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.