Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Clinton Supporters Email-Bomb Superdelegates
Shocked by this behavior. Notice no Obama supporters threatening. Who is dividing the party?
At least two other party insiders wrote the Huffington Post expressing concern over the scope ("I've received emails like this for weeks but tonight it started in mass) and negativity of some of the Obama attacks, including one red-state Democrat:
"I spent my entire life in the two reddest states in the entire U.S. so please excuse me if I fail to discern the nuances of the arguments sent my way this evening in what appears to be an orchestrated campaign to intimidate the remaining unpledged delegates by threatening to leave the party and vote for a third Bush term if I and others like me don't vote for Sen. Clinton," wrote the exasperated superdelegate. "I have been uncommitted throughout this campaign because I wanted to see how the candidates performed in a variety of settings. I am proud of them both. But I am horrified by this effort to threaten votes for McCain if super delegates don't vote for Sen. Clinton. I have received hundreds of emails from both sides - but I can say without exception that I have not received a single email from an Obama supporter that threatened a vote for McCain if I didn't support Sen. Obama. You really ought to be ashamed."











Comments (40)
This is the post that should've been titled "What the hell is wrong with you people?"
May 9, 2008 11:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Amen to that.
May 9, 2008 1:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm thinkin' at this point ignoring the negativity (instead of feeding it) might help it go away. The insiders seem to KNOW this thing is over as over gets & they probably know that based on delegates (even if she manages to get Florida & Michigan seated as is).
I believe the "undeclared" supers have probably committed privately & may just be waiting for May 20th & Oregon to put him over the top (pledged delegate majority) so that they can publicly declare with appropriate cover (seems to be the wisdom right now). Yesterday I was a lot more nervous (thinking Clinton has some judge in her back pocket somewhere waiting to award her the nomination) It's sad cause I truly started this primary season as a Hillary supporter & pretty much planned on voting for her until she started losing & couldn't handle it with grace & dignity. I truly hope her & Bill can take a chill pill & get it together enough to help give birth to a new era of Washington politics. I don't know how much Obama will actually succeeed (probably depends a lot on what kind of majority we hold in the Senate. 60% would be a GOD SEND). It's time to act as if...
May 9, 2008 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree totally. Here is what I believe should be the response to any Hillary Supporter TPMer who threatens to hold his breath until they feel their ass has been kissed sufficiently:
Dear ________________,
Vote for the candidate of your choice in November. Since I never expect people to vote for Party, but rather candidate, you will hear the same arguments as the registered GOPers and Indies. I encourage you to do what you feel needs to be done to get the best POTUS in the White House.
I wouldn't begin to insult your intelligence by pandering to you. If you feel that Obama is now the Dem nominee, I have an assignment for you:
Please go to these websites and look at the policies:
http://www.barackobama.com/index.php
http://www.johnmccain.com/
I'm not saying to vote based on policy alone, but it's important for you to become educated about, at very least, the two major party candidates.
I look forward in having discussions with you in the future.
May 9, 2008 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you can stop at the first sentence: Vote for the candidate of your choice.
Period.
May 9, 2008 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL! Right on!
May 9, 2008 2:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
And all the Obama campaigners who called black stateswomen and black statesmen "Uncle Toms". Is that democracy?
May 9, 2008 2:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Link please
May 9, 2008 2:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Really? When? Where? I spend a great deal of time all over the Internet and some heavy Obama-supporting sites. I have never, repeat NEVER heard "Uncle Tom" used. Never.
NEVER.
May 9, 2008 2:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jesus, Quit WHINING!!!!!!!!!!
May 9, 2008 2:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not quite sure - given your history it seems like you're calling the Obama supporters whiners here - am I right? Because I seriously don't get the logic in it.
Obama supporters aren't completely innocent in this (ie. the not infrequent calls that blacks would leave the party if Obama didn't win), but at least their outrage was based in the stance that their candidate is significantly ahead in all metrics and the SD's reversing this would be seen as a slap in the face.
The Clinton people are the opposite. Their candidate is behind in every metric by a substantial margin and are basically throwing a fit. "If we can't be captain of the team we aren't going to play, and in fact we'll actively work against you". I can understand being disheartened that something you put a lot of emotional involvement into isn't turning out how you wanted, I just hope that cooler heads will prevail and everyone who was so passionate about this race does what they feel is right for the country, not based on a personal attachment to a politician.
May 9, 2008 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Electablity Isn't Enough
May 9, 2008 2:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ummmm who is going to tell the emperor that she has no clothes? The race is effectively over. There will be no more debates. I swear to God Hillary will still be running on the day that President Barack Obama is sworn into office.
Reality, much?
May 9, 2008 3:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wasn't the Clinton campaign emphasizing that superdelegates could base their decision on whatever they want? Now that they are making an independent decision, based on their view that Obama is the presumptive nominee, Clinton supporters are upset about it. Along the same lines, after PA we heard how "more people had voted for her" (a clever way of obscuring the fact that some of those who voted for her didn't have the option of voting for Obama). Now that her gains from PA have been wiped out and the popular vote count is unlikely to favor Clinton even if you include Michigan, we aren't hearing much about that anymore either. It seems like they'll run out of arguments eventually, but not before they get to the bottom of the barrel.
May 9, 2008 4:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fear not, super delegates. Such sour grape Clinton supporters will be swept away with the McCain supporters when the Obama tsunami makes landfall.
May 9, 2008 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Donna Brazile answer to the intimidation campaign
"Honestly, this is the 9th email today," she wrote before 8:00 pm. "So I believe you're ready to not only destroy Roe versus Wade, voting rights, civil liberties and civil rights. Perhaps adding trillions more to the deficits through non-stop tax cuts to the wealthy and 100 more years in Iraq. Yes, please join Rush and McCain asap. The train has left. Catch it."
Priceless
May 9, 2008 5:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's been a very sad campaign from the beginning.
I have never been prejudice in my life and I am 70 years old. I always thought it was nice to help all races and colors and treat each with the same dignity. I have seen first Valerie Plame being tragically mistreated, after she had been outed by the Bush Administration. Geraldine Ferrero was basically forced to give up Clinton fundraising because she repeated a statement made by Barack Obama himself. She said that being black helped him be where he was today. He said that if he were not black he would be one of 14 Senators going nowhere, without the opportunity to run for president and certainly not have the opportunity as far as the book deals go. This is not verbatim for either because I can no remember exactly but the idea is completely as spoken.
Hillary Clinton, has been held to such a high standard that it would be impossible for anyone to achieve balance. She has always worked for the poor and for women and somehow, those very people she has worked for the hardest are ready to abandon her and even degrade her, because they think something better has come along! She does get up every day and goes out and tries to win the nomination, despite taking criticism from most involved in the news, talk shows and guests, because she has a mission to help people. She has proven herself in the Senate. Just listen to those who had their doubts. She is highly respected in the Senate by all who thought she would be very partisian and found her to work well with all but to fight for what she believes in. When she tries to make a point of a difference between Barack Obama and herself she is accused of being racist or nasty. Obama's
Chief Strategist, David Axelrod, has a daughter who is developmentally disabled and his wife, co- founded a a foundation for Epilepsy, and Hillary Clinton had done significant work on behalf of epilepsy. His wife even said that a 1999 conference that Clinton's convening on finding a cure for the condition was "one of the most important things anyone has done for epilepsy."
This is the kind of people the Clinton's are. There are so many positive stories out there about them, but people like to focus on the negative, mostly lies, to take her down.
I am more sad because of how Obama runs over women and no one hears or listens. If you knew how he got started in the Illinois State Senate, you would probably not feel so good about him, no matter if you are black or white. I am sorry to say he uses what ever will work people.
Hillary has proven she will work for us but they are trying to run her off. She wants to save the election and Obama will not be able to stand up to the Republicans. They will bring all of his shady deals from Chicago and his lack of experience will assure 4 more years of Bush actions.
May 9, 2008 6:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Regardless of your low opinion of Obama. I hope you vote for him in the fall.
Of course Clinton isn't all bad. I just think that the tone of her campaign and the continuation of it is not good for the party.
May 9, 2008 7:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
joflorida:
Well said. Thank you.
supa:
It would be foolish to write in Obama in November when Hillary is actually on the ballot against McCain :)
Obama's name was not on the ballot in Michigan because he was not smart enough, politically, nor compassionate enough personally to leave it on. Hillary knew how important it was to 1) acknowledge Michigan because of their awful economic problems right now, and 2) give them a chance to vote for someone and have their voices heard, despite the stupidity of the DNC in disenfranchising them over, what?, a primary voting date change. If Obama was truly caring of all voters, he would insist on a revote, even if it meant his losing. That would be an Obama that all of you seem to think he is. In reality, he is very much someone other than that.
Michelle only cares about being a first lady, so whatever it took her husband to do to other women to get ahead politically, she supported. No angel there!
May 9, 2008 11:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
"She is highly respected in the Senate by all who thought she would be very partisian and found her to work well with all but to fight for what she believes in."
And yet, of those same Senators who have such high respect for her, more of them have, as superdelegates, declared themselves as supporters of Obama, not Clinton.
"I am more sad because of how Obama runs over women and no one hears or listens."
That's just absurd. Provide one link showing that Obama has run over women.
"She does get up every day and goes out and tries to win the nomination, despite taking criticism from most involved in the news, talk shows and guests, because she has a mission to help people."
And you don't think, after literally WEEKS of Wright, flag pins, Ayers, Rezko, flipping off Hillary, hand not over heart for pledge, Obama in a turban, and mountains of other garbage, that Obama doesn't get up and try to win the nomination despite taking criticism?
May 10, 2008 10:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
why are people making a comparison between Clinton and Obama supporters? ONLY the Clinton
supporters were disenfranchised! There were no states that Obama won where the votes were not counted. Do you blame florida and Michigan voters? Don't you think it is frightening to have a circumstance where people are told we don't need your votes now, but be sure and come in and vote in November because we really need you at that time?
COUNT OUR VOTES. TAMPERING WITH THE OUTCOME OF AN ELECTION IS CALLED FIXING A RACE.
May 9, 2008 7:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Take a deep breath and think about it for a minute. Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan, and you are claiming it is fair to say Hillary won, to count her votes when he followed the rules and took his name off the ballot?
May 9, 2008 9:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
joflorida,
Yes, it is sad that two state's legistatures and governors decided to violate the agreed upon rules and move their primaries to dates that preceded the earliest established dates. But the reality is that the fault lies mostly with those state's legislatures and governors...not with Obama.
Further, Hillary Clinton agreed to these rules along with everyone else. It wasn't until she found herself in the hole that she suddenly saw the light and began to champion the cause of seating those delegates.
Sorry, you don't change the rules in the middle of the game.
But we are beyond this arguement now. We are quickly approaching the time when we will have a Democratic nominee. That person is most likely to be Barack Obama.
One of the central arguements from the Clinton campaign is that superdelegates are free to choose whomever they wish. That is 100% true. And they are choosing Barack Obama. Very soon he will have the 2025 delegates he needs to earn the nomination, probably after Kentucky and Oregon. By Clinton's own arguement, that will make Obama the legitemate nominee.
The time is near for all of us to stop bickering about this stuff and rally around the nominee. Unless, of course, you would rather have McCain become the next POTUS.
May 10, 2008 1:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
"There were no states that Obama won where the votes were not counted."
Haha, well Hillary did say that the caucuses that Obama won weren't Democratic or had too many "intimidating" people or some such. So she really doesn't think those states count. In fact, in one of her supporters' scenarios, they don't even count the caucus states that he won in which no total voter counts were provided or some such crap. That's in order to boost Hillary's popular vote and minimize his. Officially, of course, they do count. And officially, of course, Michigan and Florida DON'T count because they broke the rules.
May 10, 2008 10:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Shockingly, it turns out that this counterproductive exercise in vitriolic futility was conceived among and is being promoted by commenters at those two bastions of civil discourse and calm, dispassionate reasoning known as taylormarsh.com and hillaryis44.org.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/09/clinton-supporters-send-l_n_100979.html
I've been checking in periodically to keep my pulse on the temperature down in the bunker, and its now become unhinged that I find myself running out of the building and gasping convulsively for air, metaphorically speaking, after a couple of minutes. The way those people enable and spur each other to ever greater heights of hysteria and delusional thinking reminds me of of nothing so much as the "constitutionalist" militia nuts back in the 90s with their tales of black helicopters and plans to impose the UN as a world government. Its really getting scary.
May 9, 2008 7:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
The first time I went to His44.org I read through about 700 comments with my eyes popping out of my head--Obama was MISOGYNIST, EVIL, HITLER, the ANTICHRIST on and on and on. Then someone posted that she's gone to other blogs and people were "really nasty" or something like that.
I guess it's like the blind man and the elephant, except pinker.
And Obama, run over women? Have you SEEN Michelle? She would kick his ass if he did that.
May 9, 2008 10:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
n the interest of not criticizing others for the specks in their eyes while ignoring the beam in my own, I've always tried to take note of really nasty comments about Hillary by Obama supporters and unquestionably people on both sides of the fight have crossed the line of decent behavior many times. However, one thing I've noticed in both sides (myself included) is that for each candidate, there is a class of nasty comments that is considered fair game by the side that makes them and totally out of bounds and beyond the realm of decency by the other side.
For example, Hillary's most vociferous supporters take great umbrage at the use of the term "Shrillery" or at calling her "shrill." To their mind, this is a vicious sexist attack which is indicative of the vile sexist campaign being waged by Obama against Hillary. I find this confusing because I do not consider shrillness to be a gender-specific quality. Paul Krugman was referred to as "the shrill one" long before he turned his shrillness on Obama. Even when they explain it to me in-depth, what they're saying makes no sense to me. Likewise, Hillary's supporters frequently profess to be baffled at how anyone could find anything even a teensy bit racist about their frequent accusation that Obama is "an empty suit." Even when you explain to them that, to our ears, it sounds like an accusation that he got where he is through formal, or informal, affirmative action programs, what we say seems to make no sense to them.
Whatever. I do see two real differences between the two camps' grievance-mongering, and they are difference I find troubling. First, even back when she had a chance, I never, ever, ever seen, read or heard of an Obama supporter say "I can never vote for Hillary after all the awful, awful things her supporters have said about Obama." I have lost count of the number of times I've seen Hillary supporters say that. I simply cannot follow the logic of this. It's like they think there is some secret conspiracy by Obama's campaign behind all of this and that all of the millions of people commenting on blogs are actually his sock-puppets (a charge that is only lent credibility for them by the fact that only Hillary's campaign has been caught using sock-puppets in this thing.)
Even more troubling to me, however, has been the way many of Hillary's supporters are inclined to see equivalence between nasty anti-hillary statements made by anonymous individuals typing comments into a heated exchange in the comments of some blog and statements made by persons high up in Hillary's campaign. "Yeah, sure saintly, misunderstood Gerry Ferraro said Obama wouldn't be where he was if he wasn't black but this one time, I read mean stuff by some random fool in the comments to a diary on Daily Kos."
Regardless, she sheer intensity of the poisonous hatred boiling away in the comments sections of those two blogs, and at MyDD for that matter, is horrifying. The reason we need people like Billy Glad here is illustrated by those blogs. Once a real echo chamber gets going, the participants feed off of each other and end up mutually enabling their spiral into something that's starting to look and sound a lot like psychotic levels of derangement. The person behind hillis44.org is one of them and he'll never stop. It's truly a case of a lunatic being in charge of the asylum. Taylor Marsh, however, charlatan though she may be, at least purports to be above the worst of it, yet she allows it to continue. That makes her the most blameworthy of the two in my book.
May 10, 2008 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary who?
May 10, 2008 12:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
3 words: Know Your Audience.
Pissing off the supers with blackmailing emails is not exactly the way to Win Friends and Influence People. Pondering how in hell they thought this would work just boggles the mind.
Reason # 45,375 why the supers are coming out of the woodwork for Obama.
May 10, 2008 12:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, bad behavior, all those emails. Yes, sour grapes, because Obama will be the nominee of the divided (again)Democratic party. Now, does anyone else remember that there is an ELECTION coming, after the nomination is sealed? Does anone else realize that the Clinton backers are NOT BLUFFING when they openly say they will vote for John McCain? Is anyone else aware that a lot of so-called Independents are driving around with McCain stickers on their cars? Does anyone else realize, yet, what this all adds up to? How is Mr. Obama going to get enough total votes, nationally, to win the presidential election, when he has to strain every fibre of his being just to finally get nominated?
May 10, 2008 3:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
If this is truly the case, then we lose. I won't insult Clinton supporters for their views, but I won't give in to blackmail. You don't want to vote for Obama, don't do it. He's made his case and he's winning based on it's merits. She had her chance to do the same. This won't gain Clinton the nomination, just animosity from Democrats and any new voters that have been brought into the Party since this process began.
May 10, 2008 9:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
McCain won't be so bad. Actually, he has stronger credentials to be, among other things, Commander in Chief, than either Mr.Obama or Mrs. Clinton. Neither Mr. Obama nor Mrs. Clinton, come to think of it, have any military experience, at all. Sometimes we forget, I think, that there is more to the JOB of president, than having a fresh, new face, and/or a big, wide smile. Or having lived in the White House, before.
May 10, 2008 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
McCain won't be so bad. Actually, he has stronger credentials to be, among other things, Commander in Chief, than either Mr.Obama or Mrs. Clinton. Neither Mr. Obama nor Mrs. Clinton, come to think of it, have any military experience, at all. Sometimes we forget, I think, that there is more to the JOB of president, than having a fresh, new face, and/or a big, wide smile. Or having lived in the White House, before.
May 10, 2008 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, have fun with that, bro. McCain doesn't stand a chance in hell.
May 10, 2008 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
drosz:
Try this, as you attempt to learn to count: "One potato, two potato, three potato, four..." {It doesn't have to be potatoes; you can use ballots.} I think you'll catch on, by, oh, say, November.
May 10, 2008 9:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Potatoes can vote!? You're right we're screwed! If only I could count, then everything would be sooo clear! Damn my public school education!!
May 11, 2008 7:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Polyphemus, blinded, launches rockes at random into the ocean, shouting "nobody, nobody blinded me!"
Odysseus, who told Polyphemus his name was "Nobody," sails off without a scratch.
May 10, 2008 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
drosz: Per your observation regarding "...{your} public school education!!": Don't worry about past failures. President McCain will loan you the funds to attend private school, even though it appears possible you may not vote for him.
May 11, 2008 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hehe,
A day late and a dollar short, my friend. Now if he can reduce my rates...
May 11, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment