1. Like videos? Check out DirectDamage.com!

Clinton Campaign Denies Pursuing Obama's Pledged Delegates

Discussion in 'Political Zone' started by BrAinPaiNt, Feb 20, 2008.

  1. BrAinPaiNt

    BrAinPaiNt Backwoods Sexy Staff Member

    63,613 Messages
    7,321 Likes Received
    Seems like the Clinton Campaign is always denying something that they seem to be doing.


    This morning we noted a Politico story suggesting that the Clinton campaign would go after Obama's "pledged" delegates – that is, the delegates who have ostensibly been allotted to a candidate based on primary or caucus results. As it turns out, these "pledged" delegates aren't actually pledged at all, and they can technically switch sides.

    The Obama campaign has been pushing the story as evidence that the Clinton campaign will do anything to win. In a conference call with members of the press corps, Obama supporter and former DNC chairman David Wilhelm called the strategy "beyond troubling."

    "I would just add that sometimes nominations are not worth having, and one of those times would be when the nomination comes at the cost of ripping the party apart," he added. Obama campaign head David Plouffe, meanwhile, said this: “Every day there seems to be a new tactic they’re developing that might allow them to pull a rabbit out of hat and subvert the will of the voters.”

    The Clinton later campaign released a statement contesting the story. As CBS News Chief Political Consultant Marc Ambinder reported on his Atlantic blog, Clinton spokesman Phil Singer sent an email stating, "We have not, are not and will not pursue the pledged delegates of Barack Obama."

    The statement also included this sentence: "It's now time for the Obama campaign to be clear about their intentions."

    The Politico piece, meanwhile, includes this: "Clinton spokesman Phil Singer told me Monday he assumes the Obama campaign is going after delegates pledged to Clinton, though a senior Obama aide told me he knew of no such strategy."

    In a noon conference call, the Clinton campaign didn't address the issue specifically, instead referring reporters to Singer's statement.
  2. sacase

    sacase Well-Known Member

    4,423 Messages
    157 Likes Received
    Well, just another lie from Clinton...
  3. BrAinPaiNt

    BrAinPaiNt Backwoods Sexy Staff Member

    63,613 Messages
    7,321 Likes Received
    Now now...it was not her, it was her staff without her knowledge.;)
  4. sacase

    sacase Well-Known Member

    4,423 Messages
    157 Likes Received
    Riiiiight....and I am Jerry Jones.
  5. iceberg

    iceberg nothing is nothing Zone Supporter

    29,394 Messages
    2,350 Likes Received
    she either has full knowledge and concent of such things and is held accountable - OR IF NOT because she really is not aware of what her staff is doing, then it goes something like -

    how can you run a country and have no knowledge of what your staff does? you can't even run a campaign w/o turning to this excuse far too often.
  6. Sasquatch

    Sasquatch Lost in the Woods

    5,095 Messages
    320 Likes Received
    If it were anyone but Clinton, would the media be portraying the race as finished after 10 consecutive victories for Obama?
  7. Doomsday101

    Doomsday101 Well-Known Member

    82,591 Messages
    6,139 Likes Received
    Given the momentum his camp has compared to the disarray of hers yes. I’m no fan of either and can see this race is done. I do think she has 1 last gasp in Texas but right now that looks to be slipping away from her

Share This Page