HuffPo: Clinton WILL use 'Nuclear Option'

It's no longer speculation, but official: Hillary's quest for the nomination and the destruction of all who oppose her will not be limited in any way by grace or party unity:

Hillary Clinton's campaign today acknowledged plans to try to win seating of the disputed Michigan and Florida delegations to the Democratic National Convention at a meeting of the party's Rules and Bylaws Committee on May 31.

In a statement issued in response to a story on The Huffington Post ("Clinton Camp Considering Nuclear Option," see below), the campaign declared:

"There is no secret plan.... The Clinton campaign has been vocal in stating that the votes of 2.5 million people must be respected. Hardly a day goes by when a Clinton official doesn't publicly declare that the votes of Michigan and Florida count and that the delegations from those states should be seated."

The campaign's public assertions stand in contrast to its response to inquiries prior to publication of the story. At that point, Clinton aides insisted on keeping all comments either off the record or on deep background, or did not respond to questions at all. The campaign statement appeared to be designed to try to reduce the significance of the story.

In a more typical reaction to the story, political analyst Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia said: "Wow. The nuclear option will yield nuclear winter for the Democratic Party."

Wow. Superdelegates, the party leadership, Governor Dean, I beg you: Stop this train before it derails into the Grand Canyon.

She's taking the party and the country down with her. Please, please stop this madness.

•  Tip Jar

  Please kill me if this happens...

  by jkennerl on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:17:34 AM PDT

  •  It ain't "breaking" if it's been posted on HuffPo

    .... since this morning, and then mulitiple diaries show up here saying the same thing.  

    If there is anyone in the United States and territories whom didn't know that she was going to try to seat FL and MI,  please just drop them off at the nearest day care center.

    by AmericanRiverCanyon on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:27:46 AM PDT

    •  Dean will stop the madness

      He has worked too hard for the party to see one person, even one who thinks she is "owed" these delegates, ruin his hard work in party building.

      by MD patriot on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:30:06 AM PDT

•  From the HuffPo graphic,

  It looks like she plans to nuke Florida and Michigan.

  In all seriousness, for this plan to work she'd need Dean to sign off on it. And Dean knows it would be the party's death warrant, so he won't do that. Maybe if McAliffe were still in charge, but you can thank your fair and balanced stars he ain't.

  by droogie6655321 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:19:12 AM PDT

  •  Does she have the votes already?

    Why would Dean matter?

    And if I were him, I would change the committee now and stack it with people who will follow the rules.

    by jkennerl on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:20:24 AM PDT

    •  asdf

      For the scenario to work, then, Dean would have to be convinced of Clinton's superior viability in the general election, and that she has a strong chance of defeating McCain next November.

      Dean appointed the majority of the people on the rules committee. They'd basically be going back on rules that they helped write, and that Dean himself supports. It's extremely unlikely.

      Clinton "going nuclear" in this way is like me saying I can nuke you with a handful of uranium ore. It would take a lot more resources than Clinton has at her disposal.

      by droogie6655321 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:24:04 AM PDT

      •  That quote refers

        to the Credentials Committee of the convention, not the rules committee of the DNC, which set the delegate selection rules for the convention. (Confusing, I know.)  The rules committee is, I think, already set. The make-up of the convention credentials committee is decided based on primary/caucus results (which I think is kind of screwy, but thems the rules).

        The meeting at the end of this month is a meeting of the rules committee of the DNC, which will have to overturn the rules that they themselves wrote in order for this to work.

        by yellowdog on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:39:52 AM PDT

        •  That's what I meant to say

          They won't overturn the rules that they came up with.

          by droogie6655321 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:41:38 AM PDT

  •  I don't think Gov. Dean wants

    to see Chicago-1968 demonstrations at the Democratic convention, because that's what would happen.

    It would be a disaster for the Democrats (and for democracy), and Gov. Dean will not let it occur.

    by A Mad Mad World on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:21:23 AM PDT

  •  Depends on the Credentials Committee

    I think they vote on it.  I don't think Dean can do anything about it at that stage.  

    The supers can.  Now.  Because if she gets those delegates seated as is, the party will implode.  Because then it WILL be the party's fault, complicit with Hillary.  

    The party fucking falls apart.  

    by 57andFemale on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:21:28 AM PDT

  •  Let's just nuke Florida.

    KIDDING!! Or am I? YES I AM! But what if Im not?

    by ablington on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:24:08 AM PDT

    •  I think the term is "obliterate" n/t

      by A Mad Mad World on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:25:18 AM PDT

  •  She probably does. n/t

    by Muzikal203 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:29:30 AM PDT

  •  She doesn't need Dean

    She has a majority, or close to it, on the Rules and Bylaws Committee.

    by Angry White Democrat on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:35:52 AM PDT

•  But it's her turn. (n/t)

  by jkddude on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:19:18 AM PDT

•  There have been about 5 diaries on this today

  by atlliberal on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:20:45 AM PDT

  •  Yeah, but

    if feels so good to dump on this over and over again.

    Clinton is rapidly becoming Lieberman.

    by A Mad Mad World on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:22:45 AM PDT

    •  No, this would be

      Cheneyesque.

      by ratador on Mon May 05, 2008 at 12:47:06 PM PDT

•  If anything

  This ought to convince the remaining Supers that #1 Clinton is insane, and #2 that she's thrown all of these silly rules to the wind and is ready to do whatever it takes.

  Time to declare, Supers, and get this thing over with.  Jesus!

  by slippytoad on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:20:50 AM PDT

•  Also via Huffington Post

  here. Clinton said in 2005 that we need agrees with McCain and we need to stay in Iraq.

  "Senator McCain made the point earlier today, which I agree with, and that is, it's not so much a question of time when it comes to American military presence for the average American; I include myself in this. But it is a question of casualties," said Clinton. "We don't want to see our young men and women dying and suffering these grievous injuries that so many of them have. We've been in South Korea for 50-plus years. We've been in Europe for 50-plus. We're still in Okinawa with respect to protection there coming out of World War II."

  by Robinson Eaton on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:21:12 AM PDT

  •  HRC = McBush on obliterating countries

    Just as long as they can be viewed as "others", HRC and bomby McBush agree on wiping them out at the slightest made-up provocation.

    by MD patriot on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:32:12 AM PDT

•  Howard Dean

  even said they'll be seated on an interview a few days ago.  However, he didn't say how they will be seated.  In other words, I wouldn't panic about this.  There will be some distribution that hasn't been stolen by her.

  by nolalily on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:21:28 AM PDT

  •  If they're split, she's done.

    Her strategy relied on a) destroying Obama with smears and b) getting all of MI and FL delegates counted as hers.  So far, a) has only served to drive up her own negatives and turn the black electorate, which was half in her camp at the start of the primaries, almost totally against her to the point where they might not vote for her in November should she "win" the nomination in this sleazy a way.

    by Phoenix Woman on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:24:56 AM PDT

    •  She's been done, waiting for Deus ex Machina

      .... the "God in the Box" to extend the big shepard's hook fr behind the velvet curtains, and pull her off the stage .

      by AmericanRiverCanyon on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:33:15 AM PDT

  •  Even Obama today said he supports

    seating the delegates in a way that is "fair". Don't worry people, it's under control.

    by dagnabbit on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:27:45 AM PDT

•  The entire article paints a bleaker picture

  This will not happen.

  by Dartagnan on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:22:11 AM PDT

•  Breaking, Broke, and Broken. n/t

  by Kab ibn al Ashraf on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:24:13 AM PDT

  •  Changed the heading

    But I wasn't aware that there was confirmation of the strategy until today.

    by jkennerl on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:28:57 AM PDT

    •  Of course my words also refer to her strategy!

      by Kab ibn al Ashraf on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:30:18 AM PDT

      •  her strategy stinks, as usual

        Look, this only works if she controls a majority of delegates (pledged and super) at the convention. She won't.

        Case closed.

        by elmo on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:54:47 AM PDT

•  Not Breaking, Not News: We've Known This

  Since the MATH became impossible for her, like since Wisconsin.

  by SteamPunkX on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:24:37 AM PDT

  •  Not exactly

    At that point, it was speculation that she would try this. Today, they got confirmation.

    by jkennerl on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:26:58 AM PDT

    •  "Confirmation"?!

      Um, anyone who has been listening to them and/or looked at the numbers has known that this was their only option for awhile now. It's why their campaign went "meta" after Tx/Oh: they had to keep explaining why they were in the race without actually saying "we're going to steal it."

      by SteamPunkX on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:29:05 AM PDT

      •  I guess some (including myself)

        speculated that she wouldn't do it if Obama took 2025. Perhaps I thought wrong.

        by jkennerl on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:30:14 AM PDT

        •  It came down to simple if then statements

          and there came a point where there was no logical reason to be running unless you planned to steal it.  

          The fix has been in for awhile.

          by SteamPunkX on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:31:53 AM PDT

          •  Yep.

            by Drew J Jones on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:50:09 AM PDT

•  Guess we'll have to go nuclear on her!

  Suggestions (in a non-life threatening way, of couse). We might just truly and for once destroy her career?

  by goofygringirl on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:26:54 AM PDT

•  don't give huffpost more trafic

  it only helps Arianna's pocket

  by chimaeranyc on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:27:04 AM PDT

•  repeat after me

  "The Clinton campaign is putting this out there to perpetuate the false meme that they would be in the lead if Florida and Michigan were counted."

  This is not true.

  However, the NUCLEAR OPTION is a sensational enough buzzword to encourage reporters to perpetuate this B.S. anyway.

  Clinton is still amost 100 pledged delegates behind if FL and MI are counted.

  There is no possibility that Dean will defer to their will when determining who will be on the credentials committee.

  This is why they wanted Harold Ford as head of the DNC.

  Sucks for them.

  It's over.

  by Stroszek on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:27:59 AM PDT

  •  They're trying to change the minds of

    any voters in Indiana and North Carolina who might decide to give Obama their vote instead of her simply because they believe she really doesn't stand a chance.

    Nuclear option = Chance.

    by Shelley99 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:43:18 AM PDT

  •  the post is factually inaccurate, also

    The Credentials Committee members to be appointed by Dean have already been appointed (25 of them). The balance are determined roughly in proportion to the earned delegates (advantage Obama).

    Even if Hillary wangles a minority report out of the Credentials Committee, the convention as a whole votes on it. If Obama controls a majority of earned and superdelegates (as we expect), then the floor vote isn't going to be a problem.

    It all boils down, as it always had boils down, to winning enough superdelegates to go over the 2025 mark.

    by elmo on Mon May 05, 2008 at 12:03:58 PM PDT

  •  I hate the term "nuclear option"

    I hated it when they talked about it in the Senate, and I hate it in this concept.  Nuclear Option to me means something that is related to the use of Nuclear Weapons in warfare (or peace-fare, or whatever the hell we are in these days).  Just an observation -- the indiscriminate use of this term is really disturbing to me.

    by annetteboardman on Mon May 05, 2008 at 12:39:37 PM PDT

•  You know what, at this point I don't even care.

  If the credentials committee or the super delegates give this thing to Clinton, the democratic party will be screwed for at least the next 20 year or so.

  by Muzikal203 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:28:40 AM PDT

•  Someone explain - how is this nuclear

  The only way I can figure that this will be destructive is if she expects to get all the delegates from these two states.

  Which seems laughable.

  Otherwise, split proportionally or in half, it seems like Obama will still be ahead.

  by BrighidG on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:30:14 AM PDT

•  Nuclear Attack on the Democrat Party

  Demands Oblideration of the Clinton Campaign.

  Make the DLC Radioactive for a generation. It's the next necessary step.

  by greenskeeper on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:31:44 AM PDT

•  If she does this

  things are going to get really ugly, and fast.

  However, I put at least some of the blame on Obama for this situation. He should have gotten out in front on the issue of Florida and Michigan a long time ago. If he'd gotten out there in public with a reasonable compromise (and 50-50 isn't a reasonable compromise), he'd be in a much better position on this. Letting it lie fallow for so long has left him vulnerable to shenanigans like this.

  by Angry White Democrat on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:42:56 AM PDT

•  There is a zombie movie in all of this

  The Unkillable Candidate

  Shriek as she savages the democratic process!

  Scream as she makes an unholy alliance with the Army of the Repugs!

  Cower as she survives bullets, a stake to the heart, and even high negative polls!

  There will not be a voter standing in the theater by the end of this show!

  by A Mad Mad World on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:43:10 AM PDT

•  Whatever.

  As long as she doesn't plan to go NOOK-U-LAR.

  by Clyde the Cat on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:43:29 AM PDT

•  No kidding.

  Look, kids, did anyone with an IQ above 40 doubt she'd try to do this?  I have no idea if she can realistically expect to, but this is an obvious one.

  One of these days, people are going to wise up and listen to those of us who have been shouting that the Clintons will screw everybody, either stealing the nod or destroying Obama's chances in November.  For now, though, most people seem to be living with the fantasy that the Nut Case is still a good Dem and not, well, a nut case.  And, to those folks, I say that I've got some fabulous mortgage-backed securities to offer you.

  Stupid.

  by Drew J Jones on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:44:02 AM PDT

•  Just a thought...

  From everything I've seen both on Repub sites and Demo sites, it seems to me that something is further up since no one really seems to understand why Hillary is doing this.  So here's a thought that's been playing in my mind.  We all know the Clinton's are politically savvy.  We also know that originally Hillary was Republican before marrying Billyboy.  Her campaign against a fellow Democrat has reeked of Republican attacks, to the point of the Republican's damn near embracing her as one of their own.  Soooo, what if her plan is to run this nuclear option within the DNC, and if she loses the nom then she can legitimately leave the Democratic party.  But she'd ONLY do this if Obama won the GE (as we've seen, very rarely do the Clinton's ever support their downstream Dem's unless there's something in it for them, so I won't hold my breath for her to help Obama if she loses the nom).  If Obama wins, she'll leave the Dem party to run against him in 2012, if he loses the GE, then she runs against McCain in 2012.  If she doesn't lose the nom, then she gets to run for president, any way you look at it from a Clinton perspective, she wins.  

  The ONLY losing scenario for her is to lose the GE in any of those instances.

  by That Crazy Mom Over There on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:50:39 AM PDT

  •  Idiotic

    Stop drinking the koolaid.

    by paulmi on Mon May 05, 2008 at 12:27:14 PM PDT

•  This would be political death

  to anyone involved in this slight of hand, not to mention the death of the party, the loss of the Congress and the loss of the future.  Somebody better wise up.

  by ratador on Mon May 05, 2008 at 12:43:16 PM PDT