It's Over
Despite the spooky echoes of the "Brooks Brothers Riot" in 2000, on the part of the Clintonistas at the Rules Committee hearing, the committee voted to seat the Florida and Michigan delegation with one half a vote each. My guess is the final victory of Obama will come with the votes of Montana on Tuesday evening.
Even thought Ickes is threatening to take the Michigan decision to the credentials committee, I believe its an empty threat.
Advertisement
Kudos to Clinton supporters Alice Huffman and Don Fowler for their class. And a big raspberry to Harold Ickes for being his usual icky self.
May 31, 2008 7:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Amen to that. Huffman and Fowler won my respect this evening.
May 31, 2008 7:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
it's over, alright.
June 1, 2008 9:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, Hillary will be disappointed, but I doubt she will take it as badly as Ickes appeared to.
He looked pissed!
He's right, of course, that the 69-59 delegate split (34.5-29.5 convention vote split) is pretty much pulled out of thin air.
However, the alternative under the rules wasn't really the Clinton sweep that Ickes wanted, but rather upholding the 100% delegate loss.
So the Michigan vote split is a pure political compromise -- but not one I can see the credentials cttee overturning.
Despite the chants of "Denver!" I don't see it even going to that cttee.
Today's show actually may have educated lots of voters as to what the process issues were in Florida and Michigan, so the spectacle -- almost as much as the outcome -- could have a positive effect.
May 31, 2008 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
It sure is pulled out of thin air. This was done for the sake of Party Unity; which will not be achieved if Hillary keeps riling up her supporters.
But giving Hillary what she was asking for would be a pulling something from thin air just as much: considering those votes as the legitimate will of the people would be a crock of dirt.
The absolute only way to solve this issue without pulling something out of thin air would have been appliying the punishment as stated originally: The two States stripped off all of their delegates. This was avoided -through negotiation- in the name of Unity. Too bad Hillary is getting in the way of this, as per her comments today, in which she complains that he received four of "her" delegates.
Truly, the only reason why the the Rules Committee decision was challenged is that Hillary has been relently pushing this for months. Had she ever stuck to the pledge she signed, and accepted the rules of the game, the challenge would have never occured.
June 1, 2008 9:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Time to move forward. Cooler heads have prevailed.
I think Ickes and the Clintons and the Clinton mob in the audience that protested look pretty bad coming out of this meeting. Like crooks.
I know they don't represent all Clinton supporters. For those that are reasonable, I look forward to teaming up to win in November.
May 31, 2008 7:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Amen, brother.
May 31, 2008 7:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ickes's ickyness is part of his job description. It's his reason for being, his mission in life. He and Davis have been the nastiest representatives of a candidate since Cheney and Rove. So don't blame them; they were born with a sour expression on their faces.
Meanwhile, the RBC showed such decency and class that the party's message is clear: go forth and sic the dogs on that lying cheating corrupt Republican!
May 31, 2008 8:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. The Clinton supporters' behavior was so awful that, since she encouraged them to be there, she may have hurt *Chelsea's* chances in a couple decades...
May 31, 2008 8:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cheslea, so far, has worked at McKinsey as an intern and is now working for a hedge fund, no?
She'd better start ponying up or she's gonna lose all her chances at that White House run.
Just sayin'.
May 31, 2008 9:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jesus, does it now simply go without saying that any relative of a President is a plausible future candidate? What the hell does Chelsea Clinton have to do with anything?
June 1, 2008 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did anyone else notice? It seems that the demonstrators today outside the rules committee hearings were Republicans. Those interviews with the demonstrators saying they would vote for McCain if Obama wins our nomination sounded so Republican. Taplin is right, this really is another Brooks Bros demonstration. We should chase down the identity of some of those "demonstrators".
May 31, 2008 11:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Staff members of Rep. Boehner(R), flown out on Cindy McCain's Bud-beer-financed corporate jet.
June 1, 2008 12:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
In Indiana you have to wonder if republicans put her over the top as she didn't win by that much
June 1, 2008 1:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
The only thing that really is exciting now is figuring what the Clintons will get.
June 1, 2008 4:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
bye bye hillary
and don't come back
the hillbots were chanting "Faux Gnus, Fair And Balanced", so I don't think they were Democrats
June 1, 2008 7:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
ITS OVER?????? PRAISE JESUS!
FREE AT LAST, THANK GOD ALMIGHTY I'M FREE AT LAST!
I'm an Obama supporter, but thank God the ubiquitous Hillary bashing will now start to wind down.
June 1, 2008 7:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
I join you in prayer, brother.
June 1, 2008 9:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
How did it feel being associated with those kinds of "democrats"?
June 1, 2008 4:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not over. Or rather, it's not any more over than it was a month ago.
It will be over when Hillary says it's over, or when she goes down in flames (the latter is ever more likely IMO).
June 1, 2008 8:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
CAN the Clinton campaign submit a petition to the Credentials Committee? Wouldn't the petition have to come from the Michigan party? But this compromise was THEIR plan! Just who would Clinton be representing with such a petition?
June 1, 2008 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Steve, yes there are rules for sending a petition to the credentials committee, I don't remember the number of seated delegates that would have to sign it, but the bar to get a hearing is pretty low.
The problem for Hillary is the make-up of the committee, it will be controlled by Obama representatives (each state designates members and alternates with large states getting a few more) and the committee is filled out by the Chair -- meaning Dean's appointees. Same chairs as Rules and ByLaws.
They will get a hearing and a Majority Report, which probably will confirm what RBC did yesterday. To get to the floor, they will need a Minority Report with support from at least 25% of the Credentials Committee members, and that might be very difficult if Michigan and Florida stick with support of yesterday's decisions. In other words, if Michigan and Florida are saying they agree with the existing terms, most states will not support overthrowing a state party's agreement with the DNC. If it would change the outcome, some might, but it won't -- so they will support Michigan and Florida's decision to make an agreement in the interests of party unity.
If by chance a minority report is brought out with enough support, expect the Convention Chair, Pelosi, to schedule the debate for a very obscure time, and dispose of it with as little attention possible. I seriously doubt if they will do it, though they may talk a game till the Super Delegates chime in and put Obama way over the top. I think that is about to happen.
June 1, 2008 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks Sara- that's very illuminating.
June 1, 2008 2:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
This may be a repeat, but it looked like more of a Walmart riot to me!
June 1, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
How many more times are you idiots going to say it is over? It's June, and Obama still doesn't have the magic number of delegates to declare victory. Of course he will get there, but it should be so very obvious that it has taken him much too long to get there. In a few days when you're jumping up and down, try to remember that. Temper your enthusiasm with a just a touch of reality.
June 1, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're right. Clinton still might get to see her dream/only hope of an assassination come true.
June 1, 2008 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Much too long according to whom or what? Your "arguments" get stupider all the time. Your candidate lost, deal with it. Get professional help if you need it. A grief counselor, perhaps.
June 1, 2008 4:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
There were not "shades of the Brooks Brothers Riot" as Jonathan Taplin contends. Taplin is so quick to call his opponents names. I'd prefer to reach out to people who are so passionate about the election that they were willing to protest at a rules committee meeting so that they can help us beat McCain in November.
Sure, Hillary's campaign bussed these people in, but they're the ones who cared enough to go.
Taplin has once again allowed his hatred for the Clintons, and I really would like to know what's behind it, to overcome his sense of reason.
I do hope this is over soon. Some people have been made pretty silly by silly season. Taplin's the prime example.
June 1, 2008 5:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama supporters also cared about the outcome, but the Obama campaign explicitly asked his supporters not to come to the RBC meeting and demonstrate. I recall he was organizing people to register voters in Northern Virginia instead.
The last thing he needed was some televised violent confrontation between rabid supporters of each candidate. That would have immediately made the media narrative that the Democrats are replaying 1968.
June 2, 2008 10:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Destor,
I heard from different sources how the Clinton camp had organized this protest. I think it was Andrea Mitchell who pushed that line even while saying snidely, "the Clinton campaign denies busing protesters in." In fact, they had nothing to do with it and the protesters were a mix of people. Here is an article with a more objective look at some of the protesters and their motivations (Alex Kopppelman salon):
http://dean.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/05/31/protest/index.html
Truth or simple facts seem to be missing from our press these days.
June 2, 2008 4:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Destor haven't you noticed. Those people were chanting "McCain" in the committee meeting. Six of eight interviewed outside said they would vote for McCain if Obama won the nomination. I do not know who these people are, but they are not democrats. Perhaps we will soon be seeing analyses of "McCain" democrats from our pundit class. I am not blaming Hillary for this, but I do think that the republicans are exploiting this conflict to sow division in the Democratic Party.
June 1, 2008 8:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
No... they are Democrats. They're so Democrat that they're more interested in punishing the party than they are in winning the election.
They're misguided, yes.
But they are hard core Democrats.
And people like Jonathan Taplin just encourage them to want to punish the party all the more.
Smug, arrogant name callers like Taplin could cost us an election that we should win in landslide fashion.
And, yes... the protesters are wrong. Anyone so angry over Hillary's loss who votes for McCain is wrong. But, sometimes people will take a loss in order to punish the party. People like Taplin make punishing the party seem like a fun thing to do.
June 2, 2008 1:08 AM | Reply | Permalink