I heard Hillary on Morning Edition this morning, and I have to say she sounded outrageous

[4_Legs_Good]

I mean, IMO, to even consider seating the Michigan delegates according to the "primary" is utterly absurd. Can she really say that with a straight face? Luckily it was radio!

There was more too, but, come on Senator Clinton, don't expect us to swallow that, particularly not an NPR crowd who isn't ignorant about what happened. I can hardly believe that she's putting this absurd notion forward. I expect she's just trying to start the negotiations in her favor, like Obama suggesting a re-vote caucus style, expecting to end up in the middle somewhere, but to even put forth such a proposition just makes her look desperate and incredibly calculating to me.

That said, I didn't hear Obama on NPR, and haven't recently, though I've heard Hillary interviewed in a very personable manner twice in two days. If Obama wants to compete, he needs to get out there in a personal way over the next six weeks. People need to get to know him, and this is a good opportunity.

Sorry for the rant, but I was just irritated this morning. I'm not a rabid anti-Hillary fanatic, so I'm not after starting a flame war, just expressing some frusteration.

David

Edit: typos

[GOTV]

1. It shows little respect for the voters on Clinton's part....

... to insist that the votes in Michigan or Florida were legitimate and can be construed to represent the will on the people in those states.

[rodeodance]

5. BO--memo yesterday HE WANTS A 50-50 splt. NOW GO DISS BO!

[4_Legs_Good]

9. 50-50 split makes more sense to me than a 55 - 0 split

And 50-50 is what the polls are showing.

But hey, I'm not sold on anything yet. Personally, I do believe they broke the rules and should be punished. I know it's harsh, but that's just my personal opinion.

David

[rodeodance]

23. BO wants those deles by STEALING THEM.

[SoonerPride]

26. How is equality = "stealing"

As opposed to Clinton taking all the ovtes Ruissia style, with only one name on the ballot?

Patently absurd.

.......and sadly desperate on clinton's part.

You can tell it is over.

[rodeodance]

41. did people vote for him?? they are not his votes. PERIOD!

[JackORoses]

49. Hillary gets nothing from this. Get it?

She is a loser and is struggling to try to cheat her way back into the White House.

Do you enjoy knowing that you are supporting a low-down dirty thug?

[4_Legs_Good]

50. True enough, but they are nobody's delegates

According to the rules.

That's the only thing that really matters, I think.

David

[rodeodance]

51. Then BO should not try to claim them

[4_Legs_Good]

52. Fair enough! Hillary doesn't claim any, Obama doesn't claim any. Done and done! (n/t)

[GOTV]

55. Show me BO's statement in context and maybe I will....

... but 50/50 split is mathematically the same as not counting the votes at all so I don't see that as worse.

Saying you're going to count votes from an election where people were told they wouldn't count the votes is a slap in the face and can in no way be construed as a representation of the will of the people.

[Cha]

21. And tell me when hilary clinton has shown RESPECT

for the voters?

[papau]

2. the current situation -don't seat=instant loss of election-so options are redo or seat-seems clear

[4_Legs_Good]

4. Do you really believe that?

Seriously, I'm curious. All the talking heads say so, but I don't buy that just because Michigan's delegates didn't get seated at the convention, that they're all going to rubber stamp McCain in a General Election. I 'm from California, and if our delegates didn't get seated, I'd still go out and vote against any Republican in the General.

Maybe it's just me, but that whole notion seems like a false argument. Not to mention that recent SUSA polls show Michigan as a loss if Clinton runs against McCain and as a win (tiny) if Obama runs, so it seems seating delegates as are would still result in a general election loss of Michigan.

David

[papau]

24. "all" is of course not true - but enough to lose - yes I do believe that

[mythyc]

3. k&r

<snip> That said, I didn't hear Obama on NPR, and haven't recently, though I've heard Hillary interviewed in a very personable manner twice in two days. If Obama wants to compete, he needs to get out there in a personal way over the next six weeks. People need to get to know him, and this is a good opportunity.

my thoughts exactly. I've been somewhat disappointed by how distant he's kept himself. I suppose it's to be cautious, but I think it's a terrible strategy. The more he shows of himself the more people like him and want to learn more. good post....

[LisaM]

6. Hillary wants a re-vote. She's negotiating.

I think that's fairly obvious.

OTOH, it seems to me that Obama doesn't want to count the voters of Michigan and Florida in any way, shape, or form. They are both large primary states and Michigan has an industrial base. They will probably favor Hillary in any kind of re-vote. I personally believe ~you are welcome to disagree~ that Obama is really willing to simply write off the millions of Democratic voters in both states to achieve the Democratic nomination. Hillary knows that she needs them both to win. Obama knows that she needs them both to win. Therefore, she is taking the negotiating stance of counting them as they stand (won't happen) and Obama is taking the negotatiating stance of completely disenfranchising both states (also won't happen).

I was very forthright long before the primaries took place saying that I thought the DNC should have paid attention to Michigan's (in particular) pleas not to be ignored in the primary process. These are both states with huge economic problems, which they rightfully wanted highlighted in the campaign. The DNC turned a deaf ear. Now, it's a problem for them. It should be. It turned out that Michigan and Florida's economic woes were a harbinger for the country and should have been at the forefront of the campaign all along.

I disagreed with the DNC from the outset on this, and it saddens me that Obama would just write off the voters in both those states for this.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

10. Good post. She is starting negotiations from a maximalist position

It's exactly what she says about health care... if you concede anything up front you will never get a fair deal in the end.

[LisaM]

15. Exactly!

It really bugs me that Obama seems willing to dump all those voters under the bus. People need to understand, too, that in both states, the legislature tried to change the dates back. In Florida, it was voted down, and in Michigan, the Republicans filibustered a budget bill so it couldn't come to a vote.

[WilyWondr]

38. Any recall elections planned in MI/FL?

For the state legislators that did not listen to the "will of the people" when they made this date change last fall?

I have heard of no recalls in those states over this issue, have you? If their state legislators were not listening to them they would have been recalled by now.

[4_Legs_Good]

18. Agree on the maximalist position, but not on health care

well kinda. If she was serious about health care, she'd just adopt Kucinich's possition as a start! ;)

I can certainly understand trying to stack the deck in your favor at the beginning of a negotiation, but her position just seemed way too rediculous. Like Obama saying "well we should split the vote 55-40 for me". It was a silly, arbitrary starting point, IMO.

I miss Dennis.

David

[Dawgs]

13. Where has Obama said that the MI or FL voters shouldn't count?

Do you have a link?

[Vinca]

7. Hillary needs to begin treating voters as if they actually have a brain.

The dimmest bulb can figure out an election isn't fair if only one of the candidates is on the ballot. She's making a fool of herself.

[MonkeyFunk]

27. And the dimmest bulb

can figure out that if you take your name off the ballot, you don't get any votes.

[4_Legs_Good]

32. True, but s/he can also figure out that a paper victory

brings no delegates!

Right???

David

[WilyWondr]

39. I guess the dimmest bulb also thinks

it is fair to count a primary that the people were told would not count before they voted AND where she was the only one on the ballot.

That is just priceless.

[MonkeyFunk]

40. I don't understand

why so many people lie about how many names were on the ballot.

Four democrats were on the ballot.


Obama wants 50% of the delegates from a race he didn't he even run - how is that fair?

[Avalux]

42. Pay no attention to the truth, only pay attention to what I tell you is the truth.

This is how Bush and the GOP operates; it's the reason why so many people STILL believe Saddam Hussein was connected to 9/11. They know most people don't bother to 'vett' information.

[Qutzupalotl]

8. Steve Inskeep said at the end that they had asked Obama

and the implication was that a similar interview with him is coming.

[4_Legs_Good]

11. I can't wait

But he should really be out there trying to get on the airwaves in a low-key sense. Six weeks is a long time with lots of opportunities for TV appearances, advertisements, Radio spots, Town-hall meetings, and HUGE rallies. If he hits all of those regularly, and kinda casually, he'll really start to move things, IMO. And if he *doesn't* move them, then he won't win, and shouldn't. I'm a big fan of people getting to know the candidates and making a judgement. If the people don't like him, they shouldn't vote for him.

Of course, I do believe the poeple will LOVE him when they get to know him a little better! :)

David

[FSogol]

12. You're right. It was absurd and Steve Inskeep called her on it.

Her argument was strange.

Here's the link, if you didn't hear the interview, listen for yourself and decide. Click on "Listen Now"
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=88165077

[4_Legs_Good]

14. Thanks for the link!

I forgot to post it.

I miss Bob Edwards. :(

David

[FSogol]

16. Np. I miss Bob also. n/t

[DemVet]

17. Hillary is not the one who decide to pull BO's name off the ballot. Who did?

Answer that one.

[C_U_L8R]

19. Obama did and he was following the rules...

And that's something I hope our next president can do.

I've had enough of Clintonian definition bending tricks.

[4_Legs_Good]

20. Obama pulled his name off the ballot, sure!

Given the facts in the case at the time, it was the smart thing to do, IMO. Edwards did the same. I would have too. Clinton did the smart thing too, leave her name on the ballot, as the clear leader on name recognition to give the perception of a win, even though she knew it didn't count. Had she not been the front runner at the time she had to make the decision to stay on or remove it, she would have been a fool not to take her name off the ballot too.

They all calculated what would be the best for them at the time knowing the rules and knowing that the delegates wouldn't be seated. I don't hold it against her that she stayed on the ballot - nor do I hold it against those who removed their names.

But you can't change the rules after the fact and expect the non-legitimate results to count.

David

Edit: typo

[Drachasor]

25. Hillary said she was doing the same. Mysteriously didn't get the paperwork done on time

Such a deceitful strategy is unbecoming a President. Or if it was some sort of clerical error, we don't need that kind of incompetence.

This is a lose-lose issue for Hillary.

[4_Legs_Good]

28. Really? I hadn't heard that, but I still think that staying on was a fair, tactical move

which made sense at the time. Just like getting off was a fair tactical move by Obama and Edwards at the time.

The problem, imo, isn't the choices they made at the time, those have played out to their advantages fairly, but rather trying to then use the choices they made then to decide a race based on new rules.

David

[MonkeyFunk]

34. You're thinking of Kucinich

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

22. Nothing shows Hillary's true colors more than her insistance on seating the Michigan delegation. . .

talk about Chutzpah!

[elixir]

29. Well I can certainly understand your frusteration. I read the summary

of the show and she clearly stated that MI has to count. I guess what I'm wondering is - is it really wrong for a candidate who won votes to not want them to be counted? I mean, if Barack were in Hillary's position would he NOT ask for MI and FL to count? Just a question.

Also, Hillary raises a good point that Obama chose to remove his name from the MI ballot but left it on in FL. He had the option to keep or remove his name in both instances and made a conscious decision, and I suspect a political decision, on this issue. Keep in mind, these candidates were not asked to take their names off, they pledged not to participate.

Here's the pledge. It's very specific about what you CANNOT do, so the inference, in my mind, is that there is much you could do.

"THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, in honor and in accordance with DNC rules, pledge to actively campaign in the pre-approved early states Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina. I pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any election contest occurring in any state not already authorized by the DNC to take place in the DNC approved pre-window (any date prior to February 5, 2008). Campaigning shall include but is not limited to purchasing media or campaign advocacy of any kind, attending or hosting events of more than 200 people to promote one’s candidacy for a preference primary and employing staff in the state in question. It does not include activities specifically related to raising campaign resources such as fundraising events or the hiring of fundraising staff. "



Keep in mind that she sums up the conversation with the statement "if there is to be any difference between my propoasal, that we count those votes (MI and FL), and any other course of action, it should be a complete re do of the primary. Nothing else is fair."

You can hear the podcast on the link.
Here's a summary.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=88165077

[4_Legs_Good]

31. Of course it was a political and tactical decision by all parties

but it was a decision made based on the rules at the time - that the delegates would not be seated. She made a tactical decision to stay on the ballot, he (and Edwards) made the decision to get off, almost certainly because they each felt the tactic they were taking would favor their candidacy.

Personally, I'm clueless as to why Obama and Edwards didn't take thier names off the Florida ballot.

But, again, they made their tactical decisions based on the rules at the time. Clinton liked the idea of a "paper victory" to give her some momentum. Obama and Edwards knew they would lose in a non-competitive race, so they removed their names to avoid the "paper loss". It all makes perfect sense to me.

What doesn't make sense is trying to turn the paper victory into a delegate gain.h

Again, I don't hold any of their decisions at the time against them. I would have done the exact same thing each of them did in each of their shoes (minus I would definitely have gotten off the Florida ballot!).

David

[Life Long Dem]

30. It tells me she lied.

[krawhitham]

33. She got 55% of the vote, give her 55% of the delegates

and Obama the other 45%

[4_Legs_Good]

37. Hey! Kucinich got 4% of the vote

He deserves his delegates too!

Poor Dennis. I miss him in this whole mess. I'm at least glad he'll be serving us in the House.

/salute Congressman Kucinich

David

[ButterflyBlood]

44. Below 15%. That's the threshold for any delegates.

nt

[4_Legs_Good]

45. Touche!

Poor guy!

David

[tabasco]

35. Let's revote & be sure to get those tax returns & WH records out before the vote!

Must be some stinky stuff in there because they are taking a lot of heat for hiding them.

What is Hillary hiding from Democratic voters???

[4_Legs_Good]

47. I wonder if the tax returns are a red herring...

She says she'll release them a couple weeks before her last chance. Seems like she would continue to stonewall us on them if there was enough there to really damage her, or she'd release them now and then do as much damage control as possible over the longest period of time.

She's very clever. Unless Obama really knows something, I wouldn't put too much emphasis on these.

David

[anigbrowl]

36. Relax...the delegates for 'uncommited'

are not going to vote for hillary. After all, they already had the option to do so once.

[grantcart]

43. The most revealing thing about your post is the absurdist reactions to it

Reveals clearly alot about the two camapaigns.

Split don't split, revote don't revote. The status quo is not going to be seated that is clear. An expensive revote will not take place before May and probably June - it takes 30 days simply to review any proposal.

FL and MI will cancel each other.

[cali]

46. I heard it too. She was disgusting.

Arrogant and lying her ass off. Really putrid interview. She made me want to puke.

[4_Legs_Good]

48. But she sounded personable, confident and friendly

if maybe more than a bit condescending. I agree with you on substance, I was really put off by it, but her tone says a lot, and I think right now she's selling tone and people are definitely buying.

I think Obama needs to get out there in the casual tone battle and just let people hear him. He's got time, lots of time, use it and help to dampen down the frenetic pace of this thing which I don't think serves him as well.

David

[Medusa]

53. She thinks the American people are stupid. That we are so confused

by the election process that we won't remember that she was the ONLY PERSON on the Michigan ballot.

[From The Left]

54. Hillary is sounding increasingly deranged