Is there any way that battling it through past Pennsylvania will help the eventual nominee?

[awaysidetraveler]

The math indicates Obama's got the win in the bag.

Hillary's supporters intend to fight it out until the bitter end,
because they have faith in her.

I think that might be fine, if it weren't for the negative attacks
bringing down the party.

Is there any historical precedent for such a protracted battle?

More importantly, are there any ways to turn this bitter dispute into a victory
over McCain?

[jody]

1. Only the nominee McCain. We Dems are self-destructing again. We must have a death-wish. n/t

[awaysidetraveler]

3. McCain... hum... yeah I guess he could drop out or sleep around again.

Osama Obama did seem to do Obama some good, though. It was simply so wrong that anyone who looked at it understood.

Of course, Hillary's hated by the republicans, so her comments won't have too much of an effect on rethugs.

I don't know... maybe it's just wishful thinking.

[jody]

10. We Dems have become polarized over the BO-Hillary vendetta and I wonder if fanatical supporters from

both camps are mature enough to come together and support whomever is the ultimate Dem candidate.

[awaysidetraveler]

17. Yeah, I can't help but wonder what all it would take in substance to sway supporters to rally

and not to act like sideliners at a Tyson match.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[awaysidetraveler]

7. Thanks, but I'm voting for Obama for ethical reasons.

By the way, "downside" is misspelled.

Also, he's going to win.

[Quixote1818]

22. You are breaking the rules. You can't post the whole article and you must post a link. nt

[cbayer]

4. We will be just fine.

IMHO, contested elections are good. No question they can bring out the worst in people, but they can also highlight their strengths.

There are as many theories about how the democratic nomination is going to end up as there are people that care. And I don't think anyone really has the answer at this point.

And prepare yourself for negative attacks from both camps. These two are so similar in so many ways that they will have to bring it down to a personal level to highlight their differences.

But we have two phenomenal candidates, an unprecedented turnout of democrats so far and a disastrous Republican nominee.

We will be just fine.

[awaysidetraveler]

9. That's encouraging.

Still... comments about McCain's qualifications do nothing but improve McCain's chances.

[cbayer]

12. I'm not going there with you.

I support both candidates.

[awaysidetraveler]

18. Fair enough.

Yeah... I'm pretty tired of it as well.

[Lucinda]

13. I agree.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

5. The most recent precedent was 1992 Tsongas, Clinton and Brown.

until April of that year.

[awaysidetraveler]

11. Did that make it all the way until April?

I don't recall Tsongas having much of any chance against Clinton by March of that year.

Am I off?

[awaysidetraveler]

15. I can't help thinking of the Mondale/Hart situation.

Which wasn't good.

[DJ13]

6. No, it wont help

The tone Hillary is now using will end up being matched by Obama out of necessity.

That means every campaign speech by either candidate will be archived by the GOP to use against whoever our nominee eventually is.

The DNC really should step in behind the scenes to tell the Clintons to cease their Republican styled tactics for the good of the Party in the GE if they dont want to lose.

If I were Dean (or Gore) I would be rounding up 100-200 unaligned super delegates to petition the Clintons to stop their negative campaigning with the threat of a mass Obama endorsement if they refuse.

But that would take balls, something the Party seems to be in short supply of.

[awaysidetraveler]

14. That seems fair enough by this point.

Not to end the contest, but to throw a bucket of water on the proverbial ant war we've got going on.

I'm okay with people voting for her, if that's where their principles are.

[HeraldSquare212]

8. And think of all the money that's going to be spent for Fla and Mi do-overs

that could have been spent in the GE.

[awaysidetraveler]

20. Yuck... yeah, and who knows if it will even matter in Florida?

I mean it really could only be a few delegate difference in one direction or the other there.

In Michigan, it's different though: there's the ethical problem of Obama not even being on the ballot.

If it doesn't change the election though, who cares?

[Yael]

16. No. This state will become a war zone. McCain is the only one who will

benefit from that.

[awaysidetraveler]

23. It would be nice if we could call for some ground rules for the protracted battle.

Something that would focus the protracted battle around issues.

[Yael]

27. Like telling the candidate(s) that endorsing McCain is off limits?

All for it. :thumbsup:

[BzaDem]

19. Yes. It will help make Clinton the nominee.

PA, and revotes in MI+FL could make Clinton the popular vote winner. 57% of democrats believe that the popular vote winner should be the nominee (and the superdelegates will play close attention to this).

[awaysidetraveler]

25. Okay fine, I know you've got a slim chance that Clinton will win, and that's reason to hope.

And even if there was no reason to hope that she would win, voting for her is still your right.
Heck, it might be the right thing to do, if your principles lie with her positions alone.

But what about after she wins? What then? How will the protracted battle finish with her on top,
if this negative sniping back and forth continues?

[BzaDem]

28. Because I think Hillary will slam McCain.

Hillary knows how to fight. Obama may debate slightly better than McCain, but Hillary is 100 times better than McCain. She will school him on the issues.

But more importantly, voters know her. Some like her, and some hate her. All the attacks that are thrown at her won't change that. They are all old news.

With Obama, voters don't know him (aside from the active campaigners and supporters, such as this board). Republicans will be able to bring up Rezko, Farrakhan, drug use, and everything else. And the point is, these scandals will shape his image, because he is so unknown. By September, he will be painted as a guy who you would not want in a million years to be commander in chief. I know it's not true. I think he would be fine. But swiftboating works, and he won't win. I can't understand how people don't see what's coming. With Kerry, he had a great record, so Republicans had to make up stuff (and it worked because he was relatively unknown). But with Obama, they don't even have to make up stuff. His campaign will be destroyed.

The main reason I am voting for Hillary is that she is much more electable. If Obama gets more experience and becomes more known to the general electorate, he may very well be electable in the future. But right now, he is unknown, and because of that, swiftboating will make us lose.

[goldcanyonaz]

21. It's called Democracy. Every primary should be this way.

[KittyWampus]

24. Your candidate lost. She's doing nothing but wasting time and money we could be spending

putting McCain away.

[goldcanyonaz]

26. I'll put you down as Hate Democracy.

You're candidate hasn't won, and the race will go on until the magic number is reached.

[Laelth]

29. That's certainly what Al From is arguing ...

... as MadFloridian chronicles here: http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1892

Of course, we know for whom From is working. The long battle is the only chance Hillary has, and it's a slim chance at that.

Meanwhile, the party is in danger of being ripped apart.

:(

-Laelth

[KoKo]

30. I think ALL STATES NEED TO VOTE...to the last one...We didn't have that chance last time...n/t