Hillary Clinton fan club's new site

I hope that the message has a "Trickle-Down effect" on the Obama supporters who are still commandeering the liberal websites with hate-filled messages towards Hillary and her supporters.

Imagine this: Obama gets more votes than Hillary in the primary. The media spews vitriol at Obama throughout the primary season. Hillary gets more pledged delegates, but not enough to secure the nomination. Superdelegates decide to throw their support behind Hillary instead of Obama. Would Obama supporters think this is an acceptable outcome?

Bemused,

Your scenario is flawed as it includes Florida and Michigan. You are, at best, disingenuous, when you neglect to mention that Hillary Clinton agreed to the DNC ruling that those states would lose their delegates when they violated Party rules.

The Clinton campaign underestimated Barack Obama and perhaps her biggest error was in ignoring caucus states.

Barack Obama played by the rules of the game and won fair and square.

Dear Doug,

Stop fighting the battle and losing the war.

There is a certain degree of disingenuousness in your comments, as well.

You are correct that Hillary underestimated Obama, but Michigan and Florida would not have made a difference, until THEY MADE a difference.

If they merely amplified the decision, these so what? But when leaving them out distorted the will of the entire nation, they became important.

Also, the rules might include Caucuses, but that doesn't make them democratic.

Obama supporters seemed to take extreme pleasure in losing Texas and taking more delegates.

Have it your way, but don't expect those who you trampled along the way to jump onboard your Peace Train.

The decision as to who is the Democratic nominee is decided by the official delegation of the Democratic Party; it is not decided by emotionalism, but by rational thought (although of course the ability to inspire good feelings across the board is greatly considered). Obama won by best presenting (in the delegates eyes) the universal ideals and 'general vibe' of the Democratic Party as it now wishes to present itself. If Clinton had aced the message of change, and thoroughly convinced the young and vital that she was 'with it'--instead of appearing peculiarly conservative, stubborn and devious, the Party and the people would indeed have backed her more. But she didn't.

It is no coincidence that Mich and Florida were not allowed to count. They were 2 states that the DNC knew Hillary would trounce Obama. Hillary got more votes and had the nomination stolen from her. Howard Dean is a hard core lefty loon and they hate Clinton. It is pretty sad that the far left won out over the moderate Dems. I will never vote for Obama. I am a Hillary supporter that will vote for McCain. Every Hillary supporter I know is going to do the same. It is so hipocritical that the party that cried about the popular vote in '00 is now doing the exact same thing. The DNC has a whole nomination process set up so that the party elders and insiders can pick the winner. SO what if Florida and MIchigan moved up. WHO CARES? Also the Obama campaign stopped all attempts by both states to have a revote. that is the part taht bothers me the most. The Obama campaign better not cry Obama GOP voter suppression in Nov when they did the same thing to get the nomination.

ElliotNC,

"There is a certain degree of disingenuousness in your comments, as well."

My alleged disingenuousness is to be found where?

So, per your assertion, the Clinton campaign didn't care about Florida and Michigan voters until it became very necessary and in her best interest? Lastly, "...distorted the will of the entire nation." Oh, really? Says who? You? You take an incredibly close race and claim to speak for the entire nation. I've got news for you, Obama supporters aren't second class citizens either.

Kim,

I don't know whether Howard Dean hates Clinton (either one) or not. What I do know it was the DNC Rules and Bylaws committee made the decision to sanction Florida & Michigan. Howard Dean didn't have a vote in the matter.

Well, Barack Obama might win this time, but I think a Clinton nomination is in the foresee-able (even for me, a grumpy 51-year-old white male).

I just read a few Texas news paper sites about Chelsea Clinton's 5 minute address at the TX delegate convention.

Clear, concise and to the point.

Obama's daughters, while cute, are simply too far off (in time).

Doug, you and others like you are the reason Hillary supporters are not thrilled about supporting Obama. Your obnoxious, self-serving distortions make one weary of supporting the candidate who would attract the likes of you. Fact is, I was referring to people who actually voted - NOT to whether those votes translated into delegates. So, keep fighting with Hillary supporters who have legitimate concerns about the process, and whether the nominee actually represents the true will of Democrats who came out and voted. Obama is going to need all of the support he can get. Alienating 50% of the Democratic Party isn't a smart way to get elected.

It's over - Obama is the Dem's candidate. Now the task at hand is to get him elected, and the only why we can get the HIllary loyalists on board is to have her on the ticket, and if not Hillary, then someone who carries the same political ideals as Hillary. How about Richardson? Some may say - that a African-American and Hispanic would turn off the white vote. To them I say get over the labels, and choose the candidate based on the character of the individual. Richardson's foreign relations backgorund would be an asset to the Dems ticket. If Hillary is not the choice, any other woman VP would never measure up to Hillary.

Count all the Votes (except the caucuses)!

The HRC supporters really can twist themselves into knots trying to make their point, can't they? They just can't get past their sense of entitlement, their notion that Hillary owned the nomination from the beginning, that she had the right to it, and shouldn't have had to win it at the polls.

Take a clue from Hillary. Accept defeat gracefully, put your own bitterness to the side, and work against four more years of the tragically failed Bush policies.

Bemused,

"Your obnoxious, self-serving distortions make one weary of supporting the candidate who would attract the likes of you."

Is that the best you can do? When you can't prevail on the facts, you resort to childish name calling and personal attacks?

Read the archives on this sight and you will find virtually all Democrats who post here have stated very publicly that we would support Hillary if she became the nominee. Truth be told my biggest beef with Hillary was that Bill was going to be part of the package. I know a lot of people who feel the same way, including my 70 year old mother. This is not a slight against Bill so much. It's just that I'm tired of him and I don't/didn't like the dynasty feel of the whole thing. If Bill weren't in the picture I probably would have supported Hillary from the get go.

As flawed as you may find the rules of the game, Obama played by them as they were set out and won.

I'm confused.... so, you're not supporting Obama, not because of his stance on issues, is personal comments, or anything actually about the candidate. But rather, based on the behaviour of his hard-core supporters (which act almost exactly as the hard-core Hillary supporters act). That seems unfair to Obama, no?

Judge a person for who he is, not for what others do. Don't let a bruised ego stop the best person 'remaining' from getting to the place that would serve this country best. If you were supporting Clinton, I guarantee... you do NOT want a McCain presidency. Allowing it is cursing the country you love due to your own ego being bruised by constituents not unlike yourself who behave exactly as you would if you felt about Obama as you do about Clinton.

Everyone should walk in the other man's shoes when judging him. Peace.

It would have been great if Hillary "quit" the campaign instead of just "suspending" it. Under the DNC rules, her pledged delegates are still that -- pledged to her, and she can resurrect them at any time.
Leave it up to Hillary to lull everyone into a false security while. most likely, badgering the superdelegates behind the scenes.
I wouldn't put anything past her.

The two candidates are John McCain and Barack Obama. Any reference to prior candidates who dropped out of the race is a waste of time.

I hope that the message has a "Trickle-Down effect" on the Obama supporters who are still commandeering the liberal websites with hate-filled messages towards Hillary and her supporters.

Posted by: ElliotNC | June 9, 2008 2:05 PM

Funny ElliotNC, I thought it was the other way around. Then again I realize allot of the people who post as Hillary supporters are really republicans stirring the pot! I applaud her message of unity.

Doug,

Are you the moderator of this forum, or what?

If you go back and reread my post, you will see that I partially agreed with you.

Clinton underestimated Obama when he took his name off the ballot to give his campaign a chance in Iowa.

When I said that the two states didn't matter until they mattered, that does not reveal some terrible defect in logic or character.

Florida mattered in 2000, because when the vote (my vote) was not counted, it changed the outcome of the election.

Florida did not matter to George McGovern. But the fact that it mattered in 2008 is precisely the reason that it SHOULD count.

The "They broke the rules" argument is a little anal retentive.

Please don't bother posting another response. You have already turned off enough Non-Obamabots from ever being able to come to grips with voting for your political and spiritual savior.

It's amazing how many people keep saying Hillary "won" Michigan, when: 1. every nominee EXCEPT her pulled her name off the ballot. My gosh, how easy it is to win when you have NO official competition! 2. Hillary supporters in MI keep harping about "how they're not getting heard" and complaining their vote isn't counting. What about the nominee supporters who did NOT have the desire to vote for Hillary, but didn't get heard, either? I have friends in Michigan who have pointedly said, "I didn't bother going to the polls, because my candidate's name wasn't on the ballot, and I sure wasn't voting for Hillary." Michigan is a highly skewed contest and any discussion of it being a legitimate win just don't make sense. 3. Michigan (and Florida) choose to go against Party rules and moved their dates, so the DNC said their votes didn't count. Why did they do it, if they knew that was the outcome? 4. It's amazing how Hillary is willing to go to bat to get those votes she "won" in MI, but if Barack had "won" there the same way she did, do you think she'd be so willing? Hardly.

Please stop trying to recreate the Kennedy Camelot mythology by using Bill, Hillary and Chelsea.

The only way Hillary will ever become President is if John McCain defeats Obama. If Obama is elected, Hillary will have no shot (Especially if Biden decides to run after Obama). If McCain wins, Hillary will run against him in 4 years. Vote for McCain!!