Democratic Convention Watch: Open Thread

Tuesday, April 01, 2008

Open Thread

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

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

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

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

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

Thanks!

Previous Open Thread here
New Open Thread here

4317 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 2001 – 2200 of 4317 Newer› Newest»

suzihussein22 said...: independent voter-I saw Colin Powell on the View. He didn't sound too enthusiastic about making any kind of run for the WH as VP or Pres., IMO.; May 26, 2008 12:50 AM
Independent Voter said...: Leah, if you decide not to come back on, have a good night. I'm going to hop in the shower her in a few minutes (I'm watching the mayoral debate here in San Diego) and then going out for a few beers. I haven't drank in about 3 months, so it's well deserved.; May 26, 2008 12:50 AM
vwis said...: Well I guess I stirred things up enough. When I started blogging tonight not much was happening. Now look at all of you. You all have the blog bug. I really enjoy reading you all.; May 26, 2008 12:53 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Btw:

Bob Barr was nominated as the Libertarian candidate today.
They are saying he might be taking some 'conservative' Republican votes away from McCain in the south - that is a good thing for Obama ;)

______________

Okay, I can't help myself. Some folks that are NOT good choices for Obama's VP:

Gov. Ed Rendell - Nope!
He praised Farrahkan at a dinner in honor of Farrahkan. The video is on YouTube - the Republicans would use that!

Powell - Nope!
His wife does not want him to be VP or President. He will respect her wishes. Besides America is ready for some change but I don't think it is ready for two AAs on the same ticket.

Chuck Hagel - Nope!
He is Republican and if, God forbid, anything happened to Obama then the Republicans would have control of the White House.

Just my two cents worth ;); May 26, 2008 12:54 AM
Independent Voter said...: ss - ya, I've heard the same thing. I don't think his wife will allow him to do it anyway. But I still think it would be an excellent compliment to Obama.

And I don't think the country would go for it. I hate to say it, if he picks another "minority" candidate it wouldn't fly with "white" America.

Now I personally don't care who is on the ticket provided it's not Clinton, but I don't think it would go over in "working-class-white-America" too well.

I'm just thinking about the whole, you can't change the things that are wrong in DC unless you get there first. Know what I mean?; May 26, 2008 12:54 AM
vwis said...: Ya'all,

Let's see what August brings us. Goodnight.; May 26, 2008 12:57 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Independent voter -

I hope you have a great time.

I'm out-a-here now for a bit!

Ciao ;); May 26, 2008 12:58 AM
Unknown said...: To Leah,
Although I think this blog will slow down a little once Obama is nominated, I wouldn't bank on McCain supporters deserting us...
Please, read my next comment for my supportive argument!; May 26, 2008 12:58 AM
Independent Voter said...: LOL vwis.

Leah - I agree with you on most of them. I like the idea floated earlier of Lincoln. But again, I still don't know if the country is ready for an African-American and a woman (other than Hillary) on the ticket.

I still like the idea of Lincoln Chafee, but that's just me.; May 26, 2008 12:59 AM
Independent Voter said...: vwis - goodnight

There you go - you poke at the hornets nest get us all riled up and then take off. LOL - just kidding.

good night.; May 26, 2008 1:00 AM
Independent Voter said...: jason, are you referring to Yam? LOL; May 26, 2008 1:01 AM
Independent Voter said...: thanks leah; May 26, 2008 1:01 AM
vwis said...: Before I go I was researching Harold Ickes and how he was one of the DNC members to say that FL and MI should have their votes stripped and voted for it. Was it the Washington post?

He also said, "That there was no way to get a fair outcome because of it." Maybe its not the Clintons who are the turncoats so much as the people they surround themselves with.

To him I say be careful of what you seed.; May 26, 2008 1:06 AM
Independent Voter said...: vwis - VERY NICE!; May 26, 2008 1:10 AM
suzihussein22 said...: guten nacht all y'all; May 26, 2008 1:23 AM
vwis said...: I thought I try this again since it didn't work before. It's always to finish what you started.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/
world/us_and_americas/us_elections/
article3998946.ece; May 26, 2008 1:24 AM
suzihussein22 said...: Lest we forget-

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080526/ap_on_re_us/wwi_survivor

We honor you and all who sacrifice for the chance to live freely in this country.; May 26, 2008 1:33 AM
Unknown said...: TO ALL,
I have been reading all your comments for couple days now, and even though I had the urge to respond to many of them, I decided to resist the temptation and to keep reading instead.

I have learned a lot just by reading everybody's comments. And I do agree with whomever said that we should let Yamaka speak his mind as he is making us revisit our statements, find supporting arguments, while refuting his/her baseless comments (because most of them are!).

I was first feeling bad for the guy, wondering what would happen to him/her when the race is over. (S)He seems so invested, especially after I read some of his comments where he mentioned getting some quotes/facts from other blogs, so I finally understood that he doesn't have anything else to do.

Then, I realized that he is no HILLARY's fan. He truly talks like a Republican in hiding, and I'm not talking about those moderates, but rather the far-right kind. Whenever he mentions something bad about the other side, he stops short of praising the repubs before he slams BO. Through all his comments, I haven't read anything really bad he said about the Repubs. On the other hand, he often uses very inflammatory comments about Obama, short of calling him a terrorist, he often uses Osama for his name amongst other things.
His facts are all tainted with half-truths, his math does not make any sense... But he does all this so that others, who might be enraged by his implications react to them by blaming or insulting HRC.

To tell you the truth, I like Bill Clinton a lot as a president. I travel all over the world, and I can't forget Clinton's days where Americans were welcomed and liked everywhere they went (well, almost!). Now, for an American president (BUSH) to be so badly received in the UK, and to have tomatoes thrown at him is a first in American history... YES, everybody hates us now, because of the actions of this current administration.
Now of course, for some ignorant people like Y. who don't leave their county (not Country!) much, there is no need for us to care about the perception of Americans abroad. Well, let me tell you this, it is this alienation of others that led to the fall of the US Dollar, to the rise of the price of Oil, and to the "NUCLEAR" direction countries like Iran have taken.

Well, being a Clinton supporter in 2000, I followed some of HRC's NY's Senate run, and I was a little disappointed. She didn't have any of her husband's charisma, she didn't seem truthful, nor did she seem to connect easily with people... but I still supported her.
On this campaign however, she was a huge disappointment, not because she chose not to end the race sooner, but because of her "Republican-like" tactics. The latest being to attack Obama for spreading a video on her "assassination" gaffe. Not only she does not properly apologize for what she said (or how she said it), but she doesn't even own up to her "mis-speaking again."
She doesn't want to end her negative campaigning even after she was shown to be statistically "un-nominateable." She's shown to be too self-serving. She keeps spreading the word that Obama is unelectable by working-whites, women, and the elderly, when it was proven on many occasions (by surveys taken in several states) to be false.
Having said all that, I really don't think she meant anything by the "assassination" comment, although knowing her strategy, I'm sure she though the controversy would be of some gain to her (I don't know how though).
So, I don't think we should slam her the way we've been doing on this blog, because it really doesn't help our party. I'm sure that most of us don't have a good opinion of her now, and I'm sure that most of this is due partly to the media spin, and partly to the tactics used by those who want to prevent or delay party unity.
So, let's redirect our criticism to McCain's position (not McCain himself though). Let's find all the bad decisions he's made while in the US Senate, let's find all his bad associations/connections, so that when they want to bring up Obama's we can effectively retaliate.; May 26, 2008 1:36 AM
Unknown said...: Independent Voter,
Yes I was referring to him!!!; May 26, 2008 1:48 AM
Keryl said...: Hey Jason. Welcome voice of reason. I'm glad to see there are people who are moderate and thoughtful. I'm sad too see such animosity among the dems; so unnecessary. Ignore Yam at all costs, (s)he can yammer (pun inteded) till the cows come home, but noone is that stupid. No matter how you look at the math, the race is over. The only question that remains is how we unite. Despite how much Obama folks hate Hill, I think she will ultimately try to find a way to exit that benefits the party. All dems have so much to lose if we lose the GE. We have to think like Republicans, cold hard assessment of what will be the best theater for the convention.; May 26, 2008 2:10 AM
Aunt Jean said...: I just thought that this was real insteresting so enjoy this is about obama:

On July 28th, the day after his speech at the Democratic convention catapulted him into the national spotlight, Barack Obama told a group of reporters in Boston that the United States had an "absolute obligation" to remain in Iraq long enough to make it a success.

"The failure of the Iraqi state would be a disaster," he said at a lunch sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor, according to an audiotape of the session. "It would dishonor the 900-plus men and women who have already died. . . . It would be a betrayal of the promise that we made to the Iraqi people, and it would be hugely destabilizing from a national security perspective."

In late winter, 2008, on the campaign trail, Obama says he wants to bring the troops home yesterday -- you decide -- was he lying then or is he lying now?; May 26, 2008 2:10 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Here's anough one:

In his autobiography, "Dreams From My Father," Obama mentions studying the Quran. He was enrolled in two Jakarta schools as a Muslim. His teacher Tine Hahiyary said that she remembered that he had studied "mengaji" (recitation of the Quran)." Classmate Rony Amiris described Obama as being a very devout Muslim, saying, "Barry was previously quite religious in Islam." Another classmate, Emirsyah Satar, now the CEO of Garuda Indonesia, was quoted as saying, "He (Obama) was often in the prayer room wearing a 'sarong.'" (See Obama's Education.)

Yet, on his official campaign website, Obama has posted this statement, "Barack has never been a Muslim or practiced any other faith besides Christianity."

Obama's grandfather was a Muslim. Obama's father was a Muslim. Obama's stepfather was a Muslim. His African relatives are Muslims. What was he for the 27 years before his alleged conversion if he wasn't a Muslim?

If Obama has always been a Christian, why was he enrolled in two Jakarta schools as a Muslim, and why did he study the Quran?

And note his Clintonesque defense, "I have never practiced."

This is Obama's biggest problem -- his dissimulation.

Saying, "I've always been a Christian," is a bold-faced lie.; May 26, 2008 2:19 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: Aunt Jean,

Got a link? I'd like to see the ENTIRE context of what was said.

Please provide a link.

Otherwise I'll just presume that you pulled this off The (so-called) Free Republic, or from one of Lush Rimbaugh's programs. Or could it have been an O'Lielly broadcast?

Mike; May 26, 2008 2:20 AM
Keryl said...: Aunt Jean: Do you also want to comment on McCain's flip flops on the issue? Why don't you pull the quotes before I do ms. history buff. To be honest, I like McCain, I like Obama, I think they're both honest poeple trying to do the right thing, but have very different approaches. You seem determined to find out of context quotes that you repeatedly only look at through your very tiny lens of self righteous bs. Please go away.; May 26, 2008 2:22 AM
Aunt Jean said...: there are plenty more here's the link:
http://www.freedomsenemies.com/_Obama/ObamaLies.htm; May 26, 2008 2:24 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: Aunt Jean,

My previous post was concerning your post about Senator Obama's discussion with the Christian Science Monitor.

This post is about the 'mengaji' comments:

It is EXTREMELY obvious that the words written under "Aunt Jean" are not your words, but a copy and paste job from some other site.

Please provide a link to that site.

Same presumption applies if you don't as my previous site.

Oh, and those other sites are filled with Republicant LIES about any and all Democrats.

Mike; May 26, 2008 2:26 AM
Aunt Jean said...: KERYL YOU GO AWAY DS. Jean

The reason I posted these was because someone [I'm not going to say any name] got grat joy out of the lies that Hillary said.So I'm a firm believer was is good for the goose is good for the gander. Jean; May 26, 2008 2:27 AM
tmess2 said...: Looking at former Edward's delegates, from the states that currently are sanctioned:

Obama 12, 4 undecided, 3 not yet picked

From the one state that is not sanctioned, Obama 2 definite, 7 more probable according to MSNBC, 4 undecided.

That seems to be a pretty solid movement toward Obama, math doesn't seem to be hard as the King Canutes of the blog world seem to think.; May 26, 2008 2:30 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: LOL!

Goodnight everyone.

Signed,

Someone

H
Obama '08
P
E

.; May 26, 2008 2:31 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: Aunt Jean said...
there are plenty more here's the link:

Just as I suspected.

A Republicant TRASH site that you went trolling through to pick up dirt.

Guess what?

That dirt you picked up will not wash off your hands. You are tarnished with the title of TROLLESS (to differentiate you from the TROLL who uses an Asian-sounding name).

You are not a supporter of Senator Clinton. You are a trashy Republicant TROLLESS who is in bed with the trash of the Republicants, such as KKKarl Rove. Real nice company you keep, TROLLESS.

Mike; May 26, 2008 2:32 AM
Joshua said...: There should be a consequence when our leaders lead us down the wrong and dangerous path. The following senators voted for the Iraq war and they are currently up for re-election this year. It behooves us to do everything in our power to assure their defeat:

Allard, Wayne (R) - CO
Cochran, Thad (R) - MS
Collins, Susan M. (R) - ME
Craig, Larry E. (R) - ID
Domenici, Pete V. (R) - NM
Enzi, Michael B. (R) - WY
Hagel, Chuck (R) - NE
Inhofe, James M. (R) - OK
McConnell, Mitch (R) - KY
Roberts, Pat (R) - KS
Sessions, Jeff (R) - AL
Smith, Gordon H. (R) - OR
Stevens, Ted (R) - AK
Warner, John (R) – VA; May 26, 2008 2:34 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Oh, before going to bed I just wanted to jump up and down, dance around a bit, giggle and say:

OBAMA only needs 49 more delegates to secure the nomination! Hillary needs 246.

Obama 49 Obama 49 Obama 49

Nite ya'll ;)

.; May 26, 2008 2:35 AM
Keryl said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 26, 2008 2:37 AM
Aunt Jean said...: keryl what's the matter can't take the truth. LOL LOL. You are the one that is delusional not me I'm thinking real straight. I'm backing the best one Hillary. Jean; May 26, 2008 2:41 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Leah texas not for obama you better watch you might pee your pants LOL LOL Jean; May 26, 2008 2:42 AM
Unknown said...: Aunt Jean,
I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are not aware of the full story...
First, let's answer your claim that BO lied about Iraq. Unlike Hillary, who voted for the Iraq war and then claimed that she wants to bring all soldiers home as soon as she gets in the WH, BO said that it would take time to bring our soldiers home, and that he wouldn't do so prior to 2009... even though he has been against the war since the begining.
However, this war that was supposed to make us safer just made it easier for Al Qaeda to recruit and grow even stronger.
So your claim is DEAD WRONG, please check your facts before spreading them, you start to sound like Y.. Maybe you're one of those too, and the lies so far are only coming from what you're writing!
Second, and most importantly, Indonesia as you must know is a muslim country, 93% of its population is muslim. Now, they don't have a separation of church and state (or mosq and state in this case) as we do here in US. Therefore, kids learn the Quran, or some sort of religious teaching in elementary school. It goes without saying that every kid goes through that education, whether they're muslim or not, even the remaining 7% that are mostly of the Christian and Hindu faiths. As far as him being a muslim is a total made-up "Republican" rumor to sell him as the devil who shouldn't be elected to the most powerful position in the world.
So, once again the lies are not his, since he's never been a muslim, he was raised by his Kansas-Christian mom and grand-parents. He wasn't under the influence of his dad's faith or up-bringing since he left them at Obama's very early age.
And Please, stop spreading the fear of Islam like you used to spread the fear of Communism in the 70s and 80s to make ignorant people vote for republicans, so they can put more money into building more weapons we don't need, rather than investing a little more in the education of our kids and their health-care.
SHould we have had invested in our education system as early as the 50s, we wouldn't have you spread such ignorant and deceitful lies.
Now, you have something that is a fact, I would be happy to discuss it with you, but those rumors, you can keep for your other "Republican" blogs. They live for that!; May 26, 2008 2:45 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Mike in maryland I just typed in Obama's lies and that is where it sent me. I don't care if you believe me or not but I am a DEMOCRAT if you like it or not. Jean; May 26, 2008 2:46 AM
Unknown said...: Aunt Judy,
I hear ya...
You try to remain civil, but some people just keep bringing up unfounded rumors to generate reactions we want to avoid...
So in addition to Y, I will avoid Aunt Jean, and I think it might be the same person, although she wasn't as bad before. She had a different opinion, but up until now she hasn't spread those inflammatory remarks.
I will choose to ignore her comments as well!; May 26, 2008 2:49 AM
Keryl said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 26, 2008 2:50 AM
tmess2 said...: Mike, some of the Senators that you mentioned:

Senator Allard of Colorado
Senator Craig of Idaho
Senator Domenici of New Mexico
Senator Hagel of Nebraska
and Senator John Warner of Virginia

have decided to retire from politics and as such you will have to forego the pleasure of campaigning against them as much as they deserve the opposition.; May 26, 2008 2:51 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Jason there is no way that you can prove that it isn't the truth. Just because Obama would say it's a lie come on get real. He lies and lied all the time. I'm not saying that Hillary hasn't told her share. But there are people on her that will tell you that obama is a very honest person. Well that is a LIE!!!!!!! Jean; May 26, 2008 2:52 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Goodnight everyone. Have a big day planned tomorrow. Jean; May 26, 2008 2:53 AM
Aunt Jean said...: For your info I was looking for the story that I believe Fox [now I remember who it was]put out on all the three and the lies they told. I was not trying to put lies on here. I was trying to make a point to someone that obama lies just like everyone else.So goodnight!It's got to have some truth in it because they could get sued for slander. Jean; May 26, 2008 2:58 AM
Joshua said...: tmess2,
Thanks. I’ll flag them as retiring in my database. I know Hagel was retiring. He is currently doing a book tour. Some Democrats are fooled into even recommending him as VP for Obama. That just makes me want to vomit. He is not even apologetic of his Iraq war vote. He has not admitted it was an error in judgment. No Republican has ever admitted it was an error.; May 26, 2008 2:58 AM
Keryl said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 26, 2008 3:03 AM
Unknown said...: Keryl,
Don't get all worked up over what Yam or Aunt Jean are saying. That's exactly what they're looking for.
We shouldn't ignore their comments though as they will be brought up once McCain's GE campaign takes off for good. We should make sure we find the flaws in all their false erroneous claims, but I really don't think they deserve a response from us.; May 26, 2008 3:19 AM
Oregon Dem said...: keryl:

The facts are true (what you just said to Aunt Jean) however. She did a typical rupugnacan tactic. Make a statement and then say "prove that the statement is wrong." Does not matter whether the statement made was true, false, intentional slanderous, or totally malicious. You say it and some people will believe it.

I do believe that both Yamaka and Aunt Jean are Rush wannabe trolls. If you have read their posts they hardly ever say anything constructive and nice about their candidate. There is nothingpositive in what they say what-so-ever.

If the very, extremly, totally imposssible happens andSenator Clinton becomes the nominee - you can bet they will be blogging for McCain or whoever Rusn tells them to.; May 26, 2008 3:19 AM
Keryl said...: Ahhh...so true. Thanks for talking me off the ledge. Late night gets me just hankering for a fight. I have been reserved for weeks, but a late night just brought out the worst in me. I'm going back to delete...almost all of it.; May 26, 2008 3:23 AM
Unknown said...: Keryl,
To prove my point...
Even if there is a solid proof that Obama were a muslim at some point in his life, pointing it just makes us biggots.
Because, what we are looking to establish from those statements is that BO is like the kind of muslim (because let's face it, they're not all terrorists like Fox News would have us believe!) that blow themselves up for some BS cause.

Making such an implication speaks for itself, it shows us how these people, when they can't argue the facts, start making up stories and rumors that will be harmful to the candidate.

It's a shame you call yourselves Americans, you really stain the image of the US around the world!; May 26, 2008 3:29 AM
Joshua said...: As for me, I have chosen not to read their posts. They certainly do not deserve a response whatsoever.; May 26, 2008 3:30 AM
Joshua said...: I was commenting the other day that Hillary would find a way to go lower than her assassin remark. She has gone lower. She is blaming the uproar on her opponent!!!

She insists on going out like Eight Belles. She may have just done that to her career.; May 26, 2008 4:01 AM
Unknown said...: It is a sad site for Clinton!
I don't know why she keeps on making those bad decisions. I guess she feels that this is it: Either she fights on or she goes down the "forgotten" lane.

Still, it is very low to play it all negative, especially since BO has been ignoring her comments and actions for the past 3 weeks... Unless she thinks that she can hurt BO so bad in the GE that she might rise again in 2012 election...
If that's the case, then it is really selfish of her, and she wouldn't deserve to even run for the 2012primaries.
Good luck with her, and I hope someone in her campaign would have the decency to talk some sense into her (not to quit, but to quit the negative attacks!!!!).
I really don't mind her fighting on until June 3rd, but knowing she is not gonna make it, she should refrain herself from the negative tone a little!; May 26, 2008 4:14 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: At Andrew Sullivan's site, he has a Memorial Day tribute "For those who gave all, so that others might have everything." It's a YouTube video you can find here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYufNNkpQXI

Quite moving, and appropriate for our veterans who have given their all for this country.

Mike; May 26, 2008 5:21 AM
Amot said...: Ok, at this very moment Obama needs 49 to claim victory. There is no state convention scheduled between now and 31st of May. I will ask each one of you to give his/her prediction on the following:

1. How many delegates will Obama get before RBC announce its decision? (inlcuding supers, switches, updates)?

2. How many dalegates will Clinton get with the same conditions?

3. What will be the RBC decision?

The best predictor will be officially titled 'Best predictor'!; May 26, 2008 8:02 AM
Yamaka said...: "Yamaka have a problem when they use both Rev.Wright and Islam as an argument against Obama."

peter:

1. When we criticize BHO you immediately conclude we are Republicans! That's the height of stupidity.

We are passionate Hillary supporters. Because she is a Genuine American Classic, more suitable to be the President than the least qualified BHO.

2. There is nothing wrong to be a Muslim or Christian. What is odd and absurd is hiding & distorting the historical truth, "I have never been a Muslim". I call BHO a pathological liar because from all the available historical facts up until he was baptized by pastor Wright at TUCC BHO was a Muslim, whether he realized it or not. He was born to a Muslim, brought up by a Muslim step-father in a Muslim country. He has recited Holy Koran many times, gone to worship in the Mosque. He has often proclaimed, "Allahu Akbar, Mohammed Rasoolilahi Allahu Akbar" the cardinal passages for any Muslim to recite in daily life.

Had BHO initially said, "I was born into a Muslim father and grandfather, I converted to Christianity later in my life when I was young man", the whole issue would not have risen. His lies damn lies that made this a real issue.

Hiding this has been his Campaign Strategy.

3. Pastor Wright brought another dimension to BHO's character, judgment and credibility. He CHOSE to attend the TUCC of Wright, who has been spewing venom of anti-White, anti-American rhetoric for a long time - BHO has been cheering him in the pews. Now when this got exposed, again he lies so carelessly. BHO loved and enjoyed most of what Wright said.

But when he was ready to run for Presidency, he decided to leave him at the back of th bus! Hypocrite.

Again, let me repeat being a Muslim as a young boy or attending TUCC in itself is not a crime, but lying about it is very pathetic and shows that he would say anything and do everything to get votes deceptively, period. He wants to win at all costs!

_______________________________

RodentinMD:

You are a man of Representative Democracy! My point was Hillary will win very big in PR gaining at least 200K popular vote lead.

This PV lead would make the Hillary Leaning undeclared SDs to come forward and endorse her.

I expect that she can get about 240 of the remaining Ds and SDs:

1972 + 240 = 2212 TDs,

according to the Left Last Box of DCW.

The Real Hurdle after the RBC Meeting will be closer to 2209, which reflects ALL States, IMO.

I also know that you don't like Full Inclusive Democracy - You love some moribund arcane Rule which disenfranchised 2.3 million innocent voters in MI and FL. This will NOT stand after the RBC Meeting.

Rodent, your Manchurian Candidate will kiss the death of disaster if by some hook or crook steals the Nomination, at the GE. Because he is the least vetted and least experienced Candidate in a half Century.

The Democratic Party is pandering too much to Blacks, alienating most of White women, working class and older Whites, the backbone of American Electorate. For this transgression, the Party will suffer immensely, for sure.

Stay tuned, RodentinMD.

:-( :-(; May 26, 2008 8:06 AM
Yamaka said...: peter:

I know you love to keep the RFK Comment alive, for your political gains.

Most non-partisan Americans have heard it and decided it as a simple innocuous statement emphasizing the Campaigns slugging through as long as June of the Presidential Year.

But, you the BHO campaign wants to get as much mileage as you can for political purpose. You are all pathetic monsters.

This story when you keep it alive would encourage some lunatic to act and create mayhem in this Season.

Your sinister diabolical instincts could come true destroying the harmony in the Society.

That's why I called BHO, the Trojan Horse whose entry into the race has been very divisive and meant to destroy the Democratic Party, and now the Society!

Down Down with the Minority Candidate. Stop BHO Now.; May 26, 2008 8:15 AM
Peter said...: Yamaka you again demonstrate how you are stuck in your sci-fi fantasy. Several predictions regarding turnout in PR are between 200 000 and 400 000. Clinton is not going to win by 2-1 and she is definitively not going to win with 100% of the votes, PR is not Michigan, Obma is on the ballot and even if he wasn`t, uncomitted probably would have gotten a lot of votes....

The problem with your "muslim" story, is first you are using "muslim" as a bad word, do NOT deny that, because you have done that several times.
Second, Obama has NEVER been a muslim. LEARNING about a religion does NOT make a follower of that religion.
I have visited both mosques, churches, synagogue, temples and other holy "houses". I have talked to muslims, christian, hindus, jews, budhists and others to learn about their faith. Does that make me christian, muslim, budhist, jewish or a hindu? No, I don`t follow either of these faiths, but I think its interesting to learn about these. So Obama visiting, talking and learning about Islam, does NOT make him a muslim. Him learning about Islam is natural because of his father and grandfather. If Obama was a muslim he wouldn`t be embarassed about it, or deny it in any way, because he dosen`t have any thing to hide and it would be impossible to hide as well.
The reason i call you a republican (and a RIGHT wing republican) is because you use the same rhetoric as them. You use stupid lies and rumours to state your case.

You may be a HRC-supporter, but I doubt it. I think you are a Rov/Bush-enthusiast eager to use hate and racism as an argument not to vote for Obama. If Clinton was ahead, you probably would have used sexism. Your intentions have been revealed Yamaka.; May 26, 2008 8:25 AM
Peter said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 26, 2008 8:33 AM
Peter said...: I deleted my last comment because we shouldn`t reply to a delusional and hat-spreading character like Yamaka. I should just ignore him in the future, I felt in to the trap and answered him. I think his illness is getting worse by us answering him.; May 26, 2008 8:42 AM
Emit R Detsaw said...: LOL - Sorry Aunt Jean. You state that you can't believe anything that the Huffington Post prints and then you use a Republican 527 smear type website are your credible source. That's more than weak, that's pathetic.

While in Indonesia Obama when to two different schools. One was a Muslim school and the other was Catholic. So I guess by your reasoning, he is catholic/muslim? Both schools complained to his mother about him being inattentive when they were covering religious topics. Typical for young American boys. His mother was an atheist. He didn't really find "faith" until later in life when he was in Chicago. (obtw - the first Wright sermon he attended was the Audacity of Hope sermon. You should reall listen to that one.)

http://truthabouttrinity.blogspot.com/2008/03/audacity-to-hope-full-audio.html

On honoring our troops. Even the distorted truth from the rag website you referenced would constitute a lie. Obama has been against the war from the start, he has always honored service men and women, and he wants to bring them out of Iraq so they can fight elsewhere on the real war on Terror.

As human as Obama is, and we all are, you still have not proven he is a liar. Not an intentional one like Clinton, Bush, and McCain. You have only proved that you can quote Clinton and Republican lies that are meant to make people suspicious of a really outstanding American.

His biggest lie that is on the record is that when he was asked when he got to the Senate if he would run for President in 2008. Initially he said no, but after several in the Democrat party persuaded him, he said he would. That is changing one's position, not lying, but I could see how you would take it as such.

Happy Memorial Day everyone; May 26, 2008 8:45 AM
Vicki in Seattle said...: First of all, Happy Memorial Day, and a big ole "THANKS" to all veterans. :-)

Second of all - the more you feed trolls, the more they come around. I choose to ignore ignore ignore. They can go on and on as much as they like, but I don't have to respond.

That is all. Just starting to putter around here on the Left Coast. Enjoy, y'all!; May 26, 2008 9:39 AM
Mike said...: This episode falls within the classic clintonian tactics. Everyone else is responsible for their failings. Right wing conspiracy, Obama team making Bill to make racial remarks, also responsible for Hillary's denegration of the MLK's contributions to civil rights, and now Obama's camp is misinterpreting an innocous remars and keeping it going.

The truth is this is not the first time or second time that she made the remarks. This shows that it has been part of her strategies all along. Well discussed and reharsed among her inner circle, including Bill. She is only running away from it now becaue of the reaction of the public and political repercautions. I have listened to the clip many times and the message is clear.

As for me, the clip reveals her develish mind, and Keith Oberman captures my feeling. She is simply evil, citing possible assassination of your competitor as a reason for staying on. She's ore that the Tanya Harding of presidential politics.

Her judgement and entire behavior during this campaign reflects who she is. Only an evil mind will harbor the thoughts she has expressed. I can assure you that this will not be the last time. She is obsessed with power.

And this will never go away, no matter the strength of her defence.; May 26, 2008 9:42 AM
Mike said...: BTW, I used to be a stauch Clinton supporter. I have learnt a lot about thier characters during this campaign. HC and Bill are one of a kind.

Good luck to them. The Democratic party is better off without them. They believe the party is there to serve them and they have the right to whatever they demand; May 26, 2008 9:54 AM
Emit R Detsaw said...: I know Vickie, but I hold out hope that I can educate Aunt Jean (my fellow misguided Texan). ;o)

It may only be one vote, but I feel that one person uninformed is a shame.

BTW Aunt Jean, I would like to thank you for how you put your post together last night. I think they were some of your best written, but incorrect with lies from a propaganda site. But you put the posts together nicely. Thanks! They were much easier to read. ;o); May 26, 2008 9:55 AM
suzihussein22 said...: G'day Left Coast, Rite Coast, Up Coast etc. :), but seriously for a moment-

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=4926355&page=1

jason-yes, that's pretty much the impression I have of him/they also

Aunt Jean-I think many of underestimated our chances of "victory" in the Middle East. Do we remember how decisive we were in Vietnam and Korea?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A44801-2003Mar28?language=printer

mike-how about that...I didn't see TN for this cycle anyway.

Peter-I like sci-fi. :) was watching an online episode of Ghost Hunters yesterday.; May 26, 2008 10:11 AM
suzihussein22 said...: Are we grilling out today? My husband will be photographing for 12 hrs. today.

http://www.livescience.com/health/080523-healthy-burger.html

Enjoy! I mix ground turkey with ground round. Then mix it with an egg.; May 26, 2008 10:19 AM
billyjay66 said...: vicki and mike

re Clinton flap and their dealing with mistakes

A little bit of history I can only recall from memory... no cites. Ken Starr at one point (before Monica blowup) said he wanted no more of ongoing investigations and announced he was leaving the team. Bill responded with such heavy-handed gloating and put-down remarks that......guess what? Ken Star changed his mind. The rest is history. I think it was very shortly after that things blew up.

Typical handling of a Clinton mistake.; May 26, 2008 10:19 AM
suzihussein22 said...: It's a small world after all-

http://www.livescience.com/environment/080525-earthquake-triggers.html

The Yellowstone Caldera is due to be active again. Then global warming wouldn't be the problem.; May 26, 2008 10:22 AM
Yamaka said...: peter:

Many people in this site know me as a regional delegate standing up for Hillary in TX.

Because of political insecurity and novice character, you would label anybody opposing the Manchurian Candidate as a Rush/Rove Republican! Your inexperience speaks to this pathetic behavior.

mike:

Remember Bill and Hillary represent the viable faction of the Democratic Party - the moderate centrists. She has gotten MORE popular votes than BHO, who is supported by the FAR LEFT leaning bleeding liberals of the Party.

These paragons of failed Liberalism have been in the cold for the past 30 years since Carter, the embodiment of a failed America in 1976-1980. Most American Electorate has since moved to the Center, which is represented by the Clintons. Remember, Bill is the only two term President that Democrats have since FDR in the last Century! The Clintons ARE the REAL viable face of the Democratic Party, all others are the perennial losers: Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Kennedy and Kerry.
________________________________

Folks:

No matter how you slice it, BHO can never clinch the Hurdle before the RBC Meeting. Even if he does, so what? The Real Hurdle will be closer to 2209. Definitely not 2025.

This is my prediction:

1. RBC will punish the SDs from MI and FL, which is fair.

2. They will seat ALL delegates from MI and FL in Full because the voters did not violate any Rule.

3. They will punish BHO for running campaign Ads in North Florida violating the Agreement.

4. The MI "Uncommitted" will be kept as is because we don't know the true intentions of the voters on Jan 29.

Therefore, the Real Hurdle will be very close to 2209.

Hillary can and will clinch the Nomination:

1972 + 240 = 2212.

After June 3, her Popular Vote lead will be substantial, the SDs just CANNOT ignore the fact that she IS the Majority Vote Getter - the Real Popular Candidate. At least 240 of the remaining 317 Ds will move and nominate her.

This is the reality as of today.

All others are fancied fantasy of the Perennial Loser Camp: BHO, Kerry, Kennedy, Dukakis, Mondale and Carter!; May 26, 2008 10:39 AM
Vicki in Seattle said...: no prob, you all can respond all you want! not my cuppa tea, though.

enjoy the holiday, all! I'm gonna putter around in the garden, put in some seedlings so I can have grilled squash in a couple of months.; May 26, 2008 10:54 AM
apissedant said...: Yam, both Truman and LBJ served two terms, though they were only elected to one. Both chose against running for a third term. I don't think that should be held against either. I also don't think the assassination of JFK should count against him.; May 26, 2008 11:09 AM
rkw said...: Yam -

Manchurian Candidate? Really? The reason some of us react to you negatively is not because we think you are Bush or Rove. It is because you call people names. It is because you say the same things over and over. It is because you claim your view is the only truth (despite most of the facts). It is because of your almost religious fanaticism. It is by claiming that you and your candidate represent the "viable," you essentially say that the rest of us are in some way not viable - including the millions that voted and caucused for Obama.

I'd like to remind all of us of something. We need a new direction in this country. We need something other than Bush, pseudo neo-conservatism, and the Republican party in the White House.

Our goal is more than picking a candidate. Our goal is to win in November. And to win in November, we're going to need all the votes and support and factions that we can pull together.

We need to figure out that we are on the same team ultimately. So I suggest that we tone down the anti-Clinton and anti-Obama rhetoric. Regardless of the candidate, we need to start healing the hurt feelings and resentments.

If McBush wins we will get a Supreme Court with a 30 year ultra-conservative majority. If McBush wins we will get an economic system skewed to reward the rich and ignore the poor. If McBush wins we will get a foreign policy based on saber rattling and gunboat diplomacy. If McBush wins we will continue to get the most expensive healthcare in the industrial world for the rich and privileged.

Ladies & gents lets keep our eye on the ball. Our candidate is pretty much known now. But even if you don't agree with that, the candidate will be known in a few weeks. Then we've got to be focused on winning in November. In the meantime, let's try to not exacerbate the divisions between our camps within the party.; May 26, 2008 11:15 AM
Anonymous said...: Yam,

When you resort back to the name calling it makes you irrelevant and seem small minded. You say when you "criticize BHO you immediately conclude we are Republicans! That's the height of stupidity." Yet you consistently label others here criticizing HRC as women haters among other things. Hypocricy probably won't change many views here.

I will say I fully expect your predictions to remain dead on track with your previous ones.; May 26, 2008 11:15 AM
Emit R Detsaw said...: It's fun to have someone as delusional as Yam around. ;o)

Yam, if you like to live by the rules, then you will know that the best case scenario for Michigan and Florida will be to seat 1/2 of their delegate count. Whether they do that by seating all and making each count as 50% or only seating 1/2 of the delegate count. That would make the goal 2117. Then it would be up to the states to work with the DNC and the candidates on the 31st to figure out the correct split. No matter how it is sliced, Clinton will not be given enough of a cut to close the gap. But she will spin it that it's someone else's fault.

Personally, I think all of the delegates from Florida should have to have the first name of Chad. ;o); May 26, 2008 11:24 AM
Peter said...: Re Pablo and others

We should just ignore Yamaka, his comments are not worth answers.
I have answered him a couple of times, but i regret it. Its best to ignore him.; May 26, 2008 11:26 AM
RobH said...: OK Amot, I'll bite, but there's a couple of twists in my response.

Of critical impact is WHEN the RBC announces it's decision, because your question is "how many will they get before the decision is announced."

I believe the RBC meeting is scheduled for Saturday 5/31, and I've seen written that there is every expectation it will go into Sunday the 1st. And Puerto Rico's polls close at 2PM EST on Sunday, but delegates will certainly not be ultimately allocated until sometime Monday (although their allocation can be predicted on Sunday afternoon.) Also, Maine's add-on probably won't be known until Sunday evening (although easily predicted.)

Okay, here we go:

I predict Obama will secure the endorsements of eleven more SD between now and Saturday. None will be switches from HRC. HRC will receive two new SD endorsements.

Additionally, I predict the RBC’s decision will be to seat the MI and FL delegations with the percentages as voted (and MI’s uncommitted allocated to Obama) with a penalty of a 50% weighting for all delegates (pledged AND super.)

Further, I predict Clinton will win a narrow victory in PR; 30 delegates to Obama’s 25 (19:17 by district, 7:5 for at large, and 4:3 PLEO.)

And I predict Obama will secure the Maine add-on on Sunday.

So, my prediction comes with three versions:

1) If the RBC announces it’s decision Saturday, it will be Obama 11, Clinton 2.

2) If the RBC announces it’s decision Monday (and you’re willing to declare some unallocated delegates as if they’ve been earned), then it will be Obama 37 (11 SD plus 25 PR plus 1 ME) Clinton 32 (2 SD plus 30 PR.)

3) But, because of the curious timing of this weekend, and your specific question, here's the science fiction like version:

The RBC will fail to reach agreement until late Sunday. When they do, the polls in PR will have been closed for several hours, but the delegates will not have been fully allocated. At that moment, the count will sit 19:17 for HRC. Also, the Maine convention will not be over, so the add-on for Obama will not have been recorded yet. Thus at that moment, it will be Obama 28 (11 SD plus 17 PR plus 0 ME) and Clinton 21(2 SD plus 19 PR.)

Well, I guess I’ve got my bases covered. A long winded way of saying “I equivocate!!”
But in any event, you can just forward me my prize for best predictor, ‘cause I was the first guy to call that it would be MT and SD that do the deed – about a month ago. Also, looks like I might be the only guy to take you up on the challenge.

Cheers.; May 26, 2008 11:31 AM
jpsedona said...: Aunt Jean,

I saw a great campaign button yesterday that I thought you'd like "KITTY POWER FOR HILLARY 2008". Maybe you could find one somewhere.; May 26, 2008 11:40 AM
jpsedona said...: Yam,

How's that math working for ya?

All 5 MI & FL options show Hillary needs between 237-247 delegates. Obviously the pool of delegates change for each of the options, but Obama seems to be reducing the magic number under each scenario.

Under option 5 (your favorite), Obama is down to 154. With MI uncommitted, remaining add-ons & contests, he'll need around 60 SD's to capture the nomination under this scenario.

The trend is not looking too good. How's that math working for ya?; May 26, 2008 11:52 AM
Independent Voter said...: Emit - "BTW Aunt Jean, I would like to thank you for how you put your post together last night. I think they were some of your best written, but incorrect with lies from a propaganda site. But you put the posts together nicely. Thanks! They were much easier to read. ;o)"

-------

The only reason they were easier to read is because they were cut and paste jobs :o(; May 26, 2008 12:10 PM
greywolf said...: Good morning everyone...Hope your having a great Monday.

Did everyone read the article this morning where Bill Clinton says Hillary is the victum of a cover up. In that everyone is trying to force her out before 5/31! That she is being disrespected in that when she had a meeting down the hall from the senate 8 chairs were empty! That they want her out before they settle MI & Fl so that they dont have to resolve the issue! It goes on and one... but it's all about a cover up.; May 26, 2008 12:12 PM
jpsedona said...: Read this post...

In a CNN Polititcal Ticker article, Bill Clinton asserted a cover-up:

Bill suggested that there is a 'cover up' that the Dem party would loose in Nov if Hillary's not the candidate.

"I can’t believe it. It is just frantic the way they are trying to push and pressure and bully all these superdelegates to come out,” he said at a South Dakota campaign stop Sunday, in remarks first reported by ABC News. “'Oh, this is so terrible: The people they want her. Oh, this is so terrible: She is winning the general election, and he is not. Oh my goodness, we have to cover this up.'"

Full CNN Article

This story underscores my belief that Bill isn't just trying to campaign for Hillary and help her win, but that since his heart surgery, he's not the same man; that his faculties are significantly reduced.

The following article, and the NE Journal of Medicine article references,underscore that there can be as much as a 20% decline in cognitive function after 5 years.

Link Between Bill Clinton's Heart Surgery And Mental Decline

Dr. John McDougall in his article writes: "Remember, this is the president who withstood public impeachment before the entire world for his relationship with Monica Lewinski without once losing control. Now, he is easily angered by hecklers, and makes factual mistakes and racial slurs while aggressively defending his wife’s campaign for presidency. Everyone sees his mental and emotional decline, yet to date, no medical professionals have spoken out about the cause or offered help."; May 26, 2008 12:18 PM
greywolf said...: My only concern is this.

As long as this continues, the clintons will have all the more time to drive a wedge into the Democratic party.
What have the recent charges been.

Sexism, reverse racism, inciteful politics (obama at fault for spreading and adding fuel to the RFK mess), and not the DNC, Super D / Obama cover up. All this is being leveled against Obama as that he has a strong hand in promoting and causing all of this.
Most people are smart enough to realize this is all political maneuvering and that it is complete BS. However there are those that will buy into this to the extent that they belive, support and spread it.

If comments like this are allowed to continue, my question is will the rift with in the party be so deep and wide that we will not beable to close and or bridge it to the point of success come november?; May 26, 2008 12:27 PM
tmess2 said...: Predictions for the week:

Between now and the start of the RBC meeting on Saturday, Obama will get between 12 and 15 unpledged delegate endorsements and maybe 1 of the Edwards folks still undeclared from Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.

The RBC will decide on Saturday (heck even a bunch of lawyers concerned about process can reach a conclusion in 5 hours of discussion). The decision will be to seat Michigan and Florida based on the election results. The pledged delegates will get half votes. The unpledged delegates will also get half votes (but some nagging feeling in me fears that they will protect their own and give the unpledged delegates full votes). The current 36 uncommitted district delegates from Michigan will be seated but Obama will get some type of right of review on the remaining 19.

On Sunday, Obama will pick-up 1 pledged delegate and the add-on in Maine and 22 of the pledged delegates from Puerto Rico.; May 26, 2008 12:37 PM
Joshua said...: Another poster just began using the handle of “Mike.” His first post was at 9:54 A.M. today. This is not me. Whoever this poster is, please stop using this handle since I got here before you. Please change to a different one.

That is really poor of this site to allow multiple posters to use the same alias. Really bad administration. As someone who also writes software to administer internet sites, it is really easy to prevent a new poster from using an alias already in use. Oreo or Matt or Yousri, do something about this.; May 26, 2008 12:43 PM
greywolf said...: So where did everyone go?

It sure got quiet. lol.

Okay let's try this. How do we reslove the differences in her. Maybe we can all agree that we support our candidate of choice and agree that no matter who is the ultimate winner that we band together to do all we can to keep another republican out of office.
Lets stick to only the facts and leave all that other crap out!

Is that acceptable and doable?; May 26, 2008 12:46 PM
suzihussein22 said...: These are comments from HRC's campaign-

Harold Ickes Said 'It's Useful To Win States, But States Don't Vote--Delegates Do' And Said "This Is Very Much A Race For Delegates At This Point.' 'It's useful to win states, but states don't vote -- delegates do," said Harold Ickes, who is heading up the delegate operation for New York Sen. Hillary Clinton. "This is very much a race for delegates at this point,' said Ickes, a longtime Clinton insider and aide to President Bill Clinton. Reuters, 1/31/08

Wolfson: This Is a Race for Delegates, Not Individual States. 'This is a race for delegates,' said Howard Wolfson, communications director for Clinton. 'It is not a battle for individual states. As David knows, we are well past the time when any state will have a disproportionate influence on the nominating process.' Washington Post, 1/16/08

Harold Ickes, btw, is one of the ones who voted to strip MI and FL of their delegates 100%. Guilty by association?; May 26, 2008 12:54 PM
Emit R Detsaw said...: So, back to a question that I asked awhile back.... ;o)

What will any of you do in supporting your parties nominee?

Donate money
Donate time
Make phone calls
Go door to door
Tell your friends, family, co-workers about the good points and try to dispel rumors?

Just how far are you willing to go?; May 26, 2008 12:57 PM
suzihussein22 said...: e r d-I happen to love the name Chad.:) That's the name my husband and I picked for our future son when we were still dating in the mid '90s.

robh-Cheers.

graywolf-I'm kinda hangin' around. I'v also been watching a few clips of game show bloopers while trying to ignore the cicadas' droning.:D; May 26, 2008 1:00 PM
Joshua said...: Posters, there is fraud going on at this site. Unless Matt or Oreo etc fixes it, this site will lose credibility. A second poster just started using my alias this morning. His first post was at 9:42 a.m. His next post was at 9:54 a.m. I think that the poster is the same as Aunt Jean and Yamaka or whatsoever. You can tell from the poor syntax, bad grammar and bad spelling. Here is what he posted:
“I have learnt a lot about thier characters during this campaign.”

That is not something I would ever post. This second Mike, please change your handle immediately.; May 26, 2008 1:04 PM
Hippolytus said...: Calm down, everyone. Aunt Jean uses the word "dissimulation" ten times a day, don't you, Aunt Jean?; May 26, 2008 1:06 PM
suzihussein22 said...: e r d-I'll be making phone calls and talking to people in public...I have a big "publick" to talk to in retail...that was a Ron White/blue collar reference...just call me Tater Tot :); May 26, 2008 1:06 PM
greywolf said...: Soft, I use to live in AL, GA, MS, NC, FL, and SC so I know and understand the cicadas. To me they were music to the ears, they warned of an impending storm, tornados and ect. I loved sitting out on the screened patio at night listening to them Sorry Im a nature freek.

BTW thanks for the kind words yesterday evening. Im only 57 so I am not old and took no offense to your wisdom comment. It takes a lot to get under my skin, except when it comes to out right stupidity and ignorance. LOL; May 26, 2008 1:06 PM
suzihussein22 said...: This is great news for both Dems-

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10609.html; May 26, 2008 1:11 PM
suzihussein22 said...: graywolf-I wish I could get around that much :). Seriously, I can't wait to visit out West and try to go to Scotland.; May 26, 2008 1:15 PM
Emit R Detsaw said...: LOL - Softspoken22

Looks like it's time for them to use Access to combine several spreadsheets into a usable database.
Over 1.5 Million different donors would be a problem for any normal MS product to handle.

;o); May 26, 2008 1:17 PM
Joshua said...: Emit, here’s what I have done: I am a 56 year old physician who has never before donated money to a politician. Until now. I have donated money to the Obama campaign. My family has joined Obama’s grassroots. My wife has been canvassing and making phone calls for him. On election day, she got out of bed at 4:15 a.m. and went to Obama’s campaign office and got one of his signs. She then paced a block with the sign waving at the cars. Please note that my wife is an introvert and has never done anything like that before.; May 26, 2008 1:20 PM
suzihussein22 said...: Robocall/Swiftboat Alert-

http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/; May 26, 2008 1:22 PM
suzihussein22 said...: mike-I'm an introvert also and this is all a big deal for me too. My husband has been very surprised at how much I'm "getting into" this.; May 26, 2008 1:25 PM
suzihussein22 said...: Cowboy diplomacy at its finest-

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jared-bernstein/what-would-buddha-do_b_103516.html; May 26, 2008 1:30 PM
Emit R Detsaw said...: I hear you Mike. Neither my wife nor I had ever donated to any campaign before. Shoot, my wife hasn't even voted for the past couple decades. Just something about Obama that inspires true hope that the politics of old are about to change. She is nearing 60 and is not only excited about voting this year, but she donated and has been vocal. She too is somewhat introverted. LOL

We sent things to our families (they are life long Republicans), and after seeing the research, even my bigoted parents voted for Obama in Kansas. Yes, that red State of Kansas can go Obama in the GE.

08ama; May 26, 2008 1:32 PM
greywolf said...: Finally, some one in the news media this morning (FOX, on right now) stated that this whole RFK mess is fault of the media. He stated the the media who is so anxious to find and report those controversial blunders of the candidates created this current frenzy. Also said that Obama did nothing wrong by initially jumping on this, as it was the reverse for him with the Bitter comment. Also said Obama backed off immediately after it Clinton explained her remarks accepting her explaination. Finally someone in the meida with a set of B...s to openly admit that the media frenzy for a headline is the cause of this mess.; May 26, 2008 1:35 PM
Joshua said...: SoftSpoken, that’s why I know that Obama will win. Correction: we will win. Obama is merely a front for WE THE PEOPLE.; May 26, 2008 1:37 PM
greywolf said...: There is not too much I can do to help the obama camp this year. Although I am retired Army, Im forced to live on a fixed income of $1500 a month after being forced to close my Home remodeling business when the market died here in Oregon. Bankruptsy took everything except a bed, tv, computer, dishes, my clothes..they even took my transportation. So now if I want to go camping friends take me out, drop me off and pick me up three weeks later.

So now I get on my bike, peddel my a.. down town, talk to people about the candidates and debate the issues vs the candidates. I works too cause I converted over 100 people that are in my age group.; May 26, 2008 1:41 PM
Joshua said...: Emit, if a young man like Obama can get the cynical old me to think that change is possible, Wow! It sure is nice to see a politician depend on us for votes and money and not have to sell his soul to lobbyists in Washington.; May 26, 2008 1:45 PM
Joshua said...: Good for you greyWolf, you still watch MSM, even Fox. I have no idea what the TV talking heads are saying about anything. I stopped watching TV 3 months ago, except for an occasional Keith Olberman since his first “Special Comments” on Hillary. Friday was his second.; May 26, 2008 1:49 PM
greywolf said...: mike, I do still watch the news. I like to keep informed as to what everyone is saying pro or con about this nomination. That way when I hear the arguements for or against, I have a reasonable and logical response to their stand especially if it is negative. I am a 100% obama supporter, but will do all I can to keep any republican from gaining office during the next 4 + years. That is how much I believe we need change...I must also admit this is the first time voting Democrat for me, I have always voted republican up until this year.; May 26, 2008 1:57 PM
greywolf said...: I know at my age changing parties is very unusual... but then I am not a ususal kind of fella. I think these past two years of looking homelessness square in the face twice and loosing everything I worked all my life for during the past 19 months would cause one to rethink their position and out look on life.. lol; May 26, 2008 2:01 PM
greywolf said...: Soft,

That swift boat add robo thing has no meat behind it. Not only has the democrats taken the day off so has the republicans. People will not buy into that at all... and if they do they are mindless sheep. baaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh...lmao; May 26, 2008 2:04 PM
greywolf said...: well i am going to jump into the shower and go get dirty again working in the garden.. That makes a lot of sense doesnt it. LOL... but never want to work dirty, Only work to get dirty so I can get clean again... lmao; May 26, 2008 2:12 PM
Yamaka said...: rkw:

I really agree with what you said:

Winning the WH is the prime aim of all this Primary Season.

I agree I used words like Manchurian Candidate, Trojan Horse and Empty Suit at BHO. They were used to underscore a particular character of his, but not a permanent mark of dishonor.

Believe me when the Primary Season is over, most Democrats will come in line to support the Nominee.

My only hope is the Party should choose the Most Electable Person to go against John S. McCain. In my view of the world, it is Hillary Rodham Clinton, not BHO who is the least vetted and least experienced. Therefore it is very very risky for the Party to field such a Novice to go against a vastly experienced Opponent in the Fall.
________________________________

pablo:

I believe that most of the supporters of BHO are either anti-Clinton or anti-Women (totaling 70%) and the For-Obama people are a minority 30%, IMO.

This is NOT name calling. This is just an opinion.

Like your opinion that what I say will not happen! Mostly we write of our views and opinions. That's fine in a blog like this!

If they call me as a Rove/Rush Republican, then that's name calling because I am a delegate standing up for Hillary in the State Convention (June 6). That's just a simple fact.

______________________________

emit:

RBC will go by certain principles:

1. Who were the real villains and victims of the MI FL Fiasco?

Ans: Villains are the SDs of MI and FL. Victims are the Voters.

Therefore, they will punish SDs with 50% sanction, and NOT the voters. That's fair.

2. The Uncommitted in MI should remain so because that was the verdict of the voters as of Jan 29th. They did not give any preference. BHO did not want their votes in MI in Jan. A Fact.

3. BHO violated the Agreement in FL by running campaign Ads. For this he must be sanctioned 50%.

Only 50% sanctions on the Villains will dissuade them in breaking the Rules in the future.

____________________________

jp:

I am waiting for the PR to vote. I want to see how much the PV Lead Hillary will get. I am hoping for about 200K net lead.

Still the Math holds:

1972 + 240 = 2212, the Real Hurdle being closer to 2209 (Left Last Box of DCW)

I still believe for her getting 240 out of 317 outstanding Ds + SDs is quite possible.

Wait and See.

:-); May 26, 2008 2:12 PM
Hippolytus said...: Yam said to pablo:

"I believe that most of the supporters of BHO are either anti-Clinton or anti-Women (totaling 70%) and the For-Obama people are a minority 30%, IMO."
____________

Yam, I think that you are conflating anti-Clinton and anti-women. I am against one particular woman, Hillary Clinton, because of the win-at-all-cost approach she has taken during this campaign. Thant's not anti-women, it's anti-that woman.; May 26, 2008 2:30 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Amot said...

Ok, at this very moment Obama needs 49 to claim victory. There is no state convention scheduled between now and 31st of May. I will ask each one of you to give his/her prediction on the following:

1. How many delegates will Obama get before RBC announce its decision? (inlcuding supers, switches, updates)?

2. How many delegates will Clinton get with the same conditions?

3. What will be the RBC decision?

The best predictor will be officially titled 'Best predictor'!
__________________________

The RBC is meeting May 31st to 'hear appeals'. They will not be making any decisions anytime soon. I heard that there is a possibility that they might not even make a decision until CLOSE TO convention time.

So, Amot are you saying how many will Obama and Clinton get before June 1st or before the RBC decision is reached?

My prediction for before June 1st:

Question 1 & 2
Supers, switches, updates

Obama 10
Clinton 1

Question 3
The RBC will accept the Michigan proposal of Clinton 69 - Obama 59
For Florida the will reduce by 50%

.; May 26, 2008 2:32 PM
jpsedona said...: Yam,

"1972 + 240 = 2212, the Real Hurdle being closer to 2209 (Left Last Box of DCW)

I still believe for her getting 240 out of 317 outstanding Ds + SDs is quite possible.'

Just to clarify, if Obama wins 80 of 320, and hillary can't get the majority, for YOU, it won't be over right? it'll be "look how close... needs to go to the convention... yada yada..."

So, how many votes over the magic number will it take for YOU to say it's over? 50, 100, 200? Go ahead and tell us... "There's no number large enough before the convention"

As far as popular vote is concerned, I think that should Hillary be ahead by 200K excluding MI, it won't make Hill-a-Beans to the SD's. Less than 1% in the popular lead won't be enough to convince any SD that isn't already for or leaning toward Hillary.

But I think that the PR results will be very close and that with wins in MT & SD, it's possible that Obama comes out ahead if you even include MI 320K-zero. But for her campaign, it's one fruitless excuse after another.; May 26, 2008 2:36 PM
Independent Voter said...: YAM, you like to use Bush's "fuzzy math". First - even with NO sanctions, Obama currently has an 83 delegate lead over Clinton, with 52 of those being pledged. It is IMPOSSIBLE for her to catch up. She would have to get 87% of the vote in PR to overtake his pledged delegate lead. And if you believe that is going to happen, you are SADLY mistaken, especially when you consider that 2 months ago she only had a 13% lead over him. He had no name recognition and was still pulling 35+% in those polls.

Also considering that he is more than likely to take both MT & SD, there is NO way for her to catch up.

Your thinking that 200 SD's are going to come to her rescue is absurdity speaking...

bye bye now....you've proven that you don't have ANY basic math skills.

You're beginning to bore me...YAWN; May 26, 2008 2:39 PM
Independent Voter said...: leah - Question 3
The RBC will accept the Michigan proposal of Clinton 69 - Obama 59
For Florida the will reduce by 50%

-----

I can see the Florida going the way you predict, but I don't see MI going the same way. I see Clinton getting her 74 and Obama getting 36 with the rest being "uncommitted" to the convention but I also think that they will be worth 1/2 vote each - otherwise there is really NO punishment for their actions.; May 26, 2008 2:46 PM
Distance Dave said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 26, 2008 2:51 PM
Peter said...: "1. How many delegates will Obama get before RBC announce its decision? (inlcuding supers, switches, updates)?

2. How many delegates will Clinton get with the same conditions?

3. What will be the RBC decision?

The best predictor will be officially titled 'Best predictor'"

1. I think Obama will 12 supers before RBC announce its decision. 2 or to switches.

2. I think Clinton will get zero, that means she will get two and lose 2.

3. Florida is quite easy, 50% penalty, i doubt any other scenario is realistic.
Michigan will also get a 50% penalty and I think a likely solution is 69-59 before the penalty.; May 26, 2008 2:54 PM
Distance Dave said...: Just for the sake of pretending that you're not trying to make an issue over Barack's middle name, if you're going to refer to him as BHO, you should be referring to HIllary as HDC or HDRC. Her middle name is not Rodham, and even though at the 1992 inauguration, she said she'd be using that form of her name, if you're going to use BHO's LEGAL full name, at least do the same will HIllary's full name.; May 26, 2008 2:56 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Independent voter said: "Obama currently has an 83 delegate lead over Clinton, with 52 of those being pledged."

_______

Where the heck did you get those numbers?

Currently Obama has a 197 total delegate lead.

.; May 26, 2008 3:00 PM
greywolf said...: This should put some meat behind the out come of the next three primaries.... yeeeehaaaaaa..; May 26, 2008 3:05 PM
greywolf said...: as if 5/15 PR polls are

50 clinton
37 obama
13 undecided

5% +/- margin of error.; May 26, 2008 3:12 PM
Gator said...: chewwook said...
if you're going to use BHO's LEGAL full name, at least do the same will HIllary's full name.

chewwook.
Obama's legal name is Barack Hussien Obama Junior. His father was the only Barack Hussien Obama .; May 26, 2008 3:13 PM
Independent Voter said...: Leah - Where the heck did you get those numbers?

Currently Obama has a 197 total delegate lead.

---------

I was using yam's MYTH math scenario (using the MI/FL) box on the front page.; May 26, 2008 3:15 PM
Independent Voter said...: Check out this Protest that took place in San Diego a couple of months ago.; May 26, 2008 3:20 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: I think the people that try to use Obama's name against him are idiots.

None of us choose are names.

We are not responsible for our names.

That is really going to the bottom of the barrel and then looking UNDER the barrel for something to use against someone! LOL.

Obama/Kathleen Sebelius

Obama/Blanche Lincoln

Obama/Anyone BUT a Clinton

.; May 26, 2008 3:20 PM
Independent Voter said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 26, 2008 3:26 PM
Independent Voter said...: greywolf,

Using those poll numbers (which are you sure it was as of 5/15? I believe that polls was actually from 4/10. I recall someone doing an "analysis" around 5/15) and giving Obama 38 and Clinton 62% (highly unlikely, just giving yam the benefit of the doubt) the split would go roughly

Clinton 33
Obama 22

I'm also kind of curious as to why Yam is wanting to use "popular vote" as a metric. Yet he/she/it wants to include the popular vote of Puerto Rico (who has NO say in the general election) but NOT include the true popular vote in caucus states. HMMMMMMM.....hypocrite much?; May 26, 2008 3:27 PM
Independent Voter said...: leah, I guess we could try to use Hillary Rotten Clinton' name against her, fair is fair right?; May 26, 2008 3:28 PM
apissedant said...: Puerto Rico is a great mystery, there is only one poll ever conducted, and it was almost two months ago. Anyone who is predicting ANYTHING in Puerto Rico is psychic or retarded.; May 26, 2008 3:29 PM
greywolf said...: That poll for PR was updated on 5/15 according to the source.; May 26, 2008 3:30 PM
Independent Voter said...: pissed ant - LOL!; May 26, 2008 3:31 PM
apissedant said...: That poll ended 4/5, not 5/15; May 26, 2008 3:31 PM
greywolf said...: My bad.. your right the figures were added not updated... sorry

Democratic Polls
Democratic Primary Date: 6/1/08

Delegates At Stake: 63. Awarded Proportionally

Research & Research Posted by El Nuevo Dia
Date: 3/31-4/5
Puerto Rico
Added: 5/15/08
Est. MoE = 3.3% [?]

Hillary Clinton 50%
Barack Obama 37%
Unsure 13%; May 26, 2008 3:32 PM
Independent Voter said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 26, 2008 3:33 PM
greywolf said...: Also, it is a given Obama will take montana he has a double digit lead there now 52 to 35 obamas favor.; May 26, 2008 3:33 PM
Independent Voter said...: no problem greywolf, I've been looking for new data but keep coming up empty.; May 26, 2008 3:35 PM
greywolf said...: SD polls old but the only ones I can find

Democratic Polls
Democratic Primary Date: 6/3/08

Delegates At Stake: 23. Awarded Proportionally

Dakota Wesleyan University
Date: 3/24-4/3
South Dakota
Added: 4/7/08
Est. MoE = 6.0% [?]

Barack Obama 46%
Hillary Clinton 34%
Unsure 10%
Source

taken from:

http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/south-dakota.html; May 26, 2008 3:37 PM
Independent Voter said...: What is nice about the Montana poll is that it was done May 19-21 so it is pretty recent.; May 26, 2008 3:40 PM
greywolf said...: This is the current solution to the MI and FL debate as found on the huffington post today... just fyi

Page 2

A possible solution

So what is the fairest solution for the Rules Committee, taking into account Michigan's and Florida's willingness to revote but for the failure of the Obama campaign to sit down and work out details to solve their "concerns"?

It is rather simple. Go back, in effect, to the status quo ante and make some reasonable and fair adjustments.

In Michigan, Clinton received 55 percent of the vote. According to Thegreenpapers.com, she thus should receive 73 pledged delegates based on that percentage.

What about the 50 remaining uncommitted delegates, and 7 collectively cast for Sen. Chris Dodd and Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich, who were also on the ballot?

Some of those 50 delegates might have been for Clinton as a second choice to candidates other than Obama, so it would be totally unfair to award all 50 delegates to Obama.

One little known fact: Clinton complied with party rules by allowing her name to remain on the ballot, as did Dodd and Kucinich. Obama was not forced by party rules to remove his name — he chose to do so.

The Rules Committee has several options. The fairest would be to allocate those 57 pledged delegates, to Clinton and Obama by the same ratio of their standing to one another in the average of the most recent Michigan statewide polls prior to the Jan. 15 primary. Or perhaps one Solomonic compromise, more generous to Obama than to Clinton, would be to divide the remaining delegates approximately 50-50 between the two of them, 28-27 (giving Clinton the extra delegate since she led in all the latest statewide polls prior to Jan. 15).

Florida's compromise solution is even easier. Clinton won 50 percent of the vote, while Obama won 33 percent of the 1.7 million Democratic votes cast. According to Thegreenpapers.com, that would give Clinton 105 delegates and Obama 69 delegates. That leaves 11 elected John Edwards delegates yet to decide, as well as 13 still unpledged superdelegates. (Eight supers have already decided for Clinton and five have decided for Obama).

Practical politics: Winning the November election

Such solutions for the seating of Michigan and Florida, rooted as they are on neutral and long-standing principles of law and equity, are also required by practical political realities if the Democrats want to win the White House in 2008.

If more than 2.3 million Democrats in Michigan and Florida are told their votes didn't count even though their party leaders were willing to revote, that could anger them, to put it mildly. If they blame Obama for not supporting the revote while still blocking a fair solution by the Rules Committee, essentially not permitting their January votes to count, they are likely to be angrier still — if, that is, he is the Democratic Party's nominee. In a close election that could mean the difference between the Democratic candidate carrying or losing Michigan and Florida.

Is it worth risking the White House in November by not accepting this fair solution?

I don't think so — too much, such as the Supreme Court and Roe v. Wade, hangs in the balance.

Lanny J. Davis served as a member of the DNC from Maryland for 12 years (1980-1992) and served on the DNC Executive Committee. He is former Special Counsel to President Bill Clinton (1996-98) and a supporter and fund-raiser for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton. He holds no position in Clinton presidential campaign; the views expressed are entirely his own, and in no way speak for the campaign.; May 26, 2008 3:47 PM
jpsedona said...: greywolf,

The PR Poll you reference seems to be the April 10 poll by El Nuevo Dia. Some news sources added the poll data on 5/15. The poll itself was conducted 3/31-4/5.

This poll has received some criticism since El Nuevo Dia, a Spanish language newspaper, does not have a long track record in polling. Since none of the major polling firms has conducted a poll in PR, the numbers from almost 2 months ago are dubious at best.

In PR, Obama has the organization, but Hillary has the name recognition. Enthusiasm has declined since Obama has expanded his lead for the nomination. Clinton as of last weekend had only been running radio ads; no tv... maybe a budget savings exercise.; May 26, 2008 3:48 PM
greywolf said...: Current polls from Huffington Post
Obama vs McCain

CBS/NY Times: Obama, 11 points
USA Today/Gallup: McCain, 1 point
Ipsos: Obama, 4 points
LA Times/Bloomberg: Obama, 6 points
NPR: Obama, 5 points
Quinnipiac: Obama, 7 points
ABC/Washington Post: Obama, 7 points
Reuters/Zogby (including Ralph Nader & Bob Barr): Obama, 10 points

A few polls have been released since I wrote my oped:

GW-Battleground poll: Obama, 2 points
Investor's Business Daily: Obama, 11 points
Newsweek: Tie; May 26, 2008 3:58 PM
Independent Voter said...: greywolf, of course that is how Lanny Davis - rabid Clinton supporter - is going to rewrite the rules - to suit his candidate. (Referring to MI)

There is still ZERO punishment for their failure to abide by the rules as they were set.

If that is what they want to do, they STILL need to punish them. I still say cut their delegation in half.; May 26, 2008 4:29 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Words that Hillary or Bill have used during this election that shouldn't have been used:

Hillary:
Sniper fire
Shame on you!
Assassination
Hard working WHITE Americans

Bill:
'Hit job'
Cover-up
Fairy tale

What else? ;)

p.s. Obama has used ONE - 'bitter'.; May 26, 2008 4:36 PM
Peter said...: I think that people how to remember that there are not many people in the RBC besides Ickles who will go for 100% seating of the delegates. That includes Clinton supporters, she has 13 supporters in the RBC, but she does NOT have 13 supporters who will do "anything to get her elected", she has at least one, probably 4-5 in total.
Remember that most people in the RBC probably have some proud in what they do, the same RBC voted for a 100% strip just 1/2 year ago, do you think they will do a 360?
Not, likely. I think we will se a solution where Obama-camp has given into a solution which favours Clinton, that means him getting less than 50% in MI and that FL is seated as is. In addition to this, there has to be a penalty or DNC and RBC will be a laughing stock.

I`m pretty sure that Clinton is outnumbered in the RBC.; May 26, 2008 4:39 PM
suzihussein22 said...: graywolf-After seeing a video of a woman from WV say something about being scared of this Hussein "stuff", bless her heart...there's several that seem like mindless sheep. :(

the dem. address transcript for this week-

http://www.democrats.org/a/2008/05/state_sen_john.php; May 26, 2008 4:42 PM
Peter said...: Re Leah

Zimbabwe

That comment was just laughable. She compared MI/FL to Zimbabwe but she didn`t oppose the decision earlier and one of her top people actually made the decision...; May 26, 2008 4:42 PM
Joshua said...: The Iraq war is the single biggest strategic calamity of our generation. Those of us for whom the Iraq war vote is a deal breaker, we are in a quandary. I very much want to see the Democrats increase their majority in the Senate. But I also want those who voted for that abomination punished.

The following Democrats voted for the war and their seats are up for re-election this year. I really want to see them replaced by other fresh democrats:

Baucus, Max (D) - MT
Biden, Joseph R., Jr. (D) - DE
Harkin, Tom (D) - IA
Johnson, Tim (D) - SD
Kerry, John F. (D) - MA
Landrieu, Mary L. (D) - LA
Rockefeller, John D., IV (D) – WV; May 26, 2008 4:47 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Words that Hillary or Bill have used during this election that shouldn't have been used:

Hillary:
Sniper fire
Shame on you!
Assassination
Hard working WHITE Americans
Zimbabwe (added: by Peter)
pillow

Bill:
'Hit job'
Cover-up
Fairy tale

What else? ;)

p.s. Obama has used ONE - 'bitter'.; May 26, 2008 4:47 PM
suzihussein22 said...: e r d-This is basically what I do with fundraisers through school/church also-

http://www.democrats.org/a/2008/02/neighborhood_le_3.php; May 26, 2008 4:47 PM
Joshua said...: I think that no word is out of bounds. But we are also free to use our own words to judge you based on the words you use.; May 26, 2008 4:56 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: I took a close look at the Montana poll.

Montana has one Congressional District, but is splitting the state into two districts for the primary, along the lines of the two CDs it had before the 1990 census.

If you take the poll results and split the undecideds in the same proportion as the 'decideds' have stated, we get these results:

- The Eastern District will go for Senator Clinton by 54%, and give her 3 of the 5 pledged delegates; Senator Obama will get 46%, and pick up two pledged delegates.

- The Western District will go for Senator Obama with a bit more than 71% of the vote, and he will pick up 4 of the 5 pledged delegates; Senator Clinton will get a tad under 29%, and pick up one pledged delegate.

- Statewide, the poll shows Senator Obama with almost 60% of the poll (factoring the undecideds as above), which would mean he would get two of the 4 PLEOs, and 1 of the 2 at-large pledged delegates. Senator Clinton would get the same numbers.

Totals would be:
Senator Clinton - 3 + 1 + 2 + 1 = 7
Senator Obmaa - 2 + 4 + 2 + 1 = 9

Mike; May 26, 2008 5:13 PM
Amot said...: RobH, tmess, Leah, Peter (I didn't miss anyone, did I?)

I used 'announce' on purpose :)
I believe that will happen Sunday but in the afternoon before polls close at PR.
My own prediction:
Obama: 9 supers (including 1 switch)
Clinton: 1 super (and losing 1 switch = net 0)

FL: 1/2 vote pledged
MI: 69/59 proposal - all chosen delegates seated and the statewide rebalanced. No penalty!

Both FL and MI supers - full vote!

PR will have a new poll on Tuesday and I think the results will be close to the actual ones, so I will give my 2 cents on the last three contest tomorrow.

Thank you, all!; May 26, 2008 5:13 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Amot -

Geez!

I said Obama 10 and you said Obama 9. You sure didn't leave me much wiggle room there ;); May 26, 2008 5:19 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: My predictions:

Obama: 10 supers (including 2 switches)
Clinton: 1 super (and losing 2 due to switching = net -1)

FL: 1/2 vote pledged
MI: 69/59 proposal - and 1/2 vote pledged.

Both FL and MI supers - 1/2 vote

If Florida is penalized when they can give a half-hearted plea (in desperation) that it was the GOP-controlled legislature and the GOP Governor who made the date switch (even though the Dems went right along with it), I don't see how Michigan can get any less of a penalty, especially when you consider that the House is majority Democratic, and the Democratic Governor signed the bill. I could even see Michigan getting more of a penalty, since they tried these shenanigans in 2004, but backed down when then-DNC Chair Terence Richard "Terry" McAuliffe told them they would not be seated at the Convention if they did move the primary. That same Terence Richard "Terry" McAuliffe is pushing for full seating for both delegations, and I think someone on the RBC will bring up his words from 2004 to make a point about obeying the rules and historical perspective (and also to show that McAuliffe speaks out of both sides of the mouth).

Mike; May 26, 2008 5:27 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Here ya'll go...

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/26/veepstakes/index.html

It has the top 10 ten picks for VP - Democrats and Republicans.

Click on each photo to read the pro's and con's of each person. You have click on Dem/Rep to see all 20 of them.
-----

It doesn't mention Redell's ties to Farrahkan.

Blanche Lincoln and Lincoln Chafee are not listed.

It is really still too early to have a clear idea who Obama has in mind.; May 26, 2008 5:35 PM
Amot said...: Leah,
sorry about that but the other option was to second you :)
You can also see that Mike is closing the door too :)

59/69 proposal is penalty itself because it is redistribution, so I don't think they will add half vote to that. Anyway the difference is unsignificant - 5 delegates :) I am only sorry about Yam - his new math next week will be fascinating :); May 26, 2008 5:47 PM
Meg said...: Why do you guys think so many (if any) SD's will declare before the RBC decision? Haven't you noticed that the daily drip drip has slowed down?
I'm not talking add-ons.

I think the remaining SD's are all waiting until AFTER the decision because they are weenies.; May 26, 2008 6:00 PM
Yamaka said...: "Yam, both Truman and LBJ served two terms, though they were only elected to one."

apis:

I stand by my remark that Bill Clinton is the ONLY Democrat elected twice back-to-back since FDR in the first half of last Century, long long time ago.

Both Truman and LBJ DID NOT serve two full terms. Partial of one term and they got elected once. That's all.
____________________________

BHO Supporters:

I know you all want 50% sanction against the pledged delegates of MI and FL. This IS punishing the voters for no fault of theirs.

The Villains ARE the SDs. They MUST be sanctioned 50%. That's fair.

But you let BHO go free on his violation of the Agreement not to campaign in FL. This is unfair. He was the Villain there.

I know your hearts are for protecting the Villains and punishing the Victims, the innocent voters.

Tell me please, if BHO is the Nominee, What working Govt Model of the past will he invoke?

Carter, LBJ or Truman?

Remember, he IS the Bleeding Liberal of the type of Kennedy, Kerry and Carter?

Americans know how horrible was Carter's Period!

You are setting yourself up for the serious disappointment.

The Party will lose both WH and the Congress!

:-( :-(; May 26, 2008 6:01 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Right now

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

they have a great photo of Obama with Sebelius together on the front page just a little bit down from the top in the middle.; May 26, 2008 6:01 PM
Emit R Detsaw said...: Well, looks like Florida isn't going to appeal with anything fancy. "Although the DNC has said it will not recognize delegates from Florida, the Florida Democratic Party plans to appeal to the eventual Democratic nominee for President to be seated at the Convention. While there are no guarantees that this will happen, the Party will continue the delegate selection process to elect the actual delegates to the Democratic National Convention and will use the results of the January 29th Presidential Preference Primary to determine the apportionment of those delegates."

http://www.fladems.com/content/w/florida_delegate_selection_to_the_2008_democratic_national_convention

They have Clinton at 105, Obama at 67, and Edwards at 13.; May 26, 2008 6:02 PM
greywolf said...: Hi I back..

befor the three primaries..

BO 9 incl 1 switch
HC 2 less 1 switch net 1

PR
BO 22
HC 31

Montanna
BO 10
HC 8

Dakota
BO 10
HC 8; May 26, 2008 6:05 PM
Yamaka said...: "I think the remaining SD's are all waiting until AFTER the decision because they are weenies."

emma:

I agree with you partially.

But they are NOT weenies though!

Most are Hillary Leaners! They want to move en mass towards her for the Nomination.

1972 + 240 = 2212. (Last Left Box DCW)

Close to 2209 will be the Hurdle to Jump.

Stay tuned for the Shock of the Season!; May 26, 2008 6:06 PM
RobH said...: Amot, Leah, Mike,

I believe the Clinton campaign will not acquiesce to the 69:59 split. They've already rejected it, and we all know that the minute they accept anything, it's over. They are vested in NOT comnig to any agreement. That's the logic behind my prediction that it wil go "as voted", with a 50% penalty. And since I'm the only one taking that position in this pool, I've got that locked down (if it goes that way.)

And Amot .... you are POSITIVELY CHEATING .... waiting 'til tomorrow to make your predictions re 6/3? Until after new polls are out?? Why, you'd think you made the rules, or something.... I'm OUTRAGED!

All, it is interesting to see the closeness of our predictions, re Obama's pick-ups, I think we saw 9, 10, 11 (my fave - I wanted a prime number can you believe it?) and 12.; May 26, 2008 6:09 PM
greywolf said...: Fl and MI

pretty much as everyone.. except 1/2 vote; May 26, 2008 6:09 PM
RobH said...: Oooh, greywolf comes in late, just barely beating the buzzer...

But..

PR has 55 at stake, MT has 16, SD has 15.

We here at the rules committee will allow you to resubmit your delegate counts (just like we'll do for HRC next weekend....lol)

ACK!; May 26, 2008 6:13 PM
Vicki in Seattle said...: I would think that, being behind, that anyone really wanting to see HRC continue as the nominee, would come out and say soon, pretty.darn.quick, too.

like yesterday would have been good.

but I'm a patient woman. All will be revealed in the fullness of time.; May 26, 2008 6:13 PM
Vicki in Seattle said...: by the way, there is me (vicki with a lower-case "v"), but also a Vicki. We are not one and the same. I don't object to anything she says (so far), but be aware that we are two different people. You can think of me as vicki in seattle if you want.; May 26, 2008 6:15 PM
Anonymous said...: I have been involved in Democratic politics since 1965 and I can tell you all IMO:Neither Candidate will control the VP pick unless the loser openly declines the slot.
Both have too large a delegate counts for it to be otherwise; May 26, 2008 6:16 PM
RobH said...: Emma,

my belief why it will marginally ramp up vs the recent slow down is that the Obama campaign, and the wider party, want his shortfall of delegates before th3 6/1 and 6/3 contest to be small enough so that his projected ick-ups will put him over the top, and thus end it for all practical purposes.

They can't come out in a flood, and have it seem that "the SD's decided it", but they don't want the to-go number to be so large that he's still short after 6/3.

That's my rationale to your question at 6:00, and why I chose a nice cozy number to make it happen. (With more fear that it will be lower, rather than higher. If I don't see two or three on Tues and Weds, I'll be sweatin'); May 26, 2008 6:21 PM
Meg said...: I read somewhere that the RBC has control of the MI and FL issue until June 29. After that it's the Credentials Committee of the Convention. I think HRC could appeal to them if she doesn't like the RBC decision.

Yam: You said that the last SD's are villains AND Hillary supporters. Interesting.; May 26, 2008 6:25 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Amot said...
59/69 proposal is penalty itself because it is redistribution, so I don't think they will add half vote to that.

Amot,

Yes, 59/69 is a penalty, but a penalty to Senator Clinton, not the state of Michigan.

The penalty, as used prior to this, the 2008 primary, originally was against the state, but not directed towards any candidate. When the rules for the 2008 primary were enacted, they wanted to make sure the penalties applied in addition to the candidates. The method to enforce it was to strip delegates from candidates if the rules were violated.

Since Senator Clinton appeared in Florida for several fund-raisers, and appeared in Florida on primary day (after the polls closed, but the planning necessarily HAD to take place before the primary, which many [most?] would interpret as against the rules), I wouldn't be surprised if Senator Clinton is threatened with the loss of ALL Florida delegates if she doesn't agree to some agreement on Michigan more along the 59/69 line (penalty against the candidate), and an equal, 50% loss of delegates penalty of both states (penalty against the states).

Remember, the RBC will also (or at least SHOULD) be looking at how their decision will encourage or deter the states from jumping the gun on primary dates in 2012 and beyond. If the state of Michigan, after thinking of jumping the gun in 2004, then actually doing it this year, isn't penalized, they and who knows how many others will do it (or do it again) in 2012.

That is the reason I think the RBC will impose a penalty on both states, not just Florida.

Mike; May 26, 2008 6:27 PM
greywolf said...: Actually I will do next week now... someone can save it for the record.

Michigan and Florida will be seated with no penalty the DNC does not want to disenfranchise the voters at the expense of the Politicians mess up.
They will be seated this way..

MI

OB 57
HC 70
undecided 30

FL

BO 84
HC 116
undecided 11

Dakota

BO 9
HC 6

MT

BO 9
HC 7

Before that

BO will pick up 7 plus 1 switch
HC will pick up 2 minus 1 switch

That is my final offer.. lmao; May 26, 2008 6:30 PM
RobH said...: Leah,

I just finished reading the CNN veepstakes page.

The Repubs are in trouble...

Carly Fiorina as a credible top ten? Just 'cause she's McCain's economic squeeze make's her eligible to be one (aged) heartbeat from the Presidency. Gee, what's her stand on, say, Irag?

Joe Lieberman??? Scared Repub's gonna accept a Dem (albeit a wuss) on their ticket?

Condi Rice?? Do they want to make it evne EASIER to tie this ticket to Bush??

Unbelievable.; May 26, 2008 6:36 PM
apissedant said...: leah,
I have noticed your VP selections are widening. That's all, just pointing it out.

And I feel like joining in and randomly guessing on election results that I know nothing about. I guess Obama gets a clean sweep, getting at least 60% in all three states. I judge this off nothing, it is wishful thinking more than anything else. If I am right, then I got lucky.; May 26, 2008 6:40 PM
greywolf said...: If you all look at USA Election POLLs as of 5/22 both Obama and Hillary beat McCain in MI an Fl however the surprise is Obama does better in both states then Hillary.
So What is to keep the Rules commitee from looking at those numbers when seating both FL and MI

Now there is some food for thought. Laughing my ass off..; May 26, 2008 6:41 PM
Yamaka said...: "Less than 1% in the popular lead won't be enough to convince any SD that isn't already for or leaning toward Hillary."

jp:

I disagree. In elections this close, any increase in popular vote is meaningful. At least to most of the remaining SDs, IMO.

Dubya won 2000 election by 1/270 of EV!

You underestimate the PR voters. Hillary will have a blow-out, which will be another Game Changer!

Stay tuned.

If there is dichotomy between the Pledged delegates and Popular votes, a showdown at the Convention is NOT that unreasonable as you think.

I welcome that showdown, myself.

Let the whole world knows what we are fighting for!

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

Indep:

ALL certified Popular Votes will be used, whether it is in PR or in any Caucus State, in my Math.

There is no hypocrisy here.

_______________________________

BHO Supporters:

Why you get so upset with BHO's legal name, including the middle name Hussein?

I am serious. Please explain. You and your Piper seem to give an obvious feeling that his legal name is such a dirty one!

Barack Hussein Obama Jr is just fine with me.

I did not choose my real name, although I chose my Pen Name!

But hiding and lying about the legal given name is the REAL CRIME here.

:-( :-(; May 26, 2008 6:44 PM
apissedant said...: Republicans will not put a soft VP up. McCain already worries the far right, so he is going to have to select someone further to the right to solidify the base. Republicans have no problem abandoning elected officials that don't conform to the far right. They did it with George H. W. Bush, Gerald Ford, Chafee, and countless others. They give them no funding and don't show up at the polls. They let the Democrats win as an example to the rest of the Republicans to toe the line.
It has worked out in their favor in the end, they get their way more often than the accepting compromising democrats do.; May 26, 2008 6:45 PM
RobH said...: Emma,

your post regarding a possible HRC appeal underlies my theory regarding the SD pace.

If Obam is within PR/M/SD striking distance on the weekend, and the RBC announces a decision that HRC might choose to appeal, her options are constrained.

Does she announce her appeal on Sunday, only to have him clinch by "mutually pre-agreed rules" and voters (not SD's) putting him over the top on Tuesday? Does she announce her appeal on Weds, after he's clinched by those same dynamics.

All while not having the SD's do the deed on Thursday, 'cause then we'd have to hear Bill whining about a 'cover-up.'; May 26, 2008 6:45 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: I really posted yesterday regarding the next three primaries but I will say it again:

Puerto Rico
Obama 28
Clinton 27

Montana
Obama 10
Clinton 6

South Dakota
Obama 9
Clinton 6

Maine add-on - Obama 1
---

Before (12am) June 1st
I predict:

Obama will pick up 10 superdelegates.

Clinton will net 1.; May 26, 2008 6:47 PM
Yamaka said...: "Both have too large a delegate counts for it to be otherwise"

jim:

Amen. Well said.; May 26, 2008 6:50 PM
RobH said...: Apissedant,

I agree with you, they won't put up anybody soft. Why Bobby Jindal is now suddenly a front-runner boggles the mind. In fact, I don't believe it, I believe this weekend is a "coming out party for a new debutante" who will be impactful in the future, just not this year.

I said they're in trouble because of the dearth of credible candidates. Those choices were mostly comic.

I don't see Romney (tho' Mitt wants it bad)- McCain hates him.

I could actually see the Huckster, that would feed the right.

Or Portman or Pawlenty.; May 26, 2008 6:54 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Mike in Maryland said: "Since Senator Clinton appeared in Florida for several fund-raisers, and appeared in Florida on primary day (after the polls closed, but the planning necessarily HAD to take place before the primary, which many [most?] would interpret as against the rules),...."
______________

Clinton and Obama WERE allowed to fundraise in Florida and Michigan. The pledge was 'no campaigning' but fundraising was allowed. Hillary in this case did not break the rule 'AS FAR AS I KNOW' ;)

OBAMA '08; May 26, 2008 6:56 PM
Meg said...: Could someone confirm these numbers?

Michigan:

128 pledged
29 supers inc add-ons
157 total delegates

Florida:

185 pledged
26 supers inc add-ons
211 total

I just want to be sure, when they start talking percentages, that I have the correct numbers.; May 26, 2008 6:58 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Regarding JINDAL from wikipedia:

Speculation over vice presidential nomination

On February 8, 2008, conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh mentioned on his syndicated show that Jindal could be a possible choice for the Republican vice presidential nomination in 2008. He said that Jindal might be perceived as an asset to McCain's campaign because he has support in the conservative base of the Republican Party and his youth offsets Sen. McCain's age. If McCain were to win the presidency, he would be the oldest president ever inaugurated. Heightening the speculation, Jindal, along with Governor Charlie Crist of Florida and former rival Mitt Romney (Mike Huckabee was also invited, but he turned down the invitation because he already had plans to go on a cruise with his wife that day), met with Sen. McCain on Friday, May 23, 2008 at his home in Arizona, according to a Republican familiar with the decision. The meeting, however, may actually serve a different purpose, presenting Jindal with the opportunity to speak at the 2008 Republican National Convention, in a similar fashion to Barack Obama at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, cementing a place for him in the party and opening the gate for a future run for the presidency.
______

*Bolded for emphasis ;); May 26, 2008 7:01 PM
greywolf said...: This is how real clear politics has FL and MI when going up against Cain

as of 05/07
MI

BO 44
HC 41

as of 5/22
FL

BO 40
HC 47; May 26, 2008 7:03 PM
RobH said...: Generally, regarding VP on the Dem side:

(My prediction)

Obama will "clinch" the nomination, in the public's perception, firmly and finally, during the period June 4 -June 10, when masses of superdelgates endorse him.

Clinton will drop the animosity based, contention approach, sucking up to win the VP nod, but with the side effect of her spending the summer declaring how wonderful Obama is, and helping to unify the party.

At some appropriate time before the convention, Obama will announce his pick for VP, someone who he knows will carry in the convention, but it will not be Clinton.

At that point Sen. Clinton will be in an impossible predicament. Should she announce she will floor fight at the convention and reveal unambiguously that her aspirations are bigger than the parties? That she's willing to break the party to her will?

Imagine the unenviable position to be in to have to run against all the wonderful things she said all summer.....; May 26, 2008 7:07 PM
RobH said...: Emma,

those are corret.; May 26, 2008 7:09 PM
greywolf said...: If you all go to real clear politics and look at the battle ground states.

Obama does just as good if not better in 75% of those states as Hillary. Plus he beats McCain in the majority of those states. I dont want to hear any more electibiltiy comments. Also
I do not any longer want to hear any thing about HRC being the best in a national election. This just proves it to be all wrong. BTW all those polls were taken these past few weeks. Deal with fact people; May 26, 2008 7:10 PM
Independent Voter said...: emma - it is also possible that it has slowed down due to the holiday weekend. It only slowed down on Saturday (he had 3 on Friday which one of those was a switch from Clinton).; May 26, 2008 7:13 PM
Anonymous said...: I've lost count Yam, this big win in Puerto Rico you're predicting, will this be the 7th or the 8th "game changer" for hillary; May 26, 2008 7:15 PM
Amot said...: RobH,
I am not cheating. I didn't ask about PR, SD and MT, I was asking about supers only :)
I really am in the mist about PR, sometimes I think he can win, sometimes - it will be landslide for her... I guess the truth is in between, but I will not be surprised if it is close to a tie. Of course, the best is Obama's victory :)

I am glad he have so many contenders now :); May 26, 2008 7:15 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Leah Texas4Obama said...
Clinton and Obama WERE allowed to fundraise in Florida and Michigan. The pledge was 'no campaigning' but fundraising was allowed. Hillary in this case did not break the rule 'AS FAR AS I KNOW' ;)

Section 20 (Challenges), C. 1. b. reads:

A presidential candidate who campaigns in a state where the state party is in violation of the timing provisions of these rules, or where a primary or caucus is set by a state’s government on a date that violates the timing provisions of these rules, may not receive pledged delegates or delegate votes from that state. Candidates may, however, campaign in such a state after the primary or caucus that violates these rules. “Campaigning” for purposes of this section includes, but is not limited to, purchasing print, internet, or electronic advertising that reaches a significant percentage of the voters in the aforementioned state; hiring campaign workers; opening an office; making public appearances; holding news conferences; coordinating volunteer activities; sending mail, other than fundraising requests that are also sent to potential donors in other states; using paid or volunteer phoners or automated calls to contact voters; sending emails or establishing a website specific to that state; holding events to which Democratic voters are invited; attending events sponsored by state or local Democratic organizations; or paying for campaign materials to be used in such a state. The Rules and Bylaws Committee will determine whether candidate activities are covered by this section.

The pertinent part is “Campaigning” for purposes of this section includes . . . sending mail, other than fundraising requests that are also sent to potential donors in other states.

When Senator Clinton held her 'after primary' rally in Davie, Florida, she had to send the notice of it to people outside the state (not a violation), but realistically, how many people outside southern Florida would attend a rally held less than 25 miles north of Miami, and more than 325 miles from the closest resident of another state (Jacksonville, in Florida, is 325 miles north of Davie)? The announcement of the rally was aimed at Florida voters, specifically southern Florida voters.

She might have been technically within the rules, but the entire intent of her actions was to thumb her nose at the rules.

Mike; May 26, 2008 7:24 PM
greywolf said...: I really do not think Barack will take PR... I honestly think Hillary will beat him by 5-10% but that is okay in my book...considering PR is considered latino so if he pulls 45% or better it shows he is gaining ground rapidly.; May 26, 2008 7:25 PM
greywolf said...: I agree mike in MD

Also any comments about the media coverage by Obama that also hit parts of norther Florida as breaking the rules is also mute. The DNC ruled that they understood the mass media bleed over problems for most states and that it was okay since those effected in Florida constituted for a very small percentage of the population.; May 26, 2008 7:30 PM
greywolf said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 26, 2008 7:30 PM
tmess2 said...: My reasoning for a decision on Saturday from the RBC. It's my understanding from the schedule posted on this site that the appealing parties from Michigan and Florida will get to present information in the morning but that the afternoon is set aside for making a decision.

The people on the RBC are reasonably intelligent folks who have been thinking about how this mess should be resolved for the past several weeks. While they are giving Florida and Michigan the courtesy of making a presentation, I am doubtful that what is said in those presentations will change anyone's mind.

Ultimately, this appeal is not a legal hearing it is a political one.

My expectation is that you will have two or three proposed solutions from the members of the committee, that they will spend an hour or so discussing those solutions. At that point, you will get a motion to adopt one of the proposals, there will be a series of proposed amendments, some of which will pass and some of which will not,and then the question will be called and a final decision will pass.

I really can't see them taking much more than 5 or 6 hours debating alternatives and I can't see anyone wanting to come back on Sunday to wrap things up.; May 26, 2008 7:32 PM
apissedant said...: I agree with Mike in Maryland as I stated earlier. The fund raising was in no way a violation, but the after party was. Despite the fact it was held AFTER the win, it required hiring staff and informing participants through a campaign that was in fact against the rules. It also showed quite clearly that her "volunteers" were not separated from her official campaign, which is against the rules. Since she was not officially allowed to campaign, she should not had an organization to have a party with, yet somehow she still did.; May 26, 2008 7:51 PM
greywolf said...: you will all find this interesting reading.. re Liz and her laughing..

Is the secret service looking at her? that is the question..

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-seitzman/is-the-secret-service-inv_b_103565.html; May 26, 2008 7:56 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: greywolf,

I noticed throughout Trotta's 'apology' and 'explanation' that she was almost smiling. Her apology was not in the least bit sincere.

She deserves at LEAST the same length of suspension that MSNBC gave David Schuster when he commented about Chelsea Clinton being 'pimped' - IOW, a minimum of two weeks. However, Schuster's comment was an expression of what he might have perceived the Clinton's were doing with their daughter, but not a threat to her life. Since Trotta's comments were, in effect, a call for someone to kill a person, Trotta's comments were much, much worse and repugnant than Schuster's, and therefore she deserves a much longer 'time out' from broadcasting. Maybe a year or so would be appropriate, the length of time for a trial?

Mike; May 26, 2008 8:23 PM
Vicki in Seattle said...: well, I think I'm gonna put on some music and do my "superdelegates! ENDORSE!!" dance.

I'll check back later to see if it "took."; May 26, 2008 8:29 PM

«Oldest ‹Older 2001 – 2200 of 4317 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

4317 comments:

Tags