June 1st, 2008 -- Posted in American Politics, Comics |
I wanted to do a little dance when I woke up this morning to discover that the last of Senator Clinton’s hopes is dead. Here is a summary of the delegate split decision:
Obama - 33.5
Clinton - 53.5
Obama - 29.5
Clinton - 34.5
This effectively gave Senator Clinton a net increase of 24 delegates which is just a drop in the ocean when there are only three primaries left. After I declared Senator Obama the democratic nominee over a week ago, I must admit I was hesitant in doing so given the unpredictable nature of politics but I am quite thankful to be right. There are still many problems with the decision; the first possibility being that the Clinton camp might appeal the decision at the Democratic convention which is something that the party leaders are trying to avoid. The second possibility revolves around the “significant” number of Clinton supporters that might defect to the Republicans or simply not vote.
I believe the second possibility has been played up in the media for the purpose of ratings and sales; I do not have any facts to prove this but can make a generalization based on the current political climate. Every democrat is aware of the current state of the United States from the economy to the “progress” in Iraq. This awareness would make it illogical to vote for Senator McCain given his views towards Iraq and on the Bush Tax Cuts. I believe and hope that the Democratic Party will unite but the first step has to start with Senator Clinton this week.
“We’ve got to tell those people, ‘You’ve been in a fight, the fight is over. Which side are you on?’ “said Lawrence Guyot, 68, a former civil rights activist who headed the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party in 1964. “Do you support McCain, or do you support Obama?”
Guyot said it is up to Clinton to start that dialogue and bring her supporters to heel.
May 31st, 2008 -- Posted in American Politics |
It’s almost 11am and the RBC (Rules and Bylaws Committee) would be taking a break trying to decide how to sort out the conundrum that is the Michigan and Florida delegates. Senator Clinton wants the delegates seated completely and allocated in accordance with the rules because she took majorities in both states. The problem as outlined by Martha Clark:
“How do you recognize the people who didn’t vote and how do you recognize the people that did vote and how do we at the same time maintain the integrity of the process?” said Martha Fuller Clark, a DNC Rules Committee member from New Hampshire and Obama supporter. “And there are no easy answers.”
The Clinton camp has been continuously repeating that every vote should count but many people in both States did not vote but are invested in this election, how do we count their votes? In yesterday’s post I found a comment by someone who had relatives in Florida who did not go out and vote because they knew it would not count. Senator Clinton’s logic does not simply hold up, therefore I believe that Senator Clinton will not receive her wish but neither will Senator Obama. Instead we will all be waiting for the magical solution to solve this problem, and it will certainly have to be magical in order to appease people in both sides.
The Clinton camp is also talking about the demoralization of the Democratic Party if Florida and Michigan are snubbed in some way. I think in an ordinary election year this would be true but democrats across the country realize that conservative policies do not work and have not worked for this country over the last 8 years therefore mass desertions seem highly improbable. Of course, a certain small percentage of the population will be unhappy but the majority of voters want to take a stab at liberal policies to see if the Democrats can bring change. Finally with a Democratic controlled House and a President to support them, I can only imagine sweeping changes that will be good for America.
Lastly, on a personal note; Senator Clinton would be a strong presidential candidate and would mostly likely win the upcoming general election in the traditional electoral methodology. My argument here is that the American people and Democrats want the right person to be in the White House in 2009 rather than the candidate that could win the easiest. The easy way may help many liberals in the short term but many Americans are looking for a long-term change of direction with the economy and Iraq, can Senator Clinton deliver that?
Senator Clinton is a liberal, I cannot argue that point but she has many centrists view that almost lean towards the right as demonstrated by her Iran comments:
On April 29, answering a question on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” Sen. Hillary Clinton warned that if Iran attacked Israel with nuclear weapons, “we would be able to totally obliterate them.”
I want the candidate who is willing to negotiate and understands that military force is the last resort and not the first. I want the next President to be smart, well-educated and understanding of the world and the inter-play of forces that create human society. I want America’s future leader to reform American foreign policy to realize that America and its traditions must change in the wake of the new world order. In order for America to remain competitive, we need change.
May 30th, 2008 -- Posted in American Politics |
No, this is not some excerpt from the Highlander but rather a look at some of the comments and press surrounding the Rules and Bylaws committee meeting. Public tickets to observe the meeting have already been taken according to Stacie Paxton, a spokesman for the DNC. This is going to be good and bad for the party because whoever wins, one side is going to come out angry. I feel very sorry for the members of that committee at this moment, if they side with Senator Clinton and her “bus loads” of supporters then they risk alienating the youth, African-American and college educated voters. If they side with Senator Obama, than they risk losing Senator Clinton’s valuable base of white-working class voters, older people and Latinos. What’s that old saying again? “Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.” I am the worst person when it comes to remembering such colorful phrases but I am sure you can all think of something appropriate to say at this moment. I wanted to look at the impending meeting from a different perspective and look at some of the comments on the published articles online. The first article is by Christi Parsons of the Baltimore Sun entitled: Clinton camp: DNC lawyers ‘incorrect’.
It seems that Obama and his supporters are lacking in principles.
It is a simple matter for Obama to agree to the fundamental bedrock American, democratic principle to count every vote and be done with the controversy.
Obama’s wanting to disenfranchise FL and MI voters who want their votes to count is no “change to believe.” That is more the modus operandi of Obama as a ruthless, slick, sly, devious Chicago politician.
Another commenter TL sums up what I have found out with regards to the voters of MI and FL (Not Everyone Voted):
I have lots of relatives in FL and quite a few did NOT go vote since they KNEW it didn’t count. By conting them at all, Clinton is DISENFRANCHISING all those that did not vote KNOWING it wouldn’t count……but this is no different then her DISENFRANCHISING 9 caucus states in her popular vote count or all those in MI in her popular vote that would of voted for Sen Obama…Her FAKE, popular vote count says NOONE in MI voted for Sen Obama LOL OK……..And she already disenfranchised all those Harlem voters….Remember the ones where not a single vote was cast for Sen Obama? in Harlem???? LOL….enough of this bogus crap. Sen Clinton is OVER and thank goodness….As a registered Independent I will be soooooooooo glad to say BYE BYE Clintons…..AND Sen Clinton you may want to start worrying about your Senate seat, I will be personally helping ANYONE that plans to run aginst YOU
Maya Ayazi writes:
Guys, your comments are proof that we need a woman in the White House. You sound like you’re playing slot machines at Las Vegas. What a headache. We’re not playing games here. We’re talking about people’s votes. Why aren’t you bashing the stupid idiots who made the candidates sign pledge cards in order to run for president. What do you call that? The difference between Hillary and the other candidates, is that she understands that you can’t deny people a vote. She never took her name off the ballot in either Florida or Michigan. Barack Obama, on the other hand, was interested in playing Bridge. That’s why he pulled his name off the ballot in Michigan, and tried to do the same thing in Florida without success. Let’s get it clear, Hillary is the person on the right side on this issue.
There were rebuttals to this argument but Senator Clinton is right that every vote should be counted but rules exist for a reason and it was Senator Clinton’s people who created them. Senator Clinton may be morally right but the primary process was never about the people, but who played the best game, clearly that has been Senator Obama. My prediction for tomorrow is that there is an even split of the remaining delegates of Florida and Michigan between Senator Obama and Senator Clinton.
May 24th, 2008 -- Posted in American Politics |
It is exactly one week to ago until the Democratic Party’s Rules and Bylaws meeting where Senator Clinton’s last glimmer of hope exists. I personally don’t think it will make a difference what the commitee decides but Dan Balz at the Washington Post summarizes the situation quite neatly:
The Clinton campaign has staked out a tough position, what’s described as the “100 percent, 100 percent” solution. Clinton wants the full delegations from both states seated, with full voting rights, and the pledged delegates allocated on the basis of last winter’s primary results.
That means in Michigan awarding no delegates to Obama because he took his name off the ballot. The non-Clinton delegates would officially be considered uncommitted. Clinton’s campaign has calculated that, if that solution prevails, she will net 111 delegates, although most of the uncommitted delegates likely would end up supporting Obama.
In tribute to the strong posistion taken by the Clinton campaign, here is an extraction from her own website (with some editing of course):
May 22nd, 2008 -- Posted in American Politics |
A few weeks ago I wrote about the percentage of internet traffic that the three candidates receive using Alexa.com. Today I am going to use Google Trends which demonstrates whether Senator Obama or Senator Clinton is searched for more using the world’s most popular search engine. So what is the relevance of this particular data? Well I was reading the various articles about the two democratic candidates today and one commenter couldn’t comprehend how Senator Obama was able to raise such large amounts of money. This Google data shows that as of May, Senator Obama receives the greater number of searches compared to Senator Clinton. For example if a potential voter was looking for information on Senator Obama and typed in “Barack Obama” or “Senator Obama”, the very first link that comes up, is for the Senator’s campaign page. Once you go to the Senator’s campaign homepage you are immediately first taken to the contribution page as you are with Senator Clinton.
The demographics of Senator Obama’s supporters come into play at that point in that his greatest appeal is to 18 - 29 year olds who are in college or just out of college. In the case of the people from 22 - 30, they would be earning roughly 25,000 - 55,000 depending on their level of education and state. For these people, donating $25 is a drop in the water in the scope of a cable bill for $60. This is where 1,000,000 people donating $25 makes a big difference rather than many rich people maxing out their personal contributions.
Senator Obama has the money but he has still had to fight Senator Clinton very hard in what the pundits determine the “swing states.” I have argued that this term is invalid in the current election in previous posts so I won’t argue it again but rather I want to touch on the point of the popular vote. Senator Clinton is arguing that she will have the larger popular vote after Puerto Rico and if the Michigan and Florida primaries are counted which is true. The difference in popular vote though will be minimal and the system was not setup like that, the democratic nomination is about pledged delegates and superdelegates. The general election is not even about the popular vote so why bring it up now? I believe that Senator Obama can win some of the States like Florida if the majority of the Clinton people backed him as indicated by the latest Quinnipiac poll:
In a Clinton-McCain matchup, she leads 54 - 37 percent among women, while men back McCain 45 - 42 percent. In an Obama-McCain matchup, men back McCain 48 - 39 percent, while women split, with 43 percent for Obama and 42 percent for McCain.
The poll doesn’t show Senator Obama winning but it does hint at the trend of him improving with key constituencies like woman. At the end of the day though, The Daily Kos has the full story as to why Florida and Michigan will not be seated in her favor and that is because it was loyalists to her campaign who stripped these states of their delegates.