Hillary supporters - Romney didn't demand coddling by McCain - Why does Hillary?

[sfam]

Just wondering here, but if my memory serves me correctly, Romney didn't continually warn McCain of impending disaster if he didn't coddle Romney's enormously bruised ego on McCain's way to the nomination. Instead, Romney dropped out, enthusiastically embraced McCain and IMMEDIATELY did all that he could to help McCain get elected. This has included numerous fund raisers, statements to the media, etc.

Why is it that Hillary is demanding maximum coddle time? Not only does Obama have to spend a month praising her at every stop (meaning its been clear to all who will win for quite some time), all of her supporters continually are uttering, "Well, that's not really helping to unify us" type statements whenever Obama responds to an attack or makes his case. And by referencing unification in these coddle requests, they are already acknowledging they've lost. Ickes is the latest to do so this weekend. His "taking four delegates is not a way to unify" comment indicates both the he KNOWS Hillary has lost AND that she requires massive coddling.

Why is that? Why is Hillary special - so special that she demands maximum coddle time from Obama and all his supporters? If Hillary was truly interested in the party first in pursuing our REAL goals (winning the GE), wouldn't she at least want to demonstrate the minimal the grace Romney displayed? Why has Hillary positioned herself, and convinced the MSM in the process to DEMAND coddling?

Just wondering...

[KittyWampus]

1. Well, Romney is a Mormon and Hillary is a member of a NeoCon Power Cult.

I really do think Hillary feels entitled to he coronation.

[leftofcool]

2. Hillary asked for coddling? Have a link?

[Waya]

4. Asked for or not.......

....she is getting it. I have never seen so much sugar clowing and catering to the losing Candidate as I have seen this time around.

[sfam]

8. I just gave you one in the OP...but truly there's TONS...and no...

She doesn't use the word "coddling" but its quite clear what she means. This whole issue of unifying is repleat with it. Hillary and her supporters will NOT go to Obama unless he engages is serious coddling. It reached epidemic proportions just a few weeks ago where the MSM was flooded with reports of Hillary supporters saying "Hillary MUST get the VP or else" type comments. That's some MASSIVE coddling.

[Hola]

3. Just to point

even when Romney did that, his supporters didn't fall right into line. AFAIK, one of his sons recently said he wouldn't vote for McCain.

But it's true that many have fallen behind McCain now, this stuff takes time and even with Romney's gracious and early concession it's taken several months for folk to get behind McCain. What will happen with Hillary supporters, I dunno.

[Yotun]

5. Compare with Huckabee.. He at least has the decency no to go negative against the presumptive nomine

of his party. He was clear he was providing a way to present the messages of a certain wing in the party, and was not attacking or pressuring McCain. How low we've fallen when the Republicans are acting more principled than the Democrats.

-PS: Independents are watching.

[sfam]

9. Agreed. Huckabee displayed FAR more grace than Romney...I was looking for a worse case example...

Other than Hillary of course.

[Clovis Sangrail]

6. Romney didn't have the ability to demand it

He was popular among some republicans, but he didn't have much of what could be called a 'fanatical' base.

[sfam]

10. So because Hillary "can" then she "should"?

Huckabee didn't, and he clearly has a base.

[Clovis Sangrail]

11. I didn't say anything about 'should' /nt

[Hugabear]

7. Because Romney has more class than Hillary

He bowed out of the race because party unity was more important to him. Imagine that. Putting party unity first.

True, he really didn't stand much of a chance of winning at that point - but does Hillary now?

[leftofcool]

12. Yea, a repuke with class

why am I not surprised

[DemocratSinceBirth]

16. Did He Have A Lot Of Class When He Attached His Dog To The Roof Of His Car On His MI To Canada Trip?

~

[sfam]

17. Are you suggesting that Hillary is even worse than that?

I don't know that I'd buy that argument if so. In any case, I'm not sure how Romney's dog woes relate to Romney's support of the republican nominee. Could you enlighten me on this?\

EDITED to remove "nt" from title

[DemocratSinceBirth]

19. Did I Strike A Nerve, Sfam?

If you treat your dog like that perhaps you shouldn't own one...





HeeHawHee

[sfam]

20. Sorry, you really lost me. Perhaps you'll elaborate this time...

and answer my question. Or are you going to continue to post nonsensical innuendos?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

22. There's No Such Thing As Stupid Answers, Only Stupid Questions

on edit- Your question is based on a false premise unless you can provide evidence that Hillary Clinton has asked to be coddled... The comparisons with Romney and Huckabee are spurious...You could fit everybody who voted for Romney in the Rose Bowl*...


The only parallel is Ronald Reagan in 1976 who arrived at the Republican Convention with almost as many delegates as Gerald Ford and took his fight to the floor...




*obvious hyperbole

[sfam]

24. Got it...so, no answers. You just wanna spew shit...

Your initial post made no sense as it relates to the question, so your defense is to continue spewing nonsensical shit. I think you've made your point loud and clear. But feel free to follow-up with yet another red herring post. We're all waiting....

[DemocratSinceBirth]

27. Reading Comprehension Is Not Your Forte

Perhaps Santa Claus will leave "Reading Is Fundamental" under your Christmas tree...

[rucky]

18. I'll wait for Hillary's concession speech before I say that.

Romney did bow out gracefully - BECAUSE HE KNEW THAT STAYING IN WOULD HURT HIS PARTY

As for that Hillary concession speech - still waiting.

[Maribelle]

13. Why are you endorsing a republican?

[Hugabear]

14. Oh, the irony of your post is just so rich

Nowhere in that post does the OP actually endorse a repuke, but merely points out that Hillary is acting worse than they are.

Now, contrast that with many of your cohorts who are actively and openly endorsing McCain over Obama.

Why don't you go over to Hillaryclintonforum.com and ask them why THEY are endorsing a republican?

[sfam]

15. exactly...the question is why is Hillary helping the republicans by asking for the coddling...nt

[LowerManhattanite]

23. “Why don't you go over to Hillaryclintonforum.com and ask them why THEY...”

“...are endorsing a republican?”

Go over to?

Second browser window's already opened to the Goddamned home page.

Big bowl o' Grump-Encrusted Bitter Flakes in front of 'em. Now with EXTRA BILE!

[Maribelle]

41. I think you might have missed the irony of my post to begin with

It was in fact dripping

[gal]

36. I think it needs to be pointed out ...

You can say something nice about a human being without endorsing them.

[Maribelle]

42. Yes, I agree totally.

My post was in fact irony, not in accord with the actually information about Romney, but rather to an event regarding Hillary when she made a statement about McCain.

[NashVegas]

21. Did McCain's Surrogates Go On TV and Talk About Magic Underwear?

[Captain Hilts]

25. Romney got stomped. that's why. nt

[SeaLyons]

26. Hillary has not asked to be coddled....

Are you confusing Obama's self serving niceness towards Hillary as coddling? Are you confusing common respect as coddling? Are you so used to Hillary being treated like dirt, that when you hear any degree of kindness, you construe it as coddling????

[sfam]

29. No, I'm talking about the "Make me VP or else", Ickes' comments and all the rest...

Did you hear ANY kind words by McCain to Romney prior to his dropping out? Any at all? In fact its rather normal for candidates to be rather mean to each other. Unfortunately, its also rather normal for candidates to drop out when its clear they cannot win.

Hillary has not done that, even though is been clear to ALL for quite some time that there was no chance. Behind the scenes, her surrogates even admitted after Wisconsin that the chance of Hillary winning was far less than 10%, but they continued. We can go through all the markers, but bottom line, Hillary has continued far past the point where she had any chance. And there has been a stream of subtle and not so subtle messages indicating that if Obama wanted to have her constituents supporting him, he would have to do "X, Y an Z". Call that crap what you want, but to me its clearly coddling.

This is why Obama has been unbelievably gracious to Hillary. He praises her at every opportunity because he knows her supporters expect the coddling or else.

[SeaLyons]

31. Hillary supporters expect respect for Hillary, not coddling...

and as far as her chances go, Hillary has the popular vote on her side, she has the electoral vote on her side, so why would she be exected to drop out?? She is the most electable candidate.

[sfam]

32. We can do the "talking points" debate, but you know as well as I that Hillary had no chance...

of winning long ago. Her surrogates even said her chances were less than 10% after Wisconsin. Hillary did not do the Huckabee tour, where she stayed in but made nice. She continued to attack Obama in numerous ways - most recently as this weekend by saying he cannot win Hispanics and has "stolen" delagates out of Michigan.

Again, she KNOWS he will win, yet she is still competing hard, very hard, to win. This is not normal behavior. And yeah, she is asking to be coddled in ways that virtually no candidate does. Nowhere else has closely contested races had one side continually demanding "respect" the way Hillary has. This word has become so loaded as to be virtually synonymous with "I demand to be coddled or else." Name me another instance where this occurred. Romney didn't, Huckabee didn't, Tsongas didn't, nor did Gore's opponents, or Bush's, or even Kennedy for that matter when he took it to the convention. It just hasn't been done.

[SeaLyons]

33. Competing to win and doing a damn good job of it....

if you're so sure of Obama's win, why are you giving this any thought. Just feel the need to kick Hillary.

Oh, and I'm sure Obama recognizes the importance of Hillary's nearly 18 million voters. Why don't you ask him about coddling?

[sfam]

34. Obama clearly KNOWS he needs to Coddle them. Hillary has made that clear...

And again, even you know Obama will win. You have known it for a very long time, just like the rest of us.

Again, the question is why is coddling part of the price to get Hillary's supporters? Why isn't the fact that they are both like 95% the same on the issues enough?

[Beacool]

28. One reason: She won as many, and by some accounts even more, votes than Obama.

That's the difference between her and every other candidate.

[sfam]

30. That's a fair point. This is certainly different from Romney. But again, just because she can...

Why should she? The vast majority of candidates leave the field when its clear they cannot win. In the instances where they don't do this, almost always we see that the party loses in the GE.

So what's the purpose here? Why is she placing herself above the needs of the party?

[Beacool]

35. Because she is the first woman candidate.

This is not a regular election like the previous ones, we have the first woman and the first AA who have come this far. She's staying until all votes are counted mainly because that's what her supporters want her to do.

Besides, we are of a opinion that she's better prepared and suited for the job. If he had been someone with a heft of experience, maybe we would feel differently. As it is, there are many who will have a very difficult time casting their vote for Obama in November.

As for the VP spot, when you have two candidates who are almost nose to nose, then the one who wins the top spot should automatically ask the other one to be his/her VP. I would have said the same thing if it had been Hillary who got the nomination. I don't know if she even wants the job, but it should at least be offered.

[sfam]

37. Its a shame that her supporters needs (and hers) are taking precedence over the party's needs...

This is really the rub. Her supporters want her to stay in. Ask Edwards's supporters here on DU if they wanted him to continue (he would have become Kingmaker if he had). So did Huckabee's. So did Romney's. This is not a valid reason to continue to compete.

And if the argument is she's staying in because she's a woman, I would just point out that this reduces the status of a woman candidate to a different measure than we use in evaluating a male candidate. Personally I think we should use the same measure for both.

Would it make sense for Barack to continue to stay in if he was clearly going to lose (even if it was extremely close) simply because he was the first viable African American candidate, and because his supporters wanted him to?

As for the VP selection, your argument that the one with the second most votes should automatically get it is not in the rules anywhere. Previously, the belief was the winner gets to choose. Whether Hillary is chosen should be based on the merits of whether she helps him the best in getting elected and governing (she very well may, in which case Obama should choose her, and I'll enthusiastically support it). Why should she "deserve" the VP spot? Is it because African Americans don't have the same right of choosing if they win as everyone else (I say this in jest)? Clearly not. Bottom line, that argument that Hillary "deserves the VP or else" is exactly what I'm talking about regarding the whole coddling thing. How 'bout we keep the same rules as we have in the past and allow the winner FULL choice in selecting his or her VP?

[Beacool]

38. You are still missing the point,

none of the other candidates that you mentioned had even remotely as many votes as the front runner, Hillary does and may even surpass him in that area. THAT's the main difference. This contest has been almost 50/50 for a long time and will require finesse to finish it or the party will end up regretting it in November.

[sfam]

39. The point may be the title of your last post - "because she is the first woman"

Yes, I get that they are very close in total votes. But the race was long since decided. That Hillary chose to stay in to keep the vote total close and perhaps win it depending on whether you count Michigan doesn't change the fact that it was clear long ago who was going to win on delegates. The vast majority including Hillary's folks believe that occurred after the Wisconsin contest. Had she dropped out then, none of this would have been an issue. Our party would have been united now (and as an aside most likely Hillary would have been the odds on fav for VP - now the argument is she is demanding it, previously virtually everyone wanted that).

I do agree that it will require finesse to finish it. I absolutely agree that Hillary has clear constituent groups who support her just as fervently as Obama's folks do, and that now there is a real danger of giving away what should have been an easy victory for either candidate. My question was why we ended up in this position, versus, say, Hillary dropping out when it was clear that she couldn't win? And you've already answered that question as you see it, and I've already given my response to it.

[Beacool]

40. Because in her and our mind she still had a chance.

Super delegates can do whatever they want and neither she nor Obama will be the nominee without them.

The Democrats needs to modify the way we choose our nominees. This whole election season has proven a fiasco, particularly in caucus states.