Last night Barack Obama boasted that he was within 200 votes of clinching the Democratic nomination. He’s wrong. That boast is premised on the assumption that the “magic number” for clinching the nomination is 2025.
But the “magic” of 2025 is the magic of fake disappearances, conjuring and pulling rabbits out of hats. Obama’s faux magic number constitutes a majority of the Democratic delegates only if you don’t count MI and FLA’s alloted delegates. The real Magic Number is 2209 — 50% + 1 of all the delegates, pledged and SDs, alloted to the 50 states, Guam and Puerto Rico. But by excluding MI and FLA, Obama and Dean and Brazile and the MSM talking heads, not to mention The Blog That Must Not Be Named, seem to think they can lower the bar for clinching the nomination. In other words, excluding MI and FLA kills two birds with one stone: it excludes Clinton delegates, and it lowers the magic number for Obama. How conVEEEEEEENient.
Obama, of course, vetoed, stalled and squirmed his way out of permitting a re-vote in MI and FLA back when there was time to do so. Not only did he fear a repeat of Clinton’s victories, he also feared the daunting task of securing 2209 delegates, rather than a mere 2025.
The DNC and the talking heads all say that “MI and FLA will be seated in some fashion.” That’s doublespeak for “MI and FLA will be seated in a manner which makes permanent the disenfranchisement of MI and FLA voters.” If, for example, the DNC awards Obama the nomination at 2025 delegates, then the MI and FLA delegates will have been rendered meaningless, whether they are “seated” before or after the DNC hands the trophy to Obama. You can’t say you’re seating MI and FLA, and then permit Obama to claim victory based on a magic number that doesn’t count MI and FLA’s delegates.
Yet this is precisely the sort of sleight of hand that the DNC and now Obama himself are trying to perform. There are only two solutions to this problem, now that Obama has made it impossible for re-votes to be held. Seat MI and FLA as is, and seat them now. Or not. But in either case, the DNC must make clear to everyone — the candidates, their supporters, the uncommitted SDs, and the MSM talking heads — that there is only one “magic number,” and that number is 2209. Obama can win it with or without actually giving MI and FLA their tickets to the convention hall. But he can’t win the nomination with only 2025 delegates.
Even Albus Dumbledore doesn’t have enough magic to turn 2025 into 2209.
We’ve all wondered today what to do about supporting Hillary, and forcing the DNC to understand the magnitude of the errors it has made during this campaign season. Spreading this fundamental fact — that Obama can’t win the nomination with 2025 delegates — is one such thing. When you talk about seating MI and FLA, too many talking heads, not to mention Obamabots, just tune you out with intonations of “The ROOLz, the ROOLz.” We should short-circuit talk about The ROOLz, and just talk about The Math. The Math is simple. Nomination = 2209 delegates. Period. Get them however. Pledged, SDs, seat MI and FLA, don’t seat MI and FLA. But get 2209 delegates.
Spread the Mathematical Truth far and wide. Maybe then Dean and Brazile will get their heads out of their arses.
Filed under: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Presidential Election 2008 |
The Confluence 
Great post, litigatormom. I watched MSNBC last night (against my will — I was a guest) and saw only one reference to Florida and Michigan, and no reference to the actual magic number.
What must it feel like to be a Democrat (or any voter) in Florida and Michigan and watch that coverage. Imagine feeling sidelined in the most hard-fought and significant primary season any of us can remember?
I’d be pissed off. That is, more than I am after my vote counted.
I spoke the other day to a young colleague who started invoking The ROOLz. She’s an employee, so I couldn’t go batshit crazy on her. But I gave her the rundown on all the problems with not seating MI and FLA. She was having none of it.
The Obama campaign makes powerful Kool-Aid.
I will not view the nomination is not legitimate until FL/MI have a meaningful say in the choice of nominee.
EDIT * I will not view the nomination as legitimate..
litigatormom — this is a great post. No. No I don’t believe in magic. Wishing won’t put our party together again.
If we don’t count all the delegates, then this convention won’t count in my eyes.
#2209, that’s what it takes. Or else.
Are not the roolz the roolz of Calvinball?
If you change the penalty (all instead of half the delegates) after you know who it is that will be penalized, what other than Calvinball could that be? Perhaps these folks had no inkling FL would be a strong state for HRC?
Sometimes even I am amazed by the hypocrisy of the DNC. I get email copies of the Democratic Laywers brief. It is a summary of recent election law changes and tips on protecting voter rights. They are having meetings to teach “Democratic lawyers” how to protect our voters during the primary and general election campaigns. Does the DNC not realize that they themselves are the ones that are doing more to disenfranchise voters than the Republicans ever dreamed of. The DNC is in North Korea and Russian territory. Where is Jimmy Carter, where is the civil rights community. are we the only ones that care that two entire states have been thrown overboard.
I asked to be taken off the mailing list. No response from the DNC, but the DC chapter head did send me a response and told me that there is a lot or rumblings in the DC branch about the disenfranchisement. Asked if she could send my email to the DNC to show that lawyers are leaving over this.
WS-
Agreed. No matter how much my Obamabot friends tell me that “Obama won by the ROOLz”, I won’t see his possible win as legitimate if Michigan & Florida Democrats don’t have their votes counted. Sorry, but I don’t believe in voter disenfranchisement… And I used to believe that my Democratic Party (yes, Donna Brazile, it’s my party, too!) would never endorse such a thing.
Honora — Sounds like a great basis for a Letter to the Editor. Really.
A big thank-you to GaryChapelHill for all the fine posts.
How’s it going today? What’s the local take on the election?
(Now I’ll go look to see if you have some comments….)
Honora-
Good for you. If Obama’s DNC buddies really want to go forward with this, then it’s on their heads that the Democratic Party dies this fall. They really are fulfilling Karl Rove’s prophecy of a “permanent Republican majority” by disenfranchising fellow Democrats. Not only is this immoral, but it’s impractical as well.
The gaming of the caucuses really contributed to Obama’s bottom line in terms of delegates. Have caucuses in the past been scammed so successfully? Just a little bit of Chicago politics can turn an election around.
But the opera isn’t over until Rezko sings.
Son of Bill, do you know neither Party has ever been able to successfuly sanction states from the nominating process? It’s NEVER happened. The only time two states were not seated was in the 40’s because they WALKED out. This is absurd. Closing your eyes and pretending people didn’t vote doesn’t make it so, no matter how much you and Howard Dean wish it were. What a bunch of cowards the Obamicans are. They know with these two states that Hillary won, the game is tied. This is why they can’t let the will of the people in two huge electoral states be recorded, and they insist on pretending they didn’t vote. Also, Son of, are you aware the rules called for AT MOST, a sanction of 50% of the delegates, NEVER the full delegation, and NEVER the Super’s from those states.
Also, Son of, Clinton agreed not to campaign in the states. So? She never agreed to the sanctions. In the last two Dem primaries(Gore, Kerry), most states never saw either candidate. So? They didn’t campaign in Guam or Hawaii. They both had surrogates running campaigns in Florida, and Obama supporters had a major operation for uncommitted in MI, which included television advertising and canvassing. Obama ran ad’s in Florida. This is just excuse making for not counting the votes and pressing on the scale in Obama’s favor.
Son of Bill Brasky, it aint no longer the Dem pardy.
That be why we yokels are protestin’.
And yes, you better believe we ‘DEMOCRACTS’ would ALWAYS make the case to count votes and seat delegates, even if the votes are against us. If you don’t believe that votes should be counted, you’re not a Democrat. At least, not part of the ‘old coalition’ that’s now outta the tent. The ‘Bots came into my tent, like the story of the Arab and the Camel(http://www.bolokids.com/archives/025.htm). I welcomed you, and you slowly pushed me out.
“But there was an agreement. Clinton went along with this agreement.”
If this is repeated enough times, does it magically become true? There was an agreement not to campaign in MI or FL. Never an agreement to disenfranchise the voters of MI and FL. And guess what? Even if every sleazy politician in this race agreed to that, the voters of MI and Fl didn’t. Why don’t we summon Howie and Donna and agree that anybody tries to vote the wrong way in the general, we’ll beat their brains in? Sleazy corrupt power crazed power brokers agree–democracy is soooooo Old Politics! Let’s stop worrying about silly irrelvancies and think about hope and change.
“Would you all be making the same case if the tables were turned? I doubt it.”
Aw, hell no. I was lying in 2000, too. I don’t believe in any kind of principle. Democracy can mean bang ’em over the head the hardest, so long as I get something out of it. Tables turned, not only would I be like, disenfranchisement forever, don’t count the votes, I’d be like “This is not only the right thing to do, it’s the smart thing to do! Those damn uptight nuts in these states probably won’t vote for us, but we won’t let them vote anyway, AND we’ll invent our own states to cover the difference! Who wants to be a resident of Screwyoustupidvoterwelieandcheatandstealland?” Disenfranchise every state–make me the decider! It’s weird, though, I think some people other than me would actually stop supporting Sen. Clinton if she were in favor of a truly despicable power grabbing scheme like that. Funny the kind of fine distinctions and foolish quibbles that can be created when you’re not staring at a wall with glazed eyes muttering “Obama will heal my soul and raise my children and braid my hair and sing me a lullaby. War is peace, freedom is slavery.”
“It’s the Democratic Party.”
No, it’s the Tell Your Base to Screw Off While Chasing Magic Pony Republican, Independent and Youth Votes That Somehow Always Fail to Materialize Party. You don’t want women, Latinos, Catholics, blue collar voters, older voters, etc. Awesome. But you better find a way to win without them. Try this enough times, it’s bound to pay off one day, only about 4 million more humiliating defeats to go. How about Blogger nation, 42 residents and 57,000 electoral votes? Nov. caucus in BloggerNation–only one that counts!
¡Enhorabuena Lmom!.
Cuando crezca quiero escribir tan bien como tu. 😉
When one of the supers announced they were voting for Obama the MSM broke into regularly scheduled programs because it was an anti Clinton vote. Let’s see how much interest is displayed regarding the possible defection of us from voting Obama. It is a major issue to cover because of the sheer impact it can have on the vote in November. Or will the MSM ignore our voices as usual. I know they read the blogs.
All of the above, PLUS… The purpose of the ROOLZ was to ensure Iowa and New Hampshire went first. They did go first (and with no penalty even though they moved up their dates).
So what’s the problem? Why a penalty if the reason for the ROOLZ was obviated? Answer me that, DNC!
I don’t see how I can vote for Obama. Not only because I’m a (former) Catholic, gay, working class, woman baby boomer and he’s said he doesn’t need or want my vote. But as a Michigan citizen, my vote apparently doesn’t even exist.
Yes we voters are being treated like imprisoned convicted felons here in Michigan by the DNC. We’re not allowed to vote!!!! It’s even more ironic since our voting was not wrought with fraud like appears to have happened in some other states. If a new party appears as an option maybe they would consider holding their first convention in one our great cities such as Grand Rapids or Kalamazoo.
Maggie, I can probably scrape up gas money to drive from Detroit to Grand Rapids or Kalamazoo. I’d suggest having it here but we’re a bit preoccupied with our incompetent, philandering mayor.
Yes we voters are being treated like imprisoned convicted felons here in Michigan by the DNC. We’re not allowed to vote!!!!
Yet, we are supposed to count the results?
How do you want to count MI and FL? Forget Florida, how do you want to count a vote in MI in which a slight majority selected ‘other’. Does Hillary get 45% of the delegates and no one get the other 55%?
It’s a clusterfuck. But it is what it is, and it can’t be undone.
Little secret: Give Hillary a 55 45 split in each state, and Obama still wins.
And, he isn’t some evil tyrant disenfranchising voters. He’s a liberal democrat that is going to be facing John McCain in a few months. There may be valid complaints about media bias, but the fact is that he beat her.
It’s 50%+1. If MI and FL are excluded, as they are as of now, the number of delegates needed DOES change. Ain’t rocket science.
“There was an agreement not to campaign in MI or FL.”
False. The agreement was not to campaign or participate in either primary. Hillary signed a pledge to that effect. Here it is:
Click to access 070831_Final_Pledge.pdf
And as for the whole magic number business, Hillary’s campaign…. Well, here’s what Hillary’s campaign had to say about that:
Chose not to turn the tv or radio on today as an effort to absent myself for anymore ridicule of Hillary and the beatification of him. I am waiting for just one objective pundit to put the questions out there: Just what are you voting for? Then adding the flip side: Just what are you voting against? Instead all we are getting are plaudits for him and calls for her to leave.
Someone with a forum needs to take seriously how committed we are to abstain.
@TJ: She broke no DNC rule in remaining on the ballot. Besides, this is about basic democracy and winning the GE (i.e. not about either Clinton or Obama).
Of course he’s not an evil tyrant disenfrachising voters. He’s the leading light of progressivism, our hopes, our dreams, our better angel, god’s only begotten son–disenfranchising voters. And yes, it can’t be undone. It’s a puzzler that even a Nobel Prize winner couldn’t have figured out. “Dude pulls name off ballot so he can say state shouldn’t count, dude says %$^ no, no revote, if I can’t guarantee they’ll vote for me they don’t get to vote,” it’s absolutely beyond the greatest minds of any age.
atdleft, I’ve always thought that FL and MI should get to revote or keep the current results. There’s millions of Democrats whose voices haven’t been heard in those states.
LOL Um, TJ? That doesn’t say “participate in any primary” it says “campaign or participate in any STATE.” Leaving aside the fact that Obama both ran ads and attended an event in FL in violation of the agreement, if “participate in any state” means withdrawing from the primary, which it clearly does not, then why didn’t Obama or any of the other co-conspiritors yank their names off in FL as well as MI? It’s not because he refused to engage in the process there, since he was running a “Vote Uncommitted for Obama” campaign.
“Well, here’s what Hillary’s campaign had to say about that:”
Except Hillary isn’t an amalgamation resident of MI and FL. She doesn’t get to decide anymore than you or barack or Howard or Donna or any rival state. Unless FL and Mi seceded and nobody got the memo?
What is wrong with including MI and FL into the nomination process? Millions of Democrats live there.
I think the best way is to revote the states especially MI. Let them have their say.
As far as I am concerned, not only is the number 2209, but Obama can never get there. He gets no delegates in Michigan, because he got no votes there. No one told him to take his name off the ballot. If you want to consider the “uncommitted” vote, then it should be equally split between every candidate who took his name off the ballot. As to Florida, he campaigned there, in direct violation of DNC rules. so he gets no votes. If they want to ignore that rule-breaking, he might get his percentage of vote there. Hillary gets the rest.
Otherwise, both states should have full revotes. Let’s see who wins the overall popular vote and delegate count after that.
48 + 2 = legitimacy
There’s a primary on Aug. 5th in Michigan. Why can’t they put up an Obama or Clinton ballot there?
Florida is more problematic as its the next primary is Aug. 26th in the middle of the convention. But hey, it’ll make the convention more exciting! Seriously, though, I’m sure there is a way for Florida to get a revote sometime in the summer too. FL really doesn’t have to revote as much as MI does but they could revote if thats the only way they can be included in the nomination process.
“then why didn’t Obama or any of the other co-conspiritors yank their names off in FL as well as MI?”
Because Florida law did not allow him to. I suggest you educate yourself about this situation, because you seem to be ignorant of some very basic facts.
“Except Hillary isn’t an amalgamation resident of MI and FL. She doesn’t get to decide anymore than you or barack or Howard or Donna or any rival state.”
Actually, she could have done something. If she was so concerned about the poor voters of Michigan and Florida, she could have told her supporters on the Rules & Bylaws Committee to vote against stripping their delegates back in 2007 (all of them, including Harold Ickes, voted to strip the delegates). She could have raised a stink about it back when there was still time to prevent it from happening. She didn’t. And her campaign agreed to the 2,025 delegate finish line until it became clear that she was going to lose under that metric. Now they’re trying to move the goal posts yet again.
myq2xu: we should put stickers in our cars with the 48+2 motto. You should send that to the Clinton campaign.
No, Hillary never agreed to that, and there was nothing Hillary could do to stop the members of the rules and bylaws commitee. But, TJ, this really isn’t about the DNC or Hillary or Obama. It’s about real people who went to the polls and voted.
@TJ: Disenfranchising MI and FL will only hurt Obama’s chances in the GE. If he’s so strong there should be no worry in revotes.
The rules need not be so rigid that it will cause these states to be disenfranchised. The rules allow for revotes, why not?
This made me feel better:
http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/7/192357/1703#commenttop
The media is talking more about the fate of MI and FL especially if it increases their ratings. MI and FL might get more media coverage soon.
I like myz2xu’s motto, 48+2 = legitimacy.
This post made Talk Left. Congratulations, litigatormom
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/5/7/195231/0991
Also, 2209=legitimacy
“No, Hillary never agreed to that, and there was nothing Hillary could do to stop the members of the rules and bylaws commitee.”
She could have told her supporters on the committee to vote against stripping the delegates. She could have spoken out publicly against the sanctions while there was still time to stop them. She did neither.
“But, TJ, this really isn’t about the DNC or Hillary or Obama. It’s about real people who went to the polls and voted.”
And what about all the real people who DIDN’T go to the polls and vote because they were told by everyone, including Hillary, that their votes weren’t going to count?
Where’s all the concern about their “disenfranchisement?”
“Disenfranchising MI and FL will only hurt Obama’s chances in the GE. If he’s so strong there should be no worry in revotes.”
The Michigan legislature already killed a re-vote. But I think there will ultimately be some sort of compromise reached.
I know that as a Hispanic I am irrelevant to Donna and friends, but I just contributed some “old coalition” dollars to the roolz breaker in chief (clue: she is super-mega bad times infinity).
If those states had a revote, Obama would win MI and he’d be close in FL. It’s been strung out long enough that it doesn’t matter anymore.
“Florida law did not allow him to. I suggest you educate yourself about this situation, because you seem to be ignorant of some very basic facts.”
Then educate me. FL law didn’t allow him to remove his name, so as a result he was forced to campaign there and try to solicit Republican votes, Democrat for a Day? Wow. Lucky him. Good that he was able to figure out that that uh, extremely ambiguous wording forced him to remove his name in MI right about the time he realized he didn’t have much of a chance to win there since the definiton of “campaigning” confused him mightily in FL.
“She could have told her supporters on the committee to vote against stripping the delegates. She could have spoken out publicly against the sanctions while there was still time to stop them. She did neither.”
She’s doing the right thing now. Yes, it benefits her, but she’s doing what needs to be done, and Obama should be standing beside her, even though it’s not to his benefit.
“And what about all the real people who DIDN’T go to the polls and vote because they were told by everyone, including Hillary, that their votes weren’t going to count?”
Best argument ever. Elections are inherently unfair to people who don’t participate, therefore we should retire democratic principles altogether. War is Peace, freedom is Slavery, and by rejecting the initial vote AND refusing a revote, Obama is NOT disenfranchising the record number of voters who went to the polls, he’s enfranchising the voters who didn’t go in the first instance and might not go again in a revote. (Well, not enfranchising them I guess, but protecting them from being disenfranchised by others actually voting. If anyone wonders how that works, it’s simple–people who vote often vote their own preferences without considering the interests of those who don’t vote, and that’s inherently unfair and disenfranchising to nonvoters. Or something.)
Tomorrow, Obama will announce he’s leaving politics, since he’s benefitted unfairly from the disenfranchisment of everyone who’s ever not voted in his state and district. He’ll only accept an annointing or a coin flip, and only after all his rivals are removed from the ballot. When did Hillary and Barak and Edwards tell these voters there votes weren’t going to count? Before or after she and Barack told them they’d try to make them count? Weird to find politicians that short sighted and stupid.
“The Michigan legislature already killed a re-vote”
With no help from Obama or his cronies.
@TJ: Wrong. Obama killed the revote. The DNC had agreed to it and Obama refused on the basis that those Dems who had foolishly tried to mess with the GOP primary wouldn’t be allowed to vote. Read this sad article.
He would not win Michigan. There is no evidence of that at all. I am absolutely sure Hillary would again win Michigan.
MaggiefromMichigan, on May 7th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
If there were a convention in Kalamazoo or GR, I’d drive up from Chicago. (I’m a Michigander by birth).
I’ll be there.
Rich, it does matter, because Obama supporters continue to try and make these arguments that it’s all right on principle to run the party this way. It’s not, and yes, lots of Democrats are going to leave the party over this.
Virtually no Clinton supporters started out disliking Obama, but this garbage has pushed us there.
TJ–so now we’re concerned about the people who didn’t vote, before we were concerned about the people who already voted in the Repub primary and would be victimized by not getting to vote (and have their votes counted) twice, before that it was all their own fault anyway and who cares about any of them. You can see that telling people to move to a better state if they want to be allowed to vote isn’t a very persuasive or appealing argument, especially for Nov?
You know, if there had been a re-vote, and Obama had won MI or FLA or both, I’d have been disappointed, but satisfied that Democratic principles had been upheld.
TJ: FLA had a record turnout in the Democratic primary. People went to the polls in droves because they wanted their voices to be heard. To strip those millions of voters of their voices forever, just because some people didn’t bother to vote, makes no sense at all.
MI is a harder case, I grant you, because of the fact that Obama chose to take his name off the ballot. We can’t know for sure how many of the uncommitteds would have voted for him, and how many would have voted for Edwards.
But we know that Obama could have gotten no more than 45% of the vote, and likely would have gotten somewhat less. Edwards was a contender then. I’d have been in favor of giving 45% of the delegation to “uncommitted” delegates, or giving Obama 35% of the delegates and making the rest uncommitted. If Obama could pick them up, fine.
Obama didn’t want a re-vote, the only truly fair solution. But the fact that the best solution is no longer available doesn’t make the worst solution — permanent disenfranchisement of two key states — acceptable in any way.
I think most of you lost your marbles sometime around the Ohio primary.
@Jake: Thanks for your concern. Do come back in November won’t you? I can’t wait to see how you’ll hold up during the GE. I’m sure Obama will just do splendid!
When I read this post on crooks and liars in March, i began to see red. This is an explanation of the reason FL’s primary date was moved up. It felt to me like a manipulation of the Democrat’s process, by the GOP .
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/03/09/foxnews-sunday-debbie-wasserman-schultz-rejects-brit-humes-framing/
I know I’m not the brightest crayon in the box. I also know I’m not stupid. But after reading this, I’m not so certain of the DNC and their smarts…….
Davidson, I plan to vote for McCain. You know, the war hero? The candidate who actually values the sanctity of human life?
Jake:
You’re going to vote for the guy who’s Bush on steroids? The guy who values human life so much he’s willing to stay in Iraq forever, and bomb bomb bomb Iran? The guy who believes in making permanent the tax cuts he once opposed? The guy who used to decry agents of intolerance and now sucks up to them? The guy who says he’s against torture but then enables George W. Bush to keep doing it? The one who denounces special interests and then surrounds himself with lobbyists?
That guy? I honor McCain’s military service, and his courage in staying with his men in Hanoi when he could have gone home early. But that honorable service does not make him fit to be president of the United States. Not when he seems bent not only on continuing all of George W. Bush’s grievous mistakes, but making them worse.
Good luck with that. I think you’re the one who’s lost some marbles.
Is Jake the same person we know as Saul on dependable renegade?
@Jake: Sure, he does! He values it so damn much he doesn’t mind if it gets tortured or gets snuffed out by some damn insurance. Sure, he didn’t like being tortured himself and he likes being covered for his cancer, but that’s different.
[…] Obama to acknowledge that as long as the number is 2,025, Florida and Michigan are silenced. As of last night, Senator Obama still hadn’t caught on. Is that doing what’s right by Florida, Senator […]
Obama got zero votes in Michigan.
He thought he was being so sly removing his name.
Obama broke the pledge to not campaign by airing TV ads and talking to reporters against the rules… when visiting for a legit fundraiser event.
He thought he was being so sly getting some air time.
Obama stalled and fought with all his might to not let the voters have their say again for FREE through donations.
He thought he was behind closed doors and the dumb voters wouldn’t ever find this out.
And meanwhile the DNC condoned it and ignored his rule breaking all along and made it seem like Hillary did something wrong. He even said she was thinking about running TV ads right before HE actually aired his.
She never did. But he used it as a smear on her.
and as for the DNC, you forgot to mention Pelosi who apparently has her head in the same place as Dean and Brazile – in OB’s back pocket lips firmly attached.
Yeah! Litigatormom takes center stage in her first post and is getting linked from talkleft. Exxxxcelllent!
Great post! I have been writing about validating Florida and Michigan as is, since at least March 25, when I also resigned from the Democrats and went Independent.
The primary process is so tainted at this point, that the “will of the people” can’t be clearly determined. Even if Florida and Michigan are seated as is, at this point, the delaying tactic has been able to rob Clinton of any momentum that would have accrued to her if it had been properly done long ago.
There is NO way to fix this tainted process at this point, and I squarely blame the DNC for its “old school politics.” This party deserves to become marginalized. I am ready for the New Democrats Party and nothing that the DNC does at this point will change my mind. They have done their damage, from which there is no recovery. This primary is not tainted by the candidates — what is tearing the Democrats apart is the process. And for that, you can blame the DNC.
Because the “will of the people” is so impossible to determine at this point due to the Florida/Michigan delay factor, the anti-democracy of caucuses, THE SUPERDELEGATES SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO WHATEVER THEY WANT TO DO. I’ll say it again, the process is so tainted at this point, that there is no valid way to determine the “will of the people.”
I don’t mind Hillary backers wanting to count votes in MI and FL. You’d like to do whatever helps your candidate the most. Regardless of the original rules set up, it’s not hard to say that it’s silly not to count all the states. Hopefully something will be done so that everyone here that seems to be very passionate about the policies Hillary stands for, will also back the party in the end, just as I, an Obama supporter would back Hillary if she sweeps the remaining contests (yes, even if she doesn’t have the most delegates…if she wins the final seven, then she’d deserve the nomination).
“Obama got zero votes in Michigan.
He thought he was being so sly removing his name.”
I assume that all of the other candidates are just as sneaky, sly, and unethical for removing their names from the ballot. Like that traitor Richardson?
[…] it backwardsNuclear nightmare scenario: Guam determines nomineeAn Invitation to Democrats in ExileDo You Believe In Magic?Dear SD’s, here’s the only viable solution:The Game has Changed [UPDATE]Wednesday: There is no unity […]
They crossed a line. Fuck ’em. They can live with it. If Obama once–ONCE denounced the sexism toward Hillary Clinton coming from the media and the blogosphere, I might consider it. But he never did. He took ADVANTAGE of it.
No, the image I have in my head is Obama slyly giving Hillary the finger after his fucked-up debate performance (the image they all told us we hysterical broads were simply imagining, despite his supporters cheering him on) and wiping the “crap” from his shoulders and his shoes. The image Spencer Ackerman thought was so so cool. That’s the image I take with me into the voting booth.
I also take the daily insults of Josh Marshall, Ezra Klein, Oliver Willis, HuffPo, Daily Kos, etc. into the voting booth with me, as well. The snub, the kitchen sink, “periodically”, the betrayal by the party elite. Michigan and Florida. Turkana thinks I should fall in line? If you knew me, you’d know there is nothing in my life that would indicate I would fall in line after being crapped on for the last 5 months.
You can scream about the Supreme Court until you’re blue in the face. He’ll never get my vote. Yes, I am a bitch. A stubborn middle aged, middle class white bitch. The kind the Democratic party wrote off this year.
man you people are bitter, maybe taking this a little too personally. we are picking a candidate for our party. the race has gone on a long time, so we are all invested in our candidates. but one of them has to lose, and one will win. it’s hard to see–even with seating FL and MI–how Obama would lose this. at some point we have to close ranks and support our nominee, even if it’s not our candidate. being bitter is not a valid reason to not support your party and vote for McCain. do we really want 4 more years of this crap?
…not ROOLZ..not even rules..DICKtates
Unless Democrats want to guarantee the next President of the United States is a Republican, you better read all of this. As the CNN News had repeated ignored what the DNCC, GOPC, Sen. Clinton, Sen. McCain & Sen. Obama know that the Senate Select Committee on Ethic received a legal brief in April 2008, where Sen. Obama has been charged with violation of the Senate’s Code of Ethics.
As it not a frivolous charge, the Senate Select Committee of Ethics is conduction their investigation. Because of red tape, and time, if the Democrats want the next President of the United States to be a Democrat, time must be given for their investigation to conclude. Which means those pledged delegate for Sen. Obama need to hear from those Democrats in their district, and States, otherwise what will happen will be Sen. Obama will be selected as the Democratic candidate, then as the evidence against Sen. Obama, (see below), is so overwhelming, there will be no choice, but for Senate to censure Sen. Obama for unmoral conduct for befriending a domestic terrorist. Hey you better read on, because as you read, you will see that while you may have already voted for Sen. Obama in your primary election, you may see that the only way the next President of the United States, will be a Democratic, is if Sen. Clinton is given the time to fight on to the Democrat Convention. There is always the slim chance Sen. Obama will not be censored, but there no want to know, unless the Senate Select Committee of Ethic have the time to complete their investigation. So call your pledge delegates and tell then that time is needed, that those delegates should announce that they will wait until the Democratic Convention to choose who they vote for. Time, is needed. Other wise you will guarantee a Republican as the next President of the United States. As do you really think a lot of those who previously voted for Sen. Obama, will vote for him in the General election when he has been censored for his friendship to a domestic terrorist?
The FBI classifies that the act of setting a bomb is a terrorist act. Do you know what both Lee Harvey Oswald and William Ayers have in comment, both are domestic terrorist and neither was convicted of their crime. Oswald was killed after he assassinated JFK, and Ayers admitted that he got off on a technically, even though he set many bombs and should of set more bombs. As Oswald only committed one act of terrorism, and Ayers have committed more acts of terrorist, William Ayers is technically a worst domestic terrorist than Lee Harvey Oswald was.
There is a moral cause in the Senate Code of Ethics, that Sen. J. William Fulbright stated in the U.S. Senate in the early 1950s, that when a Senator’s gives the “implied behavior of The Moral Deterioration of American Democracy”, that that is a violate the Senate Code of Ethics.
And to think that Sen. Obama compared his friendship to William Ayers, (domestic terrorist), to his friendship with Sen. Coburn. (A highly respected Republic Senator).
To all Democrats, unless you call your delegates and tell them that time is needed, and let the Democratic Convention decide then who the Democratic Candidate is, you will be guarantee the next President of the United States to be a Republican.