Home » Blog » Vote for Bill Hedrick for Congress - Today!
Blog for America
Vote for Bill Hedrick for Congress - Today!
Linked to groups: Blog For America
The competition for the DFA Grassroots All-Stars is fierce, but there is still time to cast your vote for our very own Bill Hedrick, who is running for House of Representatives right here in the California 44th Congressional District. Whether you give him one, or all three of your possible votes, vote for Bill Hedrick today:
Vote for Bill now: http://democracyforamerica.com/gras
Bill has a stunning story. Two of his sons and his daughter-in-law have served or are serving tours in Iraq. Bill is running for Congress so that American families like his don't have to continue needlessly suffering the countless sacrifices his family has made in a war that never should have been waged to begin with.
He is running for Congress to bring America's sons and daughters home. Bill is running to engage in the diplomacy that is the only true solution to the regional instability the War on Iraq created. And Bill is running to get America back on track to focus on the things that matter to every day Americans.
True national security that protects Americans, not the profit margins of the war profiteers. A truly strong economy that lifts up the American middle-class and protects small businesses. And a public education system rededicated to the mission of ensuring that every child in America is provided the skills, the knowledge and the shared cultural values that make our democracy great.
Vote for Bill now: http://democracyforamerica.com/gras
Whether you give Bill one of your three votes, or all of them, vote today to show your support for Bill Hedrick, our very own local candidate in the national DFA Grassroots All-Stars competition. And once you do, don't forget to ask your friends and family to vote for Bill, too!
A new Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg national poll shows Sen. Hillary Clinton leading the Democratic presidential race with 42%, followed by Sen. Barack Obama at 33% and John Edwards at 11%. Just last month, Clinton had a 24 point lead which has now dwindled to nine points.
Interesting finding: "Three out of five supporters of each candidate say they would like Clinton or Obama, if nominated, to choose the other as a running mate."
by Ed Kilgore, January 23, 2008 12:21 PM EST
There is a new and (no matter whom you support) disturbing CW dominating analysis of the Democratic nominating contest at the moment. It's that Obama is becoming the "black candidate," repelling the white and brown voters who will determine the ultimate outcome. Indeed, this point of view is feeding the Clinton campaign's efforts to downplay an expected Obama win in South Carolina this Saturday. After all (suggest the pundits, not the Clintons), SC is just about black folks, who won't matter down the road. Typically, Dick Morris is the bluntest in publicly presenting this point of view, but I can tell you, it's endemic in the DC chattering classes.
Totally aside from the corrosive effect of such race-based political assumptions--including the planted axiom that white and Latino voters don't want to be on the same bandwagon as African-Americans--they strike me as a being over-simplistic from even a cold, amoral perspective. Here's a new flash for the punditocracy: there are African-Americans who live in states other than South Carolina.
A case in point: the most under-discussed story about the Nevada Caucuses was that (according to the entrance polls) the African-American vote was a large as the Latino vote. Among the latter, it was widely reported that Clinton won by a little better than two-to-one. But among the former, Obama won by better than five-to-one. And lest we forget, Clinton was running even with or even ahead of Obama among African-Americans nationally until very recently.
http://www.slate.com/id/2182569#obamaescape
How Obama Can Escape from the Ghetto: I thought Margaret Carlson was out on a very shaky limb a few years ago last Thursday when she wrote that Obama had lost the essence of his candidacy as the first black man to run as himself. Once the race card is on the table, no matter who puts it there, it's impossible to put it back up anyone's sleeve. Obama may look back on the first two weeks of 2008 as the time when he lost the nomination to Clinton.
Now the idea that Obama has been "ghettoized" as the "black" candidate has become the accepted template for the campaign--even the point that a win in hotly contested South Carolina on Saturday is seen as actually hurting Obama because (in Dick Morris' analysis) [w]atching blacks block vote for Obama will trigger a white backlash that will help Hillary win Florida and to prevail the week after.
TEST s/b 4
Dean is first!
Personally, I really object to the author's choice of the word, "ghettoized".
Gratuitous racism. Sheez.
the Rovian adage is "attack where you are weakest", so a Clinton campaign that has so completely relied on the gender bias wants to innoculate itself against the charge that she doesn't appeal to men voters
thus the race riff
If John Edwards pulls off an upset and beats Clinton in South Carolina for second it is a whole new Super Bowl, Mike, and the Giants aren't the only longshots making a return
The final SurveyUSA poll in the South Carolina Democratic primary shows Barack Obama on his way to a win, but it's one marked by racial polarization. Obama has 43%, Hillary Clinton 30%, and John Edwards 24%. Only 18% of black respondents said they'd vote for Hillary, and only 21% of whites preferred Obama.
Pollster.com analysts Mark Blumenthal and Charles Franklin are giving their final takes on the SC polling. Franklin's word of caution to Obama fans is particularly noteworthy: "Obama has appealed to white voters in previous primaries and caucuses. The pre-election polls have found him getting as low as 10% of the white vote in South Carolina. The potential for racial polarization in this Southern state could damage his ability to transcend race as a basis of voting."
Well, let's hope people just have to get it out of their systems and see how other people react.
That, after all, is what it's about--acceptable social attitudes. If it's not acceptable to be exclusive, people won't.
I like the Giants game too Mike.
How many more times do pollsters have to get it wrong to lose credibility? Or maybe we're seeing the birth of a new national passtime--fool the pollsters. LOL
the Rovian adage is "attack where you are weakest"
Wrong again.....
For those who saw BUSH'S BRAIN, the Swift Boat Ads came as no surprise. They were vintage Rove. You attack your opponent's strength, not his weakness. And you cast deep shadows of doubt -- which can't be refuted in time for the election.
The Directors of BUSH'S BRAIN
*** cChalfonte***
Fri, 01/25/08
The LA Times is full of Hollywood hype. It's about as credible as the Star Magazine.
even the point that a win in hotly contested South Carolina on Saturday is seen as actually hurting Obama
That was being pushed here a few days ago. That slimey stuff keeps overflowing onto this blog like backed up sewage.
Almost everyone has heard about Hurricane Katrina's toll on the
residents of New Orleans. But Gulf Coast trees also took a wallop.
Hundreds of millions of trees were destroyed or badly damaged and have
become an unexpectedly large contributor to global warming, according to
new research.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=17814049&ft=1&f=100
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
unexpected negative feedback loops aren't even in most global warming models
lol, Monica. The pollsters and pundits haven't had the best of scores this primary.
http://gesterling.wordpress.com/2006/11/...
Report: LA Times to Be Split Off and Sold
According to Editor & Publisher, citing several sources, the Tribune Co. is now open to selling the LA Times separate from the rest of the company:
The intrigue surrounding the troubled Tribune Co. continues to swirl. How else to explain news that L.A. mogul David Geffen sold a Jackson Pollock painting last night for a record price — about $140 million — was taken as further evidence that he intends to buy the Los Angeles Times any week now. Recently he sold two other classic paintings for $143.5 million.
Indeed, with bids for the mammoth Tribune Co. coming in far lower than expected, the media giant is telling prospective bidders that individual pieces are now available for sale, according to published reports.
That’s probably good news for the LA Times, which is currently engaged in trying to figure out a longer term digital strategy. The purported synergies of print and online newspaper and local TV affiliate ownership never materialized for Tribune, which has been subject to a highly publicized internal board fight about the future of the LA Times. Most recently the Tribune Co. fired the LA Times’ publisher Jeff Johnson who supported an editor refusing to make editorial cutbacks Tribune ordered.
The Giants can't be first as shown on this blog...endorsed by Clinton too...phew!
Sea, thanks for posting that. I'm a dance with the one that brung ya kinda gal and bailing on JRE doesn't feel right. At the same time, I'd sure like to feel that I was voting in an historic "first" type of election. I'm troubled!
Caveat emptor
Res ipsa loquitir
The corporate media speaks for itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sky_Is_...
How many more times do pollsters have to get it wrong to lose credibility?
It's like the gambloholic when who got into a crap game with crooks. When he found out the dice were loaded he kept playing because it was the only game in town.
Jeez, the segment about super delegates is disgusting. And who are they going to endorse? The progressive or the corporate candidates? Bets, anyone?
And Phil, why are you a delegate for Obama? Please tell us how many super delegates there are and why they can go against their state? Looks to me like the dem party is not gonna let the people choose the nominee.
Everything is upside down.
Phil Specht
Fri, 01/25/08
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ill be posting my in depth Super Bowl preiction next week, but I think the Giants are in a great position...................NE,s playoff games have exposed them to not be invincible, where the Giants have basically outplayed each of their opponents 10fold...................
Edwards................if theres anything Ive learned about American politics............never count anybody out................
*** cChalfonte***
Fri, 01/25/08
____________________________________________________________________________
Dont worry....................ObaM is going to unite us all into a utopian world of peace, love and.........wow. lol
Reed in VT
Fri, 01/25/08
___________________________________________________________________________
Yeah..........but Romney likes the patriots...................pass the toilet roll please.
Please tell us how many super delegates there are and why they can go against their state?
You can ask Phil, who's often dead wrong, or you can let someone else look it up for you........
The 2008 Democratic National ConventionThe 2008 Democratic National Convention, where the Democratic presidential ticket is formally agreed upon, has 796[2] superdelegates, although the number is not final until March 1, 2008. Superdelegates to the Democratic Convention include all Democratic members of the United States Congress, Democratic governors, various additional elected officials, as well as members of the Democratic National Committee.[3] A list of superdelegates can be found here.
A candidate needs a simple majority of the combined delegate and superdelegate votes to secure the nomination. Democratic delegates from state caucuses and primaries number 3,253. This means that the total number of votes is 4,049. The total number of delegate votes needed to win the nomination is 2,025.[2] Superdelegates account for approximately one fifth (19.6%) of all votes at the convention. Delegates chosen in the Democratic caucuses and primaries account for approximately four fifths (80.4%) of the Democratic convention delegates.[2][4] Note: All numbers in this section assume that Michigan and Florida's delegates are not counted per current Democratic National Committee rules. If those rules are changed before or during the convention, the numbers above will change as appropriate.
CriticismThe Democratic Party is often criticized during election cycles for conducting primary elections in a non-democratic fashion, since superdelegates are appointed by the party and not obligated to support the candidate chosen by the voters. There have been repeated calls to eliminate the superdelegates from the primaries to more accurately reflect the popular vote and lessen the party's control over the nomination process. [5]
( The Republican Party does not have superdelegates. There are 123 delegates, members of the Republican National Committee, however it constitutes a much smaller portion of the vote.[1])
It sucks when the Republican Party is more democratic than the Democratic Party.
Michael, lol. Well, unity, peace and love are noble goals, you've got to admit:)
if theres anything Ive learned about American politics..
>
The guy talks as if he was not born and bred here.
Michael, lol. Well, unity, peace and love are noble goals, you've got to admit:)
The candidates who supported the worst of Bush (and their supporters) have nothing of substance to attack Obama with.
I'm a dance with the one that brung ya kinda gal and bailing on JRE doesn't feel right.
He reminds me of The Picture Of Dorian Gray.
*** cChalfonte***
Fri, 01/25/08
____________________________________________________________________________
Noble yes.........but not realistic.........thats why the Republicans win more elections...........
The way i see it for Democrats, if you want to win the battle go for Obama..if you want to stand a chance at the war..........vote for Edwards. Thats politics...............
Tuesday | July 29, 2003
Delegate counts, super delegates
I have seen periodic questions about the delegate allotments for the Democratic National Convention. Here they are. ...full post: http://www.dailykos.net/archives/003574....
---
Unveiling the "They"
http://www.democrats.org/page/community/...
---
Super Delegates = Banana Republic Rules
http://www.democrats.org/page/community/...
---
Superdelegate Endorsement List
http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/...
Edwards plays the "southern guy" card........ again.......
“Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama have brought their New York- and Chicago-style politics to South Carolina. Fighting with each other, tearing each other down,” Edwards said at a campaign stop in Greenville. “But South Carolina’s better than that, and you deserve better than that.”
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_convention_delegate_process_explained
The Convention Delegate Process Explained -- Why can't Obama run ads in Florida? Who gets to be a superdelegate? And what exactly is a brokered convention? We take you inside the secret world of delegates and the nomination process.
Brokered conventions (where no candidate arrives with a majority of the delegates) are predicted every four years, and every four years they don't actually happen. However, it does seem likely this year that we'll, at the very least, see a closer result than any since 1980 or even 1968. We might not even know who will win until the convention gets underway. Edwards could act as a kingmaker by throwing his delegates to Clinton or Obama and putting him or her over the top (his delegates would not be required to follow his instructions, but they will likely be personally loyal to him). Or, unelected superdelegates could throw the nomination to a candidate who comes in second in pledged delegates. Even if the result is known at the start of the convention, it might not be determined until June or July.
Despite the importance of the convention, the actual rules that cover delegate selection and behavior are obscure even to seasoned political watchers. While some of the rules are too complicated to get into even here (there are, for instance, actually three different ways pledged delegates are selected), what follows is a brief overview of the Democratic convention process: where the delegates come from, how they will be assigned, and what the process will look like from now until August.
(More at the link--interesting. I didn't know about this process at all)
35.
Sitka
Fri, 01/25/08
Edwards is a Southern Guy and charming. But not because of good looks. He was raised in a loving family.
The way i see it for Democrats, if you want to win the battle go for Obama..if you want to stand a chance at the war..........vote for Edwards. Thats politics...............
Your polling is way out of date. Hillary and Obama are dead even with McCain. They don't even bother including Edwards any more.
And polling 11 months from the election is meaningless anyway.
Edwards is a Southern Guy and charming.
The last thing we need in the South is somebody like you coming down and telling us what we need to do.
Really charming.
superdelegates are not appointed by the party they have won elections to that job through other paths some receiving hundreds of thousands of votes
Any opinion from that side is roll worthy Mike...
39.
Sitka
Fri, 01/25/08
I heard him say that on C-SPAN. He sounded very charming and the local folks loved it!
superdelegates are not appointed by the party they have won elections to that job through other paths some receiving hundreds of thousands of votes
Phil greatest asset to this blog is that he'll always tell you exactly what the party insiders think their inherent rights are.
And Phil, why are you a delegate for Obama?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
my son wants to go to Denver and I am holding a spot for him at the County Convention, while winning the concession from the Obama folks that they need a progressive delegate favorable to Edwards
and I think a Clinton nomination would be a disaster in November, but even more so in the years to come if she wins
you too can be a super delegate ... run for the US Senate and win
I heard him say that on C-SPAN. He sounded very charming and the local folks loved it!
When he goes up north, people don't like him for some reason.
you too can be a super delegate ... run for the US Senate and win
You too can be a disenfranchised voter -- be a Democrat.
Giving politicians 20% of the delegates is shameful to the "Democratic" Party.
the dem party is not gonna let the people choose the nominee.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
the people choose the President, and the Party chooses its nominee for the General Election ballot and we are in the Party part of that process
and I think a Clinton nomination would be a disaster in November, but even more so in the years to come if she wins
And her senate record is the virtually the same as Edwards'. Connect the dots.
the people choose the President, and the Party chooses its nominee for the General Election ballot and we are in the Party part of that process
Phil reveals is anti-democracy side once again. But they should just change the name of it to the Politicians' Party.
Giving politicians 20% of the delegates is shameful to the "Democratic" Party.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
the shame !!!!
politicians have a part in politics
Really charming.
>
Good dis', Sitka.
Arn't ya just sick and tired of those a-holes in the south who toss that line. Makes ya wanna go back in time and execute the treasonous. They are near treasonous today.
Oh well, that's my rant and a goal for the time machine.
I wonder if Obama listens to Bananarama?
Say that 10 times :)
Anyone posting this - Fri, 01/25/08 - without a timestamp included is an idiot.
the shame !!!!
politicians have a part in politics
Phil loves the backroom wheeling and dealing, but it belies the very label of the "Democratic" Party. Let them be chosen as committed delegates like everyone else.
I wonder if Obama listens to Bananarama?
I wonder if Obama listens to Bananarama?
I wonder if Obama listens to Bananarama?
I wonder if Obama listens to Bananarama?
I wonder if Obama listens to Bananarama?
I wonder if Obama listens to Bananarama?
I wonder if Obama listens to Bananarama?
I wonder if Obama listens to Bananarama?
I wonder if Obama listens to Bananarama?
I wonder if Obama listens to Bananarama?
-
By Michael Ellis on Jan 25, 2008 8:16 PM ESTThe New York Football Giants are.........................first.