2008 Primaries Thread 2: THE QUICKENING

Details of a possible delegate plan under discussion:

–Michigan’s 156 delegates would be split 50-50 between Clinton and Obama.

–Florida’s existing delegates would be seated at the Denver convention—but with half a vote each. That would give Clinton a net gain of about 19 elected delegates.

– The two states’ superdelegates would then be able to vote in Denver, likely netting Clinton a few more delegates.

http://thepage.time.com/details-of-a-possible-delegate-plan-under-discussion

How could they not? xpost

TS26946-MD Obama St. Patricks Day T-Shirt - Medium (back order)
1 $20.08 $20.08

Sub Total: $20.08
Tax: $0.00
Shipping: $8.36
Grand Total: $28.44

Is there any evidence that Clinton's campaign is pushing the Wright stuff now? It seems like Good Morning America and FOX decided to run with it on their own.

Maybe they did, but they're not going to say the Hillary campaign gave them the story, which happens all the time.

really, it could have come from any number of parties interested in tying obama to wright's controversial statements, but don't fool yourself about the self-directing agency of media outlets; these types of 'newsworthy' stories are sold to the press by parties who need axes ground.

Obviously no one's pushing it publicly, but you better believe they are behind closed doors. What do you think they mean when they keep complaining that Obama hasn't been properly "vetted" by the media?

Is accusing the Clinton campaign of pushing unsubstantiated smears without any evidence of such wrongdoing in fact an unsubstantiated smear?

wait, hillary is the victim again?

My apologies for the cognitive dissonance. Hillary is evil - Obama is good. Carry on.

uh you know were not the media right

putting our internet-message board "who leaked the story" speculation on the same ethical level as the leaker (whoever it may be) provoking controversy == you are a simpleton

Re: Wright, is anyone actually paying attention to this outside of the blogosphere?

and not one person has said 'j'accuse' to hillary on this matter anyway

uh you know were not the media right

I know - though identifying who exactly the "media" is in the age of blogs is not as easy as it once was. Stories get traction on blogs and somehow make their way to more conventional outlets. I seem to recall the media parroting unquestioningly Drudge's unsubstantiated claim that the Obama-turban photos had been circulated by Clinton staffers.

yeah jhoshea stop being a shill for matt drudge

That was made worse by the HRC campaign's decision not to quickly and unequivocally deny their involvement in circulating the Obama photos.

(xp)

i am totally a shill for matt drudge as evidenced by the 1m screen shots on this thread

Maybe the Clinton camp fumbled the first denial, but still, wouldn't it have been a nice moment for Obama's campaign if they had said something like "There is an allegation that these photos were circulated by my opponent. However, until some evidence of this is presented, I will refrain from making any personal accusations." Instead they immediately and angrily jumped on it.

Dan, yes. My mom (aka Crawlwatcher) was on about Wright and his 'Afrocentric church' a couple of days ago, as has been covered in trashy mags/TV and is now thinking more about voting for McCain. All the while talking about the stupid, gullible people who fall for this shit.

The only thing America fears more than an angry black man is an old angry black man.

LOLZ Dan. Unless it's this man:

http://64.13.133.31/pics/up-33DRHBQFQSE5DBCS-l

btw as long as were talking ancient history it was pretty clear to me that the hillary people did circulate those obama turban photos

first all the non-denials which only got as definitive as "we dont know abt that"

then they already had their little divisive bullshit memes ready to go the next morning "his native clothing" indeed - this from one of the top clinton surrogates - stephanie tubbs jones is on tv everyday - she doesnt go off message

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnLSkWulPVE

of course the whole thing was dropped once they realized how bad they were looking

xp: or COS!

Obama was pretty chill and "let's move on" about it at the debate that next day, def. not on the attack

TS: Obama/Ruckus 08 v. Obama/Cosby 08

I think the reason for the first ambiguous denial was not that the Clinton camp was hiding some involvement in the photos - I think it's more likely they got a bit too clever thinking they could turn the issue around and make it look like the Obama camp was somehow dissing Kenyan native dress. Kind of a stupid idea perhaps, but not necessarily a sign of complicity.

Cosby/Ruckus 08

o nate all of their denials were ambiguous

How so? The top campaign brass claimed they knew nothing about it. How's that ambiguous? Either they knew about it or they didn't.

o. natepaws

What else could they say? The only way that they could say for a fact that no one associated with the campaign sent it was if they knew who did send it. It's not like they monitor all the email accounts of everyone who works for the campaign.

i think, o. nate, that both campaigns were intelligent enough to realize it was a stupid flap over a non-incriminating photo of a non-incident, and were ready to let it rest (or head to the blog universe for dissection and paranoid discussion)

Re: Obama "really can't win the General Election" -- Downticket Democrats believe Obama's coattails are longer than HRC's. Not a direct response, per se, but still good evidence.

What else could they say?

"This is an obvious attempt to rankle ethnic prejudice against Senator Obama and we denounce any such divisive smears." Too straightforward?

yeah, if you want health care, maybe you should pick the candidate more likely to help us get over the filibuster hump

"we'll take a look see if this came from our shop - if it did those responsible will be dealt with"

This, however, is a direct response to Penn's comment.

"we dont know nothin - it took us all morning to come up w/that - care to try and prove it wrong - you cant right? ok now whats no bad abt obama in his native garb lol"

"Watching the Democrats self-immolate during this election, which should have been a slam-dunk for the party, has really made me question its abiity to lead this country at all, ever again. If someone, anyone, could explain to me how this party is fit to lead, please, let them explain. From its ineffectual performance in Congress since the midterms to its fratricidal primary warfare, the Dem party seems determined to prove that it has outlived its usefulness. Now, gifted with a candidate who represents a new start for the future--who offers an attempt to show the country how we can at least attempt to transcend the most divisive elements of racism, prejudice and partisanship (no, not get rid of them completely, but at least kick them a ways to the curb in the name of progress and solving this country's very serious current challenges), it has instead chosen a fight to the death to re-install a desperate, discredited monarchy that is taking refuge in the last century's cultural and identity wars.

What the hell?

And where is the party's leadership? Cowering in the shadows. Unlike the Republicans, who are at least attempting to unite around their candidate and present a grown-up face--and whose candidates were Emily Posts compared to the Clintons in their effort to maintain some of the party's dignity during the primaries--too many Dem leaders are standing around watching this ridiculous spectacle hands in pockets.

Gore? Edwards? Biden? Richardson? If they really backed the Clintons they'd have said so by now, but rather than come out and stand up for the future, they're hedging their bets. Hoping for Cabinet posts? The Republican drop outs, meanwhile, immediately moved to unity, endorsing McCain quickly.

Dems will say this is healthy. Democracy is messy! Oh, please. Maybe it WAS healthy. Now it's just nuts. No offense to the Palestinians, but you know that saying that "they never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity?" Well, the Dems have become the Palestinians of U.S. politics.

This election will signal the end of my identification as a Democrat. I've had it. And I can't imagine I'm alone in thinking and feeling this way. Can't the party see this?"

Yeah, cited upthread, hoos.

xpost
Also, I think it's a bit chicken-little-ish - there are many structural reasons why the GOP and Dem primaries have turned out differently, and I don't think it's quite as apocalyptic for the Dems as that post makes it sound.

I agree that Democrats should distance themselves from identity politics since the way they're going about it is inherently divisive both internally and externally but that excerpt basically reads like "WAAAAAH I WANNA BE A BORG" to me.

^^ i agree. democrats could stand to stop worrying about the monsters under the bed. xpost

It's also trivializing otherwise heavyweight Democratic contenders. The race is degenerating into "So-and-so is a racist," "So-and-so is a sexist," "It's wrong to play the race card and call me a racist," and "It's wrong to play the gender card and call me a sexist."

More debates! Mark your calendars. April 16th on ABC and April 19th on CBS, Pennsylvania and North Carolina respectively.

It's also trivializing otherwise heavyweight Democratic contenders. The race is degenerating into "So-and-so is a racist," "So-and-so is a sexist," "It's wrong to play the race card and call me a racist," and "It's wrong to play the gender card and call me a sexist."

-- Daniel, Esq., Thursday, March 13, 2008 4:12 PM (11 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

both race and gender cards were played by hillary

I do not deny it.

not that the gender 'card' didnt have some truth to it, just saying

Mark your calendars.

NO

I'll watch the ABC one if Charlie Gibson does it again. I'm not terribly interested in watching Katie Couric do the one on CBS, though, if that's the case.