Lanny J. Davis served as a member of the DNC from Maryland for 12 years (1980-1992) and served on the DNC Executive Committee. He is former Special Counsel to President Bill Clinton (1996-98) and a supporter and fund-raiser for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

I can't trust anything they say. That is their fault. I don't even know if the "facts" in this opinion piece are worth checking.

Lanny Davis is scum of the highest order. This doesn't shock me.

Hillary couldn't push that lame president's weelchair.
/look it up, youngsters.

Third stage: Bargaining

Math is hard.

1. Denial
2. Anger
3. Bargaining
4. Depression
5. Acceptance


Or from the DNC's POV:

1. Infatuation
2. Justification
3. Appropriation
4. Obsession
5. Resale

CarolynLibrarian: 4. Depression

Uh-uh. Witness:




Depression to the point of tears-as-bargaining-chip.

She's still going to win.

Right?

She's still going to win.

Right?

Of course she is. Just ask her.

shiat... 80%? That's not the crazy, reckless, fantastical Clinton I know. Why not 100%? 150%? Those delegates are hers, and all the additional ones are hers as well, because a lot more democrats would have flocked to Michigan if the media-conspiracy hadn't hid the fact over the last decade that it was going to be her turn

CarolynLibrarian: 1. Denial
2. Anger
3. Bargaining
4. Depression
5. Acceptance

Very astute

Judging by her palpable desperation, Acceptance can only look something like this:



But I don't think she's capable of Step 5, so:



Look, Hills, a new pantsuit!

Hillary Clinton: Bringing equality to the Democratic primaries since Super Tuesday.

She's our girl!

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that this is DOA.

Somacandra: I'm going to go out on a limb and say that this is DOA.

Hopefully, but it looks like the rules committee is heavily sided with Hillary supporters, so we'll have to see. We'll see what happens in just a few days.

Thanks for the laughs Cankle Queen!

The day she is finally out of the picture (quits or loses) will be one of the finest days ever. And the next day will be like the first day of sunshine in months.

clancifer: Somacandra: I'm going to go out on a limb and say that this is DOA.

Hopefully, but it looks like the rules committee is heavily sided with Hillary supporters, so we'll have to see. We'll see what happens in just a few days.

It breaks down as such:

Clinton supporters- 12
Obama Supporters- 8
DNC hard-liners- 6

Now the DNC want's what will win an election (ie not undercutting Obama and losing his supporters), Obama's people want this just to be over so Clinton can stop using it as a talking point (with just enough margin for it not to matter [less than half in MI, as is in FL) and some of the Clinton people were early supporters who may dump her in private away from her whip.

Is this guy saying the Obama campaign is responsible for Michigan and Florida not having a revote? I hadn't heard that one before.

The democrats will find a way to lose this election yet

bulldg4life: The democrats will find a way to lose this election yet

Truer words were never spoken, m'dear. They have it handed to them on a silver platter by possibly the most reviled and least respected president of the modern age, and they're going to blow the entire thing if it's the last thing they do.

I swear to Elvis - if Clinton doesn't knock it off, she's going to totally screw it up - and even thought the American public tends to have the hindsight of a gnat, I think they'll remember who's responsible for that in 2012.

But I could be wrong. As Einstein purportedly said, the difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has limits.

Philbb: Is this guy saying the Obama campaign is responsible for Michigan and Florida not having a revote? I hadn't heard that one before.

You've never heard that? Dude. This is one of the main talking points for Hillary folks. If you read pro-Hillary blogs or websites, its assumed as a fact that the reason they didn't revote is Obama. It's not even a debate for them. It's his fault it didn't happen.

IOW, they think he's stealing the election willfully.

CarolynLibrarian: Truer words were never spoken, m'dear. They have it handed to them on a silver platter by possibly the most reviled and least respected president of the modern age, and they're going to blow the entire thing if it's the last thing they do.

I would love to see some poll done of Obama against Bush, head to head. That would be interesting just as a curiosity.

clgrin: clancifer: Somacandra: I'm going to go out on a limb and say that this is DOA.

Hopefully, but it looks like the rules committee is heavily sided with Hillary supporters, so we'll have to see. We'll see what happens in just a few days.

It breaks down as such:

Clinton supporters- 12
Obama Supporters- 8
DNC hard-liners- 6

Now the DNC want's what will win an election (ie not undercutting Obama and losing his supporters), Obama's people want this just to be over so Clinton can stop using it as a talking point (with just enough margin for it not to matter [less than half in MI, as is in FL) and some of the Clinton people were early supporters who may dump her in private away from her whip.

I think that Hillary has less supporters than she thinks. The only way that the two will be counted is if BOTH sides agrees how the delegates are split up. The Obama camp offered her a 56% win in Michigan with the rest going to Obama. Delegate wise, both he and she would get some. She rejected that.

Second of all the Hard Line DNC are not happy about Clinton's behavior. I'd imagine Dean has already talked to them about how to handle this.

Darth_Lukecash: Second of all the Hard Line DNC...

I thought those were the Hillary folk.

CarolynLibrarian: Darth_Lukecash: Second of all the Hard Line DNC...

I thought those were the Hillary folk.

no... they put the party first (for good or for bad). Hillary does not

CarolynLibrarian: Darth_Lukecash: Second of all the Hard Line DNC...

I thought those were the Hillary folk.

That's DLC. DNC is Democratic National Committee, and that's Howard Dean.

The same Howard Dean who didn't much like the Clintons sending in Wes Clark to upset his 2004 chances (not that that didn't get farked up in another way, but) and pretty much hates them now.

Man, my outrage fatigue is at an all time high

DamnYankees: Philbb: Is this guy saying the Obama campaign is responsible for Michigan and Florida not having a revote? I hadn't heard that one before.

You've never heard that? Dude. This is one of the main talking points for Hillary folks. If you read pro-Hillary blogs or websites, its assumed as a fact that the reason they didn't revote is Obama. It's not even a debate for them. It's his fault it didn't happen.

IOW, they think he's stealing the election willfully.

I guess I've been living under a rock or something. Is there any evidence for this belief? I'm off to google to see what I can find myself.

The DLC is the Clinton camp. This is over. Even WITH Michigan and Florida handed to Clinton, Obama still has the lead. The only question is whether they give Obama enough delegates to end it on June 3rd.

Which they should. I mean, Clinton couldn't even blow away Uncommitted in Michigan.

Philbb: I guess I've been living under a rock or something. Is there any evidence for this belief? I'm off to google to see what I can find myself.

Hillary has a vagina, therefore Obama is a sexist election thief.

/that's actually pretty damn close.

The smartest thing the DNC can do is have a press conference after their meeting and say:

Both candidates agreed to these rules and understood that Florida and Michigan would not count. We are not changing the rules in the middle of the game, the delegates will not be seated. We do not fault the Florida and Michigan voters, but the elected officials from their respective states are to blame. We'd also like to add, that all remaining super-delegates have came out today and support Barack Obama, meaning Obama has secured the nomination. Rendering the results of our decision about Florida and Michigan irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

Philbb: I guess I've been living under a rock or something. Is there any evidence for this belief? I'm off to google to see what I can find myself.

I'm confused. Why would "evidence" have any connection to "things Hillary supporters believe"? That's like asking if there are going to be any tacos in the space shuttle.

/yum

robsul82: CarolynLibrarian: Darth_Lukecash: Second of all the Hard Line DNC...

I thought those were the Hillary folk.

That's DLC. DNC is Democratic National Committee, and that's Howard Dean.

The same Howard Dean who didn't much like the Clintons sending in Wes Clark to upset his 2004 chances (not that that didn't get farked up in another way, but) and pretty much hates them now.

If that's true, then why hasn't he done something by now to get her off the stage? He should have been just looking for a reason, and Elvis knows, he's had plenty.

Not snarking, just really wondering and have been for some time now. Why the Fark doesn't the big hook come out of the wings and drag her off?

CarolynLibrarian: Why the Fark doesn't the big hook come out of the wings and drag her off?

Because Hillary will go kicking and screaming and drag the party (and her supporters) down the drain if it is perceived that she was "forced" out of the race.

It has to be done in a way that she somehow admits in a round about way that she's done...which I don't see happening any time soon.

DamnYankees: Philbb: I guess I've been living under a rock or something. Is there any evidence for this belief? I'm off to google to see what I can find myself.

I'm confused. Why would "evidence" have any connection to "things Hillary supporters believe"? That's like asking if there are going to be any tacos in the space shuttle.

Just to clarify, I was wondering about this for my own knowledge. I know full well that fanatics (of all stripes) are capable of finding all sorts of beliefs with no evidence whatsoever. (Obama's a Muslim, McCain's a maverick, etc...)

I was just wondering if there was any basis for this in reality at all or if it was just completely made up.

If Obama wins the Democratic nomination, then loses to McCain, will everyone then blame Hillary for her divisive campaigning?

As a Michigander, I didn't vote in the primary because the Democratic party here farked up and went against the party at the national level. I do not currently feel "disenfranchised".

If the DNC allows Hilary to get this portion of the delegation, they need to die in a fire.

Philbb: I was just wondering if there was any basis for this in reality at all or if it was just completely made up.

The latter.

shivashakti: If Obama wins the Democratic nomination, then loses to McCain, will everyone then blame Hillary for her divisive campaigning?

Most likely, and justly.

"That is, in fact, what happened in 2008 to Michigan and Florida. Those states violated the party rules when they scheduled their primaries before Feb. 5. But then in March, elected officials and party leaders in both states were willing to "cure" - i.e., to hold new primaries and raise the money privately to pay for them. In Michigan, Gov. Jennifer Granholm and Sen. Carl Levin proposed a "fire house" primary in June, in which voters could revote at local fire houses or libraries. In Florida, Sen. Bill Nelson and others supported a revote by mailed ballots and perhaps also offering the fire house alternative for those voters who preferred to vote in person. "

and YET
they are STILL TOO STUPID to have a PRIMARY
HELLLO
DO IT
DO IT RIGHT NOW

and then your votes will count

what the fark are they talking about?? why does obama MATTER?
this is a PARTY DECISION
clearly the party ALLOWS for a repeat election to make up for a farked up one (the delware example)

1) go to the national party and say "WE ARE HAVING A REPLACEMENT PRIMARY, we will get you the results on this day"
2) inform candiates and voters
3) have the primary

HELLLO
this is all fair and "legal" within the party rules
move the fark on

god I HATE hillary for doing this ...
if she pulls this CRAP off I will vote for mccain
hell I will give money to mccain

sigh
democrats .... the only part which can pull off a LOSS in this environment

sigh

Notice this part of the argument. Davis says that Hillary should get half of the uncommitteds. Why, you might ask, should she get any of them? Surely, because she was on the ballot, anyone who supported her should vote for her!

Well, Mr. Davis explains as follows. It seems there are a ton of voters out there, over half of the uncommitteds, who actually had Clinton as their second choice, when their first choice was someone who was neither Clinton nor Obama. So half of these uncommittde votes actually supported Edwards or Dodd or whoever as a first choice, and Clinton 2nd. So Clinton ought to get those votes over Obama!

Lets put aside the obvious stupidity of thinking any large amount of people would actually vote like this, and consider the flipside. How many people actually voted for Clinton because she was the only name on the ballot, when she was actually their 2nd choice with Obama being their first choice! Well, turns out exit polling shows us that about 11% of people who voted for Clinton preferred Obama.

So, Lanny wants us to believe:

Even though only 11% of Hillary voters preferred Obama, we are to say that more than 50% of the "uncommitted" vote preferred Clinton over Obama, even though her name was on the ballot and they could have voted for her.

This, my friends, is a new level of fail.

namatad: they are STILL TOO STUPID to have a PRIMARY

It won't happen for a few reasons:

1) Hillary needs the issue as a wedge.
2) She won't get a better result than the current vote.
3) A revote would probably result in Obama winning Michigan.

Lanny Davis is utter scum

There's a nice annotated version of Davis' note up on FiveThirtyEight (new window)

TheCid: Hillary has a vagina

And what evidence do you have for that, hmmmmm?
Now that's a poll I'd like to see.

/beans 'n' franks

rcain: TheCid: Hillary has a vagina

And what evidence do you have for that, hmmmmm?
Now that's a poll I'd like to see.

/beans 'n' franks

Willy doesn't swing that way.

shivashakti: If Obama wins the Democratic nomination, then loses to McCain, will everyone then blame Hillary for her divisive campaigning?

No, many Hillary supporters will blame Obama for stealing the nomination from Hillary. After all if he looses, then she would have won, that is basic mathematics.

Philbb: DamnYankees: Philbb: Is this guy saying the Obama campaign is responsible for Michigan and Florida not having a revote? I hadn't heard that one before.

You've never heard that? Dude. This is one of the main talking points for Hillary folks. If you read pro-Hillary blogs or websites, its assumed as a fact that the reason they didn't revote is Obama. It's not even a debate for them. It's his fault it didn't happen.

IOW, they think he's stealing the election willfully.

I guess I've been living under a rock or something. Is there any evidence for this belief? I'm off to google to see what I can find myself.

And here I thought I had paid for a PRIVATE rock to live under...

:P

Seriously though... um... didn't the routine go that it would be too expensive ( money and logistics ) to do a re-vote... unless the DNC subsidized them - for breaking the rules in the first place...

And... am I confused... but didn't those statements come from the states etc. in questions...

?!

Grrr - planning to leave the country for another 4 years in 2009....


Michael

vudukungfu: Hillary couldn't push that lame president's weelchair.
/look it up, youngsters.


How ignorant do you think we youngsters are?

/I mean, pssht, we do watch Family Guy. Sheesh.

Last I checked... there were quite a few African-American folk in Detroit and Flint. Quite a few young college folk in Ann Arbor, too. Can't imagine either is real thrilled with this outcome.

Plus, fewer than 600,000 people voted in the Dem primary this year in MI (out of 10.5 million). More than 700,000 voted in the Kentucky Dem primary (out of 4.2 million). Perhaps because IT WAS ALREADY DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL by a court.