This is the Presidential Campaign Thread.

Barack Obama Vs. John McCain.

Edited November 6, 200817 yr by Toups

KO really did hand Bush his ass last night. It was the best commentary I have heard in decades.

Wop to California. Now let's see Arnold do the right thing and say the courts have ruled, we're moving forward.

Big hats' off to Hillary Clinton. She stepped up today and told the pres to stick it and good for her. She called hiim on his Nazi BS.

You know, I read about California and I'm proud of em. I'm from Texas and GWB is the shame of Texas. Believe me, it's not easy being the shame of Texas. Maybe the Dixie Chicks could write a song about Bush the Embarrassment.

He's good today as well. I could do without the Bill O'Reilly stuff but I know their feud is the joy of their lives.

He said that he respected the court's decision and that he won't support an amendment to the constitution that would overturn the ruling. It might become a voting issue in November depending on whether the people wanting to add it to the ballot are able to do so.

Arnold needs to come up with a viable plan for balancing the budget because now he wants to dip into the transportation tax along with some other bad ideas. I can't even think of anyone in office in the state, city or county of interest to me today besides Henry Waxman.

I saw that earlier. She did a good thing.

You know, I thought that Bush was still Texas' Favorite Son (To hear him tell it). Glad to hear that those who backed them have woke up. And, if he wants to start comparing folks to Nazis..........he needs to first get a picture of his grandfather, Prescott Bush, who ran a bank that profited from the Nazis during WWII.

Jackass.

It's about time the country moved into the 21st Century as far as gay rights are concerned. This close-minded BS is something I'm sick of, and that the country can do without.

I will remind myself not to complain much about Arnold if he does do something complaint worthy because I can see Villaragosa is setting himself up to run for governor and I hope that doesn't happen.

Waxman and Berman endorsing Obama is flying under the radar today.

I actually want Villaraigosa to run and be the first hispanic governor (I think he would be the first) but not just because of that but since I feel he would do the best job. However, I do not want Fabian Nunez as the nominee in 2010. He is too much of an opportunist, way too relaxed on immigration, and will say what is right for him rather than what is right for the people...and, after he used campaign contributions to shop in Paris and drink their wine, I don't trust him. I am all for a latino or Hispanic being the governor-just not that one!

I heard about Waxman and Berman. I wonder if Obama won their districts....

he needs to first get a picture of his grandfather, Prescott Bush, who ran a back that profited from the Nazis during WWII.

Bingo! I am hoping people would research his family more in depth and find this out

I actually want Villaraigosa to run and be the first hispanic governor (I think he would be the first) but not just because of that but since I feel he would do the best job.

Does it even matter or not whether he's doing his present job? He was barely in office before he went over to Asia talking about trade agreements. At least spend a few months in the city that elected you and take care of some business before globe trotting. He does more things to campaign for higher office than he does for the city. He's the worse mayor I've seen so far.

I want a governor who is going to do his job or hers for that matter. I definitely don't see Villaraigosa as the one.

I heard about Waxman and Berman. I wonder if Obama won their districts....

I really don't think you want to go there unless you have already calculated how many SDs HC would have to give up under that criteria. But it doesn't matter because SDs are free to support whoever they want to support.

Does it even matter or not whether he's doing his present job? He was barely in office before he went over to Asia talking about trade agreements. At least spend a few months in the city that elected you and take care of some business before globe trotting. He does more things to campaign for higher office than he does for the city. He's the worse mayor I've seen so far.

I really don't think you want to go there unless you have already calculated how many SDs HC would have to give up under that criteria. But it doesn't matter because SDs are free to support whoever they want to support.

From what it looks like, he is doing his job in Los Angeles because reports show how well liked he is down there. He also said that, if you come to California, you need to learn English. I agree there and am glad to see someone take a stand on that important issue. I am tired of this "to continue this message in English" BS when I live in a state that has English as the official language in the state constitution. I will take your word for the Asia trips but there can be some good to come from trade but also bad...The WTO and NAFTA have pluses and minuses.

I think each one would have to give up SDs if we went by the criteria of states and districts won (my U.S. Congresswoman, who is a Democrat SD, would have to switch from Obama to Hillary because our district voted for her). I mean, CA has the most superdelegates so most or perhaps all of them go to her....same with New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Texas-four big states.

Edited May 16, 200817 yr by DevotedToAMC

Could John McCain tempt you with Al Gore? McCain is presently trying to distinguish himself from Bush on the environment and might see Al Gore as a great partner in that cause (not that I think Al Gore would align himself with JM) but if he could, would it work for you?

Yes.

To anyone who thinks Al Gore will be McCain's running mate...I say dream on dudes. You will never see anything like that happen with Gore. He is far too smart and sophisticated to align himself with the likes of douchebag McBush

From what it looks like, he is doing his job in Los Angeles because reports show how well liked he is down there.

Great but I have yet to encounter anyone that shares that sentiment. Besides what does being well liked (even if I don't see it) has to do with doing his job? He could be charming some people without doing his job.

He also said that, if you come to California, you need to learn English. I agree there and am glad to see someone take a stand on that important issue. I am tired of this "to continue this message in English" BS when I live in a state that has English as the official language in the state constitution.

I will take your word for the Asia trips but there can be some good to come from trade but also bad...The WTO and NAFTA have pluses and minuses.

You missed my point here. He barely started his job before he left the city. Stay put and work in the city before taking trips that may or may not end up being fruitful.

I think each one would have to give up SDs if we went by the criteria of states and districts won (my U.S. Congresswoman, who is a Democrat SD, would have to switch from Obama to Hillary because our district voted for her). I mean, CA has the most superdelegates so most or perhaps all of them go to her....same with New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Texas-four big states.

Since they don't have to follow these criteria then it's a moot issue. I don't think they are going to change the rules or criteria governing SDs now.

Today on the presidential campaign trail

Associated Press/AP Online

By The Associated Press

IN THE HEADLINES

Democrats say McCain was willing to negotiate with Hamas ... After GOP stumbles in the South, Obama warns Republicans about critical ads ... Democratic Party panel members show little interest in Clinton's call to seat disputed delegates ... Obama picks up endorsements from former Edwards delegate, California congressman

---

Democrats accuse McCain of hypocrisy on Hamas

WASHINGTON (AP) - Democrats accused John McCain Friday of hypocrisy on the question of whether the United States should negotiate with terrorists and dictators, saying the certain Republican nominee had previously been willing to negotiate with the militant Palestinian group Hamas.

In an op-ed published Friday in The Washington Post, former Clinton State Department official James Rubin said that McCain, responding to a question in a television interview two years ago about whether U.S. diplomats should be working with the Hamas government in Gaza, said:

"They're the government; sooner or later we are going to have to deal with them, one way or another, and I understand why this administration and previous administrations had such antipathy toward Hamas because of their dedication to violence and the things that they not only espouse but practice, so ... But it's a new reality in the Middle East. I think the lesson is people want security and a decent life and decent future, that they want democracy. Fatah was not giving them that."

Rubin, who interviewed McCain for the British network Sky News, said McCain is "guilty of hypocrisy" and accused him of "smearing" Democrat Barack Obama. On Thursday, McCain suggested that Obama was naive and inexperienced for expressing a willingness to meet with rogue leaders like Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

McCain campaign spokesman Tucker Bounds said Friday that McCain has long said he would impose preconditions before meeting with Hamas or other radical groups and leaders.

full article link: http://www.verizon.net/newsroom/portals/ne...ref=articlePage

will this gay marriage in california have an impact on this and how?

curious because i love reading what yall say...

After some talk with some friends (and a great one at that), I realized that my "stupid" comment may have offended some people. Though I feel that way, I probably should have worded it differently.

The following is from Yahoo: http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080516/pl_politico/10396

Perfect timing: Obama's super show-stoppers

Jeanne CummingsFri May 16, 5:40 AM ET

With her deep party ties, New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton was supposed to own the superdelegate primary.

But in the last two months, it's been the rookie, Democratic rival Barack Obama, who has maximized his superdelegate moments.

When new images of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's "Goddamn" America sermon emerged in March, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson was escorted to a stage to dub the Illinois senator a "once-in-a-lifetime leader" and steady the candidate.

In the aftermath of another staggering wave of Wright publicity, and after Obama was thrashed in the Pennsylvania primary, it was former Democratic National Committee chairman and one-time Clinton backer Joe Andrew's turn to stanch the bleeding, as Obama fought for a close finish in Andrew's home state of Indiana.

And then there was former presidential challenger John Edwards on stage this week in Michigan, endorsing Obama and putting the brakes on any momentum Clinton might have seized from her West Virginia primary rout.

It is unclear whether the timing of these show-stopping endorsements was the product of luck or design. Both the candidates and the superdelegates are on virgin turf, feeling their way through a primary phase that hasn't been tested since the nominating rules were written in the late 1980s.

Obama's campaign won't elaborate on its superdelegate strategy. "As people tell us they support us, we release it," said Bill Burton, a campaign spokesman.

That's pretty much how it worked in Andrew's case.

In an interview, the former DNC chairman said the campaign never overtly asked for his support since he'd already announced his backing of Clinton. But it stayed in contact with him, seeking guidance on issues or strategy.

That lack of pressure impressed Andrew, who said he viewed it as "part and parcel with their commitment not to play the political game the old way."

Once he made up his mind to switch his pledge, he called the campaign on a Tuesday and said he would like to go public on Thursday when he could get back home to Indiana from Washington.

"They said, 'OK,'" Andrew said.

Such a hands-off approach, of course, doesn't fully explain the made-for-television moments that surrounded the Edwards and Richardson endorsements. And people close to the campaign say that some superdelegate announcements have been delayed a day or two to ensure full impact.

Richardson, a former Bill Clinton Cabinet secretary, has told reporters that he decided to endorse Obama a week before it became public. The Obama campaign, on the day of the announcement, said only that the governor had informed it "recently" about his decision.

There is no doubt, however, about the impact of the March 21 event in Oregon that came on the heels of Obama's well-received speech in Philadelphia about race in America.

Richardson's effusive endorsement drowned out the Wright story, sent a powerful signal to Hispanics and other superdelegates, and so angered Clinton supporters that consultant James Carville was reduced to calling his former friend "Judas."

"It's like playing a bridge hand," said Peter Hart, a Democratic polling expert. "You want to use your trump cards at the right time and in the right way."

Beyond the big names, the Obama campaign has also employed his superdelegate pledges to create a lower-decibel -- drip, drip, drip -- feeling of inevitability to his nomination quest.

It began as trickle after Super Tuesday, with two superdelegates announcing one day, followed by another one two days later. Then they came in threes and fives. Now there seems to be a steady flow, boosting Obama to what is currently a 288.5 to 270.5 advantage over Clinton.

In addition to unveiling Edwards, Obama countered Clinton's West Virginia win this week with endorsements from another former Bill Clinton-era DNC chairman, Roy Romer; the steelworkers union; the NARAL Pro-Choice America abortion-rights group; and three former Securities and Exchange commissioners.

"You don't have control of your own destiny, because a lot depends on when these people want to come out, and they have different ways to stage it," said Bill Carrick, a neutral Democratic consultant. "But when you have three or four a day, you have a story every day about it."

The incremental nature of the process runs counter to rumors earlier in the campaign that the Obama camp had a sizeable bloc of superdelegates that planned to endorse him after Ohio or North Carolina and decisively shift momentum in the race. Burton dismisses those strategic musings as "just rumors."

Doug Schoen, another independent Democratic consultant, says that, ultimately, a slower strategy is the best one for the campaign.

"By doing it that way, they are avoiding the charge that the bosses, the party leaders and insiders, are conspiring to deny Hillary a voice and voters a choice," said Schoen.

"My sense of it is that everything is working to their advantage. They get more press each time they do it. They are not looking like they are trying to steamroll Hillary. And the inevitability is fed," he added.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/...ing-with-obama/

May 16, 2008

Edwards flatly rules out running with Obama

Posted: 11:12 AM ET

From CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney

An Obama-Edwards ticket 'wont' happen.'

(CNN) — Seeing John Edwards and Barack Obama on the same stage earlier this week left political pundits buzzing: Could these two be an unbeatable presidential ticket?

They appeared to have natural chemistry — something Edwards and then-Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry seemed to lack in 2004 — and the former North Carolina senator remains popular among a key demographic that has been reluctant to support Obama — working class white voters.

But Edwards flatly said Friday, as he had before he endorsed a candidate, that he's not interested in making a second run for vice president.

"No," Edwards said in no uncertain terms on NBC's the Today show when asked about the possibility. "Won't happen.…It's just not something I am interested in."

As for another position in an Obama administration, specifically Attorney General, Edwards was decidedly more coy.

"I don't really want to get involved in that speculation," he said. "Right now we have to focus on getting Barack Obama elected to President of the United States, then we’ll worry about those things."

Edwards formally endorsed Obama Wednesday evening, the day after Clinton scored a 41 point victory over the Illinois senator in West Virginia. Edwards also said Friday the timing of his announcement was not specifically designed by the Obama campaign to direct the media coverage away from the New York senator's win.

"That's not true," he said. "I know it's not true because I am the one who made the decision about when to do this. I believe this was the right time to do it. I made a decision that the public should know at this point my view."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080516/ap_on_...qv.Kdj32FOyFz4D

Florida, Michigan cannot save Clinton

By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer 42 minutes ago

Michigan and Florida alone can't save Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign.

Interviews with those considering how to handle the two states' banished convention delegates found little interest in the former first lady's best-case scenario. Her position, part of a formidable comeback challenge, is that all the delegates be seated in accordance with their disputed primaries.

Even if they were, it wouldn't erase Barack Obama's growing lead in delegates.

The Democratic Party's Rules and Bylaws Committee, a 30-member panel charged with interpreting and enforcing party rules, is scheduled to meet May 31 to consider how to handle Michigan and Florida's 368 delegates.

Last year, the panel imposed the harshest punishment it could render against the two states after they scheduled primaries in January, even though they were instructed not to vote until Feb. 5 or later. Michigan and Florida lost all their delegates to the national convention, and all the Democratic candidates agreed not to campaign in the two states, stripping them of all the influence they were trying to build by voting early.

But now there is agreement on all sides that at least some of the delegates should be restored in a gesture of party unity and respect to voters in two general election battlegrounds.

Clinton has been arguing for full reinstatement, which would boost her standing. She won both states, even though they didn't count toward the nomination and neither candidate campaigned in them. Obama even had his name pulled from Michigan's ballot.

The Associated Press interviewed a third of the panel members and several other Democrats involved in the negotiations and found widespread agreement that the states must be punished for stepping out of line. If not, many members say, other states will do the same thing in four years.

"We certainly want to be fair to both candidates, and we want to be sure that we are fair to the 48 states who abided by the rules," said Democratic National Committee Secretary Alice Germond, a panel member unaligned with either candidate. "We don't want absolute chaos for 2012.

"We want to reach out to Michigan and Florida and seat some group of delegates in some manner, at least most of us do. These are two critical states for the general (election) and the voters of those states who were not the people who caused this awful conundrum to occur deserve our attention and deserve to be a part of our process and deserve to be at the convention," she said.

Just as Democrats across the country have been divided over which candidate would make the better nominee, most of the panel members also bring personal preferences to the table.

Many are long-standing party officials with close ties to the Clintons. The former first lady has 13 members publicly supporting her, including campaign advisers Harold Ickes and Tina Flournoy who are working to build her delegate count. Eight are openly aligned with Obama. Nine others are officially undeclared.

"We have to have delegates, and they have to be delegations that reflect the opinions of those two states," said former DNC Chairman Don Fowler, a committee member supporting Clinton. "How we get there is very different because everyone sees these questions of who it helps and who it hurts. I don't think the formulation has been found that will get around the piece at this point." But he said a solution is probably possible among the diverse interests.

Because Obama is in the lead for the nomination, his camp heads into the meeting in a position of strength. It is possible the Illinois senator could clinch the nomination by the time the panel meets if he picks up the pace of superdelegate endorsements in the next two weeks.

But Obama has such a lead that he may be able to afford to be generous and give Clinton most of the delegates. That would help put the issue behind them and help him build goodwill in Michigan and Florida heading into the November election.

Still, some of Obama's supporters think the fairest solution is to disregard the primary votes and split the delegations evenly between the two candidates.

"It has to be a fair process for both candidates," said member Yvonne Gates, an Obama supporter from Nevada who said she wasn't sure what position she would support at the meeting. "My definition is a 50-50 split is something that is fair. It cannot be a situation where you give one candidate more votes than the other. In my opinion that wasn't an election when they didn't have a chance to get out and talk to the people of that community."

It's also possible that any vote that recognizes the Michigan and Florida results would legitimize their elections. Clinton has been arguing that she leads in the popular vote, but that's only when both states are included and it is very slim — fewer than 5,000 votes out of 34 million cast.

Her accounting also doesn't include some caucus states that favored Obama and where the popular vote wasn't tallied. The measure of winning the nomination is not the popular vote but whoever can get the majority of delegates — currently 2,026 are needed for the nomination although adding Michigan and Florida back in would change the threshold.

Obama hit the 1,900 mark with the support of California Rep. Pete Stark Friday morning, and the addition of eight John Edwards delegates who switched to Obama since Edwards endorsed him Wednesday night. Clinton has 1,718 delegates and is trying to use the popular vote argument to win over more.

So far, Obama's campaign has not been giving direction publicly or privately to panel members. The Clinton campaign's official position has been full reinstatement, but her advisers acknowledge they are considering an idea before the panel to seat the delegates with half a vote each. Clinton campaign Chairman Terry McAuliffe said Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press" that they "certainly might" accept a compromise to seat half the delegates.

If their elections had been held according to party rules, Michigan and Florida would have allocated a total of 313 pledged delegates based on the outcome of the vote. Using the results of the January elections with votes for Obama from Michigan, Clinton would get 178 to Obama's 67, giving her a 111-vote advantage. As of Friday, she was behind 182 delegates, so that would not catch her up even under that unlikely scenario.

The plans before the committee will be more generous to Obama. The Michigan Democratic Party has proposed giving 69 of its 128 delegates to Clinton and 59 to Obama, an advantage of 10 delegates for Clinton.

A proposal from Florida would halve its 185 delegates. From that, Clinton would get 52.5 and Obama 33.5, a 19-delegate advantage for Clinton.

"I think it's a reasonable solution to the problem that was created, and my hope is that we'll be able to get past this and move on," said Allan Katz, an Obama supporter who serves on the panel but won't be able to vote on any Florida solution because he is from the state.

The committee is not bound to select the proposals offered and has authority to reinstate any number of delegates and divide them in any way.

An open question is how to handle the other type of delegates each state lost — the superdelegates who are party leaders not bound by the outcome of the vote and are free to support whatever candidate they personally choose. Michigan has 29 superdelegates, and Florida 26. A total of eight have declared for Obama, seven for Clinton and the rest are undeclared.

Germond said she hopes the meeting will begin the process of unifying the party.

"Probably what we will come up with will not make everybody or anybody completely happy, which will mean that we did a good job," she said. "It is mighty unfortunate that at this point in our nominating process we are talking about people who did not abide by the process instead of talking about (beating Republican presidential candidate) John McCain."

After some talk with some friends (and a great one at that), I realized that my "stupid" comment may have offended some people. Though I feel that way, I probably should have worded it differently.

its one of those not what you say but how you say it type things....

After some talk with some friends (and a great one at that), I realized that my "stupid" comment may have offended some people. Though I feel that way, I probably should have worded it differently.

I think all of us were offending each other that night :lol: We're all back being friends again, but I'm sure the offended parties appreciate your comments.

To anyone who thinks Al Gore will be McCain's running mate...I say dream on dudes. You will never see anything like that happen with Gore. He is far too smart and sophisticated to align himself with the likes of douchebag McBush

Really!! I think whoever is pitching that concept ought to be made aware that Gore speaks of global warming and not hell freezing over.

will this gay marriage in california have an impact on this and how?

curious because i love reading what yall say...

IMO it won't have any affect.

Obama and Hillary both say leave it up to the states and Mccain is totally agianst it.

Mccain may be able to get a few votes out of it in California but i don't think it will be enogh to put the state in play.