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 801 – 1000 of 1514 Newer› Newest»

ed iglehart said...: Amot,

Easley isn't even on the list at the "political markets", and the only four in double digits are (in descending order):

Someone called "Field" - 35.9%
Clinton (H) - 16.5%
Jim Webb - 15.7%
John Edwards - 10.7%

I never heard of this Field person....

xx
ed; May 16, 2008 5:37 AM
Peter said...: We need a VP who can get "white-voters" in states like Missisipi, Georgia, Kansas, North-Carolina, South-Carolina and Ohio. I`m pretty sure Obama will take both Pennsylvania and Michigan quite easily, he has a good margin in PA and I think he will get a good margin in MI shortly. Ohio is close, things need to be done here and i think the demographics of the voters Obama need in Ohio is similar to the ones he didn`t get in NC, SC etc.

If we look at the EV Kerry got in 2004 it was 252, 270 is needed to get the majority. Obama has a good hold on most Kerry-states, his only
"concerns" should be Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota. He is tied with McShame in those states.

But when you look at states Bush won, Obama has the edge in several of those allready. Colorado, Iowa, Nevada and New Mexico. Thats 26 EV and if he keeps Kerry-states and get those four, he will win. But he is also close in Ohio which has 20 EV. FL got also be possible.

But I think the key is to put an extreme amount of states into play. Obamas appeal to young voters and AA will get us halfway there, but he need to increase his appeal to older voters and "white-blue-collar" a little bit. If he gets a VP who can do that, he will put a couple of dozens states into play.
South-Dakota, North-Dakota, Nebraska, Alaska, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Mississipi, Montana, Virginia etc. The more states put in play, the more trouble McShame gets. We have the edge since Obama has few "weak" blue-states. McShame has several "weak" red states.

I agree when it comes to the sex, we can`t have a female VP when the president is AA, that would turn-off some voters completly, some voters we need. We need an experienced white man with a solid track record. Perhapes a war hero who opposed the Iraq war from early on. I`m thinking Jim Webb.; May 16, 2008 5:46 AM
Amot said...: Ed, good joke :)
I have access to a market with 20 or so names for VP, but Easley is not present there either... Strange!

Otherwise checking again the current Governors' list (I have 'ex' in my criteria to say that ex-governors also qualify) some names and faces look good:

Strickland (OH) - many pro's

Freudental (WY) - I like his profile and I think he is a good match

Kulongoski (OR) - looks fine too

Schweitzer (MO) - also many pro's

Strickland and Schweitzer are in the bet market, Kulongoski and Freudental - not. Your opinion about the Four Kings?

Really, I like Freudental and Easley the most. They will look just perfect next to Obama; May 16, 2008 6:08 AM
Ariane said...: Yamaka,
Here are some names, ages and hometowns of 20 men and women from U.S. military forces who have been KIA in Iraq. Could you please tell us which ones are "American names"?

Capt. James Adamouski, 29, Springfield, VA
Sgt. Shawn G. Adams, 21, Dixon, CA
Spc. Jamaal Addison, 22, Roswell, GA
(USMC) Pfc. Christopher Adlesperger, 20, Albuquerque, NM
Pfc. Daniel Agami, 25, Coconut Creek, FL
(USMC) Cpl. Andres Aguilar, 21, Victoria, TX
Sgt. James C. Akin 23, Albuquerque, NM
Spc. Segun Akintade 34, Brooklyn, NY
(USMC) Hospitalman Zachary Alday, 22,Donalsonville, GA
Spc.Alexandre Alexeev, 23, Wilmington, CA
2nd Lt. Tracy Lynn Alger 30, New Auburn, WI
Pfc. Wilson Algrim, 21, Howell, MI
Spc. Azhar Ali, 27, Flushing, NY
(USMC) Cpl. Jeremy Allbaugh 21,Luther, OK
Spc. Yoe Aneiros, 20, Newark, NJ
Staff Sgt. Jason Arnette, 24, Amelia, VA
Pfc. Michael Arciola 20, Elmsford NY
Cpl. Nicholas Arvanitis, 22, Salem, NH
Sgt. Julia Atkins, 22, Bossier City, LA
(USMC) Pfc. Lionel Ayro, 22, Jeanerette, LA

Extra credit!: Explain the reason for your choices of which of these American soldiers' names are "American names."
******************************************************************************************************************
Details of their units and how they died; May 16, 2008 6:26 AM
ed iglehart said...: Nice shot, Ariane!

Bulls-eye!
xx
ed; May 16, 2008 6:35 AM
Ariane said...: Amot, I dont think Edwards is considered a "Judas" anywhere near what Richardson is, since he was a Clinton appointee and Bill Clinton swears that Bill R told him he would not endorse Obama. Of course I personally can have no idea what really went on between them, if Richardson did say something like that, or if he may have thought it was noncommital but Bill C heard it differently. Carville when he defended his Judas comment said that he had not called anyone else Judas but in this case he insists there was a commitment- -and so do a lot of other Clinton supporters who believe Clinton's version - -and a lot of Hispanics are included in that group so I don't know how much help he would be with the Hispanic vote.

Anyway you're probably right that we need a White Christian. That's another thing that rules out Rendell.

I like Edwards and i would like to see him as VP but don't know if he is the best choice. Or if Elizabeth's health might mean he would not want to take the job.
If you think Edwards would also be considered a sell-out, does that mean you rule out anyone who endorsed Obama?

I really like Bob Casey but agree he is too new. and I think he is pro-life which would be a problem for some of the party.

I don't think Gore (who should be our President) wants anything to do with elections ever again after the mess of 2000. And neither does Tipper.

I dont really like Bayh for some reason. Maybe it just bugged me how HE could endorse before the primary & campaign for Clinton, but then told other Indiana SDs not to! "Do as I say, not as I do."

Bloomburg? Talk about elitist! the Repubs will be all over that.

What about Brian Schweitzer, Gov of Montana? OK so he's not as old as you think he should be. He'll be 53 at the time of the election.

Phil Bredesden of Tenn. is a Southern moderate Democrat, he is getting up there, I think he is about 65. my relatives there like him and I like some things i had heard about him that he has tried to make more transparency and has done some things with health care coverage for uninsured.... but don't know very much.

I still like Webb too.; May 16, 2008 7:18 AM
suzihussein22 said...: Ariane-Hi. Phil Bredeson(my Gov.) wasn't very successful with the healthcare reform. It didn't seem to me his transparency was crystal clear. He's also getting ready to cut up to 2,000 state jobs at the end of July. He managed to turn a surplus into a deficit in 2 yrs. I don't know if he would want that vetted.; May 16, 2008 7:34 AM
Amot said...: I agree Bloomberg is elitist... unfortunately because he is the strongest on economy. Another negative is he is almost unknown nationally.

Edwards is considered elitist too. And because de facto he put the end of the campaign with his endorsement he will be considered sell-out.

I consider only late endorsements weak and suitable. Bayh is late endorsement. And he was not as hard campaigner for Hillary as Rendell was. I am not fan of Bayh but he fits the profile...

Shweitzer is young, but his resume looks good, plus he secures one more state...

Bredesen was in my long list, but I deleted him - he doesn't look good next to Obama and he will bring no state to the race either.

If only Freudental was not coming from such a small state...

I agree Gore wouldn't like to be a VP - unfortunately!

Honestly Strickland and Easley
fit the profile best if we add the bonus state for each!; May 16, 2008 7:36 AM
Peter said...: Bloomberg is not a good candidate. The only reason to choose Bloomberg is to gain cred regarding economic-issues, that is not Obamas problem, but Mcshame. Bloomberg could end up with McShame.
I think Obama should choose someone who can "counter" McCains warhero story and someone who can attract some older voters. Geography should also be an issue, choosing someone from possible swing-states like Indiana, Ohio, Virginia or Missouri could be good. But it has to be someone who actually can attract new voters as a VP and can carry their home-state, Edwards didn`t manage to do that in 04. But Obama is also a much better candidate than Kerry, so it is not that fair to compare.; May 16, 2008 7:45 AM
Amot said...: Last polls showed Dems are more trusted about the war than GOP is, so I don't think Obama has to oppose the war hero credit. He only needs to state that being hero doesn't mean you can run a country especially if you are weak on both domestic and foreign affairs!

Only two governors come from big swing states and can influence the outcome - Easley and Strickland! I don't know if they can attract new voters...; May 16, 2008 7:58 AM
ed iglehart said...: Recollections from Obama's college days

" Siddiqi says Obama was a follower of comedian-activist Dick Gregory's vegetarian diet. "I think self-deprivation was his schtick, denying himself pleasure, good food and all of that."

But it wasn't exactly an ascetic life. There was plenty of time for reading (Gabriel Garcia Marquez, V.S. Naipaul) and listening to music (Van Morrison, the Ohio Players, Bob Dylan). The two, along with others, went out for nights on the town. "He wasn't entirely a hermit," Siddiqi said.

Siddiqi said his female friends thought Obama was "a hunk."

"We were always competing," he said. "You know how it is. You go to a bar and you try hitting on the girls. He had a lot more success. I wouldn't out-compete him in picking up girls, that's for sure."

Obama was a tolerant roommate. Siddiqi's mother, who had never been around a black man, came to visit and she was rude; Obama was nothing but polite. Siddiqi himself could be intemperate _ he called Obama an Uncle Tom, but "he was really patient. I'm surprised he suffered me.""

nice
xx
ed; May 16, 2008 8:43 AM
UUbuntu said...: Wow -- a whole conversation full of articulate and informed people on the VP choices! I'd almost given up.

Anyhow, I like many choices -- some I hadn't thought of until reading them here.

I agree that the VP choice isn't critical to the election (Dukakis, with a lead in the polls made an excellent choice (Lloyd Bentsen), and ended up losing to Bush, who chose Quayle(!) -- who wasn't even the best choice from Indiana), and Lieberman (before he went postal on the war) was a far better choice than Cheney. Furthermore, while choosing Al Gore in 1992 is NOW seen as an inspired choice for Clinton, it wasn't seen as a very good choice at the time (two candidates with almost identical regional appeal and philosophical experience -- the "dubba-bubba"). So the VP choice will probably be reflective of Obama's judgement and temperamant rather than an appeal to a particular region or constituency.

But that shouldn't stop the speculating :-). Below is the estimated odds as put forth in Intrade, as of today, along with my take on them.

Clinton 5:1 odds (17%)-- No chance. It seems apparent that, although they have very similar politics, they don't have similar political philosophies. Clinton's strength would have been the team she'd have in the white house, and as VP, you don't get to bring in your team.

Jim Webb 6:1 odds (15%) -- Good chance, good choice, for all of the reasons others have put forth.

Edwards 8:1 (12%) -- While I like Edwards, I think a better choice would be as attorney general. His appeal in NC isn't as great as his appeal nationally, and he didn't do a whole lot for John Kerry 4 years ago.

Kathleen Sebelius 9:1 (10%) -- An interesting choice too, but potentially troublesome, as she and Obama tend to appeal to the same constituencies. If she and Obama get along, it could be like Clinton-Gore, but then it may not broaden Obama's appeal beyond the Democratic base. Since Kansas is probably off of the table in the general election anyway, she wouldn't be my first choice.

Richardson 12:1 (8%) -- I like this choice, but he can be gaffe prone. Keep in mind that gaffes by the VP aren't necessarily a big deal (see Quayle), but given Carville's comment, there may be a lot of Clinton supporters that will view this choice as a slap in the face.

Al Gore 15:1 (7%) -- Been there, done that. If he's interested, he'd be an excellent choice. But that's a big if.

Ted Strickland 15:1 (7%) -- I wasn't familiar with this choice until I read others' comments on this blog. From reading his Wikipedia article, he might be an excellent choice, complete with the trivia piece that the networks love -- he and Obama share a birthday!

Mark Warner 17:1 (6 %): He may not be interested (he dropped out of the presidential sweepstakes last year), and he may be too conservative, but he does appeal to VA voters. However, Jim Webb is better known and likely a better choice.

Reid
Rendell
Nunn
Casey

All good choices, all 20:1 shots. The list goes on and on.

Keep in mind that, though Chuck Hagel has been mentioned here, he is a very conservative Republican senator from Nebraska, and outside of his stance on the Iraq war (which has been a beacon of light from that party) he has been a reliably conservative vote on a wide variety of legislation. He would be a non-starter for me -- much like John McCain was a non-starter for me when discussing John Kerry's possible VP choices 4 years ago.

I've enjoyed everyone's comments and look forward to some more.; May 16, 2008 9:22 AM
ed iglehart said...: On the betting "market", I've sold 150 units of HRC as Veep at 21.5%.

At the present 16.8 she's still an attractive short.

I expect to be able to cover well below 10.
;)
ed; May 16, 2008 9:30 AM
JayW said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 16, 2008 9:35 AM
JayW said...: Where is the retarded Aunty Jean form the toothless family in Texas? She hasn't posted for a while. Must be her "boyfriend" is over visiting. (What a bunch of crap right? We all know a hatefull old lady with a house full of cats that posts on the internet ALL DAY/NIGHT doesnt have a boyfriend.)

Anyway... someone please explain to me the big deal that people are making about HRC supporters not voting for Obama in the general election. The national polls show that either HRC or Obama beat McCain in a heads up match. So, when polling takes place and people are asked to vote for Obama or McCain... arent all the retarded HRC supporters that wont vote for Obama and will vote for McCain already factored into the poll. It seems that we dont need to convince people like Aunty Jean. She supported a loser and will then vote in the general election for a loser. I guess it is in her blood.; May 16, 2008 9:37 AM
ed iglehart said...: I see a total delegate lead of 183 with 189 pledged delegates remaining.

Hmmmm.; May 16, 2008 9:49 AM
Yamaka said...: Good Morning Fellow Democrats:

Another cloudy day in Houston.

Ariane:

You deliberately miss my core issue:

It is a fact only about half of the Left-leaning Electorate has voted in the Primary.

It is a fact you need most of them to vote for the Nominee to clinch 271 EVs.

Most of those people have problem knowing/understanding BHO. Because of his "Funny Name" as he put it.

If the Democratic Party fields the Skinny Guy with a Funny Name as the Candidate in the GE, I bet my pool that the Party will lose both the WH plus the Congress.

Because he has a poor Name Recognition and very poor experience.

If you don't want to accept my thesis, be my guest to go to the deep end of the pool for drowning!
_________________________________-

Folks:

Your VP obsession is mind-boggling!

Your Skinny has a long way to clinch the Nomination, here you waste your useless lives on VP selection. Morons.

________________________________

My Math is Still alive and kicking:

1909 + 103 + 200 = 2212 a few more than the Real Hurdle 2209.

Still 265 SDs left in the undeclared side,

Where is your Momentum?
What happened to Ed's endorsement?

It is NOT over till the Million Dollar Girl Hillary says so or at the Convention in late Aug.

Joe P. Goebbels of BHO's Gang, get a life!
:-); May 16, 2008 9:52 AM
ed iglehart said...: Pity I don't fancy your pool, Yarmulka; May 16, 2008 10:03 AM
Anonymous said...: Kansas: McCain vs. Clinton Rasmussen McCain 53, Clinton 39, Und. 8 McCain +14.0
Kansas: McCain vs. Obama Rasmussen McCain 55, Obama 34, Und. 11 McCain +21.0; May 16, 2008 10:16 AM
Amot said...: Yes, Jim,
that means Clinton will win Kansas, right?; May 16, 2008 10:21 AM
Anonymous said...: Amot,
Not likely, but with Kathleen Sebelius looks good for us.
Look at Arkansas; May 16, 2008 10:27 AM
Anonymous said...: One might wonder why she polls 7 points better in a state Obama had a landslide in.
Voter remorse?; May 16, 2008 10:40 AM
jpsedona said...: Yam,

Some responses to your most recent posts"

1) Including FL & MI (option 5), Obama now leads Hillary by about +90 delegates.

Pledged delegates: +65
MI District delegates: +25 or more (uncommitted supporting Obama)

2) "What happened to Ed's endorsement?"

Those 'pledged delegates' are changing the numbers. You are not following the totals close enough. Check out the "Edwards Delegate Status" link.

3) "there are 265 SDs still left at this minute - my prediction is most of them about 200-210 will move to HRC between June 3 and 31"

You know that there are add-ons between now and 6/3, as well as likely endorsements for one or the other before then. So, you really need to project how many she'll get between now and 6/3, and what the pool remaining will be on 6/3.

4) "Her constituency is broader and deeper representing about 55%, while his is shallow and narrower about 45%: In NJ 9.9%, PA 9.2% CA 8.3% OH 8.7% FL 16.9% margin that HRC won"

So, what? If her appeal was so great in the votes, she'd be winning the pledged delegates. Your caucus argument is bogus; she was playing by the same rules as she was. Doesn't she have appeal to those who do participate in caucuses?; May 16, 2008 10:42 AM
Amot said...: Jim,
I agree he polls worse than her in KS, but they will both lose. I don't see the Sebelius ticket honestly. Even she can't secure this stae for Dems plus if you have read my VP criterias she doesn't fit. Hillary can win Kansas if she gets Sebelius as VP but two women on the ticket? Too many sexists live in USA...

Arkansas is the only state Obama can't win and Hillary will win easily, I admit. But there are many more states she can't win and he has big chances... Don't get me wrong - I don't think either of the two can lose GE - they are both much stronger candidates than McCain is.

I am interested to hear your opinion on TX - what should Obama do to win Texas? Not that he needs it but it will be nice to get a big Dems GE victory :); May 16, 2008 10:49 AM
Peter said...: I think Kansas is off the table.
If you look at states where Clinton has the edge compared to Obama where it is close, you`ll find: Florida, Ohio, Arkansas and West Virginia. Off these Obama can`t win WV and Arkansas, I also think Obama would have problems winning NH, but Clinton is also trailing there at the moment. Clinton would probably carry FL and OH, Obama is a bit behind here and need to do some work in these states.

If you look at Obama, he would carry Washington and Oregon with ease, Clinton actually trails in Oregon and is close with McCain in OR. Obama has the edge in Colorado, Iowa, New Mexico and nevada compared to Clinton at the moment.
But while Clinton probably only have one "wild-card" (Kentucky), Obama has several. But to get these wild-cards he need to get a little more appeal amoung older voters and white-blue-collar. If he does that, he could have a chance in several "red-states", including Indiana and several other s. Obama is within single digits in almost a dozen-states, states where Clinton is trailing by 15-20%.

So both candidates have states where they can win and the other don`t stand a chance, but i think Obama has more of those states, several more.; May 16, 2008 11:03 AM
themann1086 said...: Both Democratic candidates will crush McSame in November. Electoral-vote.com has a good run-down of the current state of polling. Considering that both of them still beat him while they and their supporters are wailing away at each other, we have nowhere to go but up. They both have broad, highly-motivated bases which will work for the other when the loser endorses the nominee (who will almost definitely be Obama; sorry Hillary fans). This has been possibly the greatest primary in the history of presidential campaigns, and I for one am proud to have been a part of it.; May 16, 2008 11:18 AM
jpsedona said...: A few comments & opinions about VP choices in general:

1) The MOST important issue is that the choice is vetted (does the name Thomas Eagleton mean anyhting to you?).

2) The ability for a VP candidate to deliver a state is in general highly overrated.

Sometimes a presidential candidate won't carry their own state (Gore 2000); McCain could have to defend AZ this yr.

3) Having a VP candidate that's qualified to be president is important; having an unqualified VP choice can be disasterous. Many of you might recall Ross Perot's VP choice in 1992, Jim Stockdale. The VP debate with Gore, Quayle and Stockdale was extremely uncomfortable to watch; Stockdale even made Quayle look qualified.

4) Geographic balance is not as important as it once was (prior to widespread TV ownership). Clinton chose Gore, that didn't have any negative effects.

5) Governors (and former governors) tend to make better VP candidates you're picking then to carry their state. This is because their political network in the state is much more active than a Senator's; and more widespread than a Representative. They closer with mayors and state house politicians. They also get a lot more play in local media.; May 16, 2008 11:20 AM
Richard said...: I would like to re-propose my previous choice for VP: former Sen. Bill Bradley.

Bill Bradley's Pros:

- Name Recognition (Olympic Gold Medalist, Hall-of-fame basketball player, second-place Presidential primary contender in 2000)
- Well liked
- Long Resume
- Experience in foreign affairs
- Solid liberal street cred.
- Not currently in Senate (no majority worries)
- Opponent of war
- Long-time Obama supporter; May 16, 2008 11:23 AM
Yamaka said...: "(What a bunch of crap right? We all know a hatefull old lady with a house full of cats that posts on the internet ALL DAY/NIGHT doesnt have a boyfriend.)"

JayW:

Please go to a mirror and see who is hateful, here!

:-(__________________________________

jp:

You know for a fact that

1. HRC's main constituency is working people, women and older folks.

2. Most of these people shun Caucuses because they are protracted cumbersome and not confidential.

3. The proof was evident in our 2-Step in Texas: She won clearly the Primary by 4% and lost in the Caucus.

4. Bill Clinton pulled lot more of younger crowd.

That's the reason her 55% Constituency does not show up in the pledged delegates.

Further proof is HRC won NJ by 9.9% PA 9.2% CA 8.3% OH 8.7% and FL 16.9%. If you average these margins you will get a 10% margin overall. That's the point I make, which I believe reflects the true HRC's strength in the country.

The current Pledged Delegate count is just a false reading of the temperature of the body of American Electorate. A Bogus Number. A more thoughtful assessment is what I just gave you.

I hope the SDs listen. They may very well. If not, they would have already moved en mass to the Suicidal Sect of BHO!!

Still 264 left, at this minute (I need only about 200-205 of them). I thought Ed had about 32 with FL and MI. How many of them did cross to the Suicidal Sect? Not very many. I gave only 50%. Rest belongs to HRC.

Wait and See.

Follow Option 6 carefully.

DCW Left Last BOX is the Box to watch.

:-); May 16, 2008 11:32 AM
Amot said...: Bradley is way too liberal, doesn't qualify!

We need a VP who has a good understanding with Obama but not his cloning or his die-hard supporter!; May 16, 2008 11:36 AM
Yamaka said...: "A few comments & opinions about VP choices in general:"

jp:

You said you are NOT a BHO supporter and you are a Right Leaning Moderate!

How come you are into this VP game, when the Nomination is as uncertain as Texas weather?

Don't get sucked into this

Suicidal Sect of BHO!

That's for Piper's Children.

Puppet Masters' Puppet has not spoken as yet on this VP game!

:-); May 16, 2008 11:36 AM
jpsedona said...: Yam,

I say this tongue-in-cheek, on caucuses not being confidential... one could infer that Clinton supporters are embarassed to come out to caucuses and say that they support her.

As for VP choices, I am am just commenting on criteria and not specific candidates. I think that there are a number of VP choices that either candidate could make that would help a Dem ticket.; May 16, 2008 11:48 AM
Anonymous said...: Here are the current numbers from electoral-vote.come.

State-by-State:
Obama 114, Clinton 84. Oregon moves from Obama to Blue. (OR was Blue yesterday, but I missed it.)

National:
Obama 237, Cinton 273.

.....

Jim wrote (with a little editing):

countjellybean said...
(")Here's another element for the Hillary post-mortem. Not only did Hillary Clinton not consult with leading economists before announcing her support for the gas tax holiday, she threw them under the bus"

Thank goodness she threw (them) under, economists are a group of
idiots who have no common sense.

I am gratified to see that we agree on something, that there will be no place for educated, independent people in a Hillary Clinton administration.; May 16, 2008 12:01 PM
Peter said...: Yam

You are as usual full of BS. But the main point is: The nomination is not unsure, Obama lacks just over 120 delegates to seal the deal. That means he would need just a couple of dozen supers, the rest he will get from the remaining 5 "contests". HRC on the other hand, needs around 309 delegates. That means she would need roughly 75% of the remaining delegates (both pledged and supers). How many supers have she gotten the last couple of weeks?

You know this is over. Talking about VP is natural at this point.; May 16, 2008 12:03 PM
Anonymous said...: Good morning everyone. I have the day off and am just doing some work around the house. Once again you have been a prolific bunch. It took me over an hour to glance through the latest comments on this and the previous page!

I just made up my mind on who to vote for for President and have not even thought about who would be a good person for VP. A lot of the names thrown out there I do not even know, but I read one post mentioning our Governor and I would say that if you are going to look at any politican from Oregon you should look at our past Governor (Kitzhaber) he has worked tirelessly on Health Care issues since he left office 6 years ago and has quite an extensive executive and legislative history,

I do have a question though. I read that Michigan has a proposal in to the RBC that asks the MI delegates be seated 69 for Hillary and 59 for Barack. I also see that FL has proposed halfing its delegates. Does the RBC just vote on those proposals (up or down) and then it is decided or what?

If both are accepted where is the election at? I mean has anyone won?; May 16, 2008 12:10 PM
Aunt Jean said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 16, 2008 12:17 PM
themann1086 said...: The veepstakes are like fantasy baseball: fun to speculate over!

I'm working off the writing of Chris Bowers, liberal activist and founder of Open Left. Back in December, he wrote On Choosing A Vice-President about how you should go about picking one. He's expanded on this a lot, and I highly recommend reading his writing on this and every other subject. The basic idea is "reinforcing, not balancing". You choose a candidate NOT based on how they shore up weaknesses of the prez; you choose one who reinforces their strengths.

Along those lines, an Obama ticket should include a VP who represents: Change; Outside Washington; Able To Bring (Former) Republicans To Them; Judgment, Especially About Iraq.

There's no perfect candidate here, but there's several good options. Gov. Sebelius fits this pretty well, and might also be able to quicken bridging the divide between Obama's and Clinton's camps. Wes Clark was against the war, but he's not exactly from Outside the Beltway. Jim Webb might fit the bill, but he's a bit of a loose cannon and I wouldn't want to jeopardize his Senate seat.

Rendell is a bad bad bad bad choice; I'm from PA and he is your standard machine pol, definitely not the kind to reinforce Obama's message. Casey is also a bit of a standard, career pol; his father was Governor of PA. Also, after a contentious primary with the most viable female candidate in the history of this country, you probably shouldn't pick an anti-choice candidate for veep.

Alright, Hillraisers: who would you like to see running as Hillary's veep if she had the nomination?; May 16, 2008 12:18 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Jayw I'm not telling you any more leave my family out of this I don't know what your problem is but I've had enough one more post like that and not only will I be talking to Matt and oreo I will being talking to other people. What I am and what I do you have no idea so before you start insulting me you best look at your own life. I'm not posting 24/7. How do you know maybe my boyfriend is out of town on a job or works nights you have no idea but it doesn't matter you have sat there and insulting not only me but my family STOP!! I'm asking you to stop and respect my wishes. Jean; May 16, 2008 12:20 PM
ed iglehart said...: Sprite,

As I understand it, the rules committee can consider the proposals, make their own proposals, and rule however they please.

Who has won? Obama, of course, (barring a photograph of him in flagrante delicto with a sheep (or other non-human)).

I hope you decided on a winner.

xx
ed; May 16, 2008 12:24 PM
Yamaka said...: "The veepstakes are like fantasy baseball: fun to speculate over!"

themann:

Amen. Well Said.

But, when you are going to lose the Nomination, why bother?

Hillary will NOT jump the gun.

That's for immature inexperienced Suicidal Sect of BHO, the Piper, who is taking you all to the Deepest End of the Sorrowful Sea!

Guess, how pitiful he would lose KY, PR - the presumptive front-runner losing here?

He would lose big time in PR that would give HRC a humongous Popular Vote swell of close to 200K!

Nomination will belong to HRC - not for the Empty Suit, the Manchurian Candidate, the Trojan Horse.

We know where his Achilles heel is!; May 16, 2008 12:30 PM
Amot said...: Ed,
RBC can do anything - they can decide how many delegates to seat, how many to allocate to each candidate and what portion of vote should everyone have. So proposals are only starting point, it can end anywhere including the Clinton idea...

Jean,
one more post like that and I will talk to Matt and Oreo myself. JayW is really insulting at the wrong place! Hope your mother is better.; May 16, 2008 12:34 PM
Anonymous said...: Amot,
"I am interested to hear your opinion on TX - what should Obama do to win Texas? Not that he needs it but it will be nice to get a big Dems GE victory :)"

This may shock you and I am sure others will call it dreaming, but
IMHO both can win Texas.
He would have a tougher time, but if he can get hispanics then it can be done.
She could win by 4.
The two on one ticket would win by 7.
I live in what was a bright red county and quickly going blue.
Noriega is the key. I think he will win the Senate back if he gets a little help with the working class.
You can't believe how hard it is around here to find Bushy now.
Most of my relatives are Republicans or Blue Dogs and would go Clinton and a majority would tag Obama if he can veer a little to the center.; May 16, 2008 12:42 PM
Amot said...: Jim,
I asked the question because I believe he will win TX (didn't know she has good chances too, thanks). I was interested to hear a local opinion what should be the strategy and you say it is doable with hispanics :) Thanks again!

YAMAKA
when option 6 happens Hillary will win, I am convinced now!

P.S. Unfortunately there is no options 6 and there are no chances for Hillary too :); May 16, 2008 12:47 PM
ed iglehart said...: regarding the rules committee

And, John Edwards just ruled hinmself out as VP nominee.

xx
ed; May 16, 2008 12:51 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Amot thank you. I would like to say something. I do believe that you guys see something in obama that I don't but I do believe that there are some good people on this blog. Now I know that most if not all will disagree with me but give it some thought. You say McCain will lose in nov. Well I think he will win in Nov. because there are some mad Hillary supporters out there. You ask and this make sence if you stop and think about it. If most [which is wrong I believe] [I'm not saying there's not a lot]of Hillary supporters are low income people they will get help from the gov. who ever is in there.You say but it would hurt the rest of her/ his family and she says that it won't not really because they make more than enough money. Wouldn't it better to offer the VP to Hillary than to push her aside which will make Hillary supporters even madder.If you are willing to admit Hillary is a smart person yes she was over confidant she should have made heads rolls and didn't. Plus Bill didn't help her but that is water under the bridge.. Now before you out and out say NO reallt think about it. At first I said NO way but then I started giving it thought. It's maybe not perfect but I do believe that it's a way to get the biggest voteing party. Plus this will sooth some angry feelings and maybe then the party can unite.So please give it some thought and let me know.I've got to go see someone it will be great seeing him but it's only for a few hours [ but I guess that's better than nothing]then he's gone again I will be so glad when he gets this over with if you know what I mean. Jean; May 16, 2008 12:58 PM
RobH said...: Jean,

I disagree with a lot of what you say, and how you say it but I second Amot's post of a moment ago, and was about to write the asme when he beat me to it. JayW's post is DESPICABLE. It has no place here and is simply designed to inflame you and destroy the tone of this discussion. As I said the other day, you do have the power to stop it by simply not responding. Like a spoiled child, he will go away when you stop giving him attention.; May 16, 2008 1:00 PM
RobH said...: And Jean,

No, just 'cause JayW ends in a cap, and RobH ends in a cap, does not mean we're the same guy.

Unlike Yam, I only have one name here, I'm me. You have me support (on this one...); May 16, 2008 1:01 PM
RobH said...: WOW! WOW! WOW! WOW!

I started reviewing the thread this morning for reaction to the VP discussion idea, ‘cause I thought I’d respond to individual’s comments. In the first hour or so, there were few comments, and I thought “well, I guess nobody’s really interested.”

Then, it started picking up, and I started taking notes. I quit at three pages.

THANK YOU THANK YOU, to all those who turned this thread back into what it’s supposed to be, reasoned discourse (with humor), not course attacks. Thanks.; May 16, 2008 1:03 PM
RobH said...: And now for aome specific comments re VP:

Tyler @11:32:
Agree w/ Gore’s credentials, but he’s not on my short list, ‘cause I think he wouldn’t want it. A) he’s been there, done that, b) he may be more effective outside of gov’t. EPA would make sense, but might actually constrain him. Also, judging by Webb’s beatdown of GWB, I wouldn’t worry that he’s too close to R.

Leah @ 12:28 and all who participated in the Rendell exchange:
Yeah, I forgot about his Farrakhan moment. While I think his attractiveness to HRC supporters and appeal in PA (and Ohio) si significant, I worry that would be more than offset by the attack machine’s compounding of Obama/Wright, Rendell/Farrakhan. Too much

As an aside, what I’ve seen of Casey is interesting, I agree with whoever commented that he appears ‘effete’. Appearances matter, and I’d hate to see ‘the machine’ portray them as
‘nancy boys.’ PS Rendell would be the opposite.

As an aside to that, and on appearances only, I’ve got the same problem w/ Edwards. While they ‘look great on stage together’, the $400 haircut and huge mansion issues will put him/them in line for the same treatment.

Further Leah:
Yes, I counted on your response re Sebelius (she is on my shortest of short lists.) I can’t agree w/ Amot’s rule number 1 re no woman on the ticket – while I can completely grasp the argument (that’s what I meant by my shorthand in my invitation to discuss when I wrote “too much change”, I don’t subscribe to it. I think the Obama and Sebelius on stage in Denver as the face of directional change for the US would be THUNDER. Can you imagine??

Also Leah, I have to say (and in some ways I’m saddened by it) I agree with your resounding NO, regarding HRC. It saddens me because she has been a significant figure and I rue the potential loss of her die hard supporters. But the “court intrigue” – will she snipe him from the VP’s office, what role does Bill play, and her high negatives, and her snuffing out (and probable chasing over to McCain) of independent voters, simply outweighs all.

Hippolytus @ 1:29:
Kind of agree w/ you that Bayh seems light, thought it’s just my ignorance/lack of info. Then I remembered. Wasn’t Dan Quayle from Indiana. I think I was making a subconscious assignment…..; May 16, 2008 1:05 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Amot thaks for asking about my mother she is doing well . I only have just a few hours alone but tomorrow I have to share him with my famile they have all gone camping oh well I like to go camping so I guess it will be ok. ha ha.Got to really go this time have a nice day everyone. Jean; May 16, 2008 1:06 PM
ed iglehart said...: Rob,

it's "coarse", you under-educated working class twit!
;)
ed; May 16, 2008 1:07 PM
JayW said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; May 16, 2008 1:08 PM
Yamaka said...: For ALL the Open minded fair people out there:

Option 6 (DCW Left Last Box) is the most legitimate thing to do:

1. Voters of MI and FL did NOT commit any crime, did NOT violate any Rule - Gov Dean will vouch for it.

Only the Party Officials and DNC committed the horrendous felony, therefore identify the culprits and punish THEM properly, not the voters. Potential culprit # 2-4.

2. FL should be AS-IS as both HRC and BHO were there on the ballot.

3. Divide the 'Uncommitted' votes of MI equally between ALL the candidates who were competing in Jan, except HRC who herself already earned the 55% of the votes. Accordingly, as per the choice of the Primary voters, SEAT ALL delegates.

4. This is fair, doable - can be accepted by both Candidates, provided BHO is a "Uniter" not just a demagogue, talking big things but delivering none.

Therefore DCW Left Last BOX is the only Legitimate Box.

The Real Hurdle is 2209.

HRC can jump the Hurdle:

1909 + 103 + 200 SDs = 2212. This is quite possible for her.

Yes.. She....Can be the First Woman POTUS.

:-); May 16, 2008 1:12 PM
Anonymous said...: Thanks Ed. That article explains it. So basically what it is saying is that the RBC members interviewed agree that something will be done BUT it will NOT be fully seating according to the votes in the states of MI and FL (which is what Yamaka is both arguing for and counting on). In the end, if they interviewed the right RBC members whatever decision they make will NOT benefit one candidate or the other in any significant way.

Aunt Jean: If / when Barack gets the nomination I see nothing inherently wrong with having Hillary on the ticket as VP.

Ed (and Oregon Dem who asked last night) I voted for a current US Senator for President! Is that enough of a hint? :-)

Oh and Oregon Dem yes I am in the 5th CD in Oregon and Welches was a pretty good guess as to where I live. Close not exact.; May 16, 2008 1:17 PM
jean said...: Hey.
JayW you need to be blocked.
you have wasted enough of peoples time.
Now that I have finished wasting my time in giving you the time.
Does anyone think that the reason that Edwards said no to VP that he could be setting up Hillary?
Or do you think the wife said no way.
I think there is much more behind the scenes than we think.
Jean not Aunt Jean.
By the way, it looks like I missed you Aunt Jean. Hope all is well.
jean; May 16, 2008 1:21 PM
jpsedona said...: Yam,

You are living in the past... there are only 5 options on DCW (right now and for a while).

You should read the comments on the FL & MI blog page for opinions to option "5" (the one you like).

With respect to splitting the "55 uncommitted", any candidate could compete for them at the district conventions. Obama did not win them all. The remainder get allocated in June by the MI Dem Central Committee. Any other process is NOT option 5 (the one you like).; May 16, 2008 1:24 PM
RobH said...: Ed,

Of coarse it it..'ya got me.
Still laughing even now.

You proved it....wallah!

(Still trying to come up w/ an altered version of touche'. One presents itself immediately, but I'll refrain....; May 16, 2008 1:26 PM
JayW said...: Dumb Quotes by Sen. Hillary Clinton

"I'm not going to put my lot in with economists." --after being asked by George Stephanopoulos about economists' claims that her gas tax holiday proposal would not bring down gas prices

"I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base." --on visiting Bosnia in 1996, contradicting other accounts that said there was no threat of gunfire. Clinton later said she "misspoke"

"On a couple of occasions in the last weeks, I just said some things that I knew not to be the case." --on misspeaking about her Bosnia visit

"The question is, we face a lot of dangers in the world and, in the gentleman's words, we face a lot of evil men. And what in my background equips me to deal with evil and bad men?" --laughing off a question from a voter who asked Clinton what qualified her to deal with leaders from countries such as Iran and North Korea

"I just want to add, I did not say that it should be done, but I certainly recognize why Gov. Spitzer is trying to do it. And we have failed." --responding in a Democratic debate to New York Gov. Elliot Spitzer's plan to give drivers' licenses to illegal immigrants. Moments earlier, Clinton had said, "They are driving on our roads. The possibility of them having an accident that harms themselves or others is just a matter of the odds."

"Aww don't feel noways tired. I've come too faarrr from where I started frum." --adopting a Southern drawl while speaking at a church (Watch video clip)

"We are going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

"God bless the America we are trying to create."

"I have to confess that it's crossed my mind that you could not be a Republican and a Christian."

"We have a lot of kids who don't know what works means. They think work is a four-letter word."

"I have said that I'm not running and I'm having a great time being pres -- being a first-term senator." --on her presidential ambitions

"I'm not going to have some reporters pawing through our papers. We are the president."

"He ran a gas station down in St. Louis... No, Mahatma Gandhi was a great leader of the 20th century." --introducing a quote by Mahatma Gandhi

"Who is going to find out? These women are trash. Nobody's going to believe them." --on Bill Clinton's bimbo eruptions

"If I didn't kick his ass every day, he wouldn't be worth anything." --on Bill Clinton; May 16, 2008 1:37 PM
Peter said...: The way Obama answered the "Bush/McCain"-attack was simply brilliant. He has managed to tie McCain to Bush in a clear and obvious wat, McCain can`t get himself loose from Bush now. Being linked to Bush is worse than being linked to rev Wright or anyone else for that matter. Being linked to one of the worst presidents EVER, is not a good thing. Obama has done that brilliantly and at the same time he has clearly shown that he can be tough. His response was really good and the way democrats came together and attacked Bush/McCain yesterday shows that this party will be united around Obama.; May 16, 2008 1:48 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Something to think about.

The talking heads on TV a day or so ago said that 'if' Obama picked Clinton then Obama could roll back the office of the V.P. and send him/her back over to the Congress and out of the White House. This would mean that the V.P. would be more like a V.P. used to be and not have the position/powers like Cheney does now.

Now in this scenario it is possible that Obama would be able to work within the rules and limit Hillary's involvement 'if' he were forced to put her on his ticket.

I don't really know the history of V.P.s increasing power, but I am sure others on this thread might have some insight on this issue.; May 16, 2008 1:58 PM
Yamaka said...: "Any other process is NOT option 5 (the one you like)."

jp:

Thanks for the clarification.

There is no Option 6 - it is now Option 5, the one shown on the Left Last Box of DCW, the one I favor the most.

:-); May 16, 2008 2:01 PM
Yamaka said...: Folks:

Be real, for once in your entire life!

If the Democratic Party chooses the Suicidal Path by fielding the least vetted, least experienced and the RISKIEST Candidate to the GE, then HRC must just keep quiet for sometime - let her not take VP nonsense, she doesn't need it, she has been a Co-President for 8 years - and prepare for the 2012 against the Second Term of the Maverick!

BHO will be a dead meat in the GE, if he steals the Nomination. Pelosi and Reed would go into Retirement Homes!!

I won't give him more than 100 EVs, that's it, folks.

That is the choice the Party has to make.

Hillary: say NO..NO...NO to VP!!!!

Your ARE a Presidential Timber.

:-); May 16, 2008 2:09 PM
Emit R Detsaw said...: Since it probably won't matter anyway, but fun to get Yam all spun up, here is how Emit feels MI and FL should be handled.

1) MI and FL Super Delegates are reduced to .5 as if they were Overseas. This would be consistant with the rules on the book for moving ahead of the 1st Tuesday in Feb without getting a Mother May I permission slip.

2) Florida election results count for delegate distribution, but also at the .5 weight for each delegate awarded. Same reason, that is the minimum penalty for voting ahead of Feb.

3) Since not all of the candidates (removed or left) names were on the ballot, then the distribution presented by the State should be the basis for distribution. Once again, there should be the .5 weight applied.

This does several good things. It penalizes the States for moving up their primaries, it counts the votes of the people, and it heals most wounds.

Yams arguement that you should distribute the MI votes by splitting up the 40% to all of the other candidates is not viable. You have to consider that the soonest that the election results should count would have been the 1st Tuesday in February. Therefore, at worst (or best) that 40% should only be split by the candidates that were still in the race on Feb 5th.

I was a non-counted vote in the Florida Hanging Chad fisaco, so know what it feels like. But rules are rules. If you count them they have to be at a penalty for not following the rules.; May 16, 2008 2:23 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: The 'future' President Obama is on TV answering reporters questions. He is very presidential looking today. We have a strong confident leader that will bring respect back to America in the eyes of the world!; May 16, 2008 2:32 PM
Anonymous said...: OK So I am a dumb novice here and have another potentially silly question:

Whether it is 232 (top left box) or 268 (bottom left box) or something in-between of "remaining super delegates" Are some of those the add-on delegates?

I do not quite get what an add on is, but I did read Oregon Dem say that in Oregon they select that at the State Convention and if 55-60% of the delegates to the state convention pick who the add-on is wouldn't it follow that the add-on delegate would support Obama?

In a different manner some of those states that have already voted (and those we know who will select their add-ons) are (or are not) some of those 232 or 268 pretty much known?

If that is the case are they still considered "uncommitted" and when do they become uncommitted.; May 16, 2008 2:38 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Here is the calendar for the ADD-ONS

http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/03/add-on-superdelegate-selection-schedule.html

I believe the number of add-ons that have not been selected yet are included in the 'remains' number in the left top boxes.

The add-ons are normally added to Obama/Clinton once they are 'selected' in their state and have voiced their choice of candidate.; May 16, 2008 2:47 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: At the top left there are links for:

Democratic Nomination Schedule

and

Add-on Schedule & Tracker

Both links have info about when the add-ons are selected.; May 16, 2008 2:53 PM
RobH said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 16, 2008 2:56 PM
themann1086 said...: The most likely outcome is option H in FiveThirtyEight's scenarios. In order to secure the majority of the pledged delegates, including FL+MI, a candidate needs 1705 pledged delegates. Obama currently has 1663 + 7 Edwards delegates, or 35 pledged delegates away from securing a majority of pledged delegates. He will definitely secure this number on Tuesday.

Even under Obama's worst case scenario, FL+MI being seated in full (Option D), he has 1724 + 7 Edwards pledged delegates, which is 52.5 away from the majority of the pledged delegates, 1783.5. He will definitely reach that by June 1st, if not sooner. It is unlikely that the superdelegates will overrule the pledged delegate count; several have stated that they will vote for the winner of the pledged delegates, aka the Pelosi Club.; May 16, 2008 3:01 PM
jean said...: Yamaka
I have never "talked" to you so I feel Yam is too presumptuous.
If Hillary is chosen for VP it is a double edged sword.
If she accepts Obama will win and the Dems are in.
If not the Dems will lose.
I still have hopes for Hillary but they are honestly slim.
If she waits for the next election I need to consider the damage from McCain.
Leah, you're comments on the powers of the VP need to be considered. If Obama would do that it also shows why I would not vote for him.
On the last note. jayw needs to go away. Do you know how to make that happen? I don't mind disagreements but he has a lot of hate.
jean; May 16, 2008 3:03 PM
RobH said...: Leah and Woodland Sprite:
(re add-ons and all that)

So it looks like Edwards was the Kingmaker after all, but not how or when I envisioned. It was release of his pledged delegates, who declared for Obama yesterday, that finished it off.

Hallelujah, check this.

As of THIS moment, even if Barack Obama receives NO more Superdelegate endorsements other than the add-ons, and even if he gets NO more of the remaining 11 pledged Edwards delegates, and if the remaining contests go according to current polls, he will have more that enough to clinch the nomination according to current rules (the only ones that count – for now.)

Delegates as of 5/16 1901
Required 2025
to go as of 5/16 124

all remaining add-ons 31 (of 43)
Kentucky (36:64) 18 (of 51)
Oregon (57:43) 30 (of 52)
Pelosi club 8 (having clinched majority/pledged)
Puerto Rico (45:55) 25 (of 55)
Montana (55:45) 9 (of 16)
South Dakota (55:45) 8 (of 15)

Here it is chronologically:

5/16 to go 124
5/17, 5/18 add-ons 5 ( of 8: CO, KS, NE, CA 2:3)
5/20 Oregon/Kentucky 48
5/20 Pelosi club 8
5/21 to go 63

5/23-6/1 add-ons 6 (of 6: ALSK, GA, WY, HI, ME)
6/1 Puerto Rico 25
6/2 to go 32

6/3 MT/SD 17
6/4 to go 15

If Obama gets as few as 15 more SD endorsements in the next 19 days, or less than that if he secures any more Edwards pledged delegates, it’s over on 6/4.

If not, the remaining 20 add-ons between 6/7- 6/21 are more than enough, and the remaining 11 pledged Edwards delegates simply make it happen sooner.; May 16, 2008 3:03 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: According to the Official Obama website their numbers show that Obama needs 17 more pledged delegates to have the 'majority' of pledged delegates. (120.5 delegates to secure the nomination).

Once he has secured the 'majority' of pledged delegates then it is likely that 'all' of the Pelosi Club members can be said to be his.

Then Obama will need less than 100 to win the nomination!

Obama / (V.P. of your choice) '08; May 16, 2008 3:08 PM
RobH said...: Also Leah,

Thanks for your late night contributions to the VP discussion last night. I inserted the idea, and then left for the evening. I couldn't believe the volume of the discussion, and was really heartened by the tenor of it.

If it isn't obvious by now, my shortest of short lists for VP are Webb or Sebelius. Lots of folks are in line for consideration, and with such a wealth of choices, it's too bad you have to choose one. But so many candidates will make other contributions in other posts.

I'm already in the tank for Webb, but I'm almost in the tank for Sebelius. With about my only reservation being those who say "that's just too much change for one cycle", I really think the vision of the two of them on stage whould represent a PARADIGM SHIFT.

And that's what we need, IMHO.; May 16, 2008 3:11 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: jean (not Aunt) said: "Leah, you're comments on the powers of the VP need to be considered. If Obama would do that it also shows why I would not vote for him."
_______________________

I did NOT say that Obama said that.

I did NOT say that Obama said that.

I just want to make it clear that Obama did not say that.

It was the talking heads on the news that were mulling that idea over.

Please only judge Obama on his 'own words'.

.; May 16, 2008 3:12 PM
RobH said...: Leah,

I was taking my control numbers off of Green Papers and DemConWatch. I find them to be just a touch more conservative than barackobama.com. In each case where there's a dispute (Tex, Lou, Wash, and Dem Abroad)barackobama.com always show a higher number.

Also, sorry I couldn't line up those numbers, can't figure out how to do that here.; May 16, 2008 3:15 PM
jean said...: Leah,
Let me clarify that I do not think Obama said that.
I honestly did not think that kind of action could be done.
I guess this means that VP actually means nothing depending on the president.
jean; May 16, 2008 3:18 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: RobH -

Considering that almost all of Senator Obama's decisions during this campaign have been right on the mark I have no doubt that his choice for V.P. will be well thought out and strategic. I am looking forward to seeing who exactly he picks :)

.; May 16, 2008 3:19 PM
RobH said...: OK, I admit it. I sometimes read Yam's posts just for the fun of it. I know I'm violating quarantine, but it's for a luagh, not an argument. Here we go:

Yam, I think your confused, it was Bill who had the Presidential TIMBER.....; May 16, 2008 3:20 PM
Anonymous said...: But RobH: The fact is that the rules as they are now will apparantly not be the "final" rules. Having read that article that someone refered me to earlier and it said basically that the RBC will seat the MI and FL delegates somehow. So this is really still somewhat up in the air right?; May 16, 2008 3:21 PM
Richard said...: Amot: I disagree with the list of qualifications you have for a running mate. I do not believe that the way for Obama to win on a platform of change is to move to the center or saddle himself with a centrist VP the way Al Gore did. The time for cold-calculation in VP choices is over: that's the old Gore/Kerry/Clinton way, the three-state strategy.

Obama wins this race not on his running mate choice but on the power of his ideas and the force of his movement. I think he needs to find someone who complements his strengths, not someone who "balances the ticket." Bradley and Obama are both extremely affable guys with high favorability ratings, solid progressive ideals, and an ability to move people. I think together they would be a force to be reckoned with.; May 16, 2008 3:23 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 16, 2008 3:24 PM
JayW said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; May 16, 2008 3:26 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Did someone else hear on MSNBC a little while ago that a Clinton spokesman said that Clinton knows she will not win the nomination, but that she thinks there is no harm in going ahead and participating in the remaining contests?

I was distracted and did not hear the whole thing... is that what happened???

Of course it is obvious that Obama is our nominee - but has it been confirmed that Hillary has acknowledged the fact?; May 16, 2008 3:42 PM
Oregon Dem said...: Just doing a quick check in during my lunch hour. Only one super moving to Obama today so far...

Hummm, maybe Yam is correct - lol

Woodland Sprite: I see you voted, but - no - telling us that you voted for a current US Senator is not enough of a hint - lol. want to give us another hint (like was the person you voted for male or female?)

RobH: Interesting calculations. I would like to see (personally) Obama go over 2025 total delegates before 5/31 because that would make the Rules Committee really have a problem "overturning" their previous determination which they will be doing if they seat Michigan and Flordia at all. At that point they may still overturn their previous decision but in doing so they would want to be careful not to change the results of the campaign.

Yam: Did you answer the question I asked you three times last evening? Sorry do not have enough time to read all the posts since I left last night on my lunch break. I will tonight though.

Beautiful sunny (hot) day in Oregon today, over 85 where I am which is almost a record high for the day.

Woodland - I vote for Kitz as VP as well.; May 16, 2008 3:43 PM
RobH said...: Woodland,

Yes, 'technically' it's still up in the air, but I would argue 'effectively' it is not really up in the air.

One needs to ask the question: "What are the odds the the rules committee will declare the seatings of the rogue delegations in a way that would materially penalize either candidate, while still imposing some form of penalty?" Or stated another way, if one of the campaigns is at the cusp of clinching, or in fact has clinched by 5/31: "What are the odds that the rules committee will declare the seatings of the rogue delegations in a way that would seem to overturn an already earned result?"

Answered fairly, I think one could say that the ultimate ruling will reflect the on-the-ground realities, at least as much as the pure arguments for and against the various possible permutations.

And in any event, my stream of math is as conservative as it gets - it presumes Obama secures no more SD, or Edward D's. Far more likely we'll see a steady stream and the committee will be in an awkward position on 5/31. Can you imagine if he picks up say 35 SD's or Edwards D's by 5/31 and is within 23 SD's of a pure clinch on 5/30. The committe meets on Sat,5/31 to "decide" on seating MI &FL, knowing that the next day, Sun 6/1, he'll likely earn 25 pledged delegates in PR to clinch. Do you think they'll seat FL & MI in such a way to negate that?; May 16, 2008 3:46 PM
UUbuntu said...: JayW (or Yamaka, if you're the same person) -- Please don't pass off other people's writings as your own. If you think a particular "Spoof" story is funny and want to share it, a link will do. Some of our comedic tastes are a bit more prosaic than yours.

Leah -- She has not *publicly* acknowledged that fact, but it's probably a correct assumption about her campaign's current internal state.; May 16, 2008 3:46 PM
RobH said...: Oregon Dem:

Just read your 3:43 post AFTER I came back from posting my 3:46. Of sourse it took me that long to compose it.

Funny to see your "I'd like to see him go over 2025 before 5/31" at precisely the same moment I was espousing the same argument to Woodland Sprite.

I agree wholeheartedly that the math could unwind in such a way that the chronology leads us to a 5/30, 5/31, 6/1, 6/3 resolution as we both supposed.; May 16, 2008 3:51 PM
JayW said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; May 16, 2008 3:53 PM
RobH said...: Leah,

Yes, Andrea Mitchell reported early this AM a 'significant discussion' with 'the highest advisors inside the campaign' to this effect. I missed teh story and so hope to catch it on Hardball or Countdown.

Andrea Mitchell is not given to hyperbole, she is the model of journalistic gravitas (IMHO.)

Did you know whe is the wife of Alan Greenspan. Hard to believe, no? It's true. (He looks like such a codger, and she...not so much.); May 16, 2008 3:53 PM
Joshua said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; May 16, 2008 4:37 PM
Amot said...: About Hillary still running:

1. If she is positive, and she has been so far during the last week, that is good for the party! New voters, new people...
2. She is the next-in-line. She wants to secure herself against potential problem with Obama. If she is 100 delegates short of nomination she will be able to conince enough supers to give her the position. But what if she is 200 delegates short? Obama supporters can decide to give the job to Gore and she can't stop them. So she is running to get enough power to say 'veto' if Obama is not the nominee.
3. If she runs cheap campaign and raises money at the same time she can reduce her debt. If she quits - no money!; May 16, 2008 4:48 PM
Amot said...: About the VP:

:)))

Look at the future, please!!!!

Let me explain:

1. Many voters don't know Obama, they think he is Muslim and/or unexperienced and/or not American! Plus he is black! He needs someone well-known, somewhat predictable, trusted!
2. 20% of his voters are sexists and if woman is the VP big percentage of them will not vote for him! With a woman he will lose Ohio and possibly PA and more states...
3. If he presents an older white man as VP now, he can run in 2012 with a new message of change - woman as VP :) And he will be well-known and successfull president, he will win 400+ EV and enlarge further the Democrats base.

I have been reading and watching a lot of interviews with voters. I live outside the USA and I think I can see the big picture in somewhat different way. I am interested to hear what Ed thinks about it. All you guys, too!; May 16, 2008 4:57 PM
Anonymous said...: I feel like such a novice here...

Thanks for the answers to my silly questions. Just noticed a few of you shortening woodland sprite into woodland (sorry I picked such a long name but it suits me :-) ).

Call me woodland call me sprite call me woodland sprite or call me silly - no matter to me :-)

RobH said it is effectively over and surely that is what most people on TV are saying. Maybe so but numbers are not my strong point. I am not an accountant but rather do interior design.

OR Dem (look I shortened it! LOL). The person I voted for puts their pants on just like everyone else. One leg at a time! Is that better?

JayW I try not to get negative and usually do not. I have seen what happens around here when someone does get a little so. So let me say it this way: As a 48 year old woman I take offense to your post that included such phrases as:

"Authorities are expecting a pachyderm parade of over-50, over-weight, menopausal, women in pink pantsuits."

I know humor / comedy takes all formsand what one person can laugh at another person takes offense at. In short, I wish there was a little icon thingy at the bottom of a post to report objectionable comment cause that way that post would get erased.

There are all sorts of folks in the broad coalition called the democratic party (not my words somebody else said that). But if that kind of "humor" is what the democratic party loyalists are all about I will go back to being an independent.

Leah: I like Andrea Michell. I also cannot see what Aunt Jean sees so objectionable in your posts. But then I am knew here and maybe just plain too optimistic about people's intentions.; May 16, 2008 4:58 PM
Anonymous said...: Amot: Where do you live?

PS: Note I did NOT ask for your full address and phone number!

PPS ^ that is my kinda humor :-); May 16, 2008 5:04 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Woodland Sprite -

The only numbers that really matter (the ones to keep an eye on) are how many delegates are still needed to win the nomination.

Obama 124
Clinton 308

On that other matter, I think that there are just some people that get upset when they don't understand how someone can support Obama and not Clinton and they try to rationalize it to fit their own biases.

I am a white 48 year old woman (grew up in the North, 15 years, and live in the South, 33 years) that supports Obama and I am not racist or sexist. I am not a woman-hater or a man-hater. I've based my vote on the issues and the character of the candidates.

.; May 16, 2008 5:14 PM
Yamaka said...: "I've based my vote on the issues and the character of the candidates."

Oh, BHO's character is an oxymoron!

He is a fuzzy talker with a messy character, judgment and credibility.

BHO, where is the beef?

People of PA and WV knew it.

KY and PR will send a deadly-message to him and the Democratic Party: Do NOT field the least vetted, least experienced and the riskiest Candidate in the GE.

If you do, lose both the WH and the Congress!

:-(; May 16, 2008 5:25 PM
Emit R Detsaw said...: Well, the respect meter just dipped again for one of the Republicans. I had respect for Huckabee for how he stayed in the race but stayed clean - just getting out his message. Then he had the poor taste jokes about shooting the ducks because they wouldn't vote for him, adn so forth. And now he jokes about someone pointing a gun at Obama. Classless. He is also one of the top names on the Rpb side for VP.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/16/huckabee-jokes-about-obama-ducking-a-gunman/

Hope so, that would just about lock up the President for Obama.; May 16, 2008 5:35 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: I think that the debates between Obama and McCain we will see fireworks. He has had on the kid gloves with Hillary since she is in his own party.
I think that with his education he is going to blow McCain out of the water!

From wikipedia on Obama:

......He then transferred to Columbia University in New York City, where he majored in political science with a specialization in international relations

......He entered Harvard Law School in 1988 ... His election in 1990 as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review was widely reported ... Obama graduated with a J.D. magna cum laude from Harvard

From wikipedia on McCain:

Alma mater: United States Naval Academy

NO COLLEGE EDUCATION ???; May 16, 2008 5:35 PM
RobH said...: Amot,

I particularly noted your comments in the middle of the night regarding the "metrics" by which we should evaluate/select a candidate. As you've no doubt read in several of my posts since, I am particularly challenged on your rule number 1, and definitely can see both sides. I respect the "too much change at one time" view, but don't embrace it.

Let me ask you: If PA and OH had something like high 50's percentage female voters, and relatively high average age voters, and were right in Hillary's wheelhouse; and Sebelius addresses both those demographics and is the daughter of a former Ohio governor and can then thus take a swing at delivering a major swing state....how does that hurt?

We talk EV all the time:

"Hillary will deliver OH and FLA and no other close swing states"
"Obama can't deliver OH or FLA, but will deliver some of WI, IA, MO, CO, NM, VA."

What if he could also deliver OH?
It's a game closer.; May 16, 2008 5:38 PM
Yamaka said...: "Therefore, at worst (or best) that 40% should only be split by the candidates that were still in the race on Feb 5th."

emit:

Good idea. I will live with that!

I only object to give ALL of that to BHO, which was not the intent of the voters at the time of voting.

Good, we are moving in the right direction.
:-)
________________________________

Hello Lemmings - the Gang of Joe P. Goebbels!

In spite your propaganda, still 263 SDs left undeclared, and most of Ed's PDs not yet moved to BHO!

What does that tell you?

Think hard. The momentum is over - his best days are over.

Give me a clue, by next Wed how many Popular Vote margin will HRC have?

Now she has 29.4K lead, which will swell to nearly 100k after KY and OR.
________________________________

Ore Dem:

I have answered many times over your silly Qn.

Don't bother. Stay inside the Echo Chamber and recite the following:

"Ossabbammmmma....Ommmm. Ossabamm"

Join a Choir and recite the same to get a good mental health!

:-(; May 16, 2008 5:38 PM
Emit R Detsaw said...: Leah, the Naval Acadmey is a College. A regular 4 year one with professors and books and everything. LOL

Sorry, got to stick up for the military institutions, but not McBush.

;o); May 16, 2008 5:38 PM
Amot said...: Joni,

I live in Bulgaria. In my world Obama and Clinton differ a lot because what most matters is foreign policy. I really don't want nukes in Israel and Iran - both are too close to my country :(
I want a leader who is able to sit and talk! I told you before - if you want international respect for America and Americans you have to choose the one you chose. I am glad you did...

About the big picture:
30 years ago USA was the most progressive country. 20 years ago it went on a course to conservative moral values. And now even the ex-communist countries are more progressive than USA. Pity... But the fact is that USA have to go back on the progressive track and change is what you need. But you need to remember how to walk before you try to run again! That is why when it comes to make the choice - progressive VP and more change to the ticket or moderate one and one step at a time, I vote for the second scenario! Once in WH, Obama can make many many more steps of change!; May 16, 2008 5:43 PM
RobH said...: I just followed the link to the Huckabee comments.

I am stunned.

What in the world are we coming to? This from a supposed man of God?? Where in the world is the value or sensibility in that 'joke'?
How could you pass that off as a joke; May 16, 2008 5:47 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Emit R Detsaw said: "Leah, the Naval Acadmey is a College. A regular 4 year one with professors and books and everything. LOL"
___________________

Emit-
Thank you for educating me :)
As you could see I didn't have a clue about the Naval Academy! Good to hear that they have 'books' :) LOL!

But with as many mistakes McCain has made so far regarding Shia/Shites etc. it will still be fun to see how McCain does in a debate up against Obama :); May 16, 2008 5:57 PM
Amot said...: RobH,
Obama worst case scenario is 269 EV. And that is a winner since the House will choose the President.
I agree Sebelius can probably bring OH and PA, but the other states?

How many women, who supported Clinton will ask: Why she instead of her?... and vote the other way?
How many male sexists will take the other ticket?
How many female sexists will take the other ticket (do you know how many women think a women should not run for an office)?

No one can bring more change to the issues the ticket will represent. Many people endorse the issues but they have trouble with the persons (Dems are trusted more than Republicans, but Obama and Clinton are almost tied with Mccain). The ticket should not represent more visual change. And that means no woman. 2012 will be the year for that change. We, the Internet folks, are more progressive than the average American. Trust me, Obama better do it one step at a time. He needs a ticket that will not only win the Presidency - any ticket would do. But he/we need a ticket that can win Congress seats in TX and UT and ID and everywhere, and Senate seats, and governors...; May 16, 2008 5:57 PM
ed iglehart said...: Just for information,

Annapolis Naval Academy has a very good academic reputation.

Jimmy Carter finished 59th out of his Academy class of 820 in 1946, and is the only US President who was an Annapolis graduate.

On the other hand, John McCain, Navy Admiral and former POW, graduated 5th from the bottom of his class of 899 students in 1958, so we can see the level of McCain's intellectual prowess!

xx
ed; May 16, 2008 5:57 PM
Amot said...: 5th from the bottom? That much?

:)))); May 16, 2008 6:01 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Leah said...
Alma mater: United States Naval Academy

NO COLLEGE EDUCATION ???

Leah, as Emit already stated, the Naval Academy is a four year college. In fact, the three service academies (US Naval Academy [Annapolis, MD]; US Military Academy [West Point, NY]; and the US Air Force Academy [Colorado Springs, CO]) are considered very high in quality of education, some rating them along side the Ivy League schools, although many would say that the Air Force Academy is probably the weakest of the three schools, but still first class.

A couple of points about McCain at the USNA:
- At graduation, he had an extremely low class rank - 894th of 899 graduating cadets. In other words, he almost didn't make the cut. His GPA just BARELY kept him in school.

- Also in the Wiki article is this comment: "McCain had conflicts with higher-ups, and he was disinclined to obey every rule . . . ."

Do people think he is leadership material if he was disinclined to obey every rule? How will he interpret laws, already on the books, he doesn't like? In a manner similar to Dumbya? This is another reason to call him McSame.

Mike; May 16, 2008 6:07 PM
jpsedona said...: Yam,

You said: "The momentum is over - his best days are over."

How many pledged delegates have come out in support of Hillary in the last month? How many did she lose? Since Ohio & TX, I would think that about 90% of the pledged delegates went to Obama... sure sounds like Hillary's best days were before the first vote was cast.

This weekend is looking much better for her. She may pick-up 4 add-ons if she gets one from NV; I expect that he'll also pick up 4 add-ons.

As far as popular vote is concerned, after next Tuesday, she'll only be behind by 450,000 if you include FL & the caucus states into the total.

If you include MI's 328,000 to Obama's zero, why she'll only be behind by 122,000. But of course no one who's not already committed to Hillary would be stupid enough to include MI into the popular vote when it's 328,000 to zero.; May 16, 2008 6:07 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Okay everyone you can stop rubbing it in now. My face is already bright red from my mistake ;) And I have thanked Emit for correcting me and I have gone to wikipedia to get further educated ;)

You're never too old to learn something new ;); May 16, 2008 6:10 PM
Anonymous said...: Robh,
"We talk EV all the time:

"Hillary will deliver OH and FLA and no other close swing states"
"Obama can't deliver OH or FLA, but will deliver some of WI, IA, MO, CO, NM, VA.""

Hillary will deliver Tennessee,Arkansas,West Virginia and Kentucky none of which Obama can.; May 16, 2008 6:10 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: JP,

I think you meant superdelegates, not pledged delegates.

Let's not give Yamakamikaze a point to dispute since he's already lost the "REAL NUMBER" argument (even though he won't admit it yet).

VBG

Mike; May 16, 2008 6:13 PM
Amot said...: Ed, you are wrong!
McCain was 6th from the bottom!
BTW I watched Huckabee too. How rude and vulgar!; May 16, 2008 6:14 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Mike in Maryland said: "Do people think he is leadership material if he was disinclined to obey every rule? How will he interpret laws, already on the books, he doesn't like? In a manner similar to Dumbya? This is another reason to call him McSame."
_____________________

That is one more reason I prefer Senator Obama. While Obama was a professor at Chicago University he taught Constitutional Law. He knows the U.S. Constitution like the back of his hand. It will be wonderful to have a president in the White House that KNOWS the Constitution and will obey the Constitution.

Remember, George Bush once said "the U.S. Constitution is only a piece of paper."

He should have been run out of town after he said that!

.; May 16, 2008 6:15 PM
Amot said...: It doesn't matter who can deliver what!

They will both win against McCain!
One of them won the nomination. Now he, the other candidates and the party elders have to master the best plan to get 30 more seats in Congress besides winning the Presidency! The party must fight for every seat of congressman, senator or governor! This victory has to turn big, huge blow to GOP!; May 16, 2008 6:20 PM
jpsedona said...: Jim,

You said: "Hillary will deliver Tennessee,Arkansas,West Virginia and Kentucky none of which Obama can."

She might be able to deliver Arkansas; but she'd need a lot of help in WV & KY. I don't think she would stand a chance of winning TN. But who knows, maybe she would have surprised us.; May 16, 2008 6:29 PM
Amot said...: Jps,
Don't argue! They both can make a lot of surprises! If by any chance Obama is not able to run, Hillary will have her try!
We have to focus on how to win BIG! At all levels!; May 16, 2008 6:34 PM
Yamaka said...: jp:

As of this minute (realclearpolitics.com)

Pop Vote + Fl MI 29241 for HRC
Estimate + IA NV ME WA -80751

Uncommitted in MI = 238, 168

How many of this intended for BHO when the voters voted in Jan?

I say divide this 238K/no of total contestants-1.

Probably, 30K belongs to BHO.

But your assertion to give all 238K to BHO is just insult to the integrity of a thinking brain!

Again, these Estimate of Caucuses is an indication that there is fraud there (questionable practices, which can be challenged legally!).

Why can't they just count the real actual numbers from the "Exhibit Sheets"?

Why didn't all Ed's PDs move to the "Man with the Momentum" after the hoopla of "Swift boating" against HRC?

:-); May 16, 2008 6:45 PM
Yamaka said...: "While Obama was a professor at Chicago University he taught Constitutional Law"

Here we go again, from the Gangs of Joe P Goebbels' Propaganda Machine:

Obama was just an adjunct part-time Senior Lecturer in U of C.

Not a tenured full Professor. There is a world of difference.

These people wanted to say McCain didn't finish College!?

What a bunch of liars! Their Piper is a Pathological Liar - what else you expect from the Lemmings!

:-(; May 16, 2008 6:51 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Yamaka-

Go research the FACTS.

The University of Chicago released a statement that Senator Obama WAS A PROFESSOR at their University.

Apparently they should know better than you.

You do not need to be fully 'tenured' to be a PROFESSOR.

Obama turned down their offer of a full-time position.; May 16, 2008 6:55 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Amot said...
Obama worst case scenario is 269 EV. And that is a winner since the House will choose the President.

Amot,

If it goes to the House, they don't vote as individuals. Each state has one vote.

If a delegation has more Democrats than Republicans, the vote for that state will go to the Democratic candidate. If a delegation has more Republicans than Democrats, the vote for that state will go to the Republican candidate - doesn't matter who won the state in the popular vote.

And it is the NEW Congress, not the current one, that will make the decision.

An example - Indiana currently has a 5-4 Democratic-Republican split. If the election goes to the House, and the current delegate split is re-elected, Indiana would cast one vote for the Democratic candidate. If one of the Democratic Representatives is defeated in November, then the split is in favor of the Republicans, and the Indiana vote would go to the Republican candidate.

It takes 26 votes to put a candidate over the top. If a delegation is split, the state does not get a vote, but the total votes needed is still 26.

Right now (quick count, I could be off by one or two), the House delegations split 28-21 for the Democrats. Arizona splits 4-4 between the parties, and thus would not count.

However, there are several states that are just one or two House members from tipping the other way - Indiana (+1 for Ds), New Jersey (+1 for Ds) and North Carolina (+1 for Ds), Delaware (with one House member) is currently Republican, but could go Dem at any time, Alaska (with one House member), though usually safe Republican, has a lot of elected officials in the midst of scandals that might cause the electorate to say "throw all the bums out", and flip the state to Democratic in the House.

There are several that are just one seat from breaking even - Arkansas (currently 3-1 D) and Mississippi (also currently 3-1 D), for example. In those cases, the state can't vote, but the 26 state requirement would still apply.

With no effective change in the makeup of the different state's delegations in November, the House vote would go to the Dem nominee. Don't count on that happening though, and thus there needs to be a win in the Electoral College to erase doubt.

BTW - unless the delegations change, Michigan and Ohio both have more Republicans than Democrats in their delegations, thus would both vote for the Republican nominee.

Mike; May 16, 2008 7:08 PM
Yamaka said...: Uni of Chicago now will say anything because this U (Rockefellar Univ) tried to get 1 million dollar pavilion from federal money through the Piper!

In return, U of C Hospitals hiked the salary of Michelle by $200K.

Quid Pro Quo.

Corruption of the Univ of Chi stinks a mile away!

Non tenured Sen Lecturer is just a dime a dozen in many Universities.

Learn more!; May 16, 2008 7:08 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Yamakamikaze,

Read and weep:
http://www.law.uchicago.edu/media/index.html

Mike; May 16, 2008 7:15 PM
RobH said...: WOW, again.

Just saw Andrea Mitchell try to bring up the Huckabee comments on Chris Matthews and he shut her down saying "I don't want to have that on the show, all kinds of nuts watch everything."

They may try to bury these comments, I hope they don't. This is the most disturbing kind of rhetoric. Can you imagine if Obama or Clinton were speaking and they made that kind of off hand remark re McCain? The MSM would go nuts! The country would be in an uproar and the election would be over.

I better hear of some kind of apology or retraction from Huck, and McCain, and in a hurry.; May 16, 2008 7:20 PM
jpsedona said...: Yam,

You're drinking too much pool water.

RCP popular vote with FL & caucus estimates shows Obama leading by409,060. This is the fourth line down; this total excludes MI.

I did not assert that ANY votes go to Obama. I think that the popular vote total in MI is unreliable, period. There is no way to know: 1) how many votes Obama received 2) how many voters stayed home because their votes wouldn't count 3) how many people stayed home because their candidate wasn't on the ballot. If you look at turnout in MI, it is drastically lower historically, and significantly different from the hiugher turnout in other contests. The numbers are just plain bad.

As for "Again, these Estimate of Caucuses is an indication that there is fraud there (questionable practices, which can be challenged legally!)."

Yam, you just don't know what you're talking about with respect to anything to do with the law. The first time that popular vote came into the nomination is when the Clinton campaign tried to fabricate it as a basis for gaining support from SD's.

Adding total vote from caucuses (lower turnout as you've agreed) and primaries is flawed (as is just about every other argument Clinton's campaign team has tried to use to garner support from SD's).

As far as Edward's delegates are concerned, he's likely to get most or all of them. How many have come out for Hillary? Not one that I know of...; May 16, 2008 7:24 PM
tmess2 said...: Am tired of hearing certain folks talk in generic sd numbers. I am assuming that most of the folks active on this site are somewhat active in their state. There is a list of unannounced SDs on this site. Just from your state (or in the larger states from your part of the state), how do you think your undeclared SDs are leaning.

In Missouri, I am going to call it 4 for Obama, 1 for Clinton, and 1 who will not declare prior to the convention.; May 16, 2008 7:32 PM
Matt said...: We will not allow personal attacks on this thread. Talk up your candidate, say why the other would be a mistake, but do not insult each other. We'll be deleting some of the worst comments, and will continue to do so.; May 16, 2008 7:35 PM
protactinium said...: Wow. I took a very extended leave because all the was occuring in the blog world was name calling and very destructive behavior.

But the facts are the facts.

The rules where put in place before the elections started.

Obama has won the election fair and square. I understand many people are upset at the fact that their girl lost. This is only normal.

But to say you will rather vote for Mccain then Obama because you are angry that he won the election fair and square. It really makes me wonder do you support democracy or facism?

The reason I ask this is because you want the SD to over turn the winner by all scorecards including the most important DELEGATES. I also agree that SD should simply not exsist. But then you are willing to vote for Mccain. He has made it very clear he wants to spread war and take away your rights.

Here is the facts.

Mccain stands for removal of Aboration.

Mccain has voted NO to an admenment for equal pay for women.

Mccain has said YES to staying in IRAQ.

Mccain has made it clear he would live to invade iran.

Fact is if we stay in Iraq for another 100 years we may be able to work with our warn out miltary. But any talks of going into Iran, or any other country for that matter would require a DRAFT!

Mccain does not give a crap about our financially status. Something the republican party has seem to give up as one of their core values.

So please just remeber this when you vote Hillary supporters. Mccain cares nothing for everything you support. You are a Democrat for a reason.

PS. Here are some female Governers who have endorsed Obama.

Chris Gregoire, Kathleen Sebelius(who I personally think will be our first female president), and Janet Napolitano.

Beverly Perdue who is running for NC governer has also supported Obama. How many ladies does the republican have in governer positions?

Please think carefully about what your vote really means. Voting out of anger will be something you will deeply regret if Mccain wins in a year or two down the road.; May 16, 2008 7:36 PM
protactinium said...: I heard people refering to coal as being an anti alternative fuel issue. This is not a true statement, and I belive one of the ways Obama wins WV in generals and other coal states is by pushing Liquid. It also would give us an export for the rest of the world who is hurting for fuel.

While it is true it will do nothing for Global Warming, it will get us off oil. Which is a massive security disaster and push economic growth with in America. And if we are all richer, we all will have more cash to care about global warming.

We need to drill or make Liquid coal. Ethanol currently is not the answer and may never be. (I live in IL, and something like 35% of corn is already being used for fuel) Yes there are other answers in the works, but we will not see any of these in any real terms for atleast a couple more decades.; May 16, 2008 7:52 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: JayW said...
Hey Tyler...

at what point did I take credit for that writing?

In any event... shut your hole.

The lack of crediting the source is plagiarism.

As defined on Wordnet.com:
"1. a piece of writing that has been copied from someone else and is presented as being your own work
2. the act of plagiarizing; taking someone's words or ideas as if they were your own"

Without crediting the source, you plagiarized.

The source of your quote is a site called "The Spoof", and can be found here:
http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s2i35385
(TinyURL: http://tinyurl.com/5633cb )

Mike; May 16, 2008 7:58 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Senator Obama's Rally in South Dakota has a live streaming link on the right side of the page at www.CNN.com

McGovern is talking now and Obama will be on stage soon!; May 16, 2008 8:16 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: MSNBC on TV....

Huckabee has just issued an apology to Senator Obama regarding the remark he made at the NRA.; May 16, 2008 8:18 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: protactinium said...
I heard people refering to coal as being an anti alternative fuel issue. This is not a true statement, and I belive one of the ways Obama wins WV in generals and other coal states is by pushing Liquid. It also would give us an export for the rest of the world who is hurting for fuel.

Coal is even dirtier than oil. The Union of Concerned Scientists has issued many statements about this, including this:
http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/fossil_fuels/the-hidden-cost-of-fossil-fuels.html
(TinyURL: http://tinyurl.com/2rzhvu)

One section on coal states:
"Coal mining, especially strip mining, affects the area that is being mined. Characteristically, the material closest to the coal is acidic. After the mining is completed, the land will remain barren unless special precautions are taken to ensure that proper topsoil is used when the area is replanted. Materials other than coal are also brought to the surface in the coal mining process, and these are left as solid wastes. As the coal itself is washed, more waste material is left. Finally, as the coal is burned, the remaining ash is left as a waste product."

In the state of Maryland, an old and abandoned coal mine in West Virginia is causing serious and severe problems in the Potomac River. The acids (referenced in the above paragraph) have leached into the water coming from the mine. The state of Maryland has erected large structures on the North Branch of the Potomac River just downriver from the outflow from the mine to deliver pulverized lime into the water to neutralize the acidic water. Do a search for Kempton Coal Waste Stabilization Project for more details.

Also, coal has a large amount of mercury that is released into the atmosphere when the coal is burned. Current technology isn't capable of removing a significant amount of that mercury pollution. We are just finding that this mercury is now contaminating the marshlands that should filter pollutants out of the water, thus polluting the small fish that are eaten by larger fish, thus entering the human food chain.

Coal is plentiful. It also has a large number of problems that might be solved at some time in the future, but are not at that stage now.

Mike; May 16, 2008 8:18 PM
Hippolytus said...: I like Richard's remarks about Bill Bradley. Affable, competent, team player, well-respected by everyone, and...vetted. He'd also make a phenomenal Supreme Court Justice! What's not to like?; May 16, 2008 8:19 PM
Hippolytus said...: Bradley can also makes free throws!; May 16, 2008 8:20 PM
RobH said...: Well there it is. Moments ago, Huck's team issued a retraction.

Too little, too late. Get these guys ought here.; May 16, 2008 8:20 PM
RobH said...: Leah, you and I are watching the same thing.....; May 16, 2008 8:22 PM
RobH said...: Leah,

but if you are still on here at 2AM, like last nioght, you need to re-align your priorities.....; May 16, 2008 8:23 PM
RobH said...: Protactinium,

I was going to go after your remarks re coal, but Mike beat me to it.

CTL (coal to liquid) is devastating e nvironmentally and un-economical. Read "End of Oil" by Paul Roberts and "Freedon From Oil" by David Sandalow. IMHO the solution regarding transpotation is plug in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV's) where the grid is ultimately sourced from hydro/solar/wind/nuclear.

Anything based in carbon is ultimately taking the product of millions of years of solar energy (coal/petrolem) and burning it off (and filling our atmosphere) in hundreds of years. Drilling in ANWR represents the same short sighted solution. Drill in ANWR and add six years to our reserves (while refineries take 30 - 40 years to pay down.) Senseless.; May 16, 2008 8:32 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: RobH -

I am obsessed!

I am on the patio with my laptop with the Obama rally on www.cnn.com listening with 'one' earbud ... and next to the laptop I have a baby monitor speaker that is playing MSNBC on TV (the other part of the baby monitor is in the den next to the TV)... and while listen to all of that I am surfing websites looking for more news! LOL ;); May 16, 2008 8:33 PM
jpsedona said...: Mike in Maryland,

I generally stay away from the issues, but I have to ask...

If not coal, nuclear, drilling new oil (off FL, CA, AK), bio fuel (because it's causing a global food crisis), hydro (because of endangered fish), what solution works?

Solar is great in AZ (APS is building the largest solar plant), but not feasable in other parts of the country. Solar isn't a 24x7 power producer. And it requires tremendous storage capacity for 24x7 operation since solar doesn't get generated at night.

Wind power isn't a solution everywhere because the average wind speeds are too low.

Carter warned about oil running out eventually (during the oil embargo). Have politicians in either party done anything to resolve the issue? No. Dependence on foreign oil is in part the root of our issues with terrorism. Foreign oil is also a drastic threat to our economy (as we're experiencing now). Sending so much of our GDP overseas for oil is a threat to economic and political security.

The only three high capacity mid-term solutions are drill more, use our 200yr supply of coal or build nuclear. What's your poison?; May 16, 2008 8:35 PM
Hippolytus said...: "Huckabee...that cwazy wabbit!"; May 16, 2008 8:37 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: CNN.COM...
UPDATE, 8:28 PM: Huckabee released the following statement regarding his comments Friday, according to the New York Times website:
During my speech at the N.R.A., a loud noise backstage, that sounded like a chair falling, distracted the crowd and interrupted my speech. I made an off hand remark that was in no way intended to offend or disparage Sen. Obama. I apologize that my comments were offensive. That was never my intention.

.; May 16, 2008 8:44 PM
Hippolytus said...: Looks like the Huckster just blew any remaining chance of being tabbed for GOP #2 -- too much of a loose canon, even if she could help McCain with the Evangelicals.; May 16, 2008 8:56 PM
Hippolytus said...: Typo - he, not she (re:Huckabee). The sound of a chair falling distracted me.; May 16, 2008 9:04 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: jpsedona said...
Mike in Maryland,

I generally stay away from the issues, but I have to ask...

If not coal, nuclear, drilling new oil (off FL, CA, AK), bio fuel (because it's causing a global food crisis), hydro (because of endangered fish), what solution works?

I have not said a word about nuclear on these pages, and I won't now, except to say that I'm still trying to decide which side of that issue I'm on.

Drilling for oil off FL, CA, AK? For maybe a few more years of fuel that will not do anything to help relieve out dependence on fossil fuels? No thanks. Besides the environmental damage the drilling, transport and use of that supply would cause, the danger of an oil spill would be even more dangerous to the environment.

Bio fuel needs to be investigated further, but not with food crops. Any bio mass can be used to produce ethanol, we just haven't found the best way to do it yet. Algae can be used if we allow research to find the method. Saw grass. Etc., etc.

Hydro doesn't have to be dams, and besides there are very few areas left in the US where a dam could be sited to produce electricity. We do, though, have a tremendously long coast line. How much investigation has been made into producing electricity from tidal action?

Solar is great in AZ (APS is building the largest solar plant), but not feasable in other parts of the country.

Tell the Germans that there is no potential for power to be generated locally from solar. The Washington Post had an article on that subject on May 5 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/04/AR2007050402466.html (TinyURL: http://tinyurl.com/33w4e4).

Take a look at the German Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology page on Solar Power, http://www.german-renewable-energy.com/Renewables/Navigation/Englisch/solar-power.html (TinyURL: http://tinyurl.com/6rkbeq)

Google 'solar power Germany' and you will find many other site with information on solar power in Germany, NOT noted to have clear skies like the American Southwest.

Oh, and the rest of your argument is now, now, now. How about looking to the future, and what do we do when the current fossil fuels run out - where do we go then? Research now can start to pay dividends in the near future, and completely replace fossil fuels in the more long-term future.

Mike; May 16, 2008 9:12 PM
protactinium said...: Wow. I was not trying to start a debate about liquid coal.

I really was trying to present it as a politcal arguement to coal mining states, and as an alternative to oil which makes us vunerable to forign powers. It also would be a huge boon for the American enviroment.

Co2 is bad for the enviroment. However anything that uses combustion will produce CO2 as well as other toxins depending on what impuritys are mixed into the product.

Solar, Wind, Nuclear are actually only solutions for electricity. The battery technology is not there for vechiles yet to allow us to run off our national energy grid in any real acceptable manor.

Also Hyrdogen is not a great solution either because fuel cell batterys will be unrecyable.

So honestly anything we do for vechile energy will be bad for the enviroment.

Also Russia and China have made notice they are making a move to the moon for H3.(Does not exsit in large amounts on earth) There has been studys and a belief that it will lower the activation costs for Fission and will become the next fuel sources. Yet America has done nothing to make any move towards the moon.

America has known the energy crisis has been comming for 20 years yet we have sat around with a thumb up our ass increasing our energy use every year.

There is no good solution to this arguement.

The only thing we can do is start phasing in alternative energy, but immediatly we despartly need to get off forign oil.

We have already start building wind and solar plants, but it is a HUGE task to replace our energy and will decades. There is no good answer for todays enery issues.

But again I merly only meant it as a security and an econmic
arguement.

PS. We had global warming in the 1920s and 1930s, glaciers in greenland melted and everything.

Here is an article from newsweek 1975 about global cooling.

http://www.denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm

I am all for cleaning up our enviroment but to put it over the prosperity, and security of this country will only hurt the enviroment. A prosperous America is the best thing we can ever have to fight pollution.; May 16, 2008 9:19 PM
Yamaka said...: "by409,060. This is the fourth line down; this total excludes MI."

jp:

Clearly you are hung up on line 4 and I prefer line 6 -80751.

I want to divide the MI "Uncommitted" by 5 : 238168/5 = 47633.

Add this to 80751 = -128384 for HRC.

That is, Hillary is lagging BHO only by 128384 pop vote taking into a/c all votes polled. Not 409K!!!

This will change to her favor by June 4th, IMO.

Wait and see. :-)
________________________________

RodentinMD:

What are you peddling these days?
Any more of spelling typos?

You are the Epicenter of the Propaganda Machine of BHO, a subsidiary of JP Goebbels' & Co!!

More of spins and more spins!!!!

Get a life, Rodent!!!

:-(; May 16, 2008 9:29 PM
jpsedona said...: Mike in Maryland,

Fair enough.

Your example of Germany is interesting. Very progressive there, but with lots of government underwiriting of costs.

Bio fuels like switch grass which yield higher energy per acre than corn is great, but what will encourage farmers to continue farming corn if they can make more money per acre with switch grasses?

There does need to be a comprehensive policy to address foreign oil dependence. It's some combination short term, mid term and long term. But there are compromises for all solutions.; May 16, 2008 9:35 PM
protactinium said...: "That is, Hillary is lagging BHO only by 128384 pop vote taking into a/c all votes polled. Not 409K!!!"

And what part of the remaning schedule do you think she will even gain 129k? WV was her last big chance of amasing alot of popular votes but they had low voter turn out. In fact Indiana and North Carolina was her last real chance and she droped any furthur.

Oh wait. You are not seriously counting Purto Rico are you?

But honestly its all in the Super delegates hands now, and I highly doubt they will cause a massive conterversy over this it would take to over turn ever mesure that Obama won by. Even though Hillary moved the goal posts 1000 times Obama has met every one of them.

SD are staying on the side lines to let all 50 states vote. Its great for the democratic party, getting the voter registration sky hi for novemeber.

Its time to concentrate on Mccain to prevent him for causing more damage to our country.; May 16, 2008 9:38 PM
Hippolytus said...: protactinium said:
"Its time to concentrate on Mccain to prevent him for causing more damage to our country."

Well said!; May 16, 2008 9:58 PM
Yamaka said...: "drill more, use our 200yr supply of coal or build nuclear. What's your poison?"

My two cents on this issue:

It need not be the poison!

1. I will IMMEDIATELY ban worldwide corn/rice/sugarcane/etc based ethanol production. Ethanol from food source is a horrendous idea.

2. I will gear up R&D of cellulosic ethanol; use tax subsidy to achieve a high capacity technology on this possibility.

3. I will do a moderate off-shore drilling, not on ANWAR.

4. I will gear up on solar, high-capacity battery, nuclear, wind etc.

5. I will focus more on clean coal technology: to recapture C and store it underground.

6. Spending about $100 per car I will make Open Fuel Engines, where any combination of fuel can be used efficiently.

7. All these will be done simultaneously, very focused along with serious conservation at all levels, Govt, Private, Consumers etc.

This is doable. We need not send so much dollar to Iran and S. Arabia; we can achieve self sufficiency in about 10-15 years, IMHO

This needs a National Focus from the President Clinton, the Congress and all Americans.

Political novice like BHO cannot handle this type of undertaking!
:-); May 16, 2008 9:58 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Woodland sprite the reason I took offence to what Leah said was based on other things she has said on this blog. Leah said uneducated/lower income people. She should have said blue collar workers [proper word for them] no instead she likes to make sure it sounds like an insult if you voted for Hillary. Of course that isn't the only reason. Jean; May 16, 2008 10:01 PM
jpsedona said...: Yam,

What five candidates do you want to use for divding MI's undecided? Certainly, none of the candidates other than Edwards polled well in enough for share of that vote.

But under no circumtances will a SD who is not already supporting MI use any popular vote totals from MI.

So, if you want to say that I'm hung up about not including MI popular vote, you're right.; May 16, 2008 10:01 PM
Hippolytus said...: Yamika,
Like Bill Clinton did such a bang up job getting us to energy self-sufficiency during the eight years he was POTUS.; May 16, 2008 10:03 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Yamaka said...

snip

1. I will . . .

2. I will . . .

3. I will . . .

4. I will . . .

5. I will . . .

6. . . . I will . . .

Yamakamikaze has gone totally over the edge!

He/she/it is now sending messages as if he/she/it is in a position to make policy decisions.

All of our previous suspicions have now been convincingly proven!

Mike; May 16, 2008 10:04 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Hey guys no I wasn't trying to stir up trouble with Leah just thought woodland sprite should know the reason and she did wonder.
Had a wonderful day today and in a great mood alittle tired but that's ok. I'm going fishing up at Livingston tomorrow and of course camping looking forward to it.

Well I haven't read all the posts on here just a few has anyone made a comment on my purposal about Hillary. I bet that hit you out of left field LOL LOL I'm not saying that I want her to quit or that I think Obama has won just wanted to see what you guys had to say IF he does. Jean; May 16, 2008 10:09 PM
jpsedona said...: Folks, just a point of information for ya... if you didn't know it, one of the largest land based sources of oil is the LA basin. There are hundreds of oil wells in LA... if you've never researched it, you should ...; May 16, 2008 10:09 PM
protactinium said...: "Political novice like BHO cannot handle this type of undertaking!
:-)"

Aww got to turn it into a political cheap shot. What I find ironic that Obama has been pushing alternative fuel agenda in Il from the day he went into office?

Where was the Clintons in the 90s? We all know what the Republicans have done.

In fact all the Clintons was BLOCK new oil from being drilled. He put no new alternative on the table.

Here is a good chart of Americas important, and exporting of oil.

In the 70s we exported 80s we consumed 90s we consumed much more.

How ever I suspect Hillary would push any agenda that seemed popular.; May 16, 2008 10:11 PM
protactinium said...: opps here is the link.

http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_04/fibonacci110704.html; May 16, 2008 10:12 PM
Hippolytus said...: OK, Aunt Jean -- I'll bite. What was your proposal regarding Hillary? I tried to find it, but we've had a lot of posts.; May 16, 2008 10:21 PM
RobH said...: Mike in Md and jp,

Ya didn't ask me, but I'll butt in anyway.

The problem is that transportation (car, bus, train, airplane) is 96% oil driven! Without oil, there are no supermarkets, air travel, commerce as we know it, etc, etc. Think what that means for choice.
Intensly local, as James Howard Kuntsler says.

The electric grid, however , is less than 30% oil, it's mostly coal, gas, hydro.

Near term (not really so near, but ASAP) solution is: power the grid w/ solar, wind, hydro, and nuclear, and develop PHEV (plug in hybid electric vehicles) for all ground transport. (That doesn't solve air transportation however.)

Ethanol and LTQ are problematic.
Tar sands in Alberta and drilling in A?NWR buy us a few years at most. Switchgrass or logging waste are OK for biomass.

Read "Freedom From Oil: What the Next President Can Do to End the US Oil Addiction" (David Sandalow, 2008) Author was in the Clinton White House in the 90's - Asst, Sec'y of State, I think.); May 16, 2008 10:33 PM
RobH said...: Protactinium,

At 9:19 you said there are no good solutions to this.

Actually, there are. Grab that book I recommended from your library. It's great, not only from a "what tools muight work from an environmenta;/economic standpoint", but also from a "this is how the gov't works" standpoint. Author was on several policy council in the Clinton WH, "Economic Development" and one other, I forgot which. Excellent read.

Other good titles are "End of Oil" Paul Roberts,"The Long Emergency" James Howard Kunstler, and "Blood and Oil", Michael Klare.

There is hope.; May 16, 2008 10:42 PM
RobH said...: Yam,

point #6, I assume you mean "flex fuel" vehicles. The accepted number is $300+ per vehicle.; May 16, 2008 10:44 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Leah please quit insulting Hillary this is the kind of trash I'm talking about that comes out of your mouth HILLARY IS NOT A REPUBLICAN. Also Obama was a lecturer between 92 and 96 then he was a senior lecturer between 96 and 04. HE WAS NEVER A PROFESSOR. He taught 3 courses ayear in voting rights and election law. Woodland sprite I've asked her a number of times to quit calling Hillary a republican and other names and she keeps doing then she wonder why I do not like her.I think the only reason she does it is to make me mad or so she thinks.IT GETS OLD THOUGH. GROW UP LEAH.You are showing a juvenal behavior! Jean; May 16, 2008 10:52 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Hipp I will find the post for you and tell you where it is ok you really need to read the post. Thanks Jean; May 16, 2008 10:54 PM
tmess2 said...: If we are going to engage in the useless effort of trying to determine who should get what share of the vote for uncommitted, several facts need to be noted.

First, outside of Michigan, no state had more than 25,000 votes for uncommitted.

Second, Hillary was not the only candidate on the ballot in Michigan -- Kucinich, Gravel, and Dodd were also on the ballot. That leaves you with Biden, Richardson, Obama, and Edwards as possible candidates. Biden and Richardson dropped out before Michigan -- so you couldn't include them in dividing election day votes.

Third, we do have exit polls from Michigan that asked how people would have voted if all the candidates were on the ballot. Under those circumstances, Senator Clinton got around 45-50% of the vote, Obama got in the low 30s, and Edwards got . In addition, the demographics for uncommitted in those exit polls looked a lot like the demographics we have seen since for Obama.

Fourth, in the other states that voted before Edwards dropped out, Obama got more votes than Edwards.

The bottom line is that if you want to include the numbers from Florida and Michigan and you want to be fair, you have to at least credit 120,000 of the 238,000 uncommitted votes as being for Obama.

If you want to include those advisory primaries, however, how do you justify not including the advisory primaries in Washington, which Obama won by 38,000, especially since there are no popular vote numbers from Washington outside of the advisory primary.; May 16, 2008 11:01 PM
tmess2 said...: Forgot to include the Edwards number in Michigan, it was less than 15%. Basically, with all the candidates on the ballot, the results in Michigan would have been close to the results in Florida.; May 16, 2008 11:04 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Aunt Jean,

Are you the omnipotent person to determine Senator Obama's title and what that title means where he was teaching?

What authority do you base your claim on that he was not a professor?

Where do you get your information about Senator Obama's position at the University of Chicago?

Do a bit of research, and you'll find that parroting Yamakamikaze's position on this issue is incorrect.

And if you find that you were mistaken, and decide to publish an "Ooooops", we'll understand. You might find that your conscience is eased when you admit (to yourself) that you can admit an error, whether that admission is public or not.

However, if you continue to make the same old assertion that Senator Obama was not a professor, you'll show yourself to be extremely closed minded, and probably an unproductive member of society as a result.

Mike; May 16, 2008 11:05 PM
Yamaka said...: "Do a bit of research, and you'll find that parroting Yamakamikaze's position on this issue is incorrect."

RodentinMD:

I stand by what I said about BHO.

He was just an adjunct part-time Senior Lecturer, period.

U of C's internal document showed this.

For external use, they give imprecise information for some political reasons.

U of C's hands are stained with blood as far as their dealings with Michelle and BARack Hussein Obama!

This is the fact, if you care about any.

:-(; May 16, 2008 11:18 PM
tmess2 said...: My understanding from what I have seen published is that Obama's official title at the Univeristy of Chicago was Lecturer. However, at most law schools that title is used for those who are not on the tenure track. However, I have also seen reported that he was offered a tenure track position, but declined it due to his desire to remain in politics. In any case, the distinction between a Lecturer and a Professor is meaningless outside of the internal structure of the Law School.

The simple fact is, as a former President of the Harvard Law Review, Senator Obama could have gotten a tenure track at any law school in the country. Furthermore, the University of Chicago is one of the top ten law schools in this country. Being asked to teach either as a Professor or a Lecturer at the University of Chicago speaks highly of a person.; May 16, 2008 11:22 PM
Aunt Jean said...: HIPP . I would like to say something. I do believe that you guys see something in obama that I don't but I do believe that there are some good people on this blog. Now I know that most if not all will disagree with me but give it some thought. You say McCain will lose in nov. Well I think he will win in Nov. because there are some mad Hillary supporters out there. You ask and this make sence if you stop and think about it. If most [which is wrong I believe] [I'm not saying there's not a lot]of Hillary supporters are low income people they will get help from the gov. who ever is in there.You say but it would hurt the rest of her/ his family and she says that it won't not really because they make more than enough money. Wouldn't it better to offer the VP to Hillary than to push her aside which will make Hillary supporters even madder.If you are willing to admit Hillary is a smart person yes she was over confidant she should have made heads rolls and didn't. Plus Bill didn't help her but that is water under the bridge.. Now before you out and out say NO reallt think about it. At first I said NO way but then I started giving it thought. It's maybe not perfect but I do believe that it's a way to get the biggest voteing party. Plus this will sooth some angry feelings and maybe then the party can unite.So please give it some thought and let me know.I've got to go see someone it will be great seeing him but it's only for a few hours [ but I guess that's better than nothing]then he's gone again I will be so glad when he gets this over with if you know what I mean. Jean

May 16, 2008 12:58 PM

Now before you start saying NO just think about it for awhile that's all I ask. Thanks Jean; May 16, 2008 11:23 PM
Yamaka said...: "All of our previous suspicions have now been convincingly proven!"

RodentinMD:

What's your point?

Aren't you the Epicenter of Propaganda Machine of BHO, the subsidiary of JP Goebbels' & Co ?

Go get a life, Rodent!

:-(; May 16, 2008 11:23 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Aunt Jean and tmess2,

I invite you to read the information at: http://www.law.uchicago.edu/media/index.html

Mike; May 16, 2008 11:34 PM
Hippolytus said...: Aunt Jean,
I found your proposal re: Hillary, posted at 12:58 today. As much as picking Hillary as VP might put some salve on wounds in the short run, I respectfully don't think that the interpersonal dynamics would make for very good governance. Obama is entitled to have his own pick in the VP slot, man or woman. While I can't read her mind, it doesn't seem to me that VP would be a very good fit for her, either.
I like that you asked the question, though. It shows some movement in your thinking, and that as difficult as it must be for you, that you're really want to be on the same side as the rest of us when it comes to defeating McCain. Like it or not, Obama is going to be your best option come November.; May 16, 2008 11:36 PM
Yamaka said...: On Dumb Dubya's Appeasement Comment and BHO's Reaction:

1. Dubya clearly wanted to bring the inexperience of BHO in his apparent appeasement of our arch enemies. That is perfectly fine with me. But, I am puzzled why he brought up this issue in Israel?

He need not have gone to the extent of citing Germany's occupation history etc to expose BHO's facade of inexperience. That was way too, too much. An over-kill.

2. BHO's Achilles heel is National Security and Foreign Policy. The more he opens his nicotine-tinted mouth with stammering and stuttering he comes across as very lame and totally incompetent.

He throws cheap shots at McCain, who has enormous experience in National Security and Foreign Policy matters. BHO is an under weight loony going against a heavy weight Champion of the World on this issue.

BHO, watch out; American Electorate is watching. You will be a roadkill very soon.

3. Gov Hukka made an innocent joke. The Left wing media need not have gone to War Mode on the joke.

Our resident BHO's Lemmings are hitting the roof on a simple joke.

In politics, parody, satire and criticism are just fine are welcome traits, if you live in America.

If you don't like it, shift your shelter to Cube/N.Korea or Red China!

Cheer, Smile and Vote for Hillary the First Woman POTUS.

:-); May 16, 2008 11:44 PM
Yamaka said...: "Obama was not a professor, you'll show yourself to be extremely closed minded, and probably an unproductive member of society as a result."

RodentinMD:

This is an utter nonsense!

JP Goebells' & Co, go get a life!!

:-(; May 16, 2008 11:51 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Hipp I respect the fact that you read it but it does sound good that is if everyone willing can she not get the blue collar workers? Jean; May 16, 2008 11:53 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Hey Guys what does Michelle call Obama in private: BARACK OR BARRY

Probable: HONEY
JUST THOUGHT I WOULD TEASE AWHILE!!

GOT Ya! I BET YOU THOUGHT I WAS GOING TO SAY SOMETHING UGLY LOL LOL Jean; May 16, 2008 11:58 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Yamaka said...
"Obama was not a professor, you'll show yourself to be extremely closed minded, and probably an unproductive member of society as a result."

Yamakamikaze,

One of the oldest tricks in the book of the DISHONEST - the taking of thinks out of context, and deleting things that the DISHONEST person does not want anther to consider.

The full quotation should have been:
However, if you continue to make the same old assertion that Senator Obama was not a professor, you'll show yourself to be extremely closed minded, and probably an unproductive member of society as a result.

I would like to engage in a serious discussion of the issues. Those who wish to engage in dishonest monologues can stuff it where the sun doesn't shine.

Mike; May 17, 2008 12:03 AM
suzihussein22 said...: What a cool evening for us Southerners.:) I visited with some friends. One has been in Iraq 4 TIMES now! A missionarycouple just got back from China to have their first child here with their family. The husband was able to help rescue 7 people before they left. This, IMO, reinforces that this election should be about the bigger picture.

A quote from Teddy Roosevelt gives me a chuckle in these trying times-Politicians and diapers should be changed frequently-and many times for the same reason!

Amot-ontheissues.org-I read up some on Mike Easley from NC-He doesn't sound too bad. His stance on the lottery for elementary children and fathers' initiatives impresses my husband. He doesn't like the way our lottery was passed. Too much goes to admin. and then the scholarships start backwards from college and then skips down to pre-K.

Aunt Jean-If HRC is picked as VP, I'll support them. I hope your family is doing better.

Woodland Sprite-I'm not good with stats either. I'll have to say though, when I designed our house, the 3-D blueprints got accepted the first time. I'm not in design. I'm in retail mgmt./trainer.

Jim-You might be right about TN. The Thompson supporters could surprise you though. BTW, I didn't support him,didn't watch any of his tv shows, but I think he did a good job guesting on Paul Harvey news.; May 17, 2008 12:04 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Mike in Maryland the link where I went to it was a site at the college where he taught said that he was not a professor. Jean; May 17, 2008 12:07 AM
Yamaka said...: "Those who wish to engage in dishonest monologues can stuff it where the sun doesn't shine."

RodentinMD:

Beautiful monologue, excellent imagery.

Good try, Rodent. JP Goebbel's.

Go Get a Life :-(; May 17, 2008 12:08 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 17, 2008 12:10 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: Yamakamikaze,

I should add that the Nazis, as exemplified by Joseph Goebbels, were the masters in DISHONESTY.

Are you trying to emulate the Nazis, or just Goebbels? Or maybe the American version, Joe McCarthy?

If so, you do not represent the candidate you profess to support in a favorable light. In fact, if someone reads your posts, they wouldn't have reason to believe you are trying to drive everyone away from the candidate you support. I'm sure Senator Clinton would tell where to go, and to go there with no detour.

Mike; May 17, 2008 12:11 AM
Hippolytus said...: Aunt Jean,
Hillary could help bring in the blue collar vote, but she doesn't necessarily have to be the VP nominee to do that. And others can help bring in that vote, too.
No single candidate has emerged as everybody's #1 choice. But Obama and Hillary have a lot more in common than they have differences. He deserves your respect and support, assuming that he is the Democratic standardbearer. It's fine to have reservations, but please respect and support him, nonetheless.; May 17, 2008 12:14 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: From:

The University of Chicago
The Law School

Statement Regarding Barack Obama

The Law School has received many media requests about Barack Obama, especially about his status as "Senior Lecturer."

From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School's Senior Lecturers has high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined.

.; May 17, 2008 12:14 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Mike in Maryland his title was [when he left] was senior lecturer nor professor. I'm not saying that he didn't get offered a job as professor because he did and he was well liked. All I said was that he wasn't a professor there. Jean; May 17, 2008 12:15 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Leah you are wrong he did not have the title of professor. He had the title of senior lecturer. Now I'm not saying that they didn't consider him a professor but title wise he wasn't: not because he couldn't be. Jean; May 17, 2008 12:18 AM
Yamaka said...: "In any case, the distinction between a Lecturer and a Professor is meaningless outside of the internal structure of the Law School."

tm:

I disagree.

This goes to the heart of BHO's character.

He must clearly say what was his real designation when he left the job (his designation is printed in his appointment letter: whatever it says is his Official Designation)

He started as a part-time Junior Lecturer for some years, then promoted to a Senior Lecturer, part-time.

Professor means quite something different: a very senior person of enormous experience in teaching and/or research.

BHO is a dishonest person on this matter, IMO.

Lemmings will not agree, it's their problem.
:-); May 17, 2008 12:19 AM
protactinium said...: No matter how useless of an arguement this is. It is desprate to try and argue about postion names. This is a distration, and has nothin to do with improving our country or proving his leadership. But even so I will do you the favor and debunk your myth.

Here you go. Here is the UoC website.

http://www.law.uchicago.edu/media/index.html

From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors.; May 17, 2008 12:20 AM
Aunt Jean said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 17, 2008 12:21 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Hipp I have to disagree I don't believe that obama can get the blue collar workers and I don't think that anyone else can get them for him either because Hillary supporters will see this race as stolen if he gets it.. Jean; May 17, 2008 12:23 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: Aunt Jean,

Leah has posted the full release from the University of Chicago Law School.

The pertinent part reads:

"Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track."

What part of "are regarded as professors" do you not understand? If that statement were not written in English, I would understand you not being able to comprehend it. But since it's written in the English language of the 21st century, you do not have that excuse.

Or are you so bull-headed you cannot admit a mistake?

Here's are some wise words I found on admitting mistakes:
"You can only learn from a mistake after you admit you’ve made it. As soon as you start blaming other people (or the universe itself) you distance yourself from any possible lesson. But if you courageously stand up and honestly say “This is my mistake and I am responsible” the possibilities for learning will move towards you. Admission of a mistake, even if only privately to yourself, makes learning possible by moving the focus away from blame assignment and towards understanding. Wise people admit their mistakes easily. They know progress accelerates when they do." [scottberkun.com - #44 - How to learn from your mistakes]

Google 'admit mistake' and you'll find about 385,000 more links.

Mike; May 17, 2008 12:25 AM
protactinium said...: "Hillary will see this race as stolen. Jean"

You win the award for the most ignoarnt comment ever posted.

How could Hillary ever claim is was stolen or her supporters?

Was it all that instuinal support? Or the fact she wants Mi, and FL now seated.(Obama has agreed and now Hillary is fighting it)

Or is it the fact she start with more super delegates?

Oh I get it. You mean anything the questions the queens royalty and dare fight her rulership is a traitor, dishonest and stole it away from her?

I am sure glad I live in America. Maybe you can try Russia. They do that kind of thing.

HILLARY HAS LOST. NO matter how much you complain, or attempt to smear Obama. Now get off your high horse and vote on issues, between Mccain or Obama. Oh wait. Im guessing issues is were you draw the line. Character assasinations only/; May 17, 2008 12:26 AM
Yamaka said...: "Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track"

This is a political statement from the Univ of Chicago; they have corrupt practices with Obamas for a long time. They try to save his skin!

Not accurate. Let BHO publish his Appointment Letter which will show his clear designation.

:-(; May 17, 2008 12:29 AM
Yamaka said...: "HILLARY HAS LOST. NO matter how much you complain, or attempt to smear Obama"

Prota:

No one has clinched the 2209 as yet. Five more Contests to go. No one knows the results!!

Wait till the Convention.

If not, go enjoy the Coronation Ball in Hyde Park!!

:-(; May 17, 2008 12:32 AM
Hippolytus said...: It all depends on how Hillary decides to play it. If she decides to sincerely support Obama, she'll bring along her supporters. If she can't bring them along, what does that say about her leadership? Don't get me wrong -- she can be a pretty persuasive lady. Things are going to look a lot different in five or six months than they do right now.
This is not to deny that Obama has a problem with a segment of the Democratic base. He does have areas that need to be shored up. The same could be said of any candidate, of either party. He'll do fine. You just watch and see.; May 17, 2008 12:33 AM
protactinium said...: "This is a political statement from the Univ of Chicago; they have corrupt practices with Obamas for a long time. They try to save his skin!"

Did you really just call UoC corrupt? Desprate!!! Why don't you go read about it before you critize.

http://www.uchicago.edu/research/

here is the research they do.

Hey I got an idea. Tell all the Drs the UoC educates and tell them that they are all corrupt. I hope you don't ask for healthcare through them. Oh and don't use anything they are involved in research.

Maybe while your at the site you should look up all the awards they have earned.

Its fitting. Hillary is desprate, and it shows on her supporters. Ignorance is Bliss i hear.; May 17, 2008 12:34 AM
suzihussein22 said...: Leah-http://www.time.com/time/press_releases/article/0,8599,1129509,00.html-You've probably already seen this article, but this is what I've read about Sebelius. So far, so good.; May 17, 2008 12:34 AM

«Oldest ‹Older 801 – 1000 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