Clinton counts on superdelegates
By Susan Milligan, Globe Staff
WASHINGTON -- Hillary Clinton will take the Democratic nomination even if she does not win the popular vote, but persuades enough superdelegates to vote for her at the convention, her campaign advisers say.
The New York senator, who lost three primaries Tuesday night, now lags slightly behind her rival, Illinois Senator Barack Obama, in the delegate count. She is even further behind in "pledged'' delegates, those assigned by virtue of primaries and caucuses.
But Clinton will not concede the race to Obama if he wins a greater number of pledged delegates by the end of the primary season, and will count on the 796 elected officials and party bigwigs to put her over the top, if necessary, said Clinton's communications director, Howard Wolfson.
"I want to be clear about the fact that neither campaign is in a position to win this nomination without the support of the votes of the superdelegates,'' Wolfson told reporters in a conference call.
"We don't make distinctions between delegates chosen by million of voters in a primary and those chosen between tens of thousands in caucuses,'' Wolfson said. "And we don't make distinctions when it comes to elected officials'' who vote as superdelegates at the convention.
"We are interested in acquiring delegates, period,'' he added.
Clinton advisers rejected the notion that the candidate -- and the party -- would be badly wounded in the general election if the nominee were essentially selected by a group of party insiders.
"This is a nomination system that exists of caucuses, primaries, superdelegates and also the issue of voters in Florida and Michigan,'' states whose delegates currently will not be seated at the convention because they broke party rules by moving up their primaries to January, said Mark Penn, senior strategist for the Clinton campaign. But "whoever the nominee is, the party will come together behind that nominee,'' he said.
With the battle for the Democratic nomination excruciatingly close, supporters of both campaigns are questioning the nominating process. The Clinton camp has suggested that the caucuses -- where Obama has bested Clinton in all but one state -- are inherently undemocratic, since only a small percentage of eligible voters are able to make it to a caucus site and commit the time to vote at a particular hour.
Clinton -- who initially joined other Democrats in opposing Michigan and Florida's decisions to go ahead with early primaries -- now wants the votes of those primaries counted. The Obama camp thinks that idea is unfair, since candidates were not allowed to campaign in those states, and Clinton alone kept her name on the Michigan ballot, meaning Obama did not have a chance at getting even provisional delegates.
Superdelegates should "vote their conscience,'' despite how their states voted, Wolfson said. Penn noted that the Obama campaign, for example, has not asked Massachusetts Senators Edward M. Kennedy and John F. Kerry to cast superdelegate votes for Clinton, although the Bay State voted overwhelmingly for her in the primary.
The two candidates head into contests next week in Hawaii and Wisconsin; Obama is leading in the polls in both states. The Clinton campaign is pinning its hopes on the March 4 states of Ohio, Texas, and Rhode Island, but Wolfson said yesterday the campaign is opening offices in every remaining primary and caucus state, including Puerto Rico.
If the superdelegates are going to select the nominee, why bother going through the primaries?
If the superdelegates are going to select the nominee, why bother going through the primaries?
That's insane. If she does that, there'll be rioting on the streets. It'll be Chicago '68 all over again. I hope she and the DNC aren't that stupid.
Even if Senator Obama wins more pledged delegates (so far he does), wins more states (so far he does), and gets more of the popular vote (so far he does), Clinton campaign will stomach a win through the votes of "super delegates" and will also try to change the rule after the game is over, trying to legitimize Florida and Michigan voting, where Senator Obama did not campaign. How similar to how George W. Bush won the 2000 Presidential Election. Legitimate? Seems to be. Pathetic? You bet. Senator Clinton had claimed that she "embodies the change". Would you believe her after this?
It is amazing that a party that cried fowl when Bush had the Presidency delivered to him by the Supreme court in 2000, is thinking about doing the same thing to a member of their own party. And he is a more popular member at that than Mrs. Clinton. This just goes to show you that Clinton is 100% out for her self, not what is good for the party. Why does she have to be so divisive?
Translation: Screw the popular vote, Clinton is going where the money (and the elitism) is.
No one should be surprised by this, and this is exactly the reason Clinton cannot win the popular vote - too many independents and leftists are tired of politicians that are experts at schmoozing and back-room, back-alley deals with lobbyists and unsavory political characters. Clinton reeks of the corruption of money - a stench that Obama has not yet gathered.
The election process should heed to the desire of the people. Elected officials are suppose to represent the people and be for the people. The super-delegates are no different! Each states has a certain number of "super-delegates" and they are an extension of the designated delegates from each state. Why is there so much talk and confusion on where these "super-delegates" votes should lie?
When the Democratic National Convention starts - August 2008; those so-called super-delegates should vote in favor of the people. Contradictions to Mr. Wolfson's comments that "Super-delegates should "vote their conscience,'' despite how their states voted". History has already shown us what happens "when {Pres. Bush} was elected over voters desires.” Let the poll delegates dictate whether Senator Clinton or Senator Obama, majority rules, wins the super-delegates votes. We say that we want “Change” in our speeches, but when the road gets rough and the numbers are not looking in our favor; we so quickly convert back to the “Old-ways of doing business”.
Also, the issue surrounding delegates that were unseated "in Florida and Michigan,''. The Democratic committee made this determination well in advance of both Michigan and Florida elections. Everyone was aware that the state of Florida and Michigan carried "NO DEMOCRATIC DELEGATES" well in advance. There was NO lobbying, press, or candidates complaining before the elections, but now that ONE candidates seems to be under the wire for delegates these two-states have become an concern. I represent one of these states (Florida) and I was well aware of the ruling prior to the primary election date. I and many others either went to the polls or declined to vote based on these guidelines. You don't change the rules after the game has already been started, and in the case of Florida and Michigan, after the elections has already been conducted.
Last, as it has been duly noted the "Super-delegates" vote is not final till the day they actually cast their vote. Why then are their numbers being represented inside the actual delegate count inside most media articles and news reports? People are interested in seeing "actual numbers" not "possible figures". Is the media supporting one side over the other - by including unsubstantiated information inside the count?
Not only: "... in every remaining primary and caucus state, including Puerto Rico.", Since Puerto Rico have more delegates than 27 of the other states and territories, it looks like it might be decided here!
Give up Hillary - You're beaten and you know it. All the tears in the world will not save you. Save what honor you have left and find a job that minimizes the damage you took in this election.
So let me get this straight? Hillary Clinton is willing to destroy the democratic process of the Democratic Party, divide its membership base and then... not be prepared to do the same thing in the general election?
I'm tired of this. I'm tired of politicians who are willing to do "whatever it takes" to get into government - and then have the gall to make out they are doing it for the people the represent. Hillary Clinton's motivation for running for President is because Hillary Clinton wants to be President. She thinks it's an entitlement due to her and she should be able to do whatever she likes to get her reward.
Her reward is to govern the American people. Because it's her turn. Because she spent 35 years living in the shadow of her husband and didn't get the credit that she wanted in that relationship. So she demands it from us.
I'm tired of this. I'm guessing a lot of people are too, by this point.
If Barack Obama were to take this "win at all costs" tactic his candidacy would be dead in the water. His support comes from people who believe in him. Who want to believe in him. Who hope and believe and desire that they can have something more in the person who they choose to govern them.
Hillary Clinton's attitude, like that of the current President is unpatriotic. It ignores the nation, because it is oblivious to the needs of the citizens - our inherent right to be heard and to matter. If she cared about the needs of the people she would stand down. She would concede. She would be remembered for doing something selfless; something good. I hope she does. I hope she looks at herself and realises there are more important things to fight for than Hillary Clinton's ego.
People want a leader, not a administrator. We need a figurehead to stand behind, stand next to, someone who will take us forward because they, like us see us as people worth representing, worth leading. Not as pawns who can be sacrificed and ignored if we don't vote their way.
I support Barack Obama, because I want a leader. Someone who provides me with the spirit that my voice matters, that my vote counts and that those who stand beside me matter too. Even those who disagree. Even Hillary Clinton.
Shouldn't the super delegates conscience tell them to vote the way the populace of
their particular state wanted to go in the first place? Am I missing something or is her campaign starting to sound as dirty and double talkee as the current administration?
This article just goes to prove that the Hillary camp clearly does not care about what the people have to say. I think none of the superdelegates should declare either side until the national convention. If Hillary wants to get greedy and kill American democracy then I guess she has the power and the friends to do it. I'm tired of a two family dynasty that has lasted 24 years. The thought that during my life I have only seen two families in power in a country that says that it is democratic makes me sick.
So go ahead and kill democracy Wolfson. If either Obama or Hillary win by super delegates alone it will show that democracy is dead. I say we get rid of superdelegates. They're a bad idea and anti democracy. Since when should 350 American votes equal that of one old crony. Go figure. Why are we even having primaries and caucuses? Why are we saying that we have a democracy? Superdelegates are not democracy. We need to eliminate them.
I promise you that as someone who can't stand what W has done to the country, I want more than just about anything to keep McCain from claiming the Presidency. But, like those conservatives who can't bring themselves to vote for McCain, should the Clinton campaign win the nomination because of super delegates over the express majority vote of the primary voters, I WILL NOT vote for her. I will stay home.
Disgusting.
Why is it that we have an American Presidential candidate who proudly belongs to a segregated church that declares it's non-negotiable commitment to Africa and nobody is talking about this? Check out Trinity United Church of Christ's website!! www.tucc.org!!!!
So Clinton demands a coronation via fiat and smoke filled back rooms over the will of the people. Hillary thinks democracy is wonderful until you lose I guess.
Just further proof that Senator Clinton and her campaign believe this "is all about her," and not about our nation. If, at the end of the voting, the candidate that has the most elected delegates and the most votes is denied the nomination by the super delegates, the Democratic Party will loose the Presidency and many Congressional seats. Those first time voters and all those people that are Democrats because we are the party of fairness, transparency and working people will stay home. The Democratic Party will be no better than the GOP we have bolding critisized for seven years for smear politics, cheating, lying and bullying. We will be no better and not worth participating in.
What a sad collection of arrogant people advise Clinton. If Clinton negates the popular vote there won't be enough Democrats on board to win. They tried to unite the party under fear once already and no one will buy it this time. These superdelegates won't last in office long either.
If this sentiment is true, that is proof that Senator Clinton sees this campaign as all about "her," and not about this country. If there is any attempt to bypass the choice of the voter's choice (candidate with the most earned delegates) there will be hell to pay in this party that will result in a Democratic defeat in November. Taking the nomination away from the rightful winner by super delegates will end up with all the young people, Independents, and voters looking to a system for tranparency, fair play and new politics sitting home on election day. It will not only cost the Party the Presidency, but a lot of Congressional seats as well. Mr. Wolfson is spinning, but he is dead wrong and in very dangerous territory. Mike Bloomberg anyone?
It sounds like they're willing to sell their soul to win. It's getting a little scary. I guess the American people will need to stand up show her what the true will of the people means.
Should Sen. Clinton be behind in both the popular vote and pledged delegates, yet insists on fighting for the nomination, the price will be the Democratic party. She - and her husband - will be despised. Many of us will either vote for Sen. McCain or write in "Barack Obama." Even more - young voters, African-Americans - will be lost and who can blame them? All that they've hoped for dashed before the might of Clinton ambition and entitlement.
Should it look like this scenario is about to unfold, someone - Al Gore? - will have to step in. Otherwise, a Pandora's box will be unleashed. The convention will be truly war as the will of people fight to overcome the will of the Clintons.
Mrs. Clinton is the best qualified for the President of USA. She is ready to take on anything that comes her way. Mr. Obama is the opposite. He is far from being qualified for the job, not even close. It is so important that we have Mrs. Clintion in the office so that we can have this country back again.
Would someone help American to understand that the time is very crucial if we want to move forward. And, so far, we have been moving backward for the last eight years. If we continue the same game for another eight years, this country will be driven to a deep ground. You think this time is bad, it will be so bad that you wish you could be in somewhere, other than America. Take back you country!
This would seem to contradict what Clinton said back in November 2000 about an aspect of our election system that is as undemocratic as the "superdelegate" scheme:
"I have thought about this for a long time," Mrs. Clinton said at a rally in an airport hangar in Syracuse. "I've always thought we had outlived the need for an Electoral College, and now that I am going to the Senate, I am going to try to do what I can to make clear that the popular vote, the will of the people, should be followed."
***
She said she wanted "to be on the side of the democratic process working," and so would support the effort to establish direct presidential elections.
***
"I believe strongly that in a democracy we should respect the will of the people."
ahhh. "whoever the nominee is, the party will come together behind that nominee,'' he said.
no, he is wrong. I have been a loyal Dem for years, and I will abandon ship faster than you can say Obama. It seems painfully obvious that if Clinton somehow does end up as the nominee, the party will have completely blown their chance to take back the White House. This just makes me sick.
Obama has proven the ability to create a long term Democratic majority unlike any we have seen, bringing young voters, old, black, white, liberal, conservative, you name it. Dear Ohio and Texas, help us end this primary so we can focus on Mcain.
How quickly do the leaders of the Democratic party cave in to their own hypocrisy by using a system that ignores the popular vote in a manner that is similar to that of the electoral college system.
So why does anyone make a big deal about Florida in 2000, if Hillary can just call up her friends and Bill's and get voted in even if the people don't vote for her.? sounds a lot like what Putin is trying to do in Russia by gaining power so he can stay in office without term limits.
This is an unglamorous position, to say the least. The Clintons show, once more, that they are ready to do anything to get elected. Obama has campaigned brilliantly and will get the nomination nevertheless. It is just sad that Clintons' legacy in the hearts and minds of many Democrats will resemble Republicans' memories of the 90's.
The king is dead. Long live the king!
Go, Obama! The new generation is yours!
It's unfair for millions of voters in Florida and Michigan for DNC to deny their votes, plain and simple. I guess, these voters will become dissatified with the party, ultimately will change their party to independent or republican for that matter. It has to be resolved now before it's too late. I, myself, feel that way.
Is Clinton really going to steal the nomination? Will the Democratic officials let her? So many Democrats will stay home or vote Green if she gets away with it.
What a great strategy to disenfranchise the Democratic rank and file... I have seen speculation that the Clinton campaign is considering this if they're "close" in the committed delegate count (less than 100 delegates separating). This is also in line with their strategy to try and seat the MI and FL delegates -- where the states were penalized by the DNC for moving their primaries forward of Feb5 -- and all candidates acknowledged that these primaries were "invalid". All of this makes it clear that Sen. Clinton is willing to do whatever it takes to win the nomination -- even if it means that she'll splinter the party and disenfranchise the "activists" who have helped to push Sen. Obama into the lead in both committed delegates and total votes.
What a great strategy to disenfranchise the Democratic rank and file... I have seen speculation that the Clinton campaign is considering this if they're "close" in the committed delegate count (less than 100 delegates separating). This is also in line with their strategy to try and seat the MI and FL delegates -- where the states were penalized by the DNC for moving their primaries forward of Feb5 -- and all candidates acknowledged that these primaries were "invalid". All of this makes it clear that Sen. Clinton is willing to do whatever it takes to win the nomination -- even if it means that she'll splinter the party and disenfranchise the "activists" who have helped to push Sen. Obama into the lead in both committed delegates and total votes.
This is the same arrogance that has gotten us (America) into the mess we are in now. We already have a President who not hear the people's wishes to end the war. We already have a President who has been so stubborn and arrogant and not listen to his own party members.
Mrs. Clinton is arrogant and stubborn. The "superdelegates" are elected officials and are suppose to speak for the people. She will go at any length to make her point; even if its going against the will of the people and the majority of the Democratic Party. She has already divided Latinos and Blacks by making this a racial issue. What will she do once in office. I thought this was suppose to be a democracy where the people decide. Apparently not.
If Hillary Rodham Clinton or any other candidate thwarts the will of the people through trickery, then I would hold my nose and vote for the Republican candidate. Short of that, I certainly wouldn't take the time to vote for her.
Hillary, Senator-elect, in 2000:
"We are a very different country than we were 200 years ago," Clinton said. "I believe strongly that in a democracy, we should respect the will of the people and to me, that means it's time to do away with the Electoral College and move to the popular election of our president."
Except, of course, when it applies to her chances at the Democratic nomination.
But "whoever the nominee is, the party will come together behind that nominee,'' he said.
-You are so wrong, if Clinton wins nomination by superdelegates, the Democratic party is over.
Hillary, Senator-elect, in 2000:
"We are a very different country than we were 200 years ago," Clinton said. "I believe strongly that in a democracy, we should respect the will of the people and to me, that means it's time to do away with the Electoral College and move to the popular election of our president."
Except, of course, when it applies to her chances at the Democratic nomination.
Popular vote. Period.
"Hillary Clinton will take the Democratic nomination even if she does not win the popular vote, but persuades enough superdelegates to vote for her at the convention, her campaign advisers say."
And she will lose the general election HANDILY. I can see the Republicans now. "Even the voters in her own party don't want her to run. Yet she's used her political ties to cheat, steal and lie the nomination away from Sen Obama."
Yeah, great strategy.
Democracy?
Ha!
Super-delegates. What a crock! They have no place in a democratic process. If the super-delegates make the difference in this primary I hope people protest the lousy process.
Gee, what a shocker... this woman will do anything and say anything to get the nomination. Distort the record of her opponents, lean on party insiders to install her into the position of nominee, flip-flop on her position with regard to the contests in Michigan and Florida...
I think we've had enough of the Clintons.
I wish Penn would stop taking my vote for granted. He's foolish to think that the electorate won't feel betrayed if one candidate emerges as the leader in pledged delegates and the popular vote, but the other wins the nomination on the strength of machine politics. It would tap right into the anger Dems felt after the Supreme Court intervened in the 2000 election. It would be tear the party apart.
Like the democrats do in every US election...find a way to win!!!
moral or legal,ethical, doesn't fit into their scheme of things..only power .
Power, money and greed...for the next 8 years....didn't anyone learn
anything from the Clinton 90's????
The Superdelegates better not do this. If they crown Hillary queen after Obama wins the most regular delegates, that is the end of the Democratic party. I will walk out and I hope everyone else does. I would NEVER vote for Repuke crooks but I refuse to vote for a nominee that was chosen in a smoke-filled room.
Shame on you Hillary! This is disgusting.
Like the democrats do in every US election...find a way to win!!!
moral or legal,ethical, doesn't fit into their scheme of things..only power .
Power, money and greed...for the next 8 years....didn't anyone learn
anything from the Clinton 90's????
The opportunistic and elitist Hillary strikes again!
Is she going to let the will of the American people get in her way? Of course not. She’ll rely on Washington insiders to get her in regardless of what the people want.
And of course since she was the only candidate slimy enough to keep her name on the ballots in MI and FL, she now wants those delegates counted. How can she possibly justify this?
I think it’s pretty clear by her tactics in this campaign what kind of president she would be, so you have been warned: a vote for Hillary is a vote for the Democrat model of George W Bush.
I think as Super delegates, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry should follow the lead of the people of MA and vote for Hillary Clinton.
I'm sorry but for either Obama or Clinton to lose the majority of delegates from the legitimate voting and accept the nomination based only on backroom dealings will be one of the few sure ways to jeopardize the general election. It is disgusting to think that with record voter turnouts in the democratic primaries that the party willfully ignore the will of the people. The superdelegates may as well be the crooked Supreme Court that put Chimpie in office at that rate.
I'm sorry but for either Obama or Clinton to lose the majority of delegates from the legitimate voting and accept the nomination based only on backroom dealings will be one of the few sure ways to jeopardize the general election. It is disgusting to think that with record voter turnouts in the democratic primaries that the party willfully ignore the will of the people. The superdelegates may as well be the crooked Supreme Court that put Chimpie in office at that rate.
Not acceptable.
Dear Foon Rhee & Susan Milligan:
My personal opinion on the campaign race is that Obama will win. The race is very close for both candidates.
What would I know? I am an artist that wishes to see the American public by pass the racial differences since Obama will be a great President. It will be an example for the world to see Obama as a President. The Clinton's have their chance in the past. I am not so sure that we desire the same governmental power.
Liliana Prina
If this were true I would switch my support to Sen. Obama. But after reading every news article on the subject, Mr. Wolfson never actually says it.
You are putting words into his mouth.
The Clintons are shameless. They'll do anything and everything to win. She won't get my vote if she were pitted up against an actual elephant.
If Senator Clinton circumvents the will of the people, I for one,will sit the election out. We've been disenfranchised for 8 years and I am greatly disappointed that the Clinton campaign would consider participating in this shamefule practice.
If this were true I would switch my support to Sen. Obama. But after reading every news article on the subject, Mr. Wolfson never actually says it.
You are putting words into his mouth.
Shameful.
There's no longer any doubt about Hillary's intentions, and it saddens me. I have defended her here and elsewhere, but I'm done with it.
Apparently, she and her team have no qualms at all about letting a bunch of party poobahs decide this thing, as long as it's in their favor. The will of the people, such as it is, matters not a whip to her, nor does the prospect of a deeply splintered party heading into the general election.
Both nominees should abide by how the actual earned delegates work out, and have the grace to concede if they're on the short end. The notion that delegates from elected officals, decided in smoky backrooms, should count just as much as delegates won in primaries and caucuses is pure bull. Anyone with even a base understanding and affection for true democracy intuitively gets that.
Shameful.
There's no longer any doubt about Hillary's intentions, and it saddens me. I have defended her here and elsewhere, but I'm done with it.
Apparently, she and her team have no qualms at all about letting a bunch of party poobahs decide this thing, as long as it's in their favor. The will of the people, such as it is, matters not a whip to her, nor does the prospect of a deeply splintered party heading into the general election.
Both nominees should abide by how the actual earned delegates work out, and have the grace to concede if they're on the short end. The notion that delegates from elected officals, decided in smoky backrooms, should count just as much as delegates won in primaries and caucuses is pure bull. Anyone with even a base understanding and affection for true democracy intuitively gets that.
Hillary to superdelegates: Oh, superdelegates, you HAVE to endorse me! YOU OWE ME, YOU OWE ME, YOU OWE ME AND IT'S TIME FOR YOU TO PAY UP!!!! YOUR PAY BACK IS GETTING ME BACK INTO THE WHITE HOUSE...YOU OWE ME, YOU OWE ME, YOU OWE ME, TIME TO PAY UP!!! PAY UP NOW!! EVEN IF SENATOR OBAMA IS AHEAD OF ME ON ALL COUNTS, YOU CANNOT ENDORSE HIM!!! WAHHHHHH WAAHHHHH--I WANT TO LIVE IN THE WHITE HOUSE AGAIN, YOU OWE ME!!! IT'S PAYBACK TIME!!!!
I have read every actual quote you have for Mr. Wolfson, and he never EVER says "Clinton will not concede". Not once.
You are putting words into his mouth.
Don't you just love this! If the Hillary cannot win the nomination democratically she will try to steal it ala George Bush style. What is wrong with politicians these days? Ethics are non-existant. Integrity and honor do not exist in our government. Greed is the Creed. This country was begun by our Founding Fathers. It is now being brought down by these floundering fathers. That the average citizen is democratically deaf, dumb, and blind and has no care whatsoever as too how this is threatening our rights and freedoms is extremely frustrating. With the media being dead on arrival we do not even have a medium to shout out warnings in or have investigating style reporting from. Where do we turn to?
There is a reason why our wise Founding Fathers built Superdelegates into our system i.e. to provide check and balances to the tyranny of majority and to protect our Republic from becoming a mobocracy.
Our way of electing a president is unique among Western democracies, where party insiders usually pick the candidate to represent their party first, before letting voters pick the president/premier minister from among the candidates of various parties, which is why they tend to have better luck at ending up with a qualified president/premier minister.
The fact is, party insiders tend to be more informed and in better position to judge the qualification of their fellow politicians than the general voters, the more so since our voters tend to be not well informed nor issues oriented, not to mention quite susceptible to manipulation by the media and to adopt a self-centered focus in picking a president i.e. basing their decision on personal like and dislike instead on objective evidence as to a candidate's qualification and record in best serving the nation.
In light of the dire state this nation is in, we can't afford to repeat the mistake of electing a president based on rhetoric and appearances, lest this nation will deteriorate further.
Barack Obama wants the name of the Democratic Party to support his candidacy, and supported the choice to allow so many undeclared Independents and Republicans into the nominating process. Why then he is unwilling to abide by the Democratic Party rules? If he wants a party where winner takes all, he should run as the Republican he is.
There are many Democrats who believe that he is trying to destroy the Democratic Party to create a new Obama Party.
If he wants to run as an independent third party, then go for it. Or why not change the Democratic nominating rules before he is a candidate. I find his willingness to disenfranchise Michigan and Florida voters extremely disingenuous.
I personally will never vote for a whining candidate to be President.
Why is he unable to debate at a moment's notice? Is it because he isn't transparent about his real positions? If he had prepared himself to help poor and middle income voters, a debate wouldn't be so frightening.
How can he solve our problems when he can't even enter into a debate discussing them.
It is Old Politics As Usual to refuse to debate in a state where you are slightly ahead. Where is the vision and judgment he claims to have. He is just politics and Washington as usual when he refuses to debate.
His lead campaign strategist last night on the Jim Lehrer Hour on PBS fell all over himself trying to explain why Barack won't agree to a debate in Wisconsin. Of course, his lead strategist is an employee of Exelon, the nuclear power company in Illinois. Talk about a special interest with a special need to swing the electiion to his bought candidate.
Hillary Clinton is the REAL voice of change. Obama is a great guy and his words truly are inspiring and beautiful. I’ve watched him. I know. The way he talks about ourselves being the “change we seek” makes me think that anything is possible and that there is no obstacle I can’t overcome. But it kills me that this country is being so swayed by well thought out words, that they might actually let the wonderful opportunity we have with Hillary slip by. He is inspiring. But she can bring actual and real change. (And come on people, Obama is a politician too. He is going after those super delegates as well.) For example, Hillary is the best shot we have for finally getting universal healthcare. My parents are getting older and I just found out that they aren't going to the doctor for things that they should be for, because the cost of their co pay and deductible are so high. That tears me up so much. Looking at the details of my parent’s policy, they are literally one major illness away from serious financial hardship. You would be surprised at how many Americans are. Obama’s words are beautiful, but his plan of supervising insurance companies is the same tired old band-aid spun as us for many years by many tired old politicians. Its time for real change! She is the best shot we will probably have for the next hundred years at changing things. It tears me up that people think that he is actual going to change things on that front. Please Americans! I love you! Don’t let this opportunity get away! She could really help you, me, my parents, your parents and us all! Right now, for my parents and millions of other good, hard-working American people, a diagnosis of cancer would not only mean a health crisis, but a budget disaster as well. Right now if my parents were to get cancer or something, they would probably have to keep working past their sixties and probably… well forever. They worry about this. The saddest part is that they won’t really talk about it. It too shameful to mention. They should not have to do this! No American should! We should not be ashamed! We need to be informed of the fact that this is happening and Hillary is our best shot at getting out of this mess. The sweet political words of Obama will not be able to inspire us out of bankruptcy or wash away cancer.
Hillary Clinton is the REAL voice of change. Obama is a great guy and his words truly are inspiring and beautiful. I’ve watched him. I know. The way he talks about ourselves being the “change we seek” makes me think that anything is possible and that there is no obstacle I can’t overcome. But it kills me that this country is being so swayed by well thought out words, that they might actually let the wonderful opportunity we have with Hillary slip by. He is inspiring. But she can bring actual and real change. (And come on people, Obama is a politician too. He is going after those super delegates as well.) For example, Hillary is the best shot we have for finally getting universal healthcare. My parents are getting older and I just found out that they aren't going to the doctor for things that they should be for, because the cost of their co pay and deductible are so high. That tears me up so much. Looking at the details of my parent’s policy, they are literally one major illness away from serious financial hardship. You would be surprised at how many Americans are. Obama’s words are beautiful, but his plan of supervising insurance companies is the same tired old band-aid spun as us for many years by many tired old politicians. Its time for real change! She is the best shot we will probably have for the next hundred years at changing things. It tears me up that people think that he is actual going to change things on that front. Please Americans! I love you! Don’t let this opportunity get away! She could really help you, me, my parents, your parents and us all! Right now, for my parents and millions of other good, hard-working American people, a diagnosis of cancer would not only mean a health crisis, but a budget disaster as well. Right now if my parents were to get cancer or something, they would probably have to keep working past their sixties and probably… well forever. They worry about this. The saddest part is that they won’t really talk about it. It too shameful to mention. They should not have to do this! No American should! We should not be ashamed! We need to be informed of the fact that this is happening and Hillary is our best shot at getting out of this mess. The sweet political words of Obama will not be able to inspire us out of bankruptcy or wash away cancer.
Should Florida and Michigan count? ABSOLUTELY. Let them repeat the primaries with both Obama and Clinton allowed to campaign, as they have in the other states. Legitimize the delegates, then seat them.
"There is a reason why our wise Founding Fathers built Superdelegates into our system i.e. to provide check and balances to the tyranny of majority and to protect our Republic from becoming a mobocracy."
Lanlan Hoo, you are sadly misinformed. Superdelegates were added in to the system after the 1968 Democratic Convention. Unless someone dug up Benjamin Franklin and used him as a ventriloquist's dummy in '68, superdelegates have about as much to do with Ye Olde Holy Founding Fathers as the right of blacks and women to vote (i.e., nothing at all).
Uhhhh.....
Anybody besides me want to know why we, as taxpayers, are funding primary elections ( in terms of ballots, tabulation, etc...) when the PARTY sets the rules? I am a registered Democrat in Florida, though only because at the time, if one was not a Democrat, one had no voice in local politics.
My vote does not count, but my taxes sure paid for the primary election process.
If the PARTY's get to set the rules, why do they not foot the bill for the primary election?
I state this as my complete disgreement with Superdelegates. Lets do a National Primary, so a few small states do not have undue influence (not that their opinions are not important, but why should 3-4 states determine who I can vote for?) and then do a General Election and scrap the useless Electoral College? Just food for thought....
hmmm a reason to not debate hillary? Could it be that most analysts agree her only hope of winning now is to start smearing him? She's already started and a debate might help her with that. Could it be that her campaign is skirting bankruptcy and a debate is free air time for her? It's always easier to ignore the snotty kid's whining about not getting their way than it is to include them.
The easiest way to set the superdelegates straight is to just start reminding them and the people of Mcgovern. When the insider's pick the candidate, it drives away cheated party members and makes the candidate look like a joke from day one. The superdelegates already "voted their conscience" as private citizens during the primaries. In their official capacity, it HAS to be by the numbers.
I just want to say what a master stroke it is that Obama is ignoring all of hllary's baiting to get in a mud fight. She calls him a plagarist and he just explains it for what it is and makes her look more the fool. It was the biggest mistake of Kerry's campaign to respond to all of the negative ads as if they were legitimate counts against him.
So, she'd use the system to steal the election - in spite of the wishes of the people (popular vote)?
Isn't that what the Dems accused Bush of doing?
Frankly, this is what's wrong with the Clinton clan, i.e., being willing to do anything and say anything to win, and to attempt to implement their own "out there" polices and plans because, "We know better than you...".
Dr Mazair... you stated, "I find his willingness to disenfranchise Michigan and Florida voters extremely disingenuous.
I personally will never vote for a whining candidate to be President." Evidently you are either misinformed as to what traspired regarding Michigan & Florida, or you are willfully ignorant. The Democratic PARTY, not Obama determined that neither of these states' votes would be counted as a penalty for the actions of those states when it came to choosing the dates for their primaries. Mrs. Clinton at the time agreed with this decision. In Michigan, all Democratic nominees even removed their names from the balots as requested EXCEPT Mrs. Clinton, therefor guaranteeing herself a cheap win if needed. You state you will never vote for a whining candidate, well then your choices are down to One, because Hillary has shown that she is exactly that. You also stated, "Why is he unable to debate at a moment's notice? Is it because he isn't transparent about his real positions?" The debate issue, isn't about being prepared. Let's be honest, there isn't anything new that is going to come up at a debate. The reason the Obama camp declined the invitation to debate by Mrs. Clinton is because it's a strategic move. Mrs. Clinton's campaign is hurting for money, as has been well documented in the media, to the point that she wrote a check for 5 million dollars to keep it afloat. What this means is, quite simply, she can't afford to buy TV air time, etc. By trying to debate as often as possible it gives her free air time and free exposure. The Obama campaign knows this, and in a brilliant campaign move, said no. The American People in the Democratic party are showing who they support both by their votes and by their donations. Mrs. Clinton is losing on both counts and as the article states, will say and or do anything to win the nomination. This truly is a sad end to a Clinton legacy, but Hillary is doing it to herself, and the American people are trying to stop her... The Democratic Way.
"Clinton advisers rejected the notion that the candidate -- and the party -- would be badly wounded in the general election if the nominee were essentially selected by a group of party insiders."
this is patently false. I, the young, independent, college educated voter so oft referred to, would absolutely NOT vote in the general election should hillary clinton steal the democratic nomination through the use of superdelegates. the democrats need independents & first time voters to tip the balance. they most assuredly would lose that support if they nominate hillary clinton despite a loss in the popular vote.
while I'm writing this... I want to add that the whole superdelegate thing sucks -it's breeding ground for political backscratching.
and NO, florida & michigan should not have their delegates seated for a host of reasons: they were made of aware of the penalties before choosing to continue, not all the names were on the ballot, campaigning was not allowed & the cost of a revote is too high. ok I've said my piece.
You all said it so well. I hope that the states with primaries remaining take the time to analyze this position. It is truly George W from 2000. If we can get Hillary out, we really cant lose. Both Obama and McCain are independent thinkers, appear honest, and I believe they would both keep the best interests of this country at heart. One point I have not heard anyone come up with yet regarding Hillary... Did you ever wonder why "W" was such a poor president? Its because he did not achieve this position entirely on his own merits and accomplishments. No one could ever convince me that "W" could POSSIBLY even gotten CLOSE to the presidency if Bush Sr. was not his Daddy. Its really the same for Hillary. She would not be this close to a nomination for President had she not married Bill Clinton. The job of the President requires incredible charisma and ability, and only someone who arrived at the position based on their own merits can be successful. So there are actually 2 similarities between "W" and Hillary... 1) They didnt get there on their own, and 2) they are willing to use inside connections to circumvent the will of the public...
Steve K has made the most compelling point - compelling because it is so simple and obvious - that Mrs Clinton would not be considered a candidate on her own merits. This, together with the issue of "stealing" the election by means of the superdelegates, reinforces the point that all talk of progress or change from her camp is a tinkling cymbal. The grotesque similarities to 2000 become the more apparent. But Americans must be careful that they are not seduced into voting for "change" for its own sake. If Senator Obama is nominated, as Steve says, America is the winner, as there will be two candidates who have earned the respect of the elctorate in different ways. The important thing for the country is that this become the choice - as it is the real choice - as soon as possible. It seems that the only person not to recognise this is Mrs Clinton.
To those who object to an independent role for Super Delegates, where were your objections when the independent Super Delegates were created?
Many years ago when I first registered to vote I checked the "Independent" box. A few elections later I switched to "Democrat" in order to be eligible to vote in the Democratic primaries.
This is a Democratic Primary and I resent the fact that in some states--not mine--Independents and Republicans can vote in the Democratic Primary. Independents and Republicans should be welcomed with open arms to vote for Democrats in the General Election. But I strongly believe that in a Party election, only members of that Party should be permitted to vote.
I vote in Democratic Primaries because in my state that's the vote that really matters. Most often Republicans don't hold primaries in New York. In the General Election I have often voted for some or all candidates under a different party's name on the ballot.
So let's stick by the rules regarding Super Delegates unless Obama supporters want to give up the percent of Independent and Republican votes they counted in past primaries.
And the Democratic Party should rethink whatever rules exist regarding votes of non-Democrats in Democratic Primaries.
It seems to me that you people think all this is something new and has not been
a part of American Politics for ever. It is much like Rome,The direction of the people is dictated by the Elite . The Mob goes in the direction that a select few
create. Since when has either a democrat or a republican ever had a plan to
address any of the issues that need attention.In a Business Enviroment you make
decisions to improve the health and longterm viabilty of the company.In American Politics we choose the one who looks like or we feel like might do a good job
without any recourse.It is about public speaking and hugging people and kissing babies.It has never been about who is willing to put together a plan and the actions needed to correct problems and then communicate the action so people can make a decision based on merit. Clinton,Obama.McCain will all do what ever they can to get elected no matter how you may like it. That is why they call it Politics.Based on who we like not who has plan to change the problems.
So my recommendation is vote and lets see were it all falls.Either way not a lot will be corrected anyway.The president can not scale all the special interest and religous,Racial.and economic factions that have their own agenda.Maybe one day a candidate will come along that has the skills and plan to make some things change.That Candidate is not in this group in either party.Picking the best of the
worst is your final option. The entitled in Clinton,The great motivator in Obama,and the old veteran of the political arena McCain.Who wins? Who knows
But you still have the right to vote!
I don't think HIllary will necessarily do the delegate dance. but if she does
it's only fair since Obama has been given 30 million dollars by an "unknown"
source. Also, he's not as qualified for the job. Many Americans are just too
naive (or maybe even stupid) to realize this. Mob followers are who are voting
for him. When we apply for jobs, our experience matters, our resumes. why
not his?
The true is, Hillary is the one to lead this country, as it had already been shown on the debates; she has the sound judgement, integrity and the leadership quality. Whereas, Obama could be a good sellsperson who can mumble and jumble on and on without any substance. Think again, If you are his subordinate, do you know what is his order specifically? As far as I look at it, the national media is bias in favor of Obama, one could only speculate that if Oprah Winfrey owns the stations.
That Opray Winfrey would rather educated young black children in africa. She said black kids in USA rather pay alot money for tennis shoes. And Obama father and grandfather were muslim. That probably why he did not vote to go to war in iraq. I would vote for Hillary. Somebody should bring that up in her debates at Cleveland State. Thank you, Elly
What bothers me most about Obama is that he has not taken a stand on issues when he had the opportunity. "Voting" present fails to meet the standard of voting! He talks a good talk just as our governor did when he campaigned, "I have wonderful ideas." Sadly he did not have any worthwhile ideas. Obama is following his lead and quoting him verbatim. Those who rage at Clinton for calling him on this are not in my mind critical thinkers, Sadly critical thinking is not a criterion to being allowed to vote. Frankly I am very upset that the Democrats chose to deny two states delegates at the convention because they moved their primaries to an earlier time. We should all have our primaries at the same time and let anyone who wants to run easier access to all primaries. We might be delightfully surprised by who gets the most votes when the playing field is equal. If we eliminated the superdelegates and required these people to run in the primaries, we might also be greatly surprised at who gets elected and who does not. We would also do ourselves a big favor if we stopped answering all these polls that are being touted in the media. These polls are NOT accurate in spite of what the media claims! They do not represent the general public. Of course, we can not be like the Irish who say, "Vote early and vote often!" but we could "Answer polls early and answer polls often!"
OK finally I am able to put into words what I have been pondering as well as what has been annoying me. Annoying in the sense of curiosity, pondering in the sense of a deep and meaningful reflection because the stakes are of a level of a nation. No my intentions are not that of changing the world, I just hope to be heard somewhere in this world.
I am a Black (African) American living in France for the past 25+ years. Due to that number 25+, when I left America, I was Afro, today its African and in between I have simply settled for American. Living abroad has taught me that the color question is really an American phenomenon. Here in Europe it is your country of origin, which makes all the difference, if you are expulsed or politely asked to get your papers in order.
But that is not my reason for writing as mentioned above there are some things that I have pondered and have finally found the words to describe the image which answers my questions concerning this US Presidential campaign.
Here is an image that struck me as the way some and maybe not enough, view this campaign. As far as I see it, this is a remake of the Vietnam crisis? Era? Which conjures up the other Bush, no? The Republican engaged in a war and left, someone else to finish, leaving the economy in shambles. Remember? Or maybe the majority of the Obama supporters were too young to recall and maybe it was not presented, sorry written, that way in your history books. Oh, Vietnam was my draftable age! So are the Democrats a shoe in? Probably, which explains, as well, all of the hype and hoopla surrounding the Democratic nomination campaign. True this is a historical moment not only for the USA but as well for the world.
There are two candidates one having and/or claims to have more political experience, having lived the White House experience for 8 years. While the other claims to have the oratorical edge, putting forth his dreams, as his own and causing others to dream along with him.
First of all why can’t Hillary have a dream? Is it because she is a woman or because she is white or BOTH? Others have had DREAMS in the past so why can’t she? Women are the largest oppressed minority throughout the world, as well as its’ history including Africa and its’ history, no?
From what I have heard and read everyone is discounting her White House experience as just being the wife of the US President but that is experience in itself.
Imagine you are traveling by plane. On most flights your flight crew consists of the pilot, co-pilot, navigator (cockpit crew) + the stewards and stewardesses (cabin crew). Now imagine there is an attempted highjacking and the pilot and copilot are killed, as well as the highjacker. Now whom would you want to land the plane? The navigator or the coffee, tea, or me, person with the contagious smile?
In closing I hope this scenario plays out:
Hillary: President/Obama: Vice-President (experience gained) 2008-2012
Obama: President/African-American Woman: Vice-President (experience gained) 2013-2021
African-American Woman: President/Non-African Person (experience gained) 2022-2028
The pen, which writes history, has just changed hands (experience gained), no?
OK finally I am able to put into words what I have been pondering as well as what has been annoying me. Annoying in the sense of curiosity, pondering in the sense of a deep and meaningful reflection because the stakes are of a level of a nation. No my intentions are not that of changing the world, I just hope to be heard somewhere in this world.
I am a Black (African) American living in France for the past 25+ years. Due to that number 25+, when I left America, I was Afro, today its African and in between I have simply settled for American. Living abroad has taught me that the color question is really an American phenomenon. Here in Europe it is your country of origin, which makes all the difference, if you are expulsed or politely asked to get your papers in order.
But that is not my reason for writing as mentioned above there are some things that I have pondered and have finally found the words to describe the image which answers my questions concerning this US Presidential campaign.
Here is an image that struck me as the way some and maybe not enough, view this campaign. As far as I see it, this is a remake of the Vietnam crisis? Era? Which conjures up the other Bush, no? The Republican engaged in a war and left, someone else to finish, leaving the economy in shambles. Remember? Or maybe the majority of the Obama supporters were too young to recall and maybe it was not presented, sorry written, that way in your history books. Oh, Vietnam was my draftable age! So are the Democrats a shoe in? Probably, which explains, as well, all of the hype and hoopla surrounding the Democratic nomination campaign. True this is a historical moment not only for the USA but as well for the world.
There are two candidates one having and/or claims to have more political experience, having lived the White House experience for 8 years. While the other claims to have the oratorical edge, putting forth his dreams, as his own and causing others to dream along with him.
First of all why can’t Hillary have a dream? Is it because she is a woman or because she is white or BOTH? Others have had DREAMS in the past so why can’t she? Women are the largest oppressed minority throughout the world, as well as its’ history including Africa and its’ history, no?
From what I have heard and read everyone is discounting her White House experience as just being the wife of the US President but that is experience in itself.
Imagine you are traveling by plane. On most flights your flight crew consists of the pilot, co-pilot, navigator (cockpit crew) + the stewards and stewardesses (cabin crew). Now imagine there is an attempted highjacking and the pilot and copilot are killed, as well as the highjacker. Now whom would you want to land the plane? The navigator or the coffee, tea, or me, person with the contagious smile?
In closing I hope this scenario plays out:
Hillary: President/Obama: Vice-President (experience gained) 2008-2012
Obama: President/African-American Woman: Vice-President (experience gained) 2013-2021
African-American Woman: President/Non-African Person (experience gained) 2022-2028
The pen, which writes history, has just changed hands (experience gained), no?
Please please we have two very popular candidates. Hillary has proven that she can win all the ELECTORAL rich states. Florida, Michigan, Texas. New York, California, Ohio and she will probably win Pennsylvania. If the arrogant democratic committee had not penalized Florida and Michigan (None of their delegates have a voice) who heavily supported Hillary (I DON’T WANT TO HERE ANY MORE CRAP FROM THE OBAMA FOLKS ABOUT UNDEMOCRATIC BLA BLA BLA…) the delegate count would probably be less than fifty separating them and with a win in Pennsylvania for Hillary it would be a dead heat going into the convention. Obama supports are quick to revoke the rights of the States of Florida and Michigan to set their own primary dates but scream foul from the highest mountain top when the prospect of Superdelegates casting their votes with a possible Hillary victory they claim theft. Well I’m sorry to say but the truth is you can’t have it both ways.
A Barack/Hillary or a Hillary/Barack ticket is far and away a better choice than four more years of Republican rule. I really like Barack, my biggest concern is this, Barack is a charismatic effective orator. He can move voters with his mannerisms, his eloquent speeches and his generationalism(sp). However I’m extremely concerned with his proven ability to work across the isle and govern effectively. The last thing this country needs is four more years of nothing getting done in Washington. Also Barack’s naivety that he will be able to change the way Washington works is alarming. Big business runs every democracy on this planet. Always has and always will, PERIOD!! Their the ones who have complete control over job creation and retention as well as the pace of the economy and economic growth. Anyone who thinks it’s the other way around has their head in the sand. Businesses are in complete control of our $12,000,000,000.00+ economy. If anyone thinks they can change that they are deluding themselves.
We need to come together as a nation and if you’re a Hillary supporter I beg you to vigorously support Barack Obama if he is chosen at the DNC in Denver and I’m also begging Barack supporters to vigorously support Hillary Clinton if she is chosen. NONE OF US CAN AFFORD TO CRY OVER SPILLED MILK IF OUR CANIDATE DOES NOT RECEIVE THE NOMINATION.
We as a party/nation must quickly and completely jump behind the nominee and leave all hard feelings behind. The truth is HALF, yes HALF of us love Barack Obama and the other HALF love Hillary Clinton. Whichever way this race turns out HALF of us will be heart broken. I personally would Love to have a Woman in the White house who knows all the players and can build an excellent team to run the country. Equally I would Love to see a young charismatic African American full of hopes and dreams, the voice of a younger generation in the White house. We are privileged to have two outstanding choices.
Let’s support them both all the way to the White House in November.
Thanks for listening, JFW
All you people who talk about the "popular vote" -- and how do you measure the popular vote in a caucus state?
Guess what folks; Hillary has more popular votes after winning 3 out of 4 states on March 4th. Hillary is way ahead in Democrat votes. Also, if the states were winner take all, Senator Clinton would be ahead in pledged delegates. We need a nominee elected by Democrats that will vote for her in the General Election.
In the words of Obama, the Democrats have been duped, bamboozled, and hoodwinked, because Karl Rove and the GOP has been recruiting, engaging, and encouraging Republicans to vote for Obama, since the primary process began. Hmmm, a fact that explains why Democratic voter turn out is so high compared to the Republicans. Obama has been winning Red states (heavy Republican voters involved) because Republicans are voting for Obama to stop Hillary from winning the nomination. This is what we call Democracy.
Look at the numbers folks. Not only is Hillary is ahead in popular votes, she is ahead by over a Million True Democratic votes. Obama leads in crossover voters recruited by the GOP against Hillary in open primaries and caucuses. Obama is a great guy, but his wins in the Red states are due to Republicans imitating an interest in Obama; sorry to break the bad news, Obama supporters.
Furthermore, Hillary has won most of the primaries that are closed to Democratic voters. The automatic delegates know these facts about the GOP devious tactics and will support Hillary in the end. The responsibility of the automatic delegates (Super Delegates) is to select the best Democratic candidate and understand Hillary is the strongest candidate in a National Election.
The automatic delegates are fully aware of the GOP tactics: 1) Prevent Hillary from winning the nomination through Republican crossover voters in Red states and 2) Disenfranchising the Democratic voters in MI and FL by moving their primary dates. Florida has a Republican governor and legislature that moved the FL primary date and the Republican legislature in Michigan were primarily responsible for moving the primary date in MI. Both MI and FL already have and in the future will overwhelmingly support Hillary, if there is going to be a do over primary in either or both state(s).
Here is a better question. What happens when Clinton goes to the convention with the popular vote and Obama with more pledged delegates. What then would be "the will of the people" you all seem to care so much about?
I did not know much about Hillary before, but I used to think very highly of Bill. Not anymore. Both Hillary and Bill are great team together of self-serving and their sense of entitlement. They will destroy anything and anyone along the way, just to win. I am sure if Hillary wins the nomination, a lot of Democrats will vote for McCain. At least McCain has more integrity than the Clintons.
With Ohio and Texas going to Hillary Clinton, and probably Pennsylvania as well, neither candidate will arrive at the convention with enough pledged votes to win the nomination on the first ballot. Both Clinton and Obama will be campaigning for the superdelegate vote and they'll give it to the person most likely to beat McCain. In my personal opinion, that will be Clinton. Obama's a great candidate, but he doesn't have the experience or the down-to-earth qualities that Clinton has. He's a great speaker, but the US needs a leader more than it needs a speaker. Our country was in great shape under Bill Clinton and I'd have to ask, "What has he destroyed?" Nothing.
The Republicans know Hillary is the better candidate. Why on earth do you think Republicans vote for Obama in droves in the primaries? Because they know he can't win against McCain and Clinton can.
Even though I'm a huge Clinton supporter, I'll be voting for the Democratic candidate, no matter who is may be, and after the convention, I'll work for party unity. The most important thing is beating McCain.
The super delegates are not there to reflect the will of the people. When the vote is close enough, they are there to elect the candidate who can most likely beat their opponent, McCain, and do a good job as president. There would be no purpose for the super delegates if they were there just to reflect the popular vote. You may argue that having super delegates is undemocratic. A similar argument could be made about the caucus system which favors people who can participate in the election at a specific time. In this election Obama does better in the caucus system because working class people, who are more for Clinton, are less likely to be able to attend a caucus. Furthermore, FL and MI were always states more likely to go to Clinton. It wasn't Clinton's fault that in FL the Republicans thwarted the democratic process. Clinton may have changed her mind, but do you think that if these states were for Obama and he needed their votes, he would not contest it? I doubt it. In Illinois he managed to remove all of his opponents from the ballot in one of his elections. One of them was a progressive older female candidate who was friendly to Obama. Read about it. Obama is no different. He didn't want the people to decide. He strong armed his opponents out of the race based on technicalities.
The super delegates are not there to reflect the will of the people. When the vote is close enough, they are there to elect the candidate who can most likely beat their opponent, McCain, and do a good job as president. There would be no purpose for the super delegates if they were there just to reflect the popular vote. You may argue that having super delegates is undemocratic. A similar argument could be made about the caucus system which favors people who can participate in the election at a specific time. In this election Obama does better in the caucus system because working class people, who are more for Clinton, are less likely to be able to attend a caucus. Furthermore, FL and MI were always states more likely to go to Clinton. It wasn't Clinton's fault that in FL the Republicans thwarted the democratic process. Clinton may have changed her mind, but do you think that if these states were for Obama and he needed their votes, he would not contest it? I doubt it. In Illinois he managed to remove all of his opponents from the ballot in one of his elections. One of them was a progressive older female candidate who was friendly to Obama. Read about it. Obama is no different. He didn't want the people to decide. He strong armed his opponents out of the race based on technicalities.
Popular vote vs. delegates ...
Obama and his supporters keep saying that the democratic nominee should be the one who gets the most popular votes ... not super delegates. But, in addition to Obama accepting Richardson’s delegate vote, even though Hillary won the popular vote in New Mexico ... it’s apparent that if Obama’s 20 year association with racist Wright (and indirect association with Farrakan) had been known a year ago by the public ... Obama would not have gained a lead in the popular vote ... in fact, he probably wouldn’t even still be in the race at all!
A PAINFUL DESTINY. I CONSIDER ONLY COLOR OF HEART & NOT THE SKIN COLOR. DEMOCRACY CREATED BY CROWD CANNOT BE HELPFUL. PEOPLE LACK IN FARSIGHTEDNESS. WE ARE NOT EDUCATED IN TERMS OF ETHICS. SORRY, I FEEL HELPLESS. A SAD PLIGHT FOR AMERICANS. I FEEL SORRY FOR BLAMING THE PEOPLE LACKING IN FARSIGHTEDNESS.
I wonder how many realize this is a fixed election that is made to look good to the public.
Hekc, they did it to Bush's two terms,
they did this prior to get Nixon in so they can set him up.
WHO WAS ON THAT Team GOOD old hILLARY.
i KNOW I WOULD NEVER HAVE THOUGHT THAT BUT IT IS TRUE THAT ..... FILL IN ANY BAD WORD YOU CAN THINK OF I PUT MY WORD IN THERE FOR HER WHAT SHE EARNED WELL. WELL, SHE DID SET HIM UP TOO. SO WHY NOT?
BUSH IS ONTO HILLARY
HILLARY IS ONTO BUSH
THEY BOTH HAD RIGGED ELECTIONS ONE WAY OR ANTHER AND THEY TRY TO DO IT AGAIN.
PEAPLE WE NEED A PROTEST UP AGAINST HILLARY AND HER RED LETTER ELCTIONS.
SHE WINS YEAH RIGHT
CHECK OUT THE FACTS OF ANY STATE LARGE THAT YOU REALLY THINK SHE WON
SHE HAD TO PUT HER OWN MONEY INTO THE ELECTION AND NOW THEY DO NOT LET YOU GET AWAY WITH LIES ABOUT IT SINCE IT WAS NIXON THAT THEY DID THAT TOO. .... THAT IS A MAJOR LIE TOLD TO AMERICA ON THE MONEY NIXON SAID IT RIGHT I AM NOT A THEIF NO HE WAS NOT
ANYHOW,
BACK TO THIS SUBJECT HILLARY FIXED ELECTION
SHE PUT MORE MONEY IN FIVE MILLION SHE IS NOT SHY MONEY AND NOW BORROWED IT 8.7 MILLION IN THE HOLE
SHE IS WITH VERY VERY SMALL FOR THE MOST PART CROWDS. I MEAN VERY SMALL ONE OF THEM A YOUTH IN THE BRACKGROUND SAID TO HIS MOM
SHE SAYS PEOPLE IN THE HALL THERE IS NOT ANY PEOPLE IN THE HALL GOOD THING THE CAMERA SHOWED THAT FACT. SHE IS EVEN TELLING LIES TO HERSELF
NOW TO HER SUPPORTS
SHE WENT TO FLORIDA SHE MAKES IT OUT THAT IT IS OK SHE DID THAT WHEN IN FACT IT IS HER THAT MAKES IT WRONGFUL THAT PEOPLE CAN NOT VOTE AND BLAMES IT ON OBAMA
NOW LETS GO BACK A FEW YERS
WHEN BUSH RUN THE FIRST TIME YOUNG BUSH
THERE WERE SHIPS OUT AT SEA AND THEY WERE WAITING ALL DAY TO VOTE WHERE WAS THE SHIP TO SHORE VOTES TO BE DONE. NOPE THEY DID NOT WERE NOT TOLD OF THE CHANGE AND THAT THEY MONTHS PRIOR NEEDED ABSENT T VOTES. OK SO WHO WAS THE BLAME I CONTACTED THE HEAD OF NAVY AND WHO DID THE CHANGE WAS OLD BILL CLINTON AND THE NAVY WAS NEVER INFORMED OF THE CHANGE THEY PUT THE BLAME ON THEM AND SAID IT WAS THEIR RESPONSIBITY. CHANGES HAD THE RIGHT TO BE POSTED TOLD OR TOLD TO READ BECAUSE OF CHANGES IN THE NEW BOOK DONE BY CLINTON ONLY ONE YEAR BEFORE THE ELCTION.
NOW THAT SAYS A LOT ARE THE CLINTONS WORKING TO FIX ELECTIONS INDEED THEY ARE SO DID THE BUSHES.
THIS IS AN ELECTION THAT NEEDED TO BE TELLING HILLARY TO GET LOST MOVE OUT AND LEAVE THIS ELECTION BY THE SOMEHOW UNDOING RULES AND I BET THERE IS A LOT OF VIOLATIONS DONE BY HER. YEAH, WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO MAKE HER LEAVE AND LEAVE NOW.
SHE IS ONE THAT NEEDS TO SHOW HER BLANKS ON 440 PAGES AND SHE CLAIMS SHE HAS NOTHING TO HIDE. SHE NEVER EVEN WRITES THE TRUTH ON USING THE NAME MONICA OR PAULA JONES AT ALL. IN FACT THERE IS A HECK OF LIST ON BILL OF HIS LOVE AFFRAIRS TO MAKE JFK LOOK LIKE A SAINT COMPARIED TO HIM.
NOT ONLY IS THE ELCTION SO MIXED UP MY ANGER GOES NOW INTO A RAGE OVER THIS ISSUE.
TO THINK AGAIN WE HAVE TO HAVE A SELECTED FOR US PERSON AND YOU KNOW THE NUMBERS DON'T EVEN ADD UP ON HILLARY IN HER BARE ECONOMY TO ADDRESS HER ISSUE SHE IS AHEAD OF OBAMA SHE IS IN A PIGS EYE.
I WANT PEOPLE ONTO THE ELECTION I WISH WE COULD ADRESS THIS AND HAVE CORRECT READINGS ON HER GROUPIES WHO LIE SHE WON THOSE CERTAIN AREAS. ONE SHOWED UP AND IT WAS A TOTAL LIE IN FRONT OF ALL OF US. HECK YOU WOULD HAVE TO BE UP VERY LATE TO CATCH IT. THEY CLAIMED THE WHOLE AREA TO BE OBAMA AND THEY KNEW IT AND WHEN IT CAME OUT IT WAS NOT IT WAS IN FAVOR OF HILLARY WHEN IT WAS NOT TO BE. SO YEAH THIS ELECTION IS SO FIXED
NOW WE GOT TO DEAL WITH SUPER PEOPLE TO LIE MORE FOR HILLARY.
I WISH WE COULD DO AN INVESTIGATION AND GET THEM UNDER ARREST FOR VOTING FOR A WOMEN WHO FIXES THINGS ONLY THAT SUIT HER SO THE REAL TRUTH DOES NOT COME OUT ABOUT BUSH AND HER BILL AND HERSELF IN FILEGATE AND WHITE WATER AND HER DOING NIXON IN WRONG AS WELL I BET THERE IS A LOT MORE WE DON'T EVEN KNOW ABOUT DEALING WITH THOSE DEVILS
I DO NOT CARE IF ANY SUPERDELEGATE READS THIS. GOD i DO HOPE THEY DO. AND I CAN EVEN BEGIN TO THINK HOW ANYONE COULD CHOOSE A PERSON THAT IS SO RUDE AND CRUEL TO DO WHAT SHE DOES DO. filegate
IS REALLY billgate and hillarygate and admitted this by the person who is named files and is prison who knows hillary. he is a hitman. FACt ON THIS POINT AS WELL.
PLEASE DO NOT VOTE FOR HILLARY SHE IS A DOOMSDAY MACHINE.
Not a Hillary fan, but I'll take her over the guy with endorsements from The New Black Panther Party, Farahkaan, and Ludacris - http://nationalsquib.com/index.php/barack-obama-ludacris/
Are you serious? I can't believe that the DNC is seriously thinking that Barack Obama can beat McCain. I'm a Democrat and I don't believe it. HE HAS NO BACKGROUND OR EXPERIENCE. Politics is vicious--we all know it. You have to be able to writher and finagle your way through it. The Republicans are licking their lips at the prospect of Obama being the DNC nominee--they will eat his lunch. At this point, Hillary Clinton is the only one that stand up to McCain and the Republican party. She's quite familar with the attacks and with what it takes in politics to succeed. She has won all of the Largest states--the ones that always count in the general election. Barack hasn't won any!!!!! If the DNC nominates him, it will be a slaughter and we can look at 4 more long years with the Republicans at the helm.
How dare the superdelegates even consider voting contrary to the wishes of the American people. If they do give Hillary the nomination I will vote for McCain. And, I'm sure I'm not the only one. The democratic voters want Obama. Do the math!
If superdelegates should vote according to the wishes of their state, then Obama should tell Senators Kennedy and Kerry to give their support to Clinton, for that is who won Massachusettsby a huge margin. Obama and his supporters seem to want it both ways.
Should the Bill & Hillary show play through June 2008, as predicted, it could damage the DNC. As Howard Dean is beginning to suspect, Hillary could put the party asunder. I hoped Pennsylvanians would send the Clintons a clear edict; take the money and run – but they didn’t. There’s a strong case to be made against Hillary; trouble is, nobody’s making it. Seems everyone knows Hillary suffers from ED (excessive dishonesty), but before the primary nobody even knew Hillary had roots in Penn. Voters know exactly squat about Hillary. Hillary has long treated working class Americans as a species apart. I’ll forego the ironies, but if Hillary continues to get away with this, she can and will get away with anything. Ignore Hillary at your own peril: http://theseedsof9-11.com
Obama is a weak candidate, another McGovern. There is a check built in to the system--the superdelegates. They should choose wisely.
Super delegates should not decide the party's nominee. If they do, the chosen one
will be the democratic party's undemocratic nominee. I can see a fierce dertermination in Hillary's eyes, a determnination to succeed at any cost. . She will stoop to even unethical means to achive her objective. A very fearsome portent of things to come, especially if she becomes the president. If she wins especially with the help of superdelegates , ( that is the only course left for her ), all the democratic voters should go for McCain.
I'm a white male. I would have voted for clinton if she had not resorted to negative campaigning so much. She put too much emphasis on the Jeremia Wright issue. She is a power monger. She is the one who told obama that she was proud of him, but once obama started getting ahead,both she and her husband became very negative. Her statement of..."hard working white Americans don't vote for Obama..." is going to hunt her and the DNC for years to come. Shame on you Hillary. You should know better!!
When obama wins how does she expect to be picked by obama as a running mate. The more she talks , the more she damages him and her own image.
I first heard about Clintons attempt at changing the delegate math at www.whitewidowreport.com Senator Clinton is a Great politician and I applaud her for her efforts. But attempting to push the argument that the delegate math has changed prior to the rules committee convening on May 31st is a bit of a stretch. Even with Michigan and Florida seated she still loses. Its time to let it go…
People great enought to run for president are chosen by those who are not. Hillary is smarter than all of us.
Some of you, (women), are jealous of that, and therefore cite her ambition as shameful, so as to hide petty small mindedensss.
Some of you, (men), feel emasculated by this and and therefore use personal attacks against her so as to make youselves look better.
These clowns here saying Hillary should be the nominee cause she has won 4 large states is absurd. America is made up of 50 states. This woman is making us women look bad now. Vindictivness will not take her anywhere. And im dissapointed by that old lady old enough to be my grandmother who was on tv saying Obama is an unqualified black man and that she will vote for mc cain.
God help America. Obama has wom most delegates, he has won more states, he has most popular votes, yet Judy you talk about Hillary being the nominee cause Clinton has won 4 large states. Lol. Just stop and listen to your reasoning for a minute honey.
No, not because she's won 4 large states or because the DNC has made their erroneous decision to half the Florida and Michigan delegate counts.
She should win because more people actually voted for her.....The peope should decide not superdelgates or crazy DNC rulings.
No, not because she's won 4 large states or because the DNC has made their erroneous decision to half the Florida and Michigan delegate counts.
She should win because more people actually voted for her.....The peope should decide not superdelgates or crazy DNC rulings.
This blogger might want to review your comment before posting it.
Send your comments to masspolitics@globe.com
browse this blog
by category