http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/11/opinion/...gin&oref=slogin

:bad: Jame's...Krugman should realize these are just as much ROVE RULES as they are Clinton Rules...But it is an interesting article...And it just further proves my point about the Clintons...Al Gore isn't EVEN running for office...and yet a so-called "Clinton Source" would like to hit him with a "5% is too much"...smear...Does Hillary Clinton actually think throwing BIG mudpies at her fellow Democrats is actually garnering "Brownie Points" for her campaign? It smacks of BU$H/ROVE tactics... :mad:

And it is literally pushing folks out of the Clinton Camp into the Obama camp...at least it is here...there was no call to even bring Al Gore into the 'conversation' in a negative way like the Clintons did... :bad:

No offense but I think you've missed the point of the article, which is anything about the Clinton's is spun in the most negative way, taken as total truth and magnified out of proportion.

This is exactly what you are doing with this 5% remark. The term 'Clinton Source' extremely vague. Usually they might say something like a "unnamed spokesman in the Clinton camp" or a "high official of the Clinton campaign". A "Clinton Source" could be anyone and there is no way to know if it even someone even remotely connected with the Clinton campaign.

Also, You're interpeting that the comment was meant to be a put down of Gore. It could mean the 'Clinton Source' felt that the scenario was unrealistic. Out of context it is kind of vague.

So in a sense you've applied 'Clinton Rules' to this vague comment by an unknown person and extrapolated it to the point that Hillary Clinton herself is smearing Gore.

James, All I AM saying is that Hillary Clinton should address this...and blow it away herself...She can do it quite easily...There is a reason that Al Gore has NOT endorsed anyone...and by rights neither should any of us, if we follow in his footsteps.... :huh:

It has been said it WILL be Al Gore who will 'broker' a peaceful settlement between the parties...and THAT is why he hasn't "endorsed" anyone...You don't want somebody who is a supposedly a Clinton Source putting 'tarnish' on the individual that may be deciding your campaign's fate or political future! :!:

Call it 'circular logic' if it suits you, but if I were opting for the DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION the I would be trying to 'curry' favor with the ONE Individual that can make or break me...Al Gore is the SUPER-SUPER DELEGATE!...His NOD could affect both the Clinton AND Obama Campaigns! :good:

Al has repeatedly SAID he doesn't WANT the job of PRESIDENT! Al Gore's JOB in the end is to BRING PEACE to the Convention! Hillary Clinton has already been battered enough and Obama has already been smeared by the best! THAT 5% is the TIPPING value for EITHER CAMPAIGN! Letting Gore HAVE it isn't going to MAKE him President! But letting him use his 'clout' is what both Clinton & Obama SHOULD be doing! Al Gore is the Minister who will be performing the MARRIAGE at the end...I said it before, it doesn't matter to me if it's CLINTON-OBAMA or OBAMA-CLINTON...but BOTH must go...TOGETHER!...so letting Al Gore give his 'blessing' is just the SEAL OF APPROVAL! :good:

And the Clintons SHOULD let him do that because after the 2000 "fiasco" where President Bill didn't give Mr. Gore enough oomph! to put him over the top...The Clinton's owe him! :lol:

And they need to let him bring UNITY & PEACE to the PARTY! :Y:

NOW A BIG GROUP HUG! :wtf:

Just kidding...but I DO NOT THINK IT WOULD HURT FOR HILLARY CLINTON TO EMBRACE AN OLD FRIEND....AL GORE....NOR DO I THINK IT WOULD HURT BARACK OBAMA TO EMBRACE A NEW FRIEND!....AL GORE! :good:

James, I can't wait for these primaries to be over...but when we GO to the Convention then we MUST show the GOP that we DEMOCRATS are ONE BIG HAPPY FAMILY!...the ONLY way to defeat the REPUBLICANS is by STICKING TOGETHER! :good:

And we MUST show the PEOPLE that it's the DEMOCRATS who are the UNITERS! We went through 8 YEARS of DIVISION UNDER BU$H!...The PEOPLE WANT A CHANGE!...And they WANT to see Clinton & Obama & Edwards & Kennedy & Kerry...EVERYONE TOGETHER IN THAT MARCH TO THE WHITE HOUSE ON 1.20.09 TO THROW BU$H OUT!...the DEMOCRATS are the Party of E PLURBUS UNUM! :good:

WE ARE AMERICA UNITED!

Why? You're talking about an obscure quote from a British website. It has not been reported by the MSM so it is probably not on anyone's radar. We probably wouldn't even know about it if someone hadn't gone out of their way to post the story here.

You know what? James? You are right...besides Obama is pulling ahead of Clinton sooo fast right now, it just might end up a 'moot' point anyway...Hillary NEEDS to take both Texas & Ohio...(I heard about 55%)...or she will end up TOAST! :!:

I WANT a 'brokered' convention...I want Al Gore to come in and make Hillary & Barack play 'nice'...Everybody KNOWS I want a White House POPULATED by Democrats! Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton...It's a WIN-WIN situation in MY book! ;)

I JUST WANT THEM TO DO IT TOGETHER! :good:

Together these two are VIRTUALLY UNSTOPPABLE! THAT is why I didn't want them throwing any mud at each other...Or Mr. Gore...Mr. Kennedy...or ANY DEMOCRATS!...DEMOCRATS DON'T PLAY IN MUD!...We use SILLY STRING! :laugh:

It's 'clean' and washes right OFF! :good:

I, at this point, am full of venom...towards OBAMA and his merry and clueless band of blind sheep followers who are dazzled by flowery, empty campaign slogans which, in fact, are presenting a picture that is the total OPPOSITE of who Obama really is! He is not a change agent! He is not a leader! He opts to vote "present" versus for or against on many important issues in order not to offend anyone or any entity he might need to be in bed with later in order to advance his political power/career. That is a politician, NOT a leader. He is all empty sloganeering and NO substance: ZERO.

He talks about new politics and inclusion, yet he wants to disenfranchise the millions of primary votes of Michigan and Florida. HYPOCRITE! I could go on and on listing ways that his actions, or lack thereof, do NOT MATCH HIS WORDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I have the same sick feeling watching him, the media coverage of him, and his followers that I did during the ascent of Ronald Reagan: it's like: WHY can't people see through this guy? But even Reagan actually stood up for what he believed, horrifying to me as those stances consistently were. Obama is the slickest used car salesman I've EVER seen. I will give him this: he is an excellent politician. And excellent campaigner. But "there is no there there."

Am I the only one who sees this?

omg.

P.S. I can't believe I'm about to write this, as a loyal, lifelong, passionate Democrat, but if Obama becomes the nominee, I cannot in good conscience cast my vote for him. Not as a Florida Democrat. Not after his consistent, clear, SNEARING dismissal of our votes/delegates. If he does not want my vote to count in the primary election, then there is no way in h*ll he is getting it in the general election!!! And as much as I see right through him to the hollow, empty, sloganeering politician that he is, I would have absolutely rallied around him if he became the nominee, especially since Nader is running again as a Green, but I can't, due to one thing: his continual need to trash the voters of Florida and Michigan. Well, guess what buddy. When you NEED US, we won't be here for you. We will just vote "present". We won't vote for your hollow, hypocritical self. I can't do it. I physically cannot bring myself to vote for Obama, not after all that has gone down this primary season.

Come on, Ohio and Texas, turn out and vote for Hillary!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I voted early - about a week ago - and I voted for Obama. Sorry, I just don't see the things you are saying about him. The Democratic Party stripped Florida and Michigan of their delegates, not Obama. The race here in Texas is neck and neck. Guess we'll have to see how things turn out tonight...

AND (run for cover, hanging chad is in rare form today :lol: ) I'm SICK of his followers whining about:

1. "Boo hoo--he wasn't even on the MI ballot, so it would be unfair to count the election there." Well, guess what? It was HIS CHOICE to remove his name from the ballot, with the full knowledge that the delegate seating issue was still very much in dispute and that the delegates could end up being seated afterall. So OH WELL. It was indeed a fair election. And it is a fair question as to whether the delegates should be seated. But it is NOT playing fair to suggest--as his supporters CONTINUALLY do--that the election itself was unfair because he wasn't on the ballot. Well, if you remove yourself from the ballot, it usually ends up that you aren't on it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! DUH! Nothing unfair there.

2. "Boo hoo--Obama didn't campaign in Florida. If he had, he would have won. Therefore the election was illegitimate." Um, NONE of the candidates campaigned in Florida! Therefore it was an EVEN PLAYING FIELD! And guess what else? Believe it or not, we have television, internet, newspapers, the whole nine yards here! I really don't think that a few slick TV commercials and the candidates being here glad-handing would have changed the outcome much. But even if it would have, it was still a level playing field because--to recap: NONE of the candidates campaigned here. Even though the Obama folks continue to promote the FALSEHOOD that Hillary campaigned here. She did NOT. None of them did. Although Obama did run one ad on CNN that aired here, which violated the asanine pledge they all took not to campaign here. However, it probably wasn't his fault that it aired here, as it was a national ad. So I give him the benefit of the doubt on that one. So we are back to this: NONE of them campaigned here. Yet Hillary won by a large margin and with a record, massive voter turnout, even though we voters knew that the DNC does not intend to seat our delegation. So, again: the question of whether to seat the delegates is fair. But the question of whether the election itself was "legitimate" is not: it was a fairly held, state primary, with a record turnout.

Anyone who didn't campaign in any state, or who took their name off the ballot in any state, well, that was THEIR CHOICE, now wasn't it? So, too dang bad:

COUNT OUR VOTES

But just so you guys know, I'm not a one-note wonder. I can't stand Obama because of WAY more than just the DNC-induced delegate issue (and YES, I do still blame the DNC and not the two states for moving up their primaries, sorry. Do I think the states should have moved up the primaries? No. But do I think that the punishment fits the crime, or even makes ANY sense whatsoever? NO, no, no, a thousand times NO!).

...Yeah, there is a lot of venom on both sides of the Democratic campaign trail. And yeah, it is very unfortunate indeed, very unfortunate in this year when, God knows, we should all be completely UNIFIED as ONE to take back the White House. But the situation is what it is. I just cannot take the sheer hypocrisy of Obama and his supporters. Because if there is one thing that infuriates me more than most other things in life, it is hypocrisy. And if I hear about "change" or "inclusion" or "new politics" one more time out of these people, I am going to LOSE IT, MAAAHN.

Hi, Texan for Gore! My fiesty post starting "AND..." below yours was not in response to you, let me hasten to assure you! We just posted at about the same time is all. (My post was a longie and I must have been mid-composing when you posted yours.) Now, the following IS in response to your post:

Thing is, yes, it was the DNC's choice to issue the draconian punishment on MI and FL, BUT Obama has been very loudly, snearingly, dismissively and consistently chiming in on it since he LOST both primaries, including unleashing John Kerry on us with his cries of "illegitimate election" and "fabrication". Again, what infuriates yours truly here is not the fair argument over whether to seat the delegates, it is actually attacking the election process itself as being illegitimate or unfair. It was a fair and properly run election. Whether to count the results due to the rule violation is another story. But the RESULTS themselves are not in question, far as I'm concerned. Again, if the man chose to remove himself from the ballot in MI, what can I do about it? I don't care: count my vote! And if they both chose not to campaign in Florida, what can we do about that? To me, that was no problema, because in 2007/8, it was certainly easy enough to educate oneself about the candidates without the 30-second ads and without them flying down here and shaking some hands, nice as that would have been.

Come on, Texas and Ohio (and my beloved Vermont--surprise me, Vermont--see through Barack! ...And Rhode Island: git 'er done, RI!)

:lol:

P.S. To Texan for Gore: good for you for voting early, girl!!! I don't agree with your choice of candidates, but I applaud you for voting!

:clap: :good:

Thanks to everyone for voting and expressing themselves

Please take two and call back tomorrow morning :blink:

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree. :lol: I just came back from my lunch break - at my mother's house and we had our little debate over the candidates. Guess we both cancelled out each other's vote but what can I say? This election gets crazier by the minute. We are normally on the same page but not this time.

Both Hillary and Obama have been on both sides of the issue when it comes to seating the delegates AND how the superdelegates should vote. Hillary says the Florida voters should be counted. Obama says they should honor the DNC rules. As for the superdelegates, Obama says they should represent the majority of the voter in the state. Hillary says they should be able to vote how they want. So they are both changing their opinion to suit them.

Hey, I'd still love to see a brokered convention and Al riding in on a stallion but slim chance, huh? I told my mother that she and I ought to both be delegates and go to the Dem convention in Denver. She said that sounded like fun, but she didn't want me supporting Obama. :blink: Oh well. I'm ready for this election to be over. It's likes the duracell bunny. It just keeps going ON and ON and ON!!

May the best candidate win!! :good:

Hey Wayne, thanks for reeling us back in and for the medicine. :lol: I need something to calm my nerves, lol. :laugh:

Wake me up when the election is over!! :wacko:

That would be our beloved Al Gore *sniff, sniff*! I guess part of my problema is that I cannot for the life of me get over that he is not running. Logically, I know he isn't, but there is a cognitive disonance for me, like I just can't believe he REALLY isn't.

I have warmed a lot to Hillary, though. I do feel she is a very intelligent, substantive, qualified candidate. ...Too bad Obama is probably going to be the nominee. Too bad for moi, anyway, what with the whole I-can't-stand-him thing. I just see a slick politician, I'm sorry, I do. The only saving/comforting grace for me is that he is very liberal, as am I, so he probably won't be the end of the world as prez....we've already HAD the end of the world president, namely "current occupant"! God knows Obama will be better than shrub. But his inexperience and over-confidence combo worries me.

As of now, I can't see myself voting for him. But you never know, if Ralph Nader starts to irritate me enough, I might HAVE to vote. As of now, though, I am very seriuosly considering sitting out the presidential vote in the general election, though I can't fathom that, either. I have never not voted. I'm a die-hard, "yellow dog" Democrat (if "yellow dog" means what I think it does, namely, cut me and I bleed Democrat, baby). But as much as Obama excites some people, that is how much he leaves me cold. My theory is that the "Obama phenomenon" is more about how profoundly much people are sick of shrub and the shrub administration and not about Obama himself. He picked the PERFECT campaign slogan of "change", as that is what people want: the anti-shrub. But if they would really stop and look into this guy, they might see what I see, which again is: there is no there there. All slogans, no substance, that's my opinion on the matter.

Oh, Al Gore, Al Gore, wherefore art thou, Al Gore?

I think most of us can agree on at least that much. I said just that tonight.

I HAVE CAMPAIGN FATIGUE!! :dripple:

That's for sure, TN!! There ought to be a timeline as to when the earliest a person can file. This two year campaign run is a killer, not to mention all the millions wasted on campaigns!!

If the best person was running, we wouldn't be having these debates about plan B



It's a shame, but, we did everything we could

Yes Wayne, we did do everything we could. But the chances of a brokered convention are looking better. It might not happen. And if it does, we might not get Gore out of it, but I can't give up until I know every crook and cranny is covered. :Y:

I'm with you on that one!!! I'm still firmly entrenched in the denial phase! :dripple:

There is an overload of "fatigues" bombarding us all:
election fatigue
battle fatigue
bush/cheney fatigue
'misunaccountability' fatigue :laugh:
greed and profit fatigue
torture fatigue

I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired! :blink: