Let's Take it to Denver

There is one simple truth in this campaign:

Whether it's 2,024 delegates we're talking about or 2,203; the votes that matter won't be cast until August.

That's when between 4400 pledged and unpledged (super) delegates will make their voices heard.

Kennedy waged a battle in 1980 to ensure that "pledged" delegates have the right to switch their vote if they want.

In addition, as Joe Andrew and George McGovern have made clear over the last few days, super delegates can switch at will as well.

So; Hillary Clinton can and should continue her quest for the nomination of the Democratic Party all the way to the floor of the convention!

Why? Because NEITHER candidate will have the ncessary number of pledged delegates by the time voting ends in June! And the super delegates (as well as "pledged" delegates) have an obligation to the party to cast their vote for the person who they feel is the most electable candidate.

As far as I and millions of other Democrats see it, the Obama coalition is the same coaltion that failed to deliver in '72, '80, '84, '88, '00, & '04!

Hillary's coaltion looks remarkably similar to the one that succeeded in '76, '92, and '96!

I don't know about you but I'm not about to cede two or three Supreme Court nominations because someone is "ahead" in pledged delegate votes...it ain't over till it's over...and that means one thing...Denver!



Display:


Re: Let's Take it to Denver (2.00 / 3)

Why waste valuable time and energy that could be aimed at Republicans at the Democratic nominee, Barack Obama?


by reggie44pride on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:01:06 PM EST

Re: Let's Take it to Denver (2.00 / 1)

Hillary is the stronger candidate against McCain. She would ahve destroyed Obama in a Winner Take all system, which exactly what we'll see in November.


by LDFan on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:02:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Would she? How do you know? Redstate (2.00 / 1)

boot you or something?


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:04:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

If we had a winner-take-all system (none / 0)

Obama would have run his campaign differently and he probably would have beaten Hillary that way, too.


by Angry White Democrat on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:58:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Let's Take it to Denver (none / 0)

If only the Democrats didn't have a democratic selection process...


by WellstoneDem on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:45:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Let's Take it to Denver (none / 0)

Hillary was also supposed to beat all Democrats easily in this primary. Stop playing amateur pollster.


by Pravin on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:22:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Let's Take it to Denver (none / 0)

She would've won a winner-take all system because she would've racked up huge delegate numbers in bigger states like California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts which are going to Obama anyway.

The only states to worry about are Ohio and Pennsylvania, other than that the other swing states; Virginia, Colorado, Iowa, Wisconsin, all went to Obama in a winner-take all.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:20:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

because he's not the nominee yet (2.00 / 2)

and there is something of value to make sure the supers know exactly what they're doing, and consider whether Obama can win against McCain.  That's their job; let them do it.


by 4justice on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:54:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

If and when (none / 0)

the superdelegates and the rest of the contests put him at 2,024 in June, will you all stop?


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:51:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: because he's not the nominee yet (none / 0)

A lot of the same establishment also thought Kerry was very electable. Electability is something Democrats should stop worrying about and spend more energy selling the party brand itself and let the personalities emerge on their own.


by Pravin on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:22:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Winning the White House (2.00 / 2)

is what matters! A delegate lead gained in a bunch of undemocratic caucuses is not sealing the deal


by LDFan on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:01:15 PM EST

Re: Winning the White House (2.00 / 3)

Let's changed the system because we lost!!!


by mefck on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:04:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Who's asking for the system to be (none / 0)

changed?


Obama supporter working to defeat McCain.
by Rumarhazzit on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:46:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

LGF having a slow day? (none / 0)


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:04:03 PM EST

Re: Let's Take it to Denver (2.00 / 3)

How discusting that you put the love of your candidate over what's best for the democratic party. Thank god your candidate just lost and doesn't stand a chance of even initiating a floor fight in Denver. You lost, get over it.


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Bill Clinton
by venician on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:05:13 PM EST

Re: Let's Take it to Denver (none / 0)

This must be a redstater.


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:09:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Believe it or not (2.00 / 1)

Her supporters have passion as well


by LDFan on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:13:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

They also tend to have brains (2.00 / 2)

This post shows a lack of cognitive ability.


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:16:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Nice... (2.00 / 1)

Fact is we feel that b/c Florida/Michigan hasn't been resolved this nomination has not been settled


by LDFan on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:20:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nice... (2.00 / 1)

Even if FL and MI are counted, Clinton would need to win 75% of remaining delegates to have a majority of pledged delegates.

Face it - it's over.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:34:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

We who? (2.00 / 2)

You shouldn't speak for others.

MI & FL will be resolved before the convention.


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:35:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Let's Take it to Denver (2.00 / 1)

What's best for us would be to actually win the general election! I don't like the idea of trading Ohio and Florida for some unknown map that may or may not work out


by LDFan on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:11:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Let's Take it to Denver (none / 0)

Because Ohio and Florida have worked out so well for us?


by Same As It Ever Was on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:38:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm fucking sick (2.00 / 1)

of betting our entire campaign on Florida and Ohio and getting shafted every year.

Maybe other states will give us better luck.

and Obama will still campaign for Florida and Ohio.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:55:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

HA HA HA HA (none / 0)

That's the funniest comment I've read all day!

"How discusting (sic) that you put the love of your candidate over what's best for the democratic party."


by CoyoteCreek on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:44:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Let's Take it to Denver (2.00 / 3)

IMHO there is only one way for BO to win in Nov and that will require winning CO.  I just dont see any other way.  And the Democratic convention is in Denver!!!!   Thus, Dean, BO, Edwards, and HRC need to put on one of the great unity conventions of all time to capture as many CO voters as we can to win the GE.  

The convention has to go prefectly.  No Booing candadates.  No interupting speakers.  It has to be done just right because we will get the most free airtime in the state during the conventionand all of CO will be watching.

david


by giusd on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:09:44 PM EST

Look (none / 0)

Why do I feel so passionately about this?

Becaause...

1.) Jimmy Carter went to the convention with a "Stop McGovern" message

2.) Ted Kennedy went to the convention trailing by nearly 800 delegates and tried to switch delegates who were NOT allowed to change sides

3.) Jesse Jackson went to the convention in '88

And in all of the above cases NO ONE batted an eye! Yet, Hillary, who, like Barack will end the primary season just shy of the number needed to clinch is supposed to step aside like a good girl. The hell with that! The nominee will be selected at the end of August...to the floor we go.


by LDFan on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:09:50 PM EST

Re: Look (2.00 / 2)

right, and what happened in all of those elections again.  That's why Supers will be against it.  


by reggie23 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:13:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

you don't see the sexism? (none / 0)

It was fine for the Men to keep fighting but it's not okay for the woman?  


by LDFan on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:17:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: you don't see the sexism? (2.00 / 1)

No, how many times can I tell you it wasn't ok.   I'm looking at historical fact.  It's not sexist.  Its practical.


by reggie23 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:21:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: you don't see the sexism? (none / 0)

Here's the problem:
Florida/Michigan

It's needs to be resolved!


by LDFan on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:22:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: you don't see the sexism? (2.00 / 1)

It will be way before August and you know it.


by reggie23 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:23:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You know what.... (2.00 / 1)

you're probably right...honestly from the beginning I've wanted to see them both on the same ticket.

The passions of both sides are so strong I can't see another solution working.

But yes; you're probably right. The supers will most likely make their move before the middle of June.


by LDFan on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:27:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You know what.... (2.00 / 1)

Your passionate for your candidate and that's awesome.  If the same ticket wins in November, I'm all for it.


by reggie23 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:32:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Let's Take it to Denver (2.00 / 3)

Here's the problem.  Once Obama gets the pledged delegate lead (yes with FL/MI included), supers will flock to him.  I'm not talking about double digits, I'm talking 100's.  If Hillary starts to yell take it to the the convention,  I predict she ends up with at most 20% of the supers by the time Denver rolls around if she's lucky.  Then it will take her years to build up goodwill within her party.  Hillary's a smart cookie.  She'll do what's best for her and the democratic party.    


by reggie23 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:10:35 PM EST

Why was it okay for Ted (none / 0)

when he was behind by 700 delegates but it's not okay for her???? Please explaing that to me


by LDFan on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:12:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why was it okay for Ted (2.00 / 2)

No it wasn't ok - see 1980 GE


by reggie23 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:13:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why was it okay for Ted (2.00 / 1)

Who said it was OK for Ted to do that?

Show Me ONE Obama supporter who thinks this was a good idea?

Or, do you think, just cause Ted endorsed Obama, SOMEONE that fact leads from that?


"Well the danger on the rocks is surely past... Still I remain tied to the mast"...Don Fagen, Poet and Piano Player
by WashStateBlue on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:44:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

yawn (none / 0)


by Skaje on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:17:42 PM EST

Re: Let's Take it to Denver (2.00 / 3)

Stop with the FL and MI already.  It will get resolved.  Furthermore, it's not up to Obama. Why do I say that:

1. Obama has no reason to block their inclusion because if FL and MI were included Clinton would need 75% of pledged delegates to get a majority of pledged delegates and that would just not happen.

2. The DNC has its own reasons to exclude FL and MI. The other states don't want FL and MI to have no penalty because after all, those other states didn't break the rules. Furthermore, if there was no penalty for FL and MI, the DNC would have zero credibility in threatening sanctions in the future.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:38:02 PM EST

Re: Let's Take it to Denver (none / 0)

What about the other states that broke the rules?
Why do they get a pass?
by LDFan on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:41:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Let's Take it to Denver (none / 0)

Well, they were expected to go early. FL and MI were not, and broke the idea of 4 early states from 4 different regions.


by Falsehood on Thu May 08, 2008 at 12:00:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

why it won't go to Denver (2.00 / 1)

Clinton advisers said they were concerned that the candidate's online fund-raising, which boomed after her victory in the Ohio primary in March and in Pennsylvania in April, had slowed by comparison on Tuesday night and Wednesday, and that her donor base was either tightening somewhat or playing wait-and-see, despite her public appeal for money on Tuesday night. Clinton aides did not send out the near-hourly e-mail blasts bragging about online donations that came after previous successes.

Other advisers said in interviews that her campaign was nearly out of cash, raising questions about what kind of campaign she can continue to run.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/08/us/pol itics/08campaign.html?hp


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:39:46 PM EST

Re: why it won't go to Denver (none / 0)

She did geta few bucks from this online donor :)


by LDFan on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:42:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: why it won't go to Denver (none / 0)

You are truly a committed supporter.  But others are not in your category.  Unless something changes quick, her fundraising is basically done.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Wed May 07, 2008 at 10:56:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Let's Take it to Denver (none / 0)

The only winner of a floor fight at the convention is John McCain. Even if you got your wish and it was taken to the convention and your candidate prevailed she would not win against John McCain. The campaign would be too short and the party too divided. Fortunately the Clinton campaign realizes this. The rest of the primaries will play out, they will get the best deal they can on Michigan and Florida and then they will bow out if the break they need does not come.


Proudly joining the legions of people and states that don't matter on May 20th.
by Obama Independent on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:22:30 PM EST

Re: Let's Take it to Denver (none / 0)

Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton won with non-existent AA turnout and losing voters under 65 by large margins?  Cause that's the state of Clinton's coalition.


by Same As It Ever Was on Wed May 07, 2008 at 11:41:57 PM EST

Re: Let's Take it to Denver (none / 0)

I saw LET'S GO!!!

YeeeeeeeeeeHaaaaaaaaaa


by nikkid on Thu May 08, 2008 at 12:04:53 AM EST

Re: Let's Take it to Denver (none / 0)

Ted Kennedy who is Obama's biggest supporter among the old guard should be asked about this. If he did it being 800! delegates behind why can't Hillary when she is practically tied with Obama by comparison????


by rossinatl on Thu May 08, 2008 at 12:24:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Let's Take it to Denver (none / 0)

Oh and Kennedy did it against an INCUMBENT PRESIDENT which is even worse


by rossinatl on Thu May 08, 2008 at 12:25:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You might be too young to remember. (none / 0)

WE LOST IN 1980.

Seriously, it's not rocket surgery.

Learn from the past, it's a bad idea to go to the convention.

The convention is in August.  That would only leave 2 months to secure the base for the general.  That would be a disaster.

Clinton will concede before then anyway.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Thu May 08, 2008 at 12:38:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You might be too young to remember. (none / 0)

Have you learned NOTHING about Hillary yet? She doesn't QUIT....She fights. That's why we LOVE her.


by nikkid on Thu May 08, 2008 at 12:49:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

How is Obama (none / 0)

   
    like Mondale, McGovern and Dukakis? Where the hell did that shit come from?
by southernman on Thu May 08, 2008 at 12:25:18 AM EST

Re: How is Obama (none / 0)

Came from the front page.  Jerome started making that argument in the past couple weeks.  The dittoheads ate it up.


by Skaje on Thu May 08, 2008 at 01:59:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How is Obama (none / 0)


    It's absolutely ridiculous. What a load of garbage.
by southernman on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:20:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.