Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

Search




Advanced Search

Alegre's Corner
We're not finished folks - not by a long shot!

NYT Op-Ed: Let Them Vote

by: campskunk

Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 13:48:19 PM EDT


Looking for validity in the argument that suppressing a roll call vote is necessary for "unity", Michelle Cottle can't find much in her op-ed in the New York Times this morning.

It's true that having America watch as some portion of Mrs. Clinton's 1,640 pledged delegates thumb their noses at Barack Obama would disrupt the party's vision of a carefully scripted Denver love-in. But finding a constructive way for Mrs. Clinton's seriously aggrieved loyalists to channel their anger and disappointment could wind up being the path of less destruction for Mr. Obama's campaign. Plus, it's the right thing to do.

This is the closest primary race in recent memory, and attempting to hide that fact from the American public is a ridiculous undertaking. Transparent attempts to intimidate Hillary's supporters isn't helping much either- it just makes it more clear that Obama is afraid of a vote, and underscores the closeness of the contest. Sorta takes the "democratic" out of the Democratic party, as Republicans are fond of pointing out.
campskunk :: NYT Op-Ed: Let Them Vote
Michelle Cottle points out that doing the right thing would make Obama look good...

Giving (Hillary's supporters) the chance to see their beloved candidate honored in a highly public forum could, just maybe, help release a little steam from the pressure cooker. Beyond that, there could be other, more direct benefits for Mr. Obama's candidacy.

A roll-call vote for Mrs. Clinton could help Mr. Obama look magnanimous instead of messianic. Fair or not, the man has earned himself a reputation as arrogant. These days, John McCain's campaign spends much of its time watching for the tiniest show of self-importance by Mr. Obama to exploit. By making a grand gesture, inviting (even publicly urging) Mrs. Clinton to sign the (already circulating) petition to have her name submitted for nomination would help Mr. Obama look like a swell guy.

Even if he isn't.

Michelle Cottle goes on to point out that Hillary's supporters consist of those who will eventually support Obama's candidacy, and those who will never do so, and that fair treatment of Hillary at the convention would increase the former category.

Sure, some portion of Mrs. Clinton's delegates will never be satisfied with any gesture. They are determined to sink Mr. Obama in the hopes that their candidate can come back and win this thing in 2012.

But the kamikaze cohort is just one, admittedly very noisy, subset of a larger pool of wounded supporters. The trick is to find a big, public way to separate the zealots from those who just want a concerted effort by the party and its candidate to show a scrupulous commitment to respecting every vote cast.

Of course, it's unlikely that Obama will follow Ms Cottle's advice; he's already decided that anyone who doesn't yet support him is irredeemable, one of "those people", and he's given up even talking to them. In doing so, he's made a lot of enemies, and cost himself votes. But, if that's the way he wants it...
Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
NYT Op-Ed: Let Them Vote | 43 comments
And she was very neutral, even pro-Obama in the primary (0.00 / 0)
that's saying something.
Michelle Cottle makes three (0.00 / 0)
Even Gary Hart is saying the vote should happen, and we all know he supported Obama.

Also Jake Tapper said the roll-call votes have always happened.

The pressure is building ...

If Obama wasnt' so arrogant, (0.00 / 0)
and the press didn't have less integrity than whores, we wouldn't even have this discussion.

OF course, there has always been roll calls.  ALWAYS.  

BTW, Hillary shattered the glass ceiling for women.  She was the closest a woman has come to nomination.  The race was as close as it could be.  

The rampant sexism of the media is again on display as they play coy, and again malign Hillary.   How in the name of heavens, the first woman to win a competitive primary, not to mention amass more than 1800 delegates, doesn't get an official salute to her (and women's) achievement?

BTW, Jon Stewart, you and your sexist writers who try to pretend this is about HRC's ego, and not the fact that she is a woman that should be treated faily, can go --- yourself.  

[ Parent ]
they don't get it (0.00 / 0)
even a smart guy like Jon can't see that when you're female you've experienced job bias and felt sexist smears that have been directed at you. They see it as sympathy, or empathy, when it's really identification.  Hillary and many of us don't have male ego problems, we do our best anyway. We help in spite of the bias, because we can see to our children and to the future. That's why Hillary has been doing her best to bring about unity - the way that would work, not the way that would not, even though the way that can't work is being pushed on her. She'll help Barack win the GE, not help him lose it. He should listen to her.  

Hillary - alternative energy
[ Parent ]
It's hard to figure what Jon Stewart is thinking (0.00 / 0)
He was pretty fair to Hillary during the primaries, at least in February and March.  He's tried to poke fun at Obama, but something or someone is holding him back.  His segment last Wednesday on off-shore drilling was pretty telling.  He took a teeny tiny shot at Obama but then had to pull back.  But he had his guns loaded for McCain.

I'd love to know who's censoring Stewart.

[ Parent ]
probably (0.00 / 0)
his audience, he's really doing Barack a favor by venturing to joke, but his audience is over the top for Barack and they prefer anti-Hillary jokes.   but, he really doesn't get it, or he'd joke about what we're really feeling, not made up crap.  His Hillary jokes aren't grounded, they're just what anyone can say,  He'd be funnier if he really got us.  We have humor. We'd like it.  

Hillary - alternative energy
[ Parent ]
smart and right (0.00 / 0)
Barack should be asking his own delegates to sign up for a real vote in Denver.  This is his second best chance to show it, not just say it. the best is accepting that the 'bottom' wants a unity ticket, and she won half the popular vote, had the momentum, and won more than half of registered Democrats.

If he's the unity candidate, he can show it by making unity decisions.  

Hillary - alternative energy

But you have to understand (0.00 / 0)
That in Obamaworld you just have to "say" unity and it will magically appear. Or you can do what the DNC and the Democratic "Leadership" has done thus far, pretend they have unity and hope they can somehow pull it all together with a great big hootenanny of a convention.  A convention filled with thousands of cheering fans and free speech cages. Yeah, unity my A**!
[ Parent ]
that's the perception (0.00 / 0)
and it has legs cause it's fairly descriptive.  he had to do something big to 'show' he's more than words.  

Hillary - alternative energy
[ Parent ]
Will be interesting to see the look on his face (0.00 / 0)
either when the roll-call vote happens, or when the reaction from no roll-call vote flares up with due force.
[ Parent ]
Bill Richardson On Fox this morning: I hope no roll-call vote happens (0.00 / 0)
that's hope for you.

What is with the messages this whole campaign sends to kids:
quit, give up. If you don't you are tearing the party apart.

Disgusting (0.00 / 0)
Richardson must still hope for a cabinet appointment.
[ Parent ]
He needs a shave. (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
He must really have it out for the Clinton's who did so much (0.00 / 0)
for him.  He seems to be a truly vindictive and hateful person for reasons only he knows, but I think they have something to do with self interest.
[ Parent ]
re: Let Them Vote (0.00 / 0)
Obama's revolution is anti-democratic on every front.  He's all about stifling democracy.  Is that the kind of change you believe in?

Obama Partisans Block Bid to End Caucuses
 from Chicago Tribune, August 9, 2008 (link below)

Democrats who supported Clinton's candidacy pushed to amend the new party platform so that caucuses would be banned in future presidential nominating contests.

But the party's platform committee refused to allow the amendment to come up for a vote or even a discussion. Co-chair Patricia Madrid, a former New Mexico attorney general, said the matter would instead be taken up at later date by the party's Rules Committee.

That left Clinton supporters disappointed. They contend that if the party were serious about enfranchising more voters, it would take a clear position against a caucus system that discourages participation by shift workers, the disabled and overseas members of the military. In traditional primaries, people have all day to vote. But a caucus might last just a few hours....

"My feeling is the issue should have been aired and people should have had the opportunity to speak and vote it up or down," Bob Remer, a delegate for Clinton from Chicago and member of the platform committee, said in an interview Saturday. Remer had put forward the amendment that was shelved. "The caucus system is the exact opposite of everything I've been fighting for in terms of maximizing democratic input."


..........
Tensions between the Obama and Clinton forces were evident at the Convention Center here, where the meeting took place. Clinton's supporters sat together in the audience, wearing campaign buttons and T-shirts bearing her name. When Obama's name was mentioned, one person hissed.

Among the Democratic activists serving on the committee, there were also signs of a split.

Lynn Forester de Rothschild, the head of a private holding company and a member of the committee, took the microphone after the caucus amendment was defeated to register a protest.

After the meeting, she said she still hasn't made up her mind about whether to vote for Obama because she doesn't "understand how a person comes to the U.S. Senate and -- before they've done one thing there -- decides they can be president."

"I have serious questions about Barack Obama and what the Democratic Party is doing," she said. "I have serious issues with Barack Obama."


..............
HEAR! HEAR, Lynn Forester de Rothschild!!!
..........
http://www.chicagotribune.com/...


I don't get it. Or maybe I do get it. (0.00 / 0)
Did they think even a discussion of eliminating the caucus system would invalidate the legitimacy of Obama's "victory".
[ Parent ]
I think you're on to something. (0.00 / 0)
Maby they're afraid any potential eventual elimination of caucuses might be retroactive to the 2008 primaries, so they're nipping this right in the bud just in case!


[ Parent ]
That and acknowledging sexism (0.00 / 0)
wow, I think Antigone is right. It's also why they resist acknowledging sexism. His delegate lead was so very slim, and she beat him in popular votes.

If sexism cost her even a few delegates, it means he won because of sexism.

[ Parent ]
Obama is so insecure about his hold on the nomination (0.00 / 0)
There must be a reason and I would loooove to know what it is.

If his campaign weren't so insecure, they would realize that having a vote actually makes him look stronger and more in control.  Its this unwillingness to follow the rules that makes me smell fear.  What's he afraid of?

[ Parent ]
exactly. (0.00 / 0)

Anyone with real judgment to lead would say:  "All the delegates must cast their votes. I hope I win, but it's the voters who decide."

He keeps power-mongering and manipulating the process to protect his "victory"; that indicates insecurity, not strength.  He doesn't show much concern for the common good, which is based on a democratic process.

[ Parent ]
He won by exploiting prejudice AND disenfranchising voters (0.00 / 0)
ouch!
[ Parent ]
No, it is that a discussion of the drawbacks of caucuses (0.00 / 0)
would highlight the thuggish tactics and cheating that the Obama campaign employed in this primary's caucuses. They don't want it made public, over and over, that their rock star candidate had to cheat to win. That's why they don't want it discussed now. He cheated and they are covering it up. And a discussion would bring that out to the public. This is not something they want hitting the headlines just before the convention.  

Live your life in such a way that when your feet
hit the floor in the morning, Satan shudders & says
'Oh $#!%'...she's awake!!
[ Parent ]
No, it is that a discussion of the drawbacks of caucuses (0.00 / 0)
would highlight the thuggish tactics and cheating that the Obama campaign employed in this primary's caucuses. They don't want it made public, over and over, that their rock star candidate had to cheat to win. That's why they don't want it discussed now. He cheated and they are covering it up. And a discussion would bring that out to the public. This is not something they want hitting the headlines just before the convention.  

Live your life in such a way that when your feet
hit the floor in the morning, Satan shudders & says
'Oh $#!%'...she's awake!!
[ Parent ]
No, it is that a discussion of the drawbacks of caucuses (0.00 / 0)
would highlight the thuggish tactics and cheating that the Obama campaign employed in this primary's caucuses. They don't want it made public, over and over, that their rock star candidate had to cheat to win. That's why they don't want it discussed now. He cheated and they are covering it up. And a discussion would bring that out to the public. This is not something they want hitting the headlines just before the convention.  

Live your life in such a way that when your feet
hit the floor in the morning, Satan shudders & says
'Oh $#!%'...she's awake!!
[ Parent ]
No, it is that a discussion of the drawbacks of caucuses (0.00 / 0)
would highlight the thuggish tactics and cheating that the Obama campaign employed in this primary's caucuses. They don't want it made public, over and over, that their rock star candidate had to cheat to win. That's why they don't want it discussed now. He cheated and they are covering it up. And a discussion would bring that out to the public. This is not something they want hitting the headlines just before the convention.  

Live your life in such a way that when your feet
hit the floor in the morning, Satan shudders & says
'Oh $#!%'...she's awake!!
[ Parent ]
Oh dear, what a bunch of loonies! (0.00 / 0)
Boy she came close to blashphemy there!! Towing the party line seems to be mandatory under threat of punishment. Good thing Lynn didn't speculate how she might NOT vote for the one, she could have been tossed off the panel! Goodness gracious, what's with the Dems these days!

Still Hearting Hillary, In Slo-Mo toward McCain
[ Parent ]
Why Is The First Woman To Win A Primary Being Treated Differently From All The Men Who Ran Before Her? (0.00 / 0)
That's the question.

Every man who has run has been on the first ballot. What's different about this year?

A woman is ran. And they didn't like it. No, precious, not one bit.

They called her names, and she rose.

They impugned her character, and she rose.

They disenfranchised her base, and she rose.

In the end, they simply installed their own candidate, awarding him delegates he did not win in states where he wasn't even on the ballot. They took delegates she had won, and gave them to her opponent. And still, he couldn't defeat her.

What's different about this year?

This time, it's a woman. And they broke their own rules to keep her down.

Will we let that happen? Can we afford to let that happen?

It's a woman. Our grandmothers and great-grandmothers will rise from the grave to accuse us if we do not speak out against this abomination, this assassination of women's suffrage and women's rights.

This time, it's a woman. Let the adage be proven, that Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.

Let them feel your wrath!

OpEd this, Tom! (0.00 / 0)
Great message!!
[ Parent ]
I don't know how (0.00 / 0)
Please, do what you want with it. Take it, use it, spread it around. No credit wanted or required.

Get our girl elected.

[ Parent ]
Wonderful sentiments, beautifully stated! (0.00 / 0)
Losing men got treated better than a winner woman!

You speak for millions of good men by pointing out the political villainy enveloping the top levels of the Democratic party today, both men and women. Some of these folks are much too drunk on self-importance, blind by opportunism, drooling at the chance for power. They have schemed from way back in 2006 first to tear away the Clinton legacy, and then to fully discounted the Clinton acheivements, and fuelled by sexism and mysogeny, took out all their petty gripes and grievances on Hillary.

And, as the poet said, she still rises. Thanks for speaking for a whole lot of us, Tom!
Rise Hillary Rise.

Still Hearting Hillary, In Slo-Mo toward McCain

[ Parent ]
O/T Cindy Sheehan made it on the ballot (0.00 / 0)
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/...

Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan on the ballot

Bye Bye Pelosi

That's great news (0.00 / 0)
It will at least keep Pelosi looking over her shoulder.  

Alice left me in Wonderland.  
[ Parent ]
Camp, check out (0.00 / 0)
what Heidi Li has to say about Michelle Cottle's Op-Ed.

The good news is that somebody in the mainstream press is publishing an op-ed pointing out reasons for the DNC to acknowledge that it does not yet have a candidate. The bad news is that Ms. Cottle's piece seems rather misleading in a number of respects. I am attempting to reach The New Republic, The New York Times, and Ms. Cottle to gain clarification on Ms. Cottle's position, but for now I want to point out the spots where the op-ed goes wrong, in my opinion. Below is the piece, with my annotations in bold.

Check out Heidi's post for her annotated version.

Good news, bad news: an op-ed from The New York Times, annotated

Alice left me in Wonderland.  

Link doesn't work (0.00 / 0)
I would like to read this.
[ Parent ]
corrected link (0.00 / 0)
http://heidilipotpourri.blogsp...

i didn't bother to challenge the incorrect assertions in the op-ed becaue it's just part of the overwhelming propaganda push orchestrated by the obamazoids and their media buddies, but heidi does a good job of it.

Barack Obama's election proves that any male can grow up to be president, provided he's willing to use misogyny as a campaign strategy.

[ Parent ]
Still not good enough for me (0.00 / 0)
There's nothing magnanimous about allowing the vote. It's merely business as usual. It requires no justification, and before Hillary no one was ever asked to provide one. On the contrary, Obama is SUPPRESSING the vote:  THAT requires justification. And having the appearance of unity is not a good enough reason. If we want to change the process, we should try to do it for NEXT time; but of course anyone who believes in democracy would fight it. Unity comes after the nomination, not before. All previous candidates have lived with this; let Obama explain why he needs to be different.

WHAT COULD BE LESS DEMOCRATIC THAN TURNING CONTROL OF THE NOMINATING PROCESS OVER TO ONE CANDIDATE?

WHY HAVE THEY NOT BEEN FORCED TO JUSTIFY THIS, INSTEAD OF HILLARY HAVING TO JUSTIFY EXPECTING TO BE TREATED LIKE EVERY OTHER CANDIDATE?

exactly. (0.00 / 0)

Why should we have to be convincing the DNC to allow something that is the standard practice?  It's Obama who has to explain why he should be the first candidate since Lyndon Johnson in 1964 (who ran unopposed) not to have a roll call vote.


[ Parent ]
I long for the days when the convention wasn't a (0.00 / 0)
paid commercial, there were smoke filled backrooms, and riots in the street during the nomination process.  Only then was it certain that things were done the way they were supposed to be done.  Well, maybe not.  But I still long for those days.  The only thing was that women didn't have a prayer back then because the smoke filled back rooms, and most of the rioters were men scraping for a place at their table.  Now that we have made it to the streets and into the back rooms, their only chance to maintain their privilaged places in history is to write us out of the script and pretend that we aren't.  We can't let them do that, and that is what this is all about.

Dean,Obama, Kerry, Kennedy, all of them will do anything to keep women out of "their" job and in the convention kitchen making food, that they are willing to change history and the entire process to do it.

Bill Press, (0.00 / 0)
who was quite fair and favorable to Hillary throughout the primary, is completely against a roll-call vote at the convention.  He claims that is will bring terrible disunity to the party.

He just doesn't get it.  

But he does read emails on his show and you can send him an email via his website

http://www.billpress.com/

He's already read a couple of mine and I think he needs to hear from more of us.


Bill has it exactly backward; no roll call, no unity. Ever. (0.00 / 0)
Then, the party fractures, and what the DNC has sowed, so shall they reap.  While they go the way of the Whigs.


There's no excuse for this, DNC.  None.
[ Parent ]
Exactly! (0.00 / 0)
This man was once head of the California Democratic Part.  He's no dummy.

Let him know that he has it backwards.

http://www.billpress.com/


[ Parent ]
If the party has survived all the other roll calls through the years, (0.00 / 0)
why shouldn't they with this one.  There have been plenty of contested and disunified elections in the Democratic party.  I don't know why they pick this year to care about it enough to change the entire process around. Maybe it is the same reason I chose to reregister as unaffiliated for the first time in my life.  Because the Democratic Party isn't really the Democratic Party that it always has been.
[ Parent ]
You too, Hopscotch? (0.00 / 0)
Are you enjoying the unbearable lightness of being unaffiliated as much as I am?

I'm beginning to get the hang of it and I don't mind it all.  


[ Parent ]
NYT Op-Ed: Let Them Vote | 43 comments
"Always aim high, work hard, and care deeply about what you believe in. When you stumble, keep faith. When you?re knocked down, get right back up. And NEVER listen to anyone who says you can't or shouldn't go on."
Hillary Clinton - June 7, 2008

Hillary Clinton
- Put stuff here

Blog Roll
- Put stuff here

Powered by: SoapBlox