Obama's May 20 Bash: A Cynical Replay of Election Night 2000 (with update)

Think not??

I'll take you back to that fateful night in a moment.

But first, listen to strategist David Axelrod on WCCO, the CBS affiliate in Minneapolis, MN the night of the May 8 Indiana and North Carolina primaries. (The video is the top left "thumbnail" located just above the video player in the event the current news plays rather than the Axelrod video; you will also have to endure a short Coldstone Creamery ad).

http://wcco.com/national/obama.victory.p lan.2.719166.html

He talks about the "inside baseball" of the delegate situation, then pins Clinton with the upcoming "train wreck" which will happen if she stays in the race until the upcoming Rules Committee meeting. Then he gets on his high horse and indignantly proclaims that "the IDEA of Hillary Clinton contesting the validity of Obama's DECLARATION as the nominee of the Democratic Party is really a near nightmare and for Obama it's is just a thorn in his side" at a point where he should be focusing McCain. (This after admitting that neither candidate has the delegates to win outright (but he as the "majority" of them, Axelrod rationalizes) and that Obama himself hasn't sealed the deal because of his own primary loses. The whole situation is really a great inconvenience and indignity being put in Obama's way. Horrors if voters in the remaining states are allowed to actually express their preferences!

Now, let's go back to Election Night 2000. This should refresh your memory:

Blog  continues at:
http://tinyurl.com/45psse

(difficulty getting the formatting right here)

Tags: 2008 Primaries, Al Gore, Barack Obama, David axelrod, Democratic Party, election 2000, Florida, Hillary Clinton, May 20, superdelegates (all tags)

Comments

27 Comments

wow, fake outrage

by kindthoughts 2008-05-12 06:32PM | 0 recs
Re: wow, fake outrage

very intelligent response.  wow.

by TexasDarlin 2008-05-12 07:34PM | 0 recs
you know what the say

if you ask a stupid question, you get a stupid answer. Same applies to crappy fake diaries

by kindthoughts 2008-05-12 11:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's May 20 Bash: A Cynical Replay of Elect

It is the most normal thing in nomination races to announce when you've clinched the nomination. McCain did it earlier this year. Kerry did it in 2004. Gore and Bush did it in 2000.  ETC.  

by politicsmatters 2008-05-12 06:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's May 20 Bash: A Cynical Replay of Elect

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe McCain celebrated once he actually reached the requisite number of delegates, not a percentage of that number.  It just reeks of desperation, imo.  

by TexasDarlin 2008-05-12 07:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's May 20 Bash: A Cynical Replay of Elect

You would know...

by comingawakening 2008-05-12 08:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's May 20 Bash: A Cynical Replay of Elect

Including a certain Bill Clinton in 1992.

by interestedbystander 2008-05-13 03:03AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's May 20 Bash: A Cynical Replay of Elect

And I cannot imagine Obama getting on his high horse and getting indignant about Clinton leaving the race. He has not done that even once and it would clearly be terrible politics for him to do it at that point.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-12 06:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's May 20 Bash: A Cynical

are we still whining about this?

by obamaovermccain 2008-05-12 06:36PM | 0 recs
Before you work yourself into a dither...

Before you work yourself into a dither perhaps you should wait to see if this supposed party happens and what form it takes? If he simply announces that he now has a majority of all available elected delegates would he not be correct? Is he not allowed to say it?

by Obama Independent 2008-05-12 06:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's May 20 Bash: A Cynical Replay of Elect

Respectfully, this seems like you are making a case for guilt by analogy. Both cases are of one party using media momentum to their advantage. That has no direct bearing on the validity of their underlying claims.

A long, detailed examination of a extremely close race in 2000 shows Gore may well have been the winner, or at least shows significant irregularities in certain counties.

Now, Sen. Obama holds the lead over Sen. Clinton by every metric, and baring any unforeseen events is considered almost certain to be the Democratic nominee (even optimistic estimates from Sen. Clinton's camp put her odds at somewhere around 5-10% at best). The remaining primaries are all heavily favored for one candidate and end up being a near perfect split. Florida and Michigan will soon be seated in some capacity and will almost certainly still place Sen. Clinton more than 100 pledged delegate behind. The super delegate movement has been towards Obama for the last month, and in the last week has accelerated rapidly.

I am happy my candidate won, but take no particular satisfaction from the fact Sen. Clinton had to lose for that to happen, and I think the sentiment, if imperfectly expressed, is the same in the Obama camp. That being said, we are passed the point where claiming Obama is the almost certain nominee of the party is empty posturing.

The Obama camp stressing this is certainly a PR move, but it is no more underhanded than the Clinton camp stressing how Sen. Clinton is a fighter and is hanging tough. It's simply the public image each has to project going forward, and as it stands I don't believe either is malicious.

by werehippy 2008-05-12 06:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's May 20 Bash: A Cynical Replay of Elect

If Obama wins a majority of pledged delegates on May 20, he will have a majority of pledged delegates, and he will be declaring that he has a majority of pledged delegates.

In fact, if enough supers have endorsed by then, he may be able to claim victory in the entire nomination battle.

The difference here between 2008 and 2000 is that in 2000 the election was still up in the air. If Obama has a majority of pledged delegates or a majority of all the delegates and he declares that, then I don't see what the problem is.

Oh yeah, I forgot, he stole all those delegates from Hillary.

by BlueGAinDC 2008-05-12 06:44PM | 0 recs
A majority does not clinch the nomination

You must get all 2209 delegates. Until that happens, you keep running and voters keep voting.

Recall the Boston Legal episode where Hillary's nephew said he was a pledged delegate, and planned to vote Obama even though his precinct went for Hillary. His reasoning? His pledge is not binding.

For a lightweight upstart like Obama to claim the nomination before he's clinched is not only audacious but unwise and will come back to bite him in the G.E.

by catfish1 2008-05-12 06:57PM | 0 recs
Re: A majority does not clinch the nomination

No, it's 2025. FL and MI are not included because they broke the rule. Clinton, Edwards, Obama, and others all signed a pledge to this fact. Where did you get 2209 from?

by comingawakening 2008-05-12 08:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's May 20 Bash: A Cynical Replay of Elect
Actually, it would be a very bad thing to announce he had won the nomination before all primaries are conducted, even if he has verbal agreement from superdelegates. He is not going to do that. That will ensure that many Democrats and probably even some non-Democrats feel less than comfortable with his nomination. That may not be a big deal to political strategists if it's pretty obvious he has won, but it would be very antagonistic. So let's muffle the primary jubilation for now and think long term satisfaction of voters.
by Jeter 2008-05-13 12:06AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's May 20 Bash: A Cynical Replay of Elect

No it wouldn't.  It happens every single time a candidate wins the nomination.  

by Blue Neponset 2008-05-13 05:49AM | 0 recs
Yeah, except...

Obama has actually won this election, unlike Bush in 2000.

So no, it's not quite the same.

by you like it 2008-05-12 06:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's May 20 Bash: A Cynical Replay of Elect

I would have sympathy for this argument if Hillary's campaign weren't trying to change the rules at the end of the game on Michigan and Florida.  They are counting on people being stupid and not knowing that she agreed to the elections not counting.  That is all their is to know.  If Obama tried the same bullshit, I would have been pissed as hell at him, and probably would have shifted to Hillary.

by gorebeatbush2 2008-05-12 06:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's May 20 Bash: A Cynical Replay of Elect

Another thing about MI and FL is that the DNC has a vested interest in not letting the delegates count from those sham elections because, if they did let them count, then they would have zero ability to ever keep states from breaking the rules.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-12 06:57PM | 0 recs
A little history

On April 8th of 1992 a full two months before he would secure enough delegates to claim the nomination Bill's staff was calling him the presumptive nominee:

[Apr 8, 1992] Clinton's showing yesterday convinced many Democrats that, even with the depth of concern about his character and his ability to win in November within his own party, his nomination is now all but assured. "Bill Clinton is the presumptive nominee," declared Mark Mellman

by venician 2008-05-12 06:56PM | 0 recs
Re: A little history

Hillary was also the presumptive nominee back in 2007.

But a funny thing happened on the way to the coronation.

by Kobi 2008-05-12 07:00PM | 0 recs
Re: A little history

Waiting for the outrage towards Bill Clinton...

by terra 2008-05-12 08:08PM | 0 recs
The Campaign Is A Lie

by ragekage 2008-05-12 07:03PM | 0 recs
Re: The Campaign Is A Lie

is it atleast delicious and moist?

by standd 2008-05-13 12:48AM | 0 recs
As of now

the magic number is 2024.  According to the DNC, after one candidate has reached the magic number, MI and FL will be settled and the primary will be officially over.

That's AFTER one candidate has reached 2024.  So Hillary supporters, don't hang your hopes on her winning using MI and FL.  It ain't gonna happen.

by GFORD 2008-05-12 08:36PM | 0 recs
Re: As of now
Unless someone reaches the 2025 number in pledged delegates before the primaries are over, your point is moot at best. Superdelegates do not vote until the convention. Please do not impede a dignified option for one candidate to endorse the other? A lot of underdogs having their dreams crushed is never a good thing, is it? Patience.
by Jeter 2008-05-13 12:11AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's May 20 Bash: A Cynical Replay of Elect

Absolutly, he will look like an idiot an as arrogant as ever if he pulls this stunt.

by orion1 2008-05-13 03:32AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------