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

What Avedon said

What I love most about the most serene Avedon, besides her linky goodness, is that she's Not Insane! For example:

Last night Atrios was scratching his head over why some people are still supporting Hillary. Well, it could be this, or those electoral maps I referred to in the previous post. ... A lot of the people who support Hillary, if I read them right, are saying that they believe Hillary will win but Obama will lose. To be honest, if these polls mean anything at all, Hillary's chances do look significantly better. If you honestly believed that Hillary would win and Obama would lose, would you really want the superdelegates not to rescue our chances in November? Personally, I still think Obama can win, but if I didn't, I'd probably join them in fighting tooth and nail against an Obama nomination.

And now, back to running my racist "hate-fest!"

So much to do, so little time! But first, a relaxing round of Obama Golf!

0. "Despair"
1. Despair is the opposite of hope.
2. Why do you hate Obama?

No votes yet


vastleft's picture
Submitted by vastleft on

0. Linky goodness
1. Support
2. You're saying that Avedon is obsessed with brassieres!

DCblogger's picture
Submitted by DCblogger on

Dave Johnson had the same reaction that I did

Hillary made a statement the other day that can be interpreted different ways. Some people are trying to claim that she said she is staying in the race in case Obama is assassinated. Others say she was just saying that the Democratic primaries often extend until June.

I'm not going to get into the argument about this here, except to remind everyone that in 1972 the Nixon campaign pioneered the strategy of disrupting Democratic primary races. I think it should be clear that much of the conflict in this year's primary is being pushed by the right through the Drudge report, Washington Times, Fox News, etc. but for some reason in this election many Democrats seem willing to pick it up and run with it. This is a mistake.

Here's the thing. The Republicans and Bush cronies have a lot of money and the incentive that many will be going to jail (and/or The Hague) if there is an honest accounting of the Bush years. The corrupt crony machine stands to lose billions and billions of dollars. They have the conservative infrastructure's message machine of think tanks, information outlets, etc. They have the corporate media and the power of the entire American corporate structure that is siphoning so much of our money away to a top few. And they have a public conditioned to reflexively support conservatives after decades of unanswered right-wing, and pro-corporate propaganda. This combination is going to be hard to overcome. So it is going to take Obama supporters and Hillary supporters both voting for the Democratic nominee--whoever that is--to beat the Republicans in November.

To that end I want to write about how each "side" in the primaries could better approach the other, whether you believe they are right or wrong. Especially if you believe they are wrong.

read the whole thing, he is by far the best strategic thinker in the Democratic party and sets the best example of solidarity.

Davidson's picture
Submitted by Davidson on

Even if I didn't give a damn about Obama's tactics ("Progressive" campaign of hate and disenfranchisement!), I sure as hell care about denying the right wing yet another opportunity to land a body blow against this country. This is what makes it so damn frustrating when I hear Obama supporters/Clinton haters tell me that "we" must take the fight to McCain. Then why the hell are you supporting someone that will give McCain the presidency on a silver platter?

Oh, right. Because Clinton is evil incarnate.

OxyCon's picture
Submitted by OxyCon on

The Obamatons know that Hillary is the better candidate in November, as all evidence points to this fact. But they think (hope) that once Hillary drops out of the race, all of her support magically goes to Obama, so all of these polls which show Hillary with a commanding lead in November electoral votes will automatically "change" and Obama will have the lead that Hillary earned.
And, we all know what the Obamatons will say when this doesn't happen.

willyjsimmons's picture
Submitted by willyjsimmons on

Atrios also said:

At this point only a drastic rule change combined with a massive shift in support from superdelegates even gets her close to the nomination. In another words, cheating combined with the smoke-filled room residents overturning the outcome of the primary process.

I appreciate that there are people who don't like Obama for whatever reasons and prefer Clinton for whatever reasons. But he, you know, won?

Atrios plays dumb, with an astounding grasp of non-facts.

the League of Mostly Nonaligned Bloggers

Who the fuck is in this league?


DCblogger's picture
Submitted by DCblogger on

it is a sad day when someone feels a need to attack Atrios.

Obama's supporters think he is the strongest candidate and will make the best president. That is what they think.

Aeryl's picture
Submitted by Aeryl on

First of all, changing a ruling, especially one that many people agree was an unjustified ruling, hardly qualifies as cheating, though many Blogger Boiz wish it were so, which is why they keep calling it cheating.

Two, only smoky back room deals are gonna get Obama close to the nomination as well, so it's hardly fair to say "he won". Nobody wins nothin' til August.

Obama’s supporters think he is the strongest candidate

But the evidence is showing them that's not true. Clinton is the stronger candidate(and this is not saying that Obama can't win, just that it will be harder). Polls, EV maps, momentum, and media immunity all show that.

I thought we were supposed to be the reality based community here. When our members start failing in that regard, and as revered as Atrios is, he's not infallible, shouldn't we call them out(though you call it an "attack")?

Bill Clinton for First Dude!!!

Submitted by lambert on

That's why we are in an appeals process, no?

This seems like a straight OFB talking point, to me.

And given that the SDs are supposed to exercise their judgement according to the precious rules, it seems more than a little tendentious to call the process a smoke-filled room.

I used to like Atrios a lot better when he wrote about economics....

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

willyjsimmons's picture
Submitted by willyjsimmons on

who's 'attacking' Atrios?

First of all.


I refuse to sit on my hands and allow bullshit to pass as informed commentary. (if that's why Atrios is so well regarded)

I remember the day Atrios claimed he was totally not interested in covering the 'horse race' that is this primary season.

So shame on me for pointing out that when he DOES feel the need to chime in with his two cents, it's crap. And has been for quite a while.

The archives don't lie. Read them and weep.

LuigiDaMan's picture
Submitted by LuigiDaMan on

It comes down to these two states: Ohio and Florida. All of us here in the Buckeye state already know that BO is toast if he's the Democratic nominee this fall.

And, you really can't even make a case that BO can possibly carry Florida, especially after all this coniving with their primary and the Jewish vote.

Frankly, I do not see how he can possibly win.