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.


New Open Thread here
Previous Open Thread here


«Oldest   ‹Older   1 – 200 of 1537   Newer›   Newest»
Jim said...

Read em all

roadkill said...

Obama will bring international respect! I will finally not have to be embarrassed here in Argentina when I mention the US president.

jpsedona said...


You've been indicated that hillary could get 200 of the remaining delegates. That was before today's SD endorsements (and yesterday's for that matter). There are now about 275 uncommitted SD's if you include FL & MI.

Of the 48 remaining add-ons to be selected plus FL (1 for Obama), he's likely to gain +15. See my analysis from earlier today.

Subtract those 48 from the 275 and we have 227. Subtract 15 to get him back to even on the add-on's and we're down to 212. Subtract 8 remaining Pelosi delegates and we're down to 204.

Subtract Obama's 4 SD's from today, and she needs 200 of 200 using your estimates of pledged delegates over the remaining 6 contests and including FL & MI as is.


Leah said...

roadkill said: "Obama will bring international respect! I will finally not have to be embarrassed here in Argentina when I mention the US president."

I agree.
Also, the people I have talked to while I have been in Italy do not like Bush. It IS embarrassing.

America will be respected once more in the eyes of the world when Obama becomes President of the UNITED States of America!

jpsedona said...

James Carville, the Ragin' Cajun, at Furman University in SC said: "I’m for Senator Clinton, but I think the great likelihood is that Obama will be the nominee."

“As soon as I determine when that is, I’ll send him a check.”

Caville Believes Obama Will Be the Nominee

Leah said...

Hahaha - they just had a clip of Hillary in West Virginia on MSNBC and she was using her 'country-bumpkin' accent.

Will the REAL Hillary please stand up!

Jim said...

The other shoe has just entered the tropoSphere over Illinois and should drop soom

Yamaka said...

Hello Democrats, Good Afternoon:

Houston is still cloudy, it may rain!



I know you are a Master Number Cruncher.

However, I just go by the Option 6 Box (Left Last of DCW):

At this minute,

Undeclared SDs 275.5
HRC Total 1889.

Let us wait and see how these numbers change between now and the Aug 25th.

As Jim said, the declared SDs by Rule CAN change their preference up until the Convention Floor.

Then, what good is there for us to fight over the "putative numbers"?

From "Dreams" BHO writes,

"That hate hadn't gone away;
White people - some cruel, some ignorant, sometimes a single face, sometimes just a faceless image of a system claiming power over our lives"

(Tyler knows the page number on this)!

When BHO writes like this, I wonder how he imagined all this when he never suffered at all growing up in a comfortable White household!(Except for a very brief period, when Ann was a destitute, they were on food stamps: this is because BHO Sr deserted them so very irresponsibly - an act to be condemned and cursed).

I can understand if Jesse Jackson and other Sons of the Black American Soil writes like this.

BHO, I am very puzzled about your verbal and mental bombasts.

I want to see you, removing the veneer and the facade, and ask you
"Who the hell are you, really; who are your real Sponsors, Wright, Ayers, Khalidi, Hollywood Liberal Tycoons, Oprah, or who?"

Cheers. :-)

dsimon said...

Yamaka: Please go through the mechanics of holding a Primary in any State. State Parties and the Govt work together and prepare for the Primary Date. Occasionally, if the State is governed by a rival Party GOP, as in the case of FL, the Party Rule cannot be logically implemented. No mechanism available to implement it.

Not true. After the DNC said it would impose sanctions, state parties could have had held any process that fell within the proper time constraints. It is my understanding that the Florida party could have had a caucus. They chose not to do so. Also, Florida's Democratic congressional delegation opposed a revote.

So there were options available that did not depend on the state government. The Florida state party chose not to use them. Also, the DNC considered whether the state party had done what it could to oppose the early voting and concluded it had not. I suspect that there were many in the state party who supported going early because they thought it would get them more attention than voting on Super Tuesday, even with sanctions.

(Michigan poses a different problem since there are tens of thousands of Democrats and perhaps a hundred thousand independents who would be barred from any subsequent process because they voted in the Republican primary.)

Leah said...

Jim said: The other shoe has just entered the tropoSphere over Illinois and should drop soom"


If you have something to say then just say it and not use vague innuendo - no one knows what you are talking about!

I could say to you that the other shoe is about to down on Hillary - and it would be just as meaningless as your statement!

Emit R Detsaw said...

Please hurry up May 31st:

Two unrealistic targets for people to shoot at bacause we all know they will do something with FL and MI, but for both spectrums:

Before tonights results come in and give a few delegates to Clinton the numbers sit like this -
Without FL and MI:
Obama needs 32.72% of the remaining delegates to secure the required total.
Clinton needs 71.65% of the remaining delegates to secure the required total.

With FL and MI as is:
Obama needs 52.99% of the remaining delegates to secure the required total.
Clinton needs 64.87% of the remaining delegates to secure the required total.

In Clinton's best case scenerio for her she needs to pull out 2/3rds. She might get that percentage tonight, but doubt that she has a shot getting close to that even in Kentucky. Oregon will go to Obama. PR will be closer than some think.

Just FYI to think about. Fat lady is back stage warming up.

Leah said...

To those of you that think the MI and FL will be fully seated - you need to come back to earth.

The DNC is not going to be able to give those two states a slight slap and the hand and then seat them 100% - impossible.

The reason the DNC must render a substantial penalty is because if the do not then in 2012 they will not have control over other states that do not want to adhere to the calendar and then there would be major chaos once more.

Don't forget that probably the majority of the people on the Rules and Bylaws committee have law degrees and they "ain't stupid".

Felix Macacawitz said...

Can somebody hit me with the latest leaners? Here's what I've got. What am I missing? FYI: I'm not bothering with Hillary leaners. If you haven't endorsed her already, I'm not interested in where you're leaning.

'Joe Biden (+1 for BO), Phil Bredeson (+1 for BO), Donna Brazille (+1 for BO), Jimmy Carter (+1 for BO), Ron Kirk (+1 for BO), Janice Griffin (+1 for BO), Edward Smith (+1 for BO), Jim Clyburn (+1 for Obama), William Jefferson (+1 for BO), Steny Hoyer (+1 for BO), Dennis Kucinich (+1 for BO), Dan Boren (+1 for BO), Al Gore (+1 for BO), 'Maria Cantwell (-1 for HRC, +1 for BO), Nancy Pelosi (+1 for BO), Christine Pelosi (+1 for Obama), Betty Richie (+1 for Obama), Denise Johnson (+1 for BO), Mark Udall (+1 for BO), Christopher Stampolis of Santa Clara (-1 for HRC, +1 for BO), Garry Shay, a Los Angeles (-1 for HRC, +1 for BO), Heather R. Mizeur (+1 for BO), Frank Lautenberg (+1 for BO), Jack Reid (+1 for BO), Yvette Clarke (+1 for BO, -1 for HRC), Jason Altmire (+1 for BO), John Spratt (+1 for BO), Mike Honda (+1 for BO), John Salazar (+1 for BO), Alex Sink (+1 for BO), Bruce Braley (+1 for BO), Raum Emanuel (+1 for BO), Larry Gates (+1 for BO), Chris Wittington (+1 for BO), Sam Spencer (+1 for BO), Rolanda Wheat (+1 for BO), Margarett Campbell (+1 for BO), George Mitchell (+1 for BO), Zack Space (+1 for BO), Bob Brady (+1 for BO), Herb Kohl (+1 for BO), Nancy Drummond (+1 for BO), Gilda Cobb-Hunter (+1 for BO), Mike Doyle (+1 for BO), Gregory Pecoraro (+1 for BO), Bob Etheridge (+1 for BO), Joe Courtney (+1 for BO), Muriel Offerman (+1 for BO), Debra Kozikowsi (+1 for BO), Rep. Lincoln Davis (+1 for BO), Lauren Wolfe (+1 for BO), Awais Khaleel (+1 for BO)

Leah said...

According to Obama's Official website Obama needs 146 more delegates to secure the nomination. We are almost there!

I betcha he'll be down under 100 by Friday ;)

Leah said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Yamaka said...

"It is my understanding that the Florida party could have had a caucus."

To use the resources of the State, the State Govt must authorize/allow a Caucus.

To ALL the Nay Sayers:

Please read what Gov Dean has been in the past 1-2 months on this matter:

"Peoples of MI and FL did NOT do anything wrong - only the politicians and Officials did".

Naturally, I call for stripping some of the SDs (who are responsible for this Fiasco) from these two States. That's only fair.

On the other hand, because of a former Rule of DNC, most of these SDs are 'grandfathered' - meaning they cannot be stripped of their voting.

Again, I reiterate my point NO one has the right to punish the 2.5 million voters - they just went to the polls and voted, period. No Rule was broken.

Count ALL votes and seat ALL delegates.

Otherwise, we WILL fight and destroy the Convention for sure.

Stay tuned on this.
Folks, enjoy the evening results:

The Pant-Suit Lady will have a fabulous night tonight!

I want to see the popular vote margin!


Leah said...

Felix here is the list that was posted on the super-delegate tracker page:

iwuzsailor said...

Here are some updated lists of "Leaners" for the research-aholics

Brady, Rep Bob (PA)
Brazile, DNC Donna (DC)
Bredeson, Gov Phil (TN)
Campbell, Hon Margarett - MT Vice Chair
Carter, Fmr Pres Jimmy (GA)
Clyburn, Rep Jim (SC)
Drummond, Nancy - WY Vice Chair
Emanuel, Rep Rahm (IL)
Gates, Larry - KS Chair
Gore, VP Al (TN)
Honda, Rep Mike (CA)
Johnson, Blake - AK Vice Chair
Johnson, DNC Denise (TX)
Kohl, Sen Herb (WI)
Kucinich, Rep Dennis (OH)
Mitchell, Fmr Sen George (NY)
Pelosi, DNC Christine (CA)
Pelosi, Rep Nancy (CA)
Richie, DNC Betty (TX)
Salazar, Rep John (CO)
Sink, Alex (FL-AO)
Smith, MAL Edward (IL)
Space, Rep Zack (OH)
Spanyers, DNC Cindy (AK)
Spencer, DNC Sam (ME)
Turnbull, DNC Susan (MD)
Wheat, Rolanda - MO Vice Chair
Whittington, Chris - LA Chair
Ybarra, DNC Steve (CA)

Altmire, Rep Jason (PA)
Ausman, DNC Jon (FL)
Bordallo, Madeleine (GU)
Davis, Rep Lincoln (TN)
Doyle, Rep Mike (PA)
Harwell, Vicki (TN-AO)
Langan, DNC Helen (UT)
Macoll, Eileen - WA Vice Chair
Malone, DNC Ronald (OH)
Manchin, Gov Joe (WV)
Moss, DNC Patricia (OH)
Olver, Rep John (MA)
Parmley, DNCJay (OK)
Rankin, Robert (CA)
Reed, Sen Jack (RI)
Smith-Windsor, Harriet - DE Vice Chair
Stapleton, Marylyn - Vice Chair
Stein, DNC Irene (NY)
Strauss, DNC Bob (TX)
Tierney, Rep John (MA)
Umemoto, DNC Keith (CA)

* I deleted out Bonds, Braley, and Romer - because they have endorsed Obama already.

Jim said...

Leah said...



If you have something to say then just say it and not use vague innuendo - no one knows what you are talking about!

But leah,
I kinda like vague innuendos vs blunt statements like "We should kick her butt out of the party"

Lies are shouted from rooftops, but the truth sometimes floats in like a gentle breeze possessing the potential of a Hurricane.

Leah said...


It does not matter how many popular votes she picks up tonight.

They have already said that she will only pick up a margin of +12 DELEGATES tonight.

Obama has picked up more than +12 supers in the past four days - so that wipes out anything she picks up tonight.

Just face it that she is not going to catch up in this DELEGATE RACE and therefore she is NOT going to win the nomination.

Jim said...

When the other shoe drops. tears will freely flow like eloquent words
off a silver tongue

Squirrel said...

A problem for the Clintonites, and I am serious I mean Clintonites, not Republicans pretending to be Clintonites.

Before May 31st Obama will pass the 2024.5 mark, as soon as he does that he will be announced as the presumptive Democratic Party nominee for POTUS. This will be occur world wide in the press, on tlevision and radio and throughout the internet. Further more Obama will rightly and publicly accept that he is the presumptive nominee.

Under the above conditions how would the RUles committee meeting on May 31st then announce that Obama 'is not' the presumptive nominee? He has broken no rules, he even took his name off the Michigan ballot paper as he and Clinton and the other major candidates were asked to do (only Clinton had a lapse of memory - and lapses of memory are a bad thing in a prospective POTUS). Can you see the party, the Democratic Party members, or indeed the American public as a whole standing for such a decision?

The rules committee is meant to uphold the rules first and foremost, Michigan and Florida broke the rules (by the way members of the Florida Democratic Party voted for the early Primary on the floor, they did not even oppose it). The rules require 'a minimum penalty of 50% reduction' under such circumstances, so this is the minimum punishment that can be upheld on May 31st.

In the meantime Clinton is losing SD's and even now pledged delegates, her own supporters are saying Obama will win, and she is loosing on all counts.

Clinton has said (but only recently) that she is running to be president of all 50 States, but hang on she does not want to count certain State results! Her campaign has been a total shambles and she is now paying the price.

Next week Obama becomes the Democratic Party nominee for POTUS!

Yamaka said...

BHO's pathetic Lemmings:

You may try this: You all go to your Churches, Mosques or where ever and pray day and night that BHO wins ALL the 6 Contests.

Miraculously if he Wins all of them, maybe he can prevent HRC in leading in the Popular Votes of ALL votes polled.

Maybe, then you can all go for the Inaugural Ball!

If not, you go to the Coronation Ball in Hyde Park!!


Mike in Maryland said...

Yamaka said...
To use the resources of the State, the State Govt must authorize/allow a Caucus.


The state pays for primaries and general elections.

No state resources are used in a caucus. It is the party (Democratic, Republican, Libertarian, whatever) that determines the date(s), that prints the ballots, that arranges and pays for the sites, that counts the ballots, and does everything else directly or indirectly related to the caucus.

Again, I reiterate my point NO one has the right to punish the 2.5 million voters - they just went to the polls and voted, period. No Rule was broken.

Wrong again.

It is the candidate, not the voter, that is being punished. In the process, the voters might be perceived to have been hurt, but it is the candidate who takes the brunt of the penalty.

From the Democratic Party "Highlights of the 2008 Rules", Posted on August 21, 2006:

"There is a new rule that imposes new sanctions on presidential candidates. If a state, any state, violates the rule on timing/the window, presidential candidates will face sanctions . . . .

"Currently, the only punishment for states that violate the window was on State Parties. This new enforcement provision recognizes that presidential candidates must also bear a responsibility in enforcing the window or face sanctions."

Note the date. August 2006. The rules have not been changed or amended since BEFORE any candidate announced that they were seeking the office. To run as a candidate for a specific party, you must agree to abide by the rules set for that contest. If you don't want to abide by the rules, don't run as a candidate of the party - be a candidate in a different party, run as an independent, or don't run.


jpsedona said...

Yam, Yam, Yam,

You've decided to quote Dean???

"Peoples of MI and FL did NOT do anything wrong - only the politicians and Officials did".

Well, Dean has also said:

1) “we want to respect the voters who went to the polls. It was politicians that made a mess of this — not the voters."

2) “you have got to respect these two candidates. You cannot change the rules at the end of the game and change the outcome."

3) “you’ve got to respect the 48 states that followed the rules the way they were supposed to."

Read these how you want but I see this as not affecting the nominating process AND penalizing the states in some fashion.

I do agree with your previous opinion that the SD's should be the ones that are penalized.

Mike in Maryland said...

One thing I should add:

If a state is sanctioned and a candidate campaigns in that state, the rules state that ALL that candidate's delegate votes are null and void.

To those who want to say that "Obama advertised in Florida", the party ruled:
- Senator Obama made a national ad buy, which is not against the rules:
- The mechanics of national advertising could not separate out the Florida markets;
- That Senator Obama sought out clearance from the authorized person(s) in the party BEFORE the advertisements ran;

Therefore, no violation of the rules took place.

To make the point a bit clearer:

Did Senator Clinton's campaign ask the RBC to overturn the decision? Is there a pending complaint at the RBC from the Clinton campaign to overturn the decision?



The rules can be interpreted to state that appearing in a sanctioned state for a fund raiser can be determined to be a campaign appearance. Senator Clinton had at least 4 fundraisers in Florida prior to the primary. She was not officially sanctioned for those, because if she had been, she would lose ALL delegates from Florida. To press the case about the Obama campaign ad buy would have put her own actions in jeopardy, so her campaign WISELY decided not to press the issue.

Who is pressing the issue? Those supporters who cannot face the reality that her campaign, in almost all possible scenarios, cannot succeed, and are grasping at straws to in some way save their candidate.


Leah said...

Just remember tonight when Hillary wins bragging rights for West Virginia that Senator Obama has had some wins with very wide margins also:

Obama 79% - Clinton 17%

Obama 75% - Clinton 24%

Obama 76% - Clinton 24%

Obama 75% - Clinton 25%

Obama 74% - Clinton 26%

Obama 68% - Clinton 32%

And there lots more of them!

I am sure the media will talk about HRC's WV 'margin' but won't even mention all the contests that she LOST by HUGE margins!


Martin said...

Goddamn, Yamaka is setting new standards for delusion. What an odd little fantasy world he/she lives in.

Leah said...

Live streaming link on www.cnn.com right now for Obama's town hall rally in Missouri.

Independent voter said...

Leah, they actually covering the speech on msnbc right now too.

Leah said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Oregon Dem said...

Just got home from an almost all day meeting - hope the day finds you all well.

A couple of items of note out here in the left coast of the US:

New poll out in Oregon by one of our local papers and local FOX news TV station:

Obama 55% Clinton 35%

The article points out that Oregon WOMEN prefer Obama by 11% and MEN prefer Obama by 30%. Obama gets 2-1 support from those under 55 and Clinton gets her support from those over 35.

Here is the link to the article:

If the number crunchers like Amot and Jpsedona this could make Obama's chances of picking up a couple more delegates in Oregon quite likely in Oregon (and make Yam's 121 Clinton pledged delegates in the last 6 contests harder to come true)- the magic number I had for Obama to start picking up extra delegates in specified CDs varied (for obvious reasons) but if the poll is true - that the Obama lead holds constant throughout the state then this could be interesting.

If I can find a link to the cross tabs I will let you know.

Also heard Senator Ron Wyden on the radio on the radio and although he stated he would not endorse before our primary it sure sounded to me he was an Obama supporter.

Richard said...

squirrel: I hadn't thought of your point about Obama reaching 2024.5 before May 31. If that is the case, I can see the problem with announcing a 50% penalty that would move the target up. I doubt that there will be any change at the RBC meeting in that situation.

ed iglehart said...

Our President's sacrifice!

I didn't know he had it in him

jpsedona said...

Oregon Dem,

I hadn't gone through the district breakdowns for Oregon since I'd like to see some additional polling.

But here's an initial cut. There are 52 pledged. 34 district and 18 at the state level (12 at large & 6 PLEO).

Because of the unique district partitioning, if Obama does well in Portland & suburbs, those votes will aid him in three districts.

Here's the breakdown by district.
CD1: Obama 4 Hillary 3 (tough to get to a 5-2 split)
CD2: Obama 2 Hillary 3 (rural / Republican)
CD3: Obama 6 Hillary 3 (could go 5-4, but I don't thinks so)
CD4: Obama 4 Hillary 3 (DeFazio will help here)
CD5: Obama 4 Hillary 2 (could go 3-3)

District Total: Obama 20 Hillary 14
Statewide (Obama 60%-40%) yieldsing Obama 11 Hillary 7

So, based on a 20% margin Obama should net 31 to Hillary's 21 giving Obama a +10 delegate margin.

Squirrel said...


I have a feeling the date of May 31st was not chosen without some fore thought, and I suspect for this very reason.

Anyway, the exit polls seem to indicate that Clinton has not won by the 60% spread that the Clintons' were claiming they would win by. By the looks of it the spread will be circa. 35%-40%, this would result in the likely division of the delegates about 20-8 or 19-9 in Clinton's favor.

So let us use the 20-8 delegate split, that is +12 for Clinton. Well today Obama picked up 4 SD's, so that is down to +8 for Clinton. Obama picked up 2 pledged delegates in Ohio, that is down to +6 for Clinton, and then of course Joe Johnson (pledged delegate Maryland) changed from Clinton to Obama so that is effectively -2 for Clinton. Today therefore works out at only +4 delegates for Clinton.

Oregon Dem said...


I disagree - I posted before each CD breakdown and do disagree - stay tuned I am recalculating based on this little new data.

One disagreement with your projections is CD 2 (where I live btw).

I will be right back with my thoughts in about 15 mins

Oregon Dem said...

CD 1 – I agree 4-3 (Wu’s support of BHO is not that strong)

CD 2 – Disagree 3-2 for BHO (reason the rural vote is R not D and CD contains Bend, Ashland (very liberal and educated) and Hood River County (where I live) where the Dems are old hippies, enviro types and well educated)

CD 3 – I was thinking 5-4, but now I think it will go 6-3 since this is Earl Bluemenaur’s district and he has been a long time ardent supporter of BHO and is extremely popular.

CD 4 – It is not DeFazio going for BHO that will make the difference here it is the University of Oregon (and Eugene in general) that will make it go 5-2 for BHO.

CD 5 – Tough call here Hooley is lame duck (she decided not to run for re-election) she supports HRC but the District is the most conservative of all of the Dem controlled CDs. (Believe it or not the Dems in CD2 are MORE liberal than in CD 5 - we are just outnumbered by Rs...) I have had it 3-3 but the buzz is you may be right and it will go 4-2.

11 (BHO) to 7 (HRC) would be the split if the 20% advantage holds in the satewides.

The 1 add on will go for Obama…

That is a 33 - 20 result with two question marks still in my mind (CD 3 and CD 5) which could swing two delegates to HRC.

Hibbetts is one of the best local pollers and this poll was done while people were voting (18% had voted yesterday as of noon).

jpsedona said...

Oregon Dem,

I will defer to your knowledge about CD2. However, I think that the growing retirement folk in Bend and surrounding area bodes well for Hillary. I think that he will do well in Medford & Jackson County.
Overall though, the CD is almost 2-1 Republican from what I recall.

CD3 ... could be either way; need to see the polling to understand the dynamics better. 6-3 is a real tough split; could happen though

With respect to CD4 & Univ of Oregon, it all depends upon whether the students received and mailed their ballots for their CD of residency. Essentially everyone is an absantee ballot... so why would a Oregon resident student change his residency to be in Eugene?

Oregon Dem said...


I may be optimistic here, but a couple of comments:

CD 2: Bend's growth has been fueled by well educated, for the most part wealthy and relatively younger Californians who want warm dry weather and want to ski Mt. Bachelor (OK - that IS a generalization) but my state agency cannot hire an Engineer in Bend because the housing costs are (well were) out of sight due to the influx).

CD 4 The U of O factor depends alot on the recent upturn in Dem registration in Oregon. You are right that essentially all of Oregon is "absentee ballot" since we vote by mail. Amot and I have debated and looked at the numbers of new registrations and it does indeed matter where these new student registrations listed as their "mailing address." If they used their parent's home then the U of O factor is diminished as they end up voting in all 5 CDs. If they used their college address then they count in CD 4. However, what I call the U of O factor goes beyond just the students but the town of Eugene and surrounding areas as well.

The cross tabs on prior polls in Oregon are not too illuminating (just separated Portland from the rest of the state) but in those "outside Portland" went for Obama more than "in Portland metro."

It appears that Fox will release the cross tabs after 10 pm PDT tonight so then we / I may have some more thoughts.

Gotta go hear Clinton's speach - bbl.

Emit R Detsaw said...

Good night for Clinton - Congrats

Good night for both Clinton and Obama, both are beating McCain in votes in WV. ;o)

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

Hillary's speech:

1) Please go to my website HillaryClinton.com - so you can donate to keep this campaign moving forward.

2) 11 year old boy sold his bike and video games to donate money.

3) I am delusional and the real number is 2209.

4) I will never quit (even after Obama is in the White House).

What a laugh!
And the pundits said that they were told that THIS was going to be a GREAT speech - I guess they were wrong!

ed iglehart said...


Economy said...

Seat FL & MI based on the elections that have taken place.
(Obama does not get MI 55 uncommitted).

Hillary has the momentum to close this gap. The tide is turning in West Virgina even though she was probably outspent by a significant amount as was done in Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania, etc. This contest is not over.

RobH said...

The hidden story from tonight's vote:


Ahead of the vote, expectations were 400K voters, HRC nets 160K to 180K votes eating into Obama's 715K vote lead.

Actual turnout looks to be just below 350K, and HRC to pick up 120K - 130K votes. After tonight her max pickup is 200K, so she ends up at least 400K votes short.

(Let alone the 170plus delegates, 2:1 states, 60% of gov's, sen's, rep's, etc, etc)

Turn out the lights, the party's over. They say that all, good things must end......

roadkill said...


Where can I see the "popular vote" tally in all it's different formats. I had it before but I lost it.



ed iglehart said...


Try here

and, from a namesake, Roadkill Bill, a wee parable


Oregon Dem said...


As an Obama supporter I actually disagree with you on just a point or two.

Senator Clinton does need money to continue her campaign. That is a given. Making a general appeal is fine by me, but I do agree with you that when Senator Clinton mentioned the boy selling his bicycle and video games that was a mistake on her part. She should have let that press story die and be gone.

You must admit that her coming this close to securing a major party's nomination for President is historic. And, I think we agree, it is not so historic that she should be proud of that boy.

I may have taken exception to other parts of her speach tonight, but in all it was good, not great, but good.

ed iglehart said...

I love Mike Huckabee!
Commenting on Childers' win in Mississippi.

He should be Obama's VP!

RobH said...


Travis Childers wins special election for Mississippi congessional disrtict. A former lock for the GOP. The third this spring (after Haster's Illinois seat, and Louisiana's lock GOP seat.)

Cheney spent the weekend and yesterday there campaigning, as did Haley Barbour and Mike Huckabee.

As Russert said: This is seismic!
The GOP is reeling!! The btand is broken, down 15 points (self identified) nationally.

Jim, ya' must be devastated. Spin that for me, will ya'?

Leah said...

Oregon Dem -

She 'always' needs money.
The thing about her mentioning her website is that she does it ALL the time. In her PA victory speech she mentioned it THREE times. I am surprised that the late night talk shows don't do jokes about it.

Oregon Dem said...


I cannot speak for other states, but the WV win, in my opinion, will not change the momentum for Obama in Oregon.

My opinon is that Senator Clinton did as she was expected to do in WV. However, her win did nothing that fundementaly changes the overall position of either candidate.

Had the voter turnout been higher and had she made Obama unviable for delegates (< 15%) her clear win in WV would have been a momentum changer.

I went to my spreadsheet that I have been keeping since just before the 2/5 primaries and when I entered the projected number of delegates for both Senator Clinton and Senator Obama - the percentage that she needs to win the remaining states with increased.....

Just something to consider.

Oregon Dem said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Yamaka said...

Hello Democrats:

It is a wonderful day for my "Million Dollar Girl" Hillary.

I am expecting about 110k popular vote lead for her.

We will see the final numbers tomorrow morning.


"I do agree with your previous opinion that the SD's should be the ones that are penalized."-jp


I thought we are parallel lines, we will never meet anytime ideologically!

Thanks for agreeing with me at least on this issue.

The SDs responsible for this horrendous offense MUST be penalized in some fashion - I am terribly angry at those rascals!


Curiously, HRC mentioned in her Victory Speech that BHO has agreed to seat the MI and FL.

Can anyone shed more light on this particular "good" news?



I stand corrected on the State resources used in the Caucus.

If no State resource is used in any form or shape, then, of course, the Party need not have their permission.

But, then, who is going to certify as to the authenticity of the operation? Maybe, some Party observers, I suppose. Can that withstand the legal challenge by the Caucus goers on any disputes, if any?

Some BHO followers think that I am very annoying to their sensitivities and sensibilities. I want to remind them that this is the Election Campaign Season.

We must very passionately fight for our chosen candidate tooth and nail, till the Convention when the REAL Winner is announced.

At present, the Fight is very very close: He is leading in pledged delegates, and she could very well lead in Popular Votes. Finally, the SDs will intervene and choose the Nominee. We have to do EVERYTHING possible to weaken our opponent and enhance the chances for our Candidate. That's called hard fought Campaigning, which I love.

If you feel the kitchen is very hot, then please get out of the kitchen!

Cheer, Smile and Vote for Hillary the First Woman POTUS - Make New History - Break Open the Glass Ceiling once for all.

roadkill said...

Thanks Ed,

The Roadkill Bill cartoons are exactly my style.



Emit R Detsaw said...

Yam, If I heard this last couple days right, Obama agreed to seat them but Clinton balked at the split.

So while there is an agreement to seat all, they are still working out the details.

Think it is over the 50% thing that is in the rule book.

Yamaka said...


Welcome. Keep writing. You have interesting angle to the emerging story.



People keep talking about Momentum for BHO.

Where is it? In KY or PR ?!!!!!!

I predict that the mountain States are going to be very close.

So much for BHO Momentum!!!


Oregon Dem said...


and as a supporter of Senator Obama you do not expect to get appeals from him for money? I get appeals from Senator Obama to add to my contribution (OK not in his speaches but in e-mails once a month or so).

Yes I agree it is somewhat tacky to ask three times, but remember Senator Clinton was speaking to her base and trying to make them feel comfortable and hopeful that she still can prevail in her historic journey.

As an Obama supporter, I am really loving this. To a good extent this continued debate between two well qualified and historic campaigners is fantastic for the future of progressive politics in the US. It reminds me of 1968 when it was a three way - two progressives (McCarthy and RFK) and the establishment (HHH).

Feed of the energy.

Maybe this is glass half full thinking but I do believe Hillary will do what is right in the end (mid June at the latest).

Leah said...

Emit R Detsaw-

Michigan put a proposal on the table a few days ago. They offered Clinton 69 delegates and Obama 59 delegates. Hillary said NO.
She wont take less than 74.

This proves that she is not going to negotiate. It's her way or no way.


Oregon Dem-

When talking about money you MUST be tactful otherwise it makes a person look trashy. IMHO.

Oregon Dem said...


Look at the most recent poll in Oregon.

Oregon went from Obama plus 15% to Obama plus 20%.

and the women vote is Obama +11% (in Oregon).

I will send the link again if you want me to.

Oregon Dem said...


I agree with you completely on the money issue. When I was campaigning in the past (1980s) that was the LAST thing I wanted to talk about.

It is a dicey issue for any candidate for any position.

I do believe the Dems will have money problems (maybe better said as "disadvantage") if Senator Clinton gets the nomination because there will indeed be a perception that she stole it away from Senator Obama.

I know my money will go to whomever is the Democratic nominee. Heck - why on earth would I give anything to McCain other than my contempt for what he is trying to do (screw) our country?

Just my thoughts at 7:49 in rainy Oregon

Leah said...

Yamaka said: People keep talking about Momentum for BHO. Where is it? In KY or PR ?!!!!!! "

Come on Yamaka you're smarter than that! Obama's momentum is in the fact that he LEADS in pledged delegates, super delegates, popular vote, states won.... and he will win in Oregon, South Dakota, Montana and probably in PR too!!!

Don't forget that he has picked up over 25 SDs since May 8th!

OBAMA / Sebelius '08

RobH said...

Oregon Dem, your post at 10:21:

Not sure where you were going with that, don't think we disagree. Yeah, she did 'as expected' on a percentage basis, but on a raw vote basis, she did worse than expected due to the reduced turnout. Regarding momentum changing, I agree it's little, if any, but 'if any' then it is negative for her.

The lower than expected turnout is due to supporter malaise on her part; they "know it's over". If anything, we can expect more of the same in Kentucky next Tuesday, though I expect Oregon will be completely energized to put him over the top next Tuesday.

softspoken22 said...

Evening-Another reason not to go to Free Republic in the near future-My husband's stepfather, who is Libertarian, got a virus from somewhere on that site, is getting to watch little critters come down and munch on all the words he's trying to read.

Congratulations HRC supporters.

ABC-McCain will be releasing his medical records on May 23. That'll be a family day for us, so I don't know when I'll get to read it. Speaking of Rep., House Minority Leader John Boehner of OH and Rep Eric Cantor twisted Obama's interview with The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg and claimed he said Israel is a constant sore and a few other things. This isn't a good sign of how Rep. are going to campaign in the GE.

BBC-The Dead Sea Scrolls will be on exhibit in Jerusalem. One part will show Psalm 133, which I think relates to our Democratic primary. Behold, how good and pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity.

Dems Abroad-I am reading news from different countries to get a sense of how our candidates are being viewed. Thanks for your input. Since you're not here where the media is giving 24/7 bias, I feel I'm getting the bigger picture.

Oregon Dem said...


Not that Yam would actually conceede this point but isn't it better said that:

Senator Obama's momentum is his lead in total delegates.

That is so pure and simple and indisputable.

After all all Yam has to do is look at the total delegate count for each since Clinton had two and Obama had 1....

Oregon Dem said...


That is my point - Senator Clinton dod as she was expected to do with respect to the delegate advantage in the state.

The rules to who wins or Party's nomination are quite simple - even Yam and Aunt Jean agree - whoever gets the most delegates wins.

The low turnout only effects Senator Clinton's argument that the popular vote should help the super delegates select her.

The low popular vote means that argument may be off the table after Oregon....

Oregon Dem said...


Where is Aunt Jean tonight?

I surely hope I did not make her so red faced with my last post last night before I had to head to bed that she passed out....

Leah said...

Maybe she got so excited when the results came in all the blood rushed to her head and she passed out!

Oregon Dem said...


Too funny (not about Aunt Jean - rather about the critters on the screen).

Back in the early 90's I loaded programs (then you had to do it manually not over the internet) that did weird things when the user went on their computer.

One was bugs march across their computer screen and then stating "You have a bug in your computer prgram!" and another one was when you loaded Word and all of a sudden the letters in your Word document started falling and hitting the bottom of the screen (kinda like when you win in Microsoft's solitare game) and the screen went blue and said: "You have a crash!"

They were cute little programs I could install easily and were quite funny at the time.

RobH said...

No Oregon and Leah,

It had every thing to do with your titilation that all she was wearing was here jewelry....

softspoken22 said...

AOL Elections '08-NE results @ 93%-HRC has 46% and Obama has 50%. Do they have as many delegates as WV?

Pablo said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Oregon Dem said...


I was hoping you would not be THAT blunt....


Leah said...

softspoken22 said: AOL Elections '08-NE results @ 93%-HRC has 46% and Obama has 50%. Do they have as many delegates as WV?

I am lost. Who is they? What are you talking about? And who is NE ?

Richard said...

Leah, I agree with your point about Clinton's speech: not so much that she pimped her website, but that this speech was touted as historic by Clinton's proxies and turned out to be...mediocre.

Chris Matthews said before the speech that Terry Mcauliffe had promised him it would be the greatest political speech in history. What the hell?

softspoken22 said...

NE(they) is Nebraska. Sorry, I usually abbreviate states.

Mike in Maryland said...


NE (Nebraska) had Precinct Caucuses on Saturday 9 February 2008. Senator Obama took 16 of the 24 pledged delegates at stake in Nebraska.

West Virginia was the only jurisdiction voting on May 13.

Next up, May 20, are Kentucky and Oregon, Puerto Rico on June 1, then Montana and South Dakota on June 3, the end date for the primaries.

Some states will still have district and/or state level conventions beyond June 3, but the pledged delegate count will change little from June 3 forward.


Leah said...

Announcement on superdelegate page:

2 new supers... Lauren and Aweis from the College Democrats endorse Obama!

Yippeeeeeee ;)

Oregon Dem said...


Say what?


they voted on 2/9

had 24 delegates

16 - BHO
8 - HRC

not sure what you are askin?

Hippolytus said...

Congrats to Hillary Clinton tonight, who will probably gain a +- 10 delegates. Whose going to break it to her that Obama has garnered that many supers in the last 3 or four days, and will probably beat her for the week?

Leah said...


Yep, as soon as she started pimping the website I KNEW it was not going to be an historic speech!

I think Terry Mc... just said it was going to be historic so that everyone would tune into it - but I think it backfired because I was waiting for it to be inspiring and since it wasn't it made it even more mediocre.

Oregon Dem said...


My guess is that Yam will call her later tonight and tell Senator Clinton the news....


RobH said...

Hey Leah, this baby's for you:

My math says we've got about 36 delegates to go before 6/1, even less after.

Obama's at 1883 tonight (1600 pledged, 283 SD.) By my calculation we'll pick up 88 in the remaining five contests (KY 66:33 HRC, OR 57:43 Obama, PR 55:45 HRC (not so sure) MT & SD 55:45 Obama. That brings us to 1971.

Add-on's through 6/1 will be 12:3 Obama, that brings us to 1983. Pelosi Club (pledged del majority) adds at 5/20 are plus 6 , brings us to 1989. 36 to go.

Truly the real number is less than that as add-ons from 6/3 - 6/17 will go to Obama 19:9, thus it's really only about 17 to go, if it's not resolved by 6/3. Also, if Edwards could swing his 19 pledged by 6/3, that would close the deal by then.

But forget the post 6/3 add-ons and the Edwards deal...we only need 36 Sd's to be DONE. Since we got 27 this week, if next week is the same, we could be within 10, by Oregon, and done by MT/SD.

Oregon Dem said...


Terry McA also said that there is no way that Senator Clinton will even be within 100 elected delegates when the primary is over....

RobH said...

Geez zooks, my math is already down level. While I'm calculatin' DCW is adding SD's for Obama.

Holy Cow!

softspoken22 said...

I have no idea what happened. AOl is doing an update every 2 minutes for NE and just projected Obama winner with 98% results.

Hippolytus said...

Oregon Dem,
Yam should call Hillary at 3 a.m. She'll be up anyway.

Leah said...


Can you please cut and paste the URL for the page you are looking at?

I'd like to see it :)

softspoken22 said...


Hope that's right.

Leah said...

According to DCW on the Nomination Events Schedule page it says:

May 13th
NE - Advisory Primary

So what is that?

Btw: I found that other page regarding NE on AOL. I still don't know what it is.

Mike in Maryland said...

softspoken22 said...
I have no idea what happened. AOl is doing an update every 2 minutes for NE and just projected Obama winner with 98% results.

I should have checked The Green Papers first. It is an advisory primary that is being conducted. Notice that the "Del" column is filled by "-", indicating no delegates are at stake?

This just helps to confirm the study on caucus vote vs. primary vote - If all caucus states had been primary states, Senator Obama would have picked up fewer delegates, would still have won the state, but the actual vote margin would have been larger.

It doesn't really matter, though, since Nebraska will send 16 Obama delegates to Denver, and 8 Clinton delegates will be sent. Since the rules state that the candidate who receives the majority of the delegates at the convention is the nominee of the party, the actual number of votes cast is only used to determine the number of delegates to be sent to the convention. Once that determination is made, there is no further need for considering the actual number of votes cast.


softspoken22 said...

So, this was a test, it was only a test, if this had been an actual primary, you would have still heard the really loud tone? :)

mike in maryland-Thanks for the infol

Leah said...

Now they are talking about the NE advisory primary on MSNBC ;)

Leah said...

From CNN:

Clinton's biggest victory so far this campaign came in the Arkansas primary on Super Tuesday, February 5, when she beat Barack Obama 70.05 percent to 26.25 percent — the Illinois senator's poorest showing to date.

The Arkansas primary marked the only contest so far where Clinton reached the 70 percent vote threshold. So far Obama has reached or exceeded 70 percent in five contests: the DC primary (75 percent), and the caucuses in Alaska (75 percent), Hawaii (76 percent), Idaho (79 percent), and Kansas (74 percent).

Clinton's second best showing was in the Rhode Island primary on March 4, when she captured 58 percent of the vote.

So Obama beats her in 'widest margins' too. Another thing to add to his list ;)


Woodland Sprite said...

I am brand new here so please treat me kindly :-)

I read this thread's 93 posts from top to bottom and have to say that you each have some interesting positions.

There are number crunchers like jpsedona, robh and oregon dem.

There are passionate people like Yamaka and leah.

Well come to think about it you are all passionate!

Help me make up my mind, I kinda favor Obama but on the other hand as a 48 year old woman I do have to ask: if not Hillary then who, when?

I have my ballot (live in Oregon) and absent anything crazy happening in the next few days will probably mark it for Obama, but I am willing to hear any and all arguments (for or against).

joni (aka Woodland Sprite)

Hope I just did not ask for too much trouble.

Leah said...

joni/Woodland Sprite

Welcome to the thread.

All I can say is that I believe the Senator Obama is the best candidate and he will be the best for America.

Besides the math right now is on his side - there is no way that Hillary can overtake his lead in the pledged delegates and I believe the superdelegates will not overturn the decision of the majority of the pledged delegates that represent the people of America. So Obama has it wrapped up.

If you are still unsure of your choice you can read about all the issues (how Obama stands on them) on his website www.BarackObama.com
There is a tap there at the top that says ISSUES.

I am also a 48 year old woman. I would love to vote for a woman for president in my life time - but I believe that Hillary is just the wrong woman.

Good luck with your decision.

Obama / Kathleen Sebelius '08

Leah said...

Hey everyone DCW updated the side boxes with the new numbers from West Virginia.
Obama - 8 delegates
Clinton - 20 delegates

So she netted +12 for the state of WV.

Obama picked up two new SUPERS tonight, so added with the four he got earlier today that makes a total of SIX SDs for the day for Obama and Clinton ZERO ;)

So you could actually say that Hillary had a TOTAL NET FOR THE DAY OF +6 delegates.

Not a great day as far as numbers go for Hillary.

Independent voter said...

Leah, you have to remember that one of those supers is from MI. So technically that one cannot be counted at this point.

Leah said...


Independent voter that's right. Thanks for correcting me :)

Leah said...

An article for WOMEN to read (and the guys too):




Woodland Sprite said...

Leah, Thank You for the welcome. I know I certainly have to go to both Obama and Clinton's webpages and read about issues that matter to me. They are so close, from what I know about them I cannot say who I might agree with more. I do know that with both of them I feel hope for the future. Maybe more so with Obama but I am not positive.

The number cruncher types have this locked up for Obama, but I have to vote for who I believe in and I do not subscribe to just voting for the winner - heck I am not gonna be given the position of White House interior decorator just cause I sided with the winner! :-)

I want our children out of Iraq as soon as possible.

I want this partisan divide in America to end as soon as possible.

I want this country to be respected in the world community like it was when I visited Europe in the 80's.

I want us to get away from the military solution is the only solution.

McCain is an absolute disaster (even though he did have a pretty good position when he spoke about global warming in Portland yesterday).

I have traditionally been an independent but decided to vote in the primary this year for the dems so changed my registration to democratic. In Oregon you cannot vote in any primary you want you have to declare.

Thanks for your input. I will check out the issues tab for Obama, my guess is that it will say exactly what I would want to hear just like Hillary's would.

May I ask why you say "not her, not now." ?

Leah said...

joni/Woodland Sprite said: "May I ask why you say "not her, not now." ? "

I just a few thoughts:

I would like the first woman president to get there on her own - not on the coat-tails of a man.

I would like the first woman president to run a campaign that does not pit people against each other by using the gender card and race card.

I would like the first woman president to be someone that people can trust. Not someone that 'lies'.

I would like the first woman president to have less baggage (scandals) than Hillary does.

I would like the first woman president to have integrity, grace, compassion, and an impeccable character.

Bill and Hillary have already been in the White House for 8 years. It is time to move forward into the future.

I have a lot more reasons but that should give you a bit of insight of what I think.

I do think that we will see another woman run for the presidency in the future - so by Hillary not getting the nomination will not be the end of the world.

Obama / Kathleen Sebelius '08

Aunt Jean said...

Woodland Sprite welcome to this blog don't let the Obama supporter let you forget about Hillary. Obama does not have this won yet doesn't matter how much they want it.Hillary has so much class and she has done so many things in her life. Obama is green [very much so] and someone that I distrust by the way I'm 54 years old and if the media hadn't been so bias against Hillary she would have already won this. I do believe that you should consider all the people that Obama has been friends or assoc. with vbefore you make your decision. I have never voted for a republican
president and I've been voting for a few years 32+ but if obama wins this I will vote for McCain. Once again welcome Jean

Aunt Jean said...

Hello everyone had a very very long day been gone for 15 hours non stop. Well how do you like WEST VIRGINIA now? Jean

PRDude said...

Hey friends. Been away for a while. Some of you guys may remember my three excessively long posts why Clinton may be in a fight in PR, essentially (i) that (1) the ethnic dynamics and (2) issues are different than with U.S. Latinos; and (2) that the highest ranking Democrats within both powerful local parties have endorsed Obama.

I just came to put another two cents in because I saw Terry McAuliffe yesterday on MSNBC, and he kept predicting that Clinton could run up huge margins in Puerto Rico. From what I am seeing, I really doubt turnout is going to be high enough to deliver that, even if Clinton does win percentage wise.

McAuliffe said that Puerto Rico has 2.4 million Democrats. There are actually no more than a few thousand Democrats in all of Puerto Rico. The 2.4 million is really the number of registered voters (I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on this slipup, maybe because of his overly excited puppy dog facade). Turnout in PR is indeed typically a very high ~82% for gubernatorial elections, ~2 million votes cast. My sense is that this election will have a turnout that is a fraction of that. If she gets a 250,000 vote margin... I will buy a hat, and eat it.

This for three reasons. First, many folks who are pro-sovereignty will stay home on principle - on the theory that this is "none of our business", or even if it is, it should not be. Second, the excitement level on the street (media, ads, conversational, etc.) is very low relative to a gubernatorial election; if I had to guess, it's a combination of cynicism and ignorance, heavily weighted to the former. Third, and most importantly, the local political parties (who are NOT Democrats or Republican) are not mobilizing their machines, leaving all the work to the PR Elections Comission. The why behind each of these reasons... I could try to summarize later when I have free time, but you could write a book.

I have two good anecdotes as reference points. First, last week the Obama campaign held a press conference to announce that 24 of 32 mayors affiliated with the ruling PDP were endorsing Obama (as opposed to 3 PDP mayors endorsing Clinton and 5 neutral... keep on dreamin' Mr. McAuliffe...). Well, only 8 of the 24 mayors bothered to physically show up... in an island 100 x 35 miles... the rest found better things to do. Second, the PR Election Commissions announced that voter registration during the first week of May - the last for the primaries - had shown absolutely no deviation from a run of the mill week in a gubernatorial election year.

Ah, I forgot... primary day is a Sunday... that means surf, sand and sun, not voting booths... gubernatorial elections are on a Tuesday, which is granted as an official holiday...

Pablo said...

Congrats to the Hillary supporters, she had a great night tonight.

An even better night in Mississippi for the Dems. The fact that they tried slams linking Rev Wright etc with little or nil effect hopefully proves to be telling.

Aunt Jean said...

Woodland Sprite please don't listen to Leah all she knows how to do is put Hillary down and lie [yes Leah lie] Hillary has done more for Americans and she doesn't need a man skirt tail to run on. Leah you are so bias against Hillary that it is sickening. You should look at all the lies that Obama has said before you start judging. Plus look at who he had as his mentor need I say more. Don't get me started I'm fed up with all your lousy remarks against Hillary. The fact is you don't want a woman in there I don't care what you say.You try anf act like a lady well ladies don't show so much disrespect. Jean

Aunt Jean said...

Leah I meant coat tails also she didn't play the race card or the gender that was the media and OBAMAS!!!!!! Jean

Bob in Vancouver said...

I think that this is important. I'm assuming that the DNC is going to seat MI and Fl; somehow. I am now looking at Scenario 5 - Seat Fl and MI - Obama does not get MI 55 uncommitted. I'm an Obama supporter, so I don't necessarily agree with this but I was looking at the worst case scenario.

I need someone to comment back on this. And it is a real problem for Yamaka.

If you look carefully at Scenario 5 I notice that the 55 uncommitted pledge delegates are placed under the "Others" column, and then added into the total number of delegates that are available for distribution.

I don't think that this one aspect to Scenario 5 is correct. Nobody, i.e. Edwards, Clinton or Obama won these pledge delegates. So if they are not asigned to Obama, then they should not be included in the number of delegates still available. That would give Hillary Clinton a second chance at winning at least some of them. If she was going to win them, she would have won them in the original election.

I think that if they are not included somehow for Obama then they are "lost" delegates and not available to anyone, or they belong to the "kitty". And in that case it should reduce the number of available delegates by 55.

And that makes it extremely difficult for Hillary Clinton to win even if MI and FL are included and Obama is not awarded any pledge delegates from MI.

Leah said...


Thank you for posting your insightful comment.

Pablo said...

Miss Aunt Jean-

I know Leah never said she didn't want a woman as President. She just doesn't want the woman that you would choose. You should try and respect that, she has a mind of her own.

The fact that you would rather choose McCain as a penalty vote if Hillary isn't the choice could actually say alot about you. Obama's policies are very similar to Hillary's , yet McCain opposed a bill just a couple weeks ago for equal pay for women. It's hard for me to understand your blind allegiance except for the fact she is a woman.

Leah said...

Bob in Vancouver-

The bigwigs in Michigan spent a lot of time putting together a proposal. They laid it on the table the other day:
Clinton 69 delegates
Obama 59 delegates

Hillary said NO.

Michigan is sticking with those numbers and are submitting the proposal to the Rules and Bylaws Committee.

Now this is an example that shows that Hillary does not want to come to a fair solution. She wants a 73/55 split - which would gain her only a net of 8 delegates compared to the Michigan proposal.

This to me says she is not interested in a solution - she wants to go to the convention - destroy Obama and the chances of getting a democrat back into the White House this time. IMO - if she thinks she has a chance at 2012 she really should go see a psychiatrist!

Aunt Jean said...

Leah you harp about obama's wins no one has said that he hasn't had some good wins but you know those states that you listed well Hillary got more votes than all of those together tonight. When obama won NC all I said was congratulation do you think you can do the same thing NO you have to throw dirt YES dirt. You are suppose to be a catholic act like one instead an disrespectful person.

Leah said...

Here is an interesting little fact about tonight's West Virginia results...

Obama 91,017

McCain 89,322

Even with the poor turnout for Obama - Obama got MORE votes than McCain did! :)

Aunt Jean said...

Leah this is what I'm talking about::: if she thinks she has a chance at
2012 she really should go see a

You seem to be the one that needs a psychiatrist to deal with this unjust hate of Hillary it's not healthy. Jean

Aunt Jean said...

Leah but there is one thing that you forgot if national 28% of Hillary supporters won't vote for obama do you really think that he can win WV [ NO WAY] Jean

Nancy said...

One thing is for sure. There cannot be any conventon without the delegates from Florida & Michigan being seated. The fairest way is to give the uncommitted delegates in MI to Obama and let the results in Florida stand as they are because both Obama’s name and Clinton’s name was on the ballot. In fact Obama was even putting ads on CNN in the state..In addition whoever wins the popular vote in the end should be on top of the tickets including FL & MI. Mind you popular vote results have been certified by the Secretaries of States of all the states.

The color Purple. Much as we may crave it, we do not live in a democracy. If we did then each person would have one vote in every issue, and that vote would count as much as any other. But we don’t. If you participated in a caucus, your vote counted about ten times as much as someone who voted in a primary. In the general election, what ultimately matters is the votes in the Electoral College, not the popular vote, as we re-learned so painfully in 2000. So the question facing the uncommitted “super-delegates” is how do we run the best campaign with the highest probability of defeating John McCain in November, and win the majority of Electoral College votes. Cuurently Clinton has 305 electoral votes and Obama has 216 electoral votes using the same method as used in the GE. Assume that Hillary wins KY and Obama gets SD, OR , MT , Clinton will have 313 electoral votes and Obama will have 230 Electoral votes. You know who should be on top of the DREAM ticket. ThIS IS VERY SERIOUS MATTER AS SHE IS ALREADY BEATING OBAMA BY 50% MARGIN ( use the same method in the Playoffs as used in Superbowl)
Obama change and hope of the terrorists!

AHMED YOUSEF TOP HAMAS ADVISOR, OBAMA is DAMAGED GOODS – look what happened to him in WV, NY, CA, MI, FL, PA , NM, TX , MA , OH even after outspending Hillary 3 to 1

Lea, Jim ,Subodh , Yamaka & Aunt Jean thanks for your views and that was why I will never and will not ever in my life vote obama. The useless media houses in this country run negative against Clinton for Obama fo almost 16 months just aginst a woman in order to force Obama on us
I know this is not going to convince any of Obama's supporters and I might be called all kinds of things but it is reality plain and simple..
OBAMA IS A DAMAGED GOOD. Only a minority of whites are voting for him. In NC & IN, PA, OH , MI, FL , WV
two thirds of the white voters did not vote for him . The only reason he won in NC, SC, MS and all the other southern sates is because 33 to 50% of the total votes in those states were black. HE WON BECAUSE OF HIS RACE AND HE WILL LOSE THE GENERAL ELECTION BECAUSE MOST PEOPLE ARE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH HIS ASSOCIATIONS. Most of the states Obama won were Caucus state where the votes can easily be manipulated as they were not democratic elections. IT IS NOT JUST THE RACE. SHE IS MORE EXPERIENCED CANDIDATE BY A LONG SHOT.
Nowhere else in the world the elections are run like these were run in caucus states and the way delegates were disproportion ally allocated.
Dean, Pelosi, Kennedy,& Kerry and Reid didn't win those states for Obama, but the GOP media did. The GOP wants him to be the nominee......he is so much weaker than Clinton.....and now, that this has happened, if Obama is the nominee, latest exit poles show over half of the Clinton supporters will go with McCain. Thus McCain wins again....the NEW "FACTION" Democratic Party, designed by Dean, Pelosi, and Reid has now turned into their worst enemy........I don't see the Dems regaining the White House in the fall.....4 more years of Bush! If Obama is nominated, it should be considered totally illegitimate and Hilary supporters will consider it as a stolen election and 50% of her supporters will not back Obama . In close races like WV, FL, OH, PA, MI , MO it will be the kiss of death for Obama
Unless of course they get united behind the Dream Ticket- HILLARY ON TOP BECAUSE SHE HAS ALREADY WON IF YOU USE THE SAME RULES WHICH ARE USED IN THE GENERAL ELECTION. She is now leading Obama by 25000 votes . Once KY and PR votes are in , she will be way ahead of Obama in the popular votes and she should be on top of the ticket. This is what happened between LBJ & Kennedy. Even though they hated each other, the joint ticket won the election. Same thing happened again when Reagon picked up Bush and won the General Election in the Fall.

Aunt Jean said...

Pablo yes you are right she doesn't have to vote for Hillary but she does need to learn a little respect since she has tried to shove it down my throat.I'm tired of her sly remarks about Hillary you men do not see her like I do and I think it is because of the fact that I am a woman. I keep saying this I DON"T TRUST OBAMA. I think that he has something up his sleeve and it's not good. At least McCain loves America.When it gets down to voting for the President I really don't know if I can vote for McCain but I do know this I will not vote for Obama. Maybe and that is a big If Hillary is VPut that is the only way I might. Jean

Leah said...

Nancy there are so many misstatements in your post that I am not even going to try to address all of them.

Just remember:

1) This is the DEMOCRATIC party's nomination race NOT the republicans.

2) This race is based on DELEGATES not popular votes, not electoral votes, not anything except DELEGATES.

3) The person that is the nominee is the person that decides who their V.P. will be NO ONE else. It is the nominee's choice.


Leah said...

Aunt Jean-

What on earth is the matter with you tonight?

I have not even addressed one of my posts this evening to you (until this one).

Now I will send you a big fuzzy hug and I am off to bed.


Aunt Jean said...

Nancy was should obama get all the uncommitted in Michigan that would be saying that Edwards wouldn't have gotten any at the very most he should get is half the uncommitted. Jean

Pablo said...

Miss Nancy-

Show me a precedent where the LOSER was on top of the ticket. I'll be convinced and jump right on board.

I do not understand the 'stolen" theory at all. Please enlighten me.

If Hillary is the superior candidate, she should be cruising to the White House by now. She had the brand name going in, financial backing, super delegates from the get-go.

If in fact it was not the voters but the biased-media that gave him the nomination, then why wouldn't the biased-media continue this through the G.E. ?

Amot said...

Joni from Oregon,

I will no try to convince you who is the better choice. You have mentioned 4 points of interest and when you think about them you should check:
- recent and past standings on war and obliteration;
- vote of Dems Abroad in Europe (I live in Europe too and I will be glad if a worthy US President is elected)
- think of who is talking unity and non-partisanship.

You have made your mind and I guess all of those points will only strengthen your choice!

Best regards to rainy Oregon :)

Amot said...

my interest in PR grows every day with those signals from both campaigns saying opposite things. BTW if she wins by 100K I will eat a hat too - I had one that looks tasty :)

Amot said...

RobH, Oregon_Dem,
I think in OR turnout, margin of victory and popular vote lead for Obama are the most important. One delegate more or less is not a factor at this point - he gets half a dozen per day :)
Next polls will get as some preliminary results since voting is already in its hottest point!

Go ahead, Oregon!

Amot said...

don't judge Leah so hard!
When she was talking about Hillary has no chance in 2012 she ment it will be very hard for her to compete with President Obama for the nominee position! I think Sen. Clinton has excellent chances for President in 2016.

Amot said...

at the day of her biggest victory in the last 100 days:

5 new endorsements plus 1 more if MI and FL get seated
8 new pledged delegates
1 pledged delegate more (GP changed their numbers and DCW updated too)

no new endorsements
20 new pledged delegates
1 pledged delegate lost

Total: Clinton + 5 (4 if we count MI and FL)

A sound victory indeed!

Mike in Maryland said...

joni/Woodland Sprite,

First a warning. I can get long-winded, and this message is no different.

You are likely to hear some of the supporters of Senator Clinton claim that many of the men who are supporting Senator Obama are doing so because of bias against women.

Don't believe it.

I am a middle-aged, white male.

I have voted for women candidates in Maryland (Gladys Noon Spellman for Congress, Barbara Mikulski for Congress AND Senate, numerous women local candidates for city government offices (including city council, Council President and Mayor), for example) in primaries and general elections.

If I had lived in the Maryland 8th Congressional District during the 1980s, I probably would even have voted for Connie Morella, the Republican Representative who held that seat until 2002 when Chris Van Hollen won the election.

I adored Congresswoman Barbara Jordan, and if I had ever had an opportunity to vote for her, I would have in a heartbeat.

I support Senator Obama because he gives me a sense of hope that I haven't had since Robert Kennedy's campaign in 1968 before it came to it's tragic end.

I don't buy into the 'lack of experience' line about Senator Obama. He actually has more experience that Abraham Lincoln had when he ran for President in 1860. I think most people would agree that he was an important figure in American history.

Since Senator Obama and Senator Clinton have almost exactly the same viewpoints on various issues, it becomes a matter of who we think can implement those ideas more effectively if elected.

With Senator Clinton, she has the enmity, if not outright hatred, of a large portion of the population, especially the right-of-center. The majority of the enmity of Senator Obama centers around the already Republican-voting portion of the population that still wants to go back to the pre-Civil Rights Act era of segregation.

Note: I am NOT including Senator Clinton's supporters in this group. The people I describe above would be hard-pressed to vote for ANY Democratic candidate.

Since there is not much difference between the two candidates on issues, it becomes a matter of who I feel can better implement the policies. Here is where I find a major difference.

Senator Obama starts out with a lower level of enmity, which means he does not first have to spend energy on decreasing that level of enmity, and can begin working in a more bi-partisan manner with Congress. This leaves him with a large amount of negotiating power to get his policies enacted. Senator Clinton would have to rely more exclusively on the Democratic members of Congress to get legislation passed, and not have as much ability to negotiate to get any additional votes to get her policies enacted.

Senator Obama, by the manner in which he has run his campaign, has shown me that he can take a situation, study it in detail, then plan and execute it well. After all, when he began this race, he was polling in the 20-30% range. His organizational skills have served him well, as shown by his uninterrupted pledged delegate lead from the very first contest in the Iowa caucuses. He has never trailed in that category, but has slowly, but steadily, built that lead throughout the process.

Senator Clinton, on the other hand, started the campaign with the undisputed name recognition, was polling in the 50+% range, and was considered the odds-on likely Democratic nominee. She began the campaign with the institutional support of the party apparatus, had the initial fund-raising advantage, and should easily have been familiar with, and able to take advantage of, the existing party apparatus at the national and state levels.

However, she didn't properly plan for the campaign. She initially planned to have the nomination sewn up by the time the votes were counted after Super Tuesday. When that didn't happen, she had no plan for the remaining primary schedule, as evidenced by her lack of victories in the rest of February.

She didn't think she would have to contest any caucuses except Iowa and Nevada, so she didn't have any plan for any of the remaining caucuses.

Her campaign staff did not serve her well. Mark Penn (her senior strategist?!?!) was of the belief that if she won California, she would receive all 370 pledged delegates. With the proportional requirement in the DNC rules, no state's delegation is awarded to one candidate unless only one candidate receives more than 15% of the vote. Did Mark Penn think she would have received 85+% of California's vote? No. He thought all of California's delegates would be awarded to the winner of the primary, even if it were by one vote. He obviously wasn't aware of the rules on which the campaign strategy should have been based, so why was he Senator Clinton's chief strategist?

Her staff is still hurting her. Tonight I saw Terry Mcauliffe state that she will win Puerto Rico by more than 100,000 votes because it is 'Hispanic' and the Hispanics will vote overwhelmingly for her. If you read prdude's message (and previous messages in earlier threads), the Hispanic voters of Puerto Rico are much different in their political beliefs and feelings than the Hispanics of the mainland. What applies to 'mainland' Hispanics does not necessarily apply to Puerto Ricans, and vice-versa.

If she were elected President, would she make better hiring decisions when assembling her Cabinet and senior staff? Or would her hiring decisions be based more on loyalty (as seems to be the case with her campaign staff) than other considerations? We've seen the results of the hiring for loyalty over experience style with the Bush administration. And those results have not been pretty.

I've rambled on enough here. You clearly know who I'm supporting, and I hope I've given you some valid reasons as to why I'm supporting Senator Obama.

Your vote is important, and you must decide what factors and issues are important for your decision. Try to evaluate the candidates without emotion, but based on where the candidate stands with regard to the issues you feel are important to you. And also consider how you think the candidate will be able to implement those policies. Will their (perceived) style of governance, or temperment, or hiring decisions, etc., help or interfere with them implementing the policies? If you agree 100% with a candidate, but you think that candidate has no chance of implementing most of those policies (for whatever reason), is that candidate better than another, where you agree with 90% of their policies, don't seriously disagree with 10%, but has a much better probability of implementing their policies?


ed iglehart said...


I second Mike's remarks.
(I was born in Maryland, but left before I was 3, to live a life of eternal exile...)


Ariane said...

Ed, I' ve agreed with a lot of what you've said, and I do like Huckabee, I already thought he seemed like a smart, genuine, honest-person with a good sense of humor, and I'll always remember how he said things in support of Obama and Dr. Wright when Joe Scarborough was trying to get him to join the attack....
BUT.... I sure wouldn't want to see Huckabee as VP! I disagree with him on a lot of issues. I know you were probably just joking . :) I like him as a commentator though. They should have him on more. Maybe instead of Buchanan.

That was an interesting link you posted about race in Appalachia, the myths and the hidden history about the melungeons and all and its emergence as people research their family history.

We have such a tendency in this country to try to put people in clear cut categories. The truth is there are a lot of people around who don't realize they have some genes of another race. There has been a lot of race mixing throughout the history of the USA (actually starting in colonial period). There were some VERY light complected slaves who could even pass for white- -one sees this mentioned in advertisements for runaways. Mixed Caucausian/African people sometimes would say they were part Indian (which they often might be, since there was a lot of mixing between both groups and Native Americans.) In some of the areas just over the Mason Dixon line there were quite a few mixed race descendents of slave owners who freed their children and even helped them buy property.

Mike in Maryland said...


I was born in Indiana, then moved to Maryland.

However, after doing a lot of genealogical research, I found that a large number of my ancestors lived in Maryland for almost two centuries before moving to other states.

There is some indication that one of my ancestors came over on The Ark or The Dove when Maryland was founded. That line of my family tree needs more research! Another line came through Delaware when it was a Dutch colony, then received land from the Calvert family when Anne Arundel County encompassed the entire western shore of the Bay. We're talking about the mid-17th century for those two lines of my family tree.

So in some sense, I've 'come home' to my 'ancestry'.


Emit R Detsaw said...

Hi Joni/Woodland Spirit - Welcome to the board.

You will have to forgive some of the folks here, they get pretty passionate at times about their candidate.

I know not everyone has time to fully investigate the candidates, but admire that you are open to looking at both. There are some archived pages to this blog that go through more "discussion" on why folks like or dislike each candidate, but since you asked.....

I am an Obama supporter and here is why:

1) Trust & Integrity. When confronted with questionable characters from his past, he didn't duck the issues. He took them head on and explained each. His handling of the Rev Wright case actually strengthen my opinion of his character. He could have done the typical politician thing, but he didn't throw Wright under the bus simply because of some sound bites that were thrown together and totally out of perspective from how Wright was using them in the sermons. But once Wright came out and started making additional comments, he severed the ties completely.

2) Need to build up International Relations after the mess Bush has gotten this country in. Obama stated since that debate (which seems like years ago)that he would open dialog's immediately with all country's leaders to get people to the table talking again. I happen to agree that you can not increase foreign relations without talking.

3) If you research Obama's history you will learn that he has a great amount of experience in community service and leadership. He has devoted the last 25 years to it since starting to work in Chicago.

I won't attack Hillary, but there are reasons I would not vote for her. There are more reasons I would not vote for McCain though.

An Independent, Retired Military, for Obama from Texas.

ed iglehart said...


If you search my surname, or go to facebook, you'll find a whole bunch of dark complected Igleharts, including one Edward Iglehart from texas. I'm pleased to not a number of high-achievers among my cousins.

Namaste -ed

Emit R Detsaw said...

Oh Yeah, Joni, if you wanted to have a snap shot of Clinton and Obama side by side you can go to:

It's not a full look, but has the main issues sided by side.

ed iglehart said...


Also, typically, my family are inordinately proud of our wee bit of Stone-age Amerindian blood (Pocahontas - no less!), but would be mortified at any hint of African blood.

We used to taunt my grandmother (A Washington) with the fact that so many black folk (I admit to using the 'n-word' all those years ago - ;-((( ) were named Washington. She was an excellent woman, but of her time and breeding.


"My people" also include George Mason, the author of the Virginia declaration of rights, from which the US "Bill of Rights" drew inspiration. Like most of his peers and all of my great-grandparents,, he was a slave-owner.

I wish I could lay claim to Jefferson, one of my chief heroes, but also a man of his time, and father to a line of mixed-race children.....

Let us hope we can heal what Wendell Berry calls "The Hidden Wound", a book I can thoroughly reccommend.

Enough of this off-topic rambling! It's a beautiful sunny mid-day in Scotland!

Ariane said...

Yam.." We have to do EVERYTHING possible to weaken our opponent and enhance the chances for our Candidate. That's called hard fought Campaigning, which I love."

In a primary campaign, however, which is a prologue to the main fight, doing ANYTHING to weaken your fellow- party member -especially when he or she is the likely nominee- - could also be called shooting yourself in the foot/ cutting off your nose to spite your face/ and a number of other things related to doing anything to weaken your own party's chances.

I know there have been hard fought primaries before this, and 'm not sure where I draw the line here but I think there IS a line - - at least if you genuinely care about the principles you are supposed to stand for rather than just your own personal power. A lot of people felt HRC crossed that line when she negatively compared Obama to their Republican opponent. Frankly I think that really turned a lot of Superdelegates off to see a respected person in the party practically endorse McCain over the Democratic candidate leading in pledged delegates.
So with that I think she harmed herself personally in trying to weaken her opponent.

Amot said...

Ariane, second!

I think Aunt Jean is rude and Jim is sometimes hard on the issues, but the only one who constantly cross the line is Yam!

Ariane said...

Congratulations to all Hillary's supporters for her big win in WV.

Either of our Democratic candidates will be such a huge improvement over Bush and so much better for the country than the flip-flopping ex-"Maverick" McCain who sings Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran like it is a joke to get us into another war when our military and budget are already overstretched..... who promises more rightwing Supreme Court Justices that will weaken our rights for generations.

Yamaka said...

Dear Democrats, Good Morning:

Another beautiful day is slowly unfolding in the horizon.

What a day for Hillary! A whopping 41.3% margin. Voila....Wallah!

From a 113.5K deficit to a surplus of 26.6K in Popular Votes in WV! Thank you WV, you made our day.

When BHO was playing pool and blathering "I have campaigned in 57 States" nonsense, Hillary was working non-stop, having a conversation with the working folks of WV (and the American voters) - the reward is very heartening. This is the passion of a true Warrior - who will work every minute of every day to the betterment of the people.

Hillary is the Genuine American Classic.

By contrast, BHO - the Empty Suit- the Puppet under the armpit of BigMoneyBag Puppet Masters- was relaxing in MO! What an atrocious arrogance!!

Okay, BHO Jr: Please keep doing what you do now: ignore KY, PR -ignore all the hard working American voters, who hate your arrogance and ignorance: you know you are good only in small Red Caucuses and wherever your Black folks are in plenty. You hide behind them! Then, how in the world will you win the GE, by hook or crook you get the Nomination?

Most of the hard working White men and women ARE the backbone of American Electorate. Please understand this basic fact, and work hard and harder to convince them that your are the Presidential Timber, not some fake products from Kenya!!

Your supporters like Kerry, Kennedy, McGovern, Richardson, and the ilk ALL introduce you to the world as "Here is another Bleeding FAR Left Liberal coming to tax you to death and spend recklessly even during deep recession". These are the demigods of Liberal Ideology that vast majority of the Americans sent them to the Pantheon Of Dead and Gone long time ago! Here you come along on their backing; for sure you will join them in the row of perennial losers!

Vote for Hillary, a Centrist, a Moderate who can bring back the paradise of the Golden Era of 1990s, when prosperity was everywhere, even to the dumb Yamaka, who clawed up to the stairs of seven figures!

Her Math is: 1090 + 102 + 200 =
2211, a few more than the Real Hurdle 2209. Math is working.

Go Hillary Go.

Cheer and Smile for the First Women POTUS - Break Open the Glass Ceiling.

Peter said...

I actually think the MS house-win was a bigger test for Obama than WV. The MS win was the second in a row where GOP tried to link the democrat to Obama in a hope of scaring voters. They have failed twice and it is important for Obama.

Hillarys WV win is nice for her, but it does mean anything for the nomination.

Yamaka said...

OOOOooops. A correction, a typo:

The Math is

1909 + 102 + 200 = 2211.

Please make a note of it.


Ariane said...

Ed Inglehart, you said " Also, typically, my family are inordinately proud of our wee bit of Stone-age Amerindian blood (Pocahontas - no less!), but would be mortified at any hint of African blood."

You want to know what is funny (or equally sad), there's black folk the same way. I thnk especially in earlier times, they would be proud of Indian blood and say about a family member with different features "that's the Indian coming out" but would not want to admit to a white grandparent. I think maybe because back in the day it was illegal for an African American to marry a white person and even if it hadn't been illegal, it would have been very uncommon. So if you had a white grandparent it would have had to have been from an extra marital relationship.

I will have to find out about that book you mention The Hidden Wound

Yamaka said...


The Democratic Party started sailing in the self-destructive mode since Jan when the Poliburo decided to disenfranchise two important State voters (MI and FL).

At least since Super Tuesday in early Feb they knew the race is going to be very very close. Why the hell didn't they convene this BRC Meeting much sooner to resolve the issue? Were they all sleeping at the switch?

I know why? Presently, the DNC is dominated by the Bleeding Liberal Wing of the Party - who wanted their Kid to be the Nominee! They wanted to tilt the playing field in his favor.

American Electorate is watching carefully:

How undemocratic has the Democratic Party become?

They will hit us with a Thunderbolt for all the arrogance the members exude: "We Will Punish MI and FL"


Nepolians will meet their Waterloo very soon.

Shame on the DNC and Gov Dean.


Amot said...

The day after the 'great' victory:

Obama - 2 new endorsements
Clinton - 0 new endorsements

This week:

Obama - 12 new endorsements
Clinton - 0 new endorsements

Amot said...

$64K question:

Voters in WV cast 7.3% of their ballots for Edwards! Was that due to:

A)ignorance -they didn't know he is not running anymore;
B)protest - they don't like the policies of both remaining candidates;
C)discrimination - they don't want either woman or African American to be the nominee;
D)all of the above?

michael said...

Nebraska Primary final results from official source. Obama 46279 (49%); Clinton 43,614 (47%); Mike Gravel 3,864 (4%). Doesent mean much with no delegates selected but they held the election anyway and 26% of the voters came out.

Amot said...

Unfortunately for Hillary she can't use those results for the popular vote count! But if she could she would have to use the WA primary results too and that would only enlarge Obama's lead!
This primary was money spent for nothing...

michael said...

On my post above I neglected to post the link to the Nebraska Primary Election results. http://www.sos.ne.gov/elec/2008/ElectNight/primary.htm

vicki said...

Does it get under anyone's skin except mine that Senator Obama or anyone on his campagin staff didn't return phone calls or speak with anyone on the Michigan Executive committee about a possible revote or delegate breakdown and now he has found the time to come and campagin in the state? He couldn't even return a phone call to the Michigan Executive Committee all this time? Ms. Ringle was on CNN earlier this week and said Senator Obama and his campaign staff have still made not one single gesture. I don't know..Obama says he will talk with terrorists if elected President, but won't talk with officials from the Michigan Democratic Party? Is it me or is something a little strange here? Vicki

michael said...

Amot, the Nebraska election was alao the regular state primary so the Presidential Primary was cheap but still meaningless.

Bull Schmitt said...

So following up on last night's landslide victory, this has to be the day where Sen. Clinton and her campaign build on the tremendous momentum that made all the media and the nation take notice?

But I see that since WV was called, it's 2½ Superdelegates for Sen. Obama to 0 for Sen. Clinton. (Plus one for Obama from Michigan - silly Obama-ites don't count all states for some trivial reason like "I wasn't on the ballot")

Isn't this the moment where we start flooding the market with our secret Supers that have been holding out, waiting for just the right moment? Obviously if they haven't declared for Obama yet, they must be for Hillary!

I mean, come on guys - there's actually a couple of people in the media starting to try and push a "It's over for Hillary" narrative.. it would really be helpful if we ended this day +5 or preferably +10 in SuperD announcements. This is the way we can turn the race around!!

And you know in your heart of hearts, Sen. Clinton has 200 of the remaining 225 non add-on Superdelegates just waiting for her to tell them to declare on her say so, right?


Amot said...

the 2 College Dems made their clip before the results, so we better only count 1 1/2 votes or 2 endorsements after the vote yesterday. Still, she definetely got no momentum so far!

I agree they only paid for extra ballots and some staff to count them but it was meaningfull. Funny thing is GOP primary was non-binding too :)

Bull Schmitt said...

That's a great point Vicki - how dare Obama go and campaign in Michigan when he refused to do so when campaigning was prohibited by party rules! And now I hear that Obama's people are ready to sign off on the "69-59 compromise" that all the major MI officials set up to put the issue behind us - LIKE HE THINKS HE DESERVES EVEN ONE DELEGATE - IT'S SO UNFAIR!!!!!!!!!!!

Everyone knows that the only solution for Michigan is to give Sen. Clinton the 73 pledged delegates she won FAIR AND SQUARE, and leave the other 55 uncommitted, since that what was on teh ballot. And Sen. Clinton should get to choose the 55 uncommitted people for the convention, since she won more votes there, it's only fair!

Can't you people out there see PLAIN AND SIMPLE LOGIC????


Amot said...

Sen. Obama and his campaign have repeatedly said they will accept any fair DNC decision on MI and FL. They will not initiate new paln and that is the better position since there appears to be a serious legal problem if the initial decision on MI and FL is altered. Maybe MI should call Sen. obama and ask him if he thinks their proposal is fair, but they can't ask him for official support. I am sure Sen. Obama is willing to seat both FL and MI delegations if DNC finds a reasonable decision.

ed iglehart said...

For those who wish to while away the time as we await the eventual nomination, I reprise the "hot links" tutorial:

A blank link looks like this:

The URL (web address) goes between the double-quotes (“”),

and you put your descriptive text between the > and the <

THUS: descriptive text

will give this: descriptive text

Try it, and you'll feel so slick!

Ariane, They used to explain my mom's failure to go grey-haired by saying, "That's the Indian blood!" I cannot reccommend "The Hidden Wound" more strongly, especially for anyone who, like myself (and the author), who grew up through segregation and its dismantling. I was 13 when the nasty federal government told us we couldn't continue to run separate schools. I grew up seeing water fountains labelled "white only", etc., and "didn't bat an eye", as Rev Wright puts it.


Ariane said...

Here you come yet again with this fallacious claim that Obama is extreme far left liberal and Clinton is a centrist/moderate. That just is not backed up by evidence (and arguments by omniscience - -"Everyone knows..."- -do not constitute evidence.)

It's odd how Clinton supporters are directly contradicting each other on this issue of who is more liberal.. Many of Clinton's more liberal supporters have been arguing throughout this campaign that HRC is more "progressive" than Obama. Some Clintonistas even call him a "Republicrat". There are various ratings and rankings where she is showed as more liberal / progressive.

On the site Progressive Punch, which rates how "progressive" members of Congress are based on their voting, Clinton comes out in lifetime ranking as the 18th "most progressive" and Obama is the 24th. In a ranking limited to a more recent window Clinton is the 29th and Obama is the 40th. Btw these rankings are also closer to the opinion of many progressives I know who would say that neither of these two is in the top 10 or 15 most progressive/ liberal Senator.
Progressive Punch -Senators Ranked by Progressive Voting

Another liberal rating, the Drum Major Institute, gave Clinton an A-and Obama a B

Clinton and Obama have voted together like 93-94% of the time . So how on earth can you think they are so far apart?


A) You are mixing up Hillary with her husband.
Y'know, she IS an individual person, she's not just a clone of Bill. You are a fan of Bill Clinton, even a Friend of Bill, and maybe it is by extension you like Hill, you admire some of her characteristics like determination and intelligence,BUT you DON'T know seen to know much about her OWN record and positions.It's ironic that although you frequently proclaim the importance of having a first female POTUS, you seem to see her as an appendage to or clone of her husband rather than a person and politician in her own right.

Otherwise you would realize she is not so much a centrist as Bill. Even Chelsea has pointed out that her mom is more liberal than her dad- - which she sees as a positive, so she called it "progressive" ;-) Chelsea Clinton: Mom More Prepared, More Progressive Than Dad

B) Faulty extrapolation: You are focusing on one or two individual issues on which you think Obama is more liberal, and you "can't see the forest for the trees".

C) Deception: You know that their records and policies are extremely close, voting the same 93% of the time, you know that on one of the most significant policy differences- - that of health insurance mandates - - it is Clinton who is the more liberal- - but you are being dishonest in order to make an electability argument.

D) You are getting your information from right wing sources who always say the Democrat they fear running against is the "most liberal". Some people here in the past have accused you of being a Republican troll, because you use similar talking points. I think you really are committed to the Clintons (though you do seem to be mixing up the two of them.) But maybe you are getting your information from GOP sources based on flawed methods. Is it any coincidence that National Journal who have ranked Obama as the "most liberal Senator" said 4 years ago that John Kerry was the "most liberal Senator"?? Here is a post about how flawed that methodology is. Reasons Why the 'Most Liberal Senator' Claim is Unreliable I don't think it's a coincidence. They are a conservative source, they manage to analyze votes in a way that they can say the Democratic candidate they most fear, or think they'll be running against, is the "most liberal"
You have promised that IF Obama wins the nomination, you will be supporting and blogging for him against McCain.... Yeah I know we're not to that point yet but you seem pretty deep in the right wing propaganda, so maybe you'd better start, at least privately, practicing how you will debunk the same right-wing distortions you've been using against him. ;)

Amot said...

the 'tree and forest' explanation of Yam's behaviour is probably the best I have heard so far. That is exactly what I mean when I call him 'idiot'!
Do you know, I believe Yam wants 4 more years with the same policies and somehow he is sure Hillary can do that for him! He has turned Republican in his heart but he would never admit it and sticks to Hillary with the hope she will be almost Republican President. Poor being!

ed iglehart said...

Let's try that again!

A blank link looks
like this: <a href=""></a>
The URL (web address) goes
between the double-quotes (“”), and you put your descriptive
text between the > and the <

THUS: <a

will give this: descriptive

oR JUST TRY this, and then bookmark it for reference


Try it, and you'll feel so

Cheryl said...

I have voted democratic for over 25 years. If Obama wins the nomination. I will undoubtedly vote Republican for the first time in my life.

Yamaka said...


Let me label myself like this:

A social liberal but a fiscal conservative.

A Friend of Bill (FOB)

FOBs and supporters of Clintons are nearly 50% of the Democratic Party. To their Left lie the remaining Gangs dominated by Kennedy, Kerry, Carter, Mondale, McGovern and now Barack Hussein Obama Jr.

The Far Left (now I call Obamites) are itching to raise tax and more tax, then spend and spend more, even during deep recession.

Case in point, in PA HRC talked about Gas Tax Holiday, which I considered as a brilliant move both economically and politically (granted most "Economists" said it won't work: but they are just theoretical academicians who have pathetically dismal record of any profession: they could never predict the oncoming of the Subprime Debacle!). What did BHO do? He ridiculed. He wants to collect more tax even when people are hurting, hurting seriously.

He also ridiculed the vastly popular "Triangulation" philosophy of Bill Clinton, the bona-fide Centrist, the most successful two-term Democratic President in nearly 30 years!

Please Do NOT tell me that BHO is a centrist in the mold of Maestro Bill. He is a FAR LEFT liberal in the mold of Ted Kennedy! Open your eyes, see the real difference.

I know for a fact HRC has been the sparring partner of Maestro Bill even from the days of Yale, days of Arkansas and during the Oval Office. She WAS the Co-President, with first-hand knowledge of the pressures and problems in the Oval Office - She was there, shoulder to shoulder with Bill; she was NOT baking cookies and serving tea for the VIPs like Barbara and Laura Bushes do! She is a policy wonk, cut her teeth under the careful tutelage of Maestro Bill Clinton.

Please don't tell me she is as liberal as BHO Jr.

Her life has been an Open Book for everyone to read and learn: Sacrifice, Knowledge and Public Service. And Hard Work.

Do you know anything about BHO Jr. Not really. Nearly 50% of American Electorate is still asking whether he is a Kenyan, a Muslim or What?

Barack Hussein Obama Jr is NOT an American name! A Kenyan Muslim Name!!

SDs, please make a note of this.

Democrats must field a good Brand Name in the Fall, not a fuzzy talker with a messy character to win the General Election!


Amot said...

would you mind to explain why? I am really curious what could turn a lifelong Dem into a Republican?

Yamaka said...


Welcome. Keep writing about your view of the world..



Peter said...

I am sorry Yamaka, but you are full of BS.
It is ok that you support HRC and nice for her, but stop spredding lies and BS. If you don`t support Obama this fall then you are not a true democrat.
HRC has competed well but she is loosing, it is time to unite the party.
I seriously don`t understand why some HRC-supporters like you are som negative and hatefull against Obama.

Yamaka said...


Please do one thing:

Go inside an Echo Chamber and recite this:

"BARack...Oosama...Ooobamma.. my Mama...."

You will get salvation from your disease of ignorance.

You pathetic Lemmings!

:-( :-(

ed iglehart said...

An interesting discussion of the nature of Appalachia, which, however, fails to mention the problem any candidate who wishes to have "green" credentials will have with any region with coal-mining, however destructive, is an economic mainstay.


Bull Schmitt said...

Cheryl -

As long as you're okay with a pre-emptive war against Iran, 2 new Supreme Court judges in the Alito/Scalia mold, continuation of the Bush tax cuts and collapse of the middle class, and gas tax holidays that no economist thinks is a good idea - then McCain is the candidate for you.

Me, while I appreciate Sen. McCain's service to the country - I have some problems with his candidacy at this time.

1) His flip-flopping on almost every major issue since his failed run for the 2000 nomination (taxes and deficit spending, campaign finance reform, abortion rights, plus his "I was against the war I voted for before I was against it again, but I'm still for the surge" revelation)
2) His domestic (economic) policy
3) His foreign (Middle East) policy

Other than those small criticisms, he's a great choice. But then Mike Huckabee was a quick-witted personable analyst on MSNBC last night, even though he doesn't believe in evolution. Nice guy, wouldn't vote for him in a million years.

If you're a bona-fide Democrat, good luck clinging to your bitterness through a McCain presidency - you're not going to get any help from the government.

Emit R Detsaw said...

And Cheryl, from a military guy's perspective, I find a vote for McCain very offensive.

McCain not only wants to continue the war in Iraq, and possibly invade Iran, he position on the military shocks me. He stated that the military was a volunteer force so the ones that are in won't mind spending longer tours away from their families to fight the war in Iraq. That is total BS. He would continue to destroy the military as Bush has over the past few years. There is a big reason they have problems recruiting, and have Stop Loss in effect so troops can't get out or retire.

He really doesn't ahve a clue. I know he will get some votes in the fall, but really - think long and hard about what 4 more years of what we are going through will do to this country. Rome fell, and the USA is getting close!

dsimon said...

nancy: Cuurently Clinton has 305 electoral votes and Obama has 216 electoral votes using the same method as used in the GE. Assume that Hillary wins KY and Obama gets SD, OR , MT , Clinton will have 313 electoral votes and Obama will have 230 Electoral votes. You know who should be on top of the DREAM ticket. ThIS IS VERY SERIOUS MATTER AS SHE IS ALREADY BEATING OBAMA BY 50% MARGIN

I don't know why this argument is brought up over and over again when it has no merit.

If the point is supposed to be that Clinton would do better in the general election than Obama, then the place to start would be state-by-state head-to-head matuchps of each candidate against McCain, not against each other. And those polls show the candidates doing about the same. In particular, Obama would win CA, NY, NJ, and many other large states against McCain. Primary results simply cannot be extrapolated to the general election because the opponent will offer voters a completely different choice (and the voting population will be different and turnout will be higher).

And the winner-take-all primary analysis directly contradicts the Clinton campaign's emphasis on the "popular vote." The winner-take-all system gives the candidate who wins 50% + 1 votes in a state or district 100% of the delegates in that state or district. Such a result is certainly not representative of the will of the voters.

In addition, if such a system were in place, both candidates would have run very different campaigns, so we simply do not know what the results would have been.

So the "if you look at electoral votes in primaries" analysis has nothing to recommend it. Primary results cannot be applied to the general election, winner-take-all is not representative of the voting results, and it's not the system the Democrats actually have in place. It is completely irrelevant to this primary race.

Peter said...

EV is intersting between Clinton-McCain and Obama-McCain, not between Clinton-Obama. Obama and Clinton are NOT against each other in the GE.

At the moment Obama and Clinton have the same lead against McCain in Reaclearpolitics average, both lead 4,8% over McCain.
Clinton and Obama have strengths and different parts of the country, Clinton in midt-west, Obama in North-west.
Obamas biggest challenge will be Ohio and Florida. But he can compete in a dozen red/purple states, where Clinton has no chance. So, I think Obama is stronger against McCain than Clinton. And Clinton can`t beat Obama, so Obama will off course be the nominee.
I think both would have a great chance against McCain, but the party needs to unite and support the nominee, which will be obama. If Clinton had won, i would have supported her, but she will not be the nominee, so we need to support Obama.

dsimon said...

Please don't tell me she is as liberal as BHO Jr.

Still no real specifics to back up this claim that Obama is far-left. Note that on health care Clinton is further to the left.

She is a policy wonk

If so, she would never have proposed the gas tax holiday. She either believed it was a good idea despite all the evidence and theory, or she knew it wasn't and proposed it anyway as a pander.

granted most "Economists" said it won't work: but they are just theoretical academicians who have pathetically dismal record of any profession: they could never predict the oncoming of the Subprime Debacle!

You can't predict things when you don't have all the facts. The problem wasn't that economist couldn't predict it; the problem was that people were lying about their incomes, lenders were misrepresenting their mortgages, and no one took responsibility for looking into it. That's not the economists' fault.

And when expert opinion is practically unanimous on something, they should be taken seriously. Or shall we all now ignore the overwhelming opinion of scientific experts that global warming is happening?

ed iglehart said...

"they could never predict the oncoming of the Subprime Debacle!"

Simply not true! Many, including myself, predicted it more than a year ago, but we were ridiculed.

"anyone who believes in infinite growth in a finite system must be either a madman or an economist." -- Kenneth Boulding

知 者 不 言。 言 者 不 知。

countjellybean said...

Bill Clinton was smart enough to listen to his economic advisors.

I don't recall Hillary Clinton predicting the sub-prime debacle.

Jim said...

On CNN Feb.08
Said Super-delegate Donna Brazile to CNN, "If 795 of my colleagues decide this election, I will quit the Democratic Party. I feel very strongly about this."

I hope she does, because it will happen

countjellybean said...

There is also the fact that, in the future, Senator/President Clinton will never be able to say she is relying on the advice of economists to advance her policies.

Aunt Jean said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jim said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jim said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Aunt Jean said...

Yamaha don't pay listen to Ariane it seems to me that she has her head in the clouds also. These obama people get most of their stories [notice I said stories] from the huffington post [obama]loving paper! Obama IF he wins this is going to owe so many favors that he won't be able to take a fresh breath his whole term of 4 years because once again if obama wins which I don't think he can [so it's a moot point] The people will finally wake up and see the light and see him for what he really is.But it might be to late how sad for America. Jean

May 14, 2008 11:14 AM

Aunt Jean said...

Jim RIGHT ON !!!!!!! Jean

Dave in NC said...

Hi all!

Well, I see in reviewing the posts since I've been gone that we have turned into a bunch of animals.

At least that part of "we" that drew the short straw.

I'm thinking of just turning off the morphine drip in the Clinton Hospice and giving a nice shot of sleep-a-way.

Of course Yam has a nice vest with a trigger that will put him out of his misery at the convention.


Ed, your link to the "Hillary's Downfall" video is PRICELESS!

Martin said...

Just a reminder, folks! Aunt Jean, Jim and Yamaka are ignorant racist rednecks. Don't take them too seriously! Let them fester in their own delusions until Obama is declared the presumptive nominee, and then they can go running to McCain, crying about the scary black man with the funny name. Those who actually care about the future of this country will obviously support Obama.

Jim said...

A Super Candidate who cannot carry even one county in WV,looks soooo strong.
He might even lose the next two

Amot said...

check this!
You will find out that Donna Brazile said she will quit party if the nominee is chosen before the end of the primary season with the help of super delegates without reaching majority of pledged delegates.
More interesting you will find out that the popular vote vs. pledged delegates rose as a problem early February. Finally, a Clinton supporter is suggesting that pledged deleagtes are not pledged at all... on Feb 09

jpsedona said...


you said earlier that the "Math is working."

your numbers based including FL & MI: "1909 + 102 + 200 = 2211."

102 of 189... possible.
200 of 271... not impossible but getting close.

Of 271, 48 add-ons are yet to be selected plus FL. Hillary might get 16 of these but that's about it.

The pool of SD's is down to 273. Subtract out the 48 with Hillary getting 16.

Hillary then needs to get 184 of 225 (approx. 81%).

But here's where the "MATH" gets a bit rough to follow...

You've agreed that with respect to MI & FL that if anyone should be penalized, it should be the SD's. The following assumes that a 1/2 vote penalty is applied to those SD's. I will use your number of 102 pledged out of 189.

Penalizing MI

MI SD's: 29
Penalty: 14.5
Magic Number: 2201.75 (2209 minus 1/2 of 14.5 penalty)
Uncommitted SD's: 258.5 (273 - 14.5)

Current MI SD's: Hillary 7 Obama 2
Since Hillary leads in MI SD's 7-2 she would lose 3.5 to 1 for Obama.

Hillary's math: 1909 + 102 + 191 [2202 total]
Using my allocation of add-ons she gets roughly 16 of 47 (deducting for MI penalty).
This means that of remaining SD's she needs 175 of 211.5 (83%)

Penalizing FL Too

If the RBC / DNC penalizes FL too then...

FL SD's: 26
Penalty 13
Magic Number: 2195.25 (2201.75 minus 1/2 of 13 penalty)
Uncommitted SD's: 245.5 (258.5 - 13)

Current FL SD's: Hillary 8 Obama 5
She would lose 4 to Obama's 2.5 with FL penalty

Hillary's math: 1909 + 102 + 185 [2196 total]
Using my allocation of add-ons she gets roughly 16 of 46 (deducting for penalty).
This means that of remaining SD's she needs 169 of 199.5 (85%)

The Finish Line is in Sight
Using your pledged delegates (102 of 189), she needs 85% of the remaining uncommitted SD's excluding add-ons (where I predict Obama will pick them up at roughly 2-1 margin). Or, another way to look at it, Obama can just about clinch it with about 30 non-add-on SD's if a penalty is imposed on MI & FL SD's.

Hillary cannot afford to have the FL & MI SD votes reduced by 27+ votes.

Aunt Jean said...

To obama supporters: Who is the last democrat that won the white house without winning WV ? Jean

Amot said...

Dave in NC, welcome back!

Jim, what about Hillary in ID? In your measures she is not Super candidate either! Actually I don't know if she will be viable in AK and ID at all at their state conventions!

Aunt Jean said...

Martin not only are you racist ,sexist, a bigot and a frigging jerk. But mostly you are a very ugly person. Jean

Aunt Jean said...

Dave in NC welcome back hope you had a nice time. Jean

Jim said...

Yep, and last night on CNN she said to paraphrase If Obama passes the number of 2025 total delegates,
(including supers) he will be declared the winner.
She has definately changed her position.

Peter said...

Obama will have the majority of the pledged delegates next tuesday. He needs 25 delegates to secure the victory and there are 103 delegates at stake in KY and OR combined. Clinton would likely win KY with a margin between 25-40% and Obama will probably win Oregon with 10-25% points. If we assume that the margin will be the middle point then HRC will win KY with 32,5% and Obama OR with 17,5%.
That way Obama will get around around 47 of the 103 delegates at stake in tuesday. This means he will have secured the victory with at least 22 delegates befor PR, SD and MT.
So the victory will not be because of supers, Obama will win because he has won the most delegates, he will have the most popular votes, won most competition and most supers. But most importantly he will have the most delegates.

And Jim, WV is not interesting. It has few EV, a lot of voters there are racist (which exit polls show) and Obama doesn`t stand a chance in a state like that. But WV does not mean anything in the GE.

Amot said...

it is not contradiction - Obama has won the majority of pledged delegates!

BTW, believe it or not, Hillary finally got an endorsement! And the argument is WV! Can she score a second one?

Emit R Detsaw said...

Aunt Jean, now really. Do you feel the need to continue Clint's spin? The WV voting with a Democrat winning the WH is in the General Election. Obama can carry WV in the fall. He beat McCain last night and that was even with giving Clinton 2/3'rds of the vote.


Emit R Detsaw said...

And speaking of WV, did anyone else catch what Barnacle called the votes that Clinton is getting on Morning Joe today?

He called it the Moron Votes: He then continued to say that she is getting the uneducated and lower paid people so WV fell right into that demographic.

Pathetic! He was trying to be funny, but think that was a pretty mornic comment.


Jim said...

"So the victory will not be because of supers, "
Not Correct. You can only win with the majority of votes at the Convention whether that be 2025 ,2209 or somewhere in between
and supers will definately decide the outcome.

Aunt Jean said...

Peter then explain to me that there hasn't been a democrat that has won the WH that hasn't won WV since 1916 which is Woodrow Wilson. Get real you better think again before you discount WV. Jean

RobH said...

"Martin not only are you racist ,sexist, a bigot and a frigging jerk. But mostly you are a very ugly person. Jean"

But mostly we should just treat each other nice here, right Jean? Like you said? 'Cause it makes you mad when they call your candidate names, right? 'Cause it's not nice to call names, right?

Can you please tone it down? Please?

jpsedona said...

Aunt Jean,

you said: "Peter then explain to me that there hasn't been a democrat that has won the WH that hasn't won WV since 1916 which is Woodrow Wilson. Get real you better think again before you discount WV. Jean"

When was the last time a woman won the WH? the last time a minority candidate won the WH?

Whichever Dem candidate wins the nomination, you're charting new ground...

Aunt Jean said...

Emit I know that you obama have a hard time with this but I will explain. Yes obama had more votes than MCcain [not much but more]I'm sure that there were republican that didn't come out because it didn't matter but it still doesn't matter. National they say 28% of Clinton won't vote for Obama that they will vote for McCain. now if you look at it the real way instead of obama way you would see that . McCain won't even need the whole 28% to beat obama in WV. Jean

RobH said...

And yes, Jean, I saw Martin's comments where he called you names, and I would want him to tone it down, too.

But remember: you may not have the power to stop the baiting, but you don't have to take the bait.

I am amazed by the fundamental rules we all learned in kindergarten, but we all forget here.

1) Two wrongs don't make a right.
2) Treat others the way you'd like to be treated.

Come on, everybody.

Amot said...

I think the best way to decide Dems nominee is to hold single primary - in WV! The winner takes it all, right, Aunt Jean! But guess what - the winner in such a single primary would be ... John Edwards!!!

You, stupid woman! (Ed, you know that one)

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 1537   Newer› Newest»