Haha....good pos though. The Hillary supporters seem to have trouble remmebering that it was Hillary and her own campaign advisers like McAuliffe and Wolfson who supported stripping Michigan and Florida of their delegates in the first place.

No problem, brother, you make this easy! Since that's a total mischaracterization, it'll be easy to refute that line of thinking. Especially after Michigan and Florida get seated on June 1st, further cementing his nomination and eliminating that tired old line forever!

Except Barack Obama did not disenfranchise them, so your idiotic statement makes no sense. He has nothing to apologize for. He didn't vote to strip them of their delegates, and he's not the one who blocked a revote by refusing to allow those who had voted in the Republican primaries during the original vote to vote again in a possible revote.

will he be there?

All right....  I'm going to all caps the next line because I am way beyond sick of the word applied where it does not belong...

WE WERE NOT DISENFRANCHISED....!!!

We voted... our votes were counted... our votes matter... we were not disenfranchised!  Talk to voters in Indiana... they will define the word to you.

I suppose it was okay when Clinton skipped events in dozens of states, wrote off some entirely- hell, the polls came out and she ditched her event in Roanoke, Virginia like we had the plague. And this is in mountainous SW Virginia; I thought that's where her base was?

How many more times you want to see the writing on the wall? When (will it be) too late?

Me too.

Wanting your vote to be counted isn't "hostile."

We're not really this stupid, right?  Obama, like Clinton, is very aware of expectations.  He was going to lose WV big; if he campaigned there nonstop, and still lost by 30+, that would have looked terrible.  If he didn't campaign there at all, he would have been accused of the sorts of things Clinton supporters accuse him of anyway.

Clinton is currently making a point of the fact that Obama is barely campaigning in Kentucky, while she's barely campaigning in Oregon.  The same dynamic occurred in NC and IN, remember?  They both know that he cannot win KY and she cannot win OR.  If she could, she'd be there now, because it assuredly would be better for her to win OR by 1% and KY by 20% than to win KY by 30% and lose OR.  

They're eaching trying to maximize their victories.  It has nothing to do with whose votes count, or disdaining voters.  And if you really believe I'm wrong, I trust you were suitably disgusted by the many states Clinton ignored in February.

I'm afraid you got him.  While he could have been trying to increase his share of the 79 delegates in KY + WV by, say, 10, he spent the week:

• Netting an average of 6 or so superdelegate endorsements per day
  
• Campaigning in Oregon, South Dakota, and Montana
  
• Bigfooting the Clinton WV celebration with the endorsement of John Edwards
  
• Making nice with MI voters (see prev point)
  
• Engaging in highly publicized sparring with Bush and McCain
  
• Increasing his lead to 16% in the latest Gallup (the biggest gap yet)
  
• Successfully courting big Clinton donors for the general election
  
• Extending feelers to former Clinton campaign staffers (link)
  
• Holding a rally for 65-75 thousand close friends on a beautiful day in Portland

Yep, it sucks to be Sen. Obama and be a loser in KY and WV.  

Gratuitous prediction: Obama will again bigfoot Sen Clinton on Wednesday, when he travels to Florida to make nice, and incidentally rolls out another huge endorsement.  (I'm betting on Pelosi and the "Pelosi Club", but it could be Pres. Carter. Note that Pres. Carter is in the Pelosi gang, so my money's on both)

How did that 11 state strategy work out for you guys?

They've already shown that when they said so on blocking Michigan from a revote.  

It seems his followers just don't want to face reality.

Oh, snap! Beaten by the "I know you are but what am I" comeback! How could I have fallen into that trap?

Yeah, my demagogometer broke. Readings were off the charts!

No, Hillary supporters get a free pass on anything they say. Whatever Obama supporters say, though, is like it came out of Barack's own mouth.

Oh, Alegre.  Will you ever admit Clinton's blatant lies and hypocrisies about Michigan?

Will you have a life when this primary is over?  What will you hate then?  Kittens?  Puppies?  Kittens and puppies living together?  

How many do you have? ;->

is that Anna Shane, Susan Hu or SusanUnPc.

Seriously, pick one and stick with it.

Agreed.  My point is the diarist likely doesn't care about hurting the Democratic cause in November.

Seems pretty clear.  Her "popular vote" metric--as meaningless as that is in a process that mixes caucuses with primaries--includes Florida and Michigan, with zero votes going to Obama in Michigan (despite around 45% of the state voting 'Uncommitted' rather than voting for Clinton).  It does not, however, include Iowa, Nevada, Maine, or Washington.  That's the only way she can claim to be ahead.

Senator Clinton claims to be in the lead by using a popular vote count that does not include the caucus states of Iowa, Washington, Maine, and Nevada.  Those four states never certified the vote totals each individual candidate got.  They did announce how many people voted, and the percentages each candidate got, so we can figure out, pretty correctly, how many people voted for each candidate.

But because there were no "certified votes" Senator Clinton is omitting FOUR STATES from her calculations.

No. actually, the definition of pathetic and shameless in terms of this diary would be using the wildfires as any sort of a analogy...

is what gets troll ratings.

I just want to apologize to you, since you thought I was personally calling you stupid.  I wasn't.   I thought you'd get it was a retake of an old campaigne theme.

so I'll drop the stupid for you, but it's still the voters!

There was a 42% turnout in Florida.  Compare to Iowa's meager 16%; after non-stop media attention and on-the-ground campaigning -- only 16%!!  A lot bigger percentage turned out in Florida, one of whom is my own mother, and those 1.7 million votes must not be disregared.

Yeah, Clinton is blocking the votes, because she wants every person who came out to vote to have their votes counted. The people came out to vote, so let their votes be counted. Obama should not have TAKEN HIS name off the ballot.

no, he blocked both, she agreed and he said no. That's why he's now being held accountable. Had he closed the deal earlier this might not have hurt him, but since it's so close and it's still up in the air, it hurts him.