View Story | 379 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
for doing the right thing.
Head to Heading Left, BlogTalkRadio's progressive radio site!
by thereisnospoon on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:11:37 AM PDT
I'm sick and tired of our "leaders" sitting on their fuckin' asses! As far back I can remember, all they have done is the same crap as our Decider-in-Chief: decide to do nothin'. WTF!
by rudewarrior on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:16:44 AM PDT
[ Parent ]
... such as the Ferraro fiasco have really left me wondering where the supposed grownups are. I expected better leadership from the party elders than letting these situations between the campaigns (and their supporters) fester.
McCain should be their target, not a circular firing squad of Democrats.
by Spunkmeyer on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:31:05 AM PDT
I've been wondering why exactly it is that congressional Democrats, almost down to the last, can't muster the kind of basic courage you see in, say, a well-managed fifth grade classroom.
Professional athletes take their careers into their own hands on a more consistent basis than politicians; the ones that don't never even make it to the professional level.
The only rational conclusion I can come to is that these people simply don't care about the issues as much as they say they do. If they did, they wouldn't be able to live with themselves for all they've let slide in the last twenty years.
How much courage does it really take to tell one of your colleagues that they're out of line? I know cops, teachers, lawyers, and even food service workers who demonstrate more 'stuff' than these Democrats, and I finally got sick of it all and started electing those people instead.
Do you hear that, Jim Cooper? I'm coming for your job next if you don't shape up!
(-5.88, -6.46) Democracy is what happens between elections.
by autoegocrat on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:02:18 AM PDT
Very few are immune, and it is uncurable.
by soonerhq on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:23:42 AM PDT
Let's get on with it. Choose a nominee in May or early June at the very latest and be done with it.
Enough.
A riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma
by JekyllnHyde on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:38:44 AM PDT
A contagious disease afflicting liberals - especially elite members of a party whose appropriate emblem is an ass.
by griz4u on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:35:53 AM PDT
Since President's Day, a coalition of voters has been petitioning Democratic elected officials and other superdelegates to support Obama.
Our website, www.votersforobama.com, has sparked petition drives to superdelegates in four states including North Carolina, where we first organized. The site contains everything voters need to contact superdelegates in their states.
Take five minutes and use the tools on our site to contact an undecided superdelegate near you.
We are focusing on superdelegates who are also elected officials and accountable to their constituents. Hesitant to call or e-mail superdelegates? Afraid you'll somehow bother them and keep them from backing Barack? You can download and sign a petition to your local superdelegate elected officials who remain undecided.
Vote for Change - Help Register Voters Near You www.supervoters.org
by latest outrage on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:42:18 AM PDT
No, I'm not a delegate much less a superdelegate. But Florida 2000 as well as countless other episodes in history show the importance of "being there." If I and 100,000 of my friends show up in Denver, then I believe that the superdelegates will do the right thing. They will not stiff the people if we show that we really care about how this race turns out. If I don't care enought to show up...well, then anything is possible.
Your message here. Email for summer rates.
by RudiB on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 09:37:05 AM PDT
A pitchfork? :)
by griz4u on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:48:42 AM PDT
but I never travel without my pitchfork and torch.
by RudiB on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 02:15:51 PM PDT
and that is and has ALWAYS been the problem we face...
career politicians have one main goal... getting re-elected over and over and over which means, at the end of the day they STAND FOR NOTHING but getting re-elected!!
to mistakenly label these people as LIBERALS is a mistake of MAJOR proportions and feeds right into the attack meme the right loves to spew forth during election time.
The CONSTITUTION is MY Flag pin
by KnotIookin on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:48:56 AM PDT
these worms to take a stand or do the right thing.
Calculation trumps all.
Great, good, bad, and evil are a complex continuum. We easily label GOP as bad and evil - and they are. But it is very hard for me to point to very much evidence at all that says that Congressional Democrats, by and large, are "good people". I don't respect our two-party system. And it forces us, progressive citizens, to choose in ways that tends to imply: the Democratic Party is good, the Republican Party is bad.
Frankly, I don't think the Democratic Party IS good. It's simply all that's available that is less shitty than the GOP, by a long shot. Still doesn't make it good.
Those who can't commit right now earn, for me, the rank of self-centered weak office holders and collectors of taxpayer paychecks. Anyone who can't commit right now is, in the language of the street, a total loser as persons. I wouldn't trust such people with my life, not in any way shape or form.
But I don't expect these losers to do the right thing. They don't have that int them. Even though I wish they did.
----- _The Flow of FISA: video clips | GroundZero
by rhfactor on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:29:21 AM PDT
Does anyone know? Isn't he the "head" of the Democratic party?
by ginja on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 09:51:26 AM PDT
As messed up as LBJ was about Vietnam, can you imagine his reaction to the way Democrats are acting today? He would be kicking ass and taking names. We could use someone of his political caliber today. It makes me laugh just to imagine him profanely chewing out some lily-livered DLC clone.
-8.75, -8.21 Another White Dude for Obama (4/25)
by pacotrey on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 09:50:38 AM PDT
I've heard it faintly on the wind, from the west. It must be LBJ turning over in his grave on the ranch in Johnson City.
"Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight. You've got to kick at the darkness until it bleeds daylight." --Bruce Cockburn, "Lovers In A Dangerous
by AustinCynic on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 12:22:59 PM PDT
I'm hoping that the Superdelegates will think about the only thing that's truly important to most of them.
Getting reelected.
For most of them, Obama makes that happen much easier than Clinton does. And gives them more political power by increasing their majority.
You can have your "Under God" back when I get my "Liberty and Justice For All" back.
by karateexplosions on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:55:14 AM PDT
super delegates making mass decisions until Obama brings up the rear on the current head to head polling which is ONLY a reaction to the media drive on Wright.
I think Obama's numbers will go up on his head to heads and against Clinton. I think he'll be back where he is within a couple of weeks.
I absolutely agree that the super delegates will take coat tails into consideration and they should.
But Clinton's only possibility is convincing the supers on the polling data that reflects the Wright controversy. I don't want to give them that opportunity.
NetrootNews coming soon!
by ksh01 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:13:01 AM PDT
is all these "new voters" Obama has brought out to vote in the primaries, particularly the youth. The youth can not be counted on to come out in the general election in the numbers they vote in the caucuses and primaries. If history holds true, we won't be able to count on many of these first-time and youth voters in the fall.
Of course this year may be different, and these people may come out in droves to vote in November. But I don't think we should count on them. We've already seen how the right wing is willing to attack Obama, and it will only get worse. If these voters become discouraged, they won't work for Obama, much less down-ballot candidates, and we stand the chance of losing to another madman. That's the problem with first-time voters of any age - they don't understand how easy it is to become discouraged when the long knives are brought out in a general campaign and aren't in a position to persevere despite setbacks.
Our best hope is a massive education campaign aimed toward older voters and being able to outfox, outyell, out-screw the right wing during the campaign. Beautiful as it was, Obama's speech was attacked almost immediately as being insufficient by the talking heads in the MSM, and if you've looked at the stats on viewership after the speech, Fox News had twice as many viewers as the other two leading stations, CNN and MSNBC, combined. And gawd only knows what the local "news" is saying.
"In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken
by SueDe on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:35:52 AM PDT
First (and thankfully), I don't think the majority of people follow the news as closely as we do. I don't know if that's good or bad.
Second, I think you're right about the inherent unreliability of the youth vote and would counter that this time it's their energy is special. However, I think you are spot on regarding their motivation if it looks like we're losing.
We have so much work to do.
by ksh01 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:43:39 AM PDT
Let the superdelegates and our elected officials see the anger we are feeling now.
This is like Cheney saying "so" about the American people saying they want the war over.
I am so pissed it is hard to be civil sometimes.
It is horrifying that we have to fight our own government to save the environment. Ansel Adams -6.5 -6.75
by Statusquomustgo on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:54:24 AM PDT
Mc Cain = The Draft.
'Course I'm respectable. I'm old. Politicians, ugly buildings and whores all get respectable if they last long enough. Noah Cross, Chinatown
by Badabing on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 04:28:46 PM PDT
I don't believe history is a good guide this time. I see the passion among my three 20-something children and their friends. One of them said recently, "This is the first time I actually have a candidate to vote for instead of one to vote against." Their generation is out actively working for Obama. They are not going to stay home in November.
by Getreal1246 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 09:02:49 AM PDT
she said, mom I didn't do it last time but this time I am going to tell all of my friends and everyone i know to vote. this is a very important election.
I think the young are realizing too that it effects their lives. They are starting to grow up like my daughter and see what not voting did with 4 more years of Bush.
by marlakay on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:15:23 AM PDT
our kids are showing, I have 3 also, and they are 'fired up and ready to go'.
When their parents supported other candidates (Richardson/Edwards)in the beginning, my kids told us 'we'd come to the right side' soon enough. They were right and their enthusiasm hasn't wavered one bit, nor their efforts or their committment to Senator Obama.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. - George Orwell
by Alise on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:47:53 AM PDT
"but what if this or that happens???" "but what if that fails?" "I don't want to be blamed for that."
How about "what if it works?"
What if they truly embrace Democratic principles and try frikkin' LEADING! There is no shame in "going for it" when "it" is for the greater good.
If they don't have the integrity to stand on principle, get them out of the way.
No one second guesses heroes who die in the line of duty trying to save others. No one says, "because he/she failed, everyone died." No, rightly so, a hero is someone who selflessly tried to do for others despite the danger. No one remembers the ones who didn't try.
If they're motivated by nothing but self-preservation, at least they'd be able to boast how they stood up for the democratic principle of letting the voters decide.
Obama'08, climate crisis, anti-GOP, anti-McCain McSame static cling window decals & stickers @ gotta-yell-it.com!
by netguyct on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:25:18 AM PDT
I've been saying this for a while now. THEY are going to call us libruls, traitors and evil doers, no matter what our actions are. That's all they've got...FEAR. So why not take the principled stand and vote and act with your damn conscience. The result from the other side will be exactly the same.
We should not care what the other side will say, we should only care about what we will do.
Politics, n. Strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. - Ambrose Bierce
by MalachiConstant on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:52:57 AM PDT
You do understand we're talking about politicians here, right? :-)
CrustyPolemicist.blogspot.com
by CrustyPolemicist on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 04:40:26 PM PDT
Come November given a decent choice vote those who literally sit on their asses out. Support those down the ticket that promise change and action and have a history of carrying thru on hard challenges.
by jjackso1 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:42:58 AM PDT
A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves.
by charlestown dem on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:13:29 AM PDT
I'm having a little trouble finding a good reference for it (here's one, but it lacks the accompanying story), but there's a good Gandhi story (maybe in the Louis Fischer book?) about how one day he was talking to an interviewer and the march he was supposed to be leading went by, and Gandhi supposedly said:
There they go. I must run and catch up with them, because I am their leader!
This situation seems to be similar, only more metaphorical and without the context of a lifetime of morality, supreme sacrifice, and struggle for the rights of the disadvantaged.
by Warren Terra on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 02:38:38 PM PDT
of throwing US --the voters who put them there in the first place -- under the bus. And I for one, am fucking sick of it.
Last night in another diary, someone brought up the fact that only candidate diaries are making the rec list and all the issue diaries never see the light of day.
The reason is because we have DONE OUR SHARE for the past four years tackling those major issues only to watch the dems keep their fucking powder dry, just as they are by withholding superdelegate support. Pick a fucking side, Godammit, and be done with it! No they sit there and watch a perfectly good man get crucified in the media for something his pastor said on a continous loop in the MSM. It's beyond contempt wat they are doing. They could change the story line right fucking now. Right fucking now. Obama has won, he has the math, they know they will be the "deciders". They know if he falls in the polls it will be because he was swiftboated. And they sat and watched it fucking happen.
Fucking cowards, I say. I'm so frustrated I could scream. I now understand why Lewis Black left Silver Spring, Maryland--where I live now--I want to scream fuck you! at every last one of them.
I know what I won't do. I won't give one damn penny to the democratic party again until they show some balls.
NOT THIS TIME!
by donailin on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 02:41:30 PM PDT
and stand behind Obama.
We finally have a candidate who won't back down to attacks by the right. We have a candidate who stands up for principles.
It's past time for the Party to get 100% behind him.
"It's the planet, stupid."
by FishOutofWater on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:16:45 AM PDT
My wife told me I need to start doing things right here in North Carolina. She's right.
North Carolina is a key state now.
We need to send a strong message that we will not stand for race-based attacks.
by FishOutofWater on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:18:59 AM PDT
Forward, not backwards.
The Democratic party needs to embrace the new paradigm, not cling to the old. Paradigm shifts are always tough for the dinosaurs, but what does the future look like?
A newly energized electorate, with millions of new youth and minority voters. A huge base of small-dollar donors that can give over and over again. An effective and organized grassroots operation that can deliver the volunteers and voters.
What superdelegate would not covet these things? What are we waiting for? Turn the page!
It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds - Samuel Adams
by Red no more on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:35:57 AM PDT
Paradigm shifts are always tough for the dinosaurs, but what does the future look like?
For the dinosaurs? There was no future. Not that that would be a BAD thing...
Subtlety is the art of saying what you think and getting out of the way before it is understood.
by Granny Doc on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:50:59 AM PDT
There's no future for the dinosaurs in the Democratic party, either. Sure, they may be able to delay the inevitable by clinging to 90's politicians and 90's tactics, but guess what? They, too will be relegated to the dustbin of history, and that will happen sooner rather than later if we don't get our act together. As much as the dinosaurs may wish for it, it ain't gonna be the 90's again.
Well, unless you look at the trash that ABC calls journalism. That part of the 90's may well come back...
by Red no more on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:57:52 AM PDT
it all in the NCAA tourney. And I agree it's time to turn up the heat---I'm so disgusted by their inability or unwillingness to come forward to defend Obama. He's out there all alone, with virtually no visible support. And I agree about the importance of doing all you can in N.Car. Indiana and N.Car. loom large now.
by dotster on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 09:35:54 AM PDT
I cannot think of one Senator that could write the speech he did, let alone stand up in front of the entire world and bring up the subject of: Race.
Remember this?
John Kerry, the Democratic candidate in the 2004 presidential election, made an extraordinary intervention on behalf of Barack Obama yesterday, accusing his opponents of stooping to "Swiftboat" smear tactics to destroy the senator's presidential ambitions. Kerry, whose presidential bid was wrecked by innuendo and lies about his Vietnam service as a Swiftboat officer on the Mekong river, did not name the Clintons but they appeared to be the main target of his outburst. "The fight is just heating up. We won't let them steal this election with lies and distortions," he said.
John Kerry, the Democratic candidate in the 2004 presidential election, made an extraordinary intervention on behalf of Barack Obama yesterday, accusing his opponents of stooping to "Swiftboat" smear tactics to destroy the senator's presidential ambitions.
Kerry, whose presidential bid was wrecked by innuendo and lies about his Vietnam service as a Swiftboat officer on the Mekong river, did not name the Clintons but they appeared to be the main target of his outburst.
"The fight is just heating up. We won't let them steal this election with lies and distortions," he said.
"I don't want a campaign that is divisive here, and there's a danger in that," Dodd said, although he denied he was nudging Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton to end her candidacy. Dodd said Obama was "ready to be president and I am ready to support him in this campaign."
"I don't want a campaign that is divisive here, and there's a danger in that," Dodd said, although he denied he was nudging Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton to end her candidacy.
Dodd said Obama was "ready to be president and I am ready to support him in this campaign."
And this from John Edwards....
Tonight showed that if you’re willing to have a little backbone, a little courage, and stand up to corporate greed, we will be unstoppable – no matter how much money is spent," Edwards continued. "The Clinton campaign thought big money would make them inevitable – but despite being dramatically outspent by not one, but two celebrity candidates, we finished a strong second. And now we move on to New Hampshire and the other early states, where the voters will choose who is best suited to bring about the change this country so desperately needs."
A little backbone, indeed. Where are they all now when it matters most? Where are they now to stand up for the core values of the Democratic Party, and to defend our party? These 'leaders' including Senator Kennedy and others should be on every television and radio show possible discussing the issues and demanding that our party stand up and not be damaged and insulted by the right wing crazies.
I am losing all respect for these people, I really am. And as far as I can see, Obama shames them all with his brave and honorable conduct.
by Badabing on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 04:54:42 PM PDT
why the candidates need to make public their stands on New Orleans and her recovery and that of the rest of the region hit by Katrina, Rita and the federal flood?
Don't miss this series of diaries!
NOLA DIARY-ATHON SCHEDULE. ALL TIMES PACIFIC Thurs., Mar. 20 7AM Louisiana 1976 9AM blueintheface 11AM chigh 1PM mlharges 3PM Avila 5PM YatPundit Fri., Mar. 21 7AM Crashing Vor 11AM pico 1PM Chicagoa 3PM leo fender 5PM Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse
NOLA DIARY-ATHON SCHEDULE. ALL TIMES PACIFIC
Thurs., Mar. 20
7AM Louisiana 1976
9AM blueintheface
11AM chigh
1PM mlharges
3PM Avila
5PM YatPundit
Fri., Mar. 21
7AM Crashing Vor
11AM pico
1PM Chicagoa
3PM leo fender
5PM Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse
Don't miss my blog! "We are all New Orleans now."--Barbara O'Brien Geauxbama!
by Louisiana 1976 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:22:59 AM PDT
to the Democratic Party, and get this done.
John Kerry: "The rubber stamp Republicans have now become the Roadblock Republicans"
by beachmom on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:23:27 AM PDT
Look at it from THIER point of view.
That uncomitted vote keeps rising in value, now to astronomical heghts!
And as unclear as things are right now, why risk the revenge of the Clinton's?
by IndianaDemocrat on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:26:06 AM PDT
should do it. And everything you mention is short term gain (perhaps) but long term disaster. And lots of brave Democrats have defied the Clintons already.
by beachmom on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:29:19 AM PDT
...if enough voters feel disenfranchised enough to stay home or abstain from voting in the presidential election in November. And hand the Presidency to McCain.
by Spunkmeyer on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:32:55 AM PDT
The only thing that is unclear to me is how anyone can make a reasonable argument that things are "unclear". It is clear that Obama will have the lead in pledged delegates. It is clear that Obama will almost certainly have the lead in popular vote. It is clear that Obama is the candidate with the most fund-raising potential and with the best chance to help Democrats down-ticket, and, indeed, the best chance to be the 44th President of these United States.
Seems pretty clear to me.
by Supercontext on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:40:19 AM PDT
As professional politicians, they are suspicious and wary of the changes embodied in Obama's candidacy and its address to voters as Americans rather than as specifically targeted groups. But more than that, given the past poor success of the Dems at rallying enough of the base, in addition to attracting independents and recovering the Reagan Democrats (failures that cost them the last two elections,the prospect of alienating Clinton's identified bases of support terrifies the superdelegates. They foresee that happening if prominent party leaders call for an end to this too soon.
It's better to achieve a consensus than simulate one that falls apart in November.
Obama's ok; today in WV he spoke about how the war is preventing addressing economic problems and proposed specific solutions. As such, he's running for president, while Clinton appears to be chasing after him for the nomination.
by gattamorta on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 09:56:38 AM PDT
about the "value" of their votes.
They are like people sitting on the last vacant lot in a hot neighborhood, waiting to sell until the price is at the top of what the market will bear.
I think that a large number of these fence-sitters are waiting to see what they can get out of their vote, whether it's more visibility, more influence, more pork...
I doubt that Obama will be in the business of handing out favors and preference; I don't get a sense that is part of his MO. But the Clintons can be very generous to those who help, and I can imagine not wanting to get on the down side of that machine.
It's weak, and irritating, and I vastly prefer the character of the SDs who have already declared.
by kate mckinnon on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:57:07 AM PDT
OF COURSE Obama will be handing out favors and preference. There will be a limited number of positions to fill if he goes forward into the general election. There will be an overabundance of qualified people to choose from, all of whom wish to help, presumably for the best of reasons. There will be a battle for access to him. The very nature of politics is that some are preferred and some are not. There is nothing nefarious about brokers brokering. Obama won't be able to avoid participating since he will be the target of their entreaties, most likely, not the other way around.
Intelligent Designer Laments Lapse in Intelligence
by mrblifil on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:27:52 AM PDT
the same kind of blatantly offensive Pork Fest that we have seen in the past. I could be incredibly naive, and I see that you think that I am, but I don't think that Obama is going to encourage the same kind of uh, system, that is in play now.
If a superdelegate who held out until the end to give him their vote gets preferential treatment, favors, or bribes, over someone who supported him from Day 1, I'd be surprised.
Anyway, I'm happy to have someone to believe in, and you can be as cynical as you like. Odds are with you.
by kate mckinnon on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 01:06:36 PM PDT
... when there are plenty available
and these clowns don't gain their strength by collecting favors, but by granting them
thus, they stand stronger if more Dems wind up holding office at all levels
but, for whatever reason, they sit back, wondering whether they should cuff their trousers, lamenting that the mermaids aren't singing to them
The next fantasy: Obama/Dean (please let it be)
by wystler on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 09:24:42 AM PDT
competitive down ticket races. It would be riskey for some of them to commit right now and we need to keep every seat and gain some.
by TNforkerry on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:13:33 AM PDT
that is what I don't understand
"We struck down evil with the mighty sword of teamwork and the hammer of not bickering!" - The Shoveler
by Pandoras Box on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 09:01:56 AM PDT
there's a sizeable portion of the remaining uncommitteds who seem to address life like their literary hero: J. Alfred Prufrock
by wystler on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 09:21:06 AM PDT
Because waiting to see where we are at the end of the primary election process is akin to voting for the Iraq War.
I wonder how silly and hyperbolic the diaries will be if and when this process carries on till June or September. By then I guess anyone who doesn't support Obama will be Hitler.
Are you people actually moved by ridiculous overstatement?
by david mizner on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:28:53 AM PDT
to start seriously contending for the November election. I don't think it's terribly hyperbolic to point that out.
Back in February, I too was counseling patience. But that's when I though Super Tuesday or at least Texas was going to put this thing to bed.
"The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller
by lgmcp on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:38:57 AM PDT
It's not hyperbolic to express a desire to end the process now, it's hyperbolic to compare superdelegates who don't support Obama to supporters of the Iraq war.
by david mizner on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:51:07 AM PDT
it's the same cowardice. Any power brokers willing to let this thing drag on all the way into June are as weak as they are foolish.
by thereisnospoon on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:39:59 AM PDT
this, but there are millions upon millions of Hillary supporters who would be furious if the elites of this party shut this down in a way that they didn't think was fair. Millions of voters, many of whom are white working class women, who would be ripe for the picking by McCain.
I want Obama to win. I wish Clinton would drop out. But as long as Obama doesn't have a majority of delegates, she has every right to stay in the election until the convention.
Superdelegates are under no obligation, moral or political, to shut this process down and to liken their reluctance to shut the process down to a vote for the Iraq War is absurd.
This is the kind of reality-challenged moralizing that is turning Obama supporters into laughingstocks around the sphere.
by david mizner on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:49:39 AM PDT
look, Hillary got a boatload of SDs at the beginning, which the media has unfairly been counting in her corner to make her the frontrunner since the beginning. If it's about pledged delegates, it's already over no matter what.
All we need is for about 100 SDs to come our way at once, and none of it matters. She can stay in if she wants, but it doesn't matter.
by thereisnospoon on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:52:55 AM PDT
You're calling for superdelegates to announce their support for Obama and you believe that failure to do so is like supporting the Iraq War?
Is that it?
So, for example, Sherrod Brown, because he remains undecided, is doing something as bad as supporting the invasion of Iraq?
I'm trying to understand.
by david mizner on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:58:47 AM PDT
I said it was a symptom of the same disease. No, a mild fever isn't as bad as vomiting and diarrhea, but it's still a symptom of the same disease.
Get it now?
by thereisnospoon on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:03:44 AM PDT
So Sherrod Brown is a coward for not backing Obama?
Is that what you're saying?
by david mizner on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:23:32 AM PDT
As a former VP, he's a superdelegate.
Is Al Gore's refusal to back Obama a symptom of the same disease that led to the Iraq War?
Is Al Gore a coward for not backing Obama?
by david mizner on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:32:20 AM PDT
by david mizner on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:59:51 AM PDT
Al Gore has the (questionable) excuse of needing to remain above the fray in order to be an international leader.
Other Democrats, including Sherrod Brown, don't have that excuse.
Cowardice is not always a bad thing. This time it might be.
-5.63, -8.10 | Impeach, Convict, Remove & Bar from Office, Arrest, Indict, Convict, Imprison!
by neroden on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 09:31:44 AM PDT
Al Gore, too. I'm disappointed in both of them, really.
by thereisnospoon on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 03:13:23 PM PDT
... according to the latest CBS poll, only 22% of Hillary supporters would be "angry"...
–If Clinton wins more total votes but Obama takes the nomination because of superdelegates, 22% of Clinton supporters would be angry and 51% would be disappointed.
Just saying...
What's the Point?
by Vermonter on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:56:43 AM PDT
but disagree with what follows. It is unavoidable that one side or the other is going to be pissed off at whatever the SDs do. For as furious as Clinton supporters would be, double or triple that if the SDs flip the will of the majority of the pledged delegates. We'd as well inaugurate President McCain on that day and save a few million.
Superdelegtes should be able to see where this is headed and do what is right for the party and the nation, and it is clear to everybody, Clinton included, that Obama must be the nominee. Dragging this out and allowing attacks on our candidate is the sort of insanity that will put another R in the White House.
The superdelegates can and should individually make decisions that will best serve the Dem party, and allowing the primary season to continue past its necessity is counterproductive.
When the oak is felled the whole forest echoes with its fall, but a hundred acorns are sown in silence by an unnoticed breeze. -Thomas Carlyle
by rb608 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:58:35 AM PDT
but there's a natural time to move this process to a conclusion, when the primaries are over.
It sucks, but there it is.
by david mizner on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:00:09 AM PDT
between C & O supporters is whether or not the primaries are already functionally over. IMO, the better outcome is a known at this point. Continuing the process doesn't seem to be helping.
I understand the desire for the charade of making future primary voters feel as though their vote gives them a voice; but they know as well as we do that it's not unusual for the outcome to be determined before they go to the polls. I doubt it will turn anyone off from the GE in November.
by rb608 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:09:13 AM PDT
and I don't think the race is functionally over, and I think I could prove in a court of law that it's not.
Obama will probably win, but he hasn't won yet, and I don't see how premature declarations of victory do anything but hurt him.
by david mizner on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:34:48 AM PDT
but the circumstances paint a clear picture that the only way HRC can secure the nomination is through a process that virtually guarantees a McCain victory in November. We have selected our nominee. I'll concede that the outcome may not be as clear as I perceive it; but to me (a hopelessly logical guy), that means that the functional role of the primaries has been completed.
by rb608 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:44:21 AM PDT
The people here at DailyKos may have already selected their nominee, but the people of Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Indiana, North Carolina, etc, etc.. are still waiting to register their voice.
Obama is only ahead in the popular vote totals by something like 80,000 votes, so this could very easily swing to Hillary's favor with the remaining states.
I understand those here who wish for the nominating process to end now before any more embarassing issues that could hurt Obama are brought to the forefront, but consider this part of the vetting process.
And the Democratic party by not doing winner-take-all created a process that would by design drag on with a competitive race. Until someone reaches the necessary number of delegates, the race continues...a
by Defoliate Bush on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 09:46:16 AM PDT