Voters Scream At Elites: Let's Count the Votes

Tom Hayden's wife does not like Hillary Clinton. Because of that, Tom Hayden wants Hillary to quit the race. And he wants the Democratic Establishment and others to join him and his wife in the screaming:

Since no one in the party leadership seems able or willing to intervene against this self-destructive downward spiral, perhaps progressives need to consider responding in the only way politicians sometimes understand. If they can't hear us screaming at the television sets, we can send a message that the Clintons are acting as if they prefer John McCain to Barack Obama. And follow it up with another message: if Clinton doesn't immediately cease her path of destruction, millions of young voters and black voters may not send checks, may not knock on doors, and may not even vote for her if she becomes the nominee. That's not a threat, that's the reality she is creating.

Some progressives believe in talking at the ballot box. With votes. 2.3 million Democrats in Pennsylvania did their talking yesterday at the ballot box. Hillary Clinton beat Barack Obama by 10 points and over 200,000 votes. I am sorry that the Democratic voters of Pennsylvania giving voice to their views sends Tom Hayden and his wife into childish temper tantrums, but the Democratic voters of the country will not be cowed by the screaming of the Elites. Let the people vote.

By Big Tent Democrat

< Demography Is Political Destiny | For The Record . . . >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    I think the things (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 08:49:49 AM EST
    we are seeing from Hayden and MoDo are just the beginning.  it is going to get a lot worse.
    I seriously predict that before Indiana we will see some so called progressive actually hold their breath till they turn blue and pass out on national teevee.

    I think KO was trying to do that last night (5.00 / 3) (#21)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:14:13 AM EST
    but he's such a windbag that his extra supply of O2 kept it from happening.

    He got (none / 0) (#25)
    by BarnBabe on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:19:42 AM EST
    45 seconds of my time. CNN got a little more.

    KO Was Painful To Watch....trying to say (none / 0) (#116)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 03:34:40 PM EST
    you could see how she was mocking the "yes we can" mantra of Obama's camp.  He tried hard, but was talked over.

    It's the Media (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by kmblue on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 08:54:38 AM EST
    and the "elite" versus the voters.
    I've never seen anything like it.

    actually its not that different (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 08:57:05 AM EST
    from the 90s when they wanted us to hate Bill and his numbers never dropped below 60%.
    there were times when I thought Cokie Roberts head would actually explode on This Week if we didnt start seeing it her way.

    She wins... (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by kredwyn on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 08:55:03 AM EST
    She wins decisively. She's got quite a lot of voters and delegates in her column...

    And they're calling for her to get out of the race?

    Am I missing something in the logical premise here? Cause this doesn't make sense.

    Logic (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by cawaltz on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:02:41 AM EST
    There you go again, with that logic stuff. In Unityland you don't need logic instead you get a nifty pony(In the color of your choice).

    Seriously though, this is the group that insists that a 10 point loss isn't REALLY a loss. The logic train left the station without them.


    so thats it (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:04:21 AM EST
    I knew there must be a pony somewhere with all the droppings we have been shoveling.

    The expectations game... (none / 0) (#17)
    by kredwyn on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:09:48 AM EST
    that was being played out earlier was part of groundwork for that insistence.

    It's weirder in light of the fact (none / 0) (#110)
    by Daryl24 on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 01:32:58 PM EST
    that Obama himself said anything less than 50% is a loss. No moral victory and all that.

    Racing against time (none / 0) (#29)
    by BarnBabe on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:24:07 AM EST
    If crowned in Feb, we would have never known the baggage he carries. Mr. Not So Goody Two Shoes afterall. Next week might be another revelation. The problem of trying to get the nomination fast is that any bad revelation will count towards the GE. I doubt if BHO's baggage can be hidden as well as GW's was.

    You and me (none / 0) (#109)
    by Daryl24 on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 01:30:43 PM EST
    Record turnouts, tv ratings, voter registration,  party fundraising, a massive exodus of GOP from Congress and the overwhelming majority of people want this thing to go the very end.

    And they're complaining? Isn't this what they wanted?


    What is it with inspiration? (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by standingup on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 08:59:17 AM EST
    My wife Barbara has begun yelling at the television set every time she hears Hillary Clinton. This is abnormal behavior, since Barbara is a meditative practitioner of everything peaceful and organic, and is inspired by Barack Obama's transformational appeal.

    I just don't understand why they put so much emphasis on being inspired.  

    Does He Actually Think That This Is Positive (5.00 / 3) (#31)
    by MO Blue on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:25:26 AM EST
    for Obama. That paragraph could be interpreted as saying that Obama has turned normal people into raving idiots that scream at their TVs.

    LOL Barack's transformational appeal.... (5.00 / 5) (#35)
    by Maria Garcia on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:29:39 AM EST
    ...turned her into a screaming meanie!

    Yeah, inspired to stop counting the votes (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by LHinSeattle on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 01:13:09 PM EST
    Not the kind of inspiring leader I want. Is this guy a Dem?

    I'm still trying to get WHY (4.80 / 5) (#20)
    by cawaltz on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:12:26 AM EST
    they are inspired? Trying to work WITH Republicans isn't a new idea(and I might add it hasn't worked yet). We've been trying THAT method now for what appears to be forever. It's been an abyssmal failure so far and we are STILL stuck in Iraq(How's that changing 16 GOP Senators minds going anyways?) His solution for health Care appears to be that the American people need to ask for solutions for health care. Hello? We've been asking. Where you been Senator Obama?

    that was also my question (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:14:29 AM EST
    you beat me

    Considering the reaction Hayden's (none / 0) (#23)
    by oculus on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:18:19 AM EST
    ex'wife Jane evoked, his comments is quite amusing.

    Because the greatest leaders.... (none / 0) (#78)
    by Dadler on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:36:36 AM EST
    ...are the most inspirational.  Whether you think Obama is or not, and I have no opinion either way, you cannot fail to understand that a charismatic personality that inspires people is the kind that becomes president, especially in times like this.  Sorry, but policy wonks and beauracratic types just do not rally people behind them in a contest of mass appeal.

    This aspect of Obama's appeal is the easiest to understand.  That the inspiration has come with very little in the way of concrete plans and ideas, well, that's where the mystery sets in.


    Dadler, aren't leaders supposed to inspire others (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by lookoverthere on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 11:26:57 AM EST
    to do stuff beyond get them elected?

    I don't find Sen. Obama very inspiring, but I've worked in marketing and I know packaging when I see it. I also know that while I don't find him inspiring, doesn't mean others don't and that's meaningful to them.

    I never found Sen. Clinton particularly inspirational, either. But that isn't what I look for in a politician. In my line of work, there's a lot of people who swoop in with the inspiration, but they rarely manage accomplish anything.

    I've met my share of Idea Men---people who think talking is the same as doing, when it ain't.


    Dadler, BTW I agree w/you (none / 0) (#92)
    by lookoverthere on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 11:28:05 AM EST
    I beg to differ (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by ineedalife on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 11:43:13 AM EST
    History paints a different picture. Abe Lincoln was so inspirational half the country got up and left. But history proves his greatness.

    Few talk about a halo around FDR's head but he certainly was great. And FDR became president in times worse than this. Great Depression??

    Most great leaders had their greatness formed and revealed by the trials they had to lead through.

    The losing sides of most wars in history were lead by inspirational leaders.


    Oh my.... (none / 0) (#98)
    by AnninCA on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 12:02:21 PM EST
    You did make me chuckle!

    You're right.

    But so ... radical!  :)


    but policy wonks . . . do not rally people (5.00 / 2) (#97)
    by nycstray on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 11:47:50 AM EST
    Ummmm, you may want to pass that on to the Clinton supporters. They (we) seem to not have gotten the memo.

    Charisma is overrated (none / 0) (#102)
    by standingup on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 12:26:10 PM EST
    and risky.  

    Issues (none / 0) (#117)
    by MichaelGale on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 03:54:29 PM EST
    sounds like she needs more than meditative practice.........she needs serious psychotherapy.

    Elitism: A Progressive Principle? (5.00 / 4) (#11)
    by JoeCHI on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:03:28 AM EST
    If this kind of elitism is what the progressive movement has become, count me out.

    Superdelegates (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by coolit on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:03:57 AM EST
    I think the tables have turned here.  Now Obama has all the money, he has the endorsements, and he has the frontrunner status.  

    But Clinton has the voters.  She has won 4 out of 5 big states. Important General Election states.  And while the editorials may tell her to get out, I think the superdelegates will listen to the voters.

    Correct! (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by AnninCA on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:59:28 AM EST
    You are so on the money.  :)

    Voters are screaming to give money! (5.00 / 3) (#101)
    by Cream City on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 12:05:01 PM EST
    since we're right on the money here.:-)

    HRC just announced more than $10 million in donations in less than 24 hours.

    The people are speaking with their pocketbooks as well as at the polls . . . but the pundits, will they listen?  Ah, well, they are starting to have to hear us.


    Darn, there goes the "broke" argument (none / 0) (#107)
    by LHinSeattle on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 01:15:25 PM EST
    It is just on the news that Obama (5.00 / 0) (#89)
    by FlaDemFem on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 11:17:06 AM EST
    just picked up Oklahoma's governor Brad Henry as an endorsement. Hillary won Oklahoma by 55%. So much for listening to the voters. I hope Henry loses his next bid for office, since he doesn't listen to the voters of his state why would they vote for him? He said he wasn't going to say anything until the convention, but I guess he just couldn't wait to join Obama in dissing his voters.

    Hillary just picked up (5.00 / 0) (#95)
    by americanincanada on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 11:46:02 AM EST
    Rep. John Tanner from TENN. He is a huge super get. A real blue dog.

    She's won (none / 0) (#118)
    by cal1942 on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 04:12:53 PM EST
    seven of the eight largest states in the union.  Seven out of the nine most populous states that constitute just over half the nation's population.

    She's won numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8

    Obama won numbers 5 and 9


    Are they trying to destroy the party? (5.00 / 6) (#14)
    by Richjo on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:07:19 AM EST
    I think Tom and his ilk better realize if they keep trying to extort this nomination out this party that people like me and other Hillary supporters may not send checks, knock on doors, and vote for Obama. If they continue with this ridiculous notion that only Clinton has run a negative campaign that could be damaging to the party in the fall I will likewise do the same thing as will many others. Until they stop doing that, and find a way to include the voices of Michigan and Florida there will be no unity in this party. Right now the only thing that Mr. Obama seems to have to offer to half this party is the fear of another Republican adminstration. Ironic considering all he seems to do is decry a politics of fear.

    Tom Hayden destroyed the party (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by Cream City on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:20:30 AM EST
    before, and he'll be glad to do it again.

    Echoing Cream City (5.00 / 1) (#119)
    by cal1942 on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 04:22:05 PM EST
    Tom Hayden and his crowd made Richard Nixon possible, robbed the nation of Hubert Humphrey and insured the death of many many thousands of GIs and millions of people in Indochina.

    He is an elitist, Jacobin schmuck with no regard for the destruction his actions help bring about.


    It Is Also Ironic Since Obama Is Also Offering Us (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by MO Blue on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:20:46 AM EST
    a foreign policy like Reagan and BushI and Hagel and Luger for Sec. of Defense and State. If I want a Republican foreign policy, I can vote for the Republican on the ticket instead of Obama.

    Disclosure: I will not vote for McCain.


    Shrill (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by cawaltz on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:35:49 AM EST
    What is left for the super elites is to shrilly insist we do what they say NOW or by darn it they are going to pull the car over RIGHT NOW!

    Strangely enough, when you look at who is more likely to hold their breath and turn blue according to the polls, if their candidate isn't elected, it isn't the Obama supporters. There I go again with that logic stuff though. Quick, look, isn't that a pony over there? Quit now Hillary or we are all doomed, doomed I say. LOL


    Agree (5.00 / 3) (#47)
    by AnninCA on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:52:45 AM EST
    The rhetoric has been offensive to the intelligence of normal people.  First of all, Obama has been on the attack since Texas.  There is no more positive message coming out of his camp.  It's ALL about attacking Hillary.  

    The more his supporters insist that it is she who divides the party, when the core Democrats are supporting her in decisive voting patterns, the more offensive this entire theory becomes to the rest of us.

    I see this as a fight for the identity of the Democratic party as much or more than anything else.

    And I'll be darned if I'm just going to quit.

    They are turning up their noses at good people who are really the heart and soul of this party.  I will not let the elitists drum this constinuency out of the party without a fight.

    Maureen Dowd is no more clever, frankly, than Randi.  Both make a living off of talking trash.


    Supporters (5.00 / 4) (#15)
    by wasabi on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:08:13 AM EST
    Right now the media is promoting the idea that all the cranks are on the Hillary team.  50% of Hillary supporters from PA would not vote for Obama in the GE.  
    The other guys supporters are pure in that he's already won, and the nasty lady is just STEALING the election right now.
    I think at some point your average Joe is going to wonder what's wrong with the media.

    wrong with the media? (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:11:01 AM EST
    not just cranks.  low information low education low income cranks.
    the good news is the average Joe wrote of the MSM years (decades?) ago.
    no one in the real world cares what they say.  we (blogistan) care.  not many other people.

    How Much Of The Reluctance Of Hillary's Supporters (5.00 / 3) (#34)
    by MO Blue on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:29:14 AM EST
    to back Obama is the result of a backlash against all unfair treatment of their candidate by the media? There are definitely other factors at work but people get pretty stubborn when they feel a candidate is being forced down their throats.

    As someone who will vote for McCain (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by misspeach2008 on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 02:41:18 PM EST
    if Obama is the nominee, I can tell you that the way that Obama's supporters have trashed Hillary made me look more closely at what Obama himself said and did.  For example, if I suggested that I might be willing to vote for McCain, I was immediately inundated with "But what about SCOTUS, stupid b*tch"!  So I looked carefully at Obama's stand on issues like Roe v. Wade.  I found his support for a woman's right to choose tepid at best, his view on sex education just one step higher than Strom Thurmond's "Pet your dog, not your date" campaign, and his overall view of women's issues wanting.  I also found out that Obama was willing to confirm Roberts until he was told it would not be good for him politically. I also know that two of my favorite Supreme Court Justices, Warren and O'Connor, were appointed by Republicans. Now, I am not stupid enough to believe that John McCain would do better.  But if it's my own party messing with my rights and doing a crappy job, then it's harder to convince people to do better at electing a President in 2012.  And if Obama really louses up, we may be looking at a Republican White House for a long time.  But I might not have looked so closely if I hadn't been called an uneducated old biddy who was past her prime.

    MissPeach2008, PhD.


    STEALING THE ELECTION BY (5.00 / 3) (#73)
    by FlaDemFem on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:20:20 AM EST
    GETTING MORE VOTES!!! OMG!! What is this country coming to???

    (and if you don't know this is snark, you are on the wrong site...heh)


    Media: lying by omission (video clips) (none / 0) (#48)
    by Davidson on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:52:51 AM EST
    What I hate most is them refusing to tell people that Obama can't win the nomination on pledged delegates either and, thus, will also have to depend on superdelegates!  Gah!

    Here are two clips of Dobbs of all people smacking down the overt media lying in favor of Obama.


    Oops! Here's the second video! (none / 0) (#53)
    by Davidson on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:54:58 AM EST
    I put the same link twice.

    Clip 1.
    Clip 2.


    It is actually an upward spiral (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by ineedalife on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:10:51 AM EST
    Directionality is relative. It is only a downward spiral if you are an Obama supporter.

    And I wish they would define progressive and progressivism and why Obama and Hillary are so different in the context of progressivism that their vectors are polar opposite on the "spirals". They don't because they can't.

    Actually progressivism wins only an incremental victory with either candidate.

    Stronge undercurent of sexism with all this... (5.00 / 6) (#26)
    by Exeter on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:20:15 AM EST
    Can you imagine if Obama was in Hillary's position and he was ahead in the popular vote at this stage in the race?  The meme would be that "of course he should be the nominee"!  Is there any doubt if he was in Hillary's position he would not only be considered in it, but after last night, the front runner?

    But, ahhh, Hillary? The only way she can win it is, as Russert says "by wresting it away from Obama."

    So, the answer of Dem establishment and msm media to this race where they are both nearly tied? She should "just quit!"

    Even though no Dem candidate in her position or better has ever been pressured to this degree to quit, she should simply "just quit." When this type of double standard is applied to the candidate that also happens to be the first serious female candidate, when you consider that you have had major media call her a "witch," "#itch," "nurse Ratchet," and even a "#hore," and you consider the long sad history of telling women to step aside to her male counterpart, I think you have to start calling it what it is: sexism.

    Yes (none / 0) (#96)
    by Emma on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 11:47:25 AM EST

    I think Tom would have more success (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by Joan in VA on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:24:31 AM EST
    with his argument if he concluded that meditative practitioners of everything peaceful and organic wouldn't be knocking on doors and sending checks. Even if that is only 7 people.

    frankly quite ridiculous (5.00 / 3) (#36)
    by tarheel74 on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:29:51 AM EST
    I think both Hayden and his wife should seek psychiatric consultation keeping in mind that if Hillary gets elected and implements her healthcare plan they will be paying a fraction of what they are paying now.
    Peace out.

    Oh no, not Tom Hayden! (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by cygnus on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:42:11 AM EST
    The Obamatrons are making themselves look ridiculous.  If they want Obama to win, they should ask him to become a better candidate.  The guy we see now doesn't have a prayer of beating McCain.  His Olbermann training wheels will have to come off eventually. (Cue exploding heads!)

    No concern for risking the womens' vote? (5.00 / 3) (#41)
    by kcowley on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:42:44 AM EST
    I'm getting a bit tired of the concern for  alienating the african american voters.  If I recall correctly women are the largest voting block, 55% of the vote.  If half of the women are offended by the DNC and "progressives", 27% is still a larger percentage than all of the AA vote.

    Venturing (5.00 / 4) (#42)
    by Stellaaa on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:43:55 AM EST
    Yesterday fortified by the win, I ventured into outraged screamland.  This was the first article I read.  I loved the "meditative" type screaming.  So, please, I am truly moved and concerned about disturbing Frau Haydn's Zen life .  Today, I am stopping my support of Hillary.  

    These people have gotten collective hysteria.  They get all the privileges and they are now demanding this one.  

    Wouldn't you think the (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by oculus on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:48:29 AM EST
    meditatve Ms. Hayden would just turn off the TV?  

    Honestly (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by Stellaaa on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:53:21 AM EST
    what is she doing watching TV?  I think this is the lefts: "let them eat cake" moment, even though poor Marie Antoinette never said that and was more of a tragic character than history depicted her.

    Although I seriously doubt my (none / 0) (#56)
    by oculus on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:55:24 AM EST
    former father in law would ever have even considered voting for a Dem., TV coverage of the 68 Dem. convention in Chicago really solidified his feelings.  Those damn kids!

    Missed you. (none / 0) (#52)
    by Stellaaa on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:54:38 AM EST
    Thanks. Tomorrow, back to (none / 0) (#58)
    by oculus on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:57:56 AM EST
    sightseeing though.

    What an asnine post by Hayden. (5.00 / 5) (#46)
    by lilburro on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:50:23 AM EST
    Sounds like his wife has had a few too many lattes.  I guess it doesn't occur to them that blue collar voters genuinely like Hillary and her dropping out won't change their disinterest, so far, in Obama.  Hillary isn't just "in the way" of their votes.  Calling a fair percentage of the American population racists without hard data and disrespecting their right to vote will do even less to bring people into the Obama coalition than hope and change.  Have these people ever spoken to those PA voters living in rural areas?  Have any idea what they look like and think about?  I guess not.  Or if they did, they hated them.

    Obama bloggers at their best are clueless about this demographic problem.  At their worst, offensive.

    I must correct you (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by Stellaaa on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:54:13 AM EST
    meditative types drink green tea, not lattes.  

    Think she eats waffles? (none / 0) (#57)
    by oculus on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:56:11 AM EST
    Gawd NO (none / 0) (#65)
    by Stellaaa on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:06:03 AM EST
    Yes, whole grain (none / 0) (#114)
    by waldenpond on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 02:32:46 PM EST
    with flax seed and sugar free fruit spread?

    Maybe we should do a mass (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:13:13 AM EST
    email campaign to persuade Ms. Hayden to try decaf instead, hmmm? ;-)

    best kept secret of the campaign (5.00 / 5) (#54)
    by ChuckieTomato on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:55:14 AM EST
    every TV analyst repeatedly says Clinton can't win without super delegates, but what you never hear is that the other side can't win without super delegates either

    It's kinda odd (5.00 / 4) (#59)
    by Steve M on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:58:16 AM EST
    How is it that Obama, who explicitly says he doesn't want to refight all those generational wars, is viewed as empowering by all these 60s radical types?

    Hillary will thump McCain (5.00 / 4) (#67)
    by Stellaaa on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:09:41 AM EST
    whereas Obama will not.  Hillary crystalizes the differences but Obama blurs them.  This is an election where we need the differences crystalized.  Obama is running the election Kerry should have run.  They are one election off.  He is still stuck in the "culture wars" that Rove created and they are playing those out.  

    Yes she will. (5.00 / 2) (#71)
    by oculus on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:14:36 AM EST
    This quote proves it:

    "Senator Obama said today that John McCain would be better for the country than George Bush," Mrs. Clinton said. "Now, Senator McCain is a real American patriot who has served our country with distinction. But Senator McCain would follow the same failed policies that have been so wrong for our country the last seven years. Senator McCain thinks it's O.K. to keep our troops in Iraq for another 100 years. Is that better than George Bush?"

    "He's going to unify us all, goddammit!" (5.00 / 2) (#74)
    by lucky leftie on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:28:43 AM EST
    "Why can't you rotten @#$*'s SEE that?"

    Lefie envy (5.00 / 0) (#76)
    by Stellaaa on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:31:57 AM EST
    While Hayden never made it beyond being Fonda's husband and a State Assemblyman, Hillary and Bill broke down the gates.  As baby boomers they started with the same goals, changing the system.  I guess some people accomplished a bit more than being a "contributor" to the Huff Post.  

    I once said to my brother that the Democrats (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by Florida Resident on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 11:03:00 AM EST
    biggest problem was when they quit calling calling themselves Liberals and started calling themselves progressives.  They diluted the message to appeal to middle of the road conservatives and now they are paying the consequences.  Look let's not be fooled it is not the extreme left wing of the Party that backs Obama it's the faux pax progressives who are just in left because its the "IN" thing to be.  Real left wing Liberals do not attack mandates in health care, they do not waver in LGBT and Pro-choice issues.  Heck if anything the embrace socialized medicine and are outright adamant against any limitations on LGBT and Pro-choice issues.

    Tom Hayden needs to grow up (5.00 / 0) (#87)
    by MichaelGale on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 11:15:11 AM EST
    Author of the Port Huron statement in 1962, he had us all as followers. A lot has happened since then .....like we did not have another Democratic President for 27 years.  Yes the system was in dire need of repair then as now however, it does not need to be fixed by one small segment of society.

    Hayden became establishment now he wants to go back?


    Tom (none / 0) (#100)
    by AnninCA on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 12:04:06 PM EST
    is truly a throw-back to the 60s.

    He's irrelevant.


    Who's bringing in the voters... (5.00 / 2) (#93)
    by TalkRight on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 11:41:47 AM EST
    "After last night's decisive victory in Pennsylvania, more people have voted for Hillary than any other candidate, including Sen. Obama. Estimates vary slightly, but according to Real Clear Politics, Hillary has received 15,095,663 votes to Sen. Obama's 14,973,720, a margin of more than 120,000 votes.

    Someone told me that Hillary has got the most votes in PA, OH, CA ... than any other candidate in the primary history for democrats or republicans. (Not sure if that is true, but would not be surprised if it is true).

    This is big. What FL then MI and now white working (none / 0) (#105)
    by TalkRight on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 01:01:16 PM EST
    Axelrod: Democrats Don't Win the White Working Class via NPR
    "The white working class has gone to the Republican nominee for many elections, going back even to the Clinton years. This is not new that Democratic candidates don't rely solely on those votes."

    But wasn't it Obama who was winning the Obamacans? Also says it was a "home game" for Clinton except that she has home's in Arkansas, NY, CA, PA, OH.. where ever there are white working class.

    So basically, Hayden (5.00 / 2) (#99)
    by lilburro on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 12:03:55 PM EST
    is upset Clinton isn't the person she was in the 60s and 70s?  Yet reassured by Obama's blithe dismissal of those periods as "periods of excess"?  

    His article compares the Ayers-Obama link to Hillary's relationships with others carrying different banners.  It certainly doesn't address the way political discourse has changed since 9/11.  And it somehow makes her early liberal work into a bad thing.  Excerpt the middle three paragraphs starting with "To take just one example," and it could be used to defend her claim of 35 years of experience.  

    I understand you can press a charge of hypocrisy at her, and I know she knows how to attack.  But politics and policy are different.  

    We hear so much about Barack, the community organizer.  But what about Barack, the Reno Gazette interviewee?  Barack, the lover of Bush and Reagan?  Barack, the unions are special interest groups guy?  Some people may be inspired by him, but I am frustrated by the way he sells out some traditional Democratic groups and causes that still matter to make his new image.

    Tom Hayden, former editor of the (none / 0) (#3)
    by oculus on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 08:49:57 AM EST
    Michigan Daily, is a disgrace to my alma mater.  Whatever became of his radical views of the future?

    Keep your comment on topic please (none / 0) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 08:52:01 AM EST

    Tom (none / 0) (#5)
    by AnninCA on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 08:54:10 AM EST
    has been writing negative articles about Hillary since Day 1.

    email for tom hayden (none / 0) (#16)
    by Saul on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:08:41 AM EST

    Thank you! (none / 0) (#44)
    by bjorn on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:48:22 AM EST
    just sent him a note (none / 0) (#108)
    by LHinSeattle on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 01:23:53 PM EST
    to suggest his wife listen to someone who doesn't inspire her to scream. Oh, and to just let the people vote. It's a democracy, remember.

    BTW my email to MoDo came back with this:

    Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
    Technical details of permanent failure:
    PERM_FAILURE: Gmail tried to deliver your message, but it was rejected by the recipient domain. The error that the other server returned was: 550 550 Mailbox unavailable or access denied -


    "Huh?" (none / 0) (#112)
    by LHinSeattle on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 02:17:02 PM EST
    Tom Hayden to me
    show details 11:35 AM (37 minutes ago)



    On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 2:22 PM,
     <@gmail.com> wrote:
    Re: Your 4/23/08 Commentary
    Suggest that your meditative wife calm down and listen to someone who doesn't inspire her to scream.
    What's wrong with just letting the citizens vote?  That's what democracies do.
    I was appalled at your commentary saying the voters should not continue to vote. By the way, Hillary Clinton is now ahead in the popular vote.

    Do they wish Obama to be nominated (none / 0) (#24)
    by athyrio on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:19:30 AM EST
    even if he might lose the general? I don't understand their motives. They claim to be progressives, but they seem to care less about the people and what the people think. Why?

    Hillary could also (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by pie on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:26:04 AM EST
    lose, but in my opinion, she's less likely to and more likely to be a better president.

    Pepole like Hayden are entitled to their opinions, too, but the vitriol directed at her is intolerable.  Their positions are similar, and they're both passionate about the changes they can bring. They are both democrats!

    There's no reason for the immature, brutish behavior or whining.  It makes me question their judgment, that's for sure.


    They've reverted to the original progressives (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by Cream City on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:28:30 AM EST
    who were incredibly elitist but just really good at spin in their time with that moniker of "progressives."  Let's remember, they really were a wing of the Republican Party.  They put in place many ideas in the name of efficiency that really meant removing government processes from direct voter oversight (i.e., civil service).  And let's remember, one of their foremost spokesman was the very elitist media spinmaster Walter Lippman.

    It is so interesting to see how much the modern so-called "progressives" are, if all too unknowingly for too many of them, reverting to their origins.


    Yeah (5.00 / 0) (#75)
    by nellre on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:31:43 AM EST
    Ultra left.
    The Democratic party represents many, from centrist to ultra left.
    There are some who want to disenfranchise any who are to their right.

    Instead they should start their own party...
    They can have the word Progressive as far as I'm concerned. I liked liberal better (see dictionary definition)anyway.


    Yup (none / 0) (#37)
    by andgarden on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:30:55 AM EST
    Generally speaking, they hated unions and cities, and turned their noses up at filthy immigrants with their "wet" ways.

    Last night (none / 0) (#38)
    by americanincanada on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:33:00 AM EST
    on CNN, David Gergen actually said that there are worse things than losing the whitehouse. He said because if blacks and young voters leave the party it will be worse than losing an election.

    I could not believe it.


    But if women left the party? (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:46:08 AM EST
    that would be fine with Gergen.

    These one-sided argument are just hillarious.


    I actually don't entirely disagree with that (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by andgarden on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:55:17 AM EST
    I don't think we'll lose blacks and young voters, but Hillary would have her work cut out for her. No question that a unity ticket would be essential.

    I think that (5.00 / 2) (#64)
    by americanincanada on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:03:42 AM EST
    winning the whitehouse should be the end game. This argument that it would be worse to lose AA voters and young voters (who we can't count on in hte GE) than to lose the whitehouse make my stomach ache.

    What about women? We are a larger part of the electorate than any other voting block. Why are they not worried about us? Why are they not worried about that exit poll last night that said half of Hillary's voters would either vote McCain or stay home?

    That should have sent a chill down their collective spines. But they are too worried about thier rising blood pressue and yelling at tv screen to actually listen to the voters. I hope the supers are listening.

    Like Pat Caddell said last night, "of course supers will move to her, what do you think we are? A suicide pact?"


    I'm actually worried about (5.00 / 3) (#66)
    by andgarden on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:08:47 AM EST
    all of the groups.

    The Democratic Party is beginning to look like Humpty Dumpty, frankly.


    old saying (none / 0) (#120)
    by MichaelGale on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 04:34:43 PM EST
    Democratic Party, due to their diversity, "is like trying to herd cats".

    I get that and I am sure we lose because of it, at times.  But I like it. It fits.  


    I don't know any African Americans who hate (5.00 / 4) (#81)
    by esmense on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:55:51 AM EST
    Clinton in the way many of his young (especially young and upscale) supporters do. Most of my friends and co-workers (male and female, and all 45 or older, like me) would like to see both on the ticket, in some combination or another. They, like me, worry about how the party is being divided and think BOTH candidates have some responsibility in ensuring unity at the end of this campaign. I don't think a Clinton win would alienate the AA community -- but it would probably alienate some young voters. I think age is a much bigger factor in Clinton hostility than race. MUCH BIGGER.

    But, I doubt these very hostile young Obama supporters represent young voters in general. They tend to be those on the Left who at heart are convinced there "are no differences" between the parties (and therefore are hoping for something different in the personality of a candidate.) In many cases, these are people who would as easily vote for Paul, or Nader, etc. as Obama. I don't worry about losing those voters as much as I worry about how destructive they could be if they gain too much power in the party.


    Seconded (none / 0) (#83)
    by vicndabx on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 11:01:05 AM EST
    Have you seen SUSA? (none / 0) (#62)
    by Davidson on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:01:37 AM EST
    Right now, Clinton would likely beat McCain so how would she be struggling?  She's in fighting shape against McCain!

    That's true (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by andgarden on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:02:57 AM EST
    but she would have to survive the narrative of the nomination being "taken away" from Obama. If you think that won't happen, you don't know the media.

    What nonsense (none / 0) (#61)
    by Davidson on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:00:26 AM EST
    Where is the proof that blacks will sit this out?  Where?  There were exit polls in SC of all places that showed 80% of blacks would be satisfied if Clinton was the nominee.  All one has to do negate any fear of black voters sitting this out is to have Obama campaign on her behalf.  That's it!

    Besides, it has been shown that Clinton supporters would abandon Obama in favor of McCain and sit it out in higher numbers than Obama supporters if he became the nominee.

    And, in case, he hasn't noticed the youth have not been Obama's trump card in quite some time as they make up less and less of the voting electorate as the race drags on.  Hell, Clinton won some of the older youth crowd last night.


    Tourettes Syndrome Symptoms (none / 0) (#50)
    by kcowley on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 09:54:00 AM EST
    Please let Barbara know that my own symptoms- shouting random explicatives while watching television were greatly relieved when I started actively fighting back and campaigning. My family is much happier for it!

    elitists (none / 0) (#68)
    by jimmyfungus on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:11:47 AM EST
    There's a difference between elite and elitist

    Anyone read the wholle Hayden piece, and not just (none / 0) (#70)
    by Ben Masel on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:14:34 AM EST
    the admittedly weak intro?

    Nope. (none / 0) (#72)
    by oculus on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:15:10 AM EST
    There's some actual substance (none / 0) (#77)
    by Ben Masel on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:32:04 AM EST

    I read it, and the gist of the article (none / 0) (#85)
    by vicndabx on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 11:08:04 AM EST
    is the same as that in the admittedly weak intro.  As noted in other comments, I don't think blacks are going to bail, young voters w/o any historical perspective maybe.  Who's to say they would remain dems anyway?  Once they're out in the world for a little while, that rosy idealism tends to fade a bit and is replaced by real-life pragmatism.

    The democratic unity speech (none / 0) (#79)
    by nellre on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:39:55 AM EST
    Insult half of all democrats and a good number of independents.
    To use the current terminology, Hillary people are bitter people, even more bitter than the white working-class voters Barack has talked about. Because they circle the wagons so tightly, they don't recognize how identical, self-reinforcing and out-of-touch they are.

    But the real reason HRC won PA is so she could make Obama unelectable. Yeah, right.

    It is abundantly clear that the Clintons, working with FOX News and manipulating old Clinton staffers like George Stephanopoulos, are trying, at least unconsciously, to so damage Barack Obama that he will be perceived as "unelectable" to Democratic superdelegates.

    Tom, Me, Bill: '96 Dem convention (none / 0) (#80)
    by Ben Masel on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:41:27 AM EST
    I was wearing a Yippie revival hat, we'd pried permits for a resumed "Festival of Life" in Grant Park. Tom came by, we had somethin g of a showdown over his support of Bill's forceing a plank into the Platform endorsing "60 New Death Penalties." and asserting that the Party was then ready to accomodate formerly radical views.

    Before the week was out, I'd been twice arrested for leafleting, and then indicted for 30 years worth of felonies after a march spilled from one lane of traffic to two. (Acquitted at trial after 17 appearances, and collected substantial cash damages from the City.)

    Four years later, we reconciled after Tom was pretty much the only high profile Democrat to denounce the PoliceState tactics employed against protests outside the LA Convention.  

    nice of Tom (none / 0) (#82)
    by Foxx on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 10:58:18 AM EST
    to detail Hillary's extensive "progressive" political experience, in the process of saying she has betrayed it. (Yes I did read the article.) Makes it obvious (tho not to Tom) that Obama has none whatsoever.

    Speaking of super delegates (none / 0) (#86)
    by ChuckieTomato on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 11:13:10 AM EST
    Why does every one on DK scream about wanting the SD's to "step in" and end the campaign. They don't want the SD's to vote for Clinton but it's OK if they "step in" now and end the campaign.

    The SD's are part of the DNC system yet when Clinton tries to win the nomination by convincing SD's to support her the people on DK go crazy. Blame the DNC if you don't like the rules, not Clinton.  

    Neither candidate can win with out SD's. You can't have it both ways.

    Why Clinton will fail in November (none / 0) (#88)
    by SAINTIXE56 on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 11:16:22 AM EST
    -Because a lot of Obama voters  will simply not vore for her or rather as I, will be voting . no, not McCain but not Clinton. Avote to say I am a citizen, but I ll be damned if I vote for any of those nominees.
    - Because Rush Limbaugh wants her to be the nominee, and if I know the bozo , he means that this campaign is going to reach heights of anti Clinton revelations.
    Thje behaviour of the couple shows enough they are ...liars, cheaters, not one ounce of decency and I should vote for that applaing woman and her good for nothin husband. My vote means something, it means at least I rezpect the candidate.
    Mind you, I respect McCain, so withhold the void vote, it will be a McCain. At least, the guy did not dodge the draft, did not pretend not to inhale, did not lie about the blue dress and is not using Bin Laden. Well
    he is  apoor choice on the economy and Iraq, but at least, I know that his word means something and between you and me I Clinton and McCain were to borrow some money out of le, I trust John to give it back, but not the infamous couple.
    Rule #1 Elect who you respect, reject who you would not trust to be at your side in time of Danger. Oh she is cool , but way to slicky fingers for me, way to slimy

    given that most of his support (none / 0) (#104)
    by Salo on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 12:41:04 PM EST
    is in the deep south among AAs--I say, so what?

    given that a large portion of it in the rocky mountain west---i say, so what?

    the syetsem at work has made Alaska the equivalent of Pennsylvannia.

    Stupid democratic planners.


    Obama is a politician (none / 0) (#113)
    by boredmpa on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 02:19:20 PM EST
    My stock response:

    You can't get any more slimy than branding someone racist for saying they'd prefer their wife by their side.

    Clinton's record with the NAACP and prominent AAs will help her mend the divisiveness inserted by the Obama campaign.  


    Excatly, this was a Base power play a muscle flex (none / 0) (#90)
    by Salt on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 11:25:01 AM EST
    a show of strength by the extended non activist sects in the Party that turned out intent on swamping the choice of party activists and ripping Obama's coronations out of their hands. The risk now, is the irrefutable division of their expectation and priority's for this Primary's which places the extended Base at odds with the DNC, the Party Elite and Speaker Pelosi who appear willing to risk losing the White House for possible gains in margin in Congress whilst providing a social justice lecture for the peasantry by the creative class and media.

    We all know who this Base is their strenght at the ballot and their allegiance to their Country, to Communities, to family then maybe Party and IMO they are giving Democrats the chance but are also, clearly, sending the message of their terms for Nov that they believe we NEED a strong President who will act to stunt this Country's decline and turn the ship if possible a President who puts the Peoples interest first even before Party certainly before extremes.

    Obama winning popular votes (none / 0) (#103)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 12:36:11 PM EST
    in Primary elections doesn't send me into a childish temper tantrum.

    Obama winning caucusses that disenfranchise a lot of Democratic Party voters doesn't even send me into a childish tantrum.

    I've been known to be sent into a childish temper tantrum myself but not for the reasons above.

    Free advertising for Clinton (none / 0) (#111)
    by boredmpa on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 02:05:25 PM EST
    After a big win, this is just energizing her campaign and encouraging undecided voters to take a closer look at her.

    She just won vs She should drop out == cognitive dissonance.  People like underdogs, and she's got the best of both worlds in this because she's simultaneously a winner AND an underdog getting punched by the media.

    Tom Hayden? you gotta be kidding me (none / 0) (#122)
    by thereyougo on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 06:09:51 PM EST
    the non establishment flower child is calling for Hillary to drop out?  And he's betting on kids and AA not campaigning? WTF? You know, Tom H. should better.

    Both candidates do not have the Magic number of delegates, let the games continue....to the floor  of the convention if necessary/. That'll teach those GenXers and Gen Yners a thing or 2 about democracy, right Kos?