Thursday’s campaign round-up

March 6, 2008

Today’s installment of campaign-related news items that wouldn’t generate a post of their own, but may be of interest to political observers:

* For my money, the biggest problem in Democratic presidential politics isn’t whether Clinton and Obama will destroy one another, but rather, what’s going to happen with Florida and Michigan: “The governors of Florida and Michigan have stepped in to offer their opinions about the question of what is to be done regarding their states’ potential delegates to this summer’s Democratic convention. The two governors, Florida Republican Charlie Crist and Michigan Democrat Jennifer Granholm, released a joint statement Wednesday. The statement reads, ‘The right to vote is at the very foundation of our democracy. This primary season, voters have turned out in record numbers to exercise that right, and it is reprehensible that anyone would seek to silence the voices of 5,163,271 Americans. It is intolerable that the national political parties have denied the citizens of Michigan and Florida their votes and voices at their respective national conventions.'”

* There are all kinds of rumors about the Obama campaign having a secret bloc of 50 superdelegates who will all, sometime soon, come forward together to announce their support. The Obama campaign continues to deny the talk. Bill Burton told Greg Sargent: “This is just a rumor. There is no secret stash of superdelegates that we are sitting on waiting to roll out.”

* With the Wyoming caucuses just a few days away, the Clinton campaign has a new radio ad on the air in the state. The ad features a woman who says that her young son has had four open heart surgeries that the family couldn’t have paid for without the Children’s Health Insurance Program, which Clinton supported as First Lady.

* With the Mississippi primary coming right up, too, the Obama campaign is reminding Mississippians of some derogatory comments she made about the state a few months ago.

* In light of questions from Obama about Clinton’s reluctance to release her tax returns, Clinton communications director Howard Wolfson said this morning on a conference call with reporters: “I for one do not find that imitating Ken Starr is a way to win a Democratic primary election for president.” (To ask for transparency is to act like Starr? Sounds like a cheap shot.)

* There’s more counting to do, but at this point: “At last report, with 40 percent of precincts counted, Barack Obama led Hillary Clinton 56 percent to 44 percent in the Texas Democratic caucuses. Counting continues today.”

* The Clinton campaign raised more than $3 million in the 24 hours following Tuesday’s victories. Very impressive.

* Keep an eye on the possible effort to win over pledged delegates: “On a conference call with reporters, Clinton aide Harold Ickes noted that pledged delegates aren’t formally bound to vote for the candidate they’re elected to support. ‘That binding rule was knocked out in 1980,’ he said. Ickes didn’t actually suggest that the Clinton campaign would court pledged delegates, something they’ve disavowed; he just stated the rule. Still, an interesting note.”

* Clinton has emphasized on several occasions this week that her husband didn’t lock up his first nomination until June of 1992. The NYT takes a closer look at this and finds that the contest started a month later in 1992 than it did in 2008, and by March 20, 1992, some were already calling Clinton the presumptive nominee. Less than two weeks later, on April 8, after winning the New York primary, George Stephanopoulos, then Clinton’s deputy campaign manager, declared the process over.

* The Republican candidate to take on Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) withdrew yesterday, citing health problems. The deadline for candidates to qualify for the ballot in New Jersey is on April 7, leaving the state GOP in a bit of a jam.

* How strong was turnout in Vermont’s presidential primaries this week? Over 46% of the state’s registered voters participated (and that was with a largely uncompetitive GOP contest). Impressive, isn’t it?

The right to vote is at the very foundation of our democracy. This primary season, voters have turned out in record numbers to exercise that right, and it is reprehensible that anyone would seek to silence the voices of 5,163,271 Americans. It is intolerable that the national political parties have denied the citizens of Michigan and Florida their votes and voices at their respective national conventions.

What a bunch of twits. They knew the rules and decided to flout them, and now are pretending ignorance of it.

I for one hope Michigan and Florida hold new primaries. That will show they’ve learned their lesson (and soothe their voters, improving November chances).

  • Re: Florida and Michigan

    The irony is they moved their primary ahead to become more important, but ultimately it was their punishment the has led to an overinflated sense of importance.

    They should not get a full slate of delegates. Half is more than fair.

  • “I for one do not find that imitating Ken Starr is a way to win a Democratic primary election for president.”

    Right, they obviously think Karl Rove is a better model.

  • So I guess Hillary was imitating Ken Starr back when she demanded to see Lazio’s tax returns?

    What a bunch of desperate jerks.

  • In light of questions from Obama about Clinton’s reluctance to release her tax returns, Clinton communications director Howard Wolfson said this morning on a conference call with reporters: “I for one do not find that imitating Ken Starr is a way to win a Democratic primary election for president.” (To ask for transparency is to act like Starr? Sounds like a cheap shot.)

    The guilty always want to change the subject and make the accuser the guilty party. In fact, doing this is traditionally proof of the accuracy of the original accusation.

    Hill and Billary left the White House millions of dollars in debt. Within 6 years, they are worth $35 million. How that happened, and who they are beholden to for their good fortune, is indeed a relevant question.

  • It is intolerable that the national political parties have denied the citizens of Michigan and Florida their votes and voices at their respective national conventions.

    Read: Our states decided to ignore the clearly stated rules of the Democratic Party. Our plan to grandstand didn’t work, and now we want to whine about it. No one told us that actions have consequences. They certainly don’t for our beloved president!

    I hate the “we’re just innocent victims” mentality on display. That said, the most equitable solution seems to be new primaries for both Michigan and Florida, perhaps after every other state gets to weigh in.

  • We’ve been hearing a lot about conference calls with reporters lately. Is this a relatively new method of campaigning?

  • For my money, the biggest problem in Democratic presidential politics isn’t whether Clinton and Obama will destroy one another…

    I have an idea that would save the Democratic Party and its candidates a lot of grief over the next seven weeks. Instead of trying to destroy each other, which will only give fuel to McCain, why not get Clinton and Obama to agree to start going after McCain individually? Then let the remaining primary voters and the Superdelegates choose who they believe is better ready for the Big Show in November. And it keeps McCain against the ropes from the get go.

    It’s so crazy, it just might work. Just sayin’…

  • …why not get Clinton and Obama to agree to start going after McCain individually? -chrenson

    That’s what Obama spent the last two weeks doing. Attacking McCain and responding to McCain’s attacks. A lot of good that did him.

  • The Clinton campaign has Republicanism on the brain. First they praise Republican experience to attack Obama and then they bring up Republican witch hunts to attack Obama. Please guys, focus on being Democrats (and better Democrats at that) instead.

    For Florida and Michigan to play the victim card when they knew what the repercussions would be before they made their decisions is reprehensible. If they want to get back in the game they will need to tell the rest of the nation first that their predicament is their own damn fault, then they can use their own initiative and money to fix the problems they created by holding their primaries again. Some personal responsibility would go a long way in this situation.

    The only lower level of hell Harold Ickes could sink to is if he approached the Supreme Court to have them declare Hillary the winner before all the voting is done. Despicable.

  • “I for one do not find that imitating Ken Starr is a way to win a Democratic primary election for president.” (To ask for transparency is to act like Starr? Sounds like a cheap shot.)

    Sounds like that tax return question struck a raw nerve.

    Makes me all the more curious about those returns.

  • If the Democratic leadership had listened to the street in 1968 they wouldn’t have these so-called superdelegates in place waiting to impose the leadership’s will over the electorates.

  • Two points:

    I’m not sure the Clinton campaign is well served by bringing up Ken Starr.

    Michigan is a much bigger problem than Florida. Hillary got 55% of the vote in Michigan against “none of the above”. The fact that 45% of democrats came to the polls motivate to vote against HRC and for “anyone but HRC” is a huge problem for her.

  • If the nomination process could be completed by virtue of the candidate declaring himself the nominee, this would have ended back when Clinton was declared by the Media and everyone as the most likely winner. Of course Bill Clinton’s campaign declared him the presumptive nominee. That is how campaigns work. Obama has been trying to do that to Hillary during this campaign, suggesting that she pack up and go home.

    The nomination process ends when a candidate is selected at the convention. The caucuses and primaries supply input to that convention, but winning delegates isn’t binding on the process any more than the self-serving statements of the candidates are. Obama can try to preempt the convention by declaring himself the nominee by virtue of his won delegates (although he hasn’t reached any magic number and cannot with the delegates left to win), but that doesn’t make him the party’s choice until the convention says so.

    As the TalkLeft blog points out, he has yet to win any big state and without doing so, he cannot win the Fall. That means he has not proven he is a viable candidate and has no legitimacy declaring himself the presumptive nominee. Bill Clinton was in a very different position during his presidential campaign.

  • Florida and Michigan NEED to hold new primaries if they want the votes to be counted. In no way were those fair elections. Obama wasn’t even on the ballot in Michigan and they think those votes should be counted?! That’s madness.

    Neither were accurate. It’s incredibly unfair to the people of those states to tell them their votes won’t count, and then make them count. Does anyone actually think they will end up with an adequate representation? Why isn’t this brought up every time anyone talks about this?

    Those two governors sound like fools.

  • As others have said, I wouldn’t mind seating Florida and Michigan delegates if new primaries are held in which both Dem candidates have an equal chance to win over the voting public. But if that doesn’t happen then to heck with it. The drama will play out just as well without their direct participation.

  • *steps up to the podium….

    “As the governors of the great states of Michigan and Florida have jointly proclaimed, the right to vote is, indeed, at the very foundation of our democracy. It is the keystone of our society, clearly protected under the First Amendment to the Constitution of these United States. It is also reprehensible, in like measure to one’s sacred right to express an opinion via the sanctity of the ballot, that anyone would seek to silence so many voices as they strove to make their choices heard.

    However, it should be noted—with complete candor, and with undeniable fact, that the rules governing one’s right to vote are no less sacred than the right with which an individual participates in the election process. The states of Michigan and Florida, through their state legislative bodies, did with intent choose to violate these rules for their own self-serving visions of inflated political value. Both states possessed full knowledge of the consequences that would stem from their actions. Both states were provided with ample opportunity to withdraw from their chosen course, re-enter a realm of compliance, and avoid the punitive measures under which they, as unique States within the greater Union of these United States, now find themselves.

    That the governors of these two states now stand shoulder to shoulder in their audacity, blaming the national party for actions undertaken by their own legislatures, is not only an overt rejection of where the true responsibility for disenfranchisement belongs—the citizens of Michigan and Florida being disenfranchised by their own legislatures—it is also an act of reckless, irresponsible cowardice.

    Clearly, Governors Granholm and Crist are little more than tools of their disparate legislative bodies, and are more willing—as demonstrated by their actions—to cater to the limelight of the camera than they are to the undeniable rights of their own citizenry, both individually and collectively. The responsibility—and the entirety of that responsibility—for any measure of electoral disenfranchisement belongs solely to the states of Michigan and Florida, their legislatures, and their state Parties.”

    *steps down from the podium….

  • Maybe the math favors Obama, but the “people” favor Hillary! This is a democracy—not an Algebra Test. As Obama recently said, “We should let the people’s voices be heard.” Michigan and Florida voters voted when the polls were open. Do not re-vote. Count their votes. If delegates’ votes for other states are counted, then count the Florida and Michigan delegates’ votes! Be fair.

  • All this concern from Bill Crist is not encouraging. — Jim @8

    Fear the Greeks when they come bearing gifts… 🙂 What he’s proposing is that DNC should pay for the repeated primaries. That’s a cool $25 million out of the Dem warchest. Caucuses would have been a lot cheaper but I don’t see Clinton agreeing to caucuses. And yes, I think Granholm did endorse Clinton.

  • Letting Florida and Michigan in only adds numerous grounds to go to court for Clinton or Obama. Obama followed the rules; Clinton did not. How her name ended up on both states ballots is a question that needs to be answered.

  • @21:
    Do not re-vote. Count their votes. If delegates’ votes for other states are counted, then count the Florida and Michigan delegates’ votes! Be fair.

    Horseshit.

    I forgot … the Clinton mantra is, “We always play by the rules — unless the aforementioned rules are inconvenient.”

  • Where does it say that on Clinton’s official webpage? Oh, it doesn’t? Must be more casual slander then. Obama’s folks are the ones who didn’t follow the rules in Texas and Ohio, based on what CSPAN was reporting. One of the lawsuits filed in Texas concerns the Obama people obtaining the caucus packets early and filling them out during polling, not afterwards. They were witnessed approaching voters inside the limits outside polling places in Ohio and also trying to insert themselves into polling places as observers without having filed the necessary paperwork. Obama’s mantra is, “Rules apply to everyone else, but I’m special.”

  • What #6 said. Let them hold new primaries after every other state has held theirs. They will most likely still have a good chance at influencing the Democratic nomination anyway. In Florida’s case though, I hope it’s a closed primary.

    However, I don’t trust Crist, he’s a Republican official. I suspect he is most interested in ensuring that Clinton secures the nomination to make a McCain victory in the general election more likely. So above all the Democrats should not seat their delegates from the illegitimate primary.

  • Has Granholm endorsed Clinton?

    Yes, Granholm is supporting Clinton. Besides Granholm, the Michigan Democratic Party leadership backsClinton. One fear here is that, if the Michigan delegates are seated, Clinton will not only receive the delegates she would have won, but that the uncommitted delegation from Michigan will also be made up of Clinton supporters.

  • On March 6th, 2008 at 12:54 pm, Jay said:
    Maybe the math favors Obama, but the “people” favor Hillary!

    ———————————————————————

    Jay appears to be some what confused. Not only does the delgate math favor Obama, but with more than a 600,000 vote lead in the popular vote clearly the people favor him as well. Since, as per Democratic party RULES, the states have yet to hold OFFICIAL primary elections NO delegates should be awarded to those states. Until OFFICIAL primary/caucus elections, that comply with Democratic party RULES, are held then there is no way to allocate delegates from those states. Funny how while Obama is open and supportive of OFFICIAL primary/caucus elections being held in Florida and Michigan in accordance with party RULES, Billary is adamantly against the people of these states being allowed to participate in an OFFICIAL primary/caucus election. What is she afraid of?

  • Clinton communications director Howard Wolfson said this morning on a conference call with reporters: “I for one do not find that imitating Ken Starr is a way to win a Democratic primary election for president.”

    Great, dog whistle politics for Democrats. Most of us rightfully despise Starr, so this will appeal to those who don’t think about it and realize that the situation isn’t even remotely similar to what Starr did and Wolfson is therefore completely full of shit. I never disliked Hillary Clinton before this year, but Penn, Wolfson and Ickes are total slime and it reflects horribly on her judgment that these are the 3 people who speak for her most of the time.

  • One of the things I hate most in this world is people who hold a double standard and use it to viciously attack their opponents. Clintonistas support Clinton’s vile tactics, but whenever Obama defends himself from Clinton’s despicable actions, the Clintonistas go on the attack. They say that since Obama talks about a higher standard, it shows hypocrisy for him to “go negative”. Basically, the Clintonistas want to fight a battle while trying to saddle their opponent with a crippling double standard. They want an unfair handicap. They want Clinton to win and they don’t care about the means, only the ends. It’s Bushism/Rovianism at its finest and exactly why Obama deserves our votes. Eight years of this bullshit is enough.

  • Mary, do you seriously mean to imply that because Clinton beat Obama in California, that Obama would not beat McCain there? Ditto for New York.

    Or that because Clinton beat Obama in Texas, that Clinton would beat McCain?

    Cmon, don’t insult our intelligence. Those arguments about electibility are bunk.

  • Mary, do you seriously mean to imply that because Clinton beat Obama in California, that Obama would not beat McCain there? Ditto for New York.

    Obama actually polls better than Clinton against McCain in New York.

  • Must be more casual slander then.

    You’re a fine one to complain, Mary.

    You said: “Obama has been trying to do that to Hillary during this campaign, suggesting that she pack up and go home.”

    Obama said that? Really? I’ve been following the campaign coverage pretty closely and I seemed to have missed the part where Obama called on Clinton to concede.

    Or are you, once again, talking out of your ass?

  • Obama has been winning with large numbers of Republicans crossing over to vote for him. We do not know whether these same Republicans would stick with Obama instead of voting for McCain, but I see no reason why they would, especially if Obama starts talking more like a Democrat in order to hold onto the base. These so-called Independents and cross-over Republicans are just as likely to be people uninterested in their own primary (because it is a done deal) and trying to mess up the Democrats in anticipation of the run against McCain. Or they could be people with no strong party affiliation who will not stick with Obama if other concerns or current events blow them in a different direction.

    Hillary is polling as the more likely person to beat McCain these days, due to her wins in the recent primaries. The numbers go back and forth and we don’t know what will happen in the Fall. However, support that comes most strongly from an unreliable constituency of Republicans and Independents is not the best choice for a Democratic candidate, in my opinion. If you like Obama you will obviously feel differently about that. As I’ve explained before, I am unwilling to take a chance. With Clinton, I know she is a Democrat and I know what her values are, and I know from the recent primaries that the majority of Democratic voters feel the same about her. She is the Democratic candidate — Obama is not.

  • “That means he has not proven he is a viable candidate…”

    “Mary” Your vile rants underscore and reenforce the growing consensus that radicalized Clinton supporters are self-imploding. Despite your manic ramblings and bizarre conclusions you fail to see all the really good people desperately hoping to vote for a really good person.

    Clinton should go home, and take the trash out when she leaves.

  • Michigan and Florida voters voted when the polls were open. Do not re-vote. Count their votes.

    Do you realize that in Michigan neither Edwards nor Obama were on the ballot? Of the top three candidates, you had a choice of Clinton, Clinton, or Clinton? How exactly is that letting the people of Michigan have their say?

    And do you realize that Florida was a campaign in which all the candidates agreed not to campaign and informed voters realized the vote wouldn’t be counted? How is that a fair measure of voter sentiment?

    A do-over may happen, but seating the current slates — especially if they tip the balance one way or another — would be an absolute travesty.

  • Let’s not forget that both the Michigan and Florida problems were created by Republican legislatures. Now Crist wants to interfere again because Hillary delegates could help the man he endorsed (McCain)

    Also on releasing the tax returns, it was HRC who was calling on Rick Lazio to release his returns in her first Senate race in 2000.

  • The idea that Democrats will close ranks behind Obama if he is the nominee may not be true. Obama supporters keep assuming that, but we do have a choice in this election. There is Nader and there are green candidates and some other progressives in my state (CA, e.g., Peace and Freedom). Or we can sit this out. Some of my friends consider Obama too close to a conservative to vote for as a progressive candidate so they lean towards these other alternatives. Those who believe you should vote your conscience and your beliefs instead of pragmatically may desert Obama. Also, there is considerable talk in blogs about people who voted for either Hillary or Obama going to McCain as their second choice, not the other Democrat.

  • Steve, in a post this morning:
    As for the Dems, the fight over electability will surely continue unabated. In general, most recent polling shows Clinton and Obama leading McCain in general-election match-ups, and in nearly every instance, Obama enjoys a stronger margin. The WaPo/ABC poll is no exception — Clinton beats McCain by six; Obama beats McCain by 12. Make of this what you will

    Me, commenting in that same post:
    I’ll predict that Mary sees this as a sign that Obama should drop out.

    Mary, in this thread:
    Hillary is polling as the more likely person to beat McCain these days. … She is the Democratic candidate — Obama is not.

    Sadly pathetic and hilariously predictable.

  • My wife and I went through Hell here in Texas with this caucus thing. I’m so upset about it, that my vote in the general will go one of two ways, Democrat if there are no caucuses in Michigan or florida, or I will have to vote for that jerk McCain.

    Caucuses are awfull, stick to primaries please!

  • As the TalkLeft blog points out, he has yet to win any big state and without doing so, he cannot win the Fall. -Mary

    Actually, with the caucus included, he essentially won Texas. At the very least, you’d have to call it a tie. But, of course, Texas doesn’t count because it’s a red state, and Illinois doesn’t count because it’s his home state (even though Hillary was born there and he wasn’t).

    What about the fact that he’s got over 600,000 more votes than her (not counting caucuses)? Doesn’t that count for something? Not technically, but if I were a superdelegate, that would mean something to me.

    If delegates’ votes for other states are counted, then count the Florida and Michigan delegates’ votes! Be fair. -Jay

    They are being fair. They only punished those states which broke the rules. All of the other states who did follow the rules are being counted. You need to really study the definition of fairness.

    Maybe the math favors Obama, but the “people” favor Hillary! -Jay

    See above fact about Obama having more popular vote than Hillary.

    Obama’s folks are the ones who didn’t follow the rules in Texas and Ohio, based on what CSPAN was reporting. -Mary

    Similar lawsuits were filed in Nevada against Hillary. Funny, I don’t remember your righteous indignation then.

  • “Hillary is polling as the more likely person to beat McCain these days,”

    Unfortunately another lie…..

    Polling is a funny thing and seems to be very subjective when you’re behind. But the actual poll results say that head-to-head Obama is 12 points ahead of McCain and Hillary is only 6 points ahead of McCain.

  • changed the names on #38, see how it reads
    —
    The idea that Democrats will close ranks behind Hillary if she is the nominee may not be true. Clinton supporters keep assuming that, but we do have a choice in this election. There is Nader and there are green candidates and some other progressives in my state (CA, e.g., Peace and Freedom). Or we can sit this out. Some of my friends consider Clinton too close to a conservative to vote for as a progressive candidate so they lean towards these other alternatives. Those who believe you should vote your conscience and your beliefs instead of pragmatically may desert Clinton. Also, there is considerable talk in blogs about people who voted for either Obama or Hillary going to McCain as their second choice, not the other Democrat.
    —
    This is exactly why a highly negative campaign will not benefit the eventual Dem nominee.

  • Let the American PEOPLE see your TAX RETURNS Clinton ! What are you afraid of ?

  • As a Floridian, I believe that the “delegates” as is are tainted, because there was no campaigning done here.
    What we need is for Obama & Clinton to come here and campaign (I would put that in caps, but you guys don’t need that). Then hold a new type of open vote, where the Democrats can pull in the indepenants, too. A mail-in vote open to all but registered Republicans could do this.
    Floridians would get fired up with our candidates coming here, and we can’t get complacent about this election. As it is, the stupid (again, caps appropriate) Democratic leadership here screwed the voters here by agreeing to the Republican lead.
    It would be worth $25 million to take the 4th largest state, no?

  • Mary (#17)

    While I see your point about the “big blue” states, do you honestly believe that if Obama is the nominee that those states won’t vote for him? The statistics just don’t back that up. Most polls suggest that Democrats are inclined to support either candidate.

    On the other hand, how many “purple” states do you think Clinton will win? I’d argue that those “purple” states are more likely to support Obama. I would go farther and say that without Obama, those same “purple” states are likely to go to McCain.

    Now, considering that Democrats in the “big blue” states will likely support either Clinton or Obama in the general election, and that “purple” states are more competative if Obama is the nominee due to his appeal among independents, then who is really the better choice for the Democrats this November?

    I DO agree with you that the nominating process will end when it ends. The reality is we have two strong Democratic candidates and neither will get the minimum number of deligates to claim the nomination outright.

  • I’m not certain what the right thing to do is. I’m certain it would not be fair to seat MI & FL delegates without a re-vote because of several factors, many of which are mentioned above. For example, I believe both candidates had pledged not to campaign in those states, but I know Clinton was actively campaiging in FL because I was invited to several rallies and to a fundraising dinner with her in Miami back in January. Obama may have done this too and I don’t know; the point is that it’s not OK to retroactively change the rules and pretend that makes things fair, it does quite the opposite.

  • Mary on #34 you said:
    “Obama has been winning with large numbers of Republicans crossing over to vote for him.”

    The problem is, there is no evidence to support your assertion that large numbers of Republicans have been voting for Obama for the purpose of skewing the Democratic nomination in his favor. There is, however, do doubt that right wing talking heads like Rush Limbaugh did instruct Republicans to vote for Clinton on March 4.

  • The right thing to do is to leave the Florida and Michigan delegates home. Seating them in any fashion will be followed by other states that want to move their primary dates up.

    If they do re-vote, they should be awarded no more than half of their original delegate count. There has to be a punitive price to pay.

    Otherwise, we should just begin 2012 primary season on Jan, 21st, 2009.

  • mudslide – I disagree.
    It was not the voters that did the stupid dance, the fact that this outcome was possible was not reported to the majority prior to the passage of the “Let’s be all important” bill moving the date up.
    It was the legislature’s fault, so don’t punish the voters! The voters did not know the possible outcome. And this will supress the Democratic vote, to boot! You want McBush to get Florida because the Republicans sold the Democrats down the river?
    Let the voting be late, but let’s get the 50% of voters in Florida up to over 50%+1 & have whichever Dem that gets the nomination win those electoral votes!!
    Having the candidates campaign here will fire up the Democrats. We can win Florida, but you seem to want the Republicans to win, Is that what you want?

  • As if any of you don’t know, here are some numbers from RCP:

    Total Delegates: Obama-1573 Clinton-1464
    Pledged Delegates: Obama- 1366 Clinton-1222
    Popular Vote: Obama- 12,992,769 Clinton-12,406,988
    Popular Vote (w/FL): Obama- 13,568,983 Clinton-13,277,974
    National RCP Average: Obama- 46.2% Clinton-44.8%

    To all the Clinton supporters please note, Obama leads ALL of these categories, pledged delegates, popular vote (with or without Florida) and national polls.

    To all the Obama supporters please note that in spite of these numbers, this thing is still very close. It ain’t over.

    My point is that we should try to be respectful of each other. Yes we are all passionate about are preferred candidate (Obama for me), but we must resist the urge to crush each other because that is destructive to the larger goal of electing a Democrat to be the next President of the United States of America.

  • Titus,

    The causcuses were only for the Primary. The general election will be strictly voting…I too went through hell and didn’t get to caucus until nearly midnight. People basically understood that the caucus couldn’t happen until the last voter had voted, since all voters have a right to caucus, but when we had to wait an additional half hour for the election judge to “stamp” the rolls and “verify” signatures, there was very nearly a riot. I don’t understand the rules, but I can understand why some people may have bent the rules and started to sign voters before the official time. Although our precincts followed the rules to the letter (the Obama people saw to it), there really wasn’t any harm in it. Lawsuits are for sore losers.

  • Mary: Not only is Obama a Democrat, he’s the type of Democrat this country needs. Change won’t happen without the independents, and the Republicans who are sick of their party. You obviously don’t want change, or a refreshed, youthful Democratic party. You prefer the status quo of Bill Clinton’s old tenure. HRC kills the future of the party.

  • Three ways to contact DNC Chairman Howard Dean (I just did all three urging him not to back down on the party’s original ruling):

    Web form
    http://www.democrats.org/page/petition/chairman

    Email
    deanh@dnc.org (not posted on the DNC website, but it did not bounce)

    Phone
    Main Phone Number: 202-863-8000 (switchboard operator answers, I was directed to Constituent Services and left a voice message)

    (Also, Fax: 202-863-8174 – not posted on the DNC website, maybe they do not want faxes)

    http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/14762.html#comment-387398
    http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/14762.html#comment-387429

  • “I for one do not find that imitating Ken Starr is a way to win a Democratic primary election for president.” -Clinton Campaign

    Apparently the Clinton campaign would like to remind the general public about the Starr investigation. Do they really want that debate?

  • I dunno, Dan, why the eagerness to have her reveal her tax details earlier than she promised, which was earlier than required?

  • A mail-in vote open to all but registered Republicans could do this.

    Excellent idea! Not only would it be way cheaper than using polling places, but just maybe they’d see the sensibility of doing all mail-in for all their elections in the future, a la Oregon. It’s past time that Americans came to their senses about voting systems. With all the attention focused on them, maybe it would make an impression that Oregon hasn’t yet been able to make. After all, they just sit quietly there on the coast acting quietly rational, year after year. Nothing to see there, folks, just move along.

    • Comments are closed.