This person"s view on the primary is irrelevant since he already supports Obama and the primary process is almost done anyway. Falsely justifying the result is all he is trying to do here. He is correct that CO can turn blue with Obama (9 EVs TOTAL). The implication that Obama will redraw the map in a positive and system manner implies that CO is not the exception to the rule, which it is. He does not back up his view with data that is logical.
Obama will put into play or lose the states that Clinton will likely win, especially PA, MI, FL, OH, WV, NM, WV and even NJ, MO and MA. (Over 100 EVs!). Clinton will not lose WA, IA or OR in a general. Obama will not win NC, SC or the Bible belt. To believe that is to believe that after splitting the party he could really unite of anything except the Black vote and activists.
Obama will redraw the map, for sure. Right now, it looks like he cannot depend on getting more than 237 EVs 15 less than loser Kerry did and 30 less than Gore. The DNC looks to be jamming another unelectable candidate on the electorate. Today Clinton looks like she can get 300 EVs. Nice work DNC.
Former Clinton-Gore Campaign Chair: "This Race Is Over, Over."
In a telephone press conference yesterday morning, Roy Romer -- a former Colorado governor, former Democratic National Committee ("DNC") chair, co-chairman of the 1996 Clinton-Gore reelection campaign, and a superdelegate -- announced his endorsement of Barack Obama as the Democratic Presidential nominee. Despite what he called "affection for Senator Clinton," Romer said that "[t]he math is controlling. This race is over, over. Sen Obama has accumulated a lead in caucuses, primaries, and superdelegates that cannot be overcome."
Redrawing the Electoral Map: Romer explained that his endorsement was based largely on his belief that Obama has a better chance of beating McCain in November, which he said Obama could do using a different electoral map than the one Democrats have used in the last few elections and which Clinton is continuing to advocate: "As I watched the campaign unfold it was obvious there was a different kind of winning possibility that Senator Obama was presenting to the party.... This nation is evolving. Colorado is one of those states you call a red state... [but] I don't think Colorado is the same state it was 20 years ago. I think we need to get out of the straight jacket, 'this is a red state, this is a blue state'.... We need a candidate who can appeal to the evolving nature of U.S. politics." Obama campaign manager David Plouffe added, "we've won a heck of a lot of battleground states," including Washington, Colorado, Virginia, and North Carolina, and stated that Nevada, New Mexico, Montana, and North Dakota "all could be competitive in the fall."
Not Pressuring Clinton, Just Giving Her Information... Romer denied that his announcement was intended to put pressure on Sen. Clinton to drop out of the race, explaining that his goal instead was to eliminate any uncertainty about where he stood so that Clinton had more information on which she could base her own decision, and calling on other undeclared superdelegates to do the same: "All superdelegates would help the party by making [their endorsements] known as quickly as they can. That's not forcing [the Clinton campaign] out of the race, that's giving them facts that they can then base their own decisions on." He later added, "it's important for her [Clinton] to know where we [superdelegates] are so she's not misled."
... But the Information Says the Race Is Over: However, Romer also believes the time has come for Clinton to make a decision about whether the nomination is achievable. While the extended primary campaign has helped the party in some ways, Romer added that "there is a time that we need to end it and to direct ourselves to the general election. I think that time is now.... At some point in time all of us have got to say, 'where are the numbers? where is the math?'"
Michigan and Florida: Seat, But With Consequences: As a former chair of the Democratic National Committee, Romer also had firm opinions about the contentious issue of seating delegations from Michigan and Florida, which the DNC's Rules & Bylaws Committee unanimously voted to disqualify after those states tried to increase their influence in the primary process by moving their elections to dates earlier than those allowed by DNC rules. Romer said, "I was chair of the party. The party has to set rules, and the party has to have some control over the timing of the primary races... you can't just excuse that and say everybody has the same delegates they used to have." He added, "They need to be seated, but there needs to be a penalty for failing to follow the rules" in order to preserve the party's ability to set primary schedules in the future: "This party has got to find a solution to seat those delegates, but it's got to do that in a way that says to all states in the future that we mean business when we say there are rules... you can't have a party that's effective in modern politics unless you have rules that you can enforce."
Plouffe also observed that the Clinton campaign, not the Obama campaign, was blocking the resolution of the Michigan problem: "The Michigan and Florida situation will be resolved. There is a proposal from Michigan.... [and] we're open to that proposal. [But] the Clinton campaign rejected it out of hand." (The current Michigan proposal would give Clinton a net of ten more delegates than Obama.) Plouffe added that he does not believe Obama will be unable to compete in those states in the general election, citing polls showing Obama beating McCain in Michigan and running even with him in Florida.
Defining, and Approaching, the Finish Line: Plouffe also ruled out the possibility of the Obama campaign "declaring victory" after winning the majority of pledged delegates, which probably will occur during the Oregon primary on May 20. Plouffe said that winning the majority of pledged delegates would be "an important moment" because it will reflect "the will of the voters" and because most superdelegates have said they will endorse the candidate who wins the pledged delegate race. However, he denied that the campaign would be over at that point: "we're definitely not going to declare victory... we still have three contests after that."
Instead, the Obama campaign will continue until it reaches 2,025 delegates, which Plouffe said was close: Obama is only 147 delegates short at this point, which Plouffe characterized as "a very achievable number." Ever since the Indiana and North Carolina primaries last week, the Obama campaign has been portraying the race less as a head-to-head, state-by-state matchup between the two candidates and more as a countdown to a 2,025-delegate finish line. In today's teleconference, Plouffe said that "our focus is on getting to that 2,025 number as quickly as we can."
Not Poaching Superdelegates: Plouffe was asked to comment on the decision by Maryland superdelegate Jack Johnson to switch from Clinton to Obama; he replied, "Sen. Clinton's camp has said on occasion that [even] pledged delegates are fair game... [but] we have not approached any of her delegates" to persuade them to defect. He added that Johnson "made that decision on his own."
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Thanks for digging that one up..
The conscientious self-advocate in these Fingertips is not wild on the "straight jacket" part of the comment.. These guys are in politics and are supposed to live by a certain standard with respect to......
Respecting *ALL*..
Yes, things can certainly get out of hand when it comes to trying to be p/c 100% of the time across the board, but, still..
Straight jacket......?
Right this very moment when so many are watching every single move made in these political camps..?
Just the mention of straight jackets brings up horrible, horrible traumatic memories for those for whom straight jackets were morbidly abused against..
Aye, goodness.........
Back to their inbox again, I guess.. Hoping to round up a handful of friends to go with..
Cyber hugs from Talking Rock.. :)
Yes, either dem could win. I think Obama has a better chance despite all this guilt by association nonsense. I think he can turn a lot of red states blue i.e. the Carolinas and the Dakotas. People in the west really like him even after Reverend Wright.
A very common sense and logical approach by Mr Romer, I hope the other supers take heed.
Romer's got the vision. Like Frank Rick said,"Party like its 2008!" DEMS keep losing because they are playng by the old script. Flip it damn it. Remember, Tiger Woods changed the game of golf. Obama is going to change how the presidential race is won. The Repubs ain't gonna know what hit them.
"Not Pressuring Clinton, Just Giving Her Information... Romer denied that his announcement was intended to put pressure on Sen. Clinton to drop out of the race..."
Why not??? Why this kid-gloves approach to breaking the bad news to the Clinton Party? Stand up Democrats! Your future depends upon dealing with Clinton in an honest and direct manner. That's the only way those who are primarily self-serving get the message.
Tell her outright, and in no uncertain terms, that she lost! And then tell her that if she is to enjoy any kind of positive legacy, that she needs to immediately hit the campaign trail and sincerely endorse Obama and the Democratic Party.
Because quite a few of Clinton's supporters are, to put it nicely, psycho. This is not to say that they ALL are, but the ones who are now going on TV, threatening to vote McCain if they don't make Hillary the nominee are definitely psycho. They're all crying sexism, and seem to think they can hold their votes hostage from the party to get their way. I'm sure Hillary is very proud.
I, by the way, am a woman, and can say as someone who's able to be objective that these women don't give a crap about issues or what's best for the people of this country, just getting revenge and getting their way. They are an embarrasment to women in this country who take the right to vote seriously and who take the accusation of sexism seriously. This is a presidential election, not a women's lib issue, and to try and hijack an election just to get your way only validates those people who don't take women seriously, because you don't want to be treated equally, you want Hillary Clinton to be treated "nicer" and "easier" and for her to be treated with kid gloves. This is politics. Get over. If you want to vote for McCain who will bomb Iran and reverse Roe v Wade, just to get revenge, then there are women really shouldn't be allowed to vote because they don't take the right seriously or treat it with respect.
Yes, kid glove treatment.
Way too many HRC supporters are sore and saying they will not vote for Obama in the GE.
That they would vote (or not vote) in a way that would be to their detriment as far as women's rights, more dead and maimed young soldiers, a more dangerous world (cold war seems to be heating up again) is a testament to how hurt they are and how dangerous it is to make them even madder.
This is especially true if HRC decides to attempt to sabotage Barack's chance in November in an "I told you so" attempt to give herself another chance in 2012 (same results with more dead and maimed, more rights infringed upon ... etc.).
HRC needs to ease out and work with her supporters to unite the party with no strings attached (if she has any class or really does care about "the people" she claims she does).
The trick, of course, is to suppress our own instinct to thwack people on the head and say "straighten up, slacker!" and instead try to reach them where they are now, even if it's hard for us to grok.
Sincerely endorse Obama? Good luck with that.
Maybe change "sincerely" to "persuasively, believably".
Voting for Obama with their eyes closed and their nose plugged would be enough democratic loyalty for now. It takes time to heal and feel better, but it takes no time at all to do the right thing.
Loading comments…
Posted May 13, 2008 | 01:46 PM (EST)