Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior National Correspondent Jake Tapper
Jake Tapper is ABC News' Senior National Correspondent based in the network's Washington bureau. He writes about politics and popular culture and covers a range of national stories.
RECENT POSTS
- Four Remarkable Women I Went to Grade School With
- A Saturday Night Live Skit Clinton Won't Be Referencing Anytime Soon
- How Badly Is the Presumptive Democratic Nominee Going to Be Shellacked in W.V.?
- Bill Clinton's Message to Rural America
- House Majority Whip: 'I Don’t Believe That There Is Any Way That She Can Win the Nomination'
- Obama-Backing Congressman Compares Hillary Clinton to Glenn Close in 'Fatal Attraction'
- The Latest...from Albany, Oregon
- Obama New Oregon Superdelegate Impugns McCain's Ethics
- Obama Fires Foreign Policy Adviser for Meeting With Hamas
- Obama Open to Helping Clinton Relieve Her Campaign Debt
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Mr. Voting Rights Says Florida & Michigan Should Not Count | Main | Huckabee on Hillary: "I Feel Her Pain!" »
Edwards' Campaign Manager to Endorse Obama
May 08, 2008 6:45 AM
ABC News has learned that David Bonior, the campaign manager for the 2008 presidential race of Sen. John Edwards, D-NC, will endorse Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, today.
Bonior, a former Michigan congressman, was once the second highest ranking Democrat in the House, and is influential with labor unions.
Tuesday night's results were said to be key to Bonior's decision -- specifically the fact that Obama's lead over Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, appears insurmountable.
Bonior is also said to like Obama's general positive tone, as well as Obama's message of change and stance against taking money from federal lobbyists.
Edwards has not yet endorsed either candidate.
May 8, 2008 in Obama, Barack | Permalink | User Comments (125)
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/28882964
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Edwards' Campaign Manager to Endorse Obama:
Representative (former) Bonior was a victim of Michigan's population loss in the last census count, which resulted in our losing a seat in the House. While we are fortunate to have Senators and Representatives of good conscience and who advocate for the well being of the citizenry and therefore the Nation, I was extremely disappointed that we lost Rep. Bonior. His one weak area for me was with regards to the automobile industry, but that is true all of our House and Senate representatives; this is Michigan after all.
He was a very visible and vocal advocate for us "ordinary working people & families"; and a very visible and vocal thorn in the side of the administration of President George W. Bush, as well as the Republican "powers that be" in Congress and elsewhere.
I very much like the idea of Rep. Bonior as Secretary of Labor in the coming Democratic Administration.
I have been a strong supporter of Senator (former) Edwards; but I have also been disappointed that he seems to be sitting this one out. He definitely had and does (hopefully, still) have more in common with Senator Obama than with Senator Clinton. I have to wonder if his motivation has been to not alienate either, in the hopes of a position in the new Democratic Administration taking office in January, 2009.
That said, I also very much like the idea of Senator Edwards as Attorney General in the incoming Democratic Administration.
With regards to the delegates from Michigan and Florida, it is the Michigan Democratic Party "Powers That Be" (MDPPTB) and the Florida Republican Dominated Legislature (FRDL), who knowingly violated the DNC rules for conduct of the primary election(s), that bear the burden of blame for the situation in which the citizens of those two states find themselves. The common drumbeat of "the people who voted in those primaries votes deserve to be counted, and should not be unfairly disenfranchised from the precess". I contend that it isn't about the citizens who did vote, as much as it is about the citizens who did not vote, because it was pointless. It did not count! And in Michigan we could not even write in a candidate, as those votes would be thrown out. So to now seat the Michigan and Florida delegates according to those pseudo primary elections would just be another slap in the face to those of us who already feel that we have been disenfranchised.
The only bright spot in all of this, was that some of us were finally in a reasonable position to vote for Representative Kucinich. My only regret is that I didn't think of the tactical possibilities of voting for Rep. Kucinich in time to attempt to create an organized campaign to encourage citizens to vote for Rep. Kucinich. Such a campaign could have possibly given Rep. Kucinich a sizable number of Delegates and if we were also successful in convincing the DNC that the delegations from Michigan and Florida should be seated at the Convention, Rep. Kucinich might very well be in a position to influence who would be the Democratic nominee, as well as the platform on which the nominee would run.
I would be ecstatic to have either Rep. Bonior or Rep. Kucinich serve as the Secretary of Labor in the new Democratic Administration taking office in January of 2009.
Posted by: roncypert | May 11, 2008 12:00:25 AM
I supported John Edwards and completely support his reluctance to endorse either candidate. Neither fully represents what his platform was about, why the heck should he endorse? I don't want anyone to tell me who I should support, I did the research and made a decision ON MY OWN, I didn't need J.E. to tell me who to choose.
Bonior is a separate person, not an extension of J.E., why the heck shouldn't he endorse anyone he wants anytime he chooses.
Posted by: Kel | May 10, 2008 2:41:38 PM
ohn Edwards is definitely not a decider. I think his wife does the decidering.
Posted by: anuu | May 9, 2008 6:53:48 AM
i believe the rest of the world does not admire america at the moment,the people are fine its your policies that are disliked, that is why people overseas have been so attentive to the elections, senator obama is like a breath of fresh air, he brings hope that change will occur, change that the western world can believe in, america has come across as very racist, or is it the spin by republican news channels that has engendered this picture , it seems that the clintons in their belief in their right to rule has encouraged this devide ,it has set back race relations just when right thinking people have done away with this nonsense and to blame rev wright for his sometimes angry tirades is to lack understanding of the past and what african americans had to endure, he should let the past go ,but so should the racial divides be let go,christianity is not a right of white people only ,the most sincere and heartfelt spitituality was portrayed by colored races because God was their main hope, Jesus wasnt born white in washington,he was born in a middle eastern country and was brown , if you believe what christianity teaches we are all in it together, hate is not christian. the clintons have their adgenda , and it dosnt appear to be philantropic, i dont believe the clintons are actually racist ,it was a weapon to be used in the fight, encouraged by the likes of fox channel, who by the way come across as the catalyst for all the mean retoric in this fight to the white house, you could say this shouldnt concern overseas people, well it does, we suffer for the politics of america, who do you think caused the rise in gas prices? the investors in the big oil cartels, the people who were for war in the middle east, the republicans and the top money families ,thats who , plus other big money people around the world, obama seeks to change things for the better, please give him the chance , my son has just come in from a contract at a college, we had a laugh ,he said a new teacher from uk told him his mum and 15 friends email friends and family all over the world just as i do , and everyone says obama is the hope we have all been waiting for, i personaly have given myself eyestrain from reading the emails on these pages, its been sad and exciting, in the beginning we all liked clinton, but her negativity and self righteous is a real turnoff, now she is coming across as plain selfish , its all about her ,it should be about the people, good luck to the democrats in november, the eyes of the world are upon you, do the decent thing put bigotry behind you , america is a great country dont destoy it, posted by Elle
Posted by: e forest | May 9, 2008 2:05:47 AM
Barbara in Alexandria,
Do you know how ridiculous you sound? How can Barack Obama be a racist? He is half-white & half-black , who was raised by his WHITE mother & his WHITE grandparents. He was not going to that church for 20 years just because of Rev. Wright, it was because of JESUS & all of the wonderful ministries they offered at the church. Have you been listening to your own candidate lately? Hillary has said on more than 1 occasion that "the differences between her and Barack PALE in comparison to the differences she has with McCain". She also said she would campaign for the eventual Democratic nominee. Do you really want 4 MORE YEARS OF THE SAME? Believe me,Barbara, you don't know McSame the way I know him. I feel like he has been my Senator FOREVER. But this year I want him to stay my Senator. I DO NOT want him to be moving his family to Washington next year. PLEASE,all of you disgruntled Clinton supporters,think about a hasty move to McSAME before you actually make the mistake of voting for him. OBAMA '08
Posted by: Kristi from Arizona | May 8, 2008 9:00:11 PM
Jayhawk:
Excuse me, but McCain has flip flopped on countless important issues, such as the Bush tax cuts, it's going to make the Republicans sorry they ever perfected using that line of attack in 2004. McCain makes Kerry look like the King of Consistency.
You say that Obama has changed his religion. How many times do you people have to be told: HE IS NOT AND NEVER HAS BEEN A MUSLIM! It is a shame that you are either gullible enough to believe the vicious rumors flying around cyberspace or are purposely spreading these lies out of pure maliciousness.
Posted by: Willis P | May 8, 2008 5:14:01 PM
Is he a SD? If not, who cares!!
Posted by: Cindy | May 8, 2008 5:07:24 PM
Hoosier Sue,
I'm sorry, but you really do not know what you're talking about. Obama does support Universal Health Care, he's just not going to force you to buy into it. If you want it, though, you'll get it under his plan, and Bill Clinton's former Secretary of Labor said that it would be more affordable than Hillary's plan. And are you serious about McCain's plan? You need to do some research, my friend.
"He also will address climate change."
-Sorry, McCain has one of the worst environmental voting records out there. He skipped every single important environmental vote in 2007 and got a "0" score from League of Conservation Voters.
"Iraq is not an issue for me, because I think Obama will be far more dangerous in the Middle East than most people think (he's supported by anti-Semites)."
So I suppose you voted for George W. four years ago when he told you that the terrorists want John Kerry to win, too? Please, I beg of you, USE YOUR BRAIN! Obama's has plenty of Jewish support, and consistently has come out in support of Israel. His stance on talking to our enemies is shared by prominent foreign policy Republicans like Brent Scowcroft and Democrats like 9/11 Commission Chair Lee Hamilton (one of the most respected foreign policy minds in Washington). Look it up, I dare you.
Posted by: Willis P | May 8, 2008 5:03:37 PM
Welcome to the Obama train Mr. Bonier! Choo-Choo! It's absolutely essential for America's future that Barack Obama be sworn in as President in 2009! We cannot afford four more years of George W. Bush (JOHN McSAME!)
Posted by: Mr. Music | May 8, 2008 4:54:30 PM
HoosierSue, do you seriously think Hillary could possibly run for president again? Even the Clintons don't have that many lives. I also find it curious that you, a self-described moderate, prefer her more liberal healthcare plan. But let me ask you this: If Hillary can't beat a black one-term senator who, as you claim, doesn't have a shot at the presidency, how are we supposed to believe she can beat anybody else?
Posted by: greenpaz | May 8, 2008 4:54:26 PM
Like anyone cares what David Bonior has to say or who he endorses?
Bonior failed in his work for Edwards, and now he wants to weigh in with an endorsement for Obama.
Obama is a political hack who changes positions, religions, and everything else depending on when and where he happens to be.
Bonior and people like him are why I am voting for John McCain.
Posted by: Jayhawk | May 8, 2008 4:44:54 PM
I guess the Bush-Clinton dynasty is over now.
WOW. Feels like democracy again.
Posted by: fooled_once | May 8, 2008 4:44:11 PM
rich, Obama doesn't offer Universal Health Care, so you don't have to vote for him on that issue. McCain is going to issue up to a $5,000 tax credit to pay for healthcare, so that's fine with me. He also will address climate change. Iraq is not an issue for me, because I think Obama will be far more dangerous in the Middle East than most people think (he's supported by anti-Semites).
If Obama becomes the nominee, moderates like me will flock to McCain. The Dem controlled congress will keep him for going too far-right. It will be a perfect match.
McCain '08! Clinton '12!
Posted by: HoosierSue | May 8, 2008 4:17:30 PM
POTUS OBAMA!!!!
Learn to accept it now, no stopping the will of the voters.
Posted by: concerned parent | May 8, 2008 4:02:58 PM
Face it folks, there will never be a President Obama. He cannot win -- I have been around a long ime and have seen candidates like him --Eugene McCarthy, McGovern -- I campaigned for them and know that the United States does not vote for people so far to the left -- take it to the bank -- there will never be a President Obama. Obama supporters are so naive it's mind-boggling.
Posted by: emgee | May 8, 2008 3:15:15 PM
bush is squandering tax payer's dollars, bankrupting the nation and digging us deeper into debt by refusing to exit an iraqi civil war that he started that can't be won.
clinton is squandering the dollars of her supporter's, bankrupting her campaign and digging herself deeper into debt by refusing to exit a racial civil war that she started that she can not win....
O.M.G! how can anyone support this?!?!
Posted by: loki | May 8, 2008 2:59:26 PM
Barbara in Alexandria - you are no more a Democrat than John McCain is the Pope. Just another Repub Troll trying to elicit a response. A feminist perhaps, but no true Democrat. No woman in her right mind is going to vote for a president who is going to remove her right of choice, just because her candidate did not win.
Posted by: Robert | May 8, 2008 2:30:55 PM
MICH can count, but they have to agree to move their date behind New Hampshire by two months.
The idea of having a teeny state first is so that anyone can go there and meet everyone in every town and be heard. There are only a few towns of consequence and no real cities. If MICH and Florida were the first week, only actors, sports figures and billionaires (Perot/Forbes), "name brands", maybe EVITA, and the occasional millionaire scion of a wealthy family (see Romneys, Kennedys, DuPonts, Rockefellers, Gores) , would be able to be a successful candidate. That is not democracy, that is buying the election. That's why the DNC committee voted to have NH first, so the election could not be bought outright if you have two states like MICH and Florida with 35 million people, first.
That must be publicly discussed. There is a good reason to have NH first and the MICH people have to cop to it, in public and agree to respect it.
Posted by: bruce becker | May 8, 2008 2:09:10 PM
HRC has finally hit the bottom of her campaign topics.
Now she appeals in WV and KY as follows: DO YOU KNOW HOW HARD IS IT TO DO THIS, AS A WOMAN?
And HRC, it is not hard to do it as a black man?
HRC, until 1954, Catholic catechism was taught that all Jews, living and dead were personally responsible for Jesus's death, not the Roman soldiers and politicians.
Do you have any idea how difficult it is to be a Jew in a town of all Christians, when they are not allowed to date you, you are not allowed to be a member of their clubs, you are not invited to their fraternities?
So actually HRC, lots of people have had it rough, only you are reduced to appealing to women to stick with you, because you all had it so hard.
What about ideas? What about restoring habeus corpus, the right to be charged with a crime?
Not on your agenda, eh?
Posted by: bruce becker | May 8, 2008 1:57:42 PM
I've heard of David Bonior, of course -- long time Democratic house leader on bread-and-butter issues, peace isues.
But who's this Edwards person you keep referring to? & what's Edwards last name?
Posted by: chicagoexpat | May 8, 2008 1:38:12 PM
Is Bonior a superdelegate?
Posted by: Beth in VA | May 8, 2008 1:29:26 PM
Has anyone considering voting for McCain ever heard the phrase, "When Fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." The beginning of this has already happened with the prominent position of the religious right-wing hate machine and their enormous influence on polixy issues and the imposition of their morality on the rest of us. McCain, as are all republicans who believe in the superior morality of the "party of God", will just be a continuation of these policies. For those of you who obviously don't read enough, Hillary's extreme comments of annihilation of Iran should they attack Israel are an extension of these extreme religious beliefs as the religious zealots in this country believe that Israel should be protected at all costs because they will help bring about the second coming of Christ with their eventual war with the Muslim world. It is time for the forward thinking, progressive minds and the normal people of our country to take it back. People who believe in charity and helping others and of negotiating before launching a misslie. I'd settle for a government who would help our own people in case of a disasterKatrina anyone?!). There are clear reasons why everyone hates us and why our standing in the world has suffered greatly and unbridled, blind, stupid patriotism is not the answer. Engagement with the rest of the world is. This is what Obama offers and hopefully will bring to our nation. We've already seen the disaster that has been the idiot Bush and that is what Hillary will bring. It is truly time for something different. Give Obama the chance to prove how great of a nation we can once again be. Remember, we won't always have the most bombs and tanks and then what? Think people...
Posted by: nyyankee70 | May 8, 2008 12:34:20 PM
John Edwards "We" always liked you. "We" also have great respect for you, but now "We" have to ask you to do something that no woman should have to ask a man. Grow a pair, support Mr. Obama, not because "We" are asking you, but because you know it is the right thing to do.
Posted by: We The People | May 8, 2008 12:31:54 PM
I really hope that Hillary supporters take a moment to REALLY learn about Obama, and not just rely on the media's spin. He has all of his policy ideas and how to impliment them on his website. He has very strong reasoning behind all of his decisions. If you really want the causes Hillary was fighting for to succeed, we need Obama in the White House.
Democrats Unite!
Obama 08!
Posted by: Krissy | May 8, 2008 12:29:04 PM
I hope that Hillary supporters take a few moments to REALLY learn about Obama, and not just take the media's spin on things. He is a great candidate, and clearly explains all of his policy ideas and how to accomplish them on his website. He really has very intellegent reasoning for his positions.
Democrats Unite!
Obama 08!
Posted by: Krissy | May 8, 2008 12:26:18 PM
I agree w/u Melissa, how can Clinton's supporters say they will not support Obama if he wins the nominee and yet be called Democrats.
OBAMA!!!!
Posted by: Gloria Smith | May 8, 2008 12:13:09 PM
Edwards is not brave to run, brave to VOTE.
Thank God voters did not have to choose.
Posted by: kg | May 8, 2008 12:10:08 PM
edwards is a spineless, hen-pecked coward. i'm so glad that he will not be going anywhere near the white house. he can take his worthless endorsement and shove it......what a loser.
Posted by: loki | May 8, 2008 11:57:59 AM
It is shameful and cowardly that Edwards' is holding his support from the two Democratic candidates. I would understand if John Edwards had carried a few states, but he didn't even come close in his home state of South Carolina. Edwards is holding out for a position. I certainly hope that he Hillary or Barack does not give him anything.
I am please to hear that Edwards' own campaign manager has endorsed Barack. At least he had the courage to stand up.
I used to like Edwards before he pulled tthis stunt. What a coward!
Posted by: Debmood | May 8, 2008 11:53:17 AM
I'm happy about this news, but I'm so ashamed for John Edwards. When still in the race, he was the one that exposed senator Clinton's flaws the most effectively. Yet all this time, when he could have made a difference by endorsing a candidate he chose to hide and watch, but watch for what? That is what troubles me. Now his endorsement would mean nothing. By standing back silently while Elizabeth came out for Hillary, he only endorsed all the the distraction politics. To me that is pretty revealing.
Posted by: rimofheaven | May 8, 2008 11:51:57 AM
I think he is right. And by the same rule she shouldn't push for Florida and Michigan which the party rule nullified the 'primaries.' She can stay all the way sice she cannot see the finger of God!
Posted by: ambrose | May 8, 2008 11:46:43 AM
Horrible Hateful Hillary has hideously played her last card: a racist play for West Virginia and Kentucky.
Winning like that is worse than losing.
She is also playing the "protection" racket game on the party. It is time to shut her up permanently. Now we see exactly what she is. We don't need any of that, thank you. It doesn't pay to yield to such criminals.
Posted by: BuckBurris | May 8, 2008 11:43:11 AM
John Edwards manager, this is a very BRILLIANT guy, who is very POSITIVE and idealistic. I am John Edwards supporter, because I voted for him, but I know this man, as I felt he should be running for President because of his wisdom..and his charisma...His ideas were similar to Obama's. the only thing was that Edwards was controlled by his wife and couldn't deliver.You know, Edwards really wanted to endorse Obama, but his bitchy wife has delayed the process thus far....What will she do now?????So his manager made that move to indicate his(Edwards) willingness to support Obama. Come on Edwards, endorse Obama. Don't allow your wife to manipulate you....
Posted by: Kissoon Ramawad | May 8, 2008 10:57:04 AM
Drip...Drip...Drip... and the Superdelegates are off!
Posted by: latinovoter1 | May 8, 2008 10:40:20 AM
TomDavie,
Unfortunately, that may be the only fair solution. At least by splitting, they still get to go and represent their state. The fact is that theu broke the rules and the DNC needed to set an example to discourage other states from doing the same thing. Otherwise, we would have had states moving their primary and caucus dates back to 2007!!!! A good compromise would be to seat the delegates (so the state gets representation) but split them so that they can not change the election outcome (punishment for breaking the rules).
Posted by: DemocratsUnited | May 8, 2008 10:30:19 AM
Well, while you are all deciding the outcome of Michigan - I live here and I can tell you that I did not vote in February because my candidate was not on the ballot and because we were led to believe it wasn't going to count - however you now want to slice and dice it -- so somehow there is a huge door of ambiguity for Michigan that was purposefully left open. It's like the old trick telling everyone to stay home on voting day. I did not see the merit of going down to vote "uncommitted" on that day. If you really want to seat these delegates fairly - take my scenario into consideration - take the time and place in consideration - in February, Clinton was ahead; had Michigan waited their turn like they were supposed to, it could have been right into Obama's winning streak - that should be considered as well. This isn't a straight up answer weighing in on the fact that Hillary broke the rules and put her name on the ballot and so now, she should get her votes she picked up for doing so. It should be weighed with all factors considered and/or simply doled out evenly to avoid trying to speculate what if.
Posted by: Shannon, Michigan | May 8, 2008 10:21:35 AM
Melissa,
I sympathize with what you are saying. I am an Obama supporter, yet I understand why people vote for Clinton. She is a smart and likeable person. I also like Senator Clinton. If Obama was not running, I would vote for her.
However, there are only a select few people that I have accused of being racist. Those that make Jokes about Wright being Secretary of State, 50 Cent being Vice President and so on. Those that make Obama/Osama comparisons,
and finally, those that will vote for McCain if Obama gets the nomination and who call themselves "life long" democrats. How could you vote for a democrat all your life, but when a black man gets the nomination, you want to vote republican. I find that troubling.
Posted by: DemocratsUnited | May 8, 2008 10:21:22 AM
I can tell each of us that take the time out to partake in these blogs is very passionate about politics, the future of our country and the future of ourselves and kids - This PASSION can fuel negative or positive energy, depending on who you are....
I respect that passion whether you are democrat our Republican. Please take that same level of passion but use it positively for the greater good.
It is only human nature to chose our own ( birds of a feather flock together). But we are equally capable of rising above the norm or the status quo or the misrepresentations. Put the anger, the racisms aside and realize that ppl like Russ Limbaugh is using this to tear us apart even further..
Don't be biased and vote for Hillary because she is a woman or because you are blindly following the clinton dynasty. On the other hand don't just vote for Obama because he's black.
Democrats can only win if we UNITE!!! If you don't believe obama is more honest than clinton vote clinton or vise versa....... but don't come in here tearing each other apart. We should promise ourselves as democrats that we will support democrats, not be Disenchanted if we ( hillary or obama) come in first or second on the ticket. Just know in either case we will have a win. And don't think for a minute that they won't reunite when the dust is settled, they are smarter than that not to....
Posted by: Smarter than the rest | May 8, 2008 10:16:10 AM
Overturning Roe v Wade has nothing to do with congress and everything to do with the suprem court. Alito and Roberts are very conservative appointments. If McCain gets the POTUS, he claims he will look to replace retiring judges with more conservatives. There are, at least, two judges with a real potential of retiring over a 4 - 8 year span. That would put 4 very conservative judges on the bench with the power and inclination to over turn Roe v wad and congress wouldn't be able to do a darn thing. Bench appointments are for life. They will be shaping laws against women's rights for decades. I am an independent with democratic leanings. By default I am for Obama and I really don't like either Clinton. If Hillary somehow gets the nominee, I will have to put the rights of my young daughters before my own reluctance to ever vote for Hillary. Then I would vote for her.
Posted by: X marks the spot | May 8, 2008 10:15:50 AM
I can not see this party coming together
anymore. When people are called racist just because they have a different opinion. Whats wrong with this picture, have we really gone this far back in time, why are we acting so immature?
Back in November when I first started blogging everyone was so happy, excited,
looking forward to the future and what great posibilities we had before us.
Now look at everyone, and don't try and blame this all on the Clinton's. Michelle Obama was the first one to bring up race on 60 minutes in Aug or Sept. So both sides are responsible.
The media is not helping by making out that one part of the party is more important, by belittling the working class, women, elderly, hispanics,
is wrong and I believe they played a big part in tearing us apart.
So unless everyone is going to stop belittling one another I guess we will
see McCain in the white house.
Posted by: Melissa | May 8, 2008 10:12:48 AM
SierraBW
Can you explain what splitting the delegates accomplishes. Besides getting a free and useless trip to the convention.
Its not a representation of the vote. So either seat them as the vote determined, have a revote, strip them of 1/2 the delegates, or dont seat them at all.
Splitting the delegates in half accomplishes nothing. Execpt as window dressing to say they are 'included' at the convention.
Posted by: tomdavie | May 8, 2008 10:12:36 AM
Everywhere Obama campaigned he narrowed Clinton's lead considerably. It seems safe to assume that if he campaigned in FL and MI, he would have narrowed Clinton's lead considerably if not reverse it. To insist on seating MI and FL as is is not far from stealing the election outright. It is unbelievable that Clinton is asking it with a straight face.
Posted by: IG | May 8, 2008 10:12:28 AM
All the Obama bloggers asking for the party to unite while they are busing in people to boo Hillary in WV. you make me sick . And his picture is on the cover of time as the nomminee and Hillary has not droped out he is such a gentelman
Posted by: Bishop | May 8, 2008 10:11:05 AM
Katy
When are you going to get the fact NOBODY said the votes wouldnt count.
They said the DELEGATES wouldnt be seated.
Posted by: tomdavie | May 8, 2008 10:09:53 AM
Smarter Than the Rest.... Good point. I, too respect Florida and Michigan, but all candidates agreed to specific rules way before this began. In fact, Clinton's campaign strategist, Harold Ickes, sat on the Rules and Bylaws committee and voted FOR all the delegates to be stripped. I bet he wishes had the opportunity to take back that vote. The fact is, you don't change the rules to benifit a specif candidate once the process has begun!!!
The only fair thing to do is to seat the delegates in a manner that does not change the outcome of the race. Just spit them evenly among both candidates.
Posted by: DemocratsUnited | May 8, 2008 10:07:17 AM
I am not a Republican I was a democrat for thirty five years not any more.
Posted by: Bishop | May 8, 2008 10:07:17 AM
America thanks you Mr. Bonior.
And:
It is simply not fair to tell the candidates not to campaign in Michigan and Florida, or to tell the voters their votes dont count in Michigan and Florida, then hold a primary in those states. This was a setup for Hillary Clinton, and still is. The only fair thing to do is allow the candidates time to campaign and hold another primary there, or stick to the DNC decision not to seat the delegates.
Posted by: Katy | May 8, 2008 10:02:13 AM
As a registered Independent (not a Democrat) I will vote for McCain if Clinton got the nominee....If it's Obama then I will vote for him....McCain and Clinton are pretty close actually so why not vote for him and deal with 4 years, really no different then Clinton and at least a change from Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush
Posted by: tr | May 8, 2008 10:01:52 AM
did anybody else read my blog apart from Tomdavie? I did express my respect for FL and MI. I was saying if you read it carefully, now that we are HERE ( at this point) where nothing seems fair. That is, what's fair for Hillary is unfair for Obama and vice versa. Let's see it for what it is. Several months ago if both candidates sat a the table and the DNC said we will remove two states at random...... do you think either would disagree? NO!!! So, they considered themselves the likely candidate then....... now that it comes to crunch time the rules should be changed... why?? You heard ppl from FL and MI in here and elsewhere stating the locals were warned and begged by the ppl not to move the dates........ they chose not to listen. Prosecute them.... not Hillary and Obama today because of their decision...
Posted by: Smarter than the rest | May 8, 2008 9:55:46 AM
tr,
I get your point, and agree. The Clinton's are this way -- WINNING IS EVERYTHING -- AT ALL COSTS. In this way, the Clintons are like the GOP. I would not be surprised if she isn't listening to Karl Rove, because some of the low-down dirty tactics she has used in order to become the nominee, have simply shocked me. And don't forget that Gov. Rendell of PA, a Clinton supporter, also made the comment that Obama can't win the white vote. That is to say that both Clinton and Rendell are putting all white people into a single category. There are whites voting for Clinton just because they know Bill Clinton is in the background, and they remember the economic boom times of the 90's, and hope with a Clinton in the White House we will revisit those times of prosperity. People fail to understand that Bill Clinton was a delegator; he was confident enough of his own abilities in order to allow Robert Reich, Rubin, etc. to do their respective jobs, and they were great at what they did. Clinton hired intellectuals in their fields, and they delivered. There are even Blacks who are for Hillary for this same reason. It would be different if no Whites voted for (or are voting for Obama), but they are voting for Obama. It's his message, and people should well understand that. Unfortunately, the only way Clinton sees to win this thing is to create a racial divide. PEOPLE, LET'S NOT GIVE THAT TO HER! RISE TO THE OCCASION. BOOT OUT THE LIARS, THE NEGATIVE, THOSE WHO WOULD SEE THE COUNTRY AND THE PARTY FAIL, IF THEY ARE NOT THE NOMINEE.
Posted by: SierraBW | May 8, 2008 9:54:06 AM
Bobby Brown,
Your post was the most sensible post I hav e read on this blog in a while. People do not think before placing their vote for president. Look at Ohio. Ohio voted for Bush in 2004 because he was against Gay marriage and was seen as having more Christian Values. They didn't even think to look at their check books and bank accounts (something that smart people would do) and ask themselves why they are suffering so? They brought gay marriage into the voting booth instead of their families best interest and now thay are paying DEARLY for it. 4 more years of Bush got them laid off, depleated bank accounts, $4/gallon gas costs, and no savings or medicare for their children. But, at least gays can't get married, so all is well!!!
Posted by: DemocratsUnited | May 8, 2008 9:52:17 AM
I can't belive that someone calling themselves a democrat would actually consider voting for McCain because Hillary lost. If Hillary is calling for you to vote democrat, what is the issue? Are you not a supporter of hers? Also, I don't like abortions. I wish a woman chose not to have one. But being a male, I can't interfere with her right to choose what is best for her. McCain wants to make the decision for her and then go on with his life not involved with what happens later. I can't side with that. Can you? Can you side with his health care policy or lack thereof, his military decisions, his lack of economic conscience for the unwealthy, his changing of overall ethics and conscience once he started running for POTUS. If you can, than you are not a supporter of Hillary or the democratic party. If you don't like Obama, hold your nose and pull the lever, but do right by yourself and the others that depend on the help that is sure to come from the democratic party.
Peace!
Posted by: Craig | May 8, 2008 9:52:00 AM
Obama was asked to run by Kennedy and Kerry and the one thing everyone who backs him has in common is they have all lost thier bids for the white house the losers gang McGoverns Vp guess who Marie shriver's daddy Sargent Shriver.All the elitist of this push to drive the Clintons out .
Vote Mccain in 08
Posted by: Bishop | May 8, 2008 9:49:00 AM
Smarter than the Rest,
Why not just split the delegates of both states evenly among the candidates? I believe that to be the fairest option. Both states are bawking at paying to have the elections again. However, they should have some representation. Just seat the evenly-divided delegates from both states and call it a day!
Posted by: SierraBW | May 8, 2008 9:46:37 AM
Smarter than the rest.
I read your post very carefully. Unfortunately, considing you are smarter than us all, you forgot to mention the VOTERS in those states.
You just make an argument about the candidates and drawing states out of a hat .
The fact is, disenfranchising the delegates 100% was the DNC rules and it was deadbolt stupid.
You also dont mention the fact even if both Clinton and Obama DISAGREED with the ruling and refused to sign it, it was irrelivant. It wouldnt have changed the ruling.
The VOTERS are whats at stake here. Not Obama or Clinton. Regardless if Clinton wants to seat the delegates to help her cause, the point about the voters being heard is a valid one.
So, seat the delegates AFTER Obama wins the nomination. Its simple.
Posted by: tomdavie | May 8, 2008 9:44:43 AM
David Bonior's former staffer, Mark Brewer is state party chair in Michigan. Has been for decades! He had a hand in the major screw up that jeopardizes Michigan's delegation at the convention. There are lots of people in Michigan who are upset about the way things were handled. The chicanery and over-intriguing that passes for political "strategies" is orchestrated by leftover back room labor pols who'd rather "drink muddy water and sleep in a hollow log" then face the prospect of an Obama nomination. These are Reagan Democrats, for sure. Bonior's endorsement of Obama is so that Bonior can stay relevant. He has a huge ego! And he has no real influence over Edwards anyway.
Posted by: Anon | May 8, 2008 9:42:29 AM
Bishop
If McCain wins...do you know what that ends up doing to our momentum in congress.
to say we will hold congress if you all decide to vote for McCain...is disingenuous...this election is too important right now for bitter...yes "bitter" people because that is what you are voting out of...
to suddenly put a man in who is promising to fight for everythnig that democrats are afraid of...
what kind of vote says ..."vote for McCain because we will hold congress"
That is what voters will see through.
and it is not "using" Roe vs. Wade...
have you listened to a single thing McCain has said.
Posted by: dl | May 8, 2008 9:42:18 AM
DemUnited-I agree with you. The notion that women and men Clinton supporters; especially if they are pro-choice, will vote for McCain and not Obama does not hold water. With Justice Stevens at 88 years old and Justice Ginsburg at 75, pro-choice women need to think TWICE before hitting the button for McCain. He has made it very clear he wants to overturn Roe v. Wade and also stated he did not even want a VP that did not share his view.. Bush appointed two of the most conservative judges on that court!
It is time for us to move on. I can not believe the vile and complete ignorance of so many of these post.
Posted by: Paige | May 8, 2008 9:42:01 AM
bishop, where have you been? Hillary's campaign has been much more negative than Obama's. I'm sure there will be a few idiots who will vote mc-more-war out of spite, but I have faith in the voters that they will realize that Obama is the right person for the right time. I am predicting a landslide for Obama in the fall. Obama 2008!
Posted by: pt | May 8, 2008 9:38:22 AM
Well, Bishop,
There has been a lot of mud slinging on both sides. I have been reading it for months now. Clinton supporters smeared Obama with everything they could think of as soon as Obama won the Iowa Caucuses. We he officially became a threat to Clinton, Clinton supporters went into full attack mode. Obama supporters responded with smearing attacks as well. So, both sides have been mean and dirty and we've forgotten that we are all democrats (I think), and that we have more in common (democratic core beliefs) than we disagree on.
Posted by: DemocratsUnited | May 8, 2008 9:38:12 AM
Smarter than the rest to late
Donna B yesterday to a clinton supporter go ahead and vote republican or stay home.
Posted by: Bishop | May 8, 2008 9:38:07 AM
David Bonior's former staffer, Mark Brewer is state party chair in Michigan. Has been for decades! He had a hand in the major screw up that jeopardizes Michigan's delegation at the convention. There are lots of people in Michigan who are upset about the way things were handled. The chicanery and over-intriguing that passes for political "strategies" is orchestrated by leftover back room labor pols who'd rather "drink muddy water and sleep in a hollow log" then face the prospect of an Obama nomination. These are Reagan Democrats, for sure. Bonior's endorsement of Obama is so that Bonior can stay relevant. He has a huge ego! And he has no real influence over Edwards anyway.
Posted by: Anon | May 8, 2008 9:34:00 AM
My fellow Democrats, READ this carefully...
If you are reasonable people then this should make sense, but if you are biased toward one nominee or the other then you won't see the logic.
The objective is to not only win, but win fair. Agree? So if you are Hillary you would want those votes counted because you are down? fair assessment? If you are Obama you wouldn't to avoid potential change of the waves, right? This doesn't sound too fair in either cases. So here is what I'm saying.
Nobody knew the votes would come down to these two states. So several months ago when the energy was high in both camps we could have DRAWN at RANDOM any two states and take them out of the voting and it would be seen as FAIR, right?? Right! So bottomline is I respect FL and MI votes need to be heard, but the rules were breached and so we should see them AS RANDOM discarded states.......... If you asked Clinton months ago, she would have thought the race would be easy. The same may be true for Obama. SO fellow democrats be reasonable. The demographics overall doesn't support obama, so clinton should never be in this position at all.... Tell me you don't agree........ let's do the right thing treat the votes as ommitted and use the results as they are... Anything else will be seen unfair to a large percentage of people..... DON"T DIVIDE THE PARTY. DON"T DIVIDE THE PARTY.
Posted by: Smarter than the rest | May 8, 2008 9:30:48 AM
You know, the superdelegates could just go ahead and end this. Are they are still fearful of Obama?
What's the deal... Is it all about their own political future?
Go Hillary or McCain.
Posted by: cindy in nc | May 8, 2008 9:27:18 AM
Funny how the tone of voters tend to mirror the tone of their candidate. The Obama supporters are high-minded -- just like Obama. And the Clinton supporters are bitter, angry, unyielding and mean-spirited. Like Clinton, they would vote for John McCain rather than vote for change, hamstringing themselves and the country for another 4-8 years. Who, in their right mind, could vote for John McCain, when only yesterday he pledged to put more John Roberts and Samuel Alitos on the Supreme Court. What kind of Democracy do we have where the highest court in the land represents only one rigid ideology? Our rights are slowly being frittered away -- and realize it -- ALL OF OUR RIGHTS -- not just Democrats, but EVERYBODY'S. The GOP inhabits a whole other universe, much different from the one we live in, and they don't care if we survive, just that they and theirs continue to reap windfall profits on the backs of the rest of us. Wake up people, this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to revive our standing in the world. Clinton is not trusted by Americans, and so how do you think she impresses foreign leaders? Most world leaders look forward to negotiating with Obama, since he's willing to talk to allies and non-allies alike in order to resolve the stalemate created by the Bush Administration, which McCain promises to continue.
Posted by: SierraBW | May 8, 2008 9:26:27 AM
Don't use Roe v wade on us the democrats in congress need to earn thier money the turncoats.
The dems can have the house and senate but Mccain will be president women and older voters will see to it
MCCAIN IN 08
Posted by: Bishop | May 8, 2008 9:25:22 AM
charlie35
I don't think all of those women who have spent years (decades) fighting to protect their reproductive rights for themselves and their daughters are suddenly going to think "obama" is naive enough and a "poser" enough (as you say which i think is funny coming from someone who supported Hillary) ...that suddenly they are going to be spiteful enough to vote for a man who has his second talking point as overturning Roe vs. Wade and putting in the most conservative justice he can get...
In a year where the justices on their side of the issues aren't looking to healthy...4 or 8 years is a long time to not see one of them retire or worse...
and the next justices choices will swing the court to a place that would send this country back 40 years.
Yeah if you hold your nose and vote for McCain and yuor children come and ask you what you did when the country was in such a bad state and we had the choice to go down one road or the other...
on top of the fact that a vote for McCain sends a HUGE message to the world... it doesn't resolve the economic situation...or healthcare...or the weakening military... or our beholden financial situation to China...
so when future generations (your kids, your nieces, your nephews) ask...
...You tell them you voted for McCain.
Posted by: dl | May 8, 2008 9:20:08 AM
He was already supporting Him and I think we should vote Mccain the House is democratic and so is the senate so why give the elitist what they want
McCain in 08
Posted by: Bishop | May 8, 2008 9:18:59 AM
Ruth,
You are so correct. There are Clntonites on this board who are saying it will be the fault of Obama's supporters if a democrat loses the election. The are so filled with hate, bitterness and resentment that they can not see that if Obama loses, it will be because Clinton's supporters did not vote for him. SO, then it would in fact, be their fault. Not ours. But I guess you can't explain that to people have have succumbed to HATE.
Posted by: DemocratsUnited | May 8, 2008 9:17:32 AM
i'm a wounded old soldier and independant clinton and obama supporter and i think hillary should stay in until a nominee is chosen. if it is barack, she has the obvious influence and power to bring her base with her to join with his for the good of America and their party.
hillary's relentless tenacity and die-hard campaign experience would best serve the nation if she and barack can unite against America's common foe...the current g.o.p.
even if hillary is not on the ticket, the impact of both the obama and clinton families together on stage in an actual physical embrace would draw thunderous applause and pave the path toward the reconciliation and solidarity of that crucial democratic base.
we have seen the divided power and passion of the democratic party.
now lets mend (with a metaphorical welding torch) the reinforced, steel-hard might of working class whites and blacks and the advanced education and affluence of the people we want our children to become so that we can unite and stand victorious in november.....SEMPER FI!
Posted by: XERXES | May 8, 2008 9:17:30 AM
Jeanette,
You Clintonites are ridiculous!!!!!! First, when he did not disown him, you criticized him for NOT doing so. Then when Wright goes on National TV and intentionally makes a fool of himself and Obama, Obama cuts ties with him and y