ABC

You know, I've been trying to keep an open mind about the Democratic campaign for delegates and the eventual Presidential nomination. While I openly support Obama, Edwards has always been second choice, and Clinton a distant third. Truth be told, the difference between the three in terms of policy is minuscule. So, I thought to myself, I'll be the good liberal voter and support anyone who takes on the Republican machine. About a week ago, I changed my position. As of today, I'll support Anyone But Clinton. I'm not going to enumerate the various shenanigans pulled by the Clinton campaign as the press has done a decent job in the last couple days of shining some light on the subject. The latest move--the attempt to have Michigan and Florida delegates counted when the states broke the rules of the DNC--is absolutely slimey. When the DNC penalized Michigan and Florida, Edwards and Obama removed their names from the Michigan primary and refused to campaign in either state. Democratic unity and all that, right? Wrong. Hillary Clinton is now calling for the delegates to count (she's the only candidate who stands to benefit significantly from the move).

Do we really need more politics as usual? This whole move smacks of something Karl Rove would cook up. If Clinton wins the nomination, it's my belief she'll lose the general election to [Insert Republican Candidate Here]. Is there any Democrat more loathed by the Right than Hillary Clinton? Is there any Democrat more loathed by the Left?

I heard Nader is thinking about making another run. If Clinton wins the nomination, Nader can count me a supporter.

[Updated] Another excellent NYTimes Opinion piece about the Clintons and campaign strategy.