Carter sees superdelegates prompting Clinton to quit

[Lone_Star_Dem]

Source: Reuters

LONDON (Reuters) - Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter said on Sunday he expects Democratic superdelegates to reveal their choice for presidential nominee soon after the final primary in June and that Hillary Clinton will then have to quit the race.

In an interview with Sky News, Carter said he did not think Clinton was achieving anything by staying in the fight.

"I think not. But of course she has the perfect right to do so," he said while attending a literary festival in Britain.

"I'm a superdelegate ... I think a lot of the superdelegates will make a decision quite, announced quite rapidly, after the final primary on June 3," he told Sky News.

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSL2562414520080525?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews

[my3boyz]

1. I hope he is right. nt

[tekisui]

2. June 4th should be a flood day.

[JI7]

3. i think she might concede after she loses that last primary

[tekisui]

4. She'll lose two that night, it would make sense.

Of course, it's Hillary.

I think she should concede after PR. If she wins there, which is likely, she can go out on a high note, and avoid having to drop on a two-loss night. It's only 2 days before the last vote.

[MindMatter]

6. Any rational person would take the chance to go out on a high note

She is not a rational person. She is and always has been consumed with ambition. So consumed that she has lousy judgment.

I think it will play out as Carter described. She won't quit after PR. She will lose the last two races. There will be a dozen or so SDs (in addition to the Pelosi Club) who come out for Obama very soon after that, clinching the nomination for Obama. She probably still won't resign even then. Once the nomination is clinched, a few days later40 or 50 of the "gutless wonder" SDs will announce for Obama. Maybe she will quit at that point.

But maybe she will never officially give it up. It doesn't much matter at that point. It is only her future and her legacy at stake.

If she continues this bullshit, I hope Dean keeps the Clintons off the stage at the convention.

[Diamonique]

5. This is good, but...

... I think the SD's should announce before the DNC meeting on March 31st.

IMO it would be better for the last primaries to put him over the top instead of the SD's doing it.

[A Brand New World]

13. That's my opinion too. I think it would make a better impression

having the people put him over the top, instead of the SD's. Just to avoid the appearance that the SD's are the one choosing the nominee.

[ckramer]

7. After June 3, she will switch to run as a Republican

Why not?

She already showed her right wing color.

[mdmc]

8. Jimmy Carter - the last decent man to hold the white house

:toast:

[sktmax]

9. Why the Wait ....

The problem to me is that the Superdelegates' silence (including Jimmy Carter) makes it look like they have the same view as Hillary. By not coming out now when they know Obama has already beat her, they send a quiet message that they are waiting to see if something "big" might happen that could sway them away from voting for Obama. Given all that has taken place and the vast amount of division in the democratic party, (including Hillary's latest "intentional" RFK gaffe) their silence makes them no better than Hillary, becasue they could end this today not May 31, and not June 3, but May 25. I like Jimmy Carter fine, but instead of giving interviews with Sky News, he should be somewhere casting his vote now.

[corkhead]

10. it's a holiday weekend, nobody is working. Watch what happens Tuesday and Wednesday

I'm betting on a SD avalanche

[mascarax]

14. Carter lack of endorsement

Carter recently said he hasn't endorsed anyone since leaving the White House. But he heaped lots of praise on Obama and mused about almost all of his family - kids, grandchildren - were for Obama. I think it's a tough position (not all superdelegates, just him as a former president).

[Shipwack]

16. Maybe the SDs don't want to be overbearing?

I was hearing some people say earlier in the primary season that the super delegates had way too much power and influence. If they came out en masse and endorsed somebody, I'm sure people would be complaining that they had "taken away" the voice of the people in the primaries that occur late in the season.

I don't think that everyone can be made completely happy (and remember the #2 rule of the internet, that 5% of the people on either side of an issue make 90% of the noise). If they speak early, they are throwing their weight around. If they speak after the voting is done, they are prolonging party infighting.

[canucksawbones]

18. I think the wait

is a bit of appeasement to Clinton, if the supers flood for Obama now, then Hillary will cry about the states not having had their chance to vote.

After that when it is clear that Obama has the majority of delegates with or without MI and Fl, the supers can then jump to Obama and claim the majority has spoken and that they are using that argument to go with Obama.

GK

[Benhurst]

11. Our party leaders will do what's best for us.

If it weren't for them, there are those among us who would have impeached Bush by now and cut off funding for the occupation of Iraq.

Thank God they are there to save us from universal health care and maintain our status as The World's Only Superpower.

:patriot:

[lisa58]

12. That would be the best outcome IMHO

[samsingh]

15. why are they waiting?

[Wash. state Desk Jet]

17. Gee Wizzz

Didn't Carter hand over the white house to the republican party?
As I recall Kennedy lost the race for the nomination.
Didn't Carter become incredibly philosophical on election night while trying to work out some kind of deal with Iran? It seems Carter's mother knew what had to be done, but she didn't have a million dollars of her own to spend,isn't that what she said? Billy beer anyone!

[Shipwack]

19. What alternate reality do you come from?

Carter was making the best of a bad situation (the economy), and thought that Americans were adult enough to understand there were no easy solutions.

Reagan came in with a tap dance and made jokes every time Carter raised a serious issue.

Meanwhile the traitorous Republican scum-fucks actively worked to undermine Carter's foreign policy efforts, and made sure the hostages were kept prisoner in Iran until after Carter left office.

[Wash. state Desk Jet]

20. Oh really?

The reality of that is this, the democratic party was floored by the Carter adminstration. People ran as far away from the democratic party as possible,many of those are republicans even today. Why the hell do you think the party ran Kennedy against Carter? Get down in truth with that question. Go on now do your little search! And get off the conspericy theorys. International law ring any bells?

[Pastiche423]

21. Do you have a link for the garbage you just spewed?

[Wash. state Desk Jet]

22. Look spoon feeding is not

within my interest's. If you don't really know, than just keep supporting change.A link! Is there ever link upon link on end. You probably don't know anybody the use to be a Democrat ,do you? No,no way, you might really know about talking politics if you did. But I don't think you do.

[mdmc]

23. Carter rules

:kick:

[Alexander]

24. We might be able to understand you better if you made any grammatical sense.

On the other hand, maybe not.

[Pastiche423]

25. IOW, you have nothing to back up your garbage

Btw, your post make no sense at all. It's gibberish.

[Wash. state Desk Jet]

26. 77-81 were the years that made no sense.

That's why the democratic party ran Kennedy against Carter! Get real.Or at least look it up!

[Pastiche423]

27. You made the claim

You back it up.

[Wash. state Desk Jet]

28. Look, why don't you ,ah, have yourself a nice cold

Billy Beer and think about Obama daily news updates! Just ah, sit back with your Billy Beer and chill. You don't need to look nothing up, in fact it would most likely be a total waste of your time. After all there is nothing back there in time that you can twist to suit your views in the here and now,is there? And certainly history repeating itself could not possibly be a real issue could it? Hell no, that's garbage isn't it? Well wait a minute ,back it up, W.I.N. Whip Inflation Now. Now that made sense.Has to do with what you can and cannot AFFORD.Too far back right?

There was absolutely no chance of a second Carter term,that's just for openers.The democratic party was in a shambles in 1980 and thats a fact. The Kennedy draft was not just to provide a real candidate ,it was also about saving the democratic party from impending disaster.

Enjoy your Billy Beer,chill out and check out the facts for yourself. Do the research for yourself. You just might be glad you did.After all, it is always better to know, than it is to think that you know.

[Pastiche423]

29. You seem to have made some wrong assumptions about me

I do not drink, not Billy Beer, nor any other alcohol.

I am not a Obama suppoter.

I have asked you repeatedly to provide proof of the ignorant statements you have made on this thread. You can not do that, so instead you create lies about me.

You have committed the classic, attack the messenger. When no facts are on your side, you attack.

P.S. You need to re-read the rules of this site. This is a Democratic site, where it is against the rules to smear a Democrat.


P.P.S. You don't know shit.

[Wash. state Desk Jet]

30. Carter does not know when to speak and when

to stay quiet for the good of the party. The issue with Carters mother, the one where she said publicly that if she had a million dollars ,she would pay to have the Iotoilet assassinated .I am sure many people at that time agreed with what she was saying,however it should not have been said by Carter,s mother .Some of the bazaar statements that were news all over the world at that time.Now if you want to see what shit is, just research those newspaper articles during the Carter administration.


And if you go there,find out what the Kennedy draft was all about.
There is a big difference between smear and stating facts. Unless you believe the bull shit about the public having short memories.

You really don't get it about Carter and how he just must infuse himself and his personal views into the works,do you? I suppose you want to believe that the Iranian hostage crisis is why it is he lost a second term.But what is it really that brought on the emergency bail out draft for the democratic party in those years? Why is it really the party was divided ? How is it that they react out of fear and panic ? The Kennedy draft was just that.Which by the way was party admittedly having made a very poor choice.A honest politician is all that mattered,a fresh face. Someone,anyone with no connection to the corruption what goes on in Washington DC.The controversy in those years.What was happening at that time.Decisions and bad choices made out of panic and fear.


Why is it do you think that they ran Carter? Is it because they needed a honest politician to present to the people? Just what were Carter,s qualifications? And at the time,did it matter? How important is it for the president to understand international law? Were Carter's qualifications ever really checked out by party?

Terrorist and law these days.
Do you think turning the cheek is the way to deal with terrorism, or terrorist threats? Carter's brand of religion became very scary in those days.But hay, who remembers right? Or the people that fled the democratic party back than do.
By the way,remember Larry Flint? Larry Flint,Billy Beer Jimmy jeep?

Carter on the fight deck of the air craft carrier, just another view of Jimmy in the news. Indeed how the memory works.By the way,it's no crime.

My position here is swing votes that are so very important in the general election. And party once again has goofed.And it is clear that very many voters agree. Once again party unity is the issue of desperation,but is that the real issue? Has anybody noticed rather or not republican voters are fleeing the republican party and joining the Democratic party in massive droves? That just is not happening is it?

It seems that democratic voters are considering McCain,isn't that odd? The thing of it is the republican's are confident and after eight years of Bush.

And the democratic party seems willing to toss the swing votes. Isn't that just another poor choice in the making?