I thought Sen. Hillary Clinton was done, but was I ever wrong. Clinton stormed to victory Tuesday in two major states, Ohio and Texas, and added Rhode Island to her day's totals. Sen. Barack Obama took Verrmont. Obama still has a slight lead in delegates because Democratic delegates are proportioned according to the percentage of votes the candidates receive.
The math suggests that neither candidate can win enough delegates in the last few states to go into the Denver convention in August with the nomination in hand. So if the nomination goes to the convention floor -- the convention back room would be more accurate -- it could be a bloody mess. Consider what would happen if the superdelegates trump the will of the majority of voters.
But maybe there's a deal in the works, with the two rivals teaming up for the November general election. Clinton hinted this morning that they both might end up on the Demo ticket. But who would be the presidential nominee and who would be running in the second position? I can't see Bill Clinton wanting to be the second spouse.
Do you think the Dems can put together what some in their party are calling a "dream ticket" or is there too much bad blood developing between the candidates to think they'd run together in the general election?
This is fun! As a loyal conservative Republican, I’m thoroughly enjoying the Demos cutting one another to pieces. Politics is more than a spectator sport, it’s a blood sport! (Reminds me of some the illegal cock fights I went to as a kid).
There are no rules to break in the Demo party nomination process, everything goes! There are only smoke-filled backrooms filled with union thugs and drunken delegates.
Some great internet headlines: "Gloria Steinem’s last stand!" "Going negative proved positive for Hillary."
The only question that remains to be asked: Will Hillary burn the convention down in order to get that nomination?
An observation: The media is in the tank for Obamessiah.
Gee only 12 more primaries to go. Then, the Convention, and finally the cream of the crap comes to the top.
Whose dream ticket has two orthodox liberal pro-tax, pro-union, pro-abortion, lightly experienced Ivy League lawyers on it?
Outside of the moneyed coasts and the Northeast, the rest of America is hardworking, fiscally prudent, respectful of military sacrifice, prizes traditional family, and values individual liberty over government mandates.
Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton, either ticket would be a nightmare for business owners, entrepreneurs, low-wage workers, the people who actually make America work.
At this process goes on and on, it is more and more likely that Hillary and Obama will destroy each other so it doesn't matter who is nominated. Each is destroying the image of the other, something almost impossible to reconstruct. The law of libel and slander is based on this: that a lie, once told, is almost irreparable. As we said in law school, you "can't unring a bell."
It could certainly go either way although I am not so sure either of them will pick the other for a running mate.
Clinton's wins in TX and OH didn't do much to decrease Obama's lead in delegates. And Obama is likely to win at least a few of the remaining primaries by wide margins, which would probably wipe out Hillary's gains. So to win the nomination, she'll have to rely on super-delegates, and try to change the rules after the fact to allow the Florida and Michigan delegates to be seated. That sort of pull-out-all-stops manipulation will likely divide the Democratic Party, and alienate many of Obama's supporters.
So if she wins, the only way to heal the rift she causes may be to persuade Obama to join her on the ticket. Conversely, though, I don't see her swallowing her pride and taking the 2nd spot if Obama wins. But who knows, I could be wrong. Just ask T.C. or Brian.
See? I told you all months ago this would be the best possible outcome. I can hardly wait.
Mike(D)-For what it's worth.I concur.I wouldn't add or subtract a thing from your analysis.But who knows,I could be wrong.Just ask Jackie and Rich.
Tony writes:
“Outside of the moneyed coasts and the Northeast, the rest of America is hardworking, fiscally prudent, respectful of military sacrifice, prizes traditional family, and values individual liberty over government mandates.”
“Outside of the moneyed coasts and the Northeast…”
This is a lazy generalization and Warren Buffett of Omaha, Nebraska, takes offense.
“…the rest of America is hardworking…”
Most of America, Democrats and Republicans, have families to take care of and are hardworking.
“…fiscally prudent…”
Like the first six years of the Bush White House and republican congress that out-spent all previous administrations and congresses combined?
“…respectful of military sacrifice…”
The hated Ted Kennedy and many other Democrats served in the military.
“…prizes traditional family…”
Are divorce and teen pregnancy prized parts of a “traditional family” since red states have higher rates of both?
“…values individual liberty over government mandates...”
I guess that explains why Bush wants to spy on Americans.
Democrat party convention rules currently do not recognize delegates from Michigan & Florida because they acted unilaterally in scheduling their primaries at times not approved by the party honchos.
Here’s a thought - the GOP, because of their great concern for the democratic process, could, out of the grace and kindness that is in their hearts, offer to finance a "do-over." Even Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, deeply grieved by the unfairness of it all, has shared his heart-felt concern for the Democrats and has stated that his state would be for the new primary.
That it should precipitate a convention brawl is irrelevant, and that shouldn’t keep the GOP from doing the right thing! O what great fun - the Clinton monarchy against the Obama Neo-Marxists! Union goons & NEA thugs slugging it out with barnyard feminists; Lefty eco-freaks against NAFTA supporters; bloated, braying and drunken senators staggering from party to party. O what joy! Let the bloodletting begin!
Want to get a knee jerk, off the cuff reactions from conservatives?
Just say: "Hillary" or "Clinton"
For the record Brian I don't have a problem with you just the manner in which you say things. I believe everyone is entitled to their opinion but anything can be said in a nice way.
Wayne,
It's interesting that you read into what I wrote as an attack on the Democratic Party. Is that defensiveness typical of today's Democrats, or is it just you?
Equally revealing, even you couldn't deny both Clinton's and Obama's pro-tax, pro-union, pro-abortion agenda. Or their inexperience with national government.
My point still stands -- these two are no dream ticket. They are far from representative of the values of real Americans. And you're right, that includes Democrats *and* Republicans.
P.S. I'm a Fresno native and I am slso a former staffer at Sen. Kennedy's Washington DC office. Believe me Warren Buffet is *much* more representative of America's heartland values than either Clinton or Obama.
Hey Wayne,
That was too easy to point out, but hard to get through the heads of Conservatives.
Is Bush a Conservative? Worse yet the former Republican led Congress rubber stamped all of Bush's initiatives.
This is a tough pill to swallow.
Tony,
It's interesting that you claim “defensiveness” when I’m just stating the facts. I guess you must say things like that when you believe in an ideology that doesn’t live up to its preached “values.”
I could easily deny the Democratic candidates have a “pro-abortion agenda.” I don’t know anyone, Democrat or Republican who is for abortion. Reasonable people would work together to lower the abortion rate as much as possible.
I also don’t know anyone, Democrat or Republican, who wants to pay taxes. However, it seems it is a necessary evil to run the country. Especially when we need to pay for the war and the Republican’s previous spending.
One more fact: Clinton and Obama, being senators working with national and international issues, have more experience with national government than Bush had when he took office.
Looks like we found someone for whom Clinton/Obama might be a dream ticket after all!
Tony,
Read my post. I say nothing of them being my "dream ticket." I’m just responding to your incorrect statements.
Just a short time ago people were saying Hillary should drop out cause Obama had won so many in a row to which I said she should stay in because she had the momentum in the beginning and she picked up some again. If it just went by the popular vote of the people who knows who would be on top in either party. There is no need for the Electoral College.
COUNTRY ABOVE PARTY ...
Obama is proving to be a weak candidate. I hope there is a floor vote at the convention, and a stunning upset whereby Hillary Clinton replaces Barack, as the Democratic nominee for November ... I'll certainly vote for her, but if Obama continues to be the Democratic nominee ... I'm voting for Senator John McCain in November.