Clinton to Richardson: 'Barack Obama Can't Win'

[cashbalancetrouble]

In the 1880 presidential election at the republican convention, a hard fought battle in Chicago went to the 35th ballot before a candidate was chosen. Amazingly, it was Garfield winning the nomination who was not one of the leading three candidates and even considered prior to the 30th ballot taken. Unfortunately, I think had the shortest presidency after being shot by an insane lawyer from Chicago in the train station in Washington.

I really expect anything can still happen, especially if the media knows the money a controversy will mean to them. I am sure the uppers at GE know how to make money as they were the ones to learn first how to make money by terminating and converting Defined Benefit Pensions in the 90's.

[Texarkandy]

Originally Posted by Wags

You may be right it is not over "till the fat lady sings" but the least she can do while we are waiting for her newest hit is ask Mr. Clinton to tone it down.

....

Why should she have to do that?

[Texarkandy]

Originally Posted by youbet

.... The super delegates need to publicly go on record with their individual decisions so everyone can hold them accountable as heros or villians depending on your candidate preference.
...

Why should they have to do that - why can't they wait till the convention if they so chooe?

[Wags]

Originally Posted by Texarkandy

Why should they have to do that - why can't they wait till the convention if they so chooe?

If Mr. Obama wins he might extend her the invitation to run as his VP. And if she wins maybe she can extend him the invitation.

God Bless Us All

[Wags]

Mrs. Clinton wins Puerto Rico.

After the decision yesterday on Fl and Mich it appears that she may finally be ahead in the popular vote or in a tie.

Here is an interesting article concerning Mr. Clinton on ABC News - Article: Friends Feared New Clinton Bimbo Eruptions

Political Radar: Article: Friends Feared New Clinton Bimbo Eruptions

Just like Mr. Obama has cut ties with Pastor Wright it looks like it might be time for Mrs. Clinton to tell Bill to tone it down and maybe go into a low profile mode.

God Bless Us All

[samclem]

What did the decision yesterday regarding FL and MI have to do with the popular vote? Nothing. It had to do with a political deal to apportion delegates from those states. And in the process, Obama was given 4 delegates honestly won by Clinton, and awarded delegates from MI though he chose not to have his name on the ballot there. This is a heck of a way to run a railroad, and if the Obama campaign is really trying for "unity" they've got a funny way to showing it. The depth of outrage on blogs frequented by HRC supporters s dfficult to overstate.

More Democrats have voted for Hillary than have voted for Obama, and that has been the case for most of the time since the primaries began. It's a far cry from her "finaly" reaching parity--she's been ahead for a long time.

This show is far from over.

[DragoMuseveni]

Originally Posted by samclem

This show is far from over.

That is what I am afraid of. The US has entered, fought, and won wars in less time than it is taking the Democrats to nominate a presidential candidate...

[ERD50]

Originally Posted by samclem

This is a heck of a way to run a railroad, ...

I agree with that, and it is one reason I'm not too crazy of the idea of the Dems running a nation.

You do remember what Hillary said about Michigan, don't you?

Hillary Clinton Slams Dems over Michigan and Florida - The Jed Report

Update: It's important to remember that Clinton is attacking the Democratic Party for a decision that she herself embraced. NYT from last September:

Clinton, Obama and Edwards Join Pledge to Avoid Defiant States
PORTSMOUTH, N.H., Sept. 1 — Three of the major Democratic presidential candidates on Saturday pledged not to campaign in Florida, Michigan and other states trying to leapfrog the 2008 primary calendar, a move that solidified the importance of the opening contests of Iowa and New Hampshire.
... “We believe Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina play a unique and special role in the nominating process,” Patti Solis Doyle, the Clinton campaign manager, said in a statement.

And on Michigan she said:

It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything.

So to the extent that Clinton's criticisms have any validity, she has played as much a role as any other candidate in creating this mess.

The voters in MI & FL were told that their vote would not count. They were TOLD that by the DNC. So, I'm sure many voters stayed home - why take time off work, burn gas, etc, to vote in a non-sanctioned election? So now, Hillary wants to reverse what she said, and say that ALL the votes should count. How about the people who did not vote that day? How do you count how they would have voted?

much the same info and refs here:

Michigan Democratic primary, 2008 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On December 1, 2007, the Democratic National Committee decided to strip Michigan of all of its delegates to the national convention.

So, since the DNC said it would strip MI of ALL it's delegates, seems like HRC should be glad to get anything. But of course, unless it means she wins, she will not be happy.


Warren Olney - To the Point, had a good podcast on 5/31.

Can the Democrats Just Get Along? — KCRW

-ERD50

[ERD50]

Originally Posted by samclem

.... and if the Obama campaign is really trying for "unity" they've got a funny way to showing it.

Explain. I would think that following the directives of the DNC *would* be showing unity. Barack Obama, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, John Edwards and Dennis Kucinich did that, only Hillary Clinton and Christopher Dodd decided to remain on the ballot in MI.

-ERD50

[Wags]

Originally Posted by samclem

if the Obama campaign is really trying for "unity" they've got a funny way to showing it. The depth of outrage on blogs frequented by HRC supporters s dfficult to overstate.

I guess this is what one would call the fine art of unity by a supporter of Mrs. Clinton - who will now vote for Mr. McCain.

YouTube - Clinton Supporter Thrown Out of Rules Committee Meeting

God Bless Us All

[samclem]

Originally Posted by ERD50

Explain. I would think that following the directives of the DNC *would* be showing unity. Barack Obama, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, John Edwards and Dennis Kucinich did that, only Hillary Clinton and Christopher Dodd decided to remain on the ballot in MI.

-ERD50

Obama blocked efforts to have later elections in both states that would have been in compliance with the DNC timetable. That procedural move helped alienate many.

At this point in time, how could the Obama campaign help unify the party (i.e. how could they help avoid alienating Clinton's supporters)? Well, for instance, they could allow each candidate to have the number of delegates proportional to the number of votes that were cast in each state. hey could even agree to allow FL and MI to count at their full strength. He'd still have a higher number of delegates, and neither he nor Clinton would have enough to cinch the nomination--exactly where they are today, except he's p***ed off a bunch of people.

[DragoMuseveni]

Originally Posted by samclem

Obama blocked efforts to have later elections in both states that would have been in compliance with the DNC timetable. That procedural move helped alienate many.

At this point in time, how could the Obama campaign help unify the party (i.e. how could they help avoid alienating Clinton's supporters)? Well, for instance, they could allow each candidate to have the number of delegates proportional to the number of votes that were cast in each state. hey could even agree to allow FL and MI to count at their full strength. He'd still have a higher number of delegates, and neither he nor Clinton would have enough to cinch the nomination--exactly where they are today, except he's p***ed off a bunch of people.

But if Florida and Michigan had been allowed to count at their full strength you would have _havoc_ in 2012 or 2016. If there are no sanctions for breaking the rules why follow them?

[ERD50]

Originally Posted by samclem

Obama blocked efforts to have later elections in both states that would have been in compliance with the DNC timetable. That procedural move helped alienate many.

Could you provide a factual link to support that? A quick google only came up with blogs of Hillary supporters making the claim. It may be true, I just didn't find it it after some searching.

At this point in time, how could the Obama campaign help unify the party (i.e. how could they help avoid alienating Clinton's supporters)? Well, for instance, they could allow each candidate to have the number of delegates proportional to the number of votes that were cast in each state.

In some people's view, not fighting the decision to have half the delegates seated was a unifying compromise. According to the DNC, NONE of the delegates were to be seated.

The key is, you need to start at the beginning. MI & FL broke the rules, and were told the votes would not count. That is a fact. Hillary agreed with the DNC, until she found herself behind and needed those votes. It's not up to Obama to unify anything, he played by the rules and didn't back-peddle, as far as I can see.

-ERD50

[ERD50]

Originally Posted by DragoMuseveni

But if Florida and Michigan had been allowed to count at their full strength you would have _havoc_ in 2012 or 2016. If there are no sanctions for breaking the rules why follow them?

Absolutely. It seems to me that if there is any 'unifying' to be done, it should come from the ones who decided to move the MI & FL primaries up against the rules of their party. They are the ones responsible for disenfranchising their own people, and this whole mess. If I were a MI or FL resident, and this was important to me, I would be very, very ticked off.

I think it was that 'To the Point' podcast I linked, one of the people said that the US would have denounced these elections had they been held in another country. Some names not on the ballot.... people told to stay home, their votes won't count, then - hah! fooled you! we are going to count them anyhow! Or at least half of them! How.... 'democratic'.

-ERD50

[bright eyed]

the day that a rules committee meeting of any party is aired for hours on end - is a good day for democracy - how many of us knew or cared about this minutiae before? we're starting to pay attention.

i know some recent college grads who were very excited about trying to become delegates for the dem convention - that would have been unheard of and very "uncool" in my day.

this election will have a very good, long term impact on public involvement in future politics and elections - hopefully producing bettter and better candidates than the attention/ambitious/greed mongers who dominate now...

[BoutDone]

Unfortunately our curiosity with this primary campaign is more like the curiosity one has when they pass a terrible car accident on the road.

[cashbalancetrouble]

I am not worried about S Obama. If he has the confidence to be able to sit down with the likes of Ammadinajhad and Raoul Castro and be able to convince them to play nice without Nuclear Weapons, He certainly will be able to deal with S Clinton and the others in his own party. If not he, always can deal with like he has now done with his church, CUT AND RUN!

I really think he owed it to the other members to not run but stay and try to improve things working from inside the church. My guess he lost some votes there.

[samclem]

Originally Posted by ERD50

Could you provide a factual link to support that? A quick google only came up with blogs of Hillary supporters making the claim. It may be true, I just didn't find it it after some searching.

Nope, I can't produce any smoking gun to tie the Obama camp to the blockage of re-do elections in these states. Of course, Clinton pushed very hard for various types of re-do elections, and the Obama camp made lots of polite noises about doing them if a good way to be found. It surely would have been a major undertaking to hold fair elections under the circumstances, and all the Obama supporters in the respective state parties had to do was to keep bringing up these problems (cost, signature verifications, insufficient campaign time, etc) and run out the clock. I believe that's what they did. Clinton supporters pushed hard for some type of elections, Obama supporters brought up myriad reasons why the elections would be hard--and the elections didn't happen. So, I guess each side will blame the other. But, one group opposed them and they didn't happen, so people can draw their own conclusions.

I agree that letting MI and FL "get away" with holding their primaries early and against the DNC rules would have encouraged future mischief. Ultimately, the individuals responsible for these states having fewer delegates are the arrogant legislators from these states (poster child: Carl Levin) and the people who elected them.

But, seating both delegations at 100% would have helped minimize rancor within the party right now and at very little short-term cost to BHO.

[ERD50]

Originally Posted by samclem