You have to check out this auction. It's an awesome Obama logo quilt hand done by someone over on DailyKos. The procedes will go to the campaign, so bid away!!!
I originally wrote this as a comment but figured it was worth posting it as a Blog post as well...
--------
When I hear complaints about Obama asking supporters to pay off Hillary's debt I am reminded of advice my mom always gave me. "You have to pick your battles."
It's important to remember a few things. First, Obama is only asking top donors to help...those that can readily afford to write a big check. He has explicitly refused to do a mass email campaign to all of his grass roots, small donors.
Second, he can ask, but it's still each person's choice. If you want to donate, great. If not, that's fine too.
Third - and this is where mom comes in - you have to pick your battles. Sure, Obama could take the hard line, tell Hillary that she ran up the debt, so she should pay it, but what would that accomplish? Would that help us move towards universal health care? Would that help us get out of Iraq sooner? Would that help us deal sensibly with our energy problems? Would that help us rework our trade arangements to create a level playing field for American workers? I don't think so.
And what benefit is there if he refused to help with the debt? Other than "punishing" Hillary, what does this gain us? Seriously...other than as a punitive action, why else would he not at least ask? If you are against the idea of helping, you really have to give this some thought.
Barack has asked all of us to reach out, to reach across to those who are different, and to get beyond petty disputes. This is one of those cases. Let's forgive and move on. Let's donate if you can. Either way, there are more important battles to fight.
Bottom line....Obama is doing the right thing. By asking those who can most afford it to help, Barack is helping to smooth the rift between the two camps which will increase the chances of victory this fall.
Today I had the pleasure of meeting with an Obama Organizing Fellow assigned to my area in cetral PA. While I had heard all the stats before (3600 fellows, every state, etc), it wasn't until I sat face-to-face with one of them that I realized the impact of this. Here I was sitting in a coffee shop in central PA talking about get-out-the-vote operations with an arm of the Obama campaign and this was being repeated in every corner of our country. WOW is all I can say. The republicans and McCain will have no idea what hit them come the fall.
To all the fellows out there...thanks for all you will do.
To everyone else...seek out those assigned to your area and help in any way you can. Together, yes we can!!
Sorry for the repost but until people stop worry about this, we need to keep spreading this message
--------------------------------------------
There's a bunch of talk about Obama maybe offering to pay off Hillary's debt. This is just not possible. Campaign finance laws limit the amount one campaign can give to another. It is $2000 in most cases. In a few cases, it could be $5000. Either way, that is a long way from the $10million+ debt owed by Hillary.
Check with factcheck.org if you want some additional details.
Now, what is all this talk about? Well, in exchange for Hillary playing nice, Obama could "encourage" some of the large donors with large networks to make some contributions to her campaign. But, in the end, I really find it hard to believe that people would offer to pay off the debt of some other wealthy person.
If Bill and Hillary were of relativly modest means, say like Jimmy Carter when he left office, then I could see a candidate making an effort to help out the former opponent. There have been cases, for example, where a candidate mortgaged their home to finance a campaign. I could see an offer of help then, but in the case of the Clintons....it just doesn't make sense. Even if it did IT WOULD NOT and COULD NOT COME FROM DONATIONS MADE TO THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN. It would have to be poeple deciding to step up and donate directly to Hillary.
Most important, however, is that the Obama campaign CAN NOT pay off the debt beyond a basic donation of a just few thousand dollars.
Please pass this along to help stop this rumor before people stop giving to Barack thinking their money could go to Hillary...that just isn't going to happen.
TQ
I keep reading all these posts imploring Barack to look past Hillary for the VP position. Listen...we are supporting Barack to be President, Commander in Chief, and leader of the free world. I think he can handle making the decision about VP and about how best to put Hillary's talents to work. What we need to do now is to stop the "us vs. them" mentality towards Clinton and her supporters. Let's take Barack's lead...let's compliment her on the historic nature of her campaign, welcome her and her supporters into our family and focus on beating McCain. Most important...let's relax and trust Barack to make the best decision regarding VP. All these comments just cause further division.
http://www.cnn.com/
It's our time. Let's make it happen. Get involved with your local office!!!!
Hear me out. I don’t believe much happens in politics without planning. I believe tonight is just part of the strategy. Hillary is aware her time is up. But, her speech doesn’t reflect that. Why? I offer two reasons: the desire for media attention and the importance of her most dedicated supporters.
First, if she stays in or uncommitted for a while (a few days or maybe a week), it continues to keep the spotlight on the democrats rather than McCain. Think about it…McCain could run through Times Square naked and not get the attention of the media until this is settled.
Second, take a look at the Hillary Clinton website. They are asking people to sign up to tell her what she should do. The vast majority of these folks will be telling her to stay in. These are her most ardent supporters who will need the most encouragement to vote Obama and we now have a list of them. How does this help us? When the peace is finally brokered, this list becomes the target of special messaging from Hillary encouraging them to vote for Obama. This is micro-targeting at its best and is how campaigns are won.
The general election started tonight and this was our first strategic move. I love it!
Harold Ickes made the point of leaving the door open for a contined fight by the Clinton campaign by saying "We reserve the right to challenge this decision before the Credentials Committee." I just don't think this is a real threat. Instead I believe this is really the final setup for the ony way Hillary can salvage a gracefull exit. By trumping up this claim, she can then back away from the threat in a few days and "appear" to be taking the higher road. I believe it will be after she loses the two primaries on Tuesday.
We've made it this far...another two days and we can watch Obama claim victory on Tuesday night!
I was poking aroung on pollster.com, one of my two favorite polling sites, and happened to spend some time looking at the historical plot of support for the Democratic primary. I noticed something interesting.
Obama's rise in the polls coincides with the departure of John Edwards and the realization that Al Gore wasn't going to run.
What I find most interesting is that Obama's level of support seems to be the sum of his own support plus that of the departed candidates and a few switchers/undecideds while Hillary's support has pretty much stagnated since the first of the year. While she got a small bump with the departure of candidates, she stayed between 40 and 45% the entire time and ended up giving up that small bump. Barack, on the other hand, seems to have won all of these voters and, perhaps, some more. If you look at Barack, at the time it became clear that Gore would not run, you see that Barack had a little over 20% while Gore and Edwards had about 25% in total. As they depart the scene, it seems like Barack picks up all those votes.
What does this tell us? I think this might tell us why Hillary is still in and why there are reports that some in her campt won't vote Obama in the fall. She has this solid group of support that doesn't seem to be impacted by what has happened. This group can't imagine voting for anyone else and it shows in their unwavering support. And these are the people that are talking to Hillary. This is manifest in the reports of them not being willing to vote Obama. But, given their strong support for Hillary, my guess is that they have not listened to what McCain has to say and will be running to Obama as soon as they are forced to compare the remaining two options.
More important, however, is the impact Obama has on ovoters who are shopping. He has picked up all of them. In the general election these are the independents or those not strongly aligned to their party of registration. These are newcomers to the political process. These are folks who only vote in the presidential election. Let's face it...if you are here on the Obama blogs, you are very active in politics. Like it or not, most americans are not. The key to winning the election this fall is to win over those folks who are not involved and who haven't taken the time to listen to what is being discussed. Once Barack starts to target these folks with a general election message, we will see a similar trend line in the race between him and McCain. In the chart below, about 10% of voters are not accounted for. If you win most of these, you win the election.
This also begs a question: Why can't Hillary win over any new voters? Despite all the money and all the travel, she hasn't won a new voter since the first of the year.
A lot of noise has been made about Hillary Clinton supporters suggesting that they would not vote for Obama this fall. The Daily Kos has a great little post with stats from The Harper's Index that shows what these numbers looked like for past elections as compared to this year.
Here they are:
Stats from this year:Portion of Barack Obama supporters who said in April they would not vote for Hillary Clinton if she became the nominee: 20%Portion of Clinton supporters who said this about Obama: 25%Percentage of John McCain supporters in March 2000 who said they would not vote for George W. Bush: 51%Percentage who still said this in October 2000: 39%
Stats from this year:
Portion of Barack Obama supporters who said in April they would not vote for Hillary Clinton if she became the nominee: 20%
Portion of Clinton supporters who said this about Obama: 25%
Percentage of John McCain supporters in March 2000 who said they would not vote for George W. Bush: 51%
Percentage who still said this in October 2000: 39%
So, the point is...Bush still managed to win in 2000 even though 39% of McCain voters were against Bush in OCTOBER! We are far less than that and it isn't even the summer. Call me crazy, but I'm feeling pretty good about our relative odds of winning back Hillary supporters!
And something I have said before...the polling question that generates this quote is just silly.
Consider this. In the heat of the moment, you just cast your vote and someone doing an exit poll asks you, on the way to your car, if you would ever vote for the person you just voted against? Of course you would have a hard time...the emotion is so close to the surface that John McCain seems like a decent 2nd option if your favorite loses.
But, 6-months later after we learn that McCain wants to keep us in Iraq for who knows how long, wants to "bomb-bomb-bomb, bomb-bomb, Iran", wants to short change our troops, wants to keep Dick Cheeney around as the VP and bring back Rummy as sec of state, I think these folks will vote the party. Just give it a few weeks for the wounds to heal and the emotions to subside. Till then, this exit poll question is just silly fodder for the talking heads trying to sell commercials on cable news.
CNN is reporting that Obama will respond directly to Bush's appeasement comments. I am expecting a hard rebuttal but, more important, I am expecting an intelligent response.
There is a clear difference between "appeasement" and "talking". Appeasement suggests one is willing to give in to demands of another party in order to avoid some threat. Just talking to a counterparty does not suggest capitulation of any kind.
If you are interested in the history of the "appeasement" term and its relevance to WW2, you can review exerpts from Chamberlin's speach in 1938. Here you can see that there was a proposal to cede half of Czechoslovakia to Hitler's Germany in an effort to avoid war. This is clearly different than having a dialogue with an enemy. Perhaps one of the most informative quotes of the time includes:
When we were convinced, as we became convinced, that nothing any longer would keep the Sudetenland within the Czechoslovakian State, we urged the Czech Government as strongly as we could to agree to the cession of territory, and to agree promptly. The Czech Government, through the wisdom and courage of President Benes, accepted the advice of the French Government and ourselves. It was a hard decision for anyone who loved his country to take, but to accuse us of having by that advice betrayed the Czechoslovakian State is simply preposterous. What we did was to save her from annihilation and give her a chance of new life as a new State, which involves the loss of territory and fortifications, but may perhaps enable her to enjoy in the future and develop a national existence under a neutrality and security comparable to that which we see in Switzerland to-day. Therefore, I think the Government deserve the approval of this House for their conduct of affairs in this recent crisis which has saved Czechoslovakia from destruction and Europe from Armageddon.
Clearly this is far different than meeting with enemies of Isreal in an effort to develop a plan to will establish peace (where none exists currently) between these two neighbors.
If you can, get ready for another historic speech by Barack Obama. Rather than using fear, 8-second sound bites, and some dreamy vision of the future, I expect Barack to educate and persuade with solid facts and rational argument. I am looking forward to it.
What great news we have in John Edwards putting his support behind Barack Obama. I had hoped it would come on the day of the WV vote (or early the next morning), but a day later is close enough! THat it was in Michigan shows that the Obama strategists are clearly on top of their game!
If you have already watched Edwards' remarks, you should also check out Barack's introduction of Mr. Edwards. This video is not the best quality, but it really shows the warm welcome received by Edwards. Have a look:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgXd3x62CB8
With this bit of business out of the way, we are on to KY and OR. Keep the faith everyone...come Tuesday of next week Barack will cross the line of having the majority of available pledged delegates and he will see a landslide of supers coming to his side even before the final votes in early June. The time is now and yes we can!
Tonight was nothing but a minor bump in the road that we all knew was coming. Nothing happened today that wasn't expected so, despite Clinton campaigners pleas to the contrary, there is no reason for the supers to think anything different tomorrow than they did yesterday.
Hillary couldn't drop out before today because it would have looked bad for Barack to then lose.
Next week Barack will win in Oregon and those delegates will push him over the magic number of pledged delegates. This will be the case no matter what reasonable forumula you use to allocate FL and MI.
One week from tonight we declare victory and move on to the general election.
From a post on politico
As everyone knows, the Democratic nomination is determined not by voters actually voting, but by superdelegates choosing whomever they please. (They are the Democratic Party’s equivalent of the Electoral College, a safeguard against too much democracy. Unlike the Electoral College, however, superdelegates were not created in the 18th century but in 1984.)What counts to Obama is that since his victory in North Carolina and narrow loss in Indiana last week, he has picked up 27 superdelegates and Clinton has picked up one and a half.
What more can we say? Nothing happened today that wasn't expected. The results are in the margin of error of most polls and yet the superdelegates keep coming. If noting happened today that was outside the range of expectation, why would tomorrow be any different than yesterday?
In the last week the best no poll had Barack getting more than 24% of the vote and Hillary getting no less than 60%. The actual tally is coming out at 63%-30%. That means undecided voters are breaking in favor of Obama even though he barely campaigned there. If WV becomes an impotant state in the general election, he can do what is needed to close the deal.
It looks like WV will be a net gain of 9 electoral votes for Hillary. Barack landed 4 super delegate endorsements today making the net gain just 4 for Hillary. Add in the extras we got from the final count in Ohio and today was a draw!
Barack has moved on to the general election. Everyone knows it. The networks are acting like this isn't the case just to sell commercials tonight.
1988 - Bush 1 became president without winning WV.
Statistically, to call this state some sort of bellweather is just silly.
...the last three democratic victories were so large we didn't need it!
A quote from Hillary just the other day:
Hillary Clinton said again Monday that no Democratic presidential candidate can win without a victory in West Virginia — and drew a parallel between her own campaign and John Kennedy’s 1960 White House run.
Well, lets just see what history will tell us.
In 1996 Clinton beat Dole by 220 electoral votes - West Virginia was worth 5 of them
In 1992 Clinton beat Bush 1 by 202 electoral votes - West Virginia was worth 5 of them
In 1976 Carter beat Ford by 57 electoral votes
In 1964 Johnson beat Goldwater by 434 electoral votes - West Virginia was just 5 of them
In 1960 Kennedy beat Nixon by 84 electoral votes - West Virginia was 8 of them
Now don't get me wrong. I want to win all 50 states, DC, and all the territories. But, absent that being possible, I'd be happy with a win in November. But, how Hillary's team can claim anything about West Virginia's overall importance...how they can say that somehow West Virginia has special standing over places like, say, Idaho or Minnesota where Barack carried the day, I just don't understand.
Drudge would like you to be shocked by this. And he says so by running a headline that can easily me misinterpreted. Visit the exit polls for yourself. While Drudge says "SHOCK: 2/3 OF WHITES CITING RACE WON'T VOTE OBAMA IN GENERAL..." the real story is that 2 in 10 cite race in their decision to vote for Hillary. Of those 2 that cite race as the issue, two-thirds won't vote for Obama. To me this is good news. This accounts to just 13% of white voters in West Virginia saying they are unwilling to vote Barack this fall because of race. In the end, we will win some of those over and some will just stay home because they won't want to vote McCain. What is good news is that 1/3 of these racially affected voters will, indeed, switch their vote to Barack!
This will be spun 100 ways from Sunday by the time the night is over. But, do the math yourself. Two of 10 say race is a factor and only 2 out of 3 of thee folks feel so strongly as to not vote Obama.
I read with interest this morning about the reports of overt racism on the campaign trail (Washington Post Article). There's a certain percentage of the population who will have a negative reaction to Barack. Many, when challenged, will actually open their eyes. The ones who are left are no different than the ones yelling obsceneties at me when I help up a John Kerry sign four years ago. With Barack, they just have more material to work with.
Don't let this get you down. Challenge people every step of the way and you will be amazed at home many you can convert. If it's not race it will be religion. If its not religion it will be that he is too liberal or that he wants to talk to our enemies. Just keep challenging people to get past their initial learned reactions and they too will open their eyes.
For another take on this...check out this post. Oneof the best I have read!
