Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

Today in WWTSBQ v 2.0

gqmartinez's picture
Tags: 

Here's the latest example of WWTSBQ 2.0:

Obama is going to be the nominee. Those who cannot endure that thought need to turn their attention to down ballot races or issues they care about.

Sorry, but last time I checked this race wasn't decided yet. Until then, it's pretty simple.

The media cowed us and manipulated us into Iraq. They cowed us and manipulated us into accepting George W. Bush's 2000 election "win". They cowed us and manipulated us into rejecting health care reform. And so on. We are tired of the media telling us what to think and determining the course of our country--because it has really left the place FUBAR.

Here's the problem with Obama is the nominee absurdity. Since March 4th, Hillary's gotten over 500,000 more votes than Obama. She will likely increase that number in the last three contests and will almost certainly be the candidate who will have received the most votes in this primary. Shouldn't the de facto nominee be increasing his vote lead rather than getting his ass kicked at the polls? (Spare me the delegate "the math" meme.) That's the argument we are taking to the Super Delegates, along with the fact that WA, TX, and NE all showed disturbing discrepancies between caucus results and primary results which unambiguously call into question the validity of Obama's caucus wins. That's been our plan for months and our position has only improved by these criteria. We're not going to quit.

Perhaps those who cannot understand this should devote their time to down ballot races or issues they care about. Its undemocratic to deliberately try to suppress voter turnout with your WWTSBQ v 2.0. Undemocratic.

0
No votes yet

Comments

FrenchDoc's picture
Submitted by FrenchDoc on

Mindfuck... if they hammer us often enough with this meme (that Obama will be the nominee, it's over, blah blah blah), we will be cowed into submission, grieve for a little while, then come back to the fold and vote for Obama.

Well, ain't gonna happen. Hillary's in it to win and so are we. And, as you mention, she's actually in a stronger position now than 2 months ago.

So, enough with the defeatist rhetoric. Let's beat back this latest assault and let's push the trolls back into the holes they crawled out of.

Remember people: it's the map, not the math.

Hillary has the popular vote on her side, along with the GE math AND she's right on the issues.

myiq2xu's picture
Submitted by myiq2xu on

I think this new meme of JITSB (just ignore the stupid bitch) is really pathetic.

They really went off the JITSB message yesterday, didn't they?

------------------------------------------------
“I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a Democrat.” - Will Rogers

Submitted by lambert on

Drudge rules their world!

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

DCblogger's picture
Submitted by DCblogger on

when this meme was launched, before the Penn primary it was bullying, but now, she has no path to the nomination. She needed landslide wins in PA and IN. She got a solid win in PA and a whisker in IN. The really ended in Indiana.

The remaining primaries are in western states and PR. She will win PR big; but not big enough for a delegate lead, even with MI and FL. Obama will win the remaining western primaries and have a lead in convention delegates, even if not enough to give him the nomination outright.

myiq2xu's picture
Submitted by myiq2xu on

neither will have enough pledged delegates to win.

BTW - Neither pledged nor super delegates vote until August. So neither candidate can win until then.

------------------------------------------------
“I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a Democrat.” - Will Rogers

gqmartinez's picture
Submitted by gqmartinez on

to give him the nomination outright. Therefore, he's the nominee. You are using "the math" even though, by your own admission, Obama doesn't have "the math" either. In your own words:

"[Obama will] have a lead in convention delegates, even if not enough to give him the nomination outright".

We have the argument we are taking to the Super-Ds, which was the same argument we've had since February. And we are a little sick of the WWTSBQ v 2.0 which is deliberately used to suppress turnout.

DCblogger's picture
Submitted by DCblogger on

I think the process should play itself out. Everyone should have a chance to vote and the candidate with the most delegates wins.

But that candidate will be Obama. Clinton has started to make the kind of mistakes candidates make when they are in trouble and losing their focus.

Submitted by lambert on

... keep a civil tongue in your head. I didn't invest the time in a long comment to have you piss away a conversation with snark. Eh?

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

gqmartinez's picture
Submitted by gqmartinez on

Sorry, Dear Sir. Irritability level high these days.

Submitted by lambert on

Lambert being famous for his teddy bear personality.

Just keep track of the health of the blog as a whole, and who's contributing and doing the work, whether you agree with them on this or that issue.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

myiq2xu's picture
Submitted by myiq2xu on

Winning PA by 10 pts? Coming from behind to win "tie-breaker" Indiana? Blowing Obama out in WV and KY?

What mistakes are you talking about?

Saying there are 57 states? Flipping off her opponent? Thinking that Oregon was a Great Lakes state or that Arkansas was closer to KY than Illinois? Throwing people under the bus? Insulting voters?

Oh, wait, that wasn't her.

------------------------------------------------
“I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a Democrat.” - Will Rogers

DCblogger's picture
Submitted by DCblogger on

remember the convention of 1980? 'cause that didn't work so well. better to settle this before the convention.

gqmartinez's picture
Submitted by gqmartinez on

Was the 1980 pledged delegate race within a couple hundred delegates? Did one candidate have more pledged delegates but less popular votes? I just want to make sure I understand your comparison.

blogtopus's picture
Submitted by blogtopus on

How about 1972?

I'd rather have the better chance at winning the GE with Hillary, thank you.

myiq2xu's picture
Submitted by myiq2xu on

According to Obama, Reagan was a transformational politician who corrected Democratic excess.

Please keep your talking points straight.

BTW - the 1932 floor fight worked out pretty good.

------------------------------------------------
“I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a Democrat.” - Will Rogers

Submitted by lambert on

Tit for tat IS a winning strategy if you're in that game, but we shouldn't be here.

Trolls, especially concern trolls, deserve whatever they get. It's what they're paid for, eh?

But as always, context is everything. DCBlogger's making a contribution. Sharp elbows are all fine, but sh DCB is not regurgitating talking points.

IOW, good argument, wrong frame.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

myiq2xu's picture
Submitted by myiq2xu on

DCB was offering a standard Obama supporter talking point (new this year) that Teddy K was responsible for Carter's loss in 1980 becuase he caused a floor fight at the convention. (This is a version of WWTSBQ - "we need unity, so she should quit")

This conflicts with Obama's statement that Reagan won due to his transformational politics and because of a backlash to Democratic excess in the sixties and seventies.

I was merely pointing out the inconsistency.

------------------------------------------------
“I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a Democrat.” - Will Rogers

Submitted by lambert on

... on the talking points! (If that's not sexist. Heck, if that's sexist, anything is. Oh well....)

All I'm saying, to mix or shift metaphors, is that a volley appropriate for a troll isn't appropriate for a contributor. And I'm sure I've sinned in that regard.....

So, noted, presumably, case closed, move on.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

DCblogger's picture
Submitted by DCblogger on

And no, you cannot put all of Carter's defeat on the 1980 convention. I think we could have a floor fight and still win, I just don't want to test that thesis.

Obama will have a lead, and I don't see the super delegates overturning that. Nor do I think the popular vote meme will fly.

but that is just me.

I also think calls for Clinton to get out have been extremely counter productive. It gives me a very bad feeling for Obama. But this isn't about me.

Aravosis is a jerk, I gave up reading his blog years ago.

myiq2xu's picture
Submitted by myiq2xu on

I'm a history major, and until this year I never heard that the 1980 convention was the reason Carter lost. Not even partially.

Ironically, if that were true, the cause of the problem was a current supporter of Obama.

When Ted endorsed Obama, the OFB praised him as a wise elder statesman - "the Lion of the Senate." Now he is a contributing factor to the Reagan Revolution.

Can you guys ever be consistent?

------------------------------------------------
“I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a Democrat.” - Will Rogers

koshembos's picture
Submitted by koshembos on

Like DCB, I am sure that Obama will be the nominee. As opposed to him, I don't think that it's the rules. The superdelegated have the same genes the Democratic congress has; they put up no resistance and they cannot fight Obama. Had Obama been behind in delegates and ahead in popular vote, that would have been the rule and the math.

When a woman walking from the bus to her home is raped on the way, you don't tell her that she made a mistake. When Hillary mentions RFK and then is raped by the media and Obama's skin head, you DON'T tell her that she made a mistake. DCB, you better check carefully that you don't support terrible crime.

The real question is whether we want to take the same abuse in years to come. If you do, just think that Obama is the Democratic nominee. But if you want to regain your self respect and stop the abuse, don't vote for Obama.

The only way we can stand on our principles, give the media the finger and disabuse Obama's skin heads is to stay home in November.

Submitted by lambert on

... to prematurely try to game the spam filters on "skinhead"?

Just sayin. Makes me skip over the rest of your argument, which may be good, for all I know.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

jackyt's picture
Submitted by jackyt on

It sounds like DCb, (like most Obama partisans), doesn't know the rules of the ring. Taking a dive is considered cheating regardless if you're the guy on the mat or the one left standing.

But that's what seems to be missing in Camp Obama: any concept of a fair fight.

gqmartinez's picture
Submitted by gqmartinez on

s/he doesn't think that popular vote will sway super-Ds. That's a fair enough point. Super-Ds are free to do what they want. Many of those on record who support Obama have pretty lame rationales. (See: Cardoza.)

I think its fair to challenge Hillary on delegates, but we've known for months that Hillary's strategy is to win the big states (she's done that), show strength in the electoral college map (she's done that) and keep the popular vote essentially tied or in her favor (she's done that). In the last three months she has improved her standing by winning over 500,000 more votes than Obama, in addition to all the states she was "supposed" to win.

Neither Hillary or Obama has or will win this based on pledged delegates alone. We knew that for some time. Obama is playing the pledged delegate lead, which is fine. i don't have a problem with that. What I do have a problem with is when people use the pledged delegate argument to deliberately suppress turnout. If the shoe were on the other foot, I'd be equally offended if Hillary or her supporters tried to suppress turnout.

bringiton's picture
Submitted by bringiton on

Clinton leads by a bunch on every indicator regarding the Electoral College. Go to any tracking site, or read what's been written here at Corrente. They all say the same thing - Clinton dominates McCain, right here, right now, while Obama is actually behind McCain in projected Electoral votes.

Clinton has a huge lead over McCain. She is not only qualified to be president, she can win the general election and actually be the president. That's why she isn't quiting, and why I still support her in this process.

Obama's qualifications are not for me an issue any longer; they are what they are. What does matter, the only thing now that matters to me, is his electability. It seems plain to me that fielding a candidate who struggles to beat McCain - when we have an alternative in a qualified person who kicks his butt - is foolish.

Maybe Obama can come from behind and still beat McCain, but -

"I just don’t want to test that thesis."

Obama needs to withdraw, and let the better candidate proceed.

DCblogger's picture
Submitted by DCblogger on

I am not an Obama supporter. I was a Gore, then Edwards, then Hillary sort of but just barely. She sort of lost me when she started talking about bringing in Greenspan and Rubin on the real estate crash.

I am too lazy to look it up, but it was my understanding that Clinton had a lead going into Indiana and Obama succeeded in whittling it down to a whisker.

I hate to speak ill of Ted Kennedy while he is so ill, but I think he behaved very badly in 1980. Carter went into the convention with more than enough delegates to win, but there was a great opera about how the delegates should be freed from their pledge that they might be free to decide. It was too disingenuous for words.

Mentioning Bobby Kennedy and 1968 in almost any context was a giant mistake. Even if you feel, as a do, that is has been deliberately misunderstood, it was still a mistake. Talking about how she could win the votes of hard working white folks was a mistake. It just screams to be misinterpeted.

but that is just me.

myiq2xu's picture
Submitted by myiq2xu on

Hillary took it from him.

I find it curious that Hillary's suggestion on the real estate crash bothered you. Why?

Who do you support if not Obama or Hillary?

Why is mentioning Bobby Kennedy in almost any context a "giant mistake?" Since when is he a taboo topic, and why? The same questions re: 1968?

Are we not allowed to discuss anything that could possibly be "deliberately misunderstood?"

------------------------------------------------
“I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a Democrat.” - Will Rogers

DCblogger's picture
Submitted by DCblogger on

I have been saying ever since November 1980 that Kennedy's conduct contributed not just to Carter's loss, but the loss of the Senate. Actually the Democratic Senators constant attacks on Carter really did them in. Something they did not learn from, as they were only too happy to collaborate in the Whitewater smear. That ain't an Obama talking point, it is what us Carter supporters have been saying for 28 years.

Carter was defeated by hostages and 21% interest rates. I just think that Kennedy's actions were destructive.

myiq2xu's picture
Submitted by myiq2xu on

isn't much different from mine then.

Just as with Clinton, the Dem Congress didn't support the White House. I don't believe it was so much Teddy's candidacy as the same "Eastern Liberal elites" vs. "Southern moderate" we have been seeing for decades.

Carter, unfortunately, lacked Bill's political skills, and came up for reelection in a crisis year (inflation, Iran hostages, Afganistan, gas shortages) Bill's reelection in 1996 was a time of peace and prosperity, and the GOP blew the opportunity they got from winning Congress in 1994.

------------------------------------------------
“I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a Democrat.” - Will Rogers

Submitted by lambert on

... that the Democratic Senators stabbed Clinton not in the back, but right in the chest, as soon as he took office. I think it was Boren who put it to him on gays in the military -- same one who did that big Unity Fest out in Kansas awhile back.

Not sure how any of this proves that a long primary, per se, hurts the nominee. Why not a floor fight? Suck all the oxygen away from McSame. Frankly, absent the MI/FL redos, I could argue that a real floor fight is the only thing that would make the nomination legitimate.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

Aeryl's picture
Submitted by Aeryl on

Bill Clinton for First Dude!!!

Mandos's picture
Submitted by Mandos on

Unfortunately, you've got the media you've got. Because Obama is black, there's going to be some things that are rightly or wrongly off limits for a (D) rival.

Clinton went into this with one game plan in mind, but Obama successfully managed to change the rules. I don't think he'll be able to do this to McCain, but you've still got to hand it to him and his campaign.

DCblogger's picture
Submitted by DCblogger on

well, I was misinformed.

Greenspan and Rubin were partly responsible for the real estate crash. It would be like asking Cheney to look into war contractor misconduct.

I really don't care about the Presidential anymore.

Aeryl's picture
Submitted by Aeryl on

I wasn't too pleased either. But I think it was more of an appeal to authority. Rubin and Greenspan are known names, having them come in helps the "low info" voters believe she's at least doing something.

It's politics, and I can forgive a candidate for that.

Bill Clinton for First Dude!!!

elixir's picture
Submitted by elixir on

that covers the whole argument. Hillary pounds McCain in all the states that count, Obama doesn't. Do we want to win this election or not?

Sometimes I wonder if somehow there are larger powers at play here with a very different agenda.

I love this job!

Submitted by lambert on

Yes, IMNSHO. For the Obama Faction, taking over control of the party is the have-to-have. (That's what Kos and the netroots want to.) Winning the general is the nice-to-have. And you can already see the outlines of the excuse being created for why they're going to lose....

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

amberglow's picture
Submitted by amberglow on

that the media and DC Dems so clearly and obviously wants it to be him and is doing everything in its power to make it true is thankfully being proven wrong by actual voters--over and over and over.

Obama's campaign pretending it's over or that it's true and a done deal has only hardened opposition to him--and further insulted millions of voters who don't want him.

And not helping to fix FL and MI--which are necessary to attaining the magic number needed--just dismisses voters entirely in those states, and throws the decision to the Supers even more.

Submitted by lambert on

The latest insult, the latest WWTSBQ wankfest, the RFK thing, is so fake on so many levels. And it's been perpetrated by exactly the same people who picked our President for us in 2000 and 2004. Drudge rules Obama's world. There is absolutely no way I am ever going to concede a thing to these people unless and until Hillary does. And even then I'll have a hard time doing it. If this be virulence, let us make the most of it!

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

Aeryl's picture
Submitted by Aeryl on

Here's one story.

I've seen many others.

Bill Clinton for First Dude!!!

LostClown's picture
Submitted by LostClown on

First of all, the media kept saying "white working class" continually, but it wasn't racist until she said it, and as to the RFK thing, it was most apt as he was ahead of Humphrey in the popular vote and behind Humphrey in delegates and taking it to the convention before the tragedy (RIP) occurred. I hope that doesn't offend anyone, but that's what happened.

Go Hillary or Go Green!