Democratic Convention Watch: Open Thread

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.

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.

And please be excellent to one another. We do not accept name calling or any attacks on our commenters. Any objectionable comments will be deleted. Try to be civil.

Thanks!

Previous Open Thread here

New Open Thread here
Comments now locked in this one.

1207 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 1207 Newer› Newest»

Leah Texas4Obama said...: Yamaka-

You either missed the post I posted yesterday or you ignored it. So I will copy and paste it here for you:
_____________

Leah said:

Yamaka-

I caught that too last night during Senator Obama's speech about the flag. I believe it was a slight gaffe. I believe he meant his grand-father. He grand-father was his father figure when growing up and his grand-father was a veteran that had a military funeral and is buried in the military cemetery.

I am sure the press will jump on what he said and there will probably be an explanation coming from the Obama camp.
May 07, 2008 12:43 PM
____________

Yamaka I know you are trying to make a small mis-speak into a huge issue but it really is not anything important.

p.s. I like Obama also grew up without one of my parents and many times during my lifetime I have referred or called my grandmother 'mother/mom'. It is an easy mistake to make because that is how a person sees them in their mind when they have lived with them.; May 08, 2008 12:36 PM
ed iglehart said...: Climbing a mountain? Just like John & Jane Q Public, HRC is getting in over her head.

From The Wall Street Journal

"But weariness is evident in the Hillraiser ranks. The machine designed to seal Sen. Clinton's nomination was designed more as a sprint than a marathon. Many of the campaign's targets have already given the maximum $2,300 for the primary allowable under federal law.

"This was supposed to be over by now but every quarter they set another goal," says Clinton bundler Alan Kessler, a Philadelphia lawyer. "I think we're all pretty tired."

"Money too tight to mention...."

Salaams,
ed; May 08, 2008 12:37 PM
Oreo said...: Hello!
Would anybody be interested in DCW branded merchandise? We're kicking around opening a CafePress store.
Thanks; May 08, 2008 12:37 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Yamaka-

Here is the quote from the transcript of the prepared speech:

"It is the light of opportunity that led my father across an ocean.

It is the founding ideals that the flag draped over my grandfather’s coffin stands for – it is life, and liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

-------------------------

So, Yamaka you see it was a simple mistake - and not a 'lie' like you are insinuating.; May 08, 2008 12:42 PM
Dave in NC said...: Aunt Jean,

Glad you enjoyed North Carolina. We welcome you back any time.

My very best wishes for your mother. I'm sure she is a strong woman like you and will do just fine.

Lee, Soft,

Thank you for your responses.

For you both: To re-phrase my question, why do some feel certain that we can't win this fall in a state that is so heavily Democratic?

Lee, your numbers are correct. In fact, NC hasn't gone blue since '76. I guess my question is why can't we do better than that?

If NCers are so determined to vote Republican, why don't they just register Republican?

I contend that it is not that simple.

In 2000, everyone was sick and tired of Clinton so it's easy to see why his VP would be rejected. We don't need to get into "stolen election" or "he won the popular vote" because he lost soundly in NC and we are dicussing NC.

It is always tough to unseat a sitting president, especially in the middle of a war. Kerry actually did quite well under the circumstances. So 2004 can also be explained.

NC is a "values" state, but McCain isn't the "values" candidate that Bush was, and THAT Demographic is tough to get out the vote if they aren't excited.

Only 1/3 of the Republicans just voted in the primary while over half of the Democrats showed up and we DO have candidates for other offices to vote for.

Dynamics are different every year. That is why attempts to make comparisons to 1980 or 1952 are fallacies.

Obama plays very well to Republicans, he is not the left winger that many previous candidates have been. Republicans WILL vote for him.

Young and black voters couldn't be more fired up and the Bible Thumpers are asleep.

I don't predict a blow out like the primary was and I can't even guarantee a victory, but I contend NC is in play.

I am CERTAIN, however, that Democrats can pull defeat from the jaws of victory if we don't get united.; May 08, 2008 12:48 PM
Dave in NC said...: Jim,

My last comment to you was flippant and I take it back.

Peace and Love my friend; May 08, 2008 12:51 PM
Pablo said...: I am sure Yam knows it was just a mis-speak and was only raising an eyebrow that most others didn't catch it. I am suprised by that as well.

I don't believe though that he is hiding his own heritage at all, most people don't wrote about it in their own book when trying to hide it.; May 08, 2008 12:54 PM
Yamaka said...: "I am CERTAIN, however, that Democrats can pull defeat from the jaws of victory if we don't get united."

dave:

Amen.

Jim's Adlai Stevenson analogy and my invoking the 1980 are real history.

If we don't learn lessons from history, we are doomed for ever, IMHO!
___________________________________
Folks:

Whether BHO spoke right or mis-spoke we don't know. Maybe he did.

The issue I discussed relates to what he said during the Speech and what millions heard from that Teleprompter Speech. That's all.

Maybe, they corrected it in the Transcript. What did he mean at that time? Maybe, he himself doesn't know.

He is just an Opportunistic Politician. Like his Stand on War!

_________________________________

I expect Hillary to go full blast in the remaining 6 contests. I will send her some more money!

I want to know the margins in
WV, KY and PR for my curiosity.

Folks: Still there are 301.5 SDs at this minute undeclared (Option 6 Box DCW). This could go either way.

Hold your Coronation Music till Aug when Convention voting starts.
___________________________

Jp:

My probability at this minute is about 80% for the 2208.5 to stand. Maybe I am crazy, yes I am!
__________________________________

At this point Carter, McGovern or Other "Big Wigs" should just keep quiet till at least June 3, IMHO.

The Apple Cart can be tripped at anytime. Maybe wishful thinking, maybe not!
_______________________________

:-); May 08, 2008 1:12 PM
ed iglehart said...: Why Hillary MUST stay in the race!

Assalaam 'alaikum wa rahmatullaahi wa barakaatuhu
Peace, God's mercy and blessings be upon you; May 08, 2008 1:21 PM
Richard said...: Yamaka: I heard the speech you refer to, and I am sure he mentioned his father's coffin -- I noticed the error at the time. But I am just as sure that he misspoke and meant to say his grandfather's coffin, as the Fox news analysts apparently understood. This is a simple mistake and can and should easily be forgiven; it is not as if he was inventing a landing under sniper fire or something. He simply misread his teleprompter.

Amot: I said nothing about party rules, I merely said that states do not have the power to set the dates for the election of presidential electors but do have the power to set the date for primary elections. Thus your question about whether electors from a state which held its election early is moot.

If you want to know how I feel about the seating of Michigan and Florida delegates, that is another issue entirely and the analogy you are attempting to draw to the general election is irrelevant. I believe that the sanctions the Democratic party placed on Florida and Michigan were well within its rights, but that the delegates need to be seated as part of the party's reconciliation and rallying around our nominee. I do not think that they will effect the outcome.

I suspect that the Michigan delegates will be seated 69-59 as the Michigan state party proposes and the Florida delegates 105-67-13. There may or may not be a 50% penalty.; May 08, 2008 1:22 PM
Yamaka said...: "Funny that you use Rev. Wright as an authority:"

Yes, as far as BHO is concerned HE is the authority: He baptized him, he was the man who did the marriage ceremony, the man who baptized his children and the man talked to him on a daily/weekly basis for 20 long summers and winters.

Who else can vouch for BHO's character, judgment and credibility?

Oh, one more thing: Wright also predicted that once BHO's association with him is publicly known then their relationship will sour temporarily, and his voter support will melt away.

I am waiting to see what would happen in the GE.

Stay tuned. The Drama of Opportunistic Politics is continuing!

_________________________________

Fellow Democrats:

The Party is driving women away: In this Nomination most women thought the Glass Ceiling will be broken for the sake of our daughters.

No... The Party Officials/SDs play too much into the rhetorics of Jim Clyburn and other members of the Black Caucus (who mostly vote on the basis of the color of the skin, and not on the basis of the strength of the character, violating Dr. King's dictates), and now alienating our Core constituency in the Party, Women.

Oh, well. If the RNC moderates its platform on abortion, most women en mass will desert the Democratic Party, the Party now dominated by Czarist arrogance and Inward Ignorance!

Women are watching carefully how Hillary is treated in this Process.

Any disrespect to her means Cindy and John McCain will be in the Inaugural Ball.

Watch out what you say, and how you behave! For many of Obamamaniacs don't have any class! The Process MUST be clean, fair and tidy.

:-); May 08, 2008 1:31 PM
Amot said...: Richard,
I think pledged delegations must be seated with some adjustment, be it 50% or other. I think any seating of supers will be unfair
to both voters and other states.
What I don't want to see is using both delegations for dirty tricks the way Hillary does...; May 08, 2008 1:36 PM
ed iglehart said...: "The Process MUST be clean, fair and tidy."

And the way to do that is to follow the rules.; May 08, 2008 1:45 PM
RobH said...: Yam,

"If the RNC moderates its platform on abortion, most women en mass will desert the Democratic Party."

Are you kidding me?? Say What??

Have you seen who McCain thinks are model judges?? F* the platform, think what he can do with (at least) two appointments.; May 08, 2008 1:55 PM
ed iglehart said...: An interesting thought:

"As one Democrat noted, if Sen. Obama were nominated, his acceptance address would be the night of Aug. 28 -- the 45th anniversary of civil-rights leader Martin Luther King's "I Have A Dream" speech."

I was there, all those years ago!

God Bless Dr King!
R.I.P.

ed; May 08, 2008 1:58 PM
RobH said...: Aunt Jean,

If you read posts you missed while gone, welcome back. Hope all went well, and PLEASE forgive me for this upcoming shot at humour. It's meant more to illustrate the absurdity of numbers and the lengths we (all) went to w/ rounding a couple of weeks ago (and more recently.) No personal jibe at anyone.

So, Ed, I just saw where RCP has the Indiana margin down to 13,909 raw votes and show it as 50.5% v. 49.5%. Well, when I was a kid we were taught to round to the nearest integer, but when a tie, round to the EVEN number. So I guess its 50:50, and a tie, eh?

LOL, kids.; May 08, 2008 2:01 PM
ed iglehart said...: Crazy Aunt in the Attic?

Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Dorood/Peace
Namaste -ed; May 08, 2008 2:08 PM
Yamaka said...: "He simply misread his teleprompter."

Richard:

I want to believe you that he had reading problem with his teleprompter!

___________________________________

pablo:

Those two books he wrote were not read by nearly 299 million Americans. Hardly a million copy he sold.

That too, he wrote it before he started his political campaign!

By the way, since he has very thin resume, the Right Wing Attack Machine is combing his Books to highlight very controversial issues written there. There are issues that most Americans will find it very offensive.

During the GE many will be in the MSM discussions for weeks and months, believe me.

:-); May 08, 2008 2:13 PM
Anonymous said...: Dave,
"My last comment to you was flippant and I take it back."
I don't recall it or didn't read it. Like looking for a "flippant" in a haystack.
I take any pro Obama supporter slam with a grain of salt. Also enjoy them immensely
I suspect that Obama advocates are all refugees from the 1960-70 Children of God, Flower Children,
or Hippie movements or descendants thereof and in dire need of de-programming.
Who's your Daddy?; May 08, 2008 2:14 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Yamaka said: "and the man talked to him on a daily/weekly basis for 20 long summers and winters."
___________________

That is such bull. Obama joined the church 16 years ago. Do you really think that he was obsessed with talking to his 'church pastor' everyday?

He was spending his time working, teaching at the University, spending time with his wife, having and raising two children, working in the state senate and in the U.S. Senate. NO ONE talks to their church pastor everyday or even every week.

And as far as the speech transcript - they are normally released to the press just prior to the speech.; May 08, 2008 2:17 PM
Amot said...: RobH,
RCP has old numbers, margin is still about 1.1%
But I like the joke :); May 08, 2008 2:17 PM
Dave in NC said...: Yam,
"Jim's Adlai Stevenson analogy and my invoking the 1980 are real history."

My point exactly: History not Present

Different times, different dynamics, '52 was pre-civil rights, '80 was pre-Iraq, I could go on.

I find as VERY enlightening how we remember '80 from different perspectives.

Remember that Bush 41 and Reagan were in a death roll over the nomination just like Obama and Clinton are today. I was a Republican then and that is what I remember. I had almost forgotten about the Kennedy challenge to Carter.

However, Carter was about as popular then as Bush is now. The Ayatollah could have beaten him in the GE. The fact that a sitting president could face such a challenge in the primaries only emphasizes that.

Also, remember John Anderson? We don't have a strong 3rd contender this time, so no comparison is really valid.

What do you think?; May 08, 2008 2:21 PM
Yamaka said...: "As one Democrat noted, if Sen. Obama were nominated, his acceptance address would be the night of Aug. 28 -- the 45th anniversary of civil-rights leader Martin Luther King's "I Have A Dream" speech."

It would be more fitting and appropriate if the Nominee is from the glorious Civil Rights Struggle of true American Blacks (whose forefathers showed all the scars of slavery and the attendant misery), not some carpetbagger! Like Jesse Jackson or someone who walked the walk with Dr. King in the dirty street of MS and Alabama!

Bringing BHO into this discussion is an anathema to the thoughts of Dr. King.

BHO just hood winked and mugged the Civil Right Warriors in the broad day light, IMHO.

:-)

:-); May 08, 2008 2:23 PM
Dave in NC said...: Jim,

Apparently Obama has a coalition because I used to roast and eat hippies.

Then I had a team of them running one of my restaurants.

Times change; May 08, 2008 2:25 PM
Dave in NC said...: ed,

Thank you for pointing out that fact. I will surely tear up as I am almost tearing up thinking about it!

God Bless Dr. King!

Yam,

Nobody's forefathers are running for president and Clinton is the only carpetbagger in the race.

Peace Brother; May 08, 2008 2:31 PM
ed iglehart said...: Jim,

"I suspect that Obama advocates are all refugees from the 1960-70 Children of God, Flower Children,"

I'm from then, but I'm no refugee!

Peace, man!; May 08, 2008 2:36 PM
Dave in NC said...: Yam,

Old battles need new soldiers, a commanding majority of blacks have chosen him as their general.; May 08, 2008 2:36 PM
Yamaka said...: "Also, remember John Anderson? We don't have a strong 3rd contender this time, so no comparison is really valid."

John Anderson, Ross Perot and Ralph Nader were 3rd Party candidates in previous GE; I am not sure whether Anderson was "Strong" or stronger than the other two.

I believe we may have Ralph Nader also this time. I remember he pulled nearly 80,000 votes away from Gore in FL to give Dubya finally a 500 vote margin in this State, and get the 271 EV win in 2000!!

I don't think Anderson had this type of strong showing in 1980. Maybe he did, I don't recall so.

:-); May 08, 2008 2:40 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: "As one Democrat noted, if Sen. Obama were nominated, his acceptance address would be the night of Aug. 28 -- the 45th anniversary of civil-rights leader Martin Luther King's "I Have A Dream" speech."
___________________

I can barely wait to hear Senator Obama's acceptance address! I am sure it will be extra emotional for Senator Obama giving it on King's speech anniversary.

OBAMA '08; May 08, 2008 2:46 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Great article:

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/08/obama-works-the-house/

OBAMA '08; May 08, 2008 2:49 PM
Anonymous said...: Dave,
"Old battles need new soldiers, a commanding majority of blacks have chosen him as their general."
Yep, and his army is made up of puppies(follow Master) and parrots(quote Master).; May 08, 2008 2:52 PM
jpsedona said...: Jim,

When it comes to Hillary leading her troops, the firs th thing that comes to mind is the old phrase "lie like a trooper".

But hey, that's just me. Others will thionk differently...; May 08, 2008 2:56 PM
Martin said...: Several posts here confirm what I already suspected: many women support Hillary simply because she's a woman, despite the fact that she is clearly the lesser candidate. Sad.; May 08, 2008 2:59 PM
Anonymous said...: Martin said...
"Several posts here confirm what I already suspected: many women support Hillary simply because she's a woman, despite the fact that she is clearly the lesser candidate. Sad."

Martin said...
Several posts here confirm what I already suspected: many posters support Barack simply because he's a Black, despite the fact that he is clearly the inferior candidate. Sadder; May 08, 2008 3:07 PM
Dave in NC said...: Jim,

Well let me peck your eyes out and pee on your leg.

:); May 08, 2008 3:10 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Martin,

It is sad.

I am a white 48 year old woman and I do not understand how so many women can dismiss all of Hillary's baggage and will vote for her mainly because she is a woman.

I would LOVE to vote for a woman president, but the woman will have to be a woman of character that got to where she is on her own and not on the coat-tails of a man - otherwise it will not be a true win for WOMEN.

I really look forward to the day that a woman works her way up to the top on her own merits and I will be proud to cast my vote for her - but this is not the right time or the right candidate.

I will not vote based on race or gender - my vote will be based on issues and the person's character.

OBAMA '08; May 08, 2008 3:11 PM
Martin said...: Oh really? Which posts would those be? Because I haven't seen any that are anything close to "In this Nomination most women thought the Glass Ceiling will be broken for the sake of our daughters" or "Women are watching carefully how Hillary is treated in this Process. Any disrespect to her means Cindy and John McCain will be in the Inaugural Ball."

DISGUSTING!; May 08, 2008 3:11 PM
Martin said...: previous post was directed at jim, btw; May 08, 2008 3:12 PM
Anonymous said...: Martin ,
Sorry, did I misquote you the second time.; May 08, 2008 3:13 PM
Anonymous said...: Dave in NC said...
Jim,

Well let me peck your eyes out and pee on your leg.

Only difference is when Barack does pee on ones leg, he tries to eloquently convince them it is raining.; May 08, 2008 3:18 PM
Anonymous said...: Martin

"DISGUSTING!"

No need to sign your posts. And don't be so hard on yourself.; May 08, 2008 3:22 PM
Anonymous said...: leah,
You are soooo sexy when you are discusted.

as for.
"The DNC should throw her butt out of the party immediately. She and Bill have done more harm to the party than anyone I've ever seen!"

I agree with you. Time for a new party anyway.; May 08, 2008 3:31 PM
Anonymous said...: dave,
You need to jump in here and help your group.
Put me in my place. Say another party.; May 08, 2008 3:35 PM
Anonymous said...: I AM ON A ROLL. ROPE-A-DOPE WON'T WORK.; May 08, 2008 3:38 PM
Anonymous said...: y'all are starting to look like Obama in a debate with Clinton.
AH,DUH,UMM AND SO ON.; May 08, 2008 3:40 PM
Ariane said...: Aunt Jean,

Don't know if you will be on here today but I want to say I hope and pray your mothers surgery went well (or will go well if it has not happened yet.)

Thank you very much for the Congratulations, that was very thoughtful of you especially since I know how strongly you support Senator Clinton.
In turn I will say Congratulations for her win in Indiana.

Aunt Jean I could really relate to some things you wrote a while back about your love of nature, you said some things i myself feel about being open to perceiving the beauty and wonder of the world. It's funny we in some ways have much in common and in other ways disagree intensely like how you think Obama is evil! I don't think by any means he is perfect and at first I thought he should have waited until he had more experience, but a lot of people including other politicians especially our senior Senator Durbin were trying to get him to run. I felt like it would be a test to see how he could run a big campaign and I think he's done a good job.
Part of your feeling is I think misunderstanding some things about his church and former pastor. I can tell you from personal experience it's NOT a "black separatist" church. I won't go into it more here but if you want to, check out a long post I wrote (started out to Emit R Detsaw) on the last page of the previous thread. http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/04/open-thread-5.html?commentPage=5 I wrote some thoughts and put some links on there, and I would ask you & others to check them out.

OK bye,
I do hope your Mom is OK.

Ariane; May 08, 2008 3:44 PM
jpsedona said...: Hillary has sent a letter to Obama regarding the FL & MI delegations.

Hillary's Letter to Obama

Several key phrases stand out in the letter:

"fair and quick resolution"

"It is not enough to simply seat their representatives at the convention in Denver."

"The people of these great states, like the people who have voted and are to vote in other states, must have a voice in selecting our party's nominee."

IMO, this is stating that nothing less than honoring the vote as they took place in FL & MI will suffice for Hillary. She wants the delegates not to be penalized (1/2 vote each). She wants (and needs) him to commit to this solution ASAP. Clearly she looks to garner a signififcant advantage from upholding the votes, independent of whether it's fair to her opponenet or her opponents supporters.

Will Obama agree to full representation and do it quickly? Don't bet the farm on it.; May 08, 2008 3:57 PM
Martin said...: Well, it's pretty clear now that we've got some "Operation Chaos" dittoheads in here pretending to be Clinton supporters in order to try to stir up tensions between Democrats. Nice try, guys.; May 08, 2008 3:59 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: New SUPER for OBAMA!

5-8-08 - Added Rep. Brad Miller (NC) for Obama

Now we need only 10 to tie!; May 08, 2008 4:17 PM
Anonymous said...: OK I will cease my offensive until you guys call up your shock troops.

Martin said...
Well, it's pretty clear now that we've got some "Operation Chaos" dittoheads in here pretending to be Clinton supporters in order to try to stir up tensions between Democrats. Nice try, guys.

Defies logic. A republican with an agenda would pose as a Obama
supporter and try to insult Clinton supporters in order to drive them toward McCain; May 08, 2008 4:19 PM
Amot said...: Clinton is ill? Suffuring heavy form of amenisia? After misspoken on snipers, now she writes:

I have consistently said that the votes cast in Florida and Michigan in January should be counted.; May 08, 2008 4:31 PM
Amot said...: And becuse today Clinton is my favourite with her new disrespect to black not-hard-working voters, here it is:

$1M question:
If Hillary could travel back in time and had the possibility to go back last Monday, and she had a Nuke, would she annihilate NC before they vote Obama?
A) No, she would ask Bill to do it for her
B) Yes, without doubt, because they are not hard working white americans
C) Yes, but she would say Obama did it
D) Yes, but she would say she was busy with 3AM call and misspoke to her aides; May 08, 2008 4:35 PM
Peter said...: Hillary blame Obama-camp for blocking the seating of FL/MI-delegates, but that is just nonesense. Her biased proposal of seating them according to the voting earlier this year is just ridiculous. Obama wasn`t even on the ballot in MI and Clinton didn`t protest at all before the voting began. Actually I think it was an embarrassement for Hillary when she only got 55% of the votes in MI with no serious contender on the ballot. The turnout was laughable Missouri with half the population of Michigan had a higher turnout. Polls show Obama doing better against Mccain than Hillary, so Hillary pretending to "care deeply" about the voters in MI and FL is just bogus. She is desperatly trying to find some way to stay in the race.

Off course MI and FL will be seated, but the plan will be ready AFTER Obama has won the nomination. So Obama-camp is just as keen to get a solution, but they don`t share Hillarys panic.; May 08, 2008 4:42 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: I really thought that Hillary realized that she couldn't win this nomination and that she was going to play nice while she bides her time bringing in some money to pay her debts. Thought she would start to help unite the party but instead she is up to her old ways of being divisive and looking out only for herself. God help America if she steals the nomination!; May 08, 2008 4:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Amot said...

$1M question:
"If Hillary could travel back in time and had the possibility to go back last Monday, and she had a Nuke, would she annihilate NC before they vote Obama?"

She would do it only as a response to
Obama using poison gas on blue collar voters in many states; May 08, 2008 4:45 PM
Anonymous said...: leah
I still like your idea.

leah said:
"The DNC should throw her butt out of the party immediately. She and Bill have done more harm to the party than anyone I've ever seen!"; May 08, 2008 4:49 PM
Bull Schmitt said...: Hillary Clinton:

"The people of these great states, like the people who have voted and are to vote in other states, must have a voice in selecting our party's nominee."

America:

http://hillaryis404.org/; May 08, 2008 4:56 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Jim-

Okay, I'll bite.
Why do you like that idea?

You do know that she will not be able to run as an Independent. I have read that some states have a 'sore loser' rule that would prohibit her from putting her name on the ballot.; May 08, 2008 5:00 PM
Peter said...: "The people of these great states, like the people who have voted and are to vote in other states, must have a voice in selecting our party's nominee."

Hmm, how interesting. HRC didn`t say that BEFOR MI and FL voted. She actually agreed with how DNC stripped the delegates from these states. But when she needs the delegates, she suddenly cares...

HRC cares about states she wins and don`t care about those she lose. She tries to "exclude" caucus-states, because she lost them. And she don`t care much about states where the AA-vote is important, because she don`t win them. She don`t care about red-states, because she lost most of them. etc etc etc

The only reason she cares about MI and FL now, is because she desperatly need a reason to stay in the "game".
The delegates will be seated, but not the way HRC wants.; May 08, 2008 5:03 PM
Aunt Jean said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 08, 2008 5:03 PM
Ariane said...: Yamaka,
I just don't understand why you have over and over again implied that Obama is less legitimate because his ancestors were not enslaved in the Americas, didn't go through Jim Crow and the African American Civil Rights Movement etc. After all, neither were the ancestors of any previous president and Americans of all races have been voting for them.

Why does it matter so much to you that his African roots are in Africa, not in slavery in the diaspora? If you want some kind of genetic experience of exploitation by Whites, there's colonialism. If you think African Americans should be looking for some kind of commonality of experience, well those do exist in the present day for anyone "black" in USA, no matter if their grandparents came from Mississippi, Haiti, or Kenya. Although Obama is half white /half black, his skin tone and somewhat African features and hair mean that in the racially concious USA most people see him and think "Black". This does have an effect- for example in racial profiling in law enforcement, and he's likely had the experience of taxis refusing to stop for him - - especially in the south part of the "Loop" (downtown Chicago) trying to hail a southbound cab (in other words apparently going to the South Side)

Maybe your view of this in the context of U.S. history is related to how you emphasize Senator Clinton being a woman as a reason to vote for her. I am thrilled and proud we have gotten to the point where a woman or a person with African ancestry really has a chance at the highest office - after all it's not that long ago when a majority of Americans said the country was not ready for either.

BUT my vote is WAY too important and too many people struggled and fought and died for that vote, for me to give it based on race OR gender.

If anything about Obama's race influences me it is less that he is part Black than that he is biracial - -and has lived in Asia and has Asian family members. As difficult as it can be to grow up not being all one thing or all the other, I think his experience has given a window into different worlds that might be valuable in understanding different people and hopefully in being able to bring people together. That in itself is not a reason to vote for someone- - it is more like the icing on the cake.; May 08, 2008 5:04 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Emit just like you we don't trust obama plain and simple. The reason we would vote for McCain is we do feel that at least he cares about America and what it stands for. Is he the best choose heck no but we also believe that he is the better person than obama. Now let me ask you a question when Hillary wins are you going to vote for her in nov? If not who or will you even; May 08, 2008 5:06 PM
Anonymous said...: leah,
For one, I really don't like the two major party circumstance
I believe three major parties would serve us all.
Your idea would do it.
If it is in your power, please kick me out first. You would be rid of all us "passionate idiots.
But seriously, I do like the idea.
My sons are fiscal conseratives
republicans and we argue a lot, but they like the idea too.; May 08, 2008 5:09 PM
Dave in NC said...: Folks,

I'm out of town as of Fri. morning, won't be back til Wed. sometime.

Jim,

I'm leaving you in charge. Because I know that even if she drops out, you will still be here crusading.

Although, based on recent posts, I think you are still holding out hope that the '52 vote will be reversed and Stevenson named president.

If that happens, be sure to warn him about Vietnam.

Yam,

Be sure to cut those peyote buttons off at an angle so the roots don't die.

:)

Have a wonderful week and may God bless us all!; May 08, 2008 5:14 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Dave in NC-

Have a great trip!

And hurry back - we need you here :); May 08, 2008 5:17 PM
Richard said...: Ariane, thank you for an beautiful and eloquent post. You said almost everything that I have been wanting to say to Yamaka, and I wish that I could believe she would hear it.; May 08, 2008 5:20 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Another SUPER for OBAMA!

Rick Larsen (WA) for Obama

Nine more to go!; May 08, 2008 5:36 PM
Aunt Jean said...: To all the posters on here thanks so much for the well wishes for my mother. She came through surgery with flying colors and is doing well. Thanks again it was greatly appreciated! Dave yes you are right she is a strong woman had to be had 7 kids! 4 girls and 3 boys now when we are all together there is I think 68 of us [my last count] LOL LOL Jean; May 08, 2008 5:36 PM
Unknown said...: I support Hillary and will vote for her if she is the nominee. I will vote for McCain if Obama is the nominee.

Here is Hillary's best strategy to become president.

#1 - Beat Obama badly in WV, KY, and PR while holding her own in OR, MT, and SD.

#2 - Accumulate as many pledged delegates as possible including MI and FL.

If she loses by 150 pledged delegates, it means she fell 75 + 1 short of the majority. That is 2 pledged delegates per state short of winning.

#3 - Suspend campaign in June. Give a good speech saying she ran a historic race, gave everyone a chance to vote, gave every state exposure to the Dems, and is suspending campaign for the good of the party.

If Obama self destructs over the summer (i.e. more Rev. Wright, Ayers, etc), she can swoop in.

#4 - Get or force her way to the VP slot.

This helps her in two ways.

First, if she is the VP, no one can claim Hillary or Bill didn't fully support Obama's campaign.

Second, it prevents the promotion of a rival for 2012 or 2016. If Obama picks a different VP and loses, that VP selection becomes Hillary's main rival in 2012. If Obama picks a different VP and wins (one or two terms), that VP selection becomes Hillary's main rival in 2016.

#5 - Obama will lose to McCain.

#6 - Start raising money for Senate relection/Presidential campaign in 2012 the day after election day.

#7 - Correct the 4 mistakes/problems of 2008 campaign which were:

Money - max the major donors but also build a strong small donor base which can be tapped every month.

Money also fixes the next two mistakes/problems.

Caucus states - build a better network to improve her results in caucuses and get a bigger share of those delegates.

50 state strategy - don't assume the race will be over early and plan to run til the convention.

African American vote - if no Obama and their doesn't look like there is any other major African American presidental candidate to get 90% of the African American vote, a better share will get her more delegates from the south and all over the country.

#8 - Win the Democratic nomination

While I hope she wins this year, I feel that if she gets the nomination this year she might not be able to heal the party quick enough to win this year. She would have better odds in 2012 after the Dems lose to McCain in 2008.; May 08, 2008 5:36 PM
Emit R Detsaw said...: Aunt Jean,

As I stated before, I am not a Democrat. I have been an Independant since the 70's. I hold no party aligence. I look for the best person for America and vote for them. Or I will vote for a write in. Shoot, I remember many years ago writing in Micky Mouse because I didn't feel either of the candidates would be good for the country.

If Hillary should lie, cheat, and steal the Democrat Nomination away from Obama, I hope that there will be some good third party candidates step forward, because my vote will not go to McCain or Clinton. Period.

Obama has shown class, even with handling the distorted Rev Wright issue. He has displayed honor and dignity, and I have NO doubt that he will make a great President.; May 08, 2008 5:38 PM
RobH said...: Just saw Wolfson on Hardball.
How depressing. Apparently we only get 24 hours of a possibly gracious demeanor (Tues night - Weds. night). Then the ugly comments last night. Now this:

He throws out the rule book (delegates? bah!) and goes back to votes. But votes like these - MI as is w/ Obama = 0!!! FL as is, and...get ready....if it's close and PR gives her the lead, then "yes, we're prepared to make the case to SD on popular vote" when the deciding enitity is not even allowed to vote for the GE!
Preposterous. Matthews openly mocked the guy.

Her campaign is shameless.; May 08, 2008 5:38 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Dave my God be with you and have a safe and fun trip. I will be thinking of you.Now I can't say good thoughts because I'm not going on a trip LOL LOL. Jean; May 08, 2008 5:39 PM
Mary said...: Although I look at this blog about seventeen times a day, I have never posted on here before. Wonderful, wonderful work - BRAVO!
Thought I might pass along a music video in support of Senator Obama. It was made by my brother and sister-in-law - both professional singers. (On this one, its only her singing, though).
Enjoy!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=l9t3TYMK85o; May 08, 2008 5:40 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Lee-

If you are going to vote for McCain then you are not a real democrat!

Just say NO to McCain!
Say no to war!
Say no to Bush policies!
Say no to secrets and lies in the White House!
Say no to more republican appointed Supreme Court Justices!
Say no to a Bush third term!
Say no to the REPUBLICANS!; May 08, 2008 5:41 PM
Emit R Detsaw said...: Hi Ariana,

Welcome to the board and the nice words that you gave me and the Trinity church. I missed your earlier post due to the archiving.

I really think more people need to view those sermons fully, but knowing how busy most people are it's nice to hear from someone that has actually been in the pews.

Shoot, they couldn't even get his bowling score right. He had a score of 37 through 5 frames with a spare in the 6th. He still mathmatically could have ended up scoring a 177 that game. That's pretty respectable. ;o); May 08, 2008 5:43 PM
Yamaka said...: "The people of these great states, like the people who have voted and are to vote in other states, must have a voice in selecting our party's nominee."

jp:

What exactly are you worried about?

She is calling BHO for a serious talk. What's wrong with it?
____________________________________
Ariene:

I am just making a point that Jesse Jackson or others like him here is the son of the American Black Heritage. Not BHO, a man of Kenyan Heritage.

BHO was born to a Kenyan, whose father was a member of a leading Lou tribe in Kenya. As far I can read in the public literature, BHO Sr or this father or his father has never ever been enslaved and humiliated. If you know, please tell me - I will correct myself, please.

BHO's life has been fabulous. He was raised by his White parent and White grandparents, went to Oxy and Columbia (probably on Affirmative Action) and then to Harvard. At a very tender age, with the help of Rezko's $300k money, he bought his Mansion in Hyde Park, and has quickly become a millionaire.

Please tell me where is the sweat on his neck?

I agree he gives an "appearance" of a Black. That's it! Nothing more.

That's my point and observation.

:-); May 08, 2008 5:46 PM
Yamaka said...: "If you are going to vote for McCain then you are not a real democrat!"

Folks, Remember who said this

"If you are not with me, then you are with the enemy"

Dubya!

Stop promoting Dubya from this Site!!; May 08, 2008 5:50 PM
Yousri said...: Aunt Jean,

I am verry happy to knwo that your mother came through surgery with flying colors and is doing well.

A side from politics, we're still American care about each other.; May 08, 2008 5:50 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Ariane While I was waiting for my mother to get out of surgery I really had some serious thoughts. Yes you are right Obama isn't evil. That really is the wrong word. I know everyone [obama supporters] thinks I'm racist but I'm really not. I just don't trust the man. That is the main reason I don't like him. Trust is a very big issue with me. Yes I know Hillary has lied and done some things but I also want to believe that it is in the past. I hope that I'm big enough not to judge someone for the past. It's the present that matters and to me Obama has to many things that are going on right now to trust him. Hope this explains more of how I feels and is understood..Thank you for the well wishes for my mother. It was very thoughtful and that goes for the others too!Jean; May 08, 2008 5:50 PM
Rich, Orlando said...: FWIW if not already mentioned or updated Green Papers has revised their Indiana numbers to 38-34; May 08, 2008 5:55 PM
Meg said...: I am from Florida and I voted. What about all the people who didn't vote because they were told IT WOULDN'T COUNT???? I don't want the vote to be counted if they are going to only count the people who showed up. It's not fair. Either don't count us at all (fine by me), have a revote, or count us in such a way that doesn't reward or penalize either candidate.

It's embarrassing to be from a state that always seems to screw it up at election time. BUT we elected the guys who decided to break the rules. We broke the rules. You can't go back later and say that's OK.

I'm really tired of all these people screaming that I deserve to have my voice heard. That's not how I feel.; May 08, 2008 5:55 PM
Unknown said...: Leah:

Your comment is wrong. So any Democrat that does not always vote for the Democrat is not a true Democrat? I guess I am not a true Democrat since I vote for the best candidate no matter their political party.

I believe Hillary is the best candidate for the presidency.

I think Obama does not have the experience or judgment to be president. If the choice is Obama and McCain, I have to and will choose McCain.

You might not like McCain but the Dems will still control the House and the Senate. If Pelosi and Reid do their jobs, they control the Congress.; May 08, 2008 5:57 PM
yamaka said...: Please tell me where is the sweat on his neck?

I agree he gives an "appearance" of a Black. That's it! Nothing more. He's a "halfrican".

That's my point and observation.

:-); May 08, 2008 5:58 PM
jpsedona said...: Yamaka,

Hillary's "letter to Obama" is merely posturing. For who's benefit is the letter intended? Certainly not for the voters in the remaining states. It's an attempt to "look fair" to the uncommitted SD's (especially the ones in FL & MI).

If the issue isn't decided by the RBC (which could be sometime after the May meeting or last primary and before the issue gets passed to the credentials committee), the SD's are not going to wait to endorse one or the other.

I believe the letter is just a desperate ploy to: 1) raise money 2) stop the flow of SD's 3) avoid losing before the 5/31 meeting.

What do you think happens when Obama reaches the majority of pledged delegates in 12 days?

Think there will be tremendous pressure to end it then???? Well before the RBC has a chance to disucss the FL & MI plans. She needs Obama to agree to a plan before he reaches 5/20, because after that it's going to look desperate to absolutely everyone.; May 08, 2008 6:01 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Yamakamikaze:

You never misspoke in your life? Never? Not once in your life?

I'm not speaking of shading the truth, or outright lying, I'm speaking of a simple misspeak.

The Australian newspaper carried a transcript of Senator Obama's speech from Tuesday night. You can find it at: http://tinyurl.com/5bb4w9

Do a search within the transcript for 'flag' to find the reference.

Since The Australian is an overseas newspaper, it doesn't have near as much stake in this as an American newspaper, or other American news organization, so I trust them quite a bit, especially over any rag or two-bit network owned by Rupert Murdoch.

The transcript reads:
"It is the founding ideals that the flag draped over my grandfather’s coffin stands for – it is life, and liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

During the speech itself, Senator Obama did not say grandfather, but father.

HE MISSPOKE.

However, when you are raised, in part, by your grandfather, and come to think of your grandfather as your father, it sometimes is easy to misspeak.

I have a somewhat similar experience with that. I never knew my father - he died when I was 2-1/2 and my brother was 3-1/2. My mother remarried, then my step-father died 5 months later. My step-father's daughter (my half-sister) was born 6 months after her father died.

My mother married again, when I was 14, my brother was 15, and our sister was 3.

All three of us (my sister, my brother and me) thought of our step-father as our FATHER, and spoke and thought of him as Dad. Sometimes we had to do some quick explaining with family, neighbors and/or friends as to WHICH Dad we were referring to when we didn't mean our step-father. Depending on who we were referring to, it sometimes was "My Dad" or "Your Dad", but our step-father was ALWAYS Dad after he became our step-father.

Yamakamikaze, if you state that you have NEVER misspoken, you are a lying sack of male bovine droppings.

As to Senator Clinton's stating that she was under sniper fire in Bosnia, how do you explain that? Did she misspeak? Was she confused? Was she tired (at 9:00 AM in the morning)?

Or was it a total fabrication that she didn't think anyone could check back on, so she thought she could get away with a big, fat lie? I'm sure in YOUR mind, she didn't lie to us, did she?

Senator Obama misspoke, and didn't realize the error. Senator Clinton made lots of statements about being under sniper fire in Bosnia, President Clinton is the one who brought up the "she was tired" argument (tired at 9:00 AM?), and it was like pulling hens' teeth to get anyone in the Clinton campaign to even acknowledge that there was no truth to the statement.

I would rather have a person who, on occasion, misspeaks a MINOR point, than someone who lies, and lies to cover the lies. After all, a grandfather IS a father. "Father" is part of the word 'grandfather'.

Now get over it.

Mike; May 08, 2008 6:01 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Emma-

Thank you for posting your wise words.

I agree. When you are told that the votes won't count BEFORE the election and people stay home - then the election is NOT fair and should not count.

Everyone needs to stand up for the thousands of people that have been disenfranchised - those people that did NOT have their voices heard because they stayed home because they knew the election WOULD NOT count!!!; May 08, 2008 6:02 PM
countjellybean said...: Oreo posted a Rounding joke on the main page! Someone needs to go there and teach him some manners!!

!!!!; May 08, 2008 6:04 PM
ed iglehart said...: Bishop Desmond Tutu speaks. And here's the truth about The Chickens comin' Home

For those with open minds. Closed minds won't bother.

Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Dorood/Peace
Namaste -ed; May 08, 2008 6:06 PM
jpsedona said...: Lee,

With respect to "Hillary's best strategy to become president"...

I think you're correct that Hillary will consider 2012 with respect to taking the VP slot if offered. My guess is that the chances of him offerng it to her are slim (<1%).

I believe that it's this year or never. I cannot see her being a party favorite in 2012 if Obama loses in the GE; even if she is the VP candidate. I think she may feel the same way and that's why she is fighting tooth & nail.; May 08, 2008 6:07 PM
suzihussein22 said...: ERD-I will try to give my valid reasons against McCain. He will follow Bush's failing policies in Irag, he doesn't know anything about economics, he says he's transparent about his finances but "let's" his wife refuse to release her tax returns, and has flip-flopped on most of his stances. What does he have to say about the budget that used to balanced? He wants to appoint more conservative judges. This is supposed to be the Straight Talk Express? It either derailed or never left the station.

Some of my family have been Republicans all their lives. They even had an open invite to the WH when Reagan was in office. They WILL NOT vote for McCain. My husband is Independent. He won't vote for McCain. So he's your man if you want to continue the perpetual military action in Iraq.

I didn't let Bush cause a knee-jerk reaction about abortion. I won't let McCain either. I am not pro-choice, however I would be a hypocrite if I voted for the continuance of men and women dying in another country and civilians dying in their native country.

Have a safe trip Dave in NC. I hope your travelling away from these storms we're having to your west.; May 08, 2008 6:10 PM
ed iglehart said...: Ariane,

"As difficult as it can be to grow up not being all one thing or all the other, I think his experience has given a window into different worlds that might be valuable in understanding different people and hopefully in being able to bring people together. That in itself is not a reason to vote for someone- - it is more like the icing on the cake."

Well said!! That's what lights me up, too.

xx
ed; May 08, 2008 6:15 PM
Yamaka said...: jp:

I see your anguish.

But, BHO has been dubbed as the "Uniter" "Solver" by the liberal media.

Here is a call for action. Let him pull up his sleeves and get to work.

Hillary is sincere in trying to solve the issue before things get out of hand. At least she is trying.

I like the idea that the two Primary Principles trying to sit together and solve the hot issue of the day!

What's wrong with this?

:-); May 08, 2008 6:16 PM
jpsedona said...: The Clinton campaign has rejected the proposal that the MI Dem Party endorsed yesterday. Apparently, the 69-59 split is insuffcient.

Hillary Doesn't Like Michigan's Own Solution

FL wants their full delegation seated, and would possibly consider 1/2 vote each. This will be rejected by Clinton for the same reasons.; May 08, 2008 6:20 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Yamaka said:"Hillary is sincere in trying to solve the issue before things get out of hand. At least she is trying."
______________

All Hillary is trying to do is get the majority of delegates out of two state primaries that DO NOT COUNT as is!

Hillary is not concerned for the voters of those two states - if she was she would not have agreed to the initial rules - and she would have said something about the two states long before she realized that she was losing and could only win with those delegates.

What a laugh!; May 08, 2008 6:21 PM
jpsedona said...: Yam,

"Hillary is sincere in trying to solve the issue before things get out of hand. At least she is trying"

If she were sincere, why would she object to the plan put forward by the MI Dem Party? She NEEDS those votes. So, when she wants Obama to agree to HER view, he's a uniter?

Negotiation is compromise... that's how the delegations get seated. Someone with Hillary's vast experience in negotating Peace in Ireland would know that.; May 08, 2008 6:26 PM
Yamaka said...: Mickyrodent:

"After all, a grandfather IS a father. "Father" is part of the word 'grandfather'".

Thought provoking! But utter nonsense. Even stupidity has limits.

If he mis-spoke, it's fine with me.

You see, when you are at fault you have hundred and eleven "human reasons" to explain. But when others do it they are criminals, liar and what not!!

That's the hypocrisy I see in you, the "mis-educated" Masters of the Universe!

Get a life, Mouse.

:-(; May 08, 2008 6:27 PM
Anonymous said...: leah,
"Hillary is not concerned for the voters of those two states"
Balderdash! And obama is?
Both you and jp post opinions with no factual basis.
I would be tougher on you, but you would just turn tail and run like you have previously when I call your hand.; May 08, 2008 6:35 PM
jpsedona said...: It looks like the RNC is leaking highlights of info associated with previously undisclosed info on Hillary. The references Washigton Times article is interesting as well.

RNC Research on Hillary; May 08, 2008 6:36 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Yamaka-

Hillarious!

There is no way that you can compare Senator Obama mis-speaking and saying 'father' instead of 'grand-father' to Hillary lying over and over and over about Bosnia sniper fire and then lying again to try to cover up her lie! How ridiculous!

I hope this 'silly season' is not going to be going on here on the thread up until the day Hillary goes home.; May 08, 2008 6:38 PM
jpsedona said...: Jim,

Please point out the error of my ways. I provide opinion based on my interpretation of factual information & analysis of the math. If you don't agre, please point out some examples for me.; May 08, 2008 6:40 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Jim-

If Hillary is serious about resolving Michigan then why has she refused the Michigan proposal?; May 08, 2008 6:41 PM
ed iglehart said...: Bankrupt in cash terms,
and surrounded by fools, Clinton plays the race card, AGAIN!

It's sad to see the formerly great go down....; May 08, 2008 6:47 PM
Anonymous said...: jp,
I guess you main error is trying to verbalize a cognitive thought that somehow justifies your Voodoo
logic.; May 08, 2008 6:47 PM
jpsedona said...: Now that the NC primary is over, John Edwards is appearing on a couple of morning shows tomorrow... I wonder what he'll have to say? Will he endorse a candidate or stay neutral? Will he go the way his state voted? Or, will he give much needed help to Clinton?; May 08, 2008 6:49 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: JIM-
Did you read the link that jp provided above about Michigan? Hillary said NO to the Michigan proposal!

Here is more regarding it:

http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=5645

....the new deal proposed from the Michigan Democratic Party should be an end to it. Every high-level Michigan Democrat now appears to be behind a 69-59 pledged delegate split, plus seating the superdelegates...

HILLARY DOES NOT WANT A FAIR SOLUTION! SHE WANTS EVERYTHING OR NOTHING!!!

IT IS TIME FOR THE CLINTONS TO GO HOME!; May 08, 2008 6:50 PM
jpsedona said...: Jim,

I am not denegrating your support of a candudate or questioning the lucidity of your argument in favor of a candidate. But since you are interested in attacking me twice, I'd like some examples.; May 08, 2008 6:52 PM
ed iglehart said...: Links should have been This

and this

Sorry! ;-(
ed; May 08, 2008 6:55 PM
Yamaka said...: "Negotiation is compromise... that's how the delegations get seated."

jp:

Yes, Agree.

She has started the negotiation.

Let BHO talk in good faith.

Let us solve the thorn on our collective neck for the past 4 months!

As I said, I am willing to compromise on my 2208.5 Delegate Hurdle.

Will BHO ready to be a problem "solver" ?

Here is a chance for him to display courage and 'the new type of politician" mantra he proclaims he has.

Get to work, BHO.
Stop demagoguing, please.

Time is up, for real action.

:-); May 08, 2008 6:58 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Jim-

If Hillary is serious about resolving Michigan then why has she refused the Michigan proposal?; May 08, 2008 6:58 PM
jpsedona said...: Yam,

If Obama agrees to the MI Dem Party's proposed delegate seating 69-59, would Hillary? She said no, but if she agrees and loses 5 pledged (versus her 74 delegates from the vote), she might gather in support from MI SD's. That her campaign has said no to 69-59 does not bode well for a compromise in MI.; May 08, 2008 7:01 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Yamaka-

There is nothing to negotiate about in Michigan. Michigan has put the proposal on the table and Hillary said NO today!; May 08, 2008 7:01 PM
Yamaka said...: "There is nothing to negotiate about in Michigan."

Oh.. Ya?

Here is the problem in understanding the parties involved in this MI, FL mess.

There are 4 stakeholders in this Process: (In the order of Importance IMO):

1. Primary Voters and their Rights
2. State Govt and their Rights
3. State Parties and their Views
4. DNC and its Rules.

After the Election, Primary Voters Rights' trump every other parties views/rights.

Hillary is talking about the Primary Voters, their Choice and their Rights.

Stay tuned. The Ice May be Melting.

BHO, pull your sleeves and get to work, please. Stop anymore of demagoguing.

Count ALL Votes and ALL States.

:-); May 08, 2008 7:11 PM
Meg said...: On a calmer note, what happens to the pledged delegates (19) for Edwards?

Have you seen this 43 second Youtube? It pretty much sums up my feelings as a Floridian.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTY_bp1dTA4; May 08, 2008 7:16 PM
ed iglehart said...: Hillary's last SHOT!

;-)
ed; May 08, 2008 7:17 PM
Unknown said...: jpsedona:

I think you are wrong. When Obama loses in November, Hillary is primed as the favorite for 2012.

She would have just won nearly half of the pledged delegates and popular vote. Also, Michigan and Florida won't be disputed in 2012.

By fine tuning her campaign strategy, she can easily get enough delegates.; May 08, 2008 7:18 PM
jpsedona said...: Yam,

I would agree that the DNC should respect the rights of the voters above everything. Unfortunately, it should be ALL the voters. That would include those who thought their participation wouldn't count.

Unfortunately, they didn't re-vote. The DNC could have resolved it by saying that delegates would definitely not be reseated without a re-vote. That would have forced the states to do something. How could either candidate at that point not have agreed?

Well, now the DNC, the state parties, the candidates and the voters (those that voted and those that didn't) are all in the same boat.

At this juncture, Hillary's opposition to the MI plan keeps the mess unresolved unless she is willing to compromise in some fashion. If she wants to extend the length of the race, not getting a resolution is one way to do it... take it all the way to the convention.

Hillary has more folks on the RBC that support her than Obama. However, that the MI Dem party is endorsing the plan may hold sway.; May 08, 2008 7:23 PM
jpsedona said...: Lee,

I would agree that she would be an early favorite. But she has ruffled quite a few feathers. If the post-mortem of an Obama loss is pinned on Hillary extending the nomination, she will lose support among some of the party insiders.

Also, there are numerous 'fresh faces' awaiting the 2012 campaign if the Dems lose. Some of those names are potential VP candidates this year.; May 08, 2008 7:29 PM
ed iglehart said...: Thanks for the video, Emma!

Lee,

"Hillary is primed as the favorite for 2012."

In your dreams!; May 08, 2008 7:35 PM
suzihussein22 said...: Okay , Y, I'll respond to two of your satires.

First, it looks like Obama now has the popular vote lead, including MI and FL.

Second, HRC could also be considered a carpetbagger. Defined by Webster Dictionary, a nonresident who seeks private gain by meddling in business or politics. Isn't that what she did to run for Senate in NY?

Tyler, I am still thinking about influential people who make an impression with me. Australian Kevin Rudd issued the formal apology to the Aborigines and ratified the Kyoto protocol, Aung San Suu Kyi for her stand in Myanmar/Burma on behalf of democracy with the Buddhist Monks, Yo Yo Ma for his brilliance in music, and Nelson Mandela for his fight against apartheid.; May 08, 2008 7:39 PM
ed iglehart said...: An interesting Think piece, and well worth a read.

xx
ed; May 08, 2008 7:57 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Oh my gosh!

First Hillary does not know the definition of 'denounce' and now McCain doesn't know the definition of 'losing one's bearings' - maybe Senator Obama should send them both a dictionary!

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/08/mccain-camp-accuses-obama-of-making-age-an-issue/

It is obvious that Senator Obama has a better command of the English language than do McCain and HRC!; May 08, 2008 7:58 PM
Unknown said...: jpsedona:

That is the reason why I believe she wants the VP slot.

If she is in the VP slot, they can't say she didn't support Obama. Plus, Obama can't promote a new face in the Democratic party for 2012 or 2016.

ed iglehart:

When Obama loses in November, who is the favorite for 2012 if not the candidate that just won slightly less than half of the pledged delegates and all of the party leaders have called a great candidate when they say we have two great candidates?; May 08, 2008 8:12 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Yamakamikaze:

One of Senator Clinton's advisors is Harold Ickes. Harold Ickes had a hand in the development of the rules for the 2008 Presidential primaries.

Those rules state that when a state holds it's primaries earlier than an authorized date, the MINIMUM penalty is losing 1/2 their votes at the convention.

Specifically, Rule 11 A states (in part):
11. TIMING OF THE DELEGATE SELECTION PROCESS
A. No meetings, caucuses, conventions or primaries which constitute the first determining stage in the presidential nomination process (the date of the primary in primary states, and the date of the first tier caucus in caucus states) may be held prior to the first Tuesday in February or after the second Tuesday in June in the calendar year of the national convention.

I think you will agree that holding primaries in January is holding them earlier than "the first Tuesday in February".

Now we go to Rule 20.C.1.a, which states:
Violation of timing: In the event the Delegate Selection Plan of a state party provides or permits a meeting, caucus, convention or primary which constitutes the first determining stage in the presidential nominating process to be held prior to or after the dates for the state as provided in Rule 11 of these rules, or in the event a state holds such a meeting, caucus, convention or primary prior to or after such dates, the number of pledged delegates elected in each category allocated to the state pursuant to the Call for the National Convention shall be reduced by fifty (50%) percent, and the number of alternates shall also be reduced by fifty (50%) percent. In addition, none of the members of the Democratic National Committee and no other unpledged delegate allocated pursuant to Rule 8.A. from that state shall be permitted to vote as members of the state’s delegation.

Now by my reading of the rules, Michigan and Florida could be seated, but penalized by 50% of pledged delegates, and no superdelegates allowed to vote for the nomination. The question of how to determine how many votes to allocate to Senator Obama might become moot, especially if more superdelegates make endorsements of Senator Obama in the next few days.

Do you agree with that? Do you think Senator Clinton would or could agree with that compromise? After all, it would be a fairly straight-forward reading of the rules as agreed to by ALL candidates (including Senator Clinton) prior to the primaries.

Or are you going to go by the philosophy of "Damn the rules, and to hell with the process unless it helps Hillary"?

Mike; May 08, 2008 8:13 PM
jpsedona said...: Lee,

I think that Obama can (and probably will) introduce a 'new face' as his VP choice. To those of us who follow politics, the names aren't new. But for most people, many of the names are people they've never heard of.

I think there are some 'old' insiders that might be on his list (e.g. Richardson, Sam Nunn, Dodd, Biden, ). But many younger or lesser known possibilities (e.g. Jim Webb, Claire McCaskill, Bayh, etc.). Of course there are non-Democrats as well including Bloomberg.; May 08, 2008 8:33 PM
ed iglehart said...: Lee,

"When Obama loses in November, who is the favorite for 2012 if not the candidate that just won slightly less than half of the pledged delegates...?"

In the unlikely event that Obama loses in November, why should the favourite be the candidate that just resoundingly lost the primary despite deploying the most negative campaign techniques?

Face it. She's a busted flush. In four years she'll be even moreso. The list of better alternatives is too long to enumerate.

Dream on!; May 08, 2008 8:36 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: jp-

< pouting > Ya left out Gov. Kathleen Sebelius.

Obama / Sebelius '08; May 08, 2008 8:38 PM
jpsedona said...: Mike,

Good quotes on the Rules. In the case of MI, they tried pushing for an early primary in 2004 and were told by Mcauliffe that they wouldn't be seated if the primary was moved up.

Carl Levin, an Obama supporter, was one of the people pushing to move the primary. I think he and other MI Dem leaders could end up penalized.

The enforcement of a penalty shouldn't come as any surprise to the leadership in MI.; May 08, 2008 8:39 PM
jpsedona said...: Leah,

I thought everyone knew that Sebelius was on the list?; May 08, 2008 8:43 PM
ed iglehart said...: I want my nomination!

;-)
ed; May 08, 2008 8:46 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: jp-

LOL - Well they should by now - as many times as I've typed it ;)

I'm off to the store - see ya'll later.

O/S '08; May 08, 2008 8:47 PM
suzihussein22 said...: ed iglehart-That's a flattering hairstyle for her.; May 08, 2008 8:54 PM
Emit R Detsaw said...: Leah, I have to agree with you for a couple reasons (maybe more) on your suggestion of Kathleen Sebelius for the VP slot.

1) Not just because she is a white 60 year old female, but

2) I grew up in Kansas, and always remember that state having Male Republican Governors.

3) She brings in the Catholic vote.

4) She can bring in the Ohio vote. Sebelius is the daughter of former Ohio governor John J. Gilligan, and thus they became the first father/daughter governor pair in the United States after her election.

5) In 1994 she ran for the Kansas state insurance commissioner post and stunned political forecasters by winning — the first time a Democrat had won in more than 100 years. She is credited with bringing the agency out from under the influence of the insurance industry. She refused to take campaign contributions from insurers and blocked the proposed merger of Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas, the state's largest health insurer, with an Indiana-based company. The decision by Sebelius marked the first time the corporation had been rebuffed in its acquisition attempts.

6) Other tidbits and awards:

In 2001 Sebelius was named as one of Governing Magazine's Public Officials of the Year while she was serving as Kansas Insurance Commissioner.

In November 2005 Time named Sebelius as one of the five best governors in America, praising her for eliminating a $1.1 billion debt she inherited, ferreting out waste in state government, and strongly supporting public education — all without raising taxes. Also praised was her bipartisan approach to governing, a useful trait in a state where Republicans have usually controlled the Legislature.

In February 2006, the White House Project named Sebelius one of its "8 in '08", a group of eight female politicians who could possibly run and/or be elected president in 2008.; May 08, 2008 9:01 PM
ed iglehart said...: Leah & Emit,

She's not even in the betting
for Veep. There ain't any women there (other than HRC).

2008.DEM.VP.BAYH
200 3.2 4.5 200 4.6 229.9k +1.4
Select 2008.DEM.VP.CLARK
110 4.5 5.7 139 5.7 232.6k +0.6
Select 2008.DEM.VP.RICHARDSON
595 8.0 9.5 160 8.0 447.6k -1.9
Select 2008.DEM.VP.OBAMA
173 2.9 3.0 112 3.0 379.0k 0
Select 2008.DEM.VP.GORE
506 6.5 7.5 50 7.9 424.3k +1.5
Select 2008.DEM.VP.WEBB
115 10.0 11.8 100 10.0 243.5k -2.4
Select 2008.DEM.VP.STRICKLAND
102 1.5 2.6 200 1.6 177.5k -1.1
Select 2008.DEM.VP.CLINTON(H)
26.9k 18.5 18.9 2 18.5 424.2k +2.1
Select 2008.DEM.VP.VILSACK
190 0.4 0.6 200 0.3 137.5k 0
Select 2008.DEM.VP.EDWARDS
115 6.4 8.4 50 6.3 371.5k +0.5
Select 2008.DEM.VP.BIDEN
200 2.0 3.4 118 1.9 404.1k 0
Select 2008.DEM.VP.NUNN
200 2.8 4.8 125 4.9 176.8k +1.4
Select 2008.DEM.VP.DASCHLE
200 1.7 2.5 105 3.0 161.5k +0.5
Select 2008.DEM.VP.DODD
111 1.1 1.2 310 1.2 159.1k 0
Select 2008.DEM.VP.KERREY
120 0.3 0.6 500 0.8 134.2k 0
Select 2008.DEM.VP.WARNER
2098 5.0 6.8 310 5.0 196.7k +1.5
Select 2008.DEM.VP.FIELD
100 41.0 42.2 107 39.0 230.2k -10

Aside from HRC (temporary favourite - OMG!), Webb leads, followed by Richardson. I'm backing Webb, but y'all probably know that already.
xx
ed; May 08, 2008 9:17 PM
Yamaka said...: "However, that the MI Dem party is endorsing the plan may hold sway."

jp:

Let us see how the Drama ends.

MI Dem Party is the prime villain in this from Day One. As you know, the Gov of MI, a Democrat, could have prevented this Mess very very early on. She just royally screwed this.

FL is another story. It is governed by the GOP. No Democrat has any teeth to deal with them.

Voters in MI went to polls to cast their vote on Primary candidates AND a host of other matters on the ballot. Those who did not go would not have gone to polls, no matter what, IMO. Maybe, a few people did not go because DNC said so!

Hillary worked hard to re-vote several weeks ago. Carville and Rendall pledged to raise money to re-vote. But BHO showed a stony face, a distinct disdain for the idea!

Now, again Hillary is trying. Let us hope BHO takes some interest at least now at the 11th hour.

Some compromise will emerge sooner or later, I am confident.

If not, let us meet at Denver for the Final Showdown of Will Power, and perhaps mutual self-destruction!

Maybe that's our Karma, as Hindus say.

Let the Winner Win clean and fair. For Legitimacy is at stake.

:-); May 08, 2008 9:19 PM
RobH said...: Ed (7:57):

I concur - great piece and well worth the read. Seconded.; May 08, 2008 9:21 PM
RobH said...: "Let the Winner Win clean and fair."

He already has, my man.

Work hard and follow the rules.
Out plan.
Out organize.
Out manage.
Stay Serene.

You know the drill.; May 08, 2008 9:29 PM
Yamaka said...: "That is the reason why I believe she wants the VP slot."

jp:

How did you get the belief that HRC wants the VP slot?

In the cruel twist of fate, if she loses the Nomination to BHO, this is what I want her to do:

1. Don't seek the VP slot, but if the Party elders request, then give some consideration. Bill's instinct is the best in these things.

2. Help BHO in the GE as much as you can. But don't overdo. Let him sweat harder to earn the Job.

3. Prepare for the 2012. Fire up your Base. Your are a true American Classic. America needs you.

For the sake of our daughters, you MUST rise up and break the Glass Ceiling built by the macho men for the past 50,000 years. This Ceiling cannot stand in the 21st Century. It is an abomination, for sure.

God Will Bless You, Hillary.

:-); May 08, 2008 9:43 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: State of the race at this time:

(Note to Yamakamikaze - I'm NOT figuring in Michigan and Florida, since we have NO idea how that situation plays out. If you want to do the same analysis including Michigan and Florida, be my guest.)

Giving Clinton very generous allowances in the remaining primaries, I have the delegate counts as follows (Obama delegates first:

WV 9 19
Kentucky 19 32
Oregon 28 24
PR 24 31
SD 8 7
Montana 9 7

Notes:
In West Virginia, for the spread to be larger, for Senator Clinton to get more than 19 delegates, she needs more than 75% of the vote. Current polling shows her with a 56-27% lead (64% of the vote), and the gap is narrowing.

For Kentucky, Senator Clinton needs more than 70% of the vote to get more than 32 delegates. Current polling averages have her with a 59-29 lead (68% of the vote). Even if she achieves more than 70% (Senator Clinton has not achieved that 70% vote threshold yet, Senator Obama only in DC), the net difference will be 12 delegates (+6 for Senator Clinton, -6 for Senator Obama).

For Puerto Rico, I can only find one poll taken, showing Senator Clinton with a 50-37 lead (57% of the vote). To get more than 31 delegates, she would need to get almost 65% of the vote. She achieved that level in two states (Arkansas, at 70.5%, and Nebraska, at 67.5%). If she achieves 65% of the vote, it would get her 9 more delegates and take 9 off Senator Obama's total.

The total I have for the upcoming primaries is Senator Clinton gaining 120 pledged delegates, and Senator Obama gaining 97 pledged delegates.

Current delegate totals, with upcoming projected:
Senator Obama
1590.5 pledged
260 superdelegates
97 projected in upcoming primaries
Total - 1947.5 delegates

Senator Clinton
1496.5 pledged
269.5 superdelegates
120 projected in upcoming primaries
Total - 1816 delegates

If the above is anywhere near accurate or close, Senator Obama needs about 29% of the remaining superdelegates to achieve the nomination. Senator Clinton needs about 79% of the remaining superdelegates to achieve the nomination.

And Yamakamikaze, if you take the time to figure out a different scenario, please post your analysis in full (how you determined the results, the reasoning behind your analysis, etc.). I think you'll find the percentages will move some, but not significantly, in Senator Clinton's favor.

Mike; May 08, 2008 10:07 PM
Unknown said...: jpsedona:

Of course, Obama can promote a new face for VP.

That is why I think Hillary wants the VP slot, to block a new face from being promoted and becoming a rival in 2012.; May 08, 2008 10:15 PM
Larry Parker said...: Strong Obama supporter and contributor here...

NO!!!!! to Hil-lie-ry as VP. Goodbye, bitch.

No to Biden. He is a mad dog.

So who then? We now have the first black nominee. Let's double up and and add the second ever female VP nominee. Napolitano or Sebelius are OK, but I like...Michelle Obama!!! Heck, the VP doesn't do much anyway. Michelle could easily handle the job.; May 08, 2008 10:38 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Larry Parker said...
". . . I like...Michelle Obama!!! Heck, the VP doesn't do much anyway. Michelle could easily handle the job."

But there is that small detail in the Constitution that says the President and Vice President must be from separate states. That is the reason Dick(less) Cheney moved from Texas to Wyoming in 2000.

So would Michelle claim the Chicago house (but live in the VP house at the Naval Observatory in DC, up Massachusetts Ave.)? And where would Barak claim residence? If Michelle claimed the Chicago house, Barak would need to move out of Illinois, thus would need to give up his Senate seat the minute he did so.

Or he could claim the Chicago house, but she would move where?

She might be qualified, and probably is, but there are too many complications for it to happen.

Mike; May 08, 2008 10:52 PM
Rich, Orlando said...: did you change the Indiana delegates on the ticker to 38-34 in favor of HRC...the Indiana SOS site switched that today, Green Papers has that as well; May 08, 2008 10:53 PM
Larry Parker said...: Mike,

I did know about that rule, but I forgot to mention that. Thanks for bringing that up.

Michelle could move a little early to Washington, D.C. Barack would keep his official residence in Chicago until January, or when his Senate replacement takes over, and after the electors have voted.

But too many people would cry that Barack's wife shouldn't be the VP, and that "experience" is required, so this won't happen. She could really kick some ass as VP. I like the good cop-bad cop aspect also. :); May 08, 2008 11:13 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Yamakamikaze -

I still haven't seen a cogent, logical response from you on my challenge to you to defend the original Clinton '27 state' strategy versus the new[er] '50 state' strategy.

You've posted a couple of times on it, but given absolutely NO defense of the '27 state' strategy, nor have you disowned it in convincing manner.

Can you defend it? If not, I kindly request that you please stop promoting the '50 state' strategy. If you can't even try, then you will be confirmed, in my view as nothing but a Lush Rimbaugh ditto-head and/or a plant of the RNC whose only intent is to sow discord.

Mike; May 08, 2008 11:15 PM
suzihussein22 said...: My husband wants to post this quote "of the day" from him-It comes down to whose socks don't stink as bad.

With the ill-spoken words from HRC today about certain hard-working people, I call it generalizing demographics, someone posting at NYT called it reinforcing a quasi-social class system.

Issue-wouldn't we be able to respond better financially and diplomatically to the tragedy in Myanmar/Burma, Russia and Georgia, and Lebanon if the Bush admin. wasn't spending/borrowing billions for Iraq and tying up most of our military in Iraq?

issue-I have had a problem with the raising of the minimum wage. It never includes server pay. In many parts of the country, employers leave at the base of 2.13 an hour. The servers are the unrepresented working class. Some of them are college students working their way through college. I've talked with several about organizing, but they feel powerless to reform anything.; May 08, 2008 11:19 PM
Richard said...: Mike in Maryland: thanks for your predictions. Your conclusions are almost identical to mine. The idea that HRC can win nearly 80% of the remaining delegates is laughable.

Yamaka: You've seen the math, and I presume you can add and subtract as well as we can. Can you provide a scenario in which Hillary could win a majority of the pledged delegates, even if Michigan and Florida are included?; May 08, 2008 11:34 PM
Yamaka said...: As a matter of Law

if the FL, MI delegates are NOT seated as per the choice of the voters, then the States have the right to remove the Nominee's name from the ballot in the GE

and/or

the citizens have the right to ask the Court to order for the removal of the Nominee's name from the ballot in the GE.

Both can potentially happen in both MI and FL.

Can the Democratic Party afford to go to GE already losing both the States?

Whether it will happen for sure is upto the will of the State/Peoples of MI and FL, IMO.

Therefore, Seat ALL delegates as per the choice of voters of ALL States plus DC and PR.

:-); May 08, 2008 11:41 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Michelle Obama wouldn't want to be V.P. She will be busy being First Lady and a wife to her husband and mother to her two daughters.

I still think that Senator Obama might have a woman pretty high up on his short list for V.P. but it will not be Hillary. It will be probably someone that did not vote for the war. And it will not be a senator, two senators on a ticket is not a good thing - a governor is better.

Obama / Sebelius '08; May 08, 2008 11:45 PM
Yamaka said...: Richard: Please read my postings earlier.

It is quite conceivable that HRC can and will reach 2210 total delegates if ALL delegates are seated as per the choice of the voters polled.

Stay tuned.

:-); May 08, 2008 11:46 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Yamaka-

Please post a link to the citation you are referring to in regards to the ability to remove a candidates name from the ballot.

Please post a link for both states.

Thank you.; May 08, 2008 11:53 PM
Richard said...: Yamaka: show me the math. Your saying it doesn't make it so. Give us specifics. Which delegates would be seated? What about uncommitteds? What will she recieve in the remaining states? How many superdelegates will she need?; May 09, 2008 12:16 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: I'm not sure if anyone posted this link yet or not but it is a good article explaining why Clinton did so poorly:

The Five Mistakes Clinton Made

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1738331,00.html

.; May 09, 2008 12:27 AM
Kujo said...: vote fairly....

I really don't understand your comment. I understand that HRC supporters are upset, but I can never understand the position on MI and FL and feel these are just excuses to vent your frustration.

Why would it be fair if the DNC goes out and tells all candidates that FL and MI do not count. Then after the election to change their mind. Would this be fair to all the candidates who did not run there. To say (in FL case) that each candidate ran on the same ground because they did not have the popularity. If you look at all early states, the poll number changed significantly once Obama started campaining there.

The problem is HRC made a mistake, many mistakes. One was not understanding she would need Florida. She should not agreed to the punishment of these states and made it public early on. I don't really remember hearing once from voters in these states before the primaries that they were upset that there vote would not be counted and pressure either the DNC to reconsider or their state party to reconsider.

In the current setup we have one candidate who would have know one else to blame but herself for the situation that resulted. If you now go back and change the rules you would would have a candidate that would been unfairly treated and have the nomination pull from them. For some reason you call this fair. This is way Obama supporters are so passionate about the not counting the results of Florida.

If you think there is/was some way to redue the vote, think again. In Michigan where they tried it was ruled by courts that they could not do it. There was no way they could guarentee that the could prohibit voters who voted in the Republican primary from voting in the Democratic primary. A caucus vote was voted down by HRC.

I think it is funny to hear from Clinton supporters on how they hate listening to the Obama supporters that they are bulling the chat rooms and comment threads. But it is the Obama supports who would still vote for HRC in the GNC. It is the Obama supporters who could still see good in HRC. We just don't feel that she would be as good as Obama.

It is the HRC supporters who would never vote for Obama. It is the HRC supporters who show the hate.....

I think it is wise you choose to leave and not come back. You obviously find it difficult to listen to other opinions beside your own.; May 09, 2008 12:41 AM
Yamaka said...: Richard:

It is very simple math for HRC:

Option 6 DCW total del 1889
From the 6 Contests 122
From undeclared SDs 200
Total potential Del 2211
Total Del Required 2208.5

You may disagree with my projections. Your right!

But, I suggest it is conceivable and HRC can and will clinch the Nomination, if ALL delegates are seated as per the choice of the polled voters.
________________________________

Leah:

I am not a lawyer myself.

But I heard this from two of my lawyer friends, plus I read in a print of either

WSJ/Newsweek/Money/Economist or SmartMoney (the ones I subscribe) some 2-4 months ago.

You may have to call your lawyers to check on this.

You need to be open minded before you dig the literature, though!

Good luck!

:-); May 09, 2008 12:42 AM
Kujo said...: As a matter of law... whose law.

Many parties are on the GE ballot. Many of those do not hold primaries in those states.

The rules for putting names on a ballot comes from petition with enough reguired names. Once this is accomplished the name goes on the ballot.

By law this can not be removed. Just because some voters do not like a candidate they can not prevent them from having the names of their competitors on the ballot.

Can you imagine if that was possible? Knowone would ever be on the ballot. Democrats would remove Republicans, Republicans would remove Democrats......

Good try Yamaka... Try again.; May 09, 2008 12:47 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: countjellybean and anyone else tracking 'leaners', here's an article from The [Baltimore] Sun on the 10 Maryland superdelegates who have not yet endorsed:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/politics/bal-super0508,0,1737462.story
TinyURL: http://tinyurl.com/5zv8nj

Have fun!

Mike; May 09, 2008 12:49 AM
Yamaka said...: danku:

You have a point.

But consider the specific cases of MI and FL which conducted their Primaries as per their State Law. They counted the votes and submitted it to the Parties.

If the Democratic Party disrespects this process, then only then the States can move to punish that particular Party by removing their Nominee and/or the Courts can intervene and deliver a verdict authorizing the removal of the Nominee.

I understand this would trigger a massive legal fight, and even a Constitutional crisis ending up in the Supreme Court.

Good Luck.

:-); May 09, 2008 12:59 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: Yamakamikaze said...
"It is very simple math for HRC:
[snip]
From undeclared SDs 200"

As of tonight, there are 265.5 remaining superdelegates to declare an endorsement. If the rest of your math is correct (I haven't checked it yet), and if Senator Clinton gets 70% of the remaining superdelegates . . .

SHE WILL STILL BE SHORT OF THE TOTAL NEEDED. A TOTAL OF 15 DELEGATES SHORT.

Yamakamikaze, I thought you were an intelligent person. That's what you tried to portray yourself as.

Do you realize that to get the 200 superdelegates required in your scenario, she needs to get more than 75% of the remaining superdelegates?

Do you REALLY think she will get 75% of the remaining superdelegates?

If so, you are delusional, absolutely and totally delusional.

Mike; May 09, 2008 1:09 AM
Kujo said...: Yamaka.

It has already gone to the courts. One voter in Michigan had the smarts to understand what was happening in his state before the primarys started. He took it to court. He lost. He appealed. He lost.

The courts have ruled, as the have time and time again, as they did in Nevada this year that....

The constitution of the United States protects the rights of voters in the GE. Political Parties are their own entities with there own rules. They can choose a candidate because of the cloths the candidate is wearing. Voters can vote for one candidate but the party can chose another. They can have caucus, they can have primaries, they can choose from a hat. It does not matter.

To sum it up. Political Parties control themselves. The create rules, they have rules commities to police the rules.; May 09, 2008 1:10 AM
Bob in Vancouver said...: Thank you Mike in Maryland for bothe the citation of the rules and the analyses of delegates. Very susinct, and well layed out.

Yamaka:

I wonder if you could tell me just how Hillary Clinton is going to break up the OPEC cartel (Organization of Oil Exporting Countries)?

In case you weren't aware OPEC includes a number of our friends such as Iran, Venezuela, and the Socialist Peoples Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, from whom the US buys about 12% of its oil, as well as countries such as Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Indonesia, , United Arab Emirates, Algeria, Nigeria, Angola, and Gabon.

And while you are at it maybe you could explain just how Hillary is going to pull out of NAFTA if she can't negotiate her changes. Don't forget, the US is reliant on such things as electrical power and petroleum products from Canada (I can tell you Canada is not totally happy either and want changes made). And maybe you weren't aware that Canada now has 100+ years of oil reserves tied up in the Alberta Tar Sands. Yes it is expensive to extract, but it is by far the worlds largest reserves.

Not to mention, nuking Iran (obliterating was her word), as a kneejerk statement, to what she obviously knew was a fabricated scinario.

Just where does Hillary Clinton get the impression that she has an edge with foreign policy? To me she sounds a lot like Bush.; May 09, 2008 1:13 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Yamaka-

Two points:

1) There are 265.5 remaining undeclared Superdelegates. Hillary WILL NOT get 200 of them - impossible/improbable. No way Jose!

2) There is a law in Florida that a candidates name can not be removed from the ballot unless that candidate drops out of the race NATIONWIDE. Because of that LAW it was impossible for Obama and Edwards to have removed their name prior to the primary like they did in Michigan. FLORIDA cannot remove a candidate's name if the candidate is still in a race nationally.

Next topic...; May 09, 2008 1:15 AM
Hippolytus said...: "I've got Barack right where I want him!"
Signed,
Hillary; May 09, 2008 1:31 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Minus 1 from Clinton
Plus 1 for Obama

Congressman Payne, NJ superdelegate, switches from Clinton to Obama

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/05/congressman_payne_nj_superdele.html

.; May 09, 2008 1:35 AM
Yamaka said...: "To me she sounds a lot like Bush."

Bob:

You may have to be open minded to understand the mechanics of my reasoning. Perhaps I am not in the Echo Chambers of many of the BHO people!

From my readings I understand that the price of oil is nearly 50% more than what a demand and supply equilibrium would normally dictates.

Therefore, what HRC wants to do is to figure out where the collusion occurs, whether at the OPEC level of production, or elsewhere in the supply chain. You need a tough fighter to go after the BigBusiness. That's what HRC is offering the Nation. I believe she has the best brain, for she has been the Brain Behind Bill, the most successful two term President that Democrats have in the past 30 years.

On NAFTA, she has had from the beginning some reservation on how to implement it. She argued with Bill for a long time. What she says is wherever possible we may have to renegotiate with our Partners, which I think is the right thing to do.

On Iran, she was answering a rhetorical question. I believe what she gave was the appropriate answer. Your may consider it knee-jerk, but I don't.

On Foreign Policy, certainly she has the best foreign policy experience one can imagine. BHO has been in Indonesia, visited Kenya and what else he has?

I understand you want to say BHO is the Messiah to the world, but I consider him as just another Chicago Politician, as pastor Wright said.
_________________________________

Folks:

To follow the real deal, take the Option 6 Box lower left of DCW and see how many undeclared SDs are still out there:

299.5 as of this minute. I predict that HRC can potentially get 200 out of it, after June 3 results.

All others are just Incomplete meant for Partial Democracy. Not for me!

I know that Option 6 Box drives many of BHO's people into a state of intense delirium and pathos! Just I can't help it.

Oh, one other thing: For the sake of Michelle, Malia and Sasha, the Constitution can be amended that they all can be VP, Sec of State and Sec of Treasury! Just a thought. Have Fun.

Cheers.

:-); May 09, 2008 1:43 AM
Yamaka said...: "they have rules commities to police the rules."

Danku:

The Rule was very poorly implemented by the Officials/Politicians, as per Gov Dean.

Remember, FL is ruled by GOP and MI has a GOP controlled Senate. Enforcing the Rule is practically impossible in this circumstance.

The Court case you refer to is totally different from what we discussed earlier. Not the same, IMO. You are mixing the Primary case with the potential law suits of GE.

Anyway, we have a potential Train Wreck on our hands regarding MI and FL. Let us hope it gets resolved fairly to legitimize the Primary Process.

I need Legitimacy and Fairness, I don't really care who finally gets the nod. If BHO jumps the hurdle of 2208.5 total delegates, I will blog for him, as I have committed earlier.

Oh, BHO's interview on Wolf regarding his White mother Ann was just superb. That's the clean talking BHO I like, not the Master of Double Talk and the Empty Suit in the Campaign!

:-); May 09, 2008 1:55 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Yamaka,

I understand that you don't like rules. But at the moment the DNC says the number needed is 2024/5, whatever.

You do sound a bit 'off' when you keep reciting the same irrelevant number over and over.

You have to play by the rules set by the DNC.

Doesn't it make sense to you that the CORRECT number is up in the FIRST box and not the one down in the last box ;)

Reality IS NOT the Clinton spin!; May 09, 2008 2:00 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: So, Yamakamikaze,

She needs 200 of 299.5 reamining undeclared superdelegates.

You think she will get endorsed by 67% of the remaining undeclared superdelegates, and that not a single additional superdelegate will jump ship?

The only way that would happen is if there is such a catastrophic event in the Obama campaign that he would be forced to withdraw totally from the campaign.

And if you think that it's still out there, undiscovered, ready to be exposed, forget about it. If there IS something to be exposed, the Clinton campaign would:
1. Already have found it, and tried to exploit it, or

2. Her campaign is so inept that it can't find it.

Since I don't think her campaign is THAT inept (after all, the campaign is broke, but still attempting to go forward, and still might win three of the upcoming primaries), and so far no skeletons have been found in the closet that totally changed the game . . .

IT AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN.

Game and set for Obama. Match point, advantage Obama, coming up.

Mike; May 09, 2008 2:01 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: ANOTHER Super for OBAMA!

- Added Rep. Peter DeFazio (OR) for Obama

Wow they are coming in fast tonight!; May 09, 2008 2:01 AM
Bob in Vancouver said...: Yamaka:

Hillary Clinton is going around shouting that she is going to break up the OPEC Cartel. It is just more pandering. Maybe the white blue collar workers eat this stuff up but anyone with brains knows darn well that she must be smoking something.

OPEC is not an agency made up of large companies. It is comprised of countries. What is she going to do, march into one of OPEC's meetings held in Zurich, with a machine gun across her lap, and say "We don't like the price you want for your oil. We demand that you change it."; May 09, 2008 2:01 AM
Kujo said...: yakama,

Oil: The raise in oil prices has been caused by a combination of factors.

1. Weak US Dollar.

2. US does not have enough refineries to meet the demands of the new state laws in regards to immisions. We will be short for many years as it takes time to build these.

3. Iraq not producing oil like it use to.

On Iran the problem with her answer was that given a question like this, a good politian avoids answering it. They should say we will continually work with our alies to avoid allowing these situations from arising.

As for experience in foriegn policy... Geeze where do I begin. Experience does not mean qualified. I see too many sport teams rehire the same bad head coaches that other teams used because of Experience. Same results. I was really impressed with Obama for saying he would talk to his enemies. I had been saying this for years. I work 3 months of the years in foriegn countries. Its a different view from abroad. There is a reason that countries like Iran wants to build up Nuclear Weapons. THEY DONT TRUST US!. And we have given them enought reasons on why they do not trust us. We can not go and attack countries using our weapons of mass distruction because we think they have weapons of mass distruction. To find out later they don't. Then to say it was a good thing because he was a bad guy anyway when while he was that bad guy we were supplying him with arms and funding him to attack Iran. No wonder they don't trust us. Then we say we wont talk to them, why should they talk to us.

Health Care. Clinton has experience in working with congress on Health Care and were are we today. Is it her fault that when she headed the congress on this that knowone would listen to her.

Health Care. Universal Health Care? Lets forget the rich and the poor on this one, lets look in the middle. Anyone who does not want to have health care raise your hand. The problem with health care is not that people dont want it, it is that it is not affordable. How does forcing people to buy it help. We need to force drug companies and the health care industry to control prices to levels that are equal to our neighbors. Why does HRC not push for this, because the the lobiest who do not want this to happen.; May 09, 2008 2:08 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Here on DCW Obama needs just 7 more supers to have the lead in SDs and he will have the lead in all categories!; May 09, 2008 2:18 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: Yamakamikaze said...
"Remember, FL is ruled by GOP"

So?

The bill to change the date of the Florida primary was introduced by a Democrat. It was not a Republican who introduced it. It was a Democrat.

The bill passed all subcommittees with zero votes from Democrats voting against it. All of the Democratic party members on the committees voted FOR the bill.

The bill passed in the state Senate with NO votes against it. There are 14 Florida state Senators with a (D) behind their name. Not a single one of them voted against the bill.

The bill passed in the state House with two votes against it, but BOTH of those votes were cast by Republicans. There are 43 Florida state Representatives with a (D) behind their name. Not a single one of them voted against the bill.

The DNC rules state that the penalty against a state holding its primary outside the time frame as established within the rules can be reduced if state and party officials with the power to do so take all efforts to make sure the state does not vote outside the time frame.

IF such officials take all efforts available, the rules allow the penalty to be reduced or waived.

So Florida Democratic party members voted FOR the bill in the Florida House committees, on the floor of the House, in the Florida Senate committees, and on the floor of the Senate. And not just some of them, but ALL of them voted FOR the date change at all steps of the process.

Demonstrate to me where Florida Democratic party officials took all efforts to stop the date change.

Remember, the rules state that they must be able to demonstrate they took all available efforts to stop the date change. The rules don't say they had to stop it, but rather took efforts to stop it.

In Michigan, a majority Democratic House passed, AND a Democratic governor signed, legislation to change the date so that it fell outside the window for primaries and caucuses.

Demonstrate to me where Michigan Democratic party officials took all efforts to stop the date change.

If you can do that, you're a magician. And a delusional magician at that.

Mike; May 09, 2008 2:22 AM
PRDude said...: Hi there, this is my first post, and it's kind of late, but I've been hearing so often the assumption that Clinton will crush Obama in Puerto Rico because it is full of Latinos, that, as a local, I've gotta chime in.

There are three reasons why PR residents are different from U.S. Latinos (particularly Texans and Californians), and why I think that it is possible, actually quite likely, that Obama will win.

First, the ethnic "tension" between blacks and hispanics does not exist here, and is actually nonsensical. You see, ethnically, Central Americans, who make up the great majority of Southwestern Latinos, are typically a mix (culturally, racially, etc) of Europeans and Native Americans. Puerto Ricans, however, are a mix of Europeans and Africans. Thus, Obama physically could easily pass as Puerto Rican down here, while obviously he would look like a fish out of water in most of Mexico. The reality is that people in PR are far more likely identify with his skin color than they are to feel hostile to it.

Mind you, it is not that PR is a racial paradise, it is just that skin tone (same as in Brazil, for example) is seen much more as a proxy for wealth (there are plenty of blond, blue eyed Puerto Ricans here who did not emigrate in the 50s) than as a separate identity. To talk about a black-brown cultural divide here is trying to force a paradigm that is alien.

I don't kknow how long these posts can be so I'm gonna add my other two reasons next.; May 09, 2008 2:24 AM
Kujo said...: Yakama,

I understand the difference of the DNC and the state democratic parties. I understand that the state legislature made changes that is the DNC control. The DNC governing sets its rules that it expects the states to uphold. If they don't they take action.

I also think the way the DNC handled this pre 2008 was poorly. I think more the HRC did not understand the consiquences of the actions.

The problem is from this point on. If it makes you happy that the total delegate count needs to be 2208.5 then fine. It is 2208.5. Give Clinton half and Obama half. Does this really mean that people in these states had any say so? NO.

Do you really believe that counting the votes as is is fair? Just answer that question. How can it be fair if the DNC tells you the vote does not count and you have limited resources so you direct your campain for where it counts. (To tell you the truth I would not vote for any candidate who campained in a state that did not count, not smart). So if you can not count the vote as is, what would be a fair way of dealing with the people. Lets face facts, the delages will be seated. After it is determed what the results are, they will find a way of letting these states feel like they have representation. But does mean these peoples votes actually counted NO.

With they way things are going now I expect they will count the vote as is but 1/2 just like the republican party and give Obama the undecided in Michigan. This will give HRC a net of 33. They will not do this until they know that 33 to HRC will not mean anything. By counting 1/2 vote this will allow the DNC to say they still punished Michigan and Flordia and at the same time be able say they did the same thing as the Republican party. (I think the voters will see through this, but nothing else they can do).; May 09, 2008 2:24 AM
Kujo said...: Yamaka,

As for the CNN interview. I agree. This interview was good because it dealt with issues that concern people. It was not one based on garbage election mumbo jumbo. (In saying that the interview was good does not mean one has to agree with the answers); May 09, 2008 2:27 AM
PRDude said...: CONTINUED

My second reason why Obama may win PR is that the issues of mainland Latinos have nothing to do with the issues that Puerto Ricans, who are U.S. citizens living in our historic homeland, care about. We don't care in the least about immigration, or whether a fence is built on the border with Mexico, or whether Spanish should be allowed in school, or Cuba or Chávez or all the other issues that frame the political views and tendencies of mainland Latinos. Thus, to the extent that issues have shaped Latino voting tendencies, they are not relevant here. Vis-a-vis mainland politics, Puerto Ricans care the most about the island's political and legal relationship with the U.S. And so far, and I'm not going to get into detail why, Hillary has been - as a Senator in heavily PR-influenced New York - on the wrong side of this issue.; May 09, 2008 2:30 AM
Bob in Vancouver said...: We have universal health care (truly universal) here in Canada, and there isn't anyone here who would even think of giving it up. So does the majority of countries in Europe.

It's by no means perfect but a family of say four (two adults and two children) pay about $1500 a year and they are fully covered. And I mean fully. Half of that amount is paid for by the employers and the other half is taken off the employees pay cheque.

But let me tell you the fight that we had to go through to get it, you wouldn't believe. Doctors across the entire country went on strike; not for one day, but for quite some time. Many doctors moved to the US.

Today doctors are quite pleased with the system. There are of course some detractors. They get paid directly by the government on the basis of negotiated scale of fees. There has been some fraud, and there is definately some inefficiencies, but they don't have to worry about collecting huge debts.

You may know that a lot of US citizens travel to Canada to buy their drugs. Some patients with a history of heart attacks can pay up to several thousand a year in drug costs alone. Drug costs in Canada are a fraction of what they are in the US. And I can tell you for a fact that a lot of women in the US, some of them my relatives, come to Canada to have their babies. No charge in Canada for pre-natal, delivery, or post-natal care.

But believe me, you are facing one hell of a fight with the medical industry, from drug manufacturers to insurance companies if you want universal health care.; May 09, 2008 2:30 AM
Kujo said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 09, 2008 2:32 AM
Kujo said...: Assuming OHB wins the democratic nomination, where does HRC go from here.

If the Democrats lose in November, who will they blame. She, and her followers, think they will be able to say I told you so.

What will happen is the Democratic comunity will blame HRC for dividing the party. This will hurt her badly.

The best thing for HRC will be to insure Obama is elected. She will have to find a way here followers to vote for Obama.

Just my take on things.; May 09, 2008 2:35 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: PRdude-

Welcome to the board. I have enjoyed reading your posts.

Also, Gov. Aníbal Acevedo Vilá (PR) is endorsing Senator Obama so I think that might help also.

I am hoping that Obama does well in Puerto Rico :); May 09, 2008 2:36 AM
PRDude said...: My third, and most important reason, is that Puerto Ricans are not Democrats or Republicans and could not care less about either. We don't vote in presidential elections and our primaries have never mattered, so those parties have almost zero institutional presence here. Instead, there are two gigantic parties - the pro commonwealth PDP and the pro statehood NPP - that have a nearly fanatical following, kind of like the Mets and Yankees. We are used to seeing, for example, 150,000 (yep, 150k) attend EACH parties' gubernatorial campaign closing rally. AND BOTH THE HIGHEST RANKING PDP DEMOCRAT (THE GOVERNOR) and THE HIGHEST RANKING NPP DEMOCRAT (THE #2 ON THE TICKET FOR 2008) HAVE ENDORSED OBAMA. This means that the party machines are aligned with Obama. Combine this with the fact that people don't follow presidential politics, and you will find that the cards are biased in favor of Obama.

Now, that does not mean Obama is going to win. I'm just sayin' that the whole assumption that Clinton is going to cruise to a win in PR just because "she wins with Latinos" seems to me very very superficial (not surprisingly, given that on Tuesday I saw CNN actually put up a graph of JAMAICA on Tuesday on their big plasma board when discussing Puerto RIco projections...); May 09, 2008 2:39 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Larry Parker you should be ashame of having such disrespect for Hillary.To say His wife is beyond offensive that is out and out crude! Please do not call Hillary that nasty name it would be appreciated. Jean; May 09, 2008 2:39 AM
Amot said...: PRDude,
Thanks for the info, I must admit I didn't know most of it. I hope you are right that Obama has real chances to win PR. I am sure he will campaign there because he will want to keep his lead in popular vote. As far as I know the only policy important will be how PR will relate to USA in the future. With his background I can't believe he will propose a bad policy. I don't know why PR moved their voting date and changed from caucus to primary which favours Clinton (probably); but now I see there is a real chance that this campaign will end with four major slaps in Hillary's face:
- May 31st: DNC agrees on MI proposal and agrees on similar proposal for seating FL
- June 1st: Obama wins PR
- June 3rd: Obama wins Montana with double digit
- June 3rd: Obama wins South Dakota with double digit
... and efectively ends the campaign!; May 09, 2008 2:53 AM
PRDude said...: Thanks leah and amot.

The format was changed from primary to caucus, imho, because the Democratic party leaders felt terrified that 55 delegates would be allocated, in the glare of the national spotlight, by the presence of a couple of hundred C-Span buffs, which, I kid you not, is how many normally show up for these caucuses...

Besides, the pro-statehood party wants to seize the moment to get people excited that Puerto Rican citizen participation in the presidential process is possible (remember, we don't vote in the election). Primaries are better to get people riled up.

I don't have a good sense how tuned-in people are. I'm guessing turnout will be small (far less than the typical 2 million) b/c I don't see the same carnival atmosphere and hype on the streets.; May 09, 2008 3:10 AM
Amot said...: PRDude,
is there any campaigning on ground? Local offices, rallies, ads on MSM? I agree high turnout is not expected, but I think both candidates put big efforts to win the primary... Is voting right for GE an issue and what do people think of it?; May 09, 2008 3:23 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: Aunt Jean said...
"Larry Parker you should be ashame of having such disrespect for Hillary.To say His wife is beyond offensive that is out and out crude! Please do not call Hillary that nasty name it would be appreciated."

Aunt Jean,

Do any of the following quotations taken directly from this site appear familiar?

"Who is that lard but running his fat mouth on cnn?"
May 04, 2008 9:33 PM

[I think the second 't' on "but" was left off intentionally, not a typo, but in any case, the word, as used, is VERY understandable.]

"He was saying to Hillary fu@f you and brushing her off like she was nothing."
April 22, 2008 12:38 AM

[I think the letter after the '@' sign was changed from a 'k' to an 'f' in order to be "prim and proper" but in any case, the word, as used, is VERY understandable.]

"He is the son of satan if I've ever seen one . . . ."
April 22, 2008 1:43 AM

[If I remember correctly, that is the prim and proper way of saying he is 'an SOB'.]

"THAT IS SO MUCH BS."
April 22, 2008 2:37 AM

[No explanation of what 'BS' stands for needed to anyone on this site.]

"Leah you know what pisses me off about people like is you . . . ."
April 22, 2008 3:06 AM

[Absolutely NO interpretation needed about the fifth word, but the whole sentence structure makes me scratch my head a bit.]

"He's a lousy sob and bigot . . . ."
April 22, 2008 3:16 AM

[A double! Profanity and a display of bigotry with only one word between them!]

All of the above should. You posted them on the date and time indicated.

It appears you have a double standard - YOU can post messages that contain profanity and trash, but no one else can (unless they are pro-Clinton, of course).

It appears that you have a "Do as I say, not as I do" attitude.

News to Jean! People who say that are the ones that are almost universally NOT trusted in any way, shape or form.

If you are going to complain about profanity and trash, then you better clean up your act before you complain about it again.

Oh, and proof reading (or at least a quick review of) your comments prior to posting them would be very beneficial to your image on this site. You just might see where you left out words, made typos, or misstated what you were intending to say.

Mike; May 09, 2008 4:04 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: To those wondering about polling in Puerto Rico:

At Pollster.com, the only poll in Puerto Rico they have listed is one taken by Research & Research, dated 3/31-4/5/08, with 800 RV interviewed. The results were Clinton 55%, Obama 37%, and 13% undecided. I can't get to the internals as it is a registration required site, and it's in Spanish (which I don't speak or read).

A quick search by Google, and I can't find anything referencing any poll taken after that early April poll. Things certainly have changed, but how and to what extent is a mystery right now.

Mike; May 09, 2008 4:15 AM
Amot said...: Mike, I really don't know how will her race comments influence PR or how will her current situation of obvious loser, but I guess we will see new polls in the next week and check the trends.
PR is the final chance for her to get the lead in at least one popular vote count...; May 09, 2008 4:27 AM
Squirrel said...: Who will be the SD who will be forever remembered as 'the one who sunk the tramp steamer Clinton'?

The tables show that at the time of writing Clinton's lead in SD's has shrunk to only 6.5 SD's. (Remember only 3 months ago that lead was almost 100!).

Now with Clinton SD supporters starting to endorse Obama, undecideds declaring their endorsement of Obama, and even Clinton's strongest proponants are questioning where Clinton 'hopes' the race will go from here the question has to be asked, who will have fired that final torpedo that sends 'SS Clinton' to the bottom of the ocean?

Rumours are now out that one of the Clinton inner circle have already started touting for a book deal with publishers, and has been pointed out over at Kos, you do not do that if you think you still have any prospects of future employment in the nomination/General Election race.

Oh, and one last prediction here, Senator H R Clinton will stand down at the next Senate elections for New York, she might well go to West Virginia to stand there instead, but no matter what happens from this point on in the future of the USofA, the Clintons' (both of them) will have far less influence than they had at the beginning of this race.; May 09, 2008 5:00 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 09, 2008 5:50 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: Could there be another opportunity for the Dems to pick off another Rep House seat?

From the New York Times, "Representative Vito J. Fossella, the Staten Island Republican who was arrested on drunken-driving charges in Virginia last week, acknowledged on Thursday that he had fathered a daughter, now 3, in an extramarital affair."

and

"Republican officials and strategists who would not speak publicly said their preference was for Mr. Fossella to drop his bid for re-election and serve out his current term, which ends in January."

CQPolitics had been rating the seat (13th district, Staten Island and western Brooklyn) as 'Safe Republican', but Domenic M. Recchia, Jr., seems to be a strong contender for the Democratic nomination.

Any New Yorkers have any indication how this will change the scene in the 13th district? Is Recchia a viable candidate?

Mike; May 09, 2008 6:05 AM
Amot said...: Mike,
with Obama on the top of the ticket any Dem candidate can become viable :)

Squirrel,
there will not be a 'Chosen one'. Every major delegate count has different numbers, so CNN, MSNBS, AP, RCP and DCW will announce that Obama is leading in supers at a different time. The only chance to do it at the same time is if there is a 'SuperGroup' of dozen or more supers to announce today or tomorrow and make every count of supers in Obama's favour.; May 09, 2008 6:19 AM
ed iglehart said...: Yamaka,

"You may disagree with my projections. Your right!"

Shouldn't that be

"You may disagree with my projections. You're right!" ???

;-)
ed; May 09, 2008 6:27 AM
ed iglehart said...: Dankujovich,

Thanks for your cool analysis.

Prdude,

You're a breath of fresh air. Thanks

Vaya con Gaia
ed; May 09, 2008 6:58 AM
ed iglehart said...: A fine Sporting analogy

Good morning all y'all early risers across the pond from a misty Scottish mid-day

Slainte
ed; May 09, 2008 7:55 AM
UUbuntu said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 09, 2008 8:05 AM
UUbuntu said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 09, 2008 8:07 AM
UUbuntu said...: On Obama's VP choice: I recommend Al Gore, if he wants the job. He has the experience, and name recognition, and has already won a presidential election. It would be yet another reminder that we can change our course from the past 8 years. Obama has other very good options if Gore doesn't want the job -- Michael Bloomberg, Russ Feingold, Jim Webb.

To softspoken22 -- Thank you. The responses to my question continue to trickle in, with some enlightening answers.
Kevin Rudd
Aung San Suu Kyi
Yo Yo Ma
Nelson Mandela

If some of the newer folks (or older ones) here want to participate, click here for my original question from a few days ago. Even if you've answered before (like softspoken22 above, who mentioned The Dali Lama and Paul Harvey in his answer before), more answers are welcome. This request was (and remains) an attempt to get us on this blog to think about the best among all of us in this season of insults and finger pointing.

Thanks; May 09, 2008 8:08 AM
Squirrel said...: John Edwards just said he voted for Obama and that he would soon endorse the person he voted for!

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/5/9/74236/08435/130/512432; May 09, 2008 8:54 AM
Keryl said...: It just occurs to me that in addition to not having a post Super Tuesday strategy, Clinton lacked an exit strategy. I'm speculating here, but I'd be willing to bet that Obama's team had a specific point at which they would decide not to go on. On the other hand, the Clinton's initial strategy would never have been to move the bar 10 times initially. They have no exit strategy, and so every time one of their current strategies "popular vote", "big states", "FL & MI" is taken off the table, they have to come up with a new reason to stay in, because they never planned when they would have to get out.; May 09, 2008 9:14 AM

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 1207 Newer› Newest»

Welcome to Democratic Convention Watch

Blog Archive

Democratic Convention 2008

Democratic National Convention History

Denver & Colorado Democrats

DCW in the News

Friends of DCW

2008 Republican National Convention

Tuesday, April 01, 2008

Open Thread

1207 comments:

Tags