"The Florigan Plan III" from The Atlantic... the Clinton campaign WAS doing the rallies.

The ones against Florida against the DNC and Dean and the rules he was following under great duress from fellow Democrats.

The emails don't allow copy/paste, but here is a gist of it from the released emails.

The Florigan Plan, Part III



Here are the things mentioned in just this part.

1. The campaign says they should call for a revote, demand their voices be heard, and force Obama to say it would be too expensive or demanding.

2. While there was a pledge not to campaign..there is nothing preventing them now from holding rallies to "Hear our Voices" across both states.

I have always said that probably the two states, FL and MI, worked together to keep their state relevant. I have always said that the Clinton campaign was using FL and MI as tools.



Now we learn that the rallies across the state of Florida, and probably the ones in front of the DNC were organized in part by her campaign and Harold Ickes



At the rally in front of the DNC where they were yelling for Dean to resign....we learned that they were in fact Hillary supporters.

But they had been told not to say so. They wore shirts of other candidates. Debbie Wasserman Schultz was there for Hillary, so was Corinne Brown.

From First Read:

Angry Floridians



According to the Florigan plan part III the Clinton campaign was involved in these rallies.

But it is, after all, only politics. Right?

Dirty and low.

issues, including this one).

I have never been more proud of Hillary Clinton. And you should be grateful to her--she convinced me to vote for Obama. It seems like he needs my vote...not sure why....I thought I remembered hearing something about a new coalition.

Steve

it does not surprise me. Hillary and Bill think she's entitled to the presidency, just like another child of privilege.

Makes me sick

stench coming off her campaign cost her dearly.

salute mf. Every step of the way we've been right about who has been undermining Dem nominees and Dean's chairmanship. Which means they have been undermining ALL DEMS. And have been for MANY years. Wake up Clinton fans.

thanks, and add that things you have long written about may someday prove common knowledge.

we first saw the writing on the wall. The Clinton machine showed its cards way earlier than many realize - and its two biggest targets were those who stuck their neck out the most to move Dems away from the deceit and betrayal that has become synonymous with the Clinton brand of intraparty politics.

The documents portray Hillary as an ineffective manager, whose greatest failure was not to recognize Mark Penn's brilliant strategy. Could the selective release of memos and e-mails dating well into May 2008 be Mark Penn's payback to Hillary, since he was widely blamed for her loss?

Patti Solis Doyle was fired in early February, and Obama is likely going to be hurt by these attacks. So, Mark Penn benefits by paying Hillary back for firing him and hurting Obama in one swoop, thus benefitting Penn's other client, Joe Lieberman.

Self serving consultants is anybody's guess.

Their strategies are very yesterday. And they are not all that effective. Since they get paid up front they just don't care, whether they win or lose.

And somehow, the consultatnts that lose still have full employment druing the next election cycle.

So, who benefits? Mark Penn, because he can say I told you so. Thus, he takes out Obama and Hillary.

but the author of the Atlantic article says that he approached various aides and consultants, and they contributed things separately. I wonder if that's the truth, that the factions were just so pissed off at each other that they wanted to be vindicated by showing how the campaign went down, who exactly deserved the "blame". Either way (whether it was Mark Penn or not, which is a theory that I like), it's really annoying that staffers would leak these.

Charlie Black, Penn's colleague, is an advisor to McCain. Penn himself advises Joe Lieberman. Finally, by undercutting Hillary, Penn is portrayed as the victim of an ineffective presidential candidate whose biggest mistake was not to follow his advice. Penn has an ego. It must have pissed him off to be blamed for Hillary's loss. The memos paint a story that his advice simply was not followed, thus how can he be blamed?

I was just indicating what the article said, I don't neccesarily think that it's true. Damn it. I want the truth!

Makes her partnering with Penn seem even more attractive to repubs.

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/07/09/failed-advisers-mar... /

NOT.

i think part of this whole thing is a bow to republicans, for whatever reason. a set up to peal pissed off women away from the party. i have been saying for a long time that lumpy grumpy will pick condi rice for veep, and they will swoop in with tales of the terrible misogyny that cost poor hilly her rightful crown.

with the rally in Florida.

And whatever candidates hold up its masters.

Check this out:
http://oldelmtree.com/discussion/index.php?topic=53.0

THE GDP IS TO DISCUSS THE MCCAIN VS. OBAMA GENERAL ELECTION MATCH UP!!

The Clintons have successfully forced themselves into the limelight at the Democratic Convention.
The release of the memos and statements from people inside the Hillary campaign are pertinent, and directly impact the Democratic Party and our chances in November.

This IS worthy of discussion.

On Edit: K&R

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

by those groups that are unable to get over her campaign.

I think it is time to recognize the hell Dean was put through, and it is even worse now.

I post about it because it angers me so much that I don't even want to see their faces anymore.

And that is just sad. It could be remedied.

Sorry about the stuff in your toilet...it happens to the best of folks.

today in the Chinese province a sack of rice fell off the back of a wagon. Considering the world hunger problem, I think this event is equally deserving of hand-wringing discussion. After all, 'some' say it was Clinton's fault.

Which is what this forum is for.

So should we talk about Bernie Mac in here, too? That's current news.

A little off topic...

The GE is McCain vs. Obama, by the way.

If you didn't realize it.

so it doesn't happen again.

I've never seen it run out of room.

Her biological time clock is running out.....

This forum is for discussing that race.

Take all over topics to General Discussion. I come here, and so do others, to talk about the General Election.

but you are right, this should be moved to the GD forum... but it should definitely be talked about.

It belongs in GD, like you said.

That's my point.

...haven't you heard, when discussing the presidency they are still mentioning Hill--although the ugliness of her campaign to derail the Democratic nominee is now becoming more apparent, even to the blind. You all want her on the stage as though she has earned anything more than disdain? Yeah, go fish.

Even after a first quick look I notice how the McCain negative campaign follows much the same directions as indicated in these memos.

Anyone who could doubt that, or doubt the importance of the fact that Penn and Black must routinely get together for business confabs, to let their hair down over a beer or two and compare notes, is out of their frickin mind!

as what comes from her and those peoples actions unfortunately may or may not affect the general elections outcome.
sorry, try another way of avoiding it.

and hasn't accepted that SHE LOST.
so the campaign continues.

They have consequences for the entire structuring of party operations.

They have put enormous strain on how the party conducts its business and this will need to be scrutinized for the next 4 years at least.

Is so, they're idiots. If not, why bother posting something everyone already knows as if it were some kind of earthshaking revelation?

so this is old news. She played dirtier as time went on and I'm not sure if she is done. This is part of the reason why I am such a supporter of Obama. Why don't we stop talking about it and get out and canvass and register more voters!

Did they try ctrl+C to copy,sometimes that helps.

Here's the main page for them:

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200808u/clinton-memos

As for copy-pasting, Not really possible. They're images, embedded in a FLASH application.

Dear , wow!!

Super Tuesday was February 5th. That was the day it was all supposed to be over. Video clip.

But these plans began to be made on February 25.

http://www.theatlantic.com/a/green-florigan-2-25-08.mht...

(The "Florigan Plan," February 25, 2008: With Clinton’s delegate gap looming as a serious problem, a group of her advisers drew up a proposal to seize back momentum by demanding revotes in Florida and Michigan. Dubbed the “Florigan Plan,” it called on Clinton to issue a challenge to Obama on the morning of March 5, the day after her expected wins in Texas and Ohio.)

Transcribed:

The lies, double talk, winner-take-all tactics against other Democrats need to be remembered. It was pretty obvious that she was behind all of this but at least now it can't be denied.

OMG!Someone attempted to compete? You can't even begin to analyze strategy unless you have the emails of all parties and you don't.

I find the memos and discussion esp. interesting since the events are current, fresh in my mind. For example the DNC demonstrations are recent enough that I still have fresh memories of both the media coverage, the media spin, and the kind of claims and disclaimers made by the various campaigns and Dem personalities. It's nice to be able to directly compare these memos with the facts that I remember and that I can easily access for review - taking the spinmiesters out of it.

Speaking only for myself, of course, I'm not thinking at an asinine level like "OMG!Someone attempted to compete?" And I'm sure very few DUers are all THAT naive about politics and campaigning, esp. since here you'll find a very high percentage who have done everything from grunt work to the highest level campaign strategy at one time or another, for one candidate or another.

There are campaigns and campaigns, and in this case a primary campaign differs vastly from a GE campaign, since a primary campaign pits persons who wish to lead the same party, and a GE campaign pits parties who wish to lead the same state or country. Primary campaigns would generally be expected to abide by some unwritten constraints, some 'nots' that a GE campaign isn't constrained by. I say "generally" or normally, because of course there are exceptions, e.g.
"Rovian" type campaigns are noted for erasing this distinction -- and our awareness of this is another aspect, another factoid that goes into our making moral/ethical judgements re. the politics displayed.

To my mind it's an ethical decision whether a Rovian type campaign should be treated as a rule, an EXPECTATION, rather than as an exception to be handled as such. Were we to grant that the Rovian type campaign is normal, in our eyes, something to be dismissed as expected, in our minds, notions like "the truth" and "standing on one's merits" lose their moral force. In this way *all* campaigns can be judged in terms of what they show about a candidate's character, in the first place, and in terms of their effectiveness, in the second place.

Because I'm not a "Rovian" type, I'm not one to put the second before the first. I'm not one to say that because a Rovian type campaign is EFFECTIVE, therefore it's GOOD, or should be done. Rather, I'm one to say that it's best to apply an opposite and countervailing force, to neutralize the Rovian crap, rather than fall splat on our faces in the fetid muck.

The insistence that somehow he has run a "different" or "above the fray campaign" when all campaigns on this level, and some that aren't are as vituperative is ludicrous. (BTW, I am not saying this is what you are saying, just that it seems a perception some have). Campaigns are not really about anything except winning. They are about "power" getting it and keeping it. Anything else is really window dressing. Unfortunately many today want to believe the window dressing IS the campaign and many candidates actually are the "winning" image that they must sustain. This is unfortunate as it leads to real disappoint ment when reality sets in and these folks don't function as the "ideal".

A real in depth look at primary campaigns will indicate the often, even on the local level, they can be vicious. There is no unwritten rule of conduct. Take a good look at Chicago politics or Mass politics or even Arizona politics and get back to me. I have worked on a lot of primaries. Primaries aren't pretty.

This is the reason Democratic State parties often discourage them, but primaries are often necessary. They often produce winners because if one can withstand the abuse of their own, they are more likely to WIN. The nasty little secret is that we are often worse to our own than the opposition.

The stunning revelation in some of these so called "memo's" is that apparently Hillary did NOT listen to some of these folks. I was no Hillary fan, though I now respect her, and I am shocked that she didn't listen. I would have thought back then she would have. Apparently it is now the case that she was damned if she did or damned if she didn't.

Your argument is cynical opinion stated as "absolute certainty" - which isn't an argument at all. It's an excuse, offered along with a nagging injunction to stop examining events so closely. As if somehow it's the examining of these events that makes them low and tawdry, and if we shut our eyes it'll all go away. "Everybody does it!" The cry of a child caught in the act.

Crying children indeed.

If he were worth anything Florida and MI would have been settled. He can't even raise any money for the DNC. At least Terry Mac, of whom I am NOT a fan, raised money, I'll give him that, and he modernized the party and put us on a computer data system.
As for the Hillary internal memos they look like the memo's of any campaign. Obama's would look no better.There are no saints here. Hillary was Obama's opponent. They are not supposed to be "nice' I don't flipping care about what either camp said or did. Just give it a rest. All this does is create more division than there already is and there is a lot.

But you have made Dean and the DNC the enemy, and they are not.

I find it sad that Penn's tactics worked so well...and Ickes and Wolfson.

They have divided our party irreparably I fear.

I really admire much of your posting and I admire a lot of your research but my impression of both Howard and the DNC has really changed. They are manipulative and self serving. Donna Brazile is endemic of what they have become. I have been very disappointed in my party this cycle but maybe I will feel better about it in the future. This was not meant to be offensive to you, you are entitled to whatever opinion you want and I respect you for it . And I am an entitled to mine.

I noticed that reading their blogs.

To me she is okay. In fact I like her.

I think the politics of Penn, Ickes, Wolfson are killing our party.

And so are those who subscribe to such tactics.

Dean stood up for the rules, and he probably sealed his political fate.

Sadly.

and Obama wants him to remain as Chair. that is his "fate' . It doesn't sound bad to me. I think it may be all he wants. No one is going to hold him to account. And how one could like a woman who wrote such horrible emails to fellow Dems is beyond me. I used to like her too but wow! She is nasty. She has no class whatsoever.

I also remember the nasty things she said about Gore following election 2000 and I thought that was tacky too.And then there is her oft declared admiration and friendship with Karl Rove.

I read Donna's response to the nasty ugly mails. Mine would have been worse.

Clinton needs to try and get people over their anger.

You can't be serious? Donna was vicious and the girl just asked a question.And Donna let these be public. I don't want her representing me.And she told Democrats the Democratic party didn't need or want their votes. That was unbelivable. I am sorry there is no excuse for that.

have been subjected to constant bombardment from Hillary's supporters. Nasty emails, ugly ones. I quite frankly don't blame them.

This has been the politics of destruction, saracat, and the Clintons did not discourage it. They even participated.

For myself, until some changes are made, the DNC will never get another dime from me. I will directly support my state and local candidates but the DNC can whistle and that is my perogative. I have a lot of friends who have terminated their monthly donations as well. There are a lot of unhappy folks and quite a few are Obama supporters as well.Many of us just do not like the current state of the DNC and for some it has nothing to do with the Clintons.

You have been angry since 2005 about the DNC.

under the heat from the Clintons and those followers who they got to believe their drama. The Clintons are not done with their fiasco and if they don't clean up their act in time for the convention they will lose respect of most democrats. Maybe she'll go to the other side like Lieberman.

I just realized what you said. "hold him to account" for what?

Obama is an outstanding candidate, but I fear he is being sabotaged by many in our own party. Dean stood by the rules...that is all he did. There is nothing he did for the Clinton supporters to "hold him to account."

I am very worried about November if the Clintons don't "fall out of love" and "fall in line" as Bill often said.

Actually, Dean has every bit as much future in the party as Hillary does right now. Sorry, but that is the truth.

The DLC employs the old model: Collect lots of corporate money and run TV ads that no one watches because the remote control marginalized TV ads. What worked in the 90s isn't that effective in the 21st century.
Howard Dean and the DNC collects voters and raises money on the Internet. In spite of Republican election rigging, Dean's policy brought victory in 06. Too bad Nancy Pelosi ignores the will of the people, hence Congress' dismal approval rating.

At least Howard Dean stands for something. Given the choice between a real Republican and Republican wannabes (DLC), the voters would rather choose real Republicans knowing what they represent.
Those who stand for nothing will fall for anything. The only thing you find in the middle of the road are yellow stripes and dead armadillos.

What the DNC has to do is make controversial ads that will run as news like Swiftboat liars did.
Why would a candidate for president want to pimp his trophy wife to drunken bikers?

But Howard is just such a peacemaker that he thought that a compromise would help patch things up.

I am getting some stuff together about why it really could hurt Obama at the convention if the Clintons allow this to go on. It's hard though to word it right.

Funny how one can be defended or excoriated depending on whose ox is being gored.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

"It is a vast right and left wing conspiracy. Listening to Brit Hume say that Obama is surging while Hillary failed to do X is almost comical and certainly transparent. The right knows Obama is unelectable except perhaps against Attila the Hun, and a third party would come in then anyway."
-Mark Penn

Do you?

couldn't win.Obama's emails are undoubtedly no different. just look at his illinois campaigns."Winning is everything", especially to staragists. Now, I don't necessarilly agree with the statement but then again, who am I ?

And to speculate about how the other would act the same, because everything in politics is the same.

Well, everything in politics isn't the same and in fact these memos prove that even in - and especially in - the HRC campaign there was an extreme divisive split between the Rovian type dirty politickers and those who wanted to run a clean and positive campaign promoting HRC's merits.

Even in her own campaign this was divisive and destructive - just because there were people in her campaign who could make the distinction between "should" and "could". If we can't use these events to learn a lesson now, when can we learn?

Every time I was in there, so was he.

Dean assured a level playing field and made sure
the rules were followed.

If that is your idea of being a "piss poor chair", then
I suggest move to a country like Italy, where leadership
can still be purchased.

Terry McAwful WAS able to raise money...from corporations
and insurance companies....

Dean and Obama have OUTRAISED his efforts, and they did
it with donations averaging $100.00 from ordinary Americans.

You can keep the DLC model, I would rather have our candidates
beholden to the people than to corporations and financial institutions.

THE CLINTON CAMP TURNED THEM ALL DOWN.

Not only did they try to use my state to undermine Obama, they used it to undermine the Democratic party as a whole.

It was inexcusable. Attacking Obama may be considered part of the political stuff of campaigns...but accusing the DNC and Dean of throwing the primary....dead wrong.

We are no longer activie locally in Dem politics. It is called being shunned for speaking the truth.

That is the worst part.

They were trying to "fix" Florida for Hillary from day 1. The entire state party apparatus was a wing of the Clinton campaign.

They pull shit like this all the time down here.

A friend of mine contacted the Edwards campaign to get a couple of signs to display at the state convention. She was told that they couldn't do it, because it would violate the "no campaign rule". When she got there, the whole place was full of Clinton signs, and nobody else.

I didn't attend this year, since I resigned from the party earlier in protest when they voted to keep funding the war. I'd been to the 3 previous conventions. My friend said the whole convention was a 3 day Clinton rally.

I think my naivete got the best of me; because I never expected such blatant underhanded tricks.

That hurt not just Dean, it hurt the other states as well.

Having a hard time locally being loyal.

Challengers to HRH HRC need not apply. The entire state party machine was strong-armed into the loyalty oath and that mean EVERY elected. Very few bucked the system. I want to give a big shout out right now to Bill Perkins of Harlem who led the Obama effort there. But the rest did as they were told and many are suffering for it with their constituents now. It's time for this party machine in NY to die. We need to take our state party back.

John Edwards' supposed love child!!

But I love your logo! Where did you get it?

It's really hurt the state party, but why the hell would Hillary care about that? She supposedly cares, but that's a bunch of crap, because, if she did, she would've left us the hell alone.

E-mails went out before the "primary" telling Dems to switch over and vote for Romney to keep him in the running longer and make the Republicans spend down their budgets, and then Conyers did his level best to get people for Obama, Edwards, or Biden to vote for "Other" (who did really well in the primary, btw). Those of us for other candidates weren't listened to, and when the state party chair came around to the county party meetings to sell moving up the date, I have yet to hear of anyone that agreed with him.

They did this to us and screwed us over. I'll never vote for Hillary again if I can avoid it, and I'm seriously reconsidering Gov. Granholm and Sen. Stabenow, who were behind a lot of this as Hillary fans, too.

They did not attack the national Democratic Party as badly as the Florida Democrats. I have even read statements by some of them acknowledging that the blame (or at least most of it) should reside on their shoulders, not the DNC.

Yet Florida still has two lawsuits pending against the DNC.

They were NOT ABOUT to be steamrolled by Team Hillary!

One of them even tried to fix everything (a state legislator from the western side of the state) but was ignored.

to see through their plans!

I totally agree with you.

They were openly "nudge-nudge" about it.

They won't go down easy. Who is behind the planned protests... at the convention?

Lots of information here. I've only gotten through the first half dozen of the memos after reading the main article.

I'll come back and post if I can after I get done absorbing all of it.

And I'm glad you did. I always saw this as a "where there's smoke there's fire" scenario. There was certainly obvious coordination (smoke) but no clear evidence of it until now (fire).

Thanks for staying on top of this when many of us have other things on our minds. The truth is as important to the survival of our party now as it was in the spring.

The primaries were really bad here, but now knowing this....the Dems here will continue to blame Dean for Hillary's loss.

That is unforgivable.

The behind-the-scenes process (no matter which side you're on) is fascinating.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

benign e-mails. I am certain Obama's camp had similar type strategy sessions: I would love to see the e-mails on how to tie Clinton to Bhutto's death, or when to start shouting "Racism!" from the rooftops, or when to start accusing Clinton of being like Bush. Or how about the slant they put on Clinton's short term plan for gas price relief (the one that is NOW part of HIS plan?) I remember how he attacked her for that...and now uses it. I am certain there were strategy sessions involving members of his campaign talking about how best to paint Clinton in the worst light.

It is naive and dangerous to think that Obama is all goodness and light and Clinton is evil personified.

And the fact that Obama NOW wants Florida and Michigan to count (after it does not matter and after it can be to his benefit) shows that the whole thing was for political advantage on his part.

And see if these same posters come to Edwards and Clinton's aid. Because I'm sure they're just as vicious.

I'm about 90% sure if we had all the memo's from all the campaigns from this year and 2004, we'd hate the candidates.

If she truly never expected any of them to write a "tell all" piece and make a boat load of money off of her, she isn't qualified to be president. She either got what she expected or got what she deserved.

And some around here get this odd pleasure from bringing up the primaries over and over again.


And their OPs are allowed to stay in the General Election forum...

If you have 'cred,' (meaning you supported the right candidate in the primaries) you don't need to follow the rules.

I don't much care 'cause it ain't my website, but I wish the admins had had the balls to state it outright.

At least you know what is really going on here.

Florida is still divided so much.

It is not ok to manipulate two states for your own advantage.

The Clintons knew they were being divisive, they did it anyway.

I know it is popular to blame Clinton for everything, but there is no way to blame Clinton for what ailed those two states. And about being devisive: Obama has proven that he was just playing politics--by NOW asking that they be heard. No different than Clinton

I was right.

She did not cause the two states to do it. She did however use and manipulate them.

I was very clear in what I wrote.

It hurt my state a lot.

office. As a volunteer I found out his reps don't even like it if we send negative e-mails out to people on the support list (even if they are true!). Clinton played very dirty and in her eyes she's still not out. It's pretty sad because I originally was voting for her until about Jan.

You can attempt to make Obama into a saint and Clinton into the devil, but I saw the political actions of Obama and Clinton. They were both playing politics. They both attacked Character. Neither was an angel or a devil.

Obama because of her dirty play. Who ever said it above is right to say that this is politics and it has always been played this way. That is why I am supporting Obama because I am sick and tired of this type of politics. It's not to say that Obama won't play dirty if he has too. So far he hasn't in my book.

while his campaign (lead by him) did the dirty work...taken from GW's play book. But, there were memos often sent to the media attacking Clinton.

It was there for you to see, if you wanted to see the truth.

the media was slamming Clinton for things she did herself. Obama won fair and square in the primary. He was a better manager and has better people working for him...a good example of how he will run his cabinet.

But, as the primaries are over, I will not provide the usual (and often cited) sources that include admission from Obama during a debate.

But, perhaps before you judge Clinton and attack her, you should have all the facts first.

why Clinton lost the primaries. It wasn't because of lack of ability. I was voting for her at first because I think she is a very bright and intelligent woman and very capable of being president plus to have her husband on board too wow. But something happened along the way and it was sad for me to see her demise. My main concern is who is going to be able to motivate the people in our country to do what they need to do to get our country back on track. Who is going to help mend all the relationships with other countries all over the world. Who will have the judgement to surround themselves with responsible and capable people to run our country. OBAMA. Look at the people Obama has running his campaign. They are all very aligned with his view point and so fiscally responsible to the point that it frustrates me that I have to buy Obama stuff to hand out in my town because there is not any free stuff! Look at all the very "experienced" people who are supporting him. Again there is a reason why they all left Clinton's side and came to support Obama.

Most of which had nothing to do with Clinton.

clinton? Tuzla video. NAFTA meetings paper trail. That's just two of her proven lies.

Ickes was counting on the Florida and Michigan delegates in his December 22 delegate projections!

He was counting on those delgates being part of what puts Hillary over the top and makes her insurmountable after Super Tuesday!

But, then again, you already knew that.

Because the people who fell for the divisive stuff during the primaries are planning all kinds of attacks against Dean (ads, posts, protests with screaming) and against Obama (at the convention).

Trust me it is relevant.

Nah.

You just can't get over the primaries and it is sad.

by the Clintons. I am angry that she is holding fundraisers with people who are part of the Puma Alliance and threaten to cause trouble at the convention.

It is her right, it is their right....but it does anger me.

It angers me that Hillary is allowing them to accuse Dean daily of throwing the primary to Obama. They are using her name to run ads against him.

That should stop.

Maybe a vacation?

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/...

But not everyone gets one.

the party. She needs to give her speech and bow out respectively. If she doesn't she will really lose the respect of many people and never have another chance to run for any kind of office. I am very mad at her and agree with madfloridian that she really caused a lot of problems with Florida and Michigan by making it seem that Dean and Obama were the reason their votes were not counted. She knew very well of the truth though she through that out to people who didn't know the truth and that became their truth. Nothing like fooling your own supporters! This is a very current issue because she is still doing this and it sounds like she is creating real problems for the convention. Most people I know who were big Clinton supporters have aleady come to Obama's side. She is creating a big problem with this natural progression... Only for her own ego....not to let her supporters be heard. This is pathetic!

It is sad to see it, and sadder yet to see the utter denial.

NT!

Amazing. She is campaigning for him. She has given awesome speeches for him. And it is never enough for you.

Shake my head is disbelief.

we can count on a post from the OP.

Not the opposite. Making crap up is not the way to unify.

Everything I said came to pass (well, except for one thing). I had to spend many hours of my life trying to show that your characterizations were divisive and reactionary, not founded on any reality. But your obsession with Hillary continues.

I have said the same thing since the beginning. One day you agree, the next day you attack me for saying it.

I can not handle your inconsistency. By now.