Home » Blog » Political Pandering
Blog for America
Political Pandering
My dad pointed out that the recent press release on McCain's gas-tax holiday for the Henry County Democratic party was a possibly antagonistic.
Jim Nichols, Chair of the Democratic Party in Henry County, responded today to John McCain's political pandering in a recent economic speech by the Republican nominee. In the speech, McCain called for a gas tax holiday.
For more on the issue you can go to a post I did on the Henry County Democrats site. Republican nominee. In the speech, McCain called for a gas tax holiday.
My dads comments were:
The opening sentence of the Release referred to John McCain's "political pandering". Right off the bat that puts off those that may not yet have formed an opinion on McCain - whether they be Dems or Repubs. To me, use of that phrase - outside of your quote - immediately discounts the rest of the Release - it's clearly one-sided and shrill. Can I really glean anything useful from it? (that's my reaction).
I think it's more powerful for that phrase to be in your quote. Something like: "This is simply political pandering by John McCain" That's legit for you to say that - but not for the text of the release to say that. The text of the Release should set you up, in a neutral way - not do your work.
For what it's worth...
Part of me thinks he is probably right. I intended to point out that it is a questionable policy move, be a very astute political move. My point was that it won't help the market fundmentals. The goals should be to lower gas prices.
And while people like the idea of lowering their taxation for understandable reasons the impacts of lost revenue that would be going into fixing roads and other infrastucture needs seems like a higher social priority; espcially when most economists feel that since supply is fixed (oil producers claim they are churning out the product as quickly as they can) the only possible change in the price can come from demand going down.
The likelyhood of demand going down during the summer when people go on vacation and travel of lot seems a bit far-fetched. Are people going to walk their kids to summer camp?
So maybe I ought to start saying "putting votes before good policy," or "prioritizing votes before market fundamentals."? Nothing seems to roll off the tongue very well.
For some other stuff I found on political pandering by Kevin Drum, Arnold Kling, and Russ Roberts go to my crosspost at...
http://politicalautomaton.blogspot.com/2008/04/political-pandering-or-negative.html
please feel free to comment... I'm not sure where I'm at on my Dad's point.
9:25 AM EDT
ABB* won last night in PA
(*anybody but Bush)
(*anbody but Barack)
(*anybody but black)
Votes are still being counted in Pennsylvania, but one thing is already clear.
In a state where we trailed by more than 25 points just a couple weeks ago, you helped close the gap to a slimmer margin than most thought possible.
Thanks to your support, with just 9 contests remaining, we've won more delegates, more votes, and twice as many contests.
We hold a commanding position, but there are two crucial contests coming up -- voters will head to the polls in North Carolina and Indiana in exactly two weeks. And we're already building our organization in the other remaining states.
But it's clear the attacks are going to continue, and we're going to continue fighting a two-front battle against John McCain and Hillary Clinton.
I need your support right now. Please make a donation of $25:
https://donate.barackobama.com/whatthismeans
Thank you for all that you're doing to change our country.
Barack
Well good morning -- I sure felt let down when I saw the 10 percent on CSPAN when I turned it on. Oh well... That NYT editorial -- there is something that leaves a nasty taste in my mouth about the line that says 'that's what the SD's are for to resolve the issue that voting can't resolve' or something like that -- it reminds me too much of the Supremes deciding Bush v Gore in 2000. If you've never been to north Florida and would like to visit, may I suggest late October or late March/early April? Nowhere on earth has gentler weather, at least places I've lived. The birds are going crazy, everything is greening, makes one think that tomorrow might be OK after all.
At the present time it is an 8.6 spread.
The polls ended up pretty accurate. Hillary won by 8-10 points (exact numbers TBD) which is in the ballpark.
Bottom line - it does nothing to the delegate dynamic, but it keeps the media treating her as a serious candidate (even though she now needs to win 71 percent of the remaining delegates to catch Obama). It keeps the hardening of the battle lines within the Democratic Party, which will have to come down if they are to win in November, ongoing. This will make it harder to bring a "bitter" party together in the fall, like it did in 1968.
As we here know all too well, it was Bill Clinton who four years ago said "fall in love, then fall in line." Apparently that's only for people not named Clinton.
With all due respect, Mike, you're wrong about Obama being damaged for the General Election. I do think the Obama camp needs to go after Clinton's authenticity/honesty. Do we really want to be lied to all over again? We've had it now for nearly eight years. This race is over - someone needs to tell Hillary.
Hillary raised 2.5MM yesterday which doesn't begin to put a dent in her debt or upcoming expenditures for IN and NC. 2.5MM is not a big deal in the scheme of things.
vb wrote "I know Hillary doesn't have a path to the nomination - unless she destroys Barack Obama and the Democratic Party in the process. But I can't for the life of me understand how good people can vote for such a dishonest person. It's mind-boggling really."
There's no need to overanalyze it. Her candidacy is historic and is considered important by women, particularly older women, whose support for Clinton has not diminished even slightly since it began. They're a sizable majority of the traditional Democratic voting bloc. If it had just been Edwards or some other white male left to fight it out with Obama for the nomination, this contest would have ended long ago.
However, I think cC has cogently observed a significant benefit emerging from this battle. The Democrats have sucked all the oxygen from the presidential race. McCain is literally trivial. By the time they have a nominee, the Democrats will have a raft of new voters, a prodigious war chest, a much improved voter information database, and a battle-hardened candidate. The Republicans will just have some old guy who has been floating in the current for months and thinks things are going jim dandy.
rae - thanks for the vote count. Wow, Ron Paul got nearly 126K votes. I have to say here in WA state - if we were to gage a candidates support on signage alone - Ron Paul would have taken our state in a landslide. The freeways are dotted with his signs and they're still up!
Oh, and when will the networks learn math?
You do all the calculations, then round at the end, not round at the beginning and then do the calculations.
This drove me nuts all night as the margin between the candidates always had to be an even number, since they rounded first, then subtracted. It was an inaccurate measure of where they stood.
It still is this morning, as the networks report a 9.38% percent lead for Hillary as 10 percent.
Morning Folks,
Last thread, Monica, #26. I think that's an astute analysis of a mindset for Catholic women of a certain age. I remember men being described as a cross to bear. Good Grief.
I have to say that I'm sure there's a huge group of women who have known abuse, criticism, burdens and have had to rely on their own lonely strength and determination to get through. Our society is as much to blame as any indoctrination.
Men and women have to begin to understand one another, to ameliorate their differences in ways that are positive and loving. I'm thinking of all those immigrant Irish women who became members of the Temperance Society as their husbands drank the money for rent and food. What kinds of oppression abetted such distress?
Anyway, we have a chance to change, to look at the world with new eyes, to see it in ways other than enemy or friend.
One last thought: yesterday on NPR, a photographer who has taking images of flowers and pollinators for years and has digitized his footage will participate in a major new film category for Disney, called Nature. While such observation and recording is admirable, it occurred to me that more and more instead of the real thing, we are looking at the world through mediia. Instead of walking a meadow and experiencing the pollinators, now we'll watch a film. It's a fabricated, artificial substitute, but as a society we seem to be doing this with everything natural and real.
Yes, I'll contribute to Obama today also. Thanks blog friends for the good information. It helps.
Michael and John, I don't know the base for your cynicism, but I hope with all that I am that you are mistaken. Reading your posts, I feel like the Harry Potter Death Eaters are hovering. Just my take. Yet, I think all varieties of observation and perception are important to consider.
10% sounds more exciting than 9% I would guess. Gotta have that horse race.
A tidbit of news that also made me feel better, afer election results were known last night, Obama gained 200,000 new donors. It doesn't give the amount donated.
Plus it is official he gained another superdelegate from OK Gov Brad Henry.
Someone posted on Obama blog that MSNBC reported his speech was tired and old last night. Guess I was watching another speech, I thought he was envigorated. Also being said that MSM is reporting she won by 200,000 which is also not true.
If anyone is interested - there are a whole gaggle of articles up today over at Real Clear Politics. Some good and of course, the obligatory *Obama can't close the deal* stuff.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/
Just to set the correct facts straight on just a few incorrect statements made.
One, Hillary has 55, from Pennsylvania, that's 10 pct more.
Hillary has netted an additional 14 Delegates, not just 6
Hillary was the first to come out about rewriting NAFTA long before Pennsylvania. We remember well when Senator Obama agreed with Hillary's commitment to renogitate or cancel NAFTA in the Ohio debate. That was when Canada released information that Obama's Austan Goolsbee (Economic Advisor-who still works for him)had been making private assurances that his anti NAFTA talk was "just campaign rhetoric".
The polls that showed the largest gap going in to PA was Hillary 52, Obama 39.......that is only a 13pt lead.
NO ONE.......no where,,, ever showed Obama down 20 or more points, let alone 25 percent....and no one EVER predicted Hillary to have to win by or that they even expected such a huge margin.
Most thought she would only win by about 5-6 percent and considered 10 percent a BIG win. She did.
Linda wrote "Hillary has 55, from Pennsylvania, that's 10 pct more."
Nobody cares. It's irrelevant to the nomination.
Linda NM
go to the official state site with the numbers from all the races and you will find that Hillary Clinton did not beat Obama by 10 points.
she did do well enough to continue
on Today however she claimed to lead in the popular vote and included Michigan where Obama was not on the ballot
I call that delusional.
It's irrelevant to the nomination.
Sure is!
It's always been, not just in American, but the whole world... when the game is over, the team that scored the most points, WINS!
'nuff said!! :~)
Pat in Colorado
Wed, 04/23/08
____________________________________________________________________________
That scene from Harry Potter in the dark forest with Voldawart always gives me the creeps..........
included Michigan
I call that delusional
Funny thing about Michigan, if we had a re-do, which we're not, Barack would win!
rae hart
Wed, 04/23/08
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Prescription for today........no political tv, stay off the blog.....12n make nice cup of chicken soup with crackers......get on couch with blanket........read a good book or watch an old movie classic......take nap for an hour or so.................no tv tonite, its just a bunch of big mouths anyways...........good luck
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/pa/pennsylvania_democratic_primary-240.html
Hillary as much as conceded the delegate race this morning and repeated her mantra that she can win in the States where the machine supports her (the old blue states) and Obama has to turn red states blue.
America is stuck unless that is indeed true and Obama turns the current stalemate in Washington upside down.
That is the challenge, and I have no doubt when the oldest man to ever run gets to talking about Obama's ties to the sixties and voters figure out Obama was in grade school, we as a nation are going to turn a page.
Good Advice Michael, you had better take it.
Not me, I'm fighting on for Barack. Oh by the way I don't watch TV.
Phil, what ever you to claim this morning, does not change that my record straightening facts I posted are correct. Bringing a new topic in to the conversation to throw delusional out, dosn't change the facts.
But, there is nothing delusional that if you include her votes, in Florida and Michigan, she has the majority vote.
Too bad Obama blocked every effort to have a revote in Michigan so their votes could count.
Oh by the way so far she has netted only 11 delegates.
Guess I was watching another speech, I thought he was envigorated.
We thought the same thing about the comment. The crowd was going crazy for Obama because of his speech which was outstanding.
Evansville mayor has endorsed BO as has the OK governor.
Tim Russert announced around 10:00 p.m. EDT that we should "strap our seat belts" because this thing isn't over yet. The look on his face was very telling -- he knew he was lying and looking foolish at the same time.
It is disgusting what the MSM demands of their employees in order to keep their jobs.
RCP PA polling - indeed Clinton was ahead in some cases by 30+
----
Clinton +26.0
Franklin & Marshall 03/11 - 03/16 294 LV 51 35 Clinton +16.0
Quinnipiac 03/10 - 03/16 1304 LV 53 41 Clinton +12.0
Rasmussen 03/12 - 03/12 697 LV 51 38 Clinton +13.0
SurveyUSA 03/08 - 03/10 608 LV 55 36 Clinton +19.0
Susquehanna 03/05 - 03/10 500 LV 45 31 Clinton +14.0
Strategic Vision (R) 03/07 - 03/09 600 LV 56 38 Clinton +18.0
Rasmussen 03/05 - 03/05 690 LV 52 37 Clinton +15.0
Rasmussen 02/26 - 02/26 820 LV 46 42 Clinton +4.0
Quinnipiac 02/21 - 02/25 506 LV 49 43 Clinton +6.0
Franklin & Marshall 02/13 - 02/18 303 RV 44 32 Clinton +12.0
Morning Call 02/09 - 02/17 302 LV 45 31 Clinton +14.0
Quinnipiac 02/06 - 02/12 577 LV 52 36 Clinton +16.0
Keystone Poll 01/08 - 01/14 286 RV 40 20 Clinton +20.0
Quinnipiac 11/26 - 12/03 462 RV 43 15 Clinton +28.0
Quinnipiac 10/31 - 11/05 443 RV 48 15 Clinton +33.0
Quinnipiac 10/01 - 10/08 393 RV 41 14 Clinton +27.0
Strategic Vision (R) 09/28 - 09/30 LV 42 24 Clinton +18.0
Keystone Poll 08/24 - 09/02 209 RV 38 21 Clinton +17.0
Quinnipiac 08/14 - 08/20 524 RV 42 12 Clinton +30.0
Quinnipiac 07/30 - 08/06 419 RV 35 19 Clinton +16.0
Strategic Vision (R) 07/06 - 07/08 LV 36 25 Clinton +11.0
Quinnipiac 06/18 - 06/25 444 RV 32 18 Clinton +14.0
--------
the current total is Obama 45.7 and Clinton 54.3 with 99.3% of precincts reporting
not real far off from my prediction of 47/53 Mike but no cigar
lol, some do like to create their own
Phil, the day you want to spin that the numbers shouldn't be
declared rounded up the highest as Rich pointed out, then you better go back
and change all the polling and all the other percentages to.
RESULTS: Pennsylvania DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY April 22, 2008
Closed primary: 187 total delegates*
158 tied to April 22 primary, 29 superdelegates
Pennsylvania
Updated 2:08 a.m. EST, Apr 23, 2008
Clinton 1,258,245 55% 80 (delegates)
Obama 1,042,297 45% 66 (delegates)
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#PA
*** OK, I'll leave you all now. Bye.
It should be a concern that the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party was rejected by 54% of his own party six weeks AFTER he wrapped up the nomination. Everyone keeps asking why Hillary does not admit it is over when the real question is why do the voters, who know he has one, still refuse to vote for the obvious winner of the nomination. It is really amazing.
Linda in NM
Wed, 04/23/08
Reply to this
Phil, what ever you to claim this morning, does not change that my record straightening facts I posted are correct. Bringing a new topic in to the conversation to throw delusional out, dosn't change the facts.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
your facts are what is wrong, go to the official state site
With 99.09% of the PA vote in - Hillary leads by 8.51%. So, this was not a 10% victory but it was indeed a good solid victory.
who know he has one, oops, who know he has won
It is disgusting what the MSM demands of their employees in order to keep their jobs.
Joan~ You hit the nail on the head here!
btw, I've only been visiting here on our blog since it started yesterday, no other websites and no tv, it's very relaxing. I'd rather listen to our *talking heads* any day! :~)
If you're in California the Gray Panthers are offering to give presentations to groups on Healthcare reform. I highly recommend their presentations. The Gray Panthers really know healthcare.
Contact info: http://www.gpcal.org/indexhc.htm
Also the Gray Panthers offer excellent presentations on Medicare Part D reform.
Phil wrote "[Clinton] repeated her mantra that she can win in the States where the machine supports her (the old blue states) and Obama has to turn red states blue."
Because she's the machine candidate. A high profile DLC member and leader, she is everything the Dean campaign stood against. Beltway politics, the party establishment, war authorization, and old school soft money bag men. It's revolting to see former Dean followers willingly subvert all of Dean's efforts to infuse life into the party by lending support to this fossilized campaign of old ideas for a candidate who sees more to like in McCain that Obama.
close to a third of Republican voters rejected McCain, Fox, I'd be more worried that Democrats went to the polls as three times the rate as Republicans in a "battleground" state
the old duffer doesn't exactly have his base fired up
Linda wrote "what ever you to claim this morning, does not change that my record straightening facts I posted are correct[,]" but the information posted by vb certainly does.
Unofficial Returns*** 9,207 out of 9,264 Districts (99.38%) Reporting Statewide
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
it is now mathematically impossible for Clinton to reach double digits
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/4...
SOS updates in this diary. Barack has indeed moved up. If it ends up being under 8.5 then it is an 8% victory which is mighty different than a double-digit one.
Linda
where did you get those cnn numbers that were the exact high water mark for Clinton at 2:03 A.M., from the Clinton campaign?
what is wrong with using actual facts if that is what you are asserting
Hillary won, it was not by double digits, isn't the truth good enough without stretching it?
Dan Balz on Hillary's treacherous path ahead.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...
In the interest of accuracy, the NAFTA kerfuffle was revealed to have been a Clinton invention via a press release that gave out false information. The "assurances" that the NAFTA revisions were a political ploy were provided by Clinton, not and Obama surrogate. It is characteristic of the Clintons to accuse other people of doing what they are in fact up to. They do it by what's commonly referred to as "salting the mines"--leaving fake nugets for the press to find.
In addition to having modest financial aspirations, most folk are also honest and honest people do not expect other people to be cheaters. That puts honest folk at a disadvantage, especially in a culture that considers honest folk to be "suckers" who deserve to be taken advantage of. That the weak deserve to be abused is a particularly pernicious attitude and, apparently, characteristics of the Clintons and many Republican politicians. Some people think that just as the herd is made stronger, the human genome is improved by culling the herd and, even though they don't believe in evolution, they appreciate what is usually referred to as social darwinism, even though it doesn't have any relationship to darwin's theory. Darwin's theory doesn't apply on an individual level.
I was first turned off by the Clinton health care program because it was presented as a desert, something people earned--not something to which they are entitled by virtue of their being part of the human family. The human species is a social species. If the members do not engage in socially supportive behavior the species will not survive. It's as simple as that. Several variants which were, apparently, not sufficiently social have already gone extinct. There are some people who are convinced that homo sapiens is already on the edge. That's what the doomsday clock is intended to tell us. Global warming strikes me as a distraction as is the goal of "saving the planet." The planet is not in nearly as much danger as humankind. Indeed, while all humans and much other organic existence can be wiped out in a nuclear confrontation, the planet and some organisms will survive. But humans will become as extinct as the dinosaur, regardless of atmospheric warming or cooling, for that matter.
Of course, if you agree with the above, then Hillary Clinton's cavalier references to the use, by anyone, of nuclear weapons should be very concerning.
oh, silliness. there are two digits (numbers) in 8.5 no? that there's also a dot is insignificant.
BTW, while i agree that Condi has to go, that picture of her in the graphic is really off-putting. I have to look away.
Just read over at First Read that Eliz Edwards will be showing up at one or two Clinton rallys. That's her choice but I am mighty disappointed. Character counts for a lot in a candidate to me and I thought it did with Eliz. Edwards as well.
Al Wilson, the soul singer and songwriter who had a number of 1970s hits including "Show and Tell," has died. He was 68.
35.
Phil Specht
Wed, 04/23/08
Hillary as much as conceded the delegate race this morning and repeated her mantra that she can win in the States where the machine supports her (the old blue states) and Obama has to turn red states blue.
America is stuck unless that is indeed true and Obama turns the current stalemate in Washington upside down.
That is the challenge, and I have no doubt when the oldest man to ever run gets to talking about Obama's ties to the sixties and voters figure out Obama was in grade school, we as a nation are going to turn a page.
---------------
That's interesting angle to look at!
Whatever true intentions of Demos establishment (to which Barak belongs as well) WERE, there is a chance that this fight will CLARIFY and DEEPEN societal divisions which get to be done imo.
It well might be that the true Demos intentions are EXACTLY that: to find out what PACE of changes (not changes itself, its clear they are unavoidable, but their “pace”) society is ready to embrace. If so, then the way to leave that choice to people is interesting (kind of feel of Dean’s hand...lol).
The old (Clinton’s) establishment fight the new (Barak’s) wave. If Barak won’t intensify his effort he is risking losing momentum. He has no choice but to go into attacking. Whatever the outcome is, the line on the PACE of changes must be drawn.
The choices are: slower pace, some “triangulation” and double talk as well as not full truth (if not lie) by Clinton&Co. OR faster, more risky pace, little more honesty and sincerity by Obama&Co.
We’ll see.
I wish people would get some intelligence.
We are voting on DELEGATES HERE FOLKS. If hil only got 11 delegates, and that is iffy, then she did not win anything.
In Texas it took a while to sort out the delegates. In the Philly area, it is heavily AA and they went for Obama so Hil may come out of this with no plus delegates. 11 does not win anthing.
This a.m. 2 supers went for obama.
It is not the popular vote, it isn't big states, it isn't primaries. They are grasping at straws here.
Let me know when you hear of any SD's going for Hillary.
I'm disappointed by the Edwards, but not surprised. No matter what they said or did, something in me remained unmoved, unconvinced. That may just be personality and temperamental affinities, but I just didn't believe much of what they said or did.
But, something else is going on here. I am beginning to see the passion behind Hillary's fight, and it is a fight, something deeper and more resonant than I was aware of. For all the years of oppression, subjugation, designations of inferiority, abuse, poverty, loneliness, and rejection, there's a fury that has gained an outlet and it won't stop.
For every female who has been judged inferior to males, for all those attributes that make up the woman's pysche and have been denigrated as emotional, not rational, trivial, have been ignored, there's a stored memory that is being amplified.
For all the years woemn have been denied legitimacy, have been given the responsitilities and budens and none of the rewards, there's an avenging woman, an Amazon who is coming out of the forest with sword in her hand, body fit and muscular, and a cry that will not be stilled, cannot be muffled, will be derided at the peril of the deriders.
Woman is rising after thousands of years as chattel. The fight is not balanced, not elegant, not ethical in execution, but it is a fight to the death and there may be nothing that can stop it. The woman will use every weapon, every tactic, and she will change and matamorphose from hour to hour, but never, never again will she be subject, will she allow her powers and gifts to be derided and wasted.
I'm t hinking there's a huge force percolating under the mountain, and it may spit the mountain.
This is sheer fancy and speculation on my part, but I do think there is a huge anger and resentment that Hillary has tapped, and I'm wondering how far it will go.
mary vb
Wed, 04/23/08
Reply to this
Just read over at First Read that Eliz Edwards will be showing up at one or two Clinton rallys. That's her choice but I am mighty disappointed. Character counts for a lot in a candidate to me and I thought it did with Eliz. Edwards as well.
+++
mary vb -
I think Elizabeth is still smarting at the fact that she feels that her husband's chances for the dem nomination were severely hampered by another change agent in the field -- Barack.
rd - But it should be what's best for the country and clearly Hillary isn't what's best. Where's Elizabeth's moral compass?
As has been the case throughout the Democratic primary, the economy was the most important issue to voters. Of the more than half of voters who said the economy mattered most, Clinton won a clear majority. About one in four voters said the war in Iraq mattered most to them, and Obama won a clear majority of them. Only 14 percent of voters said health care mattered most, and Clinton won a majority of their support.
Fewer than one in 10 voters said electability mattered most, a trend that has long been true in the primary as Democrats focus less on pragmatism than on personal identity.
A slim majority of Democrats said the capacity to bring about “change” was the candidate quality that mattered most. Obama won seven in 10 of that bloc, but as in other large states, that strength was not enough to overcome their unsympathetic breakdowns by race and gender.
One in four Democrats said experience mattered most and as expected Clinton won over 90 percent of their support.
Clinton won six in 10 Democrats who had a gun in the home and nearly six in 10 weekly churchgoers. Half of Democratic voters lived in the suburbs and a quarter in small cities or rural areas. Clinton won a strong majority of both groups, while Obama won a strong majority of those voters in cities with populations over 50,000.
Obama won about six in 10 voters from the suburbs and the city of Philadelphia, though only about three in 10 voters overall. Clinton won a strong majority of Democrats in every other region of the state, winning nearly seven in 10 voters in the rural northeast where she has family roots.
Liberal and conservative Democrats effectively split between Obama and Clinton. It was moderates, four in 10 Democratic voters, who went heavily to Clinton’s favor — she won more than six in 10.
Obama won six in 10 new Democrats, but they made up only slightly more than 10 percent of voters. Clinton won more than 55 percent of those Democrats who were registered with the party prior to January.
Clinton's victory with traditional Democrats also carried into strength with blue-collar white men and those from union households; she won a majority of both groups.
More than half of Democrats said they expected Obama to be the Democratic nominee, despite Clinton’s win Tuesday. While the demographic breakdown of the race and the delegate lead of Obama remain largely unchanged as the race pushes on, there were once again disturbing signs for Democrats as they looked toward to the general election.
About one in four Clinton supporters said they would back John McCain in the general election should Obama win, while fewer than one in five of Obama’s voters said they support McCain if Clinton should win.
About 35 percent of Democrats said they would be dissatisfied if Obama won the nomination, while roughly one in four Democrats said they too would be dissatisfied should Clinton win.
Pat - That's just the point - Hillary is appealing to the worst in all of us - Barack is appealing to the best. It seems as though Barack has now become Frodo for goodness sake.
rd
Seems as though the Edwards want to make two endorsements out of one. Mary is right, the Edwards' are resentful. I believe the voters in NC will see it for what it is.
~~~~~~~~~~
MSNBC looking their worst lately: While they are calling Obama's lead of 5% in Indiana a "small lead" they refer to Clinton's slightly less than 10% as "huge!"
Someone tell Hil and her posse that florida and michigan do not count. stop lying.
If hil only got 11 delegates, and that is iffy, then she did not win anything.
linda b
You probably meant 11 delegates more than Obama got.
It still doesn't get her much of anywhere. She will rake in less than 11 delegates in NC and perhaps a few more in Indiana which will put her right back at square 1.
The big picture is where will she get the money to keep competing. They owe millions of dollars and after PA primary a sensible person will not see much more coming in the offering plate.
Not many people will be willing to throw good money after bad no matter how much they have to throw around. Could be many of her donors are maxed out as well.
-
By * rdorgan on Apr 23, 2008 9:16 AM EDT9:18 AM EDT
First there was Howard ...