Thou Shalt Not Steal (Updated)

Well as you might have guessed, I was at the protest in DC today as the DNC's Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC) met to decide what to do with the votes my family and some 600,000 others cast in Michigan, and those 1.7 million cast in Florida.

We turned up to make our voices heard in the hopes that the RBC would do the right thing and NOT punish the people for what their state party leaders - and those of the respective state republican party leaders did in moving up their primary dates.  It's always been my view that they were talking about punishing the wrong people but that doesn't count for much as I'm not one of the 30 people on the RBC.

I didn't even make it inside the meeting but others were there.  Some were chanting when it was clear what was the RBC was doing with the delegates from Michigan, and Jane Hamsher at FireDogLake posted the following video of one of the women who were forcibly ejected from the meeting...

They manhandled and bruised a teacher and a Democrat of over 40 years for feck sake..

Harold Ickes - who serves on the RBC and is widely recognized as an expert on the DNC rules and their history - talked about Michigan's delegates during yesterday's press conference call when an AP reporter asked him if it'd be acceptable to Hillary's campaign if BO got any delegates from Michigan's primary.  Here's what he had to say...

AP - is it acceptable to you if BO gets any pledged delegates from MI?

Harold - Uncommitted status is considered as a presidential candidate. Closed in and given the same rights and protections as a named presidential candidate. There were 4 candidates who VOLUNTARILY took their names off the ballot. She [Hillary] didn't - there was no requirement that she do so. Some 238,000 people voted for uncommitted - no way to discern the wishes of those voters. Our view is that while delegates who fill out those 55 slots have the absolute right to go and support whomever they want. They must be certified to the convention as uncommitted delegates. The RBC has no right to award those delegates to another candidate any more than they'd have the right to award any of her 73 delegates and give them to another candidate. Short answer - NO.

Giving away some of her delegates.  How prophetic that one turned out to be.

I'm too pissed and disgusted to really go into all the ways in which the RBC screwed over 2.35 million people today.  I'll just let Harold Ickes sum up what I'm thinking right now.  What follows are my notes, taken as he spoke prior to a vote on the motion to seat all 55 uncommitted delegates as Obama's delegates (which is illegal according to the DNC's rules that folks have been blathering on about for the past few months).  On top of that injustice, the motion involved stealing 4 of Hillary's delegates and giving them to Obama.

He spoke of the audacity (my word not his) of the RBC in thinking that the judgment of 30 people should take the place of the 600,000 voters in MI...

Was the process flawed?
You bet your ass it was flawed.

I'm stunned that we have the gall and the chutzpah to substitute our judgment for that of 600,000 voters.

...

You can not take delegates from one candidate and give them to another.

Not only will this motion hijack 4 delegates from Mrs. Clinton, it will take 55 uncommitted delegates and give them to Obama.

I submit that hijacking 4 delegates... is not the way to start down path to party unity.

Finally - one final word - we are ... Mrs. Clinton has instructed me to reserve her rights to take this to the Credentials Committee.

- Cheers -

Here's what Hillary's campaign manager - Maggie Williams - had to say a little while ago...

Decision on Florida and Michigan

Hillary has consistently stood up for the voters of Michigan and Florida.  She, like you, has insisted that the voice of all Americans be heard.  Today, the DNC's Rules and Bylaws Committee announced their decision on seating Florida and Michigan's delegations. In recent days, almost 350,000 of Hillary's supporters wrote in to the committee to make clear what an important principle it is for our party to count every vote.

Our campaign has released an official statement about the results of the Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting and I'd like to share it with blogHillary readers. I know how passionate Hillary's supporters are about the importance of counting every vote cast in Florida and Michigan and I hope that they continue to express their feelings with the respect and thoughtfulness they've shown during the course of this campaign.

Harold Ickes and Tina Flournoy made the following statement:

Today's results are a victory for the people of Florida who will have a voice in selecting our Party's nominee and will see its delegates seated at our party's convention.  The decision by the Rules and Bylaws Committee honors the votes that were cast by the people of Florida and allocates the delegates accordingly.

We strongly object to the Committee's decision to undercut its own rules in seating Michigan's delegates without reflecting the votes of the people of Michigan.

The Committee awarded to Senator Obama not only the delegates won by Uncommitted, but four of the delegates won by Senator Clinton. This decision violates the bedrock principles of our democracy and our Party.

We reserve the right to challenge this decision before the Credentials Committee and appeal for a fair allocation of Michigan's delegates that actually reflect the votes as they were cast.

The RBC, in their infinite ignorance, stole delegates from Hillary and gave them to her opponent - a guy who saw the polls in the lead-up to the MI primaries, knew he was going to get his ass handed to him, and took his name off the ballot in order to kiss up to the voters in IA.  

And his little stunt worked.

IN other words - he told the voters of MI that their votes didn't count and used his gigantic FU to them to win votes in another state.

And it worked.

Adding insult to injury... when the folks in Michigan tried to cure the problem (as seen by the DNC) by holding a new election - a plan that was signed off on by the DNC, the state leaders AND Hillary - BO told the voters in MI to eff off again by refusing to face the voters in that new primary.

There was even a plan in place to PAY for this new election AND - if memory serves - polls at the time were showing a much closer race in MI then than back in January.  He stood a chance of it being a wash so what was he afraid of?

BO couldn't be bothered to face the voters of Michigan not once - BUT TWICE!

And now he's rewarded for his refusal to face those voters with FIFTY-NINE DELEGATES?

This makes absolutely no sense.  None whatsoever.

BO and his supporters on the RBC might be celebrating folks - but they've just handed Hillary a damn fine reason to keep fighting at least through to the meeting of the Credentials Committee.

If they're so convinced that BO has this locked up - that there are scads of super delegates waiting in the wings to help him claim "victory" in a day or three then why couldn't they have just followed their own rules and left Hillary's delegates alone and sent those 55 delegates to the convention as uncommitted delegates?

The RBC has just violated their own rules here by stealing 4 delegates from Hillary and giving them to a guy who couldn't be bothered to put his name on the ballot so please spare us any more talk about your precious rulz .  

They've completely ignored their rules in giving BO any delegates from MI.

They've completely ignored the fact that people - in good faith tried to cure the situation by holding new primaries and that it was BO who stood in the way of that cure.

I'm beyond disgusted by this whole fiasco and I lay a lot of the blame at Dean's feet for his complete and utter failure to lead us through this mess that he and Obama have created.  The only people who are paying for their failure are my family back home, and the 600,000 voters of Michigan.

Florida voters didn't fare so well either.  Half a vote.  Is that all Florida is worth to us in the general election?  

Well I've got news for you guys - if the votes of my family are only worth half a vote, don't be surprised if our party loses a lot of support over this come November.  I'm already hearing a lot of Democrats talking about leaving our party over this shite.  

This is NOT the way to bring a fractured party back together guys.

Not even close.

If you're as pissed as I am over the way they're railroading our party toward defeat in November, you know what to do dammit...

       
 

U P D A T E

Wow - I went poking around Jane Hamshire's site a little more and found this other video she grabbed and posted of another women who'd been ejected from that RBC meeting. And boy is she PISSED

Seriously - the Credentials Committee had better find a way to clean up the mess the RBC made today. Donna Brazile and crew didn't fix the problem - they threw gas on the flames.

UPDATE 2

Ok I think we've hit a new low around here folks. I've just been called a troll for taking part in a protest in our nation's capitol. For exercising my First Amendment rights in a peaceful and respectful manner.

Something I've done in response to our government's war in Vietnam.

Something I've done in support for the United Farmworkers

Something I've done in support of the Equal Right's Amendment

Something I've done in protest of our government's murder and destruction in Central America

Something I've done in support of our right to choose!

Something I've done in protest against our government's war in Irap

Something I've done in protest against the genocide taking place in Darfur

I've been at this for over 35 years dammit - would you call me a troll for taking part in all of those protests too?

HELP HILLARY FIGHT ON - CONTRIBUTENOW!



Display:


Re: Thou Shalt Not Steal (2.00 / 17)

The DNC really stepped in it today.  


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:31:23 PM EST

Re: Thou Shalt Not Steal (2.00 / 13)

No. MI & FL stepped in it when they didn't listen to the DNC.


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:32:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Quoth Hillary: (2.00 / 11)

"This is a race to 2025 delegates."

"This contest they're having [in Michigan] isn't going to count for anything."


John McCain: He flunked ECON 101.
by Shem on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:32:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary's unethical opportunistic attempt (2.00 / 4)

to take advantage of a unfair election in Michigan should be by itself enough to disqualify her from occupying the oval office.


It's time to restore balance and fairness to our economy,... It's time to stop giving tax cuts to corporations that ship jobs overseas... - Barack Obama
by Lefty Coaster on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:35:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

C O L !!!! (1.83 / 6)

Oh wait a sec... you're serious?

Ok never mind.


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:12:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Michigan shows Hillary's underhanded tactics (none / 0)

Yes I am entirely serious. Hillary's demand that Obama be given no delegates in Michigan illustrates perfectly how Hillary is ready to dispense with ethics, honesty, and fairness in order to gain a small electoral advantage for herself.

I'm fed up with having a resident of our White House who thinks following the rules and telling the truth is for other people, not for them. Hillary's lack of honesty is consistently identified in polling as one of Hillary's biggest weaknesses as a candidate. I am not ready to see another president who won't tell us the truth.


It's time to restore balance and fairness to our economy,... It's time to stop giving tax cuts to corporations that ship jobs overseas... - Barack Obama
by Lefty Coaster on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 11:27:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Michigan shows Hillary's underhanded tactics (2.00 / 1)

Excuse me, but Hillary is fighting to have all the votes counted as they were cast.

Obama is the one who has switched his position. He originally said that MI and FL should not count, period. But once he pulled far enough in the delegate count that it would not likely destroy his chances at the nomination, his position shifted. That is ethical inconsistency to me.

He has agreed to take 55 delegates from a state where he removed his own name from the ballot. Tell me an election outside Zimbabwe or Saddam Hussein's Iraq that runs like that.


by Beet on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:09:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Michigan shows Hillary's underhanded tactics (none / 0)

You forget that the Clinton Supporters on the SNC voted 100% to strip Michigan and Florida of all their delegates last August when their candidate had a double digit lead in all the polls.


It's time to restore balance and fairness to our economy,... It's time to stop giving tax cuts to corporations that ship jobs overseas... - Barack Obama
by Lefty Coaster on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 03:31:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: C O L !!!! (none / 0)


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 01:10:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Stop That (2.00 / 1)

YOu are saying that Hillary said those things.

That's sexist.


by HillsMyGirl on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:16:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thou Shalt Not Steal (2.00 / 6)

Obviously your revisionist history and completely illogical arguments are pretty transparent at this point, but I have to say that after watching the actions of Hillary supporters today at the meetings, I feel ashamed to be a Democrat.  I sincerely hope you are not proud of the behavior of many Clinton supporters before, during, and after the meetings.


by KevinT on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:38:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thou Shalt Not Steal (1.75 / 8)

Hold on here... you have no problem at all with the way the RBC stole delegates from Hillary, but are ashamed of the way people exercised their first amendment rights to be heard in this debate?

You're not the least bit outraged at what the RBC did in that room today?

You're not the only one who's ashamed to be a Democrat today.


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:00:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thou Shalt Not Steal (2.00 / 8)

So you're proud of being a part of a scene "in which Larry Sinclair, the Minnesota man who took to YouTube to allege that Barack Obama had oral sex with him in the back of a limousine in 1999, is one of the belles of the ball."

The RBC didn't steal any delegates from Hillary.  She was awarded no delegates from both Michigan and Florida, so they were never her delegates in the first place.  You can argue all you want about whether it was technically allowed under DNC rules, but the fact is, the DNC is not a democratic government, its not unconstitutional or illegal.  Feel free to protest at the convention as well, after today Hillary supporters can't look much worse. . .


by KevinT on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:11:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thou Shalt Not Steal (2.00 / 1)

Oh give me a break.  He was one guy for feck sake.  So now I'm supposed to denounce an event where loads of people exercised our first amendment rights because ONE GUY was there?

Tell ya what - even though I'm not running for president, I'll denounce the event when BO denounces (not just leaves but denounces) his church.

Not only that - but denounces those assholes who were sitting in the pews while Pfleger was ranting and raving about Hillary.

Until that happens... wel you can probably figure out what I'm thinkin' here.


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:11:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thou Shalt Not Steal (none / 0)

Don't denounce the event. It's your right to protest.

Can you denounce those people that promote the Sinclair fairy tale?

Well?

Yes, I'm listening.

What?

Oh, no reply. I guess that's better. Sigh


McCainuire, The Wrath Of Not Enough Naps.
by catilinus on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:36:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thou Shalt Not Steal (1.66 / 3)

Classy as ever Alegre - video of someone ranting about an inadequate black male - and you include this to help your cause?  You are beyond redemption - that was contemptible.


by interestedbystander on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:45:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thou Shalt Not Steal (1.85 / 7)

Alegre, that was some truly sad displays of so-called "adults" outside and inside that building today, and if you had the sense god gave you, you'd snap out of your self-induced frenzy of victimization and take a hard look at it.

Who is going to take anyone seriously that parades around in clown shoes like that? Those supporters/protesters treated it like a circus. Ill-behaved, loud, disrespectful, childish behavior - out of grown women! The ones their daughters are supposed to respect, acting like children themselves. The Larry Sinclair nonsense, that horrid  tin-eared racial ignorance, on top of it - absolutely the last kind of behavior I want representing me, my party, my gender, or my government.

Its their first amendment rights and they can use them any way they see fit. But using a noble right to make a jackass out of yourself doesn't do your cause any favors. Grow up.


by upstate girl on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:07:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

It is impossible for me to steal from you... (2.00 / 4)

... that which does not belong to you.

The Michigan and Florida beauty-contest straw polls were not Democratic Party-sanctioned primaries, therefore no delegates can justly be awarded solely on the results of those straw polls, especially since one of the remaining two candidates for the nomination was not even on the Michigan ballot, and the other had failed to keep her signed, written promise not to participate in that vote.

The Rules committee took those straw polls into account, along with other factors, in their deliberations about how best to form delegations for the Michigan and Florida primaries, and produced a just allocation of delegates, based on what is known about public opinion in those states toward the two remaining candidates, while retaining the rules-required 50% reduction in the votes those delegations can cast.

No amount of over-the-top rhetoric from you and your dead-ender crew can change this plain fact.


Ignorance is weakness. Get strong.
by tbetz on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:53:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

DON'T FEED THE TROLL (1.75 / 16)

C'mon, guys, she even said she was one of the protesters outside- one of the ones hanging out with Larry Sinclair. She's not worth our time.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:40:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You're right. She outed herself. (2.00 / 5)

And with that pathetic showing of numbers today it's clear they're loudmouths with no real support.


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:46:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Come on (2.00 / 3)

it does no good to insult and mock.  It is time to move onto bashing John McCain.


Student Guy=JoeMentum. No really Student Guy=JoeMentum, after all JoeMentum was an embarrassment so is Student Guy. This sig is FAIL!!
by Student Guy on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:49:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Come on (2.00 / 4)

Fair enough. I was just waiting for you to come and get me:)

Did you know that John McCain voted to filibuster the minimum wage hike?


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:57:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Excuse Me? (1.71 / 7)

So now I'm a troll for exercising my first amendment rights?

Listen punk - I've been protesting since you were in short pants so don't you DARE call me a troll because I want to see my family's votes counted.

How dare you?!

I don't know who you think you are but we're here so get used to it.

And WTF is larry sinclair?

I was outside with some of the ladies from our local campaign in MD.  And none of them are named larry.


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:10:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Excuse Me? (2.00 / 8)

You would have more credibility if you cared at all about the 30,000 write in votes:

Jerome Armstrong (from earlier today):
"That MI didn't have a write-in process disqualified 30,000 votes"

or the 2 million who didn't vote because they were told it wouldn't count or their candidate wasn't on the ballot:

http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/ 03/who_didnt_vote_in_the_florida.html : "Based on a statistical comparison with turnout in other states' primaries, it appears that roughly two million more people would have voted in Florida and Michigan had they expected their delegates to be seated.
Although the Democratic turnout rate was impressive in Florida and Michigan, it was not nearly as high as it has been in other primaries so far. Of the first 37 states that have held either a primary or caucus for both Republicans and Democrats, only six states have had a larger turnout for Republicans than for Democrats: Florida and Michigan, plus heavily Republican Alaska, Alabama, and Utah, as well as Arizona"


by Brannon on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:18:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

impressive turnout in MI??? (2.00 / 2)

It was, what, around 600,000?

On February 19, in a primary that:

  • everyone in the state knew to be meaningless
  • that had no other issues on the ballot
  • that did have a competitive Republican primary from which delegates were allocated (without party registration, all voters had free choice between the party ballots)
  • that had only about 62% as large a voting-eligible population as Michigan

nearly 700,000 Washingtonians voted in the Democratic primary.

Michigan's Democratic turnout was impressive ... impressively weak.


by N in Seattle on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 04:27:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Excuse Me? (1.86 / 15)

So now I'm a troll

Oh, I thought you were always a troll. A concern troll that is. Have you ever noticed, Alegre, that everything - and I mean everything - is an outrage with you? Assuming of course it relates to Hillary Clinton. Every little slight against Clinton, no matter how minor or insignificant, results in your posting of a long-winded diary about how everything is stacked against her and her campaign.

You don't care that Clinton herself said the contests in MI and FL don't count, because now you want them to count because it benefits your candidate. More importantly, are you aware that MI is a repeat offender? That MI frequently breaks the scheduling rules of the DNC, and that major candidates regularly remove their name from the ballot in protest? Clinton actually broke longstanding protocol when she refused to remove her name.

But you don't care because you're goal here is not to engage in informed and reasoned debate. Your goal is to troll for Clinton, as you have made abundantly clear over a long history of diary posting.


www.thingsyoungerthanmccain.com
by LandStander on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:21:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Excuse Me? (2.00 / 1)

Sorry - you lost me at "concern troll".

This is my party too.


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:25:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Excuse Me? (2.00 / 1)

And you seem hell bent on destroying it's chances in November.  You won't answer this, you are always too cowardly to answer questions in your diaries, but should you feel able to, please explain how Hillary would unite the party if she were to win a floor battle in Denver, and how she would win the GE without a good AA turnout?  Please, please explain this to me.


by interestedbystander on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 03:02:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Excuse Me? (none / 0)

Proving, sadly, that our tent is maybe a bit too big.  You're behavior has been nothing short of despicable.


by Savage on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:32:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Excuse Me? (2.00 / 1)

hey alegre..
pulling the protest shit?
lets exchange
this is me in 2006(I have 6 since 2003)
I opted for 10 days..fasted the whole time..
your last CD was when?
The jury will disregard the name in the picture
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_409955 7
"harlequin speech of suicide, demanding instantaneous lobotomy"
by nogo postal on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:46:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You don't deserve this treatment. (none / 0)

I respect and admire you, Alegre.  I appreciate all of your efforts for Hillary.

You are a fine Democrat and a fine American.


Linfar's co-blogger opposing John McCain
by psychodrew on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:05:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: DON'T FEED THE TROLL (1.50 / 2)

Stop it.

You know Alegre is representative of 98% of Hillary's voters.

stop being sexist.


by HillsMyGirl on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:17:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Heh, what happened to staying (2.00 / 1)

out of her diaries, rage? I'm just here for uprating duty.


Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:59:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I only came in to try to pull people out (2.00 / 1)

I enticed with links and did my best.  poor sricki having to go through all of this and uprate (I'll hit you up on my way out with some delicious mojo).


Student Guy=JoeMentum. No really Student Guy=JoeMentum, after all JoeMentum was an embarrassment so is Student Guy. This sig is FAIL!!
by Student Guy on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 03:28:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Not too much TR abuse so far tonight, (2.00 / 1)

except what's been heaped on ragekage, of course, so I only uprated a few comments. And now I think I'm going to bed early... I drank too much tonight. Damn Saturdays...


Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 03:33:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Let her rant. 4 more days left till it's over. (2.00 / 5)


by bobdoleisevil on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:45:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The funny part... (2.00 / 5)

The funny thing about all the conspiracy theories about Obama taking his name off the ballot because he knew he was going to lose is they ignore some major facts.

Mainly, the reality of proportional representation was well known to Obama.  It was a central part of his strategery to exploit it whenever possible to get the most possible delegates out of every state he could even if he didn't win the state.

In order to accept the proposed conspiracy theory about Obama (And the fellow conspiracy members like Bill Richardson and John Edwards) we have to pretend that we think Obama didn't know about proportional representation.  That theory is not supported by any evidence.

The opposing theory, that Obama left the ballot because it was widely reported it would not count because of a party ruling and because all candidates signed a pledge not to participate seems, despite the lack of sexy conspiracy goodness, to be more likely based on known facts.


by libertyleft on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:45:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The funny part... (2.00 / 4)

And that last bit is supported by the history of Gore and Bradley doing the same thing in 2000.


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:47:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

His polls as MI decision came - 22%, 19%,16% (none / 0)


by itsadryheat on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:10:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

At that same time... (2.00 / 2)

he was polling at 21% in Alabama (he won that state 56-42).  He was polling at 16% in Conn (he won that state 51-47).  Do you see where I'm going with this?  He definitely could have and according to the exit polls did close the distance among Michiganders.  It really does defy all logic to assume that he withdrew from the ballot out of a fear that he would not win a sizable portion of the Michigan electorate.  Detroit is in Michigan for fuck's sake.


John McCain wants you to be poor!
by nklein on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 03:04:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The funny part... (2.00 / 1)

Proportional representation only works if there are delegates.

40% of zero is still zero, so why fight for zero delegates?

It wasn't a primary. It was a beauty contest.

As for the compromise, the DNC actually did a decent job of making sure the voters were heard, since voters from Michigan and Florida will be about equal to voters in other states in terms of representation. The only people with a gripe should be those who were told their votes didn't matter, so they didn't vote (or voted in the Repub primary).


by TCQuad on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:04:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Of course (2.00 / 1)

But in the conspiracy theory Obama/Edwards/Richardson took off their name to avoid  the loss.  

In order to accept that, you can't also accept that they (the majority of candidates who are very well informed people) thought the vote would not count.

If there was any feeling among them that it would count, they would be on the ballot.  If they didn't think it would count, how can you possibly argue the voters thought it would count?

The entire facade of the Clinton argument is built on BS.

(not saying you say this stuff)


by libertyleft on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:16:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Of course (none / 0)

Hey if Obama was on the ballot with Edwards in Michigan, HIllary would have gotten 89 percent of the vote.

Stop your spin.


by HillsMyGirl on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:19:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Of course (none / 0)

Oh, that's OK. I do think Obama took his name off to avoid the loss.

No delegates there, so why concede a photo op and fund raising measure to your opponent when you can short circuit it? Pulling your name off also leads to a situation where any estimate of what you would have gotten can't be factually argued, so you can argue high and settle for generous compromises. It's quite clever.

To boost that, the forty percent undeclared really hurt Hillary in the race, since it combined the Obama/Edwards vote into one singular block and turned the race into "Hillary" versus "Not Hillary", which she only won by 15.

On the other hand, Hillary stayed on the ballot, since she was (A) the front runner, (B) not expecting a protracted battle, (C) figuring that a the loss of a few votes in Iowa would be off-set by seating the states later (which turned out to be partially true).

The two different approaches were dictated by their station in the race at the time. The underdog took the points where they mattered, the insider took the points they figured they could politic in later. Both sides played it correctly, but Obama's string of victories set the mantra of "the only way that he'd lose is if the supers and party insiders took it away from him". The pledged delegate lead reinforced that and everything else fell into place. Handing the race to Hillary would've simply established a media dialogue of "smoke filled room" vote stealing.


by TCQuad on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:35:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Of course (2.00 / 1)

Nice theory, but as I said above, it is simply not consistent with the proportional strategery Obama was using unless his decision was based on assuming the result would never count, not assuming he would lose. (Or assuming both, in which case it is still impossible to argue the primary was legit)
by libertyleft on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:52:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thou Shalt Not Steal (none / 0)

And did you catch the snark at the end:  "Mother gets a little exercise".  These media/blogger boys just love to disrespect women.  Especially older women.


by Tolstoy on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:55:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I can haz answers plz? (2.00 / 10)

As I have pointed out before, one Michigan voter's vote under the 50% ruling counts for 1/9361 of a delegate...whereas my vote in Wisconsin only counted for 1/15,044 of a delegate.

How is that unfair to your family in Michigan?  My state followed the rules, theirs didn't--and yet, their votes now count more than ours.  If anything, that's unfair to us Wisconsinites...when are you going to start fighting for us poor, disenfranchised Sconnies, alegre?

(Note to rage and SG: Yes, I know I should just ignore her.  But this gets my sig into a new thread, so I think it's worth it.  And we already know she won't answer me in any case, so it's not like I'm going to start a fight with this post.)


Wouldn't it be nice if there were no rhetorical questions?
by Elsinora on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:08:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I can haz answers plz? (none / 0)

I'm taking the night off, thanks...


Ceci n'est pas une <<snark>>
by ipsos on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:13:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

just got this pic message (1.25 / 4)

from the borg.

 title=

I guess she'll answer when she's done


by Is This Snark on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:29:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I can haz answers plz? (none / 0)

Your John McCain sig is worth a few troll posts here and there.

Also, you should take a look at the graph I made up. Michigan and Florida voters were represented appropriately, it was those who stayed home because they were told their votes wouldn't matter that were neglected.

Last plug: Republican nominee John McCain. (Not sure if googlebombing works anymore, but it's still fun).


by TCQuad on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:11:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Harriet Christian is a racist. (1.64 / 14)

"Inadequate Black Male?????"

That you post this video of this racist with approval in your tirade reveals your true character.

You are a racist, Alegre.  You deserve no less than utter condemnation.  As do all of Hillary's supporters at the meeting today who acted so disrespectfully and immorally.


by Delaware Dem on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:12:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Harriet Christian is a racist. (2.00 / 1)

So it's not enough that you insult Hillary and her supporters over at the rotten orange, you cross over to spread your hate.  You are disgusting and the last person who should be instructing anyone on morality.  


by Tolstoy on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:58:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Harriet Christian is a racist. (1.00 / 1)

you are so right

By calling Harriet Christian and anyone who backs Harriet Christian a racist, Delaware Dem has insulted every Clinton supporter in the country.

I am so insulted by him.  Thank you for standing up to him.  

Very sexist.


by HillsMyGirl on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:46:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Harriet Christian is a racist. (none / 0)

another irony's not dead moment. All the talk that Barack can't be judged by the racist company he keeps should let his supporters know they're admitting he has a problem. I'd say linking to a racist isn't nearly as close an association as Barack had to his pastor. Think guys, this isn't a line of argument you should bring up?  


Hillary - alternative energy
by anna shane on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 01:14:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

While Harriet Christian sounds pretty bigoted... (none / 0)

against Obama at least (I mean both he and Clinton beat four white males and one Hispanic male).  I don't think Alegre is a racist.  A loudmouth maybe, but I would not go so far as to call her a racist.


John McCain wants you to be poor!
by nklein on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 03:17:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thou Shalt Not Steal (1.66 / 3)

Hillary did not win any delegates in Michigan per the rules...and thus she was lucky to get anything better than a 64-64 split there.  Same with Florida.  It's sad that you are so blind to what were obviously not legitimate elections.


by gorebeatbush2 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:19:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You were here arguing... (2.00 / 6)

...just a few weeks ago that Clinton could "steal" Obama's pledge delegates.

You really have no place to lecture us on delegate theft.


by DawnG on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:23:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thou Shalt Not Steal (2.00 / 7)

Nobody stole anything. The compromise was straight from the Michigan Democratic Party.

Why is it that you're so upset that the MDP's re-vote plan didn't come to fruition, and yet now you could care less what the MDP wants?

The problem is that, as the committee acknowledged, the vote was flawed. There was no campaigning, and Obama took his name off of the ballot. The pledge stipulated that they neither campaign *nor participate*.

Given the flawed nature of the vote, the MDP did their best to determine what the will of the people truly was.

For example, did you know that exit polls showed that 18% of people who would have voted for Obama voted for Clinton because he wasn't on the ballot?

The simple fact is that this wasn't straightforward. You can yell about disenfranchisement all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that the vote was seriously flawed.
by randomscientist on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:32:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thou Shalt Not Steal (none / 0)

That comment got right to the heart of it.

Thanks for making it harder for people to oversimplify this situation.


McCain: because not everyone's ready to say goodbye to W yet!
by Matt Smith on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:17:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Another $100 for HRC (none / 0)

I wonder what Al Gore is telling them tonight.

I am glad you were there today representing millions of us who are distressed with this "deal" for Michigan.

Go HRC!  Go democracy!


by 4justice on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:36:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Another $100 for HRC (2.00 / 5)

My guess is that you'll be hearing from Gore fairly soon, but perhaps not in the exact way that your post suggests.


by Pat Flatley on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:40:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Probably (2.00 / 2)

Very similar to what he was saying back in 2000.  It may not be fair, I may not feel the process has gone exactly the way it should...but in the interests of unity Hillary should concede once the voting is over.

If Gore cared so strongly about unity in the country that he was willing to sacrifice that fight, he will probably feel the same about party unity.


by libertyleft on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:45:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Another $100 for HRC (none / 0)

Mark Penn thanks you.


by Savage on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 08:41:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

See My Sig Line (2.00 / 6)

just in case you missed that cool pic at the end of the diary. :)


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:31:51 PM EST

Re: See My Sig Line (2.00 / 3)

Why would anyone give any money to Clinton? She doesn't need a dime at this point.


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:33:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: See My Sig Line (2.00 / 1)

Because we want to.  Because we have a lot of money and we can do anything with it we damn well please.  We old women who couldn't even have credit in our own names 45 years ago.


by Tolstoy on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:57:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: See My Sig Line (2.00 / 5)

Mark Penn thanks you for your support. Give some for me! Have a goodnight!


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:58:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

See My Sig Line (2.00 / 4)

I hope you're ready to take on John McCain, Alegre.


John McCain: He flunked ECON 101.
by Shem on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:34:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: See My Previous Comment Above (1.71 / 7)

Again, troll- don't give her the satisfaction, guys.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:40:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: See My Previous Comment Above (2.00 / 3)

I would say that Alegre is a hard and persistent fighter rather than a troll.  If after Obama receives enough delegates Tuesday or whenever it happens she persists in divisiveness e.g. urging a floor fight (which will never happen,) at that point, she would most definitely be considered a troll.  


by ReillyDiefenbach on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:57:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: See My Previous Comment Above (1.87 / 8)

She never sticks around to fight for her points, she twists the facts, and she sources only propaganda. I'd call that a troll, because there are plenty of Clinton supporters around here who can actually stand up and debate for what they believe in. They're the people I want on our side when this thing is over- they love their candidate, but you better damn well believe they'll stand up for her if need be.

Alegre? Not so much.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:01:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Hey RK (2.00 / 3)

I am a firefighter pulling you away from the flames Rumpharrizt (spelling may be off) just put up a good diary go read it, get out of here.  I have some heat resistant gear on and am pulling out as many as I can.

John McCain opposes democratic principles.


Student Guy=JoeMentum. No really Student Guy=JoeMentum, after all JoeMentum was an embarrassment so is Student Guy. This sig is FAIL!!
by Student Guy on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:05:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hey RK (2.00 / 2)

Yeah, I'm like that guy in Backdraft.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:07:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: See My Sig Line (none / 0)

You are the best

I just donated another fifty dollars to hillary clinton because of this wonderful diary.


by HillsMyGirl on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:47:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Zero. That's the number of delegates (2.00 / 8)

that should have been awarded in the fake contests that were MI & FL. Or 50-50 which is the same thing. Clinton got a gift.


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:31:55 PM EST

Re: Thou Shalt Not Steal (2.00 / 8)

well, that's an ugly sight- democratic voters seeking equal and proportional representation in the candidate selection process being muscled out by the hired goons of the party elite. i haven't seen it since chicago. we lost that year, as i remember.


by campskunk on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:32:16 PM EST

Re: Thou Shalt Not Steal (2.00 / 3)

Seeking equal and proportional representation? How so?


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:34:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Don't mind them. (2.00 / 4)

They don't consider 30,000 write-in votes important enough to count.


John McCain: He flunked ECON 101.
by Shem on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:38:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Don't mind them. (2.00 / 3)

Those primaries were a joke it's stunningly cynical to pretend otherwise.


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:44:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Come on Shem this isn't worth it (2.00 / 2)

you want to know somewhere that is go check out themicthandnanshow.wordpress.com/  They eviscerate Larry Sinclair quite nicely.


Student Guy=JoeMentum. No really Student Guy=JoeMentum, after all JoeMentum was an embarrassment so is Student Guy. This sig is FAIL!!
by Student Guy on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:46:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Busted link? (none / 0)

I'm getting a WordPress login.


John McCain: He flunked ECON 101.
by Shem on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:49:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Here you go (2.00 / 1)

now enjoy my fellow Obama supporters the evisceration of the idiotic Larry Sinclair:

http://themitchandnanshow.wordpress.com/


Student Guy=JoeMentum. No really Student Guy=JoeMentum, after all JoeMentum was an embarrassment so is Student Guy. This sig is FAIL!!
by Student Guy on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:55:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thou Shalt Not Steal (2.00 / 6)

You and certain others protesting have absolutely no respect for the rules, nor the Michigan Democratic Party (who proposed the compromise), nor the 17 million people who voted for Obama, nor the millions of Hillary supporters who want to see the Democrats win in November and will support Obama.

Shame on you!


AnnMarie
by wiscogirl101 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:33:05 PM EST

Bravo (1.80 / 5)

SHAME SHAME SHAME !!

How does it look alegre? Seeing all of your intellectually malignant ideas manifested in about 200 lunatics making half the party look like racist, maniacal, talking point spewing zombie must hold a special place of pride in your heart.

Thank heavens today was proof that The Harlod Ickes' of the party are seen for the contemptible frauds they really are.

Obama and Wexler are the present and future of our party.

And the wonderful thing about the new democratic party that stands up to obnoxious paper tiger bullies....

We don't need people like YOU.

Not the pretend you that represent millions.

The REAL you that has spoon feed the gullible the diseased ideas responsible for the legion you were able to corral today.


by Is This Snark on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:04:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bravo (2.00 / 0)

Hey

Alegre and the 200 people who supported the clintons at that meeting today speak for me.

They were polite, respectful, and courteous.

the country saw their terrifc behavior and are more committed than ever to vote for Hillary.

Hillary will now win Montana.


by HillsMyGirl on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:49:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You crack me up every time. (2.00 / 1)

I laugh so damn hard - i thought this would get old. Nope. Never does. Thank you.


I support our nominee President Barack Obama - and the Admins can't stand me, so I can't rec or rate. This is very mean if you were to ask me.
by TheFullBerry on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 11:11:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thou Shalt Not Steal (none / 0)

Hey alegre I admit I don't know what the hell is going on with this whole DNC meeting I was at an occasion with this cookie Liberal and he bore the hell out of me.

How many delegates did she get in Michigan and how many did Obama get ?


Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.
by lori on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:33:40 PM EST

It's on the front page (2.00 / 2)

Michigan delegates were seated at 69-59 (Clinton-Obama), each with half a vote. So overall a 5-vote margin for Clinton.

According to some people, Obama had the votes to narrowly manage a split, but he decided to go with the 69-59 split to win a larger majority (it passed 19-8.)


John McCain
by MILiberal on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:36:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

She should have gotten over 70 (2.00 / 1)

delegates in MI based on the proportion of votes she won there.

But instead they gave her 60 something, and gave four over to Obama.

It stemmed from Obama's wish to have ALL Michigan delegates split 50/50 - Hillary gets half, Obama gets half. Why? Well, even though Hillary won 55% and uncommitted won 40% and 5% went to Kucinich and Gravel, Obama argued he should get not just all uncommitted votes, and all Kucinich and Gravel votes, but they wanted 5% of what Hillary got.


by catfish2 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:49:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She should have gotten over 70 (2.00 / 2)

We should just have agreed none of the uncommitted delegates went to Senator Clinton. Sounds fair, right?

Besides, the Michigan Democratic Party came up with this solution, which included prominent Clinton superdelegates, like Gov. Jennifer Granholm, Sen. Debbie Stabenow, etc.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:56:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She should have gotten over 70 (none / 0)

Although 18% of Hillary's MI votes would have gone to Obama if he had been on the ballot, per the exit polls.


by interestedbystander on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 03:04:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

She should have gotten 73 (2.00 / 1)

and 55 should have been uncommitted.

But somehow that wasn't even enough for people so they gave Obama all 55 uncommitted, then took four of Hillary's and gave them to Obama.

End result: Hillary 69, Obama 59. And he took his name off the ballot so he could pander for Iowa votes. Took no hits.


by catfish2 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:56:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Fuckin awesome result (1.66 / 9)

That Obama sure knows how to convince people.

I wish he was running for president. We sure could use someone that constantly gets his way by convincing people through the weight of his arguments.


by Is This Snark on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:09:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Fuckin awesome result (2.00 / 2)

Now that was high-grade snark.

It does make me curious about the "insiders". Hillary was supposed to have 13, but 9 voted for the Michigan compromise and everybody went halfsies on Florida. I'm really surprised that a block of 13, or even a block of the four who came over, couldn't work out a 73-55 compromise.


by TCQuad on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:17:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

The behaviour by some Clinton supporters (2.00 / 5)

in the audience was beyond the pale.

MI & FL are resolved, now let's beat McCain.


by notme54 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:33:41 PM EST

Re: Thou Shalt Not Steal (1.00 / 7)

I could have sworn this was you:



by Deadalus on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:33:48 PM EST

Re: Thou Shalt Not Steal (none / 0)

I was literally standing next to this woman in the back of the meeting room when she started shouting "McCain! McCain!" while (co-chair) Alexis Herman was trying to conduct the meeting. As she was being escorted out (for ignoring the DNC staff who asked her politely three times to be quiet), I almost asked her if she was alegre.


Stop the racism. Fight the smears.
by CrazyDrumGuy on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 03:34:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Is this snark? (1.80 / 5)

seriously.


by libertyleft on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:34:57 PM EST

Re: Is this snark? (2.00 / 2)

Tolstoy, why have you down rated my honest inquiry into the diary? I am curious if it is a serious post or intended as humor/snark.  The inclusion in the update of that terrible video is signaling snark to me, so I would like an answer to my serious question instead of ratings abuse.


by libertyleft on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:09:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Clearly... (none / 0)

since Jerome is the paragon of virtue and fairness that we all know him to be, Tolstoy's ability to rec and rate will soon be removed.


Check out McCain.
by you like it on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:43:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thou Shalt Not Steal (2.00 / 4)

so what exactly did obama do to earn those delegates from michigan the rbc gave him today? i need a job like that.


by campskunk on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:34:58 PM EST

30,000 write-in votes that were thrown away. (2.00 / 6)

30,000 write-in votes is what Obama did to earn those delegates.  If you really cared about the "will of the voters" you'd be going to bat for them, too.


John McCain: He flunked ECON 101.
by Shem on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:37:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 30,000 write-in votes that were thrown away. (2.00 / 3)

it was never about ALL the voters only Hillary voters

I think there has been enough hypocrissy for the voters to know that no one actually cares about them, they are nothing but pawns to everyone.

<