For months now I’ve been joking that the Democratic nomination would all come down to Washington, postulating an unlikely scenario in which the candidates come out of Super Duper Tuesday in a two-way (or even three-way) tie, and the nation looking to WA caucus goers to set the momentum heading into the next leg of the campaign. Well whaddaya know… many a truth is said in jest.
And so why aren’t I more excited?
I guess, it’s because unlike much of the campaign thus far, there isn’t really a lot of suspense about what’s going to happen on Saturday. Obama’s been kicking ass in the caucus states, and he’s likely to repeat that success both here and in Nebraska, while his overwhelming support amongst black voters should serve him well in the Louisiana primary. Then comes another caucus in Maine on Sunday, followed by another good day for Obama on Tuesday as Maryland, D.C. and Virginia voters go to the polls, and almost surely extend his delegate lead. Then on the 19th we get a caucus in Hawaii and a primary in Wisconsin… two more contests that seem to favor Obama.
Yup, it’s all downhill for Obama in February, until he slams headfirst into the Ohio and Texas primaries on March 4, and their 389 delegates, and then Pennsylvania’s 188 delegates on April 22, leaving us with one of three scenarios. Either Obama picks up enough speed and delegates throughout February to lead him to some big upset victories in delegate rich states, and eventually the nomination, or Clinton retakes a delegate lead she never relinquishes. Which brings us back to Washington.
The challenge for Obama supporters is not simply to win this Saturday but to win big, which in a caucus scenario requires both turnout and persuasion. Washington state has been home to a lot of Edwards supporters and a lot of fence sitters, both of which currently describe me, and thus there are a lot of voters still up for grabs. I’m slightly leaning toward Obama for purely pragmatic reasons (I think he’d do better for down-ticket candidates) but on Saturday afternoon the Clinton folks in my precinct will have every opportunity to convince me. And if there’s an opportunity to convince somebody like me — a guy who usually has a strong opinion on pretty much everything — I’m guessing the situation is a lot more fluid than most people imagine. For Obama to have a chance of smashing through Clinton’s structural advantages in the big states, he’s going to have to win convincingly in February. And that all starts Saturday afternoon in Washington. I don’t believe Clinton can win WA, but if she makes it close, that’s more than good enough.
Which brings us to that third scenario, which no, I didn’t forget, and explains why I’m feeling a bit more anxious than excited this morning. There is now the very real likelihood that Obama does well in February, does okay, but not great, in the big states, and heads into the August convention with a small lead in pledged delegates, but not enough to overcome Clinton’s superdelegate advantage. I know “real” journalists are drooling over the possibility of a brokered convention, but this could be disastrous for the Democrats. If superdelegates and/or disputed delegates from Michigan and Florida end up determining the nomination contrary to the ultimate choice made by voters at the caucuses and polls, there could be a crisis of legitimacy that could damage Democratic prospects up and down the ballot. (A Clinton/Obama ticket would be the obvious solution, and a killer combination for November.)
How likely is this scenario? Certainly no more likely than the situation we’re in now. Which makes Saturday’s caucus all the more important.
So you rabid Obama supporters (yeah, I’m talkin’ to you Howie), it’s time to put up or shut up. You better kick ass on Saturday, or prepare to deal with the consequences.
I don’t think a brokered convention would be as horrible as all of that. First, with only two candidates, I’m not sure there’s really much to broker. One of the candidates is going to have more delegates then the other, and I don’t think that Edwards came out with enough to through it either way. As for super-delegates, it seems like they are going to go where the wind blows. Right now Clinton has more because she was the presumptive nominee, but there’s nothing stopping the vast majority of those endorsements changing.
Obama seems like a nice guy. I disagree with just about everything he says, but he sure as hell beats the shit out of Hillary as a candidate for prez. I hope the Dems nominate him just so I can see Hillary’s aspirations for prez expire.
Digby doesn’t think a brokered convention would be so bad either, but yeah, I have to worry about Michigan and Florida, since Hil campaigned in both despite the Dems saying they won’t be seating any of their delegates.
I asked this on another tread and never got an answer, so will try again to see if anyone has an answer.
If Washington does caucus overwhelmingly for Obama (greater than 60% for instance) will that likely result in Cantwell and Murray changing from Hillary to Obama? In other words, what affect does the vote this Saturday have on this state’s super delegates?
James, I don’t think they are obligated by the popular vote to change their votes. I’ll let others correct me if I am wrong, but I always recall a hubub in the past if a declared superdelegate switched.
Oh, and this is from Media Matters:
That was Tweety Matthews on MSNBC last night. Good thing they didn’t have the sound up at DL, I might have thrown something at the teevee!
I think a lot of women, at least, are tempted to vote for Clinton just as blowback to this kind of sexist horseshit.
Goldy
You owe me one. Early on I suggested we could be headed for a real convention. You dismissed this. Well I am wrong a lot too.
On the Obama vs. Clinton issue, if i understand your point it is a real politic issue… who is electable, who will effect progressive changes, etc. I I am correct, I have a request .. why not put up some of the arguments or..if you wanna fence sit then maybe encourage others?
Here is my contribution, intended to be balanced:
Hillary vs Barack, a realistic analysis?
1. Who can win in November:
HRC .. PRO incredible machine exists in place. Has fierce loyalists who have been loyal for a long time. Bill Clinton, used well is a plus.
CON some worrisome history with Black Panthers and Communist Party of USA. Bill Clinton can be a loose cannon, probably needs to cut his ties to odd business leaders if “they” become President. Liable to Vietnam era comparisons with McCain.
BHO .. PRO Charismatic speaker, innovative campaign that has tapped an amazing populist source of funds, growing grass roots organization. Spouse with unique presence and history. His speech on Iraq was awesome.
CON Youth, covert racism.
2. Who can implement reforms.
HRC .. PRO ultimate wonk, knows more than the Wikipedia. Huge contact lists. As Senator has proven ability to work with the other side. Many issues have well worked out plans. More likely to elicit initial support from leaders of the world.
CON .. history (before Senate) of polarizing, surprisingly little track record in anything other than role of rainmaker for law firm (total “service” 1 year with Edeleman). A large number of her advisers are unimpressive left overs form Clintonia: e.g. Ira Magaziner is chief of Policy! Lacks a publication record to indicate she can write well on complex ideas. A persistent and (via Bill) growing embedment in the corporate director class.
BHO .. Likely to come to office with massive good will, a honeymoon that may help through a difficult 2009. More likely to elicit popular support from populace of the world. Speaking and writing abilities are awesome. More likely to have American people follow him if he needs to make difficult announcements on war, taxes, meteors form space, etc.
CON .. needs to build trust at upper levels, that could be hard in a transition year. Likely to have more troubles grabbing levers of government needed to send Bushies home.
3. Year One
HRC: PRO this sis going to be an awesomely difficult transition. her large black book and many friends translate into a slurry of appointments and less likelihood of making mistakes.
CON A history of dubious choices at high levels. Lani Guanier, Madelyn Albright, Ira Magaziner, Penn … all these folks share a certain level of obsequious competence that means Hilalry will be able to tell them what not do but may not build the kind of infrastructure a great President .. a la Lincoln or Roosevelt, made such great use of.
BHO PRO An extraordinary list of very talented people have committed themselves to him. If he can get these people into cabinet positions then he might be better than HRC in year one. He is also demonstrably more able to reach across CLASS lines than she is.
CON Leadership at this level is unpredictable. She is more of a sure thing.
4, Greatness
I will not try to measure this imponderable. Both of them remind me of past Presidents who came to office because of publicity issues or political accidents … Lincoln, Truman, Kennedy, … none of these had the mantle of greatness visible before they served.
Hillary reminds me a lot of GHWB, the elder. Like him she has a CV. I suspect she would govern like him, though with a better vision. Put another way, she is a safe bet.
Barack reminds me of Lincoln. Well written, a Washington outsider, an intellectual. He also reminds me of Kennedy, the ability to think deeply on an issue and consult with others. Of course, without Oswald, Kennedy might be remembered as a failure. Put another way, an inspired bet.
Concerns:
HRC … can she control Bill Clinton? He has already said he will not relinquish his foundation.
HRC Is she a classist? There seems little awarenes son her part of the class divide issues.
BHO … Can he handle crisis?
_____________________________________________________
Looking at my own essay, it seems to me that to me that one thing is very clear, if BHO were not running my enthusiasm for HRC would be tremendous.
So, non objectively, why do I support BHO?
1. I believe that the ability to write one’s own words says a lot about intellect.
2. People I admire who have met both candidates, with a few exceptions, seem to choose Obama. The exception .. Wesley Clark. The influential people who affect me .. inter alia Nora Ephron, a number of scientists I can not name, Ethel Kennedy.
3. Frankly, he inspires me. Early in life I decided that I must accept the fact that there were better people than I and choose to learn form these people. I consider my “gods” Gandhi, King, Chavez, Lander, John XXIII, Rabin, Crick …all people better or brighter than I. Barack conveys this same desire in me.
I want to learn from him.
Your turn.
2 things. First, it is my understanding that superdelegates can vote for whomever they wish and can change their minds infinitum until the convention. Second, Andrew Sullivan (I know… boo hiss) has a piece in the Dec 07 Atlantic Magazine (web link – http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200712/obama ) that gives a pretty compelling argument for an Obama presidency. It’s not a short article, but worth the time to read.
There’s lots of talk that the Dem race COULD go negative – what about the GOP? McCain, Romney and Huckabee are scrapping on a daily basis calling each other names and fighting like dogs.
Rod – What do you have against Andrew Sullivan? I don’t agree with everything the guy says, but he is one of my favorite blogs to read and seems to me to take a moderate pragmatic view of most issues.
Others – Thanks for the information on the superdelegates. I guess we shall just have to wait to see if our madam senators will vote for candidate based on the will of the people in Washington, or based on pressure from Emily’s List.
So , what can McClinton offer the Democrats and the Independents but more War ? Centrist pro-war democrats or Reps. agree on one thing , We are going to be hemorraging blood on the sands of the Iraq for a very long time .
Isn’t it about time for some real Democratic change ?
Still waiting to hear which candidates will visit Washington state, and when. I would think all of them would want to be making the rounds here, either Thursday or Friday. I don’t know if there is time to organize a rally or a public speech, but you would think they would be doing the local news/radio talk show interviews.
seattle jew…..don’t forget obama’s church. i think that may be a real issue too….very radical, and oprah sure didn’t help him either, that and ted “can she swim?” kennedy….KISS OF DEATH.
but hillary? one million documents and counting. as obama said….a dump truck full of dirt on her……..
although, he really can’t talk either.
dem in the white house? NOPE.
hey, are you attending that conference?
JamesA,
Like you, I often disagree with Andrew Sullivan but usually enjoy reading him. I think his arguments are well reasoned and he avoids hyperbole. I was making assumptions about the readers of this blog (shame on me).
Rod S. Your call on the 16%ers was spot on!
rhp6033@12: I see you are in your cocoon again. The visitation schedule was announced. Do you read anything non-liberal?
Baghdad: Clinton already went negative and nukular on Obama.
Remember the drug comment?
Obama said the Clinton research machine is very good, so the smears will start real soon. Remember the Clinton War Room?
Maria CantThinkWell already stated she’s a Clintonite.
Or is that Kryptonite?
The New Jersey Governor already said he’s going to vote Hilary no matter what his state did.
Kind of like how you 16%ers feel about the rules for the caucus and primary. Dammit I do what I want who cares about stinking rules.
SJ: I agree with most of what you had to say above. Well done. Now if you can apply the same reasoned analysis to the Gov’s race I am sure you will kick Dino to the curb.
Regarding super delegates: Super delegates are under no requirement to base their support upon popular vote or the caucus vote. In fact it could be argued that they exist as a protection against a bad choice being made at the convention, though I do not but this. As near as I can tell, super delegates were created to give party leaders and dignitaries a place at the table without having to compete for it and the notion that these positions are some sort of safety net is more of a justification than a reason for these spots to exist.
This said, in this year, the super delegates may be the key to determining who will be the party’s nominee and this would not be a bad thing. Party rules dictate that the non elected positions must be balanced in terms of gender and a good effort is made (at least here) to have an ethnically representative balance.
The ones to watch are those who have yet to anounce their support.
Puddy @ 16: I don’t know what you mean by “cocoon”. I’ve been working this morning, but I checked a couple of local news outlets, didn’t see anything. I’ll check again.
sjew @ 7 writes about Hillary: “CON some worrisome history with Black Panthers and Communist Party of USA.”
This is so fucking stupid and so fucking ignorant as to defy belief. Get a grip SJ. There are many legitimate reasons to have ‘concerns’ about Hillary. So what do you cite?…her brief legal internship in ’69 and some made up shit about the Pathers.
You’re just fucking pathetic.
SJ-
Liked your post…I’m at the caucus for Obama (I was an Edwards guy)…the Hil and Bill show kind of put me off. If she’s the nominee I’ll work my ass off to see her get elected.
Set aside for a moment the policy stances of each candidate.
Set aside for a moment the down ticket affect of each candidate.
Set aside the indisputable on the ground party growth that Obama represents.
Think only for a moment about the concept of superdelegates, the history of their existence, how they get their tag.
As progressives or liberals as I like to call myself, we focus our agendas on the people, the common good, plain common sense in how government affects our lives.
I get the impression that liberals like myself like to think for ourselves, are disinclined to follow along simply because my *party* says it’s good for me.
Superdelegates, elected and party officials, came into being in 1984 as a party manipulation of the primary process. Insurgent candidates like McGovern were the impetus, as the party was so embarrassed by his landslide loss to Nixon in 1972.
Was McGovern a good candidate? In hindsight, he largely resembled Howard Dean who was just too far ahead of his time. He did represent the hugely strong anti war movement on the ground.
“There was a view that the Democratic party had allowed the grass roots to become too empowered and that in too many instances, people whose job it was to get Democrats elected were being shut out of the process,” says Meredith McGehee, policy director for the Campaign Legal Center, a Washington-based nonpartisan organization.
The primary system is “heavily filtered toward reinforcing the two major parties,” says McGehee, making it “very difficult for a third party or an outside candidate to succeed.”
During the primary process, “the party is choosing their candidates, which is very different from the public choosing a candidate,” says Norman Ornstein, an expert on U.S. politics at the American Enterprise Institute think tank. The goal is to “narrow it down to the candidates who most represent the party, and who have the greatest chance of winning,” says Ornstein.
http://www.cfr.org/publication.....egion%2F#3
I can see the argument FOR the concept, but my visceral reaction is that the people should be the front line in deciding who represents me, not the party.
How is it in the party’s interest to have insiders choose for us who will represent us?
I don’t like the whole system of party over people, I dislike more the idea of insiders overturning the will of the people.
But setting even that aside, since ALL superdelegates are elected in one form or another, the superdelegates should NEVER be allowed to commit prior to their state primary, should NEVER be allowed to vote against their state primary winner. THAT is as undemocratic as it comes.
If we followed the above, it would still hurt Obama as he has won many little states that carry far fewer superdelegates than the big states.
But at least there would be somewhat of an appearance that the people’s votes matter at least a little.
If the Clinton’s win a majority of the popular vote, they should be the nominee. I can live with that. But if they win because the party cedes to their power mongering, I will do everything in my albeit limited power to defeat them, and whichever insiders who helped them, in the general.
It’s the best approach I can take to changing our governance for my daughter’s future I can do.
That is more important to me than this particular election.
One interesting tidbit from the mass of numbers generated yesterday is that McCain took less than 50% of the Republican vote in his home state. Perhaps the more people get to know him, the less they like him.
To me, a lot of this is about leadership. I don’t need to agree with everything someone who I am voting for does 100% of the time, and chances are, I never will unless it’s me. However, I need someone who is genuine in their leadership and can get things done. To me, Clinton is that candidate.
While fervant in my support of her, in the end, if she lost, I wouldn’t hold my nose and vote for Obama. But, while it’s still competitive, I believe she is the best of the two candidates.
The War
A lot of people give her shit on the war issue, I’ve already talked about that, and all I’m going to say is that I give her a pass on it because I was fooled right with her based of the evidence presented, just like over 80% of the public who was in favor of the war was when the vote was taken.
Leadership
Leadership to me is taking a stand on issues. Leadership to me is not voting ‘Present’ (aka ‘Maybe’) on 129 bills in your state legislative career. Bills like the one that “that required mandatory adult prosecution for firing a gun on or near school grounds.” It passed overwhlemingly 52-1, and Obama voted ‘Maybe’. Or how about the one that would allow “victims of rape and other sex crimes to have their court records sealed”. Obama was the only legislator to vote ‘Maybe’. Is ‘Maybe’ ever almost an option for the occupant of the Oval Office? I don’t think so.
Pro-Choice Issues
Hillary has been stead-fast pro-life. We look back at Obama’s only clear record on his reproductive rights issues and it’s troubling. Back to those ‘maybe’ votes, Obama voted ‘maybe’ on 5 abortion related bills including a ban on certain late-pregnancy abortions and a requirement that a minor’s parents be notified. I think we need a strong advocate for Choice in the White House. I know that person is Hillary Clinton
Gay Rights
I’ve only seen one of these candidates in a gay pride parade (Hillary Clinton in 2000). Say what you want about their audacity (I’ve seen way worse things at Straight Pride – aka Mardi Gras) but I think they are a very loud statement about your compassions to the plight of gays and lesbians. She went on the record saying she was positive about civil unions, with full equality of benefits. She’s in favor of letting states decide gay marriage; they’re ahead of feds. She and I agree that gay soldiers need to shoot straight, not be straight. She’s rated an 89% by the HRC, because she has not been an outspoken advocate of gay marriage, although a senate bill in May of 2007 that she voted for – some people point as clearing the path to it. Hillary Clinton is the most progressive on the gay rights issue, not only by her HRC rating, but by her actions.
I’ll expand on Healthcare, Taxes, and Plans on the economy in my next post when I take another work break…
One positive about running HRC as our nominee is that she’s 100% vetted by the RNC.
Let’s face it there is nothing NEW the RNC can dig up that they haven’t already tried to exploit.
In fact, I hope Karl Rove and the boys try reaaaaaal hard to dig up new dirt or even old dirt for that matter.
The country got a little tired of it during the whole “get Bill Clinton no matter what fiasco” from ’93-’98. Then again when HRC ran for the senate seat in NY.
If the Kark and the boys try another Swiftboat attack it will blow back in their faces.
That’s one of the many, many reasons an Clinton/Obama ticket is the natural choice for the Dems.
A Clinton/”elder statesman” ticket will look to the youth/minority vote like “same ol’ same ol'” and they/we are thirsting for change.
A Clinton/Obama ticket brings stability and prosperity that we’re all familiar with from the ’90’s with the promise and hope the future will bring.
#8 Rod S. says:
2 things. First, it is my understanding that superdelegates can vote for whomever they wish and can change their minds infinitum until the convention. Second, Andrew Sullivan (I know… boo hiss) has a piece in the Dec 07 Atlantic Magazine (web link – http://www.theatlantic.com/doc /200712/obama ) that gives a pretty compelling argument for an Obama presidency. It’s not a short article, but worth the time to read.
02/06/2008 at 1:04 pm
I, too, read Sullivan daily. He represents to me what the somewhat reasonable *enemy* is thinking, and the process they use to get there.
His article in the Atlantic is a foundation for my serious support of Obama. As a boomer myself, I am sick to death of the place my generation has gotten us to in our unending rebattling of long gone disagreements.
My generation has done some pretty wonderful things in our time, but we have so screwed up the political process it sickens me.
Obama represents a true change in the way we, and the world, sees ourselves. He represents a removal of we -v- they thinking, covering our asses, etc.
If I’m having a dispute with my neighbor, do I approach them with a slash and burn baseball bat to the head ala Clinton, or do I go talk to them building a case that my thinking is correct, convince them that their approach is not as good for the neighborhood? Which way will be more likely to get LASTING results?
He’s telling me to get up off my couch and make my priorities happen. Think about the Schiavo case…how did it happen that Congress moved so quickly to reconvene, the President flew in in his jamies, legislation all got done so quickly and efficiently…it happened because the hard radical right mobilized on the ground and MADE it happen.
He’s telling me the progressive (I call it liberal) agenda is far better for the country than the neocon approach, I should be proud of that, I should speak out for that rather than worrying about how to give in enough to get by for power.
He’s telling the world that we are more alike you than different. All 300 million of us are just folks trying to get by each day just like the rest of the world. He’s telling the world that what we represent is the best of humanity, the overwhelming desire to help (see tsunami response).
In short, Obama represents to me the best of what’s in us as opposed to the same old same old.
DustinJames @ 25…any chance we can elevate the conversation beyond our candidates talking points? Everything in your post comes right off that list and has ALL been refuted and dismissed as malarky.
Come up with original thinking if it’s in you….
George W. Bush, a real American Hero! @ 26…please…the Clintons have been vetted UP TO WHEN THEY LEFT OFFICE. There’s 7 long years since then, and there is no doubt they as a couple, or they individually, have changed considerably. There’s already hints that Bill’s been running loose and free all that time, and true or not, relevant or not, it’s out there and WILL affect some voters.
That’s not to mention the Foundation and it’s maneuvering, those tens of thousands of *unreleased* papers from the WH….
There’s dirt, the Reps will dig it out, and the electorate will continue to be divided down the middle with NONE of our problems getting resolved.
Nice post #28.
G Davis @ 28:
I think GWB @ 25 has a point. I think the public is tired of the Swiftboat tactics and if the Republicans have to run on dug up dirt rather than what they’ve accomplished it will create a backlash effect.
Why do the libbies assume a woman needs to be prez before a black?
Please explain this to me without talking points.
Can you do it?
Mad Lib#30: Where was your voice when the Clinton Crime Commission Protectorate (CCCP) did that to Obama before New Hampshire?
I just made that up saving this!
Just checkin…
Dustin James:
The War: You say, “…I was fooled right with her based of the evidence presented, just like over 80% of the public who was in favor of the war was when the vote was taken.”
This was probably the most important vote Clinton has ever had to make and she got it wrong. She got it wrong because she did not read the NIE and because, as you say, 80% of the public was in favor of the war at that time.
Obama was not only correct when he came out against this vote, he did it at a time when he was running for the US Senate and at a time when his position did not poll well.
Leadership – Leadership is having to make difficult decisions that might go against what is polling well at the time. See the above example on why Obama has shown true leadership. And one thing you Hillary boosters convienently forget to mention is that of the 149 present votes cast by Obama at the State level, that was 149 of over 4000 votes. And he has also explained in great detail why he voted that way and has been backed up by his fellow Illinois lawmakers. This is one of two “issues” the Clinton machine has dug up on Obama, and they hammer away on him with it every chance they get.
Pro-Choice Issues – Another example of where Hillary Clinton simply regurgitates the NARAL talking points rather than trying to address the actual issue of trying to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies. Where is Hillary bring “change” to this issue? She’s not… more of the same partisan bickering and talking points.
Gay Rights – Well I am a gay man, and I could care less which candidates go to gay pride parades and talk at gay rallies. I want to know who brings up the issue in front of “unfriendly” crowds, and what thier positions are on the issues. Obama is the ONLY candidate that speaks up for gay rights in front of all black church groups and gay audiences alike. Obama is also the only remaining candidate that is in favor of fully repealing the DOMA laws. Unlike Clinton, who’s husband enacted the laws in the first place.
If you want change, rather than more of the same partisan triagulation, vote for Obama on Saturday.
PL@24……..i wouldn’t read too much into the arizona vote if i were you. remember they are on the front lines of the illegal alien problem, and that’s where they had their differences with mccain……and that’s all. you’ll be surprised. and ,mccain could handily beat either obama or clinton. both have such huge issues that will come to light that the american people will say “i don’t know about that….” very clearly at election time.
obama is a great speaker ,very JFK like, but also like JFK it’s just all pretty talk. and this is not the 60’s…….
@13 Xmas Ghost
Sorry, but if you look I have tried to ONLY address facts.
For all I know Hillary is a lesbian who collected tampons in the freezer, Barack is a major trader in imported Asian slaves, Romney is clone labeled “Made for Mattell in China” under the Mormon undies, Huckabee is best friends with the Rev. Moon and McCain IS the Manchurian Candidate and will explode like a Palestinian belt bomber during the anuguration of he hears the words …:We are the people we have been waiting for.”
As for Barack’s church, yeh mon .. this Scots guy I know goes to this Presbyterian Church where they speak in Gaellic and talk about Scots history and Scots pride, For that matter boobelah, I attend a Synagogue where we talk about Jewish history, Jewish ethics, the Jewish family.
Shocking.
Yeah… all JFK’s “pretty talk” got us was a man on the moon by the end of the 1960s.
I guess the politics of fear and divisiveness is all the GOP has left now that they’ve abandoned what used to be sensible conservative principals. Good luck with that in November.
James A
Hands across the web!
Those who question BHO’s courage and leadership should read your post.
BHO’s ability to go into a fundamentalist chirch, identify with the people AND teach a lesson on the role of gay people, that is wonderful.
@19 Rational analysis of Gregoire vs Rossi
I am not up to that for now, BUT Rossi’s failure to show leadership in re the Clark County Republican’s racims is not tolerable to me. I can not vote for a racist. Can I vote for CG? Not yet.
I just visited the CNN election web site.
See link above…
Can anyone here explain how cum Heilery has 87 more stupiddelegates when Obama won mo states? Why do the big states have more Heilery donkeys? Seems to me the donkey machine is in full gear against you JamesA!
Status quo baby!
On the Yahoo News site:
“Overall, Clinton has 1,024 delegates, to 933 for Obama with 2,025 delegates required to claim the nomination in Denver at this summer’s convention.”
So again Obama is being screwed by the donkey machine!
seattle jew…..if you can’t vote for a racist then you should just check gregoire OFF your list right now. member and president of “whites only” sorority in washington state. she stole the governor’s election from rossi who is half indian …i guess those old habits of hers are hard to break.
yup.it’s real thinker……
Puddy – I don’t think they have tabulated all the delegates yet… especially in New Mexico. Also, my understanding is that the number of ‘super delegates’ are an estimate. I heard that Obama’s campaign went into yesterday’s big day hoping to end within 100 delegates of Clinton, which they have handily done… possibly even better when we have the final results.
@21 Proud to be an Ass??
“You’re just fucking pathetic.”
Really, can you explain to me what fucking pathetic is? Does Viagra cure this?
As for my PORs and CONs .. I agree wiht you. I am not more interested in Hillary’s trysts with the Panthers than I am with Romney’s underwear. BUT, the effort her ewas to catalog, in a rational way, the facts on each candidate that might, in thise case, effect her electability. or do you imagine that some swift boat operation will not bring this up?
OK .. in the spirit of objectivity, potential swiftboat issues:
HRC
Is she menopausal (I am NOT kidding),
Was she a conspirator with commies and panthers during ‘nam while JM was a heroic POW?
What does she look like in skimpy underclothes
Do she and Bill share a bed?
Does she take hormone replacements?
Will Bill agree to divest himself of his “charities?”
BHO
Is he friendly with Farrakhan?
Was he a Muslim as a child and has he denounced Islam (whuch would condemn him to death!).
How did a Black guy manage to go to a school for Hawaian natives?
What is known about his relatives in Kenya?
How come he married a Black woman?
Is he ashamed of his Kansan origins?
Are you happy? Fucking happy?
@22 Thanks!
We are indeed fortunate to have this choice.
seattle jew @35………so, you don’t think that obama’s very vitriolic pastor and his awards to farrakhan are going to be a problem? this is a real issue my friend, whether you want to recognize it or not. don’t forget the hispanic firewall. and there is still texas to contend with.
and jamesA……..were you alive when kennedy was president? or did you just hear how wonderful he was in history class? because i am in the former category and he was a pain in the ass just like bill clinton. same couldn’t keep his “parts” in his pants, same lying, same BS. there was nothing wonderful about him at all. but ,hey, he was billed as the first catholic in the oval office. big deal.
here we were in america and he was trying to play the “royal” family.he wasn’t a decent man in any respect.
now bobby kennedy was a different case……i really liked him.
man on the moon….BFD.
@41
1. Rossi is half WHAT?? Source please,
2, I know CG was fackless a pres of her racist sorority. People do grow up you know.
The Clark County issue JUST happened. Some Nazi-wanna be is runign arounf Rossi’s party now and he is doing shit about it.
SJ…..”Is she menopausal (I am NOT kidding),” that’s a done deal…look at her age. she already went through that.
maybe that’s why she threw that book at bill’s head that time?
hey, is obama’s mother still alive? i haven’t seen her at any of the gatherings.
SJ@46..i realize people grow up, but i was never a racist, were you? and what was her excuse? it wasn’t the 30’s in alabama you know.
yup….rossi is half Tlingit.
SJ…can you cite a source for me for the nazi wanna be thing? that is very disturbing.
ghost @ 34: “mccain could handily beat either obama or clinton.”
No careful thinker should make any such confident predictions at this point in the game. McCain has a multitude of weaknesses that most people don’t yet know about. Many of the independents now voting for him want the troops out of Iraq. They will come to learn of his warmongering nature. I will say about McCain that he’s okay. For a Republican, he has some integrity, but that’s not saying much. With regard to your comment about “pretty talk,” I think you underestimate the value of rhetoric. Besides, clear speaking typically reflects clear thinking. And, after 7 years of listening to a president who can’t coherently read a page from a Dot and Jim book, I look forward to hearing someone who can speak.
christmasghost @ 13,
I don’t think Obama’s church is much of an issue. One can go to a church and not agree “hook, line and sinker” with what comes out of the mouths of the clerics. For example, many Catholics don’t pay too much attention to the Pope’s condemnation of birth control. Abortion might make them a little uneasy, but Catholic women are definitely using the pill, and Catholic men are definitely using condoms to prevent unintended pregnancies.
So, it’s a stretch to say that Obama is toeing the line with that provocative cleric that preaches at Obama’s church. Obama’s a sane guy, not a crazy.
Here is something interesting…
http://www.publiusforum.com/obama_Clay.mp3
” Clay warns Clintons against mudslinging
Maria Hickey, KWMU
ST. LOUIS, MO. (2008-01-24) Missouri Congressman William Lacy Clay says the Clintons need to tamp down their rhetoric against fellow Democrat Barack Obama.
Clay supports Obama’s bid for the presidency.
The St. Louis Democrat says he’s been alarmed by some of the things former President Bill Clinton has said about Obama’s record and campaign.
Clay calls it mudslinging and says it could have long-term effects.
“If for some reason Barack does not go all the way and become the Democratic nominee and Hillary is, there will be quite a lot of animosity throughout Missouri and throughout the African-American community toward the Clintons,” Clay said.
Meanwhile another Obama supporter from Missouri, Senator Claire McCaskill warned that nominating Hillary Clinton would likely mean a bigger Republican turn-out in Missouri.”
I forgot this with #52
http://publicbroadcasting.net/.....ectionID=1
St Louis city and county won Missouri for Barack.
I doubt you’ll see this on the nightly news.
SeattleJew@46:
You claim to be all that and you don’t know Dino’s ancestry?
Puddybud @ 31:
I’ll field this one.
What does the color of Obama’s skin have to do with it??
We are juding the Democratic candidates on the content of their characther not the color of their skin.
Why are you attempting to make race an issue? It’s quite strange to me, taking into account I KNOW you, that you of all people would make it a race vs. gender issue.
It just so happens that of all the people whe seeked the Demcoratic nomination, that the two people standing are female and black.
Sheeeez, there you go again, making red herring aruguments.
Say, Apollo, ready to go another 12 rounds??
Oh, yeah, I forgot, the last time we debated race issues you got knocked the F@*K OUT! :)
YAAAWWWWNNN Ghost said: “and jamesA……..were you alive when kennedy was president? or did you just hear how wonderful he was in history class? because i am in the former category and he was a pain in the ass just like bill clinton. same couldn’t keep his “parts” in his pants,”
But being caught hustling free blow jobs in the men’s room at an international airport is just peachy keen, huh?
Or being in the “black book” of a Washington D.C. mistress???
Or, going to sex clubs with your wife is cool, too.
Grow up. This is why no one bothers to take you seriously. Don’t you get bored being such a lying dumb ass?
JamesA @ 33:
“And one thing you Hillary boosters convienently forget to mention is that of the 149 present votes cast by Obama at the State level, that was 149 of over 4000 votes.” So rough math – that makes one out of every 31 votes he was allowed to vote Maybe. 1 out of 31 votes? Way too many. I can’t trust someone who is going to abdicate on tough issues with a “maybe”.
Again, my candidate was fooled by the fabricated evidence – Obama says himself that’s he not sure how he would have voted if he would have seen the same evidence – I’d rather vote for someone who makes a stand and can explain that stand with sound reasoning than someone who doesn’t make a stand at all – who wishy / washies out with a ‘Maybe’ every 31st time.
You know, if it was my job, and I didn’t come in to be productive every 31st day, I’m pretty sure I’d be fired.
GBS: Wrongo Rocky Balboa. And why do you keep going back to something I admitted was wrong? You only victory in the long ring battle. One round of many…
It’s the donkeys here who say this. All I am asking for them to clarify their positions. Why not Obama/Clinton?
I asked “Why do the libbies assume a woman needs to be prez before a black?”
You didn’t answer the bell either. DING!
28 G Davis – can you tell me which of my comments have been dismissed as ‘malarky’ because I can’t find any research except for the pro-obama blogs who are obviously slanted and disagree and the numerous fact check sites run my newspapers and independent people not loyal to any candidate who seem to agree with what I have posted.
GBS: This is a discussion on presidents and their foibles.
But since you went there.
Mel Reynolds and little girls – I know you have to be disgusted here since I KNOW YOU!
Barney Frank and his apartment – boys will be boys
Gerry Stubbs actually doing it and being remembered as a great American – Unlike Mark Foley he really went there.
@59: Wow The Atlantic Monthly is a lefty kool-aid site. Whodathunkit?
Obama is already slightly ahead of Clinton in delegates chosen in primaries and caucuses. With the contests in Washington, Louisiana, Nebraska, Maryland, Virginia, D.C., Wisconsin and Hawaii coming up through February 26, Obama should be ahead of Clinton in total delegates coming into the next major round on March 4.
Puddybud @ 58:
BRO!!
How can you make a statement like that? I know you’re sober and always have been sober.
You asked a very poorly worded question and got HAMMERED on it. Nobody is making assumption that a female HAS to be president before a BLACK can be president.
Blam-o!! Right to your glass jaw, my friend.
BTW, I’ve won way more than one battle. Shall we discuss your elected Republican officials who do NOT vote to support the troops????
It just happend again today in the Senate my friend. Your Republicans are being obstructionist because Democrats wanted to put into the stimulus package people who could really use the monye, like disabled veterans.
Need your cut man yet?
@2
Not an uncommon sentiment.
Puddy @ 58:
Besides, who’s really going to be a secret service agent for the first black president?
C’mon, Bro, you know there’s some nut-job whacko Republican white dude in Alabama with a gun rack in the cab and a NRA stikcer on ’79 Ford F-150 that would take a shot at Obama.
You know my words are true. And that sniper is no “libbie” either.
Baaaa-Bammm Rocky throws a mean body shot that folded Apollo and he followed it up with a sharp uppercut. Looks like the black man is bleeding and quite possibly has a black eye. Although, it’s hard to tell.
Zing! Damn I’m on a roll.
“GBS: Wrongo Rocky Balboa. And why do you keep going back to something I admitted was wrong?”
Do I really need to explain why I enjoy rubbing your nose in the proverbial dog poo??
C’mon. I know it’s been a while, but sheeez, you’re slow OLD MAN.
Time to retire from the ring?
Hillary Clinton has loaned her campaign $5 million. But where did she get the money from?
Bill Clinton is pretty well off. He has earned $41 million in speaking fees post-Presidency, and may get a $20 million payout from severing his ties with Ron Burkle, whose Yucaipa fund he advised. The couple reported $34 million in assets between them in a recent FEC financial disclosure filing.
However, Arkansas and New York — the two states the Clintons have legally resided in during the relevant time period — are not community property states. Hillary can only claim her own money that she has earned or invested, and not half of Bill’s money.
While Hillary can donate or loan an unlimited amount of her own money, Bill is limited to $2,300 for the primary and $2,300 for the general from his own money.
So where did Hillary get $5 million? The media will certainly look into it, and the answer may not be politically palatable, even if everything is legally legit.
If Clinton is nominated, you can count on far more than $5 million in “independent” Republican spending reminding voters of every politically advantageous angle on this issue.
“They say you couldn’t stop me from spending all the money I’ve saved over the last five years on Hillary’s campaign if I wanted to, even though it would clearly violate the spirit of campaign finance reform.”
William Jefferson “Bill” Clinton, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, December 21, 2007
GBS: Ahhhh yes, you pick and choose. Since I was busy today I haven’t researched the “real” reasons for the “blocked vote” and you know I need to check it out.
How was that a poorly worded question? Here’s the original statement, so to which I asked my question: “That’s one of the many, many reasons an Clinton/Obama ticket is the natural choice for the Dems.”
Roundhouse right left jab right uppercut. Rocky is reeling backing up against the ropes…
I’ve decided to head to my caucus and will, more than likely, be rooting for Obama. Obama is smart as hell, the candidate most open too change (take a look at who HRC has on her campaign!) and might actually have a shot at bringing people together and rallying the public.
I’ve decided the best way to defeat the far right is to unite the other 75% of the country marginalize the right and forget about them. Obama is the guy to do that.
The candidates are too close together policy wise to argue much about it. Plus, what ever they do they have to sell it to the congress and the people and fit it in a budget.
seattle jew….you mean you really didn’t know about dino being half indian? well, well, well….goldy sure did. and he didn’t have even one bit of a problem supporting [and helping] a racist shrew steal an election from rossi.
she grew up, huh? no…she didn’t.
so…you didn’t know before, but now you do. what are you going to do about it?
me? i find her behavior [and that of the liberal enablers] personally disgusting. she not only WAS a racist….SHE STILL IS.
i remember very well one gay couple that i talked to at the state capitol during the “after theft” rallies. they said they were against rossi because he was too religious and hated gays. i asked where that info came from and one of the guys leaned in and said “i heard it from a guy that knows his neighbors”. seriously.when i asked him if perhaps there wouldn’t be one of his neighbors i could find that would say something completely untrue about him and his partner he actually said” oh! i didn’t think about it that way. BUT, this “guy” is very reliable” good god…….what tripe.the clintons have destroyed people’s confidence in politics working at all. and they did it so they could win. because, let’s face it, if bill were running for president today….he wouldn’t make it to the primaries.especially with the internet. too much info out there about what an appalling excuse for a human being he is.
and this, once again, is what i despise about the clintons. yup…even in a backwater like washington state their nasty clintonesque whisper campaigns were going on.
this has to stop.
GBS….cuban missile crisis when kennedy was too stoned and or “busy” to know what to do…there’s a start for you.
Richard remember the $100,000 she made through Terry McAuliffe? Maybe it was more….
@70
“the clintons have destroyed people’s confidence in politics working at all. and they did it so they could win. because, let’s face it, if bill were running for president today….he wouldn’t make it to the primaries.especially with the internet. too much info out there about what an appalling excuse for a human being he is.”
I think you’ve confused the Clinton’s with the Bush’s.
@70
“too much info out there about what an appalling excuse for a human being he is.”
What information? Please show it, don’t just state the claim, back it up.
GBS@63……they blocked the dems adding on more time to unemployment and more food stamps. yup…that’s all about the soldiers isn’t it? with unemployment so low, why do they need more time exactly?
this is just another “we will GIVE you things for nothing….but you have to vote for us or you won’t get any more treats” lib bribe….and it didn’t fly.
good try though.
like the spin some people put on what mccain said about there being other wars. of course there will be other wars eventually….it’s the nature of mankind. pay attention.
michael….really, there isn’t enough bandwidth to cover it all. where have you been? mars?
cattlegate [and as a rancher i really would have LOVED to be able to make the “profits” hillary did on cattle futures.cause you know,what she did was just impossible. legally anyway.]
travelgate
IRS records of her “enemies”….that she could peruse at any time. i don’t remember anyone electing her, but hey, she’s a clinton so she does what she wants.
ad nauseum……..
and my favorite?
“bimbo” eruptions….especially insulting because really what would any of you “progressives” call a man that took advantage of a young female employee while on the job and at work? [ i would call him FIRED and sued]
pretend it’s a republican..that way, maybe, just maybe you could tell the truth.
it’s not who is right, it’s what is right.
try following that………
@50 Xmas shades
First, Why Rossi’s ancestry affect my vote is a mystery to me.
Second. I have no ide what “half indian” means or what indian means in this context. Last tome I looked American indigenous people called themselves thinks like Lakota, Narragansett, etc. Is he registered as a Cherokee? Does he consider himself “indian.” And back to the top, since I have never heard this raised by anyone other than you, why is it relevant to Gregoire.
Second, There is a new word in our language .. it is a verb “to rove.” Karl Rove and his predecessor misuse politics in a scurrilous way not seen since Jefferson and Hamilton fought it out.
For all the trash talk, NOTHING any Democrat has don in this century comes close to the evil deeds of Nixon, Reagan, and the Bushes. Nixon should have been tried for treason and would have been if he was not pardoned. Reagan’s complicity with the Iranians came close to treason and his side kick went to jail for an act of treason with the Iran Contras. Reagan’s coalition was built of racists and bigots. The Bush;s .. the swiftboats, the charges vs. McCain of insanity and being oposed to cancer research, etc. etc. NOTHING on the Demo saide, even stuff i dislike, comes close.
For that matter, it iks not imaginable to me that a the Demo party would shelter the Clark Co, KKK.
Third, nothing you have said excuses Rossi form his comlicity with the Clark Co. KKK.
@69 Michael!
hands across the net! You have summarized Obamaism succinctly and beautifully! We are one.
What if Obama wins Washington’s caucus but Hillary wins Washington’s primary? Yeah, I know only the caucus counts, but what would that tell you about Obama’s ability to win in voting booths (as opposed to the party activists who show up at caucuses)? The November election is not a caucus. If he can’t win primaries, why believe he could win in November? Don’t get me wrong, I like Obama — he’s the most exciting candidate since RFK. But I’m a pragmatist, and I don’t want to live under a McCain presidency. And McCain will be a tough opponent, so we can’t afford to run our weakest candidate against him. Obama has to demonstrate he can win big-state primaries, and if he doesn’t, he shouldn’t be our nominee.
Roger Rabbit is still breathing tonight. Long live the rabbit king!
@76 If I had no other reason to vote for Hillary, I would vote for her simply because xmasghost hates her.
Puddybud @ 72
$100,000 isn’t a lot. Political folks can get far more than that for making just one speech.
But even if Hillary Clinton legitimately has $5 million of her own to spare, the fact that Bill Clinton has made $60 million or so since leaving office by virtue of having held the office will rub people the wrong way.
John McCain may have that kind of wealth, but he earned it the old-fashioned way — he married it!
Hey ghost! What do you think of Bush’s countless fuckups? You know, WMDS and Iraq and Katrina and botched terrorism investigations etc. What do you think of the train wreck that is McCain’s life? Graduated 894th of 899 from the Naval Academy, wrecked 2 Navy jets, destroyed his marriage by cheating on his severely disabled wife, the Keating Five scandal, all that? You seem pretty selective in your criticism. Nothing Hillary ever did is anywhere near as bad as what Republicans do, yet you never criticize Republicans. Why is that? Do you put party loyalty above love of country? Do you even love this country? Why do you hate America? What did she ever do to you to turn you into an America-hater? How long have you been this way? Were you a breech baby, or did your mother drop you?
Puddy
Please tell the nice people here that you are disabled and have trouble being .. well .. truthfull?
You know very well that our good friend Mr. Rossi is not “half indian.” He describes himself as “part Tlingit, part Irish, half Italian Catholic Republican from a conservative Democrat family” . Mr. Rossi grew up white but has visited Alaska to see relatives of his his mom who is is half Tlingit,of the Klawock and Ketchikan peoples. Being part Tlingit also makes him a Sealaska shareholder.
Now Puddy, go to your cat box and then I will ask the master if you can sleep in the laundry tonite.
NOW!!
@85
The 5 million is contributions to her pac before she declared. Fully legal.
Try again.
Roger .. did you see my analysis here?
I would be curous about your response to this effort at facts.
BTW. last night at DL, I was deeply offended. A newby came by an d we talked until it became clear he thought I was you! Taking advantage of the situation he donated $500 to my personl campaign to help Barack. shall I donate it in your name or mine?
Puddy,
You missed the box again. I thought the master got you fixed!
Damn you smell bad.
@83 You sir, are the very freakin’ last person who should be talking about anyone else having loyalty for party over loyalty for country.
The next good word I read from you for any Republican, will be the first, as will the next bad word for any Dim.
Puddy’s Dad Sylvestre said: Nothing Important because Dad was not Sylvestre or Sylvester, or Sly or anything close. Puddy’s dad died long ago…
Where did I say in #54 what the percentages were Seattle Jew? Come on, I’ll wait…
Yes, you did miss the box. I heard master taught you to sit when peeing. But don’t worry I have the PuddyScooper. I provides a facts foundation so the SeattleJew messes don’t stain the floor. It is also good for Pelletizer pellets, Dull Knife Rujax! diarrhea and Clueless Idiot BULLSHITTIUM.
Tick tock tick tock – Jeopardy Theme.
seattle jew……..you can’t read either? even this idiot gets it….although he then spins it as fast as he can…..
“Mr. Rossi grew up white but has visited Alaska to see relatives of his his mom who is is half Tlingit,of the Klawock and Ketchikan peoples.”
“grew up white”
that is the most racist comment on HA today.what does that even mean? does than mean that obama grew up a muslim too?or that he grew up white too?
now this is a classic SJ bullcrap:”First, Why Rossi’s ancestry affect my vote is a mystery to me.”
wow….and here i thought you were all about fairness and against racists.
you are so dishonest that you are going to sit there and say that you think it’s okay for a known racist [gregoire] to screw over someone who is a minority [he just doesn’t use it the way your candidate does]and that isn’t racist crap???
wow…i knew you were an idiot but i didn’t think you were this dishonest.
this shows everyone what a fool you are. you voted against someone that you KNEW ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT except for the letter after his name.wow…that’s really “progressive” of you!
phony thy name is seattlejew…………
I love how the Moonbat!s whip out WMDs. Even Russia, France and Germany thought Saddam had WMDs and they best buds.
Germany helped design and build the Saddam bunkers. France sold him weapons and bought his oil. Russia provided military know how, tanks helicopters, jets. All three thought he had WMD. All three didn’t use American intelligence. France even called for no UN war mandate so Hans Blix could destroy more weapons after Hans tol dthe UN Saddam was stalling…
Look all this up leftist pinheads. It’s all in the UN Records. Puddy read them. Why do you all like to drink from the clueless idiot warm white sticky kool-aid fountain?
So for the Pelletizers, correctnotrights, rhp6033s, headless lucy’s 15 other personalities, cluesless idiots, dull knife rujax!’s, etc. do some homework before you leave more BULLSHITTIUM that Puddy will call you on!
roger@83…my family helped found this country you johnny come lately…….
what have you done? what has your family done? did they take that desperately risky trip on the mayflower? did they risk everything to survive? did they then risk and lose everything to fight the revolution to make us a free country?
have they fought in every single war?
have you even payed taxes you mooch?
no?
i doubt that you have ever done anything for anyone other than yourself. you and goldy…what a pair.
and I-BURN @88………no kidding…..very accurate assessment.thanks.
puddy…….saddam did have WMD’s…ask the kurds.
only these rusty tools would think otherwise. they haven’t done anything, or been anywhere.but they know it all.
where oh where is that idiot YLB just when we need another NUT to make this “set” complete?
i’m sure he thinks 9/11 was an inside job by the jews too…….shoot, at this point i am pretty sure that extremely dull knife seattle jew thinks that at this point……
god knows, he’s a transparent fool.
here’s one for you seattle jew: WWOT????
if you get to meet your hero be sure to tell him that you voted for a racist against a minority and then you tried to excuse it away by saying that “sh*t happens” and “big deal…why should i care?”
gee….i wonder what he would say?
be sure to point out that you waste tax dollars and research time every single day by posting instead of working and that reproducible data is just a silly ‘idea’ in your book.
i take it you are not attending the conference?
SJ..i was really hoping that you would be attending the conference, there are a couple of people that would love to meet you…….they are very interested in your stance on BIG PHARMA and research.very very interested…….heh heh heh……
@48
This is from WaPo, obtained via a Google search. It also says he identifies as ‘white’. In any case, your claim is incorrect – he is only a quarter Tlingit, not half.
So are all the right-wing tools who post here liars? And they lie about things that are so easily fact-checked. I guess that makes them stupid, too.
Tlazolteotl …….liars huh? well, if that’s what you want to call it.i would say the real lie is with goldy and others who KNOWINGLY supported a racist in her campaign to further put down a minority candidate. not surprising since you support the group of “people” that vote for people based solely on what letter is after their name.
appropriate that the letter in question is a big D…..for dumb.
I just signed up to attend a free Stand for Change Rally with Barack Obama in Seattle this Friday, February 8th.
You can RSVP here:
http://wa.barackobama.com/seattle
I thought you might want to come. Here are the details:
Stand for Change Rally with Barack Obama
Key Arena
305 Harrison Street
Seattle, WA 98109
Friday, February 8
Doors Open: 11:00 a.m.
Puddy’s Dad Sylvestre @ 85
It was Hillary Clinton’s own money, based on her own statements:
And in a quick update, her campaign has just confirmed that she’d already lent her coffers $5 million of her own money in late January. A just-issued statement from her camp:
“The loan illustrates Senator Clinton’s commitment to this effort and to ensuring that our campaign has the resources it needs to compete and win across this nation. We have had one of our best fundraising efforts ever on the Web today and our Super Tuesday victories will only help in bringing more support for her candidacy.”
More Updates: At her news conference this afternoon, Senator Clinton acknowledged the loan, saying: “I loaned the campaign $5 million from my money. That’s where I got the money. I did it because I believe very strongly in this campaign, and we had a great month fund-raising in January, broke all our records, but my opponent was able to raise more money and we intended to be competitive – and we were – and I think the results last night proved the wisdom of my investment.”
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.....tner=MYWAY
@49 X ghost
You can find it easily by Googling. The Reprican County Org published a foul set of charges about Obama. When enough people yelled, they were taken down. Then they went back up because others yelled that the Res were hiding their dim duty.
The key issue that so9me nazi wannabe posted this on an offic8ial web site. Whoever that is is being protected.
90 ghost
You seem confused.
1. I think of “white” as a culture and as an identity some folks have. I know people who are proud of that identity. fine by me.
As for how I voted., sorry X-ghost but I voted for Rossi because of the way Gregoire treated his religion.
2. I am still confused. Why would knowing that Rossi’s grandparent was Tlingit influence my vote? Do you think I should vote for him because he has an ancestor who was Tlingit?
@99 confused
I heard the same thing. I thought th9is was the money she had form the pac but it seems as if her campaign has run ut of those $$ too.
The scary thing hre is how did she get 5 million to loan herself? Obviously not on her official salary and suposedly the couple were broke when they left DC.
Bill makes a lot of $$$. But I understand NY is not a community property state. So did he gift the money to her?
Q93 Ghastly X
1. I do nhot know what conference yiou mean.
2. FWIW, the nature of my work is not 8-5. My busiest tme usually is actually from 10pm to 2 am when I study.
3. Of course science requires reproducibility .. unlike religion.
4. I am not sure what you beef is with science, you are welcome to expand.
5. I also do not understand what you are trying to say about Rossi. As I said many times here, I am NOT a fan of CG and voted for DR last time. As far as his Tinglit ancestry, I have absolutely no idea what this ir is not relevant to. has there been a lot of discrimination against Tlingit people?
@92 so you are a DAR? SAR?
I am a bit confused though, somehow you do not come across as an SAR. Who was your Mayflower ancestor? Or is this more cat pooh.
An interesting head to head breakdown of Washington voters:
http://www.surveyusa.com/clien.....cbc6a0295f
Obama far more electable…here anyway. ;0
Dustin: “Again, my candidate was fooled by the fabricated evidence”
Correct. Hillary was dead wrong on the most important vote of her political career, and she was wrong for two reasons: She did not even take the time to look at the evidence, and she made a decision in the typical Clintonian fashion of looking at the polls, figuring out what was popular at the time, then casting her vote based on what polls well.
And regarding Obama’s “present” votes, you know very well that the Illinois legislature works that way, and it is very common to vote “present” when a lawmaker had a minor problem with the bill or objected to certain language. Obama has explained how this works, Illinois lawmakers have defended him and explained how it works, but that does not matter to the Clinton/Rove political machine. Hillary cares about one thing: Obtaining power and getting back at the Republicans.
She will throw her gay supporters under the bus just like her husband did and not think twice about it. She can’t even admit that her vote to go to war was a mistake for crying out loud. How can you back for someone that has demonstrated such a poor lack of judgement?
And if you want to talk about electability, let’s talk about the documentary that will be released on Hillary by the swiftboaters if she gets the nomination. Lets talk about the list of bimbos that Bill has accumulated over the last 7 years that will be dragged out. Let’s talk about all the other scandals that come with the Clintons. She won’t get elected and will do more to mobilize the Republican base than any person out there.
Obama has been vetted by the Clinton slime machine for a year now and they have nothing on him.
If you want a change from constant political polarization, caucus for Obama on Saturday.
@106 James
I am a fervent Obamite but let me point ot that our campaign has avoided mud. In that spirit, most of the scandals you ascribe to the Clintons were BS. Even if we think sex is a public sport, she seemingly has bee chaste enough to be left out of the fun.
seattle jew @ 100,101, 103 and 104…
The key issue that so9me nazi wannabe posted this on an offic8ial web site. Whoever that is is being protected.
so, is this just another rumor?
“Do you think I should vote for him because he has an ancestor who was Tlingit?”
no, i don’t. but i think you SHOULD vote against anyone that is a known racist and who has stomped all over his rights to get where she is now……
the symposium is :The 8th Csaba Horváth Medal Award
Symposium ² taking place from April 14 15, 2008 in
Innsbruck/Austria. The
symposium will be jointly organized by the Horváth Laboratory of
Bioseparation Sciences (HLBS) at the Leopold Franzens University in
Innsbruck and the Connecticut Separation Science Council (CSSC), USA.” ……just wondered if you were going to be there….
and i am DAR….hopkins family.
and, i obviously have nothing against science. was that a typo on your part? do you not know what i do for a living?
A full explanation of the evil *present* votes:
http://blogs.chicagotribune.co.....ent-o.html
“Anyone who says that a `present’ vote necessarily reflects that someone is ducking an issue doesn’t understand the first thing about legislative strategy,” said Pam Sutherland, Planned Parenthood’s chief lobbyist in Springfield. “People who work down here and know how things get done are hearing these accusations and saying, `huh?'”
The article goes in complete depth, but the above paragraph summarizes the whole kerfuffle very well.
Imagine going to the fella’s hometown newspaper to get the real scoop on his doings…
ChristmasGhost: SeattleJew is a donkey. Donkey are not noted for long memories. SeattleJew probably don’t know what rank your husband achieved in what military service. But then again, he may have been missing from this blog when you told all. But Puddy remembers. Pertinent facts are always in the PuddyBrain.
Oh ChristmasGhost I forgot to ask, how are your 15 children doing?
:)
puddy……..well, three of them are just doing peachy. two chemists and a physicist……..however i seem to have lost track of the other 13.
oh crap……what now?