Hillary Supporter Ed Rendell: Let Pennsylvania Voters Have Their Say
The push-back against calls for Hillary to drop out begins in earnest from the Hillary side with this statement just out from Hillary supporter Ed Rendell:
“I respect Senator Leahy and like him very much but as the governor of one of America’s largest states, I am disappointed in his comments. By virtually every measure, this race is neck and neck with less than 1% of the more than 27 million votes cast forming the difference between the two candidates. To call for an end to this race before the people of Pennsylvania have had a chance to make their views known is wrong and a disservice to millions of Democrats.”
Casting calls for her to drop out as a slight to Pennsylvania voters, obviously. Clearly, the Obama campaign has to take care not to associate itself with any calls for her to get out because it would galvanize Hillary's core supporters and give Camp Hillary an opening to claim that the Obama camp is dissing Pennsylvania.
Advertisement







Comments (90)
"Leahy: Hillary Has "Every Right, But Not A Very Good Reason" To Stay In Race"
TRUE!!!
March 28, 2008 4:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where do they keep getting this "less than 1% of the more than 27 million votes cast" difference?
March 28, 2008 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
They are adding in Mich and Flordia and they arent adding in some caucuses. (they are lying)
March 28, 2008 5:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obviously, Pennsylvania Voters Will Their Say!
March 28, 2008 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
What is Rendell talking about "less than 1%"? Obama leads by 2.5-3% in the popular vote (RealClear numbers). Unless of course he's including Michigan and Florida - which I guess he is. If that's the case, are they really going to make the case that she's won the poplar vote by including those two non-contests and drag this out all summer?
March 28, 2008 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think Rendell's wrong about a 1% difference. I think it's 2 or 3%.
March 28, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Leaving what Rendell said aside, everytime I see him on TV he looks like a used car salesman who is about to try and sell you a lemon. I dunno. I just get a weird This-Guy-Is-A-Huckster vibe from him.
I got nothing wrong with what he is saying quoted above, though.
March 28, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
He is, he was a blowhard, prior to this.
March 28, 2008 5:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now you know how I feel when I look at Obama!
March 29, 2008 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
I've gone back and forth on this issue.
At this point, I'm resigned to the fact that Hillary will stay in at LEAST until June 3, if not after.
At some point after June 3, I suspect superdelegates will start moving to Obama in earnest. (ie, more than they have already).
March 28, 2008 4:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the instant Clinton campaign spin Greg.
Greg Sargent = Clinton campaign surrogate.
March 28, 2008 4:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Look, the whole point of EC is to post election news, including what the campaign and surrogates are saying/spinning. It's not an endorsement if it's posted. If you don't like it, don't read it.
March 28, 2008 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's right. If Greg clips it, he gets to spin it. Anyone who doesn't like it can start their own blog. This constant whining about Greg is irritating.
March 29, 2008 11:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
So PA is the only state left to vote now?
The Clinton camp's myopic view of this country's population is stunning sometimes. I mean, for sure North Carolina shouldn't vote, I get that, but Indiana?
Maybe we need a list of the real states so we can follow along with the new logic.
The Primary States of America.
March 28, 2008 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
He is the Governor of Pennsylvania, he's advocating for his state with this statement not only Hillary. She has said repeatedly that all of the remaining states including Michigan and Florida need their votes counted.
Why are the Obama supporters so afraid of people having their votes counted? Do you all know that if people were really given the choice, they'll vote for Hillary? If that's what happens, then that's who deserves the nomination and will win in November. You should all have the kind of confidence in your candidate that we have in Hillary, and demand for the votes to be counted to prove that your candidate is the best one for the job.
March 28, 2008 9:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did you really just say:
I suppose all those who did not vote for Hillary (over 50%) were coerced?
And despite the common comparison to a football game, this is not at all like a football game? At a certain point there is one potential winner. This is why the republican field narrowed so quickly, and this is why previous democratic contenders dropped out. At a certain point, despite there being time left on the clock, it is actually mathematically impossible for someone to pull ahead.
I am not advocating she drop out, although I would much prefer it. She is entitled to run to the bitter end, but the motives for doing so must be examined.
March 28, 2008 10:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
lbm,
Ed Rendell was willing to change the state's election procedures when the Clinton campaign blew their filing deadlines and didn't seat their delegates. Sure he wants the people of Pennsylvania to have a voice, as long as it's the right voice.
No one wants to talk about Senator Clinton's own disorganized and in-fighting campaign, and how that reflects on her as a leader. How will she run the country when her own campaign blows one of the biggest name-recognition factors in any election ever? The experience that is being repeated is one of poor management and organization. The world has millions of articulate policy wonks. We need a leader.
March 31, 2008 6:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I love that
The Primary States of America
March 28, 2008 9:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
who buys the Vote are all weighted into voter-delegates.
Counting all the sanctioned contests.
82.5% of the voter-delegates have been assigned, 53.1% to 46.9%, it isn't very close.
March 28, 2008 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
"To call for an end to this race before the people of Pennsylvania have had a chance to make no difference in the eventual outcome is wrong and a disservice to millions of Democrats.”
March 28, 2008 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
"By virtually every measure, this race is neck and neck"
Um, no Ed. That's just not true.
March 28, 2008 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
get over it. it is.
go hillary!
March 28, 2008 9:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh yeah. Where is all the crazy smack talking I have grown so fond of from the candidates or their surrogates? It just seems so calm lately. Sure, you got Leahy and Dodd expressing that Hillary drop out, but that is pretty weak stuff. I want some drama, yo. Are Obama and Hillary deciding to play it nice now or is this a calm before the storm?
Dang it. Somebody say something off-the-wall stupid! I am getting bored over here. Entertain me.
March 28, 2008 4:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Except:
Pledged Delegates: +167 (O)
Contests won:+16 (O)
Popular Vote: +800,000 (O)
Money raised: +40MM (O)
Other than that, I agree 100% Ed.
March 28, 2008 4:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
800,000 out of 300,000,000 is not a lead of any consequence. The Super-delegates still need to think clearly about which candidate can and will beat McCain in the long run. Don't think the Republicans won't play dirty with Obama's race, his religion, his #1 Liberal standing, and his inexperience.
March 28, 2008 5:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
More intellectual dishonesty and obfuscation.
300MM (I assume you mean the population of the US). Irrelevant to the Democratic Nomination contests held to date.
800M is relevant when you consider the 27MM votes in DNC sanctioned contests (excluding caucus goers). So stopped playing stupid.
As for Republicans, they are going to do what they do no matter who the Democrats field as a candidate. Stop operating out of fear.
In any event, they aren't neck and neck. That was my point.
March 28, 2008 5:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Point still not taken. 48% to 44% is still not a lead of any consequence. The magic number of 2025 is there for a reason. If neither candidate can get there in the primaries (and the fact remains that neither candidate can), the Supers need to rely on other factors for deciding who to nominate, such as which candidate carried the most important states by virtue of electoral votes. To compare, say, small states like Vermont with New York, or California, or Massachusetts, Florida, Michigan (yes, their votes will be tallied in the GE so must be considered to some extent), Texas (we're talking numbers, not delegates anymore), Pennsylvania, Ohio—to not consider her superior strength in these states will lose us the GE. The Supers must take this into consideration. Hillary will be their choice over Barack.
He should have supported her, as she did him for his US Senate seat, and he would have been a hero to all democrats, not just half of you. This would have led him to a much greater, simpler victory in 8 years, or even 12 years. He's still young enough now to make it happen that far in the future.
March 28, 2008 5:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ah, another regurgitation of the "most important states" argument. This line of reasoning ages like a fine box of wine.
March 28, 2008 6:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of these so-called important states that Clinton has won, which of them do you think Obama will not win? NY, CA, MI? As it stands he's as competitive or more competitive in those states. Florida? She's not winning Florida. He's not winning Florida. So what's your point? He puts far more states into play than she does, which means Republicans have to play on a bigger field--and given their financial handicap this cycle, one would think that would be a positive thing from a Democrat/Progressive stand point.
I get it, you think your girl has a real shot at winning. I don't think she has to get out. If you and others want to fund her to continue, nothing is stopping you. But when campaign insiders are putting their chance of success at 10%, one should wonder if that's a wise investment.
But again, my initial point was that they aren't neck and neck as Ed is stating. Moving the goal posts to make a weak argument may be entertaining, but ultimately it's just mental masturbation for the weak minded.
March 28, 2008 6:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I love this:
equal parts hubris:
He should have supported her
and dismissal:
You People.
How dare the masses speak. And for a brown person nonetheless. What about the woman!
March 28, 2008 10:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
By your logic, no voter counts, and we should just let the supers decide this thing on their own.
Fine by me, actually. I like Obama's chances with the supers.
March 28, 2008 5:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't think the Republicans won't play dirty with Clintons #2 ranking, her sketchy fundraising, Bill's business deals, the pardons, the library, and the fact that 50% of the country has a negative impression of Hillary--not to mention that she's based her campaign on experience, lied about her experience, and about national security, both of which McCain beats her on. Other than that, she's MUCH more electable...
March 28, 2008 8:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rendell's counting Florida and Michigan to get his less than 1% figure. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html
March 28, 2008 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hell, I think Obama should fight for PA- not just to lose narrowly there, but to win.
The last Rasmussen poll had them ten points apart. He's got almost a month until the primary. No other state has a primary on April 22nd, so he'll be able to campaign there, and only there, if he so chooses.
I don't care what the demographics are. I think he can take it.
March 28, 2008 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
he doesn't need to win PA. This isn't the united states of PA. He should spend a fair bit of time there, but there are other contests to think about (including the ge).
March 28, 2008 5:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
"By virtue of every measure, this race is neck and neck..." Um, what are those measures, Sir?
If Rendell is referring to one measure, 'popular vote', I wonder how he counts the folks who individually were not counted in caucus states.
And I believe that 800,000 popular vote difference [the only imperfect measure I've heard] would be 1% of 80 million, not 27 million.
Oh, well, this should play among the low information voters, maybe.
March 28, 2008 4:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
As long as they say like like Hillary. Otherwise they are "insignificant".
March 28, 2008 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
The central irony of this is Hillary had planned for this to be over Feb. 5. None of these states were going to get a say....
I'm sure, though, if the situations were reversed Hillary would keep her commitment to letting every state vote.
March 28, 2008 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, that's for sure.
And it's the part that sticks in my craw a bit. If she was beating Barack by the margins he's currently beating her, what would Hillary and many of her supporters be saying?
I think most of the (non-blog related) calls for her drop out have been very restrained out of deference to her position within the party. If it was anyone but her losing, that person would've been shown the super delegate door quite some time ago.
March 28, 2008 6:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rendell also has a financial stake in a contested primary in Pennsylvania. Primaries (or caucuses) bring in money. Media attention also brings notice to local attractions -- free publicity.
No one would ever mind if Clinton continued -- in the Huckabee mode. But that doesn't appear to be the Harding/Clinton strategy.
March 28, 2008 4:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do they not teach arithmetic in law school?
March 28, 2008 5:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
We can say this all the way to Puerto Rico. The race being decided before Pennsylvania is nothing new, most years most states don't get a choice, that is no reason to keep in the race even though she doesn't have a chance at winning. Math is math, and yes, Rendell isn't good at it.
March 28, 2008 5:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
campaign financing in the red
only way to win is to destroy the other candidate
disapproval rating soaring
drop out all ready, damn
March 28, 2008 5:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is Clinton actually having money trouble? I have not read anything to indicate that aside from the loan she gave to her campaign ages ago (before they raised 30 or 40 million in a month).
March 28, 2008 5:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
By virtually every measure, this race is neck and neck with less than 1% of the more than 27 million votes cast forming the difference between the two candidates.
"Virtually every measure...that is, that we make up as we go.
Understand that most pledged delegates doesn't count, most primary pledged delegates doesn't count, most caucus delegates doesn't count, most states won doesn't count, most popular vote doesn't count. Anything that is logical doesn't count.
We will decide what counts when we decide it and not a moment before."
The fact is... it is not equal, she has no chance of winning and she needs to go.
March 28, 2008 5:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm just glad that Ed Rendell is going to be there to help with the final nail, once Hillary finishes with her feet and the first hand.
March 28, 2008 5:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
The campaign will definitely go on until Clinton is mathematically eliminated for certain. There is no second act for her from here - I don't think she has any interest in being VP and her chances in 4 years would be slight against the likes of Warner and Obama if he lost in November.
So Hillary will keep her hat in the ring right until August. Even if after June Obama has enough pledged delegates and declared superdelegates, she will keep her hat in the ring until the floor vote. What if Obama gets caught for DUI over 4th of July?
As I mentioned in another post, the Democratic party needs to be ready to move on in July whether she has dropped out or not. Dean seems to be paving the way for such an eventuality. By July we will see Obama with 2025+ delegates to his name and the party will treat him as the nominee. He'll have more than 4 months as our candidate.
March 28, 2008 5:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Am I wrong to detect some snark in a Pennsylvanian's vaunting "one of the largest states" in his reprimand of someone from little Vermont?
March 28, 2008 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
I mostly just want the primary to be over so we can start hitting McCain.
He's sort of been making an ass of himself while no one's watching. I want Obama to start going after his ass.
March 28, 2008 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pride goeth before the fall.
March 29, 2008 11:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Do they not teach arithmetic in law school?
No. Most of us go to law school for the very reason that we can't add or substract.
At least that was one of the deciding factors for me - no math.
:)
March 28, 2008 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll second that.
March 28, 2008 5:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Honestly at this point I don't see how anyone could say that the Obama camp isn't behind, or at least a part of the calls for Hillary to quit the race. An Obama spokesman just today essentially said that people should stop calling for Hillary to quit because Hillary is smart enough to see for herself that it is time to quit. In other words, a top Obama spokesman says that it is time for Hillary to quit. And to say that the people of Pennsylvania would only think Obama is trying to "diss" Pennsylvania if he came right out and told Hillary to quit is to say that the people of Pennsylvania are not very bright. Let's be real here. Everyone knows Obama wants the race over before Pennsylvania.
With all the calls for Hillary to quit the campaign, why is it something bad or unexpected that her supporters would be calling for her not to quit? And how can anybody say that Ed Rendell's statement above isn't correct? Despite all the hype, the race IS extremely close. And quite a few states haven't even voted yet. First of all, Hillary isn't a quitter. Secondly, even if she were, it would be extremely foolish of her to do so.
On a separate matter, Obama told ABC today that the notion that Pastor Wright was a "mentor" has been overstated. That's a bit of a slip for him to say that, because aside from the fact that Write has played that kind of role in Obama's life and was even until last week a member of the Obama campaign's religious advisory counsel, Obama himself described Wright as an "important mentor". Even as his efforts at damage control continue, Obama keeps the story going.
As far as Obama's claim today that Jeremiah Wright is now "contrite" about his inflammatory sermons, I would like to hear that from Wright himself. He has been very silent recently, even canceling appearances. It gives me the impression that he has been silenced.
March 28, 2008 5:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, you're right about one thing. Wright has been silenced... by security concerns.
Sad day in America when people can't speak their mind.
March 28, 2008 5:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
damn straight
March 28, 2008 9:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
That didn't stop Malcolm.
March 29, 2008 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
I recall a certain Clinton saying this race would be over February 5th. I don't recall you pitching a fit about that statement or that the states coming after that date would be disenfranchised.
March 28, 2008 6:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please remember that it is Wright,not Obama that said what ever has been said(most taken out of context)
March 28, 2008 6:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS!! FOR HILLARY!!!
March 28, 2008 5:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Really classy comment.
March 28, 2008 5:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, I'm a Pennsylvania voter. Nothing would make me happier than to see this awful woman leave the state, and my TV screen, right this minute. Please, make my vote not count!
March 28, 2008 5:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for saying that.
March 28, 2008 6:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that the Obama campaign needs to be careful not to piss off the folks in PA. If he is the nominee, he needs the Rendell machine to help him mobilize people in November.
McCain plays well in PA (especially if Ridge is his VP), and can take it if the strong democratic machine is weakened for his (or his surrogates) calls for HRC to shut it down before the primary.
Having said that, and grown up in PA, when has the primary mattered in PA in the last several voting cycles? None that I can remember. 1992? My recollection is that Bill was pretty far ahead in April 1992, even though he didn't get the numbers until June. Does that take us back to 1984? ANyone?
There is no way she is shutting anything down before May 1, so Leahy and Dodd should be quiet.
March 28, 2008 6:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Rendell "machine" does not apply to the center of the state, he does not have that much pull there, and that will be the challenge.
March 28, 2008 9:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
maybe someone should ask Bill Clinton if it were him in Obama's position and his challenger in 1992 in Hillary's position, he'd want the losing candidate to drop out.
Obama needs to start hitting back at this "let the remaining states have their say!" crap that the Clinton campaign is floating. everyone knows Hillary only believes these states count until they vote for Obama, or unless they are caucuses, or contain too many black people or "latte-sipping liberals". no campaign in this race, including those of Republicans, has so consistently and intensely disparaged voters this year as Clinton's campaign. to then turn around and say "we want these voters voices to be heard!" only once she believes it is (however tenuously) politically expedient for her is laughable.
March 28, 2008 6:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, if the superdelegates get the message that it will be over by July1 and the math says Hillary cant win with out a fight at the convention and the supers agree to vote, then why not end it sooner?
March 28, 2008 6:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Telling Clinton to quit now is like saying because your team is six games out of first place on July 4, you should forfeit the rest of the season.
I am also suspicious of folks who said they supported Bill Clinton once upon a time but are ridiculing him now for supporting his wife. Methinks they are as loyal and have the same ethics as Dick Morris.
March 28, 2008 6:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, it's more like when your team is six games out of first place with six games left in the season, and you're having to bring up players from the minors with .100 batting averages because all your regulars are injured. Technically, it's possible you could win the season: all your new players could blossom into reincarnations of Ruth, the other team's plane could crash, the other team's city might get nuked, etc., but the odds don't favor you.
Oh, and by the way, since you are a supporter of HRC, you might want to avoid putting the words "ethics" and "Clinton" in the same paragraph. It calls up unfortunate associations.
March 28, 2008 7:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
oh get off it already.
March 28, 2008 9:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton and Ethics - The real proof that opposites repel each other.
March 29, 2008 1:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
You might want to check your physics.
March 31, 2008 11:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, it's more like when your team is six games out of first place with six games left in the season, and you're having to bring up players from the minors with .100 batting averages because all your regulars are injured. Technically, it's possible you could win the season: all your new players could blossom into reincarnations of Ruth, the other team's plane could crash, the other team's city might get nuked, etc., but the odds don't favor you.
Oh, and by the way, since you are a supporter of HRC, you might want to avoid putting the words "ethics" and "Clinton" in the same paragraph. It calls up unfortunate associations.
March 28, 2008 7:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
So am I the only one who's noticed that in in Clintonista speak, caucus states and small states, that do count because they submitted a valid delegate selection plan and abided by the rules, don't count and states that don't count, because they did not submit valid delegate selection plans and broke the rules, do count?
March 28, 2008 8:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
if obama was such a great candidate, he would have sealed the nomination immediately after super tuesday. john kerry collected the necessary delegates to secure his nomination the week after super tueday. so why hasn't obama? because people have made it clear they want more choices. and senator clinton is that other choice. it's not over until it's over. go hillary! stay in it, and stay in to win!
March 28, 2008 9:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
The reverse holds true for Clinton - if she was such a great candidate, she would not be losing right now and would have wrapped up the nomination by super Tuesday!
Gobama!
March 29, 2008 9:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
douchy obama supporters = greater clinton support! keep at it, kids.
just sent off some more cash to hillary as well!
March 28, 2008 9:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not my business, but I wouldn't have wasted my money...
especially if you still think the religious right controls America!
March 28, 2008 11:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
and who do you think voted for 8 years of ronald reagan and 8 years of george w. bush? think about it genius.
March 29, 2008 12:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
why won't obama win in november? go watch "jesus camp" and multiply that by millions and millions and millions.
March 28, 2008 9:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's clear Hillbilly will not bow out gracefully.
But that's actually to the best: the longer she fights on in her increasingly quixotic effort, the less leverage and influence she will retain when this is over - no discussion any more about VP slot, senate majority leader etc. Which is great because it will allow president Obama to implement his pro citizen/anti corporatist agenda to the benefit of the country without being sabotaged by a 5th column.
March 28, 2008 10:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
This, from the HRC camp that said it WOULD ALL BE OVER BY FEBRUARY 5TH!
Now they want PR to have its say.
LOL
March 28, 2008 10:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
The general election in November, for the president, is a winner take all election in almost all of the states - all of the big states for sure. So, it makes no difference whether the Democratic candidate wins California, for example, by 52% to 48% or 60% to 40%. In either case the Democratic candidate gets all of the states electoral college votes. That is the real weakness in the argument that the candidate doing the best in a primary in a major state deserves the nomination.
A good argument is that the candidate who, by demographics, or any other reason, stands to be competitive in the most states deserves to be the nominee. However, the nominee isn't selected by good arguments or bad arguments, but by a vote of the delegates, and at this point Obama has a commanding lead there.
March 29, 2008 1:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
CLINTON-HUCKABEE '16!!!!!
March 29, 2008 8:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry to burst your victimology spin here, Clintonistas, but I, for one, do NOT want Hillary to just drop out. No, I want Obama to beat her like she stole something. I want him to beat her like she owes him child support. I want him to beat her like a rented mule.
It is only when you totally dismantle an opponant that they will resign themselves to their inherent inferiority compared to their opponant.
See, if Hillary bows out now, her whiney fans will continue to play the "what if game." No, Obama-ites. He has to finish this with more popular votes, more delegates won, more states won, more donating supporters and more cash on hand. Only THEN will they acknowledge that, on the merits, their candidate was inferior: she tried her best, but could not lie and race bait and cry her way to the nomination.
March 29, 2008 11:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's simply not true. All he has to do is get a majority of votes at the convention. That's when the pledged and super delegates cast their votes. Not in the newspapers or blogs. At the convention. They will call the roll, beginning I believe with Alabama. And each state will record its vote for Obama, Clinton, Edwards and others. As soon as a majority of delegates have voted for one candidate, that candidate will be the nominee. Exactly what part of that scenario troubles you?
March 29, 2008 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Stop trolling around BRob and go back to your McCain campaign. It doesn't matter who wins this one, your party is going down in flames.
March 31, 2008 5:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Now they want PR to have its say."
Yes, one of their more hilarious arguments is that the popular vote in Puerto Rico should decide the nomination because, well, we all know how important the PR popular vote will be in November.
March 29, 2008 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
clinton fundraising goal, 3/27-3/31: $3 million. $1 million raised presently. 19,000 new donors this drive.
March 29, 2008 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
The reason that Hillary won't get out in spite of the delegate math is two fold:
1. She believes he is toast against McCain, and therefore she is the last best chace the Dems have, and she is hoping that the Super Delegates will get their heads out of their @sses.
2. There is no reason to believe Obama can do the job. ( Assuming he could get the job, which I don't believe) We will not be better off trading a Republican who is not up for the job for a Democrat who is not up or the job. I would remind you that when the tab for four years of Carter came due, the price was eight years of Reagan. That's worse math than the odds facing Hillary.
March 29, 2008 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
According to Ed Rendell, if Hillary Clinton lost Texas he would advise her to suspend her campaign and support Obama.
Now that the county conventions in Texas are all but done (1 county left) the results show that Obama will carry Texas by a margin of +4 or +5.
When is Ed Rendell going to hold his news conference to announce his support Obama and begin to campaign vigorously for him as promised?
The answer is, of course, never.
Ed Rendell is as truthful as Hillary Clinton which is one of the main reasons Bob Casey, Jr is supporting Obama. To everyone that knows Casey, both proponents and opponents know him to be the straightest of straight arrows.
Again, with the Peter Paul fraud trial looming in October for Clinton & Rendell veracity is again front & center.
In the final analysis Rendell will support Hillary's directed destruction of the party up to and through a massive Texas like credentials fight in Denver simply because he needs a get out of jail card that only a sitting president can issue.
March 30, 2008 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink