Obama '08?

50 superdelegates again:

Quote:

U.S. Rep. Lacy Clay, Obama's Missouri co-chairman and pledged Obama superdelegate, said that regardless of the superdelegate mathematics, the campaign is Obama's. Clay said that later this week, Obama will gain the support of 50 undecided Democratic superdelegates.

http://www.columbiamissourian.com/stories/2008/03/05/six-missouri-superdelegates-still-grabs/

I really want to SEE them rather than keep getting these rumors... sure hope it happens.

0 Replies

I read that too, and in the context of the article, I'm wondering if Clay was misusing the term "super delegates" for delegates that will be earned via primaries in the next week.

0 Replies

Butrflynet wrote:

I read that too, and in the context of the article, I'm wondering if Clay was misusing the term "super delegates" for delegates that will be earned via primaries in the next week.

Next week's primaries only total 40 together. Hard to think he'd make that big a mistake.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Roxxxanne wrote:

Want a say? Join the damn party.

I'm a member of the party, have been for 10 years. I've never voted for a republican......but you still want to silence me because I'm a Clinton supporter.

It's not that you want to silence non-democrats, you want to silence non-Obama supporters.

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

Tico wrote-

Quote:
BTW, can't someone come up with a good adjective that starts with the letter "E"?

Ectoplasmic. Echolalious.

Echolalic... I like.

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

spendius wrote:
Tico wrote-

Quote:
BTW, can't someone come up with a good adjective that starts with the letter "E"?

Ectoplasmic. Echolalious.

Echolalic... I like.

Well I'm highly insulted. Just because Spendi knows bigger words than I do. . . . .

0 Replies

maporsche wrote:

Roxxxanne wrote:

Want a say? Join the damn party.

I'm a member of the party, have been for 10 years. I've never voted for a republican......but you still want to silence me because I'm a Clinton supporter.

It's not that you want to silence non-democrats, you want to silence non-Obama supporters.

Which makes the insistence that much more bizarre as the party faithful tend to choose Hillary. It's us interlopers who are pushing Obama.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

maporsche wrote:
Roxxxanne wrote:

Want a say? Join the damn party.

I'm a member of the party, have been for 10 years. I've never voted for a republican......but you still want to silence me because I'm a Clinton supporter.

It's not that you want to silence non-democrats, you want to silence non-Obama supporters.

Which makes the insistence that much more bizarre as the party faithful tend to choose Hillary. It's us interlopers who are pushing Obama.

She certainly has some issues.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

maporsche wrote:
Roxxxanne wrote:

Want a say? Join the damn party.

I'm a member of the party, have been for 10 years. I've never voted for a republican......but you still want to silence me because I'm a Clinton supporter.

It's not that you want to silence non-democrats, you want to silence non-Obama supporters.

Which makes the insistence that much more bizarre as the party faithful tend to choose Hillary. It's us interlopers who are pushing Obama.

It really makes you wonder who the neophyte is.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Ticomaya wrote:
spendius wrote:
Tico wrote-

Quote:
BTW, can't someone come up with a good adjective that starts with the letter "E"?

Ectoplasmic. Echolalious.

Echolalic... I like.

Well I'm highly insulted. Just because Spendi knows bigger words than I do. . . . .

I like some of yours in combination, Foxy.

"Elderly eccentric egomaniac," works. :wink:

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
spendius wrote:
Tico wrote-

Quote:
BTW, can't someone come up with a good adjective that starts with the letter "E"?

Ectoplasmic. Echolalious.

Echolalic... I like.

Well I'm highly insulted. Just because Spendi knows bigger words than I do. . . . .

I like some of yours in combination, Foxy.

"Elderly eccentric egomaniac," works. :wink:

Oh okay. I feel better now. Smile

0 Replies

Roxxxanne wrote:

Again, Republicans should stay the f*** out of our business.

If you want privacy, get off the internet.

0 Replies

Quote:

Obama is much more cavalier about today's threats to freedom; he appears closer to the Neville Chamberlain school of foreign policy than the Roosevelt-Churchill one.

I'm afraid history shows that pawnbroker Roosevelt made his move when Hitler was almost exhausted after Sir Winston fought alone and then the Russians came on board. His was a mopping up operation and a fair number of American casualties were blue on blue. His freedom rhetoric was strictly for the birds.

Same as in 1956.

The Bush/Blair rhetoric is real freedom rhetoric.

If only Mr Bush had been in Roosevelt's shoes.

0 Replies

February fundraising totals (Obama) are finally in: about $55 million.

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/03/barack_obamas_february_haul_ne.html

90% of the donations were $100 or less.

0 Replies

WOW

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

btw, surveyUSA has been doing head-to-heads with McCain in ALL 50 states, and Obama beats McCain by two more then Clinton does, with different states in play:

http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=4374

http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/2008/03/06/electoral-math-as-of-030608-clinton-276-mccain-262/

http://www.openleft.com/upload/map-mccain-vs-clinton.png

http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/2008/03/06/electoral-math-as-of-030608-obama-280-mccain-258/

http://www.openleft.com/upload/map-mccain-vs-obama.png

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Andy Warhol used to do colouring books when he was a kid and confined to bed due to extreme lassitude regarding school.

0 Replies

soz wrote-

Quote:

90% of the donations were $100 or less.

Thanks soz. Something real appears at last. Assuming it's true which I do. It's still only about 1 million donations but it's pretty impressive nevertheless.

It's unthinkable here. They have to chisel it out of the bare rock where I am.

0 Replies

You're welcome. I like that aspect, too.

Meanwhile, the NAFTA thing seems to have gone from Obama's camp was doing wink-wink stuff (which Hillary pounced on) to oops, it was actually both camps (after the March 4th voting was over), to now oops, it was actually Hillary's camp (and maybe not Obama's at all).

Quote:

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
Per the Toronto Globe and Mail, in a story that was the lead on the paper's front page today, that call to the Canadian embassy was actually from the Clinton campaign, not Obama's:

"Mr. [Ian] Brodie, [PM Harper's chief of staff], during the media lockup for the Feb. 26 budget, stopped to chat with several journalists, and was surrounded by a group from CTV. The conversation turned to the pledges to renegotiate the North American free-trade agreement made by the two Democratic contenders, Mr. Obama and New York Senator Hillary Clinton.

"Mr. Brodie, apparently seeking to play down the potential impact on Canada, told the reporters the threat was not serious, and that someone from Ms. Clinton's campaign had even contacted Canadian diplomats to tell them not to worry because the NAFTA threats were mostly political posturing. The Canadian Press cited an unnamed source last night as saying that several people overheard the remark.

"The news agency quoted that source as saying that Mr. Brodie said that

"The story was followed by CTV's Washington bureau chief, Tom Clark, who reported that the Obama campaign, not the Clinton's, had reassured Canadian diplomats.

"Mr. Clark cited unnamed Canadian sources in his initial report. There was no explanation last night for why Mr. Brodie was said to have referred to the Clinton campaign but the news report was about the Obama campaign."

(Links in original.)

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/06/738264.aspx

Ow, my head.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know