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.

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.

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.

"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...)

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

"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.

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.

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

"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.

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!!)

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.

the old guard democrats want to control the nominee and the person (who wins if they in fact win),,,i suspect that is why they have this micky mouse sysytem

Jamie ---------

Maybe the Obama supporters will read the article. Obama should not be rewarded for playing the race card. He may have destroyed the Dem Party - almost looks like that was his goal.

The rules allow for a revote in Michigan and Florida.

If Clinton supportes "hate" Obama it's because of things he has said or done. "I have 99 problems but the bitch is not one of them"

makes sense why the dems have had one president in 28 years with this goofy system

Barry is winning in RED states, while HRC is crushing him in traditional Dem Blue states.CA, MA, NY, NJ, OH, etc.

I certainly hope Diaper Dave Vitter will follow Spitzer's example and resign.

5 states broke the rules .......IWOA, HN, SC, FLA AND MICH...........3 of the 5 were given waivers..........2 were stripped of their delagates ............WHY??????????????????

I still have not seen any viable scenario where HRC wins the popular vote.

And I agree the superdelegates are there to pick a candidate who is best positioned to win the general - and like I have always said - this is one of the main reasons I support Obama.

KGC:

I am not always right. But I always try to call it like I see it. Not based on how I "wish" things were.

warren, it's not sophistry, it's assumptions - if they are changed, the analysis changes - take MI out of the mix and it's a 400,000 vote spread - bigger and much more difficult, but not impossible - assume she gets teh 150,000 margin you said, the difference drops to 250,000 - very doable. I'd say that ignoring Michigan and Florida as being reflective of the likely spread for voters there is sophistry. I'd also say that arguing that your candidate is more electable than the other because he won caucuses in states you can't possibly carry in the general is sophistry, but the process of selecting candidates provide for it, so I accept those results and that argument. Don't ask the f*cking question if all you want is an answer you agree with.

I did not say I agreed with the usaelectionpolls site's analysis method, and suggested the same in my response. I provided it to show a different analysis, but more importantly, to provide you with the link - it is a good site information wise in that it aggregates polls and gets them before pollster in many cases. Of course there is some legitimacy to the caucus headcounts, and they are the method those states use to select delegates. but given the minuscule percentage of the votes that will be there in Nov., they are not equivalent to the votes in the primary states in any evenhanded analysis and skew "popular vote" totals. I do recognize the Obama might actually benefit if a statistical adjustment were applied for the purpose of determining votes rather than claches to make those states' votes reflective of what the votes would have been had a primary been held.

katherine
absolutely correct......if SD's voted the way the public did ,,,,why have SD's....we dont need them

Gov. Eliot Spitzer saying good-bye. How does one spend $80k for hookers over a 10 year period? Way to much free time and money on his hands. Not wanting to ware a condom? WTF, guess he never ever gave his wife a thought. These politicians, D's and R's, who drag out the poor wife as a sign of support, are less than scum.

tz, thanks, I try.

Fry, by spending about $8,000 a year.

Your points about not caring about his wife are dead on.

For a little humor.

Gates vs. GM

For all of us who feel only the deepest love and affection for the way computers have enhanced our lives, read on.

At a recent computer expo (COMDEX), Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated:

"If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25.00 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon."

In response to Bill's comments, General Motors issued a press release:

If GM had developed technology the way Microsoft has, we would all

be driving cars with the following characteristics (and I just love this part):

1. For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash........ Twice a day.

2. Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to buy a new car.

3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before you could continue. For some reason you would simply accept this.

4. Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.

5. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive - but would run on only five percent of the roads.

6. The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning lights would all be replaced by a single "This Car Has Performed An Illegal Operation and

must shut down" warning.

I love the next one!!!

7. The airbag system would ask "Are you sure?" before deploying.

8. Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna.

9. Every time a new car was introduced car buyers would have to learn how to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car.

10. You'd have to press the "Start" button to turn the engine off.

Please share this with your friends who love - but sometimes hate - their computer...and their car!

God Bless.

Spitzer is one of a long list of high profile men to get caught in sex scandals. What is the solution?? Vote for women, we are loyal, devoted to duty, and focused on improving the life of family/country. When is the last time you heard of an elected female politician engaging in such low-life endeavors????? Never!

Go Hillary!!!!!!!

Pogo:

I just don't see the justification for your assumptions.

Not counting PA - you are "assuming the remaining contests split about evenly." Highly unlikely.

And even puitting aside this assumptiuon, I still don't completely understand your math as to how HRC finishes with more popular votes.

Here's a great idea since many here think that the states Obama won don't count since they will go Republican anyway come November.

Since those States don't count lets leave the Democratic Candidates name off them. After all there going to stay Red anyway.

And on the Republican side for all those States who will stay Blue lets leave the Republican Candidates name off of them since they will stay Blue.

And however gets the most votes from there respective States wins the election.

In fact lets do the same thing for the Primaries as well since this is what is being touted by those here who suggest that States won in some Primaries and Caucuses don't matter over all.

God Bless.

"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 vote for Pogo for party chair.

It used to be fun to drop by and play in the sand here, but you guys fight over half-truths and items beyond your control. Reasonable people can disagree, but many of your arguments go beyond reason. For instance, the argument over states matter or states don't matter.

It's like you've all forgotten there's an electoral college. Of course states matter, and if you count one Mississippi, two Mississippi, three Mississippi, about three seconds will have elapsed, and if you could add their six electoral votes each time you said the name, you'd be almost a third of the way to counting as much as California.

The rules are the rules. 2025 is the number. You should hope the super-delegates exercise sound long-term judgment in getting to that number.

You guys can theorize all you want and make threats and call each other names, but none of that is helping to win the presidency. Neither side in your internecine battle is looking very good right now.

Opinion, Wayne Madsen Report (WMR), March 10, 2008

The McCain/Rove defence contractor shake down game
By Wayne Madsen
EADS Air Force tanker deal enriched campaign coffers of McCain and pockets of Karl Rove.

The recent major Air Force award of the KC-45A tanker contract to European Aeronautic defence and Space Co., the parent firm of Europe's Airbus Industries, and Northrop Grumman involves political payoffs and dubious lobbying by top Republican officials, including GOP presumptive presidential nominee John McCain, according to knowledgeable sources who spoke to WMR on the condition of strict anonymity.

Boeing, which proposed its Boeing 777 for the Air Force contract to replace the aging KC-135 Boeing 707 fleet, criticized the award to EADS-Northrop because the 179 A330 aircraft are to be built in France and shipped to a proposed factory in Mobile, Alabama for retrofitting for tanker use.

The background to the awarding of the contract to EADS lies at the very heart of the GOP corruption in Alabama that saw the political prosecution of former Alabama Democratic Governor Don Siegelman. The award of the Air Force contract to EADS-Northrop was the result of high-level collusion between Governor Bob Riley of Alabama, the White House, and John McCain. It also helped that two senior Bush administration officials, Deputy Secretary of defence Paul Wolfowitz and former Vice President Dick Cheney Chief of Staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby once served as highly-paid advisers for Northrop Grumman.

What I don't understand -- or maybe I do -- is why a ten thousand dollar money transfer from an account of a man who belongs to one of the richest families in NYC gets red flagged.

As far as the hooker thing, this is a different deal than the garden variety philanderer. I've know two men addicted to hooker sex in my life (probably more only I didn't know about it).

In both cases they were married to very attractive women, one in fact, was stunningly beautiful. Both of these guys said that their sex life at home was great...these wives were not frigid women. But they simply could not stay away from hookers.

I don't pretend to know what it's about.

Pogo:

And my argument about Obama's chances in the general - which I have been making BEFORE Super Tuesday - is not based on caucuses:

Hillary will energize the Republican base. This is not up for debate. Republicans state this often and the polls back it up.

Who can convince evangelical and hard-core conservative Republicans from to hold their noses and vote for McCain?

Hillary Clinton.

The Republicans are still divided about McCain. He does not have overwhelming support in the party. Republicans across the board are much more likely to rally against a return to the Clinton days than they are to rally for McCain.

In stark contrast, this is the ideal situation for Barack to come in and sweep up anti-war Republicans and a significant majority of Independents. Obama also continues to attract new voters and he is one of the main reasons behind the record turn outs.

Next, Hillary says she is battle-tested. That a bitter general election campaign is "inevitable." Well it is if she’s involved. Indeed, if it is Hillary vs. any Republican - it will be one of the most knock-down-drag-out political battles in recent memory . . . further tearing this country apart during a critical period for America. Bill’s notion that the mutual respect between Hillary and McCain will lead to a "respectful" debate ignores that the Rush Limbaugh’s and Sean Hannity’s of the world will not be constrained in the slightest from launching vicious attacks on Hillary’s policies and god knows what else.

Hillary argues she is a "known quantity," that she has been vetted and she has been through the Republican attack machine. Ironically, so will Barack after defeating Hillary in the primaries.

But the fact that the Republicans have already used some of the attacks that will be thrown her way during the general does not act as some type of magical cloak that will eliminate the effectiveness of such arguments in 2008.

The GOP will argue that Hillary’s position on the Iraq was has been based polls rather than principle. And they will have ample support. Attacks on the Clintons' scorched-earth style of politics will be raised, reinvigorated by the campaign that has been run against Obama. These anti-Hillary messages could have the American public running to the straight talk of a war hero who has shown great political courage throughout his career.

McCain also holds the trump card on experience. What will Hillary run on in the general without the "experience" argument? Change? McCain will be able to make a more credible argument that by ending the Bush-Clinton-Bush dynasty - he is the true candidate of change. I don’t know about you - but that case will work with plenty of Independents. Especially coming from a maverick like McCain who is lambasted by hyper-partisan pundits from his own party.

Indeed, it is very possible that because many Americans have made clear that they want to move past the political hang-ups of the nineties . . . these familiar attacks against the Clintons will carry even more weight in the current political scene.

The way to beat the Republicans is not to out play them according to the rules of their playbook. Its time to throw out the damn playbook and conduct politics in a way that serves the American people. This is Obama’s strength. He has been a public servant with experience in helping people and making a real difference in their lives. He possesses the intelligence, the judgment and the determination to move America forward. Finally, this is all consistent with Barack’s narrative: Changing – and improving – the way politics is done.

America wants to turn the page on partisan and personal politics, which have inhibited policymaking in favor of name calling, investigations and calls for impeachment. It is important for this country, as well as the entire world, to see America united. It is tough to promote democracy when you own house isn’t in order.

Obama for Prez!!

Back to work peeps. Catch ya later...

EdVB...

How true.

God Bless.

Patsi...

Any bank transaction of $10.000 or more must be reported to the IRS. That's the law. Why it is so I do not know, but it is.

God Bless.

I hardly think D Morris is a top BO fundraiser. That's not sensible.

" ignores that the Rush Limbaugh’s and Sean Hannity’s of the world will not be constrained in the slightest from launching vicious attacks on Hillary’s policies and god knows what else."

Snort! And you think they're gonna throw their arms around Obama and chant "Yes we can"?????

Gordo,
I agree with Jamie on the continuous reposts. I have to admit TNR is a first up for you as a source, however wilentz's article is full of crap imo.

[sigh]

"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. -- Posted by: EdVB"

EdVB, Sheila and others -- think i learned a lesson with this post to explain why i quoted a wire story without comment. Next time i'll be more clear.

But last night as i was about to write on the Mississippi results I was struck, if not stunned, by how openly the Associated Press focused on the racial dimensions of the vote -- in its lead paragraph and with the side bar examining the white vote.

Didn't add my own views because A) i shy away from exit polls, which AP was relying on for those observations and B) i am still working out what i think it means that the Democratic frontrunner is losing the white vote overall in all exit polls combined to date. Are the exit polls wrong? Have Clinton's attacks pulled whites away from him? If so, McCain should be able to do the same, i guess.

It might not mean anything because Democrats have not won the white vote in general elections for a long time (Clinton lost the white vote in '92 and '96). Democrats even lost the white vote by a few percentage points in their retake of Congress in the 2006 midterm elections.

But losing among white DEMOCRATS in the nomination race and still being the frontrunner is a new phenomenon. Question is whether that means Obama would lose more whites than Democrats usually lose in general elections.

I just don't know, but think it is worth examining -- and for those who believe it is racist to ponder such matters, i am sorry you feel that way -- but i do not agree.

Democratic Delegates Votes
.
Clinton 1485 13,755,136
Obama 1601 13,856,274
.
Needed to win: 2,025
Confused? Read Delegate 101 and See How Your State Voted. Updated March 12, 2008 - 12:19 PM EST

i just copied this off ABC website ....anyone know where they get these figures?? he is only ahead by 101,000 votes ....that can easily be over come

Maybe democrats are becoming "less white" as a party and more "of color". Nation is getting darker too :)

here is the link for my last post

http://abcnews.go.com/politics

"Needed to win: 2,025 -- Posted by: tz"

tz, et al -- if Florida and Michigan are not seated at the convention, i assume that lowers the majority number required? perhaps by 100 votes or so lower than 2,025. guess that's another big reason the Obama camp benefits from excluding FL and MI. it would put him closer to 400 votes short of the nomination, instead of 500

tz:

I could not find your numbers on the ABC website - and don't have time to look around.

But I assume your numbers re: the popular vote include MI and FL. MI nets Clinton more than 325,000 votes because Obama was not on the ballot.

According to Real Clear - Obama has 702,162 more popular votes (w/o MI and FL). That cannot be easily overcome - even with re-dos in MI and FL.

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

it's 2025 w/o the 2 and something like 2400 with them.

i was refering to popular vote craig

I don't think it is racist to examine election results that point to such a large visible divide. These people could be pink and purple and someone would make it their business to try to evaluate the results. That is what we do in elections.

here is the link again

http://abcnews.go.com/politics

Thanks tz.

ABC IS including MI and FL popular votes in their equation.

Talk about media bias!!

Antoin "Tony" Rezdog --------------------

Others have also been re-posting that link. You can go back and check. Odds are McCain will be POTUS, unless there is a Clinton-Obama ticket. Maybe someone else - Gore?

thanks warren

all i can say is WHAT A MESS....the dem party knows how to screw things uo big time

craig
there are polls showing that HRC is leading in strictly democrat voters ...

obama has not won in a closed primary state yet

I would not be too worried about the fact that there are a bunch of racists in MS. No shocker there!!

Obama has shown he can win white votes in Iowa, Georgia, Wisconsin, Virginia, Illinois, Kansas, Idaho, etc.

And let's not forget - Black voters did not support him so much UNTIL he demonstrated he could win the White vote.

I am also not surprised he has taken a hit in terms of attracting new voters - with the "kitchen sink" being thrown at him by HRC.

I also think there is a large percentage of White HRC supporters that would vote for Obama if she was not in the race.

Right after the NH primary..... when the media began speculating if Clinton won my state because of the Bradley effect...... Obama had the opportunity to nip all this racism crap if he didn't win a state in the bud...... he didn't take it...

and now it's come down to people being shocked over an AP article and GF being so upfront about race..... yeah..... as if no one with half a brain cell could have predicted this.....

EdVB......
bravo on your 12:11 post.....
you are a Yankee fan and I am a Red Sox fan..... we've chided each other.... yet obviously like and respect one another..... hey.... we're both baseball fans......

Obama supporters and Clinton supporters voted for a Democrat...... once you've voted it's out of your hands......

GO DEMOCRATS!

TZ
The popular vote total qouted from ABC includes Fl and MI.

thanks vivian

I find it absolutely fascinating that in this puritanical mess of a country a man who spends $80,000 to cheat on his wife is out of office in 48 hours.

A man who slaughters and maims 100s of thousands of people, commits several different insider trading crimes, rips the Constitution to shreds, approve torture of other human beings, and spends the country into bankruptcy gets the starring role to sing at the Gridiron dinner.

At least Spitzer seems to have had a conscience once caught.

hey you guys are right, i checked with DNC and, altho i was told this is strictly unofficial, the magic nominating number changes to 2,208 if FL and MI are seated.

Strangely, i was also told that the current 2,025 number is unofficial -- Why? Because even the DNC doesn't really know what it takes to win. These "hard counts" of delegates in the news media are such a joke. Do the Democrats really deserve to run the country if they can't figure out their own rules?

remeber spitzer ran his campaign on :"change"....ive heard that message from another politician

Woulda thunk....the Republicans are better at math than the Democrats.

Probably because equality is tough to put a number on.

She told a Fox News interviewer: "I got up and the question was asked, 'Why do you think Barack Obama is in the place he is today?'

"I said in large measure, because he is black. I said, Let me also say in 1984 -- and if I have said it once, I have said it 20, 60, 100 times -- in 1984, if my name was Gerard Ferraro instead of Geraldine Ferraro, I would never have been the nominee for vice president," she said.

In her first interview with Daily Breeze, published late last week, Ferraro said: "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept," Ferraro told the newspaper. She also said Hillary Clinton had been the victim of a "sexist media."

Hey Craig,

How come the question hasn't been why Hillary has lost the black vote in every election? With her early support in the black community, it shouldn't be assumed that Obama was going to get it because he's black.

I meant "who'da thunk"

it is tough to work and blog at the same time. Many that is why many work places ban such activity.

Question:

How many African Americans have been Senators versus women?

How many African Americans have been governors versus women?

"How come the question hasn't been why Hillary has lost the black vote in every election?"

Wouldn't the answer be that same?

Answer: BHO is a better canidate in the voters minds?

What are you inferring Alpha?

The current meme is that HRC was doing great among Black voters until her campaign started making racist statements and now she has lost the majority of her Black support. There are two problems with this claim. The first is that the campaign has not been making racist statements. The Obama campaign has had a deliberate strategy of calling the Clinton campaign racist and the media has allowed itself to be led along. Obama himself confessed to this strategy in the Nevada debate when shown a copy of a campaign memo directing campaign workers to use race-bating to defame Hillary Clinton. The second is that HRC's Black support as measured in entrance and exit polls is holding steady, and that Obama's increased Black support has come mostly at Edwards' expense. The real story here is Obama failing to attract white Edwards supporters.
http://anglachelg.blogspot.com/2008/01/myth-blacks-are-rejecting-clinton.html

Both in the press and everywhere else, I see lots of people pontificating about the weaknesses of mail-in balloting. Most of the comments are without foundation.

All the sky will be falling predictions have proven false in Oregon. The system is quite simple.

Just like in any election, people who move must fill out a change of address voting form available in public buildings.

Signature verification is quite simple since ballots are being mailed in or delivered over a 3-4 week period.

Yes..Michigan and Florida will have do some work and educating between now and then,

More and more states are allowing voters to be on permanent absentee lists.

So is Geraldine Ferraro saying this country has made no progress in terms of equality since 1984. I know Pat B. would like to hold on to this out-dated notion.

Anyways, if that truly was the case - there is no way Hillary would have ever been the "inevitable" nominee.

Someone needs to tell homegirl - "when you are in the ditch - quit digging!!"

Warren
Why is the headline on every story about the election about racial divide.

One of the amazing thing about the BO camp is the accuracy of their delegate forecast that was "leaked" to Bloomberg after Super Tuesday.
You got to give them credit for having an organized ground operation.
I believe HRC camp fell down in this area but her tenacity will pull her through.
Hope Penn and others will not be involved in the campaign for the November elections.

I am staring to see a repeat of pre-Ohio, when everyone starts asking HRC to get out - or asking why are you still here, etc. I think that those comments actually embolden HRC's base and make them more determined then ever to cast their vote.

Racial Divide not just in the South:

I believe there are elements of racial divide many places, especially where people are “comfortable” in their own zone. It is prevalent in SE Ohio, most of WV, and eastern KY. Some people, but thankfully not all, live in a bubble where they don’t really know what is happening in the rest of the world nor do they care. Some rely on about three local television stations (as in the tri-states of OH, WV, KY), and not cable news, to give them “unbiased” information. From what I’ve seen, and I witness it when I go “home” to visit, much of the coverage is not unbiased. We have well educated individuals who go to college then return to their roots to take a lesser paying job merely because they want to live where they grew up. If they don’t “get out”, they don’t know what is on the outside nor do they care. If you can believe this, I’ve talked to people who do not believe we sent men to the moon. As my father used to say, don’t stray too far from Rt. 23 into the back roads of KY or you may wish you hadn’t.

My brother died of Hodgkin’s disease. He had a black friend who had gone into the service and came home married to a French lady. My family wanted this friend of my brother to be a pall barer at the funeral. Some of the “southern” family from GA asked “who’s the black boy”. How far have we really come, people? I think it is ignorance no matter from where it comes.

Many, if not most, of these same people support HRC.

I would not be too worried about the fact that there are a bunch of racists in MS. No shocker there!!

Posted by: warren

Let me see if I understand this correctly. If blacks vote primarily for a black candidate that is not racist. But if whites vote primarily for a white candidate, that IS racist?

If either group is supporting a candidate because of their race, doesn't this belie Dr. Martin Luther King's famous quote in the "I Have a dream" speech?

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

And if, as Alpha suggests, blacks will protest violently in the streets if Hillary Clinton becomes the nominee, how does that not play into the exact racial divide that Dr. King speaks about? Can you imagine what would be said if whites were to make the same threat? I am starting to believe that Barack Obama was wrong. There IS a black America, and there IS a white America, and from what I read here, it sure as heck ain't "the UNITED states of America.

And if anyone wants to throw racist labels at me, go ahead... but I think it's time to be honest about this double standard.

Mark Penn and David Axelrod make me chringe..When they appear together it is like a devil's convention.

And now I back out of this highly charged discussion... This place is more toxic than the waste ruins from the WTC collapsing...

The election (so far) has proven to be a great divider on so many different levels.

"So is Geraldine Ferraro saying this country has made no progress in terms of equality since 1984. "

Actually, Warren, I don't think we have made that much progress. The prisons have been sucking up black men in record numbers, and for a lot of bogus charges, too.

“The election (so far) has proven to be a great divider on so many different levels.”

I agree. My aunt finally called me after two weeks' time to tell me a friend had died after having a heart attack on an airplane over Denver saying “life is too short to argue”. I told her I hadn’t called her because I did not want to argue with her about politics. She agreed then went into this scenario why HRC is the best candidate and that they are not all dumb “down there”. You all would have been proud of me. I just agreed and knew for sure I did not agree with her. Life is too short.

Karolenna

So you come here to call Clinton supporters racists instead.

I've been hearing a lot about the Mississippi exit polls yesterday and then on the way to work today.

What I'm wondering is if we can extrapolate anything of real value from them. Clearly the Mississippi primary was purely about race on both sides. I am suspicious of any other reason people gave for voting for their candidate because I believe in this particular case it is more than likely to cover up the fact that they voted based on race.

I don't think we can look at Mississippi for any patterns in voting going forward in other states.

tz

"if SD's voted the way the public did ,,,,why have SD's....we dont need them"

The reasoning behind the SDs was so that office holders would not have to run against long time party activists in order to get a vote at the convention as voting at the convention is a reward for service.

Rather than eliminate the SDs, the best way to handle it is that their vote would go to the winner of the area that they serve whether it was district or state.

I like the one man one vote within a state rather than winner take all. It makes sense for people to have their vote figure into the delegate count.

The math used to get the number of delegates from a state is there to keep the states with the most population from overwhelming the others in the choice of a candidate. Otherwise the candidates would never go near the smaller states and would feel free to ignore their issues.

The caucuses have to go. They are totally undemocratic and too open to manipulation and fraud. I doubt the Obama campaign authorized it, but in their enthusiasm, it became necessary to call the cops to keep their folks from locking the doors against the Clinton voters and there are still questions about manipulation of the caucus envelopes.

I said a couple of months ago that I was afraid that the race thing would rear it's ugly head to a point that it could be devastating to the dems. I was going by what I hear everyday in the area where I live. (southern Missouri). I have told you about my good redneck friends. It took a long time for alot of people around here to get used to the idea that Hillary Clinton would be the most prominent democrat running against the repubs. They had years to hash out the idea and decide that it was ok to vote for a woman. And they did support her around here. I am not hearing from most of them that they will support Obama.

My landlord who is a die hard dem. and quite invovled in our district politics, told me yesterday that he has yet to talk to any dem in our county who intends to vote for obama if he is the nominee. I am sure he mostly associates with older people, and hopefully he is exaggerating. He says they say that they just can't vote for a black man. He even admitted he was having a problem with it----which surprized me. He was awfully down about it. He is convinced that Mc Cain will win in Nov.

I am sorry to see that this problem with race is still so prevalent. My hope is that this does not grow to proportions which will eventually effect things outside of the democratic race. I know the more that race is thrust to the forefront the more galvanized people around here are getting against Obama. I even hear it growing in the conversations at the diners.

"there are a bunch of racists in MS. No shocker there!!"

Clearly more black than white (90% black for O' only 72% white for Hillary)

I think it's a mistake to try to take anything away from the Mississippi primary and hold it up as meaningful.

Wendy:

That was a cheap shot. You know a huge percentage of the black vote Obama WON in MS - would have broke for Clinton at the start of this race.

History of Super Delegates

You might be interested to know that super delegates came about after years of chaos involving politicians from right here in Chicago.
The mayor of Chicago, Rich Daley, and the head of the Democratic Leadership Council, Al From, remember those days all too well, even though it's nearly 40 years ago.
Daley's father, Richard J., battled party activists inside the 1968 Democratic Convention over who to nominate for president while the mayor's police department battled anti-war demonstrators on the streets of Chicago.

And then four years later at the convention in Miami, the Illinois delegation, led by Jesse Jackson, staged a successful revolt against the nomination of the candidate who won the Illinois primary.

"It showed how the rules can flip around, and they can change it. And I think it does a great disservice to the American public," said Daley.
The chaos and the losses in those elections prompted the Democratic Party, including Al From, to create the concept of super delegates so elected and appointed Democratic politicians would have the final say in settling a a complicated nomination battle like the one that's going on now.
"You have two very different theories about what would make the strongest candidate in the fall. And people who govern and have to face election ought to be in a position to make that decision," said From.

Mr. Dent:

"Why is the headline on every story about the election about racial divide."

Because it adds to the illusion that HRC is some how actually winning.

But for - racism, sexism, the biased media, GOP conspiracies, the fact that Obama supporters are naive and part of a cult, and of course all those pesky "states that don't matter" - she truly is the winner.

I feel for you Clinton supporters - trying to defend make HRC's case looks like hard work. But I admire your tenacity. It ain't over till the fat lady sings!!

Karolenna

"Many, if not most, of these same people support HRC"

Blanket statements like this are what keep the noise going. When my mother died, there were more black people than white at the funeral and most of the white people were her direct family. Making assumptions about any group without knowing their specific background can cause problems.

My guess is that an awful lot of the people who might vote against Sen Obama because he is black just might be a large number of the reregistering Republicans being encouraged to vote for Hillary by the Rush and Hannity crowd.

Warren:

Go cry to Dan Abrams if you think it was a cheap shot...maybe Hillary will get a demerit for it today.

I agree with ET's 1:31 post:

"...I think it's time to be honest about this double standard".

Wendy:

I prefer to take my issues up with the source - rather than crying to the refs.

I am not saying racism and sexism aren't factors in this contest - but they cut both ways.

And Obama is winning because he has pulled off what no other black candidate has been able to do before - he transcends race.

If Obama can so easily make up his losses because of race with the new voters he can bring into the fold then why hasn't he closed the deal already? What about him with all of his advantages-- an unprecedented amount of money, scads of major endorsements, an unquestionable gift of gab, and the ability to draw thousands of fainting people to fill large arenas to listen to his messages of hope---why has he not been able to close the deal?

" would have broke for Clinton at the start of this race."

The black vote was bound to end up with Obama once he proved electable. That was the main reason some didn't get on board. Plus, many didn't know if Obama had ever really addressed any of their problems. He wouldn't be photographed with Willie Brown, refused to participate in Jena and kept black campaign workers hidden in Iowa.

Once he got to SC he knew he had to twist everything into a racist charge.

Warren - we are saying the same thing - it cuts both ways

Truebeliever:

"If Obama can so easily make up his losses because of race with the new voters he can bring into the fold then why hasn't he closed the deal already?"

I hate to belabor the point - but this is almost as important as it is simple.

Look at this board - look at the country. HRC has a loyal group of supporters in the Democratic Party. No "knock out blow" is going to make them all of a sudden start voting for Obama. In fact, the more he goes after her - the more loyal those supporters become.

So he has no other choice but to keep winning more states, delegates and votes. Obama can't end this thing. Only Hillary can.

warren...

As everyone here knows I support Obama.

Be prepared to have someone tell you that Clinton can't end this thing. Only Omaba can.

That's why this is going to Denver and there will be a fight on the floor and it will get ugly, very ugly.

Just a though.

God Bless.

" Obama can't end this thing. Only Hillary can."

Yep -- the uppity broad should just get out of the way of The Dream. Screw her.

Should have read: Only Obama can.

God Bless.

Hillary has stanch supporters yes but there is not the fever which exists amongst Obama's supporters. I am just saying that I have wondered for awhile now why someone with all of the huge advantages that Sen Obama has behind him, has he not been able to deal a final blow to the Clinton campaign.

Why has he not been winning the bigger states just as handily as the smaller ones. I understand he does the caucuses better, but why with his resources has he not won more of the bigger states? Don't you wonder if the superdelegates aren't wondering the same thing.

Alpha

"How many African Americans have been Senators versus women?"

That is a good question. I would divide it into two groups: Those who won by running for office and those who finished out a deceased relatives turn because of an appointment. It would be an interesting number to know.

"-why has he not been able to close the deal?"
TB,
And just how is that measured? It's only been about 8 weeks since the 1st vote and he's come from a 20% deficit to a 4% lead in that time.(RCP) The only way this deal closes is when either drops out and he's been ahead in all the cats. since mid Jan. Why should he drop?. Or her, for that matter as much as I would to see it. The GE is going to be interesting, let alone Denver.

121 African Americans have served in the United States Congress.

251 women in the U. S. Congress

Many of the women were AA so the numbers overlap some.

Warren I think you made my point for me. If Obama is throwing all of this money and influence at her and has not been able to put her away what make you think he will be able to defeat John Mc Cain in the fall.
His core supporters are not going to vote for Obama, And I don't care who the nominee the dems end up with the repub's will fall in line just like they always do. If you think anything else you are dreaming. And if you think she has been nasty you haven't seen anything yet.

No need to divide it up. Hillary Clinton uses her time in the White House as part of ther 35 years of "experience", and she can only claim that time because she is married to Bill. So if a woman made it to governor or the Senate because of death is no different. Right place, right time. A place and time African Americans haven't been.

What about the Senate and governor?

truebeliever...

If I remember correctly Obama won 14 Primaries to Hillary winning 13 and I don't remember the Caucus victories numbers though.

Got to run now, time to go home.

Take care and...

God Bless.

"has not been able to put her away what make you think he will be able to defeat John Mc Cain in the fall. "
Back at you !
HRC did not fulfill her status. She was the inevitable one, couldn't run BO out. What makes you think she can defeat JM?

NEW THREAD

Alpha

Congress includes both Senators and Representatives. I'll see if I can get a total on Governors for each group. Here is some interesting info on women in government. Black men got to Congress during reconstruction. Black women didn't get there until 1969.

http://www.democrats.org/a/2007/03/celebrate_women_1.php

At this rate no one win beat McCain....he'll start touting no taxes, safe country, proud america, family values...and BHO and HRC groups will still be slinging mud -calling each other racists, and other unbecoming names.

Does anyone know of anyone in recent history who has had so many obvious advantages as Obama who has not absolutely stomped his competition? It just seems that maybe there is a ceiling to his appeal.

The beginning of the end for the Obama campaign

"Everything in politics has an arc — a beginning, a high point and an end. The art of campaigning is to hit the high end of that arc as close to Election Day as possible.

Barack Obama has generated more excitement this year than any presidential contender in at least a generation. Having seen nothing like him in their lives, young people have signed up in droves. Older Democrats say the last candidate who connected with them this way was Bobby Kennedy in '68. Women faint at his rallies. That wouldn't happen at a John McCain or Hillary Clinton event unless it was held in 110-degree heat.

But excitement is closely tied to momentum and the Obama campaign is losing both. The affection for him is genuine, but it's less a long-term romance than a crush. And everyone knows that crushes either crash or fade. Ask an Obama supporter about the senator's greatest political accomplishment and the reaction is often the same: a crinkled eyebrow, an awkward acknowledgment that they can't think of anything, but he still inspires them because he represents "change" and "hope"

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2004275515_johncarlson12.html

Gordo,

Carlson has no credibility as a neutral observer. He's a right wing radio nut as far as I'm concerned. I live in this area.

Sorry about not responding to the numbers question, warren - I had a meeting I had to attend. Since every assumption I've used has been rejected as sophistry by you, why not just tell me what the voter splits will turn out to be in MI, FL and the remaining contests except PA and then I can respond.

Snark aside, I was using the numbers you provided, included FL, used the MI number of 150 that you (generously) suggested, assumed an even split for the remaining voters, and just ran the math. I thought it was pretty simple. For an easier analysis, just forget the remaining voters - the math is the same.

407 (current D w/FL) - 150 (MI per warren) = 257 (all in thousands)

Like I said, difficult, but possible.

Truebeliever,

Obama has demonstrated that he has transcended the race issue with White voters. I suspect that the numbers are visible when you look at how well he does amongst the wealthy and well educated segment of the population.

Many of these older Democrats, and Ferraro is indicative of the group, vividly remember Archie Bunker, what the times that created that line of thinking were like.

For many older people, black folks belong on stage, on the pulpit, on a sports field or serving them in some capacity, but not in a position of power.

Malcolm X had a great quote when he was debating at Oxford... where he held up the US to the mirror of apartheid and concluded that at least the South African's were open and honest about their beliefs.

NEW THREAD

RELOAD

NEW THREAD

RELOAD

"Karolenna

So you come here to call Clinton supporters racists instead."

Hey, I am merely stating a fact...that these individuals will not vote for a black man no matter how well educated and accomplished. They tell me that is not the case, but I know them too well. Many of those in SE Ohio are my family who, for the most part, are well educated individuals, but I know racial comments when I hear them, sorry to say. My youngest brother says Obama will put "all those black preachers" in high offices. Make sense!!!

Those who support Hillary are less liberal, poorer, elderly and less educated than supporters of BO who is as "Warren states a transcendent figure". Applying such logic would mean that those who prefer beer to wine, the elderly and the uninformed are preventing BO from achieving his rightful place as our master. Those horrid barbarians are blocking the ascension of his magnificence BO and not Hillary, who is only a tool of this odious mob.

Milquetoast for BO

Welcome President McCain. After all of this, no way we can support Obama.

Curious as to why the AP identified Hillary as Hillary Rodham Clinton but Barack as Barack Obama, not including his middle name. Wondering why the Rodham has reappeared.

Craig,

If the Dem Party implodes in Denver and a solution can't be found that unites the Party behind either Barack or Hillary...Could it be numerically or legally possible for John Edwards to get the required number of delegates, pledged and super, to win the nomination if either Barack or Hillary stepped down and gave him all of their pledged delegates, and their super delegates moved as a group to him prior to a final convention vote? If in that final vote some of the other candidate's super delegates moved to Edwards for the purpose of party unity could it put him over the top in delegates and win him the nomination? In this scenario Barack or Hillary could not be the VP as it would still be too contentious. It would have to be someone like Richardson. This way both Barack and Hillary's supporters would be disappointed but most would probably turn out to support Edwards to have a Dem pres. as opposed to McCain and the Dem's would have a better chance of winning in Nov. than they do now with all this rancor.

All of the above probably not possible, just a thought. Would mean both candidates would have to put Party before personal agenda. Right now, with all the contention, as a lifelong dem- leaning independent I can't find a candidate I can support that I think will have a chance to win in Nov. I don't support Sen. Obama as I feel he is not being honest or racially correct in identifying himself as black instead of Bi-Racial. This causes me to wonder what else he may be misrepresenting. If I support Hillary if she becomes the nominee at the Convention how will I feel about the riots that Alpha and others are predicting and their effect on the election? Will it make me want to vote for McCain as a protest vote? Forget Nader... I won't forget 2000. All of this could lead me to not vote and I don't feel good about that. Is there any chance left for Edwards in this mess? Any hope out there for unity? Sure would like to find someone to vote for.