Tuesday, April 01, 2008

Open Thread

WE'VE MOVED! Democratic Convention Watch is now at http://www.DemocraticConventionWatch.com

Who's going to win, who has a better chance against McCain, or whatever else is on your mind.

Update: We have decided to stop allowing anonymous comments. Not because we don't like reading what people have to say but because Blogger has introduced a new "feature" that makes you go to a second page when the number of comments go over 200.

It's very easy to set up a Google account so that you can continue commenting.


Previous Open Thread here


«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 400 of 1560   Newer›   Newest»
Yamaka said...



Well said. Amen

RobH said...

Tony, be a little honest with yourself and your readers. You don't really:

"want to know if Obama, a liberal community activist with little political or executive experience, is tough enough to face our enemies in a troubled world"

if you deliver:

"The answer is a resounding NO NO NO!"

in the next sentence.

Why depict yourself as a truth seeker when in fact your mind is already made up? Disingenuous.

GatorsChampions4Ever said...

robh, what I was saying before is that i do not necessarily agree with Aunt Jean's views, but that i merely am happy to see someone stand up for Sen. Clinton on here. Contrary to popular belief, this race is a virtual tie and nobody(here, news outlets) ever says that. Let's not forget one thing: Whatever the Clintons want, they get.


That's your site for everything superdelegates. Let's get as many uncommitteds over to Sen. Clinton as soon as possible.

jpsedona said...


I would think that if the Presidential Election were by popular vote, you'd see:

1) More national ads & fewer local ads
2) Fewer small population state visits
3) Campaigns would greatly be focused on urban areas (where the votes are); rural communities would become second class citizens
4) The dynamics of what are blue & red states would disappear. Republicans would benefit from large states that are traditionally Dem (e.g. CA, NY, IL, etc.). Dems would get some benefit out of traditional Rep states (South and Mtn States)
5) The cost would potentially be more but primarliy because it would take a more expensive media buy.

Of course the States would never agree to a Constitutional Amendment that effectively eliminates their say in the election process. So, I think the chances of ever changing it are slim to none.

jpsedona said...


The stories about the districts in NY with zero Obama votes can be found on the NY Times website. It's important to note that many of those original reports were later corrected. I don't know that the totals end up correct, I'd forgotten about the story and don't recall anything recent being reported.

dwit said...

Don't let the haters get you down Pennsylvania.

jpsedona said...


You're correct that the reason there's no winner in the Dem race is because the two candidates are so closely matched.

We'll see what happens over the course of the 10 remaining questions where the pledged delegate margin ends up. As things stand, it would appear that Obama should end the primary season with more than 100 (probably closer to 140-150). The add-ons will break along the lines of the state winners. The remaining SD's will be in a tough situation at that point.

dwit said...

Thanks JP. I thought Leah was talking about Texas.

billyjay66 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
jpsedona said...

Based on Hillary's response to whether Obama was 'electable' during the debate, I would really like a news channel ask Hillary the following question;

If Obama is the nominee, will he win the Presidency in the Fall?

If she answers "no", then she was disingenous in her debate response. If she answers, yes, then what's the issue about being "more electable than Obama"?

I realize that we would probably get a non-answer type of answer, but it would be interesting to know how she would respond.

billyjay66 said...


There has so many reinforcing reasons that has switched me away from Hillary. I wanted to see her in the Whitehouse with all of Bill's talents to back her up. I followed Bill's two terms with a scorecard holding him to his campaign promises month by month year by year. He exceeded his promise of cutting the deficit in half - raising minimum wage - passing family leave putting - 100 thousand extra teachers in the classroom and creating 23 million jobs. His promise was to cut the deficit in half and he ended up with 2 years plus of a balanced budget. The last year it was truly balanced - not even borrowing from the SS surplus.

BUT with the "Jesse Jackson" comment by Bill opening the race issue and "Judas" comment by James Carville and the "he's lucky because he's black" by Ferrraro and Rendell saying "race will be a factor with white voters" I just got completely soured on the whole thing. There is too much of a pattern to say Hillary had no part in the orchestration of that stuff. Of course Hillary didn't say those things so you can't blame her. Right!! and George bush hated to see those swiftboaters tear up John Kerry. BUT IT WAS RIGHT out of her mouth when she said "Barack is not a Muslim as far as she knows"

Much more important is the state of denial she remains in that she is losing. Winning the most delegates is the whole game. For her if she's losing in delegates it is popular vote is what counts. Or caucuses don't count much. Or big states are all that counts. Or electoral votes is all that count. Or I get all of Michigan & most of Florida and can overturn your big lead in the end. Or my big superdelegate lead at first will come back. Never mind that it has shrunk to a shadow if its former self.

"Never mind my campaign is broke you can see I'm clearly the winner". I don't think so. As you can see I'm no phantom Republican just trying to cause trouble here and would vote for Hillary in a heartbeat over McCain. There is a great deal of sadness to see the change in her. I am just a few years younger than the Clintons but think it is time for a generational change.

Leah Texas4Obama said...


I did a search for:

New York 2008 Obama zero votes and here are some:





dwit said...


You have pretty much expressed my sentiment on the whole thing. I was willing to overlook a lot of Bill and Hillary's shortcomings, like the Marc Rich pardon and her flip flop on the Palestine issue when she began to run for New York's Senate seat. I prospered under the Clinton Administration, like most Americans, but it was when she and her staff got nasty that I knew we couldn't trust her to make sound decisions in the White House. She lost her cool while Obama kept his head and that was huge for me.

We can't afford rash and abrasive behaviour when it comes to negotiating trade and peace deals or in a crisis for that matter. We have had enough of that with Rumsfeld and Bush.

We need a candidate that comes off collected, firm and fair. Petty doesn't win hearts and minds.

The other issue that worries me is the division that would likely continue if Clinton were in the White House. It could render her a one term wonder and a lame duck from the get go. Not only will her nomination encourage people to vote Republican in congressional races, but you can bet African Americans and newly energized voters would be less than enthusiastic.

dwit said...

Alright, thats it! I'm really disappointed in Hillary now. Just heard Wolfson say "nuke U ler".

dwit said...

Why on earth do they want to "nuke" Uler too? The last thing we need now is another war. Where is this Uler?

dwit said...

Thanks Leah!

GatorsChampions4Ever said...

billyjay66. I completely understand where you are coming from, but as you said: ''I wanted to see her in the White House with all of Bill's talents to back her up''. Isn't that the most important aspect of this whole thing? I find it hard to believe she either agrees with or told Rendell, Carville or Ferraro to say those things. In the end, it is all about who would make the best president, and I think we both know that would be her.

jpsedona said...

Early exit poll data...

on the Drudge Report indicates Clinton 52, Obama 48. Obviously not scientific (or necessarily accurate) but the first that I've seen. They also are reposrting demographic breakouts. The one that jumps out at me is Obama leading with men 53-47.

Unknown said...

I think Al Gorgeous has the best chance of unifying all dems. Check out this hilarious "If they IM'd" article about Dean rallying up the lazy troops.


Leah Texas4Obama said...

One more hour and a couple of minutes !!!

This waiting all day is just horrible ;)

Unknown said...

I think Al Gorgeous has the best chance of unifying all dems. Check out the AIM transcript of Dean trying to get the lazy and indecisive super dellies to choose already!


jpsedona said...

Tim Russert just reported on MSNBC that there are rumors of as many as 40-50 uncommitted SD's ready to jump on Obama's bandwagon if tonight's results are close in order to bring the nomination to a close sooner rather than later.

Yamaka said...

Coronation Ball just got started in Hyde Park!


We have ALL the money in the world.

Yes We Can.. Buy the Nomination!!!!!

Heiiii....Haaaaaa. Ha......Huuuuuu!!

:) :)

vwis said...

I predict that Hillary folds camp after the PA polls tonight. The math does not add up for Hillary.
Obama has 1648 delegates at present. He will gain a minimum of 77 delegates tonight. That will put him at 1725. There are 308 superdelegates that are uncommitted. Also, Hillary's # of sd's are steadily decreasing. 1725 plus 300 puts Obama at 2025 the magic #. I figure the dems will seat Michigan and Florida, but it will be a 50/50 split plus 10% for the winner. That way they get representation after the election.

Unknown said...


vwis said...

Yesterday, on the View, they questioned Cindy McCain over her husband's bad temper. Someone said he would not make a good president because of it. The only politician I know of with a worse temper is Hillary. Remember during the White House years the story about her storming around the WH throwing things. We the taxpayers pays for decorating the WH, so much for the Ming vases we bought. How would that go over internationally. Although, some of the Middle-East leaders do deserve to be hit on the head with something.

vwis said...

I think Hillary stayed with Bill to make me be the better man. The man he wants to be and talks about.
Although, in her campaign I would of liked to have heard her be the better person. Instead, of whining about being picked on or always be first; she should have said I understand that I'm the frontrunner and that why I'm the one that gets the tough questions. It would have made her more authority.
It was her primary to lose.

vwis said...

Has anyone ever noticed that whomever wins the debate usually loses the election or primary?

Yamaka said...

Dear Democrats:

Rocky Big Girl has broken the jaw of the Kid. He is in deep pain, and needs some pain killer medicine!

Please don't send money, but we need pain killers, please send them (also, some prayers... to save his soul). People say not all the medicine in the world will cure his pain. Because he is bitten by one of the King Cobras: Wright, Ayers, Rezko and Michelle.

Why one really bit him? Ask the liberal MSM loafers!!

As of now, Rocky has won most of the Large States: OH TN PA NY NJ CA TX FL etc.

The Electoral Vote jumps to 283 to the Kids 198. She has clinched the Presidency, if this is the Fall.

Money cannot win everything in life. BUT message can. Character can. Policy can.

The Kid has fuzzy message and messy character, judgment and credibility. Plus, he is a FAR LEFT liberal and a Manchurian Candidate!

Rocky...Rocky..Go Girl... Big Girl.

Cheers. :) :)

I will post my Conversations with Sen BHO, very soon!

RobH said...


Congratulations. A well earned victory for your girl. I mean it.

Quick, send her your money now.

She needs YOUR money for her to continue her quest. She has hundreds of millions personally. Congratulations to her. She has spent several hundreds of millions of her followers money, but is now in debt. Oops, she didn't major in economics at Yale. She needs YOUR money.

Quickly, write another check. Now.

RobH said...

Would love to hear thoughts/reactions to this:

Stunning statistic from exit polls regarding each candidates supporters regard for the other candidate.

69% of Obama supporters will vote for Clinton if she's the nominee.

53% of Clinton supporters will vote for Obama if he's the nominee.

At risk of generalizing I read that, that Obama supporters are more interested in unifying the party and being conciliatory, and Clinton supporters would be willing to sunder the party if their candidate loses, that is to say, the candidate is moe important than the party.

This is devastating for the party.

But worse:

18% of Clinton supporters and 13% of Obama supporters say they WOULD NOT VOTE if their nominee doesn't win.

Are we out of our minds? Let's not lose sight of the bigger picture here!!

Dave in NC said...

I think the Rocky analogy is most appropriate for Clinton:

1) Rocky resorts to pugilism because he is unable to achieve his goals through charisma, diplomacy or intelligence

2) Rocky's focus is on PERSONAL gain and advancement rather than any common good

3) No sacrifice (by those around him) is too great to achieve his personal gains

4) At the end of the first movie, he was a beaten loser

5) At the end of the last movie he was a brain-damaged beaten loser

6) He got millions of people who had nothing better to do to drop hundreds of millions of dollars for a few cheap thrills

Oh yeah, and he lost a close one to a black man

Yep, I see it. :)

Unknown said...

I just finished my analysis of the remaing counties in PA and I predict Clinton to win +11.
I will be by in the morning with the trash can.

Unknown said...

Robh, By the way "it was the best little primary that money couldn't buy.I apologise in advance if you think this is negative

Somerled said...

Congratulations to our Clinton compatriots! She came out slightly better than I thought she would. Nice win.

Yamaka said...

"Oh yeah, and he lost a close one to a black man"

There is some difference between Rocky and Rocky Big Girl!

Rock Big Girl won PA by 10% margin with about 200,000 more votes.

Now if you count ALL votes including FL and MI, (2208)

She has more TOTAL delegates and more popular votes and won 15 Large Primary States that a Democratic Nominee Must Win.

Yes BHO won 30 Small mostly Caucuses, most of which belong to Republicans historically.

So who deserves the Nomination?
Who is electable in the GE?

Hillary Rodham Clinton, hands down.

SDs, and good voters of IN and NC please make a note of this remarkable achievement.

Smile and Cheer. Vote for Hillary.

Judy Bienvenu said...

Yams - you make a pretty god argument. Maybe Obama should consider her for VP.

Somerled said...

Yeah, but Yakety-yak but ya know what? IT is still losing. Try counting votes from China... have you tried Austrailia maybe?

Dave in NC said...

Uh, Yamaka,

Nothing unexpected about PA. In fact, HRC was up 17 points a few days ago.

She's just as eliminated as she was yesterday.

But, I'm glad you got to enjoy your happy pill tonight.

See ya 5/6/08 in NC and we'll show ya what a drubbing is.

Leah Texas4Obama said...

The same person deserves the nomination that won 12 in a row not too long ago - OBAMA!

Contest won to date:

Obama 30
Clinton 15

Most pledged delegates: Obama
Most popular votes: Obama

Most honest: Obama

Obama - our next president of the UNITED States of America

Obama / Kathleen Sebelius '08

Somerled said...

And I STILL firmly believe this country is ready to elect a woman. When one seeks the nomination we'll vote for her.

Dave in NC said...

Also Yam,

and I hate to hit you with factual points as it almost seems cruel, BUT:

BHO is STILL ahead in popular votes AND total delegates...


sry :(

Judy Bienvenu said...

Ooo! Burn!
Good one Somer!

Dave in NC said...


Good one.

Yamaka said...

Here is my Conversation with Sen BHO in Indiana:

- Hello Sen BHO, how are you, Sir?

- Fine, Yamaka, and as you predicted "Rocky Big Girl" has done very well in PA. A double digit victory is very impressive. Good for her.

But, I think now I know that money alone will NOT bring victory, which most people learned from Mitt and McCain fight already. I didn't.

What should I do? I am confused. I think my best days are behind me with MS. I don't do well with White Blue Color voters, the main back bone of the Democratic Party. Plus, I don't have most of the women, the most important electorate of either Party.

-Senator, not all is lost. You still can make big waves. In my analysis, although you have won 30 small mostly Causes States, you did not win large EV rich MUST win Blue States to legitimately seek the nomination of the Democratic Party. And, HRC has won most total delegates, most popular votes when you include FL and MI and the magic number is 2208.

So, I suggest that you call Maestro Bill Clinton and show your willingness to be a VP to work for the real winner of the Primary so far. He really loves your talent and the promise. What you lack is really Experience, your are 46 and she is 60. But for a 46, you ARE matured and thoughtful. So be the Master of your own destiny.

If you join HRC, the Dream Ticket will win WH and a 2/3 in the Congress. A terrific win for the Party; we can solve most of the major issues of the day: War, UHC and the Economy in just Four years.
WIN WIN for you, her and the Party.

If you go toe to toe with Clinton, you will be totally destroyed, and Clinton will be damaged, the Democratic Party will be sunk in the Bermuda Triangle. Loss for ALL.

Senator please think hard and do the right thing. Now you are the King Maker of the Party. Create history. Give your daughters the hope to become the woman POTUS when they are older. Break open the Glass Ceiling erected over women for the past 50,000 years!

-Well, Yamaka. I need to talk to my handlers. I don't really know now what these low lives are thinking; I have to consult with the BigMoneyBags who have buttered my bread for so long.

I also believe Half Loaf is better than Full Loaf! Also, I believe creating the new History in America: the First Woman POTUS. Believe me I am a uniter, not just a fuzzy talker. I can do this.

Well, I will still call you Yama. But, one of my Indian friends told me this means your are the God of Death! Are you chasing me to the Gates of Hell? Hiiiiii Heeeee Hi.

- No Senator, I wish you the best. So long; God Bless You and your family. Good night, Sir.
Oh well, this is what I think BHO should do at this time. Doing funny calculations w/o FL and MI is sinful and arrogant in Full Democracy.

Disenfranchising 3 million voters is indeed an abomination, nay "Obamination".

The magic number is 2208 and not 2025!

Cheers. :)

dwit said...


are you including super dels or something? Nobody expects Obama to win in Pennsylvania. If he can keep it within 10 points it would be a miracle. I am already surprised and encouraged that he is keeping it within 9 points. He has exceeded all expectations.

RobH said...


re: "best little primary..."
No need to apologize.
No offense taken.

Dave in NC said...


Once again, I hate to bother you with the truth, BUT:

HRC is not up double digits in PA.

BHO is 48... the same age as Bill when he was elected

Really Bill was 43 when you apply the Arkansas IQ adjustment :)

Yamaka said...

Folks, here is my back-of-the-envelope calculation for the GE:

Total number of Primary voters: 30M

About 20% of BHO people will NOT vote for HRC in the GE, which leaves 24 M.

There are about 38 M Left-leaning Americans out there who will vote in the GE.

24 M + 38 M gives 62 million voters for HRC?BHO Dream Ticket, and she will get 350 Electoral Votes EV to clinch the Presidency.

Good for ALL involved, except some 20% of the sore losers of BHO!!!!!

Smile and Cheer.

dwit said...

I can't see Obama winning Indiana by the margins they are giving him there. Indiana isn't exactly known for its progressivism.

Not to mention that only 19% of the population has a college degree. Unlike Pennsylvania, however, the 65 and older crowd is only at 12%.

That bodes well for him, given that older white voters tend to be a little less "race tolerant", to put it nicely.

RobH said...


love the postscript on your earlier note:


A worthy and interesting choice.
One that has both pro's and con's.

The big pro is:

for those of us who do desire a woman on the ticket (and I do), but just not "that woman" (because of her guaranteed loss in November credentials) Kathleen would be a great choice. Perhaps it could give some relief to the Hill supporters who are in it just for the gender angle (and I'm not sayin' that's all of them, but some) and enable them to come back to the party. Maybe a big re-unite thing.

The con of course is:

any independents who might come over from the dark side (the right I mean) and are edgy about it because of latent race issues, might become edgier still because of the combined effect "A black guy and a woman?? No way!) Could forestall some participation.

But she's definitely on my short list to be his Veep, along with, my previous faves:

Jim Webb - a real straight shooter, no nonsense, tells the truth, terrific foreign policy/military cred.

Bill Richardson - Genuine nice guy, brings the hispanic vote, makes a lot of the SW 'red' states (NM NV, Col) truly winnable. Fear that same hesitancy as above ("You mean a black guy and a Hispanic? No way!!)

Joe Biden - a self-deprecating blowhard (in a good way) who knows he's a windbag, but plays it to great effect. Great foreign policy cred and a prototypical attack dog, but making it smooth as he bites. Could you imagine him taking down McCain? I used to hate this guy, but now I love him.

Anyway, there's my choices: Webb, Richardson, Biden, Sebelius.

Your thoughts?

Yamaka said...

"HRC is not up double digits in PA.

BHO is 48... the same age as Bill when he was elected"

I stand by what I said.

55% vs 45% gives 10%.

Yes, he is 46 years old, as much as I know.


billyjay66 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dave in NC said...


45.3% to 54.7% = 9.4%

Unless you round.. oh wait, that would be 9%

Of that, I am sure.


BTW, BHO will be president at 48, and 49 and 50 as well


Leah Texas4Obama said...


Webb- I don't know enough about him to have an opinion

Richardson - I don't think that will happen because there were too many people accusing Obama of promising Richardson of something in order to get his endorsement - I believe that he didn't but if Obama offered him V.P. then people would be bringing up the accusations again.

Biden - not a good choice because he didn't do that well in the nomination race. Also Biden is a Senator and ya don't want TWO senators on the same ticket.

Sebelius - I actually don't know that much about her but she seems very honest. And she is a woman, so that will draw in all the Hillary folks that are only voting for Hillary because of her gender. Putting a governor on the ticket will be good.

dwit said...


The only way I would not vote Hillary or Barack is if either gains the nomination without the popular vote. I'm guessing this is the position of most independents like myself.

If Hillary gets the popular vote I will vote for her in a general.

I will, however, vote against our two senators (Cantwell and Murray) if they continue to back Hillary given that Washington went for Obama.

Leah Texas4Obama said...

billyjay66 -

I think you meant to say Indiana, because Illinois already voted and Obama won there 'big time' :)

billyjay66 said...

yamaka re conversation with Obama

In your conversation, you convinced Obama before its too late he can still salvage 2nd place!!!

How strange!! Just when I finished my conversation with Hillary. I am happy to reveal to you she has the key to unlock the debacle in Florida and Michigan. You are going to get your wish and get the count to stand as is. People don't realize down deep in her heart how fair she can be!! See all she has to do is not campaign in Indiana and remove her name from the ballot in North Carolina and all is completely fair. And she has seen the light and is ready!!

Who said this world is unfair?

I look forward to see how far your flights of fancy can take you now.

Hate to agree with you on anything but having both of them on the ticket is the only way the voters left out wont be mad. don't think it will happen.

PS Thanks Leah!

RobH said...


Regarding popular vote, Chuck Todd does a good job forecasting remaining contests at:


Net is:

Obama nets 150K in NC, Clinton nets 20K in Indiana, 80K in WVa, 100K in Kentucky. Obama nets 60K in Oregon, Clinton nets 60K in PR, and Obama nets 25K in Mont & SD.

Net Net: he sees Clinton taking MAYBE another 25 K votes off Obama's present 500K vote lead (after PA)!! And the estimates are conservative in that the projections for margin he uses in NC and Oregon are well below present polls.

And the 500K doesn't include the four caucus states (110K net) but of course doesn't include FLA (-300K).

So count FLA, he's still up 200K votes.

You should be very satisfied voting for Obama, as he will have won the nomination with both the most delegates (according to the DNC rules) AND the most popular votes (rules according to HRC.)


Leah Texas4Obama said...

Looks like the top left box here on DCW has been updated for PA.

Obama +74 delegates
Clinton + 84 delegates

So Hillary only gained 10 delegates. Not a very big dent in Obama's lead!

Obama now has a total pledged delegate lead of +129 -- on to North Carolina and Indiana!

Leah Texas4Obama said...

Ooops.. The +129 Obama lead is pledged + supers ;)

Somerled said...

Yep...pledged lead is only 105. Wait, that's nearly ten times what IT closed in PA... 9 primaries left. Wow. THAT doesn't look too promising.

Besides, do we REALLY want those flying monkeys hovering over the WH for the next four years?

dwit said...

So the delegate count according to CNN is

Obama +162

Clinton +24

Obama +138

Leah Texas4Obama said...


Maybe CNN has not updated the full 158 PA delegates.

DCW here updated the full 158 delegates from the Green Papers numbers.

Obama has a -10 tonight in PA.

Obama had a total of +139 according to DCW earlier today and now it is +129

I saw those CNN numbers a bit ago and they are not using the full 158 number from PA

Leah Texas4Obama said...

CNN is only showing for PA

Clinton 52
Obama 46

That is why.

dwit said...

MSNBC has Obama's pledged count at +156


NPR has Obama's pledged count at +155


DCW has Obama's pledged count at +153

Super delegates don't really count folks. You know they won't decide this thing unless one candidate has the popular vote.

Leah Texas4Obama said...

This PA state website is showing Obama with more votes than what CNN is showing:


Leah Texas4Obama said...

So I guess the only important numbers now are the number of pledged and suppers that everyone needs in order to win!

Obama needs 303
Clinton needs 432

GatorsChampions4Ever said...

DaveInNC, before you make any more
out-of-left field comments, let's take a look at 3 important facts:

1. Senator Obama will enjoy a comfortable lead through the end of this process, but what to do if Senator Clinton wins the popular vote? That is like George H.W. Bush winning the Electoral College and John Kerry winning the popular vote. Interesting argument there.

2. Senator Clinton has won the crucial swing states sich as:

Florida(she wins, do-over or not.)
Michigan(see Florida.)
Pennsylvania(which she DID win by 10)
Texas(they'll vote for McCain, but useful for the primary discussion)

Senator Obama's wins of note are Missouri and Connecticut.

He has won states that Democrats have no chance of winning. They are:

North Dakota

If Senator Obama can not win any of the vital swing states, it shows he is clearly not electable.

3. He cannot knock her out. His chances were:

After he won Iowa.
She won New Hampshire.
Opportunity #1 gone.

After he won 12 in a row.
She wins Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island.

After his forgotten wins in Mississippi and Wyoming.
She wins Pennsylvania by 10.

If he cannot knock her out by now, he will never knock her out.

The superdelegates will be looking at:

The candidate that wins the crucial swing states.

The candidate that wins the popular vote.

The candidate that is most electable.

A combination of the 3.

After the final vote is counted, it will become perfectly clear this candidate is Senator Clinton.

North Carolina will not be a blowout.

Leah, i suggest you tone it down a little.

Finally, the Pepsi Center will have hosted the following by the end of the year:

NCAA Tournament 1st and 2nd Round games.

Stanley Cup playoff games(Avalanche).

NBA playoff games(Nuggets).

Democratic National Convention.

I wonder if one building has ever hosted all of these events in the same year.

dwit said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
dwit said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
dwit said...


Can't say I'm too bothered by Leah. You may want to talk to your friends Yamakarl and Jean, however. They tend to freak out a bit.

Here it is for you folks. Obama has turned out more voters than ever in the Midwest, South and West ESPECIALLY Colorado. You'll also note that Bill won in '92 by taking several Midwest states. I see that as being more plausible for Obama as he has already taken most of them. But even better! He'll also get some of the South.



You'll notice that Obama has raised much more money in every state with the exceptions of Florida, Texas, and New York. And Texas is very close.

Trust me Florida ain't all its cracked up to be. They haven't delivered for a Democrat since 1996. Also, they voted for old Georgie the 1st in '92 and he still lost. They can't be counted on.

If she is the nominee it will have to be by super del. anointment. If that happens, you can kiss the South and Midwest goodbye.

You'll notice that Carter only barely pulled that kind of victory off because he was a Southerner and he took the entire South. Hillary won't take any folks.


Ford, a very similar candidate to John McCain took the entire West. Hillary only plays in a few big states. Obama plays all over the map AND in the big states.

Why do you think Limbaugh and Hannity have been encouraging Republicans to vote for Hillary?

They know she will only polarize voters on the right and left. They FEAR Obama.

And remember folks, it is the South and West and Midwest that have grown since Carter's narrow win.

Just sayin'...

dwit said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
dwit said...

"Turnout was higher among Democrats than Republicans, with Democratic turnout surpassing Republican turnout even in traditionally red states where the number of registered Democrats is proportionally low"


Face it folks, Obama stands a very good chance of taking a whole lot o' the Midwest, West and South in addition to the big states. Hillary would like us to believe only she can win large states, yet even Ed Rendell has admitted Obama has increased voter rolls in Pennsylvania. Rendell has also conceded Obama will probably take Pennsylvania if he is the nominee.

dwit said...

Now who is the candidate of the middle class and under privileged? Can anyone help me dissect these numbers?

Hillary Clinton
Size of Donations
$200 and Under $47,375,771

$200.01 - $499 $11,376,977
$500 - $999 $12,238,022
$1000 - $1999 $26,281,526

$2000 and Over $77,413,699

PAC $1,221,842

Barack Obama
Size of Donations
$200 and Under $102,217,130

$200.01 - $499 $22,172,143
$500 - $999 $20,351,097
$1000 - $1999 $31,362,120

$2000 and Over $61,543,167

PAC $250


To me it looks like Hillary gets most of her money from the wealthy and a PAC. Am I reading that correctly? Oddly enough, even though she has less total contributions, her over $2000 donations still dwarf Mr. Obama's.

That seems a little strange to me. Anyone help me out here?

ed iglehart said...

Pennsylvania official state data:
Clinton 1,234,547 54.3%
Obama 1,041,136 45.8%

Rounding that lot gives us 54/46 or 8% margin. Definitely NOT double digits.


dwit said...

Any idea why the "news" organizations are calling it a 10 point win?

Unknown said...

I think the media is completely missing the point again- Obama failing to win PA is not a function of the so called white working class voter- but again a function of age...Obama won voters under 40...

On another point Obama only needs arpund 320 Supers to win this- and with the add ons- that he can control- and the Pelosi club he is down to a very small number needed- less than 40....

Amot said...

Dwit, MSM and PA officials differ because MSM has included counties absentees ballots. Therefore they have greater numbers and different margin...
But we are waiting for 3% Philly and 3% Delaware plus all the absentees from those counties. My projection Clinton +9%

Yamaka said...

Good Morning Democrats:

Did you all sleep well? I did, as always! Another pretty day in Houston.


Welcome. Amen. Well Said.

Keep writing. Your are analytical and critical. Good job.

Dear Obamamaniacs:

Here is my two cents worth of prediction:

The Kid wins only NC where you have a big Black population.

Everywhere else, it is for Hillary,
the Genuine American Classic.

To ALL the American Blacks:

Respectfully, I submit you are being duped by BHO, who is NOT of your Heritage, the Glorious Black American Heritage.

He has Kenyan Heritage! His forefathers DO NOT bear the scars of slavery, discrimination and segregation, and the attendant misery.

He is cheating you all in the broad day light. Just wake up.

Support your Girl, Hillary Rodham Clinton, who has been your friend for now 20 years straight.

Folks, the Tide has changed, since PA. We will see a domino effect from now on.

BHO is self-destructing himself:

He is his own enemy. It is his pathetic destiny that he will lose everything in life.

Hillary will decimate him, crush & obliterate him in 6 weeks.

Wait and see.

But, he can be the Master of his own Destiny! By calling the Maestro!

Cheers. :) :)

Anonymous said...

The color Purple. Much as we may crave it, we do not live in a democracy. If we did then each person would have one vote in every issue, and that vote would count as much as any other. But we don’t. If you participated in a caucus, your vote counted about ten times as much as someone who voted in a primary. In the general election, what ultimately matters is the votes in the Electoral College, not the popular vote, as we re-learned so painfully in 2000. So the question facing the uncommitted “super-delegates” is how do we run the best campaign with the highest probability of defeating John McCain in November, and win the majority of Electoral College votes.

Currently Clinton has 288 electoral votes and Obama has 202 electoral votes using the same method as used in the GE. To win you need only 270 electoral votes . With 288 electoral votes she is already the winner.Assume that Hillary wins WV, Indiana , KY
and Obama gets SD, NC , OR , MT , Clinton will have 308 electoral votes and Obama will have 230 Electoral votes. THIS IS NOT TRIVIAL . HILLARY IS GETTING 50% MORE ELECTORAL VOTES THAN OBAMA by winning all the Big States which are needed to win the Presidency.You know who should be on top of the DREAM ticket.

Hillary CLINTON and her supporters will block any solution where Florida & Michigan are not counted.

Democratic party is equally divided on the basis of Age, Race, Gender and Class between Hillary & Obama. 25% of Hillary supporters wil not vote for for Obama and 15% of the Obama voters will not vote for Hillary. The ONLY SOLUTION IS TO HAVE A JOINT TICKET ---- ANY OTHER WAY WE LOSE THE ELECTION.

I know Pelosi does not want a a Dream Ticket as she wants to be the only QUEEN BEE in Washington . Do not feel bad Pelosi. We are not taking away your QUEEN BEE Status. Let there be two Queen Bees – one for the Executive Office and one for the house. VOTE FOR THE DREAM TICKET. Our Goal should be to win the General Election. We should all control our egos and join hands.

Anonymous said...

The nominating campaign is about choosing the Democrat's nominee. Delegates pledged through the primary and caucus process is a barometer that normally is pretty clear. When there is a virtual or actual tie, the DNC through the "Super Delegates" effectively choose the nominee. In the event that it comes down to the SD, then all votes and every pledged delegate should and must be counted. You can’t and shouldn’t say that pledged delegates will determine the nominee when pledged delegates are based on the votes each candidate receives. If a candidate is winning by margin greater than the votes you are not counting, then I say fine, if not, count it all and stop with the political posturing!

Simply put, the voters in the states that are being penalized were not responsible for the decision. They were powerless to do anything about it. These voters were and are being disenfranchised by their own party, not the opposition, or a local band of fearful and uneducated average citizens. Nevertheless these voters went to the polls as is their right and they voted. The DNC was wrong enacting a sanction that effectively disenfranchises every Democrat in those states. They were just wrong! They made the penalty up with the stroke of a pen. They should undo it and call it a lesson learned! The DNC, BHO and HRC have no choice, but to count it for the hope of a unified party. There is no need to do it over. We just need to count it! Then and only then can you declare that every vote was counted and the winner is……whoever! Anything short of this is just politics that will cost the Democrats the White House!

It is only this tight race that has exposed this error. Since it is exposed, the party has to eat the crow it created and count the votes. BHO postured for Iowa with Michigan, because it looked like a freebie. He postured with a caveat that in fact gave him what he would have earned that day; the uncommitted vote was his, because his campaign requested it from those that wanted to support him. He was advertising all over Michigan that whoever wants to vote for Obama should vote for Uncommited.The message got out big time.
The Michigan results are: HRC 328,309, C Dodd 3,845, Mike Gavel 2,361, D Kucinich 21,715, and BHO’s “uncommitted” 238,168. Therein is the justice.

This is a simple, fair and economical solution. This solution does not hand the nomination to Clinton. It also simultaneously helps to avert a convention nightmare. A nightmare that will show the nation and the world the complete and utter chaos you can expect from the Democrats and their nominee. Conversely, we can be mature responsible adults, count the votes as they stand, and all move on!

Finally, someone who is being objective about the situation. All things were equal in FL. Both candidates names were on the ballot. The FL delegates should definitely be seated because the republicans of FL moved the states primary date up. The Dems. in FL had nothing to do with it and therefore shoudn't be punished. False ego and arrogance and fear of losing is pushing one side asking other side not to count the votes which have already been recorded.
Like Dwit said It is up to the states, not the DNC to make that happen. That is how the organization is set up. They give the state committees the autonomy to run their state elections. Let the FL & MI state committees decide how the votes should be counted. Who are DNC bigwigs to decide against the will of the people?
Like Tyler said the current "DNC way" -- don't seat the delegations at all -- seems draconian and vindictive to me. The "seat-em anyway" option seems fair and not partisan. Worrying about future that it will set up a bad precedent is something that we should not worry about NOW when our infighting will result in losing 2008 presidency.

In future we should run the same method that Republicans use –primaries with WINNER TAKE ALL so that by March we have a nominee not the micky mouse way we run our Caucuses and proportional voting which results in disunity and defeat in General Election. Name me a single intelligent person who does not think that Democratic leadership has created a MESS for themselves this year like in 2000 & 2004?

Like Jim said Yamaka our goal this year, to win back the Whitehouse?


Yamaka said...

tony and Jim:

You make lots of sense.

We need to count ALL votes, and seat ALL delegates as per the wishes of the voters. This is the Full Inclusive Democracy.

If this is done I am willing to support Sen Obama if he gets the nod. I will blog for him all day everyday!

However, my heart keeps saying

Break Open the Glass Ceiling and let my daughter become the Woman POTUS 25 years from now. She needs a good word of encouragement, Yes She Can become a POTUS.

Sen Obama has Kenyan Heritage, not the Glorious Black American Heritage. Then, where is the real CHANGE?

Popular votes matter, Electoral Votes matter:

By popular vote HRC is leading BHO by 121,000 votes, and she has 284 to 198 EVs after PA.

Folks here is our plan to destroy the Convention at Denver, if ALL votes are NOT counted:

1. Some 6 million volunteers will descend on Denver to protect the 3 million disenfranchised voters in FL and MI.

2. We will make sacrifices: we give blood to the American Red Cross in Denver.

3. We will make human chains, and block the entrances of the Convention, and the hotels where ever the delegates stay.

4. We will NOT the Convention to start, as planned.

5. If Howi Dean brings police, let them bring water canons, police dogs, tanks and bullets. We will stay our ground till they bleed us to death.

6. We will make HD video of each second of each minute and play it in the WEB all over the world.

7. We will not hurt anyone, damage anything. But we will stay our ground no matter what.

This is what Mahatma Gandhi taught us: Ahimsha, Sathyagraha and massive Civil Disobedience, which wrecked the mighty British.

Remember, we will prevail.

A promise signed in our blood.

Count ALL votes.

Smile and Vote. :)

Anonymous said...

The nomination will not be legitimate unless Florida & Michigan are counted. . With Michgan & FL included , Hillary has 1785 delegates and Obama has 1794 delegates. Looking at popular vote, Clinton now leads Obama by 121943 votes.

If we want a Democratic president, we need a Democratic nominee who can win the battleground states, just like Ohio. She has won Florida, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, Michigan,PA,Texas, Ohio New Hampshire, Arkansas, California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Oklahoma and Tennessee.

Clinton would defeat McCain in the Electoral College because of her lead in big, electoral-vote-rich states such as Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania -- and McCain would beat Obama Hillary will win as she is the more experienced candidate and not burdened by Wright affair. This is the right thing to do as she is leading in electoral votes by 50% margin over Obama and Democratic party is not stupid to nominate a weak candidate.

Obama's totals thus far have come in great part from state caucuses nearly as much as from actual primaries. (Eleven out of the 30 states and other entities he has won held caucuses, not primaries. Washington held both, as did Texas, where Obama won the caucuses and lost the popular vote.)

Of the two systems, caucuses are by far the less democratic -- which may be why there will be exactly zero caucuses in this fall's general election. By excluding voters who cannot attend during the limited times available, the caucuses skew participation toward affluent activists and students, and against working people, mothers and caregivers, and the military. Clinton's victories, by contrast, have come overwhelmingly in states with primaries, not caucuses.

Obama is certainly entitled to the delegates he won in the caucuses. But he can hardly, on that account, claim that he is clearly the popular favorite.

Do you think Obama has any chance of winning FL, MI, PA & OH? zero zip --End of the story. GE lost.He will be in the freezer for rest of his life like Kerry, Dean, Kennedy ,etc. He will never be nominated again.
Democrats should start thinking about uniting the party by proposing a joint ticket to win the General Election with 100% certainty.

jpsedona said...

A nice win for Hillary. Cuts the pledged delegate lead by 10-12. 200,000 or so extra in popular vote.

Unfortunately for her, she has virtually no chance to catch up in pledged delegates (she'd need about 70% of the remaining delegates). To cut his lead in pledged delegates to under 100, she needs to score upsets in NC & IN.

Based on the current NC projections, he's looking like a 20+ delegate advantage coming out of NC. Elizabeth Edwards will help her campaign there, so his lead may narrow. I think IN will be about a wash. Portions of IN are in the Chicago media market and many people commute to Chicago metro for work. Hillary has Evan Bayh. Obama should do well in the college towns and IN is much better demographics (age, education) for him than PA.

Based on current estimates, after May 6 Clinton will be behind by more than 150 pledged delegates. She will win big in KY, WV and PR. Obama is going to begin advertising in OR where he leads; he'll also do ok in MT, SD.

At the end of the primaries, Hillary will be behind in pledged delegates by 140 or more.

jpsedona said...

RobH, dwitt,

With respect to Chuck Todd's projections on popular vote estimates, he and other media sources talk about FL votes but always ignore the unreported votes from IA, NV, ME, WA caucuses. There are various estimates from these unreported caucuses. RCP for example, estimates a 110,000 plurality for Obama.

I believe that Hillary's strategy will not be to claim she won the popular vote even if FL is included. I think she will instead say that after all the primaries and caucuses are done popular vote is dead even (even if behind by 200,000). She'll say "It's a tie", "I won the most important states", "the bigger states", etc.

They will discount the fact that Obama could make NC, VA, CO swing states in the GE. They will also ignore that Obama has shown significant appeal to Independent voters in open primaries. Those will be the voters required to win key battleground states.

It's all going to come down to whether the SD's have the guts to go against the voters in their own states and the leader in pledged delegates.

RobH said...

Hi Tony,

While I don't agree with some of what you say - and I can't believe I'm about to say this - I think I'm beginning to believe a unified ticket is the only hope, too.

Even though I put out a post last night that identifed Webb and others as reasonable VP candidates for Obama, I'm now thinking other considerations.

While I agree that FLA and MICH are a total mess-up, let's consider what happens if we all cave, and count them as is w/ uncommitted to Obama (boy, how due you deal w/ the Michigander who voted for "uncommited" because he/she wanted to vote for Biden. Talk about disenfranchised lol.)

Obama's up by 500K today, give her 380K fo FL and MI, give him approx 110K for caucus state estimates. Estimates (as done by Chuck Todd - see last nights 1AM post) are that she'll pick up 25K the rest of the way. He ends up winning the pop vote. (even w/out the four caucus state business.)

Joint ticket w/ him at the top?

Pro's: it's legit 'cause he won by all measures, he gets to remain "above the fray", "visionary", "uniting.
She'd be VERY effective as teh attack dog VP.

Joint ticket w/ her at top?

Con's: could alienate significant demographics (youth, AA), but the biggest one, Obama is rendered ineffective, cause Bill is really the VP.

I think I think I think, a joint ticket w/ him on top could work. But would take extraordinary conciliatory effort on both parts (a la Kennedy/Johnson) to make it work. Lots of folks don't like how this process has evolved and more lay it at her feet than his. If it could it's a freight train in November.

RobH said...

Yamaka said:

"If this is done I am willing to support Sen Obama if he gets the nod. I will blog for him all day everyday!"

Well halle - frickin - lujah.
I'm really happy to hear that.

I think most reasonable Obama supporters have said, if she's our nominee, I'll support her (if reluctantly) for the good of our country. Last night I saw exit polls that showed more Clinton supporters were not of that mind, in the reverse case. That scares me.

I'm happy to see you do so with great enthusiasm, not reluctance. Perhaps your esteemed position could disseminate this outllok to more Clinton supporters.

Unknown said...

Trash can is open.
NC is comming, so Obama had a 20 point lead in the NC polls two weeks ago,
If Clinton gets into single didits,
will that be a win?

jpsedona said...


"If you participated in a caucus, your vote counted about ten times as much as someone who voted in a primary"

Using this twisted logic, then we should multiply the caucus votes by 10 to get the real equivalent popular votes? I thought not.

"With 288 electoral votes she is already the winner"

Uh Huh. To win the GE, you need to turnout and win the states the traditional Dem states, no doubt about it. But as you say it's a purple country. In order for Hillary to win, she would need to attract a significant portion of the Independent vote. Based on her high negatives, this will be very tough to do. Both McCain and Obama appeal to Independents. In open primary states, Obama has performed very well. In Dem only contests Hillary has prevailed. Does the fact that Hillary can't appeal to younger voters or Independents portent disaster in GE if she's the candidate? I think that's the real concern. Most Dems will support whoever is the nominee. The question in the swing states in particular is who appeals to the 'swing voter'.

The advantage that the Dems have in this election year is being squandered on a bitter nominating process that won't end well, no matter who's the nominee.

Yamaka said...

"Democrats should start thinking about uniting the party by proposing a joint ticket to win the General Election with 100% certainty" -tony

Well said, Amen.

HRC at the Top and BHO as VP, a Dream Ticket that would send shiver in the spines of the Republican Party!

Cindy and John McCain will reel in delirium.

We can win 350 Electoral Votes and 60 million popular votes. This means the WH and 2/3 of the Congress in the bag.

We will solve all the persistent questions of our time:

War, Universal Healthcare and Economy.

Plus we are making a true American History First Woman POTUS.

Win Win and Win for ALL.

Sen Obama, are you awake and listening?

Or still pandering to the Puppet Masters, the BigMoneyBags and the fraudster David Axelrod?

Sen Obama think hard, and act fast.

Allowing this contest to move on further hurts ALL of us.

Cheers. :)

jpsedona said...


Your opinion on counting MI & FL. I agree that the DNC screwed up royally by not adopting a 1/2 vote rule like the GOP.

I don't believe that the popular votes from MI or FL are valid. Given the early dates of those contests and lack of campaigning, the results are not representative of what 'might' have happened. Hillary going into Jan was the known candidate and presummed nominee. What the Obama campaign has shown is that given an opportunity to address voters directly, he has narrowed the Clinton advantage even in contests that she won.

In PA, he came from more than 20 points down to narrow her margin of victory. Had he campaigned in FL & MI, or if they had carried out a re-vote, would the results have been the same? Maybe, who knows? But I think three things are clear if they had a re-vote: 1) turnout would have been much heavier 2) registrations would have been up 3) her margin of victory would have been narrowed based on the results where they both actively campaigned in the state.

The inside word is that the FL delegation is going to be seated with each pledged & super delegate getting 1/2 vote. With the results from the weekend district caucuses in MI, Obama got all but one of the uncommitted. But there's not going to be an agreement by either campaign there given Obama's name was not on the ballot.

It will all get resolved when one candidate has conceded. If it goes all the way to the convention, there will always bee 2012.

GatorsChampions4Ever said...

Let me touch on a few things as we move forward:

Senator Clinton has cut Senator Obama's lead to 9 points in North Carolina.

Source: www.realclearpolitics.com

jpsedona: If Senator Obama wins Indiana, THAT would be an upset.

Fox News Channel was reporting that Senator Clinton could perhaps steal Montana. That would be a shock.

Let's make one point clear about the superdelegates: They tend to make decisions in groups. Rarely do you ever see them decide individually.

Let's be perfectly honest, folks: Senator Obama has huge advantages in money, media coverage, etc., and yet he keeps drawing blanks in key swing states such as:


This shows a type of disconnect with Senator Obama and the core constituincies he needs to defeat Senator McCain in November. These superdelegates will see that Senator Clinton is the only choice for the Democratic party. These superdelegates do not want to risk losing in November, and Senator Clnton is a sure thing, whereas Senator Obama is not.

jpsedona said...


Given all the negative things you've said about Obama including racial insults, name calling etc. how could you support an Obama VP slot? Your support based on all your trahing is just plain dishonest. Like the candidate you support, say / do anything to have your candidate win.

With respect to winning 350 Electoral votes in the Fall, that won't happen independent of who is at the top of the ballot or who's the VP. There are going to be more states at risk for the Dems in the GE than there were 4 years ago; but other states like CO & VA present an opportunity. There will be no blowout by either party.

jpsedona said...


"Let's be perfectly honest, folks"

If you wanted to do that, you wouldn't be claiming a victory in MI & FL as big state victories for Hillary.

As for NC, if you were following the polls closely, you would also know that a number of polls like SurveyUSA (Obama +9) and PPP (Obama +25 up 5pts from last time)are highly inaccurate and reliable. Let's see how the polls from mainstream orgs have it after the voters get a chance to digest the Clinton win in PA.

countjellybean said...

Jean is up to her old tricks on the main thread.

The RCP average has been a 14-16 point lead for Obama for the past several weeks. There is a huge variance in the numbers from the different polling sources.

Rush Limbaugh is encouraging his supporters in PA to re-register as Republicans in order to increase matching funds for McCain. I am curious to see how many do that.

RobH said...


Absolutely. If Obama slides from high teens to single digits, EVERYBODY, but most notably the punditocracy, will call that a win, and start the drum beat for him to abandon the race due to "electability issues."

This whole thing is exhausting. Can you imagine how the candidates feel???

Oh, I do hope we can reconcile as a party when one of these groups is ultimately disappointed.

Yamaka said...

"There will be no blowout by either party".

I am not naive. I am being practical. I don't want to lose everything at the end of the day.

This is the Primary Season. We must all fight hard for our ideology, our candidate and our value system. Then again in our Family Fight, we lick our wounds and see what we can salvage that helps the Family!

As you may know, I am a Centrist, a Moderate and a fiscal conservative. I value experience, over some rookie at the Top.

I don't expect a Reagan blowout, but a Clinton blowout is quite possible in the GE with HRC at the Top, IMHO.

Cheer and Smile. Vote for Hillary at the Top.

RobH said...


Absolutely. If Obama slides from high teens to single digits, EVERYBODY, but most notably the punditocracy, will call that a win, and start the drum beat for him to abandon the race due to "electability issues."

This whole thing is exhausting. Can you imagine how the candidates feel???

Oh, I do hope we can reconcile as a party when one of these groups is ultimately disappointed.

GatorsChampions4Ever said...

jpsedona. Do you honestly think that Michigan and Florida will not count? Howard Dean knows he made a mistake in not counting either state's delegates. Do-over or not, Senator Clinton will still win both states. Even without either one, the argument is still strong. I think I am being honest with that claim, do you not agree? And what exactly are the mainstream polls' names?

jpsedona said...


Popular vote will be a determining factor for some SD's (those who want to hang their hat on something other than contests, pledged delegates).

I think with respect to popular vote, the argument of including MI falls on a lot of deaf ears. Even Clinton insiders don't think including MI in the total is valid. In FL, I think there's a better argument to include it if your looking at the total.

So, what if Clinton wins by 1 vote after including FL and the missing caucus states? Is that a win? Anything within 250,000 is essentially a dead heat.

I think that MI & FL will both be seated. But that agreement won't happen before someone concedes. I would be shocked if the two delegations are seated as is. The DNC will look worse than they look now. I suspect that MI will ultimately be seated but not necessarily by the margin in the primary. Once one candidate concedes, the delegations will be seated such that it doesn't change the outcome (independent of which candidate is the presumptive nominee).

I think in a re-vote, Hillary would still win FL. I think that MI would be a toss-up. But since that won't happen, it will all have to wait until someone concedes.

Richard said...

jpsedona said They will discount the fact that Obama could make NC, VA, CO swing states in the GE.

Exactly. If Obama can pull off wins in states that aren't even traditional swing states, he can take the General Election without winning Florida, Ohio, or Pennsylvania (which I still think he would win).

Yamaka said...

"he can take the General Election without winning Florida, Ohio, or Pennsylvania (which I still think he would)"--Richard

It is a fanciful fantasy. A pie in the sky.

But, a good day dream. A Risky Venture.

FL OH PA ARE key to win the GE.

:) :) Vote for Hillary and make REAL History: First Woman POTUS.

jpsedona said...


I think that PA is in play for either Dem candidate in the GE... UNLESS, McCain chooses Tom Ridge for a running mate. THAT would make PA a very tough state for the Dems to win.

jpsedona said...


As far as reputable polls, I think the following are generally unreliable:

Research 2000

The following polls are generally reliable:

Zogby / Reuters
Gallup / USA Today
LA Times / Bloomberg
Insiser Advantage

However, if you were to look at the final Reuters-Zogby Poll in OH, they blew it. They called it a tie when the final margin was 10.

If you look at the polling of SurveyUSA, their polls in PA were all over the place. So was PPP (who had Obama +3 over the weekend).ARG generally uses registered voters (instead of LV).

Ignore the outliers which fluctuate with almost random abandonment.

Leah Texas4Obama said...

GatorsChampions4Ever -

You said above that I should tone it down - Ha what a laugh! I was only stating NUMERICAL FACTS - which is a lot different than your twisting of the facts.

1) Michigan and Florida primaries ARE NOT valid - so you can not keep saying over and over again that Clinton won those states - she did NOT.

2) Texas is a two-step race. You MUST add up the delegates won in both the primary and caucus. Clinton did NOT win - Obama WON.

3) Anyone yak'ing about electoral votes in this nomination process on this blog is being ridiculous.

So bottom line - once everyone stops falsely saying that Clinton won MI, FL, and TX then you don't have much to work with.

Unknown said...

Is Obama Black, White or some shade of grey.
Does he hold Kenyan citizenship.
I know he says he is black and claims a love for Kenya,
but many persons of mixed race(white/black) say they are African American.

jpsedona said...


Let's assume that Hillary is the nominee. What's her path to winning the GE if she were to loose Fl, OH or PA?

What's the strategy for Hillary to win FL if McCain takes CHarlie Crist as his VP?

What's her strategy if McCain takes Rdige in PA?

Leah Texas4Obama said...

One more fact-
Clinton has NOT won PA by double digits:


99.44% Reporting



*** LESS THAN 10%

Unknown said...

You wrote
"2) Texas is a two-step race. You MUST add up the delegates won in both the primary and caucus. Clinton did NOT win - Obama WON."
Not so. Nobody knows who won Texas overall yet and won't until the state convention in June.

Yamaka said...

"What's the strategy for Hillary to win FL if McCain takes CHarlie Crist as his VP?

What's her strategy if McCain takes Rdige in PA?"

It depends on who she picks as VP.

With BHO as VP, she can have a blowout with 350 EV. IMHO

Well, let us wait and see how this plays out.

Whether there is a Dream Ticket or just we self-destruct all the way to June 3rd.

The Democratic Party is caught in a Perfect Storm in the Bermuda Triangle, my won Imagery!

:) :)

Subodh said...

O'bama must promise more than just hope if he is to be President of these "United" States. He cannot beat McCain even if he receives 100% of the Black vote - he needs the vote of the White majority and he will not gain their support until he unequivocally rejects and denounces the Black Nationalist/Power/Separatist tone of the UCC Church he has attended and supported for over 20 years. A Church whose vision statement is based on the writings of Dr. James Cone who has written: "Black Theology is the theological arm of Black Power, and Black Power is the political arm of Black Theology. . . Whiteness [symbolizes] the ethnocentric activity of madmen sick with their own self-concept." Dr. Cone has also written that God (the Black God) is not a God of all people but only the God of the oppressed with Whites as the oppressors. Otherwise, he says, God is a God of racism.

Finally, Dr. Cone has said that the Black Christian cannot follow the White church - much like another former UCC minister, Albert Cleage, once wrote: "[Paul] never knew Jesus and [he] modified his teaching to conform to the pagan philosophers of the white gentiles. We, as black Christians suffering oppression in a white man's land, do not need the individualistic and other-worldly doctrines of Paul and the white man."

How I long for Martin Luther King Jr. who said it so well: "Beneath all the satisfaction of a gratifying slogan, Black Power is a nihilistic philosophy born out of the conviction that the Negro can’t win. It was born from the wounds of despair and disappointment . . . In the final analysis, the weakness of Black power is its failure to see that the Black man needs the White man and the White man needs the Black man.”

Without truly distancing himself from Trinity UCC and the likes of Wright, O'bama will most likely do more to "divide" (as have the words of Wright) our 50 States than to unite them. O’bama, unlike King, is a coward not to disavowi the philosophical ideology of Black Power.

Leah Texas4Obama said...

I suppose it is fair for you to say that no one has won TEXAS yet - until the June results are in BUT as it is now:

Obama: 99 total delegates
Clinton: 94 total delegates

So those folks on this blog that keep saying that Clinton won Texas are WRONG.

Yamaka said...


Good point.

The State Convention is on the 6-7th of June, I am going there to Austin!

Let the day-dreamers dream all they want!

It's their fancy and fantasy, and they have their right to fail!

As per the DCW left last BOX, BHO leads by a lowly 9 delegates, but lags popular votes by 121,000!!

2208 is the magic number, and not 2025 as the liberal media sleepwalk!!

Smile and Cheer for the First Woman POTUS
:) :)

Leah Texas4Obama said...

Jim -

It doesn't matter if Obama is black, white, yellow, red, green, or purple.

He is an AMERICAN. Born in the U.S.A. and is a U.S. Senator of the United States of American - and deserves the respect of the American people as well as ALL of our U.S. Senators are owed our respect.

jpsedona said...


Can you explain where your 350 delegates come from?

If you switch OH & FL to blue states, and add it to Kerrey's total from 2004, that gives you 299. So, where does the other 50 electoral votes come from? What red states do you think that she carries to get that type of margin?

If you add in NM, IA, MO, AR as possibilities, that would be 328. Add in LA & TN that's 348. Or are you looking at VA and CO with a combined 22?

I'm sorry but at this point, I don't see a 350 electoral vote scenario as being remotely possible. I thin she could win some of these states but I think others like IA, TN, MO are likely to go with McCain.

Yamaka said...

"It doesn't matter if Obama is black, white, yellow, red, green, or purple."

Alas, DC, VA, SC and MS voted for him because he is Black! Although of Kenyan Heritage, not Black American Heritage!! Anyway, this is what the liberal MSM blathers everyday!!

He is counting on that sentiment to work in NC also! Is that not the fact of life?

:) :)

Richard said...

Yamaka: I don't think it's fanciful at all. CA, CT, CO, DC, DE, HI, IA, IL, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, NC, ND, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NV, OR, RI, VT, WA, WI have a total of 275 electoral votes. CO, NC, ND, and NM are states Hillary is almost certain not to win, but which Barack Obama has a real shot in. VA would also be in play for Obama but not for Clinton.

I am not saying that this is likely to be the scenario. In fact, as I said above, I think Barack Obama will win PA. I am just pointing out that while Obama has multiple scenarios for victory even without winning all or even any of the big three swing states, there is virtually no scenario in which Hillary Clinton can win without winning both OH and PA.

In short, with Clinton we basically have the same electoral position we had with Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004: everything riding on two states which have burned us repeatedly in the past.

Yamaka said...

"If you add in NM, IA, MO, AR as possibilities, that would be 328. Add in LA & TN that's 348. Or are you looking at VA and CO with a combined 22?"

Please go to 270towin.com site, and play with it!

At this point anything is possible!

I am just saying that a Clinton-blowout of 350-360 is feasible, not of Reagan type of 500 plus. That's all.


Unknown said...

Of course his color makes a difference. How else would you explain him getting about 90%percent of the balck vote so far

Leah Texas4Obama said...

Yamaka -

You conveniently left out the fact that MANY are voting FOR Hillary based on her 'race' and 'gender'.

I am a white woman and it makes my stomach turn!

Unknown said...

And it makes a difference that Clinton is a Woman. Same rational

jpsedona said...


"Yamaka: I don't think it's fanciful at all. CA, CT, CO, DC, DE, HI, IA, IL, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, NC, ND, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NV, OR, RI, VT, WA, WI have a total of 275 electoral votes. CO, NC, ND, and NM are states Hillary is almost certain not to win, but which Barack Obama has a real shot in. VA would also be in play for Obama but not for Clinton"

I think that those states are possible. However, I think that winning NV, IA, ND, NC and NM are questionable. Obama has a shot in NC becuase of the demographics. NM and NV might be more difficult with a track record of going red (barely) and having neighboring Senator running. NM is more likely to go for Obama than NV. I don't think Obama can win ND and will not be able to beat McCain in IA.

I think Obama could be competitive in VA and that might offset the more questionable state. He might have an advantage there if he picks Webb for VP.

Yamaka said...

Every one by now knows the Democratic Party is torn between

Most Blacks, young, inexperienced, affluent White males


Most Latinos, old, experienced regular White males and most women.

Which demographic abundance favors which candidate?

The abundance favors HRC, IMHO.

You may disagree. We will meet in the GE - HRC with McCain.


GatorsChampions4Ever said...

leah. I respect what you are saying, even though I wish you would say you would respect what I am saying. As for your ''interesting'' comments, let's review:

1. ''Michigan and Florida primaries are NOT valid.'' Do you actually think that Howard Dean(who hasn't exactly distinguished himself anyway.) would let Florida and Michigan not count when those are two critical states in the General Election? I'll concede you Michigan(although HE chose to take his name off of the ballot), but everybody was on the ballot in Florida. Senator Clinton would still win comfortably there in a do-over based on the demographic(older voters, lots of retirees, New Yorkers that migrate down there). It was REPUBLICANS that changed the primary date in Florida. Why should Senator Clinton be penalized for that?

2. ''Texas is a two-step race. You MUST add up the delegates won in both the primary and the caucus. Clinton did NOT win, Obama WON.''

Wrong. If you remember watching it on TV, there were 2 SEPARATE Texas polls: one for the primary(which Senator Clinton won), and one for the caucus(which Senator Obama won.)In theory, they split(although there are no caucuses come November.)

3. ''Anyone yak'ing about electoral votes in this nomination process on this blog is being ridiculous.''

Really? Isn't that how they decide the presidency come General Election time? Is it an unconventional way of looking at this? Absolutely. Is it an angle we should be looking at more? No doubt. The point about it is that Senator Obama cannot win primaries in big states(California, Ohio, Texas, Massachusetts) that Democrats need. Even if he expands the map, his new states won does not offset the tremendous advantage Senator McCain would enjoy out of those states. That is the whole point of that theory.

''So bottom line-once everyone stops falsely saying that Clinton won MI, FL and TX, then you doln't have much to work with.''

Hmmm. Ohio, California, New York, Massachusetts and New Jersey aren't a lot to work with?

Finally, Leah maybe i misspoke(where have we heard that before?) when I said you should tone it down after I went back to read your comments on here, but let's not be like the campaigns and go negative on each other. We all want the same thing: a Democrat in the White House. Let's just continue to blog on friendly and spirited terms.

Yamaka said...


You are on the money.

Keep writing. Good.

Leah Texas4Obama said...

GatorsChampions4Ever -

My comments regarding your comments above:

1) MI and FL were not valid because MI and FL broke the DNC rules. The election was not on a level playing field - come on even you must know that if Obama had had the opportunity to have campaigned there prior to the election his numbers would have been much higher. It was Hillary that did NOT do the right thing by leaving her name on the ballot in MI. And Obama and Edwards wanted to take their name off of the ballot in FL but under FL law only a candidate that drops completely out of the WHOLE race is allowed to remove their name - so it was impossible for Obama and Edwards to remove their names from the Florida ballot.

2) Regarding Texas: The primary is only a fraction of the election 2/3 and the caucus 1/3. You can not count the two polls separately.

3) Electoral votes has absolutely nothing to do with this democratic nomination race. Obama will have the support of the majority of democrats in the general election race. So trying to compare Obama vs. Clinton in this nom. race is like comparing apples and oranges. California, New York, etc. is NOT going to carry McCain.

There is too much Clinton machine spin out there in there media and too many people gobbling it up.

Leah Texas4Obama said...

Some good news coming out of North Carolina for Obama this morning:

Former Edwards National General Chairman and 49 Other Edwards Supporters Throw Support to Barack Obama

Also, Clinton picked up one super - Rep. John Tanner (TN) AND Obama picked up one super - Gov. Brad Henry (OK)

Looks like it is going to be a busy day!

jpsedona said...

Leah / Gators,

I would also point out that Harold Ickes was one of the people who voted to totally disenfranchise FL. Ickes has something to do with the Clinton campaign doesn't he?

Hillary signed the pledge related to FL & MI. Would she be taking the same position if SHE had not been on the ballot in MI and Obama had come out ahead in FL. Warm places would have to freeze over.

The NY TImes who endorsed Clinton, largely condemed her for a "mean, vacuous, desperate, pander-filled" election contest".

Her claims of leading in the popular vote as recently as this morning by counting MI where Obama got ZERO votes is BS.

When you've lost roughly 2-1 in contests, will end up behind in pledged delegates, and essentially a draw in the popular vote, it would take some significant backbone for SD's to hand the nomination to Hillary. There's no indication that party leaders who would back down on their own rules for seating FL & MI is going to turn around and give the nomination to Hillary.

Aunt Jean said...

Miranda since they took my blog off I'll repeat it here. To begin I know that Matt and oreo are doing a good job there is no doubt but I totally diagree with them about her when the other two said even less on those two things I think that they are being bias but not because they are bias people. Now for the other if you won't to talk that way to me that fine but I'm telling you you best not because I WILL GET VERY UGLY that is not a threat that is a promise you need to learn some manners. Jean

jpsedona said...

In looking at Clinton's fundraising efforts after PA, she has raised $4.5 million (or possibly more at this point). That's good for her campaign. Without capitalizing on her win in PA, she won't have sufficient funds to compete in NC & IN to compete effectively.

Per the NY TImes, at the end of March she had $10.3 million in debt and $9.5 million available. This doesn't factor in the costs of the last several weeks in PA where she was forced to advertise to offset Obama.

I have to think that she is significantly in hock if she spent more than $5 million on media in PA, let alone all the other ancillary expenses for her campaign. My guess would be that prior to today, she's in the hole by about $10 million. Even with her $5 million from yesterday, she has to raise alot more than 20-25 million over the next couple weeks to be competititve.

IN & NC come at a tough time for her from a funds perspective. NC and IN are not exactly cheap media markets. If he has $40 million on hand, he could potentially force her rack up some significant debt to be competitive.

But that's not the only bad news on the money front. Although Guam is next, and IN & NC on May 6, her most significant money problem will be Oregon. Oregon is a mail-in primary. Ballots get mailed to voters Oregon voters just before the NC & IN primaries. This means that she really has to begin spending in Oregon immediately.

Hillary cannot afford to forfeit a big victory to Obama in Oregon. The outcomes in NC, and IN in particular, may voter opinion in OR if Obama wins big in NC and eeks out a victory in IN. If voters mail their ballots before Hillary blows Obama away in WV, he's likely to get a significant boost from the May 6 primaries.

In any event, she has to beat the contribution drum as hard and quickly as possible. She needs to raise big money and fast.

Unknown said...

I quote the Obama campaign and mant surrogates. Paraphrased
"if the Supers try to curcumvent the will of the people by voting for someone with fewer plegded delagates and popular votes, it will be discusting."
Is this not what Gov. Brad Henry (OK is doing against the will of his state's voters.
Clinton won the state by more than 23% of Popular and in delegates 24 to 14.
Great justification for National supers to back Clinton.

Richard said...

Yamaka, exactly what states are you counting for Hillary in these extravagant predictions of yours? I think the only states she is likely to have a shot of winning (Excluding OH and PA for the moment) are: AK, CA, CT, DC, DE, HI, IL, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, NH, NJ, NY, OR, RI, VT, WA, WI.

That's 238 electors, which means she would need both OH and PA in order to win. Even with both of those, her electoral college total would be at best 279.

bpd said...


Looks like 3 more Superdelegates for Obama - and 47 other endorsements from Edwards supports from NC.

Unknown said...

Need some good talking points here

Unknown said...

I quote the Obama campaign and mant surrogates. Paraphrased
"if the Supers try to curcumvent the will of the people by voting for someone with fewer plegded delagates and popular votes, it will be discusting."
Is this not what Gov. Brad Henry (OK is doing against the will of his state's voters.
Clinton won the state by more than 23% of Popular and in delegates 24 to 14.
Great justification for National supers to back Clinton.

Leah Texas4Obama said...


In my opinion the way Hillary announces her website all the time is tacky. Last night during her 'victory' speech she said 'hillaryclinton.com' TWICE. To me when she talks it resembles an info-mercial.
And there was a HUGE sign at the bottom of the stage with the web addy - it was so big that it looked ridiculous.

I watch one or two of Obama's rallies/townhalls each day and he refers to his website when asking people to go there to read up on the issues but he doesn't go around saying 'BarackObama.com' all the time.

The man has 'class'.

jpsedona said...

I had an interesting discussion with someone earlier today regarding what it would take for Hillary to concede. Here's the hypothesis:

Assume that pledged delegates break about what's currently predicted (Obama winning NC, OR, MT, SD) and Hillary winning (WV, KY, PR); remaing contest split evenly.

Assume that Obama has a signififcant lead in pledged delegates.

Let's assume the 'Pelosi Delegates' go for Obama, he gets a likely number of the add-ons, and some quantity of the remaining delegates put him at 2025.

At that point would Hillary concede? Or, would should draw out the battle over FL & MI? Possibly taking it to the convention?

Since she adding in the FL & MI delegations in some proportion (even 50-50) because of the uncommitted SD's in those states, he would no longer have enough votes for the nomination.

So, if she still holds out any hope, is there any scenario whatsoever that she would pull out if Obama tops 2025?

jpsedona said...


Who are the three new superdelegates?

Unknown said...

I quote the Obama campaign and mant surrogates. Paraphrased
"if the Supers try to curcumvent the will of the people by voting for someone with fewer plegded delagates and popular votes, it will be discusting."
Is this not what Gov. Brad Henry (OK is doing against the will of his state's voters.
Clinton won the state by more than 23% of Popular and in delegates 24 to 14.
Great justification for National supers to back Clinton.

Leah Texas4Obama said...

Jim said: "if the Supers try to curcumvent the will of the people by voting for someone with fewer plegded delagates and popular votes, it will be discusting."
Is this not what Gov. Brad Henry (OK is doing against the will of his state's voters."


Gov. Brad Henry is following the voice of the people of the WHOLE U.S.A. Supers are not obliged to vote like their state - they must look at the whole picture and see what the majority of Americans want. So in the case of Henry he is supporting the majority of Americans that have chosen Obama :)

Unknown said...

Leah, the voice of the people is still being heard. If he did it after all the primaries, you could say that.
I say he is trying to subvert the Peoples Voice.

Leah Texas4Obama said...


Probably he came out with his endorsement now because basically the pledged-delegate race is over. There is no way that Hillary will be able over-take Obama in pledged-delegates - so my guess is that we will be seeing a lot more SDs that are going to vote for the candidate with the most pledged-delegates coming out now.

Unknown said...

Move on .Org, Michael Moore, Berkly Radicals Weather Underground, Religous Bigots and Jimmy carter.
With this group on his side, Could he ask for more.

Gertainly not middle class Americans.

Leah Texas4Obama said...


Your guilty by association argument is just not going to work because the Clintons have so many criminal associations in their past that it would make Obama's list look tiny.

And lets not forgot that Gov. Rendell praised Farrakhan at an awards dinner... and MoveOn.org was originally started to 'help' the Clintons.

I think it is only fair to judge each person on 'their own' character and work they have done.

Unknown said...

Oh, by the way, I am getting out the varmit (word) gun.
The only way to defeat the BIG Lie is to attack it.
I think Obama's followers are a Cult. They say it is a Movement
and that could be. I had a good movement this morning.

dwit said...

"I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran [if it attacks Israel]," Mrs Clinton said in an interview with the ABC network. She has been trying to sow doubts about the ability of her opponent, Barack Obama, a first-time Illinois senator, to lead the US in time of international tension while stressing her ability to handle "the toughest job in the world".

-Hillary Clinton (2008)

"Mrs Clinton's remarks were an escalation of an earlier statement that she would offer a nuclear shield to Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states and Israel to protect them from Iran."

How are we going to pay for this nuclear shield? Sounds like she plans to keep us tied up in the Middle east forever and ignore health care and alternative fuel development here.

We aren't going to have any money left for health care, failing infrastructure or research and development on fuels and medicine.

Last time I checked Israel was not the 51st state.

You guys are right, popular vote or not, Hillary is a dangerous choice. I guess this is what is swinging me to not vote in November if Hillary is on the ballot.

Her beliefs seem far too close to old Baghdad Johnny to me. What's the dif?

dwit said...

Stick to the high road Obama! Leave the swine to wallow in their own excrement. We are over it. We don't need Karl Roveson in the White House again.

RobH said...


His followers are a cult? So the majority of your governors senators and representatives are in a cult? Jim?

How much faith do you actually have in your country?

(PS the line about your AM movement goes right there with goats, shoes, and wiggle sticks.
Really clever. Appreciated)

GatorsChampions4Ever said...

leah. How come Senator Obama cannot close the deal? Why is it he cannot win Texas, California, Massachusetts, Ohio, Pennsylvania? I'd like your opinion on this:

Senator Obama spoke at New Albany, Indiana and said the following:

''I think Colorado, Wisconsin, and Iowa are battleground states''.


Colorado has gone Republican 12 of the last 14 times. Wisconsin might be in play, but Iowa won't.

It's not that I think Senator Obama won't win against Senator McCain, it's that I think Senator Obama has not demonstrated that he can win the swing states that the Democrats:


And since you are one of Senator Obama's most ardent bloggers, how come you never bring up the fact that Senator Obama has built up this lead through Republican states and caucuses, which do not allow all voting groups to vote due to location and time:

North Dakota

Yes this is the primary, and that is the focus, but it is also about looking ahead to the General Election, and the fact of the matter is that Senator Obama has not won any of the vital swing states. Senator Clinton has won states that the Democrats must have in the General Election. The number one issue among superdelegates should be about electability and Senator Clinton wins that argument with her big-state(not inculding Florida and Michigan wins........yet) victories.

Leah Texas4Obama said...

GatorsChampions4Ever -

Why can't you understand that Clinton DID NOT win Texas?


I do not think you can compare Clinton's "win the big states with my name recognition and then they will crown me on Super Tuesday" strategy to Obama's "this is a delegate race that includes ALL the states of America and when I am finished I will have the most delegates and have tens of thousands more new democrats registered to vote" strategy.

You are looking in the past and not the future... just because a state 'was' red does not mean it can't be blue :)

Leah Texas4Obama said...

Oh... and don't forget that there were like 1 million early voters that voted before Obama ever stepped in California to campaign. I have read in many places that many people have said they voted too soon and that if they could take back their voted that they would have voted Obama.

GatorsChampions4Ever said...

Leah. This is not about Super Tuesday. The following states were her big state wins NOT on Super Tuesday:

Ohio-March 5
Texas-March 5
New Hampshire(big for her not to get knocked out)-after Iowa

Who thinks he will win:

North Dakota

Those are locks for Senator McCain.

All I am saying is that Senator Obama does not have a swing state victory(unless you count Missouri.)

you said that the primary is worth 2/3 and the caucus is worth 1/3 in Texas. Well........Senator Clinton won the bigger prize in Texas.

Out of curiosity, what would you do if it was Senator Clinton vs Senator McCain?

Leah Texas4Obama said...


NO Clinton did not win Texas.
I really cannot believe you are still arguing that.

You can't count the two parts separately. When you watch a football game do you call the winner at half-time? I don't think so and no one else does either!

The person that receives the most TOTAL delegates (primary plus caucus) WINS TEXAS.

And to answer your question: I will be voting for Obama no matter who is on the ticket. I will be writing him in if Clinton steals the nomination by intimidating the SDs.

dwit said...


old Gator doesn't quite have a grasp of the facts or is simply making a nice balloon gator out of them for us.

Bill Clinton won Colorado AND New Mexico in '92

Here is a nice map:

You see, the small western states can be won. I happen to live in one. The reason we haven't had them for quite some time is that Republicans went there after '92 and kept up a sustained presence.

Guess who learned from their success? You got it! Howard and Barack!

For Hillary to claim those people aren't worth speaking to is simply defeatist. She would be wise to REALLY study how Truman did it instead of simply using the tired "heat in the kitchen" line.

The difference is that Obama cares about ALL the voters, not just the urban state elite and lobbyists she has turned to for support.

Like George and Uncle Karl, she is pretending to be one of the "folks", but in reality she is just using them.

Leah Texas4Obama said...

New Hampshire (Jan.8) was prior to Super Tuesday - her name and 'crying' won her that one.

And maybe you didn't hear but New Hampshire did not help her because the delegates they received were Obama 9 and Clinton 9 -- it was a TIE.

Missouri was also a TIE - Obama 36 and Clinton 36 delegates.

So why couldn't she beat him better than that ;)

She really is not doing as well as the Clinton spin machine would like for you to think she is.

Yamaka said...

Hello Democrats, Good Evening.

Another Conversation with Sen BHO.

- Sen BHO, How are you, Sir?

- Very well, what's up, Yama?

- Senator, did you read the updated DCW site: Left last box shows you have 1794 delegates to HRC's 1786. As per ClearRealPolitics, HRC leads you in total popular votes by 122,000 when you include MI, FL. What say you?

- What is there to say anything else? Number is a number is a number. I know my sidekicks and Children (my ardent but stupid and immature followers) keep forgetting the MI and FL.

I know for a fact, MI and FL should be taken to A/C. I really want to say openly it is 2208 the Magic Number; but this fraudster Axelrod never allows me to say anything about it. This stupid Michelle also discourages me. All low lives! I teach Constitutional Law as an Adjunct Senior Lecture at U of C; I know the law says you should count ALL votes, that's just fair. Forget about DNC Rule, which I know is badly implemented; therefore, the fault goes with Dean and his sidekicks; MI FL voters are NOT at fault. We must count their votes, period. But don't tell my stupid Children, who will cry, whine and commit suicide on that matter!

-Sen Well Said. You have clear brain, at least today! Sen, tell me about your skills on Administration and the massive Washington Bureaucracies?

- Well, Yama. I don't have any skill. I hate Administration. I abhor all forms of Bureaucracies whether it is in Springfield or in DC. All those people work there are real Pigs, they cheat and swindle all the Public Funds. All my BigMoneyBags have a hand in those activities; they all live in K Street. I get very angry at them.

_ Senator. You know your job number One is to manage these Agencies and Bureaucracies, if you get elected. How are you going to protect the 2 Trillion dollars of money you collect as tax from American people ? You should have nerve and audacity to reign in these Agencies. Senator, Skill matters here.

_ I know what you say Yama! But I don't have that skill, period. What else you want me to say? Lie about it? I have lied so much everyday of this past 4 months of campaigning, not more. I am fed up with this nonsense!

- Well, Senator it is refreshing you tell the truth, at least to me. That's good. See you around.
Insha Allah, I will bother you again.

- Very well Yama, the God of Death! Insha Allah, we will meet again.


As you see, Sen Obama agrees he does not have the skill to manage the most difficult Bureaucratic Administration in the world, the US Govt. How could we nominate him to the job?

Fellow Democrats, SDs, please make a note of this truth.

We need skilled, experienced people as the CEO of US Govt.

Cheers. Smile :)

dwit said...

Please Leah...DON'T DO IT!

I know its tempting to respond to the retards, but it doesn't do your intellect any justice. You aren't going to change these Clinton staffers minds.

Just keep putting out the facts.

GatorsChampions4Ever said...

leah. You still have not answered my ''respect'' question.

Senator Obama dramatically rallied from 12 points down to win Missouri. Why did that end up a tie in delegates?

Stealing the nomination? Do you honestly think that the superdelegates would not give Senator Clinton the nomination because they feel she is better suited to beat Senator McCain?

I wonder what your reaction would be if Senator Clinton were to defeat Senator McCain.

dwit. Go back. I said Democrats won Colorado twice(i actually put it as we lost 12 of the last 14.)

dwit said...

Hillary Clinton
Size of Donations
$200 and Under $47,375,771

$200.01 - $499 $11,376,977
$500 - $999 $12,238,022
$1000 - $1999 $26,281,526

$2000 and Over $77,413,699

PAC $1,221,842

Barack Obama
Size of Donations
$200 and Under $102,217,130

$200.01 - $499 $22,172,143
$500 - $999 $20,351,097
$1000 - $1999 $31,362,120

$2000 and Over $61,543,167

PAC $250


dwit said...

Also folks, let's not forget, John Kerry was the establishment candidate in 2004. What happened there? FOUR MORE YEARS OF WAR AND DEFICIT SPENDING.

No wonder he is backing Obama now. He sees the writing on the wall. This Hillary and Bill sense of entitlement is a losing proposition.

People are tired of the insiders!

Somerled said...

Why can't Obama close the deal??? Maybe it's because he's up against Hillary Clinton. Remember her? Former first lady, had 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., D.C. as her home address for eight years. The question you SHOULD be asking is why is she STILL losing??? Obama should have been an also-ran in this thing. This is Whitecastle (Obama) versus McDonald's (Hillary). What he has MANAGED is nothing short of amazing. Hillary should have had this in a walk except for a few small facts.

1. A LOT of people HATE her.

2. A LOT of people HATE that scumbag she's married to.

3. She's a liar and a flip-flopper and the world KNOWS it!

Obama ain't perfect. Hillary would NOT have stayed in that church. But if Monica BLEW the pastor and he could help her get elected, then maybe.

The republicans are after Obama...notice that? Not touching Hillary. They KNOW they can beat her. If she steals this the republicans will drag this hag out in the bright light of day, rip off that fake grin and show everyone how ugly she really is on the inside.

For one, I will almost enjoy this more if she gets the nomination. The near impeachment of BILL will look like an afternoon tea.

Cigar Anyone?

Richard said...

Gator: I don't think you have a very good grasp of reality.

Of the "crucial swing states" you mention, only Ohio and Pennsylvania are really swing states. In an earlier post you even included Massachusetts as a swing state!

Of the five states you list Obama as having "no chance of winning," Democrats are in fact very likely to win two (Colorado and Washington) and Obama may make North Dakota viable, too. And contrary to your earlier post, polls have indicated that with Obama as our candidate Iowa may be in play, too.

As for Ohio and Pennsylvania, I am sick to death of the spurious argument that primary results are somehow predictive of general election results. That PA and OH Democrats prefer Clinton as Democratic candidate does not in any way mean that PA and OH Democrats would prefer John McCain to Obama. There's just no logical connection.

Leah Texas4Obama said...

dwit- I know :)
Trying to talk to some people here is like hitting your head against a brick wall.

Yamaka- my dear late grandmother always used to say 'when a person starts talking to themselves it is time to seek professional help'.

Gator- I am not going to continue to discuss your twisted logic.

To everyone else-
I understand that many Hillary supporters are having a hard time coming to grips with the fact that their candidate is far behind and hasn't a chance to catch up - so we should all stay positive and help them during this trying time.

Richard said...

Yamaka: Perhaps you should talk to a psychiatrist about what appear to be extensive and detailed auditory hallucinations. Schizophrenia is very treatable with modern medications.

dwit said...


Do you REALLY believe Pennsylvania is a swing state?

When was the last time a Republitard took Pennsylvania?

Now take a look at both of these maps. Kerry and Gore took what we have come to see as traditional dem states and lost.


What Obama and Dean have done over the past several years is to reestablish a dem presence in the West and Midwest. It is classic Harry Truman and it works!

Hillary simply doesn't care about these folks. She has her head so far up "k" street's ass that she couldn't see them if she wanted to.

Suffice it to say, you can win without Florida AND Ohio, but I absolutely agree with you that Obama will take both and much of the South and West if nominated.

Somerled said...

You know what I'm MOST afraid of though? Look at how polarized we are. I am seriously afraid that know matter who is elected, (God, let it be a democrat) that some whack-job will try bto hurt them. I was a life-long republican until DUBYA, but we NEED a democrat and I hope and pray that even if it's HER :-), that our next president lives through the term. In that instance, GULP, I would actually pray for Hillary Clinton.

I said WHAT???

GatorsChampions4Ever said...

richard. I merely was including Massachusetts as a big state win because Leah would not include Texas, so I replaced it.

I never said Senator McCain would win Ohio or Pennsylvania, but if Tom Ridge is his running mate, Senator Obama has no chance.

Let's be honest: Do you really think Senator Obama would win:

either Dakota

I only bring these points up mainly to present a way to make Leah understand that Senator Obama has not scored a big bellwether(instead of swing state) state. All of his wins(except Missouri) are Republican strongholds or states either Senator Obama or Senator Clinton would win. So this is mainly about making an argument to Leah so she understands. It's not about ''swing states'' or delegates. It's about electability. If it was only about delegates, there would be a winner-take-all system and no superdelegates. That's why they are there: to independently exercise their own judgement on who THEY think is the best candidate to defeat Senator McCain.

Unknown said...

More on Cult vs. movement.
I talked to my doctor about my movement this morning.
Doctor: why are you concerned?
Me: Well, Doc, as i said I am a Clinton supporter and part of her Crusade. Obama has a movement and
Mine kinda connects us.
Doc: Does it smell pretty bad?
Me: Yes
Doc: Is it slimey?
Me: Yes, very.
Doc: Well I am sorry to tell you, you may have an Obama Movement and the only thing to do is to send it where it should go. Just flush it!
We can control it's size and smell.
Take two logic pills and call me tomorrow.

Yamaka said...

My deal Richard and Leah:

I AM the psychiatrist! Dealing with the "Children of BHO"!!

God Bless You both.

Smile and Vote for the First Woman POTUS. Make history.

NOT a Kenyan History. I mean American History!!

GatorsChampions4Ever said...

Leah. If you can't talk respectfully, then I suggest you do not blog. My ''twisted logic'' is not that, rather it is looking ahead to the General Election by merely pointing out facts. Your name will continue to be in my comments simply because, of all the Obama supporters on here, you are the only one who won't see the argument from anyone's view but Senator Obama's. We all have been energized by this and it is, and will continue to be historic, but let's treat both candidates on here fairly. You have every right to back Senator Obama, and good for you that you do, but not ONCE have I even come close to insulting you, and yet I don't get the same respect from you that you get from me.

Somerled said...

Obama no chance? That's laughable. Look, this is the cold hard truth. People HATE Hillary. They may dislike Obama, but I haven't seen very many people who say his name and then spit. If she somehow steals this thing she will LOSE because a LOT of people would elect ANYONE over her. Plus, the kind of bile that will spew forth from the republican side will cover her like that green crap on Nickleodeon. After Obama wins the nomination, in the interim, he will bridge races, parties, and ideologies. He will convince the rest of the nation that he is imperfect but well-intentioned. That he REALLY believes that 'YES WE CAN'. If nothing else, November? McCain could die in his sleep by then!!!

Leah Texas4Obama said...

SECOND Super delegate for Obama today:

Audra Ostergard (NE)

Now Obama has a +130 lead in total delegates :)

Somerled said...

Jim -

I tend to agree, some of us Obamaphiles do get a little...er...overzealous. But let's take a look at cults:

Johnstown - Drinking kool-aid and suicide

Heaven's Gate - Waiting of the UFOs and suicide

At least if you have a 'movement' you know yer alive!!! LOL

God, just don't let a republican win.

GatorsChampions4Ever said...

Leah. Can you provide a link to that ''claim'' instead of just saying it?

Leah Texas4Obama said...

OREO said on another page:

*** Note there will be a blogger outage in about 1 1/2 hours from now (4PDT) ***

So it looks like ya'll have about 30 minutes left.

GatorsChampions4Ever said...

yamaka. Thank you for all the kind words. By the way, what do you mean when you say POTUS?

somerled. From your ''god, just let a Democrat win'', I take it you'd even vote for Senator Clinton?

And is this about who the superdelegates dislike or electability?

Leah Texas4Obama said...


Here on DCW there is a super-delegate page. Click on the link to that page (top left of this page) and you will see a list of supers that have endorsed - then click on their name and the link will take you to the citation.

GatorsChampions4Ever said...

You know what? If it means blogging to everyone, then fine Leah, you win. It ain't over till it's over, though.

Somerled said...

I'm ex-military. We never asked 'should we?' or 'do we have to?' The troops go where they're told and DO THEIR JOBS. If it would bring them home from this travesty called Iraq, I'd vote for SATAN. That answer yer question? :-)

GatorsChampions4Ever said...

Alright then. Ignore my last comment. Thank you Leah. I heard there would be a flood of superdelegates for Senator Obama after Pennsylvania. Where are they?

Yamaka said...


POTUS President Of The United States.

Keep writing. Good job.

GatorsChampions4Ever said...

Has anyone noticed we have an ex-NFL quarterback as a superdelegate?

Leah Texas4Obama said...


I responded to your last question up above on the post time stamped:

April 23, 2008 6:35 PM

Somerled said...


I really, really detest Hillary okay, BUT, if she does lose, you still have TEBOW! :-)

Amot said...

What's the point to move troops out of Iraq if you send them next month to Iran? I thought wars will be over for a while, but she doesn't think the same way. Jews can be happy with her saying 'If Iran attacks Israel, we go at war!'. Are the rest of us happy with that?

Leah Texas4Obama said...

Amot -

It is pretty obvious that she said what she did right before the PA primary to pander to the Jewish community in PA.

They said that Obama did poorly with the Jewish vote in PA - so Hillary's little trick worked!

Richard said...

Dwit: I don't really think McCain is likely to take PA, but I think the close margins in recent contests still keep it in play. And if the amounts spent on advertising and the number of personal appearances there in the last cycle are any indicator, the candidates themselves think so too.

RobH said...

Hey Jim at 6:13:

Not so funny, that one doesn't get in the greatest hits club.

Then again, I generally appreciate South Park for their social commentary, but think it's a negative when they go scatological. I'm 50 yrs old, but love stuff with currency. Thank my kids.

RobH said...

Hi Gator:

Couple of things, and I mean some of them in jest.

1) Ya' can't talk to Leah like that. She's my secret cruch, and she's been posting here forever, and she's Secretary of State for god sakes which is a position know for its DIPLOMACY. She may have gotten exasperated by dealing with some knicleheads (not you) but she's good people. You are, too - you should get along.

2) You had alisto "locks" for McCain at 4:58 that included Washington and Colorado. Don;t agree w/ you. Washington goes blue in every GE, like Cal and Oregon. And all polling has Obama ahead of MCain head to head, but McCain ahead of Clinton head to head. They love Obama in Colorado, and will lead the new west coalition (Col/NM/NV) to go blue this time.

3) At 4:32 you stated Iowa, no way? Way! You Recall how close Iowa was in '04 back and forth on election night? Almost went blue. And now Obama, who took the primary there? C'mon.

OK, so 2) and 3) were serious, 1) was "can't we all just get along?"

Amot said...

RCP and BO still have LA at 34:22, GP have settled to the official 33:23 though we are still waiting for explanation. GP for PA are not final - it can go 73:85 or 75:83. Both GP and BO have CO at 36:19 and I can confirm it. WA is far from clear, GP and BO differ. ID made some changes (recount) and Clitnon shall be viable at the state convention, but anyway all sources have agreed on that. BO have DA 5:2. GP have it 4.5:2.5. I have posted link for the results in UDS thread. BO have TX at 99:94, still possible but unlikely. Those make the difference in numbers!
About numbers needed - I think he needs about 90-95 supers to secure the nomination!

Amot said...

About Israel and Iran - have I missed something or Israel is not one of the USA?! They have army, they have influence, they have money! Why should USA go at war for them? Maybe some people forget there is such thing as UN, maybe some people are too obsessed by the idea USA rules the world... I know that is not the reality. The rest of the world doesn't support solo actions! Don't be amazed when terror comes to USA next time and world enjoys it! I can't possibly imagine that a candidate for the highest office in the USA can make official statement that he/she will go at war if third country is attacked! Yet, she did! Maybe she did it to win the Jews, but all the country will pay the price for a new war... And that price is not only money! Excuse me, but after that statement I would never vote HRC, maybe write in Obama if he is not on the ticket!

dwit said...


"Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, said that the U.S. "should be looking to create an umbrella of deterrence that goes much further than just Israel. Of course I would make it clear to the Iranians that an attack on Israel would incur massive retaliation from the United States, but I would do the same with other countries in the region."

Now, how is she going to pay for her health care plan again?

Sounds a little like Baghdad Johnny to me.

Yamaka said...

To My Bleeding FAR LEFT Liberal Democrats:

1. We are squandering the Golden Opportunity to get back the WH. Anymore of bickering among ourselves will cost us dearly: the WH AND the Congress!

2. Face the facts: Sen BHO is your Dog in the Fight. But his constituency is weaker than the vastly superior one of HRC - mostly Blacks, young hyper-educated affluent inexperienced White men Vs Latinos, older regular White men AND most of white women. This showed up eminently in FL, OH, PA and MI.

3. No FAR LEFT liberal has won the WH in the past 30 years, because the American Electorate is largely in the Middle.

4. Therefore, your Dog has no chance of winning the Nomination and the Election.

5. So, what to do now? Sen Obama cannot be the King; but he can very well be a King Maker.

6. You all can ask him to take the VP position with HRC at the TOP, which will give us the Dream Team.

7. This will give us the WH and a 2/3 in the Congress, which means we can solve problems of

War, Universal Healthcare and Economy.

8. After 8 years, Sen Obama will be in a fabulous position to be the King.

9. This is a Win Win Win situation for ALL of US.

10. Ask him to be the King Maker, now please.

Smile and Cheer. :-) :-)

dwit said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
RobH said...

OK, and if all this other c**p, weren't enough, HRC's lack of repudiation of the RNC's racist ad today in NC today JUST CUTS IT!

EVEN McCain's campaign repudiated the ad and urged it not to be run!
When asked for a comment, the HRC campaign declined.

In combo with the Iran fiasco, HRC is now further right, and more socially divisive, than McCain.

Hill supporters, and you know who you are, PLEASE come back with some credible, defensible reason, why your candidate could take this position. Something with some kind of morally, culturally defensible reason. Forget the prostelitizing, just engage in a real dialogue - debate even - about how this advances our society.


dwit said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
dwit said...

Hillary Clinton
Size of Donations
$200 and Under $47,375,771

$200.01 - $499 $11,376,977
$500 - $999 $12,238,022
$1000 - $1999 $26,281,526

$2000 and Over $77,413,699

PAC $1,221,842

Barack Obama
Size of Donations
$200 and Under $102,217,130

$200.01 - $499 $22,172,143
$500 - $999 $20,351,097
$1000 - $1999 $31,362,120

$2000 and Over $61,543,167

PAC $250


dwit said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
dwit said...

Check out all of these donors to Clinton

America Israel Chamber of Commerce $125,000

Aventura-Turnberry Jewish Center $150,000

Beth El Synagogue

Antwerp Diamond High Council $200,000



Gold Service International

Walmart Foundation

So we have several Pro-Israel groups, a blood diamond broker, one of the largest financial institutions in the world, a consultancy that helps other companies relocate to China (CSLA), a very mysterious Columbian organization affiliated with former Clinton Treasury Secretary, Lary Summers (Gold Service Int'l) and our ethical friends at Walmart.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 400 of 1560   Newer› Newest»