John Lewis makes his move towards Obama
A few months ago, when Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) endorsed Hillary Clinton, it was a key development. Lewis, a Democratic icon and civil-right legend, became Clinton’s highest-profile African-American supporter, and sent a signal to the party about Clinton’s strong connection to the African-American community.
As I understand it, Lewis was, a few months prior, undecided on whether to support Clinton or Barack Obama, but cajoling from Bill Clinton reportedly pushed the Georgia congressman into Sen. Clinton’s camp.
Now, it appears circumstances have pushed Lewis in the other direction.
Representative John Lewis, an elder statesman from the civil rights era and one of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s most prominent black supporters, said Thursday night that he planned to cast his vote as a superdelegate for Senator Barack Obama in hopes of preventing a fight at the Democratic convention.
“In recent days, there is a sense of movement and a sense of spirit,” said Mr. Lewis, a Georgia Democrat who endorsed Mrs. Clinton last fall. “Something is happening in America, and people are prepared and ready to make that great leap.”
Mr. Lewis, who carries great influence among other members of Congress, disclosed his decision in an interview in which he said that as a superdelegate he could “never, ever do anything to reverse the action” of the voters of his district, who overwhelmingly supported Mr. Obama.
“I’ve been very impressed with the campaign of Senator Obama,” Mr. Lewis said. “He’s getting better and better every single day.”
Time’s Mark Halperin argued that Clinton’s chances of winning the Democratic nomination, in light of Lewis’ announcement, have been cut in half. That strikes me as a bit of an exaggeration, but I think it’s certainly fair to say this is a major development.
Right off the bat, it’s worth remembering that not all superdelegates carry equal stature and credibility. Lewis is one of the most respected and admired lawmakers in the party. He carries enormous, almost unrivaled, moral authority, and his switch may very well lead others to do the same.
Moreover, it leaves the Clinton campaign’s broader superdelegate strategy looking suspect. The principal reason to distrust the superdelegate counts we see in the media is that these are people who haven’t actually voted yet. They can, and will, change their minds, and are susceptible to prevailing political winds and shifts in momentum. It’s obviously too soon to say, but Lewis’ announcement may signal a break in the dam.
The Clinton campaign has suggested in recent days that the superdelegates would be their ace in the hole. That may no longer be the case. Josh Marshall explained:
The Clinton camp’s super delegate gambit is not only audacious. Far more than that it is simply unrealistic. The super delegates who are gettable for Clinton by loyalty, conviction or coercion are already got. And enough’s been seen of both candidates for everyone to be more than acquainted with them. The ones who remain — who make up roughly half the total — are waiting to see who the winner is.
The truth is that there are over 1000 elected delegates remain to be won. We really don’t know what’s going to happen yet. But if the trend continues and Obama ends the primary season with a clear majority of unelected delegates, the idea that those remaining super delegates will break for the candidate who won fewer delegates, raised less money and is polling worse against the Republican nominee simply makes no sense.
My hunch is this hurts Clinton most because it seems to represent a tipping point. To be sure, it may not be, but that’s certainly the perception that many Democrats may have this morning. The post-Super Tuesday period has been an awkward one for her campaign, between a string of defeats and a significant staff shake-up. But there was also a sense that, if Clinton could keep her team together and focus on some likely victories down the road, this unpleasant streak could pass.
Lewis’ move, in this sense, signals that time may not be on Clinton’s side.
Personally I hope Obama wins and that he is all he seems to be. Of course it's a little like wishing on a star at this point but that's pretty much all we've got left.
I'm pretty sure it's all over for her campaign. Now it's entirely up to her whether she wants to we a graceful or sore loser.
RHM's Blog
RHM @ 2:
If Obama wins do you think Hillary will be VP?
As I've been saying, a lot of these superdelegates are going to go with the winner, because if they come down on the losing side they lose power. He may have shown his hand too soon, but Lewis is setting himself up to be on the winning side.
MargeAggedon @ 3:
Not a snowball's chance in hell!
RHM's Blog
How are Hillary and Obama polling in Texas and Ohio?
I have a feeling that he wanted to go to Obama's side all along but he allowed himself to be swayed by Bill. Now he probably regrets his original decision and not going with his heart to begin with.
I'll sink my teeth into any positive message right now. Feeling hopeful feels so damned good. I don't want to let go.
I don't think Hillary would want to be Obama's vice president. It would be like playing second fiddle all over again.
Michael M. @ 6:
I noticed on CNN last night that Carville is lowering expectations for Hill in Texas and Ohio. He said that if she wins those primaries "it will be the biggest comeback in political history." Well, um, everyone expects her to win them. The real issue is can she crush Barack in order to even make this thing close.
Hillary will win OH and TX
if Hill wins OH and TX "it will be the biggest comeback in political history"
Therefore, March 4th will witness the biggest comeback in political history.
Question is, will you and the media buy the spin?
MargeAggedon @ 3:
If you look at both of them and what they have to gain and loose, if Hillary ends up the candidate it would be wise for her to ask Obama to be running mate, but if Obama in the candidate then he doesn't need (and it would probably hurt him in the long run) Hillary as a running mate. If Obama had the right plan I believe he could get John Edwards to be his VP, but I think Edwards would make a better Attorney General. Richardson would be a good choice, but if he stopped being Gov of NM then I think he would be perfect as Sec. of State. So then you start getting into weird territory when you look at who's left.
But I would say as long as Obama doesn't pick his cousin Dick as a running mate I'm sure he'll do just fine.
The Superdelegate system is anti-democratic, as it allows one delegate the equivalent of many votes, besides their one vote in their state's primary or caucus. It should be eliminated, as it will cause more and greater problems than it was supposed to cure.
"Mr. Lewis, who carries great influence among other members of Congress, disclosed his decision in an interview in which he said that as a superdelegate he could “never, ever do anything to reverse the action” of the voters of his district, who overwhelmingly supported Mr. Obama."
Mr. Lewis is doing the right thing in a very flawed system.
Michael M. @ 6:
Clinton still polling far ahead in OH:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/oh/ohio_democrati...
Interesting commentary on TX:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/casey/5543965.html
By lowering the expectations, if she does win Texas and Ohio, they can crow about the amazing number of votes she got. If she loses both states, they can say they aren't surprised.
I've decided that the best thing for me personally to do, is ignore the polls and pundits and instead wait to see the vote count. That way I don't have so many periods of ups and downs emotionally.
This new buzz word she has about "solutions" doesn't mean jack to me. She says words are cheap and I'll believe her, even when they are her words.
The thing that pissed me off the other day was when McCain used the lines, "Fired up and ready to go" He has to steal lines from Obama? Does his campaign have a creative deficit?
[deleted - not this blog.]
You sure John Lewis is a Democrat?
Did he used to be an Independent, or a republican?
How come he making moves on Obama?
Let's not let these perversions infect our party like they have the party of McCain and Lieberman.
We don't need no 'Larry in the Rest Room' headlines right now, specially when we trying to do good.
"The Clinton camp’s super delegate gambit is not only audacious. Far more than that it is simply unrealistic" Josh Marshall.
That Clinton would rely on such an undemocratic gambit rather than the will of the people is precisely the reason that so many of us reject her in the first place. She has shown that what matters most to her is power, not being a representative of the people, and now more and more people are seeing that clearly.
She is morally unfit to lead, by virtue of her war mongering votes for the War on Iraq and a potential War on Iran, and her cheerleading of the Israeli bombing on Lebanese civilians. She did not even show up for the critical FISA vote, proof that she does not care about the Constitutional rights of the people she wants to "lead".
As much as I feel the Democrats need to win the presidency, I do not believe that it should be with this person.
I'm not a Rethug or Obama fan; the Dems have let the elite and MSM pick two very flawed candidates for us. I guess that's an oxymoron of sorts, how could they not pick two very flawed candidates!
Hillary is going to win Texas and Ohio.
but I'm learning that Texas is pretty much irrelevant, and that even if she won by 20 points, because of the way they proportion their delegates, and since its half primary and half caucus, you can pretty much bet they'll simply split the delegates. not much of a firewall...
most of the rest of the states, save Pennsylvania, are favored for Obama. it doesnt look good for Hillary.
As an Obama supporter from John Lewis's district, I was very glad to hear it.
Lewis is denying the report.
NBC's Andrea Mitchell, this morning, also confirmed the denial; she said she contacted the office and was told the Times and the AP story were not true.
[deleted - refers to deleted post.]
Medical Diagnosis by Video @ 11:
Hell, the entire election process in the US is anti-democratic. There should be just one election. One
manperson, one vote. Winner take all. But then how would the Council on Foreign Relations, i.e. "Big Money" get the puppet they want, who looks after their interests?Right now all the puppets are the same. One is African American talking about change, one is a female WASP talking about experience, one is a male WASP talking about kicking Iran's ass and so on. But they've all sold their souls, and they won't do jack shit for "the common man".
Any way you slice it, you either loose, or you loose.
What about Jerry?
Go Hillary!
Heinrich @ 9:
How can it be a comeback, when she was the one Dems thought would win hands down with no competition just a couple years ago. When you are the fav, you don't make comebacks. Carville needs to get his head out of her ass and look at reality. She only was the favourite because of name recognition, and voters wishing to be back with Bill, before Bush. But, just because getting oral in the Whitehouse isn't as bad as invading, looting and killing, Billy did some nasty killing of Iraqis and Bosnians that Americans forget until their memories are jogged. Repubs have St. Ronnie of Raygun and the Dems seem to have St. Bubba of Blowjobs. Sad. People forget the negatives and only remember the positives.
Michael M. @ 6:
Is Bill Clinton doing any of the polling?
Don't sell Hillary short. She's got a couple of aces up her sleeve.
Remember Lewinsky and that spacey chick that had the nose job?
Well, they're ready to endorse Hillary whenever she needs them.
ysbaddaden @ 27:
Hahahahahahaaha.............I've heard those rumours, but they are just vicious rumours....never been proven!!!
As a 'constituent' of Rep Lewis I can assure you that his opinion don't mean shit. The guy is useless...long since having sold whatever soul he had remaining to the highest bidder (last time I checked he was among the leaders in AIPAC money)...and as for competence, for years he had to have Johnny Isakson's (R-GA) office prepare his own District's budget request. He's a place-holder and should have been put out to pasture years ago. I can't remember the last time he did or said something that was relevant to anything.
Rep. John Lewis was an actual civil rights protester who got beat up and terrorized by those awful southerners in the 1960's. If anyone thinks that Lewis wasn't offended by the dumb civil rights comments by the Clinton's, get help. Now I know many on this site continue to dismiss the fact that Hillary HAD the black vote and BLEW IT with her unforgivably revisionist comments on civil rights, but just check the numbers and notice the jail break from Hillary by black voters. We black folk felt betrayed by the Clinton's. Period. Keep denying the facts people, just like Hillary.
YellowSnow @ 28:
Oh ya, Jennifer Flowers, Paula Jones and Lewinsky all said they support Hillary!! And those are just three over the years!! How many others that got a out of court settlement like those three? For some reason I'm thinking Bill's presidency was like a Mel Brooks movie...sittin' behind the desk in his underwear :-)
But if the trend continues and Obama ends the primary season with a clear majority of
unelected delegates?second last par.
They just said on MSNBC that there are "several" superdelegates who have pledged to Hillary but are now wavering. I don't know what the hell to believe.
pissed off patricia @ 34:
I was astonished to read how much money Obama and Hillary have bribed....er I mean, given the superdelegates....seems real unethical to me
ConcernedCanuck @ 35:
Where did you read that?
pissed off patricia @ 36:
I think it was CNN, but I could be wrong...I'll see if I can find it
Marge @ 14:
Since the dems don't have an 'all or nothing' delegate system, Hillary would need to beat Obama by very large margins, around 20% just to make up the delegates she is losing by. Since Obama won the last 8 contests, (including states where black people are a myth) and is currently polling higher than Hillary nationally and against McCain, raising more money than Hillary, it doesn't look good for her, UNLESS she can garner the lion's share of superdelegates.
Anyway no one is saying its all over, just that currently Obama has an advantage and that it would be difficult for HRC to come back. So get the sand out of your vagina and stop genderbaiting you troll.
Marge @ 14:
Good insight there Marge, in my opinion. I also think there aren't enough women voting as they would like. Call me cynical, but I think there are still too many men in the country that control their mate's vote, in effect controlling two ballots. This isn't working in Hillary's favor either.
Mark Halperin is an assclown, what a total loser, rarely is his information right, he is BIAS.
John Lewis makes his move towards Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0ns8t9iQck
[deleted - see the commenting policy]
DirtyDawg@30 Yeah. He's sooooo meaningless that the Clinton's are kissing his black butt for his endorsement. Anyone who dumps Hillary opinions doesn't mean shit. You are a tool.
pissed off patricia @ 36:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/14/clinton-and-obama-gave-su_n_867...
ConcernedCanuck @ 37:
I saw a thing on drugde about superdelegates getting cash from candidates but didn't read it. I did however read a thing about a week ago in the Times about a superdelegate, HRC supporter who also was a big donor to HRC. Both of these things make me feel sick. I can't believe super-d's and candidates can be giving cash back and forth, you'd think there'd be some kind of 'conflict of interest' rule in place. Makes the whole process even seedier than it already is
ConcernedCanuck @ 32:
Yeah, in the scene with Bill and the horse, Bill was the one that farted.
[refers to deleted post.]
YellowSnow @ 42:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfkPYDQYNY0
pissed off patricia @ 36:
Found it...sorry it wasn't CNN.... http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/02/superd...
Left&Left @ 31:
So, because he endured beatings years ago, we should take notice when he speaks? Since when has getting your ass kicked been a required bullet on a resume? I got sick of hearing this kind of talk when McCain started wearing his POW status on his sleeve. It gives a person NO qualifications whatsoever.
[refers to deleted post.]
Oh and here was another one
http://www.capitaleye.org/inside.asp?ID=336
Steve@47 Ask the Clinton's, Steve. Their the ones begging him for his endorsement.
DirtyDawg @ 28:
sounds like maybe he's trying to buy it back (his integrity)
this is a good first move...
It may not be truly over for Hillary but the wheels are falling off faster and faster everyday.
what WOULD happen if Lewinsky did endorse let's say McCain or Obama or even Hillary Clinton?
What kinda news cycle would THAT be!!!
ConcernedCanuck @ 49:
I shouldn't feel surprised after reading that, but I do. Money really is what makes the world go around. What's love got to do with it? Just thought I would do some fancy footwork with song titles to express my feelings.
pissed off patricia @ 55:
It is sad when the only candidate that looks and sounds like change, turns out to be same as the rest......America needs a maid service in Washington with a heavy duty vacuum cleaner
Per Burntorangereport.com(Texas blog) Clinton leads Obama 49-41. This compared to the last of Jan when they were polling 48-38 for Clinton. Obama has not campaigned here since last summer.
[refers to deleted post.]
I bet if you posted a link to Wilson's article some of us might go and read it.
America Needs Health Care, both these candidates have pretty good plans
About the Healthcare Crisis in America.
I used to be over here (Thailand) because I was working with an American Security Co.
When that job ended I moved back to the US.
My wife tried for over a year to get Insurance but was turned down by everyone because she had a supposed pre-existing condition (which was actually a misdiagnosed thyroid condition) After a year of trying to get that purged from her record we finally figured we should get insurance that didn't cover that particular condition. We were willing to pay$300 per month, but still no takers.
So, we moved back to Thailand (I'm not really in Bangkok, but in Chiang Mai). We get Blue Cross Blue Shield for $22. per month. A complete physical cost $60 and includes far more than you get in the U.S. where they mostly just test for stuff like Cholesterol so they can sell you Rx for ridiculous prices. An MRI is $125. My friend had his appendix removed without insurance for $400.
The Hospitals in both Bangkok and Chiang Mai are top of the line.
So here we stay, forced to live in a tropical paradise for less than $1500 per month.
BB
It's the typical faux moron, adoring his role model of Hiltler. Everybody knows that the complete embarrassing idiots on Faux are hired right from the loony bins they escaped from.
Bangkok Bob @ 58:
Bob, America needs healthcare but both these candidates have crap insurance plans. All the wealth in the world, and rich nations still feed the hungry insurance industry. It's pathetic. Treating bodies like they would treat your car. "I'm sorry sir, your policy does not cover that dent in your head, perhaps an autobody specialist could help you"
Swinging the nomination to Hillary based on superdelegates was always a bad plan, I'm glad to see that people are recognizing that. I personally know 6 people that have said they will not vote for Hillary if she wins the nomination with superdelegates overriding the popular vote. Two said they would vote for McCain, four said they would vote for a third party candidate or not at all.
And truthfully, yes, the two that would vote for McCain are anti-Clinton in general and wouldn't vote for her anyway. The others, however, would probably support her if she won the nomination in what they think is a fair manner.
Left&Left @ 50:
That is my point. ALL the candidates are running on superficial platforms, not one says anything of real substance. When it comes down to it, the disenfranchised are only a small consideration to them. They consider them only enough to get elected, and only enough to keep them popular. Other than that, it's as the comment above said, it is the money that makes things go round. The more you have, the more they let you really participate.
ConcernedCanuck @ 60:
an obama plan, in conjunction with insurance industry regulation and prosecution in the noble spirit of Cuomo in NY, would put america on the path towards appropriate, fair, affordable and universal health care
I am very disturbed by the Clintons campaign tactics to dismiss states that have voted against them or certain demogratics of populations that don't vote for her. When you compare her strategy is I only matter to those that can help me get ahead arrogance to a message of hope and unity, and moving forward, I realize our only hope is Obama, and that Hillary could never represent all Americans like Obama can.
Mark Penn is a terrible person. He is CEO of a Public relations company. Read this to see how Mark Penn makes his millions and ask yourself if Hillary could really represent Americans or corporate interests and hide the truth from Americans.
http://home.intekom.com/tm_info/ge_bm.htm
FOOLISH DEMS...the perfect ticket would have been Clinton/Obama...sets up everything as we'd hope it to be...that is, until the terrorist levels go up OR an attack actually occurs to slide McCain right into the Oval Office!!!! All this back biting and baiting by our candidates is playing right into REPUG hands...and, yes, tell me WHY Hillary keeps Mark Penn???? Glad I'm old as watching another Republican march into the WH will completely demoralize me...time to retreat!
So why did Mr. Lewis change his mind. Was it over issues or over momentum? What leap is he talking about, leap year perhaps?
Sunnyside @ 64:
Mark Penn was the same person who briefed Erik Prince of Blackwater before his Congressional testimony. He is a corporate hooker enslaved to the almighty dollar.
cleo @ 66:
His district went overwhelmingly to Obama. My guess is that was a pretty good persuader.
Dancer @ 65:
WRONG-- perfect ticket is Obama/Clinton....not for any sound reasons, but the Clinton-hating right would have such effulgent glee over Hillary having to play second banana, such a ticket would deflate entirely the "firing up" of the right's base, and indeed, I'd bet many a limbaugh listener would vote to see Hillary Clinton have to bite her lip and smile standing next to and serving under another, less deserving, President.... imagining in their fantastic minds that she would be emotionally devastated ....
Steve @ 47:
I couldn't agree more. John Lewis continues to occupy a seat in Georgia's delegation based on events occuring 40 years ago, which even then don't bear any relation to his purported qualifications as a house representative.
I live in Atlanta. Lewis (more likely, his staff) submitted an op-ed piece to the AJC not more than two weeks ago, arguing why he was sticking by Hillary Clinton and citing her wealth of experience. Lewis also argued that those who questioned his endorsement were not really interested in democracy. People are questioning whether he's part of the political machine, and subject to a "slave mentality".
Personally, I think the vote in Georgia woke Lewis and his staff up to the possibility that he could lose his House seat over a Hillary endorsement. While Lewis hasn't been challenged in years, his contribution to Georgia is minimal. He doesn't bring in federal dollars to his district commensurate with his experience or the taxes we pay. Moreover, the seat he occupies is safely democratic. Why shouldn't some young, articulate, enterprising man or woman make the case that Georgia appreciates Representative Lewis's past contributions but it's time for new leadership? It's not like any other democrat in that seat would vote any differently than Lewis on just about every issue, so why should it belong to him?
The Last Word @ 70:
this gives rise to the beautiful philosophical question, does motivation matter when you do the right thing?
so now Lewis is supporting the right candidate....does it matter if his motivation is selfish, greedy, machiavellian?
no
the best candidate is getting the vote. the good guys win. the party wins. and in november, the country wins.
to hell with his motivation.....
I am a woman and will vote for the candidate that speaks to the public without a teleprompter. Hence - I will cast my vote for Hillary Clinton.
When Barak Obama makes a speach, he stands on the stage and says a few words then reads from the teleprompter. Ditto for John McCain. I want a President that can answer tough questions - that can speak to a crowd and make sense - someone that takes each side into consideration. I don't think that is too much to ask for when I am casting my one and only vote.
Grey @ 19:
Speaking of Andrea Mitchell; once again she referred to the "Democrat Party".
Please Andrea, and ALL of you party haters; IT IS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.
GrammyinPA @ 73:
i've heard donna brazile say the democrat party on This Week
it's not a big deal
lopaloo102 @ 51:
You say he's trying to 'buy back' his integrity...I say when a comparatively unknown Democratic candidate like Obama gets positive things said about him from a David Brooks and a George Will, something's fishy. Are they setting us up for a fall or do they know something about Obama's likely governing strategy that we don't?
Who The Hell Is John Lewis?
These assumptions are starting to piss me off. I could care less what or who John Lewis endorses. Actually,I am Black, and I am tired of the media telling me how important someone I never heard of is. The god dam name should speak for itself. With me, that would mean a flat dull "who the hell is John Lewis."
The Republicans and the conservative media really don't want to face Hillary Clinton. This so obvious ,and every time I see conservative rooted campaign moves to "frame" something that may not be an issue, I will speak out.
You would think this shit concerning super delegates was about something new. It is not. These rules have been in place for a long time. This is just another attempt in trying to drive a permanent wedge in the two to one advantage the Democrats have on the Republicans going into the 2008 elections.
Seriously, if I never hear another prediction Clinton is doom, it will be too soon. The media stepped over the line with their 24/7 "we hate Clinton" coverage. I have never scene it so bad. I thought the media was suppose to be neutral. Their influence has distorted the Democratic primary process and continues to distort the political rules associated our election process. This must stop.
Joseph
Read the litany of Op-Ed pieces at WaPo about the Hillary campaign. Yow.
"The media stepped over the line with their 24/7 “we hate Clinton” coverage. I have never scene it so bad. I thought the media was suppose to be neutral."
Tweety had a point, Joseph. When the Clinton press corps calls their bosses and intimidates them, there's going to be brawl. This isn't patty-cake.
DirtyDawg @ 75:
when you hear nincompoops like brooks and will and limbaugh claiming to endorse (as did limbaugh) or admire obama, it means nothing (and sometimes, on a more careful read, one sees they aren't saying what they seem to be saying)
their adulation and support of bush renders their arguments, across the board, corrupted, unfounded, and nonsensical--- not that we can derive anything from their conclusions, but that one ought dismiss whatever they say as nonsense....not for the content of what they are saying, but because they are saying it....
like the babblings of a lunatic in an asylum... you cannot try to make sense of it, somehow render it sane....it's all nonsense, and has no implication/bearing upon the real world of objective analysis and observation.
Frank Lutz makes a move towards Obama
bmw 528 @ 67:
bmw 528 @ 67:
(Ooppps, bad typing but the thought is well placed)
Oh, pleeeze. So is your “savior” Obama and every other paid whore in D.C. You need to wake up.
rain @ 72:
Howard Beale used a prompter.
As a fellow constituent of Rep. Lewis, I guess I need to remind you that he was the first member of Congress to publicly advocate the impeachment of Bush, back in December 2005.
Short of some shocking change, it's all over for Hillary. Obama now has the lead in Texas, a place where she needs a substantial win. Oh well, I gave her my vote (and my state, though not personally. heh).
http://americanresearchgroup.com/
Johnny2Bad @ 82:
I there is one thing I would like Obama to do is change Washington. He doesn't take money from Lobbiests and he doesn't have a corporate whore running his campaign. If I choose to vote Hillary because I am cynical towards what Obama can do, why bother to vote?
rain @ 72:
If the difference between John McCains and Hillarys speeches and Obamas is a teleprompter. Then somebody get these people a teleprompter.
clinton uses a microchip (implanted)..... :-)
and aliens whisper into her ear, (along with, of course, bill)
peaceful easy feeling @ 4:
Bunk they are not going to lose power what the hell are you talking about
Sunnyside @ 86:
If you think Obama is not on the money gravy train from the corprotist...I got some very nice swamp land for you to look at fool!
Stephen @ 89:
if clinton wins, she appoints cronies and supporters-- as did bush.
that's old school dc politics.... that's how it works if you've been in DC scratching backs and legally grifting and grafting for more than 1 term....
but if obama wins, you're right-- there will be no tit for tat, cronyism...
lewis has been there too long-- and is thus too cynical-- to believe that obama will break that cycle....
and his smart fear of retribution and retaliation from clinton is why lewis is backing down on switching to obama-- until it is a bit more inevitable, as it will be post ohio.
There have been no allegations that Obama broke the law or violated ethics rules in more than 15 years of informal dealings with Rezko. Local citizen watchdog groups have called Obama's failure to distance himself from Rezko earlier a lapse in judgment.
So in 15 years Mr squely Clean didn't get some inkiling that this guy was dirty....I don't believi t
lopaloo102 @ 91:
Hmmmmm counting chickens that don't exist yet...Hmmmmm good move!
Stephen @ 93:
The business of Washington is appoininting cronies and supporters. What do you think they spend all this money for you fool! If there wasn't some reward for this nonsense no one would be doing it. Same as it ever was! Grow up and get that idealism out of your eyes before you smack into a tree!
But Hillary will put the tits back into tit-for-tats.
bubba @ 85:
Yeah I know what you mean you know it was really over for Hillary in New Hampshire just like all the pundits and polls were saying.....oh what ....Oh She won New Hampshire and she won New Mexico and Never Mind......
rain @ 72:
You know, it's really ok to say that you're voting for Hillary because she's a woman and given the choice between two people who are similar on the issues you'd prefer to support your own. Most people wouldn't blame you for that. Come on, there is just absolutely no way that you actually think she's a better speaker than he is.
Stephen @ 94:
right...that's the business of washington
obama, on the other hand, is in the business of governing...
and that means appointing the most qualified to public service, not cronies and supporters
don't be a curmudgeon, stephen.....DC is corrupt and broken, yes....but not everyone aspiring to public service is likewise corruptly motivated....
obama is no savior....
but he is no DC insider, already corrupted....
give him a chance to fail.
Stephen @ 92:
These kinds of things have happened before. Truman came up through the Pendergast machine in St. Louis, and managed to stay scrupulously clean despite it.
Ben @ 99:
Scratch that, it was Kansas City not St. Louis.
Obama is already winning! If the media would report it correctly then everyone would know. When they report del;egate counts they are including elected delegates AND super delegates. If they just showed elected pledged delegates, then everyone would see that this race is not close at all, Obama is sweeping. The only thing keeping it close are super delegates who MAY vote for Hillary.
Obama pledged delegates : 1096
Hillary pledged delegates : 977 a difference of 119.
Throw the supposed superdelegates in there and the difference goes up to 42. Gee I wonder which one is higher 119 or 42. I hate this media controlled BS. Obama is beating her bad, why don't they just come out and say it.
lopaloo102 @ 63:
Get rid of insurance companies altogether and it would put America on th path towards affordable, accessable universal healthcare....Forcing everyone to have insurance? Does NOTHING. Get insurance industry completely out of the equation. State run with Fed tax dollars taken from excessive military spending. DONE.
Stephen @ 92:
This kind of smear is so unnecessary. Bring it back to the issues. Clinton will need Obama and Obama will need Clinton in the general election. These smears, or in fighting, can be used against the Dems.
Joseph
rain @ 72:
Boy will you be sorely disappointed IF that is what you truly believe. There is no such thing, no matter how much you click your red shoes together and wish it. LOL!
Joseph @ 103:
no, this proves that mr squeaky clean is not squeaky clean
so what?
he's still the most qualified, and the least corrupt
and, if we speak in relative terms,
relative to mccain, obama is squeaky clean
relative to clinton, obama is squeaky clean
lopaloo102 @ 75:
I'm NOT impressed about anything donna brazile says.
If she said it, she is wrong.
Of course, she isn't interested in setting the standards for the Democratic Party. Remember she is leaving soon !!
I'm sorry, but if Obama had 2 times the amount of delegates as Hillary, or even more than half, maybe I'd be piling on Hillary too...but 4 weeks ago, people weren't asking "Is Obama done?" even though initially he was further down.
2 Weeks ago, it was predicted because of DEMOGRAPHICS Obama would do better in the Potomac primary, and the previous 3 states. This funk that everyone is hyping is a typical lull in states...there are how many more states left? There are how many superdelegates to announce?
Hillary is far from finished...and sorry, but gaining more media attention and praise (along with votes) from republicans does not equal "Obama's getting better and better."
You all (or you PEOPLE, for those sensitives) might want to check out the stats for percentages of republicans voting for Obama in the last primaries...MORE republicans voting for Obama than Dems?
He's milquetoast if he wins...
GrammyinPA @ 107:
if the conditions that would prompt brazile to leave (a nomination that overides pledged delegates and popular votes, and is decided by superdelegates) actually occur (which i seriously doubt).... there will be an exodus of many, and a trouncing in the general...
if that perfect storm occurs, i will not only leave the democratic party, i'll campaign for mccain, out of spite :-)
GrammyinPA @ 107:
And regardless of if it's democrat or democratic, the same press we've been harping on for the past 7 years of giving a pass to bush and his f*cked up policies are now being spoonfed to my fellow progressives as if it's the word of God.."Obama this, Obama that...he's great, he's awesome, he's perfect."
Newt Gingrich..linking Obama to JFK..Peggy Noonan speaking on his positives...My boss voting for Obama in the primary...Wow, looks like alot of people's brains turned off in regards to media manipulation.
Good luck with that.
lopaloo102 @ 109:
You might have to vote for McCain regardless, seeing as how well over a million people from Florida and Michigan might not bother showing up to vote in November because the party penalized the voters because of the DNC leaders within those states.
Oh, and:
1. ALL of the Democratic candidates were on the FLORIDA ballots. ALL of the candidates including Obama were on the ballots.
2. None of the candidates were supposed to campaign in Florida, HOWEVER, Obama ran television ads weeks before the primary. He was the only one.
3. Hillary won the popular vote by a wide margin against Obama.
4. The Florida primary held on January 29th was a valid election.
5. There is no need to have a redo election because the Florida primary was valid.
6. Hillary came to Florida AFTER the primary to thank Floridians. She cares about us and was preparing for the general election because Florida could go either way. With Hillary here, she solidified the Dems - Florida is crucial in the general election to win the presidency.
Josh @ 111:
Josh, you keep bringing up a valid point on florida and michigan, but you advocate a bogus solution that any reasonable person would object to...
the only fair solution is a do-over in each state....
florida and michigan were warned that if they moved up their primary, they'd be penalized...and they got what they were told was coming....
any reasonable person would support a do-over, at the DNCs expense (as they helpded create this mess)
any reaonable person would object to simply counting the votes as they came in, despite all those legalistic meaningless points you make about the legitimacy of the florida election....
if obama had won florida, you'd be arguing against yourself....
The good thing about having Clinton as the Veep for Obama, is that the wingnuts would be afraid to assassinate Mr Obama, lest Mrs. Clinton become President by default.
You know, back when the Clintons were doing this, it was called massaging the news. Keeping up a flood of stories, all with one supposed story: Obama the unstoppable. Only this one is, well, not quite true. http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories/2008/02/15/lewis_0215.html?...
Or the story the other day about the former Clinton co-chairman "flipping" to Obama. Anybody notice he's a Chicago pol in the Daley orbit? That it really isn't a "flip" at all, that he was the Daley voice in the Clinton '92 campaign? That he's still supporting the candidate (a local guy) supported by the Daley faction out of Chicago? Remember the denunciations of the "unethical" Daley faction during the 2000 recount fiasco? Now, the Daley faction of the party is reborn, bright and shiny and clean.
So, yesterday's story: a news release parroted by all the media, with less substance than you'd think. Today's story: John Lewis switches! Only, not so much. And the spin wagon continues. I mean, it's all right. The Obama campaign has learned how to spin the media and make them sing his tune. As you'd think they would, being tough-nosed Chicago politicians, and this time with a squeaky-clean front man.
2. Obama paid for national television spots and had cleared it with the DNC beforehand.
3. Hillary was the original frontrunner by a wide margin, and Obama did no campaigning in the state and thus had no opportunity to make up the difference.
4. It was not permitted by the DNC, the party heads in Florida had been informed what would happen if they moved it ahead of schedule, and the lack of campaigning by Obama and Edwards made it a virtual certainty that the national frontrunner was going to win. But yea other than all that it was valid.
6. I tend to think it was more out of her own political self interest than "caring" for Floridians, but I'm cynical like that. In any case yes Florida is important to the national election.
And I'm sure that even you would have to admit that if any Michigan delegates are to be seated they absolutely have to have a new vote. That's especially true when you take into consideration the fact that Hillary only managed 55% as the only candidate on the ballot, with a full 40% voting uncommitted.
Josh and Joseph are about the only two who are making sense. Doesn't it bother anyone that so many Republicans are making the choice in a Democratic primary. They are in greater numbers than the Democrats and if you think $200,000 a year latte sipping elites are going to vote Dem in November, then you are all naive. They are choosing our candidate for us and in Nov they are voting McCain. And Joseph s right. We are destroying our own party. Stop the Hillary bashing!!! We need to unite!!
lopaloo102 @ 72:
Of course, I assume we can agree that the assertion about the best candidate is just an opinion.
grand Marnier @ 116:
Greater numbers than the Democrats? Umm, not exactly. Here are the percentage of voters identifying themselves as Republicans based on exit polls available on MSNBC:
Alabama - 5%
Arizona - 2%
Arkansas - 4%
California - 3%
Connecticut - 2%
Delaware - 1%
Florida - 4%
Georgia - 4%
Illinois - 6%
Iowa - 3%
Kansas - 5%
Louisiana - 5%
Maryland - 3%
Massachusetts - 2%
Michigan - 3%
Missouri - 6%
Nevada - 4%
New Hampshire - 3%
New Jersey - 3%
New Mexico - 2%
New York - 1%
Oklahoma - 7%
South Carolina - 4%
Tennessee - 3%
Utah - 5%
Virginia - 7%
Some of you indicated a desire to know more about how the candidates will fare about delegates in Texas. May I refer you to Texas kaos dot com; Feb. 11th there is an article by Matttx, titled "There is no such Thing as the Texas Primary, Part 11". It certainly enlightened me and I have lived here many years.
Kennedy and Kerry should do the same as Lewis. Clinton won Mass. Primary and they suppprted Obama
sansho1 @ 85:
I have two problems with Lewis:
(1) He's ineffective as a member of Congress. Atlanta has severe traffic and water problems yet Lewis is unable to secure federal funding commensurate with his tenure, Atlanta's contribution to fedederal coffers, and Atlanta's need. In my opinion, Atlanta (and Georgia, as a result) would be better served by someone who voted the same way but who actually had the pull to make something happen. What legislation has Lewis introduced? What dollars has he brought home?
(2) Lewis is attached at the hip to the party machine. His op-ed regarding his support for Hillary Clinton cannot possibly be reconciled with the shift in his position, other than to conclude that one or more of his staffers told him he was in danger of exposing himself politically. If John Lewis's qualifications for Congress are his integrity, and steadfastedness, and principles, I'd venture that he just took a mighty shot.
Personally,
champ @ 120:
Fine by me, if the superdelegates who have already pledged their support instead switched to whoever won their state's primaries it would still end up being a 14 delegate net gain for Obama. They actually both have some pretty big tallies from states they didn't win. Obama has 12 pledged superdelegates from California and 9 from Massachusetts, while Clinton has 25 just from the Potomac states (and DC) she lost this week.
I am simply overjoyed at the prospect of an endorsement of Congressman Lewis, however I just wish that none of them would have jumped the gun and went with Senator Clinton so early.
I really hope that with the endorsement of Congressman Lewis, there will be many more of them changing their minds and doing the right thing.
We really need a man like Senator Obama after the endurance of George Bush, he is just what we need to heal our wounds and bring us all together to help restore our country.
I wouldn't count Senator Clinton out....at least she is campaigning on issues and all obama says is we need change, we need hope, it's time for a new generation (which he took form JFK's speech) He talks a lot but says nothing. That is why he doesn't want to debate because in a debate he has to answer questions. Have you ever noticed in a debate that Senator Clinton can answer questions without batting an eye and obama has to stop and consider his answer. I still have HOPE that Americans will see the difference and realize that Senator Clinton is the only one qualified to be the nominee. The obama "movement' is just that a movement and the followers don't even know what he stands for and don't care, they just want to jump on the band wagon. Don't people know that just getting GW out of office is CHANGE.....of course we want change but obama is not the change that we want. Open your eyes and ears voters and listen to both of them and you will have to vote for Senator Clinton.
Comments are closed on this entry