NP Rank:
Clinton will Suspend Saturday not Concede, what does it mean?
Clinton will Suspend Saturday not Concede, what does it mean?
By Albert N. Milliron, Iron Mill Interactive Media inc, Politisite.com
Senator Hillary Clinton stated that she would be suspending her campaign on Saturday not Conceding. The difference is clear. Had she conceded she would be throwing her delegates to Obama and allowing the process to fall where it may. When one suspends it gives the candidates the opportunity to use their delegates at the convention as leverage to get some of ones issues confronted and passed during the convention process.
One clue that she would be suspending rather then conceding, was that her letter to contributers last night still had the, "Donate" tag at the bottom of the letter. If you concede, you can't fund raise as your campaign is over. If you suspend, you can still raise money. Since Clinton is in Campaign debt, she is still fund raising as if she concedes she loses the ability to recoup any money from her presidential campaign.
Here is another tid bit of news for you. A candidate who suspends can re-open the race. Meaning that it is entirely possible for Hilliary to still open a Battle on the floor of the Convention. Namely the Florida and Michigan issue. She could still work to get super-delegates to support her and fight for the nomination.
While we all hope this thing is over. Their are some woman and other voters who think she wasn't given a chance as media seemed that Race trumped Gender. Anyone who watches MSNBC could see that bias in action.
What will happen in August? I am willing to go out on a limb and say that Hillary wants her health care plan above Obamas. With her number of delegates prevailing I can see her finally getting her health care program in the Democratic Platform.
So Clinton will Suspend not Concede on Saturday. So at a drop of a hat she could be in this thing again. Don't dance around until the end of August.
The Long Goodbye
5:35 p.m. | Back at the New York Delegation: Here’s a little more about the New York delegation. Representative Louise Slaughter, who represents Rochester and Buffalo, tells us that some of her fellow members of the delegation were eager to be able to endorse Mr. Obama.
“There are districts that Obama carried almost exclusively, and some of them were feeling heat,” Ms. Slaughter said. In her own case, she noted that her district was split almost 50-50 between the two (and she represents areas that were home to both Frederick Douglass and Susan B. Anthony).
She said the members came out today because “we wanted to do this for some of our members and we couldn’t wait.”
For those who might have forgotten, only one county in the state — Tompkins, where Cornell is located — voted for Mr. Obama over Mrs. Clinton in the primary on Feb. 5 (many Congressional districts in the state cover several counties). Parts of Brooklyn looked like they might go for him, but in the end, they went for Mrs. Clinton.
She said the members came out today because “we wanted to do this for some of our members and we couldn’t wait.”
For those who might have forgotten, only one county in the state — Tompkins, where Cornell is located – voted for Mr. Obama over Mrs. Clinton in the primary on Feb. 5 (many Congressional districts in the state cover several counties). Parts of Brooklyn looked like they might go for him, but in the end, they went for Mrs. Clinton.
Crowd Power
-
politisite
Columbia, South Carolina, United States -
ddonar
Swartz Creek, Michigan, United States






Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (10)
at 13:41 on June 5th, 2008
To the best of my knowledge, Al, it seems if she makes that move, there are certain things she can do. It has been said that among other things, by suspending her campaign, she can still raise funds to pay off her campaign debts.
It is being floated that this also allows her to keep her delegates. It seems that conceding her campaign would require she release her delegates.
Some pundits at CNN were saying that there is the possibility of a plan for Senator Clinton to go to the convention with her delegates in tact, to allow those delegates to cast their vote for her at the convention, although she would not be nominated.
This plan is being said to be considered to serve as a method to punctuate her historic run for the Democratic Party's nominee for president.
at 13:56 on June 5th, 2008
Karen, you got it right. You ust have read as I was adding more info. Shows you have apolitico mind
at 14:07 on June 5th, 2008
Actually, I think I was posting as you were writing. Most of the article up now was not there.
Whatever her campaign is up to, it continues to undermine alleged unity and the unified Party she's said it will be in November.
at 14:13 on June 5th, 2008
My opinon of the Clinton's is not good. I think they are always above their party. I have never seen them put party unity before their own interests.
at 14:22 on June 5th, 2008
Well, the scuttlebutt is if her campaign continues these machinations it will ruin her politically. This episodic withdraw is not making Democratic leaders very happy.
You may be right. She may not care and, as the saying goes, she's going for broke.
at 09:53 on June 6th, 2008
Karen,
I know its not good journalism, but I post articles in Pieces. I have a bit of trouble loading large articles here. I also worry about loss of material. Once NP has all bugs worked out, I will post everything at once.
Now with breaking news, like the AP, I give a headline and have MTF (more to follow) I am not sure if that if from jounalism or from passing message traffic on the Military Affiliate radio system (MARS) We used to do alot of work with morse code and MTF was
dada da dididadit rather than full spelling. so Karen here is one for you in radio language (knowing you you will have the answer in 2 minutes or less) 73 88 de AL7KT
at 14:34 on June 5th, 2008
I'd been trying to flag for sometime now!
at 09:44 on June 6th, 2008
Well thanks for the continued effort to flag the story, you could have just gone on. Thanks again
at 16:01 on June 5th, 2008
politisite, I like this story. It's good stuff.
Thanks for explaining this issue as I was not too sure what it meant myself!
at 16:53 on June 5th, 2008
So, when does a possible candidate get to determine who leads the Democratic Party?
What would have happened if a party would have taken half of a state’s
votes from a Black candidate and given them to a White candidate?
If Barrack is such a good candidate, why does he need support from Hillary?
And why are Republicans thrilled?