EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- 'The Gilded Age' Statistics Corporations Don't Want Workers, or Anyone, to See
- As Death Toll Rises Beyond 500, Garment Factory Disaster 'Worst in World History'
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Report: Toxic Chemicals Found in Thousands of Children's Products
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- Report: Toxic Chemicals Found in Thousands of Children's Products
- Move Over, Koch Brothers: A Bigger, Darker Rightwing Funder Is Out to Destroy Public Education
- 'The Gilded Age' Statistics Corporations Don't Want Workers, or Anyone, to See
- Time for Big Green to Go Fossil Free
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
Popular content
Today's Top News
Obama Wins North Carolina Decisively; Late Night Drama Clinton Squeaks To Indiana Victory
Senator Barack Obama won a commanding victory in the North Carolina primary on Tuesday and inched well within 20,000 votes of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in Indiana, where the outcome of the primary came down to a large county outside Chicago that had yet to completely report its votes.
Regardless of who prevails in Indiana, the night's results injected a boost of momentum into Mr. Obama's campaign and assured that Mr. Obama would widen his lead in pledged delegates, providing him with new ammunition as he seeks to persuade Democratic leaders to coalesce around his campaign. He also increased his lead in the popular vote in winning North Carolina by more than 200,000 votes.
"Don't ever forget that we have a choice in this country," Mr. Obama said in an address in Raleigh, N.C., that carried the unity themes of a convention speech. "We can choose not to be divided; that we can choose not to be afraid; that we can still choose this moment to finally come together and solve the problems we've talked about all those other years in all those other elections."
The slow-motion pace of Tuesday's vote count in Lake County, just outside Chicago, injected a note of late-night drama into the Indiana race. As late as 11:45 p.m. Eastern time, no votes had been reported from the county, which is seen as a stronghold for the Obama camp and home to a large black population.
Shortly after 12:30 a.m. on Wednesday, the county had reported about 56 percent of its vote, and those results brought Mr. Obama within 17,000 votes of Mrs. Clinton.
Union County, a small rural district in the eastern part of the state with a large white population, had also not reported by early Wednesday morning.
In winning North Carolina by 14 percentage points, Mr. Obama - whose campaign had been embattled by controversy over the incendiary remarks of his former pastor - recorded his first primary victory in nearly two months. His campaign was preparing to open a new front in his battle with Mrs. Clinton, intensifying the argument to uncommitted Democratic superdelegates that he weathered a storm and that the time was dawning for the party to concentrate on the general election.
But as Mrs. Clinton addressed her supporters at a rally in Indianapolis on Tuesday evening, it was clear the fight was not over. In the first three minutes of her address, she asked supporters to contribute money, saying, "Tonight, I need your help to continue this journey."
Clinton advisers acknowledged that the results of the primaries were far less than they had hoped, and said they were likely to face new pleas even from some of their own supporters for her to quit the race. They said they expected fund-raising to become even harder now; one adviser said the campaign was essentially broke, and several others refused to say whether Mrs. Clinton had loaned the campaign money from her personal account to keep it afloat.
The advisers said they were dispirited over the loss in North Carolina, after her campaign - now working off a shoestring budget as spending outpaces fund-raising - decided to allocate millions of dollars and full days of the candidate and her husband in the state. Even with her investment, Mr. Obama outspent Mrs. Clinton in both states.
Six hours after the polls closed in Indiana, the race remained too close to call. Results from Lake County - home to the city of Gary, just across the state line from Chicago - had not been reported. The delay meant that Mrs. Clinton did not appear on television until well after Mr. Obama, allowing him to put his stamp of victory on the evening.
With six primaries remaining on the Democratic primary calendar, the fight between Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton now turns to Washington. The Obama campaign was poised to present a new cache of superdelegates - the party officials who may have to settle the nominating fight - as early as Wednesday to press its case that the results from Tuesday are reason enough to back his candidacy and end the torturous nominating fight.
In his speech, Mr. Obama, of Illinois, congratulated Mrs. Clinton "for what appears to be her victory in the state of Indiana." Then, he used his televised forum to deliver a speech highlighting how he was likely to come under attack. In doing so, he made an argument for his viability in a general election, which his rivals believe has been damaged because of his association with his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., who made a series of incendiary comments about America.
"Yes, we know what's coming; I'm not naíve," Mr. Obama said, adding, "The attempts to play on our fears and exploit our differences, to turn us against each other for political gain, to slice and dice this country into red states and blue states; blue-collar and white-collar; white, black, brown; young, old; rich, poor."
"This is what they will do, no matter which one of us is the nominee," he added. "The question, then, is not what kind of campaign they'll run; it's what kind of campaign we will run."
Democrats said they expect to see more superdelegates flow to Mr. Obama in the next few days, including perhaps some now aligned with Mrs. Clinton.
Senator Claire McCaskill, an Obama supporter from Missouri, called the results "a big, big night" for Mr. Obama given the Wright episode. "This shows he can take major blows and kind of rise above it," Ms. McCaskill said. "I think there was a sense that she has some momentum, and I think it has just ground to a screeching halt tonight."
Despite Mrs. Clinton's performance, she pledged to take her campaign to West Virginia, Kentucky and the other states remaining on the primary calendar. And the campaign has been pushing the cause of seating disputed delegates from Florida and Michigan, states that were penalized for holding primaries before party rules allowed.
"You know it seems, it would be a little strange to have a nominee chosen by 48 states," she told her supporters in Indianapolis. "We've got a long road ahead, but were going to keep fighting on that path because America is worth fighting for."
The Rules and Bylaws Committee of the Democratic National Committee will convene on May 31 to settle the issue of whether to seat the delegates from those two states.
Going forward, both candidates intend to spend time in Washington, courting superdelegates and party officials.
Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska, an Obama supporter, said the candidate accomplished what he needed to by outperforming expectations in both states and showing that Mr. Wright was not driving off voters en masse.
"The next question will be what happens with the undecided superdelegates," he said. "Will they begin to come his way? I don't see anything to suggest they should start going her way."
In North Carolina, Mr. Obama's performance was bolstered by a strong black vote. He captured more than 90 percent of those voters in that state, where blacks accounted for one in three voters. But over all, Mrs. Clinton continued to draw strong support among whites, particularly older women.
The voting in Indiana and North Carolina came at the conclusion of an acrimonious two-week campaign that found Mr. Obama on the defensive over incendiary remarks by Mr. Wright. Yet there was little evidence either argument caused significant shifts in electoral patterns of previous states, with most Clinton voters saying the Wright episode affected their vote and Obama backers saying it did not.
Once again, Mrs. Clinton drew the lion's share of her support from women and older voters. Mr. Obama held onto his mainstays of support - blacks, young voters and liberals - and made small gains in Indiana with lower-income white voters who have eluded him in the past.
In both states, the candidates' final arguments centered on a summertime suspension of the federal gasoline tax, which Mrs. Clinton proposed as an economic lift for voters and Mr. Obama derided as a political gimmick.
At this stage in the nominating fight, most voters seemed to have settled on their preferences before the battle intensified. Only a quarter of voters in Indiana decided whom to support in the last week, and a majority backed Mrs. Clinton, while one in five voters in North Carolina also decided late, and most of them backed Mr. Obama.
The country's economic condition was listed as the chief concern of the Democratic primary voters. About 9 in 10 voters in Indiana and 8 in 10 voters in North Carolina said the economic slowdown had affected their family at least somewhat.
At least three in five voters in both states said the economy was the most important problem facing the country, according to surveys of voters leaving polling places that were conducted in both states by Edison/Mitofsky for the television networks and The Associated Press.
In Indiana, about 8 in 10 voters were white and about 15 percent were black. Six in 10 of the whites voted for Mrs. Clinton, while about 9 in 10 blacks favored Mr. Obama.
Michael M. Grynbaum, Dalia Sussman and Megan Thee contributed reporting.
© 2008 The New York Times
Update: (Wednesday 5/7; 1:15 am) Cable networks CNN, MSNBC, and other outlets call "Apparent" victory for Hillary Clinton in Indiana.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

95 Comments so far
Show AllSorry folks but can I yawn now? Guess who thinks is coming to dinner? Not going to happen,
And to think after all this the decision may come down to the few oligarchic "super delegates".
Hillary's speech tonight indicates she ain't throwing in the towel. A win is a win, and she will continue on with expected wins in WV and KY. Then, there will be Obama victory in Oregon, and probably Montana. Hillary will take Puerto Rico.
Although I wish Obama had it locked up (which he practically does in pledged delgates, popular vote, number of states), the Clintonistas will still push on, and make Florida and Michigan the issue. Watch them blame that mess on Obama. In Florida, the GOP gov & legislature did it. In Michigan, you can say the Dems did it to themselves.
Rush must be happy with Operation Chaos.
About 9 in 10 voters in Indiana and 8 in 10 voters in North Carolina said the economic slowdown had affected their family at least somewhat.
"Focus on the family" they say. That's to keep Americans myopic about the wider world, the US government's worldwide rampage, destroying human life, destroying thousand year traditions, destroying public enterprises that best serve the people, destroying labor organizations, destroying land, water and food rights, and destroying the rule of international laws and treaties.
World War Three can break out next and the elites will still be instructing Americans to "focus on the family". The elites suit themselves very well. Very very well.
There is one campaign raising all the issues being ignored::
For peace, social and economic justice, and human rights.
www.carolmillercongress.com
I just feel relieved. I know it's still not done, but at least the people are not as dumb as Hillary thought they were.
Ms. Hillary "guns-beer-pickup trucks" Clinton, please... let it go...
Obama is not the perfect candidate, but he is one that can can be worked with. I really do not feel as cynical as I normally do about this.
We have nothing to lose by believing that we can, because the stakes are too high if we can't.
I'm wondering why no one talks about the fact that Bill Clinton did Rush Limbaugh a favor and filled in for the gasbag when he was sick.
"You may have missed it - almost everyone missed it - but Bill Clinton was on Rush Limbaugh's show the day of the Texas primary. You can hear the radio here. Limbaugh himself was sick that day, apparently, but he had already urged Republicans to cross over to keep Hillary Clinton in the race. Bill saw an opening - and went there.
Now just wrap your mind around this: the Clintons were happy to support a cynical, partisan Republican campaign to wound the Democratic front-runner, and they were brazen enough to go on the Limbaugh show to do so.
There also seems little doubt that Republican mischief played a real role in affecting the results. And they call Obama's call for them to release their tax returns a tactic worthy of Ken Starr. I repeat: the chutzpah and the cynicism just leave you speechless. And as you find it impossible to do much but splutter, the Clintons plow on with new self-serving lies." -- Andrew Sullivan
http://themoderatevoice.com/media/talk-radio/rush-limbaugh/18313/bill-clinton-went-on-rush-limbaughs-show-day-of-texas-primary/
This is incredibly sad news. I was hoping there would be some way the Obamaniacs could be stopped. We are stuck with this awful candidate and worse President to be. I'm really sad about this. We are in for four disillusioning years. Democrats are idiots!
Avez courage,Rich and dump the gloom. Obama will provide us the best opening for pushing progressive goals. Cynicism will get us no where.
obama's chances are just as good as hilliary against mccain....probably better.......i voted for edwards in our primary....after he dropped out ...i'm supporting obama...i sense that what people fear is that obama MAY ACTUALLY BE AN EFFECTIVE PRESIDENT......this is for RICH GRIFFIN... ....so under the bush\cheney administration,in 8 LONG YEARS,there has not been any disillusions ?
I was pleased to stay up last night waiting for the Lake County returns in Indiana. Only the combined efforts of Jeremiah Wright and Rush Limbaugh saved Clinton from an embarrassing defeat. Unless Obama commits some terrible, career-ending blunder or dies of a heart attack, he will be the Democratic nominee. I very much doubt the superdelegates will give it to Clinton after last night.
So you think Mr. Obama is the "answer?"
Read this:
"Obama's Money Cartel"
http://www.counterpunch.com/martens05052008.html
And this:
"The Obama Bubble Agenda"
http://www.counterpunch.com/
He just is not the guy we want to believe he is.
to HOYTDOUGLAS..............MCCAIN is not the guy who you think he is and HILLIARY is not the woman who you think she is........OBAMA is a better answer than they are....this is about the fierce urgency of now...mccain still has his cold war mentality...and hilliary still talking about the past glory days of the 1990's...we are in a new century...time for different thinking and different ideas...can we give it a CHANCE ?
I'm so unhappy with Obama supporters - I wish they could be reached and could be made to understand what a terrible politician he really is. I wish they would READ his actual positions! Listen to his words more carefully. This is a sad day. However, it is still possible that we can have a brokered convention and the cult of Obama can be stopped once and for all, before the real damage is done and he actually becomes President. For those of you who actually think he will help with progressive causes, you have lost your minds!
HoytDouglas, you need to find more credible sources. try truthout or tompaine. you go too far underground and you can find articles that have proof that Bob Hope was an alien....check out Stew Webb for fun, he swears the Bush Crime Family meets in a castle in Colorado once a year to eat live babies, he has proof too.
Here in Reality is a pretty good source for underground stuff, but probably the most reputable would be Information Clearinghouse.....
And so it drags on...
Early on in this stupid, pointless pissing contest, Hillary made it very clear that if she could not be the Democratic candidate, she would put the US through hell to destroy the Democratic party by dragging her fight with Obama out to the bitter end.
It looks like her plan is working.
The Democratic party is split between two camps, and neither one will shift an inch, blindly supporting their candidate, spitting, fighting tooth and nail to deny the opposition a reasonable chance to fight McCain.
And all the while, when the Democrats could be challenging McCain and his corporate pro-war stance and bellicose nature, McCain is getting a free ride. He has been asked no real questions about the revealed policy of torture that goes to the very heart of the presidency, has not had to face challenges about his '100 years of war in Iraq'. Has not been seriously questioned about his time as a POW, and the allegations that he turned on his fellow servicemen.
By the time the dust settles from this protracted Democratic Party cage match, the contest will be over, the election handed to McCain, who will have rightly accused the Democrats of being unable to settle party differences, and therefore not be the most adept party to rule a nation.
Ah,happy am I to be free of the cult of lefty,ideological purism!Obama isn't perfect but I see him as a step in the right direction. What is all the whinning accomplishing?
Onelove has the upcoming course of the primary season very well analyzed, although you never can tell about states like West Virginia.
As to the prediction that the Clintons will turn to the Michigan and Florida delegations in a last ditch credential fight effort, I find it revealing that Mitt Romney was on the tube this morning (CNN I believe), urging the Democratic Party to embrace that divisive tar baby, and then count Michigan and Florida for Hillary so the good folks in the Great Lakes and Little Havana don't get disenfranchised. Like Bill palling it up with Rush, politics sure does make for strange bedfellas.
Anybody heard anything on how Indiana's voter ID law impacted the turnout and counting delays in Gary and Hammond?
Anybody seen any breakdown on whether the GOP crossover vote exceeded Hillary's slim margin of victory in Indiana?
Onelove is absolutely correct that in Michigan, the Democrats shot themselves in the foot. Barack and Edwards names were not on the ballot, and you spoiled your ballot if you wrote them in. Hillary's name however mysteriously remained on the ballot, along with only Chris Dodd, Dennis Kuchinich, and "Uncommitted" as your voting options.
Just how anybody is going to blame that end result on the Obama camp is going to be a very neat trick indeed. Also, remember that every time the pundits and spin meisters compare the nationwide popular votes cast for Clinton with those cast for Obama, the Clinton numbers are artificially inflated because Barack got zero here in Michigan, because it was literally impossible to vote for him the way the ballot was structured. Hillary's 55% statewide margin of victory those bizarre constraints is no big whup. Had the Michigan primary been fairly run, I think Obama would have won here like he did later in Wisconsin.
Bill from Saginaw
Thank you for the Counterpunch.com site.....It has some great articles as does Commondreams........
Is Barack Obama different?
I got to listen to Zbigniew Brzezinski in a conference call and Anthony Lake at dinner engagement....Both men believe that we should keep our forces in Iraq until there is "Peace", which is a democrat´s word for "Victory". Both men are top advisers for Barack Obama and have participated in the creation of an "Enemy Islamic Force" from the late 70´s through the 90´s (After all, Sandy Berger didn´t steal and destroy documents from the National Archives without a good reason.) ........Yes, "Operation Cyclone" continued well after the Soviet Union was expelled from Afghanistan.....and removal of our forces in Iraq is,"NOW", not in our "National Security Interests".....
Barack Obama was the only politician who spoke out against the "Invasion" of Iraq. Therefore he is the only "HOPE" of ending the "Insanity" that has gone on the past seven years: 1. A three trillion dollar invasion and occupation of a country that had done nothing to the United States and was never a threat to the United States, 2. The killing of up 1.2 million Iraqis, 3. The deaths of over 4,000 Americans,
4. The forced removal of over 4 million Iraqis from their homes and into refugee camps, 5. The theft of billions of dollars through fraudulent contracts, 6. The U.S. support of the Sunni Insurgency by bribing their "Tribal Leaders" during "The Surge" even though the Sunnis were the "Insurgents" linked by the U.S. to Al Qaeda and supported and armed by Saudi Arabia and responsible for more U.S. deaths than any group......
Does any of the above make sense?
Yes, if you knew that the plan to invade Afghanistan and Iraq was hatched in 1997 after the Taliban, who had U.S. support, decided to give the "Oil Pipeline Contract" to Bridas Oil Co. of Argentina.
Unfortunately, the National Media was part of the program and when World Trade Center #7 went down and could not be explained without saying, "It had to have been a pre-planned demolition with explosives", 9/11 became the excuse needed to invade two countries that had nothing to do with the attacks and the National Media helped propagandize for the Neo-Conservative Movement and their idea of "Pax Americana".
When John McCain gets ushered into the White House, cuts more taxes for the rich, bombs Iran and runs this country into final ruin, we only have Hillary to thank.
Anyone who is elected President of the US has very limited options. He or she has to contend with
a huge garrison state,
social programs torn to shreds (thanks partially to Maestro Clinton),
disassembled regulatory agencies,
gutted or nonexistent environmental, workplace and other forms of protections,
massively privatized social services,
a huge gap between the haves/have-nots,
a politically supported massive outsourcing of good quality jobs,
weak union membership and few laws supporting and protecting union organizing,
a broken constitution,
collapsing public institutions and infrastructure,
a huge national debt,
economic problems beyond the experience of most American's recent memories,
military incursions, wars and semi-wars, and a heavily enlarged network of military bases, client states and dependencies,
and, last, a population that has been to subjected to continuous propaganda efforts promoting free market fundamentalism, militarism, and the muscular "religion" of Rightwing "Christians" and the constant hate, fear and smear campaigns indulged in by the Rightwing media/foundation/msm complex since the 1980s.
Whomever is elected will have to start with cleaning up horrible mess left by the Bush/Clinon/Bush/Reagan era.
This basic clean-up effort will put any President at risk: physically adn reputationally.
There's no way they are going to seat the Michigan and Florida delegates when she agreed to keep them out in the first place.
Her only hope as slim as it was, was to win big in both states. Neither happened.
She had to loan herself money again.
She is like a drunk friend at a party making a fool of herself, and people are unwilling to tell her.
My guess is the partygoers will just move into another room and leave her to boast about sniper fire in Bosnia.
Obama may not be the best candidate but he can be an interesting speaker. Like describing McCain as Bush's third term.
Good one.
They eat LIVE babies?
I never heard that one ~Liberal WithAnAttitude~.
Something to think about from another progressive site, Counterpunch:
http://www.counterpunch.org/
Look for the 'Obama Bubble' article.
Here is what I believe, of course we ALL have our beliefs, especially when it comes to politics. But, I'm basing my beliefs on statistics, polls and the voting records of the candidates.
If Obama is the Demo's choice, He will lose to McCain, ___ no matter who Obama's VP running mate is.
If Hillary is the Demo's choice, she will lose to McCain, ___ unless Obama is her VP running mate. ___ A Hillary/Obama ticet will lose however, if Mich and Fla voters are not allowed at the Demo convention.
McCain's running mate will be whomever he is ordered to have. Maybe Jeb Bush, or Hucksterberry, etc. Lots of possibilities there.
If the Michigan and Florida delegates are not allowed to have a voice at the Demo convention, McCain will be our next president Bush, ___ even if Hillary and Obama are the Demo's ticket. That's not confusing if one thinks about it.
When I attempted to edit my previous post, I was blocked by "WORLD PRESS" whoever that is. I get a screen headlined "World Press" and informed that I have entered the wrong ame or password and taht I cannot post a comment.
This happened previously last week and I could not even get back to the Common Dreams site until I had re-booted my computer and erased all cookies and files.
It matters not at all. Pointing out the fact that all of USA Incorporated's "electable" candidates are on essentially the same sponsorship payroll just doesn't seem to put even a small dent in the "mainstream" determination to play the game according to the rules of the "greatest democracy on earth".
I doubt that it ever will -- at least not until the ultimate consequences become overwhelmingly and catastrophically clear to even the most dedicated couch potato. On the "brighter" side, that day of reckoning appears to be getting closer very rapidly. It's going to be one hell of a wake-up call, but I find it increasingly difficult to find much sympathy for the self-created victims.
Quotes from this article:
"Despite Mrs. Clinton's performance, she pledged to take her campaign to West Virginia, Kentucky and the other states remaining on the primary calendar. And the campaign has been pushing the cause of seating disputed delegates from Florida and Michigan, states that were penalized for holding primaries before party rules allowed.
"You know it seems, it would be a little strange to have a nominee chosen by 48 states," she told her supporters in Indianapolis. "We've got a long road ahead, but were going to keep fighting on that path because America ..."
Mrs. Clinton sounds a lot like George W. Bush, when he tells the American People, without blinking an eye, that we are winning when we are losing in Iraq, then he admits to lying because he thinks its good for us. Hillary, please stop. We have become immunized after GWB to that lying brand of politics. That is why we are turning to Obama. We are adults, and we are not afraid of the truth. We want to stop this dysfunction. But, You just don't get it!
Rich Griffin wrote:
This is incredibly sad news. I was hoping there would be some way the Obamaniacs could be stopped. We are stuck with this awful candidate and worse President to be. I'm really sad about this. We are in for four disillusioning years. Democrats are idiots.
While I share your reservations about Obama (I anticipate he will be an unapologetically moderate and cautious President, if elected), I can't really share your sadness over the failure of Clinton's campaign to close the gap.
Were she to be elected, she would be little better than Obama, pursuing the same triangulating approach that her husband pursued and probably more so given the slimness of the Democratic margin that exists in Congress.
Nor are Democrats to blame. She has no one to blame for her failures but her own campaign staff. This has been not only one of the most ineptly run campaigns I've ever witnessed (a truly astonishing thing given how Hillary and Bill have built over the past 15 years a very extensive network of support and influence within the party), but it has also revealed Senator Clinton to be every bit the political trimmer her husband was.
One could produce dozens of examples in support of this, the latest of course being her 11th hour support for a gas tax holiday this summer (if Senator Clinton is such a smart candidate and if it was such a great idea, why wasn't she out promoting it before McCain was stumping for his?).
My favorite moment (but who can pick?) was when, in response to a comment about the fact that nearly every economist has panned the idea as unsound, she replied that she wasn't going to base her campaign on the advice of economists! Yep, Hillary's just plain folks and doesn't need no pointyheads telling her what's sensible or not! Except of course when she needs to point out which economists think her healthcare proposal is better than Obama's.
Ridiculous.
So, Rich, I think you're quite right that Obama will not be the source of the country's salvation (jeez, it feels odd that one would even have to write such a thing), but you can't seriously lament the meteoric fall of the Clinton star, can you?!?
If this campaign season has done nothing else, I hope it has snapped the spell of Clintonism among the electorate. The Clinton years (and Clintonism as a political force) have not done the country much good. I say, good riddance.
AND, another thing: I am so proud of the people, both in North Carolina and Indiana, because they show that this country is ready to move forward. Thanks, also to all the young people who clued the older ones, that yes, we can have hope and we can have a better government.
Obama said last night, "Yes, we know what's coming; I'm not naïve," Mr. Obama said, adding, "The attempts to play on our fears and exploit our differences, to turn us against each other for political gain, to slice and dice this country into red states and blue states; blue-collar and white-collar; white, black, brown; young, old; rich, poor."
"This is what they will do, no matter which one of us is the nominee," he added. "The question, then, is not what kind of campaign they'll run; it's what kind of campaign we will run."
-- Superdelegates, are you listening?
Obviously Obama is not perfect, and obviously he still needs scrutiny from the left, as does any politician. However, in my mind this is simple: Obama, of the three big candidates, seems least likely to continue the war, start another war, or turn the Middle East and eventually the world into a hellish wasteland. It's sad when you have to look at three presidential candidates and make a decision based on the one you think would cause the deaths of the fewest people, but that's tops on the list in my opinion. I still fear Obama will not totally stop the killing, but I think he will cause the least deaths.
Truth is, Nader is the best candidate. It's a damn shame that our electoral system is so grossly inaccurate that people, including myself, are afraid to-and feel they can't, vote for the candidate of their choice (Nader). We need election reform before we can get out of this two corporate party crap. It seems a "democracy" would be interested in the most accurate reflection possible of the people's will. There are successful models all over the world, Ireland, Switzerland, etc. The math has been done, and our elections do not represent the will of the people.
I think that she does get it- that she has no chance of being the Dim nominee. I hope that they are both sincere in their statements last night that the country must not have a third bush term and that the people will start to unite to accomplish that "no matter who the nominee is".
We need a de-republicanization~ on a scale to match bush's "de-baathification" in Iraq.
sLiM wrote:
We need a de-republicanization~ on a scale to match bush's "de-baathification" in Iraq.
Amen, brother. And that'll mean that a fair number of Dimocrats will also get swept up in the purge! :)
Can I get an "Amen"?
Yes- yes you can!
Obama cannot beat McCain. Hillary can. That is the bottom line.
Obama gives fantastic speeches, that won't cut it in Sept and Oct. The Repugs will destroy him.
Well KEM, we have all got to TRY and make it so! First message first- and that is to send the rethuglicans PACKING.
We who want to see a democrat can try ~SLIM~. Sorry, but the Repugs will have a field day with Obama and that's the problem, because he really is not what he says he is and they have the ammo to destroy his campaign.
Actually Hillary did not really attack Obama as she could have, and for very good reasons she didn't do so. ___ The Republicans will.___ Notice I didn't say they would "obliterate" him.
Stick a fork in the WHORE, (Randi Rhodes was RIGHT) Hillary is done! Obama will destroy Insane McCain in the general with Edwards or Richardson as his running mate. The Clintons should be tarred-and-feathered and run out of the Democratic Party on a rail.
Obama '08
I think I will take a close look at the other candidates running for the Presidency other than Republicans and Democrats. Yes, Ralph Nader will be one of the candidates, but I also will consider others. I realize they have slim to no chances of winning, but even if my vote is a minor wimper in the forest, at least I did not support the corporate controlled one-party machine with two political factions.
KEM,
I'm not sure I disagree, but if you mean by this that "Clinton can beat McCain," I would almost certainly disagree.
I've given some of my reasons for this before, but here they are in brief:
1)The Clinton brand name is a powerful galvanizing force for Republicans, especially right-wingers. It would be foolish to try to deny this fact. Hillary Clinton seems to be a source of almost irrational hatred among this faction, despite the fact that the Clinton years saw the DP (through Bill) cozying up to traditional Republican party positions and speaking a discourse that it loves (remember Bill Clinton's pronouncements on rap music and such?) The RP will unite behind McCain with incredible force.
2)HC enters a general election with a "trustworthiness" rating below 50%; McCain doesn't. These numbers will go nowhere but down for both candidates, but they hurt her more than Johnny Bomb Bomb (my favorite McCain moniker).
3)She has alienated many people who make up her base. These include faithful DP supporters like MoveOn, whose activist platform she has gone on record as saying she doesn't like. She has also hurt her standing within the black community, a community with a long tradition of forgiving white Democrats for their numerous failings and abandonment of their concerns (whether or not they should), and without black voters she cannot win. So peeing on your base is a bad idea.
4)She has gotten this far largely on the strength of support from white, working-class voters and the elderly. I predict many in the first group (the so-called Reagan Democrats) will defect to Johnny Bomb Bomb in the fall, especially if he can present a serious presidential face to the public and assure them that he is not a nutjob out to remake the world like George W. Shrub.
5)Her campaign staff appears to be the most inept bunch of bunglers I've ever seen. How they managed to take her from being (at the start of the whole race to the nomination) from being the presumed nominee of her party to struggling to beat a first-term Senator is astonishing. Seriously, in the annals of political punditry this has to go down as one of the worst run campaigners in recent memory. So you can expect more of the same if she is the DP nominee.
I'll stop there. The letters on the wall--writ so large that HC can't see them because she's too close--say "Hillary Clinton can't beat McCain."
She can and WILL win ONLY IF Obama is the VP choice and the Mich and Fla delegates are allowed to vote at the convention ERIC. Any other option will insure McCain is our next Bush.
Bill Clinton, lecher-pervert and closet racist, made a derogatory remark about future president Barack Obama. Clinton said something to the effect that Obama should be running on the fact that he hasn't stolen a car "YET." No wonder Clinton's face is so red; mine would be too, if I made such a dumb statement.
Rush Limbaugh is the Clinton's new best friend.
"You may have missed it - almost everyone missed it - but Bill Clinton was on Rush Limbaugh's show the day of the Texas primary. You can hear the radio here. Limbaugh himself was sick that day, apparently, but he had already urged Republicans to cross over to keep Hillary Clinton in the race. Bill saw an opening - and went there.
Now just wrap your mind around this: the Clintons were happy to support a cynical, partisan Republican campaign to wound the Democratic front-runner, and they were brazen enough to go on the Limbaugh show to do so.
There also seems little doubt that Republican mischief played a real role in affecting the results. And they call Obama's call for them to release their tax returns a tactic worthy of Ken Starr. I repeat: the chutzpah and the cynicism just leave you speechless. And as you find it impossible to do much but splutter, the Clintons plow on with new self-serving lies.
You know how I realized this? I saw first hand the way they dealt with gay issues in their first term. They didn't just wimp out on our push for marriage equality, they actively pivoted off homophobia to get a few points (ask Dick Morris; it's one of the things he's actually ashamed of in retrospect). The Clintons even put anti-gay ads on Christianist radio stations in the South to build support for the 1996 re-election. And they continue to show up at gay events claiming to be avatars for our civil rights. And the stupid gays still believe them!" -- Andrew Sullivan
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/03/clinton-went-on.html
The article stated about Hillary Clinton that "In the first three minutes of her address, she asked supporters to contribute money..." That fits well with a striking contrast I've noticed between her campaign and that of Barack Obama.
That contrast is clear if you alternately enter each candidate's name on Google. In both cases you will find a link to the official campaign website at the top of the page where sponsored (paid for) links are placed by the search engine. Click on the links and notice the difference between the pages that show up for each one.
Here is how they have been since I first looked many months ago. On Senator Obama's website, you find an invitation to sign up for campaign events and volunteer opportunities. On Senator Clinton's site, you find a request asking for money (in categories up to $4,600) with a form to enter credit card information.
This difference, which I read as "I invite you, in partnership, to get involved" vs. "Give me your money and trust me" reflects an essential difference between these two good people. For me, one inspires participation in the political system as equals; the other suggests a more paternal perspective, a subtle, though well meaning, sense of superiority.
I'm quite aware that, once someone signs up on either site, they will receive a steady flow of requests for financial contributions. But I still think it is quite telling what each campaign felt important enough to be the first thing someone sees when they reach out to the candidate.
Wow, there are a lot of uncertainties to that scenario. I thought we were talking about the candidates sans VP choice.
What about if she were Obama's VP choice, etc etc? (not that I think either of these options has a snowball's chance in hell of coming to pass, mind you)
correction: "Bill Clinton MADE a derogatory remark...."
The Clintons have followed a scortched-earth strategy to the nomination ever since their numbers started slipping. If I never hear the names Clinton or Bush again in my lifetime, it will be too soon. The damage done to the Democratic Party and to any progressive agenda in general by the Republican-Lite Clintons is immeasurable and catastrophic. It is time for a massive purge of failed conservative policies, ideologies and polititians, and the Clintons are at the top of that list.
KEM... we'll see in november who will win....MCCAIN OR OBAMA....mccain can't even extend his lead over either HILLIARY OR OBAMA even though they are in the middle of a SLUGFEST.....we'll see who MCCAIN REALLY IS....FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP...remmeber that slogan from the repubs ?