Nuclear Options

There has been some interesting discussion about the possibility of Senator Clinton resorting to a "nuclear option" in the democratic primary contest. The following paragraphs are taken from a TIME article on three possible endings to the contest between Senator Clinton and senator Obama. I think the information might be of interest to those in favor of democratic victories in November:

"……They also hope Clinton will finish close enough to Obama to bring into calculation the still disqualified votes of Florida and Michigan – two states that moved up their primary dates in violation of party rules and subsequently lost their delegates as a result. Should it reach a point at which the fate of those delegates would determine the outcome, that would pave the way for the scenario Democrats fear most:

"3. A Fight All the Way to Denver
Resolving the unfinished business of how and whether to seat the Michigan and Florida delegates could make the recent sniping between Obama and Clinton seem like back-fence chitchat. Florida’s situation should be the easier of the two, because both candidates were on the ballot there and turnout was high. Michigan is another story, because Obama’s name didn’t appear on the ballot. Clinton’s team is saying she won’t agree to any resolution in either state that would dilute her delegate totals, a position that could lead to a summerlong brawl if her team sticks to it to the end.

"That would mean that for the first time since 1972, the party would open its national convention without a nominee designate. Right now the fate of the Florida and Michigan delegations rests with the party’s rules and bylaws committee, a group of fewer than 100 party regulars who are trying to work out a resolution. But if they don’t find it before June 29, the matter moves to the credentials committee, which is nearly twice as big and even more political – and over which Howard Dean will hold relatively little power. Imagine that: after a year of record-shattering turnout, the party’s nominee could be chosen in a smoke-filled room – in July. If it comes to that, at least one person will be smiling: John McCain."
--Karen Tumulty; Tell Me How This Ends?; TIME; May 5, 2008; page 28

Hillary's call for loyalty is blatantly unrewarding.

And somehow I doubt that Congressional and Senate democrats appreciated her holding a gun to their heads in public.

Maybe you might want to take that comment back.

shows me she is fully intending to pull the trigger on the nuclear option.

IF she does that, she will become an evil which I, for one, could never endure and would choose my lesser of two evils accordingly.

in numbers that preclude FL or MI even mattering.. Add their totals back into the mix, and just see to it that he has enough delegates to trump her ill-gotten, cheater numbers from Fl & MI..and then tell her to go pound sand.....perhaps in Guam :rofl:

she can go back to giving shark tours in Puerto Rico...wink wink ;-P

would nto want to run into her :rofl:

Puerto Rico is a quick tube ride across the straights from South Florida too...eek

Is Clinton talking about taking ALL the delegations from the state of Michigan?

If so, I would have to say she is absolutely "nuts" if her intent is to win this for herself. This would be taking the win from Obama. It's this kind of tactics that you hear about why people won't vote for her.

And I don't want to hear from Hill supporters saying they won't vote for Obama either. There is a big difference in Obama winning this race and Clinton taking this race like that. If Clinton won this race without taking this from Obama that way then people would most likely back the nominated candidate. But not in this way.

So this means, and she must know this, that if she does this, she will probably lose to McSame. Now if she knows this, then she will be doing this for McSame, and it would be done to take this away from Obama only for the purpose of giving it to McSame.

It's sad, isn't it.

If she doew I suspect she'd be physically thrown out of the convention hall. Preferably from a rooftop exit.

She already has nearly all of them.

She inserted surrogates into the process as "uncommitted" delegates.

Clinton would rather play for 2012 than allow us to win in 2008 with somebody other than her.

Thank you for this essay

From what's given here, Florida could be inserted more-or-less "as is" without too much of a problem but from what I understand from this, Clinton's insistence that she won't accept "any resolution in either state that would dilute her delegate totals" is simply insane.

As I'm understanding this (and please, someone correct me if I'm wrong) that means she's ruling out a re-vote in Michigan (which would at least be fair) and insisting that she take all the delegates that would have been awarded from an uncontested election which both parties agreed wouldn't count.

That means that far from Obama disenfranchising Michigan voters, Hillary is directly doing so by ruling out the only fair solution and effectively forcing the DNC to shut out MI's delegates.

And we should, if we allow this crazy person to steal the nomination of the party.

The only good thing that would come of it is we would never have to have a Clinton as a factor in the party again.

She's nuts, and if anyone thinks she can bogart the nomination in spite of losing, they're as crazy as she is.

"The full make-up of the Credentials Committee will not be determined until all the primaries are completed, but the pattern of Clinton and Obama victories so far clearly suggests that Obama delegates on that committee will outnumber Clinton delegates. Obama will not, however, have a majority, according to most estimates, and the balance of power will be held by delegates appointed by DNC chair Howard Dean.

For the scenario to work, then, Dean would have to be convinced of Clinton's superior viability in the general election, and that she has a strong chance of defeating McCain next November"

Now Obama campaign has teamed up with the DNC in a joint findraising effort. I don't really think Dean will allow him to be messed about.