Clinton Camp Considering Nuclear Option To Overtake Delegate Lead

[sniffa]

Hillary Clinton's campaign has a secret weapon to build its delegate count, but her top strategists say privately that any attempt to deploy it would require a sharp (and by no means inevitable) shift in the political climate within Democratic circles by the end of this month.

With at least 50 percent of the Democratic Party's 30-member Rules and Bylaws Committee committed to Clinton, her backers could -- when the committee meets at the end of this month -- try to ram through a decision to seat the disputed 210-member Florida and 156-member Michigan delegations. Such a decision would give Clinton an estimated 55 or more delegates than Obama, according to Clinton campaign operatives. The Obama campaign has declined to give an estimate.

Using the Rules and Bylaws Committee to force the seating of two pro-Hillary delegations would provoke a massive outcry from Obama forces. Such a strategy would, additionally, face at least two other major hurdles, and could only be attempted, according to sources in the Clinton camp, under specific circumstances:

more:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/04/clinton-camp-considering_n_100051.html

[babylonsister]

1. Sounds like political suicide to me. nt

[cliffordu]

5. I wouldn't bet against her trying it....

After the lying and the pandering and then this economist bullshit....

I think the little sociopath is capable of anything.

[Blondiegrrl]

152. She might try it but they won't bite.

The Clintons may have their loyal supporters, but given the choice between loyalty and salvaging their political careers, those supporters will opt for the latter.

[Raven]

7. She may feel she has no options left...suicide or the Presidency. I have

no confidence that she has a sense of herself and her place in history without the Presidency. She probably won't have another shot at the Presidency after this election...even if Obama or McCain serve only one term...she has burned an enormous number of bridges.

[catgirl]

20. I think your theory is correct

I'm surprised she hasn't had a breakdown by now. It's kind of sad in a pathetic
kind of way, until you think about all the crap she's pulled and the negative
impact her actions have had on other people's lives.

[nichomachus]

107. It's do or die for Hillary or so she thinks

No matter what she does, this could be the end of her political career

If she loses the nomination, she has burned so many bridges that her political career could be over. She would be very vulnerable to a senate challenge next time around and would have no traction as a presidential candidate in 2012.

If she wins the nomination, there's a chance she would be defeated in the GE because she would have pissed off so many people with her underhanded tactics. McCain might win in a cakewalk. If so, her political career is over.

If she manages to win the presidency because Democrats hold their collective nose and vote for her to keep McCain out, it will be a hollow victory. She may have electoral support, but she will have no moral support.

When the right-wingers attack her -- and make no mistake, they will (O'Reilly already attacked her and mocked her, post-interview, in his newspaper column), there will be very few fellow Democrats and extremely few voters who will stand by her. Her presidency will be a one-term failure. Her political career will not only be over, it will be a joke.

Her only course at this point is to bow out as gracefully as she can -- difficult because of the crap she's pulled -- and try to salvage a Senate career.

[tbyg52]

8. Amazing what desperation will do..... nt

[flpoljunkie]

36. Interesting, she forgets how vulnerable she is to Republican attacks. Carl Bernstein reminds her.

The Question of Hillary Clinton's Guilt-By-Association Tactics

Posted May 2, 2008

Whatever name it is called, Hillary Clinton, perhaps better than any contemporary political figure of our time, knows the insidious nature of this kind of guilt by association, for she (like Bill Clinton) has been a victim of it herself over a political lifetime.

Precisely because she knows the destructive power of such assertions and how unfair they can be, she has sought for a quarter-century to hide and minimize her own activities, associations, student fascination, and personal history with the radical Left. Those associations -- logical, explicable, and (her acolytes have always maintained) even character-building in the context of the times -- are far more extensive than any radical past that has come to be known about Barack Obama.

Which raises the question: Is the Clinton campaign's emphasis on the Ayers-Obama connection significantly different or less spurious than the familiar (McCarthyite?) smears against Hillary, particularly those promulgated and disseminated by the forces she labeled "the vast right-wing conspiracy" in the 1990s?

Like Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton has (at least so far as this reporter and biographer has been able to determine) consistently rejected the ideological rigidity of the radical Left and -- especially -- the notion of revolutionary violence as a means of political change in contemporary America, despite claims to the contrary by the VRWC. Like Obama -- and John McCain for that matter -- she has valued her friendships with individuals who figured in the Left-wing and anti-war movements of the 60s and Vietnam era. And like Obama and McCain, she has never wavered from her belief and faith in establishment politics, within the two-party system.

But her past associations -- and her evasions about them -- may tell us much about the formation of Hillary Clinton, both as a product of her youthful time -- the sixties and seventies, when radical student movements and the anti-war movement were a hugely potent force on campus and in American politics generally -- and as a presidential candidate. The facts are fairly simple:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carl-bernstein/the-shame-of-hillary-clin_b_99912.html

[Boz]

128. ts also not possible which is why they are "floating" it now. It takes a SUPER MAJORITY not simple

majority to even consider the motion. Let alone allow for the motion to come to the floor.

A super majority would require 21 of the 30 and just like her superdelegate math it is unreachable but possible.

Which means not just improbable but IMPOSSIBLE.

[roguevalley]

153. nothing that dame would do would surprise me but it would make

me blink if anyone did it. they would never have a future in politics or business in this country again. the times have changed. even repugs are voting dem for Obama. no one will stand for it. If she is stupid and selfish enough to upend the country, then I hope she gets her butt slapped good at the convention. I will personally find the dough to fly there and throw rocks. (metaphorically of course, in case the government is listening.)

[alcibiades_mystery]

2. That is the only condition under which I will not vote in the fall

I'm perfectly happy to vote for Senator Clinton should she win the nomination in a reasonable and fair manner. If they do something like this, I will not vote, period, since that vote would be a total joke after such a dishonest subversion of process.

To quote e.e. cummings, "there is some shit I will not eat."

And don't blabber to me about the "Supreme Court" and John McCain. They cannot do anything worse than completely undermine the last vestige of democratic (small "d") process that we have.

[flpoljunkie]

43. I tend you agree with you, particularly the quote from e.e.cummings.

[Yael]

45. I will vote, but if she wins by manipulation, it will be down-ticket only

[Laurab]

97. Same here. n/t

[Eurobabe]

127. Ayup.

If she goes all nookyalar, I will write in Obama and only vote D downticket also.

[WeDidIt]

74. It would definitely be the lesser of two evils

and it would take me a lot of thinking to decide which is the lesser evil should she win the nomination this way.

[Yukari Yakumo]

145. Given her nature...

Even in that regard, I am not sure just who would be the lesser of two evils.

Ah, forget it. I'd just go 3rd party. They'll probably be more progressive than either HRH HRC or McInsane ever could be.

[EFerrari]

3. Can't she just go obliterate some other party?

What an idiot.

[hfojvt]

64. the Clintons, best players on the Republican team

Go Team! Go! Fight! Win!

[DJ13]

4. That would be the DLC equivalent of Custers last stand

[dkf]

6. And people wonder why we hate Hillary.

The woman has got zero morals.

[NightOwwl]

9. Are there any legal options

that could be taken by the DNC to forcibly remove her as a candidate? (And potentially take her Senate seat away as well?)

Her actions have gone from bordering on insanity to over the edge.

[catgirl]

31. I ask the same question

She is a lawmaker and she's proven that would (and has) corrupt the
system in order to achieve her self-serving dreams. I have no confidence
in her as a Senator.

[Avalon6]

10. If she even tried this, it would be for Florida. There is no way it can happen for Michigan

Obama would get virtually no delegates because a lot of the uncommitted delegates were stacked with pro-Clinton union supporters.

[PatGund]

11. And if they used that option.....

There would be NO way in hell Sen. Clinton would win in November. And the DLC would be pretty much ruined from that point forward.

Problem is that they might take the DNC with it.

What IS it with Sen. Clinton's attitude that "rules don't apply to us?" The rules barring Florida and Michigan were created BY her supporters when they ran the DNC!

[DJ13]

24. "Problem is that they might take the DNC with it."

You know, Im at the point right now where Im not sure that would be a bad thing.

Since the DNC has refused to deal with Clinton's insurgency in trying to seize power, they have proven themselves to be far weaker than I ever thought.

[roguevalley]

154. our country will be over. if there is not even a pretense of having a

say, what will keep anarchy away? we all live the life we live because we agree on it. we know the rules and even if half of them suck, we all still hold to the agreement. but if rich assholes with power mad dreams can upset even that pretense, we are over and here comes the chaos. god, i wish she would leave, the undemocratic asshole.

[AllentownJake]

12. Last time I checked

Howard Dean appoints a majority of those people.

Destory the party for your own ambition.

[Warren Stupidity]

13. I must admit that this would do it for me.

She could at that point have the nomination and I would be forced to write in Obama for president. Hopefully this is not really being considered, and even if attempted one would have to hope that a floor vote would be required and that it would lose badly.

[TBF]

14. Of course she'll do it - she'll do anything to further herself even if it means destroying the party

[bluestateguy]

15. Then she will win a nomination that is worthless

When half of the delegates walk out on her in Denver (and that will then be the story, not her convention speech) and the party is perhaps irreparably ruptured as a result.

[BlueIdaho]

16. That would split the Democratic party in half

Potentially destroying the party as it is known today. The ultimate Pyhrric victory.

But on the bright side - Bill and Hillary really want to be in all the history books - That would do it for sure.

[Bensthename]

17. Hillary wouldn't do that.. She knows that would damage the party too badly.

Wait.. We are talking about Hillary, never mind.

[jazzjunkysue]

141. I was gonna say- At this point, what is she doing to help the Dems?

She's the new libermann. I swear, she is.

[Austinitis]

18. If she has the popular vote she should go ahead with this

It would stop Obama friendly super-delegates from stealing the election by overturning the popular vote.

[NightOwwl]

21. Have fun with what's left...

of the Democratic Party.

[Johnny__Motown]

25. Popular vote is not the standard, it would be stealing if SD voted based on it

[DerekJ]

27. "stealing the election" .LOL. How is the mood at hillaryclintonforums these days?!

[cali]

29. LOL! it's all yours in that case

I'll just watch hilly get blown out of the water by lame mccain, and become a complete pariah along with her hubby.

[smoogatz]

32. Wow. So, changing the rules in the middle of the election would keep

Obama from "stealing" the nomination? That's a fascinating yet completely bogus rationalization, based entirely in projection. Besides, Obama's winning the popular vote by around 200,000 using any estimate that doesn't include Michigan, where he wasn't on the ballot. How's Hillary going to make up a 200,000 vote deficit?

[nyccitizen]

34. The problem is "popular vote" can be tallied in many different ways...

Do you propose MI count in the popular vote tally? A state which would net her 330,000 votes against Obama because he wasn't on the ballot, even though current polling there has them running even?

[MaineDem]

70. There's really no way to count popular vote

It's impossible.

[WeDidIt]

87. AS soon as you can tell me the popular vote from

Iowa, Maine, Washington, and Nevada, I'll consider the popular vote argument.

[virgdem]

96. You really must be brain dead...

again and again in post after post, you simply don't comprehend that it is the delegate count, not the popular vote that determines who gets the nomination. I now commence ignore.

[Zhade]

132. She does not have the "popular vote" and this is decided by delegates.

The only person trying to cheat is clinton.

[Yukari Yakumo]

147. That assessment is...

... stupid, insane, and reeks the same kind of arrogance Chimpy and HRH HRC has in spades.

Nevermind the so-called PV doesn't include caucus states, but I guess they don't count.

[smoogatz]

19. Her negatives would soar; every Obama supporter in the country

would hate her outright. I'd consider voting for McCain under those circumstances, partly as a protest and partly because McCain would, in fact, be the more ethical candidate.

[Bensthename]

22. yup.

[RamboLiberal]

30. Same here - this would be the final nail for me

IMHO there's no way she could win the GE under these circumstances. The Clintons, the DLC and the Democratic Party would need to be taught a lesson under these circumstances.

I'm tired of the Clinton supporters and some others here preaching that we need to march in lockstep and vote for HRC if she steals the nominination.

Back when Edwards dropped out I was fully prepared to vote for either Obama or Clinton in the GE. No more for Clinton.

Sad b/c except for a few maddening incidents I thought Bill Clinton was a great president.

[WillyT]

40. Reminiscent Of Ben Tre Logic, Eh ??? - We Had To Destroy The Party To Save It...

for Hillary.

http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2008/04/07/svHILLARY_narrowweb__300x375,0.jpg

:mad::nuke::mad:

[smoogatz]

52. It's the selfishness that just floors me.

As though she was somehow entitled to the nomination, no matter what the rules say or the voters think. Yuck.

[PatGund]

66. What's new??

Sen. Clinton has had that attitude from day one, that she was "entitled" to the nomination AND the presidency. Some of her supporters here have even said it's "her turn" and that Sen. Obama needed to "wait his turn".

She went in figuring that the primaries were just a formality and it would all be over by "Super Tuesday". The campaign you've seen since then, with the lies, money problems, mudslinging, "kitchen sink", and smear tactics, are the result of that attitude.

[Yael]

51. He already is the more ethical of the 2

Unfortunately, his policies will sell this country out faster than you can say "damnit".

[smoogatz]

56. They're both essentially corporatists.

The only advantage Hillary would have, for me, is that I don't think she'd appoint crazy wingnuts to the Supreme Court. So I guess I can't really vote for McCain. Not sure I could bring myself to vote for Hillary, either. Maybe writing in Obama would be the best choice.

[Road Scholar]

80. She's almost there now. This would cinch it. nt

[blogslut]

23. If she got the nom that way

She would lose the GE. Plain and simple. If she doesn't know this by now...

[Johnny__Motown]

33. Clintons don't think that way, They know she can't win the GE unless nominated, so you must win

the nomination at all costs



Then you can deal with the damage you caused later

[blogslut]

37. She'll still lose the GE

Foolish woman.

[bunnies]

26. Im starting to feel violated.

Hillary, stop trying to ram yourself down my throat. I already told you NO!

[nyccitizen]

28. Can someone explain their math to me?

Florida seated as-is would net her 38 delegates. MI seated as is (with Obama getting ZERO delegates) would net her 73 delegates. That's a gain of about 111 pledged delegates. Right now Obama leads in pledged delegates by 154 and in overall delegates by 136 (according to RCP).

So where are they getting this "she would lead by 55" estimate? Even in some magical universe where she got MI seated with NO delegates voting for Obama, she would still be behind in pledged delegates by 43 and in overall delegates by 25. Are they counting estimates for all the upcoming primaries? If so, I find it highly unlikely that she will net between 80 and 98 delegates between now and June 3rd, for a 55 delegate lead.

[catgirl]

38. They're either nuts, or they want McCain to win

so Hillary can run again in four years.

[nyccitizen]

39. Or do they mean it would net them 55 delegates, not give them a 55 del. lead...?

That would make more sense, but even if she picked up a whopping 55 delegates she would still be 80-100 delegates behind. And she's not closing that gap by June 3rd.

[NightOwwl]

41. I'll go with both. n/t

[Yael]

57. I would assume they are factoring in the Pelosi Pledge

and other such SD factors in that.

[Cha]

35. hilary, The Cheater, The Liar, The Neocon Warmongering

Panderer is sealing her own political legacy and I love it.

Freakin'Freakshow.

[flpoljunkie]

46. Don't forget, totally shameless panderer! Remember this Christmas Panderfest?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzBvQ9EeF3k

[VolcanoJen]

42. That sure would make for some fireworks in Denver.

Half of the delegation would turn their backs and walk out on her. It would be horrifying to watch, all the while knowing Republicans were high-fiving and back-slapping.

But I'd certainly support the delegates for just up and leaving the convention if that's the way she secures the nomination. Hell, I'd encourage it.

[Yukari Yakumo]

149. Rush would never need viagra ever again.

It would be his ultimate dream come true.

[NJSecularist]

44. Good for Hillary.

This nomination process is no holds barred. Obama should start treating it that way. Nobody is entitled to the nomination. They both have to earn it.

[galaxy21]

75. You cannot seriously condone this?

How blinded by devotion are you?

It would rip the party apart.

[NorthCarolina]

135. This from a "Democrat" for Hillary??? Hmmmm.........

[2rth2pwr]

47. There are hundreds of thousands of voters in Florida who deserve to have

their voices be heard. Silencing the people's time honored tradition of having their efforts rewarded by doing the research and investigation of the candidates, taking

time out of busy lives trying to make ends meet, and actually traveling to and waiting in line at the voting booth would be a sign of a shift toward giving the real

power to the power brokers in the state legislatures across the nation. The peoples voice should not be held hostage to the petty bickering of the fat cats of the

party.

[SoonerPride]

48. I'm pretty sure she won;t have "at least 50%" of the rules committee seats

It might be close, like 52-48%, but it won;t be 50/50 and any such shenanigans would be overruled and voted down.

The delegate leader dominates the rules committe and that won;t be a 50/50 proposition, as Obama will have the lead and his team will make the rules.

[NJSecularist]

55. I believe the seats are apportioned by population per state.

The states with the largest population (i.e. California) get more seats than the states with the smallest population (Maine). Under these rules, Hillary may break even with Obama under this scenario. But it is clear that Dean's appointees will hold the ultimate power since they will be neutral.

[WeDidIt]

78. That would be for the Credential Committee

This is about the Rules and Bylaws Committee.

Of course, should the Rules and Blaws Committee overturn the ruling it put in place regarding Florida and Michigan, it will ultimately end up in the Credentials Committee.

[SoonerPride]

82. Thanks for that. I had confused the two. You are right.

If the Rules Committee tried to change it, the Credentials Committee still has the power to not recognize those delegates.

I've heard Dr. Dean mention this many times before and saying that the delegate leader will wield more power than the runner up so really it is a moot point.

The leader will determine what happens and who gets recognized, so Fl and Mi will not matter unless Obama wants them to matter.

[WeDidIt]

85. Right, but if the R&BC overturns their own ruling

then Michigan and Florida must be considered during the seating of the Credentials Committee.

See what a mess we may be in?

And it's all because of the Rules and Bylaws Committee and an egotistical power grab by one insane candidate.

[WeDidIt]

73. She's got 13 out of 30 right now

Here's the list:

Co-Chairs (both undeclared):

Alexis Herman Washington D.C. *1
James Roosevelt Jr. Massachusetts

Declared for Obama:

Allan Katz Florida *2
Thomas Hynes Illinois
Sarah Swisher Iowa
Janice Griffin Maryland
Martha Fuller Clark New Hampshire
Everett Ward North Carolina
Carol Khare Fowler South Carolina
Sharon Stroschein South Dakota

Declared for Clinton:

Alice Huffman California
Garry Shay California
Mona Pasquil California
Michael Steed Maryland
Elaine Kamarck Massachusetts
Donald Fowler South Carolina
Jaime Gonzalez Jr. Texas *3
Mame Reiley Virginia
Elizabeth Smith Washington D.C
Ben Johnson Washington D.C.
Eric Kleinfeld Washington D.C.
Harold Ickes Jr. Washington D.C.
Hartina Flournoy Washington D.C.

Undeclared:

Mark Brewer Michigan *4
Yvonne Gates Nevada
Ralph Dawson New York *5
Jerome Wiley Segovia Virginia
David McDonald Washington
Donna Brazille Washington D.C
Alice Germond West Virginia

Footnotes:

*1 Alexis Herman served as the first African American Secretary of Labor under Bill Clinton
*2 Allan Katz, though an Obama endorser, is from Florida and therefore may be incluined to seat Florida's delegation.
*3 Jaime Gonzalez Jr. was undeclared until just a few days ago. This could be indicative of how the Rules and Bylaws Committee will rule on the matter come May 31.
*4 Mark Brewer, though undelcared, is from Michigan and therefore may be inclined to seat Michigan's delegation.
*5 Ralph Dawson is the only undeclared New York Super Delegate. All other New York Super Delegates have endorsed Senator Clinton. Ralph Dawson is the member of the Rules and Bylaws Committee who initally introduced the ruling that stripped Florida and Michigan of their delegates.

[Boz]

150. The rules committee would have to get a super majority to ok even consideration of the motion

Let alone to allow the motion to carry.

She would need 21 of 30 to even begin thinking that way.

[AJH032]

49. Nuclear Option? You mean she wants to...COUNT VOTES?

Oh Hillary, you KNOW Michigan and Florida voters are not supposed to have a say. How dare you imply they should.

[SoonerPride]

54. When they hold a sanctioneded election, let me know.

Until then, no, their mock elections don't count for shit.

[newmajority]

60. How appropriate that you implode like the WTC towers with post #911

There are no votes to be counted in Michigan and Florida, because there were no valid primaries in those states.

If you, as a Michigan voter, have a problem with that (and it's completely understandable that you would) I suggest you ask Jennifer DLC Granholm and Debbie DLC Stabenow about it.

[AJH032]

67. Actually, I'm more concerned about FL than MI

since Obama was on the ballot there, and people had a fair choice between all the candidates. The only reason their primary was deemed "invalid" was because the DNC made it so. The people of Florida voted, just like everyone else.

But it's okay, I understand. Florida does not deserve a say.

[SoonerPride]

83. Florida deserves a say. They need to hold a vote that counts.

What they don't need is to try and recognize a sham, mock election as though it were a real election. It clearly meant nothing. And should count for nothing.

[AJH032]

110. sham, mock?

People went and voted. A record number, in fact. Are they sham, mock people? The only difference between it and other primaries was the status given to it by the DNC.

[SoonerPride]

113. An unsanctioned election is no election at all. If I vote for President in 2007 does it count?

There are sanctioned, real elections.

What occured in Florida and Michigan were not real elections, regardless of how many people "voted."

[AJH032]

121. Then I suppose it depends on how we define it

It was sanctioned and administered by the state of Florida, exactly how it was in other states, just not by the DNC. That seems to be (to me, at least) significantly different than, say, writing someone's name on a piece of paper in 2007 and calling it a "vote" (which is what I think you're trying to use to illustrate your point). Depends how far you want to extend it, and you've got to draw the line somewhere.

Of course, all this begs the question: why on earth would the DNC choose not to sanction otherwise perfectly legitimate elections in perfectly legitimate (and crucial November) states?

[SoonerPride]

122. "why on earth would the DNC choose not to sanction otherwise perfectly legitimate elections"

Because they broke the agreed upon rules. They were not legitimate elections.

Those two states are not more important than the other 48. Are they? Can they willy-nilly do whatever the hell they want? Why can't every state do that? What are rules for anyway? Who needs rules?

If you allow any state to vote anytime it wants, even though it violates rules that they themselves agreed to, then you have anarchy.

Sanctioning those two states would completely invalidate the legitimacy of the entire process and the DNC would never again be allowed any input whatsoever on the process, as each of the 50 states would continue to jockey ahead further in time until primary elections for 2012 would be in 2009.

Rules are there for a reason and all 50 states agreed to those rules at the outset. That they later decided to buck the system means they get punished. That's the way it is.

Period.

[AJH032]

130. Anarchy?

I've got just one thing to say: puh-leeez. Is Iowa the most important state in the country? Is New Hampshire the second most important? The DNC needs to reconsider its concept of legitimate rules.

Speaking of rules, it's perfectly within the rules for the superdelegates to vote as they please, yet I hear nothing but whining from Obama supporters about how "unfair" that is, despite it being perfectly within the rules.

[Zhade]

133. Yeah, and MORE people stayed home after being told their vote would not count.

So what about them? Fuck 'em, as long as clinton gets to cheat?

[rufus dog]

148. So an election that was defined as invalid before the election

should now become valid. So people who took the time to go down and vote in an invalid election should be counted but those who determined it was a wasted vote didn't vote and should be penalized. Look at the numbers in FL compared to the rest of the Country. It is obvious hundreds of thousands skipped it.

[Vinca]

50. Her nuclear option, whatever that is, could decimate the party.

If SDs overturn the delegates elected by the voters, that will be it. I don't care if that's the reason they were created. That was a different time and place, when smoky backrooms and party elders ruled. This is a different time.

[Cha]

59. Isn't that what she wants?

Doesn't she want to start her own suckers for hilary party ala her good drooling buddy, joe, I adore mccain, lieberman?

[Major Hogwash]

53. That strategy would guarantee a McCain victory this fall.

There is still time to stop the wicked witch - somebody throw some water on her now!

[Major Hogwash]

61. Hillary doesn't have high negative numbers because we are all misogynists, ya know.

There are a lot of dirty deals she has made over the last 7 years as a Senator that helped to contribute to her high negative numbers.

She has taken 12 different positions on the Iraq War in just the last 2 years.
Now she is saying "within 60 days" as if she means it, but after listening to her lies about "ducking sniper fire" in Bosnia, you can forget it.

[dansolo]

58. If it doesn't get her the pledged delegate lead, what good will it do?

By all estimations, even with FL and MI, Hillary still won't be able to get the pledged delegate lead. And the superdelegates are not buying the popular vote argument. So what does this buy her, other than sowing discord amongst the rank and file of the Democratic Party?

[me b zola]

62. Last week 2 pundits were talking that they had both heard

from different sources in camp clinton that there was going to be a big something happen the first week in June. I wonder if this is that something.

I'm disgusted. 86 her.

[kwenu]

63. I've got news for you. Her OWN people would not go along with this!!!

Huffington must be huffin' again. Put the aerosol can down please.

[MaineDem]

65. It would make many Supers go back to Obama

Many of those who are backing her would switch. I can see it happening.

[quakerboy]

68. Man. You had me scared

I thought she was going to add a few chosen states to her list subject to a massive retaliation "nuclear" umbrella strike.

[4themind]

72. LOL Post of the day

Thanks, I needed it

[Zhade]

134. DUzy.

NT!

[Barack_America]

69. Well, who wants to meet up in Denver?

If the DLC wants to launch a coup against this party, I'm going to have something to say about that.

[meow mix]

71. im not far and will be there to help bring the place down

if necessary

[Yael]

92. I'd go if I even thought there would be a HINT of this.

[Barack_America]

98. Cool, we can carpool.

;)

[zulchzulu]

140. I already have reservations in Denver and there would be enough room for 8 people

It could be DU HQ...

[ima_sinnic]

76. I would vote for McCain in that circumstance, because he would be the more ethical & principled cand

only the ignoranti and the Clinton-party apparatchiks want Hillary at this point. She is a total fucking LOSER. Actually, the scenario described in OP would be a blessing, because, for once and for all, she would be voted OFF THE FUCKING ISLAND. there is no way someone with more than 55% disapproval rating--even before this kind of shit--is going to win a general election.

I have come to hate that woman with every fiber of my being.

[TBF]

77. Right, so the plan is to nuke every state that voted for Obama, right?

[4themind]

93. Well since 'don't matter'

it won't be considered as a loss to her

[anigbrowl]

79. It still wont' work...I've been saying since Feb. that a net gain of ~57 isn't a big threat

Yeah, she could halve his lead, but then she'd also be widely perceived as a cheater. I'm thinking that come the convention Obama's going to defuse the issue by saying 'sure, have them' at a critical point. So Clinton can throw a tantrum and demand her special exception but it still won't be enough to swing the race to her.

The thing to recall is that the delegates are still split proportionally. so she doesn't get 210 from Florida, she gets maybe 105-110. Obama gets about 70. Ooooh, 35-40 delegates net gain - not such a big deal. Similarly she pulls about 75 delegates from Michigan, but who are the undecideds going to vote for? They already had the option of voting for Clinton, and didn't. So some Edwards supporters might prefer to decide for Clinton, but realistically Obama's going to get most of those votes.

You can say 'well COULD happen', which is true, but then the Democratic party could also decide to disband and leave the Republicans in charge for ever. Or everyone could switch to Mike Gravel. Or whatever. The Clinton arguments that it's all up for grabs at the convention are about as unlikely as it being the epicenter of alien contact with Earth.

[WeDidIt]

81. The net gain is from the Super Delegates

The majority of both states have declared for Clinton.

[Yael]

95. I am nore concerned that it will set prescedent for the next primary

That the rules don't matter if the 'anointed' wants them tossed -- the states can do whatever they please.

If that happens, the next primary will be the entire country voting on January 2nd and the nomination will be sold to the highest bidder.

That doesn't sit well with my populist spirit.

[pompano]

84. I don't...

think even the DNC would do something that politically stupid, or allow it to happen. These supers are not going to risk these House and Senate seats to pacify the Queen Bee. I am mightly afraid thats what will happen. Shit, it would be 25 years before a Democrat would ever be elected again. People that sit out one election make it easier on themselves to sit out the next one. Ain't no way on this green earth she'll pull that off without some chapped asses and chapped enough to throw the sponge in.


I won't put it passed her trying. She has shown time and time again Hillary and her legacy is the only thing important to her and she will tear this party apart limb to stearn to get what Hillary wants. I have some confidence there are some cooler/rational heads that see through this bullshit and will see to it this Party hold together despite Hillary's best efforts.

If they don't , won't or can't they are incompetant. I'll be an Independent. Fuck it.

This is my opinion.

[WeDidIt]

91. Not a single Senator of Congressperson sits on the Rules and Bylaws

Committee.

Not one.

And she a;lready has 13 of 30 members of that committee declared for her. See my post above for more information. It's far more likely they will be seated as-is than not.

Sadly, Obama will have it wrapped up on May 20, and will probably go over the magic number of 2025 before the R&BC hears the case from Florida and Michigan, then they'll move the goal posts because by adding those delegations, the magic number increases.

Obama will ahve won, and then the Rules and Bylaws Committee will strip him of his win by overturning their own ruling that set the rules that Obama followed.

And they'll do it out of some blind loyalty to Hillary Clinton. HArold Ickes, who strongly supported the stripping of the delegates, has gone on record as wanting to seat them as-is now.

[pompano]

117. I understand what you are saying...

I should have been more clear. I was thinking further down the line and writing in the present.

I am not being flip here. Congresspeople and Senators are not elected by people that refuse to go to the polls. It doesn't matter what Commitee or Group they sit on or with. If half the Democrat base feels screwed and stays home an election or two they won't have a Group to sit with. Heck! 20% of the base would nail the coffin. Some of these elder Senators have a little pull. They won't sit back and allow a large percent of this base stay home when their jobs are on the line. I guarantee it.

It certainly may not happen. But, I know for sure this Party is as split as I have ever seen the Democratic Party in my lifetime. Thats the point. Ickes doesn't run the show, Hillary doesn't run the show, we the voters run the show. I doubt very seriously we'll ever see Ted Kennedy standing in the unemployment line because Hillary or Ickes wants it their way.

I hope like hell it never comes to that. If she wins it fair and square, more power to her. Obama likewise. Peoples patience with rigged, changing rules mid stream, manipulated and stolen elections is wearing thin and the powers that stand back and continuously allow it to happen, or turn a blind eye, or deflect our disdain might feel the pinch at the polls.

We the voters have the ultimate say. Thats the way the forefathers wanted it.

[lojasmo]

86. Sure path to electoral loss.

I for one, would write in Obama.

[TragedyandHope]

88. Say goodbye to Democracy

If Hillary tries this, I'm sure it will be "for the good of the country" and no other reason. :sarcasm:

[rocktivity]

89. If the members of this committee are committed superdelegates

wouldn't it be a conflict of interest to vote on such a rule? :shrug:

But actually, it's a moot issue--enough superdelegates would come out for Obama for him to actually get the 2025.

:headbang:
rocknation

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

90. Obliterate the Democratic Party?

:think:

[Faygo Kid]

94. That's it! You got it exactly right.

She may just do it, too.

[adoraz]

99. uh, that math doesn't make much sense to me.

I don't think she would be leading, even assuming nobody gets undecideds in MI, which obviously wouldn't happen.

[Thickasabrick]

100. CHILL!!! She can only do it with Dean's help - I have more trust

in him than that.

[WeDidIt]

103. Better think again

If the Rules and Bylaws Committee overturns the ruling they made last year and seats Florida and Michigan, both states must eb taken into account for seats on the Credentials Committee.

If she can use a coup on the R&BC on May 31, she can then force the hand of the CC in July.

Don't think this is not possible. It is incredibly possible, but depends on how close she can get it between now and May 31.

[Thickasabrick]

106. But Dean appoints the people on that Committee. From the article:

The full make-up of the Credentials Committee will not be determined until all the primaries are completed, but the pattern of Clinton and Obama victories so far clearly suggests that Obama delegates on that committee will outnumber Clinton delegates. Obama will not, however, have a majority, according to most estimates, and the balance of power will be held by delegates appointed by DNC chair Howard Dean.

For the scenario to work, then, Dean would have to be convinced of Clinton's superior viability in the general election, and that she has a strong chance of defeating McCain next November.

[rocktivity]

111. DING DING DING! Whutgives, you're our grand prize winner!

...She can only do it with Dean's help...

If such a ruling was to succeed, Dean could simply limit the number of delegates to 50% per candidate, or give them half a vote, or refuse to seat the MI/FL superdelegates. But he knows that giving in to them would be career suicide, and it isn't going to come to that anyway: Once Obama picks up 134 more pledged delegates, it will be impossible for Hillary to overtake him under any circumstances. That will allow enough superdelegates to "come out of the closet" for Obama to get him to 2025.

:headbang:
rocknation

[galaxy21]

101. Obama could run as an independant

and he might have a good chance of winning...

[WeDidIt]

104. HE'd never do it

He'd let the chips fall where they may.

[galaxy21]

109. There was a rumour he and bloomberg planned to run together....

if Hilary somehow 'stole' the nomination.

Again it was just a rumour though.

[Gore1FL]

112. He'd be better off not,

but I amnot going to worry about this.

[Dems to Win]

102. Need to avert catastrophe

Indiana and North Carolina Democrats, your help is needed to avert an ugly controversy awaiting us in Puerto Rico. In the U.S. territory, citizens do not vote in presidential general elections, but they are given a voice in the Democratic primary.

Puerto Rico's Democratic party decided, on March 8 of this year, to hold a primary rather than a caucus to allocate it's 55 delegates. This decision was made after it became clear that in a close contest, the total popular vote -- no matter how skewed a figure, due to the mix of primary and caucus states -- would become an important number in discussions about the nomination. States that had already had their caucuses, in full accordance with the rules established before the primary season began, did not have the re-do option.

Colorado and Puerto Rico have been allocated the same number of pledged delegates, 55. With Puerto Rico holding a primary with an expected turnout of at least a million voters, its popular vote will likely equal the total caucus votes of Colorado PLUS the primary votes of South Carolina, New Hampshire, Delaware, and Utah, combined. Puerto Rico will thus have a popular vote equivalent vote strength of 160 pledged delegates, rather than their allocated 55.

If the perception is widespread that Obama won the delegate count but lost the popular vote, it will weaken our Democratic nominee and cause feelings of resentment among Clinton supporters. Our best hope of winning in the fall is with a strong nominee who was fairly chosen because he won the most pledged delegates and the most popular votes. The large popular vote expected for Clinton in Puerto Rico may make Obama fall short in the popular vote.

If you've concluded, as I have, that our likely nominee, Senator Barack Obama, is worthy of your vote in the fall, I urge you to consider voting for him May 6. I think it is a wise move for everyone who hopes for a Democratic victory in the fall.

Even if Obama is not your first choice now, your vote in his column of the popular vote would be a gesture of hope for a Democratic victory in November. Doing so will help unite the Democratic Party and give us our best chance for a win in the general election.

As a California voter in June of 1992, I cast my vote not for Jerry Brown, my governor and favorite candidate, but instead for an inexperienced, charismatic governor of a small state, Bill Clinton. It was clear that he would be the nominee, and I wanted to add my little boost to strengthen him going into the convention and the fall election.

Thank you for your consideration.

[rocktivity]

105. No so fast, comrade

...(T)his coming Tuesday, Clinton would have to win Indiana and lose North Carolina by a very small margin - or better yet, win the Tar Heel state. She would also have to demonstrate continued strength in the contests before May 31...
If Hillary wants "demonstrate continued strength," she should do it fair and square--by winning ALL of the May contests with AT LEAST 69% of the vote. THEN she'll have the numbers with which to make a legitimate electability argument.

...(H)er argument that she is a better general election candidate than Obama-- that he has major weaknesses which have only been recently revealed -- would have to rapidly gain traction, not only within the media...but within the broad activist ranks of the Democratic Party.
That's not going to make anyone overlook HILLARY'S "major weakness"--SHE DIDN'T BEAT OBAMA!

:eyes:
rocknation

[Shine]

108. It won't work.

too many hurdles, not to mention the massive outcry from Team Obama if they did try.

[Gore1FL]

114. In fairness

There is no evidence this is going to happen.

In the vent it does happen, she is still behind in delegates--even not counting the uncommitted in MI.

There would be outrage if it were attempted. (The term Nuclear is used for a reason) and the remaining super delegates aren't stupid.

She has to pull off a major victory in IN and a slim defeat in NC -- this is not at all likely.

She would likely be unable to show her face in the Senate, and would have no future there.

Her Senate seat would be in jeopardy next tie around from a challenger from the left.

She's a lot of things, but she isn't stupid. The Clinton campaign won't attempt this.

[rug]

115. Sounds like it's legal under the same rules Obama has so scuccessfully used.

The rest is politics.

[Gore1FL]

118. What rules are you speaking?

please be specific and include links.

Thanks in advance.

[rug]

123. I'm helping my son finish his science project. That's enough homework for me.

But feel free to start here:

http://www.democrats.org/page/s/nominating

[Gore1FL]

125. As I thought

Nothing there where Obama leveraged the rules.

[rug]

129. I said he used them, not leveraged them. Just like Clinton can.

[Gore1FL]

139. neither is right actually

followed sort of fits it best. Clinton folowed the rules at the beginning as well. Now she finds her only hope is to change them.

[SoFlaJet]

116. we need to start a letter wring campaign-here's the Super Delegates list

http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/superdelegates/index.html

[AZBlue]

119. If the Dem Party allows that to happen, I will leave it.

It won't be a party I can be associated with any longer.

[Raine]

137. Me too

I will reregister as a Green or an Independent...ANYTHING other than a Democrat or reTHUG. :grr:

[Zachstar]

146. Me too.

[BlueJac]

120. Hillary.... destroy everything to win, even the party......

She is so low and so Bush like. I just can't stand the Clintons at this point.

[nyccitizen]

124. Question: What does the 2025 magic # change to if FL/MI are to be seated?

I think it's around 2182 but can anyone confirm?

[dave29]

126. Nuclear option?

Only if she wants to obliterate the party.

[Lord Helmet]

131. the Clintons are a festering sore on the Democratic party

[my3boyz]

136. The Clinton campaign is floating this out there as a trial balloon to see what people think. nt

[Zachstar]

144. Well hopefully they will get the responce needed to not do it.

[me b zola]

155. Then the SDs should open the flood gates in response

And throw enough support to Obama that her antics mathematically won't even matter--other than her being drummed out of the party.

[Raine]

138. If they pull that shit Hillary will NEVER

ever get my vote no matter what! :mad: :grr: :nuke:

[berni_mccoy]

142. WOULD YOU LIKE TO PLAY A GAME?

No one wins Nuclear Wars. Period. This would destroy the party.

[Zachstar]

143. If she does attempt it I hope at once her supers switch to Obama.

And hopefully it will fail.

[IDemo]

151. Here's just the thing for her to wear to the convention if that happens:

[BlooInBloo]

156. Let her. I'll enjoy watching her last bit of spite drool out of her power mongering mouth.

[Kablooie]

157. After years of Republican corruption and incompetence, the *Democratic* party implodes?

The Republicans have proven themselves to be corrupt and incompetent while the Democrats have the faith of the country and the most inspirational candidate in decades.

...

So a Democrat decides to destroy the Democratic party and let the Republicans remain in power.




There's got to be something ironical about that but for the life of me I can't figure it out.

[txaslftist]

158. This would pretty much kill the Democrats shot at winning in November...

...not that I suspect that consideration means much to Ms. C.