I could not find a decent quality Republicans for Obama yard sign, so I made my own. I decided to put my county on it, especially since it's the most Republican county in Indiana. After ordering my own, I figured I'd make it available to anyone and raise some money for the campaign.
Here's a Hamilton County Republicans for Obama yard sign:
http://www.cafepress.com/wwobamad.279087309
I created one for Marion County (state doesn't matter):
http://www.cafepress.com/wwobamad.279101456
If anyone is interested in a design with a different county, let me know at chuck@whatwouldobamado.info what county and I'll create it and put it up there, and send you a link. In fact, I'll keep the following page updated with any new counties:
http://www.whatwouldobamado.info/cafepress.html
I'll be adding to this store over the next few days. Net proceeds will go to the Obama campaign.
http://www.cafepress.com/wwobamad
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
In their attacks on Obama’s proposal that our nation be strong enough to talk to our enemies as well as our friends, Gary Varvel and Charles Krauthammer give the word ridiculous new meaning. After eight years of a disastrous foreign policy, with an endless Iraq war, the strengthening of al-Qaeda and the complete inability to halt Iran’s efforts at building nuclear weapons, the man who should be reading Foreign Policy for Dummies is John McCain, who proudly proclaims his desire to continue down the same path that President Bush began.
Krauthammer once called President Reagan “ignorant and pathetic” for his willingness to sit down and negotiate with Mikhail Gorbachev, President of the USSR. Krauthammer was wrong then, and he remains wrong today. Much could be accomplished by talking directly with Iran, as President Bush’s Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Admiral Mike Mullen, maintain. Contrary to Krauthammer’s overblown claims, an agreement could be reached whereby Iran makes concessions on Iraq and its nuclear program for the promise of economic and energy assistance. Such an agreement might not be perfect, but it would be a far cry from the roadblock we find ourselves at today.
I am a part of several barackobama.com groups. These are indepedently created and moderated groups of Obama supporters. Lately, it seems many group members have become high stressed and have been more negative than usual. I have a couple thoughts as to why this might be:
1. As the primaries end in each state, there is a feeling of "what do I do now?" In Indiana, my wife and I worked hard, were part of a group, were given assignments. There was energy, excitement, a goal! When we turned in our final walking packets the day before the primary here, we asked what was next. The answer was, "nothing, we're done." We asked about the general election, and they said, "there will probably be an office downtown, but not here in Hamilton County." In other words, after all the work, energy and excitement, we were dumped. There was no decompression. We were both depressed for days, and still feel ancy, like we should be doing something to help and there's nothing to do.
2. We've talked about all the "real" issues already to death, so the groups are resorting to the fringe issues, which are the most divisive. Immigration, abortion, racism, Hillary - very emotional issues. The West Virginia primary only enhanced the emotions about racism in particular.
So, I am asking that Senator Obama do a speech specifically to all his supporters - even if it's only shown on this site. Announce it in an email to all groups. Just encourage us to stay positive, to believe in the inevitability of our goal, to keep hoping. We need something new just for us. Make it clear you still appreciate us, and didn't just use us in each state and forget us. Talk to us directly, Senator Obama, and show us the love!
Now that Senator Obama is the presumed nominee, our thoughts move towards who we'd like to see as VP. This post title tells you my preference.
Making Hillary his VP would be against everything Barack stands for - a complete destruction of his principals. So, it's not going to happen. At no point so far has Senator Obama compromised, so he won't start with something so controversial! For this same reason, he shouldn't pick Evan Bayh. Bayh used horrible tactics against Obama during the Indiana primary campaign, showing his old school leanings. McCaskill is fantastic, but she is also a Junior Senator, so too inexperienced to be on the same ticket. Barack needs a governor, a general, or an elder statesman (stateswoman). How does he find someone with experience, who also is not too caught into the Washington web? My choice is Governor Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas: http://www.governor.ks.gov/about/bio.htm and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nHp90Z2NJk. She has had great success in Kansas, is likable, and knows how to run a campaign (she's won twice). Let's not ignore the fact that, as a female, some of those Hillary supporters would feel vindicated.
Bill Richardson has proven through the primary that he is not competent as an executive branch candidate. He should be made Secretary of State. Wesley Clark often comes across as crazy, like Mike Gravel, so I think he'd hurt the campaign, like Vice Admiral Stockdale hurt Ross Perot's campaign in 1992. John Edwards - he lost his chance to be VP by not endorsing Obama. By playing it safe, he has at best earned the position of Attorney General. How about General David Petraeus? Petraeus won't be able to run because he's serving in the Middle East, but he'd be an interesting candidate. Maybe too conservative.
NYC Mayor Bloomberg? That's worthy of a book of comments...
I also would be okay with the idea of Senator Chuck Hagel: http://hagel.senate.gov/public/ Here's an interesting article from way back in December: http://www.nationalledger.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi?archive=20&num=17657
Check the excellent comments by politicoswizzlestick, who answered a question about this: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080222114338AAazfDL. The answer starts with, "The Obama camp has thus far wisely not leaked any VP choices..."
What are your thoughts?
(originally posted at my blog on my website - www.sherylhugill.com)
Yesterday was a big day here in Indiana. For the first time in a really long time, people came out in droves and voted in a primary election. This is the one opportunity we had to really make our votes count. Whether you voted on a Democrat or Republican ballot, whether you voted for Clinton, Obama, McCain, Paul, or someone else - your vote still counted. You can tell yourself “I’m only one vote, what difference does it make?” or “I voted for Ron Paul, he won’t win anyway.” - but the truth is that if all the people that think that would go vote anyway - you just might make a difference.
Here’s my example. I’m just one vote, right? But I’m a very passionate vote. I’m a declared Barack Obama supporter. Everyone around me knows it. I’ve talked about it, and I’ve talked about why I think what I do. And on top of that, I’ve gone out and knocked on doors to talk to people about it. I took a vacation day from work to talk to people about it. And I know, for a fact, that my vote - because I’ve been so passionate about it - has influenced at least a minimum of 4 other people to vote for the candidate that I support. Those are just 4 people that I can specifically name. I have no doubts that I’ve influenced more than that.
I did take yesterday, primary day here, off of work to volunteer for the Obama campaign. I spent the morning out by myself in a neighborhood of big, expensive houses knocking on doors and encouraging people to go vote. I left information for those not at home about where to go vote. I spent the afternoon painting a huge “OBAMA” sign that I helped hold up at a corner by a local high school/polling location and on an overpass over a very busy interstate. And I got a sunburn from all that time spent outside - but I had an absolute blast and enjoyed every second of it. I wouldn’t do a single thing differently, either yesterday or on any of the time I’ve spent on the Obama campaign.
I can’t even say I’m really too disappointed that Obama “lost” Indiana. Hillary was predicted to win it, and since we’re not an “all or nothing” delegate state, the delegates were split almost evenly. So for yesterday - my candidate still came out ahead overall. And what I’m really proud and excited about - is that Hamilton County - my county - voted for Obama at a percentage of 61 to 39. I know that that’s due in no uncertain terms at least partially to passionate voters like myself and the amazing people I’ve worked with over the last few days and weeks. People that have believed in something so much that they are willing to devote their time and energy to doing their absolute best to make sure that it happens. People whose enthusiasm and commitment shows through enough to make the people around them reflect on what exactly it is that makes them care so much, enough to turn a vote or cause someone to visit the polls that originally wouldn’t have.
Why should I be disappointed? I had fun, met some awesome people and built relationships that I already had, and saw evidence that I made a difference. You know why I decided to become actively involved in the Obama campaign? I mean, it’s one thing to say you support a particular candidate - it’s quite another to get so actively involved in their campaign, right? Honestly - it almost came down to “why not?” I decided I thought Obama would make a great next president, so why shouldn’t I work to get him there? If nothing else, I know I’m contributing to history being made, and I’ll never look back on it with regret.
Posted:("May2, 2008 6:30 PM EST")
INDIANAPOLIS (AP) - Days before Indiana's critical primary showdown between Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, voters throughout the state are flooding county clerk offices with absentee ballots.
The Indiana secretary of state's office said more than 14,000 absentee ballots were processed across the state on Thursday, boosting the total number of early primary ballots cast to 127,247.
That's more than twice the number cast in Indiana's presidential primaries over the past two decades. It's nearing the number of early ballots cast in the 1992 general election, when 162,068 people voted early, and in 1996, when 165,218 early ballots were cast.
The strong interest in the race has left the 92 county clerks in the Republican-leaning state struggling with a lack of staff.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed
This message came from J J Hopkins and I could not have said it better.
Good morning.
Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s name has been brought up more times than I can count in the first hour of MSNBC this morning, although sickened by this, it is not having the effect on me that I am sure the main stream media is intent on having.
For every time I see or hear these worthless ‘hits’ I am going to straighten my posture, lift my chin and make sure I do something positive for the Obama campaign today. I gave myself a trial of making calls a few days ago (not too sure I was pleased with my performance), I might give it another shot. I have talked about canvassing but have not taken the plunge yet. But, I will do something positive today and I am being fueled by the media not dismayed.
The Utter Fallacy of the Popular Vote Argument
While a vigorous debate could be held over the merits of choosing delegates by means of a primary election vs. a caucus (and there are clearly some very valid arguments for each), this is nonetheless an irrelevant issue at present. The entire DNC, including members of Clinton’s team, helped to craft the present system and agreed to abide by it many months ago. Yet, we continue to hear Senator Clinton argue that the “popular” vote is what ultimately matters most.
To illustrate the utter fallacy of this argument, consider Oklahoma and its slightly larger neighbor, Colorado. Oklahoma has 2.2 million registered voters, 61% Democratic or Independent, Colorado has 2.9 million registered voters, 65% Democratic or Independent.
In Oklahoma’s primary, Clinton gained a net lead of 10 delegates and 98,350 votes over Obama by virtue of a 23.6% victory.
In Colorado’s caucus, Obama gained a net lead of 15 delegates and 41,274 votes over Clinton by virtue of a 34.2% victory.
Even though Obama's margin of victory was 45% larger than Clinton's, her popular vote total was 238% higher (314% if we adjust for voter registration). Note however, that the delegate totals scale correctly with respect to the winning percentages, i.e. he received about 45% more delegates.
The point is painfully obvious if you recall anything whatsoever from high school algebra. Two oranges plus five apples doesn’t equal seven of either. The delegate count is the only meaningful measure, as it is a normalized representation of the voter intent in states with different polling procedures. Of the 17 caucuses held, Senator Clinton has only won the delegate count (by 1) in American Samoa. Four of the caucus states don't even report popular vote counts, and in the caucuses of Washington and Minnesota, states much larger than Colorado and Oklahoma, Obama comfortably won by more than a 2-1 margin. Therefore, simply counting the raw "popular" vote significantly under represents the actual number of voters supporting Senator Obama.
Of course there will be opponents who disagree, since a caucus turnout is generally smaller than a primary. Here again, mathematics tells the true story. Professional statisticians routinely conduct national polls encompassing roughly a thousand individuals, and do so with error margins of plus or minus a few percent. The total vote in Colorado’s caucus was more than one hundred times this amount (118,952), making the probability of selecting the incorrect winner less than the likelihood of being struck by lightning.
James McBride, Ph.D.
1647 Windy Ridge Court
Saline, MI 48176
734-944-3102
Today was an interesting day. My wife, Sharon, and I went to see Senator McCaskill from Missouri, who is working for Senator Obama's nomination. As a Junior Senator like Obama, who is against partisanship and old-school Washington politics, she has decided that, although a woman like Hillary, she must support the candidate she feels is most able to create change in D.C. She explained that her belief in equality of the sexes means choosing the best candidate, regardless of his or her sex, not because of his or her sex.
There were about 40-50 people in the room, which is pretty good for mid-day in the Republican stronghold of Hamilton County. After talking about the importance of Indiana in the primary, and the similarities between Missouri and Indiana, Senator McCaskill explained how it's not a matter of IF Senator Obama will get the nomination, but WHEN. Indiana can help make WHEN be sooner, rather than later.
I asked the first question - "Knowing that Hillary cannot win the nomination, and knowing Hillary has to also know this, why do you believe she is still running?" Her answer was interesting. I'll paraphrase, so don't quote me exactly... Senator McCaskill believes Hillary is hoping something major will happen, like a complete Obama melt down or a major revelation about Obama, that will give her the chance to get the nomination. She then reconfirmed that she truly believes there is no possibility that anyone other than Barack Obama will get the Democratic nomination.
Senator McCaskill stayed for one and a half hours, graciously answering question after question, even when her people were saying she had to leave. Although I don't live in Missouri, and as a life-long Republican I'm still suspicious of Democratic politicians, after today I am a huge fan of Senator McCaskill and look forward to supporting her in any way I can.
http://mccaskill.senate.gov/
Here is a pic of myself, my wife, Sharon, and Senator McCaskill:
In an Obama list, someone sent the latest Hillary site feature - a Pop Quiz about Barack Obama.
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/quiz
Here are my thoughts:
A candidate shows their opinion of the voters by how they interact. Senator Obama shows respect, and a belief in the intelligence of the voter. For example, this page, which, I can tell you with my marketing background, is NOT dumbed down: http://factcheck.barackobama.com/. Compare that to the Clinton Quiz, and we can see how the candidates feel about their supporters. Likewise, watching any given speech by Hillary, McCain, or Obama, and you'll see who is using "small" words, talking like talking to children, dumbing down their speech, and who is not. Those who dumb down their speech are the elitists, not the one candidate that speaks to us like intelligent adults.
You can summarize the campaigns as: Senator Obama: "Yes We Can."Senator Clinton: "I Can, But He Can't"Senator McCain: "Of course I'm going to be the next president, so stop bothering me with questions."
