Things That Happened Today

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Sat May 31, 2008 at 09:30:00 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Bump and Update: We are moving to the new server around 10:30 pm ET as opposed to 11:00. See you all in an hour or so.

****

Is the drama over? Yes and No.

To review the day, Big Tent Democrat, Back From Ohio and I started at 9:00 am ET getting live threads going to cover the day's big Democratic Rules Committee meeting. We finished at 6 pm.

There was lots of drama at the committee meeting, you can read our five or six live earlier threads on it.

There was also drama behind the scenes as our server went down and the site crashed repeatedly. All day. Sometimes for five minutes, once for almost an hour.

No one knows why. . [More...]

They don't know if it's the hardware (the server) or internal coding for the site. It usually happens on debate and primary nights and days like today when not only are there more visitors than normal, they stay on the site longer.

The average length of a site visit on TalkLeft has been over 6 minutes for some time. With 25,000 to 30, 000 unique visitors a day, and each one averaging 3 page views per visit, maybe that's too much to expect a server to bear.

But we added another server and the problems continued. Then we added 5 more gigs of memory to the server and the site still goes down. We're the only site on the server, it was new a year when we moved to it and it now has 6 gigabytes of memory

So, it's something else.

The site also tends to crash when comments top 200 on any given thread. Maybe it's too many people refreshing the page to see the new comments at the same time.

In any event, it's very frustrating.

It may be the server itself is bad. That's what we're going to check next.

Tonight at 11 pm ET, we're moving to a new server, again with 6 gigabytes of memory and we'll be the only site on it.

We'll be down for less than an hour while they do the move.

I hope this fixes the problem because between moderating offensive comments, dealing with site crashes and communicating with IT people who talk in a language I don't understand, this is more drama than I care to deal with on any given day.

Thanks to everyone who hung with us all day despite the glitches, and to those who contributed the past few days. (I did send out "thank you" emails to those who used paypal during one of the down periods today -- something I didn't do the past two times. Amazon will be next).

Okay, your turn. Any and all drama stories welcome.

And if your a tech person with any ideas what might be causing us to crash, I'd love to hear them. We're on Scoop, like Daily Kos and MyDD, not Wordpress or Movable Type.

And we'll be down around 11 pm ET for up to one hour.

< Alcee Hastings To Boycott Convention Due to FL Delegate Travesty | Obama's Popular Vote Lead . . .? >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Things That Happened Today | 175 comments (175 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

I've got a new appreciation for TL... (5.00 / 4) (#45)
by p lukasiak on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:16:58 PM EST

When the server started crashing, I went over to Marci's place....

it was all obots, all the time, and not one of them understood what a "rule" was, what the rules were, what the charter was....NOTHING. Complete and utter ignorance, and Hillary hate.

Marci used to have one of the smartest blogs around. Marci herself is pretty smart -- but she's joined the cult. She actually suggested that SIGH IN SHEETS from district conventions rather than vote totals be used to apportion delegates in Michigan.

Then she had the nerve to tell me that I didn't know what I was talking about when I talked about "fair representation", and how the state was REQUIRED to assign delegate at district conventions based on the returns of the elections.

I wasn't making it up -- i was relating what Brewer had said when Levin was challenged on the claim that the state delegate allocation process had begun based on the compromise proposal percentages. Brewer had said it, and when he realized WHAT he'd said, he walked it back very quickly....

a sad, sad, day in so many ways...

Hmm, comment time trouble (5.00 / 1) (#50)
by andgarden on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:28:44 PM EST

And I got the rate-limit warning too.

[ Parent ]

What's that? (none / 0) (#65)
by JavaCityPal on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:13:37 PM EST

[ Parent ]

Comment rate limit (none / 0) (#106)
by hillct on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:48:17 PM EST

The comment rate limit exists not as a server capacity management consideration but as an anti-spam measure - in that spammers are likely to want to post many comments quickly, we limit comments to discourage spammers in that sense, but also to encourage legitimate users to post substantive comments where they've put some thought into the composition. This in contract to sites on which no such limit exists, where you can often find tons of comments consisting merely of "I Agree." or "no, you're wrong".

I believe the limit as it's set now, contributes to the positive visitor experience on the site, although I'm sure if enough people fine the rate limit to be too low, Jeralyn could be persuaded to increase it.

[ Parent ]

Actually, it was on my first attempted comment (none / 0) (#115)
by andgarden on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:56:25 PM EST

after the site came back up. So it was obviously a glitch.

I have run into the real thing before, but I usually try to make fewer short comments now, so that's not a real problem.

[ Parent ]

Huh? (none / 0) (#130)
by p lukasiak on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:12:44 PM EST

;-)

[ Parent ]

: heh (none / 0) (#133)
by andgarden on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:14:16 PM EST

(dkos allowed a lot more of these. . .)

[ Parent ]

Can you do me a favor. (none / 0) (#51)
by phat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:30:03 PM EST

I've had some trouble finding the appropriate rules defining the DNC's delegate allocations.

Ultimately, the DNC has to approve the delegate allocation rules provided by each state. But I don't know the rules that they are supposed to use to make that decision.

Do you have a link for this?

[ Parent ]

link (none / 0) (#92)
by p lukasiak on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:41:00 PM EST

delegate selection rules

the timing rules (rule 11) are on page 16 of the PDF file. The penalty rules for disobedying the timing provision is rule 20 C 1 a (Page 24 of the PDF)

[ Parent ]

Thank you (none / 0) (#105)
by phat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:48:07 PM EST

Perfect.

[ Parent ]

Now I know why I didn't read that earlier (none / 0) (#120)
by phat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:58:11 PM EST

I wish I hadn't read it.

[ Parent ]

yeah, its kinda weird isn't it... (none / 0) (#134)
by p lukasiak on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:14:21 PM EST

to actually read the rules, and then watch the rules committee pretend to be enforcing them...

[ Parent ]

I suspect (5.00 / 1) (#141)
by phat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:23:54 PM EST

That a few states didn't actually meet some of the requirements.

But the failsafe is this Rule 13 H:

H. For the purpose of fairly reflecting the division of preferences, the non-binding advisory presidential preference portion of primaries shall not be considered a step in the delegate selection process and is considered detrimental. State parties must take steps to educate the public that a non-binding presidential preference event is meaningless, and state parties and presidential candidates should take all steps possible not to participate.
1. In a state that uses a caucus and/or convention to determine presidential preference of voters, the plan must provide for the timely reporting of the election results to the state party.

This is terrible.

[ Parent ]

Grrr. (5.00 / 1) (#143)
by phat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:25:22 PM EST

This is such a vague and empty-headed rule.

[ Parent ]

Wait a tick (5.00 / 1) (#147)
by phat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:32:32 PM EST

Somebody may have violated this rule.

[ Parent ]

Hmmm, would it be this part? (1.00 / 1) (#155)
by Cream City on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:47:02 AM EST

. . . .state parties and presidential candidates should take all steps possible not to participate.

Do I see what you see?

[ Parent ]

: Yes (5.00 / 0) (#161)
by phat on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:46:04 AM EST

That is what I see.

[ Parent ]

Ah glitches are a small price (5.00 / 9) (#1)
by Lahdee on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:34:36 PM EST

to pay for the live blogging we got today. I especially liked the polls, very cool. Thanks so much for everything Jeralyn. Good luck with the changeover tonight.

Could also be a hit? (5.00 / 1) (#2)
by Andy08 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:35:17 PM EST

It seem to happen a lot to all pro-Hillary websites.
Coincidence? Perhaps....

Maybe it's just that Hillary sites (5.00 / 5) (#4)
by MarkL on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:36:32 PM EST

are popular.

[ Parent ]

: Yessss (5.00 / 2) (#12)
by Andy08 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:41:35 PM EST

I like that optimism better !!!!!

[ Parent ]

You make an interesting point (none / 0) (#124)
by hillct on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:02:12 PM EST

There's probably more to be said about this, but lets not. While that sort of thing does occur, it's difficult to develop compelling evidence of the true source (other than IP addresses) of such things so it would be irresponsible to make such accusations.

What can be said definitively is the issues being resolved this evening were hardware related, not network related.

[ Parent ]

My sympathies Jeralyn.... (5.00 / 7) (#3)
by Maria Garcia on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:36:14 PM EST

...but we really do appreciate that you hang in there for us.

It was a tough day staying on this (5.00 / 3) (#5)
by zfran on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:38:25 PM EST

site today, but never gave up and glad to finally be back in. Thank you so much for all you've done to keep things moving and civil here, and thanks for help in understanding the complicated rules and regs. we've come to know and critique.

I noticed (5.00 / 3) (#6)
by Coldblue on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:38:35 PM EST

that the site was continually loading when the 'live blog' was in the thread. Other threads were normal. I'm not a geek, just wondering if it was a problem.

I'd bet that's part of it (none / 0) (#36)
by blogtopus on Sat May 31, 2008 at 09:26:35 PM EST

I am a geek, and it seems the common denominator is the live blog. Having the server under constant loading for a large number of individual must really drain the resources.

[ Parent ]

It seems that comments (5.00 / 4) (#41)
by Stellaaa on Sat May 31, 2008 at 09:35:36 PM EST

should be blocked on live blog threads. A separate comment thread with the users having two windows open. I really think the live blogging slows things down and crashes since you have to reload to check for new comments.

[ Parent ]

: The trolls/troublemakers (5.00 / 1) (#68)
by JavaCityPal on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:16:00 PM EST

were here in bigger numbers than normal and dominated threads with their meaningless arguments, though, too.

[ Parent ]

The one with J and BTD (none / 0) (#38)
by waldenpond on Sat May 31, 2008 at 09:31:27 PM EST

had so many comments it was bogged down. Really can't go over 200.

So I left and went on to Ohio's live blog. No problems ....until the whole site went down.

[ Parent ]

coveritlive.com live bloging software (none / 0) (#127)
by hillct on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:07:21 PM EST

The live blog app is not hosted on talkleft.com although it is embedded on some pages. The result is that while it does constantly poll coveritlive.com for new entries, it doesn't have a direct impact on talkleft.com

[ Parent ]

Hey, you gave it an all-day effort (5.00 / 1) (#7)
by andgarden on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:39:27 PM EST

BTW, is the version of Scoop at the database software you're using 64 bit, if not, it's possible than anything beyond about 4 gigs of RAM in the server isn't going to make a difference.

It's possible that with this kind of traffic you've just outgrown your software.

Also (5.00 / 1) (#13)
by andgarden on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:42:47 PM EST

If you can talk Markos into letting you use his modified version of Scoop, that might well solve your problems.

[ Parent ]

Prolly not. (none / 0) (#17)
by Fabian on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:52:13 PM EST

Those bells and whistles probably add a ton of overhead to the site.

[ Parent ]

: I suspect that the whole thing (none / 0) (#22)
by andgarden on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:58:05 PM EST

is fairly light-weight. And my impression is that they streamlined, modified, and updated it to bear the weight of all the traffic.

[ Parent ]

DailyKos custom comment engine (none / 0) (#137)
by hillct on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:20:22 PM EST

Markos (through his tech staff) have offered to contribute their customized comment display code back to the Scoop project, but that has not yet happened, based presumably on time constraints, likely due in part to the the impact the election season has on dailykos.com

The mechanism used over at DailyKos is a more efficient version of the dynamic comments display mechanism currently available on the Comment Preferences Page of this site. The DailyKos version is somewhat more efficient on the back end and was written specifically in response to the exact same long comment thread rendering speed issues we're seeing here, so when that does become available, it will be deployed here. Until then, the exiting dynamic comments mode is more efficient than the default nested view, as well as providing (in my opinion) a better reader experience so you may want to try it out. If you don't see the dynamic options in the comment display mode list, be sure you've enabled 'Dynamic Interface Elements' in Interface Preferences.

[ Parent ]

: Thanks for the info (none / 0) (#146)
by andgarden on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:31:19 PM EST

I now have my comments set to nested, and I think the reason I did that was because, after threads passed ~200 comments, I was only able to see the subject lines in dynamic mode. I can see why that would be more efficient, but it makes it difficult to follow the conversation!

[ Parent ]
: Thanks (none / 0) (#159)
by themomcat on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:03:42 AM EST

I learned a couple of things from your comment. The Dynamic Interface Preference was especially helpful.

[ Parent ]

Since Scoop runs with a My-SQL (none / 0) (#46)
by RalphB on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:22:36 PM EST

backend, it might be worthwhile to check the transaction log space there. The live-blogging software may cause an undue increase in the number of transactions and, if the logs fill, hangs etc occur.

Threading issues in Apache can also cause these kind of problems. Generally there are logs for all these components and errors may show up there. If you're running on Linux, there may be error messages in the syslogd message files. FWIW.

[ Parent ]

: System Administration (none / 0) (#145)
by hillct on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:30:37 PM EST

Thankfully, the live blog software is not hosted on the talkleft server, but that said, now that we've hopefully addressed our hardware issues, I can focus on some further database optimizations that should improve overall performance further. In particular, the query cache and join buffer requirements of the larger threads are rather extensive. There are plenty of further optimizations to be had, but it's better to start with known sane hardware.

[ Parent ]

64-bit vs 32-bit hardware and software (none / 0) (#150)
by hillct on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:02:06 AM EST

64-bit hardware and OSs has benefits and drawbacks. They're optimal for database servers, for example, where the memory access requirements of individual processes (database server daemon) can exceed 4GB but at an OS level, any modern server OS (read: NOT Windows) supports Physical Address Extension which handles OS-level addressing of memory up to 64GB.

The chief drawback for web servers in particular is rather severe - per process memory requirements typically 20% higher than on a 32-bit OS - where webservers run many processes each with their own memory footprints, it's generally not reasonable to have a 20% memory overhead requirement.

There's a lot more to this, in much more detail than anyone here is likely to care about, and it is a debatable point.

[ Parent ]

Colin, thanks for your comments here (5.00 / 2) (#152)
by Jeralyn on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 12:55:31 AM EST

Colin is our web administrator who handles everything from Scoop and the design of the site to the hardware and the servers.

Most hosting companies offer you an email address when something goes wrong. Colin, on the other hand, is personally available, by phone, which is both rare and very helpful. For example, knowing that debate, primary and election days are big here, he's always around on them to help out. So instead of going down for a day, we're down for a few minutes usually at most.

That said, his last comment is a perfect example of what I meant when I said it's like talking to someone who speaks a different language. I don't understand a word.

But again, thanks Colin for all that you do for TalkLeft.

[ Parent ]

: Whew. I thought it was just me. :-) (5.00 / 1) (#156)
by Cream City on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:49:50 AM EST

[ Parent ]

Thanks so much Jeralyn for all you and BTD do (5.00 / 6) (#9)
by athyrio on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:40:38 PM EST

this is my favorite site....

Thanks so much. (5.00 / 2) (#10)
by jpete on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:41:10 PM EST

You've helped to make today better. Otherwise, HRC has been struck a blow, while Obama foreswears more of his background.

What's not making sense here?

The counter movement is growing (5.00 / 5) (#11)
by Edgar08 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:41:21 PM EST

As the internet is the last refuge of the disenfranchised, I do expect a bumper crop of pro-Clinton blogs "keeping up" with this Obama movement thingy.

Initially I got (5.00 / 6) (#14)
by Stellaaa on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:47:19 PM EST

excited that the arguments were on the table and we were getting to hear them all, I thought the whole thing would be behind closed doors.

Then I had to leave, I come back with a decision made that somehow did not make sense with what people were saying and the arguments I heard.

Then, Obama has this press conference on leaving the church and says some things that seemed rather strange about faith etc. In addition, he said that he did not anticipate the Wright and church thing to be a great issue. He finishes off, by saying that he will decide what to do about church in January. Uhh, he will know in November. His press conference had a disturbing quality.

In November (5.00 / 1) (#19)
by Monda on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:54:34 PM EST

He finishes off, by saying that he will decide what to do about church in January. Uhh, he will know in November.

LMAO, he will know in January?!

[ Parent ]

hmmmm (5.00 / 3) (#54)
by txpolitico67 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:03:29 PM EST

maybe he knows something we don't.

the fix must be really IN

[ Parent ]

Yes (5.00 / 2) (#59)
by tek on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:10:00 PM EST

That's my suspicion. Not only will the primaries be corrupt, but they have plan to corrupt the GE too. The Democratic leadership has gone barking mad. I detest Howard Dean.

[ Parent ]

: I doubt seriously (5.00 / 1) (#102)
by txpolitico67 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:45:40 PM EST

that the Republicans would roll over. See Florida in 2000 for details.

[ Parent ]
: oh it is probably that he doesn't plan on (none / 0) (#167)
by hellothere on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 11:43:56 AM EST

speaking to it during the election. he doesn't want to irritate the aa voters and hopes no more information will come out. good luck with that! it is going to happen whether he likes it or not. and if he thinks the repubs are going to play nice with him, then he is poorly informed about things.

[ Parent ]

Thanks Jeralyn (5.00 / 1) (#15)
by mattt on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:47:25 PM EST

and BTD for liveblogging and giving your time to keeping the site up. I enjoy your insights even if I disagree with a lot of them lately. Always good to listen to people you don't agree with. Good luck resolving the issues.

Heartfelt appreciation (5.00 / 4) (#16)
by clio on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:47:51 PM EST

for the dispassionate and accurate reporting. I must be one of the people causing the server problems as I find myself coming to this site more and more for informed, respectful commentary and opinions.

Thank you, Jeralyn.
Thank you, BTD.
And Mwah! BackfromOhio. Really enjoyed your on site observations today.

I want to thank and commend (5.00 / 3) (#18)
by themomcat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:53:16 PM EST

You, Jeralyn, BTD and BakfromOhio for a magnificent job that you have done, today especially. Thank you for giving us a voice here.

: Thanks (none / 0) (#176)
by BackFromOhio on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:25:55 PM EST

My thanks to Jeralyn and BTD - Reading their analyses of the Rules, the history of the primary scheduling, waivers & penalties, etc. (along with legal staff memos, challengers' docs & RBC By-Laws and Delegate Selection rules), was most helpful to me in following the proceedings yesterday.

[ Parent ]

Thanks so much (5.00 / 6) (#20)
by Democratic Cat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:55:49 PM EST

This is my favorite site right now, hands down. The live blogging is a true service to the readers; Jeralyn, BTD, and T Chris write amazing posts; and the commenters are some of the best to be found. Despite being in the tank for Hillary, I even enjoy many of the supporters of Sen. Obama who post here. They are a spirited bunch, if you can ignore the trolls (many of which are probably Republicans trying to stir up trouble).

My one complaint is that sometime it is difficult to figure out exactly where BTD stands on an issue. He's so wishy-washy. :-)

He's not wishy-washy (none / 0) (#53)
by lobary on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:32:51 PM EST

He's a man of principle.

[ Parent ]

Wow, didn't think I needed (5.00 / 5) (#73)
by Democratic Cat on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:18:14 PM EST

a snark tag on that one.

[ Parent ]

: I see what you did there! (5.00 / 2) (#135)
by lobary on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:20:13 PM EST

But you didn't see mine. /wink

[ Parent ]

Low key "drama" here :) (5.00 / 2) (#21)
by nycstray on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:57:59 PM EST

my mother called right when they started to debate FLA. Normally I would ask to call her back, but she wanted help finding a new pup for her and my dad. So I would like to say "THANKS!" for live blogging as my TV was muted for most of the 'debate'. Yes, one eye on muted TV, one on live blog while chatting away about what she's looking for, lol!~. I think it was actually less stressful or perhaps it just saved my TeeVee for the next round of insanity from this primary.
Again, Thank You!

Thanks (5.00 / 6) (#24)
by stxabuela on Sat May 31, 2008 at 09:01:08 PM EST

This blog is the only one I've found that allows supporters from both sides the opportunity to state their cases based on issues, not personalities.

I have become a person without a party, and I truly appreciate the "atmosphere" here. TL has been my refuge in a stormy season.

Borrowing a phrase from my children and grandchildren, "TL ROCKS!"

Get an unpaid/low paid intern or two? (5.00 / 1) (#25)
by jerry on Sat May 31, 2008 at 09:02:28 PM EST

You might be able to get some free/low cost semi-reasonable sysadmin help by sponsoring an intern from the nearby universities....

It all makes sense now. . . (5.00 / 10) (#30)
by NotThatStupid on Sat May 31, 2008 at 09:12:44 PM EST

... and what a brilliant strategy it is. Obama plans to win in November by using the Michigan Maneuver to force the electoral college to give some of McCain's votes to him.

Maybe he can take his name off the ballot in all the swing states to help that process along.

He Plans To Contest All Of The States (5.00 / 2) (#39)
by MO Blue on Sat May 31, 2008 at 09:33:28 PM EST

McCain wins using the precedent that there were X number of voters who meant to vote for me but just didn't vote. Therefore, I actually won the EV of the state. That will definitely win the WH in November

[ Parent ]

: It's his back up for the no-show youth vote (5.00 / 4) (#42)
by nycstray on Sat May 31, 2008 at 09:35:41 PM EST

[ Parent ]

ROFLMAO!! (5.00 / 2) (#61)
by tek on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:10:54 PM EST

LMAO!!!! (5.00 / 2) (#87)
by DWCG on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:37:21 PM EST

That's the quote of the day!

[ Parent ]

Thought the problem was on my (5.00 / 2) (#31)
by JavaCityPal on Sat May 31, 2008 at 09:13:05 PM EST

router, so I kept resetting it :)

Jeralyn, BTD, and BackfromOhio all earned big KUDOS for a great day at the blog !!

Can you believe this?! (5.00 / 6) (#32)
by americanincanada on Sat May 31, 2008 at 09:17:46 PM EST

Obama aide Anita Dunn, per ABC News:

"Asked if Obama would wait to get a concession call from Clinton before claiming the nomination, Dunn said the onus was on Clinton now that the Democratic Party has firmed up the number of delegates needed to claim the party's nod."

"`He's not going to wait by the phone like a high-school girl waiting for a date,' said Dunn. `That's not Barack Obama.'"

"`After Tuesday,' Dunn added, referring to the final contests of South Dakota and Montana, Clinton `can decide how united she wants this party to be.'"

I tried riding the unity pony. (5.00 / 5) (#34)
by Donald from Hawaii on Sat May 31, 2008 at 09:24:17 PM EST

But it kept bucking me off and galloping back to its stable in Unity City.

[ Parent ]

WTF?! (5.00 / 3) (#35)
by nycstray on Sat May 31, 2008 at 09:26:02 PM EST

Methinks the Unity Pony needs a few lessons in unity.

[ Parent ]

How uncooth and surly!!! (5.00 / 2) (#43)
by zfran on Sat May 31, 2008 at 09:35:52 PM EST

I Think The Voters Will Decide How United (5.00 / 4) (#44)
by MO Blue on Sat May 31, 2008 at 09:37:18 PM EST

they want to be. With supporters like Dunn, the answer may well be "Count me out. It is your party now and your responsibility to prove that the NEW exclusive Democratic Party is viable without my help or my vote."

[ Parent ]

I looked up Dunn's e-mail and just (5.00 / 2) (#56)
by zfran on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:07:47 PM EST

wrote to her. I find her choice of words appalling and insulting. Hearing his reps. Obamaspeak really drives home how some of the people who come to this blog behave and write.

[ Parent ]

Dunn used to apparently work (5.00 / 1) (#72)
by zfran on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:17:57 PM EST

for Tom Daschle.

[ Parent ]

: her comments speaks to the attitude of (none / 0) (#168)
by hellothere on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 11:46:55 AM EST

the campaign. that unity pony will be spending most of the election in the barn it seems.

[ Parent ]

Heh (5.00 / 1) (#62)
by Steve M on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:11:35 PM EST

Methinks her name should be Anita Pony.

[ Parent ]

Can we please now admit (5.00 / 3) (#79)
by madamab on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:22:31 PM EST

that Barack Obama is not now, nor ever will be, interested in reaching out to Hillary Clinton or her supporters?

What does it take, folks?

What.

Does.

It.

Take.

[ Parent ]

: Speaking for me ONLY (5.00 / 3) (#100)
by txpolitico67 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:44:34 PM EST

I get it. Always have.

[ Parent ]
: They are the sorest of sore winners (5.00 / 1) (#149)
by Raven15 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:59:19 PM EST

[ Parent ]
: Reaching Out (none / 0) (#177)
by BackFromOhio on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 09:35:30 PM EST

Watched the discussion at CNN this evening concerning what Clinton & her supporters will do -- Jeffrey Toobin, Gloria Borge, et al. Borge said several things that raised my ire: First she mentioned that discredited theory floating around the the fewer the AAs in a state, the more white people vote for Obama (see thoughtful critiques by Sean Wilentz, Prof. of American Studies at Princeton, & Lind, Journalism Prof at Columbia); second, she said Barack needs Hillary to work hard to get her supporters to back Barack as nominee -- my problems with this one are that Barack is not nominee yet & Hillary's supporters made up their own minds to support Hillary and will make up their own minds about whether to support Barack if he should become the nominee. We are not sheep - but analytical thinkers. While I respect Hillary's loyalty to the Dem Party, I am so repulsed by the disrespect for the rules as a means for elbowing Hillary out of the race, it's going to take a lot more than Hillary doing the heavy lifting once again to bring me around.

[ Parent ]

Not enough to make digs at (5.00 / 4) (#88)
by cloudy on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:38:30 PM EST

mothers, and grandmothers. Now we have to insult girls? Please. Yet they expect women to wait around for a ride on the unity express.

[ Parent ]

E-mailed Anita Dunn and just (5.00 / 4) (#91)
by zfran on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:39:48 PM EST

received an e-mail back saying she was sorry she said it the she did, but she was upset because a Hillary supporter had said something racial and it upset her. So, she apologized....with Sen. Obama, isn't always someone else's fault. Anyway, I re-wrote her and told her why I wasn't voting for Sen. Obama. It really felt good.

[ Parent ]

what is her email (5.00 / 2) (#95)
by bjorn on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:42:06 PM EST

: Anita Dunn's e-mail is (5.00 / 2) (#104)
by zfran on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:47:14 PM EST

adunn@squiermedia.com

[ Parent ]

wait . . . she blamed a Clinton supporter (5.00 / 3) (#128)
by nycstray on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:08:00 PM EST

and managed to pull race (ism) into it also?

Oy. GMAFB.

[ Parent ]

: i don't want 4 years of hearing it's all about (none / 0) (#169)
by hellothere on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 11:48:38 AM EST

race and that i am a low information, bigoted hick. no thanks mr obama.

[ Parent ]

AICF! (none / 0) (#40)
by waldenpond on Sat May 31, 2008 at 09:33:35 PM EST

I had to bug out right before the MI (5.00 / 2) (#80)
by bjorn on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:23:31 PM EST

decision was announced and just got back. Thanks Jeralyn and BTD for a great day. It was easier to take sharing it with everyone at TL.

I am cruising Red State, Michelle Malkin...others (5.00 / 3) (#81)
by txpolitico67 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:26:03 PM EST

and for what it's worth, they are more on the Clinton side of things. Red State said that Hillary supporters are NOT backing down AND that the demonstration looked more like a conservative rally.

The dynamics are unbelievable right now. Frikkn craziness!!

: Heh (none / 0) (#114)
by Steve M on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:54:55 PM EST

Uh, thanks for the compliment. Yow.

[ Parent ]

My husband just told me (5.00 / 3) (#86)
by madamab on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:36:48 PM EST

that, although it makes him nauseous, he is going to vote for John McCain.

This is a 55-year-old original dirty f-ing hippie who protested the Vietnam war when he was 15 years old.

He has never, ever voted for a Republican. He was a George McGovern guy.

The Democratic Party has absolutely lost its collective mind.

I laud your husband (5.00 / 2) (#98)
by txpolitico67 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:43:29 PM EST

i'm sitting here angry because the party that my aunt Pauline, who got me into politics in the FIRST place when I was 14 working for Congressman Jim Wright here in Fort Worth, got me so active and committed to is gone. I am so glad she's not alive to see this incredible bullsh1t. she is no doubt SPINNING in her grave right now.

Howard Dean should resign IMMEDIATELY for leading the party of FDR, Truman, JFK and BILL CLINTON into the dustbin.

Thanks for the unity Barack. I sure hope that video of your wife IS coming out with the racially charged comments...hence your TWENTY YEAR DECISION to leave your church has become so important.

[ Parent ]

I agree with your DH (5.00 / 2) (#138)
by reslez on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:20:48 PM EST

I never thought I would say this but it's conceivable I might vote for McCain. All he has to do is hint he won't appoint judges that would overturn Roe. Think how many Hillary voters he might pick up by doing that. What's to stop him from dogwhistling our direction the same way they dogwhistle to the right?

Thanks to this primary brawl and the loutish behavior of Obama's supporters I've become utterly unenthusiastic about the Democratic party. That's pretty amazing considering how traumatized I feel by the entire 8 year Bush debacle. I guess the ability to inspire strong feelings in hooligans really is a double-edged sword.

Also, since this is my first comment I would also like to thank Jeralyn, BTD and everyone else for their hard work on the site and comment moderation. Reading discussions here has been a balm and oasis.

[ Parent ]

welcome to the site (5.00 / 1) (#154)
by Jeralyn on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:12:16 AM EST

Glad you like it.

I think any Democrat is better than a Republican not just because of Roe v. Wade but all issues that come before the Supreme Court and our federal courts -- particularly involving the Bill of Rights. These are lifetime appointments that will mold our courts for 30 to 40 years.

I think the Dems lost a big chunk of female voters today and can say goodbye to Florida and Michigan, as well as to Ohio and probably PA if Obama is the nominee, but I'm still voting for the Democrat. Obama's possible win in the western states can't make up for those.

And, I'm still going to cover the convention. No boycott for me.

[ Parent ]

: No confidence here (5.00 / 1) (#158)
by reslez on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 01:59:49 AM EST

Obama's record on judicial appointments in the Senate doesn't engender confidence. Unlike him, I'm not a fan of John Roberts. When paired with our toothless Democratic congressional leadership, Obama is even less inspiring. And the threat of losing more rights rings hollow when it comes from the same craven party leaders who participated in the last 7 years of assaults on our civil liberties.
Judicial appointments are a necessary but not sufficient condition to choose a candidate. I believe in the Democratic party's ideals, which means I prefer a Democratic candidate to a Republican one 99 times out of 100. I believe Obama shares most of those ideals -- but I'm not confident he will act on them. Obama has yet to demonstrate that any issue matters to him other than winning the nomination. That's why he doesn't have my vote.
At this point I intend to write-in for the Presidential ballot. But as my earlier comment stated, it's conceivable I could vote for McCain. At this stage in the nomination, that is a profoundly depressing statement.

[ Parent ]

My son is having his fun (none / 0) (#160)
by Cream City on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 02:39:08 AM EST

because I match your description of your spouse, but for the gender. And I always vote, and I always have voted Dem for decades now. And I raised my children to always vote, too, taking them to the polls with me and inculcating in them that there is no duty more important for us. So I was horrified in 2000 when my progeny returned from his first time at the polls to say he voted for Nader. Ohhhhhh. Even if it made no difference in our state. Ohhhhh.

Now, he just heard his mom say that I don't see how I can vote this fall at all -- I can't vote for McCain, but I can't vote for the presumptuous nominee and his party now, as it's not a party I can belong to or support at all anymore. And for me to not vote at all (except downticket) is, believe me, beyond imagining. So my son just spent a happy half-hour getting back at me for all the times we have discussed his vote for Nader, all the times he has watched the horrors of the last eight years in this country under the result.

But I don't see any way around it, after what we witnessed today. Frankly, even if Clinton becomes the nominee, or even if the convention is deadlocked and the Dems resurrect Gore -- I still would have to hear some firm commitments from Clinton or Gore about how the Dem Party is going to clean out the corruption and reverse the terrible direction it has taken this year, and especially today.

[ Parent ]

Obama cut off his (5.00 / 5) (#90)
by Mrwirez on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:39:33 PM EST

nose to spite his face..... He cut Hillary in half, alienated probably 25% or so of the party, to claim victory on Wednesday over 4 of Hillary's delegates. None of his own, yet some of Edwards, Chris Dodds, and some from Judas Iscariot's pathetic campaign.

If Obama was smart, and that is a big IF, he would have said seat all of them from FL and MI. Remove me from MI, because I was naive and removed my name from the ballot. He would have looked like a stand up guy....I don't mind losing that bad, but I don't like to lose and feel like I was ripped off... ie 2000. Obama would have, in all reality won anyway, even though I feel he is a light weight and without merit. His problem is now she can cast a light on him..... He did not get the popular vote, what nominee does not get the popular vote in the primary's? She is probably a better match against McCain, and in the battleground states.

Big thanks to Jeralyn (5.00 / 2) (#96)
by cloudy on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:42:51 PM EST

and BTD. I'm 6 hours behind so was fast asleep when this started. Thank you for the live blogging!

This was a banner day on TalkLeft (5.00 / 2) (#112)
by Radiowalla on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:52:03 PM EST

Great blogging all 'round.

I'm proud to have donated yesterday and am grateful for an island of excellent analysis.

Time for Clinton (1.33 / 12) (#49)
by lgm on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:25:27 PM EST

It is even more clear than ever that Obama will be the nominee. It is time for Clinton to accept the decisions of her party. The youtube clips of over the top Clinton supporters show that she is tearing the party apart.

Al Gore accepted the Supreme Court decision in 2000. It's time for Clinton to do the right thing. This is the real test of her character. Al Gore passed, what about her?

Heh (5.00 / 8) (#57)
by Steve M on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:09:06 PM EST

Tell me, are you happy about the results of Al Gore's decision?

[ Parent ]

: Yeah igm might what to watch (5.00 / 2) (#70)
by Practically Lactating on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:17:16 PM EST

the Al Gore analogies.
Is this the SAT question that will be appearing in 8 years?
Al Gore : Hillary Clinton :: George Bush : ???

[ Parent ]

Please, the "decisions of her party" (5.00 / 1) (#58)
by zfran on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:09:31 PM EST

hasn't ended and won't until August.

[ Parent ]

Right, (5.00 / 4) (#63)
by tek on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:12:18 PM EST

and aren't we all thrilled with the results of Gore accepting Gore v. Bush? Pay attention, will ya?

[ Parent ]

Yes... (5.00 / 4) (#75)
by Jackson Hunter on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:19:39 PM EST

and it's clearer than ever that we gonna get our *ss handed to us in Nov. Al Gore not defending himself was pathetic and sad, not a show of "character", unless you feel that all of those dead soldiers and record deficits are a good thing. (And no, I'm not voting for McCain, but I'm not voting for BHO either. He can go to Hell with his arrogance.)

Oh, and character involves not sitting in a church that spews hate for 20 years, and having that hate exposed to your children. It would be like me going to a Klan meeting and taking my kids, if I had any. Apparently, the Precious agrees with me since he threw the whole church under the bus, now that it has served his needs. Sorry, I'm not supporting a guy who will throw me under a bus when it is convenient to do so.

Good luck in Nov. As the Obama people say, they don't want or need us, which is the racist half of the democratic party, so I guess I take my "hatred" and "White privilege" and stay home. But hey, enjoy your Pyrrhic victory, I'm sure that it will keep you warm.

Jackson

[ Parent ]

: i think brazile had a lot to do with (none / 0) (#171)
by hellothere on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 11:52:45 AM EST

gore's loss in floria. of course let's also not forget liberman and his disgusting conduct during the contentious period about votes.

[ Parent ]

Yeah (5.00 / 4) (#84)
by Blue Jean on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:31:51 PM EST

I don't know what planet you're living on, but here in a place we like to call Reality, Al Gore got his "character", a spoiled, alcoholic brat got the Presidency, the US got two wars, the SC got two reactionary Supreme Court Justices, the Treasury got record deficits, the US got humilated, and the rest of us got shafted.

If anything, Bush vs. Gore is a good example of why Democrats should not give in.

[ Parent ]

As I posted yesterday in another thread: (5.00 / 2) (#94)
by DWCG on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:41:45 PM EST

Deja vu all over again.

Bush proclaiming victory, while Gore only asks for recounts in select counties, all the while the true intent of the GOT DAMN VOTERS isn't even on anyone's damn mind or mouths.

You unpatriotic undemocratic smucks: SEAT THE DELEGATES AS THE PEOPLE VOTED!!!!!!!

Where's the God-blessed love for DEMOCRACY in this fricking country?

Let me stop, before I go Jeramiah Wright on ya...

[ Parent ]

RIGHT ON!! (5.00 / 2) (#144)
by txpolitico67 on Sat May 31, 2008 at 11:26:33 PM EST

Hillary is a fighter. I will back her up all the way. If Gore had had HALF of Hillary's cojones, we would probably not be in this terrible state we are in now.

[ Parent ]

Gore was constrained by FL election law, which (none / 0) (#164)
by jawbone on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 10:10:31 AM EST

required that the challenging candidate be able to prove that a recount (after the first mandatory machine recount, which I gather 18 counties didn't even do, based on Jeffrey Toobin's statements) would likely result in a real change in the vote outcome.

I asked if others here remembered that, and one commenter (Steve?) stated it was correct.

So, Gore could not demand a full statewide recount without proof that it would likely result in a change. They had pick their challenge counties carefully. Perhaps the only one they could have asked for and didn't is the county where many ballots were rejected as overvotes, and it seems voters out of an excess of cautions had filled in the ballot for Gore, then also wrote in his name to ensure their vote would be counter. Which meant it wasn't, alas.

The FL Supreme Court did eventually come to decide a full statewide recount was needed, and the Supreme Five cut that off and awarded the presidency to Bush.

It was not the fault of Gore that he didn't demand a statewide count--he simply could not.

I remember a retired FL election official made that statement. Later, it seemed to be buried in part due to the MCM's Narrative that Gore campaigned badly and thus did not deserve to win.

[ Parent ]

: Would it have been difficult - yes (none / 0) (#175)
by DWCG on Sun Jun 01, 2008 at 04:50:39 PM EST

But there were plenty of lawyers in the Democratic party and activists to fly in or mobilize locally to force it. Additionally, they could have asked for it by the Florida Supreme Court. And they should have asked for all under-votes and over-votes (the condition that truly ascertains the will of the voters, and just so happens to be the one that shows that Gore actually won).
In addition to being the right thing to do, it would have given him the rhetorical and moral high-ground, and basis to fight all the way to the floor of Congress.

[ Parent ]

Here we go (5.00 / 2) (#103)
by PlayInPeoria on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:45:47 PM EST

with the "Clinton is tearing the party apart" ... Di you EVEN watch what the DRBC did today?

They wer not tearing apart theparty when they ignored half of the Fl vote and gave MI delegates to a person not even on the ballot.

My 7th grade civics class had a better concept of Democracy.

GET THIS... if Obama is the nominee then he needs to start being sensitive to the FL , MI voters and the Hillary supporters.

HE CAN NOT GET ELECTED WITHOUT THEIR SUPPORT!

[ Parent ]

When the final curtain (none / 0) (#23)
by miriam on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:59:46 PM EST

comes down on this wretched season and the books start to be written and published, what do you think will be seen as the moment/event that the Democrats lost the '08 election?

Hasn't happened yet (5.00 / 2) (#47)
by Lou Grinzo on Sat May 31, 2008 at 08:23:47 PM EST

If it happens, it will be when Obama refuses to pick Clinton for the VP slot, and then does precious little to mend fences with her supporters.

Even if he picks her, Obama will need the schmoozing skills of Bill Clinton, and from what I can see he's not even in the same time zone as Bill in that regard.

[ Parent ]

The moment?... (5.00 / 8) (#85)
by p lukasiak on Sat May 31, 2008 at 10:33:09 PM EST

one point? well, if there is one point where his odds of getting less than 270 electoral college votes went below 50%, it was "bitter/cling."

that was the light bulb moment -- the point at which people who knew they didn't like Obama, but were sure why they didn't like him, realized what it was that was wrong with him -- his complete disconnect from the concerns of average working americans.

Bitter/cling made it possible for every smear that the GOP would eventually put out about Obama to be believed, and amplified.

The moment when the Party lost the election was when they voted to strip four delegates from Clinton. It was an overt sign of complete, insitutional disrespect for Hillary Clinton.

That moment stripped the fig leaf of "following the rules" for screwing clinton by only giving FL and MI delegates half the vote. It was completely unnecessary -- its the equivalent of stripping two more delegates, so its not a big deal in terms of delegate counts.... but the committee under no circumstances had the power to take delegates from one person, and give them to another. It was just egregious.

[ Parent ]