Hillary has outdone herself. I’m ragin’ mad.
Her warning of the price that might be paid if the DNC does not seat the Florida and Michigan delegations according to her wishes:
“If we fail to (allow the Michigan and Florida votes to be counted) I worry that we will pay not only a moral cost, but a political cost as well,” she said. “We know the road to a Democratic White House runs right through Florida and Michigan. If we care about winning those states in November, we need to count your votes now. If Democrats send a message that we don’t fully value your votes, we know Sen. McCain and the Republicans will be more than happy to have them. The Republicans will make a simple and compelling argument: why should Florida and Michigan voters trust the Democratic Party to look out for you when they won’t even listen to you.”
It sounds to me like Hillary is giving Democrats in Florida and Michigan a reason to vote for McCain in November. A reason, an excuse, an argument to do anything but vote for Barack Obama. Let me remind you that in Michigan Barack Obama’s name wasn’t even on the ballot. And he did not campaign in Florida because BOTH he and Hillary agreed not to. Yet now it’s only “fair” and “moral” to count those states for her?
Shame on you, Hillary.
Clearly, you only care about yourself. You don’t care about your party or your country. If your name is the ONLY one on the ballot in November, I won’t vote for you. You’ve proven to me that you are everything I’ve hated in the current president: arrogant, utterly selfish, and uncaring.
Markos Moulitsas (Kos) said it best in a recent edition of Newsweek:
has proved during the past few months that she is a fighter, that she is tenacious, and that she is in the race to win. There’s just one problem. She’s already lost.
No matter how you define victory, holds an insurmountable lead in the race to earn the Democratic nomination. He leads in the one metric that matters most: the pledged delegates chosen directly by Democratic voters. But he also leads in the popular vote, the number of states won and money raised.
Clinton’s near-lone chance of victory rests with a coup by superdelegate, persuading enough of them to overcome the primary voters’ preference. Yet a coup by elite Democrats would be ill-received, to put it mildly. Obama’s base spans the party’s most loyal and engaged constituencies: African-Americans, professionals who generate hundreds of millions in small-dollar donations and a conventional-wisdom-defying outpouring of youth support.
If Obama lost at the polling booth, these supporters would accept the voters’ verdict and carry on. Many, including those who backed Howard Dean’s heartbreaking 2004 campaign, have been through such disappointment before. But if Beltway bigwigs steal a hard-won victory, it would amount to a declaration of civil war. Not only would the resolve of thousands of loyal foot soldiers and the party’s new fund-raising base be irrevocably shaken, but it would torpedo the opportunity to build and strengthen a new generation of Democrats.
Clinton’s best-case scenario for victory requires sundering her own party. It is an inherently divisive strategy, but she doesn’t appear to care. For Clinton, all’s fair in pursuit of victory—even destroying her party from within. Her campaign has adopted a bizarre “insult-40-states strategy,” which has belittled states small, liberal and Red. Apparently, the only states that matter are the ones she coincidentally happens to win.