I didn't hear anything negative if you didn't ;)

http://www.taylormarsh.com/audio.php?aud io=http://www.taylormarsh.com/podcast/mp 3/stream.2008-05-16.134204.mp3

Over at Taylor Marsh they have the podcast. Here it is.

If the link doesn't work you can go to her website.

with this comment and the core of the meaning

"The argument fully ignores that they are in fact meaningless with low turn out, but what the heck let's not focus on the negative.  "

Are you trying to tell me that the primary votes that "didn't count" had low turn out? I totally disagree!

Try taking a look at WA state. More than 3 times the amount of people voted in the primary compared to the caucuses. Anyone who thinks ALL of those people, who STILL wanted to voice their vote no matter that it did not count, could have or should have caucused is a fool. There is NO WAY, it was already a huge cluster F and would have been total anarchy if all those people had showed up.

I don't want to hear the false argument that "people who caucused did not vote in the primary", etc. There are people that did BOTH (like they did in TX .. I know their F'd up double vote system counts), there are people that only caucused and there are people that only voted in the primary.

I would bet that MOST old people and disabled people did not caucus. Yes there were some of both in my caucus but some also left early because it was to CROWDED and some of the O supporters became a little too pushy.

From time to time I'm reminded that we aren't battling the Repugs, this is just bickering within the family.  Well, maybe more bloody than bickering but it's still within the family.

Think about it...we are arguing about who will do better at getting universal health care, not about whether we should have it.

Arguing about who will get us out of Iraq faster, not about whether we should leave, about who will do more to enact fair trade, who will fix public education.

I get so angry sometimes I forget that if I had a political (non-candidate-based) conversation with someone like Alegre or even TexasDarlin we would both be nodding our heads and agreeing about what is wrong and what we should do going forward.

I don't believe Alegre is a racist, I hope she doesn't think I'm sexist.  We just chose different candidates but for the same reasons...fix everything that has been broken over the last eight years.

Part of blogging is finding an article or something and posting about it (not always, but most of the time).  Alegre lays out what she wants well and gets her point across very clearly.  Moreover, she has a following.  I would say that makes her effective and a good writer.

I have no knowledge of whether she met Clinton or works on the campaign, but particpating in a conference call does not make her a liar on those points.

So, if one meets a candidate, that makes them paid by that candidate?  No I don't believe Alegre has said she never met her.  I am sure she has, but she is obviously not a "paid" blogger.  If you listened to the audio you can tell she is no more a paid blogger than Armando, or the rest of the questioners on the call.

because I think you were being sincere.

Not sure but I like to give the benefit of the doubt

You still need to take her name out of the title.  It's a violation.

Wow. What has happened to linfar? Her diaries now seem so sad.

I didn't no they had a mini rivalry going.

Well, no it certainly wasn't the first time.  I have seen Alegre mention those in diaries and she got mad when I or someone else asked if she was paid.

Well, "leading in the delegate count" and "delegates  chose the nominee" really doesn't take coordination, its just stating the obvious.

There is no effort by the Obama campaign to coordinate bloggers, and I dare you to produce such evidence.  They have professional bloggers on the campaign's website, and that is all.

We have four tiers here:

1) heartfelt Hillary volunteers

2. heartfelt paid Hillary bloggers
   
3. cynical professional paid Hillary bloggers
   
4. republican trolls

I think Alegre falls into the first category. My only complaint is that like her candidate, she's willing to take a position that she knows is flawed if she thinks that such means will justify the end of additional votes.

Specifically:

1) gas holiday - Hillary knows it's disingenuous, but if it works she'll say it

2. Obama and guns - ditto
   
3. Obama the Muslim - ditto
   
4. Obama and Wright - ditto