Despite the Rev. Wright controversy and his other recent struggles, Barack Obama is still marching toward the Democratic nomination, the New York Times reported. Obama continues to pick up superdelegates at a quicker pace than Hillary Clinton. Obama’s campaign manager noted that if Clinton won 55 percent of the remaining pledged delegates — which is highly unlikely — she would still need about two-thirds of the remaining uncommitted superdelegates to reach the 2,025 delegates needed to secure the nomination.
-
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in. -
Contact us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Franklin on The GOP’s white-bread convention
- Monkeyhawk on Palin’s record a ‘mixed bag’
- lindainks55 on Palin’s record a ‘mixed bag’
- Franklin on The GOP’s white-bread convention
- Franklin on The GOP’s white-bread convention
- Pedant on Palin’s record a ‘mixed bag’
- Franklin on The GOP’s white-bread convention
- cosmos_originally on Palin’s record a ‘mixed bag’
- BlueJay on Palin’s record a ‘mixed bag’
- Regular on Palin’s record a ‘mixed bag’
78 Comments
See the first post under Open Thread 5/3…Hillary will win.
Well,
In politics, it’s all about momentum.
Senator Clinton’s star is on the rise. She will win Indiana. She has won every major state so far.
Meanwhile, the gleam is off the “man with the mojo hand”. His feet firmly rooted in the mire of his own personal associations, Obama has ceased to be the face of hope and change and become the face with a big question mark over it. What’s to come? What else don’t we know?
For folks like Randy and Phil, so eager to hurry up and have Obama as the nominee, I have to wonder.
Are they in a hurry for a reason? Do they feel something slipping away?
Like maybe a nomination that shouldn’t happen?
But as with all supporters of Senator Clinton, I am content to let the process play out and for as many to have a vote as possible.
I am convinced that the Repubes want Obama as the nominee and have propped him up with press and donations.
They FEAR Hillary and know she can beat the womanizer McBush.
They FEAR the revenge she will enact on them once in office.
They FEAR the powers that Hillary will have that Bush/Cheney have given the Presidency.
Yes…the Repubes are a bunch of scaredy cats.
The Rev. Wright controversy reawakened the race issue for many white Americans, and that includes Democrats. It may just be that Blacks stay home on election day if their man isn’t the Democratic nominee. If that’s the case, Dems can kiss this election goodbye. Without the Black vote, the Democratic Party isn’t viable.
Ya know?
I am sure there is no small number of folks who will not vote for or will vote against Obama simply because he is black.
As much as I want everyone to vote, I’d just as soon people who think? this way wouldn’t
I am also sure there is a large number of folks who will vote for Obama ONLY because he is black.
I really don’t care if they vote either.
Elections are somewhat more important than simple black and white.
The Republicans aren’t gonna win this one, no matter which of the remaining two excellent Democratic candidates becomes the nominee.
Linda, that’s exactly what Newt Grinrich said the other day on CNN.
The NYT article has a graphic that was instructive, laying out several possibilities that could lead to a Clinton victory.
What’s unsetting is that it includes fairly implausible (though possible) paths to a Clinton nomination. The first three practically require the remaining superdelegates to hand her the nomination on a silver platter. That ain’t gonna happen.
What isn’t entirely implausible is the fourth one listed, where Clinton wins 60% of the remaining delegates, grabbing the momemtum, but trailing 49/51 in pledged delegates.
She would then have to win 60% of the remaining superdelegates to get the nomination.
What’s unsettling is what’s been stated before: it would be a situation in which the superdelegates were overruling the pledged delegates. And hence, ugly, intercine warfare. The rules permit this, but it wouldn’t be pretty, or particularly democratic.
If Clinton’s going to win the nomination, she’d better start kicking some serious ass right now. She needs a full 70% of the remaining pledged delegates to get a proper 50/50 split. Merely winning primaries ain’t gonna cut it.
P.S. On the brighter side, if the race narrows that much, John Edwards and his 26 delegates might have quite an important role to play.
lindainks55,
You may be right, but I’m betting against it. Just read some of the comments on this blog. Democrats who won’t support their party if their candidate isn’t “the one”. That’s a major reason why you Dems lose so many elections. You won’t support each other and you’re incapable of working together for the greater good.
You DO have 2 excellent candidates. Too bad you all can’t get behind one or the other.
I predict that not much will change come election time. 4 more years of Republican control.
We will be unified and will support the nominee as soon as one is chosen. There are states not heard from, states who scheduled their primaries according to the rules. The process continues as it should.
There is ample time to win unity once the nominee is selected. And it won’t take much time to show the superiority of the Democratic Party nominee compared to McCain. Everyone knows that is the goal.
Republicans have chosen their man. We’re still having fun, and toughening up our candidates for the final battle.
“Without the Black vote, Democratic Party isn’t viable.”
No truer words spoken…in fact just “Democratic Party isn’t viable” is even more so.
My take: IF Clinton can take 55% of the remaining delegates AND get her popular vote above Obama she wins the nomination. And, with a plurality of the popular vote she will have earned it.
I think we will learn a lot Tuesday. (Of course, we have been saying that for a few Tuesdays now)
It’s really too bad FL and MI didn’t figure something out. They could be the determining factor right now.
We are paying an awful lot of attention to black and white.
Just under the radar? Gender.
I heard a caller to one of the radio shills. He says his mother is as a conservative a Republican as you could ever meet.
But he can’t talk her out of voting for Senator Clinton!
There MAY be a great unknown factor out there. Many women might SAY they will vote for McCain.
But if they are there alone in front of the ballot? A lot of history may come to mind.
They might see an old white man and a capable woman and just decide to give women that final force to crash through the glass ceiling.
And with that, I’m off to help Ben clean up the river.
Dammit Ben. You coulda got us a little warmer day for this!
BlueJay, In many ways Senator Clinton is more conservative than Senator McCain. Maybe that caller’s Mother recognizes that.
In many ways I am more conservative than McCain. I believe in fiscal responsibility. I don’t believe America has any right to force their form of government on any other country. I believe our military is for keeping Americans safe, not for occupying oil-rich nations. I believe government should be limited.
What passes for Conservative today, simply isn’t what was once considered Conservative. Today it refers more to social issues the government shouldn’t be involved with. McCain has NO ideas beyond continuing bushco policies. That may be what that wise older woman sees and why she won’t vote for McCain.
Linda that is kind of what worries me, Some will vote for Mc Cain because he is more Democrat than Hillary! While some will vote for Hillary because she is more Republican then Mc Cain. That is not a put down, but rather part of how confusing this election has gotten.
Boxlock
Posted May 3, 2008 at 8:31 am | Permalink
“Without the Black vote, Democratic Party isn’t viable.”
No truer words spoken…in fact just “Democratic Party isn’t viable” is even more so.”
______________________________________________
Maybe yes, maybe no. I think that depends a lot on how many Americans realize that the Republican Party has run completely off the road with the advent of George the younger, or George the stupid, or George the witless. Personally, I’m going to have a real problem supporting Republicans unless they return to being the party of fiscal responsibility and smaller government. The way I see it, anything, including Democrats is better than supporting what Republicans have become.
I understand, Dog! It is interesting to say the least. I just can’t vote for anyone who smacks of neocon. It might be too late already. Some days I thank you for bringing this scary nonsense to my attention, other days I curse you for the same thing.
Linda, believe me I truly understand that!
Dog, I don’t see how anyone who has paid any attention and has working brain cells will vote to continue bushco policies.
And, I know you have paid attention and do have working brain cells so help me understand.
Clinton did pretty well relatively in some rust-belt states like PA and OH, where the winters are cold and the people are bitter and Big Unions would rather “bear those ills they have than fly to others they know not of.”
But in terms of numbers, it ain’t going to happen. Obama is ahead now and will continue to be ahead when the day is done.
He’s ahead in pledged delegates, in the popular vote, in new voter support, in number of states won, in the amount of money raised, and in the number of people contributing to his campaign.
He has raised a quarter of a BILLION dollars from one and one-half million donors. That gives you an idea of the breadth of his support.
Bush gave us someone to vote against. How’d that work out for the more “electable” Kerry?
Obama gives us someone to vote for.
Someone pointed out on DemocraticUnderground yesterday that the press keeps saying that “Obama can’t seal the deal.”
Actually, he sealed the deal on Super Tuesday. That’s when he pulled so far ahead that Clinton could never catch up.
And now our nation’s math illiteracy comes home to roost . . .
lindainks55 wrote: In many ways Senator Clinton is more conservative than Senator McCain. Maybe that caller’s Mother recognizes that.
Absolutely true, Linda. In Hillary’s transformation from Goldwater Girl to yellow-stripe Democrat, she witnessed many historical changes in the U.S.
She was invariably on the side of the staid status quo: civil rights, Vietnam, the ceding of political power to corporations, Hillary always took the safe stances.
Her MA thesis on radical organizer Saul Alinsky–cited by the ignorant as proof of her “liberal bonafides”–was actually a criticism of Alinsky’s confrontational tactics.
She already blew a chance for national health care once because she was too timid and refused to take on corporate power (and its paid shills in government, the RepubliCONs).
And some people want to give her even more power to screw up again.
Bad idea.
“And Dog let out a nervous laugh as he whistled passed the graveyard…”.
Linda it could be attuned to a lack of one or the other factors you have listed.
But I believe a good deal of it is like what a cancer patent goes through when first diagnosed.
Unwilling to accept it, disbelief of the diagnosis, discounting just how seriously ill they are and ignore the illness for as long as possible.
We the American people elect someone for one reason solely, so we do not have to think about the weighty issues. Look how thinking about the weighty issues has effected you? The masses dismiss many issues by thinking that someone else is there to think about and solve problems. IN a sense that is dangerous because we do not pay any attention to those in power. The Neo-Cons are a good case in point, their agenda is not hidden. In fact in Washington they are readily acknowledged as part of the power players and their agenda is well known. At best it is being dismissed there and their effect is being belittled, but the Prima-facie evidence (on the face of it) shows they have a great deal of influence on economics and foreign polices.
If not for them there would not have been an invasion of Iraq and where the real threat lays would not have all but been ignored.
Which is the easier thought to accept:
“Those in power have allowed the enemy that attack the homeland to live now for seven years. While killing someone that was at best a minor player in the terrorism threat and sidetracking the effort to defeat the country’s enemy“.
“Those in power are exposed to information I am not so they must know best and I have faith they are doing the right and important things that need to be done So now I am at ease and can watch Dancing with the stars!“.
It is easier to argue partisan politics then to face reality in such situations, that is just a form of “whistling pass the graveyard” for most that are paying attention. The rest are not paying attention, it is the same reactions one has if they are about to witness the death of their child. You turn away…..
Heck, I might even vote for HillBilly this time, if she can jump the broom at the convention.
No matter who gets the nomination, McCain is going to walk away with the grand prize.
Too many exit polls indicate that Clinton voters will not support Obama and vice versa.
This dod-eat-dog game they’ve been playing has alienated a number of democrat voters.
But isn’t is JUST like the democrats to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory? lol
Clinton’s big mistake was assuming she would wrap it all up on Super Tuesday instead of being ready for a race beyond that. By the time she ramped up, Obama had won 11 races in a row and built an insurmountable delegate lead. Clinton’s only hope now is for Obama to make a terrible blunder that would render his candidacy hopeless. It’s not likely going to happen, but even if you’re trailing by four touchdowns going into the fourth quarter, you play out the game. You don’t often win, and winning the fourth quarter alone doesn’t matter, but as long as there’s a slim chance you keep trying.
We have 6 months until election day. Anything can happen. At this point, it’s a waste of time and energy to try to calculate who will win and who won’t. The MSM knows this, but they LOVE to keep us all stirred up. People will change their “favorite” at least one or two more times between now and November…and especially before August. Polls will bounce back and forth.
When the numbers are this close, polls tell very little. It depends on where the poll was conducted, in what way, on what day, who generated it, and how the poll questions were asked.
Dream on, folks. It ain’t over until the Supreme Court decides who won.
Nano, with respect to your post of 9:45 am;
I don’t disagree with you at all there fella! Seems to me both parties have jumped the tracks and have become a dangerous loose locomotive. The American public & taxpayer better do something quick.
That being said, I believe in conservative, Constitutional principles and view the Republicans as slightly less dangerous to the country.
I know if my taxes rise much further, I’m going to quit and take retirement benefits in a couple of years and let the government start giving it back as quick as I can. I refuse to work as a slave to the government, giving over half the fruits of my labor to them.
“You don’t often win, and winning the fourth quarter alone doesn’t matter, but as long as there’s a slim chance you keep trying.”
Two words
Peyton Manning
Three words
New York Giants
‘Nuff said
Never underestimate a middle aged woman
You do so at your own peril
My take: IF Clinton can take 55% of the remaining delegates AND get her popular vote above Obama she wins the nomination. And, with a plurality of the popular vote she will have earned it.
But what if Obama maintained a convincing lead in the caucus-going states? These are states , you know. You can’t just write them off as irrelevant. That would be far worse than not seating Florida and Michigan.
The real question: how do you determine their relationship to the popular vote? The only way, under the rules, is, of course, the rules. You count delegates. And if I had my druthers, every state would have a primary, but that’s not the way it is.
Another approach would be to determine the level of popular support in each caucus state, but . .how? Opinion polls are hardly more reliable than an organized vote.
I think PD (
) is ultimately correct. We’ll just have to see what happens.
Shery_n_Shad–
Does it take two of you to be twice as dumb?
More evidence that when Clinton wants to score points, she doesn’t let a little thing like facts get in her way:
From the Merrillville, Indiana, Post-Tribune
April 11, 2008
Clinton, Magnequench and China
By Andy Grimm Post-Tribune staff writer
U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton on Saturday will discuss the future of defense industry jobs with former employees of Magnequench at a town-hall meeting at Washington Township High School, just east of Valparaiso…
The high school is not far from the former Magnequench plant in Valparaiso, which manufactured magnets used in the guidance systems for “smart bombs” until it closed five years ago. The parent company moved its manufacturing operations to China.
In a conference call with reporters from Northwest Indiana, U.S. Sen. Evan Bayh, a Clinton supporter and possible vice presidential running mate, said Magnequench’s move cost the region 225 manufacturing jobs that provided better-than-average wages and benefits.
“It’s not very smart to align America’s defense on the goodwill of the Chinese, and yet that’s exactly what happened,” he said.
In a campaign ad (see below), Hillary Clinton decries the idea that American defense parts are being made in China and blames it on the Bush Administration. She repeated this during her visit to Valpariso, the former home of Magnequench.
But, just as with so many things emanating from the Clinton campaign, this one is not totally true and conveys a false impression.
It was during the Bill Clinton Administration (1995) that the sale of Magnequench to the Chinese was approved (via their surrogates Archibald Cox and the Sextant Group). As the Indianapolis Star reported, the Clinton Administration could have blocked the sale since ” Congress gave the president authority to block foreign acquisitions that could threaten national security”. That law was available to the Clinton Administration.
Bill Clinton could have blocked the sale to the Chinese and yet chose not to. Whether that failure by the Clinton Administration to act was tied to alleged Chinese fund raising for Bill Clinton’s reelection is not clear. Had he blocked the acquisition those 225 jobs would most likely have remained in Indiana. The actual moving of the company overseas (with the resultant loss of American jobs) did occur in 2003 under the Bush Administration but would not have happened without the Clinton Administration’s 1995 approval.
The loss of the Magnequench jobs in Indiana was a direct result of Bill Clintons faillure to act to protect foreign acquisition of defense technology. Hillary Clinton needs to look closer to home before she blames this all on Bush.
From the Merrillville, Indiana, Post-Tribune
April 11, 2008
Clinton, Magnequench and China
Link, please, Capn. It appears the story you’re quoting is from the Gary Post Tribune and doesn’t include the criticisms at the end.
http://www.post-trib.com/news/889797,vhillary.article
I think this might be (I’m saying “might”) a better source
:
Back in 1995, a Chinese consortium, which included two Chinese state-owned companies, made a bid to take over Magnequench. Because the company makes key parts for smart bombs, the takeover had to be approved by the Clinton administration’s Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States. Despite the national security and economic problems with selling off such critical manufacturing capacity to the Chinese — and despite the knowledge that such a deal would likely end in a domestic mass layoff — the Clinton administration approved the deal. This same deal — not surprisingly — paved the way for those 200 Indiana jobs and that sensitive military technology to be shipped to China.
The Clinton administration’s move was not surprising. This was an administration whose NAFTA and China PNTR record more than proved it was intent on helping Big Money interests face as little resistance to international financial transactions as possible — consequences be damned. But the move was very controversial, raising the ire of key Hillary Clinton surrogate Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN). As the Los Angeles Times reported in 2005, “Bayh was particularly disturbed by the committee’s decision in 1995 to approve a Chinese consortium’s takeover of Magnequench Inc.” In 2006, Bayh specifically slammed the Clinton administration’s approval of the deal to the South Bend Tribune, saying “It’s not smart to put ourselves in the position of relying on the Chinese for a critical component of a vital weapon system, and yet that is what the CFIUS process has allowed.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20080428/cm_huffpost/098972
Here’s a rather perilous predicament: What does one do if NONE of the candidates compel one’s devotion? That’s the situation I find myself in - and I don’t know what to do about it.
I wish I could be enthused with Hillary. My inabilities to do so have nothing to do with the following: 1) harboring a hard, ugly, misogyny that compels me to believe that women politicans should be porcine and not heard; 2) believing that a woman can’t be as intelligent as a man; or 3) believing that her horndog of a husband would be leading her around like a priapic field commander.
But she and her spouse have evidently brought a lot of baggage to the table - and it’s evidently turned off a lot of people - including former supporters. This is troubling to me.
Four years ago, Obama’s riveting, vivid speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention was, in my mind, a portent of things to come. Sadly, my enthusiasm has been mitigated by his lackluster debates and his vanilla (no pun intended here, Rev. Wright) meanderings regarding his pastor.
Last week, I was the unwitting recipient of a video clip of Wright’s latest bombast. Had he been lambasting a KKK leader, I’d have paid it no mind. Instead, he was denigrating a certain president who was murdered nearly 45 years ago - for his speech, not for any racism real or imagined.
Couple this with Obama’s milquetoast dismissals, and you’ve got one dissatisfied Democrat (me). “Rev. Wright’s comments…..were…..not….only….wrong……………………………………………………………they…..were…………………………..divisive,” Obama warbled earler this year.
“Mofo, please,” I snarled. That’s like crooning that those “midgets in the Wizard of Oz sure were…………………………………………………..short.” It wasn’t the words he used - but the way he used them. Moreover, his petulant laziness during his recent debates with Hillary were hardly the stuff of presidential prowess.
And then we’ve got McCain……………………………….
Christ - what to say here. He loves Bushie. He’s sneaking up on his 72nd birthday. His knowledge of our economic climate is woeful. He’s not exactly charismatic. And he’s a Republican to boot.
Suffice it to say, the Songbird isn’t energized like she was in 2004. And that was AFTER surviving a near-fatal bout with hyperthyroidism.
I’m not flat on my back in the E.R. right now; I’m visiting the ignoble land of my noble birth. Hays America is a Volga-German, staunch Catholic, ultra-conservative enclave - and I’ve no doubt that McCain would win here. But I don’t know for whom to throw in my support.
Politics is a dirty, murky business. It’s a sad day when you have to say to yourself, “Who’s the least shady character here?” That probably says something dire about our culture.
Has anybody seen Ben?
See, I’m looking for him.
I spent much time looking for him this morning at the Water Center for the river clean up.
Well that Water center area is good and picked up now. I made sure of that.
WHILE I was walking around singing “All by myself”!
Ben you got some ’splainin’ to do.
What’d I miss?
“Obama gives us someone to vote for.”
Not ME Capn. And you know why. Too, I increasingly find his supporters a source of irritation. I am looking in your direction.
Like this?
“And now our nation’s math illiteracy comes home to roost . . .”
It’s nice you hold me in the same respect as you do my opinion I guess? Consistency IS important.
“But what if Obama maintained a convincing lead in the caucus-going states? These are states , you know. You can’t just write them off as irrelevant. ”
Oh come now (trying not to laugh) Rage. KANSAS? ALABAMA? IDAHO?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Oh they are relevant ok. If you’re a REPUBLICAN candidate!
People I talk to think Obama is toast. Even my own brother, a zealot Obama supporter concedes that Senator Clinton did a FAR better job against Billo O’Reilly than Obama is likely to!
But let it play out. I want you Obama people to think long and hard about President John McCain. Take your time. Search your memory.
Oh come now (trying not to laugh) Rage. KANSAS? ALABAMA? IDAHO?
I see. Then why not just have the party leaders choose the candidate, and not even bother with primaries or caucuses? Or just limit them to the “states that matter” (”Sorry, Kansas, but you haven’t gone Dem since 1964 — you have no say in picking the nominee!”).
I prefer democracy.
““states that matter” (”Sorry, Kansas, but you haven’t gone Dem since 1964 — you have no say in picking the nominee!”).
I have lived in Kansas all my life.
Unfortunately, due to the people here, my vote in every single election has been worth exactly zero.
So yeah, if I want to WIN, I err toward more…relevant states like Florida and Michigan. Kansas and places like it EARN their irrelevant status.
Songbird, if you’re in a “safe” state for either major party candidate, you’re not limited to Dem or Rep. It may be purely symbolic, but you can vote for anyone you want.
I lived in Kansas in 2000, and voted for Nader (and have been catching hell for it ever since!)
So maybe my advice is not so good. . .
In 2004, I agreed to swap my vote.
If Obama is the nominee, that will likely be my course this time.
Kansas and places like it EARN their irrelevant status.
Okay. So what if we strip both candidates of the delegates from those states, and reduce the number required for nomination by that much?
Cool with you?
Thanks to its winner-take-all rules, the Kansas Republic Party will go to St. Paul with a 100% Huckabee delegation.
Talk about being irrelevant.
I don’t expect it to happen but I won’t be altogether surprised if Kansas votes blue in November. We have Democratic governor, two Democratic congress-critters, a Bush-aholic incumbent senator facing a viable Democratic challenger. I doubt it will happen, but it could.
Iraq is bad and only getting worse. The economy is bad and only getting worse. The natural and logical results of Republic Party policy are proven bad and only getting worse. And John Sidney McCain the Third’s message is “Four more years!!!”
No…John Sydney McBush’s message is 100 more years!
Rage I am sorry that something is the matter with Kansas and that it truly does not matter in national politics.
EVERY Kansan, the Republicans too, should be sorry about that as well.
But facts is facts. And electoral votes is electoral votes.
And Floridan and Michigan are just plain more important than Kansas and Alabama.
And Floridan and Michigan are just plain more important than Kansas and Alabama.
Okay. How about:
Iowa
Alaska
Colorado
Idaho
Minnesota
North Dakota
Nebraska
Washington
Maine
Hawaii
Nevada
Texas
Wyoming
Actually, Alabama is a primary state. They did support Jimmy Carter in 1976 (that’s “bluer” than Kansas anyway). But, since, by your own reckoning, they’re irrelevant to the general election, why should we be counting their primary results?
And Indiana, like Kansas, also went blue last in 1964. Why we should care who wins there? It’s easily as irrelevant as Kansas. Or maybe not :
Selzer & Co (which is I believe the same pollster that conducts the Des Moines Register poll) released another Indiana survey tonight, also showing Obama up within the margin of error, 41% to 38%.
And in truly stunning general election numbers, Obama leads McCain 49% to 41% while Clinton and McCain are tied at 46%.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-nichanian/new-polls-indiana-toss-up_b_98581.html
All of which is quite beside the point, of course, as what I was talking about is ensuring that the eventual nominee is perceived as having won fair and square. If there is a significant difference between the percentage of pledged delegates and the superdelegates, this will be a problem, and simply comparing the primary totals won’t fix it.
Barack Obama, you drop any and all ties to the illegal alien invasion of America and i will vote for you but to keep you safe from lawsuites. I want a pre - nup agreement. I want a paid in full impeachment of Barack Obama by Barack Obama if he even tries to go against America or Americans for the illegal alien invasion of America.
Thank God for SUPER Delegates!
They will make sure Hillary gets the nomination!
Doesn’t matter how Democrats actually voted! The Dems don’t care what the people think!
Looks like Wordpress just had a stroke. One more time:
And Floridan and Michigan are just plain more important than Kansas and Alabama.
Okay. How about:
Iowa
Alaska
Colorado
Idaho
Minnesota
North Dakota
Nebraska
Washington
Maine
Hawaii
Nevada
Texas
Wyoming
Actually, Alabama is a primary state. They did support Jimmy Carter in 1976 (that’s “bluer” than Kansas anyway). But, since, by your own reckoning, they’re irrelevant to the general election, why should we be counting their primary results?
And Indiana, like Kansas, also went blue last in 1964. Why we should care who wins there? It’s easily as irrelevant as Kansas. Or maybe not :
Selzer & Co (which is I believe the same pollster that conducts the Des Moines Register poll) released another Indiana survey tonight, also showing Obama up within the margin of error, 41% to 38%.
And in truly stunning general election numbers, Obama leads McCain 49% to 41% while Clinton and McCain are tied at 46%.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-nichanian/new-polls-indiana-toss-up_b_98581.html
All of which is quite beside the point, of course, as what I was talking about is ensuring that the eventual nominee is both perceived as having won fair and square. If there is a significant difference between the outcome of pledged delegates and the superdelegates, this will be a problem, and simply comparing the primary totals won’t fix it.
Oh–Wordpress must have just spewed crap from the buffer at me. Never mind. Sorry for the double post.
“Doesn’t matter how Democrats actually voted! The Dems don’t care what the people think!”
Max, this could not be true. This is the party whose motto is “Every person’s vote counts; unless it doesn’t count.”
“I increasingly find his supporters a source of irritation. I am looking in your direction.”
Well, I’m honestly sorry about that. Sometimes I jerk your chain and sometimes you jerk mine . . . that’s blogging.
But, seriously, you don’t make up your mind about a candidate based on the attitude of his or her supporters, do you?
I vote as to whom I think will be the better leader for our country.
That ain’t Hillary.
Been there, done that. We can do better.
The “math illiteracy” comment isn’t meant to disrespect anyone in particular.
It’s a general observation that the numbers can’t possibly add up for Hillary.
Which is exactly what the thread header is saying . . .
Blue Jay - I met the other people from South Central at the Water Center parking lot and we went across Pawnee and worked the bank there - working our way northward. Sorry I missed you. Also had to get bags to another group from Fresh Start cleaning under the Harry Bridge. We must have just missed each other.
It was a good day for it - other than being a bit windy - especially on the River with its wind tunnel effect.
According to the rules?
The numbers cannot “add up” for Obama either.
He can’t “win” in the normal sense.
That is why we have a process, the super delegates, and a convention.
And that process continued today. Primary in Guam.
I don’t think they can even vote in the general election. But the results?
After leading by 10 points early, 6 points most of the day?
Obama wins.
Last I heard it was by 7 or 8 VOTES.
First good news he has generated in some time.
Sorry. I just don’t believe after 25 years of being kicked in the face, we should smile with our remaining teeth and be friends with the aggressor.
Well…
OK Ben.
Kinda felt like a snipe hunt.
I got there just after 10. There was only one older lady there. Her name was Joanne and she said something about some big shot or other couldn’t come.
At least we reassured each other we weren’t crazy.
She waited til around 10:30. I happened to have a bag in my truck so I picked up around the water center until a little after 11. Could not get down to the river’s edge.
Well I COULD have. But since it is about a 10 foot drop, I might still be there tonight.
It’s ok. Maybe next time.
That is quite a drop there. North of Pawnee the bank is less steep. But there is a point up there where the river curves that seemed to concentrate the wind. We got about 15 bags of stuff in that half-mile stretch. The Fresh Start crew got more than that at Harry. I’m betting well over 100 bags all told Between Herman Hill and Sim Park.
Well the upshot is I have SOME good news.
The stuff down by the river. There wasn’t much.
And around the water center and all the way down to that dropoff?
Only filled the bottom of a trash bag.
Strange thing is there were duck eggs all over the place!
In the fountains and ponds, on the sidewalk, in the grass. Weird.
I’m glad you guys picked up so much.
Good to have you there - even though we didn’t get to meet. Maybe another time …
HAGATNA, Guam (Reuters) - Democrat Barack Obama beat rival Hillary Clinton by just seven votes in Guam’s nominating contest after record numbers of residents voted in the tiny U.S. territory’s primary, officials said on Sunday.
Results after more than 12 hours of manual counting showed Obama took 2,264 votes to 2,257 for Clinton. In the last Democratic primary in 2004 only 1,500 people took part.
“Clearly, both of them are quite popular and we should celebrate that,” Josh Tenorio, Obama’s campaign manager on the territory told Reuters. “It’s a good day for Guam.”
———————
And that is exciting! To have such large numbers of people (Democrats — the best kind!) eager to cast their vote. All over the country Democrats have turned out in record numbers. Oh, happy days are here again!
Obama also picked up a net 5 plus superdelegates today.
And he’s up 12 in Oregon.
http://www.blueoregon.com/2008/05/rasmussens-firs.html
CapnAmerica
Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:27 pm | Permalink
And he’s up 12 in Oregon.
http://www.blueoregon.com/2008/05/rasmussens-firs.html
Apparently Obama is the elitist that Hillary says he is. The following taken from the Captain’s own link above:
“Obama does best among upper income voters while Clinton’s strongest support comes from those who earn less than $40,000 annually.”
http://www.slate.com/id/2190556
Slate weighs in on the Hillary Political Deathwatch
Hillary Clinton, Fairy Princess
Can we please stop pretending she has a plausible chance to win the nomination?
By Timothy Noah
Posted Friday, May 2, 2008, at 7:21 PM ET
Here’s a rule I would like every political reporter, campaign official, TV talking head, and politician in the United States to follow. Go ahead and say, if you like, that Hillary Clinton retains a serious chance of winning the Democratic nomination. If you say this, however, you must describe a set of circumstances whereby this could happen. Try not to make it sound like a fairy tale.
. . .
The only number that matters, however, is 2,025, which is how many delegates a candidate will need to secure the nomination. Obama has 1,488 primary delegates to Clinton’s 1,334, according to the Associated Press delegate tracker. Add in superdelegates and Obama has 1,736 to Clinton’s 1,602. Obama needs 289 more delegates to win the nomination. Hillary needs 423.
[The final decision will come down to the superdelegates . . . ]
A great debate has taken place on how superdelegates ought to choose the nominee. Should they vote their conscience, or should they follow the popular will? We could debate that one all day. The more relevant question is: How do superdelegates choose the nominee? Answer: They tend to follow the popular will. That’s why superdelegates gravitated to Clinton when polls showed she looked like a sure thing, and then to Obama when he started outpolling her. That’s why more than one-third of the superdelegates remain uncommitted now. Believe me, it isn’t because they haven’t been paying attention, and (except for a few head cases) it isn’t because, after 23 Democratic debates, they still don’t know which candidate tickles their fancy. It’s because they’re reluctant to be out of step with the popular will as expressed through all the primaries and caucuses. The longer any given superdelegate waits to make his or her endorsement, the likelier he or she is to choose whoever ends up with a plurality of delegates. Why else wait?
*****
So . . . the supers of course are going to vote to reflect the candidate who earned the majority of pledged delegates.
What else can they do? Tell the candidate who got more votes and more delegates to get lost?
Can’t happen.
I have been chuckling to myself most of the afternoon when ever I thought of it! A fun dirty political trick, it is funnier if you could see it. But anyway here was a thought at occurred to me after they started talking about the battle for Guam by Obama and Hillary. Neither having been there, I pictured that one of them wanting to make some points. A staff member puts out the call for someone that can speak “Guamainan”
The other campaign gets word of the request and sets up a fake speech.
So the candidate goes on TV in Guam looking all serious and reading this statement: “wall-but-dubu a bam-bam! Scuba-ah-duba a-willy-nilly! ( the candidate looks down at the hand written speech and reads in brackets { while speaking remember to wave your arms wildly} so suddenly they fling their arms to and fro while continuing the speech) TACO-A-PACKO A SILLY WAMBA!
It much funnier in my head!!!!!
There are 4 elected delegates and 5 supers from Guam.
The pledged delegates will split 2 and 2.
But since he “won” the commonwealth, he will pick up at least one more super than she does and perhaps as many as three. The word on the street is he picked up three.
That’s 20 percent of what Hillary netted in effing PA! From Guam!
You can see how this just isn’t going to work for her . . .
” Apparently Obama is the elitist that Hillary says he is. The following taken from the Captain’s own link above:
“Obama does best among upper income voters while Clinton’s strongest support comes from those who earn less than $40,000 annually.”
That confirms my experience AND some of the pro Obama supporters on this blog.
A lot of DEEP wounds are being inflicted on the base of the party.
And it is the Obama supporters doing it.
I respect them. I have held my fire mostly.
I’m not going to do so much longer.
Word up to the more….reasonable Obama supporters.
Rein in the zealots. They have forgotten who their friends are.
I’m getting kinda forgetful myself….
“I have held my fire mostly.
“I’m not going to do so much longer.”
Well . . . I wouldn’t wait too much longer if I were you.
There isn’t much longer left.
“Well . . . I wouldn’t wait too much longer if I were you.”
I don’t intend to. I’ve been far too kind.
“There isn’t much longer left.”
Sure there is. But you won’t wait. You can’t wait.
Your con apologist pandering candydate can’t survive the light on him. You have to have the nomination NOW.
Oh well.
McCain or Obama? I attack in both directions. I’m tired of being sandbagged.
“BlueJay” claims –
“A lot of DEEP wounds are being inflicted on the base of the party.
And it is the Obama supporters doing it.
I respect them. I have held my fire mostly.”
Golly. And here I though I was holding fire. I feel like I’m being trolled.
And here I am, flopping around in the boat.
(sigh)
We all know you’re a Hillary supporter, “Blue Jay.” But mostly, I think you’re more anti-Obama than pro-Clinton.
All I hear from you is negative stuff about Barrack.
We’ve exchanged comments in the past. I think Obama is the better general election candidate. You don’t. We’ll see.
I realize “ksfarmgrrl” is hung up over the McLurkin campaign event. I think she’s straining at gnats beyond proportion, but I believe she comes by it honestly.
Call me a “zealot” if you want. But I’m not the Democrat who mopes about swapping his vote if my candidate doesn’t get the nomination. From the beginning of the primary campaign I’ve relished that Democrats had so many eminently qualified candidates. (Mike Gravel, not so much. But all of the others!)
But I’m your friend.
I’ll support whomever the Democrats nominate because I know the alternative.
Can you say as much?
My couple of previous comments were not directed at you Monkeyhawk.
I think I made it clear the direction I intended them.
The only…unfortunate comment I find from you is in diminishing the concerns of my friend kfg. Don’t do that.
You should talk to Capn or WS.
I won’t be anymore.
I respect your choice of candidate. I thank you for respecting mine and my reasons.
What is frustrating to me: I count as my friens BOTH Obama and Clinton supporters. Whatever the HELL happens totay, this week, this month … we MUST all be together in November.
This is the pledge I will make and I ask my friends to mak: WHICHEVER one wins, I will support him or her. 100, 1000, a million year-war McSame, singing Bomb Iran, tied to his Crusade-loving preachers wuld be a disaster for this country. We simply cann afford to let that happen because of our internecine squabbling.
Well said and exactly how I feel, Ben. We really do need another dose of that snowy night in February.
Doesn’t a great book talk about a time for everything? A time to sow and a time to reap…
There is a time for primaries and that time is now and until early June. We should all be enthusiastic for our choice and accepting of the enthusiasm of others for their choice. Then comes the time for unity!
Right now is also a time for tolerance.
So true linda. I remember visiting the ‘other room’ and talking to friends there. As you will recall the message was loud and clear: “Tomorrow we need to be united; we have sime serious butt to kick!”
capn, BlueJay, MH, KsFG, MrC, etc. Let’s fight like cats and dogs today. But tomorrow we must be together against the REAL enemy.
bth
Posted May 4, 2008 at 1:52 pm | Permalink
So true linda. I remember visiting the ‘other room’ and talking to friends there. As you will recall the message was loud and clear: “Tomorrow we need to be united; we have sime serious butt to kick!”
capn, BlueJay, MH, KsFG, MrC, etc. Let’s fight like cats and dogs today. But tomorrow we must be together against the REAL enemy.
——————————–
And who would this REAL enemy be Dr. Ben?
As usual, the Democrats confuse enemy and adversary when it comes to political and war terminology.
They put everything into the same category and apply the solution to both in the same manner and method.
“bth” offers –
“capn, BlueJay, MH, KsFG, MrC, etc. Let’s fight like cats and dogs today. But tomorrow we must be together against the REAL enemy.”
Exactly.
Although I’m not all that eager to fight like cats and dogs against the Clinton supporters. I know and understand and respect their reasons for supporting their candidate. We just disagree on the details.
And as much as I think relegating the Republic Party to history’s dust bin (with the Whigs and the Know-Nothings), I’m still not to the point where I consider Republic Party partisans as “enemies.” They’re just wrong. Consistently, dependably and perpetually wrong.
I think, sometimes, they have good intentions. But they’re wrong.
I disagree with a lot of my fellow Americans. But I don’t consider them enemies. Frankly, I’m not entirely convinced Americans have many “enemies” we haven’t created.
We get caught up in minutia such as flag pins and what a preacher might have said when he was on a rant and liked the sound of his own voice.
Is that really what we need to measure the qualifications of the next Leader of the Free World?
I guess nobody ever promised democracy would be pretty.
“You should talk to Capn or WS. - I won’t be anymore.”
These is a God in Heaven - thank you.
By the way, Farm Grrl, Peyton Manning plays for the Indianapolis Colts - his brother Eli threw the winning touchdown pass in the Super Bowl - after the refs blew the call on the helmet to football play.
And to the more reasonabable Obama supporters,
I offer you own zealots as evidence.
The record will show that when WS was at his lowest, it was I and farmgrrl tried to reassure him.
Well I’m glad he has his fight back. Too bad he is STILL pointed in the wrong direction.
Monkeyhawk is correct. I am not so much for Clinton as I am leery of Obama.
I have my concerns as to Obama. I get them dismissed by his more zealous supporters with promises of “hope” and “change”.
And they never show me a single con that can be worked with, as Obama asks us to trust him to do.
Also I get insulted by “Capn” and told that I am not needed by “WS”
And there is, as ever, the attempt to marginalize a friend of mine. To get her “on board” with folks whose candidate threw her and hers under the bus to woo the enemy.
Sorry. I don’t do that. I won’t. Not ever.
And Obama supporters as I have said only show me that they are willing to turn on me to work with my enemies.
I have said, and often, that the problem in America is that too many who should be voting Democrat foolishly vote Republican.
In this forum? It is my take we have more than a few who in their wallets, hearts, and minds are Republicans wanting to be Democrats. And eager to sacrifice real Democrats in the process.
26 Trackbacks
[...] Greg Sargent wrote an interesting post today on Math still isnâ??t working for ClintonHere’s a quick excerpt…and his other recent struggles, Barack Obama is still marching toward the Democratic nomination, the New York Times reported. Obama continues… [...]
[...] Union Review | Labor Movement News & Views wrote an interesting post today on Math still isnâ??t working for ClintonHere’s a quick excerptWright controversy and his other recent struggles, Barack Obama is still marching toward the Democratic nomination, the New York Times… [...]
[...] Union Review | Labor Movement News & Views wrote an interesting post today on Math still isnâ??t working for ClintonHere’s a quick excerptWright controversy and his other recent struggles, Barack Obama is still marching toward the Democratic nomination, the New York Times… [...]
[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]
[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]
[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]
[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]
[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]
[...] MNFUNKY wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerpt[…] Read the rest of this great post here […] [...]
[...] on Math still isn’t working for Clinton by Hillary Clinton … MNFUNKY wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerpt[…] Read the rest of this great [...]
[...] Carl Bernstein wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptHillary Clinton on Saturday will discuss the future of defense industry jobs with former employees of Magnequench at a town-hall meeting at Washington Township High School, just east of Valparaiso… The high school is not far from the … [...]
[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]
[...] Carl Bernstein wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptHillary Clinton on Saturday will discuss the future of defense industry jobs with former employees of Magnequench at a town-hall meeting at Washington Township High School, just east of Valparaiso… The high school is not far from the … Read the rest of this great post here [...]
[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]
[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]
[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]
[...] unknown wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptActually, Alabama is a primary state. They did support Jimmy Carter in 1976 (that’s “bluer” than Kansas anyway). But, since, by your own reckoning, they’re irrelevant to the general election, why should we be counting their primary … Read the rest of this great post here [...]
[...] Continue Reading [...]
[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]
[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]
[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]
[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]
[...] Kavon W. Nikrad wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptActually, Alabama is a primary state. They did support Jimmy Carter in 1976 (that’s “bluer” than Kansas anyway). But, since, by your own reckoning, they’re irrelevant to the general election, why should we be counting their primary … [...]
[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]
Jack…
I always enjoy coming to this Free Mp3 Download because you offer great tips and advice for people like me who can always use a few good pointers. I will be getting my friends to pop around fairly soon….
Washington State Department Of Retirement Systems…
I enjoyed reading your blog. What a great thing it is to be able to share information like this on the Internet….