Letters to the Editor
-
Petition to nowhere
The more relevant number that we ought to be analyzing today is the $40+ million dollars raised in March by the Obama campaign. Over 1.3 million donors have contributed to that drive representing the determination of a genuine grassroots movement.
This is a tide that cannot be turned back, not even by a desperate last-ditch effort like this lame petition.
-
@ jebldmm
I agree that Obama would not have wanted to seat Fla & MI's delegates in a way that was favorable to HRC, but that is a far FAR cry from claiming he was trying to block those voters from having their votes counted. I also submit, hypothetically that HRC would have been just as unhappy to seat those delegates under a scheme that was favorable to Obama.
Fact is, each state's legislature shot down the do-overs. And since everyone else in the country, and those who did vote in Fla & MI voted under the understanding that those delegates would NOT be seated, it is just as arguable that HRC is trying to disenfranchise THOSE votes.
-
Heads in the sand
Yes, yes, we all know Clinton eats babies and tortures puppies when she's not championing children. Obama supporters want to ignore many realities that they are potentially facing for the sake of saying that they won because at this point, he has more delegates (even though he can't win without superdelegates either).
Yes, yes...the risk of Hillary staying in the race and winning is that she'll piss off African-Americans and keep them from voting. I see that as a smaller risk than the one Obama is facing if he pushes Clinton out (vis-a-vis lobbying the superdelegates to end the race). Here are the risks Obama faces due to the demographics of Clinton's voting base.
1. By refusing to do anything about Michigan and Florida's delegates, the voters in these (important) states may very well stay at home if Obama is the nominee. Not because they don't like Obama, because they're pissed at the Democratic party.
2. Women, a larger Democratic party voting block than African-Americans and who are spread more evenly throughout states, will stay at home as they perceive men supporting Obama (Leahy, Kennedy, Kerry) pushing her out of the race and Olbermann/Matthews/Wolfe/Alterman (male pundits) telling her to get out.
3. Older voters will stay at home or vote for McCain as they do value experience and will vote that way.
4. Blue-collar voters will vote McCain or stay at home.
5. Hispanics will stay at home.
6. This will compound the problem people have about his Pastor (and just coming back from vacation, my Obama-supporting husband spoke to several people who expressed how much that bothered them and that it is changing their minds).
Spare me all the @juneausmog letters. This is my analytical perspective and I'm not going to respond to disagreements this is bound to get because you happen to be for Obama. IMO, these are real risks he faces.
-
Isn't it amazing
at how quickly and deeply the Clinton Clan have drunk the koolaid about MI and FL?
Just like their fearless leader they all insist that Obama is the only one blocking a revote and "disenfranchising" the voters in both states? Not one of them will even broach the subject of Hillary's bait and switch in Michigan...they're so enthralled with their Holy Mother that they refuse to see the stains on her garb!
(see? those little epithets sting don't they?)
-
recto-cranial insertion
better a head in the sand than your head up your ass, juneau nothing. the klinoonians keep burning crosses on the lawn in the public square, then say they're just trying to bring light to the situation. all the candidates knew, all the jurisdictions knew, all 55, what the rules of the primary were to be. 53 of them complied. 2 did not. Now, billary wants "her" delegates, when that is not even at issue. She's trying to make the darkie look like a bad sport, a disenfranchiser of voters. Horseshit. Each party can choose its nominee in the manner it wants. They could hold a drawing, a raffle, a hammer/paper/scissors tournament. Nothing- not one damned thing- guarantees any vote in a primary. Billary's desperation is palpable, her ethics nonexistent, her ambition bigger than Big Bill's Bimbo Book.
-
@ jebldmm
By the way, you want to talk about disenfranchising voters:
"Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton, who is unlikely to catch rival Barack Obama in pledged delegates, hinted Thursday that she hoped to persuade a few to back her instead of him."
I know its not against the rules but certainly HRC can't have much respect for the voters if she is willing go this course.
-
what does "pledge" mean?
Now, Gumby Clinton, flexible in the extreme, is really saying pledged delegates are not pledged. Thus, the primary elections and caucuses have meant nothing to her. Not one damned thing. A Lieberman democrat if there ever was one. And there is.
-
Judgement to choose correctly
Someone like this thinks they have the judgment to pick a presidential candidate? I'm happy to have made an opposite conclusion from tom payne. XH, looking forward to your defense of his unrevealed points. The following written excrement was in response to a benign opinion I made.
recto-cranial insertion
better a head in the sand than your head up your ass, juneau nothing. the klinoonians keep burning crosses on the lawn in the public square, then say they're just trying to bring light to the situation. all the candidates knew, all the jurisdictions knew, all 55, what the rules of the primary were to be. 53 of them complied. 2 did not. Now, billary wants "her" delegates, when that is not even at issue. She's trying to make the darkie look like a bad sport, a disenfranchiser of voters. Horseshit. Each party can choose its nominee in the manner it wants. They could hold a drawing, a raffle, a hammer/paper/scissors tournament. Nothing- not one damned thing- guarantees any vote in a primary. Billary's desperation is palpable, her ethics nonexistent, her ambition bigger than Big Bill's Bimbo Book.
-- tom payne
Salon editors, have you thought about limiting the number of posts one LW can post per article? I believe that this letter forum has jumped the shark that exceeds the anonymous problem. The same people use it over and over as their own personal political forum where ultimately, it can create the effect of intimidation and slandering of other LWs.
Do these people have nothing better to do than to taint the letter forum with their anger and derision at other LWs over and over? Seems to me if they want a place to lord over others' opinions and self-appoint themselves as editor and publisher, they should go to DU or DailyKos, but not do it here.