Why didn't Hillary pull her name from the MI ballot?

[NJmaverick]

Anyone know why both Edwards and Obama pulled their names, but Hillary left hers on? What was her excuse?

[MonkeyFunk]

1. She didn't need an excuse

there was no requirement to do so. The others did it because they weren't going to win there, and to pander to Iowa and New Hampshire voters.

[NJmaverick]

2. The others said they did it, because they thought that was what the party wanted

Why do you need to make things up, to support Hillary? Doesn't that tell you there is some serious problems there?

[MonkeyFunk]

9. I didn't make anything up

there was no requirement that they remove their names. The DNC could've easily made it clear if that were case - it wasn't.

[mcctatas]

10. the others did it because the party asked ALL of them to...

once again, the game is played differently for Hillary....
"Well, there are a lot of things that happened with Michigan. First of all, the primary law was challenged as to its constitutionality and it was thrown out. So, there’s no law supporting the Michigan primary.

There’s the fact that Hillary Clinton’s name and the uncommitted slate was the only thing that was on the ballot in Michigan because the Democratic National Committee asked the other candidates to withdraw their names from the ballot. So, here you have the institution itself asking people to pull their names off the ballot.



All of them, yes. That’s what--I don’t know what I just said-But, OK, that’s what I thought I said.

In any event, and you also have the uncommitted slate on the ballot—you have an uncommitted slate on the ballot and, you know, one of the proposals that came forward that I’ve seen is: Why not give half of the delegation to Clinton and half of it to Obama and that way it won’t make any difference and people can be seated. Well, what do you do with the fact that there was an uncommitted delegation that got votes and is entitled to delegates? I think that one is a whole big mess."
http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/05/dnc_rules_commi.html

[MonkeyFunk]

20. When did the party ask them to do that?

Nobody's ever shown me anything of the sort.

[mcctatas]

25. follow the link....

"What caught my ear were the comments made by Garry Shay, a well versed and insightful California Democratic Party Rules Chair and a member of the important Democratic National Committee Rules Committee, who said he anticipates the May 31, 2008 meeting of this body to be important and for it to resolve questions surrounding the seating of delegates from Florida and Michigan.

Shay is known as a straight shooter who is well versed in rules and chooses his words carefully. He announced around the time of the California primary that he was supporting Hillary Clinton. He, as well as the other seven superdelegates on the panel--and another who had to leave early but spoke to the crowd--had some interesting things to say about what this means. But Shay’s analysis of the Florida and Michigan situation was very interesting.

He was more predictive of the Florida delegation, which he said, based on putting bits and pieces of information together, would be seated, each with a one-half vote. He said the resolution of the Michigan delegates, where all Democratic candidates except Hillary Clinton, took their names off the ballot at the request of the Democratic National Party, was “anybody’s guess.” But being told to arrive a day early and to schedule plane flights coming home a day after the meeting, he said that there will be a big push to resolve these issues before the convention. The Rules and Bylaws Committee has jurisdiction on this issue until June 29. If it goes to the convention, it will then be handled by the credentials committee."

http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/05/dnc_rules_commi.html

[Maddy McCall]

28. Is a blog the best evidence you have?

I could blog that little green men landed in my front forty last night. Doesn't make it so.

[DS1]

34. Or there's the Chicago Tribune

http://weblogs.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/blog/2007/10/leaving_michigan_behind.html

[mcctatas]

but...

anyone can write for the chicago tribune, Maddy could write for the tribune! :rofl:

[Maddy McCall]

45. It's a blog headline without an article attached.

Yes, the Tribune has blogs...and that one is just a headline with no article attached to it.

Show me where a reputable news source directly quotes the DNC saying that candidates are to remove their names from the ballot.

[Maddy McCall]

42. A blog title not even linked to any article?

Blogs aren't evidence of anything. So far, all anyone has posted is hearsay.

Not one AP article claiming that the DNC required or requested candidates remove their names from the ballot in MI.

[MonkeyFunk]

54. again

that's a characterization. It quotes Obama saying it's "an extension" of the pledge.

Where's the press release from the DNC? Where's Howard Dean on TV saying they're breaking the rules by not removing their names?

[mcctatas]

52. I was going to respond with more articles, links etc....

but then I decided I couldn't convince you that fire was hot if Hillary said it wasn't...
Peace

[MonkeyFunk]

58. How about something

from the DNC or Howard Dean stating unequivocally that the candidates were expected to remove their names from the ballot?

We're not that hard to convince - you just need something more than a blog entry that characterizes it that way.

[VolcanoJen]

70. That would be a pretty cool blog entry, though.

;-) Maddy!

[MonkeyFunk]

33. that's not evidence of anything

that's just somebody characterizing it that way.

Where's a letter from Howard Dean asking them to remove their names? Where's Howard Dean speaking to the press and saying he expects all candidates to remove their names. Where's a press release from the DNC condemning Clinton, Dodd, Kucinich and Gravel for not removing their names?

[Occam Bandage]

36. "because they weren't going to win there"

I absolutely love this argument. Clinton was doing no better in MI than she was doing in any of the other states Obama flipped after campaigning there.

[MonkeyFunk]

57. exit polls from Michigan

show her winning in Michigan even if all the candidates were on the ballot. If I recall correctly, it was 46% to 35% over Obama.

[Occam Bandage]

59. Right. 11 points was nothing back then. Obama was regularly making up 20 across the board,

simply by showing up, running a few ads, and holding a few rallies. Heck, he made up 10 points there simply by existing; he was down 20 two weeks earlier.

Keep in mind that two weeks before Super Tuesday, he trailed in 19 of 21 states, by 10-20 points in almost all of them. He certainly could have won MI.

[NJmaverick]

73. Jessie Jackson won that state when he ran

[hokies4ever]

55. And now she's stuck stumping for FL and MI

when she's campaigning in Oregon. Bet that went over real well with undecided voters. "Vote for me because FL and MI are important." When you're behind Hillary, you need to reach into your opponents' core groups.

[PBS Poll-435]

3. To make you angry.

That is the only reason that makes sense.

That and Edwards and Obama were going to lose MI and it was too soon in the season to have a huge loss.

[NJmaverick]

6. Again false claims against Obama and Edwards (and Richardson and Biden for that matter)

but no explanation why Hillary stayed on the ballot. I find the lack of an honest answer very telling.

[PBS Poll-435]

13. What did I say that wasn't true.

A huge loss before Super Tuesday would have been devastating to the Edwards & Obama campaign, and neither was going to win Michigan.

[NJmaverick]

44. The candidates were ASKED by the DNC to with draw

so all your claims as to movites, were false

Here is proof

http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/05/dnc_rules_commi.html

So said Garry Shay (Super Delegate, Clinton Endorser, and member of the Rules and Bylaws Committee) just yesterday:


Well, there are a lot of things that happened with Michigan. First of all, the primary law was challenged as to its constitutionality and it was thrown out. So, there’s no law supporting the Michigan primary.

There’s the fact that Hillary Clinton’s name and the uncommitted slate was the only thing that was on the ballot in Michigan because the Democratic National Committee asked the other candidates to withdraw their names from the ballot. So, here you have the institution itself asking people to pull their names off the ballot.

[PBS Poll-435]

51. How about you find a contemporaneous source....

Spamming your own post with the same link isn't really doing it for me.

[NJmaverick]

74. Here you go, now you can admit you were WRONG

Pretty sure being on the ballot is considered as "participating"

THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by the rules and regulations of the DNC. It does not include activities specifically related to raising campaign resources such as fundraising events or the hiring of fundraising staff.


http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/09/can-clinton-still-get-edge-out-of.html

[PBS Poll-435]

79. No. A source that says that the DNC asked the candidates to file with the Michigan SOS

...to have their names removed.

Can't do it, can ya.

When will you admit you are wrong...

[NJmaverick]

82. The actual pledge they signed, is all the PROOF needed to dispell the falsehoods

you are perpatrating.

[PBS Poll-435]

84. Did the DNC ask the candidates to file the necessary paperwork with the MI SOS (or not.)

Burden of proof is on you.

(it is your OP)

[NJmaverick]

88. No, I have provided more proof than I needed. While you have provide NOTHING

to back up your ridiculous claims. Sorry this isn't Clinton camp headquarters. The real world doesn't play by her insane rules and logic.

[PBS Poll-435]

89. You posted a link to a blog and cut/paste "the pledge." Why can't you back up your assertion?

And when is Obama going to repudiate Chairman Dodd?

[NJmaverick]

91. Facts and reports back up my assertion. You have provided NOTHING

Other than a belief repeated ad naseum

[PBS Poll-435]

92. Where is the statement from the DNC? Where is it?

Oh yeah...

[MonkeyFunk]

60. that's not evidence

that's just a blog that characterizes what happened. And wrongly.

Where did Howard Dean or the DNC claim that the candidates were expected to remove their names from the ballot?

[PBS Poll-435]

62. It was on a memo. Jeeezuz, don't you remember?

It, unfortunately, was written with disappearing ink.

On a cocktail napkin.

[NJmaverick]

72. Unfortunately for your reputation, it didn't disappear

Pretty sure being on the ballot is considered as "participating"

THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by the rules and regulations of the DNC. It does not include activities specifically related to raising campaign resources such as fundraising events or the hiring of fundraising staff.


http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/09/can-clinton-still-get-edge-out-of.html

[PBS Poll-435]

76. My reputation? Right...

By your logic...

Why did Chairman Dodd break "the pledge" by staying on the ballot?

Obama needs to take him to task NOW!

Why did Representative Kucinich break "the pledge" by staying on the ballot?

Obama needs to take him to task NOW!



Or maybe..."the pledge" isn't what you claim it is...

[NJmaverick]

78. Sorry, it's check and mate. You can't spin your way out of this one

there is no way on earth, you can claim having your name on the ballot is not participating in an election, you pledged not to.

[PBS Poll-435]

81. When will Obama Repudiate Chairman Dodd & Representative Kucinich?

They were very bad! (according to you)

[NJmaverick]

83. LOL! Kucinich tried to withdraw but screwed up the paper work

As for Dodd, he long ago withdrew so what's the point. Can't even get this pathetic spin right.

[PBS Poll-435]

85. Dodd needs to be punished. He didn't comply with "the pledge."

And Kucinich?

Can anyone really prove that he attempted to remove his name. Or are we taking is word for it.


:rofl:

[NJmaverick]

63. If you want a blog that characterized what happened

you just have to go here:

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/03/03/7428/

“You know,” Senator Clinton remarked, “it’s clear the election they’re having isn’t going to count for anything. Obama’s name did not even appear on the ballot in Michigan.”

[NJmaverick]

64. How about the pledge they all signed?????

Pretty sure being on the ballot is considered as "participating"

THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by the rules and regulations of the DNC. It does not include activities specifically related to raising campaign resources such as fundraising events or the hiring of fundraising staff.


http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/09/can-clinton-still-get-edge-out-of.html

[book_worm]

4. whatever the reason she is on record as saying MI doesn't count, until she needed it to count

the story of the Hillary campaign. Changing it's goalposts and wanting to break the rules when it suits her. It's the story of a failed campaign. Don't worry Michigan and Florida will be seated. My guess is that a split in Michigan between Hill and Obama and in Florida they may give her 10-15 more delegates than Obama. It won't change a thing though.

[NJmaverick]

8. what was the reason for her refusing the party's request?

[ShortnFiery]

5. The DNC encouraged all candidates to withdraw their name in FL and MI ... where the could.

There was no mechanism to pull your name off of the FL ballot.

Again, the democratic state leaders of both FL and MI SCREWED their own people and the popular vote will NOT count toward the total. No, no matter how many lies and bad behaviors from HRC and her supporters, the best they can hope for is seating of the delegates 50:50.

HRC has shown what a TRUE HYPOCRITE she is by changing her position: She was caught on audio stating "MI votes won't count for anything."

But NOW, those delegates and votes are *every DAMN thing* to HRC.

Only The Clintons can lie with such ease and change their positions on a dime ... and seemingly "get away with it." I hope they continue to LOSE dirty and trash their legacy. Enough! :puke:

[NJmaverick]

7. My question still is unanswered Obama, Edwards, Richardson and Biden all complied with the DNC's

request. Why did Hillary refuse??????

[dkf]

14. Because she is a cheater.

[MonkeyFunk]

16. When did the DNC do that?

Where did the DNC say it was expected they'd remove their names?

[crankychatter]

18. They should ask her this question over and over every time she takes the mic

non-stop.

"You said they wouldn't count but now you say they should. How do you justify that? Isn't your word WORTH anything? How do you explain this? Nobody campaigned there. Obama's name wasn't on the ballot in Michigan. You said "everybody knows they won't count." Now you say they MUST count. Is this because you're LOSING?"

They should grill her ass like an ABC debate five times a day, until she comes clean.

[Maddy McCall]

11. Why did Obama pull his? Because he was polling under 15%?

[Barack_America]

15. Because his party asked him to. n/t

[Maddy McCall]

19. That's a lie.

Show me where the party instructed candidates to take their names off the ballot.

[MonkeyFunk]

21. They didn't

of course. It seems to be the new Obama fan lie of the day.

[Maddy McCall]

24. Oh, is this today's lie?

Figures.

[DS1]

31. Just for you

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5826909

[MonkeyFunk]

35. That's just a blog entry that characterizes it that way

surely if they were asked to remove their names, there'd be a little more evidence than that.

[NJmaverick]

47. You have proof, and you are still clinging to the lies

This was behind the scenes actions. Punishment is not the stuff the DNC wants on the front page of the paper.


Here is proof

http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/05/dnc_rules_commi.html

So said Garry Shay (Super Delegate, Clinton Endorser, and member of the Rules and Bylaws Committee) just yesterday:


Well, there are a lot of things that happened with Michigan. First of all, the primary law was challenged as to its constitutionality and it was thrown out. So, there’s no law supporting the Michigan primary.

There’s the fact that Hillary Clinton’s name and the uncommitted slate was the only thing that was on the ballot in Michigan because the Democratic National Committee asked the other candidates to withdraw their names from the ballot. So, here you have the institution itself asking people to pull their names off the ballot.

[NJmaverick]

66. How about the pledge they all signed?????

Pretty sure being on the ballot is considered as "participating"

THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by the rules and regulations of the DNC. It does not include activities specifically related to raising campaign resources such as fundraising events or the hiring of fundraising staff.


http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/09/can-clinton-still-get-edge-out-of.html

[NJmaverick]

67. Why is it that someone that is challenged by honesty, is calling everything a lie?

Pretty sure being on the ballot is considered as "participating"

THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by the rules and regulations of the DNC. It does not include activities specifically related to raising campaign resources such as fundraising events or the hiring of fundraising staff.


http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/09/can-clinton-still-get-edge-out-of.html

[mcctatas]

86. It's not a lie if it supports Hillary silly....

[DS1]

29. Here you go

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5826909

[NJmaverick]

41. Ahh the TRUTH is they did, you Hillary people are about as honest as she is

Here is proof

http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/05/dnc_rules_commi.html

So said Garry Shay (Super Delegate, Clinton Endorser, and member of the Rules and Bylaws Committee) just yesterday:


Well, there are a lot of things that happened with Michigan. First of all, the primary law was challenged as to its constitutionality and it was thrown out. So, there’s no law supporting the Michigan primary.

There’s the fact that Hillary Clinton’s name and the uncommitted slate was the only thing that was on the ballot in Michigan because the Democratic National Committee asked the other candidates to withdraw their names from the ballot. So, here you have the institution itself asking people to pull their names off the ballot.

[DS1]

27. Here you go

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5826909

[Maddy McCall]

32. Same blog linked above.

Hardly stone-cold truth.

[DS1]

37. there's another one

but after this I'm out, because you and funk are purposely being stoneheaded about this

[Maddy McCall]

48. LOL. Nope. You don't have any evidence reported by a news agency.

And that's why you're out.

Bye.

[NJmaverick]

49. It was the sniper's fault don't you know

[Barack_America]

50. Lol. And certainly you've NEVER posted anything by Taylor Marsh on this board.

:rofl:

[NJmaverick]

68. Well we could also look at the FACTS

Pretty sure being on the ballot is considered as "participating"

THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by the rules and regulations of the DNC. It does not include activities specifically related to raising campaign resources such as fundraising events or the hiring of fundraising staff.


http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/09/can-clinton-still-get-edge-out-of.html

[Maddy McCall]

87. By whom?

I don't even know who "Taylor Marsh" is.

I've certainly never posted anything by him/her.

[NJmaverick]

71. Here are the FACTS, something I know you hate

Pretty sure being on the ballot is considered as "participating"

THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by the rules and regulations of the DNC. It does not include activities specifically related to raising campaign resources such as fundraising events or the hiring of fundraising staff.


http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/09/can-clinton-still-get-edge-out-of.html

[Maddy McCall]

90. Cool. Now show me where it says they must remove their names from the ballot.

[NJmaverick]

38. Ironic that you are lying, in your claims as to what is a lie

Here is proof

http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/05/dnc_rules_commi.html

So said Garry Shay (Super Delegate, Clinton Endorser, and member of the Rules and Bylaws Committee) just yesterday:


Well, there are a lot of things that happened with Michigan. First of all, the primary law was challenged as to its constitutionality and it was thrown out. So, there’s no law supporting the Michigan primary.

There’s the fact that Hillary Clinton’s name and the uncommitted slate was the only thing that was on the ballot in Michigan because the Democratic National Committee asked the other candidates to withdraw their names from the ballot. So, here you have the institution itself asking people to pull their names off the ballot.

[NJmaverick]

26. He pulled it because the DNC asked all the candidates to pull them

5 candidates did, Hillary (ever the sneaky cheater) decided to hedge her bets.

[Occam Bandage]

39. He was 20 points back. Just like he was in most Super Tuesday states. You'll recall

that in the early stages of campaigning, Obama made up twenty points just by showing up.

[NJmaverick]

69. What he did was honor his pledge

Pretty sure being on the ballot is considered as "participating"

THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by the rules and regulations of the DNC. It does not include activities specifically related to raising campaign resources such as fundraising events or the hiring of fundraising staff.


http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/09/can-clinton-still-get-edge-out-of.html

[Barack_America]

12. In order to say "nyah nyah" to the DNC?

A little bit of "you're not the boss of me" to Howard Dean?

The Clintons and DLC are dead-set on destroying Dean and saw a chance to cause trouble. That's probably the truth behind this.

[Maddy McCall]

22. Spoken like a true Deaniac.

[Occam Bandage]

43. Well, things did get an awful lot better for this party once Dean took the reigns from

the Clinton squad. I'm surprised there are Dems who *aren't* Deaniacs at the moment.

[Bucky]

17. My theory: she lost the paperwork. She coulda sworn in was in one of those boxes.

I keed, I keed!

[MonkeyFunk]

23. No, that was Kucinich

He flubbed the paperwork when he tried to remove his name.

[Teaser]

30. lulz

.

[Iceburg]

40. Why did the Obama campaign send out flyers in MI encouraging an "uncommitted" vote?

[Yotun]

46. The lack of logic in including Michigan and Florida

Hillary included her name for obvious political reasons- she knew that they wouldn't count. If she lost, it would hardly matter- they didn't count and she didn't campaign there. If she won though, which at that point they thought more likely since she was leading in all polls, then they'd be two more states in the 'States I won' list, and two more states when she names her victories in her speeches (which is true, because she does it now). Sure they mean nothing, and she knew it, but its merely a rhetorical and political device that enhances the 'inevitability' argument , which was her strategy and what she was going with at that point in the campaign. Its exactly this kind of politics that disgust me. That she just puts in Michingan and Florida in there as states I won, merely for political purposes, when any logical, unbiased individual knows they meant nothing, while she acts as if the votes are legitimate.

Hillary now wants to include those votes in her popular vote count- But there is no logic at all in doing so!!! Don't argue with Clinton supporters about rules- the answer to their argument is simple. The popular vote metric is the popular vote for the contest of the election of the Democratic party presidential nominee! Florida and Michigan voters knew their votes would not count, so they were voting for what they considered to be a completely different purpose, and NOT for the contest of the Democratic party nominee. You cannot count votes in which the voters voted for A, in an election where voters vote for B. Its like saying that since the majority of the people do not like Bush, Bush wins the popular vote in the 'Who do you want to be the next president' election.

The facts are clear. Michingan and Florida voters knew that their elections would not count for the primary. Under those circumstances and presumptions, a certain result was arrived. That result is in no way representive of the result that would have arrived in an election under different presumptions and circumstances- namely, that the elections would count (a scenario in which we would most certainly see a much greater turnout for senator Obama in the Michigan primary for example).

[Romulox]

53. Edwards and Obama took their names off the MI ballot as a pander to Ia, NH.

Simple as that.

[NJmaverick]

65. Wrong! Unlike Hillary they HONORED their pledge

Pretty sure being on the ballot is considered as "participating"

THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by the rules and regulations of the DNC. It does not include activities specifically related to raising campaign resources such as fundraising events or the hiring of fundraising staff.


http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2007/09/can-clinton-still-get-edge-out-of.html

[Romulox]

80. Contract drafting 101: Say what you mean.

"Participate" is ambiguous, and leaves reasonable observers to differ in its meaning.

If the pledge was meant to require the pledgees to remove their names from the Mi/Fla ballots, the drafters knew how to say so, in clear, unambiguous language. They chose not to. Which tends to negative the inference that this removal was central in the minds of the drafters of the pledge or the candidates who signed it.

PS: This "pledge" wasn't issued by the DNC, which makes a bit of a jumble of the argument that the DNC required Obama and Edwards to remove their names.

[PBS Poll-435]

56. I don't see how ANY of this is helping Michelle's children.

:eyes:

[Romulox]

61. *snort*

:spray:

[Mass]

75. Because rules are not for her. Which also explains why she is changing the way to calculate

the popular vote with each primary, so that she can find a new formula to win it. The latest one is nice: include MI, but forget other states.

[NJmaverick]

93. That seems to be a Clinton family trait

[kentuck]

77. Because the Party establishment had already set up the election...

in her favor. Why should she have dropped out?