It's starting! Donna Brazille tells Hillary it's over.

And guess what committee she sits on? That's right, RBC. She may be officially uncommitted but it's obvious that she's in Obama's column and that means that RBC will not give Hill what she wants- FL as it stands with full votes for delegates and MI with 0 delegates and votes for Obama. Smart money is on the RBC already settled on a solution that gives Obama all the uncommitted in MI- if not more- and gives the FL delegation half votes. And if Hillary knows what's good for her, she'll accept that solution gracefully.

Donna Brazile tells Hillary it's over
by Belvedere Come Here Boy
Wed May 21, 2008 at 06:03:56 AM PDT
You have to scroll down to read Donna Brazile's quote in the USA Today story today.

But even if you grant Brazile's Obama-lean, and she is remaining "uncommitted", here is the priceless gem:

Democratic strategist Donna Brazile, an influential superdelegate who hasn't endorsed either contender, says Obama has now earned the party's nod. "It's time to start healing the party and bringing everyone together," she says. "No one has ever won a majority of pledged delegates and lost the nomination."
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/5/21/85921/3772/154/519543

what RBC is. Kinda slow this morning. K&R

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

they said she was smiling and rocking in her seat.

I thought that was so great because she has tried to be very neutral on tv

he tried to make her go left when she's clearly going right

It's hard to imagine any Democrat not being excited by Obama's speech.

Their last hopes rest on assuming that ALL of the undeclared superdelegates are undecided. I mean, who could actually make a decision after all that they've seen. To the Convention! :rofl:

They already know there is going to be protests they have already stated that Clinton's situation has no bearing on their decision.

They are NOT going to destroy the party for the next decade by seating the two states as is.

:scared:

and he's just starting campaigning. Obama also leads him in MI. Particularly in MI, where the repuke economy is suffocating people, McCain has very little chance. And if Obama does lose FL, there are quite a few other states he can compensate for that loss: He leads McCain in NM and CO.

It's not exactly a secret that I don't have much confidence in O. Nevertheless, assuming McC is being truthful about his intentions, his agenda will sink this country even further than it is already sunk.

It is duly noted.

Also duly noted.

This whole thing is a dreadful reminiscence of 1988.

Obama is nothing like Dukakis. He has two qualities Dukakis sorely lacked: Charisma and teflon. And 2008 is not 1988.

before she believes it.

Thanks, now I've got the image of Hillary at the convention in a pirate costume.

as long as she arrives in this:

No sane person is accusing him of anything of the sort.

Without them...WE LOSE.

Some people can't see the obvious.

Good post.

1> It assumes that FL and MI will go red because of this.

2> It assumes that either state would go Blue if it didn't.

3> It assumes that there is only one path to 270.

She's boring and a bit dim. I don't know why she's on TV so much.

Probably because she makes us look boring and a bit dim.

But it is probably over.

I believe she co-chairs the RBC.

Doesn't matter. A dead cat could run the elections this year and we'd still clean up.

There will always be a place on TV for people like her.

agreement among the Rules & Bylaws Committee that if Senator Clinton does not accept their proposal for Florida and Michigan, that they will encourage the undeclared super delegates to close the show.

Where did you hear that? It would be interesting to watch!

I hope they give both pledged and supers .5 of a delegate. I don't like the idea of the pledged delegates getting halved but the supers keeping a full vote. The supers were (in many cases) the instigators of the entire problem. They shouldn't get a full vote if the pledged votes get halved (which they will because that was already part of the rules and the DNC has to do something or else it would just be encouraging this kind of crap in 2012.

Televising would be key for a couple reasons, mainly because of the need for complete transparency.
There will be protesters in DC for it, and lots of people wanting to know how they decide.
Also, a televised meeting means that we can move on right away with our nominee.

By the way, if we give Obama the uncommitted delegates in Michigan and otherwise seat the delegates without punishment, then Obama still has the pledged delegate advantage. Michigan and Florida set him back 35 delegates. After last night then, worst case scenario says he needs an additional 8 or so pledged delegates for the majority.

Just in case you were wondering!
:headbang:

The party leaders have decided to recognize the will of the people and elected delegates on this. I can say without any chance of error that even some of those who supported Clinton have decided in private that they are going to support Obama for the nominee.

Brazile's a stooge.

Don't disagree that she's not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

The hill campaign is sinking fast.

Your girl isn't Queen of the universe, she doesn't get to make all the rules everywhere, you need to accept this for the healing to start.

I wonder if the decision to have Edwards endorse Obama in Michigan has anything to do with that.

It certainly makes it seem more likely, IMO, considering almost all of the uncommitted votes were for either Obama or Edwards.

That's laughable. Brazille has shown her bias for Obama for a long time now. She was even called out on CNN by Campbell Brown for showing her bias for Obama. Brazille can go to hell.

and a SD.

Who cares which one of these tv talkies is clamoring for it?

It should be recognized that these states which chose to hold these late primaries can't win for losing. All of the resistance to moving them up flies in the face of their effort to be recognized in their positions at the end of the process. I'll bet we don't have such a late convention next time.

you get over that

Who cares.

They don't seem to matter with some of these belligerent folks.

Too into it these days? Or paid for it?

Committee of the DNC for weeks now, and the meeting on May 31 that decides the MI and FL mess.

:eyes:

:rofl:

thanks for the honesty Donna... like no one knew...

8/30 have endorsed Obama.

two pro-Clinton states?

I would be less suspicious of Donna Brazille if she wasn't still (as of May 20, 2008) appearing on TV as a "neutral" representative of the DNC.

Why the need for the dishonesty, Donna? :hi:

FL and MI for breaking the rules, just like Brazile?

Ickes, Harold Ickes.

Why was a top Clinton aide the person who crafted the punishments?

McCauliff, Terry McCauliff.

your post is nonsense.

All the while promoting Barack Obama on national TV, night in and night out (appearing as a DNC "neutral".)

Harold Ickes is not being dishonest about which candidate he is working for, at the very least. Why is Donna Brazille still pretending???

it's pointless to discuss anything with people who don't live in the real world.

I suggest just throwing around a few flaccid insults and skulking away!

:hi:

Your argument is ludicrous and predicated on falsities. At the time that the DNC voted to punish FL and MI, no one believed the race would take the route that it did. It's widely known that Clinton and her many supporters on the DNC, pushed for front loading with Super sized Tuesday. Like Hill they thought she'd have it sewn up on Feb 5 and that FL and MI would be inconsequential to her plan to win early. So assmuming that Brazile had magical oracle powers is patently absurd.

The decision was made by the RBC in August 2007.

That's a "seven" on the end up there.

Hillary didn't start yapping until AFTER she got votes in those states and AFTER she decided she needed those states to win.

How do you explain that?

How do you explain Ickes and McCauliffe who have, after the fact, ABSOLUTELY flip-flopped on their position?

Such bullshit.

{1}Co-Chairs - no endorsement
Alexis Herman (co-chair, Washington , D.C. )
James Roosevelt, Jr. (co-chair, Massachusetts )

Members - Clinton supporters (12)
Hartina Flournay (DC)
Donald Fowler (SC)
Harold Ickes, Jr. (DC)
Alice Huffman (CA)
Ben Johnson (DC)
Elaine Kamarck (MA)
Eric Kleinfeld (DC)
Mona Pasquil (CA)
Mame Reiley (VA)
Garry Shah (D-CA)
Elizabeth Smith (DC)
Michael Steed (MD)

Members - Obama supporters (8)
Martha Fuller Clark (NH)
Carol Khare Fowler (SC)
Janice Griffin (MD)
Thomas Hynes (IL)
Allan Katz (FL)
Sharon Stroschein (SD)
Sarah Swisher (IA)
Everett Ward (NC)

Members - no known endorsement (8)
Donna Brazille (DC)
Mark Brewer (MI)
Ralph Dawson (NY)
Yvonne Gates ( NV)
Alice Germond (DC) - DNC Secretary
Jaime Gonzalez, Jr. (TX)
David McDonald (WA)
Jerome Wiley Segovia (VA)




(2) Democratic Party panel members show little interest in Clinton's call to seat disputed delegates
By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press
Last update: May 16, 2008 - 10:

WASHINGTON - Sorry, Sen. Clinton. Michigan and Florida can't save your campaign. Interviews with those considering how to handle the two states' banished convention delegates found little interest in the former first lady's best-case scenario. ….
If their elections had been held according to party rules, Michigan and Florida would have allocated a total of 313 pledged delegates based on the outcome of the vote. Using the results of the January elections, Clinton would get 178 to Obama's 67, giving her a 111-vote advantage. As of Thursday, she was behind 180 delegates, so that would not catch her up even under that unlikely scenario.

The plans before the committee will be more generous to Obama. The Michigan Democratic Party has proposed giving 69 of its 128 delegates to Clinton and 59 to Obama, an advantage of 10 delegates for Clinton.
A proposal from Florida would halve its 185 delegates. From that, Clinton would get 52.5 and Obama 33.5, a 19-delegate advantage for Clinton. …..

More:
http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/president/19003084.html?location_refer=Most%20Viewed:Homepage

{3} Section 3.4 (P): Voting: A member of the RBC shall not vote on a challenge arising in his or her own state.

Great info. I was going to post something similar but had only my faulty memory (I remembered 13 Clinton insiders on the rules committee, so glad I didn't post).

I've been worried for some time that she has the committee stocked with her peeps and that she was counting on that as her ace in the hole.

Good news to hear what Donna said, gives me hope.

Donna Brazile is irrelevant.

In your heart, you know Obama will be the nominee.

I look forward to you supporting Barack Obama for President in the GE.