Comments on: Kneecapping

By: CLD

CLD — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 18:08:35 +0000

OK… with regard to FL and Michigan. I agree that the “rules” were broken. That being said, I’m getting sick and tired of folks acting like FL and Michigan are some random glob things that chose to ignore the rules, so they should just suck it up and deal with the consequences. The legislatures of the two states chose to ignore the rules — not the people of those two states.

The voting public had no say in the matter. The voting public are being disenfranchised. Period.

By: Ellid

Ellid — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 03:17:54 +0000

More than anything else, I will not vote for Hillary Clinton in the general election for this reason:

She is not even loyal to her own family.

I say this because she gave an interview – and not just an interview, a ninety minute mini-press conference! – to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. Not only is this paper about on a level with the Washington Times for being a right-wing rag, it is owned and published by Richard Mellon Scaife, the man who funded the “vast right-wing conspiracy” that nearly destroyed her husband’s presidency!

Someone who will so willingly consort with the enemy (literally) is not someone who should be President. Period. If she’s the Democratic nominee I will vote for Ralph Nader, or the Libertarian Candidate. But I will never, ever vote for Hillary Clinton. I was becoming less and less happy with her over the last few weeks, but this?

No. No. Ten thousand times no. If she had any character or any sense of decency, she would not so much as spit in Richard Mellon Scaife’s direction, let alone give a ninety minute video interview to his newspaper.

By: Hawise

Hawise — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 14:22:42 +0000

And the convention starts the day after the Olympics end, I may have to get a portable TV this summer.

By: Aeryl

Aeryl — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 13:41:23 +0000

I actually am hoping for a floor fight. It will definitely be more entertaining to political junkies like me than the last two lovefests we’ve had.

Clinton will be in my city tomorrow, and I am going to try like hell to see her.

By: Hawise

Hawise — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 11:44:24 +0000

Predicting how the superdelegates will turn is like predicting the direction that a herd of cats will take- each will take the path that they like. I personally would not consider either candidate as having WON the nomination unless this goes to the convention. I just wish that people would stop harping on how bad this is for the party (it isn’t) and remember that the system is actually working as designed. Two strong candidates are reflecting their bases and as they get farther along the process we are learning more and more about them.
I predicted that they would tell her to shut up and STFU months ago and for the same reasons- she is standing in the way of the guy and her shadow might touch him and take the shine off his halo or he might get cooties or something. She doesn’t eat babies and he doesn’t bath in virgin’s milk- they are capable politicians backed by elite party members who, it appears, hate each other with a passion deeper than the ocean.

By: Meowser

Meowser — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 05:27:31 +0000

But if they want this whole thing to be “over” in February, why keep having primaries in May and June, then? Why not just have one winner-take-all primary day in February and the convention in March, and that’s that? I can tell you right now that if my state’s vote in late May actually matters, that makes voters here more energized and interested in the process and the issues, not less. If the primary vote in the later states is just one big yawn, just a technicality, then who cares?

I am not sure why people are in such a hurry to coronate a winner. Obama, if he is the winner, is going to find out that Clinton is tickling him with a feather duster compared to what the Republicans plan on doing to him. I, for one, am in no rush to see that start.

(And incidentally, just today Clinton came out and told a Democratic audience flat-outnot to vote for McCain under any circumstances, so please let’s bag the “she’s a secret Republican OMG!!11!!” nonsense already. “He only has a speech from 2002″ was a dumb-ass thing to say, but it’s also been wildly decontextualized. And believe me, once the Rethugs start in on him, “Barack Obama is a nice young man who is out of his depth as commander in chief” is not going to BEGIN to describe the hatchet job they have in mind.)

Besides, superdelegates “voting against the results” is really a matter of interpretation. Do they go by popular vote, or by the total number of states won, or polling trends in potential swing states, or something else? There is no explicit formula stating exactly how the supers should vote. Which is why I hate superdelegates and think this entire formula for choosing nominees is just complete insanity. But it’s the one we’ve got right now, and as they say in baseball, you gotta play all nine and more if there’s a tie.

By: Donna

Donna — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:53:44 +0000

Yes but it really is true that her chance of winning 65 to 70% of the vote in the remaining primaries is miniscule, she has no chance of winning enough delegates or enough of the popular vote to catch up to Obama. Thats why people are telling her to “siddown and STFU”. And it’s pretty disingenuous to say you want to wait for all the other primary results, when you don’t want them to really matter, when you are hoping that the superdelegates will vote against the results.

By: Meowser

Meowser — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 02:32:37 +0000

And I am wondering why do you think that she is best to go up against McCain then? I don't know if she is or not. Frankly, I'm still undecided (my first choice, Edwards, dropped out) and my state does not vote for two more months. I do know that no man who trailed at this point in the contest by less than 200 delegates and still led by considerable margins in some contests still remaining would be told by officials of his own party to siddown and STFU. And it bugs me, like it does Zuzu, than even on a feminist blog one would get raked over the coals for noticing. What, and no one’s called Godwin’s Law on this thread? OK, make it Squeaky Fromme rather than Eva Braun, then. Lorena Bobbitt. Wev. Point still stands.

By: Vanessa

Vanessa — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:20:12 +0000

His lead would be even bigger if only New York didn’t count.

Exactly. I mean, isn’t that exactly why Clinton ran for Senate in New York, anyway (as in, it has a high delegate count for a “home state”)?

Do home states not count?

By: Rachel

Rachel — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 19:30:04 +0000

I don’t know how you and Liss and Kate Harding stand it, Zuzu. You’d get less of a fight, even from most of your fellow feminists, defending Eva Braun than you do defending HRC.

What, and no one’s called Godwin’s Law on this thread?

Fine, I’ll call it.