Hillary Clinton and the Convention

I expect multiple Diaries on this.

Being noticed and played..seen and read  Sen. Clinton is expressing her desire to have her delegates heard.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la- na-clinton7-2008aug07,0,6846877.story

What does this mean?

Does anyone really believe that if there is a "count" that
Sen. Clinton will end up with the same number of delegates she had on June 4? (after all she did encourage her support to support our nominee)

If this is pursued...Does anyone doubt how the media will play this?

Yes...I am aware of "past practice" regarding placing a name in nomination.

I am also aware that the opportunity for recognition for Sen. Clinton should come with an everyone standing after she is introduced before her Tuesday speech.

I guess, at least for me, it goes down to the bone.
How important is it really to defeat John McCain?

....await the coming ashore of PUMA's
(note...I can even understand your alliance...however,;
venom is a poison that is not a positive health choice)

in order to disarm..please listen to the following before commenting..or listen with out commenting

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7ODJHUX_ EM

..yesterday, here in Denver, we were blessing with the first significant rain since May...



Display:


Re: Hillary Clinton and the Convention (2.00 / 5)

Update the delegate counter!


by Jerome Armstrong on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 07:56:48 PM EST

I know I shouldn't ask but I'm British (2.00 / 2)

Have I found snark?


Pointing to the inadequacies of John McCain
by duende on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 08:53:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

actually duende. (2.00 / 2)

i think the comment is rather appropriate to much of the dairy.


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 09:06:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: actually duende. (2.00 / 2)

Then it must be snark!


Pointing to the inadequacies of John McCain
by duende on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 09:29:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Clinton and the Convention (2.00 / 5)

I believe a process like this is a win-win for everyone.

I am not sure why some people are so hyped to squelch this idea, but they are misguided.

Hold a vote, confirm Obama as the nominee, and then life goes on as before.  Why give anyone the basis for a grievance, either real or imagined?  It's just not rational.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 07:56:49 PM EST

Because in the end (none / 0)

it will be the superdelegates who decide the nominee because no one will get a majority of delegates (Although Obama will get the majority of pledged delegates), with or without Michigan and Florida at full strength.

PUMAs will call for the superdelegates to overturn the results of the pledged delegates and when they don't, and they won't since Clinton has few superdelegates anymore, even all New York State SD's have endorsed Obama, they will still be all riled up.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 08:07:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Because in the end (2.00 / 3)

I don't follow you at all.  There will be a vote or some kind of similar process where Clinton's delegates get recognized, her supporters will take great pride in the moment, and then the convention goes on.  What could possibly be wrong with that?

It's like people have come to value sticking a thumb in the eye of the PUMAs over every other consideration.  If we do the classy thing, and there are still a few people who aren't happy, then who cares?  Obama certainly won't LOSE any votes because Hillary's delegates get recognized.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 08:16:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I don't think he'll lose any (2.00 / 2)

if there isn't a roll call.

My point is, the media likes a fight. When the numbers are announced and the superdelegates decide, those dozen or so PUMAs will scream and every network will make it out to look like the Los Angeles riots.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 09:00:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't think he'll lose any (2.00 / 2)

This is truly one of the silliest scenarios I have ever heard.

Let me get this straight, if there is no recognition of Hillary's delegates, the dozen PUMAs will not scream?  Or the media won't cover them in that scenario?  Which do you think it is?

It's an obvious winning moment for the party.  I have no idea why you'd want to deny that moment to Hillary's supporters because you're fixated on what a dozen or so malcontents might do.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 09:30:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't think he'll lose any (none / 0)

There HAS to be a roll call. Of somesort. HRC can ask tohave her name withdrawn.

State by state. Sometimes a state passes so that , knowing which state will put the nominee over the top, that state then will get the honor.

AND the "super" delegates will vote at the same time as the "pledges" delegate, This is not two step like during the primary season.

Know the rules. That is why Mark Penn lost and David Plouffe won the strategery battle. won.


by ttmiskovsky on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 10:54:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

They'll be a roll call (none / 0)

the question is will Hillary have any delegates. She's not a candidate anymore. She has to put her name in for nomination.

In 2004 there was a roll call, but except for a few Kucinich delegates, they all went to Kerry, not Dean, not Clark, not Edwards.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 05:37:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Steve, there will be grievances (none / 0)

after this is over.  Bill Clinton has even said he's not going to speak his mind about this until next January.  Implying he's holding back his real criticism until then (although telegraphing the punch does nothing to decrease the anticipation, does it?)

And don't forget, this means the whole convention will revolve around nothing but Obama and Hillary making-up with each other.  Maybe not on the floor, but certainly in the media, where the rhetorical question will be how much of it is genuine, how much is forced, and can a divided Democratic party win in November.  This will be what we spend the DNC Convention talking about.

This is bad news. Obama must have already picked a veep that he knows the Clintons will hate, or he wouldn't have agreed to this under such pressure that it makes him look weaker.

I'm finally starting to worry about November.  I wasn't until now.  I realize the post-Hillary partisans are overjoyed by this and can see little wrong with it, but it makes Obama look weak, right up to the day of his acceptance speech.  That is so much time to lose.  You can bet that McCain will not come out of his convention without a significant bounce because of their unity.  And they will have Lieberman on the podium too, probably.


by Dumbo on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 10:19:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Steve, there will be grievances (none / 0)

I think the media will buzz about that stuff no matter what happens.  But by organizing the convention this way, you generate compelling images of unity to counteract the media buzz.

Many more Americans will see Hillary up there on the stage giving Barack a hug and saying all these wonderful things about him than will ever hear the clowns on CNN speculating about whether there is a rift.

I think there is much more potential for mischief if the media gets to run with a storyline like "Obama is afraid to have a roll call vote," "Obama doesn't want Bill to speak because he's worried about being upstaged," etc.  The media can say what it wants, but I think the vibe given off by a convention where the Clintons have a prominent role is that Obama is VERY secure in his status as the nominee and isn't worried about a thing.  I feel it projects confidence.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 10:43:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I understand you think that. (none / 0)

Now we'll see.  We both made our predictions.


by Dumbo on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 11:22:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Is it because she is a woman? (2.00 / 1)

I don't remember all of this anger when Gary Hart or John Kennedy did exactly the same thing. Why does Hillary have to be bombarded with complaints because she wants to give people a voice, a chance to vote for a woman for the first time?

Why?


by Wiseprince on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 08:32:54 PM EST

Gary Hart or [Ted] Kennedy did the same thing... (1.50 / 2)

Are you intentionally channeling years where the Democrat lost?


by Glaurung on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 08:53:14 PM EST

Re: Hillary Clinton and the Convention (2.00 / 3)

It really sucks when people have to continue to Clinton bash when Obama is the presumptive nominee.

By the way, the bashers--they suck too.


by Check077 on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 09:01:32 PM EST

If I remember correctly, (2.00 / 2)

you're a PUMA. However, your comment didn't deserve at TR. Uprated on principle.


Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 09:36:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

WTF is this?? n/t (2.00 / 1)


Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 09:30:54 PM EST

Re: WTF is this?? n/t (2.00 / 2)

There's a rumor that this is a diary.


Linfar's co-blogger opposing John McCain
by psychodrew on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 09:36:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary Clinton and the Convention (none / 0)

Hey...

I am not saying deny Clinton.
My only question given the media play today
is a reaffirmation by Sen. Clinton of what she has indicated..
That she would not place her name in nomination.

Of course the media is jumping on this...
They cannot resist jumping on Clinton.
They need to spread the meme of our Democratic Party
not being united.

There is another Diary (reasonably presented) that Sen. Clinton will be the VP as former President Clinton is allegedly penciled in just before the VP..

Don't know..
I was curious about a discussion on this thread...
looks like it is taking place..


"harlequin speech of suicide, demanding instantaneous lobotomy"
by nogo postal on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 09:58:37 PM EST

Re: Hillary Clinton and the Convention (2.00 / 2)

I think placing her name in nomination is just a way of paying tribute to the level of support Hillary received in this historical campaign.

They could probably accomplish the same thing through some sort of pre-arranged production that doesn't involve an actual roll call vote.

Either way it will get worked out, and my prediction is they will find a classy way to handle it.  There seem to be a number of Obama supporters who don't understand why this is important to Hillary's supporters, or who mistakenly believe this is about "catharsis" for Hillary as opposed to her supporters.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 10:04:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The roll call (none / 0)

could happen with the pledged delegates voting for who they were pledged for...but then the superdelegates will probably all vote for Obama in order to avoid the divided party meme.

You can't say the party is divided with pledged delegates vote for the candidate they were pledged to vote for. You can say it is if like 10 Senators and 30 Congressmen/women vote for the candidate who isn't the presumptive nominee.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 05:42:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thank you for the Beethoven. (none / 0)

Here's some very cool Prokofiev.  (Symphony #1, second movement.)  Perfect when you are in a Beethoven/Mozart kind of mood but don't want Beethoven or Mozart.

<


by Dumbo on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 10:31:23 PM EST


You are not logged in.

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

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