"The Clinton and Obama campaigns just got done fighting over Iowa... again! The state's 99 county Democratic parties held conventions today and the two campaigns were actively fighting to gain even more pledged delegates. At stake: the 14 pledged delegates John Edwards earned during the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses."
"Tonight, the Obama campaign claimed a gain of 7 pledged delegates, added to the 16 they earned on Jan. 3. Obama's manager, David Plouffe, also said their math had Clinton actually losing one of her 15 delegates that she garnered on Jan. 3. BTW, if the 7 number is accurate, it would be two short of what Clinton netted out of Ohio."
The Clinton campaign disputes losing any delegates but admits Obama gained.
Update: Todd notes revised numbers today: Obama +9, Clinton -1
Sen. Barack Obama has pulled "almost even" with Sen. Hillary Clinton "in endorsements from top elected officials and has cut into her lead among the other superdelegates she's relying on to win the Democratic presidential nomination," Bloomberg notes."
Among the 313 of 796 superdelegates who are members of Congress or governors, Clinton has commitments from 103 and Obama is backed by 96, according to lists supplied by the campaigns. Fifty-three of Obama's endorsements have come since he won the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses, compared with 12 who have aligned with Clinton since then."
If Obama maintains his current 150 lead in pledged delegates through the end of the primary season, Clinton "would have to snag more than 70 percent of the remaining 334 or so superdelegates."
"Having mastered the art of town-hall meetings on the campaign trail," Sen. Hillary Clinton "is now holding them in a more comfortable setting: her living room," according to the Washington Post.
"The real mission of the evening was to court lawmakers -- who are also superdelegates in the party's nominating process -- especially those from some of the biggest states."
“If we get to the end and Senator Obama has won more states, has more delegates and more popular vote,” said Representative Jason Altmire, Democrat of Pennsylvania, who is undecided, “I would need some sort of rationale for why at that point any superdelegate would go the other way, seeing that the people have spoken.”
Mr. Altmire said he was repeating an argument that he made to Mrs. Clinton during a session at her house in Washington on Thursday night with uncommitted superdelegates.
"She did not sit in on national security meetings. She did not have a security clearance. She did not attend meetings in the situation room. She conducted no negotiations. She did not manage any part of the national security bureaucracy."
-- Former Clinton White House aide Greg Craig, in an interview with
the National Journal, adding that Sen Hillary Clinton has "in serious ways overstated, if not grossly exaggerated, the nature of her experience."
"If the votes of the superdelegates overturn what's happened in the elections, it would be harmful to the Democratic party."-- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, quoted by the Associated Press, in a "declaration that gives a boost to Sen. Barack Obama."
"A few weeks ago, I started to feel sorry for her. Oh Christ, let her win already...Who cares...It's not worth it. There's not that much difference between them. She can have it. Anything to avoid watching her descend into madness. So I switched. I started rooting for her. It wasn't that hard. Compromise comes easy to me. I was on board.
And then I saw the ad.
I watched, transfixed, as she took the 3 a.m. call...and I was afraid...very afraid. Suddenly, I realized the last thing this country needs is that woman anywhere near a phone. I don't care if it's 3 a.m. or 10 p.m. or any other time. I don't want her talking to Putin, I don't want her talking to Kim Jong Il, I don't want her talking to my nephew. She needs a long rest. She needs to put on a sarong and some sun block and get away from things for a while, a nice beach somewhere -- somewhere far away, where there are...no phones,"
- Larry David, HuffPuff. His audio is great.
Many readers expressed disbelief at my claim that the Clintons ran anti-gay ads on Christian radio stations in 1996. Did I have proof? Actually, John Aravosis recently provided a very extensive round-up of what happened back then. It's all true. Here's an excerpt from a Log Cabin briefing at the time:
In an article in today's Washington Times, entitled "For Christian Radio, Clinton Changes Tune on Gays, Abortion," it was reported that the Clinton-Gore campaign "shrugged off" angry calls to shelve the radio ad. The article cited reports from gay and lesbian groups that the campaign might delete the portion of the ad which boasts of Clinton signing the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), but "Clinton campaign spokesman Joe Lockhart said there are no plans to alter the radio ads, which will run for 'a few more days.'"
After boasting about Clinton signing the anti-gay DOMA, the ad concludes with the line: "President Clinton has fought for our values and America is better for it."
John also notes that Bill Clinton advised John Kerry to triangulate against gays in 2004. Kerry refused.
But the Clintons have used gays in two ways since their careers began:Continue
reading "The Clintons And The Gays, Ctd." »
In a May 2005 interview with the black weekly newspaper the New York Amsterdam News, the former president said that he supported the efforts of Louis Farrakhan and the Revs. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson to organize a Million More March in the nation's capital that fall...
"Jesse [Jackson], and Mr. [Louis] Farrakhan and Rev. [Al] Sharpton probably have internal domestic political differences," Clinton is quoted as saying, "but they've agreed on this, and I think it's a good thing." ...
Post-White House Clinton found no fault with Farrakhan's leadership. There was no mention of Farrakhan's "malice and division" during the interview.
“She hasn’t managed anything as complex as this before; that’s the problem with senators,” said James A. Thurber, a professor of government at American University who is an expert on presidential management. “She wasn’t as decisive as she should have been. And it’s a legitimate question to ask: Under great pressure from two different factions, can she make some hard decisions and move ahead? It seems to just fester. She doesn’t seem to know how to stop it or want to stop it.”
At a cocktail party this weekend I was talking to a friend and his boyfriend - both are rabid Clintonites - and I'm asking questions like Why did she attack Rick Lazio for not releasing his taxes, yet now she is doing the same? Why did Bill refuse to release his medical records when he ran even though Dole did, is this a pattern with them? If she takes credit for Bill's presidency then shouldn't she be tarred with DOMA?
And listening to his defense I realized what it reminded me of. It wasn't the defense of a politician whom he admired, he sounded like somebody 40 years older defending Judy Garland or Liza Minelli: "Oh, life has been so cruel to them, but didn't they come through it with fire and glamour?!".
"Everyone's been looking for a way in. It's just been thin gruel beyond a certain point," - a news editor on the desperate attempt to find some newsworthy dirt on Obama.
Given that some public opinion polls say that as much as 13 percent of the electorate still thinks Barack Obama is a Muslim, the more focus on his Christian pastor the more that smear gets permanently erased.
Tim, you run against uncommitted, that's the toughest election to win. I'd rather run against an opponent anytime than against uncommitted, and Hillary Clinton got 55 percent of the vote against uncommitted. - PA Gov and HRC supporter Ed Rendell
No comments:
Post a Comment