If DEMOCRATS overturn the will of the people, I'm no longer a DEMOCRAT

[wowimthere]

The primary process was about the accumulation of elected delegates to get to the nomination. Since neither of the candidates can get to that specific number then SDs come in and help the process by casting their vote. The candidate who has more pledged delegates, more states won, has majority of the popular votes are determining factors of the will of the people and this candidate should be helped by the SDs. The candidate who has the most pledged delegates is Barack Obama. He has won more state contest, more votes thus far. It is nearly impossible for Clinton to unhinge Obama from any of these benchmarks but let me make one thing perfectly clear, Clinton is a side show to a candidate who has already won. The media is spinning everyone but people like me and more importantly, Clinton is doing something that will undermine her reasons for running in the first place... spinning her supporters. Like the Republicans of the last 7 years, she has decided that all things can be done to win. It's become about winning. It's no longer about what's best for the good of the country. She believes she is "better" than her democratic opponent. That's ominous... It implies something more sinister and she's expecting others to go along with her on her assessment. I was a Clinton supporter once upon a time. Her war vote turned my stomach and now she has damaged her credibility beyond repair.

She is hoping that by carpet bombing Obama with any petty thing she can find - Bitter-gate(nothing more than fake outrage for the media to jump on, on her behalf), Wright, Rezko that super delegates will see him as unelectable while it paints a big target on Obama's back for the republican machinery.

She can only win by default. Ruin Obama so that she comes out the victor to run in four more years. That Dems stand by while this happens is anecdotally like watching the Iraq war kill scores of individuals without raising a finger.

The Dems will start becoming the party of irrelevance if they don't get their act together. They need grassroots to move their agenda forward. They need people because people vote them into office. Don't have those votes, you don't stay in office. How can you govern with a majority with Ds next to their names if you don't have the "people" behind you. At the end of the day this process is about people.

If this continues, understanding this to be the sham that it is, I'm going to stop supporting the Democratic party. If after this process Obama has been ruined because of inaction on the part of the Democratic party and it goes to the convention, I will no longer be a Democrat. If after he's gotten more pledged delegates and won more states and has the popular vote (Michigan and Florida should be seated but no revotes... they made their own decision against DNC rules) and the party hands this over to Clinton, I'm done with the Democrats. If Democrats continue to act like Neo-Cons then I'm done with the Democrats. I want the Democrats to stand up and do what's right by the party and the people of this country.

Obama has already won this contest. It's over. SDs and party officials need to tell Clinton to retire the side and support Obama as the nominee.

[proud2BlibKansan]

1. Couldn't agree more

:applause:

[AtomicKitten]

44. Yep.

:patriot:

[PoliticalAmazon]

74. ITA. But we need to leave the party at the same time to make an impact. n/t

[niyad]

2. when, exactly, did obama's delegate count reach 2,025 (you knowl, the number needed to win)?

[wowimthere]

9. here is a line from my post...

The candidate who has more pledged delegates, more states won, has majority of the popular votes are determining factors of the will of the people and this candidate should be helped by the SDs.

For party unity... let's unite.

[niyad]

28. I repeat, WHEN did obama reach 2,025? simple question.

[goletian]

56. hes closer to the number than hillary is, so he gets it. no more stupid questions. - nt

[mdmc]

61. some of us hope he never reaches that number

That "thoses that know best" but Hillary ahead, even though she received less votes from American voters.

America deserves a choice between HRC and McCain.

The Dem party deserves to be whigged.

[MyNameGoesHere]

46. Ok since you are a supporter

of the candidate espousing unity, change, hope and all that happy horse poo, you first. My candidate is jaded and knows the truth of the world. So be a shining beacon that you and your candidate pretend to be and unite behind HRC.

[DJ13]

3. I agree!

I wish Dean would read your post.

[wowimthere]

26. I wish Dean would first understand what is good for the party.

[proud2BlibKansan]

117. What more do you want him to do?

He appealed to the SDs to make their choices so we can move on with ONE candidate. I don't know what more Dean can do.

[boobooday]

4. No.

If they overturn it, THEY won't be democrats anymore.

Either that or they confirm that they never were.

[wowimthere]

59. I think it confirms that maybe I didn't know why I joined the Dems

[BooScout]

5. I hope you enjoy the Republicans. n/t

[PoliticalAmazon]

75. We've been fighting Hillary, who is worse than most Republicans. n/t

[Why Syzygy]

132. A viable third party could come from this. No shit.

The people who make up Obama's grassroots are not going to be content for a reply of the same old crap every four years. Not a chance.

[MADem]

6. So, if the Democratic Convention doesn't follow the rules that YOU just made up, you are no longer a

Democrat?

Apparently, you never WERE one.

PSSST--this contest is NOT over. Except in your non-Democratic head.

[wowimthere]

From someone who supports someone who has moved the goal posts back how many times?

[MADem]

24. You want to play the waffle game, we can trash talk each other's candidates all day long.

And we can pick apart what this one said, and what that one wants, and maybe that will make you happy.

But that's not the subject of this thread, is it?

The subject had to do with the Party's CONVENTION RULES.

And what you're doing with that reply IS certainly moving those goalposts--from talking about convention rules to talking about candidates and what they might have said.

Magic number is 2024. Hit it, and the game is over.

Otherwise, suck it up, grow up, and keep on slogging. That's how it works.

[kwenu]

29. WRONG. There has to be an appropriate standard for the SDs to make a decision.

The rules don't say what that standard should be but there are very well known notions of fair play and democratic principles that you would have to be a fool to deny exist. This is an election for the presidential nominee. Hillary's folks are saying there is NO fair play and there are NO democratic principles. That is NOT acceptable in THIS country. This is still America right? Wielding power without responsibility means the "powerholders" get sent to the chopping block, the guillotine, or they may entertain a bullet in the back of the head. There are more than enough historical examples of this, but in modern times it effectively means the END of this party.

[MADem]

40. And you, or the OP (who will otherwise take ball and go home) get to decide what that standard is?

You can talk, and I can talk, and Clinton and Obama can talk, talk, talk, but it's not you, me, or them making the decision at that stage. And threatening to leave the party if it isn't done to one's liking is a real "There's the door, don't let it hit ya" opportunity waiting to be articulated.

Convicting people BEFORE the trial is what happens in totaliatarian regimes. Apparently, it's popular here on DU as well. I, for one, intend to wait for the Convention before I even contemplate the prospect that I might grab my little softball and flounce on home...

:eyes:

I think that when people get pissed, make dramatic statements, threaten to leave, want to truncate the process, and not allow it to play out fully, that says more about their lack of confidence in their candidate than anything else. If he's so great, he'll win. If he's not so great, he won't.

And don't even try to toss the "dirty tricks" card. If your candidate cannot handle the Marquess of Queensbury rules tit-for-tat that is occurring at this point, he'll be DECIMATED by the GOP machine.

You want to see a MASTER of dirty tricks at play (not even work, yet), you check out what the North Carolina GOP is doing with their brand new ad, and how McCain is taking the "high road" and decrying it. Gee, now EVERYONE wants to see it! Why, it's NEWSWORTHY, too--so they'll just HAVE to show clips of it on tee vee!

Now THAT's dirty politics. And like I said, that's still the 'playful' stage.

[kwenu]

53. The trial is over silly. She can't catch up. We know what the numbers are.

Tit for tat has nothing to do with it at this point. Math does have something to do with it. And the Republicans will be much worse garbage is sooo overplayed. But you're right, politics is dirty which is why the Dem party will get its throat cut from within if it defies the pledged delegates and the popular vote. That's TRUTH.

Deal with it.

[MADem]

66. Uh, "Silly" --the magic number is 2024. And unless a candidate reaches it, NO ONE has "won."

"Silly."

Deal with THAT.

And leave the FEAR CARD at home with the rest of the chickenshit/anything but the issues deck. The only throats getting cut belong to the Coronation Team.

[kwenu]

69. Okay. Please list Hillary's argument to the SDs why she should be chosen? Here are Obama's:

1. I lead substantially in pledged delegates. (Approx. 120 or so)
2. I lead substantially in the popular vote.
3. I have consistently raised more money than Hillary. She's broke.
4. I have brought more younger and newer voters into the process.
5. Hillary has higher negatives than any candidate running for the Presidency.


Now, what compelling argument could Hillary make?

[MADem]

79. No. I won't be drawn into a bullshit back-and-forth with you. Apparently, reading is NOT

terribly fundamental in your case.

Let me recap for you, since you didn't "get it" the first time round: T

he candidates can whine all they want.

YOU can whine all YOU want.

The decision is to be taken not by you, not by me, not by the candidates, but by the delegates to the convention, super and otherwise.

Too bad if you don't like that--that IS how it works.

Why is that so hard for you to understand?

[kwenu]

84. See. This is how you can tell a bullshitter. When it comes time to pony up. They've got NOTHING!!!

NOTHING!!!!!!!!

Please return to bullshit headquarters and tell Hillary she's screwed.

[MADem]

86. Are you this childish ALL the time, or only on the internet?

Try reading what I write. Just because you want to change the topic does not mean I have to follow along after your disordered and inarticulate thoughts.

Get over yourself. And grow up.

[kwenu]

96. You're apparently comfortable with ranting and raving but when it's time for serious facts--

YOU'VE GOT NOTHING. You can't even put together a serious listing of your candidates reasons why Hillary should impress the superdelegates.

As we say in Texas, "All hat, no cattle"!!!! Just like your candidate. And Dubya!

[MADem]

104. Ah, I see. You ARE this childish all the time.

Ranting and raving, eh? You might want to check your mirror, there, child.

[kwenu]

105. Still no useful information in support of Hillary. It's time for you to support Obama.

You can't justify your candidate. That's a bad sign.

We look forward to welcoming all after the presumptive nominee is declared.

[MADem]

110. Past your bedtime, there, cranky? NT

[kwenu]

114. Yes. But I'm waiting on your bedtime story. You know, the one about Hillary justifying why she

should be annointed the nominee.

[MADem]

115. Someone tore the pages out of your book. She's not saying that.

It's the Saint Obama supporters who are driving that train.

Get to bed, now. And don't forget your pill.

[kwenu]

123. But Madem Madem. If you think Hillary can still win...you're the one who needs the pills.

[MADem]

127. It's rather clear you know nothing about me. NT

[kwenu]

128. Nonsense. I know you are incapable of logically explaining why Hillary should be the nominee of the

Democratic Party given her performance and fairly simple math.

Care to give it try?

[wowimthere]

111. it's a good question since you are defending this process on behalf of the candidate...

you support. Why not answer the question? You are here. The SDs are going to hear this argument of electability argument. You're talking about people whining but take a look in the mirror.

[MADem]

113. Try reading what I actually wrote. NT

[wowimthere]

55. Who should be afraid of the GOP? If SDs are committing and have been committing...

then they should continue to do so. It too is part of the process or else SDs would have never cast their endorsements until after the primary. Your argument that the candidates should continue on ripping each other is a good one if you like dirty politics but I'm suggesting that instead of truncating the system... keep it fair within the party. There is enough dirt on the Republican side that I won't mind the mud wrestling.

What do the GOP have to run on. Nodda! Nothin'. I don't think anyone should be afraid of the GOP because if personal attacks is all they've got then they will lose. I am saying at the end of the process, the will of the people should be the over riding sentiment... but not at the expense of the media and Clinton tearing this party apart. She should know better. Remember the "Rightwing Conspiracy"?

[MADem]

83. Take a good look at what the GOP is doing in North Carolina.

That's just a taste of what you can expect once this contest is over.

If you can't handle a little contentiousness in a primary, you're going to have major hurdles trying to get past the GOP.

Stop whining. Let them duke it out. It makes you look fearful, trying to stop the fight because you are afraid your baby might get hurt. I'll tell ya who will rip him up but good--and it's not Clinton.

Oh, and stop underestimating McCain. The guy may be a bastard, but he's a pro.

[wowimthere]

108. A pro who took us to war on a lie. If we find out that you lied about that how much of a pro can...

you be?

[MADem]

121. You overestimate how much people actually care about the war.

The big picture is the ECONOMY.

Most of the people who are fierce against the war aren't going to vote for him ANYWAY. It's just not a prime decision point for his voting bloc.

This is a common mistake that "enthusiasts" make--not everyone cares about the same issues they do, and with equal fervor.

All he has to do is claim that he's going to force the Iraqis to pay us back with oil, and wave a bullshit tax cut at 'em, and they'll vote for him.

I'm not kidding, either.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/11/economy.poll.schneider/index.html
Poll: Economy outpaces war on list of voters' worries

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/21/opinion/polls/main4029859.shtml
CBS Poll: Economy Worries Young Voters


Poll: Economy top issue among NC adults
http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/564/story/424211.html

[MattBaggins]

91. You don't see the real danger

many won't just take their ball and go home. The danger is in those that will actually campaign against the democratic nominee. Those who will try to recruit others to damage the Dem party.

[wowimthere]

109. As we speak the media is trying to find another way to keep this going...

and she's leaning on the media to give her as much air time as she likes. She doesn't need to buy advertisment. You always hear about her way more than you hear about Obama. Ever wonder why? They are helping her get her message out.

[wowimthere]

51. SDs have a role to play and it is helping this process. Since no one can

get to this magic number, SDs help make the choice clearer for "the" people. They act independently but they are not there to undermine the will of the people.

You can always put off understanding the will and the SDs' intention til tomorrow but tomorrow will get here. Obama will have the clear advantage and knowing this won't erase the facts. SDs will have to take that into consideration. I'm way ahead here... I've taken into consideration what the SDs will take into consideration. The math = the will.

[MADem]

89. And the will of the people will be clear, in time. After EVERYONE votes.

Not after the Obama Whining Club "sez so."

[wowimthere]

106. And you're probably sure that your vote counted in 2004 and you're sure

that everything is right as rain with the Democratic party. I understand... Your candidate got out campaigned but remember she was my candidate too once upon a time. Her tactics have been Republicanized and she is a democrat? No one's whining but if you like your politics below the belt then why not route for John McCain. They vote the same. They talk the same. They both vote on the losing side of the issues. I'm whining alright. I want to see a good democrat in the white house... not someone who wears the D logo but acts like a republican.

[MADem]

112. Say, throw a few more logs on the fire--you didn't get quite enough tangential issues in there to

properly obfuscate the discussion!!!

:rofl:

Frankly, anyone who spells Democrat, referring to the political affiliation, with a small d but manages to pull out the Great Giant R for the word "Republicanized" is a bit suspect in my book. If anyone here is "route"-ing (that would be ROOT, dear) for McCain, it would more likely be someone who bothers to give the GOP the Big R, but can't be bothered to manage the Big D for their putative own team.

Eh?


My vote did count. We have a paper trail where I live.

Look, you "route" for whomever you want. I don't want to stop you, in fact, I encourage you to rah-rah all the live-long day. Just stop trying to circumvent the process. That's NOT what DEMOCRACY looks like.

[Name removed]

133. Deleted message

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

[kwenu]

23. Hillary is hard to take when her position regarding the rules is that there are no Rules.

FL and MI by agreement didn't count until she realized she was behind. Then she said the SD's should vote for the popular vote winner until she realized that likely won't be her. Now her position is that she should be the nominee even over the pledged delegate leader and the popular vote winner because she can win people who won't vote for a Black guy and of course in her mind only her and McCain have passed the threshold to be commander in chief.

If you've been paying attention you should be thoroughly disgusted.

[MADem]

42. I invite your attention to post forty, where I replied to this complaint.

The candidates don't make the gravy at the Convention. The delegates do. Get used to it, and get over it.

And stop trying to shut people up if their views don't match yours. You can disagree all you want, but trying to insist that Clinton depart to make it easier on your hero just isn't going to happen.

I am paying attention, and people who subscribe to undemocratic coronations of weak, unvetted candidates who can't take punches very well do indeed 'disgust' me.

Let it play out. If your candidate is so frigging hot, he'll win.

What are you so afraid of? Don't even give me that "fractured party" bullshit--we've ALWAYS been fractured, disorganized, tolerant of everyone and everything between tighty-righties and loony-lefties, and we always manage, nonetheless.

This is a test of your candidate's STAMINA as much as anything else. If he can't go the distance, it's better to know NOW.

[kwenu]

54. I wouldn't dream of shutting anyone up. That is a tactic for people who don't know how to argue.

I'm here to debate in full glory as a contact sport. I even concede when a logical point is scored.

[MattBaggins]

97. Just keep going and going

Keep dragging on wasting time, energy and resources while McCain justs sits back laughing while he gets a free pass. Just let Hillary continue with her little hissy spat and stop Obama from concentrating on our real opponent.

[MADem]

134. Don't you have anything nice to say about your candidate?

If he's so hot, stop worrying. Stop acting like a child, wanting his opponent to go away so he can be coddled and have it "easy" for awhile. Grow the fuck up. It's a campaign, not a coronation---isn't that the Obama Supporters' Mantra?

The more you trash Clinton, the more I suspect your candidate is an empty suit. Why don't you root FOR your candidate, instead of crapping on mine?

What........... .............. ....................... nothing positive to say?

Anyone?

Buehler?

All I see on this forum is griping and whining and crying from Obama supporters about Clinton.

Makes me wonder why they are so angry and frightened, actually.

[SeaLyons]

7. 2025

That's the magic number. It's that simple.

[MattBaggins]

100. McCain

it's that simple.

Or is clawing and scratching your way to a Pyhrric victory you can't attain anyway; just to show your spunkiness, more important?

[tammywammy]

103. I thought it was 2024

Since Spitzer resigned and Paterson didn't give up his DNC position.

RCP says 2024
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_delegate_count.html

[LakeSamish706]

8. I totally agree with your post and really wonder if and when the Hillary supporters...

will wake up to what they are supporting in this woman.... I can't figure out why anyone hasn't seen through her me/me/me BS yet.

[wowimthere]

19. Thank you and I'm hopeful that people will start looking at this for what it really is...

The media is using the Democrats to make money. All of the networks.

[PoliticalAmazon]

77. If the Dem Party frauds things up so Hillary can win, we'll know we're no longer needed...

...or wanted by the Dem Party. It will be our cue to leave the Dem Party and become Independent or Undeclared.

It will also be a cue for each of us to put up a web page--even if it is only one--informing the world of our actions and why we did it.

[kwenu]

10. Not ready to declare that yet but I would strongly consider being Indpendent.

[Swamp Rat]

11. No matter what you do, vote for the Dem nominee in November.... SCOTUS.

[shaniqua6392]

12. The Super Delegates can do what they want.

They were created for primaries that ended up like this one. We just need to let this run it's course. They will also have to do something about Michigan and Florida also. They will not disenfranchise these two important states. The payback if they neglect to honor the votes of these two states will be tremendous in the General Election.

[emilyg]

20. Exactly.

[wowimthere]

32. I'm sorry I'm not buying that argument any longer... the occupation and incompetence of McCain...

will be the qualifiers in this election. By time the Democratic nominee is set, McCain will be clearly defined by our party. Florida will not want a president who is as inept as this one and Michigan will follow suit.

[kwenu]

35. A foolish lie. Don't deceive yourself.

[Big Blue Marble]

52. That twisted logic may work for you,

but it does not work for many who are democrats that is with a small d. We watched the
Republicans steal our country in 2000 and probably again in 2004. If the Democrats
within our party do the same, democracy in our country is a sham.

To continue supporting what would be only a ruse is a waste of time and money. I, too, will be done with the Democratic
Party until once again it's organizing principle is democracy. It is amazing that you and so many are willing to over
turn the very principles that have made this party dear to so many, just so your candidate can "win" no matter what
the cost.

If the super delegates do what you are suggesting, the Democratic Party as we know it will be shattered. The
Republicans may get their 50 year multi-generational dominance after all. Karl Rove is smiling.

[qijackie]

13. the will of what people?

Nixon, Bush Sr, Reagan, Bush Jr..........
all "the will of the people".

[wowimthere]

43. some of them were the will of election fraud.

[DangerDave921]

14. Get real

1. Obama has NOT won the contest because he does not have the requisite number of delegates.

2. Super Delegates are the creation of the Democratic Party. Hence, their use is completely legit regardless of who is currently leading in delegates.

How do you determine the will of the people when it is such a close contest? I like how some folks always talk about "the people" like it is a monolithic entity with a singular mind. It's more accurate to say the will of the slight majority of folks who voted in the Dem primaries. I don't think you can balloon this to mean some grand "will of the people" argument.

[wowimthere]

47. She can't win the delegate count. Period. She loses state cnt. She now relies on Pop and SDs

SDs shouldn't over turn the will of the voters to preserve party unity. If the math were on her side no matter who I'm supporting then the SDs should make a determination as to who will serve our constituency by how many votes they've gotten.

[Tom Rinaldo]

49. Where did this "State Count" Business originate?

In 2000 Al Gore won 19 States and the popular vote. George W. Bush won 31 States and the Electoral College. Had Al Gore won 20 States instead he would be President even though Bush still would have won ten more States than Gore. 2004 was much the same. Republicans always have a better chance of winning more States than Democrats, but it doesn't matter. What matters is how many people live in each State, which factors into the Electoral votes; giving an advantage to Small states even so.

Surely you don't believe that if Hillary won New Hampshire, Nevada, and West Virginia, but Obama won California and New York, that the fact Hillary won more states than Obama in that example is more important than the number of voters in each state?

[DangerDave921]

76. Why do we have SD's?

If they are supposed to be a rubber stamp for what has occurred in the primaries, then they serve no purpose under your rationale.

[Saturday]

15. Do you care about the will of the people of MI and FL? I didn't think so. nt

[wowimthere]

22. I care about all people. Fl and MI still broke party rules. They can still be seated though. But.

how about those people who are fighting in Iraq? McCain is not going to end this war. Obama, LIKE Clinton will. But Clinton is not in this to win it... because she can't.

[kenny blankenship]

16. Let's not go there - it won't happen. The SDs don't want to destroy their futures

Let's leave "dark threats" to the suicidal Hillary deadenders.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

17. "the will of the people" is the popular vote and Hillary has that!

[wowimthere]

25. This is a misconception you will follow as long as someone keeps it alive.

Hillary Clinton doesn't have the popular vote. Your assessment is that you can win a state by being the only person on the ballot even if others are clearly in the race. This makes sense to you?

[Debi]

34. That and caucuses don't count

Or that delegate totals equal 'popular vote' for the caucuses (which is false)

Or that 'estimated' popular vote can be created by looking at total turnout at the caucuses and delegate count (again, false.) No hard count of supporters in the FIRST ROUND of the caucuses is tabulated (before realignment) so there is no way of knowing what the 'popular vote' was in the caucuses.

'Popular vote' is a myth in a mixed Caucus/Primary nominee selection process.

[wowimthere]

38. this would never be an issue if Clinton had won more caucuses.

[Debi]

41. Agreed - it's just a small point that nags at me

Since Iowa doesn't release the 'raw data' on the first alignment results any information coming from Iowa can only truly be used for delegate counts, which is the rule of the DNC. Anything else coming from Iowa is a 'guess' and not accurate information.

Not that THAT would stop the Clinton campaign - OH, and If the campaign cares at all the delegate count in Iowa has changed:

At our County Conventions in March Edwards and Clinton LOST delegates and Obama GAINED delegates - is that reflected in the 'popular vote' tabulations? AND our District Conventions are this Saturday, where the total will probably change again (and state convention is mid-June where the total will probably change AGAIN). None of that will be reflected in the 'estimated popular vote' :crazy:

After the Caucuses:

Obama 16
Clinton 15
Edwards 14


After the County Conventions:

Obama 25
Clinton 14
Edwards 6


http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P08/IA-D.phtml

[kevinbgoode]

131. This is the kind of crap that starts convincing others not to support her.

[mkultra]

18. yup, if O takes the pledged and the SDs subvert

Ill sit this one out.

[newmajority]

21. After the DLC'ers in the Senate (including Hillary) sold us out in 2002

I almost quit this party in disgust. The only two reasons I have stayed in are Howard Dean and Barack Obama. They are the ones working their asses off to rebuild not only this Democratic party, but this country. The media whores and the DLC were able to stop Dr. Dean's run for the White House, but they couldn't stop the 50 state strategy. Not in 2006, and not now, because Obama is clearly using it, while the DLC/Clinton/McUseless types are still trying the tired old "as long as Hillary only wins the big states, that's all that matters" crap that brought us a Repuke majority in all three branches of government.

We can stop this shit now. We must not let the DLC steal this, or the Democratic party is finished. :evilfrown:

[wowimthere]

27. I will champion fairly but if by the end of this process I see the Dems going down the dark alley...

instead of a well lit street then I'm done with this party. I wouldn't think of becoming a Republican... ever... but an uncommitted independent would be best.

[WA98296]

30. I will be walking out with you.

[zerostar]

31. ITS NOT ABOUT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE -- IT'S ABOUT DELEGATES!

ITS NOT ABOUT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE -- IT'S ABOUT DELEGATES!
ITS NOT ABOUT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE -- IT'S ABOUT DELEGATES!
ITS NOT ABOUT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE -- IT'S ABOUT DELEGATES!
ITS NOT ABOUT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE -- IT'S ABOUT DELEGATES!
ITS NOT ABOUT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE -- IT'S ABOUT DELEGATES!
ITS NOT ABOUT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE -- IT'S ABOUT DELEGATES!
ITS NOT ABOUT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE -- IT'S ABOUT DELEGATES!

IF the PLEO's give their nod to HRC she will have the nomination.
If they keep going to BHO like they have he will have the nomination.

I don't see any other way either can with without them.

[hfojvt]

33. "Deny thy father and refuse thy name, or if thou wilt not

be but sworn my love,
and I will no longer be a Capulet!"

[wowimthere]

36. If you believe that a Democrat using Republican tactics is the way to go then people should just...

throw their support to the Republican candidate. I like issue oriented platforms, not gotcha politics. This election is about vital issues we face as a nation. The rest of the world is looking at us. If we continue to be the party that is now in charge then what is the point to all of this... Let's just keep things the way they are. Change elections are about change.

Fighting the good fight doesn't mean tearing a person down but differentiating regarding platform issues. It doesn't have to get personal or destructive.

[oasis]

37. Hasta la vista baby.

:hi: :cry:

[enid602]

39. boo hoo

Of all the idiotic trends in Obamabot posts, this new 'I'll commit hari kari if He doesn't win' genre really takes the cake. This is about the fourth one I've read this AM. How much do they pay you fools for writing this drivel? Funny how someone who has offered so little in terms of concrete, progressive policy (Iraq, health care, school funding, child care, etc) can engender such loyalty. I'm impressed.

[dpbrown]

45. Leave now. Please.

Take your tantrum to the Greens or the Republicans were it belongs.

[wowimthere]

48. Democrats have bought into the bogus scenarios media paints for us...

Dems turning against each other instead of understanding where we really line up. Some of you are traiters to your own cause. If we start acting like the Republicans that are in power, we will suffer the same fate.

Endless wars. Strapping more debt to people. Buying the media spin.

[Az_lefty]

50. I'm with you. There's no way I would tolerate it.

[wowimthere]

57. And yes much of this does have to do with race and gender. It should be the issues and fairness...

if we are the democratic party then we should act like Dems not like Republicans. They love their politics dirty even when it means sacrificing human life. I don't want to be associated with a party that acts like a party we say we don't agree with on core issues.

[BklnDem75]

58. Rec'd!

My thoughts exactly. I vote for the pledged nominee, not the appointee.

[mdmc]

60. The DLC killed the pary years ago

We need a new non-triangulator party.

HOWARD DEAN NEEDS TO DROP THE SD system ASAP!

[wowimthere]

62. i agree with you. Will take it this year but it should be abandoned.

[2rth2pwr]

63. Stop your crying, Hillary wins a big primary and all the sore losers show their faces.

[wowimthere]

68. This is a reality check. You bought into the spin at the expense of the party.

MSNBC and ABC and CNN and CBS as well as FAUX benefit. Democrats don't. This is over. I really expect Dems to do their homework. None of it was done by the Senators who voted for this War. The media is using people to make their money at the expense of getting a Democratic elected in 08.

[LWolf]

64. Democrats have already overturned my will,

and I haven't voted in the primary yet. Neither HRC nor Obama offers the change I wish to see.

Obama doesn't represent "the will of the people." If he did, he would already have accumulated enough delegates to have secured the nomination. He hasn't.

What percentage of people are you willing to leave behind when factoring their "will?"

[wowimthere]

70. it's called a majority... it's the only indicator. Kucinich didn't vote for this war...

Obama didn't either. That is the litmus test right now. Obama represents, right now as a choice between staying the same or carrying us away from a Republican agenda we've been fighting against for 7 years. Voting for a war, saber rattling for war with Iran, voting for a bankruptcy bill that straps more debt to poor people won't get you where you want to go. Obama isn't there yet but he's further along than Clinton, Edwards or McCain.

[LWolf]

78. If that's the "litmus" test, then Obama loses.

His hypocritical campaigning on "I was against the war from the beginning" repulses me. :puke:

He's voted to fund the war he says he is against repeatedly. He gets no high ground on the war.

Obama is not going to "carry us away from a republican agenda." He LIKES the republican agenda. In the face of the last 7 years of democratic capitulation to the republican agenda in congress, he thinks we need to work even closer with them. He spouts republican agenda all the time. Examples? How about supporting merit pay for teachers and further privatization of public education? As a teacher, I'll NEVER cast a vote for him.

I could go on, but why? Obama isn't any further along than HRC. We have NO worthy candidate to send against McCain in the fall.

Unless we can unearth one at a brokered convention.

I'll fight to the end for that option.

[wowimthere]

99. I know why I want to be a democrat but I know what will carry me away from this party too...

Are you a democrat?

I've tried to find the good in all of these candidates. We have disagreed on many issues. I don't like that Obama voted to fund this war but my reasons are my own and I own them. He didn't drive the bus into the ditch. That is the litmus test for me! If you didn't authorize the war then there wouldn't have been a war to fund. That's the test I gave the candidate.

I'm not going to agree with everything a candidate does. I line up with a lot of Kucinich's ideas but to say that Obama is like a republican is stretching it. Clinton has voted like a republican on many occasions and that's not a bad thing but on key issues her votes have been problematic.

[LWolf]

122. I am a Democrat.

I am 48 years old, and I have voted for a democrat for president in every election since I was old enough to vote.

Neither of these candidates pass MY litmus test, which grieves me.

[ShortnFiery]

65. If the superdelegates overturn the pledge delegate lead, the Democratic Party will IMPLODE.

That's a truism. :nuke:

[wowimthere]

81. How do you say... mass exodus!

[ShortnFiery]

120. LOL, here ya go!

FIRE IN THE HOLE!

FIRE IN THE HOLE!

FIRE IN THE HOLE! :nuke: <Democratic Party implodes as "her highness" is coronated Nominee>

[ImpeechBush]

67. Sounds like redefining the rules so that your favorite candidate wins

If we really want the "will of the people" to prevail, it seems to me that we would do away with superdelegates altogether and depend only on the voters to determine the candidate. It also strikes me that most elections are winner takes all.

Nevertheless the time to change the rules is not in the middle of the contest. And the time to declare a winner is when someone actually "wins", not when someone is ahead and uses that to demand that everyone else drop out.

I don't think anyone is very happy with the hash that has been made of the primary process this year. But the answer is not to change the rules in the middle of the contest to ones favoring your personal choice.

[wowimthere]

71. Um actually if you didn't read it in the post... I was for Hillary before she voted for this war....

She has undermined our ability to truly fight terrorism because she wanted to look tough on national security. By virtue of not having a vote but speaking out about it, Obama didn't support this war of attrition.

I liked and was throwing my full support to Clinton before she became Republican and lost her mind. When killing is senseless and it is authorized by people we trust to do our bidding, they don't deserve to hold the highest office in the land.

[crankychatter]

72. oh gawud... what is the value of repeating this nine million different ways?

how does it help?

I can't even read it... it's like Halloween sequels

understand that DU will not abide proselytizing against the nominee, when the nominee is decided

in the short term while this is being tolerated... how is this helping here?

so are we green recruiting early or something?

is this a form of terrorism? seriously...

I always told my kids... "we do not negotiate with terrorists, it's departmental policy" when they had a tantrum

I say... give me a positive alternative...

[wowimthere]

73. Sometimes repetition is good... People don't get it unless you repeat it... We should...

repeat that you don't take a nation into dumb wars more often too. If we did, you'd hope it would sink in. Undermining our votes and undermining democracy should be repeated ad-nauseam.

[Barack_America]

80. K&R!! I just saw this.

Interestingly, the post I was composing when you wrote this runs along a very similar vein.

This is a wonderful post and I couldn't agree more!

[wowimthere]

87. thank you Kristi... your post was inspiring... and it got to me like no other post...

Because you truly understand what this process is really about.

[Stop Cornyn]

82. It won't happen.

[jmg257]

85. SDs are NOT supposed to simply "help the process by casting their vote". It would have been

easier just to not have them at all, and leave the pledged delegate count at a point obtainable by a candidate. (easy enough to do)

http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2008/0215_elections_mann.aspx
"Superdelegates were created by the Hunt Commission, set up in 1982 and led by Gov. James Hunt of North Carolina. The commission was reacting in part to a nominating process in which the weight of influence was with a relatively small cadre of ideological activists whose involvement with the party was essentially limited to the once-every-four-years push to nominate a like-minded presidential candidate.

The Hunt Commission proposed superdelegates (initially set at 14 percent of all delegates, subsequently increased to about 20 percent) to improve the party’s mainstream appeal by moderating the new dominance of these activists and by increasing the contributions of elected and party officials to the Democratic platform and their impact on the selection of a nominee; to provide an element of peer review, weighing the requirements of the office, the strengths and weaknesses of the candidates and the chances that they’ll win; and to create stronger ties between the party and its elected officials to promote a unified campaign and teamwork in government."

{Seems like "the will of the people" isn't high on the list of "why Superdelegates exist".
But...}

"...
But superdelegates, sensitive to the implications of internecine battles, are more likely to try to transcend emotions to find a reasonable outcome that enhances the party’s chances of winning an election. The superdelegates do not unite to block the candidate with the strongest support from voters; they have always cast a majority of their votes for the candidate who won a majority or plurality of votes in the primaries.

I guess we will have to see what they do - when they do it. Seems many SHOULD back Barack - but do they have to? Not really.

BTW - this is a good article worth reading if interested in SDs.

[wowimthere]

90. Extremely insightful... thank you

[jmg257]

101. Cheers! It was worth reading - I learned alot. n/t

[Texas Hill Country]

88. this is such a lame argument... play by the rules, but not over here... or here... or i quit!

[Eric Condon]

92. Rec'd.

This is how I feel. If the Party makes the statement that they're willing to overturn the will of the voters and that they feel that they are best represented in the GE by a GOP-enabling, war-mongering DINO, then I don't belong in this party.

[wowimthere]

94. For me... it is important that we not use tactics we deemed inexcusable when Republicans do it.

[Eric Condon]

124. Exactly.

For me, the most important thing is a point I made in a post last week: while I believe it is important to support the Democratic nominee, I think it's even more important to support the democratic nominee.

[BigDDem]

93. Obviously you're not familiar with the role of the SD's

[wowimthere]

95. there are many metrics that have been bandied about... I can recognize when someone may understand

more than I do about a given process... We're all learning things we didn't know... When was the last time you saw a race like this? It's the first in my life time. I'm not going to pretend I know more than I claim to know. This is called a discussion forum. We all learn more than we did before we got here.

[BigDDem]

98. Perhaps you might consider learning about the rules

before the "I'm no longer a DEMOCRAT" if my guy doesn't win thing.

[wowimthere]

102. I know all I need to know to make a decision about the candidates and this process...

there are variables and their are variables... the tenor and tone of a campaign is as important as the process itself and I've heard SDs speak to the very issues I'm raising. Some of you may not agree with me but clearly, I don't agree with the politics we've decided to fling into our party. If implosion was not a consideration if it should go to the convention then it would never be discussed by SDs. They make a decision. I am within my rights to make a decision based on their assessment.

SDs are helping this process like all of us are. One part of that process is not more important than the other.

[GarbagemanLB]

107. Since you know all about the rules, I assume you are against FL and MI being seated?

[Yes We Did]

116. KICK!

[grantcart]

118. fortunately it will never happen

I would hate to have to start a new party it sounds like a lot of work

[Yes We Did]

119. Did'nt you know? Rules don't apply to Hillary people.

[NoBushSpokenHere]

125. If the will of the people is overturned I am outta the USA nt

[bigwillq]

126. It's not what other people do

that make you a Democrat, it's what you do or what you believe.

It will be a shame if the supers hand the nod to Clinton, but I will still be a Democrat.
We need to fix and change the system, that is for sure, even if Obama does go on to win the nod.

[Why Syzygy]

129. Totally with you.

I'm a progressive independent, but if they would do such a deed, if evil Hillary is rewarded for her performance, I will never vote for another Democrat for as long as I breathe.

They can write off the Independent vote. We don't go for that shit.

[woolldog]

130. I will reregister as an Independent if Clinton is allowed to steal the nomination