Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Superdelegate suggests Clinton camp tried to 'buy' her vote
rawstory.com — “They asked me what it would take to get my vote and I said, I don ’t think I heard you right," Dr. Council told RAW STORY Tuesday. "I know I didn’t hear you imply that my vote was for sale. Oh no, [they said], that wasn’t what I intended to say at all...then what the hell do you mean?”
johnd24- 1216 diggs
- digg it
- hurleyNY, on 05/07/2008, -15/+0That's the kind of pressure these superdel's are under...it's a wait and see campaign for everyone except the dueling candidates!
- Charlotte_Web, on 05/07/2008, -1/+10"They asked me what it would take to get my vote..."
Huh?
Politicians ask each other that question all the time. Don't you people watch The West Wing?
"Senator, we really need to pass bill XYZ... what would it take to get your vote?"
"Well, I want your support on issue such-and-such."
"You got it." - didiman, on 05/07/2008, -3/+6im no fan of clinton, but rawstory is always buried
- hyunseob90, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1Hilary reminds me of an American politician.
- Charlotte_Web, on 05/07/2008, -1/+10"They asked me what it would take to get my vote..."
- aussiejan, on 05/07/2008, -6/+70I had just assumed Hillary was buying their votes.
- RealmDown, on 05/07/2008, -2/+17I'm more concerned about the ones who sold them.
- MidgardMurda, on 05/07/2008, -2/+6Pfft, My vote is ***** priceless...Obama 08.
- bruenig, on 05/07/2008, -8/+2Have fun with your over 20 million uninsured and at least 4 more years in Iraq.
- bruenig, on 05/08/2008, -1/+2Classy, no refutations. Just digg downs.
- MidgardMurda, on 05/08/2008, -1/+1Why would someone argue with an obvious moron? Pretty pointless if you ask me.
- bruenig, on 05/07/2008, -8/+2Have fun with your over 20 million uninsured and at least 4 more years in Iraq.
- MidgardMurda, on 05/07/2008, -2/+6Pfft, My vote is ***** priceless...Obama 08.
- LukasSmith, on 05/07/2008, -14/+7This story is bull. Anyone who believes this should be mentally examined.
- Solis, on 05/07/2008, -1/+2And how do you know it's bull? You have some magical source you'd like to share?
- DooM, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1This is true - and its not uncommon. My Senator (Claire McCaskil-D Missouri) was on the radio a few months ago before Super Tuesday talking about how Missouri Super Delegates in 2004 should have held out to get some promises from Kerry about spending in our state. This is nothing new - quid pro quo.
- daizaru, on 05/07/2008, -3/+13I don't know why Lukas is getting dugg down, "what would it take" is extremely vague and seems to me to be quite literal... "what kind of information is lacking that leaves you still undecided on who you're backing?". It's not a ludicrous question at all and it's not a bribe. This article is BS sensationalism, I'm all for Hilary bashing but let's digg some articles that are remotely logical.
- jaznova, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4I'm with you. When the superdelegate said "Then what the hell do you mean?", what was the Clinton camp's response? I mean, that detail would have been the whole ***** point of this article.
- Spuy767, on 05/07/2008, -3/+3Let's try to imagine for a minute that there was no Obama for a minute? Who would rawstory.com be pounding then? They'd likely be praising hillary as she would probably be the nominee by now, so who would they fling their editorial feces at? I take almost nothing that rawstory says seriously because most of it is little more than ridiculously pro-obama blogspam. I like obama, but to think that any story coming from these guys is unbiased is positively ridiculous.
- RealmDown, on 05/07/2008, -2/+17I'm more concerned about the ones who sold them.
- lhbaker, on 05/07/2008, -3/+5Dr. Council, prepare to be pilloried by Hillary.
- Deodrus, on 05/07/2008, -19/+37I just did my math on the Delegate Calculator on CNN.
http://fapomatic.com/show.php?loc=0818&f=nc_result ...
What I found is that even if Clinton wins all the remaining contests by 60% to 40%, Barack Obama will almost touch 2025 delegates (the magic number), only being short of it by 2 delegates !!
Meaning if 2 supers endorse him from now on and she wins with 60% in every state... HE STILL WINS !!
I think it's time to give up for HRC.
Do the math yourself:
http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/interactive/allpolitics/080 ...
(direct link to the delegate counter so you can zoom in)
[I'm copy-pasting this comment because I can't be bothered to rethink new ways of saying it]- aigulf, on 05/07/2008, -1/+6You forgot to mention the one last thing you did for him to reach 2023. You split the delegates 51/49. Giving him 2 *more* than her. Not 2. That's a big difference. Without the unpledged super-delegates (keep in mind that the pledged supers are already in the totals) a 50/50 split in the remaining primaries gives Barack 1944. And a 20 point win *for Hillary* in each remaining state gives Barack a 1923-1811 lead without those supers.
It's virtually impossible for either candidate to win it on the remaining primaries. The super-delegates will have to pick one. We can only hope they pick the candidate with more of the pledged delegates, or popular vote, or states won... - blackinthmiddle, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4The math has suggested for a long while now that she should drop out. Why she hasn't done so yet - one can only guess. This story is one of the thoughts I always had. She would somehow buy out even pledged superdelegates.
- greenrider04, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1I don't know if you can really go by that counter right now. CNN hasn't removed IN and NC from the calculator but updated the total delegates from last night so there are erroneous delegates in the calculation.
- bonhoeffer, on 05/07/2008, -5/+0Did the calculator include Florida and Michigan, which Clinton, whose supporters control the rules committee, intends to include?
- temsi, on 05/07/2008, -0/+31. She agreed to the rules, as did the states, which then promptly disregarded the rules, knowing full well their delegates would not be seated.
2. In Michigan, all the other candidates withdrew their names from the ballot, except HRC.
Florida can be seated as is as far as I'm concerned, but it won't change anything.
But the only way for Michigan to be seated is if the election is either re-done or Obama gets the "uncommitted" votes and their delegates.
Anything short should be considered rigging the election to benefit HRC.
- temsi, on 05/07/2008, -0/+31. She agreed to the rules, as did the states, which then promptly disregarded the rules, knowing full well their delegates would not be seated.
- SouthsideIrish, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2So, what you are saying is Obama could with the Convention if it was held today? No you aren't. So, the fat lady is tuning up, but she hasn't started singing yet. Get back to me after HRC goes nuclear.
- temsi, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2If she does, that's the end of the Democratic Party, and her political career.
What's worse, Grampy McSame would become President and could continue Shrub's numbskull policies and destroy what's left of the economy, our good will in the rest of the world, and rip apart anything resembling a UNITED States of America.
- temsi, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2If she does, that's the end of the Democratic Party, and her political career.
- SEGA4life, on 05/07/2008, -2/+5This guy is SPAMMING every single Political thread with the same reply, digging it will just make him continue.
- jd72277, on 05/07/2008, -2/+1Thanks for the advice. I will now do the math.
Love, Hillary - saikyan, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Hahahaha... did you now? On fapomatic.com and i.a.cnn.net? I heard fapomatic has great deligate counters...
- aigulf, on 05/07/2008, -1/+6You forgot to mention the one last thing you did for him to reach 2023. You split the delegates 51/49. Giving him 2 *more* than her. Not 2. That's a big difference. Without the unpledged super-delegates (keep in mind that the pledged supers are already in the totals) a 50/50 split in the remaining primaries gives Barack 1944. And a 20 point win *for Hillary* in each remaining state gives Barack a 1923-1811 lead without those supers.
- pb28, on 05/07/2008, -7/+4If you’re tired of waiting around for those super delegates to make a decision already, go to
http://www.lobbydelegates.com and push them support Obama
It takes a moment, but what's a few minutes now worth to get Obama in office?!
Sending a note to current Obama supporters lets them know it's appreciated, sending a note to current
Clinton supporters can hopefully sway them to change their vote to Obama, and sending a note to the
Uncommitted folks will hopefully sway them to vote for Obama. It's that easy...
- glaz, on 05/07/2008, -21/+4ENOUGH OF THE ***** CLINTON STORIES FOR THE LOVE OF GOD.
- blackinthmiddle, on 05/07/2008, -2/+9You know, you *could* just bury the story and move on. Instead, you read the story, then even take time to post. Yeah...that makes plenty of sense!
- thcobbs, on 05/07/2008, -3/+1bury 75% of the stories that come up? That's not worth my time.
- sqwirl, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3Translation: Using Digg the way it was intended to be used? That's not worth my time.
- thcobbs, on 05/07/2008, -3/+1bury 75% of the stories that come up? That's not worth my time.
- BlacklabelSAR, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Yeah let's stop covering the election because glaz is tired of it. It's all about glaz, don'tcha know.
- blackinthmiddle, on 05/07/2008, -2/+9You know, you *could* just bury the story and move on. Instead, you read the story, then even take time to post. Yeah...that makes plenty of sense!
- aladrin, on 05/07/2008, -7/+79"What would it take to get your vote?" is not an attempt to bribe with money. It's an attempt to find out what portion of her platform is disagreeable to that delegate. Any politician that doesn't understand that is doing a really ***** job.
Don't get me wrong, I don't want Clinton to be president any more than any other Digger, but let's have a little sense about things.- blackinthmiddle, on 05/07/2008, -3/+15Agreed. I thought it was reaching a bit. Unless there's more to the story, it's a stretch to say they were trying to buy votes.
- NJank, on 05/07/2008, -3/+9Agreed. Buried as inaccurate for trying to pander to the anti-clintons. (i may be naive, but not THAT naive...)
- pjrbx75, on 05/07/2008, -2/+3yeah the assumption that she was trying to buy council's vote seems ridiculous.. plus it's entirely marginal of the point of the article.
- neognostic, on 05/07/2008, -3/+6I have to disagree, this is a subtle dodge play. It gives them an out if the delegate does question the intent. I'm sure if the delegate said "Donate $50,000.00 into my campaign coffers" there would not have been any hesitation by her campaign to do so.
- akatsuki, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1I am pro-Obama, but supporting local politicians is the norm, so this is not out of line, albeit a bit crass.
- akatherder, on 05/07/2008, -2/+5I'm really reaching but I think the wording of the question "What would it take..." reminds people of a car salesman asking "What would it take (to put you in this car and drive it home today)". In that case, money and perks are the only thing in question.
That's about the only way I could conceive some nutjob thinking this is about money.- thcobbs, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3In the democratic party right now.... money is a lot less valuable than political support. The Super delegates can use this as a political chip(read endorsement in their own campaign, pushing a pet project, etc.) with a high-powered senator and possibly even a president. This is when future "leaders" are made.
This woman is just a dumb(even for them) politician who thinks more about money than political power.
- thcobbs, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3In the democratic party right now.... money is a lot less valuable than political support. The Super delegates can use this as a political chip(read endorsement in their own campaign, pushing a pet project, etc.) with a high-powered senator and possibly even a president. This is when future "leaders" are made.
- kymike, on 05/07/2008, -1/+2What difference does it really make? Either way, money or not, it implies that she is willing to pay _something_ to "buy" votes. Whether the currency is money, political favors, or changing her position on some issue.
Can you imagine if Obama was caught doing something similar? Hillary would be all over it, and so would Fox "News".
- zcboltz, on 05/07/2008, -7/+2If you can't win 'em, buy 'em.
- brt653, on 05/07/2008, -10/+4This 'candidate' is a lying, murderous, back-stabbing professional politician that is married to a clone of her and these idiots that would even THINK of voting for her for ANY OFFICE should be shipped to Guantanamo Bay.
- MrShinra, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2Hey now, I don't plan to vote for her, but its this kind of crazy US OR THEM black and white thinking which keeps this race going. So all of those voters who pledged for her suddenly need to be shipped off to be tortured?
You need a reality check. Seriously I know she flip-flops, distorts the truth to a dangerous degree and outright lies sometimes, but
to say that a person's voice is invalid and one should be punished for it is almost as bad. Senator' Obama's words to move beyond partisan mudslinging and unite to guide our country was talking about this kind of comment. Senator Clinton may not be the best choice for President, but she's human and deserves decent common respect.
In b4 Negative Diggs for a sensible comment. Be BETTER then this guy. Vote Obama and give Hilary a dignified exit.
- MrShinra, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2Hey now, I don't plan to vote for her, but its this kind of crazy US OR THEM black and white thinking which keeps this race going. So all of those voters who pledged for her suddenly need to be shipped off to be tortured?
- IslandDog, on 05/07/2008, -8/+12Rawstory spam.
- captaindoobers, on 05/07/2008, -4/+6Hillary's hair is a mullet in disguise
- thcobbs, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Business in the front and party in the back woods?
- jond, on 05/07/2008, -6/+15I think Digg now officially has more Anti-Hillary 'news' articles than tech articles.
- calipan, on 05/07/2008, -1/+2lol. We need a "how to photoshop in Bosnian sniper fire into your vacation photos" article STAT!
- thcobbs, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2Now? JUST NOW?
Jeeze, what digg have you been reading? - sremick, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1Someone who has never submitted a single story isn't really in a position to bitch. If you want different content, try contributing.
I love tech stuff too but even geeks have their priorities in order right now, it would seem.
- acatzr800, on 05/07/2008, -3/+12Hmmm.. thats strange considering just about every candidate/politician asks what it would take to win anyone's vote. Its not illegal (minus the circumstances where money is actually involved) to try to push through legislation or toss a few pork bucks back to that district whose vote you're vying for. Its pretty bad when you can spin a normal, acceptable political practice into something anti-hillary.
- XStatic, on 05/07/2008, -1/+22Inaccurate...
What would it take to get your vote?
Hmm, I don't guess that would mean - What part of the platform is most important to you, what information do you need to know to make your decision and pick our candidate...
Not defending Hillary, but bogus story, I will vote against Hillary whoever she runs against..- Zipko, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1I didn't take it to mean "what would it take" in an informational sense like that, although I still don't think she was really trying to buy votes with money or gifts. It's more along the lines of offering a political favor in return for a delegates endorsement. Clinton's implying that she'll support whatever bill that delegate might come up with in the future even if she doesn't really care for it and in return she'll get an endorsement out of it. This kind of bartering is commonplace in politics and certainly isn't considered a bribe. Where it kind of gets out of hand though is when you get into pork spending but that's another issue.
- diggstown, on 05/07/2008, -1/+8There is nothing in the content to suggest that Hillary's campaign actually tried to buy a vote. For anyone that thinks what happened was unusual in any way, welcome to politics. Even your sainted Ron Pauls and Obamas would do the same.
- inajeep, on 05/07/2008, -1/+6That sounds like a standard question that can be taken a couple of different ways.
- jontalisman, on 05/07/2008, -3/+8Sensationalist ***** by another Obama supporter determined to make Clinton look bad. Asking what would it take to get your vote is in no way, shape or form the same as telling someone you'd like to buy their vote.
- bonhoeffer, on 05/07/2008, -2/+7Gun Manufacturers Suggest Obama Will Use Flame-throwers and Biological Warfare Against Their Distributors
February 15, 2008: Senator Obama says the country must do "whatever it takes" to eradicate gun violence.
How's that for missinterpreting a valid comment.- humanerror, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1Hmm... tell me more about this flamethrower plan
- RRJackson, on 05/07/2008, -7/+1Good. Hopefully she buys them all.
- LukasSmith, on 05/07/2008, -8/+5Lol. seriously guys dont you think this Obama propaganda has gotten out o hand? I thought Digg.com was a serious newsource. Apparently I was wrong.
- RSersen, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4Yes, you were wrong. And you were wrong well before Obama mania started.
- jontalisman, on 05/07/2008, -5/+5Sensationalist ***** by another Obama supporter determined to make Clinton look bad. Asking what would it take to get your vote is in no way, shape or form the same as telling someone you'd like to buy their vote.
- SEGA4life, on 05/07/2008, -5/+2O please the raw story is this moron turned down MONEY in the middle of a recession..
what next, are we going to blame the recession on Hilary? - apackofmonkeys, on 05/07/2008, -4/+2Buried as innaccurate. I'm not voting for any of the 3 bad candidates we have running now, but if I could, I'd negative vote Obama, just because his supporters on digg are acting SO FREAKING STUPID.
- Kyan, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1Oh, now there's a good meter by which to judge if a candidate is worthy of your vote.
- Nutmegan, on 05/07/2008, -1/+5Please, there's no legitimate implication that money is on the table there.
- DEIx15x8, on 05/07/2008, -4/+3That's so shameful. Why can't she just go out and outspend 4:1 like Obama does. That is so much better than buying a vote.
How can someone even think she tried to buy a vote? Obama has been buying votes since day one buy outspending everyone at unnecessarily high ratios. - smacksaw, on 05/07/2008, -2/+5I'm always surprised at what I think of as "premise change" in these articles, where you read something about vote buying and the person interviewed is...going OT to a point if that makes sense. Her comment about her kids is right. Hillary is not only going to disenfranchise black voters, but young voters. I cannot see how she thinks she is doing good. It's mind-boggling.
The other thing I thought was a good point was the remark about who is going to fix the economy right now. I think Obama needs to be more on-message there.
Look at the difference. Hillary's gas holiday which is $30 or Obama's $1000 tax refund. And what are we talking about? Not his $970 advantage over Hillary. I almost think she concocted that half-baked idea to get people talking about how stupid it is instead of how awesome the $1000 refund Obama proposed is. I wouldn't put it past her.
But most importantly, and if any of you know Obama's advisers (or are, I've been contacted by stranger by my posts and blogging), tell them he needs to hammer home the obvious point that with things like the gas tax staying in place it's taking care of the long-term while a $1000 break takes care of the short-term. Obama is going to help people NOW without gutting them later on.
And in relation to that, Obama needs to make sure that his crossover voters understand that cuts in taxes always come with cuts in spending. We don't want a tax-and-spend Democrat and we don't want a tax-and-borrow Republican.
It's worth it to read these articles just to find these little messages, but I want to point them out so they don't get lost. - drmangrum, on 05/07/2008, -2/+1Is anyone really surprised? Politics has a way of corrupting even the most steadfast do-gooder. Hillary may mean well, but she's been in the game so long all she can think about is keeping her personal power. The people she's supposed to represent and protect are an afterthought for her.
I really wish there was a way to hit a reset button on the whole lot of them. We need a completely fresh government, the corruption is run too deep.- pkonink, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1All governments are corrupt. We need a reset button on our populace's attitudes toward materialism and what it means to have and use material wealth. And someone needs to teach Americans what true wealth is - hint - it's not a fancy car, mcmansion or plasma tv - it's knowing that when you get old you won't be shoved into a nursing home by your kids, it's being able to walk down your street and knowing the name of everyone you see, it's not having to worry about being downsized and losing everything you have - you get the picture.
You get the populace in line and the leaders will follow. Remember, WE are the government. I'll get off my soapbox now, lol.
- pkonink, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1All governments are corrupt. We need a reset button on our populace's attitudes toward materialism and what it means to have and use material wealth. And someone needs to teach Americans what true wealth is - hint - it's not a fancy car, mcmansion or plasma tv - it's knowing that when you get old you won't be shoved into a nursing home by your kids, it's being able to walk down your street and knowing the name of everyone you see, it's not having to worry about being downsized and losing everything you have - you get the picture.
- rahamm, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2Yah that guy just flips a coin to figure out who to vote for cause reasoning means nothing to him.
“They asked me what it would take to get my vote and I said, I don ’t think I heard you right," I saw Obama say this to undecided voters yesterday on TV. - Vash3001, on 05/07/2008, -3/+1Obama never said the change he promises was good change.....food for thought. He will ***** us.
- petebot, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2"Hey Garth, we're gonna make some changes to show. ..you OK with that?"
"We fear change..."
- petebot, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2"Hey Garth, we're gonna make some changes to show. ..you OK with that?"
- username484767, on 05/07/2008, -4/+2what a filthy, stinky *****.
- insonh, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1OK which of these Super "D" arent getting someing for their vote?
anyone?
anyone?
I'm thinking they all sold their vote for something - GrodyChamp, on 05/07/2008, -0/+0Sounds like a reasonable question if you want something from someone to me.
- kemp34, on 05/07/2008, -2/+1The Bush/Clinton crime team needs to go!
- ATLien74, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2I'll be the last person to defend Hitlary, but come on... she wasn't trying to buy a vote.
- Treoinmypocket, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2Ah the hollow indignation of the elitist... whose soul role is to subvert the will of the people by operating outside the confines of the popular vote.
Ladies and gentleman I give you....the SuperDelegate.- Rodalli, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Sole. "Sole role" has a terrible ring to it, though. I would go with "sole purpose".
- Treoinmypocket, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1hahah - damn. kudos to you my friend...kudos to you....
- Rodalli, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Sole. "Sole role" has a terrible ring to it, though. I would go with "sole purpose".
- jimjacks, on 05/07/2008, -2/+0What vote in Washington isn't for sale these days?
- lalee, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1"What would it take to get (you to do what I want)?"
C'mon, this is a common negotiation question, be it sales or any other favor. Pssh. - pdiddy827, on 05/07/2008, -0/+0buying a vote is no big deal, everything in DC is for sale, even obama no matter how much he says he's not
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by
