We agree with Hillary Clinton & Barack Obama, we support the progressive values they support, and we share their dedication to making this nation better... That's why we're Democrats! :-)
Last night, Hillary Clinton came to Tampa. And boy did she kick some ass! I arrived dressed in my Hillary gear and stood roughly 20 feet from the stage. I could not find good video of her visit on Youtube. This is coverage of her visit from a local news outlet.
It was obvious that the Obama campaign is using Hillary to reach out to women. The invocation was given by a Unitarian minister, a female. The pledge of allegiance was led by a female. The first speaker was a state representative, an African-American female. And former Tampa mayor Sandy Freeman warmed up the crowd before Hillary's appearance.
Sandy Freeman is a strong supporter of Hillary Clinton who at one point was reluctant to endorse Senator Obama. Last night, she gave him her strong endorsement and provided the crowd with a stinging indictment of the McCain-Palin ticket.
And the woman of the hour...
She talked about how important the election was and reminded voters that her generation risked being the first to pass on a country that was worse off than when they inherited it.
She also reminded us that this election is bigger than any one person. Bigger than her and bigger than Barack. And speaking directly to the Clintonistas, she asked us if we did it for her or if we did it for the future.
At the end of the speech she repeated a line from her concession speech where she said that although she and Barack had started out on separate paths, they are now on the same journey. She asked the Clintonistas who worked hard for her to work just as hard for Senator Obama.
My favorite line:
This election is about the differences between us and the Republican party. And you know, anybody, anybody who uh believes that the Republicans, whoever they are, can fix the mess they created probably thinks that the iceberg could have saved the Titanic.
And my other favorite line:
No way! No how! No McCain! No Palin!
Once again, Hillary made me laugh, she made me cry, and she reminded me that this election is not about Psychodrew's feelings. It's about the future of our country. She did more than re-affirm my support for the nominee. Her speech, listening to her speak in person, gave me some much-needed closure. Going forward, I think that I'll be a little less angry and a little less sarcastic, but probably no more enthusiastic about the ticket.
But most importantly, I'm going to vote for Barack Obama!
I have been a Hillary Clintonista since before she became a senator from the State of New York. I followed her campaign closely. I bought her book. I joined her mailing lists. And I'll be honest, I first felt excited about her 2008 presidential campaign on the morning of November 3, 2004. I literally cried the day she announced her candidacy and I proudly signed up to join her.
That was 19 months ago. Tonight, in a speech that was very different from the one she envisioned that evening in January 2007 when she announced that she was "in it to win it", she graciously and unequivocally offered her support to the man who defeated her.
I have been supporting Hillary for nearly ten years. I walked with her during the highs of this campaign and I walked with her during the lows. I never stopped fighting, I never stopped believing, and I never stopped supporting her. And I will continue to support her anytime, anywhere, anyplace. And now, as the Clintons pass the torch to Barack Obama, as he officially becomes our nominee, as the dream officially comes to an end, I will continue to walk with Hillary.
She fought for the presidency for 17 long months. She donated more than $13 million of her own money. She endured relentless sexist attacks from the commentariat and the right wing and right-wing smears from members of her own party. Clintonistas, she's given enough of herself to our cause and to our party. It's time to stop fighting. It's time to let go of the dream. It's time to support Barack Obama.
And you're wondering just what the deal is with this person. And you may also be wondering why the "PUMA" crowd is cheering this new lie...
Well, here are the facts. First off, this supposed "martyr" Debra Bartoshevich has always been a McCain supporter. Despite her crocodile tears about being kickied out of the Democratic National Convention's Wisconsin Delegation because "she was a Hillary supporter", the truth is that she was removed because Democratic Party delegates do NOT support Republicans! She broke the rules, so the state Democratic Party replaced her with a true Hillary Clinton Democrat.
And now, Debra Bartoshevich is proving her Republican bona fides by lying in a national TV commercial for McCain. She refuses to mention McCain's embrace of all things Bush-Cheney. She doesn't mention how John McCain now stands for more wars, fewer protections for the middle class, more environmental destruction, fewer real energy solutions, more extreme-right judges "legislating from the bench", and fewer civil rights for all of us. Oh no, Ms. Bartoshevich refuses to tell the truth. She just lies for her beloved "Johnny Mac". And really, we're supposed to believe she's a Hillary Clinton Democrat?
"Now, I understand that the McCain campaign is running ads trying to divide us," Clinton said. "And let me state what I think of those ads: I'm Hillary Clinton, and I do not approve that message."
"Let there be no mistake about it, We're united, and we're united for change. We are, after all, Democrats, so it may take (pause) a while. (Laughter). We're not the fall in line party. We're diverse. Many voices. But make no mistake, we are united. We are united on behalf of the Democratic Party values we hold dear."
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. "PUMA" is nothing more than a Rethuglican front group! They want to sow anger and division among us Democrats, just so that John McCain wins this fall and their beloved GOP can have at least four more years to destory this nation some more.
I've had it with their lies. I've had it with their attacks on Democrats. Before the corporate media slavishly laps up the "PUMA" falsehoods any more, it's time they hear from us on what the truth really is.
During the Democratic Convention this week, we'll finally see the party unite to win this fall. Hillary Clinton will speak once more in support of Barack Obama. Barack Obama will show his support for what Hillary Clinton and all of her voters support. And once and for all, this false meme of "Democrats in disarray" can finally be disproven.
Obama holds a 47%-43% edge over McCain among registered voters and a 48%-45% edge among likely voters. Both leads are within the margin of error of +/—4 percentage points.
In the USA TODAY/Gallup Poll a month ago, Obama led McCain by 3 percentage points, but McCain held a 4-point lead among likely voters.
That's the good news. The bad news is that Obama still isn't holding a larger lead because 30% of Hillary Clinton Democrats are either undecided or leaning McBush, while another 23% are just leaning Obama (the other 47% are solid for Obama). So obviously, this week is EXTREMELY IMPORTANT.
First off, Hillary Clinton will be able to do a whole lot to solve this problem. When the world sees her throw her full support to Barack Obama once more, that will be a HUGE HELP for Democrats. And if Joe Biden & Barack Obama build upon this by presenting a clear contrast from the Bush-Cheney-McCain past & a bold vision for a bright future & a renewed promise for America, this can finally give Democrats the upper hand again.
Hopefully, we'll see a united Democratic front this week in Denver... Which will result in a clear path for a Democratic victory on November 4! :-D
During this election cycle, in part because of the excitement over the historic Democratic primary and in part because of President Bush's unpopularity, more voters are identifying themselves as Democrats than Republicans, giving Democrats a 7 point advantage nationwide.
If independents are asked toward which party they lean, the lead expands to nine points.
Why isn't the lead in party identification translating into a larger lead in the polls? Because the Democratic party is divided. An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll released last week gave Senator Obama a statistically non-significant 3 point lead, down from six points a month earlier. The reason, according to the pollster, is the Clinton Democrats.
Yet perhaps the biggest factor keeping the presidential race close has been Obama’s inability to close the deal with some of Hillary Clinton’s supporters. According to the poll, 52 percent of them say they will vote for Obama, but 21 percent are backing McCain, with an additional 27 percent who are undecided or want to vote for someone else.
What’s more, those who backed Clinton in the primaries — but aren’t supporting Obama right now — tend to view McCain in a better light than Obama and have more confidence in McCain’s ability to be commander-in-chief.
Senator McCain, who cannot run a campaign based on his ideas of continuing the policies of George Bush, is trying to exploit the lingering wounds of a tough primary battle by running ads like this, release yesterday:
In this election, the Democrats have the power to decide who wins. The only way that McCain wins this race is if we allow his strategy of divide and conquer to succeed.
What can we do? The most important factor is that we stop fighting the primary wars. The primaries ended more than a month ago. Barack is over it. Hillary is over it. And we need to get over it, too. When a troll comes around trying to ignite a fight over snipergate or bittergate or Hillary said this or Barack said this, ignore it. Don't get sucked in. You may have very good reasons for hating Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama but expressing them now only advances what has become John McCain's only strategy for winning the White House: Divide the Democratic Party.
The backlash against my diary on Will Bower's lies was a little bit stronger than I had anticipated. I have basically been challenged on three points. The first is that Will Bower backed off the $6 million figure to a smaller amount. The second is that some of the money accidentally went into Hillary's senate campaign account. The third is that PUMAs raised "close" to the $6 million, Will Bower's "conservative" estimate on July 10th.
First, here is Will Bower on July 10, 2008.
We at JustSayNoDeal.com, we started an initiative before the Fourth of July to raise money to put down her debt. And within that week leading up to the Fourth of July we raised approximately $10 million. Our most conservative estimates have it at six million but we're looking more at $10 million. Our sources tell us that the debt is now less than $5 million from being in the black... we believe that by this weekend that Hillary's debt will be finished.
Yesterday, both here and in private communication, I was told that Will Bower had backed off the $6 million number. I requested, but did not receive, any further evidence from those making this argument. I did a Google search with "Will Bower Hillary Clinton debt" and did not come up with any public statement to that effect. I did, however, find this blog post (which has since been deleted) dated July 23rd in which the author claimed to have learned from Will Bower that Hillary's debt had been erased.
If anybody can find a retraction or clarification of his July 10 statement, please send it to me and I will post it. I have tried to find it without success and I did not receive a response to my request yesterday. I was referred to a Clinton Campaign Debt FAQ written by a PUMA who regular visits MyDD. This FAQ only raises more questions for me:
Has PUMA been able to pay down Hillary’s campaign debt?
We won’t know the answer to that questions until the campaign files their next monthly report with the FEC on Wednesday, August 20th. If you recall, in early July, the Just Say No Deal coalition kicked off the July 4th/$20.08 fundraiser, which may have raised an estimated $6-10 M according to Will Bower.
The campaign filing for June shows that the campaign received $2.7 M in individual contributions. July’s report will include July 4th/PUMA fund raising donations. Will’s estimate may be accurate.
I've explained Will's estimates. He clarified those estimates several times in July on No We Won't/PUMA radio (I will have to find the shows). The revised estimates were blogged (again in July), I will have to find that as well.
If he "clarified" the $6-$10 million estimate in July, why was this PUMA quoting those discredited numbers in August?
The second argument was that some of the donations had gone into Hillary's senate campaign account. In my original diary, a PUMA posted this email, presumably sent by Will Bower to the members of the PUMA movement:
Hello, fellow PUMAs!
Last week, many of you reached into your pockets and generously gave what you could to help pay down Hillary's campaign debt.
However, the main contribution link at HillaryClinton.com had been redirected towards a different account. Instead of going to pay off her debt, it directed contributions towards her 2012 Senatorial campaign.
If you have any doubt as to where your contribution went, you must contact the financial department at HillaryClinton.com and let them know where you had intended it to go!
For them to be legally able to redirect your donation back into her debt fund, you must make your intentions clear to them.
Here are four ways you can contact them, to let your intentions be known. Again, this is only for if you are in doubt. If you are confident that your money went to pay off her debt, then you need not pursue this.
If you are in doubt, please contact (any or all) of the following, and encourage your PUMA contributing friends to do the same:
Thank you, and I hope you had a great holiday weekend!
What I find interesting about this email is that date it was sent out:
This is a copy of the email that Will sent out on July 6th regarding our July 4th/$20.08 fundraiser, which had kicked off a week earlier:
So four days before Will Bower went on national television to announce that the PUMAs were quickly erasing Hillary's debt, he knew that there was a problem with tracking the donations and getting them to the right place. When he went on Fox News, he made NO mention of the change at Hillary's website. Why? He was on a national platform and the ability to reach potential donors who were not on the PUMA mailing list, yet he said nothing.
Let's assume that a lot of money did, in fact, go to Hillary's Senate campaign. I visited the FEC website and reviewed the financial reports for Hillary's Senate campaign. During the 2007-2008 campaign cycle, through June 30, 2008, Hillary's campaign has received a total of $56,013.
Even if we assume that all $56,013 came from PUMA and all of it in June (this is important because the PUMAs are also arguing that the big fundraiser began in late June), this falls quite short. As these reports are filed quarterly (I think), we will have to wait until the end of September for an update. However, when asked about Bower's claims, a spokesperson for Hillary's presidential campaign said the following:
As far as we know, that $10 million is a fallacy. We have not seen that money. It is our understanding that these groups provide links to our website, and there is no way to track which sites those donations come from. We have received no donations from the PAC.
The third argument posed is that the PUMA's raised "close" to $6 million. Here is what one PUMA wrote to me:
Hillary raised close to $3m in June and $2m in July. That's about $5m total. The PUMA fundraising effort raised most of that money between late-June and July 4--in about a week. So the estimate of $6m wasn't that far off. Since her vendor debt is $11m and $5.2m of that is for Mark Penn, the remaining vendor debt is $5.8m and it looks like the PUMA effort paid a lot of that off.
According to Hillary's June and July monthly FEC reports, her campaign raised a total of $2,708,334.94 in June and $1,930,823.83 in July for a total of $4,639,158.77.
If PUMA claims credit for all of those numbers, it still falls well short of $6 million. I would imagine that there are a number of people who would enthusiastically object to the PUMAs taking credit for all $4.6 million of Hillary's money. The Obama campaign claims that its two fundraisers alone pulled in more than $500,000 for Hillary Clinton. That does not include the many unsolicited small donations made by Obama supporters who wanted to reach out to the Clintonistas after Hillary's concession speech. And Hillary has also held her own fundraisers, both public and private these last two months. In addition to contributing to her T-shirt fundraiser in July, I contributed more money in June in response to an email from Hillary, not PUMA. The PUMAs cannot attribute the entire $4.6 million to their July 4th/$20.08 fundraiser and their other explanations do not add up.
As a Hillary Clintonista, I am anxious to see her debt retired so she can get back to work in the Senate and on the campaign trail for Senators Obama and Biden. I appreciate any effort by any group to help retire her debt, but making false claims about phantom donations do not help her in this effort. If Will Bower cannot back up his claims with facts, he needs to stop talking.
For those of you who are interested in donating to Hillary's debt relief, you can follow this direct link to her presidential campaign.
[Updated at 7:00pm (PDT) by psychodrew]
I have known many of the PUMAs for many months, now, dating back to the primary wars when we were still on the same side. I got to know grlpatriot through the forums that the Clinton bloggers used during the primaries. After Hillary's concession, we maintained our friendship, even when some of her PUMA allies got mad at me for supporting Obama and when some of my Obama allies got mad at her for not supporting Obama. I can say with all honestly that grlpatriot is a true believer. She is not a Republican troll or a troublemaker. I believe that she is a person of conviction, even if I do not share those convictions.
In today's diary, I questioned Will Bower's honesty and I will not walk that back. Until he comes up with an explanation for what he has said and done, I stand by my words. But I should not have implied that grlpatriot was dishonest. In the comments and in private communication, she has objected to how I depicted her Clinton Campaign Debt FAQ.
Her position is that Will Bower did back off the $6 million figure in the PUMA radio shows, even if he didn't do so in a more public forum. Even if I did not know grlpatriot to be an honest person, the explanation makes sense. If Will Bower hadn't provided his own people with an explanation, there probably would have been an internal coup.
She also maintains that the Clinton Campaign Debt FAQ was written independently of Will Bower and she used the $6-$10 million figure because nobody was sure how much money had been raised and she (personally) believed it was possible that they could have reached that figure. Again, I am taking grlpatriot at her word on this point because I believe she is an honest person.
Finally, grlpatriot has pointed out that they are not professional political operatives, so they should be expected to make mistakes. Fair enough, rookies make mistakes, but that does not account for why Will Bower has not taken an opportunity to clarify his misleading statements on Hillary's debt. He's had numerous opportunities. Frankly, I think that political operatives, as they become more experienced, learn how to avoid saying "I was wrong."
In the end, I should not have implied that grlpatriot was being dishonest, especially without having spoken to her first, and for that, I apologize. However, I stand by my criticism of Will Bower. And I believe that the PUMAs were wrong to take Thursday's diary so personally. Will Bower is a public figure and he chose to make himself a public figure. He has given me no reason to believe that he is anything other than a dishonest, political opportunist looking to cash in on Hillary's name and defeat Barack Obama for the most selfish of reasons, fame. I'm not going to pull punches when someone is trying to put an anti-gay, anti-female, pro-war, Scalia-loving wingnut in the White House just to feed his ego.
So I repeat myself: If you don't like what I wrote, prove that I'm wrong.
“It was good that she said my supporters need to now support Barack Obama,” said Ms. Shaffer, 46, reflecting on Mrs. Clinton’s speech before about 700 people. But, she added, “I wanted her to repeat that one more time.”
She needed her to say it twice!? Are you kidding me? Would you also like her to hold your hand and sing you a lullaby?
Some of her supporters are so busy being angry that they have forgotten that losing was devastating to Hillary, as well. She spent at least two years planning for her presidential bid, she spent 18 months raising money and campaigning, time she could have spent with her daughter or her aging mother, she was drug through the mud by a shameful media and a Clinton-deranged blogosphere, but in the end, she managed to put her hard feelings aside and do what's best for the country. She goes around the country talking about "change you can believe in" and "hope" and asking her supporters to please join her in supporting Barack Obama.
Yet despite all of Hillary's hard work on Obama's behalf, we still have Obamapeople like this:
Pat delValle, an Obama volunteer, said Clinton needed to appear more sincere if she was to have any effect bringing her supporters along.
It was her body language, delValle said. "I didn't see the smiles."
And Clinton people like this:
"I haven't heard her saying anything yet that makes me feel like I need to vote for Obama," said Wendy Richardson, a graduate student who had planned to vote for Clinton and is now considering Republican Sen. John McCain.
Huh? Let's look at what Hillary has said. On June 7, 2008, she suspended her campaign, endorsed Barack Obama, and asked her supporters to do the same:
Today, as I suspend my campaign, I congratulate him on the victory he has won and the extraordinary race he has run. I endorse him and throw my full support behind him.
And I ask all of you to join me in working as hard for Barack Obama as you have for me.
On June 27, 2008 in Unity, NH, she said that her supporters should not stay home and should not support McCain.
She also addressed the Democratic Party's fractured state, saying, "If you are considering not voting or voting for John McCain, I strongly urge you to reconsider."
In fact, as far back as May 14, in the heat of the primary campaign, Hillary said that her supporters should get behind the nominee:
"Anybody who has ever voted for me or voted for Barack has much more in common in terms of what we want to see happen in our country and in the world with the other than they do with John McCain," Clinton said on CNN's "The Situation Room."
"I'm going to work my heart out for whoever our nominee is. Obviously, I'm still hoping to be that nominee, but I'm going to do everything I can to make sure that anyone who supported me ... understands what a grave error it would be not to vote for Sen. Obama."
I have reached the point where I believe that some people won't ever be persuaded. They say they are waiting for some magic words because they don't want to be persuaded. They are content to wrap themselves up in their righteous indignation and stand on the sidelines pouting. In the meantime, instead of raising money or campaigning for down-ballot candidates, instead of working for important groups such as Emily's List, instead of working on her own political action committee, HillPAC, all things which would help further her issues and expand her political power, Senator Clinton has to go around the country BEGGING her supporters to get behind the nominee.
If you are a Hillary Clintonista, if you really believe in her and support her as I do, then you will stop making her go around the country and beg for your votes. It's time to grow up, accept that she has been defeated, and let Hillary get back to work.
If you keep holding out, demanding that Hillary work for your vote, you are part of the problem, not the solution.
Remember this video of Will Bower, a leader in the PUMA movement, announcing the PUMA's didn't need Obama's help raising money for Hillary?
Guess how much money she actually raised in July: $2.5 million.
What happened to that $6 million, Mr. Bower? I'll tell you what happened. It never existed. But admitting that his coalition wasn't raising money quickly enough wouldn't get him on Fox News, would it?
Did Mr. Bower ever stop to think that spreading these lies might make it harder for Sen. Clinton to raise money? Of course not. Because this isn't about Hillary Clinton. It's about Will Bower. And Will Bower being interviewed on television. And Will Bower becoming famous for taking down Obama and handing over the White House to McCain.
The PUMAs have raised a lot of very legitimate concerns about the nominating process and the need to reform the party. But when their megalomaniac leaders go around making ridiculous claims like $6 million and a "whitey" tape and 500 buses to Denver, it casts a shadow over the movement and lessens our chances of getting the reform we need.
To my friends on the other side, please ditch your narcissistic leaders and join the Clintonistas for Obama. This is the path that Hillary has chosen and has asked us to walk with her. I'm with Hillary. How about you?
I know we went poll-crazy here yesterday, but there was one more tidbit that got overlooked in the frenzy last night. With the ugly numbers that we woke up to, many rejoiced at the numbers from the NBC/WSJ and CBS/NYT polls putting giving Obama a 3 point lead, 45-42.
Yet perhaps the biggest factor keeping the presidential race close has been Obama’s inability to close the deal with some of Hillary Clinton’s supporters. According to the poll, 52 percent of them say they will vote for Obama, but 21 percent are backing McCain, with an additional 27 percent who are undecided or want to vote for someone else.
What’s more, those who backed Clinton in the primaries — but aren’t supporting Obama right now — tend to view McCain in a better light than Obama and have more confidence in McCain’s ability to be commander-in-chief.
For these reasons, Hart believes that Clinton’s speech on the Tuesday night of the Democratic convention will be a significant event. “The Democratic convention is more than a coronation,” he says. “It is an event where the words of Hillary Clinton are probably going to be exceptionally important.”
Hart adds, “The Hillary Clinton campaign may be over, but the Clinton factor remains an important part of the election.”
It’s also worth noting that while Obama leads McCain by three points in the poll, Clinton edges the Republican by six points in a hypothetical match up, 49 to 43 percent. But she remains a polarizing figure: 49 percent say they don’t want to see her as president someday, and 42 percent view her favorably versus 41 percent who see her in a negative light.
No doubt there are people who rejoiced at yesterday's numbers and maybe even saw an opening for Hillary on the ticket or even as a surprise nominee next week. I am already on the record as opposing a unity ticket and I have dismissed any possibility of Hillary being resurrected in 2008. I write about polling because (a) I am a statistics dork and I find the number-crunch fascinating and (b) I want reinforce the message that this election won't be a cakewalk.
If that doesn't square with your image of Psychodrew as a bitter Clintonista with "unresolved issues," so be it. I'll continue speaking my mind. And you continue speaking yours.
The editor's of the Wall Street Journal inadvertently revealed that the media has already written the story on the Democratic National Convention.
"The one thing that Obama should never have agreed to is a roll-call vote with Hillary Clinton," says Jeff Birnbaum, a Washington Post columnist. Mr. Birnbaum nonetheless admits to being "so grateful that we are going to have a story, which is Hillary Clinton's attempt tacitly to take over the Obama victory, and that [story] will go through virtually every day of the convention" given how frequently Bill and Hillary Clinton are scheduled to appear before delegates.
I'm a little confused because I thought journalists were supposed to uncover the facts and report the story, not decide on the story and then interpret the facts to accomodate their storyline.
Although a plurality of Democrats believe that having Hillary's name put into nomination will be good for party unity, the media have already decided that the storyline in Denver will be Party Disunity as Hillary Tries to Steal Nomination. I guess McCain was onto something when he called the media "his base."
If you want to reach out to Hillary female supporters in Michigan, don't use Nancy Pelosi.
During the primary campaign, Nancy Pelosi made no effort to hide her bias for Barack Obama and didn't bother commenting on any of the sexism Hillary faced until after she suspended her campaign and endorsed the nominee. It's probable that only political junkies such as the Clintonistas for Obama would be aware of this controversy, but using Nancy Pelosi is still risky. The governor of Michigan, Jennifer Granholm, was a Hillary Clinton supporter and would serve as a much better surrogate for Obama for reaching out to women.
Hillary Clinton is giving her supporters another chance to win a free trip to Denver and join her for dinner. Today, I received this email from the Clinton campaign.
Dear Andrew,
I cannot wait for the lights to come up and the cameras to roll at the Democratic National Convention in Denver. When I join Democrats from across the country who are unified and ready to get to work to elect Barack Obama, I want you there.
So many people have reached out to help us pay down our campaign debt, and I was just overwhelmed by the generous spirit of so many of you. I'm pleased to announce that Leslie of Tacoma, WA won our contest and will be joining me for dinner soon. But so many people participated that I knew I just had to give you another chance. So will you enter today for the chance to join me in Denver?
This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to see an event that will truly make history. I'll make sure you get great seats to see me speak on Tuesday night when I address the nation and see Senator Obama accept the nomination at Mile High Stadium on Thursday.
We're going to have an amazing convention and head into the fall campaign unified and ready to work. And if you contribute today to help us pay down our campaign debt, you might be the one to join me in Denver!
If you're the lucky winner, we'll fly you to Denver, where you'll be my special guest at the convention. And I'll make sure that you and I have some time together to chat. You'll get to see me speak Tuesday night and see Senator Obama accept the nomination at Mile High Stadium on Thursday.
You know that we're still working hard to pay off all the small vendors we owe from our presidential campaign. And your help continues to make a huge difference.
So let's have some fun in Denver -- try your luck and contribute today. You might be the one joining me for the 2008 Democratic Convention!
Contribute today, and you might be my special guest for the convention.
Hillary Clinton's name will be put into nomination at the convention. Whatever controversy the corporate media & the right-wing trolls tried to generate has been killed off. Hillary & Barack negotiated it out, and we will be a part of the convention.
Alright Clintonistas, we all knew that this quote by Hillary was going to come back to haunt Democrats. Hold onto your pantsuits and press play.
I don't want this thread to turn into a debate on the appropriateness of Hillary's comment. I felt at that time and still do now that her comment was within bounds. From having spoken with my co-bloggers, I have the sense that I am in the minority, if not alone, in my thinking.
As Hillary stated in her concession speech, this isn't about the past. It's about the future. The Republicans have no plans for the future beyond the failed policies of Bush/Cheney/McCain, so all they can do is dredge up the past. Remember two things. First, this is going to happen over and over and over again. Prepare yourself. Second, the only way this strategy works is if we let it work. McCain's only path to victory goes through Denver and a divided Democratic Party. If we allow past battles to get in the way of future victories, then we lose and our country loses as well.
The Republicans are at it again. Don't fall for it!
It's time to let go of the dream. Hillary is going to be in the Senate for the foreseeable future. From Voteboth.com:
Because of your work, Senator Obama asked Hillary to be his keynote speaker at the Democratic National Convention! We hope you are as pleased as we are that he has tapped Senator Clinton to deliver one of the most important messages of that crucial week—the very role that Barack Obama had four years ago.
Regretfully, this means that Senator Hillary Clinton is no longer under consideration as Senator Obama’s running mate.
For those of you who are considering withholding your support for the nominee:
We worked for Hillary for a combined ten years, so we know how many of you may be feeling. And to those who are hesitant to support Obama right now, we urge you to keep giving him the chance to earn your vote. We are confident he will.
Because, when it comes down to it, even the most ardent Hillary-supporter must ask himself or herself, “Do I want John McCain sending our soldiers off to more wars, giving Big Oil free rein to gouge us at the pump, and letting ideology overrule decisions that should be made on the basis of science and health?”
No. Never.
This is a little easier for me, because I never wanted her to be on the ticket with Obama. But I understand that others may be disappointed. However, we need to accept the reality that the Clinton Democrats are going to be shut out of the executive branch. With Hillary's keynote address, we are politely being shown the door.
For now, we're down. But are we out? Where do we, the Clinton Democrats, the Clintonistas for Obama and the PUMAs, go from here? Is there an alternative to (a) voting against the party—and thus against Hillary’s and our own interests—or (b) standing nauseous on the sidelines with an Obama sign and a phony smile?
One of my friends had a wonderful idea, an alternative to giving John McCain control of the White House:
"Deaniacs" are a brilliant example of what can be done. Dean has done a great deal for the party in my eyes and the fifty state strategy is so important! And think about this, what if PUMAs put all that energy into getting their local democrats elected? Krazy huh?
Think about this for a second. Our alternatives in 2008 are Obama and McCain. Period. Hillary is not going to be resurrected. If the PUMAs succeed in tilting the election to McCain, the Clintons--and their supporters--are finished. We are the scum that extended the war in Iraq and put two more Alito's on the Court.
But suppose we decide to attack from the bottom rather than the top.
Obama is all about big speeches in front of large, adoring crowds that will go away after November 4th. His "youth voters" and "Obamacans" aren't the committed Democrats that many of us are. For the most part, the college students don’t understand the hard work that changing this country is going to require. And the Obamacans will wipe their hands of the Democrats after the cathartic relief of punishing GOP leaders. The day after the election, these "Democrats for a Day" go back to their own lives and we step in. We start running for local offices. We take over key positions. The Clinton Democrats re-take the party from the bottom.
Right now, the latte/arugula wing of the Democratic Party thinks that they have successfully marginalized the Clinton Democrats. Their guy is on the top of the ticket. Hillary is out. The DNC has moved to Chicago. Bill is back to fighting AIDS in Africa. Their guy is so confident of success, he started mapping out the legislation for 2009 in a meeting with House Democrats.
Let them think that they are in charge. Meanwhile, we organize at the bottom (and give our money to Hillary) and we reshape the Democratic Party for the future. Because in the end, that's what this is really about.
After Bill Richardson leaked details of his private conversation with Hillary Clinton, I bashed him up one side and down the other. Now that he is reaching out to the Hillary Clinton, I need to give credit where credit is due. On August 17th, Gov. Richardson is going to hold fundraisers for Hillary Clinton in Santa Fe and Albuquerque.
Money raised will go toward helping Senator Clinton pay down the debt remaining from her historic and hard-fought Presidential primary campaign. After withdrawing from the race in June, Senator Clinton enthusiastically endorsed Senator Barack Obama, now the presumptive Democratic nominee, and is working diligently to assist his campaign.
Do you think that he genuinely wants to atone for his bad behavior? Or contribute to party unity?
Or do you think he wants to reduce the animosity with Senator Clinton to make himself less radioactive as a nominee for a position in an Obama cabinet?
"But his associates describe [an Obama-Clinton dream ticket] as unlikely, saying that for a variety of reasons, Mr. Obama is not looking to have her as a running mate or serving with him in the White House. . . . [Obama's short list] includes Senators Evan Bayh of Indiana and Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, as well as Gov. Tim Kaine of Virginia..." -New York Times, 7/29/08
Dear Friend, This is it; this is the endgame. We have to act today.
Today’s newspapers tell us that Senator Obama is looking closely at some candidates for running mate, and Hillary is not on that list yet.
Obama’s team say there are “a variety of reasons” he is not yet looking to put her on the ticket.
Well, you and I are voters, and we have something to say about it, too. Let’s give Senator Obama our own “variety of reasons” to put Hillary Clinton on his short list and really consider putting her on the ticket.
Email a letter to the New York Times and Washington Post and tell what Hillary adds to Obama’s ticket.
However, an analysis of fundraising reports by the Arizona Republic found some good news--the Clinton Democrats are giving more money to Barack Obama than John McCain, by a ratio of 100 to 1.
Thousands of Hillary Clinton's donors gave at least $1.2 million to Democrat Barack Obama in June, accelerating a migration from her presidential campaign that began months ago.
Republican John McCain collected about $11,000 from that group in the same period, according to an Arizona Republic analysis of Federal Election Commission records.
The numbers suggest no widespread defections from the Democratic Party after its hard-fought primary season between Clinton and Obama ended the first week of June. McCain has hoped that many of Clinton's supporters would join him in an anti-Obama backlash.
The financial reports are even more lopsided than polls that indicate few Clinton backers are crossing party lines.
Not only is Obama doing well among Clinton donors, he is raising more money than he raised from supporters of former Senator John Edwards. Since January, Obama has raised $3.6 million from the former and $1.9 million from the latter.
This month's numbers should be interesting. With the end of the month just days away, Democrats need a big push to keep the pressure on the GOP.
And also important is empowering Hillary Clinton. If you believe in Hillary and her leadership and you want her to continue as leading voice in the Democratic Party, donate to her political action committee.
Some of my friends and former allies are working on a movement to convince superdelegates to support Hillary Clinton at the convention in November. Earlier this week, a front page diary at a well-known blog celebrated a rumor that eight Obama superdelegates indicated that they would vote for Hillary if a roll-call vote were held in Denver.
Now, they are technically correct that, under the rules of the party, Senator Obama does not officially become the nominee until the delegates cast their votes at the convention. It is possible that something could happen that would force him off the ticket. However, if they are correct, and Hillary Clinton becomes the nominee in Denver, she will be doomed in November.
The first problem is getting Barack Obama out of the way. An email campaign organized by a group of bloggers, not matter how dedicated, will not be enough. Barack Obama is the presumptive nominee. The superdelegates decided this race. They provided Senator Obama with his margin of victory. They have already decided that he is sufficiently experienced and electable. A flood of emails will not convince the superdelegates that they have made a mistake. A trickle of superdelegates that narrowly puts Hillary over the top is not a realistic scenario. It's going to require a large event outside the control of this dedicated group of Clinton supporters.
To that end, a lot of these Clinton supporters have been pointing to what they perceive as weak polling numbers. But a drop in poll numbers will not be enough. An extramarital affair or even an illegitimate child would not be enough. He would have to be caught engaging in (or having had engaged in) activity that borders on criminal and something for which a subordinate cannot take the fall. Although some in the PUMA movement claim to have highly damaging information against Michelle Obama, nothing has surfaced. In this day and age of information technology, if information of such a damaging nature existed, it would already have surfaced.
In the unlikely event that such information was uncovered, would the superdelegates hand the nomination to Hillary? The superdelegates are professional politicians and party loyalists. Replacing Senator Obama at the convention would come at a steep political price. His most die-hard supporters would certainly resist and his two core constituencies, the African-American community and his young voters, would be demoralized. The party would be ripped apart as some supporters cried fowl and others walked away crushed. African-American elected officials would be torn between the party and their constituents. It would open up a rift so huge that no politician could heal the wounds before the general election.
If Hillary were to suddenly emerge the victor in Denver, is it logistically possible for her to win the race? Even if Senator Obama walked away gracefully and his supporters lined up behind Hillary, she would find herself, on August 28, 2008, only 68 days away from the general election with no staff and no plans. She would have to build an organization, find a running mate (or settle for the running mate vetted by Obama), and create a strategy with almost no preparation. Remember, much of her primary campaign staff has already gone in different directions, some signing contracts that will employ them through the rest of the campaign. Even if everything else goes her way and she is able to integrate Obama's coalition into hers with no losses, mounting a nation-wide general election campaign in such a short period of time would be impossible.
If this great looming scandal did come to light, I would expect that the superdelegates would stand by Barack Obama, even if it does mean losing the general election. Because Hillary Clinton would certainly be defeated in November, Democrats would have nothing to gain and everything to lose by replacing Obama. The sudden demise of Obama's candidacy would likely cost Democrats the African-American vote and possibly even an entire generation of new, young voters, perhaps permanently.
The effects of this rift would not be limited to the top of the ticket. All of the projections for gains in the House and the Senate are based on the assumption that Obama would drive up turnout among African-Americans and young voters. If African-Americans and younger voters stay home, some of the tougher Senate races (North Carolina, Mississippi) will be put out of reach and many of the seats we have long expected to pick up (Virginia, Colorado, New Hampshire, New Mexico) would likely be unwinnable. Mary Landrieu (LA) would certainly be defeated with a depressed African-American vote. With a Republican president and vice-president, that would hand control of the Senate back to the GOP. A similar scenario would certainly emerge in the House of Representatives.
Finally, the leaders of the "It's Not Over Yet" movement have forgotten one more essential detail. Under such a scenario, would Hillary even accept the nomination? I suspect that she would not. First, as outlined above, she would have no chance at winning. Second, she would forever be tainted in the African-American community for having replaced their historic nominee and Hillary values her relationship with the African-American community.
So my friends in the blogosphere are incorrect when they belittle this movement as "praying for a miracle." In reality, they aren't praying for a miracle. They are praying for a disaster of the highest order, one that would cost Democrats not only the White House, but possibly even the House and the Senate. It would be a setback to every single progressive cause that Hillary Clinton has dedicated her life to advancing.
This time, there will be no comeback for Hillary Clinton. The people have spoken. The party has spoken. For better or worse, Barack Obama is the nominee. The only alternative is defeat.
That $200 you could have donated to Hillary Clinton's debt relief or to other female candidates can instead be used for the first ever PUMA Civil War conference. On the weekend of August 8-10, while most of us--even the political junkies here at Clintonistas for Obama--will watching the Beijing Olympics, the PUMAs will be meeting in Washington, DC at the Pre-Convention PUMA Conference (PCPC). Today, Riverdaughter called upon all her "Conflucians" to join:
The purpose of PCPC will be to organize PUMA for the purposes of the Denver convention and to define our role going forward. We see great potential in PUMA as being an organization that keeps an eye on the major parties. Right now, there is no particular entity whose responsibility it is to make sure that the parties play by the rules. There is no group that holds the party players accountable to the voters for the decisions they make and the propaganda they generate. PUMAs are now to assume the mantle of responsibility that others have abandoned. We will become the referees. We hope to represent the voice of the voters who will give democracy back to the electorate. We want to make sure that our votes are counted, our primary results are respected, and what is important to us is recognized and included in party platforms. And unlike more ideologically motivated groups that have sprung up in the last several years, it is our desire to find that place where most Americans are and base our positions on principle, and to survey the political landscape from those principles, in order to resist the cults of personality and fad movements which have siphoned our strength and diminished our role as voters.
I think that I have made my sypathies and affection for the PUMAs quite clear. I absolutely do not agree with them, but I understand their anger and I have defended them when they are called "turncoats" or "dead-enders." I believe that casting a protest vote at the ballot box is a fair use of one's constitutional right to vote and I don't begrudge anybody for this. As far as I'm concerned, one needn't be a straight-ticket voter to be a good Democrat.
That said, this conference is a huge mistake. It has the potential to become a spectacle of the highest order because the PUMAs themselves, are quite divided on goals, strategy, and motivation.
Goals--Some PUMAs want to teach the party lessons. Others want to defeat Barack Obama. Others want Hillary to be on the ticket. Still others want her to run third party.
Strategy--Some PUMAs are supporting McCain. Some will stay home. Some will vote third party. Others will vote, but leave president section blank. And that changes if Hillary on the ticket. Fewer will support McCain, and some will still say home. But many will vote for Obama.
Motivation--Some PUMAs are motivated by angry emotions. Others want revenge. But many others--and I know this because I've calmly and rationally discussed this with them--are motivated by a since of principle. They believe that the process was unfair (as do I). They believe that the DNC should have defended Hillary against the sexism as forcefully as they stood up against Fox News Channel's smears on Obama. They feel that the only way to reform the party is to fight party unity. They are good progressive who believe that they are acting in the best long-term interest of the party.
When If PUMA meets in Washington, DC, all of these divisions will be on full display. When you have that many angry people in a room at one time, people who have different agendas but believe that theirs is the most morally justified,consensus and co-ordination is impossible. If the divisions do not end in chaos, infighting, and backstabbing, it will be because nobody showed up in the first place. The media will be more than happy to replay on a continuous loop video of angry PUMAs denouncing our nominee and the Democratic Party alongside video of largely empty conference rooms.
If the PUMAs want to support Hillary Clinton, they should donate their $200 to helping pay down her debt. Or they could spend their money donating to the superdelegates who supported her in the primaries. As I wrote two weeks ago, a number of Hillary's supporters in the House are facing primary challenges and will need the financial support for the general election. They can also donate to Emily's List, an organizaiton that proudly stood beside Hillary throughout the process.
If the PUMAs want to reform the party, they should begin organizing themselves as a pro-reform movement within the party. There are a lot of Democrats, many of them wealthy, prominent supporters of Hillary Clinton, who believe that the process was flawed and in need of reform. If Obama is elected, he is likely to install people at the DNC who will protect that process that elected him. In that event, a strong reform movement will be needed to hold the DNC's feet to the fire.
This conference is a bad idea. It could be the undoing of the PUMA movement, rendering it more irrelevant than it is now, but it also has the potential to embarrass the participants, the nominee, and the party. Images of more Harriet Christian moments only benefit the Republicans. Don't waste your money on a trip to DC. Donate to Hillary. Empower her by donating to HillPAC, her political action comittee. Donate to progressive causes and progressive candidates. Build up, don't tear down.
1. No attacks on posters or other commenters. 2. No thread hijacking is allowed. 3. Foul language is permitted, but language that is demeaning of one's race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, and/or gender identity is NOT.
The administrators reserve the right to moderate and/or delete any comments that violate the Terms of Use.
Comments, suggestions, or complaints may be sent to c4oblog@yahoo.com
Posts
