Craig Crawford's Trail Mix

Please refrain from using the anonymous sign-in procedure to impersonate real people. We enjoy playful screen names, but at least be original.

Not a big fan of the headline.

"the latest in a string of racially polarized presidential contests against Hillary Rodham Clinton"

Not a big fan of that line either. The likelihood of any Dem taking these states in the general is almost impossible. What's the point of this discussion.

I think the racial divide is exaggerated that most of Hillary's loyal supporters are white. They will not vote for Obama with HRC still in the race. Her supporters will continue to be as negative in the exit polling (and on this blog) as HRC is on the campaign trail. The tone is set by the candidate.

Warren exactly the reason you're seeing the hierarchy of the party lining up against Clinton.

I disagree Brian.

With Obama - GA is in play in the general for sure.

MS may also be a possibility. Remember that the base is not crazy for McCain - and there are plenty of anti-war and anti-Bush voters out there.

Plus (with 98% reported):

Votes in MS:

Obama - 245,788
McCain - 110,826

And Obama is running against HRC - who got 152,403. A lot of that is the Dem. base that will not vote for McCain. Obama gets at least 60-70% of those votes.

I know plenty of Repugs stayed home - but MS could be in play.

As to Florida plan, there appears to be a glitch in that
after meeting with Sen. Nelson, the Florida Dem. members of he House issued a statement that they are opposed to the mail in vote plan, without elaborating as to why.

NYT has the story up for today's edition

Warren & Brian -- The racial component of this primary
was bound to be center stage, it didn't happen as
soon since John Edwards was in the race earlier
and as you know he did take some of the white guy
votes.

Woohoo!

Looks like my 20-point prediction was conservative! (Patsi was right - I mean left - oh just forget about it).

Obama will win by around 100,000 votes. Rack em up!!

Maybe people should drop the "for the good of the party" argument. That doesn't work on the Clintons. I think it is time to bring up the "L" word.

Brian:

OK. I get it. The feminists are going to start to channel Pat Buchanan and tell me that a black man can win the general election.

Holy cow Batman!! I never thought of that. How could I be so stupid. I hope there is still time for HRC to win...what can I do to help?!! We must save the Democratic Party!!

Warren I really don't consider Georgia a typical deep southern state anymore. The state has become too heavily dominated by metro Atlanta.

"can't win"

Freudian slip. I actually like Pat and think that him voting for Obama in the general could be like an act of contrition for all his racist comments over the years. I know Pat is no fan of McCain.

(btw, this is a flight of fancy - but my credibility flew out the window earlier today anyways...)

Thank god you caught on Warren, it's right up there with only the "big states" matter! Looks like Miss is going to be a 23% win for Obama, yee haw!

20 points is pretty much Obama's average in the "states that don't matter."

If more states "mattered" to Senator Clinton - she would be doing a lot of better.

Back to the typical Craig headline. Here's a question, in a state where 70% of the Democrats are black, why isn't the burden on Hillary Clinton? Why can't Hillary get black votes is a better question. Remember, the Clinton's had a lock on those votes less than six months ago. Ah, but if you believe that blacks will vote for blacks anyway, that question isn't relevant. With Craig's headline, only white votes are valued, and black votes are assumed and not worth fighting for.

Warren if Gore or Kerry had paid a little more attention to one of those states that don't matter just think how much different the world would be today. God bless Howard Dean and the 50 state plan.

Alpha to some people black votes are only worth 4/5 of what a white vote is worth, they call it counting votes old school!

Here is a little perspective for everyone clamoring about "voter disenfrachisement" in order to keep Clinton's chance for the nomination alive:

Popular vote (with FL as is) - Obama by 388,229

That is going to just keep growing in the remaining contests. And having a re-do in FL may net Clinton less popular votes than she received in the primary that already took place.

The Clintons are running out of options.

Oh boy, Keith is going to have a special comment for Hillary tomorrow night, how exciting. So lets see Hillary and BIll have manage to piss off the black wing of the party, the liberal wing of the party, and the elite of the party. And they expect to win what super delegates?

Duh! I don't understand the "shock " about the demo of BO's voters in MS. It's no surprise to me. Now I know things have changed a bit in recent years, but the south is still the south.
I think it's disappointing that his white vote demo has come down from 43 in GA to 25 tonite. I think race prejudice plays a major role but so does the Clintons' campaign efforts to fan those flames over the course of this primary season. In six weeks, by the time we get to PA, he'll face more liberal voters and improve that 25%.

Update:

Looks like Obama will win by close to 25%. This increase to Obama's average in the "states that don't matter" - is because MS is heavily populated by blacks - which apparently this year are not important to the Democratic Party - because c'mon - how many black super D's are there anyways.

Clinton has this one in the bag.

Clinton supporters:

I will now stop dancing and you can return to your regularly-scheduled programming.

It's going to be interesting (and fun) to see just heavy Keith comes down the Hillary tomorrow night. I'm down right giddy with the thought of it!

Craig,

How can Geraldine Ferraro's comments NOT be the headline??? She is obviously part of an obvious racist appeal to white working class men and women in Pennsylvania that's reminds me of that famous Jesse Helms commercial against Harvey Gantt. This is the most outrageous comment of the primary campaign and if the Clintons thought they'd lost the black vote before, now they're becoming hated. They've proved that they're no friend of the African American community and that door will be closed forever. If a Republican had made this GF comment, we'd call for them what they are. GF shouldn't get a pass.

Exactly Brian. I say 3/5 to keep us historically correct.

3/5, my mistake, as I said I'm giddy tonight.

I was talking to my Republican friend - who is pretty astute when it comes to politics back on Super Tuesday, He was unsure about whether the GOP could be Obama - but he said McCain would beat Hillary by winning the South.

"Mr. Obama has enjoyed overwhelming support among black voters and won all the other contests in the Deep South by large margins."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/11/us/politics/11cnd-campaign.html?hp

The "big state strategy" is a fiction created by the Clinton campaign. The Southern strategy is real.

Don't forget Obama won all those states with record turn outs.

Clinton supporters - we are not trying to bamboozle you.

More Clintonista hubris warren, the assumption is that just because Hillary won in those states she's the only Dem who can win those states in the general.

Brian, when was the last time you were in Georgia? Because outside Atlanta, it's still pretty boondocky...

Yeah - McCain would definitely win NY, MA and CA. People in those states love Bush and War and are all a bunch of racists.

But seriously - he may have a chance in PA. From the link I posted earlier:

"Mrs. Clinton was in Harrisburg, Pa., on Tuesday where she addressed more than 2,000 people inside an auditorium downtown and continued to aggressively take on Mr. Obama, accusing him of flip-flopping on energy policy, Iraq and the North American Free Trade Agreement."

She is basically stumping for McCain. Think it is a coincidence that the GOP is pushing for re-dos in MI and FL and Pat is making HRC's case anytime he gets the chance?

Craig,

Considering that Geraldine Ferraro had her own problem with tax returns in 1984, would it be imprudent for Obama to make a tounge in cheek link to her and the Clinton refusal?

Alpha, I am not sure why you are shocked that the comments have garnered little attention. Remember when on the 4th, there were Clinton supporters on this page who dismissed the black vote entirely and said Clinton could easily win without it.

If she does win the nomination, I am of the opinion that at least one angry black man will think about running as a third party candidate. I would love to see how vote totals would shake out under that scenario?

Boy it got quiet in here, I guess reality is starting to settle in and the three "sisters" are curled up fetal, curing the very name Barack Obama.

Hey Bear,

Nope, it'll be angry, and I do mean bad spirited angry, black folks everywhere Hillary goes. Think Chicago '68 was bad? Go to Denver and take the nomination away from the candidate who walks in with the most delegates, most votes and most states won. It'll make Chicago look like the Rose Parade.

LOL at Brian!

Julia more than half of Georgia's population live in Metro Atlanta, that's what I mean when I say the state is dominated by it.

43 days until the 2008 WH Correspondents Dinner. Last month Craig Ferguson was selected as MC.
I have become a real devotee of Ferguson in the last few months . He's proud as a peacock of his new US citizenship and I expect him to make a big deal out of that.
Will Bush wear his ridiculous cowboy hat? The world awaits.

The interesting things about this Ferraro mess, which hasn't really come up much and I suspect Warren as a fellow New Yawkers will back me up on. The italian community in Queens is not exactly known for racial tolerance, that was the first thing that struck me about her comment. Some real generational thinking going on there.

Monday night Abrams kept repeating that Eliot Spitzer could get 20 years for Mann Act violations, federal felonies.
Even then, I thought Abrams was way off the mark. It seems Tuesday's consensus agrees with my thoughts: all they want is Spitzer's job...he'll do no time in prison.
Wild speculation has it Dick Grasso had a hand in this take-down. I do know Grasso is banned from any NYSE property, but I doubt Grasso had anything directly to do with this federal probe.
Spitzer, half-a-billionaire, was just to arrogant, downright cocky, to last.
All the reports I read say Paterson is much-loved, and will be able to right a lot of the crap that Spitzer put down.

Did anyone read Earl O Hutchison column on Huffpo saying GF was right and he gave credit for saying so.
For those of you who do not know (he is Black).

NY times says Spitzer spent 80 thou over 6 years. I think the man has a problem..

Lastly, I sure am going to smile when Hillary wins the nomination and you boys are crying in your beer..

Uh, if you follow black politics, you'd know that Earl Hutchinson is a self appointed commentator on black issues. He has absolutely no credentials (and being that he's from Los Angeles, I'm watched him over the years). Never lead anything. Never fought for anything. Just created a business (literally) where he writes editorials. Besides that, being black doesn't give him any more weight. It just means that he's dumb and wrong like GF in black skin.

Hillary will win the nomination.

And Geraldine Ferraro will be her VP! The "Dream Ticket" as neither will get to the West Wing unless on a White House tour.

I've been sitting her trying to get a grip on your "Racially Polarized Against Hillary" statement. Craig....I'm really trying to understand why this statement is so important and why you write it just this way?

When isn't the gender divide a natural accurance for Clinton and NOT Obama?

We ALL accept that and don't argue against it.

With Mississippi having a very large Black Democrat population, why can't he have taken the state?

So if Clinton takes Pennsylvania, is it NOW because of her Whiteness PLUS her female vote?

So Obama doesn't deserve JUST the Democratic Vote of Mississippi and you so sublty point out, He only got it because he is Black?

If I am going to follow your logic Craig, That means that ALL the WHITE MALE votes in the state went to CLINTON because they are all prejudice and would rather vote for a woman.

Because you didn't bother to follow up with more detail in your train of thought. Publically, you look a bit tainted on the subject.

Quick Clip from TPM,

Persona Non Grata
As attention has turn to other subjects down here, up in Canada suspicion over the Obama/Goolsbee leaks has focused in on Canadian Ambassador Michael Wilson. Wilson has been forced to concede that he spoke to the reporter who broke the story shortly before the story first aired but he has declined to explain what they discussed. Now Canadian opposition leaders are calling for his resignation.

--Josh Marshall

"Nope, it'll be angry, and I do mean bad spirited angry, black folks everywhere Hillary goes. Think Chicago '68 was bad? Go to Denver and take the nomination away from the candidate who walks in with the most delegates, most votes and most states won. It'll make Chicago look like the Rose Parade"

Good God, Alpha. Exactly what sort of a threat is this? First you advocated destroying Maxine Waters, now it's riots in Denver? Listen to yourself.

If Barack does have the most delegates and the popular vote by Denver, he SHOULD be the nominee.

Comment to this one...
Of the black vote what % is men vs women?
And should the 4th estate fuel old flames that may not be related?
Could it be the skill set of the candidate?

Uh Patsi, if voting Maxine Waters out of office for supporting someone who doesn't have the concerns of her constituents is "destroying", then each election is about "destroying" a candidate. That's just silly.

As for my statement about Denver, I'm serious. The Clintons KNOW that they can't pass Obama in either total vote, pledged delegates, etc. So why are they still in the race? The only way they can win is to overturn what all of the elections gave us as a result. And I'm telling you that if that happens, all hell will break loose.

"And should the 4th estate fuel old flames that may not be related?
Could it be the skill set of the candidate?"

Absolutely the media is fueling this race issue. And, absolutely the skill set of the candidate is a huge factor. He's a helluva campaigner, helluva speech maker. Bush demoralized the country to the point that some factions are looking for a savior.

Craig... (system prob sorry if repost)
Is it possible that BHO has just done a better job with a skill set that HRC does not have -JDF is half correct.
Also is it irreasponsible for the 4th estate to fuel a fire that might not be out but is on the way. Yours was the easy old time conclusion

Patsi.. What the? we agreed again !! Oh My

OK, Back from a trip for work to Germany and now off to work here in Otown!!

Hey to all

Craig - if you are lurking - on my Germany trip you became the topic of conversation. A story about you and this other person that was on the trip - waiting by the old McCoy Airforce base when a big "texas" limo pulled up and a large gentleman stepped out....
So who was in the limo, who was on the germany trip...

Alpha, I'm not even sure how to respond. But first, Maxine Waters. I can't tell you how offensive I find it that you are ready to kick her under the bus because she supports a female candidate as opposed to a black man.

I know a black guy here in Nashville whose family will barely speak to him because he admitted that he voted for Hillary in the TN primary.

As far as the race riot you appear to promise...that's ill-advised talk at best and reckless at worst. The superdelegates are going to break for Obama no matter what, even if the final vote count is almost a tie. You know it and I know it. They have to now because this has been so skillfully maneuvered. And not because anyone threatened to burn down Denver.

Coreen wrote:
'As to Florida plan, there appears to be a glitch in that
after meeting with Sen. Nelson, the Florida Dem. members of he House issued a statement that they are opposed to the mail in vote plan, without elaborating as to why."
http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/2008/03/another-racial-divide-in-the-d.html#comment-50787

From my own experience, when it came time to fight over absentee ballots, it was a real challenge determining the authenticity of signatures. Many of the voters registered when they were in their 60s or 70s. Their signatures twenty years later really reflected the ravages of age.

It would be a real mess with the potential for fistfights and more serious mayhem.

It's probably going to get very "HOT" for Obama over the next few weeks. Let's see if he can survive the firestorm - I doubt it. That's why Hillary is staying in - the SDs want someone who can win in Nov, that is not Obama. The Repubs would destroy hiim.

Well if its mail ballots I see nothing but fraud coming out of it.

Due to demographics people move constantly so to verify the votes would take far longer than the August convention.

So people who have moved there addresses wouldn't match the voting information and could end up not being able to vote in the general as the Repugs would strip them from voting roles.

Oh that's right they would be mostly black and Hispanic that would end up being disenfranchised, not the white voters.

See you later and ...

God Bless.

Ping, you should know that Craig doesn't sneak around parking garages--he goes first class or not at all.
http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/2008/03/another-racial-divide-in-the-d.html#comment-50841

Ditto to what Gordo wrote.

ps - What about all of the comments about Hil'ry winning because she cried & Hil'ry only being in after 11 losses because of who she is? You know, people have tried to marginalize her, too.

Don't mess with Texas? The Texas caucus mess:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080311/ap_on_el_pr/texas_caucuses

Also as this goes on I expect to hear the "N" word coming out.

If that happens the Democratic Party will lose the AA vote for generations. And if you don't think that can happen you better wake up and smell the coffee.

No Democrat can win a election without the AA vote or Hispanic vote for that matter.

God Bless.

Democratic Firestorm

"The video above partially explains what's happening, which no one in the Obama campaign or in the world of his supporters understands. I'm not talking about myself personally, but about the emails and comments coming in. Clinton supporters are infuriated at the race comments and charges coming from the Obama camp and his supporters, while they feel wounded over comments made by Ferraro and others. Clinton supporters feel a double standard happening, which is made worse with Obama's rhetoric using "hoodwink," as well as shameful op-eds like the one yesterday in the Times, both of which are being ignored compared to Ferraro. But Olbermann is evidently going to make matters worse tomorrow night, in order to benefit Obama, as he's promised a "special comment" on the Clinton campaign. This is a huge error in judgment on his part, but there's nothing that can be done. It will stoke an already burning inferno of rage felt by many Clinton supporters, which will flow over on to people's feelings about Obama."

http://taylormarsh.com/

Gonna make a remark about alcoholics on the wagon supporting Dems, but that would probably be in poor taste, huh? Can Dems win without the support of triple A?

Anon -- so far you are the only person I've seen around here to dredge up "the N-word."

Gordo wrote; "Democratic Firestorm":
http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/2008/03/another-racial-divide-in-the-d.html#comment-50851

It's a real tragedy what his campaign has done. And Olbermann, he's a scumbag who uses his intelligence and rhetorical skill to separate and denigrate and impugn motives, rather than elucidate and educate.

I honestly believe the Obama campaign is terribly misguided in with its implicit emphasis of (past and current) racial distrust and long-festering wounds.

Ditto to what Flatus wrote about Darth KO's misuse of the force. It's just a shame, really. I miss KyOda.

Patsi...

I have been told by many AA co-workers that they expect to hear it used between now and the primary in PA. I'm just passing on what I have been told by them.

I'm also watching all the comments here and there back to what they had been earlier. So you can knock me around all you want. The truth hurts sometimes, however it's out there and if it comes out , well good luck.

God Bless.

That's just ridiculous, but if someone is looking for something, they are sure to find it eventually. It's like Matthews & the idiot who wrote that article about the 3am ad being about 911, not 9/11. Where on Earth did anyone get that idea? It was a foreign policy ad. When I go for a walk, I usually find money on the ground. I'm sure there are probably dog droppings, too, but I'm not lookin' for 'em. If people are looking for things to divide us, they'll surely find them and the Dems are doomed.

Patsi.....yes....."Good night and may god bless."

Analysts: Is Obama's black support nudging whites to Clinton?
Associated Press

"Moreover, some analysts think it's possible Obama's heavy black support is nudging some working-class white Democrats into Clinton's camp. If true, it could be an important factor in a contest that remains remarkably tight after a year of campaigning.

In general elections, which pit Democrats against Republicans, the racial sensitivity of white voters has been pronounced and well-documented for decades. It's a chief cause of the realignment of the South, where blacks remained intensely loyal to the Democratic Party as whites moved to the GOP by the millions."

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5605004.html

Sheila said:

"Publically, you look a bit tainted on the subject."

translation:

Craigs a racist! Craigs a racist!

Sigh

Looks like the Obama folks have jumped the shark.

Time to stick a fork in this election, its done.
Wonder what the pieces will look like for 2012.

How about this. A new Party called the American Party.

IYR Schumer helped Judas Iscariot Lieberman get re elected by gathering signatures for the Connecticut For Lieberman Party when it became apparent that Judas would lose Connecticut as the Democrats of Connecticut did not want Lieberman as their candidate.

The paper work needed to be submitted I believe the day after the Primaries to get him on the ballot.

Now is the time that I believe a third party could emerge if Obama is stripped of the nomination after winning most states {you know the ones who don't count} and the most delegates.

If signatures were to be gathered on the possibility of this occurring they would have enough to get a spot on the ticket for the November General Election.

They would of course have to start in all fifty states right now, however I could see them getting the signatures needed to do it.

I believe that Obama could win the General as a third party candidate as he would strip the majority of AA's and I fell that all the new party members he brought into the party would follow him as a Independent choice.

He would also retain the white vote he has already got and could win the General.

This would certainly change the whole political system as we know it and would be a first step to returning our country back into a Democracy.

Yeah I know its just a dream, but I see real possibilities here if that were to occur.

God Bless.

2 words: President McCain.

"2 words: President McCain"

True,

I've given up on the presidency.

Now we are endanger of losing the gains we made in 2006

Morning peeps

GOP -- Thanks, Barack. The deposit will be in your Swiss account soon.

Mornin' all.

Congrats to Obama. Impressive win that the 4th estate can't ignore, and can't ignore the voting alignment in. As I said Monday, MS is a rural state of primarily 2 groups - blacks and rednecks. 3/4 of registered Dem voters are black, and with Obama getting 85-90% of the black vote in all southern states, who couldn't predict a big win in MS?

And the media, particularly the political media, pointing out the racially aligned voting patterns in the south is hardly feuling the flames of racial divide - it's reporting on a divide that still exists in the deep south and may do as much to reduce it as some here believe it does to perpetuate that. I didn't hear any of you crusaders complain when the media was pointing out Hillary's strength with female voters in the early contests, and why should you? It was as legitimate an analysis as what we are seeing now with the southern vote. What's missing is taking the analysis to the next level to show that it is largely confined to the deep south, and a few other smaller areas in the country, and I believe that it is.

Warren, you are delusional if you think that Georgia and MS are in play for Dems in the general. States don't get much redder. Of course Mississippi, with Haley Barbour and Thad Cochran and Roger Wicker as their 3 statewide officeholders will not go blue in the general election. And Georgia ofcourse has Saxby Chambliss, Johhy Isakson and Sonny Perdue, all republicans. Of the 2, Georgia is the best chance, but it is remote, at best.

Alpha, I'll turn your queston about why Hillary can't draw more black votes in the south back on to you - why can't Obama pull more white votes there? It's pretty obvious, and Rez aluded to it - it's still the south and the south is still polarized along racial lines - not like it was in the 50s and 60s maybe, but if you think the south isn't still racist, you need to live there a while to soak in that ambiance. I think you'd find that it's pervasive.

Julia, GA may be boondocky outside of the Atlanta metro area, but that's half of GA's population.

And I agree that GF's comments went over the line to this extent - I disagree with her that the only reason Obama is where he is is because he is a black man - his ppolitical skills are pretty impressive, as is his background - and I certainly disagree with her saying that she is being discriminated against because she is white, but certainly Obama's race is a factor in his success - just as her gender was a factor in her success when she was chosen to be Mondale's running mate. Jesus H. Christ, folks, we are not a color blind, gender neutral society yet, and stating the obvious should not draw the ire it is drawing. I note that John Ridley agreed with much of what she said on MoJo this morning, and he has been a Hillary basher since day one of the campaign.

And Patsi, given where AP is located, I would not be surprised at all to learn that frequent use of the N-word against Obama would occur. FL may not be the south to most southerners, but it's still got plenty of that old southern racism.

Last week I wrote a post but thought if I post it the same Liberal bigots will start with the name calling again, so I held it back.

Now I see the Liberal Dem female, Geraldine Ferraro, has said virtually what I have been think all along. Thank you Geraldine for speaking the truth!
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080311/D8VBENK80.html

This race has always been built around race. No one in either camp will admit it, but all one has to
do is go back and read what has already been written.. The Mississippi primary is such an example. Miss. has the
largest % of black D voters based on states population. 90% of them voted for Obama, but 40% said they voted for
him because of race. Only 23% of the white voters said they voted because of race. So if Obama was white, same message, same everything, do you really think he would be ahead of HRC, the wife of the first American black president? Do you think if Obama was white, he would be receiving 90% of the black vote? This primary has always been built on race, and those who can't must be wearing blinders.

"2 words: President McCain."

Two words, Sour Grapes

GORDO...

What if I were to say I heard from unnamed sources that you have ties to a Terrorist Organizations and the money is in a Swiss Bank account.?

Do you think that the IRS, FBI and Homeland {Fatherland} Security may start investigating you because of the rumors being spread concerning ties to Terrorists?

Since you have no problems with innuendo's about Senator Obama maybe I should start rumors about you on other sites.

Just a thought.

God Bless.

BlueNDallas - as a follow-up to this post:

http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/trailmix/2008/03/another-racial-divide-in-the-d.html#comment-50848

This is a very tight race...and no reason for Hillary to even consider dropping out...especially with FL and MI still in play. Other's have pushed harder and longer with less to show for it than Hillary:

"Carter’s approval ratings jumped in the 60-percent range in some polls, due to a "rally ‘round the flag" effect[6] and an appreciation of Carter's calm handling of the crisis. Kennedy was suddenly left far behind. Carter beat Kennedy decisively in Iowa and New Hampshire. Carter decisively defeated Kennedy everywhere except Massachusetts, until impatience began to build with the President’s strategy on Iran. When the primaries in New York and Connecticut came around, it was Kennedy who won.

Carter was still able to maintain a substantial lead even after Kennedy swept the last batch of primaries in June. Despite this, Kennedy refused to drop out, and the 1980 Democratic National Convention was one of the nastiest on record." - Wikipedia

ANON said to GORDO: "Since you have no problems with innuendo's about Senator Obama maybe I should start rumors about you on other sites."

ROFL! Anon -- you start the damndest rumors and speculate about the craziest theories on here that I've ever heard! Now you are threatening to become a Gordo cyber stalker!!! You are showing yourself to be very like the so-called Nazis you deplore.

I think Gordo is too much of a one-trick pony myself, by the way. But Jeezus....threats?

AP, if word got out that the Obama camp was beginning to gather signatures for a third party run, contingent or not, the reaction of the party establishment would be swift and sure - he would be abandonned. And I don't for a moment believe that all the white or AA votes he's gotten so far would be going with him - party loyalty is pretty strong for most folks who identify with one of the 2 major parties - some would, many would not. And while the current party split is something like 40/30/30 D/I/R, he draws considerably less than 60% of the Is that vote in the primaries, so he can't even count on that group as a bloc. Go take a look at his donor base and the sctors they come from, and I think you'll see that he would not continue to be able to fundraise as he's done up to now, and he'd have no support from a party organization to fall back on for fundraising help, which is why no 3rd party has been successful in organizing a national campaign in the past 100 years.

"The most obvious difference between “PA” and “MS” can be expressed as a football score: 21-6. Not a blowout, but decisive. I’m speaking of electoral votes, according to which Pennsylvania’s exactly 3. 5 times more important than Mississippi. Then, too, Mississippi voted 60-40 percent for President Bush in 2004. It’s a lead-pipe cinch to vote Republican come November. No bookie would take the bet.

So yeah, Pennsylvania, a must-win swing state for Democrats, is far more important—this year and every year. It’s also more important than a bunch of states that Obama has won—South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Wyoming, Idaho, Utah, North Dakota, etc. —so when the candidate himself, a Harvard Law graduate, talks about how he’s won more states than Clinton, he knows he’s blowing smoke. Giving you the old “Okie-Doke,” as he likes to tell black audiences. "

http://www.nwanews.com/story.php?paper=adg§ion=Editorial&storyid=219479

Disillusioned Dem and Sheila

The words in the current post aren't Craig's...I don't think...it appears to be a quote from the AP - I believe he was just trying to stoke up a conversation by showing the group what's being written out there.

After watching the Dan Abrams piece...and seeing what's going on with the Ferraro comment, I'm starting to think the Dem party might also be doomed.

And...both campaigns are going to be to blame.

We should start a pool on what group within the party the Clintons are going to alienate today. So far they've pissed off the blacks, the party elites, and the liberals. Who's left?

Brian Hannity in NYC won't be satisfied until the only decent presidents in the second half of the century are Ronald Reagan and W Bush. Hannity in NYC no doubt wants Ground Zero renamed "W-World."

And he'll destroy the Democratic party by lying and distorting to see it happens.

Pogo wrote: "disagree with her that the only reason Obama is where he is is because he is a black man - his ppolitical skills are pretty impressive"

Pogo...she actually said all those things first before she made the crack about him being lucky because he's black. Those comments didn't get published and talked about...She said he's run an incredible campaign ... one of the best she's seen.

But...a good point was made by Bobby Kennedy jrs daughter today - instead of worrying about things that matter...cable news is more interested in MaryAnn getting busted for pot.

The news likes the sound bite and the conflict...that's what drives the ratings and in the end...that's what's going to elect our next President...chances are the last name will be McCain.

Patsi does that mean you don't want in the pool?

Spitzer to resign at 11. One less SD for Hillary.

Brian

And what about the Obama campaign?

Women, working class, and now whites.

I think the white folks of this country are getting tired of being called racist every 5 minutes on the news...bound to piss a few people off.

Point remains...the Democratic party is in big trouble and BOTH parties are to blame. Including Mr. Shiny O'

Brian...Hillary will take her same amount of New York superDs to the convention with her. But you keep hope alive.

All Clinton supporters are racists and unless they
put their hoods away and drop out and give Obama the nomination all blacks will leave the party.

Pogo,

You are absolutely right. Yesterday, I posted that the media wanted this particular race because of two iconic candidates, each with an attractive skill set for campaigning. To get the race that would create the most excitement, they virtually shut out the other candidates when it came to coverage. The debates didn't help because of allowing so many on the stage at once made it impossible to concentrate on issues and proposed actions rather than personalities.

Now we have a race where the natural contingencies of the two icons have split. If you comment on that split

(race - younger demo - caucus states - wealth vs. gender - older demo - primary states - middle income or lower) ,

you get called names, so any in depth analysis is shoved aside in favor of headlines and anger with all the he said, she said, they said caterwauling between the campaigns.

Someway this mess has to be put back together or McCain will slide into office because we have what amounts to three parties in the race. Obama without Hillary means a large group either voting for McCain or sitting home. Clinton without Barack means a potential for riots and another large stay at home group that has often been the margin of victory for the Democratic party.

The only way I can see fixing this mess is for the campaigns to go on a news blackout other than direct statements about issues and actions without a single mention of any kind about their opponent and that they do that as a unified front. Just stop feeding the beast so that it will go away and die a natural, well deserved death.

Then get together to decide how to handle Michgan and Florida. Finish out the primary cycle and then merge. They don't have to like each other much less love, but they have to come up with a ticket and a plan to resolve this without splitting the party. They don't even have to run together as long as one or the other gets a major position or appointment that will molify their base.

The most important thing is to win in November and right now that is looking truly impossible.

Would Oprah be supporting Obama if he wasn't black.

On Trick Pony

Craig has respectfully requested that the phony names of known people stop. Keep it up and we will all have much more restrictive registration rules. If you can't identify yourself as someone we have come to know by another name, then your message should be totally ignored and discounted for the obvious attempt at troublemaking that it is.

who else is on trick pony

"I've been sitting her trying to get a grip on your "Racially Polarized Against Hillary" statement. Craig....I'm really trying to understand why this statement is so important and why you write it just this way? -- Posted by: Sheila Hussein the Chef Nun"

Sheila, all of that language is from the Associated Press wire report. That's why I put it in quotes, in blockquote text, and sourced it to AP with the link to the story. I thought it was interesting langugage for a wire report and worth debating. -- Craig

Please refrain from using the anonymous sign-in procedure to impersonate real people. We enjoy playful screen names, but at least be original.

Posted by: Craig Crawford | March 12, 2008 12:04 AM

"Unless Obama pulls an upset in Pennsylvania, this thing’s going seven, by which I mean Florida and Michigan, two more crucial swing states that Democrats need come November. Do-over primaries are mandatory between now and the Democratic convention.

Think of them as rescheduled rainouts. And if nobody’s won after seven ? Well, the rules say the superdelegates get to decide. And when they do, they’ll be looking at the stats, such as Obama losing 83 of Ohio’s 88 counties; the fact that so far Clinton has won states totaling 263 electoral votes to Obama’s 193; or which one polls ahead of the GOP nominee, Sen. John McCain, and where. "

http://www.nwanews.com/story.php?paper=adg§ion=Editorial&storyid=219479

The Obama campaign has run a short sighted scorched earth campaign. Unlike Clinton they have not looked beyond their short term concerns. Such behavior will have disastrous consequences if continued into the White House. Therefore, I am reluctant to support an Obama presidency. I have come full circle in my support , I started out an enthusiastic supporter of Obama and even voted for him but no more. For the welfare of my country I must withdrawn my support for Obama. What do I do next ? I do not know.

I am beginning to understand the Democratic Congress' low approval ratings. Pelosi's comments yesterday were counterintuitive at best. Nancy and Howard are not doing much to unify the party. We are verging on a complete meltdown. "One order of Party Leadership now please!" Or I am going to have a "Check, please" moment.

jamie, thanks. I like to think I look at things pretty realistically. Pretending that race and gender are not factors - HUGE factors - in this race is simply to deny the reality of our country. Not a good thing, but it is what it is.

And I fully agree that November is the ultimate goal. I am not as sanguine as many about the Dem party's chances in Nov. if the nominating contest goes on - it does have its positive side in that it is keeping the voters engaged, although the supporters of Hillary and Obama are pretty insular. Look at the pitiful Rep turnout now that McCain is the nominee. I don't put much credence in the exit polls from MS saying that many more Obama supporters would be happy with a Hillary candidacy than Hillary supporters would be with an Obama candidacy that Tim went on and on about last night. MS (along with AL LA, GA, TN, NC & SC) are different from the rest of the country - people there still harbor the old hatreds and prejudices, and the Dem party won't likely win any of those states. I rather think that no matter which candidate wins, the other candidate will be gracious in defeat and endorse the other, urging their supporters not only to vote for but to work for the electionof the winner.

"Women, working class, and now whites."

And what has the Obama campaign done to alienate these groups? I mean other than dare run against your beloved Hillary?

Ally, from your lips to god's ear.

I doubt that Pelosi or Reid would survive a challenge from any strong challenger for their leadership seats.

perpetuate sexist attitudes and accuse everyone of being racist

that's what they've done

people are getting tired of it.

keep hope alive...all of this will blow up in O's face.

"what has the Obama campaign done to alienate these groups"

Besides fill his campaign staff with bigots and sexists?

I guess nothing then

Race Man

"How Barack Obama played the race card and blamed Hillary Clinton."

http://www.tnr.com/story.html?id=aa0cd21b-0ff2-4329-88a1-69c6c268b304

Maxture,
I understand Repug glee at the Dems nomination tussle.
HRC will be the eventual nominee and your man J.Mc will get the opportunity to showcase to all Americans his "grasp of the issues".
The swiftboat attack machine is gearing up just now but at the end of the day reality trumps Rovian strategies.
Enjoy the ride and meet us in November.
I say Dems will widen their margins in the House and Senate plus win the Presidency.

Maxtrue,
As I pointed out yesterday, the rally in the markets was a dead cat bounce.
Having digested the "good news", the market is realising that this intervention is not enough.
Their is a broad body of opinion which says that the FEDS will have to cut rates to 1%-1.5% and cough up another $100Billion to $150Billion to really stimulate the economy.
Even then, expect the positive effects to be felt slowly around the summer of 2009

I've read some wire reports that have attempted to make a big deal about Sen. Clinton winning handily amongst Republicans voting in the Democratic primary. Is this not related to the idea that Sen. Obama is perceived as the bigger threat to Sen. McCain, so the talking heads in the GOP suggested that they should vote for Sen. Clinton as she is more beatable? I've not heard much commentary on this yet...

Voters in Mississippi are still hoping to see both on the ticket. The media continues to focus on the race issue but most voters do not.

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/3/11/175616/245

Gordo

There really should be some sort of limit on how often you can post a link to the same article. If was interesting several weeks ago. Now it is an irritation. We assume you have a voice of your own. Please try using it for a change.

Hey Bear,

Nope, it'll be angry, and I do mean bad spirited angry, black folks everywhere Hillary goes. Think Chicago '68 was bad? Go to Denver and take the nomination away from the candidate who walks in with the most delegates, most votes and most states won. It'll make Chicago look like the Rose Parade.

Posted by: alpha1906 | March 12, 2008 2:02 AM

Sort of like the "angry black folks" in LA that started assaulting innocent people after the Rodney King beating? Stop 'yer whining.

Republicans voting for Clinton is a problem?

Obama has made a big deal out his Republican support. This is more of, it's ok if Obama does it but when it happpens for Clinton it's bad.

I dom't remember Obama repudiating all the Republicans including Dick Morris who are out campaigning for him

I didn't look all the way through the comments to see if Craig tried to clarify his remarks, but it looks like he was mis-read overnight. Craig's blog entry talks about Baracks contests against Hillary Clinton, and in dissecting the voting patterns, I assume by the use of exit polls, the various primaries and caucuses have revealed racial polarization.

Nothing is racially polarized against Senator Clinton or Senator Obama. At least Craig's writing is not trying to say that anything is.

Unless of course, he comes on here and says I'm the one who's mis-reading his entry.

KC I think it's highly unlikely that Hillary will be on the ticket come the general. I think Nancy Pelosi made it quite clear that Hillary has crossed a line that will make it very difficult for Hillary to count on much support from the party powerful. Frankly I'm willing to bet with her presidential ambition squashed that Hillary won't even run to retain her senate seat at the end of her term.

Let me correct myself. Those weren't Craig's words I was trying to explain in today's blog. It's a quote from AP. But the remarks about the sentence construction still hold true.

I'm not trying to insinuate that republicans voting for Sen. Clinton is bad, though I can understand why my question might have been interpreted that way. I remember hearing anecdotally that there was a push for Republicans to vote for Hillary by conservative talk show hosts during the Texas race (I believe). I am curious what the prevailing thought is about whether this is still occurring or if this represents a significant change in voting patterns from previous races.

TE in CO

Rush and the dittohead types have been pushing for votes to Sen Obama in order to get Sen Clinton, but I've heard others suggest that Sen Obama might be an easier target. Either way, that far right crowd will be trotting out the 527 Swiftboat lies no matter who the Democrats run.

The middle name, muslim emails, Rezko association and the Kenyan picture would only be the beginning for Sen Obama, and Sen Clinton will be hit with every single thing that happened or was connected to her husband's White House. For her they will simply pile up clones of Vince Foster's body.

There is a group of about 25% of the voters who will believe that he is some sort of terrorist manchurian candidate and that she is a lesbian/adulteress murdering virago. I'm not particularly worried about the characterizations as about 75% of the voting public has caught on to the lies.

Wouldn't be the first time Nancy P has been wrong.

If the voters want them both on the ticket why not?

And of course, if you read the whole article she goes on to say, she has chided BOTH campaigns about their negative campaigning.

TE: If we had closed primaries, we wouldn't need to second guess the Republican vote. The Democrats and this screwy system they have for allocating delegates in addition to open primaries and caucuses have made for a frustrating mess.

Update:

Popular vote (w/FL) - Obama +407,390

Can a Clinton supporter run the numbers and give me a plausible scenario as to how Mrs. Clinton can finish with more of the popular vote?

Cause if she doesn't win the popular vote - and loses and in terms of states and delegates - what exactly will be her argument to the Super D's?

Here is the link for my numbers:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

KGC: Pelosi is out of touch for floating the impossibility of a Dream Ticket. She should listen to her own advice about being negative! It's frustrating!

KC pre-McCain remark I would have vigorously supported the idea of Hillary in the number two slot, no longer. I'm sure I'm not alone in this sentiment, this scorched earth policy of Hillary is splashing back all over her.

"Think Chicago '68 was bad? Go to Denver and take the nomination away from the candidate who walks in with the most delegates, most votes and most states won. It'll make Chicago look like the Rose Parade."

I see someone else must also watch Imus.

Yep, Hannity in NYC --- maybe if your ilk whip up more hate, you can get what you really want: the uppity bitch who dared to run against a preachin' man is stoned and left by the side of the road.

Warren: And with Michigan he is up by 79,081 (I know, I know, he took his name off the ballot. But he did campaign for people to vote uncommitted.) You may be right...she may not be able to catch up but let's wait and see. A popular vote lead of .2% or 1.4% is hardly a mandate.

"Hannity in NYC"
You crack me up Patsi, LOL.

Jamie,

"Either way, that far right crowd will be trotting out the 527 Swiftboat lies no matter who the Democrats run.'

Actually that won't be necessary, the Rs will just play back the D's campaign commercials. The D's are doing all the dirty work for us. Thank you Geraldine.

"Think Chicago '68 was bad? Go to Denver and take the nomination away from the candidate who walks in with the most delegates, most votes and most states won. It'll make Chicago look like the Rose Parade"

that's right if you try to steal the nomination from Clinton all the women in purple and red are going to be very angry.

Fry

Don't worry, plenty of Romney statements about McCain for the Democrats to use. And the Plunger wasn't much of a help either. Do you think people didn't keep copies and of course youtube.

We will know after all states vote what the totals are.

And even if he only remains up by .2% or 1.4% you still feel that he should not get the nomination?

God Bless.

Flatus:

"I honestly believe the Obama campaign is terribly misguided in with its implicit emphasis of (past and current) racial distrust and long-festering wounds."

Are you serious with this crap?! I can't tell you how many times me and other Obama supporters have been called sexist.

We have all been guilty of stupid comments. So I fault Geraldine more for her absurd defense of the statement - rather than her original comment.

But Clinton supporters sure have emphasized that everyone from Obama, to anyone employed by MSNBC, and even me - are raging sexists that will do anything to keep power out of the hands of a woman. And that is just plain BS.

KC you're right, if Hillary has won the most states (well that's not possible anymore) and has the most pledged delegates (highly unlikely at this point) and leads in the popular vote (possible, but not very likely) she should get the nomination.

How do you justify some one who does not lead in any of the above three being given the nomination? Are you so willing to toss out the will of the people to select their candidate for office?

Ally:

"A popular vote lead of .2% or 1.4% is hardly a mandate."

The mandate is based on winning more states, delegates and votes. Isn't that what this whole process was all about?

warren, the numbers aren't that difficult - Using OH as an example, Hillary got 240,000 more votes than Obama - if the FL & MI vote totals stay about the same as they came in in the first go rounds, an 80,000 vote margin in Pa would put her ahead of Obama in pop vote, assuming the remaining contests split about evenly.

usaelectionpolls doesn't count caucus voters because of the lack of realistic reflection of actual voting patterns. They put Hillary ahead by almost 250,000 when only primary votes are counted.

http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/

I know you will reject their numbers, but it's an interesting site to put in your favorites if you don't have it.

Plus Ally - in a fair fight - Obama may win MI - in spite of HRC's ties to that state.

The Obama way is to shut down voting and not allow Florida and Michigan to revote. Why is that? Shouldn't both campaigns and the National party be doing everything possible to build strength not cut people out.

Let me know when one of the candidates hs the required number of delegates. I believe close only counts in horseshoes and curling.

i have to blame the DNC for all this hate ....the primary system they have is a horror story ... all these months of campaigning ...and strippimg the the fourth and eighth largest states of their delagates.... .caucus's where 2 percent of voters pick the winner.....open primaries where outsiders can pick the winner.......super delagates where the winner is picked for political reasons...proportional distribution of delagates ....this set up is geared for no one to win 2025 delagates ....HRC wins 3 states obama wins one state and she only gains 7 delagates....what kind of genius came up with this math .....the more candidates are on the road the more they have to attack to try to separate themselves ...the more their electorate gets hateful and start saying things that are outrageous...15 months and still going ...thay cant keep saying the same thing so they resort to throwing things against the wall to see what sticks.....DNC created this mess and deserve to be laughed at....maybe this should go to the convention and tear this dem party apart so it can be rebuilt with some sanity and common sense

And Brian
you were claiming the whites are racists, in Mississippi the people who decided their vote based on race were Obama voters. 60% of the people who voted for Obama voted for him because of his race.

"Cause if she doesn't win the popular vote - and loses and in terms of states and delegates - what exactly will be her argument to the Super D's?"

If the party insists on keeping this idiotic concept of "superdelagates" then I believe each should have to vote as did their districts or states. No matter which candidate profits from the end result. Of course, I don't know how that might work for, say, a Senator, as opposed to a Congressman or Congresswoman. For example, does Maxine Waters vote with her district or her state?

This I know: the Democratic party's process is one big clusterf&&k.

kc, I heard that statement as "close only counts in horse shoes and hand grenades."

Warren: I was making the point that we need to let the rest of the states vote. Obama's current lead of .2% or 1.4% are hardly enough to justify demands that she drop out. Let's let the final votes be counted, yes? And if the nomination comes down to Superdelegates, don't even get me started.

Those comments are mild compared to what has been said about HRC and Barry.

But first the D's have to get passed Denver, without totally imploding. What would happen if Barry was sidelined, and HRC got the nomination? Blacks and the 20ish crowd roiting in the streets again. BTW, without a doubt HRC should get the nomination as she is the most qualified on the D side. It would be nothing less than a travesty for the women's movement if HRC was sidelined for this lightweight.

Pogo:

That is sophistry and you should be ashamed.

MI CANNOT stay the same because Clinton got 328,309 votes - and Obama got NONE.

Best case (and unlikely scenario) for Clinton in a MI revote - she gains 150,000 votes (and that is generous).

And - what kind of nonsense is "if you don't count the caucus voters." This is along the same lines as the argument about the "states that don't matter."

Yet - Obama is trying to "disenfranchise" voters. C'mon pogo - make some arguments based in reality.

some one explain this math to me .....she wins ohio by 240000 wins 9 delagates.......he wins missisippi by 100000 and wins 7 delagates ,,,,,,,,,,,this is democratic???????????

Yet - Obama is trying to "disenfranchise" voters. C'mon pogo - make some arguments based in reality.

Posted by: warren | March 12, 2008 11:24 AM

Et tu Warren
You repeat the same crap over and over and when you are proven wrong (Ohio and Texas) you pretend it didn't happen.

KC how about answering my very reasonable question and not trying to change the subject. Do you really believe the person with the most votes shouldn't win? If that's what you believe you must have been very happy with the way things turned out in 2000.

Ally:

The rest of the primary will play out like everything we have seen up to this point.

Obama will win more states, delegates and votes - and Hillary will pick a few big states to concentrate her resources on - so she can maintain viability - and lose the "states that don't matter." Btw, is it Wolfson or Penn who gets to pick which states to piss off and which ones to annoint and the only state with people who KNOW how to pick a President. I thought that states was MO - which Obama won!!

(and yes yes - it was close - because it borders on the Clinton's home state of Arkansas!!)

Brian

The person with the requiste number of delegates will win. That is the Obama line are you trying to change it now.

Ohio picks the president

KGC:

You are wrong. I always hoped for a victory in either OH or TX. And was aware HRC would continue if she won.

And you don't even have any crap to repeat except personal insults.

tz - if Hillary wins PA, you'll get your wish - it will go to the convention.

warren, yes, the primaries are there to pick a candidate. My take is that the process as it's set up now is designed to winnow the field and the superdelegates are there to pick a candidate that can win the general election if more than one candidate makes it to the convention. (before you pounce, I disagree with the concept).

I posted a comment a week or so ago setting out my "platform" if I were to run for party chair - it included getting rid of caucuses, open primaries and superdelegates and would base the results in each state on one person, one vote. I stand by my contention that those are changes that at a minimum need to be made to make the stupid results we are getting this year go the hell away and produce a legitimate candidate at the end of the process.

Warren: Like I said, let the votes be counted.

Clinton won the popular vote in Texas. Are you suggegsting that she should get the most delegates from the state. No you are crowing because she did not.

Sure Warren what ever you say
I'm sure you are always right,.

some one explain this math to me .....she wins ohio by 240000 wins 9 delagates.......he wins missisippi by 100000 and wins 7 delagates ,,,,,,,,,,,this is democratic???????????

No, but it is the way the DNC set things up. What is wrong with winner take all? If that was the case then HRC would be your person no questions asked. Now all you have is this dog and pony show that get trotted out every other week. PA will go BIG TIME for HRC, except in Philly with it's very high black population. Is that a racial observation? Geraldine will back me up on that.

pogo
that is the best post ive seen for the arguement of common sense

KGC:

"The Obama way is to shut down voting and not allow Florida and Michigan to revote. Why is that?"

Because those were the rules everyone agreed to when this thing started. (and before Clinton started to lose and make a big issue about this)

"Shouldn't both campaigns and the National party be doing everything possible to build strength not cut people out."

Like the negative campaigning that HRC has been engaging in - which inevitably causes her supporters to hate Obama. Or how bout saying the nominee should be the person that wins in 6-7 "key" states.