Clinton compares race to Bush v. Gore

Can't wait to see how the battle of Florida, er, meeting turns out.

P.S. Typo correction: meant to say that it is about time someONE invoked 2000, not someHOW invoked it *cringe*. My passion on this issue led to that typo, I'm afraid. Sorry!

Now that's a comparison that will bring cries of unity to the Dem party!!!
Billary the uniter bringing up the 2000 election.

Fla and Mich. should have delegates seated. They should figure out some way to have their votes represented, but that's not really what Billary is looking for. Where was this outrage by Billary in January? Oh, she signed up with the idea that these States were not going to be counted (metrics not withstanding). She believed that she wouldn't need these states because she would have the nomination signed up by Super Tuesday

Where was Billary the whole time Al Gore was going through the recount? Self-Serving.

This isn't the "tough-minded" first female candidate that I would like to remember. This is the self-interested Billary Machine that exploits the uneducated middle-American to the T.

P.P.S. Me again, back to comment on this quote from the piece: "John Dickerson of Slate in a column today argued that if Obama is the truly the presumptive nominee, then Clinton was doing major damage to the party's chances in November by making voters in this crucial swing state feel alienated and angry toward the Democratic Party." Clinton did not make us feel alienated and angry towards the DNC, it was Howard Dean who did that with his draconian decision to go against what party rules recommend and yank away ALL the delegates instead of half. But he didn't even stop there. He then had the candidates all sign that daft pledge not to campaign in FL & MI, AND he pressured them all to remove their names from the MI ballot (no rule said they should, let alone that they had to). It's like the man is determined to alienate and disenfranchise millions of voters in two key swing states, one of which (FL) has loyal, long-suffering Dems who have been through more than enough in 2000 and we REFUSE to ever be disenfranchised again, especially at the hands of our own party. No, our wrath is squarely on Howard Dean, Donna Brazile, et al. Not on Clinton, who has been the only one of the candidates to fight for us.

YESSS, thank you, Hillary! It is about time somehow invoked 2000 in all of this, as it is absolutely beyond all comprehension, reason and compassion that our own DNC would treat Florida Dems like this after what happened in 2000. Yes, the repug-controlled state legislature broke the rules by moving up the date by 7 days, but Howard Dean chose to ignore the rules, too, by his draconian decision to remove ALL of FL's delegates instead of HALF, as the rules recommend. Removing half would have effectively chastised the state and warned other states not to follow suit, yet would have left the voters with a representative, albiet understandably diminished, voice in the process. But no, Dean chose to go nuclear, punishing the wrong people (the voters) and by default circling up the firing squad on our party, whose victory should have been a given this fall but now is completely up in the air. In a year when Florida Democrats were unified, fired up, passionate and ready to avenge 2000, our own DNC chose to kick us in our collective gut and disenfranchise us.

You just gotta love the irony in all this!

Also, the libs love to complain about the Voter ID law of Indiana being overly burdensome on voters, but they don't complain about the overly burdensome caucus process which requires hours of a voters' time in order to participate. If it wasn't for the caucuses, then Senator Daily Kos Obama would be going back to his day job.

I wonder if there is anyone who complains about Florida & Michigan who realize that Barack Obama now has the majority of pledge delegates, and is also way ahead in Super delegates without Florida and Michigan. Whether we find a way to seat Florida and Michigan's delegates or not (which I do believe we should), Barack Obama is going to be the Democratic nominee. Even if we count Florida and Michigan as they are (which would be ridiculous) Obama would still be ahead. Hillary still loses. Its time for her to step aside and stop this nonsense. She's doing a better job of getting the senile nut that is John McCain elected than she is herself.

Another page out of the Ridiculous Republicans playbook !! Maybe we can scare the majority of Democratic voters into supporting Hysterical Hillary's candidacy !! Forget it !! I'll take Gore over Bush from now until doomsday and if the Ridiculous Republicans get into Office, that doomsday may not be too far off, given Senator " Questionable Conduct " McCain's cheerleading chant of: Bomb, Bomb, Bomb !!!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE. NOW.

Keep in mind that, contrary to what HRC wants you to believe, none of this is Obama's fault. The only person at fault here is HRC for agreeing to this before the race started.

It's really a shame that the voters of Florida and Michigan are the one's that are paying the price for this mess but changing the rules now, just to appease one of the candidates, is in no way the fair or democratic way.

Honestly, if I were a Dem voter in Florida and Michigan, I would become an Independent and demand that an empty space be included on the ballot in November to insert whomever they want.

Moreover, Hillary Clinton should run as an Independent and really give both the Dems and Repugs a run for their money. Without Hillary's folks, Obama has no chance of winning in November , and frankly the insults that he has levied, and then in his usual knee-jerk way apologized for, against the blue collar working class, has left many loyal "uneducated" Dems "bitter" (to use his term), disenchanted, and untrusting of Obama.

Hillary has not insulted any population of Dem. voters, even though her camp has gone after their opponent, Obama. The difference between Hillary and Obama is she won't "brush him off her shoulder like dirt" as he did to her when he lost in PA. Frankly, he hides a side that will be a turn off to many Democractic voters.

Count all the votes! Who cares about rules? We are a democracy, and in a democracy every vote must count! That's what the Democrats told the world in 2000. But now the rules are all that matter. I was wondering when Hillary was going to point out the hypocrisy.

The party must not feel that her rantings are hurtful because they are not doing anything about it. I don't believe they are in a situation where they can't reel her in.

Even those dead voters !! You can't be serious, can you, " JB "?
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE. NOW.

You must remember, Hillary agreed to all of this until it didn't work in her favor. She is not without blame.

The fourth paragraph is incorrect: "...the state parties in both Florida and Michigan broke national party rules by moving up their primaries on the election calendar."

The state parties did not break the rules; the republican Florida legislature moved the primary, and the republican governor signed the bill.

That said, the comparison to Bush v Gore is still spurious. The DNC is in a pickle, but the solution is not so simple as "count all the votes" as it should have been in Bush v Gore. While it is not Florida democrats fault that the republicans moved the primary or that the DNC ruled against them, it is also not a sinister plot by Obama to steal the election. It would be ridiculous to seat all the Michigan delegates for Clinton when Obama didn't appear on the ballot and polls show the state evenly split. The RNC handled the problem with far more foresight (or luck) by ruling that these states delegations would only be half seated, and allowing all candidates to appear on the ballots.

The DNC should take a page from the republicans and seat half the Florida delegates as they were pledged by the primary. They should seat the other half 50/50. And they should seat the Michigan delegates 50/50. And they should not seat any Florida or Michigan Superdelegates, as Superdelegates have absolutely nothing to do with votes anyway.

This would help Hillary, but not enough. Tough. To help her by seating all the Michigan delegates for her would be blatantly undemocratic, regardless of the "count all the votes" simplistic sloganeering. The system is broken, but rigging it for a Hillary win doesn't fix it. Eliminating superdelegates and having a better plan for states whose primaries are moved up by an opposition state government need to be in place next time. This time, the best we can do is what is most fair. I hope the DNC accompishes something close to this - and that when it's finished Clinton accepts her loss and does not equate their decision with Bush v Gore, which is sure to bring all sorts of smiles to John McCains otherwise dour visage.

Count all the votes!! The will of the people is obviously inmaterial to the Dnc,they should just make the rule superdelagates choose your nominee it would save us all the trouble and aggravation of not having your vote count anyway,Since there intent on taking the nomination away from Hillary i guess they we find out our votes do count when we vote Mcain! Mcain all the way 08.

I heard Hillary's speech in Florida today (5/21). Didn't Hillary sign a pledge early on to give NH, IA, and SC their "first in the nation" status? She seems to forget that she signed a pledge about campaigning in FL and MI. I thought she accepted the situation back when it seemed as if she was the frontrunner. I'd also heard she asserted that this was all about delegates and that those two states wouldn't count. Now, of course they're important to her, so her opinions have changed radically. She sounds self-interested and disingenuous when she talks about all the other "right to vote" causes, and she's opening old wounds with her comparisons to 2000. The DNC can make its own decisions, but I would like some accuracy in the discussion.

Why isn't the media calling her on this?

I'm tired of hearing ..."Obama wasn't even on the the ballot in Michigan." He VOLUNTARILY CHOSE to take his name off the Michigan ballot. Why didn't he just go ahead and take his name off the Florida ballot too? Then he could cry victim even louder. Of course this all comes back to his LACK OF JUDGMENT. How stupid is this guy? They should give all the delegates and the nomination to Hillary since she won them fair and square.

Obama should have shown his statesmanship and ability to solve problems by agreeing to seat these delegates as the voters wanted. Heck, if he's got this locked up as we're being told, it would be a nice gesture of unity without much risk. Instead, he's showing that he is petulant, willing to sacrifice citizens' rights, and unable to deal with an adversary. Great demonstration of your leadership skills there, Senator Obama.

Ok, if I hear one more time that Hillary signed a pledge to not campaign in FL I will scream. She did not campaign in FL but appeared after the primary when she thanked the voters for their support. Now Obama did have ads running on the TV before the primary, check it out! This would be considered campaigning by any standards. He said it was not his ads, but the ads run the democratic party. Right!

Terry,

As far as I know, every state where Democrats hold caucuses - so do Republicans.

(1) What about the Floridian Obama supporters disenfranchised because they thought the vote 'wouldn't count'?

(2) What about the voters of Iowa, Maine and Washington, where there are no popular vote totals - they should be disenfranchised?

(3) What about the 40% 'uncommitted' votes in Michigan - should all those people be disenfranchised?

This is pathetic, and at worst plain old lies coming straight from Hillary's own mouth. The popular vote is a seriously flawed metric in this race for the reasons highlighted above, and if all were taken into account Obama would still lead in every metric.

Hillary is grasping at straws/becoming increasingly narcissistic.

The hypocrisies of Clinton supporters is astonishing. "Count all the votes", they yell! "Our voices demand to be heard", they cry! But not if those voices belong to John Edwards or Barack Obama supporters, they don't count. The voters who followed the ruled don't count. Bush states he's staying for a third term, doesn't matter, rules are made to be broken right? Why are you vocal supporters so adamant about only counting those who voted, yet you wish to stick your fellow residents in the eye for being aware of the rules? Think about the prescient that you are pushing for. It has very dangerous implications for democracy. For to believe, to be that naive to think that others, those who may have other interests in mind, may use the same philosophy to subjugate the rules. And you know what, there won't be anything you can do about it, for you have encouraged this way of thinking in the first place. Meanwhile, just think of the great lesson you are teaching the children in the short term, and the example of what America stands for, in the world view. But hey, that don't matter, because the end justifies the means when it comes to satisfying Clintons narcissistic ego, and Billy's lust for interns.
So here's hoping for the right outcome, the fair outcome, the one that unfortunately doesn't work for Clinton and her supporters, but reinforces the image that America is, in fact a democracy, that is held up by adhering to laws of decency, fairness, and common sense.

Well, at least these blogs give us a forum to vent our frustrations, but they seem ineffective in making hillary go away. As I write, Bill Clinton is telling people that Obama's presumptive nomination is a media fabrication. (He doesn't dare say fairy tale again...) How many times do Clinton supporters need to be TOLD that (1) it was HILLARY who told audiences (before she was losing) that Florida and Michigan did not count; (2) it was HILLARY who told audiences (before she was losing) that it was all about delegates; (3) it was HILLARY and BILL who told audiences (when she was winning) that Obama was whining about the media and that political campaigns were meant to be tough fights, so if Obama couldn't take the heat.... (5) it is now HILLARY and BILL who today are telling audiences that hillary is losing because of gender bias against women, because the media favors Obama, and because voters in FL and MI had their civil rights violated by not having votres counted. Would you all help me raise enough money to send Hillary and Bill on a second honeymoon,,,,slow boat to china. one way

Doug,

No arguement. I think the caucus is more restrictive to a voter's rights than showing a valid ID is. That is all my point is making. And also, that Hillary beat Obama in the primary states, but in the caucus states where organization and people with free time on their hands (college students and limo liberals) have more of an opportunity to participate.

The DNC needs to step in and make this stop.

The further this goes, the deeper the divide. The way I see it, Hillary will win or ruin the party in the process.

I was open to voting for either candidate who became the nominee because I think a McCain presidency would be the straw that breaks the camel's back (meaning ours).

I don't feel that way anymore.

Regardless of how it happens, if Hillary Clinton gets this nomination, I will never, ever vote for her. I won't vote for McCain, but I could not live with myself if I enabled this swindler to take the highest office in US politics.

Terry,

And you charachterize Republicans who have time to participate in caucuses ("no arguement") how?

She compares this race to Bush vs Gore. Will HRC take the Fla. and Mich. thing to the Supremes? Hillary seems to have no problem changing agreed upon rules-- like Chimpy has no problem ignoring or changing law. HRC has a slash and burn mentality regarding this primary race. BHO needs to sharpen his nails and learn how to deliver a sucker punch as I believe HRC would have no problem executing.

That's the main point isn't it? Seat Fla and Michigan for Billary. Will that solve it? Probably not. No, what Billary is looking for any way possible for the last year to "not count". A "do-over" for not winning the primary. Her own campaign planned on having the nomination wrapped up at the Feb. 5 super Tuesday results. She presented herself as the candidate that had the "experience to lead on day one" back then. Hmmm..... Edwards was the populist on the trail, and then when he dropped out it was still "day one". Once April started and the elections shifted to the rust-belt, good-ole Billary the shot/beer girl with the grandpappy who taught her how to shoot came out.

Billary as the protecter of ole Jethro BlueCollar. Billary who's better half signed created NAFTA that sealed the coffin on the already corroded rust-belt. Billary who mad $110 million (reported income) over the last 10 years...while she's been struggling for the "little guy Joe Blue Colllar". Believable? Would you buy a car from someone with these credentials ? Let alone let them lead a country. Enough is Enough. What Billary is doing now is evident, self-serving, and won't be forgotten. If Obama wins the Dem nomination and loses the general, hopefully a fresh face will emerge in 4 years to fix the mess. Billary has already set herself on a path of forgetfullness.

My state held a caucus on the weekend, so anyone could have participated.

We've been labeled Left Wing Extremist Elitist Wealthy College Kids who won't vote in the general election and want to drive America into the toilet.

Try way post-college centrist democrats barely making ends meet unbeleivably excited to participate in selecting a nominee and passionate about seeing a Democrat in the White House.

Clinton has been attacking US, the caucus voters, not Obama, not McCain, we the voters. We've been insulted, discounted, and alienated since day one by Hillary "all the votes count" Clinton.

I voted Obama that day, but at the time I was prepared to campaign for her if she won.

And now, thanks to her actions, I have become what she accused me of. I went from being a middle-of-the-road voter to an impassioned, outraged, fully invested ACTIVIST, ready to march into battle to defeat her.

Food for though for Hillary: If in some delusional alternate reality you win this thing, you'll have some intense appologizing to do to all of us dedicated Democrats who caucused.

Obamas are the spoilers for the dems and for liberals for the next 20 years. If he gets in it will be a DISASTER.
Don F and the obamites are screaming to high heaven that (once again) Hillary beat them to a THOUGHT.
She's right to say what the DNC is doing to Florida now is similar to what happened in Bush v Gore 2000.
Scream away kids. Then go away. Or join Hillary's campaign with your candidate as veep for the first 8 years. Then it's his turn as pres.

She makes me ill. As others have said, she agreed to the sanctions before the primary.
Superdelages need to swarm to Barack and put him over before she does even more damage to the party. And by the way, pay your own debts off!

Obama '08!

CLINTON AND CAPITULATION

It is NOT OVER until someone crosses the threshold in required delegates. Until then, the process should be allowed to proceed.

http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2008/05/clinton-and-capitulation.html

It would be undemocratic to do otherwise.

Why don't we give up, gang? It is obvious the worst is going to happen. Hilary Clinton will be the nominee. She has already signed the contract with the big corporations who run this country. You don't think we citizens actually count, do you? Come on. Hilary is touting Bush-Gore because she's going to manufacture evidence of election fraud, have Obama indicted, steal the nomination and declare herself President. That's all in her Contract With (corporate) America! You know, the bald white guys who own the networks that are always kissing Hilary's ... well. You know.
This ain't no democracy no more.

Terry, Obama's campaign won the caucus states because they were organized and highly motivated. The Clinton campaign just wasn't as well run. And limo liberals is a nice alliterative GOP slogan, but it would be more appropriately applied to the highly paid Clinton staffers like Mark Penn. My guess is that limo riding latte drinkers were not a major factor in the Iowa caucus. Maybe in Nebraska or Minnesota...

The woman is absolutely mad.

The only genuine similarity between the 2000 campaign in Florida and today’s efforts is in the use of legalities to get a candidate court-appointed, one who actually lost the popular vote.

Clinton knew the rules from the beginning, but she wants to change them ex post facto, making simpering appeals about democratic principles.

This is a person of no principles whatsoever.

This woman belongs as far from the White House as it is possible to have her.

I genuinely see no improvement represented by the (fortunately remote) possibility of her holding office over the wretched Bush.

He’s stupid. She’s utterly pure selfish ambition.

The woman is absolutely mad.

"The only genuine similarity between the 2000 campaign in Florida and today’s efforts is in the use of legalities to get a candidate court-appointed, one who actually lost the popular vote...."

Posted by: John Chuckman, Toronto, Canada | May 22, 2008 6:39 AM

John-

Not sure how much of the constitution you have read- but the part you may find interesting is the electoral college process that is used to elect presidents here. This process protects small population states from being under represented in the presidential campaign process. In your research, you will find that the goal of this process is to equalize the influence of any state regardless of population. Without it, people running for president would tend to ignore states that would have little or no impact on election results.

Ironically enoough, it turns out- we don't elect presidents with a popular vote!

So yes- this is exactly what the Dems were complaining about in 2000- and yes the process required-your words- "the use of legalities" , Supreme court intervention to resolve.

"The only genuine similarity between the 2000 campaign in Florida and today’s efforts is in the use of legalities..."

"legalities"?? The US courts upheld the law. How could that be wrong?

"to get a candidate court-appointed, one who actually lost the popular vote...."

This was proven false years ago. News organizations recounted the votes over and over and Bush still won.

If you have to lie to make a point, it isn't worth making.

Fontapa - you have been labled as" Left Wing Extremist Elitist Wealthy AND College Kids".

As far as your state having their caucus on the weekend and as you put it "so anyone could have participated." Not sure about your state, but a lot of people in my state work on the weekends - most are the working class and minimum wage workers - the ones that tend to vote for Hillary.

Anon - no arguement that the Obama campaign was better managed that Hillary's - especially in the caucus states whiere you get more bang for your buck.

Doug - my point is which is more of a hassle for a voter - presenting a ID and then goping into the ballot booth OR sitting in a caucus for a couple of hours to cast your vote?

Just out of couriosity, does anyone know if the DNC & their sychophants has ever offered any reasonable, rational explanation on how Florida & Michigan lost all of their delegates for doing the exact same thing that Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, etc. did but without either public repremand or penalty, in spite of the fact that "The Rules" said that as per the agreement with the RNC & all of the American states & territories, the maximum penalty for a state or territory moving the date of its' 2008 presidential primary or caucus was to be a loss of exactly 50%, no more, no less, of that state or territories' Democratic & Republican delegates to their respective 2008 national conventions?