As of this writing, Howard Dean is refusing to let Hillary’s name be on the ballot for the first vote at the convention, a startling departure from the norm. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote in this campaign and she earned more primary votes for President than any Democratic candidate in the history of this country. And the DNC won’t even let her name be on the ballot.They won't even allow the winner of the popular vote to carry a symbolic victory into the hall. Teddy Kennedy had that privilege in 1980. And Dean had the gall to decry sexism recently...!
The Obots think they can achieve unity with a chainsaw.
By the way: I notice that the prog-blogs have gone back to hating Nancy Pelosi, because she won't impeach George W. Bush. Note: The proggers do not castigate John Conyers, head of the Judiciary Committee. And they will never criticize the Lightbringer, who shares Pelosi's position, and whose power is now such that he could get an impeachment movement going if he chose.
Gee -- why concentrate all the hate on her, and not on those other guys? Ya think penis-ownership might be a factor here? Ya think? Ya think?
11 comments:
Somewhat OT, but this gem popped up on Corrente. Still feeling the love from the Oborg, the sorest winners in history:
http://www.correntewire.com/puma_hunters_in_orange_vests
What the hell is WITH you bots? You never give up.
Man...I've never seen a group work the blogs like this.
When you say she won the popular vote, does that include states where she was the only one on the ballot ?
I guess you're right about Nancy Pelosi - I tend to blame her first myself, mainly because I had such high hopes of her when she became Speaker of the House. I've been disappointed.
We should be blaming all the Democrats who declined to support Dennis Kucinich in his efforts, because if enough of 'em had backed him when he presented impeachment articles against Cheney, Pelosi and Conyers might have had to do something.
no name: Was Hillary Clinton the one blocking revotes in FL and MI?
There wasn't a single state primary where Clinton was the only name on the ballot.
If it helps, here are the names that were on the Michigan ballot and the percentage of votes each received:
Clinton 55.2%
Kucinich 3.7%
Dodd (who had withdrawn but still had his name on the ballot) 0.6%
Gravel 0.4%
Uncommitted 40.1%
As for Florida, none of the candidates actually campaigned there, but their names were on the ballot.
.R.S.E.
Joe, I live in Michigan.
Michigan was not able to revote. The logistics wouldn't allow any type of revote. It was always going to come down to a compromise, and the longer that was up in the air, the longer Clinton was able to convince the press that there was some strange possibility of her winning the delegate math.
Claiming she won the popular vote is totally disingenuous without qualifying the statistic further. When those qualifications are noted, the silliness of the claim just becomes more evident.
Logistics? Hardly. There was a huge push for a revote -- and the push back came from the Obama camp.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/03/19/obama_lawyer_questions_wisdom.html
"en. Barack Obama's campaign has raised questions about a possible June 3 revote in Michigan, although the Democratic National Committee seems fine with the idea.
"We have recently been asked whether the legislation as proposed by Michigan would fit within the framework of the National Party's Delegate Selection Rules," DNC officials said in a statement. "Our review of this legislation indicates that it would, in fact, fit within the framework of the Rules."
But Obama lawyer Robert F. Bauer raised several potential problems in a campaign memo released this morning, noting that the primary would be "unprecedented in conception and proposed structure," as no other states has ever "re-run an election in circumstances like these."
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/14/769247.aspx
"Everyone seems to be on board in the state Democratic world of Michigan, including the governor, the Dingells, Carl Levin, the Kilpatricks and the UAW. For those that follow Michigan Democratic politics closely, you'll know getting all those folks in agreement isn't easy"
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/19/nation/na-dems19
"On Tuesday, Clinton advisors accused Obama of blocking the proposal for a June 3 contest that would replace the results of Michigan’s Jan. 15 primary.
“Sen. Obama and his campaign are dragging their feet,” said Harold Ickes, a senior Clinton advisor."
So stop trying to kid my readers. If you look at the contemporary discussion about the revote, you'll see that the argument wasn't over logistics. It was about money.
Yes, Joe, all the leaders were fine with it. Let's have another vote. The problem wasn't the desire. The problem was that the local folks that come and man the velvet ropes weren't going to be able to pull it off.
The logistics at the local, precinct level were not going to be able to pull it off.
I remember all of the articles, finger-pointing, and look-at-me politicking of the argument going on. They even had a "last-minute" todo on the floor of the Michigan legislature. What they never really had was the support of the little towns, churches, fire stations and schools that were going to have to re-host.
I'm not kidding your readers.
And btw, quoting Harold Ickes--whose job was literally to argue for Hillary--as proof of your point that Obama didn't want a Michigan revote is just as disingenuous as stating that Hillary won the pop vote without qualification.
Post a Comment