Actually, Hillary has this sewn up.
Tue Mar 25, 2008 at 09:13:18 AM PDT
Weeks ago, we found out that Hillary had said that this would be over by February 5. Since Barack Obama has come out ahead in delegates in almost every contest since then, it's hard to imagine why Hillary Clinton still feels the need to be in the race. Let's be honest - if the roles were switched and Barack Obama had lost 30-14 (contests), had fewer delegates, less votes in the popular vote, less money and she had won all over the country - the DNC and everyone would demand that he step back, for the sake of the party.
She gets away with it now and with good reason. Because it was only Senator Clinton who knew, as opposed to Barack or Howard Dean, that any delegate selected in this whole process was open to vote for any candidate. Hell, Mike Gravel might even win this.
While true, pledged delegates can cast their ballot for any candidate they desire - it takes a certain level of audacity to suggest that people selected by the popular vote or caucuses actually switch their vote for you.
Let's play a game:
John W McCain runs, loses the popular vote/states won, yet then mentions in an interview, "Oh I've not given up because in the electoral college, they can vote for whomever they want. I'm not suggesting that they switch, and it may break their state law, but the vote would still count."
Would dKos deal with that calmly or recognize that for the democracy-stealing that it is? In a Newsweek article, we are told that the pledged delegates might switch because they believe that it's the right thing to do.
A "good conscience" reason for a delegate to switch, Ickes told NEWSWEEK, would be if one candidate—such as, say, Clinton—was deemed more "electable."
Finally, I think we should elect Senator Clinton because of her imagination and acrobatics. We all know that she told us (a few times) about sniper fire in Boznia, only to rush out and save a little girl who wouldn't leave her alone with her stupid flowers. On NAFTA, she was against it, she told Ohio, and now we see her White House schedules telling people she was for it - a great job on the balance beam.
In the same interview with the Philadelphia Daily News as she said pledged delegates could switch, she said:
There are different ways to become a delegate, there are delegates from caucuses, there are delegates from primaries, and there are the appointed delegates, they’re all equal, they all have an equal vote – those are the rules of the Democratic Party. Now if you don’t like the rules, change them going forward but those are the rules. And they are there for a purpose, because if you go back and look 30 years ago, people were elected to Congress said, 'Wait a minute, this party is not running winning elections. We need to have a say, with all due respect,' so, they have a say. You know, the goals are very conveniently being interpreted, you know – Michigan shouldn’t count because of the rules and and we shouldn’t count the superdelegates even though the rules...You know, I think that doesn’t make sense.
First - Yay! Caucus states matter. They didn't before.
Second - We should go by the rules we agreed on but we shouldn't follow the rules on Michigan or Florida even though we agreed on them? That is some nice work there, Lou.
So, although Hillary has this sewn up, through whatever rules she agreed to and wants to keep, through the 1600+ delegates Obama has who will certainly vote for her, through all of her imagination about past, present and future roles in the White House - I urge you to make calls, donate money and knock on doors to help get Obama a few more delegates (that will certainly go to Clinton).
Permalink | 15 comments