Howard Dean is what you get when you cross a democrat with Karl Rove.

Oil and water.

No matter the effort, Dean will not be able to make Hillary palatable to voters- and he is a part of the party Obama has rightly rejected.
Sigmund, Carl and Alfred | Homepage | 02.08.08 - 1:05 pm | #

LMAO, well said again.
spree | Homepage | 02.08.08 - 1:16 pm | #

Howard Dean, huh? Well, I figure I'll lose about 2 seconds of sleep tonight, between flossing and brushing. Somebody euthanize this guy already.
Lily | Homepage | 02.08.08 - 1:46 pm | #

I've said before that I expect two things out of the Dems this year:

1) A candidate that people will mouth the words but not actually vote for

and

2) A civil war that will lead to a third party.

Clinton versus Obama means somebody is going to lose. Whoever loses will take millions of voters with them on the way out the door, whether it's the youth vote and African-Americans or the white female vote...the losers will bolt the party in droves.

2008 will be a disaster for the Dems. The damage is already done. Throw the super-delegate problem into the mix and boom...millions will be "disenfranchised" overnight. They'll stay home in record numbers and the GOP will reap massive benefits.

In other words, John McCain *will* be the next President, and it's time we made our peace with the man rather than fighting him.
Lightwave | 02.08.08 - 2:53 pm | #

Why not reduce the number of delegates required to win the nomination. Instead of needing 2,025, reduce the number needed by subtracting FL and MI delegates (366).. This would take FL and MI completely out of the mix..
Dave | 02.09.08 - 1:29 pm | #

Good idea, but they rarely do the obvious so I wouldn't hold your breath for them to use such a simple solution.
spree | Homepage | 02.09.08 - 1:42 pm | #

This whole super-delegate process is completely
UNdemocratic! Why not mandate that the super-delegates are only to be implemented in the event that there is NO clear leader in the primary process. If the voters have spoken with their votes, even through a small margin,
there is no reason to bring in the super-delegate forces. It would be an outrage if the process of brokering in a back room came into play. WE the people are the deciders. NO candidate should be able to have politicians in their back pocket determining the outcome!
becky Whitaker | 02.10.08 - 2:03 pm | #

The super delegates are because the candidates if the race is close enough still need 2025 delegates to win the nomination and without the super delegates, in a race very close, neither candidate can get that amount unless the other steps down.

With that said....... you are right, the supers shouldn't BE able to thwrt the will of the party supporters.

More on this here where Hillary is reported to be plotting to ask Pelosi and Reid to pressure Obama to step down:

http://wwwwakeupamericans-spree....i-and- reid.html
spree | Homepage | 02.10.08 - 2:14 pm | #