This is gonna come back and bite the DNC in the ass

[redstate_democrat]

By bowing to Hillary in this way and allowing those state delegations to be seated in a way that blatantly advantages one candidate over another, they are setting a precedent that future candidates and states will raise challenges to CHALLENGE ANY RULE the DNC has. If she can challenge the fucking timing rules, what CAN'T you challenge? The party has just nosedived into the shit can. It ain't worth squat right now.

[anonymous171]

1. I agree. WA state must be heard sooner now, to counteract FL and MI.

[RazBerryBeret]

6. I say Ohio needs to vote in January!!!

[anonymous171]

7. The west coast has been ignored for far too long! WA state primary must now be in December!

[RazBerryBeret]

hahaha...I can see we're all going

to be having primaries around Halloween!
get out the apple cider and carmel apples!
yay!!

[PFunk]

2. I agree.

And expect to see a lot of dems becoming indies or joining third parties after this GE no mater who wins.

[patrice]

3. Unless we throw out the whole process and build a new one after the GE . . . ?

On Edit: I guess that wouldn't be such a good idea if the Democratic Party is purged by a Clinton nomination.

[polichick]

4. imo if the party gives in to HRC's ridiculous demands, it'll deserve its demise.

[nichomachus]

5. That was the Clinton plan all along

which is why the Clintonites voted for the rule they're now opposing. The idea was always to challenge the DNC rules down the road -- even if she were the presumptive nominee at this point -- to force the DNC to cave in and cut its own nuts off. If she were the nominee at this point, she could have positioned herself as the Benevolent Mama.

In either scenario, the Clintons and the DLC come out stronger and the DNC comes out weaker.

The whole thing was a setup to undercut the DNC and push the Clinton DLC into the leadership role in the party.

[sandnsea]

9. Yep

This has been a DLC/DNC fight all along, or at least from the day John Kerry endorsed.

[redstate_democrat]

13. This is exactly what it is.

I can't believe decent party leaders are allowing it to happen like this. And on national television at that. She is singlehandedly cutting the DNC's balls completely off. This party is finished after this.

[nichomachus]

14. Worse still -- the old dinosaurs don't see it

I had breakfast with a state committee person this morning -- he is all Hillary and all for disemboweling the DNC, although he doesn't see it that way. He was asking me about a vote he will have to cast for members of the DNC. I tried to tell him it didn't matter -- that it was like auditioning people for the band on the Titanic.

[Solomon]

8. It's the age old problem with us democrats. We simply

refuse to enforce our own rules.

I hate it when the person who plays by the rules gets blamed by those who want to change them. But that's what happens when the pattern is to not enforce your own rules.

[Bluerthanblue]

10. rules - schmools- who wants to live by rules? we

don't need no stinkin rules.

Wait.... isn't that the mindset of the bush administration?


Sorry- but Hillary has more in common with the current administration than many people want to acknowledge. IMO-
Those supporters of hers who say they will vote mccain if she isn't the nom, only reinforce this.

:shrug:
peace~

[BlooInBloo]

11. It's good to be the king (i.e., have one's own people's hands on the levers of the party).

That's the only reason Obama has to concede these field goals.

[featherman]

12. Why are we protecting the "early primary" status of IA and NH anyway?

Who cares? They have not been Democratic core states recently, each voting GOP in one of the last two elections.

The other "early primary" state that were allowed in are SC, a core GOP state, and NV, a lean GOP state in recent elections.

I'm saying screw IA and NH and their special status and restructure the whole nominationg process.