Obama Proposes ‘Team of Rivals’ Cabinet
An amusing question and an historical answer at Sen. Barack Obama’s town meeting in Boca Raton, Fla.
The questioner asked, "You’re about to achieve a truly wonderful, historic nomination, but we both know unless you, and we, win in November, it’s going to be a footnote. So, my question is when the time comes, will you be willing to consider everybody who is a possible help to you as a running mate, even if his or her spouse is an occasional pain in the butt?"
Obama first begged off the presumption that his nomination is a done deal — "I don’t want to jump the gun," he said — but then he pivoted and jumped the gun a touch.
"I will tell you, though, that my goal is to have the best possible government, and that means me winning," Obama said, per ABC News’ Sunlen Miller. "And so, I am very practical minded. I’m a practical-minded guy. And, you know, one of my heroes is Abraham Lincoln."
Obama then referred to "a wonderful book written by Doris Kearns Goodwin called ‘Team of Rivals,’ in which [she] talked about [how] Lincoln basically pulled in all the people who had been running against him into his Cabinet because whatever, you know, personal feelings there were, the issue was, ‘How can we get this country through this time of crisis?’"
Lincoln, FYI, appointed three of his rivals for the GOP presidential nomination to his cabinet — three men who at the time loathed him.
William H. Seward became secretary of state, Salmon P. Chase became secretary of the treasury, and Edward Bates became attorney general.
Another former rival, Edwin Stanton — who once called Lincoln a "long armed ape" — became secretary of war.
"That has to be the approach that one takes," Obama said, "whether it’s vice president or cabinet, whoever. And by the way that does not exclude Republicans either. You know my attitude is that whoever is the best person for the job is the person I want. … You know, if I really thought that John McCain was the absolute best person for the Department of the Homeland Security, I would put him in there."
An audience member yelled out: "No!"
"No, I would, if I thought that he was the best," Obama said. "Now, I’m not saying I do. I’m just saying that’s got to be the approach that you take because part of the change that I’m looking for is to make sure that we’re reminded of what we have in common as Americans."
Andrew Sullivan proposed the Team of Rivals idea earlier this month when pitching a unity ticket with Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., as vice president.
So … Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., as secretary of state? (Sorry, Sen. Kerry.) Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., as commerce secretary? Former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., as attorney general?
Where would you put Mike Gravel?
- jpt
Email
GOP Rap: 'Take America Back'
Afghanistan Timeline Realistic?
Once again I suggest Obama will probably pick a Republican for VP. He is more than likely going to try to put together the best team he can find to run the government, regardless of their politics.
His message has been about change, but what he means by change is that we need to look beyond the things that we do not agree on that are not pressing. What we need to do is find common ground in our common goals and dreams that are pressing.
I doubt flag burning, gay marriage or abortion for that matter will be issues his presidency will be about. Bush has used this too often to keep the focus off our real problems and McCain by all his actions both past and present will try to continue to use.
Posted by: Deward Bowles | May 22, 2008, 9:32 pm 9:32 pm
why is everybody continuing to underestimate the Clintons’ duplicity? I don’t think he should let them within 1000 feet of the White House. To take her on as VP would be a huge mistake for that reason alone. Another reason: it would make him unelectable. Hillary is not as electable as she thinks she is. Over half the country despises her and did way before Obama came on the scene.
Posted by: Elizabeth | May 22, 2008, 9:37 pm 9:37 pm
LBJ had a similar view. He described his feelings differently, something about an adversary urinating out of the tent as opposed to urinating into it. Of course Johnsons reasoning was purely political while Obama uses whats best for the country as his reason.
Posted by: Richard | May 22, 2008, 9:40 pm 9:40 pm
everyday, and just about everytime obama opens his mouth he shows he is not ready to be president.
I hope sen. clinton will not be his vp.
because after the way michelle obama has talked about the clintons, and the media has treated her. obama does not deserve to have her.
she is too smart for him now, and she is to smart to take second place to him.
but he needs her. and i’ll bet he wants her. if not as vp, he will want her counsel in some way.
she schooled him on national tv. during a debate on how he should react to the minister farrakahn. remember his statement “if that is what she wants me to say, thats what i will say.”
our country is in bad shape, and he is not going to be able to make it better.
he has changing washington-what we need is someone who can work with washington to change the direction of this country for the better.
Posted by: worldcitizen | May 22, 2008, 9:48 pm 9:48 pm
well we all know thats not going to happen. Thr man is so simple do anyone ever ask him about his plan other than hope and change.
McCain 08
Posted by: toby | May 22, 2008, 9:49 pm 9:49 pm
Hints are over the place that Hillary wants the VP, but hints are all over the place that it will not be her.
So we will see.
Posted by: Thinking | May 22, 2008, 9:50 pm 9:50 pm
Yeah, Obama and his obvious power grab is already going to his head. Do you suppose we’ll see Reverend Wright as one of the “Team of Rivals”. How about Louis Farrakhan. Maybe even BKMC, one of the architects of Obama’s RapperGate!
=======================================
Obama and SweetieGate, we shall not forget!
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | May 22, 2008, 9:56 pm 9:56 pm
obama and michelle will be doing sen. clinton a favor to NOT have her with them.
michelle said if sen. clinton were the nominee she would have to think about campaigning for her.
I wish i could give michelle and barack obama sen. clinton’s answer when they need sen. clinton to campaign for them.
she is to smart for obama.
she will be a better at ANYTHING
she dicided to do than obama and his being president.
Posted by: worldcitizen | May 22, 2008, 9:58 pm 9:58 pm
Plays the violin for Obama.
A violin should always be playing when he is portraying himself as a noble, honest, sincere guy, who cares.
Just like in the movies, He should get an Oscar every time he acts.
He will make his cousins Bush and Cheney Look like angels if he ever is elected.
Posted by: seah | May 22, 2008, 10:02 pm 10:02 pm
OBAMA WOULD DO AND SAY ANYTHING TO GET ELECTED. DON’T YOU PEOPLE SEE THIS BY NOW?? HE CHANGES HIS ANSWERS WITH EVERY AUDIANCE.
IRAN, NO BIG PROBLEM, NEXT DAY, GRAVE PROBLEM. MEET WITH NUTS NO CONDITIONS, NO MEET WITH NUTS, BUT NEED PREPARATION.
PARSING WORDS WILL BE HIS PRESIDENCY CAN’T YOU SEE THIS??/
THIS IS EXACLTY WHAT YOU ARE HOPING FOR.
SOMEONE WHO TALKS OUT OF BOTH SIDES OF HIS MOUTH. HE THINKS HE CAN TALK HIS WAY OUT OF ANYTHING THAT’S WHY HE IS DANGEROUS. B/C OUR ENEMIES DON’T DRINK OBAMA KOOLAID LIKE SOME OF YOU DO.
HE’S HORRIBLE. AND IF HE WINS HE’LL BE LIKE CARTER, ONE TERM AND OUT.
HILLARY SHOULD NEVER ACCEPT A VP SPOT WHY SHOULD SHE CONTINUE TO TEACH HIM HOW TO CAMPAIGN AND HOW TO GOVERN.
LET HIS ANGRY WIFE TEACH HIM.
NO BAMA
Posted by: NOBAMA | May 22, 2008, 10:11 pm 10:11 pm
A good politician and a good man. We should be so lucky as to have him working for us.
Posted by: dem in chicago | May 22, 2008, 10:14 pm 10:14 pm
He will not pick a rep and Billy boy is pushing hard for Hilly and he can push her back to New York and they both stay there..
No Clinotns in the White House
Posted by: honest | May 22, 2008, 10:16 pm 10:16 pm
If Obama picks a Republican for VP, this lifelong Democrat will refuse to vote for him.
The best thing for our country is to get the GOP out of office.
Posted by: Karen | May 22, 2008, 10:21 pm 10:21 pm
He hasnt won the nomination has he? Kinda putting the cart before the horse isnt he? LOL
Posted by: andrea | May 22, 2008, 10:21 pm 10:21 pm
Once again I suggest Obama will probably pick a Republican for VP. He is more than likely going to try to put together the best team he can find to run the government, regardless of their politics.
His message has been about change, but what he means by change is that we need to look beyond the things that we do not agree on that are not pressing. What we need to do is find common ground in our common goals and dreams that are pressing.
I doubt flag burning, gay marriage or abortion for that matter will be issues his presidency will be about. Bush has used this too often to keep the focus off our real problems and McCain by all his actions both past and present will try to continue to use.
——————–
What dream world are you in when talking about change? Not going to happen. Hes saying what you want to hear, so you listen to him without really thinking it through. You want it so bad you will put your country,and everyone who lives here, in jeopardy with someone who makes promises we know he cannot keep. He has no experience nor judgement in foreign affairs. Hes never governed a state much less been in the U S Senate long enough (less than 4months) to even vote on anything relevant to experience. So, get over yourself and remember when you vote for him you vote for your neighbor, your family, your friends, and everyone who lives in america. Who would you want to help us out of the dangerous situations we are in when confronted with decisions that affect our everyday lives? You may not like the Clintons, but at least we know they have the experience and knowledge of the routes we need to take to get out of them safely and unilaterally.
My vote is for Hillary. No matter what it takes, because my future, and my familys future is at stake and I want someone who will fight for me and them, not for a chosen few.
Posted by: shewill | May 22, 2008, 10:22 pm 10:22 pm
His ‘change’ means going from white to black. I just figured it out.
Posted by: andrea | May 22, 2008, 10:23 pm 10:23 pm
NOBODY BUT HILLARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: andrea | May 22, 2008, 10:24 pm 10:24 pm
Obama likes to compare himself to Lincoln. Obama is no Lincoln:
The Lincoln comparison is tortured. Yes, Lincoln spent only two years in the House after winning election in 1846. Yet his deep involvement in state and national politics began in 1832, the same year he was elected a captain in the Illinois militia — and 28 years before he ran for president. He then served as leader of the Illinois Whig Party and served his far-from-undistinguished term in Congress courageously leading opposition to the Mexican War.
After returning home, he became one of the leading railroad lawyers in the country, emerged as an outspoken antislavery leader of Illinois’ Republican Party — and then, in 1858, ran unsuccessfully for the Senate and engaged with Stephen A. Douglas in the nation’s most important debates over slavery before the Civil War. It behooves the champions of any candidate to think carefully when citing similarities to Lincoln’s record. In this case, the comparison is absurd.
Posted by: countallthevotes | May 22, 2008, 10:34 pm 10:34 pm
I DARE Obama to pick Judas.
PLEASE!
Posted by: artist | May 22, 2008, 10:39 pm 10:39 pm
Obama’s old associates and his new associates are really troubling. Which direction is this great nation heading to?
Posted by: J | May 22, 2008, 10:41 pm 10:41 pm
NOBAMA says OBAMA WOULD DO AND SAY ANYTHING TO GET ELECTED. DON’T YOU PEOPLE SEE THIS BY NOW?? HE CHANGES HIS ANSWERS WITH EVERY AUDIANCE.
==============================
I could say the same thing about Hillary, pandering with the gas tax and now she will make sure Guam has voting rights. Oh please. And she changes her accent depending on what state she’s campaigning in. Who’s the phony that will do anything and everything to get herself elected. And god forbid if you get in her way.
Posted by: lily | May 22, 2008, 10:42 pm 10:42 pm
Go back to Illinos, BO
Posted by: NoObama | May 22, 2008, 10:53 pm 10:53 pm
Obama was too lazy to even do his job as a U.S.Senator for 1 term and he wants to run the country?
Opportunist is all he is … Empty rhetoric .. Cheap talk … No action ..
Brought no change all his life anywhere and he is now big on change? Ya Right, big mouth
I just cannot wait to see him learn his lesson in November that this is not acceptable to the sane of this country. We expect more from the person who thinks he wants to be the President.
Republicans need to go out 100% force to vote for MCCAIN and we, the 33% Hillary supporters will join you to help bring MCCAIN over the top.
Let’s come together and show the Dumbocrats what we do expect as credentials for the President of the United States.
Posted by: DefinitelyNoObama | May 22, 2008, 11:00 pm 11:00 pm
Old man McCain will never win. And if this country is stupid enough to vote another republican into office after 8 years of Bush, then we are definately no super power and will be the laughing stock of the world again. McCain and Bush have the same policies. Isn’t that what we want to get away from.
Posted by: erin | May 22, 2008, 11:06 pm 11:06 pm
Hey Erin,
I wanted to get away from Bush-like policies that McCain is sure to continue, but the problem is knuckleheads like you got behind a weak inexperienced candidate in Obama and you are forcing the hands of many that don’t want to go that direction but feel compelled to do so, rather than turn over the nuclear trigger to an unknown quantity. Sorry.
========================================
Obama for knucklehead-in-chief
========================================
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | May 22, 2008, 11:10 pm 11:10 pm
Shewill,
I doubt any Republicans are going to wreck their careers by affiliating with Barack Obama. It won’t happen. As soon as word gets out that he’s looking in that direction the Daily Kos Mafia will abandon him en masse and get behind some yokel like Nader, instead. Just another idea on how to create a train wreck. Kerry probably lost 5 points over his flirtation with McCain and look at how that turned out.
========================================
Obama and BitterGate, we shall not forget!
========================================
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | May 22, 2008, 11:14 pm 11:14 pm
It’s time for Hillary to announce her VP candidate should she take the nomination, in order to beat Obama at his own stupid game. She has more intestinal fortitude in her little finger than he does in his whole body.
=======================================
Obama and SweetieGate, does that sound like a future President?
=======================================
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | May 22, 2008, 11:17 pm 11:17 pm
westcoastmessenger, does it make you feel better to call me a knucklehead because I have my own opinion and don’t fall in line with yours. Do you feel like you are better than me. Sorry I think this country is stupid to vote McCain. And we are stupid for putting Bush in for another term. We are a laughing stock and not the super power we once were. But that obviously doesn’t matter to you.
Posted by: erin | May 22, 2008, 11:21 pm 11:21 pm
Well, at least we know that Mac will choose Lieberman because he needs him to whisper in his ear which country we are supposed to be bombing!
I hope it turns out that Mac’s hearing is pretty good because if it isn’t then Iran could sound like France and then would our collective faces be red or what?
Posted by: Annoyed | May 22, 2008, 11:26 pm 11:26 pm
Then I guess it’s ok to vote McCain!!! Thanks Obama….See, it’s not all about party!!! So stop bashing the Clinton supporters who are dumping him like tea in Boston Harbor.
Posted by: Tony | May 22, 2008, 11:31 pm 11:31 pm
Oh my goodness…is this the guy the Democratic Party is pushing so hard for?
I have been a Democrat all my life, but iif this guy is the nominee I will change my party affiliation.
At least McCain says one thing and sticks with it.
Posted by: vicki | May 22, 2008, 11:33 pm 11:33 pm
Nicholas, blab, blab, blab. Yes we know you won’t vote for Obama. You keep posting that anywhere and everywhere. We don’t care. JUST DO IT AND STOP POSTING IT ABOUT IT. I am so sick of reading this.
Posted by: erin | May 22, 2008, 11:34 pm 11:34 pm
I’m reading all of these posts and am a bit confused. What did Senator Obama actually say to generate such controversy? That he would actually choose the best person for the job? Seems like a non-story to me; which candidate wouldn’t choose the best person? So why all the hate?
Posted by: MIguy | May 22, 2008, 11:39 pm 11:39 pm
DefinitelyNoObama, I definitely agree with you.
Posted by: golfgirlusa | May 22, 2008, 11:41 pm 11:41 pm
This is too funny to keep to myself. Speaking of bipartisan cabinets, Obama was not the first, by far, and I am sure Obamaphiles will not like the comparison:
7/7/05
Will The New Iranian President Have A Big Tent?
By Bill Samii, Radio Free Europe
President-elect Mahmud Ahmadinejad will be sworn in on 4 August, and a formal inauguration at the legislature will take place one day earlier. In the meantime, Ahmadinejad must select a cabinet. Ahmadinejad says ideology and politics will not determine his choices and he has met with individuals from the hard-line and reform factions. His choices are a sign of what one can expect from his presidency.
REFORMISTS NOT INTERESTED
“It is a government of 70 million,” Ahmadinejad said during a 26 June press conference, state television reported. “I mean, it is a cabinet that makes the entire Iranian nation feel that their willpower finds manifestation there. They feel that their demands are being studied.” Ahmadinejad indicated that competence rather than ideology would be the deciding factor in his choices, saying, “We will use all talents and take advantage of all opportunities and use all worthy individuals.”
Posted by: countallthevotes | May 22, 2008, 11:52 pm 11:52 pm
As a very strong Hillary supporter, I am extremely encouraged by the above piece and Barak’s comments. It is surprising that the TV/press talking heads have not commented on the obvious positive implications an Obama-Clinton ticket would mean for the election of a super-majority of down-ticket Democratic congressmen/women and Senators in the fall. Such a ticket would result in a massive turnout for the Dems and create an unstoppable Democratic majority for many years to come. It would also erase in a nanosecond the great dissapointment and even resentment many Hillary supporters would feel should she not be on the ticket and allow Obama to much more easily achieve his worthy legislative goals. The Clintons could barnstorm the states she is particularly strong in, allowing Obama to concentrate more on the purple states. Hillary on the ticket would clearly bring in more women, elderly and non-college educated voters for the Dems–net result = a massive Democratic congressional majority beginning in 2009. I hope he keeps an open mind about including Hillary on the ticket!!
Posted by: Tom Ziegler | May 22, 2008, 11:52 pm 11:52 pm
Obama said, “I’m a very practical minded guy”. Oh, yea, is that why he sat in the Black Liberation Theology Church with Rev. Wright for 20 years? Is that why he called on Tony Rezko to help him purchase his mansion after Obama knew an investigation was going on? Is that why he asked Bill Ayers, the known terrorist to give him a political coming out party? Is that why he will do and say anything to win this election? I say it is just more political pandering. He doesn’t know when to shut up.
Hillary Clinton, hang in there.
Posted by: Mary | May 22, 2008, 11:56 pm 11:56 pm
Tom Ziegler,
I really don’t think Obama was talking about Hillary as VP. I think that would have happened a long time if she were his choice, unless of course he is afraid that MI and FL might be counted. There is that new federal suit filed today by three FL delegates.
Posted by: countallthevotes | May 22, 2008, 11:56 pm 11:56 pm
Senator Obama compares himself to Abraham Lincoln in this article and other times has been compared with John F. Kennedy. He certainly can not come close to the intergity and judgment of either. He should stop the nonesense and realize he is just another corrupt politician who will say or do anything to win. He needs to go back to his corrupt Chicago where he came from. They are still waiting since 1996 for him to fulfill the promises he made. He is all talk and no action. He has nothing to offer except more empty promises.
Posted by: Mai | May 23, 2008, 12:32 am 12:32 am
I don’t believe the tactic of “vote against so-and-so” generally works; if people have a negative opinion of the candidates many choose not to vote at all. The assumption that McCain broadly appeals to Republicans is clearly false. He is hardly conservative enough fiscally to vote for him. He supports a very expensive war with limited potential benefits. His econonomic plans aren’t great. And he has no real moral sway with evangelicals. So, there’s no real driving force to vote for him.
Posted by: MIguy | May 23, 2008, 12:50 am 12:50 am
@MIguy2: cool to have a doppelganger – thanks. These guys are all surrounded by people we don’t like. Personally, I think Lieberman is a weenie and cringe that he may have some cabinet position (looks like Lieberman wants Sec. of State). There’s others too, so I find exercises like this pointless. Whoever wins will win and then Americans should support whomever that is so that the country can go forward.
Posted by: MIguy | May 23, 2008, 1:03 am 1:03 am
MIguy | May 23, 2008 12:50:32 AM:
Actually there is one:
Should Hillary not win this travesty of a race, then we would have a patriotic, honest, no less imperfect presidential choice in Mccain.
Country before party!
GIVE ‘EM HELL, HILLARY!!!
Posted by: Questioner | May 23, 2008, 1:04 am 1:04 am
@Questioner: I don’t see much similarity between the ideas of Senators Clinton and McCain. I also think that the President’s power is overstated; if either party had a clear majority in Congress then the President has got to play ball.
Posted by: MIguy | May 23, 2008, 1:07 am 1:07 am
Here we go again, with the spin. If you look carefully you will see that he didnt compare himself to Lincoln, he merely said that he idolized the guy and went on to say why, and implied that he might do the same. I wish you people would stop trying to tear him down with anything he says. Sheesh, what liars!
Posted by: mitch | May 23, 2008, 1:24 am 1:24 am
Mitch, he has a great baritone. I’d hire him for a TV commercial not president.
Posted by: Sluggo | May 23, 2008, 1:35 am 1:35 am
mitch: “he merely said that he idolized the guy and went on to say why, and implied that he might do the same.”
There… you said it yourself. Obama compares himself to Lincoln by saying that he’ll be like him. The same thing happens every time he references one of the Kennedys. And his flock falls for it every time.
Posted by: cappamore | May 23, 2008, 1:39 am 1:39 am
Obama is the driven force for Republicans to vote for McCain. For mr he is the driving force to aupport Hillary Clinton. Obama is divisive, unprepared, arrogant and empty. Obama is unelectable.
Posted by: libre | May 23, 2008, 2:47 am 2:47 am
Hillary does not want the VP with Obama that would be political suicide. Obama is unelectable, he is going to lose the GE. Hillary does not need to be in a losing ticket. Write Hillary on the ballot.
Posted by: libre | May 23, 2008, 2:51 am 2:51 am
This leaves the door open for a Hillary supporter like Wes Clark. A non-Progressive like Jim Webb. A non-endorser like Jack Reed. A non-politician like Anthony Zinni. A non-man like Kathleen Sebelius. And a non-pundit’s choice like Bill Bradley.
This sounds good.
Posted by: ElodieStClair | May 23, 2008, 3:06 am 3:06 am
Obama’s relationship with Wright is more than association. they are friends, Wright is his spiritual advisor and his mentor. Obama sat and listened to Wright for 20 years. I do not believe their fake break up for the media. They are still pals, they still think alike. Will Rev Wrigh be part of the cabinet?
Posted by: libre | May 23, 2008, 3:54 am 3:54 am
Vice President: Hillary Clinton
Secretary of Defense: Chuck Hagel
Attorney General: John Edwards
Secretary of State: Bill Richardson
Posted by: Stacey | May 23, 2008, 6:35 am 6:35 am
You may not like the Clintons, but at least we know they have the experience and knowledge of the routes we need to take to get out of them safely and unilaterally.
——————————-
You mean lie to everyone? Or Hillary’s FAILED health care reform? The Clinton’s method of gov’t is trying to ram their ideas down people’s throat. They try to stomp on those who disagree. That’s why when Bill was President we lost both the House and the Senate. No one in Washington likes the Clintons. (Look at all their “friends” who have jumped ship this election.) They are self absorbed, ego centric, dishonest, and care nothing about anyone but themselves.
Hillary has proven to be incredibly deceitful, even to her own supporters. She has no real positions, she votes depending on which way the wind in blowing. And as a woman, I’m insulted by her using her own lust for power as a “woman’s issue.” I didn’t vote for her and will never vote for her. Thank God she lost the primary.
Posted by: Susan B | May 23, 2008, 6:38 am 6:38 am
“Obama is unelectable”
Posted by: rich in VA | May 23, 2008, 6:43 am 6:43 am
Talk about counting your chickens before they hatch!
Obama can forget about picking a cabinet, because he is not going to win Florida, Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio, and West Virginia.
If Obama becomes the Democratic nominee, he will lose the General Election in November.
Why? Because these states will reject Obama again, since Obama is too far left to win there.
Posted by: USmarine0331 | May 23, 2008, 6:56 am 6:56 am
Top Hillary Supporter Says She”s Showing “Desperation”
Here”s some audio of a stunning rebuke that a top Hillary supporter gave her in response to her comparisons of the Michigan/Florida controversy to the country”s historical civil rights struggles.
The supporter, New York Governor David Paterson, said flatly on a local radio show that Hillary was starting to show “a little desperation.”
Listen below:
http://tpmelectioncentral.talk
ingpointsmemo.com/2008/05/top_hillary_su
pporter_says_she.php
Posted by: jld1959 | May 23, 2008, 6:59 am 6:59 am
vp joe biden, hillary clinton, rendell
sec of state biden, richardson, clinton (she would use it to run again)
secretary of commerce bloomberg
secretary of defense hagel,powell
attorney general john edwards
national security advisor – powell, richardson, dodd
Posted by: dl | May 23, 2008, 7:00 am 7:00 am
name one issue outside ending the war and talking to our enemies (which isn’t far left many republicans as of yesterday are saying the same thing)
that Obama is “far left” where his policies are more left than Hillary’s…
his healthcare is about cost and clser to the right
his attitude against fighting in congress puts him closer to the right
this is a made up issue. You can’t name an issue where this is a real argument …it is created for anti-marketing by the other team.
Posted by: dl | May 23, 2008, 7:03 am 7:03 am
Two things are being floated by the Obama loving media. One is that Hillary is seeking VP. I know Drudge (who is right wing, not Obama lover, but Dem destroyer) is also pushing that on his site.
Hillary most certainly has no interest in VP. She’s giving everyone a chance to vote, and then the superdelegates can make their choice in August at the convention based on who will give the party the best chance to win in November.
The other thing being floated is that Hillary is seeking having her $20 million debt paid off by Obama. Obama floated that himself to try to buy Hillary off, same as he has done with Congress and the SD’s.
Most of the debt is Hillary’s own money and to Mark Penn’s firm for work done. The way Mark Penn screwed up her campaign he doesn’t deserve to get paid anyway. And Hillary has the funds in her GE account (which I contributed to after maxing out primary limit) so 1) she doesn’t need any help, 2) it was a buyout offer from Obama, and 3) I agree with Obama supporters that their money shouldn’t go towards Hillary anyway (although if Obama were successful in buying out an opponent then he would putting your money to good use).
So all in all, Hillary is making her case for President. Obama will obviously proceed as the presumptive nominee but we’ll see what the delegates do in Denver in August. Hillary’s name will still be on the ballot.
Hillary ’08
Posted by: rd | May 23, 2008, 7:03 am 7:03 am
Abraham Lincoln was assinated and so was JFK who took L. B. Johnson by keeping their Enemies close. I think Barack should stay as far from Hillary as he can for his own political good and safety! We must learn from the past that these marriages of convenience do not work!
Posted by: Angellight | May 23, 2008, 7:12 am 7:12 am
everyone knows that if what is know now about obama was known in jan. obama would not be in the position he is in.
the media failed to do its job.
we still do not know who he is
and everything we slowly find out only gives more questions.
What is obama and his church’ relationship now?
what about alice palmer
bill ayers
the chicago combine
and all of the others
the list is long and getting longer
we hear what he says one day on a subject only to hear him say something different on the next day.
on cspan now they are talking about what he needs to learn. and the things that he has flubbed up over this week.
I don’t think anyone really believes sen.clinton needs to be brought up to speed on any of the issues that face our country-she knows them and is able
to converse well about it.
I don’t want sen. clinton to be his vp.
she can do so much more for the american people in the senate, or working with the CGI.
i would not want her buried in the vp position-having to be the one to teach him behind the scenes.
Posted by: worldcitizen | May 23, 2008, 7:21 am 7:21 am
Please show me one place where hillary “declared” herself president. It was the press.
bho is unelectable. first he has HUGE baggage that the GOP will exploit. second, he cannot win the swing states against mccain, eg., florida, ohio, pennsylvania, etc. the base that got him elected were blacks, and they always vote dem by at least 80% +. hillary would also pull back the reagan dems.
Posted by: pp | May 23, 2008, 7:25 am 7:25 am
We know that Barack has made a deal with people like Bill Richardson and John Eduards: support in exchange for future job.
But Hillary is different because she knows that she is far more qualified to be president… It is likely that this nomination process will go on for a while, I don’t see the issue of Florida and Michigan resolved because we have to demand that all the votes count!
In the end she will have the popular vote, so why not also ask will he want to be her VP? Although all these questions are pointless until we resolve the issue of the delegates. She will win the popular vote, he will win the pledged delegates. So it is in the hands of the superdelegates. My opinion is that given the fact that so many superdelegates has been won by a caucus process that is blatantly anti-democratic, the validity of the popular vote is stronger and the superdelegates must ensure that the popular votes is respected. If Barcak was white this is the likely outcome. But as Geraldine said if Barack was white he would not be where he is, so the superdelagates are likely to vote for him. This argument is not racist, but it is a complain against favoring race over gender, that is so blatantly used in favor of a black person and against a woman person. I hope that the leaders of the democratic party show that they are better than that and support Hillary!!
Posted by: ed | May 23, 2008, 7:33 am 7:33 am
Get out the the race and fall in line Hillary!!!!
Posted by: Alex | May 23, 2008, 7:37 am 7:37 am
Hillary, you’re not going to be VP, talkless of the President. You should do anything to become the POTUS and Barack would have to have a 3rd eye on you that would distract him from the job at hand. No, Hillary you will not smell the Oval Office again!!!
Posted by: Alex | May 23, 2008, 7:39 am 7:39 am
so alex,
why would you want “mrs. slimy”
to campaign for obama?
Posted by: worldcitizen | May 23, 2008, 7:45 am 7:45 am
Obama’s relationship with Wright is more than association. they are friends, Wright is his spiritual advisor and his mentor. Obama sat and listened to Wright for 20 years. I do not believe their fake break up for the media. They are still pals, they still think alike. Will Rev Wrigh be part of the cabinet?
**********
Ummmm, no. Wright was his pastor. Period. Did you ever hear of Separation of Church and State? I couldn’t care less where someone went to church or IF they did. I care about the issues.
Rev. Wright is a non-issue, unless he run’s for office.
Because of Hagee, Wright is off the radar for fall.
Posted by: MI VOTER | May 23, 2008, 7:55 am 7:55 am
Let’s get real. Hillary would NOT run as VP. She would have to release the Clintons library donors and their full 2007 tax returns. She doesn’t want to do this to run as VP
She has not been fully vetted, and Obama can turn her down as VP on this basis alone
Posted by: Jay Biggs | May 23, 2008, 7:59 am 7:59 am
so hagee who is not and never has been mccains pastor should be an issue?
why should sen. clinton want to be obamas vp?
i don’t think and i hope she will not
campaign for obama.
why should she?
they don’t want or need her, i hope she just goes back to the senate and completes her job.
all of the others have gone back to their jobs, she should also.
michelle obama does not want her.
michelle obama said if sen. clinton had been the nominee. michelle would have to think hard about campaigning for sen. clinton.
Posted by: worldcitizen | May 23, 2008, 8:00 am 8:00 am
jay biggs,
sen. clinton does not want to be obama vp. the media are trying to make a story of this.
sen. clinton does not want to be vp.
and obama does not want her.
alex, said she should campaign for the obama’
why should she?
Posted by: worldcitizen | May 23, 2008, 8:03 am 8:03 am
Posted by: MI VOTER | May 23, 2008 7:55:31 AM
dream on in your little world. wright’s church, over twenty years, certainly influenced bho’s take on the world. mccain never went to hagels church…different issues, wright still in play..
Posted by: pp | May 23, 2008, 8:04 am 8:04 am
Sometimes, Obama says what he actually means. Its always enlightening—”My goal is to have the best possible government, and that means me winning…” Really, when you cut through all the slogans and meaningless rhetoric, the core of Obama’s campaign is his view that he is exceptional. He is the one he has been waiting for….. Yuck.
Posted by: NJH | May 23, 2008, 8:13 am 8:13 am
njh
oh yeah,
geo. bush was a fool we have seen before and have known of.
this obama is going to be some new kind of fool for us to look at and watch his new way of taking this country futher down the road to perdition.
Posted by: worldcitizen | May 23, 2008, 8:16 am 8:16 am
pp,
McCain never atttended his church, but he DID actively seek out and got Hagee’s endorsement simply for political gain. That makes it worse, so much worse for McCain and they know it. McCain aligned himself with Hagee to pander to the hard right. Same with Parsley.
Just like Hagee, Wright comments were taken out of context and amount to 35 seconds of a career spanning 40 years.
Stay home in the fall and let the grown ups, who can see the difference between spin and the real issues elect a President. This country needs to get out of the mess it’s in.
Posted by: MI VOTER | May 23, 2008, 8:19 am 8:19 am
A March 6th article in the Washington Post by Ann Kornbult and Peter Baker mentioned one of Hillary Clinton’s favorite books–Team of Rivals by Deloris Kearns Goodwin. Glad to see that Obama is catching up on his reading.
Posted by: Nancy | May 23, 2008, 8:21 am 8:21 am
Isn’t it funny how the same people who bought into the Bush fear tactics and “values back to the White house” are now saying Obama is like Bush and we shouldn’t vote for him……
well those of us who didn’t buy into Bush … …realize when someone sounds like they are talking about issues level and logical … that is the difference
we recognize the old poltics of spin, scare and manipulate…
and we this time have a leg up that most people won’t buy into that old campaign… the same campaign style that got GW…
Obama supporters won’t be pushed to the back of the room…that is why our voices are so loud this time…
we will not let fools or old time power brokers take us down that road again.
Logic and Hope in 08.
Period.
Posted by: dl | May 23, 2008, 8:24 am 8:24 am
and Nancy
Obama mentioned Lincoln’s grouping over and over last year at his engagements in NH…
it was Hillary who took that from Obama after she saw her campaign was losing.
and most politically savvy junkies have read Goodwin’s book. and Goodwin the author has actually compared Obama to Lincoln on this issue…several times.
Go watch her interviews on Meet the Press and the Tim Russert Show.
Posted by: dl | May 23, 2008, 8:28 am 8:28 am
and obama pandered when he threw rev. wright under the bus.
but not until he was FORCED to do it.
so obama sat in the church for 20years
said he did not hear anything-flip
then obama said maybe he heard something like that but not that bad-flop
then obama said he could not disown-rev, wright-flip
then obama said he did disown rev. wright-flop
flip-flop,flip-flop,flip-flop
and with the recent iran 5/18-5/19 statements
it think this is what we have in store for us.
obama is not prepared-and he will not be ready to lead and do what this country needs to have done on day one.
Posted by: worldcitizen | May 23, 2008, 8:29 am 8:29 am
ok,
here is something I want to say right here and NOW.
mark my word
if obama becomes president.
within his first 100 days
we will have some reporter or talking head say:
“well maybe we didn’t like sen. clinton that much-but we sure didn’t think this is what the change and hope was all about.”
obama will make a further mess of this country
with whatever his change is.
Posted by: worldcitizen | May 23, 2008, 8:34 am 8:34 am
Rev. Wright’s views are waning views in the world, not new, waxing views. That is a huge difference. That means that if you are black, you’ve heard all that before, oer and over, from the older generation – it isn’t shocking, however, in fairness, Wright said that once 5 years ago – but attitudinal wise, he believes that America has done some wrong out there – is that an Un-American view? Becaue I think America has done some wrong out there – certainly, unlike the Japanese, who didn’t even know they lost the war, I am willing to acknowledge the things that the U.S.A. has done for political gain. Ever watch John Stewart? Is he unamerican or is it just because he’s funny when he points out America’s flaws. It has nothing to do with religious belief. How deeply does Obama believe Rev. Wright’s theories of conspiracy? I doubt he does – if anything, Obama has leaned uncynical which is probably a result of having to tolerate people’s views like Rev. Wright. I wouldn’t worry about that – unless you are just one of those HRC tactical bloggers, then you know better anyway.
Posted by: Shannon, Michigan | May 23, 2008, 8:36 am 8:36 am
Posted by: MI VOTER | May 23, 2008 8:19:50 AM
still a huge difference…wright’s church tenets espouse racism, and are anti-american. bho still went to the church, worshiping, and using wright as his spiritual guide. oh yea, i will be voting mccain if bho is the niminee.
Posted by: pp | May 23, 2008, 8:44 am 8:44 am
Posted by: dl | May 23, 2008 8:24:11 AM
you have bought into smoke and mirrors like the wizard of oz..this time when the curtain is pulled there stands bho, a little man with no idea what he is doing.
Posted by: pp | May 23, 2008, 8:45 am 8:45 am
OUR FOUNDING FATHER USED, THE VOICE AND VOTES OF THE PEOPLE TO DECIDE. THE ONE WITH THE HIGHEST NUMBER OF VOTES WAS THE PRESIDENT , THE ONE WITH SECOND HIGHEST WAS THE VICE PRESIDENT. RE; WASHINGTON AND JOHN ADAMS. THEN AND ONLY THEN ARE THE PEOPLE OF AMERICA HEARD!
Posted by: jp,michigan | May 23, 2008, 8:49 am 8:49 am
pp
Your just angry like a lot of people who defended a candidate for years against the republicans…got incredibly vested in them and they became the bar from the incescent defending of them to any attack against them.
The Clintons aren’t the bar. They did a lot of good but only when it helped them…never did they personally take a back seat to any situation.
As young college students and coming out of college they started the climb for their careers…they picked the good side to stand on (democrats) but their “fight” that they always talk about had more to do with how they played into the system. Their goal unfortunately really did have more to do with them achieving… (think back and picture Hillary and Bill in their younger days and every choice they made had to do with their personal achievement)
They have done some good but what we need right now is someone who doesn’t fight for the issues that get them elected as much as fight for the issues.
Name me once that Hillary or Bill took a hit for anything or anyone for that matter…personally. Once where they had a choice to achieve themselves or help the country…in any event you look at where they had that put in front of them (the Monica stuff, the FBI files stuff, the WAR, this primary alone, FL and MI when it mattered to stand up – when HER team was consulting on the delegate count system and schedule more than any other campaign and she thought discounting them was okay, NAFTA, licenses, gay people, energy policy…they always risked the country, the issues and the party for themselves.
They did not vote for something…fight for something unless they new it wouldn’t hurt them in the polls.
That’s a problem.
a big problem…and 3.4 of America knows that now.
Posted by: dl | May 23, 2008, 9:01 am 9:01 am
She is a sick puppy right now and let her go back to New York……His cabinet will help him in all areas,there will be change but not with her on this ticket…
Posted by: older person | May 23, 2008, 9:05 am 9:05 am
Chuck Hagel remains a viable VP choice.Obama might need Clinton to woo over some disgruntled Dems but she is also off-putting to many, to say the least.The Obama team has pushed all the right buttons so far.This is a huge one…
Posted by: bskahn | May 23, 2008, 9:05 am 9:05 am
and PP
Listen to what Obama is saying…
you can discount his 30 second soundbite …Clinton has been better at it…but that is becasue when you listen to Obama’s thoguhts on each subject…they are logical.
If you had gone and heard him speak in small engagements (as I did with him and Hillary and mccain… living in NH political junkies got to do this)…
His thought process that you can see him make on each one is based on logic and the values that most dems by into…
Hillary and others like Romney and a couple of others … spoke in Hyperbole once they got out of the 30 second sound bite …using terms and when they used facts that no one could really substantiate in those situations…it was not about the logical situations that presented themselves. It seemed like …well people walking around the points of their arguments that they didn’t want to show in presenting their case.
Maybe it was because Obama hasn’t been around long enough (but Joe Biden and Chris Dodd were similar) …that he just sat down with groupd and attacked it as if we were a class of adults who could figure it out…but needed to be walked through it.
That is why i switched…because it made me realize Obama DOES know what he was talking about.
Unfortunately he is not always been good at wrapping that up in a 30 second sound bite.
Posted by: dl | May 23, 2008, 9:09 am 9:09 am
There he goes again! Can Obama ever give a speech without invoking Lincoln, JFK, or Dr. King?
Posted by: HoosierSue | May 23, 2008, 9:20 am 9:20 am
Why is Obama numbers dropping in all these polls against McCain, is that not a concern for some how is he going to win a GE if he cannot win over voters against McCain?
Posted by: SJ | May 23, 2008, 9:46 am 9:46 am
I see a Obama SD from Guam is now supporting Clinton, how come there is no news on this switch.
Whenever Clinton drops a SD its hot news off the press guess the MSM is not interested in the fact that Obama lost a SD, maybe its a sign of things to come
Posted by: SJ | May 23, 2008, 9:50 am 9:50 am
A fair chunk of the Obama vote is an “anti-Hillary” vote. Putting her on the ticket is a good way to lose. Richardson makes a lot more sense than Hillary. And Richardson is actually qualified – unlike Hillary who has only been an observer – OK and helped abuse the women Clinton exposed himself, too.
Posted by: disambiguates | May 23, 2008, 9:58 am 9:58 am
Hillary needs to campaign on Obama’s behalf because that shows party unity. Rivals always fall in line and campaign for the winner. Obama will win and Hillary needs to do her part. If the roles were reversed he would enthusiastically campaign for her and so would I. She’s still a slimy politician all the same. I say this based on the things that she’s said and done. Did anyone forget Sniper-gate!! LOL!!!
Posted by: Alex | May 23, 2008, 10:01 am 10:01 am
So Richardson can claim that he has votes from 17 mill people or that he has SD backing him?
I have not idea what Obama will decide as to a VP but the fact is if you are looking at support for a candidate the only one out there at the moment with bragging rights is Hillary.
I honestly do not feel Obama can win anything without her
Posted by: SJ | May 23, 2008, 10:02 am 10:02 am
The way his poll numbers are dropping in math up against McCain in key state, Obama is in deep trouble. He appointed his self King with the help of the media, but seem to me he is now looking like a King without subjects.
I don’t understand why the DNC did not see this coming, its not like they were not told or questioned about it, unless they feel the polls are incorrect, but they are in a mess not because the candidate that they want to push seems to be fading and McCain gaining on him daily
Posted by: SJ | May 23, 2008, 10:08 am 10:08 am
Polls are interesting. Anyone catch the Survey USA poll that has Obama ahead of Mccain in Virginia by 7 points? If that holds Mccain will be destroyed in the general.
Posted by: David S | May 23, 2008, 10:10 am 10:10 am
As in idnependent voter, I ahev to ask teh Democrats, “Are you purposefully trying to lose an election you have no earthly reason for losing?”
1. Actually allowing a losing candidate to try to change the rules she herself agreed to back at the start of the primary campaign, thereby threatening a convention fight and alientating a significant portion of your base?
2. Discussing said candidate (who has criminally mismanaged a campaign designed to coronate her, in debt to the tune of $20M, and disliked and distrusted by over 50% of American voters)as deserving of a place on the ticket instead of thanking God that she won’t win the nomination.
3. Giving your opponants the easiest campaign issue ever by allowing John McCain to run against your party instead of your nominee. All McCain ahs to do is say, “I am not mentioning my opponants, but instead ask the Aemrican people this- do you trust a party to run the government effectively when they can’t even effectively run their own primary season?”
And you wonder why Democrats lose Presidential elections…
Posted by: TJ | May 23, 2008, 10:21 am 10:21 am
someone wrote: “Because of Hagee, Wright is off the radar for fall.”
In your dreams. McCain denounced support from Hagee and another pastor for their views. They are extremists, same as Wright.
Now I will tell you, there are many people who are members of those two pastors churches. And I know the second one has several black members. His services are on local tv in Columbus, OH. And there are plenty of people that buy into the anti-Islam thing. But unacceptable for them to be president. That’s why the right wing extremists don’t get elected.
Also true for left wing extremists. We will see plenty of Wright jumping up and down and maybe Michelle with him, who knows?
Obama will go down like all the rest of the liberals, liberals who didn’t have baggage like Wright, Ayers, Rezko, Farrakan, Hamas, Auchi, and the Chicago corruption machine.
Holy cow. You must be nuts if you think anyone but a left winger would vote for that mess. And what ties them together? Some guy names Obama who has no record whatsoever and lies about everything he’s asked.
Hillary ’08
Posted by: rd | May 23, 2008, 10:32 am 10:32 am
God raised Barack from a dead political career to the United States Senate. Then, as Jesus ascended into Heaven, God made a way for Barack to ascend to the pinnacle of politics. . . . We are truly in a “new day.”
Rev. Jeremiah Wright, essay “Facing the Rising Sun”
Trumpet Magazine, TUCC, April 2007
Posted by: Yavo Lem | May 23, 2008, 10:34 am 10:34 am
Why aren’t any of you Clinton supporters making any comments about all of her BS? From the constant moving of the goal post, pathetic attempts to change the rules, and most obvious, her insistence on counting votes she herself previously stated would not count? Why don’t you talk about that? It’s because you have nothing to add except stupid comments about Rev. Wright. Several of you morons have actually asked if Rev Wright will be on the ticket. I think I can answer that question…NO! By the way, I don’t go to church at all so with all due respect to anyone who does – I DON’T CARE! Now, do you have anything constructive to ad? Anybody? Anybody? What’s happening here for her supporters is exactly what’s happened to this joke of a campaign she’s run. I think they’re all starting to realize that Obama will win and they’re basically venting. And how can you all continue to cheer for this woman when she’s clearly a loser. Her campaign is a microcosm of how she’d run this country. And she’s continued to ask people to go to her website and donate money. I saw a report last night which stated that some $2,800,000 dollars was paid to Mark Pen’s agency last month. This is what she’s doing with your money you idiots! By the way, West Virginal, Kentucky, Michigan, and Florida are not Democratic states. Clintons’ assertions that she can win those states is not swaying any of the super delegates. While I’m sure they’d love to win those states, they are not part of the Democrats map. Neither was Oregon for that matter and look how that turned out! Trust me, the supers are just waiting for the last vote to be cast. Then they’ll come out for Senator Obama en mass and crush that bug eyed harpy!
Posted by: roxanne | May 23, 2008, 10:35 am 10:35 am
Hillary cannot will not be #2 at anything. Even if he offered, she accepted, when it came down to it she would act (and feel entitled – as in cheated) to be #1. And, eventually he would have to “put her back in her place, she wouldn’t go there, and all chaos would break loose.
I would not have her on a stick, even if it meant a few votes from her hangers-on. How embarrassing she is as a woman now – (heavy on the sarcasm) since she lost BECAUSE she is a woman.
Posted by: Ellen | May 23, 2008, 10:38 am 10:38 am
The DNC doesn’t want Hillary because she won’t bow down to them, they cannot control her.
So they chose Obama, banking mainly on his charm and color to win people over.
Obama is their little puppet and they can twist ot bend him however they please.
Notice how Obama says something stupid and the DNC rushes in to say what he “really meant to say.”
The DNC must literally hold their breath when Obama goes off script.
(i.e. Iran is a tiny country that is no threat-a week later-Iran is a grave threat).
Obama is a weak,inexperienced,arrogant,
unqualified candidate,with heavy baggage.
Hillary or McCain08
Posted by: cindy in nc | May 23, 2008, 10:38 am 10:38 am
Hillary on the team looks good on paper.
However, she reminds me of Glenn Close (who actually could star opposite Wil Smith in a movie about this election–not that I like Smith but he seems to fit the part) and Hillary is the Fatal Election Candidate. She could either be going for history or she will call the blacks the n-word and in Kentucky she will say things like “I know you don’t really like Barack but ya know, if something would happen to him, I could step in (wink, wink).”
[She has been all over the map message wise that I really think she could sabotage it so that she can run in 2012.]
Posted by: Mr. Coffee | May 23, 2008, 10:39 am 10:39 am
Obama is a Fraud!
How come Democrats/Libs love to meet with Terrorists another Democrat Lobbyist that reports to the Libs in congress is now under investigation by Columbia for meeting with FARC along side Communists. The foreigners placed under investigation Thursday include two Ecuadoreans, a Venezuelan and the American consultant, James C. Jones, who has been working with Democrats in the U.S. Congress.
You should do a blog for all the talk the Libs have had with terrorist
Pelosi – Syria
Carter and separatly a Obama Strategist – Hamas
The two Democrat congressman that went to Iraq prior to the war and condemned the US on Iraqi soil!
Obama who wants to meet with terrorists to help them with propaganda
and so forth
Don’t forget Hilary kissing the PLO leader!!
Posted by: spock | May 23, 2008, 10:42 am 10:42 am
Obama is promoting his ‘unifying politics’.
Most of his supporters reacting here are anything but…
You’re some of the most partisan hicks I’ve ever seen.
Want to promote Obama? Put your money where your mouth is.
Posted by: Kaj | May 23, 2008, 10:43 am 10:43 am
Popular vote as of May 23, 2008
These figures INCLUDE Florida and Michigan, as they were fairly and legitimately earned by Senator Hillary Clinton, and have been validated by the respective Secretary’s of State.
Clinton 17,422,285
Obama 17,254,779
Total Diff. +167,506 (Clinton)
Pct. Diff. 0.46% (Clinton)
Above figures from RealClearPolitics.com
So, why SHOULD Hillary quit NOW?
Who do you think will be leading when the dust settles?
Hint – See below:
Combined population of Montana and South Dakota = 1,752,039
Population of Puerto Rico = 8,086,459
Posted by: Yavo Lem | May 23, 2008, 10:43 am 10:43 am
Obama will probably put William Ayers of the Weather Underground in charge of Homeland Security!!
and Pastor Wright in charge of Education Department!
Posted by: spock | May 23, 2008, 10:44 am 10:44 am
Which Democratic candidate is more electable?
Consider this:
This is how the Electoral College stands as of May 23, 2008, showing strengths of Clinton vs. Obama, based on their results. For those who have not understood, this is not a head-to-head matchup, but rather a side-by-side comparison.
This assumes a winner-take-all primary/caucus vote takes all Electoral votes for each state. The totals immediately below are WITHOUT any consideration of the states of Florida and Michigan.
Clinton 264
Obama 224
But with Florida and Michigan:
Clinton 308
Obama 224
With just Florida added, which was won by Clinton, fairly and squarely, the Electoral College Vote is:
Clinton 291 (includes Kentucky)
Obama 224 (includes Oregon)
Assuming the following victories, based on current polls, with Clinton winning NOTHING ELSE, and Obama winning South Dakota, and Montana, the totals would then be, still without Florida and Michigan:
Clinton 264 (includes Kentucky)
Obama 230 (includes Oregon, Montana, and South Dakota)
On June 4, 2008, with Florida, Michigan and Kentucky for Clinton, and, being charitable, with Oregon, South Dakota and Montana for Obama:
Clinton 308
Obama 230
Please note that it takes 270 Electoral College votes to win the General Election.
Whether or not the vote turns out as indicated, I firmly believe the above analysis more than amply demonstrates which of the Democratic candidates is in a better position to be the stronger candidate in the General Election.
P.S. – One last thought about this Electoral College Vote analysis; in it I gave Senator Obama full credit for the state caucuses he won. However, it should be noted that there are not any caucuses to be won in the Big Leagues during the General Election. There are only PRIMARIES, WINNER-TAKE-ALL.
And I am sure the “Super Delegates” are aware of that.
Posted by: Yavo Lem | May 23, 2008, 10:51 am 10:51 am
Whether Hillary is VP or not does not change my oninion of Obama.
His arrogance,choice of churches,dirty politics in Chicago–I just don’t trust him to lead this country.
Hopefully 20-30% of Hillary supporters will vote McCain in November. He has the experience and is not afraid to go against his own party. Similar to a moderate Democrat. Plus we know him.
Hillary/McCain 08
Posted by: cindy in nc | May 23, 2008, 10:52 am 10:52 am
My guess is that Obama and his “team” will stack the odds in his cabinet in the same way that he stacked the odds for friends in the Illinois Senate Health and Human Services committee.
Posted by: Will | May 23, 2008, 10:57 am 10:57 am
The popular vote total is the votes cast by individuals in state primaries. Caucus votes don’t count in the popular vote total because they are counted in terms of delegates, not votes, and many states don’t count the number of people attending caucuses. How are Hillary’s supporters accounting for that? They want to count Michigan where she was the only candidate, and Florida where many voters stayed home, but not the twelve caucus states? That’s her idea of counting every vote?
Washington and Texas caucuses (won by Obama) are not included below because these states hold primaries AND caucuses. Caucus state include (Obama won all of them)
• Iowa
• Alaska
• Colorado
• Idaho
• Kansas
• Minnesota
• N Dakota
• Nebraska
• Maine
• Hawaii
• Wyoming
The popular votes being touted by the Clinton Campaign do not take this into account, and are therefore disenfranchising the “real” popular votes from all of these states.
Posted by: power2people | May 23, 2008, 10:57 am 10:57 am
Can you imagine Obama’s inaugeration?
Rev.Wright or Rev.Moss giving the invocation. How will they truly bless America when they hate it so much?
Will Obama and Rev Wright pray in the basement again, hiding from the public?
And we are to trust Obama to lead this country knowing what he willingly listened to for 20 years? Unbelievable.
Hillary or McCain 08
Posted by: cindy in nc | May 23, 2008, 11:00 am 11:00 am
cindy in nc
He has the experience and is not afraid to go against his own party said.
*********
Just like Bush
Just like Cheney
Just like Rumsfeld.
GWB thanks you for his third term.
Posted by: MI VOTER | May 23, 2008, 11:01 am 11:01 am
Things are NOT as they are made to appear.
For all the talk about “Super Delegates”, there is nothing “Super” about them. Just as everyone of us, they have one vote each. Their endorsement is just that, an endorsement. It is not a vote. They are not supposed to come into play unless there is a deadlocked convention, and in that case, they are expected to exercise their BEST JUDGMENT to cast their votes for that candidate they, in view of their extensive experience and political wisdom, think would be able to WIN the General Election. They are not supposed to be endorsing this or that candidate, BEFORE THEY VOTE AT THE CONVENTION. To do otherwise is to be false to the trust and responsibility that has been placed in and on them.
It would be better at this point if all the bickering supporters of each candidate looked at the number of ACTUAL PLEDGED DELEGATES allocated to their candidate on the basis of primaries and caucuses won. Those figures, as of May 23, 2008 (NY Times web site), for those who truly follow politics are:
Obama 1,485
Clinton 1,421
Diff. +64 (Obama)
Of the “surveyed” “Super Delegates”, of which there are approx. 795, there are at least 215.5 who have not “endorsed” any candidate, which is as it was intended to be. Again, an “endorsement” does not necessarily translate into a convention vote, since in theory “Super Delegates” are supposed to represent the wisdom of the party and are expected to be above the fray. Those who have endorsed, really should be stripped of their position and replaced by those who will act as intended. However, that is the responsibility of the DNC, which so far, has proven inadequate to discipline its own members.
The bottom line, “Super Delegate” endorsements should not be counted by candidates claiming that such an “endorsement” makes this person into a PLEDGED DELEGATE, for that is NOT THE CASE, and to think otherwise is to delude oneself and one’s followers. It is also wrong for the media to even report what “Super Delegates” are doing now, as they do not even come into play unless and until there is a DEADLOCKED CONVENTION.
However, there is nothing to prevent partisans from ‘counting chickens before they hatch”, nor is there anything to prevent the media from playing games with gullible people to increase interest in these silly stories.
As Yogi Berra once said, “It ain’t over, ’til it’s over”. And this fight is a long way from over.
Posted by: Yavo Lem | May 23, 2008, 11:01 am 11:01 am
2/11/2008
Obama and Clinton Campaigns Agree that Superdelegates Should Vote for Who They Think Would be the Strongest Candidate for the Party
Top Obama Strategist Axelrod on Superdelegates
From this morning on NBC:
LAUER: Let me ask you about superdelegates. A lot of discussion about the role they’re going to play in all this by the time it’s over and the debate being whether they should vote out of loyalty to a candidate, particularly if they’re elected officials, or whether they should vote the way their state or district votes.
So, when it comes to Senators John Kerry and Senator Ted Kennedy, should they vote for had Barack Obama because they’ve endorsed him or should they vote for Hillary Clinton because the state of Massachusetts voted for Hillary Clinton?
AXELROD: I think that the role of the superdelegate is to act as, sort of, a party elder. These are elected officials from across the country and they’re supposed to exercise their judgment as to what would be best for the party. And as they look at this, they need to decide who would be the strongest candidate for the party…
LAUER: David, you’re not answering. Should those two senators vote for Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton?
AXELROD: I think they and all the superdelegates should vote according to what they think is best for the party and the country. And I think that we need the strongest possible candidate against John McCain…
Posted by: Yavo Lem | May 23, 2008, 11:03 am 11:03 am
cindy in nc,
I really think you should move. Really I mean it. Move to another state and get a better view of the world at large. Travel around a bit. Your views are so 1950′s it’s scary. The World has evolved. Join the party. It’s fun here in “All-Inclusive Land”. No one hates anyone, we all get along.
Posted by: MI VOTER | May 23, 2008, 11:03 am 11:03 am
Change, shmange. When it comes down to it, Obama is just a politician. He will choose Clinton as his VP because he knows that he needs to – to get more votes, to have her knowledge on his side (particularly regarding foreign policy), and to win the election.
Posted by: Lisa S | May 23, 2008, 11:10 am 11:10 am
Before voting for Obama please do your research on the type of politics he was a part of in Chicago.
The people he used, treated unfairly, and the underhanded tactics to get ahead politically.
You owe it to this country to know all about him. Obama says he wants a change in old time politics. Judge for yourself if he is any different.
Then vote your conscience.
Hillary/McCain 08
Posted by: cindy in nc | May 23, 2008, 11:11 am 11:11 am
All the talk about counting the popular vote ignores a very key issue: the rules are that delegates are what counts. That’s what the rules have been for a very long time. To argue otherwise is like a football game where one team wins 35-33, and the team that had the fewer points argues that they should have won, since they had more yards gained.
You don’t change the rules near the end of the game – it’s simple fair play.
Posted by: tex805 | May 23, 2008, 11:12 am 11:12 am
Obama pick a Republican for VP? Highly unlikely.
Since I am not religious, I don’t understand all the criticism of Obama for his choice of church. He probably went there because it was the largest black church around and a good place to build his constituency while keeping his faith. Most of my friends who are religious never talk about their pastors–just their friends at church. Those who won’t vote for Obama because of the pastor seem to resist change in whatever shape or color it comes in.
Posted by: Joan from Virginia | May 23, 2008, 11:15 am 11:15 am
MI voter–maybe you should move to a state where your vote counts…
Hillary/McCain 08
Posted by: cindy in nc | May 23, 2008, 11:20 am 11:20 am
The precondition for Senator Clinton accepting the Vice-President slot on the ticket must be open access to any meeting in the White House.
And if Obama is nearly as smart as he is said to be, he will accept that.
Obama supporters: Get over yourselves. You will doom this party with your rants and your get-even strategies. The Party elite has spun up a defeat in November with the presumptive nominee. Clinton can turn that into a victory.
You can’t.
Posted by: len | May 23, 2008, 11:21 am 11:21 am
Oh Please leave her behind in the dust and move on down the road. Hagel for VP (that would upset Mr. McCain to no end) lol.
Posted by: Tia | May 23, 2008, 11:24 am 11:24 am
Joan from Virginia – There are many churche in chicago, and larger ones at that, his pastor continously spew anti-white, anti-jewish and anti American rhetoric, even Oprah left the chuch!
This has a lot to show on his character!
Now all those that want to vote for Obama, unless your one of his elitist friends here is a quote for you from him on what he plans on trying to do -
In a campaign stop in Oregon, Obama called for the U.S. to “lead by example” on global warming. “We can’t drive our SUV’s and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times … and then just expect that other countries are going to say ‘OK.’ … That’s not leadership. That’s not going to happen,” he said
So he is planning on controlling your life!!
Yavo Lem – You can use the states that they won in the primary to give them electoral votes, main reason is most of the states Obama won will never go blue
If memory servers he only won 2 Blue states.
And Clinton is pretty much out of the rae anyhow!!
Posted by: spock | May 23, 2008, 11:28 am 11:28 am
All of you Hillary supporters should go to her website and let her know that you will be voting for McCain in November. And maybe she could talk some sense into you. You should not be so attached to the person. They both have pretty much the same ideas on the issues. That’s why I don’t understand why you are so against him. Their only big difference is with healthcare. So just think about that and ask yourself if you could deal with 4 more years of living like this. If you don’t think we are doing bad right now then vote for McCain.
Posted by: RHONDA | May 23, 2008, 11:33 am 11:33 am
MI VOTER – What experience does Obama have? please tell us, since no one not even him can tell us!! I mean he has experience Hating America, Hating the Whitey and so forth but what experience does he have!
Now with all the rhetoric abut Pres. Bush, what really did he do wrong (exclude Iraq) we have a strong economy even thou its a little slow right now, but that is more to do with the lib Congress and the oil prices are because of the libs!!
So please answer the 2 questions!!
Posted by: spock | May 23, 2008, 11:36 am 11:36 am
worldcitizen -Please explain the bad shape the US is in, by your name I presume you believe we should be ruled by the World?
Posted by: spock | May 23, 2008, 11:39 am 11:39 am
He simply cannot trust Hillary. We see her ego at work now…Does anyone think for a moment, she will behave as second banana? She will be busy trying to show the women who supported her that she has crashed the glass ceiling when obviously she had been plumming the depths ethically. No, Nada…the idea of finding a group of excellent rivals to join him in changing this country is a brilliant idea. The quickest way to move people off their intransigent bias is to have them work with you on a day to day basis. Folks have to leave the labels at the door and eventually learn people are people. Some good and some bad, but that has little to do with the color of their skin. Hillary is ethically challenged and that is worrisome!
Posted by: anghiari | May 23, 2008, 11:41 am 11:41 am
Joan from Virginia…. 1) you obviously know nothing about Rev. Wright, or Trinity church, which is a common fault of many, 2) you interpreted Sen. Obama’s comments on “leading” in global env. issues, by suggesting that he is calling for a police state controlling food distribution- you must be joking? Any such initiative that were to take hold such as that, is NEVER going to come from some obscure coded speech on a campaign trail… it would be a result of some secret gov’t black op psych warfare operation, right? You shouldn’t let critical analysis turn into paranoia. Bush took our freedoms because of the 9/11 inside job, not because he said he would in the campaign he ran, haha. Right?
Anyway, Obama is 100 times better than McCain, but it is IRRELEVANT… until massive grassroots participation threaten the congressional status quo, not much will change.
Posted by: organizer1 | May 23, 2008, 11:41 am 11:41 am
The change that Senator Obama will bring is not the change America needs.
1. Bring Chicago dirty politics to Washington
2. Change from moderate Democrat to radical socialist
3. Consider Hamas and other terrorist groups as friends
4. Consider the White working class as inferior (Mainstream Americans)
THIS CORRUPT POLITICIAN WILL BRING CHAOS TO OUR COUNTRY. DON’T TRUST HIM.
He has been buying the superdelegates and he is behind in popular votes.
Posted by: Mary | May 23, 2008, 11:43 am 11:43 am
NOT joan, but rhonda… oops
Posted by: organizer1 | May 23, 2008, 11:46 am 11:46 am
The popular vote total is the votes cast by individuals in state primaries. Caucus votes don’t count in the popular vote total because they are counted in terms of delegates, not votes, and many states don’t count the number of people attending caucuses. How are Hillary’s supporters accounting for that? They want to count Michigan where she was the only candidate, and Florida where many voters stayed home, but not the twelve caucus states? That’s her idea of counting every vote?
Washington and Texas caucuses (won by Obama) are not included below because these states hold primaries AND caucuses. Caucus state include (Obama won all of them)
• Iowa
• Alaska
• Colorado
• Idaho
• Kansas
• Minnesota
• N Dakota
• Nebraska
• Maine
• Hawaii
• Wyoming
The popular votes being touted by the Clinton Campaign do not take this into account, and are therefore disenfranchising the “real” popular votes from all of these states.
Posted by: power2people
To: power2people
In general, Caucus votes are not counted for a number of reasons:
1.) They are not provided by the states
2.) They are not representative
3.) They are in many cases trivial or insignificant in relation to the state population
4.) Caucuses are quite vulnerable to manipulation by deception, obstruction, delay, inconvenience, confusion, strong-arm tactics and other despicable practices, which is why they would be favored by a Chicago machine politician, such as Senator Obama.
But, just so everything is up front, I have checked your list and the results are below:
Iowa
Obama 940
Clinton 737
Alaska
Obama 6,674
Clinton 2,194
Colorado (included in total Popular Vote, as posted)
Idaho (included in total Popular Vote, as posted)
Kansas (included in total Popular Vote, as posted)
Minnesota (included in total Popular Vote, as posted)
North Dakota (included in total Popular Vote, as posted)
Nebraska (included in total Popular Vote, as posted)
Maine
Obama 2,079
Clinton 1,397
Hawaii (included in total Popular Vote, as posted)
Wyoming (included in total Popular Vote, as posted)
With regard to Florida, both Clinton AND Obama were on the ballot. Clinton did not campaign in the state, but, breaking his pledge, Obama did. Clinton won, fair and square.
With regard to Michigan, the names of all three major candidates, Clinton, Obama, and Edwards, were on the ballot. However, Obama and Edwards had their name removed, BY THEIR OWN CHOICE. Their supporters were told to vote “UNCOMMITTED” for them, as if voters wrote in their names, they would not be counted.
With regard to Texas, Clinton won the Primary, case closed.
With regard to Washington, this is the explanatory note from RealClearPolitics:
“*(Iowa, Nevada, Washington & Maine Have Not Released Popular Vote Totals. RealClearPolitics has estimated the popular vote totals for Senator Obama and Clinton in these four states. RCP uses the WA Caucus results from February 9 in this estimate because the Caucuses on February 9 were the “official” contest recognized by the DNC to determine delegates to the Democratic convention. The estimate from these four Caucus states where there are not official popular vote numbers increases Senator Obama’s popular vote margin by 110,224. This number would be about 50,000 less if the Washington primary results from February 19th were used instead of the Washington Caucus results.)”
I trust you can understand the that the complications were caused by the Caucus states, and not by Senator Clinton. In fact, this is one of the best arguments for getting rid of the Caucus system, but that is up to pressure from the citizens of each of those states.
Posted by: Yavo Lem | May 23, 2008, 11:48 am 11:48 am
BHO has been groomed by the Democratic elite from the get go for this election. N. Pelosi and Dean do not want Hillary any where near the White House in any status and especially not VP. You Hillabots need to realize that as much crap as she talks that if you follow the insiders that know there is no love lost in DC with the Clintons. And Pelosi and Dean do NOT want to have that same derisive Senate and House her and her husband created. Despite popular opinion the Dems and Reps need each other and with HRC in there in any any capacity brings dark clouds over DC.
Posted by: porterwayne757 | May 23, 2008, 11:49 am 11:49 am
Does anyome know what the distance is between Springfield (capitol of Ill) and the south side of Chicago? 200 miles…now for all those makeing the assinine statement that Obama sat in that church for 20 years…would you travel 400 miles to go to church? Now he also traveled all over the country and world..he was not even in Ill a good bit of the time. While the media tried to place Obama in that church during any of the contreversal statements by Wright, they could not. We as a people can only succeed if we have a base of honor and honesty…so please stop useing slander and lies to further your own candidate.
I am not a church goer, but can you support a church with donations, belong to a church and not sit in the pews each service? Do you have to believe every word your pastor says to belong to that church community…if so that is a cult and not a fellowship.
I think this whole argument is stupid and we have worse things to worry about. As far as anti white…that church was anti bad government if anything. It has white members. Read the sermons and stop allowing the media lead you around by the nose.
Check on the votes and records of the candidates…such as Hillary voted for a ban on flag burning.
Posted by: terra | May 23, 2008, 11:58 am 11:58 am
To: RHONDA
Believe me Senator Clinton and the DNC are very much aware of what will happen is she is not the Nominee. As for “talking sense into us”, that is not necessary Per contra, it is the Obama supporters who need to do some basic research on line and learn who their candidate really is, and who his fellow-travellers are.
Posted by: Yavo Lem | May 23, 2008, 12:03 pm 12:03 pm
Hey Yavo Lem, you really need to check your facts before going on one of your rants. In the pledged delegate count, Obama actually leads Clinton by 156 delegates, not 64: 1656-1500. Some news organizations may be off by a few delegates one way or the other, but Obama definitely leads in the pledged delegate county by about 150.
Posted by: New York | May 23, 2008, 12:23 pm 12:23 pm
Hillary is the wrong person to be on Obama’s cabinet, much less as VP. She’s been lying and pointing fingers at Obama from almost the very beginning. Why would he even consider her anywhere near him when all she’s shown is her supposed superiority to him and her pure hatred of him? She’s such a scum sucking slug that if he did choose her to be his VP (which WILL NOT happen) she would have him assassinated shortly after his inauguration. He should be very outspoken and say publicly that he will not even consider appointing her to any position in his administration. She would rather divide the party than bow out gracefully, which should’ve happened after her minuscule win in Indiana.
She’s a bad loser who is as deluded, if not more so, as her supporters, who still think that she will win. She needs 245 more delegates; he needs 61. That’s such a wide margin that she will not even come close. She’s totally out of touch with reality. She’s lost so much support during this debacle, but she’s shrugging it off, as if it never happened. Even people from her own campaign have either defected or begged her to get out of the race. Her support has waned and keeps on waning. If she thinks that Obama will dig her out of her $21 million dollar debt after all the horrible things she’s said about him and done to him, she’s crazier than I thought. She made her bed and now she has to lie in it.
She’s been complaining about the fact that Michigan and Florida won’t count, even though she signed an agreement along with Obama, with the DNC that she would not campaign in those states. She lied – surprise surprise. She’s so intent on winning to show that she’s not a quitter. She’s saying that to show her determination – too bad it’s coming off as desperation and refusal to face the reality of the situation.
The stink that she’s been making is a pointless distraction that is digging her deeper and deeper in the hole of denial. And she will not receive the support that she so wants and needs. She’s burned too many bridges. There’s no coming back from that. Nothing can help her. She’ll be lucky to keep her Senate seat. When she’s up for re-election, she’s bound to get a rude awakening when she finds out that New York hates her. She’s pathetic.
I hope that the DNC does its job and enforce the rules that she had initially agreed to and signed. That will be justice.
And to you Clinton-ites who support her and plan to storm the DNC, you are doing her far more damage than you think. If she wants to run in 2012, it’s going to make it that much harder for herself to even be in the top 5 candidate spots. She’s laid down the path and America will not go down that road.
The sooner the men in the white coats come to get her, the better. Anyone who would only drop out only under the condition that she was predicated a VP nod after all the animosity and spite that she has shown Obama is fit to be tied… but the men in white coats.
Nobody wants you, Hillary, so get over yourself, take your Thorazine, and go to the sanitarium.
Posted by: Dr. Johnny Skeptic | May 23, 2008, 12:30 pm 12:30 pm
Mike Gravel should perhaps be Secretary of the Internet, a cabinet level post. I don’t know much about him. What I *do* know is that he really seems to *get* the internet, and seems to love it.
Posted by: Fongy Tongy | May 23, 2008, 12:42 pm 12:42 pm
Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama this race is virtually a tie and this is where the superdelegates have their work cut out for them. The 1/2 that voted for Obama will not be satisfied without him on the ticket and the same for the 1/2 that voted for Hillary. They are both strong candidates and we should honor both as deserving, smart, very accomplished people. Obama is inexperience in many ways but represents a more youthful paradyme. Hillary is very experienced and represents solid nuts and bolts with tremendous understanding of the system.
We have to have someone who does know the systems in place whether we like it or not they are there. The president does not act or run things in and of himself or herself. They must work with the congress, foreign leaders, the U.N. etc. Call it old politics or whatever, they must be able to work with them and that takes a tremendous understanding of these systems. MI and FL must be seated, it is against our rights as citizens not to count our votes. Remember, if this year it is FL and MI loosing their votes. What could this open up for future elections? The vote to change the dates was voted on by both republicans and democrates. Republicans had a huge say it this! Another part of the game. Seat them now and move on with the nomination.
Posted by: drjune | May 23, 2008, 12:55 pm 12:55 pm
Did it actually occur to you that those same people actually had something to do with murder?
Posted by: Achilles | May 23, 2008, 12:56 pm 12:56 pm
It seems to me Obama has been played Mccains Medical records came out and we are hearing very little about them cindy’s not going to put her taxes out and nothing is being said if that was Obama or Hillary that would be all we would hear wait and see it will be Mccain that wil be held up as the winner as soon as they are sure Hillary is out. IMO
Posted by: Bishop | May 23, 2008, 1:01 pm 1:01 pm
Terra – You do know that Obama lives on the south side of Chicago? That his children go to school on the south side of Chicago? That he had a second job as a visiting lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School (on the south side of Chicago)? He lived in Chicago, and he went to that church, and he donated money to that church, sometimes up to 20,000/year.
Posted by: vicki | May 23, 2008, 1:02 pm 1:02 pm
Hey hillary supporters, sorry but she isn’t gonna have time to do much after she finally quits, she will be in court too much on the PAUL V CLINTON trial. It’s still at the forefront, if you really want to Educate yourselves you should look it up on line!
Posted by: Sue Filutze | May 23, 2008, 1:08 pm 1:08 pm
TO: Dr. Johnny Skeptic
I really hope the FBI is reading your posts.
Posted by: Yavo Lem | May 23, 2008, 1:26 pm 1:26 pm
al, I don’t know which side you are on, but thanks for the information. At any rate, the Chair of the South Carolina State Democratic Party is a long way down the line from the DNC in Washington, D.C.
I trust “Hot-under-the-collar” Larry will see your post and being the gentleman he is, will check it out for himself, before he gives me another blast.
Posted by: Yavo Lem | May 23, 2008, 1:48 pm 1:48 pm
To all of you who have taken exception to Senator Obama “comparing” himself to Lincoln: Saying someone is one of your heroes is not comparing yourself to that hero. Most of the posts on here seem to be from loud-mouthed pseudo-intellectuals who obviously just like to spout off and think of themselves as important. Other sites that I’ve posted on seem to have much more reasonable and informed people making the comments. I just wish that I had the time to single out those of you who are the worst. Good day.
Posted by: Tim - North Carolina | May 23, 2008, 1:57 pm 1:57 pm
“Where would you put Mike Gravel?”
Ambassador to Alaska.
Posted by: JC | May 23, 2008, 2:03 pm 2:03 pm
Yavo, I’m actually an independent and don’t really like any of them. But I do like to check all facts out. No it didn’t come from Washington DC but I’m sure this is what Larry was referring to.
Posted by: al | May 23, 2008, 2:09 pm 2:09 pm
To Yavo Lem, your electoral math analysis ignores the simple fact that Obama will not be running against Hillary Clinton in November. He will be running against John McCain. Do you think Obama will lose California to McCain the way he did to Hillary? How about New York? Your entire analysis is based on a fallacy. Furthermore, all polls indicate Obama will crush McCain, and that is in spite of the fact that many Hillary supporters are telling pollsters that they would vote for McCain, in order to bolster her arguments for the nomination. Once Hillary drops out and does her best to graciously endorse Obama, her supporters will vote for Obama as well. Not all her supporters (I suppose there are those that are voting for her because she is white and will vote for McCain for that reason, but that is a small percentage – the vast majority will stand by the Democratic candidate knowing full well what peril we will be in if McCain is elected).
Posted by: Bob Scofield | May 23, 2008, 2:10 pm 2:10 pm
Does anyome know what the distance is between Springfield (capitol of Ill) and the south side of Chicago? 200 miles…now for all those makeing the assinine statement that Obama sat in that church for 20 years…would you travel 400 miles to go to church? Now he also traveled all over the country and world..he was not even in Ill a good bit of the time. While the media tried to place Obama in that church during any of the contreversal statements by Wright, they could not. We as a people can only succeed if we have a base of honor and honesty…so please stop useing slander and lies to further your own candidate.
I am not a church goer, but can you support a church with donations, belong to a church and not sit in the pews each service? Do you have to believe every word your pastor says to belong to that church community…if so that is a cult and not a fellowship.
I think this whole argument is stupid and we have worse things to worry about. As far as anti white…that church was anti bad government if anything. It has white members. Read the sermons and stop allowing the media lead you around by the nose.
Check on the votes and records of the candidates…such as Hillary voted for a ban on flag burning.
Posted by: terra
=========================================
Yes, terra, I’ve been thinking about what you posted. It is quite a distance as you say, and I’ll take your figures as accurate. However, for a good part of the time Senator Obama was married, in TUCC, by Rev. Jeremiah Wright. As a married man, I assume that he, like me in my former life, would really like to spend time with my wife, and since I don’t think legislators work more than a 9-5 day, 5 days a week (with some exceptions of course), with much material they can take home to work on, that he would most likely spend a good amount of time at home, especially if he got any kind of legislative perks at all, like a transportation allowance, or a car, or could even hop a train at no charge, etc.
I know how wearing long distance travel can be, as I used to commute a 100 mile round-trip 5 days a week, driving my own car, between work and home. I did that by car for five years, and by train for another five. So, I don’t think it is unreasonable to believe that Senator Obama did something similar, and being home, he probably went to hear Rev. Wright, who you have to admit can be quite entertaining, more so that any minister, or priest I’ve every heard speak, even Bishop Fulton J. Sheen, or the Rev. Robert Schuller.
And then there were all those CDs of the sermons, and the Trumpet magazine. By the way, it should be mentioned that Senator Obama appeared many, many times on the cover of that publication and had been interviewed on occasion as well as written about in it by the Rev. Wright, himself. In fact, in the April 2007 issue of “The Trumpet”, Rev. Wright wrote an essay entitled “Facing the Rising Sun”, in which he said, “God raised Barack from a dead political career to the United States Senate. Then, as Jesus ascended into Heaven, God made a way for Barack to ascend to the pinnacle of politics. . . . We are truly in a “new day.” Now with that kind of expectation being placed on him, and with his over-inflated ego, I should think that Senator Obama would have made EVERY effort to attend that church and bask in his glory. Amen.
As to Hillary’s vote against flag burning, and again, I take your word for it, I’m glad she did, but there is an irony involved in that vote. I’m all for it, because having served in the U.S. Navy, for two years active duty on two six-month patrols, operating out of Guantanamo Bay (Gitmo) Naval Base, during the run-up to the Cuban Missel Crisis, I came to appreciate the very great importance of the American Flag and when later I travelled in Europe, I really appreciated seeing it when the ship I returned on passed the Statue of Liberty and I saw the flag flying again. It was the greatest sight in the world, especially having been away from it so much. And so I literally hate to see an American terrorist, like William Ayers, trampling on it and wiping his feet on it, as he did for a publicity picture for his crummy book, taken in an alleyway, (I wonder why he didn’t do it in public), as you can see for yourself at:
I also do not like to see its likeness used for all kinds of articles of clothing and on junk, nor am I fond of those flag lapel pins or the other trivial commercialized uses of our flag. No, I served under it, doing my part to defend my country and perhaps to have protected people like you, or if you are not that old, then your parents. In short, I don’t wave the flag, I respect the flag, I am pround of the flag, I honor the flag, and I am sickened by people who think they can just trash it, or burn it in protests or riots, people like Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dohrn and the rest of the SDS and Weathermen creeps. But here is the irony: legally, the only proper and authorized way to dispose of an American flag that has become tattered and worn is not to throw it in the trash (which by the way is illegal), but rather it is to burn it, respectfully.
So, Senator Obama can put on a flag pin or surround himself with American flags to pander to potential voters, but frankly, I do not think he is that sincere, nor do I think voters are that easily fooled.
Posted by: Yavo Lem | May 23, 2008, 2:41 pm 2:41 pm
terra, I forgot one other very entertaining religious type, the late Rev. Gene Scott. Now he was really ridiculous, and so self-absorbed, somewhat like Rev. Wright and Senator Obama.
Posted by: Yavo Lem | May 23, 2008, 2:47 pm 2:47 pm
Shewill
Reality check for you. (Careful. It may hurt.)
The ONLY one Hillary has been fighting for is herself. She has lied to you. She is using you. Its about her.
Truth.
Posted by: Gemma | May 23, 2008, 2:47 pm 2:47 pm
TO: Bob Scofield
No, you are totally incorrect and clearly you either did not read my Electoral Vote analysis, or you did not understand its purpose. Try reading it again, especially the first paragraph or so, which was put in for the benefit of people like yourself.
Frankly, I have no interest in head-to-head matchups for conditions that do not yet exist. First, comes the Convention in Denver at which a Nominee will be selected, but between now and then, a lot of “stuff” is going to hit the whirling blades, and opinions will change, etc. So, really, any so-called polls are meaningless at this point. My analysis just address the question, “Who is the most electable (or stronger) candidate, NOW, based on a side-by-side COMPARISON of WHAT THEY BOTH HAVE ACCOMPLISHED TO DATE, AND CAN ACCOMPLISH through the end of the Primaries?” I realize the question may be a little bit to long and that perhaps it is too complicated for you, but the concept is simple, and so are the numbers. Read them and weep.
Posted by: Yavo Lem | May 23, 2008, 2:58 pm 2:58 pm
If anyone has been pandering it is McCain and McClinton.
Gas tax holiday anyone?
I always remind myself to have faith in the American public. Then I remember they voted for Bush. TWICE.
And I read these comments. And I know why. At least half of America is seriously uninformed, bigotted and plain irrational.
(I have no viable diagnosis for anyone who would vote for McCain if Hillary isn t the nominee. They simply defy all the laws of sanity.)
Posted by: Gemma | May 23, 2008, 3:01 pm 3:01 pm
mike gravel for drug czar!!!!
Posted by: ace holiday | May 23, 2008, 3:09 pm 3:09 pm
libre
You say he is unelectable. Substantiate.
Posted by: Gemma | May 23, 2008, 3:12 pm 3:12 pm
VP=ABH… Anybody But Hillary
She has squandered her popularity and the public’s goodwill towards the Clintons in this election debacle. Mike Huckabee is the example of fighting out the nomination with class. The Clintons have always been painfully lacking in class and tact. Her “unfavorable” rating is growing among Democrats and independants nationwide (see her falling poll numbers in Ohio and California).
Hillary has abandoned any credibility as a leader of all of America. She has been a divisive force in American politics for years, and with this election it is clear that she is more than willing to balkanize the population in order to pit group against group, divide and conquer. Her Appalachian Strategy is race baiting at its most insidious, and she has been happy to have the sexes spar with one another over this (see Geraldine Ferraro and Joy Behar’s comments).
John McCain might be Bush’s annointed successor, but Hillary Clinton is the real heir to Bush/Rove politics. We as a nation need to move past this era of damaging politics. We need a generational change in Washington, and Obama is the one to make it happen.
Posted by: AstoriaNYC | May 23, 2008, 3:13 pm 3:13 pm
Because of Darth Cheney, the Vice President has a lot of power now. We cannot have a Republican Vice President.
Obama should guarantee his supporters that he will not choose a Republican Vice President!
Posted by: Karen | May 23, 2008, 3:18 pm 3:18 pm
rd
Ironic that you call Obama a liar when it was Hillary Clinton who lied about NAFTA, Bosnia and the ‘benefits’ of a gas tax.
Furthermore the reasons you cite that make Obama a bad candidate have nothing to do with the candidate himself but w/ associates of the candidate.
So I’ll ask you a question, the logic and rationale of which may cause your addled brain to implode:
Are you electing Obama or his associates?
I also challenge you to highlight an actual lie Obama has told.
You have until November to find the lie.
Posted by: Gemma | May 23, 2008, 3:24 pm 3:24 pm
Obama and Web in 08
Dream ticket
Posted by: catherine s | May 23, 2008, 3:26 pm 3:26 pm
YES! A “team of rivals” cabinet sounds great. But please….NO HILLARY. She is way too partisan, and just plain poison.
Posted by: Lindsay | May 23, 2008, 3:55 pm 3:55 pm
First he has to win the nomination. Then he has to have somebody on the ticket who will help, (not hinder,) him win the General Election.
Once he has won the presidency, he can appoint a cabinet of “the best and brightest” of his rivals. Just as Lincoln did.
Posted by: ERW | May 23, 2008, 4:17 pm 4:17 pm
Every democrat candidate running for President has been respectful and decent except Hillary Clinton. Edwards, Obama, Dodd, Richardson, Biden, etc….all displayed respect for themselves and others.
Every person could have brought out a long laundry list of baggage associated with the Clintons, but never did that to her. However, she did not hesitate one second to demonize others with lies, engage in race baiting and changing the rules to maximize her chances.
As a woman, I supported and had high hopes for her, but selfish motives revealed multiple character issues that cannot be overlooked. She is not a team player, except with John McCain.
Posted by: Florida voter | May 23, 2008, 4:26 pm 4:26 pm
If Obama taps Hillary for VP I would seriously fear for his safety :( I say Obama/Webb is the best way to go. Should definitely help with the “White Blue Collar” vote. Experience would be an issue but both of them make up for it with common sense and integrity. Webb is also coming off a big victory with his GI Bill. Plus they could make up for lack of experience with a stellar cabinet. How about Colin Powell for Secretary of State? Let him try it again, this time with an administration that has some integrity and will actually listen to him.
Posted by: Sean | May 23, 2008, 4:37 pm 4:37 pm
@ Mary, who said Obama will…
“…Consider Hamas and other terrorist groups as friends” and “has been buying the superdelegates and he is behind in popular votes.”
First off, I would really like to see a link to anything that indicates Obama would consider Hamas and other terrorists to be friends. I think you just made that up.
Second, the only way Hillary is leading in the popular vote is if you discount the voices of hundreds of thousands of voters who participated in caucuses and who ventured out in the Michigan cold simply to vote AGAINST her. Since Hillary wants EVERY voice to be heard, I’m afraid the math doesn’t add up… again.
You shouldn’t believe everthing you hear from Hillary or read on the Internet. However, if someone from Nigeria sends you an email and says you can make a million dollars then, yes, it’s true. Send them your bank account info.
Posted by: Sean | May 23, 2008, 4:50 pm 4:50 pm
Gemma, Obama’s complete record as an Illinois State Senator is a lie. The bills he takes credit for were based on the work of other state senators. Emil Jones (President of the IL State Senate) put Obama’s name on those bills because he was being groomed for a US Senate seat. Obama’s association with Rezko, Wright and Ayres indicates that he has very poor judgement. Associations do matter. These judgement issues will be attacked by the Republicans. Look at how poorly Obama has done in the primaries since the end of February. He lost Rhode Island, Ohio, Texas, Pennsylvania, Indiana, West Virginia and Kentucky. He won in Vermont and North Carolina. He lost seven of nine primaries in the last two months. This is because the people started paying attention to who he was and what his politics are. If Obama is the nominee McCain will be the next President.
Posted by: vicki | May 23, 2008, 4:58 pm 4:58 pm
@Vicki,
Are you suggesting that A) Hillary Clinton is the more honest of the two candidates and B) That Hillary has fewer “questionable” associations than Obama?
Don’t think for a second that the Republicans aren’t sitting on a mountain of ammunition in the unlikely event that she gets the nod. Believe me, there’s a reason why Karl Rove is trying to convince Democrats that she’s the better choice.
Posted by: Sean | May 23, 2008, 5:13 pm 5:13 pm
Vicki, you haven’t mentioned Bill and Hillary Clinton’s ties to Rezko. I wonder why. Google it. There’s plenty of photos of them together.
Oh, and Bill and Hillary invited Reverend Wright to the White House to counsel them after the Lewinsky affair became public.
And Bill issued an awful lot of pardons for some very dubious people, who then donated money to his and Hillary’s campaigns. But you know that already, right?
Posted by: thepoliticalcat | May 23, 2008, 5:13 pm 5:13 pm
For those questioning the distance between Springfield and Chicago:
Michelle and the girls stayed in Chicago. Obama was always home on the weekends – which I know from hearing Michelle say she insisted that he be. (Anybody wanna bet he defied her?) Same when he worked in Washington – she wanted him home as much as possible to help with the house and the girls.
Posted by: HoosierSue | May 23, 2008, 5:46 pm 5:46 pm
thepoliticalcat – One picture at a fund-raiser vs. 17 year relationship, $250,00 donations, buying lot next to house, getting funding for sub-par housing for REZKO stop being nonsensical.
One picture with Wright vs. 20 year reltionship, getting married by him, baptizing his children, “I can no more foresake Wright than I can my own grandmother” – wait, did he just say I’m a politician! “I forsake him”.
Please, get serious.
Posted by: vicki | May 23, 2008, 6:03 pm 6:03 pm
Vicki, do you really think Reverend Wright will be an issue in light of McCain’s recent pastor issues? And again I have to ask, do you think Hillary is more honest than Obama?
Posted by: Sean | May 23, 2008, 6:33 pm 6:33 pm
Obama isn’t afraid of working with people who disagree with him. I like that.
It’s a very different way of doing things… compared to an executive who surrounds himself with yes-men, and who dismisses those that disagree with his pre-conceived notions.
Posted by: Buddy McCue | May 23, 2008, 6:50 pm 6:50 pm
I support Barack Obama because I believe he can deliver on his promises of change. Washington needs someone who can work across the aisle and get the right people involved… people who are willing to take a common sense approach on issues.
I was looking for some information on Obama a few days ago and I came across this piece which had a tidbit about him that surprised me. It kind of made him seem even more human to me. (We all have at some kind of weakness, right?)
http://www.informzoo.com/main/cat/14/111
Posted by: obamarules | May 23, 2008, 7:07 pm 7:07 pm
Yeah, ok, dude!
Something tells me Abe Lincoln is turning over in his grave as we speak, totally disgusted that the all time sham of a candidate considers him a hero.
Poor Abe.
Posted by: Howdy Doody | May 23, 2008, 10:21 pm 10:21 pm
shewill,
Many of us remember the Clinton years, so we KNOW that they only fight for themselves, they fire staff and hire their family and friends, and they pardon criminals simply because they are friends, or because a friend asked them too…including 2 members of the Weather Underground that they tried to connect Obama with.
So, if anything I feel much more comfortable with a President Obama than I ever will with a President Clinton…and whatever causes you to believe that Obama would only fight for “not for a chosen few” can only be based on any assumptions and biases you’ve made, not an anything that proves this. Your response to him is nothing a huge case of xenophobia.
Posted by: XME | May 23, 2008, 11:08 pm 11:08 pm
So refreshing to hear a candidate speak like this. After 8 years of lunacy, it’s just nice to have the prospect of a smart person in the White House.
Posted by: Donna | May 24, 2008, 9:00 am 9:00 am
Robert Gates for SecDef!
Posted by: John Stevens | May 25, 2008, 12:01 pm 12:01 pm
If Obama is stupid enough to add Hillary to his ticket, he deserves to loose. That woman and her husband are both greedy physcos and are only wanting back in the Whitehouse so they can sell us out some more and make up for all the money they have spent. Right when this all started, Bill just made a deal and sold our national defense contracts, our secrets, and our jobs to China! So much for looking out for our national Interest and looking out for those “Blue-collar” workers that are so readily to line up behind Hillary……what is wrong with these people ?????
Posted by: Dave Peck | May 26, 2008, 8:27 am 8:27 am
Now think about it people…..the “REAL” dream team, which would be completely unstoppable would be:
OBAMA / EDWARDS 2008 !!!
Wouldn’t that be a great Move ?????
Posted by: Dave Peck | May 26, 2008, 8:33 am 8:33 am
I don’t care what Obama or any other candidate talks about right now, other than the countries dismal real estate market, particularly the Boca Raton real estate market. Does either candidate plan to address this and possible solutions in details? I doubt it, their much to busy bickering to care.
Posted by: John | June 29, 2008, 10:56 pm 10:56 pm
I like the idea of a president choosing a cabinet full of rivals. This forces people to work together and set aside petty personal differences. I think that it would at least be interesting to see exactly how it would all pan out. I think too that we might get some solid solutions to big issues in this country. Personally I’d like to see someone sort out the Boca Raton real estate issues here as well as real estate woes in the rest of the country.
Posted by: Barry | June 30, 2008, 5:52 pm 5:52 pm