Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

There was an organized CAMPAIGN to get people to vote "Uncommitted" against Hillary in Michigan

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:38 AM
Original message
There was an organized CAMPAIGN to get people to vote "Uncommitted" against Hillary in Michigan
So, the bullshit that somehow this is a remarkable spontaneous occurrence is just that: bullshit.

People did not "spontaneously" come out and vote against Hillary Clinton. There was a major media push to get them to come out and vote against her.

This is just one of the number of organized efforts to stir up the black community and get them to register a vote against Hillary by voting "uncommitted."

You will note that this particular group used raw racial politics to do so.


“If the Clintons don’t get at least 60 percent of the vote, I think it would be a total rejection of her candidacy,” said Sam Riddle, an adviser to Detroit city councilwoman Monica Conyers.

Conyers and her husband John, a U.S. congressman – both backing Obama -- taped radio ads urging voters for “Uncommitted,” which has become a consensus alternative for supporters of Obama and John Edwards.

Riddle said a weeklong back-and-forth between the Obama and Clinton camps over the legacy of the civil-rights movement and Obama’s own drug use will galvanize black voters in the urban centers of eastern Michigan to deliver a no-confidence vote to Clinton.

“That type of stuff has no place in the campaign but it shows the Clinton desperation,” Riddle said. “They’re demeaning Obama and folks in Detroit, Flint, Saginaw, Pontiac don’t like it one bit.”

“’Uncommitted’ does not the get-out-the-vote apparatus that the Clintons have,” Riddle said. “We did talk radio, hit the churches -- much like you would with a candidate, except the candidate is ‘Uncommitted.’”


http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/01/michigan_clinto.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ccpup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:41 AM
Response to Original message
1. Conyers has gone downhill in my eyes
by doing this. As has Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Yes, I agree with you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:55 AM
Original message
Obama came out days after to say comments were NOT racial-He let it stew-let
people get upset-allowed things like the obove to happen. As a leader he could have put this to rest immediately--but he did not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ccpup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
54. because he is not a Leader
he is someone who sees which way the wind is blowing and THEN makes a statement. Doesn't put action behind it, of course. But it's on the record that he SAID something. Probably something inspirational with the words "change" or the phrase "yes we can" somewhere in there. But after the big circle of his rhetoric comes to a stop, you find yourself right where you started only then you're thinking 'WTF was he saying?'

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedgehog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 11:26 AM
Response to Original message
62. So, Obama is now responsible for apologizing when people on the other side shoot
their mouths off?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MH1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:42 AM
Response to Reply #1
49. But it was okay for Clinton to snub the party
and unfairly remain the only candidate of the top 3 on the ballot?

I think it was appropriate for Edwards and Obama supporters to vote "uncommitted". What else were they supposed to do, not vote? Or is it untrue that the rules said write-ins for Obama and Edwards wouldn't be counted?

What I find unfair is everytime a media outlet "reports" that "Clinton won Michigan." :eyes:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lyonn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #49
69. So agree, did she snub the DNC?
Made her own rules?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #1
81. In this case, I agree with him. Though I support Hillary.
I'm sure it may be personal as well, since the Conyers are supporting Obabma, but I think it's important to do right by the voters. It was the state party that made the decison which screwed over Michigan voters. By having the uncomitted delegates (I think they will be seated) they can have delegates able to support Obama and/or Edwards at the convention. It's not the same as if Michigan had been able to vote, but since Obama and Edwards withdrew unnecessarily, at least there is a bit of balance for the voters.

We really don't need to be throwing away Michigan or Florida, or being unfair to voters who didn't get to make a choice about gambling their votes for an earlier primary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fletcherwalker Donating Member (34 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:44 AM
Response to Original message
3. The Dalai Obama using dirty tricks and race baiting????
Never! And we all thought he was a saint. Will his followers still drink kool-aid for him now?
I bet they will....lets see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Want to be specific about the "race baiting" you claim
Obama has done. I don't address vague accusations. Please post specifics and links to any dirty tricks and "race baiting".

Welcome to DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #4
19. He confirmed the memo that his campaign
Edited on Wed Jan-16-08 10:06 AM by seasonedblue
used against her. Timmy held up the 4 page memo, and Obama confirmed it. I'll try to find the exact quote in a transcript, but Timmy asked, "Do you regret pushing this story?" and Obama said yes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #19
24. I keep hearing about the memo--but to my knowledge, no one has posted it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #24
26. Huffington had it posted,
a few other sites also had it posted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #26
31. That link was dead -right after it was posted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #31
32. I'll try to find it,
I think maybe Politico had it too, or Talk Left. I'll look around, it's got to be up somewhere especially since Obama confirmed the story last night.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lynnertic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #32
65. "politico" is short for "propaganda office"
It appeared and was mentioned/endorsed by WH officials in press conferences shortly after the Gannon/Guckert snafu.

I don't trust the source of info on that site.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #31
53. I just took the text of the memo from HuffPo
The link in my post below is not dead and it wasn't dead the first time I saw it on the evening of January 12. FYI.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #24
50. It was a listing of Clinton camp punches at Obama in the media - re racial politics
I personally wouldn't have a candidate who didn't keep such an inventory and supply it to what are called "interested parties" -- supporters, speakers, the press when it's in the campaign's interest to do so. (Although this apparently was not released to the press, but an inside memo, as I understand it, and I'm not clear on how it reached HuffPo.) In fact, I've never heard of a campaign not having and quietly distributing similar material. It hurts when it's not your side, but it's in the standard mix of rapid response.

It was posted to Huffington Post on January 12 @ 1:15 PM, and it includes a dated Newsday reference of January 11. The memo itself as posted to HuffPost is undated, but the media reports the memo refers to are all dated, so this seems to have been written January 11 or the morning of January 12.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/12/obama-camps-memo-on-clin_n_81205.html



Subject: MUST READ: Key S.C. figure takes issue with Clintons

SHUCK AND JIVE

Clinton Supporter Andrew Cuomo, Referring To Obama, Said "You Can't Shuck
And Jive At A Press Conference. All Those Moves You Can Make With The Press
Don't Work When You're In Someone's Living Room." Clinton-supporting New
York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo said the thing that's great about New
Hampshire is that you have to go out and meet people rather than "shuck and
jive" through press conferences there. Cuomo said of New Hampshire on an
Albany radio station: "It's not a TV-crazed race. Frankly, you can't buy
your way into it. You can't shuck and jive at a press conference. All those
moves you can make with the press don't work when you're in someone's living
room." (Newsday, 1/11/08)

MARTIN LUTHER KING / LYNDON JOHNSON COMPARISON

Clinton, Criticizing Obama For Promising "False Hope" Said That While MLK
Jr. Spoke On Behalf Of Civil Rights, President Lyndon Johnson Was The One
Who Got Legislation Passed: "It Took A President To Get It Done." Clinton
rejoined the running argument over hope and "false hope" in an interview in
Dover this afternoon, reminding Fox's Major Garrett that while Martin Luther
King Jr. spoke on behalf of civil rights, President Lyndon Johnson was the
one who got the legislation passed. Hillary was asked about Obama's
rejoinder that there's something vaguely un-American about dismissing hopes
as false, and that it doesn't jibe with the careers of figures like John F.
Kennedy and King. "Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President
Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act," Clinton said. "It took a president to
get it done." (Politico, 1/7/08; Video)

Clinton Introducer Said JFK Gave Hope, But Was Assassinated. Clinton
introducer: "If you look back, some people have been comparing one of the
other candidates to JFK and he was a wonderful leader, he gave us a lot of
hope but he was assassinated and Lyndon Baines Johnson actually did all his
work and got the republicans to pass all those measures." (HRC, Dover, NH,
1/7/08) AUDIO ATTACHED

NELSON MANDELA

Bill Clinton Implied Hillary Clinton Is Stronger Than Nelson Mandela. "I
have been blessed in my life to know some of the greatest figures of the
last hundred years. (...) I go to Nelson Mandela's birthday party every year
and we're still very close. (...) But if you said to me, 'You've got one last
job for your country but it's hazardous and you may not get out with life
and limb intact and you have to do it alone except I'll let you take one
other person, and I had to pick one person whom I knew who would never
blink, who would never turn back, who would make great decisions (...) I would
pick Hillary.'" (ABC News, 1/7/08; Audio)

DRUG USE

Clinton's NH Campaign Chair Raised The Youthful Drug Use Of Obama And Said
It Would "Open The Door To Further Queries On The Matter." Clinton's
Campaign Issued A Statement Distancing Themselves From Shaheen's Comments
And Shaheen Issued A Statement Saying That He "Deeply Regret(s) The
Comments." The Democratic presidential race took on a decidedly nasty and
personal turn, with the New Hampshire co-chair for Clinton, raising the
youthful drug use of Obama. Shaheen said Obama's having been so open -- as
opposed to then-Gov. George W. Bush, who refused to detail his past drug use
during his 2000 presidential campaign -- will "open the door to further
queries on the matter. It'll be, 'When was the last time? Did you ever give
drugs to anyone? Did you sell them to anyone?'" Shaheen said. "There are so
many openings for Republican dirty tricks. It's hard to overcome." By the
end of the day, Clinton campaign spokesman Phil Singer had issued a
statement asserting that "these comments were not authorized or condoned by
the campaign in any way." And Shaheen himself issued a statement: "I deeply
regret the comments I made today and they were not authorized by the
campaign in any way." (ABC News, 12/12/07)

Mark Penn, In Trying To Defend His Campaign Over Bill Shaheen's Obama Drug
Use Comments, Used The Word "Cocaine," Drawing A Rebuke From Edwards Adviser
Joe Trippi. Mark Penn, defending the Clinton campaign in light of Bill
Shaheen's comments about Obama's drug use, repeatedly referenced Obama's
cocaine use. Edwards adviser Joe Trippi accused Penn of dropping the word
"cocaine" deliberately. Mark Penn said "Well, I think we have made clear
that the -- the issue related to cocaine use is not something that the
campaign was in any way raising. And I think that has been made clear. I
think this kindergarten thing was a joke after Senator." Joe Trippie
responded and said "I think he just did it again. He just did it again. ...
This guy's been filibustering on this. He just said cocaine again."
(Politico, 12/13/07; Video)

FAIRY TALE

Donna Brazile Lashed Into Bill Clinton For Comparing Obama To A "Fairy Tale"
And Said "It's An Insult... As An African-American" And That His Tone And
Words Are "Very Depressing." Donna Brazile lit into Bill Clinton over his
insulting comments of Obama, where he called him a "fairy tale" and said "I
could understand his frustration at this moment. But, look, he shouldn't
take out all his pain on Barack Obama. It's time that they regroup. Figure
out what Hillary needs to do to get her campaign back on track. It sounds
like sour grapes coming from the former commander in chief. Someone that
many Democrats hold in high esteem. For him to go after Obama, using a fairy
tale, calling him as he did last week. It's an insult. And I will tell you,
as an African-American, I find his tone and his words to be very depressing.
... I think his tone, I think calling Barack Obama a kid, he is a United
States senator." (Politico, 1/8/08)


Amaya Smith
South Carolina Press Secretary
Obama for America

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #50
51. Yes,
Edited on Wed Jan-16-08 10:48 AM by seasonedblue
they were pumping their own spin on Bill and Hillary's words. Very unfortunate. People should have been left to decide for themselves. I notice they left out Jessie Jackson Jr.'s comments too.

The Obama campaign was not above stirring the pot, as he claimed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #51
55. It's a matter of opinion who was first or last stirring the racial politics pot
At some point, you either stir back or get slaughtered. You and I will disagree on this, we already know, so let's drop it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #55
56. He kept the fire buring,
Edited on Wed Jan-16-08 11:00 AM by seasonedblue
actually he stoked it with that memo. Yes, we won't agree on this, but I'm satisfied that Obama said yes when Timmy asked if his campaign was pushing the story with the memo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #56
57. Enjoy your day, Sea
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #57
59. You too WD
I hope it's better than usual around here :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #3
33. diaper
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:48 AM
Response to Original message
5. The dislike of Clinton is a big problem for her
and this is nothing compared to the dislike of her in the population at large. She's a polarizing figure, and she has none of Bill's transcendant political skills and charisma.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jasmine621 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. Not really. It is a real problem for those that hate her.
Hate is active and vocal. But there are many, many people who respect her and her life's work as well as her courage in the face opposition and ranchor. For everyone person who wants the chance to scream how much they despise HC, there are at least three others who quietly sing her praises...and who will vote for her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #7
29. That Was Beautiful
~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #7
41. The results so far, seem to prove you right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lyonn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #7
71. Maybe not hate but disappointed
I vaguely remember about the time Bill was out of office, and I was new to the internet, that I wrote Hillary telling her how, if she ran for president, that I would vote for her. Truly admired the lady. Well, it turns out she is no Bill......

During that era it was liberating to write your politicians and tell them how you feel. I wrote letters to lots of people, it gave me some relief from my horror of bush being elected. Once I wrote someone saying what a disaster bush's presidency would be, he was a liberal type, and he wrote back and said something to the effect that people shouldn't get hysterical, something like that. I was so hoping I was wrong - no, he was so wrong, it was worse than I could have imagined.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #5
10. and when she tries, the media mocks her (for the most part)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #5
35. A lot of it isn't dislike for her, but a dislike of the manipulating Party machine.
Edited on Wed Jan-16-08 10:22 AM by rhett o rick
While the popular vote has a close race between the top three, the "super-delegates" are giving Clinton and the machine a large lead.

Super-delegates = party machine The Democratic Party doesn't want the rank and file to have too much power so 40% of the delegates are in the hands of the super-delegates, and according to CNN and ABC they are leaning heavily for Clinton.

IMHO it appears that the Party machine is favoring Clinton and I think there is a lot of backlash by the rank and file.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #35
37. IMHO
the party machine is NOT favoring Clinton. It's the exact opposite.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #37
44. Last count I saw Clinton was leading in 58% of delegates when your
Party Machine super-delegates are included but only 38% when super-delegates are not included. Looks to me like the Machine likes her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #44
48. Oh good,
Edited on Wed Jan-16-08 10:41 AM by seasonedblue
yep, the party machine is behind her then. I'm delighted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lyonn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #48
72. Good thing you like the "party machine"
How I wish she showed more progressive ideas and less concern for big business since she no doubt will win the nomination. The party machine is troubling in my mind, hate to admit that there are the "chosen ones" in our Democratic party.

Yes, if she is nominated she will get my vote. At least we can feel secure with issues concerning the supreme court and all the courts across the country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #48
84. So do you support elections? or no? nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalFighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:52 AM
Response to Original message
6. There is no way it was spontaneous. I agree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jasmine621 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:53 AM
Response to Original message
8. The real story here is that she won anyway. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #8
42. Exacly. 40% for Obama + edwards both - not so much to write home about
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadBadger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #42
75. Answer this smarty. Which candidate(s) supporters were more likely to stay home yesterday?
Obviously the answer is Obama and Edwards, but that would never occur to you know would it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:55 AM
Response to Original message
9. so when is john conyers gonna actually ENFORCE his phoney subpoenas? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #9
14. he sure has changed, in my eyes, since he was holding hearings in the basement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #9
36. Where are all the investigations? I want results. nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
11. I find it hilarious that the same people who spent days demanding that people "vote uncommitted"...
are now claiming that people just went out to vote on their own.

In similar fashion, the same people who have been declaring the MI primary irrelevant are now claiming that it's some spectacular victory for "uncommitted" and a huge loss for Clinton.

Too funny.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcibiades_mystery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
12. Wow...people really organize and encourage particular votes
in election campaigns? I'm stunned.

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #12
16. Organizing is NOT the issue here--but the reasoning they used--they took advantage
of stewed up comments --claiming the comments were racial when they knew they were not--and Obama comes out late to say that.

That is the issue for me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indimuse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 09:57 AM
Response to Original message
13. once again..
a concerted effort to undermine Hillary...IT WON"T WORK!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cloudythescribbler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #13
21. Hillary Clinton is the ONLY major name on the ballot, and urging uncommitted votes ...
... in an orphan primary that the Party itself insists it won't count is merely a "concerted effort to undermine Hillary"???

WOW,that's rich
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:33 AM
Response to Reply #21
43. It was THE ONLY campaigning going - so yeah...Anyway, it got 40% - congrats
Both your candidates trounced her! :eyes:
The pile-on was a success - again
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GigiMommy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:01 AM
Response to Original message
15. You know...
I voted yesterday and I voted "uncommitted" but NOT because I was following BLINDLY behind Conyers. People in this state, people that I heard were MAD(PIS**D) that the MDP (Michigan Democratic Party) used our votes as poker chips with the NDP to move up in the Primary Calendar. I wanted the candidates (all of them) to come here. I wanted to hear for myself their postitions. I had to endure hearing and seeing Republican talking points everywhere. Now I'm NOT in Detroit (in Metro Detroit), but I didn't get the memo from Conyers and his group. I just wanted a FAIR primary and I GOT HOSED!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #15
20. yes, I have heard many people were angry about the playing going on. sorry to
hear you were one who got caught in the middle of the games!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skipos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:02 AM
Response to Original message
17. I live in Michigan
and this "campaign" was never seen nor heard by me nor anyone I know. There was mass confusion amongst many, many Edwards and Obama supporters.

Hillary fan, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #17
23. well, Conyers jumping on the bandwagon must have drawn many in. Just saying
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skipos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #23
25. He drew in many people WHO REALLY PAY ATTENTION. Most people don't.
That is what happens when candidates don't come to a state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RichGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:02 AM
Response to Original message
18. They all use surrogates.
Edited on Wed Jan-16-08 10:06 AM by RichGirl
They all have dirty tricks of some kind. Politics isn't T-ball...it's dirty, nasty mud wrestling. I wish it were different, but wishing won't make it so.

What we are seeing now is just a small forecast of what is to come in the general election. Personally, I want know how well they can take it and how well they dish it out.

If the Obama campaign becomes unglued at the mere mention of color...how are they going to deal with the real and blatant racism that will be thrown at them by the republicans.

Condemning any of our candidates for using surrogates and tricks is really a waste of time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:05 AM
Response to Original message
22. If That Is True People Should Be Ashamed Of Themselves
What you have is a situation where a person can not campaign for himself or herself but people can can campaign against her...

How is that different from telling a defendant in a criminal case he can not defend himself or herself but the prosecutor can prosecute him?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #22
45. And then the crowing "she almost got defeated by "oh, please god no"
Edited on Wed Jan-16-08 10:37 AM by robbedvoter
As if things happened spontaneously...Anyway, last I checked, 55% is SOLIDLY more than 40%.
But, hey, Edwards beat Hillary in Iowa - he must now about "almost" vs really, non?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:09 AM
Response to Original message
27. The All Powerful Conyers did the Vulcan Mind Meld to The Uncommitted
Wow. What a cool spoof idea!

The UnCommitted





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #27
30. funny---but, in the end--He does have poliitcal influence
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #27
46. I respect him enough to have considered his words myself - but as no campaigning
Edited on Wed Jan-16-08 10:41 AM by robbedvoter
was going on (which is absurd anyway), this amounts to a dirty trick.
Telephone calls before election day - the most effective form of campaigning - done it myself. The more respected the caller - the better for the candidate. Except this was AGAINST a candidate . Something GOP would do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #46
58. If Hillary had done like the other candidates, this would not be an issue
She wanted to play a cheap victory. She got it, except the trophy is made out of dogshit.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #58
60. It would even if you perceived she did. Everything in the world is a set-up by her
lately. Even after the facts come in (e.g - "iron my shirts", "the tears question" and even "the media attacking her before NH")
Anyway, the subject of this thread is: dirty tricks by Obama surrogates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fadedrose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #60
66. the "iron my shirts" was a setup???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pathwalker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #66
78. That's a lie, and it's been proven so repeatedly.
Some folks will post anything. It was 2 radio jocks from a local station.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lyonn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #58
73. Agree, why didn't she withdraw like the others? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
28. Wow. Slimy.
I hope this ends now... I was hoping the tone set last night would be the start of a trend.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TriMetFan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
34. It really does not matter...
From what I understood Hillary took 55% of the vote and then there was 40% that was was uncommitted. But out of those 40% only 70% for Obama, 17% for Edwards and 3% for Hillary. So basically Hillary really got like 58% of the vote and Obama of something like 35%. But I think any of these people would do a Great Job as President. Any one but a repuke.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:28 AM
Response to Original message
38. And they still only mustered 40% ! So, there was campaigning after all!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #38
40. Yes,
Obama and Edwards only got 40% between them, with surrogates campaigning for the uncommitted vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:29 AM
Response to Original message
39. ACTUALLY...they were urging people to vote "uncommitted" to protest the primary
Because it didn't count, thanks to the state/national dem parties. This was a protest against the state losing its delegates. That is specifically what the radio spots said. They did not encourage a vote against Hillary.

But, yes, it's true that the Conyers support Obama and almost assuredly hoped the "uncommitted" votes would help him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #39
52. GOP-ers in NJ in 2000 were calling Corzine voters to remind them to vote - at 2 AM!
They pretended to be Corzine's campaign - to get voters angry right before the election. This reminds me of it.
last time I checked, it wasn't Hillary's fault that Michigan voters were disenfrancised. Obama & edwards getting off the ballot was their own choice - and showed disdain for the voters, IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fadedrose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
47. "Uncommitted" response to unhappy voters
When I first learned of the early primary and who was on it, the FIRST thing I did was email Sen. Levin to see if a write-in space would be provided on the ballot since I could not vote for Clinton, and Edwards was not going to be on the ballot. It soon came out that write-ins would not go to the candidate unless said candidate had registered with the state to receive them.

I imagine there were a lot of people like me and the "uncommitted" blitz came as a RESULT, NOT THE CAUSE, of the coverage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #47
61. Dirty tricks are dirty tricks, chicken/egg dillema nothwithstanding.
And you only got 40% - so, no reason to celebrate and be snarky as you tried.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4083144
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fadedrose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #61
64. I voted Kucinich
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 11:31 AM
Response to Original message
63. This was a grassroots campaign....
that was started by people who want to end the Corporate "Pay to Play" rule in Washington.
It was started the day after Hillary betrayed the DNC (The DLC & the Clintons have always hated Dean) by refusing the DNC request to NOT campaign in Michigan after the Michigan Party "jumped the shark".

Conyers picked up the grassroots campaign to restore the Peoples Voice late in the game.
I suspect that Clinton's BIG CORPORATE backers wouldn't let her join the rest of the Democratic Team. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dionysus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 01:55 PM
Response to Original message
67. wwaahhhhhh!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BringBigDogBack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 01:57 PM
Response to Original message
68. sounds like excuses, excuses...
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CyberPieHole Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 02:07 PM
Response to Original message
70. ruggerson, Senator Clinton got 60% of the vote...Obama and Edwards got ZERO, NADA, HIHIL, ZIP, SQUAT
So the Clinton~haterz were able to stir some of their brethren to vote "uncommitted"...don't worry about it. Obama and Edwards were too stupid to keep their names on the ballot...they showed the voters of Michigan what they think their votes are worth: ZERO, NADA, NIHIL, ZIP AND SQUAT! Between the two of them they got 40% of the vote (with Clinton~haterz campaigning against her)? Senator Clinton got 60% WITHOUT having to campaign.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

:kick: and recommend
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skipos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #70
74. 60%? Provide a link or admit you are lying. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadBadger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #74
76. Yup, I know as you know it was more like 55.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CyberPieHole Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #76
77. And Obama got what? A big fat ZERO...which is more than he deserves...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skipos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #77
79. Do you admit you were lying? Or are my eyes deceiving me?
I see "60%" in your post. My glasses perscription is pretty recent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
avrdream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 02:57 PM
Response to Original message
80. So much for the pledge not to campaign - let the surrogates do it instead.
Disgusting politics from supporters of the great unifier.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scout Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
82. i got that suggestion from several email lists i'm on....
to vote for uncommitted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JustABozoOnThisBus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-16-08 06:04 PM
Response to Original message
83. What part of MI are you in? I didn't see any campaign
The local TV news folks were informative and seemingly neutral about explaining the choices of "Clinton" vs "Uncommitted" vs "write-in", and the consequences of a write-in.

I didn't see any signage for Clinton or uncommitted, and didn't get any robo-phone calls for either. My answering machine was jammed with Repub robo-calls. It took a while to sanitize it.

There may have been signs at the polls, I don't know - I voted by absentee ballot to avoid the crowds (joke).

But if there was any organized campaign for uncommitted, it had to be very low key. I saw nothing.

Where did you see a campaign?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kucinich4America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-17-08 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
85. Nothing at all wrong with organizing to stop Hillary from buying a nomination.
It's just too bad they didn't focus their energies into giving the primary win to the other candidate on the ballot, and restore some fucking actual democracy to this scam of a primary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 15th 2024, 11:20 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC