Monday’s campaign round-up
Today’s installment of campaign-related news items that wouldn’t generate a post of their own, but may be of interest to political observers:
* Campaigning in Indiana over the weekend, Barack Obama continued to respond to the controversy surrounding his former pastor. The NYT noted that Obama implored an Indiana audience to set aside racial divisions and heed the words that Robert F. Kennedy delivered not far from here the night the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated. “I will not allow us to lose this moment where we cannot forget about our past and not ignore the very real forces of racial inequality and gender inequality and the other things that divide us,” he said. “When people say things like what my former pastor said, you have to speak our forcefully against them, but what you have to also do is to remember what Bobby Kennedy said that it is within our power to join together to truly make a United States of America.”
* On a related note, apparently aware of the seriousness of the Jeremiah Wright controversy, the Obama campaign also released a web video on the subject over the weekend.
* There are rumors that the Clinton campaign may go to court to challenge the results of the Texas caucuses: “As final results from the Texas Democratic caucus remain unknown, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign wants signatures from the March 4 contest verified before party conventions are held around the state later this month. In a letter sent to the state Democratic Party late Friday, the Clinton campaign requests the March 29 count and state Senate district conventions be postponed until the eligibility of an estimated 1 million caucus-goers are double checked.”
* Superdelegates are starting to commit in larger numbers: “The number of undecided superdelegates has fallen in recent weeks as both candidates have picked up support — Barack Obama more so than Hillary Rodham Clinton, according to a survey by The New York Times and CBS News. Mr. Obama has gained the support of about 60 superdelegates in the last month while Mrs. Clinton added more than half as many. Still, just under half of the total 795 Democratic party leaders who will cast votes at the convention have not expressed a preference for either candidate.”
* House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sounds as if she’s leaning in Obama’s direction, telling ABC News yesterday that it would be “harmful” to the party if superdelegates were to give the Dems’ nomination to a candidate who is trailing in pledged delegates. One assumes Pelosi realizes that Obama will almost certainly go to the convention with more pledged delegates.
* Speaking of Pelosi, this is important: “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has endorsed three Miami congressional candidates after two House Democrats from South Florida refused to participate in their campaigns because of their friendships with the Republican incumbents. In letters, Pelosi and four other top House Democrats congratulate each of the challengers for a ‘strong start” and say they look forward to helping each ‘become our newest Democratic partner for change in Washington.” The letters came after Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Kendrick Meek said they wouldn’t actively campaign for their fellow Democrats because of they didn’t want to risk their personal and professional ties to Republican Reps. Lincoln and Mario Diaz-Balart and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen.”
* A do-over vote in Michigan is looking more likely; a do-over vote in Florida is looking less likely.
* In a quote I’m sure she’d like to take back now, Hillary Clinton said this during a radio interview a couple of months ago about the Michigan contest: “It’s clear. This election they’re having is not going to count for anything.”
* Obama got a boost in Oregon with support from the state’s AFSCME organization.
* Pro-Clinton bloggers are apparently organizing some kind of DailyKos boycott. “This is a strike – a walkout over unfair writing conditions at DailyKos. It does not mean that if conditions get better I won’t ‘work’ at DailyKos again,” diarist Alegre wrote, promising to come back only “if we ever get to the point where we’re engaging each other in discussion rather than facing off in shouting matches.” The “unfair writing conditions” reportedly include comments threads with significant Clinton criticism. (Markos said he thought the move is “great,” adding, “It’s a big Internet, so I hope they find what they’re looking for.”)
* Sen. Norm Coleman (R) is looking surprisingly strong against Al Franken (D) in Minnesota’s Senate race, at least according to SurveyUSA.
* And Rep. Don Young’s (R-Alaska) future just got a little more challenging, thanks to a primary challenge he’ll face from Alaska Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell (R).
So almost one third of the delegates to the Democratic National Convention will have been selected rather than elected. I thought we learned better than that in 2000.
If you had read the statement of the striking Daily Kos writers, you would know that they are complaining because Obama supporters were calling for posting of personal, real-life information about Clinton supporters, including places of employment and home addresses. They were also complaining that those running the blog were not blocking spam in the comments sections of the Clinton-supporting posts, in other words, not doing their job in order to sabotage discussion on pro-Clinton posts.
This is a great deal more serious than the description you have posted here. Why is that?
On a related note, apparently aware of the seriousness of the Jeremiah Wright controversy, the Obama campaign also released a web video on the subject over the weekend.
I’m thinking they should make a little viral youtube video called Dancing Rev Wright with him singing God Damn America with faint praise!
Hillary Clinton is showing us all how efficient she is, that she knows how to get the job done without spending a lot of money. Why spend all that time and money on convincing a million voters to caucus when you can just wait to see how the vote comes out and then if you don’t like it hire a few lawyers to sue the state for running the caucuses exactly the way they said they would.
The rules are only what your lawyer can make them be.
Link please, Mary.
thx
Hi Mary,
You and I have not often seen eye to eye, but if the conditions at Daily Kos are as you describe them, then I for one am sorry. Open honest discussion is always the way to go.
Of course, I have not spent any time over at the Daily Kos, so I really have no way to know what things have been like over there.
Yesterday, Ms. Dana Bash stated that the Obama campaign originally shone a light on Ms. Ferraro’s comments in the Breeze. Yea or Nay?
If you had read the statement of the striking Daily Kos writers… -Mary
Please don’t call it ‘striking.’ A group of angry anonymous people who have decided to make a public showing of their ability to not read a particular blog is nothing compared to union members who put their entire livelihoods on line in order to make significant changes in the workplace. Let’s keep the discussion grounded in reality.
I’ll just mention that Swan was once a diarist at DailyKos.
I read Kos every day and I’ve never heard of Alegre.
And yet MSNBC is reporting on this like it matters.
I’ll just mention that Swan was once a diarist at DailyKos. -Dale
Still is.
Link, Mary. You’re too frequent a liar and exaggerator for anyone here to take your word for this. Put up or shut up.
Kristol has correction at top of his column:
In this column, I cite a report that Sen. Obama had attended services at Trinity Church on July 22, 2007. The Obama camapaign has provided information showing that Sen. Obama did not attend Trinity that day. I regret the error.
What is most interesting is that Newsmax had reporters attending Obama’s church in July.
Sen. Norm Coleman (R) is looking surprisingly strong against Al Franken (D) in Minnesota’s Senate race, at least according to SurveyUSA
Really? It is “strong” for a sitting incumbent to be tied with a challenger who struggles to convince people that his candidacy is not part of a comedic sketch? (Particularly when Franken has been locked up in what was until last week a fairly tight 3-way primary?)
No, Coleman is looking very, very vulnerable to being picked off. Once people start paying attention this fall and realize Franken actually has the chops, not just a few off-color jokes, Coleman is in a world of hurt. Live from Minnesota, its a new Senator and all that. . .
“This is a strike – a walkout over unfair writing conditions at DailyKos. It does not mean that if conditions get better I won’t ‘work’ at DailyKos again,” diarist Alegre wrote, promising to come back only “if we ever get to the point where we’re engaging each other in discussion rather than facing off in shouting matches.” The “unfair writing conditions” reportedly include comments threads with significant Clinton criticism.
Yes, we’re going to stamp our feet and pout and hold our breath till we turn blue, you mean ol’ nasty reality-based community, you.
Why is it all the Clintonistas turn out to be so stupid? They sure didn’t seem like that before The Empress was revealed to have no clothes.
Don’t let door hit your asses on the way out, kiddies.
I think I read almost the entire discussion at kos about the “striking” Clinton supporters, and never saw one mention of Obama people trying to get Clinton supporters to post private information. So I too would very much appreciate a link from Mary about this.
I know I’m being either cyncical or idealistic (hey, it’s Alice-in-Wonderland anymore) but I think it’s pathetic to watch Obama coming down so hard on Wright. So far no one has disputed the truth in Wright’s accusations regarding America. So far no one has condemned Hagee or Parsley in comparable terms for spewing much worse and much less believable crap. I thought Wright’s “mad and I’m not gonna take it any more” statements, even out of context, were stirring and right on (as we used to say – now it’s “spot on”, whatever that means). C’mon, Obama: he’s your pastor and mentor; the least you can do is leave well enough alone and move on. Piling on just lumps you with everybody else, including so-called “liberals”.
And here’s [clink] to that legendary Irishman, Barack O’Bama!
I have to agree that the substance of much of Wright’s most “inflammatory” remarks is hard to argue with. However, the way he’s saying it and the where he’s saying it (in a pulpit rather than from an academic office) make it hard for people to even understand the message. Understanding what someone is saying, rather than jumping on the most inflammatory phrases in it? And offering that nicety to a black man in a black church? Why, he’s so lucky to be a black man. @@ Heaven knows if white men said anything like that, day in and day out, not just occasionally, they’d have no political friends.
This whole flood of resignations is, I believe, the bumpy aftermath of years of non-accountability engendered by a Republican administration that never allowed consequences against any of its criminally stupid co-conspirators, going all the way back to the Swiftboat Liars who torpedoed Kerry’s campaign if not further.
As painful as it may be now, I actually think it’s a good sign for the future. People are finally tired of being played for suckers 24-7 and won’t put up with what they perceive as low blows anymore, at least not to the same degree.
It’s even reaching the wingnut level, what with so many truly hateful foam-spewers losing their shows these days. Heck, even Ann Coulter’s credit card was refused at a grocery store the other day, and you know things are getting tough for them when that happens.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/20/ann-coulters-credit-card_n_87531.html
And here’s [clink] to that legendary Irishman, Barack O’Bama! -Ed Stephen
How right you are!
“House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sounds as if she’s leaning in Obama’s direction, telling ABC News yesterday that it would be “harmful” to the party if superdelegates were to give the Dems’ nomination to a candidate who is trailing in pledged delegates.”
I know what CB meant by this comment since Obama benefits from Pelosi’s logic.
However, rather than stating that Pelosi is leaning in Obama’s direction, I think it’s more accurate to say that she is leaning in democracy’s direction. Undoubtedly, Pelosi would take the same position to the benefit of Clinton if Clinton had won the most pledged delegates via the primaries and caucuses (i.e. via the voters).
The Democratic Party can’t afford to have record numbers donating, record donation amounts, record voter turnout and then ultimately overrule the voters.
Norm Coleman will be a very tough opponent in our Senate race this year. I’m really pretty pleased that a credible organization like SUSA has it 48-47. That means it’s definitely within reach.
Thanks Ed. I watched the vids of the Rev over the weekend. All I could say was, whats the big deal ?. Especially in context, there wasn’t much to argue with. What was interesting, I saw no discussion of what he was trying to convey.
Ed:
“Spot-on” is a common British phrase that some Americans have adopted in an attempt to sound hip, not realizing it only makes them sound silly and pretentious instead.
P.S. Even Kieth O, stuck his head in the sand when he had a chance to discuss this and instead went w/ the repudiate and denounce garbage.
Sorry, but this is complete crap. I’m a frequent Daily Kos reader and have never seen anything like that on there, unless you’re cherry-picking some random troll and accusing them of representing the whole, Bill O’Reilly-style. Although based on the second half of your post, it really just sounds like you don’t have a clue how the site works. Do you get your info from O’Reilly or Hillaryis44.com?
“” The “unfair writing conditions” reportedly include comment threads with significant Clinton criticism.”
Seemingly endless carping about “Obama supporters” is silly. Obama supporters on this and other blogs are not running for president. Obama is. People should judge him on his experience, judgment, background, record, proposals, character, etcetera.
Obama supporters, in general, are not critical of Hillary because of her supporters. They’re critical of Hillary because of her words, actions, record, positions, … If you can’t defend Clinton on a particular issue without changing the subject and making it about “Obama supporters”, then maybe you don’t have a very strong case.
Ed @ 17:
C’mon, Obama: he’s your pastor and mentor; the least you can do is leave well enough alone and move on. Piling on just lumps you with everybody else, including so-called “liberals”.
I don’t think Obama’s piling on, I think he’s doing some needed spin control. I’ve heard Obama clearly state that while he repudiates Wright’s more inflammatory statements, he does not repudiate the man. I have no doubt that Obama and Wright discussed the way to play this together.
Obama has also tried to place Wright in the context of a ’60s-style firebrand, a position I think is both accurate and politically wise. To me, in context, all of Wright’s statements are justifiable. But I’m not a religious white swing voter in Missouri, either. (Socially conscious South Side church? C’mon — he’s supposed to be fulminating against The Man.) But that doesn’t mean these statements can’t be used against Obama politically. Socially and religiously, Obama has a higher hurdle to clear than Clinton or McCain, something both Obama and Wright are savvy enough to know.
What did Jeramiah Wright say that didn’t need saying? His exact words—and I quote—“God Damn America for treating her citizens as less than human.”
Any nation that treats its citizens as less than human is, by all accounts (and by international laws regarding such things), worthy of being damned. Such a nation deserves no better, and should probably be granted a spot on the international totem pole a few notches lower. Such inflammatory rhetoric was justifiable in an earlier era—the ’60s and ’70s—but it’s to be condemned today?
Why—because it’s “unpatriotic?” Well, then—Damn Patriotism itself, if that’s the case.
Patriotism has become meaningless in the America of 2008. Patriotism means a Congress that bows down to, and further enables, a tyrannical, megalomanic oaf and his sadistic handlers. Patriotism means tolerating a MSM that licks the boots of that oaf and those handlers. Patriotism means kicking families out of their homes, while bailing out the banks that kicked those families out of those homes.
Patriotism means caring more for the financial health of a CEO than the physical health of a child; of placing the importance of what’s in someone’s multimillion-dollar portfolio above whether there’s anything in that child’s tummy when he or she goes to bed at night; of setting more importance on the financial integrity of a predatory profiteer over the structural integrity of that child’s school, or the bridge crossed every day by that child’s school bus, or the pedagogical integrity of the revisionist garbage passed off in that child’s school as “a curriculum.”
THAT is what “patriotism” has come to mean in the America of the Bu$hylvanians—and to THAT America, and THAT “patriotism,” I say, Yes—DAMN YOU. DAMN YOU EIGHT WAYS FROM SUNDAY.
Now as for that “blog-strike rubbish”—I’d like to invite each and every individual who has the ability (don’t do this if you’re at work; it’ll take several hours to read through all the “sordid stuff”) to buzz on over to DK, click the “search” option, type the term “alegre” into the search-box, click the drop-down, select “diarist,” select a time-parameter of at least 4 weeks, and read through some of the “diaries” created by the individual in question. The vast majority of text-bytes expended by this individual was spent, not in lifting up Clinton, but in slapping down Obama. So what appears up front to be a legitimate complaint against DK is, in reality, a “whine-snivel-pout fest” established by an individual who loved to dish it out, but apparently couldn’t take it. So to those who have the “whine,” I shall heartily offer a well-worn, somewhat soiled paper plate of stale, generic, Cold-War-era bomb-shelter crackers and a slightly, mis-shapen carton of moldy “government” cheese-like substance….
You cannot honestly say that had the Reverand Wright video been available all along that people would have voted the same way, would have donated money to this man in the same way.
Racism is one of the worst afflictions to society, but it works both ways. When preachers start talking about how rich white people gave black people drugs and aids in order to hold them down, and “God damn America”, these people should be removed from their positions.
It is likely now that Barack Obama will find himself out of the race completely, and best case scenario is VP.
And NO, you can’t have my phone number and address 🙂
Katie @ 22 – Perhaps Steve meant that Pelosi is leaning towards supporting Obama in that she would cast her vote for him? It may be for the principle of democracy, but if that’s what will influence her allegiance, it’s fair to say that she’s supporting him and his bid to be president.
Is a diarist at Kos nothing more than a commenter?
Danp said:
Is a diarist at Kos nothing more than a commenter?
You do have to sign up and then you get your own blog or “diary”. Same with Democrats.org and others. There are no qualifications required.
Yep, anyone can register and anyone can post a diary. The only restriction is, I believe, a one-week wait period after registering before you can post a full diary, although you can comment immediately.
If you comment and get enough recommends, you’ll eventually become a Trusted User, allowing you to Hide Rate comments. If enough people Hide Rate (formerly known as Troll Rating) a comment, it’ll eventually disappear to non-Trusted Users. People can uprate it to counteract this if they don’t think a comment is hide-worthy, and one uprate is equal to four hide ratings, i.e. a comment will disappear if the ratio is less than 1 uprates to 4 hide rates.
If a diary is good, it can potentially get recommended up into the Recommended Diaries list, or if it’s exceptionally trollish or nasty, the diarist will get hide rated pretty quickly and eventually auto-banned by the system once they get enough bad ratings. Pretty interesting system, actually.
Greg: “You cannot honestly say that had the Reverand Wright video been available all along that people would have voted the same way, would have donated money to this man in the same way.”
Yes I can.
Gallup: “Obama Leads Hillary Nationally By Three Points”
Greg is having difficulty distinguishing between his wishful thinking and reality.
Katie is right. Greg is a regular Obama-trasher on this blog. He wishes the Rev. Wright controversy thing will swing things Hillary’s way, but fortunately, most are drawing the conclusion that Greg doesn’t want them to draw, and that is that Barak Obama is his own man.
If? I am living in May I will vote in the first Democrat primary I have ever voted in. I will vote for Mr Obama. What his preacher said makes no differnce to me. Been voting since 1978. I look forward to his prresidency. White boy said that.
I will not be commenting on this blog unless and until CB censures Mary and Greg. I will not allow myself to be subjected to such “unfair writing conditions”.
Thanks Dale and L Boom.
Regarding the superdelegates, the NYT blog linked above shows Clinton with 221 supers while Obama gets 201. Demconwatch.com shows Clinton with 244 vs 209 for Obama. The latter count would leave 342 uncommitted. However, of these, 74 are what is known as “Unpledged add-on delegates” (UAD’s). These people are actually chosen by delegates who are elected in the primaries or caucuses, and have been vetted for their preference of candidate. So, for example, since Iowa has more delegates for Obama, it is safe to assume Iowa’s UAD’s will be Obama votes. They are roughly proportioned according to the percentage of voters or Dems in each state, with each state getting at least one. The best guess is that Obama should get about 45-50 of these with Clinton getting 25-30. Then there are only about 270 undeclared supers.
Greg is having difficulty distinguishing between his wishful thinking and reality.
I believe the official diagnosis for that is Chronic Mary Syndrome.
I would have, because I’m not voting for Obama’s pastor, I’m voting for Obama. And unlike some people, I’m smart enough to know the difference.
Greg, your amazingly newfound sensitivity to racism would be much more believable if you had been this outraged when Geraldine stuck her racist foot in her mouth, repeatedly. Since you weren’t, I’ll assume you only think it’s racist when a black man says something intemperate.
LOL at “God Damn America” being the new worst thing anyone has ever heard…
Regarding the Obama Pastor kerfuffle
When was Free Speech taken from the US Constitution? It seems ok for BUSH/Cheney to hold weekly telepone conferences with religious leaders of their presuasion. So Why can’t Obamas pastor speak freely?
From Devilstower at DKOS:
” Damn you rich! You already have your compensation.
Damn you who are well-fed! You will know hunger.
Damn you who laugh now! You will weep and grieve.
Damn you when everybody speaks well of you!”
Scholars Translation of Luke 6:24-26, quoting Jesus of Nazareth
The Obama bashers may apologize to Jeremiah Wright for giving us a timely update of this quote.
Oh LOL at TR and Chronic Mary Syndrom.
And Steve @#30, that rant was brilliant sir. Hat tip and golf clap and all that.
I will vote in the first Democrat primary I have ever voted in. I will vote for Mr Obama. What his preacher said makes no differnce to me. Been voting since 1978. I look forward to his prresidency. White boy said that..
Ernest SedgwickYou Rock!
Yes! We! Can!
Steve #30 – well said!
I, personally, always thought the dropping of two atom bombs on Japan at the end of WWII was a completely immoral decision, and that the U.S. accumulated some very bad karma. Most Americans don’t know the truth about what this country has done over the years; we are all brainwashed from our earliest days about how “good” we are, and how bad the “enemy” always is. The U.S. has tremendous potential to be a force of good on this planet, but we’ve frequently traded that power and ability to further the Empire. What happened on Sept. 11, 2001 was a tragedy and another example of how innocent people pay the price for a country’s policies. That extends to ANY country whose innocents are killed and maimed in any act of terrorism or war.
As far as Reverend Wright’s racial comments, for those of us who are white and have not been subjected to the kind of prejudice his people have, I don’t believe we can judge his words.
greg writes: It is likely now that Barack Obama will find himself out of the race completely, and best case scenario is VP.
greg, your constant posts positing such wishful thinking BS has gotten so tiresome. Maybe CB should institute a system like they have at Kos, so that the likes of you and mary could be mercifully put out to a quiet electronic exile. Stop wasting my electrons!
Greg (#31),
Funny, when Ferraro–a member of Clinton’s team at the time–makes repeated inflamatory racist comments you don’t seem to have much of a problem, but when a preacher who is not–and never has been–a part of Obama’s campaign, makes similarly inflamatory racist comments you are suddenly Mr. Indignant. Please!
Can we please get back to discussions of healthcare, labor rights and ending the war?