No disenfranchisement here
I joined an odd conference call this afternoon set up by the Clinton campaign for North Carolina media. The e-mail invitation announced it like this:
"Charlotte City Council Mayor Pro Tem Susan Burgess to Hold Conference Call to Challenge Sen. Obama to Stop Trying to Disenfranchise North Carolina Voters"
I was curious to find out how Sen. Obama was trying to do that. When I saw him here in Greensboro last week, he was urging people to register and vote.
At 3 p.m., Burgess came on the line with Clinton campaign staffer Isaac Baker. In addition to being the mayor pro tem in Charlotte, she's a Democratic superdelegate who's backing Hillary.
She talked up Sen. Clinton, then disclosed she's been hearing messages from the Obama campaign suggesting Clinton "should call it a day." She was concerned that it would cost North Carolinians a chance to vote if Clinton were forced to drop out.
When she finished and media types had a chance to ask questions, I noted that I'd heard Obama say Clinton ought to stay in the race as long as she wants. Is there any doubt she's going to do just that?
Absolutely none, Burgess said.
After a couple of questions on other subjects,. Mark Binker got back to the subject of disenfranchisement, noting that's a loaded word in the South. Is its use justified?
Baker tried to handle that, insisting that surrogates and operatives were trying to bully Sen. Clinton into getting out of the race. He referred to suggestions by Senators Patrick Leahy and Chris Dodd that she should give up for the good of the party.
Leahy and Dodd are bullying Clinton? Baker wisely backed away from that.
Someone asked Burgess directly: Does she believe Sen. Obama is trying to disenfranchise North Carolina voters?
Not in a legal sense, she said.
"I want to make sure we're not deprived of voting and our voices are heard in this important race," she said.
It seems to me that's up to Sen. Clinton. If she stays in the race through May 6, North Carolina voters can weigh in.
But no one's going to be disenfranchised.
The Clinton campaign needs to take that word out of its talking points.
Comments (6)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Look over the attachment.This is an uninterrupted 51-second video of Obama speaking; he's telling us exactly what he will do to the military...watch it before this too is removed off the web site. The USA needs a Wake-up call.
http://www.macsmind.com/wordpress/2008/02/27/obama-plans-to-disarm-america/
Posted on March 31, 2008 5:50 PM
Scripting.com (Dave Winer) has been occasionally posting MP3's of these calls. After about 3 days, I was bored out of my head.
Posted on March 31, 2008 5:52 PM
But no one's going to be disenfranchised.
The Clinton campaign needs to take that word out of its talking points. * Doug
No doubt the Democrat Mayor Pro-Tem of Charlotte has never been to Newark NJ to understand the full meaning of the term "disenfranchised" by the Soprano Clinton family
Posted on March 31, 2008 8:00 PM
But no one's going to be disenfranchised.
The Clinton campaign needs to take that word out of its talking points. * Doug
No doubt the Democrat Mayor Pro-Tem of Charlotte has never been to Newark NJ to understand the full meaning of the term "disenfranchised" by the Soprano Clinton family
Posted on March 31, 2008 8:00 PM
Well, you know Democrats do have a fairly liberal definition of disenfranchisement. Since Al Gore, I think it refers to an election isn't going their way, but would be if only voters weren't "disenfranchised." It's more of a metaphor for them, and it gets a lot of play because they have so much difficulty designing and casting ballots, obtaining identification, organizing primaries, and so forth.
Posted on March 31, 2008 9:57 PM
That might be the strategy here, brian. Hillary isn't expected to win here. If she loses, she can say Obama "disenfranchised" her supporters by making them think she's going to quit the race.
Posted on April 1, 2008 10:37 AM