Bloomberg has an intriguing theory regarding the split in votes between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in the OH and TX primaries — let’s call it "the Archie Bunker divide."
The white, blue-collar voters personified by the 1970s fictional television character cost Obama yesterday. His Democratic presidential rival, Senator Hillary Clinton of New York, beat him 54 percent to 44 percent in industrial Ohio, and 58 percent to 40 percent in heavily Catholic Rhode Island.
In Ohio’s 10th district of Cuyahoga County, a suburban enclave on Cleveland’s west side that includes a large population of Polish-Americans, Clinton trounced Obama 61 percent to 37 percent, according to exit polls. In the state’s Belmont County, an economically depressed Appalachian border area that is predominantly white, she had a 50-point lead over Obama, the first black candidate to have a shot at the White House.
"Race played a significant factor in Ohio,” said Cuyahoga County Commissioner Timothy Hagan, who supported Obama. "These people are not necessarily bigots, but the image they see every day of black America is drugs, crime, guns and violence.”….
The challenges he faces with these groups are evident in his hometown of Chicago, where voters know him and he is popular. Still, he faces resistance in working-class, white ethnic neighborhoods.
“I can’t support him,” said Richard Dorsch, a 53-year-old paramedic fire chief from Chicago’s Edison Park. Dorsch, who said his kids liken him to Archie Bunker, voted for Clinton in the primary, though he plans to support Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona if Obama wins the nomination.
“When he talks to you, it’s like he’s talking down to you,” Dorsch said. “He doesn’t have the experience to talk like that.”
Dorsch’s 41st Ward, which gave Clinton, 60, a six- percentage-point advantage, is 90 percent white, dominated by German, Polish and Irish ethnic police officers, teachers and city workers.
Living as I do in the hills of WV, I have heard this sort of talk from a lot of folks — both about not feeling comfortable casting a vote for Obama or for Clinton, on race or gender grounds. But it isn’t limited to the Archie Bunkers of the world, because there are a whole lot of Ediths in the racial and gender discrimination closet as well. You can see from the "These people are not necessarily bigots, but the image they see every day of black America is drugs, crime, guns and violence.” that a lot more discussion and education on this is sorely needed. (No siree, no bigotry there. Sheesh.)
Pam Spaulding, who has been writing about this issue quite a bit this election cycle, provides a perfect example of an "Archie Bunker" that isn’t reachable. But he is illustrative of the sort of education and bigotry issues we will all face as we head toward November, whether Clinton or Obama is our nominee.
Where people have researched the candidates and can have a broader discussion about specifics, the gender and color questions fade in light of particular pet issues. At least, that’s proved true when I’ve talked about this with folks here. But I always get the feeling that, for a lot of them, there is still a bit of a comfort question and that the person who looks like a traditional presidential choice for them is…McCain.
No matter who the Dem nominee may be, we are going to have a lot of work to do.
Both Democratic candidates ought to stop flinging poo at each other via the surrogate blather networks, and start thinking about building up their own images instead. If these traditional blue collar democratic-leaning voters don’t have a solid feel for what the Democratic presidential nominee stands for, how hard the candidate is willing to fight to solve their problems, for the things that matter to their families, for the kitchen table worries and the fear of job loss and health problems and no insurance and rising energy costs and on and on that are hitting Americans square in the gut? Then the Archie Bunker problem is going to be a whole lot bigger than just this one segment of the electorate.
People want change. Absolutely. But they need to know what "change" means for them — what are we changing to? What are the goals toward which we all ought to work together? How do we get there? And how do we make it crystal clear that a vote for McCain is a vote for even more Bush/Cheney purgatory for all of us?
These issues are going to cut across voter groups larger than just the Archie Bunker segment of the population. And they need to be hit now…not later.
It doesn’t help that the racial and gender tensions of the Archie Bunkers of the world keep getting egged on and exacerbated by foot-in-mouth surrogates with both campaigns. Here’s an idea — how about we all start trying to lift one another upward and talk about the things we ought to be doing instead of just lobbing pies and insults back and forth? Both campaigns could start by taking a peek at this article from Kavita Ramdas in The Nation, and adding their voices to the conversation. It sure would be a helluva lot more constructive than "neener, neener, neener" or any number of other stupid things that have come oozing out lately.
Ah, well, a girl can dream…
Related posts:
- Election 2009: Election Night Thread #1; Polls Now Closed in VA
- Memo to Jay Cost: Obama Won a Larger Percentage of the Popular Vote in 2008 than Reagan in 1980
- Election 2009: What Happened in Virginia?
- Does Obama’s 2008 Campaign Have a Lesson for Saving Healthcare Reform?
- Citizens United Case Underlines Court’s Deep Ideological Divide
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
hi christy
You’re an optimist, Christie. So am I, but I’m not holding my breath waiting for any candidate’s campaign to start acting logically.
Doesn’t much surprise concerning the overcoming race attitudes.
“…drugs, crime, guns and violence.”
I thought he was describing U.S. policy in Iraq and Afghanistan.
No surprises here, wish there were.
It’s sad that these attitudes still exist.
He’s not talking down to you, he’s talking TO you. It shouldn’t freak anyone out to have a discussion with a smart, black man.
Sorry, nothing constructive to add. I’m frustrated with this election and need to turn off the tv.
Ya know, to be honest, if you’re a white man in this country and you’re still not prepared to vote for either a black man or a woman, you’re a certifiable idiot, nutjob and an asshole who doesn’t deserve what this nation offers, so get the hell out of my country.
How the fuck do you get “prepared” to vote for anyone? Are these exemplars of white male virtue putting themselves through horrendous torture to better prepare to vote for McCain? Are they making shady deals with big money donors? Are they gleefully accepting the endorsements of crackpot preachers? Really, what the fuck are they doing to “prepare”?
The economy will be the good news/bad news joke for the Democrats. The bad news is that the economy will be much worse: the good news is that the bad news will favor the Democratic candidate.
Open racism is generally unacceptable now (unlike when I grew up) but will show itself with the “acceptable” “anti-Muslim speak.” MSM shows that misogyny is still very “acceptable”. I suspect that among people who would consider voting for a Democratic party candidate, misogyny is probably more of a factor. It was much different when the racists were Democrats..thank you LBJ.
The one good thing about getting this “Archie Bunker problem” out in the open now is that I’m much happier confronting it during a year when the Republican candidate wants to privatize Social Security and stay in Iraq for 100 years.
Come November, anyone who is running against McBush gets my vote. In the meantime, I’m an interested observor. I already voted in the primary (for Edwards) and I guess the convention will decide who I vote for next. I am at peace with that.
I agree..
Hey Christy!
McCain “looks like a traditional presidential choice” because he is. He’s a White Male and that’s what all the viable Presidential choices have been in this country since 1788 or so.
People are seeing history of a new sort and they don’t know how to respond.
Perhaps with a little more effort my party, the Democratic Party, can help elect John McCain. I’m disgusted.
Racism is alive, doing quite well, and confined all over the place.
Nice ta see McBush giving President Clusterfuck a public blowjob yesterday….seemed a little hesitant though- as if he hadn’t brought mouthwash.
Democrats need to inspire and register many, many more currently disenfranchised voters for this election: the young; single women; people of color; working folks. We must expand the electorate and give the voiceless a vote for change.
It’s the only way to overcome the latent, unspoken bigotry and sexism that’s ingrained in too many Americans. They, unfortunately, will have to see a successful woman or black President before they will believe it possible. It’s up to us to make that happen before their eyes, and against difficult but surmountable odds.
So let’s stop listening to the verbal jabs at our own candidates and demand they both show us their best GOTV and anti-McCain campaign, starting today~!
Obama and Clinton, let’s see your general election campaign right now. Show us what you’ve got against St John — we’ll sure help, here in the blogosphere, but you need to craft and hone your anti-McCain messages and speeches starting right now.
Show us how you’ll defeat him, and let the remaining Democratic voters pick the candidate who does that the best. We don’t need to see any more criticism of one of you by the other. That we understand, and really don’t like. Give us your best shot against Bush/McCain.
Whatcha got?
And it is true with all cultures. The “genius” of Lee Atwater and later Karl Rove was to have a political message that “pushed” those buttons and induced people to vote against their self interest. That worked out real well for the Reagan Democrats in the Upper mid-West.
I was not at peace on Tuesday night. Was a bit surprised because I’d decided to support Clinton if she is the nominee, in spite of her connections to Wall and K Streets, and in spite of Penn and Wolfson. For the first time, on Tuesday night my gut was flip-flopping. So I don’t know now what I’m going to do.
Just ask your white pals (liberals or not) (Republicans or Democrats) if they would be comfortable with their kids marrying a person of color.
hi christy
I’ve said from the start, if we were to give the republicans a chance it would be by mobilizing their base, we are doing just that by fielding candidates that they hate
if there were ever an election we might have a women or a black man elected to office, this is the one
but man, what we are risking is the very existance of this country if we fail
ah me, so torn
Things like this remind me of the “hard hats” for Nixon many years ago.
You and me both, brother
The only way that goopers win big out of the ongoing dem primary is if dems turn the primary in Armagendon as if one of the candidates was the annointed saint and the other the devil incarnate…Sadly- this is happening.
I hear more than a few of my local Democratic women friends telling me they don’t think that the country is ‘quite ready’ for a lady president. Blows me out.
I keep reading the candidates position statements- and other than a relatively minor disagreement about health care- THEY ARE THE SAME. There is no rational reason to expect a signficantly different govt. out of either of em.
“You’ve come a long way baby”. This head up the ass, I’m proud to be an ‘meracan stupidity elected Bush and may elect McBush. As a nation I guess we get what we sow: Bigoted, under educated, reactionary electorate and increasingly arrogant and corrupt politicians.
I want a President, not a Commander In Chief. I would be much happier if Clinton and Obama would try to out “President” each other instead of the phony ‘red phone’ business.
and my father is absolutely convinced american will not vote for a black man
Amen Christy,
Inspiration (aspirational) politics.
Unfortunately it doesnt sell newspapers or retain eyeballs.
I’m so despirited watching the Dems from both camps (including my own mother for cripes sake) act like this. I’ve never seen anything like it, and pray it doesnt kill our chances.
Regardless of the rather tasteless “3 AM ad”, we will vote, in this house, for the Democratic nominee. To rid ourselves of the Republicans and to defeat McCain remain our primary objectives. And of course we feel the Dems will bring much needed relief to the nation and the world.
The old “Edith, stifle yourself” is alive and well. Makes me sick. Here we are in 2008 and people still think it’s okay to be against an AA and a woman. Please, could we just grow up.
Bloomberg has a theory … Yeah, right!
Like Bloomers doesn’t have a dog in this hunt.
Any real or imagined differences between Hillary and Obama are trivial compared to the disaster that four years of a McCain Presidency would be for this country. I am 64 years old and I never though that I would live to see what the Republican Party has done to this country. I thought Edwards probably had the best message to win in ‘08 mostly because the economy would be in obvious trouble by Nov. But as Russ Feingold pointed out,
Edwards was not a paragon of Progressivism either. IMO, most of the “my candidate is great, yours is shit” is projection by the supporter and is not based on reality.
This divide is the reason the northern cities burned in the mid 60’s.
The Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act had no effect in the north,
where working class, blue and white collar, and mostly Catholic voters
walked away from the Democratic Party… there was no reconstruction
in the north, racism was supposedly a southern problem. Listen to the
racist under/overtone of the Tweety set, the Murdoch crowd, and talk
radio banzai types… it is mostly race most of the time and the Republicans built a political party on it and no one has called them out on
it to any extent… they are the establishment now… that is what most of
the buzz about “liberal judges” and “law and order” is… race code…
mandatory minimums, three strikes, no knock searches, profiling all brought
to you by that nice white peoples party the Republicans. This country has
already disgraced itself abroad, watch it disgrace itself at home this fall.
Obama has run one of the most positive and issues-oriented campaigns I can ever remember seeing at this level. He has been the whole time. Responding strongly to Wolfson, Penn, Clinton attacks that often have no basis in fact does not count a poo-flinging IMO.
We’ve all spent years bemoaning dirty politics, and when we have a candidate at this stage who is actually doing things differently, so many around here are still lumping them all together as “they all suck” or “I sick of them all..” etc.
Obama is clearly living and breathing a new era of politics that most of us have said we wanted.
Obama is half white as probably most of us know. I wonder how, if at all, this fact figures into things?
I’ll be glad for a moderate this time around over Insane McCain. He’s already tied to Bush, now’s the time to throw the book at BushCo so voter will see the real choice.
My lady and I are hoping Obama becomes the next president.
I fear that this election, at the Presidential level, will NOT be about the issues. My sense is that, relatively speaking, few people care about issues when voting for President.
No, this election is all about symbolism-the President as figurehead-who’s gonna make us feel better about ourselves, an old white guy, a handsome black man, or a competent professional woman? I just don’t know. I think unforeseen events between now and November will determine most people’s final decision.
I am sure it helps kiddo, I am also hoping he has energized more new voters then his race will alienate
that looks like it could be the case
It bothers the bigots a lot.
Interesting isn’t it. Or ask Hindu Indian or a Japanese or a whatever. My great niece is Afro-Euro and has interesting perspectives on the subject.
Ding.
When you are half white, and 1/2 yellow, brown, black or red, life can be sometimes particularly tough. In this house we admire Senator Obama.
Sadly, I think the bad economy brings out the worst in people. Too much competition for the few jobs that are left. It will take optimism and hope, for sure, but it will also take putting this recession totally in the hands of republicans — outsourcing, privatizing (more outsourcing) and the rich not paying their fair share.
Obama is the antidote to the poison. The young voters are really serious
about this, the only solution is an electoral tsunami to flush the
Congress of the remnants of Goldwater/Reagan/Bush racism. I hope we can
stick together long enough to gives this once in a lifetime opportunity
a chance, the Republican game is bankrupt, we have to kick their ass now.
It is very exciting to see young people so excited about a candidate.
A new New Deal for starters, help across the board for the victims of the
destruction of the economy in the name of investment banking. There
must be a modified capitalist model that can be more fair and restore
public confidence so that race cannot be blamed for the shortage of jobs.
First off most of these types left for the repugs long ago. The guy above only voted for Sen. Clinton to stop Sen. Obama in the first place.
No way significant numbers of people like that are voting for HRC in the fall.
Which brings me to this nonsense of open primaries. It may not violate the law, but it sure violates the spirit of what voting is about.
Rush’s knuckleheads skewed the results in Ohio. Sen. Clinton probably would’ve won anyway, but it would’ve been much closer.
Wingjob radio was ordering their minions to vote for her to stop his momentum. And it says much about her campaign’s level of desperation that Bill Clinton would court this nonsense by going on his show, whether he was there or not.
If a white person told me they were voting for Clinton because she is white, I would consider that reprehensible and call them out on it.
Somewhat illogically, if a blck person told me they were voting for Obama because he is black, I would let it pass.
So, I would go after Archie Bunker, but would give George Jefferson a pass. Sometimes, I confuse myself.
A small fragment of a poem that my 15 yo g. niece wrote for Black History month..that speaks to that..
That is what gets me about Big Dog, the Clinton haters in Arkansas were
the Faubus democrats who Little Rock 1957 made famous. Ambition must be
the culprit.
In Alaska we have Diane Benson, a half-Tlingit/half-Norwegian woman who took on an addled white male GOP crook – Don Young -in 2006. She did well enough to encourage two Democratic Party old school white male attorney apparatchiks to take her on in the Dem primary to take on Young again.
The political establishment on both sides here probably disses her less for being half Tlingit and a woman than for being an outsider, running against the Dem machine.
OT – more corruption arrests coming today and/or tomorrow. There will be at least one HUGE surprise.
Lush’s site yesterday replaced the large Vote Hillary button with her logo, with a Photoshopped photo of her today with the words, “We Got What We Wanted: Chaos….Dem Bloodletting Continues.”
One of the Murkowskis or Begich?
((( ET ))) … can I get that link to your blog ?
Thanks much !
I await with bated breath, ET! ;-)
Dood, click on his name…! *g*
There are tons of Archies in this country that is for sure, but I think far less than 20 years ago. The country has come a long way, and the youth is a major factor. If the Archies were going to be such a huge factor, McCain would have gotten a lot more votes in the primaries…he didn’t. I think a big risk is that if either Obama or HRC is not on the ticket in whichever order the voters choose, those loyal to either one will either not vote, or possibly vote for McCain. So, in my opinion, in order to beat McCain, the dream ticket is probably the best way to go. Anything else risks a McBush win.
LOL … thanks Buddy !
Ridiculous trivialization of Hillary supporters. Does Archie Bunker represent Latinos or Asians who voted overwhelmingly for her? And what of Obama’s >80% support from African Americans? Is that the George Jefferson factor?
Kiddo,
While in the military, being around folks of all races and religions was the norm, now I live in a Caucasian area with a few Indians and Asians. The contrasts are stunning. When I visit the air base the multicultural-ness of it seems normal, but where my home is an African-American looks out of place. I do think racism and sexism are more involved in this process then we want to believe they are. The guys that work for us know not to use certain phrases around my husband anymore, because he will call them on it. I was stunned when my husband said what a rock protruding up in the middle of a logging road is called. I won’t repeat it here.
The good news is we are starting to have the discussion, so hopefully some improvement will follow.
Whatever it takes, the country is at stake, make no mistake.
Here in the Isles, there is a large undercurrent of racism, each of the ethnicities have their own ‘pet peeves’… But, the melting pot tends to obscure it…! 8-)
Under advice from my Samoan attorney, who is sober for a change, I can only say one or MORE ex-governors, one a Dem.
Click on Edward Teller to go to my place.
OT..Oh shit!!!
CNN
The Shadow Government was out to neutralize Edwards from the beginning.
Why do you think Obama appeared out of the blue … loaded with money?
The MSM vanished both Edwards and Ron Paul. Obama is next.
I think the Archie Bunker image is rrestricted to the industrial north,
not so much the southwest, although Catholic older women nationwide
favor HRC 2 to 1.
See, there ya go stereotyping…! *g*
Sounds interesting! ;-0
Can’t vote for a black, can’t vote for a woman…
The only way out of this nonsense is a joint ticket. We should all sink or swim together.
Together I believe we’d swim. Apart, I’m afraid we could sink.
With one, without the other it’d like this for the next 50 years: “we can never nominate another xxxxx, rememeber what happened in ‘08?”
Besides Archie Bunker archetype would vote for John McCain. And quite possibly an African American male well before he would vote for a woman.
Many know precisely how to respond. Keep their biases closeted until they are in the voting booth. Then vote those biases. That is the basis for the misogyny, and scary brown people memes that are currently out there and getting amplified.
Has anyone put numbers on the Rush Limbaugh factor?
Well GW Clusterfuck can still point at the economy- right?
On the day he came into office, the DJIA was at 10,588
Today, over seven years later- it’s at 12,052
So the Harvard MBA has grown the value of the market by under 2% per year during his time in office, BEFORE adjusting for inflation….
McBush promises the same policies.
Yeah, and the surge is working…2 huge explosions in Baghdad…a whole bunch of people killed…and injured..
I wonder what it is in the human mind that causes us to feel “better than” someone? It seems that every group needs this but I can’t understand why. If I’m doing okay, why is it not okay for someone else to be doing okay?
i read that 8-10 percent were Repugs voting for Hillary because Rush said to.
Why would Bill go on that show? I dont get it.
GW Clusterfuck administration complaining that the media isn’t paying attention to Iraq- and the surge.
Has anyone put numbers on the Rush Limbaugh factor?
Yeah, 8% of Hillary’s vote.
kiddo at 19-”
Just ask your white pals (liberals or not) (Republicans or Democrats) if they would be comfortable with their kids marrying a person of color.”
kiddo, just as i was getting ready to comment, i saw your comment…so, i’m changing what i was gonna say….yeaaaaaars ago, late 70’s,my mom and i were out on the deck, and she genteeeely broached the subject with me……that if i didn’t know it already, that it was ok with her and my dad if i decided to marry outside my race……i had a friend who was black, and they thought we were just acting ’as friends’ when around them…….nope, we were just friends..still are…..i was lucky to grow up in a socially/economically diverse way. my folks are great, so were my grandparents.
my sister’s first boyfriend in the 6th grade was black, they used to talk through the living room window for hours, with mom and dad right there watching tv or not…….we had to come in when the streetlights came on, and he was allowed out……they could have talked on the phone, but it was more fun laughing and talking in person. we used to pass him snacks and stuff through the window……what a hoot.
================
sttp at 49–”Rush’s knuckleheads skewed the results in Ohio. Sen. Clinton probably would’ve won anyway, but it would’ve been much closer.”
senator clinton won in all but 5 counties in ohio…….there are 88……..the claims of nafta messup, rush, and racism can’t cover that i don’t think.
“Obama has run one of the most positive and issues-oriented campaigns I can ever remember seeing at this level. He has been the whole time. Responding strongly to Wolfson, Penn, Clinton attacks that often have no basis in fact does not count a poo-flinging IMO.
We’ve all spent years bemoaning dirty politics, and when we have a candidate at this stage who is actually doing things differently, so many around here are still lumping them all together as “they all suck” or “I sick of them all..” etc.
Obama is clearly living and breathing a new era of politics that most of us have said we wanted.”
I agree.
This reminds me of the same MSM “balance both sides of the story” crap that so many here have (rightfully) railed against for years.
Sen. Obama’s campaign (like him on the issues or not) has been refreshingly absent of negative bs; so much so the talking heads are all suggesting how he’s got to now “get down and dirty” with her and “hit back.”
Nonsense.
He’s just got to keep on doing what he’s been doing- bringing more young people into politics by appealing to their hopes and better selves, and increase that delegate lead.
I think that I read somewhere that Obama got more of the crossover Republican vote in Texas than Hillary, which would indicate that Limbaugh wasn’t much of a factor.
The Rush factor:
Two weeks ago he was telling his audience to vote for Obama. A week ago he switched and joined Laura Ingraham in suggesting Repubs vote for Clinton. The local Central tx DJs were advocating voting for Obama.
The exit polls: 9% of Republicans voted for a Democrat.
Obama received 53% of their vote and Clinton got 47%.
It’s a riff on HST, who used the attorney’s uncle.
“Under advice from my Samoan attorney, who is sober for a change…”
Dr. Gonzo, I presume..?
The American myth of rugged individualism with it’s roots in the
completely government subsidized west is a good starting point.
Reagan bitching about welfare Cadillacs and welfare queens was a
marketing strategy that played to that myth.
I think Obama’s been getting the bulk of the gooper crossover vote for some months now.
My NW side Chicago city worker says the country is “not ready for a black President”
He is a pretty open individual, so I am not certain how much is him, and how much is perception.
But he has a better first-hand take on the Archie Bunkers than I.
I believe vanity, or several other, of the seven deadly sins, would come into play…! ;-)
Nice…good work Hillary and I guess Rush is crowing. Just what we want in our primaries…not
What about what they did to Mike Gravel? and why are you trying to marginalize the best candidate? [/snarkypoo]
Hmmm. Looks like it’s a good thing for your state that Tony and Frank both lost in ‘06.
by PA Rush should have his base whipped up to a lather. Hillary will win.
Heh, I must’ve forgotten to tag it with the obligatory ‘/TS’…! My Bad! *g*
Perhaps vanity. I have never understood what this is about. I have read that lighter-skinned AAs are considered “better” than darker-skinned even in the AA community. That simply amazes me.
I believe that Pennsylvania does not allow crossover voting.
Explaining Hillary’s wins by invoking Rush makes about as much sense as attributing them to the actions of a mood ring.
Sadly, the level of bigotry and ignorance in America is epidemic. I find that even when I speak to well educated upper middle class people in my community, they have little political or historical knowledge whatsoever. Many of the ones that know anything about politics merely repeat the salacious rumors and GOP talking points spewed by FOX and Rush. It is astounding to me that otherwise sensible people know and care so little our their country and the world they are handing their children and grandchildren. Arrogance and ignorance abound.
Yes, he does. There’s a GIANT difference though about his numbers.
Obama gets crossover votes because people LIKE HIM. Hillary’s crossover is largely to throw a wrench in our primaries and suck up money and energy.
It’s not just Limpdick’s show. I’ve heard this from people I know that work on campaigns around the country, where word has been out for weeks now in Repub circles to get people to vote for Hillary when possible.
A local TV station did their own exit polling on video and almost 50% of the Hillary voters were laughing and saying they were encouraged to do this by the local Repub Party. There wasn’t one single one that voted for Obama for this reason. This was weeks ago and before Lush started his deal.
Hillary staying in now is hurting us tremendously for Nov.
Ironically, as a former Harvard Law Review editor, I admire his rejection of top elite Law Firms in either DC or NYC, to work in the southside of Chicago…!
I have noticed prolonged teevee discussions about “why did Hillary win?” They attribute her victories to:
her teevee ad
Obama slipping
Obama not having his hand over his heart
etc.
None of em pick the obvious explanation—-these were her states with her demographics- they had been polling in her direction from the beginning and voted as expected. In other words- there’s NOTHING TO EXPLAIN!!!
Racism is worse than sexism, perhaps. Our Governor, Sarah Palin, announced yesterday afternoon that she’s 7 months pregnant. The newspaper blogs and right-wing radio are screaming for her to resign because “she can no longer do her job!”
The old saw that a pregnant woman is “ill” – strange.
Knocked up gov eh? Who will answer the calls at 3am?
There is a vast demographic difference between the NW and SW sides of Chicago.
And yes, I admire that decision as well.
I have a great respect for the do-gooders of this world.
“I think that I read somewhere that Obama got more of the crossover Republican vote in Texas than Hillary, which would indicate that Limbaugh wasn’t much of a factor.”
There is “good” crossover and “bad” crossover.
Good crossover happens when a rethug is fed up with BushCo. and sees the light. This person is voting for someone they will likely vote for again in November, be it Sen. Clinton or Sen. Obama.
Bad crossover is the Rush & Laura Ingraham kind; voting to disrupt your opponents primary.
I can’t speak to Texas, but trust me, Sen. Clinton benefited from a lot of bad crossover here.
I think it kinda says something on the powers of observation of the reporters and such if she is just now announcing her pregnancy at 7 months…
What happened to IOKIYAR? That’s a travesty, on many levels across the repug spectrum…!
Senator Obama raised $55,000,000 last month. Somebody likes him. We in our home do.
Yeah—of course it’s winter in Alaska–maybe she’s been wearing a BIG COAT!
She will since she’ll already be up…for hours before…and hours after…
(yes, we have a baby in the house….Zzzzzz)
Yeah- that’s what I was thinking about—
WOW!
“Obama gets crossover votes because people LIKE HIM. Hillary’s crossover is largely to throw a wrench in our primaries and suck up money and energy.”
Is this a FACT or just your OPINION?
Because I know some Republican women for Hillary. And even a Republican man voting for her.
You’ve got the 2 am feeding followed by the 3 am incoming nukes call—
BTW, we seem to have won a brief retrieve on FISA…
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories…..0944.shtml
I’m for Hillary.
She had proved one helluva fighter.
ctuttle at 99 says-”
Ironically, as a former Harvard Law Review editor, I admire his rejection of top elite Law Firms in either DC or NYC, to work in the southside of Chicago…!”
i used to say that, too, a long while ago, year ago when i was first looking at the candidates, until my smart mom pointed out that-if you want to go into politics, that’s EXACTLY what you do. i told her good point.
later
707!
I have been told by my lady and friends and other family members that I can take a lot of pain. But the discomfort of having a baby scares me to death. I don’t know how wommen do it. Seriously.
At least three more supers chose Obama today from VT, NV, and WV (Rep. Nick Rahall). That’s at least 6 since Tues, and at least 10 this week. Seems he hasn’t lost any momentum, no matter how hard the BigMedia tries to drag this thing on to make ad money and ratings.
Hillary hasn’t done much fighting in Iraq. Has she. Since the 3 AM ad, the gloves are off Senator.
I have said this before; maybe it’s spoiled grapes but there is evidence that deep set perceptions could lead to either a GOP Pres. Win or a contest too close for the GOP to not steal.
I was an Edwards man all the way. I liked his message; His history and the fact that he had already been through a pres. campaign. He is good looking articulate and smart. Aside from that in my heart I felt that America was still not quite ready for a woman or African American president. It was always obvious to me that McCain would be the nominee. I was surprised so many loonies came out to challenge him. Yes, he is loony, but has the appearance of sanity. I knew that those who can’t stand Hillary or who can’t stand Obama will vote for McCain. That is why I could stand seeing Edwards get the short stick on support of his candidacy. I mean why did Kerry win the nomination? Because he was by conventional wisdom the most electable (and was , Hello, Ohio). Obama and Hillary are not.
However, Obama has the mojo to motivate those who haven’t voted before on a cross-party wave that we haven’t seen before and that is why Hillary should step aside. He can do the job as easily as she. I submit she is more beholding to the beltway than anyone else, except McCain.
This is the kind of thing that pisses me off. I think Obama projects a certain sense of superiority that leaves me cold, and the guy made a perfectly valid point. Yet you choose to interpret it that he’s “freaked out” by a conversation with a “black man.” Where did the guy ever say he was freaked out, and more importantly, who introduced race into the discussion? You did. Cut it out.
“Explaining Hillary’s wins by invoking Rush makes about as much sense as attributing them to the actions of a mood ring.”
Speaking for myself, I’m not explaining her wins via Rush. I am saying that in an election that was expected to be close in Ohio, his involvement certainly made a difference.
I stated elsewhere she probably would have won, anyway.
Not by 10 points, though.
Good news. ;0)
Kinda reminds me of the old wife’s tale; “…If men had to give birth, we wouldn’t have kids…!” ;-)
And Hillary 35..total $90 million for Feb..I hope the Dems aren’t burning through their donors before the GE.
Banks, hedge funds, and financial houses are blowing up NYC.
Bernanke has another couple of months — at most.
You must not have read Hacktacular Howie Kurtz’s Media Notes column today in the WaPo0. Most of it was the whining of the reporters and pundits that the Dem race was continuing because they wanted to have their vacations and take a break from their stenographer gigs.
I still think Oprah did more, to clearly make this a black / white issue, whether she intended to or not and the results speak for themselves. BTW has anyone ever seen a picture of Obama’s mother? Is she still alive and why doesn’t he speak more of her? Just wondering……
It’s been a looong primary season… Poor things need a break… A permanent break would make me happy..! ;-)
Let’s hope not. We have to evict the Republicans from the White House and defeat the ideals of John McCain. Of course you most likely don’t me to tell you that my friend.
“Obama gets crossover votes because people LIKE HIM. Hillary’s crossover is largely to throw a wrench in our primaries and suck up money and energy.”
That is pure conjecture. There are certainly many republican women who cross over to support Hillary because they are tired of what their party has become, and see her as the best candidate out there.
“A local TV station did their own exit polling on video and almost 50% of the Hillary voters were laughing and saying they were encouraged to do this by the local Repub Party. There wasn’t one single one that voted for Obama for this reason. This was weeks ago and before Lush started his deal.”
This sounds like an urban myth spun to explain why Obama lost in Ohio, a state whose demographics favored Hillary; just as SC’s demographics favored Obama. I haven’t seen a crossover republican breakdown for OH, but there was clearly no Limbaugh factor in TX.
“Hillary staying in now is hurting us tremendously for Nov.”
Who is “us”? She is winning the traditional democratic voter base (excluding African Americans) overwhelmingly in all the major blue states. In fact the reason she is favored in PA is because it is a closed democratic primary. Frankly, these are the kind of arguments that were made to force Al Gore and John Kerry concede prematurely. Let them fight it out to the convention and may the best woman win :-)
Uh, she died of cancer when he was a teenager.
sttp at 105-” can’t speak to Texas, but trust me, Sen. Clinton benefited from a lot of bad crossover here.”
see my #80, you keep saying this, and i keep saying, she won all but 5 counties, out of 88, so, you’re saying in 83 counties rush limbaugh’s crossover crowd won it???????? i don’t see it….
i know the locals here hate mccain, they don’t trust a cheerleader, which is what they call obama, so they voted for hillary. no conspiracy there.
kiddo, left you a comment at #80
I’ve heard that “superiority” thing repeated quite frequently….Personally speaking, I’d like a candidate who speaks with an air of superiority when he/she deals with the GOP…you know…the warmongering, spying, torture party.
Both candidates are excellent.
No poo here…just expressing my own personal opinion. *g*
You mean Spoiler. Turn over the tax returns already Hillary. The only way she can win is to convince super-delegates to ignore the will of the majority of the pledged delegates, caucuses and primary voters. That is to steal it as well as GOP’r could. Why do you think she crossed her pledge adn broke the rules by not withdrawing her name from Florida and Mich ballots. She was saving the ace hidden up her sleeve to steal the pot. She knew it would come down to this.
Homer 08 !!!111
Either, or…! As long as we don’t have a third term of McBush…! ;-)
Can . You . Digg . it . !!!
Died in 95
Obama would have been in his thirties I guess.
All of Obama’s donors are the small $50-$500 kind. That means the same folks can still give again, after the primary is done. Hillary can’t most of her donors are the PAC and Corp. kind who blew their wad long ago.
SpiderPig, SpiderPig, does whatever a SpiderPig does … *g*
I don’t doubt that racism is a factor in this campaign. But I will point out that the only one making that point in tis article is an Obama supporter using it as an excuse for his loss, yet it’s being treated as a fact. There’s not much in this article to support the premise of racism. I’ve seen it written that upscale Dems can concern themselves with issues like the “tone” in Washington, while blue collar voters are more concerned with questions like “where’s my healthcare?” Yet I see many people here are quick to accept the thesis that Hillary enjoys strong support among blue collar voters because of racism. Why is it that when Obama wins it’s proof that he appeals to all races, and when he loses he’s a victim of racism?
And I must admit to being more than a little pissed off that Bill Clinton is accused of playing the race card because he made a perfectly supportable argument about Obama’s natural constituency propelling him to victory, but here you have an elected official who’s an Obama supporter out and out accusing Hillary’s supporters of racism, and no one has any objection? You can bet if he was a Hillary supporter he’d be identified as a “surrogate.”
and cows
Preliminary figures show Obama got more than $45 Million donations online …
I wouldn’t go through what my wife went through with the birthing of our beloved daughter for all the money, or power in the world. Sixteen hours of labor. Labor? Not quite, I think. 16 hours of torture; more like it. I know, I was there. And there were times at that event I thought I was going to panic. The nurses and the doctor were very glad to get rid of me when it was all over. I was wreck. Some of course, for different reasons, argue I still am (a wreck).
LOL
Where are you getting your information from?
“Why do you think she crossed her pledge adn broke the rules by not withdrawing her name from Florida and Mich ballots.”
There was no requirement for anyone to take their names off the ballots in Florida or Michigan. Some candidates took their names off of the Michigan ballot, others didn’t. It was a pure political move to remove their name.
Nobody removed their name off Florida because if they did, it would not be allowed on in the GE election.
It would be truly evil for a candidate to ask for the votes of the superdelegates—WAIT—BOTH candidates are asking for the votes of super delegates- and before the election is finished–EVIL—evil I tell you.
moo
Just reporting from Nebraska that I have 3 relatives who voted replican during the 2000, and 2004 election. All three are voting for Hillary and despite Obama because (I won’t repeat it) but it’s pretty “archie bunker” as to why they won’t vote Obama. It surprises me because I think of them all as sexist as well as racist, however, they liked Bill Clinton. So. There you have it. It goes both ways. I am tired of hearing all the rhetoric. It’s going to be very controversial because of all the reasons we wish (as good dems) it wouldn’t be. There will be racists who will not vote for Obama because he is black and also because they fear he is muslim. I think the muslim thing is a bigger issue because it is MORE ambiguous.
There are those who won’t vote for Hillary because they think she a ***ch.
I wish Obama and Hillary would join forces before they do any more damage. I wish that Edwards would join them and that they would beat the pants off John McCain. I have never been more certain that of what we don’t need. I would really like to see the 3 of them join forces, for the sake of the party.
Here’s some background on Obama’s mother (deceased in 1995):
http://www.chicagotribune.com/…..7609.story
I saw it with my own eyes. Obviously you can say that I’m making it up, but a fact is a fact. The coordinated Repub effort to disrupt open primaries is just called “common knowledge” amongst my friends that work in various campaigns around the country.
Like anything, it’s not 100% this way or that way, and I can point to all sorts of variations to these trends just from my own tiny circle of life, but many exit polls I’ve seen also bear this out.
Each Candidate at the time declared publicly that if those states violated the rules they would withdraw their name, Hillary as well. But at the moment of truth she didn’t. Scruples, anyone. No it was not required but the other candidates kept their word.
It seems you have very loving parents. ;0)
Do you have a link for that? Where did you get that number?
Thanks for the correction…obviously my memory for dates is lousy today…
“There is “good” crossover and “bad” crossover.”
It would appear that a “good crossover” is a vote for Obama and a “bad crossover” is a vote for Hillary; heads Obama wins, tails Hillary loses. Is this a generational thing? Because I can’t for the life of me understand the logic behind some of these fixations. Well, gotta go.
Yes but only Hillary is asking them to ignore the will of the majority of the voters so far, and alter the course of the nomination and winner of the most delegates.
Well it sure sounds like none of them have scruples then because everyone’s name was left on the Florida ballot.
JFK actually wrote a book, and though he was Catholic, was a brahmin. These same people voted in droves for Adlai Stevenson, who was as uppity as they come when it came to brains and vocabulary. That sentiment is basically the losers view of the world. That group of people make up the core of the right wing consistuency that verges towards fascism. It is alwayhs ‘just about them’. Policies don’t matter. I don’t care whether or not Obama or any other politician makes me comfortable. I want results. It’s like the guy who fixes my car. We have a business relationship. It’s the same with the people you elect to represent you.
FWIW, I know a number of Republicans who are planning on voting for both Hillary and Obama (depending on the person) and not McCain because they like them. Almost none of the folks I know listen to Rush — they think he is an asshat.
So do keep in mind that some Republicans are just as disgusted with the GOP as we are — because they feel like their party abandoned fiscal conservatism or what-have-you, and that it needs a clearing out…and are planning to vote for a Dem. And that Rush is a publicity whore, and would claim victory for making the sun come up if he thought he could pretend he had something to do with it. Don’t let him play you…you are better than that.
(And, no, I don’t have a clue why Bill Clinton went on the show with the guest host either…)
Please remember that either Hillary or Obama are far better than McCain and avoid disparaging them.
I think Hillary fans didn’t know she needed money. She is doing fine now that we all became aware that she needed cash. She had many new donors beginning in February.
Actually, I believe JFK wrote multiple books.
IIRC, the first was titled While England slept and then of course Profiles In Courage
Bonkers — please, stop repeating talking points without citing sources for them. Can you empirically show that the Clinton crossover votes are solely because someone wants to throw a wrench in the works? If so, show your data.
Can you show that Obama’s are solely because people like him? If so, show your data.
Repeating talking points without backing them up with empirical data amounts to pot stirring in my book. So back this up, please.
“It would appear that a “good crossover” is a vote for Obama and a “bad crossover” is a vote for Hillary; heads Obama wins, tails Hillary loses. Is this a generational thing? Because I can’t for the life of me understand the logic behind some of these fixations. Well, gotta go.”
I never said anything of the sort. Please re-read my comment. I clearly stated that good crossover could (and in fact, has) happen for either candidate.
Obama’s team already figured they were not going to win Ohio a week out from the primary — it had stayed trending away from them for weeks, and it didn’t look like they were going to make up ground there enough to catch Clinton. Which is why they poured so many more resources into Texas.
(And if I know that from looking at poll numbers and talking to people, you can be sure as hell that Rush knew it too — which is why I say don’t buy his bullshit sale.)
But Christy those must be human reasonable republicans, because they consort with you. They obviously have good taste. The rest unfortunately follow the GOP bedrock of “Do WHATEVER it takes to win.” If you get caught lying cheating stealing, or uh um other things, “Do WHATEVER it takes to win.” (this is also equally applicable: “Do WHATEVER it takes to make a profit.” If you get caught …
Please show me the quote where Clinton agreed to remove her name from the ballot. I can only find her quote where she agreed not to campaign there as per the rules.
Make no mistake, when Dorsch says: “When he talks to you, it’s like he’s talking down to you,” Dorsch said. “He doesn’t have the experience to talk like that,” it is meant to put Obama “in his place”. And it is pure racism.
Bingo. Dovetails nicely into “national security” and “warr on terra” storylines, doesn’t it. Hillary knows damn well what’s she doing with the Drudge/Obama-in-garb photo, the 3AM ad, and unbelievable crap like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYspjJCjgX8
The Drudge/Obama photo supposedly got started by a freeper, not the CLinton campaign. The same folks who started the Obama is a Muslim e-mail from all the research that I’ve seen on backtracking it. Again, please, if folks are going to throw out accusations on this stuff, back it up with links and citations and data. Thanks.
I think that the actual “popular vote” for Hillary vs Obama is a virtual tie at this stage- and who knows which candidate will end up with the most votes (Obama is nearly certain to end up with the most committed delegates, but that’s a different issue.)
Both candidates are trying to get votes from superdelegates and they are using the arguments that work best for them…That’s how it’s SUPPOSED to be..This is POLITICS.
May the best person win!
If Hillary wins the “popular vote” (more individual voters vote for her than for Obama) then would you say that superdelegates MUST vote for Hillary?
I can’t; Maybe she never said that. I guess that makes it OK then. She strategically got one over the rest. The other candidates at least whether (politically motivated or not) took the appearance of standing up for the rules set by the Democratic party.
I can’t provide links to conversations I have with friends. I saw a local TV report and can’t find it now on their site. Again, perhaps I’m making this all up, or people can chose to believe me.
Whose talking point would I be repeating anyway? I have these opinions based on my own experiences.
And sorry I was late on the thread, gang — had an appointment. This was a great discussion, sorry I missed most of it, but the read down through the comments was interesting all at once. :)
What I’m saying is that conversations with friends can’t be backed up by data. So if you are saying something that you got from conversations with others, say that’s where you got it. If you are using back-up data for it, then say that.
But throwing out a blanket statement without saying where it comes from makes it difficult to evaluate how much weight someone else should give the statement. In terms of weighing it for their own evaluation.
Obama and Hillary are trying to win the dem nomination. They seem to understand the rules and as far as I can tell have stuck to them. We have a long ways to go before this race is over- Let’s wait and see what happens. It seems to be a fair system. It should result in a good candidate.
The packets were traced back to a Thug web site.
Well obviously that would be the fairest thing and we won’t know until the end I suppose. However, my understanding is that the pledged delegates are selected by the popular vote in their precinct or district. The Super-Delegates are not bound. But many have stated that they would follow the lead of the delegates in there constituencies. This leads me to the belief that super-delegates would not easily abandon that philosophy and possibly incur the wrath of disenfranchised delegates and voters at their re-elections as well. So what I believe Hillary has to engage in is an democratic way to convince those Super-delegates to go against that will to help her win as a favor or because of her popularity with individual super delegates, voters and pledged delegates be damned (if necessary). Right now she is behind in states, delegates, and popular vote.
Okay, see you are using computer language. Say that in techno-phobe terminology. You mean the information on drudge could be traced back to a wingnut website? And, if so, how — because that sounds really cool. (Yes, I am utterly computer hopeless, why do you ask?)
No. You are wrong. She did stand up for the rules. She did not campaign in Michigan.
However, Obama did break the pledge and run ads in Florida as part of a national ad buy.
Read a bit of the story about Obama’s mother linked above- sounds as if she was a PISTOL…..According to the story, Obama tries to paint her as a Kansas girl- but her formative years were on Mercer Island in Washington State where she prided herself on bein a freethinker- an atheist- and one who felt that marriage was for other people…
Great story–wonder what will happen when the goopers get their hands on it.
Agreed. And that’s why I did precisely that in the comment you replied to:
And here’s more about the Drudge/Clinton connections from last Oct:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10…..ge.html?hp
Drudge says he got it from Clinton staffers, but of course we can never trust anything that slimeball sez. But, given Team Clinton’s past in “working with” him, and how it all coordinates so well with the 3AM ad fear mongering and he ridiculous “answer” on 60 Minutes (linked this a coupla comments up), it’s reasonable to conclude her campaign had something to do with it IMO.
I heard yesterday on NPR that under Dem rules from 1980 no delegates are bound. Pledged delegates are expected to vote by how they were selected but they are bound only by that expectation.
If the superdelegates (US Representatives) were to go as their home districts voted, Clinton would win. She won the large states and won most of the counties in Missouri and Ohio.
You want to argue that?
FWIW, both candidates have been working the superdelegates pretty hard. But even if they have a commitment from one, that person isn’t required to vote that commitment by the time the convention rolls around — it’s not like the elected delegates who have to vote in accordance with a primary or caucus designation on the first ballot. And, since most of them are elected or public officials in some way, public opinion plays a big part in their decision-making.
So, if there is a huge swing one way or the other in votes before the convention, I’d look for the superdelegate vote to swing that way as well…but both sides are working them fairly hard, and have been for more than a month. (I know Clinton brought in Harold Ickes a couple of weeks ago ostensibly to do that more effectively for her, and Obama already had a couple of folks on his team working it hard…can’t remember names off the top of my head, but I’d assume that Axelrod has a good handle on that, since the numbers game is a forte for him and a lot of the staff under him.)
Christy, after playing on that iMac for 3 months, you’ll learn so much … wait until you see what great widgets they have …
He didn’t say he received the e-mail from a Clinton staffer. He said he “obtained” an e-mail from a staffer. Big difference. One is received directly, the other through a non-direct mode.
I’m still not on it yet. Am on Mr. ReddHedd’s laptop at the moment…
Can’t wait to play with the new toy, though. :)
Do you have a link to a tally of the popular vote? I understand that it was VERY close PRIOR to the wins in Ohio, Texas, and Rhode Island.
Curious. Did you click on the link in my previous comment?
I’ll be around if you need help on anything “Mac” and I’m sure newtonusr and many others here will guide you, should you encounter any glitches … it is intuitive and sublime …
Oh, and the Peanut is gonna love Photo Booth … my girls sure do …
I need help..I have problems with FF locking up on my Mac Pro quad core..runs fine on single processor Mac Book..I really don’t like Safari.
I read that article a long time ago. What does that have to do with the fact that Drudge said he “obtained” an email? Who “obtains” e-mails from their inbox?
Attack Obama’s dead mother? You think that’ll help them get votes?
Please stop promoting these completely erroneous notions. The candidates pledged not to campaign in Florida and Michigan. Obama and Edwards made their own decisions to withdraw their names from the ballot. Hillary was under no obligation to do so. It’s possible the Obama’s campaign just miscalculated (try not to swoon, they can make mistakes too.) It’s also possible that Obama knew he would lose, and by withdrawing his name from an election that wasn’t going to count anyway he gave himself cover.
I don’t happen to believe that Obama’s campaigning in Florida made much difference (and the results would bear that out) but he did do more to violate the pledge than Hillary did, since she didn’t violate it at all.
The States violated the rules. Obama didn’t take advantage of the situation which is too bad for him I suppose. However, Hillary wants the delegates to be seated as the result of an uncontested primary, (although she has backed off from that,now) is that fair? The only fair way is to have new primaries which is not likely to happen. She is trying her best to have the set rules overturned for her advantage.
I mean nation wide.
How does anyone get info to put a number on the crossover vote? Permitting crossovers is pretty foolish, but I don’t see a way to put a handle on it other than exit polls and that’s not too hot.
This has started to happen since the last FF update for me, so I switched to Opera … perhaps newtonusr has a solution …
Why was her name the only one of the MI ballot. Isn’t that strange?
That might be the only thing that gets the ‘Nineteen Percenters’ to withdraw their support …
Sorry can’t find the link
Unfortunately, possibly.
Actually IIRC, Dodd, Kucinich and Gravel were also on the MI ballot
“only Hillary is asking them to ignore the will of the majority of the voters so far”
And only Obama is trying to promote the idea that you don’t really need 2,025 votes for the nomination, and that it should go to the person who comes closest, even if it’s only by half of a percentage point. I guess the rules are only sacrosanct when they favor you. If he doesn’t get the required number, he hasn’t closed the deal. It’s that simple. Insisting that your opponent drop out of an extremely close race shows a distinct lack of class. It seems a significant majority of Dem voters agree.
FWIW, I don’t think Obama is asking HRC to drop out, only Obama supporters and some of the more tired/tiresome members of the media.
There is a difference.
Cool. So you’re admitting he got it from the Clinton campaign. And, given all the other factors which I’ve spelled out above, it seems a fairly safe conclusion that this was a tactic on Team Clinton’s part.
BTW, Maggie Williams defended it saying Hillary often dresses in traditional clothes when visiting countries. Why aren’t we see those photos then, and having that become a story?
Seems obvious to me the answer is because they are trying to plant seeds of doubt as much as possible as far as Obama’s faith.
It is really strange. FF ran fine for months with “Tiger” then gradually began locking up more and more. Upgraded to Leopard, ran fine..yea..problem solved..Same deal gradually increasing lock ups. It is as if there is a “file” that gradually accumulates errors. I have removed all FF file that I can find and reload FF..no help. Single core no problem. I’ll look at Opera.
Similarly you could argue that after seeing Obama’s performance she calculated on being able to get those uncontested delegates seated, also giving herself cover by arguing it isn’t fair that Dem. voters will be disenfranchised by the GOP State Gov. and Leg.
I didn’t take the time to figure out what the problem is, I have a MacBook Pro Core2Duo … I just switched to Opera and it’s been great …
You know, I’ve been seeing a lot of answers – from both sides, actually – explaining really nasty charges by saying [there’s a tenuous connection, but we know that [candidate] is evil, which clinches it]
That puts us in a really, really bad position in the fall when the press does the same thing to whoever our candidate turns out to be, and I really wish folks would stop doing it.
Oh yea, that sounds familiar. So Biden, Richardson, Edwards, and Obama, the frontrunners all took their names off except Clinton.
Several media outlets showed pictures of Hillary and Chelsea wearing “Muslim” head scarfs while visiting Pakistan(?).
Steve, did you contact Mozilla ? Perhaps they have a workaround … at the least, if enough people contact them, they will work on it …
Thanks for the suggestion.
There have been about 25 million votes cast so far in the primaries and Obama leads by about half a million- he’s got a two percent advantage so far in the popular vote.
You said: However, my understanding is that the pledged delegates are selected by the popular vote in their precinct or district. The Super-Delegates are not bound. But many have stated that they would follow the lead of the delegates in there constituencies.
I said: If the superdelegates (US Representatives) were to go as their home districts voted, Clinton would win. She won the large states and won most of the counties in Missouri and Ohio.
You want to argue that?
You said: I mean nation wide.
Well, obviously…. then the advantage goes to Obama.
The superdelegates will do what is right for the party after all the voting is done. Until then, let’s let the people vote. My vote counted for the first time in 36 years. Others may be in the same boat.
[edited by mod] Here’s a quote from the Obama press release issued after the Michigan primary:
“All of the Democratic presidential candidates publicly pledged not to campaign in Michigan, none have visited the state, opened offices, hired staff or communicated with voters through television, mail, phones or otherwise. In addition, four Democratic presidential candidates, Obama, Edwards, Richardson and Biden withdrew their names from the Primary ballot in order to avoid participating in the Michigan Primary. Clinton did not withdraw her name even though she publicly committed to not participate in the Primary.”
As much as they tried to communicate the message that Clinton was somehow being unscrupulous, don’t you think if withdrawing her name was part of the pledge, they would have come out and said it? They are simply inferring wrongdoing because it helps their cause. [edited by mod]
[Mod Note; Please do not insult fellow commenters. Thank you.]
I don’t know if Biden and Richardson took their names off or not
Likewise. I don’t remember seeing anything from Obama even remotely close to the fairly consistent drumbeat of innuendo Team Clinton has put out ever since Iowa.
Obama’s positive campaign has been a breath of fresh air and is a big reason I gravitated toward him.
Hey bonkers, how can wasabi “admit” anything? We’re all just commenters here. If I come out and flatly “admit” the Clinton campaign sent that photo to Drudge, will that make it true? I can’t believe you’re still trying to push that photo as evidence of Clinton dirty tricks. Face it, the substance of your argument is that you just know that Hillary did it. Try coming up with some facts.
Again, why did every other front runner take their names off and not her?
I just believe that it is for all practical purpose impossible for Hillary to receive enough delegates to win. Obama having the most delegates logically argues that the super-delegates should vote the way that won’t offend the majority of the party. Whereas Hillary cannot make that argument because she cannot overtake Obama’s lead. She must argue as she is that the Superdelgates should just do what they want independently, (i.e. not follow the will or majority of the party) In my mind that is not Democratic, however I admit it is utterly political. I also admit that she was never been my choice (Edwards) but if she was in Obama’s position I would say the same (I hope) and she would be arguing the same. We need to start the fight against McCain now. He is getting a pass while the country watches the Dem. Party air our dirty laundry.
Late to thread but I spoke with my mother in very red East Texas. This county went over 4000 for Hillary, 2200 for Obama,with only around 400 each for McCain and Huckabee(Huck slightly ahead). She was coy and would not say who she voted for, but said they had a lot of local primaries for sheriff, etc. and most voted in the Democratic primary so they could be counted – and she had heard about Limbaugh’s call to vote Hillary. And, well, I know my mother and she would never vote for Obama. So it may have only been part “to mess with Dems” and part to make sure they supported local candidates. My mom hasn’t voted Dem for anything national in years – since Johnson, probably.
you sir are so right, Christy would love an Imac, . Easy o’ so easy.
Hillary can’t overtake his lead. He has more popular votes, more delegates and more state wins. Even if she wins all the rest of the states and by substantial margins she will only come close to overtaking him maybe, … maybe only. Most likely he will win some as will she but several will by very close margins, which only solidifies the gap in the delegate count to Obama.
Exactly; Haven’t we had enough with the bending of rules and below board dealings.
You are so correct. I do not have a picture of Hillary handing over an envelope to Drudge or an email tracer showing the photo came from Chelsea’s laptop.
Like many things though, we can analyze a variety of factors and develop conclusions. I’ve laid out several factors above and previous threads (with links!) to support my theory, and it makes a lot of sense me and others around here.
Ya know, for such a champion of “facts” as you claim to be, you’d think you’d supply some links and evidence for your assertions. Going through the thread, I see none. Oh well. I suppose you’ll just insult now, right?
Yes!
Actually, bonkers, you did what I’m describing in the post I was responding to.
Perhaps I could provide you with some facts if you told me which of my posts you’re talking about. And I’m sorry, but “many people agree with me” lends absolutely no credence to your theory. Face it, you haven’t presented a scintilla of evidence that the Clinton campaign was behind this, other than “it seems like something she would do.” The fact that you’re repeated it in multiple posts doesn’t make it any more true.
But again, which of my posts need more facts?
The last chart I saw (on morning teevee after the texas/ohio votes) Hillary had more popular votes. And in a winner takes all delagtes system like the GOP has, she would have a very large delagte lead over Obama.
it’s because of these “every state seems to apportion delgates a differnt way” method(s) that the Dem s are using that you find all the “experts” having to count dlegates for both Obama and Hillary as a range of numbers b/c nobody seems to be sure how many they each have exactly .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E…..a_metaphor
I tend to agree with the idea that’s floating around FDL about “vetting” the candidates on our own terms. This was reasoning behind the Rezko stories being done here, and I’m glad that happens. Hillary’s own actions – things she does herself – have been very troubling to me through this campaign starting in Iowa. There are plenty of factors which appear coordinated to advance a false idea about Obama. Hillary’s answer on 60 Minutes is so blatantly obvious and inexcusable to me. I still feel I put forward a decent case for the theory, and it’s not that I’m just making smears up out of the blue, as Clinton’s campaign has already done.
Would you consider this worth parsing?
http://weblogs.chicagotribune……nderi.html
This is apparently becoming her new line of reasoning since she’s said this multiple times. She’d rather have McCain’t over Obama. How Lieberman-esque.
Don’t you want to know who exactly we’re voting or not voting for? Like many here, I want to make sure we put the best candidate forward for the General.
Obama still leads according to NBC, and does even if FL is counted as is. Hillary barely leads if you also include MI, which is just silly since Obama’s name wasn’t on the ballot and her’s was.
http://tpmelectioncentral.talk…..vote_l.php
I have no idea what your point is with that link.
kemo, I don’t particularly care for Obama. I find him to be thin skinned, to have an air of superiority, and I think he’s lacking in experience. And I strenuously object to your characterization of my attitude as racism.
Sorry, did not mean to offend. It wasn’t your attitude I was questioning, but specifically pointing out that particular quote in the article. I wasn’t implying you would make the same statement.
To me, Richard Dorsch simply doesn’t like being (here comes the code) “talked down to” by Obama, simple as that. It doesn’t matter how much experience Obama actually has.
Obama thin-skinned? How does that come across. I think he’s been pretty good and letting stuff roll off.
Christy, did you see the article from the Cleveland Plain Dealer [I sent you a link this morning]. In it, individuals at OH polling places reported the “throw a monkey-wrench in it” voters.
Also, this morning on Stephanie Miller’s show, an individual called in with an extensive report re TX. She’d researched the Dem vs. Rep voting totals in a number of precincts in 2004 and 2006, and compared those numbers with Tuesday’s. Areas that had gone 60-70% Republican on those prior dates had very small Rep. numbers on Tuesday, and large Hillary numbers.
Anecdotal, I know, but you can listen to the caller on Stephanie’s site. [During second hour.]
I suspect a search of various sources would find more reports of this.
WADR, that’s really not to the point. You’ve made a very specific accusation, and if you have hard facts to back it up I haven’t seen them after you’ve been asked to provide them. Instead (as again in the comment I’m responding to here) you’re moving the conversation to other things she’s done that you don’t like.
I’m fine with your not liking her, and I absolutely think you you should use your own judgment in assessing her. I also don’t think you should make accusations you can’t back up, particularly if they’re extremely divisive.
The conversation between supporters is really getting schoolyard, and I think we’re better than that.
Yep — saw it. And yesterday, I linked up a number of articles in another thread where journalists in both Ohio and Texas did “man on the street” interviews with voters who were crossovers voting for both Obama and Clinton because they liked them.
There are always going to be dumbasses who try to pull stunts in politics — every year. Dems tried to do the same thing in MI with Mitt because it was an open primary. But when you know that both the Obama and CLinton campaigns had internal polling numbers that were telling both of them that Clinton was likely to win Ohio, AND you know that Obama was devoting his best resources to TX, AND you know that Rush Limbaugh is a self-promotion bonanza who also saw a lot of the same poll numbers we were seeing…I just don’t see it as statistically significant on rumor and innuendo and the occasional bit of anecdotal evidence. I want to see someone do a full-out statistical analysis and some real follow-up reporting first.
For one thing, how does the reporter who interviewed those people know for certain they cast a Democratic ballot — or that, if they did, they actually voted for Clinton — and didn’t just say it when they were leaving the polling place to stir up a bunch of shit with Democrats? Because people who listen to Rush Limbaugh never, ever tell a lie? Sorry, without statistical back-up, it’s an anecdotal story with no foundation for me. And the very sort of thing that asshats who want to stir the pot would do.
I don’t think this question is subject to ”statistical analysis” — at least not the polling type. Folks aren’t going to admit that they attempted to screw up the Democrats, at least not in large enough numbers to get a true picture.
I do, however, think the kind of examination of the past & present voting patterns, as was done by the caller to Stephanie Miller’s show, sheds some light on the subject. I don’t believe a district in TX is going to go from 72% Bush support in 2004 to 20-some percent for McCain and a humongous number for Hillary in 2008. Obviously my references in the last sentence aren’t accurate, but I do think it’s worth taking a look at this. It’s a way of going beyond rumor & innuendo, and I think it deserves investigation, not disparaging.
How anyone in the 50k and under category could support Hillary Clinton is beyond my conception. She spends more than that in a month on her wardrobe.These people, her supporters, use to work in factories that were shipped overseas by Billy boys Nafta while she sat on the board of Walmart and did not lift a finger or utter a word to make the life of the working man a little easier.Eleanor Roosevelt she is not and check out her campaign filings- she has hugh stock portfolio and wealth far exceeding her 8 million dollar book deal. She feels she is entitled to the Presidency based on what…h her brothers selling pardons…her 10,000% profit stock pick ala Tyson Foods…her handling of the White House travel office… her botched healthcare effort… her vote to go to war in Irag… her support of George Bush and his Iran resolution… her big business bankruptcy vote… her support for land mines and cluster bombs and other means of mass destruction, her condescending remarks …her world travelling shopping trips… er vote to block Obama’s Office of public integrity…or her enabling of a serial wife cheating liar which of course makes her the victim and worthy of the Presidentcy of the United States.She is a Barry Goldwater girl who headed her colleges young Republican chapter and changed partys because Bill was an oportunity to cash in which she did very well and which she continues to do. That may be allright but her 35 year fighting for you B.S. is just another lie.