If you still can not understand why the Michigan delegates should not be seated, perhaps this will help to demonstrate the sheer idiocy and brazen bullshit of the Clinton campaign:
A few more can be found here.
It is funny because it is true.
Reader Interactions
130Comments
Comments are closed.
Trackbacks
-
[…] (h/t John Cole.) […]
rob!
just like Doug Feith says people who worry about whether we torture are “assholes”, the Clintons say people who follow the rules are suckers.
Kevin K.
Great find, JC.
“But what you don’t realize is that the chips in my cookies are far more delicious than the chips in yours.”
Too funny.
p.lukasiak
Except of course its not true.
See, the raffle was already in progress — and it wasn’t the candidates putting raffle tickets into the bowl, but the supporters of the candidates. What the candidates agreed to was not to make any effort to get more of their supporters to put raffle tickets into the bowl.
Except of course, that Obama’s supporters (like John Conyers) were campaigning for him in Michigan — making sure that Obama had as many raffle tickets in the bowl as possible.
But any opportunity to bask Hillary on behalf of the MUPpets, regardless of how inane it is, right Cole?
libarbarian
How much did your nose grow when you typed that?
John Cole
No shit. I am going through CNN’s election results, and I don’t see one raffle ticket for Obama. Certainly PLUK would want to contact them and tell them it is embarrassing for a major news organization like CNN to miss a major candidate’s votes. I mean, Plukasiak says Obama was on the ballot and got lots of votes. Where are they?
Conservatively Liberal
Shorter p.luk: Conyers was trying to get votes for Obama, but never mind the tiny fact that Obama’s name was not on the ballot to receive those votes.
I think pluck needs a new handle. I suggest Tad Disingenuous.
isit2009yet
John Conyers was campaigning for “none of the above”? Obama’s name wasn’t on the ballot…
Davebo
Hey, if Conyers is that skilled at getting folks to vote for someone who isn’t even on the ballot I think we should give him Dean’s job!
Scrutinizer
I waited for days for plucked to show up and that’s the best he could do?
slippy hussein toad
Amazing. The jokes write themselves.
I like the one where he offers the guy winning the arm-wrestling match to allow him to win, because it would be “awesome.”
That’s about the substance of it.
Dennis - SGMM
How dare John Conyers show his face in Michigan at any time during the campaign? That he’s a Congressman from Michigan has no bearing on his brazen behavior.
I’m shocked, I tell you!
Just Some Fuckhead
I was watching that thinking but Hillary has more cookies than that. Which clearly means I’m going crazy like those Hillblog fucks.
libarbarian
From what I’ve seen, their illogic is as follows:
* Hillary was the only candidate to leave her name on the ballot and therefore she was entitled to win an uncontested election with 100% of the vote.
* Adding “undecided” to the ballot, and the campaigning to get people to vote for it, was a illegitimate attempt to embarrass Hillary by stealing the votes that she legitimately earned via her position as the sole remaining candidate.
I believe it was Taylor Marsh who asserted the entire thing was a plot, from the beginning, to “trap” Hillary with her name on the ballot (framing her by making it appear that she was trying to campaign in the state) and then having her lose to “Undecided” just to embarrass her. I could be wrong – it might have been a talkleft goon.
Dennis - SGMM
There you have it.
p.lukasiak
John Conyers was campaigning for “none of the above”? Obama’s name wasn’t on the ballot…
yes, in fact Conyers was urging people to vote “uncommitted” as a show of support for Obama.
Keep in mind that exit polls were taken (i.e. we are able to tell who people really wanted to voter for) and guess what? Obama came in 10 or 11 points behind Clinton.
Oh, and ya wanna know what Conyers did…here is the text of the radio ad he did with his wife…
Oh wait….Conyers — an OBAMA supporter, was telling Michigan voters that their votes would count, and that Michigan’s delegates would be seated. Imagine that.
Not a surprise that newly minted white Democrat John Cole has no respect for black voters in Michigan, and their cheif spokesman, John Conyers.
leinie
Bwaahhhh! Those are awesome!
The chips in the cookies are bettah, I tell you!
And I do know magic, I do! I totally sat next to that guy!
isit2009yet
Oh noes! It’s that vast right wing conspiracy again!
Scrutinizer
plucked? That MI thing? It’s over. Beat a different horse.
jake
Are you calling Hillary a shark, an animal?
SEXIST!
There is a 99.9% chance Paul L won’t show up in this thread.
Just Some Fuckhead
Oh, that’s a really good one! I’m starting to regret not putting more thought into mine.
cleek
basically, we’re basking in our blatant Hillary bashing.
at least there’s no bukkake. now that would be sexist.
bukkake.
PeterJ
I always read his name as p.lunatic
Scrutinizer
Is myiq back too?
Dennis - SGMM
On the other hand, you’ve already inoculated yourself against insult.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
Since the videos were done by a Chicago design firm, you can smell the sexism from a mile away. It’s so sexist, they got that woman to attack her designated candidate. Hillary expected so much more of her.
theturtlemoves
You know who has it really easy? Cripples.
Conservatively Liberal
I think that pluck and Rarely Posts enjoy beating their dead horses. It is funny watching pluck and Rarely Posts double team us on counting the votes in Michigan and Florida. pluck covers Florida, and Rarely Posts covers Michigan. So we are listening stupid in stereo!
pluck, Conyers was countering Hillary’s decision to leave her name on the ballot in Michigan, that is all. But keep beating that horse, you just might find some flesh left on its bones somewhere.
Heck, when you reduce the bones to powder, I bet you will still be flogging that baby for all it is worth.
marjowil
Hmm, interesting, because I voted “uncommitted” in Michigan to signify my support for Edwards, who had also taken his name off the ballot. (And I didn’t participate in an exit poll, either.) So how will we sort out the Edwards uncommitted from the Obama uncommitted in Michigan?
Also interesting: the governor of Michigan AND Debbie Dingell, both of whom were instrumental in Michigan violating DNC rules and voting early: Clinton supporters.
I voted “uncommitted” because I didn’t want the only major candidate on the ballot to assume that she had 100% of Michigan’s vote. (Kucinich, Gravel and Dodd, who had already dropped out, were also on the ballot.)
The thought was, if by any chance delegates from Michigan ARE seated, at least some of them will be able to vote “anyone but Clinton,” thus accurately reflecting my preference.
Of course, I know a lot of people who didn’t bother to vote at all. Unlike Florida, there were no initiatives on the ballot, no one to vote for except either the Dem nominee for President, or the Republican nominee. So those people who didn’t vote… because their vote “wasn’t going to count”… is Clinton going to claim their support, too?
t jasper parnell
Okay then P.luk, as someone who would rather Obama won but who will vote for Clinton should she obtain the thorny crown, I denounce, renounce, reject, repudiated, disassociated myself with, decry, deplore, dismiss, find fault with, and generally heap abuse on Conyer’s campaigning for Obama (If you can show that he did so with Obama’s support and under the hypnotic orders of he who must be obeyed ditto for Obama re MI)and, for good measure, do the same for Clinton re Florida and Michigan, the insane idea of a CinC threshold and the equally weird notion that if she were Obama she wouldn’t have fallen under the cultic mind meld of Wright (whatever her pastor or Martin Marty might have to say about Wright’s bona fides)
Conservatively Liberal
Oops! Should read:
More coffee!
Adam
Wait, what!?
cleek
of course! only Obama wants to disenfranchise the fine folks in MI. Hillary is heartbroken by what Obama has done to strip away their Constitutional rights. i hear she’s petitioning to have him charged with a Voting Act violation.
Conservatively Liberal
I checked that link, and boy do you get around! ;)
tBone
Breaking news: P.luk, Hillary’s Number One Fan, recently had his sense of humor surgically removed to prove his commitment to his candidate.
OMFGBBQ John Cole is a racist!111111
Once upon a time, you actually had arguments to make here, p.luk. Now you’re just being a prick.
cleek
i’d ban the fucker. that’s over the line.
Rick Taylor
Repost that’s relevant here from another thread that’s dead.
I posted a link to that youtube clip where Hillary says of the Michigan delegates in talkleft: ”Well, you know, It’s clear, this election they’re having is not going to count for anything.” Someone told me that if you listened the full context, it was clear from her inflection that she was being sarcastic, and implying this was a dumb idea. So being the ever studious poster I am, I found the entire interview and listened to the relevant part (from twenty to twenty six minutes, roughly).
Unsurprisingly, there’s nothing indicating she was being sarcastic, she was defending herself from the implication staying on the ballot in Michigan somehow violated her pledge.
She did say it was important to consider we’d need Michigan in the general election, and it was with this in mind she kept her name on the ballot. Listening to the whole thing, I actually wonder if she was anticipating she might need to use the strategy she’s using now even then.
Adam
Just to compare:
Big Tent Democrat, et al.: Willing to ban posters for expressing alternate viewpoints or perhaps just because Armando’s in a pissy mood.
John Cole: Lets trolls call him racist for answering a bad argument about John Conyers despite not mentioning John Conyers at all, presumably because John Conyers is black.
CLINTON DERANGEMENT SYNDROME OMG
t jasper parnell
He is trying to get banned so that he say somewhere or another that his support for the democratic principle of one man one vote, and black men at that, got him banned. Perhaps he will say it to the various voices in his head.
Adam
— That said, I agree with cleek. That comment was miles over the fucking line.
Adam
On second thought, I agree with this. Let him flame out.
zack
These guys need to get going on a new “super-delegate” parable.
Basically, what Team Hillary is now telling the super-delegates is this:
Americans in the swing states are too stupid and too racist to ever vote for Obama.
Team Hillary is citing Obama’s relationship with Rev. Wright, and saying that these voters are so dumb that they’ll believe the right-wing smear tactics that there’s really no difference between Obama and Wright – and that they’ll be frightened by their “blackness” and vote Republican.
Hillary is arguing that she can get these really stupid and racist people to vote for her.
Put that in a “parable” and YouTube it.
PeterJ
He wants to go on a rant about how Obama followers banned him and don’t respect the idea of opposing views.
I’m guessing the rant will take place over at TalkLeft…
tBone
I’m hoping for another all-caps rant before he does, though. Those are fun.
Dennis - SGMM
pluk is another one of the hilltrolls who remind me of the line from that immortal movie “Kung Pao, Return of the Fist.”
Please don’t ban pluk. I want to enjoy the Chris Crocker meltdown when Obama is nominated.
Just Some Fuckhead
Yeah.. it’s going to be surreal when, ya know, we have to get back to normal after Obama wins the nomination. Even more so when he wins the election.
Do we just kinda quietly agree to never bring it up or will it be more like, “Hey, SpermChugger, remember when you flat-out lost your fucking mind for like seven months? Man, that was weird..”
Kevin K.
“I believe it was Taylor Marsh who asserted–“[insert sound of tires screeching]
Conservatively Liberal
Fixed.
pluck is typical of the rabid, over the top Hillary supporters. Logic is not their friend, facts are not their friend but any jackalope that they can hang on to they do so for dear life. They start their arguments with whoever, and the discourse devolves as they see that they are not scoring any points. So they jack up the volume and scream “More cowbell!” in an attempt to drown out the naysayers.
If/when they get banned for their crap, they run around to other web sites crying about how unjust the Obama loving assholes who banned them are.
It is all just so many crocodile tears. So go ahead and let pluck lame out here. At least we get some free entertainment!
John Cole
Why would I ban him? I would rather let the comment stand there so people can see it and then point and laugh.
Soylent Green
One of these days the passengers aboard the great ship Hilltanic will accept that it has struck a tall skinny iceberg on its maiden voyage, and is sinking fast.
Then maybe they will stop rearranging all the deck chairs.
tBone
You’re assuming they’re not all going to strap on their Nikes and hitch a ride on the meteor when Hillary loses.
tBone
And by “meteor,” I of course mean “comet.”
Ted
John Conyers is the spokesman for Michigan blacks? Does he know that?
Seriously, folks. I’m really glad pluck showed up with his new pokemon to show us today. The jokes write themselves.
Ted
Well, John said he doesn’t do bannings, just time-outs. Which, if you think about it, is appropriate for a campaign and its supporters behaving like toddlers when they’re told NO, and they won’t stop screaming.
Adam
I’m cool with either one, personally.
Just Some Fuckhead
That explains today.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
I support that idea.
If you _did_ ban him, it’s because he brought your skin color into this, and that is past the line. We expect that shit from morons that have conversations with their gun-racks.
But it’s good to let it stay. More and more, Hill’s supporters swing ever-more obviously Rovian, and we should let the examples speak for themselves.
Just Some Fuckhead
Gotta be careful ya don’t shoot yer mouth off there.
Adam
John Cole encourages anti-troll hate speech OMG
Ted
John Cole also must have a thing against middle-eastern immigrants. He disrespects their votes too. Is there a large Asian immigrant population in MI? No? I guess he’s cool with Asians, then.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
TalkLeft: John Cole encourages anti-Hillary hate speech OMG
Taylor Marsh: John Cole encourages anti-Woman hate speech OMG
Doughy Khaki-load: Democrat blogger encourages anti-Woman hate speech OMG
Washington Times: Democrat encourages anti-Woman hate speech OMG
Washington Post: Democrats encourage anti-Woman hate speech OMG
Ted
John Cole doesn’t like auto workers. Pluck will explain it all to you.
p.lukasiak
Listening to the whole thing, I actually wonder if she was anticipating she might need to use the strategy she’s using now even then.
hardly. Clinton understood what everyone “understood” at the time — that someone would wind up dominating the primaries, and Michigan and Florida’s delegations would be seated in the name of party unity.
I mean, if Clinton were to quit to tomorrow, do you really that seating the delegates from those two states would be a problem?
Do you really think that Obama and his henchment would continue to demand that the be excluded from the convention?
Are you really that stupid?
Rarely Posts
Funny. Seriously.
p.lukasiak
Hey, I’m not the guy who has spent nearly his entire life as a member of the GOP — the party that would not even exist today were it not for its “southern strategy” built around racially coded and “crypto-racist” statements. Cole didn’t seem to have a problem being a life-fucking-long member of the GOP, despite all of its coded racism…
So lets cut through the crap here, and tell the truth. Cole doesn’t give a flying fuck about racial justice, racial insensititivy, or anything else for that matter. He only writes statements like this:
Kevin Drum begged people yesterday to stop accusing the Clinton campaign of racism. I think that is a fair request, provided they stop making racist and crypto-racist statements, and they do something about Geraldine Ferraro.
because he’s just as happy to exploit race as Al Sharpton. Being a lifelong republican will do that to you.
t jasper parnell
In as much as no has dominated the primaries then it is intellectual dishonest, on your telling, for anyone to insist on the delegates from MI and FL seating and in as much as only one candidate has suggested that this seating of delegates is now her reason of running then only one candidate has refused to accept that the conditions assumed to obtain prior to the democratic process were in error; therefore the one candidate calling for the seating of those delegates is refusing to accept the reality that now, which is to say the present as it actually is as opposed to how it out to be, is not what we thought. Thus, I would suggest, have Hillary and her supporters showed that they lack the suppleness to change their tactics as the strategical landscape alters.
t jasper parnell
Sorry for the typos
So wait, all Republicans are racists or those who seek to use race for there own advantage? If this is the fact of the matter, then do not Hillary’s comments re McCain’s honor and his related presidential CinC whatnot not equal Hillary’s positive representation of a long-term racist?
After all McCain was a soldier in the Regan Revolution
Ted
Anyone else notice that John doesn’t use contractions very much, or am I the only one? Just curious, as it’s causing me to hear Data’s voice from Star Trek when I read his posts.
Ted
Ah-lovit, ah-lovit, ah-lovit, ah-lovit, AH-LLUUUVVIT!!
TR
Wait — were you an Asian Republican before?
scrutinizer
Of course the delegates would be seated, you tool. The delegations from both MI and FL will be seated in the name of party unity—after the nomination is resolved. Before that, not so much, unless its done in a way that is acceptable to both campaigns. Clinton’s not going to be able to drive the narrative on this. Her self-serving behavior on the not-a-primaries in MI and FL is too blatant to be ignored, and her great big crocodile tears about the poor disfranchised voters doesn’t play in Peoria.
TR
Amen to that. Stupidity needs to be ridiculed.
Ban their stuff and they think they’ve actually said something important or daring.
cbear
shorter pluk— yu flukking kids dont unerstand.
How’s that keyboard holding up under all that spittle, asswipe?
Larime The Gimp
No, but then again I’m not stupid enough to believe that Obama is demanding they be excluded. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/06/uselections2008.hillaryclinton3
scrutinizer
p.luk, you talk about MUPpets “basking” Hillary, and you write shit like that? Fuck you. Not because you’re a Clintonista, but because you’re a low-class prick.
libarbarian
Of course not, but why would MI of FL stillget pissed about not being seated if the nominee is a foregone conclusion?
Do that many Democratic voters have such delicate self-esteems that they would feel slighted about being excluded from a meaningless vote. Where is the logic in demanding your right to vote in an election with only 1 candidate? How the fuck does that make sense?
libarbarian
Da comrade! He cannot hide from his petty bourgeoisie heritage. He may valk viss us for now, but he is not trustworthy. Vonce a counter revolutionary, alvays a counter-revolutionary. Ve must purge him.
p.lukasiak
So wait, all Republicans are racists or those who seek to use race for there own advantage?
I won’t go quite that far, but anyone who is a Republican obviously has a high tolerance for “racially coded” messages, and Cole was a lifelong Republican. For him to suddenly be accusing anyone, let alone Hillary Clinton of being some kind of “crypto-racist” based on complete BS (obviously, he hasn’t read the Sean Wilentz piece) is beyond the pale, IMHO.
So, do I think that Cole is a racist? Yup. But his opposition to Clinton is based on his sexism — Obama is acceptable to him because he makes every effort to “transcend” race, and act like race (and Cole’s own racism) doesn’t matter.
Rick Taylor
Well that’s what everyone thought at the time, but it certainly doesn’t seem to be working out that way. Well, maybe Obama will make a strong showing in the next few primaries and Clinton will drop out, but last I heard she was comparing herself to Rocky and saying she was in this until the end, and indicating she’d attempt to seat the delegates from the contested primaries using the credentials committee if another solution wasn’t found beforehand.
Conservatively Liberal
What if Hillary had removed her name from the Michigan ballot like everyone else, and then competed for the delegates at the convention? What Conyers is saying is that he wanted Michigan to eventually be seated, and he would use ‘Uncommited’ to do it. Conyers said “so that Obama can compete for their vote“, and not ‘so Obama can have them all‘.
So what is wrong with that? Conyers is not stacking the deck for Obama, he wants the Michigan delegates seated so they can vote for whoever they end up voting for. Of course, only Hillbots are able to construe some evil intent from this. I guess competing fairly is not one of their strengths.
That is why Hillary decided to leave her name on the ballot. Obama and the other candidates acted in good faith, and Hillary crossed her fingers behind her back. Hillary looks out for Hillary, and nobody else.
But keep flogging the poor dead horse! Did I just hear a ‘neigh‘? Jump that fucker and finish it off!
t jasper parnell
A further thought, is it the Clinton supporters’ argument that she is better suited to win over independents and Republicans voters for a Democratic candidate (as Cole has shown himself to be) because they have the perfect message for them: racists have you always been. For fuck’s sake, deep breaths.
t jasper parnell
This is incoherent on nine levels. You, pluk, are doing more damage to the Clinton Campaign than you can possible imagine.;
Conservatively Liberal
Naah, he’s drooled on it so much that the Cheetos cheese powder is clogging the keys. I heard that Mountain Dew flushes that crap right out.
p.lukasiak
so everyone here pretty much admits that the plan was always to seat the Florida and Michigan delegations.
The only real question is “when do the rules stop mattering”? When the purpose of the punishment has been accomplished (i.e. maintain the focus of the candidates and the media on the states chosen by the Party for their ‘early primaries), or when Obama says that the rules don’t matter anymore?
The minute it becomes arithmetically impossible for either candidate to get to 2025 elegates elected in primaries and caucuses needed to win the nomination is really the moment the rules should ignored. That minute came and went on March 4.
Michigan and Florida aren’t going to put Clinton over the top, and the superdelegates will have to decide who the best candidate is.
Cole’s moronic insistence that Clinton is ignoring the “rules” (while not a word has been written here about the wholesale violations of Texas Party rules during the Texas caucuses) when everyone with any common sesse knows that the delegations were always meant to be seated is just another sign of the kind of person he is.
Back before he belatedly realized what a complete clusterf*ck the Bush administration was, he was as much of an idiot in his support of the war, and his support for Bush, as he is now in his support of Obama. He’s doesn’t know how to think clearly, apparently — its either wingnut, or MUPpet. There’s no real “there” there — he fully exists only when he has something to oppose (the DFH’s who were opposed to the Iraq war, and now Hillary and her supporters.)
Ted
Pluck will probably flee the scene before he can explain the LSD-induced trip that led his “logic” to the conclusion that a racist supports Obama not just now, but did as well when there was still a vanilla-white male candidate available running in the primary. Maybe the fact that he didn’t support Edwards is also racist, or sexist, or something. Pluck will have to explain it to you.
tBone
Shorter p.luk: I am simultaneously a huge fucking tool and a pathetic, anklebiting douchebag.
I usually try to avoid flat-out namecalling, but you earned it. You’ve really sunk to a new low here today.
p.lukasiak
You, pluk, are doing more damage to the Clinton Campaign than you can possible imagine.
only a complete idiot would think that I’m affiliated with, and thus capable of damaging, the Clinton campaign.
And since you’re obviously a MUPpet, you fall into the “complete idiot” category.
tBone
You’re not getting paid for this bullshit? Wow. You’re not just a huge fucking tool, you’re a huge fucking tool with no financial sense.
p.lukasiak
Conyers said “so that Obama can compete for their vote“, and not ‘so Obama can have them all‘.
Clinton isn’t asking for all the Michigan delegates, moron. She’d be happy with the apportioning all the uncommitted delegates to Obama. Hell, she’d probably be happy allowing the delegation to be seated based on the exit polls.
It was the Obama camp that destroyed the possibility of a revote in Michigan and Florida (you know you’re full of crap when you campaign threatens to complain to the Bush Justice Department if one of the revote plans hadn’t fallen through).
Clinton understands that it is in the best interest of the party to seat the delegates from the two states. She needs michigan and florida…. and so does Obama. But Obama is such a self-centered prick that because Clinton might receive an insignificant advantage if those delegations are seat, that he won’t let what is best for the party happen.
TR
I was an Edwards backer and when he dropped out, I was really torn between the remaining candidates. I liked Clinton slightly better on domestic issues, Obama more on foreign policy, and really would’ve been happy with either.
And then, after a while, I started realizing that the candidates’ supporters on several blogs — including this one — were resonating with me in different ways. The Obama people had an energy about them, an optimism I hadn’t felt in a long time in the Democratic Party. The Clinton people, meanwhile, just seemed like assholes. So I began to identify with the Obama folks in the blog arguments and, sure enough, I wound up voting for Obama on Super Tuesday.
Looking back, I find it hard to believe I was ever that torn, and I’m sure I would’ve ended up here eventually, given the other crap that turned me off the Clinton campaign over the last months.
But, yes, asshole Clinton supporters were a key first step. I can’t say for sure if you were one of them, p.luk, but you certainly fit the bill.
I’m sure Obama thanks you for my vote and for the $600 I’ve donated to his campaign thus far.
Tlaloc
Adam
“And by “meteor,” I of course mean “comet.”
I’m cool with either one, personally.”
A meteor is the flaming destruction of a chunk of rock on it’s way down to crash into the dirt. That may not be the metaphore you want for Obama. Of course a Comet is a chunk of dirty ice that evaporates when it exposed to light leaving flakes behind before disappearing to utter obscurity again.
That one isn’t so great either. :)
Shygetz
So anyone who has at any time been a Republican is not allowed to decry racism?
Nice to know where you stand, lukasiak. Here’s hoping your reputation never recovers.
t jasper parnell
P.Lukasiak
1) I have never voted other than Democratic and will not in the fall election change my history.
2) Affiliated or not when you accuse cross over voters of bad faith when a said cross over voter has already said he will vote for Hillary, you are damaging Clinton’s campaign.
3) If by MUPpet, you mean someone whose loyalty to Obama forbids voting for Clinton, see 1.
4) The behavior of supporters does, oddly enough, affect the way fence sitters view a campaign. See, for example, John Cole and Schiavo.
5) Are you constitutionally incapable of discourse that is not filled with invective and insult?
6) Go drink the refreshing beverage of your choice and calm the fuck down.
7) Why? Because neither Clinton nor Obama are in and of themselves able to “transcend” or resolve the multifarious problems confronting this nation.
8) Either, however, is better able than McCain.
9) Think of your discourse here as sincere attempt to convince fence sitters and not as an opportunity to insult, in the sense of unfounded accusations of racism and sexism, those whose support for your preferred candidate is lukewarm.
10) Consider, re 9, I once defended the Clintons and now find them less appealing, your rhetoric and preferred mode of argumentation (those who oppose she who must be obeyed are racist, sexists, lying swine) is not and cannot convince me to return to my previous endeavors, although your stupidity cannot rob the Democratic nominee of my vote.
11) Well, you get the idea.
Rarely Posts
.
Yup. Like putting lipstick on a pig.
Tlaloc
“9) Think of your discourse here as sincere attempt to convince fence sitters and not as an opportunity to insult, in the sense of unfounded accusations of racism and sexism, those whose support for your preferred candidate is lukewarm.”
Funny, I’ve suggested as much myself, but because I was saying it to the _obama_ supporters it resulted in being labeled an “asshole troll.”
Go figure.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
Um, no. Everyone here is smart enough to be aware that Obama’s people are going to look out for Obama, and Clinton’s people are going to look out for Clinton, and there’s nothing to be done about that. As long as Obama and Clinton don’t give positive reinforcement to those over-enthusiastic efforts, then the dust will settle and everyone will be adult about it.
Oh, but what’s that? Hillary put her name on the ballots? Now, that’s not good. She agreed she wouldn’t do that.
Moral of the story for the wayward kids: Clinton shouldn’t have to get dinged for her supporters trying to bend the rules. But when her campaign tries to bend the rules, she’s going to get nailed to the wall. And she’s going to deserve it.
Obama didn’t put his name on the fucking ballot. He *did the right thing* and *stuck with the agreement*. Deal with it.
Inexperienced or no, the man has class, and we follow class.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
p. luk:
Just highlighting why some Clinton supporters will deserve their week of endless sobbing when Obama gets nominated for being the presidential one.
Tlaloc
“Oh, but what’s that? Hillary put her name on the ballots? Now, that’s not good. She agreed she wouldn’t do that.”
Can I see that exact quote please? Strangely enough no one so far has quoted the place where she said or thing she signed that said she’d remove her name from the ballot. For that matter why did a binch of the other dems not remove theirs either? Why was Obama’s name on the ballot in Florida when it committed the same infraction and was supposed to suffer the same penalty as Michigan?
Something about your statement just doesn’t fit with reality…
Rick Taylor
Admits? This is common knowledge, it’s not something anyone is admitting. There’ve been posts on it in the past. The only question is when and how.
The rules never stop mattering. I only have a rough understanding, but from what I’ve heard the rules themselves specify how to deal with it if it the matter hasn’t been resolved beforehand. There’s a committee they form from the delegates, 3 from each state and 25 from Hoard Dean. If someone has been nominated, of course they’ll vote to seat the Michigan and Florida delegates, since it will no longer affect the outcome of the election. Otherwise there will be a debate about what to do, but with most of the states going for Obama it seems unlikely they’ll vote to seat the delegates if that would give Hillary a lead. Here’s a link. From what people are saying, given Obama’s lead, it’s unlikely the superdelegates will break so strongly for Hillary that they’ll overturn it.
Tlaloc
“but with most of the states going for Obama it seems unlikely they’ll vote to seat the delegates if that would give Hillary a lead.”
Exactly. So you have a situation where states that support a certain nominee will cancel the votes of other states because they support a different nominee. Hence the people in those states get pissed. It’s certainly true that they should be pissed at their state parties that moved the dates up. It’s also true that they are unlikely to be that selective in their anger, and that voters that are angry with their own party don’t tend to turn out so well.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
I’ll go for details/links.
Can someone not out for blood help me on this? I always thought Clinton was the only name on the FL ballots has my news feed been tainted? Am I spouting nonsense re: FL?
t jasper parnell
By me? Also for MUPpet’s defense of the Clintons see and keep up the fine work of winning hearts and minds.
Tlaloc
You can find the results for Florida here:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#FL
Obama got 33% of the vote.
What they agreed to do was not “participate” which has been interpreted a few different ways but generally as not actively campaigning. There was nothing that required them to take their names off the ballots. In Michigan Obama, Edwards and I think Dodd chose to completely of their own volition. Nothing obligated the other dems to do as well (although apparently Kucinich tried but missed the deadline).
Liberal Masochist
pluk – you are raising the spectre of MI and FLA going for McCain because their delegations won’t be seated. This is ridiculous for numerous reasons. I outlined them yesterday to Tlaloc.
This is a rhetorical dodge that hides your real concern, that is that Hillary has no chance without them being seated based on the votes as cast in those primaries. Seating them like that is unfair for obvious reasons. Even under your generous scenario above (and the numerous scenarios outlined in yesterday’s discussion – sorry forgot poster), the odds are way against her. Expecting the superdelegates to break dramatically in her favor to clinch ain’t gonna happen.
Attacking John is another dodge. Give it up.
Rarely Posts
Yes, your news feed is tainted. Obama was on there as well as some of the has beens.
Rarely Posts
Nice name, btw. But it’s true that Florida at least will more than likely go for McCain as recent polls show if Obama is the nominee. The sad fact is, the majority of Dems in Florida are DINOs. And any little slight can send them to the Republicans.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
That seems to be what I’m finding, but it’s all fuzzy now. Two months ago, there were two memes floating about: FL and MI delegates wouldn’t count, and there was an agreement between candidates to not “do” FL and MI, but now I’m confused over the “do” part.
I think I might have incorrectly assumed that “no campaigning” also means “get off the ballots”. It makes complete sense to me, but doesn’t mean that it’s correct. Why would you agree to something stupid and unenforceable and not agree to something discretely enforceable? I dunno…
Tlaloc
TJP:
“By me?”
No, not that I recall. My point is only that that message needs to be heard by everybody.
“Also for MUPpet’s defense of the Clintons see and keep up the fine work of winning hearts and minds.”
I used to respect that Cole would defend the Clintons againt the most egregious bashing. Then something happened and he became one of the most egregious bashers. Very disappointing. By comparison Kevin Drum went from the Hillary camp to the Obama camp but remains fair to her. She’s not his candidate but he doesn’t buy into and echo the right wing slurs the way that far too many Obama supporters have been.
The simple fact of the matter is that the Clintons are politicians. Their job is to try and weasel an advantage. And Obama’s a politician too. Pretenses that he’s one iota nobler than Hillary are false. You don’t rise quickly in one of the most corrupt political arenas in the US (Chicago) and remain pure. Nor do you end up a presidential contended with your moral virginity intact.
Doesn’t happen.
Now if we can just admit that they are both in fact dirty god damn politicians then it’s cool. We can knock of the ridiculous “He has come” reverence and treat this like a race instead of an inquisition.
That’d be good for all concerned.
Tlaloc
“I think I might have incorrectly assumed that “no campaigning” also means “get off the ballots”. It makes complete sense to me, but doesn’t mean that it’s correct. Why would you agree to something stupid and unenforceable and not agree to something discretely enforceable? I dunno”
See that?
“I thought it was one thing, I was mistaken it’s actually another.”
Fucking A, dude. That’s great. We can have a conversation and not just yell at each other in increasing font sizes (except that I have to leave work in just a minute to catch my bus).
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
Wikipedia
OK, I’ve been shamed.
This was apparently the agreement:
The Candidates MAY NOT talk to the states.
The Candidates MAY tally the results of not talking to the states.
The Candidates MAY NOT be rewarded for said tally.
What.
The.
Fuck.
I think I made the critical error back when I assumed the Democratic Party was run by functioning adults. That was pretty damned stupid of me.
Rick Taylor
Tlaloc wrote:
We’ve already been through this perhaps a half dozen times. We believe that after the DNC determined the early primaries in Florida and Michigan were invalid, after none of the candidates protested, after all of them including Hillary signed statements they wouldn’t participate or campaign in the early primaries, after Hillary made public statements that it was fine for her to leave her name on the ballot in Michigan because of course that primary wasn’t going to mean anything, we feel that implicit in all that was a commitment to honor the DNC decision, and that turning around and working to seat the delegates in an election where she ran virtually unopposed as a result is a betrayal of the spirit of what she signed and said and we’re upset about it. Unfortunately, our zeal for our beloved unity pony Obama who’s feet we are not worthy to touch blinds us and there’s no help for us, so if you want to have a discussion of issues, you’ll just have to deal with that, just as we have to deal with you. I’d give you the links to the documents involved, but I think you’ve seen them already.
Caidence
Don’t waste your time. I’ve posted links multiple times. Tlaloc’s not asking the question because he’s genuinely interested. He’s asking the question to make the clever point that Hillary never signed a statement saying “I will not participate in the early primaries in Florida and Michigan, and of course I will not attempt to seat the delegates that may be apportioned based upon them afterwards.” Just admit Hilary never said specifically said that and move on. Honestly, I think it’s rude to ask a question and ask for links when you’re really trying to make a clever point; you should just argue your point if you have one.
None of the candidates were able to remove their names from the Florida ballot; there was no procedure for it. Even those no longer in the race were on it. Obama, Edwards, and Richardson removed their names from the Michigan ballot. Kucinich attempted to but filed late.
t jasper parnell
I agree with the notion that politicians are politicians; however, the Clinton camp’s claims about McCain are weird and off putting. I have yet, and please if I am wrong correct me, to have heard, read, or seen Obama making similar claims, i.e., McCain and I have penises therefore we have passed all manner of thresholds.
This is not, by the way, to suggest that the Clinton claims of greater experience = Obama is an ignorant whatchamacallhim. It is, on the other hand, weird to find that the Clintons compare a fellow Democratic politician unfavorably with their shared Republican opponent.
And, I would argue, that their are degrees of “dirty god damned politicians.” Spitizer lies on one end of the continuum and “Duke” Cunningham lies on the other. The former is depressing the latter is a danger to the Republic. But that is just me.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
But, quite frequently, I will fight for what I know to be true; except my knowledge will occasionally get corrupted.
But, you know, I’m not a Democrat. So I’m not going to wring my hands over whether-or-not everything is picture perfect and every minority gets their ice cream.
We live under Bush right now, where everything is a dismal failure. I’ll take “pretty-good” in a fucking heartbeat. Instead, I have to deal with Clintonites telling me I have to wait because it’s “Clinton’s turn”.
No, I’m not going to be that civil.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
THANK YOU! Sane *and* informed. You impress me, good Sir.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
Also,
is there ANY chance you can get a link to Hillary’s agreement? Every week there’s a thread on this shit; I would LOVE to have something to beat back with and help put this crap away for good.
Rick Taylor
Caidence:
Ohh, that’s a lot better than what I found. A pdf document and a radio interview (which has not agreement in it, but is interesting as 20-25 minutes in Hillary addresses Michigan).
Dulcie
Yep, that’s correct. The only way any of the candidates could remove their names from the ballot in Florida is if they completely withdrew from the Dem Primary. Michigan had no such rule, so all of the candidates, with the exception of Clinton and Kucinich, removed their names from the Michigan ballot.
cleek
ah… so pluky is trying to get himself banned as a counter to BTD’s banning predilection. almost clever enough.
cleek
and Kucinich tried, but didn’t get his papers in on time, IIRC.
Conservatively Liberal
Can’t you Hillbots do something other than regurgitate your MI/FL talking points? I just came back to the computer, read a few posts from where I left off and then grazed down the posts to see the same ping-pong crap you have been doing endlessly for what seems forever. I think this has been dissected and parsed to death, and nothing is going to change because you say so.
Talk about skipping records. Your needle is dull, you go around and around in circles and your record is old and scratchy, like your candidate. Time to add a couple of candidates to the hot goat sex script so they can join myiq in some good ol’ fun.
Oh, and regarding the Republicans being racists, the Democratic party has plenty of them too. Anyone who says otherwise is a liar. I would not be surprised to learn that most of them are supporting Hillary.
If the shoe fits, wear it.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
I read that in the WP article, as well.
Rick Taylor
Tlaloc wrote:
I’ve said this before, but yup I agree. it’s a potential problem. Some people say it won’t make a difference; some say it will. I personally don’t know, but as much as I want to win Florida, the damage has been done. Of course it won’t be as much of an issue if the nominee is determined before the convention, but we’ve already had this conversation. One of the main reasons I’m currently upset with Hillary is her exploiting the situation to her advantage by distorting what’s happening is making the division worse. On other blogs, they blame Obama for the current situation and feel he is making the situation worse, and that’s why they’re upset with him; that’s basically what the argument seems to be about.
And yes, all politicians are crooked, in all politicians there’s a balance between idealism and pragmatism, if that was really your point to begin with, we might have saved some time. But that doesn’t mean everything is the same, there are lines. We might not agree what the lines are or when they’ve been crossed, but not everything is the same.
John S.
Good luck to him with that. We had to suffer Darrell for years, and I don’t think he ever got banned.
Rick Taylor
And you impress me. I appreciate people who like to find links support arguments, and so on.
Notorious P.A.T.
Of course, I know a lot of people who didn’t bother to vote at all.
I didn’t vote. I thought my vote wouldn’t be counted so I thought “why bother?” If I could vote now, of course, I would vote against “isn’t John McCain so very experienced and presidential?”
Dismayed Liberal
Why was Obama’s name on the ballot in Florida when it committed the same infraction and was supposed to suffer the same penalty as Michigan?
My understanding is that the candidates could remove their names from the ballot in the primary in Florida, but that doing so also meant that they could not appear on the ballot in the General Election. That basically made it impossible for any candidate to remove their name from the ballot in protest of Florida’s decision to violate the DNC’s rules.
marjowil
btw, Gravel, Kucinich, Clinton and Dodd were on the Michigan ballot, as well as Uncommitted. Dodd was already out of the race, or I would have voted for him. I guess Gravel didn’t agree not to participate. Kucinich supposedly missed the deadline to take his name off. So the 40% Uncommitted were Edwards plus Obama. Clinton was 55%, with about 3.5% for Kucinich and 1% shared by Gravel and Dodd.
Beej
Dear Tlaloc,
I read a lot of political blogs, and the one argument I have seen repudiated on nearly all of them is the “the voters of Florida and Michigan are going to be pissed at the Democratic party” argument. Commentor after commentor from those states has written that they and most of the people they know are somewhat pissed at their state party officials, but I haven’t read a single comment from a Floridian or Michigander (is that a word? Sorry if I’ve botched it.) that blames the national party. Your assertion to the contrary seems to be baseless from the evidence I’ve seen.
Xenos
Wow. So the rules do not matter AT ALL?
I agree the difference is minimal, and unlikely to change the results, but is is wrong to advance to that level of analysis when what you are proposing is in several ways in violation of the party rules.
All Obama is doing is standing up for his rights within the rules. Clinton wants to throw out the rules with the nomination process still underway, but Obama is the untrustworthy one. Does not compute, buddy.
Nim, ham hock of liberty
I live in Michigan, and while this is just anecdotal evidence, not ONE Obama supporter that I know bothered to go vote for “uncommitted” on primary day. Obviously, some did. But none that I know of. I know plenty that didn’t bother to vote, and a small handful that went and voted for Mitt Romney, just to keep the GOP race going a little while longer.
To suggest that “uncommitted” votes were an accurate proxy for “Obama” votes, you really have to slam your head in a door for a few hours.