Only Edwards has the standing to call Obama a "sore loser". I'm not sure how the Clintons could seriously level that charge after all the complaining they've been doing.

The difference is that Obama actually followed through with some evidence and a formal complaint. The Clintons threw around a bunch of serious allegations when trying to stir up their voters at rallies, but have never provided evidence or filed a formal complaint.

I don't know if this is such a good idea. Seems to me it sounds like sour grapes. I would think that it would be better to forget about nevada and move on at this point. It kind of gets the right wing media to bring up mr. bill's baseless claims to "balance" the reporting. I think I would have just left it alone.

Come on. Didn't you see Bill today say how he personally spoke with 6 hispanic women who claimed that they'd been told they couldn't vote if they weren't voting for Obama by their boss at the casino? Both of them did the same thing! Thin-skinned Obama just can't handle a fight.

I am an American,
but I see that we are really becoming if not the laughing stock, at the least
irrelevant on the world stage of Ideas.
But many Americans would have you believe that George Bushes Home ownership society "Idea" was an intellectual rather then just a business as usual thing.
Americans just don't know what an Idea is any more.
The bright light is mistaken and confused for the almighty dollar sign for Americans.
Well lets face it -
Americans are broke.
Thanks to Clinton and Bush.

The only person with leadership imagination and ingenuity is Barack Obama.

Oh, and if you don't believe Clinton witnessed voter fraud because he says so, well that's just a damned right-wing talking point.

I just don't know how Obama will hold up in the general. Which is why I wanted him to run in 2016, when at least he had faced a republican in a general election before. If he thinks the Clintons don't play fair, just wait until he sees what the right wing smear machine has for him. Personally I like him more than Hill, but there is a lot of uncertainty with Obama.

Lee Atwater
Bill Clinton
Karl Rove

what do they all have in common?

They tear democrats apart for sport

So first Billy "overheard" these conversations

Now Billy says he "took part" in these conversations

Well I remember when he wagged his finger
in your face and said "I did not have sex with that woman"

The Clintons are disgusting people!

See, the difference is, I've actually heard a lot of documented facts, or at least accusations, about misconduct or irregularities about the Clinton campaign, whereas all I've heard negative about Obama has been Bill whining, but I don't remember ever seeing and evidence or detailed documentation. THAT is the difference here.

It'll be interesting to see what happens.

agreed, brad.

politics is a dirty game, but a game that requires referees and accountability nonetheless. if you have 1,600 complaints and choose to ignore them, how can you honestly argue that you're seeking to operate as a voice of the people? obama should move forward with this (tactfully as possible)...the same way hillary or edwards or anyone should.

BTW, how is that New Hampshire recount going?

Oops, looks like the money ran out.
http://www.sos.nh.gov/recountresults.htm

Thanks for following through, Kucinich. Really classy.

Bill on January 19th: "Today when my daughter and I were wandering through the hotel, and all these culinary workers were mobbing us telling us they didn’t care what the union told them to do, they were gonna caucus for Hillary.

There was a representative of the organization following along behind us going up to everybody who said that, saying 'if you’re not gonna vote for our guy were gonna give you a schedule tomorrow so you can’t be there.' So, is this the new politics? I haven’t seen anything like that in America in 35 years. So I will say it again – they think they're better than you."

Bill Clinton today: "I personally took six Hispanic women who came to me to say, 'We are so glad to see you, and we'll be there for you in November,' at one of the hotels, and I said, 'Well ... aren't you gonna caucus?' They said, 'No, we can't,' and I said, 'Why?' They said, 'Well you had to sign up by Wednesday and we didn't.' And I say, 'Why didn't you,' and she said, 'Well because we're for Hillary and we were told if we were for her our union told us we couldn't sign up for her. We could only caucus if we weren't gonna be for her and we were gonna be for him, so we couldn't sign up.' And now that's six people. We were told that hundreds of times."

Think that might be a noteworthy inconsistency? I suppose he could be just chock full of anecdotes about this stuff, but you'd think if that were the case they'd actually have lodged an official complaint before the primary since they were thinking ahead of time that they'd fair poorly with the culinary votes.

"Of course Obama is going to be called a "sore loser" it's what the Republicans said of Al Gore and John Kerry - and both folded under the charge. Obama needs to be strong about this and talk continuously about disenfranchisement.

Well said. I wouldn't be surprised if Kerry encouraged him to do this. I'm sure he regrets not fighting strong enough in 2004.

Re Meet the Press ... Every time an Obamabot invokes Tim Russert and his roundtable, we know they're getting desperate. Imagine that? Tim Russert sided with Obama over Hillary. Shocking!

Re John Kerry ... His "role" in this campaign is one of the sadder developments. He, in fact, embodies why Obama can't be our nominee. Kerry reminds us that even people with long records and strong experience can "get defined" by the GOP instead of defining themselves for the voters. Obama is Kerry. Clinton is, well, Clinton.

Maybe we should go back and examine the Iowa caucus and make sure every person there was able to caucus. Oh right, I forgot, St. Obama won that one so it must be correct. Funny how everytime he loses, the Obama crowd shouts fraud. NH and now Nevada.

I think for many Obama fans, the Democratic party will never be pure enough. Were you the same useful idiots who voted vor Nader in 2000?

Obama pretty solidly confirmed the sore loser narrative when he was too petulant to even congratulate the winner of the Nevada primary.

I caucused in NV and I saw supporters of both candidates being aggressive...expected it, but this shows what a sore loser Obama is...how can we expect him to compete against the repubs if he is this thin-skinned against a Dem??? Does this mean he will challenge every state he does not win...did Hillary challenge here loss in Iowa...who is the better candidate to go against the Repubs???

GO HILLARY 2008

I regretted ever contributing to Kerry's compaign in 2004. Maybe it was for the election of a democrat not Kerry himself. This man was a presidential nominee and has now lowered himself as an attack dog for Obama. unbelievable!!! Just as someone pointed before, Kerry went to Nevada to compaign against Clinton where Bill compaigned hard for him. Damn it! Even Chelsea Clinton compaigned for Kerry in 2004. What an ingrateful SOB!

At least Obama has the balls to actually back up what he says.
I didn't see many Democrats giving thanks to God when Gore and Kerry decided to bend over.
Now, when it is the Clintons getting called on their BS it's all of a sudden "sour grapes".
Whatever.........
Look, you Hillbots should get something through your thick skulls. WE DON'T CARE WHAT YOU THINK. We are interested in a novel concept known as the RULE OF LAW, and DEMOCRACY. We know that these are foreign concepts to the Clintons since it was Bill that introduced Extraordinary Rendition, and lying to a Federal Grand Jury. But that's OK. We will exorcise leniance when you get busted for this crap because since you have no morals in the first place, you don't know that lying is wrong. Hell you lie so much, you can't tell the difference anymore.

I regretted ever contributing to Kerry's compaign in 2004. Maybe it was for the election of a democrat not Kerry himself. This man was a presidential nominee and has now lowered himself as an attack dog for Obama. unbelievable!!

The Clintons will destroy the democratic party..there's all the evidence we need

At least the Obama campaign is taking action. Bill Clinton keeps whining about it, and yet the Clinton campaign does nothing. If there was such obvious intimidation, it should be looked into.

As for the Obama is a sore loser theme? Since he received one more delegate than Bill and Hillary, how is it a sore loser mentality to take this action?

Hey, irishamerican, take it easy, my friend. Don't lose sight of the fact that you apparently support the candidate of Hope, of New Ways, of Promise ... of every empty platitude in the book. Yours is not the campaign of shrieking e-mail screeds. It's the campaign of empty ideas and gauzy focus ... the campaign that lies about Rezko and Iraq and health care and the economy, and then -- when finally called on the lies -- claims to be operating on a higher plane than the rest of us.

I don't know if this is such a good idea. Seems to me it sounds like sour grapes. I would think that it would be better to forget about nevada and move on at this point.

I am broadly inclined to agree with you. The only thing that I can think that might argue against us is that it might anger Floridians (who have frequently had their votes stolen) if Clinton could be associated in their minds with electoral dirty tricks. Given that he cannot actually campaign in Florida, maybe this is just the only way that he could think to try to close the gap there? I am just guessing. Other than that possibility, I agree that it is best just to turn the page on NV and not dwell on it.

This will probably hold up as well as the diebold conspiracy theory based recount in NH.

Man this guy really hates losing doesn't he?

To be very fair, dear Katie, it was Kucinich, not Obama, who asked for the recount in NH. Obama conceded defeat there graciously and has not looked back.

Sadly Obama doesn't have to wait to be swiftboated by anybody, he's doing a great auto de fe.
Wah Wah Wah cries the baby! Geez, is there no end to his whining?
And by the way, check out the koskids complaints for a taste of the Obamabot's allegations:
"She was loud and mean to me and kept saying I should caucus for Clinton even after I said no and then I saw her talking to other people to get them to her side!"
"She sounded like she was from New York so you know she wasn't really a resident!"
They do go on. And on.

And does he really want to tie his campaign to Loser Kerry? Pathetic...

Aren't there any moderators on these threads?

Moderators for what, Tithonia? To weed out people who don't agree with you? Don't think so.

"Zach wrote on January 23, 2008 5:00 PM:

Come on. Didn't you see Bill today say how he personally spoke with 6 hispanic women who claimed that they'd been told they couldn't vote if they weren't voting for Obama by their boss at the casino? Both of them did the same thing! Thin-skinned Obama just can't handle a fight."

OMG! This is the most naive post I've read in quite some time! Why in God's name do you think Republican's are hell bent on destroying unions? Because Democrats support union causes and unions endorse democratic candidates, and those unions instruct their members to vote for the candidate they've endorsed! Of course the union who has endorsed Obama is going to instruct their members to vote for Obama, perhaps even strong arming them. That's the quid pro quo for getting decent wages, excellent health care, etc. That's the whole point! If unions are unable to get the votes out for the people they endorse, they would become irrelevant.

If Hillary had gotten the endorsement, which was expected frankly, this would be a complete non-issue because Bill-o knows full well how the process works. Sheesh!

The Clintons are rapidly destroying themselves and the Democratic party.
I never thought I would see the day that a democratic candidate would use racebaiting, outright lies and even voter surpression to win.

Shame on the Clintons
Never would I vote for that woman
Everything about them is phony especially their so-called marriage.
Bill is and has always been a serial philanderer during their marriage.
Most of Hillary's experience is in covering up for Bill's indiscretions and smearing any woman that accuses him
They are shameless and dispicable.

If these allegations are investigated, I could see this badly damaging, and almost sinking a campaign.

If this is true, the Clintons need to investigate how this happened, and prevent it from occuring again to regain the public trust. This would badly damage both Clinton's respectability, and would be hard for them to overcome in a short amount of time.

If this is not true, Obama is sunk: His appeal and his campaign are built on the perception of honesty, and something big and demonstratively false blows that out of the water.

That said, when a campaign receives several hundred complaints alleging that doors were closed before they were supposed to, that ballots were handed out with a candidate's name pre-checked, that people are being told that sign-in sheets are for a certain candidate's supporters only, and that apparently those supporters were told that nothing is "illegal unless [the caucus chairs] tell you so," then it would be irresponsible for any campaign to ignore those findings and not have those investigated.

KevinH wrote on January 23, 2008 6:20 PM:

Irishamerican:

I'm done with being inspired by a candidate. I'd like to win an election first. I want a candidate who's tough enough to take on the Repubs and can win.

I think one of the problems with the Democratic party over the last 40 years has been too many people only wanting to support inspirational candidates at the expense of winning. What good is inspiration if you don't win the election?"

Where have I heard this sort of argument before? Oh yes! When people voted for Kerry over Howard Dean in 2004 because Kerry would surely beat that big, bad Bush!

How about voting for a candidate who inspires AND can win the general election? That candidate would be, IMHO Barack Obama.

ChrisNBamaP:

Ah yes, instead of inspiring, we decided to nominate the dullest, most plodding candidate around (at least until Fred Thompson showed up).

Here is some discussion of at least some of the reported irregularities on DailyKos:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/1/19/162953/644/790/439573

I won't put anything past the Clintons at this point, they've proven that no low is too low for them.

Steve S.

That is the most interesting thing about this whole "universal" healthcare debate. Both Hillary and Edwards mandate that all American's be covered, which implies that, in certain circumstances, people will actually be penalized if they can not afford the subsidized versions of their respective plan's. Obama compared their plans to Romney's in Massachusett's where there are people who are unable to afford the subsidized health care and are being financially penalized by the state government because of the mandates. How prevalent this is, I don't know, but the fact that the possiblity exists is troublesome. Obama's plan, while substantially the same as Edward's and Clinton's doesn't penalize adults who opt not to pay into the system. I think this is a plus, and it is being strenuously portrayed as a weakness.

You are 100% right that a single payer system is the way to go, but that simply ain't gonna happen.

The Clinton campaign has filed their own complaint. Not that it has anything to do with Obama's campaign filing a complaint. Just a coincident. Promise.

It seems that the Clinton people are filing their own complaint about election irregularities in Nevada.

Here's Ben Smith weighing in.

Steve, sorry to say single payer healthcare like Kucinich wants has 0 chance of actually becoming law. The country just isn't there. It's sad really, I'm self employed and can't currently afford insurance so I'd give up 1% of my income in a second to make it happen. My dad, also self employed, pays over $7000 per year for his insurance and isn't sure how long he can keep doing that. He'd also gladly give up 1% of his income. The country simply isn't there.

I actually think the non-mandate nature of Obama's plan actually makes it better then the Clinton or Edwards plan. First I agree with him that it just isn't fair to fine people who can't afford insurance thus making them both worse off financially and still not covered. Secondly you know the Republicans are going to cry that government is stepping on peoples toes making them do things. Obama can just smile and say hey, don't like it don't buy it. It makes his plan that much easier to actually become law.

From Nevada: I was there, in the Caucus rooms, when Hillary supporters broke many rules... overzealous they were, and our side -- Obama and Edwards supporters united -- had to intervene to stop them. They tried to close the doors a half hour eary; they posted illegal signs; they broke the rules in soliciting campaign support while registering new voters... I am the source of one of the 1600 complaints. I am a long-standing Democrat in Nevada. I am very unsure if I would ever vote for or support a Clinton for anything. This isn't being a sore loser -- we won my state, in the end, we fought for our delegates and won by one! No matter that, I'm tired of this style of mud-slinging, aggressive, bullying, lying and cheating politics. In other words: I'm so, so tired of the Clintons!

Que Dios les bendiga, y que no se olvida de Obama --

Diego

Katie - "Man this guy really hates losing doesn't he?"

Well, of course he does! Particularly if he's being attacked by the topgun political machine that is supposed to be in the same party!

And, the fact of the matter is that Barack Obama won in Iowa, by 8%, and Hillary won in NH by 2%, and NV 6%, but at the moment, Obama is ahead in deligate count - 38, 36, 18.

I'd say he's winning! No, what you're really seeing here, Katie, is how badly BILLARY hates losing!

Of course, with kind of money they pull in http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120097424021905843.html this loss won't hurt the Clintons much.

Chris:
"single payer healthcare like Kucinich wants has 0 chance of actually becoming law. The country just isn't there."

Maybe. We'll never know. The press is determined it won't happen. With the dozens of polls they take every day, that's one thing they won't ask.
But public opinion is no longer important. The government is doing whatever it's told to by the oligarchy and the press provides the coverage that is dictated by advertisers. The debates have been filtered by them. No questions from Wolf dealing with not-for-profit health care, defense spending,torture, impeachment, or peace. The word 'public' doesn't even come up.

Which employers would prefer to keep paying for health care? Support is there, and would be almost unanimous if given a fair shake on TV.

Is somebody paying all of these Obama fluffers? They just drone on and on and on.

Yes we get it. The "Clintons" are destroying the democratic party. Hillary is bad. She will say anyting. Hillary has used the dirtiest tactics ever concieved of in any political campiagn. Hillary can't possibly win the election. Obama is the great HOPE. He will show us the way. ONLY Obama can win. Only Obama can end the string of Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton republican rule. Clinton and Bush are the same. On and on and on.