posted
It's too early for Sinbad to be President. First he has to be a secret service agent protecting the President's bratty kid. Then, using the exprience he gains from that, he can run in 2016, just in time to go head to head against Republican candidate Arnold Schwartzenegger.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
In response to Hillary's "I helped to bring peace to Northern Ireland", the NobelPrize-winning negotiator for the Irish peace settlement said her claim was "a wee bit silly" and that "I don’t know there was much she did apart from accompanying Bill..."
Same with the other parties involved in the GoodFriday negotiations.
quote:Clinton, during a late December campaign appearance in Iowa, described a hair-raising corkscrew landing in war-torn Bosnia, a trip she took with her then-teenage daughter, Chelsea. ...
In her Iowa stump speech, Clinton also said, "We used to say in the White House that if a place is too dangerous, too small or too poor, send the First Lady."
Say what? As Sinbad put it: "What kind of president would say, 'Hey, man, I can't go 'cause I might get shot so I'm going to send my wife...oh, and take a guitar player and a comedian with you.'"
I am actually highly concerned that she brought her daughter on a trip that was considered dangerous. So, right now, I feel like I am either being lied to or Bill and Hillary were horrible parents. And to be honest, I have never actually questioned their parenting before. But either way, this quote upsets me.
Posts: 1001 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
It wasn't dangerous, though the "..." represents a couple of paragraphs about possible sniper fire, which would probably worry you more. I just thought it was funny, though.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
They're working on something like a mail in primary or a mail in caucus here. I think it's a horrible idea. They're working on a way to raise funds for it but, I'd rather there be no vote and we don't count at all than this screwy idea.
Obama won Mississippi btw.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I still like Geraldine Ferraro. Her statement was divisive, but it wasn't ridiculous. Blacks carried Obama in the South, and without women, H. Clinton wouldn't have a prayer in the general. It's like saying that Kennedy wouldn't have won if he were ugly. It's the truth. It's a reasonable opinion. Putting a gag order on reasonable opinions isn't democratic politics.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Counting just Clinton's and Obama's votes because only their's will be counted in the delegate apportionment:
154,852 : 37.926685% : 13 pledged-delegates : Clinton 253,441 : 62.073315% : 20 pledged-delegates : Obama 408,293 : Total
My pledged-delegate split is pure guesswork based on 33 total pledged-delegates apportioned according to the percentages in the total vote. Because the actual apportionments will be by the ratio within each CongressionalDistrict as well as by the ratio within the State as a whole, my numbers are meant only as a rough guide as to what the real pledged-delegate split will be. Clinton's share was rounded up to 13 pledged-delegates. And Obama's was rounded down to 20 pledged-delegates.
quote: Yes, it's fairly reprehensible that Geraldine Ferraro said "if Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position, and if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept." But in a weird way, there's much less to this comment than meets the eye. After all, Obama is not a woman, nor a white man. He's who he is. To say that if he were different, things would be different is to say nothing at all. As a white woman, maybe he would have led a military coup and established himself dictator. Who knows!? Hell, if he were a slightly less inspiring speaker, or had an off-night at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, he wouldn't be in this position either. Similarly, if Hillary Clinton were a black man, it's unlikely that she would have been a national political figure for the past 15 years, as it's unlikely that she would have married another man from Arkansas, and unlikely that the country would have put an interracial, same sex couple in the White House. But so what? This is an election, not Marvel's "What If?" series.
Meanwhile, folks are forgetting that Ferraro has been trying to ruin her reputation for months now. Check out her awesome New York Times op-ed explaining that superdelegates were created to vote for Hillary Clinton for an example. I bet if she were a multi-headed alien from the plant Zblatt, she wouldn't be doing any of this.
posted
Ferraro's Op-Ed piece in which she says there is no grassroots mandate in Obama's performance. What an elitist.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well at the very least she's full of crap on voter turnout. Far from lackluster, it's increased in some states by more than 300%, and has posted double digit gains at least I think in every state that has yet voted.
As for choosing the best candidate, wouldn't the fact that Obama has so much cross party appeal only raise his electability?
At least she announces her bias in the middle of the article. It saves me the trouble of calling her on it.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Her claim that true populist should want to include Michigan - which Clinton barely won as the only name on the ballot - is pig hooey.
Okay, here's my fantasy bracket for the remaining democratic contests: Dem End Game Clinton would have to win PA by 81% to close the delegate gap (at least as CNN has it). In terms of actual pledged delegates, it's more like 99%. She will do well in Kentucky and West Virginia. Puerto Rico is somewhat of an unknown.
If Florida has a revote, I think it would be fairly even. If Michigan manages a revote, I think there may be some backlash against her there.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm troubled by the possibility that Hillary Clinton is 1) desperately looking for something, anything that will boost her to victory and 2) failing that, set up a situation where Barack Obama loses the general election, setting up a 2012 Hillary Clinton run.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
According to some of the commentary I've heard (Tim Russert, I think, and others) Senator Clinton has static positives - as many people as are going to like her, already do. So the only way she can win is to raise Obama's negatives. Obama's positives are not static, not everyone knows him already.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: I'm troubled by the possibility that Hillary Clinton is...set[ting] up a situation where Barack Obama loses the general election, setting up a 2012 Hillary Clinton run.
That's certainly how I interpreted her comments implying that she felt that McCain was better qualified for the presidency than Obama. Well, that was one of the possible interpretations that I came up with, anyway. The other was that she was just trying to shift the mantle of "uneletability" off of her shoulders and onto Obama's.
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: According to some of the commentary I've heard (Tim Russert, I think, and others) Senator Clinton has static positives - as many people as are going to like her, already do.... Obama's positives are not static, not everyone knows him already.
Interesting. That mirrors the problems that she has with funding as well, in which pretty much everybody who is likely to give her money has already given her as much as they can, while Obama's contributers still have more to give.
I wonder how many new donors each of them have been getting over the past month or so? Those would be interesting numbers to see.
I will say that I have become completely disenchanted with Clinton over the past month or so. At the beginning of the year I felt fairly neutrally toward her. I supported Obama, but I felt like either candidate would make a decent president, and fully intended to vote for her in the general election if she won the Democratic nomination. Now...not so much. If she's the Democratic candidate in the general I'm really not sure at all what I'm going to do. I don't care for 2008 McCain at all, but I really don't know.
Kate, are you thinking about going to Pennsylvania to help with Obama's voter drives or anything?
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
With a six week break in voting, I'm thinking that Obama should at this point bring the fight to McCain and largely ignore any low blows by Clinton. After all, the math suggests that Clinton's odd of winning are pretty small unless he undergoes a major collapse. Getting dragged into the mud in a fight with Clinton seems like the most likely way such a collapse could happen, and has the double negative of hurting his odds in the general election. If he can take the high route with Clinton while focusing the media on McCain, he can position himself in the eyes of the public as the guy to take on McCain, he can take Clinton out of the spotlight, and he can force Clinton to start talking about McCain instead of him.
Posts: 2432 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm thinking about it. It is a bit tough, since I will be in London for the week before the primary. (I hope.) It is more likely that I will be making phone calls in the week before that.
You should go, though. You meet fun people.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
The most heavily Democratic CongressionalDistrict is allocated 7 pledged-delegates, the other three are allocated 5. Assuming the least shift in the number of voters from the statewide average, I'd guess that Clinton picked up over 50% of the DemocraticPrimary votes in one of the two Republican CongressionalDistricts. Since the only declaration of party affilliation in Mississippi occurs through voting in the PresidentialPrimary, that one more delegate for Clinton* doesn't necessarily mean that the extra support came from Democrat-leaning voters.
* And one less for Obama.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
But wasn't it a closed primary? No, right. Carry on. Montana is also open. Most of the rest are "modified" like California with same day registration for independents.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Noemon: I will say that I have become completely disenchanted with Clinton over the past month or so. At the beginning of the year I felt fairly neutrally toward her. I supported Obama, but I felt like either candidate would make a decent president, and fully intended to vote for her in the general election if she won the Democratic nomination. Now...not so much. If she's the Democratic candidate in the general I'm really not sure at all what I'm going to do. I don't care for 2008 McCain at all, but I really don't know.
Me, too. At this point, I'm close to being unable to vote for her. She's really digging herself a hole. Desperation is never pretty.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
pollster.com now has graphs for McCain v. Obama and McCain v. Clinton nationally and in a few key swing states. The same dynamics that will propel Clinton to win Pennsylvania may deliver that state, which has gone Dem since 1992, to McCain in November.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Noemon: I will say that I have become completely disenchanted with Clinton over the past month or so. At the beginning of the year I felt fairly neutrally toward her. I supported Obama, but I felt like either candidate would make a decent president, and fully intended to vote for her in the general election if she won the Democratic nomination. Now...not so much. If she's the Democratic candidate in the general I'm really not sure at all what I'm going to do. I don't care for 2008 McCain at all, but I really don't know.
Me, too. At this point, I'm close to being unable to vote for her. She's really digging herself a hole. Desperation is never pretty.
I wrote her campaign a letter to this effect. I don't expect that it'll actually do any good, and in fact I'd guess that it will just be thrown away when it isn't accompanied by a check, but it felt like the thing to do.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
It might make some sense to write to local democratic leaders - anyone who is a superdelegate. Since it seems that it will come down to who the superdelegates believe has the better "story", we should make sure, they have all the facts.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Number crunching again, since CNN's delegate counts have been updated for the TX caucus and MS results.
Obama: 1404 pledged + 207 super = 1611 Clinton: 1243 pledged + 237 super = 1480 Obama's lead is 161 pledged or 131 total. There are 580 pledged delegates left unaccounted for. To pass Obama in pledged delegates Clinton needs to pick up 371 of 580, which is winning 64% to 36% in every state left. Pretty unlikely, which leaves superdelegates or seating MI and FL.
So what if they do revotes for MI and FL? That adds 313 pledged delegates to the mix (as well as upping the "magic number" needed to win a majority). So if there are revotes, Clinton would need to get 527 of 893 to catch Obama in pledged delegates, which is winning 59% to 41% in every state left. That's maybe within the realm of possibility, but I really doubt it.
Clinton needs to either start winning by much higher levels than she has elsewhere, or else have the superdelegates flock to her overwhelmingly. I don't personally see either of these as too likely at this point.
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: It might make some sense to write to local democratic leaders - anyone who is a superdelegate. Since it seems that it will come down to who the superdelegates believe has the better "story", we should make sure, they have all the facts.
That's a really good idea.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Noemon: I wrote her campaign a letter to this effect. I don't expect that it'll actually do any good, and in fact I'd guess that it will just be thrown away when it isn't accompanied by a check, but it felt like the thing to do.
Maybe you should have made out a check with something like "buy yourself some dignity" in the memo.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: It might make some sense to write to local democratic leaders - anyone who is a superdelegate. Since it seems that it will come down to who the superdelegates believe has the better "story", we should make sure, they have all the facts.
posted
I'll still vote for her in November. But, whereas I'd have been happy about it even in February, now I won't be.
Personally I don't think she'll hurt Obama in the Fall though. I think the more she says, the more people realize she's full of crap, or at least some people. I think it's hurting her credibility as much as his, and some day when she has to drop out and endorse him, people are going to wonder why she's endorsing Obama when she said McCain would be better. She's going to have a credibility gap bigger than what she already has.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I think it's hurting her credibility as much as his, and some day when she has to drop out and endorse him, people are going to wonder why she's endorsing Obama when she said McCain would be better. She's going to have a credibility gap bigger than what she already has.
Few people remember the vicious slams GHW Bush made against Reagan during the 1980 primary election. They were long forgotten before the general election. Heck even when his predictions that Reagan's policies would cause the deficit to balloon were proven true, no one remembered them. Even Bush himself never pointed it out.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think she's hurting her credibility. Oh, sure she is with us. But she took three out of four states in minisupertuesday, and has everyone talking about her making a little comeback. Clearly her approach is being effective. It might be too little too late as far as winning the nomination, but she is clearly not turning voters off en masse.
-o-
I had a lot of people questioning me, some of them somewhat critically, with suggestions that I was basing my vote on shallow perceptions, when I posted to the effect that I was supporting Obama, but that if the nominee was Clinton, I might well end up voting for McCain instead. I'd like to point anybody who questioned it at the time to the insights on this page. Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Side note, wouldn't the "mini" and the "super" cancel each other out and just make it Tuesday? I'd expect a minisupersized coke at McDonalds to basically just be a large. Just curious
And oy, yeah, you're both probably right, I guess that was my inner wishful thinking talking rather than my inner analyst. Obama could flip her attacks right back around at her quite easily I think. He's pretty good at deflecting stuff she throws at him, though she throws so much that of course some stuff is going to stick a little bit. I wouldn't mind seeing him throw a punch or two once in awhile.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
For those keeping score at home: The Wall St. Journal has a story out that claims Obama will likely pick up 8 delegates more than early margin estimates for the California primary. Some news websites have updated their delegate counts , some are waiting for the official certified results later this week. http://blogs.wsj.com/numbersguy/obamas-california-comeback-295/
A wonk at the Calitics political blog picked up on this discrepency--go new media!!
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Obama is running radio ads here in PA for moderates or Republicans to join the Democrat party and vote for him in the primary
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Add another hurdle to the Florida mail-in primary: the entire Democratic Florida House Congressional delegation is against it. Not sure if they can kill it, or force another alternative. My guess now is, between them, the DNC, the FDP, the 2 campaigns, The US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, and everyone and anyone with an ax to grind, no Florida re-do will happen. Too many parties to please, unwilling to consider compromise, and not enough time to negotiate equals the status quo: either the delegates won't be seated, or a deal without a redo will be struck.
quote: U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., has embraced the mail-in idea, but the nine Florida Democrats in the U.S. House adamantly oppose it.
"A mail-in campaign would likely result in fraud, would disenfranchise seniors who have left the state, college students who change addresses, some of those who rent or have moved in the last few months," said Rep. Robert Wexler, D-Delray Beach. "Such a mail-in primary would result in yet another election controversy that Florida does not need. We are playing with fire."
quote:But she took three out of four states in minisupertuesday, and has everyone talking about her making a little comeback. Clearly her approach is being effective.
I think it's going to far to say her approach is being effective. We don't know how many of her voters were Red Rovers. Actually, I'm pretty comfortable asserting that the margin between her turnout and the polls going it probably were.
8 more delegates from California is nice.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The spectator in me has thoroughly enjoyed the complete disaster that the past two days with Geraldine Ferraro has been. This is what happens when Grandma goes off on one of her racist rants.
My cousin married someone non-white last year, and during their engagement my grandparents expressed to me their sadness about it. Ms. Ferraro sounded exactly like them - nothing crude, but a clear dismissal of her excellent qualities because they couldn't get past her skin color.
I have a friend who has worked in different offices for various politicians in D.C. for the past ten years, and she said that her friends who worked for Clintons said they were completely ruthless politically and were often questionable in the way they treated allies and enemies alike.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just had a conversation with one of those grandmas yesterday. She and her husband exemplified the classic "I'm sure they're very nice people but I wouldn't want my daughter to marry one" attitude. And then their granddaughter did. And when their first great-grandchild was born two years ago they were presented with a choice -- they could either get over it or be excluded from their great-grandson's life. They decided to get over it, fell in love with the baby, got to know his father, and found out that skin color really didn't matter.
She wouldn't have voted for a black presidential candidate 2 years ago, and now she might. I thought it was a pretty inspiring story -- I've given up on the idea of a lot of older people ever shaking off habitual racism -- I know my grandparents weren't able to. It was good to see someone who did.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dkw: They decided to get over it, fell in love with the baby, got to know his father, and found out that skin color really didn't matter....She wouldn't have voted for a black presidential candidate 2 years ago, and now she might.
Wow! I was poised, after reding the first sentence in the above quote, to post something to the effect of "did they really learn that skin color didn't matter, or did they just learn that his skin color didn't matter[/cynical]", but the second sentence answered the question. Very cool.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Accidentally posted this in the Ferarro thread.
In other news, Mitt Romney does another 180, this time going back on his "I won't be a McCain Vice President. That's something that's not going to happen." by actively soliciting the VP nod from John McCain.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Romney could work if people were more worried about the economy than their souls, which in principle I wouldn't want to see, even if I personally feel they are being morons. Also, McCain would have to be selling Romney as actually having policy influence, which is a tricky sell in a general race.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Obama is running radio ads here in PA for moderates or Republicans to join the Democrat party and vote for him in the primary"
Pretty much has to. The Republican party-machine is saturating the airwaves with hours-upon-hours of their rightwing talk-shows recommending that Republicans should crossover to vote for Clinton during the remaining primaries. Their reasoning being that: . Even if Obama were to win, a closer pledged-delegate count between the top two candidates would trigger a Convention floorfight that would disrupt the unity of the Democrats for the GeneralElection contest. . Clinton would be the easiest Nominee to beat in the GeneralElection. . Even if Clinton were to win the Presidency, her victory would trigger a landslide of Republican victories in the 2008 and 2010 GeneralElections for the seats-in-play* in Congress and in the state legislatures, as well as for state-wide offices such as governor and attorney general. What with mandatory redistricting coming up due to the 2010Census, the party controlling the state legislature has a very strong influence on which party wins the most elections over the next 10years (at least). Which in many ways is more important than who wins the Presidency in 2008.
* Many districts/etc are so lopsidedly Democrat or Republican in their voter base that ya couldn't elect a candidate from the other party short of using real nukes. Seats-in-play are in districts/etc which have a sufficient abundance of swing&crossover voters that the elections can go either way (though the incumbent is presumed to have an advantage that must be overcome).
posted
Cuz he's the only other candidate who's still in the Republican contest. And when the Men-in-Black expose McCain as an illegal alien...
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
I'm interested to read about an election process named for stew.
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
She'd just cackle all the way to the bank.![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Not sure if they can kill it, or force another alternative. My guess now is, between them, the DNC, the FDP, the 2 campaigns, The US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, and everyone and anyone with an ax to grind, no Florida re-do will happen. Too many parties to please, unwilling to consider compromise, and not enough time to negotiate equals the status quo: either the delegates won't be seated, or a deal without a redo will be struck. 
