I agree with Wolcottt- I don’t like how Hillary is running her campaign, but if you vote for McCain, you deserve what you get. Although Wolcott unfairly attributes the fratricidal maniac comment to Sullivan, I largely agree with the overall sentiment.
He Is Right
This post is in: Election 2008, General Stupidity
Jinchi
The problem isn’t that people might vote for McCain. It’s that Hillary has spent so much time telling Obama’s voters that they shouldn’t count (because they’re independents or Republicans or college grads or red staters or black or under 50) that they might decide she’s right and not bother voting at all in November.
If Obama wins the popular vote and the pledged delegates but the supers give it to Clinton in a back room deal, lots of those people will feel dissed. She only needs to drive away a small percentage of those people to lose in the end.
Pb
And then there’s the little-known third option. Not that it’ll matter, as I’ll be voting for Obama.
Dug Jay
It is a very good and typically funny post from him. His closing paragraph reads as if he were directing it to a very great many of the commenters here:
p.lukasiak
wow, your CDS is really on overdrive. That Wolcott piece was about how people like you are simply irrational, and now that Obama is fading, irrational crybabies.
Get a grip. Clinton isn’t half as bad as you think she is, and Obama isn’t half as good either.
demimondian
I hate to agree with John about anything — tarnishes my maverick image, you know — but, Christ on a crutch. TZ, at least, has a good argument for sitting it out, as his state will go for McCain anyway. I might not, no matter how upset I get, because p.luk might be right that Washington State could be in play, in which case I’ll have to vote for the Dem ticket. If you’re like me, and live in an in-play state, then you need to suck it up and pull the lever, no matter how little you like it.
If you’re such a filthy little purity troll that “you can’t do that”, well, don’t expect to be held in high esteem from me.
demimondian
No, Paul, that isn’t fair.
John is saying the thing which you should be grateful for — Clinton isn’t ideal for him (which is true), he prefers Obama (also true), and he will vote for either one. He hates Clinton…so, fine. He hates Clinton. Putting aside hatred to work for common goals is a good thing, not a bad one.
John Cole
The only thing in overdrive right now is your rampant douchebaggery. By stating I agree with Wolcott, I am implicitly acknowledging she is not as bad as many are making her out to be.
That doesn’t mean I still don’t get to think that she is running a shitty, divisive, scorched earth and counter-productive campaign. It also doesn’t mean that I prefer her over Obama, as I don’t.
Been a while since I got to say this to a commenter, but seriously, go fuck yourself Lukasiak.
demimondian
Ahh…just like old times.
Keith
I gotta say, if Hillary somehow manages to engineer a nomination, I will not vote for her; I’ll sit out the election. If she won it fair + square, that’s one thing, but given how she has carried herself (and her entourage), I will not vote for her, regardless of whether it’s a vote against someone else. If I could cast a purely “vote against”, then sure, I’d vote against, but by voting for Hillary Clinton, I am implicitly saying that I want Hillary Clinton to be prez, and if she wins the nomination the only way possible (stealing it), then I cannot in good conscience vote for this person. Sorry, but even if McCain has Rush Limbaugh as his VP candidate, I would still not be able to bring myself to cast a vote for someone who played the kind of divisive games she has played against her own party, and if the party allowed it, I could not vote for the party, either.
demimondian
Bravo, Keith! I’m so proud of you! You’re such a prize voter.
Loser.
The Other Steve
Now that’s not really fair.
I listened to Hillaries argument, and she’s right. If the election comes down to voting for experience, I really have to vote for the most experienced candidate.
And that’s John McCain.
Or does she have something else that qualifies her besides experience?
demimondian
So, let me get this straight, TOS. You’re seriously going to vote for McCain? In Minnesota? Is that what I’m supposed to take away from your posting?
Pb
I’m in a state that might go for Obama, but won’t go for Clinton–go figure :)
Same here, as I said here last month back when that was but a distant yet troubling possibility. Anyone who can’t respect the will of the voters will not get this voter’s respect or vote. Democracy is not too much to ask, thanks.
demimondian
Why don’t you vote for someone who truly reflects your dedication to democracy, then, Pb? I urge you to look at Ralph Nader, the Green party candidate for President. He’s got that whole “I embody the Democracy” thing down pat.
ThymeZone
I love the smell of “go fuck yourself” in the morning.
Not really, just wanted to say that.
This is going to sound really strange, but this whole last two months has tested my patience for pluk, but strangely, I am have come to appreciate him more. I don’t agree with anything he says about this primary, but he can carry a tune here, which is something.
Paul, you’re alright. John, it’s okay. Your commentariat is annoyingly loyal, we will never leave you. You will never get rid of us. We’re like cats, once you feed us we will never go away.
demimondian
I can haz cheezburger?
myiq2xu
At least now we have a term for those long, pious posts we see every day describing how that particular commenter, after deep and thorough introspection, has reached the conclusion that he or she, in good faith and with all the liberal/progressive/Democratic best intentions, cannot possibly ever cast a vote for that vile shrieking
monsterwitchharridanbitchwhorewoman Hillary Clinton.“Wolcotting”
empty
OK. If we can call the posters who post these long pious posts Keiths.
Pb
demi,
Funny story — in 2000, I thought about voting for Nader. Turns out that not only was he not on the ballot in NC, but write-in votes for him wouldn’t actually count either! NC has some sucky election laws, so I do have a lot of sympathy for his cause, but not for his current state of perpetual candidacy. If he wants to get elected and change things, then he should try running for another office, and get others to do the same — that’s how you build a party.
Cain
What experience? Wankery? Jeezus, at least Clinton is coldly calculating and like smart. What the fuck does John McCain have to offer us? Scenic trips with a full combat armor down an Iraqi market while sprouting bullshit? I question his sense of judgement in just about everything. He’s flipped almost 180 degrees from 2000 to 2008. His endless pandering to people who have less cognitive skills than a dead beaten seal. Please. Hillary is the right choice when compared to that sleaze ball. It’s a complete no-brainer.
That said, go MUP!
cain
Cain
Strangely I feel the same about myiq2xu. I appreciate the fact that despite all the wankery that I still genuinely laugh at some of his responsesin a heated debate. Pie is good for everyone.
cain
BobJones
Don’t blame me, I voted for Kodos.
ThymeZone
Pay me Tuesday.
myiq2xu
I was thinking of calling them “Louisa Mays” but that doesn’t quite work.
Maybe Cleek could come up with a “piety” filter?
empty
I take back my nomination. Keith’s post doesn’t really fit the bill. It’s just really stupid. And we already have a word for that.
The Other Steve
Surely John McCain has more experience than Hillary Clinton. He is like 10 years older after all.
ThymeZone
Fuck, that is funny. And I think its more like 11+ years, right?
McCain was already president material before Hillary was even born. As the son of an admiral, he is CIC material at birth already.
rob!
having a famous, esteemed Vanity Fair writer write a piece mocking some random bloggers seems kinda like dropping a nuclear bomb to get rid of a mole digging holes in your front yard–effective, sure, but a little overkill.
sure, us Obamabots (say it loud, say it proud) get a wee bit too worked up over this stuff sometimes, but GOD FORBID a lot of people be passionately positive about a politician, and get upset when it seems like he’s getting stabbed in the back from someone in his own party.
yes, let’s heap scorn and name-call these poor losers, who aren’t being ironic or post-modern or sarcastic. let’s sit high up in our Vanity Fair offices and laugh that some people care about stuff. drinks all around.
Dennis - SGMM
George H.W.Bush is a combat veteran with fifteen years of government experience, including eight years as Reagan’s VP before being elected himself, and look how good he turned out.
TenguPhule
And in 200 years, McCain will be optimal CIC material with all the experience he’ll really need.
Go Zombie McCain! That 2208 Election is just waiting for you!
Punchy
Just found out one of my students has a brother deeply involved with the Pat Tillman fiasco. Said he’s been charged. I had no idea soliders had been charged with anything. Thought the gov’t whitewashed the whole affair.
Punchy
That’s good comedy.
jnfr
I’m not tired of the primary, but I am damned tired of the bitching on all sides.
Dennis - SGMM
If we stop bitching the terrorists win.
myiq2xu
Moaning however, is optional.
rachel
I am so looking forward to the Hillary-Obama issue being decided. These hair-pulling matches between the Obamaniacs and the Clintonistas have gotten really tiresome.
jnfr
Then we’re safe forever!
Studly Pantload
And GOD FORBID anyone of note point out that those who gush (in a performances worthy of some sort of Faye-Dunaway-as-Joan-Crawford memorial statuette [“Why can’t you give me the respect I DESERVE?!!”]) over how they plan to take their ball and go home if they don’t like the end results of the Calvinballesque pre-GE trial heats the primary process is, the liberal agenda and very fucking fate of our country (think I’m exaggerating?–go ahead, see what happens to this country if we keep overspending like a drunken sailer in a whorehouse) be damned.
Jesus Monkey Humping Christ. Yes, Hillary as Atilla the Hun in drag is, well, a drag to behold. Yes, Obama in the GE appealling to our higher angels would be a once in a generation or two event fit to make burly, grown men weep with pride like freckled little girly girls. But as a staunch Obama supporter, I’ll take Hillary in office, even if she’s pissing off the left, over McCain bowing and scraping to to the brain damaged knuckle draggers as he’d have to (being as they’ll be ready to start the — say it with me — lynching party at the drop of a hat if he strays one iota from the agenda they expect him to hold to by implication of allowing him to run without howling bloody murder any more than they have) any day of any week.
Oh, and run-on sentences rock. Deal with it.
Chuck Butcher
Since I live in the State of Oregon I get to fill out my ballot in the sanctity of my home. If it is Hillary v McCain in Nov, it may take me three trips to the toilet bowl and 3 broken #2 pencils before I can get her box checked off, but I’ll do it. If you can’t listen to a hard core left wing Democrat, then listen to an apostate Republican named Cole. Too much rides on Nov. Damn it is hard, really hard, to say that about Hillary but there is John McCain out there. The one hope I have for you drop outs is that by Nov you’ll have had plenty of opportunities to see just how bad that guy is.
Doctor Memory
Let’s not lose sight of the big picture. The point of this election is to get the gang of criminals currently in power far away from control of our government. The nation’s future depends on it. Another four or eight years in Iraq will bankrupt us.
Your vote is your vote, and you can do what you want with it, but ask yourself what your vote is for. Is it to help put this country’s house in order before it is too late, or is it to help you feel good about yourself? Righteous indignation and a dollar twenty will get you a cup of coffee.
I backed Edwards originally, thought Hillary would be okay if she won, didn’t know anything about Obama. Now I’m enthusiastic about Obama and think Hillary Clinton is the devil. But my state is in play, and nothing could stop me from voting for her if she hijacks the nomination. Plenty of states that tend to tally blue could go the other way if Dems don’t join together to prevent it.
TenguPhule
At least pretend to enjoy the pony ride.
TenguPhule
I reserve the right to bitch about either candidate when they’re in the White House, though.
TenguPhule
Thanks to Republican sponsored inflation, that won’t even get you coffee anymore.
Tom in Texas
Right or wrong, Wolcott is a douche. A man who thinks four syllable words stretched out interminably long make up for his vapid cocktail hour observations should never ask to be spared another person’s prose. I’ve suffered through the miles of drivel he spews forth, when his point can usually be summed up in four words:
I’m better than you.
oh really
lukasiak says:
“Clinton isn’t half as bad as you think she is…”
Funny, she’s turning out to be at least twice as bad as I thought she was.
Studly Pantload
Like we don’t know that’s coming, no matter what. I’d give Obama m’be six months on Penn. Ave. before the “he sold us out!!!11” bitchfests pour forth from the bloggy heavens. Hell, even FDR earned the lumps he got from the ranks of the coalition that “huzzah!”ed him to power. And I’m sure I’ll have choice words along the way of the unfolding of the Obama administration, as well.
weenus
Face it you Hillary excusing fucks. Obama inspires people, Hillary divides them. That’s why Hillary is losing in all categories, especially the one that matters: Delegates.
Only thing she is doing now is shitting all over the Democratic nominee.
Ted
Hillary is dangerous. She has a nuclear weapon hidden within her ‘sniz’. I thought this had already been brought to everyone’s attention.
Wilfred
Clinton will not beat McCain. Period. The dog whistle politics of ‘I’ll get up at dawn to kill brown skinned Muslims’ works against Obama but not against McCain.
Personally, I don’t like any argument based on fear – “Vote for McCain and get what you deserve”. But then I’m still young enough to cut off my nose to spite my face when principles are at stake. Obama represents a breath of change, the possibility of actual political change in a country that sorely needs it. If you can’t see that, you’re already dead – so vote Clinton, and get what you deserve.
Tom in Texas
And where the hell does Wolcott get off calling only one side a bunch of crybabies anyway? My lord this woman gets the vapors and demands heads roll every time someone calls her a kindergarten insult. But she’s “tough”? I call bullshit. Obama may not like being compared to Ken Starr. But his supporters don’t have epileptic seizures every time someone uses the word periodically either.
Studly Pantload
Actually, all Team Hill has to do in the GE is run a “lesser of two evils” campaign. Ask voters if they want four more years of 90s era “hey, the making of the sausage will turn your tummy, but at least y’all will have jobs that don’t involve ringing up Slurpees,” vs. another term of allowing the lunatics to run roughshod at Bonkers Central.
Make no mistake. That is an argument she can win. And, frankly, if I can hold my nose for Kerry, voting HRC will be a cakewalk.
Studly Pantload
I generally like Wolcott and tend to agree with his post in question (and point in specific), but, yeah, touché.
Chuck Butcher
Wilfred,
There is a limit to what the country can absorb and come back in a reasonable fashion. Now, I’d like to see the Republican bastards of today’s party ground into dust so that my as yet unborn grandkids don’t have to vote against them, that they have something real as choices. I’m 54 and I never thought I’d see a replay of ‘Nam. I thought I’d seen the worst the R’s could offer with RMN. This is worse, much worse.
I don’t trust Hillary with George II’s powers, but McSame is a guaranteed cluster fuck. At some point this country is either going to get shoved over the edge into violence or just roll over and die. These things are not as far away or as unlikely as you may think. Americans will sell their rights pretty cheaply to fear mongers but losing their houses and jobs makes them testy. Just a small example is the danger of some more trickle down economy, this country is nearly owned by creditors now, much of any more stress will break the bank and McSame’s policies would do it.
My parents grew up in the Depression and I can promise you that you do not want to go there. BushCo hasn’t panicked publicly yet, but we’re already teetering on the edge of something very very bad. Housing has kept this show alive for over 6 years and now it’s trashed. If this mess goes over the edge and accelerates there will be hell to pay. What jobs do you think will come back? How do you think consumers will be able to support YOUR job? Ah fuck it.
What the hell do you support your candidate about that is bettered by a loss? Clinton would play hell beating McSame, it isn’t as though it’s a given she wins and on her worst day she’s still better for whatever you think your candidate stands for.
You have no idea how distasteful this argument is to me. No idea at all, but I make it because what happens to my fellows is more important than my distaste. Jayzus, I’m a gun-totin left wing Democrat, how goddam often do you think I get my way. And fuck you, I happen to be right and I get to watch the shit get deeper every day, for 30 fucking years. You actually think you’re pissed? You don’t know from shit about pissed and being crossed by those you should be able to trust. But I’ll fight every damn inch and I’ll take any damn piece I can get, and if it’s that corporate whore Hillary, well, then…
Studly Pantload
Chuck Butcher Says:
A-yep.
And speaking of RMN, who here doesn’t wistfully wonder at America’s potential sans Vietnam War (which war was e’er so enabled by Nixon & Kissinger & Co.), while also thanking the apotheosis of the cosmic flux on their knees for Medicare and Medicaid (don’t now?–just wait till you and/or your folks are eligible)?
Yeah, able executives can toss rose petals with one hand as they feed you steamin’-fresh crap from the other, but I’ll still take that any day over the zero-sum bullpucky of the GW years that McBush is promising.
Dave Shepherd
While I have no buy in to any candidate*, I found this one of Wolcott’s lesser posts (something I don’t say lightly as he has put me on to so much good stuff in the blogging universe). I agree some of Obama’s people have to suck it up, but I felt he dodged Chait by slinging mud at Sullivan. I would be more interested to read his response to Chait’s piece, which raised some salient points about Hillary’s campaign and the corner she is forcing Obama into, at the potential expense of her party’s chance in September. Jonathan Schwarz’s Iron Law of Institutions in action…
*being Australian, I just hope you guys pick our next Prez more wisely than you did the last
VidaLoca
Studly Pantload Says:
And the reference to RMN is perfect in a lot of ways. I’m Chuck’s age so I can remember being in 8th grade in the summer of 1968 and sitting in my parents’ living room watching as the Chicago police beat down the Wilfreds of that day in the streets, while the democrats went on to nominate the Hillary of that day: Hubert Humphrey. Hubert Humphrey who was in a lot of ways progressive around an issue that mattered: trying to stand against the domination of the Dixiecrats over the democratic party. Hubert Humphrey who was LBJ’s VP and who couldn’t (and wouldn’t) distance himself from the great imperialistic adventure of his time. At least what’s different now is that Humphrey won that nomination fair and square on the delegate count, playing by the rules, while if Hillary wins it will very likely be by gaming the rules and taking every advantage she can get, and damn the consequences.
The democrats will do this. The party that nominated Mondale. The party that nominated Dukakis. The party that nominated Kerry. They are perfectly capable of fucking it all up again. People this is a party of imperialism. It is a party of white privilege. The thing that matters most to the poobahs of the democratic party is their continued access to their own power; they will cheerfully lose an election to maintain control over what they think is “their” party. They do not give two shits about you, or the country, or “democracy” in any abstract sense. It’s all about opportunism.
Wilfred, you think Obama’s a little different? He may be, a little — but only a little; he is still at the core a right-of-center democrat. Do not be surprised if you see an Obama administration shipping cluster bombs off to the Israeli air force to drop on kids in Beirut again next year, just like last year; you have no solid reason (other than hope) to think that this will not happen. (On the other hand, you can almost count on it happening in a Clinton administration.)
That is how they roll.
But: all those of you who are too young to have seen this all before: do not make the mistake we did. Do not throw the baby out with the bath water and get all wrapped up in your principles and walk away from it because that’s the easy thing to do and it feels good. As Chuck said, the country can not absorb another hit like that and come back in any kind of a reasonable fashion.
After McCain, the darkness. It will be so much worse. The only chance we’ve got is to try to hold it off.
The better chance is that more people will get involved in the process; clearing the Clintons and the DLC crowd out will help with that so Obama’s a better candidate from the point of view of collateral benefit. But don’t be surprised and don’t be disappointed if it doesn’t happen. Take the long view. There is too much at stake not to.
Keith
Dude, it’s my vote, and if I don’t want to cast it for someone I do not like, it’s my choice. The best you can do is throw out insults? Go talk to a shrink or someone else who can help you with whatever issues you’ve got bottled up.
p.lukasiak
For those thinking about not voting for Clinton or Obama if either is the nominee, I have two words.
Supreme Court.
p.a.
Amen. Let’s worry more about our nation and less about our consciences. I live in a deep blue state so I may withhold my vote or go 3rd party (not Ralph!), but if my state were in play- or God forbid somehow comes into play, Hilzilla gets my vote. And please, if you must withhold your vote from her, don’t stay home; help the downticket candidates.
VidaLoca
Keith,
With all respect, he’s trying to say sarcastically what I’m trying to say sincerely: out of three possible options you will in the end come up with two choices — an incremental approach to an authoritarian form of government sooner, or later.
VidaLoca
Forgot to add: Clinton will equal later — how much, I don’t know. That will be to some degree up to you.
McCain will equal sooner.
jake
True, but I’m having a hard time ignoring the long-term benefits of 12 straight years of BushLeague Politics. I’m really sick of the Democratic party being the cleaning maids for those hyper-privileged bastards. Since I’ve been born the Repubs have followed the same pattern: Fuck everything up until they’re booted from office. Cry like their tits are stuck in a wringer because the place is such a mess (and everything was just dandy when they took power). Take over again because the stupid worthless Democrats can’t do anything right. And it works because the average voter has a dodgy long term memory. Fuck that shit. I’d almost pay to hear the sort of excuses the GOP will come up with in 2010 when the reek of a dead economy can no longer be ignored. “Bu-but, the Democrats said the economy was bad and that hurt the economy’s feelings and … Look! Osama bin Laden!”
Now, I would prefer not to wind up fighting over refrigerator boxes and eating K Street lobbyists, but if that’s what it takes to finally put a stake through the GOP, well, there’s plenty of lobbyists and they can’t possibly taste as bad as they look. And I’ll have lots of boring stories for the great-nieces and nephews.
Anyway. That’s what I plan to tell myself if McCane wins.
Thepanzer
I don’t understand Hillary supporters. That isn’t a bash on them, I simply don’t understand what the attraction is. Take away gays, guns, and abortion and Hillary is a moderate-left Republican. I could deal with moderate-left Republicanism if it was competent and didn’t go to crazy town for special interests like Bushco. The bigger issue is foreign policy. I say that because as bad as our economy is we’re still the world’s reserve currency, have trillions of dollars of foreign capital (particularly mid-east petro dollars), and are currently paying for 2 open-ended occupations on the other side of the planet. Our economy teeters on the edge of losing foreign support. Opening a 3rd front with Iran, even limited airestrikes is suicidal. The chances that the muslim world would go apeshit is huge We literally cannot afford for muslim investors to withdraw funds from our market. That’s not even counting the chances of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, etc finally going up like powder-kegs in variations of the Iranian revolution. All of these regimes are teetering with rich elites using propaganda and security forces to keep their pissed off young out of work populations in check. Seriously, if we attack a 3rd muslim country contrary to sanity and world opinion we risk having a total economic meltdown. Hillary prides herself on being a Democratic super-hawk and so far has a voting track record of supporting the foreign policy establishments bellicose business as usual model. Mcsame shows every indication of bombing iran with a smile on his face, Hillary’s record shows she would contemplate, triangulate, talk with the American people and then bomb Iran anyway. The end result is the same. Given that Hillary voted for Iraq and more worryingly voted to label the IRGC as a terrorist organization is bad juju. So really, educate me, what has Hillary done to PROVE she’s not going to listen to the same neocon shitheads who got us into this mess? My support for Obama stems from his balls at not supporting the Iraq war when it was political suicide to do so. It gives me some hope he would resist our foreign policy crazies who only differ from Bush in believing we should use the velvet glove over the iron fist. So seriously, I’m not trying to flame you guys but where’s the proof she’s not another neocon flunkie? It’s not in her voting record… As a former Republican I trusted that fucktard Bush during his first tenure. After that experience I’m in no mood to just trust Hillary is going to do a 180 and start behaving like a dove. Especially when she’s using the same Republican fear tactics that Bushco have employed the last 6 or 7 years. Why should I vote for someone who puts Mcsame on a pedestal, listens to neocon hawks, votes with them, uses fear based advertising to get elected, and shows every other sign of being….a Republican. I could just vote for Mccain if I wanted more of teh crazy. With Hillary you get watered down “teh crazy!” and destroy whatever shreds of credibility the Democratic party has left as an opposition party.
Splitting Image
” if you vote for McCain, you deserve what you get.”
I agree with you and Wolcott to a point, but it bears mentioning that if the Democrats vote for Clinton under the circumstances, they also deserve what they get.
I’d also like to stress that the problem isn’t voting for Clinton so much as the quicksand the federal Democrats will be falling into if they overturn the results of the state by state nomination process. If they pick her and she loses, the entire Democratic caucus in Washington and elected leaders throughout the country will be implicated in her defeat.
This is actually one of the reasons it took so long for the Democrats to rebuild after the Mondale defeat in 1984. It wasn’t only that he was a bad candidate, but many Democrats in Washington had to endorse him to get him the nomination, and their judgement was called into question because of it.
Kerry lost? Lousy candidate. Dukakis? Lousy candidate. Dole? Lousy candidate. McCain? Lousy candidate.
Mondale? Showed how out of touch the Democratic party was back then. Clinton? Will show just how out of touch the Democratic party is right now.
Obama? Might show that a lot of people who voted for him were unrealistic about his chances, but at least the elected party members can wash their hands of him.
Her camp is already moving to shift the blame, too. It’s not going to be her fault if/when she loses. It will be because of the crybabies who wouldn’t vote for her.
J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford
I agree with Keith 100%. I will not vote for a candidate that steals a nomination.
The “Hillary has momentum” meme is horseshit. Even if Hillary wins Pennsylvania Obama will erase whatever gains she makes by winning North Carolina. Both states could go either way in the general election so winning one is no more important than winning the other.
All of you folks saying that “Clinton may be bad but McCain is so much worse” sound just like Republicans (Bush is bad but Gore/Kerry is so much worse).
If you do something as stupid as continue to support and push Hillary to the nomination don’t be surprised when I do something stupid and vote for McCain instead of your lying, scheming, conniving bitch.
Hillary Clinton = Joe Lieberman
Cassidy
I’m having a bit of a hard time with these kind of statements. While Hillary isn’t my candidate of choice, if she gets the Nom, it will be by the rules of the Democratic Party. For her to win by Super-delegate, would surely be disenfranchising to some, but this is a lesson we’ve allready learned: the popular vote doesn’t count for shit. Nada. Nothing. That’s not the way our system works, and for a (somewhat) logical reason. AAMOF, Obama’s campaign personifies that reason: he’s making the voters of “unimportant” states feel like they have a voice.
In the end, the votrs really only have two choices. This isn’t about Obama’s “Hope” or Hillary’s “Experience” or what she might do or what he might not do. This is a very simple equation. You can either pick a Democrat, or you can pick a Republican who will continue the dicked up policies of this latest Administration.
Me, I’m gonna happily go with the Dem Nominee, regardless of the name. By not voting, I’d essentially be saying that “business as usual” is acceptable and the Republican way of doing business is unacceptable. If you don’t physically vote, then you are casting a vote, but it may not be saying what you want.
Secondly, if you are an American Citizen, it is your duty, your responsibility to vote. Too many people in this country have gone without the right to vote for you to casually toss it away and take it for granted. Too many people have had their lives cut short because they believed in something bigger than them. You may not agree with them, but staying home and not voting is an act of selfishness that is beyond irresponsible. Think about every gay couple that can live as a stable married couple. Think about every Soldier who is doing their job, regardless of their personal beliefs. Think about every woman who may lose her right to make medical decisions about her body.
Don’t be an asshole. Go vote.
Bob In Pacifica
lukasiak says Obama is fading? How so? Because now the merger with Limbaugh and FOX is official re Ohio and Texas and Governor Crist in Florida? Because of Clinton’s drooling on McCain’s medal? Maybe it was Obama winning Saturday and tomorrow. Maybe it was Art Torres telling the candidates to end this before the convention (which is to say, Concede, Hillary). Maybe it’s his lead in delegates. Maybe Obama is fading because the fellow he campaigned for in Illinois won Hastert’s old seat.
Or maybe lukasiak is just repeating MSM talking points. He’s essentially now doing Limbaugh’s work, extending the race so that the Repubs can bloody Obama before the fall. Strange.
Xenos
DWFPPOTY.
(Damning With Faint Praise Post of the Year)
Cassidy
Fixed typo
J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford
Hillary Clinton = Joe Lieberman
J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford
Exactly.
lutton
God, the drama on both sides is out of control. I recall a Hillary supporter (maybe) refering to a potential Obama nomination as ‘the death of hope!’
Jeez, get a grip.
ntr Fausto Carmona
I’m with J.A.F. Rusty. I haven’t been facepalming at the Republican “The Democrats are worse!” B.S. these past god-knows-how-many years only to cast a vote for Hillary because “The Republicans are worse!” If she wants my vote, she’ll have to earn it. She won’t get it by Liebermaning her way to the Democratic nomination, that’s for sure. Hell, I’ll write in Jim Tressel for President if I have to.
J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford
hey Fausto Carmona – you an Indians fan?
White Sox fan here.
FAP
I’m either voting Obama or McCain. Feel free to nominate Hillary, I already have an acceptable alternative.
I will never ever ever vote for Hillary.
Dug Jay
Here’s a story about the first lawsuit by the Obama camp to prevent Hillary from getting the Florida delegates. Given the player behind it, such a suit might prove self-defeating.
demimondian
What VidaLoca said. What Cassidy said. What Studly said. What a lot of people said.
Keith, it’s your vote. I don’t own it, I can’t make you vote in any particular way, and, contrary to what you might think, I won’t even try. It’s your ballot, and I would have fought to protect your right to cast it *or not* if I could.
That doesn’t mean I’ll respect you if you choose to waste your ballot.
Like VidaLoca, TZ, and others, I remember the 68 convention, I remember the 72 convention, and I remember 80, 84, and 88, too. The lessons I learned from those years are the same as the lessons Clinton learned: you have to win to govern. A noble loser is a loser with a pretty grave. Your principles mean nothing when you’re out of power. Winning isn’t everything but nothing else matters if you lose.
This election matters. It matters a lot. We need to investigate the corruption which is rotting in the sewers of Washington. We need to stop the bleeding of the financial sector. We need to look seriously at our energy policies, and fix them. We can not afford to lose.
If that means you should pinch your nose and vote for Clinton, then that’s what it means. You can bitch and moan about her tactics — and I’ll make fun of that — and you can gripe about her nutcracker thighs and her cleavage and all the other things which aren’t misogynist, even though they’re codewords for her gender — and I’ll certainly make fun of that — but I will respect your participation.
Spoil your ballot? Not so much.
Punchy
He pitches for them! the “ntr” means Not Throwing Rightnow, which is why he’s blogging. Although I’m not sure why it’s not in Spanish.
And White S
uox fan? Cubs here, natch. grown tired of yer manager yet?ntr Fausto Carmona
The ntr is ‘not the real’. Too many Punchys getting me confused with the real one. And yes, I am an Indians fan. *muttergrumblethomeandhisrockmutter*
And you think Hillary will actually do all this? Hell, I’m not even sure if Obama can/will do it. At least he doesn’t have the Clinton “Throw Progressives Under The Bus” track record behind him.
J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford
I thought “ntr” was “not the real.”
I hate the Cubs. In my lifetime they have been the worst team in baseball (Tampa Bay has only been around for a decade) yet their fans talk like they haven’t been watching shitty baseball all their lives.
Did you see that Steve Stone signed on with the White Sox fulltime? You know why Steve Stone left the Cubs? Because the Cubbie organization is a bunch of whiney, beanie baby loving douchebags.
Cassidy
Yes, but neither of them have the “send Soldiers off to die, cuz someone tried to kil my daddy” track record, either. Or the “I’m a principled man, unless standing for my principles means losing the possibility of being POTUS” track record of McCain.
Pick your poison.
Blue Neponset
There is no fucking way in Hell I am voting for Hillary Clinton. I waited eight years for a President that I respect, I can wait four more. Take your scare tactics and go be scared somewhere else.
Cassidy
Yeah…right…you mistake fear for reality. I, personally, am not scared of what one person can do in 4-8 years. This country has weathered worse and it will weather worse than this. I do have concerns about what kind of legitimacy a Republican win in November will give to this past administration.
But the statement you quoted is the reality of the situation. If you choose not to vote for Hillary (or Obama), then you have cast your vote for McCain and the status quo.
Stop being a skycrane (world’s biggest tool) and get off your soapbox and vote for the betterment of the country. Even a conservative Dem like HRC is better than a real conservative.
Cassidy
Translation: Waaaagggghhhh….someone validate me….waaaaaagggghhhhh
Dennis - SGMM
Or, you could pick a Republican who would, along with his buddies in Congress, take the fall for the all of the largely irreversible shit that’s going on.
Cassidy
Sure, fuck it….it’s already happenning. Why try and fix it? Hahahahaha all you middle class people…hope you don’t mind continuing to lose your homes just so we can stick it to the GOP! Yeah, right on! That’s the progressive spirit.
Cassidy
It’s funny that that the one who is honest about his lack of empathy (me) is arguing for the greater good. Ya’ll, the “I refuse to vote for Hillary and will cut out my bowels first!” crowd, might want to take a long look in the mirror.
Cassidy
And….
For a bunch of people who jumped on me for stating that I beleive citizenship should be earned, it’s disheartening to watch you so cavalierly throw away your own rights. To hell with the lack of respect for civil liberties this administration has, just throw your own away…that’s the ticket.
Blue Neponset
Hillary is just a Democratic version of George Bush. If the Democratic Party has to defend the same policies we have been jumping up and down about for the last eight years we will have bigger problems than a McCain Presidency. You shouldn’t let your fear make you so short sighted. Take a long view and realize what is at stake here.
Z
I like using the term ‘Wolcottism’. I just think it needs to apply to all the rabid, foaming ‘Obama is teh evil!’ Hillary supporters, too.
Svensker
Much as I dislike the Hillary, she will get my vote if it comes to that. We cannot afford McCain.
But NO Hillary on the Supreme Court, if Obama gets the nod. Hillary? The Constitution? They’re barely on speaking terms.
ntr Fausto Carmona
merrinc
1968 convention: Dem candidate not decided until convention. Establishment candidate with backing of party insiders chosen over anti-war candidate who had energized youth vote. Republicans win the White House.
1972 convention: nominee not chosen until convention; Republicans win the White House.
1984: nominee not chosen until convention. Young, dynamic challenger unable to overcome establishment candidate’s lead due to “superdelegates”. Republicans win again.
Doesn’t look like history is on Hillary’s side.
jenniebee
But Hillary has the policy and Obama, frankly, doesn’t. When the general election comes, I’ll hold my nose and pull the lever for Obama, but it’s going to take some serious drinking to get me over the fact that in a can’t-lose election, the Democrats nominated someone even further to the right than the Clintons and turned their backs on the policy substance in favor of the rhetoric. It’s going to take even more to cope with the concept that through it all, Obama will be called a “progressive” when he’s nothing of the sort.
note bene – among people who cite health care as their top concern this election cycle, Hillary leads by 16%. Just saying – there are actually quite a few people who really do support Hillary, and who do so for rational, reasonable reasons.
cleek
or ours.
TheFountainHead
I feel as though a big, fat “Duh!” is the only thing I can add to this.
Dug Jay
VidaLoca expresses a concern about all of the candidates that one doesn’t often find voiced so openly among the liberal left:
TheFountainHead
And here I thought I was going to make it through the day without needing to take some Advil.
demimondian
Do I
You know what? I do. I think any Democrat will do it.
There’s a big difference between 2008 and 1992. In 1992, the Dem majority in both houses was entrenched, and far more interested in protecting its own perqs (House Post Office Scandal, anyone) than in helping Clinton get things done. After all, the House had been in Democratic hands for a generation and a half — literally, I, a man in his thirties, could not remember the last time the Republicans had held the Speakership. The was time enough to let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
1994 taught the Dems a tough lesson: that’s not true. The voters can, and will, throw the bums out. You don’t have forever to compromise. The subsequent twelve years of Republican domination in the House — and their sudden ejection, in their own turn, in 2006 — drove home how important that was, and how transient.
So, yes, I think the next President will get things done. I don’t think that he or she will have a choice.
Pb
Cassidy,
I’ll be voting in the primary; and if Hillary Clinton can not show the basic respect due to that vote and this voter, then she simply will not get my vote in the general, or, in fact, ever. That is all.
demimondian
Um…remind me again who was young and dynamic in the Mondale-Ferraro ticket?
Jake
What does that mean? I’m asking without the least amount of snark or hostitily.
demimondian
Oh, you meant the challenger, didn’t you? In that case, (a) the line about the superdelegates is a lie, Mondale won handily. The “young dynamic challengers” face planted incredibly early (Donna Rice). Jesse Jackson was neither young nor dynamic — nor relevant.
Like I said, some of us remember those times.
simplicio
A month ago, I was of the mind that I’d be supporting whoever won the democratic nomination. With the new craven, by any means necessary, Hillary on display, that is no longer the case. If she gets the supers to give her the nomination in a backroom deal, I will stay home in November. Unbelievable how well the democratic party is positioned to win and yet we might have a clinton as the face of our party. No thanks.
demimondian
Since when does the truth give you a headache?
jenniebee is right — Clinton’s policies are to the left of Obama’s, in the rare cases where they differ. Go look; I think you’ll be surprised.
4tehlulz
Mark Penn apparently didn’t get that memo:
Pb
You might be able to construe some bits of her campaign platform that way, but when you look at what she’s actually said and done, she’s definitely to the right of Obama. For background as to how and why, see also Dick Morris and Mark Penn, for starters.
Punchy
Just do us all a HUGE favor and promise to never, ever, ever post a single comment bitching about how President McCane is nominating the KKK for the SC or how he wants to open up an additional war with Syria a month after he’s attacked Iran and Sri Lanka.
You people kill me. Progressive? my ass.
Cassidy
The short sightedness here is dismissing reality. I realize that disregarding anyone who isn’t agreeing with you as being afraid is a coping mechanism for you, but you really might want to step back and take a longer view of things.
Then you need to quit the party. Her nomination, if secured, is because of our Party’s progressive intent. Do you really think she’s the only one who would take advantage of the rules in place? I voted for Obama as well. I’d like to see him win. I’ll be very disappointed if he doesn’t, but I’m not gonna punish the candidate for the Party’s lack of cajones.
TheFountainHead
Some of Clinton’s policies, like on Healthcare, for example, certainly could be considered left of Obama’s, and you are correct to say they differ little on their Senate votes and stated policies. There are also policy issues on which Obama is the Lefty. That’s really neither here nor there, but to suggest that somehow Obama is not a progressive simply because he’s pragmatic and doesn’t see all of her plans as viable, is utterly ludicrous and DOES give me a headache. In a political world where McCain and Hannity are the alternative, Obama is not only a progressive, he’s radically progressive.
Pb
Punchy,
I won’t be voting for McCain, thanks. However, in a Clinton-McCain election match-up, McCain will win my state, and not by one vote, either. Obama, on the other hand, might have a chance.
Cassidy,
I’m not in the party; remember, it’s not just Democrats voting for Obama that Hillary Clinton would be screwing over here.
Blue Neponset
It means Hillary will do anything to “win”.
quickdraw
9/11 changed everything.
myiq2xu
See what happens when you put a woe-man on the ticket?
BTW Demi: – Hart planted his face in Rice’s monkey business in 1988, which helped Dukakis become the nominee.
Too bad isn’t it, cuz Hart would obviously have won in either 84 or 88 if only he had been the nominee.
Anyone except Mondale/Woman would have beat the enormously unpopular Reagan in 1984. Just like Kennedy would have beat Reagan in 1980 and Bradley would have beat Bush in 2000.
demimondian
Um…you should go back and look at their votes, Pb. She’s considerably to the left of him on votes they both took.
J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford
You folks just don’t get it. There is a large segment of the electorate that will not vote for HRC no matter what. There is also a large segment of the electorate that will rise up and vote against HRC if given the chance. And then there is a large swath of new voters energized by Obama who will be de-energized by HRC conniving her way to the nomination combined with a whole slew of voters completely turned off/disgusted with HRC, and who happen to just not give a shit anymore.
Force Clinton as the nomination and you will have no one but your dumb selves to blame.
Obama has already won the nomination. Even if Clinton wins Pennsylvania, Obama will erase her gains when he wins North Carolina. Jenniebee said that Obama doesn’t have the policy but HRC does. What a load of horseshit. There were rules before this nomination process started and they count for something. Everytime something doesn’t go HRC’s way it’s time to move the goalposts. If HRC loses a caucus state, well then caucuses don’t count. If HRC loses a primary state, then that state doesn’t reflect the real electorate.
I’m so tired of this shit. Anybody else and they would have been told to take a hike. Because HRC was married to Bill Clinton we have to pretend like she didn’t already lose.
Pb
demi,
Right, because war with Iran is the liberal position…
Jake
But fucking up and bitching about the consequences ’tis the American Way!
Blue Neponset
You’re the one who is doing all the name calling pal. If you want to get all haughty about “coping mechanism” you might want to look in the mirror first. I just don’t like being told by people such as yourself that a McCain Presidency is so horrible a prospect that I have to vote for someone who disgusts me like Hillary Clinton. I’d rather trust that the 72 million Democrats that aren’t named Hillary Clinton can keep McCain from doing anything too awful for four years.
Mary
Speaking of Limbaugh …
John S.
Um…you’re full of shit.
There are some cases where Clinton is to the left, but there are also cases where Obama is to the left. It depends entriely what the issue is.
Analysis here and here.
Your authoritarian streak is really shining through these days.
Punchy
Hint–the one with the highest votes wins. A non-vote is allowing McCane to win. Either you want another Thomas on your SC OK’ing torture in every form, spying in all circumstances, and corps to have no liability, or you vote Democratic.
You protest by no-voting. Go ahead. Just not a peep when Prez McCane completely destroys all vestiges of freedom in this country.
Pb
Indeed. We don’t need more politicians who only count the votes of those who vote for them. We already had a 50% + 1 presidency, governing under those ‘rules’, and look where it got us.
myiq2xu
With two large segments against Hillary and a large swath voting for Obama, who are these people turning out in record numbers to vote for Hillary?
Punchy
Bullshit. Complete bullshit. And hell, I support Obama. But outside of the very small community known as Blogworld, she’s quite popular. Whether you agree with this or not.
Cassidy
Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice…
VidaLoca
Rusty,
That’s the last thing I’d want to force. I voted for the MUP in the WI primary in large part because I saw the policy/experience issues between MUP and Hillary as mostly a wash. I like MUP because I see him bringing a lot of new people into politics (people a lot like, I’m assuming here, yourself). And I dislike Hillary for many of the same reasons as many other people here. IOW I like MUP because of some of the collateral benefits he brings to the table.
But the MUP may not win the nomination. Power never concedes anything without a fight and that’s what you’re seeing now: Hillary calling in all her debts, doing whatever it takes. One will win; one will lose; we all have almost vanishingly little to say about it. But it’s a good idea, even if an academic one, to have a backup plan if things don’t go the way we want.
Svensker
Yeah, that worked out real well with Dubya.
Pb
Punchy,
Let’s try this again.
I won’t be voting for McCain, thanks. However, in a Clinton-McCain election match-up, McCain will win my state, and not by one vote, either. Obama, on the other hand, might have a chance.
I’ve made this very clear. Either Hillary Clinton can learn to respect the vote I cast in the primary, or she’ll lose my vote in the general. I won’t support candidates who won’t support democracy; that’s not such a high bar when you’re in a democracy, and thus, that’s the sort of leadership I’ll vote for to run a democracy.
We The People of the United States. Learn it, live it, love it.
Blue Neponset
Dubya hasn’t done too much since the Dems won both Houses of Congress. McCain won’t be able to do too much either as long as the Dems control one or both houses of Congress.
TheFountainHead
I need a new thread. I grow weary of this one.
Punchy
How noble. You wont support a Dem b/c she’s used some campaign tactics unsuitable to you. But if by not voting, you allow McCane to win (repeating myself), and he goes hog-wild disassembling the Constitution, starting more wars everywhere, and generally fucking us all for decades to come, so be it.
I hope you’re proud of your stance when you discover what crap McCane will inflict on your life.
demimondian
Um, no I’m not. There are a number of studies of their votes.
Of the FOUR — that’s right, FOUR — votes where they differed (and Obama actually bothered to show up to vote), she voted to the left on all four.
merrinc
Not according to Tad Devine, a key member of Mondale’s campaign staff.
Some of us are indeed. That’s why I remember that the Donna Rice scandal torpedoed Hart’s chances in the 1988 primary.
demimondian
Um, Blue? I want you to go back and look at who had control of the Senate when the AUMF passed. (Hint: it wasn’t the Republicans.)
Billy K
I really like Wolcott. But regarding his blindness to Hillary and mocking of Obama supporters, I only have this to say: Fuck You.
Blue Neponset
Quite popular with who? The majority of Dems & independents who voted against her or the Republicans who despise her?
Cassidy
Famous last words…
Seriously, are you Constitutionally retarded? You do realize that the Democratic Party is a …wait for it…political party. Howard Dean could say he wants a fight to the near death between all the candidates and last man standing wins. As long as the Party says sure, they don’t have to hold a Primary vote for shit. They could change the rules that say only the Super delegates count and that’s that.
Jesus, you sound like a whiny child with that remark. That is quite possibly one of the most retarded things I’ve read of late and I read Hillaryis44 everyday.
You are completely detached from the process. There is no forcing. The voters have not overwhelmingly decided, or Obama would already have the delegate count. That leaves Plan B, as set by the Party. Jesus, will you people get this narrow-sighted, lame brain idea that anyone is stealing anything out of your head!
Zifnab
The 28%ers of the left?
Seriously, though, Hillary will have the general support of the mainstream Democratic Party. And that will give her a good base of support. However, she’s never made strong inroads into the Independent bloc – in fact, she’s shown open disdain for those states that “never vote Dem anyway” – and she hasn’t shown much initiative in expanding the party outside its strongholds. She’s playing the 50% + 1 game, but she doesn’t even have the common sense to use the Karl Rove playbook by roping in the Soccer Moms and NASCAR Dads and whatever other happy euphemism we’re currently using for “middle class white people”.
Obama, by comparison, has been catering to the Dean 50-state strategy and pushed hard in districts like IL-14 (Denny Hastert’s old seat) to flip reliably red districts blue. He deliberately appeals to Independents while still emitting the populist vibe that resonates with left-wing voters. He’s running an amazing grass roots campaign, and he’s taken a commanding lead with pledged delegates. Obama voters are caucusing more, voting more, volunteering more… He’s just done a better job of energizing the party nationwide.
If Obama had never entered the race, I doubt I’d have a problem with Hillary Clinton’s campaign strategy. But seeing the clear distinction between insider Washington political strategy and outsider grass roots appeal, it’s clear that Obama’s movement-liberalism approach will benefit the party as a whole far more than Clinton’s battle-ground state strategy.
Pb
Punchy,
Thanks.
Wrong again. If she wins it fair and square, I’ll hold my nose and vote for her. Funny thing is, I don’t see how she could do that at the moment. Seems to me she probably should have dropped out by now.
Indeed; see previous, wherein this scenario won’t happen.
I am indeed. I hope you enjoy supporting politicians who don’t care about anyone but their supporters. I’ve already seen how that movie ends, thanks.
myiq2xu
Eriposte demolishes some Obama campaign fairy tales:
MUPpets please don’t read it. It’s all lies and will only make you mad.
Cassidy
I’d show up to that caucus.
Blue Neponset
The fact that Iraq hadn’t happened yet is another reason the AUMF got passed. Do you really think a Democratically controlled House or Senate will bend to the will of another Republican President after the Dems have gotten screwed by Bush for eight years? I Don’t.
Pb
Cassidy,
The basis of Democracy is respecting the will of the people, under whatever system. If you don’t get that, then all I can say is, I’m not surprised, because it also fits in nicely with your use of “the greater good”. Pfft.
Cassidy
Because they’re such stand-up fella’s now right? Maybe a strongly worded letter is needed.
TheFountainHead
Only after allowing the bills to be eviscerated in committee or on the floor. She’s never taken a progressive stand in her life because she’s never taken a stand.
myiq2xu
Paging Mr. Obvious!
Zifnab
Contrary to popular belief, Howard Dean is not the High Holy All-Powerful Overlord of the Democratic National Committee, he’s just the chairperson. If Dean says he wants a fight to the death among candidates, the DNC committee still needs to ratify it. Each of the candidates has sway in the DNC. And while either party could take a page from the Chinese or the Russians and decide who gets to run for what office in smoke-filled back rooms to the exclusion of all else, the reality is that the Democratic Party derives its power from its constituency. Democrats are no more “required” to choose via a Primary than they are “required” to accept campaign donations or volunteer efforts on the party’s behalf. But without national input, you don’t have much of a national party. That’s what the Republicans are finding out.
Cassidy
Ummmm…nooo…reshaping definitions to fit your argument doesn’t work. I love Democracy, as a basis for gov’t. I respect the right of private institutions to do as they please. And regardless of this straw man BS, the reality is that the nominee will be chosen by Super-delegates, period. Obama does not and will not have the necessary number of delegates to win outright, so he will have to win by using the same back room, late night phone calling and more so, as he is behind in that count. This is how the Party works.
myiq2xu
Forget the convention, let’s use Thunderdome!
Cassidy
Well, yeah, but Dean demanding a Thunderdome style cage match to the death is so much more believable, adn a much better visual, than any other prominent Dem.
Blue Neponset
If only Hillary were in the Senate in 2002 and got to vote on the AUMF. She would have shown us all how to stand up and fight against Dubya’s stupid policies.
Cassidy
“Awright guys, huddle around. Coach wants us to pull a left 32 Goal Post Shift. But I’m thinking this….I’m gonna pull this little round ball out of my sock, and we’re gonna start playing another game entirely, without telling the other team. What do we have the lose, we’re getting our ass kicked here, might as well change direction.”:
Pb
Cassidy,
I think a lot of the superdelegates also understand about the will of the people, and indeed, a lot of them are Congressmen and Governors. So I’m not really worried about Obama not getting the nomination on that front, although I do wonder about some of the DNC members. But it is a fallacy to say that “the nominee will be chosen by Super-delegates, period” — the rank-and-file voters will play and have played a much bigger role, and, I believe, will determine the nomination.
Cassidy
Outside of some hopeful progressive undercurrent of Kumbaya, how do you really expect his to happen? The voters have/ are having their say. And what is being siad is that neither candidate is taking the whole party. The Super-Delegates get to choose, period. Now maybe some will take into consideration the will of the people, and some will dangle their vote for concessions, and favors. Maybe someone will offer it for one night with Mrs. Obama in the Lincoln Bedroom. Point is, there are a lot of what if scenarios, and you are wanting to enforce a standard that simply doesn’t exist.
Sojourner
I am convinced that Obama is going to win this thing eventually. If the party leadership and the superdelegates give it to Hillary (assuming no huge change in voting patterns), this could be the last straw for some of us.
Would I vote for Hillary under normal circumstances? Yep.
But I am profoundly tired of the incompetence displayed with great regularity by Reed and Pelosi. The Dems need to decide what they stand for and get some leadership in that will act accordingly.
I think Obama is the guy. But what happens if he’s not the winner?
AkaDad
If I don’t vote for Hillary, it’s because she’s behind in every metric, and in order for her to “win” she would be disenfranchising voters in 30 States.
Svensker
Well, since the current Dems are about to bend over and beg THIS Republican president to pork them real hard on FISA, I find your assurances a little unconvincing.
Speaking of which — any activists out there: PLEASE call Pelosi, Hoyer and Reyes, plus your own congressperson, and ask them to stick with the old House version of FISA, and please not give the telecom’s retroactive amnesty for lawbreaking.
To paraphrase Otto: Pork away, Herr Bush. Pork away!
Pb
Cassidy,
Your perception of this is slanted by a distinct chronological bias. Just because the superdelegates vote after the people do, does not mean that their votes are somehow more important, or more determinative. Let us assume that the superdelegates will in fact vote 67% Clinton – 33% Obama. I don’t see this happening, but let’s say that it will. Then, would the outcome be determined by the voters, because if enough of them vote for Clinton in the coming contests, she will end up being the nominee? Or, if enough vote the other way, Obama will be?
Sojourner
The Dems are getting ready to cave on the FISA bill so I have no idea what you’re talking about.
tBone
If Hillary was the nominee and I lived somewhere where my vote could conceivably make a difference, I’d load up on clothespins and anti-nausea medication and vote for her.
That being said – when Republicans vote for a Republican candidate, no matter how awful, because “the Democrats are always worse,” we roundly mock them. And rightly so.
At some point you have to be willing to stand on principle. Reading this thread, I’m wondering where that point would be for some of you, or if it even exists.
chopper
late to the game, but i’m with keith. if hillary gets the nom in a smoke-filled room over the will of joe democrat, i’m not voting for her in the general. i’ll write in someone else.
zsa
I will vote for the Democrat in any case.
That said, JAF Rusty is right. Deservedly or not, lots of people despise and distrust Hillary. She can win the solid blue states and she might be lucky enough, or McCain senile enough, for her to pick off Florida or Ohio for the win. Maybe.
Simply put, Obama is more electable because he’s not named “Bush” or “Clinton”.
Obama is running a 50 state strategy (which worked in 2006, kids). He’s not going to win Wyoming, but it’s important to fight for every state. Maybe in 2016 or 2020 a Dem does win Wyoming.
What we’ve got here is an opportunity. Conservatism has failed this country. Majorly fucking failed. We all see it … red/blue/purple we all clearly see that the conservative ideology has well and truly imploded.
The economy is going into the shitter, friends, because conservatives think that capital markets can manage themselves with little or no regulation or oversight. The major investment firms are spiraling the bowl even as we speak, and the Fed is dropping dollars into the swirling mess, where they vanish forever. The hurt is coming … this could be the kind of economic fuckage that brands the Republicans for a generation as a witless gang of boobs who can’t manage their way out of a toilet stall. Opportunity.
The Bush admin has proven that time and again that if you don’t believe in the effectiveness of government, you can’t effectively govern. Opportunity.
We’ve blundered badly in the Middle East, endangering our fuel supply and empowering our enemies. Opportunity.
A Democrat has captured Denny Hastert’s seat. The former GOP Speaker of the House. By a huge margin. Opportunity.
So how do we kick the Republicans back into the darkness? Does anyone really think that Hillary is a better choice than Obama in this context? She’s old-school Democratic politics. She’s the 90s. Obama is transformative: young, inspirational, charismatic, and he’s calling people to service. Opportunity.
Punchy
Unlike bandwagoneers like yourself, I don’t just vote for a politican. I vote for a party whose views most closely match my own. I’m smart enough to realize that Clinton and Obama dont exactly match my views, but the party’s platforms are in general much, much more palatable than the Republicans.
IOW, I really don’t give a shit who the Dems nommy in August. Both are fine BECAUSE both are Democrats. Different styles, sure, but both will largely support what I do.
Zifnab
The vast majority of those violations of etiquette can be traced to individual party staffers in private conversations. You’ve got Obama’s adviser in Scotland directly quoted with a request that the “monster” comment be taken off the record. Valerie Jarrett apparently commits the sin of bringing up Obama’s lack of infidelity – something both the Clinton house and the McCain house have as a weakness – and this becomes offensive to Taylor Marsh and Marc Ambinder.
A number of the complaints are directed at the Obama campaign returning fire at the Clinton campaign for previous transgressions – effectively lambasting Obama for stooping to Clinton’s level. Eriposte attacks Obama for questioning Clinton’s foreign policy experience as of last month, when “Obama doesn’t have as much experience as I have” has been a cornerstone of the Clinton campaign for the last year.
I’m sorry, but the Obama campaign has been largely positively run, without a single negative TV ad to his name. If you think “an Obama supporter said to a newspaper editor during a town hall meeting in Iowa” has the same weight as direct quotes from Hillary that both praise John McCain and attack Barack, you’ve got to be out of your flipping mind.
Whether or not the Clinton campaign has remained “in bounds” in terms of rhetoric can be left up to debate. But trying to drag Obama down to her level is completely laughable.
Billy K
I never thought I’d say this, but I agree with Sojourner’s last post 100%.
Pb
Punchy,
LOL, what.
ROFL. See also, Joe Lieberman. Yes, who the candidate is really does matter, a lot–sorry to have to break it to you.
AkaDad
Q. What do you call it when Hillary says she brokered peace in Ireland?
A. A Fairy Tale
Jake
How ’bout that Electoral College?
[Ducks]
jenniebee
My husband’s been pushing for that as a method to choose the Republican nominee for years. They want manly men for their party, what could be manlier than a selection process where two men enter, one man leaves?
As for Hillary vs. Obama on voting records, it’s splitting hairs in many ways, except that she shows up to vote more often, as he has, in only two years in office, developed an alarming allergy to controversial votes. The man just dodges anything that would nail him down and keep him from being all things to all people. His health care plan is dishwater-timid, and during the early debates he criticized his opponents health care plans from the right (that 3 am bullshit wasn’t the first box of ammo gift wrapped for Republicans; Obama had already sent them a case). What’s most disturbing to me about him is that he’s running as the anti-war candidate, fighting Hillary for her AUMF vote when at the time of the invasion (and not months before when Congress voted for what they were told was a license to bluff) he’s quoted as saying that there was no difference between his position on the war and George Bush’s. But that has been dumped down the memory hole, just like his behavior on health care during the debates.
I’ve said it before, I’m not a Hillaryis44 or whatever that is person. I’m still gnashing my teeth about Dodd and Edwards throwing in the towel. But for those of you who think that Obama is a sincere progressive who takes courageous stands or whatnot and is so different from that political animal Hillary, goddamn, open your eyes and stop fooling yourselves.
borehole
Damn, I love people who WOULD NOT STOOP to vote for a candidate who doesn’t “represent them” 100%.
I love these people because I know they live their entire lives by this principle–they never buy anything but fair-trade coffee, they never throw their recyclables in the garbage, they never download music unless they can verify that the songwriter got his or her share of the revenue, never hook up with a chubster, etc., etc., etc.
Grow up. We’re not putting together a tribute to our progressive principles, we’re trying to stave off the apocalypse. Can’t vote for Hillary in good conscience? Then I hope you’re busting your ass for Obama in between internet bitching sessions.
For fuck’s sake, you’d think the term “lesser of two evils” was recently coined or something.
jcricket
Yep – just like the myth the right likes to spread about how “unpopular” Clinton was. At the height of the impeachment scandal his approval rating was in the 50s and 60s. Almost Reagan-popular. Contrast that to the reality facing the current occupant of the WH.
Yes, Clinton obviously arouses a lot of ire, both from the left, but especially the right. There will be many people who will not vote for her. There are a lot of racists and Republicans who will also not vote for Obama, perhaps they’re just underground right now (although who do you think is spreading all those “Obama is a muslim” smears…). You can hear it starting, though, with the caller on Rush’s show saying Obama looks like “Curious George”.
This “ire generating quality” of Clinton’s has not demonstrably resulted in her failure to gain support this or any other election season. It’s a convenient narrative, because she’s trailing Obama in popular votes and delegates, but the margins are quite small, and could be smaller in the end (even if/when she loses). Yes, you can decry her tactics, but Obama uses “tactics” to get voters to his side too – despite many arguing otherwise, I don’t think there’s agreement about which tactics are “fair” in politics. Obama supporters don’t just rain from the sky like those religious nuts who flock to the mold on the side of the house in Florida that looks like the Virgin Mary. He attracts them through rhetoric, surrogates, etc. – y’all think his is more fair/positive/wonderful, but not all agree.
Also, to counter another spin point, recent polls that show both Clinton and Obama beating McCain (her by 6%, him by 12%) show she picks up an almost equal number of self-described “moderates and independents” as Obama does (just from different pools of people). So just like the myth that Bill Clinton was unpopular, Hillary is able to attract more than just wedded-to-the-party Democrats. Stop claiming otherwise just because she turns you off.
If Obama wins the nomination that doesn’t erase her record fundraising + turnout results. It just means that she was “super” and he turned out to be “super-er”, and it’s a winner-take-all contest. It might also mean he ran a better campaign, which is fine – that’s who should win out.
I leave you with this great post (again) by Kevin Drum – mainly for the quote by one of the people in his comment threads. Go read it, you’ll chuckle.
Cassidy
…when we were in Afghanistan and the majority of America felt the same way.
This is so not the argument here. I could care less if Obama turns into fucking-Rainbow Brite and start shooting moonbeams, and rainbows, and flowers out his ass. I could care less if Hillary starts biting the heads off of chickens at the end of all her stump speeches. None of that matters to me. Hell, most of either of their policies are too liberal for me, but I can live with that.
The problem in here is that so many of the Obama supporters, whom I am one, are so short sighted and tunnel visioned, that they are willing to give up a golden oppurtunity to put Dems back in charge, because it isn’t their Dem. That is ridiculous!
On a personal note, I’ve been to war once, and I really don’t want to do it again. Neither do most of my friends. We’re tired. We’re burned out. We’re on anti-depressants and have nightmares. We have random panic attacks. So please, pretty please with a fucking cherry on top, vote for the Dem. Maybe Hillary will send us to war again. Maybe not. But I’m pretty damn sure McCain will.
mrmobi
I hate to agree with you about this, but you’re correct.
It seems like the Obama campaign is taking all the credit for the record-breaking turnout all over the country, and that just isn’t true. People are coming out to vote for Hillary because she can be, and has been, quite charming and intelligent during this campaign.
I hate (really, really hate) her advisors, and think her husband is an over-rated gasbag, but Obama supporters (like myself) should be aware that we have two really fine candidates this year, something that hasn’t happened in a really long time.
Pb
borehole,
Fixed.
CaseyL
A point has been made elsewhere that needs also to be made here.
The Purity People who will refuse to vote for Clinton in November if she gets the nomination are lying when they say they’re ready and willing to “pay the price” for letting McCain win in 2008.
They’re lying because they’re not the ones who’ll be paying the price.
They’re not the ones who’ll be killed or maimed when McCain decides to “bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.”
They’re not the ones who’ll be left to die when the next natural disaster destroys another American city.
They’re not the ones who’ll be bearing unwanted children, or enduring illegal abortions, or unable to get effective birth control.
They’re not the one’s who’ll be losing their homes, their livelihoods, and everything else they own because McCain, who doesn’t know much about economics, appointed political hacks who only know how to steal.
They’re not the ones who’ll be eating unsafe food and drinking poisoned water, who won’t be able to go to a doctor or a hospital, and who won’t be able to get their kids into a decent school.
Maybe the Purity Brigade should think about who’ll really be paying for their fastidiousness, and in what coin.
(I say that as someone who has come to really, really loathe Hillary Clinton, BTW.)
VidaLoca
tBone,
Well my first response would be that this is a valid question only IF one thinks that Hillary would be worse than McCain. In which case, again: “Supreme Court”.
Let me offer something more thoughtful though. Back in 2000 I was tempted to vote for Nader — because I was sick of the Clinton administration, was not impressed much by Gore, bought into the “no difference between the two main parties.” Sounds crazy, I know — you had to be there.
Anyhow I ended up voting for Gore and my reasoning was that if, by voting for Nader I ended up enabling Bush to win the election then I had damned well better be sure I could devote a whole lot of time and energy to fixing what I had helped to break by helping in the creation of a political party that would realize the ideals that I was trying to represent by that vote. And like the Greens (then and now) I had not the least fvcking clue. Another case of walking the walk being a lot harder than talking the talk. So I didn’t go there.
So how do I look back on that one? About making compromises in my life, a little guilty. About that vote, not so much.
quickdraw
That’s Dr. Obvious. He didn’t spend 6 years at Obvious Medical School to be called Mister, thank you.
borehole
Dude, are you making fun of me or them? Because they’re right here in this very thread, seemingly free of straw.
jcricket
I will counter that part of this is where we are in the campaign right now. If Obama or Hillary were already the nominee, people would probably be “getting over it”. But the fact is, for supporters of either candidate, we’re still not at a nomination. So it’s not really a surprise everyone’s still passionately trying to argue their candidate is better. That’s the point of a primary.
I just wish more people could take the viewpoint that mrmobi did a second ago:
Or at least understand how there are record numbers of people that find a more attractive candidate than Obama, and millions more that don’t hate Hillary the way they do.
It’s been a pretty eye opening experience for me, as I’ve gotten older, to realize how narrow my world-view is. One tends to think that being “well informed” makes one an expert not only on how things are, but how everyone sees things. Not so much.
dslak
It’s not the Obama supporters who are likely to jump ship if their favored candidate doesn’t win, but Clinton supporters.
tBone
He was there for the bankruptcy vote. He was there for the FISA vote.
Um, no. That quote was from 2004:
So his position was that, having invaded, we needed to try to bring some semblance of order to Iraq. Also keep in mind this was right before the convention and he didn’t want to say anything that could be used against Kerry/Edwards.
Also from that time period:
Punchy
I dont get it. Lieberman’s an Indy. I’m not voting Indy. Thought I made that pretty clear.
Pb
Punchy,
Joe Lieberman was Al Gore’s Democratic VP running mate in 2000. Joe Lieberman was a Democrat up until he lost a Democratic primary. Is he a different Joe Lieberman now, without the D next to his name? I don’t think he is. Ultimately, it’s not the letter that matters, it’s the person.
myiq2xu
Some things are too funny:
tBone
That’s fair – and I don’t think Hillary would be worse (or anywhere near as bad as) McCain, which is why I’d be willing to vote for her despite my distaste for her campaign tactics and my visceral loathing of most of her advisors.
Leave aside this particular election year, though – I see a lot of people here clutching their pearls at the very thought of someone refusing to vote for a Democrat on principle. If I wanted to be a mindless drone who could be reliably counted on to vote a straight-party ticket no matter what, I’d become a Republican.
Cassidy
I think it’s more about listening to the bitching, moaning, wailing, and gnashing of teeth over the last 8 years. This is like some dude being pissy cuz he can’t get laid, then passing up some tail because she ain’t a red-head. You’re friends would make you feel stupid and rightfully so.
tBone
Well, that’s why I said “leave aside this particular election year.” We’re coming off one of the worst administrations in history and the stakes are incredibly high, so I can’t really blame anyone for getting pissed at someone throwing away their vote.
Under more normal circumstances, though, I hate that party-line purity bullshit. We know what happens when you start drinking that Koolaid.
Tsulagi
That’s funny. I’ve seen some of that same brilliance on RedState among some there who still can’t stand McCain. Calling to vote Hillary if they’re matched up. Astute reasoning being Hillary would once and for all prove The Democrats are Worse no doubt leading to a rise from the ashes in 2012 of a new Reagan messiah and golden age for their party. Country would of course then come along on his coattails. Gotta love those who see The Big Picture with such clarity.
Guess the flip side for some really smart Obama supporters if Hillary gets the nomination would be to vote McCain. Confident in the irrefutable knowledge that The Big O would be resurrected in 2012 thereby adding ascending to his already proven transcending powers.
Tom in Texas
It’s not the color of her hair that worries me dude. There are valid reasons that someone might opt to pass on a person like Hillary — such as the diseases she’s got from her and her husband’s many adventures. Some people don’t sleep with anything just ‘cuz it’s a chick.
And I am not saying I won’t vote for Hillary. I’m not promising I will either. I’m 99% certain she’ll be sane and reasonable in her cabinet appointments, but every day I lose a little more faith she can actually lead. It all depends on the ticket the candidates assemble for me.
Punchy
If this were a choice between Clinton and Chuck Hagel, we werent in a war, weren’t in debt up to our ears, and weren’t wantonly breaking laws, I might understand people going with the latter.
But we are, so I dont. At this point, anyone is better than another war-mongering, hot-headed R. Period.
Dennis - SGMM
I’m not advocating a vote for McCain. My larger point is that the messes left by Bushco are so catastrophic that whomever is elected will barely be able to put a dent in them.
When you have a neocon like Brent Bozell writing things like this:
You can bet that the Republicans will work full time to hang any negative outcomes for the next thirty years on Bush’s successor if he or she is a Democrat. For pity’s sake, Bozell blows right past the last seven years without blinking an eye. They’ll have little trouble convincing themselves and their followers that It’s All the Democrats’ Fault – just as they’ve convinced themselves that we were winning in Vietnam when the Democratic Congress pulled the plug on funding and thereby lost the war.
Splitting Image
“I am convinced that Obama is going to win this thing eventually. If the party leadership and the superdelegates give it to Hillary (assuming no huge change in voting patterns), this could be the last straw for some of us.
Would I vote for Hillary under normal circumstances? Yep.
But I am profoundly tired of the incompetence displayed with great regularity by Reed and Pelosi. The Dems need to decide what they stand for and get some leadership in that will act accordingly.
I think Obama is the guy. But what happens if he’s not the winner?”
Depends on why he’s not the winner. If Clinton comes from behind in Mississippi and parlays that into a big win in Pennsylvania, she might generate enough buzz to overturn Obama’s delegate lead. In that case, the superdelegates could pick her with my blessing.
At this point, it’s just so difficult to see that happening. Has Clinton even won a single state that wasn’t considered a gimme for her at the outset? All she’s demonstrated is the ability to lose in “safe” states and that’s bad. The Republicans came close to winning in New Jersey and Hawaii last time. That’s a trend that has to be stopped.
I also think Obama is the guy and the Democrats would be making a huge mistake to pick Clinton. If she’d taken Iowa and coasted to victory, on the other hand, I think people would be nuts not to fall in behind her.
jcricket
They’ve been doing this since at least Vietnam, what makes you think now would be any different? Not that Dems are blameless, but the Republicans ability to shift blame is absolutely mind-boggling.
Every failure is because Dems weren’t on board or it wasn’t really a Republican idea. Every success is because Dems were shunted to the side and the idea sprang fully formed out of the mouths of PNAC or whomever (despite it usually being a Democratic idea).
Chris Johnson
Look, people, you don’t seem to get it.
*I don’t trust* Hillary.
I don’t trust her. I don’t trust you guys supporting her. I don’t trust what you say, I don’t trust when you’re making up all kinds of reasons why Obama is a lying treacherous right-wing (!) monster and supporting him is voting for Bush Redux.
I don’t trust your frame for stuff, your on the one hand insisting that we have to stop McCain (lord knows you won’t do a thing to resist him if he wins, right? right?) but on the other hand insisting that Hillary is more tough, battle-tested, ready to bomb people at 3 in the morning if The Call comes. WTF? Seriously, WTF?
I DON’T TRUST YOU.
I particularly don’t trust your notion that Hillary is shaping up to be in any way different FROM McCain. You cannot have it both ways. I see absolutely no reason to believe she will not look at the rapidly looming troubles we face- insoluble troubles, troubles like peak oil she CANNOT avoid- and respond by nuking the world just like Bush to cling onto what gas prices and dollar-valuations we can still command.
Right now the next president will preside over FAIL. There ain’t no way around it and it’s not that bad, we’ll still get by without trashing the rest of the globe, just with less toys and more socialist peasant-rescuing food stamp survival-techniques. Our richest will have to scale it back, our middle class aren’t coming back to speak of.
I don’t trust Hillary. She will try to evade that cruel judgement by wreaking havoc on the rest of the world, driven on by the fact that a bunch of We The People will actually want her, expect her to. We aren’t the most mature country in the world.
You cannot think that Hillary could be elected and NOT be under enormous pressure to evade our upcoming reality- you cannot think that she won’t react by carrying on as bad or WORSE than Bush. Bush attacked a relatively helpless country. Clinton’s looking at Iran, looking at China just as Cheney looks at China.
There is no difference in voting for someone with principles vs. someone without (Hil vs Cain) if she will instantly ditch the principles upon political pressure- and when we KNOW that pressure is forthcoming, how can we seek to put her in that position? You’ll be as sorry as I was when I voted for Nader and got Bush. I’m serious, you’re making a mistake. Some of these things can be seen in advance.
Or, are you that much more out of touch than the poniest of MUP-worshippers, that you seriously believe that if only you elect Hillary, she will NOT be under political pressure to ditch all of her pretensions, lock in all the authoritarian excesses of Bush, and in fact prove she is tougher than McCain would have been by out-Bushing Bush? We do face Iran- economically, with the Iranian Oil Bourse. We face China and again economically, with our insane trade codependence. China will only want to retain the value of the dollar if WE do not turn it into wastepaper, they might have to write off our titanic debts one way or another, they won’t automatically support us.
It’s possible that Hillary is even wronger for the job than McCain, if only because it’s possible she’d get more collusion from the Democratic Congress in doing horrible things, and McCain would possibly get resistance.
It is a SYSTEM we are adjusting, that is supposed to be self-conflicting to keep from going out of control. So we follow total Republican dominance and total war with- total Democrat dominance and total war. WTF?
DON’T tell me not voting for Hillary is the worst thing to do. What if I was in the position of voting a straight Democrat ticket and McCain, on purpose, at the top? What if I helped give you even greater Democrat domination of the Senate, and threw the Presidency to your war guy biggest nightmare? THEN would you fight?
J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford
Well said Chris Johnson. Well said.
If you need anymore reasons why HRC is bad for Democrats listen to Randi Rhodes.
Clinton has a lot of explaining to do about contributions and her brothers for starters.
jcricket
I’ve never said, not once. And most Clinton supporters I know like Obama and plan to vote for him if he’s the nominee – no nose holding involved.
Cassidy
Ummm…I think you’ve mnissed the part where most people are saying they are Obama fans, but a Dem, regardless of name, is better than a Republican. You guys, the anti-Hillary set collectively, keep trying to make this into a HIllary vs. Obama argument. You are in the wrong zip code, by far.
This has nothing to do with those two and their differences. This is about staying home and playing the pouting fool and allowing a possible 4-8 more years of Republicans, as if this 8 hasn’t been bad enough. This childish notion of not voting, because the it isn’t your candidate is just that….childish and immature and lacking the ability to look past anything. I’m not sure who has convinced you that this is some kind of principled stand, but they did you a grave disservice.
Chuck Butcher
Folks, this is not the fucking Revolution. You are not going to get a revolutionary candidate with the electorate that exists. Even if you did, Congress sits there, a great vast pool of interests in near status quo. Now, if you want a Revolution, about 8 – 12 more years of Republicanism might do the job. But what you don’t get is Revolutions are fucking ugly. And in this country you’re not going to get a situation of winning because thousands stood in the streets. This place is armed to the teeth and once that starts Iraq would look like child’s play. I, alone, could effectivly arm a squad that was dangerous from 1/3 of a mile to close range. I know exactly what the results of advanced non-Geneva Convention bullets are on flesh and bone. I successfuly hunt animals that are considerably larger than humans.
You take what you can get at the ballot box because the alternatives are horrible. Since I am armed, I do reserve the option to act as I choose, but I am also rational. You think candidate “X” is owned, well maybe they’re not owned but they’ve gotten as far as being a Presidential candidate by working the system – as it is, not as you wish it were.
Here’s the deal about Super delegates, they’re designed for exactly the situation we’re in. You will not have a decided Convention before it starts. Delegates are expected to vote their pledge on the first ballot, and these people were elected to do that, they made promises to get there, promises to their peers and they will work for their candidate. There is no “delegate cadre,” they will be elected by State Party members, you have to run for election. Now, there are not enough delegates willing to shift their elected positions, ballot after ballot after ballot. You think this Balloon Juice is partisan? These are long term activists being elected, you all ain’t shit.
I’m not going to run because I can’t afford to go to Denver, if I wanted I could go and silly as this sounds I might easily be one of the most reasonable delegates on the floor. The supers will finally take the vote across the threashold. Somebody has to and the “selection” process for these people was intended to have reasonable people in that position.
Unless Hillary pulls off something stunning or Obama explodes I expect to see Obama take it. There are some real good reasons for that and not so good ones against. It’s crystal ball gazing with a bunch of factors weighed in. Anybody who thinks Howard Dean is a Hillbot pays no attention. Terry McAuliff was replaced with Dean for very good reasons and very emphatic ones and his model of DNC is now broken and not coming back without a Hillary as head of Party (nominee). A large swath of supers are State Party officers, the ones who endorsed and elected Dean. Dean has helped State Parties to an unprecedented degree, these Parties owe him big time.
In a decided Primary, a lot of elected delegates are favors for people who want to go to the party, this ain’t the usual. People are going to have to actully run to be elected pledged delegates.
If you folks would take a little time to find out how this actually works you might make more intelligent posts on the subject. If you like, you can consider some negatives for Hillary with State Party super delegates – they don’t like McAuliff’s ways and they don’t like the DNC being harmed and they don’t like high negative approval numbers. Those are some hints, there’s more going on, you figure it out.
The elected officials supers have some of their own calculus and loyalty to the Dean DNC may not play highly. But they are elected officials and that enters the picture, they know how they won and what it takes. They know what coattails are and money raising potential. Favors owed may play, but Clinton Presidency was 7+ years ago and even then it wasn’t that helpful (who won Congress? what happened to Governorships?)
You need to calm down about stolen elections, nothing is going to get stolen, your cadidate may not win, but the system doesn’t encourage “theft” it encourages reasoning. I won’t like Hillary but it still wouldn’t be theft. Caucuses aren’t theft (sorry Hillary), elections aren’t theft, and the supers aren’t theft. Delegate apportionment isn’t theft and the manner of voter selection isn’t theft. It is a pretty wild system, but it has very good rationales. The real weak point in it is the scheduling.
Relax. Vote. Work for a candidate. Accept the results. Go from there. The alternatives suck.
Tax Analyst
“Amen” to the whole post (well, I’m not a “gun-toter”, but that’s not at issue here, Chuck. I’m 57 now and I’ve seen and felt the same way. I’ve gone from leaning towards Clinton to “on the fence” to loathing her campaign tactics and finally deciding that Obama is the best choice for the future of our country – without letting HRC’s foolish, zero-sum tactics affect that choice – I’d like to give her a swift kick in the ass, but I’ll vote for her in November if she gets the nomination. She’ll be better than McCain, but I wouldn’t expect a whole lot more than that. The future is going to require forward-thinking and you just cannot move the country forward with this divisive “50 + 1” bullshit.