- Subliminal Messaging, or Over-Active Imaginations?
- VEEPBEAT: Contenders Off Radar as Obama Travels
- Team Clinton Gearing Up for 2012?
- Rice to Meet with North Korea Next Week
- The Note: Obama Poised for High-Profile Trip
- McCain Touts Surge Success Before Obama's Overseas Trip
- Hearing-Gate Exposed! McCain Has Worse Afghanistan Hearing Record Than Obama
- Bill Clinton Says He's Ready to Campaign for Obama
- Obama Blasts Conservative Attacks Against Wife: 'Debate Me Not Her'
- Biden hits back - More on Obama's Committee
- Obama Hits the Gym, With Multiple Repetitions
- Gore To Issue Clean Energy Challenge
- The Note: Foreign Trip Taking Shape for Obama
- Obama Raises $52 Million in June
- Religious Group Demands McCain Staffer's Ouster
« Huckabee: 'I May Be Killing My Political Career' | Main | Clinton Raises $15 Million in 15 Days »
Dems Debate Poaching of Pledged Delegates
February 19, 2008 1:11 PM
ABC News' Teddy Davis, Eloise Harper, and Mike Elmore Report: Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson said Tuesday that Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., will not go after Sen. Barack Obama's, D-Ill., pledged delegates after an unnamed Clinton official told Politico that both campaigns would pursue such a course if there is a "stalemate" between Clinton and Obama going into this summer's Democratic convention.
"We issued a very Shermanesque statement earlier today," said Wolfson on a conference call with reporters. "We have not, are not, and will not pursue the pledged delegates of Barack Obama. We think Sen. Obama's campaign owes you all a clear answer as to whether they will pursue our pledged delegates."
Asked if Obama would vow not to go after Clinton's pledged delegates, Obama spokesman Bill Burton told ABC News, "We're not going to do that. My question is: 'Why didn't they deny this yesterday?' It fits a pattern of their willingness to say or do anything to win the nomination."
The Democratic campaigns debated the poaching of pledged delegates on Tuesday because a high-ranking Clinton official told Politico that as we get closer to the Democratic convention, "if it is a stalemate, everybody will be going after everybody's delegates." Politico also had Clinton spokesman Phil Singer saying he assumes the Obama campaign is going after delegates pledged to Clinton.
On a Tuesday conference call with reporters, David Wilhelm, an Obama supporter who managed Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign, criticized Hillary Clinton for the Politico story, saying: "Sometimes nominations are not worth having and one of those times would be when the nomination comes at the cost of ripping the party apart."
After a 1980 Democratic convention fight between Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., and then-President Jimmy Carter, the Democratic Party changed its rules so that pledged delegates -- those which are allocated from winning primaries and caucuses -- are not bound (not even on the first ballot). Kennedy was behind Carter in pledged delegates going into the convention. But supporters of the Massachusetts senator believed that if given the freedom to "vote their conscience," the delegates would have chosen Kennedy to be their standard-bearer.
Due to what was derided at the time as "the robot rule," pledged delegates were not allowed in 1980 to switch their allegiance to Kennedy. Carter went on to lose in the fall to Ronald Reagan.
While pledged delegates are no longer bound, it's rare for them to switch allegiance at the convention because the respective campaigns find loyalists to serve as pledged delegates.
"They have total discretion. Pledged delegates are not bound, so they can change their mind as many times as they want," a senior Clinton adviser told ABC News last week. "Having said that, I've slated delegates in many elections for many candidates and they basically are wholly owned real estate."
February 19, 2008 in Clinton, Hillary, Obama, Barack, Vote 2008: Democrats | Permalink | User Comments (174)
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/26284898
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Dems Debate Poaching of Pledged Delegates:
Who becomes the democratic nominee is so much bigger than one might think...how will it really go down?
Something to consider: If Sen. Obama becomes the democratic nominee and selects an Afro-American Vice Presidential running mate is white America really ready for a double black ticket? or...would this lead to McCain taking the race in November? your thoughts?
Posted by: B. Milo | Feb 19, 2008 1:40:50 PM
Obama will not go after Hillary's pledged delegates. I'm wondering if Deval Patrick will say so so we can be sure.
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | Feb 19, 2008 1:53:13 PM
Obviously the blowback from this was huge... but make no mistake, the junior Senator from New York won't bow out gracefully if she loses... she'll destroy the party in her quest for power.
Posted by: | Feb 19, 2008 1:58:20 PM
I think clinton is getting to a breaking point, she feels very strong that obama might swing the opinion of superdelegates. Many of the super delegates have commited to Clinton initially when the whole world was thinking that clinton will be democratic nominee, but now they a repenting for backing clinton. She is trying to lock them up before they change their mind. Another piece of dirty politics from Clintons.
Posted by: Surv | Feb 19, 2008 2:04:24 PM
dirty politics: Jesse Jackson Jr., supporter of senator obama, asked Emanuel Cleaver if he wanted to go down in history as someone who prevented an African American from occupying the White House for the first time. This kind of implied intimidation flies in the face of Dr. King's dream that a person's character, not the color of their skin, be the standard they are judged by.
Posted by: chris | Feb 19, 2008 2:09:23 PM
obama borrows his style and speeches from deval patrick and his substantive policies from Senator Clinton.....AMERICA NEEDS A LEADER, NOT A BORROWER
Posted by: chris | Feb 19, 2008 2:10:30 PM
And as Hillary speaks Chelsea and Bill are doing just that.
Posted by: Patriot2008 | Feb 19, 2008 2:12:15 PM
Estimates Hillary 110 billion - 124 Billion cover everyone that needs coverage ...if not covered already..Obama 50- 102 Billion cover only 23 mil. uninsured people...Obama can prove he tries to pass off speeches as his own those inspiration words you thought were his were not...he passes off ideas as his...when he started running his policies were critized by everyone ..he stop discussing his policies and started preaching fluff...he sat on the fence on important legislative (State) way too many times..but some people seem to think he a good canididate boy do you people like so so people with so so experience to lead you...
Posted by: dellee | Feb 19, 2008 2:12:55 PM
uh, chris: who put out their health care plan first? who actually HAS a plan for social security? guess what, it's Obama. Sad that all Hillary has to do is SAY she's about "solutions" and her sheep think it's factual.
Posted by: Fact Check | Feb 19, 2008 2:18:50 PM
I dont know guys? after the comment made by Obamas wife saying 'somewhat' she is now proud to be an American.!?
What was she before?? Now I think they may have lost me for a possible vote.
And how about the Clinton gang? I sure wish there was a bigger batch of president hopefuls to pick from. I can not afford any more taxes with the Clinton gang trying to get back in. I am affraid that will happen.
Posted by: Jim Rod | Feb 19, 2008 2:22:20 PM
I wanted HRC to win because I think she is the best candidate. Obama I can't consider, I believe he is not a good person. The Rezco situation, plus his church and now the true color of his wife. Never really been proud to be an American. There’s to much hatred in their personas for me to even consider. McCain is a Republican that wants to be 100 years in Iraq, that is terrible. If its between Obama and McCain , I have to go with McCain. If HRC puts Obama on her ticket, Still have to go McCain. Please Bloomberg jump in this race. give us an alternative to win. The Dems have self-destructed.
Posted by: Charles | Feb 19, 2008 2:25:26 PM
Suri, I am an African American, please know that Jesse Jackson is so irrelevant. Obama would not ask Jesse for anything and with good reason.
Posted by: Shawn | Feb 19, 2008 2:26:02 PM
Jim Rod, if a comment by Obama's wife which was meant to indicate her excitement about the direction our country is moving loses you as a voter, I don't think your vote was really with Obama in the first place.
Posted by: Fact Check | Feb 19, 2008 2:26:19 PM
The American people at this moment in time, at this time in history need a change. I say to the American people, elect a 'tape recorder' full of well spoken rhetorical borrowed speeches and install it in the White House. Oprah will run the tape and all Americans will have free gifts from the Oval office Oprah shows.
Posted by: J. Preston | Feb 19, 2008 2:28:56 PM
Jacob,
Where did Obama get the $$$ to buy his 1.6 million dollar home. Opps Rezko and from the amazon wife family. Get a grip the guy is a LOSER.
Posted by: Frank- South Hampton | Feb 19, 2008 2:30:04 PM
Additionally--all this talk about Obama stealing someone else's words.....let's call it what it is--AN ACT OF DESPERATION by a candidate not ready to admit defeat. Who hasn't quoted someone else's words? I mean to allege plagiarism...this is reaching. How many time has Hillary quoted Obama, or how many times do politicians quote other influential, inspiring people period. As John Stossel says....Give Me A Break!!!!!
Posted by: Ladrema | Feb 19, 2008 2:30:06 PM
I do have to give Clinton credit that her comment about Obama's speech has hit and has people talking. I do think it is way overhyped and not a big deal. Two people were dealing with the same kind of attacks in their campaign and made an obvious point about speeches by Presidents. I am sure Clinton has wrote all her speeches. Obama has written most of his speeches and two books. His words or more his than Hillary's whom I am sure has not wrote any of her speeches yet.
Posted by: Jason | Feb 19, 2008 2:31:19 PM
Fact check I am an Independent. I am holding to know one. I will vote for the best possible person I think will take this country forward. If its Obama or Hillary or John McC or someone else.
We all take things said in our own way. OObamas wife pretty much slapped me. If she meant it in another way she should have made that clear.
Posted by: Jim Rod | Feb 19, 2008 2:31:34 PM
This morning there was an article citing a Clinton staffer's statement that the Clinton 'team' will go after Obama's delegates. Now this article stating that the Clinton Campaign WON'T be trying to steal Obama's delegates and asking for Obama to makthe same pledge for her. First of all, the Clinton merry-go-round is making me dizzy. Secondly, this sounds to me like article #1 was a Clinton plant so that they could put out the 2nd one and challenge Obama to take their "high road" which is 'we've nobly decided NOT to do the dishonest thing that we told you this morning that we WOULD do'. If he doesn't fall for their trick, in a few days their spin will be to accuse Obama along the lines of 'Obama won't pledge against stealing delegates.' She's relentless. We'll see.
Posted by: dream on | Feb 19, 2008 2:33:10 PM
I am sure glad that Kennedy lost to Carter that year. I am sure glad I didn't vote for Kennedy that year.
I am sure glad that I won't vote for Kennedy (aka Obama) during this election.
Posted by: Lou | Feb 19, 2008 2:35:11 PM
Frank--South Hampton
As we talk about LOSERS----It seems awful funny to me that HRC "went along to get along" when she was on Wal-Mart's (notoriously anti-union) board of directors. Now she is trying to court those same union votes in her bid for the Presidenct. I'd like to point out to you that there are more blue collar workers in the US that there are people in HRC's socio-demographic. How can you take the word of someone who flip-flops their position on things when it best suits them, or when it is "what is popular" at the time.
Posted by: Ladrema | Feb 19, 2008 2:35:26 PM
ladrema,
obama also stole this line, he is asking us to vote for his pal Patrick I guess since he uses all his good lines
this one is word for word...who are obamamaniacs voting for Patrick or Obama!? (from ABC)
Patrick in June 2006, at the Massachusetts Democratic party convention: "I am not asking anybody to take a chance on me. I am asking you to take a chance on your own aspirations."
Obama one year later, as quoted in USA Today: "I am not asking anyone to take a chance on me. I am asking you to take a chance on your own aspirations."
Posted by: jedi mom | Feb 19, 2008 2:35:37 PM
ANYONE ELSE BUT NOT HUSSEIN OBAMA'O8!
Michelle Obama today said that “for the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country. And not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change. I have been desperate to see our country moving in that direction.”
Michelle Obama — from the middle-class South Shore neighborhood of Chicago, Princeton 85, Harvard Law 88, associate at Sidley and Austin, and eventually a high-ranking official at the University of Chicago — WAS NOT proud of her country until her Hussein Jr started winning elections.
FOLKS think about it. Vote Hillary vote Mccain NOT THIS PHONEY.
Posted by: truths08 | Feb 19, 2008 2:35:49 PM
Jason - " It takes a village" and "living History by Hillary Clinton" - and yes she aides in writing her speeches. If you don't like her that is fine but don't spew out misinformation..
Posted by: Frank- South Hampton | Feb 19, 2008 2:36:11 PM
Jim Rod: I respect your opinion and apologize for coming off a little brash.
Posted by: Fack Check | Feb 19, 2008 2:36:39 PM
I guess we can take them at their word -- for today...
Posted by: w_roos | Feb 19, 2008 2:37:07 PM
Please DO NOT vote for Hillary Clinton:-- Hillary supported NAFTA in the 1990's. NAFTA is responsible for the USA losing hundreds of thousands of high paying jobs to companies over seas.-- Hillary voted for the war in Iraq without even reading the Intelligence Report. She said she trusted George W. Bush. Hillary lacks proper judgement. The war is costing us trillions of dollars.-- Hillary said at a debate on national TV that she is happy to take money from lobbyists. Hillary receives more money from lobbyists than just about any other US Senator. She is in their pockets. -- Hillary can never make up her mind. She changes positions based on public opinion and she is stubborn. She does not like to compomise or bend. That will mean trouble with congress on her part and stagnation for America.-- Hillary is running on her husband's record and name. Her "experience" has not been completed revealed. She refuses to turn over her first lady records to the public.-- Hillary has a loose cannon husband. If she can not keep her marriage under control, how is she going to run the country?-- Hillary wants to force health care coverage on the poor and middle class. She plans to garnish wages as punishment for not joining her health care plan.Barack Obama is ahead in pledged delagates. Hillary had a chance to catch up, but lost the opportunity. Hillary can not win the nomination now and is refusing to tell her supporters that. She is not a forth coming and honest person. Plus, where are her tax returns?Barack Obama is the BEST candidate for president
Posted by: jacobs | Feb 19, 2008 2:37:30 PM
fack Check there is no apologizing needed here to me. We are both here for the same reason I think. Looking for more information and finding what everyone is thinking and making our comments and then lets go vote!!
Posted by: Jim Rod | Feb 19, 2008 2:42:02 PM
Shawn: You posted the below comment. If this is true, then why is Jesse Jackson part of Obamas campaign team? He is one of obama's advisors. Please explain.
Suri, I am an African American, please know that Jesse Jackson is so irrelevant. Obama would not ask Jesse for anything and with good reason.
Posted by: Shawn | Feb 19, 2008 2:26:02 PM
Posted by: Lou | Feb 19, 2008 2:42:03 PM
EXTREMELY Dissapointed in Michele Obama! Not Until Her adult Life Was She Proud! This wasn't a comment off the Cuff! This was a written text that was well thought out...
Could you Imagine if a Clinton used these words! We'd send him or Her to Hell and Back the Send them back Again... I think we are seeing the TRUE Feelings of the Obama's coming Forth... And it's all about ego!
Posted by: astutevoter | Feb 19, 2008 2:43:07 PM
Laudrema -
Thanks for your thoughts. I believe both candidates have skeltons in their closets - but in my own opinion and gut feeling I believe HRC is a very hard working individual with alot of ambition and you need to have that to run for the highest position in the country and the same can be said about Obama. He just sounds like a televanglist and can't bring my self to vote for him.
I believe HRC want to be Prez for her own ego (as well as Obama) but I think she is sincere in wanting to do a good job. Go Hillary! I earn a substantial living and understand the daily grinds of making ends meet. I don't think you have to be poor to understand that and I think HRC understands that as John Edwards did or does. Best of luck to you and to the country.
Posted by: Frank- South Hampton | Feb 19, 2008 2:43:14 PM
Jedi Mom--
Does it really matter if Obama quoted a statement or 2, 3, 4, 5 or even 10? What does it bear upon? What does it prove or reflect? How many other political leaders, attorneys etc..don't quote other great minds..."hence the quote great minds think alike" It is a distraction intended to deflect the fact that HRC is becoming increasingly irrelevant, and she has no better weapons to do battle with than to raise such a ridiculous point.
I'd prefer to hear how she is going to make the good ole' US of A better for me, not a nitpicking tattletale.
Posted by: Ladrema | Feb 19, 2008 2:47:56 PM
NAFTA was initially pursued by corporate interest in the United States and Canada supportive of free trade, led by Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, U.S. President George H. W. Bush, and the Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari. The three countries signed NAFTA in December 1992, subject to ratification by the legislatures of the three countries. There was considerable opposition in all three countries. In the United States, NAFTA was able to secure passage after Bill Clinton made its passage a major legislative priority in 1993. Since the agreement had been signed by Bush under his fast-track prerogative, Clinton did not alter the original agreement, but complemented it with the aforementioned NAAEC and NAALC. After intense political debate and the negotiation of these side agreements, the U.S. House passed NAFTA on November 17, 1993, by 234-200 vote (132 Republicans and 102 Democrats voting in favor; 156 Democrats, 43 Republicans, and 1 independent against),[7] and the U.S. Senate passed it on the last day of its 1993 session, Saturday, November 20, 1993, by 61-38 vote (34 Republicans and 27 Democrats voting in favor; 28 Democrats and 10 Republicans against, with 1 Democrat opponent not voting).[8]
Posted by: Frank- South Hampton | Feb 19, 2008 2:48:53 PM
The benefits of NAFTA have been quantified by several economists, whose findings have been reported in publications such as the World Bank's Lessons from NAFTA for Latin America and the Caribbean,[9] NAFTA's Impact on North America,[10] and NAFTA Revisited by the Institute for International Economics.[11] Some argue that NAFTA has been positive for Mexico, which has seen its poverty rates fall and real income rise, even after accounting for the 1994–1995 economic crisis [2]. Others argue that NAFTA has been beneficial to business owners and elites in all 3 countries, but has had negative impacts on farmers in Mexico who saw food prices fall based on cheap imports from highly subsidized US Agribusiness, and negative impacts on US workers in manufacturing and assembly industries who lost jobs. Critics also argue that NAFTA has contributed to the rising levels of inequality in both the USA and Mexico. The majority of neoliberal economists believe that NAFTA has not been enough (or worked fast enough) to produce an economic convergence[12] (which is hardly surprising given the initial economic disparity between Mexico and the United States/Canada), nor to substantially reduce poverty rates. Some have suggested that in order to fully benefit from the agreement, Mexico must invest more in education and promote innovation in infrastructure and agriculture. Others believe that the agreement is fatally flawed, and should be repealed[citation needed] or replaced by a new agreement that fully harmonizes labor and environmental standards.
Posted by: Frank- South Hampton | Feb 19, 2008 2:49:27 PM
It is funny that you said that you didn't know if you were voting for Obama or Patrick because Obama doesn't know if he is running against Hillary or Bill Clinton. It seems that it is ok for the Clintons to go 2 vs. 1, but if Obama borrows a couple lines of a speech from someone it isn't fair. Clintons = Hypocrites
Posted by: Jason | Feb 19, 2008 2:50:54 PM
Same old Clintons... same old slime tactics.
Is anyone really surprised by all this?
Say no to fear:
Posted by: MG | Feb 19, 2008 2:50:55 PM
"EXTREMELY Dissapointed in Michele Obama!"
If people just wacth pathologic clinton haters and Obama pimps at CNN and MSNBC understandably they can be carried away by the Obamamania.
The more facts you know about the Obamas and their ideology the more shocking it will be.
Hussein Jr and Michelle belong to EXTREME LEFT WING and subscribe to uber liberal communist and African separatist theories and do not represent the bulk of the American population in the middle.
The so called support of the independents for Hussein Obama has been evaporated by Michelle! Good job Michelle.
Posted by: truths08 | Feb 19, 2008 2:52:07 PM
Right now, Obama can be good movie actor, he thinks and acts like one or a good VP. He may be good president after 8 years. We need a person with experience as we cannot afford to make mistakes
Posted by: sal | Feb 19, 2008 2:52:11 PM
Obama has no vision. He has other peoples visions like JFK, RFK, MLK, Roosevelt, Lincoln, Clinton (both Bill and Hillary) and now Patrick. He is an embarrassment. He doesn't have two ideas to rub together that are his own.
Posted by: C DEPP | Feb 19, 2008 2:54:03 PM
Michelle Obama's remark was simply off-the-cuff and ill-considered. How many times have any one of us said something like "That was the best..."- whatever. We didn't necessarily mean exactly that. Of course, the uncharitable among us will put the worse spin on it. Clearly, Mrs. Obama was just saying that she is extremely proud of her country. That comment will not cause her husband to lose any votes. The people who are making a big deal of it, just like Senator Obama's "words", were never going to vote for him anyway. So quit with the "Oh, I was going to vote for him, but these words have made my change my mind." Rubbish! The thing to focus on is the intent of the candidates. Like one who decided to poach pledged delegates of her opponent, but was forced to retract after an outcry. Note the other thing, as much as there is to take Senator Clinton to task on, Senator Obama stays on the high road. He certainly does respond to her petty criticisms, but he concentrates on his message, not what she just said or did.
Posted by: Clara | Feb 19, 2008 2:56:08 PM
With head hack Howard Wolfson saying their campaign won't go after Obama's pledged delegates, this certainly means they are already aggressively doing just that.
Posted by: Jack | Feb 19, 2008 2:56:56 PM
Right now this country could use a uniter, not a divider. My only worry is that if HRC takes the nomination that enough people have such strong feelings against her because of her husband and his legacy, some of their questionable dealings, and her populist views(look at the numbers that Obama has been able to rack up...) that she won't have the votes it takes to allow the Democratic party to re-take the White House. And then we'll be stuck with at least another 4 years of the same...
Posted by: Ladrema | Feb 19, 2008 2:59:55 PM
Should make for an interesting debate on Thursday. You know that both the topic of stealing delegates and writing speeches is going to come up. I know it may look bad for Obama now, but he may have to take Clinton to task on her past speeches on Thursday. Should be entertaining TV. Hopefully by then Obama has won 10 states in a row.
Posted by: Jason | Feb 19, 2008 3:00:03 PM
The Clinton's machines are known for its arrogant advocacy. When Clinton caught repeatedly for his infidelity, the machines had been advocating, it is not Infidelity. They can manipulate anything and they want and get away with it.
Posted by: John Elias | Feb 19, 2008 3:08:33 PM
Obama is zeroing in on Clinton's union support, delivering an address last week at a General Motors Corp. factory in Janesville, Wisconsin. He spoke to hundreds of United Auto Workers members, focusing on lost U.S. manufacturing employment and linking his opponent to President Bill Clinton's support of the North American Free Trade Agreement.........Associated Press: Obama said the United States should ‘pursue deals such as the North American Free Trade Agreement.' "Obama said the United State should continue to work with the World Trade Organization and pursue deals such as the North American Free Trade Agreement."
Posted by: chris | Feb 19, 2008 3:10:06 PM
Sorry to burst your bubble; Barbara Feinman apparently "ghost" wrote "It Takes a Village & Hillary did not write it. But, it is okay that you wouldn't know this as Hillary REFUSED to even acknowledge the actual writer in any manner in the book. Hillary the Hippocrite.
Shelley
Posted by: shelgirl | Feb 19, 2008 3:10:11 PM
Think about this . The best Obama could do in Illinois with Hispanics was a split 50%. That shows that the chances of Obama getting closer in Texas is dificult.
Posted by: Latasha | Feb 19, 2008 3:11:31 PM
She will not just destroy her party, but the clinton team has already done damge they do not see. Nor do they care about it. My 19 year old is watching this process, asking questions and remembering what was done in the white house with Bill and Monica. She wants to know who or what will Hillary be doing in the oval office. She watched when that whole thing went down. It is nice to see at least she remembers it. Seems most of America has fogotten. I think Hillary will say or do anything to get back in there, if not to become the first female President. Her personal power at the cost of anything and everything else. Why can't people see this?
Posted by: Lori | Feb 19, 2008 3:12:43 PM
Ha! You know Wolfson would not be making this offer if he wasn't worried about superdelegates he thinks are in his bag being swept up in the momentum of the campaign changing their mind and climbing on the Obama bandwagon love train. No, thank-you. Superdelegates are political beasts. Of course they are fair game right up until the time they vote. Let's hope it doesn't come to that.
Posted by: Sara B. | Feb 19, 2008 3:15:21 PM
WHEN HILLARY FIRED HER LATINO CAMPAIGN MANAGER AND HIRED AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN REPLACEMENT SHE LOST A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF LATINO/HISPANIS VOTES AS THEY REALIZED SHE HAD BEEN USING THEM SO FAR!
Posted by: jacobs | Feb 19, 2008 3:18:30 PM
Every time I see Michelle Obama speak she always leaves me with the same impression. If your not voting for my husband then why are you voting?
I hope Michelle Obama is reading these blogs today. I would like to tell her I would not vote for her husband if he were the last politician on earth. He would be the worst president our great country has ever known. And our country is great Michelle and I not ashamed of my country the way you are. I have not always liked the way fellow voters have voted in the past: Bush, daddy Bush, Reagan and Nixon but that is individual people not our great country as a whole. Our country is bigger than the uninformed votes some people make. And no one has to vote for your husband to be proud of our great country.
Posted by: C DEPP | Feb 19, 2008 3:21:07 PM
Jacobs at least we Hillary supporters see the how fake obama is with his false hope..with the rise in heating costs maybe you could some of his hot air to heat your home.He is all gab and no go..pretty soon he will end world poverty,global warming and bring about peace too..He is the true Messiah..Did you see the halo over his head..Go Hillary..DG
Posted by: JC | Feb 19, 2008 3:25:32 PM
"Every time I see Michelle Obama speak she always leaves me with the same impression. If your not voting for my husband then why are you voting? "
Obama's whole campaign can be summarized this way "HOLIER-THAN-THOU".
They are intellectuals ...they know everything...arrogant......this has been the secret behind their success in all the dem caucuses....intimidating those who don't go with them.
Posted by: truths08 | Feb 19, 2008 3:26:02 PM
Ladies,
Do you realized that if we do not get Hillary in the Whitehouse that it will take at least another decade before we see another WOMAN worthy of being called Ms. President.
GO HILLARY ALL THE WAY!
Posted by: Meg Lengson Kingsley | Feb 19, 2008 3:36:35 PM
has anyone considered that super delegates being 'shamed' into voting for whoever their district voted for defeats the whole purpose to the super delegates?
of course you all know this. You just love it cause that would potentially favor Obama. Dont forget to also shame every black super delegate to switch to Obama too. Anything to get the nomination you know.
The super delegates are in place to make sure a super HYPE KING doesnt sucker the public into the nomination, all to get CRUSHED in the general election. Like George Mc Govern and Jimmy Carter in 1980.
Anyone see a pattern here?
Posted by: tom | Feb 19, 2008 3:38:01 PM
I must say I don't believe Michelle Obama meant the comments the way they came out. Over the past eight years I have said many times that I am ashamed to be American. President Bush and his cabal made being an American a diffiecult thing for any American who had to travel overseas. Then they tried to change the meaning of patriotism. If you didn't support their failed, dangerous and catastrophic foreign policies, then you were not a patriot. I was not proud during all that time.
Posted by: Pat | Feb 19, 2008 3:39:43 PM
Hillary, how dare you accuse Obama of not debating you, so what were those dozen or so debates you have lost? Our memories are not that short.
Posted by: Patriot2008 | Feb 19, 2008 3:42:32 PM
Does anyone remember the last person the voters elected with their head in the clouds???? G E O R G E W. B U S H !
Posted by: C DEPP | Feb 19, 2008 3:43:42 PM
To those who are saying "I was for Obama until his wife said something like"I am proud now to be an American". I don't think you EVER thought of voting for Obama. I think you're a Clintorn supporter grasping at straws, looking for any little thing to discredit Obama, just like Mrs. Clintorn" (mispelling intended). And besides, who are we voting for, his wife or him??? I think what she meant is that MOST Americans are looking beyond the color of his skin.
Posted by: jon sid | Feb 19, 2008 3:45:03 PM
Patriot2008
You call yourself a patriot but you don't want presidential candidates to debate? They have debated once just the two of them. Once. Or has your memory been going lately since you joined the Obama cult.
Posted by: C DEPP | Feb 19, 2008 3:47:56 PM
Meg Kingsley, It sounds like you're willing to vote for the Big H simply because you don't want to wait another 10 years for another woman candidate to come along. Wow, talk about playing the gender card...
Here's a noble concept -- vote for the candidate with the best track record, someone with INTEGRITY, LEADERSHIP skills, etc. Do NOT vote for anyone based on gender, race, hair color. Good greif!
Anyone but Hillary '8.
Posted by: Earl | Feb 19, 2008 3:52:41 PM
This whole Democratic Party selection process is a joke. The truth is the will of the people is not considered important at all. When 20 percent (superdelegates) of the voters are not even chosen by the people and the ones that are can vote however they feel and can basically be bought (poached). Now dont tell me the Clinton's are above trying to poach delegates they will say and do anything to try to get power. The way this race is going the party is going to fall apart and McCain is going to sneak in.
Posted by: Ron | Feb 19, 2008 3:56:37 PM
Women and men are proud to vote for Hillary because she is the best person to lead America out of the ditch Bush has driven us into.
Posted by: C DEPP | Feb 19, 2008 3:56:56 PM
jon sid : "I think what she meant is that MOST Americans are looking beyond the color of his skin"
NICE SPIN. DOESN'T CUT IT THOUGH.
Michelle Obama today said that “for the FIRST time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country".
The very first time she has been proud in 44 long years. I bet if she loses the election or even the nomination she will be very much ashamed of this country.
Posted by: truths08 | Feb 19, 2008 3:57:15 PM
truth08 said of Mrs. Obams:
The very first time she has been proud in 44 long years. I bet if she loses the election or even the nomination she will be very much ashamed of this country.
========================================
In case you haven't been following the news, Mrs. Obama isn't running.
Posted by: jon sid | Feb 19, 2008 4:01:36 PM
Obama camp complains, but plans to do some poaching themselves. Why don't you Radar pundits check with someone in authority before you put this stuff out to the public? This is a political race and I say the delegates are fair game as long as there is no intimidation. Jesse jr. shouldn't be trying to coerce anybody. Frankly, I thought he was different but now I know better. It's like some people trying to pick your friends.
Posted by: Vivi | Feb 19, 2008 4:01:45 PM
People please do not get drawn into the trap of reducing the presidential race to gutter politics. We don’t have time for this foolishness with the many issues we have to address (i.e. the economy, war in Iraq, etc...). This business about Obama plagiarizing his speeches is a joke. The man has written 2 bestselling books and given many speeches during this election that is completely his own words. The vision and ideas of his campaign are his own. I wish Clinton would focus on her own message and engage us on the issues. It is a slippery slope to keep distorting Obama record. While Obama may have borrowed a few words from a friend on the stump, you are claiming 8 years of a presidency because you were Bill’s wife. Enough already! Obama is not an empty suit. He has more legislative experience than Clinton, (7 years in Illinois House, and 3 in the U.S. Senate) and has worked on the streets of Chicago as an community organizer.
For all this talk about being ready on the first day Obama has managed his campaign much better (grassroots outreach, fundraising, etc..). If continuing to through mud at her opponents is the only way she feel that she can be competitive Hillary has already lost. This campaign is bigger than gender or race. I am sick of this toxic, partisan politics. We have to “turn the page” and plan for the future. For all you Dems the best way to assure that McCain wins in Nov. is to nominate Clinton. With all problems McCain is having with the conservative base, Hillary is the one person who would unite them. Instead of engaging the issues of today we will be stuck fighting themes of the ‘90s (gutter politics the Clintons know how to play all too well). For the sake of progressive and a win in the Fall, Hillary has got to be stopped!
Posted by: LaVida | Feb 19, 2008 4:02:20 PM
Want a tag team with baggage, vote for Her Royal Higness Hillary, want another 100 years in Iraq and ultra conservatism, vote McCain, want no choice, vote Huckabee. Vote for change! Vote for hope! Vote for Obama 08!
Posted by: Slawson | Feb 19, 2008 4:03:05 PM
Obama supporters won't vote for Hillary if she wins the nomination. What makes them think that Hillary supporters want to vote for Brack ?? He might get in and then you will see his divisive tactics because he won't care what all of his "supporters" say. He will have a ring of advisers who think like he does and shove his ideals down our throats. Everyone thinks that he will get the nomination, and if he doesn't they will riot. Then what if he doesn't get elected, will you riot then ? By the way, I applaud Emanuel Cleaver for not caving in to the pressure.
Posted by: KC in MO | Feb 19, 2008 4:03:05 PM
Michelle Obama has much to be ashamed of. She keeps saying what she feels and she has a big problem with America. Well we have a big problem with her and its her words.
Posted by: C DEPP | Feb 19, 2008 4:03:12 PM
hillary is qualified and she is inspiring
Posted by: darlamc | Feb 19, 2008 4:04:26 PM
Knowing how sneaky and sly the Clintons are as they proved themselves again during this campaign, I would not trust their words.
Posted by: Philip, NY | Feb 19, 2008 4:05:02 PM
YOUR CANDIDATE HILLARY IS SOOOO SMART YET SHE AUTHORIZED THE IRAQ WAR AND WAS GONNA AUTHORIZE A SHOW DOWN WITH IRAN!!! WOW GENIUS SHE ALSO SUPPORTED NAFTA WHEN HER HUSBAND WAS PRESIDENT, A TRADE AGREEMENT THAT HAS SEEN HIGH PAYING BLUE COLLAR JOBS BE RE-LOCATED FROM AMERICA, YEAH GENIUS INDEED, SHE CANT EVEN RUN HER OWN CAMPAIGN WITHOUT GOING BROKE YEAH GENIUS! SURE INCOMPETENCE WE CANT COMPREHEND!
Posted by: JACOBS | Feb 19, 2008 4:07:24 PM
Slawson
What the "Obama cult member" tag the rest of your life vote Obama. Want the best person running that has great ideas for America and solid plans to put them in place vote Hillary.
Posted by: C DEPP | Feb 19, 2008 4:07:49 PM
C Depp, get a clue. Hillary wants one debate every week, but with 15+ debates so far this primary season, what else do informed voters possibly need to know? She's desperate, and she needs the free airtime.
And how is Hillary the best person to lead us out of this ditch? Her campaign is falling apart before our eyes, but you would trust her to manage our country? Her campaign was so broke she had to lend it $5M of her own personal riches, but you would trust her with the federal budget?
Please open your eyes.
Posted by: Evan | Feb 19, 2008 4:11:02 PM
I knew from day one Obama was bad.... Being station in Chicago this guy did nothing for the Latino community and tax the Hell out of IL... This guy is a sweet talker and can sell you anything there no denying that!!!! More you do your research the more you know about Obama.... Stop being sold on his fake speeches and media bias.... This guy haven't even finish a term... As least Governor run a state, hell Obama can't even show up to vote on anything....
Posted by: john | Feb 19, 2008 4:13:46 PM
HILLARY AND BILL ARE TWO REALLY ANGRY SENIORS! IS THIS WHO WE WANT IN THE WHITE HOUSE? FOLKS WHO CANT CONTROL THEIR TEMPERS AT THIS STAGE OF THEIR LIVES? NO WAY! ONE CANDIDATE SAYS HEY I HAVE ALL THE EXPERIENCE IN THE WORLD VOTE FOR ME, YET SHE CANT EVEN RUN A HALF-DECENT CAMPAIGN AND MANAGE PROPERLY OVER 100 MILLION DOLLARS SHE HAS RAISED, SHE WASTED ALL THAT TAX-PAYER MONEY QUITE RECKLESSLY, ANOTHER CANDIDATE SAYS HEY VOTE FOR ME, I MAY NOT HAVE ALL THE EXPERINECE IN THE WORLD, BUT I HAVE GOOD JUDGEMENT AND TRUE LOVE OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND OUR LAND, AND WHO HAS RUN A HECK OF AN AMAZING CAMPAIGN, COMING FROM 20 POINTS BEHIND IN THE SUMMER AND OVERTAKING HIS COMPETITORS BY THE FALL, WHO WOULD YOU VOTE FOR, WHO HAS SHOWN BETTER JUDGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP STYLE, SKILL AND SUBSTANCE?
Posted by: JACOBS | Feb 19, 2008 4:16:58 PM
No Poaching??? Are they serious?
Folks, if I were one of these
two, I would swear on a bible
that I would not poach.
Immediately thereafter, I and
my staff would go after every
pledged delegate in the other
camp to. I would offer them
anything and everything that
would not land me in jail.
A weeklong date with Chealsea,
VP slot, fund raisers,
introductions, and so on and so
on. These two candidates want
to win very very badly. They
would do the same and probably
more.
Posted by: Beto | Feb 19, 2008 4:18:34 PM
My mistake Jacobs - my message above was to C Depp
I'm a 52 year old white "independent" female, and don't feel the Clinton tag team is what America needs. I don't need to explain myself however I do feel it's time for a change and Obama is my candidate.
Posted by: Slawson | Feb 19, 2008 4:20:13 PM
Why not debate,,,, Who cares how many time they did it before.... Each state have there own issue and concerns... Obama say Wisconsin not important to debate but Texas and Ohio is? Well that tell you what Obama think about Wisconsin and other states then!!!!! The only reason he did't debate in the state he winning because he campaign though it might hurt them... They want hype up speeches instead talking about issue onc



