Asking for calm when Obama concedes

by Universal, Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 03:15:36 PM EST

After his getting drubbed in states where he at least doubled the spending of Hillary Clinton, it is becoming increasingly clear that Barack Obama cannot and will not win the nomination. The narrative which the pro-Obama media wants you to believe -- that this is a contest for pledged delegates -- is meaningless, as neither candidate appears able to secure the needed numbers via only pledged delegates.

This being the case, the Superdelegates will make the final call. And there is absolutely no way that they will choose Obama over Clinton. Doing so would violate all reason and doom Dems come November:

- Hillary is winning the Democratic popular vote, and will finish well ahead of BHO in this, the most relevant, category

- Hillary has won in all the important large states. Party leaders know that relying on wins in states like Utah and Nebraska is fool's gold come the general

- BHO had the chance to effectively close the deal yesterday, and instead he was blown out in two states (even though he handily outspent HRC in Ohio) and lost in a 3rd (TX) where he both outspent Clinton and received the edge in GOP votes

It was a heck of a run by Obama, but we have reached the beginning of the end of his candidacy. Expect far fewer John Lewis situations as Superdelegates realize that there is no political cover for going against the will of Democratic voters. This is not an open nomination which GOP voters and GOP-leaning Indys can or will make the call; it is, instead, the Democratic Party nomination.

*
*

Which brings me to the main point of the diary. There are still a number of months to go before Hillary is declared the nominee. There is time for healing from the divisiveness of the campaign season, time for cooler heads to prevail.

And so I ask my fellow Democrats who have supported Senator Obama: when Obama concedes, which he eventually will be forced to do, please handle the development as maturely as possible. We don't need more Al Sharpton rioting rhetoric, nor Donna Brazile flee-the-party grandstanding. The Party is already in tatters right now due to this contest, and more childish outbursts are not, in my opinion, the answer.

Your candidate has run a strong, albeit losing, campaign. There is no shame in hitting the wall which Obama hit last night nor that he is continuing to hit as regards Rezko, NAFTA, etc. These things can happen, and the increased scrutiny which Obama is finding himself under these days was bound to happen sooner or later. No person -- whether presidential candidate or entertainer -- stays the media's darling forever, and the worm turning in this regard for BHO is not a surprise, either.

I imagine that the pressure will be enormous for Clinton to choose Obama as her VP. I'm not sure that this will happen, but I understand the sentiment. Perhaps that is the best way to resolve this issue and to keep Obama supporters in the fold when Hillary is named the nominee.

It has been a great race. I never thought BHO would make it this far, but he has. He and his supporters deserve a tip of the cap and kudos for that accomplishment.

I just urge them -- and their candidate -- to exercise the dignity, class and restraint which will help the Party when Hillary is named the nominee. It is more certain than ever that this is going to happen, and I'm praying for our Party to accept this reality as smoothly as possible.

Tags: 2008 elections, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton (all tags)

Comments

91 Comments

Sort by

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

I really don't enjoy these diaries which choose to taunt under the guise of being classy and mature.

Be that as it may, let me pose a question to the diarist. If the superdelegates really are destined to break for Hillary in the end, because all the electability arguments are in her favor or what have you, shouldn't we be seeing a trend in that direction in the here and now? Shouldn't we be seeing, for example, at least a few superdelegates responding to last night's results by declaring for Hillary? Why do you suppose this is not taking place?

by Steve M 2008-03-05 03:20PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

I think the superdelegates largely have a wait and see attitude. I think that they want it to be obvious to all as to why they are choosing one candidate over the other. I think PA will probably be the deciding factor.

by Ga6thDem 2008-03-05 03:32PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Strangely, Obama has picked up 3 Super Delegates yesterday and 2 today. There has been no movement on Clinton's side.

by Tantris 2008-03-05 03:40PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Don't forget about the Prius drivers in the swing state of Oregon, and the Democrats who don't count in Wyoming and the emerging swing state of Montana due to both being traditional Red States.

by PaulVA 2008-03-05 05:14PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

So of the 10 contests left 5 heavily favor Obama, Hillary has PA, KY and WV, and possibly IN, where is she going to make up massive deficit she faces? How is she going to catch Obama?

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-05 06:14PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

you're troll, and a damn good one at that.
i was almost suckered in, but you overplayed your hand.

it was this statement
"No, no no -- wrong framing my friend.

You sound like a media talking head." that got me.

see at first i thought you were just a hillary supporter who was stupid, but when you said no, no, no, my friend, i recognized the bait.

see, i myself am a troll, and i have spent plenty of time using this tactic, you make a seemingly passive non-sequitor, in an attempt to illicite a angry and profane counter, at the same time, you include an ad hominem in this case, comparing them to a MSM, this acts as an insult without actually implying on directly, thereby making a clean attack on your target withou openly doing it.

but it was to recognizable.
you fucking fail

by Lazeriath 2008-03-05 06:53PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

i don't feel used, i could care less quite frankly, i'm merely stating that you're a troll.

now you can claim otherwise, but that, much like clinton's campaign would be ignoring the reality of your position.
you are clearly trolling, hell the main premise of this diary "obama should quite, despite leading every important metric, because he lost some big states" is a troll.

by Lazeriath 2008-03-05 07:02PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

i sure will, i have everything i need, wine, lattes, a copy of mother jones, and a copy of my local universities newspaper, and guess what guys, i'm cranking up the college radio.

by Lazeriath 2008-03-05 07:32PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

how is losing by 2-3% and still getting more delegates being "blown out"? Thats right, the sec. of state says obama should come out +3 in delegates. I wouldnt say he "won" last night but blown out is well overblown. Also, the NAFTA thing has been debunked by the PRIME MINISTER OF CANADA!! RCP had Obama +110 including supers yesterday and Obama +109 today. Blown out? Mrs. Clinton is the one who missed a huge oppertunity to make up delegate ground which DID NOT HAPPEN. PA if she were to win it will not phase his +109 supers and +144 pledged delegate lead.

by affratboy22 2008-03-05 03:45PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

I'm having trouble figuring out how the NAFTA thing was debunked by the Prime Minister of Canada when I'm simultaneously being told that it was a plot by the Prime Minister of Canada in the first place, but I'm sure it will all become clear to me in time.

by Steve M 2008-03-05 04:51PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

i'm pinching myself to make sure i still exist in your world. While Hillary did better than Obama last night, gaining less than 10 del.(est as low as 4) was not enough with the states left. Also, Hillary got very favorable media last week especially over the wkend (SNL, media repeating over and over how they had been unfair to her b/c Hillary said so, is he really ready stories). This will now end, the "is he ready" stories will dye back down in favor of the horse race which they will spend allot of time talking about how "going negative works for her" and "she cant quite catch up but shes hoping to beat Obama up so bad the supers will turn it for her anyways" are ALL much better for him than last week.

by affratboy22 2008-03-05 05:36PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

its just you act like we dont matter and we all magically want Hillary because the votes she has gotten matter more. I plan on voting for the democratic party for most of my lifetime and i want to be represented and i feel like Sen. Obama's view and style represent me. I don't connect to Hillary at all so i guess in your world i no longer exist. Let the voters finish based on the rules in place (which he is now winning) and stop prentending only a certain part of a certain type of voter matters. I will note that the Democratic party base (the one he somehow now cant win b/c he lost some "big" and "important" states by 2-12%) has been with us for the past 2 elections. Ask Karl Rove how to beat the base of the party and he'll lick his lips and ask when and where. Newer, younger and less affilated voters may actually be people we WANT to hear from since those are the people we NEED to finally WIN.

by affratboy22 2008-03-05 08:35PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

So when she follows up PA by getting pimp slapped in the last remaining large state (NC), you'll agree she should concede.

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-05 06:15PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Um, I count 100,000 at best where do you get 250,000, is that Hillary rule where African American votes are only 3/5 the vote of a "real American"?

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-05 06:16PM | 0 recs

permalink

nice try

I guess if you say it enough times you may convince yourself it will come out the way you like.

I think Obama will get most of Hillary's voters, I don't know that the opposite would be true though.

by highgrade 2008-03-05 03:22PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: nice try

Well if past is prologue, take it from someone who has been around for quite a long time. This election is starting to resemble 1968, the last great purge of one demographic from the Democratic party.

The young and newly energized voters, primarily supporting Obama will not only not vote for Clinton, they may not vote for another 20 years. Hubert Horatio Humphrey gained the 1968 nomination at the expense of the party's future. I'd hate to see that happen again, but I discount nothing in this strange race.

by Its Like Herding Cats 2008-03-05 03:28PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: nice try

Those voters hung around and got McGovern in 1972. How'd that work out?

You surely have to look at each candidate and what demographics they bring to the party. It seems that Obama has won the demographic that brought you McGovern and their children.

by Ga6thDem 2008-03-05 03:34PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: nice try

Your analysis is faulty, what I am talking about is the voters that came into the primary process and then abandoned the the party and the general election altogether.

In fact in the 1972 primary process, McGovern was the de facto "insiders" choice after the Edmund Muskie crying moment implosion. Democrats have not, since the days of Estes Kefauver and Adlai Stevenson, re-nominated losers. Neither Humphrey nor McCarthy stood a chance.

In 72 McGovern was the logical party choice, that is unless you think George Wallace, Sam Yorty could have been the standard bearers for the party. In fact IF the young vote from 1968 had stayed around even for the 72 primary process Eugene McCarthy would have most likely won handily. But the young vote abandoned the party after Humphrey was handed the nomination over McCarthy in 1968.

Just why do you suppose Richard Nixon won the general in 1972? Because he was a great President? No, because so many Democrats just didn't bother to vote any more. The demographic that was ignored in 1968, simply turned the tables and ignored the party for the next decade and a half.

by Its Like Herding Cats 2008-03-05 03:55PM | 0 recs

permalink

and Eagleton is what killed him

not the fact he was the antiwar/youth's choice.

by omar little 2008-03-05 04:07PM | 0 recs

permalink

he went from 42%-24%

in the week that he asked eagleton to step down and schriver accepted the VP spot

by omar little 2008-03-05 04:10PM | 0 recs

permalink

I guess

you're just too hip for this 55 year old male, huh?

by Coldblue 2008-03-05 04:57PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: nice try

"The young and newly energized voters, primarily supporting Obama will not only not vote for Clinton, they may not vote for another 20 years. "

The young voters inevitably find good reason not to vote and participate in civic and political activity. Something or other was going to disillusion them about electoral politics. It requires maturity and a nuanced outlook on life to tolerate disagreement with others, delayed gratification. It requires an ability to compromise which is at the heart of politics in a heterogeneous nation, and empathy for others who live a vastly different life experience. People may develop that maturity as they gain experience, and it may power their dedication to civic responsibility.

The young also simply have challenging jobs and careers they devote themselves to, families to start, first homes to buy, and all the other challenges of adulthood that constrains their participation in politics.

People are responsible for their own decisions about how they will spend their time. It is a is a mistake to rely on young people remaining involved en masse in politics, which is too demanding and often too ugly and disappointing to be emotionally invested in long term. Attributing the inevitable disillusionment of these young participants to one candidate or event is unrealistic.

This is especially true because both political parties remain committed to a strategy of deliberately discouraging wide participation of the electorate so that their ideological base can remain more effective in winning elections with a dedicated and vociferous minority of party activists. In fact, the only hope of either extreme, left or right, to enact their preferred political policies is to discourage the participation of majority viewpoints, absent a major sea change in attitudes.

The young people who decide that remaining purposefully involved in their communities over time, usually for free as volunteers, at significant cost to themselves, and to become deeply committed and knowledgeable about issues, history, candidates, etc., are a great blessing that allows the political process to stride forward with a coherent continuity and the wisdom of accumulated self correction. Very often they later come to be known as "party elders", "party regulars" and "super delegates." And yes, "insiders."

by 07rescue 2008-03-05 05:09PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: nice try

I do have some doubts about that. I am a HRC supporter, although I've got nothing against Obama. I think he's a fine candidate, just not the right place and time, and I don't disagree with the OP saying it's set in stone essentially.

That said, I have questions as to whether or not Obama can sell his economic package. That's where he's losing. Let's take aside NAFTA and all this talk. All along, the one thing that held true was that the blue collar workers supported HRC. Most of that was due to her ability, IMO, to reach out the blue collar workers, to reach out to the rural areas and to sell them on the economic package, which I think the Democrats have struggled with for the last 8 years.

If Obama isn't able to sell his economic package, a lot of these voters will look to other issues to decide.

Now, that said, a good strategic VP pick could overcome some issues. For example, Edwards. Here's a guy who was probably the best in recent years at selling the Democratic economic vision and why it's right, why it's the better plan. Webb may also be another option. So there are possibilities.

by toonsterwu 2008-03-05 06:33PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Thank you for this diary it really made me laugh out loud. The funniest thing that happened to me today.

by Its Like Herding Cats 2008-03-05 03:22PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Yes Obama's advisors are dumb, the people who count the delegates are dumb, young voters are dumb , black people are dumb we get it if you vote Obama your either not a real democrat or just too stupid to see that the Cult of Clinton saves all.

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-05 06:19PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Obama is ahead in pledged delegates and the popular vote unless you cheat and count MI and FL.

No way he concedes.

You're living a fairy tale.

by Walt Starr 2008-03-05 03:23PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Tehre was jno legitimate vote in FL and MI, so seating them is cheating.

You have two choices under the rules. Hold new primaries or caucuses by June 10 or wait until July and bring a case before the credentials committee. Here's a clue: if the outcome would be altered by seating the FL and MI delegates, they will not be seated. Your best bet is revote.

by Walt Starr 2008-03-06 07:57AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Whoever has the most pledged delegates come June 10 will have the nomination.

by Drummond 2008-03-05 03:27PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

no don't you bet on that it doesn't matter.

by democrat voter 2008-03-05 04:16PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: No shot

If this happens I suggest you start preparing yourself for a 1968 style general election, hey maybe Hillary can call herself the "Happy Heroine" in honor of her Humphreyesque chances in the general.

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-05 06:21PM | 0 recs

permalink

Oh yea, and PS...

And so I ask my fellow Democrats who have supported Senator Obama: when Obama concedes, which he eventually will be forced to do, please handle the development as maturely as possible.

And I expect the same from you when Clinton concedes right?

by Its Like Herding Cats 2008-03-05 03:30PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Oh yea, and PS...

Somehow I seriously doubt it.

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-05 03:35PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Keep in mind, the following projections from the Obama campaign came out on Fenruary 7th of 2008.
http://www.google.com/search?client=fire fox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aoffi cial&channel=s&hl=en&q=obama +spreadsheet+prediction&btnG=Google+ Search
Where were they wrong?
Ohio by 3 in HRC's favor.
Rhode Island by 3 in HRC's favor.
Vermont by 10 in BO's favor.
Wisconsin by 10 in BO's favor.
Hawaii by 47 in BO's favor.
Maryland by 17 in BO's favor.
DC by 35 in BO's favor.
Virginia by 27 in BO's favor.
Maine by 21 in BO's favor(thus far, this is the only instance when the Obama spreadsheet was wrong on predicting the winner)
Washington by 17 in BO's favor.
Louisiana by 11 in BO's favor.
And finally, Nebraska by 16 in BO's favor.

They were able to call the results of Texas by nearly a month ago. Have you looked at the predictions for the upcoming states?

by Setrak 2008-03-05 03:33PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

I never heard the Obama internals for New Hampshire. What were they? Where'd you find them?

by Setrak 2008-03-05 03:40PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Good point. I'm sure someone, someday, will write a book all about that night up in New Hampshire. Hopefully it won't be Kucinich claiming aliens rigged the electronic voting machines.

Still, to counter-argue, NO ONE was close when it came to New Hampshire. Infact, the first waves of exit polls were way off as well(although they did narrow). Was it tears? Was it victimization at the hands of the media who may have been too busy writing her obituary to remember that they're suppose to report on the news and not make it? Was it the Wilder effect, or....

the Hillary effect!

Who f'ing knows. Someone could easily make a buck by writing a book on New Hampshire. I still fondly remember the horse of Paul supporters chasing after Sean Hannity.. those were the days.

by Setrak 2008-03-05 05:48PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

*horde

by Setrak 2008-03-05 05:50PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

You are asking for calm if/when Obama concedes. If/when Clinton concedes I hope that you will have calm and will urge calm to all the people around you as well.

I hope that between now and the time either candidate concedes, that you will work to calm the vitriol on both sides of the spectrum. To calm those who support Hillary Clinton in their attacks on Obama. And to calm those who support Barack Obama in their attacks on Clinton. That you will not participate in either side and work to bring thoughtful discussion back.

by Tantris 2008-03-05 03:34PM | 0 recs

permalink

lol

thanks. i just love all these diaries with abstract points like "he couldn't close the deal" or "hey look we win a swing state by 10 points, BHO cant win it in a GE!"

functionally, what you are saying is that the arguments you put forth in this diary are going to be enough to have the supers revolt against the pledged delegate winner. sorry.

by omar little 2008-03-05 03:42PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: lol

When will this magical wave of SDs side with her and once again ask African Americans to move to the back of the bus? (And this is how it would be taken, make no mistake, taking the nod away from the first viable African American canidate if he had the lead going into the convention would in effect destroy the democratic party, it'd be like when we lost the dixiecrats only without someone to take their place.)

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-05 06:25PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

You are correct, the voters of Ohio and Texas showed that there was serious "buyers remorse" and Obama could not close the deal after all his "hype" after 11 straight wins.

Clinton is in the driver seat now, she just needs to avoid the same danger, losses in Wyoming and Mississippi would show "buyers remorse." I mean if she can't win after these stunning victories that changed the dynamic of the race, and the SNL endorsement, she can't win in the general. Right? That is the argument we are making now?

by labor nrrd 2008-03-05 03:42PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Pledged delegates? Obama by about 140.

Popular vote? Obama by about 600K.

Yeah, she's got him right where she wants him. LOL

by goodnbad 2008-03-05 03:48PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

again you are counting the wrong voters. the voters that matter are in the big states and the swing states, the red states, not so much. sorry. he doesn't have enough pledged delegates, so he cannot win with them.

by democrat voter 2008-03-05 03:56PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Here's the thing - Obama has been very wise. He's running a 50-state campaign and considering all to be important and possible Dem wins in November. This is new and very good for the party. Some will actually turn Dem and in any event he will help local Dems on the ticket.

Hillary is running an old school campaign in which machines and big traditionally Dem states are what count. That is what really gripes me - she can't seem to see that that is not good for the party or for the country. I also don't think it can win any more. I think the Super delegates and other party leaders can see what Obama is doing for the party and want to help him. I very much believe that's why they are gravitating to him. His way is the future of this country. It's normal for the old guard to try to maintain the status quo so they are furious at him. As a 60 year old woman, Obama makes me proud to be an American.

by Becky G 2008-03-05 05:00PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Great way to grow the party. Gift wrap all the red states for the OP nominee along with all the Senate, House, Gubernatorial and down ballot races.

That's smart thinking.

by PaulVA 2008-03-05 05:19PM | 0 recs

permalink

marsh?

i am taylor marsh

by omar little 2008-03-05 03:42PM | 0 recs

permalink

My favority part of this fairy tale

is when the superdelegates ignore the greater pledged voters which actually is a relevant category but pay great attention to the popular vote.

by kindthoughts 2008-03-05 03:50PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Actually Clinton is the stronger candidate, Obama is a new guy. He doesn't have enough experience for this country to elect him as the president. It is really that simple. Doesn't matter if he has more delegates, they only count if he get to 2025, if not, they don't even count. See you in Denver silly, she wins the big states, he can't. She wins where it matters, he wins red caucus states where it doesn't matter. The bosses know the difference. The party is run by pragmatic people unlike the likes of these here at this place. Obama isn't winning folks, he is trying to make it look that way but it doesn't matter. You don't understand politics very well. Caucus state wins are not as important, they just aren't even though Obama and the press are trying to make you believe that is true. It only matters if you win, if not it doesn't. He doesn't have and won't have enough, therefore he loses. And even if the select him for the fall he loses. either way he loses. Obama supporters are ate up with themselves and the coolaid, but the real middle of America voters are decidedly not impressed. Period. He loses.

by democrat voter 2008-03-05 03:53PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

So if they go to the convention and Obama has a lead in pledged delegates, you'd support the supers overthrowing the will of the electorate? I think you're at the wrong site. Here's your guy.

by bullmoosetr 2008-03-05 04:00PM | 0 recs

permalink

sorry

she will never go into the convention behind in delegates and come out the nominee.

won't happen.

lets talk in august.

by omar little 2008-03-05 04:12PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

I have seen many Hillary supporters say Missouri is a big state.

If you count every state with delegates above Missouri as a big state, Obama has taken MORE big states than Hillary has.

Major States equaling over 70 Delegates (Missouri has 72)

Obama won:
Illinois
Missouri
Georgia
Minnesota
Washingon
Virginia
Maryland
Wisconsin

Clinton Won:
New York
New Jersey
California
Mass
Texas
Ohio

Even if I throw in Tennessee (at 68 delegates) its still an Obama lead in number of states. Even adding Mich and Florida its a tie.

Left to play:

PA
NC
Indiana

Obama has a great shot to win 2 of the remaining 3.

However your myth of Obama not winning big states is just incorrect based on the standard many MyDD Hillary supporters have put forth.

FTW. You've just been PWNED.

by yitbos96bb 2008-03-05 04:13PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

"real middle america" funny that she's the choice of "middle america" and yet this is the only Midwest state she won, I mean IA, MN,WI, MO, IL, all middle america: NE,KS - the very heart of the heartland (obviously red states count otherwise TX wouldn't be a big deal for her).

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-05 05:07PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Get used to the fact that Obama is damaged goods and cannot be the nominee. Hillary has everything going for her. After April 22, it will be quite apparent that Obama is just standing in the way of the first woman becoming president and he'll be asked to concede.

Fair warning.

by Nobama 2008-03-05 03:53PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Yeah... White Water, TravelGate, Norman Hsu, Gupta, The Cattle Futures... one of the most divisive politicians of our time. Yes, she isn't damaged.

It must be nice to live in your fantasy world.

by yitbos96bb 2008-03-05 04:01PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Judging by your references, I'd say that you are a Republican. So...your argument is not too persuasive to a real Democrat.

by christinep 2008-03-05 04:28PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

I'm a liberal Democrat and I would also make those references. She is dirty and tainted. Can't win. I also believe there is more to come out during the campaign. She's an old school machine Democrat and needs to bow out soon.

by Becky G 2008-03-05 05:05PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Clinton had high negatives before the nomination fight began.

Now they are higher.

Now, why would Rush have told his listeners to vote for Clinton? Because he wants a stronger candidate?

by mainelib 2008-03-05 05:59PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

I'm not sure where people get the idea that the Clintons are such progressives.

They helped found the DLC and were the epitome of trianglating centrists. Bill Clinton sold the Dem party down the road and never had coattails.

by mainelib 2008-03-05 06:02PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Don't forget Mark Rich's pardon, after he closed a West Virginia factory down costing West Virginian steelworkers 5,000 jobs.

by PaulVA 2008-03-05 05:22PM | 0 recs

permalink

lol

you are seriously gonna look at Clinton and Obama and say that BHO is the one who is damaged goods???

by omar little 2008-03-05 04:13PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Now we know why Hillary has strugled, her supporters are confused!

Clinton supporter on the Obama Campaign:

"Your candidate has run a strong, albeit losing, campaign."

Really? And you've been winning. If his campaign has been "losing" and you've been "winning" i say keep up! At this rate we'll continue to "lose" all the way to Denver!

by affratboy22 2008-03-05 03:55PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Um No.
Obama leads in the PV by 600,000 votes.

If using Missouri as the Big State Threshold, they are about even on big states.

He did lose, I will give you that. But Obama has proven he learns from his mistakes.

Anyone who is foolish enough to say their candidate is inevitable deserves to be ridiculed for their stupidity.

One last question... Show us her path to the nomination. She needs to get 60% of all the remaining delegates to go into the convention TIED with Obama.

by yitbos96bb 2008-03-05 03:59PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

you still don't get it. the delegates only count if they make up 2025. if not they don't and the party bosses decide. Obama can't get there either, so he can't win with pledged delegates, and frankly they don't even have to vote for the person they were slated for, ever been to a convention? a contested one? you know nothing about party politics.

by democrat voter 2008-03-05 04:08PM | 0 recs

permalink

it ain't 1968 friend.

if it was i'd be having a lot more fun.

by omar little 2008-03-05 04:15PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

At least I understand proper spelling and grammar. 1) If you think the SDs overturn an Obama lead, I have a bridge to sell you.

2) When I said 60%, that INCLUDES SDs. So she needs 60% of all the remaining states AND the remaining SDs.

3) If they were going to support Clinton, they'd have done so by now. Unless she has a PD lead, she isn't taking it.

But nice try... you just got PWNED again. Wow, its like arguing with a 3 year old... its just too easy.

by yitbos96bb 2008-03-05 04:17PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

I'm starting to thik you're serious, that you really want a 1984, 1980, 1968 style convention, only worse than 1980 or 1984 since both of those times the leader got the nod-- you really think that its not only likely but a good idea for the DNC leadership to ask the first viable AA presidential canidate to go to the back of the bus, are you a Republican?

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-05 06:30PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

How on earth is Hillary a better canidate, at least the Rush campaign gave Obama a taste of what a tough electoral fight is, I mean Hillary's entire career has basically been a walk she hasn't had a serious primary or general election campaign-- ever so why should I beleive she can beat Mccain, especially as a choice over the more election savy Obama team?

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-05 06:44PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

That'll be a winning strategy with the SDs vote for me I can be this generations Hubert Humphery or Fritz Mondale.

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-05 05:09PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Yep that about sums it up, you will lose in Denver too, its so sad that some people don't understand that this thing was never in the hands of the people to begin with. Grow up. The party set the rules, they can change them and its not fair anyway. Get over it.

by democrat voter 2008-03-05 04:04PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Intelligent argument. Are you even legally allowed to vote? I only ask because your grammar, typing ability and spelling ability is that of a 15 year old.

by yitbos96bb 2008-03-05 04:21PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Yeah man, its all controlled from the top, both parties are the same man, my god you sonund like Nader voter in 2000.

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-05 06:32PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

No where is it written that the supers have to pledge their vote to the delegate leader. the rules of the game simply state it takes 2025 total delegates to win the nomination. everyone is assuming that the sd's will act in unison like some cohesive group. You are talking about 800 individuals with their own concept of right and wrong not some type of either conspiracy or unison act. They will do what they feel is best. If after MI and Fl revotes and the rest of the primaries and HRC has a lead in popular vote but not in delegates,people of good conscience can still say they are going with the will of the people(not some silly rules on delegate apportionment devised by DNC overthinkers)

by JP from HB 2008-03-05 04:04PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

red state delegates just won't matter that much to them I have seen this movie before and know the ending.

by democrat voter 2008-03-05 04:11PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

I guess they should all just leave the party then form a third party, all read state democrats, is that what you think would be a good idea?

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-05 05:11PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

they are using Obama to grow the party simple really when you think about it.

by democrat voter 2008-03-05 04:12PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Which is why it would be stupid to go against him, I mean really your argument should at least be logically consistent.

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-05 06:33PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re:

I think MI and FL will revote and I think both will be Clinton states especially Florida. Hillary has a real legitimate shot at the nomination now that she didn't have Monday

by rossinatl 2008-03-05 04:14PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re:

She might win MI and FL, but he its going to be a lot better off in Delegates than if she got all of her MI delegates and he got none of the uncommitted.

A re-vote helps him just as much and avoids the credentials fight. The only thing that helps him more is the current status quo is maintained.

by yitbos96bb 2008-03-05 04:24PM | 0 recs

permalink

Asking for reality as Obama wins

Ha!!!

A net gain of 4 delegates is a drubbing? Clinton needed a major win in both OH and TX to have a chance of beginning to catch up on delegates, and she's still behind in the popular vote!

She won't win the popular vote, she won't win on delegates, but she'll do anything to win. In the process she may just manage to ensure McCain wins.

Thanks for killing the party Hill, just like Bill.

Fuckers.

by Demeric 2008-03-05 04:27PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for reality as Obama wins

I think that you will find Senator Clinton ahead in the popular vote after Pennsylvania (as you guys seem to keep repeating, do the numbers). When you add in Florida and Michigan--in whatever configuration--she will lengthen that popular vote lead. To those who feel so strenuously about the popular vote....you have your answer. And, a request: Notice over the next few weeks how the emphasis will, in fact, turn to what the voters want...not what type of delegate...not what specialized rule...but, the classic popular vote. That will be especially so if she is victorious in the big electoral college vote state of Pennsylvania. People will gradually focus on electoral college implications and location & reality of the popular vote as well as the segments of Democratic voters.

by christinep 2008-03-05 04:35PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for reality as Obama wins

She has to get throgh her drubbing in Mississippi and Wyoming - or do voters there not count as well?

by PaulVA 2008-03-05 05:23PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for reality as Obama wins

See, these are comments I just don't get. They do more harm than good. You do realize that there's a lot of strong avid HRC supporters? You make it seem as if we are being dragged around by her, when most of us are supporting her on the basis that we believe she has the right policies and that she is the better candidate.

I've got no problem with Obama. I'll support him if he's the nominee. But comments like these are what makes the blogosphere so ... well think of a nice word I guess.

It's funny ... she's killing the Democratic Party, but yet, last I checke,d she's winning the vote in regards to registered Democrats.

by toonsterwu 2008-03-05 06:36PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

You sure are awfully confident about a candidate that gained no more than a handful of delegates that will be undone in the next week.

The superdelegates know they can't undo the pledged delegate lead of what should be the first african-american major party nominee in American history.

You can crow about superdelegates making the decision but there is no way Clinton overcomes Obama's lead and no way superdelegates do it for her.

by WellstoneDem 2008-03-05 04:50PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: No, you're looking at the wrong constituency

Damn right tell the African Americans to get to the back of the bus! That's a good strategy, hey are you like a really, really old school dem, like a pre-Southern Realignment Dem by chance?

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-05 06:35PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: No, you're looking at the wrong constituency

And if Hillary was going to be in the lead when it happened I'd agree with you, but even you would admit its likely that Obama will be ahead by 100 or so pledged delegates (or if FL and MI redo 50-75 pledged delegates), how are you going to explain to African Americans that the person who is leading going into the convention should quite literally take a back seat?

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-05 06:47PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

So, Washington, Illinois and Virginia are important states?

Or Wisconsin and Colorado?

Aren't those swing states?

And what about the drubbing Clinton took in February? Or those states don't count because she didn't win them?

Of course, TPM says that she does not have a popular vote lead even with MI and FL.

And what about that Clinton claim that it was always about delegates?

And Obama has run a losing campaign? Excuse me?

If you want you're Mondale, you can have her. And Democrats and Independents like me will make sure she isn't President come November.

No. No, help from me.

Sorry. If you wanted our help, maybe your candidate's campaign should have chosen different tactics, unless your a fan of racebaiting, making subtle appeals to racism, doctoring photos to make people look more black...

Convince me why I should support a campaign that doesn't have a problem with making race an issue.

No, if she's the nominee, there's some serious payback coming. I don't care if we get President McCain or not.

I mean, what's the difference? We all know that Hillary isn't going to end the war; we all know that's why she's taken the Lieberman position("Nobody wants to end the war more than me."

What goes around, comes around.

You reap what you so.

Too bad for the Cult of Hillary and all her psychophantic hero-worshippers.

by jaywillie 2008-03-05 04:52PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Asking for calm when Obama concedes

Of course, a shrewd superdelegate will also look at such things as:

fundraising--who will be the best at raising money, particularly from small donors?
enthusiasm--who is doing the most to expand the voter base?
ground organizing--who is building new infrastructure and who is relying on existing party machinery?
down ticket effect--who will benefit the elected superdelegates in November?
head to head electability--who has the best shot at winning big over McCain in November, not just winning but winning by a wide margin?
media coverage--who will get more favorable media coverage?
message "packaging"--who will be most effective as a salesman for a progressive agenda?

On all 7 of these counts, Obama is currently well ahead of Clinton. If she wants to be the nominee, she's going to have to do better in all of these areas.

And, yes, he's ahead in states won(by 24-14), pledged delegates won(by about 150), popular vote won in official contests(and only behind if you count MI/FL and award him zero votes in MI), and has narrowed the superdelegate endorsement gap to about 40(it was over 100 at the beginning of the year).
He's going to win Mississippi easily and is likely to win Wyoming, raising his total to 26 states won. He has 6 weeks to campaign for Pennsylvania, so I'd say he's got a decent shot to at least keep it close there. If he does keep it close, he'll likely win Indiana and North Carolina, and will probably win Montana, South Dakota and Oregon, too. If there's a re-vote for FL and MI, he's got a good shot at winning Michigan, given the proximity to Illinois and the demographic differences between it and Ohio. At any rate, the delegate gap from a re-vote is almost certain to be smaller.

So, that's at least 31 states won for Obama, with a probable pledged delegate margin when all is done of maybe 200, and I'm guessing a pop vote margin of around a half mil to a million.

But feel free to spin away.

by megaplayboy 2008-03-05 05:33PM | 0 recs

permalink

props for civility n/t

by kindthoughts 2008-03-05 06:05PM | 0 recs

permalink

I'm sorry Universal.

But I think this type of diary is every bit as premature as the diaries calling for Clinton to drop out before yesterdays vote. And while I agree with many of your points, this primary is far from over. It could still go either way. Hillary could continue to gain momentum, in which case you are probably right. Or Obama could make a strong comeback. We don't know at this point. I think our strongest ticket in Nov. would be Clinton/Obama. With Obama the deciding vote in the Senate, he could work across party lines to help get a lot of important policies passed, and continue to build his credentials in the process. We might very well be able to hold the White House for the next 16 years.

by georgiapeach 2008-03-05 06:16PM | 0 recs