The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent
vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums
here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules
document is now in effect.
This Primary race is too Democratic
Posts
"And I just ask you all this, do you really believe Florida would be getting this kind of treatment if the vote had turned out the other way?"
...
He's talking about, I guess, the peace corps and educational grants.
What a dick.
Seriously.
In other news, Ambinder says the Obama campaign says, big endorsement at 7. Halperin thinks it's Edwards, but his post was made just to get idle speculation and page views so I won't help him.
I know he got NARAL recently.
Like, within the past hour.
My money's on Penn.
And EMILY's List is pissed and continuing to embarrass themselves (I'm waiting for New York NOW, that should be an entertaining statement):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Juy9NwI8_i0
I dont understand how you can answer that without an uncomfortable truth coming out... the prompted for answer appears to be "No!" but that shows how much of a double dealer Hillary is for only fighting for them because they voted for her.
MWO: Adamski
Obviously there was no point in answering her because she swooned and passed out immediatly after.
Not the most highly, but he and Hillary are ranked the same on choice issues, yeah.
It's the sweetie that is not helpful.
Edwards will probably endorse Obama tonight. He's in Michigan (at least I think Halperin said this before yanking it on the times page) and the Obama camp is touting a big endorsement for tonight.
http://thepage.time.com/2008/05/14/ready-to-choose/
That link used to say more in regards to Edwards but changed it to just a picture.
edit: Though who knows, maybe Halperin pulled the text because it's not Edwards.
Much adieu over nothing. Another god damn reporter trying to get a gotcha moment.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Yeah, but a lot of hardcore feminists and pro-choice types don't like him. Here's an excerpt from an ex-girlfriend of mine's blog:
I don't think the Democratic party can expect to keep any Renegade Republicans after Obama. Just because Obama's presidency goes well does not mean the next best President will automatically be a Democrat. Think about it, the next Democratic candidate could be like a Hillary Clinton.
Huh. This is exactly the stance of every Dem presidential candidate I've ever heard. Kerry, Gore, Bill Clinton all had this exact position. I would be gobsmacked if Hillary didn't trot it out as well if she somehow got the nomination.
Successful terms are generally followed by a continuation, while unsuccessful bids are generally followed by divergence. Gore basically ran as Clinton 2.0, and Kerry did much the same.
The basic question of confrontation vs. cooperation is really the key divide between Obama and Clinton supporters. The demographic breakdown is often just an analysis of which groups fall into each school.
I'd say Clinton's "confrontation" is a sham, because she's just as calculating and triangulating as her husband.
But then, the "cooperation" model is itself something of a sham to pull in moderates and create a majority large enough that you can just pass things without a lot of fighting.
DAMNIT CLINTON. INSANE OR SANE, PICK A SIDE.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Oh my goodness, is she rediscovering some graciousness?
Please oh please learn some tact Hillary then I might come to like you again
NNID: Hakkekage
pleasepaypreacher.net
That's a good point, and yeah, she's definitely cast in the confrontational mold.
But also, and I haven't said this to her face, but I think a lot of this stems from a sense of - I hesitate to use the word "bitterness" because of the connotations it's picked up in this campaign - but basically she's on the board of NARAL South Dakota for years, has done a lot of ground work for Daschle and Stephanie Herseth in a deeply (almost creepily) conservative state and endured all sorts of threats and nastiness, and I get the feeling that she really resents all these Johnnie-come-lately young folk that Obama is bringing into the fold.
"We're hoping that voters in the Midwest and the Mountain West are more racist than voters in the Deep South. We're pretty sure they're not, but it's worth a shot, right?"
I say meh. He's such a flaming phony and he waited till it's completely useless and meaningless, so meh to him.
Much like Richardson after texas, Edwards does it after North Carolina.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Now we have a candidate who knows that both pro-life and pro-choice groups can be brought together in the common goal to reduce the number of abortions, not by reducing the providers but by reducing the need, and even though he reflects what we've been saying all along it's somehow not enough?
No, apparently we need someone who'll tell everyone who doesn't agree with us to suck it.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
That's an awesome description of my view on the issue. I will have to use that in the future.
Er...Edwards is not pointless. He doesn't have much clout, but he DOES have pledged delegates. So he's like a super superdelegate if he is throwing in with Obama.
I don't know, maybe I'm misreading the question, especially since I don't know the context of the treatment, but the answer to me seems to be "No". Which just makes it a dumber question for Bill to ask. I mean, if Florida had done the same, but the votes had gone to Obama, he would probably have just let it sit by the sidelines. They broke the rules, he doesn't need their votes to win, they can go stew. Hillary wouldn't be pushing to the get them counted if it hurts her. That was just a weird question