Letters to the Editor

Letters posted here are associated with the following article:
If she hasn't already quit, it's hard to envision Clinton continuing her unwinnable -- even with Florida and Michigan -- battle beyond June 4.
The letters thread is now closed.
  • " The Clintons on the downslide remain a riveting psychodrama"

    That sums it all up. This is a vital election, yet the bulk of attention is centered on the Clinton psychodrama. It doesn't further discussion on any of the issues that should be forefront. Enough. She lost, She won't get the nomination. Move on to the important things. My fear is that we are already seamlessly moving from "how long will she stay in?" to "will she be the vp nominee?" She won't. Obama will pick an appropriate running mate and it won't be Hillary clinton. She had her charmed shot, she lost. End of story.

  • Hillary is not a likeable person

    Experience? What experience? Being the First Lady? Being a carpetbagging Senator from New York by way of Arkansas?

    Getting your butt handed to you by an unknown first-term black Senator? That's experience. Live and learn, Hill.

  • i had understood the rovian "attack the strength" strategy

    like Kerry's patriotism - or even cleland's. what i hadn't realized was the ploy of attacking YOUR OWN WEAKNESSES in the opposing candidate. it was very frustrating till i became aware of it. let's say you notice Hillary's incredibly high negatives. she can't be elected. so you then attack obama's electability! get it? everyone then gets distracted and tries to decide whether it's racist or not. a huge distraction from hillary's negatives. the whole campaign is run that way. hillary did practically nothing in the senate except make deals (that's why she was so popular) so *obama* did nothing - then you have his supporters going through urls and urls trying to discredit that charge. easy, see?

  • Sugarman describes the plan accurately

    Thanks David.

    Again, the proposal is: seat only the MI and FL superdelegates, and give them all the votes that would have been controlled by primary delegates. Let the supers have all the say for those states, and all the accountability for their choice. Do not count them *additionally* as superdelegates.

    Supers are elected officials representing the states. In supporting unrecognized primaries, they simply grabbed the decision-making power for themselves. Future line-jumping states may choose to do the same and will be understood as doing so by their voters. States do have the right to set their own primary dates, and parties do have the right to delegitimize primaries. But national parties must recognize state delegations in some form. It is not for the DNC to apportion FL and MI delegates between Obama and Clinton. It has to be a decision that comes from those states.

    This plan enables those states to have their votes tallied at the convention, as cast by legitimate, accountable representatives.

  • dataguyx

    Democrats vote for their party, not for Grampa McSenile with his paper underwear.

    Got that right.

    If Hillary Clinton wins the nomination we should all give her our enthusiastic support. It should be pretty easy for all Democrats to agree with that.

  • WHAT DIGNITY?????

    "The New York senator has obviously reached the death-with-dignity phase of her 2008 ambitions."

    You have got to be kidding! She has no dignity. That is obvious from the many times she has been humiliated by her sort of husband and the phony, race baiting, dishonest campaign she has been running. The next action is to get her out of the Senate.

    IT IS A BEAUTIFUL TING TO WATCH HER AND HER CAMPAIGN MPLODING !!!!

  • Yea....but what about..........?

    Analyze away! Analyze it to death, if you must. There are far more interesting questions about scenarios "post-primary" than the end game voting cycle and the impending coronation of Barry Obama. For instance: Where is Reverend Wright and how much was he promised or actually given, to keep him from doing what comes natural (opening his big mouth)? Next, will Obama TRANSFORM (one of his campaign's favorite words) himself back to his veritable status of "bi-racial" ? The ersatz African-American identity will have already served it's purpose and the need to qualify for blue collar white votes will be so great that Obama's minions will almost surely tout the up to now blurred truth; he is not African-American in the sense that all others who fit that description are. He has no relationship whatsoever to slavery or emancipation. He was raised socially and culturally "white" by white people. His skin color is a function of biology (not history) and since he already successfully hyped the African-American community into automatic "brother" support, he may now have to do a chameleon like ethnic "transformation" to racially assuage the white vote required for the final act. Be on the look-out for this and other Axelrod tactics that are aimed to sell perception, not substance.

  • @green job

    The Republicans stripped Michigan and Florida of half their delegates. New Hampshire has historically gone early.

    If the same dynamics existed with a half-vote penalty, the Clinton campaign would now be arguing for a full vote by the very same reasoning. This is not to dismiss the various arguments for and against the voters of those two states being allowed to participate in their party's primary process, just that very soon after Iowa the Clinton campaign realized it had a fight on its hands and began jettisoning any stated principles in favor of whatever gained their candidate more delegates.

  • Gordon Wagner

    Hillary is not a likeable person

    Tut tut.

    Hillary will prove herself to be a loyal Democrat, and not really a closet neocon, by graciously conceding the nomination once it becomes clear that she cannot win.

  • @Taliesan

    I've read your rantings, screeds, ad hominem attacks and blather demeaning and berating Clinton and her supporters on Salon for months. You personify precisely why I, and others, view Obama's supporters as bordering on being drones, 'droids, bots or worse.

    It seems that all of you are virtually incapable of promoting your candidate without demeaning the other. The fact that most Obama supporters seem to be rude, contemptuous and snide is not lost on the rest of us; therefore, many if not most of us have no desire whatsoever to work with any of you for Obama's election. If Obama is such a great candidate, why are so many of his supporters such total a**holes?

    At this point, it looks like Barack Obama will be the Democratic candidate for President. I wish only good luck to him in the general election; he's really, really going to need it...in abundance!