A majority of them will swing behind one or the other candidate-likely Hillary Clinton-boosting her over the top even if she lags behind Barack Obama in the pledged delegate count.

Uh, no. This biatch is crazy if she thinks the supers are going to do that.

I'll just write in Obama then.

Calvin Coolidge: A majority of them will swing behind one or the other candidate-likely Hillary Clinton-boosting her over the top even if she lags behind Barack Obama in the pledged delegate count.

Uh, no. This biatch is crazy if she thinks the supers are going to do that.

I know. No Democrat has ever lied. At least they ended the war.

This just in:
Eleanor Clift is stupid.

If they did that, they'd pretty effectively hamstring the Nader/Green effect... which is probably the entire reason for Al Gore latching onto global warming in the first place...

Dems win the "F**k up a good thing" award everytime though, gotta give'em that.

a sampling of the reviews to "It takes a village"
Link

Who in the hell wrote this article? It's absolutely terrible.

cltbuilder: I know. No Democrat has ever lied. At least they ended the war.

What?

Also, the quote in the headline is awesome.

Ah yes, the other "cult leader".

Funny how only popular Democrats ever get called that.

Al Gore? Not a chance. Sorry, Eleanor, we can totally smell your vagina on this one.

If the supers give the nod to the Hildebeast I'm switching to Independent and writing in Obama.

Al Gore was devastated by having the election of 2000 stolen from him. It's my firm belief that he will NEVER run for elected office again.

Smellvin
If they did that, they'd pretty effectively hamstring the Nader/Green effect... which is probably the entire reason for Al Gore latching onto global warming in the first place...

Your point 1, plausible.

Your point 2, fail. Grade: Ignominious.

I could go for Gore! He was my first choice, i wished he would have been drafted into the nomination.

Gore/Obama would be the ultimate ticket for me.

Won't happen though. In this day and age with the mass media, Clinton or Obama will need to be nominated. Too many people are invested in them to not have either elected.

Obama should run as an independent if they pull this garbage. Screw the Clintons.

This is getting sillier by the minute.

(Racists vs. sexists) vs (conservatives vs conservatives) = (USA/2)

gusto1214: If the supers give the nod to the Hildebeast I'm switching to Independent and writing in Obama.

If that happens, how much you wanna bet that Bloomberg drops $1B and forms an independent third party with Obama as the candidate?

I would love to see polls on a three-way race.

So instead of a candidate that 50% of primary voters supported, they will go with a candidate that 0% of primary voters supported?

Right.

Another Hillary derangement thread in 3..2..

EwoksSuck: Obama should run as an independent if they pull this garbage. Screw the Clintons.

I'd agree if Romney was the Rep. Candidate.

McCain will get too many independent votes for Obama to be effective as a 3rd party guy.

moralpanic: I could go for Gore! He was my first choice, i wished he would have been drafted into the nomination.

Gore/Obama would be the ultimate ticket for me.

Gore/Jesus

Al Gore was born with 9 lives. He died twice. Now he has 14.

TO AL GORE!

I would love to see polls on a three-way race.

Here you go:

McCain 48%
Clinton 28%
Obama 23%
Green/Libertarian/Bull Moose candidates: 1% combined

AssCobra77: I'll just write in Obama then.

me too

It would be so awesome to watch him lose a second time....

spiderpaz: AssCobra77: I'll just write in Obama then.

me too

Since he won't win that way, I think there should be an online petition to write in "Not Hillary" instead.

"What happens if they split the superdelegates?" asks an adviser to the Clinton campaign. The roughly 350 superdelegates who have not yet endorsed are all free agents. There's nothing that says they have to act in concert, and they'll work to avoid anything that fuels conspiracy theories. "My real worry is there is no back room," says this adviser.

Yep, this is Clinton's concern alright.

Lawnchair:

I can has buttsecks thread?

This comment on their website is RICH:

Obama chose not to have his name on the MI ballot, so why should he get to have it there in a re-do?

Jesus Farking Christ: If that happens, how much you wanna bet that Bloomberg drops $1B and forms an independent third party with Obama as the candidate?

No chance in hell. Obama wouldn't run third party -- even if he gets rooked out of the nomination this year, he's got a very promising political future. Running third party would make him anathema to the Democrats, he wouldn't get their support or their nomination in 2012, 2016, 2020, or ever. He'd be lucky to hang on to his Senate seat.

Obama is not a freaking idiot, which is what he'd have to be to chuck his entire career away because Clinton played dirty.

Please! The American rejected Gore in 2000, they rejected his Kerry-clone in '04 and they rejected his alarmist global warming hysteria of a "documentary" in '06. But we're supposed to believe that 2008 is finally his year? Can anyone even begin to imagine the state our economy had a democrat been in power raising taxes and hampering free enterprise with burdensome regulation for the past seven years?

It's only going to be a goddamn mess if the Clinton people CREATE a goddamn mess. The vast majority of us are just happy having the supers follow the will of the voters in some way- popular vote, will of constituents, delegates won, whichever. Any of them will result in a one-ballot nomination.

glaurunge: Please! The American rejected Gore in 2000, they rejected his Kerry-clone in '04 and they rejected his alarmist global warming hysteria of a "documentary" in '06. But we're supposed to believe that 2008 is finally his year? Can anyone even begin to imagine the state our economy had a democrat been in power raising taxes and hampering free enterprise with burdensome regulation for the past seven years?

Better than the state of our economy with cripping debt brought on by a nonsensical war.

But of course, reality would be anathema to the ridiculous propaganda conservatives believe about how Democrats are the party of huge budgets.

glaurunge: Please! The American rejected Gore in 2000, they rejected his Kerry-clone in '04 and they rejected his alarmist global warming hysteria of a "documentary" in '06. But we're supposed to believe that 2008 is finally his year? Can anyone even begin to imagine the state our economy had a democrat been in power raising taxes and hampering free enterprise with burdensome regulation for the past seven years?

Is that a satirical post?

Pelosi's remarks, made during the event at Hearst Tower in New York, were some of the most revealing insights she's offered about the campaign. On Capitol Hill, she often deflects questions about presidential politics.

But on Friday, she waded in deep.

She said she believes that supporters for both Obama and Clinton, after a long and exciting race, have grown strongly attached to their candidate. She worries how those voters will react when - inevitably - one of the two candidates loses.

"So many new people are involved because of Barack Obama and we don't want them to be disenchanted," Pelosi said. "On the other hand, there is a chance that he might not win, and hopefully he will keep them in the fold. I think it will be about his leadership, too - whether he wins or not - to keep them in the fold and to attract others."

She said the same is true if Clinton loses the fight for the nomination. Many of Clinton's supporters, especially women, are just as passionate about her candidacy, and those voters will be crucial in November, Pelosi said.

"You have to have a thick skin in this business. You can win or you don't win, but it doesn't mean you pick up your marbles and go away," she said.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/07/BADGVG0PL.DTL

They are so desperate to have a bought and paid for candidate that they want to do a voodoo ceremony and reanimate Gore's long dead political career?

Vote for me. I'm Zombie Gore!

glaurunge: Please! The American rejected Gore in 2000, they rejected his Kerry-clone in '04 and they rejected his alarmist global warming hysteria of a "documentary" in '06. But we're supposed to believe that 2008 is finally his year? Can anyone even begin to imagine the state our economy had a democrat been in power raising taxes and hampering free enterprise with burdensome regulation for the past seven years?

Yeah, they rejected it so much he only won an Oscar and a Nobel Peace Prize with the 4th-highest documentary box office in US history.

SusanIvanova:
No chance in hell. Obama wouldn't run third party -- even if he gets rooked out of the nomination this year, he's got a very promising political future. Running third party would make him anathema to the Democrats, he wouldn't get their support or their nomination in 2012, 2016, 2020, or ever. He'd be lucky to hang on to his Senate seat.


Exactly. He's a young man. Never going to happen. If he doesn't get the presidency this year (Clinton job or McCain somehow), he'll quite contentedly go back to being a damn fine Senator with 80% approval in Illinois. If Clinton jobs him, he'll just politely say "screw y'all" when the Democrats beg him to run in 2012, 2016, and 2020. He might consider it again in 2024, when the girls are grown up and out of the house.

SusanIvanova: Obama is not a freaking idiot, which is what he'd have to be to chuck his entire career away because Clinton played dirty.

I've said it before. If Obama loses, he becomes de facto leader of loyal opposition in the Senate. He'll start building his own machine and will be in a strong position to check any insanity by President Mothra. Even if he never runs for President again, he'll have a good shot at Majority Leader at some point in the future.

glaurunge: Please! The American rejected Gore in 2000, they rejected his Kerry-clone in '04 and they rejected his alarmist global warming hysteria of a "documentary" in '06. But we're supposed to believe that 2008 is finally his year? Can anyone even begin to imagine the state our economy had a democrat been in power raising taxes and hampering free enterprise with burdensome regulation for the past seven years?

LOL!

Does anyone really want the guy who couldn't beat Bush to run against McCain? Besides McCain supporters?

This is the dumbest article on politics that I have read in weeks. Does the author actually get paid to write this shiat?

glaurunge: Please! The American rejected Gore in 2000, they rejected his Kerry-clone in '04 and they rejected his alarmist global warming hysteria of a "documentary" in '06. But we're supposed to believe that 2008 is finally his year? Can anyone even begin to imagine the state our economy had a democrat been in power raising taxes and hampering free enterprise with burdensome regulation for the past seven years?

Wow. That's a good one. I almost began replying earnestly to that lil' farker. Good show!

Smellvin
If they did that, they'd pretty effectively hamstring the Nader/Green effect... which is probably the entire reason for Al Gore latching onto global warming in the first place...

Hardly. Earth in the Balance was poorly researched well before Nader appeared on Gore's radar.

/Al Gore - ruining good ideas with shoddy rhetoric since 1977

glaurunge: Please! The American rejected Gore in 2000, they rejected his Kerry-clone in '04 and they rejected his alarmist global warming hysteria of a "documentary" in '06. But we're supposed to believe that 2008 is finally his year? Can anyone even begin to imagine the state our economy had a democrat been in power raising taxes and hampering free enterprise with burdensome regulation for the past seven years?

You should work for Colbert.

Gosling: glaurunge: Please! The American rejected Gore in 2000, they rejected his Kerry-clone in '04 and they rejected his alarmist global warming hysteria of a "documentary" in '06. But we're supposed to believe that 2008 is finally his year? Can anyone even begin to imagine the state our economy had a democrat been in power raising taxes and hampering free enterprise with burdensome regulation for the past seven years?

Yeah, they rejected it so much he only won an Oscar and a Nobel Peace Prize with the 4th-highest documentary box office in US history.

I think the blatant disregard for facts was supposed to make the bait more juicy as wee as the troll more believable. I do praise the resisting of the use of random capitalization as that would have been just too obvious. Twas an 8 in my book.

Smellvin: If they did that, they'd pretty effectively hamstring the Nader/Green effect... which is probably the entire reason for Al Gore latching onto global warming in the first place...

Gore was known as an environmentalist before he even became Vice-President. Jeez, I was like 12 and I remember that.

glaurunge: Please! The American rejected Gore in 2000, they rejected his Kerry-clone in '04 and they rejected his alarmist global warming hysteria of a "documentary" in '06. But we're supposed to believe that 2008 is finally his year? Can anyone even begin to imagine the state our economy had a democrat been in power raising taxes and hampering free enterprise with burdensome regulation for the past seven years?

Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000. Granted he lost the election, but I don't really consider getting more votes than the other guy as a "rejection." Also, Kerry is, at least in my eyes, nothing like Gore. Finally, he won an Academy Award for that documentary, which was incredibly popular (it's the 4th highest grossing documentary ever according to wikipedia), this also does not appear to be a rejection. You seem woefully misinformed.

Lawnchair: He might consider it again in 2024, when the girls are grown up and out of the house.

Or when "the girls" (read: Hillary's main base) are dead and buried.

Smellvin: If they did that, they'd pretty effectively hamstring the Nader/Green effect... which is probably the entire reason for Al Gore latching onto global warming in the first place...

Gore seems to be latching onto the global warming thing (I thought the term was supposed to be "climate change" now that it's become apparent that the Earth isn't actually warming) because his side realizes they can only achieve their goals by scaring the public into aquiessing to their collectivist policies of wealth redistribution, class warfare and endless regulation with the eventual objective of implementing a European-style command and control economy.

And yet it's the left that always accuses republicans of being "fear mongers" whenever we point out the existential threat of Islamic Fundamentalism. It's the left that scoffed at Bush for fighting terror "over there so we don't have to fight them over here" as if al-Qaeda and Iran were just figments of his imagination. Well the difference between "climate change" and Muslim Extremism is that thousands of Americans have died at the hands of the former. Can the liberals actually name a single American whose demise can be conclusively attributed to global warming? It just shows you how out of touch with reality the modern Democrat party is.

If Hillary runs, Gore should run as a third-party candidate. I'd vote for him.

Hell, now, I'd vote for him over most politicians. Because he finally grew a pair of balls after the 2000 election.

That, or he cut McCain's balls off and started wearing them.