Hillary knows she needs to pick up numbers in FLA and MI in order to even begin to make the case that she should go on to get the nomination so it should come to no suprise that the folks who offered to finance the revote are also old school ClintCo moneybags.

Clinton changed her schedule to fly to Detroit Wednesday and challenged Obama to support a do-over. He "speaks passionately on the campaign trail about empowering the American people," Clinton said. "I'm urging him to match those words with actions."

Hillary, back when she thought she was the candidate of inevitability, was quite clear that she respected and would obey the DNC's decided punishment for FLA and MIs stubborn attempts to move their primary dates up without consultation.

That is to say that she would not campaign in those places, would not advertise there and she would abide by the DNC's decision to not seat the delegates.

Now that she needs those votes she's singing a different tune, of course.

And it's Barack who's doing sommat wrong according to her?

Ah, Karl Rove would be so proud of her.

Maybe Rupert Murcoch will take her out for another dinner fer this?

She's so transparent she may as well be Pinnochio.

Spud to Hilldawg.

Spud sees through you!

Be Well.

Hillary signed an agreement with the DNC not to participate in the Michigan primary. That included having her name on the ballot.

In January she said Michigan's vote won't count.

Now that she's behind because she did a horrible job managing her campaign with her 'experience', failing to plan for PostTuesday they count - or should count.

I think the ethics behind the do-over (hillary contributors are giving you fine people of michigan a chance to show your support for me)is a crock and the DNC should recognize it for what it is (bribing the people of Michigan to vote for Hillary)

ten wealthy democrats........I thought they were all like pro bono lawyers and welfare workers who helped the homeless children for nothing but pennies in donations from other 'progressive' democrats. hmmmmmm I wonder how many of these ten wealthy democrats got their money through the back of the working class or maybe....BOOTLEGGERS like the kennedy clan?
ah but here is my question. so what of the delegates for edwards and any other delegates for other candidates but especailly his....what sort of 'deals' are going back and forth between obama and hill to get those...

There are still questions to be worked out about who would get to vote to make it a fair contest for Democrats. Personally, I think it should be open to all registered Democrats and no one else. Independents and Republicans have no business in helping to choose the Democratic nominee. Republicans in Texas and other places who have voted in the Democratic primaries to help Hilary Clinton deserve to get what they voted for....Hilary Clinton as their president. That would be fair punishment for assholes who listen to Rush and let him convince them to play dirty tricks rather than allow democracy to work the way it was intended. Trust me, that would teach them a lesson they would never forget. If Hilary won and then was elected I would hope that those same assholes wouldn't forget Rush Limbaugh's part in it and hold him responsible.

With what's happening to Obama, I think they had better prolong this process in some way - the reaction to the minister thing has crushed him among independents so far, and if that's the case, he's done in Nov, and I'd rather take my chances with Hillary. (I voted for Obama in the primary)

The most anyone can contribute to a federal candidate for the nomination or the general election is $4600. If Hillarys friends are going to bribe the state of Michigan the DNC better step in as she is taking control of the DNC rules. Where are you when it counts Howard Dean?

Talk about buying elections.

Hillary hatred often borders on the irrational, as we see here.

How is holding a primary the equivalent of "buying" an election?

And don't lecture me about "the rules". The VOTERS didn't make those rules, and letting them vote in a very close election is not really so terrible, is it?

With what's happening to Obama, I think they had better prolong this process in some way - the reaction to the minister thing has crushed him among independents so far, and if that's the case, he's done in Nov, and I'd rather take my chances with Hillary. (I voted for Obama in the primary)

Posted by midiman at 2008-03-20 08:31 AM | Reply


I enjoy the Hillary bashing (and the Obama bashing), but to be honest, the thought of her as President isn't nearly as scary as it was a couple of months ago.

I honestly believe open borders McCain will win, but he's at most a one termer.

danni said

Independents and Republicans have no business in helping to choose the Democratic nominee.

well gee..

dems had not problem WHATSOEVER with independents and dems helping to pick the republican candidate and in fact mccains rise from the ashes can be directly pointed to all those wonderfully independent minded voters in new hampshire or iowa and a couple of other states with open primaries.
REMEMBER ALL THAT dont you?
of course not.
just another example of leftists seeing results and then wanting to change proceedures until they get the desired results.....
can you say electoral system?

The VOTERS didn't make those rules

But they voted for the people who did make the rules.

And when your donors are promising to cover the cost of a new election they are essentially buying the election.

I don't hate Hillary and I will gladly vote for her come November, if she gets the nod. I do have a problem with changing the rules mid-stream. Even Hillary acknowledged back on October 11 that the Michigan vote would not count.

CNN this am....so it HAS TO BE TRUE....
gallop poll has hillary ahead of obama for first time in 5 wks but it also said it was taken after clips of the racists preacher and before obama's MLK speach.

you remember that speach from the other day dont you. the one where obama THREW HIS GRANDMOTHER under the bus for political reasons....his WHITE grandmother by the way...and this guy is african american...how????????

and the same polling shows mccain ahead of BOTH OF THEM....

speach from the

WARNING
WARNING
WARNING

grammar police will be here shortly.....stand against the wall with your hands behind your head.

This one seems pretty simple to me. Hillary is Flip-Flopping and will do anything to win and 10 wealthy supporters are willing to pay for a revote. Sounds like buying an election to me. I, lke Danni, live in Florida and see things in real time here. You know what, I am pleased there is no re-vote. I am not disenfranchised because I see it for what it is worth. You break the rules you take responsibility for your actions and live with the consequences no matter who made the rules. You don't like it you vote to change it the next time around. Again, This seems pretty simple to me.

"grammar police will be here shortly

Posted by bushlovertwo"

They gave up on you in abject defeat a long, long time ago BL2.

grammar police will be here shortly.....stand against the wall with your hands behind your head.

Posted by bushlovertwo


Followed by the "coherent argument without the use of talking points" police, who would shoot you on sight.

He threw his grandmother under the bus? GEEZ. How many times did they have to repeat that line on TV or radio before you learned to repeat it so well?

I enjoy the Hillary bashing (and the Obama bashing), but to be honest, the thought of her as President isn't nearly as scary as it was a couple of months ago.

I honestly believe open borders McCain will win, but he's at most a one termer.

Posted by 101Chairborne



Chair this post reminds me that I once defended you on another thread - did you see it? Sounds like another episode of lucidity on your part - I agree with you (except for the bashing part).

:-)

He threw his grandmother under the bus? GEEZ. How many times did they have to repeat that line on TV or radio before you learned to repeat it so well?


Posted by midiman at 2008-03-


I picked it up on the first reading and NO PICTURES either........your high level intelligence must be rubbing off......hardy har har

Chair this post reminds me that I once defended you on another thread - did you see it? Sounds like another episode of lucidity on your part - I agree with you (except for the bashing part).

:-)


Posted by midiman at 2008-03-20 10:53 AM | Reply


I don't believe as though I did, but it doesn't surprise me...I've made the mistake of attempting to be rational once or twice in the past week.



Quickly off topic...I just got a dump for making "generalizations" about blacks. Of course I'm guilty as charged. I've been picking that scab here for as long as I can remember. Since when though have generalizations against any group been a no-no at the retort? Jews, Christians, Blacks (the obama supporters have been generalizing about why blacks are angry with out dumps), gays, pedophiles, lefties, righties, elderly, etc

What's a "dump"?

"What's a "dump"?"

Posts that are deemed too offensive or threatening are removed by Rcade. If you get 3 you take a short vacation from posting.

Hey Chair - I've been reading this site for the better part of 3.5 years and don't post much. I've noticed it has become "tamer" (if that's a word for the grammar police, but that seems to have brought a better level of discussion instead of name calling and trolling. Offtopic a little here too. I am somewhat young and haven't had a ton of different presidential choices in my lifetime. Soooo, for you "older" types...oops a generalization, lol. Have presidential elections always been this divisive in our country or just since the 2000 election?

Tsk tsk. Offensive posts should be met with vehement responses, but we won't get the chance to responde if they are censored.

Anybody else getting tired of all the "apologizing" and "denouncing" going on in politics?

People should just speak their minds, and then have to deal with the fallout - I'm sorry I didn't read what you wrote ... I'm sure it would have provoked a response, which is the whole point (and fun) of this site.

I have faith in you, though, to revert to form and to provide me with a way to pass some time while during study halls and while students are busy with tests.

What a blessed, blessed relief for our racist society... to have an excuse to vote for Billary....

And when your donors are promising to cover the cost of a new election they are essentially buying the election.-- Tax

Tax, this began as a challenge -- Carville said he had donors lined up and challenged Obama to do the same, so that MI and FL voters would not be disenfranchised in the primaries.

Despite his rhetoric about the importance of voters' wishes (in the context of superdelegates), Obama has been the chief obstacle to the Party's attempts to correct the mistake it made. It was his choice not to meet Carville's challenge.

Soooo, for you "older" types...oops a generalization, lol. Have presidential elections always been this divisive in our country or just since the 2000 election?

Posted by mdloftroad at 2008-03-20 11:10 AM | Reply


I'm 35, so I've only known Clinton and Bush elections.
My guess is 24 hour cable news and the internet made the elections as divisive as they are now. I'm not saying they weren't ugly before this, but probably not as ugly.

Despite his rhetoric about the importance of voters' wishes (in the context of superdelegates), Obama has been the chief obstacle to the Party's attempts to correct the mistake it made. It was his choice not to meet Carville's challenge.

Because Obama won't dance to Carville's tune Obama is supposed to be the bad guy herre?

FAIL!

Wot flavor is the Hill-aid this morning, Phoenix?

Obvious Orange or Desperate Sour grape?

Be Well.

I do have a problem with changing the rules mid-stream. Even Hillary acknowledged back on October 11 that the Michigan vote would not count.

And that vote will not count.

But a re-vote is appropriate for any number of reasons, and the "them's the rules" argument doesn't fly.

Why should the DNC be allowed to single out Michigan and Florida, when New Hampshire did exactly the same thing?

While Michigan Democrats were disappointed that our state was not selected for one of the four early contests, we appreciated the new rule... We announced that we would abide by the new calendar provided that other states did the same.

But last August, the New Hampshire secretary of state indicated he was going to schedule his state's primary before the date specified, clearly defying the sequence and timing the party had set. Michigan Democratic leaders repeatedly asked the Democratic National Committee if it intended to penalize New Hampshire for this violation, but the committee refused to act.

Rather than allow this broken system to persist, we challenged it by deciding to apportion our delegates according to the results of a primary scheduled by the Michigan Legislature for Jan. 15.

The Democratic National Committee proceeded to selectively enforce its calendar rule. It gave New Hampshire a waiver to move from third to second place in the sequence. But Michigan and Florida, which had also moved up the date of its primary, were denied waivers. When Howard Dean, the party chairman, says that states should not be allowed to violate the rules, he ignores the fact that when the committee itself decided not to follow the rules and granted a waiver to New Hampshire, it set the stage for the present impasse.

And that vote will not count.


Nice attempt at spinning. She acknowledged Michigan was a no go and now that she is losing she wants to change the terms and try to buy herself the election. I think it is time for the Hillary camp to move along and recognize that FL and MI aren't going to happen no matter how much money or spin the throw at the issue.

Why should the DNC be allowed to single out Michigan and Florida, when New Hampshire did exactly the same thing?

Because the DNC agreed to allow it. It did not agree on allowing MI and FL to move up there votes. Pretty simple to understand when you aren't looking at it through desperation colered glasses.

Damn italics.

It was his choice not to meet Carville's challenge.

So inaction, i.e., letting the MI legislature work its own problems out, is now opposition?

So inaction, i.e., letting the MI legislature work its own problems out, is now opposition? -- Tax

Surely you understand politics well enough to get that.

But it's not just inaction. Everyone is on board in MI except Obama, who has put up obstacle after obstacle.

Remember when he said he'd go along with the DNC on this one? Forget that -- the DNC is on board and Obama is STILL being obstructionist.

Small wonder that he's down in the polls. People are finally seeing through the "different kind of politics" BS.

Hillary signed an agreement with the DNC not to participate in the Michigan primary. That included having her name on the ballot.

In January she said Michigan's vote won't count

Please, when will you learn that you cannot ever trust what she says?

She is an opportunist and will do whatever she needs to do to gain the power that she craves.

Everyone is on board in MI except Obama, who has put up obstacle after obstacle.

Everything I read points to division in the MI legislature.

Remember when he said he'd go along with the DNC on this one? Forget that -- the DNC is on board and Obama is STILL being obstructionist.

Everyone is on board with a fair election, but there are already signs of impropriety, including the funding by Clinton supporters. You have still failed to give one instance of Obama coming forward and opposing new elections in MI.

-That is to say that she would not campaign in those places, would not advertise there and she would abide by the DNC's decision to not seat the delegates.


First two, yes, third, not hardly.

The candidates agreed not to campaign or advertise, period. An agreement Obama broke.

Unless Obama agrees not to disenfranchise voters in these two states, he will not win them in the fall if he is the nominee, meaning he will not win the election.

Few people realize that the much stiffer penalty that Howard the Duck Dean put on these states, no delegates at all vs the lower delegate penalty the GOP used, was a penalty that was applied AFTER the the GOP controlled Congress in FL refused to allow the Dems to move the primary date back again.

Dems did not know what the penalty would be, and when it was issued, no one thought the DNC was stupid enough to try to make it stick.

But as FL and MI were states that Hil would have likely won, making it near impossible for Obama to gain a big delegate lead, the Obamite Dean took away all the delegates.

The DNC Rules allow for reducing the penalty and having new primaries, which the DNC has endorsed.

The only one keeping voters disenfranchised now is Obama and his refusal to agree to new primaries. The longer this goes on, the less votes Obama will get in a new Primary.

And if he stops them from happening, Dems will register as Indies in the fall and vote McCain, or just sit on their hands and wait for 2012.

Wait, FL made its own decision not to conduct a re-vote and MI can't get enough legislators to back a new vote because of the shroud of impropriety, and its all Obama's fault?

The two states screwed this up themselves and trying to spin it as if Obama is solely to blame is disingenuous (I have been using that word quite a bit lately).

And if he stops them from happening, Dems will register as Indies in the fall and vote McCain

Empty threat. When the economy is tanking in October, the voters will go with the candidate who will give a hand to the middle class and the have-nots, and that sure ain't Grandpa Pee-Pants.

-Empty threat.

Not hardly. The DNC takes away my vote and see how fast I register Independent.

With the usual Repub candidate, a Rudy or a Mitt, maybe. But McCain is a Dem favorite anyway, and will win both states if Dems are disenfranchised now.

Corky what you say may be true, but doesn't represent me at all and I live in Floriduh as I like to call it. I, personally, want to see change in November so I will most likely vote Obama or Clinton. This whole charade has not disenfranchised me as a Florida voter at all. It's called responsibility for your actions, IMO. I knew that day that my vote wasn't going to seat delegates and that is that. Hillary is just whining and moaning (heh) and trying to figure out how to weasel more votes when in the past she agreed the delegates weren't going to be seated.

Clinton and Obama could do more for the country if they stuck to the dang issues than this petty crap. Tell me how you are going to install Universal Healthcare, Lower or Raise Taxes, etc. The ISSUES are what matters not tearing each other down. I guess that is too rational and winning at all costs is what matters, no?

"And if he stops them from happening, Dems will register as Indies in the fall and vote McCain, or just sit on their hands and wait for 2012."

No, the vast majority will vote for Obama and celebrate when he wins. A few sore losers will say "fuck America" and let John McCain win and appoint SC Justices, continue the war, etc.

Both Hilary and Obama and all their supporters need to realize this isn't about just them or their candidate it is about the future of the country.
Any Democrat who willingly lets John McCain win just because their own candidate isn't the nominee is being childish and is hurting the future of the country.

In the general election either Dem candidate can make the same list of reasons not to let McCain win by default.

The WAr
The Economy
Roe v Wade (which will fall with additional SC appointments by a Republican)
The bankruptcy law
The environment
Education

-she agreed the delegates weren't going to be seated.

Did not happen. Candidates only agreed not to campaign, period.

Danni

John McCain has a better reform record than Obama, working across the aisle with Dems on major legislation, and is seen favorably by Dems overall. If you think that even as little as 3 or 5 or 8 percent of Dems not voting or voting McCain won't give both these battleground states to the GOP, then you are sadly mistaken.

Obama has already managed to revive the Reagan Dems, now he is working on alienating two major states in the fall.

Nice.

Everyone is on board with a fair election, but there are already signs of impropriety, including the funding by Clinton supporters. You have still failed to give one instance of Obama coming forward and opposing new elections in MI.

Posted by taxman at 2008-03-20 12:06 PM

TAX for you...

In New Memo, Obama Camp Effectively Opposes Michigan Revote
By Eric Kleefeld - March 19, 2008, 9:51AM

The Obama camp's opposition makes it all but certain that the revote won't happen

There are still questions to be worked out about who would get to vote to make it a fair contest for Democrats.
Posted by danni at 2008-03-20 08:23 AM

Danni ... the proposal is for dems to vote in the redo with reps. and inds who voted in the Rep. primary excluded from voting

McCain 08 stop the Hildabeast!!!

Corky - I can speak for myself and from reading Danni's posts I don't think either of us are bleating the horn for this bitterness. Why are you so bitter? I'll admit I support Obama, but Jesus that doesn't mean I abosolutely hate Hillary and would not vote for her out of spite. Both Hillary and Obama are relatively close in where they say they want to take the country. Stop preaching the hate and infighting which is exactly what the Repubs want. WAKE UP!

But McCain is a Dem favorite anyway, and will win both states if Dems are disenfranchised now.

So now you are taking your ball and going home? Weren't you attacking Tony and others for doing the same? Moreover, at the same time you think it would be fine if Obama went in to the Convention with votes, states and delegates and didn't come out with the nomination, but anybody who would vote for McCain out of disgust afterwards is despicable.

Finally, is McCain a dem favorite in your eyes if Hillary is running as well or is it just Obama?

You can't have it both ways.

Effectively Opposes

Link please I would like to be able to read the piece in context.

Corky, as for FL it looks as though they are going to award Hillary her porportionate share of half of the delegates, which is just like what the republicans did. Thus, your vote still counts and Hillary comes out with a net of 19 delegates out of FL.

WAKE UP!

Go back to sleep.

Corky that is profound, no? What are you really trying to say?

My question to you after reading your posts are you really that naive to believe the rhetoric right now? I remember a time not too long ago with both sides staying on topic and talking about issues. That is what we need not this divisive bickering which is exactly what McBush (I loved that term, credit to whomever said it first) and his supporters want.

When Hillary made mention of a possible split ticket I thought that was awesome and was miffed that Obama didn't say something to leave that door open; however he didn't close it either. I would like nothing more than to see them CHANGING AMERICA TOGETHER!

Am I awake enough?

As I always say, sometimes.....

Clinton/Obama '08!!
16 Years is Better Than 8!!

I even have a deal for the candidates. Clinton agrees to resign at the end of her 7th year, so Obama gets 9 years.

And America gets the first woman and the first black Presidents, something that may take another 20 years to accomplish at the going rate.

Also we get the benefit of a much more experienced and qualified Obama as President.

I can't believe there are posters here saying there should be NO LEGAL DNC APPROVED VOTE IN FL & MI what country are we in?

NO revote because ...

They (FL & MI) broke the rules ... and their delegations for now will not be seated, however a re-vote IS NOT AGAINST THE RULES and THE DNC has signed off on them.

Can't change the rules in the middle of the contest ... there is/was no rule change concerning seating FL & MI ... maybe

See Posted by Phoenix at 2008-03-20 11:19 AM About NH

The DNC change the rule in the middle of the contest as per NH, but they make them so I guess it's all right.
While party rules at the time the primary date was moved did say that states would lose half their delegates, the rules committee later voted to strip FL & MI/of all its delegates ... again if you make the rules you can change them.

HC agreed the votes/delegates don't count...they don't but what does that have to do with a DNC sanctioned revote

It's to HC advantage ... democracy has the advantage when it's people vote, the voters will decide the advantage as they have in the previous primaries and caucuses

Hillary bribing the people/state of Michigan because her supporters will pay ... HC buying votes she already has from her supporters???...how many BO supporters will switch to HC because her supporters paid? As to the state the leading dems have called for and agreed on a re-vote.

Clinton/Obama '08!!

But if not you are taking your ball and going home right?

Tax

Do you stuff your Strawmen before you put words in their mouths or after?

Corky:

The DNC takes away my vote and see how fast I register Independent.

An Independent can vote in either Primary.

But, we'll see, won't we?

Corky - We both agree on the best ticket, just not the same order. I don't buy into the lack of experience thing. Hell, a toddler could've done at least as good as the Shrub has done. Who here agrees with me that Obama and Clinton should make peace and get back to the ISSUES!

Forgot to add I'm very disappointed that BO is standing in the way of the revote.

This stance does not agree with his message/vision
of HOPE and INCLUSION for the future but of the very same old style politics he renounces

An Independent can vote in either Primary.

Sure they can Corky, that's how you are covering yourself.

Just don't be pissed when Obama supporters do the same.

You already now my take on how I am voting either way, but the could change if dirty politics are played.

I am betting that Bloomberg is really pissed that he said he wasn't going to run. Also, where is Al Gore?

Who here agrees with me that Obama and Clinton should make peace and get back to the ISSUES!

Definitely not the Clinton camp. They need the race issue in order to strong-arm SDs into backing her.

BO will get slaughtered in the big show.

He will be exposed for the giantic phony that he is.

McCain 78%
Nader 15%
Obama 07%

Not all states allow independents to vote in either primary. In Florida you can vote in the primary you are registered for and if you are an independent then you get the middle finger and can't vote in a primary.

Stop the nonsense. throw both of them on the ticket and stop the bickering. we can't afford to lose this election. I may joke about wanting McCain but I can't in good conscience let him win. He is an evil republican mastermind who will steal from the poor to pay the Rich.


The evil republican war machine must be destroyed.

Ain't gonna happen. Read the headlines which tell us the Michigan legislature adjourned and left the proposal alone. So, not going to happen the news tells us.

The headline should have read: Clinton Supports Buying Election. I wonder how many under the table cash deals are going on with those Super Delagates. Clinton already had illegal Chinese contributions. I would bet everything I have that there are shady cash deals going with Super Delagates to help Clinton.

As a matter of fact, now some congress people are pushing for a 50 / 50 delegate split which Obama loves and Hillbill is having a heart attack over. Wanna bet this proposal is the one that goes?

Sure doesn't look like Obama had anything to do with this, it was the state legislature that was worried about a re-vote. From the MI Governor:

I believe Senator Levin, Congresswoman Kilpatrick, National Committeewoman Debbie Dingell, and UAW President Ron Gettelfinger identified the fairest way for Michigan voters to have a voice in seating a delegation in Denver. They recommended to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) that Michigan hold a state-run, privately funded primary. I supported their recommendation, as did the DNC, and I am deeply disappointed that it is no longer a possibility. Now that the Legislature has decided not to act, we will turn our attention to other options. There is no road to the White House that does not go through Michigan, so it is essential that Michigan voters have a voice in who will be our party's nominee and, ultimately, the next president of the United States.

The legislature is now on recess for two weeks, and by the time lawmakers return, it will probably be too late to approve and organize a new vote before early June, the deadline established by the national Democratic Party

Wow, there really are consequences for actions?

This'll at least have a chance at stopping a pell mell madcap collection of states with primaries that are late from trying to jump the lineup next election cycle, which was kind of the point all along wasn't it?

Be Well.

WAIT -

latest Zogby is out:

National Election
McCain 89%
Clinton 07%
Nader 03.7%
Obama 0.3 %

WAIT -

latest Zogby is out:

Who's the biggest moron on the Drudge Retort?

Fredo C 89%
Rob the A 07%
101 Airhed 3.7%
Fwthom 0.3%

Be Well.

Will they accept donations to hire a hobo armada and "take out" the super delegates?

What conditions would place McCain as Hillary's VP?

We shall see.

I posted two weeks ago that Obama leading the way on this issue. Here was my post, at the time:
* * * *

Barack Obama should be in front of this issue, right now. He should go to campaign in Lansing and Detroit, and in Jax, Orlando, Tampa and Miami. He should demand a new vote, and offer to pay for it.

Can you imagine the panic that would ensue in the Clinton camp THEN? Were Barack Obama to say, "I am seeking to be the head of the Democratic Party, and its candidate for the presidency. I WILL NOT stand by while our third and our fifth largest states will be disenfranchised. A mere generation ago, millions of Americans had their ballots throw out, because of mechanizations of legislatures and party heads. Because of small mindedness. Because of bigotry. It's time for a new start, a fresh beginning. I'll be contributing $10 million out of my own campaign, to have another election in both Michigan and Florida."

He would win. And he would probably deserve to.

Posted by rightisright at 2008-03-10 12:53 PM
* * * *

Now Hillary's people have decided to, instead. And, frankly, she deserves to beat him. She's run an awful campaign, but he is surrounded by some pretty awful people. I'm wasn't thrilled with my choices as a righty, but the Dem lineup is even worse. Which is really saying something.

Hillary is a bitch, why would yoou vote for her. She lied about all that experience.

Is Carville trying to help Billary change the rules by buying the election in MI. Better luck MI in 2012 mabe you'll obey the rules then.

HEY HILLARY!!!!!

Go back to the race card, this revote dog won't hunt!