New Dem Wave Cresting for Obama
ABC’s Z. Byron Wolf reports: When Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar endorsed Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., for President today, she buttressed his lead in a small but interesting subset of the already exclusive club of Democratic superdelegates: the Democratic New Wave.
Democrats retook the Senate in 2006 when they elected six new members and replaced a Democratic-leaning Independent from Vermont with another Democratic-leaning Independent from Connecticut. They lost a member in Joe Lieberman, but he still votes with them in all issues that don’t have to do with the Iraq war and Indy Joe is supporting John McCain for President.
It may not be the largest sampling of lawmakers, but in the subsection of superdelegates, Sen. Obama has a lead over Sen. Clinton.
In fact, of the five new Senate Democrats that took office in 2004, only Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., has endorsed Sen. Clinton. Democratic Sens. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, and Bob Casey of Pennsylvania have all backed Obama. McCaskill has been one of the most vocal supporters of Obama’s campaign and Casey stumped through Pennsylvania last week with Obama. The all-important primary there is the next battle in the protracted Democratic nomination fight and Casey hit the trail with Obama even though polls show Sen. Clinton with a substantial lead in the Keystone State.
Democrats, under a road map drawn by Clinton supporter and New York Democrat Sen. Chuck Schumer, made a point of recruiting moderate candidates in purple or even red states like Missouri, Pennsylvania and Virginia. It was part of a move back to a big tent sort of platform; McCaskill of Missouri opposes most Democrats where it comes to immigration. Casey of Pennsylvania is pro-life.
It is important to note that while Obama has a slight lead among New Democrats in the Senate, Clinton still has time to make up the deficit. While McCaskill is with Obama, the other poster boy for the New Democrats is Sen. Jim Webb, a former Republican and Reagan cabinet secretary. Webb may be necessarily uncommitted. He has been rumored as a possible running mate for either Clinton or Obama (Webb says he isn’t interested in being Vice President). But Obama campaigned for Webb in 2006.
Liberal Democrat Sherrod Brown of Ohio and independent Bernie Sanders of Ohio also remain uncommitted, though as an independent Sanders is not a Democratic superdelegate.
In the House, another notable New Democrat, Rep. Heath Shuler, D-NC, is according to some media reports going to go with Obama, although those reports are unconfirmed. Shuler is notable because he comes from a conservative district and got elected only after distancing himself from Democrats on issues like immigration.
Email
Santorum: Money Will Not Defeat Obama, Ideas Will
Rick Santorum's Full Speech at CPAC 2012
How many other SUB sections of superdelegates are there? In all the parts of this race that matter, Clinton can win. Let the voters of Pennsylvania and the rest of the primaries have their votes. Then let the Michigan and Florida votes count, or revote. In this election, that is what counts most for the success and continued life of the Democratic Party. If regular voters cannot have their votes, who in the h—cares about the votes of superdelegates!
Posted by: georgia | March 31, 2008, 2:21 pm 2:21 pm
I know this… if the votes in FL and MI are not allowed by the DNC then Barack Obama will NOT get our votes in November!
Posted by: OpusRooster | March 31, 2008, 2:28 pm 2:28 pm
As long as the media plays favorites.
The DNC playing GOD and screwing the people.
The super delegates playing Political fixer.
The Democratic Party loses.
If Obama is on the ticket, everyone is voting republican.
Shame they DNC are pushing voters away, and telling them the people do not matter.
A vote for America is a Vote against Obama
Posted by: seah | March 31, 2008, 2:31 pm 2:31 pm
Looks Like Obama is planning a Slow March to the Sea with an arrival date somewhere around the beginning of June.
There will be a new super delegate added each day to Obama’s totals and the magic number will be eventually obtained.
Hillary’s only hope will be to burn down her party to keep the nomination away from O.
Posted by: The Commander Guy | March 31, 2008, 2:34 pm 2:34 pm
The biggest dilemma the Dems have is not the back and forth between Hillary and Obama, but not allowing Fla. and Michigan’s votes to be counted. If that is not settled before the convention, all heck is going to break loose.Moreover, if these votes are not counted, Obama will never get my vote.
Posted by: Joan | March 31, 2008, 2:38 pm 2:38 pm
The entire process with this election should wake up Americans, along with all the crime and resigning going on at the Federal level! No media coverage or no open door at the White House for truth, fairness, or a true democracy being upheld. RALPH NADAR 08 for We THE PEOPLE, stop this unjustifiable, inside control. Obama, Clinton, and McCain are the current system, Nadar is for us, the people. Urging all to look at how to end this power in the White House.
Posted by: regionfive | March 31, 2008, 2:45 pm 2:45 pm
Although I am supporting Obama, I believe that the Democratic Party will emerge stronger by Clinton continuing the fight. The biggest weakness the Democrats have had is the lack of solid, forged, identity. I have accused them of being Demopublicans for years. Always taking a position just left of the Republicans. This is a fine strategy if you are angling to capture the moderate middle. When the Republicans went right so did the Democrats. All of a sudden the silent majority in the middle couldn’t discriminate one party from the other. So, Hillary, keep up the fight all the way to the Convention. The fight will lead to a stronger and more meaningful platform for the Democrats to take forward.
Posted by: BooMan | March 31, 2008, 2:47 pm 2:47 pm
This is just more effort to try to force Hillary Clinton out of the campaign. Come on Pennsylvania voters move substantially for Hillary and get this back on track!
Posted by: raf | March 31, 2008, 2:47 pm 2:47 pm
You guys havent figured out yet that 90% of the news the liberal media pumps out daily is just more Obama brainwashing?
Cant people think objectively and understand what is really happening here?
Obama cannot and will not win the general election.
However, Pelosi, Kerry and Kenney cannot and will not accpet another Clinton administration. This is what this has always been about.
Posted by: tomdavie | March 31, 2008, 2:48 pm 2:48 pm
How can one stay loyal to a Party candidate when the candidates have not stayed loyal to the Party?
Posted by: regionfive | March 31, 2008, 2:50 pm 2:50 pm
tomdavie,
Obama will win the election in a landslide. The only brainwashing going on is that Clinton still has a chance at winning the nomination or that this is a close race.
What is a fact is that if a Clinton is on any ticket, its game over for the Democrats, we lose the Presidency, the House and the Senate. All this progress for nothing.
Posted by: Stephen | March 31, 2008, 2:53 pm 2:53 pm
What is it with Florida always screwing up our democracy? Where were these sobbing Floridians when the DNC told them if they decided to move up their primary that they’d be shut out of the convention? You folks should have fought the move up of the primary. C’mon, we need Florida Democrats to wake up and participate in the country’s affairs. Get your head out of your *** Florida!
Posted by: madintheUSA | March 31, 2008, 2:54 pm 2:54 pm
madeintheUSA, the current system is screwing up America, not Flordia. Suggestion, don’t vote for the current system, which is Rep and Dems, they are the current screw ups. Take a look at the alternative, Nadar just may win me over prior to Nov., God Bless USA
Posted by: regionfive | March 31, 2008, 2:56 pm 2:56 pm
What is the difference between Hilliary, McCain or Obama. Expansion of government: same. Continuation of war be it Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq or Iran: same. Global carbon tax: same. Bailouts of corporate criminals with no prosecution, while you can’t file for bankruptcy: same. Government spying to find “homegrown terrorist” who own maps, read the constitution, or are “white al-Quaeda”: same. Wake up folks, your fighting over which dictator gets to rule over you. What’s all the fuss about. Either way you LOSE. So please, get off the chat rooms, go to work, save what money you can. And take care of your family. Because NONE of this media induced drivel has ANY effect on your life! The best thing you can do is turn off the tv, read a book, or educate yourself, as to what is going on in the world outside of private controlled, corporate, tax exempt media, military, industrial empires.
Posted by: cba | March 31, 2008, 3:05 pm 3:05 pm
It’s all about the economy and the general election. Republicans will have a field day with Obama in Nov. if he gets the nomination. Wright, Rezko and Emil Jones are bad news for Obama. I can see the republicans coming already.
Posted by: ken | March 31, 2008, 3:10 pm 3:10 pm
regionfive, NADER is a spoiler, he is running for himself and will not get the attention of any media at this point in time, he is a masked republican and is for the republicans and want to put another republican in the White House after WBush, what a shame. God bless America and God bless Obama. OBAMA08.
Posted by: BKMC | March 31, 2008, 3:16 pm 3:16 pm
I never would have thought that we are so stupid and naive – So many are being told Barak is the answer to everything – he is not – he is the beginning of trouble, he is a calm spoken radical who believes the crap that Rev Wright preaches day in and day out… His wife is an educated women who hates all non blacks….. Our government is in serious trouble if this guy gets the presidental nomination. He will run this country into the ground with his radical b.s— We are all equal – everyone of us americans must demand the same oppourtines so as we will be equal.How many poor americans fight by education to get ahead, and how many poor americans don’t bother to get out of the poor life? Each and every human being has to make a choice – daily choices and stand by their choices, should I be hindered because a person who is in the same situaction as me chooses to make a different choice and it leads to that person jail and me i am moving to the JR college.Get with it people we make our own mistakes and our own greatness.
Posted by: Cathy | March 31, 2008, 3:21 pm 3:21 pm
tomdavie is right. If Hillary gets the nomination then this nation will have a sea of disillusioned young and young at heart voters. These new voters are the new energized base for the Democratic Party and hopefully for a united America. Talk about throwing someone under the bus. And for what? So we can have the first women president? To satisfy the ego of Hillary and Bill? To prevent some backlash from donors? I don’t buy Hillary’s electability argument and I believe most other people don’t buy it either. I am a Republican who worked hundreds of hours for Barack Obama as an unpaid volunteer in Texas. We need to go further than no White America and Black American. We need no Republican and no Democratic America. Setting up the two party systems is the biggest hoax to divide a nation, to meet political agendas. I also feel that people see someone in Barack Obama so different from the typical sorry politician. They don’t want anything to scr*w this up, like cut-throat politics.
Posted by: Radmanaustin | March 31, 2008, 3:23 pm 3:23 pm
Georgia,
Everytime we approach a swing state which Obama clearly doesn’t stand a chance in, Obama Zombies start raising a cry for Hillary to drop out. The Democratic elite, led by the senators from the two coasts clearly are aiding and abetting this situation.
I agree with you, let the voters vote and we will decide who is the victor, not the pundits, not the Beltway elite.
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | March 31, 2008, 3:25 pm 3:25 pm
Georgia,
Why do you think Michigan and Florida should count? Just because you want Clinton to win even by fraud? Why did you not advocate that Michigan and Florida count before the start of the race? Only when Clinton is losing then you folks suddenly want Michigan and Florida to count badly!! Some of you really embarass Americans.
Posted by: kool | March 31, 2008, 3:27 pm 3:27 pm
Who is to blame for the Michigan and Florida mess? I have read many articles who put the blame on the shoulders of the Florida Democratic Party leadership, but I want names. (I’m not from Florida or Michigan, but if I was, I would want my “leadership” changed immediately!)
Posted by: Marilyn | March 31, 2008, 3:35 pm 3:35 pm
not only can obama win the general election he’s a shoe in.
mccain is an old man with old ideas and a war on his back.
Hillary is basically mathematically eliminated and has proven herself to be a bold faced liar.
obama is the hope for the future. deal with it!!!!!
Posted by: phil alegata | March 31, 2008, 3:35 pm 3:35 pm
If Obama get in, my vote is for McCain
Posted by: Yolanda Diaz | March 31, 2008, 3:41 pm 3:41 pm
I guess all of Clinton voters posted here. Where your the only person on the ballot that is not an election it is a yes or no and 44 percent said no in MI. Clinton did fund raisers in FL so in a way she campaigned there even though nobody else did. Neither could count without a full do over. MI tried to say only the ones that voted Dem Primary could vote in the revote when a lot of voters went over to vote for Romney. Personally you tweleve can vote for McCain and Obama will still carry close to 70 percent. Hilary would carry maybe 20-35 percent and we would have a Bush third term. Your empty threat of switching party doesn’t scare anyone! One big note is that Hilary can’t even run her primary finances and owes millions of unpaid bills and you want her to be in charge of the US finances. I will just say if it happend we will be looking up to the Great Depression and say they had it good!
Posted by: haydenlh | March 31, 2008, 3:44 pm 3:44 pm
DO NOT BLAME Obama for what has happened in Michigan and Florida…it is your own fault. Rules are the Rules. It has nothing to do with him.
Posted by: becky | March 31, 2008, 3:44 pm 3:44 pm
OPUSROOSTER
I AM GLAD YOU ARE A TRUE DEM. CONGRADULATIONS. I SEE YOU DONT LIKE TO PLAY BY THE RULES EITHER. I SEE YOU AND THE CLINTONS FEEL THE SAME WAY. OH WELL THE PARTY WILL SURVIVE WITH OUT PEOPLE WHO THINK IT BELONGS SOLELY TO THEM. HILLARY IS ON HER WAY OUT.
Posted by: LAUEPOW | March 31, 2008, 3:47 pm 3:47 pm
It’s mathematically improbable she will overtake Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., in pledged delegates, and her campaign has left a trail of unpaid vendors all over the country, with $8.7 million in unpaid debts.
Posted by: Lauren | March 31, 2008, 3:49 pm 3:49 pm
Thanks to Wright, “I SAW THE LIGHT”! Had I known THEN what I know NOW, I NEVER would have voted for Obama. He has lied and smooth-talked his way into the minds of those who sincerely wished for —(careful what you wish for)–someone “different”.
Will any of the media be brave enough to appear ‘racist’ and ask him the hard questions? Isn’t it important enough?
Posted by: joe | March 31, 2008, 3:52 pm 3:52 pm
opusrooster…why are you balming Obama? their own states chose to do this, and they fought again when it was brought up again for re-count. They should can all their representatives for mis-use of power and causing the mess.
Posted by: cindy | March 31, 2008, 3:52 pm 3:52 pm
More handwriting on the wall for all to see. Hillary is DOOMED.
Posted by: The Commander Guy | March 31, 2008, 3:57 pm 3:57 pm
Joe
In 2 years from now you will be saying i did make the right choice when i voted for him. Just be patient and you be happy that you did .
Posted by: Lauren | March 31, 2008, 3:59 pm 3:59 pm
joe, uou can keep bringing up the pastor, but it’s not working. Checked the national polls lately. You would find that maybe the lie that came out of Clinton’s own mouth did effect the peoples opinion. Most of the people (not you) can see the difference when it comes to honor and decency.
Posted by: Andrea | March 31, 2008, 4:00 pm 4:00 pm
Obama hasn’t won yet. Oregon voters haven’t voted yet. Last time I heard we live in America and have a right to have choices of candidates at this level and not be lead around like sheep and be told Obama is the winner. He hasn’t reached the golden mark yet, so why he is the obvious winner. He makes me sick.
Posted by: Kris | March 31, 2008, 4:01 pm 4:01 pm
Hillary was not for counting Florida and Michigan votes when she was up in the polls, as evidenced in the many interviews she gave (and I wonder why the media are not pressing this important point); but, now that she is down, she wants to paint Barack as the obstacle, and herself as the only true fighter for the peolple of Michigan and Florida.
Posted by: TK | March 31, 2008, 4:02 pm 4:02 pm
The only brainwashing that has been applied to the American people is in concerns that the electoral process outweighs the popular vote. If Clinton and her camp argue that it is an injustice against Democracy to not apply the electoral college and super-delegates as the primary factor of deciding the election; I argue that not valuing the popular vote demeans the foundations from Democracy itself. As representative of Andrew Jackson. As for Florida and Michigan, who were of no interest to Senator Clinton until she noticed she needs them to have any chance of clinching the nomination; I feel for them, however rules are rules, and to have them bent to cater to Senator Clinton is undemocratic to those who followed instructions. The vote was held in realization it would not count, and was not debated until after it demonstrated any gain for her.
Obama is not to blame for Florida and Michigan’s misfortune, the local government is. Clinton is using it as a ploy to justify her candidacy.
A candidacy preaching readiness “On day One,” when her experience in foreign policy has just proven to be exaggerated if not fraudulent.
The real questions are,
“Where are the tax records?” As well as What happened to Peter Paul? Transparency will set her free, however she does not have the motives to lift the party, rather than herself.
Posted by: Maurice | March 31, 2008, 4:03 pm 4:03 pm
georgia
I hope you were screaming from day 1. When your senate decided to ignore what the dnc said. Dont worry Hill plans on getting your delegates if, they dont give them to her she will be on the steps of the Supreme Court. Like you she only likes the rules when they work for her.
Posted by: Lauren | March 31, 2008, 4:03 pm 4:03 pm
I really do not understand how anyone from Florida or Michigan can be upset with Barack Obama because their votes are in question. The anger and outrage needs to be directed at their primary committees/officials of their state. AND both states also suffered a discounted vote by cutting each vote in half in the Republican Primary also, it just doesn’t seem to matter there since there was not a serious contest going on.
I’ve heard lots of comments on how the votes need to count, but what is the DNC suppose to do… suspend and/or change the rules after the fact? What is the point of having rules then? AND if we change the rules now… then do we change the rules again in 4 years when another state doesn’t like the position in which they get to hold their primary? THEN everyone is unhappy again! How does anyone… individuals, political parties or states learn to play by the rules…. Hmmmm maybe by suffering the consequences when they don’t play by the rules?
If you seat the delegates and split their delegate count evenly between Obama and Clinton, they get to participate limitedly in the Convention and flawed votes don’t get to impact an important election. AND while that might not sit well with everyone who wants their votes counted… it is the right thing to do. You cannot expect rules to change that you blatantly disregard just because you don’t like consequences. Would you expect to do that for your children? Or what if it wasn’t your state… would you be screaming with the same anger to change the rules?
Posted by: cattpam | March 31, 2008, 4:06 pm 4:06 pm
Nice reporting, but Bernie Sanders is from Vermont, not Ohio.
Most other senatorial mix-ups would be forgivable, but Bernie Sanders is a one-of-a-kind political hero that could only be elected in the great state of Vermont, which remains about 100 years ahead of the rest of the country on most issues…
Posted by: matt | March 31, 2008, 4:07 pm 4:07 pm
I watched an interview with McCaskill on Real Time and Mahr asked her why she was supporting Obama. As is usual with his supporters she didn’t really have an answer and then she said it was because of her daughter. She explained her 18 year old daughter had whined and badgered her until she agreed to support him. I was embarassed for her….
Posted by: Firefighter | March 31, 2008, 4:08 pm 4:08 pm
I will vote for McCain if Obama get the nomination. NEVER OBAMA!
Posted by: Linda Schon | March 31, 2008, 4:10 pm 4:10 pm
who many of you in this blog are parents? when you set the rules for your home do you break them just because your child screams thats not fair you didnt get my vote on placing those rules? well if you change them just because the kids didnt vote on them, you should know that you will probably be visiting the local county jal. children needs rules. just like adults d. if we break them there will be consequences that we will be responsible for.
Posted by: Lauren | March 31, 2008, 4:11 pm 4:11 pm
Linda
good for you go ahead and vote for McCain . He wont win.
This is just what Hillary i doing to this party. Divide and conquer. The problem is she will destroy the party before she leaves. She is unelectable
in the national . McCain and all republicans can not wait to sink their teeth into her. If she wins the nom. Over half of the loyal dems will be disenfranchised. there goes the base to the dem part.
Mario is saying who ever wins thee other should be vp. heck no Obama and edwards
Posted by: Lauren | March 31, 2008, 4:18 pm 4:18 pm
Why are some of you people so dense. The reason Florida and Michigan should NOW be heard is because of the nature of this particular contest, all the states now seem to have the opportunity to be heard. Originally, when the disqualification was accepted, the general belief was that a nominee would already be selected after New Hampshire (which is often the case) and we wouldn’t even need to hear from all the other states. Well, now that that is no longer the case, every American citizen should have an opportunity to vote. Obviously Obama and his supporters don’t want Florida and Michigan to vote because he knows he is not favored in these states and vice versa for Hillary. All that aside, the people have the right to vote. Otherwise it will get ugly in November. THE END
Posted by: marlo | March 31, 2008, 4:18 pm 4:18 pm
Cathy – how can Obama possibly do worse than George W.? The problem with Clinton supporters is that they are like Clinton herself. They can’t fathom that they may not get this nomination so they threaten to walk away from the party and vote for MCCain just as Clinton will drag this out til the nomination regardless of the effect it has on getting a Democrat in the White House. Are you serious? Just because you are losing? It is the most immature, irrational thinking I have ever heard of. Elementary school kids act more mature. Listen, she is a good politician but she is not going to be elected President. And as far as all of those people sayiong Obama will get crucified over Rezko and Rev. Wright, get over it. He’s handling it now and will handle it when it comes up. What are the Republicans going to do, bring up the same thing over and over again. It doesn’t work that way. Hillary buried herself and didn’t run as good of a campiagn. Simple as that. This man will become a great president and in 4 years we will be glad we voted for him. Just watch. Obama 08′.
Posted by: Tim | March 31, 2008, 4:21 pm 4:21 pm
i will never in a million years ever vote for the queen of sleeze Hillary.
Its time she learned the world doesnt revolve around her wants and needs.
Posted by: lauepow | March 31, 2008, 4:27 pm 4:27 pm
Marlo…
Hmmmm… we are dense? The rules are supposed to change because now the votes count. The whole reason that Florida and Michigan moved up against the rules was so that their primaries would possibly sway the vote. That is common knowledge. We all know why Florida and Michigan moved up their vote. BUT MARLO we all.. including Michigan and Florida knew the consequences of that choice.
So now that it really matters… and in the reality of today if Florida and Michigan had played by the rules their votes might have made a difference… the rules are suppose to change? PLEASE… are you grown? Rules do not change just because you realize that playing by the rules could have been beneficial to you. What a concept!
If I were in Florida or Michigan I would be mad as hell as well… but I would be screaming and yelling at the State Officials to work it out. Cut a deal, spend the money… do whatever you have to because your state officials are the ones who have disenfranchised you.. not any Presidential Candidate.
Posted by: cattpam | March 31, 2008, 4:28 pm 4:28 pm
This word is considered to be dirty now…
But…
I am a Liberal
The difference between the Clinton voters and Obama voters education wise,can be summed up in the following ideas.
If Hillary Clinton loses the nomination the supporters of Clinton vow to not vote for Obama and vote for McCain out of spite.
If Barack Obama loses the nomination when the popular vote, delegates, and contests won are all in his favor, I will leave the party.
Having proven itself corrupt after it’s initiation from the Republican secession of 1860, and the two thousand election. Both are cited examples of thieving Democracy. I have too much pride to co-operate with a logically and emotionally inconsiderate party.
In its stead, I would vote for either Mike Gravel, or Ralph Nader. I would rather see a candidate who is qualified and has a better approach to fixing my problems, than vote out of spite. And if they get the 5% for funding, it is a bonus.
Posted by: Maurice | March 31, 2008, 4:30 pm 4:30 pm
Marlo the people did vote in Fla.
They just get to have their delegats seated at the convention. They broke the rules they need to pay the consequences like everybody else does, Hillary is not above the rules even thou she believes she is above the rule and laws.
Posted by: lauepow | March 31, 2008, 4:33 pm 4:33 pm
Marlo – “…every American citizen should have an opportunity to vote.”
Right you are, Marlo, including all those American citizens who stayed home because they knew their votes wouldn’t count in an illegal election. So either have a re-vote, or abide by the DNC rules.
Posted by: Don | March 31, 2008, 4:33 pm 4:33 pm
If the superdelegates vote for Obama then they ae not listening to the voters. Shame on them and when their time comes to be re-elected they will be out of a job. I just don’t understand what the superdelegates are thinking. Do they ever listen to the people that voted them into office? I will never vote for them again if they go with Obama. What a mess. If Obama is the choice I am voting McCain. How can anyone vote for this man that does not love or care about America. I just don’t get it.
Posted by: Barb | March 31, 2008, 4:34 pm 4:34 pm
Barb how can you say that the super delegates are not listening to the voters if they vote for Obama. He is ahead in delegates, popular vote and most states won. So how is that not listening to the people. And voting McCain only says you are not a true democrat so go for it
Posted by: moe | March 31, 2008, 4:38 pm 4:38 pm
In response to Tim:
Rezko and Reverend Wright are “Skittles” in comparison to the Clinton’s Peter Paul scandal. Where she was caught lying under oath on tape, and cheated her way through the courts to be given the opportunity to even run as a candidate in this election.
There is far more dirt on Clinton than the media brings up, they are being far kinder to her then necessary. Obama could bury her on personal attributes, I admire the transparency and the intent to take the higher ground on all scenarios. A president should not be perfect by any means, but they should desire to co-operate and judge without bias for the good of himself/herself and others.
Posted by: Maurice | March 31, 2008, 4:39 pm 4:39 pm
All of you who want revotes in Florida and Michigan know full well that those voters will prefer Clinton just by virtue of the fact that, despite signing an agreement as did all the other democratic presidential candidates, she left her name on the ballot. In voting early, the Floridians and Michiganites broke the rules, and then Hillary backed them by breaking the rules, too. Because Obama’s name was not on the ballot in either state, as per their signed agreement, he will be perceived by the voters as having ignored those states. Therefore, the DNC should split the delegates equally in both states. It’s the only way to ensure fairness. Those states should not have broken the rules and voted early. Hillary, in leaving her name on the ballot in those states, also behaved unethically — as she tends to do of late.
Posted by: SierraBW | March 31, 2008, 4:40 pm 4:40 pm
Barb- With all due respect…
How can you say that with more contests, won and the popular vote it is not democratic for super-delegates to vote for Obama. You are WARPED. The only thing Clinton leads in IS super-delegates, and to say they shouldn’t vote for Obama is to negate the argument Clinton has to win the election. Read up sister!
Posted by: Maurice | March 31, 2008, 4:44 pm 4:44 pm
Any Democrat who would vote for John McCain because their candidate didn’t win the nomination needs to remember why we are at this juncture. Even most Republicans didn’t want McCain, but sadly he’s their best bet. The GOP can crow that their nominee is already chosen, ready to choose his running mate, and therefore ready for the convention if they want. What they don’t really want to admit is — OF COURSE THEIR CONTEST IS OVER — THEY DIDN’T HAVE ANYBODY WORTHWHILE RUNNING. The Democrats, on the other hand, had all great candidates, any of whom any Democrat would have been proud to vote for. Despite the sourness of the current back and forth between Obama and Clinton, they are two great candidates. The GOP has none.
Posted by: SierraBW | March 31, 2008, 4:47 pm 4:47 pm
Barb…
The Super Delegates are protecting their own jobs by supporting Barack. I believe that all the Super delegates realize that there’s on way he can win the General election without winning any of the Red States. Obama did not win ANY large states in the primary, so there’s no way he will win in November. I think the Democratic Party is only backing him because of his “media darling” status.
Posted by: Eric | March 31, 2008, 4:47 pm 4:47 pm
“Un-american”,”Muslim”, even “Woman”…
All rhetoric to distract you from which candidate is more resourceful. It is completely arrogant to claim someone who is running for public office has no interest in the country, especially someone who has a liberal voting record as strong as Obama’s.
Posted by: Maurice | March 31, 2008, 4:48 pm 4:48 pm
Barb, what planet are you from? Is there a different one where Clinton is ahead in delegates, most states etc? Please let us know about that planet!
Posted by: Andrea | March 31, 2008, 4:48 pm 4:48 pm
It seems that over and over the folks who are so hopping mad about Michigan’s superdelegates are not from here. Honestly, we knew the score and we knew the rules. And we were not “disenfranchised” – we voted. So please stop asking us to revote, we are not asking you to revote your state. And we are not so silly here to not vote for our preferred candidate in the fall because of some dumb decisions by our legislature. Michigan has been a blue state since 1992 and with our economy in shambles, it will continue to be a blue state.
So thanks again everybody for being so concerned about our welfare here, but it’s okay – we’re over it, I suggest you get over it too.
Posted by: MIguy | March 31, 2008, 4:51 pm 4:51 pm
Are you kidding me Eric?
The states that Hillary won excluding Texas traditionally vote Democratic. To deny his ability to campaign in those states is not an educated statement.
The margin in which these wins happen however can be brought into perspective, however the states that are “Blue” states were close.
Obama has proven he can gain Independents, Republicans, and win “Blue” states when opposing someone with an opposite approach to the country’s issues!
Posted by: Maurice | March 31, 2008, 4:52 pm 4:52 pm
Word MIguy…
I appreciate some truth on this forum. HAHA
Posted by: Maurice | March 31, 2008, 4:56 pm 4:56 pm
Funny isn’t it? All of the Clinton supporters hollering about count me count me from Flaorida and Michigan. Obama didn’t have the dates moved up and the potential penalties were known to all before they were moved so now that Obama is ahead it is a problem. Where was all of this yelling and screaming when the DNC chair told you what was going to happen and you did it anyway. You got what you asked for. As for the vote for her or him or go replubican that tells me you you people do not care about the issues. You would rather take 4 more years of McCain/Bush politics than vote the party line which either way will get us out of Iraq. Wow ain’t America great.
Posted by: r porter/va | March 31, 2008, 5:01 pm 5:01 pm
“Posted by: UnfareElection | Mar 31, 2008 4:45:05 PM
Any Democrat who would vote for John McCain because their candidate didn’t win the nomination needs to remember why we are at this juncture. Even most Republicans didn’t want McCain, but sadly he’s their best bet. The GOP can crow that their nominee is already chosen, ready to choose his running mate, and therefore ready for the convention if they want. What they don’t really want to admit is — OF COURSE THEIR CONTEST IS OVER — THEY DIDN’T HAVE ANYBODY WORTHWHILE RUNNING. The Democrats, on the other hand, had all great candidates, any of whom any Democrat would have been proud to vote for. Despite the sourness of the current back and forth between Obama and Clinton, they are two great candidates. The GOP has none”
This entry above is why I AM voting for Obama. Because he is the most qualified, and ignorance like this only sets us back. When we look towards each other and transcend racial, and gender barriers we cannot be hindered from our progress. Change comes from within, and I am strong enough to work with my fellow Americans, because I in many facets envelope the diversity, hard work and ethics that define us as the land of opportunity. As are many people who look to better themselves. This arrogance is not for leaders, but for people satisfied with mediocrity. We should not throw these people away, but include them, as they are obviously clouded as to what America is, and where America can go. Hopefully, we will move forward and progress ourselves, and truly become United States of America…
Posted by: Maurice | March 31, 2008, 5:04 pm 5:04 pm
Hillary needs 63% of the vote in each remaining territory to catch Obama without seating Michigan and Florida. She may win Pennsylvania but does have a shot of running the table. Those Michigan and Florida delegates should be split in half. She played unethically and did not take her name off of the ballot like every other Democrat did. If anyone is mad, be mad at the lawmakers of each state. Just because Hillary tried to circumvent the system for her own gain doesn’t mean she should be rewarded for it. It will be a shame if she is.
Posted by: Tim | March 31, 2008, 5:04 pm 5:04 pm
The DNC, Obama and his supporters could have fixed the mess the Dems are in, by first really working to fix the problem with FLA and MI, instead of blocking all the solutions. They also want Hillary to concede, so they can then make Obama the nominee, seat FLA and MI afterwards in a masquerade of Democracy, to then make those two states feel included, and supposedly give the Dems a chance to win in Nov. How can this be considered by the world community to exemplify an open and transparent elections’ process, that can be seen as truly expressing what Democracy really is about, if two of the 50 states don’t even have a voice? If this was something we saw of another country, we would be very outspoken in disagreement toward that country as not truly being a valid Democratic process. Fix it now, so it is a real Democracy, rather than later, and only showing an appearance of one.
Posted by: Rotweil | March 31, 2008, 5:05 pm 5:05 pm
I have had enough of this, my vote will go to the republicans over this ousting of Hillary and all the democrats jumping on the Obamawagon.
Posted by: Kay | March 31, 2008, 5:16 pm 5:16 pm
The conventional wisdom has been wrong all year. I think the ultimate failure in this wisdom is the suggestion that the Democrats have two strong candidates.
You’d have to live in a box to think that. No matter who wins there is a major portion of the Democratic party that will vote against the winner.
The Democratic Party has blown it once again.
Neither Clinton or Obama will win the election. McCain isn’t your normal Republican, and he has a large cross-over appeal. The only difference between Obama and McCain…is that OBAMA will say anything to get elected. Just google his different statements at different times!
Posted by: Ben | March 31, 2008, 5:20 pm 5:20 pm
Booman, you’ve just made the point that many of us are waking up to and one that Sen. Lieberman made yesterday – in what will become one of the most important remarks of this election season. He told the audience for “This Week with G. Stephanopolis” that the Democratic Party is no longer the Party of Bill Clinton and Al Gore (remember them, they won!). He said the Democratic Party has been hijacked by the left. I believe it – how else to explain the swooning over Obama and the rush to coronate him BEFORE THE REST OF THE STATES HAVE VOTED! Hillary Clinton represents that “centrist” element of the Party. She’s the one that many of us want. If we can’t get her nominated – fairly by the way. We’ll be moving over to John McCain. Then you can keep the remnants of what was formerly known as the Democratic Party.
Posted by: s. valenti | March 31, 2008, 5:23 pm 5:23 pm
Unbelievable – rather than vote for Obama – if he is the legitimately elected candidate, dems would rather vote for McSame. Ok folks, get over your pity party and grow up – McSame will change nothing, it’s Bush III. Remember, tax cuts for the rich, wrong-headed foreign policy, conservative supreme court judges. Now cool your tempers, level your heads and start thinking logically. If you do so, you’ll stick with the Dems and run, not walk away from the notion of voting for John . Use some sense!!
Posted by: Julie | March 31, 2008, 5:24 pm 5:24 pm
The straight talk express is B.S. Ben. I hate to break it to you.
McCain is not a person who has great positions. There are HUGE differences in the directions they have to offer. I know not everyone is consistent, but record wise, one of them goes in my interests. The same way that McCain doesn’t. Gravel, Nader, and Obama do. McCain is NOTHING like them and as an Independent I am for Obama, not McCain.
Posted by: Maurice | March 31, 2008, 5:25 pm 5:25 pm
I’m so tired of the media promoting Obama. He has no record to evaluate for Presidency. Matter of fact, he is a fake..but I guess it doesn’t matter, because the DNC and media will be ‘racist’ if they don’t promote Obama. My vote in Nov will be for John McCain. At least he fought for our country!
Posted by: diane | March 31, 2008, 5:27 pm 5:27 pm
Maurice–I don’t know you. But if Obama and Wright represent your interests then enough said! You can’t argue with crazy people.
The straight talk express is much more alive in McCain than in the Democratic choices!
Posted by: Ben | March 31, 2008, 5:31 pm 5:31 pm
I love how people put words into a candidates mouth. Obama never said anything about reparations.
The problem is that people look at the other side as villainous, or judge on personality. Instead of evaluating the candidates and seeing what is in our interest. To say “leftist” is dumb. Liberal is a reference to reform, and George Bush did “A LOT” of reform from No Child, to Patriot Act. It is identifying with the issues not the title. Joe Lieberman is bitter, and hungry for power. His interests never laid with the people so much himself.
Posted by: Maurice | March 31, 2008, 5:31 pm 5:31 pm
Weekly Standard points out that: since 2005, Barack Obama has donated THREE times as much as Senator Clinton to Democratic superdelegates:
The study found that the presidential candidate who gave more money to the superdelegates received their endorsements 82 percent of the time. That’s based on a review of elected officials who are serving as superdelegates and who’d endorsed a candidate as of Feb. 25.
In cases where superdelegates received money from Obama’s Hope Fund but none from Clinton’s PAC, Obama got the superdelegates’ support 85 percent of the time. And in cases where superdelegates received money from Clinton’s Hillpac but none from Obama’s PAC, 75 percent backed Clinton.
If 82 percent of the superdelegates are endorsing the candidate who donated more to them, that’s indicative of something other than a belief in ‘the audacity of hope.’ It sounds more like good old-fashioned bribery.
Posted by: carl | March 31, 2008, 5:33 pm 5:33 pm
Wesley Weng what you fail to mention has to do with the rules, and what the candidates signed, which allowed for a revote, which Obama blocked, for his own self interest. Apparently wining is more important than Democracy to Obama and his supporters.
Posted by: Rotweil | March 31, 2008, 5:36 pm 5:36 pm
Agreed Ben, how many times is Obama going to claim he didn’t know something or disagrees with something? Course this is all disagreement AFTER he got CAUGHT.
This NO guilt by association claim is also insane. Of course you worship at a place that shares your beliefs.
Posted by: John | March 31, 2008, 5:38 pm 5:38 pm
Ben,
As though every one of your friends are exactly like you. Have the same opinions, are responsible for your actions, and define you as a person…
I am refusing to say that he is not qualified because something his Pastor said, as I refuse to say that Clinton is not qualified because of Peter Paul, or Bosnia. What I am saying is that there is a clear difference in between political and personal life. If you want to bring personal life, people bring of the Clinton scandal. Does that illustrate anything about qualifications? NO.
For starters the “Straight Talk Express”
was talking about Al Qaeda dangers training in Iran. That is not true. “The Straight Talk Express” mentioned being Pro-Life, and switched positions three times in the course of the primaries. “The Straight Talk Express” originally had timetables for the war and now announces he wants to be there for hundreds of years. Rather than float with a slogan. Get educated. Look it up. I have. I read everyday. I am a Pennsylvanian for Obama. I have been watching ALL caucuses. The Republican candidate of my choice was Ron Paul. I know where they stand. You are following some political pick up lines, and not the facts Ben. I am sorry you are wrong.
Posted by: Maurice | March 31, 2008, 5:40 pm 5:40 pm
Bernie Sanders is from Vermont, not Ohio.
Those who are blaming Obama for opposing a re-vote in MI. and FL. are mistaken. The Democratic Parties in each state made the decision without any input by Obama. Clinton’s assertion that he has blocked re-votes is disingenuous.
And she had no qualms about “disenfranchising” these voters when she approved the plan, at the time when she was sure that she’d have the nomination all wrapped up by Super Tuesday.
Posted by: Marina Moonlight | March 31, 2008, 5:41 pm 5:41 pm
I follow primaries and results, but first off, I follow facts.
McCain did talk about being in Iraq for 100 years, but the comment is much different than how you say it.
He said that he didn’t mind if we were in Iraq for 100 years so long as our soldiers weren’t dying!
We have military bases in German and Japan. Most people want us to have a military base in Iraq, so long as our soldiers aren’t dying.
Also, many people want us to regain the respect of the world. I AGREE. That will not be achieved by abandoning Iraq at this moment. As soon as we withdraw, news stations across the world will be buzzing with pictures of the terrorists beheading anyone involved in the current Iraqi government. We need to support the right thing. We broke it. We MUST fix it!
Posted by: Ben | March 31, 2008, 5:45 pm 5:45 pm
I am and have always been a liberal. My vote was from Barack Obama in our primary, but if by some mishap that I cant foresee and Hillary wins, then my vote is for her. I personally don’t like the type of politics that she has played recently, but what she has said and done will only be multiplied by 100 from the Republicans. I don’t like the negativity from democratic candidate to democratic candidate since we are supposed to be on the same team, but again, it will only be worse from republicans.
When you really look at the policy difference between Barack and Hillary there is very little. My vote is for what I think is better our country… our jobs, our economy, ending the war, education… so on. I would hope every American feels the same way.
I think Barack is the best person to get us there, but if it is Hillary I will be behind her also. But, regardless of which nominee wins, I could never consider voting for 4 more years of George W. Bush, which is exactly what casting a ballot for John McCain is. I do not understand how someone who supports Hillary and her concepts for the country could ever even consider voting for McCain. The same being true for Barack supporters. Everything that I perceive and have heard Hillary say she stands for is in direct opposition of McCain.
As passionate as we all feel about Obama and Clinton… we need to stay focused on the big picture, what is best for country and who has the ability to get us there. AND the answer to that question is either Obama or Clinton.
Posted by: cattpam | March 31, 2008, 5:46 pm 5:46 pm
Marina Moonlight your mistaken, it’s common knowledge why the vote was blocked by Obama, it’s not a misguided observation of Clinton supporters. It is just not in his best interest. There’s nothing standing in the way of a revote but Obama. Funding has been figured out, there is time, but Obama refuses to say yes.
Posted by: Rotweil | March 31, 2008, 5:47 pm 5:47 pm
What does Reverend Wright talking… Have to do with Barack Obama’s positions?
Nothing.
If you run a campaign that says “Experience that Counts” “Judgement On Day One” and your experience/resume is fabricated it is unattractive. Thats why Clinton dropped in the polls. The whole basis of her candidacy was being questioned when she lied on the issue.
As for Obama saying he was not there. He was not there for the particular phrases that were on tape. But as mentioned, there are generational differences. Just 40 years ago Blacks were given permission to use the same bathrooms and women were given the opportunity to vote. In a country that preaches equality for all human beings. The generation before us has some animosity, it is not right, but it doesn’t mean we adopt is, or we use it to dictate our personal lives. Injecting it as a factor sidetracks us from the issues facing the country, like foreign policy, and economy. Where a lie in experience in foreign policy is of more damage then any notion that you heard someone say something.
BOTH John and Ben.
It is not the United States if we are divided by things as pointless as Race or Gender, and his position is clearly against Wrights. Just because he happens to be a black male does not mean he is the ambassador for all black males. As no body is an ambassador to their type. He is truly trying to do what is in the best interest of the country. “Monster” is not a sexist remark. Cookie Monster is a boy. But Geraldine Ferraro remarks, Jesse Jackson remarks, are all low tone injections. Look into things. They are politics there are a lot of dual meanings.
Posted by: Maurice | March 31, 2008, 5:50 pm 5:50 pm
Last line should have read. “Funding had been figured out, there was time, but Obama refused to say yes.”
Posted by: Rotweil | March 31, 2008, 5:51 pm 5:51 pm
In Primary it is not split by Blue or red states. Electoral Votes mean absolutely nothing. NY,CA,OH,MA,PA, will all vote Democratic. He will win those. All this proves is he has more crossover appeal.
Posted by: Maurice | March 31, 2008, 5:53 pm 5:53 pm
And MI and FL with a falling economy, they are not going to vote against their interest and vote for a candidate who is continuing Bush’s Tax cuts. It is not to their advantage.
Posted by: Maurice | March 31, 2008, 5:54 pm 5:54 pm
Repealing Bush’s tax cuts would ONLY harm the individuals in Michigan. People of ALL wage groups pay MUCH less under Bush than they did under Clinton. To repeal those tax cuts would start a depression. It costs more than 34,000 dollars LESS to raise a family of four under Bush than it did under Clinton.
THAT is the truth.
Posted by: Ben | March 31, 2008, 5:58 pm 5:58 pm
WHAT ABOUT Michigan & Florida? The Democratic Party is acting like a mafia or bunch of rogues. Why gang up on Hillary for a weakling like Obama? He has been associated with corruption and shady supporters. HILLARY SHOULD NOT BEND TO YOUR PRESSURE…..she should run AGAINST the party as AN INDEPENDENT if these attacks continue……we are not impressed with a CON ARTIST callled Obama
Posted by: PETE in TEXAS | March 31, 2008, 6:02 pm 6:02 pm
Campaigning advantages my friend…
Obama is running off of less than Clinton. And this Morning Governor Rendell mentioned how asking Hillary to quit early is like ending the basketball games in NCAA at 35 minutes. he said his bracket could have turned out differently. But I argue that to change the rules of basketball in the middle of the game, would also make the game turn out differently. The only thing you can do is play by the rules. Obama did not induce this situation the local government did.
Posted by: Maurice | March 31, 2008, 6:04 pm 6:04 pm
For those of you saying Michigan funding had been figured out… funding is the smallest aspect of the contest and one that has nothing to do FAIRNESS. If both states want their votes to count then both states should hold primaries… the ones where you go in the booth and vote. AND who is eligible, those who were deemed eligible to vote in the primary the first time. If you think the only object about holding primaries is a financial concern then your concept is flawed from the beginning.
The rules of contest have to be fair. AND the way you make it fair is to hold primaries that allow EVERYONE who voted the frist time to vote again. Do not disqualify a whole sector of the democratic party as suggested in Michigan and then say but we can hold a primary. THAT isn’t counting all the votes!
Lastly and I will keep saying it over and over. Michigan and Florida knew exactly what the consequences were when they held their primaries early. They have suffered consequences from the Republicans in the primaries and will suffer consequences from the Democrats…. UNLESS you hold another primary in which everyone deemed eligible to vote in the first primary can again vote in the second one.
Posted by: cattpam | March 31, 2008, 6:05 pm 6:05 pm
In EL PASO, TEXAS all delegates went for HILLARY! Yes! Impressive. We are not too impressed with the ghetto jive and talk of a con artist. Obama should stay in Illinois and benefit more from his corruption deals…how is that nice house Obama? Your con friend helped you much with cash. Sooner or later the light will shine on things you have done….the media can not be so nice forever…see you when you get caught….
Posted by: PETE in TEXAS | March 31, 2008, 6:06 pm 6:06 pm
but I do agree we should have abided by the rules. The rules that both candidates signed did have rules, and those rules allowed for a revote to seat the delegates of both states. People aren’t whining because their standing up for their rights, and Obama being disingenuous in spreading a misconception, has attributed to your lack of knowledge on the issue.
Posted by: Rotweil | March 31, 2008, 6:06 pm 6:06 pm
Joe, be honest you never supported Obama. If you did then you would not let the words of someone else change your mind. People are smarter than that, we don’t judge by someone else’s words. I listen to some of the stories my grandparents (both 88) tell and I feel ill. They should not have had to suffer the way they did because of the color of their skin. My grandparents are still voting for Hillary despite all the lies, now they are true supporters.
Posted by: Emilianna | March 31, 2008, 6:07 pm 6:07 pm
Pete in Texas… Last time I checked the Caucuses Obama won in Texas. Why is he a weakling?
He won more. Thats not weak. He is more transparent. That shows strength. Lying and not fessing up to mistakes is weak.
Posted by: Maurice | March 31, 2008, 6:08 pm 6:08 pm
There cannot be a revote in Mi. That would be unfair. Mi has an open primary but the revote would only allow dems to vote
Posted by: candy | March 31, 2008, 6:09 pm 6:09 pm
Emilianna
Could you please list the lies you talked about?
Posted by: Ron | March 31, 2008, 6:11 pm 6:11 pm
Wonderful thing about the process allows you to change political parties. Anyone that wanted to vote as a Dem could change parties to do so. MI is no exception.
Posted by: Rotweil | March 31, 2008, 6:14 pm 6:14 pm
Why change parties and vote for a democrat. If Michigan and Florida want their votes to count for a democratic nominee then hold a primary! AND allow everyone who was eligible to vote in the first primary vote in the second primary. THAT IS FAIR… Don’t make the public have to finagle around or change parties in order to cast a vote for the nominee of their choice.
Posted by: cattpam | March 31, 2008, 6:19 pm 6:19 pm
cattpam I agree in letting everyone have a vote regardless of party in MI, however in Cali where I voted only Republicans could vote for a Republican, so it’s not like having the rule the same in MI is unheard of.
Posted by: Rotweil | March 31, 2008, 6:24 pm 6:24 pm
Rotweil…I don’t care how you look at it, a re-vote would not have been fair. You also neglect to mention that Hillary agreed that FL and MI should not count before it was convinent for her. Obama said that he would agree to whatever DNC proposed as long as it was fair. Please stop blaming Obama for the Problem in MI and FL just another stragety for Hillary’s supporters. Be honest and call it for what it is!
Posted by: Emilianna | March 31, 2008, 6:26 pm 6:26 pm
Obama has nothing to do with the problem of Michigan and Florida, rules are rules, it is the states’ own problems, he will follow the rules of the state and the DNC.
Posted by: JIBRIL | March 31, 2008, 6:31 pm 6:31 pm
Emilianna it really doesn’t matter what you or I think of the revote, It was part of what both candidates signed as one of the two rules specified for each state to regain their delegates. That rule allowed for each state to submit a new plan, (the new plan being a revote), and I too am for the rules I know it’s not very convenient for Obama and his supporters, but Democracy should be the issue, not convenience
Posted by: Rotweil | March 31, 2008, 6:32 pm 6:32 pm
Democracy isnt inconvenient for Barack… but the rules in Michigan should allow everyone deemed eligible to vote the first time, able to participate in the re-vote.
If everyone cant participate, then your theory of Democracy is flawed and slanted.
Posted by: cattpam | March 31, 2008, 6:40 pm 6:40 pm
Harold Ickes, in charge of superdelegate “relationships” for the Clintons, has few if any next-generation democrats in his little black book of chits.
His only leverage is his reputation for crushing non-believers. Looks like the new generation refuses to be bluffed out of the game.
Posted by: Gorgon '08 | March 31, 2008, 6:41 pm 6:41 pm
cattpam If the new plan (the revote) specifies that only Dems can vote for Dems, that doesn’t stop people from changing their party to Dem to participate. Takes about a whole week to do. I’m sure if we really try we can come up with a whole bunch of scenarios that condemn the whole thing, but shouldn’t putting as much effort into getting MI and FLA vote to count really be where our energies should go.
Posted by: Rotweil | March 31, 2008, 6:47 pm 6:47 pm
I am so glad the democratic insiders are finally making their move. May be Hillary will join the republican party where she belongs. It is time to rally around Obama to victory in November. It is time to put an end to this political dynasty strategy, and give washing the face lift it has long needed.
Democrat for the White House !
Posted by: merle7 | March 31, 2008, 6:53 pm 6:53 pm
If I understand the re-vote proposal that Michigan put out, it would have disqualified a large sector of democrats who didn’t think their vote was going count so they did exactly as you said and voted in the Republican primary. My guess is they cast a vote against John McCain by voting for one of his opponents.
So if they have a revote, those individuals who voted in the Republican primary would be disqualified from voting for a democrat. AS I said earlier, I am a Barack supporter, but I will vote for Hillary if she wins the nomination. BUT, I cant support a re-vote that disqualifies democrats from voting.
I personally think that if Hillary is behind in delegates and the popular vote after the last primary then she should get out of the race. BUT, I side with Barack on this one… she should not get of the race right now. If a re-vote is to be held then it needs to be fair and it needs to be a traditional primary where everyone gets to go in and cast a the vote.
Now I myself do not feel that we are encumbered as democrats to find a way to count Michigan and Florida votes. AGAIN, they knew the consequences when they moved the primary up. BUT, if the states do decide to hold a primary… then fine count the votes fairly and let democrats vote fairly!
Posted by: cattpam | March 31, 2008, 6:59 pm 6:59 pm
Georgia, Right on if Fla, and Mich. don’t count there is no Democratic Party, lets see how Mr. Whine does missing 30 % of Hillary supporters.
Posted by: Beau | March 31, 2008, 7:04 pm 7:04 pm
I don’t see Michele Obama’s statements being as racist as Geraldine Ferraro’s or Reverend Wright or Rezko being as controversial as Peter Paul or Clinton’s Wal-Mart involvement. Once again Barbera your words are passionate but biased. There is even a picture of Bill Clinton in the White House after the Lewinsky Scandal with Reverend Wright. Senator Clinton wants to separate her position on a national issue NAFTA with flesh and blood. Why can’t Obama separate an approach to people with someone who is not in his immediate family? I apologize but your comment alone is foolish.
Posted by: Maurice | March 31, 2008, 7:09 pm 7:09 pm
Hillary already had many of the top behind her he is still playing catch up so like Bill said chill And there is no way you can win without the party united ask ted Kennedy and Jimmy carter hello 1980. 1968
Posted by: Bishop | March 31, 2008, 7:13 pm 7:13 pm
The true “Mr. Whine” is a person who votes out of their economic, health, and diplomatic interests. And votes in spite of what can be positive or the inevitable. Vote for McCain. Get four more years, and continue your path that leads to no improvement in Iraq. Vote and get no help in the economic realm. Vote for him and continue to watch NAFTA play a roll. The ignorance of some voters who call themselves “Democrats” is astounding.
Posted by: Maurice | March 31, 2008, 7:15 pm 7:15 pm
If Obama is to do all for us why didn’t he take care of his own people in his state with his slumlord friends
Posted by: Bishop | March 31, 2008, 7:23 pm 7:23 pm
cattpam I agree also that all voters should count regardless of party, I also believe that not allowing someone who was or is a Republican last time to vote isn’t right either, but again, these are issues that could have been worked out to give all the voters in both states an equal voice with the rest of the country, which is what is lacking now, and should be addressed and fixed well before now and the convention. Instead of the DNC telling us that the two states wouldn’t matter, they should have been working last year to resolve it. I really think you and I are pretty much for the same type of result here, which in the ends gets all 50 states truly represented.
Posted by: Rotweil | March 31, 2008, 7:25 pm 7:25 pm
It concerns me that Obama is getting this support. I truly feel these people will regret their backing of him. His whole campaign is scary.
Posted by: Kris | March 31, 2008, 7:41 pm 7:41 pm
Regardless how anyone wants to spin it, without the revote it will appear to many as an undemocratic election, and will then have the consequences in Nov. In my opinion, Obama and the DNC are only interested in solutions that don’t cost Obama delegates, and this isn’t part of a Democratic process but the hijacking of one.
Posted by: Rotweil | March 31, 2008, 7:48 pm 7:48 pm
Let’s get serious – Obama would not even be in the race if the Wright scandal had hit in January. As it is, he has only a razor-thin lead. Hillary is way ahead in PA, WV and KY. The media is obviously panicked about a prolonged fight and is trying to anoint Obama. Ridiculous.
Posted by: kfmiller | March 31, 2008, 7:55 pm 7:55 pm
If someone feel chitted he or she has the right to complain and say I wont vote. But only coward will say I wont vote for X or Y because my candidate lost.
Posted by: leche | March 31, 2008, 8:00 pm 8:00 pm
o, I don’t want Obama to give Hillary anything, I want her to have the majority vote for her, and if they don’t, than that is what the people decided, as it now, that’s not what we have if two states votes don’t count. As a Dem, I have always voted Dem. I will not vote Republican, but if the FLA and MI issue stays as is, it will be the first time I won’t be voting in the General election, and the first time I’ll be ashamed to be a Dem in my 30 years as a Dem.
Posted by: Rotweil | March 31, 2008, 8:03 pm 8:03 pm
o, it is conspiracy theorist like yourself that have convoluted the issues in this race for so long it is beyond description. It’s the equivalent of calling for her tax returns, like she’d run for the highest office in the country and have something so obvious to use against her, is the best analogy that first comes to my mind.
Posted by: Rotweil | March 31, 2008, 8:23 pm 8:23 pm
o, and then there you go asking for the tax returns lol
Posted by: Rotweil | March 31, 2008, 8:26 pm 8:26 pm
Michigan and Florida need to have their say. All the states need to participate and then we can decide who should be the candidate. In the Rasmussen poll today, Hillary trails Obama by 3% and last week she lead him. With all the negative press, there isn’t any wonder her poll numbers are down. Media bias is outrageous!
Posted by: Two-cats | March 31, 2008, 8:26 pm 8:26 pm
Obama won 12 states in a row – before the Wright scandal. Wishful thinking is not going to unload all the ammo that he’s handed the Republicans.
Posted by: kfimiller | March 31, 2008, 8:34 pm 8:34 pm
Being an Illinois transplant, there are many, many relatives and friends in Missouri who are very angry about Claire McCaskill. Obama barely won Mo. In fact the networks had projected Clinton as the winner. When McCaskill ran against Jim Talent we all pulled for her. No more.
Posted by: RL in Illinois | March 31, 2008, 8:46 pm 8:46 pm
Wright will be old news in Nov. And his favorable rating has gone up dispite this
Posted by: erin | March 31, 2008, 8:47 pm 8:47 pm
Obama has been Senator for three years -and running for President for two of them. This guy is a huge risk and another Jimmy Carter waiting to happen. No way he has the experience to justify the kind of support he’s getting. He needs to hang out in his crib while the adults debate.
Posted by: kfimiller | March 31, 2008, 8:49 pm 8:49 pm
Hillary can’t hurt the Democratic Party. She is a looser and will just go away and hide under a rock. She has served a purpose by being such a dreadful person, and making Obama look so good in comparison. He is now, Obama the Dragon Slayer. He has already shaved 6% off her lead in Pennsylvania and looks set to go on and sweep the rest of the primaries. Then he can campaign in Florida and Michigan unopposed and unify the party. Clinton can’t do that, she has run out of support and money. I feel a bit sorry for poor old bomb bomb McCain. He won’t even know what hit him.
Posted by: John | March 31, 2008, 8:51 pm 8:51 pm
Claire McCaskill may be supporting Obama, but Missouri is actually polling for McCain. This is what I fear the most…too many of Obama’s wins going Republican when the votes are tallied in November. Hillary has won the big, blue states; Obama has red state victories. That should say something to the superdelegates. Let’s get all the votes in, including FL and Michigan; then there will be better information for the superdelegates. They should not be deciding now!
Posted by: Two-cats | March 31, 2008, 8:54 pm 8:54 pm
I do not believe Hillary is being treated properly by the media or by hierarchy of her own Party. They both have bought in to the Karl Rove theory – If you can’t beat her, fair and square, thrash her to death.
They are all proclaiming ‘landslide ‘ Obama as they victor while it is quite possible for this race to change because the margin is not that overwhelming. I will be like of other Democrats in the fall – if Hillary is not treated fairly by her own Party ( I could care less about the media ) and sit out the General Election. This is not a threat – it is a promise.
Posted by: John Brady | March 31, 2008, 8:58 pm 8:58 pm
States where the voter outcome in the primaries have increased dramatically for the Democrats. Voters in “Blue” states will stay “Blue” The red states have more people participating and Obama has more cross-over appeal.
Posted by: Maurice | March 31, 2008, 8:58 pm 8:58 pm
If we’re going to do guilt by association, then I guess Rezko and Wright are to be part of this. We can spin this all day long if everyone really wants to.
Posted by: Rotweil | March 31, 2008, 9:00 pm 9:00 pm
I can’t believe Clilnton is still on his way to the presidential chair, hasn’t she understood that we’ve already saw her as an oportunist?
I don’t think she’ll be the next USA president, unless she acts like G. W. Bush did in his first term to win and many think she probably would…
Posted by: Pickone | March 31, 2008, 9:02 pm 9:02 pm
All I’ve got to say is, Hillary Supporters are 1/2 of the Democrats voting, and will not forget the SuperDelegates who do not vote for Hillary……..hopefully those SuperDelegates want to retain their seats when we vote again in 2 years…..I think the obama-supporting SuperDelegates should be challanged for their Democratic seats by other Democrats—–they very well could lose their seats, because it would be brought up that the incumbant Democratic politician backed obama….
Win or lose, Hillary Supporters have VERY VALUABLE VOTES to speak their minds with. The biggest issue we Hillary Supporters can gain movement and “FORWARD CHANGE” on is the DisEnfranchised Michigan and Florida votes and their Delegates:
Hillary Supporters can refuse Howard Dean’s suggestion to contribute to the General Election campaign fund UNTIL THE MICHIGAN & FLORIDA VOTES & THEIR DELEGATES ARE COUNTED.
obama supporters and others can say that “those threats won’t work, and blah blah blah”—-but we are American and we deserve to boycott and can use our vote HOW WE SEE FIT TO USE IT.
How’s THAT for obama’s so-called “power to Unite people”??? His statement is ONLY 1/2 TRUE, else he has a lot of beggin’ and MORE promising to do……
Posted by: COUNT THE MI & FL VOTES & SEAT THEIR DELEGATES | March 31, 2008, 9:04 pm 9:04 pm
The way she is being treated by media is impartial. She is surviving, but there is plenty of the race still ahead. Being projected to win PA is not an insult. It is what she does afterwards. It is a fact that the Math is against her.
Posted by: Maurice | March 31, 2008, 9:04 pm 9:04 pm
Maurice, yeah my point is spin usually does go Nowhere, and really isn’t going to bring gas cost down, help the economy, or any of the other real issues that face the nation. It does require though a fair election process.
Posted by: Rotweil | March 31, 2008, 9:09 pm 9:09 pm
Obama may have more crossover appeal, but Democrats may have more crossovers to McCain if Obama is the nominee. McCain is a dinosaur, war monger, disagreeable person, even a loose cannon
but the media will portray him as moderate and brand Obama as liberal and inexperienced. If Obama is the candidate, the media will turn on him. Just wait and see.
Posted by: Two-cats | March 31, 2008, 9:12 pm 9:12 pm
Am I concerned that a bunch of freshmen senators are voicing support for Obama? Not really. It makes sense that as “newbies” they would be pursuing the “next new shiny thing”. More troublesome is that the DNC is not succeeding in reining in premature endorsements by superdelegates now that the race is very close. It tells me that the DNC is talking out of both side of its mouth. That they risk alienating further those Clinton supporters who are ready to bolt if it appears that the DNC is tipped in Obama’s favor. Her supporters are not stupid. If it appears that support is lining up behind their “boy” Obama, some voters in the upcoming states may think it’s just easier to go with the DNC “backed” candidate. Clinton supporters will not accept empty rhetoric while superdelegates appear to independently come out to support Obama before the remaining primaries are held. Again, we’re not stupid.
Posted by: s. valenti | March 31, 2008, 9:30 pm 9:30 pm
I think the debate and competition between Barack and Hillary have been good for the democrats, but I think it is bad when supporters and surrogates of the campaign try to threaten defecting the party if their candidate doesn’t win!
I would think that anyone who is truly voting on the issues or on party lines need to realize that this a close race. The amount of people who support Barack are virtually the same as those who support Hillary, BUT only one winner. I would hope that everyone would take a breath and rethink your second choice of McCain if your particular Candidate doesn’t win. Why must Barack be a saint and Hillary be the devil… or Hillary be the only choice and Barack be a bad choice. Both are great candidates with nearly the same views on policy.
I intend to vote in the fall for a Democrat and I am hoping that democrat is Barack Obama… but, if it is Hillary I will vote and support her as well… AGAIN, because I care about jobs, the economy, health care, getting out of this war and the education of our children! The only two candidates that are interested in changing status quo in all those areas are Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
Think about it people… we are talking about the next 4 years of our country! Do you really want more of the last 8 years?
Posted by: cattpam | March 31, 2008, 9:39 pm 9:39 pm
Gwen, Caucus results – the most undemocratic way of running an election. Check out the sites that detail abuses by the Obama campaign. Somehow, I’m thinking that caucuses will go the way of the Atari – your generation should remember that!
Posted by: s. valenti | March 31, 2008, 9:42 pm 9:42 pm
W H A T C A U C U S E S ?????
There ARE no caucuses in the General Election……(o no, somebody is IN TROUBLE…)
Posted by: COUNT THE MI & FL VOTES & SEAT THEIR DELEGATES | March 31, 2008, 9:47 pm 9:47 pm
Whether you like the Cacuses or not.. they are part of the process. In fact Bill Clinton took Texas under the same process that Hillary lost Texas. It is silly to count who won a state by the popular vote when the popular vote does not elect a party candidate nor our next President. The media and those keeping tally should count a state won in the same way they win the nomination… via the delegate count.
Hillary did not win Texas… Barack did. Whether you like it or not… the popular vote does not win anything in the US or we would be saying President Gore instead of President Bush.
Posted by: cattpam | March 31, 2008, 9:56 pm 9:56 pm
obama ALSO went around saying that he
“was a Professor at the University of Illinois” in Chicago……but then the University came out with a report that he “taught things that a Professor WOULD” when he “filled in teaching” for 6 months at the University……
PROFESSOR ???
N O T.
Posted by: COUNT THE MI & FL VOTES & SEAT THEIR DELEGATES | March 31, 2008, 9:59 pm 9:59 pm
cattpam:
as I said…..
WHAT caucuses???
There ARE NO caucuses in the General Election against McCain…….
(o no, somebody’s in trouble if they get the Nomination……)
Posted by: COUNT THE MI & FL VOTES & SEAT THEIR DELEGATES | March 31, 2008, 10:02 pm 10:02 pm
Were the rules and consequences for primaries laid-out before Florida and Michigan decided to move their primary dates? I think that they were. These two states did so thinking that their relevance would be increased, right? Had they left their dates as set, they would have been completely relevant, right?
I know that it’s a sensitive subject outside of our state (I live in Florida) but we knew what was at stake when our primary date changed but we didn’t care about the democratic ticket because McCain has got our vote! Let the two demolition party participants sweat out their race and argue about our votes, we couldn’t care less. McCain is our man!
Posted by: Iso | March 31, 2008, 10:03 pm 10:03 pm
I really think McCain would lose to Obama. Look how Obama got the youth to come out and vote. No one under 40 will vote for McCain. They just can’t relate to him. Obama will also have older people vote for him. I just don’t see McCain winning
Posted by: maryland | March 31, 2008, 10:05 pm 10:05 pm
There may not be any Caucuses in the General Election… but ummmmm there are Caucuses in the democratic primary that you must win in order to become the Nominee.
Hillary or Barack does not get to the General Election until they get the delegates in the primary. AND again, you dont have to like it, but there are lots of delegates that are awarded through Caucuses in the primary.
Posted by: cattpam | March 31, 2008, 10:07 pm 10:07 pm
Do these fools know how many Democrats are going to crossover in November if the elitist leftwing nutjobs are able to steal the votes of true Democrats? WE will never vote for you Obama nuts again
Posted by: geevill | March 31, 2008, 10:15 pm 10:15 pm
The missouri Democrat has lost a lot of support after her support for Obama instead of Hillary. Woman supports are moving away from her.
Posted by: ts | March 31, 2008, 10:23 pm 10:23 pm
ok, cattpam: go out on the Web and tell me EXACTLY HOW MANY CAUCUSES ARE LEFT in the Nomination Process…..oh, and DON’T COUNT Puerto Rico, because they recently CHANGED from a caucus format to a PRIMARY…..
I’ll wait while you search…..
Posted by: COUNT THE MI & FL VOTES & SEAT THEIR DELEGATES | March 31, 2008, 10:24 pm 10:24 pm
It isnt how many Caucuses are left… it is that the Caucus is part of the democratic primary process. AND delegates have been awared from Cacuses, including Texas which gave Barack 99 delegates and Hillary 94 Delegates. So via the delegate count Barack took Texas and Nevada.
Posted by: cattpam | March 31, 2008, 10:34 pm 10:34 pm
PLEASE tell the folks in Florida and Michigan that it is NOT Clinton’s nor Obama’s fault that their Primary votes don’t count. Bombard your state govermnents for making the change against the rules of the DNC. It is important to pay attention to the laws and resolutions that local and state goverments put in place. IF the delegates are seated at the convention, they should be divided equally or not at all. In the end Florida and Michigan voters will get to cast a ballot in November. See you at the polls.
Posted by: Nancy | March 31, 2008, 10:36 pm 10:36 pm
Nancy…
I have been saying that… both Florida and Michigan knew the consequences for moving up thier primaries. Their votes were discounted by half in the Republican primary.
I am like you.. I said seat the delegates from both states, but split the delegate count evenly between the candidates. You dont change the rules in the middle of the process.
Posted by: cattpam | March 31, 2008, 10:40 pm 10:40 pm
o: …..but the OTHER AMERICAN STATES HAVE YET TO VOTE ON THEIR CHOICE OF A NOMINEE…..unless obama wants to DisEnfranchise THEM, ALSO…..sounds like he wants to, having his “endorsers” do his dirty work and call for her to “withdraw”……
o, but wait until after PA votes…..meet ya back on this blog the night AFTER their Primary and we’ll discuss it further……..
Posted by: COUNT THE MI & FL VOTES & SEAT THEIR DELEGATES | March 31, 2008, 10:45 pm 10:45 pm
We sure will see in Nov if they do split the delegates of Fla and MI and don’t seat them till the convention. It will be a gotcha moment that will only benefit the Republicans. Go ahead, disenfranchise those states. See ya’ll in 2012, maybe you’ll learn something by then.
Posted by: Rotweil | March 31, 2008, 10:50 pm 10:50 pm
Sounds good… because she need to win every state left by 65% or a 15 point margin over Obama… I dont think that will happen! So sure I will meet you here after the Pennsylvania Primary and we will see if she took the state by at least 15 points.
I like Hillary.. I just like Barack better and I think he will not only be our nominee but our next President!
Posted by: cattpam | March 31, 2008, 10:50 pm 10:50 pm
All candidates were on the Dem ballot in Florida – and Obama was the ONLY candidate to break the rules by airing TV ads.
Florida should be counted as is.
Yes – the Repub legislature broke the rule and changed the date of the primary – but the PURPOSE of the rule was to prevent other states voting before the first 4 states.
Florida voted AFTER the first 4 states.
Count Florida!
Posted by: JoseyJJ | March 31, 2008, 10:51 pm 10:51 pm
JoseyJJ…
AGAIN…Florida knew the rules and broke the rules. If Florida wants it’s votes counted then Florida needs to hold another primary. If Hillary wins that primary then she wins the primary. But taking the results of a primary that broke the rules should not happen. What happens in 4 years when another breaks the rules because they dont like the order they placed in by the DNC.
AND again I say… if I lived in Florida or Michigan I would be mad as hell also.. I just would be mad as hell at the state officials who chose to move the primary and damn the rules. That is where you anger should be and your effort should be to get them to hold a legitimate primary.
Posted by: cattpam | March 31, 2008, 10:59 pm 10:59 pm
Let’s review a summary based on actual chronology:
The DNC imposed the penalty against the voters even though the Republican controlled legislatures in MI and FL moved the dates up ahead of DNC rules. Yes the MI state dem committee played a role but they could not have done it on their own.
People need to realize what really happened is: the GOP machine willingly did this to try to make the voters mad in two major states so they will vote for the republicans out of anger in Nov. The idiots at the DNC like Dean and the credentials committee folks played right into their hands. All these rich fat cats in charge of the DNC and all the politicians (every representative and senator in the US Congress is at least a millionaire in case you did not know) will be just fine for the next four years no matter what happens to the party, the voters, or this election.
Politicians know that voters have short memories. The voters are the ones who suffer disenfranchisement and it is the candidates who should be standing up for them. The problem lies in the fact that both are entrenched in party politics and need the support of the very parties they need to be fighting against on behalf of the voters. So let’s see who had the guts:
Last year, both candidates, said they would honor the party’s decision by not campaigning. In other words, they both play the political game to be a part of the dem party… just politics.
Prior to the voting in MI and FL, both said they expected the delegates to be seated at the convention no matter who the nominee turns out to be.
During negotiations in FL and MI, Clinton said she would agree to counting FL as is or a revote and giving Obama all the MI undecided votes (even though they were not all his) or a revote. Obama said he would honor any agreement the DNC agreed to. But, the Obama camp blocked the seating of FL and MI delegates when compromises were proposed. Splitting the delegates 50/50 in both states is the same as not counting at all. Regardless of what you think is fair or unfair with regards to votes, counting the votes and seating the delegates is certainly more fair than not counting at all.
If Obama is so confident he will win the nomination, he should be standing up for the voters. He should be accepting how they voted for the good of the party and the country because MI and FL voters are needed by the dems in Nov. His surrogates have threatened to sue the DNC if they seat the delegates and have implied there will be rioting and shift of black voters to McCain. I dont think America will stand by and let idle threats once again scare them. The courts will decide either way. We are a nation of laws… not a nation of bullies regardless of what Obama’s surrogates think. Anyone who cannot win with all the votes counted does not have a mandate from the country to be its leader. Is it at all surprising to find that Bush, Cheney, and Obama are all cousins?… Same bat time, same bat place… Anyone claiming MI and FL deserve to be punished and knew the rules are implying this was a decision by its voters and that is clearly not the case.
“Children shouldnt suffer but for the ignorance of the parents.” Anyone advocating NOT seating the MI and FL delegates and allocating the delegates based on the voting are just plain behaving in an unAmerican way.
Posted by: The Real DCVoter | March 31, 2008, 11:06 pm 11:06 pm
Excellent post, The Real DCVoter !
THAT is the TRUTH, even if people don’t want to acknowledge it….
Posted by: COUNT THE MI & FL VOTES & SEAT THEIR DELEGATES | March 31, 2008, 11:12 pm 11:12 pm
“o”: …..therefore, a “lecturer” is occasionally known to UnderGrads as a “GradAss”, and not a Professor shall be…….obama WAS A LECTURER, PLAIN AND SIMPLE. He EMBELLISHED his position title. Period.
Posted by: COUNT THE MI & FL VOTES & SEAT THEIR DELEGATES | March 31, 2008, 11:18 pm 11:18 pm
The court case for FL that asserts the DNC violated the constitutional rights of its voters by not treating all states equally for scheduling (2 states were allowed to move up their primary/caucus dates and 2 were punished) is valid and was sent back to the district court level for refiling now that the voting has occurred (it was considered a procedural error to file suit prior to the voting). Attorneys on behalf of FL voters vow to take it all the way to the US Supreme Court. The attorneys are correct… if the DNC had simply said no state can vote before Feb 5, all the voters would have been treated equally (equally bad is just as fair as equally good). Because they were not, and the penalty imposed disenfranchised the voters because of the deeds or decisions of a select few, then I think it does appear to be a constitutional rights issue of all voters and not related to the DNC’s rights to run their primaries as they see fit. Schools, businesses, agencies, citizens, etc. have the right to run their operations and lives as they see fit IF AND ONLY IF they do not violate constitutional rights. Why should the DNC be immune to law?
Posted by: The Real DCVoter | March 31, 2008, 11:21 pm 11:21 pm
Maurice: the difference is CLEARLY that Clinton admitted that she misspoke and made a mistake……..obama STILL BELIEVES THAT HE WAS A “Professor”.
Please……don’t insult REAL Professors: “anyone who speaks in front of a classroom is deaned the title “Professor”…….obviously, Maurice, you have not been to Graduate School or beyond.
Real “Professors” have to EARN their title, they just aren’t “people who talk in a classroom”.
Posted by: COUNT THE MI & FL VOTES & SEAT THEIR DELEGATES | March 31, 2008, 11:25 pm 11:25 pm
Whether or not it is following the rules to not seat MI or FL, Obama’s refusal to allow a revote will cost the Democrats those state. He ran ads in FL and still lost. The Democrats are giving up one of the most give me elections in history. Obama can not win the swing states. He has run the most devisive campains (Bill Clinton’s fairy tale comment was about Iraq, not race). He is part of the Cook County political machine. Wright and Rezco are not the end of troubling associations. This is going to be a bloodbath.
Posted by: Jay | March 31, 2008, 11:29 pm 11:29 pm
Thx WCM… Jay, I read an article earlier that is bringing out much more damaging information than just Wright and Rezko against Obama. Let’s hope the MSM starts putting it out there in time.
Posted by: The Real DCVoter | March 31, 2008, 11:38 pm 11:38 pm
o. There are many politicians and non-politicians with degrees from ivy league schools. In fact, your boy Bush is one of them. It obviously means nothing with regards to intelligence since we know those degrees can be bought. Obama is a silver spoon baby, related to Bush, and may or may not have valid degrees. In any case, it has no correlation to the issue of Obama’s false claim of being a Professor. He gave some lectures… he was not a Professor.
Posted by: The Real DCVoter | March 31, 2008, 11:42 pm 11:42 pm
madintheUSA, it’s the GOP who control the date of primary election in Florida. Mr. Obama, if you ignore the voters in Florida, you are no different than a GOP wearing Dem mask.
Posted by: stock_craft | March 31, 2008, 11:58 pm 11:58 pm
The Commander Guy I agree, Wikipedia has become just an easy source for them to write what they want and use for their own purpose, because of the format they use to obtain info.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 1, 2008, 12:39 am 12:39 am
If Obama can beat a CLINTON in the democratic primarys, he will have no problem with John Mcain. He has more votes, more delegates, more states… He may lose Pennsylvania, but he is going to win North Carolina, Oregon, and considering that 30 percent of my home state is a suburb of chicago, I’ll venture he carries Indiana by 8%. Sorry Clinton people, its just not going to happen… Vetrans for Obama ’08…
Posted by: Matt | April 1, 2008, 12:42 am 12:42 am
question o which part of what you in your last post qualifies Obama for POTUS?
Posted by: Rotweil | April 1, 2008, 12:54 am 12:54 am
Not really any part bud, except for the part that all my republican iraqi combat veterans are voting for him, and that he’s winning. I guess by all your definitions of experience, the first George Bush should have trounced Bill Clinton… And How does Hillary plan on competing with John Mcain on experince, with 48 percent negative polling, and no african american vote? Listen, I don’t dislike Hillary, and I think her continued campaigning is good for Obama by preparing him for the general… But the only experiance you need to be president, is the experience of having more votes. I’m not sure what experiance Hillary supporters are looking for, considering she only has a few more years in the senate than Barack… Is it being a first lady? Well then I guess she is more qualified than him… By the way, my fiance draws peoples blood for a living… she’s been at it for ten years… so put your arm out, because I have a needle, and ten years experiense… (Sorry about the spelling, I’m a veteran, not a college graduate..)
Posted by: Matt | April 1, 2008, 1:08 am 1:08 am
o, I guess I’m to take it from your answer, that you don’t think Hillary is the candidate, but you can’t come up with anything from his history that you’ve written that quailifies Obama.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 1, 2008, 1:08 am 1:08 am
Lol… Your a good guy Rotwiel, and I respect your loyalty to your canidate… I personally believe that Barack has shown in his ability to run his campaign without it going broke, that he has the fiscal responsibility to be president… I also believe that he has shown in his continuing improvement in his debate prefomances, and campaign speeches, that he gets better as he goes… he learns from his mistakes, and I will admit that he has made some. I think that working with the likes of my own esteemed senator from Indiana Richard Lugor on Nuclear Non Proliferation, that he shows an ability to work across the isles… But who know, I am a white man engaged to an african american woman, with three mixed children, and maybe I just want someone for them to look up to besides Alicia Keys, and Beyance…. Either way it has to be a democrat in 08′. I just like obama more:)
Posted by: Matt | April 1, 2008, 1:20 am 1:20 am
O, come on man… I’m not intending to tear you down… I’m just joking around. Everyone needs to turn the focus outwards… We are missing a golden opportunity here… Its two on one… If we could both go after Mcain, instead each other, than whoever comes out on top here, we will all win.( I still like Obama though) STOP THE MADNESS!!
Posted by: Matt | April 1, 2008, 1:26 am 1:26 am
Matt, that’s the first response I’ve gotten today which seems to me authenic. You’re voting from a sense of what in your life is important. I would question some of what you said regarding where his money comes from, and his nuslear prolferation package, but I repsect your opinion for your reasons, which for me of course are different in my reasons and choice.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 1, 2008, 1:27 am 1:27 am
Mr. Obama has no chance of being US President after Wright story. He should distinct himself from Wright 20 years ago. No one is stupid to vote for someone who doesn’t like America. As Hillary said, we have no choice when selecting a relative but we do have for a pastor.
Posted by: stock_craft | April 1, 2008, 1:27 am 1:27 am
It’s ok Matt i didn’t feel picked on, I’m a Hillary supporter, I’ve got thicker skin than that. tc bw
Posted by: Rotweil | April 1, 2008, 1:28 am 1:28 am
One last note though Matt, I do wish also we could be on the same side against the Republicans come Nov. I love to debate them. But for me there’s an issue with Fla and MI, that for many other Hillary supporters, as well of the voters for those two states, that could prevent me from participating at all. Can’t vote for a Rep. would like to be able to vote for a Dem like I usually do, and feel good about it. That can’t happen for me though without a fair resolution for Fla and MI.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 1, 2008, 1:37 am 1:37 am
The people want Hillary
The majority of the voters want hillary.
A vote for America is a vote against Obama
Posted by: seah | April 1, 2008, 1:46 am 1:46 am
We’ll be fine, and they will work something out, I’m sure… One thing I know in my life, is that no matter what, people usally worry about things that end up working themselves out in the end. One way or another.. We have to remember everyone that Mcain got beat down by…Gulp… Bush.. If bush can beat him, than Obama or Hillary can too… Finally we don’t have a boring canidates that doesn’t make people fall asleep when listening to them.
(I still like Obama though)
Posted by: matt | April 1, 2008, 1:57 am 1:57 am
THIS FIGHT IS A LONG WAY TO GO BUT BARACK OBAMA WILL BE NOMINEE AND HE WILL DEFEAT MCCAIN IN GENERAL ELECTION. ALTHOUGH CLINTON STILL HAS SOME CHANCES BUT OBAMA HAS UPPER HAND. MAY GOD BLESS AMERICA. OBAMA ’08 .
Posted by: I.A.T Smith | April 1, 2008, 2:32 am 2:32 am
The DNC, Obama and his supporters could have fixed the mess the Dems are in, by first really working to fix the problem with FLA and MI, instead of blocking all the solutions. They also want Hillary to concede, so they can then make Obama the nominee, seat FLA and MI afterwards in a masquerade of Democracy, to then make those two states feel included, and supposedly give the Dems a chance to win in Nov. How can this be considered by the world community to exemplify an open and transparent elections’ process, that can be seen as truly expressing what Democracy really is about, if two of the 50 states don’t even have a voice? If this was something we saw of another country, we would be very outspoken in disagreement toward that country as not truly being a valid Democratic process. Fix it now, so it is a real Democracy, rather than later, and only showing an appearance of one.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 1, 2008, 3:55 am 3:55 am
At 24, I have only seen Bush’s and Clinton’s in the White House, this is not a monarchy! She does not have divine right to the presidency. This is a democracy, and she does not offer a true alternative. using African heritage, words from someone else, and small contrasts on stories of your origin differ from being inconsistent with policy and lying about experience. I refuse to hear that being given a middle name like Huessein is an excuse to not choose a candidate. Hillary can’t control what everyone in her camp says, why discriminate against Barack? Wearing a pin does not make people American, generating genuine concern of elevating the country does. The platform should push the social, political and economic agenda forward. And by these measures the only qualified candidates are Nader, Gravel and Obama!
Posted by: Maurice | April 1, 2008, 4:03 am 4:03 am
The DNC, Obama and his supporters could have fixed the mess the Dems are in, by first really working to fix the problem with FLA and MI, instead of blocking all the solutions. They also want Hillary to concede, so they can then make Obama the nominee, seat FLA and MI afterwards in a masquerade of Democracy, to then make those two states feel included, and supposedly give the Dems a chance to win in Nov. How can this be considered by the world community to exemplify an open and transparent elections’ process, that can be seen as truly expressing what Democracy really is about, if two of the 50 states don’t even have a voice? If this was something we saw of another country, we would be very outspoken in disagreement toward that country as not truly being a valid Democratic process. Fix it now, so it is a real Democracy, rather than later, and only showing an appearance of one.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 1, 2008, 4:09 am 4:09 am
Without a doubt, every voice deserves to be heard. And a primary without seated delegates from MI and FL is absurd.
I debate with Governor Rendell’s analogy. It is inappropriate to tell Mrs. Clinton to drop out of the race early. It is like ending the NCAA games early. Had he of had breaks, his brackets would have ended differently. But to maintain the analogy, you are not allowed to change the rules during the game either. For the game would come out differently. Obama’s supporters, and Obama are not responsible for the disorganization of the primaries, the officials of Florida and Michigan are. They are the ones who need to be approached, not Obama. As for Michigan, it is a “Blue” state and with a falling economy, it is bound to vote democratic anyway. They need a method where voters will actually be well represented, not like the original primaries in which people were originally compliant with the stipulation their vote didn’t count.
Posted by: Maurice | April 1, 2008, 4:39 am 4:39 am
What a revote does regared are the rules, and what the candidates signed, which invovled two rules, one of which allowed for a new plan ( the new plan being a revote ) to be brought to allow the two states to regain their delegates. It was part of what each candidate agreed to when they signed it,
Posted by: Rotweil | April 1, 2008, 4:59 am 4:59 am
Who ever took the time to point out Bill Clinton problems. who was president on Sept 11, 2001 who was in charge that day. nuff said.
Posted by: Quintell | April 1, 2008, 5:01 am 5:01 am
now back to Obama, I am going to explain this once because its a once-in-a-lifetine statement im making even if Obama wins even though im a Clinton fan and Im A.A. man, is that if Obama cant fix the problems of the USA democrats will lose in 2012 my Obama friends say he a once in a lifetime leader, yeah right, here is the list of problems he will have to face in Jan 2009 and some of these are urgent and looming problems 2010, ’11, and ’12.
1.Home foreclosures
2.Iraq
3.Iraq
4.Social Security
5.Medicare
6.Did I mention Iraq
7.Judical Retirement(we cant have fights with GOP over judges we’ll lose.)
8.Immigration
9.Jobs
10.wage stagflation
11.the national debt(which such be #1)
12.Healthcare(which should be #2)
13.Broken education system
14.Taxes
15.Weak US dollar
16.broken election process
Okay Obama fans lets see, if he messes up just one up, even tough he didnt create this mess was for him to clean it up who is he going to blame George W he already he is going back to the ranch. Now my girl Hillary she has been bashed on for everything and she is second place as we speak. she can take the hit for not curing our ill’s and still when relection 2012 why because people know when Bush leaves office it takes 8 years to clean it up. Here is another history maker for u Obama Bandwagon supporters he will also the first African American president not to be elected, So even if dont like hillary think about would like 4 years as with him or 16 years with the both of them.
Posted by: Quintell | April 1, 2008, 5:20 am 5:20 am
Yep this is really ridiculous analysis….3 of 5 of a subset go for Obama? How can we make a story calling for Hillary to resing out of that.
Lame but not unusual as the media applies the spin.
There are some real stories out there. Obama is not the guy he claims to be.
Read the Chicago newspapers like the Sun-Times and wonder why the media gives us this drivel.
Posted by: Jackie | April 1, 2008, 5:57 am 5:57 am
DO we want the “people’s Republic of Barraka” shoved down our throats or do we want our Freedom to choose.
When service men and women and national guard’s are away on duty and cannot be available to caucuss It is denial of their right!!! Plain and simple!!!.OBAMA is only Pressent to collect votes and deny “people” their.
In which coutry do you se this kind of practice? Not in a free country.
Posted by: ruthmatters | April 1, 2008, 8:00 am 8:00 am
If the Democrats want to win the White House, 50% support Clinton – 50% support Obama. Either these 2 need to join forces or Howard Dean needs to pick a 3rd person that everyone likes. I swear that man should be fired for running the DNC into the ground after the 2006 elections that finally brought them back to federal government prominance. Everything that man touches turns to sour mash.
Just outta curiosity, where is Edwards on all this? Richardson opened his fat mouth on what’s left… now what about Edwards?
Posted by: MM | April 1, 2008, 8:45 am 8:45 am
Klobuchar has just lost one vote in the next election for her lack of judgment.
Posted by: Joe Daley, Minnesota | April 1, 2008, 9:31 am 9:31 am
Idealism is a great concept, but it doesn’t generally lead to winning elections for the Democrats. Too many “new voters” and “new members of congress” are looking to too many “old guard” democratic insiders to lead the way. By pushing Obama on those of us who make up the majority of a skeptical and mature voting public (many of whom refuse to be force-fed Obama’s media driven candidacy and are turned off by it) they are giving this election to the Republicans.
Posted by: mhhunt | April 1, 2008, 9:57 am 9:57 am
I dare the DNC and Howard Dean ignore the voters of Michigan and Florida !!! If that happens we will vote for McCain !!!
Posted by: MikeB | April 1, 2008, 10:13 am 10:13 am
HILLARY is the big answer to solving all the problems US is facing today.
Why? Because she is hard working smart and can get things done.
Posted by: Tim | April 1, 2008, 10:50 am 10:50 am
MI and FL are two most important states in deciding presidency in upcoming elections.
Posted by: Tim | April 1, 2008, 10:54 am 10:54 am
It is sad, but I think perhaps Obama will be nominated. Too many people voted before the ugly truth reared it’s head. I’m from way down south – and all the white people I know will vote for McCain rather than Obama. If that’s racism; so be it.
Personally, I never bought into his show.
Posted by: dot in dixie | April 1, 2008, 11:20 am 11:20 am
This Independent voter finds it both sad and hard to believe that some Democrats would rather vote for McCain/More War/More Bush rather than vote for Obama.
You’re allowing the Clinton’s “kitchen sink strategy” rent too much space in your heads.
Posted by: Common Sense | April 1, 2008, 11:42 am 11:42 am
Could it be that the very people who will vote for Clinton are too d**ned poor to contribute to her campaign?
Money shouldn’t buy votes.
Posted by: dot in dixie | April 1, 2008, 11:42 am 11:42 am
Just an observation:
We are not allowed to say anything about the candidate Obama ,as we are called RACIST. What do you think will happen if he was elected ? Freedom of Speech is already threatened by blacks.
I don’t want further eroding of my rights
I will vote MCCain!
Posted by: Cathy In Indiana | April 1, 2008, 12:13 pm 12:13 pm
as a afterthought:
I will vote for Hillary if she is nominee
Recieved my letter today from DNC for donation
I sent letter back with note that if Hillary is NOT nominee they can just forget about donation !
Posted by: Cathy in Indiana | April 1, 2008, 12:18 pm 12:18 pm
Claire McCaskill of Missouri is the sorriest excuse of a woman I have ever seen. She said on TV that she was supporting Obama because her TEENAGE DAUGHTER THREATEND TO NEVER SPEAK TO HER AGAIN IF SHE DIDN’T SUPPORT OBAMA.
Posted by: LARRY | April 1, 2008, 12:23 pm 12:23 pm
A vote for Obama = President McCain. Obama can’t beat McCain. A third of Hillary Clintons supporters already say they will vote for Mccain. And the contest hasn’t even begun. And wait until the repubs get ahold of the rev wright story.
Posted by: LARRY | April 1, 2008, 12:29 pm 12:29 pm
good point tess, These exit polls are not scientific. remember that everyone has the right to remain silent about who they voted for. Their are no public records that show who a person voted for or what their education level is. It’s all just whatever the pollee want’s to tell the poller. And who knows how many people lied about their education.
Posted by: LARRY | April 1, 2008, 12:32 pm 12:32 pm
“Claire McCaskill of Missouri is the sorriest excuse of a woman I have ever seen. She said on TV that she was supporting Obama because her TEENAGE DAUGHTER THREATEND TO NEVER SPEAK TO HER AGAIN IF SHE DIDN’T SUPPORT OBAMA”
Yes Larry, I agree. Claire McCaskill is a sore loser. She is unfit to be a senator. Her spoil daughter demand is more important than the issue of this country!
Posted by: Dallas | April 1, 2008, 12:33 pm 12:33 pm
You Know What……
I am sick and tired of the mad rants of Clinton supporters. What the HELL are you so mad about? Who are you fighting with? If you want to support Mrs. Clintor than go on and do so. We support others. We are not mad at you or her. My God, aren’t we all grown ups. Have some respect for yourself and your candidate. It is a real turn off and if Mrs. Clinton wins the nomination
(which I hope not as an Obama supporter) she does not need her primary supporters turning everybody off.
I really wish Mrs. Clinton would give some leadership to you all on this and show you that it is better to have grace. Nobody likes a sore loser or an ugly winner. Come on.
Posted by: shelgirl | April 1, 2008, 12:35 pm 12:35 pm
To all of you who claim that Obama “can’t win the general election” is this because you think America is not ready for a black President just because you are not. Yes, we have lots of small people like you but the overwhelming majority of Americans in every party are bigger and better than that. So, I resent the implication. This stupid “working class white” code nonesense. People in America will vote most for what is in their best interest and that of the country. I think that after 8 years of Bush they have learned to vote for a balance between their own best interest and America’s interest.
Posted by: shelgirl | April 1, 2008, 12:41 pm 12:41 pm
This Florida/Michigan issue isn’t just about these candidates and this election, it is about all the candidates and all the future Presidential elections.
This is really a contest between
Iowa/New Hampshire v. Fl./MI.
Both parties commited to the smaller states of Iowa/New Hampshire to keep their first in the nation status. These little states count on this for their economy. Additionally, candidates count on it because these are much cheaper local markets and it is cheaper and easier to travel around these states letting America and the voters get to know you. It is not just historical, it is practical. If you drive the early primary states to Fl/MI or NY/CA you drive many potential candidates out of even attempting to enter the race.
If we go along with FL/MI this year, what about the next election. I mean, I feel that the parties, both parties, as a matter of honor, should stick to their representations to the two states that did not break any rules nor tried to use their size and potential to get an unfair advantage over other states.
I am also totally fed up with Florida and believe that it will not be helping to elect a Democratic President anyway. Look at who it has elected as Governors for its last several election cycles. Florida is a wash. After 2000 they should feel enough humility to not go around threatening to cause the Dems to lose any MORE Presidential elections. I am of the mind to make Florida pay when she goes Republican this time and we still win (because we will without her) and anything she needs from the Feds should be REAL hard for her to get!
Now, if someone wants to talk about MI finding a fair way that considers the interest of not just these two Dem candidates but all future candidates and the first in the nation states of Iowa and New Hampshire, let’s see the proposal.
Posted by: shelgirl | April 1, 2008, 12:51 pm 12:51 pm
Shelgirl: I don’t think america isn’t ready for a black president I think Obama screwed himself out of it. Quit playing the race card.
Posted by: LARRY | April 1, 2008, 12:58 pm 12:58 pm
The Obama supporters are the ones who come out to trash Hillary in the first place. I remember reading all blogs and articles a few months ago, 90% of the comments is so hateful toward Hillary. What did Hillary do to make you guys so angry? If you can come up with hundred of reasons, I can tell you thousand of reasons right now why we hate Obama and his supporters too. Just to let you know one thing. I will make sure all my friends in church and comunity, all my family members WILL NOT come out in November to vote for Obama if he is nominated.He will lose more votes from the Demorats in Primary that he can never imagine!
Posted by: America | April 1, 2008, 1:04 pm 1:04 pm
exactly what we’ll have to deal with if Obama doesn’t get the nomination. The only reason they can think of as to why he shouldn’t get it is because he is AA. Which is exactly why he shouldn’t be nominated. The race card won’t work against the GOP
Posted by: hal | April 1, 2008, 1:04 pm 1:04 pm
“i will never in a million years ever vote for the queen of sleeze Hillary.
Its time she learned the world doesnt revolve around her wants and needs.”
Posted by: lauepow | Mar 31, 2008 4:27:07 P. If you are a Democrat, this is the sort of trash that’s making me reconsider sitting out the election if Obama is the nominee. I’ll assume that you are a Republican who will vote for McCain in any case. Obama will get my vote if he is the nominee because I will never vote Republican ever.
Posted by: Jose C | April 1, 2008, 1:04 pm 1:04 pm
Let’s keep the facts straight. First of all, Hillary and Barak agreed from the beginning that the FL and MI will not be counted. The moment that Clinton realized she was behind, she then demanded the votes to be counted.
This is not Barak’s call that’s just her political spin. Barak has said over and over that he will comply with the rules of the DNC. What’s wrong with that? Everything must be fair to both candidates not just one.
I am an African American woman and an Obama supporter if he does not get the nomination, I am voting for Hillary without blinking an eye. I don’t care if she has to steal the nomination from Obama to do it. There is no way, I want another four years of George Bush. Screw that!!! American’s will be doing themselves a great harm if they put McCain in office out of spite. Stop being so racist. Vote for a DEM regardless.
Posted by: Here we go again... | April 1, 2008, 1:04 pm 1:04 pm
This primary election isn’t about who is better qualified to be president, it is about who actually has a chance at winning in November. Obama has blown it. If Hillary Clinton doesn’t get the nomionation democrats can pretty much forget winning.
Posted by: Oat08 | April 1, 2008, 1:10 pm 1:10 pm
Here we go again, what is it with calling everyone racist if they don’t like Obama? Did it ever occur to you that he isn’t qualified? What’s better for the country may not be a democrat. Just because Bush was republican doesn’t mean that another republican is as bad as Bush and not better than Obama.
Posted by: Oat08 | April 1, 2008, 1:14 pm 1:14 pm
Please, Obama never plays the race card, he’s been forced to respond to it but trust me, race is the last thing he wants to discuss. Obama has tanned skin but was raised in a white home by his white family. So as far as i’m concerened as a AA woman, the closest experince he’s ever had to having a close black family is the one he has with his wife Michelle. Thank God for that. I don’t care about any of that, I just want a DEM in the White House.
I only pointed that out to say that his skin maybe darker than a typical white person but his experiences have been centered around white people. I’m sure he’s struggled with his identity for a long time…it’s must be very difficult to be bi racial, unless you are stupid like Tiger Woods.
Posted by: MET | April 1, 2008, 1:20 pm 1:20 pm
I actually think Obama has a very good chance of beating McCain
Posted by: jj | April 1, 2008, 1:20 pm 1:20 pm
Hillary is no more experienced than Obama…this is on the job training. Hillary is just older. This is one job that you actually have to do to say that you have experience. Both of their policies are the same and they are both imperfect because they are human. Please give me a break. There’s nothing wrong with either of them. We all have our preference but if you are a DEM vote DEM regardless who it is. They will both beat McCain and make great Presidents of course with mistakes. Enough of this crap already!!!
Posted by: Here we go again... | April 1, 2008, 1:26 pm 1:26 pm
Their experiences are not the same. Obama was a community organizer for Gods sake. He was about one pay grade lower than a city engineer.
Posted by: Oat08 | April 1, 2008, 1:29 pm 1:29 pm
McCain will not get the youth vote for one and that is hugh. And Kerry was boring and uninspirational. Did anyone really like him
Posted by: jj | April 1, 2008, 1:29 pm 1:29 pm
Hillary Clinton has done a significant amount more than Obama. And regardless of wheter she lied about sniper fire, the trip to bosnia did have significant diplomatic success. Which is a WHOLE LOT MORE EXPERIENCE THAN OBAMA. But her experience go back further than that even.
Posted by: Oat08 | April 1, 2008, 1:31 pm 1:31 pm
First of all it is easy to build a campaign against someone when you can make them affraid. Just follow me. George W Bush did it to Kerry we all know that
John Mccain will be able to mobilize a whole new demographic of voters in Novemeber that normally don’t vote. They dont watch the news they don’t read the paper they didn’t go to college and likely even dropped out of high school. follow me so far?
Posted by: Oat08 | April 1, 2008, 1:32 pm 1:32 pm
we know that is not true. But these people will have never voted before. But they will rise up and vote against a black man that they think is bad. It will be much easier for mccain to build a case on the basis of hate than it will be for him to build a case against lies.
Posted by: Oat08 | April 1, 2008, 1:33 pm 1:33 pm
People do crazy things when they hate. Remember JASPER, TEXAS? LAramie Wyoming Gay black persecution. This wasn’t 40 years ago. It was in the 10-15 years. And that was happening in small towns. What happens when it spreads and all of these people begin to hear that a terrorist is running for president?
Obama will be easy to build a case against and guys like KARL ROVE are watering at the mouth…
Posted by: Oat08 | April 1, 2008, 1:34 pm 1:34 pm
Point is a whole new group. It was the christian Right against Kerry. The christian White will mobalize and make it imposible for Obam to be president.
It’s easy to make people hate. Look how much support Bush had right after 9/11
Look at Hussain and how much support he had going into Iraq.
His approval rating were through the roof at that time.
Becaus ehe made people hate. If Obama is nominated there will be more hatered directed towards blacks, muslims, and any other characteristic you can stick on Obama
Posted by: Oat08 | April 1, 2008, 1:35 pm 1:35 pm
Two other words… SWIFT BOAT.
Kerry was put into question because he supposedly threw his medals over the fence at the white house.
It sounds a little unpatriotic doesn’t it?
Posted by: Oat08 | April 1, 2008, 1:36 pm 1:36 pm
On the other hand. If Hillary clinton gets caught in another lie. They’ll just say “They all tell lies” and turn up another lynard skynard tape and pop the top on another coors..
Ask yourself if you really want the democrats to win or if you just want Obama as the nominee…
Posted by: Oat08 | April 1, 2008, 1:37 pm 1:37 pm
***************************************
The citizens of this great nation finally seeing who the most talented person is.Not this time in electing a DUMMY see Bush.
Obama change in POLICIES and innovative thinking in making America catch up and surpass some of the other countries going into the 21st century.
No way America should be in debt to China and others.
America have had enough of electing Idiots and paying the price later.
Obama 08 ..finally someone with serious TALENT.
Posted by: C.T.D | April 1, 2008, 1:39 pm 1:39 pm
It’s not democrats that you have to win in the general it is the republicans that need to be kept from mobilizing. The Christian Right did it to Kerry the Chrisitian White will do it to Obama.
Posted by: Oat08 | April 1, 2008, 1:40 pm 1:40 pm
Rev. Wright hasn’t even reached the masses yet. General Election voters aren’t even concerned about it yet. And when they do all of these rumors and myths and lies about him will snowball out of control costing the democrats another election.
Posted by: Oat08 | April 1, 2008, 1:47 pm 1:47 pm
The only brainwashing that has been applied to the American people is in concerns that the electoral process outweighs the popular vote. If Clinton and her camp argue that it is an injustice against Democracy to not apply the electoral college and super-delegates as the primary factor of deciding the election; I argue that not valuing the popular vote demeans the foundations from Democracy itself. As representative of Andrew Jackson. As for Florida and Michigan, who were of no interest to Senator Clinton until she noticed she needs them to have any chance of clinching the nomination; I feel for them, however rules are rules, and to have them bent to cater to Senator Clinton is undemocratic to those who followed instructions. The vote was held in realization it would not count, and was not debated until after it demonstrated any gain for her.
Obama is not to blame for Florida and Michigan’s misfortune, the local government is. Clinton is using it as a ploy to justify her candidacy.
A candidacy preaching readiness “On day One,” when her experience in foreign policy has just proven to be exaggerated if not fraudulent.
The real questions are,
“Where are the tax records?” As well as What happened to Peter Paul? Transparency will set her free, however she does not have the motives to lift the party, rather than herself.
To Libby, you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him/her drink! If you want some sources as fact look
Posted by: Maurice | April 1, 2008, 1:50 pm 1:50 pm
Obama was a community organizer? Please explain that one. I have searched the web and found nothing about that. Post some URL’s to show us his years and years of organizing and helping the needy. All I have seen is a few speeches to raise money.
Michelle Obama has much more experience in that from what I have read.
Of course Hillary has over 20 years of community service from helping children in the areas of education and healthcare to helping migrant workers. She was also a hard core supporter of Civil Rights but yet some Obama supporters have called me a racist for saying that I will be voting for Clinton. Simple minded individuals for saying such things.
Posted by: Raleigh Voter | April 1, 2008, 1:50 pm 1:50 pm
Where were all the Clinton supporters in FL and MI when their votes were being rendered meaningless by their state governments? Funny, I don’t recall anyone jumping up or down, or marching in the streets, or firing off impassioned emails. Nope! Not a peep from the lot of you…losers and whiners all.
Posted by: balthus | April 1, 2008, 1:54 pm 1:54 pm
Preaching Nostradamus as fact… and using fear tactics. Injecting race, and religion in America… A melting pot. A nation of immigrants. Hillary said that she did not want the vote of someone who votes on such gutless credentials… And that’s all race, “Nostradamus” are. His voting record opposed the war the whole time. Stop putting words in their mouths.
Posted by: Maurice | April 1, 2008, 1:54 pm 1:54 pm
I am not sayiong that Hillary Clinton will use that tactic. I am saying that the REPUBLICAN MACHINE will put fear in every americans head about Obama.
Obama has also said that if he had lost 12 contest in a rown he would have quit. Imagine the sound clips of Obama saying “I would quit”. Next to that picture of Iraq and his quotes about exiting Iraq. The’ll call him a quitter and a coward and accuse him of leaving a war too soon. It will be portray as devestaing to our country. They will target american soldiers asking them if they want a quitter leading our country. He will be eaten alive.
Posted by: Oat08 | April 1, 2008, 1:58 pm 1:58 pm
I could agree with you on that. But we are not talking about us. John Kerry lost because of less. Remember the swift boat ads? Politics doesn’t have anything to do with waht is true. I has everything to do with perception. To democrats the perception of Obama is good right now. He is new and exciting. When the republicans trash the general populations perception of him it’s over…
Posted by: Oat08 | April 1, 2008, 2:02 pm 2:02 pm
Why do all Obama’s supporters say the same thing?? It gets old.
Tell me his experience? Specifics please. And no…change is not a qualification to be President. Oh…one more thing…when someone bases their entire campaign on change and practicing a new kind of politics, they better damn well deliver. Obama…just another politician that will do whatever to win. Examples:
1. Lying about not hearing Wright say inflammatory comments. Of course later he said he did. Oh…and now he says if Wright would not have retired then he would have left. Hmmmm…k
2. Lying about Rezko and the amount of money involved. His other dealings are questionable, including obamas ownership in Chicago buildings.
3. Now saying that Hillary should stay in the race if she wants. Oh Pleeeze…his surrogates have been saying she should drop out for weeks. He now is saying this. Little too little, little too late.
4. His new commercials say he has not taken any money from oil companies. Technically no politician can. But they gave to his campaign, the same as they have given to others…no different Obama are you!
5. Uses significant portions of other peoples words in his speeches. Yet everyone says how great they are. Just words…where are the actions??
6. Taking his whole campaign from John Edwards. In his new NC commercial I swear I was looking and listening to a black John Edwards… No kidding…
7. Change?? His supporters are so focused on Hillary bashing because they have nothing of substance to say for their own candidate. Negative, negative, negative. So quit pointing fingers at Clinton.
8. He can work across the political spectrum? Not…look what happened when him and McCain were trying to work together. Read it in Newsweek.
Posted by: Raleigh Voter | April 1, 2008, 2:02 pm 2:02 pm
And he will be so easy to do it to. Because most of it he has done to himself. And let his friends and family run their big mouths. That is why experience matters. Hillary Clinton told a few lies but all politicians tell lies. At leaste she is experienced enough to not get into such a huge conspiracy during election time.
Posted by: Oat08 | April 1, 2008, 2:05 pm 2:05 pm
MLK, JFK, they wern’t just words when they spoke but apparently Rev. Wright whom he has known and loved like an Uncle, just spoke words with no meaning.
Posted by: Oat08 | April 1, 2008, 2:08 pm 2:08 pm
Oat08…I COULDN’T AGREE WITH YOU MORE! I’M AFRICAN-AMERICAN AND I’M NOT AN OBAMA SUPPORTER. I’VE RECIEVED ALL TYPES OF RACIST COMMENTS FROM OTHER AFRICAN-AMERICANS BECAUSE I HAPPEN TO SUPPORT HILLARY CLINTON…I CAN’T UNDERSTAND THE IGNORANCE OF SOME OF HIS SUPPORTERS, AND THESE ARE THE ONES SHOUTING “CHANGE”.
Posted by: Eric | April 1, 2008, 2:09 pm 2:09 pm
Moderate Democrats are coming out supporting Obama? What does that mean? NOTHING. He is rated more liberal than Clinton.
Posted by: stop2think | April 1, 2008, 2:13 pm 2:13 pm
last post should have ended: You must have gotten involved last week to make such a silly comment.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 1, 2008, 2:27 pm 2:27 pm
The findings in this article don’t surprise me. Obama is only ahead now because of the support of independents and the liberal wing of the democratic party. I think the math shows that Hillary is carrying the majority of the democratic party. Why don’t the independents put up their own candidate and then we can have a 3-party system instead of tearing apart the democratic party?
Posted by: sarnorton | April 1, 2008, 2:29 pm 2:29 pm
OpusRooster | Mar 31, 2008 2:28:19 P
lol
What with the “not get OUR votes”?
You have more than one vote? lol
Stop playing the toad in blowing up yourself so much.
Get used to the idea of President Obama, WITH OR WITHOUT your ONE VOTE!
Posted by: New Yorker | April 1, 2008, 2:31 pm 2:31 pm
Here-we-go-again, “Hillary is no more experienced than Obama” Excuse you! Hillary has been in the public services for years before becoming the first lady of United States, and hundred more things she had done in the White House as the first lady. Hillary was not like the other first ladies who just sitting around and wait for party events. She went to different countries for good causes.Despite her mistatement in Bosnia, I still think that at least Hillary was there in the war zone to see our troop. Now what did Obama do for the past 20 years.let see…. Obama has been sitting in the pulpit to listen the hate speeches toward Americans from his stupit pastor for THE PAST TWENTY YEARS!. That is a real experience from your candidate! Now Obama comes out to preech hope and dream,peace and unity. HA HA HA!don’t try to fool us. Don’t insult American’s intelligence!Get real!
Posted by: Tina | April 1, 2008, 2:51 pm 2:51 pm
If Obama should get the nomination, I for one, will be very interested in seeing if Obama’s numbers don’t drop when the supporters that claim they’re for him, go back over to the Republican side. With all the politics I’ve seen in the attacks on Clinton on blogs, which remind me of the same old Republican arguments they’ve used for years, I can’t help but feel it’s just a ploy to get Hillary out of the way, so the Republicans can have an easier time in a campaign against Obama. I hope I’m wrong, and the support for Obama is really what it appears, but having gone thru 30 years of elections and having seen the Republicans line since 96 on the net, I don’t think I am. Either way, without Fla and MI counting there will be Dems like myself that won’t participate past the convention, other than to watch and see if the tide doesn’t turn. I tend not to want to post this since I don’t like conspiracy theories when I see them, but it’s been nagging at me for a while so what the heck, no one is listening anyway.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 1, 2008, 2:55 pm 2:55 pm
Replicans hate the Clintons and would love to take them out. And I think they would rather run against her. Hillary not winning the election would be a major defeat for her. If Obama is the nominee and McCain wins, Hillary will be back. And the dems can’t win without seating Fl and Mi and the DNC knows it.
Posted by: maryland | April 1, 2008, 3:18 pm 3:18 pm
OpusRooster…If The Florida delagtes aren’t seated at the DNC, they to to look at Florida’s Republican controlled legistlature for the blame…not Obama. The Florida Legistlature voted to move up the primary eventhough they knew the consequences.
Posted by: LowB44 | April 1, 2008, 3:23 pm 3:23 pm
Can any one explain to me why Michigan and Florida should get the chance to revote??? From what I understand, they were given a choice and they decided to move their primaries up and suffer the punishment.
Based on the rules the DNC has decided not to hold a revote. So how in anyway is that unfair???
Michigan and Florida knew what would happen if the moved the primaries, well for the fact the nation knew what would happen if they moved their primaries, so why is this a topic of concern when they willing disobeyed the rules.
Posted by: Mike | April 1, 2008, 3:34 pm 3:34 pm
Barabara Bush said on larry king a few months ago that if Hillary Clinton ran for president they would have a very hard time defeating her. John McCain said “I have no doubt that senator Clinton would make a good president.” Obama is getting support from the republican becasue he’ll be easier to beat. Remeber the game show the weakest link? PA has had 100,000 republicans change their registration to democrat and well known republicans are using reverse psychology to get Brrack Obama the nomination. I just wish Hillary Clinton would run with John McCain. They are very very good friends.
Posted by: jh09 | April 1, 2008, 3:39 pm 3:39 pm
The more I read some of these posts…the more I think I’m hearing Republicans that don’t want to face Obama.
Posted by: LowB44 | April 1, 2008, 3:43 pm 3:43 pm
LowB4, if you think the republicans don’t want obama you must also think that little green men fly down in UFOs. He is an easy beat.
Posted by: jh09 | April 1, 2008, 3:46 pm 3:46 pm
maryland I agree with parts of what you say, (obvious which parts from my last post)and it’s all about perception how each of us see it. I really wasn’t saying which one would be easier to run against, just what the perception of the Republicans would have been at the start of this back in Jan of last year when Obama didn’t have name recognition. It may well be true that Obama now would be the harder candidate to beat, if the numbers of support really are there for him. My point is, what if they’re not? With the DNC making no sense in the way they’re handling FLA and MI, (really how much sense does it make for the DNC to keep Dems from counting their delegates in FLA, when it was Republicans that moved up the primary and kept Dems from stopping it) they are cutting out many Dems who should be part of the process, and making it so folks like me feel cheated from the result. Not to mention how I feel in general about only having 48 states instead of 50 in the process. It’s too convoluted and if it’s just the way things happened Dean should be fired for incompetence at the end of this. An interesting theory to divide the Dems and in the end these circumstances would play into what the Republicans want, which is their nominee to be elected. Maybe I give the Republicans too much credit, but these are the folks that got George W elected to two terms, so there is something that makes it possible to elect a candidate with his level of competence, and it isn’t because he’s qualified for the job.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 1, 2008, 3:47 pm 3:47 pm
jh09, Texas Lil what news channel are you guys watching LOL actually where are you getting your information from so we all can understand what you guys are talking about. Texas (Halliburton / KBR land) screwed itself and no matter what goes on down in Texas. Texas has been and shall be for the foreseeable a racist corrupt place (Bush is from where) that give the rest of America a bad name.
Posted by: Mike | April 1, 2008, 3:53 pm 3:53 pm
I get my news from republicans. I know what most of the republicans think of Obama. I don’t like it. But Obama and his minister came along and saved the day for them on an election year that democrats should have had in the bag. And there will be plenty more the’ll use against him.
Posted by: jh09 | April 1, 2008, 4:00 pm 4:00 pm
So all you Hillary backers who would vote for McCain if Obama gets the nomination, you’d rather continue the tax cuts for the rich and the status quo in Iraq than have your ego bruised over backing the wrong horse? Just checking…
Posted by: EHarris | April 1, 2008, 4:07 pm 4:07 pm
EHarris I can only speak for myself, but with the current circumstances with FLA and MI if Obama was the nominee I wouldn’t vote for him. I wouldn’t vote for McCain, cause I wouldn’t vote in Nov.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 1, 2008, 4:10 pm 4:10 pm
I support Hillary. If not her McCain because Obama needs more time. And he should ditance himself from the controversy around him for a few years.
Posted by: Apr 1, 2008 4:07:47 PM | April 1, 2008, 4:10 pm 4:10 pm
Maybe Nader will win. hehehehe
Posted by: Apr 1, 2008 4:10:21 PM | April 1, 2008, 4:12 pm 4:12 pm
Hey iliad, what are you basing that comment on? So far Obama has weathered everything thrown at him, and without resorting to raking all the muck surrounding the Clintons. You think the GOP will be as kind to Hillary? Even one of McCains top advisors has said he will sit it out if Obama gets the democratic nomination.
Posted by: EHarris | April 1, 2008, 4:14 pm 4:14 pm
They’re all liars at some point really, they’re politicians, it’s how that works. Image is more important than being consistent in that game. Having a reason for policy differences makes more sense to me than “she’s a liar”
Posted by: Rotweil | April 1, 2008, 4:18 pm 4:18 pm
Well liars go places Chris. People who hate america don’t People get killed because people hate and fear them. People don’t moibilize against a liar. They don’t get killed because of lies. They mobilize because of hate and fear. THE GOP will have an EASIER time building a base of fear against Obama than they will because of Hillary Clinton telling a few little white lies. I have lied, I’m sure Mccain has lied, JFK lied. And Chris, I’m sure even JESUS CHRIST TOLD A LIE once or twice. Everyone does it sometimes. But this election isn’t about who is really the best fit. It is about who can win in November. Obama won’t.
Posted by: jh09 | April 1, 2008, 4:19 pm 4:19 pm
When people say that hillary won all the important battleground states they seem to be forgetting a few states. Obamma won wisconsin Missouri Minnesota and Iowa. In 2004 kerry won Wisconsin narrowly Missouri and I think Iowa went narrowly to Bush and Minnesota was fairly close That accounts for 37 electoral votes. that is almost twice as many as in Ohio that Clinton made such a big deal about.
Posted by: Jason | April 1, 2008, 4:19 pm 4:19 pm
Rotweil, I agree with you on certain things. I think in the beginning Dean punished Mi and Fl knowing full well that they would be seated. Hillary was so far ahead even I assumed she would be the nominee and I’m sure every else did too. I don’t think Dean thought it would be an issue. Who knew Obama would be a formidable canidate. Dean has made a mess of this and needs to figure out how to seat them. And I thought the republicans crossed party lines to keep Hillary in the race. It will be interesting to see who repuclicans vote for in Pa
Posted by: maryland | April 1, 2008, 4:21 pm 4:21 pm
That’s a good question maryland about PA, I too am curious to see how that plays out (though I think Rush put the writing on the wall with that, to stir the pot, though I also believe it’s a game plan change from their original) and I am waiting, but in the meantime, believe that FLA and MI being unresolved needs to be addressed in a fair way for all of us and the candidates, is an issue that will make or break Dems getting to the WH
Posted by: Rotweil | April 1, 2008, 4:28 pm 4:28 pm
If they aren’t seated, not only will we lose but I think the party will be severly damaged if it hasn’t been already. So you think the original plan was that republicans vote for Obama, interesting.
Posted by: maryland | April 1, 2008, 4:38 pm 4:38 pm
Also about Dean not thinking it would be an issue is one of the things I’ve had an issue with from the begining. Since last year he’s been telling us the FLA and MI wouldn’t matter, and my thoughts were, how dare he say that two important states (and even two states in general) wouldn’t matter with having their voice heard, regardless of how they voted.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 1, 2008, 4:41 pm 4:41 pm
lol yeah I know maryland, like I said earlier I hesitated to even say anything, I hate conspiracy theories too, and always condemn them, but I really didn’t think anyone would even pay attention, I have felt this way for a while from seeing the comments that I’ve never seen in my years on blogs from a Dem, it’s always been republicans talking the hate of the Clintons and seeing it from (supposed ) Dems this time, has been a strange experience for me..
Posted by: Rotweil | April 1, 2008, 4:46 pm 4:46 pm
Also one other note along these lines, that tends to give a little credibility to my rationale, Notice how Republicans voted for Obama until Rush said vote for Hillary. If they were really behind Obama, why would they switch to Hillary because Rush said so.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 1, 2008, 4:58 pm 4:58 pm
Yes, Dean said they wouldn’t matter because he thought Hillary had it locked up. He thought super tuesday would end it and primaries after that were just be a formality. Little did he realize that every state has an impact on this election. He says they are going to be seated but I’d like to know how. It has to be fair to both canidates.
Posted by: maryland | April 1, 2008, 5:00 pm 5:00 pm
well maryland I understand what you’re saying, but the idea, no matter how it’s rationalized, all states matter under all circumstances, and when you take them out of the picture even for a moment, that’s not a good thing.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 1, 2008, 5:03 pm 5:03 pm
So far Hillary Clinton has been the only one to oppose counting the votes in Florida and Michigan, but that was when she was ahead in the process, many months ago, when she thought she was the heir apparent and crown princess of the Democratic party. Since then, voters who vote by the rules that she had agreed on have given her a rude awakening–and subsequently, she has been the champion of rule changing, because quite frankly, her candidacy is sunk in its own muck, and…she desperately needs more time, more votes, and more fools to support her. Now to count a “vote” in retrospect, where other candidates did not even appear on the ballot, is a far cry from “democratic” in most fair-minded persons view. To do so, would be to discount the votes of the vast majority who did play by the rules. She needs to quit playing “poor me,” stop whining, and stop playing on peoples delusions! Finish the race, and make a fool of yourself, but don’t whine when you get rejected, and don’t expect people to hand you an election because you’re a political hack–and a gender-based novelty.
Posted by: Justinteim | April 1, 2008, 8:25 pm 8:25 pm
Justinteim Hillary has been open to the revote, when the revote was finally talked about in a realistic way. Before that, no one mentioned a revote, because the DNC was telling everyone it wouldn’t be an issue. In the end it wasn’t Hillary that was the reason it was killed in MI and FLA (granted it would have been most likely to her benefit to have the revote) but Obama( granted it wasn’t in his best interest and that’s how politics work), who’s lawyers killed it in MI and stalled agreeing to it in FLA to where it ran out of time. No matter who is to blame, (for me it’s Dean and the DNC more than anyone) it is an issue that could have dire consequences for the party.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 1, 2008, 8:48 pm 8:48 pm
Obama’s relationship with Rev Wright shows why we should elect him president. Obama’s election goal is to bring everyone to america’s table, even those who are disillusioned and have let hate taint their hearts example Rev Wright. He has steadfastly been even tempered, kept an open mind and stuck to HIS ideas for what america can achieve not been a blind follower who does the biding for others. Try judging Barack Obama based on his actions for a change, although those who don’t like him would surely much rather ignore his inclusive political leadership and just continue to talk about Rev Wright as if he is Obama’s god.
Posted by: fool me once | April 1, 2008, 9:34 pm 9:34 pm
I can’t believe Obama is still in the race.
I can’t beleive so many Americans have such weak minds. I am extremely disappointed.
I also can’t believe how many Americans don’t care about their country.
Sad day for The Great United States Of America.
This is by far worse when everyone lost their minds and voted for bush.
I remember telling everyone if they voted for bush they would regret it, and I didn’t want to hear anyone complain.
I extend the same for Obama…………
You will regret it
Posted by: seah | April 1, 2008, 11:06 pm 11:06 pm
OpusRooster – Ickes, a newer mouthpiece for Clinton voted against Florida and Michigan to get their delegates seated…think about that one. Obama followed the rules and now your saying let them count? how fair is it that a cheater wins…she should not have campained there and should have pulled her name from the ballot…I bet the counts would have voted had SHE followed the rules.
Posted by: pablo | April 1, 2008, 11:31 pm 11:31 pm
The right is loving it because it is a “Divide and Conquer” scenario playing out here….went from race to gender, to age, to who’s been in longer than others too…who knows, but if they keep coming up with new groups, eventually they’ll get people on their own to squash.
Posted by: pablo | April 1, 2008, 11:46 pm 11:46 pm
Hillary’s supporters want to RE VOTE MI and FL not COUNT only and not because we are loosing but to be FAIR, every state the vote should be counted.
That’s why we need to RE VOTE.
Anyway why Obama does not want to RE VOTE, what is he afraid of?
He keeps saying “Unite the country” .
In this case he doesn’t.
Posted by: crisis08 | April 1, 2008, 11:51 pm 11:51 pm
GOD BLESS OBAMA AND HIS CAMPAIGN. FOR ALL OF THOSE WHO SPEAK OUT CRUELTY AGAINST OBAMA AND HIS CAMPAIGN.
Posted by: Wanda | April 1, 2008, 11:55 pm 11:55 pm
What is it with this Hillary?
She saids she has something like 45 years of experience I believe at last count? Is the world’s smartest woman. Is ready to fight, lie, argue, steal, cheat and do whatever it takes to gain the nomination. Shes’ in it to win it. Wheeeee I’m having fun & just warming up.
But everyplace she goes here in Pa. she has to have an escourt, one or two of Rendell Raiders has to take her by the hand, & coach her through the meetings. They even have their people in the audience to ask the questions. What a bummer!
With all this experience You would think by now she would be able to function on her own. Lead, take charge, organize, be inspirational instead of the people coming away depressed. SO SAD!
All we hear at these meetings is that she needs more money, more help, more photo opts, more pot, more medicine, anything to make her appear presidential. SO SAD!
Posted by: So Sad | April 2, 2008, 1:09 am 1:09 am
say o, you’re a Dem right? How come i never see you posting anything against McCain in the sections that are about him. Hasn’t anyone written something you can use to copy and paste in those sections? You need to go and get some material and spread it around where the Republicans are, Oh that’s right, they don’t write it for you. I guess it’s easier to spew against a Dem than for you to actually go where the Republicans are speak out and take them on like the rest of us.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 2, 2008, 3:18 am 3:18 am
Radmanaustin: Young voters,young at heart voters? Do you think Obama is the only one who has young voters?? Out of 26 million voters to date Obama leads by approximately 100 thousand votes, not counting Michigan and Florida. Sounds like a tie to me. Should half of the voters just shut up and and quit so we can have the first Black President? Let’s just throw all the Hillary supporters under the bus? Obama is every bit the politician. What has Barack Obama done for White people? What has Hillary Clinton done for Black people? What has either done to bring us together? Being President isn’t going to bring us together. The next President will have many problems much greater than race. We need to nominate the person who can get our economy back on track,create new jobs and get people back to work,get healthcare for everyone,get funding for better education at all levels for all, get social security and Medicare secure for the future,resolve the illegal immigration problem,AND continue to fight the war on terror while untangling us from Iraq..those are just for starters.. I don’t think you can say that supporters of Hillary Clinton don’t matter or are not young and energized. Obama supporters are blinded by their own tunnel vision. The swift boat is waiting for Obama.
Posted by: sparklewdc | April 2, 2008, 3:59 am 3:59 am
All of this diatribe from Dems against Dems, and yet few here, if any, bother to go to the pages about McCain and make a statement there about Republicans. Has everyone forgotten that they are the people that are the real threat of getting in the WH for another 4 years and continuing the policies of George W?
Posted by: Rotweil | April 2, 2008, 5:23 am 5:23 am
BTW pablo, you mentioned Ickes voting against the Fla and MI delegates, but fail to mention he was then acting as a member of the Rules and Bylaws Committee “not acting as an agent of Sen. Clinton when he voted in August of 07, also you failed to mention him saying ” Those were the rules, and we thought we had an obligation to enforce them”. He was playing by the rules, just like the the rules that were part of what each candidate signed, where one of the two rules invoved each staet being able to bring in a new plan to the DNC to regain their delegates. That new plan, like I’ve said, before being a revote.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 2, 2008, 5:41 am 5:41 am
pablo also it was Obama that campaigned in Fla not Clinton, well documented.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 2, 2008, 5:56 am 5:56 am
I should restate the above comment from “Obama that campaigned ” to, it was Obama that ran tv commercials in FLA.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 2, 2008, 6:18 am 6:18 am
If Florida and Michigan do not have elections to be seated in the Democratic process millions of voters will be disenfranchised. I cannot support a party that would let that occur. I will vote for McCain.
Posted by: Jim | April 2, 2008, 7:06 am 7:06 am
I think the Obama folks talk out of both sides of their mouths. One the one hand they say Florida and Michigan cannot count because that was the rule. On the other hand, they also say the superdelegates should not overturn the pledged delegates but that was the rule before the primary process started. Only difference is that a Michigan and Florida revote would favor Hillary. Obama is just another overrated nobody from Illinois with no experience. Go Hillary!!
Posted by: James | April 2, 2008, 7:13 am 7:13 am
Jim– Makes no sense for a Dem to vote for a Republican. I completely understand and agree with your reason, but think your solution doesn’t accomplish a good result. I face the same problem with Fla and MI, but at least if it’s not resolved, I’ll just not vote. Extreme as I think that is and hard as it will be for me to do, it’s mild by comparison to yours.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 2, 2008, 7:25 am 7:25 am
I do wish there would be revotes in Fla. and Mich. The states messed up (and are STILL playing chicken with the DNC–it is ridiculous to blame that on Obama). But it is not the regular voters fault. “If I ran the zoo” they would MAKE them do revotes, but then should strip them of their superdelegates – -That way there would be some consequences that might deter more states from breaking other rules next time. But it would not be the innocent voters who got punished.
btw I am an Obama supporter – -and not the only one – who thinks Fla. and Mich should have a vote and Hillary should not drop out. I do want to see the Dems focus on campaigning against McCain though.
Although if one looks at the math, it is nearly impossible for Hillary to win, even including Fla. and Mich., I still don’t want for anyone to feel like they did not have a voice, and because of that so switch parties to vote for McCain no matter how far he is from them on the issues. they may regret it when their kids are drafted.
But I am just for making them have revotes – -there is no way the results of the previous “beauty contest” votes should count when voters were told they wouldn’t, and there was no campaigning except Clinton’s fundraisers. Still for the sake of peace I would not mind Fla as much but to count Mich. with only Clinton on the ballot would be ridiculous.
Posted by: Ariane | April 2, 2008, 8:41 am 8:41 am
Populism is a political philosophy urging political system change with a rhetorical style. This is a perfect definition of what Obama is offering this year.
The most famous populists in Latin America include Juan Peron and Hugo Chavez. The most famous populist in America was Huey Long of Louisiana. President Roosevelt in the 1930s referred to him as the most dangerous man in America.
Populists promise change. Just look at all the change Hugo Chavez has brought to the people in Venezuela – he totally messed up the economic system with price controls on food and goods and now there are food shortages.
Posted by: Lance | April 2, 2008, 9:02 am 9:02 am
Wanda,
NO NO Don’t say “GOD BLESS OBAMA AND HIS CAMPAIGN…” just repeat what Obama’s pastor preeched to his audiences for the past twenty years..Obama and his wife habor hate, now hate will be in their way….We are not surprised.
Posted by: An | April 2, 2008, 12:55 pm 12:55 pm
Ariane you started off pretty well, but you had to add another misconception. Hillary attended two events in FLA that were closed to the public, that’s not campaigning. Where as Obama had commercials for two weeks run in FLA. What does that sound like to you? This info isn’t hard to find, you just need to look other than at Obama’s website.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 2, 2008, 1:49 pm 1:49 pm
Fla and MI go another day without being resolved.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 2, 2008, 1:52 pm 1:52 pm
Obama philosophy: Deny and destroy. Don’t pay for your mistakes. Deny ever hearing or seeing anything. If you don’t want to pay for your mistakes just get rid of them or blame someone else.
Posted by: sparklewdc | April 2, 2008, 3:54 pm 3:54 pm
Clinton supporters should read the article in Newsweek that came out yesterday under the title ” Substance Abuse
Debunking a bogus claim about Clinton’s legislative record” a google search under that title will bring it up. Very interesting article which again documents false and misleading info about Hillary.
Posted by: Rotweil | April 2, 2008, 4:32 pm 4:32 pm
IF MY VOTE DOES NOT COUNT I WILL VOTE FOR MCCAIN. ALL 50 STATES HAVE THE RIGHT TO VOTE. COUNT MICHIGAN AND FLORIDA””.
Posted by: DANIEL | April 25, 2008, 9:33 pm 9:33 pm