A Rake’s Progress

During the past week my email folder has been inundated with messages pleading for me and other Hillary supporters to join with them IN HILLARY’S NAME to protest her treatment by the media, the DNC, Obama, the state party chairs, the bloggers, the influx of black flies that have come and gone in New Hampshire.

All of you know that I have been an ardent friend and supporter of Hillary for decades. Like many of you, I cried when she gave her concession speech. Over the course of this election I have been filled with rage, anger, disappointment, disgust — and most of that got vented in my blogs and on my web sites.

But through it all, I have been proud of Hillary. Even until the very moment she endorsed Obama, she stood as an example to all of us — men and women — about how to fight the good fight, stand up for principles, and try as hard as you can to reach your goal. None of that suprised us, did it? We who know her always saw those leadership traits in HRC.

I think that Hillary has made it clear what her intentions are now. I have no doubt that in her mind she has made what she feels are the right choices for her, the Democratic Party, and the country. We, her supporters, are not “ditto-heads.” Each of us can choose where we go from here, who we support, what we protest, what we embrace as our own. I am still making up my own mind about what I will do in the months ahead and who will get my support.

But it is WRONG and HURTFUL to Hillary to stage protests, disruptive acts, and civil disobedience IN HER NAME. Such behavior is not what she wants. If she wanted to personally continue this fight, she would. If she is working behind the scenes in some way to right the wrongs she suffered, I would not be surprised. But she has not asked for and has made it clear that she does not want her supporters IN HER NAME to act like sore losers, no matter how justified we feel we are. To do so is to disrespect Hillary and what she stands for.

Whatever we feel we must do in our OWN NAMES is our right and our obligation. Create your own action groups or protest plans, but do it not in Hillary’s name but one of your own making. Do not let anyone infer or believe that this is what Hillary wants. She doesn’t.  If she did, she would be leading us.

I only ask people to be careful not to drag Hillary’s name through the smoke and fire because it feels right for us to do so. It can hurt her and our cause in the long run. It isn’t right and I will not support it.

Thank you.

- Rake

From American Research Group –

Nate Silver, aka Poblano, of fivethirtyeight.com continued his losing streak this week by incorrectly predicting that Barack Obama would easily win the South Dakota Democratic primary. This followed Mr. Silver’s failure to accurately predict the outcome of the Democratic primary in Kentucky on May 20.

In Kentucky, Mr. Silver missed the turnout by 200,851 votes and he missed the vote for Hillary Clinton by 179,471 votes. This is an error rate of over 40% for turnout and over 64% for Clinton. Of the 200,851 vote error in turnout, 179,471 votes (over 89%) are from Senator Clinton.

In South Dakota, Mr. Silver’s projected turnout was over 34% too high, his projection for Barack Obama was off by over 57%, and Senator Obama did not win in South Dakota as Mr. Silver so confidently predicted.

Mr. Silver’s predictions provide great fuel for speculation on the Internet, but even he admits choosing from many possible outcomes when making his final predictions. His final predictions reveal his personal biases as he continues to incorrectly make causal claims from statistical associations.

Now that the coronation ceremonies are beginning for Barack Obama, many of Hillary’s supporters are looking for a way to tell the world that they are not to blame for this political mutation.

Some are in the streets protesting, others are making home made signs. But everywhere the message is the same: “Don’t blame me, I voted for Hillary!”

By the time the Denver Democratic Convention comes around, there will be a Democratic stampede over to John McCain’s side. It is starting already.

“For 35 years people have been asking me if there will be a female president, and I have always said, ‘not in my lifetime,’” she said. “I still feel that way. The patterns of history are that, at the upper levels, we see different varieties of men first. The female comes later.”

Steinem said disgruntled Democratic-leaning women ultimately will back Obama. Besides, she suggested, much of their ire should be aimed at the news media, not the candidates.

“The media was in love with Obama,” Steinem said, “and in hate with Hillary, hands down.”

Click here for the complete AP story.