Without any convention drama, very little/any M$M coverage, let Hillary delegates have their moment.

[CK_John]

Or is Obama losing too many superdelates to chance a roll call vote?

[liberalmuse]

1. I agree, after having been convinced by some kind people here at DU.

I'd advise against anyone watching the MSM coverage of the convention, however.

[NYC_SKP]

2. Did I miss something? Is Obama losing superdelegates.

I've only been gone three days, please enlighten me by providing some context to the assertion re superdelegate loss.

Many thanks.

[book_worm]

4. No, he hasn't.

[CK_John]

10. That was a question, just what to know what Obama is afraid of. n/t

[book_worm]

11. Where has he said he's afraid?

I don't think he has said anything on this subject. It's some of his supporters here on DU who have. So you are mixing up supporters with the candidate in kind of a snide way.

[book_worm]

3. Nope, Obama hasn't lost any super delegates or any delegates whatsoever

he may have even gained some. But I agree let the Hillary supporters have a roll call. It didn't hurt when other primary losers were also nominated at conventions and gave their delegates a chance to cheer one last time for their original choice.

[Whisp]

6. I have not problem with the roll call, except for the fact

that I do not, repeat, do not trust the Clintons.

[MonkeyFunk]

16. You honestly fear

some attempt to steal the nomination at the convention under the guise of a pro-forma roll call?

Now THAT'S some good Clinton-hatin'! Paranoid, insane... perfect!

[anonymous171]

5. One thing I do not miss about Hillary is her and her supporters' drama.

[Beacool]

20. Better than the boring election we are having so far.

:boring:

[Lisa0825]

7. If there were not still a faction that still vocally want to undermine Obama

this would not be an issue. But there is, and if we "let Hillary have her moment," I have little doubt it will end up being much more than just that. We don't need more division.

[snowbear]

8. Losing Superdelegates? Are you CRAZY???????

Or did you just post that to rile people up?

Wow. This one I'll bet hits the litterbox.. dumpster.. shredder... whatever they call it.

[book_worm]

9. I believe the OP meant that little tidbit as somewhat of a swipe.

[NYC_SKP]

13. Yeah, huh....

As my students used to say, with a certain inflection imparting sympathy and agreement following someone's statement.

Like, "that was mean." "Yeah, huh..."

**************************************************

Losing superdelegates is the hope and dream of posters in other places, like the infamous Alegre and others.

Obama isn't losing superdelegates, he was gaining them looooonnnng before he absolutely needed them to cinch.

The truth is that, except for DLC's and non-elected superdelegates, Obama was favored pretty early on. demconwatch has all the records.

I was always impressed by the fact that his peers, Senators, favored him for a long time over the other Senator that lost, and that they also had to work with.

I think that is very telling.

Hi Larissa! :hi:

[TexasObserver]

12. He's the nominee. He runs the party. It's his decision.

Her job is to fall into line, give him unequivocal support, and whip her stragglers and renegades into line. If she wants to have a political future of any kind, that is.

None of this is new. It's just new to those who think everything should change because Hillary is the losing candidate.

[CK_John]

14. He is not the nominee until confirmed by the convention. n/t

[TexasObserver]

17. Maybe in your world, but we're talking about the REAL world

We're not talking about HillyLand.

The race is over. She lost. She can't even pull the delegates she had before the primaries concluded. It's over. Accept it. Stop undermining our party and our candidate.

[CK_John]

18. Like Obama said, you enjoy being igorant. n/t

[TexasObserver]

24. hahaha! No, he didn't say that. He wasn't talking about me, but about the GOP.

You think Obama was talking about HIS SUPPORTERS if you think that.

Why don't you take a break and come back after the election or after you can post without making personal attacks on those who support our nominee? Or didn't you read Skinner's comments about leaving the primary behind?

[CK_John]

25. This is about the convention the primaries are over. n/t

[TexasObserver]

26. Yes, and those who can count know Obama won

It's become apparent that the last remaining holdouts in the renege PUMAs simply never learned to do grade school math.

[TexasObserver]

31. "igorant"!!! hahahaha

For future reference, if you want to accuse someone of being ignorant, it's wise to know how to spell it. While misspellings are part of posting, such errors in those accusing others of being "igorant" indicate that maybe you should not be casting such aspersions at others, eh?

[Beacool]

21. No it isn't . The roll call is not his decision.

It is Hillary's right to have one if she so chooses.

[MonkeyFunk]

28. He runs the party?

No he doesn't.

Did John Kerry ever run the party? No.

Get him elected, he'll have a lot of say.

[MonkeyFunk]

15. There's no risk in letting the traditions play out

in fact, there's much to gain.

[Beacool]

22. Yeah, like votes in November. n/t

[MonkeyFunk]

23. and money

right now, any money I have to spare for politics will go to defeat the anti-gay marriage amendment here in CA.

But if Clinton were the VP choice, I'd throw some that way. That's nothing against Obama - I just put my money where I feel most passionate. Team Obama here on DU has made it clear that they don't need me, so let them send money. They have my vote, and that's it.

[Beacool]

27. I hear you!!!

:D

[Egnever]

32. You should be sending your money to clinton

She still needs it or did you throw her under the buss already?

[GoesTo11]

33. How about if we give Hillary a gold star?

Then everyone can feel good.

If Obama wants her as VP, then that would be fine. But the point of all this isn't to make Hillary feel good. It's not about making Obama feel good either. Or about making Obama supporters or Clinton supporters feel good about themselves. It's to win the election and save our country.

[question everything]

19. With candidates of both party pretty much secure

one has to wonder why even bother with conventions that are going to cost a fortune.

Yes, we want to be united, we don't want a brokered convention (why not?) but if so, why bother? We are glad that we got many young people interested in the process. But the convention is going to be one long yawn.

And coming after the Olympics - I think that most would have had plenty of sitting in front of the TV watching events.

[quakerboy]

29. I think this is a distraction

My concern is not of the loss of the vote. HRC is not our enemy. Anyway, no one in their right mind would try to change it, at this point. It would turn a win into a certain GE loss, and with it the loss of any future in the party.

My concern is what the M$M will do with a vote. Is there anyone here who doubts their intent in the coverage this year? A vote, particularly if it is anything like close (you know, the way the polls merely "lean" Obama in Mass with RCP average +14 for Obama and the same in Wisconsin at +10.7 Obama) is more fodder for the "democrats are divided" line. Why do we need that?

[Franc_Lee]

30. I agree, let them have their moment, this too shall pass...

[quaker bill]

34. Drama is futile

Hillary and her delegates will get their stage managed moment, as well they should, protocol demands such. It will be early in the convention, then the focus will shift to Barack Obama.

The drama of a nomination in contest is exactly what you do not want. The drama of an acceptance speech in front of 75,000 people is the drama desired. Unity of purpose and strength of conviction is what the party needs to display. Get ready because this is the script.

[lojasmo]

35. They can have their moment...

Voting for the presumptive democratic nominee.