*** Official Barack Obama FBG campaign headquarters *** (4 Viewers)

[Death Bytes]

"special comment" is on right now.

So help me god, my wife is watching America's Next Top Model, and won't let me change the channel. Someone please set us up with a link.

You are going to love this!

That was awwwwsome!!

sigh.

Not a fan of Kristy Lee Cook I see.

 

[BuddyKnuckles]

"special comment" is on right now.

So help me god, my wife is watching America's Next Top Model, and won't let me change the channel. Someone please set us up with a link.

You are going to love this!

That was awwwwsome!!

sigh.

missed it

 

[Sweet J]

Text of his comment (I know there are formatting problems):

Finally, as promised, a Special Comment on the presidential campaign of the Junior Senator from New York. By way of necessary preface, President and Senator Clinton -- and the Senator's mother, and the Senator's brother -- were of immeasurable support to me at the moments when these very commentaries were the focus of the most surprise, the most uncertainty, and the most anger. My gratitude to them is abiding. Also, I am not here endorsing Senator Obama's nomination, nor suggesting it is inevitable. Thus I have fought with myself over whether or not to say anything. Senator, as it has reached its apex in their tone-deaf, arrogant, and insensitive reaction to the remarks of Geraldine Ferraro... your own advisors are slowly killing your chances to become President. Senator, their words, and your own, are now slowly killing the chances for any Democrat to become President. In your tepid response to this Ferraro disaster, you may sincerely think you are disenthralling an enchanted media, and righting an unfair advance bestowed on Senator Obama. You may think the matter has closed with Representative Ferraro's bitter, almost threatening resignation. But in fact, Senator, you are now campaigning, as if Barock Obama were the Democrat, and you… were the Republican. As Shakespeare wrote, Senator -- that way… madness… lies. You have missed a critical opportunity to do... what was right. No matter what Ms. Ferraro now claims, no one took her comments out of context. She had made them on at least three separate occasions, then twice more on television this morning. Just hours ago, on NBC Nightly News, she denied she had made the remarks in an interview -- only at a paid political speech. In fact, the first time she spoke them, was ten days before the California newspaper published them... not in a speech, but in a radio interview. On February 26th, quoting... "If Barack Obama were a white man, would we be talking about this, as a potential real problem for Hillary? If he were a woman of any color, would he be in this position that he's in? Absolutely not." The context was inescapable. Two minutes earlier, a member of Senator Clinton's Finance Committee, one of her "Hill-Raisers," had bemoaned the change in allegiance by Super-Delegate John Lewis from Clinton to Obama, and the endorsement of Obama by Senator Dodd. "I look at these guys doing it," she had said, "and I have to tell you, it's the guys sticking together." A minute after the "color" remarks, she was describing herself as having been chosen for the 1984 Democratic ticket, purely as a woman politician, purely to make history. She was, in turn, making a blind accusation of sexism -- and dismissing Senator Obama's candidacy as nothing more than an Equal Opportunity stunt. The next day she repeated her comments to a reporter from the newspaper in Torrance, California. "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept." And when this despicable statement -- ugly in its overtones, laughable in its weak grip of facts, and moronic in the historical context -- when it floats outward from the Clinton Campaign like a poison cloud, what do the advisors have their candidate do? Do they have Senator Clinton herself compare the remark to Al Campanis talking on Nightline... on Jackie Robinson day... about how blacks lacked the necessities to become baseball executives, while she points out that Barock Obama has not gotten his 1600 delegates as part of some kind of Affirmative Action plan? Do they have Senator Clinton note that her own brief period in elected office, is as irrelevant to the issue of judgment as is Senator Obama's… …while she points out that FDR had served only six years as a governor and state Senator before he became President? Or that Teddy Roosevelt had four-and-a-half years before the White House? Or that Woodrow Wilson had two years and six weeks? Or Richard Nixon… fourteen... and Calvin Coolidge 25? Do these advisors have Senator Clinton invoke Samantha Power -- gone by sunrise after she used the word "monster" -- and have Senator Clinton say, "this is how I police my campaign and this is what I stand for," while she fires former Congresswoman Ferraro from any role the campaign? No. Somebody tells her that simply disagreeing with and rejecting the remarks is sufficient. And she should then call, "regrettable", words that should make any Democrat retch. And that she should then try to twist them, first into some pox-on-both-your-houses plea to 'stick to the issues,' and then to let her campaign manager try to bend them beyond all recognition, into Senator Obama's fault. And thus these advisers give Congresswoman Ferraro nearly a week in which to send Senator Clinton's campaign back into the vocabulary... of David Duke. "Any time anybody does anything that in any way pulls this campaign down and says let's address reality and the problems we're facing in this world, you're accused of being racist, so you have to shut up. "Racism works in two different directions. I really think they're attacking me because I'm white. "How's that?" How's that? Apart from sounding exactly like Rush Limbaugh attacking the black football quarterback Donovan McNabb? Apart from sounding exactly like what Ms. Ferraro said about another campaign, nearly twenty years ago? Quote: "President Reagan suggested Tuesday that people don't ask Jackson tough questions because of his race. And former representative Geraldine A. Ferraro (D-N.Y.) said Wednesday that because of his "radical" views, "if Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race." So... apart from sounding like insidious racism that is at least two decades old? Apart from rendering ridiculous, Senator Clinton's shell-game about choosing Obama as Vice President? Apart from this evening's resignation letter? "I am stepping down from your finance committee so I can speak for myself and you can continue to speak for yourself about what is at stake in this campaign. "The Obama campaign is attacking me to hurt you." Apart from all that? Well. It sounds as if those advisors want their campaign to be associated with those words, and the cheap… ignorant… vile… racism that underlies every syllable... And that Geraldine Ferraro has just gone free-lance. Senator Clinton: This is not a campaign strategy. This is a suicide pact. This week alone, your so-called strategists have declared that Senator Obama has not yet crossed the "commander-in-chief threshold"… But -- he might be your choice to be Vice President, even though a quarter of the previous sixteen Vice Presidents have become commander-in-chief during the greatest kind of crisis this nation can face: a mid-term succession. But you'd only pick him if he crosses that threshold by the time of the convention. But if he does cross that threshold by the time of the convention, he will only have done so sufficiently enough to become Vice President, not President. Senator, if the serpentine logic of your so-called advisors were not bad enough... Now, thanks to Geraldine Ferraro, and your campaign's initial refusal to break with her, and your new relationship with her -- now more disturbing still with her claim that she can now "speak for herself" about her vision of Senator Obama as some kind of embodiment of a quota... If you were to seek Obama as a Vice President, it would be, to Ms. Ferraro, some kind of social engineering gesture, some kind of racial make-good. Do you not see, Senator? To Senator Clinton's supporters, to her admirers, to her friends for whom she is first choice, and her friends for whom she is second choice, she is still letting herself be perceived as standing next to, and standing by, racial divisiveness and blindness… And worst yet, after what President Clinton said during the South Carolina primary, comparing the Obama and Jesse Jackson campaigns -- a disturbing, but only borderline remark... After what some in the black community have perceived as a racial undertone to the "3 A-M" ad... a disturbing -- but only borderline interpretation... And after that moment's hesitation in her own answer on 60 Minutes about Obama's religion -- a disturbing, but only borderline vagueness... After those precedents, there are those who see a pattern... false, or true. After those precedents, there are those who see an intent... false, or true. After those precedents, there are those who see the Clinton campaign's anything-but-benign neglect of this Ferraro catastrophe -- falsely or truly -- as a desire to hear the kind of casual prejudice which still haunts this society voiced... and to not distance the campaign from it. To not distance you from it, Senator! To not distance you... from that which you as a woman, and Senator Obama as an African-American, should both know and feel with the deepest of personal pain! Which you should both fight with all you have! Which you should both insure, has no place in this contest! This, Senator Clinton, is your campaign, and it is your name. Grab the reins back from whoever has led you to this precipice, before it is too late. Voluntarily or inadvertently, you are still awash in this filth. Your only reaction has been to disagree, reject, and to call it regrettable. Her only reaction has been to brand herself as the victim, resign from your committee, and insist she will continue to speak. Unless you say something definitive, Senator, the former Congresswoman is speaking with your approval. You must remedy this. And you must... reject... and denounce... Geraldine Ferraro. Good night, and good luck.

 

[golddigger]

Because I follow the news. Obama's foreign policy adviser has articulated Obama's position on this point. While he is willing to talk with heads of state even if those states are hostile to us, he would not sit down and talk with terrorist organizations, which would include al Quaida.

I hope you are right and I will give him the benifit of the doubt.

 

[Sweet J]

Because I follow the news. Obama's foreign policy adviser has articulated Obama's position on this point. While he is willing to talk with heads of state even if those states are hostile to us, he would not sit down and talk with terrorist organizations, which would include al Quaida.

I hope you are right and I will give him the benifit of the doubt.

The link the this interview was posted maybe 10-15 pages ago -- you could probably find it easily becuase it is followed by about a dozen "OMG I would totally do her!!!11!ONEONE!!" (including from me ). His senior policy advisor, susan rice, clearly and in no uncertain terms, lays out his position.

 

[golddigger]

This is an honest question so be nice.There are many more Republican senators being voted on this year than Democrat. Also, the enviroment is ripe for a large Democrat pick up in the House. As a result, I believe the Democrats will have a filabuster proof congress. My fear is that Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid with go on a tax and spend fest. There will be nothing stopping them. Will there be any restraints of fiscal matters?

I don't think the Democrats are going to making many gains in congress this year. This presidential race is going to disenfranchise one group or another and it's going to kill the Dems in November. That's my prediction anyway.

Most experts disagree. The Democrats have a lot of energy now. If you look at the number of democrats who vote in the primary it is about 2/1 over republicans. Also, there is many more republican senate seats open relative to democrats. The only solice is the experts are always wrong.

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

"special comment" is on right now.

So help me god, my wife is watching America's Next Top Model, and won't let me change the channel. Someone please set us up with a link.

You are going to love this!

That was awwwwsome!!

sigh.

missed it

Link to Video

 

[Jeremy]

This is an honest question so be nice.There are many more Republican senators being voted on this year than Democrat. Also, the enviroment is ripe for a large Democrat pick up in the House. As a result, I believe the Democrats will have a filabuster proof congress. My fear is that Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid with go on a tax and spend fest. There will be nothing stopping them. Will there be any restraints of fiscal matters?

I don't think the Democrats are going to making many gains in congress this year. This presidential race is going to disenfranchise one group or another and it's going to kill the Dems in November. That's my prediction anyway.

Most experts disagree. The Democrats have a lot of energy now. If you look at the number of democrats who vote in the primary it is about 2/1 over republicans. Also, there is many more republican senate seats open relative to democrats. The only solice is the experts are always wrong.

If Clinton gets the nomination despite trailing in pledged delegates, that energy will be gone faster that you can say President McCain.

 

[Sweet J]

This is an honest question so be nice.There are many more Republican senators being voted on this year than Democrat. Also, the enviroment is ripe for a large Democrat pick up in the House. As a result, I believe the Democrats will have a filabuster proof congress. My fear is that Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid with go on a tax and spend fest. There will be nothing stopping them. Will there be any restraints of fiscal matters?

I don't think the Democrats are going to making many gains in congress this year. This presidential race is going to disenfranchise one group or another and it's going to kill the Dems in November. That's my prediction anyway.

Most experts disagree. The Democrats have a lot of energy now. If you look at the number of democrats who vote in the primary it is about 2/1 over republicans. Also, there is many more republican senate seats open relative to democrats. The only solice is the experts are always wrong.

If Clinton gets the nomination despite trailing in pledged delegates, that energy will be gone faster that you can say President McCain.

I am truly not worried about her getting the nomination. It is just not going to happen. But I am worried that she will make it difficult for him to win in November.

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

"special comment" is on right now.

So help me god, my wife is watching America's Next Top Model, and won't let me change the channel. Someone please set us up with a link.

You are going to love this!

That was awwwwsome!!

sigh.

missed it

Link to Video

Nope

I fixed the link, but just scroll up

 

[BuddyKnuckles]

Thanks Sweet J

video is under Countdown->Special comment -

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Link to Video

Holy Crap! Olbermann on a tear!

 

[golddigger]

How would you all feel if Obama had to pick HRC as a running mate so as not to fracture the party?

I hope this isn't a honda

 

[D_House]

I sense an air about Obama supporters that is nothing but pure hatred for anyone that doesn't respond to him as they do. And when the talk turns to criticsm of him and his lack of experience, his lack of a platform (that every politician suffers from at this level) and his stance on any number of issues, the critics are the "old boy network" or "racist" or "fearful of change" blah blah blah. I wou;dn't vote for him anyway, so I don't care, but the exercise is interesting to me.

I haven't met a single Obama supporter that fits that description. There probably are some, but most are not.Let it never be forgotten who fired the first salvo in the race debate.HINT: It wasn't Obama.

I haven't either, though I'm sure they're out there, just like they are with any national political figure. And criticisms of his policy positions are usually met with information concerning his policies.Look Yankee, if you don't think he's experienced enough, and you don't like the idea of universal healthcare, and you don't want to pull out of Iraq, then that's perfectly fine. Obama's not your guy. But don't act like you're being persecuted when people disagree with you. And if you do propogate false memes about him, which have been debunked ad nauseum here and elsewhere, then you should be prepared to take some heat.*I* don't like everything about the guy. But I think he's the best of the three candidates, and so I'm voting for him and supporting him with a donation or two. Is it safe for me to say that without being labeled a cultist?

This thread is chock full of good information for anyone interested in a potential Presidential candidate. And the outright supporters are the main source of it, and handle most criticisms of Obama with even more information. I do not get the "cultist" accusations or the persecution complex that some Obama critics bring to this thread.And this from someone still undecided.

 

[Autumn Wind]

How would you all feel if Obama had to pick HRC as a running mate so as not to fracture the party?I hope this isn't a honda

I'd feel that I should start getting used to a McCain administration.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

How would you all feel if Obama had to pick HRC as a running mate so as not to fracture the party?I hope this isn't a honda

I'd feel that I should start getting used to a McCain administration.

Yep.Obama will let the party fracture if thats what it takes to help fix America.

 

[skol asylum]

From the Obama campaign this afternoon:

Dear _____,

When we won Iowa, the Clinton campaign said it's not the number of states you win, it's "a contest for delegates."

When we won a significant lead in delegates, they said it's really about which states you win.

When we won South Carolina, they discounted the votes of African-Americans.

When we won predominantly white, rural states like Idaho, Utah, and Nebraska, they said those didn't count because they won't be competitive in the general election.

When we won in Washington State, Wisconsin, and Missouri -- general election battlegrounds where polls show Barack is a stronger candidate against John McCain -- the Clinton campaign attacked those voters as "latte-sipping" elitists.

And now that we've won more than twice as many states, the Clinton spin is that only certain states really count.

But the facts are clear.

For all their attempts to discount, distract, and distort, we have won more delegates, more states, and more votes.

Meanwhile, more than half of the votes that Senator Clinton has won so far have come from just five states. And in four of these five states, polls show that Barack would be a stronger general election candidate against McCain than Clinton.

We're ready to take on John McCain. But we also need to build operations in places like Pennsylvania, Indiana, North Carolina, and Oregon that will hold their primaries in April and May.

Barack Obama needs your support to fight this two-front battle. Please make a donation of $25 right now:

https://donate.barackobama.com/math

With our overwhelming victory in the Mississippi primary yesterday, our lead in earned delegates is now wider than it was on March 3rd, before the contests in Ohio and Texas.

And thanks to your help, we have dramatically increased our support among so-called "superdelegates" -- Governors, Members of Congress, and party officials who have a vote at the Democratic National Convention in August.

As the number of remaining delegates dwindles, Hillary Clinton's path to the nomination seems less and less plausible.

Now that Mississippi is behind us, we move on to the next ten contests. The Clinton campaign would like to focus your attention only on Pennsylvania -- a state in which they have already declared that they are "unbeatable."

But Pennsylvania is only one of those 10 remaining contests, each important in terms of allocating delegates and ultimately deciding who our nominee will be.

We have activated our volunteer networks in each of these upcoming battlegrounds. We're putting staff on the ground and building our organization everywhere.

The key to victory is not who wins the states that the Clinton campaign thinks are important. The key to victory is realizing that every vote and every voter matters.

Throughout this entire process, the Clinton campaign has cherry-picked states, diminished caucuses, and moved the goal posts to create a shifting, twisted rationale for why they should win the nomination despite winning fewer primaries, fewer states, fewer delegates, and fewer votes.

We must stand up to the same-old Washington politics. Barack has won twice as many states, large and small, in every region of the country -- many by landslide margins. And this movement is expanding the base of the Democratic Party by attracting new voters in record numbers and bringing those who had lost hope back into the political process.

Push back against the spin and help build the operation to win more delegates in these upcoming contests:

https://donate.barackobama.com/math

Thank you for your support and for everything you've done to build a movement that is engaging voters and winning contests in every part of this country.

David

David Plouffe

Campaign Manager

Obama for America

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I do not get the "cultist" accusations or the persecution complex that some Obama critics bring to this thread.

They have nothing else to offer. Simple as that.

 

[Death Bytes]

How would you all feel if Obama had to pick HRC as a running mate so as not to fracture the party?I hope this isn't a honda

Well, I've heard for years from a lot of Clinton lovers that Ross Perot's independent run was not the reason that Clinton was able to win the presidency. Assuming that's true, if Hillary loses the party nomination there's absolutely no reason that she would need to settle for being the VP candidate. She and her supports could take down Obama with an independent run for the presidency. If Perot was not the reason that Clinton won in 92, then a facturing of the democrats in 2008 won't put McCain in the Whitehouse either, and Hillary and Obama can continue the battle through to November, winner take all.Either that, or the belief that Clinton didn't need Perot's run to win is a crock, and it is a fact that fracturing a party between two candidates has the devestating effect of putting the other party's guy in. Whoever wins the democratic nod, the party better rally around that choice, and I think the battle has been too ugly for these two to turn around and say they're united.

 

[Pai Mei]

How would you all feel if Obama had to pick HRC as a running mate so as not to fracture the party?I hope this isn't a honda

Well, I've heard for years from a lot of Clinton lovers that Ross Perot's independent run was not the reason that Clinton was able to win the presidency. Assuming that's true

That report is bogus. The truth is the notion that Perot WASN'T the reason Bush41 lost is based purely upon exit poll sampling of voters on election night. But as we now know, exit polling is a terrible indicator. Recall that exit polling in 2004 said that John Kerry was going to win BIG, and as it turned out Bush43 won.

 

[skol asylum]

How would you all feel if Obama had to pick HRC as a running mate so as not to fracture the party?I hope this isn't a honda

Well, I've heard for years from a lot of Clinton lovers that Ross Perot's independent run was not the reason that Clinton was able to win the presidency. Assuming that's true

That report is bogus. The truth is the notion that Perot WASN'T the reason Bush41 lost is based purely upon exit poll sampling of voters on election night. But as we now know, exit polling is a terrible indicator. Recall that exit polling in 2004 said that John Kerry was going to win BIG, and as it turned out Bush43 won.

Of course we have no idea if the exit polls were wrong or the voting machines.:nopapertrail:

 

[Pai Mei]

How would you all feel if Obama had to pick HRC as a running mate so as not to fracture the party?I hope this isn't a honda

Well, I've heard for years from a lot of Clinton lovers that Ross Perot's independent run was not the reason that Clinton was able to win the presidency. Assuming that's true

That report is bogus. The truth is the notion that Perot WASN'T the reason Bush41 lost is based purely upon exit poll sampling of voters on election night. But as we now know, exit polling is a terrible indicator. Recall that exit polling in 2004 said that John Kerry was going to win BIG, and as it turned out Bush43 won.

Of course we have no idea if the exit polls were wrong or the voting machines.:nopapertrail:

I have no answer for that. If you think the system is so rigged that a huge Kerry win turns into a Bush win, then you've lost all faith in the system.

 

[cobalt_27]

Link to Video

Holy Crap! Olbermann on a tear!

That was refreshing.

 

[skol asylum]

Keith Hussein Olbermann rocks.

 

[skol asylum]

Sen. Clinton, speaking today at the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, argued today that the delegates from Florida and Michigan should be seated, in some form or another:

"If you are a voter from Florida or Michigan, you know that we should count your vote. The nearly two and a half million Americans in those two states who participated in the primary elections are in danger of being excluded from our democratic process and I think that's wrong. The results of those primaries were fair and they should be honored. Over the last few weeks, there has been a lot of discussion about what we should do to ensure that the voters in Florida and Michigan are counted.

"In my view there are two options: Honor the results or hold new primary elections. I don't see any other solutions that are fair and honor the commitment that two and a half million voters made in the Democratic primaries in those two states. Whether voters are clamoring for solutions to the challenges that we face or not, or whether people are coming out in droves to be heard, we have a basic obligation to make sure that every vote in America counts.

I hope that Senator Obama's campaign will join me in working to make that happen. I think that that is a non-partisan solution to make sure that we do count these votes."

Yeah OK, Ms. Monster.

 

[BuddyKnuckles]

How would you all feel if Obama had to pick HRC as a running mate so as not to fracture the party?I hope this isn't a honda

Well, it has been discussed, but probably will be for the next 6-12 weeks in even more depth. And many people's opinions may change on the subject in that time. For me, its the same as it was a couple weeks ago. If Obama is at the top of the ticket, then i could live with it. I certainly dont wish for it to happen. I will not encourage it. But, if it happens, so be it. After the last discussion on this topic in this thread, i tend to agree with a common point from other posters. Specifically, HRC as a VP choice compromises Obama's main message of changing Washington. While i think that ticket would win in the fall, it would certainly water down his message.

 

[BuddyKnuckles]

Sen. Clinton, speaking today at the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, argued today that the delegates from Florida and Michigan should be seated, in some form or another:

"If you are a voter from Florida or Michigan, you know that we should count your vote. The nearly two and a half million Americans in those two states who participated in the primary elections are in danger of being excluded from our democratic process and I think that's wrong. The results of those primaries were fair and they should be honored. Over the last few weeks, there has been a lot of discussion about what we should do to ensure that the voters in Florida and Michigan are counted.

"In my view there are two options: Honor the results or hold new primary elections. I don't see any other solutions that are fair and honor the commitment that two and a half million voters made in the Democratic primaries in those two states. Whether voters are clamoring for solutions to the challenges that we face or not, or whether people are coming out in droves to be heard, we have a basic obligation to make sure that every vote in America counts.

I hope that Senator Obama's campaign will join me in working to make that happen. I think that that is a non-partisan solution to make sure that we do count these votes."

Yeah OK, Ms. Monster. :(

Yeah, i saw that too, unbelievable. Its one thing to say what you think should happen. Its a whole different ball game when you support that belief with completely invalid reasons. Fair and honorable results? That defies logic to the point of hurting my brain. And where are all the "angry" Florida and Michigan voters? Where are the picket lines, rallies in front of the state legislators offices, and general signs of contempt? Nowhere, because the voters of Florida and Michigan arent all that upset about this. Its only Crist and Granholm that are mad about this, and they're up in arms for completely self serving reasons. Um, governors, you do realize that YOU were the ones who signed off on the primary move in the first place.

 

[flufhed]

Developing story on CNN's site: "Geraldine Ferraro is leaving the Hillary Clinton campaign in the wake of a controversy regarding her remarks about Barack Obama."Guess this means she denounces her comments after all.

And the victim card will be played again. And again. And again.

Mission accomplished for Hillary. She got the race issue out there and still gets to look good for letting her go. Nice little game of good cop/bad cop they had going there.

its been the pattern all along

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Sen. Clinton, speaking today at the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, argued today that the delegates from Florida and Michigan should be seated, in some form or another:

"If you are a voter from Florida or Michigan, you know that we should count your vote. The nearly two and a half million Americans in those two states who participated in the primary elections are in danger of being excluded from our democratic process and I think that's wrong. The results of those primaries were fair and they should be honored. Over the last few weeks, there has been a lot of discussion about what we should do to ensure that the voters in Florida and Michigan are counted.

"In my view there are two options: Honor the results or hold new primary elections. I don't see any other solutions that are fair and honor the commitment that two and a half million voters made in the Democratic primaries in those two states. Whether voters are clamoring for solutions to the challenges that we face or not, or whether people are coming out in droves to be heard, we have a basic obligation to make sure that every vote in America counts.

I hope that Senator Obama's campaign will join me in working to make that happen. I think that that is a non-partisan solution to make sure that we do count these votes."

Yeah OK, Ms. Monster.

Except for the bolded part I agree with her here. Redo the vote. She may win but it will still result in Obama leading the delegate count and it will remove the one last thing she can spin.

 

[Mookie Blaylock]

Link to Video

Holy Crap! Olbermann on a tear!

That was refreshing.

Refreshing? Hmmm...I suppose this is what happens when you give a sportscaster a news show. Just another pawn for the democratic agenda. So it appears the dems have chosen which of their gimmick candidates to endorse. And they used a guy who used to be on sportscenter to do it. My favorite thing about all of this is that Gerry is right about all of this. She was correct in her assertations of the Jesse Jackson experiment. She was correct in her assertation about her own political career being a gimmick as well. And she is correct about this campaign. Unfortunately she was attacking with the hope of helping out her candidate rather than simply to expose her party for what it is - a bunch of fraudulent ego pimps.

 

[BuddyKnuckles]

Yet another Clinton spin is proven blatantly incorrect: LINK

HRC has been claiming (along with sock puppet Ed Rendell) that she deserves the nomination because she is winning the "important" states. The article details how winning states in the primary does not necessarily translate into wins in the General. Some highlights:

Recent history shows that winning a state in the primary season — no matter its importance on the map — doesn’t guarantee success in the general election.

In 1992, Bill Clinton captured primaries in Florida and Texas, but lost those states in the general election.

A poll he conducted less than two weeks before Clinton's primary win showed Obama leading McCain in Ohio, 48-47 percent, and McCain beating Clinton there, 51-47 percent.

 

[Sammy3469]

How would you all feel if Obama had to pick HRC as a running mate so as not to fracture the party?I hope this isn't a honda

Well, it has been discussed, but probably will be for the next 6-12 weeks in even more depth. And many people's opinions may change on the subject in that time. For me, its the same as it was a couple weeks ago. If Obama is at the top of the ticket, then i could live with it. I certainly dont wish for it to happen. I will not encourage it. But, if it happens, so be it. After the last discussion on this topic in this thread, i tend to agree with a common point from other posters. Specifically, HRC as a VP choice compromises Obama's main message of changing Washington. While i think that ticket would win in the fall, it would certainly water down his message.

I said this in the Randi Rhodes rumor thread, but I'll expound here.THIS NEEDS TO END NOW.There I said it. At this point I really don't care who's on the top and who's on bottom. But this campaign is dangerously close to killing any chance either has to beat McCain in Nov. The latest NBC poll now has both behind him eventhough a generic Dem is up 15%. This is not good. The 3 grown-ups left in this mess, Dean, Pelosi, and Reid, (I guess 4 if you count Gore), need to step in and tell these two to come to some accomidation NOW instead of beating each other up for the next 5 months (since there's no way either campaign will give up before the convention). This "process" has taken the party into the gutter and quite frankly as much as I don't like her, the only way the supporters of each side will feel satisfied is if both these people start acting like adults and more importantly LEADERS, heal the wounds of the past 2 months, and come together.Really its that simple.Oh and Dean...please reform this idiotic system where any nomination contest with 2 strong candidates is thrown to the convention floor.

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

Sen. Clinton, speaking today at the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, argued today that the delegates from Florida and Michigan should be seated, in some form or another:

"If you are a voter from Florida or Michigan, you know that we should count your vote. The nearly two and a half million Americans in those two states who participated in the primary elections are in danger of being excluded from our democratic process and I think that's wrong. The results of those primaries were fair and they should be honored. Over the last few weeks, there has been a lot of discussion about what we should do to ensure that the voters in Florida and Michigan are counted.

"In my view there are two options: Honor the results or hold new primary elections. I don't see any other solutions that are fair and honor the commitment that two and a half million voters made in the Democratic primaries in those two states. Whether voters are clamoring for solutions to the challenges that we face or not, or whether people are coming out in droves to be heard, we have a basic obligation to make sure that every vote in America counts.

I hope that Senator Obama's campaign will join me in working to make that happen. I think that that is a non-partisan solution to make sure that we do count these votes."

Yeah OK, Ms. Monster.

Except for the bolded part I agree with her here. Redo the vote. She may win but it will still result in Obama leading the delegate count and it will remove the one last thing she can spin.

The other thing her campaign has been doing this week is trying to float this idea that there are really three categories of delegates; "automatic" delegates, which is their interest choice of terminology for superdelegates, pledged delegates, and "caucus" delegates. The idea being that if they redo the votes in FL and Michigan she might be ahead in delegates from the primary states (she isn't currently), and that somehow the caucus votes shouldn't count as much.Fortunately this doesn't seem to be getting any traction, but is another example of their attempts to keep re-writing the rules until they get a favorable result.

 

[Sweet J]

How would you all feel if Obama had to pick HRC as a running mate so as not to fracture the party?

I hope this isn't a honda

Well, it has been discussed, but probably will be for the next 6-12 weeks in even more depth. And many people's opinions may change on the subject in that time. For me, its the same as it was a couple weeks ago. If Obama is at the top of the ticket, then i could live with it. I certainly dont wish for it to happen. I will not encourage it. But, if it happens, so be it. After the last discussion on this topic in this thread, i tend to agree with a common point from other posters. Specifically, HRC as a VP choice compromises Obama's main message of changing Washington. While i think that ticket would win in the fall, it would certainly water down his message.

I said this in the Randi Rhodes rumor thread, but I'll expound here.THIS NEEDS TO END NOW.

There I said it. At this point I really don't care who's on the top and who's on bottom. But this campaign is dangerously close to killing any chance either has to beat McCain in Nov. The latest NBC poll now has both behind him eventhough a generic Dem is up 15%. This is not good.

The 3 grown-ups left in this mess, Dean, Pelosi, and Reid, (I guess 4 if you count Gore), need to step in and tell these two to come to some accomidation NOW instead of beating each other up for the next 5 months (since there's no way either campaign will give up before the convention). This "process" has taken the party into the gutter and quite frankly as much as I don't like her, the only way the supporters of each side will feel satisfied is if both these people start acting like adults and more importantly LEADERS, heal the wounds of the past 2 months, and come together.

Really its that simple.

Oh and Dean...please reform this idiotic system where any nomination contest with 2 strong candidates is thrown to the convention floor.

See, I don't get this. Obama is running a winning campaign that is not based on mud-slinging. She is losing and running a compaign that is as dirty as it gets. Why should he have to come to some sort of accomidation?

 

[Pai Mei]

Fortunately this doesn't seem to be getting any traction, but is another example of [the Clintons] attempts to keep re-writing the rules until they get a favorable result.

I never cease to amaze at how the democrats finally see the Clintons for what they are after all these years.

 

[Pai Mei]

How would you all feel if Obama had to pick HRC as a running mate so as not to fracture the party?I hope this isn't a honda

Well, it has been discussed, but probably will be for the next 6-12 weeks in even more depth. And many people's opinions may change on the subject in that time. For me, its the same as it was a couple weeks ago. If Obama is at the top of the ticket, then i could live with it. I certainly dont wish for it to happen. I will not encourage it. But, if it happens, so be it. After the last discussion on this topic in this thread, i tend to agree with a common point from other posters. Specifically, HRC as a VP choice compromises Obama's main message of changing Washington. While i think that ticket would win in the fall, it would certainly water down his message.

I said this in the Randi Rhodes rumor thread, but I'll expound here.THIS NEEDS TO END NOW.There I said it. At this point I really don't care who's on the top and who's on bottom. But this campaign is dangerously close to killing any chance either has to beat McCain in Nov. The latest NBC poll now has both behind him eventhough a generic Dem is up 15%. This is not good. The 3 grown-ups left in this mess, Dean, Pelosi, and Reid, (I guess 4 if you count Gore), need to step in and tell these two to come to some accomidation NOW instead of beating each other up for the next 5 months (since there's no way either campaign will give up before the convention). This "process" has taken the party into the gutter and quite frankly as much as I don't like her, the only way the supporters of each side will feel satisfied is if both these people start acting like adults and more importantly LEADERS, heal the wounds of the past 2 months, and come together.Really its that simple.Oh and Dean...please reform this idiotic system where any nomination contest with 2 strong candidates is thrown to the convention floor.

It is rather ironic that one of the primary bashing-points of Bush43 has been that he has been a divider instead of a uniter. And here we have 2 democrat candidates that are dividing their own party. The left can't even unite themselves.

 

[Pai Mei]

Oh and Dean...please reform this idiotic system where any nomination contest with 2 strong candidates is thrown to the convention floor.

Honestly, I can't think of a better way to determine a party nominee when the vote is very close. Sure, you could go strictly by the book and pick the candidate that has the most votes, but the vote that really matters is the official one in november, and there is merit to the party selecting a candidate that can do the most for the party at that time.

 

[urbanhack]

How would you all feel if Obama had to pick HRC as a running mate so as not to fracture the party?I hope this isn't a honda

Well, it has been discussed, but probably will be for the next 6-12 weeks in even more depth. And many people's opinions may change on the subject in that time. For me, its the same as it was a couple weeks ago. If Obama is at the top of the ticket, then i could live with it. I certainly dont wish for it to happen. I will not encourage it. But, if it happens, so be it. After the last discussion on this topic in this thread, i tend to agree with a common point from other posters. Specifically, HRC as a VP choice compromises Obama's main message of changing Washington. While i think that ticket would win in the fall, it would certainly water down his message.

I said this in the Randi Rhodes rumor thread, but I'll expound here.THIS NEEDS TO END NOW.There I said it. At this point I really don't care who's on the top and who's on bottom. But this campaign is dangerously close to killing any chance either has to beat McCain in Nov. The latest NBC poll now has both behind him eventhough a generic Dem is up 15%. This is not good. The 3 grown-ups left in this mess, Dean, Pelosi, and Reid, (I guess 4 if you count Gore), need to step in and tell these two to come to some accomidation NOW instead of beating each other up for the next 5 months (since there's no way either campaign will give up before the convention). This "process" has taken the party into the gutter and quite frankly as much as I don't like her, the only way the supporters of each side will feel satisfied is if both these people start acting like adults and more importantly LEADERS, heal the wounds of the past 2 months, and come together.Really its that simple.Oh and Dean...please reform this idiotic system where any nomination contest with 2 strong candidates is thrown to the convention floor.

It is rather ironic that one of the primary bashing-points of Bush43 has been that he has been a divider instead of a uniter. And here we have 2 democrat candidates that are dividing their own party. The left can't even unite themselves.

I believe the division is only temporary, unlike what Bush has done. However, if Obama wins the nomination the democratic base has a chance to grow/expand, but a Clinton nomination will definitely shrink the party. This is what Dean, et al. should be looking at.

 

[Mookie Blaylock]

How would you all feel if Obama had to pick HRC as a running mate so as not to fracture the party?I hope this isn't a honda

Well, it has been discussed, but probably will be for the next 6-12 weeks in even more depth. And many people's opinions may change on the subject in that time. For me, its the same as it was a couple weeks ago. If Obama is at the top of the ticket, then i could live with it. I certainly dont wish for it to happen. I will not encourage it. But, if it happens, so be it. After the last discussion on this topic in this thread, i tend to agree with a common point from other posters. Specifically, HRC as a VP choice compromises Obama's main message of changing Washington. While i think that ticket would win in the fall, it would certainly water down his message.

I said this in the Randi Rhodes rumor thread, but I'll expound here.THIS NEEDS TO END NOW.There I said it. At this point I really don't care who's on the top and who's on bottom. But this campaign is dangerously close to killing any chance either has to beat McCain in Nov. The latest NBC poll now has both behind him eventhough a generic Dem is up 15%. This is not good. The 3 grown-ups left in this mess, Dean, Pelosi, and Reid, (I guess 4 if you count Gore), need to step in and tell these two to come to some accomidation NOW instead of beating each other up for the next 5 months (since there's no way either campaign will give up before the convention). This "process" has taken the party into the gutter and quite frankly as much as I don't like her, the only way the supporters of each side will feel satisfied is if both these people start acting like adults and more importantly LEADERS, heal the wounds of the past 2 months, and come together.Really its that simple.Oh and Dean...please reform this idiotic system where any nomination contest with 2 strong candidates is thrown to the convention floor.

It is rather ironic that one of the primary bashing-points of Bush43 has been that he has been a divider instead of a uniter. And here we have 2 democrat candidates that are dividing their own party. The left can't even unite themselves.

A clear indicator to me that both are in this for at least some of the wrong reasons. If either of them truly wanted to lead they would realize that a leader isn't always the name on the door and compromise. THAT would be refreshing. THAT would be something even I could support.

 

[Pai Mei]

See, I don't get this. Obama is running a winning campaign that is not based on mud-slinging. She is losing and running a compaign that is as dirty as it gets. Why should he have to come to some sort of accomidation?

Because of the belief that Hillary could at the very least take her campaign to the convention. That's August 25-28. Many feel that 5 months of a bloody fight between Obama and Clinton will severely weaken both. Therefore Clinton has a bargaining chip and Obama probably needs to cut a deal to prevent that from happening. The funny thing about bargaining chips is that the person with the smallest chip often has the most power. Someone with 99% of everything they need to accomplish their goal actually is often at the mercy of the other guy that holds that last 1%. You see the person with the 1% has nothing to lose if they don't make a deal. Its the person with the 99% that has everything to lose. So yeah, I could definitely see Hillary asking to be at the top of the ticket.

 

[Sweet J]

Fortunately this doesn't seem to be getting any traction, but is another example of [the Clintons] attempts to keep re-writing the rules until they get a favorable result.

I never cease to amaze at how the democrats finally see the Clintons for what they are after all these years.

I know. I feel like a guy who has been cheering for Duke for years, and then woke up one day and it just clicked. . . .

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Sen. Clinton, speaking today at the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, argued today that the delegates from Florida and Michigan should be seated, in some form or another:

"If you are a voter from Florida or Michigan, you know that we should count your vote. The nearly two and a half million Americans in those two states who participated in the primary elections are in danger of being excluded from our democratic process and I think that's wrong. The results of those primaries were fair and they should be honored. Over the last few weeks, there has been a lot of discussion about what we should do to ensure that the voters in Florida and Michigan are counted.

"In my view there are two options: Honor the results or hold new primary elections. I don't see any other solutions that are fair and honor the commitment that two and a half million voters made in the Democratic primaries in those two states. Whether voters are clamoring for solutions to the challenges that we face or not, or whether people are coming out in droves to be heard, we have a basic obligation to make sure that every vote in America counts.

I hope that Senator Obama's campaign will join me in working to make that happen. I think that that is a non-partisan solution to make sure that we do count these votes."

Yeah OK, Ms. Monster.

Except for the bolded part I agree with her here. Redo the vote. She may win but it will still result in Obama leading the delegate count and it will remove the one last thing she can spin.

The other thing her campaign has been doing this week is trying to float this idea that there are really three categories of delegates; "automatic" delegates, which is their interest choice of terminology for superdelegates, pledged delegates, and "caucus" delegates. The idea being that if they redo the votes in FL and Michigan she might be ahead in delegates from the primary states (she isn't currently), and that somehow the caucus votes shouldn't count as much.Fortunately this doesn't seem to be getting any traction, but is another example of their attempts to keep re-writing the rules until they get a favorable result.

It will get traction, she's just laying the groundwork now. I heard her on NPR this morning (her voice is much more tolerable in one-on-one interviews than when she's speaking to a crowd) and she went through the "three types of delegates" thing very calmly and matter-of-fact and I thought "OK, what the hell is she up to?"

The interviewer didn't follow up and she didn't elaborate so I think she's prepping her "case" to the supers in order to give them something to justify supporting her.

 

[Sammy3469]

How would you all feel if Obama had to pick HRC as a running mate so as not to fracture the party?

I hope this isn't a honda

Well, it has been discussed, but probably will be for the next 6-12 weeks in even more depth. And many people's opinions may change on the subject in that time. For me, its the same as it was a couple weeks ago. If Obama is at the top of the ticket, then i could live with it. I certainly dont wish for it to happen. I will not encourage it. But, if it happens, so be it. After the last discussion on this topic in this thread, i tend to agree with a common point from other posters. Specifically, HRC as a VP choice compromises Obama's main message of changing Washington. While i think that ticket would win in the fall, it would certainly water down his message.

I said this in the Randi Rhodes rumor thread, but I'll expound here.THIS NEEDS TO END NOW.

There I said it. At this point I really don't care who's on the top and who's on bottom. But this campaign is dangerously close to killing any chance either has to beat McCain in Nov. The latest NBC poll now has both behind him eventhough a generic Dem is up 15%. This is not good.

The 3 grown-ups left in this mess, Dean, Pelosi, and Reid, (I guess 4 if you count Gore), need to step in and tell these two to come to some accomidation NOW instead of beating each other up for the next 5 months (since there's no way either campaign will give up before the convention). This "process" has taken the party into the gutter and quite frankly as much as I don't like her, the only way the supporters of each side will feel satisfied is if both these people start acting like adults and more importantly LEADERS, heal the wounds of the past 2 months, and come together.

Really its that simple.

Oh and Dean...please reform this idiotic system where any nomination contest with 2 strong candidates is thrown to the convention floor.

See, I don't get this. Obama is running a winning campaign that is not based on mud-slinging. She is losing and running a compaign that is as dirty as it gets. Why should he have to come to some sort of accomidation?

Because while he's winning, he's not going to have the nomination wrapped up until at the earliest June and more likely not definitively until the convention. It's more an issue of timing than anything. As much as I hate to say it because I really don't like her, as long as she has a chance of winning, he has to accomodate her. At this point he also has to heal the party which also means making her happy. Whether that means making her the VP (a pretty ceremonial title I might add), making her the Whip in the Senate, or telling her she'd be the his first nominee to Supreme Court, it has to be done simply so they don't keep hammering each other, spending gobs of money, and giving McCain a free pass for 6 weeks.

Waiting until June or August while they hammer each other (even if they somehow manage to only go at each other on the issues) while McCain gains strength (and make no mistake that's all he's been doing since Super Tuesday) simply isn't a winning strategy. Accomodating her has nothing to do with giving her a pass on what she's done, but everything to do with seeing the big picture for what it is, we need a stong and united party to ensure that we don't have 4 more years of Republican rule.

 

[adonis]

How would you all feel if Obama had to pick HRC as a running mate so as not to fracture the party?I hope this isn't a honda

Well, it has been discussed, but probably will be for the next 6-12 weeks in even more depth. And many people's opinions may change on the subject in that time. For me, its the same as it was a couple weeks ago. If Obama is at the top of the ticket, then i could live with it. I certainly dont wish for it to happen. I will not encourage it. But, if it happens, so be it. After the last discussion on this topic in this thread, i tend to agree with a common point from other posters. Specifically, HRC as a VP choice compromises Obama's main message of changing Washington. While i think that ticket would win in the fall, it would certainly water down his message.

I said this in the Randi Rhodes rumor thread, but I'll expound here.THIS NEEDS TO END NOW.There I said it. At this point I really don't care who's on the top and who's on bottom. But this campaign is dangerously close to killing any chance either has to beat McCain in Nov. The latest NBC poll now has both behind him eventhough a generic Dem is up 15%. This is not good. The 3 grown-ups left in this mess, Dean, Pelosi, and Reid, (I guess 4 if you count Gore), need to step in and tell these two to come to some accomidation NOW instead of beating each other up for the next 5 months (since there's no way either campaign will give up before the convention). This "process" has taken the party into the gutter and quite frankly as much as I don't like her, the only way the supporters of each side will feel satisfied is if both these people start acting like adults and more importantly LEADERS, heal the wounds of the past 2 months, and come together.Really its that simple.Oh and Dean...please reform this idiotic system where any nomination contest with 2 strong candidates is thrown to the convention floor.

It is rather ironic that one of the primary bashing-points of Bush43 has been that he has been a divider instead of a uniter. And here we have 2 democrat candidates that are dividing their own party. The left can't even unite themselves.

A clear indicator to me that both are in this for at least some of the wrong reasons. If either of them truly wanted to lead they would realize that a leader isn't always the name on the door and compromise. THAT would be refreshing. THAT would be something even I could support.

WTH are you talking about?

 

[Mookie Blaylock]

Anyone in this thread willing to post what line of work they are in?

 

[Sweet J]

Sen. Clinton, speaking today at the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, argued today that the delegates from Florida and Michigan should be seated, in some form or another:

"If you are a voter from Florida or Michigan, you know that we should count your vote. The nearly two and a half million Americans in those two states who participated in the primary elections are in danger of being excluded from our democratic process and I think that's wrong. The results of those primaries were fair and they should be honored. Over the last few weeks, there has been a lot of discussion about what we should do to ensure that the voters in Florida and Michigan are counted.

"In my view there are two options: Honor the results or hold new primary elections. I don't see any other solutions that are fair and honor the commitment that two and a half million voters made in the Democratic primaries in those two states. Whether voters are clamoring for solutions to the challenges that we face or not, or whether people are coming out in droves to be heard, we have a basic obligation to make sure that every vote in America counts.

I hope that Senator Obama's campaign will join me in working to make that happen. I think that that is a non-partisan solution to make sure that we do count these votes."

Yeah OK, Ms. Monster.

Except for the bolded part I agree with her here. Redo the vote. She may win but it will still result in Obama leading the delegate count and it will remove the one last thing she can spin.

The other thing her campaign has been doing this week is trying to float this idea that there are really three categories of delegates; "automatic" delegates, which is their interest choice of terminology for superdelegates, pledged delegates, and "caucus" delegates. The idea being that if they redo the votes in FL and Michigan she might be ahead in delegates from the primary states (she isn't currently), and that somehow the caucus votes shouldn't count as much.Fortunately this doesn't seem to be getting any traction, but is another example of their attempts to keep re-writing the rules until they get a favorable result.

It will get traction, she's just laying the groundwork now. I heard her on NPR this morning (her voice is much more tolerable in one-on-one interviews than when she's speaking to a crowd) and she went through the "three types of delegates" thing very calmly and matter-of-fact and I thought "OK, what the hell is she up to?"

The interviewer didn't follow up and she didn't elaborate so I think she's prepping her "case" to the supers in order to give them something to justify supporting her.

WHAT????? I HADN'T HEARD THIS??? WTF? IS SHE HONESTLY TRYING TO DO THIS???Sweet jesus, I'm becoming unhinged. Internet, I don't know how to quit you.

 

[Sweet J]

Anyone in this thread willing to post what line of work they are in?

heh.

 

[urbanhack]

Anyone in this thread willing to post what line of work they are in?

Sure.Why do you ask?

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

How would you all feel if Obama had to pick HRC as a running mate so as not to fracture the party?I hope this isn't a honda

Well, it has been discussed, but probably will be for the next 6-12 weeks in even more depth. And many people's opinions may change on the subject in that time. For me, its the same as it was a couple weeks ago. If Obama is at the top of the ticket, then i could live with it. I certainly dont wish for it to happen. I will not encourage it. But, if it happens, so be it. After the last discussion on this topic in this thread, i tend to agree with a common point from other posters. Specifically, HRC as a VP choice compromises Obama's main message of changing Washington. While i think that ticket would win in the fall, it would certainly water down his message.

I said this in the Randi Rhodes rumor thread, but I'll expound here.THIS NEEDS TO END NOW.There I said it. At this point I really don't care who's on the top and who's on bottom. But this campaign is dangerously close to killing any chance either has to beat McCain in Nov. The latest NBC poll now has both behind him eventhough a generic Dem is up 15%. This is not good. The 3 grown-ups left in this mess, Dean, Pelosi, and Reid, (I guess 4 if you count Gore), need to step in and tell these two to come to some accomidation NOW instead of beating each other up for the next 5 months (since there's no way either campaign will give up before the convention). This "process" has taken the party into the gutter and quite frankly as much as I don't like her, the only way the supporters of each side will feel satisfied is if both these people start acting like adults and more importantly LEADERS, heal the wounds of the past 2 months, and come together.Really its that simple.Oh and Dean...please reform this idiotic system where any nomination contest with 2 strong candidates is thrown to the convention floor.

It is rather ironic that one of the primary bashing-points of Bush43 has been that he has been a divider instead of a uniter. And here we have 2 democrat candidates that are dividing their own party. The left can't even unite themselves.

A clear indicator to me that both are in this for at least some of the wrong reasons. If either of them truly wanted to lead they would realize that a leader isn't always the name on the door and compromise. THAT would be refreshing. THAT would be something even I could support.

WTH are you talking about?

It's a sort of thread-turrets.

 

[Mookie Blaylock]

How would you all feel if Obama had to pick HRC as a running mate so as not to fracture the party?I hope this isn't a honda

Well, it has been discussed, but probably will be for the next 6-12 weeks in even more depth. And many people's opinions may change on the subject in that time. For me, its the same as it was a couple weeks ago. If Obama is at the top of the ticket, then i could live with it. I certainly dont wish for it to happen. I will not encourage it. But, if it happens, so be it. After the last discussion on this topic in this thread, i tend to agree with a common point from other posters. Specifically, HRC as a VP choice compromises Obama's main message of changing Washington. While i think that ticket would win in the fall, it would certainly water down his message.

I said this in the Randi Rhodes rumor thread, but I'll expound here.THIS NEEDS TO END NOW.There I said it. At this point I really don't care who's on the top and who's on bottom. But this campaign is dangerously close to killing any chance either has to beat McCain in Nov. The latest NBC poll now has both behind him eventhough a generic Dem is up 15%. This is not good. The 3 grown-ups left in this mess, Dean, Pelosi, and Reid, (I guess 4 if you count Gore), need to step in and tell these two to come to some accomidation NOW instead of beating each other up for the next 5 months (since there's no way either campaign will give up before the convention). This "process" has taken the party into the gutter and quite frankly as much as I don't like her, the only way the supporters of each side will feel satisfied is if both these people start acting like adults and more importantly LEADERS, heal the wounds of the past 2 months, and come together.Really its that simple.Oh and Dean...please reform this idiotic system where any nomination contest with 2 strong candidates is thrown to the convention floor.

It is rather ironic that one of the primary bashing-points of Bush43 has been that he has been a divider instead of a uniter. And here we have 2 democrat candidates that are dividing their own party. The left can't even unite themselves.

A clear indicator to me that both are in this for at least some of the wrong reasons. If either of them truly wanted to lead they would realize that a leader isn't always the name on the door and compromise. THAT would be refreshing. THAT would be something even I could support.

WTH are you talking about?

What part don't you understand? It's pretty simple really. This fight is about their egos. How do you not see that?