Interesting.....

[patgund]

I was reading an article on the Huffington Post about "The Denver Group" and their plan to force a roll-call vote at the Democratic National Convention in Denver. And other PUMA groups are openly calling for delegates to overturn their pledges and vote for Sen. Clinton

Basically they're operating under the idea that the delegates and superdelegates will get to Denver, and go "hmmm, naw, we don't really want Sen. Obama after all" and vote for Sen. Clinton instead.

I think trying to get the SD's to overturn the primaries would utterly ruin not just the Democratic party, but ANY future political career that Sen. Clinton would have. I would be amazed - and bitterly disappointed - if Sen. Clinton had anything to do with this attempt, (which I doubt she does, I think the PUMAs spit in her face actually. But I wish she would denounce these people once and for all. All they do is hurt her.)

The problem is some of the die-hard PUMA types seem to believe that if the voters will is overturned and the SD's and other Delegates change their mind, it will be sweetness and rainbows and everything will magically group around Sen. Clinton. It won't. They're too blinded with hatred to see it won't. They claim that Sen. Obama winning the primaries split the party. That would be nothing compared to if that win was overturned and the nomination given to Sen. Clinton.

If the primaries were overturned and Sen. Clinton got the nomination, the GOP would eat it up. The right-wing noise machine, Fox News, etc., would all be lambasting the Democratic party for "stealing the vote from Sen. Obama", "overturning the will of the people", etc. Not to mention spitting in the face of everyone who came out to vote for Sen. Obama in the primaries.

According to the latest PEW poll, 69% of Sen. Clinton supporters are now behind Sen. Obama, with 17% for Sen. McCain. But if the primary is overturned in a "smoky room & faithless delegate" fashion, then I strongly doubt you would see 69% of Sen. Obama supporters doing the same - while the vast majority of them would have voted for Sen. Clinton had she won the nomination, far fewer of them would vote for Sen. Clinton if it appears the convention was rigged in anyway, shape, or form.

Again, I don't see Sen. Clinton endorsing such a thing, She knows it would be political suicide. There are PUMA supporters who claim that Sen. Clinton is aware of what they're doing and support them. I strongly doubt this exists anywhere but in their echo-chambered enhanced minds. Because if it was true, then the only way to describe Sen. Clinton would be "two-faced liar". Sen. Liberman would have more of a future in the Democratic party than Sen. Clinton.

Comments

[selenesue.livejournal.com]

She's just not that stupid as to endorse that kind of thing overtly or otherwise. Or maybe PUMA is actually backed by the Republicans, in order to sabotage the Democratic Party in general? Hmmm could be.

[patgund.livejournal.com]

Actually the PUMA PAC founder donated to Sen. McCain in 2000. And there's a lot of evidence that much of the PUMA groups are being bankrolled by GOP interests.

[jeran.livejournal.com]

Wouldn't surprise me if they were. Easiest way to win an election is to screw up the other side. If the opposition candidate's an unelectable loon, or if the opposition vote's split between two candidates, or if you can make the opposition unwilling to get out and vote at all, the bar you need to clear to win's that much lower.