Democratic Party | Hillary Clinton | News

BigGayDeal.com

Clinton Volcano Rumbles to Life as DNC Convention Nears

Clinton

As the Democratic National Convention nears, the question is beginning to arise as to how Hillary Clinton will have her voice heard, and at a recent California fundraiser she suggested that she's considering putting her name into nomination.

Said Clinton: "It's as old as, you know, Greek drama. There is a catharsis. I mean everybody comes and they want to yell and scream and have their opportunity, and I think that's all to the good."

New York mag has a round-up of pundits with their thoughts on the issue...

Politico's Ben Smith reports that he received an email from the Clinton and Obama campaigns trying to dampen news of any conflict between them: "We are working together to make sure the fall campaign and the convention are a success. At the Democratic Convention, we will ensure that the voices of everyone who participated in this historic process are respected and our party will be fully unified heading into the November election."

Watch the clip, AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. My 2 cents = not even worth that

    Hillary should have the most prominent speaking arangment at the convention.

    Less prominent than Obama of course and probably Kenedy (most likely taped speech because of his health), but more prominent than anything or anyone else at the convention.

    Name for the nomination for show? Not cool

    On a side note, Obama has put foreword letting FL and MI vote in full now.

    Posted by: Jimmyboyo | Aug 7, 2008 1:19:37 PM


  2. Why should Kennedy's speech be more prominent than her own? When are people doing to stop elevating that man to heights he does not deserve. He's a respect public servant, but he isn't the foundation of the Democratic party, he never was.

    As for there being a roll call, having her name there is not unprecedented or even that big of a deal. The delegates will vote how they vote.

    Of course Obama wants full votes now, he's won the nomination.

    I'm not for Clinton grandstanding at the convention. She lost. But there's no reason why her name can't be on the ballot along with anyone else's. The delegates have for the most part pledged who they are voting for. It's a matter of process. To me pulling her name and forcing her delegates (who represent those of us who voted for her) to vote only for Obama is not only undemocratic but offensive.

    Posted by: Banne | Aug 7, 2008 1:30:50 PM


  3. Why should Kennedy's speech be more prominent than her own? When are people doing to stop elevating that man to heights he does not deserve. He's a respect public servant, but he isn't the foundation of the Democratic party, he never was.

    As for there being a roll call, having her name there is not unprecedented or even that big of a deal. The delegates will vote how they vote.

    Of course Obama wants full votes now, he's won the nomination.

    I'm not for Clinton grandstanding at the convention. She lost. But there's no reason why her name can't be on the ballot along with anyone else's. The delegates have for the most part pledged who they are voting for. It's a matter of process. To me pulling her name and forcing her delegates (who represent those of us who voted for her) to vote only for Obama is not only undemocratic but offensive.

    Posted by: Banne | Aug 7, 2008 1:31:24 PM


  4. CNN reports otherwise:

    "Since the delegate count is so close ... what if you are called up for nomination and what if you do win by a narrow margin?" a questioner asked her at last weekend's event.

    "That is not going to happen, not going to happen. Look, what we want to have happen is for Sen. Obama to be nominated by a unified convention of Democrats," she said.

    Posted by: Dan B | Aug 7, 2008 1:40:35 PM


  5. Edward Kennedy is the "father" of the Democratic Party that FDR, Sargent Shriver, Hubert Humphrey, and Lyndon Johnson built. FDR, Sarg, HHH & LBJ are dead--that leaves Teddy.

    Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Aug 7, 2008 1:41:28 PM


  6. ...and now the Democrats will implode on themselves. Always snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

    Would she have ever brought 200,000 people out to hear her speak in Europe? I don't think so. Barack has proven he has something she does not, nor ever did have; Statesmanship and professionalism.

    I hope to Hell she does not grandstand. That will only detract and chance of the Democrats widening the majority in both the House and Senate, and securing the Whitehouse. It's time to undo the damage to this country and to the world that these last 8 years of garbage have brought on. If she were a stateswoman, if she were more concerned about civic duty, Hillary would accept how things turned out in the primaries.

    I know it's in her and Bill Clinton. Support Barack, support democracy.

    Posted by: Rad | Aug 7, 2008 1:47:47 PM


  7. The time has come. The time has come. The time is now. Just go. I don’t care how. You can go by foot. You can go by cow. Hillary R. Clinton, will you please go now! You can go on skates. You can go on skis. You can go in an old blue shoe. Just go, go, GO!

    Posted by: FASTLAD | Aug 7, 2008 1:48:08 PM


  8. While “New York RAGazine” has seen fit to promote Dan Amira from writing such critical-to-Civilization-as-we-know-it pieces such as “Bob Saget Weighs In On Ashley Oslen & Lance Armstrong,” “The ‘Veronica Mars’ Encylcopedia,” and essays on Big Apple strip clubs, his piece on Sen. Clinton appears to be but another one of his slime-one-slime-them-all [Hillary, Barack, McCain, Mother Teresa...or was that Hisstopher Hitchens?] balls composted from cherry-picked quotes from those with their own agenda. In any case, any further fertilization of the fallow fields of Hillary Hatred are counterproductive. And about as relative as bell bottom pants. Sure, some people still have them, but why haul them out now?

    Just last Thursday in San Francisco: “Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton delivered a rousing call to thousands of union workers in San Francisco on Thursday to put Sen. Barack Obama in the White House come fall ... Clinton's address was met with cheers and a prolonged standing ovation from a crowd of 3,000 at the international convention of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees at Moscone Center. ... The powerhouse labor union of public employees, which has promised to mobilize 40,000 workers in the campaign, endorsed Obama after Clinton had left the race, and its members gave him an ecstatic reception when he delivered a speech to them by satellite while on the campaign trail. ... Clinton exhorted the union members to put their muscle and their money behind Obama. ‘...to make sure we have a Democratic president taking the oath of office on Jan. 20, 2009’. ... it is now ‘time for us to unite and stand together’. She delivered high praise for Obama, saying that throughout her often-contentious race against him, she had ‘seen his passion, his determination, his grace and his grit’. ‘There are a lot of folks still on the sidelines, trying to make up their minds’, Clinton said. But she said labor activists like the army of municipal workers must get behind him ‘if we're going to have a president that respects unions’."

    As for the idea of a joint ticket itself, the “San Francisco Chronicle” continues: “with less than 100 days to go before the general election, Clinton's appearance in San Francisco underscored her continued appeal to many grassroots Democrats who were her supporters, many of whom say they are clinging to the hope that she may get the nod as Obama's running mate.”

    Posted by: Leland Frances | Aug 7, 2008 2:01:31 PM


  9. Will you people stop accusing her of trying to undermind the convention. Nothing she has said indicates that. A floor vote is completely normal. And considering how many delegates are pledged to her, there is no reason for them not to be able to cast a vote for her. She is not trying to steal this, is not going to steal this. God, you people just won't be happy until she flies in on her broom and turns Obama into a toad and steals the election.

    Posted by: Lucas | Aug 7, 2008 2:04:05 PM


  10. Hubert Humphrey and Lyndon Johnson, later joined by Richard Nixon, were mass murderers and jointly responsible for the murders of over a million Vietnamese.

    Bush and Clinton followed in their footsteps by ordering the genocides in Iraq.

    Clinton and LBJ are the real legacy of the Democrats just as Nixon and the Bushes are the real legacy of the Republicans.

    Be smart. Vote against the Clinton Clone Obama and the Bush Clone McCain. Or just sit it out.

    Instead of giving money or energy to a pair of worthless frauds invest in the movement's for real social change like the antiwar movement and UnitedENDA. The antiwar movement will be demonstrating against the war parties in St. Paul and Denver. Join us.

    Posted by: Bill Perdue | Aug 7, 2008 2:18:04 PM


  11. GOOD FOR HILLARY..she knows that she is STILL the BEST choice to run this country and I pray her name is on the ballot..I can tell you right now if she were the nominee TODAY she would be 20% ahead of McCain and not the terrible numbers Obama is showing.

    Hillary 2008!!!!


    Posted by: daveynyc | Aug 7, 2008 2:28:24 PM


  12. All right, Bill, I get your message. And I do respect a lot of what you say about the two political parties.

    I guess I was being a little myopic...thinking about myself, Bill. OK--LBJ, HHH, Sarg Shriver & Ted Kennedy were good for Colored people like me, Bill...but maybe bad for Colored people in Southest Asia.

    Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Aug 7, 2008 2:29:58 PM


  13. Davey, you're such a delusional, vapid, circuitboy.

    Posted by: Jason | Aug 7, 2008 2:33:39 PM


  14. banne

    Kenedy has spearheaded and or openly supported almost every bit of legislation dealing with equal rights, voting rights, civil rights, gay rights, medicare, and social security

    He is even credited with saving an entire nation of people= The country of Bangladesh.

    The Pakistani armies were comiting genocide against the people of Bangladesh with USA supplied weapons. Kenedy as the sole voice of sanity and humanitarian compassion spoke out publicly and did everything he could to end US weapon support to Pakistan and to get foreign aid to the people of bangladesh. To this day Kenedy is still forbiden to travel in Pakistan while being praised in Bangladesh as their savior.

    Many times during the reagan years Kenedy was the lone voice in the wilderness promoting liberal causes.

    So give up all of your civil rights, gay rights, future medicare and social security aid up if you think Kenedy isn't anything big.

    Hell, I would rank kenedy's speech at the convention bigger than Obama's except Obama is the nominee so Kenedy has to take a back seat.

    Hillary should definetly be give the most prominent position after Obama of course and kenedy (if nothing else the dude might die soon and we need to show him some thanks and respect)

    Posted by: Jimmyboyo | Aug 7, 2008 2:36:12 PM


  15. PS

    Edwards should have nothing to do with being seen at all at the convention. He should be asked to not even show up.

    I liked Edwards pre Iowa (saw the writing on the wall), but even the shadow of suspicion about an adulturous affair and illegitimate child is too much drama.

    Posted by: Jimmyboyo | Aug 7, 2008 2:40:54 PM


  16. "Would she have ever brought 200,000 people out to hear her speak in Europe?"

    Um, why, yes, she would, actually.

    Posted by: JeffNYC | Aug 7, 2008 2:46:04 PM


  17. DAVEY,

    if you don't come into the real world soon, they're going to gently wisk you away to Bellevue...you'd better hope Senator Clinton hears about your plight, and tries to get you out.

    Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Aug 7, 2008 2:53:04 PM


  18. I agree with JeffNYC

    To my fellow libs, there is no need to dis Hillary. The primary is over.

    Hillary should have the most prominent position at the convention after Obama the nominee and Kenedy (actually his taped speech)out of respect for his health issues and past work for all of America.

    DaveyNYC, that ship has sailed. Sorry.

    Obama / Clinton 08

    Posted by: Jimmyboyo | Aug 7, 2008 2:56:42 PM


  19. Her delegates should absolutely be allowed to vote for her - meaning her name should certainly be put on the ballot for nomination at the convention.

    And she's right, she won't win. And she's also smart enough to know that her supporters, particularly the few chosen to be delegates in Denver, need to be made to feel as though their support counts for something - that the people who voted for her (in record numbers) have their sentiments validated.

    It boggles my mind that Obama supporters would prefer it any other way. Its not as though a close vote at the convention changes anything - everyone already knows how close the contest was - let the convention reflect the reality of the situation - and THEN move on.

    Besides, polls show the majority of HRC voters support Obama. Allowing HRC delegates to vote for HRC in Denver can only help continue bridging that divide.

    Posted by: AERES | Aug 7, 2008 3:00:10 PM


  20. I totally support Hillary putting her name on the ballot! If she could pull off the nomination I would seriously consider voting for her. What a departure for me! However, given your current choices she is the best candidate all the way around. Obama will bankrupt the country much the same way Carter did. With any hope, she will pull an upset. If she does not, there will NOT be unity in the party. Bill cannot even say Obama's name out loud!

    Posted by: RB | Aug 7, 2008 3:33:52 PM


  21. RB, you're such a stupid fuck. You'd vote for Hillary but consider Barack a socialist? WTF?
    And your president hasn't nearly bankrupted this nation sending us on fool's errands that you support? Idiot.

    Posted by: Nick | Aug 7, 2008 3:37:50 PM


  22. RB, I realize that, like many Republicans, you are immune to facts and reason. (I imagine that's why when you were blathering on about how Obama's tax plans would be a disaster last week, and I posted actual statistics comparing Obama's tax plans—favorably—to McCain's, you promptly disappeared from the thread.) You simply want to believe whatever it is you've been told by Karl Rove and Co.

    Nonetheless, I feel compelled to disabuse you of your silly notions about Carter and fiscal policy.

    CARTER
    Increase in debt: $.18 trillion
    As % of GDP: –3.2%

    REAGAN 1st term
    Increase in debt: $.65 trillion
    As % of GDP: +11.3%

    REAGAN 1st term
    Increase in debt: $1.04 trillion
    As % of GDP: +9.2%

    And, in fact, that's absolutely consistent with everything we've seen from Democrats and Republicans since then:

    BUSH 41
    Increase in debt: $1.4 trillion
    As % of GDP: +13.1%

    CLINTON 1st term
    Increase in debt: $1.12 trillion
    As % of GDP: –.6%

    CLINTON 2nd term
    Increase in debt: $.42 trillion
    As % of GDP: –8.2%

    BUSH 43 1st term
    Increase in debt: $1.15 trillion
    As % of GDP: +6.9%

    BUSH 43 2nd term (projected)
    Increase in debt: $.42 trillion
    As % of GDP: +3.9%

    Clearly, it's Republicans who have been driving the nation toward bankruptcy over the past 30 years.

    Posted by: 24play | Aug 7, 2008 4:26:19 PM


  23. 24Play and Nick are more democratic self-loathing gay idiots who are voting for Obama notwithstanding that the presumptive nominee includes ex-gays like Donnie McClurkin in campaign events, is against gay marriage, and wants to expand the Bushie Faith Initiatives Program. Makes me sick to watch the gay machine rally around the Obama homophobe!

    Posted by: AnotherDemocraticIdiot | Aug 7, 2008 4:42:12 PM


  24. Thanks, 24Play:

    any argument is stronger when you have facts to back it up.

    "....self-loathing gays who are voting for Obama"

    and the gays who love themselves are voting for McCain?...yeah, like Larry Craig.

    Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Aug 7, 2008 4:58:54 PM


  25. ANOTHERDEMOCRATICIDIOT,

    Um, I brought facts and figures in support of a reasonable discusion. You brought name calling.

    P.S. What's wrong with the other screen name you've been using over the past week or two when you post your hysterical anti-Democratic drivel? Is it no fun anymore using THATSRICH, after you've been called out for being a tragic TROLL? Having trouble getting people to play your stupid games, my needy, needy friend?

    P.P.S. Nothing screams "PATHETIC TROLL HERE!" more than using multiple screen names.

    Posted by: 24play | Aug 7, 2008 5:02:22 PM


  26. 1 2 3 »

Post a comment







Trending


« «Sally Kern: A Judeo-Christian Warrior with a Loaded Gun« «