Clinton rejects delegate compromise

Our nominee (4.00 / 4)

Senator Obama, will resolve this situation, right now he is working on his VP pick and organizational factors related to the Convention in Denver.

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Thu May 08, 2008 at 20:43:35 PM UTC

You know what? If she's rejecting THIS plan... (4.00 / 2)

...which is already more generous than she deserves under the circumstances (she'd have a net gain of about 10 pledged + perhaps another 12 SD's under it), I have a counter-counter-proposal:

Go ahead and seat all 128 pledged delegates--for Obama.

The DNC has two choices: they can either follow the rules to the letter--in which case none of the delegates are counted--or they can negotiate, which is what this (and numerous other proposals) are a part of.

In any negotiation, there's eventually going to be a final offer "take it or leave it". It seems to me that this 69/59 deal was (or should be) that final offer, and she chose to leave it.

Considering today's statement implying that only poor white people work hard, I'm almost--ALMOST--at the point of not voting for her even if she does somehow manage to wrestle the nomination out of Obama's hands.

And anyone who knows me knows that this is not something I'd consider lightly.

To Yvette, Xavier, and other Clinton supporters--I'm sorry if this statement ruins any chance of sitting down for a drink in person or whatever, but this thing has gone beyond any semblance of rationality on Sen. Clinton's part.

---

by: Brainwrap @ Thu May 08, 2008 at 21:48:21 PM UTC

She wants an excuse to wage a floor fight in Denver (0.00 / 0)

As I see it, Clinton's scorched-earth strategy has two prongs: (a) continue to raise  "issues" such as Jeremiah Wright in order to render Barack Obama damaged goods by the time the convention opens and (b) present herself to the media as the victim of a conspiracy by party insiders [oh, the irony!] to deprive her of the nomination.

At the rate she's going, Hillary Clinton might wind up being dragged out of the Pepsi Center by convention security--a high-profile version of John Chancellor's arrest at the 1964 GOP convention.

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always count on the support of Paul.

---

by: Hy Dudgeon @ Thu May 08, 2008 at 23:08:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Toast (1.33 / 6)

HRC is toast. Stop wasting time and party collegiality.

Take your dead a$$ and bow out.

Sorry all you delusional HRC backers, you lost.

Game, Set, Match.

Unless your planned cheating bears fruit and in that case I and others will sit out. We will not vote for a sour puss cheater of which HRC seems intent on becoming.
:):)

Breathe deep. It is Obama time baby. Get on board or get out of the way.

---

by: doxie53 @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 00:25:17 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

No need to be rude to her *supporters* (4.00 / 4)

or, at least, those outside of the campaign. I went through a similar period of denial after my own "Obama", Howard Dean, flamed out in 2004, and the last thing I needed was John Kerry supporters making fun of me.

I have no qualms about hostility towards Hillary herself (and her inner circle) for many of the ugly, offensive statements that she's made of late, but I hold no hard feelings towards those who voted for her in good faith, believing that she was the best candidate for the job.

---

by: Brainwrap @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 00:37:25 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Again doxie (4.00 / 6)

your are doing a great job of driving Clinton supporters away from voting Democratic. Are you a complete idiot or what? We can not win  in November unless we all pull together. With Democrats like you who needs Republicans.

The end of the human race will be that it will eventually die of civilization.

 - Ralph Waldo Emerson

---

by: michmark @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:27:20 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Seat our elected delegates, tell the super's to bugger off. (4.00 / 2)

And whether the delegates are apportioned to how the vote went down or some compromise number won't make a wit of difference.

So simple a caveman could do it.

Julie

To prepare for when your life flashes before your eyes, make sure it's fun to watch.

---

by: JNelson @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 00:13:12 AM UTC

Desperate people at Camp CLinton (0.00 / 0)

Well, I guess if I loaned my campaing $11 million of my own money, I'd want to do whatever I can to keep this going to try to get some more donations in and pay myself back.  I wonder if she's ever paid the Universities in California that hosted her and Stroke My Ego Bill rallies back in January/February?  The old guard of the Democrat (Clintons, DLC, etc.) sure aren't going down easy, but Thank God for the good of the Democratic Party, they do seem to be dying off.  Dean Democrats rejoice! Let the party return to the people - not the Terry McAuliffe "rich people only" wankers of the world.

---

by: jimwhitaker @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 00:50:37 AM UTC

1972 (0.00 / 0)

Once upon a time, the young turks (now the Old Guard) took over the national party and got their candidate - George McGovern.  They didn't need to be bogged down with that Old Guard party, that silly New Deal coalition.  They were better educated than that Old Guard, they were younger and they were the future.

McGovern won a state.  Our national party has won three presidential elections from the 1972 cycle to the present day.  I'm thinking maybe our party needs to re-think the power structure of our party.

---

by: IgnatiusDonnelly @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:52:51 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

History (0.00 / 0)

But McGovern was on the right side of history. He ran an anti-Vietnam War campaign. Nixon didn't serve out his term thanks to Watergate. Then Ford finally pulled our troops out of Southeast Asia.

---

by: rich @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:57:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The power of positive thinking (0.00 / 0)

I like it.

McGovern was a nightmare of a candidate that left Nixon in the White House, regardless of the fact that he was a good man and correct about many things.

McGovern was not relevant to Nixon's leaving.  And Ford didn't pull troops out of Viet Nam.  That year's special budget for the war was bottled up in Congress.

Obama is not running against the war.  He wants a responsible withdrawal - so did Nixon.  Nixon wanted to end Johnson's war in a stable way that would provide peace with honor.

---

by: IgnatiusDonnelly @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 13:07:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Progressive Thinking (4.00 / 1)

Yeah those clandestine bombing raids in Cambodia were a mighty fine part of the "Peace With Honor." Nixon always claimed to have a secret plan to get out of Vietnam...He just wouldn't reveal it until after he was elected to a second term.

I'm not going to defend McGovern's less than stellar campaign. But the one thing it did do was to make it obvious that the war in Vietnam was impossible to "win." But what I like about the "Nixon was the better candidate" thinking is that it feeds directly into the stupidity of voting for competence that is put into the service of moral bankruptcy. It's what gave us Nixon, Reagan, and Dubya. Sorry, but history is already judging McGovern far more favorably to Nixon. Just as Al Gore is looking pretty damn good compared to Dubya.

I'm fine with where the power structure is going these days. The Progressive Wing of the party (the portion that was against the War in Iraq at the start) is finally having more say.

There is no honorable way out of Iraq. Any remote chance of honor died with the use of "Shock & Awe" and the revelations of Abu Ghraib.  

---

by: rich @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 13:58:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Whoa there; I'm not praising Nixon (0.00 / 0)

What I am saying is that winning is actually important.  Nixon held office for nearly six years; Reagan for eight; Dubya for eight.  We haven't had a lot of time to fix things that were done in those days.

The titles change over time, but 1972 is an important line of demarcation.  The "progressives" took over the party then too.  The Clintons came from that time and wore the progressive mantle for a quarter century.  I don't think Obama, or Dean, or others in that faction are any more progressive than the Clintons.

This year's race has been fascinating because the progressive camp dumped the couple that "got them there", and HRC was forced to run to the proles.  Of course she was only able to do that because both she and Obama made sure that the proles' candidate was driven under right away.
 

---

by: IgnatiusDonnelly @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 14:48:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Progressives? How about regular people? (0.00 / 0)

I don't think this is a case of "progressives" taking over the party as much as it is regular people elbowing out the millionaires and $100+ million candidate to make way for a President who will listen to the people and doesn't act all self-righteous all the time (granted, she has the crying thing on queue when needed).

---

by: jimwhitaker @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 21:18:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

A People-Powered Party (0.00 / 0)

As I wrote the folks in Michigan who could vote for who became the DNC Chairman in early 2005, "for the sake of the sustainability of the Democratic Party, please support Governor Howard Dean for DNC Chair."  I would write a similar appeal today.  

Isn't it great to have a candidate who inspires young people to get involved?  Isn't it great to have a candidate who doesn't rely on $2,300 maximum donations from their supporters to run his or her campaign - but instead appeals for $25 or so from the regular folks?  Isn't it great to have a candidate who has the confidence, charisma, and the sensibilities to take on the Republican hate and fear machines and go toe-to-toe by brandishing the TRUTH?

I'm sorry, but the DLC and everything the Clinton's did to damage the Democratic party need to be buried right now.  

---

by: jimwhitaker @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 21:14:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

this will go to the convention at least and possibly farther (4.00 / 1)

after supporting obama in this process in my opinion, nevermind anything you hear from the MSM, you have to be a realist about the clinton's. I used to think she'll try and sink obama to clear the way for her in 2012 (and she really has hurt him). I now  think she believes she can win a third party run. As off-the-wall as it seems I don't think it's impossible. she's worked hard to stake out a new base which could be a launching platform for a third party run. no one understans general election electoral college math better than bill clinton, who never won with 50% of the vote. of course, this is just my take on things and i'm sure I'm a lone ranger on this. I can't wait to get trashed for even saying it.

As for obama, his campaign has been too flat and cliche ridden lately. he's going to have to get tougher. HRC has proved his Mr. nice guy stuff (trying to stay above the fray) doesn't hold up to negative campaining. instead of just saying "yes we can" at a rally he's going to have to start explaining how we can in more precise terms.

---

by: left of liberal @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 01:53:40 AM UTC

HRC already said she'd support the nominee (4.00 / 4)

This is just bad crystal ball gazing.

Actually, I'm glad it lasted past Pennsylvania, now Obama has disavowed Rev Wright and it gets that out of the way as a major issue for the General Election.   That's made it worth it (plus Obama does seem to be reaching out more to labor which is a really good thing and something that he's needed to do a lot more of -- we may really end up with a solid nominee).

West Michigan Rising: The Progressive Blog for Our (future) Left Coast

---

by: philgoblue @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:07:22 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

labor can't deliver votes (0.00 / 0)

I was a UAW member for twenty years and lived in macomb county nearly all my life. macomb is famous for being union (should say was union - the union has been decimated there)and reagan democrats - just the folks hillary has been courting. labor never had any sway over these voters. I'm not saying obama can't win them over. he can - but not the way he's running his campaign now.

and how do i know wheather HRC will go third party? but the clinton's have a deep fire in their belly for the presidency and I wouldn't bet against their going to the wall.

---

by: left of liberal @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:59:08 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

actually union households (4.00 / 2)

are among the most consistent Democratic voters.  Usually at 60-65%.

CTW already supports Obama.  Even if unenthusiatically, UAW and AFL-CIO will come on board in a month or two.

West Michigan Rising: The Progressive Blog for Our (future) Left Coast

---

by: philgoblue @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 13:45:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Third party run. (0.00 / 0)

My offer of a friendly wager still stands. How about if she runs third party I make a contribution to Obama. If she does not you make a contribution to his campaign. You name the amount.

The end of the human race will be that it will eventually die of civilization.

 - Ralph Waldo Emerson

---

by: michmark @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 10:34:10 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

at this point in my life (0.00 / 0)

all my donations go to my kids. but I think it's naive to think it's not possible just because it hasn't happened before. If you gage HRC's actions today she doesn't look like she's leaving the race. and all indicators point to her being able to pull off a third party run and win. I think I asked you this before: when and under what conditions does HRC leave the field without the nomination? If you see how I'd be interested in knowing because I don't see it. i said above bill clinton won twice with three parties in the field. joe lieberman lost the dem primary and won his election with a coalition like HRC is putting together. there are no proportional electoral votes - it's winner take all no matter what percentage the winner has.

don't be fooled by this dem pulling together and all for one stuff. This is presidential politics. Do you see HRC making love to the party?

i support obama - but he'd better wake up. he's running a lousy campaign and won't win with his current mentality. he's still got two opponents not just McCain. HRC is still blasting him at every opportunity and will untill at least the convention and we'll see what happens after that.

---

by: left of liberal @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:49:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I don't think you understand party politics (4.00 / 1)

Which is understandable since you aren't really involved in such (am I remembering that correctly?).

There is NO WAY IN HELL Hillary will run third party.  It would sever ties to the power base that is well established and put a huge black mark on Bill's legacy.  Not to mention good-bye choice committee seats in the Senate as an Indy.

Never gonna happen.  I'd wager serious cash on it.

This hasn't been just a fight for the nomination, this has been a struggle over the direction and make up of the Democratic party.  I believe it really started with Dean's campaign, has continued on a lower level since 04 and is, once again, very high profile.

The money game sums it up, really.  The big money has been beaten by the little money.  Obama has reached over 1.5 million donors.  Even James Carville acknowledged the gravity of this when he said "1.5 million, that's not a donor base, that's a political party."

Lastly, all indicators point to her being able to pull off a third party run and win  ROFL!!! Which "indicators" are those??

Here is an article that may help you to better understand the absurdity of that claim:   http://www.time.com/time/polit...

Julie


To prepare for when your life flashes before your eyes, make sure it's fun to watch.

---

by: JNelson @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 13:30:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I agree with all of your points except (sadly) for one... (0.00 / 0)

" Not to mention good-bye choice committee seats in the Senate as an Indy."

Hasn't happened to Lieberman yet, even WITH him running around campaigning for friggin' McCain.

---

by: Brainwrap @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 15:07:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

This is true except there is one difference (4.00 / 2)

Lieberman, fool that he is, isn't responsible for tearing the party apart or costing us the WH.  If Clinton committed the folly of a third party run she's lose as well as help hand the WH to McLame.  That would merit serious backlash on all levels and it would be forthcoming without fail.

Julie

To prepare for when your life flashes before your eyes, make sure it's fun to watch.

---

by: JNelson @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 16:08:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

i very much understand party politics (0.00 / 0)

I don't think you understand the clintons. They're not in this for the party. they're in it for the presidency - the most powerful position in the world. I'll ask you the same question I asked michmark.

when and under what conditions does HRC leave the field without the nomination? If you see how I'd be interested in knowing because I don't see it.

You folks really go bonkers over just the mention of this. Are you an HRC supporter or one of her delegates? If you are, that's fine. just curious.

---

by: left of liberal @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 21:09:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The part you quoted (0.00 / 0)

Wasn't written by me and I am not a Clinton supporter.

Julie

To prepare for when your life flashes before your eyes, make sure it's fun to watch.

---

by: JNelson @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 01:32:33 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

it was written by me in a comment further up the thread (0.00 / 0)

i thought that was clear

---

by: left of liberal @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 01:40:21 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sorry 'bout that (0.00 / 0)

I guess I didn't follow the whole discussion as closely as I should.  Your remarks still puzzle me.

Julie

To prepare for when your life flashes before your eyes, make sure it's fun to watch.

---

by: JNelson @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 11:27:49 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Clinton will get out (0.00 / 0)

when she knows she does not have the delegate votes, if not before. As the superdelegates go in greater numbers to Obama, she is getting closer to dropping out. It could happen very soon or she may wait for primary season to end.

The end of the human race will be that it will eventually die of civilization.

 - Ralph Waldo Emerson

---

by: michmark @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 20:56:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

that's two different answers (0.00 / 0)

It could happen very soon or she may wait for primary season to end.

i think you can throw the first one out. she's going to finish the primaries. today's news has her up by some forty points in west virginia.

On the second, time will tell.

---

by: left of liberal @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 21:12:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sorry I can't be more precise (0.00 / 0)

Guess I'll have to send in the crystal ball and have it cleaned.

The end of the human race will be that it will eventually die of civilization.

 - Ralph Waldo Emerson

---

by: michmark @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 23:30:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

that's the problem (0.00 / 0)

when folks rely too much on high technology like these new-fangled crystal balls you speak of. they go out of calibration and if the user doesn't know it they get bum results and think they are real. Try some good old political common sense and read the article from kos by DHinMI (a very prescient political analyst - I always read his stuff) posted at the top of the front page? then let's see if we can agree to throw out both you're answers above. HRC is taking this fight all the way to the convention. after that only time will tell.

When I read DHinMI's post I got the sense HRC already has one foot out of the party.

---

by: left of liberal @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 01:03:06 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Don't pay much attention to kos (0.00 / 0)

when it comes to Clinton. Too much bias there.

The end of the human race will be that it will eventually die of civilization.

 - Ralph Waldo Emerson

---

by: michmark @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 01:55:53 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

i agree about clinton bios at kos (0.00 / 0)

but Ive been reading DHinMI since about '93 when he was at the now defunct "blogging for the president". he's been around the block and knows michigan politics.

but hey - there's always that crystal ball.

---

by: left of liberal @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 02:17:14 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

OK I read it (0.00 / 0)

but don't see how it proves your contention that she will keep this contest going for over three more months. Even is she were to get her way with Michigan and Florida(I don't think she will) it won't help her. Only the superdelegates can save her and they are all breaking for Obama right now as we speak.(See link to article in my above post).

The end of the human race will be that it will eventually die of civilization.

 - Ralph Waldo Emerson

---

by: michmark @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 02:31:25 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

How's that challenge coming along? (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Cole6015 @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 02:19:31 AM UTC

Filed Challenge last Sunday electronically (0.00 / 0)

We have signatories from several counties across the state.

But Mark Brewer's office has been stonewalling for weeks on important ancillary documents, such as the central and executive committees' meeting minutes, and the actual participant lists and counts from April 19th.

Since they've canceled the May 17th meeting, I've been inviting more folks to sign.  Now, we have until the May 31st meeting in DC to build momentum.

Want to join us?

---

by: William Allen Simpson @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 13:16:00 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The challenge has been denied. (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Cole6015 @ Thu May 15, 2008 at 23:31:17 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Disgusting (0.00 / 0)

After HRC's comments to USA Today Wednesday more than suggesting that only she, because she is white, can win I am through with here completely.  She cited polls "that found how Senator Obama's support . . . among working, hardworking Americans, white Americans, is weakening again. I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on."

Her arrogance is amazing.  Of course only white Democrats are hardworking Americans. Of course, Hillary.  

---

by: LiberalBubba @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 11:59:17 AM UTC

Go Hillary Go! (0.00 / 0)

Keep on fighting the likes of Carl Levin and Debbie Dingell!  

KICK MICHIGAN IN THE TEETH UNTIL IT GETS WITH THE PROGRAM!!!

---

by: China Mig @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:50:07 PM UTC