Sunday, February 24, 2008

Time for Hillary to call it quits?

I enjoyed this column by Eugene Robinson who wonders if Barack Obama had lost 10 primaries in a row, would he be under greater scrutiny than Hillary Clinton? I think so.

In this blog post titled, "The First Major Call For Hillary to Drop Out" at the National Review Online, Jim Geraghty had the following to say:

John Nichols of the Nation made an interesting remark during our radio appearance this morning - he was in Wisconsin, and he noted that in 2006 and 2007, as Hillary was running as the inevitable candidate, a lot of Democrats at many levels signed on because... well, she was inevitable. And they came with their own agendas. Some wanted jobs in her administration, some wanted to ensure they had an in with the new president, etc.

Obama's supporters and staffers signed on because they believed. The chances of a benefit or cushy appointment from President Obama seemed pretty long odds, so they were motivated by something different - actual agreement on the issues or stirred by his rhetoric or whatever.

You have to wonder how many Hillary backers, staffers, and endorsers are quietly thinking to themselves, "dang, I backed the wrong horse, how do I get out of this?"

Associated Press reporter Tom Raum thinks Clinton is "on the ropes" in this column.
She's still fighting, but it's awfully hard to find encouraging news for Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Democratic homestretch.

She's behind in money, delegates and momentum. She's selling experience when everyone seems to want change. And all the cheering for the man who could be the first black president is drowning out any excitement for the first female.

Once deemed the nearly inevitable Democratic nominee, Clinton has now lost 10 presidential contests in a row as the battle heads for a March 4 showdown in Texas and Ohio — states she must win. By most measure.
He goes on to make the point that Clinton faces 3 major challenges:
  1. "Obama has outpaced Clinton in fundraising and spending."
  2. "She's behind in delegates, and the gap has been growing."
  3. "Momentum? That clearly goes to Obama ..."
Micheal Grunwald of Time wrote a piece titled, "Clinton's Spin Machine: Spun Dry" and comments on the Clinton campaigns tendency to discount Obama's primary wins saying that they don't matter.
So maybe all these Obama victories mean something after all. Maybe they mean that voters are sick of the perpetual Clinton spin machine. At the very least, they've made it clear that the machine is broken, if not dead.
Hillary, please do the right thing. Step aside for the candidate who can and will win - Barack Obama.

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

3 Reasons to Vote for Obama from Lawrence Lessig

This video from Lawrence Lessig lists 3 important reasons why he supports the candidacy of Barack Obama. Lessig's presentations are always thoughtful, well-reasoned and articulate.

He states: "He represents the very best of who we are ... character, integrity, ideals ... as someone who opposed the war from the start."

Vote for Barack Obama in 2008!

Thursday, February 7, 2008

Vote Obama Unless You Want John McCain in the White House

3 columns in today’s newspaper have crystallized a thought that has been forming in my mind for some time: If Hillary Clinton is the Democratic candidate for President, John McCain (“who almost promises a war with Iran”) and the Republicans may win the presidency again in 2008.

10 Key facts to consider:

Romney has quit the race, making McCain the de facto Republican candidate.
2. Contributors are voting with their wallets for Obama:

a. Obama’s campaign raised $32 million in January, $3 million on Wednesday (the day after the Super Tuesday) and $7 million total since Super Tuesday.
b. Clinton’s campaign only raised $4 million since Super Tuesday.
c. Clinton has loaned her campaign $5 million.
d. Clinton staffers are voluntarily forgoing paychecks.
3. Clinton is seen as “the most polarizing person in contemporary politics.” (George F. Will – see below, Stanley Fish, NY Times)
Obama has greater appeal than Clinton to independent voters.
5. California voters could play a critical role again in November.
Obama only lost in California by almost 390,000 votes, he surely ran much closer in the votes cast on Tuesday, after Clinton’s double-digit lead in polls had evaporated.
7. How many votes already cast in California for John Edwards would have gone to Obama?
8. Party identification is weak in California. Democrats are losing ground with registered voters.

9. The rapidly growing ranks of independent voters hold the balance of political power in California.
10. A poll of likely California voters found that McCain was virtually tied with Clinton in a hypothetical match up while Obama held a seven-point lead over McCain.

Key points from all three columns:

1) “
Division Problems” By E. J. Dionne Jr.

John McCain is now the clear Republican front-runner, but … has survived only because conservative opponents have fractured their movement.

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama fought to a near draw (and the) primaries revealed a sharp gender gap; a generation gap at least as deep as the age divide that was so widely advertised in the 1960s; and differences across ethnicity, race and class.

... Obama is the overwhelming favorite of voters under 30, and has inspired a disciplined army of youthful organizers who helped him win decisive victories in caucuses in Colorado, Kansas, Idaho, Minnesota, North Dakota and Alaska. If Clinton is the nominee, how many of these young voters will walk away from a process that thwarted their hopes?

Does Clinton’s weakness among male Democrats -- she lost men by 20 points in Delaware, 21 points in Connecticut and 39 points in Georgia -- portend problems in a general election?


2) "
Democrats Living Dangerously: Early Voting Insanity And a GOP Gift"
By George F. Will, Washington Post
Thursday, February 7, 2008; Page A21

Forewarned, Democrats now are forearmed -- not that they will necessarily make sensible use of the gift. Tuesday's voting armed Democratic voters with the name of the candidate that their nominee will face in the fall. Will their purblind party now nominate the most polarizing person in contemporary politics (Clinton), knowing that Republicans will nominate the person who tries to compensate for his weakness among conservatives with his strength among independent voters who are crucial to winning the White House?

The Republican Party's not-so-secret weapon always is the Democratic Party, with its entertaining thirst for living dangerously.

The surest way to unify the Republican Party, however, is for Democrats to nominate Hillary Clinton. Barack Obama, the foundation of whose candidacy is his early opposition to the war in Iraq, would be a more interesting contrast to the candidate who is trying to become the oldest person ever elected to a first presidential term and who almost promises a war with Iran ("There is only one thing worse than military action, and that is a nuclear-armed Iran").


3) "
California may have a voice in November"
By Dan Walters, Sacramento Bee

Wednesday,February 6, 2008

California's decades-long isolation from national politics ended Tuesday as voters turned out heavily to vote in two close contests for presidential nominations – and they could play a critical role again in November.

The political media have made much of the state's non-involvement in choosing presidential candidates for the last several decades, thanks to its traditionally late primary elections, but California also has been taken for granted in the November duels.


Party identification is weak in California, and both parties have been losing ground in voter registration – especially the Democrats – and the rapidly growing ranks of independent voters hold the balance of political power.
Independents – liberal on social issues, generally, but conservative on taxes and crime – have favored the most centrist, or the least ideologically rigid, candidates.

Independents have leaned Democratic in most recent high-profile elections but the election and re-election of Arnold Schwarzenegger indicate that they're willing to vote for a moderate GOP candidate. And McCain fits that description, a Republican who, like Schwarzenegger, is often castigated by the GOP right for deviating from ideological dogma – on immigration most notably. A poll of likely California voters by Field Research found that McCain was virtually tied with Clinton in a hypothetical matchup while Obama, thanks largely to his broader appeal, held a seven-point lead over McCain.


Vote for Obama in 2008 - Our best hope for the future
Please forward this link to people you know in these key states: Texas, Ohio, Louisiana, Maine, Nebraska, Washington, Maryland, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Hawaii

Monday, February 4, 2008