Sticking A Wrench In The Gearbox

Maybe, just maybe, a bunch of delegates to the Democratic Convention in Denver will change their minds at the last minute. Maybe there is an outside chance that between now and the last week of August a critical mass will decide that Barack Obama is not their guy -- that, to the surprise of one and all, Hillary Rodham Clinton is to be the 2008 nominee after all.

That is the thinking behind a small but determined band of Hillary backers, some of whom have formed a 527 fundraising committee that has already run one $9,700 ad in the Chicago Tribune, and plans more in the weeks to come.

The Denver Group: Keeping the Democratic Party democratic, created by Georgetown Law professor Heidi Li Feldman and freelance advertising man Marc Rubin, ran an ad in Friday's Chicago Tribune declaring:

"Senator Clinton's name must be put in nomination. Her supporters must be allowed to make speeches on her behalf of her candidacy. There must be an honest roll call vote, not a symbolic one, so superdelegates can cast their votes honestly, for either candidate, as their judgment, conscience and democratic principles dictate."

Feldman told the Huffington Post that the goal of the Denver Group "is to insure substantive and legitimate selection of the nominee." DNC chairman and other party leaders "should be taking responsibility for making sure it's a legitimate procedure. They cannot demand that people simply unify around either one of them."

Feldman argued that it is entirely conceivable that an open vote could produce a Clinton victory. "Then, the decision comes down to the superdelegates. I have no Idea what they are going to do six weeks from now."

Feldman declined to say how much the group has raised, or who the donors are - "We can't disclose that information" - although he acknowledged that the 527 organization will soon have to report that data to the IRS. She said the largest donation so far is $5,000.

The Denver Group is not committed to any candidate, Feldman said, although the organization's web site, and the links provided at the site, suggest a decisive tilt toward Clinton and, in some cases, intense animosity to Obama.

Rubin, for example, writes not only on the Denver Group site, but also on Tom In Paine. There, the lead piece by Rubin is titled "The New Obama, The New Nixon and The Same Old New York Times." Rubin writes, "The analogy of Obama to Nixon is valid from many different points of view since a case can be made that Obama is the most underhanded and dishonest politician since Nixon."

Spokesfolk for the Obama campaign declined to comment on the Denver Group. It should not be confused with "Unconventional Denver," a separate anarchist organization pledged to disrupt activities at the Democratic convention. "We don't want history to remember the Democratic National Convention in Denver as something that went smoothly," Tim Simons of Unconventional Denver told the Denver Post, "We want people to know there was dissent and people spoke up."

The ad in the Chicago Tribune:

Comments

[Trinidad707]

If the Obamabots are so sure their presumpive candidate will win, why do they fight and say the awful things about Hillary; they must be worried about something

[condew]

I hear Bosnian Sniper Fire, quick, crawl back into your hole.

Hillary told bald-faced lies, on numerous occasions, and they were easily refuted by video.

That is the chief reason she is no longer a viable candidate, and as VP would be a drag on the Obama campaign.

[paulbikes]

Not news,

There will be a roll call. For a host of reasons Obama will win it, and on to the white house.
These guys are just saying that they want a real roll call, no big deal.

Check out Hillaryis44.com , now that is some funny stuff.

[kcmookie]

lhurley PLEASE SPARE US. I can name an Obama accomplishment, it is the only one that matters at this point in time, he BEAT your candidate. You want someone to explain to you why they support Obama, without trashing on Hillary, and yet you take broad swipes at Obama in most of your posts. Other Obama supporters have pointed you to his website to answer any questions you might have, and you dismiss it off the cuff.
I support Obama because he represents common sense, which in and of itself is CHANGE in our political system.
Regarding your question about FISA, Why is it an issue for you? That the telecom industry big wigs have been insulated from criminal prosecution? If you were a bigwig at the telecoms and the gov't came and told you to turn over files and you did, wouldn't it be ridiculous for that very same gov't to come back and press charges against you when all you did was what they asked you to do? The issue is a little broader then that, but in a nutshell that is where the COMMON SENSE comes into play. So stop ranting about Hillary, go pay her debt or take your pantsuit over to the Republican side, because honestly based on the way you have attempted to dominate this message board, that is what you already appear to be. Please just go away, Hillary needs help retiring her debt, maybe you could volunteer your time and efforts there.

[lhurley3171]

I've already given as much as can to pay Hillary's debt.

FISA is an issue for me because I believe the president should not be able to get warrants to spy on people without cause. The telecom immunity wasn't as important as the 4th amendment which protects us from illegal search.

I don't wear pantsuits, most of the time you can find me wearing scrubs.

If you are willing to push us into the republican party, how do you expect to win in November?

I just want an honest roll call, like we have had for many years, is that to much to ask for?

[kcmookie]

FISA is a non-issue once Bush is removed from office, and I hope he is criminally held accountable for the things he has done, including the abuse of FISA. But holding the telecom industry responsible for the actions of a governments abuse of power is a bit ridiculous, and using it as a defining statement against Obama is equally the same. We actually agree regarding the 4th amendment.
Pantsuit, scrub same difference, one is polyester and one is cotton.
Who is this US you speak of? Those foolish enough to vote for McCain? I actually credit you with a broader intelligence then that if you liked Hillary (whom I would have voted for). I am simply tired of her supporters demanding this and demanding that from Obama and his supporters It shows a classless refusal to accept her defeat.
You have been demanding a lot more then an honest roll call with your postings. If that is standard then I see no reason to believe anything other then that would happen, believing tha Obama would attempt to change anything like that without some type of verifiable knowledge is a bit like falling for the bait. Do you really believe he would attempt a weak move like that? He beat her when and where it counted, only her supporters believe something is still going on.
So join our team, or join the other team, the choice is yours, but quit acting like Obama or his supporters owe you anything.

[lhurley3171]

I will only be able to be brought into the Obama camp if you can answer these questions:

-Why are you afraid of the roll call? The same roll call we have had for a long time? Why is the roll call bad?

-Why can you not give me positive comment in support of Sen.Obama that does not mention anyone but him and his accomplishments. I have given you several about my support.

-Why do you let democratic party leaders contantly cave to republicans? I thought you wanted the new transendant politics. Why aren't you hopping mad at Sen.Obama's FISA cave-in? Now he is just a normal pandering politician. We tried to warn you, we told you he would cave under pressure. He couldn't even answer an off the cuff question without sputtering. Maybe that is why you can't answer my questions, because Obama hasn't given you any answers.

[iLogos]

It isn't a case of can't, it is a case of won't... if you can't bother to actually do the simplest research, you have shown any inclination to accept that your candidate has lost, nor have you attempted to educate yourself about Sen. Obama early on to help you choose your candidate.

The rest of us are too busy trying to get him elected to refight a battle we have already won.

[AliHajiSheik]

It is time for these so called pumas to just don the floppy shoes, the novelty lapel corsage, the red nose, the facepaint and the colorfull jumpsuits, since you are clearly just a bunch of clowns.

Move on with your lives.

[lhurley3171]

That's nice. You all are such a crack-up. You can't even tell us what Obama has acheived. I have stated mine. Seems like a fair exchange in the name of unity.

[AliHajiSheik]

I don't think you understand how this works. The time for selling your candidates accomplishments, or in Hillary's case spewing divisive invective and spreading troubling innuendo, is over. Obama won, there will be no do-over. Sales pitch season is over.

People lose elections and primaries sometimes, and their supporters kind of have to "get over it".

[Linda Bergthold - Huffpost Blogger]

I am interested in the views of the Huffington Post readers as to the reasons why some of the Hillary supporters are still so angry, so oppositional, and so willing to keep this fight going. If you have ideas or theories, please share them in comments to my recent post - The Selfish Gene - Part 2 - here on the Huffington Post. As I note in the post, I am not interested in Clinton bashing but in thoughtful ideas about what keeps the hostility going at this point.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/linda-bergthold/the-selfish-gene-part-2_b_112343.html

[patmancando]

Part 2

BTW: Sekoff can delete this, as he usually does, but that promotes censorship and eliminating of exchange of ideas. How can one get over it if you can't even discuss feelings in a civil manner?

[JanetE]

Ha ha ha ha ha .............. these posts below mine here are so funny!

People actually blaming Hillary for the drop in support for Obama! It is not a coincidence that the spread between McCain and Obama went from 15 points to 4 points in the past two weeks which are the same two weeks during which Obama has changed his mind on many of his key issues that all YOU guys gave him money for.

People saying "Tonya Harding" as if Clinton is the one who started PUMA! (Nope, they are a few thousand of the 18 million who voted for her).

The last one I just read (LOL) was that Hillary had something to do with the New Yorker cartoon cover!
Ha ha ha ha ha ha. OPEN YOUR EYES, GUYS!

[condew]

Every time Obama uses part of a major speech to extend an olive branch to Hillary, he weakens the speech and gives up an opportunity to appeal to other voters or expand on his issues and policies.

Every time Obama helps Hillary raise money to repay the debt incurred in the 3 months she campaigned after it was clear she lost, this is energy and money sapped from the Obama campaign.

Every time McCain uses a line of attack that Hillary originated, Hillary's treachery continues to do damage.

Obama did not get 3 months to reorganize his campaign from the primary fight to the general election fight because Hillary would not admit she lost and become a team player.

Yes, if Democrats do not prevail in this election, Hillary owns the loss. She has caused millions in Democratic contributions to be squandered on an internal battle that proved nothing, and she remains a divisive figure more concerned about her money and her future than she is about the Democratic party and the country's future.

[CaptainVideo]

Obama supporters should not send Hillary any money to help pay off her debts until she first releases her delegates and agrees not to have her name put into nomination in Denver. He failure to do so helps maintain the divisiveness in the Democratic party.

[dreffein]

Obama supporters have sent less than $100,000. HRC does not need your money - her debt is paid. Her name should be put in nomination - just as it has been done in the past for members of the old boy's club. It is an historic event for women and we should be able to celebrate this milestone.

[condew]

How do you keep track of what money came from Obama supporters? Sounds like more Hillary math to me. Certainly $100,000 is a WAG, real totals don't end in 5 zeros.

[JanetE]

I'm back reading this again and all I keep reading are Obamakins NOT wanting Hillary's name up for voting at the convention. NO! NO! NO!

and I ask WHY NOT??? What in the world are you so afraid of? Since you think Obama is king of the world and you hate Hillary so much, wouldn't you just be so happy to watch her lose AGAIN??????

Or are you afraid that THIS time she would win?
I don't get it.

[dreffein]

JanetE - and what everyone seems to overlook is that this is an historic moment for women. HRC achieved more than any other female candidate. It's an achievement that women should be allowed to celebrate (and anyone else that was part of her historic accomplishments). If she were a man, like in past conventions, this wouldn't even be an issue.

[iLogos]

If she was not a Clinton she would have been forced out of the nomination process after Feb.

If she was not a Clinton who had run a campaign in that manner she would have been forced out in April.

If she was not a Clinton who had made statements about character and race rather than policy she would never have been entertained as a VP candidate.

If she was not a Clinton who created this much division through word, action, surrogate, and inaction she would not have her name read at the convention.

Personally I'm fine with it... but lets be honest here, she got where she is now as a candidate and received the charity and special treatment she did because she was married to Pres. Bill Clinton.

[CaptainVideo]

Hillary has lost, it is time Hillary bitter enders accept that fact and get with the program.

Putting Hillary's name up for nomination will simply serve to keep the Democratic party divided.

[pleeezzze]

You and your ILK are the ones who have succeded in the division and I might add ,continue to do so .
Why are you so willing to see the Dems lose ? That will be the only thing accomplished by the H bashing . She has a perfect right to be on the ballot , and to have a place at the "Dem" convention ,not the "O BAMA" convention .

[JC1c1]

Why is this even newsworthy? It is not going to happen, and frankly it looks kind of sad and pathetic. She lost, sorry, but she did. I know some may not like it, but it is the truth.

If it were not for groups like this, she may have had a chance at VP, now it is not going to happen.

The only ones who get anything from this are McCain, and his campaign, hmmmmmmmmmmm

[lhurley3171]

For Hillary Clinton, former first lady, and a US Senator with twice the senatoral experience as Sen.Obama to serve him as VP would be completely degrading to women, and would prove that the glass elevator does exist. If you don't know what that is look it up on wikipedia. There is no way I want a failing Obama presidency to tarnish Sen.Clinton.

[condew]

Hillary's offer to allow Obama to be her VP when he was winning was a complement? Sounded like "Driving Miss Daisy" to me.

[lhurley3171]

Okay guys, I will still try to get a positive comment out of you in support of Sen.Obama that does not mention anyone but him, and his accomplishments.

Here are some examples:

"Hillary's healthcare plan will help prevent emergency room closings and 3-7 hour wait times in the ER. These issues are due to the 50 million uninsured patients that they are required to serve."

"I support Hillary Clinton because she has been a vocal supporter of progressive causes for 35 years. When she was first lady she helped to pass health insurance for children, and she was the major force behind implementing that law accross the US . Her record in the senate is exemplary. She has been the sponsor of 19 bills that were signed into law by our republican president.

Source of the number of bills signed by Bush: http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/substance_abuse.html

Source for childrens health care: http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/giving_hillary_credit_for_schip.html"

I know you guys can do it. You are Sen.Obama's biggest fans. You must know something that I don't about his legislative accompishments.

[jkminwa]

lhurley3171 - I'm not sure why we're still having this discussion...you should have been participating on the blogs back before Obama won the nomination. Back then, HRC supporters believed the best campaign strategy was to malign Obama and cry foul whenever anyone questioned Hillary's qualifications for President. I also don't understand why legislative accomplishments are all that relevant, since the President is not a legislator. One can look to voting records as an indication of a candidate's positions, but Presidential candidates must appeal to voters across the nation, so past votes for a district or state may not be representative of current policy positions. Neither Senator can claim a major coup in the Senate (look at the list in the FactCheck citation), which is understandable because both have been in office when Republicans ruled a scorched earth.

You cite healthcare (and only healthcare) as a reason to support HRC. Hillary is strong on healthcare, and the provision of healthcare to all Americans is an increasingly important issue. That is why I am glad she will be in the Senate, where she lead the charge to pass the best possible healthcare legislation. She lost my support for President when she decided a woman had to look, talk and vote tough to be elected President. First, she voted to give Bush authority to wage war on the wrong country; years later, after the Iraq debacle had completely unfolded, she said she'd annihilate Iran. IMO, she made a mistake equating tough and strong.

[Mattjoe]

Economy, Fuel, Darfur, Iraq, environment, impeachment etc.

No, no . . DNC disruption a cause? a mere footnote to the appendices of the 2008 election. This is newsworthy? this is cause? YOUR contribution, your progress?

PUMA (Party of Unalleviated Moronic Aspirations)

Perhaps you'll even maintain a Republican regime.

You must be so proud.

[lhurley3171]

And you wonder why we don't want to unify.

The process is flawed, it is against the very nature of the democratic party. For me, if Obama can win without a set-up at the convention, it would go a long way towards healing and then winning in November. Voting for Sen.Obama as things currently stand would be justifying a process that is not only anti-democratic but anti-American.

It would be giving up everything I love about the democratic party.

[theMightyT]

I wonder if you would be saying this if hillary had won.

Somehow i doubt it.

[jkminwa]

I'm confused - how is it that a vote at the convention would be MORE democratic than the primaries and caucuses that already occurred? He won, in accordance with the rules that he AND Hillary accepted, back when Hillary expected to be the nominee by Super Tuesday. In order for HRC to win, either superdelegates would have to switch their allegiance, or pledged delegates, who were selected on the basis of actually voting, would have to switch their allegiance. That, my dear, would be a set-up.

My question for you is, how long have you been involved in the Democratic Party? Because the Democratic Party has used this system -- a mixture of caucuses and primaries, IA and NH first, candidates sometimes being selected before all states have cast their ballots (without states trying to move their primaries into the year preceding the elections, of course) since 1972.

[iLogos]

What I find amusing is ignorant posts like this... every argument about why this is unfair (both here on HuffPo and those made by Sen. Cliton before she accepted defeat) ignore that Sen. Obama won using a modern approach to Pres. Bill Clinton's own campaign. He campaigned heavily in the South, in Middle America, and especially in caucus states. With out the proportionate system, caucuses, or delegate/super-delegate system, he would not have been elected president and Sen. Clinton would likely still be just an ex-first lady from a state in the south most Americans can't find on a map.

It is a perfectly democratic process because it was voted on decades ago, all parties had the rules going in, and th eonly times the rules changed it was to help the person who had numerically already lost the election.

You are still angry, still hurt, still bitter. Fine I get that, but at some point you need to put away your hurt feelings, stop lying to yourself and take a good honest look at the process, realize why and how Sen. Obama won, and what it may mean if you don't engage and support the Democratic party as led by Sen. Obama.

[StrangerSearching]

For the love of God.

[pupbayer]

I still have not seen an answer to the question of why Hillary Clinton should not be on the first ballot at the convention. Donna Brazile says she has more than enough delegates to be on the ballot. For decades, more than one candidate's name has been on the first ballot often as a symbolic gesture. It has never been a problem before. Now that Obama is "leader" of the Democratic Party, it is a problem. Why?

[kcmookie]

Can you factually VERIFY that Obama's team has requested her name not be on the ballot, or are you just spewing hearsay as it so often happens? Therein lies the faulty belief in something in an attempt to have Obama's name dragged thru the mud. Anyone please? Point me to where this little factoid is, anyone?

[lhurley3171]

Are you kidding Donna "I'll quit the party if the superdelegates decide the nominee" Brazile just last week was giving an interview on the very subject of the roll call, and how roll calls are just for show, and it would be up to Sen.Obama to dictate the show of unity at the nomination. Is that what we democrats are, a show?

[pupbayer]

There's been a little too much smoke for there not to be a fire. It's not like he really ever comes out and says anything. He likes to do everything behind closed doors. We're just being proactive.

So what is your valid reason that she should not be on the ballot or are you saying you think she should?

[ivorytower54]

b/c it gives her supporters an official "never say die" reason to keep attacking Obama. The only way for them to succeed is to bring him down. That plays right into the GOP's hands!

[dreffein]

IvoryTower - did you ever stop to think that for women, HRC's run was historic and should be celebrated as an achievement for all women? That's why she should be on the first ballot - just like so many Democratic members of the old boy's club have been in past conventions..

[pupbayer]

I'm sorry. I should have been more clear. I want a VALID reason not some silly, immature, made up reason. My bad.