• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Who gets their stuff?
    lateblum on Who gets their stuff?
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Who gets their stuff?
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Who gets their stuff?
    William on Who gets their stuff?
    alibe50 on OooOOOoooo, Snap! That’s going…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Who gets their stuff?
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Who gets their stuff?
    riverdaughter on Who gets their stuff?
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Who gets their stuff?
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Who gets their stuff?
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Who gets their stuff?
    Niles on Who gets their stuff?
    William on Who gets their stuff?
    William on Who gets their stuff?
  • Categories


  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • Why Would Iran Attack Tankers?
      Well, if it did. Let me tell a story, possibly apocryphal. Back in the 70s the Russian (USSR) ambassador supposedly had a talk with the Pakistaini leader of the day. This is what he is reputed to have said. ” I do not know who will be in charge in Moscow in ten, twenty or […]
  • Top Posts

  • Advertisements

Putting Hillary’s Name in Nomination: The Spreading Virus

It’s important to remember that Democratic delegates aren’t PUMA — they can’t be. Delegates are bound to support the nominee whoever it may be while PUMAs are commited to opposing Obama if he is the nominee. But, that doesn’t mean we can’t share a deep commitment to Hillary.  In an exciting development, yesterday we saw Texas delegate, Gary Mauro explain why it’s necessary that Hillary’s name be entered for nomination at the convention.

But, Gary (unlike a PUMA) was careful to pledge support to Obama should he win the nomination.

Pressure is mounting on Democratic Delegates as we get closer to the convention.  It’s coming from us and (if there’s a difference) it’s coming from the DNC & the Obama Campaign.  We know that anything approaching PUMA is a dangerous label for a Delegate.  Just ask Debra Bartoshevich a Wisconsin Hillary delegate who lost her convention credentials when she pledged her vote to John McCain if Obama is the Democratic nominee.

It’s exciting to see more and more Hillary Delegates supporting the petition to put her name in nomination.  But, signing that petition — sharing that petition — does not make them PUMA.

Advertisements

56 Responses

  1. Yay, KB! This is a good virus, too!

    I just got an email from Murphy at PumaPAC. Check it out:

    I heard tonight from someone who was in touch with big shots at the DNC (and when I say big, I mean BIG). They are in a DITHER about our calls and letters – an absolute dither. We cannot let up

    .

    Amen, sister Darragh!

    Hillary ’08!

    PUMA!

  2. Do you suppose that we care finally getting through to the DNC?

  3. Drudge has a link to this article on his website:

    http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/aug/06/group-plans-to-hail-hillary/

    PUMA and others get a shout out in this article 🙂

  4. Hillary said loud and clear the delegates, her supporters need to feel valued – that the delegates have the right under the rules — you know – the DNC is so F’d up — They have the data that women made up over 50% of the voters in ALL primaries if they DON’T respect Hillary and her supporters November 4th will be a landside.

    If I can’t have Hillary on August 28th — then I hope they continue on with their snobbery attitudes. I hope the working class families which I come from do not forget and tell them loudly on Nov. 4th – NO MORE. It would certainly be the end of Botox Pelosi, Coward Dean, Brazilenut and No Suit Barry.

  5. I just sent letters to Rasmussen, Gallup and Quinnipiac asking for more polls including Hillary (this was a Clinton Dems action item). I’m putting flyers on cars. And all over the country there are others doing their part!

    It IS making a difference.

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/obama_leads_bush_by_twenty_but_clinton_does_better_against_mccain

  6. kb, is there somewhere i can email you the letter i sent to superdelegates? It’s long.

  7. From the beginning they wanted Hillary out, the people wanted Hillary in and in the end she got the popular vote, while being OUT SPENT 3 to 1 and 4 to 1 by Obama.

    Hillary needs to have a roll call vote, if they don’t do this they will lose more Democrats and they will lose the election. Plain and simple…

    R
    E
    S
    P
    E
    T

    the VOTERS! No voter should be declared as
    1/2 a Person/VOTE…EVER!

  8. Just as the Texas delegate said. The convention is a nominating convention. But Howard Dean and the DNC has short circuited the whole process. WHY, HAVE A CONVENTION AT ALL…….IT’S FIXED.

  9. Howie knows the PUMA label is toxic. That’s why his office is using it to smear the petitioners.

    Alegre has a diary up quoting Ricki Lieberman’s email about this.

    Sue Castner, Clinton delegate, Oregon writes: “The chairman’s office at the DNC today is telling people our nominating petition is a PUMA petition and that HRC only needs one delegate to put her name in nomination. Amazingly, Governor Dean’s office has not returned my phone calls attempting to correct the woefully inadequate misinformation they are disseminating. Can you imagine?
    As long as they can paint us in a negative light as a bunch of disgruntled, angry, delusional malcontents, they can dismiss us en masse. There is also a great deal of confusion about PUMA PAC, PUMA and dozens of other petitions circulating. Howard Dean and the DNC is capitalizing on this confusion, exploiting it, and hoping it carries them through the Convention.

    looks like Howie’s coordinating a strategy to put out disinformation DIRECTLY FROM THE CHAIRMAN’S OFFICE. Shame, shame, shame.

  10. Previously I would comment from time to time on about three different blogs, but when they turned their backs on maintaining any kind of freedom to express a thought in opposition to their diatribe for Obama, I stopped. I found Riverdaughter fairly soon, took a sigh of relief that all the inhabitants of the Democratic Party had not had a lobotomy and some type of mind control mechanism implanted in the place of the brain matter removed.

    However, I do believe that some Pumas should make it a priority to get on the various blogs and speak with reason and clarity about what they actually are when some of the bots decide they want to define us. There are so many assinine assertions being made, that I feel need to be addressed. I don’t feel you should linger and be made into a troll. Just get in, made a factual, rational statement and get out. Of course, it will cause a *swarm*, but it will still leave a point of common sense that will probably have more impact than if you stayed around to fight it out. This is just my opinion from reading some comments on Taylor Marsh this a.m. in response to an item about McCain entering his wife, Cindy in a Buffalo Chip contest.

    They tried to lump all Pumas together, which really irritated me. I feel Pumas are like original Democrats, in that we have many different v iews about how we will vote in November — some will not vote, some will vote third party, some will write in Hillary (in states where they can) and some will vote McCain. We do not have any chip in our brain that makes us respond like robots.

    We simply do not wish to allow the *democratic* party to steal our votes from us now, or in the future. If we just roll over and play dead, we are acquiescing our subjugation to a party that no longer recognizes the platform that at one time guaranteed one person, one vote. We want to fight against a totalitarian, authoritarian party that decides which candidate is best for us and selects that person instead. in fact, we regard this as a fight for our rights and resent people trying to turn this movement into anything else.

    Or, at least, that is how I feel.

  11. I just watched that vid at NQ showing an interview in NV with Jon Ralston & B0. Not only does B0 get testy when asked about his vote for the Cheney Energy Bill, he says he voted for the bill because it gave money to energy alternatives, but he didn’t really agree with the subsidies toward the oil companies; he said so at the time.
    Well! As long as he said he didn’t support the tax breaks, that’s that. Guess the oil companies didn’t profit any.
    He also says McCain is against alternative energy, against solar or wind power, etc. Without linking to any specific story, I am postive that is patently false.

  12. Doesn’t Obama need 300 delegates…..ALSO.

  13. I just sent out my letters to the Supers. Murphy has it broken
    down into four separate letters. You BCC the addresses.
    It’s the subject matter line that matters.

  14. I wonder if he is also getting messages from God like Bu$h does.

    Excerpt from:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/08/he_is_who_he_is.html

    by Tony Blakely

    “… the more I watch this man the more stunned I am at His overconfidence and towering pride. I have known a number of great and powerful men (and read biographies of many more), and they surely don’t lack confidence or ego. But who among the great would have answered the question posed to the junior senator from Illinois a few weeks ago as He did? Asked whether He had any doubts, He said “never.”

    Is He so foolish as to think He has the world figured out to the last detail, or is He so proud of His intelligence that He cannot confess to ever having any doubt? Either explanation renders His judgment of dubious presidential caliber.

    Here is a man who talked almost contemptuously of Gen. Petraeus. Explaining His differences with the general, He said that His “job is to think about the national security interest as a whole; (the generals’) job is just to get their job done (in Iraq).” Of course, right at the moment, the junior senator from Illinois doesn’t yet have “His” job, while Gen.
    Petraeus, as confirmed Centcom commander, has direct responsibility for both Afghanistan and Iraq and everything in between and around them. But in the mind of Sen. I Am, He already is, while He thinks the man who is perhaps our greatest general in two generations is just another flunky carrying out routine orders. It is repulsive to see such a mentality in a man who would be president.”

  15. I hope we are getting on their nerves.:grin:

  16. CB – You know that article was written by a Republican when he calls Petraeus “perhaps our greatest general in two generations.” LOL

    Nonetheless, he is spot-on about Obama. If only the news media were as invested in diagnosing Bush’s narcissism in 1999, we might be in a very different situation today.

  17. SimoFish, on August 6th, 2008 at 12:35 pm

    Exactly SimoFish! Hillary is keeping her word and is TRYING to help the Party unify. but the DNC / Obama people are too stupid or cowardly or both , to heed her excellent advice . On your tape , Hillary says” I’m doing everything I know how to do!! ” Indeed. But there is the problem. From Hillary’s perspective, votes and unity is EARNED and she trying to help them to that . But that’s not BO ‘s camps view at all. IMO In their view is Hill is trying to “hurt” him because she won’t just hand over her voters. He doesn’t get it. He has the political sensibilities of a low level, Chic-Town pol where all is kick backs and pay offs . That’s all BO can understand and he should have been left where he was . Actually it’s our good fortune Bo and Co are so stupid ….they are among PUMA’s greatest assets! LOL!!

    PUMA!

  18. madamab, I think Petraeus is a great General. I wouldn’t want him to be deciding the policy the way Bush defers to him, but since he took control the numbers have gotten better there. Neither Sanchez nor Casey could get much done. Maybe it was due to the BUsh administration hamstringing them, or Petraeus’ success is due simply to the agreements made with tribal warlords as the neo-left loves to cite in order to discount him. I don’t know, but things seem to have gotten better since he took command. This is not an endorsement to stay in Iraq, but I was very offended when MoveOn did their betrayus ad when I think the real villain has always been Bush, and Petraeus seems to be a competent and admirable person of integrity just trying to make things better there.

  19. britgirl, I called them all on my lunch break. The guy at rasmussen seemed a little perturbed. I think he had already heard from a lot of other people. He said they were thinking about polling Clinton, but weren’t sure if they were going to do it.

  20. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080806/ap_on_el_pr/poll_obama_overexposure

    Count me among those who are feeling the same. It’s interesting, how so many people are sick of hearing about Obama, have reached the saturation point (which I reached months ago), but most of us still don’t know who this guy is or what the hell he stands for after all the overexposure.

    I am literally sick to my stomach of his mug and what his superego has to say about him, him, him.

    This guy is so full of hubris and pride I don’t see how he can walk.

    I too want HRC’s name to be on the ballot and her name put into nomination with a legit vote. At the very least, if for no other reason than respect, that is what needs to happen.

  21. Wooooow!

    How did I ever miss this?

    Best satire evaaaaah!

    Tell me what you think.

  22. has anyone pressured Obama to give up his senate seat if he is the nominee? I remember they pretty much forced Dole to in 96, and gave Kerry a hard time about it in 04. If he is the nominee, maybe we can force him into giving up his senate seat to campaign full time. Kill two birds with one stone. get him out of the senate and have him lose the GE in disgrace.

  23. Mawm – I think that Petraeus’ “greatness” is something to be debated, not asserted, and certainly not in such a hyperbolic manner as Tony Blakey did in the article CB quoted.

    There has been so much obfuscation about the “surge.” When did it start? When did it start “working”? Has it worked? And did Petraeus have anything to do with whatever successes have occurred?

    Here is something I wrote in January of 2008. The military says the surge didn’t work at all – it was changing tactics that started quieting the violence.

    There is so much propaganda surrounding this war that I don’t know if, or when, the truth will ever be known about what actually went down. In any case, Petraeus may be a great general, but it’s surely too early to say so without expecting some sort of debate, IMHO.

  24. MABlue, on August 6th, 2008 at 2:16 pm

    Hilarious! Funnier still if one is clingy and bitter and knows something of the bible ! lol!

  25. Howard and CO getting “in a dither”? Beautiful. Mission accomplished. I don’t always get all my PUMA prowls done, but I did phone Dean Wormer and let them know what I thought. Not that it matters to them, but it made me feel better. Darragh Murphy is a force to be reckoned with, DNC folks. Wake up and smell the coffee–BO is going to lose in the fall. The responsibility for this rests squarely on your heads.

  26. madamab, you may be right. I know the propaganda is thick, and Blakely is definitely being hyperbolic. I just cringe, though, when liberals go after the generals when the one who is ultimately deciding, the decider to some, is the President. The criticism of the policy should be directed at him/her. Bush successfully switched the responsibility to the Generals, blaming them for needing to stay, saying, “I am just listening to the Generals on the ground”. MoveOn fell into that trap when it released its betray Us ad, and they didn’t do Democrats any favors by pulling that stunt because a lot of people thought it was classless and misdirected. They even made Hillary get into the muck of it. She defended MoveOn from a free speech point of view. Obama ducked out on that vote if you remember.

  27. Mawm – I agree completely. I could not believe how easily Bush ducked all responsibility for his disastrous decision-making on the war. And as usual, liberals made it easier for him to do so.

    MoveOn’s endorsement of Obama was disgusting to me. I couldn’t believe they picked the LEAST progressive candidate.

    Wonder how they feel now? Their ad shop certainly has lost its luster since the Obama/DNC Conglomerate took them over.

  28. I believe if the surge. is ” working” , it’s due in large measure to the fact that we have taken the smarter and hollowed route of paying off various groups so they don’t fight us. They are running the county , we are their paying guests.

    the wonderus Petraeus was in charge of creating an Iraq army years back, how did that work out?

    Also Petraeus has political ambitions that would make Al Haig blush…..part of the article’s aim is to help him with that . IMO

  29. Great news from the state of Georgia (at least for me).

    In the Democratic run off race for the US Senate, Martin beat Jones (an enthusiastic Obama supporter). I think he believed Obama’s huge win, here in GA over Clinton would ensure him the win.

    Jones has his own issues. But as an African American in the State who supported Obama, I’m wondering where all that enthusiasm from those new democratic voters went when it came time to cast a vote.

    Jones made a point of letting voters know that Martin voted for Edwards who had already dropped out of the race in the Feb. 5 primary.

    However, GA voted before Rev. Wright came on the scene.

    I know this is jumbled but wanted to you all a heads up from GA.

  30. Obama needs 300 delegates…ALSO.

    Doesn’t Howard Dean, ALSO., have to challenge his nomination.

  31. Bonita, on August 6th, 2008 at 2:46 pm

    excellent news….this is the problem for the down ticket Dems….Even if he was doing well in the polls, Obama’s coat tails are nonexistent . His core voter votes for him and none other

  32. Interesting news from GA, Bonita.

    I believe a lot of the Dems jumped on the Obama bandwagon because they thought all that vast new turnout would help them. Apparently not.

  33. has anyone pressured Obama to give up his senate seat if he is the nominee? I remember they pretty much forced Dole to in 96, and gave Kerry a hard time about it in 04. If he is the nominee, maybe we can force him into giving up his senate seat to campaign full time. Kill two birds with one stone. get him out of the senate and have him lose the GE in disgrace.

    For all intents and purposes, he hasn’t been there either!

  34. Roland Martin is back to bashing the Clintons. He has an offensive disgusting piece up at cnn…a sample

    Stuck in no man’s land, no longer able to stand before adoring crowds of African-Americans who would welcome him as the “nation’s first black president” with thunderous applause and all kinds of pats on the back, he clearly is having issues dealing with the new world order.

    will some of you go tell Roland what a stupid piece of shit hack he is??? (they never post me–I think they know who I am through wordpress) What a smug fucking bastard, as if he speaks for all black people. He really is one of the most vile (and to make it even worse, stupid) commentators out there. ARGGGG

  35. Annetoo, on August 6th, 2008
    His core voter votes for him and none other

    that’s what happens when a candidate tries to lead by force of personality only,
    and not by any core principles and real solutions.

  36. Madamab: I have to agree with you on Petraeus. I genuinely believe that if the plan General Franks wanted to use had been utilized, we would not still be there and General Franks refused to compromise his integrity. IMHO

  37. FYI: I bought the Obama book today. As I was standing in the checkout line a black couple standing behind me gave me a couple of dirty looks. They started whispering and staring. The poor cashier hadn’t noticed the tension so as she is bagging it, she says, “I am not too sure about him. Guess you aren’t either.” The black couple were steaming.

    Because I detest His Nibs does not make me a rac*ist but people like this couple can sure be intimidating.

  38. I must be offensive today as I am in moderation.

  39. garychapelhill, BTW there are other cuts of the Bill Clinton interview up on the Good Morning America website that focus a little more on his foundation’s work in Africa and a more expanded version of the comments about the election. A great exercise in how editing can completely change the tone and context of any statements. It makes his point about the coverage.

  40. Genl. Petraeus is only doing his job. It will be years and years before we know if the surge itself actually worked. We do know that ethnic cleansing was going on before he assumed command. Just picture Obama as C in C. Of course, he needs to military history to make decisions. He is The One.

  41. Steve Clemons doesn’t seem very happy about Obama’s compulsion to throw allies under the bus:

    WRONG. . .WRONG. . .WRONG: Obama Lets Muslim Advisor Resign

    Will anyone notice? Barack Obama’s team just threw its key Muslim advisor under the bus.

    Barack Obama needs to make a statement loudly, clearly, and with passion that he embraces Muslims as much as any other Americans of Christian, Buddhist, Jewish or other religious persuasions. It wouldn’t hurt for him to embrace devout secularists like me for that matter.

    But I’m irritated and saddened by news that Barack Obama’s Muslim-outreach coordinator, Mazen Asbahi, has resigned “amid questions about his ‘involvement’ in an Islamic investment fund and various Islamic groups.”

    As long as his supporters keep sucking up to him, why shouldn’t Obama fell free to throw people under the bus as he pleases.

  42. The new world order?

    Martin seems to be sharing the delusion that Obama is already elected.

  43. Better start a new thead. This is nothing about ‘The Hillary virus.

  44. Why do we need Muslim advisers or religious advisers or women’s issues advisers on a national campaign? What a joke this is!

  45. Hey everyone – there is a new thread up. Paris Hilton for President! 🙂

  46. Tony Blakely writes for the Washington Times and I think was once a consultant to Newt Gingrich. A total Repub mouthpiece. However, I will never fault him for singling out Obama under any circumstances. In this instance, he speaks directly to my beliefs about him. President Fraud indeed!

  47. The new world order??? Good grief, Roland Martin just managed to validate Randy Weaver. They no longer publish me on CNN either, GCH>

  48. Forgive me for interjecting since I’m not a Democrat, but I’m completely bewildered.

    The desire of Clinton suporters is that her name be placed in nomination and on the ballot. However, Harold Ickes has spoken of delegates being “hijacked”, and allegations of caucus fraud have appeared on this very site.

    If these allegations are wrong, Obama has been libeled.
    If they are right, delegates have been stolen. What kind of integrity can that ballot have?

  49. regardless of what happened in the caucauses, I believe Ickes was referring to the delegates that were hicjacked by the RBC when they took delegates awarded to hillary by michigan voters and gave them to obama. that’s what most of us are referring to when we say “stolen” delegates, because that’s exactly what happened.

  50. So SD’s if they truly want the White House, which is a question in my mind, need to decide quickly and do the math judge as we have, CAN Obama whose record, qualifications, deeds, experience and associates will now be placed under the spot light and assessed without the luxury of the dismissive haze of racial animus which shielded him, prior to being rendered impotent last week, win in Nov . And what of the electorate that is now anti Obama that those that have broken through the Code, like PUMA and understand now they were the THEM maligned as the foils of Obama Difference, Bill Clinton certainly is not the only voter disgusted by these tactics, nor who knew once known they would back fire and hurt when they did. So while it is probably to late the question remains, CAN Obama’s Differences his stature as a famous Personality win the Party the White House on the merits if that’s the goal?

    Unlike many I do not believe the answer is Hillary as VP, she could not save his candidacy her joining him would be a band aid that unfortunately will not stop the bleed and could do more harm. The Party will pay dearly for their choice to swift boat the Clinton’s as the dismissive racist effigies the foil to Obama’s difference and short comings, still as factual now as then, his lack of experience and qualification for Office of the President. unchanged Add that the Party has splintered and created a large movement of anti – Dems out of life long Democrats as well as Independents who expected better and are now unwilling to forgive the betrayals of the fraudulent Primary. IMO the only hope, would be radical action, SD’s and Pledged Delegates in the districts Hillary won voting with her as they should with the will of the Base, acknowledgment admission that Dean et al the DNC rigged the race providing Obama false momentum he had not earned from the Base, Dean, Kennedy, Pelosi and Clyburn must be dealt with publicly driven eventually and soon from their positions of leadership in the Party but disempowered immediately their betrayal shouted down unforgivable, unnecessary, unprincipled, corrupt. .And lastly courage will be required to end the blackmail the threat of civil action from Clyburn and Sharpton, which I suspect as a political knife has already now lost most if not all of it’s former power..

  51. This is from Clinton’s op ed in today’s Rupert Murdoch-owned WSJ:

    “Over the course of three years, Truman set about investigating a president of his own party in order to discover and eliminate wasteful and fraudulent spending.”

    That’s a shot across the bow, all right. I love the Clintons, but I would not want to be one of their political enemies. Unless the DNC gets a cloo and nominates her instead of Barky, heads are gonna roll. And I feel certain, somehow, that Hillary and Bill are quite decent bowlers.

  52. As an outsider, I saw the RBC meeting as pretty much settling the nomination for Obama. What then can be the point of having a ballot tainted by ‘stolen’ delegates?

    Further, has Obama replaced any other Clinton delegates since that time.

    I don’t mean the questions polemically– just trying to get a handle on the logic behind the pro-Hillary efforts at Denver. I find this drama fascinating.

  53. JohninCA, August 6th, 2008 at 4:07 pm Said

    Many descriptors may be used but what is factually correct is that the RBC awarded Obama Delegates that did not correspond to a vote with his name on it, and also awarded Obama 5 Delegates where the actual voter had legally cast his or her vote for Obama’s opponent Hillary Clinton.

    There is very little about a Caucuses that could with stand challenge,reasons to numerous to list , but validation is a trust me kind of measurement but at the base unlike Primaries they are Party events not State certified elections governed by election law. In this Primary for example about 2 percent of the actual popular vote people turning out and participating were awarded appox 40 percent of the Delegates based math that can not in many cases be validated as votes are. To me that’s a poor measure if what you are searching for is a factual representation of the intent of the Base or an understanding of which candidate is more marketable when people do go into the voting booth. Thus indicating which candidate is more likely to increase the Party’s chances of a win. Or at least that’s what I would want from the process ,but the DNC says no that’s not the intent; I would then say ok, and then don’t use it as a numeric that measures or defends the DNC RBC choice of nominee as equal to a ballot cast.

  54. ELECTABILITY!

    The only job of the delegates at the Convention is to select the electable Democrat to get us back to the White House. She is HRC.

    During the primaries, the more voters learned about BO, the more they voted for Hillary Clinton. He is failing to “seal the deal” now just as during the primaries. A Democrat should be ahead in the polls by double digits given the state of the country and the antipathy to Bush and the Republicans.

    The pledged delegates must have the opportunity to represent the 18 million who voted for HRC, and, regardless of any previous statements, the Super Delegates are accountable for nominating the candidate who is electable, and the only electable Democrat is Hillary Clinton.

    To remind the SDs of this as we approach Denver, please participate in the ELECTABILITY WATCH by contacting me at rrlieberma@gmail.com to receive background, sample letters and a list of SDs.

    GO GO GO!!!

  55. JohninCA, yes, Sen. Obama has booted pledged delegates and replaced them with his handpicked delegates.

    There was an outcry when he tried this in California—HuffPo had a post about it from one of the Obama followers who got booted. There was a lot of gnashing of teeth, rending of garments, and wailing, esp. since Sen. Obama’s choices tended to be well-heeled donors taking the pledge spots of his grassroots.

    A WI pledged delegate was also booted, as have several Florida pledged delegates. You can use something called “Google” (you’ve heard of that, haven’t you?) to find out more.

    The Convention has followed historical precedent for decades. Not having a candidate in nomination regardless of the primaries is something shiyn and brand new courtesy of the junior senator from Illinois. Failing to follow history is not a good way for him to achieve any sort of Unity. Again, Google is your friend.

    Sen. Clinton’s name in nomination also allows her supporters to give voice to their choice. That is why they are there. This is not a roll call or show vote, it is an attempt at the nomination and the only reason to deny what is hers by right of being a candidate is because Sen. Obama believes he will lose. And he is right—should the nomination come to a vote, there is a chance he will not win, certainly not on the first vote. That is the only explanation for this bizarre behavior and reversal of precendent.

    If you again try Google, you’ll find that nomination votes have historically been the way political parties have selected their nominees.

  56. […] the second round of misinformation to come out of the DNC in as many weeks.  Last week Howard Dean tried to tie the petition movement to PUMA, suggesting that it was some sort of sabotage from unknown quarters. […]

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: