Rachel Maddow discusses Ickes vs. Wexler, Clinton strategy

[ProfessorPlum]

Run time: 09:50 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEjyZa6kkYo   Posted on YouTube: June 01, 2008 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: June 02, 2008 By DU Member: ProfessorPlum Views on DU: 1045

 

[bdamomma]

1. I love listening to Rachel.

[greiner3]

2. I was wondering if anybody caught a hint;

Of a cat fight between Nora and Rachel when they interacted?

[Bette Noir]

3. Thanks for putting this up.

I had other things to do this weekend than watch MSNBC all day, and I hate to miss Rachel.

[Vote4Change]

4. I didn't have other things to do this weekend ...

... and watched it Saturday from wire to wire on MSNBC.

It was a valuable insight into the workings of the DNC and the campaigns. What my wife and I saw was this:

1) The Florida Democratic Party submitted it's proposal, which included the concession that they had broken the rules and deserved (and accepted) the punishment of a 50% reduction in pledged delegate votes. That proposal received support from the Obama campaign and, in the end, the DNC Rules & Bylaws folks. But guess who didn't support Florida's own proposal? Harold Ickes, on behalf of the Hillary campaign, and an obnoxious group of Hillary insurgents hellbent on (and successful in) making fools of themselves and their candidate in their effort to disrupt the DNC's efforts to bring a fair resolution to the problem of these two state's unsanctioned primaries.

2) The Michigan Democratic Party submitted it's proposal for a fair resolution to a flawed primary, which admitted that they had broken the rules. Michigan's Democratic party accepted the punishment of a 50% reduction in pledged delegate votes. That rulng by the DNC was also graciously accepted by the Obama campaign. But guess who didn't support Michigan's own proposal? Harold Ickes, on behalf of the Hillary campaign, and an obnoxious group of Hillary insurgents hellbent on (and successful in) making fools of themselves and their candidate in their effort to disrupt the DNC's efforts to bring a fair resolution to the problem of these two state's unsanctioned primaries.

In summary, what we saw was the Rules & Bylaws Committee of the DNC (a national organization) working in concert with the Florida and Michigan Democratic parties (state organizations) to reach a fair and representative allocation of pledged delegate votes so that the voters in both states would have their votes counted and, at the same time, allocate the delegate votes as fairly as possible between the two candidates, reflecting the will of the voters. The Rules & Bylaws Committee and the representatives of both state parties, as well as the representatives of the Obama campaign, all conducted themselves, whether in supporting or opposing a position, with a high degree of courtesy and professionalism and with the ultimate goal of uniting the Democratic party to win in November. On the other hand, there was: Harold Ickes, on behalf of the Hillary campaign, and an obnoxious group of Hillary insurgents hellbent on (and successful in) making fools of themselves and their candidate in their effort to disrupt the DNC's efforts to bring a fair resolution to the problem of these two state's unsanctioned primaries.