home

For Expectations, Zogby Should Be the Clinton's Choice

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Sat May 03, 2008 at 09:50:50 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

John Zogby, after successfully jiggering his PA poll from an Obama lead to a Hillary 10 point advantage in the last three days before the Pennsylvania primary, has regained some Media cred. He is clearly a charlatan imo. But charlatans have political uses. For example, his latest polls have Obama up 9 in North Carolina (yesterday Obama was up 16 in the Zogby poll, which would NORMALLY mean Obama is cratering, but this is Zogby) and Obama up 1 in Indiana (up 1 from yesterday).

This presents an opportunity for the Clinton campaign in terms of the expectations game. Zogby tells a story of a huge Clinton rally in North Carolina from a 16 point deficit five days out. Zogby tells a story of an Indiana race as tight as a tick. I think you can mark it up now, Obama wins NC by 8-10 points. Clinton wins Indiana by 6-10 points. But in terms of expectations, Zogby gives the Clinton camp a lot to work with.

By Big Tent Democrat

< Politics Has Always Been Stupid | Why Not One Drug for Lethal Injections? >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    For Expectations, Zogby Should Be the Clinton's Choice | 145 comments (145 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Hillary needs to flat out win Indiana (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by ruffian on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:08:13 AM EST
    by 5 or more, IMHO. I don't think any expectations game will help here there, mostly because she needs at least one victory that day to keep any momentum going.  In NC though, I'm sure Clinton would be ecstatic with any single digit loss if it is paired with an IN win.

    Is It Okay To Hope She Wins Both? (none / 0) (#96)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:07:05 PM EST
    We still really don't know how much the Wright controversy has hurt obama.  And there are residents of IN who were not happy with the bitter comments either.  

    Parent
    BTD (none / 0) (#101)
    by AnninCA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:14:34 PM EST
    is right in that demographics are the key.

    Yes, you're right.  A lot of the fall-out is really from the Bitter comment.  That's one of those intangible issues that can't be gotten at through polling.  People say they aren't offended, but they really are if they are connected to their spirtual paths or they don't see their rifles as being relevant to politics.

    They'll answer immediate pollster questions as though they are more open-minded.

    but they vote privately.  

    And thus, those polls on highly personal issues never pan out.

    I personally think he sunk his own candidacy with his bitter remarks.  Wright is truly a side-line issue.  But Bitter is the deal.

    He offended people on their gut level.  Just as he offended Wright at is gut level.

    I read an AA activist blog who commended Hllary for having a statement prepared for the recent court uproar over the killings of the wedding participants.

    They pointed out that she took the time to craft a good statement.  

    Obama did not.

    Parent

    RIght about Bitter (none / 0) (#114)
    by BackFromOhio on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:51:26 PM EST
    I think you're right about the bitter remarks.  I read an analysis that showed Obama's numbers started slipping in PA before the Wright story hit the front page.

    Parent
    I have seen this over and over,Obama (none / 0) (#142)
    by thereyougo on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:54:44 PM EST
    just doesn't legitimize himself with AAs,in the campaign.

    Feb. was Black History month, after MLK s b'day
    nothing. As you mentioned the shootings is big news, yet nothing said from Obama. Actually he said something, mostly mutterings about programs for youth and really made little sense.                    

    At his rallies, whites were purposely choreographed  behind him, while AAs are more often not seen. WTH is going on? One rally in Ohio I think it was, there was a whole gym full of AAs.No white to be seen, but he wasn't there, it was Michelle and Teresa the Heinz heiress.

    After the Wright comments I would not be surprise if this demographic left him like a dime store hooker and his support could be understated that Obama has lost favor with his roots. I wouldn't count on them totally to be on his corner on Tues. I think, they feel betrayed by his throwing the rev. under the bus.

    Obama's numbers eem static to me or spiralling in some cases, while Hillary is adding to her lead.

    Parent

    agree with your margins (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by Turkana on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:08:51 AM EST
    clinton's best case is an indiana win by a margin larger than her nc loss. that would be huge.

    Great way to look at it (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by ruffian on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:10:59 AM EST
    That's what I'll look for.  That would indeed be a huge night for her.

    Parent
    There's a chance of that (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by andgarden on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:19:47 AM EST
    And a real chance, because she probably needs it, of keeping Obama below 10 pts in NC. That would point to Hillary getting upwards of 70% of the white vote. Good for her, bad for Democrats.


    Parent
    Disagree (none / 0) (#12)
    by sas on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:22:03 AM EST
    that would be good for Democrats.

    IMO, if he is the nominee we will lose.

    Parent

    Any situation (5.00 / 5) (#13)
    by andgarden on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:22:59 AM EST
    where the racial division is that stark will be bad for Democrats.

    Parent
    Race (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by AnninCA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:29:00 AM EST
    isn't as big of an issue as most think, I'm convinced.

    It's more that he's an empty suit.  He was exciting and different.  He rode a wave.

    But he never did put meat on the bones.  He can't.  

    He really is a bit of a goof-ball, thinking-wise.  Smart but not a clear thinker yet.

    That's his lack of experience.  You gain that, if you're smart, through real experience.  He has very little.  I'm sorry, but you get by with sloppy thinking as a state legislator.  You DON'T get by with it on the national level.

    So I'm one who says that it won't be the big race war.  It WILL be a problem that he's not offering much.

    But so far, neither is McCain.  LOL*

    Parent

    obama Has Morphed Into gwb... (none / 0) (#97)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:09:18 PM EST
    When I see a pic of obama, I see it morphing into gwb's face.  And when he is speaking off the cuff, the likeness is even more apparent...frighteningly so.

    Parent
    Really? (none / 0) (#104)
    by AnninCA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:16:38 PM EST
    I'm sorry, but I cannot get into demonizing the guy.

    He's innocuous.

    He's a wuss to me, politically speaking.

    What's wierd is that I think I'm a great deal more demanding of change than Obama supporters are.

    They are, in my perspective, copping out.

    I want REAL change.

    Parent

    Not to sound to prissy. . . (5.00 / 3) (#57)
    by LarryInNYC on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:48:45 AM EST
    but it ain't that great for America, or for human society as a whole either.

    Parent
    What's the difference? ;-) (5.00 / 2) (#62)
    by andgarden on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:53:07 AM EST


    Parent
    I think the racial division (none / 0) (#44)
    by Kathy on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:24:21 AM EST
    with him getting 90% of aa's, is pretty stark.  Why would it be more of a problem if she got a higher percentage of white voters?  

    Parent
    Simple: (none / 0) (#52)
    by andgarden on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:37:57 AM EST
    I think blacks will come back, and whites will not. History suggests this is the case.

    Parent
    Again (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by AnninCA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:06:19 PM EST
    I think the reason is rooted in the initial reason for leaving.  He was attractive to white voters initially.  It's hard to claim racism when the facts dispute that.  He won over Wisconsin.  

    Believe me, how often did I read that only aging white women still voted for her.  I felt I should prop a cane up by the computer!  :)

    They are leaving not due to racism but due to something a lot harder to win back:  credibility.

    His is shot.

    Parent

    Hmmm. (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by Dr Molly on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:14:40 PM EST
    "I think the reason is rooted in the initial reason for leaving.  He was attractive to white voters initially.  It's hard to claim racism when the facts dispute that.  He won over Wisconsin."

    Yes, and he won Iowa handily with huge white support and that was the most positive part of the campaign.

    What I've been thinking seems to be the opposite of what most people are saying - I don't think whites are not voting for him due to racism; I think whites were driven away from because of the baseless racist charges that they began flinging around casually post-Iowa and have been doing ever since. So, basically, if racism is what is causing whites to not vote for him now (in contrast to early stages of campaign), I think it's kind of due to reverse racism.

    I know that I and most of my white friends were definitely in his corner and very excited about his candidacy before all the racial slurs began.  

    Parent

    Now If We Can Get Oregonians To Come (none / 0) (#98)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:11:22 PM EST
    to their senses.  Any thoughts on that race?

    Parent
    I agree (none / 0) (#87)
    by Kathy on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:32:28 PM EST
    whites will not forgive as easily.  I, for one, don't know which makes me more furious: being called racist or being called elderly.  

    Parent
    It's Hell Being An Elderly Racist.... :) (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:12:06 PM EST


    Parent
    LOL* (none / 0) (#88)
    by AnninCA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:33:34 PM EST
    It has demanded quite a bit of humility, eh?

    I didn't realize that being in my 50s means I'm ready to be put out on the iceflow.  :)

    Parent

    Try 37 (none / 0) (#126)
    by Kathy on Sat May 03, 2008 at 03:05:44 PM EST
    and neutered, apparently.  Or is it spayed?  I'm supposed to be at my prime soon, dagnabbit!

    Parent
    just racist or elderly?! (none / 0) (#89)
    by nycstray on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:36:43 PM EST
    I'm trying to get past uneducated and low info also. And then there's that "typical" issue . . .

    But none of it really matters, because after all, we are voting for her because she's a woman and that's all we care about . . .

    Parent

    I see you are steering away from (none / 0) (#92)
    by oculus on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:51:24 PM EST
    "post-sexual" and "low-information," not to mention "Chablis-drinking."

    Parent
    And why would it be more of a problem if she got (none / 0) (#109)
    by bridget on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:32:07 PM EST
    a high of 90% of Women voters.

    Or 80%. Or 70%.

    Still, she has done much better with both men and women as I ever thought possible four years ago and I give her a lot of credit for it. She sure had to work hard for it. Too hard considering the negative media.  

    Suggestions on certain "progressive" blogs that it is time for a woman in the WH and that Hillary Clinton is the one who can do the job was more often than not showered with disdain and strong rejections. Many of them were women bloggers and they made incredibly nasty HC remarks. Not v. progressive IMO.

    A woman in the White House would do so much for women in the US. No doubt in my mind.

    I do have a close family member who lives in Berlin for years and he told me about the positive effect Angela Merkel's election had for the German women (She is the first German female chancellor). When I asked that question he actually got really excited and brought up all kind of issues re Merkel and the German women. I also remember from following the German election v. closely that "being a woman" was much less of a problem for Merkel in the German election that it is for Hillary Clinton here in the US. Really, there is no comparison come to think of it ...

    I also joined a small German anti-Merkel political blog at the time yet the woman thing wasn't mentioned even once as long as I was there blogging. Bloggers only talked party and the issues. I often think of that experience during this campaign.

    Parent

    Finland (5.00 / 2) (#128)
    by Kathy on Sat May 03, 2008 at 03:13:18 PM EST
    Woman president (an atheist!), 1/2 of the cabinet and 40% of the parliament are women.

    Least violent country in the world.  Best social services.  One of the highest happiness indexes of all western countries.

    It helps to have a woman in charge.  Even Thatcher for all her bluster helped British women ("milk snatcher" aside)

    Parent

    Finland's woman president must have (none / 0) (#130)
    by bridget on Sat May 03, 2008 at 03:30:37 PM EST
    done wonders for the "socially inhibited" Fins who used to dance the Tango for social therapy. Probably still do. Glad to hear about the happy Fins :-)

    Parent
    Well, they'd be the most surprised (none / 0) (#132)
    by Kathy on Sat May 03, 2008 at 03:41:31 PM EST
    to hear they're happy.  Content is how they'd probably describe it (though they were a tad depressed when they dropped to two on the suicide rate!)

    Parent
    I'm beginning to think that polling is (5.00 / 3) (#7)
    by Anne on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:13:54 AM EST
    right up there with forecasting the weather - what other job do you know about where you can be wrong as often as they are and still get paid - and paid well - to keep doing it?  When I listen to the weather, I am often reminded of George Carlin's "hippy dippy weatherman," whose forecasts were: "tonight - dark, with increasing light toward morning."  With polls, it could come down to "Someone will win, someone will lose."

    It is true that some polling outfits - like SUSA - are much better, and more reliable at what they do, but it doesn't seem to make up for all the Zogby-types that are just awful.

    Well, I learned that (5.00 / 5) (#16)
    by Cream City on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:24:27 AM EST
    ob-gyn's are about as good as pollsters and weather forecasters.  Even with all the technology today, my ob-gyn's predictions of when my babes would arrive was less accurate than either of the above.

    Most accurate were the "old wives' tales," the old ways that women used by timing the first kick.  So I think the best guess for what will happen Tuesday is to ask the nearest granny.  And watch the candidate who is getting the most kicks out of this campaign.

    In Hillary Clinton, I see that exuberant love of politics and policy that we saw in Bill.  And I just don't want to watch a president who finds it all too wearying and gets bored already.  I like to see someone who tackles problem-solving with zest!

    Parent

    Kick is also what takes you through the last lap (none / 0) (#63)
    by Ellie on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:54:09 AM EST
    HRC's still got reserves but Obama's going to be hard-pressed to match his burn rate.

    So I think the best guess for what will happen Tuesday is to ask the nearest granny.  And watch the candidate who is getting the most kicks out of this campaign.

    LOL. HRC's definitely got the "are we having fun yet?" aura about her. The biggest contrast is that she's put the worst behind her while for Obama, the worst is yet to come.

    And Gran's getting a kick out of both campaigns, albeit for different reasons. (Clinton's her senator.)  

    Parent

    maybe she'll have an easier ride with McCain (none / 0) (#143)
    by thereyougo on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:10:06 PM EST
    afterall, he IS on the wrong side of the issues. It will be about the economy and his ability to talk about the issues, the war and his health. He already shown us his weakness.

    His health is not fully known as of  yet. When they release them, we'll know how much cancer he's got. he's not out of th e woods yet, it hasn't been 5 years since his treatments.

    Parent

    That's not really fair to the weather folks... (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by OrangeFur on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:01:07 AM EST
    ... they actually do a pretty good job.

    Parent
    Yeah, he's clearly cooking the books (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by andgarden on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:21:07 AM EST
    I think all indications are that Hillary is actually in a lead in IN, though I could be wrong.

    The Obama drop in support by 5 points over the course of a day in NC isn't credible. But then, nothing Zogby says is credible.

    She'll (5.00 / 0) (#15)
    by sas on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:24:05 AM EST
    win Indiana, which is big, since he was ahead by 5 before.

    The fact that NC is tightening should be a wake up call to the party elite who have predetermined BO as the nominee.

    I've learned (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by AnninCA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:33:44 AM EST
    a bit more about polling this season, for sure.  It appears that the biggest problem is turn-out.  That dictates so much and requires a crystal ball, I guess.

    I agree with BTD's predictions.  That's what I'm seeing, too.  I'd love it to be tighter in NC, though.  

    the obamatrolls are in rare form today (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by karen for Clinton on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:47:36 AM EST
    Go out there and correct their many wrongs.

    The Blogs are full of them, like cockroaches.

    Vile lies and misinformation galore on all the newssites and websites.

    Keep vigilant, stay real and they will be exposed one at a time as the vile disinformation spreaders they are.

    LA radio host (5.00 / 4) (#22)
    by AnninCA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:57:05 AM EST
    mentioned yesterday that this weekend is when the voters explain to the bloggers what's what.  LOL*

    He pointed out that bloggers are about 200,000 compared to the millions of voters.

    I chuckled, since as one of those bloggers, I DO lose sight sometimes.

    Parent

    Fear drives trolls (none / 0) (#71)
    by Marvin42 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:03:44 PM EST
    I think they have gotten a whiff that the end is nigh. The other sign I'd that Zogby got PA right!

    Parent
    O-Trolls also sound like their mommies drive them (none / 0) (#84)
    by Ellie on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:27:31 PM EST
    Into the basement where they touch base with the astro-troll borg at command central, and with this weird thing they have against women generally.

    (The math thing is bizarre too: I'm dying to get a glimpse of the formulas proving that I'm "actually" older than these Teh Nu Kool Roolz Kidz who are, er, I'll be charitable here and call them a LOT not-younger than me so as not to panic them.)

    Parent

    Was Just On HuffPo....It Ain't Pretty (none / 0) (#103)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:15:35 PM EST
    They will be in full-on combat mode tomorrow after Meet The Press, touting what a fantastic job obama did of answering questions like:  1) What is michelle's favorite flower?  2) Did you scrape the money together to get your kids in summer camp this year?  3) Will you have a yellow rug in the Oval Office?

    Parent
    I went slumming too! (5.00 / 0) (#135)
    by karen for Clinton on Sat May 03, 2008 at 06:44:26 PM EST
    The orange site folks are confused as to what type of spin to put on the Wright issue now that he flipflopped and they're absolutely fretting over what questions TIM will ask their Messiah due to some posed possible questions on republican sites. The vibe is frantic and creepy.

    It's funny, I've never worried about how Clinton will handle anything. I just trusted with full confidence she would handle any issue she faced and that she would do it in the best way possible.

    Parent

    I like Hillary's chances next Tuesday. (5.00 / 4) (#24)
    by lyzurgyk on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:58:45 AM EST

    Sure the gas tax holiday is probably useless at best as policy (to quote Krugman) but at least it's somebody making an effort.   And is a windfall profits tax really a bad idea?

    So where's Obama's solution to the gas pump crunch?   What's he doing about it?  

    Hillary has now positioned herself as a "fighter for the people" and the Obama message is little more than "Hillary Sucks".   I think he's lost his way.

    It focuses the discourse on the economy (5.00 / 3) (#32)
    by Cream City on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:13:05 AM EST
    which focuses it on the people.  And even if it's only a start in the discourse, a means to put pressure on Washington to do something -- it has to start sometime, somewhere.  

    It is not productive at this point to stop that debate, to say "no, we can't" and not offer any other proposals for immediate relief.  People can't put off buying food until January and then find out what a candidate "hopes" to do.  They need hope now -- hope that their economic worries at least are being heard, that the level of the public's concern is understood by a candidate.

    When hundreds of thousands of people are losing jobs, as they are, it's not the time for Obama to make the job interview all about hiring him.

    Parent

    Agree (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by AnninCA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:19:11 AM EST
    with you on the immediate relief factor.  I got a call yesterday from a young single mom friend in tears about which school to send her son to next year.  The problem?  Gas.

    It's really bad out there.

    Parent

    My daughter may give up health (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by Cream City on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:30:46 PM EST
    insurance, although she has a chronic condition, because her management job doesn't include health insurance -- and doesn't pay enough, despite recent raises but at the increased cost because of that condition, to cover insurance she had to get on her own and gas cists these days . . . because she has to drive farther, because she couldn't afford rent, too, and had to move back home.  We'd help her more, but we also have to help my son, still in school and also moved back home with us.

    And because the management at my spouse's lifelong employer took lots of perks but canceled health insurance and devalued pensions by more than half, he's in (and fortunately enjoying) his second career at 65.  So no young person can get that job yet -- nor mine, as I won't be able to retire when I planned, either.  Not with so many mouths to feed again, much as I love 'em all . . . even though I walk to work.  But I see the impact of the fuel, food, etc., inflation all around me.

    And we're the lucky ones.  I could tell you stories of my students, but it's finals time for us all, so off to grading I go . . . to get some to graduation, but we're down more thousands of jobs this week in my town.  So the graduates may be lucky to get jobs at all, and few will get health insurance coverage, and the cycle begins again for them as it has been for us. . . .

    Parent

    The CEO Of The Company I Retired From (none / 0) (#91)
    by MO Blue on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:46:52 PM EST
    received a multimillion annual salary, made bad decisions which lost the company hugh amounts of revenue and the stock went down 40+%. He walked out the door with a multimillion dollar package including benefits. To make up for this, the company has drastically reduced its contributions to retiree health benefits and our premium have tripled. Still better off then those who do not have insurance and can't afford to get it but that increase in insurance premium cuts deeply into my fixed income.

    Parent
    Yep -- my spouse's company's stock (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by Cream City on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:56:38 PM EST
    actually has dropped 75! -- while the CEO and others got great packages of perks . . . including stock, of course, that they somehow dumped soon enough.  

    The company perk for employees was buying stock, since it's partially employee-owned.  Guess which group didn't get the word in time to dump the stock?  Yep, plus the retirees.

    Parent

    I Plan On Working Til My Dirt Nap.... (none / 0) (#107)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:24:09 PM EST


    Parent
    How much food will you be able to buy with (1.00 / 0) (#36)
    by independent voter on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:18:08 AM EST
    the 18 cents per gallon you will be saving?

    Parent
    it will help truckers a lot (5.00 / 4) (#43)
    by bigbay on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:23:49 AM EST
    which will help food prices.

    Fortunately, I think people understand that, except for Thomas Friedman.

    Parent

    It's also a psychological (5.00 / 2) (#49)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:31:35 AM EST
    boost.  As Cream City says, just proposing it gives people a sense that somebody understands the effect of gas prices on the average guy and cares about it.


    Parent
    Obama doesn't get this just busy trying to tear (none / 0) (#144)
    by thereyougo on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:22:05 PM EST
    Hillary down. Enough of this already, lets get Hillary in there now without a minute to waste. I'm done with giving Senator Omoonbeam any more time to change my mind.

    Parent
    That's funny, the economists (1.00 / 0) (#45)
    by independent voter on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:26:23 AM EST
    don't seem to understand that.

    Parent
    Not the point (5.00 / 0) (#117)
    by IzikLA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:55:42 PM EST
    I don't think.  So is Obama just agreeing with 'the economists'? Obama has only criticized her plan, which is fine really.  But if he chooses to criticize it then he should also offer his own better solution.

    Parent
    the smartest guys in the room (4.00 / 0) (#83)
    by bigbay on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:27:18 PM EST
    don't impress me much. They have cheerleaded the destruction of our middle class since Reagan.

    What is wrong about instituting a windfall tax , and eliminating one of the most regressive taxes we have ?

    Most so-called economic experts get their paycheck, directly or indirectly , from rich people - who don't like the concept of excess profit being taxed.

    Parent

    over 7 gallons of milk (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by nycstray on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:47:56 AM EST
    and that is if you are one of the few who will only save 30 bucks. Commuters and folks that have to drive for work, etc, will save more.

    doing some 'math' and figuring out some averages, the average trucker will save $1 every 28 miles. Farmers should see some savings also along with other independent workers out there.

    Parent

    Let's not forget that (5.00 / 5) (#60)
    by BevD on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:50:53 AM EST
    for the working poor, especially, who tend to own older cars which get less gas mileage, generally live in rural/suburban areas and use a tank of gas per week, 3.00 can be a matter of feeding the kids for another day.  With 3.00 you can buy two loaves of bread, 2 lbs of apples, a jar of peanut butter, 2 quarts of milk, 3 boxes of corn flakes, 3 cans of orange juice concentrate, 3 lbs of spaghetti and a lb of hamburger.  So while some of us can sneer at that and consider it chump change, for that single parent trying to feed kids or buy another tank of gas to go to work, three bucks can help.  

    For those to whom 3.00 bucks is meaningless, take that money you saved at the pumps and buy a couple loaves of bread and donate it to the local food bank.  For some people it will be a godsend.

    Parent

    You meant (5.00 / 0) (#136)
    by Molly Pitcher on Sat May 03, 2008 at 07:04:57 PM EST
    "two loaves of bread, or 2 lbs of apples, or a jar of peanut butter, or 2 quarts of milk, or 3 boxes of corn flakes, or 3 cans of orange juice concentrate, or 3 lbs of spaghetti and a lb of hamburger"
    didn't you?   Seems to me only a shoplifter could get out of a store with all that for only $3.

      The local paper today lamented about where the budget money goes.  It said that after spending around 57 cents of each dollar for 'necessities,' there is only 43 cents left for discretionary items (eating out, shoes, etc.)  I can recall when there was nothing at all left for discretionary items--except maybe for penny candy for the kids and cigarettes for dad).  And I know plenty of families now who would be glad to have any money at all left over after food, rent, gas, heat, etc.

    Parent

    They Still Have Penny Candy???? (none / 0) (#139)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 07:49:19 PM EST


    Parent
    Sort of: (none / 0) (#141)
    by Molly Pitcher on Sat May 03, 2008 at 09:26:45 PM EST
    There's a catalog company that specializes in old-fashioned stuff.  They have 2 lbs of 'candy counter' candy (loose individual items, I think) 2 lbs for $13.  So it would depend on how many pieces are in a pound.  A worse deal: the cancer stcks--they were a penny a piece when I smoked.

    Parent
    Bev! (none / 0) (#81)
    by bslev22 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:22:21 PM EST


    Parent
    You Go Girl!! Sister Bev In Da House!! (none / 0) (#105)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:20:07 PM EST
    What you say is totally true.  I have been there.

    Parent
    18 cents a gal makes a difference to people who (5.00 / 3) (#61)
    by jawbone on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:51:40 AM EST
    must decide between buying a gallon of milk OR a gallong of gas.

    That's the group for whom this proposal is made.

    And it is a palliative to try to cushion the blow to the lives of people living on the economic cutting edge.  

    Hopefully, the Congress will find some of way of assisting these people with a program like, oh, Gas Stamps? Transportation Stamps? to assist them in dealing with the massive dislocation to lives which will come with new much higher energy costs. Gas is going up now; shortly, bus ride costs will be increased, which will also affect those on the edge.  All public transit will cost more.

    Repubs will fight such programs, but I think they will be necessary.  Guess what -- the wealthy can go out and buy a Prius. I can't afford one, and I'm not on the edge (if my health insurance premiums keep going up 25% each year, I will be on or over the edge in due time).  

    The new technologies will first be bought by and benefit those with enough money to afford them. (Along with progressive government entities, which will hopefully get on the bandwagon, to both benefit the environment but also save money.)  The poor will be left using those traded in SUV's with plummeting resale value. They won't have the wherewithal to get in the game, until later when prices begin to come down more and there are used hybrids and higher mileage vehicles.

    So, yes, the gas tax plan is a short term palliative measure, which is also politically meaningful.  Hillary has a solid long term set of proposals and plans.

    Why the MCM (Mainstream Corporate Media) is focussing to much on the gas tax thing? And even referring to discussion about it as "bitter"?? Beyond me, except they glom onto the small, easily discussed things -- and ignore more complex issues and solutions. Fie on them.

    When was that last time you heard a discussion comparing Hillary's and Obama's energy plans? Except on a blog (some use audio)?


    Parent

    70 (none / 0) (#66)
    by AnninCA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:56:55 AM EST
    dollars a month is really important right now.  My area?  Rents are skyrocketing because of the mortgage crisis.

    OK, so now we're squeezing higher rents, higher gas, higher food......with no increase in wages.

    It's at a tipping point.

    Either we do something or we all agree that it's OK to raise children in cars along the side of the road.

    Parent

    Recently Moved To Las Vegas....jobs (none / 0) (#106)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:23:06 PM EST
    galore they said.  Well, yeah there are many and many pay $6.25 to $7.00/hr.  A family cannot live on those wages.  And you should see how many foreclosure signs there are in the neighborhood; and the worst is how many families are already living on the streets.  Every penny counts in this day and age, whether you believe it or not.

    Parent
    You (5.00 / 5) (#37)
    by sas on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:18:46 AM EST
    assume he once knew his way.

    Sorry,imo, I think he views this like running for Prom King or something.  I don't view him as someone serious about actually helping people or even running this country.  It's a prize.

    I can't imagine him doing anything of substance, except compromising Democratic principles to the point where they are watered down slush.

    I can imagine him setting up SS and healthcare for reform that results in worse conditions for people, rather than better, because he doesn't know what he is doing and has no sense of history or a knowledge base on which to fall back.

    Parent

    Rasmussen confirmation (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by gandy007 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:03:24 AM EST
    The Zogby numbers may at first blush look overly optimistic, but I like what Rasmussen is saying that is similar.

    In Indiana, Rasmussen had Obama by 23 two weeks ago. On Monday, the lead had been cut to 14, and now it is only 9.  Rasmussen may not be exact at the end but is pretty good, especially in showing a trend.

    He uses a rolling average, I believe a four day one, and that way if the latter days used are significantly different there are some good inferences to be drawn.

    I say Obama wins North Carolaina by 7 or fewer points and that would be huge.  Another aspect is the Bill factor.  He is beating the bushes there. For example yesterday, he made 11 stops at towns from 3,000 to 22,000.  The rurals seem to love him and he will probably gain 20 pounds from all the barbecue and fried chicken he's sucking down.

    Just to make sure of Indiana, maybe they will send him into Appalachia there for a day.  Where he went out in the sticks in Pa, coincidentally or not, she won the counties by 30 or more.

    As for Indiana, Rasmussen has her by 5, with the trend line in her favor.  I like your numbers for Indiana.  Hopefully the the late deciders will continue to break heavily in her favor.

    The only thing that would be REALLY huge. . . (none / 0) (#64)
    by LarryInNYC on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:55:57 AM EST
    is if she wins North Carolina -- or has some result that can be labeled a "tie".  A loss will still be a loss -- even if she falls further behind by less than original predicted.

    But if she wins North Carolina -- even by a half a percentage point -- that would be something.  I don't think it will happen and neither does anyone else, but how far behind was she in New Hampshire?

    Parent

    We need to remind the press... (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by OrangeFur on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:05:29 AM EST
    ... that Obama himself said that Indiana was going to be the tiebreaker. It is certainly not the case that Clinton was always favored here.

    If those Obama folks are right, and the race is over, what does it say about our inevitable nominee that millions of people are rousing themselves to get up and vote for someone else?

    Obama's own projection (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by waldenpond on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:29:56 AM EST
    was they would win IN by 7 and NC by 8 (with 35-40% AA vote, that was a ridiculous projection IMO)

    NC: By their projections with 33%AA at 90%, I think that leaves the projection of the non-white vote at only 36% to win by 8 pts.

    IN: by their projections with 12%AA at 90%, I think that leaves their projection of the non-AA vote at 46% to win by 7 pts.

    Large disparity in projection of the non-AA vote.  Can't wait to see what happens.

    Parent

    What about Guam?? (none / 0) (#65)
    by jawbone on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:56:09 AM EST


    Parent
    Well, thank you for bringing up Guam (none / 0) (#68)
    by AnninCA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:58:31 AM EST
    Apparently, when it's Hillary, then Guam is insignicant.

    When it's Obama, he gets to count Americans Abroad, Virgin Islands, and Alask with all 400 Dems as "states won."

    Grrrrrrr**

    Parent

    Management by Objectives (5.00 / 0) (#29)
    by Stellaaa on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:06:32 AM EST
    Remember that?  Everyone set low objectives so that they could get the raise.  

    Zogby is (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:07:58 AM EST
    a charlatan. I have pretty much disregarded him since 2004 when he said Kerry would win.

    NC will be the first contest to measure any (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by ivs814 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:27:44 AM EST
    effect Obama's renunciation of Wright has had on his AA support.  One thing that baffles me is why there has been no outcry in the media by Wright supporters to his being so blatantly kicked off the Obama express.  Just a mere 5 weeks ago Obama was being hailed for standing by his guy and how courageous that was.  He stood up for him when all the white media was demanding that he denounce Wright.  Then he did a 180 at the expense of a once hailed black leader.

    How can the AA community not take that as a slap on the face?  He has time and time again not hesitated to take them for granted yet they stick with him.  Can the Wright fiasco open up their eyes?

    Is that the reason the numbers are moving away from him in NC?

    I've read (5.00 / 0) (#50)
    by AnninCA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:32:43 AM EST
    some pretty scathing pieces by AA activists.  But they were already not enamoured by Obama.

    I agree.  It will be very interesting to see the demographics of the AA vote.  If she picks up 10% more in the "affluent, educated" crowd; and he loses 10% either by lower turn-out or by actual loss.....

    Then she's right.   This will be a game-changing state.

    Amazing that just a month ago, I was thinking, "If only she could win Indiana."

    Now, we're all watching NC.

    She obviously has the momentum.

    Parent

    Zogby Breakdown of NC Vote (none / 0) (#119)
    by BackFromOhio on Sat May 03, 2008 at 02:04:56 PM EST
    Zogby indicates that Obama is leading in North Carolina among AAs by 73% to 10%; there are obviously many undecideds; it will be interesting to see whether they break for one candidate or another or stay home.  Does anyone know if in prior primaries, AA pre-primary support for Obama was in the 70s?

    Parent
    Shrug (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Steve M on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:47:13 AM EST
    The expectations game is becoming less and less meaningless at this point.  I think Hillary really does need a game-changer soon.

    I agree (none / 0) (#82)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:22:27 PM EST
    Oregon is where it has to be.

    She can't do it in North Carolina.

    Parent

    Less-educated whites hurting (5.00 / 0) (#59)
    by oculus on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:50:33 AM EST
    Obama, per AP/Yahoo poll:

    NEWSDAY

    Can we change the "LESS EDUCATED" (5.00 / 2) (#75)
    by feet on earth on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:13:31 PM EST
    line with the "Street smart working people", please?

    Parent
    Obama (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by AnninCA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:15:14 PM EST
    has already told them to vote Republican, anyway, per Axelrod.  :)

    Parent
    The Zogby fallacy. (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by LarryInNYC on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:58:01 AM EST
    Just because he's been disastrously wrong before doesn't mean that the opposite of what he predicts is more likely to come true -- just that his predications ought to be ignored.

    Unsophisticated here in poll stuff (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by AnninCA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:14:14 PM EST
    But here's what I've gathered.  Anytime I see spreads from 16 to her ahead, I deduce:  Polls are worthless in this particular state, and we'll hear the reasons later.

    Then I deduce that the only real value is to look at the trend.  Whose moving, in other words.

    Then I look at who is not looking tired.  I think the candidates themselves are more telling.  He/she who has a spring in her step?  She's "sensing" it, unless they are avoiding the reality.

    Then I look at the news versus reality.  Bayh and the NC governor are real endorsers, who are working their states.  Andrews?  He writes scathing columns that get attention but don't really change votes.

    That's how I'm coming up with less than 10 for Obama in NC and a win for Hillary in Indiana.

    He'll lose more of the educated voter in NC.  He's also going to be disappointed by the AA turnout again.

    He registered, but they won't vote.  

    And I predict the youth vote is fading, just as we predicted.  They've moved on.  This season is too long for the youth to stay engaged.  If anything, she's got the momentum even in that group, because it's cool now to go against the peer group.

    Parent

    Linking in from CNN story on energy policy dispute (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by Totoro0101 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 05:24:32 PM EST
    I'm so upset with Obama for characterizing Hillary's far ranging policy regarding petrol as simply selling one's vote for $30 or so. Her policy is SO MUCH MORE and characterizing it as such is heinously unfair. She spoke in York, PA (I was in attendance) about starting a bond program for upgrading the nation's infrastructure (which would of course create jobs for American workers), ending the war on science by funding research into renewable energy (again creating jobs) and she spoke of opening up the strategic reserve (which is a far cry from the current stockpiling which is going on). Barack Obama is EMPLOYING oil company executives. Hillary Clinton wants to attack the problem on every front that she can! I really question the validity of what the man says, Hillary is so much better than that!

    Still Irrelevant (1.00 / 2) (#9)
    by aequitas on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:20:58 AM EST
    If Clinton doesn't win 70% of all the remaining contests, she has no chance to surpass Obama's lead.

    The math, the math!!!!! (5.00 / 3) (#11)
    by andgarden on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:21:23 AM EST


    Parent
    The Reality (1.00 / 2) (#33)
    by aequitas on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:13:24 AM EST
    eom

    Parent
    You are invading space here with OLD (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by feet on earth on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:40:41 AM EST
    and beaten to dead subject lines.  They look like 3 week old arugula leaves.  Through them out already!!!

    Parent
    Sorry to spoil the party...... (1.00 / 2) (#100)
    by aequitas on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:12:27 PM EST
    ....but I'll go with the math over wishful thinking.

    Parent
    Spoiled Arugula. No Chlorophyl, Again. (none / 0) (#124)
    by feet on earth on Sat May 03, 2008 at 02:24:40 PM EST


    Parent
    Nope, you need some new math (5.00 / 3) (#17)
    by Cream City on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:26:20 AM EST
    Not that even the quantoids can quite agree.  But see, for example, electoral-vote.com (yesterday, if not still the same discussion today).

    Parent
    She doesn't need the lead. (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by lyzurgyk on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:19:02 AM EST

    She needs to perform well enough at the polls to convince enough superdelegates that Obama's bubble has burst and he can't win in November.  Not easy or likely but if she can win 55-60 percent of the remaining popular vote, she's got the makings of an good argument.  

    Obama can't afford to keep getting his butt kicked.   There's a tipping point out there somewhere.

    Parent

    Ahem.... (1.00 / 2) (#102)
    by aequitas on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:15:21 PM EST
    "Obama can't afford to keep getting his butt kicked"

    More votes, more delegates, more states, more money, better campaign, and more SD's committing to him.

    Parent

    This Is Going To The Convention, We'll See (none / 0) (#108)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:31:09 PM EST
    And the more money thing really paid off for your boy in PA eh?  And that great campaign that didn't see the Wright controversy coming...stellar...NOT.  

    I think your shift is starting at HuffPo...run along.

    Parent

    You are now officially chattering (none / 0) (#123)
    by Marvin42 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 02:14:50 PM EST
    According to site TOS, so you may want to read up on that.

    Parent
    Marvin...Were You Referring To Me? (none / 0) (#125)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 02:47:39 PM EST
    I am fairly new and don't want to break the rules....

    Parent
    I have no official capacity (none / 0) (#137)
    by Marvin42 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 07:18:01 PM EST
    So its up to the site moderators, but read site rules. Repeating the same thing over and over is chattering. Look here:
    Comments

    Parent
    Sorry no PssttCmere08, it was for aequitas (none / 0) (#138)
    by Marvin42 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 07:19:40 PM EST
    Repeating the same line over and over.

    Parent
    Got the makings (none / 0) (#40)
    by AnninCA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:19:58 AM EST
    isn't going to cut it, I'm afraid.

    We need a butt-kicking now.

    Parent

    blah blah math blah no chance blah wrong (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by Marvin42 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:00:09 PM EST
    honestly this old talking point doesnt even deserve this much.

    Parent
    Obama has equally insurmountable numbers (none / 0) (#41)
    by gandy007 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:22:40 AM EST
    So what! See your bet and raise you double.

    Unless Obama wins by 60% the rest of the way, he can't get the nomination without the super delegates.

    Parent

    I (none / 0) (#110)
    by sas on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:41:37 PM EST
    think she will win the popular vote count, and show a big MO that the party leaders ignore at their peril- a loss in the GE>

    Parent
    Stop (none / 0) (#120)
    by IzikLA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 02:06:07 PM EST
    Ignoring Michigan & Florida and then we can have a reasonable discussion.  While you're at it, have a think about states we need to win in November and about the Popular Vote.  Let's talk when the votes are all counted and we have a real assessment of everything.

    Parent
    neither will he get the magic #, next question? (none / 0) (#145)
    by thereyougo on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:37:27 PM EST


    Parent
    Lots of undecideds and 'someone else' (none / 0) (#1)
    by ruffian on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:03:13 AM EST
    I assume that 'someone else' getting 8% is John Edwards.  But 8-9% undecided is interesting too.  We'll see if Obama recovers over the weekend and gets a few more of those late breaking undecideds than he usually does.

    I assume both Obama and Clinton will try to spin that the Edwards voters are really on their side.

    Dare I hope? (none / 0) (#73)
    by AnninCA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:08:09 PM EST
    Late deciders break for her in the past.

    Come on late deciders!

    Parent

    Shills, charlatans & panderers (none / 0) (#2)
    by wurman on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:05:09 AM EST
    Four years ago, I wasted some downtime trekking through the Zogby statistical wasteland.

    On average, he seems to always provide the numbers that support or project the lame stream media story line.

    Funny how that works out!

    Go Zogby Go! (none / 0) (#3)
    by Militarytracy on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:08:08 AM EST


    This blog has saved my political life (none / 0) (#14)
    by Jim J on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:23:55 AM EST
    and I'm eternally grateful. But BTD, I still have to laugh at the charade that you're an Obama supporter. Or is this simply an urban legend at this point?

    Just so no one can say I'm off-topic, I predict a more extreme version of your analysis: A 12-15 point NC victory for Obama propelled by a massive black turnout and Research Triangle hipsters, and a similarly crushing HRC victory in Indiana propelled by the demographic corollary there.

    She needs to win more (none / 0) (#18)
    by Cream City on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:28:05 AM EST
    to close in or even stay even in pledged delegates, to help to persuade more super-delegates.  Because NC has more delegates than does IN.

    Parent
    Laugh? (none / 0) (#80)
    by squeaky on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:20:50 PM EST
    A sure sign that you are a cultist is that you are so smitten with your candidate that you become reduced to a fanboy . By your standards is it also laughably that BTD is also Dem?

    Guam will send 9 delegates to the Democratic convention. Right now, Florida and Michigan, and its 2.3 million voters who voted in their primaries, will send NONE. What a ridiculous political party we Dems have.

    BTD

    Time to wake up. Both candidates are virtually the same.


    Parent

    Both candidates are virtually the same. (none / 0) (#86)
    by nycstray on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:31:56 PM EST
    uh, no they are not.

    Parent
    How So? (3.00 / 0) (#95)
    by squeaky on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:57:53 PM EST
    The most important issues to me are identical. Both will continue the WOT, if not in Iraq in Afghanistan. Both want all Americans to be covered by Health Insurance, neither plan has a chance of passing, imo.

    They both represent centrist democratic policy positions. Their votes in the Senate are almost identical. Both are pandering to the right side of the asile now, be it the right side of our party or the Republicans.

    If either candidate moved to the left, or close to what I would like to see, McCain would win. America has gone to the right. Both Hillary and Obama reflect that fact more than anything else about them.

    Parent

    Surpising Elizabeth Edwards (none / 0) (#93)
    by oculus on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:52:58 PM EST
    does not differentiate between Obama and Clinton health care plans.  Also disappointing.

    Parent
    Elizabeth Has Differentiated (5.00 / 0) (#116)
    by BackFromOhio on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:55:28 PM EST
    Elizabeth Edwards in several TV interviews made it quite clear that she prefers the Clinton Healthcare Plan as far more similar to John's in that it includes millions that Obama's plan leaves out.

    Parent
    You are absolutely correct. (5.00 / 0) (#127)
    by oculus on Sat May 03, 2008 at 03:12:41 PM EST
    I must have gleaned my mis-information from Huffington Post, as I've checked International Herald Tribune, NY Times, and LA Times, which all agree with you.  

    Parent
    Thanks (none / 0) (#129)
    by BackFromOhio on Sat May 03, 2008 at 03:24:00 PM EST
    I do endeavor to remain, at all times, in the reality-based community.

    I actually saw both interviews on TV myself.

    Parent

    My only excuse is I was (none / 0) (#131)
    by oculus on Sat May 03, 2008 at 03:40:30 PM EST
    out of the U.S. for over three weeks; but, given we are, afterall, in the information age, that is a pretty poor excuse.

    Parent
    You're Forgiven (none / 0) (#133)
    by BackFromOhio on Sat May 03, 2008 at 04:44:25 PM EST
    No one can cover every issue, even when right here in the grand ole USA

    Parent
    15 Million + Differences Between Them (none / 0) (#111)
    by feet on earth on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:43:46 PM EST
    1 for each person that the Obama's healthcare plans leaves out to begin with, plus all the Reagan ideas we likes
    I stay happy asleep through your calls to wake up until Obama changes is stamp speech with real Dem plans.

    PS: I don't dislike him, but he is not my type: too skinny on policies and plans

    Parent

    research triangle hipsters? what is that? (none / 0) (#146)
    by thereyougo on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:43:14 PM EST
    is that like latte drinking liberals? sheesh, the urban dictionary needs a new volume every 2 weeks, with those kinds of phrases.

    Let me frame your  prediction for posterity. It is doubtful, becase the bestest pollster in teh world is SUSA and she's got IN in the bag by 9 and NC by 9 too....

    From where did you pull  that set of binaries out of?

    Parent

    General Election (none / 0) (#21)
    by mmc9431 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:52:10 AM EST
    I read today that Indiana hasn't voted for a Dem  president since 1964! I hope Hilary does win big there but I don't know what effect that will have to SD's. They really need to focus on the states that are in play in the GE. The odds are very slim that we'll be able to win there in Nov.

    I hope (none / 0) (#23)
    by AnninCA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 10:57:52 AM EST
    we get a chance to see.  For sure, Obama isn't their candidate.

    I think Hillary could give McCain a run there.

    Parent

    I think (none / 0) (#26)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:02:33 AM EST
    the larger story will be about demographics. If Obama can't do better than he has demographically I think the handwriting is on the wall w/r/t him being the nominee.

    Parent
    Maybe (none / 0) (#31)
    by AnninCA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:11:03 AM EST
    true, but I'm learning alot this year about my party of 30 years.  LOL*

    I had no idea we were so thrilled with underdog thinking.  Obviously, the more one is a victim of something, the more people rally.  That's pretty codependent, in my opinion.

    But hey....I'm a moderate Dem.  So according to the progressives, I'm not really one of their "ilk."

    Parent

    The victimhood thing, I have hated (5.00 / 2) (#35)
    by Cream City on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:16:33 AM EST
    and debated it for years, as it's a major meme for our local rightwing bloggers/radio squawkers/columnists -- all rolled into one in my town, so they have considerable power.  One even wrote a book decrying the Dem victimhood meme.

    I said it wasn't so.  Turns out I was wrong -- it is the narrative pushed by one part of the party.  If that part wins, it will be a party without me.  

    I am a social justice Dem, but that's not about victimhood.  That's about self-empowerment.

    Parent

    Good to see I'm not alone (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by AnninCA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:23:45 AM EST
    I was raised in a straight Dem. home.  I have always voted straight Dem.

    When did we get into this victim stuff?  I must confess, Kerry put me to sleep.  I voted, but that was about it.  I just didn't like the guy much.

    I'm also MUCH more enamored with Gore in his new role.  Pretty neat.  And I love it that he's actually turned his back on politics and found an even more effective way to make a difference.  Good thinking!  There's always more than one path.  True creative thinkers don't get stuck in a box.

    But this victim stuff that Obama started passing off flipped me.  Then someone pointed out that Change candidates, by definition, have to run negatively.  That made sense.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#74)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:12:27 PM EST
    I'm not saying he won't be the nominee, I'm just saying that if he is the nominee it will be obvious that he'll lose in Nov. Really, I don't think that the party wants to win in Nov.

    Parent
    Not (none / 0) (#112)
    by sas on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:45:01 PM EST
    only are you not of their ilk, you are probably low-income, uneducated, racist, and white trash.

    Parent
    *wink* (none / 0) (#140)
    by AnninCA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 08:29:01 PM EST
    Sure......:)

    Parent
    Addendum to Rasmussen numbers (none / 0) (#34)
    by gandy007 on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:15:19 AM EST
    I should have mentioned that the Obama 14 point lead came out on Tuesday and the 9 point lead came out on Friday.  So similar to Zogby, there was a 5 point move in just 3 days seemingly reflecting the Wright factor or perhaps just a matter of accretion.

    Obama camp rumor that Bayh will be Obama VP (none / 0) (#51)
    by jawbone on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:34:05 AM EST
    Per Commenter JJ at TM, now in the state to work on campaign, writes:

    ...there is a rumor that is being spread by Obama people here that Bayh is backing away from Hillary because Obama offered him the VP spot. Where have we heard this before? Kansas, New Mexico, Virgina...familiar story. My dad got a call from a friend of his who is a big Obama fundraiser (who fundraises for him to appease his kid but he will be voting for McCain come Nov.) and the fundraiser asked if my dad had heard anything about it. And my dad said he did not think it was true given how hard Bayh has been working all over the state for her and just said that Bayh has more integrity than that.

    SNIP They did this in VA with Warner to get undecideds who like Warner to go with him, and they are doing it in IN for the same reason, as well as to cast a negative light on Hillary. It is not true, Bayh is a passionate supporter, I have heard him talk about her, and he has far more integrity than that.
    JJ | Homepage | 05.03.2008 - 01:33 am

    Has anyone here heard of rumors like this being floated in those other states?

    Just wondering.

    Bayh (5.00 / 0) (#58)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:49:14 AM EST
    isn't backing away from Hillary. He's been campaigning for her. This just reeks of desperation from the Obama campaign.

    Parent
    Just rumor-mongering (none / 0) (#53)
    by AnninCA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:40:30 AM EST
    stuff, it sounds like to me.

    Parent
    Bayh seems pretty committed (none / 0) (#69)
    by waldenpond on Sat May 03, 2008 at 11:59:45 AM EST
    to Clinton.  Here's a piece from the National Journal.

    [They'll attack Hillary, too, no question about it, but people already have a pretty fixed opinion of her. Barack's challenge is, when you are new, when people don't know you very well, the other side has a greater opportunity to kind of fill in those blanks in a way that is potentially harmful to you.]  Bayh

    For the most part, her baggage is old news, Obama's is new and makes him more vulnerable.  If that is his opinion, does it make sense to run two unknowns on the same ticket?

    Parent

    So, this is pretty much local under the radar (none / 0) (#90)
    by jawbone on Sat May 03, 2008 at 12:43:03 PM EST
    stuff? No one so far in the states mentioned has heard of anything like this, right?

    Parent
    Report this (none / 0) (#115)
    by BackFromOhio on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:52:52 PM EST
    Anyone report this to the HRC Campaign?

    Parent
    Apparently Joe Andrew, the SD who switched from (none / 0) (#118)
    by jawbone on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:59:36 PM EST
    Hillary to Obama is one who has been pushing Bayh as an Obama VP -- since his letter and then appearance on Morning Joe.

    I doubt he's doing it without agreement from the O camp.

    Parent

    You are right (5.00 / 0) (#122)
    by IzikLA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 02:13:37 PM EST
    I saw this yesterday.  That is really sneaky of them and I don't like it.  Bayh has been extremely loyal to Clinton, I think the only ticket he could get the VP slot on would be hers.

    Parent
    Greatest (none / 0) (#113)
    by sas on Sat May 03, 2008 at 01:50:34 PM EST
    victory ever recorded in any election, at any time, since records have been kept...

    this will finally extinguish Rev. Wright....

    time for Hillary to drop out?...

    so will the MSM proclaim tomorrow after Obama wins Guam today

    Ah (none / 0) (#121)
    by IzikLA on Sat May 03, 2008 at 02:08:13 PM EST
    My first good laugh of the day.  Thanks!

    For Expectations, Zogby Should Be the Clinton's Choice | 145 comments (145 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment