Are the Democrats in Trouble??

********************     UPDATE ************************ 

*********************************************************

At least in Pennsylvania, a substantial number of supporters of both Obama and Clinton say they will vote for McCain if their candidate does not get the Democratic nomination. I expected this of Obama supporters, who tend to be younger, more likely to be registered independents, or even Republicans, than Clinton supporters. But in Pennsylvania, 19% of Clinton supporters say they will vote for McCain, while 20% of Obama supporters say they will vote for McCain. Interestingly, 13% of Clinton supporters WILL NOT VOTE if Obama gets the nomination, whereas only 3% of Obama supporters will not vote. Can somebody please explain this to me???

What the Hell: Clinton endorses McCain??

Well, that made my decision easier. If Barack Obama gets the Democratic nomination, I’ll vote for John McCain. At least that’s what Hillary Clinton would do!

“I think that since we now know Sen. (John) McCain will be the nominee for the Republican Party, national security will be front and center in this election. We all know that. And I think it’s imperative that each of us be able to demonstrate we can cross the commander-in-chief threshold…I believe that I’ve done that. Certainly, Sen. McCain has done that and you’ll have to ask Sen. Obama with respect to his candidacy.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/06/clinton-mccain-and-i-hav_n_90310.html

Democracy, Now?

Is it me, or is our nominating process for the Democratic presidential candidate a giant clusterfuck? (yes, I just wanted to use the word ‘clusterfuck’).

Remember in 2000, when Gore won the popular vote but lost the election, and all of the outrage that followed? Although I have a feeling we would disagree on a lot of issues, this blogger  accurately points out the sheer hypocrisy of it all.

-  Clinton won the popular vote in N.H., but Obama and Clinton got the same number of delegates (the CNN count refered to in the blog above was premature, but is updated here)

- Clinton won the popular vote in Nevada, but Obama got more delegates

- Clinton won the popular vote in Florida, but nobody got ANY delegates.

BUT,

Despite the fact that Barack Obama has more pledged delegates than any other candidate (63 to Clinton’s 48), Hillary Clinton has the superdelegates  on her side. These mysterious super delegates (see the link for some historical context) are party operatives and elected officials who make up about 20% of all democratic delegates, and can vote for whoever they damn well please, people and primary results be dammed. In the superdelegate battle, it’s Clinton:184, Obama:95.

So what is going on here? Will the Democratic nominee win the popular vote but not win a majority of pledged delegates,  only to be saved by the preferences of an elite few. (After all, former President Bill Clinton is a super delegate himself )

I don’t think it should be winner take all (nationally as well as within each state), but a little more transparency would be nice. Certainly we can do better than the clusterfuck that exists today.

    

They’re dropping like flies

So long, Edwards: http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8UG8CQO0&show_article=1

So long, Guiliani: http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080130/D8UG77E81.html

Mitt Romney = POSER

Does anybody else see the connection (link)   ?

 

The Iowa Caucuses

I don’t have time to make this blog sound as pretty as I’d like to, but for those who are interested, here’s an e-mail I sent to some friends about the Iowa Caucuses. This only applies to the Democratic caucus; from what I understand, the Republican caucus is a secret ballot much more similar to a typical primary.

=================================================

The process is essentially like this:

 

1) Go to the section of the room corresponding to the candidate that
you support (there was also an undecided section).

2) After 30 minutes, tally the number of supporters for each
candidate. Candidates must have the support of 15% of the caucus
goers to be viable.

3) Supporters of non-viable candidates then need to support one of
the viable candidates, or join supporters of another non-viable
candidate to make a candidate viable, or they can always leave.

4) After about 20 minutes, a new and final count for each candidate is done.

5) Each precinct has a certain number of delegates (we had 11), and
the number of delegates a candidate recieves is proportional to the
number of supporters they have. 

The process took about 2 hours overall, which included some orders of business in the beginning not related to the caucus.

Overall, it wasn’t the best of experiences (at least compared to the last time I did it) because the room was much too small to handle the 270+ caucusers plus media plus volunteers that were there. (I think the legal capacity of the room was actually 140). It was pretty hot and uncomfortable, and nowhere to sit, which I’m sure turned a lot of people off. Also, in order to count the number of supporters (and the total # of people there), you literally raise your hand and count off, which is pretty difficult when people are scattered around, it’s hard to hear, and other groups are shouting.

Last time I was in a huge room and the process was much smoother. But I guess that’s what happens when you get record turnouts, and I’m not really complaining.

Out of Obama, Edwards, and Clinton, it looked as though supporters of Obama and Edwards were by far much younger than those caucusing for Clinton. It was hard to tell where supporters of the non-viable candidates redistributed themselves. I know Kucinich told his supporters to support Obama if he wasn’t viable, and I believe that Richardson may have as well.

The War on Science

If you think it’s time to end it, you might want to consider voting for Hillary Clinton:

Hillary will restore the federal government’s commitment to science by:

• Rescinding the ban on ethical embryonic stem cell research
• Banning political appointees from unduly interfering with scientific conclusions and publications
• Directing department and agency heads to safeguard against political pressure that threatens scientific integrity and to promote transparency in decision-making
• Appointing an Assistant to the President for Science and Technology Policy and strengthening the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy
• Reviving and enhancing the national assessment on climate change
• Enhancing American leadership in space through investments in exploration, earth sciences, and aeronautics research
• Pursuing a comprehensive innovation agenda, including establishing a $50 billion Strategic Energy Fund

###

Why are the Republican candidates afraid of You Tube?

That is, despite the fact that many Republicans candidates have whored themselves out on You Tube (i.e., Giuliani, Romney, and Tancredo), only Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) and Rep. Ron Paul (Tex.) have agreed to participate in the CNN/You Tube Republican debate scheduled for September 17th (link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/27/AR2007072700283_pf.html) And it doesn’t look like many more are going to commit. Cowards….

Presidential Candidates in First Ever Gay Debate!

I wish I could take credit for that headline, but the truth is that I can’t. In all seriousness, though, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards are confirmed for participating in a debate dealing exclusively with LGBT issues. With the democratic race currently as close as it is, the importance of this debate cannot be overlooked.

Or maybe it can be. Afterall, Clinton, Obama, and Edwards are all against same-sex marriage, although Clinton and Obama both opposed a constitutional amendment that would have banned gay marriage while in the Senate.

Interestingly, there are no current candidates that support gay marriage. Third party candidates, where are you???? 

The candidates react to Scooter Libby’s Commutation

You would think that someone who has been on the hit TV show Law and Order for 5 years would know something about, well, Law and Order. Not to mention the fact that Fred Thompson was a lawyer/attorney before he became an actor. Nevertheless, here is Fred Thompson’s reaction to President Bush’s commutation for Scooter Libby, who was recently convicted for obstruction of justice: “I am very happy for Scooter Libby. I know that this is a great relief to him, his wife and children. While for a long time I have urged a pardon for Scooter, I respect the President’s decision. This will allow a good American, who has done a lot for his country, to resume his life. (emphasis mine)”

It will be interesting to see what kind of stances the other candidates will take on this issue, and whether or not opinions will split along party lines. Barack Obama, the first Democratic candidate to release a statement, described the commutation as “exactly the kind of politics that we must change”. Real Clear Politics has more about what Obama and other candidates have said so far.

Considering that 69% of Americans oppose a pardon for Scooter Libby (from a CNN Poll taken in March), I imagine that Republican candidates will try to distance themselves from this…