There has been a lull in the Pastor Wright saga, with Wright uncharacteristically silent in public, and Obama shifting his explanations about the pastor and Obama's role in the church over the past twenty or so years.
Now the NRO has posed 22 questions for Obama to answer, about Wright, about what Obama knew, about whether Wright's views are Obama's views.
This is the beginning.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZGVkY2NhYTkzZjIyYzRkYTIxNTU3MjBiMDVmZmE2Y2Y==
There is no way that Obama cannot answer these questions if he has any hope of being the Democratic nominee for president, or of being president.
Even though these questions come from a rightwing organization, the questions are valid, and Obama owes American voters answers.
Or do the "new politics" of Obama exclude candor on such issues?
Monday, March 31, 2008
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Gore to the rescue, and let the convention choose BOTH Obama & Clinton for VP
Good news from down south at last: senior Democrats are considering a strategy which could result in the best candidate being chosen to beat McCain - the man who should have been president before the buffoon was elected: Al Gore.
"Plans for Al Gore to take the Democratic presidential nomination as the saviour of a bitterly divided party are being actively discussed by senior figures and aides to the former vice-president.
The bloody civil war between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama has left many Democrats convinced that neither can deliver a knockout blow to the other and that both have been so damaged that they risk losing November's election to the Republican nominee, John McCain.
Former Gore aides now believe he could emerge as a compromise candidate acceptable to both camps at the party's convention in Denver during the last week of August."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/30/wuspols130.xml
This is the best news of the primary season so far - the most credible candidate for the Democrats, with the best experience, a man of honor, and a man who would restore decency to the USA.
How exactly do the Democrat leaders plan to make this happen? They are considering a very canny strategy, which should work well:
"If neither Mr Obama nor Mrs Clinton has the 2,025 delegates needed to win the nomination, and if both appear unable to beat Mr McCain, under one scenario a group of about 100 party elders - the "super-delegates" - could sit out the first ballot in Denver, preventing either candidate winning outright, and then offer Mr Gore the nomination for the good of the party.
Tim Mahoney, a Democrat congressman from Florida, said last week: "If it goes into the convention, don't be surprised if someone different is at the top of the ticket." This suggests the party would accept a Gore-Clinton or a Gore-Obama pairing."
The convention could then choose between Clinton and Obama for the post of VP.
The Cat suggests one minor change to the Draft Gore movement: make sure that BOTH Clinton and Obama become VP. How? Choose one of the two by majority vote at the convention, with the understanding that the other one becomes VP for the second Gore term.
That way the Democrats would go into the general election united.
"Plans for Al Gore to take the Democratic presidential nomination as the saviour of a bitterly divided party are being actively discussed by senior figures and aides to the former vice-president.
The bloody civil war between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama has left many Democrats convinced that neither can deliver a knockout blow to the other and that both have been so damaged that they risk losing November's election to the Republican nominee, John McCain.
Former Gore aides now believe he could emerge as a compromise candidate acceptable to both camps at the party's convention in Denver during the last week of August."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/30/wuspols130.xml
This is the best news of the primary season so far - the most credible candidate for the Democrats, with the best experience, a man of honor, and a man who would restore decency to the USA.
How exactly do the Democrat leaders plan to make this happen? They are considering a very canny strategy, which should work well:
"If neither Mr Obama nor Mrs Clinton has the 2,025 delegates needed to win the nomination, and if both appear unable to beat Mr McCain, under one scenario a group of about 100 party elders - the "super-delegates" - could sit out the first ballot in Denver, preventing either candidate winning outright, and then offer Mr Gore the nomination for the good of the party.
Tim Mahoney, a Democrat congressman from Florida, said last week: "If it goes into the convention, don't be surprised if someone different is at the top of the ticket." This suggests the party would accept a Gore-Clinton or a Gore-Obama pairing."
The convention could then choose between Clinton and Obama for the post of VP.
The Cat suggests one minor change to the Draft Gore movement: make sure that BOTH Clinton and Obama become VP. How? Choose one of the two by majority vote at the convention, with the understanding that the other one becomes VP for the second Gore term.
That way the Democrats would go into the general election united.
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Why Democrats should NOT choose Obama to run against McCain
The reason? Obama stands little chance of beating McCain.
An excellent analysis of the reality of the political battleground - as opposed to wishful thinking of the swooning classes supporting Obama - is found in the following article:
"Regardless of how well Obama did in some deep-red state Democratic caucuses, the truth is that the Wright fiasco, McCain's appeal to independents and Hispanics, the fact that nearly 1 in 3 Hillary voters may defect to McCain, and thewell-oiled Republican attack machine will leave Obama, at best, where John Kerry was in August 2004, that is fighting desperately to reach 270."
http://mydd.com/story/2008/3/28/13939/3427
Obama is compounding the problem every time he says anything about his infamous Pastor Wright. He has moved from never hearing any of the nasty things the pastor said in the church, to hearing some but not agreeing with them, to defending the Pastor as misunderstood, to now claiming that the remarks were taken out of context. With each foray into this mess, he creates clubs which the Republicans will use to devastate any campaign he might wage should be become the candidate.
It will be interesting to see whether the Democrats at the convention decide to do a lemming-leap over the cliff and choose Obama. If they do, McCain will give Obama a drubbing which will put Obama in the history books as one of the lowest electoral college winners of all time.
If Obama is chosen, then it will be interesting to see who runs for the Democrats in 2012. McCain might not run for re-election, given his age, so the race could be between two non-incumbents. Clinton might run again.
So might Al Gore ...
An excellent analysis of the reality of the political battleground - as opposed to wishful thinking of the swooning classes supporting Obama - is found in the following article:
"Regardless of how well Obama did in some deep-red state Democratic caucuses, the truth is that the Wright fiasco, McCain's appeal to independents and Hispanics, the fact that nearly 1 in 3 Hillary voters may defect to McCain, and thewell-oiled Republican attack machine will leave Obama, at best, where John Kerry was in August 2004, that is fighting desperately to reach 270."
http://mydd.com/story/2008/3/28/13939/3427
Obama is compounding the problem every time he says anything about his infamous Pastor Wright. He has moved from never hearing any of the nasty things the pastor said in the church, to hearing some but not agreeing with them, to defending the Pastor as misunderstood, to now claiming that the remarks were taken out of context. With each foray into this mess, he creates clubs which the Republicans will use to devastate any campaign he might wage should be become the candidate.
It will be interesting to see whether the Democrats at the convention decide to do a lemming-leap over the cliff and choose Obama. If they do, McCain will give Obama a drubbing which will put Obama in the history books as one of the lowest electoral college winners of all time.
If Obama is chosen, then it will be interesting to see who runs for the Democrats in 2012. McCain might not run for re-election, given his age, so the race could be between two non-incumbents. Clinton might run again.
So might Al Gore ...
Friday, March 21, 2008
Obama & Clinton: the solution - A Free Vote For All
Looks like the convention is going to be deadlocked, with neither Obama nor Clinton carrying the day without a substantial whack of superdelegates voting for one of the two.
That poses a quandary for the superdelegates.
By then, Clinton will most likely have been most successful in the remaining 10 (12 if we count revotes in Michigan & Florida, which better happen of McCain is not to be a shoo-in) contests; Obama will most likely have been shown to be mortally wounded in matchups with McCain (the Wright-candidate turning out to be the wrong-candidate), Clinton most likely beating Obama in the polls - due to the erosion of his support arising from his missteps and opposition to the revotes in the two major states, and many Democrats and Independents who voted in earlier primaries suffering from buyer's remorse and wishing they could also have revotes ....
What should a superdelegate do?
One solution? Sit on your hands in the first round of voting. If enough do that, then neither candidate will get enough votes to win.
Then, in the second round of balloting, when everybody is now free to vote as they wish, let the majority votes of ALL delegates carry the day.
That way, superdelegates can let the free votes of all delegates determine the winner, rather than having to choose between the two candidates and create enormous bad will on the part of the loser's pledged delegates.
That poses a quandary for the superdelegates.
By then, Clinton will most likely have been most successful in the remaining 10 (12 if we count revotes in Michigan & Florida, which better happen of McCain is not to be a shoo-in) contests; Obama will most likely have been shown to be mortally wounded in matchups with McCain (the Wright-candidate turning out to be the wrong-candidate), Clinton most likely beating Obama in the polls - due to the erosion of his support arising from his missteps and opposition to the revotes in the two major states, and many Democrats and Independents who voted in earlier primaries suffering from buyer's remorse and wishing they could also have revotes ....
What should a superdelegate do?
One solution? Sit on your hands in the first round of voting. If enough do that, then neither candidate will get enough votes to win.
Then, in the second round of balloting, when everybody is now free to vote as they wish, let the majority votes of ALL delegates carry the day.
That way, superdelegates can let the free votes of all delegates determine the winner, rather than having to choose between the two candidates and create enormous bad will on the part of the loser's pledged delegates.
Thursday, March 20, 2008
The Crux of the Problem Obama Faces regarding Pastor Wright
Whether Obama's speech was a good one on race relations in America is a side issue. The issues which will determine whether this man becomes the next president of the USA, or is demolished (by voters in the next 10 states voting in the primaries, or by voters in the general election) will be those raised by the Republicans and conservatives.
The framing of the general election debate has already begun.
The 'swooning classes' have lauded Obama's misleading speech, but the crucial issues remain: has he answered the essential questions to be elected?
In my view, he has not.
What are the issues which McCain and his attack dogs will focus on if Obama somehow miraculously becomes the Democratic nominee? They are these:
"This is where things begin to get sticky for Obama. In half-a-month we’ve gone from Wright and his church being essentially non-controversial; to Obama implying that the venomous statements by Wright came as news to him; to admitting that he was in the pews when Wright spoke as a “an occasionally fierce critic” of American domestic and foreign policy. Those remarks were so fierce that even Obama, himself an orthodox liberal who has scorched the Bush administration, was clearly made uncomfortable by what Wright said.It also begs the question:
What exactly did Wright say that Obama strongly disagreed with? Was Wright in fact presenting a “profoundly distorted view of this country”? The odds are a good deal better than even that he was. But Obama has yet to answer those questions — and he probably won’t, at least with any specificity, unless he’s forced to do so. This story, which seemingly changes in every re-telling, is beginning to resemble nothing so much as Bill Clinton’s evolving explanation about his draft notice. It was then that most of America was introduced to “Slick Willie.”Senator Obama’s speech on Tuesday was a brilliant effort to deflect attention away from what remains the core issue: what did Obama hear, when did he hear it, and what did he do about it? The answers, as best we can tell at this stage, is that Obama heard some very harsh things said from the pulpit of Trinity United Church of Christ; that Obama heard them said a long time ago and probably repeatedly; and that he did little or nothing about it. This from a man who tells us at almost every stop along the campaign trail that he has the “judgment to lead.”"
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OTU2N2ViMGFkN2VmMzdmMTk1YzVlMDc0NzUyODQyMmQ=
So until Obama has answered (assuming he can, which I doubt) these questions, he will not become president.
The framing of the general election debate has already begun.
The 'swooning classes' have lauded Obama's misleading speech, but the crucial issues remain: has he answered the essential questions to be elected?
In my view, he has not.
What are the issues which McCain and his attack dogs will focus on if Obama somehow miraculously becomes the Democratic nominee? They are these:
"This is where things begin to get sticky for Obama. In half-a-month we’ve gone from Wright and his church being essentially non-controversial; to Obama implying that the venomous statements by Wright came as news to him; to admitting that he was in the pews when Wright spoke as a “an occasionally fierce critic” of American domestic and foreign policy. Those remarks were so fierce that even Obama, himself an orthodox liberal who has scorched the Bush administration, was clearly made uncomfortable by what Wright said.It also begs the question:
What exactly did Wright say that Obama strongly disagreed with? Was Wright in fact presenting a “profoundly distorted view of this country”? The odds are a good deal better than even that he was. But Obama has yet to answer those questions — and he probably won’t, at least with any specificity, unless he’s forced to do so. This story, which seemingly changes in every re-telling, is beginning to resemble nothing so much as Bill Clinton’s evolving explanation about his draft notice. It was then that most of America was introduced to “Slick Willie.”Senator Obama’s speech on Tuesday was a brilliant effort to deflect attention away from what remains the core issue: what did Obama hear, when did he hear it, and what did he do about it? The answers, as best we can tell at this stage, is that Obama heard some very harsh things said from the pulpit of Trinity United Church of Christ; that Obama heard them said a long time ago and probably repeatedly; and that he did little or nothing about it. This from a man who tells us at almost every stop along the campaign trail that he has the “judgment to lead.”"
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OTU2N2ViMGFkN2VmMzdmMTk1YzVlMDc0NzUyODQyMmQ=
So until Obama has answered (assuming he can, which I doubt) these questions, he will not become president.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Is Obama for Pastor Wright but against Michigan and Florida?
Hillary Clinton is calling on Obama to support a re-vote in Michigan. And in Florida.
Obama's camp has said he will do what the DNC recommends, but apparently Obama's lawyers are throwing up all kinds of nit picking reasons for delaying and obfuscating the issues, apparently hoping that Michigan and Florida will fade away, like Wright ...
In the meantime, latest polls show McCain doing even better than before against both Clinton and - especially - Obama.
As one commentator put it so clearly:
"If he believed his own rhetoric, he would welcome a revote."
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/03/obamas_memo_on_michigan.php#comments
Come on Obama: give Americans in Michigan and Florida their chance to vote.
Should be a no-brainer ....
Obama's camp has said he will do what the DNC recommends, but apparently Obama's lawyers are throwing up all kinds of nit picking reasons for delaying and obfuscating the issues, apparently hoping that Michigan and Florida will fade away, like Wright ...
In the meantime, latest polls show McCain doing even better than before against both Clinton and - especially - Obama.
As one commentator put it so clearly:
"If he believed his own rhetoric, he would welcome a revote."
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/03/obamas_memo_on_michigan.php#comments
Come on Obama: give Americans in Michigan and Florida their chance to vote.
Should be a no-brainer ....
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
One take on Obama and Pastor Wright
Obama faced a crisis: people were playing videos of speeches made by the pastor of his church in 'endless loops'. These videos disturbed many with their racist rantings by the the pastor, and his succinct condemnation of America.
So Obama made a speech today, designed to explain why his attendance at the church of the pastor for some twenty years, was not nor should be an issue in the presidential election.
The chattering classes of the left are swooning over the Obama speech.
But one man is not:
" Instead, to Obama, the postmodernist, context is everything. We all have eccentric and flamboyant pastors like Wright with whom we disagree. And words, in his case, don’t quite mean what we think; unspoken intent and angst, not voiced hatred, are what matters more. Rather than account for his relationship with a hate-monger, Obama will enlighten you, as your teacher, why you are either confused or too ill-intended to ask him to disassociate himself from Wright."
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YWVkMThjN2RjNDU2N2EzODE1YWRmZmQwMTE0YWFkMzg==
Victor Davis Hanson, in his article in NRO, a rightwing publication, raises some very hard issues regarding the structure and purpose of Obama's speech.
When all the plaudits of the swooning classes are over, Obama will still - if he wishes to be president - have to address the issues his attendance raised.
Oh, and he will have to explain why Hanson's analysis of his speech is wrong, because the Republicans will be using Hanson's analysis to flay Obama, day after day after day, should Obama somehow become the Democratic nominee.
So Obama made a speech today, designed to explain why his attendance at the church of the pastor for some twenty years, was not nor should be an issue in the presidential election.
The chattering classes of the left are swooning over the Obama speech.
But one man is not:
" Instead, to Obama, the postmodernist, context is everything. We all have eccentric and flamboyant pastors like Wright with whom we disagree. And words, in his case, don’t quite mean what we think; unspoken intent and angst, not voiced hatred, are what matters more. Rather than account for his relationship with a hate-monger, Obama will enlighten you, as your teacher, why you are either confused or too ill-intended to ask him to disassociate himself from Wright."
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YWVkMThjN2RjNDU2N2EzODE1YWRmZmQwMTE0YWFkMzg==
Victor Davis Hanson, in his article in NRO, a rightwing publication, raises some very hard issues regarding the structure and purpose of Obama's speech.
When all the plaudits of the swooning classes are over, Obama will still - if he wishes to be president - have to address the issues his attendance raised.
Oh, and he will have to explain why Hanson's analysis of his speech is wrong, because the Republicans will be using Hanson's analysis to flay Obama, day after day after day, should Obama somehow become the Democratic nominee.
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Words which Obama may soon come to regret
The firestorm that has broken out over Pastor Wright's sermons has burnt a ring around the candidacy of Obama. Obama has finally responded to the problems posed for his run as president with words which he may soon regret having said:
"None of these statements were ones that I had heard myself personally in the pews. One of them I had heard about after I had started running for president, and I put out a statement at that time condemning them.
The other statements were ones that that I just heard about while we were -- when they started being run on FOX and some of the other stations. And so they weren't things that I was familiar with."
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/obama_talks_to_major_garrett_o.html
These are final words, clear words, unequivocal words, uttered by a man who has fiercely argued that words count, words mean things, words are not just words.
These words will be like a red rag to a bull for any journalist in America worth his or her salt. I can just see journalists (and bloggers) poring through the speeches of Obama's minister, to try to find similar statements, and the date the preacher made them in the church, and then to match them against Obama's visits.
It will only take one set of similar statements, made when Obama was present in the church, to sink Obama's candidacy.
What a pity if this happens!
"None of these statements were ones that I had heard myself personally in the pews. One of them I had heard about after I had started running for president, and I put out a statement at that time condemning them.
The other statements were ones that that I just heard about while we were -- when they started being run on FOX and some of the other stations. And so they weren't things that I was familiar with."
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/obama_talks_to_major_garrett_o.html
These are final words, clear words, unequivocal words, uttered by a man who has fiercely argued that words count, words mean things, words are not just words.
These words will be like a red rag to a bull for any journalist in America worth his or her salt. I can just see journalists (and bloggers) poring through the speeches of Obama's minister, to try to find similar statements, and the date the preacher made them in the church, and then to match them against Obama's visits.
It will only take one set of similar statements, made when Obama was present in the church, to sink Obama's candidacy.
What a pity if this happens!
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Dion lays an Easter egg - again!
Good thing the Keystone Cops have already been invented, or we would be calling Dion and his merry band of disappearing fighters the Dionstone Cops.
Does anyone in the current leadership team of the Liberal Party really understand how pathetic an excuse it is to not cause an election before the Easter weekend? But perhaps, later?
Pathetic is too mild a word. Somebody, somewhere, please give Dion and his close advisers a lesson in Communications 101.
Didn't anyone amongst the Liberal Leaders think through what they were doing when they slipped in a bill to amend the Tory government budget? What did they expect the Harperites to do? Play dead?
Haven't they learned that Harper and his boys are sharper than they are when it comes to gaming the opposing party? That Harper has consistently out thought, out planned, out smarted, and out fought the Liberal pack for some two years?
Does Dion and his advisory group think this was a fluke?
If so, then it's time for them to wake up, smell the coffee, search for the Easter eggs, beat the bushes to flush out the Easter bunnies, and get some intestinal fortitude.
Why on earth should voters vote for a party whose leaders show such obvious stupidity, by not thinking through what they are doing?
It is time to come out with some sound policies, give the voters reasons for supporting the Liberals. If the Liberals don't do it, then it might be time for voters who oppose the Tory rightwing agenda to take a fresh look at the Green Party, or the NDP.
Support has to be earned from voters.
Does anyone in the current leadership team of the Liberal Party really understand how pathetic an excuse it is to not cause an election before the Easter weekend? But perhaps, later?
Pathetic is too mild a word. Somebody, somewhere, please give Dion and his close advisers a lesson in Communications 101.
Didn't anyone amongst the Liberal Leaders think through what they were doing when they slipped in a bill to amend the Tory government budget? What did they expect the Harperites to do? Play dead?
Haven't they learned that Harper and his boys are sharper than they are when it comes to gaming the opposing party? That Harper has consistently out thought, out planned, out smarted, and out fought the Liberal pack for some two years?
Does Dion and his advisory group think this was a fluke?
If so, then it's time for them to wake up, smell the coffee, search for the Easter eggs, beat the bushes to flush out the Easter bunnies, and get some intestinal fortitude.
Why on earth should voters vote for a party whose leaders show such obvious stupidity, by not thinking through what they are doing?
It is time to come out with some sound policies, give the voters reasons for supporting the Liberals. If the Liberals don't do it, then it might be time for voters who oppose the Tory rightwing agenda to take a fresh look at the Green Party, or the NDP.
Support has to be earned from voters.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Obama starts to chicken out about Florida revote
Why is Obama scared of having the Democrats in Florida do a re-vote using a mail ballot?
Could it be that he fears having delegates from Florida and Michigan seated at the convention?
"But obviously there are concerns about a mail-in vote. I mean, there are concerns about eligibility, ballot security," he said during a conference call. "The state of Oregon has mail-in voting, and it took them more than a decade to perfect it to the point where they felt that they could run a statewide campaign through mail-in votes. And now we're going to turn this process over to parties within the states to run on with a matter of weeks to prepare."
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2008/03/obama_camp_concerned_about_mai.php
Does he plan to sneak into being the nominee on the strength of his wins in caucuses, and smaller states?
One wonders how on earth a man who is afraid of the voters will beat John McCain, the maverick semi-liberal Republican nominee ..
Time to be a man, Obama: help the Democrats in Florida and Michigan take back their votes.
Could it be that he fears having delegates from Florida and Michigan seated at the convention?
"But obviously there are concerns about a mail-in vote. I mean, there are concerns about eligibility, ballot security," he said during a conference call. "The state of Oregon has mail-in voting, and it took them more than a decade to perfect it to the point where they felt that they could run a statewide campaign through mail-in votes. And now we're going to turn this process over to parties within the states to run on with a matter of weeks to prepare."
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2008/03/obama_camp_concerned_about_mai.php
Does he plan to sneak into being the nominee on the strength of his wins in caucuses, and smaller states?
One wonders how on earth a man who is afraid of the voters will beat John McCain, the maverick semi-liberal Republican nominee ..
Time to be a man, Obama: help the Democrats in Florida and Michigan take back their votes.
Friday, March 07, 2008
James Carville agrees with The Cat: Let Obama and Clinton raise cash for the Michigan & Florida re-do
James Carville threw down the gauntlet in front of an Obama spokesman on CNN today, daring Obama to let these two states hold fresh primaries, so that their voices are heard in the choice of the Democratic nominee:
"CARVILLE: I — Wolf, can I — is it all right if I say — Verysimple thing. I have talked to people today that are ready to go. Weput up $15 million, Senator Obama puts up $15 million. We go to postand we let Democratic voters in Florida and Michigan decide this thing.
We don’t need a backroom negotiation. We need sunshine. We need tosomehow the world that the Democratic Party is ready to go. And we cando this. In a country this rich, you’re going to tell me that we’regoing to exclude people from Florida and Michigan from participating inthis most important election in history?"
http://thepage.time.com/transcript-of-carville-on-cnns-the-situation-room/
Obama is now in the hot seat: does he run for the hills and avoid giving the voters in those two states the chance to have their say?
If he refuses the Carville challenge, Obama is toast.
"CARVILLE: I — Wolf, can I — is it all right if I say — Verysimple thing. I have talked to people today that are ready to go. Weput up $15 million, Senator Obama puts up $15 million. We go to postand we let Democratic voters in Florida and Michigan decide this thing.
We don’t need a backroom negotiation. We need sunshine. We need tosomehow the world that the Democratic Party is ready to go. And we cando this. In a country this rich, you’re going to tell me that we’regoing to exclude people from Florida and Michigan from participating inthis most important election in history?"
http://thepage.time.com/transcript-of-carville-on-cnns-the-situation-room/
Obama is now in the hot seat: does he run for the hills and avoid giving the voters in those two states the chance to have their say?
If he refuses the Carville challenge, Obama is toast.
Deadlocked convention? Al Gore to the rescue
Let's assume neither Clinton nor Obama have the needed delegates to win at the convention. Let's assume Obama does not do the sensible thing, and run as Clinton's Vice President.
What to do?
One solution is for all delegates to vote on an alternative process: if Al Gore is nominated, and wins the majority vote of the delegates, then each of Clinton and Obama will release their delegates, and a majority of delegates can choose between Clinton and Obama as Gore's VP.
Who wins? The Democrats. Gore should beat McCain and become president.
What to do?
One solution is for all delegates to vote on an alternative process: if Al Gore is nominated, and wins the majority vote of the delegates, then each of Clinton and Obama will release their delegates, and a majority of delegates can choose between Clinton and Obama as Gore's VP.
Who wins? The Democrats. Gore should beat McCain and become president.
Thursday, March 06, 2008
Sorry, Governor Dean, Michigan & Florida is your problem
Howard Dean has said that there are only two ways to solve the problem of the missing delegates from Michigan and Florida. Either the state parties come up with a fair way to run a new set of primaries, or the two states can appeal to the delegation committee.
In his comments, Dean has said that the funding for any new do-over contests will have to be provided by the Democratic party in those two states:
" Mr. Dean dismissed that out of hand today. On CBS’ “The Early Show,” he said:
We can’t afford to do that. That’s not our problem. We need our money to win the presidential race.” "
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/06/the-florida-michigan-morass/index.html?ref=politics
What utter twaddle!
Dean and his DNC are as responsible for this mess as anyone else, because they resorted to the draconian step of stripping both states of all their delegates. If they had chosen to punish the states by cutting their delegates in half - as the Republicans wisely chose to do - then today there would be far less concern about the issue.
If the delegates from both Michigan and Florida are not allowed a say in the choice of who becomes the nominee for president, the chances are very high that the Republicans will win the presidency. It is as stark as that.
And that means that it IS the responsibility of Howard Dean and the DNC to fund the do-overs.
So, shape up, Governor Dean: help clean up the mess you contributed to.
An obvious solution is for the burden of funding new primaries to be divided: one third contributions from the state, the local state Democratic parties, and from fund-raising by the two candidates, Obama and Clinton.
In fact, I am sure that if Dean and the DNC agreed to split the costs with the two candidates, then a joint appeal by Obama and Clinton for new funds from Democrats all over the country would raise the $30 to $40 million needed within a week or so.
In his comments, Dean has said that the funding for any new do-over contests will have to be provided by the Democratic party in those two states:
" Mr. Dean dismissed that out of hand today. On CBS’ “The Early Show,” he said:
We can’t afford to do that. That’s not our problem. We need our money to win the presidential race.” "
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/06/the-florida-michigan-morass/index.html?ref=politics
What utter twaddle!
Dean and his DNC are as responsible for this mess as anyone else, because they resorted to the draconian step of stripping both states of all their delegates. If they had chosen to punish the states by cutting their delegates in half - as the Republicans wisely chose to do - then today there would be far less concern about the issue.
If the delegates from both Michigan and Florida are not allowed a say in the choice of who becomes the nominee for president, the chances are very high that the Republicans will win the presidency. It is as stark as that.
And that means that it IS the responsibility of Howard Dean and the DNC to fund the do-overs.
So, shape up, Governor Dean: help clean up the mess you contributed to.
An obvious solution is for the burden of funding new primaries to be divided: one third contributions from the state, the local state Democratic parties, and from fund-raising by the two candidates, Obama and Clinton.
In fact, I am sure that if Dean and the DNC agreed to split the costs with the two candidates, then a joint appeal by Obama and Clinton for new funds from Democrats all over the country would raise the $30 to $40 million needed within a week or so.
Obama could lose against McCain because he has a Big State problem
Obama's remarkable and 'hopeful' insurgent candidacy for Democratic nominee has won him delegates, fame, a reputation for hard work and for inspiration.
It has also shown that he is really a 'fringe candidate'. Obama has been unable to close the deal with the huge bulk of mainstream Democrats.
Why? He has a Big State problem:
"So the deck is stacked in Pennsylvania. A Clinton victory there will intensify a debate among Democrats about whether Obama has a "big state" problem. In states with more than 100 pledged delegates, Clinton has won California, New York, Texas, Ohio and New Jersey. Obama has won Illinois and will be favored in the May primary in North Carolina."
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/03/06/for_obama_an_uphill_battle_in_p.html
Obama's remarkable speeches have moved college-educated and younger candidates, but not the huge mass of Americans he needs to win the presidency.
This means he would be walloped by John McCain come November.
The best thing for the Democrats is to have Hillary Clinton run for president, with Obama as her VP running mate. That magic combo would demolish McCain and give the Democrats control of the presidency, the Senate and the White House.
And then the healing of America can start, under sixteen years of Democratic presidential rule.
It has also shown that he is really a 'fringe candidate'. Obama has been unable to close the deal with the huge bulk of mainstream Democrats.
Why? He has a Big State problem:
"So the deck is stacked in Pennsylvania. A Clinton victory there will intensify a debate among Democrats about whether Obama has a "big state" problem. In states with more than 100 pledged delegates, Clinton has won California, New York, Texas, Ohio and New Jersey. Obama has won Illinois and will be favored in the May primary in North Carolina."
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/03/06/for_obama_an_uphill_battle_in_p.html
Obama's remarkable speeches have moved college-educated and younger candidates, but not the huge mass of Americans he needs to win the presidency.
This means he would be walloped by John McCain come November.
The best thing for the Democrats is to have Hillary Clinton run for president, with Obama as her VP running mate. That magic combo would demolish McCain and give the Democrats control of the presidency, the Senate and the White House.
And then the healing of America can start, under sixteen years of Democratic presidential rule.
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
How Hillary Clinton fans can help Michigan & Florida play a part
How can Hillary win? By having the votes of Florida and Michigan counted.
How can she do that? By having her fans come together in launching a grassroots campaign to have Democrats in those two states write, email, phone and sign petitions (on the internet and on paper) which ask the Governors of those two states to hold a new primary for both states on April 22 or in late May.
Let the votes of Americans count!
Why will this help the Democrats win the presidency? Imagine if these two states are NOT allowed to vote for a Democratic nominee - how many will in fact vote for the Democratic candidate in November? Many would most likely stay at home or vote for McCain.
Now imagine if a new primary is held in those two states - think of the excitement of the Democrats, and then ask yourself: are those energized Democrats more likely to vote Democrat in November?
Of course they would! A tidal wave of enthusiastic Democrats would sweep Hillary Clinton into the White House as President, with Obama as her Vice President.
In 8 years, Obama could take another stab at becoming president. He might be formidable, then.
How can she do that? By having her fans come together in launching a grassroots campaign to have Democrats in those two states write, email, phone and sign petitions (on the internet and on paper) which ask the Governors of those two states to hold a new primary for both states on April 22 or in late May.
Let the votes of Americans count!
Why will this help the Democrats win the presidency? Imagine if these two states are NOT allowed to vote for a Democratic nominee - how many will in fact vote for the Democratic candidate in November? Many would most likely stay at home or vote for McCain.
Now imagine if a new primary is held in those two states - think of the excitement of the Democrats, and then ask yourself: are those energized Democrats more likely to vote Democrat in November?
Of course they would! A tidal wave of enthusiastic Democrats would sweep Hillary Clinton into the White House as President, with Obama as her Vice President.
In 8 years, Obama could take another stab at becoming president. He might be formidable, then.
Monday, March 03, 2008
Obama & Clinton - the solution: The Revolving Presidency
Both candidates are slugging it out in the trenches, accumulating delegates, but neither is the clear winner yet. The odds are that there will be a fight on the convention floor, unless both Florida and Michigan hold new Democratic primaries, which I believe will happen.
If there is no clear winner come the convention, what to do?
Well, the Cat says if 8 is good, 16 is even better.
Why not have Obama and Clinton cut a deal, backed by the convention, under which come convention night, the two candidates and all the delegates agree to aim for a sixteen year occupancy of the Oval Office by a Democrat?
How to do this? Obama and Clinton and the delegates agree on a revolving presidency concept. A coin is tossed, to select who is the candidate for presidency this time, and who is the vice presidential candidate. Then, after four years, the roles are switched, and the president becomes the candidate for vice president, and the vice president becomes the candidate for president.
Four years later the same switch, and four years after that, the same switch.
The result? Each of Obama and Clinton get 8 years as president, and 8 years as vice president.
The advantage for the Democrats? No bitter fight at the convention; both teams cooperate as both candidates will get the chance to be president (if the Democrats win, that is).
If McCain wins, the deal is off for the next presidential election.
If there is no clear winner come the convention, what to do?
Well, the Cat says if 8 is good, 16 is even better.
Why not have Obama and Clinton cut a deal, backed by the convention, under which come convention night, the two candidates and all the delegates agree to aim for a sixteen year occupancy of the Oval Office by a Democrat?
How to do this? Obama and Clinton and the delegates agree on a revolving presidency concept. A coin is tossed, to select who is the candidate for presidency this time, and who is the vice presidential candidate. Then, after four years, the roles are switched, and the president becomes the candidate for vice president, and the vice president becomes the candidate for president.
Four years later the same switch, and four years after that, the same switch.
The result? Each of Obama and Clinton get 8 years as president, and 8 years as vice president.
The advantage for the Democrats? No bitter fight at the convention; both teams cooperate as both candidates will get the chance to be president (if the Democrats win, that is).
If McCain wins, the deal is off for the next presidential election.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
