2008 Primaries Thread

as usual i agree with josh marshall on the MI/FL matter:

01.25.08 -- 5:38PM // link
No Way
The Clinton camp really needs to be shut down on this new gambit of theirs to muscle the party and the other candidates into seating the Michigan and Florida delegate slates.

And let me be very clear about what I mean. It was very debatable decision whether the DNC should have punished Florida and Michigan with the loss of their delegates slates because they broke the rules the party had set down for scheduling their primaries. By 'debatable' I don't mean it was right or wrong, only that it was a pretty draconian move and I know there was a lot of discussion about whether or not it was the right thing to do.

But that was the decision -- one that each of the candidates at least implicitly agreed to. Indeed, each agreed not to campaign in either of these states, again implicitly agreeing to the decision not to seat the delegates.

The Clinton camp is just pushing to seat these delegates now because the contingencies of the moment mean that the decision would favor Hillary. She was the only one whose name was on the ballot in Michigan, thus insuring her win. She has a wide lead in every Florida poll taken this month.

Even Michigan was a matter of her basically pulling a fast one on the other candidates by not taking her name off the ballot. Each of the major candidates signed a pledge not to "campaign or participate" in any primary or caucus prior to Feb. 5th except for Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina. The other major candidates adopted what seems like the only reasonable interpretation of the pledge (see text here) and pulled their names from the ballot.

But then Hillary didn't, thus in essence guaranteeing her win in Michigan.

The Clinton campaign said taking her name off the ballot wasn't required by the pledge. But what can "participate" mean over and above "campaigning" other than formally being a candidate in the race?

In any case, by gaming the process Clinton already insured her win in Michigan, though it seemed only for a symbolic victory, not real delegates.

But all these particulars are secondary to the principle, which is that you don't change the rules in midstream to favor one candidate or another. This is no more than a replay, with different factual particulars, of the attempt to outlaw the at-large caucuses in Nevada after the Culinary Union endorsement made it appear they would help Barack Obama.

Perhaps there's some detail of this question that I'm not aware of. And if there is I'll revise my opinion accordingly. But based on what I know now this is pretty clear-cut.

Hillary can muscle for every advantage she wants. Good for her. She's a fighter. But everyone else should see this for what it is and say No.

It's just politics. They're trying to change the media narrative. Obama made remarks a few months back hinting that he'd seat Florida delegates as well. Something else I've read is that the convention itself isn't bound by DNC rules.

Here's more -
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_convention_delegate_process_explained

Josh Marshall is so in the tank for Obama

(thanks YGS)

Huckabee challenges Romney over fried chicken
Mitt Romney's failure to eat fried chicken with the skin on is nothing short of blasphemy here in the South, according to GOP rival Mike Huckabee.

OMG

Romney: no-fried-chicken-skin eatin' liberal

01.28.08 -- 12:55PM // link

Clan
If the issue is dynasticism in politics, I guess there's some measure of irony in the group endorsement I'm now listening to from the Kennedy family.

(ed.note: For those of you who are keeping track, this is one of the posts that provides clear evidence we're in the tank for Clinton, as opposed to the others that provide the final proof that we've been covert Clinton-haters all along.)

--Josh Marshall

Huckabee has a point, tho

haha, gff, i was just looking for that

But this was at KFFC!

kentucky fuckin' fried chicken

lol even former fatso eats chicken skins

Huckabee, looking ahead to a flotilla of southern states up for grabs on Super Tuesday, was told about the move by a reporter here in the Florida panhandle.

"I can tell you this," he said, "any Southerner knows if you don’t eat the skin don’t bother calling it fried chicken."

"So that's good. I'm glad that he did that, because that means I'm going to win Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, Arkansas, Oklahoma … all these great Southern states that understand the best part of fried chicken is the skin, if you're going to eat it that way."

Huckabee admitted that he hasn't eaten fried chicken in a while because of his weight loss program, preferring it broiled or baked instead.

And speaking of possible gaffes, a good Southerner might also dispute one of Huckabee's claims: since when is Oklahoma "a great southern state"?

...

Yeah, Huckabee's crazy. Please don't drop out, Huck.

KFCGATE 2008

hillary wishes she'd thought of this tactic first

'well, the people of south carolina eat a lot of fried chicken... but uh yeah obama ran a good campaign'

the buttermilk-batter constituency

it's never too late, and what

Bill: "It's quite peculiar that Obama didn't bother with the batter at Popeye's that Americans hold dear to their hearts."

so want squirrel zing from camp romney now

http://www.gwu.edu/%7Ebaseball/images/cluckulogo.jpg

RIP cluck u @ nyc ;_;

lol ethan

xxxp

I think it's telling that so many in the press and blogland who normally shit on ted kennedy are now acting like he's basically awesome since he's endorsed obama. it seems more like the kennedys are getting a boost from barack than the other way around. he sure as hell isn't riding their coattails at this point

T80MB80T

Huckabee makes the Dems look better with his stupidity, so I hope he stays.

have you seen his ass? who'd want him riding their coattails?

and yeah as msnbc pointed out a Ted K endorsement is kind of the Madden curse of this shit

i know everyone's sick of this so i'll try to keep it brief but i'll concede that what bill said is technically -- dictionary-definition -- racist. (if racism = the privileging of skin color over other factors in making an assessment). that he was talking about a situation in which the privileging of skin color by voters may have played a role shouldn't have mattered -- he can't read people's minds. the situation is complex. and why the hell shouldn't black voters want to be a part of the first black candidate to have a real, serious shot at the white house? i know my mom loves obama but deep down she really really wants to vote for hillary because it's the first time in her life she'd be able to vote for a woman to be president. if she likes the candidate why the hell not?

tombot not 8080, the reason kennedy's endorsement is important is that its signifying that its ok for establishment folks to not feel indebted to the clintons, that they would have nothing to fear from endorsing barack

obama's arg = we're all on this bus together, and i'm going to drive us to a better place
hillary's arg = the bus is broke and i'm the mechanic

all these reductionist metaphors which we seemingly can't live without obscure the fact that clinton and obama are two complicated human beings with all kinds of old grudges and hopes and biases many of which are probably unknown even to themselves, and we really only have the faintest idea about how they would govern

and yeah as msnbc pointed out a Ted K endorsement is kind of the Madden curse of this shit

-- El Tomboto, Monday, January 28, 2008 4:04 PM (11 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

??? he doesnt normally endorse candidates in the primaries

look at bush jr for instance, he was just supposed to be a kind of benign nitwit

xpost

Why Ted Kennedy's Endorsement Matters

and clinton was supposed to be a progressive, not a center-right micromanager

(Or, I should say, why T. Kennedy's endorsement should matter).

yeah yglesias otm

It would matter more if it were someone else besides Ted Kennedy.

Sorry. None of his speeches have ever shaken my belief that he's a windbag.

Duh, he's a politician; OF COURSE he's a windbag!

Don Imus got into an animated discussion this morning about former President Bill Clinton's comparison of Obama's South Carolina primary victory over Senator Clinton to Jesse Jackson. ''If I had made that comparison to Jesse Jackson,'' I have a feeling that I'd be talking to Al Sharpton again,'' Imus told Michael Graham of Boston's WTKK.

(The entire point of politics is to find the windbag who will pontificate on the issues you care about.)

yeah, but the QUALITY of the air escaping from the bag matters.

the windiest bag full of the baggiest wind, yes, but certainly consequential no matter how you look at it

(The entire point of politics is to find the windbag who will pontificate on the issues you care about.)

thanks -- I'll be sure to remember it.

Whatever else she is, HRC is NOT a windbag. Neither is Obama. Romney is a wet bag. Giuliani is a bag of dicks.

Everyone you've listed is a total windbag, come on.

2008 Presidential Candidates: If you were a bag, what kind of bag would you be?

Sorry for being grouchy. This thread gets especially gaseous when it turns into a transcript of what CNN/FOX News have been no doubt discussing all day.

I'm not saying it's a bad thing that politicians are windbags! If they weren't, no points of view would ever get put across to anyone.

e.g. discussion on the Ted Kennedy thing and a question on how it will "play out".