The Liberal Thread #2 - No Debate Please

[KikiFan]

But they were put in place to prevent a situation like what happened with Gary Hart. They were intended to keep the party from nominating a candidate that was involved in a scandal - something that hit mid-campaign and preceded a string of losses - and would have no chance of winning the general election. They were not intended to overrule the vote of the people.

I spoke a super delegate this Tuesday. The way it was explained to me is that if the vote is overwhelming, then no they aren't supposed to overrule the vote of the people. But if the vote is close and no candidate has reached the magic number 2025 (meaning an absolute majority); they have a lot more leeway on who to vote for. At that point, they vote for who they believe is the best candidate. They look at popular vote, particularly in key states, they look at fundraising and a bunch of other issues. One of the issues that they are also looking at is if the vote is close, how much of it is because of Republicans mucking with the system. My caucus was the one where some knucklehead proposed Ron Paul for VP. Believe me, not all the people in that caucus had noble intentions.

The Supers are meant to really function as "party elders" who make course corrections when the will of the people isn't clear or in the event of a Gary Hart type situation.

 

[LuvDuke]

I think the super delegates will go with whoever is ahead in the delegate count. I also think there are quite a few super delegates who are sick of Hillary Clinton and her husband and would like nothing more then to boot them off the political stage.

 

[MerryPoppins]

When would be your cutoff date for choosing party affiliation? As an Independent thinker I will always be an Independent, I always have been and at times I've crossed the aisle, so I'm not sure that everyone in the USA would like to be put into one box or the other, but say you had up until 3 weeks prior or 1 month prior to an election, I could see that as a possible cutoff for marking your party affiliation for the primary or general upcoming.

Our state has a closed primary, so I guess I'm coming at this from that perspective. Yes, it's possible to switch party affiliations...not sure how long before because I've never done it, but several weeks before I'd guess. I know you can't just show up the day of an election and change. As a life-long Democrat I would not be willing to switch my affiliation to the Republicans to vote in their primary and I'm assuming many others would feel the same.

I'm sure not everyone likes being "put in a box" but votes for the Republican candidate should come from Republicans. Votes for Democratic candidates should come from Democrats. If you aren't one of those, then you can go to the trouble to change your affiliation or remain what you are and not vote. It's not my fault if you don't have a primary for your party. I think less people would cross over if they had to go to a lot of trouble to switch and switch back. We can at least make it hard for them to cross sides.

 

[DISUNC]

I think the super delegates will go with whoever is ahead in the delegate count. I also think there are quite a few super delegates who are sick of Hillary Clinton and her husband and would like nothing more then to boot them off the political stage.

Many of the SD became SD's because of the Clintons!

Just throwing a thought out here. Does anybody think for a moment that Hillary is STILL in the campaign because she thinks, she might just get the SD's? Or does SHE KNOW she will get the SD's?

Does this have anything to do with Obama ratcheting up on the negative campaign?

 

[DISUNC]

Spin it however you want, the Supes never were intended to overturn the vote of the people. It would be the quickest way to completely discredit whatever nominee we put forward.

No they were never intended to overturn the vote of the people.

Since many states allow Republicans & Independants to vote in Democrat primaries. The outcome is not always the Democrat peoples outcome. The SD's were created to vote the pure Democrat Party candidate.

The SD's are the Party Leaders not followers.

Also please keep in mind with the 'vote their constituency" is a bunk. Most SD's are private individuals and are not currently Elected officials with constituancies.

Ps. The SD's came into being AFTER Carter got the nomination. The DNC was not happy with him. The creation of the SD"s had nothing to do with Gary Hart.

 

[Fitswimmer]

Ok, here's a REALLY odd theory that a caller came up with on the Randi Rhodes show yesterday:

Hillary is playing a scorched earth game. She's too smart not to be able to do the math that everyone else has been doing, she knows she can't win. So, her thought process is-get McCain to win. He'll continue the policies of GW, people will get angrier. He's also old-so the combination of an even angrier electorate with his age makes him a one-term President. And there she sits, waiting for that open Oval Office, just like a spider.....

If Obama wins, it's 8 years before she gets another shot.

 

[JARNJ3]

Ok, here's a REALLY odd theory that a caller came up with on the Randi Rhodes show yesterday:

Hillary is playing a scorched earth game. She's too smart not to be able to do the math that everyone else has been doing, she knows she can't win. So, her thought process is-get McCain to win. He'll continue the policies of GW, people will get angrier. He's also old-so the combination of an even angrier electorate with his age makes him a one-term President. And there she sits, waiting for that open Oval Office, just like a spider.....

If Obama wins, it's 8 years before she gets another shot.

Like I said on another thread - or here - Randi Rhodes is now pro-Obama and anti-Clinton - so it would reason her callers are that as well.

Do you think all of us Hillary supporters would be on board if that were her plan?

Her plan is to do her best and try to win. She believes that she is the best candidate for the job - we believe she is the best candidate for the job. Why is that so hard to accept?

She has repeatedly said that the party will come together and rally around the nominee (here - I think some of her supporters (some seniors and latinos) may vote for McCain - but the majority will vote for the Democratic nominee.

The reality is - the supers will have to decide the outcome of this race. All this math talk reminds me of the "fuzzy math" time. Ugh.

 

[Fitswimmer]

Like I said on another thread - or here - Randi Rhodes is now pro-Obama and anti-Clinton - so it would reason her callers are that as well.

Do you think all of us Hillary supporters would be on board if that were her plan?

Her plan is to do her best and try to win. She believes that she is the best candidate for the job - we believe she is the best candidate for the job. Why is that so hard to accept?

She has repeatedly said that the party will come together and rally around the nominee (here - I think some of her supporters (some seniors and latinos) may vote for McCain - but the majority will vote for the Democratic nominee.

The reality is - the supers will have to decide the outcome of this race. All this math talk reminds me of the "fuzzy math" time. Ugh.

But it still leaves the question of why she continues to praise McCain instead of going after him. She's been tougher on Obama than McCain!

 

[NewJersey]

But it still leaves the question of why she continues to praise McCain instead of going after him. She's been tougher on Obama than McCain!

Thank you!!

It looks like she wants to take the party down with her.

 

[KikiFan]

But it still leaves the question of why she continues to praise McCain instead of going after him. She's been tougher on Obama than McCain!

Because right now McCain isn't her opponent. Obama is and she's trying to highlight that she'll be better able to compete against McCain in the general election.

I'm not sure it's the best stategy, but to say she doesn't care about women's rights, the supreme court etc is a bit of a stretch. I'm guessing that Hillary feels that McCain's comment about "100 years" will trump everything else when it comes to his foreign policy experience.

 

[Fitswimmer]

Because right now McCain isn't her opponent. Obama is and she's trying to highlight that she'll be better able to compete against McCain in the general election.

I'm not sure it's the best stategy, but to say she doesn't care about women's rights, the supreme court etc is a bit of a stretch. I'm guessing that Hillary feels that McCain's comment about "100 years" will trump everything else when it comes to his foreign policy experience.

Ok, so say she does win the nomination. All these nice things she's said about McCain are out there. How is she going to turn around and start attacking him, when she's spent March through August saying what a great guy he is??

I don't get her strategy here.

 

[Hound 109]

Ok, here's a REALLY odd theory that a caller came up with on the Randi Rhodes show yesterday:

Hillary is playing a scorched earth game. She's too smart not to be able to do the math that everyone else has been doing, she knows she can't win. So, her thought process is-get McCain to win. He'll continue the policies of GW, people will get angrier. He's also old-so the combination of an even angrier electorate with his age makes him a one-term President. And there she sits, waiting for that open Oval Office, just like a spider.....

If Obama wins, it's 8 years before she gets another shot.

Thats very odd thinking. (that Randi has). I'm sure that both HC & BO supporters thinK their candidate can win this year.

But since neither candidate can earn enough delegates to get elected, & both candidates positions are so similar, both candidates will have to prove to voters & superdelegates how they differ & who might be the better candidate.

 

[Laura]

Why mention McCain at all, if he's not her opponent yet? She wants him to be her opponent, so why start praising him?

 

[Fitswimmer]

Why mention McCain at all, if he's not her opponent yet? She wants him to be her opponent, so why start praising him?

That's what makes me go too. I can see why people are coming up with their own explanations for her strategy, because it just doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense

 

[Hound 109]

But it still leaves the question of why she continues to praise McCain instead of going after him. She's been tougher on Obama than McCain!

You praise the opponent's service & you praise them as a person..... while strategically defining how you are different (better). It's exactly what BO has been doing (against HC & others) until last week.

HC knows that she'd smoke McCain on "change", tax breaks for the rich & Iraq & probably his age. (As would BO).

The fact that the BO supporters in the media find fault with this strategy (which BO supporters themselves used) means that they are either not thinking clearly or they are getting desperate. My take is that BO's handlers don't have "experience" in counter punching & they think that running for president should be a series of steps toward Coronation.

 

[robinb]

Ok, here's a REALLY odd theory that a caller came up with on the Randi Rhodes show yesterday:

Hillary is playing a scorched earth game. She's too smart not to be able to do the math that everyone else has been doing, she knows she can't win. So, her thought process is-get McCain to win. He'll continue the policies of GW, people will get angrier. He's also old-so the combination of an even angrier electorate with his age makes him a one-term President. And there she sits, waiting for that open Oval Office, just like a spider.....

If Obama wins, it's 8 years before she gets another shot.

I think that theory is total BS and just another way for some Barack supporters to demonize Hillary. They want to think so little of Clinton that she would even consider giving up the country for 4 more years in an attempt to gain power afterwards. That's simply insane. Even if McCain wins that doesn't mean that Obama will just be sitting on his hands in 3 years!

 

[Laura]

You praise the opponent's service & you praise them as a person..... while strategically defining how you are different (better). It's exactly what BO has been doing (against HC & others) until last week.

HC knows that she'd smoke McCain on "change", tax breaks for the rich & Iraq & probably his age. (As would BO).

The fact that the BO supporters in the media find fault with this strategy (which BO supporters themselves used) means that they are either not thinking clearly or they are getting desperate. My take is that BO's handlers don't have "experience" in counter punching & they think that running for president should be a series of steps toward Coronation.

No, it just doesn't make sense, no matter how you try to spin it. I'm thinking clearly and I'm not desperate, thank you. Obama's not the candidate who's behind, he has more delegates, and he's raking in the donations.

And who's talking about coronation. Hillary Clinton was supposed to be the inevitable candidate. When that doesn't happen, she starts acting irrationally.

 

[punkin]

You praise the opponent's service & you praise them as a person..... while strategically defining how you are different (better). It's exactly what BO has been doing (against HC & others) until last week.

HC knows that she'd smoke McCain on "change", tax breaks for the rich & Iraq & probably his age. (As would BO).

The fact that the BO supporters in the media find fault with this strategy (which BO supporters themselves used) means that they are either not thinking clearly or they are getting desperate. My take is that BO's handlers don't have "experience" in counter punching & they think that running for president should be a series of steps toward Coronation.

Hmmm, interesting. I tend to agree. Obama's people are great. They are all fired up because their candidate is "different" and he will "change" things. However, there does not seem to be the type of institutional experience that Clinton people have. Obama people expected to canonize a Saint and instead found themselves in the middle of a political campaign. I just wonder if Obama is personally that naive as well?

 

[Laura]

I think that theory is total BS and just another way for some Barack supporters to demonize Hillary. They want to think so little of Clinton that she would even consider giving up the country for 4 more years in an attempt to gain power afterwards. That's simply insane. Even if McCain wins that doesn't mean that Obama will just be sitting on his hands in 3 years!

I don't believe it either. I think right now she's gunning for VP, assuming bygones will be bygones once the nomination's clinched. She's trying to show how much support she has among Democrats (and she has a lot) so that a combined ticket will be the best compromise.

 

[Fitswimmer]

You praise the opponent's service & you praise them as a person..... while strategically defining how you are different (better). It's exactly what BO has been doing (against HC & others) until last week.

HC knows that she'd smoke McCain on "change", tax breaks for the rich & Iraq & probably his age. (As would BO).

The fact that the BO supporters in the media find fault with this strategy (which BO supporters themselves used) means that they are either not thinking clearly or they are getting desperate. My take is that BO's handlers don't have "experience" in counter punching & they think that running for president should be a series of steps toward Coronation.

I haven't heard any speeches Obama has given praising McCain's fitness to be President.

There's a difference between praising his war record and service to the country and praising his fitness to lead the country. Perhaps Hillary and her supporters are missing that fine line. They'll see it clearly in November when all those commercials come out from the McCain camp with Hillary's own kind words in them.

on the subject of "coronation"- which candidate and supporters thought it would be wrapped up on February 5th again?