LOL. Expect some (very) nasty comments to follow your (nasty) post.

But, to judge post-primary Hillary by her supporters (who may vote McCain) is unfair.

Is There a Clinton Backlash? How About A Backlash Backlash?

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/is-there-clinton-backlash-how-about.html

Here's an anecdote from Todd Beeton at MyDD in Denver:

"It's been thunder storming here in Denver lately but right now it's not too bad, drizzling a bit. On the descent into Denver we saw amazing bolts of lightning in the distance and even a tornado hovering over a lake.

On my shuttle to the hotel, I encountered a storm of another kind: an Obama delegate from Illinois and a Clinton delegate from Massachusetts. When she said she was a Hillary delegate, the Obama delegate said facetiously: "Oh they're letting you in here, are they?" She retorted (in a friendly but stern way): "That's what's wrong with Obama folks. You're not reaching out to the Hillary people." It was the second time in as many days that I'd heard the same complaint from a Hillary supporter. Whether it's true or not, the perception is there and it needs to be addressed. I hope they're on it."

Interesting (heated) discussion in the MyDD thread regarding the delegate anecdote (ref. John #3):

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/8/23/19119/8076#commenttop

***

Quotes:

"I was a county delegate for Obama here in MO and had to deal with constant crap from the Clinton delegates. But you know what's crazy? I don't blame Hillary for her delegates or supporters, these random individuals are just jerks.

Anecdotal evidence cuts both ways and proves nothing."

***

"Fantastic. If any of those delegates are reading this blog, get it together. Don't be assholes and if you see someone else being an asshole, stand up to the bully."

***

"Please understand that many of us BO supporters have tried to reach out to HRC supporters. Yes, most HRC supporters are now Obama backers. However, folks who keep telling us we need to reach out to them are starting to seem a bit unreachable.

Forget the jerks who are sore winners. If you are looking to them to decide your vote, you'll be disappointed. Look at what the candidates stand for and where their values are. If you honestly cannot choose Obama and prefer McCain, then please do vote for him. That doesn't make you a PUMA or a deadender. It makes you someone who is doing what s/he thinks is best for the country.

Keep in mind that the name-calling is a two-way street. It is not just Obama supporters who have been disrespectful. "

***

"Don't be a dick.

Admittedly, it is one delegate talking to another, and I'm not terribly concerned about the HRC delegates. I'm also a little tired of the worrying about over people's fragile feelings.

That being said, though. As the victor, take the high road."

***

"Douchebag Incident aside

My brother is one the ground in Virginia campaigning for the Obama-Biden ticket. (BTW, they didn't know it was Biden until we knew).

They are reaching out to Hillary people, with some success, but the problem he says to me is that SOME Hillary folk are unreachable. They want to be reached out to, but they don't want to extend their hand. Before they do, they want A,B,C, and D. After a while, a campaign has to decide whether or not to give in a list of demands and try to move on and hope they come too. There's a lot of irrational people out there who won't respond to any reaching out Obama does and screams instead that they're not reaching out to them, makes it look like they're not at all.

Maybe Biden will have better success. "

--'It's called the bargaining stage of the grieving process. At least they've moved beyond denial and anger.'

***

"Sorry we interfered with your coronation party... problem is, your candidate needed to be elected, not appointed... and she pissed off a lot of people, enough to lose the nomination...

We suck it up and move on... Most of us never had their first choice to be president... but, that's life...

Instead of getting mad at us, you should get mad at your candidate for not reaching out to those she alienated...

We've been trying to reach out to you, but you aren't listening...

That's fine... it's your choice... but, remember, you are a democrat, and your job as a delegate is to support the party and its nominee... if you feel that you can't do that, you should really resign your position as delegate.

Otherwise, onwards and forwards... Congratulations on being a delegate... it is a huge honor, and a huge responsiblity... to all of us Democrats who want a Democrat elected...

Please don't forget that... you don't just represent Hillary, you represent all democrats..."

***

"No offense, but life is full of disappointments and worse ... like the last eight hellish-beyond-belief years. Suck it up. Prefer McCain? "

***

"Just hold your breathes for one week. After that, once Hillary has had her convention vote and she and Bill have given their convention speeches, the divisions will fade away. Especially once the Clintons are on the campaign trail supporting Obama and their good friend Joe.

This of course won't change any PUMA minds, but like most irrational fringe groups they can easily be ignored. They are not a threat, not a factor and simply not relevant."

***

"Christ, one person makes a joke and the other uses it as a reason to demand ass-kissing. I hate seeing liberals jump all over themselves to try for votes of people who won't ever vote for them anyway."

***

"But it's a good example of why you must never joke at all about strangers' political standpoints if you're in a position where you represent a candidate. Even the most harmless jokes can cause unnecessary damage."

***

"The joke was insulting and condescending. You're defending the right to be an asshole to a voter never met and who is the prime target of your candidate.

I'd never ever want somebody like that person who made a joke like that anywhere near a campaign. Nor anybody who defends them. Because people who do so fuck over their candidate.

That person just fucked over Obama by being an insulting jackass. Made it just a little bit harder for him. Sorry I want Obama to win, Apparently the person who made that joke didn't care enough about that to be civil."

--'I am not going to defend some random ass hat Denver. But I will ask how anyone could ignore the vile crap that is thrown out there everyday by Limbaugh, Hannity, and the rest of the conservative movement by voting for McCain. He stands against everything liberals, progressives, feminists, gay rights activists, environmentalists, and workers stand for.

We may be a dysfunctional family, but we should still be a family.'

***

"....Don't get me wrong, I have nothing but respect for Clinton supporters and I fully understand the difficult situation that resulted from such a divisive primary.

I am sure there are many Hillary supporters that are skeptical of voting for Obama. I hope that they can be convinced, along with all the other swing voters out there. But PUMAs are not swing voters. They are not a numerically significant group. Yes, I hope we can woo former Clinton supporters, like my grandmother who is unsure about Obama. But no, we will never woo self-identified PUMAs. They don't want to be convinced. We shouldn't even be trying. Like I said, ignore them."

***

"I agree. Everyone should cut out the stages of grief stuff.

I'd also recommend that people stop demanding that every single Obama supporter treat all HRC supporters with kid gloves at all times. That encourages snarky responses.

Look at all the candidates. Consider what they stand for. Vote for the one you believe will do the best job as president. Forget the condescending jerks (including me)."

***

Dear Gotham

Please, if you have time, give Frank Rich's column a read -- http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/opinion/24rich.html

Giving time to intra-party Dem verbal brawls sucks attention and energy away from the fight against McCain et al.

When no one watches a soap opera, it gets pulled off the air.

love, h

just want to say for those who automatically recoil at words with such potential for a truly terrifying level boredom as 'read [xys's] column', that the Frank Rich piece is kick-ass, fresh, incisive, smart and solid, the best short piece of pragmatic political analysis and advice I've read in months.

again, it's at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/opinion/24rich.html

(or click my name)

love, h

Rich's piece is one of his very best. And he is absolutely, correct

Re. #7

On similar lines to Rich's column, Nate Silver at 538:

"Clear-Eyed Pragmatist": The Obama Brand Has Come Full-Circle

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/clear-eyed-pragmatist-obama-brand-has.html

"Perhaps the most striking feature of Joe Biden's speech in Springfield today was his description of Obama as a "clear-eyed pragmatist who will get the job done". This is certainly different from the rather more abstract meaning of the Obama "CHANGE" brand as it was applied during the primary campaign. In fact, it sounds more along the lines of how Hillary Clinton was trying to present herself."

...

"To certain progressives, all of this has come as something of a disappointment. Obama's brand during the primaries was essentially an anti-establishment one, and that allowed him to beat the establishment choice of Hillary Clinton. It would surely have been a lot of fun to see how everything played out had Obama not compromised on FISA, not accepted public funding, and then had picked someone like Kathleen Sebelius as his running mate.

But in other ways, "clear-eyed pragmatist" is a more accurate reflection of the 'real' Obama, and certainly of the ways that he made his way through the Chicago system, as Ryan Lizza's seminal piece in the New Yorker concluded:

__________________________________________________
Perhaps the greatest misconception about Barack Obama is that he is some sort of anti-establishment revolutionary. Rather, every stage of his political career has been marked by an eagerness to accommodate himself to existing institutions rather than tear them down or replace them. When he was a community organizer, he channelled his work through Chicago's churches, because they were the main bases of power on the South Side. He was an agnostic when he started, and the work led him to become a practicing Christian. At Harvard, he won the presidency of the Law Review by appealing to the conservatives on the selection panel. In Springfield, rather than challenge the Old Guard Democratic leaders, Obama built a mutually beneficial relationship with them. "You have the power to make a United States senator," he told Emil Jones in 2003. In his downtime, he played poker with lobbyists and Republican lawmakers. In Washington, he has been a cautious senator and, when he arrived, made a point of not defining himself as an opponent of the Iraq war.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07/21/080721fa_fact_lizza?printable=
__________________________________________________

"And in other ways, the primaries version of the CHANGE brand was a poor match for the mood of the country. The most acute problem with George W. Bush is not that he's corrupt, not that he's the inevitable consequence of a broken system, but rather simply that his mode of thinking led him into an series of exceptionally poor decisions that left the country worse off. The problems of the Bush administration are not abstract -- they are highly tangible, made more manifest still by the deterioration in the economy that occurred over the first quarter of this year. What CHANGE means now is this:

i) Not Bush, or someone who thinks like him;
ii) Working our way, by any means possible, out of the hole that Bush left us in.

This certainly isn't what CHANGE meant during the primaries. But it's a message that voters should have little trouble understanding. And now that the Obama campaign seems to understand it too, it should help them to provide a more focused and disciplined message."

Hi Gotham,

I hope Barack Obama doesn't resonate like you. Because your "Hillary go away" and all this frustration and accusations against her is precisely what will make her stay, and cement her role of "bad guy", until you realize certain things.

I'm not familiar with the details of this race, but according to your description, after losing, Hillary ws not able to let go of her pride, to cooperate and encourage her voters to support Obama. I agree, it would have been wonderful if she had less ego than she has. But things are as they are- aren't they? Reality is as it is, isn't it?

The question for you as an Obama voter would be not how much ego Hillary and her supporters have invested in this - but how much ego you have invested in being their counterpart. When speaking about the requests of Hillary voters, you say things like "Why in the hell would they have wasted the time, money, and energy going through that laborious process?" Well... maybe Obama does not invest time and energy in that particular process you're speaking about, but if he and his voters don't invest time and energy in building bridges and truly understanding and respecting the point of view of people in the same camp (you said yourself it is the same camp)... then... well... the "evil Hillary" won't go away, you see. This kind of thinking and attitude is not going to produce friends, but enemies. And then maybe Obama and his voters haven't learned their most important lesson after all.

To make it short, Gotham- do you see and treat Hillary and her voters as your respected friends or as your sleazy enemies? Because that's what they will be.

The winds of change eddy and whirl
Come Autumn leaf confusion
E'en proud trees fallen.
Earthworm is gleeful turning in its grave
Primroses awaiting.

Burying the USAToday/Gallup poll lead ...

The USAToday headline is "Poll: More than half of Clinton backers still not sold on Obama"

www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-08-24-campaignpoll_N.htm

But the Obama lead is better now than their survey last month:

"Obama holds a 47%-43% edge over McCain among registered voters and a 48%-45% edge among likely voters.

[In the USA TODAY/Gallup Poll a month ago, Obama led McCain by 3 percentage points, but McCain held a 4-point lead among likely voters.]

Most of the telephone survey of 1,023 adults was taken before Obama announced Delaware Sen. Joe Biden as his running mate Saturday."

And you'd never know from the headline that 70% of Hillary's supporters are already planning to vote for him in November.

"In the survey, taken Thursday through Saturday, 47% of Clinton supporters say they are solidly behind Obama, and 23% say they support him but may change their minds before the election."

They wants da drama.

"Obama Still Ahead/ Obama Takes Lead" not nearly as sexy.

Dear Gotham

The few and thoughtful responses to this post so far should tell you two things about the blogosphere: It consists of mostly quiet, responsible, thoughtful people. And if you go fishing for data in its noisiest places, you're more likely than not to net trash. (Corollary to the second: if you report back into the blogosphere with the trash you netted... ah... you risk looking like... ermmmm... I'll let it go.)

The responses so far make me proud of ordinary people.

love, h

"Bring it on." OK!

"Call me a cynic." Yep!

"Call me a racist." Probably!

"But there is no rational reason why a Hillary voter isn't an Obama voter." Bullshit..sure there is...he's an empty suit...and for all the dislike I have for her...she at least has a little bit of substance....

"The Clintons used to be the Party's king and queen before the descended from their thrones and became sleazy campaigners willing to say or do anything to get elected. So sad jojo." Slight correction....they've always been sleazebags! You just didn't care while they were on that throne.

"Call a spade a spade: a lot of people that are bailing out on Obama are doing it because of the race card." Wouldn't be surprised! Funny thing...they're democrats! Haven't heard the first one of my conservative friends mention it, but I did hear from a very good source that when a local woman was contacted by a pollster during the primary, her answer was, "I ain't votin' for no goddamn nigger." You can play the little race song all you want...but the race problem isn't over here on this side...it's right under your own noses!!

We can argue all day if you'd like, the merits of their qualifications, but Republicans gave us the first woman on the Supreme court. The first black on the supreme court. The first black secstate. The first black woman secstate. The first hispanic attorney general.

I'd vote for Condie in a heartbeat for Prez... with much more happiness than I'll have voting for the 'old white guy' this November.

Obombus injected race into this race, with his little Post Jeremiah Wright speech...

He's going down...I'm starting to think...and it's a combination of race, incompetence, arrogance, and lack of experience. Enjoy your convention week...it's gonna be along fall for you little obamaniacs!!

:)

Indeed, Frank Rich writes an amazing column (see #7), calling out John McCain and demanding! yes, demanding! that Obama stop making nice and start telling Americans how he will change the world.

I think the cranky tone in Frank Rich's column reflects that held by even the most sincere Obama supporters: John McCain would actually be WORSE than Bush. Ready or not, Obama is the candidate and we need to leave the Bush chaos behind. We can't go forward in the economy with an ambitious, untruthful man who the press insists on flattering because of his dramatic story as a POW.

Rich writes, "Economic anxiety is the new terrorism."

In other words, Obama need to clearly and honestly compare the stories McCain tells of happy entrepreneurs like Crocs and E-Bay with the grim reality of an America on the verge of an economic meltdown. People are losing their jobs and many would move to the desert for those $50 an hour agriculture jobs McCain wants to save for the immigrants.

We can't let McCain lie that America can drill our way out energy crisis, when the Enron-like oil speculators playing the futures market like a Stradivarius will profit from the valuable leases and then demand "assistance" in getting the oil out of these tricky places.

We can't let McCain attempt to blather us into a health care disaster that even the New England Journal of Medicine tells us would result in LESS health care for most Americans, forget more!

We can't let McCain lie about taxes any more that reward wealth and not work.

Frank Rich counsels:

"The argument against Obama’s "going negative" is that it undermines his message of "transcendent politics" and will make him look like an "angry black man." But pacifistic politics is an oxymoron, and Obama is constitutionally incapable of coming off angrier than McCain."

Yes its time to play the fear card. McCain is scaring Frank Rich and that is scaring me too! As Rich say,

"The fierce urgency of the 21st century demands Change Before It’s Too Late."

It is rather sad to see the democrats are flummoxed by the reverend Write incident, even though with a near certainty of Democratic victory. But the democrats are so out foxed, time and again due to their inability to stand together and be up right in representing the American people. As politicians they do as bad as the other side. The so called show downs ,spending millions of American tax payers money, have hardly been used to address the core issues like War, Peace, Economy, Trade, Employment ,Universal Health Care and Education issues , off course, even Race and disparities among the living standards of Americans.
Considering the fact all the candidates are part of present government and with hundreds of advisers have not come up with any draft paper which will not only address the present state of affairs through legislation but also a blue print for future of America, whilst majority of Americans are taken for a raid by the poor standards of present politics and media over trivial issues like what reverend Write or any other person has to say .
On the other hand, there is very little doubt about the efficacy of the present democratic presidential candidates in being able to deal with many pressing issues that seems to be the reason for bickering among many sections of American population, especially among the democrats, which are spreading a larger gloom over the nations psyche, spearheading insecurity and low morale.

Posted 04:26 PM. 04/29/2008 on Huffingtonpost.com

It is rather sad to see the democrats are flummoxed by the reverend Write incident, even though with a near certainty of Democratic victory. But the democrats are so out foxed, time and again due to their inability to stand together and be up right in representing the American people. As politicians they do as bad as the other side. The so called show downs ,spending millions of American tax payers money, have hardly been used to address the core issues like War, Peace, Economy, Trade, Employment ,Universal Health Care and Education issues , off course, even Race and disparities among the living standards of Americans.
Considering the fact all the candidates are part of present government and with hundreds of advisers have not come up with any draft paper which will not only address the present state of affairs through legislation but also a blue print for future of America, whilst majority of Americans are taken for a raid by the poor standards of present politics and media over trivial issues like what reverend Write or any other person has to say .
On the other hand, there is very little doubt about the efficacy of the present democratic presidential candidates in being able to deal with many pressing issues that seems to be the reason for bickering among many sections of American population, especially among the democrats, which are spreading a larger gloom over the nations psyche, spearheading insecurity and low morale.

Posted 04:26 PM. 04/29/2008 on Huffingtonpost.com
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/29/obamas-reverend-wright-pr_n_99215.html?page=56&show_comment_id=12769580#comment_12769580

I found it ironic how both Frank Rich and Maureen Dowd in their Sunday columns referred to McCain's still fighting the Vietnam war. His latest "bluster" towards Russia offering us all proof. I wonder if they both discussed what they would be writing about with each other, and one got the idea from the other, or maybe it is just a case of two minds thinking alike, or maybe just maybe it is obviously the truth, that is the scariest thought of all.

I think Obama, or maybe Biden, should adopt that line of Rich's, "Change before it is too late".

Rich is definitely on to something as far as stressing the urgency of change in America in a changing World. I like the "before it's too late" angle. Biden's speech yesterday touched on this saying "it might be the last chance we get to save the America we know". Good advice, at any rate.

It is pretty much common sense that we need change before it is too late. Rich in fact articulately states the obvious. I actually could see and hear Biden saying that exact line, "we don't just need change, we need change before it is too late."

Hello Gotham and Everyone,

Gotham you write,"Bring it on. Call me a cynic. Call me a racist. But there is no rational reason why a Hillary voter isn't an Obama voter. They stand in the same place on the issues. Seriously, just do the research."

I do not know who you are talking to or listening to...the repubs? Every Hillary Clinton supporter I know and I am one...has moved on...and we do not think Hillary is VP material, in any way, especially Barak's....and we are voting for Barak..I know not one Hillary supporter, out here, in the "world," who is voting for McCain. We are voting for Barak Obama for the issues he stands for, that are, as you say, in place with Hillary's.

Last week M Dowd wrote a very weird piece in the nytimes about how Hillary and McCain are playing it against Barak....this was afer Barak Obama's poor performance in the Saddleback forum...and his poll numbers dropped...apparently M.Dowd blames Hillary...I couldn't believe she was writing such a weird piece, actually blamig Hillary, instead of being concerned as to why Barak Obama was not smart enough to pass on the forum in the first place, also, I was starting to get concerned about her mental health, envisioning her hiding out in Hillary's bathroom with poison pen in hand ready to attack the woman who is huring her Candidate's chances to win.

The Hillary supporters I know feel that the less qualified male Candidate was chosen by his political Party, for a number of reasons to represent it.....we get it...we are disappointed but we are not going to kick ourself in the face and vote for an even less qualified Republican Candidate.

Hillary Clinton deserves to be right where she is....a thorn in Barak Obama's sass....and if he is the man and Candidate he claims to be and his supporters clamor he is.....well, then, he can handle it....I and other Hillary supporters are voting, not so much for Barak Obama, as for the issues, this time round.

Really, I have voted in many elections in this Nation, and I have to say that the Barak Obama camapign and it's supporters do more crying about his treatment than any other before them. Really, it is a big turnoff.

Barak Obama is going to be nominated by the Democratic Party this week as their choice for the presidency....and, now, it is his, alone, to win or to lose.....my adivce to the campaign and it's supporters get over Hillary, already, and start taking responsibility for Barak Obama's weaknesses and his strengths as a political candidate.

have a great convention...ruth

Oh, just wanted to add...you write, "The Clintons used to be the Party's king and queen before the descended from their thrones and became sleazy campaigners willing to say or do anything to get elected. So sad jojo."

Look's like your hero is doing a lot of sleazing on his own these days when it comes to saying or doing anything to get elected.... like anyone is really surprised by any politican playing their sleaze cards.....oh, I forgot....but Barak Obama is not a politician....he is a saint.

To call the Clintons sleazy campaigners while overlooking Barak's sleaze is just pathetic...pathetic.

In all seriousness, the Barak Obama campaign and it's supporters do not know how much it hurts Hillary Clinton supporters to vote for Barak Obama, and, really it does not have so much to do with Barak, himself, or we wouldn't vote for him at all, it has to do with his campaign sleaze and his supporters' total bulllsheet when speaking of him and lauding his....whatever the heck it is you guys laud about him........Barak Obama and his campiagn should cherish every Hillary vote it gets....because god...you guys are trying our patience....

oh, well...ain't politics a fun happy time!!!ruh

oh, one more thing....

Really, after Barak Obama's official nomination....the campaign is his ALONE to win or lose.

and if the Barak Obama campaign and it's supporters really wanted Hillary to go away all they have to do is deny her any of their attention....so, I am really wondering if Hillary is hanging around, in their attention, as someone to lay blame on.....as a convenient scapegoat everytime their Candidate hits a ruff spot in the polls.....I hope not...

The full and total responsibility of Barak Obama's win or loss of this coming election stands with him and his campaign....and whether Hillary Clinton campaigns, with gusto, for him or not, will still not matter....so do not even think about blaming the Clintons if Barak Obama is not successful in November...because we sure know they will not get any of the credit if he wins....

hey, if the Democratic party didn't want any bad blood they would have done things a bit different in the first place....the Democratic party created this conflict for itself....and all parties are responsible....including our little innocent Barak....so live with it, deal with it...their will be no excuses accepted and no scapegoats to lay blame with...

so Barak Obama....do you magic...win your race...it is all about YOU, now.

The notion of 'blaming' others for own campaign's foibles is rather silly (or rather sounds like the Clinton primary campaign.)

Hillary Clinton is now A PART of Obama campaign, whether ALL or NONE of her supporters like it or not.

She will be "USED" -- and Bill Clinton will be (un)used -- as seen fit.

Like this:

As reported by Ben Smith of Politico:

Clinton's riposte

"I'm Hillary Clinton and I do not approve that message," Clinton tells the New York delegation of McCain's ad that features her old criticism of Obama.

Clinton says Democrats are gathered in Denver for a "clear and specific purpose and that is to elect Barack Obama President of the United States," my colleague Amie Parnes reports.

"Now I ask each and every one of you to work as hard for Obama as you worked for me," she said.

:::::::::::

Anyway, read the artcile

"RELENTLESS: How Barack Obama Outsmarted Hillary Clinton"

by Roger Simons

"This project, which Simon named "Relentless" to reflect what he saw as the animating spirit of Obama's remarkable campaign, is the result of Simon's two years of reporting on this campaign, and decades of observing political personalities in action."

*****************
LINK

http://www.politico.com/relentless/

******************

From Roger Simon's extended tale of how Barack Obama won the primary:

Roads not taken...

The opening:

"In the summer of 2006, Patti Solis Doyle offered David Axelrod a job. Hillary Clinton was running for reelection to the Senate and Solis Doyle was her campaign manager, but everybody knew Clinton was soon going to run for president. And Clinton wanted Axelrod onboard.

Axelrod was a highly experienced and successful political consultant and just what Clinton needed. But he declined. Presidential campaigns were mentally taxing, physically exhausting and emotionally draining. There were easier ways to make a buck.

Unless. “I wasn’t planning to work in a presidential race,” Axelrod told me, “but if Barack might run, well, he would be the only guy to cause me to get in.”"

EEK...."Hilary supporters go away" sounds like a 12 year old girl, no that would be unfair to 12 year girls I am sure they are far more tolerant the Gotham

EEK...."Hilary supporters go away" sounds like a 12 year old girl, no that would be unfair to 12 year girls I am sure they are far more tolerant than Gotham

This is Old news guys.. I'm thinkin about who's in position for 2012? aren't you? What do ya think? Really THIS is Old news. But, fun to watch everyone squirm.
This has already been played and played again, don't you get it? Gotham says " If we could just make Hillary go away, everything would be O.K. "
I sorry, but are you as dumb as a brick pal? oops..

Mark Penn writes an artcile at The Politico

"Clintonism Lives"

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12792.html

Ron Chusid at Liberal Values writes:

Clintonism Does Not Live
August 25th, 2008

One of the best things about the match up this year is that (assuming John McCain doesn’t totally shock the world by picking Jeb Bush as his running mate) there will not be a Bush or Clinton on the ballot for the first time since 1976. We came very close to this not happening with Hillary Clinton looking like a strong front runner for the nomination before the race began. Hillary Clinton appeared to start out with all the advantages, but it turned out her campaign was not as unbeatable as many first believed. One of many reasons for this was relying upon the advice of Mark Penn.

Penn shows once again that he is out of touch in an article at The Politico entitled Clintonism Lives. Penn claims that Clintonism “remains the most cohesive and successful Democratic governing philosophy the country has had since Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s election 1932 and the advent of the New Deal.” One problem with Clintonism is that it it hardly qualifies as a cohesive governing philosophy. Clintonism under Bill Clinton was more a tactical strategy than a governing philosophy based upon compromising principle whenever necessary for political advantage. One example of this could be seen in 2004 when Bill Clinton advised John Kerry to support anti-gay marriage amendments in the states where they were on the ballot because he might have picked up more votes. Most Democrats would agree with Kerry in rejecting this advice.

Under Hillary Clinton, Clintonism became even more a philosophy of big-government Nanny Statism accompanied by disturbing ties to the religious right and a propensity to use neoconservative scare tactics about terrorism for political gain. Hillary Clinton managed to merge the worst characteristics of present Republicans and past Democrats. As a consequence, despite going into the race with every advantage, Clinton was upset by a newcomer to national politics who capitalized on a desire for change from the recent leadership of both parties.

Penn does give some examples where Bill Clinton’s views do survive. Bill certainly was right in some areas, and his ideas were far preferable to those of George Bush. By framing Clintonism as the opposite of the views of George Bush, Penn was bound to make Clinton look good by comparison. This does not mean that the country wanted a return to the full Clinton package. Besides, a politician who based his policies largely upon the polls was bound to have some popular ideas. Being right at times, however, is far different from having a comprehensive governing philosophy. Maybe the belief that the country saw Clintonism as a desirable goal is one of the reasons Hillary Clinton’s campaign was overly optimistic about their chances for success and failed to recognize how formidable an opponent such as Obama could be.

really, I would say Hillary is not as much a problem for Barak Obama losing some Democratic votes...as is his supporter's cut and pastes in the blogging world such as John's #24....it is stuff like this that is turning good solid Democratic votes away from Barak Obama.

so, John, are you a repub...trying to cause strife in the Democratic party? What other reason would one have to keep cut and pasting negatives about her...Barak is it...he won....so why keep harping on Hillary Clinton...unless you are trying to muster up some strife.......repub man....

hmmmmmm....

I wholeheartedly agree with Gotham's post.

Hillary supporters are behaving EXACTLY like George W Bush's supporters in Florida when they eventually realized that they had lost the 2000 election. They were going to threaten and intimidate until they got their way.

And did.

But they could never ACT like real winners. Not once.

This time, however, it isn't going to be the loudest sector that is going to win.

Also...

a full quarter century of Bushes and Clintons is simply too much to bear.

Threadworn.

evening

I was tuning in an out of the convention coverage saw and heard a little of Ted and Michelle's speech....but I tuned into the Fox TV news coverage to see what they were saying after Michelle's speech and what I saw and heard is why I am posting so late when I need to go to bed to get up early in the am...

as I tuned to Fox the African America fellow who comments for them, Juan Williams, was asked what he thought, first, there are three white men and a white woman on the panel with him, and, Chris Wallace, on the floor of the Convention.

Juan Williams turns around and starts talking and he is saying how big this is for the African American community, to have Michelle Obama speaking at this Convention, how big it is for the African American family to be presented this way..and he was clearly choked up...you could see tears that were not being shed but would have if he were alone or in a different environment...he was having a hard time keeping his emotions in check.....through this man's reaction, through his choked emotional response, through him holding back his tears....I realized how big the moment was and is...it is big...

It is funny that with all the hoopla of the Convention and the written professional speech writers...the most moving and telling moment that expressed the history and journey and struggle of a race comes from Juan Williams just trying not to cry on National tv after witnessing Michelle Obama, wife of the first African American to be nominated for the presidency of the United States of America, give her speech at the Democratic Convention, along with their beautiful family....I really get Juan Williams tears...I am deeply moved by them...

The the white Republican folk gave their take which was...Bill Kristol....thought it was ineffective...the white woman....wasn't impressed either....Chris Wallace, from the floor,...a wasted evening....Fred Barnes..gave it a thumbs up..........It was so strange to see Juan Williams moved to tears while his white republican counterparts coldly poo-pooed the evening....but Juan Williams couldn't play his usual republican part in the political game...he could barely hold himself together....it was a very touching, deeply honest, moment to witness...thank you Juan Williams....you are absoutely right....it is BIG.

:))ruth

Go away, Hillary

Go away, Bill

'It Is Still All About The Clintons', writes Ron Chusid:

"Bill Clinton, with his atrocious conduct both during his wife’s campaign (which was also notable for rather atorcious behavior by the candidate) and after (when at least his wife has shown the realization that she has zero future in the party if she doesn’t at least make a show of party unity), appears determined to destroy his legacy. He is not being helped any by Clintonistas who are writing their views today. I already commented on Mark Penn’s article at The Politico. Far worse is an article by Howard Wolfson at The New Republic.

Wolfson’s article is on improving relations with the Clintons, and winds up talking more about Bill than Hillary. A more sensible topic would have been about what Obama should do in order to obtain the support of Clinton voters who are considering voting for McCain over Obama. The opinions of those voters do matter. Bill Clinton’s hurt feelings do not. Obama won, no matter how much some Clinton supporters continue to deny this, and his top priority is to suppoort his own agenda to win the general election, not to use the convention to attempt to restore Bill’s hurt feelings."

More reactions:

Ta-Nehisi Coates: “…the idea that people should cater to the amazing smallness of this dude strains good sense. His anger is clearly more important to him than the fate of his country. This is what must have driven Andrew and Hitch insane. Bill Clinton carries this sense of having been perpetually wronged–the game is only fair when he wins. I think what must burn him up the most is (assuming that it’s true that the Obama people pushed the race-baiting angle) that Obama 'actually Sista Souljahed Clinton', that he took a few minor mis-statements used them to paint Bill as, well, exactly what he was.”

http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/08/the_incredible_arrogance_of_bill_clinton.php

M.J. Rosenberg: “…the Clintons merely lost a nomination fight. Big deal. There are winners and there are losers and until now no nominee has had to suck up to the other side. As we say on Passover, ‘why is this nominee different than any other nominee?’”

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/08/25/on_the_clintonobama_rift/

David Sirota: As disgusting and disingenuous as this is, it is pretty predictable. The Clintons are doing everything they can to make this convention all about them - and to absolve themselves from the substantive criticism of both Clintonism and Bill Clinton’s behavior on the campaign…No, Bill Clinton was not “painted as a racist” - he was a racist during the campaign…That Clinton’s top surrogates are now saying Obama’s major task is to appease Bill Clinton - rather than, say, win the election - shows just how egomaniacal the Clintons really are.”

http://www.theittlist.com/site/ittlist/ind/5079/

Gotham, it's been nice to read all of this.

Clintonians for McCain are indeed closet racists. It's NH all over again...

It's just like the Pro-Petroleum dipsticks who are suddenly worried that feedstock for fuel is going to deplete our food supply...while they chaw on their juicy prime rib steak that took 20 acres of feed corn to produce.

What comes out of their mouths ceases to sound like reasons and begin to sound like pathetic excuses.

Some steak-eater wrote on a blog:

FEED PEOPLE NOT CARS.

to which I replied:

FEED PEOPLE NOT COWS.

The fact is that 2008 Clinton supporters are beginning to sound more and more like 2000 Nader supporters every day. So go vote for McCain. And maybe it'll be YOUR kids that get conscripted to invade Iran and Venezuela to reestablish no-bid preeminence in exactly the same way the IPC club members did in Iraq at taxpayers' expense.

Because for IPC, free was good.

Dana, buddy....your passion overcometh your good sense!

This statement of yours is absolutely crazy: "Clintonians for McCain are indeed closet racists."

Is there some racism involved? Of course...but that's a mighty big brush you're painting with my friend. If I were a dem., I'd surely consider McCain over obama, and it has nothing to do with race....it has to do with credentials, experience, aptitude, tax policy, and yes, I'll throw it out there....patriotism.

Why can't you all get it thru your heads that not voting for a person of color doesn't make you a racist? Quite Frankly...that's bullshit...at least to the extent of making blanket statements.

As for the prime rib analogy....it doesn't take 20 acres to produce that prime rib. We raise cows....those stats that y'all like to bandy about are kinda like that stuff that splatters on the ground behind that big angus boy...bullshit!

Hope you're well....

:)

Not really sure what to say to that, Skinny.

I can only speak from my own limited experience: I have a pair of shoes in the closet that I proudly proclaim to be my Howard Dean shoes. Left shoe has a hole in it, and they're both scuffed down to nothing. I wore those shoes canvassing in Kansas City for Dean. Then I wore them up in Iowa, and endured a blizzard to do some more.

And when he lost, I knew that I couldn't really support John Kerry the same way.

So my wife and I did downtown Kansas City voter registration instead...to let the will of the People prevail. I'm sure in the months that followed--now sitting in that inner city market, shoes retired--that my wife and I must've registered close to a thousand democrats.

I would suggest to Clinton supports who feel jilted, spend some time registering voters instead of carping. You'll feel better about the whole thing.

I promise.

P.S. GoodnSkinny, it really does take more to feed a cow to feed a person than it does to feed a person. So the argument still bears merit.

Much more.

P.S. Also, Skinny, Democrats have a tendency to listen to Republicans and then do pretty much the opposite than what they suggest.

Just to be on the safe side.

Nate at FiveThirtyEight: What Hillary needs to do tonight: show some emotion. Challenge her supporters in the most direct terms she thinks she can get away with: express empathy with their grievances, but challenge them to really think about the stakes of the election. And than take that visceral bit of emotion around and turn it on John McCain. In order to call it a home run, I am looking for nothing less than a "shame on you, John McCain!" moment.

Reporting from inside of the Pepsi Center, pro-Hillary blogger Arjun Jaikumar says:

"People going nuts. It's Clinton's night. Courtesy of Obama. His gift to her, maybe.

Amazing moment for party unity. If the repubs are listening, they will shit."

Nate of 538 blogging from the Pepsi Center writes:

8:58 PM MDT. Hillary's sincerity factor is very high tonight and getting higher.

9:01 PM MDT. Like Schweitzer, Hillary started out a little slow, but there are Republicans kicking chairs over right now in RNC offices all across America.

9:03 PM MDT. One thing about Clinton -- really both Clintons -- they understand the audience they are speaking to better than any other politicians in America.

Nate & Sean of FiveThirtyEight blogging live:

9:09 PM MDT. I wish I had a more substantive, less rah-rah reaction for you, but I really think she just accomplished everything that she needed to, and did so in style.

Or as Sean puts it: "goddammit, Hillary, don't make me like you again!"

More from Sean:

"When she turned to "Why are you in it?" from that point to the end of the speech she warmed even my slow-to-warm heart. That was a great speech. She did what she came to do. Nate's "Shame on You" moment was more or less accomplished by the Twin Cities line. She explained to her supporters that if you support my agenda, you will vote for Barack Obama. Like Nate said, she was sincere. A sincere Hillary Clinton is a great Hillary Clinton."

Hi Gotham,
Do you still feel this way, after Hillary's speech tonight?
Isn't she an 'asset' to Obama, she really gave a commanding pitch to rally America around Him.
love,
~ Kate

p.s.
just curious,
how do feel about Joe Biden as Barack's running mate (is it the face of 'BIG CHANGE' :-) you had hoped for)