The Liberal Thread #2 - No Debate Please

[eclectics]

I wonder how much effect his endorsement will have on his supporters' decisions? My thinking is the majority of them have moved on and have already decided on another candidate by now.

Has anyone done a poll on his supporters and who they now are leaning towards? I haven't seen it discussed on CNN or MSNBC.

 

[JARNJ3]

Has anyone done a poll on his supporters and who they now are leaning towards? I haven't seen it discussed on CNN or MSNBC.

Um - isn't it obvious - they all went for Obama? Judging by the most recent election returns?

 

[eclectics]

Um - isn't it obvious - they all went for Obama? Judging by the most recent election returns?

Not really. Obama is not winning everything by a landslide. If he was, we wouldn't be having all these "spirited" discussions.

I'm sure Hillary is the recipient of some of his supporters. I just wondered how much, percentage wise.

 

[Laugh O. Grams]

Um - isn't it obvious - they all went for Obama? Judging by the most recent election returns?

So if Edwards endorses her, does Hill get a bump by ex-Edwards Obama supporters jumping ship or is it too late for an Edwards endorsement to have any real effect on his supporters?

 

[JARNJ3]

So if Edwards endorses her, does Hill get a bump by ex-Edwards Obama supporters jumping ship or is it too late for an Edwards endorsement to have any real effect on his supporters?

I honestly think its too late. If Gore endorses - maybe - but I doubt that will happen - he would have done it already!

Her only hopes are winning TX, OH and PA - in my humble opinion. I hope the initial polls are wrong in MD & VA - but I doubt it. She lost most of the African American vote ....... I don't think that can be overcome in the Democratic Primary.....

I think as you or someone else stated - the positive press Obama is getting with these wins is helping people choose him, as most people want to choose a winner.....

This is course, is my opinion - I am a pessimist by nature. I can see the writing on the wall........

 

[JARNJ3]

I don't even believe this article. I think these delegates will be squeezed by the Obama "machine" for a lack of a better word.....

Clinton has lead with party insiders

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER and JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writers 57 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Hillary Rodham Clinton retains her lead among suddenly critical Democratic Party insiders even as Barack Obama builds up his delegate margin with primary and caucus victories across the country, according to a survey by The Associated Press.


Of the 796 lawmakers, governors and party officials who are Democratic superdelegates, Clinton had 243 and Obama had 156. That edge was responsible for Clinton's overall advantage in the pursuit of delegates to secure the party's nomination for president. According to the AP's latest tally, Clinton has a total of 1,136 delegates and Obama has 1,108, following Obama's victory Sunday in Maine's caucuses. A candidate must get 2,025 delegates to capture the nomination.

The numbers illustrate not only the remarkable proximity between the two candidates, but also the extraordinary influence superdelegates could wield in determining who becomes the nominee. Both campaigns are aggressively pursuing superdelegates, trumpeting their endorsements the moment they are secured.

"I told my wife I'm probably going to be pretty popular for a couple months," chuckled Richard Ray, a superdelegate and president of the Georgia chapter of the AFL-CIO. Ray said he will remain undecided because the labor federation has made no endorsement.

"If they endorse, then I will, too," Ray said.

The national party has named about 720 of the 796 superdelegates. The remainder will be chosen at state party conventions in the spring and summer. AP reporters have interviewed 95 percent of the named delegates, with the most recent round of interviews taking place last week, after Super Tuesday.

For the first time since the AP began contacting superdelegates last fall, more than half of them — 399 — have endorsed a candidate. The remaining 320 or so delegates said they are either undecided or uncommitted, making them the subject of intense lobbying by both campaigns.

With Clinton and Obama trading wins and loses as the primary and caucus season unfolds, the role of the superdelegates has been magnified and is causing anxiety inside and outside the campaigns. If the current snapshot of the race holds, superdelegates could decide the nomination in favor of one candidate even if the other receives more votes in the party primaries and caucuses.

Donna Brazile, a top Democratic National Committee member and manager of Al Gore's 2000 presidential campaign, said party elders have a role to play but said voters should lead the way.

"I don't want to superimpose my personal views; I want to reflect the will of the voters," she said Sunday, noting that as a superdelegate she is torn between Obama and Clinton. "Honestly, I don't want to decide this."

Obama himself weighed in Friday, telling reporters that voters should determine who superdelegates support, even as his campaign actively courted them.

"My strong belief is that if we end up with the most states and the most pledged delegates, and the most voters in the country, then it would be problematic for political insiders to overturn the judgment of the voters," he said. "I think that should be the guiding approach to determining who will be the nominee."

Clinton, speaking to reporters on Saturday, argued that superdelegates should make up their own minds and pointedly noted that Obama has the endorsements of superdelegates John Kerry and Edward Kennedy, both senators from Massachusetts, a state whose primary Clinton won.

"Superdelegates are by design supposed to exercise independent judgment," she said. "If Senator Obama and his campaign continue to push this position, which is to the contrary of what the definition of superdelegates has historically been, I will look forward to receiving the support of Senator Kerry and Senator Kennedy."

Unlike pledged delegates secured through a primary or a caucus, superdelegates can vote for whomever they choose, and they are not required to vote for the candidate they endorse. Indeed, some superdelegates who had endorsed other Democratic candidates have already switched to Clinton or Obama or are reconsidering their earlier choices.

Democratic superdelegate Christine "Roz" Samuels of Montclair, N.J., said she backed off her preference for Clinton after hearing former President Bill Clinton scoff at Obama's stance on the Iraq war.

"I'm disappointed in a few things that were said a few weeks ago by President Clinton," she said. "I'm going to have to revisit what I'm going to do between now and when we vote."

The Democratic Party introduced superdelegates to the nominating process after the 1980 election with the idea of giving a voice to elected officials and party elders who had a stake in who became the party's standard bearer. In 1984, Walter Mondale relied on superdelegates to distance himself from rival Gary Hart and secure the Democratic nomination. Mondale went on to lose to Ronald Reagan in the general election. Since then, the primaries and caucuses have determined the party's nominee without superdelegates making a difference.

As Democratic senators, both Clinton and Obama are superdelegates.

They now make up about 19 percent of the overall delegates. Obama and Clinton have vigorously lobbied them. Clinton has relied on her best surrogates, not the least of which is President Clinton. Former Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota, who is co-chair of Obama's campaign, said he spends much of his time calling superdelegates and urging them to vote for Obama. "It could make the difference" for the nomination, he told South Dakota Public Broadcasting.

While the number of new commitments is growing, many superdelegates are still a hard sell.

"I truly am torn. We have two wonderful candidates," said Steve Achelpohl, chairman of the Nebraska Democratic party and a superdelegate. Clinton "has a backbone of steel," he said, and can reach across the aisle to get things done.

Obama is "the instrument of change."

"He's rallying our young people in a way that I've not seen in my lifetime," Achelpohl said. "He's a phenomenon. He's the next Jack Kennedy."

 

[Planogirl]

Um - isn't it obvious - they all went for Obama? Judging by the most recent election returns?

Not all of them....

Texas should be interesting. I really don't have a feeling one way or the other how this state is leaning.

 

["Got Disney"]

And the Independents like him....very much.

Obama vs. McCain is the Dems best scenario to take the WH, imho. And please Hillary supporters, don't flame me for dissing Hillary. I like her too and will vote for her if she wins the nod. It's just that she will have a harder time beating McCain in November. I think we can all safely say that as a fact rather than conjecture.

I cant say that...they have even showed that both Hillary and Obama would win against McCain...but Obama had a slight higher edge.

DANG! You are ON FIRE today!

I see it his way too. "The Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend!" My enemy is the Republican party, Their enemy is Hillary...Therefore Hillary is my 'friend"

I always thought it was very odd & circumspect how the GOP and their Media outlets have always been rather kind to Obama. Very suspicious to me.

Same here....Everything is Hillary Hillary Hillary and I have heard Obama say a few things that never hit the media. Funny how all they can really hit her with is her crying and that she is not as likable...nothing to do with anything she has done wrong. Bill on the other hand, needed to keep his mouth shut.

Apparently the old one wasn't calling back super delegates and was mis-managing campaign funds (allegedly the reason for Billary donating $5 million). Wasn't it Billary criticizing Barack after that debate in NV (or NH?) when he said his one flaw is that he loses papers - the next day she criticized his management style and said the President needs to be a great manager. Certainly seems ironic given today's events...

First time I have heard that...and what about the stuff that Obama has said about her...I like Obama but he is getting a little cocky

I'll comment on one issue. If Iraq continues to be a top issue, I think Obama has the luxury of claiming he was opposed from the get go. If it's him and McCain in a general debate it's pretty clear cut. McCain=100 more years in Iraq while Obama=never supported it and never will. Seems to me the anti-war Independents have a no brainer. Of course the Republicans will try to bring up the terrorist fear factor and how those pesky Democrats won't protect you but that particular battle cry stopped working in the '06 elections and I think America finally figured out it was merely a scare tactic.

But my problem with Obama and if we need and I mean need to go to war ....will he or will he Say no. Also turn the tables for a minute here. What if it turned out that the war was the RIGHT thing to do and it saved us....and that if we did not go and something else happened because of it....that his voting NO could have caused more terrorism...

My problem with him saying I SAID NO is that no one really new what would happen for sure. And there was no way to tell. More voted to go so does that make them all wrong...Senators are only human

Does the Republican party even hold the high ground on terrorism anymore? I could have sworn that I read somewhere that the American public now trusts the Dems more than the Republicans when it comes to fighting terror these days...

No they do not ...they feel that the Dems are to week and that we want to LOOSE the war....

Um - isn't it obvious - they all went for Obama? Judging by the most recent election returns?

They had said that most of Edwards votes would go to Hillary due to her and Edwards issues were the same for the poor....but they have not shown who has received the votes.


when it all comes down to it...if Hillary gets the nod than Obama will ralley his troops to Hillary and Hillary will do the same for Omama...neither wants a Rep back in the WH so they will keep the party together. They are so close with there issues and even though it is a race they do respect each other.

 

[Laugh O. Grams]

Bill Kristol of all people has an interesting take in the Times this morning on the momentum that Obama's building in the primary race so far.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/11/opinion/11kristol.html?ref=opinion

Obviously, when it comes to Sen. Clinton, he's not exactly the most objective person to speak on her chances, but he does make some good points.

 

[DISUNC]

Has anyone done a poll on his supporters and who they now are leaning towards? I haven't seen it discussed on CNN or MSNBC.

I recall hearing they are leaning towards Obama! Not sure if it was a poll or just conjetcuring!

 

[DISUNC]

[QUOTE="Got Disney";23124055]Same here....Everything is Hillary Hillary Hillary and I have heard Obama say a few things that never hit the media. Funny how all they can really hit her with is her crying and that she is not as likable...nothing to do with anything she has done wrong. Bill on the other hand, needed to keep his mouth shut.[/QUOTE]

A few months ago when asked about going all over Americas, and Obamas repsonse was about meeting the farmer...

"One of the great pleasures of running for president has been, you know, to go to some tiny town in Iowa and you've got some guy in overalls and a seed hat say, 'what do you think about the situation in Burma?'

You know, and you think he is going to ask you about corn -- and he asks you about Burma," said Obama, provoking laughter from the New Hampshire audience. "But that happens all the time."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/11/guys-in-overall.html

I was ! I was sure the press would jump all over that! IMO..A very elitist thing to say! However they did'nt.

This is about the time I started paying attention to him.

 

[Fitswimmer]

Why is that elitist? Wouldn't you assume that the farmer would ask about an issue that directly impacts his life before he'd ask about Burma? If I had a shot at a one on one with either candidate, I'd be asking about the stuff that effects me like the economy and taxes before I got to Iraq or Darfur. Sure, I'd ask about those things, but I'll admit that I'm selfish enough to ask about my own issues first.

 

[DISUNC]

Why is that elitist? Wouldn't you assume that the farmer would ask about an issue that directly impacts his life before he'd ask about Burma? If I had a shot at a one on one with either candidate, I'd be asking about the stuff that effects me like the economy and taxes before I got to Iraq or Darfur. Sure, I'd ask about those things, but I'll admit that I'm selfish enough to ask about my own issues first.

You have to maybe also hear how he said it. He was more suprised that a "hayseed" hat wearing Farmer new about Burma!!!!
BTW Farmers dont wear Hayseed hats....That is a derogatory term!

 

[Fitswimmer]

You have to maybe also hear how he said it. He was more suprised that a "hayseed" hat wearing Farmer new about Burma!!!!
BTW Farmers dont wear Hayseed hats....That is a derogatory term!

I think a lot of it is the preception of the candidate. I'm going to look at everything McCain and Huckabee say with a negative bias and I'm going to view things that Obama and Clinton say with a much gentler eye. If McCain had made that same statement I'd probably feel the way you do-but since it was a candidate I support I'm willing to cut him slack. While people were hyperventaliting over Hillary and the MSNBC reporter-I cut her slack as a Mother protecting her child.

It's all about perception in these things-no matter how much research we do on the issues there's still something left that is all about feelings.

 

[DISUNC]

I think a lot of it is the preception of the candidate. I'm going to look at everything McCain and Huckabee say with a negative bias and I'm going to view things that Obama and Clinton say with a much gentler eye. If McCain had made that same statement I'd probably feel the way you do-but since it was a candidate I support I'm willing to cut him slack. While people were hyperventaliting over Hillary and the MSNBC reporter-I cut her slack as a Mother protecting her child. .

As do I, to a degree. I by no means think Hillary is a Angel sent from above, Nor do I think that of Obama. I am very willing to defend my candidate as I am willing to say when I think they took a misstep.

I must admit the Obama 'can do no wrong sentiments' are a bit naive.
As I stated before I am backing Clinton, but if Obama is candidate I will vote for him. But he was my 3rd choice.

That said, the convo about this was in relation to how the press is handling both Dem candidates. Hillary sheads a tear and its front page news, Obama makes a off putting remark (which IMO is much worse) and its page 78!

It's all about perception in these things-no matter how much research we do on the issues there's still something left that is all about feelings.

I dont think this is a perception issue. Farmers DONT wear hay hats, that is stereotyping farmers. And farmers do read newspapers and such. Its phrases like this that make me go "hmmmmmmmmmmmm"! Thats all.

 

[Fitswimmer]

As do I, to a degree. I by no means think Hillary is a Angel sent from above, Nor do I think that of Obama. I am very willing to defend my candidate as I am willing to say when I think they took a misstep.

I must admit the Obama 'can do no wrong sentiments' are a bit naive.
As I stated before I am backing Clinton, but if Obama is candidate I will vote for him. But he was my 3rd choice.

That said, the convo about this was in relation to how the press is handling both Dem candidates. Hillary sheads a tear and its front page news, Obama makes a off putting remark (which IMO is much worse) and its page 78!



I dont think this is a perception issue. Farmers DONT wear hay hats, that is stereotyping farmers. And farmers do read newspapers and such. Its phrases like this that make me go "hmmmmmmmmmmmm"! Thats all.

I would agree that the press is playing favorites with Obama-he's a dynamic figure and he is the more interesting story. With Hillary it's more like-"we've seen her before...let's move on"

I really dont' like what they did regarding the "tearing up" thing. Good grief-that whole scene was crazy.

Did you see 60 Minutes last night? They did Obama and Hillary and I thought both pieces were really good. Katie Couric said that they invited John McCain but he turned them down.

 

[DISUNC]

Did you see 60 Minutes last night? They did Obama and Hillary and I thought both pieces were really good. Katie Couric said that they invited John McCain but he turned them down.

No I missed it! Maybe it will be online!
Much ado was made of John McCain taking the weekend off. I heard that on 3 different news casts last night!

 

[DISUNC]

Sorry for the 2 posts...NUT i anted to comment on this too.

I would agree that the press is playing favorites with Obama-he's a dynamic figure and he is the more interesting story. With Hillary it's more like-"we've seen her before...let's move on"

I really dont' like what they did regarding the "tearing up" thing. Good grief-that whole scene was crazy.

Do you think its really the "seen her before...lets move on" or as Any Female I know think its because she is a woman.

 

[Fitswimmer]

Sorry for the 2 posts...NUT i anted to comment on this too.




Do you think its really the "seen her before...lets move on" or as Any Female I know think its because she is a woman.

If she were the first woman who hadn't been First Lady for 8 years I think we'd have a better idea whether it's gender bias or not. Her history makes her candidacy different. I think if she had just been a Senator we might have a more objective view.

 

[JARNJ3]

Do you think its really the "seen her before...lets move on" or as Any Female I know think its because she is a woman.

I think its both - first serious woman candidate - and she was the former first lady people like to hate, because she had the audacity to work within her husband's administration.