Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Clinton's Convention Fight Comments

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) set off a firestorm this afternoon when, during an interview with the Associated Press, she seemed to suggest she was willing to push the Democratic nomination fight all the way to the party's national convention in late August.

Asked whether she would support Florida and Michigan if they decided to take their dispute with the Democratic National Committee all the way to the convention, Clinton responded: "Yes I will. I will, because I feel very strongly about this."

The Fix ran the traps with Clinton advisers late this afternoon to get a sense as to whether these comments represented a major change in Clinton's approach to the nomination fight or whether she was simply responding to a question and/or trying to put a bit of pressure on the DNC in advance of the Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting later this month, which will decide the fate of the two states' delegations.

Our sense? The latter.

"Our hope and expectation is that there will be a fair and reasonable settlement of these issues before the convention," said one senior Clinton adviser granted anonymity in order to speak candidly. "We are not looking for a fight, simply a solution that respects the voters from Florida and Michigan who cast their ballots in good faith."

A look at another of Clinton's answers from the interview backs up that sentiment. To the suggestion that the race could go beyond June 3, when South Dakota and Montana voters cast ballots -- Clinton replied: "It could. I hope it doesn't. I hope it's resolved to everyone's satisfaction by that date because that's what people are expecting -- but we'll have to see what happens."

For all the talk that Clinton would rather blow up the party than see Obama chosen as the Democratic nominee, there seems to be little evidence that Clinton or her campaign are planning to push this fight to the convention.

Clinton has made clear she will remain in the race until the end of the balloting. She is likely to continue campaigning after that date until it is clear that superdelegates have no stomach for overturning the choice of the pledged delegates. If that happens by June 15 or June 30 -- and if some sort of accommodation has been made that satisfies Florida and Michigan -- it's hard to imagine Clinton staying in.

By Chris Cillizza  |  May 21, 2008; 8:21 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Ad Wars: Graves' "San Francisco" Ad
Next: Why Clinton (Still) Runs

Comments

While Clinton has the right to continue through the primaries, hopefully she will not damage the Dem. Party in the process. The primaries are about, and always have been about delegates, which her campaign managers seemed to have forgotten. The only sexism in this race is coming from Hillary's campaign itself by her inference that because she is a woman she has a right to be President.

Her strong fight to get the Florida and Michigan All TO HERSELF is another example of her belief that she has an unalieable right to be president bcause she is a woman and a Clinton. This the most clear and egregious example of her arrogance. unfortunately she apears to be ready to prostitute her personal integrity on the altar of her ambitions.

In the past I've always held her Presidential qualifications to be very high. Her recent campaign tactics, however, have led me to the inescapable conclusion that she is neither ethically, moraly, nor has the honesty or integrety, to be qualified for the Presidentcy.

Given that she virtually mathematically cannot win the Presidential nomination her recent campaign tactics are likely to destroy her political future. She could have been the natural successor to Ted Kennedy and a virtual legend and power in the Senate. It is indeed unfortunate she has shown herself to be just another polical hack who is willing to say and do ANYTHING to satisfy her ambitions even to the extent of destroying her Party.

Posted by: RM | May 24, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

The media may not count Michigan or Florida votes; Israel or the Jewish people may not count Florida or Michigan vote; nor the rest of Barack supporters. However, since there are no rules for super-delegates, the super-delegates can consider these two states votes, regardless of whatever happens.

The super-delegates considering these two states votes is a wise choice, since all 51 and not 49 states will be voting in the general election.

By the way the super-delegates should be more concerned about Hillary supporters. Her supporters are in the middle politically; while Barack supporters are all the way to the left. Her supporters might go over to the Republicans and permanently stay there. This would be bad for the democrats in future elections. However, Barack supporters usually don't vote; also, come back a million years from now and all of Barack supporters will still be voting democratic

Posted by: Abdul | May 23, 2008 10:28 PM | Report abuse

At this point Hillary has demonstrated herself to be someone I want nothing to do with, will not associate myself with in any way including voting for her on any ticket.
The Clintons have proven themselves to be despicable and I am completely disgusted...
Just last weeken during his introduction of Hillary Bill Clinton used class warefar... all those people who say Hillary can' win...they are rich and educated...they have no problem paying for gas at the pump... she is your candidate... she is for the working class folks.... i was livid when I heard the things he was saying... how divisive and disgusting they were.
The democratic party will be a loser if they allow Hillary on the ticket in any way shape or form...
Because I will fight to keep her out of office. I will be fighting for a third party candidate. I will never sit back and do nothing and watch her go back to the white house. I could not live with myself if I did. It would be like once again seeing George Bush take office. I won't stand for it. I won't sit by and watch it happen. I will fight because she is exactly what we don't need in a president.

Posted by: lb | May 23, 2008 9:00 AM | Report abuse

I don't think there's any confusion within the Clinton ranks except for purposeful disinformation -- fighting to the end and peaceloving; race baiting, rumor mongering about obama and complimenting on the other hand; good cop bad cop games between top aides with talking points, surrogates and the candidate herself. These strategies are getting more obvious and sinister, not less so.

Posted by: mike | May 23, 2008 12:50 AM | Report abuse

You're a mean one, Mrs. Grinch.
You really are a heel.
You're as cuddly as a cactus,
You're as charming as an eel.
Mrs. Grinch.

You're a bad banana
With a greasy black peel.

-adapted by Dr. Seuss

Posted by: nOT EVER GOING TO BE AN OBAMA ZOMBIE | May 22, 2008 11:49 PM | Report abuse

"For all the talk that Clinton would rather blow up the party than see Obama chosen as the Democratic nominee, there seems to be little evidence that Clinton or her campaign are planning to push this fight to the convention."

you mean other than the fact that hillary said she would take it to the convention?

Posted by: freaktown | May 22, 2008 9:29 PM | Report abuse

Re: the lengthy "open letter to Hillary" posted by PT at 4:13. Ph.D. or not, this writer perpetrates many untruths about Barack Obama, in troll-worthy fashion. Just one example: Obama's curiosity led him to travel to Africa not just once but several times as an adult.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 9:20 PM | Report abuse

She ain't stopping until its official.

Posted by: Lanny Davis | May 22, 2008 8:11 PM | Report abuse

Hillary has every right to go to the convention. Should she just turn over her 17 million votes and delegates to Obama. Why? What is she getting in return? They probably won't even thank her. She's invested her own money and has every right to fight on. If the democratic party does not treat her with respect, she should be prepared to run as an independent.

Posted by: Maria | May 22, 2008 5:08 PM | Report abuse

It is time for the leadership of the Democratic party to firmly ask this desperate and deluded candidate to abide by the rules or get out. This is the exact reason people want her out of the race. She can never play fair. I would like to hear one reasonable response from a Hillary supporter as to why Michigan and Florida should be seated when it was agreed upon by ALL the candidates BEFORE the election that they would not. Hillary agreed to it. And now she wants them seated b/c she "won" in those states - you cannot "win" if no one was competing against you(competing in politics involves campaigning which did not happen in those states) and if there was no contest to begin with as was agreed upon, and I will say again, by HILLARY BEFORE THE ELECTIONS. We do not want more slime in politics.

Posted by: MM | May 22, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

An open letter to Hillary....A candidates character and life choices matter. Please fight on until the convention...may the best candidate win....
I am frustrated. I keep hearing about Barak Obama's life story and I can't help compare it to my own. No, I am not black. But I am a person who grew up without a father, with a mother struggling to pay the bills and with no mentor, just my own aspirations as a girl from a working class neighborhood. This letter is not only about Barak Obama's seriously flawed qualifications to be President of the United States, it is also about your perfect resume for the job. It is difficult for me to not compare my own life accomplishments with that of each Presidential candidate. Why can't we choose a President who from the very start of their formative years was working hard for change and on the right path, like you were? Why doesn't anyone notice that unlike Barak Obama, you did not seek your election to the Senate as an immediate springboard to the Presidency. Barak Obama entered the Senate, spent his first 18 month writing a book in the Senate, then announced for Presidency against the backdrop of very little experience. You entered the Senate and promised you would complete your entire first term -- you did. That was the right thing to do. Doesn't anyone care about character anymore.
Please don't exit this race. Please fight on all the way until the convention. If you pull out of the race for any reason, you will be yielding to not only a very flawed democratic primary system, not only to a media who is trying to influence this race, not only to the disenfranchisement of 2.3 million people in this very close race, not only to the very hard glass ceiling, but you will also be yielding to the status quo. In order to change the system, you need to fight on. In my view, this primary and the lack of leadership at the DNC regarding this primary demonstrates just how much repair needs to occur in the democratic party. While I have never registered with the democratic party, I have voted democratic my whole life (including Hillary's first bid for Senator of NY), but I no longer feel much aligned with the democratic party. If you withdraw, all the issues that have arisen in this primary will ultimately be ignored and swept under the carpet.
I hear things everyday in this campaign that drive me crazy. Let's start with the term "downscale" voter. I cannot even start to understand how anyone "educated" can willingly us a term like that on national TV. I guess they are referring to my blue collar working class sister on Long Island. Next time I send her a card, I'll say Hi to my "downscale sister".
Then there is Caroline Kennedy (promoting Sen. Obama) indicating how she understands, because she grew up in a single mother household. Really. That is interesting. Sure, it is tragic when any child's father dies, but we really need to re-define the concept of a single mother household. From my own experience, my mother (with no family support) was raising three kids on less than $12,500 per year. When it was my time for college (the first and only one in my family to graduate from college), my single mother could not afford to give me more than $750 per term. It happened that my university - NYU - made college a reality for me. I mention NYU by name because it was the only school to offer me a financial aid package that I could actually afford (Thank you NYU). I paid tuition each year with 6 slips of paper (loans, grants, scholoarships) and my own saved cash.
Then there is Barak Obama, saying that he can prove he was disadvantaged when growing up because he worked in a burger joint after school. Well, I worked in a burger joint when I was in high school too. Getting that job in the burger joint at 16 years-old was one of the most exciting days of my life. It is not something I look back on as if it was a burden or disadvantage. I could start to earn money for college and start to secure my own future.
An Obama surrogate (I forget who, but I think it was Senator Rockerfeller), who comments that you have to have spent time abroad to understand how the world views America. Yes, as someone who had lived abroad for more than 14 years, I agree. But what Sen. Rockefeller offered as experience abroad was that Barak Obama lived abroad with his mother between the ages of 5-10 years old. Now that one really got me. Sen. Obama did not have the curiosity to travel. His mother was there and he was living with her. Moreover, it was his childhood years, a time in which he would no less read the newspaper than discuss politics with the locals.
I have to say, I wanted to travel abroad and see the world for as long as I can remember. But, being from a single parent household, my first plane flight ever (and basically my first trip out of the tri-state NY area) was at the age of 20 for my semester abroad in Italy. During my semester in Italy, I only just started to get my feet wet about perceptions regarding the international community's view of America. How on earth could Sen. Obama make any formative opinions between the ages of 5-10 years-old. I traveled all over Europe (some say Sen. Obama has only been to one Nato country), to learn about these cultures. I even ventured on my own into Eastern Germany in 1988 before the wall came down. At that young age, I was only just starting to formulate some views of how America was seen. I strengthened those views by traveling to South America and South East Asia. But it was really only during my graduate studies at the London School of Economics in pursuit of a Phd that I really started to understand the depth of the world view of America.
I arrived in London in 1991. Thanks to President Clinton, in 1992 when the Student Loan amount was raised from $7500 to $18,000 per year, I could see my pathway to the Phd, prior to that, I constantly wondered how I could afford to achieve my goal of a Phd. Oh, and by the way.....unlike Senator Obama and his wife's apparent frustration that they had to pay back student loans into their 40s, I do still have student loans and every month I pay them I am not bitter....I am grateful.
The early 1990s in London was a time that the IRA was still active, the Tories where in Power and America was derided often by my classmates as an "unworldly" place. According to my international classmates, America was always on the wrong side, doing the wrong thing. Inadvertently, I was made to feel a bit unworldly simply because I was an a American. I started challenging my international classmates and their America-critical and America-cynical sentiments. Then September 11, 2001 happened. It was on that day, the day those iconic buildings - the twin towers, the towers I took a picture of in 5 th grade and wrote "I will work here some day"; the twin towers - 2 World Trade Center Floor 65 - the place I worked as an investment banking analyst after university -- it was the day those buildings disappeared that I stopped apologizing to my international classmates for being an American. It was their view, not America's actions which needed to change. Is America perfect. Certainly not. There is room for improvement in every country in the world. Yet, the Liberal wing of the democratic party simply assume it must be us, not them, without even having observing it from abroad. The liberal wing of the democratic party reminds me too much of my international classmates who think that America should be embarrassed and ashamed. I feel Senator Obama extends that view with the mis-guided belief that "talking" and showing understanding to America's critics is the path forward to a mutual understanding. That greatly concerns me. As a person who has experience abroad, that view from a Presidential Candidate greatly concerns me. Talking is necessary, but hard resolve, like you have Senator Clinton is vital.
Hillary, you cannot withdraw from this race because people are making you feel like you are damaging Barak Obama, or because they are making you feel like you should be embarrassed to continue ,or because people believe that your withdrawing will somehow help the democratic party. The only way you can help to fix this democratic party is by fighting to do the right thing and stop the rampant misconceptions. The misconception that people in West Virginia and Kentucy are maybe "Archie Bunkers" and voting against Barak Obama rather than for you, the more qualified candidate; the misconception that it is fine to exclude 2.3 million people in such a close race; the misconception that it just fine for Sen. Obama to try and block a re-vote in MI and FL; the misconception that it is acceptable to handicap a candidate for the Presidential nomination by giving them a pass on everything; the misconception that people like me who are supporting you will somehow back a seriously flawed candidate like Barak Obama; the misconception that a candidate's character and associations do not matter If the character and associations of someone of wants to be President of the United States does not matter, than I guess there really is no ideal anyone can live up to
Hillary, you must fight on until the convention. How can we stop all the misconceptions and put America on the right path if you pull out of the race? Staying in will keep the discussions open. Thank you for continuing to fight. We are depending on you to go to the convention. It is true that you must always pick your fights carefully, but Hillary, this is a fight worth having.

Thank you for fighting on....

Posted by: PT | May 22, 2008 4:13 PM | Report abuse

I note that many of the posts here say that it is not racist for blacks to vote
for blacks because they have voted for
whites in the past. True. But maybe
someone can find a situation anywhere
in this country where 90% of the blacks
voted for a white when the election included a black person. I am an
Independent voter and a non-racist, and
I do use the same criteria to determine
what racism involves. There certainly are
pockets of racism against blacks in some areas of the country; however, I know of
no instance where where whites gave 90%
of their votes in a contest between
equally capable candidates. That can't be said of this primary.
Anyway, I'm not planning on voting for
Obama because of his skin color, I just
don't think he is qualified. He doesn't
even have U.S. Senate experience since
he started running for president almost from his first day in that chamber and
missed most of the votes and sessions.
He has a Chairmanship position on a
subcommitted regarding Afghanistan, which
he often mentions will get his complete
attention after he pulls the troups from
Iraq. Why then has he failed to convene
even a single meeting of that subcommittee?
It is plain that he is only interested in
his public image and not interested in
taking any action which would reveal his
lack of substance. As the old saying goes,"It is far better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your moouth and remove all doubt."
Unfortunately, the choice we will have
to make in this election is difficult as
we certainly aren't going to be deciding between the two best qualified leaders
for this country. Again, it seems we are going to be left with choosing the best
of the least. In that regard, I am leaning
toward McCain as it now seems that the
Democrats will have substantial gains in
congressional races and probably get to
the magic "60" vote margin in the Senate to get good legislation passed. In that
case, Congress will be able to control the
President's ability to do anything really
bad, and the President can veto any real
bad Democratic bills. In my opinion, it is
always better to have at least the Executive Branch and Legislative Branch of
our government be split between the two
major parties. Part of my final decision will be based on who McCain pick as his VP.
Another consideration is the situation in
November as to what the majority will be
in a Democratic Senate. I would prefer a
large majority to be able to stifle any
attempt at making judicial nominations to ultra conservative jurists. This is especially true in the Supreme Court where there should certainly be a less biased court that what we have now.

Posted by: tsinzara | May 22, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

If the DNC and Obama supporters are so focus in the rules, WHY they are silent with the behavior of the College Democrats of America? As you are aware, the College Democrats of America, as an organization, are not allowed to endorse any presidential candidate. College Democrats of America are breaking the rules of the DNC. They recently, endorsed Senator Obama in YouTube. This is illegal and unfair. The President and Vice President of College Democrats of America are using the machinery, resources, staff, funding,and credentials of the Democratic Party to favour Obama over Senator Hillary Clinton. This is illegal.They are breaking the rules. This is unfair. No wonder why Obama is successful in the caucuses. Senator Obama not only has his campaign; but he has the extra branch of the College Democrats of America as well! Where is Howard Dean? Where is Nancy Pelosi? Be fair. Check the rules. Be honest. I am a doctoral student supporting Senator Hillary Clinton.

Posted by: mmarii | May 22, 2008 3:17 PM | Report abuse

Senator Hillary Clinton should go all the way to the convention. She is winning the popular vote. Florida and Michigan matters. She has a clear victory in Florida. Also, Senator Hillary Clinton won Michigan as well. If Senator Barack Obama chosed to remove his name from Michigan,too bad. Obama is a "rookie" in politics. Vote forexperience.Experience matters. For your information,in Michigan, Senator Hillary Clinton was not the only candidate inthe ballot.
She shared the ballot withSenator Christopher Dodd, and even with Kucinich. They kept their names in the ballots. After all is a presidential primary. It was a smart decision.Now, I do not have a problem if the DNC would like to make a re-do primary in MI. Perhaps this could be the next step. Vote smart. Vote for the best option in November. Vote for Senator Hillary Clinton.

Posted by: mmarii | May 22, 2008 2:53 PM | Report abuse

Please someone enlighten me on those who claim my Senator's is the superior candidate for the fall election. To date her political resume is thin, full of mistakes and failures.

Her is my assessment of her relevent experience

National Security - Voted for the Iraq fiasco. Not learning from that long unacknowledged error, voted for a back door authorization to attack Iran (by declaring that the Iranian arm forces is a terrorist organization). Surpassing the stupidity and lack of forsight of the GOP, she now proposes a nuclear umbrella in the middle east for those nations who support our democratic ideals (Saudi Arabia? Kuwait? Egypt?). Does she understand diplomacy in the middle east or is she depending on riding George Bush's horse in a superior manner?

Economy - Pretends renegotiating trade agreements that her husband and the GOP put into place will solve the problems of those who have not fared well with those global trade agreements. Wants to give us all $30 to offset high gas prices this summer in lieu of a workable energy plan that will end the pain at the gas pump. After rolling back the tax cuts for those making over $200K spends that money multiple times for programs she can't or won't deliver.

Health care - She does propose an excellent and laudable plan. But, she is taking huge political contributions from those in the Health Care industry that will certainly oppose that plan. Can those folks be that stupid? So far, her health care history is one of failure.

She will stay in to the end and has every right to do so. But stop the blather that she has proven to be the superior candidate to face John McCain.

Posted by: Bill in NY | May 22, 2008 2:16 PM | Report abuse

It's a fair fight. Hillary should stay in as long as the nomination is not clinched and she has the money to do so.

Obama will eventually win. And Obama is scared of a fair fight. Let Hillary bring it on. Let her throw her best shot. She will still lose.

Then, Obama will resoundingly defeat John McCain (who is running as George W Bush's 3rd term) in the general election.

History is on Obama's side. McCain is yesterday. Obama is today -- and tomorrow.

Hillary has made this one of the most fantastic election cycles in US History. She is tough.

But Obama is the man of the hour. He is great for America. Ultimately, he will be great for the world.

Posted by: AdrickHenry | May 22, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

So she won't take it to the convention, per her advisors, kind of like how she voted for the Iraq War, but didn't really mean it? Give this woman some hormones, it's obvious she's going through the change, been there, then take her back to NYC and make her Queen of some Island, where her and Bill can rule and make up the rules they like! She's really becoming pathetic!

Posted by: Sue-Idaho | May 22, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

"These Obama sewer jockeys do not represent unity, just ungrateful anarchists that will never have a shot in hell at getting Presidential representation."

Nice, he's a lot closer than Hillary will ever get. BTW: name one "shining" accomplishment Hillary Clinton has achieved because we are not voting for Bill.

Again, Clinton supporters vitriol with NOTHING to back up their claims.

Posted by: JR | May 22, 2008 1:39 PM | Report abuse

There is a huge difference between the oppressed voting for a candidate (e.g. Blacks voting for Obama) and the oppressors refusing to vote for a candidate based on their race (e.g. people in WV and Ken. saying they would never vote for a black candidate under any circumstances)

Blacks have turned out in record numbers to vote for whites in the past. The opposite is still not true.

Posted by: JR | May 22, 2008 1:35 PM | Report abuse

If the shoe were on the other foot, Hillary Clinton would haved asked Sen. Obama to accept the math and end his campaign--immediately. It's amazing to me how she thinks no one can (or should) be president, but her. Who does she think she is...the Messiah? Our Savior? The answer to all of our problems?

Hillary thinks she's superior to Barak just as many whites think they're superior to blacks and that is, partly, why the woman refuses to quite.

Posted by: Michele | May 22, 2008 1:33 PM | Report abuse

I can only think that this "Hillary's supporters will not vote for Obama" threat is being propagated by a few rabid Clinton supporters because if she is so wonderful and so electable and so deserves this nomination in their eyes then why is she over 20 mill dollars in debt? Why don't these supporters put their money where their mouth is?

Support your candidate or shut up.

And don't come crying to Obama to pick up the tab.

She can't even manage the finances of her campaign, how is she going to manage the country?

Posted by: JR | May 22, 2008 1:31 PM | Report abuse

lil, are you aware that Clinton herself as well as many of her top advisors are the very ones who decided your vote didn't count? But why let some basic research get in the way of your rantings? Please continue.

Posted by: Chris | May 22, 2008 1:28 PM | Report abuse

lil, are you aware that Clinton herself as well as many of her top advisors are the very ones who decided your vote didn't count? But why let some basic research get in the way of your rantings? Please continue.

Posted by: Chris | May 22, 2008 1:28 PM | Report abuse

That's right Osama is a racist and so are the 90% of blacks who voted for Osama because his skin is black! They turn their backs on the Clintons that passed a multitude of laws to strengthen affirmative action and create grants for blacks and minorites to go to college with. Osama has done nothing to help blacks yet he gets their vote because he is black. There's your racism, BLACK RACISM.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 1:25 PM | Report abuse

ShellyI, I read your post and it struck me as funny that you are trying to come across as holier-than-thou but yet there are several stereotypical attacks in your own post. Then again maybe this is what we should expect by now from aged female Hillary supporters.

Posted by: Chris | May 22, 2008 1:23 PM | Report abuse

And this is the country that wish to bring democracy to every corner of the earth... when theirs is only skin deep!

Ignorant, uneducated, misinformed, besotted Clintonistas!

Posted by: politikus | May 22, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

Every time I see a post spewing hate at Hillary Clinton I am certain they are not Democrats or they have not been Democrats until now. These poorly behaved hacks do not represent the Democratic Party, they crawled out of sewers. That is why they are blind to the stellar accomplishments of the Clintons. It will be nice when they crawl back in their sewers after Clinton gets the nomination and wins the Presidency.

These Obama sewer jockeys do not represent unity, just ungrateful anarchists that will never have a shot in hell at getting Presidential representation. They most certainly are not strategists or they would know that an Obama nomination = a McCain Presidency.

Posted by: ShellyI. | May 22, 2008 1:19 PM | Report abuse

Now we see the true colours of the citizens of this so-called greatest democracy in the world!

So Ignorant! And Racists!

Posted by: the watcher | May 22, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

I have difficulty reading opinions that place blame on candidates for their religion, gender, or ethnicity. Running for the nomination is an arduous business all the way around. Leave the inflammatory statements to the people who are paid to make their opinions at least look professional.

Both Clinton and Obama have the right to run it out to the end. I do not fault either for showing the diligence to do so, and perhaps, Clinton's reasons to stick it out run far deeper than this campaign.

If we backtrack to the early twentieth century, we'll remember that voting rights also came down to a race of minorities. With all the positives and negatives thrown around at that time, it took intelligent leaders, men, women, black, and white to bring this country together and work toward better equality.

Perhaps, Clinton simply wishes to show that a woman will stick with the task at hand. I do not see her as pulling the party down. I see her as an individual that is making a stand for her constituents, and I have every reason to believe that this woman, who has taken a beating over and over, (as should any candidate), has the skin to take leadership. She hasn't taken shelter from the media downpour, and I have every reason to believe that she will support the party's final say on the matter. She may not be the most popular, she may not be the best candidate, but she stays the course.

There have been many female leaders through history that were described as the bane of existence, and now we hold them up as the models of perseverance, because why? They stayed the course.

Criticize her policies, criticize everything, but givng her a hard time for not dropping out is like telling your daughter to give up because she has no chance of winning. I couldn't say that to my daughter, to my friends, to my mother.

Let her run the course if she so wishes. She'll win or lose in good time on her own.

Posted by: Rae Bryant | May 22, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

"The Obama campaign position on Michigan and Florida is just wrong, given the rare historical nature of this nomination. Leaving them out of the convention or not counting every one of those primary voters is much more threatening to the Dem party. Ask any life-long Dem, not the new voters."

I could not disagree more with this perspective. Claiming the 'rare historical nature of this nomination' is like starting the alphabet at the letter 'H'. The current difference about this election can not be used as a justifier to include states that otherwise broke known policy.
There would no fighting over MI/FL Delegates and/or votes if Joe Biden and Chris Dodd were the two left standing. There would be nothing historical at stake at all.
The obvious question to me is whether the Clintons would be making this stand for what they believe in had Obama won MI/FL and or if the outcomes there were 52/47, providing no clear statistical advantage?
Electing a President with 48 states, I agree is absurd. Electing a Nominee for a Party with 48, is not absurd.
You can't validate the votes cast in MI/FL (by well intentioned voters) but not validate the (well intentioned vote) of the elderly Nuns who went to cast their votes but had no valid, government issued ID. A rule is a rule, if they can't cast because they don't have ID, MI/FL can't count because theirs were out of order.

Posted by: Allen - Omaha, NE | May 22, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

So Hillary signs the rules agreement and agrees to abide by them along with Obama.

So imagine if the NFL said well these are the rules and you agree to play within these rules.

You're ten yards from the goal line and have 8 seconds on the clock. Does anybody in their right mind think the NFL would say gee your close! we'll just add a minute to the clock just for you cause we like you.

Get real people Florida and Michigan decided they were above the rules and went ahead, so now they are paying the price.

And of course now that Hill is behind she thinks its ok to throw the rules out.

Wouldn't life be wonderful if we could just change the regulations to fit out personal lives.

Without rules and regulations life would be chaos, and if Senator Clinton thinks she is above them and can change them to suit her personal needs then is she really someone you want in the White House?

Posted by: Larry the cable guy | May 22, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

New-York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has a right to continue in this race, she has won the most votes of any potential Democratic nominee in history. But Sen. Barack Obama reaches a Democratic majority of pledged deligation, so at the end of the day Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton will not be able for nomination. It's bad luck for her,!!!!!

Posted by: Akber A. Kassam. | May 22, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

Obama Not Electable!!!

After annointing himself as the Democratic Nominee for weeks now one would think that Voters will swing to his corner.

However, they're saying NO TO BARACK'S CANDIDACY.

RISE HILLARY RISE!!!

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x2882.xml?ReleaseID=1180

May 22, 2008 - McCain Leads Obama In Two Of Three Key Swing States, Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll Finds; Clinton Has Big Leads In Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania

FLORIDA: Clinton 48 - McCain 41; McCain 45 - Obama 41;

OHIO: Clinton 48 - McCain 41; McCain 44 - Obama 40:

PENNSYLVANIA: Clinton 50 - McCain 37; Obama 46 - McCain 40

Posted by: Obama Not Electable!!! | May 22, 2008 12:35 PM | Report abuse

I think y'all have narrow tunnel vision. The question here is not whether Obama is being conspired against, or whether whites are too racist to vote for him, or whether Obama turned on his old friend when his friend became inconvenient.It is not even whether Obama can be elected while spending his campaign dripping contempt for blue collar white voters.

The question here is this: does the Democratic party condemn ALL racism or does it condemn only racism directed at blacks?

So far in the entire Wright/Obama debacle all the democrats have been able to do is scream that whites are racists for bringing the debacle to public debate and poor Obama.

But what is actually being brought to public debate and obviously is not going to go away on it's own is the extreme racism of Obama himself along with his known associates. Now the new pastor of Trinity (prayed for and hired this month by the congregation) is even MORE racist towards whites, Jews, etc. than Wright was. But when asked if he will continue with that church, Obama's reaction was "Of course".
If we couple that with Obama's contempt for blue collar whites, his cackling preacher's amusement at the idea of his own visit to Tripoli causing Obama's "votes from the Jews drying up faster than a snowball in hell" we start to get an even more unpleasant picture of Obama. Especially after his stated reluctance to have Floridian voters count-Florida with it's huge Jewish voting block.

How is it that a political party that champions itself as an opponent of racism even runs such a guy on their platform? Unless of course democrats only oppose racism against blacks. This is the question it boils down to in many voters minds. Are Democrats only opposed to racism in whites and no one else?

Unless they get on the ball and make a shift toward Hillary, the Democrats may end up being the new "racism" party just because the message Democrats are sending to the American people with this candidate is so wrong.

And knowing this, you bet Clinton stays in the race. She just cannot lose while her party is falling on it's own sword.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 12:28 PM | Report abuse

I don't care about how FL and MI came to be left out of this.
Posted by: lil
-----------------------------------------

Yeah, why be bothered with the facts when you can just spout off in ignorance.

Posted by: ding-dong-the-witch-is-dead | May 22, 2008 12:11 PM | Report abuse

Face it Barack Hussein Obama is totally
Un-Electable in 2008 and 2012 and will never be elected President! And no one I
know wants his bitter hateful loser wife
Michelle Obama as First Lady! The Democrats
Once Again Stole Failure Out Of The Jaws
Of Success With This Loser Obama!

Posted by: Sherry Kay | May 22, 2008 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Obama chose to pull his name from the ballot in Michigan - rather than face defeat. If you stop running before the race is over, you do NOT get to split the prize money 50/50 with the winner. Clinton should get the delegates she won in MI - Obama gets none of them. (The other Democratic candidates remained on the ballot - only Obama chose to remove his name).
Posted by: GimmeAbreak | May 22, 2008 10:18 AM

You never know with these people whether they're lying or whether they're just witlessly parroting the lies of others. Edwards and Richardson also removed their names from the Michigan ballot. Hillary said that she couldn't be bothered because she knew Michigan wouldn't count anyway.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 11:43 AM | Report abuse

Dear Mr. Cillizza,
I did not have time to read more than a few commenters this morning, but I have wanted to comment on the unfounded assumptions being made on the Internet and in the media about Mrs. Clinton's intentions, motivations, interpretations, political decisions, etc. I think the Clinton campaign has actually been restrained in this nominating fight. She is a life-long Dem; the party matters to her. I see no evidence that she has conducted this campaign to blow up the party by chasing African American voters or any other constituency. The Obama campaign position on Michigan and Florida is just wrong, given the rare historical nature of this nomination. Leaving them out of the convention or not counting every one of those primary voters is much more threatening to the Dem party. Ask any life-long Dem, not the new voters.
I think Mrs. Clinton does feel (and rightly so) obligated to women and other voters for her to finish the nomination process. She is the first woman to go this far. It matters a great deal that she finish with every vote allotted to her counted and with all the dignity that she can gather for women candidates in the future. The mentality of much analysis seems to be ignorant of history and political knowledge. Thanks for the opportunity to write.

Posted by: Diane Nesin | May 22, 2008 11:39 AM | Report abuse

37th&OStreet wrote:

"In the interests of fairness, Obama has only himself to blame for actively attempting to PREVENT re-vote in Florida and Michigan. Obama has sought to take advantage of this issue, and has not lended any help in solving this issue."
----------------

Keep in mind the re-vote in FLA was quashed by a GOP-led state legislature.

Also, this issue was already "solved" last summer when the DNC punished the 2 states. It only became an issue that needed "solving" when Hillary Clinton needed the results of those contests as is to make a case for the nomination.

The plan all along probably was to seat them and count them as 50% sometime after the party had a nominee.

Posted by: John E. | May 22, 2008 11:36 AM | Report abuse

She's been VETTED, alright! That's why 60% of Americans DISTRUST her!

Wake up, Supers!

Posted by: sue | May 22, 2008 11:22 AM | Report abuse

let me get something straight to you "T".

even if Clinton dropped out now, at the convention, or five months ago I would still never vote for Obama. Clinton is not tearing the Democratic Party apart, OBAMA IS! Those who voted for Clinton WOULD NEVER VOTE FOR OBAMA because he scares us on may levels:

He is racist and we watched 90% of blacks vote racist.

Clinton has been bashed by the media and the DNC while Obama has been praised.

Obama stalled on Florida and Michigan, making it impossible for a revote.

His church hates America as does his wife.

We don't trust him.

His Muslim name. (sorry but that matters when Americans see radical Muslims want to annialate Israel.)

He has no experience.

His supporters have behaved in a disgusting manner to the Clintons.

Obama and the DNC have attempted to force Clinton out even BEFORE Florida and Michigan were included!

oh there's more and I'm just getting started.

Posted by: lil | May 22, 2008 11:22 AM | Report abuse

I love this notion put out there by Tucker Carlson and Pat Buchanan and some posters in the comments section that because Obama's goal is to unite the country if he doesn't win every state by a wide margin, then he is somehow underperforming against some arbitrary high bar. The question of the last 2 weeks should not have been "what is wrong with Obama that he can't win in Appalachia?" (forgetting to point out that the Dems have lost that area for the better part of 40 years now) but "what is up with at least 20% of the people in those areas who won't support a black candidate under any circumstances?" It's like do you want better healthcare or do you want to feel good for the 5 seconds that you vote for a white person? Do you want to end our referreeing of a civil war in Iraq or do you want to feel good for the 5 seconds you vote for a white person and then make sure we stay for another 5, 10, 15 years or until we have achieved victory (whatever "victory" means this week)?

Unfortunately for the Dems this campaign has highlighted some fissures in the Democratic party's major interest groups and constituents.

Posted by: John E. | May 22, 2008 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Hillary's comments on fighting till the convention are a bluff. Obama has ran a terrific campaign, one for the history books, plain and simple. Hillary ran a good campaign but it was short-sighted.

When all the analysts and historians go back and look at where Hillary started off when she first announced her candidacy in Feb 2007 to where she ended up in Jan 2008, they will see that Hillary had the "inevitability factor" as her campaign mantra. Hillary lead in all the polls nationally over Obama and the other candidates by 20 or more points. Hillary has access to the Bill Clinton Political and Fundraising machine that set records in 2007. Hillary had strong and relatively consistent debate performances throughout 2007. Hillary enjoyed the status of front-runner and as the inevitable Democratic nominee throughout most of 2007.

Posted by: AJ | May 22, 2008 11:11 AM | Report abuse

"Clinton has made clear she will remain in the race until the end of the balloting. She is likely to continue campaigning after that date until it is clear that superdelegates have no stomach for overturning the choice of the pledged delegates."

In other words she will stay in the race until she is forced out. How is that even remotely reasonable or good for the party?

Despite your confidence that she is unwilling to "blow up the party" and is no longer "attacking" Senator Obama, Clinton's campaign is using arguments that do exactly that. Her claims that she won the popular vote (based on electoral math that resembles Enron's accounting practices), coupled with her insistence that it is sexism which has defeated her, on top of the "disenfranchisement" meme her campaign is (hypocritically) pushing regarding the illegitimate and unrepresentative primaries in Florida and Michigan; all add up to an effort to de-legitimize Obama's nomination. These arguments are an attack on Obama and are threatening to tear the party apart.

In an echo of the sense of entitlement and inevitability with which she started this campaign; Clinton is trying to convince her supporters that they were cheated out of their rightful victory. If she succeeds this could split the party and depress the Democratic vote in November; costing us the election. And, in deed, that maybe the point, because it would position her to run in 2012 on the basis that if she had been the nominee in 2008 the Dems would have won.

Posted by: T | May 22, 2008 11:06 AM | Report abuse

I don't care about how FL and MI came to be left out of this. I am a FL voter who voted for Clinton and I will not stand for that fraud Obama getting HALF OF MY VOTE! They had better make my vote for Clinton count IN FULL just like everybody elses. If they do not then McCain will win FL and MI!!! In fact I will bet that many Clinton supporters nationwide will vote in protest against Obama. We have seen corruption and we will not forget!

FIGHT ON HILLARY!!!!

Posted by: lil | May 22, 2008 11:05 AM | Report abuse

heh, why do i have the feeling that at some point, at 3am, all of Clinton's staffers are going to sneak out and run away?

Posted by: run away | May 22, 2008 11:05 AM | Report abuse

Senator Clinton and many of her supporters are so busy wringing their hands about Michigan and Florida and talking about this being an insult to democracy that they seem to have forgotten that the junior Senator from New York agreed with the decision to strip Michigan and Florida of their delegates for violating party rules. The time for her to stand up and protest was when the sanction was being determined - instead she went right along with it. She herself referenced that the Michigan election was meaningless in a speech. She assumed she would clinch the nomination after Super Tuesday and Michgan and Florida would not matter. It was not until she needed the votes that she decided to decry the actions of the Party.

Senator Clinton and her supporters are quick to claim the popular vote by including Michigan and Florida and touting the need for everyone's voice to be heard but the creative math used to swing the popular vote her way fails to include all of the caucus states where voters came out in record numbers. Apparently heeding the voices of some voters is important to Ms. Clinton, and necssary to preserve the democracy, but not all.

As someone one participated in a caucus, I can say unequivocably that I did not see any evidence of fraud, coercion, and all of the other ills that Clinton supporters cling to to explain why their candidate did not do well. In fact, the person running the caucus was an enthusiastic Clinton supporter, and Obama still won. The only group distributing false information were Clinton supporters who were handing out blatantly misleading leaflets regarding Senator Obama's position on heating oil aid. Two minutes of Internet research revealed the pamphlets for the outright lies that they were. The Clinton campaign simply failed to put the time and effort in to establish community connections in the caucus states, and the Obama campaign did.

The bottom line is that a delegate is a delegate no matter which state he/she comes from and Senator Obama has more delegates. If Hillary were winning delegates we would all be hearing a different song.

Posted by: Time and a place for equality? | May 22, 2008 10:55 AM | Report abuse

Obama and his supporters are delusional. They need to wake up. You may as well be handing McCain the Presidency.

What we have seen is that Clinton Democrats are not Obama Democrats. Clinton Democrats are not convinced by a song and a dance. They distrust Obama, the media is throwing him at them. They ask why?

Hillary Clinton is the logical choice, the safe choice. Right now, your average American does not want anarchy or the revolution that Obama offers...they want to be safe in a failing economy where the US dollar gets weaker every day. This is not a time to take chances and gamble on a song and dance. The Clintons have proven what they can do for the economy. I predict Clinton Democrats would vote for McCain or not vote at all, or write in Clintons name if given the choice between Obama and McCain.

I also think that Clinton Democrats are concerned about Obama's unpatriotic America hating church as well as his wife's disdain for America. Obama's Muslim heritage and his devotion to black issues does not represent them. They are concerned about his naivety on foreign policy.

I think Clinton Democrats represent mainstream America and this is why Obama could never win in a national election.

As we have seen in the popular vote, Clinton Democrats are the majority of the party.

If Democrats are in this to win the Presidency, they will nominate Clinton at the convention.

Posted by: g | May 22, 2008 10:49 AM | Report abuse

This is what a mental sickness looks like: Hillary!
Before the primaries, she participated in and signed the DNC's decision to punish any state moving their primaries to earlier dates. Her signature back then says these states must be punished with no delegates counted. Until Super Tuesday in March, her signature was her position, believing the primaries are coronation for her. The next day she wakes up after losing in state counts (13-11) and again 11 in a row, she loses her mind and starts screaming that she was drugged when she signed those DNC rules to punish violators. She wants them reversed now. Her new slogan is: I am people; you disenfranchise me, you disenfranchise people of Florida and Michigan. She goes further insane when her desire for VP is rejected. Her hallucinations take twists and turn: Florida and Michigan start appearing to her Zimbabwe, Civil Rights Movement, Bush-Gore CHAD holes, and all other historical events like related to disenfranchisement. She has been seeing that movie Carrie, both 1976 and 2002 versions, and has started imagining herself to be Carrie pulling down everybody in the final act of the Convention. This is what mental sickness looks like: Hillary !

Posted by: S Green | May 22, 2008 10:42 AM | Report abuse

What a surprise for me to wake up this morning, read the blogs, and find out I don't exist! Evidently, I'm a figment of the imagination of some Obama campaign worker. While I am flattered that my message may have been perceived as being professionally and, presumably, strongly written, it continues to stun me how so many people use lies, personal attacks and the "I can yell louder and insult better than you" tactics in these blogs. I suppose it's better than kicking one's dog when frustrated. But not much.

Please don't lie. Don't act like you know something is true when you don't. And, just as my vote should count, so does my voice. Why can't we all stand up for what we believe in and respect others for doing the same?
Now I'm going back to work. Being home sick for the day and reading in the blogosphere was bad for my health.
Signed, a real live white middle-aged female primary care physician. (One who btw, is a member of Physicians for a National Health Program and supports Obama's approach to health care reform, as well as his foreign policy, and his wise use of expert advisors in shaping his policies.) He will be a great president.

Posted by: AFS | May 22, 2008 10:18 AM | Report abuse

Obama chose to pull his name from the ballot in Michigan - rather than face defeat. If you stop running before the race is over, you do NOT get to split the prize money 50/50 with the winner. Clinton should get the delegates she won in MI - Obama gets none of them. (The other Democratic candidates remained on the ballot - only Obama chose to remove his name). And they were both on the ticket in Florida. She should get the delegates she won there as well. We cannot nominate a DEMOcratic candidate if some of the DEMOS (the people) are not represented. The DNC botched this thing. They need to fix it. It's about time we held primaries on the two consecutimve days over a 48 hour period in all states at the same time. Then we wouldn't have any of this brouhaha.

Posted by: GimmeAbreak | May 22, 2008 10:18 AM | Report abuse

I am worried that Hillary isn't a mere sore loser. She is a violent loser. I suspect her psychology, and that of her mean-spirited campaign brass, is if she cannot win she'll take down the person who beat her.
To wit, she is laying track for 2012 over her own party's chance at the White House this Fall, believing her own rhetoric that Obama cannot beat McCain and that McCain will be a one-term president.
The Clintons indeed have made what might have be an inspirational, transforming period in American politics into a dismal political science of winning by the same old means to the same old ends.

Posted by: JMFulton, Jr | May 22, 2008 10:18 AM | Report abuse

He did nothing for Black people. Stope the BS. What he did was make it easier for Black men to be incarcerated. This is never talked about. With welfare reform, it was about getting the supposed lazy black women back to work. It has been a failed policy. Yes, people should work, but you should also give them the opportunity to go to school/college so that they can get a decent job paying a living wage. For most people, if you take away two to three paychecks they are behind the eightball. Stop saying what he did for Black people because my paycheck continued to rise under Rethuglicans, thank you. He did nothing. He gave a few people job here and there. If you are a president you are to work for ALL of the people. If the nation does good, then naturally all people should prosper! They are crooks and hateful people. They are an embarrassment to themselves and this nation. If she takes it to the convention she will LOSE! She will be embarrassed on the convention floor and so will her supporters. She better not even think of running in 2012 because AA's will not support her EVER AGAIN! We are fed up and we are not going to take it ANYMORE! They have outlived their usefulness and welcome! Go Away!

Posted by: demcor | May 22, 2008 9:52 AM | Report abuse

Thank you for cutting through the BS on both sides, and telling it like it most likely is. Clinton will accept 1/2 votes for all FL MI delegates, and they will be seated. Obama and the DNC will agree.

PR will vote.

Then on Monday, June 2nd, enough Supers will commit to Obama, so that Montana and SD put him over the top.

Everyone's happy.

Posted by: Alyosha | May 22, 2008 9:48 AM | Report abuse

Anytime the Clintons are involved, it is divisive and high drama....all about ME. They do NOT display true christian behavior and values.

The Clintons are NOT victims as many of you portray them. Politics is tough and they are the best at getting down and dirty. But when someone else challenges them, they complain and whine...always someone else's fault. Hillary Clinton is accountable for a poorly run campaign especially when she was the front runner with hundreds of millions of $$$$$.

Not one Hillary Clinton supporter has acknowledged the mistakes SHE and her campaign have made...just blame everyone else. Where is the accountability that a true leader must have?

Their primary goal now is to elect McCain and come back in 2012. But they will have lost many many many voters forever.

Posted by: Florida Resident | May 22, 2008 9:32 AM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton = spoiled rich girl who is delusional about her right to the throne. If she wants to fight we'll be there. News to Hillary: you have lost the election. It's over. News to supporters: she has lost the election. There is no way to fix the math. She ran a terrible campaign-- in fact she made the mistake of thinking she didn't really need to run a campaign. Well, she was wrong and she lost. She can't win, she can only wreck the party. She might as well switch the republican party, she is their hero now and they would probably elect her president.

Posted by: mo | May 22, 2008 9:24 AM | Report abuse

"Clinton or Mc Cain in '08, for the sake of our Country!"

Posted by: steve

You mean for the sake of YOUR country, which only imbeciles would want to live in. Clinton and McCain are so defective in so many ways that whoever votes for them is equivalent in mentality to those who put Bush the Nazi financier's grandson in power for eight years. Their supporters can't point to any real positive qualities--not even their ideas. Those two are hypocrites of the highest order. The times they are a-changing, and as a 60-year-old I say it's about time the U.S. pulled out of its death spiral.

Posted by: edwcorey | May 22, 2008 9:13 AM | Report abuse

Response to John in Tampa

Obama ran a racial campaign in South Carolina - pushing race the whole way through - (calling into question the wisdom of choosing South Carolina over Florida by the DNC - however that is another issue)

Obama basically destroyed his own campaign theme with his own actions.

So don't try to tell us what you are tired of - WE are going to tell you what we are tired of - then Obama pulled the same thing on Gerry Ferraro.


This is old politics.


Obama is a FRAUD - this is going to be THE issue this fall - Obama has defined HIMSELF.


The history Obama has made will be a Cast Study on how NOT to run a Presidential Campaign.


Give this nation a break.


Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 8:52 AM | Report abuse

Sadly, the HRC situation is beginning to look more and more like an "Old Yeller" scenario. To wit: what do you do with the old beloved family dog once it has become hopelessly and irretrievably rabid? The time has come for the so-called super delegates to exercise a modicum of moral authority and coax her from the stage with a sweeping endorsement of Obama. They may be the party's (and the nation's) last hope of a deus ex machina intervention in the third act of a Greek tragedy that looks and sounds more and more like Medea each minute.

Posted by: Kevin | May 22, 2008 8:47 AM | Report abuse

This is 2008, and I can see we have come a long way towards race relations in this country. NOT....I can't believe some of the MORONIC vile being spewed by some/a lot of Angry,Bible,Gun toting,poor, uneducated,simple minded, pinhead, toothless wonders.....fomenting lies and other drivel. (how do you like it).Ive heard everything from "Obama" being a racist, crack head, gay,women demeanor,anti american, etc. etc. Get over it, he is going to be our next president. If he some how gets CHEATED out of it, I hope you enjoy your new old geezer of a President. You know the "Manchurian" candidate one. The one who was brain washed in Hanoi.Lets all say it, "four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years""four more years"

Posted by: AntiClintoon | May 22, 2008 8:46 AM | Report abuse

I am so tired of this Obama was abusive to Hillary riff. If anybody was abusive to good 'ol Hillary, it was her adoring honest and caring spouse Bill Clinton. But no feminist dare say anything about THAT abuse! If it were me instead of obama, I would have treated her equally by countering her negative campaigning with my own. This is a woman who along with her disreuptable husband approved the pardons of members of the terrorist group the FALN. Why? To pander for the hispanic vote in New York in preparation for her run at the Senate. Yeah, she's been vetted. She's nothing more than a amoral whiner and opportunist. She would have the same amount of problems running for POTUS as Barack would but with a caveat: she is much more polarizing and amoral. The Republicans love her; she is a pinata to them. Hillary the whiner, bleating like a lamb. The Republic is saved, go Hillary. I know its hard for you to give up the spotlight, but its time. The curtain is coming down on this tragic farce. But don't worry, you still have Bill.

Posted by: john in tampa | May 22, 2008 8:29 AM | Report abuse

Wow, there are a lot of low IQ HillBillies on this blog. I'm leaving.

Posted by: maxwellinformed | May 22, 2008 8:23 AM | Report abuse

From the first weeks of the initial primaries
the Secret Service assigned agents to Obama
WHY?
Because they feared then, as they fear now
that he is a candidate for assassination
WHY?
Because he is the ANTI CHRIST!!

Posted by: Nostradamus | May 22, 2008 12:38 AM

Why did Obama get secret service so soon. Because anyone whose heartbeat is between a Clinton and what they want is a dead man (See Vincent Foster)

Posted by: Paui | May 22, 2008 8:12 AM | Report abuse

Obama stay out of FLA!

Obama is using his REVIVAL TENT approach to impress SUPERDELEGATES only! They give out "free", but nonetheless tickets to attend his rallies...big deal...so you get a souvenier to attend the side show at his circus! Swell the crowd!

Clinton, please stand firm that our votes, as cast, must be counted....NO "splitting", etc....we did NOT give such a permission to the DNC in our votes! Our rights as voters are NOT to be tampered with under any circumstance!

Is this a democracy or NOT?

The DNC is complicit in attempting to sway the Superdelegates to vote for Obama.

Obama is making 'promises' all over the place....that is why all the has beens in Congress and elsewhere are 'supporting' them.

Clinton will be her own person, accountable as she so often says, only to the voters. The Presidency under Clinton will not be for sale! And, that is what is ticking off Obama supporters.

Obama go back to the Senate...let us see you CAN:

1. show up to work

2. VOTE

3. Introduce and pass meaningful legislation for the benefit of ALL Americans!

OBAMA HAS UNDERPERFORMED EVERYWHERE HE HAS BEEN!

Clinton or Mc Cain in '08, for the sake of our Country!

Posted by: steve | May 22, 2008 8:09 AM | Report abuse

the clinton's supported the black cause all along and here comes an inexperienced, drug addict, black candidate and all the black turned their back and talk badly about him especially husein obama. so typical to this minority

Posted by: noobama08 | May 22, 2008 1:10 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 8:04 AM | Report abuse

Response to Honesty is best at 4:00


OK I will concede to you that perhaps the democratic party has taken the black community for granted over the years. They go into the black neighborhoods looking for votes every fall and forget about the black community once they are elected.

That is the charge about the democrats - and I agree -


I have seen that first hand and it makes me sick. As we are fond of saying "A little less talk the talk, and a little more walk the walk."

I find that to be an extremely serious charge against the democratic party make no mistake.

The democrats are essentially a fraud against their own core values.


well.

Having conceded to you that general state of affairs, there is absolutely no excuse for the campaign tactics employed by Obama this year.


First Obama has harmed race relations, we have gone backwards maybe 30 years as a result of Obama's racial baiting campaign.


Once Obama put out there his post-racial campaign theme, he had to match his actions with his words.


It is a question of trust.


For a minority to be elected, first he must show that he can represent ALL the people.


Obama's tactics in South Carolina and with Gerry Ferraro show that he can not represent ALL the people.


Second, Obama opened up a credibility gap which destroyed his own campaign theme.

THAT Obama will go down in history for.

If Obama's campaing theme is to challenge the political system to restrain themselves from racial campaigns, then Obama better be the first on line.

Obama was not - he did not do that. Obama talked the talk but he did not walk the walk.


Charge made.

Charge sticks.

.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 22, 2008 7:58 AM | Report abuse

sam

The only difference is that the blacks are being told by Obama to vote racist - and all the whites are being told to vote post-racial and not even mention the word "black."

It is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.


If you say "Black Liberation Theology" they go absolutely nuts, they can't handle it, they have to start making false charges and they have to start the name calling.


If you say "Black Liberation Theology" they lose their minds.

If you say "Black Liberation Theology" they refuse to have a discussion based on merits, they have to degenerate the conversation into a shouting match.

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 22, 2008 7:46 AM | Report abuse

The poster at 7:20 AM is 100% correct.

Do not be afraid to express your views.

They will attempt to shout you down and intimidate you.


Do not back down.

Posted by: America First | May 22, 2008 7:31 AM | Report abuse

Race, its a term used as I see it only about white voters. Look at all the papers, listen to all the radio talk shows, look at cnn, msnbc, fox..White this , white that. How many white woman , how many white men , how many white educated, how many white uneducated...how many percents of each voted for Obama, for Hillary....how many whites voted against Obama because of his skin color..its all there on all medias...you cant deny or excuse the 92 to 97% black vote for Obama, like all the medias do..its racist to the core..at least Obama is getting many white votes...but you cant deny the black vote for a black man in this race..its disqusting that with the numbers as staggering as they are , it is ignored...but just let the race card fall on the whites ...im sick of the double standard and you will see the backlash in the final election...Mcain will win by a landslide..you have woken the sleeping giant and that giant is whites are sick and tired of being called racist,and they will show this in the end...its not racistseeing that Obama gets 97% black votes...were all equal REMEMBER

Posted by: tino | May 22, 2008 7:20 AM | Report abuse

A BRIEF HISTORY OF FACSISM!

First they came for the eggheads, and I wasn't one so I kept my mouth shut. Then they came for the Blacks, and I wasn't one so I kept my mouth shut. Then they came for "San Francisco", and I didn't live there, so I kept my mouth shut. Then they came for the elite, and I, certainly not being one of those, I kept my mouth shut. Then they came for all the men(who didn't vote for HRC), but I lied about that one(Hillary said lying is OK--"whatever it takes") and then kept my mouth shut.

Then they came for the DNC--Oy vay! Now its Howard Dean as the Robert Mugabe of Fla. and Mich. Very bizarre!

Hillary loves to play the victim, but even more, she likes to blame and demonize. Making the DNC--"Vote Stealers", "Oppressors"--into her newest model SCAPEGOAT! Does she really think this helps her with superdelegates? Even more bizarre. (Not to mention: selfish and self-serving.)

Very sad and very ugly that these two good people, Hillary and Bill Clinton, are so driven by themselves winning that there is nothing that they will not do. The severity of their moral disability has rendered them politically bankrupt! American's estimation of both has substantially declined. Why can't she get out of the blame game and out of the gutter?

Posted by: sabatia | May 22, 2008 6:12 AM | Report abuse

The decision to vote for Barack instead of Hillary was both a difficult and easy one. Difficult because I loved and unreservedly supported the Clintons up until North Carolina as did most Blacks. Look at the exit polls from before the primaries up until North Carolina and you will see the evidence. Hillary didn't have to earn the Black vote, she had it locked up going into the primaries although there was a Black candidate running. Barack must have started the primary season knowing that he would have to work for the White vote and that most Black people didn't know him and were therefore not inclined to vote for him either, a point made almost daily in the media by prominent and influential Blacks such as Cornel West and borne out clearly in the polls at the time. They (we) just didn't see him as 'one of them/us'.

From North Carolina onwards the decision to vote for Barack was easy because although I was for Hillary before, I was interested in this newby and what he stood for and I found myself 'grudgingly' recognising that he was also an excellent candidate even as I continued to support Hillary. Then the race-baiting, and I decided that I was going to vote Democrat no matter what but since Hillary and Bill's almost daily insulting and belittling people who had been their most loyal supporters, I decided to try my luck with the other candidate who seemed not to take my vote for granted and whose coalition looked more and more like a rainbow every day, meaning that he would welcome my White husband's vote as well.

Make no mistake, although I am bitterly disppointed with the Clintons I would vote for Hillary before any Republican any day of the week! She is still Hillary Clinton and therefore still a qualfied and formidable Democratic candidate for the Presidency. As a woman I am immensely proud of her achievements and I just wish she hadn't gone down the road she has with her campaign.

I was rewarded for my decision to support Barack almost immediately. Just walk into any of his campaign offices and you will see people of all ages, races and persuasions and they will greet you with the warmest of welcomes. I want that to be the America my children and grandchildren inherit. I know that he is not a perfect candidate (it doesn't exist) but I believe that he loves this country and is the right person to lead us into the future. He could have been green and it wouldn't have mattered to me. The way I see it, you are still taking a gamble even on the 'safest' of bets. Peace to you all.

Posted by: Honesty is best | May 22, 2008 4:52 AM | Report abuse

Phuque Hillary Clinton and her entire family of lying dirtbag white trash.

Posted by: jeffp | May 22, 2008 4:41 AM | Report abuse

wow, all you people are making stupid, ignorant comments.

If you look at their policies, its pretty much the same. The ONLY difference is their personality.

So cry and whine how you will write in Hillary Clinton on the ballot, the truth is you wont. And not 44% of the Hillary Clinton supporters aren't going to vote for obama... and definitely if you have a semi-half brain you won't vote for mr mccain whose policies are a reverse of the ones you support.

So hypocritical.

Posted by: sam | May 22, 2008 4:34 AM | Report abuse

The wonder years -

If you had made that post without that Jeremiah Wright stuff and the middle finger stuff, it would have been a pretty good post. Don't dilute strong points with nonsense.

And yeah, the reverse discrimination stuff is just crap. He doesn't do it and everyone knows it.

Posted by: DDAWD | May 22, 2008 4:02 AM | Report abuse

You people calling the Black community racist for 'voting for Obama because he is Black' are total hypocrites. Blacks have been the most loyal Democratic constituency. Democrats White and Black have always known that they could depend on the Black vote but have always had to woo White voters who were just as likely to go for a Republican. Tell me, after all the years of voting Democrat religiously regardless of skin colour, and after all the hard work that Bill and Hillary Clinton have done on behalf of civil rights, why should I vote for a candidate who implies that I am fickle enough to vote based on race when there has been no evidence to support this, who implies every day that I am not her 'core' constituency of 'hard-working, white' Americans? I was all for Hillary until North Carolina, as were most Blacks. We could see right from the beginning that Obama was Black but we voted overwhelmingly for Hillary until the race-baiting started. If she doesn't want or need my vote and Obama says he'll gladly take it, why shouldn't I vote for him? I suspect there are many White people who feel this way as well. For those on both sides (Black and White) who voted based on race alone, shame on you!

Posted by: Honesty is best | May 22, 2008 4:00 AM | Report abuse

If Barack supporters don't want to see the Democratic party split then they should seek to change the law. However, they should not be allowed to harass Sen. Clinton to quit. America like all civilized nations is a land of law.

Posted by: Joy Connor | May 22, 2008 3:35 AM | Report abuse

STOP drinking the kool-aid!
here in Fl. the Republican administration decided that the money for public electios would be used to hold public elections earlier than the DNC allowed. the "democratic voters" in Fl. had no say in the matter.
after the 2000 election many republicans moved to fl. giving us one of the fastest growth rates in the nation and a lot of electoral votes and a very big inflationary housing bubble. these same newcomers gave us a republican governor (JEB!) and legislature. these are the people that are laughing at the democrats.
now please put down the kool-aid, there's something missing from your cup.

Posted by: a BLACK man | May 22, 2008 3:30 AM | Report abuse

Not the Harvard man, as always, nothing but a suit.

Posted by: paukune | May 21, 2008 11:38 PM
_____________________________________________

John Kennedy was hardly a suit. neither was FDR. Both were Harvard men.

Posted by: gbooksdc | May 22, 2008 3:27 AM | Report abuse

Thank you brother Obama for destroying Hope!

Thank you brother Obama for destroying the democratic Party!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 3:23 AM | Report abuse

Thank you brother Obama for destroying Hope

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 3:21 AM | Report abuse

Thank you brother Obama for destroying Hope

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 3:21 AM | Report abuse

The assumption that "whites" will not vote for Obama owing to his "race" is itself a not-so-subtle form of racism, as is the tendency to lump all whites (or Latinos, or African-Americans, or Asians) together -- a form of analysis usually known as stereotyping.
.
Obama could easily have distanced himself from Wright by specifically rejecting Wright's claim that Obama was a "poor black boy" and Hillary one of the "rich white" people who rule the country (they are both in the very top income category, based on their earnings, and Obama had as elite an education as Clinton), and he could have rejected Wright's call to his congregation to vote for Obama because he was a poor black boy (a form of racial politic). Obama could also have distanced himself from Wright's theology, which holds that Jesus was a poor black man (like Obama?) crucified by rich white people (like Clinton?). But he did not. Instead, he seeks to present himself as the son of a single mother, barely mentioning his grandparents or his stepfather, who actually raised him, and in considerable comfort on the island of Hawaii, not the mean streets of continental America. When he did mention his grandmother (former VP of the Bank of Hawaii), he implied she was a racist and used her to take the heat off Wright. Evidently surprised that anyone would find such a comparison problematic, he explained that he meant to say she was a typical 'white person,' all of whom have an inbred fear of others. His later remarks about bitter, unemployed white folk clinging to their guns and religion and nervously eyeing strangers and free trade deals simply exacerbated his earlier remarks.
So it is not just what Wright has said, it is also what Obama has said and not said. To be "Catholic," Obama's own sins of commission and omission explain why many do not trust him.
You do not have to be older or white or less educated or less affluent to find such remarks disturbing -- unless you also believe that "down-scale" white folk are even more of a problem in this country than "rich white" folk.
In reality, the history of racism and discrimination in this country is much more complex than Obama's self-serving speech suggests; not only have Asians and Latinos experienced it, so have many whites - unless, of course, you believe that the social and economic segmentation of this country occurred "naturally."
What the media needs to do is to stop pretending there is little difference between the platforms of Clinton and Obama and begin to discuss them seriously. If they did, they would find that there is little in Obama's platform that appeals to those who are not members of officially designated minorities and the more affluent groups in this country, a more rational explanation of the demographics than race. There is no iron-clad protection of Social Security (which is why Obama stumbled in Philly on this question and Clinton did not); there is no universal health care, something those at the lower end of the salary scale desperately need (which is why Obama prefers to launch disingenuous attacks on Clinton's health plan rather than discuss his own); and there is no viable plan to help poorer kids afford college (tax credits are of little use if you don't have the money up front, and loans leave the less advantaged even more disadvantaged after they get their degrees because they are saddled with debt and cannot use their parents' networks and elite degrees to coast into comfortable careers). He appears to have no identifiable foreign policy proposals, other than to end the war in Iraq eventually and talk with people Bush thinks are evil.
Rather than race, look to Obama's platform and his manner and style, all of which reflect his background, which is both elite and black, the first a gift from his white grandparents, the second his own choice. During speeches and debates, he appears to be supercilious - "brushing off" his failure, surreptitiously making a gesture usually associate with college sophomores and high school kids at football games, and continually taking oh-so-clever little digs at his opponent while pretending to disdain such tactics. He also appears to believe that the only reason anyone will not vote for him is because he is black and they refuse to embrace his wondrous message of hope. But that is nonsense -- so much empty rhetoric and meaningless oratory based on flawed assumptions and Obama's peculiar view of the world, which is increasingly clear and increasingly problematic.

Posted by: The wonder years | May 22, 2008 3:05 AM | Report abuse

The assumption that "whites" will not vote for Obama owing to his "race" is itself a not-so-subtle form of racism, as is the tendency to lump all whites (or Latinos, or African-Americans, or Asians) together -- a form of analysis usually known as stereotyping.
.
Obama could easily have distanced himself from Wright by specifically rejecting Wright's claim that Obama was a "poor black boy" and Hillary one of the "rich white" people who rule the country (they are both in the very top income category, based on their earnings, and Obama had as elite an education as Clinton), and he could have rejected Wright's call to his congregation to vote for Obama because he was a poor black boy (a form of racial politic). Obama could also have distanced himself from Wright's theology, which holds that Jesus was a poor black man (like Obama?) crucified by rich white people (like Clinton?). But he did not. Instead, he seeks to present himself as the son of a single mother, barely mentioning his grandparents or his stepfather, who actually raised him, and in considerable comfort on the island of Hawaii, not the mean streets of continental America. When he did mention his grandmother (former VP of the Bank of Hawaii), he implied she was a racist and used her to take the heat off Wright. Evidently surprised that anyone would find such a comparison problematic, he explained that he meant to say she was a typical 'white person,' all of whom have an inbred fear of others. His later remarks about bitter, unemployed white folk clinging to their guns and religion and nervously eyeing strangers and free trade deals simply exacerbated his earlier remarks.
So it is not just what Wright has said, it is also what Obama has said and not said. To be "Catholic," Obama's own sins of commission and omission explain why many do not trust him.
You do not have to be older or white or less educated or less affluent to find such remarks disturbing -- unless you also believe that "down-scale" white folk are even more of a problem in this country than "rich white" folk.
In reality, the history of racism and discrimination in this country is much more complex than Obama's self-serving speech suggests; not only have Asians and Latinos experienced it, so have many whites - unless, of course, you believe that the social and economic segmentation of this country occurred "naturally."
What the media needs to do is to stop pretending there is little difference between the platforms of Clinton and Obama and begin to discuss them seriously. If they did, they would find that there is little in Obama's platform that appeals to those who are not members of officially designated minorities and the more affluent groups in this country, a more rational explanation of the demographics than race. There is no iron-clad protection of Social Security (which is why Obama stumbled in Philly on this question and Clinton did not); there is no universal health care, something those at the lower end of the salary scale desperately need (which is why Obama prefers to launch disingenuous attacks on Clinton's health plan rather than discuss his own); and there is no viable plan to help poorer kids afford college (tax credits are of little use if you don't have the money up front, and loans leave the less advantaged even more disadvantaged after they get their degrees because they are saddled with debt and cannot use their parents' networks and elite degrees to coast into comfortable careers). He appears to have no identifiable foreign policy proposals, other than to end the war in Iraq eventually and talk with people Bush thinks are evil.
Rather than race, look to Obama's platform and his manner and style, all of which reflect his background, which is both elite and black, the first a gift from his white grandparents, the second his own choice. During speeches and debates, he appears to be supercilious - "brushing off" his failure, surreptitiously making a gesture usually associate with college sophomores and high school kids at football games, and continually taking oh-so-clever little digs at his opponent while pretending to disdain such tactics. He also appears to believe that the only reason anyone will not vote for him is because he is black and they refuse to embrace his wondrous message of hope. But that is nonsense -- so much empty rhetoric and meaningless oratory based on flawed assumptions and Obama's peculiar view of the world, which is increasingly clear and increasingly problematic.

Posted by: The wonder years | May 22, 2008 3:05 AM | Report abuse

The assumption that "whites" will not vote for Obama owing to his "race" is itself a not-so-subtle form of racism, as is the tendency to lump all whites (or Latinos, or African-Americans, or Asians) together -- a form of analysis usually known as stereotyping.
.
Obama could easily have distanced himself from Wright by specifically rejecting Wright's claim that Obama was a "poor black boy" and Hillary one of the "rich white" people who rule the country (they are both in the very top income category, based on their earnings, and Obama had as elite an education as Clinton), and he could have rejected Wright's call to his congregation to vote for Obama because he was a poor black boy (a form of racial politic). Obama could also have distanced himself from Wright's theology, which holds that Jesus was a poor black man (like Obama?) crucified by rich white people (like Clinton?). But he did not. Instead, he seeks to present himself as the son of a single mother, barely mentioning his grandparents or his stepfather, who actually raised him, and in considerable comfort on the island of Hawaii, not the mean streets of continental America. When he did mention his grandmother (former VP of the Bank of Hawaii), he implied she was a racist and used her to take the heat off Wright. Evidently surprised that anyone would find such a comparison problematic, he explained that he meant to say she was a typical 'white person,' all of whom have an inbred fear of others. His later remarks about bitter, unemployed white folk clinging to their guns and religion and nervously eyeing strangers and free trade deals simply exacerbated his earlier remarks.
So it is not just what Wright has said, it is also what Obama has said and not said. To be "Catholic," Obama's own sins of commission and omission explain why many do not trust him.
You do not have to be older or white or less educated or less affluent to find such remarks disturbing -- unless you also believe that "down-scale" white folk are even more of a problem in this country than "rich white" folk.
In reality, the history of racism and discrimination in this country is much more complex than Obama's self-serving speech suggests; not only have Asians and Latinos experienced it, so have many whites - unless, of course, you believe that the social and economic segmentation of this country occurred "naturally."
What the media needs to do is to stop pretending there is little difference between the platforms of Clinton and Obama and begin to discuss them seriously. If they did, they would find that there is little in Obama's platform that appeals to those who are not members of officially designated minorities and the more affluent groups in this country, a more rational explanation of the demographics than race. There is no iron-clad protection of Social Security (which is why Obama stumbled in Philly on this question and Clinton did not); there is no universal health care, something those at the lower end of the salary scale desperately need (which is why Obama prefers to launch disingenuous attacks on Clinton's health plan rather than discuss his own); and there is no viable plan to help poorer kids afford college (tax credits are of little use if you don't have the money up front, and loans leave the less advantaged even more disadvantaged after they get their degrees because they are saddled with debt and cannot use their parents' networks and elite degrees to coast into comfortable careers). He appears to have no identifiable foreign policy proposals, other than to end the war in Iraq eventually and talk with people Bush thinks are evil.
Rather than race, look to Obama's platform and his manner and style, all of which reflect his background, which is both elite and black, the first a gift from his white grandparents, the second his own choice. During speeches and debates, he appears to be supercilious - "brushing off" his failure, surreptitiously making a gesture usually associate with college sophomores and high school kids at football games, and continually taking oh-so-clever little digs at his opponent while pretending to disdain such tactics. He also appears to believe that the only reason anyone will not vote for him is because he is black and they refuse to embrace his wondrous message of hope. But that is nonsense -- so much empty rhetoric and meaningless oratory based on flawed assumptions and Obama's peculiar view of the world, which is increasingly clear and increasingly problematic.

Posted by: The wonder years | May 22, 2008 3:05 AM | Report abuse

wow, all of this venom over the color of a person's skin. the strangest thisg is that we have voted democrat for as long as we have without publicly discussing certain facts. during the years of jim crow (which is in my lifetime), as i came of age in rural south ga. i learned about te legacy of the solid south, always voting democrat, whites and blacks. it is now a mystery to me why this was so. voting republican was always a no way in h*ll proposition, as was not voting (police dogs, firehoses, lynching and nightsticks can galvanize our feelings about the electoral process). most of the elected officials in the south were democrats, which meant that most of the voters were also democrats (you've read this far, try to keep up please). by extending this to one of its logical conclusions then, the people in the sheets were also democrats. reading these blogs has shown me that things have not changed, to be black in america is still a second class citizenship. we are still being bitten by the very hand we are feeding. I know michelle obama has read a few comments this political season, so i salute her courage in gutting out the words that she is proud of her country. i do wonder what this country is doing that makes her proud however. the "i will never help elect a n!!!!!!" rethoric is not that well hidden, and to all of you that make me feel that way you make me ashamed that I wore the uniform for so long. you shi* in the face of the sacrifice of every veteran, and are so proud of yourselves in your ignorance and bigotry. yet even with the white sheet of the internet to hide behind you still couch your words in catchphrases for fear that someone will know you. well i know you, you are the stuff on my shoe that i stepped in, it's past time to scrape you off the political landscape and go forward. fortunately you are dying out, old, afraid and embittered by change tat you cannot change. i do wonder what you see that scares you so much, is it a mirror of your own insecurities?
to the point however is that it does not matter who is the democratic nominee, do you really want to vote to cut your own throat that badly?look at where the republican policies have brought us to. you would make your children suffer for your ignorance! vote mccain or don't vote and that is exactly what you do!

Posted by: a BLACK man | May 22, 2008 2:48 AM | Report abuse

Pelosi just came out and said that sexism is not an issue for Hillary Clinton in this presidential nomination process:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbzT2YqhGT4

Posted by: Pelosi's Proof | May 22, 2008 2:45 AM | Report abuse

Obama needs to do the right thing and become Hillarys VP.

HILLARY CLINTON IS ALREADY THE TRUE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE!

That will unit the party. why this will work.

Everyone knows Obama cheated in the caucuses. So his tie lead is incorrect.

What happened in the caucuses needs to be investigated and the truth must be told.

If no then we do this all the way to nov. and beyond

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 2:41 AM | Report abuse

Not only is Obama half black, he is also half American. His father was a Kenyan. Does that not also make him Kenyan? O sorry, he was born in Hawaii. But are we now not attempting to take citizen ship away from children born here to illegal immigrants? Should that not also apply to Obama?

Posted by: Opa2 | May 22, 2008 2:10 AM | Report abuse

Words of Wisdom, not so wise. Reminds me of W. or a blogger for Mccain.

Posted by: Joseph | May 22, 2008 2:08 AM | Report abuse

Clinton supporters, she's completely lost her mind. Over the top, crazy as a loon. If any of you still think that the superdelegates are going to back her, then you're as delusional as she is.

I love your delusional posts -- "Obama ran a dirty campaign." Are you nuts? He ran about the cleanest campaign out there. Your nutjob was as filty as they come.

Fraud=Hillary Clinton. It's over. Get over it.

Posted by: Get Over It | May 22, 2008 2:06 AM | Report abuse

Peoples. Get a clue. Mad that Hillary isn't winning. Obama this, Obama the liar, Obama that..forget all of this.
I'm sorry to say, but the Democrats didn't fix the voting machines (again), and the funny business will continue. Mark my words. The Republicans stole the election twice. What makes you think they won't again? Open your eyes. Remember this post.

Posted by: Joseph | May 22, 2008 2:04 AM | Report abuse

"The will of the people."

What does that mean? does it mean overriding the popular vote? Does it mean that delegates count more than the "people's vote"?

"Play by the rules."

What does that mean? The rules say that Super Ds can change their mind up until the convention. Obama supporters cheer when a Super D from Clinton changes to Obama, but I'm sure it's "stealing the election" if an Obama supporter changes for Clinton. NO One will win the nomination after the primaries according to the rules...NO ONE (not Clinton nor Obama) because they both will need super Ds. The Super Ds and others who will determine the fate of the Florida and Michigan votes will surely over turn the "will of the people" who voted in huge numbers ... but you see that's ok because in Obama land that is "playing by the rules"; however, if the super Ds vote for Clinton, well that's going against the "will of the people".

Obama supporters keep disrespecting Clinton, vilifying her, calling her supporters ignorant and her working class voters worse. However, Obama supporters say that if Hillary's supporters don't vote for Obama it's Hillary's fault? That if Obama does not win the general election is her fault and that she is destroying the party? I guess because your candidate is the perfect candidate, if he loses the election the fault must be someone else's.

Take a look in the mirror.

Just because your candidate claims to take the high road in politics apparently does not mean that most of his supporters do.

Posted by: David M | May 22, 2008 2:00 AM | Report abuse

It is very unlikely that Clinton can still win the nomination. If Obama can not lock it up before the convention, you could have a deadlocked convention and, in that case, the nomination could still go to a third party. But only after several ballots in which neither gets a majority. Since I am not enamored with either of those two, because I think both of them will lose to McCain,that is my pipe dream!

Posted by: Opa2 | May 22, 2008 2:00 AM | Report abuse

I want all you ignorant bigots who failed math ...who call yourself Hillary Democrats who say they're going to vote McCain to come back in January 09 and take it right in the face. Maybe by then you will have come to understand the concept of the "Winner" actually being the winner. You have to be the sorest losers ever to grace this planet.

One other thing...Bill Clinton sunk his own ship. For all those Bill Clinton apologists who can't explain why the hell he can't shut up... you deserve what you get.

The entire HRC campaign has only ever been about trying to make her opponent appear unelectable to that ignorant segment of her "base" (consisting of all those who who think the Gas Tax Holiday is the solution to all our problems) and then to try to use that group in formulating a rationale that explains why Obama can't win in November...
These are the same people who needed two terms of George Bush to realize maybe they should consider the alternative. Just laughable.

Posted by: Coltrane | May 22, 2008 1:56 AM | Report abuse

well if hillary signing an agreement that mi and fl would not be counted and now they should you might as well throw that paper that are founder s signed listing our right s because it wont mean anything

Posted by: show me | May 22, 2008 1:56 AM | Report abuse

Jumping ship as of tonight.
She has set women back 25 years and is now an embarrassment to our democratic party.

I have lost undue respect for this woman. I've hung on and hung on - today? She did herself in! Doubtful that she'll have a political career after today. Nor does she deserve one. Bill somehow bounced back - Hillary pushed us all too far by taking us on her roller coaster.

Sadly, I bid her goodbye and goodluck.

Posted by: barbara miller | May 22, 2008 1:53 AM | Report abuse

just written:

May 22 (Bloomberg) -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said women won't suffer a ``step back'' if Democrat Hillary Clinton loses her presidential bid, and rejected the idea of sexism in the presidential campaign.

HERE YOU GO, glad it doesn't exist:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ulw4dBr7e4


pelosi, brazille, boxer - all dems who support obama - these are they type of "sweetie"'s that would sell their own daughters to get ahead but could never support another woman to get ahead.

obama does not have the experience yet these women support him. why?

Hillary will become our nominee DESPITE these type of women!

Posted by: pelosi is a judas traitor | May 22, 2008 1:53 AM | Report abuse

Obama Pusher sould know
"Sticks and stones will break my bones, but names will never hurt me"

Posted by: We want Hillary as are President 08 | May 22, 2008 1:43 AM | Report abuse

Get ready for a stolen Democratic Nomination. Why else would Mrs. Clinton talk about Bush-Gore? Who is she in that dynamic? Gore? Is she claiming Obama is Bush? Jeez Lu-eez. I think she is saying she's Bush. Bush is her model for winning. Not surprising since she and Bill kiss Bush's ego every chance they get. The Party is dead because of her selfishness.
Stay away from Broadcast News folks. They are all chums with the dark side.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 1:41 AM | Report abuse

Obama Pusher sould know
"Sticks and stones will break my bones, but names will never hurt me"

Posted by: We want Hillary as are President 08 | May 22, 2008 1:37 AM | Report abuse

Look at all of the trolls in here tonight!!

Hey guys.

I just have one question for you.

Do you really believe that you are ever going to actually use your new Wii Fit?

Come on, tell the truth.

You know your fat asses are staying glued to your lazy boy chair.

Posted by: Anton Bursch | May 22, 2008 1:37 AM | Report abuse

just written:

May 22 (Bloomberg) -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said women won't suffer a ``step back'' if Democrat Hillary Clinton loses her presidential bid, and rejected the idea of sexism in the presidential campaign.

HERE YOU GO, glad it doesn't exist:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ulw4dBr7e4


pelosi, brazille, boxer - all dems who support obama - these are they type of "sweetie"'s that would sell their own daughters to get ahead but could never support another woman to get ahead.

obama does not have the experience yet these women support him. why?

Hillary will become our nominee DESPITE these type of women!

Posted by: pelosi is a judas traitor | May 22, 2008 1:35 AM | Report abuse

it has nothing to do with RACE but a MUSLIM should not be allowed in the white house.

Posted by: notamuslimpresident | May 22, 2008 1:28 AM | Report abuse

Chris...you make an excellent point. When Obama took that cheap shot at President Bill Clinton at the South Carolina primary branding him a racist, I said right away this Obama guy is nothing but a snake.

President Bill Clinton did more for the African American cause than any other politician before him.

He deserves the respect and credit for that and not be smeared by a nobody desperate inexperienced politician in Obama who hasn't earned his place in politics.

Posted by: Gus C | May 22, 2008 1:25 AM | Report abuse

This primary gets more absurd everyday.

With all of Senator Clinton's talk about rigged elections and disenfranchisement, Clinton's top surrogates voted to strip FL and MI of delegates, and Clinton signed the agreement not to contest those states. The DNC asked candidates to remove their names from the ballot, so Obama and others were adhering to the rules. Florida doesn't allow candidates to remove names, but the outcome was always understood to be moot.

If Clinton was so worried about counting every vote, why didn't she speak up for FL and MI when the rules committee voted - a committee that includes her top surrogates - to have those delegates striped. What Clinton wants now actually reeks of rigged elections, not anything Obama did. He followed the rules that don't seem to apply to the Clintons when it's not to their benefit.

Frankly, this entire fiasco that Senator Clinton has decided to create is a disservice to the American people. She is exploiting fear and fanning flames that she created. It is a masterful PR spin probably orchestrated by Mark Penn. It is theater to advance her own self interests.

She could have taken the high road and actually worked as a unifier but, instead, chose to be a divider. I don't believe the Clintons have much credibility left with most voters. I bet McCain is happy.

I am deeply disappointed with the Democratic leadership. They have allowed Senator Clinton to perpetuate false arguments and invented math. This destructive primary should have ended weeks ago. I will make sure I vote for new leadership and hope others do the same.
New York voters need to reconsider Senator Clinton's representation. Do they want a representative who mismanages a campaign, is disingenuous in her appeal to working class white voters, manufactures perception for self gain, and is willing to walk on everyone including the voters to win.

Our electoral process is set up to be stable. It was never intended to be an ideologically pure democracy. It is intended to be a representative government. But, I am a firm believer in federalism. It wasn't until the turn of the century that voters actually participated in primary selection.

Well, I can't take much more of this primary. It is hard to watch the destruction of the most gifted and inspirational politician this nation has seen in fifty years. The destructive media and propaganda coined as news seriously undermines democracy. We have finally reached a tipping point and may be too late to salvage what once made this country great.

Thank you senator Clinton for destroy hope.


Posted by: Deborah in VA | May 22, 2008 1:21 AM | Report abuse

Hillary HAS to take the fight to the Convention, if only because the election laws prohibit her from repaying to herself the millions she loaned to her campaign [last figure I heard was $11.4 million] if she drops out before the nomination is complete.

Posted by: tom | May 22, 2008 1:20 AM | Report abuse

Ok, how hard would it be to seat Clintons delegates from Florida along with Obamas and the others. Then in Michigan give Clinton the delegates she won and all the undeclaired delegates go to Obama. Might not be totally fair to Barak but Hillary's voters can't say their vote didn't count.

Posted by: Bob in Iowa | May 22, 2008 1:20 AM | Report abuse

springchickennot ARE YOU OBAMA'S GRANDMOTHER??? I SAW HER SEVERAL TIMES ON tv WITH ALL THE CHICKEN AROUD HER

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 1:19 AM | Report abuse

""...You may find out that he is not a Muslim. (Not all Arabic names mean that someone is muslim) ""
Posted by: Woe | May 22, 2008 1:07 AM

now you try to tell me HUSEIN OB(S)AMA is not a muslim???? his father was muslim and his mother married a second husband who was muslim as well. he studied in the madarsa and only 20 years ago he converted to christianity by the biggeSt BIGOT rev wright.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 1:17 AM | Report abuse

NOT WORTH DISCUSSION!

Posted by: Disabled Veteran | May 22, 2008 1:16 AM | Report abuse

If Hillary has so much support, why aren't her supporters sending her contributions? Maybe they should put their money where their mouths are so she can re-coup her own donations so she can withdraw. She can only get her money back by keeping in the race.
s it because Hillary's supporters doh't want to send their hard-earned money to an already rich person who is not good at handling money?

Posted by: springchickennot | May 22, 2008 1:14 AM | Report abuse

OPERATION CHAOS!!!!!!!!!!!

GO HILLARY!!!!

Posted by: Rush | May 22, 2008 1:13 AM | Report abuse

the clinton's supported the black cause all along and here comes an inexperienced, drug addict, black candidate and all the black turned their back and talk badly about him especially husein obama. so typical to this minority

Posted by: noobama08 | May 22, 2008 1:10 AM | Report abuse

Ok, how hard would be to seat Clintons delegates in Florida along with Obamas and the others. Then in Michigan seat Clintons delegates that she won and all of the uncommitted to Obama.

Tain't rocket science folks. Might be totally fair to Barak but he still wins and Clinton supporters can't say that their vote didn't count

Posted by: Bob in Iowa | May 22, 2008 1:09 AM | Report abuse

Its a shame that there is so many ignorant hypocrites posting on these blogs. Its a shame that so many of my fellow Americans are blind sheep being lead astray. The same people who let George Bush use a climate of fear to intimidate them into going into a total lie of a war with Iraq for so called weapons of mass destruction. Wake up and see the truth. Why do you think that Hillary is so vigilant to get the caucuses of Michigan and Florida counted. Its not truly for the voters of those two states, but its for her own reaching for straws desperation for her failed bid for the democratic nomination. Do you honestly think that if roles were reversed and she was in the lead for the nomination would she be campaigning so hard to have these votes counted. No I seriously doubt it. This democratic race is also bringing out a lot of people being hypocrites in America. Maybe we haven't changed as a country in the past 40 years. Maybe we still do need affirmative action for women and minorities (all minorities). After reading through a lot of these blogs I still hear and read and unfortunate amount of people not wanting to vote for Obama because he is black. Hasn't America gotten past that, obviously not because a lot of Americans are cowards here who hide behind computer screens and post their racist and sexists sentiments. Were did it say in the the US constitution that only a white Protestant male could run for president. Yet a shocking amount of Americans are acting like this is so. Why don't some of you ignorant people stop being so lazy and do a little research. Maybe if you read a little bit instead of listening to 30 sec clips and being brainwashed by radio hosts my might learn what the future democratic nominee Barack Obama is about. You may find out that he is not a Muslim. (Not all Arabic names mean that someone is muslim) That he is not an elitist, he grew up from an humble background actually being raised partly by his Caucasian grandparents. I hope people wake up and see that times are changing and its time to get out of our past faulty ways of thinking.

Posted by: Woe | May 22, 2008 1:07 AM | Report abuse


i block all emails from the DNC asking for another contribution. NO MORE!!! you don't listen to me i will not give my money to you
at the end of the day i will vote for mccain

Posted by: Democrat for McCain | May 22, 2008 1:01 AM | Report abuse

Clinton supporters, go for it. Just go ahead and join the Republicans now and have a big happy family affair with McCain, Bush, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Karl Rove, Cheney, etc. You will be delighted to continue Wars, Economic ruin, fear tactics, no universal health care, supreme court judges that will overturn women's rights, etc.

You don't get to choose your relatives...You get ALL of the above plus so much more. Be excited. Your children will thank you for such wise choices that will impact their lives adversely for generations to come.

Clinton supporters are so reasonable, thoughtful, intelligent and rock!!

Posted by: So | May 22, 2008 1:01 AM | Report abuse

The best post of the day here!

After yet, another Tuesday
Obama still has it, going away.
People are now talking
about the dead woman walking.

The race was not, much of a thriller
In the state, of the Bourbon swiller.
In the beaver state, of Oregon
Barack was again, the chosen one.

Hillary is whining, about the press
go take a pill, for your duress.
For two moths now, the race has been over
Hill wants to find, a four-leaf clover.

Super delegates, are slipping away.
While misogyny was, her whine of the day.
Hillary, Hillary, don't be a fool
If you lose the game, you can't change the rules.

Posted by: NorcalRuss | May 21, 2008 10:52 PM

Posted by: Richard | May 22, 2008 1:00 AM | Report abuse

Does Hillary think that because she didn't really know the rules and follow them during her campaign that she should be handed the nomination? I think not. She is in the hole for about 20 million and Obama is sitting on 30 million. We need someone that can manage their money and not someone that will add to the deficit. Bye bye Hillary.

Posted by: Dennis | May 22, 2008 1:00 AM | Report abuse

As a Republican for McCain, here is my idea about why Hillary keeps running.
The longer she stays, the more she can make Obama look like the far-left candidate that he is. This game plan may ultimately help McCain in 2008.
She hopes to run again in 2012. If good old Mac is not too popular in '12, she will have another chance. However, if Obama where Pres., she'd be out of luck.

Posted by: Texas Dan | May 22, 2008 1:00 AM | Report abuse

Chris...you make an excellent point. When Obama took that cheap shot at President Bill Clinton at the South Carolina primary branding him a racist, I said right away this Obama guy is nothing but a snake.

President Bill Clinton did more for the African American cause than any other politician before him.

He deserves the respect and credit for that and not be smeared by a nobody desperate inexperienced politician in Obama who hasn't earned his place in politics.

Posted by: Gus C | May 22, 2008 12:59 AM | Report abuse

"We believe Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina play a unique and special role in the nominating process," said Patti Solis Doyle, campaign manager for Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y.
"And we believe the DNC's rules and its calendar provide the necessary structure to respect and honor that role."
The decision to deny new primary dates would directly affect Michigan and other states, like Florida and Wyoming's Republican caucuses, who have made moves to leapfrog their primaries.
Democratic presidential candidates Clinton, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.; Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn.; Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del.; New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and John Edwards have all signed pledges to ignore states who move up their primaries, specifically Michigan and Florida.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 12:59 AM | Report abuse

More on McCain's less than strait-talking dealings:

First the FEC is unable to make a ruling on McCain's illegal campaign financing situation because four of its six seats are vacant.

If the seats on the commission were filled---which, they are SUPPOSED TO BE---then the FEC would have to make a ruling on the McCain campaign financing situation!

So, we can see that they are purposefully being left vacant to ensure a non-ruling! If this is not the case, then the solution is obvious---fill the posts!

If the court refuses to allow the suit to go forward, it's sufficient evidence to the public that the presidency, Congress, govt agencies, and especially the Courts are choosing to no longer operate under the law and there's no reason why the public should acknowledge their authority over us!!

Now that the issue has 'blown past' the current news cycle, McCain is desperately trying to use both fair means & foul to ensure he can get his Federal money for the General Election! So he is now attempting to influence the White house's nomination decisions to ensure the vote goes his way or is in some way circumnavigated so he can get the money without the illegal Campaign Funds Financing debacle ever coming to a vote. However on Tuesday (May 6th), President Bush suddenly announced three new nominees to the commission. He also backed away from Republicans' insistence that the nomination of Hans von Spakovsky, a former Justice Department official who faces vigorous opposition from Democrats, be voted upon with other nominees to the commission. President Bush's dumping of Mason can only be viewed as a bald-faced and brazen attempt to wrongly manipulate an important enforcement decision by the nation's campaign finance enforcement agency and with this one move, the White House ended McCain's accountability for his use or abuse of the primary public financing system while putting him in position to take money for the general and it is inconceivable that McCain was not informed of the plan. In fact, it is highly probable that he was involved in its formulation or its approval.
At minimum, said several campaign finance experts, Republican officials obviously understood the implications for Mr. McCain.
Even Mr. Gross, who represents clients from both parties, said the decision to pull Mr. Mason's re-nomination made it difficult to believe that Mr. McCain was not involved in some way.
"It is sort of further indicia that Senator McCain's fingerprints are somehow part of the motivating factor of getting these commission seats filled," Mr. Gross said. "I didn't get a license in detective work, but I don't think you'd have to be a certified detective to figure it out."
Asked how Mr. McCain could go about getting the funds released, without a functioning commission, Mr. Gross said he could apply for a court order for the Treasury Department to release the funds. But he added, "We've never had this scenario before."
"From a procedural standpoint, it's not entirely clear how it would happen," he said.
Congress could also pass some type of rider for Mr. McCain to obtain the money without a functioning commission, but that would force Mr. McCain into the awkward position of making entreaties to a Democratic-led Congress so he could obtain the money needed for his campaign.

Excerpt from Washington Post:
"Initially reluctant to support the swap, the Arizona Republican became a key figure in pushing the deal through Congress after the rancher and his partners hired lobbyists that included McCain's 1992 Senate campaign manager, two of his former Senate staff members (one of whom has returned as his chief of staff), and an Arizona insider who was a major McCain donor and is now bundling campaign checks.
When McCain's legislation passed in November 2005, the ranch owner gave the job of building as many as 12,000 homes to SunCor Development, a firm in Tempe, Ariz., run by Steven A. Betts, a longtime McCain supporter who has raised more than $100,000 for the presumptive Republican nominee. Betts said he and McCain never discussed the deal."
"Betts is among a string of donors who have benefited from McCain-engineered land swaps. In 1994, the senator helped a lobbyist for land developer Del Webb Corp. pursue an exchange in the Las Vegas area, according to the Center for Public Integrity. McCain sponsored two bills, in 1991 and 1994, sought by donor Donald R. Diamond that yielded the developer thousands of acres in trade for national parkland.
In the late 1990s, McCain promoted a deal in Arizona's Tonto National Forest involving property part-owned by Great American Life Insurance, a company run by billionaire Carl H. Lindner Jr., a prolific contributor to national political parties and presidential candidates."
Yet another example of how the 'strait-talker' walks a crooked road.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 12:56 AM | Report abuse

Joe Jackson: "I am a Republican and I have given Hillary money. I could not ever and would not ever vote for a Dark skinned Muslim as President. Not ever. I also believe that speaks for most White people in America. Hillary should fight this thing all the way to the convention and win. Hillary has the most votes and not delegates because the democratic Party is boneheaded. If the delegates came from each state won Hillary would have won already. But the media want Obumma."


Let me set you straight Joe! YOU ARE AN UNINFORMED RACIST BIGGOT. Most people in America, regardless of the color of their skin, are not racists.

Posted by: Character Counts | May 22, 2008 12:55 AM | Report abuse

The sad truth is that it is the REPUBLICAN party that has changed over the last 3 decades. Republicans USED to stand for responsibility in Government by minimizing federal power. It USED to stand for FISCAL responsibility. It USED to stand for 'Capitalism at it's best'. However it now stands for something else, I'm not sure what (because it is still mutating)...but lately it seems to stand for:

Irresponsible Gov't spending (recent CC scandal is but ONE small example)
BIG Business - businesses USED to care about their workers & their products...now they ONLY care about $
Taking Care of Friends is more important than taking care of the country
Restriction of personal freedoms (ie religion, sexual preference)
Demeaning Science & Technology - we USED to be the home to world-class scientist, now they go to china, Japan or even Europe...because our Gov't restricts their research & demeans their findings (ie that modern humans are causing accelerated Global Warming is an UNDISPUTED FACT in the world science community, but the US Govt keeps putting doubt out there like it will change the facts.)

I'm upper-middle class with fiscal responsibility and a conscience. I'm finding it practically impossible to vote republican anymore.

Up until this year, I was going to vote McCain...seemed like a good choice: ex-military & not too hooked into the 'modern' republicans. However now that he has changed his mind on taxes (it doesn't effect me that much, but just a couple miles away...those poor & getting poorer folks are going to turn to crime soon) and the fact that he won't support Vets (I'm a vet who went to school on the old GI bill - but it didn't pay nearly enough even back then) I have become disaffected. I have to admit...it really did throw me when I heard that McCain & Bush had discussed WHY they weren't supporting the new GI bill...because it makes getting OUT of the military too good!?!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 12:54 AM | Report abuse

I'm afrad Rachel Maddow is right - unless the superdelegates step in and stop her, Clinton will take this to the convention - "better a losing nominee than afailed candidate for a winning party" - with all at stake this year, we are held hostage to one woman's egoism. Underestimating this is the worst lack of insight. I believe that a new 'second party' must come out of the Clintonista destruction of the Deomocratic Party, i see no way around it. Either that or dissolve the union into regional republics, because it is clear we can no longer hold it together as it is.

Posted by: Emmanuel Winner | May 22, 2008 12:53 AM | Report abuse

So...if Hillary agrees to not campaign or participate in the FL and MI elections, did voice ONCE opposition to not seating their delegates BEFORE the elections.

Is this the President you want? To back out of agreements and not play by the rules?

Sounds a lot like Bush if you ask me.

Posted by: RobK | May 22, 2008 12:53 AM | Report abuse

McCain's problems:

- Voted for Bush policies 95% of the time (more than any other Senator)

- Even though he, himself, has stated that he would prefer a 'Christian President' he is NOT a Christian! Personally, I don't care what religion the president is...but since McCain has stated a preference then maybe he should vote for the Dem Nominees. Both of them are Christian.

- Flip-flops on the issues (taxation, Military & Veteran support, lobbyists' influence, political ethics)

-Wife's business dealings are so shady she stated she would NEVER release her tax records (must be pretty bad!). Does she not realize that the American public has a right to know if their possible leader gets income from ANY source? She is married to him & even though they file separately, they have lived together & he has benefited equally by her vast fortune & business dealings!

-McCain's shady political dealings over the years to benefit his 'heavy-weight' supporters. In the Keating Five dealings, he pressured other politicians to help out his 'friends' while sitting on the ethics committee. On land deals he has repeatedly shown his determination to help his friends get land deals that make them HUGE profits (often at the expense of Conservationist's efforts & that go against public support).

Example 1: Initially reluctant to support the swap, the Arizona Republican became a key figure in pushing the deal through Congress after the rancher and his partners hired lobbyists that included McCain's 1992 Senate campaign manager, two of his former Senate staff members (one of whom has returned as his chief of staff), and an Arizona insider who was a major McCain donor and is now bundling campaign checks.

AND

Example 2: When McCain's legislation passed in November 2005, the ranch owner gave the job of building as many as 12,000 homes to SunCor Development, a firm in Tempe, Ariz., run by Steven A. Betts, a longtime McCain supporter who has raised more than $100,000 for the presumptive Republican nominee. Betts said he and McCain never discussed the deal

AND

Example 3: In the late 1990s, McCain promoted a deal in Arizona's Tonto National Forest involving property part-owned by Great American Life Insurance, a company run by billionaire Carl H. Lindner Jr., a prolific contributor to national political parties and presidential candidates

AND
Example 4: Despite John McCain's presidential campaign pledge forbidding official favors for top donors, the Arizona senator has introduced legislation and heavily intervened to acquire lucrative deals for a wealthy longtime friend who has raised a quarter of a million dollars for him so far.
A major U.S. newspaper has documented in a lengthy piece the decades-long relationship between the 2008 Republican presidential candidate and a powerful Arizona developer who has made millions of dollars thanks to the senator's efforts on behalf of the deals.
Without McCain's aggressive intervention, millionaire Donald Diamond could not have made the deals, which, in a few instances involved beneficial public-for-private land swaps and the actual re-mapping of public lands. McCain helped his friend acquire the valuable properties by introducing legislation in 1991 and 1994 on his behalf. The senator's efforts led to multi million-dollar profits and the acquisition of thousands of acres in Arizona. McCain has sponsored a third similar bill that currently sits before the U.S. Senate.
In 1999 McCain helped Diamond purchase highly-sought yet forbidden California land owned by the Army, which he immediately sold for a $20 million profit. Then McCain got his buddy a lucrative contract to develop a resort hotel and luxury housing in 2005. These efforts certainly contradict McCain's vows not to intercede with the government on behalf of a donor or take any action on their behalf that doesn't serve the public's interests.
FUNNY how every example above shows McCain 'reluctantly' helping them out....yeah, right. I haven't found a single time a 'friend' got turned down! This also leads me to wonder what kind of 'kickbacks' got funneled to Sen. McCain through his WIFE's business dealings! It would certainly explain WHY she refuses to open her tax records up to public scrutiny! And this type of stuff is exactly why it is important to know more about her financial dealings!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 12:52 AM | Report abuse

i just got sick to my stomach reading all this complete bullsh*t about which candidate is better/worse. such a large population of narrow minded people you all are (we all are). 1 person (not even george the idiot bush) is the be all end all to any problem or solution. get real - and get some balance. either o or h will do 10x better than gw. sh^t... my bumper sticker says "anybody 08" -

Posted by: UGG | May 22, 2008 12:49 AM | Report abuse

I received the latest of several requests from the DNC for a contribution. I have written back and have told callers that I will not be contributing anymore until they hold new primaries in FLA and MI or decide to let the current votes count. I have also communicated my indignation at their efforts to pressure superdelegates to announce their choice of candidates as soon as possible, thereby circumventing the democratic process. Perhaps there are others who feel as strongly as I do about about the DNC's reluctance to respect the rights of voters in all 50 states, and that is why it is not faring well in their fund-raising

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 12:49 AM | Report abuse

Andrew Austin:
Do you work for the Clinton Campaign or do you just get your talking points from it.

The Clinton Campaign thinks the only votes that matter are the ones that favor her. Minority voters, youth voters, urban voters, and educated voters, these are the base of the democratic party. Clinton is trying to convince us that they don't count. Democrats are not going to win states like West Virginia or Kentucky. Democrats are going to need to win swing states. They aren't going to win them by trying to convince the white rural working class to vote for a democrat. They are going to do it by getting minority, youth, urban, and educated voters to the polls in record numbers.

The bottom line is that Clinton agreed to the rules before this primary started, and now that she is losing she wants to change them.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 12:49 AM | Report abuse

Hillary is right-she should stay the course
lets see what those pathetic super delegates and the DNC have to say when
they throw her to the lions. I have been getting letters from the DNC for contributions for the fall campaign(they can go jump in the lake).Not only will I not contribute to the cause, I have with friends and family members ordered
Tee-shirts with the slogan "Hillary Democrat for McCain", which will be printed the minute the Democratic Party gives the election to Obama. I am
one of those Democrats who will never, ever, vote for Obama, and to heck with the
the Party. I have voted Democratic since
l954 and folks its about time I exercised some independent judgement and stood up for
what I believe. Obama is an accident waiting to happen and when the Republicans get through with him, Wright will look like a bible story. Hillary has the intelligence, ability, and foresight to lead this country,Obama makes speeches. If a lot of people in this country fall for his empty promises and pathetic explanations for every time he was found to be lying, then so be it. I won't stay at home this election, but I sure as heck will make my voice heard by being A Hillary Democrat for McCain.(No its not a snit and no I won't come around.)

Posted by: Kavanaughl | May 22, 2008 12:48 AM | Report abuse

i cannot wait for the swift boat group to uncover stories about OBAMA. it will be an interesting election.
at the end of the day mccain will win :)

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 12:45 AM | Report abuse

Oh no....ALL the way to the convention! It's unprecedented. This is never happened before! The DNC won't know what to do. Apparently they've never planned for the possibility of a primary race that plays out to the end. They're too busy figuring out if they are still "the party" the cares about strong women or not.
"The truth will set you free. But first, it will p iss you off." � Gloria Steinem
HILLARY FOR PRESIDENT 2008!!!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 12:45 AM | Report abuse

David says, "The black community blindly supports candidates because of their color. If you are black, they will vote for you. Heck, even that idiot Nagin won reelection after he sat around while his city drowned."

What's the best thread count to use for KKK sheets, David? You don't have to like black people. Just quit spewing this sewage.

How many whites voted for Clinton? [Not this one!]

Posted by: tom | May 22, 2008 12:41 AM | Report abuse

HRC lost the election when she voted yes on the Iraq War Resolution in 2002. It is just that simple. She made the wrong choice on the most important vote of the century so far, never admitted it, and it has cost her the election.

We don't know what Obama would have voted if he had to, he says he would have voted no. That is good enough for me.

Posted by: frankieCO | May 22, 2008 12:41 AM | Report abuse

While there is a lot of good back and forth, and sharing of wisdom on this blog, I am saddened that so many of the posters are so negative on one or more of the candidates.

While neither Obama, Hillary or McCain have run a perfect campaign, and while none of the three are perfect candidates, in truth, NOBODY is a perfect candidate.

I do believe that each in their own way has demonstrated an ability to lead; an ability to take a blow; to take criticism; and keep on fighting for their candidacy.

It is fine to get all partisan and to call others names, but at some point it gets to be plain stupid when people absolutely refuse to believe that the other party, or the other candidate, have no positive qualities.

Hillary has fought a tough and long campaign. It certainly seems as if she will not win the nomination of her Party.

But the people who post nothing but negative statements about her have lost perspective. Sure, eventually she is going to have to concede defeat, but she will do it when she believes it is the right time to do it. She has run her campaign, she has won many victories (not as many as Obama), she has improved and grown as a political candidate and she will eventually decide for herself when to concede.

The one negative comment I will make about Hillary's campaign is that I never believed her talking point that she was the "most experienced" candidate. And I would hope Hillary was at least honest with herself and understood when she started her Presidential campaign her two Senate races in NYS were such cakewalks that she truly did not the political experience needed to assure her commanding lead before the caucus and primaries began would result in her winning the nomination.

As she has continued participating in the primaries and caucuses she has improved as a candidate. For example, since before her victories in Texas and Ohio Hillary has generally (not entirely) succeeded in keeping the mouth of her anchor of a soon to be ex-husband (MARK MY WORDS) shut.

Posted by: Bronxnative | May 22, 2008 12:41 AM | Report abuse

Obama should pick Sen. Edwards as his running mate and announce it ASAP.

It is really sad that after 8 years of republican party in office Democrats havent learned their lesson.

People supporting Hillary are the same people who were fooled by Republicans for Bush's second term in the name of National Security and who were fooled in the name of Family Values for Bush's first term.

Can we really afford Hillary or Mccain as a president even for one term.

Hillary is still running not for people but for her Ego.

People please wake up.

Posted by: DANIEL | May 22, 2008 12:40 AM | Report abuse

From the first weeks of the initial primaries
the Secret Service assigned agents to Obama
WHY?
Because they feared then, as they fear now
that he is a candidate for assassination
WHY?
Because he is the ANTI CHRIST!!

Posted by: Nostradamus | May 22, 2008 12:38 AM | Report abuse

In response to: "all voters shouldbe heard"
AMEN! (Please read back to their post!)
People in Florida were told nearly a year ago that their vote wouldn't count... we also didn't get the chance to get to know the candidates and hear them speak, like the rest of the country.
Most of us didn't vote, and most of the ones that did only knew one of the people on the ballot.
Now, you want to count the votes after all?
THIS is what will disenfranchise Florida, and likely Michigan, as well.

Posted by: Floridian | May 22, 2008 12:38 AM | Report abuse

Republicans love this primary.

So much hatred between democrats.

Thank you so much, Hilary.

Democratic party is imploding, while a bozo like McCain all over suddenly has a chance to win the election in a year when Republicans should have no chance at all.

Democrats have no chance to unite after the convention and will screw themselves like they always do.

Posted by: Republican. | May 22, 2008 12:36 AM | Report abuse

I'm a woman and I would never vote for Hillary for President. She is acting in self-interest and not the interests of the country. She may be a woman, but she's not a lady. Also, I think is racism is boring and stupid.

Posted by: springchickennot | May 22, 2008 12:36 AM | Report abuse

The black community blindly supports candidates because of their color. If you are black, they will vote for you. Heck, even that idiot Nagin won reelection after he sat around while his city drowned.

Now Barack Obama is as white as they come. Raised by whites, educated by whites, associates with blacks only to garner their votes. But he sure is quick to label any opponent as racists.

Barack sucker punches any opportunity he gets by associating everyone with GW Bush. He even denigrated Clinton by linking him with Bush. Now let anyone challenge him and he hides behind his race or calls for civility. If he wins, and he just might with the slanted coverage he's getting, let's see how much support he'll receive when he starts raising taxes and chaos erupts in Iraq and the World Oil markets.

Posted by: David | May 22, 2008 12:35 AM | Report abuse

"Obama's popularity is largely an illusion created by a noisy personality cult and an artifact of the Democratic primary map. "

Maybe so. He still won. Hard cheese!

Posted by: tom | May 22, 2008 12:35 AM | Report abuse

the problem with the democratic party is that they are afraid to say obama is not fit to be president because it will come across as racism.
times are very hard now - the economy is bad a war in iraq and we need an experienced president and not a preacher turned candidate. as sad as it is people will jump the fence and vote republican this time around

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 12:35 AM | Report abuse

""None of our cases establishes an individual's constitutional right to have a 'fair shot' at winning the party's nomination," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the court.

****
But the Supreme Court said there is nothing in New York's process that violates the Constitution. "Party conventions, with their attendant 'smoke-filled rooms' and domination by party leaders, have long been an accepted manner of selecting party candidates," Scalia wrote.

More broadly, the opinion said, "A political party has a First Amendment right to limit its membership as it wishes and to choose a candidate-selection process that will in its view produce the nominee who best represents its political platform."

And so much for the "disenfranchisement" line of argument.

Posted by: tom | May 22, 2008 12:32 AM | Report abuse

This race is much more about the electoral map than the popular vote. Clinton's popular support reflects her electoral map strength. Obama's popular vote support is in states that will vote overwhelming Democrat anyway and in regions that will never vote for an ultra-liberal politician from Chicago - the Deep South, Midsouth, Southeast, and most of the Midwest. It was, frankly, comical watching John King, who knows his way around an electoral map, try to make the case for Obama. He simply couldn't do it.

The black and ultra-liberal vote looks impressive in the primary, but it means very little in the general when whites plan to vote overwhelming against you and very few blacks live in the states you need to win. Watching the excitement over Mississippi, Georgia, and South Carolina told me that too many Democrats are too deeply confused about what it takes to win this thing.

Obama's popularity is largely an illusion created by a noisy personality cult and an artifact of the Democratic primary map. Check out Rove's electoral maps. I think he knows a little something about how to win. Bill Clinton knows something about how to win, too. Look at his map. Clinton brings it. Clinton wasn't race-baiting in South Carolina. He was reminding you of a fact of history.

Wait until the Republicans turn the machine on Obama. They're laying low right now, hoping Democrats will remain ignorant Hillary-bashers while Obama limps to the nomination. They couldn't be merrier about the dynamic in play.

The corporate media establishment has the Republicans' backs on this one. There's a reason why Obama hasn't been sufficiently vetted. There's a reason why it took a viral video to make Americans aware of Trinity United. There's a reason why the pro-Obama media scrambled to portray a mediocre speech as an historic event - a speech that has gone nowhere since. (If you want to hear a moving speech, check out Hillary Rodham Clinton's "Remarks to the U.N. 4th World Conference on Women Plenary Session, " 5 September 1995, Beijing, China. Now that is a speech for the ages.)

Investigative journalism has been dead for years. The news media types have rationalized their behavior by saying that they need the Republicans to go after Obama to cover the story. Oh boy. Just wait. And there's nothing you can do about it - unless you dump Obama.

There's a whole lot you don't know about Obama. The Republicans will roll out associations and damning photographs every week and Obama will never be able to give enough speeches to recover. That feeling running up Matthews' legs will be running the other direction.

Unfair? Sure, maybe. It depends on your values and politics. Myself, I have never been a member of the Democratic Party. But I always vote for Democrats because Republicans are wrong for America. And I'm sick of losing to them. I'm sick of watching the Democrats put up against Republicans the likes of Michael Dukakis and John Kerry time and again.

Elections are for winning. In the final analysis, this election is about electability. It always has been. The question for you is therefore obvious: do you want to run the best candidate and win this thing for the sake of the federal judiciary and the other things that are vital to our democracy? Or do you want to put your heart before your head and lose this thing big time to the Republicans? Do you want vote for the most qualified person to be seated at the toughest desk in the world? Or do you want to field an inexperienced ultra-liberal from Chicago and watch the Democratic Party go down in flames?

The choice is crystal clear. Clinton has withstood the most withering assault and keeps on going. She's a traditional cold war liberal, the type that Middle America wants to govern the nation. She's in the tradition of Roosevelt and his brilliant wife, Eleanor. The superdelegates have to act to save the party in November. Please encourage them to do so. Tell them to switch their votes to Hillary Clinton.

Posted by: Andrew Austin | May 22, 2008 12:32 AM | Report abuse

Obama's favorable numbers are down.

Obama's unfavorable number are up.

NOW HERE'S THE KICKER:

PLEDGED DELEGATES OVERSTATE OBAMA'S STRENGTH! Why? NOT ALL PLEDGED DELEGATES ARE EQUAL!!!

Obama got most of his pledge delegates in small state caucaus' that he manipulated with Hillary Haters - now, fine, all you Obama supporters who don't like what I just said then fine - listen to just the facts:

In Idaho, Obama won the caucaus (a very small group of party leaders who pick a candidate) by 13,000 votes and received 13 pledged delegates - sounds good, huh?

In Pennsylvania, Hillary won the primary (actual voting by the people) by 200,000 votes and received 10 pledged delegates - sounds unfair, huh?

See complete review in WSJ: Obama's Strategy for Low-Turnout Caucuses Helps Drive Delegate Edge, May 15, 2008; Page A6.

So, Obama received more math by winning a small state caucaus than Hillary did by winning a big state primary!

THIS IS EXACTLY WHY I WILL FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT TOOTH AND NAIL, TILL THE LAST DOG DIES, AND ANY AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT SAYS I WILL FIGHT FOR REAL DEMOCRACY AND NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER ACCEPT OBAMA!

Obama can't win the big states.

Obama can't win the swing states.

Hillary has already won the big states.

Hillary has already won the swing states.

Hillary is the real winner and Hillary will be our President

Posted by: Thank you Hillary for never giving up! | May 22, 2008 12:32 AM | Report abuse

Mrs.Clinton's me first,scorched earth politics is astounding.
It's possible, although not probable that she may win a battle(nomination) and lose the war(election). In the process she would destroy the party she is an integral part of. The divisiveness she is creating is exactly like Mr.Bush's politics of the last 8 years. In spite of all the partisan hate spewed out on Mr. Obama, any thoughtful person surely realizes that he has a powerful message of bringing the country together.

Posted by: concerned15 | May 22, 2008 12:31 AM | Report abuse

Obama is running scared! His supporters are even more scared!

Obama is now campaigning in FLA and MI... WHY? Because he wants to make sure he can fix the results before he will agree to having the votes re-counted!

The super delegates are in a flux... they know Hillary supporters will not fall "into place" as they claim!

WE ARE UNITED AND WE WILL BE HEARD!

Posted by: Justice | May 22, 2008 12:31 AM | Report abuse

Anyone who claims to be a Dem & votes for McCain just because they are sulky about who won the nomination...is turning their back on their country.
McCain is 4 more years of a Rep driving our country down into an endless depression, staggering debt & putting us on a diplomatic island from the rest of the world.
In short...it's a suicidal tendency. I have tried to keep faith that Hillary actually wants what is best for this country...and that is why she is fighting so hard, because she believes she is the best choice. I can respect that. But anyone who professes to be a Hillary supporter & backs McCain, rather than Obama is a traitors to entire middle-class in this country.
Hillary & Obama are on the same page for 95% of their policy positions. McCain is on the exact OPPOSITE end of the spectrum in his policy positions.
Yeah...if you liked the last 7 years...vote for McCain (and if you are middle-class, I hope you enjoy being pushed into poverty).

Posted by: Our Only Hope | May 22, 2008 12:29 AM | Report abuse

I suggest the following for why Hillary stays in the race:
1. Popular Vote
She can win the Popular Vote based on how it is counted and the remaining contests. These numbers are from RealClearPolitics.
a) -449,000 Popular Vote Total -1.3%
b) -559,000 Popular Vote Total + Caucus estimates -1.6%
c) -154,000 Popular Vote + FL -.5%
d) -264,000 Popular Vote + Caucus + FL -.7%
e) +173,000 Popular Vote + FL & MI +.48%
e)+ 63,000 Popular Vote + Caucus + FL & MI +.17%

Based on the RCP Horserace blog, which has been incredibly accurate, Clinton will gain 221,000 votes in the remaining 3 contests. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/chooseyourown.html
Including the 221,000 votes with the numbers above, the totals would be:
a) -228,000
b) -338,000
c) + 67,000
d) - 43,000
e)+394,000
f)+284,000

2. That's why counting the votes of Florida and Michigan is more than an academic exercise.

3. Delegates
If Florida and Michigan are added, it extends the number of delegates needed to win and she would be apportioned more of those delegates. That would extended the number needed for Obama to win.

4. May 31 is the meeting date for the DNC Rules Committee to try to decide FLorida and Michigan.

I do not say this to be right or fair, just to put forward the "Possibilities" that exist. It is still the superdelegates to decide and this would make a better case for her.


Posted by: bj123 | May 22, 2008 12:29 AM | Report abuse

What one is observing with all the Obama hate messages against Hillary. You are instead directing your venom against over 17,000.000 voters. We voted and many more will vote for Hillary Clinton. We are the long time Democrats that will bring this nation a Democrat as a winner in November. Ease up and enjoy some patience and STOP your hateful diatribe.
The Democrats take it to the Convention that is an important part of our History.

Posted by: Martha Washington | May 22, 2008 12:29 AM | Report abuse

Interesting Supreme Court decision (unanimous) in January, which is on point. As reported in the WaPo: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/16/AR2008011603669.html?hpid%3Dmoreheadlines&sub=AR

Posted by: tom | May 22, 2008 12:28 AM | Report abuse

"A team can still score in the ninth inning."

Yeah, but I'm trying to remember the last time a team down by ten runs said the game should be extended another five innings.

Posted by: DDAWD | May 22, 2008 12:27 AM | Report abuse

The FACT is...if Hillary had run her campaign correctly, she MIGHT be ahead. Instead she chose to believe EVERYONE would vote for her 'Name Brand'.
Obama ran a SMART campaign & it drew MILLIONS of new voters into the Democratic party.
Between two such candidates (Hillary =almost incumbent and Obama = man of the people) it doesn't surprise me that it is a close race.
But once the general election race starts...the Dems will all get behind the nominee. If they don't, then all those Blue-collar workers that Hillary professes to care about will slide completely into poverty. Gas prices will soar & with it food prices. Then people will have to choose between walking to work or stealing food to feed their families.
Hard times ahead regardless of who is President, but with a Dem there is at least a possibility that it will get better. With McCain, it is guaranteed to get worse.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 12:26 AM | Report abuse

in 76 every one wanted a change so badly and they got stuck with Jimmy Carter
who was the worst president ever.
after learning this lesson we will vote for clinton. (write her name in) she is experienced level headed unlike obama who DID NOTHING to prove his ability to lead.
if only michelle obama wouldn't admit how much she hates the USA

Posted by: adrian | May 22, 2008 12:26 AM | Report abuse

When Obama has lost in Nov, you will no why! The caucuses are giving the party and supporters an incorrect picture of the truth of whats been going on in this election! So you by sporting Obama have given the election to McCain! Hillary has always been the stronger candidate! We have only been trying to wake you folks up! Stay with your head in the sand close you eye's to what is really happening! Voting for Obama is giving it to MCCAIN!

Posted by: Q | May 22, 2008 12:23 AM | Report abuse

MIKE WROTE:

"what brainless id**ts clinton supporters are!"
i can say the same about all you guys supporting obama. he is where he is only because he is black. he is a looser. his wife is a looser and there is no room for these kind of people in the white house.
mccain democtratS will show the power comes november.

I WILL NEVER VOTE FOR OBAMA.

MY RESPONSE --> MIKE, YOUR REDNECK IS SHOWING. AT LEAST LEARN HOW TO SPELL - IT'S "LOSER," NOT "LOOSER." AND, WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY "THESE PEOPLE?" SURELY, YOU DON'T MEAN "BLACK PEOPLE" DON'T BELONG IN THE "WHITE HOUSE?"

Posted by: mike | May 22, 2008 12:04 AM

Posted by: eduardoweb@balarezo.net | May 22, 2008 12:23 AM | Report abuse

Maybe it's not just Hilary. Maybe dumb is just pervasive amongst her followers. For example, (not very) Wylie says:

"Clinton has 146,000 more votes than Obama for all the primaries since March."

Well, the Mariners scored more runs against the Tigers in the last three innings of tonight's game. Guess what, they lost.

Basic math. Learn it. Or, move to W. Virginia!

Posted by: laura bush in 2012 | May 22, 2008 12:22 AM | Report abuse

And what about the Florida voters who didn't vote because their party told them it would not count? Who gets their vote?

http://cobbsblog.com/blog/?p=84

Posted by: Stephen Cobb | May 22, 2008 12:22 AM | Report abuse

The only way Hillary can create a popular vote victory is by not counting Several of Obamas caucus victories and the uncommitted vote in Michigan. (PS his name and others where not even on the ballot) Does that seem fair???

At this point does fair even have anything to do with this??

Posted by: case | May 22, 2008 12:21 AM | Report abuse

All she wants to do at this point (she knows she can't win) is to sabotage and undercut Obama as much as possible in order to set up a 2012 run. She is a Clinton, funny how her running has destroyed his legacy with Democrats. All the way till November she will be doing what she can to take down Obama. remeber she now listens to Karl Rove.

Posted by: hillarvain | May 22, 2008 12:21 AM | Report abuse

CLINTON AND CAPITULATION

It is NOT OVER until someone crosses the threshold in required delegates. Until then, the process should be allowed to proceed.

http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2008/05/clinton-and-capitulation.html

It would be undemocratic to do otherwise.

Posted by: PacificGatePost | May 22, 2008 12:20 AM | Report abuse

Clinton has 146,000 more votes than Obama for all the primaries since March.

Obama leads in the heart of the party machine. Clinton leads in the hearts of the people.

Posted by: WylieD | May 22, 2008 12:19 AM | Report abuse

"...She must be smoking crack, or she's just power mad.."

Posted by: David | May 21, 2008 11:29 PM


as far as i know obama is the one that admitted to using drugs and sold it on the streets of chicago.

not obama not now not ever
the republicans will win in a land slide.

Posted by: alex | May 22, 2008 12:18 AM | Report abuse

GET A CLUE,

Sexism in this country is NOTHING compared to the racism problem.


To put this into Honest perspective...there is NO comparison between Sen. Clinton making her gender a MAJOR part of her campaign & Sen. Obama talking about race when he was hit over the head with the subject: I never heard of a White Woman being hunted down, strung up, or burned alive during any part of America's history. This was still a COMMON practice just 50-60 years ago in many parts of the country.

You'd think that black people were the ones who enslaved, segregated, economically oppressed, socially marginalized and terrorized white people for hundreds of years instead of the other way around. I ask you: What in God's name have black people, on the whole, ever done to white people in West Virginia or Kentucky to engender such hostility? Answer: Absolutely nothing! There are barely any black people even living in those states.

I think that many older, rural, working class white people like those in West Virginia,Pennsylvania, Indiana, Kentucky and elsewhere really are bitter and cling to their fading white skin privilege to rationalize their increasingly marginalized and empty lives. If they value having a white president more than the very survival of our country, then they deserve four more years of Republican incompetence and hypocrisy. Too bad the rest of us will have to suffer along with them through endless wars and economic malaise.

The one encouraging thing is that many, though not all, of these pathetic racists are older and are slowly but surely dying off.

A new, much more racially-diverse group of more open-minded and sane Americans are coming of age, and these pathetic racists will go the way of slavery and Jim Crow - into the dustbin of history. Good riddance!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 12:18 AM | Report abuse

It's funny how words from coast to coast get twisted. Some folks think that it is Hil who wants to put STJones on the SC for all of this fight and hype shared by the two. Now the words are coming out that it would be appeasing if Obama gave Hil that same kind of recognition. This is not a Woman's world and I don't like the thought of this taking over. I am not a push over, but I don't want to sacrifice my education and work merits for anything but equality, not to push women over men. This world is doing just fine. I am for my Husband for another 55 years, not against him. This is where the women are losing, they appear to me as trying to be what was not meant to be, and that that they can't be, and they don't appear to get it. Times are about the FUTURE- Understanding and capable of making good judgement is needed. We need another woman who possesses compassion, and other such qualities,and intellegence +,and to start out at a younger age,for the president and someday soon, we will succeed.

Posted by: mamamay | May 22, 2008 12:18 AM | Report abuse

Obama has 164 working days of experience in the senate.


143 days! NOT EVEN 164!

Obama has 143 working days of experience in the senate!!!!!!

Posted by: Correction | May 22, 2008 12:16 AM | Report abuse

Mike at 12:04 is the true idiot. He can't even spell loser.

Posted by: Lisa | May 22, 2008 12:16 AM | Report abuse

The South Carolina Black Caucus encouraged five states to move forward. South Carolina, Nevada, Florida, Michigan and one other.

Donna Brazille from CNN wrote the documents to change the delegate count from half to whole. They did not change South Carolina and Nevada because he was supposed to win them.

This election is going all the way to the convention. Obama is unelectable. Obama does not have the nomination yet.

Posted by: grace | May 22, 2008 12:15 AM | Report abuse

Hillary is ruining the chance that ANY Democratic nominee gets nominated in November out of sheer ambition. Hillary is more important than this nation to the Clinton's and their gullible supporters. She has run a dirty campaign while Obama hasn't yet she and her supporters are wide-eyed in their angry hysterics DEMANDING her immediate crowing. She fanned the flames of racism caused by the Rev. Wright issue while he said NOTHING about her LYING about being under sniper fire in Bosnia. It wasn't a misstatement it was a LIE. She is a liar and a panderer who looks down at her ignorant Appalachian and transparent menopausal supporters. Giving her to June 3rd is fair and understandable. If she takes it to the convention and succeeds in dividing the Dems and ruining what should be the easiest election for a Democrat in history her future in the Dem party and Bill's legacy will be worth nothing. She will be hated more than Ralph Nader and Joe Lieberman put together. All of you blind followers who encourage her and are helping along this travesty should be ashamed of yourselves. You are only ignorant and angry, nothing else.

Posted by: Jerry N | May 22, 2008 12:15 AM | Report abuse

what sane, reasonable person would call themself a democrat after the belly of the DNC has been laid open. cancerous socialism.

Posted by: laughing at the dems | May 22, 2008 12:14 AM | Report abuse

"We believe Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina play a unique and special role in the nominating process," said Patti Solis Doyle, campaign manager for Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y.
"And we believe the DNC's rules and its calendar provide the necessary structure to respect and honor that role."

AND Clinton said last year, "Well, you know, people in Michigan are flat on their backs. They have the highest unemployment rate in America. They are now grappling finally with what they are going to do with the auto industry. 1 in 10 jobs in America is tied to the auto industry which is -- the American auto industry, which as we know is centered in Michigan. You know, it's clear this election they're having isn't going to count for anything." [NHPR Interview, 10/11/07]

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 12:14 AM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton has been out manned; out gunned, and out spent 2 and 3 to 1. Yet Obama has only been able to manage a very tenuous and questionable tie with Hillary Clinton.
What has gone on in this election needs to be exposed. Fortunately Hillary Clinton has been able to hold on against this sexism outrage with those repeated dramatic comebacks of Hillary Clinton.
Not only has it been the Good old boys club, of the Grand old party of the DNC! It's been the Good old boys club of the media and its use of sexism disguise in yellow journalism.
This election is being stolen! The media has been bullying Hillary supporters with constant put-downs. Just as they have been interfering by broadcasting that the primaries are over, when they clearly are not. The Super delegates are being paid off and/or bullied by Obama and team as well
Shame on the media for not doing its job! It should be exposing the sexism. Instead of pretending it's not happing to Hillary Clinton and her run for the White House. As if she is the only women in the world that sexism is not happing to. What a joke! You're not going to get away with it just because she happens to be Hillary Clinton.
Try Exposing that the unfair tactics of sexism used by the all male run Media, and the all male run DNC! The all male late nigh TV shows.
Try Exposing that Obama is only ahead by gaming and cheating the caucuses making him look like a stronger candidate then he really is. Try Exposing Hillary Clinton has taken this country and women light years ahead. This must be why she has a movement behind her! And why so many have had to mass an army against her.

Hillary Clinton is one hell of a fighter, one incredible advocate for women around the world, for what is right in this country like universal health care. Obama has to steal her ideas and solutions to even look good. Why I am not surprised that a man with little or no experience instead of a woman with 30 years experience is being put a head by the all male run leadership of the Democratic Party by the Good old boys club.

Posted by: GET A CLUE | May 22, 2008 12:14 AM | Report abuse

Saw Clinton today, what a piece of s**t she is. People were laughing at her rant. One old woman as we were leaving said she thought she may be insane and everybody began laughing. She no longer talks about issues just how she is being cheated out of being president. What a sad image she has become.

+++++++
The only question that counts is how much damage Hillary will do before she is confronted with the truth at the convention: Obama has more support, and wins the delegate count. She must be smoking crack, or she's just power mad.

Posted by: David | May 21, 2008 11:29 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 12:13 AM | Report abuse

Race, its a term used as I see it only about white voters. Look at all the papers, listen to all the radio talk shows, look at cnn, msnbc, fox..White this , white that. How many white woman , how many white men , how many white educated, how many white uneducated...how many percents of each voted for Obama, for Hillary....how many whites voted against Obama because of his skin color..its all there on all medias...you cant deny or excuse the 92 to 97% black vote for Obama, like all the medias do..its racist to the core..at least Obama is getting many white votes...but you cant deny the black vote for a black man in this race..its disqusting that with the numbers as staggering as they are , it is ignored...but just let the race card fall on the whites ...im sick of the double standard and you will see the backlash in the final election...Mcain will win by a landslide..you have woken the sleeping giant and that giant is whites are sick and tired of being called racist,and they will show this in the end...its not racistseeing that Obama gets 97% black votes...were all equal REMEMBER

Posted by: tino | May 22, 2008 12:13 AM | Report abuse

Clinton's most recent comments scare me. I am generally OK with her staying the race and running - I think the continuing conflict between Hillary and Obama keeps McCain in the background; denying him the free media coverage he might otherwise rely on... but I may not be watching the right news outlets so... that could be wrong.

Regardless, Clinton is beginning to scare me. Her continuing inability to adhere to the truth and interparty decency is beginning to become too much of a liability to the party and the Democratic leaders need to stop her now. Here are the crimes against the party I perceive, some of which have been voiced by enough people already I decided to join the choir. The main theme boils down to Clinton blackmailing the Party for one reason or another:

1) I fear that she intentionally left herself on the ballot in Michigan for just this occasion - in case she started to lose she could always argue for the votes to be counted and thus have a contingency read... knowing she would have a monopoly. I give no credence to the argument that she has been arguing for the inclusion of FL and MI since NH. Don't forget she thought she was going to lose NH and only squeaked by - very eye opening. NOTE: some rumors I get to hear living next to NH say that she did lose NH and that there was vote tampering - don't forget that Diebold, Inc., of the infamous voting scandals, supports her. Anyhow if the above is true she has been planning a party coup since this winter.

2) I have no doubt that she is currently blackmailing the party and Obama to get her money back. This is so harmful to the whole party. (a) The money will come from either Obama, the party nominee, and will not be spent beating McBush; or it will come from the DNC and will not help the many congressional Dems who are running against well funded Republican opponents. (b) She is enforcing her terroristic tactics by continuing to run and thus increase the bill she is asking other people to pay. Like the Monty Python skit "Blackmail" the longer, they refuse to pay the more she will make them pay.

3) She in continually undermining Obama and giving fuel to McBush. McBush has a very limited budget this year (OMG a Republican at a financial disadvantage), but thanks to pal Hillary, McBush can sit back and let her spend his way into office

4) Her untruthful claims have destroyed her credibility and made her unelectable. Clinton supports can say what they want but they can't honestly say that she underwent sniper fire in Bosnia or that she is really ahead in the popular vote or that she has "years of experience." The Republicans will be all over her for these inaccuracies and rightfully so. Based upon her logic she has an awful memory, can't do algebra (dealing with unknown quantities), and every married person has equal experience as their spouse in their spouses field.

5) I am afraid she will pull a Lieberman if she does not get her way and ensure the Democrats fall into the old cliché of circling the wagons, only to shoot inward.

I think it is time the Democratic Party take decisive action and shuts Hillary out of this race once and for all. The super delegates need to come forward and make these issues go away by supporting Obama STRONGLY... it is impossible for Hillary to win (given that MI and FL will be resolved with a modicum of equity). She needs to deal with reality, and the party should not have to deal with this terrorist. They should not pay her debts. They should not have to make amends with FL and MI for decisions the individual states made. Basically, she has dug her own hole and hopefully, given what I have seen out of her this primary, the hole is too deep to dig out of. Clinton needs to be told to stand back so that other democrats, who know how to play nice with others (like Edwards), can mend the fences she has decided to wreck.

Posted by: new guy | May 22, 2008 12:12 AM | Report abuse

Did I miss something or didn't Obama take half the womens vote in Oregon, (which is less than 2% white). How are Clinton supporters claiming to speak for "women". Obama is taking the lions share of black votes and you don't hear that kind of 'speaking for' of black voters.

The rules where set before the primary..the candidates based their campaigns on those rules.

Is it me or have many Clinton supporters here indicated that they really could care less about rules, votes, delegates or the even the process. What if the numbers where reversed.. do you really think anyone would support Obama in such an incendiary strategy.

Posted by: case | May 22, 2008 12:12 AM | Report abuse

Unbelievable.

BO supporters think we will be forced to vote for Obama even though he has no experience.

Obama has 164 working days of experience in the senate. Hillary has 30 plus years of dedication to America.

Bush was a coke-head-loser and Obama said in his book he was also a coke-head-loser. AMERICANS ARE TIRED OF COKE-HEAD-LOSERS!!!! WE WILL NOT ACCEPT OBAMA - NO MATTER HOW MUCH THE MEDIA TRIES TO TELL US THAT WE WANT HIM!

106 - the number of times Obama couldn't make a decision in the senate and vote neither Y or N.

6 - the number of time OBAMA HIMSELF said he "hit the wrong button accidently" in the senate!!!!

Are u friggin' kidding me?!

One dummy for another dummy - NO!

http://hillaryclinton.com

Posted by: Obama's "experience" | May 22, 2008 12:11 AM | Report abuse

SWEETIE for OBAMA,

Actually...they ALL did (or they CANNOT run as Democrats!):

"Democratic presidential candidates Clinton, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.; Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn.; Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del.; New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and John Edwards have all signed pledges to ignore states who move up their primaries."

Abiding by the DNC's rules is a requirement to run on the Democratic Ticket.

Posted by: Our Only Hope | May 22, 2008 12:11 AM | Report abuse

"Team Clinton = Team Idiot

Posted by: Captain Jack Sparrow | May 22, 2008 12:04 AM "

i have some news to you. all the blacks that voted for obama don't know to read all they know os shoot innocent people robbing carjacking live on food stamps instead of taking care of themselved and get a job

Team obama = gangs

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 12:11 AM | Report abuse

Senator Obama should allow the Florida and Michigan votes to be counted. Attempting to deny people their vote is something Nixon might have done (many here may not be old enough to remember his dirty tricks campaign). Speaking of Nixon, I am reminded of his "secret plan to end the war" every time I hear the empty rhetoric of Senator Obama.

Posted by: C.R. | May 22, 2008 12:11 AM | Report abuse

Reading the comments of the CLinton supporters posted here makes me frightened for my country.
It also confirms that her supporters are what the media has characterized them as: uneducated bigots.

Posted by: Miande | May 22, 2008 12:10 AM | Report abuse

For anyone (such as Hillary) who thinks that a caucus is "undemocratic":


1) It's our earliest form of voting in the US,

2) Hillary has no problem with letting this be decided at the convention, which is just a great big caucus!

Hillary can't claim to have gotten more votes, even if it did matter, because she's not included the caucus votes (they're secret, not available for inclusion), and she's trying to include Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico is a commonwealth, not a state, and as such Puerto Ricans don't get to vote in the general election. She's even including ALL of Michigan's votes for herself, nobody else. Her gall is breathtaking.

This is all ludicrous.

Posted by: Jane C. | May 22, 2008 12:10 AM | Report abuse

Well the other super delegates could stop her by announcing their support of Obama if they wanted to I think a lot of her enemies in the Democrat party are enjoying her trying to catch Obama and either she is really delusioned or does not really know math well .......I think it is funny all the ones who are deserting her ........I am not even voting for any of them but it is fun watching her think she is going somewhere and it is going to be fun when she realizes she really is not gettig the nominee ............her song will be Cry Me A River ...........and Howard will do his eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee...........FOR HER

Posted by: tootie | May 22, 2008 12:10 AM | Report abuse

Clinton is the most devisive, destructive person that I have ever seen.

She will say and do anything. Whites against blacks, Educated vs uneducated, young vs old, rich vs poor.

Remember this.. CLINTON ISN'T ELECTABLE. And not because she's a woman, but because of what she is and how she constantly divides people and many people HATE her. Her negatives in every poll are above 50%. It doesn't happen to many people and there is a reason why.

She's unwilling to play by the rules. She feels entitled to the nomination and will seriously damage democratic party in her faling attempt to secure it.

And if Obama loses this election... it will be Clintons' fault and legacy.

Posted by: Concerned Democrat. | May 22, 2008 12:10 AM | Report abuse

This argument about who's getting the nomination is ridiculous. Whoever gets the most delegates, whether elected or super, should be the nominee period. That's how this game is played. Wanting to change the rules at the end of the primary cycle because you just don't like that fact that you candidate is not winning says a lot about HRC and her supporters. And to think that last year I was certain that I would have eagerly voted for her if she captured the nomination.

Posted by: Jason, Grundy, VA | May 22, 2008 12:08 AM | Report abuse

She's only staying in to placate her female base, who can't deal with the idea that a woman can run a losing campaign. Hillary does not deserve to win because she's a woman. She needed to run a better campaign. Had she developed a plan beyond Super Tuesday, she could have won it. God forbid she admits that. She's playing the victim again. Not a good example for future female candidates. If you want to be taken seriously, have the balls to admit when you messed up.

Posted by: Obama Wins | May 22, 2008 12:08 AM | Report abuse

I've finally had it. After a lifetime of supporting the Democratic Party I no longer recognize it. It has been taken over by a radical left wing faction that does not speak for me. If I could put my foot up Howard Dean's @ss that would be some satisfaction but I couldn't stop there. These clowns deserve to lose the election by an obscene landslide.

Posted by: Ex Democrat | May 22, 2008 12:08 AM | Report abuse

While it is true that HRC signed an agreement not to campaign in MI and FL only. She did not sign a pledge that the delegates and votes wouldn't count.

It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything," Clinton said Thursday during an interview on New Hampshire Public Radio's call-in program, "The Exchange."

Pennsylvania's Edward G. Rendell and New Jersey's Jon Corzine suggested that it would be seen as unfair to award those delegates to Clinton, given the Democratic Party's ruling that the vote in those two states would not count.

Posted by: SWEETIE for OBAMA | May 22, 2008 12:05 AM | Report abuse

They WILL seat the delegates from FL & MI...probably at half of votes...with 'uncommitted' votes given to Obama in Mich, because he wasn't on the ballot (this option favors Clinton HEAVILY). Which makes the magic # 2131 delegates.
As of today the count is:
----Current Count---FL---MI---Supers---Total --Votes needed to win
Obama-1680---41---28-----308-----2057--- 74
Clinton-1518---52---36-----280-----1886--- 245

This is a BEST case scenario for Sen. Clinton....and yet, Sen. Obama is still in the lead by 171 votes.
There are only 4 primaries & 138 pledged delegates left in the nomination process.
TAKE NOTE: 114 of the undeclared super delegates are in states that Obama won & only 85 are from states that Hillary won.
Obama will be our nominee.
Seriously, Obama winning the nomination is the ONLY way the Dems will win in the general election. Hillary has a VERY strong Dem base...but the swing votes WON'T vote for her. Obama will get the majority of Dems, the Independents & the crossover republicans. And don't forget the millions of new voters Obama's campaign helped register...the Dem party is bigger and broader than ever. It's a no-brainer on the national scale

Posted by: Our Only Hope | May 22, 2008 12:05 AM | Report abuse

How could the voters of MI cast their ballots "in good faith" if Obama, Edwards and other reasonable candidates weren't on the ballot? Let's not forget that Hillary signed the pledge to remove the delegates from MI & FL.

Posted by: hillaryis44 | May 22, 2008 12:05 AM | Report abuse

You don't get it -- Clinton's not running this show. We, her voters, are

Posted by: NO Justice NO PEACE | May 22, 2008 12:05 AM | Report abuse

Annie Oakley for President '08

Posted by: Buffalo Bill | May 22, 2008 12:04 AM | Report abuse

"what brainless id**ts clinton supporters are!"
i can say the same about all you guys supporting obama. he is where he is only because he is black. he is a looser. his wife is a looser and there is no room for these kind of people in the white house.
mccain democtratS will show the power comes november.
I WILL NEVER VOTE FOR OBAMA.

Posted by: mike | May 22, 2008 12:04 AM | Report abuse

words of wisdom knows baseball as poorly as he knows politics

hilary has lost. before this began florida and michigan were stripped because they broke the rules.

game over. obama has the votes. ms clinton does not.

but she will do whatever she can, even if it is destroying him, destroying the Democratic party, destroying the party's strong association with black votes, creating divisions between all segments of the population.

the power is the thing. not what is right or decent. the power.

but we can fight the power!

(of course, as the current wife of a president, i am still rooting for mrs. clinton. it increases my chances the next time. you know, i was under sniper fire and ate bad meals at state dinners just like she did.)

Posted by: laura bush in 2012 | May 22, 2008 12:04 AM | Report abuse

Hillary a 'reform' republican has garnered the support of W Virginia and Kentucky. Two struggling states with bad literacy levels. She is also fighting for more do overs in Florida.A state that just messed things up 8 yrs ago. She a Clinton is once again employing us and them politics. *See Bill Clinton. Please anyone but her, Obama, Arnold ,Napolitano ,Gregoire, Lingle,or anyone but another Clinton or Bush. Please say america will finally see the ruse of this era.

Posted by: c Greis | May 22, 2008 12:04 AM | Report abuse

Unbelievable. She is clearly in this for personal reasons. To mask that disdainable motive, she drapes herself in the "bigger cause" of the moment - sexism, being an example for young women, assuring the votes from Michigan and Florida count. No doubt, there is sexism in this campaign - Clinton's generation of women vote for her because she is the woman. Moreoverm if Michigan and Florida wanted to be counted, then they should not have moved their primaries. Harold Ickes, one of the Clinton Campaign's series of rejects, retards, and failures, voted for the rules - He is on the rules committee. Clinton also approved of these rules - Of course that was when she was on the "inevitability tour," where her, Bill, and anyone else in their sphere assumed she would win because "she deserves it."
To be a proud American, suck it up. You lost.

Posted by: Eric Sims Jr. | May 22, 2008 12:04 AM | Report abuse

"Scranton '64; McCarthy, Reagan, Rockefeller '68; Humphrey, Wallace '72; Reagan, Udall, Brown '76; Kennedy '80; Hart, Jackson '84; Jackson '88; Buchanan, Brown '92; Buchanan '96. All those guys took it to the convention when they had less chance than Hillary has now and there was hardly a peep about how they were obligated to be good little men, genuflect before the media-anointed, and get the hell off the stage. Yet the first serious female candidate is held up as a crazed megalomaniac if she even thinks about following their example.

She should go to Denver and fight to have Florida and Michigan seated."

----------------------

You do realize what most of those candidates who took the fight to the convention have in common, right? Yeah, for most of them their party lost in November, other than the years when Jerry Brown took it to the convention. Plus pre-1970, it was still somewhat normal to have things decided at the convention.

If Hillary takes it to the convention, no matter how bad of a campaign Obama runs (or how great a campaign McCain runs) if he loses in November, her legacy will be she opened a division in the party and helped cost the Dems a Presidential election in a quixotic attempt to win it. Whether true or not, that will be how history will write this. It'll be hard for her to run again in 2012 and get wide support from the party insiders if that is her real motivation here.

Do you think she'll get 85+% of the black vote (like Gore and Kerry got in 2000 and 2004) in 2012? Hillary would need the same monolithic margin of 80+% of the black vote to tip some states like OH, PA, MI, etc, to her column also. This isn't a new phenomenon for Democratic candidates just because a black guy is running this year. Since this current Red/Blue map has become the norm the last 16 years or so, there are a lot of blue states the Dems win mainly because of large turnout among a monolithic bloc of black voters.

Besides, I heard rumors the Dems will decide how to seat FL and MI in the next few weeks and this will all be academic as soon as the Superdelegates decide. No need to go to the convention for that issue.

Posted by: John E. | May 22, 2008 12:04 AM | Report abuse

The redneck Republican legislators are laughing so hard that the cheap beer is spurting out their nostrils. Who'da thunk that the spouse of the man who chose gays in the military as his first fight as president could be be this moronic?

Posted by: Fred in Georgia | May 22, 2008 12:04 AM | Report abuse

http://www.newsweek.com/id/138109

Seriously -- no wonder most of Clinton's supporters are uneducated. They can't do simple math.

But what is more laughable is how Clinton herself can't figure it out. Of course, with someone like McAuliffe on her side, it's no surprise. He let Bush win two terms on his watch through pure idiocy, and now he's blown yet another slam dunk campaign opportunity.

Team Clinton = Team Idiot

Posted by: Captain Jack Sparrow | May 22, 2008 12:04 AM | Report abuse

The redneck Florida Republican legislators are laughing so hard that the cheap beer is spurting out their nostrils. Who'da thunk that the spouse of the man who chose gays in the military as his first fight as president could be be this moronic?

Posted by: Fred in Georgia | May 22, 2008 12:04 AM | Report abuse

I live in Michigan and there is no way that I will vote for Obama.


Obama did polls in Michigan, that is why he didnt want the state to re-vote.

Funny, how the black community wanted voting rights for so long, once they get voting rights, they pull this.

What a joke.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 12:04 AM | Report abuse

How can one person be so wrong?
Have you been asleep?
Hillary had everything going for her:
200 superdelegates
over 200 million in the bank
The Clinton name
And she lost...
It is time that you open your eyes and really...listen. It seems you haven't been listening, that is why you do not know who Obama is. Here is Obama's senate history:

During the first (8) eight months of his elected service he sponsored over 820 bills including:
233 regarding healthcare reform,
125 on poverty and public assistance,
112 crime fighting bills,
97 economic bills,
60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,
21 ethics reform bills,
15 gun control,
6 veterans affairs and many others.
His first year in the U.S. Senate, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427. These included the following:
**the Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 (became law),
**The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, (became law),
**The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate,
**The 2007 Government Ethics Bill, (became law),
**The Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill, (In committee), and many more.
In all since he entered the U.S. Senate, Senator Obama has written 890 bills and co-sponsored another 1096.

This rubbish that he has not done anything while in the senate is only viable if you are too ignonrant and closed-minded to look at BOTH records

Posted by: Kevin | May 22, 2008 12:02 AM | Report abuse

Unbelievable. She is clearly in this for personal reasons. To mask that disdainable motive, she drapes herself in the "bigger cause" of the moment - sexism, being an example for young women, assuring the votes from Michigan and Florida count. No doubt, there is sexism in this campaign - Clinton's generation of women vote for her because she is the woman. Moreoverm if Michigan and Florida wanted to be counted, then they should not have moved their primaries. Harold Ickes, one of the Clinton Campaign's series of rejects, retards, and failures, voted for the rules - He is on the rules committee. Clinton also approved of these rules - Of course that was when she was on the "inevitability tour," where her, Bill, and anyone else in their sphere assumed she would win because "she deserves it."
To be a proud American, suck it up. You lost.

Posted by: Eric Sims Jr. | May 22, 2008 12:02 AM | Report abuse

The Superdelegates don't want Hillary, but they don't want Obama either.

They have realized that to go with Obama means they will be rid of her this spring, and rid of Obama in November.

That sounds the best to them. They are willing to take a dive this year to get a whole new candidate in four years.

You've all taken dives before, for a friend, or after a hard night -

The Superdelegates are taking a dive for Obama.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2008 12:00 AM | Report abuse

So let me make sure I have it right:
Cry your way to the presidency
Jump up and down and throw a tyrade
The delegates count
The delegates don't count
Lie about sniper fire
The super deglegates count
The super delegates don't count
Change the numbers
The popular vote doesn't count
The popular vote is the only vote that counts
Play by the rules
Don't play by the rules
Whatever it takes, we will win...
WHAT KIND OF LEADERSHIP IS THAT?!
31M in debt to her campaign....
What does that mean for the debt to our nation if she were president?
And BTW, maybe the real question is WHY CAN'T SOMEONE WITH THE CLINTON NAME AND POWER BASE WIN AGAINST OBAMA DEFINITIVELY?!!!!

Posted by: Val from Maryland | May 21, 2008 11:59 PM | Report abuse

i live in florida and i want my vote to count. sorry Obama you cannot arrange the rules according to your needs. (this what they do in the arab countries - not here).
and if all votes are counte clinton will be the winner. hillary should run as an independent - she will win. otherwise all these votes will go to the repbulicans. at least mccain knows what he is doing

Posted by: mira | May 21, 2008 11:58 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is going to stay in the race all summer long. First she has the chance that something will come out about Obama, which it just might.


Second, she can fundraise the whole time. She has a huge debt which she can pay off.


She is almost done with the primaries.


Hillary has a chance.

She really does. Obama is not going to win this fall - any superdelegate endorsing Obama now is doing so WITH THE FULL KNOWLEDGE THAT OBAMA WILL TANK IN THE FALL ELECTION.

.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:58 PM | Report abuse

There sure seems to be a whole lot of dumb a$$ people on this site. And they all seem to Billary fans. What a sad group.

Posted by: Hillary08? | May 21, 2008 11:58 PM | Report abuse

I find something odd. When people suggest Obama is where he is only because is black, they forget the other side of the equation:

Would Hillary R. Clinton be where she is if she were black?

EVERYBODY knows the answer to that question...

Posted by: Ronn | May 21, 2008 11:57 PM | Report abuse

Obama thinks the American way is to push Hillary out and force her to be a quitter.

Well, Obama, we Americans who LOVE THIS COUNTRY do not agree!

Did you hear that Michelle Obama?

TRUE AMERICANS SAY TAKE IT TO THE CONVENTION AND BATTLE TILL THE LAST THE TRUE AMERICAN IS STANDING ----- AND WE ALL KNOW THIS IS HILLARY R. CLINTON!!!!!!

Posted by: onto the convention | May 21, 2008 11:57 PM | Report abuse

Clinton should stay in the race until June 3 after all of the American people have cast their votes, after that there is NO REASON for her to stay in this race!!! If she takes this to the convention we might as well roll out the red carpet for John McCain at the front steps of the White House, because Obama will not have a chance to focus on the general election with Hillary nipping at his heels.

The primary is based on the amount of delegates not the popular vote. If the popular vote worked in Gore's favor during the general election, events in this country would have turned out differently. But it's all about the math and Obama is 60+ delegates away from clinching the nomination.

Posted by: Jennifer | May 21, 2008 11:55 PM | Report abuse

The democratic party is a complete joke - they certainly don't have any business going anywhere near the White House - I do not want the democrats making any decisions about the national security of this nation.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:55 PM | Report abuse

what brainless id**ts clinton supporters are!

Posted by: chinku | May 21, 2008 11:54 PM | Report abuse

hummmn
if obama was in clinton's shoes and still holding out/on despite clearly losing, the media would beat him down to a pulp.

typical sore loser.
and one winning votes on what HER husband did. being married to a doctor doesn't make me able to see patients.

Posted by: jack doe | May 21, 2008 11:54 PM | Report abuse

another obamadrone exhibiting "class" and "intelligence":

what brainless idiots clinton supporters are!

Posted by: chinky | May 21, 2008 11:50 PM

Posted by: "...for the first time in my adult lifetime i am proud of my country...." | May 21, 2008 11:54 PM | Report abuse

"We believe Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina play a unique and special role in the nominating process," said Patti Solis Doyle, campaign manager for Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y.
"And we believe the DNC's rules and its calendar provide the necessary structure to respect and honor that role."
The decision to deny new primary dates would directly affect Michigan and other states, like Florida and Wyoming's Republican caucuses, who have made moves to leapfrog their primaries.
Democratic presidential candidates Clinton, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.; Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn.; Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del.; New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and John Edwards have all signed pledges to ignore states who move up their primaries, specifically Michigan and Florida.

Posted by: Our Only Hope | May 21, 2008 11:53 PM | Report abuse

Thank you Hillary. As a prolife white male I am all for your effort to carry this until the last days of the convention. Who cares if you win or lose. I know that in the end I'll win. We'll elect McCain and my country will be saved.

Posted by: Hillary08 | May 21, 2008 11:53 PM | Report abuse

"It's fairly clear that this is about money now. Hillary has lent her campaign millions of dollars and she wants it back."


She can suspend her campaign indefinitely, there will be fundraisers to restore her fortune. At this moment, she is running up debt. This is not about money. She wants the nomination.


She will destroy everything in her path to get it, and if she doesn't get it, she will destroy any other Democrat's chance of getting it.

This is not a good woman.

Posted by: Jane C. | May 21, 2008 11:52 PM | Report abuse

Ok, phew. The uncommitted super delegates declined hillary's offer of chelsea for their vote. They did, however, make a counter offer. Hillary escorted them to a back room and went to work.

They said they promised to be there for her at the convention.

Way to take the problem in your own hands.

Hillary 08

Posted by: omg | May 21, 2008 11:52 PM | Report abuse

IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT SEN. OBAMA WANTS. The rules were made a long time ago. What is wrong with all these people who don't want to follow the rules? The people of Florida and Mich. should have mobilized a year ago. But I guess the hand to mouth culture of the new america does not figure that they must sleep in the beds they make. If you allow a rules change now the democratic primary process with be an even bigger joke next time. Get involved on the front end and quit whining.

Posted by: cm grigg | May 21, 2008 11:51 PM | Report abuse

the changeling


What does it tell you if a party has to resort to making candidates sign statements like that ?>>????

It tells you that the party does not have the authority to make the decision in the first place.

Lame attempt at enforcement.

Allow me to tell you Florida and Michigan are not going to cooperate with lame attempts to intimidate them in 2012 either.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:51 PM | Report abuse

I'm getting a vision. Hillary Clinton is going to form a new centrist party. Populist, for the working people, etc. The Populist Party? The Labor Party?
Get ready!

Posted by: Sleeping in Seattle | May 21, 2008 11:51 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton is a disgrace to the party and to her gender.
She complains that she has been the victim of gender bias in the race to date but has carried the white male vote in many places, often in places where race is considered an important factor in the voting by those responding to polls.
She has changed her view of the rules she was fine with before the pendulum swung for Obama.
She has raced the spectre of whites not voting for a black man again and again.
She is a dishonest person who has lied often during the campaign, and I am not only referring to her "misspoken" remarks when she recalled being under fire.
She is at base a needy person whose needs are so strong for approval that she has become a bad person in pursuit of that approval.
Sad.

Posted by: Richard McDonough | May 21, 2008 11:51 PM | Report abuse

Every time you hear an Obama supporter argument all you hear about is references to family siblings fighting, children fighting, teachers reprimanding school children, etc.

It is so nice to hear the "white educated masses" or "black voice" that supports BO. So educated.

hahahahahahahhahahahah

Posted by: Madam President | May 21, 2008 11:51 PM | Report abuse

>>> "I live in Washington state and everyone is still talking about it. This was total cheating with Obama people."

Huh? Attendees at my caucus was 9:1 Obama. My girlfriend's caucus in Woodinville was 11:1 Obama. My friend's caucus up in Bellingham was 7:1 Obama. Down in Olympia, my friend's caucus was 6:1 Obama. I'm not talking only about results, I'm talking about people in attendance.

Do you have any hard facts?

Posted by: P Diddy | May 21, 2008 11:50 PM | Report abuse

This tenacity vs hate to quit is not helping either of my daughters or my grand children. Hil wants it anyway that she can get it.And she's demanding it,like a spoiled brat in a temper tantrum, for the white collar folks and who ever, to give her this nomination. Remember,when she proved to some folks that she could whip up on the boys and win. Plus, she went to an all girl's college and got all toughen up for this league for the boys. Now Hillary needs to call K.Rogers for a lesson to learn some ettiquette about holding and folding when it is time to quit. On the last Primary, she needs to go; take her off all future ballots; and send her back to the Senate to aid GB in his exiting stages, because Hillary is not helping the Dems and she obviously does not give a hoot. We still must go on and I am one who has been going longer than she. I am 70+ from Ky and Hil has messed over us as women and as a party. We need not appease her any longer. Enough already.

Posted by: Mamamay | May 21, 2008 11:50 PM | Report abuse

way to go hillary!!! don;t give up we are behind you. you are the only democrat who can change things in washington

Posted by: nora | May 21, 2008 11:50 PM | Report abuse

what brainless idiots clinton supporters are!

Posted by: chinky | May 21, 2008 11:50 PM | Report abuse

I won't vote for Barack because of his voting record:

Hillary voted NO on Dick Cheney's Energy bill. Barack voted yes.
Hillary voted no on Bush's Class Action Fairness Act. Barack voted yes.
Hillary voted no on the confirmation of Thomas Griffith to Federal Judge (Leahy voted No also). Griffith is fiercely anti-Title IX. Barack voted yes.
Hillary denounced the republicans for the vote to keep Terri Schaivo alive. Barack voted with the republicans.

Hillary is a true blue democrat. Barack is..well, I don't know what he is.
Barack is also backed by Ethanol. We subsidize ethanol and it drives our food prices up.
Why will I vote McCain if Barack is nominee?
McCain, like Hillary can handle two wars in the middle east.
This election is between two experienced and honest senators: Clinton and McCain.
Barack, go back to kindergarten.

Posted by: JUST SAY NO OBAMA | May 21, 2008 11:49 PM | Report abuse

Response to poster named laurabush in 2012


Obama does not have the majority of delegates needed for nomination which is 2209


You can say your team won in the middle of the season, however it is simply not true.


A team can still score in the ninth inning. The Obama people are attempting to end the game in the seventh inning.


.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 21, 2008 11:49 PM | Report abuse

Give us Obama just because he is half-Black.

We will give you McCain just because he is a patriot.

Posted by: HILLARY WINS GENERAL | May 21, 2008 11:47 PM | Report abuse

People get need to freaking get over it. If she does go to the convention it won't be the first time it went that far. The superdelegates shouldnt have been such scary cats and throught their support behind who they wanted a long time ago, and the dnc should have placed the florida and michigan delegates a long time ago. People talk so much crap about how evil Hillary is just because she is fighting. Its sickening no one can saything about Obama because everyone claims its racisim or he says its kitchen sink or whatever like he is above commenting to simple mortals god forbid you question his wife on her comments lay off my wife, even though Hillary went through hell when bill was first beign elected. All this talk about change is nonsense the plain and simple truth is that people were excited in this race not because of Obama's supposed ablity to bring about change or Hillary's supposed experince. People were excited because Obama was black(at least he will claim the title even though he makes sure you know his mama was white so what makes him more black than white especially when he was raised by his white family) They were excited because hillary was a woman. And as much as things changes how they stay the same looks as in history women will need to stand in line again and wait. Don't blame Hillary if Obama looses because he is not moderate enough for the blue dog democrats.

Posted by: rachel | May 21, 2008 11:47 PM | Report abuse

YES A CALL FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY

Florida and Michigan have the ball in their court now - the Democrats don't want the voices of Florida and Michigan citizens to be heard while the democratic nomination is still being decided?

How about if there is a movement within Florida and Michigan to deny the democratic party nominee ballot access in November in return. A fitting response. If the democrats do not want to count ALL of delegates elected on the dates selected by the STATE LEGISLATURE, then the democratic nominee should not be recognized on the ballots of those states in November.

There is no way that the democratic party should expect ANY cooperation from Florida or Michigan.

Florida and Michigan have the CONSTITUTIONAL POWER to set the rules for their own elections. The Constitution does not give the parties the right to set the rules for elections, nor does the Constitution give the parties power to select Nevada and South Carolina to hold elections before Florida and Michigan.

If the democrats do not want to respect Florida and Michigan, it doesn't have to go the other way either.

Each state should make a law that states that no political party can have its nominee on the ballots in Florida and in Michigan if the delegates selected are not counted BEFORE the nominee is decided, in this case when one candidate has the majority of delegates.

In the case of Michigan, place the provision in a bill which includes other items and negotiate a way to have the Governor agree.

In the interests of fairness, Obama has only himself to blame for actively attempting to PREVENT re-vote in Florida and Michigan. Obama has sought to take advantage of this issue, and has not lended any help in solving this issue.

Quite to the contrary, there has been an active campaign by the Obama people to PREVENT the re-votes and STOP the voters of Florida and Michigan from counting in the Democratic nomination process.

Obama has taken this course because his lead looks much stronger without Florida and Michigan delegates - little help to the right to vote or to democracy itself.


SANCTIONS AGAINST THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 21, 2008 11:46 PM | Report abuse

When children can't get their way, they often throw a tantrum to gain attention. Then it becomes necessary for adults to take control and sometimes it is necessary to punish the child.

Poor Hillary. Some children never grow up. Too bad she doesn't see what her future will look like.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:46 PM | Report abuse

Wow,
The author, like so many others, has been duped into believing that Hilary is essentially trying to finish out the race, get as many votes as possible, proclaim her fortitude and "girl power" and then support the winner, Obama.

Uh, no. She will continue her pursuit of the Presidency and the only way for her to do that is by being the Democratic nominee. This will not stop on June 3. It will not stop until the super delegates (ahem) man up and proclaim what we all know to be fact. That Obama has won. Like him or not, he's won. He's lapped Hilary, even though she claims that they are really neck and neck.

Aint true. But she will continue. This is not about what's best for the party or the country, and certainly not about what's best for the voters or the electoral process.

She did not turn a blind eye to Bill for more than 30 years to have this snatched away by someone none of us knew just 12 months ago. If I worked for the Obama team I would certainly not turn my eyes from her.

Posted by: laurabush in 2012 | May 21, 2008 11:45 PM | Report abuse

NO Justice NO PEACE. It should be sent to every news media in the country. They are supposed to be the investigative reporters. What an articulate expression of many LONG TIME DEMOCRATS.
The attitude of Dean(DNC) thow out the old bring in the new is the the MOST hateful thing I have ever witnessed in our Party. We have worked for our party for many elections and yet now Dean & Co. are riding on infatuation instead of logic. Give us this vision that we must win in November with a candidate that will outperform Bush. We have to do this right and the only person that will help our party in November is Hillary.

Posted by: Martha | May 21, 2008 11:45 PM | Report abuse

Florida's 4.2 million registered Democrats were told that their primary didn't count. 1.7 million of them voted anyway. Once the DNC's decision was announced (and it was a decision onto which all of the candidates signed on), there is no claiming that any election then held is a fair representation of that state's electorates.

I'm astonished that the Clinton's flawed reasoning is even being considered. How is this possible?

My state, the largest in the nation, followed the rules even though there is great discontent here about not being able to shape the candidate list. I didn't get to vote for my preferred candidate because by the time we got to vote (March 4th), my first and second choices had dropped out of the race.

If Florida's and Michigan's votes are going to be counted, how about we bring ALL of the candidates back into the race and re-hold all of the elections again in all of the states?

I feel as if we have been played by the Clintons, I resent it, and I can't remain in a party that stands for this.

Posted by: Jane C. | May 21, 2008 11:45 PM | Report abuse

"Here is the agreement ALL of the candidates signed before the primaries began (back when Hillary was Queen):"

Four State Pledge Letter 2008
Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina
August 31, 2007
WHEREAS, Over a year ago, the Democratic National Committee established a 2008 nominating calendar; WHEREAS, this calendar honors the racial, ethnic, economic and geographic diversity of our party and our country;
WHEREAS, the DNC also honored the traditional role of retail politics early in the nominating process, to insure that money alone will not determine our
presidential nominee;
WHEREAS, it is the desire of Presidential campaigns, the DNC, the states and the American people to bring finality, predictability and common sense to the
nominating calendar.
THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential
election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa,
Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as "campaigning" is defined by rules and regulations of the DNC.
___________________________ __________
John/Jane Doe, Doe for President DATE


"Which doesn't really explain why Clinton didn't make an issue out of Michigan and Florida until it became clear she might not be able to win the nomination without those contests counting.

Or why Clinton campaign senior adviser Harold Ickes, as a member of the DNC's rules and bylaws committee, voted to not recognize Michigan and Florida's delegates, thus -- I suppose -- taking for granted our precious right to vote."


i can not vote for someone who agrees to a set of rules and then disavows them when they don't suit her needs. she does not believe in fair play.
she has not shown a penchant for keeping her campaign in budget why would she have one for a nations budget? she has been boldly divisive and egoic. a person who lives in a glass castle and continues to hurl boulders. NO WAY.
i want change.


Posted by: the changeling | May 21, 2008 11:45 PM | Report abuse

Are the Clinton supporters that are so adamant actually expecting to go to the convention and have Hillary be the nominee? The numbers just aren't there, and they're not going to just magically appear. When the delegates are finally tallied and the decision is final, are they going to go into a rage of shocked disbelief and throw a tantrum? The reason the other candidates dropped out was because they reached a point where the numbers just don't add up. Hillary is not being a tenacious fighter, she is being obstinate, selfish and blind to reality. I for one don't want any of those qualities in a president, having made it through the last 8 years. Time for a change.

Posted by: David | May 21, 2008 11:44 PM | Report abuse

Hillary has become completely pathetic, and now reminds me of Howard Dean, Eggleton, Dukakis, and other never-heard-from-agains.

I'm white, reasonably well educated, and coming up on 69 years of age. The reason why I will vote for Obama has nothing at all to do with glass ceilings or misogeny or alleged media bias.

Instead, it is due to the fact that Hillary, despite their $109 million income, simply doesn't represent my interests, and Obama does. Oh, and frankly I am tired of the Clintons -- eight years was quite enough.

I'm not a blue-collar unionist nor a recent immigrant, and although I don't look down on such people or wish them any ill, their needs and desires are not the same as my own.

Likewise, the Republican's natural alliance with the rich and powerful lawyers, bankers, insurance companies, oil producers, and fat-cat CEOs, together with the neocons and the religious right, also completely fail to address my concerns.

Under other circumstances, if Obama were not nominated, I might be inclined to cross over to the maverick McCain rather than vote for Hillary. I did so when I voted for George Bush in 2000 (to my everlasting shame), because I didn't trust Al Gore to stand up for my Second Amendment rights.

Unfortunately, given McCain's support for Bush's war, that isn't an option, much less if he selects an anti-science VP like Mike Huckabee, or others who espouse creationism and such nonsense.

Maybe it is time for a three-party system. Let Hillary have Appalachia, Obama have the urban liberals, and McCain have the neocons and Bible-bangers. Now no one would get anything done without some form of compromise, and that might actually be healthy.

But assuming we stick with a two-party system, Hillary can either give up gracefully, and assume the mantle of the Lion of the Senate as the esteemed Senator from New York, now that Ted Kennedy is so unfortunately likely to succumb within the next year or so, or she can become as irrelevant as Howard Dean and the other wannabees.

It's her choice. Go with dignity, and perhaps be resurrected and respected as Ted Kennedy was after Chappaquiddick and even as Nixon was in his later years, or become irrelevant and tagged as a sore loser and party-destroyer.

I pray she will make the right decision. I don't want to lose her insight and ability, but I don't want her as President.

Posted by: SuiteB | May 21, 2008 11:43 PM | Report abuse

After yet, another Tuesday
Obama still has it, going away.

Now people are talking
about the dead woman walking.

The race was not, much of a thriller
in the state, of the Bourbon swiller.

In the beaver state, of Oregon
Barack was again, the chosen one.

Hillary is whining, about the press
go take a pill, for your duress.

For two months now, the race has been over
Hill wants to find, a four-leaf clover.

Winning in November should be the key
why does she need to be a cry baby.

Now thirty million, in the hole
losing the election, is her only goal.

Super delegates, are slipping away.
misogyny was, her whine-of-the day.

Hillary, Hillary, don't be a fool
you lost the game, you can't change the rule.

Posted by: NorcalRuss | May 21, 2008 11:43 PM | Report abuse

AFS posting at 11:10 does noot exist She is a figment of the imagination of the Obama campaign


The Obama people are frauds, they make up posts from fake people.

Notice the demographic outline at the beginning.

What a lame attempt Axelrod !!!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:43 PM | Report abuse

We live in a democracy. ALL the votes are supposed to count!
And by the way, how about an investigation regarding the many irregularities in the caucas states? The numbers don't tally right! Talk about OUT OF WHACK PERCENTAGES! I live in Washington state and everyone is still talking about it. This was total cheating with Obama people.

Posted by: librairie | May 21, 2008 11:42 PM | Report abuse

I just spent the last 30 minutes scanning the comments and taking an un-official count. I know, I have way to much time on my hands! I Counted Hillary fans, Obama fans and those comments that focused on the Delegate seating in a way that excluded putting them in either of the other two camps. The results were DELEGATE SEATING 68, HILLARY 46, SENATOR OBAMA (they next President of the United States) 142.
Those who don't believe my count should get started doing their own darn count!!!

Posted by: downhill240 | May 21, 2008 11:41 PM | Report abuse

Here is the money quote from the Clinton Campaign in Sept 07......

On Sept. 1, the Clinton campaign issued this ringing statement:

We believe Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina play a unique and special role in the nominating process. And we believe the DNC's rules and its calendar provide the necessary structure to respect and honor that role. Thus, we will be signing the pledge to adhere to the DNC approved nominating calendar.

So there was a signed pledge, no?

Posted by: John E. | May 21, 2008 11:40 PM | Report abuse

Response to self sycophant

The race baiting that Obama engaged in in South Carolina was not good for the party either.


If Obama didnt want Hillary to fight dirty, he shouldn't have started it.


Obama is getting what he deserves.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:39 PM | Report abuse

I hope she stays in. The democratic party is not as democratic as they think they are. One vote, One count. That is democracy. Screw you half assed jounalists who would love to see that under qualified ass in the White House, you bastards should be ashamed of trying to steal this election. Fight Hillary, fight, many love your tenacity, that ias what we want in America. Not the Harvard man, as always, nothing but a suit.

Posted by: paukune | May 21, 2008 11:38 PM | Report abuse

I don't have tape of Hillary agreeing with the decision...there is an audio interview I heard on the news last month. But here are some articles.....

See here http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/09/hillarys_brier_patch.html

From Sept 2007 talks about Clinton's strategy in agreeing to not seat FLA and MI.

And here recently on Slate recaps the whole thing. http://www.slate.com/id/2188985/pagenum/all/

Posted by: John E. | May 21, 2008 11:38 PM | Report abuse

To WTB:

Well said, and exactly right.

Posted by: R.C. | May 21, 2008 11:37 PM | Report abuse

wow, lively thread, but seriously,,,Bringing up Ohio, Penn, Indy, basically the great white north , is really a weak argument, considering a democrat hasnt won the midwest since Carter,And ever since then the midwest has been properly dubbed " the Bible Belt" not because we need a belt for our holey britches, but because we are the people who cling to our religion , guns and small town ideals Obama was talking about, and we need to stop.Every election cycle drives deeper divides into the Mid-west, and every four years, hundreds of thousands of more jobs are leaving here, not to anopther part of america, but to another country because our Small Town ideals wont let us see the politicians for who they really are, crooks and liars giving way to Corprate greed every step of the way.Its not about taxing the rich, or balincing the budget,, its about paying for your deeds, and being righteous about your actions,, So far the Mid-west has
missed the mark in the last three major elections, so dont let Bigotry or racism divide this country, we cant handle much more divisiveness than we have gotten from Bush.
I made three predictions in 1999, when bush was running for his first,,, We'll be at war in the Middle East(Iraq, Afgan),,Hatred toward america will hit an all time high (9/11), And we will be closer to another depression like the beginning of the 1900's than we have been in a hundred years (hmmmmm) im not Nostradamus, but i think i nailed it on the head,

Posted by: bill | May 21, 2008 11:37 PM | Report abuse

And while I have no doubt much of the Obama bashers are trolls, I will point out that these decisions were made by all the candidates well before the actual elections. There was political pressure to go along with the DNC rules because running in MI and FL ran the danger of alienating the voters in contests approved to be held before Super Tuesday. Obama withdrew from MI and would have withdrawn from FL, but the FL officials would not allow it.

Also, the Obama campaign recently agreed to a compromise supported by the MI Dem party that would have seated the MI delegation with a four-delegate loss to Clinton. Clinton rejected the deal. Bottom line: they won't support ANY compromise.

I predict that Clinton is going to lose this matter on May 31. She's made it clear anything short of awarding her all the delegates that she says she won is unacceptable. As it's all or nothing for her, and the party NEEDS to enforce its rules, I predict she'll get nothing. The only incentive for a compromise from the standpoint of the party is to avoid a divisive convention fight, and Clinton is signaling that the price of avoiding that is just too high.

Meanwhile, by continuing to act as an obstructionist, Clinton is making it impossible to be acceptable to Obama as a running mate, which will no doubt enrage her simple-minded backers (well, they are, just like they are hardworking whites). She really DOES want Obama to lose so she can have a clear field in 2012.

Posted by: gbooksdc | May 21, 2008 11:37 PM | Report abuse

"Hillary Clinton will be the nominee."

The chances are zero.

Posted by: Chuckamok | May 21, 2008 11:37 PM | Report abuse

@@@@@@@@@

Chris C. wrote:

'it's hard to imagine Clinton staying in.'

YOU DON'T KNOW THE CLINTONS!


@@@@@@@@@

Posted by: klintonkoolaid | May 21, 2008 11:36 PM | Report abuse

Maybe Kentucky and West Virginia can be persuaded to leave the Union. Then Hillary can become their King with Huma Abedin as Queen and old Bill as Court Jester. That should "eliminate" the Clinton problem for the other 48 states.

Posted by: Huma Huma | May 21, 2008 11:36 PM | Report abuse

Obama says that the American people want straight and honesty - stolen from McCain.

He even said "si, se puedha" (the way he said it) in Spanish - stolen from Mexicans.

Here is some straight facts:

FACT - Hillary has won states that will total 308 electoral votes in November -- more than enough to carry the general election.

Hillary has won more votes than anyone running for the Democratic nomination in the history of the Democratic party.

Obama used his own lawyers to stop Michigan from revoting even though the money was put up by others to pay for it.

Obama took off his own name in Michigan because he knew he was going to be a big loser - just like WV & KY

Obama will not get elected without the more than 2 million voters in Florida and Michigan that he is trying to NOT be heard.

Obama will not get elected without the womens vote - which, sweetie, let me tell you - he will not get.

Obama will not get elected without his wife loving this country - and we know she doesn't.

Hillary has already proven herself with the electoral votes - the womens vote - the Latino vote (loyal Latinos!), yes and now even the mens vote, the Republican vote.

Donna Brazile said the Dems don't need the womens vote or the Latinos vote - well, I guess cuz she thinks Obama has the Black vote and the upper white educated vote then none of the rest matter - Brazile cares only that Obama is Black. Not about the party. Not about women. Not about this country.

Hillary Clinton will be the nominee.

Hillary Clinton should take this to the convention.

Hillary Clinton will be our fighter in the white house and no one, no one else will be accepted!

Hillary Clinton is the most qualified person EVER to run for president and all you hear is sexist remarks that she is only running cuz she was first lady, okayyyyyyyyyy.....

Obamadrones, get ready to salute MADAM PRESIDENT, HILLARY CLINTON!!!!!!!!!

http://www.hillaryclinton.com


Posted by: Take it to the Convention - UNTIL THE LAST DOG DIES!!!!!!!!!!!! | May 21, 2008 11:35 PM | Report abuse

MAC

Hillary should pick up a net 111 delegates on Obama if all of Florida and Michigan pledged delegates are counted.


In addition, the superdelegates could vote for her too.


Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:35 PM | Report abuse

My Goodness, the obamabots are out in full
force tonight. They must all be wired from
their lattes. I haven't seen such a movement since Jim Jones in Jonestown.

Anyone with half a brain (sorry obamabots,
that doesn't include you) knows that
Hillary has to do all that it takes to win this nomination. Sorry if that upsets some people. Too bad. Just remember
Obama nominee = President McCain.
Wake up people.

Posted by: Joe | May 21, 2008 11:34 PM | Report abuse

"Obama is not entitled to our votes. "

Then how come he got so many more than Clinton did?

"No justice, no peace, no brains."
But a very big mouth.

Kiss off.

Posted by: thrh | May 21, 2008 11:34 PM | Report abuse

Some may know this but the argument Clinton wants to spin about Florida votes counting because both were on the ballot doesn't hold water. What the fact is is, the ballot had a property tax initiative to change the state constitution one of the most important votes in years. With the hurricanes driving the insurance rates sky high and taxes tripling in just four years people turned out in force to vote. The problem is, they were older people and property owners and they made a primary vote even though it didn't count just because they were already there. In other words, Hillary got votes just by default. Young people who don't own homes or property, didn't bother to even go to the polls. They are a big part of what would have been Obamas voting base. He might as well not even have been on the ballot. The result is a falsehood and an illusion if you know the facts. Of course, Hillary never let a small thing like facts stand in the way.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:33 PM | Report abuse

Hillary and Obama agreed to the Mich and Florida rules, so why is she trying to re-write the rules?

She has absolutely no character.

She is cheating, we dont want a cheat and a sore loser as our leader.

Fl and MI were punished by the DNC, not Obama for moving the dates.

Hill knew it going in, Obama never campaigned there, so how come she wants all her votes counted which is illegal under the laws because they dont count per the rules laid before the primaries began and plus it assumes Obama would have got ZERO votes.

If any Hill supporter believes that is true then they are dispicable and disgraceful and should be ashamed of themselves and Hillary.

Posted by: mildbrew | May 21, 2008 11:33 PM | Report abuse

FL & MI VOTERS SHOULDN'T HAVE TO PAY

Those responsible for the Florida and Michigan deal should have to pay, not the voters. The state officials who set the early voting date should be fined a stiff personal penalty, and the votes should count. It's not fair for the voters to pay for their mistake.

Posted by: Billw | May 21, 2008 11:33 PM | Report abuse

To everyone pretending Hillary can't win:

Current:

Obama: 1961, Hillary: 1779

NOW with FULL Florida + Michigan delegates counted - too bad for Obama, if he didnt want that he shouldn't have blocked their revotes:

Obama: 2083, Hillary 1957

Thats a difference of only 126 delegates and amount which would shrink to close to 100 in the remaining primaries. Once Clinton appears a viable candidate again picking up 100 more superdelegates won't be problem - the talk is that MOST of the Obama leaning delegates have announced already while the Hill-leaning ones are waiting to see what happens with MI and FL.

Posted by: MAC | May 21, 2008 11:33 PM | Report abuse

Is it comical or just sad that Obama supporter are not smart or so disinterested in America, that they have not read "Living History" by Hillary Clinton. She answers everything and corrects all the falshoods you spew and drivel over all the blogs. At least have the interest to get the truth. They most likely have not even read "My Life" by Bill Clinton that gives you an idea of the job of a President. Some of us remeber his 78% approval ratings but Of course it is 1000 pages.
They probably do not know in 1932, the first year FD Roosevelt won the nomination, he won at the convention. They probably do not know Kennedy lost to Jimmy Carter at the convention. In fact most of our nominations are settled at the convention. On to the convention!! We cry foul, Obama cheated in Michigan,cheated the Michigan voters and cheated the American public, ran from problem and vacationed in Virgin Island 3/24/2008

Posted by: Martha Washington | May 21, 2008 11:32 PM | Report abuse

To people who count FL and MI in the vote totals--delegate or popular. That's voodoo math. THOSE VOTES DO NOT COUNT. They are NOT Democratic Party votes. They're votes sanctioned by the FL government, and they don't set the rules for the Dem. Party.

Quit LYING.

The popular vote is not a metric for measuring who should be the nominee. It's not a rule. And it represents a post-hoc rule change.

The problem with using the popular vote, aside from being the post-hoc change--is that changing the metric only changes one variable, pretending as if nothing else would have been different.

Had the popular vote been the standard, campaign strategies would have been different, meaning the popular vote totals would have been different. Under a popular vote rule, you wouldn't have both caucuses and primaries since the former have much lower turnout. Given that Obama won most/all caucuses, the most reasonable assumption is that he would have won those states in a primary, boosting his relative popular vote total.

You wouldn't have votes on different days because having vote under different days under different conditions puts non-like votes in competition with non-like votes. Under the current delegate system, votes only compete with each other for a given state. The delegate system greatly attenuates that because the results are only representative of the net results, putting net results in competition with net results. And net results are population-adjusted by the relative allocation of delegates.

Obama would've been on the MI ballot. Allowing campaigning in both FL and MI would've benefited Obama far more than Clinton since he had much less recognition and other states demonstrated that his support ballooned when he began campaigning there.

Posted by: jackstpaul | May 21, 2008 11:32 PM | Report abuse

To the author of the post Posted by: | May 21, 2008 11:21 PM:

You fixate on the campaign part of the sentence, but it actually states:

I shall not campaign or participate in any state

The 'or participate' part seems to be conveniently put aside. The other candidates removed their names from the MI ballot so that they adhered to this, namely, they did not participate. Obama and Edwards left their names on the Florida ballot after it became clear that Clinton went back on her word in regards to MI.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:31 PM | Report abuse

BRING BACK THE GLORIOUS CLINTON YEARS!

Bring back the pittance wages due to NAFTA. And the ones mostly (not all) voting for her were the ones most affected by it simply because they're not having a darkie in the Oval Office.

Bring back the lying and flagrant obstruction of justice (Whitewater)

Bring back the political job selling (Travelgate), and additional obstruction of justice (Filegate).

But most of all, bring back Bill Clinton turning the White House into a BROTHEL.

Hillary lovers really must have a stomach for this after Bosnia and NAFTA and the job selling, I don't see much changing except Bill's women might be a little older.

Posted by: Get me Tums | May 21, 2008 11:30 PM | Report abuse

Caucuses are hardly "undemocratic".

Anachronistic? Perhaps. Inconvenient? Perhaps.

But they are hardly "undemocratic". If anything, the exchange of ideas and debate between neighbors is perhaps the finest example of our democracy.

I personally think the caucuses we held here in WA were a complete waste of a Saturday. But I did appreciate getting the opportunity to meet my neighbors and debate with them. Oh, and the (useless) primary we held here in WA mirrored the caucus results almost exactly.

Could it be that Senator Obama has legitimate support from a slightly larger contingent of voters than Senator Clinton? Losing sucks, I know. Losing is akin to someone reaching down your throat and ripping your guts out. I hate it. Everyone does. But your character is defined more by how you lose than how you win.

In the coming weeks we will see Senator Clinton's true character.

Posted by: P Diddy | May 21, 2008 11:30 PM | Report abuse

Boycotting Obama Will Lead to Famine, Armageddon, Government-Controlled Uteruses, and other Scare Tactics

A lot of desperate Democrats are suddenly scrambling to "unify" with Clinton's supporters, now that they realize that their snow job of an election will lead to an Obama boycott in November. The classic line says that we need to avoid letting emotions interfere with judgment and to think about "the issues." Well, here's my answer (disclaimer: I do not have a uterus).

First of all, I do not need to clear my head and take a deep breath. I am a lifetime Democrat, and I have been voting for Democrats since the mid-80s. I am very experienced having my candidate lose, but then moving on to support the party ticket. In past primaries, for example, I voted for Dean, Bradley, and Jesse Jackson (twice!). I get the idea of party unity....Next.

Second, my vote represents more than just support for a set of standard liberal issues. It also protests liberal hypocrisy. The party espouses an equality rhetoric but has undermined it during this election. The party has bashed poor white people, as if they are responsible for the racially segregated nature of corporate America, U.S imperialism, and the exploitation of vulnerable consumers. The party has ignored Latino voters because recognizing them challenges the "only racists vote for Clinton script." The party has invented claims of racial injustice to demonize the Clintons. The party has ridiculed "uneducated" voters, even though Democrats supposedly represent disadvantaged people. Male party members and liberal media have constantly called for Clinton to drop out -- starting after Iowa -- in order to place an aura of doubt around her campaign. The party has completely ignored or even denied the sexist treatment of Clinton, while responding with absolute venom to any real or imagined "racism" directed towards Obama. The party has allowed Obama to wear multiple racial hats -- the nonracial black man, the just black enough to be an historic black president, and the black racial victim - to secure votes. But if Clinton deviates even slightly from a prior script, she is portrayed as a horrible witch who would do "anything to get elected." I refuse to join this madness.

Third, I am unmoved by the pro-Obama scare tactics ("what about Roe, the war, health care, etc.). These are just Karl Rovian "red alerts." Obama is not entitled to our votes. Whatever loyalty the party had from me prior to this election has been depleted. Earlier on when we wanted to discuss progressive issues, the Obama camp and the media silenced our efforts and instead focused on the big rock star pep rallies, Obamania, Camelot, weeping college students, and a host of other unimportant concerns. They told us that we and Clinton were cold and unhopeful, that Clinton was a mere "policy wonk," while Obama made people "feel good again." Suddenly, you want to talk about the issues because it benefits Obama. That's way too unprincipled for me.

Clearly the party leadership has determined that anytime Obama looks weak, the "boys" will endorse him or call for Clinton to leave because she is "hurting the party" and "kneecapping" the "first viable black presidential candidate." Well, party leadership and media, you made these rules; suffer the consequences. To paraphrase Obama, don't tell me my disgust with your behavior doesn't matter. Don't tell me sexism doesn't matter. Don't tell me liberal hypocrisy doesn't matter. Don't tell me I must vote for Obama in order to be a "real" Democrat. If being a real Democrat means bashing women, the poor, and the elderly, manipulating race, ignoring Latinos, and stifling dissent, then I respectfully resign my membership! Achieving justice requires sacrifice, brutal honesty, and passionate commitment. I will not "endorse anything to get a Democrat elected," and neither should you.

Posted by: NO Justice NO PEACE | May 21, 2008 11:30 PM | Report abuse

"Here's the thing: if Senator Obama does not need the votes in FL and MI in order to be nominated, he should agree to allowing the votes to be counted and we can all be done with this."

WHEN WILL ALL YOU BOZOS GET IT THROUGH YOUR THICK SKULLS? [Yup, I'm shouting!] It's not Obama's decision, any more than it is Clinton's. It's the National Democratic Party's decision. Jeez!

Posted by: tom | May 21, 2008 11:30 PM | Report abuse

I cannot remember such a hue and cry about the destruction of the political party when the last two primary candidates who were trailing took their campaigns all the way to the convention floor. So, now, when it's a woman -- who is MUCH CLOSER to the nomination than those failed candidates, Ronald Reagan and Edward Kennedy -- SHE's supposed to just give up "for the good of the party?" Puh-leeze. Myopic people just can't see the big picture, can they? FDR wasn't nominated until the FOURTH ballot at convention. The first serious female candidate for the U.S. Presidency *ever* and you think it's even remotely possible that she would drop out before it was ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that Obama was the party's nominee? To do what? Demonstrate definitively that a woman just doesn't have what it takes to get it into the end zone? Think clearly about this: It would be a monumental mistake for ANY female candidate in her historic position to give up BEFORE THE GAME WAS TRULY OVER.

There are any number of sports heroes and teams who are revered because they never gave up until it was over, who sometimes pulled off the most incredibly upset at the buzzer. But, in Hillary's case, giving it her all until the very end is now a defect, a moral or ethical failure, a personal weakness, an attempt to bring the temple down around her. Why? Because she's a woman? How stupid. Who can forget Michael Jordan taking the last shot of his NBA career with 5.2 seconds left in the 1998 final, and sinking it to win the championship? Everyone thinks of it as a storybook ending. But, maybe not. C'mon, there were five seconds left, the Bulls were losing... why didn't he just step aside and let Karl Malone win his first championship title, y'know, for the sake of the NBA? Jeez, what an ego, huh?

Posted by: WTB | May 21, 2008 11:29 PM | Report abuse

This is a sticky situation. I agree that Florida and Michigan should not go completely unrepresented in the convention. However, I don't think the solution is nearly as cut and dry as the Clinton campaign makes it out to be.

Just an example, some of the older members of the Democratic party understood the rules and consequences of changing the primary dates. As such, some of them thought it would be a waste of time to vote in the first place. The votes as stand do not accurately represent the views of ALL the Democratic voters in Michigan and Florida. And talk about disenfranchising voters... these would be the ones who have been loyal Democrats for years.

Secondly, in case some people need to be reminded, neither of the candidates campaigned in the states. The vote was based mostly on name recognition alone. Of course Hilary would win-- she's been in the news for the last decade and half. I'm sure if Obama was given the chance to organize as vigorously as he did in Iowa, the results would be starkly different.

Finally, I find the Clinton popular vote math mind-boggling. I don't particularly mind that MI and FL are included, I think it's fair to count their votes if not their delegates. But what is the logic behind excluding the caucus states? The implied message is "Michigan and Florida are important enough to count," but "Iowa, Colorado, Texas, Washington and Minnesota are not."

Again, who is disenfranchising more voters?

Posted by: Sophia | May 21, 2008 11:29 PM | Report abuse

The only question that counts is how much damage Hillary will do before she is confronted with the truth at the convention: Obama has more support, and wins the delegate count. She must be smoking crack, or she's just power mad.

Posted by: David | May 21, 2008 11:29 PM | Report abuse

Saw Clinton today, what a piece of s**t she is. People were laughing at her rant. One old woman as we were leaving said she thought she may be insane and everybody began laughing. She no longer talks about issues just how she is being cheated out of being president. What a sad image she has become.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:29 PM | Report abuse

Hill is bent upon proving her manhood and will destroy anything and everything in her path.

Cant see the bigger picture beyond her own selfish self image as the first woman president, a role she probably practiced in front of a mirror since she was a very young girl and the reason why she tolerated Bills infidelities all these years, now she's angry all her sacrifices are being undone by a BLACK MAN, how indignant, of all the things a BLACK MAN has upstaged her, an unknown, young Senator with a foreign sounding name has made all her sacrifices re: tolerating that fat blimpy womanizing Bill's phillandering amount to nothing...

thats what this is all about, not about her winning to make the nation better.

Its about making her time with Bill worthwhile. She kept quiet all these years when Bill was caught with so many women, because all Hill wanted was to become the first female President.

That is also why Bill is working so hard to have her elected, because one, he knows he owe's her bigtime, two that she will dump his fatty behind if she loses this.

We want a real self made first female President, not someone who becomes a President on the coattails of her former President hubby.

Now that would be glorious, to have someone like Obama come out of the blue because of her intelligence, character, background, education and self made worth, as the first Female President of the US.

I dont want another Bush Jr, or Clinton Jr or Mrs Clinton in office as Pres.

Posted by: mildbrew | May 21, 2008 11:28 PM | Report abuse

If only I was not so sure that Hillary is the better candidate. If only Obama would just be as clear as Hillary has been in expressing his plans and policies. If only I could pretend that Hillary and her supporters are simply racists. If only all of us Hillary supporters, literally half of the democratic party, could just get over the idea that we have opinions that matter. If only we wouldn't feel offended when others belittle our concerns, call us names, reduce our position to being against Obama instead of for Hillary, and try to demonize us for not having given up long ago. If only we didn't have opinions and didn't have votes, then the democratic party would not be divided, but it would only be half as big and half as powerful.

Posted by: NO Justice NO PEACE | May 21, 2008 11:28 PM | Report abuse

In addition to the opinion below that Obama is too liberal left for mainstream America, like the previous losers, might I add that his naiveté (I shall not use lobbyists - even if McCain says he won't, and then does) is very dangerous. He would also be ignoring the resources of a lot of very smart, influential, experienced and available people.

The best solution is for a more middle of the road Clinton with a VP named Obama, who can then gain some real experience and perspective on what political infighting is really about. Obama says no to lobbyists, no to big companies (don't they the pay peoples salaries and taxes??), no to Washington insiders (isn't that the definition of Congress and lobbyists?), no to rich people (tax 'em! tax 'em!)... Who is left? a bunch of idealistic inexperienced nobodies who then become Washington insiders? He needs to lose his political innocence. God help us!
If he were the VP Clinton would be stupid to not use him effectively. His silver tongue could crucify her, although he sure seems to NOT have the ability to get mad and express outrage except in idealistic detached Ivy League emotionless, but pretty, prose.
But it sure would make for a nice political fight in 2012. er... Sorry, next time the campaign will start in 2010!! God, really help us this time!

Posted by: John | May 21, 2008 11:28 PM | Report abuse

In her arrogant belief that she can tell everyone else what to think, Hillary ignores the rules that were established for the Democratic primary - rules she agreed to BEFORE she needed Florida and Michigan to salvage her failing campaign.

The Rules Committee isn't going to allow Michigan delegates to be seated per the January vote, given that Obama took his name off the ballot in cooperation with the DNC. They're not going to let Florida delegates count 100%, thereby encouraging a free-for-all in four years.

Hillary knows this. Her strategy now is to see how much she can EXTORT from Obama and the DNC in exchange for getting out of their way. She's not thinking about the big picture - only what's in it for her.

Yes, Hillary's a fighter ... for herself ... but the hole she's in just keeps getting deeper.

This situation is just what the superdelegates were intended to remedy. After June 3rd they will hopefully move en masse to support Obama, sending a clear signal that he will be the nominee regardless of further manipulations by the Clinton machine. From that point the media should simply tune her out. No spotlight, no money, no problem.

Posted by: Barbara Campbell | May 21, 2008 11:27 PM | Report abuse

"If you count Fla and Mi and give Obama zero votes, then she is winning."

But only if you "disenfranchise" as it were all of the caucus states.

Posted by: tom | May 21, 2008 11:27 PM | Report abuse

I wonder why Sen Clinton does not take the issue to a Republican panel and get it settled. Obviously she's contemplating the republican party. She always whining that if we had the republicans' rules she would have been the nominee by now. She cannot afford looking at herself and not being a president. That's why she accepted to put her feelings under the rules of Monica Lewvinsky (a 20 year-old girl). Now the ferry tale comes to life. Sorry Mrs Clinton, we cannot back the time. When it is over, it is over. Good bye. If you believe in God, we will see in the after life. For now, it's over. We do love you, and with all due respect, we saying good bye. This is life: the best things come and go. The people you we love the most we watching them dying. Sometimes, we just cant help. We have to take it as is. Bye Darling

Posted by: Zaco | May 21, 2008 11:27 PM | Report abuse

Here's the thing: if Senator Obama does not need the votes in FL and MI in order to be nominated, he should agree to allowing the votes to be counted and we can all be done with this. If, on the other hand, Senator Obama might not be nominated if the votes are counted, then Senator Clinton is exactly right to insist that they do count - and in my book it dosen't say much for Senator Obama's respect for the will of the people.

The more I see of Senator Clinton, the more I like her; but like her or not, I'm sure everyone would agree that this woman is very tough and tenacious will be a great president (kinda in the mold of Harry Truman, I think).

Posted by: R.C. | May 21, 2008 11:26 PM | Report abuse

Well this situation is almost like the one at 2000 election, but Al Gore was a man of responsibility and thought about our country instead of throw us on another civil war, as we won't admit that another Clinton, or their supporters, get close to the White House.
Thanks God for the Second Amendment, because if Banana-bama backs out, and the Clinton supporters manage to get close to DC again, Real Americans won't let that happen.
We hate you all and your leader, and you won't pass!
I don't think the press is going publish this comment, but American people is ready and loaded to fight the Clintons, and their supporters, with our blood if necessary!

Posted by: Civil war here we come! | May 21, 2008 11:26 PM | Report abuse

If the video's not good enough for you, here is the Clinton campaign's press release agreeing to "adhere to the DNC approved nominating calendar" (which means, FL and MI don't count): http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=3134

Posted by: gbooksdc | May 21, 2008 11:26 PM | Report abuse


STEVE; Your deliberate ignorance is highly annoying, though it is echoed in post after post despite the facts being readily available. Once more: the DNC did not ask the candidates to remove their names from the MI ballot. That action by Obama was another judgment made by His Inspirationness all by himself, knowing full well he was going to take a serious ass-thumping, which would break his winning streak, if he stayed on the ballot. No other reasonable explanation obtains. If Obama thought he could get more votes he would have left his name on the ballot, even if he thought the votes wouldn't be counted. How could getting more votes hurt him, whether counted or not? Obviously, he didn't think he would win. And why ruin a perfectly good win streak built on undemocratic CAUCUSES with a drubbing by a real vote in a PRIMARY? Not that it was a dumb move, but that he tried unsuccessfully to get back on the ballot does raise questions about his decisiveness and judgment. Don't you think? And that's a purely rhetorical question--no need to respond.

Posted by: AlphaOverdawg | May 21, 2008 11:25 PM | Report abuse

OBAMA IS THE ANTI CHRIST!

He comes from the East, has ties to Asia, is a Muslim, rises out of nowhere and claims to be a man of peace!

Posted by: Nostradamus | May 21, 2008 11:25 PM | Report abuse

She is not only wasting her time money and energy in a futile campaign...

She is also wasting Senator Obama's money time and energy. America is on RECESSION!!

It is the way she is lynching him.

Senator Obama MUST be prepared to ask her for any expenses that He incurs in futility campaign with her after He is a formal nominee.

If she losses she MUST disclose sources of income and the way she ill spended every penny on the campaign. american people be prepared for a bag of warms.

Posted by: alm a Ludivina | May 21, 2008 11:25 PM | Report abuse

Scranton '64; McCarthy, Reagan, Rockefeller '68; Humphrey, Wallace '72; Reagan, Udall, Brown '76; Kennedy '80; Hart, Jackson '84; Jackson '88; Buchanan, Brown '92; Buchanan '96. All those guys took it to the convention when they had less chance than Hillary has now and there was hardly a peep about how they were obligated to be good little men, genuflect before the media-anointed, and get the hell off the stage. Yet the first serious female candidate is held up as a crazed megalomaniac if she even thinks about following their example.

She should go to Denver and fight to have Florida and Michigan seated.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:24 PM | Report abuse

Michigan Will Have A Re -Vote In August ....... Florida Votes Will Count As Certified .. ... If This Upsets You , Go Live In Another County !!! . All 50 States Have The Right To Vote , And All Votes Will Be Counted , The Will Of " ALL "The People Will Be Heard !!!! . This Is Bigger Than Any Candidate . To Many Have Died To defend This Right !!!!

Posted by: NO Justice NO PEACE | May 21, 2008 11:24 PM | Report abuse

OK Let's get the church issue solved right now! Out of 20 years of sermons given by Rev. Wright there are only two that they are playing clips of! Why? Because that's all they could find to harp on! Do you think this was the same sermon from 20 years ago? NO, it wasn't, so knock it off with the Church thing because it doesn't fly with people who have common sense. You don't have to go to college to figure that one out! And what the Rev. said was not Anti-American, it may have been Anti-American Gov't Policies, NOT THE PEOPLE!!

Posted by: Angryman | May 21, 2008 11:23 PM | Report abuse

If the actual Clinton backers here (and not the Republican double agents) all vote for McBush to show their displeasure, then I'm sure that they'll have a lot of fun explaining to their daughters and grand-daughters why the Supreme Court is loaded with conservative judges who overturned Roe v Wade, why we are still in Iraq in 2016 (really think she'll get the Dem nod in 2012 after this? Dream on...), why the economy is forever in tank, why they can't afford to send them to college, why the rest of the world continues to hate the US more than they idiotically believe the Michelle Obama does, why we don't have any national parks anymore, etc. Start warming up those bed-time stories!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:23 PM | Report abuse

To all you idiotic Clinton supporters who think Clinton is winning the popular vote:

she's losing the popular vote if you don't count Fla and Mi. If you do count Fla she's still losing. If you count Fla and Mi and give Obama zero votes, then she is winning.

She talks about the need to count every vote, but what about the people of Mi who couldn't vote for Obama because his name wasn't on the ballot?

Do you really think he'd get zero votes there?

If you give Obama the 40 percent undecided he is ahead in the popular vote.

So stop your complaining. The only way she is ahead in the popular vote is if she takes everything from an election where her main competitor was not on the ballot.

As for the popular vote awarding the nominee, if those were the rules going in, Obama would've spent more than one day in California, would never have gone to Delaware, would've spent more time running up the score in Illinois. His game plan would've been different.

But in either case it doesn't matter because she's not winning the popular vote. IN her totals she's leaving out the votes in the caucus states. Apparently Hillary wants to count all the votes, accept the ones she lost. She's also not counting the votes in the Wa primary, which also held a caucus. Obama won both.

And remember, after the 2-2 split of the first four primaries, the Clinton's campaign said this is a race for delegates. They also said, when asked when someone should drop out, that once someone was ahead by 150 it would be over.

And remember, she also pledged before Iowa that Mi and Fla would not count. All the major candidates pledged this. Now that she needs those votes she goes against her pledge. That's the type of leader she would be.

So Clinton supporters, I know you're pissed she lost. But the only way she can claim victory in the popular vote is if she takes all of Mi and gives Obama victory. And again I must ask you: would Obama really get zero votes in Mi?

Her goal is clear: make as many people think Obama stole this nomination so they won't vote for him in the fall.

Then hope like hell that Obama loses. Then after four more years in Iraq, a new war with Iran, gas at ten bucks a gallon, and Roe V. Wade overturned by McCAin's two new justices, Hillary will try to run again.

If the press would point out that she's not really winning in the popular vote some of her smarter supporters might be able to see through her red-herring.

Posted by: edzo2 | May 21, 2008 11:23 PM | Report abuse

It's time to tell Hillary to take her strap-on off. Bill's been bent over too long and isn't cooperating with her any longer.

Anyone want to wager how long he'll stick with his evil old lady after the convention?

Posted by: No To Angry Women | May 21, 2008 11:22 PM | Report abuse

Hillary supporters are:
better informed, much better educated, and RICHER!

Posted by: Justice | May 21, 2008 11:17 PM

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Apparently you don't read the polls. They show the opposite for a typical Hillary supporter.

Denial isn't just a river in Africa.

Posted by: Hillaryus | May 21, 2008 11:22 PM | Report abuse

This is a note to superdelegates-- PLEASE SEND HELP-- we are being held hostage by Hillary Clinton. She has gone bizerk. She thinks she has won the popular vote, when in fact she has not. I am tired of being held hostage. 8 years of delusional Bush was enough. Please end the drama. You supers have no excuse to sit on your hands. You know who you support, now step forward and make your pledge. This can not go to the convention.

Posted by: Melissa | May 21, 2008 11:22 PM | Report abuse

Hillary lost this campaign a long time ag due to arrogance, incompetence and cluelessness.

Let her continue to disgrace her name and reputation beyond repair. If she somehow ends up taking the nomination from Obama, she will have all the "Bush 2000" baggage to carry around, and she will lose handily in the fall to several coalitions who will never support her brand of politics. Her white, uneducated and bitter racist supporters in the Appalachians won't carry her anywhere except to the Land of Mondale.

She is, after all, a Democratic version of George W. Bush -- a nobody who is only in this discussion because of her last name.

Posted by: Seriously | May 21, 2008 11:22 PM | Report abuse

This is sick, is it true? I was told that hillary just offered chelsea to a group of undecided super delegates.

Bill said she's been well trained.

Posted by: omg | May 21, 2008 11:22 PM | Report abuse

Four State Pledge Letter 2008
Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina
August 31, 2007
WHEREAS, Over a year ago, the Democratic National Committee established a 2008 nominating calendar;
WHEREAS, this calendar honors the racial, ethnic, economic and geographic diversity of our party and our country;
WHEREAS, the DNC also honored the traditional role of retail politics early in the nominating process, to insure that money alone will not determine our
presidential nominee;
WHEREAS, it is the desire of Presidential campaigns, the DNC, the states and the American people to bring finality, predictability and common sense to the
nominating calendar.
THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential
election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa,
Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as "campaigning" is defined by rules and regulations of the DNC.
___________________________ __________
John/Jane Doe, Doe for President DATE

Okay, exactly where does it state in this pledge that the candidate signing it agrees that the votes in states that have their primaries or caucuses before February 5 (with the exception of Iowa, etc.) won't be counted? All I see is that the candidates who signed it (including Hillary and Barack Obama) agreed not to campaign in any state that held its primary or caucus too early (and the didn't). Despite what the pundits keep saying, Hillary didn't sign a pledge stating that she was accepting that the votes in Michigan and Florida wouldn't be counted, she just signed a pledge stating that she wouldn't campaign there. It's Howard Dean and the DNC who decided after the fact to strip those two states of their delegates, even though the DNC rules state that they can only take away half of the delegates. Maybe if they counted the votes as cast in Florida and Michigan, as they should, the superdelegates wouldn't have such a hard time voting for the candidate who has the best chance of beating John McCain in November, and who has the most popular votes -- Hillary Clinton. But I guess as long as Nancy Pelosi blackmails the superdelegates into voting for Obama by threatening to cut off their reelection financing, we'll be stuck with the candidate who can't, and won't, win. But at least they'll get to pat themselves on the back for proving the Democratic party isn't racist by nominating an African American. Too bad (for Obama) they can't blackmail the voters into voting for him. Get ready for four years of President McCain.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:21 PM | Report abuse

The Clinton campaign accepted that the FL and MI primaries would not count via a letter in response to a letter from Howard Dean. Here's Tim Russert reading same: http://video.aol.com/video-detail/hillary-clinton-agreed-not-to-seat-mi-and-fl/1058680867.

Posted by: gbooksdc | May 21, 2008 11:21 PM | Report abuse

really don't know who is crazier, Hillary or the loonies on this site who rant on about such ridiculous things. Time for a reality check. It's over.

Posted by: Electric Bill | May 21, 2008 11:20 PM | Report abuse

"We will not allow him to win in November."

Politically, there's no diff between Obama and HRC. They're both socialists.

If you frustrate the Obama nomination and assure a McCain victory, you give the Pubs the opportunity to appoint maybe THREE more SCOTUS justices.

Spite is a poor basis for a political decision.

Posted by: Chuckamok | May 21, 2008 11:20 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is pathetic. Somebody should just put her out of her misery. What a loser!

Posted by: Gas Man | May 21, 2008 11:19 PM | Report abuse

Thank God more women dont enter into politics or run for President, they have absolutely no class.

Hilalry is bent upon proving her manhood and will destroy anything and everything in her path.

Cant see the bigger picture beyond her own selfish self image as the first woman president, a role she probably practiced in front of a mirror since she was a very young girl and the reaosn why she tolerated Bills infidelities all these years, now she's angry all her sacrifices are being undone by a BLACK MAN, how indignant, of all the things a BLACK MAN has upstaged her, an unknown, young Senator with a foreign sounding name has made all sacrifices tolerating that fat blimpy womanizing Bill amount to nothing...

thats what this is all about, not about her winning to make the nation better.

Its about making her time with Bill worthwhile.

Posted by: mildbrew | May 21, 2008 11:19 PM | Report abuse

A good summary of the way that they have distorted events regarding Florida and Michigan:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6063329

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:19 PM | Report abuse

"Let's add it all up:

* Popular Vote Totals (w/FL & MI)Hillary leads by 174,047 votes (.48%.)
* Popular Vote Totals (w/FL & MI and Estimate w/IA, NV, ME, WA): Hillary leads by 63,825 votes (.18%)"


=================
Please keep in mind - these totals are assuming ZERO people in Michigan wanted Obama to win, which we all know is NOT TRUE. Who were those people in Michigan at his rally then? Did they all travel in from out of state?

If they are going to count Hillary's votes in Michigan, they have to AT THE VERY LEAST, subtract all the votes that went against her - and that will put Obama ahead in the popular vote by more than 100,000.

Do you who support Hillary honestly believe there were NO people in Michigan who wanted to vote for Obama?

And what about those voters who didn't bother to vote because they were told their votes didn't count? I live 5 minutes from the Michigan state line, so I was very aware of the situation, and if I was told my vote wouldn't count, I would not have voted either.

If those voters are disrespected like this, it can only be very BAD news for the entire Democratic party.

Hillary says "every vote counts" but what she MEANS is "every vote for ME counts"

Posted by: Mary in Indiana | May 21, 2008 11:18 PM | Report abuse

Oh yeah and to Tom Jefferson and the other people ripping Howard Dean....yeah he's horrible (insert sarcasm). Under Dean's stewardship the Dems have employed a 50-state strategy that Obama may end up furthering, as they try to become more than just a party that wins on the coasts + Illinois and a few other states. They took back Congress and are now positioned (hopefully) to take back the Presidency. They are winning Congressional seats in the reddest of red districts in LA and MI. Not a bad 4 years.

Unlike the great tenure of Terry McAuliffe -losing 2 unloseable Presidential elections to a bumbling governor from Texas and losing both houses of Congress. The GOP was on its way to permanent majority under McAuliffe's watch. If he wasn't a shameless Clinton lackey, would he have even gotten that job to begin with?

Posted by: John E. | May 21, 2008 11:18 PM | Report abuse

There are three major reasons FL and MI cannot count as voted, aside from the fact that everyone agreed to that:

1. Nobody campaigned. Therefore, only previous name value meant anything, clearly an advantage to the former First Lady. The longer Obama has campaigned in a state the better he has done.

2. All the local papers and TV stations told voters that the primaries wouldn't count. Therefore, the people who actually voted are not representative. How many stayed home because they knew it wouldn't count.

3. One of the features of the other states was the fantastic registration drives engineered by Obama volunteers. Millions of new Democrats have been registered. But not in FL and MI. Again, not representative.

Seat the delegations 50-50. They come to the convention but properly have no effect on the outcome (which will be over long before then anyway.)

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:17 PM | Report abuse

Blah blah blah blah... Obamabots are full of it!

Do you need to put down others to make youself feel better? Do you constantly need justification for what you do? This is what you call an inferiority complex! Deep down, you know:

You're not as educated
Youre not as intelligent
You're not as young
you're not as well off

AS YOU SAY YOU ARE!

Hillary supporters are:
better informed, much better educated, and RICHER! And if you were one of our kids, we could tell you: " we brought you into the world, we can take you out!"

Posted by: Justice | May 21, 2008 11:17 PM | Report abuse

I was sitting in a hospital waiting room today in Michigan (my Dad in for surgery).

Hillary came on MSNBC and bleated about Michigan and Florida.

One very large White woman around the age of 55 said very loudly "I have had my fill of Hill! Shut that B_itch up!" There wasn't a single person that looked peeved, almost everyone popped up and started saying "Shut her up" "Go home to Bill, Hill" "You're a sore loser!"

So to all of those HRC backers claiming Mich wasn't represented, I would say "Bring them on! Let them speak!" Hillary is hated here in Democrat country in Michigan.

I am a Republican living in Arizona. I cannot stand McCain, I could tell you stories about that guy. I've seen him up close many times because I am active in the GOP. I am going to suck it up and vote for Obama in November on the idea of "Change", though I don't agree with his policies. But it will be a cold day in Hell before I would vote for that lying, thieving old POS that "Stood by her man" in order to gain power. Hill, will you just shut up and leave the country?

Posted by: AZ Guy In Michigan | May 21, 2008 11:17 PM | Report abuse

The Obama camp blocked the re-vote in FL and MI when they knew that would change the dynamics of the election... Obama would have then lost IN by wider margins and probably crawled to the finish line in NC.

Now his camp is willing to cut a deal... why, because they afraid that if they don't the tide might turn against them... Obama camp has been the one that has been manipulating the public:

(1) A false message of change with out any substance
(2) Playing the race card ever so subtly and accusing the Clintons of playing the race card
(3) Running away from a fight when they know they can't win, FL, MI, KY, WV are examples

What is he going to do in the general election...

Republicans will take the fight to them and slaughter him... the only way they can win is by tearing Obama down and the Obama team has demonstrated over and over again that they can't win a fight.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen | May 21, 2008 11:16 PM | Report abuse

FOUL.treacherous, dishonorable these are the bywords of the smarter voters about Obama's disire to STEAL this election.

Every voter in PA,Ohio,WVA,Ky knew Obama tried to rig the election. We will not allow him to win in November.

When he complained because he took his name off the ballot The Michigan Democrats were directed by Dr. Dean to have the candidates meet to decide on a re -election in Michigan.
Hillary flew to Michigan, Obama sneaked away to the Virgin Islands, two Chicago Attorneys met Hillary in Michigan and told her NO REVOTE.
Obama tried to rig the election, by paying off super-delegates from his own PAC (the hope fund) we will not allow this unfairness. It is illegal to STEAL an election!

Posted by: Martha Washington | May 21, 2008 11:15 PM | Report abuse

Hey, John E, where is the video of Hillary agreeing to the MI/FL delegate stripping last fall?

Why doesn't ANY journalist ask her why she didn't fight for these votes to count last fall?

Posted by: Joan E. | May 21, 2008 11:14 PM | Report abuse

The DNC will likely split the delgates from FL and MI, thereby validating the democratic process by counting people's votes. A 50-50 split is the only compromise available that would sufficiently penalize both states for egregious rule violations. Sorry folks, you play the game so you must agree to abide by the rules -or you're toast.

The 50-50 split will also have no effect on the relative delgate counts or the popular vote. It's time for pundits, HRC supporters and the stealth Republican blog dwellers to get over it. Obama is going to be the nominee short of a very wierd scene.

Had HRC not pushed for counting the delegates and unlawful popular votes from both states, had she not lied about Bosnian sniper fire, had she not co-advoctated a bogus gas tax gimmick with Mr. McBush, had she not jumped on the Wright or "bitter" bandwagons, perhaps I could have lived with her as a VP candidate. But alas I won't vote for Obama if he chooses her as such. If he does, we'll know he's just full of hot air as HRC and McBush say he is.

But I have a hunch HRC will fade into history as a disgraced wanna be who could not control her ambition-in-overdrive. Who knows, perhpas a VP from FL or Michigan might win over a few disenfrancised voters and provide an exit strategy for HRC?

Posted by: LH | May 21, 2008 11:12 PM | Report abuse

Can any one of you deliberately ignorant commenters who insist the candidates "signed" an agreement stating votes would not be counted in MI and FLA produce such a document? If so, please do. Those who don't think such a document exists would be delighted and edified to read it in its entirety. Come on, surely you are basing your posts on research which will support your endless assertions. Cough it up, share it, so all can be enlightened. Don't be reluctant: you've posted whole books on here about drivel and trivia. Give us the good stuff too. Didn't think so.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:11 PM | Report abuse

Don't back down Hillary. I would love to see a good floor fight at the convention. Stick to your guns and don't wimp out. Even if you don't win the nomination, make Obama the "primadonna" earn it. Keep it up Hillary!

Posted by: andy | May 21, 2008 11:11 PM | Report abuse

you need to get informed dude!!!!!!!! Obama and his attorneys are the ones who would not agree to revotes in Michigan or Florida and had threatened to sue the DNC if they seated and counted the Florida and Michigan votes.

Obama supporters who are touted as being so well educated simply just show that the guy is full of hot air - hot air because some of his supporters are just plain old stupid, and hot air because he has no clue as to HOW to get any of the bla bla that he talks about done.

Get real!!!!!!!! He is giving nothing up! Clinton will prevail with the popular vote at the convention - who wants another error like the one made in 2000 putting someone in the White House with no expereience and via the Supreme Court. Gore had the popular vote and Bush filed suit. I will bet that the first words out of Obama's mouth would be that he would take it to the Supreme Court if Clinton has the popular vote and the DNC realizes she is the only one who can beat McCain.

Obama and his people need to understand, the voters rights are first and primary and democratic to count them all. Clinton started right after the New Hampshire primary to fight for the Florida and Michigan votes to count. She had to wait because it set the table for the argument to count the votes in Florida and Michigan since New Hampshire had also moved it's primary up with no penalty. You folks need to understand that this if for the White House and not some person who can only flip-flop from what is said in a debate...to the real world. Guess he needs some further lessons from Clinton!!!!

A vote for Obama is a vote for McCain, a vote for CLinton is a vote for a Democratic White House.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen | May 21, 2008 11:11 PM | Report abuse

They WILL seat the delegates from FL & MI...probably at half of votes...with 'uncommitted' votes given to Obama in Mich, because he wasn't on the ballot (this option favors Clinton HEAVILY). Which makes the magic # 2131 delegates.
As of today the count is:
----Current Count---FL---MI---Supers---Total --Votes needed to win
Obama-1680---41---28-----308-----2057--- 74
Clinton-1518---52---36-----280-----1886--- 245

This is a BEST case scenario for Sen. Clinton....and yet, Sen. Obama is still in the lead by 171 votes.
There are only 4 primaries & 138 pledged delegates left in the nomination process.
TAKE NOTE: 114 of the undeclared super delegates are in states that Obama won & only 85 are from states that Hillary won.
Obama will be our nominee.
Seriously, Obama winning the nomination is the ONLY way the Dems will win in the general election. Hillary has a VERY strong Dem base...but the swing votes WON'T vote for her. Obama will get the majority of Dems, the Independents & the crossover republicans. And don't forget the millions of new voters Obama's campaign helped register...the Dem party is bigger and broader than ever. It's a no-brainer on the national scale

Posted by: Our Only Hope | May 21, 2008 11:10 PM | Report abuse

Terry McAuliffe told Chris Matthews last night that Hillary was taking the fight to the convention. She will be spending the summer poaching delegates (pledged and super) from Obama.


When the question of seating Florida and Michigan first surfaced, her surrogates suggested that they would stretch it beyond the convention with lawsuits. No sooner had that idea been leaked than they clammed up and did another "denying" act like we're seeing here today.

Posted by: Beninn | May 21, 2008 11:10 PM | Report abuse

Hillary needs to face reality and the facts Obama is to far ahead now for her to win and she herself agreed those votes would not count and she should be fair and stop whining about it and except her lose because Obama also agreed those votes wouldent count and for her to try to make them count just because shes a loser would not be fair to Obama and all those millions of Americans that voted for him.Who is she to make her own rules as she sees fit. She should go on if she likes but its over for her.

Posted by: sharon | May 21, 2008 11:10 PM | Report abuse

I live in Michigan, I am female, in my 50's and an enthusiastic supporter of Obama. He is knowledgeable, strong, and has shown good judgment both in his Senate work and in his campaign. And I also feel he has run a very fair and decent campaign. I am puzzled as well as saddened by the level of suspicion and vitriole directed against him, and against Hillary too. Where is that coming from?

I voted "uncommitted" on our "faux" primary day and blame the state's Democratic Party insiders - mostly Hillary supporters - for deciding on their own to go against the rules of the DNC. Only Clinton and Kucinich left their names on the ballot (the latter because his request to have it removed was past the deadline). Despite the fact that Obama was not on the ballot, 35% of voters chose "uncommitted". If he had been able to campaign here and had his name on the ballot, I believe he would have received a substantially higher percentage of the votes. I am not bitter, or a Hillary hater, but I do feel compelled to point out that when she claims that she has the majority of the popular vote and that she wants "every person's vote to count" she is not counting all the Michigan voters who chose "uncommitted" because they supported Obama (or Edwards). That is hypocritical. Does my vote not count? And will she claim that she speaks for me because I am female? If she claims that she ignores all the women voters who are Obama supporters.

I also implore Hillary supporters to keep in mind that if McCain gets elected he will choose 2 more of the Supreme Court Justices and we will have an extremely conservative Court for the foreseeable future. Say good-bye to Roe v Wade as well as other guarantees of our civil rights. We Democrats must stick together!

Posted by: AFS | May 21, 2008 11:10 PM | Report abuse

Poor renaldo, in severe denial, will soon be standing on a window ledge howling at the moon.

It's a good time to invest in companies making power washers. Gonna be tons of SPLAT! on the sidewalks of America.

Posted by: Chuckamok | May 21, 2008 11:09 PM | Report abuse

Makes me wonder when I see supporters of Obama give the Black Power Salute at his rallies.
Posted by: faireve | May 21, 2008 10:55 PM
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
What channel have you been watching? Or should it be what do you smoke? All of those 75,000 White people in Oregon, and the Whites in Iowa, Wyoming, Washington, Maine, Colorado, etc. giving the Black Power Salute must've been something to see.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:09 PM | Report abuse

The ONLY fair solution to the Florida/Michigan mess is for DNC to admit they screwed up, and split the delegates from each 50-50. Then seat the delegates.

It will have no net effect on either campaign, and will allow Michigan and Florida to be represented.

Rick
===========================================

I agree with Rick.

Posted by: Malama Makena | May 21, 2008 11:08 PM | Report abuse

Via Real Clear Politics:

* Hillary won Florida by 294,772 votes.
* Hillary won Michigan by 328,309 votes
* Hillary won 150,000 more votes than Obama last night in Kentucky and Oregon. She won Kentucky by 249,224 votes while Obama won Oregon by 102,144 votes.

Let's add it all up:

* Popular Vote Totals (w/FL & MI)Hillary leads by 174,047 votes (.48%.)
* Popular Vote Totals (w/FL & MI and Estimate w/IA, NV, ME, WA): Hillary leads by 63,825 votes (.18%)


Posted by: Concerned Citizen | May 21, 2008 11:08 PM | Report abuse

McLame whoops Clinton's big fat arse in every poll.

Face it, Americans HATE the Evil One in the pant suits.

Obama has a reasonable chance to beat McLame but it won't be easy. It will be impossible with the Evil One on his ticket as a VP.

Hillary is hated more than GW Shrub and Dick Nixon together.

Posted by: Truth Hurts | May 21, 2008 11:08 PM | Report abuse

It's fairly clear that this is about money now. Hillary has lent her campaign millions of dollars and she wants it back. Her only leverage now is to threaten the Democratic party with a drawn out and divisive selection process. I don't think anyone actually looking at the data could seriously think that HIllary is going to get the nomination, but she does have enough support to make a lot of trouble. She is waiting for someone to offer to pay her campaign back the money that she leant it, then she'll get out.

The Clintons didn't make over 100 million dollars over the past 6 years becuase they don't care about money. Bill was asking for as much money as he could get because he wanted that money. Imagine how you would feel if you just invested a large portion of you spouses substantial net worth in a failed bid for president. I think that many of us who don't have 100 million dollars somehow assume that people with lots of money don't worry about money, nothing could be further from the truth. The DNC or Obama have to figure out how to repay Hillary or she will probably make it very difficult for Obama to win in November.

Posted by: captbilly | May 21, 2008 11:07 PM | Report abuse

Hillary felt SO strongly about Michigan and Florida last fall -- when she didn't think she would need them -- that she completely agreed to stripping them of their delegates!

What character she's showed us, America!

Posted by: Captain Jack Sparrow | May 21, 2008 11:07 PM | Report abuse

Hilary does not own her supporters. We support her. Her alone. Not her we get to sit back and consider experience, record, and longevity.

BTW...what ever happened to those Obama Abercrombie kids? How come he never has his voting class behind him? He gets 93% of the black vote in NC and 99% of his back drop is white folks...what's with that?

Is he embarrassed?

Posted by: Gal4Hil | May 21, 2008 11:06 PM | Report abuse

I just want to throw up every time I read the latest thing that Hillary says. Conventions have not really been about choosing the candidate for many years now -- they are a ceremony and a formality. And let's not forget that the primary system for years has decided most nominees well before half the states vote. For Hillary to pretend otherwise -- to forget that is exactly the way it was when Bill was elected -- is as disingenuous as everything else she says. It's all about HER and she has no concern for anything but winning -- no concern for the party, no concern for the "little people" she is buddying up to now. Let me tell you something, HRC, bad karma will come back to bite you every time. And man is your karma stinky right now.

Posted by: Karen | May 21, 2008 11:06 PM | Report abuse

And Chelsea Clinton lost her mother years ago to Satan.

Hillary is the anti-Christ!

Posted by: Chelsea Lost UEFA Today | May 21, 2008 11:06 PM | Report abuse


Clinton will prevail with the popular vote at the convention - who wants another error like the one made in 2000 putting someone in the White House with no expereience and via the Supreme Court. Gore had the popular vote and Bush filed suit. I will bet that the first words out of Obama's mouth would be that he would take it to the Supreme Court if Clinton has the popular vote and the DNC realizes she is the only one who can beat McCain.

Obama and his people need to understand, the voters rights are first and primary and democratic to count them all. Clinton started right after the New Hampshire primary to fight for the Florida and Michigan votes to count. She had to wait because it set the table for the argument to count the votes in Florida and Michigan since New Hampshire had also moved it's primary up with no penalty. You folks need to understand that this if for the White House and not some person who can only flip-flop from what is said in a debate...to the real world. Guess he needs some further lessons from Clinton!!!!

A vote for Obama is a vote for McCain, a vote for CLinton is a vote for a Democratic White House.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen | May 21, 2008 11:06 PM | Report abuse

Why are all the HRC supporters so sure she is the only one who can defeat McCant????Unless you have missed most of the reporting of the Right leaning media, Republicans Back Hillary because they know they can beat her, they have dirt a mountain tall on the Mrs. and yet she won't even admit it to herself..
Even with a about face with the Supers (which obviously is'nt going to happen) Hillary cant even catch Obama with Florida and Michigan, unless her funny math still lets her figure in all of the two states delegates, which she only won half of in either contest, so she is still way behind,,game over, let us all move on!!!!
We need deep change in this country, a new face to give us a new outlook to the world, and unfortunately, the world looks at Hillary as a continuation of the former HATE stle government we seem to have embraced for the last 12 years. Even though her husband was in office in the late 90s , he was completely hamstrung by the way right leaning Senate and House,effectively disenfranchising his second term.
If all of us take a step back, look at America through another country's eyes, You'll see where our troubles lay. We are the mighty America, yet before too long, all of our might and power in this world will be lost,and the rest of the world sees it. For too long now, we have let corporate America have its way, its juggernaut style of ever increasing greed for profit loosing sight of how it came to be the Powerful country it was, and now it appears as the world figured how to defeat us. Not by battles on the ground, in the sky or sea, but through our own selfish greed.Our American desire to be bigger , better,fancier to the rest of the world has blinded us, and it appears Hillarys own wealth has blinded her. Her air of entitlement has driven me so far from even considering her as viable, i couldnt vote for her even if she was the only candidate available,which is sad since i havent missed a vote since the day i turned 18, yet the incessant need for her to gain the allmighty power of the office wont let her step back, and help the American cause.

Posted by: bill | May 21, 2008 11:05 PM | Report abuse

Truth: Obama is ahead in pledged delegates

Truth: Obama has moved ahead in Superdelagates

Truth: Senator Obama has won more states

Truth: Obama has raised more money

Truth: Obama has one many states with hardly any black voters

Truth: Republicans are prepared to fight the perceived winner-Obama

Truth: Obama is currently engaged in two election battles

Truth: Economists overwhelmingly agree with Senator Obama on the usefulness of the gas tax holiday

Truth wins arguments. Opinions come from the supporters of all the other candidates. Reading through all of the comments on this thread, it impresses me how most of the Obama supporters speak the truth. Thruthfulness improves most situations. America could benifit from more straightfoward truth. We've been missing it for about 7 1/2 years. Go Obama supporters!

Obama '08

Posted by: a_skeptic | May 21, 2008 11:05 PM | Report abuse

Go for it Hillary! You will never get anywhere if you play by the rules, play nice, don't interrupt the status quo. Make them sweat a little bit.

Posted by: andy | May 21, 2008 11:04 PM | Report abuse

Why is it that in all of Obama's events most of the crowd is white? Why is it that he attracts both males and females in almost equal numbers? Why is it that he attracts most of intellectuals?

Why is it that in all of Hillary's events most of the crowd is white, female and older?

Why did Hillary vote repeatedly for the Iraq war? Why are most of the participants in the war poor whites, blacks and Hispanics?

Why did President Clinton support NAFTA and globalization which have decimated the communities Hillary professes to care for: Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania?

Wake up America. She represents anyone who is easily swayed: xenophobes, ultra religious, diversity phobes, gender mongers, work-displaced.

OBAMA ALL THE WAY.

Posted by: Baboulas | May 21, 2008 11:04 PM | Report abuse

The ONLY fair solution to the Florida/Michigan mess is for DNC to admit they screwed up, and split the delegates from each 50-50. Then seat the delegates.

It will have no net effect on either campaign, and will allow Michigan and Florida to be represented.

Rick

Posted by: Rick | May 21, 2008 11:04 PM | Report abuse

I have hated the Clintons since '91 (campaigning for '92) It's abundantly clear that both are evil, completely untrustworthy and will place themselves before America.

Adding the religious and racial crap into this campaign should automatically send them into a permanent from America.

And Bill, remember to keep your hands to yourself. And your cigars, and your other body parts.

Posted by: Keep Your Hands and Religion To Yourself! | May 21, 2008 11:03 PM | Report abuse

A few points....from the posts I skimmed...and my long-winded responses

1) they all agreed with the decision to punish FLA and MI. There's that uncomfortable tape of Hillary floating around from around October '07 where she agrees with it in an interview. She left her name on the ballot for one simple, cynical reason - she thought she would be the inevitable nominee and that the primaries would be little more than a coronation and she wanted to have her name in all the states. At the time nobody thought they would need those delegates anyway.

2)The Popular Vote argument is ridiculous. It's a loser's argument. The parties use delegates to nominate. Just the country uses electoral votes, not popular votes. Obama's campaign was designed to accumulate as many delegates as possible, because, well, those were the rules at the time and still are. If the party decided now that Popular Vote and not delegates were the most important criteria for the nomination, it's changing the rules right before the end of the game. You may not like the rules, but they are the rules. Perhaps if popular vote was the standard and not delegates everyone would have campaigned differently and the totals would be different. The argument of couting popular vote more than delegates is like saying yards gained are more important than points scored in a football game.

Hillary's argument that she is ahead in popular vote of course counts FLA and MI and counts 0 for Obama in Michigan...an argument that wouldn't pass the sniff test in a junior high debating class. And Obama's popular vote numbers are way underestimated since many caucauses don't tabulate them. One analysis showed him with possibly another 250-300K net votes if all the caucauses had counted all the voters. He won some of those by 25-30 point margins. And that's why delegates are used as the deciding factor to compensate for the lack of true vote totals with different states having different rules.

3)Obama does look a little tired. But frankly at this point, he's trying to mount the beginning of a general election campaign....one that mathematically should have probably began in March, when the delegate math was in his favor and his lead insurmountable based on the way delegates are apportioned. He doesn't want to spend a lot of time and money trying to increase his margins in primary states that the Dems (any Dem) probably won't carry in November anyway.

And a 140-delegate lead may not seem like much, but it's all relative. He's had a lead hovering between 120 and 140 since late February. Since a 55-45 win in most states only nets you about 10 delegates, that means he built that lead in February and March by winning about 14 more states than Clinton did by a big margin.

4) And I like this apportioned delegate distribution system better than the GOP winner take all system. This system allows for the person who runs the more efficient campaign with better strategy (who also can raise a lot of money) to compete with the favorite with the name recognition and big party insiders behind him/her. Otherwise, the big name candidate can just raise a lot of money win a few big states early and the air of inevitability takes over and the race is over in mid-February. That's the system that gave us George W. Bush and John Kerry as candidates early on. Why would we want to repeat that? I'm an Obama backer and wanted this over in March at first. But I don't mind the drawn out primary....as long as it wraps up by mid-June. It's good for democracy. As long as in the end whoever loses does what's right for the party.

5) Any Clinton supporters who are thinking about voting for McCain because their candidate will likely lose - just remember a President McCain may be nominating 1 or 2 perhaps Supreme Court justices in his next term. And he thinks justices like Scalia and Thomas are just swell. Say goodbye to privacy rights, restrictions on corporate power, Roe V Wade, etc. You may not love Obama and you may feel a little angry about losing such a long, close race. But if you are choosing lesser of 2 evils in November and you supported Clinton (because you actually agreed with her positions, not just because as 20% of Kentucky voters basically said they wouldn't vote for a black guy), then Obama has to be your lesser or 2 evils choice.

Posted by: John E. | May 21, 2008 11:03 PM | Report abuse

Scott Mann:

So now you're going to hold Obama08 responsible for what his delegates do? That is the stupidest thing I've heard today.

Posted by: Southern Old White Boy Against the Shrew | May 21, 2008 11:03 PM | Report abuse

When will you Clinton whiners stop? She AGREED not to count Michigan and Florida. They broke the RULES. She is breaking her word by demanding they be counted. You know - cheating! Their votes will count in the general election. In the meantime we don't need a liar who voted for the war and campaigned for NAFTA. She is poison. Her scorched-earth campaign will get McCain elected so she can try again in 2012. It's always Clinton first, America second!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:03 PM | Report abuse

Why is it that in all of Obama's events most of the crowd is white? Why is it that he attracts both males and females in almost equal numbers? Why is it that he attracts most of intellectuals?

Why is it that in all of Hillary's events most of the crowd is white, female and older?

Why did Hillary vote repeatedly for the Iraq war? Why are most of the participants in the war poor whites, blacks and Hispanics?

Why did President Clinton support NAFTA and globalization which have decimated the communities Hillary professes to care for: Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania?

Wake up America. She represents anyone who is easily swayed: xenophobes, ultra religious, diversity phobes, gender mongers, work-displaced.

OBAMA ALL THE WAY.

Posted by: Baboulas | May 21, 2008 11:02 PM | Report abuse

What I especially savor is reading all the whiny exasperations of you purple-lipped ozombies.

I love it when Hillary whoops Jomama's ass and shoves his face in it.

Love it, love it, love it.

Press on Hillary! Yes, you can!

Posted by: renaldo | May 21, 2008 11:02 PM | Report abuse

Why did Hillary do so well with the uneducated whites?

Because they're the only ones who actually believe the lies being widely circulated by email - Obama's not an American, he's a Muslim, he was sworn in on the Quran, he doesn't cover his heart for the national anthem (by the way, neither do most people - that's the Pledge of Allegiance, because you're making a pledge.)

Better educated whites are supporting Obama. Look at Iowa, Oregon, Kansas, Wisconsin...

It's time for the superdelegates to declare and put an end this thing. Put him over the top by enough to allow FL and MI any solution they want.

Posted by: Malama Makena | May 21, 2008 11:00 PM | Report abuse

This is all bias because everybody agrees to seat these delegates. Of course she wants to seat them by her way so she can claim to be the nominee. I just hope DNC members are not so stupid and buy it. Anyway today is new bias coming out. Since this morning all Hillary Rocky Clinton's surrogates on MSM are pushing problem of SEXISM. Geraldine Ferraro was so stupid that she even went to cry on Bush News with it....I am so sick of HRC and her power mongering.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/21/ferraro-black-journalists_n_102967.html

Posted by: Jarda1 | May 21, 2008 11:00 PM | Report abuse

Isn't there someone who truly loves this person who can save her from herself?

Bill? Help your wife.

Chelsea? Save your mom.

Make her stop.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 11:00 PM | Report abuse

she is a destructive force in this campaign and surely will set the pace for a republican victory. if she thinks obama is unable to rally behind him certain segments of voters, she also has the same problem. she is smug, has no real plans and is putting an anchor on both the future of our country and the dems campaign. why were we so energized by JFK and his young ideas and so willing to embrace her old world bill clinton do nothing attitude. im lost, another blow for working americans....

Posted by: rayj | May 21, 2008 10:59 PM | Report abuse

Sad commentary that angry old women are still being so nasty to young people that really care about American politics.

That's a good enough reason for me to make sure HRC never sees the inside of the White House again. And that includes getting her out of the NY Senate seat.

Posted by: RUThroughYet? | May 21, 2008 10:59 PM | Report abuse

I think Obama supporters are running scared due to the vitriol of his supporters' comments here.

So what if Hillary keeps going through to the convention? IF Obama is gonna win, he's gonna win! What's the problem here? Are you worried Hillary has more temerity and tenacity than your candidate?

Posted by: BJ | May 21, 2008 10:59 PM | Report abuse

There's no need for Obama to pay Hill-Rod's campaign bills.

Just wind ole Bill up and turn him loose on the adoring faithful. He'll rake in another 100 mil in no time.

Unless, of course, those folks were only "investing" in a new Clinton regime. Hmm ...

Posted by: Chuckamok | May 21, 2008 10:58 PM | Report abuse

To Mike C-
I am not afraid of Hillary going all the way because even if she does, Barack still wins.
The thing I find upsetting is her willingness to divide the Democratic party - when she suggests that she has most of the popular vote, that conclusion is made from her accepting all of her Michigan votes, and from her being willing to disenfranchise all of the voters who voted against her, and all of those who stayed home and did not vote in both Michigan and Florida because they were told their votes did not count.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 10:58 PM | Report abuse

Take a Obama's supporter argument, replace the word Obama with clinton and you have a Clinton supporters argument. There is an obvious disconnect on both sides of the divide. Its sad that we have let ourselves become this divided. I would vote for either candidate who was nominated. But at this point the best course of action is to declare Obama the nominee and do our best at bringing the Clinton supporters back from the dark side.

Political suicide sounds like a noble idea to a Clinton supporter. Its more important to spite Obama than what is in their best interest.

As for the popular vote argument, Clinton as well as the other dems agreed to not campaign in Florida or Michigan because the DNC didnt want them to move their primaries up. In the case of Florida Hillary broke this promise. In the case of Michigan Obama was not even on the ballot. The only way Clinton has the popular vote is if you count the Michigan vote where no one was even able to vote for Obama, and "undeclared" garnered 45% of the vote. This is undemocratic and the "count all the votes" argument is disingenuous.

I think we should have a Obama Clinton ticket because it would be the most likely way to bring Clinton supporters back from the edge. Hillary is obviously very influential with her demographics and Obama cannot win without them, just as if Hillary were the nominee she could not win without Obama's.

But letting this battle play out in the convention will bring chaos in Denver, and thats the last thing the Democratic party needs.

Posted by: TheTruth | May 21, 2008 10:58 PM | Report abuse

I do believe that people are being hood winked. We should do away with delegates and just go by popular vote. Such a simple answer. Why make things so complicated. I do believe the news media has a lot to do with
telling people which way to vote. People should decide who they want to vote for an not have some newsperson saying well they're going to vote this way and they follow along
with whatever and don't use their own brains
that God gave them. Hillary should fight on.
I am a republican and I would vote for her.
I am sure there are a lot of people that feel that way too. This Obama seem to come from out of nowhere which is what the anti-Christ will do. People really should stop and think about what they're doing. The president can only do so much. We need someone with experience. Period. Beware the Ides of March.

Posted by: Lee | May 21, 2008 10:57 PM | Report abuse

Hillary's latest strategy:


If I can't have the nomination, no one can.

She's going to blow up the convention and then McCain is going to win in November. I only hope the superdelegates step in and stop her first.

Posted by: suzanne | May 21, 2008 10:56 PM | Report abuse

Scorched earth, anyone? Senator Clinton has shown herself willing to burn down the Democratic Party's house, so I think Dean & Co. need to man up and show Hill and Bill the door and say, "Don't let it hit your arses on the way out!" Who knows? Senator Clinton can be on McCain's short list of veep picks (she is a Goldwater girl, you know).

Posted by: Black and Bitter like Coffee | May 21, 2008 10:56 PM | Report abuse

Everybody take a deep breath!

Obama will be the nominee - there is no chance for any other outcome. None.

And the Democrats who support Hillary will vote for him in November.

You say no, but I beg to differ!

Hillary will end this in June and throw her support to Obama. She will campaign her heart out for him, as promised. She will help you get on board with the most promising candidate we have see in decades.

She'll have to, or she will have no future in the Democratic party. Zero. If she ruins the nominee's bid for the presidency, the party will not forgive her and she'll be finished.

It's how it works here in the real world.

Posted by: Fired Up, Ready To Go | May 21, 2008 10:55 PM | Report abuse

Makes me wonder when I see supporters of Obama give the Black Power Salute at his rallies.
Hillary is the champion of all the hardworking people who have supported the Democratic Party since Roosevelt.
Obama needs to start his own party rather than destroy the Democratic Party.

Posted by: faireve | May 21, 2008 10:55 PM | Report abuse

What you're all missing is how fractured we all are.

Obamama's can't stop themselves from sniping yet their baby needs us.

Ok, Obamama...I can't vote for your baby...convince me. Explain his claim to glory.

Posted by: Gal4Hil | May 21, 2008 10:54 PM | Report abuse

For all Barack supporters, why are you so afraid of Hillary going all the way? Why are you screaming to Sen. Clinton get out, get out? If he is as great as all his supporters is saying , then no matter what happens he will win the presidency, right? Obviously you are not so sure of Obama.

By the way, super-delegates can change their mind any time. And I don't think there are any rules for them, other than they should choose the person who can win the Presidency. They can even count Florida and Michigan votes if they want

Posted by: Mike C. | May 21, 2008 10:54 PM | Report abuse

For all of those who think that Obama can not be elected, please refer to the latest Reuters national poll that has him ahead of McCain by 8 points and ahead of Clinton by 26 points:
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN2034087120080521
Clinton keeps talking about West Virginia and Kentucky - both those states went for Bush in the last two elections and are probably going to go Republican no matter who is the Dem. candidate. Oregon is a truly swing state that Obama has a much better shot at than Clinton.
For all of those that think that Obama is a Muslim, you are wrong. I could start a rumor that McCain is a Martian and it might be repeated a million times - that doesn't make it correct.
I personally would strongly prefer Obama over Clinton, but, I am absolutely going to vote Democrat regardless of which of them win. That is such a no-brainer, it should not have to even be said, but, apparently, it does.

Posted by: Gary Whitten | May 21, 2008 10:54 PM | Report abuse

Truth is Hillary doesn't have the popular vote, delegate vote or super delegate vote. She knows this and is looking for a proud way to bow out. She has lied about her involvement during Bill presidency with foreign trades agreements, and being under fire over sea when she wasn't even there. We have seen her play the race card and play on less educated white folk, white women and white racist minds. It's OVER... The rest of us Americans see the TRUTH and the fact that Obama is a man of color does not sway him as a better PRESIDENT. Hillary may have contributed to this hatred ruining this country further by support McInsane for president. It is not the first time that bigotry and racism has destroyed this country. When will you learn. Another US riot may be coming...

Posted by: MyTy | May 21, 2008 10:54 PM | Report abuse

Pansycritter???

Yeah...uuuuhh....Good point.....better pick the next President by analysis of bumb@sses like myself on this post...hope those "snarky" comments didn't scar you too deep...

Posted by: self sycophant | May 21, 2008 10:53 PM | Report abuse

Who is Hillary fighting? Is it her legacy, the democrats, male voters or the vast right wing conspirators who've hounded the ClintonOcrazy?

Posted by: JACKAL | May 21, 2008 10:53 PM | Report abuse

LOL at HillaryIsDead.....

We could have her play Russian roulette when caught out lying by the detector. She gets five chances, and if it doesn't go off, she gets sent to an obscure island to never be heard from again.

HBO could sell passes and give the proceeds to the Democrat Party. At $50/per household, that would bring in $2,500,000,000 to defeat McLame in November.

Posted by: YouAreTheWalrus! | May 21, 2008 10:53 PM | Report abuse

I don't know, I just don't trust Hillary Clinton, and I certainly don't trust the people around her. I think they are pawns of big money interests and have no allegiance to the Democratic party. If they were not pawns and were loyal to the party, abide by the rules, would have gracefully exited by now and be supporting the nominee, Barak Obama. Instead, she continues to have a temper tantrum that is dangerous and damaging to the party, and it is difficult to tell whose view's she is more in line with--Obama's or McCains. Since she has no chance of being the nominee, I wonder just what her motives are.

Posted by: Clarke D. | May 21, 2008 10:53 PM | Report abuse

It's like a train wreck or Brittney Spears' career. I don't want to look, but morbid curiosity still compels me...

Posted by: Terrorfied | May 21, 2008 10:52 PM | Report abuse

After yet, another Tuesday
Obama still has it, going away.
People are now talking
about the dead woman walking.

The race was not, much of a thriller
In the state, of the Bourbon swiller.
In the beaver state, of Oregon
Barack was again, the chosen one.

Hillary is whining, about the press
go take a pill, for your duress.
For two moths now, the race has been over
Hill wants to find, a four-leaf clover.

Super delegates, are slipping away.
While misogyny was, her whine of the day.
Hillary, Hillary, don't be a fool
If you lose the game, you can't change the rules.

Posted by: NorcalRuss | May 21, 2008 10:52 PM | Report abuse

"Parties are merely de facto agents in a Federal election, and bound by all sorts of Federal law and regulations, including the voting franchise. The courts will make this clear in the nearer future."

Not quite right. And as I recall, though I really haven't been following this all that closely, there were a couple of lawsuits to that effect booted by the courts in Florida already. And the Michigan state courts have decided that the whole primary was unconstitutional on other grounds, too. So getting the whole thing decided by the courts is pretty unlikely. I don't know any federal judges who would be inclined to hear all this stuff if they don't have to.

Posted by: tom | May 21, 2008 10:52 PM | Report abuse

"If you lose the nomination, run as an independent. Kick, scratch and claw your way to the White House gate. Don't let the Democratic Party get in your way."

Are you kidding me? We are already doing that, despite the delegate math already being impossible.

Apparently Denial is a river in Arkansas.


Posted by: First Ladies Man Bill | May 21, 2008 10:52 PM | Report abuse

I'M SO *^%(* SICK OF THIS ELECTION!!!!

Posted by: Terrorfied | May 21, 2008 10:51 PM | Report abuse

Hilary's supporters keep saying that they can't trust Obama, that he is dishonest.

After watching Bill here in SC (and Bill was the one making racist remarks here, not Obama), and watching Hilary throw everything she had at Obama in subsequent states, the only thing I can see that Obama did to Hilary was to beat her in all the ways that matter.

Posted by: SusanSC | May 21, 2008 10:51 PM | Report abuse

Tom and Chuckamoc exactly right.

If you sign up to the rules, or as Tom states even help create them, at the beginning you play by them.

Its like playing a sport and saying that even though you scored by ignoring the rules (offsides or whatever) your touchdown/ goal/points should count and constantly complaining to the referee/umpire about it.

Posted by: Jeff | May 21, 2008 10:50 PM | Report abuse

So I am supposed to believe that all of those conservative Democrats in Kentucky, West Virginia, Ohio and Pennslyvania will vote for Hillary in November? What did all of her baggage suddenly get lost? A large share of them voted for Bush twice, so the odds are they are going to vote for Bush-Lite.

The Clintons new rally is an old one they've used before. Rules are bent to be broken if the outcome benefits them.

Posted by: Hillareeznuts | May 21, 2008 10:50 PM | Report abuse

And I WOULD be the Nominee, too...

If it weren't for all these so called "FACTS" and Stupid "VOTERS!!"

Posted by: HILLARY CLINTON | May 21, 2008 10:49 PM | Report abuse

My last post on this topic:
Why the race card,

It is sickening that as I read through all the different blogs I have been called white racist, redneck idiot, and other names throughout the last couple months that lead towards Hillary supporters being White Racist. It is amazing.

What would the outcome be on this boards if people started making racist remarks against blacks. See that isn't allowed because they are the minority. ( I beg to differ in todays damn age.)

But what I can safely say is this.
I never attended a church for so many years where anti white statements were consistant and then tried to say that wasn't my belief. How many year was he a member of that church. He could have choosen to go to another church but didn't

So who is really the racist.

I wonder if he is a secret member of
The Nation of Gods and Earths, commonly known as the Five-Percent Nation

Posted by: Eric | May 21, 2008 10:49 PM | Report abuse

the person call krueze missle who wrote senator jesus

wow the only being that gets everyone home to heaven jesus you are obviously not in need or wanting to go home to heaven with a comment like that so you and hillary and bill will go home to whence ye came from i refuse to say where however want the people to know the truth about your comments

Posted by: truth | May 21, 2008 10:49 PM | Report abuse

"The DNC violated their own rules...only 50% of the delegates can be unseated for any sanction.

So lets start by playing by the rules not with the rules."
I'm sure they can figure it out. Hillary has 13 supporters on the Credentials Committee, Obama has 8. The rest are officially uncommitted. And, must I repeat: THEY ARE THE PARTY'S RULES TO ENFORCE! Not the voters'.

Posted by: tom | May 21, 2008 10:48 PM | Report abuse

And the Clintoon HillBillies slip further down the rabbit hole.

Bye, bye legacy. Bye, bye.

Posted by: Kevin Schmidt | May 21, 2008 10:48 PM | Report abuse

WHY SHOULD FLORIDA'S VOTES COUNT IF MANY FLORIDIANS DID NOT VOTE?

FLORIDIANS WERE TOLD THAT THEIR VOTES WOULD NOT COUNT!!

Some people have to make plans to get to the voting station: pay extra for more babysitting time, pay extra for gas to go vote, leave work early, change vacation plans, catch a different bus etc. The elderly, sick, poor, disabled, etc. have their particular challenges to get to the polls.

Many dedicated voters would have made plans to vote if they knew that their vote would count. Many would have encouraged their friends and families to GET OUT AND VOTE.

Before Florida delegates are seated, someone needs to determine how the votes of VOTERS WHO WERE DECEIVED INTO NOT VOTING would be represented.

If Hillary wants Florida to count, she needs to present a solution that would represent all citizens of Florida.


Posted by: all voters shouldbe heard | May 21, 2008 10:48 PM | Report abuse

Hillary it's over. You cannot turn against the pledge delegates. You and Bill are not going back to the White House. and, stop screaming that you are the great White hope. it's over. go buy yourself a new pantsuit.

Posted by: Nelly, NYC | May 21, 2008 10:48 PM | Report abuse

TOM: The DNC can certainly make that argument in court. As matters now stand, it is true the Parties COULD pick their nominees just about any way they choose. However, once embarked on a voting process which includes State and Federal government participation, franchise rights do obtain. The Parties are merely de facto agents in a Federal election, and bound by all sorts of Federal law and regulations, including the voting franchise. The courts will make this clear in the nearer future.

Posted by: AlphaOverdawg | May 21, 2008 10:48 PM | Report abuse

I have an excellent idea of how to end this stupidity. Make Hillary answer to a call in Q&A on nationwide television while strapped to a lie detector. Every time she tells a lie, she gets shocked with a percentage of an amp. Each lie increases the amperage.

She'll be dead (Yea!) in less than five minutes, either by electrical shock, or by stroke from being forced to tell the truth.

Posted by: HillaryIsDeadIAmTheEggMan | May 21, 2008 10:47 PM | Report abuse

There is absolutely ZERO chance that the Super-D's will give the nomination to Clinton.

Speculation to the contrary is just another sign of the desperation of the Hillary camp.

Posted by: Chuckamok | May 21, 2008 10:47 PM | Report abuse

This woman is the daughter of Beelzebub, I'm sure of it, more than ever. She makes Don Quixote look like a realist.

Posted by: Tom | May 21, 2008 10:47 PM | Report abuse

I LOVE YOU FLORIDA & MICHIGAN!!! =)! From Kansas! I am ashamed of the elected people you have representing you, screwing up our process. I want to know why other members didn't call them out instead of watching the entire process be completed to being void, just stood still watching it happen. Unbelievable.

Now, as for Hillary, as a woman I primarily supported her. I read up on Obama and found that he had similar stances on the issues plus. I am absolutely pleased with my decision based on what I have been witnessing. I am going to say, that Hillary is REALLY beginning to annoy me much much more than she did when she started attacking team members so she can get ahead. This is not intended to be an insult at all, but calling my feelings on how she ran her campaign to my displeasure. I now only relate with her on some of the issues. I'll vote for her before I vote for McCain. As a woman, I don't feel she represents my ideal kind.

Hillary, what fair proposal do you have considering the rules were broken, only your name was clearly on Michigan's ballot, there were voters who knew their votes wouldn't count due to the dates being moved up w/o authorization, you and Obama were both aware, you both accepted the fact, and you both said that due to the circumstances, the votes would not count. Hillary, now it seems to me that you are changing the rules in the last few minutes of the process. Where is your integrity or can you not be trusted with your words? How far along in the process have we come, before you started fighting for Florida and Michigan? Something doesn't add up. I don't believe this is sincere. It really looks like you're trying to have rules your way. What are you going to do about those who didn't show up to vote, knowing their states wouldn't count? How fair are we willing to negotiate? I'm not understanding what the problem is. Obviously Michigan and Florida will count, just that it seems they can't go as they are. Is it that you are fighting for both of these states to be counted as they are when neither candidate got a chance to make their cases, one of the states had only your name on the ballot, and the factor that voters stayed home knowing the states' votes wouldn't count. I would absolutely LOVE an entire re-vote in all fairness. However, since we're not having one, given the circumstances, I believe we need to be as fair as possible. I believe you are attempting to cheat. I am NOT looking for any way to cheat you either Mrs. Clinton. It's not hard to be fair. I think that once those states moved their dates up, knowing of consequences, there should be penalties as warned from the beginning to which you accepted. Have integrity and stand by your word, or split 50/50 (no more or less on either side) and move on. Continue to make your case for your campaign, continue the voting processes, and let the people and delegates select our Democratic nominee so we can get on with the debates with a unified party.

'08

Posted by: Obama2008 | May 21, 2008 10:47 PM | Report abuse

Mrs. Clinton is not damaging the Democratic Party. Parties mean nothing to 95% of American voters--it's only politicians who care. Clinton has every right to run her campaign as she sees fit. IT'S A FREE COUNTRY--REMEMBER? If people are so concerned that Obama can't win as long as she stays in the race, then maybe they're right. So maybe HE should drop out. Otherwise, they might as well slug it out. It's been mildly entertaining, after all.

Posted by: Emmalee | May 21, 2008 10:47 PM | Report abuse

She's gone Insane.

Period.

Posted by: Bill Clinton | May 21, 2008 10:47 PM | Report abuse

Are there no limits to this?

Obama does not need many more delegates to secure the nomination at 2025 or 2026. I want the superdelegates to step up and give him the nod prior to May 31st. Come on, you can do it!

If this goes all the way to the convention, we will elect John McCain. Party unity will never happen, people will be hopelessly entrenched.

Posted by: Obama for Me | May 21, 2008 10:46 PM | Report abuse

Comment by Manolete may 21 10:31 PM- "We will continue to support Hillary Clinton all the way to the convention, because she is the only democrat that truly loves America!"

You sound like the Neo0Con Republicans with your hate message filled with false diatribe!
I support Senator Obama for President and I would like to see Hillary accept the Vice-Presidential position.
The Republicans are working for and hoping for the events in the Democratic party to turn to self-serving mud-slinging by the handful of Democrats willing to accomadate their wishes.
Hillary is right about the need to seat both Michigan and Florida at the convention. Her reasons will be called self-serving by some but not by me. She and surely many other Democrats realize they committed a terrible blunder when the DNC decided to punish these two states. It was and is sheer foolishness considering what happened in Florida in 2000 that put a mad-man in the White House. I call on all Democrats to fight the urge to play dirty with-in the party. Save your play dirty tactics for the battle with the dirtiest tricksters ever, the Republicans in the presidential election process. For anybody to throw filth at either of these two great political leaders (Obama and Clintn) is insane to the point I will only believe it's a Repubilcan in sheeps clothing doing the throwing. If you are a Republican get the hell off my porch!!!

Posted by: downhill240 | May 21, 2008 10:46 PM | Report abuse

Look down the list of posters. You can easily identify the "new politic" posters. Name calling and snarky. Yeah, we want that for the next 4 years don't we?

Posted by: Pansycritter | May 21, 2008 10:46 PM | Report abuse

> Senator Hillary Clinton has the popular vote.

Only if you believe that caucus states like Iowa contain no voters just because they have no vote totals (not to mention Michigan) and that the national polls of Democrats where he's 14% ahead are meaningless.

Otherwise, he's way ahead, by every fair measure.

Posted by: Joe | May 21, 2008 10:46 PM | Report abuse

"We are not looking for a fight, simply a solution that respects the voters from Florida and Michigan who cast their ballots in good faith."

PLEASE pay attention Hillary AND DNC - there is NO good faith involved here. Many Barack Obama supporters either voted against Hillary, or did not show up to vote, because Barack was not on the ballot.

I believe the DNC should NEVER have been so petty as to punish the voters to begin with - BUT to punish them again, by saying Hillary gets ALL the Michigan votes and Barack gets NONE is a complete travesty! I am just livid that Hillary would even think for one second that is fair. This proves to ME that she in fact does NOT care about the people and what they want, and so she needs to stop lying and saying that she does.

Posted by: Mary in Indiana | May 21, 2008 10:46 PM | Report abuse

You go, girl! If you lose the nomination, run as an independent. Kick, scratch and claw your way to the White House gate. Don't let the Democratic Party get in your way.

Posted by: hamishdad | May 21, 2008 10:46 PM | Report abuse

"Figures I would make that mistake being white, stupid me."

It's okay, Mark. You're not stupid because you're white. I know lots of white people who aren't stupid. You, you're just stupid. White is coincidental.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 10:44 PM | Report abuse

Force the delegates to make a choice they may ultimately regret

Posted by: Content of His Character | May 21, 2008 10:42 PM | Report abuse


Yes. Ted Kennedy and Jimmy Carter went all the way to the convention in 1980.


And Ronald Regan won.


Keep telling me it's good for the Party.


Idiots.

Posted by: self sycophant | May 21, 2008 10:42 PM | Report abuse

Hell has no fury like a woman scorned...

Posted by: koolaid | May 21, 2008 10:41 PM | Report abuse

"A win is a win" Hillary's words.
She mistakingly claimed to be under sniper fire because she was tired and sleep deprived, yet is ready to answer a 3 a.m. call.
She displays the same judgment Bush does when as the decider he makes decisions and doesn't quit no matter what. Do we want tenacity, yes, DO we want destructive tenacity and ambition at the cost of McCain's victory. YES, So YES to Dynasty and Yes to Hillary for President. She represents Change, it will be a tenacious Democrat in the white house instead of a tenacious Republican and we won't have to pay a gas tax.

Posted by: Jr. | May 21, 2008 10:41 PM | Report abuse

Most of you are getting just way too bizarre over all this. Lots of hyper-ventilating going on. Lots of irrational thinking and emotional screaming and yelling. Its kind of amusing seeing everyone weirding out. Thank god I have lived most of my life because we are all sliding down this slippery slope of uncivility. I am afraid Hunter S. Thompson was right. It hasn't gotten weird enough yet.

Posted by: Patrick | May 21, 2008 10:41 PM | Report abuse

The Hilldabeast's antics only further the dagger she is shoving into her own back. No Clinton destiny will result, and she may have killed her chances to return to the Senate in her next election.

Anyone can try to spin it however they want, but the reality is very clear to most Americans: Hillary believes that she should have been handed the ticket lead without working at it. She hasn't worked in the Senate; a quick comparison of Obama's shorter tenure to hers easily demonstrates that she is a fraud.

See ya later Shrill Hill! I'm looking forward to not hearing your grating voice much longer.

Posted by: Joop deBruin | May 21, 2008 10:41 PM | Report abuse

Clinton was outfoxed and outclassed by an 'uppity' young Black guy and she doesn't have the grace, nor common sense to acknowledge it. The raging Clinton machine brought to a screeching halt by the little engine that could.

When it's all over and the history books are written she'll be the punch line of a very sad joke.

Posted by: Hillaryus | May 21, 2008 10:41 PM | Report abuse

The DNC violated their own rules...only 50% of the delegates can be unseated for any sanction.

So lets start by playing by the rules not with the rules.

Posted by: Pansycritter | May 21, 2008 10:40 PM | Report abuse

Obama our next president! Read it and believe it :) This country is changing for the better. What an amazing beautiful country to be able to elect OBAMA! GO USA.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 10:40 PM | Report abuse

Chris,

Nobody ever said Hillary lacked tenacity. Perhaps that is why she's made it this far. For sure, it isn't intelligence or willingness to listen to the people. Uh, strike the intelligence part. She is a Rhodes scholar, if memory serves.

Posted by: Jeff K. | May 21, 2008 10:40 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is disingenuous. She along with all the candidates agreed that Florida and Michigan would not count because they moved their primaries ahead, to now claim the votes in Florida and Michigan should count only proves you can NOT trust Hillary to keep her word or her pledge. She is a compulsive liar. Hillary and Bill are disgusting lowlifes just like the Republicans claimed they were. Hillary is willing to destroy the Democratic Party for her own selfish cause, just like her husband cost the Democrats congress years earlier, she is willing to do it again. only worse. What a sad individual Hillary has become.

Posted by: Bo | May 21, 2008 10:39 PM | Report abuse

Let the people decide.

Posted by: Real America | May 21, 2008 10:39 PM | Report abuse

She is simply pathetic!!

Posted by: Jack in Miami | May 21, 2008 10:39 PM | Report abuse

"We will continue to support Hillary Clinton all the way to the convention, because she is the only democrat that truly loves America!"

If that's the case, why would any democrat vote for Clinton?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 10:39 PM | Report abuse

This is stupid. Hillary just has to go. She's going to keep hanging around, threatening everyone with her contingency of voters who will vote against Obama until someone gets the nerve to just tell her to get the hell out.
I'm sick of her inferred threats. Don't ever try to hold me hostage in an election you evil, self-important, conniving person.
Shoo.
Go.
Bye-Bye.

Posted by: self sycophant | May 21, 2008 10:38 PM | Report abuse

Oh for goodness sake.

Dear Hillary,
For your own dignity, for the dignity of the party and for the dignity of America know when the fight is done.

I'm tired of the political games, the parsing of words and the veiled or implied attacks on someone who has the real potential to make a difference to this country. I know I'm not the only one.
Is this the candidiate you want to be?

I know its hard, I know its all you ever wanted in life and it was yours for the taking at the beginning of the campaign but let it go.

As someone wrote recently, For all your endeavor and ambition, sorry Hillary but you just don't have it, Obama does.

Thank you for your work - please do more, but you are not the leader you are the worker.

Posted by: Letter to Hillary | May 21, 2008 10:38 PM | Report abuse

She has been popular in states notorius for "non-diversity". Her position seems to attract the racist element of the population, while Obama is popular in more progressive regions. I would be disappointed to see her selected by the population. It would represent a leap backwards, rather than a unifying change.

Posted by: Stelton | May 21, 2008 10:38 PM | Report abuse

As a Democratic woman, I am embarrassed by HRC. She does not fight fair and any class she had she is losing day by day with her mutually assured destruction tactics. Last poll had Obama over her by 15 points. Hillary, you are turning people off, just bow out before you make it any worse. You lost.

Posted by: Dee | May 21, 2008 10:36 PM | Report abuse

"The superdelegates can and should - must - tilt this in Clinton's favor."

Wouldn't happen in a million years. And that's a fact.

Posted by: Chuckamok | May 21, 2008 10:35 PM | Report abuse

"We will continue to support Hillary Clinton all the way to the convention, because she is the only democrat that truly loves America!"

Including yourself? Or maybe you're just another Republican not too good at hiding your true leanings...

Posted by: kreuz_missile | May 21, 2008 10:35 PM | Report abuse

Aren't conventions supposed to be for choosing the candidate? If not, then why does the DNC have all those rules about multiple ballots and freeing delegates etc?
Could it be that the DNC made ANOTHER scheduling mistake in addition to the Fla and Mich ones? The DNC is already responsible for major headaches and teeth gnashing, and useless arguments, not to mention disenfranchising of voters.
I for one would like to see it go to the convention as it has done in many years past. At least the TV ratings would go up. This would also mean that there are a lot fewer obnoxious campaign ads.

Posted by: John | May 21, 2008 10:35 PM | Report abuse

All you Clinton supporters are forgetting one simple thing, this country is a democracy!!
Clinton lost. Even if you count Florida she still lost. All your whining is starting to make you sound very un-American and frankly it's pathetic.

Posted by: Rich | May 21, 2008 10:35 PM | Report abuse

So she's been following Bill's direction and pushing personal glory ahead of party unity. She will get blamed by Democrats if Obama ends up losing to McCain (very likely...).

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: matt | May 21, 2008 10:34 PM | Report abuse

Hillary, Shrillary, go away
Don't come back another day
Barack Obama is here to stay
Hillary, Shrillary, GO AWAY

Posted by: South Dakota | May 21, 2008 10:34 PM | Report abuse

Has everybody forgotten that Ted Kennedy & President Carter went all the way to the Convention back then, when T. Kennedy was behind by almost 600/700 delegates. At that time, I was told, Kennedy was not least bit criticized or trashed for being selfish or destructive. It was construed as being something he should do. Why the difference? Could it be that a man's expected to be aggressive and headstrong, and yet an strong willed & tenacious woman will always be labeled as a _itch?

Posted by: susan | May 21, 2008 10:34 PM | Report abuse

Jackie

I trust you have no children...

Posted by: Pansycritter | May 21, 2008 10:33 PM | Report abuse

re: informed democrat

check the bundling of advertising that resulted in Obama getting airtime in Florida

florida and michigan were out of play according to the candidates due to scheduling too early. since that hasn't changed why are they back in play?

if Hillary can't beat Obama, how the heck can she beat McCain?

529s are about saving money for your kids, 527s you should be worried about!

Posted by: semi-informed democrat | May 21, 2008 10:33 PM | Report abuse

I suggest an intervention from the most powerful woman in the congress...third in succession to the president....NANCY! PLEASE talk to her. Tell her she's pulling us all down with her SORE-LOSER antics.

Posted by: hard-headed woman | May 21, 2008 10:33 PM | Report abuse

The superdelegates can and should - must - tilt this in Clinton's favor. I have been saying from the beginning that Obama can't win, and everything since March has proven my judgment correct. Middle America is not going to elect a liberal Chicago politician.

An Obama candidacy means a McCain presidency. And this, folks, is precisely why the Democrats created superdelegates: to make sure that the screwy caucus and proportional systems don't nominate somebody who can't win.

Clinton is bringing the winning map for the general election. It's the map her husband brought. Her husband showed Democrats how to win the White House and keep it. The superdelegates have it within their power to make that happen.

Clinton isn't fighting the rules. The rules are in her favor. The superdelegates could make all this right and run the candidate who can beat John McCain. Democrats can't advance the cause of democracy if they can't win the general election.

What Clinton is up against is a faux-liberal Democratic elite that is working to complete the transformation of the Democratic Party from a party that used to represent the broad middle of America to the party of identity politics.

An Obama candidacy does more than give McCain a mandate to transform the US judicial system and complete the conservative counterrevolution. An Obama candidacy further weakens the Democratic Party. It's McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis, and Kerry all over again. Middle America doesn't want those kind of Democrats.

Clinton must fight this for the sake of the country and for the sake of the future of the Democratic Party.

Yeah, it's that serious. Look at the maps. Look at history. Look at who wins and who loses.

The fact that Obama is leading right now confirms Middle America's hypothesis about the Democrats, namely that the party is out of touch with working class voters.

Posted by: Andrew Austin | May 21, 2008 10:32 PM | Report abuse

GET HIM HILLARY!

YOU GO GIRL!!!

HILLARY ALL THE WAY!!!!

Posted by: Hillary All the Way | May 21, 2008 10:32 PM | Report abuse

We will continue to support Hillary Clinton all the way to the convention, because she is the only democrat that truly loves America!

Barack fooled many voters in the early primaries but we now know of his close relationships with black supremacist and radical extremist groups that hate America and were celebrating the sad attack on America on 9/11.

The only hope for democrats to win the general election is if Hillary is the nominee; Barack does not have the trust of americans that love our country and we will never vote for him.

We will continue to support Hillary to demonstrate our distrust of Barack and if he is the democratic nominee, then we will vote for John McCain because he is a patriot that fought for our country and loves America in his own conservative way.

Save America from radicals and extremists! Vote for Hillary or McCain

Posted by: Manolete | May 21, 2008 10:31 PM | Report abuse

she must have been reading www.straightrecord.com/dems, which suggested nearly three months ago this should be the outcome. stuff happens. let the superdelegates and the convention analyze what is best for the party at this point. both candidates have a lot of baggage. cool heads need to sort this out.

Posted by: rapswork | May 21, 2008 10:31 PM | Report abuse

Clinton is staying in so that Obama will lose in November, and she will get another shot at the Presidency in 2012 -- after John McCain wrecks what's left of our once-glorious country, during his first term as President.

Clinton is only for Clinton. She will step over the wreckage of the Democratic Party, not to mention the entire USA.

Posted by: oldhonky | May 21, 2008 10:30 PM | Report abuse

tom - great post.

The fact is - the Obama campaign understood the rules, planned accordingly, and won.

All this caterwauling from Hillary's corner is nothing but sour grapes.

Anyone following all the buzz can sense reality FINALLY falling in on these folks and they're all plowing through the five stages of loss, at an amazing pace.

Posted by: Chuckamok | May 21, 2008 10:30 PM | Report abuse


(1.)TAKE IT TO THE CONVENTION

(2.) writehillaryin.com

Posted by: Ned | May 21, 2008 10:30 PM | Report abuse

I am a Republican and I have given Hillary money. I could not ever and would not ever vote for a Dark skinned Muslim as President. Not ever. I also believe that speaks for most White people in America. Hillary should fight this thing all the way to the convention and win. Hillary has the most votes and not delegates because the democratic Party is boneheaded. If the delegates came from each state won Hillary would have won already. But the media want Obumma.

Posted by: Joe Jackson | May 21, 2008 10:30 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Jonny | May 21, 2008 9:57 PM

An agreement yes. Between who? I do not think the people of those states signed any agreement that says Don't count our vote.

So reguardless of what agreements were signed it was not the wish of the people of those states nor should any one be able to take that right away.

Posted by: Eric | May 21, 2008 10:29 PM | Report abuse

The stages of grief, through WoW:

Denial- We won, we have more popular votes if you exclude caucuses, count two elections that weren't part of the process, one of which Obama's name wasn't on the ballot; and even without that, it's the job of the Superdelegates to pick the candidate with the best shot in November, which is clearly our candidate despite her electoral performance...

Anger- This is total crap! People were denied their right to vote! Our opponent played dirty! The sexism was impossible to overcome! The Superdelegates and pundits are trying to declare this over too soon!

Bargaining- We deserve to be VP, or have a major say in the process, or dominate the writning of the platform. We took 47% of the delegates, you owe it to us or else we're voting for John McCain.

Depression- Coming soon

Acceptance- See you in Denver!

Posted by: kreuz_missile | May 21, 2008 10:29 PM | Report abuse

pansy...
Losers who don't know when to quit are in denial. But we always knew that didn't we?

Posted by: Jackie | May 21, 2008 10:28 PM | Report abuse

With these last few comments, Hillary has shown herself to be unqualified to be head dog catcher.

What a buffoon! Somebody like god needs to sit down (or at least a group including Al Gore, Sam Nunn, Jimmy Carter, Boren,...) with this woman & let her know in no uncertain terms pressing this rules fight to the floor of the convention means she has absolutely no future in the democratic party. Zero, zip, nada, turn the lights out & don't let the door hit you on the butt on the way out time.

Otherwise, it's a gang fight in the streets of summer Denver while John McCain sits on the sidelines smiling.

That's all.

Posted by: Aaron | May 21, 2008 10:27 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton supporters, like myself, will simply write her in come November if the Democratic Party chooses suicide, and decimate BOTH Obama and McCain.

So she has nothing at all to lose by hanging in until the very end.

Democracy in action. Can actually be sweet sometimes.

Posted by: xbjllb | May 21, 2008 10:26 PM | Report abuse

The reason for the primary date PLEDGE is so we wouldn't be having primaries the day after the inaugural. It's bad enough as it is with perpetual campaigning and fundraising.

Posted by: Joyce | May 21, 2008 10:26 PM | Report abuse

WoW has moved on to a new whine of the day. I can't even read them anymore, I mean, I see typing there, but all I hear in my head is a baby crying over and over again.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 10:25 PM | Report abuse


STEVE; Your deliberate ignorance is highly annoying, though it is echoed in post after post despite the facts being readily available. Once more: the DNC did not ask the candidates to remove their names from the MI ballot. That action by Obama was another judgment made by His Inspirationness all by himself, knowing full well he was going to take a serious ass-thumping, which would break his winning streak, if he stayed on the ballot. No other reasonable explanation obtains. If Obama thought he could get more votes he would have left his name on the ballot, even if he thought the votes wouldn't be counted. How could getting more votes hurt him, whether counted or not? Obviously, he didn't think he would win. And why ruin a perfectly good win streak built on undemocratic CAUCUSES with a drubbing by a real vote in a PRIMARY? Not that it was a dumb move, but that he tried unsuccessfully to get back on the ballot does raise questions about his decisiveness and judgment. Don't you think? And that's a purely rhetorical question--no need to respond.

Posted by: AlphaOverdawg | May 21, 2008 10:25 PM | Report abuse

You go girl. Losers are fine, quitters suck.

Obama has quit, he wants to be carried over the finish line. He can't "win" either. He's lazy and bored. Mr. Faculty Lounge is "tired" of the "mean" people.

I'm actually pretty amazed at the local view of all this. Life long democrats will vote for McCain or not vote at all-male and femle. The pundits will skew it to color bias(of course--that's all Obama is running on)and the single thing they are missing is reality.

That is why Senator Jesus will lose. No reality.

Posted by: Pansycritter | May 21, 2008 10:24 PM | Report abuse

There's a lot of confusion about "disenfranchisement" going on here. The franchise refers to the general election. The primaries and caucuses are not general elections, but the process by which the parties select their delegates. Some state parties use primary elections; others use caucuses. If the national parties still permitted, they could get a bunch of "superdelegates" together in the back room and pick a slate of delegates without the voters or caucusers being involved at all. But there is no "franchise" in the constitutional sense involved: IT'S A MATTER OF HOW DELEGATES TO THE PARTY CONVENTION ARE SELECTED TO PICK A NOMINEE FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION.

So the national parties each make their own rules for delegate selection, and each of the state parties sets its own process ACCORDING TO THE RULES OF THE NATIONAL PARTY. When there are violations, it's up to the national party to set the sanctions. That's what happened with Florida and Michigan: they violated the time constraints imposed by the national party. The Obama campaign neither made nor is enforcing the rules: the national Democratic Party is. [In fact, several of Clinton's senior advisors were involved in making those rules, and will be involved in enforcing them. Terry McAuliffe, for one.] But the "voting franchise" isn't implicated in all of this, since it's not a constitutional election.

Posted by: tom | May 21, 2008 10:24 PM | Report abuse

This is for everyone who called Obama a racist. Obama's mother was white, his grandfather, grandmother and his family. To be a racist he would not only have to hate himself but his mother and the grandparents that raised him. Its a part of him and his history. It was years before he even met the african part of his family then it was just visits. He was raised by his grandparents this is simply not true. If you were talking about Al Sharpton I would agree with you 100% but not Obama.

Posted by: Bianca | May 21, 2008 10:23 PM | Report abuse

Since I was banned from MSNBC political blogs and Daily KOS I guess this is my final place of refuge to express myself. As a black man in America today I feel targeted. I am now expected to forgive and forget the past injustices the Majority population of this nation have and continue to bestow upon me. Just for the sake of electing a Black man as president.(that the same Majority Doesn't want). I will not forgive or forget the racist acts that were and are the in The Founding documents of this nation. 3/5ths of a man is still common in the minds of racist America... I hear white people crying about affirmative action. You take my tax money but I can't even get a government job. Well for all of you white people who think Affirmative action was bad thing...you can Kiss my attitude.... Including Jim Webb and all the Scot-Irish you can find...

Posted by: rhatwasntfunny | May 21, 2008 10:23 PM | Report abuse

Well Chris, if Obama wants to end this race he can go back to his day job. They need someone with his ears to listen to cloakroom chatter. Ooops, I used the word race. I mean contest. Figures I would make that mistake being white, stupid me, I need to show more sensitivity to things like that, sweety.

Posted by: Mark W. | May 21, 2008 10:22 PM | Report abuse

Wahhabi is an ultraconservative Islamic type of green horseradish from Saudi Arabia.

Posted by: eatbees | May 21, 2008 10:22 PM | Report abuse

Go, Hillary; we're with you all the way.

At my house Hillary Clinton has our votes because we know she'll steer us back to a sound economy without wars; with good employment; lessened out-sourcing; gas & electricity we can afford; the same health care plan that Congress members enjoy--for every one of us, leaving no one uncovered; & an income tax that's fair instead of favoring the wealthy. We trust Clinton. For my family it's Clinton all the way & we're supporting her every way we can, including campaign contributions whenever we can--it's our investment in our future.

Posted by: Patrick Knif | May 21, 2008 10:21 PM | Report abuse

"Why don't you admit you at Obama headquarters at Michigan & Lake ??

You obviously have the research department there."

Nope, just an informed voter with a long memory who knows how to do research (and I thought those masters degrees would never pay off, but look, I can debate with irrelevant strangers online!)

"Larry Sinclair story in depth..."

Isn't this the guy who has failed multiple polygraphs, contradicted himself on numerous occasions, and cited places Obama demonstratably wasn't on multiple occasions? The guy whose credibility is so bad even Sean Hannity and Michelle Maulkin won't touch him with a ten foot pole?

"Clinton better stay in until the candidate SELECTED BY THE VOTERS is our nominee."

And that candidate is Barack Obama.


Posted by: kreuz_missile | May 21, 2008 10:21 PM | Report abuse

Come early December and all are taking serious expectations of a joyous Christmas Holiday season.
Will someone at that time please get a message to the Clintons about the campaign being over, finished...... done..... stick a fork in it.
Blind obsession is one thing, but this is near insanity and an affront to reality.
How much campaign debt will Hillary bring to the Convention?

Posted by: motiv8ed | May 21, 2008 10:21 PM | Report abuse

"Seriously, Obama winning the nomination is the ONLY way the Dems will win in the general election. Hillary has a VERY strong Dem base...but the swing votes WON'T vote for her. Obama will get the majority of Dems, the Independents & the crossover republicans."

Um. No, he won't. This SWEETIE is sticking with McSane. Obama's just a little too far left of Loony for me.

Posted by: J Cline | May 21, 2008 10:21 PM | Report abuse

AMERICAN LAW IS A FRAUD!

Posted by: Tom Jefferson | May 21, 2008 10:19 PM | Report abuse

We are all idiots. That is why Bush was elected without protest and re-elected with the both the electoral college and popular vote. That is why we were tricked into thinking Iraq supported Al Qaeda and pulled our troops from Afghanistan and the hunt for Osama Bin Laden.

Everytime we are given two choices we aren't given a choice. Republican vs. Democrat, Obama vs. Clinton, Right vs. Left. Please start to see that things are not two sided, but multifaceted.

I have only been able to vote for a few elections, but both the Democratic and Republican parties have shown me they are not interested in fixing the problems, but instead interested in getting elected and staying in office.

I am voting for third, fourth and fifth party candidates.

I am voting for term limits.

I am holding incumbents to their previous campaign promises.

I am voting for change.

Posted by: Really? | May 21, 2008 10:19 PM | Report abuse

There is a problem with Howard Dean and the Executives of the Democratic Party poking a stick in the collective eye of all Democrats by alienating two states that are pretty important in the general election.
NO ONE, not the State Democratic Party OR the National Democratic Party has the right to take away a citizen's vote. The idea, that someone in the party thought that was a good solution to the problem, is totaly beyond my comprehension.

Posted by: Doug LaPlante | May 21, 2008 10:19 PM | Report abuse

It is time that the superdelegates end this damn thing. Sorry Puerto Rico.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 10:18 PM | Report abuse

Joyce,

You don't get it do you? There is no law, there is no agreement. It can be all twisted and spun, in every direction imaginable.

Why? Because this is the type of self-serving legal system we've established in the last few decades.

Forget about law, and forget about agreements, it's all over baby...Just hang on for the ride, and do try not to fall off my dear!

Posted by: Johnny Democracy | May 21, 2008 10:18 PM | Report abuse

"Hillary is staying in the race all the way to the Convention for one reason: Obama's underhanded and RACIST campaign in South Carolina."

Must be Bill posting here. And what a cute nom de guerre!

Posted by: Chuckamok | May 21, 2008 10:17 PM | Report abuse

When Obama is nominated he will most likely pay for all of Hillary's debts which means money donated to Obama's campaign will go right into Clinton's pocket. Obama supporters are paying Clinton no matter how large the debt and no matter how much she divides the party. FROM THIS POINT ON CLINTON SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR REPAYING HER OWN DEBTS. If she has to pay for her own campaign debts she will cut her losses and back Obama.

Posted by: malarkey | May 21, 2008 10:14 PM | Report abuse

"It's that green horseradish from Japan."

That's wasabi.

Posted by: Jon Morgan | May 21, 2008 10:13 PM | Report abuse

Chris:


Hillary is staying in the race all the way to the Convention for one reason: Obama's underhanded and RACIST campaign in South Carolina.


In this campaign, Obama smeared Bill Clinton and twisted his words around.

Obama deserves what he gets for his own dirty campaign which turned his post-racial campaign theme into a complete FRAUD.

.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 21, 2008 10:13 PM | Report abuse

Here is the agreement ALL of the candidates signed before the primaries began (back when Hillary was Queen):

Four State Pledge Letter 2008
Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina
August 31, 2007
WHEREAS, Over a year ago, the Democratic National Committee established a 2008 nominating calendar; WHEREAS, this calendar honors the racial, ethnic, economic and geographic diversity of our party and our country;
WHEREAS, the DNC also honored the traditional role of retail politics early in the nominating process, to insure that money alone will not determine our
presidential nominee;
WHEREAS, it is the desire of Presidential campaigns, the DNC, the states and the American people to bring finality, predictability and common sense to the
nominating calendar.
THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential
election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa,
Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as "campaigning" is defined by rules and regulations of the DNC.
___________________________ __________
John/Jane Doe, Doe for President DATE

------------------------
Now, I'm sure Bill & Hillary, in their lust for power, will pull out the old Clintonian legaleeze, e.g., "what the meaning of is is" ploy.

Posted by: Joyce | May 21, 2008 10:12 PM | Report abuse

-------------------------------------------
an

NEWS FLASH!


"DNC CHAIR HOWARD DEAN ANNOUNCES THAT AMANDA JEFFERSON, A SENATOR FROM DELEWARE, WILL REPRESENT THE PARTY FOR PRESIDENT THIS FALL IN THE GENERAL ELECTION"


In a dimly lit back room, Mr. Dean is seen having his cake, and nearly choking on it too!


an
-------------------------------------------

Posted by: anton | May 21, 2008 10:12 PM | Report abuse

Someone ought to poke GORE with a sharp pointed stick. I'm willing to bet ANYONE who has has first had experience with this gender embarrassing person won't endorse her.

Posted by: Helen | May 21, 2008 10:10 PM | Report abuse

"If that happens by June 15 or June 30 -- and if some sort of accommodation has been made that satisfies Florida and Michigan -- it's hard to imagine Clinton staying in."

So if p AND q, Clinton gets out. But what if p and NOT q (or vice versa)?

Posted by: Jon Morgan | May 21, 2008 10:09 PM | Report abuse

To all Hillary Clinton supporters:

Your'e fired!!!

The task : To manage, raise funds and organize a campaign for the presidency by winning the majority of delegates (2026).

Result: Started off with a national lead and millions of dollars in comparison to other candidates. Chose not to campaign aggressively in caucus states. Spent money on consultants, and lavish surroundings and accomodations that added no value to the campaign. Surrounded herself with strategist, advisors who she allowed to take her on a particular course, even when the common sense people told her the strategy was not working.

Essentially lost the front runner status, by allowing her husband to set the tone of her campaign, found her voice for a minute and then relinquished it for an ever changing message. Ended up with her campaign in the red, even after loaning millions to it, and is now behind in the delegate race.

If Mrs. Clinton wants to be the Democratic nominee then she needs to win the required number of delegates, its that simple and its time she takes some responsiblity for the state her campaign is in. We need a president who will speak to us like grown ups and who will act like a grown up.

Posted by: Perception vs Reality | May 21, 2008 10:09 PM | Report abuse

"What's a wahabi?"

It's that green horseradish from Japan.

I think.

Posted by: Chuckamok | May 21, 2008 10:07 PM | Report abuse

There he goes, BHO off to Brazil, he's finally going to do it, turn himself into a woman, and placate all the preferrential quota system lawmakers. He's really going to do it! Two quotas with one operation...Wow,

Wow, this is exciting!

Posted by: JenniferUSA | May 21, 2008 10:07 PM | Report abuse

With the latest outrageous statement by Hillary Clinton, that she is willing and ready for a nasty and divisive convention fight, forget about Sen. Obama's campaign helping her to retire her mounting campaign debt. Bear in mind, that Hillary Clinton and her inept campaign staff, incurred the debt by waging blistering, caustic and destructive campaign against Sen. Obama. What moral justification is there for Sen. Obama's campaign to help Hillary Clinton retire the $20 million plus campaign debt? If immorality is not punished, what is the incentive for morality?

As for the so-called women Hillary Clinton supporters, including the BITTEREST of them, the incomparably, nasty Geraldine Feraro, who rant, that they may not vote for Sen. Obama, if he wins the nomination, I say this to you: you will regret doing such a stupid thing! There are alot of issues of particular interest to women, that there is no way in hell, John McCain and the Republican Party would accommodate your interest, for instance, filling the next vacancies on the Supreme Court and other similar judiciary appointments. If these women are so foolish and parochial enough, to sacrifice all that women everywhere care about, just to register sympathy vote for someone like Hillary Clinton, you have betrayed the fundamental principle behind the suffrage. You had better think again.

Posted by: Ignatius Anyanwu | May 21, 2008 10:07 PM | Report abuse

Today they finally played the gender card.

What I'm wondering is, if sexism played a role in her being behind in the Democratic nomination process, why wouldn't it play a role in the general election process? I'm not disputing her claim. I just have trouble reconciling that argument with her argument that she is the stronger candidate. To me, those arguments cancel each other out.

I am also having trouble with her argument that she has won a majority of the popular vote. Granted, she adds Florida and Michigan, but that argument only works if you didn't add Obama's votes in Florida to his total, and the uncommitteds in Michigan.

I would have respect for her arguments about Florida and Michigan if she had taken this position early on. But to wait until she's irrevokably behind in delegates to begin making the argument, I cannot help but think her motives have much more to do with her than any regard for the feelings of the voters in Florida and Michigan.

Posted by: aBigSAM | May 21, 2008 10:06 PM | Report abuse

Obama followed the rules and Hillary has played terrible politics by making him Public Enemy #1 of the Florida voters for something that he did not have anything to do with. Florida Democrats voted 100% along with Republicans to move their Primary forward, the DNC punished them, Obama and Clinton both signed the rules imposed on them to compete. She is using the votes argument to paint Obama as illegitimate. That's just unacceptable.

After a ballot that was won based on name recognition for Clinton, she wants the ballots counted. Fine! But also recognize that there are people who stayed home because the contest didn't count in both Michigan and Florida, particularly in Michigan. Obama pointed out, after getting proper legal and consitutional advice that there were real problems with re-voting because many new lawsuits would come from the woodwork. It's not his fault that the Rules Committee Meets May 31st, the Committee is full of Hillary supporters (some of whom voted for the Florida sanctions and now will undo their punishment) and she's out there shouting that the Rules Committee should not disenfranchise voters. This is the worst kind of hypocrisy and denial I have ever seen. It approaches the level of ridiculousness of Saddam Hussein's Information minister.

She talks about civil rights and Obama has won pledged delegates through contests she had a fair shot in. She wants the party to count MI and FL voters and ignore the millions who through the rules have decided that Obama should be the nominee. The only people who can end this are New York and California superdelegates breaking ranks, particularly Dianne Feinstein and Charlie Rangel.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 10:05 PM | Report abuse

OK everyone, move back from the ledge, make a nice cup of tea, and pet the kitty. Nice kitty.

Posted by: ar | May 21, 2008 10:05 PM | Report abuse

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

To: DNC Members
From: Informed Democrats
Re: Understanding of Florida Primary Rule Violations
Date: Until Michigan and Florida are Seated

Dear Governor Dean & Esteemed DNC Members,

STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING: As an informed Democrat, I am seeking to understand when will, we, Democratic voters see true equity in the Democratic Presidential Primary race?

RULES OF UNDERSTANDING: According to the rules of the Florida Democratic Presidential Primary, agreed to by all Democratic Presidential Primary candidates, no Democratic candidate was to advertise in Florida prior to the Florida primary.

FACTS OF UNDERSTANDING: Senator Barack Obama purchased national cable advertising and advertised HEAVILY in the State of Florida prior to the January presidential primary.

REQUEST OF OUTCOME BASED ON UNDERSTANDING: When will Senator Barack Obama and his campaign receive written (and publicized) notification he is; therefore, disqualified from receiving ANY of the delegates he and his campaign are seeking when Florida is ultimately seated, based on he and his campaign's failure to follow DNC rules?

EQUITY IN UNDERSTANDING: As a lifelong, Informed Democrat I know and understand you and the esteemed members of the DNC will do everything in your power to make an equitable decision in this matter, with liberty and justice for all.

THANK YOU FOR UNDERSTANDING INFORMED DEMOCRATS REQUEST:
Thank you in advance for the time and attention you and the esteemed members of the DNC have and will give to this matter, because we know you and the members, hold that all men and women are related equal in DNC decision-making. Right?

THE ONLY UNDERSTANDABLE OUTCOME: Seat Michigan and Florida, as they are currently counted, and award the only Democratic candidate who can win in November the nomination-Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Why embarrass the Democratic Party any further by awarding the nomination to the Manchurian Candidate Obama and wait for the Republicans and the 529 to unload to the world Obama's unelectable dirty laundry: Antoin Rezko, William Ayers, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Iraqi born Aiham Alsammarae, the former electricity minister convicted of corruption in Iraq and his deal with Obama and Rezko to build nuclear power plants in Iraq-a nation we are currently at war.

SENATOR HRC: To the Convention!

Democratically Yours,

Informed Democrat

Posted by: Informed Democrat | May 21, 2008 10:05 PM | Report abuse

Damn right! You got a problem with it, Steve?

What's a wahabi?

Posted by: Wahabi Poster | May 21, 2008 10:04 PM | Report abuse

Come on, who you kidding?

If you believe this I have NY bridge you'll be interested in buying.

The Clintons' stategy is to fight just fiercely enough to stay within the bondaries of reaction. She'll be singing this tune well into the summer.

The superdelegates will remain unwilling to 'offend' the old, white, racists that support her on the desperate hope she will drop out.

She'll continue to cripple the Party and cloud Barack's chances up until the convention. August is not that far away and the slippery slope of accommodation will make it arrive even faster.

Fight anger and fear. Choose hope and dreams. Live free.

Posted by: Ricky Galileo | May 21, 2008 10:04 PM | Report abuse

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
5-21

Anyone for an Obama gender change, please raise your hand?


wot
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Posted by: way out there | May 21, 2008 10:03 PM | Report abuse

kreuz_missile


Did you go over to the other room and tell Axelrod what we said ???


Why don't you admit you at Obama headquarters at Michigan & Lake ??


You obviously have the research department there.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 21, 2008 10:03 PM | Report abuse

Dear Lord! who gonna put senses to this pathological liar the so called Hillary. Unlike Hillary camp,Obama camp adhered with the rules set by DNC. It seems unlike Hillary they had no hidden agenda.Hillary should stop trying to steals this election. I guess she is working with cohort with Mcain. Destroying Democratic party from within is simple for her bearing in mind that, they are both owned by lobbists and they have to repaytheir debts to those lobbists!! Get out Hillary you cant stand the heat in the Kitchen and remember to put ferraro in your baggage.

Posted by: Pedeen | May 21, 2008 10:03 PM | Report abuse

Every day Hillary Clinton looks more foolish. I can't imagine what a fight until August will do to her image. Give it up woman while you still have some dignity left.

Posted by: Lilly1 | May 21, 2008 10:02 PM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton in 2004:
"Now one of Clinton's Laws of Politics is this: If one candidate's trying to scare you and the other one's trying to get you to think; if one candidate's appealing to your fears and the other one's appealing to your hopes, you better vote for the person who wants you to think and hope. That's the best."

Sounds like Sen. Obama's campaign...the Hope of our Nation and he wants the message to stay positive. Obviously his supporters are in agreement. Negative ads are finally being recognized for what they are...a poor attempt to to drag candidates down instead of lifting the nation up.

"We the People" will no longer be directed by the lowest common denominator. These attack ads show us ALL the worst in ourselves.

I have made a pledge that I will never again be led by negative advertising. Forever onward, I will look more carefully at the victims OPPONENT...thinking, 'What is so bad about this candidate that people on his side feel they have to draw attention away him?' and 'What is so wrong with his policy positions that his campaign can't stand on it's own merits?'

Posted by: Fair is Fair | May 21, 2008 10:02 PM | Report abuse

Chris: I suspect they'll pull the plug on the crazy woman on June 4th!

Posted by: KYJurisDoctor | May 21, 2008 10:02 PM | Report abuse

They WILL seat the delegates from FL & MI...probably at half of votes...with 'uncommitted' votes given to Obama in Mich, because he wasn't on the ballot (this option favors Clinton HEAVILY). Which makes the magic # 2131 delegates.
As of today the count is:
----Current Count---FL---MI---Supers---Total --Votes needed to win
Obama-1680---41---28-----308-----2057--- 74
Clinton-1518---52---36-----280-----1886--- 245

This is a BEST case scenario for Sen. Clinton....and yet, Sen. Obama is still in the lead by 171 votes.
There are only 4 primaries & 138 pledged delegates left in the nomination process.
TAKE NOTE: 114 of the undeclared super delegates are in states that Obama won & only 85 are from states that Hillary won.
Obama will be our nominee.
Seriously, Obama winning the nomination is the ONLY way the Dems will win in the general election. Hillary has a VERY strong Dem base...but the swing votes WON'T vote for her. Obama will get the majority of Dems, the Independents & the crossover republicans. And don't forget the millions of new voters Obama's campaign helped register...the Dem party is bigger and broader than ever. It's a no-brainer on the national scale

Posted by: Our Only Hope | May 21, 2008 10:02 PM | Report abuse

"Just one example: Hijacking our democratic blogs, and filling them with paid Trolls posting hate rhetoric against Clinton."

Try getting a firmer grip on reality.

Obama beat the Clinton Machine at its own game.

Hillary truly believed she DESERVED the nomination. She didn't spend all those years trashing any woman who DARED to expose BubbaJeff's sexual predations for nothing.

Both of the Clintons are felons.

The Trash Heap O' History is too good for them.

Posted by: Chuckamok | May 21, 2008 10:01 PM | Report abuse

AMERICAN LAW IS A FRAUD!

every little detail can be twisted and spun to a certain liking. no such thing a black and white, just a lot of gray...kinda like obama

Posted by: Tom Jefferson | May 21, 2008 10:00 PM | Report abuse

The most important issue in this election is not even being discussed: rewarding the poor judgment of John McCain and Hillary Clinton.
The U.S. is in total denial of what these two did by voting to invade Iraq. They are going all over the country touting their vast experience and readiness to lead. Where is the evidence? When it came to the most important decision they ever made in the public arena, they came up short.
They voted to attack another country without provocation. The experts on the ground were pushed aside to make way for the invasion. Both McCain and Clinton, supposedly experienced, didn't even bother to read the intelligence estimates on Iraq. How callous can one be with the lives of the sons and daughters of others?
Those who flew the planes into our buildings were neither from nor trained in Iraq. The base of Bin Laden and Taliban was, and still is, in Afghanistan. Bush used Iraq to distract us from his failure to find Bin Laden. McCain and Clinton voted for this blockbuster blunder. Millions of deaths and casualties have followed, a trillion dollar nightmare, sending the economy teetering on bankruptcy.
I believe that they feel exempt from the rules. It's reprehensible that they feel qualified to run for the Presidency.
That they can do this, says something unflattering about their characters, doesn't it? Also, what message does it send to our youth and the world that we even tolerate them being in the race?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 10:00 PM | Report abuse

"Ollie, Obama AND Hillary both have problems, but at least Hillary isn't going to spend money like there's no tomorrow"

Hmmm, whose campaign is $20 million in debt? This indicates fiscal responsibility? -- to say nothing of multiple management shakeups.

Look at who has managed a solid campaign with an amazing fundraising success.

Posted by: Don in VA | May 21, 2008 9:59 PM | Report abuse

Larry Sinclair story in depth... describes Trinity United Church gay choirmaster murdered, after calling Sinclair as a Obama campaign operative to discuss Sinclair's tryst with Obama in the back of a limo.

This is what Hillary refers to when she says Obama is not vetted.

http://advanceindiana.blogspot.com/2008/04/will-obamas-indiana-truth-squad-address.html

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 9:59 PM | Report abuse

September 13, 2004: Private detective Anthony Pellicano was hired by the Democrats in 1992 to squelch "bimbo eruptions" about Bill Clinton, and CBS accepted his assurances that the Gennifer Flowers tapes were fakes.
September 10, 2004: At the time of the Gennifer Flowers scandal, KCBS, the network's owned-and-operated affiliate in Los Angeles, took her tape and submitted it to private detective and forensic tape expert Anthony Pellicano for analysis. Only later was it learned that Mr. Pellicano had no formal training in evaluating tapes and was at the time being paid by Democratic sources to squelch "bimbo eruptions" surrounding Mr. Clinton.
January 4, 2004: Pellicano was the audio recording "expert" hired by Hillary Clinton to analyze taped conversations between then-President Clinton and Gennifer Flowers. Pellicano falsely claimed the tapes were "selectively edited" by Ms. Flowers. Ultimately, of course, the recordings were found to be 100% authentic. Pellicano, who is known as the "investigator to the stars" was in the habit of illegally wiretapping his targets. Many in Hollywood, and in Washington, are concerned about what these tapes might reveal.
November 23, 2003: Mary Matalin, now a senior advisor to President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney stumbled across the Clinton-Pellicano link while she was political director for President Bush's 1992 reelection campaign."I got the letters from Pellicano to [various women linked to Bill Clinton] intimidating them," Matalin said in 1997, when she was the host of her own nationally syndicated talk show on the CBS Radio network. "I had tapes of conversations from Pellicano to the women. I got handwritten letters from the women...I got one letter from one of the women's dad's saying, 'This is so horrible. Here's what they're going to do to us,'" . Matalin wasn't the only one who knew about the Clinton's employment of Pellicano. In fact, before Pellicano's name became politically toxic, his identity had been widely reported. "Shortly after the [Monica Lewinsky] scandal broke, Lucianne Goldberg was in her office in New York when, she says, she got a call from David Kendall, Clinton's lawyer on Whitewater matters," reported Newsweek's Michael Isikoff in 1998. "Kendall, a gentlemanly lawyer, politely asked Goldberg if he could send someone by her New York apartment to pick up her tapes of her conversations with Linda Tripp. "Goldberg was furious. A few days earlier, one of her famous clients had already been approached by Anthony Pellicano, seeking information about the tapes. The detective had said that he was 'working for Clinton.'" New York Sen. Hillary Clinton's Washington attorney David Kendall denied that Anthony Pellicano ever worked for the Clintons.
Anthony Pellicano Web Links
This is where this info came from also look up Peter Paul and read about the case and you all want these people in the whitehouse

Posted by: kathy | May 21, 2008 9:59 PM | Report abuse

I say we releive Clinton of her outright racist votes she got in West Virginia and Kentucky and give Obama those delegates. I can't beleieve some people would support this shrieking, pandering woman who has been nothing short of heinous toward Obama during this whole primary ordeal. She actively courted white uneducated poor working class people and used them to further her and Bill's greedy agenda. She's played the "Race Card and the Dumb-ass Redneck card"; she's flip flopped on Florida and Michigan; she's done all sorts of goal post moving in order to win the nomination. This woman is a giant pain in the ass. "Give it up Hillary" Stop being a sore loser...LOSER.

Posted by: Doug | May 21, 2008 9:58 PM | Report abuse

Get her help--she's a jumper.

Posted by: trlrtash | May 21, 2008 9:58 PM | Report abuse

Look, no one told fool Bill to go to South Carolina and say what he said, just like no one told Hilary to make "misstatements" and talk about supposedly dodging sniper fire, she chose to do that. Has it ever occurred that maybe a lot of Americans are just tired of the whole Clinton empire and simply want something different?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 9:58 PM | Report abuse

Talk of a convention fight should lead another 100 or so super delegates to commit to Obama right away.

Posted by: Dolph924 | May 21, 2008 9:57 PM | Report abuse

what happens in puerto rico next week?

3 million voters going 70-30 for hillary, that's what! what will the obamaites say after he's behind by over one million popular votes? come on obamaites, what will you say then?

oh, but the superdelegates.....

they're a joke, get it!

a joke on you, a joke on america!

Posted by: independent raza girl | May 21, 2008 9:57 PM | Report abuse

Who cares how early Michigan and Florida went? I made my mind up 7 1/2 years ago that we didn't need another bush and then made my mind up again 7 years ago that we don't need or want bush. Look at the mess we're in now!!! I don't see why timing of these two very crucial states should decide why not every AMERICAN voice is heard. But then again maybe I am just being a democrat and asking too many questions and not actually getting anything done. Yet, to my grave I will support this party to the best of my ability!

Posted by: Adam, NYC | May 21, 2008 9:57 PM | Report abuse

There was an agreement that Florida and Michigan would not count and that nobody would campaign in those states. Hillary was a part of this agreement. You can't take back what you agreed to just because it now serves your purpose.

Any Hillary supporters that actually believe it is fair to count those votes now do not believe in a fair election. Plain and simple.

Posted by: Jonny | May 21, 2008 9:57 PM | Report abuse

Dear tango, what does this woman, whose hands are bloody because of victims of Oklahoma bombing, and who, certainly, knew about the incoming demolition of WTC on 9/11 has to lose pertinent to 'name is mud', ah? This entire country and the world, however, have to lose the very great lot, if she is somehow in white house.

Posted by: aepelbaum | May 21, 2008 9:56 PM | Report abuse

Obama will be President for the next 8 years. He will be an acceptable President of a republic. If somehow Clinton messes everything up, McCain will be President. The only thing that everyone with a triple digit IQ knows is that Clinton will not be President. The American people may be stupid enough to elect lots of strange people, but the American people will not elect someone who is close to needing a long stay in an institution. Someone please get the dart gun, please.

Posted by: rusty 3 | May 21, 2008 9:55 PM | Report abuse

"Sadly, it appears evident that Clinton, a once formidable and admirable leader for many women of my generation, has managed to mangle the precious image that endeared her to many of us"

It was ALWAYS image, empty image.

That Hill-Rod fooled so many for so long is the sad part.

Posted by: Chuckamok | May 21, 2008 9:55 PM | Report abuse

50 YEARS:
50 YEAR:
50 YEARS:

The amount of years ago when the process went to the Convention and a Democrat became President.

Taking this to the Convention is at best a threat, and at worst - given Rove is popping up in Clinton's presentations - a sinister ploy to undermine any chances OBAMA will have.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 9:55 PM | Report abuse

go mccain!

Posted by: yay | May 21, 2008 9:54 PM | Report abuse

Clinton better stay in until the candidate SELECTED BY THE VOTERS is our nominee.
She is being marginalized ala Al Gore, 2000.

Same people, same Trick.

This time Obama is playing Katherine Harris by not allowing a
Florida and Michagan revote.

This is the slimiest primary I've seen in my lifetime.

Women will not vote for Obama because of all the corruption in this primary. Just one example: Hijacking our democratic blogs, and filling them with paid Trolls posting hate rhetoric against Clinton.
Even the Trolls are finally laughing about themselves.

This isn't what democracy is supposed to be. And the democratic party is going to be toast if the elected candidate is not our nominee.

Posted by: greenfrog | May 21, 2008 9:54 PM | Report abuse

Obama Underwhelms me. With no experience,
and a not-so-great record in the Senate,
I can't vote for him. He can't win without
Clinton's voters, either. If Fla. and Mi.
votes are counted, Hillary will win the popular vote. Hillary is the better candidate.

Posted by: paul | May 21, 2008 9:53 PM | Report abuse

Tomorrow's Headlines:

"Lawyers drowning themselves amuck in self-created, political jargin and fraud!"

go on lizards, beat yourselves to death over this one....))))))

Posted by: Tom Jefferson | May 21, 2008 9:53 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton does not respect and uphold the very basis of civil justice system by ignoring her own signature on the document, which she willingly signed. How could anyone even imaging this 'back to dark ages' creature to become the president of the USA is impossible even to begin to understand. Hillary clinton is the worst and the most unprogressive choice for the incoming presidency.

Posted by: aepelbaum | May 21, 2008 9:52 PM | Report abuse

Ollie, Obama AND Hillary both have problems, but at least Hillary isn't going to spend money like there's no tomorrow.

Posted by: guityi | May 21, 2008 9:52 PM | Report abuse

For many years, Hillary Clinton represented a yardstick for me and many other younger females, looking for strong female leaders from whom to admire for their strength, leadership, wisdom, tenacity and achievements. But the way that she has conducted herself in this race, has forced many of us to realize that the dream of who we thought she represented was just that -- a dream. Being a wise leader involves knowing when the time has come to move on, and when to sow a new seed, if needed. It's licking your wounds having played the game fair and by the rules, but coming back even stronger next time. Sadly, it appears evident that Clinton, a once formidable and admirable leader for many women of my generation, has managed to mangle the precious image that endeared her to many of us, and served as an inspiration to our own achievements and dreams. It's downright embarassing to watch the final days of the campaign, as she scraps for crumbs in trying to derail Obama from the nomination, simply because she is a woman. She does not care about the braoder implications or how her actions impact future generations of women behind her. I am so ashamed of this display. There's no integrity there anymore, nothing to look up to or to be hopeful about in seeing Clinton today. For all of the forward progress that she has made in this cycle, she has managed to louse it up by failing to be the strong leader that many of us thought she was. And I really, really admired her.

Posted by: chicago blues | May 21, 2008 9:51 PM | Report abuse

Gee, I took Psych 101 a ways back. Let me see, somebody calls himself "Words of Wisdom." Now what personality disorder was that? I honestly don't recall; but I know it has something to do with his early years and potty training.

I would love it if all Democrats who put their candidate over the party would leave the party. Please, if this is a Feminist issue, start the Feminist Party. You build the infrastructure. But, dollars to doughnuts, Mrs. Clinton won't be part of it. Her power is with the Democratic Party. She's staying, even if she is making a fool of herself.

Posted by: Joyce | May 21, 2008 9:50 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is running for 2012. She cares nothing about this election, except to destroy Obama.

The Clintons are sick and twisted and Hillary has been lying since day one.

If you believe a word she says, you also have a screw loose.

Posted by: Ken | May 21, 2008 9:50 PM | Report abuse

Hillary seems intent upon prolonging the campaign for two reasons: the very remote possibility she may somehow steal the presidential nomination, or to undermine Barack's chances so he will lose in November.
The Clintons then would hope most Americans, especially Democrats, would forget about their role in helping John McCain win, so she could be a candidate for president again in four years. Talk about being elitist and condescending!

Barack will appear weak if he chooses Hillary as the vice-presidential nominee. How could he be a strong leader on the international stage if he appeases the Clintons and their most fervent supporters?

Posted by: CaIndependent | May 21, 2008 9:49 PM | Report abuse

Since the candidates agreed to the rules then they should let the DNC and the states work out the solution, why is she trying to impose herself in the process. I think Michigan and Florida democrats can speak for themselves.

Secondly why is it okay to be proud to continually say that the majority of white uneducated workers and those without a college degree votes for me, I'm sick and tired of the labelling, I am a citizen of America regardless of my skin colour or ethnicity.

This election proves that the democrats were never a united party, the abuse and insults thrown to fellow democrats is shameful. I thought that at least we could conduct ourselves with respect, I dare say we are in no position to throw stones at Karl Rove or the Republican Party. Vote for your candidate and shut up already,at the end we tally the delegate count and get the winner to help put this country back on track. Throw all traitors overboard, they add no value anyway and let the true democrats press on with the issues of health care, college tuition etc

Posted by: Enough already | May 21, 2008 9:48 PM | Report abuse

Chris, I dont quite understand why when you are told such things by the Clinton campaign do you not tell them that we the voters are all adults, and either you say what you mean or you dont.

I think you all in the media have been incredibly patient with this whole popular vote theory - first that it is the new metric, second that Clinton leads it, third in pontificating that she has a case. I mean, when you propogate such s**t and give it credibility by reporting it in your newspaper or on TV, you really waste our time. You would do your job much better if you immediately discuss the matter threadbare with them and report it if it only made sense. Why keep repeating something when it makes no sense, and lend it legitimacy.

As a voter I dont see why June 15 or June 30 is at all reasonable. It should be June 4 or 5. After that we should move on, one way or another. The Super delegates can cast their votes on those two days and be done with it!!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 9:48 PM | Report abuse

This is why I dislike politics. People choose sides, and it just makes a big mess. Every one of the candidates have problems, and equal problems at that.
I think people need to act more like JFK ! :D

Posted by: jessie | May 21, 2008 9:48 PM | Report abuse

Well, WoW, before you resort to such bellicose statements, do remember that the real opponent here isn't Sen. Obama but John McCain.

I do believe that from time to time, Sen. Clinton does use stronger words to remind people of what she wants- but as seen from recent examples, she knows there's gonna be a limit and she probably won't go till that limit.

That's pretty much it, really.

Posted by: Tim | May 21, 2008 9:48 PM | Report abuse

As usual we know were the Wahhabi Posts loyalty lies - with the candidate sponsored by their Wahhabi brethren.

Posted by: Peter | May 21, 2008 9:48 PM | Report abuse

It was the very serious achievement of the early medieval period when rulers started to respect and to support laws, documents, own signatures on these documents, and so on. In short, the very basic of the civil justice system, which is currently used by Western civilization. However, the hard fighting contender of this presidential primary doesn't feel that she has any obligation or would, as a possible ruler, to support and uphold this very basis of our civilization. Her own signature on documents means nothing to her, as she has already shown, and want to show to the entire world all over again. This is, of course, just the behavior one could expect from the woman, who has been trying to turn the development of our country (world also) back to the dark ages. The question is, however, "How could any reasonably thinking person even imagine this dark creature in the position of the president of the USA?"

Posted by: aepelbaum | May 21, 2008 9:48 PM | Report abuse

At the rate this primary is going, the Supreme Court will have made their decision by the end of October, and have crowned and nominee just in time for the General Election.

This is really exciting!

Posted by: JenniferUSA | May 21, 2008 9:48 PM | Report abuse

I voted for Hillary in '06- remember the Dems were gonna get us out of Iraq? We're still there and I wouldn't vote for her if you shoved bamboo up my fingernails. She'd sell her soul to win this thing, which is what the Republicans want! An easy win for the old man. She going out kicking and screaming, will wreck havoc where she can and cry foul to women. News flash! I'm a high school graduate-no college, white woman in a small, rural New York town that is 90% Republican. Many people I talk to are looking at Obama because they're afraid of the way the country is headed. Plain and simple. No Bush repeat and no more Clinton. Bill is a thorn in the side of the dems. Let's get this over with!

Posted by: ideas | May 21, 2008 9:48 PM | Report abuse

Note to feminists. Her screed of losing because of sexism is so outrageous that she will stir up a backlash and resentment that will impede support for legitimate civil rights issues such as reproductive rights and sexual preference.

Their selfishness seems to have no limits. They would indeed sacrifice and destroy Obama if the they could get away with it, but they will be stopped by those who realize the stakes are to great--- and far from worth the risk and cost of a Bush third term and the complete theocratic takeover of the Judiciary and Supreme Court.

And second note to the Ferraro/Feminism=Racism crowd' glass ceiling bla bla.--two words-- Nancy Pelosi. Unlike Ferraro, the racist drunk, and Hillary, dishonest sleaze owing her position to a sleazy rapist, women abuser who she enable, Nancy has intellect, character and leadership.

Posted by: barbra | May 21, 2008 9:48 PM | Report abuse

I thing the DNC will seat the FL and MI delegations, but have the votes split arbitrarily 50-50.

I forgot who originally proposed this ridiculously PC scenario, but it IS so very like the Dem party, right?

Posted by: Chuckamok | May 21, 2008 9:47 PM | Report abuse


guityi,
I'm curious whether you think Hillary's Universal Health Care will come from a different pot than Obama's Health Care that includes youth?

O

Posted by: Ollie | May 21, 2008 9:47 PM | Report abuse

RIP Roger Moore.

God, I miss the Yahoo news boards . . .

Posted by: Biff | May 21, 2008 9:46 PM | Report abuse

Site after site has people squealing back and forth at each other. If any of you, put this misguided fanatical faith in any of those 3 candidates you WILL be let down. I assure you. Clinton has issues, Obama has issues, McCain has issues.

As for the votes not being counted. I know 100% that if the shoe were on the other foot, Mrs. Clinton would have absolutely ZERO, I repeat ZERO interest in any of those voices being heard. She cares not one bit for anything but winning. McCain has completely flipped on many of his positions to get this nomination and I have no doubt Obama would be less than sterling if he was in Clinton's spot.

Obama FRAUD, Clinton FRAUD, McCain FRAUD...holy crap get a grip and pull off your fanatic blinders.

Posted by: Randy | May 21, 2008 9:45 PM | Report abuse

It won't be surprising to see her bolt from the Democratic Party and take her place alongside Joe Lieberman who could not stand being defeated in the connecticut primary by a new comer. The same arrogance and disrespect for the party rules that led the man who was chosen as Al Gore's VP. and is now John Mccain's mouth piece,is an evil disease that these arrogrant and power hungry wolves are trying to destroy the party and be the republicans stooges to that end. Her behavior speaks of her cunning and deceitful schemes when you compare her tears in New Hampshire to her arrogance and fractured logic she is now using to make a case for the nomination.

Posted by: samiael | May 21, 2008 9:45 PM | Report abuse

Mary in FL,

Howard Dean is not a public official. He is a duly elected leader of a political party. As the Democratic party is neither a creature of the Constitution or Congress, its internal operation is its own purview. Dr. Dean's service to the party will continue as long as he still pleases the members of the DNC. They are the ones who elect or remove DNC leadership.

Most likely he will be replaced with someone who is an Obama loyalist. The Presidential nominee is traditionally viewed as the head of the party.

If Bradley and Edwards voters had acted like Hillary voters in 2000 and 2004, maybe the Supreme Court would still be viewed as a non-political body.

Posted by: James Hare | May 21, 2008 9:45 PM | Report abuse

Scott Mann: "Rush is right, as usual."


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA OHMYGOD HAHAHAHAHAHA

Damn, thanks Scott. Haven't laughed that heard in ages!

Mercy!

Posted by: MCook | May 21, 2008 9:45 PM | Report abuse

You know honestly I believe that if both want to run then they should be allowed to run. Why do we have to have only one canidate per party. Put them both on the ticket for the presidential election.

I hope that if Hillary does not get the Dem nomination she decides to run as a Indepenadnat or something and kicks both thier butts.

BTW I am replublican but will definately vote Hillary if given the chance. Otherwise this is one elecion I am not voting in. I do not like either of the other 2 canidates.

As far as Florida and Michigan. If thier votes don't count I hope the people of those state boycott the Presidential Election. Maybe then people will realize that EVERY State has a right to choose a delegate. (Gee I wonder what Obama would be saying if the roles were reversed)

At least Hillary has shown that she will fight to the end for what she believes in.

GOOOOOOOOOO HILLARY

Posted by: Eric | May 21, 2008 9:45 PM | Report abuse

It's a sad day when the Democratic Party refuses to count every vote. Instead, they choose to elevate arbitrary rules over core democratic principles.

Posted by: Evie | May 21, 2008 9:45 PM | Report abuse

Howard Dean's idea of a practical joke on his Democratic constituents:

Support Clinton, the first potential woman President through the fall of '07, then do an about face, and support Obama, after his win in Iowa with the college kids home from school. Then, create as much confusion and ambiguity in the election as is humanly possible, and then, you get it...the mess we're all in now.

The sooner we lose him as the leader of our party, the better off we're all going to be!

Go figure, pit a white woman against a mixed race male. What's he thinking?

Posted by: Tom Jefferson | May 21, 2008 9:45 PM | Report abuse

Of course Hillary will put herself before the Democratic Party and continue to lie to the American public she claims to defend. This is a very sad time in America when we could be celebrating the real hope that exists in an Obama presidency. I'm a 65 year old white female and I long for her to stop her selfish antics.

Posted by: bee | May 21, 2008 9:44 PM | Report abuse

BUT those ARE the rules - the Superdelegates CAN overturn the result - the Superdelegates can say, hey the caucus results were not representative of the party as a whole, and they have to go with the person who is best for the party for the November election.

---------------------------------------------
Uh, that would be caucus and election results....

--------------------------------------------


Yup, that is true, but how democratic is this? The idea that the supers can overturn the will of the people? The Democratic party is so careful not to offend anyone by not having clear winners and losers in each state contest--by awarding delegates in proportion to the vote. (Forget the fact that in the general election, there is one clear winner per state.) And then give representation to political entities that cannot even vote in the general.

But then "big daddy and big mommie demo" make sure that the candidate that Nancy and Howard think can win will be the candidate via the supers. Sham on you poor little demo voters don't know what you want or is best for you!

Talk about a paternalistic political election!

Posted by: Hmmm | May 21, 2008 9:44 PM | Report abuse

Ollie ? If obama is the next president, i bet a couple of days later, you will be DREAMING that you voted for hillary.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 9:44 PM | Report abuse

The poster at 9:38 has the right solution Obama is headed to Brazil right now !

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 21, 2008 9:43 PM | Report abuse

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/23/us/politics/23florida.html?_r=2&ref=politics&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

"The House plan, a priority for State Representative Marco Rubio, a Miami Republican who is the speaker of the House, passed easily Wednesday, just two weeks into the legislative session. The Senate is taking more time to study the pros and cons, said Senator Jeremy Ring, a Democrat from Parkland who is sponsoring a Senate version of the proposal.

Still, Mr. Ring said the Senate would most "likely" endorse the leap to Jan. 29 by the time the legislative session ends in May. The Senate's current bill calls for moving the primary to Feb. 19, but Mr. Ring said that date was serving as a placeholder while lawmakers debate the issue.

"Right now it looks like Jan. 29 would be more favorable," he said from Tallahassee. "One thing you can be sure of is that Florida will be relevant during the primaries."

Both major parties have rules penalizing states that hold primaries before Feb. 5, stripping them of half their delegates to the national nominating conventions. Under Democratic Party rules, the candidates can also be penalized, losing the delegates they won in the rule-breaking state.

But Mr. Rubio, the House speaker, said such sanctions would not matter much."

http://www.local10.com/news/10731385/detail.html

http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/broward/blog/2008/03/jeremy_ring_sponsor_of_early_p.html

Posted by: kreuz_missile | May 21, 2008 9:43 PM | Report abuse

Oh, yea! So, you do not think she is going to fight all the way to the convention floor? Right. You have too much faith in someone who has a penchant for moving the goal post at will.
Clinton responded: "Yes I will. I will, because I feel very strongly about this."

The Fix ran the traps with Clinton advisers late this afternoon to get a sense as to whether these comments represented a major change in Clinton's approach to the nomination fight or whether she was simply responding to a question and/or trying to put a bit of pressure on the DNC in advance of the Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting later this month, which will decide the fate of the two states' delegations.

Our sense? The latter.

"Our hope and expectation is that there will be a fair and reasonable settlement of these issues before the convention," said one senior Clinton adviser granted anonymity in order to speak candidly. "We are not looking for a fight, simply a solution that respects the voters from Florida and Michigan who cast their ballots in good faith." Clinton replied: "It could. I hope it doesn't. I hope it's resolved to everyone's satisfaction by that date because that's what people are expecting -- but we'll have to see what happens."

Beware DNC... She is going all the way to November and then to the Supreme Court. Didn't she invoke 2000 somewhere?

Posted by: John Paul Telhomme | May 21, 2008 9:43 PM | Report abuse

Words of Wisdom,
Fraud? Obama? Why come to this forum to spread falsehoods? What proof do you have to back up your assertions?

I'm thinking none, or you would've very happily provided it.

We've got your number. Try again.

Posted by: Ollie | May 21, 2008 9:42 PM | Report abuse

"POPULAR VOTE" ????????

13 CAUCUS STATES:
... are excluded in the "Popular Vote" scheme of Mrs. Clinton's campaign. Caucus states do not use a "popular vote" process.


Hillary: I love MI + FL v. I hate 13 other States


Hillary: I love $$$ wealthy donors $$$ v. I get votes from the poor.


CHANGE = A move from this kind of cataclysmic hypocrisy.

Posted by: chevychasedesigns | May 21, 2008 9:42 PM | Report abuse

This is a very sick women and she needs help

Posted by: Jean
_____________________________________________________________________________________________

I assume you are talking about yourself. Will be sending you help. Not just one psychiatrist, but a whole team. Sounds serious.

Posted by: Dante | May 21, 2008 9:42 PM | Report abuse

Well...Obama is going to jail anyway cause of REZKO.He must drop out and prepare himself.

Posted by: Mike | May 21, 2008 9:41 PM | Report abuse

Jackie - Thank you for that post. Not that I agree with it, but I'm glad to see people like you aren't afraid to speak your minds for all the world to see. I hope many intelligent people read it and realize what kind of people are behind the Clintons. Your post says so much more about you and the type of people slamming Obama than anything I could type. Thanks again.

P.S. It's "inner city" not "inter city", not that getting that right would have made your post any more intelligent.

Posted by: Benjamin | May 21, 2008 9:41 PM | Report abuse

This is becoming a disgrace. And if McCain wins in November, will the Democrats blame..a. the voters; b. the moral majority; c. the religious right; d. all of the above; e. anyone but themselves? Maybe they need to go back and see what they accomplished in the famous "48 hours of the NEW congress"..it won't take long to read!!

Posted by: bullmountaininc | May 21, 2008 9:41 PM | Report abuse

Although I am an Obama supporter, this lifelong Democrat who voted for Dukakis while serving in the Army will be changing her registration to independent. It's a sad and bitter divorce, but I simply cannot abide the Democratic party's pandering to the Clinton name. I grew up in trailer parks, but even I realize that the Clintons lack class. Lest someone claim that I am a female misogynist, I have self-identified as a feminist even when other women of my generation rejected feminism. It's not that HRC is a woman; it's the fact that she is HRC with all the baggage that comes along with just being who she is.

Posted by: quickowit | May 21, 2008 9:40 PM | Report abuse

seriously, what's wrong with hillary. nothing, and if you say obama is better..
then look at this.
obama says he wants to give healthcare for the children first, yeah that's great and all , but the nation is kinda low on money. Where are we going to get all that money ? uhh i don't know, maybe we COULD tax people. sounds like communism..
and all of those scandals, like the wright thing. "god damn america" or something like that?
yeah, i don't trust him.
and i seem like the only one who is baking hillary up.

Posted by: guityi | May 21, 2008 9:40 PM | Report abuse

IMPEACH HOWARD DEAN!

What an idiot!

Posted by: Mary in Fl | May 21, 2008 9:40 PM | Report abuse

I hope she fights as long as it takes to win the nomination.
She is the right candidate to beat McCain.
All you Obamiacs, get over it.

Watch and learn.

Posted by: bz | May 21, 2008 9:40 PM | Report abuse

So it comes down to the fact that Billary will do anything to get elected, and Obummer will meet with all our enemies and have high tea. Let's see.. Obummer has friends like reverend Wrong, Bill Ayers and wife, and now today we find that one of his delegates was discharged from the military when he was a Muslim chaplan and believed prisoners at Gitmo instead of the US military. Speaks to judgement, character, wisdom. He has none. He is nothing new, just recycled Chicago political machine democrat. Super lib verses super lib. With all his faults, I'll take McCain any day over either of these. I don't agree with all his policies, but at least he knows who our enemies are, and they are not us. Let Billary take it all the way to the convention floor. Serves the dems right for stupid rules and unscrupulous candidates. Rush is right, as usual. Operation Chaos is in full swing.

Posted by: Scott Mann | May 21, 2008 9:40 PM | Report abuse

Gio:

Your options on how to deal with the consequences are in direct contradiction with your correct assessment of the situation. You cannot uphold the principles this year only to remedy the consequences in 2012. This basically invalidates the role of any consequences. Gives the message to any state party that "yes, you will be punished this election cycle but we will make up next cycle, so if you want to change your primaries, you can do so with the proviso that you have to wait one cycle".

Furthermore, holding a re-vote is fundamentally unfair to those candidates who have long dropped out of the race. It is conceivable that if they could have fully campaigned and participated in the MI and FL contests back in Winter, at least one of them (say Edwards) could have made significant gains which would have then given him more momentum to win following races and as a result we might have had a different match-up.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 9:39 PM | Report abuse

For those who would like to put a "qualified" candidate, read "Hillary" in the White House, I'm wondering where did you pick up your list of qualifications for the office of POTUS? I'm so tired of hearing what folks think are the qualifications when they haven't a clue about the real qualifications.

If I had it, I'd bet $1M they also thought GW was "qualified." If GW was qualified, I want my next POTUS to have no qualifications at all--the fewer qualifications (read Washington experience), the better!

Posted by: MoreSane | May 21, 2008 9:39 PM | Report abuse

Obama is the clown.A lot of talk...jut talk and talk bla bla bla.He is the fake

Posted by: Mike | May 21, 2008 9:38 PM | Report abuse

Bring on a convention fight. I welcome it. Hillary deserves to face the cold reality that it will bring.

Posted by: duh

__________________________________________________________________________________________

A name like "duh" just makes your post even more hilarious.

Posted by: Dante | May 21, 2008 9:38 PM | Report abuse

Yes... Michigans votes must be counted! Nevermind the fact that Barak Obama was not even ON THE BALLOT in Michigan (he pulled his name off the ballot as the DNC asked, unlike Hillary) and he would likely have WON Michigan if his name had been on the ballot and if he had campaigned here. I love the complete ignorance of reality the Clinton campaign shows. That's just what I want in the White House... 4 more years of ignorance, just like the last 8.

Posted by: Steve | May 21, 2008 9:38 PM | Report abuse

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
5-21
News Flash!


DNC through Howard Dean announces that "to placate Democratic women voters, and to ensure the preferrential treatment of minorities in this election continues, Senator Barak Obama will undergo a gender change operation in Brazil, thereby satisfying his position as not only a Bi-Racial nominee, but a woman as well!


Associated Press
wot
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Posted by: way out there | May 21, 2008 9:38 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is so power mad and arrogant that she doesn't see all this is leading to is a final outcome: she, through her gutter politics, and inability to live up to the agreement she SIGNED regarding the RULES around MI and FL, is simply ending her career as a national political candidate. If she didn't like it, she should have run in the Green or Communist Party.

Time for Obama to push her into the garbage dump.

Posted by: byeh | May 21, 2008 9:37 PM | Report abuse

This is a very sick women and she needs help

Posted by: Jean | May 21, 2008 9:36 PM | Report abuse

Clinton is sure on hell of a fighter,
and that's why we need more people like her in America.

Posted by: asdfjkl; | May 21, 2008 9:36 PM | Report abuse

The HillBillys dont care about the party anymore as far as this election is concerned. They are in it for themselves. Hillary will gain if McCain wins the election instead of Obama. She can then run 4 years from now. By that time the people will be pretty tired of the republicans. But letting Obama win will be a major setback for Hillary since she will have to wait 8 years for another run. She will be 68 years old by then and will be considered too old to run.

She will even sent some surrogates or plants to ask Obama some stupid question so that he will give some stupid answer, or spend some money to dig some more dirt about Obama's associates.

Hillary can not be trusted.

Posted by: Malone | May 21, 2008 9:36 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: DeanCA | May 21, 2008 9:33 PM

Amen to that, too.

:)

Posted by: Chuckamok | May 21, 2008 9:35 PM | Report abuse

Hillary, please go home...we are all tired of you. You put up a good fight, but we all think it is time that you called it off. Thanks...

Posted by: Bubba Ray | May 21, 2008 9:35 PM | Report abuse

"POPULAR VOTE" ????????

13 CAUCUS STATES:
... are excluded in the "Popular Vote" scheme of Mrs. Clinton's campaign. Caucus states do not use a "popular vote" process.

Hillary: I love MI + FL V. I hate 13 other States

Hillary: I love $$$ wealthey donors V. I get votes from the poor.

CHANGE = A move from this kind of cataclysmic hypocrisy.

Posted by: chevychasedesigns | May 21, 2008 9:35 PM | Report abuse

What's wrong with HRC? Count the popular vote, what is this some kind of democracy?

Posted by: #1 Patriot | May 21, 2008 9:35 PM | Report abuse

Hopefully the DNC will pass a resolution banning Hillary from the Party forever.

Posted by: Thomas
_______________________________________________________________________________________

Obviously you are not one of highly educated Obama supporters.

Posted by: Dante | May 21, 2008 9:35 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 9:34 PM | Report abuse

Bring on a convention fight. I welcome it. Hillary deserves to face the cold reality that it will bring.

Posted by: duh | May 21, 2008 9:34 PM | Report abuse

Why doesn't Clinton run as an independent, if she has so damned much "electability?"

She will have far more control on how the money is spent, if she does that. There's no DNC rule that requires her to drop out of the Presidential race.

How about a 4-way race, with McCain, Obama, on the conventional parties, and Clinton and George H.W. Bush as independents? Who do you think would win THAT?

Posted by: James M | May 21, 2008 9:33 PM | Report abuse


She's making a flaming fool out of herself.

(The most cogent statements above is the one noting that she and her harridans--

are setting women back 10 years. Let alone feminism. God, it's embarrassing to be a women with that screacher screaching.

Posted by: Cogent | May 21, 2008 9:33 PM | Report abuse

This is a very sick women and she needs help

Posted by: Jean | May 21, 2008 9:33 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone doubt that if the results in Florida and Michigan had favored Obama, that Clinton would still be pushing just as hard to include them? After all, this all about fairness to those disenfranchised voters, and even if it meant her ultimate defeat, Clinton would fight to include their votes... (In your wildest hallucinations, maybe...)

Posted by: DeanCA | May 21, 2008 9:33 PM | Report abuse

Considering the Florida Democratic Party pushed the bill and it was sponsored by Democratic representatives and lauded by the delegation of Florida Democratic superdelegates, this is a load of garbage

_________________________________________________________________________________________

You are good at parroting Barry's talking points on this. You can spew all the BS & excuses you want, but the fact of the matter is that the GOP controlled legislature in both states initiated the legislation and passed it. That's the facts. Get over it. The GOP took this action precisely for people like you who can be manipulated quite easily. What are all you Obama supporters afraid of that you are so eager to disenfranchise fellow Democrats? Looks like McCain will be in the White House thanks to Barry.

Posted by: Jack Straw | May 21, 2008 9:32 PM | Report abuse

Yes, let's allow those superdelegates to put the wife of a two-term president into office. Yes, we'll have two-for-one, just like in the OLD days.

Do you know what I say to that? Please, God. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!

Posted by: Ollie | May 21, 2008 9:32 PM | Report abuse

kreuz_missile


Deceptions and lies will get you nowhere. The Obama campaign was supposed to be running a post-racial campaign.


The Clintons restrained themselves.

Your deception is so pathetic. Watch the youtube video. The racial campaign was pre-planned by the Obama campaign.


A FRAUD IS A FRAUD.


South Carolina will stain Obama for the rest of his life.


Axelrod wrecked his career in South Carolina.


I stand by my words too - you can tell Axelrod I said it too.


Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 21, 2008 9:32 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats would rather have a President that Senior Law Makers can tell what to do then have a qualified President. Hillary is the only qualified candidate in the race. Looks like McCain will win by default just as Kerry lost because of Karl Rove's tricks. You'd think the Democrats had learned. Pelosi pushed the public to support her as the first Woman Speaker of the House but she kicks Hillary to the curb so much for Woman's Rights. Americans allow the Media/Journalist call Hillary every curse word in public and not a word from any Democrat Law Maker or even Obama. Look for Mrs. Obama to be called curse words and see what happens. When Obama and his bosses put the country in a recession look for the good old gang to call on Bill and Hillary Clinton to help clean up the mess. Katrina victims were dying on TV for 5 days with no help nor any out cry from Law Makers. One would think the so call black candidate Obama would have saw blacks dying and tried to help but he didn't need their vote at the time. Yes who did the racist White House call Bill Clinton. I will never be told who to vote for that's not what the Civil Rights Bill was about. Dr. King talked of choice not being told what to do because some Senior Law Makers want to use Obama as their puppet. Mrs. Obama born and raised on the South Side of Chicago will bring a new meaning to First Lady when a reporter calls her the curse name they call Hillary. You can take the girl out of the inter city but you can't take the inter city out of the girl. For peek look at how black woman really act from a black neighborhood rent Waiting to Exhale.

Posted by: Jackie | May 21, 2008 9:32 PM | Report abuse

Hopefully the DNC will pass a resolution banning Hillary from the Party forever.

Posted by: Thomas | May 21, 2008 9:31 PM | Report abuse

Clinton feels passionately about Clinton - plain and simple.

I voted her into the senate and now I would sooner walk over hot coals than vote for her.

She is an egomaniac and is politically dead to me.

Posted by: PulSamsara | May 21, 2008 9:30 PM | Report abuse

Believe Clinton is just playing politics here (we, the normal people, call it black-mailing :-) ). Rule a way I like otherwise I'll menace to bring it straight to the convention.
She is expecting VP, should we bet on that?

She is clever, the lady. What has she to lose anyway. Easy to play when you have nothing at stake :-)

Poor America.
The best of you already started to move out, top universities are in East Asia and Europe... We will welcome you when we'll decide to come here (where gasoline is 9 euros a gallon, but car drives 20 miles with a liter, everyone has health care and can go to college...)

Cheers from Europe

Posted by: jmbarrie | May 21, 2008 9:30 PM | Report abuse

Poor Hillary, nothing seems to work out for her. First she and Bill tun into racists and then she plays the sexist card. She refuses to accept the fact that the majority of Americans do not want her as President. How very very sad. She is pitiful. Arrogant ignorance never plays well to an educated audience. Good bye and good riddance!

Posted by: Bismarck6 | May 21, 2008 9:29 PM | Report abuse

I cannot imagine that with all the economic issues facing the country, it would have been acceptable to spend millions of dollars for a re-vote in a primary election, and we wonder why the clinton campaign is in so much debt. Its win at all cost, and that approach is what led her to easily vote for the war in Iraq, where the soldiers still need equipment to assist them in fighting. Mrs. Clinton is so transparent and just like she proclaimed in her last debate, she's not DUMB, neither is Obama nor the voters in the Democratic party. Those who turned out to vote,and those who couldn't afford to lose time to place a vote that they were told would not count are disenfranchised, and had she not won based on name recognition we would not be having this discussion. Its big states, because caucuses are undemocratic, its delegates, no its automatic delegates, its popular vote, its the electoral votes, it doesn't end. I am a Christian and I believe in honesty, and more importantly integrity. Mr. Obama has lost several races since Wisconsin, and he congratulates her on her victories, he doesn't make excuses for the losses, and he moves on. I just simply cannot vote for someone who is so self absorbed like Hillary Clinton, at no time has she displayed any amount of graciousness to her opponent, and even had the audacity to offer him the VP position when he was leading. I think its time for her to move to the Republican party with which she appears to have more in common

Posted by: Donna | May 21, 2008 9:28 PM | Report abuse

This is one sick woman...does she not get that a third term for Clinton is just as bad as a third term for Bush? At least Bush's 3rd term would be by a surrogate!

Posted by: chaotician | May 21, 2008 9:28 PM | Report abuse

Listen kreuz_missile - we all know you work for the Obama campaign - so go walk over to the other room and tell Axelrod I said that. I stand by my words as truth and wisdom.


and if he does not like it tough.

Obama did it to himself. So did Axelrod.


Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 21, 2008 9:26 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Woody | May 21, 2008 9:18 PM

Amen to that.

Posted by: Chuckamok | May 21, 2008 9:25 PM | Report abuse

It's amusing to hear Rush Limbaugh chastise Democrats for choosing Obama over Clinton. Limbaugh's influence appears to have declined over the last few years as it becomes more obvious even to the thick that he is only a parrot of the Administration's message. Limbaugh, demonstrating an elitist understanding, seems to think that he will be able to persuade the hard working Americans/white Americans.

Posted by: Kevin R. | May 21, 2008 9:24 PM | Report abuse

str8talk


BUT those ARE the rules - the Superdelegates CAN overturn the result - the Superdelegates can say, hey the caucus results were not representative of the party as a whole, and they have to go with the person who is best for the party for the November election.


Those are why they made the rules they way they have.


The problem is now that the Obama campaign is seeking to INTIMIDATE the Superdelegates into NOT performing the role they are supposed to play - the Obama people are saying, vote for Obama or there will be "riots in the streets"

THAT is CLEARLY telling the Superdelegates NOT to make an evaluation of who the best candidate is, but to fear the RACE RIOTS and the backlash within the party.

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 21, 2008 9:23 PM | Report abuse

"The South Carolina strategy of pushing race is going to haunt him for the rest of his life."

THe Obama camp didn't start it, they hit back. Hard. The Clinton Camp's folks were stupid and said stupid things that would have detroyed them without the talking points. Clinton shouldn't have made the JAckson comparison or a number of other things he did. Now, is the Hillary campaign going to acknowledge playing the gender card since New Hampshire and continuing to use that to divide the party?

Posted by: kreuz_missile | May 21, 2008 9:23 PM | Report abuse

kissthesky - This has been VERY entertaining.

I am going to miss, however, the Pub ad that would have run this fall - a split screen of Shrillary's stump speech about dodging sniper fire and running to her limo, and the ACTUAL footage of what really happened.

I assume it would have run, oh, three times an hour?

:)

Posted by: Chuckamok | May 21, 2008 9:20 PM | Report abuse

I would further add, if Hilary had such convictions about Florida and Michigan as it relates to all votes being inclusive, she should never have signed on to agree with the party sanctions against those states. This only solidifies what many of us see as her holding to no principles except that of her obsession. And I hear people actually want to see her considered for the supreme court, where integrity and character is probably more necessary than the presidency. What a joke!

Posted by: str8talk | May 21, 2008 9:19 PM | Report abuse

About the issue of Florida and Michigan early primaries

•Rules are rules and must be respected
•You cannot break a rule and then negotiate the consequences
•People should be reinforced to believe in the democratic process.
•People should understand that not having complied with the rules inevitably the election cannot be considered valid.
•People should feel a superior authority with consistent principles and a clear ethic
•No candidate of the primaries election should be perceived as winner or loser as a result of this decision. Florida's and Michigan's issue should be kept clearly separated from the present candidates.

Following some options:
•Since it appears so important for Florida and Michigan to anticipate their elections, it can be decided that in 2012 Florida and Michigan will vote first.
•It may be decided that in 2012 the number of delegates assigned by Florida and Michigan will be doubled (adding the number of delegates of this year to the count of 2012's delegates), or raised by a certain factor (for instance 150%)
•The DNC could decide to address some money (ideally 50% of the money necessary to organize a new election) to the campaign in Florida and Michigan, opening new offices and financing a better communication among the party and the people of Florida and Michigan.
•Delegates will be seated at the convention but their vote will count as uncommitted. They will have anyway right to speak and they are expected to have coordination responsibilities for the democratic presidential campaign in the two States.

•Alternatively re-vote should be conducted in Florida and Michigan. One week should be allowed for the two candidates to campaign. I suggest that to have the right to vote $2 should be paid by the primaries voters. This money will go to the Democratic Party for the presidential campaign. This way the chaos we observed this year, with the suspect of many Repubblicans voting in the Democratic primaries could be avoided. This solution has been adopted in other countries (like Italy) as well, and worked well.

In my opinion, the decision of not considering Florida's and Michigan's elections as valid cannot be revisited. Nevertheless the Democratic voters in the two states should be praised, they are a richness of democracy and we value them. No candidate should be perceived as winner or loser of the process. This decision is about democracy, rules and the credibility of the Democratic Party, not about Sen. Obama or Sen. Clinton.

Posted by: Gio | May 21, 2008 9:19 PM | Report abuse

"Do you think when the GOP controlled legislatures in FL & MI moved their primary dates it was for the good of the Democratic party?"

Considering the Florida Democratic Party pushed the bill and it was sponsored by Democratic representatives and lauded by the delegation of Florida Democratic superdelegates, this is a load of garbage. Same goes for Michigan and their Democratic governor who pushed for it as well. They believed the party would be gutless and not enforce the rule and the candidates would ignore it, so that even if the delegates didn't count thier states would gain more clout and still play a major role in the momentum gain. They rolled the dice and lost.

News Flash: Even with FL and MI counted by Clinton's best count, Obama would still have a majority of pledged delegates locked up with over 80 still to be determined. So why is this fight going on? Because until the status of these delegates are resolved, the final number required to declare a nominee is unresolved and Clinton can therefore claim a reason to stay in the race. Guess what Michigan and Florida, this has nothing to do with you, it only has to do with Hillary and excuses, because she will lose no matter how it is resolved- her only hope is to keep it from being resolved.

"Quite a few people forget that Ted Kennedy ran against an incumbent Democratic president, Carter, for the Democratic nomination for president in 1980. Ted was behind by 750 delegates but pushed the Democratic nomination fight all the way to the party's national convention."

And he lost...and then Carter lost. Learn from history Jack.

Posted by: kreuz_missile | May 21, 2008 9:19 PM | Report abuse

AxelDC

Sounds like you like to vote for LOSERS. You backed the right candidate to continue your losing streak.

Posted by: Jack Straw | May 21, 2008 9:18 PM | Report abuse

Such a suggestion only proves 'Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.' Talk about setting feminism back 40-50 years!

Posted by: Woody | May 21, 2008 9:18 PM | Report abuse

Get your story straight. it's Larry Sinclair (not Saunders). Right now you can bet the supermarket rags are trolling Chicago precincts with street money. MSM shops are likely developing contingent files. This is why Obama has been trotting out the family, and it's why Hillary stays in the race against all odds. Obama was dealing with this on the night he choked on the last debate. It's just a question of if he implodes on Hillary's watch or McBush's


http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2008/04/larry-sinclair-obama-was-lovers-with-murdered-gay-choir-master/

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 9:18 PM | Report abuse

Just one more voice to call Major BS on the Clinton's dishonest and deceptive effort to frame the seating of the Florida and Michigan delegates as a Nobel Civil Rights issue.

And "I got the most votes..." what a dishonest hack.

SNL had it dead on.

Why is Hillary staying in the race?

1. She exploited racism and now has a hard core support from white racists.

2. She has No Ethical Standards.

3. She is a bitter, sore loser.

And note to feminists. Her screed of losing because of sexism is so outrageous that she will stir up a backlash and resentment that will impede support for legitimate civil rights issues such as reproductive rights and sexual preference.

Their selfishness seems to have no limits. They would indeed sacrifice and destroy Obama if the they could get away with it, but they will be stopped by those who realize the stakes are to great--- and far from worth the risk and cost of a Bush third term and the complete theocratic takeover of the Judiciary and Supreme Court.

And second note to the Ferraro/Feminism=Racism crowd' glass ceiling bla bla.--two words-- Nancy Pelosi. Unlike Ferraro, the racist drunk, and Hillary, dishonest sleaze owing her position to a sleazy rapist, women abusing who she enable, Nancy has intellect, character and leadership.

Posted by: dabne | May 21, 2008 9:17 PM | Report abuse

JoeT1


That is not what the article said - Axelrod said yield meaning yield for the Obama campaign


However wouldn't such a compromise, giving additional delegates to Obama that he did NOT earn with actual VOTES - wouldn't that be against the rules???


What would they call those delegates ?? PreventDelegates? The delegates which Obama earned by seeking to PREVENT a re-vote in Florida and Michigan ???


m,

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 21, 2008 9:16 PM | Report abuse

Bob22003

Do you think anyone is going to read your naive childish rants? Stop embarrassing yourself.

Posted by: Dante | May 21, 2008 9:15 PM | Report abuse

This is Hillary's death dance. 100% of the right already hates her. Now 50% of the left will hate her too. She can't get elected dog catcher with 25% of the popular vote.
McCain will beat her 2 to 1. Then Hillary's political career will be over. She'll be a pariah in all circles. The woman that got McCrazy elected.

Posted by: DWayne | May 21, 2008 9:14 PM | Report abuse

Washington Post,
why do allow folks to put fake news here?

Geraldine,

the story your speaking of,
Larry, is a hoax. he took a polygraph and failed miserably. Multiple polygraph experts, using standard equipment and techniques agreed that Larry Sinclair was "practicing deception" when asked directly about his claims. The results were not borderline. He failed miserably.

Posted by: William | May 21, 2008 9:14 PM | Report abuse

Black voters have been extremely loyal to the Clintons over the years. They are not racist voters- if they were they would vote for Condy Rice against Hillary and we all know that they would not do that if the issue ever arose.
She and Bill had 8 years in the white house partly because AAs supported her steadfastly. Now this is the reward she gives them for their loyalty. Saying it is racist for blacks to vote for a black man = saying women are sexist for voting for a woman. C;mon Hillary you had 8 years as a couple in the white house. You seem to have got a taste for the power and prestige. Why not be magnanimous and give it up unselfishly? Or are you going to make a complete goose of yourself by damaging Obama after he won by the rules. You are also making it harder for the next female presidential candidate with your hysterical bleating about sexism. If you look ghastly in those pant suits you chose that is not the fault of the male gender. You talk about toughness but where is your's when people question your dress sense? That isn't sexism. You just don't have the likability of Barack- that is not his fault. Its not his fault he is a better orator either. Your obvious pitch for the white racist vote shows just how unprincipled you are.
Its all about Hillary. The rules of the game are clear and you lost. No use to bleat about the umpire. You don't seem to care you are damaging Democrat prospects because only Hillary the graceless loser matters.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 9:14 PM | Report abuse

I was a Republican until 2002, when George Bush's blatant and obvious lies about Iraq drove me out of the party. For 5 years, I tried to convince myself that I was wrong about Democrats and the Clintons, but the past 5 months, Hillary Clinton has reminded me exactly why I voted against her husband twice.

I still will not vote for McCain or any Republican until they return to fiscal and foreign policy sanity, but I certainly will never vote for Hillary, Bill or Chelsea Clinton.

Posted by: AxelDC | May 21, 2008 9:14 PM | Report abuse

"Shouldn't the candidate who got the most votes get the nomination?"

That's how it is done. The delegates vote at the convention and the candidate who gets the most votes gets the nomination.

Posted by: tom | May 21, 2008 9:13 PM | Report abuse

Stop drinking 4 hours before you post.

This WaPo site is unedited.

Don't make it like the NYT where they decided to run off drunks and spammers and trolls.

Posted by: shrink2 | May 21, 2008 9:13 PM | Report abuse

If the DNC changes its own rules now because one candidate may have a better chance of winning, aren't we then teaching our children that rules are useless because someone may changes in their favor?

If the DNC breaks the rules they set in place to appease a delusional candidate, they will have proven to be every bit as dysfunctional as they are alleged to be. It would be totally unfair to the past candidates who because of lack of the massive name recognition of the Clinton brand in those two states at that time, and who didn't have an opportunity to campaign there, never stood a chance of winning.

Posted by: str8talk | May 21, 2008 9:13 PM | Report abuse

Oh, please, someone, tell the Clintons to go away. Eight years of their sleaze is enough. It's time to move on.

Posted by: Bob22003 | May 21, 2008 9:11 PM | Report abuse

kreuz_missile,
Do you think when the GOP controlled legislatures in FL & MI moved their primary dates it was for the good of the Democratic party? These voters are being disenfranchised by the Democratic party for the actions of the GOP. The GOP fooled Dean and obviously you. If the voters of FL & MI are not given their right to vote, forget about November. Only a naive moron would think different.

Posted by: Jack Straw | May 21, 2008 9:09 PM | Report abuse

note:

what axelrod says can be different than what axelrod actually does.

remember that for the next 8 years.

Posted by: kissthesky | May 21, 2008 9:08 PM | Report abuse

Words of Wisdom: you need to read words more carefully. Axelrod is saying he is willing to accept a result which gives Hillary more delegates than the rules would give her if they were enforced. you have it backwards.

Posted by: JoeT1 | May 21, 2008 9:07 PM | Report abuse

This is so funny... now the Obama supporters are going to hate Hillary more than the Republicans have hated her for the past 20 years.

The irony does not get sweeter than this. Obama-rama addicts are rabid.

Posted by: kissthesky | May 21, 2008 9:06 PM | Report abuse

kreuz_missile


Everyone complaining on the boards for months about the rules, the rules - yes Axelrod is a fraud.

The South Carolina strategy of pushing race is going to haunt him for the rest of his life.


It will haunt Obama too, Obama will never recover from his hypocrisy.

What is wrong with you???


Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 21, 2008 9:06 PM | Report abuse

When agreed upon rules are deliberately flouted, repercussions must follow. This is not disenfranchisement. Maybe Florida and Michigan should take another look at who's leading their Democratic Parties. All the people in Michaigan and Florida will (if the Supreme Court allows), vote for a presidential candidate. I'm not allowed to vote in the primaries for Obama simply because I'm not a registered Democrat. So what's the problem? Disenfranchisement occurs when people like Bush deliberately deny otherwise legally registered voters.

Posted by: Don | May 21, 2008 9:05 PM | Report abuse

florida & michigan to give obama the nomination

an ironic (and fair to all parties) solution to the mi/fl mess.

1. split the delegates accordingly:

michigan:

40% obama (uncommitted)
55% clinton

florida:

47% obama (obama+edwards votes)
50% clinton

2. seat the full mi/florida delegates.

3. increase the number to accomodate clinton

2208

4. bring that number back down to 2025 by having:

183 superdelegates handing over their delegates to michigan and florida thereby "giving a full voice" to michigan and florida.

5. the remaining superdelegates (28) would be respected non-partisans endorsing in the interest of not the candidates, but the democratic party. some would be relieved...

RESULT

obama would cross the (reaffirmed) 2025 finish line with michigan and florida delegates seated at full being that he would only need
86 more to claim the nomination!

lets get this party going quickly!!

clinton's solution becomes her demise!!!

Posted by: rommelo | May 21, 2008 9:05 PM | Report abuse

Not trying to blow up the party??!! She's changing the rules at the end of the game! She wants to take all the votes in Michigan! She wants the winner decided by the popular vote, not the delegates! (Iowa doesn't even release the popular vote!) Wants this decided by her arguments. It's all about Hillary. If she destroys the party she gets to rule again in 4 years. She's a cry baby and a complainer, not a fighter.

She is looking for a fight, and there will be one.

Posted by: Mike | May 21, 2008 9:05 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is a totally worthless self centered beeeitch. For the good of the nation I hope some militant takes her out.

Posted by: DWayne | May 21, 2008 9:05 PM | Report abuse

-PB...
the gay crack thing made the rounds months ago and has already been discounted as a home-movie some creepy weirdo guy made in his basement and put on youtube. Of course Geraldine and others will believe everything they see on YouTube and other stranger than fiction sites, but not what they read in the Washington Post. So much for the maturity of Hillary's supporters.

Posted by: Joyce | May 21, 2008 9:04 PM | Report abuse

Senator Hillary Clinton has the popular vote.

This race is a neck-to-neck race, no matter what is said by Obama and his Toadies;

However, the DNC, and the Super delegates ought to be VERY WORRIED about Senator Barak Obama, because Obama's $$$$$ can not buy him the presidency. Democratic voters will write Hillary Clinton's name on their ballot, or switch to the Republican Senator John McCain.

1. Senator Hillary Clinton has Electability ~ Obama does not have electability.
2. Senator Hillary Clinton has experience ~ Obama does not have the experience, and failed to complete his two year Senate term.
3. Senator Hillary Clinton has the voter base ~ Obama does not have the voter base.
4. Florida and Michigan delegates will be counted ~ Obama cannot buy them.
5. Senator Hillary Clinton has the gravitas to stand tall with world leaders ~ Obama is dependent upon the words and advice of his campaign Toadies, including Valerie Jarrett. No doubt this comes as a big surprise to the many folks who actually believe that Obama can think.

It is an absolute disgrace how the media has treated Senator Hillary Clinton in this Democratic primary. NBC has lost all objectivity and joined the Obama camp as early as February with calls for Senator Clinton to withdraw from the race. Eleanor Clift is totally dazzled with Obama, to the point of arguing on his behalf and being silly and ridiculous in her columns.

The women of America should simply say to hell with the media push and the deception of Obama and refuse to march to the empty music and bow to the Empire with no clothes.

Posted by: Cantabrigian | May 21, 2008 9:03 PM | Report abuse

Clinton is staying in so that Obama will lose in November, and she will get another shot at the Presidency in 2012 -- after John McCain wrecks what's left of our once-glorious country, during his first term as President.

Clinton is only for Clinton. She will step over the wreckage of the Democratic Party, not to mention the entire USA.

Posted by: oldhonky | May 21, 2008 9:03 PM | Report abuse

Quite a few people forget that Ted Kennedy ran against an incumbent Democratic president, Carter, for the Democratic nomination for president in 1980. Ted was behind by 750 delegates but pushed the Democratic nomination fight all the way to the party's national convention. Some people should learn a little history before they start whining. Feel bad for Ted with his malignant tumor and it's affect on his thinking, but now we know why he backed Obama.

Posted by: Jack Straw | May 21, 2008 9:02 PM | Report abuse

I'm now hoping the Hill-Bot DOES make it to the convention.

The math is more iron-clad than ever, yet the Relentless Ambition Carnival keeps grasping at straws: sexism, rigged media, Obama camp dirty tricks, unfair party rules.

If she causes so much carnage that even the blind, deaf and dumb New York state electorate can grasp it, maybe they'll bounce her from her carpetbagged Senate seat and send her scuttling back to Arkansas.

And all those snide, "unfair" jibes about the zombie candidate, and making sure the wooden stake finds its mark, and nailing down the coffin - geez, they're TRUE!

Posted by: Chuckamok | May 21, 2008 9:02 PM | Report abuse

I just LOVE it when someone claims to speak for everyone. For example: "The women do not trust the Obama people anymore." Odd, I know lots of women who are ardent Obama supporters (and, mind you, those who are equally ardent Clinton backers. But I guess when you look in the mirror and see everyone on earth (or at least the spokesperson for everyone on earth), then that qualifies you to speak for, well, everyone on earth.

Posted by: DRW | May 21, 2008 9:01 PM | Report abuse

"SO OBAMA IS MORE THAN WILLING TO THROW OUT THE RULES TO GET SOME MORE DELEGATES"

Wait, you,ve been whining for weeks here about seating FL and MI for the sake of voter rights, party unity, and the November election, and because Axelrod says, "ok, I agree this needs to be resolved, which is going to require Democrats coming together to reach a fair outcome that will in fact cost the Obama side delegates from our staked out position, and so as a result we will LISTEN to some proposals," suddenly that makes him a fraud? Gimme a frickin break. Go back to your neocon worldview, bud, it semms to suit all of you just fine.

Posted by: kreuz_missile | May 21, 2008 9:01 PM | Report abuse

The youtube video the Obama campaign does not want you to see

Tim Russert confronts Obama about playing the race card (his "4 pages of talking points":
http://tinyurl.com/6gcstl


.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 9:01 PM | Report abuse

Once again the dems will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. As Will Rogers said ... "I don't belong to any organized political party, I'm a democrat."

Posted by: Oracle | May 21, 2008 9:00 PM | Report abuse

Didn't conventions used to be for deciding who the nominee would be? What's wrong with going back to that? It would be interesting for a change. Otherwise it's just a glorified pep rally. Who needs that? I might watch it for a change. More power to Hillary if she does take the fight to the convention. I like it.

Posted by: John | May 21, 2008 9:00 PM | Report abuse

You have to remember, the Democrats believe they can not lose the general election now. McSame is a joke.

But this is it for the Clintons. They are going off, threats, tantrums, skreechy protesters...they will do what they want.
They have Faux News behind them. They have nothing to lose.

Posted by: shrink2 | May 21, 2008 9:00 PM | Report abuse

If the DNC changes its own rules now because one candidate may have a better chance of winning, aren't we then teaching our children that rules are useless because someone may changes in their favor?
So why do we even make rules?
Are laws and rules there to be bend and broken?
Both states decided to break the rules and now the say that's o.k.?
Where do we start and where do we stop?
Don't blame the DNC for making rules, blame the once who broke them!

Posted by: Pete | May 21, 2008 9:00 PM | Report abuse

Well said mondo. Has anyone checked the price of arugula at Whole Foods recently? What would the French think of us eating THAT?

Posted by: Emeril | May 21, 2008 8:59 PM | Report abuse

Historically, I don't think there has been a candidate in 100 years or more in any party who would have not carried the fight to the convention if the race was as close as this race is. The only way she can win would be some kind of bizarre back-room infighting, strange flips and flops, shenanigans, totally freaky off the wall stuff. But that kind of thing does happen. And she is so close, and she really wants to win -- that's what it's all about. Well, hey, that is a big piece of what it's about for anybody who has what it takes to be a serious contender for President. All this noise about not disenfranchising the voters, about not disappointing all those people who support her, about whether the caucuses didn't give her kind of people a chance -- that is all rationalizing to justify the basic motive, which is, she wants to win the thing and be President because, because. Because she wants to. And by hook or by crook, she will try until it's over, over. But that does not make her different from any other politician in history. They want to win, man, that is why they go through this. No normal person would do this thing.

So she's going to fight all the way, and so is Barack. And well, so, he is probably going to take it (which is pretty amazing, coming from nowhere). And then she goes home. But until they vote, why should she quit? She has the money. What else is she going to spend it on? Another house? A boat? A plane? Screw that, she wants to be President.

Some conventions, there are fights at. Maybe this will be one of those.

Posted by: pressF1 | May 21, 2008 8:59 PM | Report abuse

When Hillary talks about the campaign she sound like Bush talking about Iraq. Delusional! I think 8 years of a delusional leader is quite enough.

Posted by: Scott | May 21, 2008 8:58 PM | Report abuse

Why do we never see Hillary wearing a blue dress?

Posted by: Monica | May 21, 2008 8:57 PM | Report abuse

Of course this bitter, sore-loser, frantic, divisive candidate will stoop to carrying her hopeless campaign to the Demo convention. This confirms my long-standing belief that the primary outcome is more about the Clintons than our party and the nation.

Shrillary, Slick Willie and their so-called political gurus ran a failed strategy and campaign, and they are now paying the price. It is called "defeat!"

Posted by: Forrest Gerard | May 21, 2008 8:57 PM | Report abuse

kreuz_missile


The best way to describe Obama is metrosexual.

Posted by: The Truth | May 21, 2008 8:57 PM | Report abuse

Does Hillary likme Bill's cigars?

Posted by: Monica | May 21, 2008 8:56 PM | Report abuse

There is no way the superdelegates will overturn the legal, elected delegates. Changing the terms of the nomination after the rules were set would be horrible for the Democratic Party. Obama's campaign has shown herculean patience while the Clinton campaign has stomped their feet and changed the rules as they go. They've been trying to work things out, but Clinton insists on 100 percent of her illegal Soviet-style Michigan votes!

Obama is working on building up the party, he has hundreds of thousands of enthusiastic volunteers, millions more dollars (compare with 20 million in DEBT for the Clintons). The superdelegates and the party understands that to overturn the elected delegates would be monumentally stupid.

Posted by: Beth in VA | May 21, 2008 8:56 PM | Report abuse

First you complained that Obama wasn't enough of a fighter, now you complain he played dirty. Last week Clinton said she would be stronger in the general election, now her supporters claim the primary was stolen from her because of sexism (which will somehow be easier to overcome in the general election than the Democratic primary?). Man, you guys need to get your talking points straight, or at least disagree in a choerent fashon that favors your cause. She got beat because she ran a terrible campaign because she was an inferior candidate, get over it.

Here's another youtube video for you, just a flesh wound...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO5soX3iLtk&eurl=http://www.dailykos.com/

Posted by: kreuz_missile | May 21, 2008 8:55 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is pathetic. Her pant suits look like two kids fighting under a blanket.

Posted by: Pontiff | May 21, 2008 8:55 PM | Report abuse

Geraldine,
First I don't know who Barama is? Also I am not aware of Obama's involvement in this gay, crack thing you speak of. Please educate me and send me a link so I can read it for myself. If it is not a figment of your imagination.

Posted by: RB | May 21, 2008 8:55 PM | Report abuse

People like Geraldine and other hate mongers make me so-o-o-o-o-o happy to support the candidate that brings out the best in people....THANK YOU BARACK for your fine example of how GROWNUPS behave in these serious times.

Posted by: Joyce | May 21, 2008 8:54 PM | Report abuse

I think the Clinton's are on a suicide mission to either get the nomination or split the party.

I really am disappointed because I thought they had more class than this, but, again, the way the Clinton's left the White House was one of the most disgraceful in history.

Posted by: William Stickney | May 21, 2008 8:53 PM | Report abuse

I think the Clinton's are on a suicide mission to either get the nomination or split the party.

I really am disappointed because I thought they had more class than this, but, again, the way the Clinton's left the White House was one of the most disgraceful in history.

Posted by: William Stickney | May 21, 2008 8:53 PM | Report abuse

Mike


That is what the Obama people have been doing for months


Where have you been? Go back and look at this board.


Look at Translator, kruez_missile, millbrook27 -

You can not criticize anyone for doing what Obama's people have done - AND it just may be the campaign itself doing this at its headquarters at Michigan & Lake in Chicago.


.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 21, 2008 8:53 PM | Report abuse

My God... She will not die... call her... Vampirella.

Cry sexism... blame the media... Argue to count votes you previously agreed should not be counted...

Hillary... let... it... go.

Posted by: Jasper | May 21, 2008 8:51 PM | Report abuse

Shouldn't the candidate who got the most votes get the nomination?

And what's the bizarre behavior about the flag all about?

And for those of us who abhor the Patriot act, do we really want Barack telling us to (literally) eat our peas?

Posted by: Mondo Cane | May 21, 2008 8:51 PM | Report abuse

I hope it goes to the floor of the convention.
It is fun to watch.

The blathering of WOW and 37&O that is.

Posted by: smartinsen | May 21, 2008 8:50 PM | Report abuse

The Clintons know there is almost nothing the Ds could do and lose to McSame.

This is "lost boat tactics".

Just like in boat racing, the winners and the losers get close to each other; the loser wants to create confrontation.

Maybe they will win the rules commitee process, but if they do not cause a confontation, they lose. So they bang boats. They have, after all, nothing left to lose.

Posted by: shrink2 | May 21, 2008 8:50 PM | Report abuse

TO ALL THE OBAMA PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN SCREAMING THE RULES, THE RULES, THE RULES ON THIS BOARD FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS:

Axelrod continues: "Well, obviously, any compromise is going to involve some give, and that means if there's something on the table, we're willing to consider it. That may include us yielding more delegates than perhaps we would have, simply on the basis of the rules."

SO OBAMA IS MORE THAN WILLING TO THROW OUT THE RULES TO GET SOME MORE DELEGATES.

HILLARY DESERVES ALL HER DELEGATES


WHAT A BUNCH OF FRAUDS

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 21, 2008 8:48 PM | Report abuse

These comments aren't reading when one person, Words of Wisdom, sits by refreshing the page looking to attack anyone who supports Obama.

Unfortunately for this wonderful individual, Clinton is going to lose the nomination.

Posted by: mike | May 21, 2008 8:47 PM | Report abuse

Barama to Florida: Drop Dead.

Posted by: Harold | May 21, 2008 8:46 PM | Report abuse

She sure should stay in the race. With the emerging Larry Saunder story, including affadavits regarding the death of a gay choir director who reportedly had knowledge of Saunder's sexual and crack cocaine encounters with Barama less than ten years ago, the fuse is lit for Barama's implosion. The only question is if it will occurs on HRCs watch or McCain's. That's why HRC may accept the VP slot; BHO may win it and resign en campaign.

You go Girl!

Posted by: Geraldine | May 21, 2008 8:44 PM | Report abuse

convention fight. That should bring up C-SPANs ratings

Posted by: robert g | May 21, 2008 8:43 PM | Report abuse

To the poster at 8:33 who refuses to even make up a name


Here is a youtube video for you:


Tim Russert confronts Obama about playing the race card (his "4 pages of talking points":
http://tinyurl.com/6gcstl


.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 21, 2008 8:41 PM | Report abuse

By all rights, the fight over Florida and Michigan was never meant to affect the outcome of the nomination - for that fact alone, the dispute should be abandoned and ALL the delegates should be seated.


The country deserves to have a nominee free of this insane fight - free of a Presidential campaign attempting to prevent a re-vote. It is too crazy.

Give Hillary All her NET 111 Pledged Delegates and seat all the Superdelegates and let the process play out.

Hillary is going to have the Popular Vote lead after Montana no matter how you slice it, dice it, metric it or whatever else the Obama people can come up with.


Count every vote, no penalties - after the 2000 election, the party can afford to do no less.

.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 21, 2008 8:38 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is fighting so heard because this "IS" the general election. Who ever wins will be president. Either one of them will beat Mccain and they know it.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 8:36 PM | Report abuse

Truth is though, Obama will win no matter what happens, Mccain is unelectable.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 8:35 PM | Report abuse

I am afraid you can't twist words anymore, we have youtube now. Clinton stuck his foot in it and unlike 15 years ago you can't just lie your way out of things anymore. Sort of like your post, it is all out there for all to see and make up their own minds.

+++++++++
Chris:


Hillary is staying in the race all the way to the Convention for one reason: Obama's underhanded and RACIST campaign in South Carolina.


In this campaign, Obama smeared Bill Clinton and twisted his words around.


Obama deserves what he gets for his own dirty campaign which turned his post-racial campaign theme into a complete FRAUD.

.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 21, 2008 8:28 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 21, 2008 8:33 PM | Report abuse

I certainly hope not - ending in the convention, I mean. That would be disastrous. HRC best remember should this happen, her name would be mud.

Posted by: tango | May 21, 2008 8:32 PM | Report abuse

Chris:


In all seriousness, Obama and his people are the ones who have blown up the party with their campaign tactics. The women do not trust the Obama people anymore. The women still think they deserve to control the party - the white males have all been pushed to the margin.

The party is a mess.

The coalition is disfunctional and it is beyond repair - one or the other will leave.


.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 21, 2008 8:32 PM | Report abuse

Chris:


Hillary is staying in the race all the way to the Convention for one reason: Obama's underhanded and RACIST campaign in South Carolina.


In this campaign, Obama smeared Bill Clinton and twisted his words around.


Obama deserves what he gets for his own dirty campaign which turned his post-racial campaign theme into a complete FRAUD.

.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 21, 2008 8:28 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company