Edwards Dropping Out

So Edwards is dropping out. Who does this help (other than the Democats, as it lessens the chance of a screwed up convention)?






226 replies
  1. 1
    myiq2xu says:

    It helps the people still in the race

    Duh!

  2. 2
    Jen says:

    Ooh, I just missed the new thread. I knew you’d want to know that Obama is transcending again.

    I don’t think anyone knows who it helps, yet.
    Oh, we’re playing the pundit game. I get it.
    :)

  3. 3
    gypsy howell says:

    Well, I know it doesn’t help me. I was holding out for him in the PA primary (as if it would have mattered who I vote for by then)

    Honestly, I think Edwards supporters will split pretty evenly between Obama and Clinton. I have no factual basis for saying that of course.

  4. 4
    myiq2xu says:

    It’s all over but the shouting – HRC is gonna win this thing.

    Obama shot his wad in Iowa, he has nowhere left to go but down.

    And the WATB’s can weep, wail, and gnash their teeth, but it ain’t gonna change nothing.

  5. 5
    zmulls says:

    Edwards supporters with both idealists and pragmatists. He had the clearest vision, and he had the smarts to make it happen.

    The idealists will break for Obama and the pragmatists will break for Clinton.

    And those like me, in the middle, may just wait for the convention and take whichever wins…

  6. 6
    TheFountainHead says:

    It’s all over but the shouting – HRC is gonna win this thing.

    Obama shot his wad in Iowa, he has nowhere left to go but down.

    And the WATB’s can weep, wail, and gnash their teeth, but it ain’t gonna change nothing.

    You know, I used to think you were just playing Devil’s Advocate to Obama’s Unity Pony, but I’m beginning to think you’re really hoping our best chance at making Americans feel good about being Americans again loses out to the principles of “kicking butt”.

  7. 7
    myiq2xu says:

    Add this to the list John, from Sully:

    The way Obama transcends his own multiple identities, the way he both embraces his difference and yet seeks a common political discourse: this is the model that makes the most sense to me. Neither denying difference nor being defined by it is a path all minorities would be better off pursuing. And Obama’s call for self-empowerment rather than self-defeating victimology is particularly apposite for gays and lesbians.

    Ooooh! How pithy!

    “I’m different, but I’m not defined by it.”

  8. 8
    ThymeZone says:

    Edwards is playing a game now with his “pledges” scheme.

    Why he is doing this in public, I have no idea, unless he has already negotiated with the other two candidates and found them both unwilling to meet his criteria.

    Bottom line, I can’t imagine why he would not pick a rival and endorse. What the game accomplishes, I have no idea, other than making him look important.

    And if he endorses, I cannot fathom him endorsing Hillary. That just doesn’t make any sense, based on everything he has said on the campaign trail so far.

    Thus, right now he is looking to me like a foolish and irrelevant player here, which is not much to show for all the time and effort and money that has been poured into his run so far. He is in Fred Thompson territory at this point AFAIC. Like I said to an earier thread, this is looking like he just wasted several months of our time.

  9. 9
    Jen says:

    Sheesh, what a copycat you are.

  10. 10
    John S. says:

    Obama shot his wad in Iowa, he has nowhere left to go but down.

    I realize that you have the daggers out for Obama, but your quip here is flawed.

    If HRC is the front-runner, then she is the one that has no place to go but down. If Obama is the underdog, he has no place to go but up. That’s how this dynamic works. If you’re on top, you can go down. If you’re on the bottom, you can go up. I’m afraid you’ll have to find another line of attack.

  11. 11
    myiq2xu says:

    I used to think you were just playing Devil’s Advocate to Obama’s Unity Pony, but I’m beginning to think you’re really hoping our best chance at making Americans feel good about being Americans again loses out to the principles of “kicking butt”.

    After looking into Obama and Edwards dropping out (and Gore’s failure to drop in) I’m gonna hafta go with the Clagina.

    Obama is just a sweet-talking poseur.

    Sorry bois.

  12. 12
    dslak says:

    Myiq2xu does seem to find his schadenfreude in unusual places.

  13. 13
    TheFountainHead says:

    After looking into Obama and Edwards dropping out (and Gore’s failure to drop in) I’m gonna hafta go with the Clagina.

    Obama is just a sweet-talking poseur.

    Sorry bois.

    The fact that you can say this sans-snark (how I read it) after last night’s Farcical Victory Stage Show in Florida boggles the mind.

  14. 14
    myiq2xu says:

    If Obama is the underdog, he has no place to go but up. That’s how this dynamic works. If you’re on top, you can go down. If you’re on the bottom, you can go up. I’m afraid you’ll have to find another line of attack.

    Okay, you’re right – he could go up.

    But it ain’t gonna happen, so pull on your big girl panties and deal with it.

  15. 15
    Krista says:

    So Edwards is dropping out. Who does this help

    Elizabeth. I’m guessing she’ll be quite happy to have him back home.

  16. 16
    Jim says:

    If Obama shot his wad in Iowa, what did he shoot in South Carolina? Whatever it was, it seemed to work rather effectively.

    I’ve liked Edwards, but please, don’t be coy, pick one or the other. Take a stand dsmmit, and don’t be a wus.

  17. 17
    Bubblegum Tate says:

    It helps Clinton. No, Obama. No, McCain! Actually, it somehow helps Mike Gravel.

  18. 18
    myiq2xu says:

    The fact that you can say this sans-snark (how I read it) after last night’s Farcical Victory Stage Show in Florida boggles the mind.

    Waaaahhh Waaaaaah Waaaaaah!

  19. 19
    ThymeZone says:

    but your quip here is flawed.

    Heh. This spooftroll has pretty much run out the string.

    His material has descended into farce territory and at this point he is basically just static on the frequency.

    Nothing he says has made sense for quite a while now.

    “Obama eats buggers, and Hillary is hot!” This is about the level of his nonsense now.

  20. 20
    Davebo says:

    Actually Obama leads in delegates so I’d say for the here and now he’s the front runner.

    What Edwards voters decide to do is anybody’s guess.

    And if Obama “blew his wad” in Iowa then how does one explain S. Carolina?

  21. 21
    zmulls says:

    Maybe he doesn’t have a strong preference. Maybe he doesn’t want to play games. Maybe he wants to take some time to think about it. Maybe he is thinking about his family right now. Maybe he is looking past politics and looking the next chapter of his life. Maybe he plans to not endorse anyone and continue to press his issues, reasoning that the minute he commits to one of them, he will cease to have influence. Maybe he will function as a non-candidate, praising the candidates when they speak to traditional democratic values, and criticizing them when they don’t. Maybe he sees his role as an advocate for the poor, not on behalf of one candidate for another.

    I dunno, I can think of a lot of possible reasons he wouldn’t want to follow your script and “just endorse someone” like he’s s’posed to.

  22. 22
    Jen says:

    Slate’s John Dickerson is on the Twitter:

    “Clinton memo on why FLA win is huge for her. She also beat Obama in Narnia and Rivendell. Huge turnout among elves and halflings.”

  23. 23
    John S. says:

    But it ain’t gonna happen, so pull on your big girl panties and deal with it.

    Dude, you have issues. Seriously.

    I am not an Obama fanboy in the slightest. I simply prefer him over the continuance of another dynasty in American politics. I will vote for either one without hesitation. If HRC gets the nod, I won’t be freaking out.

    You on the other hand appear likely to go headlong off a bridge if Obama wins the nomination. You need to check yourself before you wreck yourself.

  24. 24
    Jen says:

    The people in South Carolina are black, obviously. The SC victory is worth, at most, 2/3 of what the Iowa victory was worth.

  25. 25
    myiq2xu says:

    If Obama shot his wad in Iowa, what did he shoot in South Carolina? Whatever it was, it seemed to work rather effectively.

    What he did he can’t repeat. It didn’t work in Florida did it?

    The part of the campaign where the candidates could get up-close and personal with voters is over.

    That’s where Obama excells. Now we’re at the part where HRC excells, and she’s already in front.

    He needed an early knock-out, and nearly got it, but she’s back on her feet and going the distance.

  26. 26
    Pb says:

    I think Edwards dropping out will help Obama a little, nationally. But myiq2xu’s posts here will definitely help Obama on Balloon Juice!

  27. 27
    dslak says:

    The SC victory is worth, at most, 2/3 of what the Iowa victory was worth.

    That’s a bit low. I’d say 3/5.

  28. 28
    TheFountainHead says:

    Not to engender any more of my1q2xu’s negative energy, but here’s a reason he’s likely to be wrong.

  29. 29
    myiq2xu says:

    Myiq2xu does seem to find his schadenfreude in unusual places.

    I usually get it from a little restaurant downtown called “Gasthaus Zur Rose”

  30. 30
    TheFountainHead says:

    Heh. This spooftroll has pretty much run out the string.

    His material has descended into farce territory and at this point he is basically just static on the frequency.

    Nothing he says has made sense for quite a while now.

    “Obama eats buggers, and Hillary is hot!” This is about the level of his nonsense now.

    I think he put it more eloquently than you did.

    myiq2xu Says:

    The fact that you can say this sans-snark (how I read it) after last night’s Farcical Victory Stage Show in Florida boggles the mind.

    Waaaahhh Waaaaaah Waaaaaah!

  31. 31
    Sasha says:

    What he did he can’t repeat. It didn’t work in Florida did it?

    I’d imagine his promise not to campaign in Florida didn’t really help him there.

  32. 32
    cleek says:

    it’s all about pie with some people.

  33. 33
    dslak says:

    Not to engender any more of my1q2xu’s negative energy, but here’s a reason he’s likely to be wrong.

    National polls are nigh meaningless when it comes to evaluating who’s likely to win any given primary, but those do provide some reason for hope.

  34. 34
    myiq2xu says:

    The people in South Carolina are black, obviously. The SC victory is worth, at most, 2/3 of what the Iowa victory was worth.

    Careful Jen, you’ll give the Obamabots the vapors if you mention race.

  35. 35
    Jake says:

    It helps the pundits who will squirt out five bazillion trillion x 10 ^13^ pixels on who this helps and why and what it all means and what happens next and bark, bark, moo quack bleat.

    Except for Sullivan, who will continue to gush over Obama until his husband gets suspicious and takes his computer at which point I will shout Hurrah!

  36. 36
    Dreggas says:

    Sasha Says:

    What he did he can’t repeat. It didn’t work in Florida did it?

    I’d imagine his promise not to campaign in Florida didn’t really help him there.

    Sasha FTW!

  37. 37
    Napoleon says:

    Well my guy is out after I ordered my Edward’s lawnsign this weekend. One thing for sure, for the first time since I have begun to vote (1980) I will not be pulling the lever for the Dem if it is Clinton. I have seen enough of them this last couple of weeks to know I will simple not vote or pick some 3rd party to vote for instead if it comes to her.

    Well off to order my Obama bumpersticker and lawnsign.

  38. 38
    Jen says:

    Well off to order my Obama bumpersticker and lawnsign.

    Out of stock. You might try cafepress.com

  39. 39
    myiq2xu says:

    Well my guy is out after I ordered my Edward’s lawnsign this weekend. One thing for sure, for the first time since I have begun to vote (1980) I will not be pulling the lever for the Dem if it is Clinton. I have seen enough of them this last couple of weeks to know I will simple not vote or pick some 3rd party to vote for instead if it comes to her.

    That’s party loyalty from the Obama Nation

  40. 40
    D-Chance. says:

    John Cole asks:

    Who does this help (other than the Democats, as it lessens the chance of a screwed up convention)?

    Well, it sure hurt Dollar Tree… they’re down almost 3% on the day.

  41. 41
    NonyNony says:

    I’ve liked Edwards, but please, don’t be coy, pick one or the other. Take a stand dsmmit, and don’t be a wus.

    Take a stand? On Obama vs. Clinton? Why should he?

    Maybe he’s looked at them, realized that if one of them is acceptable then the other is too, and decided to just stand back and let the Dem voters figure out which moderate centrist Dem they want to represent them come November.

    I mean, I’ve decided. But my decision is based entirely on the way Clinton voted on the AUMF in Iraq. Edwards voted the same way – so maybe he isn’t as ready to hoist Clinton up and lob spitballs at her as I am. But if I had to pick one of the two of them based on the issues that Edwards campaigned on and thinks are important, I’d be hard pressed to make a distinction between them. So let the voters hash it out and be in a position to get behind whoever wins the nomination 100% after the convention is over. Maybe he’ll get a job as Secretary of Health and Human Services or something when it’s all over.

  42. 42
    crw says:

    Well…even if Barack pulls ahead, I doubt he’s going to pull far enough ahead to decisively crush Clinton. And Clinton still provisionally has the lead on super delegates. Barack needs a decisive victory on SDT to pull this off. If he merely evenly splits the delegates with Clinton, I predict this goes to the convention and he probably loses unless the super delegates hop on the unity pony.

  43. 43
    DougJ says:

    This is bad news for Democrats. Good news for Republicans. It helps McCain most of all, but it also helps restore Bush’s luster.

  44. 44
    D-Chance. says:

    myiq2xu Says:

    Well my guy is out after I ordered my Edward’s lawnsign this weekend. One thing for sure, for the first time since I have begun to vote (1980) I will not be pulling the lever for the Dem if it is Clinton. I have seen enough of them this last couple of weeks to know I will simple not vote or pick some 3rd party to vote for instead if it comes to her.

    That’s party loyalty from the Obama Nation

    No, just typical kabuki.

    9+ months more if it, too… and from both sides if it boils down to Clinton/McCain.

  45. 45
    John S. says:

    What he did he can’t repeat. It didn’t work in Florida did it?

    I know others have touched on it, but this is a profoundly stupid statement.

    Obama must have had sex with your wife or something. That is the only possible explanation for your level of contempt.

  46. 46
    Caidence (fmr. Chris) says:

    Okay, you’re right – he could go up.

    But it ain’t gonna happen, so pull on your big girl panties and deal with it.

    Oh, I get it.

    He could go up. But he can’t. Riiiiight

    Taking you seriously on Hillary vs. Obama has become quite difficult of late.

  47. 47
    zmulls says:

    I will not be pulling the lever for the Dem if it is Clinton. I have seen enough of them this last couple of weeks to know I will simple not vote or pick some 3rd party to vote for instead if it comes to her.

    I felt similarly last week. At least Clinton was my second choice (distant 2nd choice after Edwards) as she was smart and capable and would be moving in the right direction; but watching Bill bigfoot all over the place gave me the…pardon the pun…the willies. I am truly torn about which negatives to overlook in which candidate now.

    But taking the long view, no candidate will be perfect, all candidates will have weeks when they disappoint or dismay, and all Presidents have the capacity to surprise and confound. Nobody in office is exactly what you thought you were getting before they got there.

    I think Clinton still brings a whole host of powerful abilities to the table, and I would still be able to vote for her — though if there are more weeks like the SC week, I will be more inclined to support Obama than not.

    And no matter what negatives there are, I can’t make the mistake of thinking we’ll be OK with another four years of Republicans.

    I’m also looking downticket, and thinking Obama has a better chance of sweeping in more Democrats into Congress and state seats. That’s another powerful consideration for this Edwards supporter.

  48. 48
    TheFountainHead says:

    That’s party loyalty from the Obama Nation

    Bought and paid for by Hillary for Supreme Chancellor.

  49. 49
    Dreggas says:

    myiq2xu Says:

    Well my guy is out after I ordered my Edward’s lawnsign this weekend. One thing for sure, for the first time since I have begun to vote (1980) I will not be pulling the lever for the Dem if it is Clinton. I have seen enough of them this last couple of weeks to know I will simple not vote or pick some 3rd party to vote for instead if it comes to her.

    That’s party loyalty from the Obama Nation

    Yes, loyalty to the deomocratic party, not the Clinton Party.

  50. 50
    Dennis - SGMM says:

    That’s party loyalty from the Obama Nation

    I’ve voted Democratic for forty years because I am a liberal progressive and most of the time the Democrats have been more liberal and progressive than the Republicans. They don’t automatically get my vote because they’re Democrats. Now that Edwards is out I’ll likely vote for Obama in the Primary. If Hillary is the nominee then I’ll vote for Dems down-ticket and leave it at that. You can not-vote for any office here in California and your other choices are still counted.

    If you’re so strong on party loyalty then you ought to consider switching parties – the Republicans loves ’em that party loyalty.

  51. 51
    AkaDad says:

    Will Edwards supporters vote for Hillary after she broke her promise not to campaign in Florida?

  52. 52
    TheFountainHead says:

    I’m also looking downticket, and thinking Obama has a better chance of sweeping in more Democrats into Congress and state seats. That’s another powerful consideration for this Edwards supporter.

    If Obama is smart, and he is, he’s going to push this and the “You can’t run Hillary against McCain because they vote the same way except on TORTURE!” memes till nest Tuesday. Not only do they sink in with a lot of Democrats, they also have the benefit of being true. Virtually ever state party chairman in red states, and the Democratic governors of some of those red states, are pleading for Obama because he doesn’t bring the Republicans out of the woodwork on Nov. 5th.

  53. 53
    myiq2xu says:

    Sorry folks, but Obama isn’t gonna win this thing. He needed an early knock-out but didn’t gety it.

    HRC has the money, the organization, and the numbers.

    Florida is just a taste of what Super-Duper Tuesday is gonna look like.

  54. 54
    myiq2xu says:

    Will Edwards supporters vote for Hillary after she broke her promise not to campaign in Florida?

    another media/Obama lie – she didn’t campaign in Florida.

    Obama ran ads in Florida that were part of a National ad-buy (I didn’tr see any of them here in CA)

  55. 55
    empty says:

    John S. Says:

    ..

    Obama must have had sex with your wife or something. That is the only possible explanation for your level of contempt.

    Or this could be an explanation.
    Or you could stick with your sexual fantasies.

  56. 56
    dslak says:

    It’s like Son of Darrell around here.

  57. 57
    dslak says:

    Empty, that’s not a good explanation in this particular case, because Hillary doesn’t have a reputation for giving two shits about the Palestinians, either.

  58. 58
    AkaDad says:

    she didn’t

    campaign in Florida.

    She was in Florida making speeches the night before they voted. I call that campaigning.

    Obama bought a national ad package which includes Florida. The Democratic party said that it didn’t violate the no campaign promise.

  59. 59
    Daniel Munz says:

    Krista, no kidding! Here’s hoping they find the time to, uh, break a few more ribs.

  60. 60
    Sharon says:

    Well, I’m an Edwards supporter and I’m glad he’s not endorsing right now. Let them earn it first.
    I don’t know which of the two remaining I’d pick, Obama’s my Senator but I’m not in a “making nice” mood with the opposition; HRC is the kind of streetfighter I want to see kick repug ass, but I don’t think independants will break for her the way they seem to for Obama.

  61. 61
    AkaDad says:

    I fail at html.

  62. 62
    TheFountainHead says:

    Or this could be an explanation.
    Or you could stick with your sexual fantasies.

    Wait, wait, wait!! I though Obama was a Muslim, how could he also be pro-Israel?? I r confuzzled!!!

  63. 63
    myiq2xu says:

    She was in Florida making speeches the night before they voted. I call that campaigning.

    She held two closed fundraisers. Assume that each was 5000 people and they all voted for her.

    Her margin of victory was way more than 10000 votes.

    She did hold a rally AFTER the polls had closed. I’m sure that tipped the scales.

  64. 64
    Zifnab says:

    I don’t know which of the two remaining I’d pick, Obama’s my Senator but I’m not in a “making nice” mood with the opposition; HRC is the kind of streetfighter I want to see kick repug ass, but I don’t think independants will break for her the way they seem to for Obama.

    But Obama has the charm and charisma to kill them with kindness. He’ll bring health care reform, economic recovery, and an end to Iraq. And even the Republicans will cheer for him.

    Come. Ride the Unity Pony.

  65. 65
    dslak says:

    I’ve found Obama’s shift on the plight of the Palestinians to be disconcerting, but I’m hoping he’s just pandering to the pro-Israeli wing of the Democratic Party. That’s right: I’m accusing the Unity Pony of pandering, and I still prefer him to Clinton. Somebody check that myiq2xu’s head hasn’t exploded.

  66. 66
    myiq2xu says:

    Somebody check that myiq2xu’s head hasn’t exploded.

    It’s swelled up but it’s been that way for years.

  67. 67
    Dennis - SGMM says:

    She held two closed fundraisers. Assume that each was 5000 people and they all voted for her.

    Yep, it all depends on what the meaning of “is” is.

  68. 68
    empty says:

    dslak Says:

    Empty, that’s not a good explanation in this particular case, because Hillary doesn’t have a reputation for giving two shits about the Palestinians, either.

    I don’t see why it isn’t. John S. was searching through his porn stash to come up with an explanation for myiq2xu’s contempt for Obama. I was just suggesting that there might be reasons outside of his stash. No mention of Hillary. And for what its worth I agree with you about Hillary and the Palestinians.

  69. 69
    JWeidner says:

    I’m sorry, but why is myiq pimping Florida as if it means anything? There are no delegates for any Democratic candidate to win there. The state was striped of all delegates as punishment for moving the primary up too early.

    So no delegates for HRC, or any Democratic candidate for that matter….so why the victory dance?

  70. 70
    myiq2xu says:

    Yep, it all depends on what the meaning of “is” is.

    And TZ says I’ve run out of gas.

  71. 71
    Jen says:

    HRC is the kind of streetfighter I want to see kick repug ass, but I don’t think independants will break for her the way they seem to for Obama.

    So here’s the tiebreaker…she has to win, to kick repug ass. I think you have your answer.

  72. 72
    dslak says:

    I get what you’re saying, empty, but myiq2xu is pretty clearly pro-Hillary. Ergo, the Israel/Palestinian issue can’t be what accounts for his animus towards Obama.

  73. 73
    Daniel Munz says:

    A(n earnest) question about the whole transcending/unity pony thing: Even if you personally don’t buy it, isn’t it a decent tactical point in Obama’s favor that he seems to make other people — particularly independents — buy it? One comparison I am happy to make between BHO and Bill Clinton is that both seemed to have kind of a political teflon driven by personal character and a sense of newness. For Clinton, it was about “transcending” the partisan divide with his whole Third Way shtick; Obama’s shtick strikes me as more timely, more credible, and less destructive to progressivism. The only legitimate worry I see here is that the guy buys his own hype too much, although personally I don’t think that’s the case. But if you’re really so enamored with Hillary (or adverse to Obama) on tactical grounds, isn’t this a positive point about Obama that you have to acknowledge as well?

  74. 74
    Doubting Thomas says:

    Will Edwards supporters vote for Hillary after she broke her promise not to campaign in Florida?

    Yes, this Edwards supporter will. I’ll also vote Obama if he is the nominee. Don’t assume Edwards voters one giant block that will support one or the other exclusively.

    I like ’em both. Personally, health care is my big issue, so I’m going with Clinton mat this point. I think they’re both pretty centrist candidates with lots of establishment support on each side. Hillary, contrary to what many say, has a pretty good progressive voting record. She’s just more hawkish and Republican-like in her foreign policy. I personally don’t see that as a bad thing and I know what will be thrown at her and that she’s tough enough to take it and dish it back. Presidential politics is a disgustingly dirty business after all. Obama needs to convince me he can fight the right-wing as well as unite the Country before he gets my vote. I happen to think 70% of the country is already united, so that’s just not a big issue to me.

  75. 75
    myiq2xu says:

    I’m sorry, but why is myiq pimping Florida as if it means anything? There are no delegates for any Democratic candidate to win there. The state was striped of all delegates as punishment for moving the primary up too early.

    So no delegates for HRC, or any Democratic candidate for that matter….so why the victory dance?

    Read Digby

    50% of the Democrats in Florida voted for HRC with a heavy turnout.

    TZ called it a sham.

    857,000 votes for Hillary is a meaningless “sham.” 160,000 more votes than McCain got winning on the GOP side is nothing.

  76. 76
    dslak says:

    So here’s the tiebreaker…she has to win, to kick repug ass.

    I had always assumed that you defeated the other party by beating them in elections, but Ma always said I was kinda slow.

  77. 77
    D-Chance. says:

    CNN is positing the same trash today that Dick Morris began last night on Fox.

    Morris asked, “Who will the Edwards supporters go to now? Because they won’t support a black man, and they won’t support a woman”. Alan Colmes jumped all over that one, asking Morris if he’s calling Edwards supporters “racist”. Morris wouldn’t come right out and say “no”. And now I just heard CNN making the same insinuation. What a crock.

  78. 78
    Tom in Texas says:

    dsl:

    I think you are underestimating the amount of Cognitive Dissonance brewed up by the Hillcamp. I mean, Obama’s record on the war can’t be trusted, but Hillary’s is stalwart? Obama can’t take em on and wants to play nice, but this Senator who meekly cowed over until Dems like Obama forced her to wake the hell up in 2004 is gonna do it? She has claimed she will roll back torture at least, I’ll give her that — but she has not come out against the constitutional excess wrought these past few years with anywhere near the ferocity Obama has.

  79. 79
    empty says:

    dslak Says:

    I’ve found Obama’s shift on the plight of the Palestinians to be disconcerting, but I’m hoping he’s just pandering to the pro-Israeli wing of the Democratic Party. That’s right: I’m accusing the Unity Pony of pandering, and I still prefer him to Clinton.

    My point is not that one should not support Obama. But if one does it should be based on realities – not some noble transcendence garbage.

  80. 80
    Jen says:

    Myiq, are you helping your clients these days, or do you just look up long enough to say “fruits of the poisonous tree” to the judge?

    /hypocritically

  81. 81
    dslak says:

    For the future of the Republic, Dick Morris must die.

  82. 82
    TheFountainHead says:

    She held two closed fundraisers. Assume that each was 5000 people and they all voted for her.

    Her margin of victory was way more than 10000 votes.

    She did hold a rally AFTER the polls had closed. I’m sure that tipped the scales.

    I think the point that you’re missing, at least on this subject, is that her margin of victory was predicated a lot on her statement that “Florida should count!” three days before the Florida primary, which to my mind, is tantamount to campaigning in the state. It certainly was pandering to the state. If you look at the exits of Florida, the voters who decided who got heir vote in the month leading up to the primary went for Obama. Those who decided in just the last three days went for Clinton. Telling, no?

  83. 83
    Dreggas says:

    dslak Says:

    It’s like Son of Darrell around here.

    POTD.

  84. 84
    dslak says:

    My point is not that one should not support Obama. But if one does it should be based on realities – not some noble transcendence garbage.

    Okay, but the posts you were addressing weren’t to do with Obama transcending anything, but myiq2xu’s boundless hatred for him, and John S.’s comments thereupon.

  85. 85
    OriGuy says:

    To those who are saying “If it’s Hillary, I’m sitting out.”, four words:

    Attorney General Rudy Giuliani

    I’ve seen speculation that Edwards is hankering for that job or SCOTUS. Even if Clinton doesn’t do that, she won’t appoint Rudy to dogcatcher.

  86. 86
    JWeidner says:

    Read Digby

    OK. And I still see no benefit to Clinton in Florida. Digby’s point is that the media shouldn’t be dismissive of the actual people casting their votes, but he also pretty plainly states that no one knows how the votes may have tallied if there had been delegates up for grabs and the candidates actually, you know, campaigned there.

    The fact is that Florida benefits no one at this point. Same goes for Michigan. So to point to this as some sort of victory for Clinton – I just don’t see it. She gained no delegates, regardless of the votes cast.

    I don’t doubt that she feels good having gotten so many votes, but without the accompanying delegates, there’s no return on her investment there.

  87. 87
    NonyNony says:

    If he merely evenly splits the delegates with Clinton, I predict this goes to the convention and he probably loses unless the super delegates hop on the unity pony.

    If this “goes to the convention” then we end up with a Clinton/Obama ticket. The obvious choice and one that I think has a good chance of happening if Clinton gets the higher delegate count (even if there isn’t an “even” split in the delegates).

    And if that happens, I spend multiple days laughing my ass off at the absurdity of the last few months.

  88. 88
    empty says:

    TheFountainHead Says:

    Or this could be an explanation.
    Or you could stick with your sexual fantasies.

    Wait, wait, wait!! I though Obama was a Muslim, how could he also be pro-Israel?? I r confuzzled

    Now TFH we’ll try to do this slowly. It is not about being pro or anti Israel. It’s about trading your principles for political gain. You might still vote for the guy, but it does arouse some contempt. No?

  89. 89
    The Other Steve says:

    My point is not that one should not support Obama. But if one does it should be based on realities – not some noble transcendence garbage.

    The only person living in fantasy world regarding Obama is myiqis40.

  90. 90
    Jen says:

    As far as realities go, I like this one:

    It’s time for new leadership that understands that the way to win a debate with John McCain is not by nominating someone who agreed with him on voting for the war in Iraq; who agreed with him by voting to give George Bush the benefit of the doubt on Iran; who agrees with him in embracing the Bush-Cheney policy of not talking to leaders we don’t like; and who actually differed with him by arguing for exceptions for torture before changing positions when the politics of the moment changed.

    We need to offer the American people a clear contrast on national security, and when I am the nominee of the Democratic Party, that’s exactly what I will do. Talking tough and tallying up your years in Washington is no substitute for judgment, and courage, and clear plans. It’s not enough to say you’ll be ready from Day One – you have to be right from Day One.

  91. 91
    The Other Steve says:

    As far as realities go, I like this one:

    Hallelujah! The Magical Unity Pony rides again!

  92. 92
    Davebo says:

    50% of the Democrats in Florida voted for HRC with a heavy turnout.

    In a closed primary.

    As for Super Tuesday..

    More than half the states holding presidential contests next month on Super Tuesday allow unaffiliated voters to participate, giving millions of independents a chance to shape what is usually an insider affair among Democratic and Republican loyalists.

    Two of those states _ California and New Jersey _ together have nearly 6 million unaffiliated voters who will be allowed to cast ballots. Georgia, Illinois, Massachusetts and Alabama are among other prized catches with millions of independents eligible for the Feb. 5 contests.

    The open voting is widely considered to benefit Democratic Sen. Barack Obama and Republican Sen. John McCain, who have fared well among independents in recent polls and primaries.

    Who will fair better drawing independants?

    BHM or HRC?

    I don’t think there’s even a question.

  93. 93
    LarryB says:

    With the possible exception of Nevada, Obama hasn’t yet shown the ability to win in a closed primary. Also, his big wins (OH, SC) were in states where he’s been campaigning for a long time, giving his grassroots support the opportunity to take root. I don’t see either of these factors working in his favor looking forward to Super Tuesday and beyond. Obama may be able to force a brokered convention, but I’ll bet five bucks to anyone here that HRC goes into the convention with more delegates overall.

  94. 94
    TheFountainHead says:

    Now TFH we’ll try to do this slowly. It is not about being pro or anti Israel. It’s about trading your principles for political gain. You might still vote for the guy, but it does arouse some contempt. No?

    The Snark. I has it.

    Seriously, my point wasn’t that he was one or the other, my point is that his personal views on Israel/Palestine a.) are unknown and b.) being wildly propagandized about in BOTH directions. And no, I’m not too much unsettled by him making some key pro-Israel comments when he’s under heavy attack for being a Muslim.

  95. 95
    crw says:

    If you look at the Florida exit polls (yeah, I know, how dare I use evidence), it’s pretty clear the vote once again broke down on age, gender, and race. Hillary is crushing Obama on the over 60 crowd and females. These two groups typically turn out in droves. Obama only dominated the black vote, and they aren’t nearly a big enough cohort to outweigh Hillary’s advantages. Just on demographics alone, Obama’s chances are slim unless he can rapidly build support in these groups.

    Predicition: On SDT Obama will do well in comparatively younger states, and Hillary will murder him anywhere there is a strong retiree population.

  96. 96
    empty says:

    Talking tough and tallying up your years in Washington is no substitute for judgment, and courage, and clear plans.

    And which clear plans are you basing your support on?

  97. 97
    TheFountainHead says:

    On the closed/open primary discussion, it is worth noting that the California Republican primary is closed to Independents, whereas the Democratic primary, held the same day, is not, which means Obama does not need fight McCain for them there.

  98. 98
    myiq2xu says:

    Why am I opposed to Obama? Because he’s a traingulating phony.

    For instance, Obama says he supports the death penalty in limited circumstances, such as an especially heinous crime. The campaign says Obama has consistently supported the death penalty “in principle” and opposed it “in practice.”

    Huh?

    He was antiwar in 2002 when he didn’t have to vote, but in July 2004 he said “There’s not much of a difference between my position on Iraq and George Bush’s position at this stage.”

    BTW – The war was still kinda popular back then.

    As a Senator, in 69 Iraq votes, Obama differed from HRC on exactly 1.

    On Kyl-Lieberman (which called Iran’s Revolutionary Guards a terrorist group) Obama was AWOL for the vote, then attacked HRC for supporting it, even though he co-sponsored a similar bill earlier in the year.

    He didn’t vote on it at all, then criticized HRC for her vote.

    Obama said he was in favor of legislation against “partial-birth abortion” but then he voted “Present” (HRC voted no.)

    I could go on (and will, later) but the closer I look at Obama, it’s clear he’s trying to be all things to all people.

  99. 99
    myiq2xu says:

    Obama can’t take em on and wants to play nice, but this Senator who meekly cowed over until Dems like Obama forced her to wake the hell up in 2004 is gonna do it?

    How exactly did Obama do that?

  100. 100
    myiq2xu says:

    Telling, no?

    No

  101. 101
    Tom in Texas says:

    In July 2004 he didn’t have a vote either. He was certainly pandering — to the numbnuts that supported it while he was at their convention. Personally I would’ve enjoyed a speech blasting the party elders for their fuckup, but one can’t blame him for trying to paint Kerry/Clinton in a better light. Illinois Planned Parenthood worked with Obama and encouraged him to vote present, because neither liked the bill as is and wanted it to do more. It is hardly evidence that he doesn’t support abortion rights.

    But his is the campaign of “thin gruel.”

  102. 102
    Caidence (fmr. Chris) says:

    I had to step out, but could someone help me out and tell me, WTF is this?:

    Or this could be an explanation.
    Or you could stick with your sexual fantasies.

    I read that 4 times, and I see 1.) Obama defending Israel defending itself against a violent political party, 2.) Obama telling a guy “sorry, maybe later”, and 3.) some line about Khalizad which I found hard to follow, without reference to Obama…

    Was there something to that that I’m blind to, or was that some left-winger blindly humping any thing remotely anti-AIPAC?

    (don’t get me wrong, I’m suspicious of AIPAC, but that does not mean Israel is immediately evil)

  103. 103
    TheFountainHead says:

    No

    Oh…well….okay.

    If you say so.

  104. 104

    Yeah, Florida did play to Hillary’s old fart demographic advantage. (See what I did there? Hillary is for the ooooooold! Which I guess means McCain is for the ancient.)

  105. 105
    empty says:

    TheFountainHead Says:

    ..
    And no, I’m not too much unsettled by him making some key pro-Israel comments when he’s under heavy attack for being a Muslim.

    I hear you. The only problem is, the quote about being upfront later is from 2004. Long before the madrassa-secret muslim thing.

  106. 106
    crw says:

    Oh good. It looks like Nader is going to try to give us a Republican pres. Again. Maybe Paul and/or Huck will do us the favor of going 3rd party and balancing it out.

  107. 107
    TheFountainHead says:

    I hear you. The only problem is, the quote about being upfront later is from 2004. Long before the madrassa-secret muslim thing.

    I’m going to go ahead and say that’s false. I’m pretty positive (though admit I’m lacking a source at the moment) that Obama faced similar “Oh Noes! He’s a Mooooslam!” propaganda when he ran for the Illinois State Senate. It’s probably been a part of his politically career since his first opponent first read his biography. Also, putting that quote in the light of 2004, it seems even less significant.

  108. 108
    empty says:

    crw Says:

    Oh good. It looks like Nader is going to try to give us a Republican pres.

    But but Nader transcends parties!

  109. 109
    Jen says:

    I thought Ralph already definitively proved there was no difference between the parties….why is he back?

  110. 110
    Napoleon says:

    myiq2xu Says:

    That’s party loyalty from the Obama Nation

    I am not loyal to the party but to what I believe in. If the Dems nominate someone who sends a surragate out to race bait like Clinton did they do not get my vote, that simple.

  111. 111
    empty says:

    I’m pretty positive (though admit I’m lacking a source at the moment)

    Can’t argue against faith.

  112. 112
    myiq2xu says:

    In July 2004 he didn’t have a vote either. He was certainly pandering—to the numbnuts that supported it while he was at their convention. Personally I would’ve enjoyed a speech blasting the party elders for their fuckup, but one can’t blame him for trying to paint Kerry/Clinton in a better light.

    How does that fit with this?

    Obama can’t take em on and wants to play nice, but this Senator who meekly cowed over until Dems like Obama forced her to wake the hell up in 2004 is gonna do it?

    He forced her to wake the hell up but he was pandering to – whoever.

  113. 113
    Zifnab says:

    Why am I opposed to Obama? Because he’s a traingulating phony.

    For instance, Obama says he supports the death penalty in limited circumstances, such as an especially heinous crime. The campaign says Obama has consistently supported the death penalty “in principle” and opposed it “in practice.”

    Huh?

    Um… that’s kinda my position too. If guy A shoots guy B, then guy A should get the chair/chamber/pokey-death stick/whatever. But the way the death penalty is currently implemented, guy A can get off with a lesser sentence if he’s rich, white, or well-connected. That’s not the way to run a justice system.

    Much like the crack/powder cocaine issue – where crack gets you steeper sentences and just happens to be used more exclusively by the impoverished and minority citizens, the death penalty is skewed to protect the privileged and crucify the misfortuned.

    Thus, it is a good idea in theory, but bad in practice.

    He was antiwar in 2002 when he didn’t have to vote, but in July 2004 he said “There’s not much of a difference between my position on Iraq and George Bush’s position at this stage.”

    BTW – The war was still kinda popular back then.

    As a Senator, in 69 Iraq votes, Obama differed from HRC on exactly 1.

    Not sure how this makes him a worse candidate than Clinton. She wouldn’t even repudiate her ’02 Iraq Authorization Vote, claiming it was all made on bad intelligence. I’m not particularly thrilled with any of the front-runner positions on Iraq. Richardson and Kucinnich were the only two talking about immediate, full withdrawal. But I can be confident that neither Hill nor Obama will actively fight Congress on stepping back from the debacle.

    On Kyl-Lieberman (which called Iran’s Revolutionary Guards a terrorist group) Obama was AWOL for the vote, then attacked HRC for supporting it, even though he co-sponsored a similar bill earlier in the year.

    He didn’t vote on it at all, then criticized HRC for her vote.

    I never saw the Obama bill you speak, so I can’t speak to that. I consider a “not here” vote infinitely better than a “yes” vote on Kyl-Lieberman. Both Hill and Barak should have known how this bill would be received. That Obama had the good sense to duck his head and keep clear makes me think he was more in tune with his constituency. That Hillary blustered on through and actively defended the bill in the face of Obama’s accusations makes me think she still doesn’t realize why signing off on Kyl-Lieberman was a dumb idea.

    Obama said he was in favor of legislation against “partial-birth abortion” but then he voted “Present” (HRC voted no.)

    Functionally equivalent. A “no” vote wouldn’t have prevented the bill from passing. In the IL legislature, voting “present” is the equivalent of voting “no” because a majority of “yes” votes are required for passage. Many IL legislators use the “present” vote as an evasion on an unpopular choice, so that they can avoid being targeted for voting “no.” In 1997, Obama voted against SB 230, which would have turned doctors into felons by banning so-called partial-birth abortion, and against a 2000 bill banning state funding.

    I could go on (and will, later) but the closer I look at Obama, it’s clear he’s trying to be all things to all people.

    :p I think that, at least, is true. He is running for President, after all.

  114. 114
    Caidence (fmr. Chris) says:

    Oh good. It looks like Nader is going to try to give us a Republican pres.

    That twit needs a good knee the jewels. What the fuck does he think he’s going to do aside from put in a Republican and make torture permanent?

    I’ll make this succinct: Anyone that supports Nader at this point in politics is just as much a failure as someone who voted for Bush in 2004. You’re not paying attention, but still interacting with society, and thus should be euthanized for the health of this country.

    ass. hole.

  115. 115
    TheFountainHead says:

    I’ll make this succinct: Anyone that supports Nader at this point in politics is just as much a failure as someone who voted for Bush in 2004. You’re not paying attention, but still interacting with society, and thus should be euthanized for the health of this country.

    ass. hole.

    Amen, again.

  116. 116
    myiq2xu says:

    Illinois Planned Parenthood worked with Obama and encouraged him to vote present, because neither liked the bill as is and wanted it to do more.

    Hmmm. From Left Coaster:

    Pam Sutherland, president of Illinois Planned Parenthood Council, said Mr. Obama was one of the senators with a strong stand for abortion rights whom the organization approached about using the strategy. Ms. Sutherland said the Republicans were trying to force Democrats from conservative districts to register politically controversial no votes.

    Ms. Sutherland said Mr. Obama had initially resisted the strategy because he wanted to vote against the anti-abortion measures.
    “He said, ‘I’m opposed to this,'” she recalled.
    But the organization argued that a present vote would be difficult for Republicans to use in campaign literature against Democrats from moderate and conservative districts who favored abortion rights.

    /snip/

    [W]hat is the point of having allegedly pro-choice candidates in the Legislature if they are afraid to vote pro-choice out of the fear that they will be defeated, and what is the reason for existence of an allegedly pro-choice organization that proudly encourages Democrats to not vote pro-choice so that they can stay in power?]

    Vote “present” and let the bill pass into law, rather than take a political risk by opposing it. Not exactly a “principled stand” or an example of leadership.

    Sounds more like “triangulation.”

  117. 117
    crw says:

    Jen Says:

    I thought Ralph already definitively proved there was no difference between the partieshe has an ego the size of Cleveland… Why is he back?

    FTFY and answered your question in one.

  118. 118
    tBone says:

    It’s the like the Son of Darrell around here.

    myiq0/u couldn’t shine the buttons on Darrell’s Boy Scout uniform, let alone fill his shoes.

  119. 119
    myiq2xu says:

    Oh…well….okay.

    If you say so.

    Oh, you’re right, those stupid Florida Democrats (all 857,000) were swayed by HRC’s wily move to call for the delegates to count, which overcame the Obama bump out of South Carolina.

    We all know Florida voters are stupid (2000 proved it) so lets just take their electoral votes away too and give them to somebody who will use them wisely. Like South Carolina.

  120. 120
    TheFountainHead says:

    Vote “present” and let the bill pass into law, rather than take a political risk by opposing it. Not exactly a “principled stand” or an example of leadership.

    Sounds more like “triangulation.”

    It’s called picking your battles. I know you jump headlong into everything you disagree with, but a politician on any side of the aisle cannot afford that luxury. If the pro-choice organization felt they could absorb the bill getting passed (perhaps because a governor has agreed not to enforce it, or some other reason) and prevent their favorite candidates from being smeared, they should, and will.

  121. 121
    myiq2xu says:

    Both Hill and Barak should have known how this bill would be received. That Obama had the good sense to duck his head and keep clear makes me think he was more in tune with his constituency.

    What about voting “no?”

  122. 122
    John S. says:

    John S. was searching through his porn stash to come up with an explanation for myiq2xu’s contempt for Obama.

    Hey, fuck you. Seriously.

    I don’t know where you freaks came from, but go back there. Anyone here can see that myiq2xu has an unhealthy obsession with hating Obama, which doesn’t seem to have any plausible explanation.

    You can write me off as an Obama fanboy if you want. You don’t seem to have much else to contribute.

  123. 123
    myiq2xu says:

    Many IL legislators use the “present” vote as an evasion on an unpopular choice, so that they can avoid being targeted for voting “no.”

    That’s triangulating.

    That’s not this:

    We can’t avoid tough questions and tell everyone what we think they want to hear – we have to tell people what they need to hear. We can’t afford to triangulate and poll-test every position because we’re afraid of what Mitt Romney or Rudy Giuliani might say.

    The Democratic Party has made the most difference in people’s lives when we’ve led not by polls, but by principle; not by calculation, but by conviction; when we’ve had leaders who could summon the entire nation to a common purpose.

    Guess who?

  124. 124
    myiq2xu says:

    It’s called picking your battles. I know you jump headlong into everything you disagree with, but a politician on any side of the aisle cannot afford that luxury.

    But Obama is different, he’s transcended politics!

  125. 125
    John S. says:

    Oh, you’re right, those stupid Florida Democrats (all 857,000) were swayed by HRC’s wily move to call for the delegates to count, which overcame the Obama bump out of South Carolina.

    Florida Democrats came out to vote for the massive property amendment. Seeing as how we were prompted to select a Democratic candidate before jamming our thumbs on the red “Vote” button, we made a selection. Many of us voted our conscience, many of us voted out of ignorance.

    Seeing as how there was absolutely no presence here by any of the Democratic candidates, I think more of us voted out of ignorance since most normal people are not political junkies like the bulk of commenters here. That situation clearly benefits the person who has a recognizable name.

    This isn’t rocket science.

  126. 126
    myiq2xu says:

    Anyone here can see that myiq2xu has an unhealthy obsession with hating Obama, which doesn’t seem to have any plausible explanation.

    It’s a healthy obsession.

    No plausible explanation? I don’t suffer from CDS, unlike some who shall remain nameless (but unfortunately not silent.)

  127. 127
    HyperIon says:

    i say run a HRC/BOH ticket in 2008 with HRC agreeing to not seek a second term. Then BOH can run in 2012. No repub could defeat this ticket in 2008.

  128. 128
    Caidence (fmr. Chris) says:

    Why am I opposed to Obama? Because he’s a traingulating phony.

    For instance, Obama says he supports the death penalty in limited circumstances, such as an especially heinous crime.

    Lets ignore that, it’s peripheral to your argument.

    The campaign says Obama has consistently supported the death penalty “in principle” and opposed it “in practice.”

    Huh?

    OK, it is a dumb statement. I don’t even know what that means. Source, por favor?

    He was antiwar in 2002 when he didn’t have to vote, but in July 2004 he said “There’s not much of a difference between my position on Iraq and George Bush’s position at this stage.”

    I dunno what to make of this, except for the fact that Hillary said “We believed the President”. One basing his/her arguments off of George Bush’s belief is bit hard to make sense of.

    BTW – The war was still kinda popular back then.

    As a Senator, in 69 Iraq votes, Obama differed from HRC on exactly 1.

    Wars require a lot of stupid votes, too. Enumerate the votes, then I might be able to see something bad about this.

    On Kyl-Lieberman (which called Iran’s Revolutionary Guards a terrorist group) Obama was AWOL for the vote, then attacked HRC for supporting it, even though he co-sponsored a similar bill earlier in the year.

    You mean Obama sponsored this:

    Click Here:
    A joint resolution clarifying that the use of force against Iran is not authorized by the Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq, any resolution previously adopted, or any other provision of law.

    But was wary of this:

    Click Here:
    that it should be the policy of the United States to combat, contain, and roll back the violent activities and destabilizing influence inside Iraq of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran

    (Links aren’t working in preview for some reason)

    Fail.

    He didn’t vote on it at all, then criticized HRC for her vote.

    That’s a fair swipe.

    Obama said he was in favor of legislation against “partial-birth abortion” but then he voted “Present” (HRC voted no.)

    Holy shit, you don’t even know where that took place, do you? “Present” doesn’t happen in Congress, it means he did that in Illinois, and voting “Present” in Illinois means you have problems with the bill and/or how it was created, not with the issue itself.

    I could go on (and will, later) but the closer I look at Obama, it’s clear he’s trying to be all things to all people.

    Holy crap! You mean Obama wants to represent us all as Head of State??! Calamitous! Shenanigans!!

  129. 129
    myiq2xu says:

    I think more of us voted out of ignorance since most normal people are not political junkies like the bulk of commenters here.

    So you’re saying you voted for Obama out of ignorance?

  130. 130
    TheFountainHead says:

    Oh, you’re right, those stupid Florida Democrats (all 857,000) were swayed by HRC’s wily move to call for the delegates to count, which overcame the Obama bump out of South Carolina.

    I said nothing about all 857,000 of them. I WAS saying that those who decided in the last three days bucked the trend toward Obama for the previous month (I can only point to her stance on Florida to account for this) and those voters made up a certain percentage of her “win”. Take them away and it changes the results dramatically I think.

  131. 131
    jnfr says:

    digby = she, just for the record.

    Maybe he’s looked at them, realized that if one of them is acceptable then the other is too, and decided to just stand back and let the Dem voters figure out which moderate centrist Dem they want to represent them come November.

    This is pretty much where I stand. This is a sad day for me. I see both pluses and minuses in both the remaining candidates, and I am completely committed to supporting whoever the Dems run this year. So I probably won’t bother to attend the Colorado caucuses next week.

    All of you who care so much and fight each other so hard can duke it out until someone wins. Then I’ll go back to work for the party.

  132. 132
    myiq2xu says:

    OK, it is a dumb statement. I don’t even know what that means. Source, por favor?

    Source

  133. 133
    Jen says:

    Hulk Hogan is on the unity pony, but I wouldn’t expect a series of Chuck Norris-style ads from the campaign.

    I think Oprah, though? Oprah is an endorsement that might actually matter to how people vote.

  134. 134
    John S. says:

    I don’t suffer from CDS, unlike some who shall remain nameless

    I don’t either.

    I simply have no desire to see another Clinton in office. I think it is unhealthy for a democracy to have the same two families control the exuctive branch for more than 20 years.

  135. 135
    John S. says:

    So you’re saying you voted for Obama out of ignorance?

    That’s a pithy rejoinder, but hardly what I said.

    Reading Is Fundamental.

  136. 136
    DougJ says:

    digby = she

    Right. Just like Jen.

    It’s more likely someone pretending to be a girl to WOW the boys with her blogging skills.

  137. 137
    Jen says:

    WOW

    Thanks!
    To be fair, that would be my commenting skills.
    My blog is mostly pictures of my kids.
    Boooooring.

  138. 138
    myiq2xu says:

    I WAS saying that those who decided in the last three days bucked the trend toward Obama for the previous month (I can only point to her stance on Florida to account for this) and those voters made up a certain percentage of her “win”. Take them away and it changes the results dramatically I think.

    Do you have facts or are you just guessing?

    She beat Obama by about 160,000 votes, and since your theory has Obama in the lead until 2-3 days before the vote, that’s an even bigger swing.

    How about this theory: The voters in Florida aren’t stupid or ignorant, and they prefer HRC?

    Occam’s blunt instrument: the voters (50% anyway) liked HRC over BHO.

    “But . . . but, it can’t be that simple! EVERYBODY knows Obama is the one!”

  139. 139
    Pb says:

    myiq2xu,

    Vote “present” and let the bill pass into law, rather than take a political risk by opposing it.

    Congratulations, your hackery has officially outstripped your “iq”. In the future, either do some research to dispel your ignorance first, or just STFU.

  140. 140
    Tom in Texas says:

    Obama is bad because some fans consider anticomments racist

    Hillary is good because some fans consider anticomments deranged.

    I don’t like Hillary. I have defended her for years, presuming she will be the nominee. I will continue to defend her if she is the only candidate left. There is no way on earth I will defend, excuse, or support her actions in SC and FL. The best I can do is a halfass “but your guy is worse” — an argument I will make, but not nearly with the relish some Hillary supporters have. That makes me as deranged as Billy is racist.

  141. 141
    The Other Steve says:

    Because he’s a traingulating phony.

    Isn’t this a Karl Rove tactic? Taking your weakness and applying it to your opponent?

    Next myiq is going to accuse Republicans of being bleeding hearts who care too much for the poor in his defense of John Edwards.

  142. 142
    jnfr says:

    I’ve seen digby in person, she’s a she.

  143. 143
    myiq2xu says:

    That’s a pithy rejoinder, but hardly what I said.

    It was a big fat slow softball hovering over the plate, and I couldn’t pass it up.

  144. 144
    The Other Steve says:

    How about this theory: The voters in Florida aren’t stupid or ignorant, and they prefer HRC?

    Is it possible that not everybody showed up to vote who would have been interested in voting because the delegates in florida don’t matter?

    Has anybody noticed how myiq ignores points made in the debate? Questions asked, he refuses to address?

    It really is like Son of Darrell.

  145. 145
    Caidence (fmr. Chris) says:

    myiq2xu Says:

    OK, it is a dumb statement. I don’t even know what that means. Source, por favor?

    Source

    myiq, next time, skip Taylor Marsh and go straight to Politico. It’s like I ask for a legal draft written up and you send me to a clown with a seltzer bottle.

    Second, nobody actually had a scan of the retarded statement you (and they) mentioned, just the first page and a fucked up copy of the second, of 12 pages, so how about we just call that point insignificant and leave it.

  146. 146
    The Other Steve says:

    I’ve seen digby in person, she’s a she.

    I’m not sure about all of the Jane Hamsher’s of the left. But Digby is definately a she.

  147. 147
    Jen says:

    Myiq used to be funny, sometimes.

    Sigh.

  148. 148
    Zifnab says:

    How about this theory: The voters in Florida aren’t stupid or ignorant, and they prefer HRC?

    Occam’s blunt instrument: the voters (50% anyway) liked HRC over BHO.

    Horray! Theory time! How about this theory:
    Voters in Florida are older and more conservative. This is Hillary Clinton’s target demographic.

    Oh! Oh! New Theory!
    Voters in Florida had a higher name recognition for Hillary Clinton and knew more about the candidate due to her decades of public exposure. They voted for Hillary because she was a candidate they knew the most about and were comfortable with.

    Or!
    Voters in Florida considered health care a top priority. Hillary Clinton’s health care plan is the most detailed of the three leading Dem contenders. Florida voters went with Hillary for her policy wonkishness.

    We can do this all day!
    DIEBOLD! THE VOTES WERE RIGGED! HILLARY WILL DO ANYTHING TO BECOME PRESIDENT!

    I’ll even settle for:
    In the Florida Primary, when confronted with the option of voting for Obama in the Dem primary or McCain the the Republican primary, independent voters flocked to McCain, alongside Romney and Guillani, was running all the ads.

    All interesting theories. But I’m going to go with yours, myiq2xu, because I’m hoping it’ll make you feel better and bring you together with the rest of the country.

    That’s right, come over here myiq2xu. Hugs? Hugs? That’s it…
    QUICK! GET THE PONY! TIE HIM ON, DAMNIT! UNITY… PONY… ZERO… EIGHT!

  149. 149
    DougJ says:

    I’ve seen digby in person, she’s a she.

    So you say. I don’t see what your supposed meeting with someone purporting to be Digby actually proves. But if it makes you feel beter, hey, don’t let me stop you.

    Hulk Hogan is on the unity pony, but I wouldn’t expect a series of Chuck Norris-style ads from the campaign.

    Because we all know how much real-life women love Chuck and the Hulkster. Right.

  150. 150
    Caidence (fmr. Chris) says:

    Isn’t this a Karl Rove tactic? Taking your weakness and applying it to your opponent?

    Karl Rove didn’t create it, he’s just the King of neurotic, my-guy-over-your-guy at-all-costs competition.

    myiq showing these signs isn’t a function of Karl Rove, it’s a function of the issues he has with Bush and Obama not addressing them to his satisfaction (and perhaps using Taylor Marsh as an informational reference *shudder*)

    But good call, nonetheless.

  151. 151
    myiq2xu says:

    I don’t like Hillary. I have defended her for years, presuming she will be the nominee. I will continue to defend her if she is the only candidate left.

    Hillary wasn’t my first choice. He didn’t run.

    She wasn’t my second choice either. She wouldn’t have been my third or fourth choices but they dropped out before my second choice.

    But after taking a long look at Obama, I’m gonna hold my nose and vote for Hillary.

    And if somehow Hillary manages to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, I’ll vote for Obama. Hell, I’ll even support him.

    Note to Caidence: Quit giggling because I said “snatch” in the same sentence with “Hillary.”

    You know you were, don’t lie!

  152. 152
    Tom in Texas says:

    LOL I missed the Taylor Marsh link. That woman is insane.

    We’ll never know for sure, but every single instance in Barack Obama’s career has him matching the times, calculating his stands, especially when votes would leave him or a colleague vulnerable. There is absolutely no evidence he wouldn’t have done the same in the Senate on Iraq.

    Except for that pesky speech saying he opposed the Iraq war, there’s absolutely no evidence he opposed it?

  153. 153
    Caidence (fmr. Chris) says:

    (and perhaps using Taylor Marsh as an informational reference shudder)

    ugh, I hate the formatting scheme on this thing

    what if I actually want asterisks surrounding my words, hmm? backslashes? does \*this\* work?

    I’m going to bet not.

  154. 154
    Bupalos says:

    If I had to guess, I think all the externals point to something being up between Obama and Edwards. It seems to me he must have decided after SC, but he hung in for a Florida beauty contest, which demographically speaking helped Obama by soaking up old whites, and then dropped out in a semi-shocker today, which flooded away any spinmentum Hillary could have garnered from her big 0 delegate win.

    Make sense? I’m guessing he might endorse on Sunday morning or before, but it’s also likely that if he thinks super2 is already a close enough contest that this thing will go long haul, he might play it for a higher stock value later. I think the endorsement will have little effect though. Hillary will benefit from what that NOW lady called the psychological gang banging from the old boys network or whatever. Maybe they figure that out and Edwards just keeps it to deniable hints.

  155. 155
    myiq2xu says:

    Myiq used to be funny, sometimes.

    Why are you picking on me? I’m not the one accusing you of mistransgenderization.

    That was the other. . . person.

  156. 156
    Jen says:

    That’s right, come over here myiq2xu. Hugs? Hugs? That’s it…
    QUICK! GET THE PONY! TIE HIM ON, DAMNIT! UNITY… PONY… ZERO… EIGHT!

    Now, that *was* funny.

    Nothing that myiq has written thus far screams that he is holding his….nose….in thinking about voting for Hillary.

    (Very low. Undignified. Inexcusable.)

  157. 157
    Caidence (fmr. Chris) says:

    Note to Caidence: Quit giggling because I said “snatch” in the same sentence with “Hillary.”

    My desperation for a restored sex life is that evident over the internet?

    Good god I need a Suicide Booth.

  158. 158
    Neal says:

    Seeing as how there was absolutely no presence here by any of the Democratic candidates, I think more of us voted out of ignorance since most normal people are not political junkies like the bulk of commenters here. That situation clearly benefits the person who has a recognizable name.

    Thank you, John S. I tried making this point with someone last night. Her name is “Clinton”. All of the old people in the democratic districts in south Florida probably went to Hillary. They probably aren’t political junkies so they went with who they knew. Barack didn’t campaign here so they didn’t get to know him. I’d like to check and see how Obama did in Leon and Alachua counties (FSU/UF).

  159. 159
    Jen says:

    Why are you picking on me?

    I don’t think I’m picking on you by pointing out that you aren’t being funny, anymore. Not intentionally.

  160. 160
    John S. says:

    How about this theory: The voters in Florida aren’t stupid or ignorant, and they prefer HRC?

    As a voter in Florida, I reject this theory.

    Most of us turned out to vote for our property amendment. The Florida Democratic party did absolutely nothing to encourage turnout. With the absence of campaigning here, voters were left to their own devices to figure out their preference for candidate, which quite frankly was entirely an afterthought.

    As I’ve said before, most people are not that involved in politics, therefore what they know about the candidates based on their own quest for knowledge is going to be pretty minimal. When voters don’t really know that much about the candidates they are voting on, the one with the name recognition wins every time.

    Most likely scenario:

    Bob Jones goes to vote for the property amendment. He sees that he has to select a candidate for president, but doesn’t really know much about them. He didn’t even think there was going to be a Democratic primary. He sees a Clinton on the ballot and thinks, “I liked Clinton. Things were better back then before this idiot Bush took office,” and then votes for her. It’s really that simple.

  161. 161
    TheFountainHead says:

    She beat Obama by about 160,000 votes, and since your theory has Obama in the lead until 2-3 days before the vote, that’s an even bigger swing.

    Now you’re either being willfully ignorant or an ass. I never said he was leading prior to her statement, I said that of the voters who decided upon their choice in the month leading up to that, they chose Obama.

  162. 162
    myiq2xu says:

    I’ll even settle for:
    In the Florida Primary, when confronted with the option of voting for Obama in the Dem primary or McCain the the Republican primary, independent voters flocked to McCain, alongside Romney and Guillani, was running all the ads.

    EXCEPT:

    Hillary got 163,700 more votes than McCain.

    Oh, and I was mistaken earlier (first time for everything) when I said HRC got 160,000 more votes than BHO, she got 288,167 more votes than Obama.

  163. 163
    Harley says:

    There is no Edwards impact until he endorses, or IF he endorses. He’ll never endorse Hillary. There’s probably a slim chance he’ll support Obama. But even that doesn’t matter if it’s after Super Tuesday.

    Another impact? He will no longer be taking delegates from either in state by state contests — making it less likely we get to the convention without a nominee.

  164. 164
    Neal says:

    Point proven, actually. Moreso than I thought. Look at Palm Beach County. Ridiculously Hillary. Look at Leon and Alachua. Obama wins. Statistics are fun!

  165. 165
    Zifnab says:

    myiq showing these signs isn’t a function of Karl Rove, it’s a function of the issues he has with Bush and Obama not addressing them to his satisfaction

    Is the function one-to-one? Is it onto? But that doesn’t even matter. Maybe you remain uninformed. Karl Rove’s control over all functions became absolute right after he captured The Math back in 2000 under a SCOTUS ruling.

    The dude could flip greater than signs into less than signs and declare victory in Florida by fiat. His power is truly unstoppable.

  166. 166
    myiq2xu says:

    “I liked Clinton. Things were better back then before this idiot Bush took office,” and then votes for her. It’s really that simple.

    And that’s why Hillary is gonna win. It’s really that simple.

  167. 167
    empty says:

    Is the function one-to-one? Is it onto?

    O noes. A math nerd.

  168. 168
    Davebo says:

    And finally myiq2xu plays his CDS card.

    I seem to recall the origin of that little bit of obfuscation.

  169. 169
    John S. says:

    And that’s why Hillary is gonna win. It’s really that simple.

    If Obama doesn’t campaign anywhere else (like here in Florida), then that is likely.

    When voters are presented with information about the candidates and listen to their message, that doesn’t seem to be the automatic response.

    So if you are arguing that Hillary wins as long as voters know nothing of the other candidate and only reflexively vote out of ignorance solely based on name recognition, then I agree with you.

  170. 170
    Caidence (fmr. Chris) says:

    His power is truly unstoppable.

    Your geeking is truly unbearable :)

  171. 171
    crw says:

    You guys are aware that overall turnout for Republicans was higher than for Democrats in Florida, right? myiq2xu is exactly right that Clinton got more votes than McCain. But the Republican field got ~236,000 more votes than the Democratic field. Which is contrary to the trend we’ve seen everywhere else.

    So either Florida Republicans were a lot more motivated than, say, SC Republicans, or Democrats were a lot less motivated to turn out, or some combination of the above. Since CNN has the state 41% D to 37% R, I’m guessing Democrats and Democratic leaning independents were less motivated to turn out.

  172. 172
    ThymeZone says:

    Myiq used to be funny, sometimes.

    Yes, but not funny ha-ha.

  173. 173
    Zifnab says:

    I’ll even settle for:
    In the Florida Primary, when confronted with the option of voting for Obama in the Dem primary or McCain the the Republican primary, independent voters flocked to McCain, alongside Romney and Guillani, was running all the ads.

    EXCEPT:

    Hillary got 163,700 more votes than McCain.

    Oh, and I was mistaken earlier (first time for everything) when I said HRC got 160,000 more votes than BHO, she got 288,167 more votes than Obama.

    Well, I never said it was good, I just said it was a theory I’d be willing to settle on. Certainly, it doesn’t rank much worse than “SC is stoopid! Floridiadans is smert!”

    But I guess 288,167 people can’t be wrong.

  174. 174
    Hypatia says:

    Bob Jones goes to vote for the property amendment. He sees that he has to select a candidate for president, but doesn’t really know much about them. He didn’t even think there was going to be a Democratic primary. He sees a Clinton on the ballot and thinks, “I liked Clinton. Things were better back then before this idiot Bush took office,” and then votes for her. It’s really that simple.

    I guess the good people of Florida are just as dumb as Sandra Day O’Connor thought they were.

  175. 175
    TheFountainHead says:

    So if you are arguing that Hillary wins as long as voters know nothing of the other candidate and only reflexively vote out of ignorance solely based on name recognition, then I agree with you.

    And mourn the loss of our Democracy.

  176. 176
    Caidence (fmr. Chris) says:

    And that’s why Hillary is gonna win. It’s really that simple.

    You do realize there’s a big difference between making statements a majority of people disagree with peacably, and then making statements that are so laughable they can’t be admitted into discussion, yeah?

    This is an example of the latter. Because 2008 is not 1996, and Hillary Clinton is not Bill Clinton.

    You really are eroding your credit. Really.

  177. 177
    Davebo says:

    Floridiadans is smert!

    Not according to Dave Barry.

    And my anecdotal 5 years residence in Florida.

  178. 178
    The Other Steve says:

    Now you’re either being willfully ignorant or an ass.

    I say both.

  179. 179
    crw says:

    I’m guessing Democrats and Democratic leaning independents were less motivated to turn out.

    And yes, I’m aware Democratic leaning independents would have had to register D 30 days prior to vote in the primary. I doubt they’d have been motivated to do so, knowing it was going to be a beauty contest.

    That’s not to say Obama would have won if Florida counted, but it would have at least been closer.

  180. 180
    myiq2xu says:

    So if you are arguing that Hillary wins as long as voters know nothing of the other candidate and only reflexively vote out of ignorance solely based on name recognition, then I agree with you.

    You are assuming that Clinton voters are ignorant but once they have seen the light they will be Obama voters.

    HRC did well with all age groups (BHO edged her out with two groups) and both sexes. She won everywhere except North Florida, where BHO beat her by 4%. BHO creamed her with the black vote.

    I’m sorry, but I’m not assuming that 857,000 Floridians were stupid or ignorant.

    Do you have something besides your own personal opinion for evidence?

    We’re not talking about a few thousand voters in Palm County that were confused by the “butterfly” ballot.

  181. 181
    John S. says:

    So either Florida Republicans were a lot more motivated than, say, SC Republicans, or Democrats were a lot less motivated to turn out, or some combination of the above.

    Florida Republicans had a stake in the matter, the Democrats didn’t.

    The Florida Democratic party did not promote turnout, there were no ads by any of the candidates and there was no active campaigning whatsoever.

    Those are the facts. Draw your own conclusions based on them.

  182. 182
    The Other Steve says:

    So either Florida Republicans were a lot more motivated than, say, SC Republicans, or Democrats were a lot less motivated to turn out, or some combination of the above. Since CNN has the state 41% D to 37% R, I’m guessing Democrats and Democratic leaning independents were less motivated to turn out.

    Another theory. Others have mentioned the property tax amendment. The exit polling showed a much broader shift in demographics, favoring older people.

    Is it possible that younger people who don’t really own property weren’t even motivated to show up for the property tax amendment thing?

  183. 183
    The Other Steve says:

    I’m sorry, but I’m not assuming that 857,000 Floridians were stupid or ignorant.

    I’m also going to assume they weren’t gay or bisexual.

  184. 184
    John S. says:

    I guess the good people of Florida are just as dumb as Sandra Day O’Connor thought they were.

    Floridians are stupid because they don’t know about the Democratic candidates that didn’t reach out to them, campaign to them or have any debates here in a primary that wasn’t promoted by the state party and has no bearing on determining the nominee?

    Interesting theory you have there.

  185. 185
    The Other Steve says:

    I’m also going to assume they weren’t gay or bisexual.

    Well, ok, some of them. But certainly not all 857,000.

  186. 186
    myiq2xu says:

    You really are eroding your credit. Really.

    Last time I checked my credit rating was “Ha-ha!”

  187. 187
    Jen says:

    Maybe old people have nothing better to do than vote in pointless primaries?

  188. 188
    demimondian says:

    Leon County isn’t a good choice — it’s also home to FAMU, as well as Tallahassee. (Leon High grad, 1976, if you want to know.)

  189. 189
    John S. says:

    Is it possible that younger people who don’t really own property weren’t even motivated to show up for the property tax amendment thing?

    Younger people who don’t have property had a lot at stake with that amendment because it would make it more affordable for them to own a home. I know plent of non-homeowners around 30 that turned out to vote for that very reason. I haven’t seen any demographics to that effect, but your question is certainly possible – and highly likely. It would help further explain a poor showing for Obama, since he has been doing so well with younger voters, which if your theory is correct, didn’t show up yesterday for the tax amendment or the primary.

  190. 190
    Jen says:

    Ezra is pretty good, on the Hillary FL/MI bait-and-switch.

  191. 191
    Jen says:

    Ezra is pretty good, on the Hillary FL/MI bait-and-switch.

  192. 192
    Emma Anne says:

    dslak Says:
    For the future of the Republic, Dick Morris must die.

    We can all achieve Unity on that one.

  193. 193
    myiq2xu says:

    Jeebus, the rationalization and mental gymnastics being used to explain how Florida got it wrong again.

    Per John S.:

    Bob Jones goes to vote for the property amendment. He sees that he has to select a candidate for president, but doesn’t really know much about them. He didn’t even think there was going to be a Democratic primary. He sees a Clinton on the ballot and thinks, “I liked Clinton. Things were better back then before this idiot Bush took office,” and then votes for her. It’s really that simple.

    Let’s assume, arguendo, that this is correct.

    That means HRC wins. Why?

    Because unless BHO spends millions to properly “educate” the voters, they will pick Hillary by default, even if she does nothing.

    This also assumes that once voters see the light, they will switch to Obama. Big assumption there.

    What John S. refuses to accept is that maybe the voters in Florida made a knowing and intelligent choice when they picked Hillary.

    But what about the independents?

    What about them? Show me proof (not opinion) that they broke overwhelmingly for McCain and will do so again in Novemeber unless BHO is the Democratic nominee.

  194. 194
    Hypatia says:

    Floridians are stupid because they don’t know about the Democratic candidates that didn’t reach out to them, campaign to them or have any debates here in a primary that wasn’t promoted by the state party and has no bearing on determining the nominee?

    Interesting theory you have there.

    My was an attempt at irony although I grant you it could be read differently and I ought to have made it clear. You’re the one who’s making your fellow Floridians sound like morons who never read a paper, browse them on the Internet, listen to the radio, or watch television news and presumably don’t know which Clinton is running for president. I also hear that the party did in fact make an effort to get people to the polls even if it wasn’t on the same scale as a conventional primary.

    If the vote had gone in the other direction the Obamabots would be trumpeting the news to the skies and demanding that The People’s Voice Be Heard. By me that’s okay – politics is politics. But I also think the MSM would have treated the news differently and we’d be hearing lots of stories about the glorious inspirational unifying victory speech that Obama read off the teleprompter to his cheering supporters and how this is one more nail in Hillary’s coffin.

  195. 195
    Pug says:

    Others have mentioned the property tax amendment. The exit polling showed a much broader shift in demographics, favoring older people.

    You mean a lot of oler people voted in Florida. How could anyone believe that could happen?

    Is it possible that younger people who don’t really own property weren’t even motivated to show up for the property tax amendment thing?

    It’s Florida. There aren’t very many younger people. Over a third of the voters were 65+. That happens to be who lives in Florida.

  196. 196
    myiq2xu says:

    Younger people who don’t have property had a lot at stake with that amendment because it would make it more affordable for them to own a home. I know plent of non-homeowners around 30 that turned out to vote for that very reason. I haven’t seen any demographics to that effect, but your question is certainly possible – and highly likely. It would help further explain a poor showing for Obama, since he has been doing so well with younger voters, which if your theory is correct, didn’t show up yesterday for the tax amendment or the primary.

    Hillary got the 18-29 voters 44% (43% BHO)

    and 30-44 voters 42% (41% BHO)

    She did even better with older voters.

  197. 197
    Zifnab says:

    Bob Jones goes to vote for the property amendment. He sees that he has to select a candidate for president, but doesn’t really know much about them.

    I’m fairly confident that Bob Jones would be voting in the Republican Primary.

  198. 198
    Emma Anne says:

    ThymeZone Says:

    Bottom line, I can’t imagine why he would not pick a rival and endorse.

    I *hope* what is doing is making his best deal to get his issues addressed.

  199. 199
    John S. says:

    I also hear that the party did in fact make an effort to get people to the polls even if it wasn’t on the same scale as a conventional primary.

    I don’t care what you heard. I live in the fucking state and have been registered as a Democrat for twelve years here. The Florida Democratic Party didn’t do shit – not one ad, email, direct mail piece, phone call – NOTHING.

    You’re the one who’s making your fellow Floridians sound like morons who never read a paper, browse them on the Internet, listen to the radio, or watch television news and presumably don’t know which Clinton is running for president.

    If you seriously think the average American voter is as well versed in politics as your average blogger or blog commenter, then I have a bridge in the Czech Republic with your name on it.

  200. 200
    John S. says:

    Because unless BHO spends millions to properly “educate” the voters, they will pick Hillary by default, even if she does nothing.

    For those people that don’t breathe politics, they don’t know much about candidates that don’t reach out to them. They do know the name of one of the candidates because her husband had the same last name and was president.

    This also assumes that once voters see the light, they will switch to Obama. Big assumption there.

    I never said that. My point has been that at least they would have been able to make an informed choice – one way or the other. Don’t put words in my mouth.

    What John S. refuses to accept is that maybe the voters in Florida made a knowing and intelligent choice when they picked Hillary.

    Bullshit. That is a perfectly acceptable scenario, but we will never know if that is the case. I think my explanation for why Hillary one given the circumstances is just more likely. But again, nobody can say for sure.

    But what about the independents?

    That is an irrelevant question. In case you didn’t know, registered Independents cannot vote in our closed primary.

  201. 201
    myiq2xu says:

    If you seriously think the average American voter is as well versed in politics as your average blogger or blog commenter, then I have a bridge in the Czech Republic with your name on it.

    And you think modern political campaigns will cure their ignorance?

    Sound bytes, pretty speeches, meaningless phrases, gobbletygook proposals no one will read, millions of dollars spent and the voters get in the booth and pick the wrong person.

    That’s democracy!

  202. 202
    over it says:

    Well, according to the most recent front page poll on Daily Kos…it looks as though Edwards supporters are breaking for Obama. (at least the Daily Kos Edwards supporters are)

    Last week – (20,548 votes)
    Edwards – 42%
    Obama – 41%
    Clinton – 9%
    Kucinich – 2%
    Other/No Clue – 3%

    (sorry if this posts twice…I signed in wrong)

  203. 203
    myiq2xu says:

    My point has been that at least they would have been able to make an informed choice – one way or the other.

    I think you underestimate your fellow Floridians. They have had plenty of opportunity to educate themselves. there have been numerous televised debates, and the information is available.

    It’s on the news every night, 24/7 on cable.

    Do people need their mailboxes stuffed with flyers, have the airwaves flooded with incessant radio and television ads (that say nothing) and to be bombarded with robo-calls before they’re “informed?”

  204. 204
    Badtux says:

    dslak Says:

    Jen Says:
    The people in South Carolina are black, obviously. The SC victory is worth, at most, 2/3 of what the Iowa victory was worth.

    That’s a bit low. I’d say 3/5.

    Ding ding ding ding! We have a winner — someone who knows his Constitution, whether U.S. or Confederate!

  205. 205
    myiq2xu says:

    Well, according to the most recent front page poll on Daily Kos…it looks as though Edwards supporters are breaking for Obama. (at least the Daily Kos Edwards supporters are)

    HRC isn’t too popular with the kossacks, never has been.

    If Obama dropped out, “none of the above” would poll ahead of her at the Great Orange Satan.

  206. 206
    Tonybrown74 says:

    John S.

    Then simply don’t vote for her in the primary, ’nuff said! But the argument that people (not saying you) will not vote for Clinton if she wins the nomination, is insanity. There truly is too much at stake right now for people to just throw away their vote on principle. We’ve done that before and look where it has gotten us.

    I admit that I am a Hillary Clinton supporter. Some people think that, because I am gay, black man, that I am crazy to do so, but I do have my reasons (and g-d lnows there are problems I have with her campaign). That said, there are some issues with Obama that make me doubt his “leadership” and capabilities, but I will more than enthusiatically vote for him come November if he is the nominee.

    There is too much at stake for me to even think about sitting out the general because he isn’t my choice for the nominee (hell! There was too much at stake back in 2000, but people, with a lot of help from the media, believed all the the bullshit that Karl Rove and company, as well as Nader, was feeding us all).

    I have no problem with all the aggressiveness and the vigor the candidates are dishing out right now, because it is going to prepare me (and them) for the unbelievable amount of bullshit we are going to hear about them in general campaign.

    Rest assured, though, that I will ride that magical unity pony or the clagina like a hot man in the general campaign, cause frankly, this country cannot survive another republican administration. And anytime you have that moment of not wanting to vote for Clinton, or Obama in the general election, just keep reminding yourself: Supreme Court! Supreme Court! Supreme Court! Supreme Court! Supreme Court! Supreme Court! Supreme Court! Supreme Court! Supreme Court! Supreme Court! Supreme Court! Supreme Court! Supreme Court! Supreme Court! Supreme Court! Supreme Court! Supreme Court! Supreme Court!

  207. 207
    The Other Steve says:

    Ezra is pretty good, on the Hillary FL/MI bait-and-switch.

    That is a good article, and a good point.

    Doesn’t matter though, myiq will still desperately argue that florida means something, even though it’s clear it does not.

  208. 208
    myiq2xu says:

    Doesn’t matter though, myiq will still desperately argue that florida means something, even though it’s clear it does not.

    Sour grapes make bitter whine.

  209. 209
    Conservatively Liberal says:

    myiq2xu Says:

    Sound bytes, pretty speeches, meaningless phrases, gobbletygook proposals no one will read, millions of dollars spent and the voters get in the booth and pick the wrong person.

    That’s democracy!

    This is a perfect description of the situation if Hillary wins. myiq2xu finally says something worth reading!

    Obama is someone who I could vote for because I want to, not because I have to hold my nose to do so. Hillary? Forget about it. I would vote for Chimpy McFlightsuit before I would vote for her triangulating ass.

    I am NOT a Democrat or a Republican, I am an independent. If it came down to McCain and Clinton, I MAY vote for McCain. It would be him or write in Obama. At least McCain has been a thorn in the side of the hard right. I have a feeling that if he won the election he would be the first to tell his party to stuff it. After all of the crap they have pulled on him, I have a feeling that John will not be hugging them any time soon. If McCain wins, he will do so with a large part of the independent vote, and if he is smart he will know who buttered his bread for him. It was not his party, that is for damn sure.

    Clinton is a disaster looking for a place to happen, and if she gets in the White House I believe that she will fuck things up so much that the Republicans will cash in on her in the following election. Hell, if she wins the primary war I bet they are able to cash in on it in the red states and cost the Democrats a few of their seats in the election.

    When it comes to the Democratic candidate(s), I will vote for the ObamaNation over the Abomination. I don’t hate Clinton either, I don’t know her. But I do know her voting record, and that of her husband (they are a package deal, right?), and that is more than enough for me to decide on.

    No more years!

  210. 210
    myiq2xu says:

    This is a perfect description of the situation if Hillary wins. myiq2xu finally says something worth reading!

    You’re a day late and a dollar short.

  211. 211
    John S. says:

    Do people need their mailboxes stuffed with flyers, have the airwaves flooded with incessant radio and television ads (that say nothing) and to be bombarded with robo-calls before they’re “informed?”

    Yes, to an extent.

    I work in advertising, and I can assure you that even the most amazing product will not be successful unless it has a good marketing campaign to promote it. Presidential candidates are no different. It doesn’t matter how great their message is or how wonderful a candidate they are – if their marketing campaign sucks, they will not succeed.

    Unfortunately, the power of marketing is so great that even a shit product can be foisted upon consumers and receive much fanfare.

  212. 212
    John S. says:

    Then simply don’t vote for her in the primary, ‘nuff said!

    I didn’t (not that it mattered).

    Regardless, if she is the nominee I will happily vote for her. I am determined to not want to see a Republican in the white house for a long time.

  213. 213

    Jen, I thought it was 3/5.

  214. 214
    ThymeZone says:

    44 out of 213 posts to this thread, myiq.

    That’s 25% of the posts.

    May I make a suggestion?

    Why don’t you shut the fuck up?

  215. 215
    Jen says:

    Ding ding ding ding! We have a winner—someone who knows his Constitution, whether U.S. or Confederate!

    Sheesh, that *is* embarrassing. I’m not kidding, I have a J.D. My head is hanging in shame.
    Mitigating factors: very little application to current law; was trying to squeeze in snark during working hours; and I FREQUENTLY work with the fraction 2/3. All day long I work with the fraction 2/3. Gold star if anyone can figure out what kind of law I do. There is probably variation from state to state so that might be tricky.

  216. 216
    Conservatively Liberal says:

    ThymeZone Says:

    44 out of 213 posts to this thread, myiq.

    That’s 25% of the posts.

    May I make a suggestion?

    Why don’t you shut the fuck up?

    25% of the posts, and most of them saying “Baaa Baaa!”. Yup, shades of Darrell, just from the other side.

    The more the Clintonistas talk, the more sure I am of my support of Obama.

    No more years!

  217. 217
    empty says:

    ThymeZone Says:

    44 out of 213 posts to this thread, myiq.

    That’s 25% of the posts.

    May I make a suggestion?

    Why don’t you shut the fuck up?

    Jealousy rears its ugly head.

  218. 218

    Up until this morning I was an Edwards supporter, now I will do nothing in the General to hand the election to the Republicans, again, I’ll pull Hillary then – while choking/

    myiqis2 seems to have broken something in his efforts to make Obama look bad, but for bad, not just looking but in fact let’s deal with the very public lie and deal breaking of HRC. DNC owns the Primary, only DC has any say about MI/FL delegates and they won’t seat them, Hillary can lie about that till the cows come home. Hillary was also one of the candidates that agreed with the necessity of DNC sanctions on MI/FL, now she says, doesn’t count – I want ’em.

    Lie – ” I have any say on MI/FL delegates
    Deal Break – No longer agee with what I agreed to – since it’s in my favor.

    Hillary is no fighter for progressive causes, she is a DLC creature of rush to the middle (which you may note has shifted far right of ’92). If you’re a fan of the Clinton years…well you might look at some income distribution figures from then.

    I refuse to not acknowledge that any candidate is a politician, that is stupid. But iq2 is being annoyingly stupid and I’m no particular fan of Obama. I am not in the least in favor of HRC which is completely post 2000 as far as CDS goes.

    But hey, if you’re a fan of Hillary’s crap, you are.

  219. 219
    tBone says:

    25% of the posts, and most of them saying “Baaa Baaa I like pie!”.

    They have in my browser since early this afternoon, at least.

  220. 220
    Mr. Furious says:

    Weren’t a substantial number of the votes in florida mailed in early? In December?!?

    You can’t tell me after the last three weeks plenty of those people wouldn’t want their Hillary votes back…

    Florida doesn’t mean a thing. Even her “momentum” was erased by Guiliani and Edwards leaving the race the next day.

  221. 221
    Mr. Furious says:

    I love it. To myiq, a “source” is an insane blogger, blogging about another blog.

    Thanks for playing.

  222. 222
    Conservatively Liberal says:

    Just IMO…

    I don’t think the Edwards supporters are a monolithic block of voters. He has a pretty wide progressive appeal, and it would be stupid of either candidate to count on getting his supporters. Obama and Clinton both need his endorsement, Obama moreso than Clinton. Edwards supporters are very independent minded, so even if John endorses Hillary or Barack I do not see his followers toeing the line and doing the same. They will go where they want to, and John’s decision will be nothing more than a suggestion as far as they are concerned.

    Regarding Edwards throwing his weight behind Obama or Clinton, I have my own thoughts on that. Based on the past history of the candidates, I think that Edwards has more in common with Obama than he does Clinton. Then there was the last minute stunt by the Clinton camp in SC and the phone smear of Edwards, I am sure that did not help Hillary a bit. While neither side has been perfect in their conduct, I think that Hillary and her camp have crossed the line more than Obama and his camp have.

    Again, just IMO, I think that if Edwards throws his weight behind Obama then it is because he feels Obama is the better candidate. If he throws his weight behind Clinton, I will suspect some deal making behind the scenes. Kind of a ‘If you take a dive now (before 2/5), I will reward you later with the ……. position’. If that turns out to be the case, my opinion of Edwards would take a permanent nose dive. I do not think there is much love between Edwards and Clinton, and him taking a position with her would just be suspect in my mind. I would hope Edwards would be above that, and I do think he is. I would suspect that Hillary would love to use Edwards as window dressing though. That would silence that young upstart Obama once and for all. ;)

    I wish Edwards had stayed in. His is a voice that needs to be heard, and I wish it had not been silenced. He is a true progressive, unlike Hillary. Obama is somewhere there in the middle, but I am of the opinion that while Obama has details about his stances online, he is being deliberately obtuse on the campaign trail.

    I don’t think what he would say (if he could speak freely) would be taken well by the right leaning middle voters. He is trying to get a broad based center of the nation behind him, so no need to antagonize any of them too much.

    Well, this may be settled out after 2/5, maybe not. But it sure is interesting to watch.

  223. 223
    myiq2xu says:

    I guess it’s just a coincidence that all these people who are crying that Florida doesn’t count are all Obama fanbois/Hillary haters.

    When the facts and logic fail them, they resort to name calling.

    “I don’t agree with you so you’re a troll” “Darrell Darrell Darrell! STFU! Waaaa! Waaaaaa! Waaaaaaaa!

  224. 224
    Tom in Texas says:

    They are Obamafans. It’s who they are.

  225. 225
    Napoleon says:

    I guess it’s just a coincidence that all these people who are crying that Florida doesn’t count

    You mean like HRC’s people before the last week, because they agreed it didn’t count when their disagreement with the decision could have made a differance.

  226. 226
    myiq2xu says:

    You mean like HRC’s people before the last week, because they agreed it didn’t count when their disagreement with the decision could have made a differance.

    Even if the delegates from Florida are never seated, the votes on Tuesday matter.

Comments are closed.