Friday, August 15, 2008
Democratic convention
HIllary's tanks are poised and ready, waiting on the outskirts of Denver. The invasion is ready. Oh, wait, I might have my stories mixed up. Might. Might not.
Apparently Obama has agreed that Hillary's name be placed in nomination and that she be included in the roll call vote. One hopes Obama has a plan, a/k/a/ knows what he's doing. He did manage his campaign brilliantly well after all. But what would prevent her supporters from demanding that the delegates (super and otherwise) support Hillary and / or that Obama choose her for vice-president? I'm sure there are conventions (heh) about delegates' commitment to their states' results but I doubt if they're legally enforceable.
I have to say I just keep shaking my head and saying "what was he thinking?". I am concerned about this acquiescence to the Clintons. Yes, it is respectful and even reasonable that the convention reflect what actually occurred so that the historical record show clearly that a woman received significant numbers of primary votes. That Hillary won a sizable number of votes. But one must keep in mind that this is the Clintons we're talking about, people not exactly known for their calm adherence to logic or agreements. Witness Bill's diatribes during the campaign (arguably responsible for her loss) and Hillary's handling of any number of things including her campaign (whose mismanagement disappointed many who were initially supportive of her candidacy, sufficiently that they became disillusioned). Is further proof needed as to why Hillary should not be Obama's (or anyone's) veep? He would have to spend at least half his time holding her off, not governing.
As for tanks, does anyone remember the 1968 convention? The lesson from that dreadful time 40 years ago is that it really is possible for chaos to reign absolutely and utterly supreme. I suspect an invasion is underway but maybe I'm wrong. my fingers are crossed and I promise to try to trust fairness and optimism.
P.S. Read this amusing take from Slate's Henneberger. Similar skepticism but much funnier than me.
Apparently Obama has agreed that Hillary's name be placed in nomination and that she be included in the roll call vote. One hopes Obama has a plan, a/k/a/ knows what he's doing. He did manage his campaign brilliantly well after all. But what would prevent her supporters from demanding that the delegates (super and otherwise) support Hillary and / or that Obama choose her for vice-president? I'm sure there are conventions (heh) about delegates' commitment to their states' results but I doubt if they're legally enforceable.
I have to say I just keep shaking my head and saying "what was he thinking?". I am concerned about this acquiescence to the Clintons. Yes, it is respectful and even reasonable that the convention reflect what actually occurred so that the historical record show clearly that a woman received significant numbers of primary votes. That Hillary won a sizable number of votes. But one must keep in mind that this is the Clintons we're talking about, people not exactly known for their calm adherence to logic or agreements. Witness Bill's diatribes during the campaign (arguably responsible for her loss) and Hillary's handling of any number of things including her campaign (whose mismanagement disappointed many who were initially supportive of her candidacy, sufficiently that they became disillusioned). Is further proof needed as to why Hillary should not be Obama's (or anyone's) veep? He would have to spend at least half his time holding her off, not governing.
As for tanks, does anyone remember the 1968 convention? The lesson from that dreadful time 40 years ago is that it really is possible for chaos to reign absolutely and utterly supreme. I suspect an invasion is underway but maybe I'm wrong. my fingers are crossed and I promise to try to trust fairness and optimism.
P.S. Read this amusing take from Slate's Henneberger. Similar skepticism but much funnier than me.
Labels: 2008 election, reflections, tv
Permalink | 
| posted by jau at 2:39 AM
jau — at 12:27 AM, August 17, 2008:
ligneus — at 7:06 PM, August 17, 2008:
| posted by jau at 2:39 AM
3 more:
jau — at 12:27 AM, August 17, 2008:
It'll be hard to be more fun than these Olympics - they've been really awesome, I've thought. You're right, though, that it'll be wild and probably equal to a gladiator set-to. The fact that some aspects of life in the U.S. of A. for the next four years are at stake does, however, spoil the fun a teeny bit.
< home >
ligneus — at 7:06 PM, August 17, 2008:
The fact that some aspects of life in the U.S. of A. for the next four years are at stake does, however, spoil the fun a teeny bit.
Ah, don't worry, there is no way a far left, arrogant know nothing neophyte can pull this one off. I've seen examples of all hat and no cattle before but this is ridiculous, though he does have a cow come to think of it. Ooops!
Ah, don't worry, there is no way a far left, arrogant know nothing neophyte can pull this one off. I've seen examples of all hat and no cattle before but this is ridiculous, though he does have a cow come to think of it. Ooops!
< home >
< home >