That’s Hillary Clinton‘s margin of victory in Indiana, where pundits, pollsters and press thought the Senator would surely trounce Barack Obama for the Democratic primary.
Obama, however, surprised us all by securing a projected 49% of the vote, while soaring ahead in North Carolina, where he took a whopping – and telling – 56% of the vote. Clinton, meanwhile, only grabbed 42% of the Tar Heel State, giving Obama a fourteen point margin of victory.
And a considerable delegate boost: at least ninety-four.
So, where do the Democratic presidential candidates go from here? Well, the next primaries, of course, but both candidates struck a particularly conciliatory tone during their respective “victory” speeches last night.
Speaking in North Carolina, Obama opened first by highlighting the state’s deciding factor in the election, but then made sure to congratulate Senator Clinton on her Indiana win. Clinton followed a similar patten, using Obama’s words against him to paint herself as a winning underdog, but then extended a bit of an olive branch:
Not too long ago, my opponent made a prediction. He said I would probably win Pennsylvania. He would win North Carolina, and Indiana would be the tie-breaker. Well, tonight we’ve come from behind, we’ve broken the tie, and thanks to you, it’s full speed on to the White House.
I want to commend Senator Obama and his supporters on their win in North Carolina. We are, in many ways, on the same journey. It’s a journey begun long before we were born. It is a journey by men and women who have been on a mission to perfect our union, who marched and protested, who risked everything they had to build an America that embraces us all.
Clinton may have kept herself in the spotlight, but both candidates are sending a clear message: we’re in this together. Take, for example, this excerpt from Obama’s speech:
This fall, we intend to march forward as one Democratic Party, united by a common vision for this country. Because we all agree that at this defining moment in history – a moment when we’re facing two wars, an economy in turmoil, a planet in peril – we can’t afford to give John McCain the chance to serve out George Bush’s third term. We need change in America.
Of course such party hat-tipping is nothing new in national politics, but the tones struck last night were more urgent. The party has been torn asunder over the past few weeks, and Clinton and Obama are doing their best to pull people together. This has some people – or, more than some people – speculating that people may get the mythical dream ticket.
It’s unclear who will lead that mythical campaign. Obama has more delegates at the moment with 1840 total, including superdelegates, while Clinton’s lagging with a total of 1684. Mrs. Clinton does, however, have more name recognition, a strong showing among blue-collar and many working class whites, which will be essential in beating McCain.
Our prediction: Obama on top with the Clintons (yes, Bill, too!) to the left and right. That is, of course, if the Clintons can put their history aside and look toward the party’s future.
I want Obama to be the Presidential nominee, however, I CANNOT imagine him winning without Clinton as his VP nominee.
Although I do not personally like Hillary, she has very adament supporters who I hope we can unite behind a single candidate. Likewise, if Hillary becomes the nominee, I will hold my breath and vote for her.
No matter anyone’s opinions, Hillary and Barack are lightyears better than John McCain.
Hillary needs to be VP. It’s a perfect fit. She will ride the coat tails of another charismatic man to Washington. It serves her right to be stuck in that Slot after what she did to Al Gore.
Ian J UK
I wouldn’t trust that woman for one second, she wants it to much, she will say and do anything to get the job, and do you realy want another four years of Bill, although it will take an intern with a strong stomach for a rerun of Bills little party!!
I will not vote for Barack. I’ll vote for the Socialist candidate instead.
Hillary will say or do anything? Barack has been far more negative than Hillary in this campaign. His advisors have just been better at lying about it.
there is no way there can be an obama-hillary ticket anymore. hillary played bitter politics and she lost her chance, serves her right
What did Hillary do to Al Gore?
Well Ian, “that woman” wants the job just as much as any of the man who ever ran for the office in the past or present. Your thinly veiled sexist slam is transparent and uncalled for. As far as Bill goes, he was a great President, who presided over 8 years of peace, stability, and prosperity.
Obama will most likely be the nominee, but his victory in NC was hardly “telling”, unless getting a majority of the black vote was some sort of surprise. Duh
I’m glad Hillary won Indiana, even if it was by a hare. It shows she has strong support in this country, despite the media bias against her. I hope she fights till the very end, and makes Obama earn his nomination.
Everybody, ALL bitterness aside
All I can say is………………..
PLEASE LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE!
As a Gay Male who is over 40. The actual possibility in all 50 states of this country of Gay Marriage being legal is NULL AND VOID.
And one thing you must remember the person who sits in 1600 Penn Ave NW cannot make those decisions. Itâ€™s the house and senate that can. And pray to God they donâ€™t give the states rights to do it, Then its D.O.A
Then you have the biggest fight of them all. The Supreme Court.
And after seeing McCain saying on TV yesterday he wants more Supreme Court judges like Alito, and Roberts it is for sure A DEAD ISSUE amongst other things for this community.
Us Democrats need to realize fight the real fight come Nov AND itâ€™s not Obama-vs-Clinton. Truth be told they both haved lied at some point and pandered as well.
Please, Please Wake up before itâ€™s too late!
You are hurting no one but YOURSELF in the end. Now if your PRIDE is that big and your willing to go in the fire. Then so be it.
Weâ€™re all sitting here going off on each other with bitter statements on the behalf of the two and theyâ€™re all laughing, smiling having backdoor meetings on how to fuse this ticket
DESTROY THE CONSERVATIVE PLATFORM THAT IS OUR NUCLEAR TARGET!
Not each other.
“I hope she fights till the very end, and makes Obama earn his nomination.”
He already has. He’s leading and she can’t catch up. All Hillary is doing now is wasting everybody’s time and money. She has no chance outside her ‘nuclear option’ which will backfire and destroy her political career.
What she should be doing, for the good of her party and for America, is to use her honed sense of dirty politics against the Republicans. But of course we know this isn’t about the party or America anymore.
I’m ready for hillary to run for the senate again in New York. I’ll be voting for her opponent in that race. She has lost what little respect I had for her and she needs to learn to bow out gracefully. There is no option with her as the nominee that will result in anything less than irreparable damage to the Democratic party.
How is Hillary wasting time and money, when all the voters have not had their say?
I am so fucking sick of the obamauts thinking Hillary should gracefully step aside, so this slick asshole can coast to a nomination. Despite the bullshit, this is still a functioning democracy, and the process is not officially over till ALL OF THE STATES/TERRITORIES HAVE VOTED. If that means it has to go all the way to Puerto Rico, then so be it.
If anything is damaging the party it’s coming from the Obama camp, and it’s nutty supporters, whose sense of entitlement is astounding.
You would vote for her republican opponent in a senate race, and you think she’s the one damaging the party? WOW!
When Obama loses in november, I wonder who everyone will blame for that?
“I am so fucking sick of the obamauts thinking Hillary should gracefully step aside, so this slick asshole can coast to a nomination.”
He obviously hasn’t coasted-he’s worked for it and he has a lead in the popular vote. And he will still have the popular vote after all states have voted. The only reason she is in the position she’s in is because she assumed she would coast to the nomination and had no plan for having to fight on past Super Tuesday.
“If anything is damaging the party itâ€™s coming from the Obama camp, and itâ€™s nutty supporters, whose sense of entitlement is astounding.”
A Hillary supporter attacking Obama supporters for their sense of entitlement is the height of irony. She was interviewed by Couric before the primaries began saying she assumed she would have it wrapped up by Super Tuesday. And no one thought Obama would do as well as he has.
Wake me up when it is all over.
A lead in the popular vote means zilch. Ask Al Gore.
When Obama loses the popular vote and the electoral college in November, who will they blame for that?
Obama has been coasting on the media lovefest, this entire race. He has no clear opinion on any issue, ans has elevated pandering to an art form.
Hillary should have had it wrapped up by super tuesday. She has the experience, and fortitude to be the President, whereas Obama excels in empty rhetoric.
The rest of the country is finally waking up to his slick sales pitch though.
No, all voters have not yet had their say. But enough now have that she cannot reach a majority of delegates or votes – Even if you DO include Michigan and Florida. That was why Obama’s large victory was so meaningful: Sen. Clinton (whom I have great admiration for and look forward to voting for should she choose to run for Senate again) can no longer claim that any hypothetical seating of delegates or counting of currently disqualified votes will put her over the top.
And there aren’t enough states or voters left now to change the game. Of course she’ll continue, at least through May 20, but the writing is on the wall, and she knows it.
As far as I know, the only person who asked her to drop out last night was her friend and supporter Gen. Clark.
She’s made Obama work hard for this nomination, and she’s made him a much better fighter. And it’s sad for her that she made the costly mistakes that she did that did cost her the nomination – it was always hers to lose, and she lost it. Blame bad advisers, blame uninformed voters, or whatever, but at the end of the day, she allowed her opponent to rack up huge leads in caucus states early on (and totally own the month of February) because she was so sure that she would win that she didn’t really bother to contest every state. By the time she could recover and fight like hell – Ohio and TX – it was already too late to win through voters alone. Her only remaining case was (and is) that Obama is so weak and damaged after the revelation of his “scandals” (Wright/Rezko/Ayers/Bitter/FlagPin) that he would be unelectable in the fall.
And his surprisingly large victory in NC and surprisingly narrow loss in IN disproved that last argument – after the toughest weeks of the campaign for him, he made up ground among Blue-collar voters, Women voters, and White male voters. He still didn’t win her base outright from her, but he won more of them that he did in OH and PA, disproving the idea that his baggage will harm him any more than hers will harm her.
And yes, it will go all the way to Puerto Rico on June 1. They will have a primary. And Clinton will probably win it. But it still won’t be enough for her to catch up to him.
(And then Montana and South Dakota will vote on June 3 – don’t forget that PR changed from a Caucus to a Primary and moved their date up a few days)
Oh – and while Obama hasn’t called for Hillary to quit, it looks like McGovern has switched sides and has joined Wes Clark in asking Sen. Clinton to give up the ghost.
Writing on the wal or not, I hope she fights till the bitter end. She has not made him a better candidate, rather a more arrogant one.
When Obama is defeated in the fall, he’ll have no one but himself to blame.
Typical White Gay Person
There is a large movement of Clinton supporters that are planning on voting for Ron Paul.
Paul is much better for the country than McCain.
Obama will never make it, he is to arrogant and his followers too bigoted.
That’s interesting, because Ron Paul has stated that he prefers Obama’s foreign policy to McCain’s. I wonder if Paul’s 10% of the Republican party (the libertarian-anti-war wing) will vote for Obama, just as some more conservative democtats (or still-angry-Clinton supporters) vote for McCain or Paul.
“Clinton supporters are planning on voting for Ron Paul.”
Whew, thanks, for a minute there I thought you were going to say something that mattered. BTW, I heard Ross Perot may run again too…you can consider him as an option.
If Obama loses to McCain, we will all share in that blame…it will show that as a country our past continues to haunt us and we remain paralyzed by the fear of anything or anyone perceived as “different.”
If Obama wins, America will continue to be just as racist, and haunted by it’s past.
Much of his white support is fueled by guilt, and the misguided belief that a vote for Barack will somehow absolve white guilt over past racism, which is still alive and kicking btw. In that respect, they are just as deluded as the blacks who see him as some kind of messiah.
They are setting him up for a major fall.
You guys are still not getting it.
So just go and vote for John McCain and
And after seeing McCain saying on TV yesterday he wants more Supreme Court judges like Alito, and Roberts it is for sure A DEAD ISSUE. Then when he picks these conservative judges. And being a homosexual will become a crime, And gay bashing and gays getting beat down will not have any protection, And there will NEVER be Gay Marriage.
Then McCain and his cabinet will tell the LGTB community “You’re not Welcome in America”
Then what????? God Damn America?
Us Democrats need to realize fight the real fight come Nov AND itâ€™s not Obama-vs-Clinton
Hillary will and should finish to end and she will be awarded the VP spot. She may not like it. But it has to be done to repair and heal the party.
Now if your PRIDE gets in the way and you will not support that is your right. However, you are asking for something that will be very dreadful McCain is not a friend of this community at all.
Please, Please Wake up before itâ€™s too late!
Weâ€™re all sitting here going off on each other with bitter statements on the behalf of the two and theyâ€™re all laughing, smiling having backdoor meetings on how to fuse this ticket
DESTROY THE CONSERVATIVE PLATFORM THAT IS OUR NUCLEAR TARGET!
“Much of his white support is fueled by guilt…”
And of course the whites who support Clinton are only fueled by a desire to have the best person run against the GOP in the fall?
I love liberals. You is some funny people.
You can deny it all you want, but white people are in love with the idea of supporting a black candidate, and it has everything to do with white guilt. Any white candidate who came out of nowhere, and has barely served his first term in the Senate, would have been booted months ago.
He’s like the school bus driver suddenly running for Principal.
I never said anything about where Clinton’s support comes from, so don’t put words in my mouth. She is in fact the better candidate on the issues that matter, despite the media bias.
I love liberals too. Are you a conservative Billiexx??
I’m white and don’t feel any guilt driving me towards Obama. Instead it’s the cool, consensus-driven approach he has to governing, rather than her street-fighting stance. I can appreciate both (and the necessity for both) but that’s what drove me to him. I don’t see our nation or our politics as necessarily us vs. them or left vs. right – and there’s a hell of a lot of middle ground there. (Plus, I appreciate his continuing to mention gay rights in his stump speech to everyone, rather than only to gay groups).
And no, I’m not blind. I know there are plenty of racists that will never vote for him. But I’m willing to bet that most of them have been voting Republican for years anyway (that whole Nixonian “southern strategy”) – and it’s mostly the same group that spent the 90s dragging Hillary through the dirt.
As for the argument about a charismatic white candidate coming out of nowhere to run for President after only one term in the Senate – I was a proud and vocal supporter of Edwards in the 2004 primary race.
Did Edwards win? No, because Dems were so concerned about “electability” and experience that they forgot to pick a candidate that inspired. Damned if we make that same mistake again.
So if she is better the candidate why is she behind in the delegate count? Why did she barely beat him in Indiana and got trounced in NC? Why is McGovern now supporting Obama? And you really can’t love liberals the way you say you do by being so dismissive of the white folk who support Obama. Geesh, you sound like Geraldine
Ferraro (just kidding). As for my politics, I’m a proud independent. I’ve voted for the GOP sometimes, other times gave my vote to the Democrats. I’m no fan of either Clinton or Obama; however, I do think the Dems have two good candidates to pick from.
Why hasn’t he sealed the deal? Why has he lost all the big states? Why has he not made any significant inrodas with working class whites, latinos, asians, or anyone who is not black, or rich and white??
“Iâ€™m white and donâ€™t feel any guilt driving me towards Obama. Instead itâ€™s the cool, consensus-driven approach he has to governing, rather than her street-fighting stance.”
Sure you don’t, and if you think Obama can run a government on cool concensus amongst dems and republicans, then you have been drinking the kool aid too long. I’m supposed to believe he will accomplish something no other President has been able to do in decades? Politics is not a tea party, and if he can’t fight he better step aside for someone who can.
Could it be because the party has two excellent candidates and can’t make it’s mind? Oh no, that’s not the answer. The real answer is the media gives Obama a free ride, whites only vote for him because of guilt, and Clinton is the only one (sort of like Neo in “The Matrix”) who can fight to get things done. Am I close? Like I said, I love liberals.
Where were the Abercrombie boys? I watched the Obama speech just to see them.
I think he has fought, and fought hard for this nomination…she certainly didn’t let him walk away with it after Feb. was over…but I believe that Hillary will fight for a cheese sandwich.
It’s all about picking which battles to fight, and not letting the perfect being the enemy of the good.
Why hasn’t he sealed the deal? Last night, he did.
Yes – they both have their different wings of the party. Why couldn’t she win the black vote, the educated vote, the urban vote, younger voters, or independents (which he’s won in virtually every contest)? They each have their own geography: He’s weak in Appalachia, the Rust Belt and Florida, she’s weak in the upper-midwest, interior west and northwest. They both can win.
There’s going to have to be some serious party healing, and they’re going to have to do it together (and I don’t mean a joint ticket). But I believe it can and will be done.
How did he seal the deal last night? Surprise surprise he won a state heavily populated by blacks.
I’m educated, young,independent, black, and live in New York, so Hillary has all the demographics covered in just me alone. There are many others like me all across the country.
Yes, both have their strengths and weaknesses, but Hillary has proven she can win every state that needs to be one in a presidential race, without having to rely on caucuses, which do not reflect an entire state, and are inherently unfair.
Obama is weak everywhere it counts, and that will hurt him come november.
Bitch Republic , I’m right there with you, I’ll go green or consider other options before I ever cast a vote for Obama. If the Super delegates fail to realize that in a general election Hillary would be the only who could pull a win including in places as vital as Pennsylvania
, Ohio and Florida then they are going to have a rude awakening come november. Florida and Michigan must have their say.
Here’s another voter who has voted for every Democrat since 1984 (that includes Mondale, folks) who will not be voting for Obama. I’ll either sit this one out or vote Green Party. Obama sickens me and I’ll never support him.
If you don’t believe he sealed the deal, you don’t have to. But believe me, it’s done.
Hillary’s electoral map had one fatal flaw. She has to win Florida to win. And if she were going to be the nominee, you’d better believe that McCain would have picked Gov. Christ. (Can’t you see the campaign signs now McCain/Christ?) And Sen. Clinton would be scrambling to find another state she could pick up instead.
Obama doesn’t have to rely on both Ohio/Florida to win – his map is so much bigger.
Is he a roll of the dice? Yes, but so is she – in the same two battleground states we’ve lost twice in a row. And the potential upside of an Obama win is so much bigger – especially in the downticket house/senate races (which this year happen to be predominantly in states that he won). And you know that the “big state” argument is baloney. NY is voting Dem and Texas isn’t. And FL probably isn’t either. And Obama won other swing states that will be important in the fall: WA, IA, MN, WI, CO.
I think our party isn’t used to this kind of identity politics being played out on such a scale – The R’s have been doing it for a while – the Economic Conservatives + the Religious Right. And the R’s have gotten used to it, and the alliances get tested from time to time, but the coalition rarely breaks fully. As Dems, we just don’t have this institutional history of how do navigate these conflicts.
Which is why, in the end, the race will go on, past the point where one candidate has exhausted any possibility of winning, because we’re all too aware that if we don’t let the process play out fully, we risk a much greater and un-healable rift later. If Clinton and her supporters don’t feel like they lost fair-and-square, then the party is really doomed.
So, ready to head to SD on June 3 (Don’t worry – MI and FL will be seated, and that compromise will come out of the Rules committee that Sen. Clinton has been promoting lately) for the end of the race?
I also find it strange and sad that the gay community is so split on this, and hope that the wounds can heal before the fall.
I want Obama to win at this point, but I also think that HRC should stay in until the end. I have these silly ideas about democracy meaning that everyone gets a chance to vote, and that the pundits don’t get to decide when it’s over.
Of course, I’m going to vote for the white guy to prove to Afrolito that I’m not racist.
You can vote for Santa Claus, and it still wouldn’t prove you believe in Christamas.
“He hasn’t won any big states”?? This is the nomination process…not the general election…first off, states like California, New York, NJ, and PA typically vote for the democrat. I live in NY and expect pigs to fly if McCain wins in this state.
Last time I checked Texas is a big state, which Obama won, though the Clinton campaign would like you to think otherwise. Look at the delegates.
and come on already. He’s won……
North Carolina, South Carolina, Illinois, Georgia, Alabama, Connecticut,Minnesota,Hawaii, Louisiana, Missouri, Kansas, Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, Washington,Idaho, North Dakota, Wisconsin, Alaska, Mississippi, Virginia, Vermont, Maine, Nebraska, Delaware, Maryland, Guam, Democrats abroad,Virgin Islands, If you add all those together it’s a pretty fucking big state.
Great point Jesse.
Published on Wednesday, May 7, 2008 by TruthDig.com
Battle of the Hawks
by Robert Scheer
In the increasingly unlikely event of a McCain-Clinton election, folks who care about the peace issue would have serious reason to worry. Both of these candidates are inveterate hawks, and what we would be up against is a choice between the neoconservatives and the neoliberals as to who could be more adventurous in getting us into unjustifiable foreign wars.
Both not only voted to authorize President Bushâ€™s irrational invasion of Iraq but also have failed to apply those lessons to the real challenges we face, particularly concerning Iran. On the one hand, we have Sen. John McCainâ€™s wildly inane â€œbomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iranâ€ singing refrain, and on the other, Sen. Hillary Clintonâ€™s commitment to â€œtotally obliterateâ€ Iran in response to any nuclear attack by Tehran on Israel.
Clinton has stood by her implicitly genocidal threat against the 70 million innocent Iranians, who have no effective control over their governmentâ€™s policy, a threat made in response to a question raised in the heat of primary day in Pennsylvania. She later extended the threat to include retaliation on behalf of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and other Arab countries if they were attacked by Iran.
Her statement extending the U.S. â€œnuclear umbrellaâ€ far beyond the threat to retaliate against a Soviet nuclear attack during the Cold War was greeted with a yawn by the media, which interpreted it as an election-day ploy to appear tough and pro-Israel. The Washington Post referred to â€œClintonâ€™s apparent effort to distinguish herself from her rival for the Democratic nomination â€¦ by offering a more hawkish approach to world affairs.â€ That rival, Barack Obama, has called for negotiations with Iranâ€™s leaders and condemned Clintonâ€™s proposal as saber rattling.
But the Washington Post story provided evidence that Hillaryâ€™s hawkishness is not merely a campaign posture, as evidenced by her two key foreign policy advisers, who the Post reports helped come up with the â€œobliterate Iranâ€ idea. One of them is Martin S. Indyk, the former Clinton administration ambassador to Israel, who was as strong as any of the neoconservatives in advocating the invasion of Iraq. In an article he co-wrote with Kenneth M. Pollack for the Los Angeles Times three months before the Iraq invasion, which cited their insider status as former government officials who â€œhad access to the most sensitive U.S. intelligence on Iraq,â€ the two claimed that Iraq had â€œthousands of tons of precursor chemicals for chemical warfare agents, thousands of liters of biological warfare agents. â€¦â€ That â€œinsiderâ€ information was false.
The Clinton campaignâ€™s national security director, Lee Feinstein, is another leading Democratic hawk and Clinton administration alum who promoted the threat to obliterate Iran. Feinstein, like Indyk, had strongly disparaged the work of the U.N. inspectors before the invasion. And even a month after the U.S. occupation began, as U.S. troops scoured all of the suggested weapons locations, Feinstein argued, â€œI believe they will find weapons of mass destruction.â€
The dark irony here is that the unjustifiable invasion of Iraq has elevated Iran to a position of enormous power over events in the region, beginning with its influence over the puppet government in Iraqâ€™s Green Zone, many of whose key members, including the prime minister, spent many years in exile in Tehran, where they were trained. The ability of Iran to make life miserable for the American occupation is the main counterweight to a tougher stance on Iranâ€™s nuclear program, and that is the direct consequence of a war for which Clinton and McCain both voted.
Clinton seems to be far more hawkish than her husband, and her increasingly bellicose remarks support that perception. If she is chosen as the Democratic Partyâ€™s standard-bearer, she can be expected to tack further in that direction, once the primaries are over and the peace vote has been counted out.
I do not think this a matter of a female candidate having to prove that she is capable of being a macho commander in chief, although there is a whiff of Margaret Thatcher here, so proud of taking her nation to unneeded war. With Clinton, as with Thatcher, quite apart from gender, there seems to be a more basic philosophical commitment to using military force before other options have been seriously explored.
That the force cited by Clinton portends the â€œtotal obliterationâ€ of another people raises the prospect of the United States, the only nation that has ever used nuclear weapons, doing so again. It suggests that such weapons of mass destruction are not heinous inventions but rather instruments of rational policy when in the hands of the virtuous. That is a message that we dare not deliver to the world.
Robert Scheerâ€™s new book is â€œThe Pornography of Power: How Defense Hawks Hijacked 9/11 and Weakened America.â€
“Last time I checked Texas is a big state, which Obama won, though the Clinton campaign would like you to think otherwise. Look at the delegates.”
Hillary Clinton won Texas, and that is a fact. I guess the Clinton camp controlled the media, and the election officials who called the state for her officially as well. Stop drinking the fucking kook aid for a minute.
The fact that Barack won more delegates has everything to do with the convoluted democratic rules of dividing delegates than anything else.
So once again, he’s won NO BIG STATES.
The rest of the states you named are either democratic blue states, or insignificant (Virgin islands,Guam? LMFAO!).
Maybe you’d have a leg to stand on if he won Ohio,Texas,Pennsylvania,Florida…..
Obama loses by more than 150 electoral votes in the general election. Bank on it. I predict McCain 328, Obama 210 (he loses Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Florida). Another four years of Republican rule because my stupid party can’t get it together to nominate a candidate who can unite our very divergent core groups. (And I’m not saying Hillary is that candidate, because she has baggage of her own, though I am convinced not as much as Obama carries.) I’m sick of watching us put forth weak candidates like Dukakis, Kerry and now Obama. Sigh.
“I also find it strange and sad that the gay community is so split on this, and hope that the wounds can heal before the fall.”
Why strange and sad? We just seem to reflect the United States at large. Don’t listen to the naysayers; Hillary and Barack are both tremendous candidates, which is why we’re in this mess to begin with. It’s like we havent decided whether we like the green dress that makes us look sexy or the blue dress that makes us look thin.
But America, based on the rules of the Democratic party, has already decided : Barack Obama is the choice for candidate. Neither has enough delagates, but the Democrats are going to have to pick one, and they are not going to pick the one who has placed second in delagates, second in popular votes and second in states won. Keep dreaming if you think otherwise.
Nothing Hillary will be doing at this point will change that, and every second going forward will either hurt her or her party.
Uhh… Marcus, you say Hillary cannot win a majority of delegates. Neither can Barack. DUH.
“Itâ€™s like we havent decided whether we like the green dress that makes us look sexy or the blue dress that makes us look thin.” – Great line Gregoire! (At least we know that we don’t want the red dress with big 80s shoulder pads that make us look 72 years old, angry and a befuddled by the world as it exists today)
It does appear that as of her speech this afternoon in WV, she’s repealing the “Kitchen Sink” strategy, and directing her attacks towards McCain again.
Again, she’s my Senator, and I’ll be glad to vote for her again here in NY if she wants to run again.
But this race is over, and she knows it.
I love how states get discredited as insignifigant because they don’t have a population of 12 million . Obama won Minnesota (pop ~5million) and North Carolina (pop. ~ 9million) Those two states alone equal a population + 2million compared to a “big state” such as PA. Most of the “big states” that hillary has won historically vote democrat anyway. My point was that when you look at the states that he has won, they are quite signifigant. It encompasses so much more of our country.
I am very excited that we have reached a point where it is mathematically impossible for hillary clinton to be ahead on pledged delegates even with Michigan and Florida seated as is.
I pose this question. If Hillary Clinton is really so concerned about the voices of Florida and Michigan voters being heard, then why didn’t she try to find a solution before they voted? Why did she agree that they had broken the rules and would be stripped of their delegates? Why didn’t she stand up for them and try to get those elections legitimized in the process? Why is it that she only voiced concern about the voters in Michigan and Florida when she found out that she was losing?
and who with any scruples would feel good about trying to win an election by getting votes counted in a state where her name was the only one on the ballot?
I was all for a legitimate election in michigan and florida, but unfortunately that didn’t happen.
and yes, Obama won more delegates in Texas under the same rules that elected Bill Clinton. The process hasn’t changed. Since the nomination is a race for delegates, I’d say that equals winning in texas, but then again, we wouldn’t want the listeners of Rush Limbaugh to feel disenfranchised now would we? So for the sake of them, we can say Hillary won.
Actually Bitch republic, let’s be fair to Marcus. No need for duh.
Dictionary.com has the following listing for majority.
maÂ·jorÂ·iÂ·ty [muh-jawr-i-tee, -jor-] Pronunciation Key – Show IPA Pronunciation
â€“noun, plural -ties.
1. the greater part or number; the number larger than half the total (opposed to minority): the majority of the population.
2. a number of voters or votes, jurors, or others in agreement, constituting more than half of the total number.
3. the amount by which the greater number, as of votes, surpasses the remainder (distinguished from plurality).
4. the party or faction with the majority vote: The Democratic party is the majority.
5. the state or time of being of full legal age: to attain one’s majority.
6. the military rank or office of a major.
7. join the majority or the great majority, to die.
So, yes. Our word for the day, Majority.
Obama will come out with a majority of delegates unless Clinton sweeps the remaining contests (highly unlikely), but neither candidate can reach the finish line without the votes ofsuperdelegates to push them to the magic number… or one of the candidates drops out.
BR – I didn’t say a majority of pledged delegates. I said delegates – meaning all delegates.
It’s over. She’ll campaign until an agreement happens regarding MI and FL (End of May) and MT and SD vote (June 3) but it won’t make a difference.
She can’t catch him unless a scandal involving underage prostitutes is involved.
PS – BitchRepublic – love the rainbow T-shirt on your site.
Winning a few red states in the primary season, does not translate into winning that red state in november. He will be routed in the south, Texas and Florida included.
lmfao at anyone actually thinking he will carry North Carolina in the general election!
I probably ride the subway with more people here in New York, than live in NC. Haha!
Typical White Gay Person
Fuck Obama…Fuck Brazile…Fuck Wright…Fuck Michelle and the rest of those fucking racist pigs.
Their own bigotry will destroy this country.
They are self serving pigs. Whores and sluts to the core.
Chris Matthews should fuck Obama in the ass and then make Donna Brazille lick the shit off his dick.
Guys and Gals,
I am so sick of all of the comments about Obama being black, and guilty-feeling whites. That is so inaccurate. Oboma is NOT black. He is half black, and also half white. The black folk have no more claim to him than us white folk do. I can just imagine the knashing of teeth if a group of white folk started being vocal about claiming him as one of us. This is a stupid point and subject for debate. So, black folks, he is just as much ours as he is yours. Let’s get the facts straight and debate things that are accurate and that matter.
Let me guess…you were offended by the faint whiff of misogyny in the campaign, right?
Regarding the South, Afrolito, if it werent such a weak Republican year, you might be right.
Obama represents potential inroads in a number of traditional red states. It should be noted that McCain lost in most of the South to Huckabee. There is potential weakness there. However McCain’s strength will be that Huckabee actually will go and hit the trail for him. (How I wish the Democrats could play so nicely.)
Hillary’s only significant plus is her domination in a couple very key swing states (Ohio, Pennsylvania). Which is certainly nothing to sneeze at, but alas it’s too late.
Hillary is incredibly smart and saavy; she knows she can’t win. She also knows she can’t destroy the party. Thus, she’s staying in for a reason that has not neccessarily been revealed yet.
Gregoire – I believe she’s still in in until all possibility has disappeared – so that she can say that he beat her fair and square, she tried everything she could, never gave an inch, and he still won. Otherwise, how could she ever face herself, her family or her supporters again – if she didn’t give it her all until the very end?
Perhaps people are beginning to see the heart of the beast. The notion that the major difference between she and Barak are immense. I think that perhaps Americans can see that she is just an extension of Bush and in truth, like her husband, a murderous hawk and a Republican, worse than McCain..(would their be a race?)
There is still hope for the country.
America may have a chance yet of preserving the Republic.
On the other hand – I’d love to see her in Harry Ried’s job as Senate Majority Leader. That never-say-die determination to drive an agenda and ability to browbeat straying legislators could be just the thing to make a real democratic agenda take shape. It’s a far more powerful position than VP, and probably more fun for her anyway.
From Clinton’s conference call today:
“If Michigan and Florida are seated fully we estimate we would pick up 58 delegates,” said deputy communications dircetor Phil Singer, “putting us within a margin of less than 100 total delegates separating Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton.”
Yes. He’d still be nearly 100 delegates ahead. And that was the best spin they could put on it.
For folks on here who are new or may not be aware of it, the “Typical White Gay Person” has been identified as severely deranged and unbalanced and his posts can be ignored. Word is, he has access from the mental ward and every now and then he makes statements which reveal how truly sick and beyond help his condition is.
Typical White Gay Person
Sad is the United States of America when an empty suit takes control and Donna Brazille Waxhead is Secretary of State?
Obamamaniacs can dish it out but they can’t take it when shit hits them in the face.
Oh, we can take it.
And take it, and take it and take it.
And still win.
Without calling anyone names.
When the crap starts to hit the fan the Obamists will see the error of their blind support for him and his militants Typical White Gay Person.
Yes, it is sad because we ALL will have to suffer the consequences.
Jesse, unfortunately, the big states vs. little states do matter in the electoral system we have in the United States. Obama has mostly won small states that will go Republican in the Fall. That doesn’t help the Democratic party at all. For example, Obama won Utah, but Utah will vote 80+% for McCain come November. Hillary has won all the important states that actually matter in our electoral system (which I’m not saying is the best system, but it is the system we have). So, yes unfortunately, some states really do not matter.
P.S.: Thanks for the comments about the rainbow t-shirt, Marcus. 😉
The bizarre fact about this matter, as you said earlier Marcus (I bleieve) is the irrational division of gay people in this contest. Rarely does anyone ever discuss issues, and quote facts. It becomes ugly when margiinalized people find the most banal hatred for each other, and come out fighting dirty. I wish that we could all try thinking, before carrying on. This group seems to be the worst on racism and sexism and most lacking on thematters of real concern, that count.
True – but Obama also won and continues to poll significantly better in Wisconsin and Washington and Minnesota and Iowa, which Dems will need too (Yes, she polls better in PA, OH and FL, but his electoral map depends less on those three than hers does). No one is claiming that Utah or Idaho will go Dem in the fall, but MA, NY, CA and NJ aren’t going Repubican either.
I think a lot of this electorate just isn’t used to being on opposite sides of an heated battle – we’re very used to being against the Republican machine, that as gay people we’ve formed a cultural identity around left-of-center politics. (Hey – you can make an anti-bush joke in any gay bar in the country and get a laugh – drag queens do it nightly – and even the log cabin guys will laugh most of the time) But we’re not used to being divided this way – and other political identities come into play.
I’m not sure if it’s “political” identities, as such,
if that was the case you would have a people doing research and debating positions, not all of this ugly stuff that sticks more to the bottom of the pot.
It’s understandable that as marginalized people we would be able to grasp a position related to compassion, as opposed to death and greed. I get more of a feeling that this even misses those issues and hits the belly of race and motherlove.
For those who wanâ€™t to be informed as to what the future will be like for Gay people with an Obama pesidency you can start with this link:
courtesy of John Norris
Demographically, Obama’s “coalition” eroded in both Indiana and in North Carolina. Particularly in North Carolina, his support among white voters (and even black men) dropped.
He was going to win NC; there was never any doubt. The demographics favored him immensely. The margin was substantially smaller than the +25 that was floating around before the primary, and his base declined in size.
I think we have to ask serious questions about whether a coalition of rich white liberals, college students and African Americans can win the General Election. McGovern and Dukakis would suggest otherwise.
You can’t win in the general without blacks or whites. So I guess both of the candidates are in the shit hole. The comments against Obama are actually pretty funny. Why is it that everytime he wins, he blows her away. Why can’t she close the deal? She won Indiana by .2 percentage points! Big deal! It was 50.1 to 49.9. If Obama was actually bleeding support he would have lost NC, but no his support holds strong. Hillary can’t even win one state out West. I mean is this some kind of joke? She is stronger in the general, my ass!
Oh Rainy, what do you consider the West? Are California, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona and Texas not considered the West? Or do you only consider the states Obama won in the West to be valid western states?
I wonder how McCain will treat all of you.
Get used to it.
For those who wanâ€™t to be informed as to what the future will be like for Gay people with an Obama presidency you can start with this link:
Girls, Girls, Don’t buy this shit. If you really want to now then go here
Because they are the only ones who make and break the laws. I wish some of you would get over skin color and look at the Big picture but yet some of you have these feelings but want Gay rights, funny to me. How you want to discriminate on folks but don’t want to be discriminated upon.
Bigotry isn’t it a BITCH?
An Other Greek
what a bunch of shillaries… Sheez!
and is “Typical White Person” a parody?
Look, sometime soon we should have a discussion about racism in the gay community. In my circles It’s come up here and there. Still, I don’t see much discussion in our media.
Should happen. Soonish
An Other Greek, You’re so right I wish someone would have a discussion on it.
I think it would be great to have a first African-American President. It would take away all the excuses of the Wright/Sharpton/Jesse Jackson types (the ones who rely on blaming every problem, from crime rates to AIDS, in the African-American community on the big bad white man’s country keeping them down) and it would give the cool African-Americans who ARE trying to succeed some good reassurance. BUT, I still can’t see any real juice to Obama. He still seems like nothing but a nicely smooth-talking cult-leader motivational-speaker untrustworthy politician to me.
So is Hillary Clinton she’s had mnay years to Master the art of persuading.
Unfortunately , while it’s like an elephant in a china shop, gays don’t dare talk about racism.
Much too close to home.
Given the fact that the discussions here rarely ever touch on such gawd aweful issues as the war and economy, peoples support is engendered by something. Why not wave flags. It’s so fucking evident and pathetically cowardly.
For those of you who will vote for McCain because you feel so passionately about Hillary or just not super excited about Obamaâ€¦ Well, I ask that you think of the young men and women who are dying every day in iraq. Your vote for McCain is like a death sentence to many. I also ask you to look at the supreme court justices that the next president may appoint. John McCain is pro-life and will appoint judges who will overturn R V Wade. Think of the women who will be getting back alley abortions with coat hangers. This man has said he is happy with 100 years of war in Iraq. He has said he has no understanding of the economy. Seriously. I understand being a hardcore hillary supporter and being upset that she will not get the nomination, but you would really vote for John McCain?
For the first time in my life I am excited about the political process. Canâ€™t wait to defeat McCain in the fall 🙂 I will be campaigning. Give me a sandwich board and some pins. Iâ€™m there.
“I think it would be great to have a first African-American President. It would take away all the excuses of the Wright/Sharpton/Jesse Jackson types (the ones who rely on blaming every problem, from crime rates to AIDS, in the African-American community on the big bad white manâ€™s country keeping them down) and it would give the cool African-Americans who ARE trying to succeed some good reassurance.”
Like I said before a lot of the white support for Barack is based on some bizarre idea that it will prove racism is over.
Black people still suffer overt and covert racism everyday, and that will not change because Barack might be sleeping in the White House.
Afrolito – I’m sorry that you believe that most of Obama’s white supporters are only supporting him out of some kind of white guilt. That worldview makes me sad.
I’m supporting him because I believe he’ll be one of this nation’s best presidents.
“Iâ€™m supporting him because I believe heâ€™ll be one of this nationâ€™s best presidents.”
Then you’re the one living in a fairytale. When you wake up John McCain will be making his innaugural address.
I’m white. I have no white guilt…nor do I think a man who is half black being president is going to obsolve anyone’s guilt or end racism in this country.
I am thrilled to be voting for Obama in the fall, guilt free 🙂
Good for you Jesse, but the rest of white america has other ideas about that.
The “black” presidential candidate will find out exactly how thrilled white america is with him come november.
Yes, he will.
‘Cause he’ll win.
The only thing he’ll win for sure, is the looniest supporters sweepstakes.
The only thing HUSSEIN OBAMA might win is the Democratic
nomination and as a member of the party that causes me so
much pain because we had eveything in our favor to take back
the White House in november.
The ONLY thing HUSSEIN supporters do is calling
racist and a “BITTER” AMERICANS anyone who sees nothing but an empty suit with a lot of
speeches without substance.
For those who wanâ€™t to be informed as to what the future will be like for Gay people with an Obama pesidency you can start with this link:
courtesy of John Norris
I keep seeing Clinton supporters on here referring to supporters of Obama as nuts, cool aid drinkers etc, when I haven’t seen Obama supporters need to resort to such name calling.
Is it really necessary to degrade another individual’s choice by stooping to name calling instead of being able to maturely express an opinion? This displays a serious lack of maturity.
I have very strong negative opinions about hillary clinton, but I don’t think it’s necessary to call one her supporters some schoolyard name.
Jesse, What name calling?
His name is BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA.
He was the one who called blue collar Americans “BITTER”.
His supporters are the ones who are calling people
who don’t support him racists.
I’m his supporter. I’ve never called anyone racist. I know lots of people who are obama supporters who have never brought up race. It’s kind of a non-issue in my opinion. He’s half black and half white.
What I am referring to are the obamanut/kool aid comments.
You’re cracking me up by using his middle name repeatedly. Oooh, I’m scared hussein…ah..that’s so middle eastern sounding. You didn’t happen to be the warm up speaker for a McCain rally, did you? 🙂
I agree with the bitter comment. He was right. For hillary clinton to be sitting on her bags of money flying around in a private jet and referring to anyone else as elitist is a joke. She is not the champion of the working class. Many of them can thank her husband for losing their jobs.
“I know lots of people who are obama supporters who have never brought up race. Itâ€™s kind of a non-issue in my opinion. Heâ€™s half black and half white.”
Fellow kool aid drinkers in denial.
Btw, most blacks in america are mixed, so Obama isn’t special. In America you are what you look like, and he looks like me….black.
He also describes himself as “african american”, not “half bland and half white”.
Damn y’all! What the hell is going on with all this bitterness? For the record, if anyone expects to be president of the United States YOU HAVE TO RUN A SUCESSFULL CAMPAIGN (JUST THE RULES)! If you go from front runner to I NEED A NUCLEAR OPTION AND A PRAYER FOR THE NOMINATION you are not qualified to be president (just the rules). I, for one, have suffered at the hands of conservatives for too long to throw my vote to them in November, unlike the rest of you crackheads. I will be voting democratic in November regardless of whether it is Obama or Clinton. If you don’t agree, you deserve all the punishment and pain the conservatives will definite dish out to you…….I don’t! Crack is a terrible drug and you bitches need to break the habit!
Seeds of Destruction
By BOB HERBERT
The Clintons have never understood how to exit the stage gracefully.
Their repertoire has always been deficient in grace and class. So there was Hillary Clinton cold-bloodedly asserting to USA Today that she was the candidate favored by â€œhard-working Americans, white Americans,â€ and that her opponent, Barack Obama, the black candidate, just canâ€™t cut it with that crowd.
â€œThereâ€™s a pattern emerging here,â€ said Mrs. Clinton.
There is, indeed. There was a name for it when the Republicans were using that kind of lousy rhetoric to good effect: it was called the Southern strategy, although it was hardly limited to the South. Now the Clintons, in their desperation to find some way â€” any way â€” back to the White House, have leapt aboard that sorry train.
He canâ€™t win! Donâ€™t you understand? Heâ€™s black! Heâ€™s black!
The Clintons have been trying to embed that gruesomely destructive message in the brains of white voters and superdelegates for the longest time. Itâ€™s a grotesque insult to African-Americans, who have given so much support to both Bill and Hillary over the years.
(Representative Charles Rangel of New York, who is black and has been an absolutely unwavering supporter of Senator Clintonâ€™s White House quest, told The Daily News: â€œI canâ€™t believe Senator Clinton would say anything that dumb.â€)
But itâ€™s an insult to white voters as well, including white working-class voters. Itâ€™s true that there are some whites who will not vote for a black candidate under any circumstance. But the United States is in a much better place now than it was when people like Richard Nixon, George Wallace and many others could make political hay by appealing to the very worst in people, using the kind of poisonous rhetoric that Senator Clinton is using now.
I donâ€™t know if Senator Obama can win the White House. No one knows. But to deliberately convey the idea that most white people â€” or most working-class white people â€” are unwilling to give an African-American candidate a fair hearing in a presidential election is a slur against whites.
The last time the Clintons had to make a big exit was at the end of Bill Clintonâ€™s second term as president â€” and they made a complete and utter hash of that historic moment. Having survived the Monica Lewinsky ordeal, you might have thought the Clintons would be on their best behavior.
Instead, a huge scandal erupted when it became known that Mrs. Clintonâ€™s brothers, Tony and Hugh Rodham, had lobbied the president on behalf of criminals who then received presidential pardons or a sentence commutation from Mr. Clinton.
Tony Rodham helped get a pardon for a Tennessee couple that had hired him as a consultant and paid or loaned him hundreds of thousands of dollars. Over the protests of the Justice Department, President Clinton pardoned the couple, Edgar Allen Gregory Jr. and his wife, Vonna Jo, who had been convicted of bank fraud in Alabama.
Hugh Rodham was paid $400,000 to lobby for a pardon of Almon Glenn Braswell, who had been convicted of mail fraud and perjury, and for the release from prison of Carlos Vignali, a drug trafficker who was convicted and imprisoned for conspiring to sell 800 pounds of cocaine. Sure enough, in his last hours in office (when he issued a blizzard of pardons, many of them controversial), President Clinton agreed to the pardon for Braswell and the sentence commutation for Vignali.
Hugh Rodham reportedly returned the money after the scandal became public and was an enormous political liability for the Clintons.
Both Clintons professed to be ignorant of anything improper or untoward regarding the pardons. Once, when asked specifically if she had talked with a deputy White House counsel about pardons, Mrs. Clinton said: â€œPeople would hand me envelopes. I would just pass them on. You know, I would not have any reason to look into them.â€
It wasnâ€™t just the pardons that sullied the Clintonsâ€™ exit from the White House. They took furniture and rugs from the White House collection that had to be returned. And they received $86,000 in gifts during the presidentâ€™s last year in office, including clothing (a pantsuit, a leather jacket), flatware, carpeting, and so on. In response to the outcry over that, they decided to repay the value of the gifts.
So class is not a Clinton forte.
But itâ€™s one thing to lack class and a sense of grace, quite another to deliberately try and wreck the presidential prospects of your partyâ€™s likely nominee â€” and to do it in a way that has the potential to undermine the substantial racial progress that has been made in this country over many years.
The Clintons should be ashamed of themselves. But they long ago proved to the world that they have no shame.
Now at the demonstrable peak of Repubican desructiveness not only of the world , but of the U.S. (period), when we have become known not as the beacons of democracy but as the purveyors of torture and destruction to the rest of the world, who wants to be so downright stupid as to let them continue on a path which for us is the dismantleing of our Constitution and Bill of Rights. We have traveled the path of Empire building farther than Rome, the Ottomans, or Britain. Britain is the only survivor by withdrawal.
The leaders of this country are so arrogant and greedy and the voters so ignorant that we may well have to destroy ourselves from the inside out.
The Founders of this country would be appaled at what has happened to what has hap[pened to what is supposed to be a republic and is turning into dictatorship and could in a blink.
no one of us can afford the personal arrogance now to defy logic and let things go on as they have. If the Clintons cared for the future of this country as they claim, they would quit further damage and graciously bow out and help out. You have proof before you how much they care.
If grace isn’t their path we need it to be ours . We need to defeat this ugly thing that is infecting this country and to try being civilized.
Comments are closed.