Political Punch

Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Previous | Main | Next »

Ickes Sees "Perversion" at the DNC Meeting

May 31, 2008 3:46 PM

Harold Ickes, a senior adviser to the presidential campaign of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., took issue just now with any notion that the campaign of Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., is conceding anything by agreeing to a proposal being floated to seat the full Florida delegation with each delegate getting half a vote -- thus netting Clinton 19 pledged delegates.

"Concession?" said Ickes. "Gimme a break. Under their formula, Hillary Clinton loses delegates, not gains delegates. It is just a perversion of the word to call that a concession."

At last year's DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting, Ickes was one of several Clinton supporters to vote to not recognize any delegates from either Florida or Michigan because the two states were about to violate party rules and hold their contests early. He has since changed his position on the matter.

- jpt

May 31, 2008 in Clinton, Hillary | Permalink | User Comments (104)

User Comments

Whether senator Obama wins the GE or not, it will surely be nice to tell my children and grandchildren that I had to opportunity to vote for a Black man for president of these United States at least once in my lifetime. Obama08

Posted by: the_peoples_prez | Jun 2, 2008 1:46:39 PM

Those who would vote for the party that that has ruined our country in seven years is only doing it to themselves and will have several years to try to get used to enjoying the pleasure.

Posted by: all | Jun 2, 2008 10:59:49 AM

HRC argreed to the rules. Then she asked for them to be changed when it became clear she was loosing, like I knew she would. To have been granted that rules change and then turn around and complain that SHE was cheated shows incredible chutzpah.

To her supporters: if you do indeed go to McCain, and that looses what is at the moment an almost sure thing for Obama, the future blood in Iraq will be on YOUR hands.

Posted by: David | Jun 1, 2008 12:58:47 AM


Why is Hillary in second place if she has all of this support and is so electable? Truth is she lost because voters prefer Obama for a variety of reasons. By the way, Hillary is acting like a John McCain supporter with plausible deniability because she is a democratic candidate. Her behavior has and is sabotaging democrats chances of winning the GE. But they will still win despite her underhanded ways.

Posted by: LG | Jun 2, 2008 3:01:42 AM

Posted by: carollt,

I agree! I expressed the same sentiments two months ago. All these woman identifying with Hillary, what a total and complete joke. Sure some of them may have experiences sexism, but Hillary hasn't experienced anything. She has been helped along - in her lifetime.

Therefore, I don't have any sympathy for her. We don't share not one thing in common - Hillary and I. Eventhough, I attended and graduate from college, my parents didn't send me to Ivy league schools... My husbands name didn't get me a job at a law firm and seats on various boards....My husbands name didn't get me a senate seat I didn't earn, etc. etc. etc. etc.

This stuff about sexism is a total joke. The only one playing the gender card here is her, men are just to stupid to see it!.....The bottom line is, she's not entitled to something just because she is Bill's wife.

No, she needs to earn her way through life just like the rest of us. Afterall, the woman is 60 years old. At one what point will she start earning her own damn way? I can guarantee you had her name been Maryland, she wouldn't have her senate seat now. Geez.

Maryland

Posted by: Maryland | Jun 2, 2008 12:07:52 AM

Sally...through supporters on the MI legislature and attorneys Obama stopped the revotes there....Obama refused to accept FL's revote plan thereby making it impossible for them to revote by mail.

Obama team did stop revotes in both states.

He was directly responsible for making sure these 2 states didn't get legitimate elections. Then to top it off in order to pander to Iowa he pulled his name off in MI.

Everyone played by the rules which were to not campaign in both states...except Obama who ran ads in FL...


You can get your negative views from the tabloid media if you want, but anyone that really cares to get the facts needs to research more than the mainstream media....

Posted by: Jackie | Jun 1, 2008 9:15:44 PM

AMEN, carollt. HRC was the wrong person at the wrong time.

If the choice had been Condi Rice and HRC, I'd have happily gone for Condi....

Posted by: David | Jun 1, 2008 12:57:40 PM

I can't wait until next week when Obama has the numbers to be the Democratic nominee for President.

Mrs. Clinton is all about Mrs. Clinton. She does not play by the rules and will do anything and say anything to win.

All this talk about sexism is nonsense. Mrs. Clinton is where she is today because of the man she married.

I am a 52 year old working woman. I want a woman to be President who has made her own way; not married into the position. Next thing we know, Laura Bush will be running for President.

If Hillary supporters want to support McCain, so be it. I hope those supporters do not have children of draft age, because John McBush will surely have to start a draft to support all the wars he loves so much.

Posted by: carollt | Jun 1, 2008 9:59:41 AM

Obama wanted his name off the
ballot in Florida as well.
But the office of the Florida
Republican Secretary of State
left it on the ballot. And
the Obama campaign did not
pursue the matter further
and let it go at that because
the DNC had ruled that the
Florida primary results would
not count.

Posted by: anon | Jun 1, 2008 2:10:00 AM

Obama is the all-American candidate.
He's more all-American than any of
the others.

Posted by: anon | Jun 1, 2008 1:37:45 AM

Posted by: David | Jun 1, 2008 12:58:47 AM

bho and hillary can talk leaving iraq asap. what they can do is another thing.
i will still not vote for bho, a man i consider to be racist and unamerican.

Posted by: pp | Jun 1, 2008 1:08:31 AM

HRC argreed to the rules. Then she asked for them to be changed when it became clear she was loosing, like I knew she would. To have been granted that rules change and then turn around and complain that SHE was cheated shows incredible chutzpah.

To her supporters: if you do indeed go to McCain, and that looses what is at the moment an almost sure thing for Obama, the future blood in Iraq will be on YOUR hands.

Posted by: David | Jun 1, 2008 12:58:47 AM

Posted by: Doug | Jun 1, 2008 12:12:45 AM

no.
been there, done that. $40,000,000 dollars later.

Posted by: pp | Jun 1, 2008 12:24:45 AM

Posted by: Ann | Jun 1, 2008 12:08:04 AM

Ann, sorry. I am a life long dem...NEVER voted republican, and i will this year. it is not just about party. i have to at least have a little pride in who i vote for. without belaboring the point, there is nothing i find in bho that would make me feel okay to vote for him. at least with mccain, i know he is proud of the country and proud to call himself an american. if the congress-pelosi and reid- do not squander their opportunity again this congress, they can be the balance to a republican presidency.

Posted by: pp | Jun 1, 2008 12:14:21 AM

I think we as a people have become a nation of ignoramuses. I cannot help but feel sorry for the people who have posted such hate in this column. Democrats do not be fooled by the Republicans who are posting here and saying hateful things about both Democratic candidates. The Democrats are smart enough to recognize that we need change and will come out unified to defeat McCain. The statements that supporters of each Democratic candidates are making right now about not voting for the opposing candidate are being said in the heat of the moment. But when they calm down and realize that they will be voting to end the economic recession, the Iraq war, global warming, povery and lack of healthcare for all, they will vote for a Democrat.

Posted by: Ann | Jun 1, 2008 12:08:04 AM

To Doug-- Don't you have a rational mind. Bill Clinton behavior was similar to Obama and L. Sinclair. And don't forget the gay choir director of Obama's church that was murdered. He and Obama were very close and the crime has not been solved. What happened there???

Posted by: Martin | May 31, 2008 11:52:34 PM

After listening to the news, I am very surprised and disgusted that Senator Obama received votes/delegates when he had voluntarily removed his name from the Michigan ballot. He deserved 0 (ZERO) votes/delegates. OBAMA HAS STOLEN THE DELEGATES. He is just a very corrupt candidate.

Posted by: Mitchell | May 31, 2008 11:39:23 PM

Posted by: Mike S | May 31, 2008 11:14:02 PM

if hillary/ickes are so awful/hypocrites/two-faced, then what does it make bho for also taking the delegates from florida, AND taking delegates in michigan where he was not even on the ballot!

Posted by: pp | May 31, 2008 11:23:00 PM

Hey Brain,

I don't want to get in the middle of this coversation but let me just interject: she isn't all that beloved! There are NOT enough people that would vote McCain just because she doesn't get the nominee. So, some childish internet folks and some angry women feel cheated - despite the facts...it won't make THAT big of a difference if they vote McCain or not. As someone else stated: 'there are other factors in play this time around'.....in addition to the fact that there won't be enough of them.

If she was all that loved, SHE'D BE THE NOMINEE! She came into this with all the things he did NOT. She SHOULD be the nominee. The fact that she is not, speaks to the voters voicing their WANTS and to hell with what Hillary or the Clinton's want.

So, I repeat, his win doesn't guarantee a McCain victory. But, his loss will surely signify the end of her and dim any chances of future women running for high office(b/c of all this mess started by her)though, you mark my words. Also, to quote one last person before I leave you to continue your discussion: 'win or not he will be the nominee and he will have beaten her' And for most people Brian, that and the end of the Clinton's is good enough....I suspect as a Rep. that is good news to you though? I leave you now to carry on.

G'nite
Janice

Posted by: Janice | May 31, 2008 11:19:04 PM

Clinto and Obama agreed not to sit the delegates because of Fla and Michigan's
violation back in 2007 and Harold Ickes agreed as well.

Now look at these two Hyprocrites Hillary Clinton and Harold Ickes.

Typical nasty two-faced Hillary

Posted by: Mike S | May 31, 2008 11:14:02 PM

Obama passed the 2026 mark-he now has 2052. Five dozen away from the new goalpost, but no matter, he wins!

Posted by: oldwhiteguy | May 31, 2008 10:16:08 PM

Dear Mr Ickes.
You were in charge of the dnc when Fl/MI were first discussed. To now expect a differant outcome is retarded.
Not to worry, you'll find a new job, just keep saying "do you want fries with that?"

Posted by: oldwhiteguy | May 31, 2008 9:31:21 PM


They shouldnt have seated the delegates at all... The elections were not true or fair elections.

You can not tell people it doesnt matter and then later change the rules and say it counts there rules where the election doesnt mater so they do not show a true example of the will of the people.

That would never happen here the rules said the election dont count.. So they should not count.

Are you living in America or Russia ?

The Only way the party should have been seated is if they where split 50/50 so in reality then the election had didnt count with regards to giving anyone any benifit.

Just my two cents.

Posted by: aussiewatcher | May 31, 2008 9:28:12 PM

Hello President Mccain. The DNC just handed you the Presidency today.

Posted by: Trish | May 31, 2008 9:26:53 PM

The Clinton campaign wants to award rule breaking. I guess anything goes to win the nomination. She said on public radio that the votes in Michigan wont count, because she thought she would have easy sailing to the nomination. But she left her name on the ballot even though all the other presidential candidates took their names out...they were playing according to the rules. But I guess keeping the rules is not what Hilary does. Now that she is not winning she wants to move the goal post. I always came to Hilary's defense when friends would be critical of her during Bill's presidency. I always was surprised how they seemed to hate her and could never understand why. Now I know why. She is a vicious person and is determined to divide the Democrats because she feels entitled to this nomination. She cannot understand how a humble senator from Illinois can be winning this campaign. Obama is being generous in giving her any delegates at all.

Posted by: Ann | May 31, 2008 9:24:44 PM

I am fed up with the DNC!! Anyone can see that they are doing everything they can to make sure Obama is the nominee. SOMEONE PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME HOW OBAMA WAS AWARDED DELEGATES FROM MICHIGAN WHEN HIS NAME WASN'T ON THE BALLOT??!! How is that fair!!

The DNC shot themselves in the foot today. They don't give a crap about the will of the people..they just care about getting the Messiah elected.

Mark my words....Obama has no chance!! Clinton supporters will unite against him. The DNC ruling today only hurt Obama's chances even more. I will not vote for an inexperienced candidate with the most liberal voting record in the Senate...with ties to hateful corrupt people like Ayers, Rezko, Wright and Pfleger. Wake up people!! Obama doesn't represent hope...he represents more uncertainty for the future of our great nation.

Posted by: Trish | May 31, 2008 9:20:04 PM

This is the first time in my 74 years (worked 8 years for political party) where a politician is awarded votes and delegates when he chose not to be on the ballot. WHY HAVE A BALLOT? WHY HAVE PEOPLE TO TO POLLS TO VOTE? JUST GIVE IT TO THE MOST CORRUPT CANDIDATE. This is just plain wrong, anyway one looks at it.

Posted by: Marla | May 31, 2008 8:53:04 PM

What was done today has made history. The democrat party took vote away from a candidate to give to someone who wasnt on the ballots.

"I didnt leave the democrat party, the democrat party left me."

Posted by: toby | May 31, 2008 8:41:36 PM

Sour grapes, anyone? Hillary supporters made fools of themselves today at the RBC meeting, as did their candidate in first saying the Michigan Primary "wouldn't count for anything" (to please NH voters) and then arguing with a straight face as a certain loser: "We must recognize these votes." Hail to Obama!

Posted by: Kiren | May 31, 2008 8:12:54 PM

Sour grapes, anyone? Hillary supporters made fools of themselves today at the RBC meeting, as did their candidate in first saying the Michigan Primary "wouldn't count for anything" (to please NH voters) and then arguing with a straight face as a certain loser: "We must recognize these votes." Hail to Obama!

Posted by: Kiren | May 31, 2008 8:12:40 PM

The Obama people are jumping up and down right now because they cheated and got by with it. Can't wait till Tony Rezko explains why he was forced to help buy the Obama Chicago mansion. Was it a pay-off or a bribe? Interesting.

Posted by: Mark | May 31, 2008 8:08:52 PM

To Karen-

So what if Obama is "the most liberal" senator. To me, "conservative" has become a bad word after these last 7 years. Selling their soul to the extreme religious right and Rovian tactics has done more damage to our country than any liberal could have done in that same time period.

Posted by: Ted | May 31, 2008 8:06:18 PM

Karen -

Obama's voting record is NOT "exactly the same as Hillary's"...it is much shorter!

Posted by: Amy | May 31, 2008 7:49:53 PM

What kind of "leader" resigns from his hate-preaching church by sending a letter then has his spokesman announce it for him??? Should we get used to this hiding from controversy...letting others do the clean up for him?

Posted by: Amy | May 31, 2008 7:46:26 PM

Re: "Because the truth is that Mr. Obama is the single most liberal senator in the entireU.S.Senate."


No he isn't. Ted Kennedy is. Look up Obama's voting record. It is exactly the same as Hillary's.

Posted by: Karen | May 31, 2008 7:25:29 PM

Hillary should run as an independent, after 50 years as a Dem it is over, i will vote for Mccain. To hell with the left wingers.
.The reality is this: Though the Democrats will not have a nominee until August, unless Hillary Clinton drops out, Mr. Obama is now the frontrunner, and its time America takes a closer and deeper look at him. Some pundits are calling him the next John F. Kennedy. He's not. He's the next George McGovern. And it's time people learned the facts.
Because the truth is that Mr. Obama is the single most liberal senator in the entireU.S.Senate. He is more liberal than Ted Kennedy, Bernie Sanders, or Mrs. Clinton. Never in my life have I seen a presidential frontrunner whose rhetoric is so far removed from his record. Walter Mondale promised to raise our taxes, and he lost. George McGovern promised military weakness, and he lost. Michael Dukakis promised a liberal domestic agenda, and he lost.
Yet, Mr. Obama is promising all those things, and he's not behind in the polls. Why? Because the press has dealt with him as if he were in a beauty pageant. Mr. Obama talks about getting past party, getting past red and blue, to lead the United States of America. But let's look at the more defined strokes of who he is underneath this superficial "beauty."
Start with national security, since the president's most important duties are as commander-in-chief. Over the summer, Mr. Obama talked about invading Pakistan, a nation armed with nuclear weapons; meeting without preconditions with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who vows to destroy Israel and create another Holocaust; and Kim Jong II, who is murdering and starving his people, but emphasized that the nuclear option was off the table against terrorists - something no president has ever taken off the table since we created nuclear weapons in the 1940s. Even Democrats who have worked in national security condemned all of those remarks. Mr. Obama is a foreign-policy novice who would put our national security at risk.
Next, consider economic policy. For all its faults, our health care system is the strongest in the world. And free trade agreements, created by Bill Clinton as well as President Bush, have made more goods more affordable, so that even people of modest means can live a life that no one imagined a generation ago. Yet, Mr. Obama promises to raise taxes on "the rich." How to fix Social Security? Raise taxes. How to fix Medicare? Raise taxes. Prescription drugs? Raise taxes. Free college? Raise taxes. Socialize medicine? Raise taxes. His solution to everything is to have government take it over. Big Brother on steroids, funded by your paycheck.
Finally, look at the social issues. Mr. Obama had the audacity to open a stadium rally by saying, "All praise and glory to God!" but says that Christian leaders speaking for life and marriage have hijacked - "hijacked" - Christianity. He is pro-partial birth abortion, and promises to appoint Supreme Court justices who will rule any restriction on it unconstitutional. He espouses the abortion views of Margaret Sanger, one of the early advocates of racial cleansing. His spiritual leaders endorse homosexual marriage, and he is moving in that direction. InIllinois, he refused to vote against a statewide ban on all handguns in the state. These are radical left,Hollywood, andSan Franciscovalues, notMiddle Americavalues.
The real Mr. Obama is an easy target for the general election. Mrs. Clinton is a far tougher opponent. But Mr. Obama could win, if people don't start looking behind his veneer and flowery speeches. His vision of "bringing America together" means saying that those who disagree with his agenda for America are hijackers or warmongers. Uniting the country means adopting his liberal agenda and abandoning any conflicting beliefs.
It's time to talk about the real Barack Obama. In an election of firsts, let's first make sure we elect the person who is qualified to be our president in a nuclear

Posted by: JIm | May 31, 2008 7:12:27 PM

Harold Ickes has proven himself to be totally disingenuous in his words. His unveiled threat to take this to the credentials committee is just a bunch of blustering after a day of endless and worthless rhetoric. Did he actually think that the flawed results of Michigan should be accepted as is? Come on. Give me a break!

Posted by: J. T. Bigglesworth | May 31, 2008 7:08:07 PM

The HillaRypublicans are not true Democrats. Hillary's own brother is hinting that he might vote for Bob Barr as the Independant candidate if she isn't selected. Having lived in GA during Barr's tenure, that is so damn disgusting that any Democrat would ever consider voting for him only because She wasn't the annoited one. See all you losers at the polls in November. Either do what is best for this country, or shut up. If you want four more years of George McBush, then keep on hatin'.

Posted by: Rick/Sneads Ferry, NC | May 31, 2008 7:07:39 PM

This is pure craziness! The DNC made a clear decision at the outset and neither candidate objected. The DNC needs to hold to that decision and not be held hostage by those who are arrogant enough to bend, or not want to live by, rules when they don't suit. If we all did that, chaos would reign.

Posted by: AD | May 31, 2008 6:53:19 PM

Holy heck. I didn't realize there was room under that bus for whole church and it's 8000 person denomination. It's officially large enough to be it's own country. BO should jump under there and be president.

Posted by: PGHPAVOTER | May 31, 2008 6:41:44 PM

Ickes is himself a perversion, as is the Clinton elite who want to wrest this nomination from the best choice for Pres, and the best person to lead this country at this time.

Posted by: anotherpatrica | May 31, 2008 6:27:34 PM

ABC just posted it.

Obama ditches his church. His credibility just went down to ZERO.

He is the ultimate EMPTY SUIT doing anything to get elected.

Posted by: cgeast | May 31, 2008 6:22:18 PM

He can't win here, can he. You Sillary supporters jump him for going to the church, then quitting the church. The ultimate empty pantsuit is Hillary for voting to ditch FL and MI, and then crying foul when she is behind and needs them. Talk about hypocrisy and doing anything to get elected. Get use to it. Obama will be the next President, with or without Hillary's support, or Hillary's supporters.

Posted by: Rick/Sneads Ferry, NC | May 31, 2008 6:26:09 PM

ABC just posted it.

Obama ditches his church. His credibility just went down to ZERO.

He is the ultimate EMPTY SUIT doing anything to get elected.

Posted by: cgeast | May 31, 2008 6:22:18 PM

Obama is african american. His father is african, and he was born in the united states.

He is african , and an american. According to the census bureau, anyone who is half white and half minority, must declare that they are a minority.

So Obama is legally an 'african american' . But he is half white really.

Posted by: cgeast | May 31, 2008 6:19:42 PM

Uh, for the ZILLIONTH time, Hagee is not McCain's pastor.

He barely knows him, he just got his endorsement.

Nice try, but quit comparing apples to elephants.

It's Obama who sat for 20 years in the hateful racist church. NOT McCain.

Sorry, but you lose again.
Posted by: Jo | May 31, 2008 6:01:47 PM

Uh, McCain just called him a great American. We will see very soon who the losers are, Jo. And it will be both McCain and Hillary supporters. America wins in this election.

Posted by: Rick/Sneads Ferry, NC | May 31, 2008 6:11:20 PM

If Obama get the nomination you will see a strong independent candidate emerge for the center. Where I am. I will vote McCain as a protest against Obama and I can live 4 more years. It won't matter anyway McCain will beat Obama in a landslide.

Posted by: Jessica | May 31, 2008 6:10:36 PM

Father Pfluger is the nail in Obama's coffin.

I knew it was coming, I'm just glad it came with video.

Posted by: Jo | May 31, 2008 6:07:09 PM

I'm curious, has Obama ever made a unity speech of love and hope (and all his other bogus crap he speaks about) to his church of 20 years, Trinity?

Uh, let me answer that. Uh, NO.

Barack, clean up your own backyard and then we'll see if you deserve the keys to the kingdom.

Until then, adios. And take your pretty (but meaningless) speeches with you.

Posted by: Jo | May 31, 2008 6:04:09 PM

Uh, for the ZILLIONTH time, Hagee is not McCain's pastor.

He barely knows him, he just got his endorsement.

Nice try, but quit comparing apples to elephants.

It's Obama who sat for 20 years in the hateful racist church. NOT McCain.

Sorry, but you lose again.

Posted by: Jo | May 31, 2008 6:01:47 PM

Dems will NOT vote for McCain. They
may try to but may end up voting
for Buchanan....they've done it before!

Posted by: hombre | May 31, 2008 5:57:45 PM

Have you ever seen a picture of Obama's father? He's not an Arab, and having an Arab name doesn't make you Arab. Black Americans have European names, but they are not European.

Posted by: Karen | May 31, 2008 5:57:22 PM

Those that rant on either side of the argument scare me. Ickes himself agree in March that the votes would not count. Barack did the right thing and pulled his name from MI. Now that HRC is not the front runner her group wants to change the rules (again both HRC and Barack agreed in March they would not count) and Ickess who was part of the decision process now says sorry I was just kidding. For those of you so rabid against Barack you sound just like the right wing republicans.

Remember the primary objective is to remove the Republicans from power, that is what you should be focused on. I started out for HRC but now she scares the c&*@ out of me. Somebody that power hungry does not need to be in the white house

Posted by: gary | May 31, 2008 5:55:12 PM

I generally enjoy reading the threads in these comments but refrain from commenting since people are generally talking past each other and often with extreme opinions. But I saw something here I must comment on. Someone, I believe with the nick Vickie, started a thread on the ethnic make-up of Obama including ethnic lineage to one point after the decimal.

I am very sorry but that looks like the documents that the Germans used to compile to determine if people would be classified as belonging to one of inferior races. I find that kind of thread repugnant and it should have no place in our society.

Shame on you who posted it and others who engaged in a discussion about it instead of repudiating it.

Posted by: lennybruce | May 31, 2008 5:54:14 PM


"...who are more interested in skin color, and racial entitlements...

-----------------

You just described the congregation at Trinity, Obama's church.

Posted by: Miguel | May 31, 2008 5:53:09 PM

Ickes is a pervert if he thinks this is
a perversion. This guy could teach
Machiavelli a few tricks.

Posted by: hombre | May 31, 2008 5:53:07 PM


"Does he always have the smirk on his face?"

------------------

Yes, Obama does.

Posted by: Miguel | May 31, 2008 5:51:25 PM

Well, we knew this wouldn't take long...BARACK JUST RESIGNED FROM HIS CHURCH!!! Anything to win. But somehow he sat there for 20 years and didn't know it was wrong. When it gets put under a microscope, it shows how wrong it all was.

Posted by: LonghornMama | May 31, 2008 5:50:49 PM

perversion-- is the act of a desperate candidate to change the rules at the end of the game so that she might have a chance to win, since, afterall, she is the more "electable" candidate.....give me a break......

Posted by: mona lisa | May 31, 2008 5:50:04 PM

Too late for Hillary to get a refund from Penn, Ickes and Loony Dufus?

Posted by: kravitz | May 31, 2008 5:48:26 PM

At least I know where John McCain stands on his love for this country. Let's torture Obama and break his arms over and over...if he can handle it then maybe he can get near the WH.

Posted by: Debra | May 31, 2008 5:47:52 PM

I am voting McCain if Obama is the choice.

Posted by: Jkan | May 31, 2008 5:24:58 PM

Why does MI get seated 100% and Fl 50/50

Posted by: Bishop | May 31, 2008 5:17:48 PM

The rule is the first one to reach 2026 delegates wins the democratic nomination. No one will reach this number by the end of the last primaries. There's no such rule that whoever gets the majority of delegates, wins. That's where the popular vote comes in along with the other factors to be considered. That's the job of the superdelegates to make a wise decision to come up with a nominee who can best balance the results from electoral map, popular vote, gallaup polls on various voting groups, gallup polls on running against McCain. Also, they should now look at the resumes of each candidate and the depthness of their knowledge on economic policies, foreign policies and national security. Who can best beat McCain not by a whisker or smaller margin but by a reasonable margin. Scared Pelosi should be fired from DNC since she doesn't know the real job of a superdelegate. If these superdelegates are marred by subjectivesness and the idea of just basing the nomination on the majority of delegates alone then the democratic party will be in a shaky position by November.

Posted by: neil1785 | May 31, 2008 5:16:48 PM

Vickie - no disagreement, that's the role of the super delegates; the only dispute is if it's really as clear-cut as you want to make it. Is Obama vulnerable in the fall? yes. Is Clinton a sure thing? no. If it were otherwise, I think we'd see the SDs break heavily towards one or the other candidate.

Posted by: rst | May 31, 2008 5:14:43 PM

I am surprised that Senator Obama is not demanding elections in the other 5 states. After all, he says there are 57 USA states. He doesn't know 4th grade social studies and he wants to be President.
I will never vote for the socialist, dictator, liar Obama. His best friends are terrorists or criminals or racists.
COUNT ALL VOTES AS VOTED. NOTHING LESS.

Posted by: Maggie | May 31, 2008 5:11:08 PM


Sally.
I have a family member in the military
serving our nation in middle east as
we speak.
You don't have to explain to me.
Thank you........

Posted by: Nicholas | May 31, 2008 5:09:23 PM

Vickie...if only the super dels understood their responsibility and job function...however, the pressure to take away what "appears" to be the first black candidate to get this far would cause chaos. Everyone knows with all his flaws and negative baggage we're just supposed to keep passing him through. However the pass will stop Nov 3. HELLO PRESIDENT McCAIN.

Posted by: Debra | May 31, 2008 5:08:26 PM

I find it extremely interesting that so many persons appear to be so confident in Hillary Clinton's ability to run the USA when she appears to have failed dismally at managing a presidential primary campaign.

Posted by: View from Canada | May 31, 2008 5:07:24 PM

Why are there so few people who post to these blogs who don't see we have two good candidates, talented in different ways, imperfect in different ways, likely to leave their mark on the presidency in different ways... why all the rancor?

Posted by: rst | May 31, 2008 5:07:10 PM

It really is time for a 3 party system.

Liberals

Conservatives

Everyone in the middle.

Posted by: cgeast | May 31, 2008 5:03:27 PM

Obama did campaign in Florida for 10 days by TV ads before he was forced to pull them. He bent the rules and lost in the election. In Michigan he removed his name from the ballot because he was 20 points behind Clinton and now wants to get delegates from non-votes for him. IS THIS THE NEW KIND OF POLITICS HE HAS BEEN TALKING ABOUT? Obama is not an honest man, never was, never will be.

Posted by: Mary | May 31, 2008 5:02:40 PM

Senator Obama does not want all the votes counted accurately. Is he a democrat, a socialist or a dictator? Senator Obama is a sleaze. All delegates should be seated as voters indicated. This is just more dirty politics from the Obama camp. After all, he has been doing this sort of thing for 12 years. Why change now? Of course, he will lose in November.

Posted by: Michelle | May 31, 2008 4:52:50 PM

The rule is the first one to reach 2026 delegates wins the democratic nomination. No one will reach this number by the end of the last primaries. There's no rule that whoever gets the majority of delegates, wins. That's the job of the superdelegates to make a wise decision to come up with a nominee who can best balance the results from electoral map, popular vote, gallup polls on running against McCain. Who can bet beat McCain not by a whisker margin but by a reasonable margin. If these superdelegates are marred by the idea of majority of pledged delegates then democratic party will be ina shaky position by November.

Posted by: neil1785 | May 31, 2008 4:50:14 PM

What bugs me about the Clinton position on this is it's such a blatantly unprincipled position. What do you think we'd be hearing from the Clintonites if the situation were reversed? Seat all the delegates? Who doesn't honestly think the refrain from the Clinton camp would be "you can't change the rules in the middle of the game, you can't change the rules in the middle of the game, you can't change the rules in the middle of the game"??? Is there not a single honest Clinton supporter out there?

Posted by: rst | May 31, 2008 4:48:31 PM

no more clintons, its time for a change and we do not need mcbush.

Posted by: falcan | May 31, 2008 4:47:05 PM

HELP WANTED: POTUS.. the desired candidate must have no experience in foreign matters, must no have clue how to run a country, must be willing to meet with questionable persons without pre-conditions must have excellant references, preferably and men of the cloth. Must be able to READ from a teleprompter or prepared speech. If this is YOU....See the DNC.

Posted by: char19145 | May 31, 2008 4:42:15 PM

I can tell there are really Hillary haters out there. Obama is an opportunist. He may win the nomination, even the white house. But American voters lose. I do not see much difference between Obama and Bush. Same kind of inexperienced, arrogant politicians.

Posted by: aajulia | May 31, 2008 4:40:48 PM

Texas Voter

OJ is a tad bit more honest.

Posted by: A | May 31, 2008 4:40:12 PM

Democratic Party is over.
President J. McCain-08

Posted by: alex | May 31, 2008 4:39:54 PM

Tom,
Did you read the post on why Obama took his name off the Michigan ballot? If Obama was so stupid to take his name off of a ballot he doesn't really deserve consideration as a President, right?
========================================
Obama campaign wants to disenfranchise voters!
========================================

Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | May 31, 2008 4:36:19 PM

hypocrite

Posted by: rst | May 31, 2008 4:34:12 PM

cgeast seems to conveniently omit these facts:

The Florida House voted 118-0 in favor of moving up the primary.

Terry McAuliffe, head of the Clinton campaign, was the one that stripped those states of their delegates.

Hillary Clinton, along with every other candidate, signed an agreement that stated FL and MI primary results would not count.

Posted by: Texas Voter | May 31, 2008 4:30:24 PM

Paulus

Take a breath and repeat after me: "Clinton loses; Dean and his puppet win."

Now, that wasn't so bad. Was it?


Posted by: A | May 31, 2008 4:30:23 PM

Giving Florida voters half a say is ridiculous. It's like saying were not really at fault. In my book, we are or were not. Which comes out say : you respect my constitutional right to participate as an equal or you don't. Us citizens have had just about enough of this democratic nonsense. Now we know why your campaign aborted Mr.Dean. You and your cronies are incompetent. God protect us if you win the next general election.

Posted by: Paulus | May 31, 2008 4:29:04 PM

It's desperation time for Bill and Hillary which is the sign of a loser. Obama has been cool, calm, and collected the entire time.