Even though I have been out of town for a few days and remarks are not as timely as I would like, I am nevertheless going to respond to cyrena. I cannot allow it to stand that I was not telling the truth about kerry’s remarks and Latino voters.

For someone who claims to know so much, you have so little knowledge of current events.

Just a few links to Kerry’s comment about Obama’s skin color:

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/20/787719.aspx

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/20/kerry-obama-can-bridge-d_n_92576.html

http://www.kxmc.com/getArticle.asp?ArticleId=221093

Some links to Clintons support from Latinos.

http://mustv.com/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18718803

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7380473.stm

http://abcnews.go.com/PollingUnit/Vote2008/story?id=4386210

cyrena writes:    “Yes, even RACISTS will select him bert, (at least the more astute and intelligent ones)”

I never knew that racists were astute and intelligent cyrena. What percentage of racists are ‘astute’ and ‘intelligent?’

She further writes:  “…if only because they have enough sense to know that he is the best chance of changing that around.’

Since when do racists want to turn racism around? Is that like gays really want to be straight? Your comment is nonsense.

Hillary rub’s my nose in it, and I do not like to be reminded that I am white or uneducated!

Patricia,

I agree, she is crashing and burning.

But, what’s this about Bills poker face? I didn’t see that part of the film. I remember seeing something that had him jumping around and running to and fro, and clapping his hands, and looking like an old cheerleader or something.

I thought THAT was really pathetic.

Meantime, I just read something on Yahoo news, (which I almost NEVER read unless somebody sends it to me) that claims that one of her aides claims that she is now sorry for having made this comment.

Gee, ya think?

Well, that’s what it seems like I remember Purple Wolf telling me even before that day…because intitially, she wasn’t going to bother to vote at all, since they had already ‘announced’ (like in the paper and stuff) that write-ins would not be counted. In short, it was the same as disqualifying your vote.

Anyway, I was trying to figure out what was going on, which is why I’d asked Purple Wolf if she could send me samples or a copy, which she did. I couldn’t remember which other dems were on the ticket at the time, and the stuff she sent me is now long gone. (my system had a fatal crash) but from what I saw a couple of days ago on a standard election primary map, Hillary had received 50 percent of the vote, and 40 percent was ‘uncommitted’ since that’s the only option that Obama and I guess Edwards supporters had. (I still can’t remember which others were on that ballot, but I know Obama wasn’t, and others that WERE, had already dropped out).

Jackpine knows, since he’s a Michiganian.

Irregardless of what she actually said, her later confirmation, all the defining and redefining and spin ... here’s how her comment sounded to Mr. and Mrs./Ms./Miss average American voter ...

“Uneducated white voters support me!”
In other words: “Bushes base supports me!”

That might sit well with Bushes base, but not with folks who want Bush gone! And come to think of it, that probably doesn’t sit well with Bushes base either. They don’t like to be reminded they are uneducated. They get that reminder every time they listen to Bush!

Maybe Hillary believes somehow that will endear her to the republican voters. Not likely. They like to believe they graduated from the school of hard knocks, so they have little use for someone who has enough money to buy an election.

The ONE thing Bush did, which was smart. He pretended not to be wealthy. That combined with his unique ability to sound like the barfly you chat with every evening in the local pup, proved to be a winning combination.

Hillary’s comments were one big monster boo-boo! Even the pundits and politicos who like to think they control the outcome agree with that!

But as I recall, the poll workers were told not to count any write-in candidates. Is that correct?
I really don’t know.

Not this one Baby.

If Hillary had a dick she just stepped on it.

Before everyone goes into a tizzy about every little thing Hillary says (y’all have the reflexes of a cat when it comes to taking offense at any and all things Clinton), let’s parse her statement, shall we? Let’s see what she’s really saying.

First a preface: Everyone knows, Hillary is a politician’s politician. She’s a policy wonk and a born political theorist. When she talks about politics you should listen with the same respect you give Obama when he talks about race. She knows her stuff. Maybe too well, which is what puts the ideologically pure into convulsions. You may disagree with her on any and all issues, but you’d be well advised to pay attention.

So, with that in mind, what did she say? There are “hard-working Americans, white Americans…who had not completed college were supporting me” - who have not caught on to Obama’s candidacy. Is this statement true? Exit polls suggest it is. Is it racist to even suggest it? Not if you’re a political theorist. It’s a fact that needs to be taken into account. What she’s saying is that there are a lot of these folks - a lot more of them then there are Blacks of similar socioeconomic status. And what she’s implying is that these are the Democrats that have flocked to Republican presidential (not congressional) candidates since Reagan. Not because they’e racist (well, not a majority of them anyway) but because they’re disenchanted with Democratic leaders in the mold of Humphrey, Carter, Gore, and Kerry. Bill won them over with “tiangulating” issues like Welfare reform. Like those policies or not, they worked in terms of sowing up this vital part of the electorate. And Hillary is holding onto that coalition. To these voters, the ones staying with Hillary, Obama, for all his talk of change and hope (and his skin color), looks and sounds like Gore/Kerry dedux. And if that’s true, then she’s right, they’ll turn and vote for McCain and the Dems could lose, once again, the general election.

Is she right? I hope not. But I’m certainly going to listen to her argument and give it due weight. And I’m not going to hysterically (hi Cyrena) scream “race baiter!”

Thomas, I live in Michigan and did go to the polls. Most of the names of the demos were on the ballot, even those who had quit running before the mock run in January. Obama’s, as well as I believe Edwards name were not on the ballot, however there was an area for those whose names were not on the ballot to mark as uncommitted-the poll volunteers said that was where people were checking that wanted Obama or the other name not on the ballot. Hillary’s name was not the only one as she claims. I even mailed sample ballots of the R.+ D.‘s to Cyrena so she could see the ballots in Michigan for one of her law classes.

Hillary and you have nothing to offer, except sour grapes.  ” should have compelled the Committee to show leniency”.  Why, more of Hillary entitlement?

If the shoe was on the other foot why do I supposed that Hillary would be singing an other tune?

Lack of integrity is something Hillary has a lot of.

Everyone talks about ‘the rules,’ but few have read them.

Rule 11.A. of the Delegate Selection Rules for the 2008 Democratic National Convention states the following:

“11. TIMING OF THE DELEGATE SELECTION PROCESS

A. No meetings, caucuses, conventions or primaries which constitute the first determining stage in the presidential nomination process (the date of the primary in primary states, and the date of the first tier caucus in caucus states) may be held prior to the first Tuesday in February or after the second Tuesday in June in the calendar year of the national convention. Provided, however, that the Iowa precinct caucuses may be held no earlier than 22 days before the first Tuesday in February; that the Nevada first-tier caucuses may be held no earlier than 17 days before the first Tuesday in February; that the New Hampshire primary may be held no earlier than 14 days before the first Tuesday in February; and that the South Carolina primary may be held no earlier than 7 days before the first Tuesday in February. In no instance may a state which scheduled delegate selection procedures on or between the first Tuesday in February and the second Tuesday in June 1984 move out of compliance with the provisions of this rule.”

COMMENTARY:  Florida and Michigan violated Rule 11.A. by moving their primaries to a date before the first Tuesday in February. There is no argument there, but what about Iowa, New Hampshire, and yes, South Carolina too.

Rule 11.A specifically set the date for the primaries & caucuses for those three states as “no earlier than 22 days before the first Tuesday in February” (Iowa), “no earlier than 14 days before the first Tuesday in February” (New Hampshire), and “no earlier than 7 days before the first Tuesday in February” (South Carolina).

Iowa held their caucuses on January 3rd. That’s more than 22 days before the first Tuesday in February.

New Hampshire held their primary on January 8th. That’s more than 17 days before the first Tuesday in February.

And South Carolina held their primary on January 26th. That’s more than 7 days before the first Tuesday in February.

Under Rule 11.A., five states were in violation of the DNC rules,  and as such, all five states should have been punished under Rule 20.C.1.a.

Yet, only MI and FL were penalized.

DNC rules did not require a 100% stripping of these states’ delegates: the automatic punishment for states that moved primaries to before February 5 was that half (50%) of their delegates be stripped.

In addition, the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee didn’t have to strip even half of the delegates if it found that MI’s and FL’s Democrats had made good faith efforts to stop their respective state legislature from changing of the primary date.

That DNC Committee was supposed to conduct investigations to determine if Michigan’s and Florida’s Democratic leaders had made good faith efforts to stop the moving of their state’s primary election. Reportedly, the Committee did not conduct such investigations. 

Instead, led by Donna Brazile, the Committee simply decided to impose the harshest sanctions possible on Michigan and Florida — despite rules and circumstances that should have compelled the Committee to show leniency.

This is what happened, but many do not care and many don’t want to - can’t handle - the truth. So strip away delegates to the 4th (FL) and the 8th (MI) largest state in the nation and two critical must win states in Nov. Let me know how that works out for you on Nov. 4th.

Thomas Eugene,

Check out Jackpine Savage’s post under the superdelegats thread, he outlines very clearly what happened in MI.

Thomas you are wrong, wrong, wrong on all counts.

Hillary was not the ONLY candidate on the ballot in either MI or FL. Both of these sets of data are the Certified by the FL or MI Secretaries of State and as reported by the NYT.

Second, in MI Barak Obama asked his supporters through both word of mouth and paid radio ads with Rep. John Conyers to vote for “Uncommitted” for him. In FL he campaigned by running TV ads in direct violation of the agreement he signed not to campaign. And don’t give me that crap that it was a regional buy and he had no choice. I have some on the ground experience with media buys and you can ask to block a certain area. It’s done all the time.

MI Ballot
Hillary Clinton 328,309       55.2%
Uncommitted     238,168       40.1%
D. Kucinich     21, 715       3.7%
Chris Dodd     3,845         0.6%
Mike Gravel     2,361         0.4%

FL Ballot
Hillary Clinton   870,986       49.8%
Barak Obama     576,214       32.9%
John Edwards     251,562       49.8
Joe Biden       15,704       0.9%
Bill Richardson   14,999       0.9%
Chris Dodd     5,477       0.3%
Mike Gravel     5275         0.3%

I will deal with the Rules in a seperate post.

Felicity, your comment conjures scary thoughts.  If Bush did all this harm because of some weird need to show up a family member—maybe she will obliterate Iran to get over the pain.  Maybe Cindy McCain is the driving force behind “bomb, bomb, Iran” and it is only to intimidate the mullahs into forcing the Islamic world to drink Budweiser—is this all about getting drunk?  And of course, as John Stewart asked Obama, “will you enslave the entire white race”—run for the hills, they’re all insane!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

From what I’ve just read on truthout, the folks in Michigan have apparently worked out some sort of a deal that they hope the DNC will ‘approve’ to allow them to seat delegates at the convention.

•  Michigan Democrats Plan for Delegate Seating
  By Kathy Barks Hoffman
  The Associated Press
  Wednesday 07 May 2008

  Lansing, Michigan - Michigan Democratic leaders on Wednesday settled on a plan to give presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton 69 delegates and Barack Obama 59 as a way to get the state’s delegates seated at the national convention
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/050808L.shtml

As others here have railed on about blaming the Party leaders, and Jackpine and others have made it clear that it was the State Legislatures who made these incredibly stupid decisions, I don’t really understand how even the most delusional ideologues can fail to see where the blame lies. (right where Jackpine Savage put it).

How IS it that you all ‘don’t get it’ when the punishment was PROMISED while there was still an opportunity to avoid it? Ya know, had this happened in ‘reverse time sequence’ there might really had been something to consider.

In other words, if MI and Fl (or any other state for that matter) had decided for any number of reasons, that they did not or could not hold their contests, by a certain date…say Super Tuesday, when a large portion of other states vote, and there was some ‘rule’ that required that they did, (hypothetical obviously, since the last contest isn’t until June 3) THEN there might actually be some legitimate ‘hardship’ case to be made. Like well, we couldn’t get it together for this, that or the other reason, before this, that, or some other later date.

BUT, this is the flippin’ opposite. The LONG ESTABLISHED rules were that states would hold their contests first/early, Iowa and New Hampshire. Why, I don’t know. I don’t even care. The point is that this wasn’t some secret or new policy. The more important point is that both FL and MI could have abandoned their stupid idea to break the rules, after discovering that this was going to be the ‘punishment’ and SIMPLY HELD THEIR CONTESTS IN LINE WITH THE RULES. It’s not like they were going to somehow ‘miss out’ on anything, and I’ve YET to understand what the point was in holding them early, when the consequences were well known BEFORE THEY DID IT! Does ANYBODY out there know what the expected ‘gain’ was, for doing this? I mean, I’d like to believe that if they willing risked this punishment, they must have somehow expected some gain that would override it, but for the life of me, I can’t understand or otherwise imagine what that could possibly be!

NOR can I see any possible way for MI to ‘fix’ this problem, by giving 69 votes to Clinton, and 59 to Barack Obama, when I KNOW FOR A FACT, that many Michigan Democrats DID NOT VOTE in that primary, because 1) ONLY Clinton’s name was on the ballot. 2) WRITE-INS WERE NOT ALLOWED – (made clear in advance, and included in the ballot instructions), so for any Michigan voters who DID go bother casting a vote, there choices were Clinton, or UNCOMMITTED! Lastly, they KNEW the delegates would not be recognized at the convention!

So, Clinton gets 50% and the Uncommitteds get 40%. How do they come up with 69 and 59 out of that, when one of the candidates (the one getting 59) wasn’t even on the flippin’ ballot, and there was no way to write-in his name? How insane is that?

I know the extra 10 delegates will not help HRC, because Obama has such a huge lead. That much is her own fault, for failing to accept that the American people weren’t going to put up with these kinds of dirty tactics after what we’ve been through the past 8 years, and any reminders to how we got stuck in this. So, I don’t get the point here, unless it’s just to add to a count that would allow Obama to reach the magic number, instead of CHANGING the magic number, to reflect the exclusion of MI and FL.

Straight talk 11,

I love this. The pop quiz was an added bonus.

Thank you.

I know it is a cliche,  but people get the President they deserve. If people especially those who would normally vote Democrat vote for Hillary Clinton or John McCain because they wont vote for a black then they have no right to complain when they do get it.

It was our state legislatures who did this, not Howard Dean.  We went (or didn’t go) to the polls knowing that those primaries didn’t count.  Now they’re supposed to count.  And you’re trying to skirt the fact that the Clintons have a little bit of pull inside the DNC.  They weren’t crying about counting every vote when they assumed it would all be wrapped up in February.

She only cares about us now because it would help her.  Where was that fighter we need convincing my state legislatures not to be dumbfucks?

With the two states on the sidelines, Obama likely wins a contest that Clinton backers are already calling illegitmate.[sic]  They’ve called everything that she didn’t win illegitimate in some way or another…it’s the Clinton MO, apparently.

And yes, the stupidity of this primary season IS all Clinton’s fault.

Finally, if the roles were reversed, you cannot make me believe that Clinton would be crying for “every voice to be heard”...so your argument holds water like a sieve.

But wait, i thought that the sky was falling for the Democrats?

Neither candidate can even know that the people who voted for them in the primaries will vote for them in the general election.  And Clinton’s coalition looks like the type that would gleefully hop on the straight talk express.

Your comment about how the AA polls like it will end up voting for Clinton if she’s the nominee pretty well destroys the argument that Clinton supporters are the “real” Democrats.  It seems to be Clinton supporters who are quick to say “I’ll vote for McCain.”

And there’s no such thing as a Reagan Democrat, not after 28 years.  At best, they are now independents…a group that Obama does better with than Clinton.

And would you quit with this “far left” crap?  Neither of these candidates are far left…they’re barely left.  What you’re trying to say is that only a Republican, or a Democrat who acts just like a Republican has a chance.  That may be correct, but it A. doesn’t bode well for America and B. sure doesn’t make you sound like much of a Democrat.

“why do you think he didn’t bother to take an American first name?”

Good grief! You have to have an “American” first name to become president? In the first place, what is an American first name these days? Is there even such a thing? What if governor Schwarzenegger’s first name had been Dietrich instead of Arnold (both good names in German)? Ignoring opinions as to his eligibility for the moment, could he have ever become governor if it had been Dietrich even if he had been just as famous? Maybe not, because of so many other pinheads in this world.

Hillary has really mooned hard all the way through this campaign. Her manner radiates the self-absorbed spoiled brat she is. The white working class wants another “bubba”, or at least a bubba’s wife. None of them are really bubbas, but some are pretty good at pretending they are despite their ill-gotten millions. And what does it say about her that she doesn’t have the funds without her own loans? Half of Obama’s money has come from donations of $200 or less! That is a very telling indicator of who and how many are going to vote for him in a general election.

What of Bill Clinton’s clear willingness to lie shamelessly without a thought for ruining a young woman to save his own skin? Yet some women love this intelligent but shameless chauvinist as if he were part and parcel of their salvation along with Hillary. And just how did Hillary manage to forget she wasn’t shot at in Bosnia? Figure that one out! The only possible explanations that come to mind are that she’s either really, really dumb (very doubtful), a self-deluded egomaniac (highly probable), a pathological liar (maybe we should add this), or suffering from basket-case amnesia augmented with hallucinatory memory content (highly unlikely). (Pop quiz: Which one of these qualifies her for the presidency?)

They’re not only unconscionable race baiters and dirty, mudslinging campaigners representing the worst of the old order in politics. Beyond lies, gutter campaign tactics, and other such relatively trivial signs of their manifest shortage of character and integrity, the Clintons have been fully in the pocket of Monsanto, among others, a company that aggressively sues farmers for patent violation after ruining their pure line seed with pollen contamination from their genetically modified crops on neighboring farmland…a company that has also inspired massive rates of farmer suicide in India and other countries with its felonious, self-interested marketing policies.

One thing we can be certain Hillary is repeating truthfully during this campaign is that she will never stop working for the American working class. She has to start first. I’m a white independent who voted for Obama in the North Carolina primary. Obama is statesmanlike and takes the high road. That’s why superdelegates continue to move toward him and even longtime Clinton friends and colleagues have abandoned her for him.

Obama’s the obvious choice not only because of his character, integrity, inspirational oratory, and statesmanlike dignity. He’s the obvious choice because McCain is either a brainwashed dullard or a not-so-bright political pawn of international corporate interests as his thoughtless slip connecting oil and the Iraq war indicates.

Alan Greenspan stated in his recent book that it’s a shame that everyone in the know is aware of this connection, but it’s politically incorrect to say it. Well, McCain was just dumb enough to slip and say what any intelligent observer already knows. Hillary is a shameless fraud. Sure she’s smart. So was Al Capone. Sure she has experience. She knows where the White House bathrooms are and for that matter, look at how much experience Bush and Cheney have! We’re very fortunate that Obama isn’t just another one like the rest.

Bert writes:

•  “Obama cannot win the general election without white voters.”

Well DUH! He didn’t win the democrat primary vote, (pledged and popular) without white voters either. What an incredibly stupid statement.

Bert writes more:

•  “In other words, Kerry was telling me that I should vote for Obama because of the color of his skin. Evidently that is OK with all of you who have posted thus far. But that remark is rank racism of the worst sort.
Nobody said it was ‘OK” bert, nor have many of us even heard such a statement from John Kerry, and we DAMN sure wouldn’t believe it just because YOU’VE decided to post it here. You’ve proven that you can’t be believed on anything.
On this…
“For what ever reasons, by and large Obama has not yet been able to get a majority of white blue collar voters or white women. Or even Latinos. Are you calling Latinos racist too because they do not support Obama? I could say the same for Asian voters. Are they racist too?”
More hyperbole from your BLIND HILLARY LOVE bert. There is no real indication that Latinos or a majority of white blue collar voters support Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama. Not democrats at least. You just much prefer to parrot the tiny leaves of the trees, instead of looking at the forest. The FOREST, with is PRIMARILY WHITE, and fairly evenly distributed between the genders, has overwhelmingly selected Barack Obama, at least from the democrats side.
So, you can play your little special interest and racist statistics all you want, and continue to deny the reality of the US population as our collective mindset exists today, in this 21st Century, after decades of steady decline in our quality of life. At the end of the day, the MAJORIY of all Americans will REJECT your divisive tactics and blind adoration, (which they’ve obviously done in rejecting Hillary Clinton) and select Barack Obama as their president. Yes, even RACISTS will select him bert, (at least the more astute and intelligent ones) if only because they have enough sense to know that he is the best chance of changing that around.
Hillary herself has put down the portion of the population that ISN’T this intelligent, by saying that the uneducated blue collar workers prefer her. Well, uneducated is NOT the same as ignorant, and there are enough intelligent people of all races and classes, to figure out that Obama is the only currently AVAILABLE chance for a change away from the steady decline of our society as a whole.
So, you just keep doing all of your little figuring, (and coming up with the WRONG results) and don’t forget to vote in November. I’m sure you’ll write Hillary’s name in.

When it’s all over, and Obama is the President, you and Hillary can escape together, to some deserted island, and live a peacefully romantic life. Hillary may be good for YOU bert, but she is NOT good for our country.

Most folks can figure that out, regardless of our race, class, or gender.

Fadel…

An Omni Scientist God???

That’s a good one.

I find it amazing how a women with even little self-respect and dignity is working so hard to go back to that “White House” where everyday she will be reminded of all her husband philandering and the blow jobs he was receiving from Monica Lewinsky and who knows who else and what else.

My theory is that because she showed no indignation to the point of divorcing him, she must herself had some sexual pervert acts of her own going on at the same time in that White House, turned into “Whore House.” And only an Omni Scientist God would know what she would do if she is back into that “Whore House!”

Bert,

Take Michigan and Florida and place them in your bonnet, you have twisted the truth, the facts and anything else you can conjure up to get those votes, which were never yours in the first place. 

The rules were stated before and after, but you and your queen have decided to gleen the off limits field.

So this is your great plan to pull these two states out of your ass, if you do this I hope you win, because I am sure you will find something else to cry about.

If Hillary had an ounce of integrity I would support your opinion, but you have joined up with the most divisive person in politics. Hillary has shown nothing, I mean nothing looking like common sense, integrity or even a slight bit of reason.

Me, myself and I, Hillary is the enchanted one who believes she is destined to be the President and everyone and everything else be damned.

Let’s hope I am wrong and Hillary may have some humility, showing a bit of compassion for our nation, and the Democratic party, instead of thinking of just thinking about herself. Can she do the right thing and step down from the campaign and support Obama? 

The Republicans are in a tizzy because they feel they cannot use Hillary tactics (Repulican tactics) to win against Obama.  Hillary has used them up!

Your argument Hillary was the only one who could win aginst McCain has been wrong, is wrong and will continue to be bull.

Burt, get you head out of where the sun does not shine and see the light.

Needed to Rant, and you deserve ranting.

You’re wrong here Winghunter, but then…you usually are. First and foremost, among those blacks who vote, (and less than half of the US 13% population of blacks DO vote) didn’t vote based on ‘their racism’. What an incredibly stupid and racist comment.

Democrats regardless of their color, who are concerned with the direction of their lives, as well as the direction this nation is taking, voted for Obama based on the fact that he was the best person to accomplish that.

The only way ANY of us get any ‘capability’ for our own governance, is to elect a progressive democrat to the office. Otherwise, we wind up with the same Fascist regime or dictator that we’ve had for the past decade, ruling by the combination of militarism and corporatism, which is what the Repugs and Hillary Rodham represent.

It’s been said here before, and should be repeated..Hillary should take her rightful position in the Repuglican party, because THOSE are the interests and ideologies that she represents.

And yes, it is true that for the most part, those blacks who DO vote, (never enough to make or break any general election) are overwhelmingly democrats, because the interests of the majority of the population, (including black folks) has historically been far better represented by the Democratic Party.

“Unlike the Republicans crossing over to vote for Barak,....”

Well, at least now you acknowledge that Obama had cross over votes too. How can you be sure that those Rs and is will vote fro Obama in the fall? What do you base that assertion on? Polls? reserch? Crystal ball? Hope?

After Wright and Ayres many of those Rs and Is will never vote for Obama in the general. That is why in PA, NC, and IN he got fewer of his votes from them. And he will get even less when the 527’s come after him.

That’s right. Blame Hillary for everything. This blind hatred of Hillary is insane. Well if Obama gets the nomination and loses I lay the fault squarely at the feet of Howard Dean and the far left elite wing of the Party that stacked the deck againsy Hillary.

I agree totally with this Nolan Finley piece. Look at the last sentence. Ut is neither Obama’s or Clinton’s fault. It is Dean’s and the DNC.

From the Detroit News and Nolan Finley’s blog:

“DNC pays price for messing up Michigan

The Democratic National Committee will have only itself to blame if its presidential nominee wins with an asterisk.

Sen. Barack Obama, after winning big in North Carolina and battling to a virtual tie in Indiana Tuesday night, has all but secured the Democratic nomination.

But it might have been a different story if Michigan and Florida had been allowed to hold primaries that counted. Clinton was the favorite in both states, but never got a chance to put them in her column because the DNC insisted on punishing them for moving up their primaries.

With wins in Michigan and Florida, Clinton would likely be ahead in the popular vote, and perhaps in delegates. With the two states on the sidelines, Obama likely wins a contest that Clinton backers are already calling illegitmate.

DNC Chairman Howard Dean made a mess of Michigan and Florida by putting rules ahead of results.

If he couldn’t come up with a solution for getting fair and meanignful primaries in those two states, it’s hard to see how Dean can keep the increasing bitterness between the Clinton and Obama camps from hurting Democratic chances this fall.”

“So we all have to assume that since these voters did not vote for him in the primary, they won’t vote for him in the general election either.”

Of course, some will vote for Obama. The question is, how many?  He will not get all of them, just as Clinton would not get all of Obama’s. And we cannot automatically assume that those who do not vote for Obama are racist. There are many complex reasons for voting for one candidate over another. I am sure some will not vote for Obama because they are racist, just as some sexists would not vote for Hillary because she is a woman. But not all are racist or sexist.

    “It seems that if the voter isn’t blatantly racist, he/she will vote for the Democratic candidate in a contest vs. the Republican candidate.”

Not necessarily. For instance, Reagan Democrats may not. Reagan Dems are very volatile swing voters who traditionally vote for more centrist and/or conservative candidates - hence the name Reagan Democrats.

    “Your argument could be made against Clinton in regards to the African American vote and general delectability.”

Yes, it could.

    “Do you assume that those votes will come back into the fold if/when Clinton wins the nomination?”

I try very hard not to assume - you know what that does. But there have been some polls done that indicate that a majority of AA will support the Dem candidate no matter who it is. I have the poll in my files, but do not have time to look for ut right now. And it was several months ago, and that could have changed in the interim. 

    “Can she win the general without them?”

That I honestly don’t know. Depends I think on whether they would just stay home or of they would vote for someone else. 

      “And Obama seemed to do well enough with white voters in a fair number of cracker-assed states…didn’t he win the white vote in Wisconsin?”

Yes, and MN too. But if you remember over on a different thread I wrote about the 6 or 7 largest Electoral College rich states and that Obama had not won any of them. Those states account for I think it was 188 Electoral College votes. If you add in MI and FL Electoral College votes it went up to over 200. But Obama has won none of those states. That is where the 20 from WI and MN could put someone over the magic 270. But those two states usually vote Dem.

But before WE and MN would be in play Obama has to somehow convince voters who have not yet voted for him that he is a candidate worthy of their suppoty. I question whether he can do that.

I don’t know the total number or percentage of Americans who have voted in the primaries. But I wiuld bet it is some where between 13-25% of eleigible voters. That is not very many Americans. A whole lot more will vote in the General Election, and while they may know a bit about what has been happening in the primaries, they will not become focused until after Labor Day. By then the 527’s will be out in full force bashing who ever the Dem nominee is. And personally, my opinion is that Obama’s negatives are far more toxic than Hillary’s. And believe me, they will be replayed and there will be new ones.

Some or many Americans may be transcending the issue of ethnic background that has been so crucial in this contest, primarily because Obama’s father was African.

Yes, it is a real dynamic for those tending to support Obama and those who may prefer Hillary.

Throughout the process though, we are engaging in helpful, though sometimes heated, discussions about the issue of ethnic backgrounds in American society (and elsewhere).

Some thoughts about this in the articles:

“Obama’s Iraq position, mixed ethnicity are key factors”

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

-  -  -

“Mixed-ethnicity Americans face challenges”

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/50835

Can we simply agree that everyone who insists on using Barack Obama’s full name in a post is doing so simply to reinforce the suspicion of anyone with a “foreign” sounding name, and is doing so primarily as a racist gesture?

To claim otherwise is cowardice for not claiming ownership for your tactics.

You’re right, she has a long record of blatant disrespect to anything other than what she wants but, Barack ( why do you think he didn’t bother to take an American first name? ) plays the same self-interested game…but here, you compare them;

Barack Hussein Obama
http://bhobama.blogspot.com/
The Clinton Legacy
http://clinton-legacy.org/
Hillary’s List of Lies ( A partial list anyway. )
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/hillarys_list_of_lies.html

Do you wear a bib when you drool this kind of insanity??

I believe Hillary’s assessment is correct;

Over 91% of blacks have voted upon their racism over the capability for their own governance and she receives predominately the uneducated and incapable white vote.

No question about it.

Hillary has always had much better looking girlfriends than Bill has ever had.

So we all have to assume that since these voters did not vote for him in the primary, they won’t vote for him in the general election either.  It seems that if the voter isn’t blatantly racist, he/she will vote for the Democratic candidate in a contest vs. the Republican candidate.

Your argument could be made against Clinton in regards to the African American vote and general electability.  Do you assume that those votes will come back into the fold if/when Clinton wins the nomination?  Can she win the general without them?

And Obama seemed to do well enough with white voters in a fair number of cracker-assed states…didn’t he win the white vote in Wisconsin?

Hillary has endured the scorn of Bill’s flamboyant philandering throughout their years together. (Odd that women feel scorned by a philandering husband, but they do - as do men by a philandering wife.)

She stuck it out.  She waited.  Some day she would be, as president of the United States, the most powerful woman in the world. She’d show him and ‘them.’  It’s not happening.  Scorned again.

To quote William Congreve, “Heaven has no rage like love to hatred turned, nor hell a fury like a woman scorned.”

My only advice is if Obama puts her on the ticket as vice-president, he’d better also hire a ‘food taster.’

She’s angry at Obama for ruining her one and only shot at becoming president of the united states. She never expected Obama to catch fire like he did and so she continues to fight on even if it means risking defeat for the democratic party come November. Hillary is power obsessed to detriment of herself, the democratic party and the nation.

Just kidding.

HRC jumped the shark.

Teh DLC is nothing more than the NeoCons Blue Arm. Liars, Cheats and Users. They are merely using knee jerk issue to elicit their desired response- same way Neo cons used the Faith based community to disguise their Greed and alterior motives.
Seh is lying about the White vote, the Working class vote and the Womens votes as she has about her reasons for continuing this deranged campaign. She ses not give a crap about anything be claiming the Crown the Corp whore politicians granted her when she started voting to support their causes- from th eIraq war vote , to her ‘work’ on the Armed Services she ahs proven her Alliegence to Them. She not only buys into th eCheney doctrine of Humas as Commodities, but her ‘Obliterate Iran’ Proclamation confirms her indoctrination into the ‘Armegeddon’ stratedgy of Hagee et al. Having been duped by the Clintons’ twice in the’90’s- I will NOT be Fooled Again!She is nothing more than THEIR 2nd horse in the Race. they have hedge their bets with both Mac & Hillary and have pulled all their election tricks to hand her the nomination.this is th eyear we End their Reign and control over our country and our future. Hillary should be thrown out of the Democratic party along with the Rest of the Treasonous bastards of the DLC. Real Republican should also drive out the Neo cons who stole their party during the’80’s also.Expose them and let them stand and Run on their Real Platforms- Corporationist with delusions of ‘Rapture’

Hillary’s remarks are not racist, except in the minds of those whose hatred of Hillary over rides any rational and clear thought. Obama cannot win the general election without white voters. The math is just not there since AA make up only 13 of the population. And Argrus, Obama is winning SOME votes from “all races.” But not in big enough numbers to win in the general.

Why are Hillary’s remarks racist and John Kerry’s remark that Obama was a better candidate than Hillary, “Because he’s African-American. Because he’s a black man.” 

In other words, Kerry was telling me that I should vote for Obama because of the color of his skin. Evidently that is OK with all of you who have posted thus far. But that remark is rank racism of the worst sort.

Hillary is stating a fact gleaned from voting results.  But Obama fans go all apocalyptic!!!!!!  They go ballistic!!!!!  It may be an uncomfortable fact to some, but it is a fact none the less. For what ever reasons, by and large Obama has not yet been able to get a majority of white blue collar voters or white women. Or even Latinos. Are you calling Latinos racist too because they do not support Obama? I could say the same for Asian voters. Are they racist too?

You can rail against that fact that Obama has not been able to get a majority of white voters till dooms day; and you can call those folks racist if you will; and Donna Brazile can say we have a new coalition and we don’t need those voters any more, but history tells us a different story. History provides us with a different set of facts. Those who fail to learn the lessons of the past are doomed forever to repeat them. So ignore white voters and Obama will end up repeating the history of 1968, 1972, 1980, 1984, 1988, 2000, 2004. Now that is doing the REAL math.

Even though I cannot stand Hillary, her white comments did not seem any less disturbing than most of the rest of her campaign.  Almost could be a opposing Wright sound bite approach to calling her out? 

Her inability to show respect for our country and the people seems to be showing, by her constant nuclear approach attempting to obliterate instead of communicate. 

New York, Take Hillary, please !

Many commentators have noted that, since there is no possible mathematic path for her to win this campaign any longer (even throwing in FL and MI as they are), that her tone after last Tuesday night will reveal whether she intends for the party to come back together or continues this campaign with the sole purpose of damaging her fellow Democrat.

I guess those results are now in as well.

To all Clinton supporters who also continue to consider yourselves Democrats: Please, please see what you are looking at. This is not a woman with a shred of party loyalty—or a good political sensibility, if she intends to remain affiliated with the Party. She is no longer attacking Obama. She is now attacking the ability to prevent a third Bush term.

She is attacking the viability of the very party itself. It will be very, very cold in the halls of the Senate when she returns to serve out her term if she keeps this up.

Yes, the pattern of her appeal to white working class Americans is based on the following:

5% Republican cross-over vote for her in Texas.

5% Republican cross-over vote for her in Ohio.

25% Republican cross-over vote for her in Mississippi.

5+% Republican cross-over vote for her in Pennsylvania.

5% Republican cross-over vote for her in Indiana.

Unlike the Republicans crossing over to vote for Barak, you can take to the bank that every one of her Repug “supporters” will be punching McCain’s ticket in November.

Footnote: Subtract the 5% in Texas and the 5% in Indiana and the reality emerges that Obama *won* those primaries, if you are focused on those who will continue to support him in the fall.

Maybe soon she will get on her broomstick and go away.

Hillary gives a new low to the meaning of a bottom feeding scum sucker.

She had hinted that Obama choose her for VP if he wins a few months back after her famous(?) “shame on you” comment. Obama, when questioned, made it clear that he had NO interest in choosing her for his VP. Hillary even hinted that McCain select her for VP a few months back. Now that’s desperation plus. There is no depth of lowness she will not stoop to, to try and conquer the white house again, is there. It is pathetic how desperate she appears. It’s time to give it up and fade away Hillary in to the hills and you may still retain a very small bit of respect for yourself, continue on and loose even that.

This is truly appalling that she continues to run. Truly. This post and her CNN announcement inspired me to write an open letter…  tinyurl.com/57qwao

There certainly is a pattern here.  The lowest common denominator seems to come out for Clinton.

One could be disparaging and call hers the “white trash coalition”...everybody knows that a Dem can’t win without the trailer park demographic, right?

But not all poor, white, undereducated Dems are voting for her…just many/most of them.  Can we deduce that many of these are A. the least well-thought/well-informed of that group and B. that there may well be a tinge of racism involved?  The latter is unavoidable…unfortunately.  The former is probably based wholly on a misconception (springing from the fount of being uninformed) of the “glory” years of the Clinton presidency.

But it really doesn’t matter.  Just keep giving her more rope; she’ll hang herself with it.  The best thing that could happen to the Democratic Party is for the Clintons to go out in a blaze of infamy.

A wise man once told me to always burn my bridges…so that i’d never be tempted to go backwards.  She’s got the kerosene and the matches, hurry to the other side and leave her behind.  If you go back for her, you’ll only fall into the chasm…and the last sound in your ears will be her cackle, Doppler shifting on your way down.

Here’s yet another reason why I would not support HC, even if she won the Democratic nomination.  She is a divider, not a uniter.  She will say/do anything to get votes, including injecting race and/or feminism into her politics. 

Talk about more of the same!  This country needs NEW BLOOD in the white house (not to mention Congress).  WE can’t take another 4/8 years of either a Clinton or a Bush! Haven’t they dragged us down far enough already?

The Clinton team is stooping into the bottom of the pit with the racist card deck again. Hillary could put the country and the party ahead of her ego and everyone would win. A Obama/Clinton ticket could lead to at least 16 years of a Dem white house but Clinton is to short sighted and eager to be a neo-liberal war hawk for the corporate world.

Not trustworthy enough to rely on to do the best for the people instead of her elitist friends.

It seems as though Clinton is bucking for the VP slot…. WITH MCCAIN!

There is indeed a pattern emerging here: Senator Clinton will say whatever it takes to further her personal ambitions. Embarrassing and disappointing.

I am a white, 78 year old female.  Surely I have lived long enough to have an opinion on the subject of race.  I live in Kentucky, and I am thoroughly ashamed of the people I have talked with about this political campaign.  People look me in the eye and say they will not vote for Obama because he is black.  This is incomprehensible to me!  Surely this country has advanced farther than that!  Thank God our young people are different. Race is not important to them,and it should not be.  The Bible says God is no respector of persons.  How dare we?

^ as Hillary sinks to the bottom of the barrel.  She’s pathetic!  If anyone embodies the symbol of plurality it’s got to be Obama.  White single mother, black, Muslim father; embodies the Christian faith (Obama).  Come on folks, get a grip.  America has never had a presidential candidate who crosses all of the ethno-economic boundaries, as Obama has and does.  I’m laughing my butt off at this silly season visited on the electorate of America.  Here we stand to lose the opportunity of our lifetime, really!

Hill! Wake up! You’re losing to Obama, which means there are people of ALL races supporting the other candidate! Quit holding on to the line. There’s no shame in a loss! The argument doesn’t even make sense. “In recent contests”? What happened to the contests before? Since Wright has appeared twice and Obama is still winning, odds are it won’t be an issue in the Fall.

This isn’t a controversy, TD. It’s a travesty to Hillary and her reputation. Who signed her to the snuff campaign??? Who has the rights to exploit her like this? Penn! Damn you! *Shakes fist*