I messed up

I forgot to put in my links. Here they are:
For Sad:http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/16/obama.bush.mccain/index.html
and for Really:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080502/entertainment/elizabeth_taylor_hillary_clinton
and
http://www.dailyreckoning.com.au/hillary-clinton-opec/2008/05/06/

And by the way great job everyone!

Sad

Wow. It is really sad when you look a the level of political discourse in this country. Our own President is trying to compare Obama saying he would not rule out negotiations with Iran to Nazi appeasement. Oh and it happens to be the 60th anniversary of the founding of the state of Israel. It is disgusting to think that our leaders would choose to immediately limit their resources when dealing with a troubled region. And its all sound bites. If Bush, or someone with a brain, could actually sit down with the leader of Iran and try to talk things over they would be a fool not to. I cringe when I think about the people who actually support that kind of closed minded policy. So what if talks with Iran fail, at least they tried to avoid a violent conflict. I think there is more to said of person who truly exhausts all peaceful options before launching into a military campaign. I guess we already know we can’t expect that from Bush. And it appears McCain, if elected, is setting him self up to have the same type of foreign policy that good G W has campaigned for almost eight years now. Call me crazy but I think foreign policy should be thoughtful, not a pissing contest. Hopefully people will come to their sense and elect a reasonable person, least say Barak Obama.

Really?

Well its official, she has gone nuts. According to the Daily Reckoning and Clinton’s own campaign site, "Hillary is calling on the President to engage in immediate negotiations with OPEC members and, if no progress is made, file a formal complaint against OPEC countries at the WTO." That’s right Hillary Clinton is going to put an end the worlds oil crisis by taking the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries to court. I know Hillary tries to paint her self as no friend of big business but this is going a little too far. She want s to sue a company because, lets face it, they have their own best interest in mind.
Now Hollywood’s original train wreck, Elizabeth Taylor, is supporting Clinton, as if we needed another reason to dislike Hillary Clinton. Personally I don’t think anyone should base their political beliefs on what a Hollywood weird has to say. But knowing this country it could possibly have an effect.

End of the year

Well nothing like waiting until the very last minute to post on here! I am writing about the endorsement of Obama from Edwards, like we didn't know it was going to happen. I am quite happy with the endorsement. I feel like this will help allow the American public start to side with one nominee instead of fighting to see who will get the party bid. It is important for the democrats to start siding together to fight against the republican party who has all the time in the world to raise money and grief against the dems in office. With this election people seem to think that either the democrats have it in the bag or else they are most assuredly going to loose, and I am unsure whether this is good or bad for it will either drive voters out in record numbers again much like it did during the primary or it can keep voters in with the idea of 'our vote wont count anyway.' Hopefully, people realize that the need for a president of the democratic party is more important than candidate loyalty. All i keep hearing about on CNN and several other news networks is that, Obama's people wont vote for Hillary, or vice-versa. Honestly, either of them is a much better choice then the alternative.

Hillary's BIG Problem

I guess it was clear which Democrat ended up raising more money this primary season. Hillary Clinton's campaign actually has her in over 20 million dollars worth of debt. She's donated herself about 11.4 million. As of right now nobody in her campaign network has any idea how they are going to address paying off the enormous debt .What can she do to pay that debt off, well she's already talked about transferring some of the debt to her Senate Re-election effort, but she owes alot of money to alot of people. One of her foreseeable options is looking to her adversary Obama for monetary support. He has been able to raise money in an unprecedented way this election. Its not like Obama can just give Clinton a bag full of cash, instead he would have to start asking his supporters to start donating to the Clinton campaign. Some incentive for him to do this for party unity. Obviously if Obama is willing to donate his money to her campaign he understands that Clinton is basically bowing out to him and thanking him for the help. It's not too crazy that another candidate helps the losing candidate out with the bills, but the bills have never been so high. Clinton doesn't have too much time left either to act. Mccain's bill on presidential election reform that passed within recent years prevents candidates from accepting any more money than 250,000 after the Party Conventions. The odds seem to be stacked against Clinton in more ways than one, and lets just hope she'll end this dragging process and just drop out.

Olympic Protesting

Tibet, the neighboring country of China has protested the summer Olympics in Beijing. The Tibetans and Chinese have disputed over the separation of Tibet from China and unfortunately the disputes have interfered with our worlds most treasured event. Tibet and protesters have disrupted the Olympic torch trail across all of the participating countries, attempting to put out the flame. In England, the torch was put out by a protesters fire extinguisher while provoking the runners of the torch.
How does the protesting of the Olympics affect politics and America? (You may ask) Well, the protesters on Ti bets freedom have caused a lot of disruption for China and its people. This has caused other countries and media to stipulate if China should continue to host the Olympic games. Since the uproar and attention of the protesting, China has taken action to use force to control their streets and has shot and killed Tibetans. This has provided large concerns to nations such as America and wish to mediate the issue with China. China on the other hand has refused to allow media to interview and address the issues at hand in China.
The Chinese felt originally that the games would provide a wonderful leap in their current battle of civil rights within the country but instead taken a leap backward. The controversy between Tibet and China should not be incorporated into a world wide shared games which is dated back to ancient times of our world civilization. This types of heinous acts during the times of the Romans wouldn't be tolerated and as a matter of fact they didn't happen because the rules of the Olympic games was to stop war during the event, out of respect for the greatness of it. These acts don't just affect the U.S but the whole world.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/03/10/india.tibet.ap/index.html

The Revival

Like we've been talking about all year, Democrats are showing up to the voting booths at an unprecedented rate. Not surprisingly Republicans can't say the same, in fact they lost many former members who jumped the fence. Democratic party registration has actually raised over 1 million people in the last seven primaries states alone. Election experts have said that this is the most politically charged voters have ever been during the 2008 elections. The fact of the matter is that not many people are really content with the position the country has been put into by the current president. People don't really understand why we are paying four dollars a gallon or for that matter, why the economy seems to be crumbling. Both democratic candidates understand this and are reaching out and appealing to people who really never had any interest voting.

People who never thought to vote before are taking stances finally because life conditions are forcing them too. I'm glad that it finally seems that the country is becoming more involved the in voting process. Its unfortunate that it took such turmoil in this country to raise political awareness but hopefully this will be a continuing trend as we move on into this century.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/28/politics/washingtonpost/main4048905.shtml

Shut up Already...

I don't know about anyone else but I'm sick of hearing about Obama's former pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright. If anyone has been living under a rock the past few months here's a quick update. Wright used to be the pastor at Trinity Baptist Church, where Obama and his family worship. Thanks to the digital world we live in (youtube) some of Wright's sermons began floating around on the Internet. In these sermons Wright made some comments along the lines of 9/11 was god punishing America and that the government invented AIDS to keep the black community impoverished. Wright claims these comments were taken out of context, and yes it could be seen that way, but regardless these are some pretty inflammatory statements to make while your in the pulpit. This all happened a couple of months ago. It had seemed that Obama had dodged a bullet by delivering one of the most poignant speeches on race relations in quite some time. Surprise! Wright is back in the news and making headlines. In a recent appearance Wright called Obama "un-american" for trying to distance himself from the fire-breathing preacher. Last time i checked Obama was catching heat for not distancing himself enough. Either way Wright is stirring up quite a controversy. It seems as if Wright is trying to piggyback Obama's rise to the top. What he dosent realize is that hes so full of crap he is going to sink them both. Thankfully John McCain and Hillary have stepped in. McCain recently did his part by writing a letter to the GOP in North Carolina asking them nicely to please not run ads linking the states democratic, Obama supporting candidates to Rev. Wright. Thank you John McCain, you have saved the day. Oh wait, no you haven't, according to Hillary Clinton you should have done more. Why in the world is this even an issue, how is a church in Chicago linked to Democratic candidates in North Carolina? Maybe if the media, the desperate for attention shemale, and the oldest resident of the golden senate retirement community hadn't made a fuss about it in the first place this would have been seen for the trivial garbage that it is.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/04/28/wright.npc/index.html

What if.......

I think that everyone has heard about these elusive "super delegates" and their incredible power to choose who to support. You then also know the power they have in changing the outcome of the election, especially in the "smoke filled rooms" of the DNC. So given that these people can give and take support from one candidate to another, what happens if Hillary is capable of swaying these super delegates to her side in the back room bargaining of the DNC and then through this bargain gets more delegate support than Obama, and thus the nomination. How would the democratic voters feel if Hillary Clinton is capable of taking the nomination through these super delegates, even though Obama has more pledged delegates and the popular vote.

It sounds far fetched and hopefully is, but none-the-less its a possibility that Hillary Clinton is probably hoping for as she pushes her campaign to the Democratic National Convention. Would the voters stand for letting this very "undemocratic" process choose the nominee? I know personally I would never vote for the Democrats again if they allowed super delegates to choose the candidate despite what the pledged delegates and popular vote had to say about it. What is the point of voting in the Democratic primary and having the public choose its candidate if these people can say "nope" and make their own choice. I know that the party wanted a fail-safe system where they could prevent an unlikeble candidate or someone they know won't win from getting the nomination. But why have a primary at all if you can't trust your supporters to make a smart choice for the party they support and want to see win?
Qucik History

I think in this particular primary election, in large part because of how competive it is, you would see a huge backlash if the super delegates went against the pledged delegates and the popular vote; a much greater backlash than when the electoral college went with Bush over Gore in the general election, even though Gore captured the popular vote. For this reason alone I find it difficult for Hillary to sway that many super delegates and take the nomination from Obama. If Clinton does push this all the way to the convention, it will be a tense moment to find out what deals have been made, especially if the delegate count is still this close by August. I think if the popular vote and pledged delegates USURPED by the super delegates, there will be hell to pay.

In case you were wondering who the super delegates are, have a look at
these chumps

The Dems are all broken up

One of the biggest issues plaguing the Democratic Primaries is the rift that is growing not just between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, but the growing divide there increasingly bitter competition is causing among both of their supporters. As the contest becomes more and more bitter, thanks largely to Hillary bringing in mudslinging (despite who you support it's clear that she made the contest negative), both candidates supporters are saying that they may not vote if the other gets the nomination.

In a poll by CNN, about 16% of Clinton supporters would not vote for Obama and an equal amount of Obama supporters would not vote for Clinton if she somehow managed to get the nomination. These 16% would either not vote at all or could even be so unhappy with the candidate that they move to support McCain.
Clinton-Obama splitting party
I had seen polls showing this percentage has grown since this article was done in late March. If this trend continues than it will become more and more difficult for the Democrats to beat McCain in the general election. Perhaps Clinton should think about whats best for the party and the unity of the party and just bow out gracefully before more damage occurs. This isn't me blatantly going after Clinton because I dislike her, I'm going simply by the numbers; she can't win. Feel free to look at the current delegate count and the remaining delegates.
Unlikely
She should be worried (as should Obama) that her/his tactics and the unfriendly atmosphere that has been generated in this campaign as of late is causing major damage. I doubt that 16% will not vote for the other or swing to McCain, but any loss of votes could be devastating- the Democrats will already lose votes to Nader, it won't help to lose more because Clinton is being petty in her race for power.

I am personally one of those people who will vote for McCain over Hillary; not for spite...well maybe a little, but mainly because I don't trust her, her foreign policy is horrible, and I don't like her universal health care plan. I honestly believe McCain would be a better choice than Hillary, although I don't like McCain that much either and Nader has no chance. If Hillary takes this to the convention she risks further polarizing democratic voters to the point where 16% becomes a feasible number of defectors or people who rather not vote. Another issue to consider is trying to bring the party together, if Hillary stepped out a few months before the August DNC, it would give Obama time to bring the party back together, because having to do that during the general election will take time and energy from breaking down McCain; McCain already has a jump start on attacking democrats on policy- they don't need to give him even more time during the crucial election period.

As much as we all love to see every primary matter and all the huge turnouts by voters because of such a competitive primary season, you also have to take into consideration what damage it has done, from turning democrats against one another to allowing the rival party to collect its self and attack the democrats on issues. I think its time that a certain candidate should call it quits and recognize the numbers are not in her favor (HILLARY) and allow this time to bring the party back together and focus on winning the White House.

This just in(!): Obama needs to eat just like everyone else!

'Just let me eat my waffle."

But, seriously, the fact that reporters will even post something like this is very, very depressing in the world of news. But where are the serious issues going? Even though the article talks about the topic of Hamas and Carter, there's nothing here that this article really has to offer on the subject anyways.

Hats off to Obama for telling the reporter off. It's refreshing that a politician can break his political character and just be human for the time he has to eat and do the things we as humans have to. (Obvious bias...) I can't imagine what kind of BS you could hear Clinton rambling about after a question like that, especially in light of a remark such as this:

"I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran," Clinton said. "In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them."

But, honestly, Obama is wise to keep his lips sealed on a topic like this for the sake of himself and for the sake of letting the media know that this sort of coverage is just out of line.

The Debate

Last night the Democrats held their 154232 debate of this year. Both candidates argued their positions as normal. This debate had the extra little tid-bit of actually answering people calling them out on their faults. I saw Hillary Clinton side step an answer for why she lied about Bosnia. I also saw Obama have to answer a question on why he doesn't wear an American Flag pin. This is very important because we all know that the next president has to wear a pin or the terrorists win. He also tried to finally put an end to all the talk about his relationships with his pastor and the english professor who made a pro-terrorist comment after 9/11. So I couldn't watch it all because it seems like a rerun every time except with a little dash of pointless topics keeping us away from the real interests.

The Boss Supports Obama

Rocker Bruce Springsteen has declared himself an Obama Supporter. This after months of being on the fence between Obama and Clinton. He has seemed to make his decision after Clinton went on the attack on Obama's relationship with his pastor and his comments on people from places like Philadelphia.
He commented: "Critics have tried to diminish Senator Obama through the exaggeration of certain of his comments and relationships...While these matters are worthy of some discussion, they have been ripped out of the context and fabric of the man's life and vision ... often in order to distract us from discussing the real issues: war and peace, the fight for economic and racial justice, reaffirming our Constitution, and the protection and enhancement of our environment."
He, like many others, sees the attacks as desperate attempts from political rivals to find skeletons in Obama's closet. With their failure to do so they have gone after trivial relationships and poor wording during one speech.

A Different Look at Obama's "Mistake"

This week, the current popular issue to talk about is Obama and his "boo-boo" speech. Upon my research I found Sam Harris' (a popular atheist) blog and he had written about this subject.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-harris/what-barack-obama-could-n_b_92771.html

In this article he mentions that when religion is involved in politics it is "so scandalously stupid." He says that candidates really cannot say what they want to say when it comes to religion or racism, and when they do say something people jump all over it as if having an opinion that wasn't "middle of the road" was unacceptable. The reaction that everyone had to his comments on guns and religion is what makes it hard for America to have a popular candidate with strong opinions one way or the other. 

Some of the topics in this article were a little far fetched, but this paragraph was pretty decent:

"Despite all that he does not and cannot say, Obama's candidacy is genuinely thrilling: his heart is clearly in the right place; he is an order of magnitude more intelligent than the current occupant of the Oval Office; and he still stands a decent chance of becoming the next President of the United States. His election in November really would be a triumph of hope."

This is true. I think many people are running with this little "oops" and saying now that he has no chance. I do not think that most Americans are that harsh, I mean the man apologized and said that he chose his words incorrectly. But then again, people will take whatever they can get. 

Harris' article ends with this bit:

"But Obama's candidacy is also depressing, for it demonstrates that even a person of the greatest candor and eloquence must still claim to believe the unbelievable in order to have a political career in this country. We may be ready for the audacity of hope. Will we ever be ready for the audacity of reason?"

What Harris is saying is that you should take the religion out of the politic, but this country was started on the idea: freedom of religion. I don't think we need to take religion out of Washington D.C. but I think people could lighten up a bit. 

The 2nd District GOP Congressional Candidates' Forum

So as some of you may know, tonight, April 7th, was the 2nd District GOP Congressional Candidates' Forum. I was rather disappointed by the student turnout of a handful or so, but then I realized that there really wasn't that much advertisement of it other than on facebook. Oh, and we are in a relatively Democratic area, on a college campus, populated mainly by Democratic types. But you'd think they'd come out for the free pizza and soda.

Even though I'm a 1st District voter myself, my political junkie was screaming for a fix, and the call of free pizza and soda was too much to bear; I couldn't resist.

Featured tonight were Congressional hopefuls Jim Steiner (http://www.joinjim2008.com/), Jennifer Horn (http://jenniferhorn.org/), and Grant Bosse (http://bosse2008.com/). Conspicuous in his absence was State Senator Bob Clegg, who I've heard may also toss his name in the hat for the 2nd District Congressional seat.

Before the festivities could even get started, there was a fire alarm. Evidently one of the residents in Hall burnt some food, and do Heritage Commons, where the forum was being held, also had to evacuate the building. So we were all quite chilly once the festivities got to a start.

Issues raised ranged from the candidates' opinions on education, Iraq, the economy, and the War Powers Act. I'll spare you all the details, considering I took about four pages of notes in anticipation of blogging the forum. I will say that Mr. Bosse distinguished himself with his adherence to free market principles, and Mr. Steiner distinguished himself by his proposal to expand programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and extending GI Bill-like education benefits to alumni of such programs in order to make higher education more affordable.

All of the candidates stressed the need to decrease the overall size of government, as well as the need to decrease the federal tax burden on Americans. Basically, think small government Republican, and you'll get the basic picture. Check out the websites if you're interested in more detailed issue stances.

Overall it was a good time, and I would encourage you guys to check out political events on campus in the future. It just so happens that Paul Hodes will be on campus this Saturday!

Clean out your Closet for good

An article in “The Economist,” March 19, 2008, stated that Sen. Barack Obama, (D) Illinois, used the press conference that was for defending himself against his former pastor to let some monsters out of the closet. Barack Obama mentioned that his relationship with Tony Rezko, a Chicago property developer and former fund raiser, was closer than first stated. He also mentioned that his campaign has received more money than it originally admitted to by 100,000 dollars.
I think that while Sen. Barack Obama has a tremendous lead in the democratic election he must hold on to it. At this point I believe that the race is his to win, but also his race to lose if he cannot shape up. It is these small problems that can “snowball” into large ones if they ferment too long. He needs keep his campaign positive and stay away from such glitches or he will begin to see that his fans will dwindle, which he cannot afford.
http://www.economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10880601&CFID=779148&CFTOKEN=99359023

McCain, still making stops

A recent article on CNN.com said Senator John McCain is, “now trying to portray himself as the most attractive option for voters in November.” He has embarked on a 5 state journey telling his biographical story. He is talking about how his family has influenced and instilled certain values that he believes will shape the future. He mentions his family has taught him a sense of duty, honor, courage, sacrifice, perseverance, and leadership. Crediting most of these “accomplishments” to his father and grandfather, both four star admirals.
The article also mentions that he has already posted a campaign ad for the general election. While I like his veracity and positive attitude I believe that it is still too early to boast such confidence. I think that he might receive some negative feedback for flaunting his confidence publicly. With the democratic side still undecided I think that he should wait because I don’t believe people are ready to dive into the election in November, when there is so much attention on the Clinton/Obama race. Hopefully he can escape this and will be beneficial to his campaign.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/31/mccain.tour/index.html

The Democratic Issue

Since its been down to Obama and Clinton for the democratic nomination we've seen some pretty fresh tactics from both candidates. Clinton's waving her experience flag, and Obama's promising the word change in nearly every other sentence. What I don't believe that people are seeing is the potential damage this quarelling can cause the Democratic party. In a recent article that I came across I read that 16% of Clinton supporters will not vote in the general election of Obama is the nominee. That number is also pretty similar to that of Obama supporters who wouldn't vote for Clinton. The more I think about the numbers the more it becomes clear, democrats need a candidate that will unite all the people. If Hilary is so dedicated to the Democratic party then maybe she should to the right thing and step off the stage and let Obama try to unite all the democrats.

The fact of the matter is its almost impossible for her to win anyways, and the attacking tactics aren't good for politics. If the democrats are going to win back the White House they have to be united. We can't have the party divided causing people to disenfranchise themselves because they don't like certain things about a candidate. History shows us that in past elections candidates who press all the way to the convention cause less people of that party to vote, and democrats can't afford that.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/27/dem.turnout.poll/index.html?iref=newssearch

Clinton/Obama Ticket '08 - Get Real

What does Bob say? "I doubt it!"

That's how I feel about this topic, suggested by PA Gov. Rendell in this NY Times article: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/30/rendell-likes-idea-of-clinton-obama-ticket/

Considering the amount of negative campaigning done, I don't think that either candidate would want to take the back seat to either. Not that this is as much of an issue on the Obama side (if he were to win it would be a bit of a historical landmark and step forward for African Americans), but I highly doubt that the female supporters of Clinton who are supporting her with that reason in high regard would ever want to take the back seat... to a man, and a black man. Those bring forth some undertones of social implications they simply would not accept. Most sources I have tried to research briefly have turned out to say that there is no correlation between black supporters and Obama, either.

Now as far as what Clinton and Obama have to say, this article seems to outline it a bit:
http://wcbstv.com/topstories/clinton.obama.ticket.2.669799.html

This was March 5, but the fact likely remains. Clinton seems to say all along that she is the better candidate and now that she thinks she can be back on top, she offers a VP slot to Obama. This is laughable to Obama, however (from the above article): "The bottom line is, we've won twice as many states, we won a greater share of the popular vote and what's most important, we've won far more Independents and Republicans than Sen. Clinton has."

Just a month before this article, Wolf Blitzer ran the possibility of an Obama-Clinton ticket (and vice versa) cited in this article. This article made it seem quite conceivable, with a few gray areas which would need clearing, obviously. But, with Clinton's recent bitter attitude towards Obama, Obama's resent for her actions, and the now seeming divine quest Ms. Clinton has taken (as people have told her to call off her campaign) there is just too much bad blood and the stakes are too high for this to realistically happen. Additionally, there is just too much support from Hillary supporters in general for her to simply drop out. I found this on Hillary's campaign site blog, and however hopeful and not based on sound rationale and logic some of these assertions are, it just shows how much support there is for Hillary, dismay for Obama, and the willingness to hold out until the bitter end.

No, at this point, unless something magical happens between them (unlikely), Obama and Clinton won't be seen on the same ticket for Presidency and Vice Presidency.

Barack gets Senator's Support in Pennsylvania

As the April 22, 2008 Pennsylvania primary closes in, Senator Bob Casey announces his support for Presidential hopeful Barrack Obama. Senator Casey announced his endorsement at a Pittsburg convention on Friday March, 28. Obama accepted the endorsement with open arms. This endorsement will help Obama among the Catholic voters of Pennsylvania as Senator Casey is the son of former Catholic Governor, Bob Casey Sr. This is a big endorsement for Barrack because in most other contests, the Catholic vote has previously gone to Senator Hillary Clinton. Although Clinton holds a two-digit lead in recent polls in the state of Pennsylvania, we all are hoping that Obama will defeat this horrible woman and lead this country forwards, not backwards. GOOD LUCK BARACK OBAMA!http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/28/campaign.wrap/index.html

Hillary at it Again

It seems that Hillary again is having trouble remembering what has happened to her in the past. Last week Clinton spoke in what appeared to be prepared remarks regarding her 1996 trip to Bosnia. Expecting a welcoming ceremony at the airstrip, Clinton said that, "I remember landing under sniper fire. . . we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base." This doesn't quite match up with what she said in her book, where she wrote, "Due to reports of snipers in the hills around the airstrip, we were forced to cut short an event on the tarmac with local children. . ." In the end even this doesn't quite seem to match up with the actual CBS news video that followed her off of the helicopter and down the tarmac. This is what actually happened. I would be mean to her for lying, but CBS's Cheryl Atkinson does a much better job of it (she was there as well). She claims she simply misspoke. This may be true, and for the sake of argument I'll give her the benefit of the doubt. That being said, who wants a commander in chief that gets "possible sniper threat" which is universal among high ranking politicians, mixed up with "shot at by snipers" which would qualify as an open act of hostility. Oh, and by the look on Chelsea's face, she seems as equally concerned about the snipers as her mom.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/118240

Political Parties, Elections and Interest Groups: Hillary Clinton Revives Campaign?

Hillary Clinton Revives Campaign?

Hillary Clinton threw up a road block to Barack Obama’s path to the Democratic Party nomination by winning Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island Primaries. Although Clinton has been granted a chance, she is still considered unlikely to reach the nomination. Hillary and her followers, however, beg a differ and recently released a memo titled “The Path to the Presidency.” In the memo it goes on rambling about how Hillary should run against John McCain; “Hillary is seen as the one who can get the job done" it doesn’t however explain how she will actually be able to do it. The idea of Hillary and her campaign allegedly releasing memos and articles explaining the audacity of her winning the democratic nomination with a 144 delegate deficit is repulsive. Clintons win in Ohio reduced the total by only nine, meaning she would need 15 more Ohio’s to pull even with Obama. Hillary and her Campaign better focus on the task at hand, instead of celebrating with the sensation that these wins will bring her to a win. "Clinton's negatives are so high and Obama's positives are so high, especially on the question 'Who will unite or divide the country?" Said Steffen Schmidt of Iowa State University, he gives Clinton a 29.9% chance of pulling it off. Political strategist Joe Trippi, John Edwards' former top aide, gives Clinton less than a 50% chance of winning. "The likeliest scenario is for Obama to continue to rack up more delegates than she does," he said. It will be a long road ahead for Hillary Clinton and many would agree but considering she is a Clinton and many do associate with her and her ideas she may have a chance but a slight one at that.

Hillarys Delegate Hub

The Delegate Hub is the Clinton campaign's latest attempt to sway the opinions of voters by pointing out facts and myths about the race for delegates in this years democratic convention. The problem is that this site is completely one sided. It does do a good job of pointing out exactly what the superdelegates, or automatic delegates as she calls them, are but all it really consists of is a whiny attempt by Clinton to sway the opinions of voters as well as superdelegates who are thinking of switching sides. The main point she is trying to make is that the superdelegates were created in order do what was best for the democratic party. She makes it seem like voters are stupid and the nominee they choose may not be the best candidate for the party so superdelegates need to balance that effect. As a voter i find this slightly offensive. The purpose of having a primary is to have the voters choose the party's nominee. Hillary is trying to take the power out of the hands of the people and put it in the hands of the party elite because that is the only way she can win. Hillary is urging super delegates to think long and hard about what is best for the party before they make their decision. She doesn't want them to take the opinions of the voters into consideration. I have a feeling that this particular tactic is going to end up backfiring for her. Anyone who visits this website will see it for what it is, a desperate last-ditch attempt to appeal to the only allies she may have left, the democratic establishment. So much for running a campaign of change. Even party leaders are starting to jump ship, just today Georgia Congressman John Lewis, a super delegate, switched his support from Clinton to Obama. I have a feeling this is only the beginning. With the overwhelming support Obama is getting from around the nation it would be a slap in the face to democracy if Hillary won the nomination because of superdelegates.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/
http://www.delegatehub.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHnuo17dsBQ

The Latino Vote in Texas

Latinos make up approximately one third of the democratic vote in Texas. With the election taking place there in the near future, it is a good idea to consider what type of issues Latinos are opposed to and in favor of. Immigration is one of the biggest things to consider especially because it is such a hot issue today in politics. About 75% of the Latinos interviewed in Texas say that building a wall on the US and Mexican border will be an ineffective way to prevent illegal immigrants from coming to the US. Instead of a wall, “63 percent of Latinos in Texas support a pathway to citizenship as a means of addressing illegal immigration.” (CNN.com).

The next major issue and perhaps the most important, is that of the War in Iraq. A large number of Latinos in Texas have a relative in the military and overwhelmingly support a withdrawal of the US troops in Iraq. That being said, these voters oppose John Mccain’s to keep troops in Iraq, allowing Hillary and Obama to battle for the Latino vote amongst themselves. As of right now, Hillary has the most support (76%), while Obama trails(66%).

Who the Heck is Gennifer Flowers?

So I don't know if you've heard about this, but apparently Bill Clinton had another relationship with this woman named Gennifer Flowers and there is proof. (tapes of phone conversations between her and Bill during their 12 year affair!) I'm sure if I had followed the whole scandal a little closer I may have heard of her before... But searching the Internet today, I found this article about her:  

CLICK HERE

This comes up now because Flowers has realized that she could get some real money by putting up the tapes of her and Bill up for bid! She says, "I certainly would enjoy the money for my future security," Hahaha! 

Upon further research I found that Hillary's response to these tapes was absolutely epic. When asked what she thought of Bill calling Gennifer "honey" in the tapes she said that in Alabama everybody calls everybody "honey," so that was the reason that it was okay. Is Hillary ignorant? YES.

Personally, I think it's kind of funny that this woman, Gennifer, brings this forward now, especially for people like me who had never heard of this nonsense before today. Hillary has once again amazed me with her wonderful words of ignorance. How much longer can she fool herself, and how long will it take until she tries to fool the country? She's already started, and it's not looking good. NICE JOB MRS. CLINTON!

Nader's tossing his hat in the ring!!!

That's right, boys and girls!!! Ralph Nader just put his name in the running for a third party bid to be President! While being interviewed on Tim Russert's MSNBC show Meet the Press, Nader announced his intention to seek the White House, yet again. See Yahoo news link below.

http://nz.news.yahoo.com/080224/5/45qi.html

So what will this mean for the 2008 Presidential election??? Lots of pissed off Democrats, for one. Lots of Republicans jumping for joy, too! You should have seen my reaction when I saw it on CNN this morning. Not that I'm a loyal Republican, I actually can't stand a large number of them and have some major disagreements with them, being the small l libertarian that I am. But I'll take McCain with all his flaws over either Barack or Hillary any day, especially with a Democratic controlled House and Senate.

So could this siphon off enough votes from the Democrats for McCain to clinch it? According to the above linked Yahoo news article, Nader was able to get 2.7% of the vote in 2000, and many Dems blamed him for costing Gore the election. No doubt, that 2.7% of the electorate was faaaaar left, being that Nader ran as the Green Party nominee. No doubt, he'll be catching many of the same voters in the 2008 election, just the sort of people the Dems are going to need voting for them in the election.

Many of the media pundits had been saying they thought Nader would stay out of it this time around, that he wouldn't want to be blamed for ruining the chances of the potential first female or black President. Well, apparently they were wrong. Apparently I was wrong too. I figured he'd stay out of it myself, if for no other reason than to keep from giving the neo-cons a leg up.

So what could be motivating Mr. Nader? Maybe the Democrats aren't swinging far enough left for his liking? Maybe he doesn't see enough change on the horizon in an Obama administration? I'm not going to try to get too far into Ralph Nader's head, because to be quite honest, I really don't understand him a whole lot. But suffice it to say, Republicans and everyone else who DOESN'T want to see an Obama or Clinton administration are jumping for joy today.

We live in interesting times...

Spring 2008 Blog Schedule

Make sure your post (a short essay on anything related to political parties, elections and/or interest groups, with some links to back what you are saying)

Week of 2/25

abullcock
Erykah
Douglas Malloy

Week of 3/3

odetoOtoole
Amanda S.
Robespierre

Week of 3/10

Justin
swbanks
Robespierre

Week of 3/24

odetoOtoole
Jessica M.
10Straight
Amanda S.

Week of 3/30

zbooher
wilson610
Douglas Malloy

Week of 4/7

Lindsay
swbanks
Erykah

Week of 4/14

zbooher
Jessica M.
Chicken Potatoes

Week of 4/21

wilson610
Justin
Chicken Potatoes

Week of 4/28

Lindsay
abullock
10Straight

Welcome Spring 2008 Class!

Welcome to our blog! The first step for class members is to set up an account with Blogger so I can add you to this blog so you can get started posting!

A few rules to follow:

1. No profanity or obscenities! This Blog will maintain professional standards of discourse!

2. No jerks.

3. No incivility. You are expected to treat one another with respect and offer constructive comments.

4. follow all rules about fair use of material--copyrights etc.

Now--get blogging!