As the campaign rolls along, I think Obama's change platform is losing it. At least to me.

Obama fought Clinton so hard to not have them seated since it would hurt him. Now that he's won, it's ok to have them seated fully.

Now that there will be no roll call vote, this is a safe move. Not much different than the ways he won his other elections, really.

McCain should watch his balls to be sure they don't get cut off before this is over.

The only good thing about this happening is that it would encourage other states to "break the rules" in the future and thus the tyranny of Iowa and New Hampshire being first be wither on the vines. People will hopefully read in future history books in horror at how the primary system used to work.

I hope they do it.

And I hope that in 2012 10 states break the rules. I'd like to see either party disenfranchise 10 states.

Bwahahahahaha!

If the DNC give FL and MI full votes, they will officially be a joke in my eyes.

Hem and haw for months and then cave in and not enforce their own rules. That would be pathetic.

"McCain should watch his balls to be sure they don't get cut off before this is over."

Like Hillary's were?

"McCain should watch his balls to be sure they don't get cut off before this is over."

Like Hillary's were?

Would be nice to have a Dem candidate who had some. FISA, off-shore drilling, campaign finance...

Obama: Seat All Florida, Michigan Delegates

Is this guy kidding, or what?

Why should Florida and Michigan be excluded from voting when the decision has already been made. It wouldn't serve any purpose except to alienate Florida and Michigan Democrats. Oh, maybe that's why some folks think the DNC should now stand tough when it is utterly meaningless.

Ok, lets see which Koolaid drinker defends this move as "good political strategy" or "mending the party" first.

Odds:
The rogue from SA 1:1
Tonyromy 1.5:1
Mr. potato head 2:1
Nopaths 2:1
DANNI 2:1
AU 3:1
HERMaphrodite 3:1
RCADE 5:1

Place your bets!

cid, I don't know if I agree with your odds here... but still funny

It's not good political strategy, it's glaringly obvious strategy. Who had any doubt that after the Democratic nominee clinched, the Michigan and Florida delegations would be seated in full?

Obama won the nomination under the rules in place when the contest began. If Dems want to reform the system for 2012 and beyond, that's OK with me, but I don't buy the argument that it was unfair in 2008.

"It's not good political strategy, it's glaringly obvious strategy. Who had any doubt that after the Democratic nominee clinched, the Michigan and Florida delegations would be seated in full?"

Good political strategy would have been for the DNC to announce that these people would be seated and for Obama to just keep his mouth shut about it.

This just makes Obama look like an ass.

-I don't buy the argument that it was unfair in 2008.

It was unfair in 2008 because the DNC allowed NH to move it's date, twice, with no punishment at all, then took out double the punishment as the GOP did on Mich and FL for the same offence.

Obama supporter Howard the Duck Dean and Obama himself neatly made sure that Clinton states FL and MI did not count.

As I mentioned, not too different then the ways he won his other elections, you know, keeping one opponent, another dear friend, off the ballot, and having the sealed divorce papers of the other opponent opened.

If we're expected to accept the outcome of the Dem primary because "them's the rules" no matter how f'ed up they are, then it should be equally acceptable that Clinton was impeached.... if you maintain the same reasoning.

Most dems say no to the latter, why do they accept the former?

"bama supporter Howard the Duck Dean and Obama himself neatly made sure that Clinton states FL and MI did not count."

Excuse the fuck out of me, but it was MI and FL who made sure MI and FL did not count. They purposely moved their primaries because they wanted to be important. The ultimate irony is had they left their primaries where they were, they would have been important.

But you don't get to shoot yourself in the foot and then complain about the limp.

-But you don't get to shoot yourself in the foot and then complain about the limp.

You do if you are NH. And you get to do it twice.

A little consistency and fairness is all anyone asked of the DNC. It was too much to ask, obviously.

The ultimate irony is had they left their primaries where they were, they would have been important.

Posted by Danforth

I thought it was less about having their votes be important in the selection process than it was to have their issues addressed in the campaign the way we hear about the importance of ethanol every four years.

"than it was to have their issues addressed"

They would have been addressed more fully had the primaries remained where they were. Instead, the only issue addressed was seating the delegates or not.

Damn that limp!

"You do if you are NH."

You conveniently forgot the 2nd half of that sentence:

...and have been guaranteed the first primary.

call me crazy, but i see her back in the race. even the party of flip-floppers must have SOME standards?

I thought it was less about having their votes be important in the selection process than it was to have their issues addressed in the campaign... --HC

Well, that, and the importance of respecting DNC rules. I didn't follow Florida closely, but Michigan Dems made it pretty clear that they would respect the 2006 agreement if NH did.

You conveniently forget that there were new rules, new states that the DNC moved forward, and that NH was not in compliance when they moved, twice, but they were not penalized, even once.

Consistency and fairness in applying the rules is what was lacking from the DNC. Just an accident that their punishing FL and MI and not NH, for the same offence against the new rules, resulted in 2 Clinton states not counting, one supposes.

Obama won the nomination under the rules in place when the contest began. If Dems want to reform the system for 2012 and beyond, that's OK with me, but I don't buy the argument that it was unfair in 2008.

POSTED BY RCADE

Actually the Repubs were successful in manipulating the Dems primaries by changing a law in Florida. They wanted Obama as the candidat, because they new they could not win against Hillary.
The calculation was simpel: no Repub will vote for a black man, at least 10% of the Dems will not vote for a black man. That adds up to enough votes for a next Repub president.

And yes, it was unfair in 2008.

-Actually the Repubs were successful in manipulating the Dems primaries by changing a law in Florida.

Ah, where's that Moment of Clarity Award?

And the DNC stood still for it, even penalizing the state twice as much as the GOP did. Wonder why?

Not sure what the point of rehashing the battle over whether or not the DNC rule was fair and/or fairly enforced.

Also not sure why this is a big issue now. I seem to recall a lot of discussion by pundits prior to the nomination being decided that whoever became the nominee would probably call for seating the delegations in the interest of party unity.

Can't wait for TonyRoma to post an entire HuffingtonPost article telling us why this is a great move by Jahova... whoops... Obama.

... the Repubs were successful in manipulating the Dems primaries by changing a law in Florida. They wanted Obama as the candidat, because they new they could not win against Hillary.

Calling for the seating of all delegates after fighting tooth and nail to be sure they did not fully count just sounds rather like old style politics.

All 57 states should have their vote counted.

-Actually the Repubs were successful in manipulating the Dems primaries by changing a law in Florida.

Ah, where's that Moment of Clarity Award?

----

Right. And the FL Dems were so upset about that. U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a Democrat from Broward County:

Are you worried that Florida will lose its clout as a result of this dispute?

On the contrary. I think this will be the final straw that will break this ridiculous primary process and give impetus to create a regional primary process that respects diversity and the appropriate role that a variety of states should have. At the end of the day, there isn't anyone who can change the fact that we're the fourth-largest state, with 17 million people. It's kind of hard to impact our clout. There's no getting away from that. All the rules and foot-stamping in the world can't change the fact that Florida will be the most significant factor in who becomes president of the United States next November.

And I hope that in 2012 10 states break the rules. I'd like to see either party disenfranchise 10 states.

Posted by member2586 at 2008-08-03 11:30 PM

I agree...we need to break the stranglehold .

"Calling for the seating of all delegates after fighting tooth and nail to be sure they did not fully count just sounds rather like old style politics."
Posted by Corky

Sad But True Award for Corky.

"Besides, most of those new Dem Senators will be conservative."

Posted by fwthom

Sadder But True Award for FWad.

It's the Obama Blue Dog Strategy a.k.a. F The base because we'll make sure they have nowhere else to go.

Posted by Hagbard_Celine

Its that strategy that kind of makes me comfortable with voting for him if I choose too and not so worried about the next 4 years (maybe 8).

If Obama and the Democrats want to go middle of the road and fill the Senate and house with Democrats more in the Lieberman mold, I'm more then fine with that... In fact I think it would be great for America... the Far Left and Far Right should be told to Fuck off...

Rob, I know you know this, but the "middle of the road" is where it is today because the GOP has moved FAR right in the last 20+ years. The dems have chased after them in order not to be characterized as extremist, even though their base is in the same place they always were.

The dems moving to the newly redefined middle have moved into solidly GOP territory without even knowing it... or they know it and just don't care.

Opinions on this topic by Republicans or right wingers of any kind are completely irrelevant.

Refighting the Obama/Clinton wars is a complete waste of time.

The Democratic Party now has one goal and that is to elect the nominee of the party.

If allowing all the delegates from Florida and Michigan to be seated at the convention will help in that effort it would be utterly ridiculous not to do so.

Anyone that disagrees with that is not primarily concerned with a Democratic victory in November and thus their opinion is counter productive and should be ignored by the DNC.

"If Obama and the Democrats want to go middle of the road and fill the Senate and house with Democrats more in the Lieberman mold,"

That is a ridiculous comment. In order to fit the Lieberman mold the Democrats would first have to become virtual Israeli neocons, that is definitely not the direction that the Democratic party is taking.

I find it incredibly laughable to read posts by righties complaing that the Dems are moving to far towards the center when they only wish that the Republicans would do the exact same thing. Their real complaint, if they were honest (which they are not), would be that they don't like it when the Dems play smart politics to win elections. They would much prefer for Obama to be as left wing as possible. I think it especially drives them crazy that a black man is able to take the center away from the Republicans due to the fact that the Republican Party has been taken over by right wing radicals.

-Anyone that disagrees.......

The Democratic Party now has one goal and that is to elect the nominee of the party.

----

Forget anything about following it's own rules. Winning is the only thing that matters.

Party over principal I guess.

I find it incredibly laughable to read posts by righties complaing that the Dems are moving to far towards the center when they only wish that the Republicans would do the exact same thing.

Complaining? Where are we complaining that Democrats are abandoning their base and moving their policies to the right of where they were? I think that's great...

Both parties are moving toward the left. McCain isn't a conservative. Neither is Bush.

What the hell does Obama stand for anyway? It shows how fucked up the Republican chances are when Obama can get 48% and nobody knows a damn thing about him.

Godwin's law strikes again. Of course this is also known as Reductio ad Hitlerum - a typical, and logically irrational, ploy used by opponents who have essentially lost an argument and have nowhere else to go.

Regurgeto Nonsensico being the basis of that last post.

This whole thread is a nonsensical regurgitation - just the re-opening of old wounds.

So, it looks like the longshot came in.

just the re-opening of old wounds.

Posted by taxman

the subject of the thread may be the re-opening of old wounds, but apparently the healing never fully took place... hence the thread.

but apparently the healing never fully took place

Obviously true when people are still using illogical Hitler v. Obama comaprisons.

Obama's doing pretty damn good against McCain. I have trouble believing that Hillary Clinton would be doing any better.

POSTED BY RCADE

Pretty damn good? With a sitting Repub president this unpopular as Bush is? It will go down in history as THE historical blunder of 2008 Dems.

And yes it was unfair to Hillary Clinton. And the result will be catastrophic.

Obviously true when people are still using illogical Hitler v. Obama comaprisons.

Posted by taxman

I thought that hitler in that post was metaphor for Obama's supporters and not Obama... but I've been wrong before.

I posted the story for two reasons.

1) If the DNC does restore the delegates fully, it makes them look dumb for not following their own rules.

2) It makes Obama look dumb as he fought hard to not get them seated during the primary. He's acting like a normal politician but running on a change platform.

Obama's doing pretty damn good against McCain. I have trouble believing that Hillary Clinton would be doing any better.

Posted by rcade

Ahhh... electoral-vote... gotta love it.

August 16, 2004:

thought that hitler in that post was metaphor for Obama's supporters and not Obama

Right, and people don't attribute views of Obama supporters to Obama - nope never happens. The intellectually dishonest love to attribute positions of a candidate to his/her supporters and vice versa.

"Party over principal I guess."

The most important function of a political party is to elect its nominees and push its agenda. The can be no principal for a party that is more important than victory.
George McGovern showed us what happens when a politician puts his principas ahead of winning....25,000 additional soldiers died in Vietnam. The most important principal is that nothing is accomplished by losing.

The most important function of a political party is to elect its nominees and push its agenda. The can be no principal for a party that is more important than victory.

----

Ethics and principal be damned! Win! Not really the agenda I would like to see running the country.

The Daffy Duck/Hitler cartoon was in response to:

"-Anyone that disagrees......."

... as quoted in the post.

Reading more into it than that isn't necessary.

The bottom line on this story is that after fighting as hard as possible to make sure that votes didn't count, self-congratulatory moves like making public a letter asking that they now do count is old style politics at best, and raw hypocrisy at worst.

"The bottom line on this story is that after fighting as hard as possible to make sure that votes didn't count, self-congratulatory moves like making public a letter asking that they now do count is old style politics at best, and raw hypocrisy at worst."

Or acting like an adult instead of playing politics with some rule book from cub scouts. We will need every vote in Florida and Michigan, it would be irresponsible to not seat them and rist alienating Florida Democrats. If Hilary were the nominee she would do exactly the same thing with Obama's blessing. Anyone that really wants to win understands that.

The most important function of a political party is to elect its nominees and push its agenda.
Posted by danni

But when will it be time for the agenda? If the route to election victory is to move to the right, and once victory is attained, its another four years of trying not to piss off the righties and blue dogs who helped elect you.

Do you mean to say that we'd have to wait until 2013 for a truly democratic agenda to take shape?

But then the argument would be that we can't risk anything that would jeopardize the chances for the next democratic nominee. And the further right we will go.

Here is the full quote:

Anyone that disagrees with that is not primarily concerned with a Democratic victory in November and thus their opinion is counter productive and should be ignored by the DNC.

Where does Danni imply that their opinion doesn't count or that anyone who disagrees should have their civil rights taken away? You made the illogical jump to comparing her to Hitler, I am not reading anything into your post. The embittered still have their rights and can still be heard, Danni is just suggesting that they be ignored by those who want to see a Dem win in November.

Clinton never having fought her heart out to keep votes from counting, I don't think the analogy is applicable.

Anyone who wants to win badly enough to sacrifice ethics and principle doesn't deserve to win.

"Anyone who wants to win badly enough to sacrifice ethics and principle doesn't deserve to win."

Don't worry, McCain'll lose.

Anyone who wants to win badly enough to sacrifice ethics and principle doesn't deserve to win.

Posted by Corky at 2008-08-04 12:49 PM | Reply | Flag

LOL!!!

The ultimate of hypocrisy.

If only you had some to sacrifice, eh?

Corky..............The real democrat supporter........all I want is to get a democrat to take the white house.......right!

If only you had some to sacrifice, eh?

You and the Hillaryites have sacrificed more than enough for everyone in the Party, Corky.

Obama didn't choose the low road, and McCain certainly isn't quoting things Obama did as reasons for voting against Obama except for lies and distortions, but they daily quote Hillary's former smears as a reason to doubt his readiness to lead. Thanks again for being such a help to the GOP.

What the hell! Why would he do that now?

To laugh in their faces? Pour salt in the wound?

What a disingenuous bastard.

Sorry dems, that's not rain your feeling.

Obama chose the low road when he kept his former friend and mentor off the ballot in one election, and when he opened up his opponent's divorce records in another.

Then he fought his heart out to keep votes from counting in a Presidential election, only now when it doesn't matter, he wants them to count.

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Thanks again for being such a help to the GOP.

Posted by tonyroma

What's funny is thinking that the GOP needed any help with figuring out how to undermine any Dem candidate and that they would never have chosen the route they with which they are currently doing so if it were not for people like corky.

And if you think corky was nasty about it, just wait until the GOP shows you what nasty really is.

I told myself I would never comment on a SeanR thread...oh wait this isn't a SeanR thread - I was confused by all the whining.

Obama didn't choose the low road, and McCain certainly isn't quoting things Obama did as reasons for voting against Obama except for lies and distortions, but they daily quote Hillary's former smears as a reason to doubt his readiness to lead. Thanks again for being such a help to the GOP.

Posted by tonyroma

Rasmussen has McCain with his first lead over Obama today... though it is statistically insignificant.

Again, I ask the question why this is an issue, or seems to come as a surprise to anyone? Months ago when the DNC penalty issue first started coming to a head every pundit on the airwaves predicted that the eventual nominee would call for seating all the delegates as a gesture of goodwill.

Could the outrage expressed here be, oh, I don't know...

faux?

Corky chooses the low road by continuing to fight yesterday's primary battles. Clue...the primaries are over now it's time to be a Democrat again.

Rob, I think that is the result of McCain going negative. Generally, negative ads work but only for so long, which is why so many on the right are shocked McCain went negative this early. People get sick of mudslining and dirty politics after a while and the effect of such campaigning eventually wears off. McCain is going to need to drop a bombshell in October if he wants to re-use this strategy.

Generally, negative ads work but only for so long, which is why so many on the right are shocked McCain went negative this early.

If the silly paris hilton ad, or moses ad is what passes for negative among the Democrats, then everyone needs to hold on to their fucking hats...

Also if those two silly little ads worked, then Obama should be worried.

Again Rob, they tend to work, but not for long. There is a backlash when a candidate keeps on pulling from the negative jar, and fails to establish his/her own policy. And yes those ads were negative as the disseminated incorrect information - i.e., the claim that Obama supports an electricity tax or that Obama decided not to visit troops because of lack of publicity (the McCain did apologize for this which I give them credit for).

Barry the magical negro. Sing it with me folks! I know you know the words Danni...

And yes those ads were negative

I wish I had the funds to put out a commercial... cuz I would show everyone what negative campaigning is.

I don't care if he has disavowed Wright, he'd be all over the place come September/October... especially after the anniversary of 9/11, putting up his comments of "God Damn America," then reminding everyone this is Obama's mentor who has shaped his life in many ways, and that obama said he couldn't disown him any more then he could an uncle or whatever the hell he said.

That's fucking negative campaigning... this race isn't even close to negative yet.

To be honest Rob, I am kind of surprised we haven't seen any Wright videos yet. I imagine the McCain camp will let the 527s handle that one.

"and that obama said he couldn't disown him any more then he could an uncle "

Will they stop there, or will they include the part where Obama condemned the same stuff they'll be showing and finally DID disown Wright?

To be honest Rob, I am kind of surprised we haven't seen any Wright videos yet. I imagine the McCain camp will let the 527s handle that one.

Posted by taxman

I think you're right about the 527s... that's too negative for an actual candidate to throw out.

I think we will see McCain bring up that Hamas endorsement though.

As much as possible will be saved for post convention and October.

To be honest Rob, I am kind of surprised we haven't seen any Wright videos yet. I imagine the McCain camp will let the 527s handle that one.

Posted by taxman

We've seen all there is to see. 1 of the 3 is him quoting Ambassador Edward Peck anyway.

I think we will see McCain bring up that Hamas endorsement though.

I thought he did that already?

or will they include the part where Obama condemned the same stuff they'll be showing and finally DID disown Wright?

If I were making the commericial I would... something along the lines of:

"Barack Obama was fine with Rev. Wright's hatred of America for 20 years (during which time he was baptized by Wright, married by him, had his kids baptized by him, and even titled his book after a speech by Wright), until he decided he wanted to be president. Only then did Barack Obama passively turn from Rev. Wright."

Something like that...

"I think we will see McCain bring up that Hamas endorsement"

Isn't that as ridiculous as if bin Laden or Amandapajamas endorsed McCain?

I thought he did that already?

Posted by taxman

On the sunday talk shows and other places, but I think we'll see it in a formal campaign commercial, endorsed by McCain.

Isn't that as ridiculous as if bin Laden or Amandapajamas endorsed McCain?

Posted by Danforth

You have quotes from them saying they want McCain to win? Because the Right has quotes from Hamas leaders saying they want Obama to win.

Obviously they want Obama to win because they think they're situation will be better under his presidency.

Whether that's true or not (probably not) is debateable... but it makes for a fantastic attack ad...

" Because the Right has quotes from Hamas leaders saying they want Obama to win."

Since when do we base our votes on what Hamas says?

Plus, I'm betting if Hamas had endorsed McCain, righties would be saying it's no big deal. We're back to the parlor tricks.

And speaking of parlor tricks, what did you think of the McCain camp having two ads ready: one bashing Obama for using the troops for political reasons if he visited them, and one bashing Obama for snubbing the troops if he didn't?

Since when do we base our votes on what Hamas says?

Did Hamas endorse Kerry, Bush, Gore, etc?

Plus, I'm betting if Hamas had endorsed McCain, righties would be saying it's no big deal. We're back to the parlor tricks.

yes, but they didn't... they endorsed Obama, and so its fair game.

And speaking of parlor tricks, what did you think of the McCain camp having two ads ready

I think its brilliant campaigning... Being able to attack your opponent no matter what he does is pretty sound strategy. And either one worked... we both know there are stupid "Independent" voters right now who bought into thinking that Obama didn't want to visit the troops because he couldn't bring his cameras.

"I think its brilliant campaigning..."

I think it's totally disingenuous. Make up your mind...that is, if McCain can locate his.

But I'd use this in an ad to show McCain doesn't really feel one way or the other about the issue itself, just looking for an opportunity to bash his opponent for doing what McCain himself might've done.

Osama bin Laden endorsed Bush in 2004. His endorsement may have tipped the election. His endorsement worked--he got the President he wantred--a nice big war draining America of wealth and lives, and he's still free.

Seating the full Florida and Michigan delegates would mean that many other states would change their primaries in 2012. There could be primaries before Thanksgiving 2011. Florida and Michigan are out. They fucked up this primary season royally and we now have the second best candidate as the representative of the dem party. To have an election be this close after 8 years of Bush is an embarassment for dems.

Osama bin Laden endorsed Bush in 2004.

If I remember that tape right, didn't it say that neither Kerry or Bush would help? Something like that...

Excerpt from Bin Laden't 2004 video:

"Your security is not in the hands of Kerry or Bush or al-Qaida. Your security is in your own hands and each state which does not harm our security will remain safe".

I thought his point was that either one sucks for us, but one of them would be better for him.

It's the "devil you know" thing.

I thought his point was that either one sucks for us, but one of them would be better for him.

It's the "devil you know" thing.

Posted by Hagbard_Celine

From that link it was just mocking and insulting Bush... I didn't see anything resembling the endorsement that Obama got from Hamas.

And I think it is a fair question to be asked, why did Hamas decide to weigh in on American politics and choose Obama?

Osama endorsed Bush in 2004. His video released just before the election had a huge impact. It scared all the pants pissers into voting for Bush. It didn't matter what he said--it was when he said it--not what he said. He bad mouthed Bush in the video--that is an endorsement.

And I think it is a fair question to be asked, why did Hamas decide to weigh in on American politics and choose Obama?

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2008-08-04 03:05 PM |

Because they want McCain. Are you that slow?

"And I think it is a fair question to be asked, why did Hamas decide to weigh in on American politics and choose Obama?"

Yeah, real fair. It should be answered right after you answer why Satan has endorsed McBush.

Corky chooses the low road by continuing to fight yesterday's primary battles. Clue...the primaries are over now it's time to be a Democrat again.

Posted by danni

Er, who was it that listed ethics and principle way after, "winning"?

Wasn't me, babe.

The most important function of a political party is to elect its nominees and push its agenda. The can be no principal for a party that is more important than victory.
George McGovern showed us what happens when a politician puts his principas ahead of winning....25,000 additional soldiers died in Vietnam. The most important principal is that nothing is accomplished by losing.

Posted by danni

I hope you don't have children and teach them that winning at all costs is the only way to live and that politicians selfless service to the American People by politicians is a quaint but laughable ideal from those heady days of the 1700's.

sheesh.

If the Democrats feel they can be responsible for enacting laws and rules and enforcing the laws and rules of the land...

but can't abide by their own rules for electing who they think best represents the party is a sick sick joke.

I understand why this idea is put forward, I just hpope the Democrat high ups state:

" we appreciate this gesture, but have decided the rules of elections within our party are important and have decided the accepted punishment for violating those rules stand."

Sigh - how many more flip flops flippety flops shall we see from the amazing Bouncing Obama - um, um, um, ah, um, eh, um as he himself might say.

notmoretax

Sigh - how many more flip flops flippety flops shall we see from the amazing Bouncing Obama - um, um, um, ah, um, eh, um as he himself might say.

How about this many?

nomoretax

enjoy your nice cold bottle of STFU.

;-)

Foreign Policy

7. McCain was for kicking Russia out of the G8 before he was against it.

8. McCain supported moving towards normalization of relations-- with Cuba. Now he believes the opposite.

9. McCain believed the U.S. should engage in diplomacy with Hamas. Now he believes the opposite.

10. McCain believed the U.S. should engage in diplomacy with Syria. Now he believes the opposite.

11. McCain is both for and against a rogue state rollback-- as a focus of his foreign policy vision.

12. McCain used to champion the Law of the Sea convention, even volunteering to testify on the treatys behalf before a Senate committee. Now he opposes it.

13. McCain was against divestment from South Africa before he was for it.

Military Policy

14. McCain recently claimed that he was the greatest critic-- of Rumsfelds failed Iraq policy. In December 2003, McCain praised the same strategy as a mission accomplished.-- In March 2004, he said, Im confident were on the right course.-- In December 2005, he said, Overall, I think a year from now, we will have made a fair amount of progress if we stay the course.--

15. McCain has changed his mind about a long-term U.S. military presence in Iraq on multiple occasions, concluding, on multiple occasions, that a Korea-like presence is both a good and a bad idea.

16. McCain said before the war in Iraq, We will win this conflict. We will win it easily.-- Four years later, McCain said he knew all along that the war in Iraq war was probably going to be long and hard and tough.--

17. McCain has repeatedly said its a dangerous mistake to tell the enemy-- when U.S. troops would be out of Iraq. In May, McCain announced that most American troops would be home from Iraq by 2013.

18. McCain was against expanding the GI Bill before he was for it.

Domestic Policy

19. McCain defended privatizing-- Social Security. Now he says hes against privatization (though he actually still supports it.)

20. McCain wanted to change the Republican Party platform to protect abortion rights in cases of rape and incest. Now he doesnt.

21. McCain supported storing spent nuclear fuel at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Now he believes the opposite.

22. He argued the NRA should not have a role in the Republican Partys policy making. Now he believes the opposite.

23. In 1998, he championed raising cigarette taxes to fund programs to cut underage smoking, insisting that it would prevent illnesses and provide resources for public health programs. Now, McCain opposes a $0.61-per-pack tax increase, wont commit to supporting a regulation bill hes co-sponsoring, and has hired Philip Morris former lobbyist as his senior campaign adviser.

24. McCain is both for and against earmarks for Arizona.

25. McCains first mortgage plan was premised on the notion that homeowners facing foreclosure shouldnt be rewarded-- for acting irresponsibly.-- His second mortgage plan took largely the opposite position.

26. McCain went from saying gay marriage should be allowed, to saying gay marriage shouldnt be allowed.

27. McCain opposed a holiday to honor Martin Luther King, Jr., before he supported it.

28. McCain was anti-ethanol. Now hes pro-ethanol.

29. McCain was both for and against state promotion of the Confederate flag.

30. In 2005, McCain endorsed intelligent design creationism, a year later he said the opposite, and a few months after that, he was both for and against creationism at the same time.

Economic Policy

31. McCain was against Bushs tax cuts for the very wealthy before he was for them.

32. John McCain initially argued that economics is not an area of expertise for him, saying, Im going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues; I still need to be educated,-- and The issue of economics is not something Ive understood as well as I should.-- He now falsely denies ever having made these remarks and insists that he has a very strong-- understanding of economics.

33. McCain vowed, if elected, to balance the federal budget by the end of his first term. Soon after, he decided he would no longer even try to reach that goal. And soon after that, McCain abandoned his second position and went back to his first.

34. McCain said in 2005 that he opposed the tax cuts because they were too tilted to the wealthy.-- By 2007, he denied ever having said this, and falsely argued that he opposed the cuts because of increased government spending.

35. McCain thought the estate tax was perfectly fair. Now he believes the opposite.

36. McCain pledged in February 2008 that he would not, under any circumstances, raise taxes. Specifically, McCain was asked if he is a read my lips candidate, no new taxes, no matter what?-- referring to George H.W. Bushs 1988 pledge. No new taxes,-- McCain responded. Two weeks later, McCain said, Im not making a read my lips statement, in that I will not raise taxes.--

37. McCain has changed his entire economic worldview on multiple occasions.

38. McCain believes Americans are both better and worse off economically than they were before Bush took office.

Energy Policy

39. McCain supported the moratorium on coastal drilling ; now hes against it.

40. McCain recently announced his strong opposition to a windfall-tax on oil company profits. Three weeks earlier, he was perfectly comfortable with the idea.

41. McCain endorsed a cap-and-trade policy with a mandatory emissions cap. In mid-June, McCain announced he wants the caps to voluntary.

42. McCain explained his belief that a temporary suspension of the federal gas tax would provide an immediate economic stimulus. Shortly thereafter, he argued the exact opposite.

43. McCain supported the Lieberman/Warner legislation to combat global warming. Now he doesnt.

Immigration Policy

44. McCain was a co-sponsor of the DREAM Act, which would grant legal status to illegal immigrants kids who graduate from high school. Now hes against it.

45. On immigration policy in general, McCain announced in February 2008 that he would vote against his own bill.

46. In April, McCain promised voters that he would secure the borders before proceeding to other reform measures.-- Two months later, he abandoned his public pledge, pretended that hed never made the promise in the first place, and vowed that a comprehensive immigration reform policy has always been, and would always be, his top priority.--

Judicial Policy and the Rule of Law

47. McCain said he would not impose a litmus test on any nominee.-- He used to promise the opposite.

48. McCain believes the telecoms should be forced to explain their role in the administrations warrantless surveillance program as a condition for retroactive immunity. He used to believe the opposite.

49. McCain went from saying he would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade to saying the exact opposite.

Campaign, Ethics, and Lobbying Reform

50. McCain supported his own lobbying-reform legislation from 1997. Now he doesnt.

51. In 2006, McCain sponsored legislation to require grassroots lobbying coalitions to reveal their financial donors. In 2007, after receiving feedback-- on the proposal, McCain told far-right activist groups that he opposes his own measure.

52. McCain supported a campaign-finance bill, which bore his name, on strengthening the public-financing system. In June 2007, he abandoned his own legislation.

Politics and Associations

53. McCain wanted political support from radical televangelist John Hagee. Now he doesnt. (He also believes his endorsement from Hagee was both a good and bad idea.)

54. McCain wanted political support from radical televangelist Rod Parsley. Now he doesnt.

55. McCain says he considered and did not consider joining John Kerrys Democratic ticket in 2004.

56. McCain is both for and against attacking Barack Obama over his former pastor at his former church.

57. McCain criticized TV preacher Jerry Falwell as an agent of intolerance-- in 2002, but then decided to cozy up to the man who said Americans deserved-- the 9/11 attacks.

58. In 2000, McCain accused Texas businessmen Sam and Charles Wyly of being corrupt, spending dirty money-- to help finance Bushs presidential campaign. McCain not only filed a complaint against the Wylys for allegedly violating campaign finance law, he also lashed out at them publicly. In April, McCain reached out to the Wylys for support.

59. McCain was against presidential candidates campaigning at Bob Jones University before he was for it.

60. McCain decided in 2000 that he didnt want anything to do with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, believing he would taint the image of the Straight Talk Express.-- Kissinger is now the Honorary Co-Chair for his presidential campaign in New York.

61. McCain believed powerful right-wing activist/lobbyist Grover Norquist was corrupt, a shill for dictators, and (with just a dose of sarcasm) Jack Abramoffs gay lover.-- McCain now considers Norquist a key political ally.

And while I realize there are some who believe these constant flip-flops are irrelevant, I respectfully disagree.

Game, Set, Match

McCain WINS the flip flop contest hands down.

If Dems want to reform the system for 2012 and beyond, that's OK with me, but I don't buy the argument that it was unfair in 2008.

Posted by rcade at 2008-08-04 09:00 AM

I don't think anyone has suggested the primary was unfair. The point has been made that the primary system is flawed--putting forth the second best candidate--the candidate that won none of the big blue states. Obama is the red state candidate. That's why this election is so close.

I hope Obama wins, and I think he will be a better President than Hillary would have been, but it doesn't mitigate the facts. Facts like Obama lose every match up except the flawed dem primary system that gave more weight to Alaska than Ohio.

The dem primary system should be run like the general election, giving the same weight to states as the general election. That puts the best candidate forward for the Fall election, gives the candidate experience in running in that type of campaign, and lessens the chance of dems putting forth the red state candidate.

Actually Amricanunity, if you take the amount of flip-flops of Obama and divide it by the length of time he has been in national politics you willl find he averages 450% more flip-flops than McCain has over his whole career in public life.

Game, set, match right back atcha..

"-putting forth the second best candidate"

He got the first-best votes.

"the candidate that won none of the big blue states."

That's not the nominating barometer. And as long as Hillary isn't running, it won't matter anyway.

"Obama is the red state candidate. That's why this election is so close."

A 100+ EV lead is close? On what planet?

NOMORETAX

You should get yourself checked for a brain tumor

Unless you can read I think you need immediate medical attention.

McCain used to stand for something. No he doesn't stand for anything.

"-putting forth the second best candidate"

He got the first-best votes.

In a flawed Primary--which is the point.

"the candidate that won none of the big blue states."

That's not the nominating barometer. And as long as Hillary isn't running, it won't matter anyway.

It should be the nominating barometer. The primaries should be held like the general election with the states weighed the same, to get the strongest candidate. You are only thinking about this election. Future elections matter very much. If dems keep putting forth the second best--they can expect to lose. Fortunately the reps have put forth their weakest candidate in a century.

"Obama is the red state candidate. That's why this election is so close."

A 100+ EV lead is close? On what planet?

There is no 100 EV lead. The states with the blank in the middle are statistical ties. The strong and weak dem adds up to 243.

Here are the polls today.

Obama only won the nomination by cutting Florida and Michigan delegate totals in half. Sounds to me like the Democrats need a full roll call vote with Michigan AND Florida getting a full votes at the very outset of the convention if they want to restore credibility to their primary process. Otherwise the only thing Florida and Michigan voters get is the ability to have their votes counted AFTER it no longer matters... and what's the sense of voting if that's the case. Nearly 2 million Democrats were disenfranchised by Obama and Dean this year.

Oh, but I guess because Obama's black, affirmative action IS acceptable in order to secure him the nomination. Relatively speaking, this guy's going to make McGovern look like a HUGE winner before this is all over...

Yep... I remember the decision to pull an "affirmative action" over-ride of democracy, the American voter and the primary process well....

A proposal favored by Clinton that would have fully seated the Florida delegation fully in accordance with the January primary went down with 12 votes in support and 15 against.

Tina Flournoy, who led Clinton's efforts to seat both states' delegations with full voting power, said she was disappointed by the outcome but knew the Clinton position had "no chance" of passing the committee.

"I understand the rules. ... I can tell you one thing that has driven these rules was being a party of inclusion," Flournoy said. "I wish my colleagues will vote differently."

Alice Huffman, a Clinton supporter on the committee, explained that the compromise giving delegates half votes was the next best thing to full seating.

"We will leave here more united than we came," she said.

Some audience members heckled her in response. "Lipstick on a pig!" one shouted.

"We just blew the election!" a woman in the audience shouted. The crowd was divided between cheering Obama supporters and booing Clinton supporters.

"This isn't unity! Count all the votes!" another audience member yelled.

electoral votes 273 needed to win
The Rasmussen Reports Balance of Power Calculator of 8/4/08 shows Barack Obama leading in states with 210 Electoral College votes while John McCain leads in states with 165 votes. When leaners are included, Obama leads 273-227. On Tuesday, July 22, Ohio shifted from "Leans Democratic" to "Toss-Up".

To Onna:

I would not believe anything the "polls" reported, especially Rasmussen. They have agendas. We will just have to wait until November.