Denver Open Thread

It's been thunder storming here in Denver lately but right now it's not too bad, drizzling a bit. On the descent into Denver we saw amazing bolts of lightning in the distance and even a tornado hovering over a lake.

On my shuttle to the hotel, I encountered a storm of another kind: an Obama delegate from Illinois and a Clinton delegate from Massachusetts. When she said she was a Hillary delegate, the Obama delegate said facetiously: "Oh they're letting you in here, are they?" She retorted (in a friendly but stern way): "That's what's wrong with Obama folks. You're not reaching out to the Hillary people." It was the second time in as many days that I'd heard the same complaint from a Hillary supporter. Whether it's true or not, the perception is there and it needs to be addressed. I hope they're on it.

I'm meeting up with Jerome later for tonight's big media party so I don't think I'll be back on until later tonight. Jonathan and Josh arrive tomorrow.

Which is a long way of saying this is an open thread...

Tags: Open Thread (all tags)

Comments

190 Comments

Re: Denver Open Thread

We'll if we loose, I guess we'll know why.

by nzubechukwu 2008-08-23 03:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

If we loose, we'll just have to toighten like a toiger.

by fogiv 2008-08-23 04:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

Fantastic. If any of those delegates are reading this blog, get it together. Don't be assholes and if you see someone else being an asshole, stand up to the bully.

by vcalzone 2008-08-23 03:17PM | 0 recs
Agreed

Don't be a dick.

Admittedly, it is one delegate talking to another, and I'm not terribly concerned about the HRC delegates. I'm also a little tired of the worrying about over people's fragile feelings.

That being said, though. As the victor, take the high road.

by iohs2008 2008-08-23 03:23PM | 0 recs
"don't be a dick"

Should be the 2008 slogan, for sure.

by Neef 2008-08-23 03:25PM | 0 recs
Re: "don't be a dick"

I wish John McCain would take that advice!

by LordMike 2008-08-23 06:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

"Oh they're letting you in here, are they?"

Douche.

by spacemanspiff 2008-08-23 03:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

Just hold your breathes for one week. After that, once Hillary has had her convention vote and she and Bill have given their convention speeches, the divisions will fade away. Especially once the Clintons are on the campaign trail supporting Obama and their good friend Joe.

This of course won't change any PUMA minds, but like most irrational fringe groups they can easily be ignored. They are not a threat, not a factor and simply not relevant.

by LandStander 2008-08-23 03:36PM | 0 recs
Wow, thanks for discounting so many of us

Attitudes like yours will send our party right down the tubes.  

Why must democrats be so nasty to each other?  Republicans don't do this to each other.  Why do we?  How could it possibly help our party?  

by SueBee 2008-08-23 06:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Wow, thanks for discounting so many of us

Ask the PUMA's.. they are the ones who are threatening to vote for McCain 'cos the party didn't overturn the pledged delegates...

by LordMike 2008-08-23 07:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Wow, thanks for discounting so many of us

Yeah right. Have you ever seen a business Republican confront a religious Republican? You haven't got a clue.

by Covin 2008-08-23 09:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Wow, thanks for discounting so many of us

PUMAS are not Democrats.  Repeat that over and over. They are Republicans.  If you support the Republican, if you actively work against the Democratic nominee, that makes you a Republican.  It's not that hard.

by ProgressiveDL 2008-08-24 04:40AM | 0 recs
If you're not supporting the nominee..

You're no democrat.

I'd suggest a plastic bag to make it easier to hold your breath for that week.

by lojasmo 2008-08-24 06:36AM | 0 recs
I beg to differ

Obama has allowed Chelsea to announce her mom who has a prime time speaking event, Bill is speaking on a prime time spot and Obama has allowed a roll call.  Obama has done more than enough to reach out to the other side.  I am sick and tired of these people who keep complaining.  This is not about them!

by hocuspocus 2008-08-23 03:47PM | 0 recs
Re: I beg to differ

ALLOWED? He hasn't been crowned king yet - and it is very doubtful that he will be.

by Marjoriest 2008-08-23 04:19PM | 0 recs
Re: I beg to differ

I responded to your above comment and now I see I shouldn't have. Anyone who would revel at the idea of the Democratic National Convention turning into a catastrophe, thereby dooming our chances in this and future elections, clearly has a distorted view about how best to ensure the prosperity of our party and our nation.

Do you really think it is "doubtful" that Obama will receive the nomination? I find that to be a profoundly difficult assertion to back up.

by LandStander 2008-08-23 04:32PM | 0 recs
Re: I beg to differ

Yes, allowed. In Grown Up World, conventions are run by the nominee with the intent of electing said nominee.

by BlueinColorado 2008-08-23 04:33PM | 0 recs
Re: I beg to differ

Actually in "Grown Up World" the conventions are run by the party members to decide the direction of the party. Nominating our presidential Candidate is a very important part of that but hardly all of it.

by Ernst 2008-08-23 06:41PM | 0 recs
Re: I beg to differ

No, the nominee has already been decided. This is Barack's convention, whether you want to believe it or not.

by Covin 2008-08-23 09:50PM | 0 recs
Re: I beg to differ

What brilliant commentary! of course it's based on the false assumption that I somehow don't believe that Obama is the nominee, something I never stated or even hinted at, but we can't let a lack of reading comprehension stand in the way of flaunting general ignorance, can we?

I'm really impressed by your complete lack of any argument relating to my point that the convention entails more then just nominating the candidate and as such it is an endeavor of the entire party, not just one person. No matter who the candidate will be and how long in advance it is know who the candidate is. A truth so simple it's hard to see how merely stating it would suddenly cast doubts on whether I believe Obama is the nominee.

But I yield to your obviously greater wisdom as shown by your complete lack of any sensible argument.

by Ernst 2008-08-24 10:35AM | 0 recs
Re: I beg to differ

Barack Obama is the leader of the Democratic Party, and the purpose of this convention, as in all others, is to show him off to the country. In that sense, it is his convention. If you disagree with that, too bad.

The primary purpose of the Democratic Convention, as well as the Republican Convention, is indeed to nominate that party's candidate for president. The rest comes second. You can argue otherwise all you want, but we don't have conventions in off years, do we?

by Covin 2008-08-24 10:45AM | 0 recs
Re: I beg to differ

Read this slowly:

This is Obama's convention not the Clintons.  He is going to receive our party's nomination as the Democratic leader of the party.  Get the fuck over yourself!

by hocuspocus 2008-08-23 04:35PM | 0 recs
I sure to want to reopen the primaries ...

But just hmow would Hillary supporters have reacted if Obama had said, "I have the support of hard-working Americans ... male Americans."  I can only imagine.   But Hillary said the EXACT thing with her 'white Americans' riff.  But Obama supporters couldn't even suggest that comment might have been, gee, pitched to people with certain racial attitudes?  And as I recall, it was met with more sorrow than anger, that she could even imagine saying such a thing, let alone actually saying it.  Come on.  Just what do you want?  What?  The Clintons are getting more face time in Denver than Obama is, for God's sake.  He's bent over backwards for months.  And what did she do for him?  Deliver that June 3 non-concession speech that horrified everyone in the party.

by Tangie3 2008-08-23 04:40PM | 0 recs
I sure DON'T want to reopen the primaries ...

by Tangie3 2008-08-23 04:41PM | 0 recs
Re: I beg to differ

Your comments are ever-silly.

by mikeinsf 2008-08-23 06:05PM | 0 recs
Obama has ALLOWED

Chelsea and the Clintons to speak????  Does he run the whole friggin' party now and the whole friggin' convention?  Jeeze.  

by SueBee 2008-08-23 06:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama has ALLOWED

Why yes he does run the friggin party and the whole friggin convention. I know that burns you deep inside, but your tears just fuel me.

Get use to it.

by hocuspocus 2008-08-23 07:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama has ALLOWED

Actually YES.
Like it or not, the Presidential nominee is the de facto head of the party.  If Clinton had won, she would have to have allowed Obama to speak.  She would have been making the decisions on how the convention would have been set up.

That is the way the parties work in our country.

by gavoter 2008-08-23 10:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama has ALLOWED

Yes.  Have you been paying attention?  Clinton CONCEDED.  Obama is the presumptive nominee.  It is HIS convention as the leader of the party.

by lojasmo 2008-08-24 06:41AM | 0 recs
Re: I beg to differ

No, This is about the democratic party. And that includes the Clintons as well as Obama.

I'd like to think the party is more then just one person.

by Ernst 2008-08-23 06:36PM | 0 recs
Obama has to reach out himself

Voters vote for candidates, not their surrogates.

Experienced candidates know that.

by Betsy McCall 2008-08-24 08:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

Christ, one person makes a joke and the other uses it as a reason to demand ass-kissing. I hate seeing liberals jump all over themselves to try for votes of people who won't ever vote for them anyway.

by oyo 2008-08-23 03:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

Yeah, that's kind of my take.  I'm not the type to make those mildly insulting jokes with someone I don't know, but a lot of people are.  Same way a person might make a comment if you're wearing a university t-shirt that differs from their favorite, or something like that.  

by freedom78 2008-08-23 05:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

And the first thing you learn canvassing that making such jokes is no way to get your candidate elected.

insulting a voter through jokes doesn't work in politics.

by Ernst 2008-08-23 05:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

Oh, I agree.  I didn't say it was smart...I just don't think it's the mean spirited remark as construed.  Some people deal with tension with humor...but perhaps this situation isn't yet to the point that such humor can be taken as such.

by freedom78 2008-08-23 06:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

Heck, It probably isn't. I wasn't there. And the tone of the remark matter a whole lot. It could all be so very harmless and I might have gone way overboard.

But it's a good example of why you must never joke at all about strangers' political standpoints if you're in a position where you represent a candidate. Even the most harmless jokes can cause unnecessary damage.

by Ernst 2008-08-23 07:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

You know what I dislike? the fact that people try to justify insulting behavior just because they feel he's "part of the team." 85% of people who voted for Clinton will already vote for Obama. Of those 15% that are left 7.5% are the easiest  persuadable voter to back Obama.

The joke was insulting and condescending. You're defending the right to be an asshole to a voter  never met and who is the prime target of your candidate.

I'd never ever want somebody like that person who made a joke like that anywhere near a campaign. Nor anybody who defends them. Because people who do so fuck over their candidate.

That person just fucked over Obama by being an insulting jackass. Made it just a little bit harder for him. Sorry I want Obama to win, Apparently the person who made that joke didn't care enough about that to be civil.

And you just defended him.

by Ernst 2008-08-23 05:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

I am not going to defend some random ass hat Denver.  But I will ask how anyone could ignore the vile crap that is thrown out there everyday by Limbaugh, Hannity, and the rest of the conservative movement by voting for McCain.  He stands against everything liberals, progressives, feminists, gay rights activists, environmentalists, and workers stand for.  

We may be a dysfunctional family, but we should still be a family.

by Xris 2008-08-23 05:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

that is a false argument. It is on a par with people who when confronted by complaints about the US torturing random people and extraordinary rendition try to shift the argument by asking "why aren't you concerned about Darfur" or some other action going on. The problem is we PAY and VOTE for the one doing these things in our name, just like the party convention is "ours" in a sense. I don't belong to or contribute to the GOP or work for FAUX so what they do is not anything I have or want any kind of input into besides not watching them. But since I do both for the DNC I would hope for better behavior from ALL the delegates.

by zerosumgame 2008-08-23 06:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

Me? don't know. don't care. I don't deal with their justifications.

All I know is that family feuds tend to create the biggest fights and the most embittered participants.

But the problem is if you'll look at form you'll notice that nowhere does it say if democrat property of Obama or if republican property of McCain.

I don't give a damn how they can justify theirselves. They've got a vote, I want that vote to be cast for my candidate.

Insulting them or demanding they vote as I tell them is the surest way to get them to vote for the other guy. That's all there is to it. Family or not. If we want something from our family, we still ask politely. And we stay polity even if they're being jackasses being we are the ones that need the favor.

by Ernst 2008-08-23 06:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

Agreed.  PUMA douchebags should be given no quarter.  I'm glad the ones hiding under rocks on this site are outing themselves.

TOS anybody....Jerome?

by lojasmo 2008-08-24 06:45AM | 0 recs
way to unite

"but like most irrational fringe groups"

If Obama loses big, can we thank these kinds of "democrats"? Such smug petulancy.

by cad 2008-08-23 03:50PM | 0 recs
Re: way to unite

I imagine you were responding to my comment. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing but respect for Clinton supporters and I fully understand the difficult situation that resulted from such a divisive primary.

I am sure there are many Hillary supporters that are skeptical of voting for Obama. I hope that they can be convinced, along with all the other swing voters out there. But PUMAs are not swing voters. They are not a numerically significant group. Yes, I hope we can woo former Clinton supporters, like my grandmother who is unsure about Obama. But no, we will never woo self-identified PUMAs. They don't want to be convinced. We shouldn't even be trying. Like I said, ignore them.

by LandStander 2008-08-23 04:37PM | 0 recs
Re: way to unite

Stop being addicted to calling out everybody as a PUMA. It's the Kossian weakness of calling somebody you disagree with a "troll."

by cad 2008-08-23 04:48PM | 0 recs
Re: way to unite

Whoa. You are being way too sensitive. Where in his post did he call this person a PUMA?

by Covin 2008-08-23 09:27PM | 0 recs
Re: way to unite

And who said this lady was even a PUMA?

She might have a Obama sign in her yard. She might already be working for the Obama campaign. Do we know that?

By acting as if every Clinton supporter is a suspected PUMA member and constantly constantly mentioning them at every turn as a justification you a tar and feathering an entire wing of the party by association. For every 2 to 3 thousand Clinton voters there is a single Puma member.

How much Clinton delegates are there to every puma member? 40 to 50? something like that?

So why does every argument about Clinton supporters have to have a PUMA mention? Giving so much attention to PUMA is nothing short of sheer counter productive folly. And ends up as excuse to dismiss all Clinton supporters.

by Ernst 2008-08-23 06:07PM | 0 recs
things younger than Biden?

Does such a website exist yet?  

We might want to lay off McCain's age, since our VP pick is close to the same age.  

by SueBee 2008-08-23 06:29PM | 0 recs
Re: things younger than Biden?

He's 65.

Hillary Clinton is 60.

Biden is closer to Clinton's age than McCain's.

Not to mention the fact that he's the Vice President, and there is a huge difference between that and the President.  

by fbihop 2008-08-23 07:21PM | 0 recs
Re: things younger than Biden?

Actually we need to lay off the age stuff, for many reasons.

And the VP historically, quite a number of times has had to become the president.  It's the main reason we have a VP.

There are a lot better reasons to support this ticket than that Obama is younger than McCain.

by mady 2008-08-23 08:43PM | 0 recs
Re: things younger than Biden?

What's with the "we"?  Above you state you're going to vote for McCain.  Why do you care what Dems are doing now in the presidential campaign?

by Fluffy Puff Marshmallow 2008-08-23 08:55PM | 0 recs
Re: things younger than Biden?

Didn't you say you're not voting for Obama.  If so, then Biden is OUR VP pick.  You can take your concern elsewhere.  At least shove it, okay?

by lojasmo 2008-08-24 06:52AM | 0 recs
Re: way to unite

Here is my point about the PUMA's.  If Obama was even concerned about unity, he would have at the least made a gesture of vetting Clinton.

If Obama was concerned with winning, unity and bringing those except the most die-hard PUMA's into the fold, he would have picked Hillary.

He did neither, and is not concerned with either.

Therefore, IMO, he's not really concerned with Clinton voters/delegates who are on the fence or were hedging a bit, OR the PUMA voters one bit.

It's that simple really.

by TxDem08 2008-08-23 06:46PM | 0 recs
Re: way to unite

But both aren't true.

We don't know if Clinton even wanted to be VP. Vetting somebody who doesn't want the position wouldn't help unity either.

And there simply is no proof that shows that Clinton on the ticket would be more successful then Clinton not on the ticket.

by Ernst 2008-08-23 07:09PM | 0 recs
Re: way to unite

1. Senator Clinton has always said she will help in any way she can.  If Obama wanted her as VP she would haved served.

2.

It's also worth noting that while Obama leads McCain by three points in the poll, Clinton edges the Republican by six points in a hypothetical match up, 49 to 43 percent.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26314990/

by TxDem08 2008-08-23 08:07PM | 0 recs
Re: way to unite

1. precisely. So Obama should want her above everybody else regardless of who perhaps would better fit the current needs of the ticket and Clinton should serve regardless of her own feelings on that matter not for the good of the country, the ticket but just for "unification"

I'd say that we're better off being unified through common respect. Obama with a VP who isn't purely serving as such out of a sense of duty And Hillary in a position she really feels she can make a difference in.

2. Again, no proof of her abilities at the second slot.

by Ernst 2008-08-23 08:51PM | 0 recs
Re: way to unite

So you're saying you would have felt better if Obama had lied to, or mislead you?

by lojasmo 2008-08-24 06:53AM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

It's called the bargaining stage of the grieving process. At least they've moved beyond denial and anger.

by venician 2008-08-23 04:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside
I guess you will never understand. We really dislike and distrust Obama. I can't see how we can suddenly decide he is likeable and trustworthy. No. We. Can't.
Being called nasty names - the worst being racist - has made things worse. And this grieving bit is simply crap.
by Marjoriest 2008-08-23 04:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

Do you think McCain is more trustworthy?  And/or do you really think that he represents the best interests of the country?  Does he share a single policy position that overlaps with yours?

by CAchemist 2008-08-23 04:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

The grieving bit is crap and it is a thoughtless and pointless thing to say. And condescending.

But your problem is that you don't find Obama likable and trustworthy? It is hard to imagine a more likable politician. He played a little rough in the primaries, but so did Clinton. And he has done nothing to show himself less trustworthy then your average pol. Do you like Kerry and Gore and Clinton and Edwards and Biden and Pelosi and all the other high-profile Democrats? Or do you uniformly dislike all Democratic politicians? It is a serious stretch to say that Obama has done anything to separate himself from the herd in terms of likability and trustworthiness. I guess it all comes down to personal opinion. But I am curious if you see some special and distinct difference between Obama and the other top tier Democrats. They are all remarkably similar in tone, tactics, policy and rhetoric. Especially compared to the other party.

by LandStander 2008-08-23 04:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

I agree with almost every single thing you said.  The grieving bit is crap, but it's not that because it's outright anger and distrust for most, and just a plain and simple feeling of betryal for others.

Both (actually all-Edwards included) played rough in the Primaries, yet what I hated and to this day is the meme that is pushed that Obama was an innocent bystander and only maybe an ocassionally made a snarky retort, when that was clearly not the case whatsoever.  I also agree that as you said that he is very similar to Kerry, Gore and Pelosi in his tone, tactics, rhetoric and policy...and I can't stand any one of them.

I don't trust him, I don't believe him or in him, and I don't think he represent CHANGE and can't believe those who do, because if you believe what you wrote he is not CHANGE but just an extension of what is already there. I don't believe he will do what he says or has the stomach to actually engage in hand-to-hand combat with the Republican's attack machine, and come out with enough dignity or credibility to get the job done.  There simply is no basis to lead me to think otherwise.

I will show up in Denver on Monday, vote the first ballot for Hillary and then continue to vote for her.  My delegation will cast it's majority votes for Obama, and that's fine, since that's how Democracy works.  I will also challenge Biden's nomination for VP.  I like Biden, I like his maverick attitude and his shoot from the hip style.  As a leader within the Democratic Party, sure, but not at the top, sorry not buying it.  He will also probably get enough votes on subsequent ballots to gain the nomination, also.  But not mine.

I won't be campaigning with or for the Obama/Biden ticket, I will only be concentrating on the down ticket, and local races especially.  I hope Obama/Biden wins, but they'll do it without my support.

And as far as the Clinton/Obama delegates interaction...well let's just say that when I was in Denver last week on business I ran into two Obama delegates.  They asked if I was going to stop being a traitor to my country and support America, or if I was going to continue to support a race baiter.  I told them they could shove it you know where, and that because of their actions if they continued to operate as they do, there would be a lot of delegates who just wouldn't vote for Obama.  And the only people they could then blame would be the one's looking back in the mirror.  That what they were espousing is not Democractic principles, but Bushism in all it's glory.

I know you were asking another poster, but I just wanted to give you my perspective and feelings on the subject.

by TxDem08 2008-08-23 05:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

I was a county delegate for Obama here in MO and had to deal with constant crap from the Clinton delegates.  But you know what's crazy?  I don't blame Hillary for her delegates or supporters, these random individuals are just jerks.

Anecdotal evidence cuts both ways and proves nothing.

by Xris 2008-08-23 05:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

You miss the point, and as has been the case in general twist the post to mean things it didn't say.

I never said I blamed Barack Obama personally for those dumb-asses comments.  What I did say is that if they continued to act like they were they could cause a lot of delegates to not vote for Obama.  If that does happen, Obama has no one to blame but his supporters, who stand by and allow individuals to act in such a way and in their/his name.  I know for a fact that his campaign and the DNC are aware of incidents like these going on, yes on both sides, but the clear aggressor's have been Obama people.  Now, before you get into a twist, I didn't say all or that every single person who supports Obama feels that way.  I said Obama people.  Those who are serving on the campaign right now and are in Denver on his behalf.

My experience while anecdotal, was my experience and apparently that of a few others also.

by TxDem08 2008-08-23 06:30PM | 0 recs
But too many Obama folks whether

they be delegates or not are missing the point.

YOUR guy won.  To the victor, go the spoils.  But one of the spoils of a primary is that it is the victor's (and his surrogates) job to reach out to us.  

We have something YOU want. OUR VOTES.  And not vice versa.  You don't have anything I want. It's different with Hillary and the other dems that lost.  They are still in the game when it comes to negotiating for power, progress down the road.

ALL I HAVE IS MY VOTE.  And it is mine.  Now I am not a jerk.  I don't need begging. But I do need respect.  Not name calling like what has been going on here for months, even after the DLC made their choice.  And is still going on now.
Either the Obama supporters are very naive, or too arrogant for their own good.

You (collectively not personally) have to suck it up.  Yea, some of us are angry, some REALLY ANGRY, some bitter, some not going to listen anyway.  But it doesn't matter.  In the end, the smart campaign says, "Bite your tongue... reach out...this is not the end game ...November is."

See what I mean???

by Jjc2008 2008-08-23 08:07PM | 0 recs
Re: But too many Obama folks whether

Please understand that many of us BO supporters have tried to reach out to HRC supporters. Yes, most HRC supporters are now Obama backers.  However, folks who keep telling us we need to reach out to them are starting to seem a bit unreachable.

Forget the jerks who are sore winners.  If you are looking to them to decide your vote, you'll be disappointed.  Look at what the candidates stand for and where their values are.  If you honestly cannot choose Obama and prefer McCain, then please do vote for him.  That doesn't make you a PUMA or a deadender. It makes you someone who is doing what s/he thinks is best for the country.

Keep in mind that the name-calling is a two-way street.  It is not just Obama supporters who have been disrespectful.

by Fluffy Puff Marshmallow 2008-08-23 08:48PM | 0 recs
Re: But too many Obama folks whether

is "deadender" reaching out? when any kind of push back on spin or debate about the significance of something happens is calling everyone racist and/or PUMA indiscriminately reaching out? are random TR's and HR's reaching out? HRC has tried to talk her real hard core supporters out of the Hillary or nobody stance...when will Obama talk to his on the blogs to calm the hell down?

by zerosumgame 2008-08-23 11:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

I totally agree with you, except I'm voting for McCain. There is nothing Obama could do that would make me consider voting for him at this point.

by derridog 2008-08-23 06:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

Thank god!

That means we won't be seeing you around here anymore?

by hocuspocus 2008-08-23 06:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

Possibly. I might visit just to annoy you.  On the other hand, I've been a Democrat since 1964.  I've never voted for a Republican in my life and I'm going to vote for McCain and I'm  not alone.

I think you all at least need to know that there are a lot of people like me out there, just to give you some perspective.

by derridog 2008-08-23 06:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

Bye!

Don't let the door hit you on the way out!  I'm sure you'll have a lot of fun with the Republican party... 'cos, guess what... you aren't a democrat anymore and are not welcome...

We don't negotiate with hostage takers.. and you are trying to win taking the party hostage...  enjoy your bogus power trip.  We will win with you or without you... and when Obama wins... what are you going to do?

I guess you can hang out with the right wingers!  Have fun!

by LordMike 2008-08-23 06:51PM | 0 recs
It cracks me up

How people say "I've voted Dem for 60 years but I'm voting McCain".

Yeah, you'll vote for Dukakis and McGovern but OMG not Barack Hussein!

Whatever. Enjoy your new ideological home:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com

by Neef 2008-08-23 06:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

Whatever, sourpuss. Enjoy the McCain Lemon Party.

by vcalzone 2008-08-23 07:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

So, what makes Barack so much worse than all the other candidates of the past 40 years?

by Covin 2008-08-23 09:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

I am glad you are announcing your bigotry out loud and proud because a McCain presidency will be the end of Roe v Wade and also the overturning of Lawrence v Texas.

I can also see why you would have voted against Goldwater.  After all, even he came around and supported those positions, so everything has come full circle for you.

by gavoter 2008-08-23 09:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

"there are a lot of people like me out there"

Yep, each of them voting against their self-interest and the policies they care about.  But that's what American voters do.

by ProgressiveDL 2008-08-24 04:37AM | 0 recs
Shame you're too old to be drafted.

I hope you have kids.

by lojasmo 2008-08-24 06:27AM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

I never thought that I would vote for a republican, but I think I must this year.  Obama scares me, I just cannot trust him to keep us safe.  My country first.  This makes me very sad but I must vote for my country's future.  

by SueBee 2008-08-23 06:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

I would say that you don't have to vote for a Republican, you can do a write in of an already established candidate or even write in yourself, instead of voting for McCain.

I would plead that you do that before crossing over.  You can also just concentrate on down-ticket races and ignore the National Prez. box.

Noting dissent, doesn't always mean you have to cut your nose off to spite your face.

Please think about it.

by TxDem08 2008-08-23 06:35PM | 0 recs
You can take 'Country First' back to McCain.com

Bugger off.

by Shem 2008-08-23 06:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

Why, is he a closet Islamist who is going to sell us out to Iran?   WTF?!?  Give me 2 solid reasons why you think he wont support America?  

I am sick and tired of this Bullshit from HRC supporters that "He will not support America" but not once piece of evidence behind it.

And I am sorry, saying that it is a gut feeling does not count.

by gavoter 2008-08-23 10:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

I'm not prepared to go that far at all.  However, I will not vote for him as a delegate or as a citizen.

by TxDem08 2008-08-23 06:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

RNC is another page. I think an Pug voting for Obama at their convention would be...wait for it...HOT!

by Jeter 2008-08-24 01:26AM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

Sorry we interfered with your coronation party...  problem is, your candidate needed to be elected, not appointed... and she pissed off a lot of people, enough to lose the nomination...

We suck it up and move on...  Most of us never had their first choice to be president...  but, that's life...

Instead of getting mad at us, you should get mad at your candidate for not reaching out to those she alienated...

We've been trying to reach out to you, but you aren't listening...  

That's fine...  it's your choice... but, remember, you are a democrat, and your job as a delegate is to support the party and its nominee... if you feel that you can't do that, you should really resign your position as delegate.

Otherwise, onwards and forwards... Congratulations on being a delegate... it is a huge honor, and a huge responsiblity... to all of use Democrats who want a Democrat elected...

Please don't forget that... you don't just represent Hillary, you represent all democrats...

by LordMike 2008-08-23 06:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

No offense, but life is full of disappointments and worse ... like the last eight hellish-beyond-belief years.  Suck it up.  Prefer McCain?  

by Tangie3 2008-08-23 04:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

I'm sorry. I take no pleasure in seeing anyone here go. I hope you find something to change your mind before November.

by vcalzone 2008-08-23 04:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

so how many people signed up for you to speak for them?

by zerosumgame 2008-08-23 05:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

Seriously you giant piee of shit, just leave, you are a worthless human being

by Dog Chains 2008-08-23 05:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

foaming at the mouth again?

by zerosumgame 2008-08-23 06:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

oh, and it is noted that you have just outed yourself as another BHO hater

by zerosumgame 2008-08-23 06:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Douchebag Incident aside

"I guess you will never understand."

You're right.

by ProgressiveDL 2008-08-24 04:33AM | 0 recs
Don't forget the keys!

For those in Denver who haven't yet gotten your keys, I've learned that the cheapest way to get a bunch of keys is to just buy blanks (sample pic here.  If those are expensive (more than $1 each), then tsee if they have miscuts (you might need to talk to the manager).  There are a number of locksmiths in Denver, so one assumes great access to the necessary props.  

If you haven't left, don't forget to add any useless keys and keyrings to your packing list!

Those that don't have their specially designed McCain keys can play along too.  They can just pull out their own keys and jingle them at the appropriate time.  

The speaker on the podium can get in the act.  He or She can just tell everybody to start jingling, and say something like:

I know that the 5 or 6 keys you have on your keyring includes only house key, but just imagine that every single one of them is for a separate million dollar house that you own.  I know that's going to take a really good imagination to do, but please try your best anyways.
 

There are probably a million ways to sear onto people's minds how out of touch McCain is.  For those who are going to be there, please help make it happen!
 

by PeterB 2008-08-23 04:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Don't forget the keys!

Yeah, and don't forget to chant U.S.A., U.S.A. Let's show em we're just as patriotic as Repugs.

by venician 2008-08-23 04:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Don't forget the keys!

Wow I was thinking of the same thing!

by hocuspocus 2008-08-23 04:37PM | 0 recs
'not reaching out'

By reports I heard, it was the O-Man who approached Hillary about putting her name in nomination, etc., etc. This whole 'reaching out' crap has become pathological.  Is HRC the first candidate to not win a nomination?  And they had the brass to talk about the Obama 'cult'?   NOTHING would satisfy these whack-jobs short of Obama stepping down in Hillary's favor.  Will the party and country EVER be done with the Clinton circus?

by Tangie3 2008-08-23 04:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes

They've got stalker mentality. Even as she says, "Don't do this, this isn't what I want", they hear, "I secretly do want this, no matter what I might say out loud".

by vcalzone 2008-08-23 04:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes

This should be very interesting. I am looking forward to that and looking forward to how the PUMAs spin it.

As for the delegates, they all took an oath to support the winner, whoever it was.  The Obama delegate was being an ass, but at the same time, the Clinton supporter has to realize that she already took an oath that they would support the Democratic nominee.  At this stage of the game, we shoul not be playing this, "you haven't done enough to win me over" shit.  If there is any delegate in Denver who is not going to support Obama in November, they should not be at the convention, period.

by gavoter 2008-08-23 04:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes

Except that you are just filling in what that Clinton supporter is or isn't doing.

For all we know she might have plastered her garden with Obama yard signs. Or pull double shifts in an Obama campaign office. We don't know, we only know that the Obama supporter was an ass.

As for At this stage (...) the convention, period. It's a nice sentiment but in reality it doesn't work that way. No candidate is automatically entitled to a vote. And simply demanding that people you think should vote a certain actually do so, isn't going to work.

The problem with a democracy is that voters have full autonomy over their vote, no matter how stupid they wish to act with that vote, no matter how much they'll hurt there own causes and ideals. For a cause or candidate there is no entitlement to any vote, anytime anyplace.

That why we always have to make sure we do everything we can to actually get those votes. It's up to us to get voters to grant us their vote. And that means that we always do what we can to get them on our side and make them stay there. That how it works. We want something from them. We might wish that is was they who wanted something from us and that we could simply demand that they fork their vote over but that's not how it works in reality.

Insulting somebody whose disposition to our candidate we don't even know is unforgivable. It's us that want something from them, not the reverse. This "joke" might have cost us a vote.

by Ernst 2008-08-23 06:33PM | 0 recs
I'm uncomfortable with that philosophy

A citizen's vote is his voice in the democracy. Are to supposed to co-opt their voices to fulfill our platforms? Is someone's say in America so cheap that it can be bought for a kind word?

We need to start pushing responsibility back on the voters, not corralling them into pens to be milked for their votes.

Presidential campaigns have become one huge marketing contest, a massive sales push, and that is ultimately damaging to the country.

by Neef 2008-08-23 07:12PM | 0 recs
Re: I'm uncomfortable with that philosophy

It is strange that you can twist my words into that after reading my comment where I say that voters have complete ownership and authority over their votes something.

If you can tell me how insulting voters will lead to "pushing responsibility back on the voters" I'm all ears.

In the mean while I'll keep on pointing to the responsibility people have when they represent a candidate that they have to do so in a civil manner and not try to claim a vote merely on their personal judgment instead that of the voter. Secure in the knowledge that in no way does that resemble "corralling them into pens to be milked for their votes"

by Ernst 2008-08-23 09:01PM | 0 recs
I wasn't trying to twist them

and if anything, it was this passage that prompted my response:

We want something from them. We might wish that is was they who wanted something from us and that we could simply demand that they fork their vote over but that's not how it works in reality.

This shouldn't be, in my opinion, a transaction between us and them. Yes, we should educate voters, yes we should treat them respectfully - but not for the sole purpose of landing their vote for OUR candidate. Voter education is a public service for the country's good - educated voters are better voters - whoever they finally pick.

I didn't intend to sound critical of your particular comment, my response was a fairly navel-gazing piece of philosophy. A result of the late hour, perhaps. But I was thinking of the flaws in the system at large, when I wrote what I did.

by Neef 2008-08-23 10:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes

I think you may need to read the rules of the convention, before you make those type of comments.

by TxDem08 2008-08-23 07:02PM | 0 recs
Re: I think the rules though

IF there is a pervasive air to the delegates, such as what we are discussing, you could be in for a 2nd or even a 3rd ballot.

For Obama to win, he has to win the 2116 delegates (I believe that is the number-anyone?) on the first ballot.  If he does, then there is no 2nd ballot.  It will be intersting to see.

The VP ballot goes the same way.  It will also be interesting to see if Obama pulls a Mondale, and squash's the vote.

by TxDem08 2008-08-23 07:07PM | 0 recs
Re: There's no way

Who's talking about her winning?  Clearly you don't get what occurs at a Convention.

There will be a roll call, and if Obama clinches more than 2116 delegates there won't be a 2nd roll-call.  It's that simple.  If he doesn't there will be.  On the 2nd ballot, she can withdraw or I believe the term is decline the ballot, but on the first, if Obama  doesn't clinch the required delegates, it's game on.

by TxDem08 2008-08-23 08:27PM | 0 recs
Re: With the vast majority of superdelegates

Where are you getting this notion that all New York's automatic delegates are voting for Obama? Rep. Loretta Sanchez told the Politico that as much as half the House Democrats will vote for Clinton, and one NY Rep predicted that 30-40% of the NY delegation would vote for Clinton. I don't see all of them defecting unless she asked them to. They still have to raise money for their races in NY, and you may not have noticed but Obama doesn't share.

by souvarine 2008-08-23 09:10PM | 0 recs
Re: With the vast majority of superdelegates

heh heh another bitter middle aged woman!

by hocuspocus 2008-08-23 09:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Rep. Carolyn McCarthy

Of course they all endorsed Obama, Clinton herself endorsed him. That doesn't mean they'll vote for him on the first roll-call. And yes, Clinton apparently intends to vote for Obama, but so far she has not released her delegates. Obviously some NY superdelegates will vote for Obama, likely most, but I see no evidence for your claim that "all the New Yorkers are voting for Obama." I doubt that would happen unless Clinton specifically asked them all to.

Politico doesn't identify the NY Rep. making the 30-40% claim.

by souvarine 2008-08-23 10:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Anthony Weiner

How will her supporters feel if she takes her name out? Depends on how it goes down but I suspect many of them would feel she gave in to another wave of WWTSBQ. Decisions have consequences, Obama controls the convention, each of these moves signal to voters the value he places on their votes.

by souvarine 2008-08-23 10:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Gave In?

Google it.

Ah, if your question is how I would react then that is different. I would check in with my friends who work for her, and with my friends who work for Obama, to get the scoop, and react accordingly.

But you asked how Clinton supporters here would react. There is a persistent feeling, fair or not, that she has been pushed out in part because of her gender. If Obama handles the nomination process poorly then he will reinforce that feeling, since as you have been pointing out he has near complete control of the course of the convention.

by souvarine 2008-08-23 11:14PM | 0 recs
it's not hopeless

Fortunately you are not Obama. He tends to follow Saul Alinsky's advice: "I start from where the world is, as it is, not as I would like it to be."

The truth that Clinton or Obama know, or you or I know, or our friends know, is largely immaterial. What matters in an election is how the voters perceive things. How Obama runs the convention, and how he chooses to recognize the votes of the 18 million people who voted for Clinton, will impact that perception. You may think it's crap, but the perception that Clinton's gender affected how she was treated is out there, and Obama has to be careful not to reinforce that perception.

by souvarine 2008-08-24 12:08AM | 0 recs
Re: it's not hopeless

With acronyms like WWTSBQ running around, it's kind of irrelevant what he does.  It was Clinton supporters who coined that delightful phrase, yes?

by Jess81 2008-08-24 01:02AM | 0 recs
Re: Gave In?

Um, let's see.  I do think she wants to have a political career after this little shin-dig, don't you?

Howard Dean and Pelosi made it clear if she pushed and fought at the convention, she would lose support.  It happens all the time in politics, however, we would all like to think that the Democratic part, was at least still Democratic.  Clearly we know that it's all politics, and Democratic if you're in the majority or have the power to wield.

Look at how long it took for Kennedy to rise back to prominence after 1980.

by TxDem08 2008-08-24 04:39AM | 0 recs
Re: Gave In?

forgot to include this...

"There is no way that Senator Clinton is going to win enough
delegates to get the nomination," Leahy said. "She ought to withdraw and she ought to be backing Senator Obama. Now, obviously that's a decision that only she can make. Frankly I feel that she would have a tremendous career in the Senate."

She should quit now...

"If the votes of the superdelegates overturn what's happened in the elections," said Pelosi, "it would be harmful to the Democratic Party."

Ignoring that superdelegates can vote in which ever manner they chose, and can vote for anyone they chose to, all the way up to the Convention.

"Dean:I need them(superdelegates) to say who they're for starting now.  They really do need to do that.  We cannot give up 2 or 3 months of active campaigning and healing time."

Thereby-violating DNC rules, as superdelegates DO NOT have to indicate who they are for and their "votes" don't count until the election.  By trying to count them as part of the pleged delegate counts, they were inflating the numbers and trying to force an ending to the Primary and thereby force Clinton out of  the race.

by TxDem08 2008-08-24 04:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Because she lost

I don't think Hillary wants a divisive floor fight.  I don't think anyone said anything of the sort, except for you.  However, she will and does want a roll-call, and there will be one.  The VP roll-call, well that's another topic and another story.

What I was showing, was how she was forced out, ala, the topic of the diary.

by TxDem08 2008-08-24 05:17PM | 0 recs
Obama doesn't share?

Remember that Obama gave more from his PAC to supers than Clinton did?

Perhaps you could write a diary about his muslim faith?

by lojasmo 2008-08-24 07:03AM | 0 recs
Re: With the vast majority of superdelegates

Just a couple of quick things...

1st, he didn't have 2116 delegates in June.  If he did there wouldn't be a roll-call.  Super-delegates (or unpledged as they are correctly termed) don't count or I should say are offical until they actually sign-in and vote at the Convention.

2nd, you can't release super-delegates, they were never pledged to anyone in the first place and can change their minds all the way up until the convention.  Hence, their correct designation as "Un-pledged" delegates.

3rd, not all of the NY delegation will be voting for Obama.  The members of the delegation who are in the Congress will (I believe I read that), but there 232 delegates from NY, of which 139 of them are Clinton "pledged" delegates.  So even if all of the Congress members from NY vote for him, a majority will still vote for Clinton.

by TxDem08 2008-08-24 04:33AM | 0 recs
Re: Yes

Her supporters do.

PUMA don't.

PUMA /= HRC supporters

PUMA=GOP

by chrisblask 2008-08-23 04:56PM | 0 recs
Yes, Hillary is THE FIRST with 18 MILLION

votes.  Do you really want to turn off even 10% of those voters?  

Let us know how that works out for ya.  

by SueBee 2008-08-23 06:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

tomorrow...
at around 9 a.m.
if ya snooze ya lose..
recreate68 starting the major
anti-war rally and march from Civic Center Park..

me I will be funkin' the War on 16th Street..

http://tentstate.org/funkthewar.htm

If ya have been downtown..then maybe ya saw a little of what's goin' on...

Have ya seen the "freedom Cage?

http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1593375 /20080822/id_0.jhtml

our legal team recorded 85 arrests today..

http://cbs4denver.com/local/denver.conve ntion.holding.2.799498.html

if ya get the chance...check out
http://sfpj.org/Students_for_Peace_and_J ustice/Home_files/FINAL%20ARD%20Schedule .htm

tap yer toes...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzORu1dqE E0

Hope ya can stop by City of Cuernavaca Park..

by nogo postal 2008-08-23 04:49PM | 0 recs
Well clearly some of these folks need a lesson

in democracy and the respect of the process thereof...

by louisprandtl 2008-08-23 05:09PM | 0 recs
I'm flip-flopping already

McCain style back from Bayh to Biden after of course, favoring Biden to Bayh just five days earlier.  Judging from the poll I took of the wiser people in my pro-HRC but cool-to-Obama family, Biden was a hit; Biden connected in the same way that she did, so hopefully, Joe will get Obama into the door of those 11% undecided Clinton dems.

by Blazers Edge 2008-08-23 05:23PM | 0 recs
Re: I'm flip-flopping already

I dont' see where you get 11%.  The NBC/Wall St. journal poll out last week, indidcated that 47% of Clinton voters still haven't moved for Obama.  53% will, so out of 18 million, roughly a little over 8 million have not moved behind Obama.

Do you remember the difference in '04?  I'll help...3.2 million.

Biden is great, but I don't know if he makes up even 3.2 million votes.

by TxDem08 2008-08-23 07:17PM | 0 recs
Erm

McCain is pulling 89% of Repugs, at the moment.

He and Obama are roughly tied in the polls, with Obama having a marginal lead.

Are you saying that 53% of Democratic voters are enough pull even with (or slightly pass) 89% of Republican voters?

I doubt we outnumber them by that much.

by Neef 2008-08-23 08:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Erm

The 53% you mention, are Clinton supporters I was referencing.

I believe Gallup has the breakdown according to them at 79% registerd DEM's (only 1000 sample size)...so even at that rate, we may not have enough.

Clearly not w/out more of the 47% of those Clinton supporters who were on the fence before today.

by TxDem08 2008-08-23 08:24PM | 0 recs
Yes, good catch

about the 53%. That's 53% of 50%, my bad.

But we're still ahead in the polls, and if the election was held today, we'd win. That's a very different perspective from your original post, which seem to indicate an 8 million person shortfall.

In other words, we are already winning without the 53%.

Now, don't get me wrong. I do not see this as any reason for complacency. The GOP numbers might increase. Dem ID might fall. It's still close.

But we're putting out an unprecedented GOTV effort, which could add 1-2%. We are nowhere near requiring all, or even many, of the 8 million.

Again, not dismissing anyone, just looking at the raw numbers.

by Neef 2008-08-23 08:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Erm

Also, don't forget that these polls are all done only to landlines.  It totally leaves out millions of younger voters (like myself) who have only a cell phone.  Obama's poll numbers are likely to be underestimated, as a result.  Obviously, many of those younger votes won't vote, but many will.

by ProgressiveDL 2008-08-24 04:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Sore winners

Are you still recruiting?

by mikeinsf 2008-08-23 06:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's got that covered.

Give me three practical things he could do right now to win over PUMAs and holdouts that he hasn't done.  Three.

by mikeinsf 2008-08-24 10:04AM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

Here's what's going to happen...they're going to get to New York's roll call. Clinton will speak and then release her delegates. There probably won't be a second vote.

by applejackking 2008-08-23 06:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

Um, no.  If Obama wins more than 2116 delegates on the first ballot, there is no 2nd ballot.  He will clinch the nomination.

It's that simple.  I don't know if he does that though on the first ballot.  If it does come to a 2nd ballot, that's when Clinton may release her delegates.  Or she can decline a 2nd ballot.  But I don't think so.

by TxDem08 2008-08-23 07:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

How truly sad - y'all can't even be civil in an open thread that's pointing out the problem of a lack of unity.

by ejintx 2008-08-23 07:01PM | 0 recs
Re: No Clintonites, No Mr. President

All this tit for tat between Clinton die hards & Obamamaniacs boils down to one simple & factual statement applicable for November 2008.

Bottom line boys & girls....

If anywhere from even 15% to 20% of Clinton democrats abandon Obama this November, there will be No President Obama.

Lets rephrase that for the slow folks.

In this expected closerace between Obama & McCain, there is virtually No Way Barack Obama can win this closeelection & 270 electoral votes if as little as 1/5 of Democrats decide to either vote for McCain or simply stay home.

Who are these crazy Clintonistas? There are 99% registered democrats.  Majority of them fall into one of these groups:

Blue collar whites
White Women
Seniors
Latinos
Asians

Basically, All Key Democratic groups.

If even 15% to 25% ( polls currently show anywhere from 20% to as high as 30% are either non-committal, shaky, or outright do not plan to vote for Obama)of these democrats decide to Not Support Obama 9 weeks from now, there will be No President Barack Obama.

The so called "white youth vote" combined with black voters will not be enough to carry Obama to victory in the electoral college without help from working class whites, women, seniors & Latinos.

What's the lesson in all these challenges ?

The responsibility to solve this serious problem  falls squarely on Obama & his fans. If they want to ensure an Obama victory, they will have to work their ass off reaching out to Clinton loyalists.

That's the real score. That's life! And yes, fair or unfair, that's reality.

There will be No Miracle crossover from white  moderate republicans or millions of white independent voters towards Obama.

Obama needs a SOLID Democratic base to win !

There is No other route to victory in 2008 .

Either the base pushes him to the top or it will be a very long November night.

by labanman 2008-08-23 07:07PM | 0 recs
Re: No Clintonites, No Mr. President

Someone who finally understands the big picture.  And with the Republican's getting re-awakened by the closeness of the race, and realizing that they may indeed have a shot at reclaiming the White House, they will in the next 72 days push like never before.

In '04 the margin of difference was 3.2 million.  If 25% of the Clinton voters don't turn out, that's 4.5 million.  If the 47%, that the WSJ/NBC poll had last week comes true (don't think it will be that high, but you never know) that's 8.4 million.

Not good.

by TxDem08 2008-08-23 07:28PM | 0 recs
Re: No Clintonites, No Mr. President

Well, if you look at every poll ever you may realize that Obama is doing fine in the above-mentioned groups. If you hadn't noticed, Obama is winning.

by LandStander 2008-08-23 07:37PM | 0 recs
Re: No Clintonites, No Mr. President

If you consider treading water in a year in which the DEM's should be landsliding the political landscape is doing fine, well, okay I guess.

And yes, Obama is winning...by 1 percentage point.  We are 72 days out, the race is within the margin and Obama may have knowingly cut off just under 3 million voters at the minimum in the above scenario.

Tell me, does 1 pt, make up more than 3 million votes?

by TxDem08 2008-08-23 07:56PM | 0 recs
Re: No Clintonites, No Mr. President

Hillary would have done no better... in fact, even worse, since she wasn't going out and registering new voters...  current polling bears this out, even with no attacks against her, she's still polling the same as Obama...

With those 3 million voters you gain, you lose 2 million independents... Nate at fivethirtyeight.com has the full analysis...

Hillary Clinton is not as popular as you think...

by LordMike 2008-08-23 09:23PM | 0 recs
Bullsh*t

Anybody who refuses to vote for Obama because Hillary didn't win is INSANE.  Yes, I'm shouting.  Get over it.  Listen to Sen. Clinton herself.  Get over it.  Your candidate lost, end of story.  Now go out and work your asses off for the Democratic candidate, or see all the important social issues you care about disappear.  One more right wing Supreme Court Justice and...

by NM Ward Chair 2008-08-23 07:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Bullsh*t

You can SHOUT all you want, b/c clearly you haven't read or even understood the discussion.

You need to GET OVER IT and realize that some people are not voting for him because of the petty juvenile reason you have created.

I'm already worried about the 'important social issues' and Obama has put them in danger with his VP pick.  Now YOU go out and work your ass off, because if he fails, it will be soley on his and your shoulders.

And HE will have place one more right wing SCOTUS for us to deal with.

by TxDem08 2008-08-23 08:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Bullsh*t

Hardly... If Hillary supporters stay home, then it is Hillary supporters who are standing in the way of  what you claim is important to you...

Exactly what purpose do you serve by supporting Republicans in this manner?  How does that further your goals?  How is it anything but petty revenge over identity politics?

From what you have written so far, it seems questionable how committed you are to fulfilling you oath to support the nominee ('cos you clearly don't).  Perhaps you should remove yourself as a delegate, if you cannot fulfill the responsibilities of the position.

by LordMike 2008-08-23 09:26PM | 0 recs
Re: You're right

Obama supporters insulting Clinton supporters at every turn is not mature, and it's stupid to boot.  

by slynch 2008-08-23 09:44PM | 0 recs
Re: You're right

but you guys make is so easy!

by hocuspocus 2008-08-23 09:48PM | 0 recs
Re: You're right

I'm not a Clinton supporter.

by slynch 2008-08-24 09:00AM | 0 recs
Re: You're right

I have yet to see a single Clinton supporter treat Obama and his supporters with any respect on this site or on Talk left or on Hillaryis44 or any of the dozens of other Hillary sites.

Sorry, I am done trying to make nice.  You want to keep being a hater go ahead.  But you do realize that if Obama does not win the Democrats wont have a chance to win the White House again until 2020.  

I have no doubt that if Obama were to lose that Hillary would be the nominee in 2012 and you can take my word that if her supporters refuse to help Obama then millions of us will do everything we can to see that she loses in 2012.

Tit for tat.

by gavoter 2008-08-23 10:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Probably not

that's ridiculous.  Both sides are being equally immature.  You're no better

by slynch 2008-08-24 09:02AM | 0 recs
Re: At least

not everyone.  In fact, there was a substantial number of Obama supporters who said that they would not vote for HRC if she "stole" the nomination from him.  Of course, the assumption there was that it was his to be stolen.  And this simply wasn't true until the very end.

I think there are just as many HRC supporters who say they will vote for Obama as there are Obama supporters who said they would vote for her if she won.

by slynch 2008-08-24 10:00PM | 0 recs
Sheer projection. eom

by NM Ward Chair 2008-09-08 05:04PM | 0 recs
Re: You're right

But, you're not Clinton supporters. You're "The Clinton Who Shines Just like Polished Gold" supporters.

Hillary Clinton, the junior senator from New York, supports Barack Obama for President. Anyone who really supports her will do the same. Anyone who doesn't is worshipping an idol of their own making, and is interested only in undermining the Democratic nominee and electing a Republican. I'm happy to insult them at every opportunity.

by BobzCat 2008-08-23 11:45PM | 0 recs
And we get?

What you said:


If anywhere from even 15% to 20% of Clinton democrats abandon Obama this November, there will be No President Obama.

Exactly. So my question to you, Obama supporters, is very simple. It is:
And we get?

Why don't you start with a health care plan that isn't fake? Should be single payer, but I'll cut you some slack.

(Yeah, FISA's a lost cause. Too bad about that.)

by lambertstrether 2008-08-23 08:53PM | 0 recs
Re: And we get?

Well, if Hillary can manage to get her plan passed in both houses, you will get her health care plan...  (which isn't any closer to single payer than anyone else's plan, BTW)...

So, there's one thing.... oh, and you'll get to keep abortion and contraception rights in the next SCOTUS...  that's pretty important, I would think, too...

These are just a few things off the top of my head, really...

by LordMike 2008-08-23 09:16PM | 0 recs
Re: And we get?

Er, no.

You're telling me about something I'm going to get later if I give my suport to you now.

But I want something from you now, and my support will come after that.

See? Very simple. Just as soon as you get over it.

by lambertstrether 2008-08-23 09:25PM | 0 recs
Re: And we get?

Well, what do you want?  I've got a twelve of Yeungling in my fridge... we can have a beer and talk it over... that's about all I can personally offer you right now...

What exactly are you getting at?  What do you want form us right now?

by LordMike 2008-08-23 09:28PM | 0 recs
Re: And we get?

I'll take a Yeungling if you're sharing.  

by Fluffy Puff Marshmallow 2008-08-23 09:39PM | 0 recs
Re: And we get?

Sure! :-)  I had someone bring me a case after their vacation in upstate New York... good stuff!

by LordMike 2008-08-23 09:44PM | 0 recs
Re: And we get?

Screw that. We don't owe you people shit. You sound like a child throwing a temper tantrum.

What you get from voting for Obama is an administration which will implement 90% of the policies a Clinton administration would. An election isn't about NOW, it's always been about the future.

If that's not enough, too bad. Obama shouldn't have to hand out lollipops and chocolate bars to win over the votes of thinking adults.

If McCain gets elected, you'll get what you deserve.

by Covin 2008-08-23 09:47PM | 0 recs
Re: And we get?

How about a moratorium on this epidemic of crappy troll and hide rating now going on again?

Regarding the post itself:

How about an economic policy designed not solely to benefit the rich?  How about some continued protection of the environment?  How about not treating the oil industry like it is our very best pal?

I'm actually not as concerned about abortion and family planning issues, I think they are writ in stone at this point.  I am concerned with economic equity, poverty, our outlook on the rest of the world, and most of all, environmental safeguards.  

I hope you are too, enough to get beyond the primary battle.  

by mady 2008-08-24 05:13AM | 0 recs
Re: No Clintonites, No Mr. President

Bye Bye you bigot.  

First of all, Latinos and Asians are strongly behind Obama now.  All that is left is older white people.  Hmm,   what reason could older white people have with Obama???

And just so you know, the base is NOT  repeat NOT older white women,  it never has been,  It is younger single women, regardless of race.   Middle aged women supported Bush is both 2000 and 2004, so this is not a natural constituency of the Democratic Party.

The only thing that matters with women is marital status, not age.   Single women vote Dem and Married women vote GOP.

by gavoter 2008-08-23 10:06PM | 0 recs
Re: No Clintonites, No Mr. President

I'm sorry, this is not helpful.

by mady 2008-08-24 05:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread
Christians are obligated by their belief in Christ to follow the teachings of Him .
People need to read the new testament, even if you don't believe. Buy wholesale electronics and Memory cards to see what hypocrites the President and the fascist right really are bluetooth headset.
by rolex 2008-08-23 07:30PM | 0 recs
Ad idea

I was just thinking of an ad idea that Obama should go with....

It would show one person on the screen and he/she goes "I love $4 a gallon gas"

Cut to the next person and they go "I the rising unemployment we've had"

Next, "I love (insert number here) Americans not able to get health care"

Next, "I love myself not being able to find a job"

Next, etc, etc, etc

Then the last person goes "I LOVE the way the past 8 years have been going and that's why I'm supporting John McCain because I KNOW I can expect more of the same"

by werd2406 2008-08-23 08:22PM | 0 recs
by Jeter 2008-08-23 10:03PM | 0 recs
Re: It's been done. Really well.

Ah! Very nice! Well it needs to be shortened up a bit, but it can definitely be effective with a similar ad like that on the air.

by werd2406 2008-08-23 10:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

The whole process is a sham.  

by nzubechukwu 2008-08-23 08:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

Perhaps I am a little off-topic with this....

but POLITICO is reporting that:

John McCain is seriously considering COLIN POWELL.   I was wondering what your thoughts was on that?    

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/080 8/12753.html

BTW:   Wasn't Colin suppose to endorse Obama anytime now.  Whatever happened to that?

by newmexicodem 2008-08-23 08:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

Yeah, it's been talked about before... not sure how much it helps having an AA on his ticket... not like any AA voters are going to switch to McCain, and he might turn off a lot of his racist base with that pick...

by LordMike 2008-08-23 09:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

The article states he's considering Powell....it doesn't say Powell is considering McCain. McCain could be considering Superman for all that article is worth in terms of information.

Also, McCain is just another term of Bush on Iraq and we know that Powell hates the way Bush has been running Iraq

by werd2406 2008-08-23 09:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

The cool thing about having Superman on the ticket is he can turn back time.  That way, they can keep trying out various campaign strategies, see what sticks and just keep replaying the election until McCain wins.  

Downside is, would we trust someone with X-Ray vision to be VP?  Dunno, maybe tho.

Don't think we've ever had a VP who wore a cape.

by Fluffy Puff Marshmallow 2008-08-23 10:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

Not true. I'm pretty sure Bush still sleeps in his Batman PJ's.

by werd2406 2008-08-23 10:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

I think that Powell is pretty disenchanted with the Republican party right now, and considering McCain's stance on Iraq... I'm not sure that Powell would want to be accepted.

That said, I bet that Powell never endorses Obama, but might say some nice things about the Illinois Senator throughout the campaign.

by fbihop 2008-08-23 09:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

Also, he's abortion rights....can you imagine the right wing if McCain put a black, abortion rights candidate who's against the Iraq war on the ticket?

by werd2406 2008-08-23 10:33PM | 0 recs
Reaching out?

You mean, like giving Bill  and Hillary prime speaking spots at the convention, or suggesting that Hillary's name placed in the roll call?

Seriously.  What would it take for Hillary supporters to feel respected?  

This is why the republicans basically own the WH.  Dems are idiots.  

Are Hillary supporters really going to vote McCain or stay home?  

I wonder how many SCOTUS justices are needed to reverse abortion rights?  Wasn't there a recent hire by the Department of Justice in the Civil Rights division?  

Republicans know how to win elections and democrats are going to have to get their crap together or we will be looking at a President McCain.  

by zmus 2008-08-23 08:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Reaching out?

"Are Hillary supporters really going to vote McCain or stay home? "

-------

Yes. Or third party Nader. Or write in.

by hwc 2008-08-23 10:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Reaching out?

Amazing.  I would have happily voted for Hillary.  In a New York minute.  

I find it beyond unthinkable that a Hillary supporter would see a McCain presideny as A OK.  That's twisted thinking.  And it's the kind of thinking that McCain is praying for.  

by zmus 2008-08-23 11:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Reaching out?

"Amazing. I would have happily voted for Hillary. In a New York minute."

----------

Well, I guess the party should have considered which candidate could bring the various factions together. I mean, the trendlines were pretty obvious as the nominee took beating after beating among white voters in key swing states like Florida, Michigan, Penns, and Ohio. As well as Democratic bastions like Massachusetts, New York, and California.

But, that's all water under the bridge now. The DNC did what it had to do in Florida and Michigan to get their candidate. And, we'll see how it works out in November not only for the nominee but in downticket races where superdelegates thumbed their noses at the voters in their own districts and states. That's the great thing about our political system. Direct accountability to the voters.

by hwc 2008-08-23 11:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Reaching out?

To be fair, Republicans are idiots too.  They just know how to hold their nose and vote en masse.

by ProgressiveDL 2008-08-24 05:00AM | 0 recs
Reaching out to voters

Using Clinton isn't enough.

Obama allowed his campaign to engage in vicious ad hominem attacks against these voters during the primary, not Clinton.  Its Obama they need to hear from and continuing to talk to them through Clinton is going to hurt him even more.

He also needs to get his storm troopers under control and stop with the "get on the bus b*tch" message framing.

by Betsy McCall 2008-08-24 08:33AM | 0 recs
Stages of grief trope considered toxic

Here and here.

If Obama's supporters had any sense of how demeaning, and just plain wrong, the stages of grief trope is, they'd stop pushing it.

But they don't. And maybe they would anyhow.

Good to see that, in Biden, Obama picked someone who voted against the AUMF. At least there's some consistency. Oh, wait....

by lambertstrether 2008-08-23 08:49PM | 0 recs
Great links there

a real gem:

1. None of these oh-so-sympathetic posters ever mention that, in the classical model originated by Kübler-Ross, following acceptance, you die. So the Stages trope is really a sophisticated variant of the calls for Hillary's death--and by extension, those of her supporters.

(my emphasis)

So, sympathetic Obama supporters are calling for the extermation of HRC et voters. Mmmm...yeah.

When faced with logic like this, do you really wonder why we flail madly trying to comprehend?

by Neef 2008-08-23 09:00PM | 0 recs
When faced with ignorance like yours...

... it's easy to see why the party's in the shape it's in. In fact, calls for Hillary's death were a constant feature, this primary season.

Just a little homework, just a little awareness, and you don't have to flail! See how easy?

by lambertstrether 2008-08-23 09:28PM | 0 recs
Oh no you don't

So one guy saying Hillary should be "put away" (which I find egregious, but that's beside the point) means it's rational to assume "stages of grief" is a call for the death of Hillary's supporters?

Poor use of psych diagnosis is equivalent to a wish for mass murder? That is exactly what that quote I gave you says, that we wish for your death when we say you're going through stages.

See, I find that certifiably batshit insane, and I'm not sure how much homework it would take to reveal the epiphany that leads to such a conclusion.

In fact, I'm sure you can't explain it, and presumably you've been involved for quite a while.

by Neef 2008-08-23 09:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Oh no you don't

PUMA's are delusional and hysterical.

by Fistjab 2008-08-23 11:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Oh no you don't

So are people who post simplistic Kossian war chants like this. It seems they really believe that by reducing every non-Obama love slave to a PUMA or worse, consign them to death, that will increase Obama's chances of winning. If Obama loses, it signals the death of the groupthink "everybody is a troll" netroots strategey. And thank Kos!

by cad 2008-08-24 12:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Stages of grief trope considered toxic

I agree.  Everyone should cut out the stages of grief stuff.

I'd also recommend that people stop demanding that every single Obama supporter treat all HRC supporters with kid gloves at all times.  That encourages snarky responses.

Look at all the candidates.  Consider what they stand for.  Vote for the one you believe will do the best job as president.  Forget the condescending jerks (including me).

by Fluffy Puff Marshmallow 2008-08-23 09:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

I'm glad I moved to Vegas. I just saw The Family Stone minus Sly and a few others, for free. Obama is making a major play in this state, and we might could pick up a house seat here in Vegas, stay tuned I'll let ya'll hear about it.

by Drewid 2008-08-23 09:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

Welcome to Vegas! Yes, Obama does hopefully have a good shot at turning NV blue, I think alot of it will come down to ground game and thankfully his is good here.

And Titus looks to be in a strong position to finally take out Porter!

by werd2406 2008-08-23 09:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

William Kristol is now firmly behind Hillary as VP.  You know, Kristol who is a major player in neoconservative circles.  William Kristol who helped lead the fight against Hillary's health care in 1994.    The same Kristol who was firmly behind the impeachment.  The same Kristol who is foreign policy advisor to John McCain.

Do you honestly think that he really gives two shits about HRC?   But, he is writing all kinds of nice things about her in his latest column.

Don't let yourself be fooled by right wing hacks.  They are working overtime to stir up dissent.   They are going to praise Clinton up one side and down the other, but are 100% opposed to everything she beleives in.

by gavoter 2008-08-23 10:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

Which explains McCain's new ad crying crocodile tears about Hillary being passed over. It's just to stir the pot and fracture the party. Which apparently is working to some die hard supporters...

by werd2406 2008-08-23 11:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Sore winners

I really hope you're being paid for this. Otherwise, the way you're spending your time is such a waste of human life it makes me sad.

by BobzCat 2008-08-23 11:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

""Oh they're letting you in here, are they?"

Which is a short way of saying Obama supporter arrogance could well cost us this election.

by Bob H 2008-08-24 03:53AM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

Obama could offer these people the moon and they would say, but I wanted the stars.  What the frigg, Hillary lost.  It is kind of creepy that they can get over Hillary.  My son tells me to never fall in love with your candidate because in the end they will just disappoint you.  JRE did that to us supporters of his. That is why it is more important to be a democrat than to be just for a person.  That way you are for the democrats any way you go.

by Spanky 2008-08-24 04:05AM | 0 recs
Re: Denver Open Thread

can't get over Hillary, not can get over Hillary

by Spanky 2008-08-24 04:52AM | 0 recs
Welcome to politics

Pretty standard for winning primary candidates is doing what they need to do to win over their opponent's supporters.

This wouldn't be such a problem if Obama and his campaign talked more clearly about issues and his agenda.  You can't sway these voters just by using branding and slogans.  Contrary to the primary meme, Clinton supporters are not "low information" voters. Most are experienced Dem party activists who are very informed on the issues and want to hear Obama speak clearly on them.

by Betsy McCall 2008-08-24 08:28AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads