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 3001 – 3200 of 4317 Newer› Newest»

apissedant said...: vwis,
Many have taken to calling stopobama Yam.; May 29, 2008 11:55 PM
Emit R Detsaw said...: Thursday's ripple preceding Friday's Flood?; May 30, 2008 12:03 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Hi everyone-

I have only popped in here a couple of times today.

When I went to bed last night around 3am I had a huge surprise when I turned on the bedroom light - the a/c drain malfunctioned which made part of my bedroom ceiling fall down on the bed and floor and quite a bit of water too boot! So I have been dealing with clean-up and moving furniture, and taking up the carpet most of the day - and have not responded to many posts on this thread - but I have finally caught up on reading most of them.

Now I am exhausted so I will sit back and listen to ya'll for awhile.

vwis - Yahoo! I see you posted the Obama 41 post - we are getting closer and closer every hour ;)

OBAMA :); May 30, 2008 12:03 AM
vwis said...: Apissedant,

Nothing was revealed, the masks are still on. I just said I had a vision. I am just a blogger like you. I try to bring levity to this blog. If you haven't noticed it tends to get a little heavy sometimes. Hope I didn't ruin it for you.; May 30, 2008 12:04 AM
suzihussein22 said...: Aunt Jean-that's okay-OR Dem posted about the same question-You made a good post @ 9:47 along those lines...You already know I don't agree, but that's fine. Thank you.

kujo-I've been wanting to know how our Dem. candidates stand about the executive emergency powers.

vwis-Actually, I've found this blog to follow up with each othe a lot more respectfully than news sites like ABC and CBS.; May 30, 2008 12:05 AM
Independent Voter said...: aunt jean, sorry I took so long to respond to your 9:47 post, Bill and I went out to dinner.

Hillary NEVER said that she was against this war, UNTIL she started running for president.

You said, "When she found out that the report that was given was false she said that she would have never voted like did did."
---My problem with this statement jean, is had she DONE her JOB, she would have read the intelligence report as did other members of Congress who actually voted AGAINST the war 20+ Democratic Senators voted against it plus 120+ Democratic Representatives voted against it, WHY? Because they DID THEIR JOB and read the report.

She want to repeal ONLY the section that refers to federal definition. If Bill and I get married here in CA (which very well may be possible next month) our union will be recognized (under her plan) to receive federal benefits (tax cuts, spousal benefits, etc.). HOWEVER and this is a BIG HOWEVER, if we decide to move to AZ or TX where same-sex marriage is not recognized, our union will no longer be recognized by the federal government (again, this is under HER plan).

Regarding the "marriage amendment" you refer to, she fought against it because it is part of the Democratic PLATFORM, which is also why their plans are very similar, so don't give me that crap! NONE of the Democrats voted in favor of the marriage amendment as well did MANY Republicans. You try to make it sound as if she was the ONLY reason it didn't pass, she didn't have much to do with it except to be 1 vote against it.

She did however vote in FAVOR of the flag burning amendment which has been rules CONSTITUTIONAL under the protection of the First Amendment rights of freedom of expression. This goes AGAINST the Democratic platform.

I think the problem that I don't like her so much is because I HAVE LISTENED to her, and I don't like the vile venom that leaves her lips.

As far as the health care policy that Obama mandates coverage for children, I too am against that, I believe health care coverage should simply be automatically available to children under the age of 18 at no cost to parents who make below $50,000 per year, all the rest sure make them get health care coverage for their kids. You're right, currently there is no system in place (as far as I know) that only allows the coverage of minors, however that doesn't mean it cannot be set up. When the government gets too involved in forcing people to do things, especially when it comes to their pocketbook and their medical decisions, you begin going down a slippery slope that nobody, at least in this country, wants to go down.

As far as Hillary talking to our adversaries, yes she will talk to them provided EVERY guideline is set in place that the Bush administration is adhered to. This is what is known as FAILED policy, that obviously is NOT working. Something has to be changed and she is not going to do it.

Her whole busing people in to "protest" the RBC meeting this weekend is also asinine. How is she paying for this "protest"? That is what I would like to know. Her campaign is flat ass broke. If asked by the Obama campaign to donate to help her get out of debt I would have, but not anymore. Not when she is throwing money down the drain.

Sorry for the novel, I will check back later, we are going out for a few beers.

Dave; May 30, 2008 12:07 AM
Anonymous said...: I agree with those who think that the person who was posting as Yamaka is now posting as stopobama now. Besides the odd timing between the departure of Yamaka and the appearance of stopobamanow, the similarities in their posts are too strong to be different people. They are at the same level, both intellectually and emotionally, and they both claim to be centrists. The only difference is that stopobamanow hasn't resorted to throwing epithets (yet).; May 30, 2008 12:09 AM
apissedant said...: vwis,
no, I mean at the DNC. When those that run this site get their moment of glory.; May 30, 2008 12:09 AM
vwis said...: apissedant:

Also, it was to be a Sitcom not the news. It would start of during and election season, but be such a success that it could run forever and just be about politics.; May 30, 2008 12:10 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Emit R Detsaw said: " Thursday's ripple preceding Friday's Flood?"

_______________________

OH MY GOSH - Emit you posted that at the same time I posted about the flood in my bedroom!

Okay - I've had my 'water' flood - Now Friday is the day for the flood of Super Delegates for OBAMA :); May 30, 2008 12:11 AM
dsimon said...: Aunt Jean: I hope if they let obama STEAL [yes STEAL] this race I hope and pray that Hillary can run Independent.

I don't understand at all the claim that Obama has stolen anything. Is it the caucuses? Both candidates knew the rules and had an equal opportunity to get results.

Is it FL/MI? Republicans imposed half-vote penalties on those states and I don't hear complaints from that side of the aisle, nor have I heard any explanation as to how to avoid even greater chaos next time if sanctions are not imposed this time. (Not to mention that the Clinton campaign was all in favor of the sanctions until it appeared they might need the votes.)

Is it superdelegates? I thought it was the Clinton camp that said superdelegates could do whatever they wanted. Now they say the supers should wait until all the voting is over, but were more than happy to accept over 100 superdelegate commitments before the voting had barely gotten started. So I don't see any grounds for accusations of theft.

As for Clinton running as an independent, nothing could do more damage to the policies and principles she stands for than allowing McCain to get into office (and possibly appoint two Supreme Court justices). I think those who advocate such a route care more about the person than the programs she supports, and seem willing to trash the latter for the former. I don't think Clinton herself would think that's a good thing for the nation.; May 30, 2008 12:14 AM
apissedant said...: vwis,
can I have a walk on, where I say mean stuff that could quite possibly be poorly thought out and misinterpreted, and then leave?; May 30, 2008 12:16 AM
vwis said...: Softspoken22,

This site has much improved in the last month as the race seems to be drawing to and end.; May 30, 2008 12:20 AM
billyjay66 said...: vwis

re: numbers to nominate

Here is a number you will like. Think Obama can't get to 2209? Look at MI-FL table on sidebar for needed to win - 127. Let's say last three primaries = 40 for Obama with 18 (Edwards) 33 (uncommitted) 36 more superdelegates.

40+18+33+36 = 127 ====2209!

Now that is 100% Edwards-Uncommitted going for Obama (all have so far) but to the extent they don't more SD are needed.....out of 221 SD left!!!; May 30, 2008 12:24 AM
vwis said...: Apissedant,

Yes, there would be regular posters and some who are guest stars that would only post in one episode. I would try to display you pretty much as you display yourself. I would have to tone the language to be able to air.

Now that's reality television. Life is better than fiction.; May 30, 2008 12:24 AM
suzihussein22 said...: vwis-Yes, I've seen that story on Political Punch/ABC and Yahoo. I just don't know what to say.; May 30, 2008 12:30 AM
apissedant said...: vwis,
I don't know why everyone is always trying to limit my vocabulary. I've heard that having a large vocabulary makes you look smarter, so why is everyone trying to reduce my already limited glossary of words even further? I think I must intimidate you and you feel inferior. That's the only reason I can possibly see.; May 30, 2008 12:32 AM
dsimon said...: stopOBAMAnow: "They agree on MOST issues."-Indepen

I disagree.

They are fundamentally different people of different mind set.

You point out three "differences," but that does not refute the claim that they agree on MOST issues. And even the differences cited are not great.

As for Iraq, you describe some alleged historical differences, but they both have similar policies for how to move forward from here. So any policy differences on Iraq are minimal.

Their most substantial difference is on a mandate for health insurance. Obama has the more moderate position, but his proposal would still be a substantial improvement over what we have and would probably lead in time to a Clinton-like program.

On Social Security, at least Obama has put something on the table. We all know that the choices are raising taxes, and/or raising the benefits age, and/or cutting benefits. Clinton has chosen to avoid the question by saying she'll appoint yet another "commission." The claim that lifting the wage tax cap is "soaking the rich" ignores the fact that the cap makes the present tax a regressive one; lifting it would make it a flat tax. And I've never heard even the archest conservative call a flat tax a soak-the-rich scheme. It would be nice for Clinton to propose something concrete, but it seems to me she doesn't have the political courage to do so. So I can't tell what the difference really is on this issue if she won't commit to anything.

On most other issues, they're in general agreement. That's why so much of the primary season has been devoted to Reverend Wright and sniper fire: because they don't really have much to differentiate themselves on most issues.; May 30, 2008 12:34 AM
vwis said...: Billyjay,

Wow! Where did that come from. How did I become your numbers guy.

Anyway I have run the numbers many times my self I just don't usually post them. People here always nit pick them to death. Robh, bless his heart and I nit picked over 2117 and 2118 for about 1/2 and hour or more yesterday.

I have read many an article on how FL and MI might turnout. The funny thing is when you raise the numbers he often gets closer in most scenarios. The other thing you can take in to account is the add-ons. ME +1 for BHO on Sunday with PR. Throughout June I believe off the top of my head another +18. That leaves 203. +7 for the Pelosi group. 196 Leaving approx. 317 (I believe) He is presently gaining at a 5:1 ratio. That would be +253 which would put him over the top.

You see I'm not a numbers guy. I haven't thought about one bit.; May 30, 2008 12:40 AM
Oregon Dem said...: Dr. in Ann Arbor said...

Re: Oregon Dem's daughter going to Grad school @ University of MI

= = = =

Absolutely - what's the best way for you and I to talk outside this thing? I can give you information...

+ + + +

I would prefer not to give my home e-mail here which is about the only way I know to contact each other that I know - how about I set up a hotmail account just to contact each other about it - if you reply to this post I will post that e-mail...

OK?; May 30, 2008 12:42 AM
dsimon said...: billyjay66: Think Obama can't get to 2209?

I ran the numbers, and even with full seating of FL and MI (where Obama gets at least 22 of the "uncommitted" delegates), by my calculations Clinton would need over 63% of all remaining delegates to get the nomination (not including the last three Obama superdelegate additions).

It's unlikely that FL and MI will be seated with no penalty at all. And it's unlikely that Clinton will get 63% of all remaining delegates (especially when Edwards delegates are more likely to go with Obama). Multiply those two unlikelies, and you get very unlikely.

Consequently, it's very likely Obama will be the nominee, with or without sanctions against MI and FL. But we'll know for sure soon enough.; May 30, 2008 12:45 AM
vwis said...: Softspoken,

By the way, I like the name.

What show on Political Punch? What are you referring to? I have too many threads going. I have been thinking about numbers and have lost my train of thought. It's getting late.; May 30, 2008 12:46 AM
vwis said...: apissedant:

Because were Obama's elitist followers. Haven't you heard? Actually I don't care about it at this time of night. I only care before 9:00 central when my kids are up and might read it or catching up in the daytime. I was only saying if it were on TV then we would have to change it to be able to air. Federal regulations, you know. Although, I come from a media background and they use h### when needed but, words are only words and then again "The pen is mightier than the sword."; May 30, 2008 12:57 AM
billyjay66 said...: dismon

You made some reference to social security and raising the cap and soaking the rich. No disagreement.

But here is a lie - excuse me misrepresentation that is told over and over.

Ever heard the statement the top 1% pay 40% of the taxes? Rarely they do say they are talking about income taxes.

BUT it is also true that Medicare-Medicaid-Social Security is 62% if the total (unified) budget. WHO pays that???? 99%...... is payed by.......those who make under $110K!!! The middle class pays the majority of all taxes - but "they" never include SS it doesn't count!! Anybody else figure this out?; May 30, 2008 1:01 AM
Unknown said...: I suspect that when this is all said and done- Obama will end up with around 600 superdelegates- as HRC will behave so poorly during July and August that she will suffer massive super defections to the point where nearly nobody will want to be associated with her...; May 30, 2008 1:06 AM
vwis said...: billyjay,

It sounds like you might be Huckabee populist. Abolish Income Tax. I'm surprised that Hillary hasn't followed suit on that to pander for votes. Oh yeah, Huckabee and Clinton are arch rivals from Arkansas, maybe that's why.; May 30, 2008 1:07 AM
stopOBAMAnow said...: dsimon:

"That's why so much of the primary season has been devoted to Reverend Wright and sniper fire: because they don't really have much to differentiate themselves on most issues."

Thanks for your reply.

I disagree.

Pastor Wright and Sniper Fire are NOT politically and historically not equivalent.

Pastor Wright is a substantively very serious issue, the implications are still reverberating in all corners of American heartland. Sen ObaBush's nearly 20 years involvement with him as a pastor, mentor and friend, and when it got exposed suddenly but surely disowning him is a testament to the serious flaw in his character and judgment.

Sniper Fire is a gaffe spun disproportionately by ObaBush's campaign with the help of the liberal MSM mostly for entertainment purpose.

Your assertion that lifting the SS cap for taxation is a "flat tax" is a total misunderstanding of how the SS tax works and how benefits are calculated. Remember, the benefits are NOT proportionate to the tax or the premium paid into this largely an Insurance program. There is a Cap for the benefits, therefore there SHOULD be a CAP on the taxation. An unlimited tax will destroy small business and limited partnerships etc. It has very serious consequences to the general economic growth, which ObaBush cannot understand well! Because he is a Socialist in heart or a Communist in the making!

Regarding Sen Clinton's position on this: She rightly said that it should be done AFTER fiscal discipline is achieved in the budget process. Now nearly 300 billion dollar of SS money is flowing into the General Budget a year. This must be stopped first, via a Lock Box, as suggested by Gore long time ago.

Once the budget is balanced, then by simply enacting a comprehensive immigration reform which brings in nearly 3 million skilled young healthy workers into US will certainly solve the demographic challenges SS faces long term. No tax increase and the resultant crippling of the economy is needed at all. That is the Magic of Clintonomics!

SS is not in real danger now. It is the Medicare which needs all our attention immediately.
___________________________

Hello there:

Yam lives in Houston, I live in Dallas. He is a Friend of Bill, I am NOT. He is a multi-tasking workoholic, I am not.

He is a millionaire with kids in expensive Colleges, and swims in his private pool. I am not, I don't have a pool.

He calls Sen ObaBush with colorful names like Manchurian Candidate, Trojan Horse and Empty Suit. I don't, although I like Empty Suit!

We both are moderates, I have read all his posts with lots of interest, fun and humor. That's all. We both are in the same page on most of the issues of politics and money matters.

He opposes Sen ObaBush for a different reason than mine: I fear for his INExperience.

Yam said he may blog for him if he wins fair and clear with 2209 TDs!

Therefore, quit calling me Yam.

I don't like name calling! I like serious discussions!

Stop ObaBush Now.

Sen Obama and W. Bush have common thread of connection: Both are moneymen with least experience in National Govt. Very dangerous.; May 30, 2008 1:09 AM
vwis said...: jceasar,

That is if she follows through on her present path and fight it all the way to the convention. Mind you I've read somewhere that many supers would like a fight on the floor, like the good ole days.

I imagine the event is very stale.; May 30, 2008 1:11 AM
stopOBAMAnow said...: "Pastor Wright and Sniper Fire are NOT politically and historically not equivalent."

Oops. Two negatives. Mistake,

Please read as "are NOT politically and historically equivalent"; May 30, 2008 1:13 AM
billyjay66 said...: vwis

Nothing further from the truth. I cringe at a flat tax. Not sure how stating the middle class pays a lot leads to a flat tax. Not in my book. Especially a national sales tax. A billionaire doesn't go into Walmart often and would pay like 0.0001 tax rate. How about you?; May 30, 2008 1:15 AM
vwis said...: Apissedant,

You had better drug your wife that was over and hour ago. You don't want her to find out you spent your night with another women on the internet.; May 30, 2008 1:17 AM
Oregon Dem said...: stopobamanow:

stop trying to convince us that you are not Yamaka - we know you are.; May 30, 2008 1:19 AM
vwis said...: Billyjay,

Huckabee doesn't promote a flat tax he promotes abolishing income tax. Don't ask me how the government would get their money. A tax by any other name is still a tax and still smells as foul.; May 30, 2008 1:20 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Oregon Dem-

I think we should pronounce Yam's new name like this:

sto--poba--manow

Sounds a bit Swahili or something, huh?; May 30, 2008 1:28 AM
billyjay66 said...: vwis

Not flat tax for Huckabee. But yes -sales tax. Just google "Huckabee sales tax" it. So.....the rich pay virtually nothing right? They dispose of very small percent purchasing goods. Second, divide the revenue needed by all that is sales taxable and the burden would be huge.; May 30, 2008 1:31 AM
suzihussein22 said...: vwis-Thanks. I meant to post Political Radar through their ABC website.It is late.

apissedant-about going to bed, lol...my husband says he can't wait for peace and quiet when the primary gets done.; May 30, 2008 1:34 AM
vwis said...: Oregondem,

Does it really matter who he is? It is what they stand for that is pretty much the same. I for one am thinking of changing my handle preparing for the GE. I'm thinking about Mc4mthePanamaCanal to present a different point of view. What do you think other than its too long.

Isn't it interesting how the RNC slipped that one in there while the DNC was too busy with their primary to fight it. Mc was born outside the US on a naval base. The RNC has been wanting to change that you had to be born in the US for a longtime. They then can run Arnold who has a mass appeal. I think they know Mc is unelectable, but wanted to get this one through. 2012 should be more interesting from their point of view. They figure give the Dems 4 yrs. They run Jeb, Arnold and whoever else. They really wanted Clinton to get the nod. To keep that whole Bush/Clinton rivalry alive. Without Clinton it makes Jeb less likely. Meanwhile they're all friends. Bill is George's other brother according to George H.; May 30, 2008 1:34 AM
Independent Voter said...: Yamaka wrote: "Sniper Fire is a gaffe"

---

Believe what you want....ANYONE who actually has come under sniper fire KNOWS when they were under sniper fire. So there are two possible explanations to this scenario:

1. She lied (which she pretty much admitted to when she said, that it was not consistent with what she wrote about)

or

2. Her memory is failing.

In either scenario - she is a liar (which by the way, look what the last 7 years of lies have gotten us) or she is losing her memory - she is mentally UNFIT to be CiC; May 30, 2008 1:36 AM
vwis said...: Leah,

You really do post all day and night don't you. How much sleep do you get or can you catch up after the primary.; May 30, 2008 1:37 AM
Unknown said...: I predict a credentials fight...I suspect the verdict on Michigan and Florida will provide HRC with around 10-15 delegates net- since they will get only 1/2 votes, and the Edwards delegates in Florida will gravitate towards Obama....but HRC wants more...she will campaign vigorously in June/July and August and try to destroy Obama so he cannot win in 2008....I really think for HRC it is no longer even about 2012 because the thought of Obama being President is no painful for HRC that she wants to destroy him even if it means destroying herself and her political future...; May 30, 2008 1:39 AM
suzihussein22 said...: OR Dem-I'm not even bothering with Y/SON. Let him/they have his/their Penn names. Satire is one thing, but he/they don't even make sense.

satire-A manner of writing that mixes a critical attitude with wit and humor in an effort to improve mankind and human institutions.

I don't see how his/their postings add to a candidate's appeal.; May 30, 2008 1:41 AM
vwis said...: All,

Just noticed the time 12:40 ct. I guess I should sign off. I've got to get up with the kids at 6:00.

Alls well that ends well.; May 30, 2008 1:41 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: vwis-

You must have missed my earlier post - the one that said I haven't hardly been online today at all because of the flood in my bedroom.

I had a note on that post to you (I think) at this point I am not positive due to exhaustion.; May 30, 2008 1:42 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Yep it was at:

May 30, 2008 12:03 AM

.; May 30, 2008 1:44 AM
vwis said...: Leah,

I did notice your post about the flood. I liked the symbolism of it too. I meant in general, you post in the day, but sometimes at night also. So what about the sitcom?; May 30, 2008 1:46 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: vwis-

If it is in Italian it would be good ;)

The only thing usually that I ever watch in English is the news.

I guess if the American version it is hit then it could go International.

p.s. I am not a morning person so I am 'rarely' online before noon, to answer your question. I love my nights out here on the patio under the Texas moon with my laptop - there will be time enough to sleep after Obama is in the Oval Office :); May 30, 2008 1:50 AM
vwis said...: Leah,

It was at 11:37. I've already had people lining up for walk ons.; May 30, 2008 1:50 AM
suzihussein22 said...: gaffe-A blatant mistake

misspeak-To speak mistakenly

These and many other terms I am learning the nuances of.; May 30, 2008 1:53 AM
billyjay66 said...: jcaesar91

re seating MI-FL

Here's a different solution. Since they are required by rule I guess to seat no more than 1/2......seat the other 1/2 but not for the first ballot!!! Second ballot only. Then when the math easily shows that 2209+ is reached for Obama...game over. The math is there for everyone to see the second 1/2 will not help her AND she is not being cheated.; May 30, 2008 1:53 AM
vwis said...: Leah,

With you as one of its star how can it not be a hit. I'm sure it will be dubbed into every language. Aim big.; May 30, 2008 1:53 AM
Hippolytus said...: Leah Texas4Obama said...
"I think we should pronounce Yam's new name like this:

sto--poba--manow"
____________

Leah, if you rearrange the letters a different way, you get:
"Oba stop woman" ;); May 30, 2008 1:54 AM
Independent Voter said...: jcaesar91,

I personally have the feeling you are absolutely correct.

If she is successful in her division of the party as it appears that she has been, SHE and HER campaign have set WOMEN'S rights back by 50 years.

At least after 2012 New York won't even have to deal with her again. I have the feeling NOBODY will forgiver her OR Bill for the way they have run this campaign.; May 30, 2008 1:55 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: vwis -

Yes I did see that.
I will have to pass on being part of it though. After I am over my 'nomination race' obsession I will need to get back to my Italian studies.

If you get it on the air I will be sure to tune in every week!; May 30, 2008 1:55 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Hippolytus said: "Leah, if you rearrange the letters a different way, you get:
"Oba stop woman" ;)

__________

That is hillaryous!; May 30, 2008 1:58 AM
Independent Voter said...: Opps the word "forgiver" (I'm really not trying to make up words here) was supposed to be forgive as in NOBODY will forgive her or Bill......; May 30, 2008 1:59 AM
Independent Voter said...: leah, "That is hillaryous!"

------

PUN INTENDED!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL!; May 30, 2008 2:00 AM
vwis said...: ...and as he rose in the sky I'm sure I heard him say ... and a goodnight to all. I really need to go now its 1:00. Its been swell.; May 30, 2008 2:00 AM
Independent Voter said...: Ok, good night all.

Can't wait to see the 5-6 supers come out for Obama tomorrow.; May 30, 2008 2:02 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Great article - New York now likes Obama better than Hillary!

Poll: New York Dems Say Obama More Electable Than Clinton

http://tinyurl.com/4syqav

.; May 30, 2008 2:02 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Goodnight to those that are leaving or have already left ;)

.; May 30, 2008 2:04 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Since Betty Richie (TX) came out and endorsed Obama this evening, and since she was a member of the Pelosi Club that means that there are currently only 6 (SIX) members left in the club.; May 30, 2008 2:27 AM
tmess2 said...: I don't see how lifting the cap on the Social Security tax is a particularly liberal proposal. Currently, someone who makes $1,000,000 per year pays less than 1% of their income in Social Security taxes and someone who makes $5,000 per year pays 6.25% in Social Security taxes. Even a conservative can see that such a tax policy is unfair.

My hunch says that any solution to social security regardless of who is President will include lifting the cap. We are going to have to move away from the fiction that Social Security is an investment program. As an investment program, it doesn't get good returns on investment. It is intended to be a safety net and we need to be honest about that fact if we are to save it.; May 30, 2008 2:31 AM
Anonymous said...: Well I am up early so I will get on my little soapbox for a bit.

Tonight's Theme: It's All Relative

.....

Obama may be to the left of Clinton on some issues.

However, compared to the amount of things that they agree upon, the differences are pretty small.

In addition, the issues where Obama is to the left of Clinton are small potatoes compared to Clinton's position on universal health care, which from what I can make of it, will give the government control over both the demand side and the supply side of a huge portion of our economy.

.....

On the Sniper Fire issue, the difference between a gaffe and a misstatement is small compared to what the mistake highlights: that Hillary Clinton did not play a substantive role in her husband's administration.

If she had other examples to show that she was involved, the Sniper Fire error would have been a minor blip. Instead, since there are no other examples, it shows how much she was out of the loop.; May 30, 2008 5:34 AM
Amot said...: Update on the contest

Original questions:

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?

Results at the moment:
Obama +8, Clinton +2

RobH O+12, C+2
tmess2 O+12(15)
Leah O+10, C+1
Peter O+12, C+0
Amot O+10, C+0
MikeM O+10, C-1
greywolf O+8, C+1

Noone caught the double switch. Rob said no switches and is close to the expected result.

OR Dem,
PR should go O 25, C 30; May 30, 2008 7:31 AM
Mug said...: One thing that hasn't gotten a lot of attention other than jokes has been Hillary's Bosnia sniper fire story.

This is an embellishment of course but the real question here is why do people make embellishments. The answer isn't difficult. They do it to cover up their own percieved inadequacies or to create the impression that they are more virtuous than they really are.

The subject at the core of this fabled landing in Bosnia is to illustrate that she has more personal strength and experience than Senator Obama due to her activities as the First Lady while her husband was president.

The fact that she embellished this story shows that she, herself, doesn't believe that she is personally strong or very experienced. If she really believed she was, then she wouldn't need to embellish her stories.

I just wanted to point out that this is not just another lie from the mouth of Hillary Clinton but has much deeper meaning to the American people. She is a weak leader. Even she believes she's weak and therefore has tried to cover up that weakness with "big fish" stories.; May 30, 2008 7:43 AM
Dr. in Ann Arbor said...: OR dem - my yahoo e-mail is now up on my profile - go ahead and drop me a line.

StopOBAMA - "Therefore, quit calling me Yam.

I don't like name calling! I like serious discussions!

Stop ObaBush Now."
----------------------------------
You don't like name calling? Then how about using the man's given name? It's OBAMA, fool!

Leah - sorry 'bout your flood...remember to always have a fresh pair of dry socks - prevents the foot fungus.

Morning all!! Here's to another day of SD counting!!; May 30, 2008 7:45 AM
suzihussein22 said...: countjellybean-Top of the morning everybody. I don't think HRC realized people know how to look back through BOOKS and archives in the 21st century. She "underestimated" some of the hard-working people.

Amot-IMO, I'll personally expect Obama +7.4% based only on impressions. :); May 30, 2008 7:46 AM
suzihussein22 said...: I just heard on the radio that a street sign in SanFran is missing for good ole Bush St. lmao

"It could have something to do with his approval ratings."?!; May 30, 2008 7:53 AM
suzihussein22 said...: http://tinyurl.com/4rm924

Here's an article about why Obama has been successful with an interest statement from an HRC endorser.; May 30, 2008 8:18 AM
Amot said...: soft,
do you mean +7.4% victory for Obama in PR? I hope you are right and I am wrong :); May 30, 2008 8:33 AM
JayW said...: Does anyone hear that sound?

It is the sound of the noose tightening around HRC's campaign. Just a few hours left and it should be oficially ALL OVER.

Cry Hillary cry!!!! I cant wait to see the tears on TV with Bill in the background all Red-Faced.

Obama won with class!!!!; May 30, 2008 8:40 AM
Peter said...: Last stunt from Wolfson and Clinton-campaign is to blame the superdelegates. "this is become a superdelegate primary".

Well, lets look at that statement?
EVERY single argument by Clinton is based on seeking support from superdelegates, from her fake math regarding popular vote to her fake poll claim.

Obama has been ahead in the pledged delegate count the whole time, he would be ahead no matter how MI and FL is solved. I think the Clinton campaign is getting so desperate, I almost think its a bit cute.

As I said earlier this week, several Clinton supporters in the RBC are saying that we need i compromise. This shows that even though Clinton might not care much about the party, a lot of her supporters do.

I am willing to bet A LOT on a MI/FL solution where 75% agree on a solution, that means more than half of the clinton supporters and the rest. This would make Clintons case extremly weak and it would be almost impossible for her to take this to the convention. She would be politically dead if she does after a solution in RBC which is supported by most Clinton supporters there.; May 30, 2008 8:57 AM
ed iglehart said...: Kujo,

"This is where Bush screwed up. Not only was he not qualified, he made sure the people he brought on would listen to only what he said."

Actually, it wuz Cheney what done that.

While hearing folk swapping stories about who was against the war first, etc., I recalled my own reaction to 9/11. I was most struck by my fellow Americans' response of injured innocence and puzzlement that ANYONE could have any grudge against us, the "good guys".

Wendell Berry wrote the best response I have seen, and I had already taken one of his suggested roads:

"XXIII. We must not again allow public emotion or the public media to caricature our enemies. If our enemies are now to be some nations of Islam, then we should undertake to know those enemies. Our schools should begin to teach the histories, cultures, arts, and language of the Islamic nations. And our leaders should have the humility and the wisdom to ask the reasons some of those people have for hating us."

I subscribed to several news lists, including that of the (US) Muslim Students Association, and began reading as much news and opinion "from the other side" as I could manage.

The MSA list was open to submissions from anyone, and I contributed on several occasions. The editor had a most amusing habit of providing introductions, and THIS PIECE is excellent, as is the final part from F***thewar...

Here are some of my thoughts at the time with links to others.

I don't know whether y'all will consider this on or off topic, but there's always the possibility to scroll on....I do it for several of our regular contributors ;-)

Assalaam 'alaikum wa rahmatullaahi wa barakaatuhu
Peace, God's mercy and blessings be upon you

ed; May 30, 2008 8:58 AM
Unknown said...: Good morning everyone

--softspoken22

You beat me to that article.

So, I will put forth some of the points discussed in that article that I found interesting.
I apologize in advance for the long quotes, but I think they clearly show how unfounded some claims about the Dem primary system are flawed are:
"For people who want a campaign to end quickly, proportional allocation is a bad system," Devine said. "For people who want a system that is fair and reflective of the voters, it's a much better system."

Now, for those who claim that Clinton is the more experienced candidate, I will use this:
"Careful planning is one reason why Obama is emerging as the nominee as the Democratic Party prepares for its final three primaries, Puerto Rico on Sunday and Montana and South Dakota on Tuesday. Attributing his success only to soaring speeches and prodigious fundraising ignores a critical part of contest."
What's missing here, is albeit Clinton's experience, she didn't have a well-prepared strategy to win this thing. She was arrogant and that's exactly what's not gonna help us in international relations, when we will need to avoid catastrophies with our enemies... you need to understand the people you're dealing with (or against), and the system/culture they live in, to beat them at their own game!
Clinton didn't show to be capable of doing so, although she claims to be more experienced.
I guess it also sheds some light on what Obama meant by "Preparation."
He's done his homework.

Well, for those who claim experience is everything, I would say that experience is only worth something when couple with good judgment. If Clinton can't run a successful campaign based on a winning strategy, when everybody thought it was hers to lose, how can she run a country?

"Without a doubt, their (Obama's camp) understanding of the nominating process was one of the keys to their success," said Tad Devine, a Democratic strategist not aligned with either candidate. "They understood the nuances of it and approached it at a strategic level that the Clinton campaign did not."

I think I will let you read the rest without my foolish comments:)
"The Obama campaign was very good at targeting districts in areas where they could do well," said former DNC Chairman Don Fowler, a Clinton superdelegate from South Carolina. "They were very conscious and aware of these nuances."

But, Fowler noted, the best strategy in the world would have been useless without the right candidate.

"If that same strategy and that same effort had been used with a different candidate, a less charismatic candidate, a less attractive candidate, it wouldn't have worked," Fowler said. "The reason they look so good is because Obama was so good."; May 30, 2008 9:22 AM
dsimon said...: stopobamanow:

You missed my point. I did not assert that Reverend Wright and sniper fire were somehow equivalent. I was noting that both stories got far more attention than they warranted because the candidates have so little to differentiate themselves from each other.

You go in depth into Social Security proposals when the point of my post is that there aren't substantial differences between the candidates on MOST issues. Again, pointing out some disagreement on three issues (actually two out of three, since they're in general agreement on Iraq) doesn't refute the claim that they generally agree on most stuff.

As for the Social Security details, Clinton has proposed a "return to fiscal responsibility" but hasn't stated how she'd achieve that. You put forward a plan, but I haven't heard it from her. Vague claims of "fiscal responsibility" is not a plan. Everyone is in favor of fiscal responsibility, so that statement doesn't carry much meaning until it's backed up with specifics.

You also assert havoc if the wage tax cap is lifted, but I've heard such warnings of doom before; when Clinton and Congress raised taxes early in his first term, conservatives said it would kill the still-delicate recovery. It didn't. Too much taxation will inhibit growth, but it seems to me that the changes in marginal rates we've tinkered with in the past don't seem to be at those levels.

Anyway, my preferred solution is raising the retirement age stating for people in their mid-40s. As people live longer and healthier, it seems perfectly reasonable to ask people to wait a year or two before receiving Social Security benefits. That's how we helped preserve the system last time we addressed the issue in the 80s.

But again, the main point is that the candidates are far more alike on policy than they are different, and a few counterexamples don't refute that general claim.; May 30, 2008 9:26 AM
Peter said...: This was a bit of a shock to me. MS could be competitive. Polling in KS from SUSA yesterday showed him only 10 points behind. He is closer in MS with only 6 points behind. This just underline how important it could be to get a VP who attracts white-southerns and older voters.

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/mississippi/election_2008_mississippi_presidential_election; May 30, 2008 9:34 AM
dsimon said...: tmess2: We are going to have to move away from the fiction that Social Security is an investment program. As an investment program, it doesn't get good returns on investment.

I'm unclear about the meaning of this post, but ...

Social Security was never an investment program that provided "returns." Social Security taxes do not go into personal accounts with our names on them to be given back to us later. It is not a government-mandated personal retirement/savings program.

Today's taxes go out immediately to pay for today's retiree benefits. Present day workers pay for present day benefits.

There has been a surplus over the past few decades because the baby boomer generation swelled the workforce faster than the growth in the number of retirees. The government has been using these excess funds in other ways, but it will eventually have to pay the Social Security system back the money it will be owed.

The looming problem is that when the baby boomers retire, the situation will reverse will be more retirees and fewer workers to pay for benefits, and the system will run at a deficit. Another more chronic problem is that people are simply living longer and further increasing the retiree/worker ratio. This latter problem was solved in part in the 80s by gradually raising the retirement age.

But the crucial point is that SS is not an investment program, and never has been. It's a common misconception.; May 30, 2008 9:38 AM
ed iglehart said...: Jason & Softie,

Excellent article. The "preparation" points are, of course, appropriate in the matter of the disastrous Iraq adventure. HRC's failure to read even the grossly inadequate information provided before backing Shrub's war fever, is yet more evidence that "experience" may not educate.

Obama has been criticised for wanting to speak with our "enemies", but he has always stated the need for "preparation" rather than "conditions". Of course, those who shout "appeaser!" don't want to see that.

I can't help myself. I feel optimistic - not "for the first time in my adult life", but for the "first time in a long time."

;-)
ed; May 30, 2008 9:46 AM
Mug said...: Jason,

I believe experience to be highly over-rated. Experience can only enhance one's skill level at a particular job or task. A person with poor leadership skills after 30 years may have adequate leadership skills due to experience. However, someone else may have excelent leadership skills right out of college. Obama has proven that he can "play by the rules" and still play "hard ball." I think he'd be a tough negotiator on issues of foreign policy. That would be a welcome relief to the current foreign policy of "Do as I say or I'll kill ... err ... liberate you."; May 30, 2008 9:56 AM
RobH said...: vwis -

Sorry you took our exchange the other day as a nitpick. I simply viewed it as a brief exchange honing in on accuracy and an exchange of complete information.

I like your idea of a sitcom. I'm trying to come up with the right people to play the parts for two of our "irrepressible" posters: Aunt Jean, and Yam/stopobamnow.

Any ideas? Anybody?

Carol Burnett in her signature role? I don't know....; May 30, 2008 10:03 AM
vwis said...: Ed,

I agree. It has been a long time. I also, noticed that you and I dropped out of the blog about the same time. We than got back in about the same time. I know I felt that the Clinton type spin doctors just keep spinning until they get it their way as in the past. I am now hopeful that their time has come to an end. Its really Plato vs Aristotle. Reality is what you believe it is vs reality is what reality is.; May 30, 2008 10:10 AM
Mug said...: robh,

How about Stephen Root from office space in the role of StopYammeringNow?; May 30, 2008 10:12 AM
JayW said...: RobH...

I know who can play Yam/StopObamnow... that kid that played Corky on that old show "Life Goes On."

The kid should be older now and old enough to pass for Yam/StopObamnow.; May 30, 2008 10:14 AM
vwis said...: RobH,

I really didn't mind it that much, but the + 1 depends on which number you start from. MSNBC is more generous than this site. Even Yam only goes for 2208, +1. Hillary adds yet another one to be 2210. That's why I opt for the conservative number. If you give an inch they take a mile. That's the way I've seen it.

Actually, I was thinking Delta Burke for Aunt Jean. Yamaka, is actually a morph of Matt and Yoursi. Actually the stars would be new actors, ones that are not stereotyped yet. We would need a casting call for auditions.; May 30, 2008 10:22 AM
vwis said...: RobH and JayW,

The question is who would play you. Who do you perceive yourself to be like. You would not really get that star or the show would sink right off the bat due the wages of the big names. So who do you liken yourself to.; May 30, 2008 10:27 AM
vwis said...: So, I wonder who yam will pick? He is an alter ego after all. He probably be a meek, computer-geek type guy and yoursi also, a computer-geek of asian decent.; May 30, 2008 10:32 AM
vwis said...: One thing about the show it would cover all races, creeds and religions. It may have mass appeal due to it. They would definitely, needs my quirky writing style though. I don't see anyone else being able to pull it off, successfully.; May 30, 2008 10:35 AM
vwis said...: Dwit could be played by one those white-working class folk from Kentucky or West Virginia.

The other question is how many of you would watch it.; May 30, 2008 10:41 AM
vwis said...: I can get all of them their jobs back however, I can get one.; May 30, 2008 10:42 AM
apissedant said...: good morning everyone!!!
I have my iced espresso, and I already had a cancer stick, so I am happy.
I was trying to catch up and read everything, but I have a touch of ADHD, and got bored. I DID however notice people talking about Huckabee's tax. Well from what I remember, he proposed the fair tax.
I have been to fairtax.org and read a bunch of that garbage, and I even invited two of their spokesman to come and speak at a Democratic meeting a few years ago. It was enlightening. I was able to see exactly what happens when a bunch of idiots with business degrees get together and attempt to write a tax code.
It claims to be a 23% sales tax on only new goods. All second hand goods are not taxed in an attempt to prevent the dreaded double taxation. Each person gets a prebate every year of about 2300 dollars to cover the extra tax expenses on the basic needs for living.
The Truth: It is a 30% sales tax on all goods, the 23% is claimed using smoke and mirrors. If you make 130 dollars, and you pay 23% income tax, you are left with 100 dollars in buying power. If instead you make 130 dollars, and have to pay 30% sales tax, you effectively have 100 dollars in spending power.
It would replace our current IRS income assuming there was no prebate awarded, and everything that makes up the GDP was taxed, regardless of whether or not it had been taxed before. This is another smoke and mirror game, as it just calculates based off the GDP, and ignores the tax breaks that come with it.
Of course, we all know, as many have said, that it shifts the tax burden from the rich to the poor. The average American spends 105% of their income in any given year. The average extremely wealthy person spends a negligible percent of their total annual income.
Oh, lastly, Republicans love fair trade, which would probably mean the wealthy could simply buy their expensive goods overseas, and never have to spend a single cent on taxes for these items. But don't worry! The wealthy will of course reinvest their new found extra wealth in new American businesses. Those business will of course be employing people in India and Indonesia, but they'll have American in the title. Or they could just rename a town in India USA or something.; May 30, 2008 10:42 AM
apissedant said...: I pick Andy Dick for Yam.; May 30, 2008 10:45 AM
apissedant said...: I think Andy Dick would be perfect, because when he transforms into Sto Poba Man Ow he could just hold a silly mustache over his lip and wear a cowboy hat.; May 30, 2008 10:50 AM
apissedant said...: vwis!!!
You spelled then wrong! I can no longer take anything you say seriously. You said than, when then was OBVIOUSLY the right word. You have discredited and embarrassed yourself. Suicide is the only option.; May 30, 2008 10:52 AM
vwis said...: Amot,

It depends on how hard Hillary fights it. If it is perceive that she is not willing to compromise any or only agree to an overturn of the election I would say O +94 C -6

If she gives a little,

O +12 C +4

I think the RBC outcome will be FL at 50% of the vote in Jan. and Michigan will be 69-59 split agreed to by MI legislators, however, I think BO will comprimise for a more generous split maybe 74-56 just to show his willingness to deal fairly. If it a no by the Hillary camp, then I suspect you will see and avalanche. I wouldn't even be surprised to see BHO walkout of there with 169 SDs weighing in. That is if their smart and have the parties best interest in mind. Which I believe they do.; May 30, 2008 11:01 AM
apissedant said...: vwis,
Now you misspelled they're!!! Holy cow! It isn't their, it isn't possessive! How do you sleep at night?!?!?!? (I should cut back on the coffee); May 30, 2008 11:05 AM
vwis said...: Also, the MI 69-59 which will probably be negotiated to be 74-56 at 50%.

Remember the Dean criteria.

1. Fair to both candidates. They will not overturn the elections. Gains to the Clinton camp will not bring her too close ie. within 80.

2. Fair to both FL and MI. If one is at 50% than both at 50%. 50% is the best that the RBC can do. If full votes are counted then the states go unpunished and the DNC will have 2012 and every state calling early. The whole race will probably be over by March.

3. Fair to all the 48 other states. The states need to be punished. Caucuses count. Popular vote in MI cannot be measured. Exit polls more accurately, show those results.; May 30, 2008 11:13 AM
vwis said...: Apissedant,

I didn't sleep much last night. If you check my blog times, you would notice that. That explains why my spelling and grammar are least at par. I am not one to ever fault anyone else, only in jest. I don't drink coffee. I simply drink water and organic green tea. After all I am an elistist, I sleep fine because I feel other deserve what the get from me. They shouldn't be so disrespectful. LOL.; May 30, 2008 11:18 AM
JayW said...: Vwis... to answer your question...

I would like to be played by Ed Norton.; May 30, 2008 11:19 AM
vwis said...: Apissedant,

You have only now decided not to take my seriously. What are you smokin.

Yes, smokin, that was on purpose. Its slang for smoking.

While proofing I noticed I actually typed slant for slang. It took me 2 times to catch it. I really need more sleep.; May 30, 2008 11:26 AM
Anonymous said...: VWIS, while I agree with you about Florida, I don't think there's anyway they seat Michigan with full delegates according to their compromise. All that compromise does is to resolve Obama not being on the ballot. It does nothing to punish them for moving the primary they way .5 delegates punishes Florida. I think the Florida delegation would scream bloody murder if this happened.; May 30, 2008 11:27 AM
vwis said...: Hey, my visual verification just disappeared. Maybe "they're" giving me freedom of the board. Boy, could I have fun editing your stuff. Don't worry, just wear some "Depends". That should take care of it.; May 30, 2008 11:30 AM
vwis said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 30, 2008 11:33 AM
vwis said...: Every thing is not making much sense to me right now so I guess I'll sign off. It took me 2 times to just copy the word visual verification and I agree with Apissedant that my spelling and grammar are awful. The lesson here is: Don't operate on a blog with less than 4 hours of sleep and no breakfast or you'll be operating like Appissedant. LOL. Really no pun intended. Yeah, right.; May 30, 2008 11:40 AM
vwis said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 30, 2008 11:46 AM
vwis said...: Blog with you later. I'm even answering myself. I need to go.; May 30, 2008 11:52 AM
ed iglehart said...: Off Topic for sure, but this PISSES ME OFF!

GRRRRR!; May 30, 2008 11:59 AM
JayW said...: vwis,

I was referring to Ed Norton of movies such as "American History X", "Fight Club", "Primal Fear", and the new "Incrdible Hulk".

I think you are dating yourself.; May 30, 2008 12:20 PM
JayW said...: Norton to shop Obama documentary

Actor, Class 5 Films ready campaign feature

By MICHAEL FLEMING

Edward Norton and his Class 5 Films are prepping to shop a feature documentary about the historic presidential campaign mounted by Sen. Barack Obama.
Class 5 has engaged Endeavor partner Ari Emanuel and lawyer Andrew Hurwitz to make a distribution deal for a film the company is producing for release in 2009. Doc has financing in place from Good, Green Film Co. and Citi Prods.

Amy Rice and Alicia Sams are directing the as-yet-untitled pic. They began shooting footage before Obama’s declaration of candidacy to become the Democratic Party’s 2008 presidential nominee. Emanuel, who guided the sales of Sacha Baron Cohen’s pseudo-docs "Borat" and "Bruno," and the Michael Moore docs "Sicko" and "Fahrenheit 9/11," has been an outspoken supporter of Obama. The brother of Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) has organized meet-and-greets in Hollywood and hosted fund-raisers for Obama. Norton, a longtime Endeavor client, has also been a supporter, reportedly donating to Obama’s campaigns.
Norton said the motivation behind the film was not to glorify its subject. Its genesis came during a chat between Norton, his Class 5 partners Bill Migliore and Stuart Blumberg and the directors right after Obama raised his national profile with a memorable speech during the Democratic National Convention in 2004.

"We were all so struck by Barack’s speech and talked about how exciting it was to see someone from our generation, not our parents’, make his presence felt in such an inspiring way," Norton told Daily Variety. "It was akin to the way I remembered my dad describing how he felt when Kennedy gave his inauguration speech.

"At the time, he was the new senator from Illinois. None of us had voted for him or contributed to his campaigns. None of us was saying, ‘I want to back this guy for president.’ It was more this generational experience, of seeing someone we felt represented us in a very unique and fresh way, and the desire to explore what would happen to the first person our age who staked a claim to national leadership."

Doc’s production got under way before Obama began his presidential run in spring 2006. Norton and the directors approached Obama and he sparked to the film, first permitting Rice and Sams access on his 2006 trip to Africa. They’ve had cameras rolling since.

"Barack in particular just got it, what we were trying to do, and the trust factor we were able to build has been so helpful," Norton said. "His success has all kinds of filmmakers hammering at his team for access, and most have been denied. We really feel like we’ve caught lightning in a bottle.

"But the film has to say something about politics in America, and just because you have access doesn’t mean you have insight, Norton added. "A lack of material won’t be our problem, there are hundreds of hours of tape already. We’ve got to do the work "
Norton said the filmmakers will follow Obama through the duration of his White House run, so it’s difficult to set a timetable or budget tag at this point.; May 30, 2008 12:27 PM
jpsedona said...: vwis,

you said: "Huckabee doesn't promote a flat tax he promotes abolishing income tax. Don't ask me how the government would get their money. A tax by any other name is still a tax and still smells as foul."

Huckabee didn't support the flat tax. He supported the Fair Tax. The link: FairTax.org FAQ's

The basic premise is that the current tax system is higly regressive and disproportionate to lower income workers. This is related to not income taxes but income+payroll taxes.

Some aspects of the Fair Tax would be significantly beneficial. It eliminates significant hidden taxes that we all pay. I think it's never going to replace the current system because I don't know that very high income people end up paying proportionately the same as today.

Take a look at the Fair Tax, I'd be happy to discuss it.; May 30, 2008 12:30 PM
vwis said...: Jayw,

Sorry, I figure out who you meant later. I have seen them in reruns. My father use to enjoy them. Look at my 11:40 a.m. post to understand the confusion.; May 30, 2008 12:42 PM
vwis said...: Jayw,

Thanks. I deleted my comment to save me any further embarrassment.; May 30, 2008 12:48 PM
vwis said...: Guys,

I just saw on MSNBC someone is claiming to have video footage of an alien. Is this for real or do I need more sleep?; May 30, 2008 12:50 PM
stopOBAMAnow said...: Hello There:

Tomorrow is going to be a chaotic day in Washington DC.

The Committee members were advised to keep their Saturday night reservation at the Hotels. This suggests to me the verdict may come only on Sunday!

My sense is the Democratic Party is going to assert itself by punishing the victims and rewarding the villains: Most probably they will seat ALL delegates from MI and FL with 1/2 vote per D. All SDs will be seated fully. In MI the D proportion will be 70/55 ratio to HRC and BO.

The Hurdle is going to be closer to 2131 probably.

Yam will be mighty disappointed that it will not be 2209! I am eager to hear his angry words!!

American Electorate is keenly watching. The punitive instinct of the Party will be retaliated in kind by the American voters in the Fall.

Many of the ObaBush people think he has nearly won the Nomination and even the Presidency! Very funny!!

I want to remind them that in 2004, 121 million people went to polls in the Fall. So far ObaBush got only about 17 million votes.

If he is the Nominee, which I doubt seriously, he has to earn the support of the Clintons first to get her 17 million voters, then he has to position himself attractive to get at least another 25 million voters to be competitive with McCain. Even this 59 million votes will not be sufficient to win the WH because Kerry got this much and lost the Election by about 25 EVs!

My point is Sen Obama is very much like Gov Bush 7.5 years ago:

Young, good looking, giving fuzzy speeches like "compassionate conservatism", "I am a Nice Guy" "I will not be world's police man" "I will be humble in my foreign policy" etc.

You know what happened? America is in worst shape in the last 50 years, maybe!

W. Bush raised tons of money during the Primary, with which he stole the GOP Nomination.

Now Obama is doing the same thing.

Their inexperience and money scare me to death.

Therefore, I call Barack Obama ObaBush.

Stop ObaBush Now. To save America.; May 30, 2008 1:11 PM
JayW said...: Hey...stopobamanow/yam,

To make any sort of comparison between Bush and Obama is really just delusional thnking on your part.

You are seriously retarded arent you?

So sad.; May 30, 2008 1:20 PM
RobH said...: OK JayW,

Now I'll date myself, I have no idea who "Corky" is, or anything about the show "Life Goes On."

I'm 50, and my oldest kid is 17, and I'm guessing this show was somewhere in between, like early 90's maybe?

I know some folks in my studio in their 30's seem to reference this stuff, and it always strikes me as wierd that there's a whole subset of poular culture that I simply missed while I was buried in toddlers.

vwis - I'll have to think on a "low cost" option. For a visual, my boys say I looked alot like Ralph Macchio when I was younger (and he was younger), now I look like Michael Andretti.

Here's two offerings, neither cheap, I'd be honored to be portrayed by, for different reasons:

Christopher Walken, Jon Stewart.; May 30, 2008 1:25 PM
Oregon Dem said...: In the sitcom you guys are working on Yamaka (along with Sto Poba Man Ow) should be played by Rush Limbaugh.

Maybe Ann Coultier as Aunt Jean?

Amot should be played by Chuck Todd.

Leah should be played by Indy Car racer Danica Patrick as they both have a lot of spunk.

As for me - just get Dale Junior to play me.

Can you tell I do not watch alot of movies?

PS Does anyone know if the RBC will be televised? or is someone blogging from the site of the meeting?; May 30, 2008 1:46 PM
jpsedona said...: stopYAMMERINGnow,

Boy, Yam would be spitting up pool water if he was watching "option 5" closely. The lead has grown by 25+ this week based on uncommitted delegates.

Unfortunately, we've probably heard the last of Yam (unless he comes back to "officially" endorse McCain).

We won't get a chance for that explanation of 240 delegates not-breaking for Clinton. Or any rants on how the RBC is disenfranchising the voters in those states. Or, claims of a Hillary popular vote victory.

No, we've seen the last of the yammers bold statements, veiled racial comments and Houston weather forecasts.

Luckily, we have you to be the standard bearer!; May 30, 2008 1:47 PM
jpsedona said...: Oregon Dem,

I think Ferraro should play Aunt Jean... a perfect fit for a bitter feminist. (by the way, Ferraro has not ruled out the possibility of voting for McCain... sound familiar?); May 30, 2008 1:50 PM
Anonymous said...: OregonDem, I think the meeting is supposed to be on CSPAN; May 30, 2008 1:52 PM
Oregon Dem said...: Sto Poba Man Ow:

Aren't you just a little upset with the fact that your "main man" Yamaka is missing the Texas Democratic Party Convention?

Dang he is a Clinton delegate and if other Clinton delegates who are not so supportive of Senator Clinton as Yamaka is do not go to the convention as well then Senator Obama may just "steal" another delegate...

2008 Texas Democratic Party
State Democratic Convention
June 5-7, 2008
Austin, TX; May 30, 2008 2:08 PM
Mug said...: StopYammeringNow,

Comparing the numbr of voters in the 2008 primary to the number of voters in the GE is very poor logic. If you want a more realistic prediction of how the GE will go, look at campaign fundraising. Obama has raised about twice as much as McCain. Clinton has raised a little less than that. Registered democrates this year outnumber registered republicans by a ratio of 3 to 1. Thinking that any significant number of Clinton supporters are going to vote for McCain is a pipe dream. Please step away from the pipe. Worst case scenario is even if Clinton supporters stay home and don't vote, Obama's larger half of the Democrats still outnumber the republicans. I don't subscribe to the worst case scenario, however, so I see the vote total being more of a 65-35 split in favor of Obama.; May 30, 2008 2:11 PM
Hippolytus said...: Leah Texas4Obama said...

"Great article - New York now likes Obama better than Hillary!"
_________

So does California, according to recent polling. Hillary is turning people off with her continuing antics. It's going to be irreversible for her if it's not too late for her already.; May 30, 2008 2:28 PM
greywolf said...: Good Afternoon or shall I say nearly afternoon.

One would think that after Nancy and Reed made their call for everyone to start making their decisions known, that there would be a flood of endorsements today and this weekend. All leading up to the DNC meeting this weekend and the last three primaries. But it looks like it will still remain a trickle. Darn it any way.; May 30, 2008 2:57 PM
RobH said...: Oregon Dem,

I heard this morning that it will be covered by MSNBC as well, starting at 9AM EDT.; May 30, 2008 3:03 PM
RobH said...: I've read some speculation that if HRC's personal ambitions are thwarted by the RBC and the Democratic party at large, she may choose to mount a presidential campaign as an Independent.

I strongly beleive this will NOT happen. My belief rests on the idea that she IS (or they are) actually politically savvy after all (though the execution of her campaign tests that theory.)

Giving her credit for savviness, I believe she would properly forecast what would likely happen to her support over the summer; a massive and embarrasing drop off. As true Democrats abandon her to ensure a Democratic victory in November, she would be presented with unassailable evidence of just how narrow her "base" has really become. Being an egotist, she would choose not to endure that loss of face.; May 30, 2008 3:13 PM
RobH said...: Yeah, I'm imagining September Presidential polling that shows:

Obama (Dem) 46
McCain (Rep) 39
Clinton (Ind) 8
Barr (Lib) 6
Nader (WTF) 1; May 30, 2008 3:16 PM
Mug said...: Here's a blog that might interest you all about predatory lending practices in Ohio. Yes, I live in Ohio. After reading this blog, please consider that an amendment was brought to the senate floor in 2006 to prohibit predatory lending practices and it was rejected. At that time, Republicans had control of the Senate. Obama voted in favor of prohibiting predatory lending practices while McCain voted against prohibiting those practices. Entire neighborhoods in Ohio have been destroyed because of it. Vote for McCain? Are you out of your mind?; May 30, 2008 3:19 PM
Mug said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 30, 2008 3:25 PM
Mug said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 30, 2008 3:28 PM
Mug said...: I forgot to post the link to the blog. Its from buckeystateblog.com which is one of the blogs selected for the convention.

http://buckeyestateblog.com/
how_kirk_schuring_screwed
_slavic_village; May 30, 2008 3:30 PM
jean said...: Re Jayw

Everything is grow a set and using the word Retard.
The only way I can picture you is a fat eunuch with a very large head.
(Sometimes you just can't resist).; May 30, 2008 3:37 PM
jpsedona said...: RobH,

This could be Hillary's only real chance for the WH. Assuming Obama picks a VP that would want to run in 2016 after 2 terms; that individual would be a likely front-runner for the nomination. It would be a very simple argument portray Hillary in 2012 as "the past" (24yrs after Bill was first elected).

So, unless Obama loses in the Fall, this could be her only real chance. Although I think running could be politically suicidal, let's think about it a minute.

Consider this scenario:

= After the RBC & remianing primaries, she vows to take it to the convention.

= She torpedoes Obama by focusing on a convention fight.

= She announces at an appropriate point... several factors will influence this.

= She continues raises GE campaign funds (she has $20+ million right now) and pays off as much of her primary expenses as possible.

= If she can wait to announce after the convention, she starts a floor fight to rally her rabid followers. She loses the nomination and gives a 'sad' story speech at the convention.

= She announces she's going to give thought to her future.

= One week later, she announces an Independent bid... picks a moderate Republican VP choice for a true fusion ticket.

Obviously the main issue would be ballot access. Either she needs align with a party with a current slot on the 2008 ballot or meet the signature rules to get on the ballot. She would have the organization to get the signatures.

However, unlike Ross Perot, Nader, Buchanan and other recent candidates, Hillary would be the highest profile candidate to run. If she did run, she might establish her own party... if she were to take a number of high profile supporters with her, how would that change the political balance in Washington?

It could be a tremendous blow to the Dem party in the GE, but the dynamics of that 3 person race are fascinating.; May 30, 2008 3:44 PM
Amot said...: OR Dem,
I don't want to be played by Chuck Todd :) Can I get someone without moustache? Short hair, no beard.; May 30, 2008 3:56 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: jpsedona -

And then what?

The Dem Senators and Reps that are supporting her now would have to denounce and reject her if they don't want the party to turn against them.

Then Hillary would have basically only have the 60+ feminist women supporting her and some pockets of the Hispanic vote.

She wouldn't have the DNC supporting her in her General Election run - they would be then doing everything in their power to see that she loses.

I don't see how she could win by running as an Independent - please enlighten me further :)

.; May 30, 2008 3:57 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Amot -

Thanks for posting the info on what the tally is for our 'how many SDs before the RBC decision'.

------

OBAMA '08; May 30, 2008 4:00 PM
jean said...: jpsedona

The husband came in reading the blog a couple of days ago and was laughing his ass off.
The question was "Since when do you associate with a bunch of groupies?"
" I went on tour for 20 years and you never had any desire to deal with people like that"
The husband is an independant and said he would vote for Obama over McCain.
He said he is waiting for Obama's
past to implode or if the Obama followers are going to do it for him.
Hate never got anyone anywhere that was worth going to.
jpsedona
You say HRc's rapid followers?
Look in your own backyard.
I really do not think you want any type of unification of the Dem Party.
You want absolute control.
Welcome Mr. McCain.
yes, this is jean not Aunt Jean; May 30, 2008 4:04 PM
vwis said...: OregonDem:

MSMBC will be covering the RBC meeting on Saturday. They have a blog link, too. Also, I believe CSPAN is covering it according to Leah.

By the way, the members of the RBC have been warned to prepare to spend the night. They expect it to carryover. I personally wouldn't be surprised if they don't actually wait to announce their finally decision after June 3. I think they would like to see Obama reach 2025 by way of the voters. The avalanche of support of SDs would follow. Then if the number changes perception of the public will be that he won. Therefore he would get most of the remaining endorsements to put him over the top. Hillary's arguments (ie: popular vote with exclusions of caucuses and WA, but include the beauty show in MI) will probably fall on deaf ears.; May 30, 2008 4:10 PM
jpsedona said...: Leah,

I didn't she would win. But the scenario would be interesting.

Most third party candidates are grassroots organizations. She would lose the support of many, but maybe not all, of her colleagues in DC.

Some people will ONLY vote for the party candidate (Dem or Rep). But the largest block of voters are independents. If she slides to the middle, she could stand a chance. Obama would need to solidify his base if Hillary mounts an independent campaign. McCain is still rebuilding with the right wing.

I would tend to think she would come in third in the GE, but interestingly, I think she could possibly win some states and throw the election to the House of Reps... it would possibly only take a few states.

For political junkies, it's an interesting speculation (although unlikely).

If she feels that 2008 is her ONLY shot, then running as a third party might be her only chance at this point. It would also let her prepare to run again in 2012 independent of who wins in the Fall.; May 30, 2008 4:10 PM
Amot said...: Leah,
in the morning I was thinking that O+12 will be the most probable outcome, but with no endorsements today and with Sunday and Saturday usually lazy, I think you are in the best position :)
Though I am not sure if we should count the double switch - IMHO that person does not deserve to be super...; May 30, 2008 4:12 PM
jean said...: I now apologize to all eunuchs and especially to anyone who is retarded. I promise never to compare you to Jayw and I am very sincere in this apology.
You contribute wonderful things to our society and I again apologize.
I let myself get dragged down into a black hole of uglyness which I will do my best to avoid in the future.; May 30, 2008 4:17 PM
vwis said...: OregonDem;

Actually, I can see it now. Obama claims victory on June 3 and again by June 26 after all the add-ons have weighed in and the bar has been raised.

Hillary refuses to concede.

One of the things early on in the election the irked me about Hillary was that she did not phone and concede on SC and a couple other states. Obama had clearly won, but no phone call came from Hillary. It is just protocol. In Washington, especially foreign relations its all about protocol. Where I come from we call that a sore loser.; May 30, 2008 4:18 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: It would be an interesting scenario.

But given the fact that HRC is already in huge debt and her grassroots support is not as solidified in 'all 50 states' like Obama's is - she would have to have TONS of more money to run an Independent campaign.

I think that maybe Chelsea would step in at that point and tell HRC that she doesn't want her inheritance flushed down the drain ;)

.; May 30, 2008 4:18 PM
jpsedona said...: Jean (anti-aunt-jean),

I do not like Hillary (too Nixon-like to suit me).

Obama or McCain would be a significant improvement of GW or Hillary. Tell me that things wouldn't be better today if McCain or Gore had won in 2000 instead of GW.

As a political junkie & historian, I am here for the math and like the political dog fight. So, a Dem convention fight ... I'm all for it. A Repub convention fight ... all for that too. An election that goes to the House ... good with me.

As far as wanting absolute control... 'absolute power corrupts absolutely'...; May 30, 2008 4:28 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: One thing about a Hellery run as an Independent - she would not even be on the ballot in Ohio, if I understand the Ohio law correctly.

Ohio law sates that if you are a candidate in a primary, you cannot be on the General Election ballot for that same office under the banner of another, or no (running as an Independent), party.

I'm not sure if federal law even addresses this. If not, the Ohio law would seem to have precedence. I remember in 2006, one of the Republicant candidates for office (a House seat, I think) lost the primary, and there was talk of them running as an Independent, but the Ohio law interfered. Also, it was discussed that Connecticut didn't have such a law, which would have saved us from Lie-bermann winning the Connecticut Senate race after being defeated in the primary, then running as an Independent in the GE.

Anyone know anything about this in better detail?

Mike; May 30, 2008 4:28 PM
Amot said...: Well, Hillary has negative chance to become a President if she runs as Independent. She can't win any state except for maybe Arkansas. But she will commit a political suicide. She will lose her Senate seat and most probably asked to leave the Democratic caucus before that. The name Clinton will be remembered in the Dems history as the biggest internal enemy the party ever had.; May 30, 2008 4:35 PM
jpsedona said...: Leah,

As far as money is concerned, she has $20 million for the GE. She wouldn't be eligible for Federal matching funds up-front. However, if she gets 5% of the Presidential vote, she would be rewarded it retroactively.

By running in 2008, should she run on a party line, then that party would be guaranteed matching funds for 2012. A good reason why an existing third party would be willing to make her their candidate.

As far as raising more money, that knowing she would be in it throught the GE might help pay-off her primary debts (since her zealots would know she's in it through the GE).

Can you see a Presidential debate that excludes Hillary running as a third party???; May 30, 2008 4:35 PM
Amot said...: Mike,
I heard such a law exist in several states, not just Ohio, I read an article about that, but can't remember when... If I find it I will provide you a link :); May 30, 2008 4:39 PM
jpsedona said...: Mike,

The ballot access laws in each state differ.

In Ohio, the Court's overturned the Ohio law for ballot access based on a suit brought by the Libertarian Party. Ohio was going to appeal the decision but I don't know what happened to the appeal.; May 30, 2008 4:41 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: vwis,

One of the reasons they told people to prepare to stay overnight is that National Airport stops flights out at 11:00 pm. They might have wanted everyone to be prepared to have the discussions go as long as necessary, instead of having an artificial 7-8:00 pm 'barrier' to close the meeting.

That seemingly early 'barrier' would be for the RBC members to close the meeting, get through hotel check-out, get a cab to the airport, get through check-in, and get on the flight. Add in that last flight to some destinations are as early as 8:30 or 9:00, and a closing of the meeting at 7:00 might be pushing it.

Of course, some might go through Dulles or BWI, but those airports are 35 miles West and North (respectively) of DC, and few would probably choose to go to them for flights home.

Mike; May 30, 2008 4:42 PM
jean said...: jpsedona
Please!!!!!!!!!!!!
jean
When I want to be somebodyelse I will tell you.
You know I like HRC. I do believe she is the best choice.
I know that Obama will get the nomination. There is no way anyone is going to piss off the AA at this time in history.
My question is why so many Obama supporters, who know that he will win, degrade HRC supporters of which they need to win the election in November.
The only thing I can assume is that they have no foresight.
This is gonna get rough.
Is there a possibilty that they all belong to the same church as Obama?
This is a fairytale to what is going to happen.
Perhaps the best way to discribe it is absolute ignorance?; May 30, 2008 4:42 PM
Bull Schmitt said...: Idle speculation aside, it's too late to get on the November ballots, much less organize a third-party challenge at this late stage of the game. Even if Sen. Clinton were to convince one of the minor parties to let her head their ballot (may I recommend the National Socialist Workers' Party), some states have a "Sore Loser" law (he he) that prohibits defeated primary candidates from re-appearing on the general election ballot.

And a shoutout to stopOBAMAnow (Yamalamadingdong) - how's that delegate math lookin' for you today, buddy?

:-); May 30, 2008 4:45 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: I read an article too.
But I can't remember what state they were talking about at the time.

It was called the 'sore loser rule' I believe.

.; May 30, 2008 4:46 PM
Anonymous said...: I believe a few states also have a "sore loser" rule prohibiting someone that lost in another primary to be on the ballot in the General Election.; May 30, 2008 4:48 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Sore Loser Statute

Only four states maintain that their “sore loser” laws apply to president: South Dakota, Mississippi, Ohio and Texas. After LaRouche won in court against Ohio in 1992, Ohio amended its “sore loser” law in 1993 to specifically apply to presidential candidates. No precedents have been set in Mississippi or South Dakota. In Texas, unfortunately, in 1996 the Constitution Party filed a lawsuit against Texas to get a ruling that the “sore loser” law doesn’t apply to president. The federal judge who got the case, James Nowlin, refused to enjoin Texas’ interpretation that the “sore loser” law does apply to president. The denial of injunctive relief is reported as US Taxpayers Party v Garza, 924 F Supp 71 (1996).

http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/01/12/sore-loser-laws-dont-generally-apply-to-presidential-candidates/; May 30, 2008 4:49 PM
Naiomi said...: I think some of you are being mean spirited with all of this sitcom casting. Would you want anyone to associate you with your comments on a second read? Please think of the candidates you support and try to emulate what you believe they stand for.

I understand you are just trying to have a little fun in what is becoming a monotonous campaign season but I believe (and I know this is my opinion and you aren't obligated to listen to me)that we should only pick on ourselves and those that are close to us in good fun.

What are we going to do when we have a candidate and have months to fill before we can vote the moron out of office?; May 30, 2008 4:50 PM
jpsedona said...: Amot,

you said: "Well, Hillary has negative chance to become a President if she runs as Independent. She can't win any state except for maybe Arkansas. But she will commit a political suicide. She will lose her Senate seat and most probably asked to leave the Democratic caucus before that. The name Clinton will be remembered in the Dems history as the biggest internal enemy the party ever had."

Everything you say may be true. But she would be the first significant female Presidential candidate on the ballot.

Although I think the chances of her running as an independent is signficantly smaller than her chance of winning the Dem nomination at this point, I think the dynamics in several states could be interesting. I think that the thought has crossed her mind; but if she can't win the GE, there's no chance of her running.

But if she did decide to run for some bizzare reason, I do think that she could be competitive in a few states (Arkansas, outside chance in NY, maybe a NE state, maybe even PA or OH).; May 30, 2008 4:54 PM
jean said...: naiomi,
How the heck are you?
I agree.
To get the Dems in it will take a unified attempt.
At this point and time i do not see it.
Obama won.
He cannot win just with his supporters.
My kids play sports and know not to kick someone when their down.
That kid might be on a team later with them and noone wins when someone is a jerk.
It seems many people have lost their common sense and forget the goal is the GE.
That is a long way away.
jean; May 30, 2008 4:59 PM
jpsedona said...: If you have an interest in the latest in ballot access laws / news, try: www.ballot-access.org; May 30, 2008 5:03 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Leah Texas4Obama said...
Sore Loser Statute

Only four states maintain that their “sore loser” laws apply to president: South Dakota, Mississippi, Ohio and Texas.

Leah,

I saw that too after Bull stated the "sore loser law" in his post and I did a Google search.

The article you cited is wrong, as further research shows that Maryland also has a 'sore loser law' as explained at:
http://www.votelaw.com/blog/archives/004482.html

The Maryland 'sore loser law' was on the books in September, 2006, so the ballot-access.org page, written in January, 2007, was not at all well researched, and thus puts grave doubt on whether it should even be considered.

BTW - Giannetti lost in the General Election to his primary election rival.

Mike; May 30, 2008 5:05 PM
stopOBAMAnow said...: "Obama's larger half of the Democrats still outnumber the republicans. I don't subscribe to the worst case scenario, however, so I see the vote total being more of a 65-35 split in favor of Obama."

mug:

Thanks for your reply.

What larger half of the Dems are you referring to?

Sen Clinton has 17,650,671 votes most of ALL votes cast so far.

Yes, the no. of voters going for McCain now is smaller than that goes to Dems.

But remember, there are about 50 million plus voters who have not participated in the Primaries, but they will vote in the GE.

My sense is these voters are largely moderates like me and Yam. They look for clear evidence of good character, credibility, judgment AND experience in the Candidate who CAN turn the economy around, solve the War in Iraq and secure the country from foreign enemies.

To me Sen Obama has serious flaws in character, judgment and credibility, AND experience:
Tony Rezko, pastor Wright and Ayers are ALL serious issues of his poor character, judgment and credibility.

On Experience he IS like the very weak W. Bush in 2000, who in a way "invited" the 9/11 attacks because of his sheer incompetence.

Most of the White women, working and older and Latino Americans do NOT like his elitistic "bitterness" comment. They are running away from him.

Who is with Sen Obama? Most of Blacks, college kids and "ill-educated affluent" Whites who are basically anti-women and anti-Clinton crowd, as Yam used to write very eloquently.

Sen Obama is very dangerous to America.

Stop ObaBush Now
_______________________________

Guys:

McClellan is like George Stephanopolis who wrote a scathing book on the Clintons.

Turn coats are there everywhere!

Do we need to talk about Sen Obama's cocaine habit now? McClellan talks about W. Bushe's cocaine habits! There again Obama and Bush share some common habits!

It seems Obama has smoked as many as 70,000 cigarettes since he started his College days at Oxy, LA.
Will this affect his thinking capacity? Maybe.

Sen Obama is very RISKY.

Now another of this pastor friends Mike Pfleger, a friend of Wright has opened the wound of hatred and bigotry in Chicago at TUCC.

Pfleger/Wright rhetoric has lots of legs to go, stay tuned.

Stop Obama Now.

He is InExperienced and Risky for America.; May 30, 2008 5:11 PM
jethrock said...: Podemos Con Obama

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuXqy40F4Co

www.PodemosConObama.com; May 30, 2008 5:12 PM
RobH said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 30, 2008 5:26 PM
greywolf said...: Current polls provide the following information in regards to the two candidates.

National GE Polls released by CNN today poll of polls:

Obama 54
Clinton 40
Other 6

And Clinton claims she is more electable, by who's standards or by what fuzzy math book.; May 30, 2008 5:27 PM
RobH said...: Mug,

Where in Ohio?

My brother's been out there since he went to BGSU on a track scholarship in '74.

Lived in BG, Urbana, Bellefontaine, Springfield, and Dayton.

Been all over that too many time to count. Where you from?; May 30, 2008 5:28 PM
Amot said...: JPS,
if she runs as Independent (major problems to get on the ballot in each state) or Minor Party candidate (and get associated with that party), she will be the first viable female candidate for President. But her chance is close to zero in all west states and all states with 5% or more black population. The young voters, the black voters and most male voters will stick with Obama, she can get some female voters from all classes and some male blue collars. That means she has some chance only in the states she won big - Arkansas, Kentucky and West Virginia. PA, OH, NY and the other states she won by less than 10% have significant black and upper class vote. She can do favor to Obama if she runs as Independent in WV, KY and AR, because she can win those satets if Obama does not campaign there. I actually proposed such a crazy theory months ago in Feb when she effectively lost the nomination. I wrote that such an act will create extra insurance for the Dems, because even if Obama fails to reach 270, McCain will most probably fail too. That is why I started the question about election of the President by The House instead of the Electoral college. Call me crazy, but if she wants to work for the party she has to put her name on the ballot in those three states and in those three states only!; May 30, 2008 5:28 PM
RobH said...: Amot,

What an interesting proposal!

PS, don't hand the award to Leah, yet. I'm thinking there may be some out of the ordinary endorsements tomorrow, to sort of reinforce the meeting. (Call me optimistic.) Plus, so far, I'm the only one that got HRC right....; May 30, 2008 5:33 PM
Amot said...: RobH,
if we get two switches tomorrow, Leah and I will be in the best position :) But you still have your chances, I admit that and you were the only one to predict no switch in favor of Obama; May 30, 2008 5:36 PM
greywolf said...: Jethrock, that was a very nice youtube video. If I got the jest correctly, they should play it in PR over and over again as an add.; May 30, 2008 5:36 PM
jpsedona said...: Amot,

Setting aside from the practical aspects of ballot access for a moment (suspension of disbelief), her key to 'winning' in a three way race would be to:

1) Stop McCain from reaching 270
2) Coming in ahead of Obama

Bill only had 43% of the popular vote in 1992; she'd only need to do that in selected states so that no one has the 270 needed. If in a 3-way race, she & Obama can hold McCain to under 200. And if she could come out ahead of Obama in EV's, it goes to the House.

Under that scenario, the state delegations might be hard pressed to choose Obama if he's third in EV's; so do they pick McCain or Hillary?; May 30, 2008 5:42 PM
greywolf said...: too many what if's going on in here today. I guess I will stop by later to see what is what. Hopefully an endorsement or two will come in tonight.; May 30, 2008 5:48 PM
Meg said...: Here's a fun website for predicting the outcome of the GE. It sort of brings into question the definition of "swing state".

http://tinyurl.com/5k6r9d

No SD's today??; May 30, 2008 5:55 PM
Keryl said...: Okay, first of all Jean, you've been a good hearted poster, are you really going to let a few fring postings sour you on any candidate. If that were the case, no one would ever vote for anyone. Don't let the blogosphere fool you and keep your eyes on how the candidates act, and not how random supporters who aren't chosen by the candidates act. By that token I think all three candidates still in the race can be looked at as respectable people who are trying to do what they think is best for the country.

And for those who respect Clinton, and believe her to be honest, do you not believe her when she says that she will do everything she can to make sure a democrat is in the WH even if it's not her? I don't think she's as petty and bitter as a lot of people make her out to be. She's shown a lot of maturity as a senator, and I think she will support Obama wholeheartedly, once he's the actual nom.

And not just because she's nice, but because she'll wield tremendous power if she does. She could be the next Supreme Court Nom, she could be in the Cabinet. I don't think President is the only job she would ever aspire to.

Are Clinton supporters only Clinton supporters if she's winning, or will they follow the will of their candidate through the GE?; May 30, 2008 5:55 PM
Amot said...: JPS,
If it is three way run, McCain will win PA, MI, FL, OH and many more that he could never win if Dems vote is united. He can even get CA! So, I believe both your points are extremely hard to happen - Dems will vote for the official candidate in larger numbers than they will for a refugee and the split will give McCain the edge. McCain will be in Bill's 1992 position, not Hillary.

I an perfect world with two brilliant candidates they should run each alone in the states he/she is more likely to win and the one with the most votes will meet the GOP candidate at the floor of The House, or win the majoriry of EV of course. Such a scenario needs Dem House as it is now or better :)

Jethrock, the youtube video is awesome, I even rated it, something I do on very rare occasions :); May 30, 2008 5:56 PM
tmess2 said...: Right now, while I would like 3 or 4 last minute unpledged endorsements for pride of place, I am really only waiting to hear from one unpledged delegate before tomorrow's meeting (or in an affidavit submitted to the RBC for the meeting) -- Senator Joseph Biden. I don't even need a full-fledged endorsement, I just want some response to the suggestion of staff counsel regarding "sharing" the uncommitted delegates. If he waives any object to Obama controlling the candidates for those slots, the meeting could be over by 3 (and except for some dissenters who actually work for the Clinton campaign -- and isn't that a conflict of interest) with most of the 30 members supporting the half-votes for everyone, seat all the delegates based on the results, position.

p.s. Why hasn't anyone in the main stream media gotten a comment from Edwards, Richardson, and Biden about the "share" the uncommitted suggestion? That would seem to be a big detail to know about in advance of the meeting.; May 30, 2008 6:00 PM
Naiomi said...: Jean, I'm doing just fine thanks. I'm a little shy and don't post much but just because I'm an avid Obama supporter doesn't mean I can't see the big picture. I was just so disappointed and disheartened when Bush was anointed president in 2000...I want Clinton supporters to be able to wholeheartedly support Obama eventually. I don't know if that even makes any sense.; May 30, 2008 6:03 PM
greywolf said...: Not even thinking about tomorrow RBC meeting. After PR, MT and SD votes are in; Obama will need the following

worst case: 4 more sd
best case: 2 sd
If darn lucky: 0 sd

This is only to reach the 2026#, after the RBC meeting; he will need an additonal 86 if they go the way I think; May 30, 2008 6:09 PM
Keryl said...: Naomi, makes perfect sense. I was sick to my stomach when I found out Bush had been reelected. I was in a funk for weeks. Even if Clinton somehow pulls this out (and I'm an avid Obama supporter), this party must, must, must come together.; May 30, 2008 6:13 PM
jpsedona said...: Folks,

Since everyone has their projections for tomorrow's RBC meeeting, I'm going to throw out an option not covered, as best as I know.

I think there's a limited chance of this happening, it's one of the few lotto number not picked.

First, FL gets seated in accordance with the primary, all delegates with 1/2 vote.

Based on my reading of the legal briefs by DNC & Clinton, I don't think the RBC will be able to seat Michigan based on the 69-59 proposal.

I don't think the RBC has the power to allocate the "uncommitted" delegates in MI under the rules. It seems that the uncommitted delegate selection process by the state parties is a grey area.

Without being able to address uncommitted delegates, the RBC has two choices:

1) indicate that the MI primary was invalid contest representing the will of the voters (MI gets zero pledged delegates).
2) they agree with the election results and uncommitted being uncommitted.

IMO, MI is more culpabale in this mess than FL Dem officials. To minimize the adverse effects of giving Obama zero guaranteed delegates, perhaps they penalize MI by reducing each delegate's vote to 1/4 (75% reduction).

In MI, that would give Hillary 18.5 delegate votes; and there would be 13.75 uncommitted votes at the convention. Split the 13.75 four ways, let the candidates who withdrew get equal uncommitted delegates. Richardson and Edwards would approve delegates that would support Obama; who knows about Biden. But in this case Obama would end up with about 10.25 delegate votes. Hillary net 8.25 delegates.; May 30, 2008 6:16 PM
Amot said...: tmess,
when I read the proposal I had a strange thought in mind - what if Sen. Obama goes at the meeting with 3 papers signed by the other non-ballot candidates, giving him the power to vet the uncommitted slate if a proposal for shared vetting power by the four is accepted. Biden will not endorse before June 3rd or even later, but from his statements I think he will definetely support such action!; May 30, 2008 6:16 PM
suzihussein22 said...: Amot-Sorry, I meant to say 7.4% in favor of HRC in PR.

RobH-I like Christopher Walken better. But I still think Stewart is funny.

JayW-Do you have the testicular fortitude to tell anybody to grow a set?:)

graywolf-IMO, the pledged delegates should have a chance to make up the remaining at this point instead of SDs.; May 30, 2008 6:33 PM
Amot said...: soft,
7.4% is fine, but the difference between 2% and 15% is just one more candidate for Obama. Of course, if the vote is equally spread.

Hey, I am still waiting for a replacement of Chuck Todd for my part :); May 30, 2008 6:41 PM
jpsedona said...: Amot,

I like your thoughts on the uncommitted...

It's possible that the RBC punts and tells MI that they need to make uncommitted delegate selection that reflects the 'will of the voters'.

If they were to do that, one method would be to use the national polling average on 1/15. At that time, Hillary was at about 43%, Obama around 32%; I would estimate that Edwards would then have been about 20%, Richardson 4% & Biden 1%. If that's the case, using the normal 'threshhold' for getting delegates, Richardson & Biden wouldn't have won any delegates in MI. That leaves just Obama & Edwards to split delegates.

So knowing that both Edwards & Richardson have endorsed Obama, and Biden wouldn't have scored any delegates, maybe they will argue tomorrow that Richardson & Edwards will allow Obama to select the uncommitted...; May 30, 2008 6:43 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: I all know is that Senator Obama is pretty darn good at learning the rules of each game and then using them to his advantage. Example: His Illinois races.

If there is anything in the rules that he can use to his advantage at the RBC he will know what they are and how to use them.

I am sure the lawyers on both sides have been going over everything with a fine tooth comb during the past several months.

OBAMA '08; May 30, 2008 6:44 PM
apissedant said...: jpsedona,
I wrote a rather long post on fairtax prior to you posting. It is around 3100. Fairtax is not what you think it is. It does not work like you think it is, and it is not for the people you think it is for. To give you an example, Bill and Hillary Clinton paid a grand total of 31% of their adjusted total gross income. The fairtax is 30% of their spending. They spend much less than they earn, which can be shown by the 20 million available to be given to her campaign. Their tax would be reduced to less than 10% of their income.; May 30, 2008 6:58 PM
Amot said...: JPS,
I studied the rules. Unfortunately one can not base allocation due to assumptions like poll results. Nor on State Committee decision. Only allowed metrics are primary/caucus results or nothing. Since MI wants their delegation seated they must propose formula based on both the Jan results and nothing ~ equal split. Lawyers said that in such case penalty must be imposed, but IMHO it should cover only the allocation numbers, based on the primary results, so I suggested 50 (18+32) Clinton, 46(14+32) Obama is also a possible variant. Lawyers made a very strong case that uncommitted slate can be vetted and the possible vetting committee should consist of the four non-ballot candidates. RBC can rule to give the uncommitted to the four as whole and they will most probably agree to transfer all the power to choose the delegates to Obama. On the other hand since a complex formula will be used, the CD pledged from the uncommitted slate will be vetted post factum and if Obama wants he may revoke a re-caucus in some dictricts (9th comes immediately in my mind). I believe that will be the decision plus 100% supers vote.; May 30, 2008 7:01 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Keryl,

I find it very unlikely that Senator Clinton will not back Senator Obama after he gains the nomination. There are two sets of questions I have about that support, and the second set depends on the the answers to the first:

1. With how much enthusiasm will Senator Clinton back Senator Obama? Will it be obvious that she is backing him, but retaining a 'sore loser' attitude? Or will she genuinely support him?

2. How many of her more hard-core backers will see, or think they see, a lack of genuine support from Senator Clinton towards Senator Obama's campaign, and how will that determine how they vote in the GE, or if they even vote? If they vote, will they skip the Presidential line and just vote down-ticket? Will they vote for McSame and other non-Democratic candidates in 'retribution' for Senator Obama gaining the nomination?

The earlier the date that Senator Obama wraps up the nomination, the sooner Senator Clinton and her supporters can start their healing process of losing the nomination battle, and then begin the campaign to elect a Democratic President, regain the majority in the Senate, and increase the majority in the House.

If the nomination battle is extended for any length past mid-June (meaning Senator Clinton needs to concede by that date), then I see a lot of Senator Clinton supporters who will retain a 'bitter' opinion, and not follow Senator Clinton's lead in backing the campaign of Senator Obama.

Mike; May 30, 2008 7:02 PM
greywolf said...: Amot, I hear you but I do not think Obama will do as well in PR as everyone thinks. I would venture he will recive 22 at the most and 20 at the least. SD has a better chance of being a tie than MT. Who knows for sure. But I still think he will need at least 2 more SDs after the last primary if everything remains as is with endorsements. Just my opinion.

AMOT Your last idea as to how it will go is exactly how I see it happening.; May 30, 2008 7:08 PM
greywolf said...: sorry, the first part of that last comment was for Soft.; May 30, 2008 7:10 PM
apissedant said...: greywolf,
what do you base PR on? Do you have some crystal ball you could loan the rest of us?; May 30, 2008 7:10 PM
greywolf said...: The only way Obama would do any better in PR is if they took that YouTube video I saw earlier and played it every few hours on PR TV and radio. Now that would have some real impact.
But having spent a lot of time in PR in my younger years. Clinton going to the bars, drinking and dancing with the guys, she sealed the deal at that point in time. Of course everytime she has done that she won.; May 30, 2008 7:13 PM
Amot said...: Mike,
I believe she will not back him with open heart, nor she will help him in the campaign. Anyway many of her supporters, the bitter and the bittest groups will not follow Obama even if she endorses him, because they will think she was forced to and will hate Obama even more. But they will either skip or vote Barr or Nader. Less than 10% of her sore loser voters will vote McSame. But about 50% of her blue-collars will vote for him. That is why Obama needs to either find a VP that can charm and regain that group, or organize a very strong campaign with Rendell, Casey and the other Dem leaders with strong appeal to those voters. Also if Bloomberg doesn't run it will help Obama. It looks like GOP will face major problem with third party candidates than the Dems.; May 30, 2008 7:14 PM
greywolf said...: apissedent... I lived in the miami area for 5 years, and worked in PR a lot. SO I know the mindset down there. So do the clintons, If they go to a few bars have a few drinks, shake their booties a few times with the locals, they will be a shoe in. Everyone will go home and talk about how great they are, their friends, famlies.. ect. It is a very tight knit society down there, they all play follow the leader.; May 30, 2008 7:16 PM
Amot said...: Greywolf,
it [PR comment] also applies to me because I predicted 25 Obama, 30 Clinton based on the latest poll. He is running ad, a good one but not as strong as the video on youtube. But the video is 3:14 minutes long. However he can buy 10 minutes tomorrow and run it 3 times :)

In PR anything is possible. The turnout will be low and all can change a lot. Plus there is always a chance he puts street money in play and wins :); May 30, 2008 7:19 PM
greywolf said...: The eldest member of the family says.. they all do the same and follow suit. Its a line of respect that you just dont cross down there with in the family and social groups.

I recruited Nurses for the Army out of Puerto Rico for 5 years. I got to know the way they think and do things very well. If I a young nurse wanted to go into the Army, all I had to do is go to the local family bar in my dress blues, have a few drinks and dance a bit with the locals and family members that were there and she was in the Army the next day. Down there it is all about the mind set.; May 30, 2008 7:20 PM
suzihussein22 said...: Make of this what you will-

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=4958947&page=1

All's fair in politics and campaign financing.

Amot-Based on Todd's looks, I would say Tim Allen.; May 30, 2008 7:24 PM
jean said...: naiomi and Keryl,
I agree that HRC will back Obama to the hilt.
I do not think it will be half ass.
My question is how the comments are made in a continuous manner of degredation on every blog between the Dem nominees.
While Obama will win it was close.
This is history.
The lack of respect will play a major factor. There are a lot of older voters will HRC.
As Jayw would put it obama needs to show his balls.
The most positive thing today was when I learned how he handled his Detroit election.
This is what needs to be done, DC is no playground.
The problem with forcing the nomination before the convention is that there will not be any proven closure for HRC's supporters.
I remember when Bush was nominated,
I am surrounded by republicans and I was so upset they even felt sorry for me.
I still work with all of them (I am the only female in the office) and they have registered dem. this year.LOL
If there is a clash at the DNC meeting it will not be good.; May 30, 2008 7:25 PM
greywolf said...: I give have it lower...I give Obama 22 and hillary 33. We will see how it comes out in a short short.

I tell you this for sure. If Barack and Michelle when down there an partied the night befor the primary in some of the local hot spots. Had a few drinks, danced a bit, talked to the locals and let their hair down some showing the locals how real they are. I promise you they would kick Clintons hinney in the primary. Every one thinks there is a problem with PR and blacks... not the case..if they party together.. it is a life time association.; May 30, 2008 7:26 PM
apissedant said...: greywolf,
I'm sure reading your posting, and reading that you think they are a bunch of lemmings would go over great.
Barack could also go down there and have some time with the locals. Bill was the governor of the state right next to Missouri, yet their performance there was nothing to write home about. Seems their "knowledge" has not been as successful as you seem to think.; May 30, 2008 7:26 PM
Amot said...: soft,
I am much younger and with a little bit darker hair, but YES, Tim Allen will do :) Thank you! Tell the producer I agreed :); May 30, 2008 7:28 PM
greywolf said...: apiss...

It was not bill.. a few days ago Hillary was down there, stopped in a few bars... had a few drinks, did some dancing and the men in the bars went crazy. I have a friend still down there, he said the talk was all over the place about how real she was and how she could relate to them and was not too good to sit have a drink, talking and dancing with them. Just going by what I hear and know from inside sources.; May 30, 2008 7:30 PM

«Oldest ‹Older 3001 – 3200 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