“He doesn't need all 300 remaining unpledged superdels. If we assume that Obama still comes out about 130-140 delegates ahead after all the contests (the likely scenario predicting some big wins for her and some big wins for him), he will need only 30 some % of the remaining unpledged superdelegates (about 132), while will need she around 70%. So, the superdels can do two things:
1) Promise to split evenly among the two candidates (this would still make it mathematically impossible for to win because she needs a majority of the remaining superdels, but they would appear "neutral"--not favoring either candidate.)
2) 132 more should back Obama NOW. Assuming she'll win big in PA, WV, KY, Guam, and Puerto Rico, Obama will likely finish with 1678 EARNED delegates, which would be a lead of about 122 delegates. He already has 215 superdelegates. So all he will need to clinch the nomination is 132 of the remaining superdels. If those 132 superdels come out now (it would be totally fair because she has more than he does anyway, and she could have all the rest since he doesn't need even close to half of them), it would be virtually IMPOSSIBLE for her to win the nomination. 132 superdels is all it takes, folks. Call a superdelegate near you and tell them how you feel!”
“I sent a link of the DKos article you wrote to my Mom, and I mentioned in the email that the comments were atrocious. I agree that Edwards may be innocent after all, but to deride someone for simply writing about it, with the best of intentions, shows how blind the progressive blogosphere can be at times. Even during the primaries, anyone who merely mentioned danger for Obama was branded a "concern troll." I love DKos in many way, but it seems to welcome nothing but cheerleading. Unless of course Obama pisses off the netroots; then it's all about how unworthy he is. There's no room for dissenting opinion, which is a shame, considering that it has the potential to attract the best and the brightes minds in liberal political commentary.”
Bitsko on Jul 28, 2008 at 01:28:32
“Infighting and backstabbing are the Achilles heels of the Democratic party. Management has been using it for years against workers, and it gets us nowhere.”
hp blogger Lee Stranahan on Jul 28, 2008 at 01:25:02
“Sex scandals are rough on communities. They cause waves of anger and denial. Read the Autobiography Of Malcolm X. My personal experience was with the Ayn Rand fans / Objectivists. Even her closest confidants didn't know about her sexual relationship with Nathaniel Branden. After all - she'd denied it.”
“Some women are indeed irrational and unable to get over their emotional attachments and prejudices. As are some men. We just call it something different when men do it: stubbornness, pride, anger, or whatever.”
“I agree, he is speaking from his heart, but if you read between the lines he is saying to ignor the racial part of the candidate. How , or why should we? It was his association with charactors like Rev. Wright, and Louis Farrakan, and the New Black Panthers, and lets not forget some of the phrases from his book, Dreams of my Father. His wifes remark about dedicating her life to "exclusively the black African causes", in her college thisis. The Obama camp using the race card to oust Geraldene Farrarra from the Clinton campaign, knowing full well that she just spoke the truth. I am almost certain that Obama dislikes white people after reading these exerpts; Sen. Barack Obama in his own words.
From his book: Dreams of my Father
"I CEASED TO ADVERISE MY MOTHER'S (WHITE) RACE AT THE AGE OF 12 OR 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites"
" I FOUND A SOLACE IN NURSING A PERVASIVE SENSE OF GRIEVANCE AND ANIMOSITY AGAINST MY MOTHER'S (WHITE) RACE".
"The emotion between the races could never be pure.....THE OTHER RACE (WHITE) WOULD ALWAYS REMAIN JUST THAT: MENACING, ALIEN AND APART"
I'm sorry, but I am white, and this guy seems to hate white people. He isn't allowing me to overlook his race. Chris Mathews wants us to think like our children do, and not see his race. I think that Chris should give that message to Obama.”
“I think Obama will win, but it will not be a landslide, if we take landslide to mean over 300 electoral votes. My neighbor still refuses to take down her Hillary yard sign. It's pretty sad. We're thinking about putting a "unite for change" sign smack in between her Hillary sign and our Obama sign in order to send a clear message :)”
Jun 25, 2008 at 06:36:48
“I whole-heartedly disagree. My father is from India, and if he had had an arranged marriage like his parents had wanted, he would never have met a crazy white lady--my mother--who was 11 years older than him, fallen in love, and founded (with her) a humanitarian organization that saved countless lives over a 30-year period. They ended up getting divorced after 12 years, but it was WORTH it, for both of them because they had a passionate, fascinating, meaningful relationship while it lasted. And they are still work partners and good friends. I would choose that any day over some bland, secure, planned out marriage. Greater risk = greater reward. I'd love to meet someone I can grow old with, but not at the expense of passion and adventure. And that is precisely what's lacking from the marriages I see around me (on the Indian side of my family). You can't manufacture love or passion.”
Boobaloo on Jun 27, 2008 at 09:35:09
“You're opinion is so boringly, predictably AMERICAN.
these lame platitudes is why we have more mutliple marriages and divorces in this country then anywhere in the world:
Greater risk = greater reward
passion and adventure
You can't manufacture love or passion
this is the way adolescents think ... you need to grow up because marriage is not dating and what you want to do is date which is fine but,spare me your inane ramblings about passion and adventure and nothing ventured nothing gained ... you've watched too many movies.
Re-read your comment: " they had a passionate, fascinating, meaningful relationship while it lasted" .... you're not exactly an insightful person.
You sound like one of those new age nutjobs holding off hysteria with crystals and chants.”
“Isn't Patti Solis Doyle the woman who would sit around and watch soaps all day? Does he really want her on the payroll? The Obama camp is known for "no drama" and high efficiency. I hope he doesn't start diluting that with Clinton people.”
ChiGuy on Jun 16, 2008 at 22:28:56
“She's not a "Clinton person".
These days, she's a paid Democratic consultant that hires herself out to whatever candidate is in need of her abilities.
She'll be a good fit in the Obama camp.”
“I think it's funny how badly they WANT Jindal to be their Obama. It's like they found the youngest, most "exotic" Republican they could find and said, "Alright, it's all up to you now son." Poor guy.”
jennbeez on Jun 15, 2008 at 15:42:38
“Kinda reminds me of when they picked Dan Quayle to "balance" the ticket with HWBush. Quayle looked like he needed a high chair forgodsake.”
“I starting to think Chris wasn't being fair to Obama because he respects Obama, but only because he detested Clinton and wanted her to lose. I enjoyed watching during the primaries, but now he's unbearable.”
frankifrost on Jun 13, 2008 at 07:03:32
“CHRISSY-BOY IS THE WORST KIND OF SNAKE;
A WOLF IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING;
ANOTHER CHICKEN-HAWK WHO HIDES BEHIND PATRIOTIC RHETORIC;
DARE I SAY,
HE IS A TRAITOR TO HIS COUNTRY !!!!!”
“K.O. is the only person who has the guts to point out the truth and stick it to the Right-wing demagogues. As for his remarks on Clinton, they were necessary. The rest of the media let Clinton and McAuliffe get away with lying about having a lead in the popular vote and pretending that they were being pushed out, even though they were treated as inevitable from the get-go.”
“It's one thing to use slag about yourself; there's nothing evil about the term, after all; but it's another to use it as your headline if you're a news network, or at least pretend to be. I think the proper term is Mrs. Obama, or how about Michelle Obama.”
pacats on Jun 12, 2008 at 11:11:12
“Michelle Obama did not use a slang reference when she said, "My babies daddy" in 2004, when introducing her husband. The inference used by foxnews of "baby mama" is designed to undermine the strong family values of the Obamas. This young couple have been married for some time. That said, the term,"baby mama" used by the youth in some groups should not be a starting point for many, to go ahead and write disparaging comments about that segment of the population. We can be part of the solution, or we can continue to exploit the problems that are evident in some segments of society.”
SaulGood on Jun 12, 2008 at 10:59:54
“she said my baby's daddy. much different that the slang - baby daddy.”
readreza on Jun 12, 2008 at 10:58:46
“there is no relationship between referring to your own husband as your baby's daddy and someone else referring to you as his baby mamma...
Nuglet304 is also likely pretending not to "get it".
Baby's daddy, for one thing, is standard, long-used language - baby mamma is well known as derogatory slang. Those pretending not to know the difference are ridiculous.”
“Note to naysayers: This is not meant to be a magic bullet. No, it won't solve all of Obama's problems in one click, but it provides an easy way for people to direct misinformed people to the truth. It will not stop the smears because those perpetuated them don't believe them either; they just do it because they hate Obama. The Pledge video is the best because it doesn't allow anyone to maintain their misinformed state. They either have to watch it and see the truth, or admit that they don't want to know the truth, in which case they probably wouldn't have voted for him anyway.”
neocon666 on Jun 12, 2008 at 11:03:44
“The lack of this is the kind of response cost John Kerry the presidency. It's good to see that the Barack Obama campaign is doing something about it.”
“Look, it makes me sick to my stomach, but the more we give these idiots attention, the more we legitimize them and allow them to pretend that they are a news network. They aren't.”
eden4barack08 on Jun 12, 2008 at 01:24:15
“I agree, but this superior take on them made us lose our country for 8 years, because sadly it's a national network and in this country the intellectually challenged vote too and they watch this and believe it's news. We can no longer afford to let them slide!
Other media, are immediately called upon to apologize and retract gaffes or erroneous reporting, no matter how silly, because us progressives hold accountable even our own.
Yet this tabloid network gets away with not only calling itself 'news', but blatantly smearing along racial and gender lines without so much as anything!
No, I'm sorry, we cannot ignore and be noble, not his time. We will not underestimate ignorance anymore!”
XME on Jun 12, 2008 at 01:02:28
“True, they are a 24/7 infommercial for hate via ignorance. (FOX = Fear Obsessed Xenophobes)
Ignorance breeds fear. Fear breeds hate. Hate breeds violence.
“I've given $1400 so far over 15 months and I plan to keep giving until I max out, at which point I'll just keep giving more to the DNC. Not everyone can afford this, but right now I can, so I'm investing it in my future and my future childrens' futures!”
msrmfp on Jun 10, 2008 at 02:25:56
“I was up to $1000 for the primary. Just gave another $150 today. I've never been moved to donate to a political campaign - EVER!
I see so many great things that can happen for this country if Obama is elected. However, I think the greatest thing he has done is to inspire people to take action, care about their country and to take our government back. He has changed the way people view politics. If you don't like who is in office, you have the power to change it. I love it!”
Ashman on Jun 10, 2008 at 01:05:55
“Someone please correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the primary and the general election are two seperate animals.
I think you can donate up to $2,300 max in each contest, so you should be starting over again at $0 for the general.
I'm going to donate all I can as well, like you said, for my kids futures and the future of this country.
“The Obama campaign is smart and tough, so I trust that they know what's coming and are preparing for it. Still, one bad ad can resonate with voters, especially low-info voters who are likely to distrust Obama anyway. I think Obama should attack the issue directly with his own ad exposing these types of ads as fear-mongering tactics that attempt to distract voters from real issues. He should say, "don't be fooled." A preemptive strike that would ensure that many who then viewed such a disgusting ad would remember Obama's warning and know to think twice about believing the slime.”
“I stopped trusting the Clinton's after New Hampshire, but I don't buy this. I just don't. Rather, I think she was warning her supporters, those threatening to vote for McCain in her name. I thought it was good speech, but is being a little overly romanticized. After all, everyone else just came out and eventually conceded like they were expected to (Romney, Huckabee, Edwards, etc); she acted like it was some grand sacrifice and took days to do it because she is a drama queen. Don't get me wrong, her speech said what she needed to say. But she should have said it Tuesday night.”
“Yes, this is about more than Obama; he has come to symbolize a new and more tolerant, intelligent America. I was born into expat life, so I know the feeling you speak of. When Obama becomes President, I can't wait to travel the world and tell people I am an American. And that I LOVE my President.”
athenasword on Jun 7, 2008 at 19:58:07
“Love what you said "a more tolerant, intelligent America" !! I married into expat life... and I also can't wait to say those things with genuine pride!!!”