Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

BREAKING: LA Times: Clinton may lose key supporters soon

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Douglas Carpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 03:42 AM
Original message
BREAKING: LA Times: Clinton may lose key supporters soon
link to full Article:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-dems2-2008jun02,0,2336476.story?page=1

"WASHINGTON -- Pointing the way to a peaceful end for the tumultuous presidential primary campaign, some key supporters of Hillary Rodham Clinton said Sunday that they accepted a new finish line in the race for delegates, a threshold Barack Obama could reach as soon as this week."

snip:"Moreover, a number of Clinton backers signaled Sunday that they were wary of the kind of protracted fight that some of her aides said they might wage in the coming months.

"It would be most beneficial if we resolved this nomination sooner rather than later," said U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, a high-profile superdelegate who backs Clinton. "The more time we have to get through a general-election period and the more time we have to prepare in advance of the convention, the better."

snip:""She'll do the right thing for America, and I don't think we're going to fight this at the convention," said Pennsylvania Gov. Edward G. Rendell, a top Clinton supporter and party superdelegate, speaking on CBS. "Because even were we to win it, unless it's going to change enough delegates for Sen. Clinton to get the nomination, then it would be a fight that would have no purpose."

Alice Huffman, a member of the rules panel and a superdelegate committed to Clinton, said she would not support an appeal if Obama had clearly won the delegate fight."


snip:"Clinton picked up just 24 more pledged delegates than Obama from the two states. Even with Clinton's decisive win in Puerto Rico, Obama is now within 47 delegates of victory. Clinton needs 202.5.

A top Obama advisor, former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.), said Sunday on NBC that the campaign expected superdelegates to come forward for Obama in the coming days. Referring to the 2,118 goal, Daschle added, "you're going to see, at the end of this week, a definitive moment . . . where he will have surpassed that number."

link to full Article:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-dems2-2008jun02,0,2336476.story?page=1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 03:55 AM
Response to Original message
1. She sure has lost this cowboy...
I just don't like the way she is doing what she is doing, and I no longer look upon her with favor or even much respect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MagickMuffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 03:56 AM
Response to Original message
2. Hopefully some more SD's will start coming out today and tomorrow
That should give Obama the nom.

:kick: & RRRRRRRRR



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Douglas Carpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 04:03 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. I think we will see a trickle through Tuesday and a flood starting Wednesday and/or Thursday
Edited on Mon Jun-02-08 04:06 AM by Douglas Carpenter
once Sen. Obama secures the 46 additional delegates...things will almost certainly start moving really fast. Most Clinton supper delegates are simply not going to stay on board the Titanic. That's not going to happen.

thanks for the recommend
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cyclezealot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 04:06 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Did that not start a couple days ago
with George McGovern's switch from Clinton to Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Douglas Carpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 04:13 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. actually Sen. McGovern changed his endorsement a couple of weeks back
Edited on Mon Jun-02-08 04:19 AM by Douglas Carpenter
although. I do not believe he is a supper delegate, although he is absolutely loved and adored among Democrats in his native South Dakota -- and his word still counts for a lot among people who entered politics with his campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anniebelle Donating Member (701 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 05:32 AM
Response to Original message
6. Saddens me to see our party in this disarray.
When this started, I had such high hopes for '08. What a field of candidates we had. Although I supported Edwards until he dropped out, I still thought any one of our candidates has so much to offer. I will have to say I have lost respect for both Clintons, I'm not sure I could ever trust them again. I will have to say, I think most of the rancor has been enhanced by the media and the rightwing bots. That's something we are going to have to deal with in a HUGE way no matter who our candidate is. We see how they can take a speck or doubt and turn it into a nonstop loop on their ridiculous 24/7 'coverage'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Douglas Carpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 05:49 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. I only considered myself an Obama a couple of weeks ago - He was not my first choice
And I agree with you about the Clinton's. I had defended them so much for so long and got so good at it - that I almost had myself convinced.

I am truly saddened to see that they appear willing to harm the Democratic Party and the risk of losing the general election.

I don't think Sen. Obama is the greatest thing in the world. I don't doubt but what there are perfectly rational criticisms. But it is NOW time to rally behind our candidate and organize for victory in November

I actually partly owe it to former Sen. George McGovern who had previously endorsed Sen. Clinton partly out of a a very long friendship going back to when Bill and Hillary had worked for him during his 1972 campaign.

When he changed his endorsement to Sen. Obama because it became clear to him that Sen. Obama had become the inevitable nominee. And he likened the games being played by the Clinton campaign with Michigan and Florida to the way the Humphrey campaign in 1972 tried to change the rules that they had previously agreed to (just like the Clinton campaign).

He recalled how this sent his campaign into total disarray and was a major reason for a mess of a convention and the inability to plan things like vetting a credible Vice Presidential candidate and organizing their fall campaign.

Sen. McGovern changed his endorsement to Sen. Obama because he does not want anyone to be put through that.

Of course it is different now. In 1972 the reelection of Richard Nixon was probably inevitable. In 2008 we have every conceivable advantage.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redstate_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #8
22. Many similarities indeed



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dems_rightnow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 07:39 AM
Response to Reply #6
13. I don't think the party is in any danger.
Seriously, I believe Hillary will do the right thing, and this will come together nicely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Douglas Carpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 07:46 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. I actually think you are "probably" right
Edited on Mon Jun-02-08 08:00 AM by Douglas Carpenter
I was watching on the BBC World Service a week back and they were interviewing someone who once worked as a fairly senior aid in the Clinton White House and now works for the Center for American Progress.

Her comment was that the Clinton's have spent their entire political life always, hearing, "it's over." "it's over," and they always managed a comeback. Now it's just really difficult for them to handle the fact that this time is different. It REALLY is over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Window Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 08:39 AM
Response to Reply #14
20. That really makes a lot of sense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MindMatter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 07:50 AM
Response to Reply #6
15. The way this played out is a solid ending
Obama's concessions on FL and MI resolve that issue as fairly as anyone could expect. And despite that, he will end up with a very decisive win. This race has not been as close as the media has portrayed it. Anybody but Hillary would have bowed out gracefully months ago. It only appears close because she has remained obstinate and Obama has made the strategic decision not to campaign against her. That cost him 100 delegates or more, but was the right decision.

There are a very small number of really stupid, insane people supporting Hillary very vocally. That includes the DLCers who are at a dead end in their careers. And it includes the very small number of agitators from the Hillaryis44 camp. There's not a real Democrat in that entire bunch, so I won't miss them at all.

There are millions of well-meaning Democrats who have supported Hillary, just as many of us supported Edwards or Biden or other candidates. Those folks may be disappointed, but they will see that Obama has won this race decisively, and without dirty tricks and tactics. I expect all of those Hillary supporters will be with us, no matter what Hillary does. If anything, the behavior of people like Ickes, who is representing Hillary personally, is showing Hillary supporters why we must move on together, without her.

It would, obviously, be easier to move on together if Hillary would do the right thing now. But really, our success does not depend on that. In teh end, most of her supporters will not want to wallow in sour grapes with her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 05:49 AM
Response to Original message
7. It was hers to lose
and she has.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Douglas Carpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 06:21 AM
Response to Original message
9. thanks for all the recommends!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
City Lights Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 06:26 AM
Response to Original message
10. Looking forward to that "definitive moment" Daschle described.
:bounce:

Recommended.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Douglas Carpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 07:13 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. I guess at the definitive moment SDs will coming rolling down like mighty waters
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grytpype Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 07:36 AM
Response to Original message
12. It would take more courage for Hillary to quit than to go on.
And that's been true for awhile.

I see a lot of George W. Bush characteristics in Hillary... the sense of entitlement, the refusal to face facts and change course.

She could have gone out with honor and dignity, but she didn't have the guts. Now she is going to be thrown out on her ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seafan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 07:57 AM
Response to Original message
16. I'm hoping that sufficient SDs declare before Tuesday night, then SD/Montana put him over the top.
Edited on Mon Jun-02-08 08:05 AM by seafan
If I were a SD,I wouldn't want to miss the window to nominate Obama. There's bound to be less value in endorsing AFTER he's hit the magic number.

We'll see.


Clinton may lose key supporters soon, LA Times, June 2, 2008

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
powergirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 08:05 AM
Response to Original message
17. Even Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is backing off
I noticed she hasn't been promoting Clinton on TV as much. She was on a news program last week talking about an unrelated issue. Maybe she is now worried about her own political future.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Douglas Carpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 08:23 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. that must take something
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Window Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 08:21 AM
Response to Original message
18. K/R.
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JPZenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 01:52 PM
Response to Original message
21. k and r. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 09:47 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC