It is true that he doesn't want anyone to consider the popular vote from Fl or MI, but if he does not allow these delegates to be seated, or for revotes to be taken, there is a strong chance that many Democrats will not see his nomination as legitimate.

....it seems to me they are acting as if the contest is actually in doubt.

and they would be right. their calls sound more like a plea for mercy (drop out, before i lose again!), then the reasonable request of one who is masterfully in command. sen. obama is far from being masterfully in command of anything, much less the nomination.

[there are only three realistic dates for Clinton to drop out]  'Why won't she quit.'

[Obama to dictate the terms of Michigan and [Florida]  'When they don't matter.' (insert evil grin here)

[Even if Clinton is able to win the popular vote in Pennsylvania, Indiana, and one of South Dakota and Montana, closure can alternatively be achieved by Obama locking up the nomination in the popular mindset by reaching one of these three milestones.]   'Closure... mindset'

It will take quite a bit to convince even the majority of Clinton supporters that the nomination campaign is over.]  'Why won't she quit.'

[even her closest supporters feeling as though all chances are lost.]  'Broken hearted, in a state of despair, they will see that The One is the only pathway to the White House.'

[Achieving the sort of closure necessary for a healed, unified party for the general election will require Clinton supporters feeling as though they were allowed to fight until there were no more realistic options remaining.]  'Ha! Ha! Ha!]

Here's my favorite......[the pain will be less with a gradual withdrawal via the patch as Obama slowly builds on his advantage]  'Oh, the angst of it all.'

[it strikes me as quite possible that the party will be almost instantly unified] 'Another Ha! Ha!.'

What role does MI and FL have in the general election of who can be on their ballots?  If Mi and Fl are told they cannot play a role in the  primary democratic nomination process then why can't  they tell the DNC the following:  

    Since we played no role in the primary nomination process there will be no democratic nominee on our ballots in the GE.

 Moreover could they also in turn tell the DNC this:  

    The only way a legitimate democratic nominee can be on our ballots is if and only if there is a primary re vote in those states.

The problem with FL and MI from a short term tactical perspective (from the Obama perspective) is that keeping them out of the narrative in the short term is critical to keeping Clinton on the ropes (within the narrative). If they get dropped back into the mix it shakes up the narrative enough that it breathes new life into the Clinton campaign.

It's clear to me that the move currently being made is to keep them out of the narrative in the short term and hope that the "Clinton can't win" narrative become a self fulfilling prophecy (are we already seen this with money? for example).

PA is a long shot for Obama, and there is a sense in which the poll numbers being so even is actually bad for him in terms of expectations games, but if he DOES win, it's arguable that one of the reasons will be because Clinton looked like she couldn't win and people like to vote for winners.

And of course the reason that she looks like she can't win is very heavily tied to FL and MI since without them she really can't win unless she has a series of enormous upsets.

It's cynical stuff but that doesn't mean it won't be successful as a short term tactic. How it plays out long term will be connected to how successful it is in the short term.

And I would say it was racist if the situation was reversed and Obama was being pressured to drop out. Imagine the uproar if no other candidate in Obama's position or better had dropped out and yet for some reason Obama--the first African American in this position-- was suddenly the first person to be scathed for staying in the race. It would be a clear double standard and clearly racist.

These absurd calls for Hillary to drop out have been coming since after Super Tuesday. Hillary's top two states not being counted? Who cares-- drop out! Her best states yet to come? Who cares-- drop out! She can still win the popular vote? Who cares-- drop out! These calls-- rooted in sexism-- have always been nothing more than a smear intended to undermine her support with the voters-- and sadly its been very effective.

Let me say this, not only were such attacks against the rules of THIS SITE, I was personally offended by them and found myself thoroughly disgusted by the commenters who did so. If an when I see those commenters comment here I will make a point of telling them this personally.

Those commenters were as bad as any I have seen and unworthy to comment at this site. It pains me that some of the are TL regulars who I thought better of. No longer.

Possibly I'd feel personally attacked.  Maybe a little.

Normally, candidates play to the base during the primary, then move center during the GE.

Obama is doing the reverse, he is appealing to the center during the primary, and his GE approach is yet to be seen. What they have decided to assume is, like Bush in 2000 and 2004, that the base will vote for you no matter how play the primary; so instead of playing to the base, spend resources playing to the middle and setting up for the GE. They took it a step further of course, and tried to also bring "outside the party" voters into the primary to aid their chances of getting to the GE.

 From what I see in the media, in the blogs and on this site, the answer to that is a resounding no.  We've been told that we are part of a cult of personality and have been drinking poisoned kool aid.  We've been told that caucuses don't matter, that primaries Obama wins don't matter, etc.    

 I would be happy to accept a revote in MI.  I would be happy to have FL punished the way the GOP punished it.  Fine by me.  But I don't believe Senator Clinton's supporters really want revotes, they want the delegations seated as is.  

Unless the demographics are fundamentally altered, I think the polls that think it is close are simply wrong.

Thanks BTD for being great and clear-sighted!

I find myself wanting to be a "good" Democrat but I really feel that I CANNOT vote for candidates who repress the vote. I CANNOT vote for Obama with the clear vote repressing behavior he is showing right now.

Is one of the GOP ideas he admires not counting votes?

I am NOT one of those voters looking for a reason NOT to vote to Obama--I can't stand him in many ways but he's not as conservative as McCain. I'm not naive enough to think that the whole vote thing is simple--but the idea that a DEMOCRAT would publicly try to take votes away from people is SO wrong and bad for the party.

And yes, Clinton will throw my vote if she does anything like this too.

Obama fans keep talking about smart he is, but where's the brightness in turning off two states we need? That FL is one of them adds more pain. Surely he can come up with a good solution if he tried? (I am NOT snarking here at all. I am urging.)