Clintonball sure is exciting sport:
Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana, who backs Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton for president, proposed another gauge Sunday by which superdelegates might judge whether to support Mrs. Clinton or Senator Barack Obama.
He suggested that they consider the electoral votes of the states that each of them has won.
“So who carried the states with the most Electoral College votes is an important factor to consider because ultimately, that’s how we choose the president of the United States,” Mr. Bayh said on CNN’s “Late Edition.”
Josh Marshall throws an unsportsmanlike flag.
This election will never end. Ever. It is like the surge, with fewer casualties.
*** Update ***
Via Reason magazine, this:
Senator-elect Hillary Rodham Clinton began a victory tour of upstate New York Friday by calling for elimination of the Electoral College.
At an airport news conference, the first lady said she would support legislation seeking a constitutional amendment providing for the direct election of the president.
It just never stops. The stream of stupid and self-defeating and contradictory spin just keeps coming at you like the Energizer bunny.
ThymeZone
If anyone really doubted that Clinton could be bamboozled into voting for AUMF-Iraq by a guy as smart as George W. Bush, I think we have all the proof we need.
BH Buck
You’re right, John. It will never end.
At least not until the democratic party is laying bloodied and dead at the bottom of the ditch.
empty
Somewhat (OK quite a bit) OT but what the heck. An explanation for the tizzy MUPpets get into when there is any criticism of their chosen candidate:
The Doctrine of Insufficient Adulation
/duck!
cleek
i do love this notion that Obama can’t win State X because, apparently, none of Hillary’s supporters will vote for him in the general.
and Obama’s supporters are the “cult of personality” ?
if he can’t win it vs. a Dem, there’s no way he can win it against a Rep ? when did they stop teaching basic set theory in high school ?
myiq2xu
Josh isn’t a referee – so that must have been a pop-pom he threw.
myiq2xu
Try pom-pom
Dave L
This reminds me of the 2000 election, when my Westmoreland County in-laws tried to argue that Bush had beaten Gore in a landslide…if you looked at the counties each had won.
Zifnab
If you discount double-amputee voters, round the delegate counts of all states ending in ‘a’ to the nearest 10, and make every Native American a Super Delegate, Dennis Kuccinich takes a commanding lead.
But no one even considers that interpretation, do they?
Stooleo
Well it looks like some on the Clinton side have reached the “bargaining” stage of the Kubler-Ross model. This is possibly the dumbest idea yet.
over_educated
Yeah, I had a brief hope after Richardson endorsed Obama that maybe Clinton would realize the damage that this race was doing to the party and use it as an excuse to graciously concede… But noting the “Judas” response I realized pretty quickly that was never going to happen.
Now it is all about dragging Obama down so he can’t win the GE…
Dennis - SGMM
It’s only fair to award those electoral votes won by Bill Clinton in his two campaigns. After all, we’re getting two for one here. In fairness to Obama, we will award him all of the electoral votes won by any non-white candidate in the history of the U.S.
myiq2xu
lambert offers:
over_educated
Hey ma! Look at me! I can link to random Hilbots who agree with me, that MUST prove me point….
myiq2xu
There’s no whining in Clintonball
John S.
We need a president who is ready on day one to be Commander-in-Chief of our propaganda!
over_educated
There’s no whining in Clintonball
BH Buck
There’s no
whiningWINNING in ClintonballThere. Fixed that for ya.
BH Buck
There. Fixed that for ya.
BH Buck
Erm, I didn’t post that twice. Are other people having problems posting?
The Other Steve
Aren’t the number of delegates a state has to the convention based on a calculation of electoral votes as well as the percentage of vote won by John Kerry in 2004?
Evinfuilt
So she was against the Electoral College before she was for it.
Well, at least she’s consistent in her inconsistency. That’s another lovely Bush trait.
John S.
Just like the release of her papers showed that she was really for NAFTA before she decided she was against it.* And of course, the majority of folks get it:
*Political offer void everywhere except Ohio.
cleek
maybe she just “misspoke”, you know, the way she misspoke about her harrowing firefight in Bosnia.
zzyzx
The one question I keep asking Clinton supporters and keep not getting an answer to is, “What is the argument that will convince Obama supporters to accept Clinton getting the nomination?” I can see a few options. If Clinton runs the table from here on in, winning by 15-20%, she’s still be behind in delegate counts, but there’s a case to be made for the SD’s that everyone would understand. However, if Obama wins PA, OR, MT, SD, and comes close in IN, what argument could possibly convince?
I think this election really comes down to NC. Clinton is going to win PA, I don’t think anyone doubts that. The question of how bad Wright affected things will come into play then. If Clinton just wins her states and Obama wins his, then I can’t imagine a way that the SD’s flip the nomination and Clinton wins the general.
John S.
Damn, that aforementioned Gallup poll on trustworthiness is ugly. And even though Clinton does rate slightly better in a few metrics (real – not imaginary):
A majority of voters disapprove of her, find her to be less trustworthy and would be less proud of having her as president versus her two rivals … BUT SHE’S BETTER POSITIONED TO WIN IN NOVEMBER!
Jake
I have no problem with this. I’ve tried to explain the EC to non-American friends. I got a headache, they got a headache, international opinion of the US slipped a hair.
John S.
The only rub is that it would move us towards more of a parliamentary democracy and away from the republic we are – which is fine – except that we wouldn’t get any of the other perks that go along with it. And it would be the first major repudiation of how our founding fathers set things up (which takes on an interesting dimension if you watch John Adams on HBO).
cleek
crazy. and this after i spent all of last winter bitching that there was no chance i’d ever get to cast a primary vote that actually mattered.
i’ll probably be voting for Obama, but if there are any Hillary supporters who’d be interested in, umm, sponsoring a Hillary vote, the bidding starts at $500.
John D.
The only issue is that if she sincerely believes that elimination of the EC is a good, just and noble thing, it’s hypocritical for her campaign to tout the electoral votes of the states she’s carried in the primary as a metric for “leading”.
Well that, and it presupposes that most people are idiots. Does anyone else buy Obama losing MA or NY in the general in the event that he is the nominee? Anyone? Bueller?
John Cole
Was John Adams on last night, because damnit I forgot.
Brachiator
But there is crying and lying. And enough spinning to make you dizzy.
I love how her outright exaggeration of her arrival in Tuzla is now not only a little bit of “mis-speaking,” but is also Obama’s fault for daring to question her character. But let’s look at the parade of the charade (hat tip to Andrew Sullivan):
And I truly love how she is against the Electoral College, but then she isn’t. Just like she agreed to abide by the Democratic Party rules with respect to Michigan and Florida, until she didn’t.
Every day there is less reason to take the Clintons seriously.
tBone
Mass beheadings are much easier to understand than the EC, but that doesn’t mean I want your islamonazifascist “friends” in charge, moonbat.
The Other Steve
Honestly, I suggest this to people pushing Obama for the general. “I just want a President I can be proud of.”
It negates much criticism without being political. It notes “Bush and even Clinton were obnoxious” without saying it.
Paul
Exactly. if she finishes “strong”, then she can make the case. “I finish strong, I will be stronger in the General Election. Obama’s support is eroding, mine is building. I will only improve, Obama is being savaged.
I will be surprised if Hillary doesn’t use this narrative starting a putative post-PA win.
Paul
Exactly. if she finishes “strong”, then she can make the case. “I finish strong, I will be stronger in the General Election. Obama’s support is eroding, mine is building. I will only improve, Obama is being savaged.
I will be surprised if Hillary doesn’t use this narrative starting after a putative post-PA win.
RickMassimo
Wait a minute – the general election is only going to have Democratic candidates in it? And in some states, only registered Democrats will be able to vote? Awesome!
Napoleon
Serious question – so what? First I would be amazed that if you could bring any of them back today they would care. Its 200 plus years on since they came up with that system. In any event it seems to me that it was the type of thing that was in the constitution as more of a mechanical fix of how to do things based on the politics of the day, as opposed to something inherently needed to make what they believed would need to get a democratic system to work (like free speech, perhaps separation of powers and things of that sort).
BTW, that change the fact we would still be a republic.
The Other Steve
I like the electoral college. I think a lot of Democrats mistakenly look at 2000 and go “aww, wouldn’t it be nice”, without reflecting that in 2004 even if Kerry had carried Ohio, he would have lost the popular vote by 3 million.
Pooh
But did she mention in proposal which votes would not count for whatever reason? Read the fine print, peoples…
over_educated
Just to be clear here, Obama leads in:
Pledged Delegates
Total delegates (including Supers)
Total popular votes
Total states won
Total Primaries won
Total caucuses won
Total money raised.
If the Superdelegates decide to overturn all of these facotrs and go with Clinton it will be a pyrihic victory as many folks (especially the essential AA vote) will just walk away from the party and ensure her loss in November.
The Clinton’s must realize this, which is why they are just trying to kick up mud for as long as possible: They want Obama to win the nomination but lose the GE, because that is now the only path to a Clinton presidency (in 2012).
ntr Fausto Carmona
If they did that, their name would be mud as far as Democratic politics were concerned. Not to mention that there’s no guarantee that McCain will be the Republican candidate in 2012.
There’s a far easier and more plausible explanation. Just listen to what they, and their supporters, are saying. How only certain states matter, or how – if crafted a certain way – she has the lead in popular vote, or any of the other arguments that fly in the face of facts on the ground. Its Bushism gone Clinton: They’re trying to redefine reality and get the SDs to bite. They actually think it might work. And I’m half-afraid that they might actually be right.
ThymeZone
Yes, and will be again through the week.
Zifnab
While this statement is true in so far as Clinton will need Obama to lose in November if she hopes to become President within the next four years, it still raises a set of rather glaring questions:
A) Why do people keep saying that? Hillary is still running for the nomination for all official purposes. The idea that she is running attacks on Obama to undermine him for a 2012 bid makes WAY less sense than the idea that she’s holding out to flip supers or at least trigger a face plant going into Pennsylvania and the other fifteen remaining states.
I know you’ve written off the Clinton bid, but I don’t know if Clinton shares your lack of enthusiasm. I seriously question whether Bill and Hillary do – in fact – realize they’ve lost this race.
B) Why would Clinton think that sabotaging Barack in 2008 would pave the way for her nomination in 2012, much less some sort of wide-eyed dream of victory. As Ralph Nader so eloquently put it, if the Dems can’t win it this year then they should just pack it up and stop trying. What on earth could Clinton do to Obama – that wouldn’t involve armed revolt – to keep him from winning the GE? Who would support her in a political coup of this magnitude, much less support her four years from now? Do we look stupid? Do we look like Republicans? Give the party some credit. Yesh.
C) Get off your CDS! If you were so close to the Presidency that you could taste it – after tasting the sweet euphoria of White House regalia 8 years ago only to watch your successor completely fuck up your country right after you put a foot out the door – I doubt you’d take losing to a pretty boy 40-something freshman Senator that no one had heard of in 2004, half this well.
I feel some genuine pity for Clinton. She had the game all mapped out, she’d played her cards just right, the good’ole’boys were in her corner and the math was completely in her favor, and then it all came crumbling down in a matter of months. Upsets like this aren’t supposed to happen. Clinton was robbed by the cruel hand of Democracy, and she’s taking it no worse than any other ousted politician.
So quitchabitch’n and stop calling for the poor woman’s head because she has the audacity to cling to the last shreds of a shattered dream she’d been building towards over a lifetime.
Jen
Last week someone pointed out one of the more obvious contradictions the Clintons have maintained for some time now. MI and FL must count as is because they are zealously committed to democratic representation and those voters’ votes should count! However, the superdelegates should definitely overturn the will of the voters.
I don’t know why I hadn’t noticed that fairly obvious contradiction before, but it fits in nicely with this Electoral College claptrap.
The undercurrent to the pitch to the superdelegates seems to me to be “look how much you owe to my husband”. This little tidbit, sheesh.
OriGuy
I pointed out in Kos that it was ironic that Evan Bayh was advancing this argument, since his father Birch, who was a Senator from Indiana, tried several times to eliminate the EC.
Tsulagi
Funny. From that link…
Gee, when did I see that happen for a political figure before? Oh, yeah, maybe on 9/12; the day after supposedly everything changed. Apparently not The Doctrine of Insufficient Adulation. Alive and well on both sides of the aisle. Smart, strong.
over_educated
A. Because if she wins via superdelegate fiat, she will lose 90% of her AA support, as well as a horde of younger voters. She and her campaign know this, yet they refuse to conceded, knowing at this point the race is moot. the ONLY goal her remaining in the primary accomplishes is to damage Obama and the party as a whole.
B. i can see the narrative now: If you went with me, we would have won. Losing a primary is not a s debilitating as losing a GE, and she could still plausibly argue taht she would make a good GE candidate. People 9not me, but many0 would forget the hullaballoo 4 years later and she would have plenty of time to adjust the narrative and mend fences.
C. Irrespective of her personal goals, the ultimate goal is to get a democrat in the White House. Losing the nomination to a “pretty boy” does not justify torpedoing the entire party to serve your ambition.
Blue Raven
It’s more the audacity she has to cling with one hand while throwing mud with the other that I can’t stand, personally. There are ways to continue a losing battle with grace. So far, she’s incapable of any of them.
myiq2xu
Yeah! Well, sort of, anyway.
Y’all are supposedly winning. If you really believe that, suck it up and quit acting like a bunch of sackless wonders.
There is nothing Hillary has said or done that the GOPers didn’t think of already. And there are quite a few things that they will say and do that Hillary hasn’t and never will.
Whining, complaining and demanding that Hillary quit make you (and your candidate) look weak.
Jeebus, try to go a whole day without whining about Hillary.
The Other Steve
It’s sad Hillary doesn’t love her country enough to gain the nomination.
Jake
Are you high?
Oh, wait. You mean the first major repudiation by the U.S. Congress. I was thinking of the Chimperor and his Majikal Deciderating pen.
Never mind.
over_educated
Oh please. The issue isn’t whether or not Obama is beating Hillary (he is). The issue is all of the crap hillary is doing to torpedo BO in the GE. That’s where the complaints are coming from.
Oh and this “complaining makes us look weak” meme that is form Carville is total horse$%#@. Again, we aren’t worried about losing the primary (thats int he bag) we are worried that 3 more months of “McCain is great” and “you can’t trust the scary negro” from OUR OWN PARTY is detrimental to the democrats chances of taking the Whitehouse.
Cyrus
I actually want to defend the way she was apparently for the Electoral College before she was against it. The states that voted for her in their primaries are more likely to support her in the general election in November than they would be likely to support Obama. People keep on quoting polls showing how the supporters of one of them wouldn’t vote for the other, and it’s always a minority, but not an insignificant minority. Obama supporters are more likely to go into the nomination demoralized if she wins and vice versa, so if some people are going to be disappointed, it should be people in states that… well… matter somewhat less by this one particular measure. But that’s 2008. In general, the Electoral College gives disproportionate representation to some people for no good reason, can overthrow the popular vote, etc. I think we should do something to move away from it. Until then, though, can we really pretend it doesn’t exist?
I agree that the constitution should (probably) be amended to get rid of the Electoral College (somehow), but it hasn’t happened yet, so while we still have to deal with it, we still have to deal with it.
None of this is to defend Clinton’s character, and I don’t think this argument for her is sufficient to beat all the arguments against her. I’m just saying that this seems to be a situation, like her opinion on driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants, where reality and principles are pushing in opposite directions.
myiq2xu
I guess all those other amendments were meaningless.
chopper
truer words have never been spoken.
John S.
Nerarly all of them clarify issues that were not addressed clearly enough by the original constitution but they do not exactly overturn any core beliefs held by the founding fathers when it was created.
Whereas the electoral college was a hotly contested subject for the framers of our constitution and a huge compromise between the big states and smaller states on representation. To undo that would be a major repudiation of the intent upon which this nation was founded and a first amongst constitutional amendments on that front.
Are you really this ignorant of American history or were you just looking to score cheap points because I humiliated you yesterday?
Zifnab
Yeah, I was going to point out the whole Gitmo Bay torture and indefinite detention. Or if you want to run off and pull from John Adams, you could mention the Alien and Sedition Acts. Basically, everything that’s ever been struck down as “unconstitutional” passes the smell test for “major repudiation of how our founding fathers set things up”.
I mean, the party system – in and of itself – wasn’t exactly George Washington’s idea of a good time. We’ve been seriously repudiating the founding fathers for over 200 years. I don’t think a Hillary nomination is going to turn the Democracy on its ear no matter how much it would disgust me.
Zifnab
:p Sorry. I don’t think abolishing the Electoral College will turn the Democracy on its ear either.
MJ
John I bet you’ll love the e mail Terry McAuliffe sent out to Hillary supporters. link
Here is a highlight:
Krista
Hey TZ — hope you’re not maxed out on your Obama donations yet.
demimondian
Sometimes I’m not too proud of my ancestors.
[Yes, I really am descended from both Presidents Adams. Sometimes things happen that way.]
bob
Cole, you just have leftover Clinton hatred from your bullshit republican scumbag past. Go stick your mea culpa up your flagrante dilecto. Bitch.
ThymeZone
No, I have a ways to go, and thanks for the tip. I am definitely doing something this week to get in on the contest.
Asti
Well, I checked your link, and I thought I might find an easy to hop over link, or a sublink to the Obama page so I could make another donation myself (I got paid recently and said I would this week) but, gosh, if I have to open up a new window and type in the addy myself… I’ll wait until… no, okay, I guess I have to work at this… geeZ!
Asti
Okay, I donated again, but, with no thanks to you, TZ! ;)
TenguPhule
Clintonball is just the plagerized version of Calvinball.
Gus
Let’s just remember who would have been elected in 2000 without the electoral college.