This from a campaign that is still struggling to shore up its base of conservative voters? That's passing kidney stones at the thought of Powell showing up in Denver to introduce Obama Thursday night?

I'd quip glass houses, but McCain already has enough places to live.

Something about cutting off your nose to spite your face comes to mind...

It amazes me that so many are still so wrapped up in their own egos (& Hillary's) that they would sacrifice their core principles to express their dissatisfaction.

Glad Wisconsin threw this %$^& out. She never deserves back in.

I'll say this again - as an evnagelical Democrat that is ambivalent about the legality of abortion, there is a part of me that would find it very rich if it were a group of supposedly feminist voters that delivered the campaign to McCain.

Either way, the poll of polls is the best way to gauge things. Since the race tightened at the end of July, Obama has never lost the lead and averages a 2-3 point lead. Until Obama loses his lead in the poll of polls, I won't be overly concerned.

DEBRA BARTOSHEVICH: Shame on you.

McCain is deliberately trying to keep the wounds open with a little help of his friends (I'm talking to you, CNN). I think this will backfire for him, but all depends on Hillary's speech on Tuesday. The ball is on her court now and she must deliver.

Also, this will backfire because this will hit his so-called bipartisan approach. The polls are starting to indicate that his negatives are up and this will not help him at all.

Wisconsin Dems: Thanks for getting rid of her.

McCain: Division First!

PD: I'm very happy if Ted Kennedy makes it to Denver. It will be a great moment. Looking forward to it.

Seriously? They actually think this will somehow work? This woman comes off as a moronic traitor.

There's no logic in switching from Hillary to McCain other than being a straight-up racist. Because you're not switching based on issues.

I mean, she should just scream "There's no WAY I'm voting for that neegrah!"

I have a feeling that this attempt by the McCain camp will misfire. Especially if Hillary delivers on Tuesday. And, she's not stupid ... she knows she needs to deliver or her role in the party is over. I think a lot of this division narrative is a bunch of hoo-hah anyway ... drummed up by the media in order to have an interesting story and taken advantage of by the McCain camp to make it look like they have a shot in hell.

Hillary is obviously at fault here for her hyperbolic ridiculousness that demonized Obama. And the only one who can put this to rest is Hillary with a harsh rebuke of McCain. The strongest rhetoric during the Convention needs to come from her.

http://www.pufferfish.typepad.com/

In this comment thread, I have my Exhibit A: the McCain campaign makes a commercial, and the Hillary haters blame Hillary. Senator McCain should hardly be faulted for taking a cue from what many alleged Obama supporters have been doing at the Cafe and Election Central since June. So much for the benefits of being sore winners. The McCain campaign has apparently read the lefty blogs and their gonna make some of us reap what we've sown. I hope it was fun castigating supporters of Hillary Clinton POST-victory for y'all for so long and with such fervor, 'cause you've given the GOP quite the script for this week. Proves the notion that oh so many of you want to hate Hillary more than you want to win in November.

Do you think all of this drama is unfolding because the candidate is a woman, or because the candidate is this woman?

On BBC World over in Europe, the 15-second convention headline is this:

1. Democratic convention starts today.

2. Divisions with Hillary expected to be prominent.

What proud Democrats are willing to be used as pawns, willing to fall to the Republican side when some blunt wedge from an obvious side is shoved down?

Isn't this the same jackass malcontent who got unceremoniously dumped as a delegate? The McCain campaign is really pimping her ass out..

oh good lord....this is hillary's show. let's she how well she dances to mccain's tune..hopefully she shows more rhythm than she has been showing in the past....

where the hell is the obama camp? house gaffe was the last i heard of them...mccain has had free reign to dump one garbage after another....can we use my hard-earned donated dollars to neutralize some of this mess? now i fear an idiotic, divided convention....poor obama, why didn't he come out looking more like his mom instead of his dad? this would have all been water under the bridge..the insult is not that obama beat hrc fair and square..it is the fact that he, being a non-white beat the pulp out of hrc fair and square...that was not supposed to happen b/c hrc was inevitable against the non-white man...can we get over it already?????? he is american and that should be good enough to respect the million of votes casted for obama by whites, blacks and anything in between....please for the love of god, let's put our bigotry aside..

i am so afraid of being sentenced to 4 to 8 more years of this travesty...

If McCain becomes president the only moment of pleasure I'll ever have is seeing the faces of these loony Clinton-worshippers when Roe v. Wade is overturned. Of course, they'll blame Obama and not themselves. But it'll be their own damn fault.

The real face of a PUMA:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-Mkgu3rJtw&eurl

Kudos to DemComWatch for this!

OK, guys, here is my request:

Stop trashing Clinton, at least until both she and Bill have made their speeches. I think those will show how this election is going to go down and what they want their role in it to be.

I have to say that Clinton has not regained my trust yet, but from what I have understood from my sources, she has been doing at least a satisfactory job of helping.

In the meanwhile, help the Clinton supporters by moving the discussion from her person to the policies the supporters were advocating and how they can be incorporated (if they have not already been.)

The Republican trolls posing as disaffected Democrats are free game, naturally. Just make a good-faith effort with people you do not know before slumping them in that category.

I think the Hillary deadenders represent a small percentage of voters and an even smaller number of Dems. Look at the video geha posted above. The woman is an independent and clearly stated that she doesn't care what Hillary says about supporting Obama. For this small group of loony tunes, it's about them and their hurt little egos, not Hillary, not the Democratic party, not our country. They're beyond saving. Nothing Hillary says will change their mind. And like this woman stated, even Hillary being named veep wouldn't have changed their mind.

That said, Hillary still needs to hit it out of the part at the convention. If her speech is 95% "glass ceilings" and only 5% Obama, I'll be disappointed. I don't think that's going to be the case - I think she'll make a strong case for Obama. And I'd like to see her, in her own words, slam the McCain ads and point out to the holdouts that a vote for McCain is a vote against just about everything she believes in.

As for Bill, I don't expect much out of him in the way of Obama support. I'm sure he'll champion the party in general in his address but don't expect much more. His dislike of Obama is personal and deep - or at least that's how it appears. I love the guy but his time is past and he knows it. Hillary still has a political future and doesn't see this as all about her. I'll cheer Bill on if he becomes a big Obama promoter over the next 2 months, but I won't be surprised at all if it doesn't happen.

"I respect his maverick and independent streak, and now he's the one with the experience and judgment."

How hackneyed and cheezy is that statement? Ke-rist, way to read the cue cards, Debra. And not only is it cheezy, it's divorced from the present reality. It's just so 2000...

I respect his maverick

Ok, whatever.

Personally I think this is a good sign. If McCain is trolling for disgruntled Hillary supporters, it suggests to me he knows his support among independents and some Republican voters is weak.

A vote for McCain is....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxrPGFjOUYI

Hillary Clinton continues to control the narrative.

Talk to the avatar.

To all Hillary Supporters remember this;

IF Obama does not get elected, the African American community will not SUPPORT HILLARY IN 2012. She will never win and we wont forget.

How stupid and foolish you idiots are is mind boggling!!!!

Interestingly, if Bartoshevich is her real name, she has not donated a dime to any any campaign, Republican or Democrat, in recent cycles. Never ponied up for Hillary even. Some "proud" HRC Democrat.

I know there's a word for a fake supporter plant.

There is also a phrase for a cultish, delusional, arrogant and dismissive political shill: Barack Supporter

Ok, so Obama has Obamacons such as Chuck Hagel supporting him and others such as Lugar and Spector saying great things about him. McCain has Debbie....yeah this ad is pretty dumb and desperate.

McCain is running circles around Obama while Obama does absolutely nothing. When are you going to stop getting bitch slapped and come out swinging? Hey Barack DO SOMETHING other than just repeat the lame loser line of we need to change the politics in Washington. Yes we have change and its McCain is kicking your ass every day and you have no response, no message. Yes have change and it’s your lead. Welcome back to the Senate. You have managed to follow in the footsteps of Gore and Kerry by snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory. It’s Groundhog Day all over again. Have you learned anything? You can’t beat a feeble old coot that offers our country nothing but peril. Fucking fight.

If Obama should lose this election, there is going to be a lot of bitter Obama supporters blaming Hillary, and there is no way the party will be willing to go through this divisiveness and drama again in four years. For the PUMAs, I have a four letter word: Gore.

The evil in this ad is how Debra B. is made to seem like the... what's the word?.. "maverick" representative of a MOVEMENT. In the spot she even exits, trying to recruit the legions of others who are obviously just like her.

She may be a maverick herself, but the truth is:

She's such a weird duck in the Wisconsin Democratic Party, that her disruptiveness goes back to June, and she was stripped of her delegate status in July or early August.

This is simply the mirror-image reversal of what Karl Rove has always done: when he finds an ax murderer who once registered as a Democrat, he makes that one individual emblematic of all Democrats.

Google is our friend. Google "DEBRA BARTOSHEVICH", and read for yourself how her early defection to McCain was met with overwhelming disapproval in her own home state, to an extent that even "surprised" her.

Now that she's been ostracized totally by her own, she has been recruited with warm open arms by the McCain campaign. This whole bamboozle is nothing more than Chapter 7 of "Democrats For Nixon" (or "Democrats For Reagan", etc., if you prefer), a scam invented by the same Republican dirty tricksters who brought you Karl Rove.

But you can take it to the bank that the MSM will, starting today, accept the meme and treat this lone strange chick like a "MOVEMENT".

That's the entire ballgame.

If Obama should lose this election, there is going to be a lot of bitter Obama supporters blaming Hillary, and there is no way the party will be willing to go through this divisiveness and drama again in four years.

Barack supporters blame the Clintons for everything anyway.

And I saw no remorse from progressives who voted for Nader or who refused to vote for Gore because "he was no better than Bush."

LOL

Barack started the divisiveness from day one when he needed to bring down Clinton to win himself.

There was no wringing of hands in the Barack camp about how divisive Barack was being in destroying the leading contender for his own personal ambition when gracefully bowing out and accepting a secondary role would have united the party very early and obviated the need to even address the inexperience issue which is dragging Barack down and which necessitated choosing a running mate that is the antithesis of Barack's alleged political vision and an insult to Clinton supporters and women across this country.

Barack supporter = double standard R us

It amazes me how the clinton people are playing the victim card, etc. fact is that obama people would have felt just as bad had the shoe been on the other foot. the question this woman in the ad and those like her need to ask, is if the shoe was on the other foot how would they feel if obama supporters, out of anger, etc. voted for mccain?

A boatload of Barack supporters made just that threat (or to stay home and not vote) when it looked like Clinton was going to win.

What amazes me is your hypocrisy and double standard.

IF Obama does not get elected, the African American community will not SUPPORT HILLARY IN 2012. She will never win and we wont forget.

Since Clinton didn't get nominated, the female community will not SUPPORT BARACK IN 2008. He will never win and we won't forget [what he and his supporters did to the first woman with the first real opportunity to be president].

Women voters will never forgive this misogynistic sophomoric fool for spoiling their chance for the presidency.

How stupid and foolish you idiots were in trashing Clinton with every breath and spitting on her candidacy is mind boggling!!!!

Experience and Judgement of what? I still don't get it how any Hilary supporter would vote for McCain,...name 1 issue? If you supported Hilary and now support McCain because she lost the primary, you never were a democrat.
I love how desperate the GOP campaign's gotta be to try and spread the doubt that Obama can't even get democrat support among women. It seems that McCain always finds more ways to lick the bottom of the barrel.

What a hoot from a group of Barack supporters who insisted that Clinton was no different than McCain and that they would not support her if she were nominated.

Funny your logic, too: if Clinton isn't any different than McCain as Barack supporters have said all along why wouldn't Clinton supporters vote for McCain - after all, if McCain and Clinton are the same, then it makes perfect sense for Clinton supporters to change their allegiance to McCain.

Now, how stupid were Barack supporters in pushing THAT meme, eh?

publis:

You progressives already screwed the rest of us already with your refusal to support Gore.

So, this is payback both for Gore's loss and for Clinton's loss.

We are returning the favor now for both those losses.

The roles were reversed and we saw how Barack supporters acted: "we will refuse to support Clinton if she is the nominee" just as they refused to support Gore.

Barack people spited Clinton (and her supporters) this year (to the extent of figuratively spitting on them) but expect the support of her people this year.

Lots of luck.

Funny, the country was also at stake when Clinton was leading big and Barack decided to trash her and initiate a divisive and bitter primary.

Where was all the talk from Obama supporters and Marshall then about how the party needed to be united behind an experienced, qualified candidate such as Clinton who had the same positions on issues as Barack?

No. Where. To. Be. Found.

Now, you demand unity.

Now, you demand party loyalty.

Now, after engaging in a misogynistic and dishonest campaign against a party leader who gave her heart and soul to American liberalism, you demand that Clinton's supporters merely put aside the fact that Barack won with GOP support, that Barack is channeling Bush in everything but a few policy choices, and that Barack is going to do for the Democrats what Bush did for the GOP, undermine the party's future with an incompetent administration that will value cultish loyalty to the progressive religion over what is good for the country and who will do anything to politically, socially, and personally destroy any person who stands in their way.

Barack more represents eight more years of frivolous, self-acclaiming, cultish leadership than McCain does, no matter how bad McQuaint is on the issues.

Caution Caution Caution

This is a TROLL alert

Remember how moderate Democrats begged, BEGGED, progressives to support Gore warning that Bush would be a disaster for the country and how progressives decided to put their own selfish disgruntlement ahead of the country and vote for Nader anyway and give Bush the White House?

And now you have the GALL to demand that moderates support your candidate after your treachery in 2000?

Clinton is not responsible for the war in Iraq as Democratic progressives have claimed.

Democratic progressives themselves are by ensuring that Bush got elected.

If progressive can put your self-absorbtion and arrogance ahead of the good of the country, you have no right to demand that anyone else do anything differently.

You can take your demands for party unity and party loyalty and so-called good of the country and put them in the same place you put them when Gore was running.

nobama,

again, why do you blame me personaly (and incorrectly) for not supporting gore? in addition, what facts back up your claim that obama people cost gore the election 8 YEARS AGO (do you have a survey with statistical analysis indicating that obama supporters opposed gore in the primary and then activly worked against him in the general)?

Point is, all this "discussion" does not justify to me why a democrat would vote for mcshame. all of this sounds like kids at recess....

you can try to justify your actions all day long but that does not dispute that were the situation reversed i have no doubt that clinton people would be outraged if obama people acted that way... and i am serious when i metion that in 12 the favor could be returned.... i have heard such things out there. this is not an arguement to justify such behavior it is merely an effort to point out what could happen.....

you need to relax

Funny how Barack folks are always telling everyone else to just relax.

It is a cultish way of addressing one's opposition.

Don't remember Barack's followers "relaxing" during the primaries when challenged or the recipient of harsh or unfair criticisms.

The only "nerve" you've hit is the one that gets exercised when being stimulated by the unadulterated and arrogant gall of Barack supporters.

first, you need to stop putting people into your neat little stereotpyical boxes. you have yet to find one that applies to me, yet you keep em coming. second, you seem only capable of far-fetched personal attacks instead of addressing the issue(s) being disussed. Guess you are a good match for mcshame.....

enjoy the fruits of your "labor"...

Hillary lacked the judgment and experience to oppose the war . . .

So did Biden.

LOL!

prove to me with fact, that obama people did not suport gore in the 2000 GE. Show me that at least 75% of them did so.

Interesting... the lady in this commercial was just on Fox Noise... 10 bucks to guess who sponsored her to the Convention...

Yup, the RNC

suedehead,

I would love to see that ad...

Now, are these Hillary supporters Democrats or were they Republicans/Republican-leaning independents that wanted to vote for a woman/Hillary?

Too, too funny how Barack supporters who proclaimed that Barack was appealing to independents and Republicans and supposedly relied upon those same independents and Republicans to defeat Clinton are now dismissive of independents and Republicans who supported Clinton.

publis,

Prove to me that more than 75% of the Republicans and independents that voted for Barack did so because the supported him rather than because they didn't like Clinton and that Barack would have won even if the independents and Republicans who voted for him weren't counted. Prove Barack won more actual Democrats than Clinton, since clearly independents and Republicans now don't count anymore according to Barack supporters here and only loyal Democrats, in particular loyal Democrats who support Barack, actually count as American citizens.

I am not the one proposing theories about the 2000 election... All i am doing is asking you to back your theories about it up with facts.... As for your requests, why would i bother to prove theories that you have presented? are you assuming way too much about me again? I think so....

barack won more delegates... anyone can prove that. that makes him the nominee per long-standing DNC rules....

i am done with you. you sit here using personal attacks and foolish what-ifs as you try to justify this behavior. your comments seem to be based upon child-like assumptions about other people and you do not seem to want to address the main points of my arguements. I leave you with this:

Vote for whomever you want, but don't be suprised if obama people return the favor in the future as we are equally invested in our candidate*

*recognizing of course that polling methods in 2008 can identify how large portions of the electorate voted, including what % of hillary people voted for mcshame to spite obama

Here's what McCain REALLY thinks of Hillary

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLQGWpRVA7o&eurl=http://www.dailykos.com/

Vote for whomever you want, but don't be suprised if obama people return the favor in the future as we are equally invested in our candidate.

Multitides of Barack supporters have already stated they would never vote for Clinton, this year, in 2012, or every, so your threat has no credibility.

i am done with you

Barack supporters were "done with" Clinton supporters a long time ago and keep proving it every day.

Go ahead and keep p*ssing on 17 million Clinton voters and see where it gets you.

Barack should be up by 10-15% points at this time, but he did so much damage in order to climb out of the hole he started in against Clinton, by trashing Bill Clinton and his presidency and leveling false charges against him and his wife.

And it was intentional because he knew he couldn't win the primaries except by trying to guilt people into voting for him by proclaiming all opposition to be race-driven - the Clarence Thomas method.

Barrack's shallow "hope and change" and "bipartisan" campaign is not substantially different than Bush's shallow "compassionate conservatism" and "bipartisan" campaign.

Barrack's supporters are driven with religious-like fervor that demands utter and obsequious support of their chosen savior, every bit like the Regent U fanatics that infested the Bush administration.

Barrack's picked a VP nominee that is the liberal counterpart of Bush's Dick Cheney.

Barrack's inexperience, while promising to rely on experienced liberals from the radical wing of the party, easily mirrors Bush's inexperience and promise to rely on experience conservatives from the radical wing of his party.

Barrack can't talk without fumbling if he isn't scripted, just like Bush.

It just goes on and on and on . . .

And reading too much into the generic term "you."

But that is just like Barrack supporters . . . self-absorbed with the belief that it is all about them personally and individually.

Pretty much like Barrack himself.

If Barrack had more hair, you couldn't tear him away from the mirror, as he would always be combing and primping it.

Self-love . . . so . . . Bush-like.

i hope i see a women president somday along with a hispanic one, and an asian one, and so on

I hope I see qualified individuals as president, not placeholders for various races and genders.

i know race played no role in yours

It played a huge role.

I refuse to vote for a person who demands that I do so because of their race and so I reject a person who makes such demands.

I disapprove of using false charges of racism as a means of promoting one's success in any endeavor, including nomination to the Supreme Court or nomination as a party's candidate for the presidency, and so I reject a person who uses this tactic.

what are you trying to convince me of?

I'm not trying to convince any particular individual of anything.

I am posting my thoughts on these issues.

This is how I perceive these matters.

Others may share these views; others may not.

As you note, you can take them or, in your case, leave them, as you wish.

I neither demand nor expect a response, although it is usually more interesting when one is received.

I am communicating to anyone who does bother to review my comments that neither Barrack nor his supporters have convinced me (or other potential voters not yet committed to him) to vote for him, much less to support him.

My reasons are transparent.

I am asking Barrack supporters to convince me and so far the responses have pretty much confirmed my impression that his supporters aren't really committed to a new style of politics and unity like they claim, but are very committed to trashing Clinton and blaming her for Barrack's own failings, as well as beating their chests, patting themselves on the backs, rubbing their primary and caucus victories in the face of Clinton (or other) supporters, and self-righteously proclaiming themselves to be ushering in a new millenium, just like a hundred other failed political movements before that showed the same hypocrisy and at the end of the day simply relished power for the sake of imposing their own world view on others, much as the Bush administration has functioned.

Satisfactory?

I note that you metion a "false charge of racisim".... One could argue that you have presented a "false charge of sexism" in previous posts. the point is, people see what they want. when one is emotionaly tied to a perspective (a political candidate or position; should my team make this trade; i don't want that development behind my house, etc.) emotion rules the day and people see what they want to see to futher their arguement. when arugements follow this tract people are only yelling past each other. This, among other things, is a basis for the "agree to disagree" theory.... The way this thread has been going has to make the "forces of evil" salivate... i understand that you were emotionally invested in hillary's campaign. i respect that. just as i was in obama's, as romney's people were in his, as kucinich's were in his.....
it seems that what you are arguing is why you supported hillary, which is your businesses. i pointed out why i supported obama. those are personal opinions that should be taken at face value. one "opinion" is no greater than another in a democracy; the only recourse for differing opinion is an election. again, my point has nothing to do with the merits of our support for our respective candidates; i am pointing out what an outcome could be. i do not speak for, nor to i advocate for such actions; i am trying to convey what could happen given how emotional both sides of this are and how hillary would need the obama people (as he needs hers now)in 2012.

as a suggestion, if you are that hurt personally by obama winning the primary, write in hillary, or someone else. the choice is yours to make and such a vote is worth as much as anyone elses.... again, all i am saying is that a possible unintended consequense could be a "return of the favor" in 4 years...

I guess that is where the need for the "compromise candidate" came from....

Dodd anyone?

Lincoln's experience consisted of 1 term in the us house (a mere 2 years of experience) before becoming president and as such i don't know hoe one defines "expereince" in a relevant term with regard to becoming president....

i agree that you obama should be up more and that is due to clinton supporters... i also beleive that this could change down the stretch...

lastly, in terms of "taunting", etc. i disagree. what hillary supporters may see is taunting when in fact it is celebrating on our part. i would expect you to celebrate if hillary had won, and engaging in that act is not taunting. for example, when the giants beat the Patriots in the superbowl last year, the celebrated. as a Pats fan i could have seen that as taunting, but they were celbrating as they should have been... the act of celebration in such circumstances is exaggerated due to the fact of extreme elation on one side and extreme dissapointmenton the other....

in any event, i have to go... goodnight

Appreciate some help. I have tried to research Ms. DEBRA BARTOSHEVICH, allegedly a long-time democrat. No record of campaign donations on Open Secrets; no news reports of Democratic activity until reports of her "defection," and in fact, no retrievable (by me) records on a web, news or blog search running back years -- it is as if she was invented for the purpose of this add.

Appreciate if some better research could be done -- is this a fraud?

AH