Clinton Supporters Plan To 'Swarm' DNC Meeting

So, if I have this right, here are the potential remaining battles in the 2008 Democratic Primary process: Primaries in South Dakota, Montana, and Puerto Rico. A meeting of the DNC Rules and By-Laws Committee to determine how the Democrats will continue to pretend to "punish" Florida and Michigan for moving their primary without actually enforcing any rules or handing down any penalties. Then, possibly, a superdelegate convention where uncommitted superdelegates will be forced at gunpoint to make a decision they could have plausibly made months ago. And finally, a full tilt bloodbath at the Democratic National Convention in Denver, which will prepare America for when John McCain is named King of America and Her United Anbar Provinces, propels us via time machine to the year 2013, and then explains how our Chinese overlords have forced us into a largely "Thunderdome-based" economy.

Speaking to the voters of the Sunshine State yesterday, Senator Hillary Clinton invoked the 2000 Recount Fiasco and spoke of the lessons learned. Now, for me, the lessons mainly are: "Do not allow the fate of our democracy to rest on David Boies' shoulders," but for Clinton, it's different:

"We believe the popular vote is the truest expression of your will...We believe it today just as we believed it back in 2000 when right here in Florida, you learned the hard way what happens when your votes aren't counted, and the candidate with fewer votes is declared the winner. The lesson of 2000 here in Florida is crystal clear. If any votes aren't counted, the will of the people isn't realized and our democracy is diminished. That's what I've always believed."

But that's not the only lesson she's learned from Florida:

The next Democratic donnybrook will be in a Washington ballroom.

Busloads of Hillary Clinton supporters will swarm a meeting next week at a D.C. Marriott, where Democratic Party elders hope to forge a compromise over Florida and Michigan's now-voided convention delegates.

"We really don't know what to expect, but we do know that the Clinton people are very organized," said a senior Democratic National Committee source.

Tactically, this takes a page right from the Karl Rove Recount 2000 playbook: send a mob of angry villagers to turn a relatively genteel process into a shrill folderol. Nevertheless, while the stage is set for roving gangs of superfluous supporters to disrupt the DNC proceedings, this will still be a model of decorum and tranquility compared to Clinton's other bizarre voter-rights reference, Zimbabwe. Though it should be noted that Zimbabwe's electoral strife would have been magnified one hundred-fold if it had featured Howard Wolfson conference calls.

Comments

[MaeScott]

Let's see...that vaunted much-referred to "bus"

who's under the bus?
...a granny, AA voters, Hagee, Wright, Ferraro, Powers, Penn, ....does that look like the Clintons?
Sure is crowded under this bus.

[conniedogs]

Let em' swarm! Sen Obama will have enough votes to cover those who won't vote for him. His supporters will play an active role in getting people registered to vote. This country hasn't been this excited in a long time, I suspect democrats will have way more voters participating than the republicans especially after Mccain has all but lost the evangelicals.

[DMW1]

Here are the facts:

1. Florida and Michigan broke DNC rules
2. Florida and Michigan were told in advance they would be penalized
3. Hillary Clinton said on New Hampshire Public radio, regarding the Michigan primary "Well, you know, it's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything."
4. Hillary Clinton, in typical fashion, now wants it to count for EVERYTHING
5. Hillary Clinton knew in advance, much better than Obama, how the nominating process works - including the caucus system, which the Clintons did not claim to be unfair when Bill won them
6. After being outcampaigned and losing the caucuses, Hillary, in the fourth quarter, while behind in states won, pledged delegates and the poll averages RealClearPolitics.comm), decides she wants to whine and change the rules, rules she has known about for years and never before complained about

[GingerB]

Hillary's word means as much as George Bush's does.

NOTHING.

[Gumby123]

Good summary of the facts. Clinton needs to stop pulling these dirty tricks

[Stew118]

Why did both of them call the Florida and Mi elections beauty contests before the elections? HIllary will say or do anything- that has always been common knowledge and I for one hope that she gets her butt kicked like this in all future elections she should choose to participate in. Her coalition is TIRED (not in the physical sense) OLD and BITTER. You all need a friggin nap.

[Stew118]

Why is HIllary's coalition boiling down to older, bitter men and women stuck in the past?

[foreffectivegovernment]

Stew118: Because we have enough age and experience to be comfortable with times when we felt secure and are not as willing to plunge into the unknown. We have realized that we are not "bullet proof" like we thought we were at your age. We realize we need a Healthcare plan that covers everyone including those who will receive care even though they don't have Insurance and we will have to pay for their care. We are not bitter, we are worried about what kind of future our children are leading us in to. I heard an old saying, "Be nice to your children because they will choose your nursing home." I am not comfortable with other people's kids choosing my President.

[TAGinMD]

What do you mean "other people's kids" choosing your president. The President is a President for all of the people, irregardless of our age, race or cultures. We need a leader who understands all of the diversity and complexities of the world. There a much needed CHANGE coming to America and all of the world is watching!

[C65]

STEW118,
The answer to that is the same answer I, at 66yrs. give to my grandsons,(8 & 10)
when I'm asked by them what is RACISM?I simple say:" it's a bitter thought
,brought on by old uneducated people who will do and say anything to make
themselves look and feel important".

[ntmessage]

People that are being disenfranchised by the establishment elites are rising up. That is not a surprise. What is and thanks to the DNC and Obama for splitting the party, this is a populist uprising and not the usual Black and uppity white one. Everything seems reversed. Bizarro world driven by voter suppression.

[Colingavignet]

Hillary was the establishment until she miserably lost the primaries.
Stop al the populist BS.

[WasteNJ]

Nobody is suppressing anybody's votes. Full stop.

[TASutpen]

Populist? You call a gang of political thugs (almost certainly some of the same faces represented in the Florida raids in 2000) storming a DNC gathering and screaming their fool heads off on behalf of a corporatist neocon . . . one who vowed, with a straight face some weeks ago, to obliterate the entire citizenry of a sovereign nation that poses no threat to these United States . . . a Populist uprising???

Are you on Crack?

Jesus, what contortions some people will go through just to keep a friggin' war going!

[ntmessage]

Yes I know. Bizarro. That the other side will be swarming the convention has been threatened for some time. Those that are making a big deal of Clinton supporters protesting the rules meetings are the one escalating this into a war. Not my dopey comments.

[leftintheoven]

Hillary truly is a uniter. But she is uniting a group that will undermine the party. Let's face it. She is in this thing not only to win but to make sure no one else does if she doesn't, It's all about her legacy- just like W. He was a uniter too, remember. Now look what we have.

If she REALLY had the party's interest at heart, she would be discouraging demonstrations and other outwardly disruptive actions and try to work within the rules that were established. I am a Florida voter and have no problem giving her the delegates she got in our state. But there is no way she gets every delegate from Michigan. And without all of them, she loses hands down.

Bill and Hillary have run an erratic, sometimes destructive campaign. They have not managed money well, they assumed they would win it all on Super Tuesday and were not prepared to deal with it when they did not. They had people like Mark Penn running the show. All of these things indicate that she is a poor manager in general. And she still owes $20+ million in debt. That is not the kind of president I want leading me.

[ntmessage]

Mark Penn should give back every dime he charged. Obama took his name off the ballot in MI, an unwise choice since uncommitted included votes from others. However, you cannot be serious in blaming Clinton because she is running a robust campaign. She supported a complete redo paid for by outside contributors. However, Obama was against this and I would not blame him for that necessary, just as I do not blame Clinton, but it was and is the best resolution.

However, the attacks that Clinton has some underhanded reason or there is a conspiracy are what is repulsing voters that agree with her. People see the campaigns differently based upon whom they support. This is a DNC created mess. Dean, just like Penn should be fired for incompetency.

Some want to support democratic principles but only to the point that their candidate still wins.

[dentuso]

This is astonishing.

We have a group of people who, for the sake of "women", demand that their nominee be allowed to disenfranchise only those voters who could not be introduced to a second candidate (FL), were told not to vote because they wouldn't count (FL & MI), or that couldn't cast a vote for their candidate (MI) because of the name of their preferred candidate not appearing on the ballot - an act that both candidates had pledged to do.

Why? To increase a flawed popular vote argument to push for yet another rule and metric change.

And if they don't get what they want for the sake of "women"? They threaten to, on behalf of that woman, cast their votes for a man and party who intend to repeal women's rights - in order to send a message to their party (who would maintain a woman's right to choose) and their nominee (who runs on virtually identical policies as "their" candidate - including a woman's right to choose).

In effect, it becomes - "Count SOME of the votes, change these rules, or we - as women demanding rights, will demand that we're represented by a man and party against women's rights!

Oh... history will not be kind.

[ntmessage]

History for sure will not be kind and I agree with you on that. Taken in its entirety from start to the unknown finish, this will be a truly historic election, even beyond that fact we had the fist viable Black and the first viable Women to run for the presidency.

[C65]

Dentuso,
You and I both,but I guess when you're HARDWORKING,OLD and UNEDUCATED
as the Clinton seregates so loudly blast it, you're fall for anything that sounds good
at the moment not assessing the long term effects.And don't you dare
think the Clintons aren't banking on this.IT DOESN'T MATTER TO THEM IF THESE
WOMEN THROW ALL THE ADVANCEMENTS DOWN THE TUBE,AS LONG AS THEY
DON'T PUT OBAMA IN AN OFFICE THAT THEY THINK BELONGED TO THEM.
HOW MANY TIMES SHE HAS SAID IT TOOK A CLINTON TO CLEANUP BEHIND
THE FIRST BUSH,AND IT WILL TAKE A CLINTON TO CLEANUP BEHIND THIS BUSH?
THESE PEOPLE THINK THEY ARE ENTITLED.

[westreal]

I love the picture of the rioters that goes with this headline. LOL Is it from the movie "M" with Peter Lore?

[Softnsweet]

This is a race war people. Clinton knows she controls white people over 50. Has she asked any black people, Asian, Latino or Indian people to come along. She went to Florida to gather up these woman.

If the black people dare to try and storm Washington, the state troopers would be out there with dogs and sticks.

[GingerB]

I'm a white woman over 50. Hillary doesn't control me. Nor does my candidate, Barack Obama.

[kristin]

I am a 70 year old white woman who is a staunch supporter of Obama. Hee hee. Does that mean I am young? Remember, statistically about 39% of older white women do support Obama. And many younger women support Hillary. Stereotyping people by saying that all in a particular group are the same creates fuzzy thinking and unfair conclusions.

[Krikkit]

Dude, SnS, stop with the hyperbole already. It is NOT a race war, it is a war between the educated and the uneducated, between the young and the ancient, between the new and the old. And the young, educated and new are winning.

[DDDOOONNN]

Obama supporters should also come on this day to protest that the two states are recognized otherwise too bad to believe you don't need them.

[dentuso]

And who will support those disenfranchised who didn't vote because they "wouldn't count", weren't able to meet a second candidate through campaigning against a person with a 16-year brand advantage, or who simply weren't allowed to vote for their candidate because there was only one freakin' name on the ballot?

Will you be there for them?

Didn't think so.

[JesusHC]

The states were penalized before the election. EVERY ONE new this. If it was such a crime against democracy why wasn't Hilary Mandela out in the streets back then?

[TiffanyHusseinBanned]

Obama supporters are tackling real issues like defeating McCain/Bush Third Term and who the Big O is going to pick as a running mate. You guys keep protesting a primary that has already been decided. We have no time for that. Thanks though.

[Witchitalineman]

Ladies you are setting us back! If the democrats lose this election in November, it will be due to those of you women who are cutting off your nose to spite your face. If you won't vote for Obama given the choice of McCain and the past eight years of this horrible administration, then you have no idea of the devastation that lies before us with a McCain presidency. You are all being poor sports and no example for our young people.

[sarakandel]

Women of all ages are deeply divided around Hillary Clinton. The other day there were about 5 diaries at Daily Kos about feminists for Obama; one diary elicited 1000 comments supporting Obama. I believe that women who are supporting Hillary Clinton, for the most part, are very well intentioned with very deep feelings of hurt. But as with many groups around the US, I believe Clinton has exploited people's resentment. And that puts us in dangerous territory. I don't know how we come together in the fall. And I too wish the superdelegates would act!

[Krikkit]

Shall we predicate our nominee selection process on the basis of hurt feelings? That would be madness, and that is just what we are seeing from this brand of supporter.

Ladies, it's time to pick yourselves up, dust yourselves off, and get on with the process with a little dignity, if you have it in you. Whining and temper tantrums are signs of immaturity. We expect such behavior from young children. We do NOT accept it in adults.

[ntmessage]

To pre-blame others in advance for an Obama loss ignores the fact that he is and always has been less electable than Clinton. If he is the nominee and loses, blame the DNC super delegates, Obama, or anyone except the people we need to win a general election.

Do not blame the people that are coming back into the party yet are being insulted by Obama and his supporters. Those people gave Clinton his wins and Bush his. They are true independent voters by action, not words and they will change sides. The closed tent policy of Obama and many of his supporters are not helping. Yes, the democrats have always been a big tent and this represents a change from that. Just like voter suppression is a change for the party as well.

The party cannot afford this kind of change.

[Colingavignet]

sometimes reality only exists in one's own mind.

[ApolloniaCreed]

In what world is the charasmatic, inspirational, rational leader less electable than the candidate who is named in an campaign funding scandal? And I do not say this as an insult. Only to say, while the Obama campaign has been gracious enough not to mention this scandal (and many others) in the primary season, don't be fooled into thinking the Republicans won't. Isn't it a bit ironic for the person losing the primary to argue they are more electable? Laughable even...

[Relax08]

Ntmesage is not a democrat, not a liberal, not a progressive. ntmessage is a dito head!

See the ugly head of un-American Operation Chaos folks!

[JesusHC]

To think that Clinton had a chance at the White House is a fanciful dream. The Republican would not have allowed it. The skeleton would have come out of the closet by the truck loads. Stop being naive. Damn it these selfish, crazy, clinton ladies need Lithium.

[dentuso]

Fact - 61% of the electorate this year is registered Democrat (vs. Republicans).

Obama supporters support Obama by 100%
McCain supporters support McCain by 100%
The only variable? Clinton supporters.

When we ask a Clinton supporter "If all Democrats voted for your candidate, would she win?" "In a LANDSLIDE!", they scream.

So... if all Democrats voted for Obama, he wouldn't win?". "No... he's unelectable", they say.

Uh huh...

Effectively, the chief argument against Obama is that "he's not electable" only becomes the case if those who make those claims decide not to elect him.

History will not show Hillary's supporters as being able to say "We told ya so". They will be known as the people who "Made it so".

For the sake of supporting a woman - they will help elect a party who will overturn a woman's right.

[conscioushope]

I concur completel with you......

*BTW, would you kindly consider using the word "women", not "ladies", Thanks. (From a non-Hillary, female Obama supporter.)

[FirstShirt]

That's going to be the question: whether there was or was not equal protection under the law? The right to vote is a fundamental right and any denial of that right will be subject to strict scrutiny. Should be interesting.

[TeriMcCarthy]

The right to vote in a primary is not a fundamental right. Sheesh

[ntmessage]

The principles of any election are sacrosanct in a Democracy. No exceptions.

[Krikkit]

The right to vote does NOT apply to the selection of the primary, which is a process carried out by a PARTY and not a national government. Don't you get it? Political parties were not established in the Constitution and they are not covered in the Bill of Rights. They are PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS to which voters may choose to belong or not.

In the GENERAL election, however, your rights are assured, and you can vote for whomever you choose, despite that person having party backing or not.

Hillary knows these things. She is playing GAMES and USING you to disrup the DEMOCRATS' process.

[Krikkit]

Since political parties did not exist at the writing of the Constitution, they are not covered anywhere in it, and so they are also not covered in the Bill of Rights.

Political parties are PRIVATE organizations, as has been upheld by the courts (thank you Hillary for clarifying that with your unsuccessful suit against the Nevada Democratic Party). They have the RIGHT, upheld by the courts, to set their selection process rules, which Hillary is seeking to undermine now that those rules haven't resulted in her coronation.

Voting Rights refers to election of government officials, which is what the election in November is all about. VR does NOT refer to the selection of a party nominee.

[McPander]

To the remaining Hillary supporters here is my suggestion for Obama's next move.

Pick Chuck Hagel as VP as a concession for Chuck Hagal taking the position Obama will pledge to compromise on Judges with the religious right. The only issue that keeps the religious right out of the party is abortion. Make it a states rights issues, sense for the most part the clinics are gone.

This will strangle the Hillary part of the party and double the base of the democrats.
It has been shown that women vote for McCain just like they did for Bush in 2004 then abortion isn't that important to them anyways.
This would make the Democratic party invincible for the next 50 years.

[AfricanLived]

Clinton is the biggest sore loser in 20 years. She has lost- why can't she and her supporters recognize that? Gawd.

[FirstShirt]

So, has Obama garnered enough delegates to call it a win? No.

Has he literally thrashed her in the states to date? No.

Have all democrats voted yet? No.

If he has not won, has she lost? No.

[kathyhussien]

I am a Obama supporter and I say let her have this shit she has created. She can't win African American will never vote for her and all the young supporters, independents, republicans and (yes believe it or not), hard working whites will not vote for her. That is the only this crazed menopausal woman and her supporters will get it. Have fun you loons, McCain is 4 more years of Bush and we all go to hell in a hand basket.

[Krikkit]

He only needs about what, 65 or so more to clinch the nomination?

How far is Hillary away from that goal, eh?

[JesusHC]

Yes she has, it is over.

[queotic]

"So, has Obama garnered enough delegates to call it a win? No."

Obama has the majority of pledged delegates. He only needs 60 more to reach 2025 - the number needed for the nomination. Hillary needs 243.

"Has he literally thrashed her in thestates to date? No."
SC, he won by 30%. Utah, 18%. North Dakota, 24%. Minnesota, 34%. Kansas, 48%. Illinois, 32%. Idaho, 63%. Georgia, 35%. Dems Abroad, 34%. Colorado, 35%. Alaska, 50%. Virgin Islands, 82%. Washington, 37%. Nebraska, 36%. Louisiana, 21%. Virginia, 29%. Maryland, 25%. DC, 51%. Hawaii, 52%. Vermont, 20%. Wyoming, 23%. Mississippi, 24%. The average % that Clinton wins by is 15%, but the average that Obama wins by is 29%. He's won 33 out of 50 contests, so that % grows even more. He HAS thrashed her.

http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/votes/index.html

"Have all democrats voted yet? No. "
There are three contests left, PR, Montana and South Dakota - about 86 delegates. Even if Hillary gets ALL of those delegates, she still WILLNOT have the majority of pledged delegates. In order for Hillary to win, she'd have to convince the superdelegates to vote against the will of the people.

"If he has not won, has she lost? No."
It's her right to stay in the race and prolong her inevitable defeat, but that does not give her the right to try destroying the Democratic base and to insinuate that the FL/MI debacle is somehow Obama's fault.

[Parkhurst]

AfricanLived See Profile I'm a Fan of AfricanLived
"Clinton is the biggest sore loser in 20 years. She has lost- why can't she and her supporters recognize that? Gawd."

------------------------------

Maybe it's because she hasn't lost - gawd!

No delegate has voted and no delegate will vote until the convention. She already has the majority of the popular vote. There is nothing in the rules that say the candidate with the majority of the pledge delegates must be nominated. This was something invented by the Obama campaign.

Now, read my lips, genius, just in case you didn't understand - there is nothing in the nominating rules that requires that the candidate with a majority of the pledge delegates be nominated - nothing.

No more than there is anything in the rules that says the candidate with the majority of the popular vote must be nominated- - but both have a reasonable argument to take to the convention.

Now Einstein, what part of the above don't you understand?

[AfricanLived]

So laughable. She has lost. He is one the most inspirational leaders that has come along in our time and is mostly responsible for the newly registered democrats ... not to mention the interest by the African-American vote. What you cited as delegates not voting until the convention- omfg, I can't believe you would suggest that the delegates change their mind and the will of the people and instead, vote for someone whom the people didn't vote for. As for popular vote? Obama was not EVEN ON THE BALLOT IN MICHIGAN... haha... she has lost.

[buckygreen]

Thanks for the input pakrlhurst, but this is an issue for Democrats to decide. We'll deal with you repugnants soon enough.

Obama/Webb 08

[ApolloniaCreed]

Here is the part I don't understand... and it has nothing to do with the primary process. What I cannot reconcile is even making the argument for popular vote when there is no real formula to determine it. States like Iowa didn't even turn in totals. In addition, it would mean a caucus state would not count as much as a primary state. The nomination is based on delegates. Period. And if any supporter has a problem with how primary elections are run, they should have been organizing and trying to change it before it had a chance to disrupt our primaries.

I wonder if those arguing popular vote will do anything to try to change how the Democratic nominating process is done after we officially have a nonimee.

Now Einstein, what part of the above do you need explained further? I am all for everyone having a clear understanding of the agruments of both sides. Because I believe the Obama campaign has the most compelling between us.

[BayAreaResident]

Just look at these numbers, and draw your conclusions, it won't be very difficult:

Barack Obama - 1,962.5
96.9% of the
63.5 needed to reach 2,026

Hillary Clinton - 1,775
87.6% of the
251 needed to reach 2,026

315 Total delegates left.

Do the math, and then tell us what exactly do you expect to happen to subvert the super delegates (who also voted overwhelmingly for Obama) to overturn what is absolutely clearly his victory? Has he been treating your candidate badly? Or maybe he is trying to break the rules in order to make further irrational claims? Or maybe it is simply him being black that you don't like about him so much? At least be honest sometimes!

Clinton: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * |
Obama: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * |

She would need a "miracle" to win and it will not happen!

[Krikkit]

You can't invoke the rules when they are in your favor and ignore them when they are not!!!

Florida and Michigan moved their primaries up in definace of the RULE and were stripped of their delegations as a result of those violations. Dems da rules!

And stop with the "Einstein" comments already. It's insulting.

And here's a little historical "rule" for you, which you can check for yourself, if you have the integrity to do so: Convention fights lead to general election losses for that party.

Hillary is trumpeting "voter disenfranchisement. Think on this: If Hillary brings this fight to the convention floor, and wins the nomination DESPITE most popular vote, most states, most pledged delegates, most superdelegate endorsements all belonging to Obama, she will lose in the general election because such a scenario is an affront to all voters who will see it as a massive disenfranchisement of their collective endorsement of Obama.

[LannyMacD]

The popular vote, as you claim, is erroneous because the Clinton campaign has changed the way the metric is used in an effort to build some traction. They want to use Florida and Michigan as they were cast, when those states were told their votes would not count. They knew the vote would not be recognized, so this limited the number of people that participated, especially in Michigan. Also, the candidates agreed to not participate in these primaries. Participation, in legal speak, also includes receiving any gain from the outcome of said contests. Clinton signed a promissory note that she would not participate in these proceedings, and she agreed to all the rules laid out at the time. So she cannot claim the popular vote since it was actually not a certified result. Also, Clinton's name was the only name of any of the front runners on the ballot in Michigan, an agreement reached by the delegates that she went against, making the vote in Michigan meaningless. She barely beat out "uncommitted" which means the result is greatly in dispute.

[LannyMacD]

The only way Clinton comes to the position of claiming the majority of the popular vote is through extremely fuzzy math, and an inclusive and exclusive method that only her handlers understand. Clinton some how thinks that she should gain benefit of ALL ballots cast for her, even in states where the votes were not certified. She counts ALL ballots cast for her in Michigan, but does not acknowledge the uncommitted vote and include that in Obama's tally. Clinton also completely ignores the caucus vote, which is just as valid as any other vote cast.

Now, if Ms. Clinton is going to project herself as the defender of democracy and continue on this bullshit tour, screaming that all votes must be counted and counted fairly, then she must start representing those votes that count against her as well. Her actions are disenfranchising hundreds of thousands of voters, simply because their ballot was not cast for her, and it is not politically expedient for them to be counted. Ms. Clinton's position is hypocritical and a very transparent political maneuver. Of course, you only see that if you actually know how the process works, view it through a clear lens and not one blurred by the fog of the kool-aid in your glass as you gaze at your navel, and are free to apply some critical thought to the proceedings.

[BayAreaResident]

I just love Hillary Rodham Clinton! Not only she is betting on our collective future by bringing the substantial risks to our GE prospects, but she is doing that with the intention to "convince" the remaining super delegates to "overturn" Obama's clear popular victory (which most of us know he mathematically won), but in order to even make such claim, she first needs to break the party rules, which she initially sworn not to contest and abide by. Integrity anybody?

Team spirit on day one?! I mean come on, don't you see what is going on?

What a reckless endangerment! It's unforgivable.

[katzooks]

Obama has done nobly, running a campaign of integrity in the face of dirty tactics, such as, now, Clinton mobilizing an angry mob to storm around the DNC Rules & Bylaws Committee, demanding that the election laws be changed at the finish line. If that fails, she and Bill will ramp up the blackmail to strong-arm Hillary into the VP slot.

I wish there were a forum to poll those Obama supporters who do NOT want to see Clinton as VP on the Obama ticket.

A show of "NO CLINTON FOR VP" hands?

[mcgreen]

yep, i'm offended - please don't consider her for vp.

women calling women sexists and worse for not supporting Clinton. definitely not this woman.

i cannot believe the gall of comparing the US to Zimbabwe, argh.... it's in the same class as the sniper story.

[GingerB]

My hands will be high in the air as soon as I finish typing this post.

[conniedogs]

If Sen Obama is forced to carry her, it's gonna be really hard to vote for him. Besides I'm not sure if people are aware of how many friends and associates connected to the Clintons have died.