Democratic Convention Watch: Open Thread

Tuesday, April 01, 2008

Open Thread

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

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

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

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

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

Thanks!

New Open Thread here
Previous Open Thread here

1514 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 600 of 1514 Newer› Newest»

jpsedona said...: Aunt Jean,

I suspect that you're correct about Elizabeth voting for Hillary; but then again John Edwards might also announce Elizabeth's support for Obama (especially if he's been bought off as you claim).

As far as "home I would leave his ass", luckily you won't have to worry about that possibility...; May 14, 2008 6:23 PM
ed iglehart said...: JP,

"The Obama campaign's timing on this stuff is perfect."

A very professional management team.
Bodes well for an Obama administration.

A good day for the A Team, and even HRC seems to be mellowing and defending BHO against the Hamas smear, telling folks it would be seriously misguided to vote McCain if Obama is the Democratic candidate...

Salaam, etc.
ed; May 14, 2008 6:25 PM
Independent Voter said...: Hey A-Jean, I'm doing well thank you. How are you doing?

I think both supporters, regardless of who got the nomination would believe that the other stole it from the other.

Does how one runs their campaign not mean anything to any of the Clinton supporters?

She had a HUGE fund-raising advantage until January of this year. ( You can verify this here. ) She put all her eggs in one basket (February 5th) and went broke. That is a sign of a bad tactical error. If this is how a campaign is going to be run, imagine how bad the country would be run.

The fact is Obama based his campaign on the rules set out by the DNC and how pledged delegates would be allocated, Hillary has also played by the rules with a different strategy that hasn't paid off. In addition to her failing to run the most effective campaign she wants to change those rules, after the fact....that is theft in its truest form when it comes to politics.

You blame the media....that argument doesn't hold either, just like I didn't let it fly the other day. The media as well as most of the DNC - including Donna Brazile - had all but coronated Senator Clinton all the way up until the Iowa Caucus.

There is so much out there on Senator Clinton that NONE of the MSM (including Fox) has even looked at. As far as I'm concerned they have gone extremely easy on her (I'm only speaking about scandals). Now as far as the media "demanding" that she drop out, I was one of those back when she lost the last February contest, but when she made it clear she was going to let it play out, I have toned down on my rhetoric. Ever since that last contest in February the media has been going ape-shit on Obama - at least until recently. But CNN - especially Wolf Blitzer (but not Jack Cafferty) - still seems to be in the tank for her.; May 14, 2008 6:26 PM
jpsedona said...: Is there any truth to the rumor that Obama is meeting with Al Gore tomorrow?

(by the way, I just started the rumor... no truth to it at all... really... ); May 14, 2008 6:28 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Aunt Jean said: "So having any woman vote for him is very offensive for me not because he's part black but because she's a woman and he's a man."
___________________

Aunt Jean-
Your true colors are now out. You are sexist! You don't like men.

Now I understand where your anger comes from and it is not a pretty picture.

Peace be with you - and farewell.; May 14, 2008 6:29 PM
Independent Voter said...: jp? Is Sedona your last name or is that where you live?; May 14, 2008 6:33 PM
Woodland Sprite said...: Wow! I guess I did ask for it when I asked for all of your opinions. Thanks for every one replying to my post last evening. I read them all. I do not have time to comment on them all but do have to point out that I laughed my head off over Aunt Jean’s mistype! If you missed it Aunt Jean said about Hillary that: “she doesn't need a man’s skirt tail to run on.” I did not know that Bill Clinton wore a skirt! But if he does I like him even more now than before! lol.

Thanks also for the issues pages where they are side by side – that will make my reading lighter 

I was quite surprised by the bigoted remark by Yamaka (“Barack Hussein Obama Jr is NOT an American name! A Kenyan Muslim Name!!”). Heck if I wanted to hear that kinda trash I can just listen to Rush Limbaugh. I mean what is an “American” name anyway? If I were going to vote for someone based on their name being a “true American name” I would be have to hope some one with a name more along the lines of Chief Running Horse was on the ballot. What a sad reason to not like someone.; May 14, 2008 6:36 PM
Independent Voter said...: woodland sprite: "I would be have to hope some one with a name more along the lines of Chief Running Horse was on the ballot. What a sad reason to not like someone."

-----

EXCELLENT POINT!!!!!!!!

Or perhaps someone with the name Mario/Maria Gonzales??????; May 14, 2008 6:39 PM
Independent Voter said...: OMG!!!!!! LOOK AT THAT CROWD IN GRAND RAPIDS!!!!!!!; May 14, 2008 6:40 PM
Aunt Jean said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 14, 2008 6:41 PM
jpsedona said...: Independent voter,

It's where I live.; May 14, 2008 6:44 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: jpsedona said...
So, who wins the evening news cylce?

Giggle.

The first evening news since Senator Clinton won in West Virginia, and the endorsement of Senator Obama by Senator Edwards is made DURING that newscast in the Eastern and Central Time Zones.

The lead story in the Mountain and Pacific Time Zones will BE Senator Edwards' endorsement.

Talk about taking the wind out of one's sails!

In real estate, the saying is location, location, location.

In politics, the saying is timing, timing, timing. And it appears that Senator Obama (and Senator Edwards) is quite an astute observer of that saying.

Mike; May 14, 2008 6:46 PM
Pablo said...: I thought that Hillary was gracious and thoughtful in her interviews today.

Aunt Jean, your last comment did seem a bit.....sexist. Perhaps you'd like to reword that.

An interesting thought. Imagine how much credit Edwards would have received if he had endorsed Obama last week before the primaries. The polls had Hillary safely in front in Indiana and within single digits in North Carolina.; May 14, 2008 6:47 PM
Independent Voter said...: Wow, John Edwards just gave a VERY nice and flattering speech about Hillary Clinton.; May 14, 2008 6:49 PM
Independent Voter said...: jp, I use to live in Phoenix but use to go up there 3-4 times a year. I Jesse still up there? My partner and I had bought a couple of his CD's. I can't remember his last name and his CD's got stolen... :(

I don't know of any place as beautiful as Sedona - it is however way to hot for my taste. I love it here in San Diego.; May 14, 2008 6:52 PM
Joshua said...: Experience, schmexperience! No one has ever been elected into the Oval Office with the experience that counts – has been POTUS before. And no one ever will. Besides, if experience is the yardstick, GWB should stay in office and never leave. Of all humans on this planet, he has the most recent relevant experience.

Aunt Jean, what does Amendment XXII of the United States Constitution say to you about “experience?”

Judgment is what counts! In the most crucial matter facing this country, Obama made the correct judgment and HRC made the wrong one. Also, even while only a candidate, the only candidate to have ever made such poor judgment that another country filled a complaint with the United Nations while they were still running for office is HRC. Iran has filed a complaint against her for threatening to OBLITERATE them.; May 14, 2008 6:53 PM
jpsedona said...: So how is Edwards' endorsement playing with Hillary's little get together with supporters at her house in Washington?; May 14, 2008 7:02 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Woodland Sprite said...
. . . I was quite surprised by the bigoted remark by Yamaka (“Barack Hussein Obama Jr is NOT an American name! A Kenyan Muslim Name!!”). Heck if I wanted to hear that kinda trash I can just listen to Rush Limbaugh. I mean what is an “American” name anyway?

Makes me wonder why Catholics are supporting Senator Clinton - after all, her middle name is 'Diane', a name that is derived from Diana, the Roman goddess of the the moon, the hunt, and chastity. At least (as far as we know, and I don't doubt that knowledge), she does have the chastity base covered herself (but definitely not Bill).

Up until at least the 1960s, Roman Catholics did not give their children names that derived from the names of Roman gods and goddesses. It was 'unChristian' to do so.

So if Catholics are now supporting people with non-Catholic names, what does that say about some of the comments about Senator Obama's name?

Mike; May 14, 2008 7:03 PM
Hippolytus said...: Brilliant speech by Edwards, with Edwards bridging the "two America-pne America" divide that has separated the different approaches of Edwards and Obama. A very nice and appropriate homage to Hillary, but a respectful nudge that the race is over. Bravo! If only Elizabeth could see the light, she could really help bring the Dems together (maybe even Aunt Jean).; May 14, 2008 7:08 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: The talking heads on TV are talking over Obama's speech.. but on www.cnn.com the LIVE STREAM is Obama speaking.; May 14, 2008 7:12 PM
Hippolytus said...: Woodland Sprite,
Just curious how you're leaning after taking everybody's input into account. Any particular line of reasoning that you find compelling?
If you prefer not to share this, I respect that, too. Thanks.; May 14, 2008 7:30 PM
Squirrel said...: Damn, missed all the fun today, but had other commitments.

Well what a great day for us all (well most of us anyway ;) ).

I note the distinct absence at the moment of one Yami guy, I guess he is hard at work trying to discover yet a new source of maths so that he can try and pretend Clinton will get the nomination!

Anyway, WV is now a forgotten victory as far as the news reports are concerned. It just goes to show what a great C-in-C Obama will make, even running the campaign cycle this late in the race.

To those who say that an Edwards endorsement earlier could have helped in WV please take into account what has been achieved today by the endorsement. Sure, maybe an earlier Edwards endorsement might have picked up an extra 2-6 delegates in WV, but Clinton would still have won it. Now though Clinton's victory yesterday is now seen as totally useless, a quirkish win, and Obama is even nearer the nomination at 2024.5.

Rock on with Obama!; May 14, 2008 7:33 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Leah yes you are right I give respect where it is deserved. Sorry Obama hasn't deserved my respect. But since we are on the subject what have you done, I think I have toned my disrespect for obama down quite a bit what have you done not a darn thing so who has more moral values.As far as Bill cheating I never said what I would do. I just believe if that is what she wants to do it's great and her business. Jean; May 14, 2008 7:39 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Mike you are so funny. LOL LOL Maybe you should ask my boyfriend I'm sure that he would get a laugh out of it. Jean; May 14, 2008 7:41 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Mike Obama has never made a judgement call on anything that affects all of America please give me a break!!!!! LOL LOL LOL LOL . Jean; May 14, 2008 7:44 PM
Woodland Sprite said...: I just listened to John Edwards talking about Hillary and Barack. Have to say that Edwards was very complimentary of both of them. I wish everyone were. I wish Edwards was on the ballor still - lol.

As for how I am leaning, I guess I still have to look into it some more and I do not have much time! (have to mail my ballot by Friday or take it to a drop off site on Saturday, Monday or Tuesday).

The pro-Obama comments in response to my questions that I read here were much more, shall I say, thoughtfully constructed. If I just went by those I would vote for Obama.

Time to go watch the news and get ready for my daughter coming home.

I'll try to see what else everyone has to say tomorrow.; May 14, 2008 7:44 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Leah one more thing before I go for awhile. I never said that she should leave him because he backed obama but out of respect he should have waited until after everyone had voted.To me he showed total disrespect for his wife!!! So what does that tell you about him??? Jean; May 14, 2008 7:47 PM
Hippolytus said...: Thanks for reply, Woodland Sprite.; May 14, 2008 7:49 PM
Woodland Sprite said...: Aunt Jean: Hope you read my earlier post that I got such a laugh out of your mis-type last evening that Hillary was not riding Bill's skirt tails. I laughed so hard picturing Bill in a skirt (even a long one that would have a train to ride on). After my day today that was a breath of fresh air I needed to smile today.

:); May 14, 2008 7:50 PM
Hippolytus said...: I wonder what Joe Biden is thinking tonight. Maybe he's the "fat lady".; May 14, 2008 7:52 PM
jpsedona said...: Here's a bizzare story... an IN superdelegate who is supporting Hillary voted for Obama...

Clinton Superdelegate Reveals He Voted for Obama; May 14, 2008 7:53 PM
JayW said...: Hey Aunty Jean...

IT'S OVER!!!!!!
OBAMA IS THE NOMINEE!!!!

Told you so earlier...
You are in more denial than HRC.

Hear that sound? No, it isn't sniper fire... it is the fat lady singing!!!!; May 14, 2008 7:53 PM
Aunt Jean said...: woodland sprite if you had read my other comment where I corrected it you wouldn't laugh I see that you are as rude as some of the other people on here. Jean; May 14, 2008 7:55 PM
jpsedona said...: Hippo,

Biden is looking for a Cabinet spot... who know's there could be a deal soon.; May 14, 2008 7:55 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Jayw the fat lady hasn't song yet and obama isn't the nominee. besides go ahead and rejoice now because come nov. you and the rest will be crying if he gets it because He won't win . Jean; May 14, 2008 7:57 PM
Hippolytus said...: Biden would make a great Sec of State.
I also wonder why Jim Webb hasn't come out for Obama. Not helping his VP chances. Not exactly a profile in courage; I'm a little disappointed in him.; May 14, 2008 7:59 PM
Aunt Jean said...: woodland sprite yes when you got on here they were toned down but go back and read some of the others and you will see what I mean. I'm not saying that all obama supporters or jerks some of them are very nice but there are quite a few that are really terrible people and like to start trouble. Jean; May 14, 2008 8:00 PM
jpsedona said...: Aunt Jean,

One thing is for certain, whoever loses the Dem nomination won't hava a chance to win or lose in the Fall. Start praying for a miracle if you want to see Hillary in the Fall... maybe a Rev. Wright cable show?; May 14, 2008 8:04 PM
Martin said...: Crazy Aunt Jean: "I think I have toned my disrespect for obama down quite a bit"

Uh huh. Earlier today you said Obama wants to destroy America, so shut your filthy lying mouth.; May 14, 2008 8:05 PM
Hippolytus said...: Aunt Jean said...

"woodland sprite if you had read my other comment where I corrected it you wouldn't laugh I see that you are as rude as some of the other people on here. Jean"

Aunt Jean, Woodland Sprite was laughing with you, not at you. You are so self-righteous that you can't tell the difference. Lighten up, for heaven's sake.; May 14, 2008 8:06 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Dave I'm going to have to get back to you on that but I will ok. I have to go help my brother in law connect the rv. My sister can't help because she broke her ankle. Jean; May 14, 2008 8:07 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Martin I wasn't really trying to make fun of obama I was stating a fact the way I really believe. So do you know him well enough to say that he won't I don't think so all you can go by is how you think or what you believe. Jean; May 14, 2008 8:10 PM
jpsedona said...: Daniel Moynihan, who bequeathed his Senate to Hillary, had a number of great sayings. Reading Aunt Jean's posts made me think of a few favorites...

In a letter to Richard Nixon, he said "The issue of race could benefit from a period of benign neglect."

Related to politics, he said "No one is innocent after the experience of governing. But not everyone is guilty."

And in an interesting parallel to comments on this blog... "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"; May 14, 2008 8:15 PM
jpsedona said...: Gee, I hope someone checks on Yam, he could be drowning in his sorrows...; May 14, 2008 8:26 PM
Hippolytus said...: Super endorsements since May 12:
Obama - 15, Clinton - 1. This keeps getting by the day!; May 14, 2008 8:26 PM
Woodland Sprite said...: Aunt Jean said...
woodland sprite if you had read my other comment where I corrected it you wouldn't laugh I see that you are as rude as some of the other people on here. Jean

======

Aunt Jean: Lighten up a bit - I read the other post but you have to admit that by mistyping one letter - making "shirt tails" into "skirt tails" made the statement amusing in a weird visual sort of way....; May 14, 2008 8:31 PM
Yamaka said...: "Gee, I hope someone checks on Yam, he could be drowning in his sorrows..."

jp:

I am just going into my pool for a backstroke!

Fine, with his momentum, money and Edwards endorsement, can BHO - the least vetted, least experienced, and very risky candidate in recent memory - win KY and PR?

That would be awesome!

That won't happen, for sure.

:-); May 14, 2008 8:44 PM
Hippolytus said...: Woodland Sprite,
Want an amusing visual? Imagine Bill riding Hillary's shirt tails, if their situations were reversed. He'd have a hand under each breast, and a big smile on his face! Too funny.; May 14, 2008 8:45 PM
Independent Voter said...: You know what Aunt Jean, NOW I understand why liberals were OUTRAGED about Hillary going on Bill O'Really's (yes I know it is O'Reilly) show. By going on his show she shows legitimacy to bigots.

Watch this, especially beginning at the 1:45 mark, and tell me Bill O'Really isn't a bigot? NEVER NEVER NEVER did I EVER hear Wright speaking as horrible things as O'Really did in this clip. Yet Obama wasn't in the pews every Sunday, and didn't hear all the controversial things that Wright had said. Wright never suggested whites to be lynched or anything of the sort. Yet Clinton WILLINGLY went onto a pseudo journalists show which gave this person legitimacy even though she KNEW he was a bigot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CowWSNO6v30; May 14, 2008 8:45 PM
jpsedona said...: Yam,

I think that Obama has a chance in PR. I think that there's little polling data so far and the demographics there are different than Hispanics with Mexican ties. There's a large PR population in NY and it 'should' help her... but I think it could be much closer than pundits might think.

ps... backstroke was good line!; May 14, 2008 8:50 PM
Independent Voter said...: hipp, I could be REALLY mean because I don't think he'd be smiling.; May 14, 2008 8:51 PM
Oregon Dem said...: Just got home from work and heard on the radio that Edwards has endorsed Obama.

As most of you know I was an Edwards supporter until he dropped out, so now I feel good about moving to Obama since then.

I will read your posts and be back in a bit.

Later; May 14, 2008 8:51 PM
Hippolytus said...: Independent voter said...

"hipp, I could be REALLY mean because I don't think he'd be smiling."

You may be right. Maybe Obama could settle this thing by agreeing to put Bill in charge of the internship program. Nah, never mind, Obama has higher standards than that.; May 14, 2008 8:57 PM
Independent Voter said...: LOL hipp, I wasn't going to go there.....LOL....but you caught the gist of it...; May 14, 2008 9:00 PM
Independent Voter said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 14, 2008 9:01 PM
Independent Voter said...: WOW!!!!!!!!!! Was Keith Olberman on fire tonight. Great Special Comment regarding Bush giving up Golf as his sacrifice for the Iraq war.; May 14, 2008 9:08 PM
Joshua said...: Aunt Jean, I have your number. You admit that you are unmarried. I’ve got you pegged. And no, you do not have a boyfriend. Trust me on this. One thing I understand is human psyche, and I have your number.; May 14, 2008 9:10 PM
dsimon said...: Yamaka: Do you know that if we had used the GE Methodology HRC has 294 EVs to BHO's 213 (Remember 270 is the Hurdle)? She has already WON!

In my mind GE Methodology is the most relevant to the Primary Process.

I am loathe to say an argument is completely ridiculous, but this one qualifies for four reasons.

1. The electoral vote model is simply not the one we have for the Democratic primary, much as some would wish it to be so. Period.

2. If we had a winner-take-all system in place, the campaigns would been run completely differently, so we simply can't know what the outcome would have been. Therefore it's fallacious to just assume that each candidate would win the states they won with the present system in place.

3. The winner-take-all system is not representative of the voters' preferences. In fact, it runs completely against the Clinton campaign's drumbeat to count the "popular vote." A winner-take-all system would allow allocate 100% of a state's or district's delegates to the person who got 50% + 1 of the vote. That result does not reflect the popular vote; it warps it even more than the current delegate system does.

If the Clinton camp wants to argue that the system should be about something other than delegates (which is the process we have, so I think considering any other systems are moot anyway), they can't have it both ways: they can't say "count the popular vote" and at the same time say "it's electoral college votes that should count, even though they don't reflect the popular vote."

4. The "electoral vote" argument is another example of the improper extrapolation of primary contests to the general election. We've been over and over this point: primary results are not predictive of general election results because the opponent will be different. Obama obviously will win NY and CA against McCain, so it makes no sense to "award" these states' "electoral votes" to Clinton in the primary.

If the argument is that Clinton gets more electoral votes against McCain than Obama does, then the place to start the analysis would be head-to-head polling state by state of each candidate against McCain, not Clinton and Obama against each other.

Can we please put this puppy to bed now?; May 14, 2008 9:12 PM
countjellybean said...: Based on Hillary Clinton's comments today, I believe that she will not accept anything less than a 79-0 split of the Michigan pledged delegates.

.....

woodland sprite, welcome. There is a link near the top of the page that will take you to previous Open Threads. After about 1200 posts, the DCW folks close down the thread and start a new one, and we are currently on our fifth thread.; May 14, 2008 9:12 PM
Oregon Dem said...: Independent Voter:

I only heard part of Keith "special comment" Did Bush really say that he had to give up golf to show to the mothers of dead soldiers (my words) that he was taking their sacrafice seriously?

I will have to tune in again when it is rebroadcast in an hour.

Aunt Jean: Everyone is not against you here. I read your post about Hillary not riding on Bill's skirt tails and laughed myself - hey the H and the K key can get interchanged easy. It was an interesting visual for me since one year back in the 90s for Halloween I dressed up as Bill and my wife as Hillary (masks and all). My mental image was what we would have looked like if I had gone as Hillary and she had gone as Bill.....

Woodland Sprite: I have supported Obama since Edwards left the race. I could tell you why but I would be as wordy (or more so than) Mike. I agree that you should look at the issues and decide. There is an NPR "quiz" you can take that asks qustions like: "Which of the following four statements do you agree with most about Health Care?" Then you pick one. It asks about 15 questions and then tells you when you are done how many issues you agree with each candidate's policy on those issues.

In Oregon you can get to the test by going to OPB's website - sorry do not have the exact link but I am sure you can find it.

Where do you live in Oregon? I am in Hoor River Valley.; May 14, 2008 9:17 PM
suzihussein22 said...: Woodland Sprite(joni)-Hi. It's nice to meet you. I am 33, married woman for 12 yrs with 2 kids. I come from a college-educated family. I am working-class. My roots come from Appalachia. I'm posting these "demographics" since you said so much about yourself. I'm Dem. and my husband is Ind. We have both been supporting Obama. Why?

He has run an organized, fiscally responsible campaign. He has more direct legislative experience.I've been reading articles from Europe, UK, Australia, and Asia. The majority of them have been more positively receptive to fresh leadership in the USA by Obama. The Dems Abroad have been more in favor of Obama. They haven't been in the middle of the media bias of either candidate as much as we are here. He hasn't implied preference to a Rep. over his Dem. rival. He has been able to get above the name recognition HRC has because of WC. I was actually very surprised that my husband and I agree on a candidate. We sometimes don't even let each other know who we're voting on because we believe so strongly about Constitutional rights. These aren't so much stats as personal opinions. I started off with researching votesmart.gov to compare their records and speeches. Yes, they are just words, but that is what Congress uses to help govern this country. I've posted before that I'm not trying to change anybody's mind and I've been trying to stay neutral, but I felt compelled to state my stance. So this is my 2 cents worth.

ed iglehart-Have you ever noticed a Bean Castle on Loch Ness? I don't know if that's the actual title, but it's my roots to being Scottish. Just a wee bit curious. :) Thanks.

Somebody on HuffPost tried to claim that pro-life supporters wouldn't possibly support pro-choice Dem., well pigs are about to fly...again, they put all their eggs in one basket, you get the point. :)

Bob in Vancouver- Not to be black-and-white, but couldn't compromising with FL and MI set a precedent for future primaries? I read some websites from FL and they didn't sound overwhelmingly disenfranchised like other states have reported. I don't know about MI. I can see both sides. Maybe they could be seated except for pledging for the pres. nom. so they could still vote on the rest of the agenda. These are just opinions.

Somebody mentioned Dem. haven't won WV since 1916. First of all, I think this primary has put more states into play. Secondly, Mrs. Wilson ran the admin. for the last 16 months of Wilson' term, so we have had a female POTUS. :)

AP-The trend of Dem. winning traditional Rep. congressional seats is "disturbing." LOL Why would the media report it as disturbing? Oh, that's right, because they're not really objective.:)

Mrs. McCain had to sell $2 million in mutual funds connected to Sudan to avoid a future conflict of interest.

Houston Chronicle-Somebody mentioned buying the race. I just learned this term yesterday. Street money-paying somebody to get people to vote. This as opposed to grass-roots volunteers. Those pesky activists are at it again, eh? :); May 14, 2008 9:23 PM
Independent Voter said...: Oregon Dem, I have a question for you (and/or anyone else from Oregon). When does Oregon normally announce their results? Will they announce them on Tuesday or will they wait until Wednesday?

Do you know if they are counting them as they come in or are they waiting until they have all been received before sorting or counting the actual votes?

I'm just curious.; May 14, 2008 9:25 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: softspoken22 -

Yep - Hillary used 'street money' down here in Texas to buy votes!

Here's the article:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2015307/posts

.; May 14, 2008 9:39 PM
Oregon Dem said...: Independent Voter:

Oregon will start announcing votes shortly after 8 pm on the 12th. To be honest I am not sure if they start counting before 8 pm (since they would have had some for up to two and a half weeks), but I doubt it as those results might inadvertantly leak out and we have party representatives overseeing the counting of the ballots.

Votes usually come in pretty quickly since county election divisions do not have to wait until the ballot boxes are physically brought to the county elections center to be read.

We use a paper ballot where one fills in the circle next to the candidate (or position on a "for / against" ballot item). So the machines that tally the vote operate very quickly and results start pouring in shortly after 8 pm.

The elections division in the SofS office posts regularly throughout the night and the Portland paper posts results rapidly as well. If you want the SofS office go to www.oregon.gov and find the elections division you should get there pretty easy. The Oregonian's website is www.oregonlive.com and there should be a direct link from the homepage (on the 12th).; May 14, 2008 9:41 PM
JayW said...: AUNTY JEAN...

If you cant see Obama is the nominee you must be a short bus kid.

I'll bet any amount of money that your toothless family has saved up and cover any bet that you want to make regarding HRC getting the nomination.

It is over... I hear you singing right now... sing fat lady (with cats in the chorus) sing!!!

Obama 08

HRC NEVER!!!!!

PS... Bill would never have gotten caught if she was doing the white house laundry like she should have been. Couldn't she get the stains out of Monica's dress in time?

PPS... Aunty Jean, how are you at laundry?; May 14, 2008 9:45 PM
Independent Voter said...: Aunt Jean, you said: ""there hasn't been a democrat that has won the WH that hasn't won WV since 1916 which is Woodrow Wilson"

-------

That is a false statement. Jimmy Carter lost West Virginia in 1976, yet still went on to win the General Election. Hillary's best friend Mark Penn confirms this here

you can also confirm it here

In fact he lost West Virginia in the primary to KKK member Robert Byrd (89%) and George Wallace (11%). Carter received 0% in the 1976 primary. Yet Carter was able to come back and win in the general election.; May 14, 2008 9:51 PM
RobH said...: Hippolytus @7:59:

Don't be disappointed in Webb. The reason he hasn't endorsed is he is number one in line for VP, and an endorsement followed by a VP offer would be seen as some quid pro quo.

The talking heads tonight were wondering if Edwards coould be a VP candidate. For the exact reason above re Webb, I believe that he Edwards is NOT high on the VP list.; May 14, 2008 9:51 PM
Independent Voter said...: jayw,

Please don't. I know that you don't care for Aunt Jean, but it does no good to insult people.

I am 100% if not 1000% behind Obama, but it does him no good when his supporters are insulting. Eventually Obama is going to need as many people behind his candidacy as possible. And the only thing insulting people does is push them further and further away.; May 14, 2008 9:55 PM
RobH said...: Jim @ 6:18,

I am completely heartened (and frankly a little surprised (happily)) that if O gets the nod, you'll vote for him. That's great.

The think is, you won't be in a group labelled 'Losers for Obama'
'cause he's our nest Pres, and I don't hink it's going to be close.

IMHO EVERYBODY continues to underestimate this man and this campaign! Teflon? Enough to make Reagan proud. Savvy? Check tonights masterful stagecraft re timing the endorsement to simply ERASE the WV win.

Just keep underestimating, that's all I ask.; May 14, 2008 9:56 PM
Independent Voter said...: Thanks Oregon Dem.

I greatly appreciate your input. BTY, I'm assuming you meant the 20th since today is the 14th...LOL; May 14, 2008 9:57 PM
suzihussein22 said...: Politico-http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10314.html

Bush is fear-mongering for McCain. Are people going to fall for that?

Edwards is going to be in the doghouse tonight. :) I still have my concerns about the Dem.'s healthcare plans. I don't know how it solves insurance reform. I would be more supportive of Mrs. Edwards views if I didn't know she's got a better insurance plan than average people. I do have sympathy for her uphill battle though.; May 14, 2008 10:07 PM
Hippolytus said...: RobH said...

"Hippolytus @7:59:

Don't be disappointed in Webb. The reason he hasn't endorsed is he is number one in line for VP, and an endorsement followed by a VP offer would be seen as some quid pro quo."

That's as good an explanation as any, RobH. I didn't think of that, and you make a good point. Still, I would have been happier with Webb if he had announced before or just after the VA primary. Then, he could be sitting in a position similar to the one that Claire McCaskill is in, as an ardent supporter. In any event, it doesn't matter very much, at this point.; May 14, 2008 10:12 PM
Emit R Detsaw said...: The Obama Super Delegate delivery.

Try to trickle out no more than 6 a day. That way all of the egos get to have their moment in the spotlight.

Of course the bigger names will get prime spotlights like Edwards tonight.

;o); May 14, 2008 10:20 PM
Woodland Sprite said...: You guys are prolific - I just saw that there were thousands of posts in old threads and believe me I am not going to read them all!

Softspoken:

Thanks for your welcome and your thoughts on why to support Obama. I appreciate hearing about your background that makes a difference. I must say that I have been an independent voter (which means we do not get to vote in primaries in Oregon) probably because I am a little lazy when it comes to politics and also I think local issues are pretty darn important in my more every day life.

Oregon Dem:

Thanks I went to the OPB site and found the questions to help you figure out who you are most aligned with. It was real close for me between Obama and Clinton...

Not sure I want to say exactly where I live but since you said "Hoor River Valley" (ps you mistyped just like Aunt Jean! :) ) I would assume that means the "Hood River Valley" rather than the town of Hood River proper or a place that does not exist in Oregon.... If that is the case if you left your house and drove south on 35 to the intersection of 26 and went west you would have driven further on 35 then you did on 26 when you got to my home...

Oh and for both Independent Voter and you. The Oregon primary count is on the 20th though you may have voted on the 12th...

;-)

MY ballot is out of the envelope....
the suspense begins - lol; May 14, 2008 10:34 PM
Hippolytus said...: Woodland Sprite says:
"MY ballot is out of the envelope....
the suspense begins - lol"

Barack gives you this singing telegram..."Let it be me..."; May 14, 2008 10:41 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Dave I will admit that they was talking about bad things on Obama for about 2 weeks wow but they was still dogging Hillary. I do blame the media more than I do obama. Yes I so agree her campaign was not ran very well and I do believe that was a her fault because she didn't correct it.Does that have an effect are me thinking that she is the better one no. As far as Wright the last couple of speeches he gave was horrible and you say they weren't that bad well I can't believe you said that. Also you can't convince me that Obama hasn't heard all his speeches and agrees with him on some things. Even if he didn't agree with any of the bad things he said why would he sit there for so many years and listen to it that's what gets me.Once again is there no other great churchs that he could have gone to. Or at the very least talk to him. As far as being a bigot yes I agree that it is wrong maybe she was trying to get him to change his mine or maybe she just didn't realize that he was that big of a bigot everyone looks for the bad in people. [even myself].I do put a foot forward sometimes to be fair. also There are some on here that are fair but there are also a lot that is totally unfair. As far as scandle there is so much going around that can't be proven but is still believed to be true. Don't you think that if they had merit that the media would have already brung it up. When Hillary says it's over that will be when it's over.Not when Obama supporters and the media says it's over. Jean; May 14, 2008 10:45 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Leah THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT THE WAY YOU PUT BS ON THIS BLOG ABOUT HILLARY DO YOU HAVE TO ALWAYS MAKE SLY, RUDE, AND UNTRUE REMARKS ABOUT HILLARY. HERE YOU ARE SUPPOSE TO BE BETTER THAN THAT. IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU DON'T TAKE YOUR RELIGION VERY SERIOUSLY OR YOU WOULDN'T SAY SUCH UGLY THINGS.DOES IT GIVE YOU A THRILL TO INSULT NOT ONLY HILLARY BUT ME.I'M SICK OF IT PLEASE STOP AND I MEAN IT.iF YOU THINK THAT OBAMA HASN'T DONE INAPPROPRIATE YOU ARE NOT AS SMART AS YOU THINK YOU ARE. JEAN; May 14, 2008 11:05 PM
Richard said...: Woodland Sprite: Welcome. I'm glad to see your radar for bigots and racists is in tune. Since you probably haven't had time to read back through all the previous threads and the worst of the comments have been deleted anyway, I will save you some time and clue you in that Jim is also a racist who likes to call Senator Obama a zebra and Aunt Jean has admitted she's a racist (though she has admittedly toned down her racist language of late).; May 14, 2008 11:06 PM
tmess2 said...: Averaging 6 a day would give Senator Obama another 110 unpledged delegates supporting him by the close of the polls on June 3rd.

Using very conservative estimates, if you estimate that he will get at least 16 from Kentucky, 24 from Oregon, 16 from Puerto Rico, 6 from Montana, and 6 from South Dakota, that would put him in the neighborhood of 2,015 on June 3rd.

If the RBC seats the full delegation from Michigan and Florida "as is" (with 55 uncommitted), he would be in the area of 2140.

Obviously, the numbers work out a little better if he gets the 55 or 59 delegates from Michigan, but in either case, he would realistically be in a position to have enough delegates to get the nomination by June 6th. The goal is obviously to improve on the numbers in the primary states so that he is actually put over the top by voters rather than the movement from the unpledged delegates.; May 14, 2008 11:08 PM
Hippolytus said...: Can't we all get along?
Signed,
Rodney King

"Join the force, Jean."
Signed, Obama-Wan Kenobi; May 14, 2008 11:13 PM
Woodland Sprite said...: LOL @ Hippo

I actually have gotten two calls on my answering machine (obviously both recorded messages) The first was from Chelsey Clinton telling me why I should vote and vote for Hillary. The one today was from Obama asking me to vote, and he did not sing ;-)

Aunt Jean:

That was a very thoughtful response. The press does like a story doesn't it. My feeling is the press would do anything to keep this fight amongst going amongst democrats going as long as possible. What is the saying about selling newspapers? I know it is not suspense sells newspapers but it is something like that.

As far as his pastor goes I do have to say I do not always agree with my Minister. She has some great teachings and great thoughts on how we should live our lives and incorporate our faith into our daily existence. I know some things she says she says out of need rather than intellectual belief though.

That is where it is problematic for me.

Oh darn lets not introduce religion into politics.

I have marked my ballot and now have to get some laundry done before it gets to late, talk with my daughter and veg out a bit before I have to go to sleep.

Good night all - tis a pleasure.; May 14, 2008 11:24 PM
Aunt Jean said...: woodland spite I owe you an apology I took what you said about me the wrong way but if you had been listening to a few bloggers I don't need to say names you might be able to understand why I would take it the wrong way. Jean; May 14, 2008 11:29 PM
Hippolytus said...: "May the farce be with you."
Signed,
Hillary; May 14, 2008 11:31 PM
Independent Voter said...: Hi Jean, welcome back, I'm sorry to hear about your sister. I hope things are alright.

You said, "Also you can't convince me that Obama hasn't heard all his speeches and agrees with him on some things". I never said nor has Obama said he hasn't heard any of his speeches, he said he has not heard all of them.

As far as him staying in the church for 20 years (it was actually 17 years), I don't know, maybe he enjoyed the fellowship? Perhaps he saw the good that the CHURCH did over the 17 years that he attended, such as community service, working with AIDS patients, etc. For what it matters there could be a whole host of reasons why he would stay. You also have to remember that Wright is the one that "introduced him to Christ". (I put it in quotes, because I don't buy into theology).

I never said that he doesn't believe some of the things that Wright has stated in the past, however he has also stated that he has confronted him on some controversial issues in the past. As far as the GD America, Chickens, AIDS/government, he had not heard them. He even came out and said he was offended by the remarks. If he wasn't in the pews those days (as his schedule has proven that he wasn't) how is he supposed to know they were spoken? Answer, he didn't know until the media blew it out of proportion.

As far as other great churches? I have no clue....I have no idea, but are you telling me that the 8,000+ members should have gotten up and walked out after all the good the church has done?

As far as the bigotry, no, I don't buy it. The incident took place February 12. Bill O'Really is a jerk and a MAJOR bigot, this has been known for years upon years. She has forgotten why Fox was brought into existence in the first place. Fox was started to attack the Clinton's back in the 90's. They have attacked EVERY "liberal" policy at every turn ranging from Affirmative Action to same-sex marriage, the list goes on.

I agree with you as far as, it will be over when Hillary says it is over for her campaign. I have NO problem with that. As long as she doesn't do more damage to the party.

Jean as far as, if they had merit regarding Clinton scandals....the MSM isn't reporting ANYTHING on them.

Here are just a few that has NEVER been reported on any of the tv news channels:

Hillary Defends Child Rapist, yet touts that she has always been a champion for children's rights.

Hillary Clinton accepts and refuses to return campaign donations from a firm that has an unusual amount of sexual harassment in the workplace.

Why has there been no reporting that one of her closest advisers FINANCED their New York home because they couldn't secure a bank loan on their own merits?

Why has there been no reporting that Mark Penn another Hillary adviser works for the same lobbying firm as John McCains chief strategist Charlie Black?
Who do you think benefits the most out of that arrangement if Hillary gets the nod? Of course the LOBBYISTS!

I have NEVER heard any of this reported by the MSM and we NEVER will.....perhaps the "October" surprise that we are all waiting for?; May 14, 2008 11:35 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Pablo as usual people take what I say wrong. What I was talking about is there are still a lot of men that think wemon are the weaker sex [please don't try and sell me that it isn't true] So I believe that they would rather vote for obama than a woman. Both parties has played the race and gender card but everyone here thinks that only Hillary has played it.Now don't think that it is the only reason that I voted for Hillary I do believe that she would be the best choise.Jean; May 14, 2008 11:36 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Aunt Jean said...
Yes I so agree her campaign was not ran very well and I do believe that was a her fault because she didn't correct it.Does that have an effect are me thinking that she is the better one no.

Aunt Jean,

And you don't think the way the campaign is run is no reflection on how a candidate will run their administration? Do you think that if a candidate makes poor decisions in hiring campaign staff, they will not make the same type of personnel decisions after elected?

By poor decisions in hiring campaign staff, Senator Clinton hired people who were loyal. Mark Penn, for example. He was the chief strategist - the one who was in charge of plotting where she should campaign, where she didn't need to campaign because she had sufficient support, etc. To figure out the strategy of the campaign, it helps to know the rules that you are operating under.

Mark Penn had a 27-state strategy, because he thought the nomination would be sewn up the day after Super Tuesday. He also thought that the Democratic nomination process was a winner take all system - if you get one more vote than any other candidate, you got all the delegates.

Wrong. The Democratic Party requires that if a candidate gets 15% of the vote, they get at least one delegate, and has specific rules on how the delegate split is determined. The only way for one delegate to get all the delegates is if only one candidate gets more than 15% of the vote.

If Penn didn't know how delegates were selected, how could he plan the strategy for winning the campaign???

As far as Wright the last couple of speeches he gave was horrible and you say they weren't that bad . . . .

The speeches given by Reverend Wright in the last month were speeches, not sermons. The snippets (taken out of context) that you kept hearing in the media were from sermons. Did you listen to those sermons in total, hearing what was said before and after the snippet the media pushed forward?

I seriously doubt it. I hope that you are intelligent enough to know that when a sentence, a phrase, a paragraph is taken out of context, it can sound entirely opposite from when left in context.

In 2004, I'm sure you kept hearing the recording of Senator Kerry stating "I was for it before I was against it." What you didn't hear was that he explained that by the time it reached the floor of the Senate, it had been amended so much that the bill was not near the same as when he first supported it - in fact it was a bill that he could no longer support.

Context and an understanding of circumstances and surrounding events are very important. If something is taken out of context, the whole meaning of the comment can be, and usually is, twisted. Unless you heard the entire sermon the snippets were taken from, then you cannot comment on what they meant, as you have no basis for determining what they meant.

As to the speeches that Reverend Wright made in late April and early May, those cannot be defended. However, they were not given from the pulpit, and were not being given as sermons. Also remember that those speeches were given AFTER Reverend Wright had retired from the pulpit, were not given in a church, and that Senator Obama was NOT in attendance when those speeches were given.

Perspective and keeping things in context are very important in determining what actually was said. And sometimes, you'll find that when you have the full perspective and the full context, what you thought originally just may not be what actually was said or what happened.

Mike; May 14, 2008 11:37 PM
Independent Voter said...: Something I forgot to address. You said they dogged Obama for 2 weeks? WRONG. They started dogging OBAMA the friday before the March 4th Primary in OH and TX and kept repeating it on a loop for 3 weeks. And then they started the same crap a couple weeks ago beginning with the ABC "Debate" and then returned to the exact same BS when Wright wouldn't go away.

The ONLY thing they attacked Clinton on was her Bosnia "misspeak"/LIE - and the preposterous "gas tax holiday" scheme.; May 14, 2008 11:39 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Richard I've never said that I was a racist and I've also said that the reason I didn't or won't vote for obama wasn't because he was black part black or whatever. I said that I won't vote for him because I didn't trust him. At least tell the truth instead of LIES. Jean; May 14, 2008 11:40 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Dave I'm not calling you a lair but you believe one thing and I believe something about the media. So lets agree to diagree. Jean; May 14, 2008 11:42 PM
Kujo said...: In reading for the last few weeks to Aunt Jean and Yamaka I have come to the realization that they must have received a different copy of the rule book for this primary. Here is an exerpt from the their rule book.

In order to win the DNC Party nomination, the DNC will run primaries and caucus's to determine who the nominee will be. The winner will be determined by the following.

1. Who has the most delegates after all contests are completed.

2. Who has the most delegates counting any and all primary elections even if they are not sactioned by the DNC.

2. Who has the most popular vote after all contests are completed.

3. Who has the most popular vote including results from any contest not sanctioned by the DNC.

4. Who is winning the electoral vote count after the all contests are completed.

5. Who is winning the most BIG states after all the contests are completed.

6. Who was winning in the polls before the whole primary season began.

7. Who wears the ugliest pant suits during a primary season.

8. Who has more doners who gave money before the primary season began.

9. Who has once lived in the White House (not a white house).

10. Who can be leading in a head to head poll during the first week of 2008.

For clinton to be the nominee, she needs only to have one one of the 10. For Obama to be the nominee he needs to win 10 out of 10.; May 14, 2008 11:44 PM
Independent Voter said...: Aunt Jean, I know you didn't call me a liar. And I appreciate that, as I have never called you a liar either. I think since our apologies last week we have been quite cordial :)

I will agree to disagree with you on the media issue. :)

And no, I for one do not recall you ever saying that you were racist.; May 14, 2008 11:51 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Dave I spent 3 months in Phoenix really seen some nice places and took quite a few pictures but it was over 20 years ago. Jean; May 14, 2008 11:51 PM
Hippolytus said...: The various metrics cited by Kujo remind me of the Monty Python movie (I think it was Life of Brian), where one knight serially dismembers another knight. When the dismembered knight has only a head left, he says: "Why don't it call it a draw?"
lol ;); May 14, 2008 11:56 PM
Woodland Sprite said...: Aunt Jean. No need to apologize heck a lot of times the meaning of a quick e-mail get misinterpreted. I just thought of a mental picture of Bill in a skirt and Hillary riding it. Twas nothing about you at all.

I did take insult at whoever it was that said his mental picture was Bill riding Hillary's skirt while grasping her breats - that was RUDE! But I did laugh as well at Oregon Dems saying he would have looked funny if he had gone to his Halloween party dressed as Hillary and his wife was Bill instead of the other way around.

Have to go move the wash into the dryer in a few. Doubt I will be back more tonight but maybe.

I still feel Edward's speech was very well done tonight but there have been few comments about that.; May 14, 2008 11:57 PM
Yamaka said...: Hello Democrats, Good Evening.

Clearly this is the day for BHO, who got the Mother Of All endorsements from Edwards! This calls for celebration!!

Here is another Satirical Conversation with Senator BHO Jr. TEnjoy!

--Hello Senator, Assalamu Alaikum. How are you Sir? Must be in a terrific mood! Edwards is in your bag!!

--Yes, Yes, Yamaka. It is a wonderful day in Obama Land! I said he is the most influential figure in American politics today! He will get me all the blue collar Whites, as I did with Richardson, who will deliver all the Latinos to me. You see, Yamaka I have tons and tons of money - I can go and get anyone in America, including ALL the voters, leaders, politicians everybody you can think of. This is the power of money. Hi....Hi...Ha...Ha.. Allahu Akbar.

--Wonderful Senator. But you know that Edwards could not deliver SC or NC in 2004, one of the reasons why Kerry lost the previous GE, and he could NOT win his own birth place SC in Jan this year in the Primary. What gives you any idea why or how Edwards would be an asset to your Campaign? The same thing you did with Richardson. He could not win the NM in the Primary. You bought him into your bag. All looks to me as a waste of money, and just theatrical rather than anything substantive. What say you, Sir?

--Yama, now I am getting angry at you! Yes, what we do is just "appearance" and in a way "swift-boating" Hillary at this time. To-day, we delayed Ed's plane such that he could come to the podium when the prime time news was on the air about Hillary's WV blowout victory, and Bhoooom we swift-boated her, stole her thunder! Voila.. Waalah. How timely his appearance was! This is our new politics, of "uniting" people and changing the Washington culture! We are very proud of what we do these days.

You talk to my Children, they all believe that Ed's 32 delegates are in our bag. It is impossible. Probably, we may get a maximum of 16, not more than that! But we gave an impression that the whole Primary Process is already over, and I am the Nominee!

You see, Yama (the God of Death) we live in a land of fantasy and "make-believe" world. That's what I like and my Children like the most. We are not interested in REALITY - we cannot handle any truth!

You see, Yama, I am the least vetted, least experienced and most risky under the whole Sun among the three left in the race. But I and my Children give "an impression" that I am the most successful and able person in entire America, why the whole World. That's our strategy and is clearly working!

But, Yama, to tell you the truth: I am really shivering in my shoes. It appears Hillary is going to go all the way to the Convention - I am leading now by about 50 total delegates, and she is leading in Popular Votes. Next week, things could change still further in her favor. What am I going to do? I may finish the Primary with a small bang in MT and SD. But still the Nomination needs lot more of SDs.

She has a winning Math to the Nomination:

1910 + 102 + 200 = 2212 a few over the Real Hurdle of 2210.

What I worry a lot is what if the SDs move en mass towards Hillary soon after the PR victory, which I fear will be a blowout! Plus, more and more people think about me they think I am just an One Trick Pony, who can get only the Black Voters, not the working White Americans, the backbone of this Country. Surely, I am not running as a Black President, for sure! Yama, What should I do?

-- Senator, you are on a roll. Keep doing what you do. Buy every single politician in the Country and show the electorate that YOU ARE the man of the year, therefore deserve to be Nominated. Bye, Senator, Insha Allah, I will see you again soon.

-- Bye Yama. Allahu Akbar Mohammed rasoolilahi Allahu Akbar.

_______________________________

Folks, Good Night.

:-); May 15, 2008 12:07 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Hipp and Dave quite insulting Bil he was a great president.Even if he did sleep around. Jean; May 15, 2008 12:10 AM
Hippolytus said...: Bill Clinton was a great President, who could have been an even greater one, had he not squandered his political capital by diverting his and Congress' attention to pressing problems due to his compulsive womanizing. He has further stained his legacy (no pun intended) by engaging in the kind of dirty politics (eg, South Carolina) against his former followers. He also perjured himself, which makes him a demonstrable liar. He has diminished himself by his conduct in office and in this campaign, and deserves all the ridicule he receives.
That being said, I apologize to Woodland Sprite and anyone else who takes offense at what I intended as as a good-natured ribbing of Bill riding Hillary's skirt tails. It was not meant to be sexist or directed at Hillary, but at Bill Clinton, for all the reasons I just gave. He will never be the icon in the Democratic Party that he was before this election, and it didn't need to be that way.; May 15, 2008 12:27 AM
November Politics said...: Hello folks, I've been following this thread for about five days now and can no longer remain in silence.

Regarding Yam's post (May 15, 2008 12:07 AM):

"they all believe that Ed's 32 delegates are in our bag. It is impossible. Probably, we may get a maximum of 16, not more than that!"

Even after the endorsement, how can you possibly still think he will get half of Edward's delegates AT MOST?

"What I worry a lot is what if the SDs move en mass towards Hillary soon after the PR victory"

First you were claiming after Hillary Clinton's huge win in WV, the SDs would move en mass towards her and now you are claiming theyll move en mass towards her after PR? Make up your mind!

Take care :); May 15, 2008 12:29 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Dave : 1st she was a court appointed lawyer so she had to defenf him

2nd; It hasn't been peoven yet besides obama didn't return all the monet rezko gave him

3 rd So what's the big deal about that Obama bought a house and lot for way under price fron a unsavory person.

4 I can't anwer this one because I've never heard it. Jean; May 15, 2008 12:33 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Well folks have agood night this gal is headed for bed I am tires long few days. Jean; May 15, 2008 12:35 AM
Woodland Sprite said...: Yamaka. Are you a writer for Saturday Night Live trying to test out lines on this web page???

If so let me give you my input on that mythical converastion between you and Obama. It was neither clever or funny or anything. It was actually a waste of time for me to even read. Just like a waste of time to watch that show on TV.

I am sorry to be so blunt, but dang when you talk about not wanting to vote for someone because they do not have an "American" name and do not realize that none of us have "American" names and, as far as I know, no one on the ballot this fall will be named "Running Horse" "Chief Seattle" or "Geronimo" Just a few real "American" names.

Your name, whatever it is is just as less an "American" name as Hillary's or Barack's.

Please feel free to show your ardent support for your candidate but please do not type bigoted and / or rude comments that I have to see.

Aunt Jean: I have only been here for a few days but I see what you mean - some people fly right back at you with a quick quip that I would probably respond to as well. I cannot remember who it was but whoever said that "one cannot control what someone dpoes to you, but you can control your response" was right.

I also realize I just violated that with the above comment to Yamaka....

Time for me to fold laundry.; May 15, 2008 12:48 AM
Hippolytus said...: Does anybody else find it curious that Hillary thanked Robert Byrd and Gov. Manchin last night, but neither one of them came forward and fully endorsed her? I would have thought that Senator Byrd would have been a lock for her. Maybe he feels that as a party elder, he needs to maintain neutrality.; May 15, 2008 12:51 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Hippolytus-

When Hillary stumped in NC she brought up John and Elizabeth's names in her stump speeches a lot too. I think it might be some sort of strategy to link herself to the political folks of whatever state she is in at the time.; May 15, 2008 1:06 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: I just watched this short video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-q4MDQ0cDI

It shows the views of some of the people of West Virginia.

The video speaks for itself.

God HELP America!; May 15, 2008 1:12 AM
Hippolytus said...: Leah,
I get your point; I still wonder why Hillary would not get Manchin's endorsement, as Gov of a state in which she had a 41 point win. I have an easier time understanding why, as an elder statesman, Sen. Byrd prefers to stay neutral. Maybe he'll be in the delegation that tells her to call it quits.; May 15, 2008 1:14 AM
Bob in Vancouver said...: I would love to see the Obama Campaign put together an add similar to the Republican's Rev Wright Add, but featuring Rush Limbaugh in a total fit and Bill O'Reilly ranting and raving away. (Make it noisy and very grainy).

And then have BMO say "I think it is terrible but I have absolutely no control over third party advertisers."; May 15, 2008 1:17 AM
Hippolytus said...: Leah @ 1:12 am -

I just watched the youtube link you provided. I wonder how Hillary would react, if she were to see that. It's bad enough to make her cringe (I hope).; May 15, 2008 1:27 AM
Bull Schmitt said...: November Politics @ 12:29am -

I'm sure Yam is just dutifully pushing his assigned talking points from the super-duper secret decoder ring part of Rush Limbaugh's site. Brilliant creator of FUD, Yam (Rush) is simply relying on that old truism of American Politics:

"As Puerto Rico goes, so goes the Nation"

:-); May 15, 2008 1:31 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Does anyone remember which states have been called *bellwether states* during this race?; May 15, 2008 1:34 AM
Hippolytus said...: Leah,
Any states that Hillary won.; May 15, 2008 1:37 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: One of Edwards' pledged delegates has switched to Obama and has been added to the DCW numbers.

Delegates now needed to win the nomination:

Obama 137
Clinton 308; May 15, 2008 1:37 AM
Hippolytus said...: Leah,
With the switch from a Clinton supporter, Obama needs only 26 to claim a majority of pledged delegates (excluding FL & MI). Yay!; May 15, 2008 1:44 AM
November Politics said...: So are Edward's pledged delegates essentially (for argument's sake) superdelegates now?

Thanks in advance :); May 15, 2008 1:46 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Hippolytus - you made me giggle!

I found them on wikipedia.

In the United States, Missouri, often referred to as the Missouri bellwether, has produced the same outcome as the national results in every presidential election beginning in 1904, except in 1956. The American bellwether states are [1]:

* Missouri - 1 miss (1956) from 1904 on, perfect since 1960
* Nevada - 1 miss (1976) from 1912 on, perfect since 1980
* Tennessee - 1 miss (1960) from 1928 on, perfect since 1964
* Ohio - 2 misses (1944, 1960) from 1896 on, perfect since 1964
* Kentucky - 2 misses (1952, 1960) from 1924 on, perfect since 1964
* Delaware - 2 misses (2000, 2004) from 1952 on, perfect from 1952 to 1996

Okay - Obama got the majority of delegates in Nevada, Delaware, and they tied in Missouri. So it looks pretty good so far ;)

Just thought I'd post that for anyone that is superstitious here on the thread.; May 15, 2008 1:47 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Hippolytus-

According to Obama's website he says he needs only 25 more pledged delegates for the majority. And he says that he needs a total of 133.5 to secure the nomination.

So it all depends on who has the right numbers, I guess.; May 15, 2008 1:50 AM
Hippolytus said...: Leah,
Sorry... I meant switch from an Edwards supporter, as you said. Still, great news! It will be fun to see how many other Edwards delegates follow suit. Welcome aboard!; May 15, 2008 1:51 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: November politics said: "So are Edward's pledged delegates essentially (for argument's sake) superdelegates now?"
_________________________

They are still pledged but there is no rule that says that they can not switch. If they switch to Obama or Clinton then they will be added to the number in the top left boxes in the pledged delegate category under the name of who they switch to.

Edwards has been talking to his delegates so I think they all know which direction he would like them to move in but they have a right to do whatever they wish to do.; May 15, 2008 1:53 AM
November Politics said...: So, even pledged delegates can vote for whom ever they want at the convention even if their county voted in favour of a particular candidate?; May 15, 2008 1:57 AM
tmess2 said...: Hippolytus, I think the Monty Python movie that you are recalling is "Monty Python and the Holy Grail," particularly the scene involving the Knight who says Ni.; May 15, 2008 1:58 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: November Politics said: "So, even pledged delegates can vote for whom ever they want at the convention even if their county voted in favour of a particular candidate?"
______________

As the rules are now, YES.
That is why it is important to wrap this up in June and then let Senator Obama start the General Election campaign as soon as possible. Because once the country accepts that there is a nominee then most likely it won't be overturned at the convention.; May 15, 2008 2:00 AM
tmess2 said...: November Rain -- As previously noted by the Clinton campaign, under the rules adopted after the 1980 convention, a pledged delegate is supposed to in good conscience reflect the wishes of those that elected them unless they are released from that pledge by the candidate. However, whether a delegate fulfills that pledge is entirely subjective on the part of the delegate.

You may want to look at the thread on yesterday's defection for more thorough discussion of this issue.; May 15, 2008 2:01 AM
tmess2 said...: The Edwards delegates are essentially now the equivalent of uncommitted or the unpledged delegates because Edwards has released them from their pledge to vote for him.; May 15, 2008 2:02 AM
Hippolytus said...: Leah,
I agree. I was using the DCW number of 1600.5 pledged delegates for Obama. I hope the Obama number is right, but I'm using the DCW/The Green Papers number, since it seems to be from an ostensibly neutral source. Both the DCW and The Green Papers guys have tried to be scrupulously neutral, and I commend and thank them for that.
No matter what number you use, Obama is sure to be able to claim a majority of pledged delegates (under present rules) on May 20. Hooray for that!
Good night, now. I'm on to The Daily Show!; May 15, 2008 2:02 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: November Politics-

One or two days ago one of Hillary's PLEDGED delegates in Maryland switched to Obama. They really are not supposed to do that - but there is no rule against it. I am sure there might be new rules for the 2012 race, but that is just how it is now.

There has only been that one so far that has publicly switched.

But several Superdelegates have switch from Clinton to Obama.

Here's the complete list of superdelegate switches from Clinton to Obama:

* May 9 - Rep. Donald Payne (NJ)
* May 7 - DNC Jennifer McClellan (VA)
* May 1 - DNC Joe Andrew (IN)
* Feb 27 - Rep. John Lewis (GA)
* Feb 27 - DNC Senfronia Thompson (TX)
* Feb 20 - DNC Dana Redd (NJ)
* Feb 15 - DNC Sarah Swisher (IA)
* Feb 14 - DNC Christine "Roz" Samuels (NJ)
* Feb 14- Rep. David Scott (GA)

.; May 15, 2008 2:06 AM
November Politics said...: Sorry for the million questions (but I am Canadian and am not too familiar with the nomination process used by the DNP). Last question of the night: Have there been any instances where the candidate leading in the delegate count been overturned at the convention?; May 15, 2008 2:08 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: November Politics-

I am sorry but I don't know the answer to your last question. I am sure that someone else on this thread might know so maybe someone will see your question and answer it for you soon.; May 15, 2008 2:19 AM
Hippolytus said...: tmess2 said...

"Hippolytus, I think the Monty Python movie that you are recalling is "Monty Python and the Holy Grail," particularly the scene involving the Knight who says Ni."

tmess2, you're right...thanks for the correction. I laugh every time I think of Hillary is the talking head, saying "Let's call it a draw." The sad thing is, she's not even at that point yet!; May 15, 2008 2:52 AM
Kujo said...: November Politics:

The Super Delegate concept was created in the 1980's and it has not happened since then.

But when there were multiple candidates accumulating delegates then it was possible/probable that no one got it on the first vote.

In 1924 the DNC took 103 votes until they finally had a candidate with enough votes. John Davis got only 31 votes on the first ballot (only 2.8%) William G. McAdoo had 431.5 votes. There were 19 candidates with delegates. By the 103 vote, Davis recieved enough votes to win the nomination but later lost to Calven Coolidge.; May 15, 2008 2:53 AM
Amot said...: Aunt Jean,
you behaved as a lady tonight!
BTW I think you have every right to be sexist. Since you are not running for office your sexism doesn't concern or hurt anyone! I have my own discriminaton issues too and I don't allow anyone to hold me responsible! I am sure when the choice is between two man in GE you will pick the Democrat!

Jim,
I am glad to see again the blogger from 2 months ago!; May 15, 2008 3:07 AM
Amot said...: On Edwards:
I agree the place was fine, but the timing could be better!

But we have to acknowledge something:

Edwards made for the unity of the party more than anyone else!
If he hasn't quit the race in January he would assemble a big mass of pledged delegates and he would deadlock the nominee selection. Many states would finish with no clear winner, he would finish 2nd in most caucuses and 2nd in many primaries, plus 1st in WV. Since the majority of his supporters favoured Obama both leading candidates would have smaller difefrence in pledged and would be equal in popular votes or having lead according to different counts. Sen. Clinton would have 300 or more supers and they would have given her the lead, but she would still trail in pledged. Obama would be the only candidate viable in all contests. BIG mess!!! The only possible outcome would be Edwards to join Clinton or Obama as VP. BTW he would be short of money by March so he would have to chose before TX and OH. By stepping out with a handful of delegates he made himself not a deciding figure in the race. One more thing - if Edwards was still in the race, Clinton would have to spent more money and would receive less money...
Dunno, but I think we owe a big 'thank you' to Edwards for making the road for the two leaders open and clear and also to give an easy path to unity when it is over!; May 15, 2008 3:24 AM
Ariane said...: Hey Aunt Jean,

I would agree with you about the media's treatment of Clinton at least in the beginning. I do feel like they switched later, and went against Obama and have even had periods like some of the time in Pennsylvania & right after her win there where they seemed to be in love with Hillary. (Of course it is only human that we tend to notice more what we feel is unfair treatment of our own candidate - - that is how both Clinton and Obama supporters insist that CNN is biased against their candidate.

As for my analysis of their motivations, I have kept feeling over the last months that the media remind me of the officials in some sports playoffs or championship series, where I have strongly suspected that they were making calls for the purpose of prolonging the series to make more revenue for TV etc. It started out as Clinton as the major front runner and being thought for sure the winner, but if it ended too soon that would be "boring" and they might lose a lot of viewers, so they were attacking her. Plus they love an unusual story and a new "character" and Obama had a unique background for a presidential candidate.

but then after he started doing "too well" they started attacking him- - not that they should not have ever reported on some of the thigns but the obsession was over the top. As was the distorition.

Since then they have kind of gone back and forth but ( you won't like this but) they have tried to portray it as more of a close contest than it really was at that point. Until recently most of them did not admit just how hard it would be for Hillary to get the numbers she needed.

But aside from them playing a game to prolong the contest, some of the media people are just plain sexist and seemed they could not resist displaying it. I was totally disgusted with the misogynist comments and always focusing on her looks, wrinkles etc much more than they ever would a man's.

Hope your mom is recovering fine. I bet she is one tough lady like someone related to her that I know.; May 15, 2008 3:46 AM
Squirrel said...: State of the game as of now!

Presently the number of required delegates (pledged delegates and super delegates) required for the nomination is 2,025. This is the present goal posts as set by the Party. On May31st the RBC meets to discuss the possible seating of pledged delegates and super delegates from Florida and Michigan, both States having been stripped of their delegates voting rights at the convention because both States deliberately broke the rules of when to hold their primaries. The RBC might change the ruling on this matter, but until the ruling is changed, indeed should it be then the number of delegates required is 2025.

At the time of writing Barack Obama has a total of 1,888 delegates (1,600.5 PD + 287.5 SD) and Hilary Clinton has a total of 1,717 (1,445.5 PD and 271.5 SD). Therefore Barack Obama requires 137 more delegates and Clinton requires 308 delegates to get the nomination. There remain 189 pledged delegates to be chosen in the five remaining contests. On top of this there are 237 super delegates who have not publicly endorsed either candidate. This is a total of 426 delegates remaining. There are also 18 PD registered for Edwards (there was 19 but after Edwards endorsement of Obama yesterday evening one PD has already publicly changed voting intentions to Obama).

The current total number of pledged delegates is 3,253, therefore to obtain a majority of pledged delegates a candidate requires 1,627. Obama needs 26.5 more pledged delegates to obtain the majority of pledged delegates, Clinton requires 181.5 more pledged delegates to obtain the majority of pledged delegates.

The remaining contests are:

May 20
Kentucky (51 pledged delegates)
Oregon (52 pledged delegates)

June 1
Puerto Rico (55 pledged delegates)

June 3
Montana (16 pledged delegates)
South Dakota (15 pledged delegates)

Latest RCP (Real Clear Politics) Averages of the latest polls in Kentucky and Oregon are:

Kentucky……….Clinton….+28.7%
Oregon………….Obama….+14.3%

If these poll averages are even marginally close to Obama’s results it is then evident that Barack Obama will obtain the 26.5 pledged delegates and have a clear and unassailable majority of pledged delegates on May 21 following these 2 contests.
It should be noted here that a small group of 8 super delegates known as the ‘Pelosi Group’ have individually announced that they will endorse whoever has the majority of pledged delegates. Obviously when Obama reaches that majority on May 21 these 8 super delegates can be counted as endorsing him.

Conservatively it can be assumed Obama will collect at least 45 of the 103 pledged delegates in the Kentucky and Oregon contests. Such would give Obama 1,645.5 PD’s and 295.5 PD’s for a total of 1,921 delegates, just 84 short of the majority of delegates required.

There are also 14 add-on super delegates to be chosen by 9 States before the RBC meeting on May 31. It is likely because of the States involved that at least 8 of these add-on super delegates will be supporters of Obama. If this is so then this would mean that Obama would be only 76 delegates short of the majority of total delegates at the time the RBC meets.

Of course what could reduce Obama’s delegate requirement even further are the 18 remaining pledged delegates from the Edward’s campaign, if just 13 of these were to follow Edwards and endorse Obama then Obama would be shy by only 63 short of the majority required. Now considering that Obama recently is picking up super delegates at the rate of greater than 4 a day it would seem likely that over the next 17 days Obama will actually have passed the number of delegates required (2,024.5) to become the Party’s nominee before the RBC meets on May 31.

Now if you were a member of the RBC how would you vote to change the decision on Florida and Michigan that would rob the present winner of the nomination process and give an advantage to the loser of that contest?

The rules state that the minimum penalty must be a reduction of 50% in voting rights, so this is the absolute minimum penalty that the RBC could impose. However, with Obama already under the above analysis already having won the nomination and for that to be acknowledged world wide by TV, radio, the press, and indeed on the internet any decision that reopens the race (favoring Clinton) would be rightly seen as partisan and unjust. I therefore suggest that the RBC meeting on May 31 will reduce the penalty on both Florida and Michigan to a reduction in voting rights along with a mandatory imposition of a 50/50 split of delegates and super delegates between Obama and Clinton.

The above would allow the seating of both Florida and Michigan at the convention and their participation in the selection of the nominee, whilst at the same time retaining order within the Party and sending out a clear signal for future elections that maverick and self-serving acts will be punished by the national party. It would also then not be able to be used as an argument that the voters in the two States were disenfranchised by the process whilst making it clear that the local Party organizations were totally responsible for the situation in the first place.

Now this is a long-winded post, for that I apologise, but I think it is logical and I being an Obama supporter have tried to give benefit throughout to Clinton so as to balance any bias I may unintentionally input to the figures. But the end result I think is clear, before May 31 Barack Obama will be the undisputable presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party, a position that will then be further strengthened prior to the convention in Denver.; May 15, 2008 3:52 AM
Unknown said...: Edwards has endorsed Obama. Does anyone know if/when (has got to be when) he will release his delegates to be part of Obama's delegate count?

(Anything to speed this process up of narrowing the field to one candidate...)

Thanks!; May 15, 2008 3:59 AM
Ariane said...: JayW you are being extremely obnoxious in that comment to Aunt Jean with talking about peoples family and your stupid "laundry"comments. WTF is that supposed to mean? I reckon you are a right wing troll trying to cause more division among Democrats. If you really are an Obama supporter I am ashamed to have someone on the same team with your attitude - - it is sure not like the Obama people I have met in person. You should realize that the way you are acting it sure looks more like you are trying to harm Obama than help.

Think how you might feel if the situation were reversed, and try to be somewhat magnanimous.

Aunt Jean and others dont listen to that ignorant person. There are a lot of Republicans going on blogs and fora and pretending to be for Obama or Clinton and saying things just to divide us even more.

Then there's the psychic psychiatrist "Mike" that tells you to "trust him" about the facts of your own life. Bizarre!; May 15, 2008 4:14 AM
ed iglehart said...: Hi all from a breezy blue-skied Scottish morning.

Softy, The first Bean which comes to mind is a family of cannibals who lived in caves on the Ayrshire coast not that far from here. Loch Ness is a good bit further, but I'll check out the bean potential and report back.

Amot, Your assessment and praise of Edwards' behaviour seems the best of the lot, though many of our fellowship here expressed similar views. I think the timing was optimal and the delivery superb.

I also concur regarding Jim Webb's position - he has done well to stand quietly back - time enough for HRC's present VP-favourite (on the betting) status to decline, and for Obama to tap him on the shoulder, as I expect he will eventually.

I don't think many will object or feel slighted. The potential for cabinet posts is embarrassed with a richness of very suitable folk, including most of those mentioned as possible VP candidates.

All in all, a rather fine 24 hours, and the good news is likely to continue.

As a possibly interesting perspective, the UK Prime Minister, one Gordon Brown was interviewed for over 15 minutes on national radio this morning. I think some of y'all might find the style of interview interesting.

0800-0830

0810 As Gordon Brown struggles with dismal headlines following the local elections, we talk to him about yesterday's draft Queen's speech and the year ahead.

Enjoy...
xx
ed; May 15, 2008 5:54 AM
ed iglehart said...: P.S. If you have difficulty getting the BBC clip to work, try setting your browser preferences to do .ra or .ram files using "RealPlayer"

In Firefox, this is accessed through
edit/preferences/applications

Good luck
ed; May 15, 2008 6:02 AM
Ariane said...: Aunt Jean I don't think I have insulted you and I really don't appreciate it that you insult me especially over a post (to Yam) where I was being complimentary to Hillary, I was pointing out to Yam that she is her own person and not exactly like her husband and I gave a link where Chelsea has said her mom is "more progressive" than her dad, and some ratings that rated Clinton as more progressive than Obama based on how they voted.

I have not been able to make sense of why Y keeps saying Obama is so much more liberal than Hillary when a lot of Hillary's staunch supporters say that SHE is the one who has given more support to liberal (or "progressive") issues in her voting.

The truth is Hillary and Barack have voted the same over 90 percent of the time, and where they have differences, it really depends on the issue which one could be called more "liberal"/ "progressive" but some of the time it is Hillary such as her health plan (which I think is better than Obama)

Y, rather than answer with any evidence, finally turned to ridiculous statements about Obama not being an "American name" ???? It's only Native Americans (like your Cherokee ancestors) who had/have names that actually originated in America. The others are imports- - US citizens have first names and family names that have originated in every other country, from all over the world. He seems to be saying that only certain of the imports are REALLY Americans.

and you think I'M the one with my head in the clouds? Wow.; May 15, 2008 6:39 AM
ed iglehart said...: Regarding Bean Castle, from the travels of Daniel Defoe:

This situation must necessarily make the narrow part be a most important pass, from the south part of Scotland to the northern countries, which are beyond it. We have been told the Romans never conquer'd thus far; and those that magnify the conquests of Oliver Cromwell in Scotland to a height beyond what was done by the Romans, insist much upon it, that the Romans never came into this part of the country: But, if what Mr. Cambden records, and what is confirm'd by other accounts from the men of learning and of observation, this must be a mistake; for Mr. Cambden says, that near Bean-Castle in the county of Nairn, there was found, in the year 1460, a fine marble vessel finely carv'd, which was full of Roman coins of several sorts; also several old forts or mounts have been seen here, which, by their remains, evidently shew'd themselves to be Roman: But that enquiry is none of my work.

In the narrow pass (mention'd above over the lake) stands the town and fortress of Inner-Ness, that is a town on the inner bank of the River Ness. The situation of it, as I have said before, intimates that it is a place of strength; and accordingly it has a castle, founded in antient times to command the pass: And some authors write that it was antiently a royal house for the kings of Scotland. Be that as it will, Oliver Cromwell thought it a place of such importance, that he built a strong citadel here, and kept a stated garrison always in it, and sometimes more than a garrison, finding it needful to have a large body of his old veteran troops posted here to preserve the peace of the country, and keep the Highlands in awe, which they did effectually ail his time.

And they say to this day, that the finest English is spoken in Inverness!

xx
ed; May 15, 2008 7:20 AM
ed iglehart said...: With friends like this....

P.S. Those in search of Bean lore, search "Sawney Bean"
;-)
ed; May 15, 2008 7:31 AM
Ariane said...: Woodland Sprite,
i never yet welcomed you - -so: "Welcome! Bienvenue!" etc. Even if you 've already chosen, you still might find this interesting- - On the blog The Field (from ruralvotes.com) there was a post Convince a Superdelegate where uncommitted SD, Rep. Deb Kowakowski, asked people to write in about why she should (and why they do) support Obama or Clinton. There are 100s of responses. At first it is tons of Obama ones then later there are a bunch of Clinton ones then it is mixed up. It is for the most part well thought out and civil comments. I wrote one but I don't think it was very profound.

I might have voted for Edwards if he had stayed in. I liked his ideas and I liked how he pushed the others more in a progressive direction. I was actually kind of surprised he endorsed Obama at this late date, I had thought he was staying out with the idea that maybe he and others could help to unify the party.

Clinton and Obama are pretty close on most issues. I like him better on some things and like her better on a few others. I have been influenced with how they have run their campaigns which in both cases is the only real example of them managing a huge organization and effort. and I do think that is a sign of how they would run an administration.

I'm glad to see your reaction was as strong as my own to that ignorant comment about Obama not being an "American name" (As I think you pointed out too, only Native Americans have names that really originated in America; the rest - -including all former Presidents- -have been imports.) We are a country of immigrants from all over the world.
It is disgusting that some people still think it's only names from certain ethnicities that are REALLY "American."; May 15, 2008 7:33 AM
Peter said...: I think there are 3 things Obama can gain from Edwards endorsement shortterm.
1: Edwards delegates. Most of them will probably support Obama, which could give him 19 +32 (in Florida). This is a huge amount this late in the race.
2: Can Obama narrow the gap in KY? He is 30-35% behind, if he can get it down to 20-25% it would be good for the party since KY is quite similiar to WV in demographics. Edwards could help Obama gain som support here.
3. Superdelegates. Undecided supers can be influenced by Edwards decision.

We all know Obama will be the nominee, but it is important that the party unite and Obamas momentum is important. Him doing better in KY than expected and perhapes getting huge wins in SD and MT could be important. SD and MT can big swing-states this year....; May 15, 2008 7:44 AM
magia said...: Independent voter ... Not a comment on what it means, just a comment on your misread:

when Aunt Jean said: ""there hasn't been a democrat that has won the WH that hasn't won WV since 1916 which is Woodrow Wilson"

I believe she is making a TRUE statement. I believe you have added the word "primary" where it does not belong. Might you not try again?

In simple English: In 1916 Wilson lost WV and won the general election. Since then, every Democrat WHO WON the GE has also won WV.

Let's not ask Mark Penn; you can also confirm it here:

http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/index.html; May 15, 2008 8:01 AM
Amot said...: Peter,
I think no math is important at that stage of the race! The race is over. De facto! And on May 31st it will be over de jure too!

Edwards' contribution was much more important than math - he started the unification! He spoke well about Hillary, he spoke about the people, the party and the one nation. I think that was altered version of his victory speech. With no endorsements and money flowing toward Clinton, she can't afford to be unpolite from now on. The best thing Obama can do is ask her to take care of UHC plan and give her all the credits for helping him grow as candidate. After he wins GE she will easily become Majority leader. She has her issues but she is a true Democrat (semi-progressive one) and we must respect her! I believe she will leave the scene with honor and dignity!; May 15, 2008 8:19 AM
magia said...: to all of you who are so impatient for this to be "over" . . .

Many of you must be rather young, because if you take out an incumbent (Pres or VP), this process is not SUPPOSED to be over before the convention. That is how we get our best candidates.

If you think that Kerry was the best we had to offer in 2004, then you think it's best to hurry the process. Not me!

Frankly, I'm disappointed that Edwards - and Biden, and Dodd, dropped out too soon; I believe that is the fault of the money pit that is now required of any campaign.

This new-fangled delirium to have it all done by May is absurd, and you better prepare yourselves -- it will not be.

The votes are not cast until convention! Deal with it.; May 15, 2008 8:24 AM
Amot said...: Magia,
This time the race was very divided... When you have several white men fighting for the nominee position you can't have a serious division in the electorate. But when you have a white older woman and a black younger man...

Last interviews I watched and read show that many Clinton backers would not vote for Obama if GE was today and vice versa. This problem needs time, more time and even more time. 6 months can be unsufficient!
If you read my post above you will find out that Edwards could only bring troubles if he had stayed in the race.

And about the money - all you talk about how important is that states have the right to vote whenever they want, but Super Tuesday turned out to be too expensive. BTW MI and FL were penalized just for that reason - campaigning there wold be too much for small candidates to handle...

Next time when you complain about disfranchising - think about the global picture!

This race started bad but is finishing well and the chances to see Democrat in WH are enormous!; May 15, 2008 8:59 AM
Yamaka said...: Good Morning, Democrats:

Another cloudy day in Houston.

BHO's Supporters: Did you all sleep well after that Endorsement?

As I said, just less than 16/32 Ed's delegates will move to your Camp, at the maximum, as a reflection of the division in our Party. That's only fair.

"The votes are not cast until convention! Deal with it."

magia:

Amen well said. You have the right understanding and the vision.

BHO's Crowd is not realistic on this Primary Process. They are just living inside a fuzzy cloud of useless imagination!

It's NOT over until the Pant-Suit Lady says so!

She is the Boss.

Plus there will be July/Aug Surprise before the Convention.

So far, only one Ed D has moved so far to BHO's side! We will wait for another 15 to follow.

HRC's Math is still intact:

1910 + 102 + 200 = 2212 a few over the Full Legitimate Hurdle 2210.

I will keep on posting this till the SDs remain above 200.

Now it is 269. A long way to go!

Again, I am telling you as a HRC Lover that I will cheer and blog for the Kid if he jumps over the Hurdle 2210, for sure.

Cheer, Smile and Vote for Hillary the First Woman POTUS - Break Open the Glass Ceiling, Now.; May 15, 2008 9:46 AM
Robert in MN said...: Hillary’s “small state” win in perspective:

Here is a list of Barack Obama’s 20 big wins with over 20% margin of victory. Half of those states were bigger in delegate totals than West Virginia. I thought small states like West Virginia didn’t count to HRC? Hillary had a nice win in a small state with her demographics. Unfortunately for her chances, there are 50 states + 6 other contents—20 of which Obama posted a 20% margin of victory.
Virgin Islands (3) 82%
Idaho (18) 62%
Hawaii (20) 52%
District of Columbia (15) 52%
Alaska (13) 51%
Kansas (32) 48%
Washington (78) 37%
Nebraska (24) 35%
Georgia (87) 35%
Colorado (55) 34%
Minnesota (72) 34%
Democrats Abroad (7) 33%
Illinois (153) 32%
South Carolina (45) 29%
Virginia (83) 28%
Maryland (70) 25%
North Dakota (13) 25%
Mississippi (33) 25%
Wyoming (12) 24%
Vermont (15) 21%; May 15, 2008 9:48 AM
Yamaka said...: Ariene:

I stand by my statement that BHO Jr's name is not American, but a Kenyan Muslim. It is a fact.

His name is least recognized in the heartland of America, it is a fact.

There are another about 35 million potentially Left leaning Americans out there who will vote in the GE, who have serious questions about his character, judgment and credibility.

My only argument is the Party MUST field a well tested experienced Candidate for the GE. To have a fair chance of winning the WH AND the Congress.

Take a deep breath. Wait until the Convention. In the mean time, watch for the July/Aug Surprise!

It's NOT over till She says so.

Hillary is the Boss.

Cheers.; May 15, 2008 10:04 AM
Yamaka said...: Ariane:

One clarification, though:

BHO IS an American Citizen.

But his name Barack Hussein Obama Jr is a Kenyan Muslim name.

There is a distinction.

What's wrong in a name? Nothing. Just accept it if you can as it is.

:-); May 15, 2008 10:07 AM
ed iglehart said...: Yarmulka,

""What's wrong in a name?"

Spelling: Ariane, NOT Ariene, for one.; May 15, 2008 10:12 AM
Peter said...: Yamaka, stop with that idiotic 2210 BS.

The number is 2025. FL and MI will probably be seated, not thanks to Clinton who opposed 69-59 in MI, but because Obama needs to unite the party and increase his support in MI and FL. But MI and FL will be punished for breaking the rule and i think 50% cut, is the least they could get. So, even if they are seated, 2210 will not be the number.

When Obama reach 2025 next week (or the week after), the party will work to get a solution for MI and FL that don`t change the fact that Obama has won. 2210, is just a bogus number without any substance at all.; May 15, 2008 10:14 AM
jpsedona said...: Yam,

you said: "Take a deep breath. Wait until the Convention. In the mean time, watch for the July/Aug Surprise!

It's NOT over till She says so."

Like Eight Belles, she's run a strong race, will finish across the line in June, and then be euthanized by the superdelegates.; May 15, 2008 10:16 AM
Anonymous said...: jpsedona said...
Yam,

Like Eight Belles, she's run a strong race, will finish across the line in June, and then be euthanized by the superdelegates.

Goodness gracious, what a way to get rid of your competition. To suggest such, even through analogy is probably at the best bad taste.

References to this tragic event by anyone is not approiate; May 15, 2008 11:01 AM
Yamaka said...: jim:

Thanks.

I thought jp is an experienced matured individual!

Maybe I am wrong.; May 15, 2008 11:08 AM
Richard said...: But his name Barack Hussein Obama Jr is a Kenyan Muslim name.

There are no "American" names. I suppose you might call my name "American," but it is in fact, using your criteria, a "German English" one. Hillary Rodham Clinton's name is "English Latin." John McCain's is "Irish English Hebrew"

Your insistence on pressing this point is offensive and only serves yet again to prove your bigotry.; May 15, 2008 11:19 AM
Pablo said...: Perhaps Jp meant....her campaign run.

I think she has run a good second campaign from Feb's supertuesday til now, though not always happy with then lengths and labels. She has proven to a viable and legitimate force, which has caused my rethought that her on the ticket as VP would be a plus. Not that my opinion matters, or would she be my first choice.; May 15, 2008 11:19 AM
Yamaka said...: A tutorial for the BHO's Crowd.

Listen, carefully, I have said many times. For me to cheer and vote for BHO, he MUST jump over the Full Legitimate Hurdle 2210.

I ridicule you and the Jr for what you are all: inexperienced bunch of Lemmings.

About Names:

Pallaniappan Chidambaram : A South Indian Name.

Abdul Aziz Bin Talal: A Saudi Arabian Name.

Yousru Akazawa: A Japanes Name.

Raila Odinga: A Kenyan Name.

Raila Hassan Odinga: A Kenyan Muslim Name.

Hillary Rodham Clinton: An American Name.

Wei Dong Lee: A Chinese Name.

Srishta Gunevardenae: A Sri Lankan Name.

Sastish Kumar Patel: A North Indian Name.

Yes, in many cases the Name can be identified to a country/and or religion or a culture.

Barack Hussein Obama Sr: A Kenyan Muslim Name.

Nothing wrong in any name.

But HIDING the national origin, culture and heritage is a political crime, the voters will NOT appreciate very much, if you care for their votes!

Ed. Please understand the voters: they look for 111 things in a Candidate, one of them is the origin of the Name, its culture, its value system etc.

:-); May 15, 2008 11:20 AM
Anonymous said...: Yam,
I am sure she thought it was clever.
We are all guilty of being once removed from common sense in some of our posts.
I am sure guilty, but still ready to rumble with those who wish to abridge my rights and those of others by ending the process early.; May 15, 2008 11:22 AM
Richard said...: Yamaka: a bigot's name.; May 15, 2008 11:24 AM
jpsedona said...: Yam / Jim,

Yes, comparisons between Hillary and Eight Belles are in bad taste, extremely apropos, but in bad taste.

But your shock and revulsion seem a bit contrived since many news sources also used the comparison.

Keep in mind that it was Hillary that compared herself and her candidacy to the only female horse in the Derby. It's likely that one of the side stories of anecdotes from this election year will be the comparison between herself and Eight Belles. You can bet on it...; May 15, 2008 11:24 AM
ed iglehart said...: JP,

"You can bet on it..."

Very droll.
;-)
ed
hilarious!; May 15, 2008 11:30 AM
ed iglehart said...: You've gotta laugh!; May 15, 2008 11:41 AM
Anonymous said...: jpsedona said...
Yam / Jim,

But your shock and revulsion seem a bit contrived since many news sources also used the comparison.

Well said, now anything we can get when we google Obama along with distasteful words is good stuff.
MAY THE GOOGLE BE WITH YOU!; May 15, 2008 11:42 AM
Yamaka said...: jp and Ed:

I see your points, the analogy, the metaphor and humor.

I always thought you two, MikeinMD are very experienced level headed individuals, unlike most other BHO supporters in this site.

But, I know you are all politically FAR LEFT of the molds of Edwards, Kerry, Kennedy, Mondale, Obama and the ilk. Bona-fide Liberal Ideologists.

As I said many times, I am a social liberal but a fiscal conservative - that pushes me towards the Center, as Clintons are.

Therefore, we have ideological divide. You will fight me and I will fight you all the way to our graves! That's only natural. I welcome that rift, that difference and the distinction. After all, What color is our Parachute?

Listen, it is NOT over till the

Pant-Suit Lady says so, or until

the Convention in late Aug.

Till then, let us wait for the July/Aug/Oct Surprise for 2008!

Enjoy the Fight.
:-); May 15, 2008 11:49 AM
ed iglehart said...: Watch out! All y'all Texans!

;-)
ed; May 15, 2008 11:49 AM
jpsedona said...: Yam,

You said: "But, I know you are all politically FAR LEFT of the molds of Edwards, Kerry, Kennedy, Mondale, Obama and the ilk. Bona-fide Liberal Ideologists"

Sorry to shock & disappoint you but I am a right-leaning moderate. Independent of your thinking, I am not an Obama supporter. My primary interest (no pun intended) is the math & the horserace (and even the horse race analogies)...; May 15, 2008 11:58 AM
michael from Minesota said...: The Nevada State convention is this week end. This ia a state with utra-soft delegates. The state convention should split the pleged PLEO delegates 3 to 3 which should hold. The atlaged should go 2 to Clinton and 1 to Obama but this is a very close dlegate count and could esily swap. If so Obama might snag the add-on super as well.; May 15, 2008 12:07 PM
Anonymous said...: Word association has been and always will be a powerful tool in American Politics.
This would include ones name.
BHO will conjur up many inferences
during the Primary and GE, so you may as well get used to it.
His speaches and writings link him to Africa and Islam and will be forever with him. The Republicans will see to that.; May 15, 2008 12:07 PM
Amot said...: Ed,
great links!
I had a lot of fun :); May 15, 2008 12:13 PM
Mike Ruth said...: Amusing scenario for a Clinton "win" in today's NYT (Gail Collins, author):

"If Clinton wants to continue, there’s $11 million that says she has paid for the right to go the distance. But is it hopeless? Not entirely. Given the Democratic Party’s innovative method of doling out delegates, all that’s necessary for her to snatch the nomination is:

1) A big, big win in Kentucky next Tuesday. Ideally, Obama should be limited to no more than 100 votes.

2) Oregon, scheduled for the same day, inexplicably breaks off and sinks into the Pacific Ocean.

3) Puerto Rico, clocking in on June 1, not only gives Clinton a huge majority, but also manages to become a state in advance of the vote.

4) Finally, on June 3 as the South Dakota polls open, Thomas Jefferson’s head on Mount Rushmore comes to life and starts shouting, “You go, girl.”; May 15, 2008 12:15 PM
Yamaka said...: jp:

"Sorry to shock & disappoint you but I am a right-leaning moderate. Independent of your thinking, I am not an Obama supporter."

I stand corrected.
_________________________________

But still I stand on my Math of HRC:

1910 + 102 + 200 = 2212 total delegates, a few more than the 2210 the Legitimate Hurdle.

(Dean on Late Night Leno hinted that the Hurdle will NOT be 2025, something quite different! Probably, between 2025 and 2210, I hope it is very close to 2210)

I see so far only 1 Ed D changed; 268 SDs undeclared.

My Math will be valid up until more than 200 SDs remain undeclared and she keeps winning KY and PR!

I am waiting for the July/Aug Surprise for 2008!

:-); May 15, 2008 12:16 PM
Unknown said...: I think Yamaka is Subodh an indian guy who has gone crazy :); May 15, 2008 12:35 PM
FB said...: Has the shift for Edward's delegates to Obama been captured in the numbers on this site?

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/15/edwards-delegates-in-south-carolina-move-to-obama/

(CNN) – At least six of John Edwards’ eight pledged delegates in South Carolina will throw their support to Barack Obama following Edwards’ endorsement of the Democratic frontrunner on Wednesday, CNN has learned.

....; May 15, 2008 12:36 PM
JayW said...: Yamaka...

You have to be the most delusional of the bunch on here...
Obama has already won. The next few weeks are just a technicality.

HRC has NO shot!!! NONE. ZERO.

Whatever math you want to use or scenario you want to imagine... it simply WONT HAPPEN.

I think you realize this deep down but have to keep up your "fight" for HRC since once you admit to yourself that you have been so wrong for so long you will feel like the idiot we all know you are.; May 15, 2008 12:39 PM
Anonymous said...: You need to brush up on your name origins. Hussein is an arabic name, not Muslim. Now say "same thing" to really demonstrate your ignorance.; May 15, 2008 12:43 PM
Yamaka said...: Hummmmmmmmmmm

People use lots of Pen Names.

Subodh may not be his real name.

Yamaka may have 1/16th of Japanese ancestry.

But again he may have a Pen Name.

Did you think of it?

But a Presidential Candidate's Name, Origin, Culture, Political philosophy plus 111 other things DO matter, if he cares to get votes from ALL voters, not just some Blacks and mi-educated "affluent" Whites!

That has been my point.

But Lemmings, miss it purposely!

In general, there is nothing wrong in ANY Name of anybody!

:-(; May 15, 2008 12:44 PM
Amot said...: Cosmo,
the shift is no official yet, but those are good news!
When GP acknowledge the shift and change their number of pledged, DCW will too, that's the policy!

Welcome to the open thread, I was expecting you here since yesterday morning :); May 15, 2008 12:47 PM
jpsedona said...: Yam,

I think it's pretty clear that Dean doesn't want FL & MI to be seated without some type of penalty.

In a NYT article today, there was mention that MI hopes to get 75% of their delegates seated. This is the first time I've seen that stated:

Party’s Rules Committee Has a Crucial Role in Clinton’s Hopes

I think that MI is much more problematic than FL. But I don't think that FL will be seated as-is either.

For a historical perspective on the Florida Primary, here's a good article from May 2007. The measure to move up the Dem primary was co-sponsored by a Dem State Senator. It passed in the Republican legislature and was "supported by many Democrats". It also states that "Strategists for Clinton vow that the senator from New York will campaign in Florida no matter what, underscoring her intent to build a campaign for the general election."

Fascinating reading a year later...

Democrats scramble to prevent Florida primary election fiasco; May 15, 2008 12:49 PM
Unknown said...: I think Yamaka/Subodh is so against Obama because indians are mostly hindus, and i can bet anything this guy is a hindu and there is such a big rift between hindus and muslims, because of the eternal war between india and pakistan. Yamaka has referred to himself as Yam the god of death many times already on this blog.; May 15, 2008 12:50 PM
Kevin D. Rooney said...: Aunt Jean -

I can't take it anymore. Please stop just regurgitiating Clinton lines about why the states she wins are more important than the states that Obama wins.

The answer to your question about what democrat last lost WV and won the election is 1916 - Woodrow Wilson. Many democrats believe Al Gore won yet he lost WV by 6 points.

WV is getting overstated so that Clinton can convince SDs to go her way. WV went democrat ALWAYS from 1932 to 1968, so all of those years are out. Plus, some Republicans won landslides (Reagan, Nixon) so those years are out.

The fact is that WV cares a LOT about coal, gun rights, and pro-life, which is why Bush carried them the last two elections. I think you're saying Clinton will win WV but Obama wont. Even if that argument is believed, its an argument in isolation. You have to look at the whole electoral map, and many (including me) believe the grass roots org that Barack has energized, makes him the stronger candidate. FYI, I am a registered republican that canvassed in Indiana for Obama.

Here's a phenomenal site for FACTS on presidential elections fyi...
http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/; May 15, 2008 12:51 PM
Yamaka said...: von:

You have a point.

But historically speaking,

BHO Sr's father converted himself from Catholicism to Islam and got the name Hussein, which he passed it on to his son and grandson.

That's that simple a history.

Whether BHO Sr was a practicing Muslim - meaning following all the Five Duties - or just going to Mosque for the Friday Afternoon Prayer only, we don't know.

Although, BHO Jr writes in his "Dream"

"In Indonesia, I had spent two years at a Muslim School......I studied the Koran"

In all practical purposes, BHO Jr has been a Muslim until he was baptized to Christianity by pastor Wright some 16-20 years ago.

His claim, "I have NEVER been a Muslim" is a flat out LIE. He is a pathological liar - he lies to get more votes, period.

:-); May 15, 2008 12:53 PM
Unknown said...: If the Dems nominate the unelectable Obama, Hillary Clinton will be the VP nominee if she wants it and it seems Obama can't stop her.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/05/if_clinton_wants_to_be_vp_obam.html; May 15, 2008 1:01 PM
Amot said...: During 2008 Muhammad will be the name most often given to babies in... UK! That means UK now are Muslim country, doesn't it?

BTW, why don't you track the origin of his given name - Barack? Because you can not scare people with BIBLE name!; May 15, 2008 1:02 PM
jpsedona said...: California Reps. Howard Berman and Henry Waxman also endorsed Obama this afternoon... CNN reports 6 Edwards delegates endorse Obama; AP & WSJ indicate that 4 have announced.

Shaping up as another tough day for Hillary...; May 15, 2008 1:03 PM
ed iglehart said...: Lee,

"Hillary Clinton will be the VP nominee if she wants it and it seems Obama can't stop her."

It seems Edwards can

Assalaam 'alaikum wa rahmatullaahi wa barakaatuhu
Peace, God's mercy and blessings be upon you; May 15, 2008 1:13 PM
jpsedona said...: Lee,

The rcp story is very interesting. If we believe that Hillary wants to be VP, and has her name introduced for the VP roll call, it could play out as the article says.

Assuming for a second that becomes the VP nominee, it puts her in a no-lose position; if the Dems win in the GE, she's the first female VP; if they lose, she locks out some other VP choice from running in 2012. It also gives her the position of supporting the ticket (mores so than if she was on the sidelines).

The only drawback is if Obama wants someone else for VP. Can you see the floor fight? Now, that would be divisive.

Should she have an interest in the slot, and were to believe that her supporters would try to draft her for the VP slot, Obama would have to counter by identifying his choice before the convention. She would then be left with challenging his choice (potentially destructive) or stepping aside ("I'm honored that my supporters would consider such a move, but we should all support Obama's selection")...; May 15, 2008 1:17 PM
Anonymous said...: LOL. That's a damn flexible criteria you have there for judging names. The indian names you list are based on geography while Clinton is based not on its anglo basis but where hillary lives, now your judgement on hussein is based on the individuals father. Pick a criteria and stick with it.; May 15, 2008 1:23 PM
Unknown said...: ed - you must not have read the article. Edwards has 19 delegates, Clinton will have 1800-1900+ delegates (even more with Florida and Michigan).

jpsedona - I posted this days ago. Her getting on the ticket as VP solves many problems.

No one can say she is not supporting the ticket. Also, it prevents Obama from elevating a new rival for 2012 or 2016 in his VP choice.

A floor fight would doom Obama in November. How will women and Hillary supporters react to see Obama try to force her from the VP spot? Exit polling already shows many of her supporters (including me) will not vote for Obama. And if Obama was successful, I doubt Hillary or Bill would lift one finger to campaign in the fall.; May 15, 2008 1:31 PM
Richard said...: Yam: I have never been baptized into any religion, but I have studied the bible, the torah, the koran, and the teachings of the Buddha. I have read the New Testament in ancient Greek. I have taught at an Episcopal school. I will soon marry a jewish woman.

By your logic, what religion am I?; May 15, 2008 1:34 PM
Dave in NC said...: Yam,

Uh, I believe "Sitting Bull" would be more of an American name, Clinton sounds English.

And even if you were only 1/64th Japanese you would still be a pagan and far more alien to current sensibilities in this country than a muslim.; May 15, 2008 1:35 PM
ed iglehart said...: Lee,

"ed - you must not have read the article...."

Oh yes I did! And I read the one below it, and another in the New York Times (I think) which made a clear case that Edwards' intervention had "cleared the way" for Obama to make his own choice.

I concur with JP in reckoning that Obama will need to move sooner rather than later, though, and at least well before the convention.

Your own expressed intent to vote against Obama anyway doesn't exactly incline me to give your opinion much weight.

;-)
ed; May 15, 2008 1:37 PM
Dave in NC said...: BTW, I don't think Yamaka is an Indian, there are too many cowboys in TX to allow that.; May 15, 2008 1:39 PM
Emit R Detsaw said...: Lee (and others that have used the term loosely), why would you think Obabm is unelectable?

He has more elected delegates, more super delegates, more popular votes, and a better organization that Clinton.

So I guess what you are really saying is that the Democrats are unelectable.

Sad.; May 15, 2008 1:44 PM
Anonymous said...: Is that you Dave in NC, or is it the other Dave in NC; May 15, 2008 1:45 PM
ed iglehart said...: We should note that Al Shrub's comments today comparing Obama to Nazi appeasers are made on the occasion of the sixtieth anniversary of one of the greatest injustices ever perpetrated.

Sixty years ago a new nation was formed by the violent expulsion of two thirds of the native population, followed by a 'scorched-earth' removal of all traces of their homes and lives. Today, George W Bush promised that we would always be the "best friend" of those ethnic cleansers.

Al Nakba, A cause for celebration?

A Primer

Assalaam 'alaikum wa rahmatullaahi wa barakaatuhu
Peace, God's mercy and blessings be upon you (and all of us - we need it); May 15, 2008 1:59 PM
Unknown said...: Emit R Detsaw:

Obama only has more pledged delegates due to the ridiculous proportional distribution. For example, in a district that has 4 pledged delegates, for it not to be split 2-2, one candidate needs 62.5%+ to get a 3-1 split. That means that winning a district 61%-39% earns nothing.

Under Republican rules of delegates, Hillary has won.

The states that Hillary has won have more pledged delegates than the states that Obama has won. In November, it is winner take all.

As for superdelegates, they are sheep and will jump on a media-led bandwagon.

Obama will not have the popular vote lead on June 3rd.

If the Dems allowed Michigan and Florida to hold their primaries then, Hillary would have won already. The momentum from crushing Obama in both states in January would have won it for her.

Obama is unelectable. Check out this site which breaks down Hillary v McCain and Obama v McCain state by state. Obama does not win the states need to get to 270.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

Also, Rev. Wright makes Obama unelectable. Ayers makes Obama unelectable. Bitter makes Obama unelectable.

If the Dems, nominate Obama - he will lose.; May 15, 2008 1:59 PM
Unknown said...: Yam is most definitely indian, if you look at his name related post then you will see that he gives two examples of indian names for different regions of india. Come on Yam stop pushing your anti moslem theology on us.

Obama 08; May 15, 2008 1:59 PM
Yamaka said...: lee:

My opinion as a staunch HRC supporter is

She should NOT seek VP. If it is forced upon her she may consider.

In the event of cruel trick of fate, if she loses the Nomination, I want her to take a well-deserved vacation with her family and be cool and be a King Maker.

Don't sweat too much for BHO. Let him work harder and earn the Trophy.

I know about 50% of her supporters will either stay home or go to McCain. It also depends on how she is treated by the DNC and BHO.

BRC on May 31st is very key.

I bet BHO will be kicked harder by the RNC, and most probably he will lose the WH and DNC will lose the WH, IMHO.

Is this what the SDs want for the Democratic Party? I think NOT.

Wait and See. :-)
_______________________________

richard:

You are an individual. You have the right to do whatever you want.

I can do whatever I want.

However, here we are talking about BHO who is hiding his full legal name, his ancestry and his culture, etc.

This is a political CRIME he is committing every day! Voters will punish him in the GE, if he is the Nominee. That's my concern.
_________________________________

dave nc:

I use several Pen Names.

Keep guessing.; May 15, 2008 2:02 PM
Yamaka said...: hmmmmmmmmmmmm:

My son in Stanford U is preparing to go to India for a study in "Foreign Cultures.

We talk to many Indians in Houston and in Palo Alto.

Therefore, I am a bit familiar with their names, now.

I use Pen Names.

Keep guessing. You are Off-the-Mark, so far!

:-); May 15, 2008 2:06 PM
Unknown said...: obama and clinton are not running for the republican nomination, you can not say when u have a golf handicap of 42 in other games the more is better, so you are a better golf player than someone with a handicap of 2.

Hillary with her two terms as co president, with her 35 years of immense experience is already in 21 million debt, how do you think that she will be competent to manage the country ???

I would love to see a woman as the president, but i don't think you get the right to the nomination just because you are a woman, you have to EARN it. and she has not.

If the situation was reversed then no body would have looked twice at obama at the same situation, but hillary with her head nodding is still here and is still claiming a clear path to victory.; May 15, 2008 2:08 PM

«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 600 of 1514 Newer› Newest»

Welcome to Democratic Convention Watch

Blog Archive

Democratic Convention 2008

Democratic National Convention History

Denver & Colorado Democrats

DCW in the News

Friends of DCW

2008 Republican National Convention

Tuesday, April 01, 2008

Open Thread

1514 comments:

Tags