Crotalus:
DrDeth is correct that Obama has won only if Clinton decides not to pursue the nomination at the convention. No delegates have voted, and the votes of the pledged delegates are the only votes now known with any degree of confidence. The way the pledged delegates stand, Clinton could win the nomination on the first ballot at the convention, if enough supers vote her way.
That’s true in the sense that a president-elect is not the president until Congress has counted the votes of the electors, who are free to vote for Charles Manson if they want to. Meanwhile, Obama has taken over the DNC, putting his person in charge and establishing its policy with respect to lobbies and PACs. He is being endorsed by the entire Democratic leadership, including Her Former Majesty.
As far as I can see from checking around last night and this morning, that aspect of the Obama-Clinton meeting is getting little or no mention. I came across that delightful bit of schadenfreude at DailyKos.
Oh – here’s a bit about it at Politico.com :
Obama’s traveling press got to Dulles after the Bristow rally and discovered the candidate wasn’t with them. An exchange from CBS News’ “The Early Show”:
REPORTER: “Is there any reason we didn’t go in the motorcade all the way? This is what we’re out here for and now we’re on this plane with no candidate.”
GIBBS: “It wasn’t an attempt to deceive in any way.”
Nosirree, no attempt to deceive at all, no way.
I tell ya, ETF , I think it’s gonna take some time for some of these Democrats to realize that they finally have a candidate who has both balls and brains. They really don’t know how fortunate they are.
Liberal:
I tell ya, ETF , I think it’s gonna take some time for some of these Democrats to realize that they finally have a candidate who has both balls and brains . They really don’t know how fortunate they are.
Careful, or the Hillaryites will call you sexist!
The meeting last night is mentioned on the NY Times website . It was probably too late in the day to include in the print media.
Here’s another article about the meeting on the NY Times website.
Here’s a third one about how they ditched the reporters.
EddyTeddyFreddy:
Have you been following these election threads? If not, I can see why you’re taken aback. DrDeth has been hammering away on the Hillary has the popular vote – Hillary is still in it – the supers must look at the popular vote and turn to Hillary – themes for a long time, long after it became clear that these were all pipe dreams.
Crotalus , the idea that the superdelegates are going to overturn the primary results at the convention is, well – how can I put this? Ah. “Ludicrous” would fit nicely. Unless a career-ending something erupts between now and then, ain’t gonna happen.
I wish I had your confidence. So much about democracy depends upon the acquiescence of the defeated, and I’m not sure we have that yet.
That link went to an advertisement. Is this the link you meant to post?
ETA: Here’s the story:
The evening began in routine fashion, with Mr. Obama holding a large rally in northern Virginia. Then, he was scheduled to travel by motorcade to Dulles International Airport and fly to Chicago. The motorcade arrived, but Mr. Obama did not, stirring alarm among reporters who had been aboard the campaign plane for 45 minutes as it sat on the tarmac.
Shortly before takeoff, one part of the secret was divulged. Robert Gibbs, the campaign’s communications director, said Mr. Obama would not be flying to Chicago as previously scheduled. He gave no reason for this mysterious pronouncement and there was little time for questions, considering that the engines had started to whir.
Sunlen Miller, who covers the Obama campaign for ABC News, filed an urgent dispatch via Blackberry to report that the senator had abruptly changed plans and had given the slip to those who were traveling with him all day. “I sent it as the wheels were going up,” Ms. Miller said of her message, recounting the agitation and confusion among her fellow travelers as the 757 lifted off.
It wasn’t until after the plane landed in Chicago — sans the presidential candidate — that Mr. Gibbs confirmed a meeting had taken place between the rivals. Details? None given.
That’s the one. It only goes to an ad sometimes, it’s the same link. If it goes to an ad, wait 30 secs and it continues to the article.
Seems, in print anyway, there are plenty saying precisely that.
Google: Clinton delusional
So she violated the no-electronic-devices rule? Wonder if the FAA will slap her wrist about that.
Shayna
June 6, 2008, 4:15pm
113
EddyTeddyFreddy:
Suse:
I wasn’t able to do the quote-within-a-quote, but what is so objectionable about what DrDeth wrote? (I get that he posted the same message on another thread. I was willing to give it a pass because it’s an important message.)
But beyond that, he didn’t say anything offensive about Obama, merely that a great many voters supported Clinton and those voters will not be enticed to vote Obama by Obama supporters insulting them and their candidate. It seems like simple common sense to me.
Have you been following these election threads? If not, I can see why you’re taken aback. DrDeth has been hammering away on the Hillary has the popular vote – Hillary is still in it – the supers must look at the popular vote and turn to Hillary – themes for a long time, long after it became clear that these were all pipe dreams.
Not to mention the post immediately above the one I quoted, which was this:
Originally posted by DrDeth
Dude- he has not won. Obama has 1766 pledged delegatesRealClearPolitics - 2008 Democratic Delegates will vote for him. WILL. Not have. The Convention is in August and no one has won until the Convention meets and 2118 delegates vote for someone.
Obama is the presumptive nominee.
That’s not my definition of gracious. I’d describe that more as stubborn.
And if this:
is true? I’ve been living in an alternate universe for the past 6 months.
It’s at noon, by the way. One talking head was asked what Hillary had to say to convince people that she really does support Obama, and the reporter answered: “She has to talk about Obama, and not about herself.” Amen.
Shayna:
Not to mention the post immediately above the one I quoted, which was this: That’s not my definition of gracious. I’d describe that more as stubborn.
And if this: is true? I’ve been living in an alternate universe for the past 6 months.
No you haven’t been living in an alternate world–I agree–it shocked me too. I would have pegged DrDeth as a Clinton supporter based on his/her posts.
So if DrDeth isn’t a Clinton support and clearly isn’t a Obama support who do they support? I am left to wonder if DrDeth is a Republican who wanted Clinton to win and thus was stirring things up. Or they are just a contrarian, which would be good to know, because for me then in the future I can avoid. You can’t argue with a contrarian–they will always take the opposite side, just to be contrary.
Liberal:
It’s at noon, by the way. One talking head was asked what Hillary had to say to convince people that she really does support Obama, and the reporter answered: “She has to talk about Obama, and not about herself.” Amen.
Is that EDT? I’d be annoyed and humorless if I missed it.
Yes, I think so. They’re waiting for some sort of annual run to finish that morning.
[McAuliffe] Hmm, sounds like a pretty busy day. We better postpone until next weekend.[/McAuliffe]
touche’