I although not old enough to vote then, remember the conventions of yesteryear.  Back then, they were true nominating conventions, none of this everything has to be wrapped up before the “convention,” surely by the last primary.  What a waste of pure and unadulterated fun and drama. Now by the end of the primary cycle, we know who the candidates are and also their platforms, because the primary cycle has lasted 2 1/2 years. We desperately need a reform of the system that elects our presidents and all the other candidates, it is far too long and way too expensive for the common person to participate in. Nostalgia, this is, but it is good to remember that in America we used to elect those people who could communicate well and did not have a beauty contest as we do nowadays.  I, for one, am done thinking about who I would vote for, and just wish that the whole process would be over with. It isn’t any fun anymore, to watch the conventions, they are actually just one big party for the delegates and do not have any meaning on who gets the nomination for the candidacy of the particular party.  It is for shame that the process is now a beauty contest and not a real and true test of who is the better candidate for the presidency.  Personally I believe, that the MSM has played a large role in the watering down of the process and has left the electorate, us, out in the cold when it comes electing the president.

^ this link;

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/020207A.shtml

It’s an editorial by Hammo; if he’s a republican I’m an alien.  Mind you I’m no fan or critic, but fair is fair and your comment/attack wasn’t based on any facts.

Cyrena says to Hammo,
“I’m also inclined to believe that you’re probably a repug. So, why do you bother with these liberal blog sites?”

Cyrena, why do you say that to Hammo.  I like to see divergant viewpoints even if I disagree with them.  How can one learn if one isn’t interested in one’s opponents views?  I’m not a dem or a repub, liberal or conservative; I’m a thinking human who agrees and disagrees on the merit of the argument/facts.  Jeez, lighten up a little.

Re: caucusdebacle

We’ve argued this point at Truthdig before. You assume that every home bound woman voter would have voted for Clinton.  There is no merit in your assertion.  It is just wishful thinking.  BTW, what about the 200,000+ republicans who switched parties and voted for Clinton in Texas, Ohio and Mississippi primaries.

As I resident of one of the last states to vote in the primaries, I am really disappointed with Mr. Dean.  Cycle after cycle the primary election comes around in may, the outcome decided, the vote essentially symbolic.  He could have at least waited until after all the states had voted. I hope the superdelegates don’t listen to him.  Its probably good to have it decided before the convention, all the states should at least get a chance to have a voice before they rush to figure it out.

Before we rush to coronate Prince Obama, please tell superdelegates that the 16% Caucus Skew we saw in Texas between the plus 4 primary results & the minus 12 caucus results on the same day really apply to ALL the caucus states!

Hillary’s house-bound older-women voters were denied Absentee Ballots in Iowa & caucuses beyond meaning that THEIR democracy-share of Pledged Delegates & Popular Votes were disappeared. Democracy is not a game. The rules of democracy mean that each citizen gets a vote.

(Non-lemming)superdelegates MUST take this shameful voter suppression into account. The Will of the People? Which people? The Will of (Only the Healthy) People, apparently. These silenced voters know they were cheated & it will affect their participation in the Fall contest—the polls already show that. “Oh no, honey, I can’t caucus, I’m a cripple. If I can’t be there in my body, I don’t count.” In America? Fie!

Howard Dean’s ‘Decide Now’ message to superdelegates is Democratic code talk for ‘Let the bidding begin, and make it fast’.

So, Obama and Hillary, listen to the leader of your party, and start pushing those bribe talks with the superdelegates. Of course, Obama would seem to have a distinct advantage in bribery, because of the size of his war chest, but....Hillary, in her naked ambition, could outbid him, if she decides to open the US Treasury-to-be under her command, and starts throwing around Ambassadorships, Cabinet Secretary positions, and unqualified advance approval, sight unseen, of all future earmarks. And if she’s willing to steal from her husband, and starts slipping shrink-wrapped bundles of Clinton community property cash under the tables, she might have a small chance of ...not winning, for that’s out of her reach, but...coming close.

The pro-Obama faction is rushing to hijack this topic too, uhh............

He said “after the last primary”.  The media is a third party in all of this and it will be pathetic to watch the know-it-alls carving everybody up yet again “in hindsight” when a nominee has been decided.

The Democrats are due for a good cleanout and Nancy Pelosi must know that her head is on the block - and especially if Hillary wins. Maybe some of them don’t care about Nancy all that much anyway.....

But, after all that, they will still be at an either/or position and running around like headless chooks desperately seeking a VP in human form! Dean spoke well but it didn’t mean a thing.

Rather that cutting the campaign before all the primaries are done, maybe Dean should organize a real debate where only issues can be discussed.

I think Clinton is showing herself to be a cynical Repug-lite and her efforts at racist and pseudo-patriotic distraction are backfiring more than helping her. She is in a weak position to be slinging prejudice as she re-enforces negative sexist stereotypes about herself in an attempt to rouse racism to her aid.

Obama is right that most voters see through this stuff and want to hear about real issues and in keeping to the “high road” is winning support. If he would move in a slightly more progressive direction and hook up with Edwards, he would be unbeatable.

Robert Reich to Endorse Obama
By John Heilemann
New York Magazine
Friday 18 April 2008
“..But Reich insists that the endorsement does indeed come as a surprise - to him. As we chatted in Washington, where Reich had come from Berkeley, where he teaches, to give a speech and meet with some Democrats on Capitol Hill, he explained that, despite the criticisms he’s made of the Clintons ("I call it as I see it"), he had planned to refrain from offering an official backing for Obama out of respect for Hillary. “She’s an old friend,” Reich said, “I’ve known her 40 years. I was absolutely dead set against getting into the whole endorsement thing. I’ve struggled with it. I’ve not wanted to do it. Out of loyalty to her, I just felt it would be inappropriate.”
So what’s changed? I asked Reich.
“I saw the ads” - the negative man-on-street commercials that the Clinton campaign put up in Pennsylvania in the wake of Obama’s bitter/cling comments a week ago - “and I was appalled, frankly. I thought it represented the nadir of mean-spirited, negative politics. And also of the politics of distraction, of gotcha politics. It’s the worst of all worlds. We have three terrible traditions that we’ve developed in American campaigns. One is outright meanness and negativity. The second is taking out of context something your opponent said, maybe inartfully, and blowing it up into something your opponent doesn’t possibly believe and doesn’t possibly represent. And third is a kind of tradition of distraction, of getting off the big subject with sideshows that have nothing to do with what matters. And these three aspects of the old politics I’ve seen growing in Hillary’s campaign. And I’ve come to the point, after seeing those ads, where I can’t in good conscience not say out loud what I believe about who should be president. Those ads are nothing but Republicanism. They’re lending legitimacy to a Republican message that’s wrong to begin with, and they harken back to the past 20 years of demagoguery on guns and religion. It’s old politics at its worst - and old Republican politics, not even old Democratic politics. It’s just so deeply cynical.”

The piece continues after explaining that Reich is NOT a superdelegate, though he was the Labor Secretary in Bill’s admin.

“All of which is true enough, as far as it goes. But beyond the bald fact of Reich’s support for Obama, the Clinton campaign should pay heed to the reasoning behind it. In his disgust with Hillary’s increasingly harsh tactics, Reich is hardly alone. Indeed, the feeling seems to be spreading more broadly in the party with every passing day. It’s been clear for some time that Hillary’s attacks on Obama were driving up her negatives. You could certainly argue this might be a price worth paying if those attacks were amping up doubts about him. But it’s hard to see any logic - or even sanity - in the tactic if the result is to drive even people who once regarded Hillary dearly into Obama’s arms.

More at the link

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/041808H.shtml

The same ‘phenomena’ seems to be here: (same link)

Super Delegates Unswayed by Clinton’s Attacks
By Patrick Healy
The New York Times

Because of the space limitations, I won’t try to post this one, but the same stuff keeps coming up again and again, with these BONAFIDE superdelegates, as has been the case with others, including Reich above.

And yeah, It reeks of complete insanity. I haven’t a clue to what Hillary or her campaign could have been thinking. But, as Louise has mentioned before, and it’s finally sinking in, it would appear that some folks don’t WANT her to win, and this might very well be all repug stuff, to make them both look bad. Her ‘supporters’ on this blog sure haven’t helped, so one can only assume that they’re repugs in drag.

Hammo,

Long ago I linked to your website. I didn’t like it.

I’ve also seen your posts on MULTIPLE other blog sites with this same stuff...Food for thought...blah, blah, blah.

The reason I don’t like it is because while I will admit that you cover it better than most..maybe the best I’ve come across, you’re a racist, and you just do a better job at slipping in the divisive racist stuff than the average troll does.

I’m also inclined to believe that you’re probably a repug. So, why do you bother with these liberal blog sites?

There are many elements and dynamics in play in the Dem nomination contest ... ethnicity, economic class, gender, religion and people’s views on the important questions of the day.

The demographics in Pennsylvania, Indiana and other upcoming primary states will be key factors.

Food for thought in the articles ...

Obama faces Ohio hearts and minds

AmericanChronicle.com
February 28, 2008

http://americanchronicle.com/articles/53747

- - -

Obama’s Iraq position, mixed ethnicity are key factors

AmericanChronicle.com
February 22, 2008

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/53128