Are the Democratic candidates going to immolate themselves, and the party, in their desire of being numero uno or will they curb their enthusiasm for the top slot on the November ballot and place the future of the country above their own internal drives to be the top dog?
A message to Senator Clinton: Bill is right this time. The November ballot must include Senator Obama.
A message to Senator Obama: Bill is right this time. The November ballot must include Senator Clinton.
It's time for both of you to be a Dr. Phil hero. Forget the nasty campaigning; it's really up to the two of you to take leadership positions. Stick to issues, tell your staffs to clean up their act and control all their urges to go negative against the other candidate.
Michigan and Florida? The rest of the party should get over their hurt feelings and egos. Go forward to the convention, and work out a fair way to seat the delegates from these two important states. In he long run, drop all the silly battles for position in the primary schedule and drop the caucus process entirely. Aren't we called the Democratic Party? Why should a few percent of activists Democrats in any state decide for the entire state? I suggest we follow Oregon's example and go for a mail primary either nationally or regionally.
This election is too important for politics as usual. Iraq, the war on terror, the ballooning national debt, the future of social security, immigration, globalization, education, healthcare, the environment, tax reform, energy costs (I'm sure I have missed some important issues): do these sound familiar? We are at a fork in the road and we must choose the right direction.
If I sound frustrated it's because I am. It's time to keep our eyes on the prize and get our all too natural desire to win under tight control. Didn't some famous American historical figure say something profound about hanging together or hanging separately?
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 11
Obama is the one who is right. What business does the second place person have offering to switch places. Maybe she could offer to take second, where she currently stands.
A few percent of activist Democrats in any state should not decide for the entire state, but the time for that light bulb to go off was before the contest started. Changing the rules now reveals that the real problem is that the "right" candidate is not winning. Does anyone believe this conversation would be taking place if Clinton were in the lead?
Obama is leading and there is little or no chance Clinton can overtake him without superdelegates, "do-overs" or some other rule change designed to benefit her. If she ends up as the nominee despite his lead in the popular vote and pledged delegates, the Democrats may lose more than just this presidential election. They may well lose an entire generation.
DB 10