In Pennsylvania, a Franklin and Marshal College poll gives Hillary Clinton a 12 point lead.
The youngest automatic delegate in the party, Jason Rae, endorses Obama...
Obama wins his 11th in a row: the Democrats' Abroad primary.
« McCain Campaign Responds To Times Story | Main | A Scenario Develops: Blame Weaver » A Brief Dems Update21 Feb 2008 09:46 am Comments (19)
Using the term "automatic delegate" instead of "superdelegate" now, huh? Very interesting. 
Ambers, why are you using the term "automatic delegate?" Wasn't this phrase manufactured by Harold Ickes like 2 weeks ago? Doesn't the sound of the term lend itself to a HRC-friendly view of what SUPERdelegates should do?
Ambers, why are you using the term "automatic delegate?" Wasn't this phrase manufactured by Harold Ickes like 2 weeks ago? Doesn't the sound of the term lend itself to a HRC-friendly view of what SUPERdelegates should do?
C'mon Marc, automatic delegate? Was that a joke?
Agreed. If you want to retain the semblance of objectivity, you really should use the proper term superdelegate. Buying into the Clinton campaign's newspeak is beneath anyone claiming to be a legitimate journalist. We have an official word for this. We don't need to go inventing new ones. I realize this parallel is overblown, but "automatic delegate" is to superdelegate what "enhanced interrogation technique" is to torture. You could be making a joke, but seriously, stop it.
It's sorta like a couple weeks ago, when Marc first parroted the "HRC will clinch with Puerto Rico!" line. Yeah, it could have been a joke. (It certainly should have been a joke.) But when the guy spends the bulk of his blogging time adopting Clinton spin word-for-word, it's kinda hard to tell whether he's joking or not about these things. And by "kinda hard" I mean "impossible." If MY had called Rae an automatic delegate: funny. When Marc does it ... not so much.
I've gotta echo the previous commenters also, Marc. Why are you using the term "automatic" delegates? That is campaign rhetoric, and a singular campaign's rhetoric, and thus its objectivity should be questioned. Superdelegate is the term. I can remember sitting in 11th grade government memorizing its definition.
Marc- don't plagiarize from me. You know better.
It's quite true that the ONLY reason to use the word "automatic" is that it parrots the Clinton campaign line. Most people will have no idea what you're talking about when you say that. So are you parroting or are you being ironic? There really aren't any other options.
Automatic delegates?
I was going to chastise you for using "automatic delegate", but it seems that many have beat me to the punch. If you read your own comments, you should have a good idea about what this does for your appearance of objectivity.
If you read your own comments, you should have a good idea about what this does for your appearance of objectivity. Ah, if only. Even aside from Marc's own perspective, which of course is his prerogative, it would be nice if he would read his own comments for corrections of the frequent factual errors and inaccuracies. It's good for his credibility! And I still can't understand why he hasn't posted the best comments from the "Off the Grid" Reader's Open/Shilling for Votes Spectacular. Perhaps he thought none of our comments measured up to his unachievably high standard ;)
Sorry Marc, but I have to echo all the other comments. "Automatic delegates"? I could give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were using the term ironically. It's not particularly obvious that you were. The tone doesn't really suggest that reading, so a pair of scare quotes would have been useful. Or perhaps you meant your use of the term to be taken at face value. In that case, way to lose all pretense of objectivity, son.
I just spit out my coffee all over my monitor when I saw you use the term "automatic delegate." Unless this was used ironically -- which there's no indication that it was -- this blog has now officially jumped the shark. Straight up pathetic, Marc.
"Automatic" delegate, Marc? Wtf?
Auto-whatzits?
So what's the deal with how those democrats abroad delegates are split up? If they have 4.5 pledged votes to give out, and one candidate gets 2/3 of the vote and the other 1/3, shouldn't the first candidate get 3 delegates and the other 1.5? I don't understand their math.
You have got to be kidding me. That Clinton spin is pitiful, and it's pitiful you are using it. They are SUPER-SPECIAL DEMS because they get to decide however they like. There is nothing "automatic" about them -- if they were automatic, they would automatically vote with the will of the people.
|
Subscribe to this blog by Email Twitter || On Facebook || QIK Live Channel  Recent Posts
Monthly Archives
|
| 
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
Oh, Marc. "Automatic" delegates? Can't believe you're buying into that so readily. Oh wait -- yes I can.
Ah well -- I guess you have to fit the Clinton spin in there somewhere, even when you're reporting good news for Obama.
Also: only 12 points in PA? Not much of a new new new firewall -- let's go ahead and move that back to Puerto Rico. Come to think of it, substitute "Bolivia" for "Puerto Rico" and the Clinton campaign starts to look a lot like the end of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. Except with less class.
Posted by Jeff Larson | February 21, 2008 10:59 AM