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

2132 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 2132 Newer› Newest»

greywolf said...: Here is a scary thought...

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/; June 02, 2008 9:44 PM
greywolf said...: gezz you are all really taking the fun out of this....

I was trying to give yamaka and aunt jean some hope... gezzzz

cant have any humor or fun in here..; June 02, 2008 9:47 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: greywolf-

Yam and Aunt Jean are confused enough as it is.

Let's stick to the truth and the real numbers so that they don't get even more confused ;); June 02, 2008 9:49 PM
greywolf said...: She really needs to give it up.–

Clinton aides said they do not expect there to be a Democratic nominee Tuesday evening when the final polls close in the 2008 primary season.

“Until there is a nominee, we are still working to become that nominee,” said campaign spokesman Mo Elleithee.

It remains unclear how the Clinton campaign will respond should Obama amass the 2,118 delegates needed to clinch the nomination. Elleithee told reporters the campaign would “cross that bridge” if they came to it and suggested if the campaign challenged the allocation of Michigan delegates the number of delegates needed to secure the nomination might change.; June 02, 2008 9:51 PM
Oregon Dem said...: Yamaka:

Two things:

1) Congrats your Million Dollar Gal did better today then since May 8th with Super Delegates. She got 2 today (so far).

and

2) Your math still works!

HRC has 1916.5 total delegates

HRC can get all 12.5 Edwards delegates (hey I know she lost 1.0 today but that is OK she still can get the rest - after all as you said a month ago: If they were for Obama they would have already declared for hinm thus they MUST be for her).

That is 1929.0.

SD goes 60 - 40 for HRC and 50 - 50 in Montana that is 19 for HRC.

1948 Total.

That is just a mere 169 short

AND

Surely she can get 169+ of the 195.5 left!!!!; June 02, 2008 9:53 PM
greywolf said...: LMAO... it worked////

I really missed your fuzz math yammer,, you remind me so much of Hillary and since she has not been talking much,,, i needed a hillary stand in so I could boost my anti Hillary serum lmao; June 02, 2008 9:56 PM
greywolf said...: Sorry guys.. but I really want to have a little fun in here tonight vs all this seriousness. We got to lighten up some if you know what I mean, wheres the laughter.
WE NEED HUMOR>>> WE NEED HUMOR>>>> WE NEED HUMOR>...; June 02, 2008 9:58 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: greywolf-

Everyone can party and have fun tomorrow night after Obama crosses the 2118 hump ;)

I think right now there are a bunch of us holding our breath waiting patiently until all of this is over tomorrow night ;)

OBAMA/Sebelius '08

.; June 02, 2008 10:01 PM
Independent Voter said...: grey, I have a good 'gay' joke if you'd like to hear it....I don't mind telling it since I'm gay.

wanna hear it?; June 02, 2008 10:03 PM
Emit R Detsaw said...: Who said:

“Our county voted by a strong majority for Barack Obama in the Democratic primary,”; June 02, 2008 10:03 PM
Yamaka said...: apiss:

Yes, people can eat out one day.

Yes, many men cook dinner and take care of children.

But for most women, including many mothers, and older folks waiting in the polling places of the Caucus for several hours is a massive waste of time, IMO.

It so happened most of these folks support Hillary, thus she did not fair well in the Caucuses, which is a simple fact.

That is it.

Can you please answer a hypothetical question, please?

1. Due to some cruel trick of fate, Hillary loses the Nomination,

2. McCain picks a NON-ProLife woman of experience as the VP,

how many women would vote for BHO in the GE?

I say a very few of White women the bulk of the total electorate.

What say you?

There is lot of anger with this Silent Majority out there, believe me.; June 02, 2008 10:09 PM
suzihussein22 said...: greywolf-We're going to have to go right to...ludicrous speed.-Dark Helmet May the schwartz be with us; June 02, 2008 10:10 PM
Independent Voter said...: WOW! Did Cheney really go there? I so hope moveon.org keeps audio of that.

Dick Cheney: "there are Cheney's on both sides of the family and we don't even live in West Virginia. You can say those things when you're not running for re-election".

WOW!!!!!!!!!!!; June 02, 2008 10:11 PM
rkw said...: Hillary Launches Plans to Run Again; June 02, 2008 10:13 PM
RobH said...: Did I miss something tonight regarding the:

Cheney offensive joke
leads to
Byrd lashes out
leads to
Byrd goes to hospital.

This from Politico tonight:

Cheney speaking:
"So, I had Cheneys on both sides of the family — and we don't even live in West Virginia," Cheney cracked. After pausing for laughter from the crowd, Cheney added, "You can say those things when you're not running for re-election."

Afterward, West Virginia Sen. Robert Byrd lashed out at Cheney for the "insult to all Americans." In a written statement, Byrd declared that Cheney showed "contempt and astounding ignorance toward his own countrymen" with the comments.

And then later in the evening Byrd goes to the hospital. Man, I sure hope he doesn't fall very ill tonight, this could be a pretty ugly connection.; June 02, 2008 10:14 PM
RobH said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; June 02, 2008 10:16 PM
RobH said...: Yamaka,

Since I know you're lurking.

Would you be so kind as to answer my well-intnetioned question at 6:26PM?

Third request.

"IF your candidate urges you to vote for Obama - for the good of the country, and as a respecting of your wishes - will you?; June 02, 2008 10:17 PM
RobH said...: softspone22:

my favorite line from said movie:

"smoke if you got 'em."

(after he head butts the vending machine...); June 02, 2008 10:18 PM
RobH said...: Yamaka:

Why would you include this in your most recent post:

"Can you please answer a hypothetical question, please?"

...when you haven't answered my very pleasant question to you this evening, asked three seperate times?

The golden rule, my man: treat other s the way you'd want to be treated. Why would anyone answer your question, when you woun't give quid pro quo?

Simple anser: Yes or No?

Please, my fellow human?; June 02, 2008 10:21 PM
Yamaka said...: Golf:

I am still on vacation at NY City!

You see, the DP has two wings:

FAR LEFT and the Moderates.

FAR Left includes BHO, Kerry, Mondale, McGovern, Dukakis and the ilk. This is the vocal Minority.

Moderates are the Clintons who are the founding members of the Democratic Leadership Council. This is the Silent Majority, IMO.
I am a Moderate and a FOB - Friend of Bill.

Now the war is between the two factions in the Party for the Control and the Nomination.

If the Far left wins the Nomination, the Moderates NEED not support it, stay quiet. That's it.

The Party will lose the GE, as it did in the past 30 years when a Far Left candidate was the Nominee.

Then the Moderates will take over the Party and win the WH.

That's why your assertion that DP will blame her is just boyish.

We are now fighting for the Most Electable Candidate in the Fall. If the SDs think it is BHO, let them go ahead and meet their Waterloo. They did it before, and faced the humiliating defeat as late as 2004!

Why should Hillary sweat for BHO, the Minority Candidate who got 300K less in the Popular Votes?; June 02, 2008 10:22 PM
RobH said...: rkw:

Thank you, that's an excellent link.; June 02, 2008 10:28 PM
RobH said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; June 02, 2008 10:30 PM
RobH said...: Still lurking Yams:

Please, my fellow human?

Yes or no?

If your candidate asks you to vote for Obama, which she will in the next two days - for the good of the country, and respecting her wishes - will you?

I think a little courtesy would do here, don't you, Ijeomi?; June 02, 2008 10:31 PM
Oregon Dem said...: Now that Yamaka is back I miss sto poba man ow!

Grey

Sorry I missed your joke - yes you were just baiting YamakaBinLaden to say that Hillary could be co-president again - my apology for not recognizing your sense of humor....

RobH

Neither Aunt Jean or Yamaka / stopobamanow (or the other name that Yam used (what was it Anon Dem in NY?) ever answer a question that is put to them frankly - they merely answer those posts that suit their being able to spout off their own philosophy. Reminds me of Rush L and Sean H.

Soft:

Please fax me some of the leftover Sweet Potato - @ 1-HRC-its-over

Thanks; June 02, 2008 10:37 PM
suzihussein22 said...: robh-Jeebs also said smoke 'em if you got 'em in MIB II. :); June 02, 2008 10:38 PM
Yamaka said...: Folks:

I have been clear on my support of BHO:

I have said before if he jumps over the Full Inclusive Hurdle of 2209, I will blog for him.

But the DNC has given us only the Partial Hurdle! That's my answer.

Once again, if BHO gets the Most of All votes cast, certified by the States, I will blog for him.

If not, where is the legitimacy?

Fairness and Legitimacy is the hall mark of my Political Philosophy.

I want Hillary to win the GE either this year or in 2012!

She has the Legitimacy, the Experience, the Guts and the Fire in the belly!; June 02, 2008 10:41 PM
Meg said...: Polls close in Montana 8 pm MST.
Polls close in South Dakota 8 pm CST.

Now, when are we going to see the big rush of SD's who waited so long so that nobody could accuse them of putting Obama over the top, which it looks like they will?; June 02, 2008 10:42 PM
RobH said...: ss22:

You're right, he did.; June 02, 2008 10:42 PM
suzihussein22 said...: OR Dem-Failure to connect:there weren't even 4 bites left.:(; June 02, 2008 10:45 PM
apissedant said...: Article on civil unrest and economic turmoil with slight adjustment proposed by ed:
http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=7931529&blogID=401911106; June 02, 2008 10:46 PM
RobH said...: Yam:

I've been quite pleasant to you, and asked you a simple question four times.

Your discourteousness to answer me shames me. Do you know shame?

Simple humanity suggests you should answer.

Do you know the concept of face?
You have none, in my opinion. You have named yourself, yes?; June 02, 2008 10:46 PM
apissedant said...: kujo,
I was behind in reading, and didn't see that you stole my thunder!; June 02, 2008 11:00 PM
JayW said...: Yam and Aunt Jean...

What exactly will you be doing when HRC gives her speach tomorrow in NY?

I would LOVE to be a fly on the wall for that.

PRICELESS!!!!; June 02, 2008 11:03 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: RobH,

I think there is an old saying about HONEST people will honestly and straight up answer a straight-up question that has been asked in a respectful manner. If they don't, it is an indication that they are dishonest, or have something to hide. It is also an indication that they show disrespect to the person asking the question.

By the hedging, evading, avoiding and non-responses that the Yammering Yammerer is giving, I think we can presume that the Yammering Yammerer is not an honest person.

I think it is now up to the Yammering Yammerer to prove whether the Yammering Yammerer is an honest person.

My bet is the Yammering Yammerer will not be able to do so. And since the Yammering Yammerer shows no respect to you, it makes it extremely difficult, if not impossible, for anyone to show respect to the Yammering Yammerer.

Mike; June 02, 2008 11:04 PM
apissedant said...: mike in maryland,
He isn't saying that Hillary wouldn't run for reelection exactly. What he is implying is that he and Hillary will declare martial law and suspend all presidential elections indefinitely.; June 02, 2008 11:05 PM
apissedant said...: soft,
regarding your post at 9:13, I don't fully understand.

I would not find it assertive to use our vast resources to build power plants, water treatment plants, homes, hospitals, and schools that we destroyed. I find that responsible. If I crashed into my neighbor's house, either myself or my insurance company would be required to cover the damages. Our policy is that individuals must take responsibility for their actions, but the government as a whole gets a pass.

So if you replaced assertive with responsible, I would answer the question yes.; June 02, 2008 11:16 PM
rkw said...: Yamaka keeps telling us that he is from the moderate wing of the party and that moderates ought to stay home in November or stay quiet or something along those lines. But I think Yamaka is actually a closet liberal.

And I suspect he's not really from Houston. I think he's from the west coast, probably some liberal bastion like San Fran.

And why do I think this?

Well, I was looking around for a translation or meaning for "Yamaka." And guess what? From reference.com.

The Yamaka (Pali for "pairs") is part of the Pali Canon, the scriptures of Theravada Buddhism. It is included in the Abhidhamma Pitaka, which according to the scriptures themselves was taught by the Buddha himself. Scholars do not take this literally, though some have suggested that some central ideas of the Abhidhamma may go back to him.

The book is in ten chapters, each dealing with a particular topic of Buddhist doctrine: roots, aggregates and so on. The treatment is by way of questions and answers: Is X Y? But is Y X? This pairing of converse questions gives the book its name, which means "pair" in Pali. In addition to the identity questions above, the main types are:

For a person (and/or in a place) that X arises/arose/will arise/cease, does/did/will Y ... ?
Does a person who understands X understand Y?
A translation has been published in Malaysia but is probably unobtainable. A detailed outline can be found in Guide through the Abhidhammapitaka, by Nyanatiloka.

http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Yamaka

Yamaka seems to be posited on relativism and logic. Clearly bedrock liberal priciples.

Yam - you are found out!; June 02, 2008 11:16 PM
tmess2 said...: Hillary will be expected to move to make the nomination unanimous, whether she does or not tells us if she will be a major player in the future or not.

Even with all the divisiveness in the Democratic Party, it is still Obama's election to lose. (And before certain folks say that Kerry was in the same position in 2004, at this point in 2004, Kerry was behind.); June 02, 2008 11:17 PM
tmess2 said...: I would note that if McCain picks a pro-choice woman as his vice president (and I am having trouble thinking of one who is qualified in the Republican Party) then half of the Republican Party becomes convinced that he is a traitor to the pro-life movement and Bob Barr breaks 20% in the vote totals. Under those circumstances, Obama wins with similar totals to Bill Clinton 48% of the vote but near 400 electoral votes.; June 02, 2008 11:21 PM
apissedant said...: Yam,
McCain already has enough trouble with the hard right Republicans. If he wants to win the election, he needs to nominate a very conservative person for VP. Nominating a pro choice VP would kill any chance he has of winning, as was already stated.; June 02, 2008 11:24 PM
golfman8042 said...: Yamaka...

You are correct, if moderate democrats refuse to support Barack, democrats will not win the white house in 2008. Whose fault will that be?

When Bill was the nominee, left-wing democrats voted for him. If they had been angry and had refused to vote (on the grounds that Bill was more moderate than them), Bill would not have won the election.

The only way any democratic nominee wins the white house is for the whole party to come together. My point is that Hillary has done much to prevent that from happening so far, and if she does not bust her butt for Barack and he loses the GE, she will be marked by the left-wing as the cause for Barack's defeat. The left-wing has consistently turned out; it's the moderates who sit on their hands or jump ship if their candidate-of-choice does not get the party's nomination.

Just my observation as an outsider looking in. I do not normally vote democrat.; June 02, 2008 11:25 PM
apissedant said...: kujo,
Thank you very much, and I completely agree. We have offended, hurt, and often caused the death of so many people throughout the world. Not you and I of course, but our government. We then complain when these same people disagree with us, or worse yet, attack our soldiers in blind retaliation. We continually escalate the violence, and never try to do anything to fix the route cause of it.

It is a terrible day when groups like Hamas, Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, and Cuba are all willing to negotiate for peace, and WE, the supposed protectors of the world refuse to negotiate.

Now McCain wants to start economic sanctions on Iran. Destroying the economy of another country, and devastating their people will totally win them over, great idea.; June 02, 2008 11:40 PM
suzihussein22 said...: apissedant-In the context of responsibility, wouldn't you favor asserting our representation as opposed to apathy?

Now I need to take the allergy stuff I was recommending to Aunt Jean. I'm not sure I'm making sense, and I haven't even had Benadryl yet.; June 02, 2008 11:43 PM
Yamaka said...: golf:

Thanks for your reply.

My position is in this Primary the fight has been very very close, unlike any in the recent past.

She leads in the Popular Vote by as much as 300K, and he leads in TDs.

I believe Hillary's Constituency is broader than BHO's:

She has most of women, working and older Americans and most of Latinos. I consider this group to be about 55%.

BHO has most of Blacks, college kids and "affluent Whites" - the 45%.

This shows up in the Popular votes, and not on PDs because her supporters don't go to Caucuses that well. This is an artificial situation. I call this as structural impediment of the Caucus system for many of the women, working and older voters - her supporters.

When she loses the Nomination, her supporters will be very reluctant to vote for BHO, IMO.

Please remember in 1980 Ted Kennedy, who lost the Nomination, did not work hard for the re-election of Carter!

Hard feelings die hard.
:-); June 02, 2008 11:47 PM
grammymndr said...: OK, I am a 52 ye old WF voting for Obama - but what gets me is that no one seems to recall that the former President Clinton was almost impeached, lied before Congress and was a philandering creep of a husband. So why are all the pundits and MSM saying "we admire him for all he did" Plus in the early 1990's I was a single mother of 2, working my A$$ off for $5.00 per hour and "things were great????$ Let me tell you, because I paid $20 per year for a Gerber Baby Life insurance policy I was ineligible for any Federal or State assistance. That is not my idea of "good times" Anyway, I will be glad to say good riddance to the Clinton Machine!; June 02, 2008 11:52 PM
apissedant said...: soft,
Of course, I'm here aren't I? We are all here, including Aunt Jean and Yamaka, because we are trying to exert what influence we have. We are trying to make positive changes for our ourselves, our families, our country, and our world. We are frustrated with the poor leadership we have had, and we are attempting to come together and improve our position.
So here, in this forum, we receive knowledge and insight into situations and other's points of view. We receive encouragement that we are not the only people worried about these problems. We get to spread our ideas, and formulate plans on how to best carry out our plans.
We may not exert much influence, and we will never by ourselves change the world. But everyone here is at least giving it their best shot.
Apathy doesn't come into play here. Everyone here cares, and that's why I am addicted to this place, just like you.; June 02, 2008 11:54 PM
Yamaka said...: "Nominating a pro choice VP would kill any chance he has of winning, as was already stated."

IMO, McCain is not a Right Wing Conservative.

He is a Right Leaning Moderate on many issues. He is NOT a rabid Right Winger as far as Abortion is concerned. Therefore, for him to choose an experienced woman VP shouldn't be a problem.

Yes, that would infuriate the Far Right, which anyway is NOT supporting him wholeheartedly now.

Just to tell America that he is NOT the FAR Right Republican he may consider moving decidedly towards the Center.

Then his chances of winning the GE goes up astronomically.

On Experience, BHO will stumble big time; on National Security, he will be a Novice; on economy he maybe equal to McCain, IMO.

Therefore, BHO is very Risky.; June 02, 2008 11:58 PM
Bull Schmitt said...: Say Yam -

Since even the 13 Clinton members of the Rules Committee voted unanimously for the Florida part of the solution (motion passed 27-0), shouldn't your personal magic number only include restoring Michigan to full strength? That would be 2117 + 64 = 2181 for those of you scoring at home (or even if you're blogging by yourself). I think Sen. Obama will get that by next Monday, the latest.

If the Florida solution is good enough for Harold Ickes, it should be good enough for the most committed Hillary supporter, right?

(And I can think of no one on this blog who is more committed than you. Or at least should be.); June 03, 2008 12:02 AM
Bull Schmitt said...: Check that, 2117 + 32 = 2149. He'd only need half of the 'restored' 64 Michigan delegates. That'll be reached by Thursday.; June 03, 2008 12:09 AM
suzihussein22 said...: apissedant-I didn't mean us, I meant in general. Thanks, and I read your paper.

Say good night, Gracie.; June 03, 2008 12:10 AM
apissedant said...: Yam,
Historically you are completely wrong. The Republican Senators that were thrown out of office in 2006 were the moderates. That is why democrats have the control of the Senate now, because the far right abandoned their moderate Republicans. It was a warning to any Republican who drifts too far to the center: go against us, and we'll kill your political career. McCain has no reason except this to continue campaigning to the far right. He has already sealed the nomination, yet his campaign stays far right. They need their money and their support to win the election. McCain is a draw to the center already, now he needs a draw to the right to solidify his base.

That is the most interesting part of this election. We actually have a Republican and a Democrat who have considerable moderate appeal. This is unprecedented in recent history. Rather exciting really. However, Obama still has the liberal backing along with the moderate backing, McCain has to find some way to attract the conservatives.; June 03, 2008 12:11 AM
apissedant said...: soft,
Goodnight Gracie!
Have a great night, I'm sure I'll talk to you again soon.; June 03, 2008 12:12 AM
Yamaka said...: "Well, I was looking around for a translation or meaning for "Yamaka." And guess what? From reference.com."

rkw:

Yamaka is just my Pen Name - an abbreviation of an imaginary name, for your information!

If written as Yakama, this may mean some thing in Japanese, not Yamaka!!

Have fun!!; June 03, 2008 12:14 AM
greywolf said...: If you want a good article on who should be Obama's you should read this. It is a shocking eyeopener, but it makes sense.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-kelly/barack-obamas-vice-presid_b_104332.html; June 03, 2008 12:20 AM
greywolf said...: after you read it give me your thoughts... lol; June 03, 2008 12:20 AM
Richard said...: Rumor has it that Hillary has canceled all her appearances after Wednesday morning and has told her advance team to stop scheduling new events. Chris Matthews reports that all Clinton staffers were given a choice of a plane ticket home or a plane ticket to NYC for her event tomorrow night (but not both). Even Bill Clinton said that tomorrow may be his last day ever campaigning for President. Could it be that the end is finally here and Clinton will drop out of the race tomorrow?; June 03, 2008 12:22 AM
greywolf said...: I know what you're going to say: Eva Peron can't be vice president -- she was born in Argentina. Relax. McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone. It won't be an issue.

And now you're going to say: "But Chris, isn't Eva Paron a waxy corpse, borne crazily from place to place by its fanatical followers?" Again, we'll be running against McCain.; June 03, 2008 12:24 AM
greywolf said...: A Military Background
So Obama doesn't get totally marginalized when we start bombing Iran in October.

Conservative
To balance his wife, Angela Davis.

Southern
So he can compete for the hardworking racists of Hillary's Appalachia.

Hispanic
Because there's nothing wrong with pandering identity politics when nice people do it.

A Woman
See above -- "Hispanic"

Older than Time Itself
Because Barack Obama is only five years old.

Jim Webb gets you "military" and "conservative." And "loose cannon," if we want to go toe-to-toe with McCain for the crazy bully vote. But he's not old enough.

Sam Nunn? I guess he's old. And he is a creep. There's that. But why would he do it? He's already been President in his head.

Bill Richardson is Hispanic, and held many, many, many jobs in the Clinton administration, none of which immediately come to mind.

Wesley Clark? I like Wesley Clark, but he's attached to Hillary Clinton like visible panty lines.

Kathleen Sebelius? There's no such thing as Kathleen Sebelius. I checked.

I know it sounds hopeless, but it's not. Obama just needs a running mate who's old, Hispanic, southern, female and enjoys state-sponsored violence, especially war.

Two words:

Eva. Peron.; June 03, 2008 12:25 AM
tmess2 said...: Anyone who thinks that McCain is a moderate has been drinking the far right's (or McCain's) koolaid.

McCain has a score of 100% from Concerned Women for America (the LaHaye's wacky group) and from the Club 4 Growth (the anti-regulation extremists). Overall, his average score from Conservative Groups is a 73%. His best score from a liberal group is 17% from the ACLU. His average score from liberal groups is a 9%.

Liberal groups rate him as the 5th most conservative member of the Senate (which is quite an accomplishment considering some of the lunatics in the Republican Party).

By the time that McCain's checkered history with lobbyists has been discussed in depth, his voting record has been revealed, and his infamous self-righteous temper explodes during the debates, McCain will be lucky to get 200 electoral votes.; June 03, 2008 12:25 AM
apissedant said...: ed,
You gave me a lot to read. It'll take me a few days, but I'll get back to you. I read a decent portion of the Israel stuff, but to my dismay or joy (I am not sure yet, depends if I'm able to finish anytime soon) each link had five more links waiting for me!
I agree with the basic underlying point about Palestine and Israel. I did not realize that talks of creating Israel dated back to 1919, and I did not know that American Jews had once so vehemently opposed it. That is great, too bad WWII changed that situation.
Thank you very much for the information. Another great example of why this website is so great. Connection to people that know more than myself, furthering my personal education and understanding.; June 03, 2008 12:31 AM
greywolf said...: apissedent..

Whats in the Netherlands?

Whats the cost of living like?

Why would you be moving there any way?

Just curious.; June 03, 2008 12:35 AM
Yamaka said...: bull s:

Please tell me what would happen to all the SDs, if say, pastor Wright goes out and lashes BHO for resigning from his Church?

He yells at him, "Barack you used me and the Church for your own personal gains. What kind of a character are you?"

This gets repeated in the MSM for several weeks from now and the Convention?

Anything can happen.

SDs declaration is final only at the Convention, not before. They can wobble any way they want till then, IMO.

That is the danger of depending on the SDs.; June 03, 2008 12:39 AM
apissedant said...: grey,
He is much more conservative than most people realize, but luckily for him, perception is reality. Hopefully the wave of unmentioned scandals that have plagued his career will come to light and gain more attention soon. Don't bet on it though, Bush's "youthful indiscretion" never gained traction.; June 03, 2008 12:39 AM
apissedant said...: yam,
What if all the skeletons from the Clintons' closet come pouring out of the woodworks? I am pretty sure they have more than Obama. Hell, they have more than the entire state of Illinois.; June 03, 2008 12:41 AM
Keryl said...: Just pausing to look around...

A few short weeks ago I had:

Never heard of blogger, never posted on a blog, never followed a political campaign, never felt anything but cynicism towards politics, never heard of superdelegates, and frankly had never really followed a primary.

And then somehow I ended up on this site, multiple times a day, obsessed with that number. Just obsessed. When Obama gained ground I was elated, when he lost ground I was frustrated.

Because of that obsession I have been introduced to a group of passionate people who have been intelligent, interesting, stubborn funny and equally obsessed with that number. It's at 39.5 as I type this. Tomorrow it might go down to 0.

ZERO. Holy shit. I hoped, I doubted, I argued, I reassessed, I absorbed, I lashed out. What a ride. What will I do all evening come Wednesday?

Party divisions aside, I am just bursting with pride for the Democratic Party. Clinton and Obama have made History. Capital H.

So all, good night and have a pleasant tomorrow. Really pleasant.

Still miles to go before we sleep.; June 03, 2008 12:50 AM
Hippolytus said...: Yam says (after repreated prodding):
"Once again, if BHO gets the Most of All votes cast, certified by the States, I will blog for him.Once again, if BHO gets the Most of All votes cast, certified by the States, I will blog for him."
________
This answer is possibly a dodge. By all votes cast, how do you account for the ones cast in caucuses? Are you willing to use RCP estimates?
Also, if Hillary can't get her own diehards to support Obama, what does that say about her leadership skills? Answer: not much.; June 03, 2008 12:57 AM
Yamaka said...: "What if all the skeletons from the Clintons' closet come pouring out of the woodworks?"

Her life has been an open book for a long time.

She doesn't have any skeleton in any closet!

Sure, his old enemies may go after Bill! Not Hillary.

Bill Clinton is NOT on the ballot!

He knows how to handle them properly!!

Remember, he walked away from the Impeachment Saga unscathed with nearly 65% approval ratings, and in the process he decimated the entire careers of Newt and Livingston!!; June 03, 2008 12:59 AM
Keryl said...: Yam didn't answer the question...

It was will he support Obama if Clinton concedes and endorses him.

It's a simple yes or no. Which actually says Yamaka doesn't want to lie, because he doesn't want to support Obama and it's likely Clinton will endorse, so he has to dodge, dodge, dodge.; June 03, 2008 1:00 AM
Yamaka said...: hippo:

Please read my 11:47 pm reply if you want to.

Hillary has leadership skills.

But her supporters have independent views!!; June 03, 2008 1:03 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: Evade.
Avoid.
Non-responsive wording.
Mis-direction.
Faulty use of math.
Implied use of racial code words.

Who does that describe?

Hillery?

Yammering Yammerer?

Both?

Did I miss many?

Mike; June 03, 2008 1:05 AM
Independent Voter said...: Not so fast there Yam,

Bill's approval rating has plummeted to 42% and his negative rating is now 45%

Hillary Clinton however has a positive rating of 45% and a negative rating of 44%.

Barack Obama has a 51% positive rating, 28% negative and 18% neutral and 3% not sure.

So it looks as though Bill has killed his legacy.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/03/maybe-bill-clin.html; June 03, 2008 1:09 AM
Kujo said...: apissedant:

I agree.

If we think back to pre-Bush area I remember the political situation in Iran where the youth were staring to make waves in the government. They were taking on a pro-western style. Then Bush came out with his Axis of Evil. Soon after they had there election and the rest is history.

Its a shame that our voting public is so il-informed.

So many people question Clinton's vote on the war and why did she do it. I remember it exactly. Anyone who did not support Bush was targeted in the press as being soft on terror, weak on protecting the US.

Same thing now. Anyone who would actually try to work with all the middle east countries will again be targeted as soft on terror. Look at the flack that Jimmy Carter is getting with his push for piece. There has been know one in my lifetime who has push for piece for the Isralies, but he is thrown under the bus for just listening.

Like I keep saying I can not wait for Obama's presidency where we can rebuild the US reputation throughout the world. Where we can actually make strides in piece in many area's of the world.; June 03, 2008 1:11 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Real early today I asked everyone how many SDs everyone thought Obama and HRC would get for Monday as of midnight - and I think no one responded to my post so - I WIN! ;)

I was way off since I said Obama 10 and HRC 4.

The actual total SDs(people) for the day was:

Obama 7
Clinton 2

.; June 03, 2008 1:32 AM
Yamaka said...: RodentinMD:

I have been for Legitimacy and Fairness in the Process from Day One.

RBC/DNC made the Process so illegitimate and arbitrary from the beginning.

From Day One the Party tilted the playing field against Hillary by removing two important States that she won by 10% from the Delegate Count. The Original Sin belongs to the RBC/DNC: The Date Rule was very badly implemented; they should have solved the problem before voting started. They are the Real Villains.

MSM conspired with the RBC all along to disenfranchise the voters.

How could anyone happily endorse something that is so blatantly illegitimate in a very very close Nomination Process?

Think hard before accuse some one.; June 03, 2008 1:33 AM
Hippolytus said...: Yam,
Now I see. You only count votes cast in elections which meet the criteria of your candidate. I guess the Clinton supporters who did participate in the caucuses were voting in a "non-sanctioned" process (i.e., one not approved by Hillary). Nice try, but no dice.
Also, one measure of a great leader is the ability to persuade. We'll see if she passes that test in the coming months. Obama has already passed that test, based on his success thus far. But I do agree that he'll have to do more, especially with Hillary supports, if he is to win.; June 03, 2008 1:37 AM
Hippolytus said...: Independent voter said...
"Bill's approval rating has plummeted to 42% and his negative rating is now 45%"
______
Independent voter, do you happen to know what Bill's favorable/unfavorable ratings were before the primary season began? Just curious. I tend to agree that Bill has tarnished his legacy, and I suspect that Hillary has succeeded only in driving up her already high negatives (which is quite an accomplishment).; June 03, 2008 1:43 AM
Hippolytus said...: Leah,
That picture of Obama and you is so funny and cute, I get a kick out of it every time I read one of your posts. Well done!
(Hope I didn't offend you with my earlier risque remark.); June 03, 2008 1:46 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Yamaka said: "From Day One the Party tilted the playing field against Hillary by removing two important States that she won by 10% from the Delegate Count."

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

Yamaka that is BS. FL and MI were removed BEFORE the primaries took place. NO ONE tilted the playing field to give an advantage to anyone! You conveniently always forget that even Hillary SAID 'That those two states would not count'.

Hippolytus - That is Obama and MICHELLE! LOL .. but I know you know that, and you know that I know you know it ;); June 03, 2008 1:53 AM
Hippolytus said...: Yam,
Why won't you give RobH a straight answer?; June 03, 2008 1:57 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: I think that the Hillary supporters are forgetting an important fact here.

Obama had enough votes on the RBC to get a motion passed for a 50/50 split. Obama 64 Clinton 64. But noooo he had his representative go ahead and agree to the Clinton 69 Obama 59 Michigan proposal.

So HRC netted 10 delegates ONLY because Obama held out the 'olive branch' to her... and what did she and her camp do? She spat on it!

Immediately Ickes started accusing Obama of stealing 4 delegates from HRC. They did not extend a thank you or nothing - they did not even acknowledge the fact that Obama was playing nice in order to come to a fair resolution.

If it had been 'me' I would have let the 64/64 split move forward and called it a day.

.; June 03, 2008 2:00 AM
Hippolytus said...: Leah et al.,
Since nobody has offered comment since Leah's post a half-hour ago, I think I'm going to pack it in for the night, too.
Big day and night tomorrow -- looks like Hillary is finally ready to call in the fire and piss on the dogs.
Good night, now!; June 03, 2008 2:30 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: lompe posted on the SD comment page:

Maria Chappelle-Nadal (MO) for Obama
_____

Yahoooo! Another SUPER DUPER for OBAMA ;)

Goodnight everyone!; June 03, 2008 2:55 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Hello everyone some of you said don't let the ranting of some make you go to their level you are right. Jean; June 03, 2008 3:50 AM
Squirrel said...: Yam says:
"Once again, if BHO gets the Most of All votes cast, certified by the States, I will blog for him.Once again, if BHO gets the Most of All votes cast, certified by the States, I will blog for him."

So according to YAMUCKA Americans abroad, Guam, Virgin Islands, Samoa, and Puerto Rico do not count as neither does Washington DC as none of these are States! Are but wait a minute, there ae not 50 'States' in the USA, some are commonwealths, is this yet more Clintonian maths coming to the fore here?

Oh, and by the way Yamucka, I do not think you not blogging for Obama will be such a bad thing, in fact if you would please blog for McCain we would all appreciate it, it would ensure more people vote for Obama in November.

It's coming up 9 a.m. here in the UK, so that is 4 a.m. in Eastern time, and this is a heck of a momentous day not only for the USA but for the world in general.; June 03, 2008 3:54 AM
Peter said...: The most fair solution for FL and MI would be a split solution in both states, but since Obama was in a position to win no matter what, they agreed to a compromise where Clinton got much more than she deserved, specially in MI where I think Obama would have won.

Ickes where playing a bad theater and Dawson (Obama RBC-member) clearly pointed that out. I think Ickes position in the party is weaker than ever.
I think most of what happen`t in the RBC meeting was a theater, they agreed quite fast and I don`t think they would have, if they didn`t have a solution ready before the meeting.; June 03, 2008 4:01 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: Squirrel said...
. . . there ae not 50 'States' in the USA, some are commonwealths . . . .

Excellent point Squirrel!

The commonwealths are Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Kentucky and Virginia.

Hellery received more votes than Senator Obama in the first three by these margins:
214,115
193,505
249,307
Subtotal: 656,927

Senator Obama received more votes than Hellery in Virginia by a margin of:
278,054

Wonder what that does to Hellery's argument?

Hehehehehehehehe

Mike; June 03, 2008 4:13 AM
Hippolytus said...: Aunt Jean said...
"Hello everyone some of you said don't let the ranting of some make you go to their level you are right."
___________

Hi, there, Aunt Jean. Boy, you're an early riser. Hope you're feeling better. I just got up for a minute, but couldn't resist getting on the computer. Will you follow Hillary's lead, if she asks you Tuesday night to support Obama?
Are you at least willing to keep an open mind? Sure hope so!; June 03, 2008 4:14 AM
Hippolytus said...: Postscript to Aunt Jean,
I should have said good night, too. Back to bed for me. I'll look for your reply when I get up.
Your fellow Dem,
Hippolytus; June 03, 2008 4:17 AM
Peter said...: The question today is how many supers endorse before Obama speaks in MN. He is 40 short of the nomination according to most networks. It is difficult to say how many delegates he gets from MT, but he will probably get between 9 and 10 in MT (8 is worst-case) and between 7 and 8 from SD. Worst case is 15 combined. So, he most get at least 25 to call himself the nominee tonight, which I think is important for the momentum ( better to have a lot of focus). 25 is a lot in one day, so we`ll have to wait and see.; June 03, 2008 4:34 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: One question is how soon after the Montana polls close will Margarett Campbell endorse? Remember, she endorsed Senator Obama, then had to retract it when it was pointed out that Montana Democratic Party rules stated that the Chair had to remain neutral until the polls closed.

Maybe she'll be on stage in St. Paul Tuesday night?

If she endorses after polls close, but prior to the vote count, is that considered an endorsement before or after the pledged delegate count? VBG

In any event, she is one guaranteed unpledged delegate we don't have to worry over tomorrow.

Mike; June 03, 2008 4:46 AM
Squirrel said...: Today it will be Politics with the capital 'P'.

The Democratic Party now know who their nominee is and the members who are SD's will want this to be the show piece it should be. It is for that reason that today I predict that the number of SD's declaring for Obama will be enough, 25-30, for the Party to announce Obama as the presumptive nominee as the results come in from Montana and South Dakota. This will then be followed by the 'flood' of SD's, both unpledged and already pledged for Clinton to follow tomorrow.

This is a GREAT DAY!; June 03, 2008 4:51 AM
Amot said...: Mike, I read somewhere that Clyburn will endorse together with 18 Congress members. And we have one endorsement today so if MT and SD deliver 17, Obama needs 21.5 at the moment. Substract 18 - he needs 3.5 supers to get the nomination. Do we expect endorsements from South Dakota? They will have 1 hour between polls close there and in MT. So actually MT will be the state to give him the majority.; June 03, 2008 4:55 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: Amot,

The only South Dakota SD is DNC Member Cheryl Chapman, and I have no idea who she will endorse.

The SDs in Montana who haven't endorsed, besides Campbell, are Senators Baucus & Tester, Governor Schweitzer, and DNC member Dennis McDonald.

I don't think Baucus, Tester or Schweitzer will endorse until later in the week, when a large surge of Senators and Reps endorse - a hide in the crowd strategy, since they will have to think of the somewhat precarious political situation they probably will face the next time they are up for election.

McDonald (because his position is 'insulated' from Repugs in the state) will endorse late tomorrow or early Wednesday is my prediction. Doing that will take some spotlight off the other three when they endorse.

Mike; June 03, 2008 5:17 AM
Peter said...: Re Amot

17 from SD and MT is likely. 9 from MT would be as expected and I also think 8 from SD is the most probable outcome. There could be a upset in SD where Clinton wins and there could be a huge margin in MT which gives Obama 10.
But the most likely outcome is a 5-10% win in SD and a 15-20% in MT.

ARG had a poll this weekend where Clinton had something like a 25% margin in SD and MT was close, but I don`t think anyone believes this. Clinton camp thinks a huge Obama win and a small one for O in SD. I`m thinking 17 or 18 for Obama, worst case is 15.
He would need something like 15 to be sure of a majority today. But 23 could be enough.
We know Spratt will probably endorse today and Maria Chappelle-Nadal (MO) have allready endorsed, so we need 23 in addition to these two.; June 03, 2008 5:47 AM
Peter said...: One interesting point is the "super"-gap in MI and FL, it is narrowing. Clinton had a "huge" lead from these states but obama has gotten a lot of superdelegates from these states lately. I really hope i can get 4-5 from FL and 2-3 from MI today or tomorrow, because superdelegates from these states also have a symoblic value. Obama supported the proposals from these states regarding delegates, if Obama gets a majority of supers from these states it will be a "sign" of him getting support for his handling of MI/FL situation. So, FL and MI supers only have 1/2 at this moment, but they have a great symbolic value.; June 03, 2008 6:34 AM
Amot said...: Peter,
you have also another wave - RBC members endorsing Obama. It looks like his campaign behaved in a manner that they respect him more now and support him.

Everyone in Europe,
I made "Europeans for Obama sticker"; it's in my profile, feel free to use it.; June 03, 2008 6:42 AM
ed iglehart said...: Ah, sweet irony!

And, to get the bad taste out of your mouth

McCLELLAN: PRESS CORPS “COMPLICIT ENABLERS” OF BUSH
They believed what McClellan told them.
WORLD NEWS
U.S. Secretly Planning Attack on Iran
According to Pentagon press release.; June 03, 2008 7:05 AM
ed iglehart said...: Just so's y'all know, the BBC is linking to DCW

Welcome to Big Sky Country, Justin!

;-)
ed; June 03, 2008 7:18 AM
JayW said...: What time do you think that Hillary will give her "I QUIT" speech? I really don’t want to miss it.

I have a dinner to go to at 6:30 (ET) and I hope I am home in time.; June 03, 2008 7:30 AM
ed iglehart said...: On the BBC blogs,

60. At 12:27 pm on 03 Jun 2008, gadfly55 wrote:

BBC audiences should re- familiarise themselves with the Scottish play, Macbeth, and the obsessive, self-destructive ambition of Macbeth and his Lady, who spurred him on, lost her mind, and self-destructed. The perpicacity of the Bard astounds us. Now HRC will set terms and conditions for Obama, including fund-raising, and consideration for black politicians who have supported her and are under severe pressure. She will suspend the campaign, but not declare surrender. She will damn with faint praise, and bide her time, always ready, if fate intervenes to lift the banner. In Act V, 5, Macbeth flings himself into battle, refusing to utter, "Hold, enough". Don't expect HRC to make this utterance, either.

Go Gadfly!
Slainte!

And, from the history of Montana, a Scottish connection

;-)
ed; June 03, 2008 7:57 AM
Peter said...: Have McAuliffe and Ickes talked with each other the last couple of days? I don`t think Clinton will withdraw or suspend or campaign today. But I think she will do it by the end of the week and she will endorse Obama, I also think they will campaign together next week, probably in a key swing-state like Ohio.

What Ickes is doing, is trying a "one last shot". Obama will probably secure the nomination today, but he will only have 1-5 more delegates than 2118. I think Ickes and other Clinton surrogates can press her case and this "superdelegates changing their minds" a little bit, but I think we will see a massive amount of superdelegates endorsing in the next couple of days, I mean big names, like Jimmy Carter, Howard Dean, Nanct Peloisi, Al Gore etc. That will stop any talk from Ickes about "changing their minds" and will make Clinton drop out and endorse Obama as she should. So, don`t expect any exit-talk from Clinton today.

McAuliffe:
"I don’t think she’s going to go to the credentials committee. We’re not going to have a fight over four delegates.”

Ickes:
"that is why this nominating process must be resolved in August, and no earlier"; June 03, 2008 7:57 AM
Mug said...: Yamaka wrote:

I want Hillary to win the GE either this year or in 2012!
_____________________________

By this statement you are saying that you would rather have 4 more years of economic recession and thousand more dead American soldiers because of you petty feelings about this election. You are a traitor to your country. Shame on you. I will not read, nor respond to any further posts by you.; June 03, 2008 7:59 AM
ed iglehart said...: Clinton's Last stand?

"On June 25, 1876, in the vicinity of the Little Bighorn River in eastern Montana, the American Army's General George A Custer and 224 of his troops were killed by a force of Sioux and Cheyenne fighting men - fighting men whose capabilities Custer had grievously underestimated - led by chiefs Crazy Horse and Sitting Bull. Because it was easily the most spectacular victory by Native Americans in the course of their many conflicts with whites, the Little Bighorn battle's immediate outcome is well-known. What's less well-known, perhaps, is the way in which the ensuing war dragged on; into the fall; into the winter. But with the United States Government in a position to deploy infinitely greater resources than its Indian opponents, this war's outcome was as predictable as the Little Bighorn episode had been unforeseen....."

;-)
ed; June 03, 2008 8:11 AM
greywolf said...: Word on the street is that there will be sperts of SD coming out today in groups of 4 and 5 up to the maximum of 30. Thus to ensure that when the last poll closes tonight obama has enough votes to cross the threshold plus. It was stated that they were going to endorse him in phases so that when he does cross the threshold that it will happen with the final primary count being MT; June 03, 2008 8:50 AM
greywolf said...: Word is also on the street that Senator Clinton all though letting her people go will continue the fight because she and bill believe she was robbed in MI and FL. Plus bill does not ever want to go through another year like this year, it was too taxing on him.; June 03, 2008 8:53 AM
greywolf said...: Current polls in SD have Clinton ahead by 20. 60/40. I am not sure I buy it but then again, anything is possible, especially when you have three campaigning for one team and only one campaiging for the other team. Heavy odds to beat, one person can not be in all three states at the same time. Where as the clinton team can cover three states at one time. Really sucks the way that works. But what can one say obama should have had everyone one on his team out there these past few weeks. TO let the clintons get any kind of leg up is a major mistake. She does not deserve any kind of consessions or breaks. Especially the way billy bob has been running his mouth lately.; June 03, 2008 8:58 AM
greywolf said...: Oreo,

Looks like quite a few of the news stations are running behind our numbers (by as many as three).; June 03, 2008 9:06 AM
JayW said...: Does anyone know what time HRC is supposed to give her speech tonight?; June 03, 2008 9:25 AM
ChagoFuentes said...: Does anyone think the Davids (Plouffe and Axelrod) are good enough to get within two super delegate endorsements from clinching the nomination by the time he goes on stage in Minneapolis-St. Paul? That could set the stage for a "Live from New York" video feed of Bill and Hillary (both supers) announcing they are switching to Obama. She could go a long way toward vindicating herself in one brief dramatic and climactic moment. Maybe she could even lead it off by introducing the Virgin Island super to switch one more time so she could be the second switch to put him over the top. Oh, well, what's a little fantasy to start off the morning? Sorry, I know this thread is supposed to be for endorsements and endorsement rumors only but a rumor has to start somewhere. (Incidentally, I posted this comment on the super delegate endorsement thread but was invited, politely I think, to post here instead because you guys are more likely to respond. No sense of humor over there, I guess.); June 03, 2008 9:28 AM
Peter said...: Re Greywolf

It is only 1 poll, from ARG. ARG have been WAY off target with several polls. Here is some of they`re last "polls" before primarys.

IN Clinton by 8%, actual around 1% for clinton

OR Obama by 5%, actual Obama with 17%

In Wisconsin they had Clinton ahead with 6%, the next day they had Obama ahead with 10%, actual was Obama by 17%.

These are just some examples but ARG have consistently polled Obama WAY under his actual results. Why? I don`t know, but they did the same thing in NC, IL and CT. There is NO way Clinton wins SD with 20%. The margin of error ARG have, is MUCH higher then they say.

From what i saw, they had their poll in the weekend, which is bad, it increases margin of error because a lot of people or not home. I would also guess that they haven`t polled enough native americans, a group I think Obama will win.

MT being close is probably also way off target. Don`t trust ARG!!

Clinton can win in SD, but not by more than 20%. Obama is the favorite, i expect a narrow margin, perhapes 53-47% or something like that. Clinton by 60-40% is not going to happen.

I expect a huge win for Obama in MT, something like 60-40.

If you read what the campaigns say, they are off course trying to play down the expectations. Clinton camp is talking about huge loss in MT and a narrow defeat in SD.

Obama camp is talking about at least one win.

To me, that sounds like a huge Obama win in MT and a close race in SD.; June 03, 2008 9:31 AM
Beryl said...: Although not a Democrat, I was an avid Clinton supporter. As a professional woman, I was happy with the idea of a woman as the Head of State. I begin to grapple with my decision to support her when I observed her inability or unwillingness to shut down her husband's negativity and old-style politics. I was supporting HER as President and not another term for Bill. I wanted to see her demonstrate that she can better control her campaign and (more importantly) her husband.

Supporter comments have been mutually divisive in all campaigns so I was less concerned about supporter comments (including Bill's) but I do listen closely to the candidates themselves. I noticed Hillary's style of taking minimal responsibility for her actions. A strong leader does not hesitate to say, "I was wrong and I've learned from that error." Instead of blaming what she knew or didn't read about the war declaration, she should have responded as Edwards did. Instead of brushing off the Bosnia "fish story" as "mis-speaking", and it showing she isn't perfect like some think, she should have just admitted to embelishing the story and apologized. Clinton proceeded to make very negative comments about Obama even while Obama praised her as a formidable opponent (I'm ready, McCain's ready & Obama made a speech, Obama is a Christian -- as far as I know etc.). Both she and her husband described this style of campaigning as the norm and if [Obama] couldn't stand the heat, he should get out of the ktichen. I am personally sick of "the norm". Bush and Cheney are nasty and self-centered and I don't appreciate need this kind of leadership and tone anymore.

I appreciated Obama's and Edward's leadership styles and then fully embraced the positive "Yes, WE can" tone of the Obama campaign. The more negativity coming from Clinton herself (not her supporters), the more my resolve hardened against her as a viable Presidential candidate. Would I had wanted another woman as president? Absolutely! I just didn't feel the Hillary Clinton would be best for our nation.

It saddens me to see so many women who have invested a lot of time and energy in the Clinton campaign and are now terribly disappointed that she appears to be losing. The MI/FL decisions are not the fault of Obama but of the DNC and those who supported the decision that their votes would not count from the beginning -- including Hillary! It is disingenuous for the Clinton campaign claim that voters are being disenfranchised AFTER it is discovered that those votes would make it appear that she had won the popular vote. If Clinton cared about this disenfranchisement, she should have made this case BEFORE. Moreover, it doesn't appear that she cares about the people who stayed away from the polls thinking that their votes would not count --she only cares about those who voted for her.

Hillary Clinton supporters should try to redirect their anger away from Obama who has never been anything but gracious and complimentary to Clinton. I encourage other women to re-think what is in our collective best interest. It is not another 4 years of a Bush Administration in hopes that Clinton will return to the throne in 2012. That may never happen. The future is now and Obama. Let's ensure that an Obama Administration meets the needs of all Americans.; June 03, 2008 9:34 AM
RobH said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; June 03, 2008 9:42 AM
RobH said...: Check out this article on
macro political trends. Written 14 months ago, it's still an interesting read, given outcomes so far. Check out the second (down) boxed graph on the right side. Reason to hope.

PS: I feel so slick. And I didn't even forget to smile.; June 03, 2008 9:46 AM
Pablo said...: Eloquently stated miss beryl; June 03, 2008 9:49 AM
stopOBAMAnow said...: Hi There:

Well, about 36 million Americans have voted for the Dems, and still the Candidates are tied very very evenly.

Now some 200 or so SDs are going to call this Nomination.

I wonder what criteria these SDs use to endorse one Candidate over the other?

The Democratic Party Methodology stinks. Had they used the one followed by Reps, the contest would have been decided in TX for Hillary. Had they used the EV Methodology, she would have won hands down.

Because of the Artificial Metrics of the most corrupt Dems, the Nomination is decided by handful of SDs. It is really very shameful to the state of affairs of one of the major parties of America!
_______________________________

Yam, I missed you last night!

I also heard that SD is going big for Hillary and MT is very close!

What would the SDs do if BOTH go for Hillary?; June 03, 2008 10:04 AM
Dilbuck said...: Yam/Sto Poba Manow

I assure you the ARG polls are full of crap. They have consistently overstated Hillary and short-ended Obama. Plus, you have to realize that every state in the area has gone for Obama overwhelmingly. I will go with a pretty big win for Obama in Montana (14%-20%) and a 5%-10% victory in South Dakota. Remember that ARG had Clinton up 6% in Wisconsin two days before the primary to get trounced by 17%.; June 03, 2008 10:20 AM
jpsedona said...: StopYammeringNow,

If Hillary wins both, so what? Who cares at this point? PR didn't matter, SD & MT don't matter. Hillary is warming up her voice for the final swan song... it ain't over until she sings.

It doesn't matter whether she concedes, fights on or runs for as an independent... her Presidential aspirations for 2008 end today.

The good 'ol Maestro has forgotton the music but she'll be singing "It's my party, and I'll cry if I want to... you'd cry too, if it happened to you"...; June 03, 2008 10:23 AM
jpsedona said...: Yam,

you said: "She doesn't have any skeleton in any closet!"

With the exception of Ted Kennedy, Hillary has more skeletons in her closet than any other candidate in the last 30 years.; June 03, 2008 10:26 AM
RobH said...: This one is for Aunt Jean, it's a comment a poster left in response to an article on RCP titled "White Women Take The Gloves Off"

(I wish the title had not included the word "white" as it really isn't about race, but rather gender preferences. And I don't want to inflame anyone by thinking I'm pursuing a racial argument - I am not.)

Aunt Jean: would your read this comment and reply with your feelings, please?

Here's the comment:

"I find it strange and confusing that people would try to honor Clinton's campaign by voting to ban women's reproductive rights, keep us in Iraq, potentially start another war with Iran, block any universal health care, etc. All the things Clinton fought so hard against.

The women protesting so loudly in Ms. Harrop's article should ask Hillary Clinton herself which America she'd rather live in rather than voting against Clinton's ideals and dreams just to "punish" Obama."

Thanks.; June 03, 2008 10:29 AM
RobH said...: Aunt Jean:

Here's another one, left by a female poster. Your thoughts would be welcome, if you'd care to share them.

"I find it irrational that anyone would vote for McCain but claim to be a Democrat. Being a Democrat in 2008 is about being anti-war and pro-women's rights. Being Democrat in 2008 is for more balanced choices for judges in American courts and better healthcare for all Americans.

If people want Republican policies, they should vote for McCain. Otherwise I think they are simply being hypocritical, saying they are Hillary supporters, whose policy positions are almost identical to Obama's, but will vote for McCain.

As a woman myself, I think that this contradictory behavior reinforces the worst stereotypes about women, that we are irrational creatures who get personal rather than logical in our choices and decisions. It is a dangerous road backward for ourselves and our daughters."; June 03, 2008 10:30 AM
RobH said...: Yamaka

Good to see you're here this morning.

I have a question for you:

"If your candidate asks you to vote for Senator Obama for President, because he'll be better for the country, and you'll be reflecting HER hopes, will you?"

Thanks.; June 03, 2008 10:32 AM
ed iglehart said...: Beryl, You're a gem!

Excellently put. I second every word, but from an undeniably male position.

;-)
xx
ed; June 03, 2008 10:38 AM
JayW said...: Robh...

I see we are trying to rile up the crazies this morning.

I love it!; June 03, 2008 10:40 AM
Dilbuck said...: AP is reporting that Hillary will acknowledge tonight that Obama has the Democratic Nomination!; June 03, 2008 10:52 AM
Richard said...: Hah! Yamaka is talking to herself again. Does she really think we can't see through so transparent a ruse?

I believe Obama will coordinate the supers very carefully so that they don't put him over before the polls close in MT. That way he will be able to tout that Montana voters gave him the nomination in his speech tonight, which sounds much better than crediting supers.; June 03, 2008 10:54 AM
apissedant said...: keryl,
I love your post from last night.; June 03, 2008 10:56 AM
RobH said...: YES! YES! YES!

AP reporting RIGHT NOW, HIllary Clinton to concede tonight!

YES!; June 03, 2008 10:57 AM
greywolf said...: Yes, campaign alert from the clinton campaign headquarters.

Senator Clinton will conceed the race tonight "if" Senator Obama has the numbers 2118. She will admit that Senator Obama has the delegate lead as a minimum.

This just came as a breaking alert from MSNBC; June 03, 2008 10:59 AM
RobH said...: You know Jay,

I wasn't trying to rile them up.
I really just want a simple answer to a simple question. So we know what they really stand for.; June 03, 2008 10:59 AM
greywolf said...: get the words correct everyone... it is said she will state that Obama has the delegates to win the nomination tonight and will conceed "IF" he has the 2118 numbers; June 03, 2008 11:00 AM
Beryl said...: This is excellent news.

Now to join hands with those who want to see an end to the BUSH breed of politics. Getting Bush and everyone like him out of power will make it a lot easier being a US Citizen abroad. US Citizens are good people and it is high time that our leaders represent us as such.; June 03, 2008 11:03 AM
Squirrel said...: Beryl, that was great!

Yamucka/Sto pOba ma/ or whatever else you wish to call yourself, please go and start blogging for McCain as I suggested in my previous post, I am sure the vast majority of us here would welcome such a move.

Now it is time for me to sit back and start enjoying the day. I have cancelled all work today and instead am sitting in my office watching the events unfold.; June 03, 2008 11:03 AM
RobH said...: She is essentially inviting the Supers to endorse today "if you really want to end this thing."

It's like she's giving them the recipe.

Now, if he doesn't pick up like 25 supers today before the polls close, you REALLY have to wonder whether he's got 'em.

I'm personally certain he has them, alse all the credible journalists (Andrea Mitchell, Chuck Todd) wouldn't have reported it.

I REALLY question why they haven't come out yet...; June 03, 2008 11:04 AM
greywolf said...: it was further stated that "IF" he did not have the numbers tonight, that she would as soon as he has the numbers offer her congratulations and conceed the race. However she will as a minimum conceed that he has the delegate count necessary to secure the nomination.; June 03, 2008 11:04 AM
JayW said...: What time will the speech be though... I need to know so I dont miss it.; June 03, 2008 11:04 AM
greywolf said...: basically she is admitting she can not close the gap and as someone just said in here, giving permission for the superdelegates to come out to day to end it.

She is tired and worn out and accepts that it time to accept the results and end this; June 03, 2008 11:07 AM
JayW said...: I just hope she does it with class. That would certainly be a welcomed change.; June 03, 2008 11:09 AM
greywolf said...: Obama has asked his supporters and SD's not to come out with an official announcement until after the last polls close tonight. He does not want them to trickle in and to come in one group at one time. But who knows for sure how it will play out.

The press release from Clintons press secretary is this.

Senator Clinton will conceed tonight the fact that Obama has the delegates necessary to seal the nomination. She is "NOT" conceeding the race if Obama does not have the 2118 numbers when she gives her speach.; June 03, 2008 11:11 AM
JayW said...: So... just as I suspected... she has NO CLASS.

The report I just saw said that she is only admitting that Obama has enough delegates to get the nomination but she is not ending or suspending her campaign. She wants to keep her campaign alive in order to try to "leverage" or "bully" Obama. What a classless wench.

I am sure part of the reason she is going to keep her campaign alive is to try and recoup some of the debt that she has incurred. I have never seen such a mismanagement of funds. Thank God she wont be running for office.; June 03, 2008 11:14 AM
Independent Voter said...: Hipp - you asked last night after I went to bed what Bill Clinton's approval/disapproval rating was before the primary season.

You can go HERE and take a look at those numbers.

It appears that his approval was about 55% disapproval 42%.

Sorry, have to go for now. I'll be back later.; June 03, 2008 11:16 AM
greywolf said...: Another news release... big bold print from clinton herself...

She WILL NOT conceed the nomination tonight. She WILL NOT conceed tonight. She will however admit that Obama has the delegate count to clinch the nomination. There will be NO CONCESSION SPEACH TONIGHT. She still wants the VP seat, as well as some say on the platform before she conceeds. What it boils down to is this... give me what I want or I will drag this out forever.; June 03, 2008 11:27 AM
ed iglehart said...: As a 'side bet', who do you reckon will get the dubious honour of being the last superdelegate to endorse HRC?

;-)
ed; June 03, 2008 11:28 AM
greywolf said...: Harold Ikes is talking now. When asked what will be said tonight... Harold states..." I am not Senator Clinton, you will hear what you hear when you hear it". I am not in the speculation department.; June 03, 2008 11:31 AM
Auli Smedes said...: Kujo wrote (June 02, 2008 11:25 PM): " We go into negotiations with other countries not to solve problems but to find out what we can gain out of it. Peace in itself is not reason for us to be involved negotiations."
This is exactly pointing out what the majority of this world's non USA-citizins find let's say somewhat annyoing about the USA as a whole, and USA foreign policies in particular. Didn't I also read somewhere in these posts "… it's the USA way or the highway"? That indeed is one of the problems 'we' (as in the majority of people in the rest of the world) have with 'USA attitude'. Another example: Mrs. Clinton stated somewhere last week in one of her rallies "… we should go after OPEC, the thirteen nations that determine how much oil will be drilled and how much the cost will be. I want to take them on and go to OPEC against them and change our laws so that we can sue them under anti-trust laws. Because they're violating our laws. …" Come again? (accompanied with a grin of disbelief) They're violating our laws? Excuse me!?
Now this is just an example, but in this statement, Mrs. Clinton was touching on something that raises eyebrows - to say the least – all over the world when it comes to USA politics. 'We' (as in other countries) have to change our laws and agreements because they're inconvenient for you (as in US of A)? I very much doubt the US of A would ever consider doing that, but that's not the point. Point is America forcing it's ideas of how things should be or should be done on the rest of the world. You can imagine how that doesn't sit well with a lot of people outside USA borders. That's the arrogance 'outsiders' refer to when asked about it. Why is it hard to accept that other nations have different ideas and views of 'a good life'? It may not be your (multiple meaning) opinion, but a different opinion is not necessarily a wrong opinion. On the contrary. It might even broaden your horizon.
Furthermore, although the USA is doing a world of good all around the world, no argument about that, but there's also a tiny little negative aspect. In lots of cases it is felt that 'help' from the USA is not free, it comes with a price. I.e. establishing a military base on foreign soil as a precondition. USA politicians et al seem to pride themselves on being good Christians more than ever nowadays, but do they act upon it? For I do not believe that Jesus Christ ever asked for anything in return when helping someone. Except maybe for being the best person the particular individual could be. The USA is supposed to be the land of opportunity, not the land of opportunism.
Huge difference methinks.
You know, a lot of us outsiders view the USA as an adolescent with serious growing pains. Which on a good day results in a friendly parental pat on the back. On any other day, most of us, 'we' just shake our heads and go about our business. And some of us (I should say 'them' here, 'cause I personally do not belong to this group of people) get really pissed. Keep this course of action going and you'll have yourself another 9/11 on your hands as fast a you can say 'ouch'. I know Americans in general do not like to hear this, and by God I hope and pray with all my heart it doesn't happen, but ask around in 'the rest of the world', this is what you'll pick up on the street.
Instead of forcing others to change their mind, you could also try to understand why their minds would should whatever have to be changed in the first place.
Just for the record, I am a single white female, 43 years of age, born and raised in The Netherlands (hello apissadent, read your posts; you're more than welcome over here :-)).; June 03, 2008 11:38 AM
ed iglehart said...: Awwww!

I know, slap my wrist!; June 03, 2008 11:38 AM
RobH said...: This is like a bad dream.; June 03, 2008 11:41 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: ed-

That photo should be slapped on the front of every online newspaper ;)

______

I can't believe how SHE is stealing Obama's big day! Already MSNBC has been saying that tonight is HER day and NOT Obama's.

Today IS Obama's day - he WILL clinch the nomination tonight after the SD and MT polls close - and the focus needs to be on HIS speech - which will have much more to do with unity than her speech will.

I have never seen such an example of 'poor sportsmanship' in my life.

Just wait - I betcha she will delay her speech tonight so that Obama's speech will air very late after many of the 'old' folks have gone to bed!!! That woman makes me so mad!

And on top of it now her camp is saying that Obama 'probably won't get enough delegates until the END OF THE WEEK'. They are delusional!

OBAMA/Kathleen Sebelius '08

.; June 03, 2008 11:46 AM
Unknown said...: Paulina rocks!
Does anyone here doubt anything she has said?; June 03, 2008 11:49 AM
greywolf said...: senator just said in another release that she is weighting her options. She is considering fighting the Michigan ruling. She does not like it and does not accept it.

additionally, word is out that Kevin Rodirques VI just switched back to Obama that was on msnbc.
looked to confirm but do not see anything.; June 03, 2008 11:50 AM
Unknown said...: I am already sending email-congratulations -from the Netherlands- to every one in the US that I know. Hopefully we can soon be proud again of being an ally with this nation.; June 03, 2008 11:51 AM
greywolf said...: Senator clinton is going to bully her way on to the Obama ticket. This is all political posturing and she is holding the nomination process hostage until she gets what she wants . Debts paid, vp slot, HER universal health care plan, and other platforms she has run on. FYI, I do not want or accept being force fed a health care plan that if I reject I could be fined and such.; June 03, 2008 11:52 AM
JayW said...: If she weasels her way onto the ticket, I am voting for Nader.

I really don’t think Obama will allow her to run with him... not to mention Michelle Obama hates her.; June 03, 2008 11:58 AM
greywolf said...: Hillary is trying to upstage Obama tonight. She wants the lime light... she has yet to acknowledge Obama in any way shape or form. Her actions today, all those press releases are nothing but contemptious and only shows the poor level of her leadership abilities. This is about Hillary tonight, it has always been about hillary, she NEVER cared about US the American People. If she did care and does care, she would get off her hight and mighty platform and let Obama have his night tonight instead of draging this out with threats of caring this further. I had a small amount of respect left for Senator Clinton, but that is now completely gone. Now I have nothing but pitty for her.; June 03, 2008 11:59 AM
ed iglehart said...: Paulina,

Right On! I couldn't have expressed it better! As I've said before here and elsewhere, I fully understand what Michelle Obama meant, when she said she was proud for the first time. I'm damned tired of being ashamed of my country, and this (unlikely?) candidacy and its success have made me glow with pride, and not least because of my slave-owning forebears.

God Bless Obama God Bless America!

xxxxx
ed; June 03, 2008 11:59 AM
RobH said...: She ....has....a....death....grip .
....on....her.....entitlement...and .she....can't...let....go.....

The rictus has set in....and...; June 03, 2008 11:59 AM
David McDonald said...: jayw,

you're as bad as yam with that comment; June 03, 2008 12:00 PM
Beryl said...: I don't have a real problem with either candidate's health care plan although I prefer Obama's.

Hillary had 8 years during Bill's administration to negotiate a health care plan. She failed because she had not learned the art of negotiation. Her reaction to the MI/FL decision is an indicator that she still has not improved in this area.

Successful negotiations usually results in compromise. President and VP should be successful negotiators.; June 03, 2008 12:03 PM
greywolf said...: Senator Clinton is looking for an UPSET win tonight in SD thus giving her more leverage with the SD, as well as her claim of being more electable. That came from an interview with one of her supporters on the ground in SD.; June 03, 2008 12:03 PM
Dilbuck said...: So we are at 3.5 delegates so far. And this is way before the expected "flood" tonight. Washington Post says that the 5 undeclared Montana supers will declare with the winner tonight which by anyone's best bet should be Obama. Will be fun to watch everything today.

6-3-08 - Added DNC Maria Chappelle-Nadal (MO) for Obama
- Added DNC Joyce Lalonde (MI)* for Obama
- Added Rep. John Olver (MA) for Obama
- Added Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick (MI)* for Obama

36.5 to go and counting.; June 03, 2008 12:04 PM
Mug said...: paulina,

I liked your post very much. My wife is an immigrant from the Czech Republic and I've heard those things echoed about America many times over. I've said for many years that If America was the land of farming, farmers would prosper above all else. Likewise, if America was the land of hunting, hunters would prosper above all else. However, Americ is the land of opportunity so it is the opportunist who prosper above all else.; June 03, 2008 12:07 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Obama got another SUPER DUPER!

Now needed:

OBAMA 36.5
Clinton 200.5

OBAMA/Sebelius '08; June 03, 2008 12:10 PM
JayW said...: Mr. David McDonald,

Sorry my view offends you... but I have been consistent all along. I will not vote or support any ticket that she is a part of.

MY VOTE will not be cast in a way that would ever potentially put her in office. If that means throwing my vote away and voting for Nader on principle... so be it.

I do not believe in her one bit. I am a huge Obama supporter, but if he rolls-over and allows her to run on the same ticket I will consider that an outrageous lack of good judgement and will no longer support him because of that.; June 03, 2008 12:10 PM
greywolf said...: Where does msnbc get their numbers. They have Obama needing 32.5 now, and the number keeps going lower with sd's switching sides.; June 03, 2008 12:12 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: MSNBC says the number Obama needs is 33 - because their have been some switches in support. But they didn't name any names. GRRRRR!!! ;); June 03, 2008 12:13 PM
JayW said...: Leah,

I really dont think that there will be a woman on the ticket with Obama. Not that Sebelius isnt qualified, she certainly is.

The problem is that with Obama being the nominee, you are already going to lose the vote of every racist in the country... that is a given. I dont think it is politically wise to then run with a woman and lose every macho sexist idiot male vote. (They may be retarded but their vote counts just the same.)

I really feel that Joe Biden offers the most to Obama in terms of VP. He is very strong in Obama's weakest areas (foreign policy, experience).; June 03, 2008 12:14 PM
greywolf said...: debbie dingle? was a clinton supporter.. does that name ring a bell?; June 03, 2008 12:16 PM
RobH said...: death throes....
last gasps....

Bill says: "He's a scumbag"
Hill says: "I need to gargle"
AP says: staff gone, factsarefacts
Hill says: ME ME ME ME ME

Can it be that everything my Dad said about the Clinton's, in the 90's, was true?

They are redefining their legacy, right now.; June 03, 2008 12:16 PM
David McDonald said...: Mr. jayw,

Isn't that getting a bit close to all those "Nobamaites who say they'll vote McCain if our candidate gets (and he will get it) the nomination? I truly understand your passion but isn't the point to elect BO as the next president? VP is not a position that does much policy making.; June 03, 2008 12:17 PM
Mug said...: jayw,

I seriously doubt that Clinton will be on the ticket with Obama. Her comments today indicate that she is trying to bully Obama into giving her the VP position. By threatening the Obama campaign with continued divisiveness unless they meet her demands, she is making a crucial error. She has forgotten that the cornerstone of Obama's platform is that "he can't be bought." Giving in to her demands would do more harm to his image than good. Likewise her continued ranting will only drive more of her supporters to the Obama camp until she is left with only the lunatic fringe of the DP. There is a chance I could be wrong about this but I think it's a long shot that you'll see an Obama/Clinton ticket in November.; June 03, 2008 12:18 PM
greywolf said...: robh...

They are not redefining their legacy, they are reinforcing what already existed.; June 03, 2008 12:19 PM
Dilbuck said...: And 2 More from MI

Dingle and Wiener. Hahaha I just realized the names... Anyhow another 1.0 for Obama. They are starting to come out a little quicker now. I wonder if Obama gets majority of FL and MI tickets if it will help settle Hillary feeling "cheated". We shall see.; June 03, 2008 12:21 PM
Bull Schmitt said...: Ed -

I said Debbie Dingell Saturday night, so I'm out of the "last to board the S.S. Clintanic" pool ;); June 03, 2008 12:21 PM
jpsedona said...: NEWS FLASH ... Harold Ickies is not in the "SPECULATION DEPARTMENT"... would that mean that he's in the spin department?; June 03, 2008 12:22 PM
Mug said...: greywolf,

The name Debbie Dingle doesn't ring a bell but I think if you rang a bell, it would sound a lot like "debbie dingle."; June 03, 2008 12:22 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: JayW-

I have been rooting for Sebelius on this thread for MONTHS - and I am not changing my mind yet ;)

Biden needs to stay in the Senate. He would not be good on the campaign trail. You root for your guy and I will root for mine ;)

OBAMA/Sebelius '08; June 03, 2008 12:22 PM
JayW said...: Mr. David McDonald,

It may be a very similar position to those that will not vote for Obama. But I WILL NOT vote vor a ticket with HRC on it. VP is one heartbeat away from being president... to say that they dont do much is really just wishful thinking. At any time, circumstance can put them in the drivers seat.

As I said, if Obama allowed her to be on the ticket (and I really doubt he will) it would show me that I was wrong about him all along and he does not have the proper leadership abilities to be president.; June 03, 2008 12:24 PM
Unknown said...: Hillary Clinton can force herself as the VP if she wants.

The VP gets voted on by the delegates at the nomination.

She has 1900+ delegates and will be within less than 200 delegates of half plus one.

I am sure there are enough delegates with ties to the Clintons and/or believe she deserves the VP spot to get enough to win the VP nomination.

Either way it doesn't matter. Obama will lose to McCain in November.

Hillary 2012; June 03, 2008 12:25 PM
ed iglehart said...: Mug,
I do so hope you're right.
David,

I'm afraid I'm with Jay on this. To allow her anywhere near the VP slot would show disastrous judgement. That's why I'm almost sure he won't, but if he does, my dis-illusion will be too great to bear.

A toast to tomorrow, and a new dawn for the USA!

Slainte!
ed; June 03, 2008 12:25 PM
JayW said...: Leah,

I meant no disrespect to you, or who you support.

Just wanted to get feedback on what people thought about having a minority and a woman on the same ticket and losing both the racist and sexist vote.; June 03, 2008 12:26 PM
RobH said...: Truly what we're seeing right now is the difficulty of the Clinton's coming to grips with the new reality that they don't control things anymore.

Some pundit said it best this weekend: "This is the moment in time where control of the Democratic Party is passing from the Clinton's to Obama.
This is now Obama's party. If it was still the Clinton's party then we would have gotten a different decision out of the RBC."

All these machinations at the endgame are just them adjusting.

Could somebody please repos the five (seven) stages of grief? Thanks.; June 03, 2008 12:26 PM
jpsedona said...: For those of you thinking that this is Obama's big night, it's not. His big night will be at the convention. He can, and will, claim the title of presumptive nominee tonight. But this is nothing we haven't really known for 2 months.

But onight will be Hillary's swan song. She will acknowledge that Obama "is likely to be the nominee of the party". She won't concede the truth (kinda like Bosnia). But this will be her opportunity to thank all of her supporters. For Obama, this is not the final chapter, his fight goes on. So, I believe this is, and should be Hillary's night.

Caveat...

What to watch for is whether she signals that she is "going to evaluate her future" or any language like that. She will see if there's a groundswell of support for a 3rd party run.; June 03, 2008 12:27 PM
RobH said...: And regarding a shift of control away from the Clintons, that's what makes Yam's posts so comic to all of us.

Every one of his statements about the Maestro, and what they demand and command, and OWN, are so thin now.

That's why we're not hearing from him at this time.; June 03, 2008 12:31 PM
Mug said...: Jayw,

I understand your position on not voting for a ticket with Clinton on it, although I still think it's important to support Obama in the GE.

Maybe Clinton really wants the VP because she actually believes Obama will be assassinated. If that were to happen, I think Hillary would be the prime suspect. =)

If Obama does pick her as VP, he's gonna need to hire extra security and a food taster. Not letting Hillary know his daily schedule might be a wise idea too. =); June 03, 2008 12:31 PM
greywolf said...: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-kelly/barack-obamas-vice-presid_b_104332.html

Eva Peron... is who some think would be a good vp for obama.; June 03, 2008 12:31 PM
Dilbuck said...: 5 Stages of Grief

1- Denial
2- Anger
3- Bargaining
4- Depression
5- Acceptance; June 03, 2008 12:33 PM
David McDonald said...: Mr. Jayw,

It seems that you don't like her as a person. They are very close as to what they will do to change this nation. I think we and especially the media focuses on personality and not policy and substance. Nader will not be elected but potentially could hurt the democratic nominee.

We should put our country first not petty likes and dislikes.

Look, i agree that it would be better to NOT have HRC on the ticket but whatever happens, I believe it's better to unify strongly and quickly.; June 03, 2008 12:34 PM
Random said...: lol, ok, the 14th "she must be dropping out after todays contest"

prediction1: Obama hits 2118 today
prediction2: Clinton does NOT drop out

she has already said she will not be conceding her nomianation, and will continue to leave her campain "open" so she can negotiate for stuff. READ: she will be trying to poach SDs between now and AUG

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

IF she doesnt end her campaign within 24 hours of Obama hitting 2118, and if Obama doesnt win the GE, then some % of blame has to go to her.

as Ive said since March, McCains best chance is Clinton, and shes really trying hard.; June 03, 2008 12:34 PM
greywolf said...: How many SD's go with south dakota and Montanna today?; June 03, 2008 12:35 PM
RobH said...: I have a stomach ache.
Ed, throw me a Guinness.
(I admit I prefer them from the can with the widget, than from the bottle. The sound of the widget puncture and subsequent gas escape causes pavlovian responses in me. Also admit tap is best.)

It's after 5PM there, right?; June 03, 2008 12:36 PM
greywolf said...: I think Hillary wants on the ticket just incase something comes up in regards to Obama. She is trying to leverage her self.. this is all it is about.. how do i leverage my power.. how do i get my self into the right position to take the reins should something go wrong ... all these things are going through her mind right now.. she believes she is in the drivers seat, she has the controls... and she is going to do all she can to manipulate this to her benefit.; June 03, 2008 12:38 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; June 03, 2008 12:38 PM
Keryl said...: Here's my hope that Clinton gives her best speech ever tonight. She doesn't have to concede literally...she just has to make the right case.

I want her to go out proud and strong.

I hope she ditches the script, she's much better when she's not reading.

She needs to say:

It has been a long, hard race fought with every ounce of effort by two great candidates.

I have been lifted and humbled by the support I have received from so many millions of Americans. After visiting with you in every corner of the country, I remain confident that together we can and will solve the challenges that face our nation and the world.

But our real fight was never with each other, it was always about how to defeat the failed policy's of Bush/McCain, and return the USA to her rightful place in the world.

As I promised, I will now turn my attention to making sure that a democrat is in the WH come November. I cannot do that alone. All of you who supported my candidacy have only one choice in November. A vote for Universal Health Care, and end to the war in Iraq, addressing climate change, tax relief for the middle class, reproductive rights, and an end to poverty. If you really supported me, you must recognize that a democrat in the WH is the only way forward.

I set out to win a race, in the process we, you and I together, have changed the world. For this I am profoundly grateful. (Thanks all the supporters,staff,individuals, etc. here)

But our work is not done. We must move forward together. As my opponent in the race has so often said, we must take up our cause with "the fierce urgency of now". Together, we will win the race for the WH.

Thank you America...

(That's what I'm hoping for, anyway); June 03, 2008 12:38 PM
RobH said...: Thanks Dilbuck.
They're at 3.; June 03, 2008 12:39 PM
Random said...: and my last gripe today is (still) to the uncommited SDs, who are mostly politicians.

if you want US to vote, then by gosh, you should VOTE too. SDs should be required to pledge on the day of their states primary.

the SDs who say they will wait to vote until someone drops out??? HELLO??? what if their local voters decided to use the same tatic the next time they are running for Gov or Senate...

absolulty shameful; June 03, 2008 12:39 PM
RobH said...: Though I think Bill's at 4.; June 03, 2008 12:39 PM
Dave in NC said...: For the party tonight, I am bringing a big bottle of vodka, no mixers as I believe vodka should only be mixed with saliva.

I am also bringing smashed Yams and peyote buttons, a favorite Texas dish.

I will also bring Aunt Jean and Yamaka/whineaboutOBAMAnow a special North Carolina dish.

It is called ITOLDYASO!

It is made with crow and humble pie. Yam's serving will be garnished with lithium.

I baked them a "Hopes and Dreams Souffle", but it fell. :(

See ya'll tonight!; June 03, 2008 12:40 PM
JayW said...: I think one of the main reasons she will be keeping her campaign "open" after tonight is to raise money. If she officially quits, then she can no longer raise money to pay down her debt.
I really don’t know how much "bargaining" she is going to be able to do just because her campaign is still running.; June 03, 2008 12:40 PM
Dilbuck said...: Greywolf,

Reports have said that the 5 uncommited in Montana will go to the winner tonight including the governor (Schweitzer) and both senators (Tester and Baucus). Not sure about SD but if I remember correctly there might only be one undeclared from SD?s Yeah just double checked. Cheryl Chapman a DNC member is the only one left from SD.; June 03, 2008 12:41 PM
RobH said...: Leah,

Grey asked about SD's.

Grey, they're are links on the upper left to all kinds of things like "SD's ho haven't endorsed yet", and Add-on schedule", etc.; June 03, 2008 12:41 PM
jpsedona said...: I would suggest that Hillary as VP could be Obama's best life insurance policy...; June 03, 2008 12:41 PM

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 2132 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

2132 comments:

Tags