Four Florida Members Of Congress Who Backed Hillary Come Out For Obama
More Dem elected officials continue to coalesce behind Obama: A bloc of four Members of Congress from Florida who previously backed Hillary -- including one of Hillary's most loyal supporters -- is coming out for Obama, one of their spokespeople confirms to me.
The four are Alcee L. Hastings, Corrine Brown, Kendrick B. Meek, and Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a very committed Hillary loyalist.
While its hardly surprising that Dem elected officials are coming out for Obama right now -- the entire New York Congressional delegation endorsed him today -- the support of these Florida Reps. is key, because they might be able to help soothe voters in this crucial state that are still upset about the failure to seat the full Florida delegation. The Obama camp advocated for a half-seating.
"It is with enthusiasm and excitement that we endorse Barack Obama for President," the four will say in a statement soon to go out to reporters that will also ask Obama to "do everything in his power" to seat the full delegations at the convention.
"All of us standing on one stage, hand-in-hand will send a clear message to Florida voters that regardless of who we previously supported, we stand united and as one from this day forward," the statement says.
This is very good news. Maybe Florida will be appeased.
June 5, 2008 5:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
The question is, are the voters in Florida really outraged over the fact their delegates only get half a vote at the convention? Somehow I doubt it. I think the whole "appeasement" meme is a construction of the press. Your average man on the street probably couldn't give a shit about it.
June 5, 2008 6:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Concur. Florida will have record turnouts this year, just like everywhere else.
Obama will spend some time there and they'll see what the rest of us see.
June 6, 2008 9:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
The entire New York Delegation?! Now that's some Party Unity, right there, my friends. Proud, proud to be an American and to see our future unfolding around this promising new Leader. :)
June 5, 2008 5:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
You would think it would have made the headlines when Hillary endorsed Obama, which she must have since she is part of the "the entire New York Congressional delegation."
Of course, I guess it's possible that Greg meant the entire House delegation. I suppose we won't know unless either a correction is posted, or a link is provided.
June 5, 2008 8:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Debbie Wasserman Schultz....I wonder if she really got the message and who delivered to her!
June 5, 2008 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I like Debbie. She can be very persuasive.
June 5, 2008 5:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I called Wasserman Schultz's political something or rather, some hack. He was still at the arrogant blithe stage a month ago. But I reminded him that shit like Wasserman Schultz's is something that people remember at primary time. There was a little silence on the other end of the line. Maybe some folks made an impact on her.
June 5, 2008 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whaaaaaaaaaaa?
June 5, 2008 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's nice to hear - but if anyone thinks Debbie Wasserman Schultz will indeed do everything in her power to help Obama, then you got another thing coming
June 5, 2008 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's nice to hear - but if anyone thinks Debbie Wasserman Schultz will indeed do everything in her power to help Obama, then you got another thing coming
June 5, 2008 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good, coz I for some reason believe Hillary still thinks she will find a open door. Her feeling of entitlement is visible even in her exit.
By the way...
Nissan Pavilion in Virginia, Thousands are gathering for Obama's rally first after claiming the nomination.
TPM please upload the video.
June 5, 2008 5:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
She's acting like it, kash - that's why.
She makes me nervous, too.
June 5, 2008 5:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Aw shit, that's like right around the Beltway from me, and I'm stuck working...
June 5, 2008 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
That phrasing seems awkward for two reasons:
1. Obama advocated a half seating as opposed to a zero seating which was the only other real alternative. This makes it sound as if he was responsible for taking half their seats away as opposed to advocating for more seats then they would have received given what was promised by the DNC before the RBC meeting.
2. I think his advocacy was for a seating of the full delegation but with a half vote. This makes it sound like the solution only seats half the delegation. Indeed that as another compromise which would have been better for him which he nonetheless rejected. In bothe the case of Michigan and Florida, he supported the solution that was least favorable to his candidacy despite despite it being possible to influence a solution that was better for him.
June 5, 2008 5:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, he is smart and gentleman enough to recognize when he could be generous to Clinton without having it hurt him.
He has handled every bit of this as a perfect gentleman. She, on the other hand, has acted like a fishmonger's wife, not a stateswoman or a lady.
June 5, 2008 5:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you owe an apology to fishmongers' wives everywhere.
June 5, 2008 5:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
lol - prolly do, too.
June 5, 2008 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed.
This probably seems like nitpicking and water under so many bridges after last Saturday, but some of the anger and frustration I've seen coming out of certain quarters makes it apparent that people don't understand the details on this. The last thing we need is some false belief that Obama (rather than the DNC) was responsible for penalizing Florida, or that Obama (rather than the RBC) was standing in the way of Florida getting full representation. Those aren't facts we can believe in!
June 5, 2008 5:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
June 5, 2008 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now be nice ... the TPM staff has been busy at Hillary speech parties, no time for silly "facts" or "details" when there's PIZZA!!!!
I aint mad, it's juz Hillaryz donz benz robbezd - and it's dat dag-burn Obaber what done it! So quitcher lyin.
June 5, 2008 6:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you.
Leave it to Greg to fuck up that facts in deference to the false Hillary narrative.
June 5, 2008 8:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought Alcee was taking his ball and going home.
How's he going to endorse the nominee of the party and claim that he's not going to the convention?
June 5, 2008 5:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS!! FOR HILLARY!!!
TM idiotic
Actually,
THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS!! FOR McCAIN!!!
A divided PO'd democratic FL is good for him.
June 5, 2008 5:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama camp should give idiotic the medal of freedom or something, once in office. His contribution so far has been enormous.
June 5, 2008 5:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree! It is like a Pavlov dog response with me now. Everytime I hear anything remotely bad for HRC, idiotic's 'voice' goes off in my head.
THIS IS ...
Even Al Giordano over at The Field has given him/her a few shout-outs.
June 5, 2008 6:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hijacking this thread because things on the front page don't allow comments:
Regarding McCain's new contest to submit a video to his campaign about someone who is "making a difference"... someone should submit a video about Barack Obama.
June 5, 2008 5:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL - how about Josh's excellent video of McCain/Obama's June 3 speeches.
June 5, 2008 5:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ha!
That's too funny - what a great idea.
June 5, 2008 6:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh yes, please, please...
June 5, 2008 6:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary who?
June 5, 2008 5:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Uhhh, the obama camp did not advocate a half seating. That was the dnc lawyers, the request of the florida delegation and the gd rules. The obama camp was complying with the rules and backing up the florida delegation.
Please correct this point. Thank you.
June 5, 2008 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just to add a point to your argument- According to the DNC rules the maximum FL or MI could be allowed was 50% vote (both for pledged and unpledged) So, In FL Obama voluntarily conceded the maximum he is allowed to concede.
By the way can you upload the "I'll whop'em" Barack video. it's funny as hell.
Back story: This afternoon a 91 yr old presented Barack with a long heavy stick, Obama in respond said- "If people in congress doesn't pass my healthcare bill, I'll whop'em, I'll whop'em."
Cool stuff.
June 5, 2008 6:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks.
Incidentally, I look forward to the time when people stop repeating the baseless clintonian arguments and the dems unite. I really, really hope that she gives a good speech on Saturday taking back, debunking and withdrawing her ridiculous and warrantless claims. It is necessary for the dems to unite and rally around the nominee.
June 5, 2008 6:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
She will never back down from her warrantless claims. But, the Party is welcome to stop pretending that anything that she's said in this Primary had any merit, whatsoever. Because...It's Obama time!
June 5, 2008 6:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know. I hope she does. She's under a ton of political pressure right now. The clinton brand is mud in the dem party after this campaign. In order to bring back the brand they have to play ball and back track. If they don't, they will be done in the dem party. I just hope they see that.
June 5, 2008 6:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly.
More bullshit Greg/Hillary "reportage".
June 5, 2008 8:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sen Webb is introducing Senator Obama as I write on CNN:)
June 5, 2008 6:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ok, holy cow! It sounded like obama was pitching him for vp. Holy freaking cow! I've been for webb since he ran for the senate and gave the rebuttal to the state of the union in 07. While he was running for the senate he handled himself with grace and honor. It really was a different kind of campaign, sort of like obama with a little edge. Is it possible? What an awesome ticket!
June 5, 2008 6:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
NO!
Please people, stop advocating the idea of Webb as VP. That is a seat we can ill-afford to have him vacate and would make it MORE difficult to get UHC, etc. because we most likely would have a hard time keeping that seat. He is a good guy and we need him in the Senate.
Stop advocating weakening our already iffy hold on the Senate.
June 5, 2008 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, I disagree. Kaine would appoint another dem to serve out the term, maybe wilder with the condition that he doesn't run for reelection. Then how about kaine runing in 2012. That works. Webb for vp big time!
I just noticed later you are advocating for warner. No freaking way. Warner we need to take the seat. Webb already won his seat and can get a dem appointed to serve out the term. No on warner. Yes on webb.
By the way, warner doesn't bring anything to the ticket. Obama needs national security creds, not a governor.
Sorry to disagree.
June 5, 2008 7:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Disagree strongly with your disagreement. Putting a "national security" VP only highlights a narrative (an inaccurate one) that Obama is weak on national security.
Webb is good guy, but let's face it, he only won in VA because Allen imploded in Maccacca.
And Warner is by far the most popular Dem in VA and would make VA a fairly safe bet that Obama would carry VA (he is already polling slightly ahead) which, because VA would be lean Dem, up-ends the rest of the electoral apple car t for the GOP.
His Gov. experience is actually more helpful than you think, and makes him far more qualified to be a VP than Webb would be. Again, Webb is a good guy and I think he would be a OK fit with Obama on some levels, though narrative wise in a way "validates" the bogus "Obama is weak on national security" meme.
Besides, economics are what this election is going to turn on, not national security. Warner is VERY strong on economic, and can speak credibly even form a business perspective. Warner brings more to the table than Webb by far.
June 5, 2008 8:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, disagree strongly with your disagreement. Quoting turd blossom, go after your opponents perceived strength, in this case national security. Mcbush sucks on the economy and has no executive experience. Obama exceeds mcbush in those areas. Mcbush's only strength, allegedly, is national security and notwithstanding obama's oratory, it is a percieved weekness. He needs national security/military creds and who better to bring it than webb.
I don't know about webb just winning because of the maccaca thing. It actually is kind of counter-intuitive when you think about it. The maccaca thing may have in a weird way helped allen in the appalacians. Also, allen was a buffoon and webb just in an indirect way highlighted the fact, kind of like what obama does.
A couple of people have made the point that you make that it highlights the fact that obama has minimal national security cred. I don't understand that argument. The fact is that he does have minimal experience in national security. It's a fact. Why not defuse the argument with a military/war hero/national security cred guy like webb. He would kick a**.
On the economy "stupid" to quote carville. Obama already beats mcbush on the economy. Mcbush has admitted that he doesn't have a clue. Go after mcbush's supposed strength military/national security and bring in a bulldog like webb. Obama already crushes mcbush on the economy.
On warner, how do you get over the fact that we would be punting a senate seat? I don't get that one. There is noone to take warner's place at this point, its too late. Replacing webb would be an appointment by a democratic governor.
June 5, 2008 8:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your last paragraph has the only convincing arugment you make. The others I think Webb's national security creds highlight Obama's perceived (albeit wrong) lack of them, and puts the national security narrative back in the same media narrative rut that somehow being military means you have national security creds as the civilian leadership of the military.
June 5, 2008 8:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ok, I don't get this argument and I have heard it a couple of times:
The others I think Webb's national security creds highlight Obama's perceived (albeit wrong) lack of them, and puts the national security narrative back in the same media narrative rut that somehow being military means you have national security creds as the civilian leadership of the military.
Mcbush will push that narrative and it will come up over, and over, and over again. I don't disagree with the underlying premis that somehow being military means you have national security cred. I also agree that civilian leadership is paramount. I am looking at theatrics and the fact that webb is more anti-war and progressive than most dems. It's gravy that he is a war hero and brings gravatas to his arguments.
Anyway, it's a fact that obama has minimal national security experience. How does it highlight the fact by having a vp with national security cred? It doesn't change the facts.
June 5, 2008 9:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
The argument is, the GOP subtext is that you have military service on your resume to be credible on national security. That is the false meme and narrative the media pushes and the GOP wants. Obama's (correct) argument is that JUDGMENT not military record is the metric that matters. Obama adding someone else to the ticket to "make-up" for the lack of military service implicitly validates the GOP frame, that you have to be military to be serious on national security. They will use that as Obama needs "training wheels" and is not qualified to be CinC.
If you DON"T have a military guy as VP, you eliminate the "training wheel" attack, and you re-frame the debate on Obama's (correct metric) that sound judgment with the military giving advice (NSC, joint-chiefs, etc.) is what we need, and in fact what is envisioned by our Constitution. The narrative has to be argued and established that Obama (not his VP) is qualified to be POTUS, regardless of the VP. He has to show he has the temperament, the intellect, and judgment to make sound decisions and take in advice and make the right decision. And, I posit, one that is not overly deferential to the military perspective, but more balance with the diplomatic, geopolitical parts of the equation which can and must guide and control use of force.
Trying to out-general the other side is demonstratively a weak approach which Kerry proved in spades (to our detriment) and is playing on their terms and field.
June 5, 2008 9:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ok, this is the thing. I don't disagree with your arguments and observations. You are very smart obviously. Probably 15 to 20 percent of the population would agree with your arguments. The problem is the 30 to 40 percent on top of that that dems need to win the white house. I am afraid to say that they would not buy the argument and don't pay as much attention as we do on this site. I am looking at that demographic. There is a large demographic like that in the voting population. Look at the b-movie actor. Thinking people thought that he was a moron, but he could play the theatrics and sway the people that weren't paying attention.
Bottom line, I would not be to quick to right off a national security person. It sings. In my opinion that's what he needs to defuse the arguments that will come from mcbush. I guess we agree to disagree.
June 5, 2008 10:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's wrong with Inouye?
June 5, 2008 10:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
But even the "theatrics" aspect of it, Obama will kill McCain. Look at the optics and deliver of the two side-by-side. Obama has the oratory to make the argument, and make it well in a way that McCain will simply fumble because he is a terrible candidate in action.
June 6, 2008 4:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
I wholeheartedly agree with all these points. I guess we'll see what happens. I'll bet you a lunch that he picks a vp with national security/military cred. Game on?
June 6, 2008 7:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, BTW, why can't Warner run for both office (like Lieberman did in CT in 2000) and Kaine still appoints replacement?
June 5, 2008 8:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think that would fly. Lieberman got away with it because in part he was a longtime incumbent. Warner wouldn't get that break. It would be a slap in the face to virginians.
June 5, 2008 9:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fair point. I was curious if it was even feasible legally, though you make a good point as far as how it might not play with the voters.
That said, I would rather have the right VP to secure the White House than to flip a GOP held Senate seat.
June 5, 2008 9:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nice little debate. One thought - I don't think the argument should be framed too heavily on Obama's perceived strengths/weaknesses vs. McCain's strengths/weaknesses. As we've seen, Obama can turn perceptions around on a dime. The notion that he is weak on foreign policy and McCain is strong? Nah-uh. Obama has been beating McCain senseless on foreign policy for a couple of weeks now. He doesn't need a military guy to give him credibility on that front.
I do want to see him coming out strong on economy, but again, I think that message needs to come from him, not his Veep.
What does he need from his Veep. I see two things. Someone who supports his message. And someone who can deliver votes. I think that Warner does both of those. I'm still liking Warner on the ticket.
June 5, 2008 10:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks. I agree basically though I would just reiterate what I was trying to get across up-thread, that Warner is right in step with Obama on position and message, they can work well together and Warner can add to Obama's economic strength (i.e. McCain's weakness) and really shit hammer him there with a one two punch.
June 6, 2008 4:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
By the way, thanks for the tip. I appreciate it.
June 5, 2008 6:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
and the crowd is so fired up:) This is beyond belief:)
June 5, 2008 6:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
June 5, 2008 6:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep.
Someone chewed on her ear a bit last evening.
June 5, 2008 6:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pelosi probably told her to forget about ever getting any pork for her district again unless she got on board.
June 5, 2008 6:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am so relieved that leaders and most of all many of 'her'supporters had limits to where and how they would follow her. It seems that they said 'look he won and we want join with our fellow democrats now and get behind him'. I think they have taken some of the wind out of her sails. And then yes realizing that she could not be forced onto the ticket was another step.
I admire Senator Obama's careful consideration regarding his VP. I personally think Edwards would be the best VP but I guess he would rather be attorney general... maybe he just wants to put Cheney on the stand?
From what Senator Obama said he is going to be hanging out with many contenders and working with his vetting team to find the best person for the job. I am sure that they will. In the process and I think he will create a powerful team of people ready to rock this country and make some really change happen! Okay last night, I was encouraging everyone to take their time and vent their bitterness, anger, etc...
Today, I'm up for some hooting, hollering, whooping, and getting excited!!!
YYYYEEEEESSSS!!!!!!
June 5, 2008 6:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Former Gov. Mark Warner (D-VA) for V.P.
Edwards would not be great as AG, he would be far better heading HHS. Hillary needs to stay in the Senate. She can champion and lead UHC in the Senate.
June 5, 2008 7:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm with you on Warner. Liking it more and more every day. And not seeing a lot else that interests me.
June 5, 2008 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nunn is starting to pique my interest.
June 5, 2008 7:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
How so?
Explain and expand please.
June 5, 2008 8:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nunn is atrocious. I'd take another look. Don't believe the pundits.
He's voted for school prayer and against gays in the military among other things. He's an ultra-Dixiecrat at their worst.
No way is he new politics. I'm thinking it's gonna be the Virginia boys.
June 6, 2008 9:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, the RBC did seat the full delegations. They just gave them half-voting power. You should fix the story to be more accurate. FL and MI got full seating, full delegations. But they got half voting power.
June 5, 2008 7:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep, but Greg (intentionally or subconscious) frames it in Hillaryland "facts" and narrative which are simply not true.
June 5, 2008 8:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bob Wexler is on Dan Abrams!
Darkhorse!!!
June 5, 2008 9:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Alcee "I ain't going to no Democratic Convention this summer" Hastings. Jesus. What a phony! Here's his GBCW letter from last week.
So has he changed his mind and he will grace the Convention with his presence, or is this just another fitful moment?June 5, 2008 9:36 PM | Reply | Permalink