Oh and by the way, why DID Barack Obama lose South Dakota yesterday? And he didn't just LOSE it, he lost it by 12 points! Are the demographics that different from North Dakota? Or is that he's lost steam since then, and after all ND was a caucus and SD was a closed primary....hmmm.
You need to embrace that reality.
I encourage people not to get drawn into this nonsense.
Nonsense? Why this is serious stuff...Remember another great diarist here from Hillaryis44, Universal?
XXXXX (AKA Universal) Says: June 2nd, 2008 at 2:50 pm Kostner -- excellent. No need to post right away. As long as we're moving in that direction is the important point, I think. 1950's -- I just started looking for them myself. I joined McCain's campaign site, the RNC site, and have bookmarked a few others. www.rnc.org/ www.johnmccain.com/blog/ www.mccainnow.com/ www.blogs4mccain.com/
I wish people from that site would stop rec'cing diaries here & on McCain blogs simulataneously.
It's pretty simple, really. Just look at the people who are rec'ing these diaries and take away their rec'ing priveleges. Will they still hijacking the reclist in Aug. getting all pumped up for a convention protest, all 19 of them(there are presently 19 rec's for this diary). How about September? November even? I've got a better idea - get rid of them now. This site should be better than that. This isn't No Quarter or Hillaryis44, this is MyDD. It should be better than this.
Universal is back at My DD as Zeitgeist9000
You're right. But it's very tempting. It's like a candy dish at Grandma's. Full of old, unsatisfying candy, but it's better than leafing through the old, unsatisfying magazines.
I think it is importnt to challenge it. Sorry.
I agree, but get it off the reclist somehow. Don't let these holdouts hijack the reclist. This stuff needs to stop.
"Because there will not be a nominee until August. There will not be -- there cannot be -- any nominee until August. And even the "presumptive nominee" status is a stretch because normally that claim is made by a candidate who has reached the required number of PLEDGED delegates (as John McCain did)."
John McCain's 'presumptive nominee' status was based on just pledged delegates because THE REPUBLICANS DO NOT HAVE SUPERDELEGATES. As for the Democratic pledged delegates(elected delegates), Obama secured a majority of them a few weeks ago. And he also has now clinched a majority of the superdelegates too, and in the process of winning all these delegates, he has indeed clinched the nomination. Hillary Clinton will not be the nominee. It's over. Time to let it go. There's no time to coddle these folks who seek to undermine Obama's legitimacy.
Theses delusional screeds are just a lame attempt to undermine the legitimacy of the Democratic Nominee for President of the United States, Senator Barack Obama. Diaries that push Clinton supporters further toward the edge of denial serve only to hinder the prospects of electing a Democratic President in '08, and should be called out as such. It should be made clear that they are not welcome on a site dedicated to a Democrat becoming the next President.
First of all the diary is correct. Neither candidate secured the required amount of pledged delegates to clinch the nomination.
Un-pledged delegates do not vote until August, and as we have all seen, can easily and quickly change from one to another. However, I can not see that happening, unless something dramatic were to happen upon Obama's part. Again I don't see that happening.
Obama is the presumptive nominee, until the actual August convention in Denver he is not the nominee -- that should be clear. Remember...rules are rules. Pointing this does not undermine Obama's candidacy or in any way disparages him or his campaign, and you're attempt to insinuate that is what is destroying the party and legitimacy.
Instead of trying to brow beat and strong arm people into thinking like you; you might want to think about actual party unity, and start focusing on the down-ticket races, which will actually strengthen the eventual nominee's position and ability to attack and secure more House and Senate seats so that Democrats can actually perform some of the campaign promises that we've been talking about.
Anything else is pure posturing and hyperbole. You want to help Democrats, help the down-ticket race. The nominee race will work itself out shortly. It's out of the people's hands now anyway. The Party insiders will vote in August and then we'll have a nominee, but I would bet you almost anything that we will be focusing on a specific individual fairly soon. If you can't handle that, then maybe you shouldn't come around here until then.
"Neither candidate secured the required amount of pledged delegates to clinch the nomination."
Willful ignorance - that's all I can say.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/200 8/06/03/obama-clinches-democratic-nomina tion/
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/ story?id=4987177&page=1
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php? id=D912O5FG0&show_article=1
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/04/a merica/04cndcampaign.php
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/poli ticalintelligence/2008/06/obama_poised_t o_1.html
http://www.cnbc.com/id/24951953
Agreed. Just ignore it folks.
1. Barack Obama has now officially won more votes than any person to seek the presidential nomination of EITHER political party in history, and his candidacy accurately represents the will of the people who voted in the Democratic primaries and caucuses.
2. Barack Obama won 33 OF 56 contests.
3. Barack Obama finished the primary season with momentum, starting the race near 15% in the polls and finishing near 60%; Hillary, in contrast, is wheezing across the finish line with a downward trajectory that bodes poorly for the general election. She has consistently polled between 40% and 50% with no change over a year and a half.
4. Barack Obama assembled a coalition of loyal voters that can guarantee victory against McCain, including white women, hispanics, catholics, jews, and lunch-bucket workers, students, youth, Republicans, independents, college-educated, cross-over voters, blacks, whites, and everything in between.
5. Hillary Clinton is too well known, relentlessly vetted by the media, and spent 20 years being clobbered by the GOP, RNC, 527 Oppo Teams due to her treasure chest of bizarre skeletons.
See, I can play, too.
At least she has finally come to grips with the fact that Hillary didn't win. I guess arguing that it's a "tie" is a step in the right direction.
It's like the video juxtaposing Clinton and Obama on the black night scene in Mony Python's Search for the Holy Grail. Aurthur chops off both arms and both legs, and the black night explains- "All right, we'll call it a draw".
It's almost worse, though, because it sounds vaguely plausable, if you squint at it jeeeeeest right and are nuts.
i encourage Obama supporters to not just whisk away this sort of comment since it's a reality that he's lost a lot of important contests towards the end and that weighs on his prospects in November. Face the reality, deal with it, or lose.
The reality of Puerto Rico, South Dakota, Kentucky, West Virginia (Appelachia) Indiana (almost) and Texas not preferring him in a Democratic primary? Oh my stars and garters! Whatever shall he do???
You forget CA, OH, PA, NJ, NY, FL, AR, & NM.
Yes...what shall he do?
The post said "late wins."
Frankly, I'm pretty happy with the current polls. Happy to have Obama pick Balki from "Perfect Strangers" (in open violation of at least two constitutional provisions, but whatever) as a running mate) as veep and win the contest in a landslide today. But if you're still hoping to taut primary results of the great people of Arkansas, who'd as soon eat me as swerve to miss me when crossing the street, (I'm 1/2 Jewish, 1/2 Squirell) as proof of general election strength, go right ahead.
I'll be over here. Storing nuts for the 8 years of Pax Obamaca.
While you may be right about Arkansas (more the squirell than the Jewish part), I'd rather Hillary not be Obama's VP.
What's funny though is the post also said...TX, FL, OH, PA, MI, in addition to AR. But then again, why stop cherry-picking now right?
Pax Obamaca? Just goes to show it's all about him over the party Obama?...yes over John McCain...No for the betterment of America. I hope he wins (when & if Hillary conceeds) yet I personally don't think at the moment he has a shot. Will I vote for him...probably. However, my focus now will be on the important issues of getting the down-ticket races competitive and getting them in office.
Pax Obamaca...nah, Pax Democratica.
to realize that this primary is over and to start campaigning against McCain.
If you recognize the weakness and care about our party, why don't you work on fixing it instead of supporting a post that keeps the divide in OUR party (note the caps).
Face the reality and don't rec this crap.
sorry but i find this sort of comment extremely divisive
And this is reality:
I was promised ponies...
Shame rec for the racist troll from NoQuarter spreading lies about our nominee.
Hillary wants you to go home.
Tell Rove and Bushie we say hi!
You are now in the minority. More HRC fans and joining forces with BO fans to build a true coalition. Go away - shoo fly!
Or is that he's lost steam since then, and after all ND was a caucus and SD was a closed primary....hmmm.
Maybe the Obamabots bullied and gamed the caucus!?!?!?
These charges have no place here. You think you're cut when all you are doing is trolling and smearing OUR presumptive nominee.
Hillary won a depressed turnout vote in South Dakota because she put in the effort there while Obama had turned primarily to the general. A lot of Obama supporters also probably stayed home knowing that the nomination was in the bag.
It was a nice win for her and congratulations to her for poaching a state that should have been his.
Maybe you should start recycling those dual-citizenship diaries.
It was 10%, not 12% in SD.
We are informed and engaged constituents committed to a brilliant and inspiring leader. We are NOT going to fold our tents and hop on board Obama's train just cause that's what we are told to do by people who, frankly, are experts at losing elections.
How many elections has Mark Penn won lately?
Completely serious question (unlike those who usually use it at an insult.) I really feel like this is someone imitating the well-known MyDD poster's style.
After all, your points are:
2. Hillary Clinton won ALL of the major states except Illinois. 3. Hillary Clinton finished the primary season with momentum, out-performing expectations in several races such as, most recently, Indiana, West Virginia, Kentucky, Puerto Rico, and South Dakota (see Obama's predictions spreadsheet); Obama, in contrast, is wheezing across the finish line with a downward trajectory that bodes poorly for the general election. 4. Hillary Clinton assembled a coalition of loyal voters that can guarantee victory against McCain, including white women, hispanics, catholics, jews, and lunch-bucket workers. 5. Barack Obama is still a relative unknown, remains unvetted by the media, and is teetering on the brink of being clobbered by the GOP, RNC, 527 Oppo Teams due to his treasure chest of bizarre skeletons.
3. Hillary Clinton finished the primary season with momentum, out-performing expectations in several races such as, most recently, Indiana, West Virginia, Kentucky, Puerto Rico, and South Dakota (see Obama's predictions spreadsheet); Obama, in contrast, is wheezing across the finish line with a downward trajectory that bodes poorly for the general election.
4. Hillary Clinton assembled a coalition of loyal voters that can guarantee victory against McCain, including white women, hispanics, catholics, jews, and lunch-bucket workers.
5. Barack Obama is still a relative unknown, remains unvetted by the media, and is teetering on the brink of being clobbered by the GOP, RNC, 527 Oppo Teams due to his treasure chest of bizarre skeletons.
If I'm wrong and this is the real person, then a version of Poe's Law probably is coming into effect here
But it's over. And there's nothing anybody can do about it. It's too late.
and rec'd your diary, but can't rec your comment. It's wording is ungracious, inflammatory, and an embarassment to me, a Hillary supporter. Please stop, thank you kindly.
Why rec a diary titled "It's a tie"? Do you think this an accurate portayal of the state of the race? Do you think perpetuating this idea in the delusional manner the diarist has will help to elect Obama? Indeed, will it help Hillary Clinton herself to move forward and do the right thing, a chance she passed up last night? This diary accomplishes nothing positive whatsoever and serves only to undermine the Democratic Nominee.
This diary reminds me of the Monty Python skit where King Arthur battled the Black Knight.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eMkth8FW no
Can anyone teach me how to embed videos?
Yes. Go to the youtube page you want to embed, look in the right column for a box that says "embed" and copy the code. Paste it in a diary or comment. Check "preview" to make sure it copied properly.
Than Hillary got ZERO votes in Michigan.
And Texas Darlin is a liar.
I'm sorry, but you're leaking RTP all over the place. Could you please stop?
Fearless Tracker: Usually mucking about at the bottom of diaries, and this time making an exception.
I'm Nicolas Chauvin and I have approved this message.
and let the best person win in August! Two ballots at the convention, and all are free to change their minds after the first ballot. Right now they both have asterisks beside their names: potential nominee until August!
The SD results just confirm the difference between the closed/open primaries and the caucuses...I think an analysis of this was posted here the other day. Imo, this system should be reformed to really reflect the will of the people.
I'd like to see both candidates continue to show and demonstrate how they would take on McCain under any label they want (presumed nominee, nominee, potential nominee, candidate) so we can all see this and come together behind our nominee in August. Let's keep the involvement going and not sit back!
The first ballot will be Obama winning by pledged and plenty of SD's.The ones voting for some other candidate on the first ballot will get a chance to change their vote on the second ballot, the one where as customary a vote is taken to have a UNANIMOUS vote of approval for the prospective nominee. That's the custom. So on vote #2 it will be All Obama ,100%. and done.
All of this tie stuff is self parody and delusion.
54 or 64 Sd'ds came intoday, more are unloading their"uncommitted" status, more Clinton SD's are changing, it's a wave of get this primary behind us and on with the Democratic Big Win in November.
Hillary Clinton is on the spot with the Democratic Party to acknowledge that and be a gracious supporter. It is expected of the runner up in these things.
Those are the true facts about Democratic primaries, regardless of the year you are talking about.
This diary ,"It's a tie" is frankly not only incorrect, but delusional and unhelpful. This is not what many,many HRC supporters are saying today. They are urging her to wind this up with the grace and style she was known for.
And why should asking a perfectly legitimate question be troll rated?
Bargaining.
The status of presumptive nominee or having "clinched" or reaqched the magic number must be done without superdelegates. If the primary season closed with neither candidate winning enough votes to clinch in pledged delegates, it goes to convention to determine which will be the nominee.
The reason: superdelegate votes are fungible until they are cast and recorded at convention. Much has changed in the las 80 days and much will change in the next. No one knows what the vote will be in August. This is the way the rules are set up and why.
We have a candidate and some party leaders who want that candidate to be the nominee who are breaking the rules. Nothing new. Hillary is correct to press her case with the supers and to spend the summer on a crusade to count the votes and try to correct the various instances during the primaries when the voters intentions did not receive fair reflection in the outcome. Fair reflaction of the voters' intention is the bedrock of the Democratic Party Charter.
Think about it. Why would a group of leaders or a candidate be so incredibly eager to shut down an election process? Why be so obvious in violation of the party rules and why antagonize so many millions of voters? Why suffer huge losses in party membership and donations?
Why show yourself to the American People as one who will not follow due process and run and win fair and square? What would make any rank and file Democrat and the most necessary Reagon Democrat feel that they are values by this party? Why is Obama that convinced that he can't win by the rules?
Dean, Reid and Pelosi say they will issue "stern letter" to superdelegates demanding that they chose a candidate and announce it at once. These power handlers in the party are threatening superdelegates to decide three months early what their vote will be and reveal it publicly NOW. But the prescious party rules say that the ballot must be secret and has to be cast at the convention in a monitored, recorded proces.
People who have studied the rules and been involved in the pary processes for various conventions kknow this and also know that what the "leaders" are doing is really wrong.
The leader of the House and of the Senate have much say in the assignment of members to committees and in the scheduling of votes and bringing legislation to the floor. Their "stern" reguirement on members implies a threat about their jobs.
We have rules in this society about people in power over other people's jobs using that power to coerce people to abridge or sumbmit their rights. Yet we have allowed the creation of an environment where many things that society abhors are now expected and usual.
Something is very wrong. We had better find out what it is before we present this man to the voter as our nominee. We only have 80 days to put this right.
