What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

*** Official Barack Obama FBG campaign headquarters *** (2 Viewers)

Sorry if this was already posted. Another defense to the "he has no foreign policy experience" brigade.

Obama received this endorsement.
Getting an endorsement does not automatically bestow experience on the endorsee. It's undeniably true that Obama doesn't have much (any?) experience at foreign policy. That's not a big deal IMO, but it's sort of an odd thing to deny.
These are the people he will surround himself with - I think that is the only defense, no? He can't create experience, but he CAN create advisers.
Of course.
 
Sorry if this was already posted. Another defense to the "he has no foreign policy experience" brigade.

Obama received this endorsement.
Getting an endorsement does not automatically bestow experience on the endorsee. It's undeniably true that Obama doesn't have much (any?) experience at foreign policy. That's not a big deal IMO, but it's sort of an odd thing to deny.
These are the people he will surround himself with - I think that is the only defense, no? He can't create experience, but he CAN create advisers.
Of course.
:kicksrock: In any case, I am psyched for the endorsement.

And for the last two Pennsylvania polls with three full weeks to go - one showed a 12 point gap and the other showed a 5 point gap. If Obama can shrink the Penn deficit on election day to the 5-7 range, that should be considered a victory.

Interesting occurrence in my neighborhood in Rhode Island. Someone went around stealing all the Hilary signs. Not the wire pieces that they hang on, just the plastic banners. At first I figured it had to be Obama folks, but then I wondered why since the R.I,. primary is over what does it matter? Maybe it is Hilary supporters saving a buck for the ongoing campaign?

 
Obama to be live on Harball tonight for the full hour. 5pm EST, re-air at 7pm on MSNBC. :wub:
Chris has Barack live on his show all by himself? Didn't know they allow pornography on regular TV these days. Cable news must be really trying to get new viewers.That was a dig at Matthews. Not Obama. Lighten up.
 
Obama to be live on Harball tonight for the full hour. 5pm EST, re-air at 7pm on MSNBC. ;)
Chris has Barack live on his show all by himself? Didn't know they allow pornography on regular TV these days. Cable news must be really trying to get new viewers.That was a dig at Matthews. Not Obama. Lighten up.
Yeah, it's pretty obvious he supports Obama. He is having McCain on soon also and they've extended an invitation to Clinton. So at least they're all getting equal time as far as this thing goes.
 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0100885_pf.html

Loyalty to My Country

By Bill Richardson

Tuesday, April 1, 2008; 10:29 AM

My recent endorsement of Barack Obama for president has been the subject of much discussion and consternation -- particularly among supporters of Hillary Clinton.

Led by political commentator James Carville, who makes a living by being confrontational and provocative, Clinton supporters have speculated about events surrounding this endorsement and engaged in personal attacks and insults.

While I certainly will not stoop to the low level of Mr. Carville, I feel compelled to defend myself against character assassination and baseless allegations.

Carville has made it very clear that this is a personal attack -- driven by his own sense of what constitutes loyalty. It is this kind of political venom that I anticipated from certain Clinton supporters and I campaigned against in my own run for president.

I repeatedly urged Democrats to stop attacking each other personally and even offered a DNC resolution calling for a positive campaign based on the issues. I was evenhanded in my efforts. In fact, my intervention in a debate during a particularly heated exchange was seen by numerous commentators as an attempt to defend Sen. Clinton against the barbs of Sens. Obama and John Edwards.

As I have pointed out many times, and most pointedly when I endorsed Sen. Obama, the campaign has been too negative, and we Democrats need to calm the rhetoric and personal attacks so we can come together as a party to defeat the Republicans.

More than anything, to repair the damage done at home and abroad, we must unite as a country. I endorsed Sen. Obama because I believe he has the judgment, temperament and background to bridge our divisions as a nation and make America strong at home and respected in the world again.

This was a difficult, even painful, decision. My affection and respect for the Clintons run deep. I do indeed owe President Clinton for the extraordinary opportunities he gave me to serve him and this country. And nobody worked harder for him or served him more loyally, during some very difficult times, than I did.

Carville and others say that I owe President Clinton's wife my endorsement because he gave me two jobs. Would someone who worked for Carville then owe his wife, Mary Matalin, similar loyalty in her professional pursuits? Do the people now attacking me recall that I ran for president, albeit unsuccessfully, against Sen. Clinton? Was that also an act of disloyalty?

And while I was truly torn for weeks about this decision, and seriously contemplated endorsing Sen. Clinton, I never told anyone, including President Clinton, that I would do so. Those who say I did are misinformed or worse.

As for Mr. Carville's assertions that I did not return President Clinton's calls: I was on vacation in Antigua with my wife for a week and did not receive notice of any calls from the president. I, of course, called Sen. Clinton prior to my endorsement of Sen. Obama. It was a difficult and heated discussion, the details of which I will not share here.

I do not believe that the truth will keep Carville and others from attacking me. I can only say that we need to move on from the politics of personal insult and attacks. That era, personified by Carville and his ilk, has passed and I believe we must end the rancor and partisanship that has mired Washington in gridlock. In my view, Sen. Obama represents our best hope of replacing division with unity. That is why, out of loyalty to my country, I endorse him for president.
Man, I'd have loved to listen in on that conversation with Hillary.
 
I still don't understand why he endorsed Obama when it does the least amount of good. About a week before the Texas primary would have made an impact.

 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0100885_pf.html

Loyalty to My Country

By Bill Richardson

Tuesday, April 1, 2008; 10:29 AM

My recent endorsement of Barack Obama for president has been the subject of much discussion and consternation -- particularly among supporters of Hillary Clinton.

Led by political commentator James Carville, who makes a living by being confrontational and provocative, Clinton supporters have speculated about events surrounding this endorsement and engaged in personal attacks and insults.

While I certainly will not stoop to the low level of Mr. Carville, I feel compelled to defend myself against character assassination and baseless allegations.

Carville has made it very clear that this is a personal attack -- driven by his own sense of what constitutes loyalty. It is this kind of political venom that I anticipated from certain Clinton supporters and I campaigned against in my own run for president.

I repeatedly urged Democrats to stop attacking each other personally and even offered a DNC resolution calling for a positive campaign based on the issues. I was evenhanded in my efforts. In fact, my intervention in a debate during a particularly heated exchange was seen by numerous commentators as an attempt to defend Sen. Clinton against the barbs of Sens. Obama and John Edwards.

As I have pointed out many times, and most pointedly when I endorsed Sen. Obama, the campaign has been too negative, and we Democrats need to calm the rhetoric and personal attacks so we can come together as a party to defeat the Republicans.

More than anything, to repair the damage done at home and abroad, we must unite as a country. I endorsed Sen. Obama because I believe he has the judgment, temperament and background to bridge our divisions as a nation and make America strong at home and respected in the world again.

This was a difficult, even painful, decision. My affection and respect for the Clintons run deep. I do indeed owe President Clinton for the extraordinary opportunities he gave me to serve him and this country. And nobody worked harder for him or served him more loyally, during some very difficult times, than I did.

Carville and others say that I owe President Clinton's wife my endorsement because he gave me two jobs. Would someone who worked for Carville then owe his wife, Mary Matalin, similar loyalty in her professional pursuits? Do the people now attacking me recall that I ran for president, albeit unsuccessfully, against Sen. Clinton? Was that also an act of disloyalty?

And while I was truly torn for weeks about this decision, and seriously contemplated endorsing Sen. Clinton, I never told anyone, including President Clinton, that I would do so. Those who say I did are misinformed or worse.

As for Mr. Carville's assertions that I did not return President Clinton's calls: I was on vacation in Antigua with my wife for a week and did not receive notice of any calls from the president. I, of course, called Sen. Clinton prior to my endorsement of Sen. Obama. It was a difficult and heated discussion, the details of which I will not share here.

I do not believe that the truth will keep Carville and others from attacking me. I can only say that we need to move on from the politics of personal insult and attacks. That era, personified by Carville and his ilk, has passed and I believe we must end the rancor and partisanship that has mired Washington in gridlock. In my view, Sen. Obama represents our best hope of replacing division with unity. That is why, out of loyalty to my country, I endorse him for president.
Man, I'd have loved to listen in on that conversation with Hillary.
WOW
 
That is a most interesting conversation with Mr. Richardson and once again portrays Hilary as a less than gracious candidate when the chips are down.

 
Probably an anomaly, but things are definitely trending our boy's way. :loco:
Yeah, definitely an anomaly. BUT, pub pol poll peeps have been spot on in a number of races. They were the closest in the pre-primary predictions (holy hell alliteration), anyway, they were the closest in predicting SC, WI, OH, and TX. So, i'll be interested to see what their updated polls look like in the coming weeks. The most encouraging news is that ALL polls are trending towards a closer PA race than originally expected.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/02/h...ob_n_94770.html

ABC News reports:

Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and former President Bill Clinton are making very direct arguments to Democratic superdelegates, starkly insisting Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., cannot win a general election against presumptive Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

Sources with direct knowledge of the conversation between Sen. Clinton and Governer Bill Richardson, D-N.M., prior to the Governor's endorsement of Obama say she told him flatly, "He cannot win, Bill. He cannot win."

I want to punch her in the neck.

 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/02/h...ob_n_94770.html

ABC News reports:

Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and former President Bill Clinton are making very direct arguments to Democratic superdelegates, starkly insisting Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., cannot win a general election against presumptive Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

Sources with direct knowledge of the conversation between Sen. Clinton and Governer Bill Richardson, D-N.M., prior to the Governor's endorsement of Obama say she told him flatly, "He cannot win, Bill. He cannot win."

I want to punch her in the neck.
can i kick her in the back of da teef first?
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/02/h...ob_n_94770.html

ABC News reports:

Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and former President Bill Clinton are making very direct arguments to Democratic superdelegates, starkly insisting Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., cannot win a general election against presumptive Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

Sources with direct knowledge of the conversation between Sen. Clinton and Governer Bill Richardson, D-N.M., prior to the Governor's endorsement of Obama say she told him flatly, "He cannot win, Bill. He cannot win."

I want to punch her in the neck.
I wonder if he laughed in her face when she told him this.Apparently some of the current conversations the Clintons have had with superdelegates have been a bit bizarre.

 
Obama's 'restraint'

One of Obama's advantages in this campaign is his campaign's ability to hit Clinton hard without getting the kind of blowback for going negative that's really become part of Clinton's image.

Asked about this by the Philadelphia Daily News's Dave Davies, Obama offered a glimpse of strategy, and blamed Clinton's conference calls for his campaign's harsh tone on Clinton's character, her secrecy, and her claims of experience.

He also seemed to draw a line between his staff's words -- site of the sharpest attacks -- and his own statements and ads:

“This is a tension that we have at this stage in the campaign. Once Senator Clinton employed what her own staff called her kitchen sink strategy, they were having a morning call, every morning, in which they were driving the media to negative stories, and at a certain point I think my staff felt concerned that if that’s all everybody was hearing every morning, we weren’t going to be able to get our message out. As you said, what I’ve tried to do is be consistent in terms of my statements and television commercials, and I don’t think that we have crossed the line, but I think that there’s no doubt that I prefer to have a debate about policy.”

“When your staff saw the need to do that, did you personally say, go ahead?” [Davies] asked.

Obama shook his head and waved his hand. “Look, I think that national politics, as a I was aware of, and discovered even more, can be a contact sport. We’ve definitely been absorbing a lot more blows than we’ve been giving. We’ve shown great restraint during the course of this campaign. So much so that as you will recall, there were constant cries from columnists and pundits all across the country suggesting that, you know, I might be too nice to be able to win this. So we try to strike that balance. My criteria is making sure that whatever it is that say is truthful and honest and is related to policy.”

One thing this primary has done: pretty well dispelled the notion that he can't take, or throw, a punch.

 
Mr. Superunkn0wn said:
They have about an 18 minute video of it up too. pretty candid and interesting. Guess i didnt expect to hear a lot of new thoughts at this point in the race. on a side note, something i found interesting; the typical video on MSNBC, or anywhere for that matter is about 2-3 minutes. During some of the more interesting discussions, they go up to 8-10 minutes. This is the 1st 18 minute video clip i've seen in a while on there.

 
Interesting Article: ABC News says clinton made 50 million over past 7 years

An independent review by ABC News has found that since leaving the White House seven years ago, the senator and her former president husband have made well over $50 million, much of it from paid speeches made by Bill Clinton.

A review of Sen. Clinton's annual ethics filings found that her husband has earned $47 million in fees from more than 280 speeches he has made around the world.

Clinton's biggest patrons include New York-based investment firm Goldman Sachs, which paid him $650,000 for four speeches in recent years, and two foreign firms. Gold Services International, a Colombian-based event organizer, brought Clinton to Latin America in 2005 for four days of speeches, earning Clinton $800,000. Another company, Toronto-based Power Within, paid Clinton $650,000 for a series of motivational speeches in Canada in 2005.

Aides to the former president have said that his paid speeches are an efficient way for him to make money and devote more of his time to charitable work.

For example, an examination of the records reveals her husband is a partner in an investment fund, Yucaipa Global Partnership, registered in the Cayman Islands, and was paid "guaranteed payments to partner." Sen. Clinton's forms do not list the exact amount of her husband's payments, only that they totaled more than $1,000 over four years.

"No average person has interest and funds in the Cayman Islands. This is all the above-average, non-tax-paying, super rich," said Jack Blum, an attorney and leading expert on offshore tax havens.
 
Hilarious.

It doesn't really matter. By the time the general election rolls around, Clinton supporters will have forgotten their hate. It's why having Obama take all these punches now is good. It's like GWB admitting his prolific coke use when he was younger, it took the punch out of what would have been a major deal had it been discovered mid-campaign.
 
Reports of Obama raising more than $40 million are quite impressive. I note that hillary won't release her numbers until April 20th when she's required to. Funny.

Aren't her tax record releases coming up soon too?

 
Reports of Obama raising more than $40 million are quite impressive. I note that hillary won't release her numbers until April 20th when she's required to. Funny. Aren't her tax record releases coming up soon too?
saw a quote from HRC's campaign that says she raised about $20mil. No link, but it was just a quote from an aide, so no guarantee for accuracy anyway. Thats great for her, as she can now use 14 mil of it to pay off her debts.
 
I still don't understand why he endorsed Obama when it does the least amount of good. About a week before the Texas primary would have made an impact.
He said it was directly related to Obama's speach on race. I tend to take him at his word on that.
I don't. I think he was waiting to make sure he endorsed the winning candidate.
Either way, I can see that affecting his decision but not the timing of his announcement.
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/02/h...ob_n_94770.html

ABC News reports:

Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and former President Bill Clinton are making very direct arguments to Democratic superdelegates, starkly insisting Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., cannot win a general election against presumptive Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

Sources with direct knowledge of the conversation between Sen. Clinton and Governer Bill Richardson, D-N.M., prior to the Governor's endorsement of Obama say she told him flatly, "He cannot win, Bill. He cannot win."

I want to punch her in the neck.
I wonder if he laughed in her face when she told him this.Apparently some of the current conversations the Clintons have had with superdelegates have been a bit bizarre.
Full Meltdown Alert.
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/02/h...ob_n_94770.html

ABC News reports:

Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and former President Bill Clinton are making very direct arguments to Democratic superdelegates, starkly insisting Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., cannot win a general election against presumptive Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

Sources with direct knowledge of the conversation between Sen. Clinton and Governer Bill Richardson, D-N.M., prior to the Governor's endorsement of Obama say she told him flatly, "He cannot win, Bill. He cannot win."

I want to punch her in the neck.
I wonder if he laughed in her face when she told him this.Apparently some of the current conversations the Clintons have had with superdelegates have been a bit bizarre.
Full Meltdown Alert.
She doesn't have a whole lot of leverage at this point, and she needs to be pretty convincing that Obama can't win. She's running out of time, and delegates. Right now, about the only reason I can see for her argument is the swing states, and that's grasping.
 
Not only does PPP show Obama with a 2 pt lead in Penn, but his bulge in NC has swelled to 18 points (among 1100 likely voters - the largest sampling yet in that state)

Moreover, the PPP poll in Penn was of 1224 LVs - which was the third largest sampling so far in Pennsylvania. Additionally, a more recent poll by Insider Advantage of 659 LVs shows Clinton with only a 3 point lead.

With nearly three weeks to go, Obama could pull a miracle and take Pennsylvania, which would be the final nail in Hilary's coffin, She would not be able to say he failed to take the big states (as he would have taken Texas and Penn), and she would lose even more superdelegates if she loses both Penn and NC.

The moops - I moved from Colorado last September to Providence.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Reports of Obama raising more than $40 million are quite impressive. I note that hillary won't release her numbers until April 20th when she's required to. Funny. Aren't her tax record releases coming up soon too?
saw a quote from HRC's campaign that says she raised about $20mil. No link, but it was just a quote from an aide, so no guarantee for accuracy anyway. Thats great for her, as she can now use 14 mil of it to pay off her debts.
I think most of what she raised can only be used if she gets to the general. In other words, it is the same millionaires who donated again.
 
Reports of Obama raising more than $40 million are quite impressive. I note that hillary won't release her numbers until April 20th when she's required to. Funny. Aren't her tax record releases coming up soon too?
Andrew Sullivan's blog suggests she'll likely release them Friday, since the media won't focus on them as much at the end of a news week.
 
Reports of Obama raising more than $40 million are quite impressive. I note that hillary won't release her numbers until April 20th when she's required to. Funny. Aren't her tax record releases coming up soon too?
saw a quote from HRC's campaign that says she raised about $20mil. No link, but it was just a quote from an aide, so no guarantee for accuracy anyway. Thats great for her, as she can now use 14 mil of it to pay off her debts.
That's kind of interesting. I saw something in the news last week about how HRC has had problems paying her bills lately. She's loaned herself money again, I think.
 
Reports of Obama raising more than $40 million are quite impressive. I note that hillary won't release her numbers until April 20th when she's required to. Funny. Aren't her tax record releases coming up soon too?
saw a quote from HRC's campaign that says she raised about $20mil. No link, but it was just a quote from an aide, so no guarantee for accuracy anyway. Thats great for her, as she can now use 14 mil of it to pay off her debts.
That's kind of interesting. I saw something in the news last week about how HRC has had problems paying her bills lately. She's loaned herself money again, I think.
Good thing Bill's made 65 million speaking since he left office.
 
What Hillary Is Hiding

Her tax records, pork...

By Amanda Kathryn Hydro

"I think I’m probably the most transparent person in public life," Sen. Hillary Clinton recently declared. [Me: :deadhorse: :unsure: , etc., etc.]

Much like her husband’s infamous Monica Lewinsky testimony, in which then-President Bill Clinton haggled, "It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is," Hillary’s claim depends on what her definition of "transparent" is.

If Sen. Clinton thinks she’s transparent now that thousands of pages of scheduling records from her days as first lady have been released — because the group Judicial Watch and others sued to have them made public — sure, she’s transparent.

And if not disclosing her sources of income and sharing her tax returns since leaving the White House equals transparency, then yes, those Clintons are one transparent couple. On government disclosure forms, Sen. Clinton reports they have assets worth somewhere between $10 million and $50 million. That’s a lot of paid speeches and book sales. For a point of contrast, Sen. Barack Obama’s reported belongings, on the same disclosure forms, are worth between $456,000 and $1.1 million.

How have the Clintons amassed most of their wealth since leaving the White House? Where did that $5 million that Sen. Clinton pumped into her own campaign earlier this year come from? Who has donated to the presidential library’s coffers?

If Sen. Clinton really were the "most transparent" public official in the country, we’d know the answers to these questions. Instead her campaign hems and haws and says they’ll try to release some tax returns on or around April 15.

And then there’s the transparency that every taxpayer is interested in: How is Sen. Clinton spending our tax dollars?

The Los Angeles Times reports "Clinton has earmarked more than $2.3 billion in federal appropriations for projects" since joining the Senate. The Times also points out that it’s lucrative to be a Clinton contributor, reporting, "Since taking office in 2001, Clinton has delivered $500 million worth of earmarks that have specifically benefited 59 corporations. About 64 percent of those corporations provided funds to her campaigns through donations made by employees, executives, board members or lobbyists."

Earmarks are often wasteful pork projects that pump federal taxpayer money into states and congressional districts at the specific request of congress members.

In a recent Senate vote, Clinton and Obama joined Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain, who has long fought against pork and earmarks, in supporting a one-year moratorium on earmarks. (Of course in DC, not even three presidential candidates can beat pork; the earmarks moratorium went down in flames in the Senate, 71-29.)

McCain doesn’t request earmarks. And Obama upped the disclosure pressure on Clinton by releasing all of his earmark requests — including the ones that weren’t approved — since he joined the Senate. Clinton refuses to do the same. Call it Clintonian transparency.

Last year, the Reason Foundation, a free-market think tank that has advised the last four presidents, joined with a diverse, bipartisan coalition of 35 groups to ask each of the presidential candidates to sign an "Oath of Presidential Transparency."

The oath commits the candidate, if elected, to sign an executive order in his or her first 30 days requiring the executive branch to adhere to the principles of Google government. This basically means the executive branch would post expenditures, earmarks, contracts and grants in a transparent, searchable database online so citizens can see how their money is spent.

Sen. Obama immediately signed the oath last August. Sen. McCain and Sen. Clinton haven’t.

McCain, at least, has a well-earned Senate reputation for fighting ferociously against pork-barrel spending by both parties. Clinton, on the other hand, has no real record of transparency.

Clinton’s refusal to sign the oath of transparency, coupled with her missing tax returns and aversion to share her pork-project requests, suggests that she hasn’t passed the threshold test for calling herself transparent.

Amanda Kathryn Hydro is director of policy development at Reason Foundation. Reason Foundation's "oath of presidential transparency," signed by Sen. Barack Obama and Rep. Ron Paul, among others, is online here. This column first appeared in The New York Post on March 22, 2008.
 
Looks like Carter is for Obama:

Carter hints at supporting ObamaPosted: 03:25 PM ET (CNN) — Former President Jimmy Carter all but said Wednesday he plans to cast his superdelegate vote for Barack Obama.Speaking with a Nigerian paper while in Abuja, Carter noted several reasons why he might be leaning toward the Illinois senator."Don’t forget that Obama won in my state of Georgia," Carter said. "My town, which is home to 625 people, is for Obama, my children and their spouses are pro-Obama. My grandchildren are also pro-Obama.""As a superdelegate, I would not disclose who I am rooting for but I leave you to make that guess," Carter added.The Carter Center confirmed to CNN the newspaper did quote Carter accurately.Responding to the comments, Clinton campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson said Thursday, "Both Senator Clinton and President Clinton have a great deal of respect for President Carter and have enjoyed their relationship with him over the years, and obviously he is free to make whatever decision he thinks is appropriate with regard to presidential choice."Wolfson also acknowledged "people will be interested in the choice that he makes."Carter's remarks are the latest from the former president that suggest he is backing Obama over rival Hillary Clinton, although he has made no official endorsement. In an interview with the Wall Street Journal in January, Carter said Obama's campaign has been "extraordinary and titillating for me and my family."He also said then that Obama "will be almost automatically a healing factor in the animosity now that exists, that relates to our country and its government."
 
Orange Crush said:
What Hillary Is Hiding

Her tax records, pork...

By Amanda Kathryn Hydro

"I think I’m probably the most transparent person in public life," Sen. Hillary Clinton recently declared. [Me: :lmao: :wall: , etc., etc.]
Well sure, i think most people can see right through her BS lines and...what? Oh, the good kind of transparency, yeah sure Hill, whatever you say :goodposting:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
New CBS/NYT Sounding

from Talking Points Memo:

There's a new CBS/NYT poll out; but I haven't yet seen a write-up of the campaign details. So a few nuggets, which will be followed later with a write-up at TPM Election Central.

The internals look significantly better for Obama than Clinton. For instance, Democrats overwhelmingly think Obama's the stronger general election candidate -- 56% to 32%. On favorable vs. unfavorable ratings, Obama has the biggest net positive of all three candidates -- 19%. Clinton has a net negative 1%.

On "shares the values of Americans", it's Obama (70%-21%), McCain (66%-27%) , Clinton (60%-34%). But the numbers are fairly close.

One thing that jumps out at me if the question of who particular candidates would favor -- rich, middle class, etc. Obama does 'better' than Clinton. But 53% of voters think McCain would favor the rich -- and only 23% say he'd treat all economic classes the same.

Still there's good news for Hillary and Dems across the board in the horse-race number. Both Dems beat McCain by five points (Obama 47%-42% and Clinton 48% to 43%).

Late Update: The Times now has up their own write-up of the results, which paints a more mixed picture for Obama. Here's the Times pdf of the poll internals. Here's the one from CBS. I'd be curious to hear what others think after looking at the crosstabs. There's a notch down in Obama's favorables among Democratic primary voters. And a chunk of Democratic primary voters who had an unfavorable opinion of Clinton appear to have moved into the undecided column. Overall, though, in most of the key measures that people are now watching, the internals pretty much all look good for Obama and he appears to have been damaged very little by March.
 
Dear Hillary,

THE END IS NEAR

Just recently, all of the following have contributed to, or are signs of, the growing desperation within the Clinton campaign:

- Bill Richardson, close friend of the Clinton's endorsed Obama

- The profiles of newly "acquired" endorsements for Obama keeps getting larger - From former governors and reps to current governors, senate members, and even a former president

- Pledged Clinton Superdelegates Corzine and Murtha are starting to hedge/qualify their endorsements

- Multiple Clinton Superdelegates have said recently that they feel Obama will win

- All polls of PA Democrats show Obama gaining ground at an alarming rate

- Tim Russert dove into the electoral numbers and showed that any of the 3 remaining candidates have a clear path to the nomination. Thus, the electability argument is beginning to fall apart

- Bill Clinton recently "blew up" in a closed door, superdelegate meeting. This just moments before his "chill out" speech.

- Richardson claims Hillary told him that "Obama cant win". Hillary now disputes that. If you have has seen the footage of this denial, its fairly obvious that she is like the little kid denying that they ate the candy bar (with chocolate all over their face)

- Hillary is now pushing the notion that even pledged delegates are up for grabs. A move that virtually all pundits and news anchors are calling desperate

- Hillary has compared herself to Paul Revere and Rocky in the past 3 days

- Obama once again outdid Hillary in the fundraising dept. If the breakdown of previous months hold true to March, Hillary raised only about $7-9 mil for the primary battle (the rest is earmarked for the general). Seeing as how she is $9 mil in debt, plus $5 mil to her own pocketbook, it appears Hillarys bank account may force her out before any Democrat big wig steps in

- Hillary's mortgage foreclosure freeze plan is widely viewed by economists as dangerous and more hurtful than helpful

-

 
Dear Hillary,

THE END IS NEAR

Just recently, all of the following have contributed to, or are signs of, the growing desperation within the Clinton campaign:

- Bill Richardson, close friend of the Clinton's endorsed Obama

- The profiles of newly "acquired" endorsements for Obama keeps getting larger - From former governors and reps to current governors, senate members, and even a former president

- Pledged Clinton Superdelegates Corzine and Murtha are starting to hedge/qualify their endorsements

- Multiple Clinton Superdelegates have said recently that they feel Obama will win

- All polls of PA Democrats show Obama gaining ground at an alarming rate

- Tim Russert dove into the electoral numbers and showed that any of the 3 remaining candidates have a clear path to the nomination. Thus, the electability argument is beginning to fall apart

- Bill Clinton recently "blew up" in a closed door, superdelegate meeting. This just moments before his "chill out" speech.

- Richardson claims Hillary told him that "Obama cant win". Hillary now disputes that. If you have has seen the footage of this denial, its fairly obvious that she is like the little kid denying that they ate the candy bar (with chocolate all over their face)

- Hillary is now pushing the notion that even pledged delegates are up for grabs. A move that virtually all pundits and news anchors are calling desperate

- Hillary has compared herself to Paul Revere and Rocky in the past 3 days

- Obama once again outdid Hillary in the fundraising dept. If the breakdown of previous months hold true to March, Hillary raised only about $7-9 mil for the primary battle (the rest is earmarked for the general). Seeing as how she is $9 mil in debt, plus $5 mil to her own pocketbook, it appears Hillarys bank account may force her out before any Democrat big wig steps in

- Hillary's mortgage foreclosure freeze plan is widely viewed by economists as dangerous and more hurtful than helpful

-
Duh.
 
Dear Hillary,

THE END IS NEAR

Just recently, all of the following have contributed to, or are signs of, the growing desperation within the Clinton campaign:

- Bill Richardson, close friend of the Clinton's endorsed Obama

- The profiles of newly "acquired" endorsements for Obama keeps getting larger - From former governors and reps to current governors, senate members, and even a former president

- Pledged Clinton Superdelegates Corzine and Murtha are starting to hedge/qualify their endorsements

- Multiple Clinton Superdelegates have said recently that they feel Obama will win

- All polls of PA Democrats show Obama gaining ground at an alarming rate

- Tim Russert dove into the electoral numbers and showed that any of the 3 remaining candidates have a clear path to the nomination. Thus, the electability argument is beginning to fall apart

- Bill Clinton recently "blew up" in a closed door, superdelegate meeting. This just moments before his "chill out" speech.

- Richardson claims Hillary told him that "Obama cant win". Hillary now disputes that. If you have has seen the footage of this denial, its fairly obvious that she is like the little kid denying that they ate the candy bar (with chocolate all over their face)

- Hillary is now pushing the notion that even pledged delegates are up for grabs. A move that virtually all pundits and news anchors are calling desperate

- Hillary has compared herself to Paul Revere and Rocky in the past 3 days

- Obama once again outdid Hillary in the fundraising dept. If the breakdown of previous months hold true to March, Hillary raised only about $7-9 mil for the primary battle (the rest is earmarked for the general). Seeing as how she is $9 mil in debt, plus $5 mil to her own pocketbook, it appears Hillarys bank account may force her out before any Democrat big wig steps in

- Hillary's mortgage foreclosure freeze plan is widely viewed by economists as dangerous and more hurtful than helpful

-
Duh.
To most educated and/or logical people with common sense, yes. To Hill and her die hards, unfortunately not
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top