That's it. F**k it.
I'm all for a united Democratic Party. I've been pushing for it for some time now. I am, however, through tiptoeing around the disgusting hatred that comes out of the likes of some "Hillary supporters." I put it in quotation marks because I don't think they really do support Hillary. I don't know what their schtick is, I don't care. Ignorance must be confronted with reality. Bullshit must be confronted with truth. I cannot see it any other way.
I was at the Colorado Democratic Convention this past weekend and I had many wonderful conversations with Hillary supporters. The theme of the weekend was unity. No question. McAuliffe was there and he spoke about it. Everyone did. Democrats, whether supporting Clinton or Obama, need to stand united not only behind the nominee, but also in opposition of those that would degrade this process and this dialogue.
Some of the best people I've ever met are supporting Obama, some are supporting Clinton. If I hear about one person who is really going to vote against the supporters of another candidate rather than vote for the issues they support, I think I might actually reach through and punch them in their very own face. No more of it.
Vote for a better America. Vote for a better world. Vote for peace, vote for health care, vote for education.
I was at the Colorado Democratic Convention this past weekend and I had many wonderful conversations with Hillary supporters. The theme of the weekend was unity. No question. McAuliffe was there and he spoke about it. Everyone did. Democrats, whether supporting Clinton or Obama, need to stand united not only behind the nominee, but also in opposition of those that would degrade this process and this dialogue.
Some of the best people I've ever met are supporting Obama, some are supporting Clinton. If I hear about one person who is really going to vote against the supporters of another candidate rather than vote for the issues they support, I think I might actually reach through and punch them in their very own face. No more of it.
Vote for a better America. Vote for a better world. Vote for peace, vote for health care, vote for education.
Advertisement
Anyone reading this, I should admit that I wrote this in a rather irritated state. I'd just come across a few comments that directly insulted Obama supporters across the board. This is a them among these comments that has been in a crescendo lately and I have to say, I do find them rather baffling.
May 21, 2008 8:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
you get upset about some critical comments about obama when this blog is replete with one slander after another about how corrupt, vile, amoral, you name it they have been called it, and you go bonkers over a few critical comments?
you are way too sensitive. those who live in glass houses shouldnt
May 22, 2008 6:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, most Hillary supporters are reasonable people and will support the eventual nominee. Most people participating here in good faith are reasonable. And most readers here are for Obama, as makes sense for his demographics, which is especially favorable among high information voters.
You should realize, as should everyone, online there are a lot of kids, trolls, and the mentally ill. Especially there are a lot of Republican trolls with seething inferiority complexes and a desire to irritate others.
Limbaugh told the Limbots to impersonate Hillary supporters. For years the wingnut sites such as Free Republic, Little Green Footbals, etc have actually encouraged members to troll other sites and pretend to be Hillary supporters. Read the comments on these sites and it's clear their typical reader makes Ann Coulter appear only half as psychotic by comparison.
You have to understand the fans of Limbaugh and these winger sites are the dregs of humanity and it's their attempt at revenge for being stuck in the ass-crack of America. It's Archie Bunker on the internet, only less classy, less worldly, and less educated.
Don't mistake them for real Hillary supporters, or even real Republicans for that matter.
May 22, 2008 6:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
This post was like a roll call for some of our worst trolls. I agree that these are not actually Hillary supporters. They just come here to grab some negative attention. The solution: ignore.
May 22, 2008 7:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, there is no edit function, so before you talk about hitting people you might try some deep breaths. You came across as violent.
May 21, 2008 8:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Deep breaths are a good thing. I'm not a violent man. Upon rereading, I did find some irony in talking of hitting people and then voting for peace.
May 21, 2008 9:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
On a separate note, I've come to appreciate your voice 'round here, Billy.
May 21, 2008 9:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Violent"? If you thought that, you've never seen violence, guy. I agree that he seemed pissed, but get a grip, Billy.
May 22, 2008 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Billy is just concern trolling.
May 22, 2008 6:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's only a little bit ironic that the Obama supporters who were screaming "anyone but Shrillary" are suddenly looking for love from Clinton supporters. Victory within reach, to quote dear leader.
What's more ironic that "party unity" coming from Obama supporters is nothing but a fresh talking point in their strategy: push her out, then shame her supporters into backing him.
Obama is not Jesus. This country will be fine with President McCain. The Democratic Congress will be strong enough to deal with him, if the so-called netroots are worth their salt.
So, punch air all you want, Obama lost my trust and my vote.
May 21, 2008 9:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
While I respectfully disagree, I'm glad you're willing to address the issue with civility, a civility I do occasionally lack. What's up with your Barack Lincoln, by the way?
And in our defense, by the way, had Hillary come out on top, it's the Hillary supporters that'd be calling for party unity with loud voices. Many of them are, even as it is. And what action did Obama take that lost your trust in him? I'm a skeptical man, an open-minded man, and a rational man. He's not my messiah. I don't pray to him at night. I just think he's the best guy applying for the job at the moment.
May 21, 2008 9:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
No way. If we win, we're going to run you Obamanauts off. :)
May 21, 2008 10:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's time I should be honest... If Hillary wins the nomination, I just don't know if I can stand to vote for her in November... McCain's not quite my cup of tea, either. Guess I'm pullin' for Nader in '08er!
Yikes, just kidding. That felt gross.
May 21, 2008 10:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know. But if you don't believe he cost Gore the Presidency in 2000, Nader is fun. He's a bright guy, but where will they find a debate venue large enough to hold his ego?
May 21, 2008 11:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's an incredibly bright guy that did wonderful work 30 years ago that, yes, has given him an ego the size of a Texas testicle. He is informed, though. I saw him speak in person and though the tone of his voice starts to sound like speakers with no input turned way up after a while, he does know his shit.
And I don't believe he cost Gore the election. I think without Nader in the race, there still would've been a dubious Bush 'victory' in Florida. What a shitty night that was...
May 21, 2008 11:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
European countries manage to have 4 or 5 parties and don't seem to run into problems. If Gore when asked in a debate what he had to say to America's hadn't talked about Social Security and prescription benefits, he might have had another million votes. If progressives hadn't endlessly trashed him for his wardrobe and not being Bill Bradley, he might have had 2 million more votes. If the media hadn't had a field day making up shit about him, he likely would have had 5 million more votes. Putting it all on the shoulders of Nader is a bit daft. Nader was just pushing his agenda - kinda like Hillary is now, except she's a lot stronger.
May 22, 2008 1:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Proportional Representation makes four or five parties possible. In our zero-sum system it just doesn't work very well.
May 22, 2008 8:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
that was "to America's youth" when he talked about SS & prescription drug benefits.
May 22, 2008 10:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
If she were just pushing an agenda or advocating for herself she would be getting few complaints. It is the outright lies she is pushing now that make her loss seem iligitimate that are the problem.
May 23, 2008 7:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
As one who has appealed for party unity, I've never screamed about Shrillary, sought your affection, or tried to shame you.
I have only ONE beef with you. You pretend to want a Democrat named Hillary in the White House. But you would support a Republican if you can't have your way. You're a f*cking baby or a GOP troll. Same thing.
May 21, 2008 9:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I want to have a capable president in the White House. To me that trumpets ideology.
And I think Obama is the least capable of the three candidates. Any doubts i might have had in the beginning have been erased by now.
If you want to shame me or scare me or others like me into backing Obama, it just won't work. Obama would call that hoodwinking and fear-mongering.
May 21, 2008 10:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not going to shame you into it. I'm not going to guilt you into it. I have all the confidence in the world that Obama will triumph in November, even absent your vote. I'll condemn anyone I see trying to shame anyone into anything.
I will point out, though, that I think you meant "trump." In fairness, in my first comment I wrote "them" instead of "theme." We're all guilty.
I do have one rather straightforward question, though. What erased that doubt in your mind about Obama's capabilities. He's run an incredibly good campaign. Clinton ran what I can only call a pretty poorly-run campaign. McCain hasn't had to run much of anything yet, though he certainly is exhibiting how little he knows what he's talking about. Please just substantiate your perspective and I'll let it drop.
May 21, 2008 10:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
How about "Yes WE CAN (convince Hillary fans to vote for Obama"
Nattering nabobs of negativity posing as the hope crowd?
How's Obama going to pass health care if he can't get past entrenched special interests?
May 22, 2008 1:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
No one wants to shame you into thinking McCain will keep troops Iraq until the last Arab that hates America is dead or changes his mind. If you think that's "fine", who are Obama supprters to tell you to be ashamed? Anyway, this election isn't about the troops. As all good democrats know, it's about proving that Obama is a faliure.
May 21, 2008 10:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
You can't divorce ability from ideology. Given the choice between an inept politician unable to enact bad policies, and an apt politician able to enact bad policies, I'd take the inept one. If one assumes, as you do, that Obama's inept, it'd be better to have an inept politician unable to enact good policies, then an apt politician able to enact bad policies.
I really don't understand how people can't see this. Not doing anything is better than doing bad things. (Don't get me wrong, I think Obama will be able to do good things and not just do nothing. However, even if I thought he couldn't get anything accomplished, I'd be sure that'd be better than McCain getting bad things accomplished.)
May 21, 2008 11:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
??? Oh I get it. You're doing a takeoff on the Rumsfeld "known unknowns" bit. I love that one! Really, though, if there was a way know that an enacted policy would be 'bad' BEFORE it was enacted then what I think may be your point would be totally valid!!
May 21, 2008 11:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think there is a pretty good evidence a policy will be bad well before it is enacted, but only if the politicians actually read the case studies they ask for, instead of being "briefed" on the broad strokes. Maybe we should enact fewer policies and spend more time on each one.
May 22, 2008 6:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
You meant to say "To me that TRUMPS ideology."
Instead, you just described what you are doing.
May 22, 2008 12:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
To say Obama is the least capable of the three is to wilfully ignore his record. Who personally persuaded every Republican as well as every Democrat to vote for reforming the rules of evidence in murder cases in Illinois, over the staunch opposition of Governor Blagojevich, in order to prevent a repeat of the pattern we had of cops torturing innocents into confesssing? Obama, that's who. Who has sponsored and passed more legislation in the US Senate? Hillary, or Obama? Obama, that's who. Hillary's legislative record is largely one of ceremonial legislation, and her campaign management has been second rate, and then there was the whole health care failure in which she went out of her way to leave Congressional Democrats in the lurch with her secrecy and her refusal to work even with Hill allies. Those aren't signs of a capable person. Those are the warning signs of a failed presidency.
May 22, 2008 12:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
What, pray tell, has led you to believe Obama is not capable, Lalo? His fundraising? His ability to harness the Internet? His perfect political pitch? His smoothly run campaign? His speaking abilities?
What has led you to believe Hillary would be capable? Her debt? Her schizophrenic messaging? Her lack of a post-Super Tuesday plan? Her campaign's infighting? Her inability to control Bill's mouth? Her ability to squander the gold-standard brand in Democratic politics to a newbie whose middle name is HUSSEIN?
Please Lalo, enlighten this foolish Obama follower to Hillary's many capabilities that are apparently visible to those with your perceptive analytical abilities.
May 22, 2008 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
True shit!
May 21, 2008 11:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, you only compared President Clinton and Senator Clinton to herpes.
Classy you fucking nitwit
May 22, 2008 6:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
This country will be fine with President McCain.
Gee, what a Republican thing for a Democrat to say. A little confused are we?
May 21, 2008 10:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's what I'm sayin'. These are Clinton supporters? They seem to have gotten what Clinton stands for really really wrong.
May 21, 2008 10:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I do not believe they are Clinton supporters. I'm of the mind that these are Republican trolls.
May 22, 2008 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think they got what Clinton stands for dead on the mark...
May 22, 2008 1:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
This comment just demonstrates how much residual love there is for "McCain the maverick" -- a brand that has been built up over many years. Without some sustained focus on who McCain is and what he really stands for, he will be tough to beat in November. And sorry Hillary fans, that means she needs to get out of this race now and start to undo the damage she's caused by elevating McCain at the expense of Obama.
May 22, 2008 7:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Desperation is the mother of deceit...
The R's around here pose as Hillary supporters, and they slip up all the time and throw their Johnnyisms into their subtle words.
The willingness of these trolls to pose as Democrats just reveals their pathological roots, they are so used to deception, they are also so usd to self-justification, and they obvioulsy get a kick out of our frustrations.
From what I have seen on the ground canvassing for Obama, just about every single sincere Hillary supporter and Obama supporter is willing to vote for the other, and it is only in these last weeks that Hillary's Bush-like numbers games has pushed sincere Obama supporters away.
But after close scrutiny, most of those wh claim they would vote for McCain if Hillary doesn't get the nom, are planning to vote for McCain from the start.
They are simply so bereft of honor, they think posing as something they aren't is justified by their necessity.
Lawlessness, the abject contempt for any semblance of personal integrity, runs deep in the republican brand... right down to the trolls who pose here as Democrats.
May 22, 2008 9:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Please, people. "lalo" is a troll, just like gotalife. He is either dirt stupid or being deliberately provocative. In either case, you're wasting bandwidth trying to convince them of the reasonableness of you position or the unreasonableness of theirs. Commenters like lalo only deserve your derision and abuse. Heap it upon them freely.
May 22, 2008 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think they're in love with McCain the Maverick. I think they're just bitter, and the grim satisfaction they'll be able to realize should Obama lose is all that's sustaining them right now. They are very small minded.
May 22, 2008 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I, Hillary Clinton, have been lost to the Democratic party forever.*
Leading the Stovepipe Hat vote!
Leading for the vote of Senator John McCain!
Leading you all!
Much Love,
Hillary.
* Claims or supposed positions leaving the Democratic party are subject to Super Delegate voting. If I'm the nominee, I'll come back. I promise. But otherwise, I'm out! So you'd better nominate me. Or else. But I'll come back if you do. But if you don't... whoa-hoa... look out! Republicans, here I come! So clearly I'm the stronger candidate for John McCain's vote. Me! Me! ME!
May 21, 2008 11:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why, specifically, did he lose your trust?
May 22, 2008 10:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
If Lalo chose to answer that honestly, no doubt the answer would be that he's not a Republican.
But I wouldn't expect that level of honesty.
May 22, 2008 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
ANYONE WHO THINKS OR SAYS
"This country will be fine with President McCain."
IMHO
is a traitor to our great nation. The party that illegally seized power and stole the 2004 election with clear vote manipulation are arch criminals. They have committed war crimes. They must be held to account.
Anyone espousing anything short of full support for the eventual Democratic nominee is a troll, a fool or seriously misguided. We have but this one chance to
Take Our Country Back.
May 22, 2008 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dude there was loaves of bread and fish in baskets in Oregan last weekend . . .
May 22, 2008 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK with McCain and a Democratic Senate? NOT!!
Two words: Supreme Court. One of the good guys (Stevens) is really old, and who's to say that one or more out of Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer might be ready to, or need to, retire? With Kennedy and Scalis the next most likely to leave, based on time, we need Democratic appointees for a change. The Senate at best can block a truly "out there" appointee, but they can't make McCain appoint a progressive, and I think the days of a progressive "sneaking through", like Souter, are long gone.
May 22, 2008 7:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Quit whining. If you won you should be happy. I've never seen such a bunch of whiners as Obamaistas.
May 21, 2008 9:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I pointed out the irony of my violent notions followed by a call to peace. Now I'm pointing out the irony of whining... about whining. I don't consider anything I say to be whining, but what whiner does, I suppose?
Certainly if you were to constantly bring up your thoughts on the balance of media coverage, and how it is seemingly biased toward your opponent, you wouldn't consider that whining. Who else might, though?
May 21, 2008 9:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
But according to you he is the Nominee? what more do you need? Why keep writing things to trash Clinton and her supporters? Why not write posts about what he supposedly do when he wins the Election and becomes President? Foreign Policy, Monetary Policy, Energy Policy?
May 21, 2008 10:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I bet if Hillary ran on those issues, she'd be the nominee. Instead it was always about Obama and how he wasn't an elite candidate like her and mccain. Woulda been interesting to hear her talk about real issues instead of all the "shame on you, boyrack" jazz. I still remember the days when she used to talk about policy and stuff, she was always so inspiring. But all that republican-style mud slinging sure got her close, I'll give her that!!
May 21, 2008 10:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I call bullshit on that. She ran on all those issues. If you somehow didn't want to hear her that was not in her control.
May 21, 2008 10:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, alright then I stand corrected. She ran (and lost) on the issues. But seriously, she was an OUTSTANDING republican-style mud slinger. Probably the best democrat to ever sling republican-style mud at another democrat. Remember how impressed FOX was with her (and she with them)? The lady would have made an AWESOME candidate back when how well you slung republican-style mud was what people looked for in a political candidate!!
May 21, 2008 11:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
"She ran (and lost) on the issues."
Way to turn the tables, but it won't do any good, we aren't really arguing with a Democrat.
I think Louisvilles' really a Republican trying to divide our party.
Like the rest of the fakies, "he" pretends to support Hillary so they can worm their way into the conversaton without detection, then constantly pose negatives and impossible scenarios.
The more I read the regulars, the more I don't believe most of them are Dems, they are just shameless republicans posing as Dems.
May 22, 2008 9:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yup, Senator Clinton did run on all of those issues. Here's why she lost:
Foreign policy: AUMF, Kyl-Lieberman, Obliterate Iran.
Energy policy: Pushing a gas tax holiday so people can keep consuming at the suicidal rate we are while simultaneously dumping gallons of dead dinosaurs into a HUGE f-250 truck.
Monetary Policy: Her campaign has been in the red for months, and she's amassed a considerable string of bad debts across the nation she's supposed to be leading out of the worst financial crisis in generations.
I think we've heard Senator Clinton loud and clear.
May 22, 2008 12:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
According to me, he is the nominee. According to anyone with third grade math skills, too.
Aside from that last sentence, I've been very kind to Clinton and her supporters. I fail to see why you always need to play the victim here. None of us are really victims. We had two great candidates go through an excellent and exciting primary, the likes of which we haven't seen in a long long time, if ever. One of those great candidates ended up on top and we can all rally around him leading up to November. See? Everybody wins.
When, exactly, do I attack anyone here, aside from some rovin' trolls that are far from representative of Clinton's constituency, who I find quite decent and respectable?
May 21, 2008 10:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton won't admit this basic truth.
Whining has nothing to do with it.
May 22, 2008 12:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton won't admit this basic truth.
Whining has nothing to do with it.
May 22, 2008 12:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Louisville, your post sounds remarkably like a whine here...
May 22, 2008 9:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
You win the Ironic Comment Award! Congratulations!
May 22, 2008 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Glad to know I'm not the only one so fed up he's using expletives. Or am I? ...I guess I am in the sense that there's others like me. But still, it's unfortunate that some of us have gotten to that point at all.
May 21, 2008 9:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please blow it out your ass. If someone's use of expletives is your biggest criticism, then you're not paying attention to what's happening to our country.
Can we not just pretend we're all adults here? A little rough language is the least of our concerns. There is that whole Iraq war thing, as well as a serious loss of purchasing power while oil, eggs and milk all reached new all-time record highs, plus the very real possibility that the current administration will try to push us into armed conflict with Iran. Remember, this is the most powerful executive at least since Lincoln--probably ever. All they need to do is go into Iran under ANY pretense whatsoever, and fire a shot at a government official in broad daylight. Far from impossible. Not even that unlikely.
Then there is the issue of unity. I'm not that worried about the Dems this season either, but we must be mindful of those who would attempt to divide us. That is the most powerful strategy the Repubs have. The intelligent among them will do anything and everything to divide us.
Let us take a lesson from the Repubs this season: no matter what koksucker they nominate, they band together all their energy and efforts to get his old, white balls in office. Let's see if we can follow their example in that regard.
BTW, whatever happened to that bin Laden guy?
May 22, 2008 12:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
ARGH!
AVAST YE WUSSY WHO COULDN'T SPELL A 4 LETTER WORD!
NOW COME THROUGH ME SCREEN AND SWIPE AT ME
YE HAND IT WILL BE LOST!
I'VE GOT THE DOLDRUMS, DEEP AT SEA
SO BORED, I READ YOUR POST
IF YOU WANT TO BE A PIRATE, YOU HAVE TO SWEAR LIKE ONE! HERE'S A 4 LETTER WORD: SOCIALISM!
BRING BACK THE COPORATE 1990S WITH WENCH HILLARY!
ACQUIRE! MERGE! MARAUD! DILUTE! DILUTE!
ARGH!
May 21, 2008 9:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fuckin' a.
Priceless, Pirate Peet. Muchos love.
May 21, 2008 9:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're disobeying your leader's orders. Keep it up and you'll drummed out of Jonestown after the show trial.
May 21, 2008 9:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
My leader's orders? Jonestown? Oh my...
It ain't Hillary supporters I'm complaining about. It's you.
May 21, 2008 9:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Constantinople is a great example of the new Republican creed "If you can't beat 'em, call 'em a cult..." because they have no intention of joining us.
The best way to turn your victorious adversaries into something you can wrap your pea-brains around its to to compare them to losers...
May 22, 2008 9:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Seth, I feel you, honey. I agree with the frustration you expressed, and I agree that your post was a little ironic near the end. I love the fact that you read it over again and laughed at that irony.
It's hard, sometimes, to sit back and take a deep breath and remember that things are looking really, really good for the Democratic party this year. The MSM is absolutely loving the fact that it's dragging on and they can stir sh*t up and get more viewers than usual by doing so, and it affects us all, it does.
I'm glad you got your feelings out and I'm glad you posted, because it's fun to see all our familiar Clinton supporters jump on you so quickly.
They're getting their frustrations out, too.
See?
May 21, 2008 9:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know it, girl. I'm not worried about November in the least, with or without the trolls. I just, rather awkwardly, need to see an end to the negativity. The more we engage them, I think, the less they'll be able to continue their line of attack.
As I say, I was at the Colorado Democratic Convention (ironically, my hotel was kitty-corner from Focus on the Family in Colorado Springs... another post, another time). The energy was palpable. Everyone was getting along. It was a fairly accurate picture, I think, of the Democratic Party as a whole right now. The worst thing I was the Obama supporters chanting Obama's name after McAuliffe cited the popular vote count that favors Clinton (with a fair smattering of boos). Ah well.
So it's a tiny minority I'm cursing under my breath right now. A minority, I'll freely admit, I'm more than happy to marginalize at the moment, though not without whining about them a little first.
May 21, 2008 9:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey Seth. I was there too. Jefferson County. It was wild to see 10,000 Democrats gathered in one place. Larger group of delegates than the National Convention will have.
I've been meaning to write something up about it but we got a bad phone call Saturday and my wife had to rush to Michigan to see her brother. Things have been chaos since.
May 21, 2008 10:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
JeffCo, eh? That's primarily Broomfield, yeah? Were you at the 2nd CD Convention as well?
And yeah, I need to write something about it at some point. It was quite the experience, and a great source of optimism. Did you see that Udall's ahead in the polls now? Good times are ahead of us.
May 21, 2008 10:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Evergreen. CD6 with Hank Eng going against probably Coffman for Tancredo's seat. JeffCo is the whole west side of Denver metro, Lakewood, Littleton, Golden, Arvada, and up into the mountains where we are.
Yes, I saw Udall gaining ground on that turd Bob Schaffer. Funny about his campaign ad featuring Mt. McKinley (Denali) in Alaska and calling it Pike's Peak!
May 21, 2008 10:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
No kidding. Gad... If CD6 goes blue this year, paint me amazified. I've been hearing really good things about Eng, though, so good luck. At least it definitely will not be Tancredo. What an embarassing presidential candidate he was...
May 21, 2008 10:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dude, 15 million and counting is a small minority?
May 21, 2008 10:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dude, try reading. I think I've been very clear about this, but to reiterate...
The vast majority of Clinton supporters will vote for Obama in November. No question there. The exception being a few of y'all trollin' the internet, and what wonkette.com has officially coined the "bitters," bless them.
May 21, 2008 10:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Small majority? You have polled all Clinton Supporters have you? AHhhhh I see.
By the way good going. I see you have disdain for anyone born below the mason dixon line. Nothing like a campaign of hope. Drink up on your koolaid.
May 21, 2008 10:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Louisville, if you actually want to continue trolling and giving idiotic responses with no value or substance, then go ahead. No one needs to poll every single Clinton supporter to know that, when it comes down to it, they're Democrats, and in the end, the Democrats are going to unite. Because, whether you like Clinton or Obama, or hate either one of them, or both, it doesn't matter: any freaking Democratic is better than John McCain.
May 21, 2008 10:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
You should talk, Sparky. You admit you're a ranter. Yet your rant had no value or substance. And that's the trouble with posts like yours and this one. They're just tedious.
May 22, 2008 12:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
There are three people who use a dozen or so names to troll this site and make outrageous statements to get usually agreeable people talking like Sailors.
The reason we don't hammer all of them is that some of legitimate Hillary supporters who get caught up defending their candidate.
I think this will all be find as long as we identify and isolate.
May 22, 2008 6:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Haha! If you want to think it had no value or substance, then go ahead. That's not what many, MANY of the responses to my post were saying. Ranting does not equal trolling. I've still yet to see you give a single rational post or response to anything on this site. Try again, buddy.
May 22, 2008 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't give a shit what other trolls say about your trollish posts.
May 22, 2008 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Check the Ohio polls today genius.
May 22, 2008 11:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, okay. I've tried with you. I have. I've tried engaging in a conversation. But you're really just makin' shit up. In point of fact, I have disdain for you. You're on my shitlist. All rational Clinton supporters, which is most, are invited over to my place for tea. We can plan fundraisers for the DNC.
May 21, 2008 10:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Louisville1975, how you mix your Kool-Aid. Obama handily wins all the traditional Confederate states and now his supporters insult anyone "below the mason-dixon line"? Sounds like a Troll to me.
Lalo35adm: just answer Seth's question. What defining action/moment/issue turned you off to Obama? If you're not a troll, then at least take a few minutes to Google a pretend answer.
May 22, 2008 7:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
honey? Oh lord.
May 21, 2008 9:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, Yoda, sweetie...why bring religion into this?
May 21, 2008 10:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly. Josh's title "Toxic", currently on the front page, is correct. Clinton has thrown the seeds of illegitimacy on this election and is fertilizing the seedlings with accusations of misogyny and disenfranchisement. Political cynicism at it's finest. She is showing every day that she would be happy if Obama gets the nomination and then loses as she cynically leads the older white folks away.
I have lost all patience with Clinton and these faux supporters and curse silently while watching this unfold.
May 22, 2008 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
By the way, man, hang in there. I know it gets really freaking hard. I had my own blog post a few days ago ranting about how fed up I was with Clinton herself. I feel you, I know where you're coming from. We're a growing number of voters. But, I've decided, it's much better to look at John McCain. Obama's going to win, so it's much better to look forward to the General Election. Much more exciting, too.
May 21, 2008 10:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
See, here's the thing. This is what really bothers me. These people are not posting because they support Clinton or believe in the Democratic cause, that much is clear. This means they'll keep resurfacing, over and over again, into the general and beyond. I don't know what their motivation is, perhaps someday it'll be clear, but I figured it was about time to confront it head-on.
I have nothing really against Clinton. I think in many ways she'd be a wonderful president. But there's this other person running, ya know, that I like more. Anyway, John McCain's goin' down. We all know that.
May 21, 2008 11:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I have nothing really against Clinton. I think in many ways she'd be a wonderful president."
Please.
Setting aside her naturally abrasive personality and her blatantly amoral ethics, I am hard pressed to imagine Hillary being anything more than a vector for continued rancor--at home and abroad. There is no more divisive, polarizing figure on the American political landscape.
Furthermore, notwithstanding her "ready on day one" and "3AM phone call" assertions, I cannot shake the sense that winning the election is her mission. Period. She wants to be the boss. The first female in the Oval Office. To her, everything else is just nettlesome detail and political intrigue.
And, speaking of "Day One," Hillary's candidacy reeks of perpetuity. Day One will be the first day of a re-election campaign that will dominate the agenda of her first term to the exclusion of all else. Her second term will be similarly devoted to repealing the 22nd amendment. Such is the depth of her megalomania.
SHE IS NOT WORTHY!
May 22, 2008 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Seth -- youre post brought all of the regular trolls out. They are so predictable. They sit at home and wait for any message that is against hillary, and they go into action. They are pathetically predictable. The live for this shit. Sad really.
May 21, 2008 11:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
They did it to me, too. It made me chuckle.
May 22, 2008 12:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
There's one now!
May 22, 2008 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was baiting them a little bit, I'll admit. I was expecting their presence. Frankly, I'm getting to the point that, any time I feel frustrated or angry, I just want to take it out on a troll. Maybe rather than allow them to be an annoyance to us, we can use them as therapy. Just abuse them. Not the real Clinton supporters, mind, just the trolls.
May 22, 2008 12:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know you're admitting to indulging in trollish behavior, right?
May 22, 2008 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
This comment from you is more revealing about you than your original post.
Boy, you really want to fit in, don't you.
May 22, 2008 4:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
I often feel the same way around here, Seth. I just try to remember that it is impossible to know who the people are in these discussions.
I work with conservatives who intentionally go to progressive sites and instigate things by misrepresenting themselves. They think it's funny. They don't come to TPM as far as I know.
May 22, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
So you're saying that if Hillary supporters don't vote for Obama you'll punch them in the face because they're hateful. Ok.
May 22, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's saying that so-called Democrats and progressives who don't vote for a Democrat in the general election deserve a punch in the nose. I tend to agree. How petty can you be to sacrifice Roe v. Wade, ending the Iraq war, the environment, energy policy, GAS PRICES, you name it - any progressive principle - just because your favored nominee didn't win? That's just stupid.
Those who know me know I've bashed Obama supporters for expressing similar sentiments. Eyes on the prize, Democrats!
May 22, 2008 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
@space cat, what cat is that movie from? I used to watch it when I was a kid but I don't remember the name of the film.
May 22, 2008 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I live in West Virginia now, but graduated from a high school on a Navy base in the California desert. The engineers were still working on and testing firefighting equipment and fuel slurry mixtures as an aftermath of the USS Forrestal fire. I was even more surprised when a retire Army Lt. Colonel I currently work with blame McCain for the accident by pulling the wrong trigger on deck. He complained about all the tax payer dollars he wasted on dumping other aircraft into the Med and Italian structures. This was unsolicited.
Experience and judgment are sometimes separate things. I know I do not trust McCain judgment. His views on the world are entirely from a military perspective. I would not want him in the bully pulpit. I found no justification for the preemptive attack on Iraq that I could reconcile with my moral compass. As others have noted, I think that is why Sen. Clinton is behind in pledged delegates. I have "fallen in love" as Ms. Rhodes says on the radio, but in the general I will fall in line, no matter who the nominee is
On the other hand, I was very surprised when talking to a Hillary supporter after the plannign commission meeting. I have known him since 1989, active in county Dems when we met, and he states could not vote for Obama since it is proven his is un-American. We covered Moslem, church, Black Panthers, etc before the conversation finally ended. It was not heated, but I tried to counter from memory all the smears the even snopes.com has refuted. You can ride the train to DC for work from here if you want, so I had never considered this Appalachia. But as Sen. Web put it so well, "poor and white, out of site", and the hills have nothing to do with this. Sydney Blumenthal has done a good job, as good as I suspect Griffin will try to do for McCain. I hope to continue the conversation with my friend over the next few months.
I took the political compass test and line up with Nadar almost exactly. I know the Constitution enough to not vote third part without and amendment, or a revolution to line all states up like ME and NE. If no one gets majority for the electoral college it goes into the House; third parties have not chance.
May 22, 2008 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe I'm just paranoid, but I feel that many of the posters on Democratic and liberal websites that proclaim that if their candidate does not acquire the nomination they will either stay home or vote for a Republican are really Republican apparatchiks. Demonization, anger and fear have long been the support pillars of Republican campaigns. It is certainly not beneath Karl Rove and company to employ agent provocateurs. And it is certainly not beyond the pale to envision deep cover operatives establishing credentials with quasi-progressive posts in order to drive a wedge between otherwise like thinking progressives and Democrats. I can think of no other reason for people to act against their own self-interest. It is counterintuitive to choose someone from the opposite end of the political spectrum instead of the person with views and policies most like your own simply out of spite. You cannot "take your ball and go home." Your country and indeed the whole world is depending upon you to make a rational decision.
May 22, 2008 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Goatlife, Billy Glad, Otto F and Louisville are just trying to get points for the McCain Online Action Center, they want the stuffed animal I think, it costs troll 5000 points on http://www.johnmccain.com/
May 22, 2008 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I believe in punishing the Republicans for their mismanagement. If that means voting for Hillary, so be it. I think, though, under current circumstances (that is, Obama not crushed under a crater-pocked meteor, limbs twitching) she's attained very little justification for a continued campaign, much less a nomination.
If we want folks in Washington to do what we say, we must make it very clear that there are consequences for thwarting the will of the people. The Republicans cannot be allowed to win in November, and if we come together, like an intelligent party would, around the candidate of our party, the punishment will be clear.
May 22, 2008 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Always serve the party citizens! *Flashes red book in face* Do not disobey the party or you will be punished!
May 22, 2008 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
To all HRC supporters who profess that they're going to cross over and vote for McCain: there are THREE moderate-to-liberal Supreme Court justices likely to retire in the next four years. Do you REALLY think that HRC wants to see Roe vs. Wade overturned, labor rights rolled back even further, enviromental protections gutted, corporations further empowered to wreak whatever havoc they want on consumers and the middle-class, etc.? Have you looked at McCain's judicial-advisory committee? He will pack the courts with ultra-rightwing activists. My God, look at the damage Roberts and Alito have already done. If you can't get over HRC losing, then at least think about that.
And Obama "least qualified?" Who of the three candidates argued--back in 2002, when it counted--that invading Iraq would be a dangerous mistake? Sorry, McCain's bullheaded stupidity and HRC's willingness to wage war based on maintaining her "political viability" trump any "inexperience" on Obama's part. Ditto the ridiculous "gas tax holiday." If this is "competence," pass me the good stuff you're smoking!
That said, I'd still vote for HRC over McCain or any other Republican any day. The Obama camp has been nothing but gracious, and frankly, I'm beginning to feel the same way as the poster who started this thread. The venting from the HRC side, Ickes' insistence today re: the "uncommitted" delegates from Michigan, HRC's rhetoric in Florida (not to mention her rank hypocrisy--go back and read Josh Marshall's post today, and tell me what you think of it), it's all beginning to go way over the line when it comes to party unity and this autumn. Is HRC and her campaign going to serve herself or serve her party?
May 22, 2008 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
By the way, Lalo, what do you think of John McCain's skipping the GI Bill vote today? What a profile in courage! Just the kind of leader I want for my country--NOT. I'm grateful that a # of R's crossed over and made this one veto-proof. No thanks to John McCain, though.
May 22, 2008 2:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama lost your trust? But, you "trust" all will be fine with President McCain and his new Supreme Court nominees because you "trust" the netroots and Senator Harry Reid. My Senator, Diane Feinstein got all kinds of netroots heat on FISA, telecom immunity, Michael Mukasey, Samuel Alito, etc. Tell me, Lalo, do you "trust" McCain not to bomb Iran because of some faith in netroots? You clearly don't have any "skin" in Iraq troop levels in Iraq. You clearly aren't feeling the economic hardships of a Bush (then McCain) economy.
May 22, 2008 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Conclusions:
1) Anyone refusing to back Obama is a Republican troll
2) Anyone voting for McCain is a Traitor To This Nation.
How sick can this crowd here get??
You sound just like "if not with us, you're against us" George Bush crowd.
May 22, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
1) You really haven't learned how to read, just how to copy and paste opinions, eh? Just those like yourself are Republican trolls (though you're ever so slightly better than most).
2) I wouldn't go that far, but I certainly think it's the wrong bloody choice. That's why I'm voting for the other one and why I will try hard to get as many as I can behind him.
Now if you'll only respond to questions posed by myself and others earlier, perhaps you can elevate yourself outside of being assumed a troll and become a member of a society that thrives on dialogue and disagreement.
May 22, 2008 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why would I defend myself against "troll" accusations from Obama trolls??? I've been on this site long enough not to do that ever again, trust me.
And if you read the comments to your post with the blinders off, you will meet a most breathtakingly intolerant, abusive, disrespectful, narrow-minded crowd.
When they ask questions, it's not because they want answers - this techinique is called "bait". Everything they say has a single purpose - to praise everything Obama and to smear anything and everyone else. Hitler Jugend used that in 1940s.
Well, I'm not 14, and I don't memorize anyone's talking points. So I couldn't care less being called a troll.
May 22, 2008 4:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's why I say you're better than most. However, when I ask you a question as a means of engaging conversation so we can have a mutually beneficial discussion on the matter, and you don't bother to respond, it doesn't speak well for you.
I think you meant Hitler Jungen, not whatever it is you wrote there.
Anyway, I'm not asking you to defend yourself, merely to engage in a positive way. If you want to have a conversation, I'm happy to. If you're not, why bother posting anything at all?
Obama's not my savior. I just want what's best for the rest of humanity and I think he provides it, or is at least the best thing we've got available at the moment. If you'd like to tell me in what ways John McCain would be better, feel free, and we can talk in a civil fashion about it. I'll try to convince you of my thing, and you'll try to convince me of your thing and in the end we'll probably still disagree but we'll both be better off for it.
May 22, 2008 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is Hitler Jugend, but thank you for checking my spelling.
Anyway, how do YOU know what's best for humanity? I don't, but then I'm probably not as well informed as you seem to be.
As for having a serious discussion, please see my comment about bait, above. And your own admission about it, earlier in the thread.
Until that changes, I don't think you are honestly looking for or capable of serious discussion.
May 22, 2008 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is Hitler Jugend, but thank you for checking my spelling.
Anyway, how do YOU know what's best for humanity? I don't, but then I'm probably not as well informed as you seem to be.
As for having a serious discussion, please see my comment about bait, above. And your own admission about it, earlier in the thread.
Until that changes, I don't think you are honestly looking for or capable of serious discussion.
May 22, 2008 4:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
The logic, one must admit is flawless. If all invitations to serious discussion are disingenuous, and all responses to disingenuous invitations are fruitless, then Lalo should not respond to such invitations as the discussion would be fruitless. (Personally, I agree with the "fruitless" conclusion but not the premise for reasons Lalo would certainly find insulting.)
But this logic only emphasizes Seth's question: Why bother posting anything at all? That is to say, if you're not a Republican troll, and you don't believe that serious discussion is possible, why are you here, Lalo?
May 22, 2008 5:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hot damn, you were right about the spelling thing. My bad. My German ain't what it used to be. I'd thought it was just "young'nes." Ah well.
As far as what's best for humanity... It's an interesting dilemma, because you either come off as arrogant or stupid when answer a question like that. I'll try this approach. I vote because I have a set of ideals that I would like to see achieved. That is to say, the information I have gathered throughout my years of life has led me to the conclusion that there is, at any given moment, a "best" path. If I did not believe that I knew the better way, if I thought someone else's opinion was probably better, I wouldn't vote, or at least wouldn't vote for what I believed in. So yes, I believe I know what is best for humanity, but so does everyone else and everyone thinks something different. Hence the dilemma.
This is exactly why, though, I think it's important to have discussion. We cannot form better opinions by being stubbornly stuck in our own thoughts. I have formed the best opinion I can, given what I know now. You may, however, have something to offer that hasn't occurred to me. As a matter of fact, you probably do. I bait those that have no discussion to offer, to expose that. If you have something to offer, put it on the table and we'll let ourselves benefit from differing opinions.
May 22, 2008 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
As I said i'm not 14. At one point in my life, I had to re-examine everything I thought I believed in.
And it turns out that Democracy is a messy, ugly, unglamorous thing. That every leader has some human flaw. That there is always the other side of the coin. And that the truth is never black and white.
So I don't care for words, proclamations and incantations. I distrust orchestrated emotions and organized faith. That's for Hiler Jugend, Stalin and Orwell.
I care for proof, ability and specifics. I see this as a job interview, not the coronation of the Pope. And that's why I see Obama as the least capable of the three.
May 22, 2008 7:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think what's being addressed here goes far beyond the Democratic nomination, beyond the general election and into the next term of the President of these United States.
We are a nation divided. Realizing that "the terrorists have won" is a very tired meme, I seek to gently revive it once more. We are sharply divided on how to handle the mounting crises which have in no small part been fumbled and/or ignored by our present leadership. I don't believe for a second that anyone planned to divide us--although I do notice that many profit from our division. The full range of media is an obviating example.
Quite simply, we cannot agree at this time. Would that the day will come when we can again. Never mind who's to blame. We are weaker as a nation because of the division. Each side to every argument insists that the other acquiesce without negotiation or compromise. Self-righteousness has most, if not all of us in full thrall. Our side is right simply because the other side is wrong.
More than any other factor, our division is what represences Viet Nam and the Seventies, however mild the current atmosphere might seem by comparison.
What continues to draw me to Barack Obama is the appearance of unity through dialogue. The very idea that he would discuss, rather than argue dogmatically, occurs as a very attractive alternative. Yet this in itself seems to breed more division: I'm right because it's wrong to point the finger, to accuse, to presume what the other stands for without listening. This is what I see as the cause for anti-Clinton reactions from every level of the Obama supporters. It's the dominant paradigm, and many voices have demanded such a reaction.
I would dearly love to see us calm down, but polemics and demagogues seem to be selling advertising. On the other hand, wouldn't agreement be newsworthy on its own merits?
May 22, 2008 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the scintillating non-answer, Lalo. Please note I did not refer to you as a troll... but you didn't address a single point that I made.
May 22, 2008 5:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nice post... of course all of us repeat voters are going to go out and vote for the Democratic candidate whether it is Obama or Clinton...
HOWEVER this CANNOT be said for the newly registered voters who have been clearly and plainly added to the party by Obama.
1) if Hillary is the candidate it will mobilize Republicans like no other Democratic candidate has seen for years. She is a lightning rod.
2) If Hillary is given the candidacy by convoluted rules changes, young, under 30 first time voters (a huge demographic block comparable to the baby boomers in numbers but not voting percentage) - many of them the young voters and people who never voted before - who voted for Obama will stay home.
3) If this is taken from Barack Obama, the Democratic party will be disenfranchising the African-American vote.
When people feel their primary vote doesn't count, it is unlikely they will show up in November.
These are the very new voters who will come out in such numbers in November to completely change the math and the electoral map which matters to many local and state races where Democrats behind Obama will win for the first time in a long time.
May 22, 2008 7:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, the babies have been tearing at their little shirts all along, but I think the new poll numbers are causing "some" to pee their little pants as well, and putting their names on it..
Oh, we think Hillary is a-okay (urping in their sleeves, thinking we can't smell it).
Get a grip Seth. We haven't even settled who the Dem. candidate is, and you're already throwing in the towel!
May 22, 2008 7:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
First you say you've never blah blah blah
Then you go on to say exactly what you said you never said.
Does that make any sense?
So, let's set the record straight.
I was a Dem from when I first registered to 2004 when I left because I didn't believe in Kerry, and you think I'm coming back for Obama?
I'm a GREEN party member, not a Republican.
I'm educated, I actually have an advanced degree.
I live in the Bay Area of California.
I'm biracial and have relations with many different races.
Guess what? I am a HILLARY supporter, not a troll, not an idiot, not mentally ill.
When you say these things to me, and MANY of Obama supporters do all over the internet, I would actually have to be mentally ill to then turn around and give you my vote.
So, keep name calling and watch your candidate go down in flames.
When I've challenged Obama it's based on his judgments, his words, his policies. When Obama supporters attack Hillary, they refer to her gender, her pantsuits, her shrill voice and oh yes her one vote way back when, not that anything she's done since then matters.
So, I was against the war as well and I am all those things Obama is but better, so maybe you should be voting for me.
In the meantime, you should spend more time attempting to get the rest of his clan to speak more respectfully to us and then we'll see where we are at in November. What do you think?
May 22, 2008 8:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you young people expressing this outrage actually members of the DNC? In other words, have you donated money? I have. But I don't believe in the Democratic Party as a holy institution. And if they give me a candidate I can't respect, I won't vote for him. Neither will I vote for McCain.
I don't believe in Obama. He pretends to have struggled but is and has always been as priviledged as the affluent young white adult posters who populate blogs such as this. He claims friendship with people he thinks can help him politically until his ego is damaged by the association, at which point he denounces them with self-righteous arrogance. His concept of a political contest is to maneuver the legal system so as to remove everyone's name from the ballot except his. He pretends to reach out to the LGBT community while refusing to be photographed with anyone too clearly gay. He claims to have been drawn to Trinity Church because of its HIV ministry which didn't begin until 1993, or several years after he'd arrived. He bases his campaign on the fact that he voted against the war in Iraq, although he wasn't in the Senate at the time and had no real vote. (And Hillary didn't vote FOR the war. She voted to allow further inspection, with war being an absolute last resort and not what could have happened on the power of her vote if Bush hadn't lied. Has anyone here bothered to read her speech on that vote?) He exhibits no honesty, integrity, courage of conviction, commitment to the marginalized. He's done nothing for the African American community except to turn it against people who've been allies and friends. He attracts white followers who consider themselves of superior intelligence because the media has dubbed them so. But I don't find you exceptional. I don't want to live in a world overrun by such as you. I prefer the company of actual strugglers whose thoughts are born of experience, not echos of plagiarized telepromptings.
May 22, 2008 9:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's great, frat boy, Come and punch me in my face, loser! All of you Obama nut freakjobs are losers, pure and simple.
Millions of people in this country hate Obama's guts with a passion, and are as organized as can be to make sure he's not the nominee, and that you can take to your mama's bank. Suck on that, frat boy loser, that and all your loser boyfriends.
May 22, 2008 11:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, take some xanax or whatever and head on over to my blogs and get a dose of reality.
http://www.Hillary-Wins.com and http://www.caucus-rebellion.com
May 23, 2008 1:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
For me personally, it isn't about a party. It is about me having confident in Clinton to bring back our country to surplus stage we had in 2000. I have no confident in Obama, and I don't agree on all of the Democratic Party causes.
So, however the Democratic Party want to calculate the fancy math, the proportional number of delegates based on percentage of the total vote candidates win in each states, or whatever, I am not going to care about it in the general election. I only care if the candidate is viable and suitable to solve our problems. We have many more problems now than we had in 1993. Am I confident that Obama can do even half of his rhetoric? The answer is "NO, I don't think he can do even 25% of what he claims. In fact, I think he will bring in deficit. This is a similar situation as the beginning of Jimmy Carter's first term. We got a liberal guy who is going to make it worsen."
So, my point is this. At the end of the day, we pick the best candidate who will be able to solve our country problems. Not the party or what the party stands for. I don't agree with all of Democratic Party causes, solutions, policies. So, it has nothing to do with being a real supporter of whom or not. Let it be clear why majority of Hillary supporters are not voting Obama.
May 23, 2008 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
NARAL lit the fire on a growing movement against Obama.
The 'won't vote for Obama' movement was just getting started and needed a catalyst like this to coalesce.
More websites have popped up in addition to petitions pledging not to vote for Obama.
The DNC and Obama have treated Hillary Clinton with amazing disrespect. Women have had it. And, their fathers, husbands, and sons agree.
There won't be any backing off.
Hillary is ahead in the popular vote and in the electoral votes.
The delegates are based on a corrupt caucus system and are further corrupted by Obama's thugs going in and pushing, blocking, throwing out, and threatening voters.
TX is a prime example of some of this mayhem. Hillary won the legitimate Texas primary, but "somehow" lost the delegates. Delegates are useless, corrupt, and meaningless.
If Hillary is denied the nomination we would rather put up with 4 years of McCain, who will have his hands tied by a Democratic Congress, than put up with a corrupt, lying, cult leader who has no experience whatsoever.
And, believe me, WE MEAN IT.
May 24, 2008 3:07 AM | Reply | Permalink