Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
I disagree. 2008 had 2 major Democratic candidates, and I don't think there was anyone who thought still_one Apr 2015 #1
And when it was a close race, one was told to get out of it early... boston bean Apr 2015 #3
not really karynnj Apr 2015 #83
Several top tier candidates in 2008... Cheese Sandwich Apr 2015 #78
I don't understand. I'd ask the question in reverse. stone space Apr 2015 #2
Precisely Sherman A1 Apr 2015 #23
it's not sudden cali Apr 2015 #4
Except when it was demanded one get out of it and concede boston bean Apr 2015 #9
yeah, that got absurd cali Apr 2015 #19
really, you want to have the delegate wars again? SUPER DUPER DELEGATES! snooper2 Apr 2015 #29
I remember the calls for her to concede, quite forceful calls.. boston bean Apr 2015 #32
Well, after McCain got the repuke nod, it was well known Obama had it in the bag- snooper2 Apr 2015 #37
2008 was as vigorous a primary campaign as it can get. morningfog Apr 2015 #39
It was, but there were many calls for her to concede and criticisms when she didn't. boston bean Apr 2015 #43
Well at someone point it is reasonable to make the case that a primary candidate should conceded aikoaiko Apr 2015 #53
The calls for it began in January... Whatever... boston bean Apr 2015 #102
and many hillar supporters said he shouldn't challenge cali Apr 2015 #55
That is nothing like where we are today. morningfog Apr 2015 #58
My desire to have competition in the primary is to be able to get the issues out. When we have only jwirr Apr 2015 #50
It works fine. I agree there should be a primary election and debates. boston bean Apr 2015 #51
That was wrong. A candidate should make that decision themselves. But now, are you asking sabrina 1 Apr 2015 #68
the calls were after the primaries when she karynnj Apr 2015 #84
what? after a certain point it was no longer close. Hillary had no chance KittyWampus Apr 2015 #59
You can call me out all day long, since you do nothing but attack Hillary and those who support NoJusticeNoPeace Apr 2015 #10
This message was self-deleted by its author B2G Apr 2015 #14
another delightful and false tidbit from thee cali Apr 2015 #24
I agree, it's not sudden Michael_wood Apr 2015 #92
It's called CHOICE. PassingFair Apr 2015 #5
Suddenly? tazkcmo Apr 2015 #6
Certainly didn't happen in 2000... brooklynite Apr 2015 #7
And how much criticism was heaped upon Hillary for not conceding boston bean Apr 2015 #12
Doubtful Capt. Obvious Apr 2015 #15
Those calls for conceding occurred because it was statistically impossible for her to win. Renaissance Man Apr 2015 #17
They were... I thought it was superdelegates that got Obama over the hump? boston bean Apr 2015 #25
Super delegates controlling the outcome was karynnj Apr 2015 #90
A majority of 2,117 were needed to secure the nomination... boston bean Apr 2015 #94
it made no sense until the primaries were over karynnj Apr 2015 #97
True, but so did Barack Obama and he got the majority of them.... boston bean Apr 2015 #98
The key word is DISPROPORTIONATE karynnj Apr 2015 #101
I guess that all depends on how you look at it... boston bean Apr 2015 #103
As soon as the issue was mentioned, Kerry said that he did not think that the superdelegates karynnj Apr 2015 #107
Why are you asking me these questions?? boston bean Apr 2015 #108
Please provide a link to anyone of any stature saying she should drop out in January karynnj Apr 2015 #109
Here you go.... It's a little difficult to search nearly 8 year old articles boston bean Apr 2015 #110
I'm not limiting anything - and why should I do a DU search for something I don't think exists karynnj Apr 2015 #113
I think your challenging this is bizarre, when we pretty much agree with eachother. boston bean Apr 2015 #114
I thought that was ridiculous. Hell Hath No Fury Apr 2015 #30
I agree. I have no issue with a vigorous primary. boston bean Apr 2015 #34
I agree. Hell Hath No Fury Apr 2015 #46
Bill Bradley never gained traction, but he was karynnj Apr 2015 #86
and the 2012 alternatives are not? brooklynite Apr 2015 #88
I was not commenting on them karynnj Apr 2015 #93
Its not Dwayne Hicks Apr 2015 #8
Untrue. Renaissance Man Apr 2015 #11
Post removed Post removed Apr 2015 #13
oh and you speak for millions? cali Apr 2015 #26
Misogyny has nothing to do with it. Renaissance Man Apr 2015 #27
agreed cali Apr 2015 #35
Remember how she was the person to beat, Clinton POWER! But then came- Iowa snooper2 Apr 2015 #40
It could be true this time treestar Apr 2015 #65
If we're on the misogyny issue then 2008 doesn't mean much treestar Apr 2015 #64
There was a lot of racism during the 2008 primaries tularetom Apr 2015 #48
If you think competition is unimportant, B2G Apr 2015 #16
Pure subterfuge. Hell Hath No Fury Apr 2015 #22
excellent point. cali Apr 2015 #42
The OP made a huge deal out of that pintobean Apr 2015 #54
stinks. : cali Apr 2015 #57
You? A racist?! B2G Apr 2015 #61
yep cali Apr 2015 #71
Wow, this is kind of weird. BeanMusical Apr 2015 #67
If there are any cobwebs left to be cleared better to be done in the primaries LynneSin Apr 2015 #18
Oh horseshit. Hell Hath No Fury Apr 2015 #20
There are both advantages and disadvantages to lack sufrommich Apr 2015 #21
That disadvantage would also be an advantage. The more attention on Repubs and what they believe stevenleser Apr 2015 #31
I would hope so,but I've learned not to sufrommich Apr 2015 #36
Competition has been important all along. It's nothing new. n/t arcane1 Apr 2015 #28
It looks like you're saying Hilary should run unopposed, but you have a Bernie sig Reter Apr 2015 #33
I didn't "demand" but certainly wanted somebody to challenge Bill Clinton in '96. Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2015 #38
Competition is healthy. Orsino Apr 2015 #41
it's comments like the op's cali Apr 2015 #45
I would say that it tammywammy Apr 2015 #47
the same thought has occurred to me cali Apr 2015 #49
i thought that from the beginning m-lekktor Apr 2015 #70
Oh, how quickly we forget Proud Public Servant Apr 2015 #44
Disagree mylye2222 Apr 2015 #52
Because we don't want to get burned again. Jamastiene Apr 2015 #56
I disagree. A candidate who has no strong opponents applegrove Apr 2015 #60
I don't think it has to do with Hillary. NCTraveler Apr 2015 #62
Competition is healthy and should be the status quo. Nothing sudden about it. Throd Apr 2015 #63
Competition hones your skills DFW Apr 2015 #66
Because it's the election democratic process, that's why. AtomicKitten Apr 2015 #69
It's actually better for Hillary to be contested. herding cats Apr 2015 #72
Easy. '68 and '80 the party pushed one person above all. Many people demanded that MAN be tested. ieoeja Apr 2015 #73
both those years show the opposite to what you are saying karynnj Apr 2015 #96
+1 uponit7771 Apr 2015 #116
Why all of a sudden is it so important to hang on to the past? GeorgeGist Apr 2015 #74
Failed premise. Agschmid Apr 2015 #75
It's not because Hillary is a woman daredtowork Apr 2015 #76
Fair point, but... Mike Nelson Apr 2015 #77
I'm sick of sexim, but a primary is needed. People need to hear it. n/t freshwest Apr 2015 #79
Ok, let's look. Name the examples of past election seasons you have in mind... JHB Apr 2015 #80
Patience. A-Schwarzenegger Apr 2015 #81
I made an edit to my post, but I'm not sure if it's relevant to your reply. JHB Apr 2015 #89
Thanks for the note. A-Schwarzenegger Apr 2015 #91
name the last unchallenged man who was not an incumbent president. karynnj Apr 2015 #82
Where have you been? It's all anyone has talked about for months - TBF Apr 2015 #85
Oh, that's a big fat fail. I've always been an advocate of competitive primaries. winter is coming Apr 2015 #87
For all of the calls for a primary opponent Proud Liberal Dem Apr 2015 #95
Then you don't understand how democracy works. Octafish Apr 2015 #99
"all of a sudden" lol Nuclear Unicorn Apr 2015 #100
Do you have any evidence demwing Apr 2015 #104
It there is no other candidate, then the choice is the candidate that there is. But still... liberal N proud Apr 2015 #105
"All of a sudden" the democratic process is important. lol. nt RedCappedBandit Apr 2015 #106
I support Hillary, but even I want a primary. RandySF Apr 2015 #111
2 recs says it all. PowerToThePeople Apr 2015 #112
A primary challenge in 2008 resulted in control of the White House for eight years. cherokeeprogressive Apr 2015 #115
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why all of a sudden is it...»Reply #74