That will be a Sunday school picnic, compared to 2008 in denver, detroit, harlem, watts, cabrina-green, st. louis, kansas city, cleveland, philly, baltimore {I could go on, but you know it}.
Posted on 02/19/2008 9:34:38 AM PST by jdm
The voters in the Democratic primaries, as opposed to the caucuses, have labored under the delusion that their delegates have a commitment to follow the popular vote in their state. A little-known rule in the DNC removed the first-ballot requirement of pledged delegates to remain faithful to their state's vote. The Hillary Clinton campaign has begun strategizing to get enough of Barack Obamas' pledged delegates to flip -- and Obama himself appears ready to flip if she tries it:
Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign intends to go after delegates whom Barack Obama has already won in the caucuses and primaries if she needs them to win the nomination.
This strategy was confirmed to me by a high-ranking Clinton official on Monday. And I am not talking about superdelegates, those 795 party big shots who are not pledged to anybody. I am talking about getting pledged delegates to switch sides. ....
Clinton spokesman Phil Singer told me Monday he assumes the Obama campaign is going after delegates pledged to Clinton, though a senior Obama aide told me he knew of no such strategy.
But one neutral Democratic operative said to me: “If you are Hillary Clinton, you know you can’t get the nomination just with superdelegates without splitting the party. You have to go after the pledged delegates.”
The Obama campaign says it's just politics as usual, and perhaps worse than that:
“As it becomes increasingly clear that Senator Clinton may not be able to secure the nomination by winning the support of actual voters, the Clinton campaign has once again floated a strategy that would essentially say that the preference of Democratic voters is a mere obstacle to their win-at-all-costs strategy," said Obama campaign manager David Plouffe. "First, they said they’ll try to seat the non-existent delegates in Florida and Michigan, something that neutral party leaders have roundly criticized. Then, they suggested that superdelegates should consider subverting the will of the voters and the pledged delegates, which has also been strongly objected to.
“Their new strategy will be to convince delegates that were pledged by actual Democratic voters to switch sides. In their own words, ‘all the rules will be going out the window.’ Voters are already rejecting the Clinton campaign’s say-or-do-anything-to-win tactics, and this is the latest example that it’s time to turn the page on this type of politics that could severely harm our party’s chances to win the general election."
As this primary continues, we find out more and more unsavory aspects of the Democratic Party's processes. The superdelegates were bad enough -- an attempt by the DNC to thwart the will of the voters in case the primaries selected someone not in tune with the party Establishment. Now we find out that all of the primaries and caucuses, and all of the get-out-the-vote efforts that went along with them, mean almost nothing. The party and not the people will select the nominee, or, at least under the DNC's rules, that remains a very distinct possibility.
The rules aren't going out the window; they're getting held up to the light, and their stench has become overwhelming. The Clintons don't suggest breaking the rules but simply using them to their advantage.
The press has reported endlessly on the enthusiasm gap between the Republican and Democratic primaries. That will prove a double-edged sword if Hillary or Obama somehow manages to get significant defections among pledged delegates. The whole convention will turn into a massive vote-buying bazaar in Denver, and the saps who turned out in record numbers in these primaries and caucuses will find out that their efforts meant absolutely nothing at all.
You think an enthusiasm gap existed in the primaries? Wait to see what happens if Hillary wins the nomination in this manner. The silence of the saps in November will be deafening. (via The Moderate Voice)
Keep in mind that although Obama has raised more money over the table than hillary, and probably a fair amount under the table as well, there is no way he can match the kind of money the clintons piled up from 1992 until now.
As I’ve mentioned on other threads, I’d estimate (though of course I don’t KNOW) that they have at least $5 billion stashed away, and probably quite a lot more. They did nothing but fund raise, solicit bribes, and sell government secrets for 8 years, and since leaving the White House they have continued to pile up more money by the bucketfull.
Plus they have access to current FBI files on all the players, and some of them can probably be blackmailed. Obama has connections to the Chicago machine, but his info is pretty certainly not as good as hers.
She is still dealing from a strong hand.
“The rules aren’t going out the window; they’re getting held up to the light, and their stench has become overwhelming.”
That is either a strange mixed metaphor; or the rules are like some photoactive chemical that stinks when exposed to ight.
If she tries it you’ll get an insurrection within the DNC like we haven’t seen in a generation.
“Plus they have access to current FBI files on all the players”
How do they have access to current FBI files?
LOL, leftists should have no illusions now about which Party is the party of vote fraud.
If you really consider it, I feel sorry for the dem voters who have come out in droves to support Barak and deserve to have their votes counted. Just kidding, pass the popcorn this is just too juicy to not enjoy.
We can only hope!
Someone get the popcorn started...
Dear dear, Methinks “silence” is going to be the last thing coming out of Denver. If the dirty tricks become this blatant, Denver is gonna look like the 2nd Manassass (only it will be a proper rainbow-colored affray).
And if Obama loses there is always Bloomberg’s Plan B.
That will be a Sunday school picnic, compared to 2008 in denver, detroit, harlem, watts, cabrina-green, st. louis, kansas city, cleveland, philly, baltimore {I could go on, but you know it}.
A fair number of agents in the upper levels of the FBI participated with clinton in various corrupt and illegal activities while he was president. He promoted many of them to the top himself. Bush has done nothing to remove them. So it can be assumed they are still passing useful files to hillary, just as they did while she was in the White House.
Clinton grew up with the Dixie Mafia and knows well how mobsters operate. He preferred to have people working for him whom he could blackmail, because they could be trusted not to betray him.
This is not surprising. I have always known, heck everyone on this forum has always known, that Hillary will do anything she considers necessary to win.
That’s always been their MO, it won’t change.
If she thought it would help, she probably would.
I literally do not put anything past her.
Hey, I actually hope you’re right. But I’m just not ready to start celebrating yet.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.