home

Yep, "Turnout Is Heavy"

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Tue May 06, 2008 at 10:42:09 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg This!! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

It is the time of day for the standard "turnout is heavy" stories. Political Wire has two:

Turnout Very Heavy

Charlotte Observer: "Long lines were reported this morning at some polling places across North Carolina in the state's first significant presidential primary election in two decades... Longtime N.C. political observers say that 1.5 million voters may participate in the historic Democratic primary."

Indianapolis Star: "More voters have turned out in the first half hour than usually turn out in a half day... Republicans appeared to be crossing over in droves today in Marion County and suburban counties."

The Republicans in Marion County part is interesting. The "It's Rush Limbaugh's fault" contingent is no doubt revving up.

Chuck Todd, once a respected voice, now on MSNBC declaring "campaigning over" today. I guess West Virginia, Kentucky, Oregon, etc., do not matter. Chuck, what happened to you man?

By Big Tent Democrat

< TalkLeft Appreciation Days | DNC To FL And MI: Drop Dead >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Yep, "Turnout Is Heavy" | 267 comments (267 topical)
    It must be bad news (5.00 / 12) (#1)
    by Stellaaa on Tue May 06, 2008 at 10:46:20 AM EST
    people voting, people participating.  Obviously the coronation and Hillary quitting would have been the right path.  

    Sickening... (5.00 / 7) (#28)
    by Exeter on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:12:17 AM EST
    ...all those people voting and in MAY no less! I just feel so bad that MSNBC has to come in tonight to cover it, although I heard they were all going to be wearing matching "Bros before Hos" t-shirts, so that might lift their spirits; )

    [ Parent ]
    There is a case to made (1.00 / 0) (#63)
    by lilybart on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:28:53 AM EST
    that this prolonged process is a problem for Democrats.

    If you read this site and kos for example, you will see people claiming that they won't vote in NOV if their candidate doens't win.

    I am not saying Hillary should have dropped out, but this process may be democratic in that lots of people are voting, but the repercussions may sink us.

    I hope we can all come back together to defeat McCain, who again, today or yesterday, promised more Scalias.

    [ Parent ]

    the Clinton supporters... (5.00 / 6) (#72)
    by p lukasiak on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:38:58 AM EST
    ...who say they won't vote for Obama aren't saying that because of the primary process, they are saying that because they are becoming more familiar with Obama, and don't like what they see.  But those flaws would have been exposed anyway by the GOP.

    The Obots who won't vote for Clinton haven't learned anything new about her, they are all just exhibiting cult-like behavior when they say they won't vote for her.

    [ Parent ]

    Right (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by CST on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:43:42 AM EST
    So Clinton supporters who don't like Obama don't like him because he is bad and has flaws.

    but Obama supporters who don't like Clinton MUST be robots or in a cult because they haven't learned anything new and they couldn't possible dislike her before this primary or due to anything else they've learned in the process...

    right...

    [ Parent ]

    That would be correct. (5.00 / 6) (#107)
    by vicsan on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:52:23 AM EST
    Very astute of you.

    [ Parent ]
    vicsan....I like your style and your predictions (none / 0) (#118)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:57:04 AM EST
    on the other thread...go Hillary

    [ Parent ]
    Back atcha! (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by vicsan on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:23:52 PM EST
    I am so fed up with BO supporters. I've never witnessed such obnoxiousness in all my years of being involved in politics. I'm beyond being gracious to them. I tried.

    Keep the faith! Hillary WILL WIN  both NC and Indiana! I feel it in my bones! Go, Hillary!

    BTW...love your screen name.:)

    [ Parent ]

    Thanks...Me Too....And Together We Will (none / 0) (#254)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 02:33:44 PM EST
    celebrate tonight with all our other TL buddies.

    [ Parent ]
    One reason (5.00 / 7) (#110)
    by BigB on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:53:40 AM EST
    I will give you some reasons whi I support Hillary and why I will not vote for Obama (when this season started out I found both of then equally attractive):

    a) Obama's lack of experience and accomplishments, and his ambition.

    b) His campaign and his supporters playing the race card against Hillary and her supporters.

    c) Obama using right wing talking points against Hillary starting early in the process.

    d) The nastiness of Obama's online supporters. I started noticing this in November even before the primary started heating up.

    e) The trashing of a decent progressive Democrat by the so-called progressive blogs and other left-of-center columnists.

    f) The nastiness of CNN, MSNBC, NY Times and other outlets towards Hillary.

    [ Parent ]

    I agree (5.00 / 6) (#145)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:06:54 PM EST
    In addition I get PEEVED when people tell me it's just PASSION that will subside once the HEAT of the primary is over.

    I don't base my political decisions on PASSION and don't think anyone should. The fact that Obama bases his candidacy on catering to PASSION is one of my problems with him -- Brother Love's Traveling Salvation Show -- ICK.

    I don't like any of the candidates all that much.  However, I think Hillary is the best of the three.  She is the one of two D candidates who you can count on to rarely say anything head-slappingly stupid (Bosnia being an exception).  Obama, on the other hand, has to hide from media to salve his gaffe-prone-ness.

    Two things will happen if we nominate a candidate who is prone to head-slappingly stupid gaffes:

    1.  He will lose.
    2.  He will win and kill the Democratic brand for decades.

    Republicans can get away with nominating politically stupid candidates because they TRULY have the media at their beck and call.  Dems can't.

    And yeah, add all your reasoning to mine.   I have a feeling the "don't blame me, I didn't vote for him" stickers will be all the rage this season.

    [ Parent ]

    number 3 (5.00 / 8) (#156)
    by p lukasiak on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:13:12 PM EST
    you forgot one...

    3) he will lose and kill the Democratic brand for decades.

    its McGovern all over again, only worse -- Obama is truly out of touch with the average American voter, and the GOP is going to exploit that to the hilt against the Democratic Party if Obama is the nominee

    [ Parent ]

    yup (5.00 / 6) (#116)
    by p lukasiak on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:56:31 AM EST
    the level of antipathy toward Clinton from Obama supporters is simply disproportionate.   Clinton supporters don't feel that way about Obama -- they just see him as not ready, and not electable.

     

    [ Parent ]

    Clinton Derangement syndrome (5.00 / 5) (#142)
    by noholib on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:06:26 PM EST
    There's a term for this irrational hatred: Clinton Derangement Syndrome.
    Jeff Weintraub has posted about this several times on his blog: jeffweintraub.blogspot.com

    [ Parent ]
    Too much democracy killing democracy (5.00 / 1) (#132)
    by angie on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:02:14 PM EST
    credit to John Stewart.

    [ Parent ]
    Such A Typical Obama Supporter Response (3.00 / 2) (#105)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:51:37 AM EST
    If you go on the blogs, you will see that obama supporters are the ones who when they aren't calling HIllary names, are repeating over and over again that they won't vote for Hillary if she is the nominee.  And yes, some Hillary supporters have said the same if obama is the nominee.  We will just have to wait and see what transpires, but I have more confidence that Hillary's supporters will do the right thing.

    [ Parent ]
    Do the (5.00 / 3) (#171)
    by kenoshaMarge on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:20:54 PM EST
    right thing? The right thing by who's definition? I will make my choice whether or not to support Obama, if God forbid he is the candidate, based on things that are important to me.

     Just mindlessly voting the party line as I have done for 40 years is no longer what "I" consider doing the right thing.  

    [ Parent ]

    voting (none / 0) (#178)
    by AgreeToDisagree on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:24:01 PM EST
    Just mindlessly voting the party line as I have done for 40 years is no longer what "I" consider doing the right thing.  

    for McCain would be very hard to justify if you support Clinton.  not voting for Obama is a independent decision (although not voting is an action).

    [ Parent ]

    A. I don't (5.00 / 4) (#215)
    by kenoshaMarge on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:51:32 PM EST
    have to justify my vote to you or anyone else.
    And B. I did not say I would vote for John McCain. That would never happen.

    I will vote because I always vote because I was taught and believe that voting is a civic duty. In order to do that duty it is also my duty to make as informed a decision as possible.

    If I can no longer vote for a Democratic candidate I will write in someone, vote down ticket for Democrats I feel are worthy of my support and go home satisfied that I have done the best I can for what I believe and what I can live with.

    [ Parent ]

    Right on (5.00 / 2) (#222)
    by txpolitico67 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 01:01:30 PM EST
    I have said I will NOT relinquish my vote.  I will simply write in the names of candidates who I feel have earned my vote.

    Good for you Marge!

    [ Parent ]

    What is your point (1.00 / 1) (#120)
    by CST on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:57:26 AM EST
    I didn't say anything about the Obama blogs.  I was pointing out the hypocricy in the statement.  P.S. scroll down and you'll see I called an Obama supporter out for something similar.  I am not commenting on what people say on blogs, I was responding to the comment as written.  But sure, I must be such a "typical Obama supporter" for decrying hypocricy.

    [ Parent ]
    "Typical" (none / 0) (#256)
    by txpolitico67 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 02:39:55 PM EST
    is Obama's word, not Hillary's.  Hope you're not bitter about it.

    [ Parent ]
    I wasn't referring to Hillary (none / 0) (#259)
    by CST on Tue May 06, 2008 at 02:46:27 PM EST
    I was referring to the post I replied to.  And yea, I'm bitter.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm not bitter...at all (none / 0) (#268)
    by txpolitico67 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 04:56:47 PM EST
    Of course I am disappointed at times that a lot of my fellow citizens don't see the policy greatness I see in HRC.  Her plans for health care, energy and jobs are those that I feel would benefit our country the most.

    Here is your opportunity to discuss how BHO will get the country back on track.  Since I have done my homework on the candidates, I would love your perspective on BHO's policies.  You have stated that you want to be able to debate and make headway for Mr. Obama.

    Here's your chance.  Tell me how he would get us out of Iraq.

    Go.

    [ Parent ]

    Hmm (none / 0) (#226)
    by kayla on Tue May 06, 2008 at 01:08:28 PM EST
    You sound a lot like Barack Obama.

    But really, I think this long primary season is good, especially for Obama.  He's getting his excuses together for the GOP when they start attacking him about all those weird friends he has.  Also, the first time Wright came up it was only stopped by Bosnia and the second time it was stopped by the gas tax holiday issue.  Hillary's mistakes are really helping him.  It isn't the other way around, because, y'know Obama never makes mistakes.

    [ Parent ]

    Prime example. (none / 0) (#166)
    by lilybart on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:18:25 PM EST
    Here is a prime example of an angry Hillary poster who sounds like he/she wont' vote if Obama is the nominee.

    Can you deny the animosity in your words? I am an Obot? I know Hillary, I live in NYC. There is nothing new to know except her new positions on issues.:)

    just saying it looks like a bad irreparable split at this point

    [ Parent ]

    Don't assume (5.00 / 5) (#181)
    by dissenter on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:25:44 PM EST
    That if this process had not played out I would have voted for Obama. I would not. I think he is totally unqualified. Wright, Ayers, Rezco, etc sealed the deal. This guy is amateur hour and he hangs out with pretty bad characters. I have no idea who BO is or what he really thinks or stands for. When you have a blank slate you have to look at other things - like who has influenced him. What do I see -  slumlords, crazy religious people and domestic terrorists. Add that to the freelancing NAFTA dude and the foreign policy expert who doesn't have enough sense not to call a sitting senator and a former first lady a "monster" on international television. This guy doesn't have creds or commonsense.

    But that is just me. Of course, I am in a swing state.

    [ Parent ]

    my animosity... (5.00 / 3) (#195)
    by p lukasiak on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:29:53 PM EST
    is toward the media and the Obots.  If you display the kind of irrational loathing of Clinton that Obots do, then you're an Obot.

    Obama has run a nasty, dishonest campaign, but I don't hate him for it.  That's politics.  Its the people who act as his enablers that are the real problem.


    [ Parent ]

    Ditto (3.00 / 2) (#201)
    by lilybart on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:32:30 PM EST
    Everything you said could be replaced with Hillbot instead of Obot.

    [ Parent ]
    Most of em have retreated (5.00 / 1) (#235)
    by Salo on Tue May 06, 2008 at 01:38:05 PM EST
    to a few sites on the net and have sworn off confrontation with obama fans. why must you invade the place looking for a fight?

    [ Parent ]
    so, your response is (4.50 / 2) (#216)
    by dws3665 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:51:42 PM EST
    basically to say (twice):

    I am rubber, you are glue.

    Very astute.

    [ Parent ]

    that is the level (5.00 / 1) (#252)
    by lilybart on Tue May 06, 2008 at 02:24:21 PM EST
    of conversation here if you are not a Hillary cheerleader.

    I am called an Obot, a cultist, lilybRat, lilyBark, comments consist of Woof Woof.....

    [ Parent ]

    Ditto (1.00 / 1) (#199)
    by lilybart on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:32:06 PM EST
    Everything you said could be said could be replaced with Hillbot instead of Obot.

    [ Parent ]
    Who cares what SelfHelp the O paTroll is slinging (4.16 / 6) (#230)
    by Ellie on Tue May 06, 2008 at 01:23:29 PM EST
    Really, where on Goddess's green earth did you get the notion that your idiotic psycho-caca will sway support to a candidate who doesn't deserve it, hasn't earned it, and is too bored and self-centered to make a case for himself?

    No one voter has to justify his or her vote to anyone. If you don't know that you don't know diddley.

    Take up your personal issues with Hillary or supporters with your own counsel. (She won me over AFTER Obama lost me on his own insults and questionable actions.)

    I think a good starting point for your cure is believing that astro-trolling this pap holds any sway.

    I mean, OOOOOOOOOOH, an Obama troll stomps around demanding answers. Please. If you wanted to be useful, explain again how someone winning "the contest" of Guam or winning a red-forever state with Dems for a Day is equal to straight up winning "the contest" of PA.

    [ Parent ]

    proved my point (none / 0) (#264)
    by lilybart on Tue May 06, 2008 at 03:19:38 PM EST
    the anger flies off the page!!

    [ Parent ]
    If Hillary (5.00 / 5) (#76)
    by misspeach2008 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:39:33 AM EST
    is forced out of this race before the convention, I will not only vote for John McCain, I'll campaign for him.

    [ Parent ]
    Now if that's not a cultist view... (5.00 / 1) (#182)
    by mbuchel on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:25:57 PM EST
    I don't know what is.

    So I guess health care, Iraq, the economy, the environment, education, torture, limitless presidential power, and any other issue aren't as important as making sure that we give our Democratic circular firing squad every chance to succeed even though it is clear who will end up with more delegates (even including the primaries that Hillary was against before she was for in FL and MI) when all is said and done.

    Get over it.  She isn't as strong a candidate for President as we all thought AND ran a lousy campaign.  She's a decent Senator, would be an excellent Supreme Court Justice, but in this race for President, she got beat fair and square.

    And one more thing.  Primary races end all the time before every last state has voted.  Once someone has "effectively" clinched, they end.  We have reached that time.  It's over.

    So go have fun with that Supreme Court for the next 30 years while you go campaign for McSame.

    [ Parent ]

    Obama doesn't stand a chance (5.00 / 2) (#214)
    by MarkL on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:51:19 PM EST
    against McCain, either way.
    Given his ludicrous posturing, with false claims of expertise, there is no way he can pass the CIC threshold now. No one will trust him to lead the armed forces or conduct foreign policy---nor should they.

    [ Parent ]
    Electability Arguments (none / 0) (#244)
    by sar75 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 02:01:10 PM EST
    ...on both sides are utterly unconvincing.  Both Obama and Clinton have strengths and weaknesses, but there is not one set of polls or arguments that prove decisively that one is more electable than the other.

    But to say that one or the other has no chance against McCain not only belies the available polling, but it fails to take into account the enormous - really truly massive - structural advantages that any Democrat will have in November.  From the economy to gas prices to unemployment to the war to the environment, Dems win on every issue.  The Democratic candidate only needs to run a competent campaign and they should win handily.

    Once we have a candidate, he or she will receive a nice healthy bounce, leaving McCain in the dust for the remainder of the campaign. The fact that this old crank can't break 45-47% in this environment (and this is the golden period of his campaign - when he's all alone and not the object of attack) and is consistently bested by both Democrats in head to head polling speaks volumes about the weakness of his candidacy.

    So, I support Obama, but will gladly campaign and vote for Hillary (because I care about actual issues and would never ever abet a McCain victory - shame on anyone who calls themselves a Democrat and progressive who would). But I'm confident that both candidates have excellent chances in November and am, frankly, sick of the idiotic "he doesn't have a chance" or "she doesn't have a chance" against McCain arguments.

    Remember, folks, we're all on the same team in November, or we should be.  And again, anyone who abets a McCain victory doesn't deserve to be called a Democrat or a progressive.  

    [ Parent ]

    We have just as much to worry (5.00 / 2) (#229)
    by cmugirl on Tue May 06, 2008 at 01:16:55 PM EST
    about the SC with Barack "I-heart-John-Roberts" Obama.

    [ Parent ]
    What I said was (4.00 / 1) (#231)
    by misspeach2008 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 01:26:22 PM EST
    that I would campaign for John McCain if Hillary is FORCED out of the race before the convention.  No one asked Ted Kennedy to withdraw.  If Barack Obama is the nominee of the Democratic Party, I will not vote for him, but how I "not vote for him" depends on how this plays out.  I could stay home.  I could write "Hillary" in.  I could quietly vote for McCain.  Or I can plaster my lawn with McCain posters and call all of my neighbors.   Sort of my version of "taking it to the streets of Denver". Obama has not "clinched" the nomination. When he has more than half of the delegates, including Florida and Michigan", then he is the nominee. Until then, the race continues.  I happen to disagree with Obama on many of the issues you mention and would not want his policies enacted in the name of the Democratic Party.  I also trust that McCain's nominations to the Supreme Court will undergo more scrutiny than Obama's would so I have no more trust in Obama's choices than McCain's.  Obama liked Roberts until he was told he shouldn't. Obama says he doesn't need my vote so why do you care how I cast it?

    [ Parent ]
    Well......I love to claim that, too, when I'm mad (5.00 / 2) (#80)
    by AnninCA on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:41:10 AM EST
    I'm now officially Independent.  That's because I'm mad at Dean and Pelosi.  :)

    Really that mad!

    However, I agree with most real political analysts.  Those who are mad are a small percentage.  Those who may switch might have switched anyway.  Based on their own interests, not on much else.  And the rest of us are making "threats we don't intend to carry out."  :)

    [ Parent ]

    I have never (4.00 / 1) (#123)
    by magisterludi on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:58:17 AM EST
    had a lot of party loyalty, so to speak. I've always voted dem, tho. I've volunteered and given money and been involved, but it was about the policies, not the party, for me.

    I think Obama is a bad candidate, true. I don't know if it would be better to have a veto-proof Dem Congress with a weak Rep prez rather than a naive and pliable dem prez controlled and cajoled by the elitists in his own party.

    [ Parent ]

    Lucky you (4.00 / 1) (#155)
    by AnninCA on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:13:07 PM EST
    I've built an entire political identity around having voted straight Dem for over 30 years.

    LOL*

    Talk about getting some humility this season!  

    I so looked down on Independents in the past.  Truly, I was snooty as heck.

    And here I am today.  Independent.

    [ Parent ]

    My voting habits (none / 0) (#225)
    by magisterludi on Tue May 06, 2008 at 01:08:15 PM EST
    do sorta belie my claim of independence in the past, but  my sensibilities have been knocked around A LOT this go-round, fersure.

    [ Parent ]
    yeah...think Alec Baldwin Who Was Going To (none / 0) (#125)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:59:19 AM EST
    move to France if gwb became president.  He's still in America.

    [ Parent ]
    If A Long Primary Process Is A Problem For (5.00 / 5) (#112)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:54:33 AM EST
    the democratic party, then sobeit.  In 1980, 1984, 1988 and 1992 when the race went all the way to the convention, no one was saying these things.  This extended primary should be making the democratic party stronger, not ripping it apart, like the msm and ill-informed people are parroting.  It is bunk, pure and simple and the sooner people realize it, the better.  I will say, however, that after this election, the democratic party would do well to revamp their process.

    [ Parent ]
    Those campaigns had (5.00 / 3) (#239)
    by FlaDemFem on Tue May 06, 2008 at 01:46:52 PM EST
    grownups involved. This one doesn't. The thing that gets me about this campaign is how very juvenile some of the attitudes are, especially from Obama supporters. And that is from personal experience, no one that supports Obama that has spoken to me, including my own sister, have been able to state or explain what his policies and plans are. My sister told me, "If you can't open your eyes and see THE TRUTH, then you shouldn't vote!!" I kid you not, she said that to me in an email, caps and all. And this is a person who has been politically involved for years, at the local level especially, and should really have known better than to say something like that. And she has children old enough to vote, which is scary too. I mean, the whole tone of the Obama campaign has been like the campaigns for Prom King and Queen in high school. More "neener, neener, neener" than policy discussion. It demeans the Democratic Party and it demeans the voters by assuming they haven't grown up at all since they were sophomores in high school. Most of us have, thank God. And that is why Hillary will win. The grownups are going to take back the Party after the children get finished with their tantrum. Hopefully, we have the votes.

    (Yes, that was a poke at Mr. Hope. Heh.)

    [ Parent ]

    I think the rise of 24/7 cable (3.66 / 3) (#173)
    by lilybart on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:21:45 PM EST
    has made it a different world.

    With all the so-called 24/7 "news" with so much time to fill and ratings to get for shareholders, the petty gotcha games have escalated way over what the three networks could have done in the olden days.

    CNN has been around for awhile, but in the beginning they did NEWS, not round the clock opinion and "debate."

    I really think it is much worse and I think that overall, 24/7 is bad thing for America.

    [ Parent ]

    Then the DNC can fix it next time (5.00 / 5) (#141)
    by Nadai on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:06:26 PM EST
    For me, here in NC, I finally got to vote in a primary where it actually meant something.  I'm sick to death of Obama supporters whining about how bad it is that everything wasn't wrapped up before now and my vote rendered just as irrelevant as it usually is.

    [ Parent ]
    Gradulations On Casting A Vote That May Decide (5.00 / 0) (#163)
    by MO Blue on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:16:07 PM EST
    the nominee. In 04, my vote in Feb was pretty meaningless since the nominee had been determined by the early states.

    Can't believe that many in the Democratic Party are against allowing people to participate in selecting the nominee.

    [ Parent ]

    LOL (5.00 / 1) (#176)
    by madamab on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:23:29 PM EST
    Good for you!

    But next time - let's have a national, CLOSED, primary day. No caucuses, no date jockeying and no Republicans or Independents.

    That way, everyone's vote counts.

    [ Parent ]

    That's more of an argument... (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by reynwrap582 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:11:42 PM EST
    as to why the democratic primary process needs to be completely overhauled, absolutely nothing to do with the candidates.

    There's plenty of time for the GE, don't let the MSM fool you.  Most undecideds/moderates (yano, the people who actually decide elections) don't start paying attention until October.  If anything, this long Primary campaign will enhance Obama's skill set at campaigning and air out the dirty laundry early on to inoculate it's effects in November.

    Unless you would have rather had the Wright thing explode mid-October, of course.

    [ Parent ]

    My take is that (5.00 / 1) (#162)
    by AnninCA on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:15:24 PM EST
    Pelosi and Dean have been caught playing power politics.

    That's all.

    The truth is that if they hadn't done this?  This would still be the bonanza year for Dems.

    BUT.....they screwed up.

    And now, nobody wants to give them money.  Obamamaniacs have to give to him.  They are trained.

    Hillary supporters are too mad to send them money.

    They are screwed.

    [ Parent ]

    the problem (4.00 / 1) (#164)
    by p lukasiak on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:17:01 PM EST
    ....the problem is that while people "don't start paying attention" until October, they still absord a great deal now -- especially when they don't know a candidate.

    That is why the Wright mess is such a disaster -- when people start paying attention, "Wright" will already be there.

    [ Parent ]

    I suspect. (4.50 / 2) (#77)
    by sweetthings on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:39:47 AM EST
    We'll heal. Passions are ultra-high right now, but assuming this thing ends sometime in June, there should be enough time for the supporters of whichever candidate loses to come around.

    Plus, every day this goes on BTD's unity ticket idea looks better and better.

    [ Parent ]

    we won't healing anytime soon. (none / 0) (#249)
    by hellothere on Tue May 06, 2008 at 02:12:51 PM EST
    and there won't be a unity ticket.

    [ Parent ]
    The replies to your post (none / 0) (#126)
    by riddlerandy on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:59:54 AM EST
    proves your point.  Enough said

    [ Parent ]
    People were saying that (none / 0) (#130)
    by Edgar08 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:01:52 PM EST
    before anyone ever voted.


    [ Parent ]
    You could say the thing about anything, though (none / 0) (#258)
    by Exeter on Tue May 06, 2008 at 02:45:39 PM EST
    Everything has repercussions.  The system is what it is.

    [ Parent ]
    I can see it (5.00 / 4) (#2)
    by lisadawn82 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 10:46:58 AM EST
    The press is definitely prepping their talking points for later in the day.  

    I can see it now, Senator Clinton only won IN because of Republican crossover voters.  She'll lose IN in the GE.  Senator Obama is the real winner today.  Even with the Republican help she still couldn't reach the required +35% win that she needed to help catch up in pledged delegates.  That means she really lost IN in addition to NC.

    It;'s already started (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by CanadianDem on Tue May 06, 2008 at 10:50:48 AM EST
    From the Indystar.com which is linked from the wire post you find this..
    Ward-Bopp voted for the Democrat she liked, but Jim Adams, 36, voted for Hillary Clinton to keep the race going beyond Indiana. He's a McCain backer and enjoys watching the Democrats fight.

    I mean there might be some truth to this 'Republicans want the fight to drag on' meme?

    [ Parent ]
    There may be. (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by Marco21 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 10:53:18 AM EST
    Still, most Americans overwhelmingly want a Democrat in the White House this fall. It's the "long campaign is destroying our fragile party" BS that's completely false.

    [ Parent ]
    It is not completely false. (1.00 / 2) (#73)
    by lilybart on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:39:04 AM EST
    I wish it were, but there is so much animosity between hillary and obama supporters, I do worry about the outcome.

    And it is obvious if you read threads here and at kos or others that we are at each other's throats.

    [ Parent ]

    And who would be (5.00 / 4) (#88)
    by misspeach2008 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:44:58 AM EST
    responsible for that?  The candidate who has said that if he is the nominee, she will work for Obama with all of her heart, or the candidate who has said that he would get her supporters, but she would not get his and did nothing when his supporters booed? We're doing fine here.  Why not go over to HuffPo and preach unity there?

    [ Parent ]
    Misspeach...my guess, as usual lilybart is just (none / 0) (#129)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:01:34 PM EST
    here to stir the pot with her faux "nervous nellie" facade.

    [ Parent ]
    Don't guess, ask. (none / 0) (#184)
    by lilybart on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:26:23 PM EST
    There is no way out of this, with things so close, but I do actually worry about this ugliness.

    Yes, I support Obama because I have hope for the ugliness to decrease. No need to tell me I am wrong!

    [ Parent ]

    seriously? (5.00 / 2) (#202)
    by p lukasiak on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:35:18 PM EST
    the idea that you think that Obama can make the ugliness decrease, given all the ugliness that has arisen because of the way that he has campaigned, should give you pause.

    I mean, how can you think that Obama is going to unify the country, when he's gone out of his way to exploit racial divisiveness throughout this campaign?  

    [ Parent ]

    Do you any examples (none / 0) (#206)
    by lilybart on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:42:32 PM EST
    of his racial divisiveness, other than his actually is Black?

    Don't bother.

    [ Parent ]

    Your own post is a perfect example (5.00 / 2) (#223)
    by tree on Tue May 06, 2008 at 01:02:23 PM EST
    of divisiveness.

    If you'd bothered to read you would have found myriad posts here pointing out exactly why some here consider Obama's campaign to have been divisive, and absolutely none of them have been "because he is black". But you think its a perfectly fine retort to accuse people of bigotry just because you are too lazy to read our posts, or too close-minded to listen. Very divisive.

    [ Parent ]

    No no no (none / 0) (#250)
    by lilybart on Tue May 06, 2008 at 02:19:46 PM EST
    I am not accusing or anyone of bigotry. I just don't  think that Obama himself has engaged in race-baiting, as you claimed.

    The only "bait" I can think of is that he is black.

    [ Parent ]

    Really (none / 0) (#260)
    by Steve M on Tue May 06, 2008 at 02:54:09 PM EST
    So when Obama accused Hillary of disrespecting MLK before the South Carolina primary, that wasn't race-baiting?

    [ Parent ]
    You mean when he said: (none / 0) (#261)
    by CST on Tue May 06, 2008 at 03:04:15 PM EST
    He was "baffled" by what he called Clinton's "ill-advised statement (made in New Hampshire on Jan. 7) about Dr. King, suggesting that Lyndon Johnson had more to do with the Civil Rights Act."

    It was an ill-advised statement, if only for the fact that it was politically toxic.  He didn't call her a racist by any means, and this certainly isn't race baiting.

    [ Parent ]

    Uh (none / 0) (#262)
    by Steve M on Tue May 06, 2008 at 03:12:39 PM EST
    it was politically toxic because Obama decided to make a political stink about how she had supposedly disrespected MLK.

    You have your cause and effect backwards.  Obama could have taken the high road and said, of course Hillary wasn't saying anything bad about Dr. King, but he just couldn't resist the chance to demagogue her remarks with South Carolina coming up.

    Keep in mind this was at virtually the same time that Obama's campaign co-chair, Jesse Jackson Jr., went on national TV to make the incendiary argument that "Hillary didn't cry over Katrina."

    [ Parent ]

    Why diminish MLK (none / 0) (#263)
    by lilybart on Tue May 06, 2008 at 03:15:59 PM EST
    on his day even if she is right that Gov had to do something and LBJ had the courage to do so.

    But it was the people marching in the streets that forced the Gov's hand and made it impossible NOT to take action. That was MLK.

    Nothing about race.

    [ Parent ]

    Right (none / 0) (#265)
    by Steve M on Tue May 06, 2008 at 03:25:51 PM EST
    There's "nothing about race" in the black candidate accusing the white one of disrespecting MLK before the South Carolina primary.  God, tell me another story.

    [ Parent ]
    google (none / 0) (#218)
    by dws3665 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:53:56 PM EST
    sean wilentz and see for yourself, lily.

    [ Parent ]
    That doesn't look (none / 0) (#251)
    by lilybart on Tue May 06, 2008 at 02:21:35 PM EST
    like Obama race-baiting. It looks like he objected to Hillary's use of Wright to smear him.

    doesn't matter

    [ Parent ]

    I won't vote for Obama (5.00 / 9) (#92)
    by dissenter on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:46:12 AM EST
    It really doesn't have much to do with DKos. I believe John McCain and Barack Obama will both be disasters and if there is going to be a disaster it might as well be McCain. I am a lifelong Dem. In fact, I've never voted for a republican.

    I don't think Obama is democrat so it makes my vote easier. Obama tells me I should vote my interests...well a higher payroll tax is not in my interest nor is his ideas on social security or health care. Since he was a Roberts fan I doubt I can count on him on judges and I live in a pro choice state. Frankly, I can't see a whole lot of difference between the two on other issues.

    As for the war. HE IS LYING. There is no way to quickly get people out of either war zone. It won't happen. Since I spend a lot of time in both Afghanistan and Iraq, I would prefer someone who doesn't put us all on alert every time he wants to make a political statement and that is exactly what happens with Obama.

    [ Parent ]

    moi aussi (5.00 / 1) (#185)
    by jedimom on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:26:40 PM EST
    me too
    I have no faith in his SCOTUS appt after all we pro choice dont understand the wrenching moral decision faced by prolifers, Obama told us so. He wants to raise my payroll taxes up to 30%, he will raise capgains to 28%
    I have heard him tell Bartiromo on CNBC his payroll tax lift starts at 72k earnings, not 98 as he tried 'waffle' on the ABC debate..
    nothing about Obama makes me feel my kids would be safer or we would do better economically
    when he began running Harry/Louise ads I knew he wouldnt get us to universal healthcare either
    his 1000 stimulus is a taxpayer deficit builder but he wont support tax waiver for summer to help truckers who pass it on to food prices which hurts us, he is funded by Excelon which loves hi gas it makes nuke power more likely
    if they cut FL MI out of the process Obama is illegitimate nominee and I wont support him, period

    [ Parent ]
    I didn't see the blog animosity (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by magster on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:05:23 PM EST
    spill over into our county Dem convention this last weekend here in Colorado.

    Very respectful, lots of mingling despite the loyalty shown by each group of supporters.  The real world is a lot different than the blogosphere. It was a very hopeful (though painfully boring) day for Democratic unity after the nomination process ends.


    [ Parent ]

    Thanks for story (none / 0) (#189)
    by lilybart on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:28:13 PM EST
    Very nice to hear some good news about people getting along!

    [ Parent ]
    That is nice to hear, (none / 0) (#233)
    by Leisa on Tue May 06, 2008 at 01:28:36 PM EST
    that was not the case in TX.  Maybe it is because we have that crazy Texas two step process and it was fraught with problems...

    I wonder, how can a candidate win the primary and loose the caucus as happened in TX?  

    I think that this result clearly demonstrates the problems with the caucus system as a means to decide on the nominee.  The GE will not be won with this voting method, so how is it even relevant?  

    [ Parent ]

    It's the assumption that... (5.00 / 1) (#183)
    by jackyt on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:26:17 PM EST
    the LESS hate-filled bunch should capitulate to the MORE hate-filled bunch that is most troubling. Ya give in to a bully and all you get is whapped up the side of the head!

    SPOILER ALERT: I still have this inkling that, if he loses the democratic nomination, Obama will pull a Joe Leiberman and use his shiny new machine to run on a third rail... with Bradley, Bloomberg, et al, goading him on.

    [ Parent ]

    look, we could have (4.66 / 3) (#108)
    by sancho on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:52:50 AM EST
    nominated obama for the '08 election after his '04 convention speech and he'd still have an uphill fight to win this november. the af-am voters consistently vote democratic and will in the fall. af-ams hate republicans more than other core dem. groups. i cant speak for what the so-called educated latte liberals will do--at least nader is not in the race.(oh, i forgot, he is.) and if we really want to be brutal about it, we can recognize that many states (like mine, florida) have well established (and horrible) practices for throwing out large numbers of the af-am vote anyway. i'll take my chances with working class dems, af-ams, hispanics, some latte dems, the crossover republican women who hate the mccains and respect hillary, and also the fundies who might stay home if mccain is the nominee but will come out to vote against obama and his "anti-maerican" preacher.) that's a winning coalition, imo, and it belongs to hillary not barack.  

    the nom. process is a chance to save the dem. party from its terrible leadership. let it go on.

    [ Parent ]

    I have to confess that the 2004 speech.... (5.00 / 2) (#135)
    by Maria Garcia on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:04:05 PM EST
    ...didn't leave me breathless. It was the best speech at that particular convention, but I'm old enough to remember some speeches that had me up on my feet hollering.

    Especially Cuomo's 1984 speech. (His 1992 wan't too shabby either) and Jesse Jackson in 1984 and 1988. (1984 convention was a great one for oratory if nothing else.)

    [ Parent ]

    Actually I enjoyed Rev. Sharpton's speech (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by Florida Resident on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:11:45 PM EST
    more in 2004.  But then I like them fiery spirited speeches.

    [ Parent ]
    Me Too n/t (none / 0) (#168)
    by MO Blue on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:18:55 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I always enjoy Sharpton, but.... (none / 0) (#179)
    by Maria Garcia on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:25:01 PM EST
    ...he wasn't on primetime in 2004 as I recall.

    [ Parent ]
    Of course he wasn't the DNC didn't want to (none / 0) (#198)
    by Florida Resident on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:32:03 PM EST
    alienate anyone.  You know he is controversial, opinionated, outspoken, and sometimes a bit off keel.

    [ Parent ]
    Interesting (5.00 / 1) (#172)
    by AnninCA on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:21:33 PM EST
    I feel I'm the only one who isn't wowed by Obama's oratory skills.

    [ Parent ]
    You're not alone (none / 0) (#248)
    by vigkat on Tue May 06, 2008 at 02:08:05 PM EST
    Every time I have heard Obama speak, and that includes 2004, I find my attention wandering (and as an attorney, I am well trained to stay focused). Perhaps it's because he's not really saying anything on which I can focus my attention.  Just words.

    [ Parent ]
    To be honest (none / 0) (#217)
    by Steve M on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:51:54 PM EST
    I thought Bill Clinton's speech in 2004 was fantastic.  There is no one better at articulating the difference between the parties and why electing Democrats matters.

    If you go back and read the speeches, the contrast between his message and Obama's is actually quite striking in hindsight.

    [ Parent ]

    At each other's throats (none / 0) (#104)
    by wasabi on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:51:23 AM EST
    For a long time I thought this animosity was primarily fed by the tone of most blogs and therefore really limited to a small percentage of the electorate.  Blogs just don't reach that many people.  However, to see the high numbers of people willing to sit on their hands or vote for the other party in the GE as seen in recent polls indicates this has gone well past the online skirmishes.  I think a unity ticket really needs to happen for the Democrats to pull off a victory in the fall.

    [ Parent ]
    My Fed ex guy didn't know about primaries (none / 0) (#193)
    by lilybart on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:29:16 PM EST
    today, so maybe it is only a small percentage of hard-core blog readers that now hate one another so much!!!!

    [ Parent ]
    Bloggers and online... (none / 0) (#220)
    by Marco21 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 01:00:52 PM EST
    posters like you and me don't indicate a groundswell of bad will this fall, despite how frenzied the back and forth can get.

    Polling suggests more Americans want a Democrat in the office than a Republican. Last one I read at MyDD was by a 20 point spread.

    If this party can't get it together after the unforgivable crime of a long season and every state getting a vote, we don't deserve to survive.

    [ Parent ]

    However (none / 0) (#228)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue May 06, 2008 at 01:12:28 PM EST
    many exit polls indicate that a high number of primary voters won't vote for the other primary candidate if theirs doesn't win.


    [ Parent ]
    Of course (5.00 / 8) (#10)
    by Steve M on Tue May 06, 2008 at 10:54:01 AM EST
    there are Republicans who vote for Hillary for honest reasons and those who vote for Hillary for malicious reasons.  The same is true for Obama.

    Based upon which category of voters the media chooses to seize upon, they can easily create or reinforce a narrative.

    [ Parent ]

    avise to republicans (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:03:34 AM EST
    be careful what you wish for

    [ Parent ]
    Heh. Heh. Heh. (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by madamab on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:07:05 AM EST
    Wouldn't it be nice if THEY were the ones that shot themselves in the feet?

    [ Parent ]
    Never forget (5.00 / 5) (#35)
    by Steve M on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:16:17 AM EST
    how badly Democrats wanted to run against that old fool Reagan.

    [ Parent ]
    And McCain is more loved by Democrats (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by MarkL on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:18:03 AM EST
    already than Reagan ever was.


    [ Parent ]
    I noticed that Operation Chaos... (none / 0) (#50)
    by kredwyn on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:21:19 AM EST
    became a talking point a bit before the PA vote.

    [ Parent ]
    I remember that. (none / 0) (#148)
    by madamab on Tue May 06, 2008 at 12:09:44 PM EST
    My parents were all excited about how Carter was going to crush him.

    Then came the hostage crisis. And the president I call the Root of All Evil was elected.

    What if Bush/Cheney bomb Iran? Do people think Obama is going to beat McCain then?

    Although it is totally illogical, I think they will go with the "safe" Republican with experience in that instance.

    I hope I am wrong.

    [ Parent ]

    Limpbaugh may want this (none / 0) (#27)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:08:41 AM EST
    he hates McCain

    [ Parent ]
    No, it's 'cause. . . . (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:18:45 AM EST
    he's always had a crush on Hillary.

    [ Parent ]
    Think about this, if Limbaugh et al had (5.00 / 4) (#52)
    by Florida Resident on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:22:09 AM EST
    much power over the republicans constituents would McCain be the nominee?

    [ Parent ]
    So do many so-called conservative pundits (none / 0) (#39)
    by madamab on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:17:46 AM EST
    like Joe Scarborough.

    Doesn't matter. They are sheep, not cats. They are easily herded and led.

    Unlike Democrats. ;-)

    [ Parent ]

    any more it's all about him... (none / 0) (#41)
    by kredwyn on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:18:00 AM EST
    I suspect that he's trying to be more of a power broker inside the party with this move.

    What's fascinating is that even when the change over isn't attributed to him, he claims that it's Operation Chaos.

    [ Parent ]

    Yep! (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by felizarte on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:17:40 AM EST
    Be interesting to know how many republican women crossed over.  It could be that they are thinking, "why wait till November to vote for Hillary?  Vote now and make sure she makes it to November."

    Maybe Rush does have a 'little crush' on Hillary after all.

    [ Parent ]

    honestly (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:08:06 AM EST
    I dont see how anyone could doubt what Hillary would do to McCain in the general when her hands are no longer tied.
    I hope they go back and talk to Jim Adams and others after she cleans McCains clock next fall.


    [ Parent ]