She was leading by 25 points nationally, most of the states she was winning by at least that much just a week ago. She did relatively well at best.
Also, are you going to tell me that that speech did not have specific standigns on issues? He was VERY clear on his intentions. Do you want him to repeat Al Gores 'locked box' blunder?
NOONE pays attention to the minutia of the programs they propose, and a speech with that info is political suicide.
j, sand, FINALLY, the media around obama was to the fact that his challenge is working so well. he is closing to taking it all, beating 2 clintons, making them use their own fortunes, while Obama has 250,000 people giving him $20 and pushing this thing forward.
well, take a look at the map people, Obama won ALL of the caucus states ALL OF THEM. saturday, WA, NE, and ME - all caucus states. there are very few opportunities for Hillary to look for Latino support, the support that saved her ass, so take solace in that simple fact, O may just run the table, and with TX, PA and VA looming, especially TX - as i am sure there is no love for Hill there - i think O can pick up a significant number of states and delegates.
LiG i was actually just organizing for a scene to be created showing Hillary eating a dead baby, but your idea about eating a live one is much more compelling... im gonna go ahead with that.
J,
I agree to a certain extent that even with all the hype around Obama, the fact that he is still behind is a bit disconcerting for some.
But if you look at how he is polling across the country, his numbers are up. He was polling in the 20's in many souther states and in Cali, yet clearly did much much better than that. I think, more so than Hillary, Barack's numbers shoot up with face time.
I anticipate he will begin to pass hillary in the next month or so because he now has the money and the time to stop in every state, all the important districts and meet with all the swing delegates.
is she thin ? Is she fat ? Thin ? Fat ? [visions of Dunaway: "She's my daughter ! My sister !. . ."] OK, irrelevant.
Senior analysts on the PBS News Hour see Obama rising over the last several weeks, on the way to overtaking Hillary. Super Tuesday just came a little early for him. Give it time.
I have to admire a candidate (any candidate) who won't make too many specific promises before the fact. "Read my lips: no new taxes" was doomed, and it didn't help the country at all -- it just helped get GHW Bush elected.
Edwards dropped out, but he was still the most honest, forthright and had the best, most detailed (look at any website that compares them) and earliest plans. my problem with Obama is that he began running without a platform--other than a vague idea of hope and bipartisanship (both of which are good to an extent)--but things like his neo-Harry and Louise ads bother me, especially while he's saying that he offers universal health care at the same time. I don't dislike Obama by any means, I just feel like he is running far more on rhetoric--and Steven Ward is right about policies in a presidential race--but if he proposes a change in politics through policy--which he has--it needs to be stronger, because it will be diluted through the Senate committees and so on. I think that Edwards had a much stronger, more sustainable and accurate idea of how to effectively change the nature of politics: by removing corporate interests, and Obama's idea of healing partisan rifts is good, but will not result in long-lasting or definitive change without something more. Partisanship is nothing new, nor is the attempt to reconcile partisan politics, so my problem with Obama is simply that he is claiming he can change things that I feel like he will not be able to change--and that the candidate who would have was overlooked. That having been said, Obama is a good and strong candidate, who had identified the fact that politics cannot be changed simply by changing policies, and his ability to inspire people bodes well for future progressive change, I feel, and his rhetoric is incredibly strong, which does play an important role in American politics. My issues is not the Obama isn't a good candidate with a strong message--because he is--but that there was a better candidate with a stronger message, and it's still kind of hard for me to accept that he was largely overlooked.
I agree with that ! It's down to the media, isn't it, to have weeded the garden too vigorously, too early ? I was just picking up on Edwards's message when he was "forced" out. . .
I like the fantasy of a mild-taiking Dem candidate getting elected -- and then "getting down to business" once in office. Sort of like Clarence Thomas, in reverse. . .
Take a look at what happened on Tuesday in the nearly all-white counties of Idaho, a place where the Aryan Nations once placed a boot print of hate — “the international headquarters of the white race,” as they called it.
The neo-Nazis are long gone. But in Kootenai County, where the extremists were holed up for several decades, a record number of Democrats trudged through heavy snow on Super Duper Tuesday to help pick the next president. Guess what: Senator Barack Obama took 81 percent of Kootenai County caucus voters, matching his landslide across the state. He won all but a single county.
The runaway victory came after a visit by Obama last Saturday, when 14,169 people filled the Taco Bell Arena in Boise to hear him speak – the largest crowd ever to fill the space, for any event. It was the biggest political rally the state has seen in more than 50 years.
“And they told me there were no Democrats in Idaho,” Obama said.
Meanwhile, some of Hillary's campaign staffers are apparently giving up their salaries.
While money isn't everything (just ask Mitt Romney), this is very encouraging. What's even more encouraging is that the vast majority of these donations have come from individuals contributing relatively small amounts. This reminds me a bit of Howard Dean's 2004 grassroots campaign, but much more viable and with a much better campaigner on the ticket. (Luckily I can't see Obama doing any weird screams on TV. Poor Dean will never live down that one-syllable utterance.)
I don't think its illegal at all. Someone would just have to be in charge of managing a paypal acct.
1. I am a United States citizen or a lawfully-admitted permanent resident.
2. I am at least 16 years old.
3. This contribution is not made from the general treasury funds of a corporation, labor organization or national bank.
4. This contribution is not made from the funds of a political action committee.
5. This contribution is not made from the treasury of an entity or person who is a federal contractor.
6. This contribution is not made from the funds of an individual registered as a federal lobbyist or a foreign agent, or an entity that is a federally registered lobbying firm or foreign agent.
7. The funds I am donating are not being provided to me by another person or entity for the purpose of making this contribution.
aking, are you serious? running is running, these are strong candidates and our country is huge, just moving around costs millions. Any campaign for School Board costs millions, do you think the presidency will be a give-me?
I am glad it is not, I am glad that Obama has had to fight it.
Shoo-in? Obama is virtually tied with Hillary for the Dem nomination, and if he wins that, he'll face stiff competition with (presumably) McCain in the general election. It's anything but a shoo-in.
I meant shoo in compared to the Republicans. The GOP know they have a tough challenge b/c of what Bush has done to the party. Yet they are no where near the fundraising of the dems. It just seems odd that what one would think would be an easy race for democrats is costing a whole lot more.
I understand the Barack and Hillary are battling each other right now but its just seems like a hell of a lot of money compared to the other party.
I think if either Romney or Huckabee were the Republican front-runner, the Dems could nominate a trained monkey at the convention and still be reasonably assured of getting the White House. But nobody saw McCain making such a huge comeback, and he has a lot of support among moderates and independents. He'll give the Democratic nominee a good fight in the general election, whether it's Obama or Hillary.
I'm afraid that's true. And the huge money is just the price of admission, these days -- it's been growing steadily with each passing election cycle. The lead of Dem spending over Rep reflects the relative apathy among Republican voters, this time around, I think.
Elections take too long, here. It's a six-week, government-funded affair in other developed nations, as I understand it. We blow through money in this country because we can. . .
I have to admire parliamentary systems, where they can dissolve the government and call new elections at the drop of a hat. Surprise! Elections are next month!
Holy fucking shit... Obama is now up to $7.2M since Tuesday. He should hold his next press conference while sitting in a jacuzzi filled with $100 bills.
^^^Well to be fair he is ahead in actual elected delegates, and there are plenty enough superdelegates that could swing his way in the next month or so. Hillarys problem right now is that the remaining states are very good for Obama and super tuesday was her last real chance to bury him.
This is probably the biggest threat to Hillary's campaign right now:
5. The calendar is her enemy. Now that more than half the states have weighed in, there is a fairly predictable formula for determining who is most likely to win the upcoming contests.
In caucus states, Obama’s organizational strength shines: He has won seven of eight. Up next are three more caucus states, Washington, Nebraska and Maine.
Obama also runs tremendously well in states with large African-American populations, another promising sign since next Tuesday’s three primaries are in the District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia — all of which have significant percentages of black voters.
Then comes another caucus state, Hawaii, where Obama is viewed as a native son.
The bottom line is that it figures to be another month before Clinton hits a stretch of states — places like Ohio and Pennsylvania — where she will be strongly favored to win.
After the Feb 9 and 12 primaries/caucuses, will Hillary's campaign be able to survive the better part of a month on life support?
I think if either Romney or Huckabee were the Republican front-runner, the Dems could nominate a trained monkey at the convention and still be reasonably assured of getting the White House.
Holy fucking shit... Obama is now up to $7.2M since Tuesday. He should hold his next press conference while sitting in a jacuzzi filled with $100 bills.
just so you guys know, you can call Washington, Louisiana, and Nebraska from your home, go to Obama's site, get your weekend minutes ready and CALL, CALL, CALL!
VOTE OBAMA
Sand, how can you be surprised?
She was leading by 25 points nationally, most of the states she was winning by at least that much just a week ago. She did relatively well at best.
Also, are you going to tell me that that speech did not have specific standigns on issues? He was VERY clear on his intentions. Do you want him to repeat Al Gores 'locked box' blunder?
NOONE pays attention to the minutia of the programs they propose, and a speech with that info is political suicide.
j, sand, FINALLY, the media around obama was to the fact that his challenge is working so well. he is closing to taking it all, beating 2 clintons, making them use their own fortunes, while Obama has 250,000 people giving him $20 and pushing this thing forward.
well, take a look at the map people, Obama won ALL of the caucus states ALL OF THEM. saturday, WA, NE, and ME - all caucus states. there are very few opportunities for Hillary to look for Latino support, the support that saved her ass, so take solace in that simple fact, O may just run the table, and with TX, PA and VA looming, especially TX - as i am sure there is no love for Hill there - i think O can pick up a significant number of states and delegates.
GOBAMA!
MN rawks the shiznit!
LiG i was actually just organizing for a scene to be created showing Hillary eating a dead baby, but your idea about eating a live one is much more compelling... im gonna go ahead with that.
J,
I agree to a certain extent that even with all the hype around Obama, the fact that he is still behind is a bit disconcerting for some.
But if you look at how he is polling across the country, his numbers are up. He was polling in the 20's in many souther states and in Cali, yet clearly did much much better than that. I think, more so than Hillary, Barack's numbers shoot up with face time.
I anticipate he will begin to pass hillary in the next month or so because he now has the money and the time to stop in every state, all the important districts and meet with all the swing delegates.
O?
Obama has two votes from my wife and I in texas...I will not vote for clinton as a presidential candidate.
Free blah blah - you wanna mess with O? She will take you down.
is she thin ? Is she fat ? Thin ? Fat ? [visions of Dunaway: "She's my daughter ! My sister !. . ."] OK, irrelevant.
Senior analysts on the PBS News Hour see Obama rising over the last several weeks, on the way to overtaking Hillary. Super Tuesday just came a little early for him. Give it time.
I have to admire a candidate (any candidate) who won't make too many specific promises before the fact. "Read my lips: no new taxes" was doomed, and it didn't help the country at all -- it just helped get GHW Bush elected.
oe,
Edwards dropped out, but he was still the most honest, forthright and had the best, most detailed (look at any website that compares them) and earliest plans. my problem with Obama is that he began running without a platform--other than a vague idea of hope and bipartisanship (both of which are good to an extent)--but things like his neo-Harry and Louise ads bother me, especially while he's saying that he offers universal health care at the same time. I don't dislike Obama by any means, I just feel like he is running far more on rhetoric--and Steven Ward is right about policies in a presidential race--but if he proposes a change in politics through policy--which he has--it needs to be stronger, because it will be diluted through the Senate committees and so on. I think that Edwards had a much stronger, more sustainable and accurate idea of how to effectively change the nature of politics: by removing corporate interests, and Obama's idea of healing partisan rifts is good, but will not result in long-lasting or definitive change without something more. Partisanship is nothing new, nor is the attempt to reconcile partisan politics, so my problem with Obama is simply that he is claiming he can change things that I feel like he will not be able to change--and that the candidate who would have was overlooked. That having been said, Obama is a good and strong candidate, who had identified the fact that politics cannot be changed simply by changing policies, and his ability to inspire people bodes well for future progressive change, I feel, and his rhetoric is incredibly strong, which does play an important role in American politics. My issues is not the Obama isn't a good candidate with a strong message--because he is--but that there was a better candidate with a stronger message, and it's still kind of hard for me to accept that he was largely overlooked.
just kidding
I agree with that ! It's down to the media, isn't it, to have weeded the garden too vigorously, too early ? I was just picking up on Edwards's message when he was "forced" out. . .
Do you have any idea how awesome it would be to hear the words "President Gravel" for four years?
If people voted on issues, Ron Paul would've stood a chance.
right on, Apu...
...as would have Kucinich
Ditto
It's a horse race.
yeah. i admit, i have been pretty interested in this race, but i'm looking @ it almost like a football game.
scratch that.
exactly like a football game.
Five reasons Hillary should be worried
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8363.html
Reason #6: Bill
I like the fantasy of a mild-taiking Dem candidate getting elected -- and then "getting down to business" once in office. Sort of like Clarence Thomas, in reverse. . .
Obama: The Shock of the Red
http://egan.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/06/obama-the-shock-of-the-red/
Take a look at what happened on Tuesday in the nearly all-white counties of Idaho, a place where the Aryan Nations once placed a boot print of hate — “the international headquarters of the white race,” as they called it.
The neo-Nazis are long gone. But in Kootenai County, where the extremists were holed up for several decades, a record number of Democrats trudged through heavy snow on Super Duper Tuesday to help pick the next president. Guess what: Senator Barack Obama took 81 percent of Kootenai County caucus voters, matching his landslide across the state. He won all but a single county.
The runaway victory came after a visit by Obama last Saturday, when 14,169 people filled the Taco Bell Arena in Boise to hear him speak – the largest crowd ever to fill the space, for any event. It was the biggest political rally the state has seen in more than 50 years.
“And they told me there were no Democrats in Idaho,” Obama said.
Obama on pace to raise $30 mil in Feb
Meanwhile, some of Hillary's campaign staffers are apparently giving up their salaries.
While money isn't everything (just ask Mitt Romney), this is very encouraging. What's even more encouraging is that the vast majority of these donations have come from individuals contributing relatively small amounts. This reminds me a bit of Howard Dean's 2004 grassroots campaign, but much more viable and with a much better campaigner on the ticket. (Luckily I can't see Obama doing any weird screams on TV. Poor Dean will never live down that one-syllable utterance.)
what is encouraging is that in Obama's case it shows support, in Romney's (and Clinton's?) case it shows they are rich.
Obama is getting a lot of that $30million from hundreds of thousands of individuals giving $20-$50. THAT IS HOW IT SHOULD BE DONE
oh, by the way if you can:
https://donate.barackobama.com/page/contribute/yeswecan
Agreed.... 20,000 people donating $50 each is much better than one insurance company donating $1,000,000.
Why are the democrats having to raise/spend so much money if its basically a shoo in?
can we get an Archinect Obama Supporters donation together or is that illegal?
I don't think its illegal at all. Someone would just have to be in charge of managing a paypal acct.
1. I am a United States citizen or a lawfully-admitted permanent resident.
2. I am at least 16 years old.
3. This contribution is not made from the general treasury funds of a corporation, labor organization or national bank.
4. This contribution is not made from the funds of a political action committee.
5. This contribution is not made from the treasury of an entity or person who is a federal contractor.
6. This contribution is not made from the funds of an individual registered as a federal lobbyist or a foreign agent, or an entity that is a federally registered lobbying firm or foreign agent.
7. The funds I am donating are not being provided to me by another person or entity for the purpose of making this contribution.
aking, are you serious? running is running, these are strong candidates and our country is huge, just moving around costs millions. Any campaign for School Board costs millions, do you think the presidency will be a give-me?
I am glad it is not, I am glad that Obama has had to fight it.
Shoo-in? Obama is virtually tied with Hillary for the Dem nomination, and if he wins that, he'll face stiff competition with (presumably) McCain in the general election. It's anything but a shoo-in.
I meant shoo in compared to the Republicans. The GOP know they have a tough challenge b/c of what Bush has done to the party. Yet they are no where near the fundraising of the dems. It just seems odd that what one would think would be an easy race for democrats is costing a whole lot more.
I understand the Barack and Hillary are battling each other right now but its just seems like a hell of a lot of money compared to the other party.
I think if either Romney or Huckabee were the Republican front-runner, the Dems could nominate a trained monkey at the convention and still be reasonably assured of getting the White House. But nobody saw McCain making such a huge comeback, and he has a lot of support among moderates and independents. He'll give the Democratic nominee a good fight in the general election, whether it's Obama or Hillary.
I'm afraid that's true. And the huge money is just the price of admission, these days -- it's been growing steadily with each passing election cycle. The lead of Dem spending over Rep reflects the relative apathy among Republican voters, this time around, I think.
Elections take too long, here. It's a six-week, government-funded affair in other developed nations, as I understand it. We blow through money in this country because we can. . .
I have to admire parliamentary systems, where they can dissolve the government and call new elections at the drop of a hat. Surprise! Elections are next month!
LiG would that be remotely possible in this country?
Not without re-writing the Constitution.
Holy fucking shit... Obama is now up to $7.2M since Tuesday. He should hold his next press conference while sitting in a jacuzzi filled with $100 bills.
While Hillary had to lend her campaign $5 M. . .
perhaps another reason to vote Obama...
"Replying to an Associated Press survey of 2008 presidential candidates' personal tastes, he specified "architect" as his alternate career choice..."
- (thanks again to) Wikipedia
^^^Well to be fair he is ahead in actual elected delegates, and there are plenty enough superdelegates that could swing his way in the next month or so. Hillarys problem right now is that the remaining states are very good for Obama and super tuesday was her last real chance to bury him.
what'd I do? reply to the wrong thread?
weird..
ignore.
This is probably the biggest threat to Hillary's campaign right now:
5. The calendar is her enemy. Now that more than half the states have weighed in, there is a fairly predictable formula for determining who is most likely to win the upcoming contests.
In caucus states, Obama’s organizational strength shines: He has won seven of eight. Up next are three more caucus states, Washington, Nebraska and Maine.
Obama also runs tremendously well in states with large African-American populations, another promising sign since next Tuesday’s three primaries are in the District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia — all of which have significant percentages of black voters.
Then comes another caucus state, Hawaii, where Obama is viewed as a native son.
The bottom line is that it figures to be another month before Clinton hits a stretch of states — places like Ohio and Pennsylvania — where she will be strongly favored to win.
After the Feb 9 and 12 primaries/caucuses, will Hillary's campaign be able to survive the better part of a month on life support?
Virginia Democratic Primary SurveyUSA Obama 59, Clinton 39
Obama +20
Virginia Democratic Primary InsiderAdvantage Obama 52, Clinton 37
Obama +15
General Election: McCain vs. Clinton Rasmussen McCain 46, Clinton 43, Und 11
McCain +3
General Election: McCain vs. Obama Rasmussen McCain 42, Obama 47, Und 11
Obama +5
Let's win this thing ;)
I'm canvassing for Obama tomorrow. Also might make it to the VA Beach rally on Sunday.
I really doubt he can win by 20 - Clinton has to have some hidden strength in rural and northern VA.
Holy fucking shit... Obama is now up to $7.2M since Tuesday. He should hold his next press conference while sitting in a jacuzzi filled with $100 bills.
Rare form today, LIG! LMAO!
[takes a bow]
Rare form? Aren't I always this witty?
Yes, you are.
THE Tony Snow ?
just so you guys know, you can call Washington, Louisiana, and Nebraska from your home, go to Obama's site, get your weekend minutes ready and CALL, CALL, CALL!
I'll be at the WA caucus tomorrow. Note to WA dems: the primary don't mean anything. YOU MUST GO TO THE CAUCUS.
http://www.wa-democrats.org/caucusinfo
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.