The Unity Express Derails in DC

"One final word....Mrs. Clinton has instructed me to reserve her rights to take this to the credentials committee."

-- Harold Ickes, Hillary Clinton Campaign representative, Washington, D.C., May 31, 2008

Saturday, the Democratic Party's Rules & Bylaws Committee (RBC), in a surreal act of political suicide, awarded Barack Obama 55 "uncommitted" delegates from the Michigan primary, even though he voluntarily removed his name from that ballot in a tactical move to curry favor with the voters in Iowa and New Hampshire.

As Ickes noted, "uncommitted" is a constitutionally recognized presidential status, the same as a named candidate, and therefore delegates earned by "uncommitted" cannot legally be reallocated to another candidate.

But the RBC didn't stop there. They also STOLE 4 delegates earned by Hillary Clinton in the Michigan primary, and transferred them to Barack Obama, as if punishing Clinton for winning an election that Obama boycotted.

Then the RBC had the audacity to call their ruling a "compromise" and cloak it in sugary calls for party "unity." Trying to shove unity down the throats of 18 million angry Democrats, a bit of a joke...Message to the RBC: See videotape of Harriet Christian from Manhattan, voter who was ejected from your meeting. That should give you a flavor of our reaction and a taste of what to expect in August, in Denver.

More from Ickes' closing statement on Michigan, which is already written into history:

"This is in the charter, this is not a bylaw..this is in the highest document of our party.. this is in the constitution of our party....fair reflection..you cannot take delegates from one candidate and give them to another..."

~interrupted by raucous cheers~

"Finally...there's been a lot of talk about party unity...let's all come together, wrap our arms around each other...I submit to you, Ladies and Gentlemen, that hijacking 4 delegates.... is not a good way to start down the path of party unity."


It's ironic, given his unique history, that Barack Obama would seek to benefit from an election in which his name was not on the ballot, especially since he removed it voluntarily. If anyone understands the importance legally of being on the ballot, it should be Obama...

In 1996, when Obama first ran for public office in Illinois, he employed a cut-throat gimmick of challenging petition signatures to knock long-time community activist Alice Palmer off the ballot for the state Senate. There is much more to the story, but the bottom line is that Palmer had been a mentor and supporter of Obama's before he steam-rolled over her in his eagerness to serve the public. Ms. Palmer, not surprisingly, campaigned for Hillary Clinton this year in Indiana.

Seems like the party elite and the hope-change candidate are clueless when it comes to "unity." But us regular folks have a pretty good idea of what needs to be done in Denver to unify the country.

Note on the Popular Vote: The silver lining for Clinton from the RBC's ruling is more like platinum: Now that the Michigan and Florida primaries have been "recognized," Clinton is justified in adding those votes to her popular vote total. At the end of the primaries on June 3rd, Clinton will be the official popular vote leader, even excluding Michigan. If memory serves me correctly, it wasn't so long ago that party officials such as Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, and Donna Brazile were touting the popular vote as the appropriate metric for super delegates to certify the "will of the people."

Cross posted at TexasDarlin



TexasDarlin, all rights reserved
Not affiliated with the Hillary Clinton campaign



Display:


Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (1.86 / 15)

Florida voters are PISSED, too.  Check it out:


TexasDarlin blog
by TexasDarlin on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:45:48 PM EST

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (2.00 / 10)

Harold Ickes, the man who derailed the unity express.


democracy!
by BlueGAinDC on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:47:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Harold Ickes doesn't give a crap (1.90 / 10)

Seriously, this is how he behaved for a large part of the meeting yesterday, while the various speakers were making their case:


by 2501 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:55:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Harold Ickes doesn't give a crap (2.00 / 4)

What a boor.


by parahammer on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:01:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Dressed :for the occasion like he was (1.50 / 6)

going to clean out his storage unit.
Hell, maybe he was. About time. He's a relic. A has been. A corrupted politician from the past who has no respect for the party anymore.  
I support our nominee President Barack Obama - and the Admins can't stand me, so I can't rec or rate. This is very mean if you were to ask me.
by TheFullBerry on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:07:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Harold Ickes doesn't give a crap (2.00 / 2)

Huh what is wrong in what he did. thats a rep from his camp that he does not need to sit and listen to since the speech that the governor was giving was already in all probability read by her supporters.

It is petty to draw attention to him about this. Stop looking to find faults w/ her or her team . The nomination is over and try to find reasons to win them over to obama's camp.


Rise / Repeat / But for god's sake don't spin!
by aliveandkickin on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:25:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Harold Ickes doesn't give a crap (none / 0)

Harold Ickes is a rep. from the Clinton Camp like Luca Brazzi was a rep. for the Corleone family.  


by Bargeron on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:49:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Harold Ickes doesn't give a crap (none / 0)

May they both sleep with the virtual fishes.


by ReillyDiefenbach on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:08:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Harold Ickes doesn't give a crap (1.00 / 2)

Ah, the smell of unity burning in the morning.


If you want Unity, nominate a Democrat
by rankles on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 04:52:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

WTF... (2.00 / 1)

...does this prove? Maybe the guy has a bad back and can't sit for long periods of time. Besides, it was his own supporter he was supposedly disrespecting.

There are plenty of things about Ickes to find detestable. This isn't one of them...


by Steve in Sacto on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:59:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Harold Ickes doesn't give a crap (2.00 / 2)

Please.  One doesn't have to be looking directly at the speaker to pay attention to everything he's saying.  Besides, he already knows what this person is going to argue.

If you watch that video objectively, there's no story here.

In fact, I sometimes do the same thing he was doing when I'm at conferences and really focusing on what the speaker is saying.  The fidgeting and walking around actually helps me focus, and I don't think I'm alone in that.


by slynch on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:28:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm with you (2.00 / 3)

When I read something I am pacing constantly, it helps me to focus.  Ickes doesn't deserve grief for that.


Student Guy=JoeMentum. No really Student Guy=JoeMentum, after all JoeMentum was an embarrassment so is Student Guy. This sig is FAIL!!
by Student Guy on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 03:36:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm with you (none / 0)

I work for a company where the chief of global technology for our division recently decreed that all meetings will be held standing and walking; that includes those participants who join by teleconference.

Given the general level of management idiocy (cf any Dilbert cartoon over the last 10 years) I thought this was not half bad.

Anyhow, Ickes is reported to have such a foul mouth that people sometimes think he suffers from Tourrette's syndrome.  I am therefore immediately sympathetic, since my (permissive) parents' refusal to punish me for swearing allowed me to grow up with a mouth like a sailor.


The fascist takeover of America has already occurred; but the people have not yet realized.
by magnetics on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 12:58:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (1.64 / 14)

Wow - amazing how quickly the HillarysVoices bots got you on the rec list!   Yea Bots!


by Virginia Liberal on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:16:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The following evidence (1.88 / 9)

1) is the blog of a Republican tool

http://777denny.wordpress.com

Look in the blogroll for "anyone but Obama" links and you find someone's blog there.

I would dare say this denny guy who runs the blog is scared sh!tless about Obama.

2) follow this link which shows that the illustrious diarist believes Larry Sinclair even calling him my favorite Obama Trouble Maker (pity this was scrubbed isn't it):

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:eNE e-CD09L4J:texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2008 04/04/notes-from-an-ordinary-day+my+favo rite+Obama+trouble+maker+site:texasdarli n.wordpress.com&hl=en&ct=clnk&am p;cd=1&gl=us


Student Guy=JoeMentum. No really Student Guy=JoeMentum, after all JoeMentum was an embarrassment so is Student Guy. This sig is FAIL!!
by Student Guy on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:30:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Why do you hate the Michigan Democratic party? (2.00 / 3)

After all, it was their proposal the the Rules committee adopted, and that Ickes so pettily called a hijacking.

Do the Democrats of Michigan, in the absence of a legitimate and DNC-sanctioned primary election, not have the right to determine the makeup of their own delegation to the national convention?


Ignorance is weakness. Get strong.
by tbetz on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:42:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That's a very interesting point. (none / 0)

Do the Democrats of Michigan, in the absence of a legitimate and DNC-sanctioned primary election, not have the right to determine the makeup of their own delegation to the national convention?

I'm inclined to say no, as a general rule.  However it does definitely deserve some thought.

As for this situation, I think that them doing so was perhaps the best possible solution.


Check out McCain.
by you like it on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:47:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Reserving rights is not (2.00 / 3)

the same as fighting it in Denver.

I think those who want that will be disappointed by Senator Clinton's upcoming decision to unify the party.

I have no doubt that she will end this soon after the primaries are over.  She is a Democrat and will work to defeat McCain.

4 delegates are not worth it.  And the "prinicple" will be overcome by her desire to unify the party.  


by TomP on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:23:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Reserving rights is not (1.00 / 4)

You're living in a dreamworld, kid.

This thing is going to the convention.


If you want Unity, nominate a Democrat
by rankles on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 04:54:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You may be right, (2.00 / 1)

but I really doubt it.

By the way, I'm 53.  


by TomP on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 06:17:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You may be right, (none / 0)

Rankles is 112, so there.


by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:18:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Another example... (none / 0)

... of the delightful dividends yielded by the Clinton message machine. Slash and burn politics at its finest.

Of course, what does the Clinton campaign leadership team care? All the results of a McCain presidency - more war casualties, loss of freedoms of choice, free speech, greater economic inequities, degradation of the environment - its just an abstraction to wealthy people like them. Won't hurt them one bit either way.


by odum on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:50:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (none / 0)

You go to convention and the democrats lose. Period.

You're calling for nothing but suicide, plain and simple.


by Yalin on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 03:19:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Is YOUR comment snark? (1.00 / 2)

Serious question.


If you want Unity, nominate a Democrat
by rankles on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 04:55:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ridiculous (none / 0)

I am so sick of the Hillary won the popular vote arguement that has to rely on a series of twists and turns to be able to make such a claim. Counting votes from a state where no one campaigned is hardly a fair representation of the voters' will. What about the people who stayed home because the they had been told their state's primary would not count.

Also, I remember not so long ago the Hillary camp going on and on about the delegate count being what mattered. Seems a rather hypocritical turn about has taken place.


by chrisj on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 05:17:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary should claim half the caucus votes (none / 0)

because she hardly campaigned in them and she should get 4 extra delegates each because she won the popular vote.

And she should ccount the primary votes she got into the pop vote if the state had both and have Obama count only the number of pop votes he got in the caucus, since he says the delegates should be devided according to the caucus votes and not the primaries.


by itsadryheat on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 10:12:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This is the same Ickes who voted to (none / 0)

strip the delegates from Florida and Michigan in December.

At this point the Clinton position on these states has longed since lapsed into parody.

The lies from Clinton on this issue are simply amazing.  More amazing, though, is that people actually believe them.


by fladem on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 06:55:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (none / 0)

Troll rated by cultural worker


TexasDarlin blog
by TexasDarlin on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 06:59:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Is this serious? (1.66 / 12)

Snark question.


by Builderman on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:48:06 PM EST

Re: Is this serious? (2.00 / 1)

I don't beleive it is snark.  To the HRC supporters it is totally reasonable to tell the voters of a state your votes will not count.  And then after the vote come back and tell them they will count.   Remember Ickes voted for the sanctions and HRC told Michigan their votes would not count.

HRC ran a great campaign but she is beaten.  I happen to beleive that almost all of her supportes will come back by November b/c another four years of Bush is something we can not risk.


by gunowningliberal on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:55:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is this serious? (2.00 / 2)

Boy.. this lie about HRC saying Michigan should not count is still going around?  I don't know how many times I have to discredit it.

Please see direct HRC quotes back on November 11, 2007, in Washington Post.  She made it very clear that she felt back then exactly as she feels now.

So, you are misinformed or just spreading falsehoods for the hell of it.


by bobbank on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:33:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Please provide a link (2.00 / 1)

I  could not find any 11/11/07 Washington Post articles containing "Clinton" and "Michigan."


John McCain
by MILiberal on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:37:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Please provide a link (2.00 / 2)

Maybe October 11th?

Oh, wait, that's the "It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything" quote.


by TCQuad on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:41:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Please provide a link (none / 0)

Yes, that's the one.  It was one month earlier than I remembered, sorry for the confusion.

Now why would you want to quote only half a sentence, ignoring the second part, which begins with "BUT"?

Perhaps I'll play your game and just quote half the sentence as well:

"I just personally did not want to set up a situation where the Republicans are going to be campaigning between now and whenever, and then after the nomination, we have to go in and repair the damage to be ready to win Michigan in 2008."

or this

"I did not believe it was fair to just say, 'Goodbye Michigan' and not take into account the fact we're going to have to win Michigan if we're going to be in the White House in January 2009,"

The fact is that, when she was winning, she still championed Michigan's stand to demand reform in the currently bungled system.  And she paid a heavy price for taking this principled stand in Iowa, where party bosses pressured candidates to remove their names from the ballot.


by bobbank on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 04:56:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Please provide a link (2.00 / 2)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xHRqi8ns vI

Lets be fair.  Clinton acknowledged the DNC Rules but did not necessarily agree with its decision stripping MI and FL.

However, same cannot be said for Harold Ickes:

http://www.blogrunner.com/snapshot/D/5/9 ickes_reverses_vote_to_seat_states

But Clinton clearly knows that there is no accurate way to measure FL and MI given the unfortunate circumstances that were not created by any candidate, including Obama.

This resentment that is being stirred, is a double edged sword if Clinton is seriously thinking about 2012.


PUMA plants.
by jv on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:13:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is this serious? (none / 0)

her supporters yesterday never denied this...


Obama supporter who is damn glad Hillary Clinton is a Democrat!!
by hootie4170 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:39:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is this serious? (none / 0)

No, he set up a strawman by changing both her words and the words of the commenter who he was responding to.


We should be able to deliver bottled hot water to dehydrated babies.
by Jess81 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:41:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is this serious? (none / 0)

She said, "will not count", not "should not count".

Nice try bob.


We should be able to deliver bottled hot water to dehydrated babies.
by Jess81 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:40:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is this serious? (none / 0)

Welcome back to the Democratic blog, Bob.


by ReillyDiefenbach on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:10:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Will we debate the meaning of "will?" (none / 0)

Should we?

Could we?

Shall we?

Parseparseparse.


by Addison on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:59:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

She made clear her reasons for staying... (2.00 / 2)

on the ballot (reasons I do not think respect the intent if not the exact language of the four state pledge).  But even if she was staying in to respect the Michigan voters and not cede the high ground to the Republicans, that does not mean that her statement saying the primary would not count is less clear in context.  She signed a pledge acknowledging that the delegates would be stripped form states that violated the time frame rules.  Now she complains that to do so or to allocate delegates in any way that differs from the results of a flawed primary.  I'm sorry that is just too inconsistent to be persuasive.


John McCain wants you to be poor!
by nklein on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:47:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is this serious? (none / 0)

Hillarious


Elections 2008 Best reality show ever!!!
by kbal on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:11:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (1.87 / 8)

I feel like you probably already had a diary drafted on this topic before Saturday, then added in quotes and video as appropriate.


by rfahey22 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:49:35 PM EST

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (2.00 / 5)

Much like the people who keep saying This or That is why I won't vote for Obama and I Swear I Was Undecided Before But He's Just Too Much of A...

(deep breath)

Bad Person Who Disenfranchises and Bowls Real Bad and Just Makes Me Wanna Vote For McCain AKA True Patriot 44.


should we go outside? / should we break some bread? / are you'nterested?
by Firewall on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:53:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (2.00 / 5)

Well, the diarist has wondered whether Obama is constitutionally disqualified from running because of dual citizenship, or something - check out her website.  That doesn't really seem like a mindset capable of unity, in my opinion.


by rfahey22 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:58:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (1.66 / 3)

If we have to trample a few delicate flowers to get to the throne, it's unfortunate, but a great many lives depend on our getting a Democrat into the White House.  Purity eludes us, as always.  Keep your eyes on the prize, Democrats!


by ReillyDiefenbach on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:15:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It didn't matter what happened yesterday (2.00 / 13)

you were going to be pissed today.  I get it.  Nothing will make you happy.  Admit that what you really want is for Obama to crumple up, blow away, disappear and have Clinton take up the mantle with shouts of joy and wonder by all.

Sounds nice, but it ain't gonna happen and all the crying, whinging, chest beating, and namecalling in the world doesn't change that.


accepting McLettuce is like being 9 years old and forced to eat your own cooking
by Sychotic1 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:52:37 PM EST

If you want votes, get ON the ballot (1.87 / 8)

Electoral politics 101.


by catfish2 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:53:29 PM EST

If you want delegates... (2.00 / 8)

compete for them in contests that actually count.

Remedial Electoral Politics.


Check out McCain.
by you like it on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:11:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

If you want delegates (2.00 / 1)

Compete for them in contests that don't count... and then insist that they should be counted.

If Ron Paul had realized that, he would be the Republican nominee right now by virtue of the overwhelming advantage he holds in straw polls.


John McCain
by MILiberal on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:47:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If you want votes, get ON the ballot (1.12 / 8)

Unless, of course, if you're Obama in which case you can be embroiled in the thick of Chicago machine corruption, can lose most of the heavy primaries, lose the popular vote, have not one but two of your "reverends" screaming their heads off on TV, take your name off the ballot and still cash in the delegates awarded by your insider friends and patrons in the party hierarchy.

And still be heralded as the second coming of Christ, the savior of the party and the bringer of hopiness and changeiness for all.


Grumpy, reluctant, sore-losing, unhappy, irritable Hillary supporter for Barack Obama 2008
by DemAC on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:18:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is this snark? (1.50 / 2)

Yes of course.

Everything about Obama is snark.


Grumpy, reluctant, sore-losing, unhappy, irritable Hillary supporter for Barack Obama 2008
by DemAC on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 05:08:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If you want votes, get ON the ballot (none / 0)

Two reverends?  Are you talking about Father Phagler?  He is a Catholic priest.  He was asked to speak at the TUCC as a part of a national UCC "sacred conversation on race."  The idea was to ask speakers with many different viewpoints.  They also asked a woman pastor to speak.  She was more mainstream.  Can we count her as one of Obama's pastors too?

I find it hard to consider TUCC responsible for Father Phagler's offensive remarks much less Obama.  Now if you want to task the Catholic Church with tolerating a priest with such misogynist views, I'd say you had a better case, since the Catholic priesthood and hierarchy have a well-known problem with that sort of thing.


by oldbattleaxe on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:50:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If you want votes, get ON the ballot (2.00 / 1)

Why do you think Obama withdrew his name from the ballot? Because it had already been decided that the election would not count. Many of the other candidates did aswell.

Clinton should have removed her name from the ballot, meaning ALL of the Michigan delagates would have been for uncommitted and (if allowed to) they could have voted for whichever candidate they wished at the convention...essentially becomming super delegates.


by smoothmedia on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:35:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If you want votes, get ON the ballot (2.00 / 2)

he removed his name because he knew he was going to lose by 20 points.


by colebiancardi on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:44:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If you want votes, get ON the ballot (2.00 / 1)

If there are no delegates awarded, there's no penalty to pulling your name off.

If you stay on, you give your opponent talking points to use against you.

If you pull off, you can gain in contests where there are delegates awarded.

No penalty + removing opponent talking point + gaining delegates elsewhere = remove your name from the ballot.

Change any one of those three and you wouldn't have seen him do it.


by TCQuad on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:50:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If you want votes, get ON the ballot (2.00 / 4)

your second point makes no sense.  How can Hillary use that against Obama, as they were both on the ballot?

to your first point, Obama's campaign had a plan in the works


"I'm doing a lot of extra work to make sure everyone in Michigan that wants to support Sen. Obama knows they must vote 'uncommitted,' " said U.S. Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich. "Voters can't write in his name because that will be considered a spoiled ballot."

"No matter who you are supporting there is a spot on the ballot you need to check off," said state Rep. Bert Johnson, D-Dist. 5, who endorsed Obama more than 10 months ago. He speculates that an "uncommitted" vote of 15 percent would be a setback for Sen. Hillary Clinton, the only front-runner on the Michigan Democratic primary ballot.

Johnson thinks the uncommitted votes will ultimately translate into delegates at the Democratic nominating convention, even though the Democratic National Committee has officially withdrawn Michigan's delegates. "We have way too many powerhouses in Washington to stand by and let Michigan go unrepresented at the national convention," he said, listing Conyers and U.S. Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, D-Mich., and Democratic Sens. Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow.

http://ourmichigan.blogspot.com/2008/01/ uncommitted-is-vote-for-obama-in.html

as to your third point, we agree.  Obama removed his name to gain political points in the first-er states and gained thru that.


by colebiancardi on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:55:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If you want votes, get ON the ballot (2.00 / 1)

And to curry favor with Iowa voters, for which he was rewarded.


by LakersFan on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:01:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If you want votes, get ON the ballot (none / 0)

BULL SHIT. Why would Iowa voters care about a contest that was going to be held 2 weeks later anyway? You know, just because you and SoCalDarlin keep repeating this "curry favor" crap doesn't make it truer each time.
From a Hillary supporter: We laughed as that became our mantra - "Barack can't win!"..... ....."he can go to hell and i'll pay for his way there."
by Cochrane on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 05:00:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That's just not in accordance with the facts... (2.00 / 1)

the demographics which have been predictive of most nominating contests in the U.S. demonstrate that Obama would be very competitive in a primary in Michigan.  That is why he is polling ahead of her in Michigan now.  It defies all logic that he would pull his name off the ballot just because he thought he would lose.  He lost in WV badly and in Kentucky badly.  Those losses were predicted months ago, but he made no move to get off the ballot in those states.  Why wouldn't he be consistent with those contests?  The reason is that no matter how much he lost by in the popular vote with the proportional system he would lose more by withdrawing.  I don't understand how you can seriously believe that, because you seem like a very rational person.


John McCain wants you to be poor!
by nklein on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:02:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That's just not in accordance with the facts.. (2.00 / 3)

your stats are for now.  Remember, the MI primary was on 1/15 - a lifetime ago.

and yes, he was way behind in the polls.  He and Edwards worked together on removing their names - both campaigns actively had their surrogates in MI tell voters to vote uncommitted if they wanted them.

My family lives in MI and they heard this on the TV, radio and newspapers.  There was no secret on why they were doing this.


by colebiancardi on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:16:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yes, but even if he was going to lose... (none / 0)

how would it help him to take his name off the ballot.  You get delegates as long as you get over 15%.  And nobody is disputing that he would have gotten at least that.  So why take his name of the ballot?  It's just not logical unless you think two things: 1) he did it to gain favor in the first primary states.  I can definitely buy that argument or 2) he wanted to honor the four state pledge not to participate in states that violated the DNC timeframe.


John McCain wants you to be poor!
by nklein on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 07:16:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That's just not in accordance with the facts.. (2.00 / 1)

also, to try and equate MI with WV or Kentucky is absurd.  

Currying favors with Iowa and NH - that is one of the main reasons why he removed his name from the ballot.  


by colebiancardi on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:18:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I can buy that, but that does not make... (none / 0)

the election any more representative of the will of the people of Michigan, because either way everybody agreed that this vote wouldn't count.  Why is it all of the sudden absolutely vital that we include them when just 6 months ago nobody cared?  At least not Hillary at the time.


John McCain wants you to be poor!
by nklein on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 07:20:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If you want votes, get ON the ballot (none / 0)

Are you nuts? Hillary didn't even beat "uncommitted" by 20 points.


by Angry White Democrat on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 04:05:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If you want votes, get ON the ballot (none / 0)

Oh, sorry, reality intruding here: Obama polls as well as her in Michigan, and despite being the only major candidate on the ballot and better name recognition, only got 55%.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled delusion...


by mikeinsf on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:04:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Is this spam? (none / 0)

Rhetorical question.


by Okamifujutsu on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 05:59:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

If you want votes, play by the rules (none / 0)

Basic ethics 101


by mikeinsf on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:02:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The Unity Express Is Pulling Out Bound For Victory (2.00 / 10)

4 Clinton Supporters on the Rules and Bylaws Committee voted FOR the Michigan Party's compromise.

from Salon:

But politics is ultimately about votes, and Clinton -- even though she had 13 supporters on the rules committee -- did not have them. When the committee took test votes over lunch (and holdouts like Donna Brazile, Al Gore's 2000 campaign manager, finally chose sides), there was a surprising 14-to-13 majority for evenly dividing the Michigan delegation between Obama and Clinton.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/0 6/01/dnc/index.html

That would have been the fairest solution and the one I would have liked to see, but the Obama people were willing to seek a broader based consensus and bring some of the Clinton supporters on board by going along with the Michigan State Party's proposal.

It was the Michigan State Party that is responsible for creating this whole mess, and it also is the Michigan State Party that is responsible for coming up with this messy solution. But make no mistake, committee members from BOTH SIDES signed off on this.


McCain's occupation plan will achieve victory when it bestows liberty to the freedom loving people of Iraq and their freedom loving oil.
by Lefty Coaster on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:55:03 PM EST

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (2.00 / 11)

Why are you people promoting the video of that vile monster, Harriet Christian?

We should be repudiating that filth at the top of our lungs.  I don't want her vote.


by Pat Flatley on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:55:08 PM EST

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (2.00 / 9)

Bigots are fine as long as they're pro-Clinton and anti-Obama. Why else do you think TexasDarlin posts at No Quarter?


should we go outside? / should we break some bread? / are you'nterested?
by Firewall on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:56:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (2.00 / 5)

I'm stunned, to be honest.  If "that should give you a flavor of our reaction and a taste of what to expect in August, in Denver," according to the diarist, then the only concern should be whether all of the Linens & Things and Bed, Bath, and Beyonds in the Denver metro area will have enough white sheets to go around.


by Pat Flatley on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:59:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Stop slandering Harriett (2.00 / 6)

She did a great job at her press conference and raised some convincing points:

And the democrats are throwing the election away...for what? An inadequate black male?

(He) would not be running if it was not a white woman dat was running for president

I'm from Manhattan

If alegre salutes her, she must be of sound mind and  body.


by 79blondini on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:36:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop slandering Harriett (2.00 / 8)

What's very revealing is that some of the diarists here are holding this person up as some sort of shining example, when they don't know how repellant that person is to the rest of us.


by rfahey22 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:40:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm astounded that TexasDarlin (2.00 / 5)

would approvingly cite a cranky old bigot.

The Clinton camp is self-discrediting.


Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.
by Carl Nyberg on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:26:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

and self-parodying (2.00 / 1)


Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!
by annatopia on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 03:34:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

If you're astounded... (1.00 / 2)

you obviously haven't been reading her posts.  TexasDarlin has made her bigotry clear for awhile now.  What astounds me is that her disgusting, anti-Democratic diaries keep making it to the rec list.


by marley on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 03:59:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm astounded that TexasDarlin (none / 0)

you mean like when Markos the BHO surrogate quoted Bob Novaks and takes his word as gospel (when it suits his purpose)? You must be just as outraged at him right? You must have links where you wrote insulting and degrading things about him like you did above right?

crickets


by zerosumgame on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 11:28:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yawn. (1.14 / 14)

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzz.
You're still ranting.
Still raving.
Still angry.
Still bitter.
Still full of hate.
Still spewing vitriol against our Democratic nominee.
Still full of crap.
Still bursting veins on your forehead and spittle hitting your keybaord about how much you hate Obama.
Still advocating and praising voting for the piece of shit evil son of a bitch McCain.
Still trolling.
Still acting like a Republican No twenty five cent troll. Never ends. Never changes.
Was annoying before.
Now boring as all hell.

Ergo:
Yawn.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz .


I support our nominee President Barack Obama - and the Admins can't stand me, so I can't rec or rate. This is very mean if you were to ask me.
by TheFullBerry on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:55:33 PM EST

Re: Yawn. (none / 0)

There is no nominee until August.


by wblynch on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 07:08:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

LOL. (none / 0)

Denial ain't just a river in Delaware.


I support our nominee President Barack Obama - and the Admins can't stand me, so I can't rec or rate. This is very mean if you were to ask me.
by TheFullBerry on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 07:26:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (2.00 / 1)

That's right! The popular vote is the will of the people.


by LA on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:55:52 PM EST

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (1.66 / 3)

You made me laugh with that one. The "will of the people" had nothing to do with yesterday, much like our upcoming general election.
by zenful6219 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:07:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (2.00 / 4)

yeah, it was really much more the will of the Michigan Democratic Party, which is the group that asked for the 69-59 split.

The will of the people went out the window when Michigan was told that its primary would not count, and this was borne out when it saw nearly 150,000 Democrats vote in the Republican primary on January 15th instead of their own primary where the only choices were Clinton, Uncommitted and Kucinich. This is born out by the fact that Michigan was the ONLY state with a primary where turnout was lower than 50% of John Kerry's total vote in 2004 (in an election where 3 states EXCEEDED the Kerry total and all but 3 were above 60% of the 2004 dem vote). Michigan saw turnout at barely 30% of the Kerry vote.

As the RBC stated repeatedly yesterday, there was no good solution. To take the Obama 50-50 position was to ignore the fact that Clinton won the majority of votes. To take the Clinton position was to ignore the nearly one million Democrats who stayed home or voted to foil McCain after being told their votes wouldn't count in MI. And to take the Michigan Democratic Party's position was to just throw out the results while acknowledging that Clinton won the flawed primary where her only opponent was Dennis Kucinich.

If you can't get that, you're not interested in having a rational debate, and you should expect that people won't view you well for it.


by skaiserbrown on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:48:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (none / 0)

What about the will of all the Obama supporters in MI? I am presuming there are more than ZERO.
From a Hillary supporter: We laughed as that became our mantra - "Barack can't win!"..... ....."he can go to hell and i'll pay for his way there."
by Cochrane on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 05:02:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Popular vote in a boycotted state (none / 0)

like Michigan is meaningless.  Hillary only wins the popular vote if you give Obama 0 votes in Michigan.  See the link in my sig.


Obama leads the popular vote too
by kellogg on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 12:05:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (2.00 / 4)

You can't have unity when the party disenfranchises half of the innocent voters who voted in good faith. They didn't have anything to do with the political scheming in either state that resulted in the primary dates being moved up. In Florida, it wasn't even the Democrats who wanted it. The party leaders in both houses of Florida's legislators tried to amend the bill to move the date back to Feb 5, but it was defeated. Michigan simply did not agree that Iowa and New Hampshire should ALWAYS have the privilege of so unfairly influencing our choices.
by zenful6219 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:57:09 PM EST

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (2.00 / 4)

Yes, here is the FL Democratic party trying to amend the bill, voraciously.


"More War Years! More War Years!" ~John McCain
by Tommy Flanagan on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:59:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (none / 0)

Ok...what is that supposed to prove?
by zenful6219 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:09:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (2.00 / 4)

"In Florida, it wasn't even the Democrats who wanted it."

If you watch the video, it proves the opposite.


democracy!
by BlueGAinDC on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:17:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yabbut... (none / 0)

Aw gee. You're right. Never mind.


by 79blondini on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:38:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The G.O.P. has unity when they disenfranchised (none / 0)

half of their innocent voters in Fl. and Mi. who voted in good faith.

How do you explain that? Maybe Republicans are acting more maturely than you are.


McCain's occupation plan will achieve victory when it bestows liberty to the freedom loving people of Iraq and their freedom loving oil.
by Lefty Coaster on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:27:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (2.00 / 1)

Clinton's people, including Ickes, voted for the .5 vote solution. If you want to vent ire, you should also be targeting them for capitulation. No Justice, No Peace!


by skaiserbrown on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:55:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (2.00 / 5)

I'm not sure Clinton can add MI to her popular vote count (which is moot anyway) because the Michigan primary was invalidated.  The 69/59 split was to reflect what MDP believed the actual delegate count may have been had it been a valid election, based on collected data.

Therefore, there is no total vote count, just a delegate count.


"More War Years! More War Years!" ~John McCain
by Tommy Flanagan on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:57:17 PM EST

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (2.00 / 4)

Exactly why Hillary's camp is so angry about that split because it confirms that the delegates were not based on any popular vote breakdown.


by sweet potato pie on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:02:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (none / 0)

Would you have preferred an even 64-64 split?

Because from the looks of things, Senator Clinton was not going to get 73-0.


Finding God in a Dog
by maxomai on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:19:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (2.00 / 1)

That would have been fine with me but the 73-0 was absurd. We are not in Russia so to think that she wins because she is the only person on the ballot despite the fact that it was not a sanctioned primary is absurd and insulting.


by sweet potato pie on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:26:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (2.00 / 1)

The Hillary camp was given a gift. They should have gotten zero.


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:52:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

She wins the popular vote without MI (none / 0)

She is the people's choice in this years election she's just not the pols in Washington DC's choice due to their fear of losing AA's.

The party is split. Race-bating tends to do that, it leaves scars. Maybe Obama will win despite his race-bating, but he will do it without me.


by mmorang on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 06:29:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She wins the popular vote without MI (none / 0)

Then you should go and find a nice, comfy blog that ISN'T trying to elect a Democrat for the Presidency.
   Maybe one with a yard, or a garden...
We have nothing to fear but fear itself. And clowns.
by haremoor on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:06:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Choo choo (2.00 / 8)

"Unity Express" - what crap.  Outside of the Borg, unity happens when all sides of dispute decide that their joint interests should overcome their differences.  

Cynical and disingenuous manipulation of the agreed-on DNC slate of primaries, busing in rabid activists to disrupt a DNC meeting, inflammatory statements stating the dispute over seating the Florida delegation is "worse than slavery" -- that's not meeting halfway.  Those tactics are meant to sow discord and question the legitimacy of the process.

I'm not going to be mealy-mouthed and attribute this to "the heat of the campaign".  Time and again, Sen. Clinton's campaign has chosen the low road, and in their increasing desperation shown that unity is not their foremost goal.  Perhaps that's lost on a Clinton apologist, TexasDarlin.


by Twin Planets on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:58:08 PM EST

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (2.00 / 1)

Yep..
Having this person as our President would be a disaster for women.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCifpbfQl OM


"harlequin speech of suicide, demanding instantaneous lobotomy"
by nogo postal on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:02:56 PM EST

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (none / 0)

ZOMG HE SO HATES WOMEN.


John McCain wants to stay in Iraq.
by ihaveseenenough on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:10:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (1.80 / 10)

I can't wait for the YouTube videos of the massive crowd of Clinton protestors in Denver -- almost as large as the horde of 200 in D.C.  Rumor has it, the other 9,800 are still stuck on the Jersey Turnpike.

Look at the rec list -- decent, dedicated Clinton supporters are representing they are true Democrats.  Even with her massive email list, alegre couldn't get her delusional hate-filled diary on the rec list last night -- perhaps it was because she included the fake bruise lady and the ranting bigot as examples of real Clinton supporters.  No one wants you people in the party -- get it?  There's honestly not enough of you to make us give a damn.


by gchaucer2 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:10:57 PM EST

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (1.83 / 6)

"One final word....Mrs. Clinton has instructed me to reserve her rights to take this to the credentials committee."
More beautiful words were never spoken.
by Caldonia on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:11:25 PM EST

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (2.00 / 6)

Music to Republican ears.


McCain's occupation plan will achieve victory when it bestows liberty to the freedom loving people of Iraq and their freedom loving oil.
by Lefty Coaster on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:14:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (2.00 / 4)

"More beautiful words were never spoken"?
What a dreary world you must live in.
by Kysen on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:14:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Mmmm, no (2.00 / 1)

some of us actually read literature, political addresses, and science tomes.  This statement would rate below "It was a dark and stormy night . . . ."


by gchaucer2 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:25:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yes. On to Denver! n/t (2.00 / 1)


Grumpy, reluctant, sore-losing, unhappy, irritable Hillary supporter for Barack Obama 2008
by DemAC on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:21:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (2.00 / 2)

Until Clinton says "I'm dropping out."

Then maybe this asinine nonsense from her dead-enders will finally stop.


Obama in November.
by Artemis Jax on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:48:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (none / 0)

Nope, then it just turns into this: http://writehillaryin.com/


by MarvinMouse on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:30:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC (none / 0)

Unity..
Edwards knows..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZbeJzsnY 2E&feature=related
"harlequin speech of suicide, demanding instantaneous lobotomy"
by nogo postal on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:14:48 PM EST