I personally think his wife is one of his strongest assets, this warm up speech she gave her husband in Illinois was simply brilliant.
I also think that it's quite interesting that there is a lot of talk / comparison regards Michelle Obama & Jackie Kennedy, in the way that she supports her husband on the campaign trail.
What I find vastly amusing is the fact that Caroline & Teddy Kennedy have come out for Obama, especially when Bill Clinton himself has previously referred to himself as being heir to Kennedy's political legacy
Last edited by Polorise; 13.02.2008 at 19:38.
Reason: clarification.
Well, I think a lot of the US and the rest of the world want, and are hoping for an antidote to Bush, and in this sense, Obama looks much more like the antidote than McCain.
People have had it with Bush's brand of poison and McCain looks too much like the same old bottle relabeled "New, improved and better tasting Snake Oil".
When Obama says something like "Don't even flush that stuff down the toilet, we'll environmentally safely recycle it along with the WMD", people perk up.
"Something is happening in America and people are prepared and ready to make that great leap," Lewis told the New York Times. "I've been impressed with the campaign of Senator Obama. He's getting better and better every single day."
can someone explain in laymans terms exactly what is a "super delegate" ?
An election fought on the economy would favour Obama. But what if an unforeseen event shifts America's political conversation - now focused on fears of a recession - to national security?
Republican operatives are already trying to frame the elections next November in terms of national security. That would help McCain, turning his age and experience into an unalloyed asset.
a Republican playing the "fear" card ... shurely not ...
can someone explain in laymans terms exactly what is a "super delegate" ?
What I'm writing here deals with the Democratic party. Republicans do it a little differently.
The Democratic party Presidential nominee is the candidate who receives the most number of delegate votes at the party convention. As of now there are 4049 delegate votes to be cast. How a delegate votes at the party convention depends on the outcome of these state primaries and caucuses, which you're now seeing in the news. The distribution of delegate votes for each state is proportional to the vote. For example, Clinton won the popular vote in New Hampshire (and hence was declared the "winner"), but the margin was so close that both Obama and Clinton each received 9 delegate votes. Effectively, a tie.
To answer your question. A super-delegate is a member of these 4049 delegates, but does not represent the outcome of a caucus or primary. A super-delegate can vote any way they want, giving their vote much more weight than the common voter. You can imagine the back-room politics and pandering that must be going on to win these votes. A few weeks ago Chelsea Clinton (Clinton's daughter) went out for breakfast with a 21-year old super-delegate (how he became a super-delegate is another question) to sway his vote.
Super-delegates are playing an essential role in the election because Clinton and Obama are so close in the polls. There is criticism that super-delegates are not democratic because they can upset the popular vote. Imagine how split the Democratic party will be if Obama wins the popular vote, but Clinton gets the nomination because of the super-delegates. It's going to be very interest to watch.
Last edited by chrisch; 16.02.2008 at 11:25.
Reason: typos, grammar, readability
The following 3 users would like to thank chrisch for this useful post:
...I'm not a fan of politics and likely don't know enough about it, but this is what bothers me about the American system. Here they preach Democracy like a religion all over the world, yet they invent Super Delegates and the Electoral College so that the outcome of an election can still be manipulated and have strings pulled by anonymous powers and interests from the back rooms. Hypocrisy at it's finest.
"The essential purpose of superdelegates is to maintain some control of the nominating process by establishment party elites," said Northeastern State University political science professor Dr. Ron Becker. "It is purely undemocratic, but the reasoning makes sense because primary elections and caucuses are dominated by party activists, as the typical voter does not turn out to vote. If the Democrats nominate a candidate too far to the left, or the Republicans nominate a candidate too far to the right, this candidate will lose the general election to the more mainstream candidate," he said. "So the idea here is to have the establishment party leaders maintain some control over nominations."
The Democratic Party devised the superdelegate system following the presidential election of 1972, when George McGovern lost to former President Richard Nixon in a landslide. Had party officials been more involved in choosing a nominee, perhaps they could have helped picked someone better-suited to win a national election, the logic goes. An exceptionally close primary is required, however, for this elite group's "super powers" to hold any sway.
There are almost 800 superdelegates in 2008 (almost 20% of the total). And we have an exceptionally close primary... What's interesting is that the "outsider" (Obama) may be the stronger national general election candidate.
The Republican Party does not have superdelegates. There are 463 unpledged delegates to the Republican National Convention out of 2,380 total delegates. Of those, 123 are members of the Republican National Committee. (Source)
...yet they invent Super Delegates and the Electoral College so that the outcome of an election can still be manipulated and have strings pulled by anonymous powers and interests from the back rooms.
While the Electoral College results in an indirect election for president, I'm not sure how you can say it results in manipulation and back room deal-making or that it is not democratic. This process has been in place since the US Constitution was written. Apparently, electoral colleges are "an ancient institution." Read on...
When deciding which candidate is best to now lead our nation, we ask that you consider supporting Senator Barack Obama. The U.S. faces serious challenges that are not being addressed by our political leaders. Elected officials of both sides have found it easier to appease their parties’ fringes to win elections, and media companies choose to shock, amuse and divide us. In the meantime, the problems we face as a nation grow as they are passed on to future generations.
This user would like to thank Polorise for this useful post:
Mrs Clinton is running out of options. There’s a growing sense that she may now choose to go aggressively negative. She is under pressure from some in her campaign to step up the attacks on Mr Obama, especially over his inexperience
probably true, my only worry is that the Democrats are starting to damage themselves heavily while Mccain sits and recovers in the corner. Will a punch-drunk Obama be able to beat a rested Mccain.
This user would like to thank dakman for this useful post:
probably true, my only worry is that the Democrats are starting to damage themselves heavily while Mccain sits and recovers in the corner. Will a punch-drunk Obama be able to beat a rested Mccain.
I don't think Obama will be punch drunk. he has , admirably in my opinion, not let himself get drawn in by Bill Clinton's Jesse Jackson jibes etc.
Moral highground seems to be his choice, which seems to make him more appealing.
I am getting more impressed by Obama. He is not getting drawn into negative tactics. Really refreshing. Mind you he does not need to as he has the momentum.
I think who ever win demorat nomination wins the presidential race for white house. Most likely hillary will emerge as the winner.
Well them conservatives who propelled Bush to power twice might still have a say. Voters who have common sense would vote for democrats but common sense is not common
Last edited by rhythmical remedy; 22.02.2008 at 14:00.
Obama has a clear direction for the US, and he wants us to
get out of this Iraq Catostrophé. Additionally, he believes
in supporting the middle and lower classes.
The Republicans will categorize him as a spending liberal
just waiting to raise taxes. They do it every time and
have been very successful with this tactic.
Linear Mode
