*** Official Barack Obama FBG campaign headquarters *** (3 Viewers)

[Poppa]

Long, but pretty good read IMO -

Why Obama is Closer to the Nomination Than You'd Think

by dloewe

Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 06:44:42 AM PST

My first blog entry discusses the status of the 2008 race with analysis that would suggest that Barack Obama is a lot closer to getting the nomination than the MSM thinks. Please visit the Loewe Political Report to read more. For now, here's an excerpt from that first posting:

But there are only 1,277 pledged delegates remaining up for grabs. For Obama to get to the 2,025 threshold without using super delegates, he would have to win 1,013 out of 1,277, or 79% of the remaining delegates. For Hillary to do that, she would have to win 1,076 out of 1,277 or 85% of the remaining delegates. That is virtually (make that actually) impossible.

What does that mean? It means that the super delegates get to decide the race. The problem with that, of course, is how shockingly undemocratic it is – party insiders choosing the nominee when we were led to believe that primaries would do that. But what’s worse is that we could have a situation where Obama wins a majority of the pledged delegates and the super delegates decide to hand the nomination to Hillary anyway. This would cause an all out civil war in the party, and would make Hillary one of the weakest nominees in modern Democratic politics, virtually assuring a President John McCain.

Here’s the catch: The party understands this, as do the super delegates. Though the above scenario is possible, it’s exceptionally unlikely. Elaine Kamarck, a senior DNC official and super delegate herself, told me Thursday that it would never happen. "Super delegates are cowards – we would never do that." This, by the way, from a woman who has endorsed Hillary Clinton. Chuck Todd, political director for NBC News said on Saturday that super delegates are likely to follow the pledged delegate winner, especially if that winner is also ahead of McCain in the polls. And because more than half of the super delegates have yet to pledge, it’s likely that this would be more than enough for Obama to maintain his lead, even when super delegates are added to the mix.

So what does that all mean? Counter-intuitively, the fact that, mathematically, the super delegates get to decide the race means they don’t actually matter. If the super delegates are unwilling to throw the race against the public will, then they are just going to support the winner of the pledged delegates. So that should be the only number we care about during the analysis: the number of pledged delegates.

News sources have been giving wildly different delegate counts for a couple of boring reasons. First, some are adding super delegates without knowing exactly who is voting for who; as a result, each network has a different list of the super delegates they think are already committed. Second, many states (as ridiculous as this will sound) actually vote for state delegates, not national delegates, during these primaries and caucuses. Those state delegates then go to a state convention where they vote for national delegates. Even though we know exactly how many national delegates will be pledged to each candidate after that process is over, some networks are refusing to add those delegates into the count until it actually happens. Basically, this means that every news outlet has a different count, and almost none of them are accurate. Bottom line is this: As of right now, in terms of pledged delegates, Obama leads Hillary by 84 (1,030-946).

All of the remaining primary contests in February heavily favor Obama (with the possible exception of Wisconsin), and the few larger-state contests in March favor Hillary. But because delegates are proportionally allocated, it’s difficult for either to pull away from each other, or for Hillary to catch up. Good news if you’re an Obama fan.

Florida and Michigan

The one odd issue remaining is Florida and Michigan. The DNC had rules that dictated that no state could move their primary up before February 5th, with the exception of four states determined by the DNC (Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada). Both Michigan and Florida defied this rule and moved their primaries up before February 5th. The DNC threatened to strip them of their delegates if they didn’t comply, and when they still didn’t comply, all of their delegates were stripped. The candidates, including Hillary Clinton, all signed a pledge that they would not campaign in those states. In Michigan, Barack Obama and John Edwards took their names off the ballot. They tried to do the same in Florida, but the deadline had passed.

Hillary Clinton never complained about this earlier in the race. Complaining about it would have pissed off Iowa and New Hampshire and she wasn’t interested in doing that. But now that she recognizes that she’s likely to lose the pledged delegate count, she has been calling for the Florida and Michigan delegations to be counted after all. (It should be noted that in Michigan, she won against her only other opponent "Uncommitted" and that she won in Florida as well.) So despite the fact that no one campaigned in these states, that both campaigns acknowledged that these races didn’t count, and that Barack Obama’s name wasn’t on the Michigan ballot, today, Hillary thinks these delegates should count. One wonders if she would feel the same way had she lost.

How will this be resolved? There are three possibilities: The DNC has been begging Florida and Michigan to revote, by holding caucuses now that February 5th has passed, allowing their delegates to be seated and both candidates to campaign there. Both states, as of now, are resistant to that idea, with some indication that Michigan may eventually come around.

If that doesn’t happen, the question of who gets seated at the convention will be decided by the DNC Credentials Committee. The Credentials Committee is going to be staffed with Hillary loyalists and Obama loyalists and the number of seats they get on the committee will be determined proportionally according to the winner of the pledged delegates. This means that, most likely, if Obama wins the pledged delegates, his loyalists will control the Credentials Committee and not allow Florida and Michigan to be added into the mix. If Hillary wins the pledged delegate count, she will control the Credentials Committee and will allow the Florida and Michigan delegations to be seated. This is a relatively moot point because, essentially, the only way that Michigan and Florida get seated is if Hillary has already won the pledged delegates (and as was said before, the winner of the pledged delegates will end up winning the super delegates and, ultimately, the nomination).

There is, however, one possible circumstance where this wouldn’t happen. It’s possible that the delegate counts will be so close that the Credentials Committee will be evenly divided between Obama and Clinton loyalists. This means that neither would have control over the committee. But, keep in mind, the current status quo is that Florida and Michigan don’t count. If the vote on the Credentials Committee is a tie, the vote loses and we keep the status quo.

All that is a long way of saying, it’s likely that, though you’ll hear a lot about Florida and Michigan, they are probably not going to end up mattering in any significant way. It’s possible, but unlikely.

 

[Sweet J]

David "Mudcat" Saunders

I think I am in love:

Saunders has a reputation for making statements that are as controversial as they are strategically considered. In a 2005 interview with the blog SouthNow, Saunders was asked, "Why did the Democrats lose in 2004?":

They can't ####in' count. That's the Democrats' problem. You don't get in the football game and punt on first down. You concede nothing. We condeded 20 states at first and then six more by Labor Day. That's 227 electoral votes. Bush only needed 18 percent of the remaining electoral votes to win.

In regards to Virginia's anti-gay marriage amendment, Saunders was quoted as saying the following:

I think it's blasphemy to put this on the ballot and try to divide God's children for political gain. God loves them queers every bit that he loves the Republicans

and:

It is political trickery - it has nothing to do with queers and marriage. It is to help Republicans, in general, unite their base in the name of hate.

According to Richard Wolffe of Newsweek magazine, Saunders is an advisor in the '08 Presidential campaign of John Edwards. Saunders was also an advisor in the 2006 U.S. Senate campaign of Jim Webb in Virginia.

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

Voted this morning.

Voted at 9:00AM. The 21º temperatures had all the campaign workers hiding in their cars when I snuck in.

Voted at 8:00 a.m. in the Del Ray neighborhood of Alexandria, VA (eclectic neighborhood with mix of working-class, hispanic, black, and white upper-middle). Many people in line indicated that this was the longest they'd had to wait. It is an "open" primary, so anybody can vote in either primary. The table where you sign in had a guy with a blue "democrat primary" book and a guy with a red "republican primary" book. In my half-hour wait, I didn't see one person sign-in at the redbook. When I finally got to the beginning, I said "you must be the loneliest guy in the world." He chuckled, and then both guys checked their notes: 350 people had signed-in for the Dem primary, and 30 had signed-in for the Repub. primary.

What's the feeling down there, is anyone speculating that this could hurt Obama? At this point, if Im a McCain supporter, I would be voting for Hillary.Sick of the different rules in every state.

If Independents are voting on the Dem side they are likely voting for Obama. On the other hand, I would think McCain supporters would be more interesting in making sure their candidate wins the state considering how things went over the weekend. Overall, Dems have turning out in record numbers and the Republican turnout hasn't been anywhere near as strong. I think what you are seeing is more apathy on the Republican side than anything else.

 

[SofaKings]

I wouldn't be shocked if there was a Michigan Democratic caucus/primary in the next 4-8 weeks.

 

[Jeremy]

What's the feeling down there, is anyone speculating that this could hurt Obama? At this point, if Im a McCain supporter, I would be voting for Hillary.Sick of the different rules in every state.

I still doubt many Repubs would risk giving Hillary a shot at the White House. Way too much hatred there.

I would tend to agree. For every person who's trying to manipulate a good matchup for the Republicans there's probably at least one person who would vote for Obama to try to keep Hillary out of the race altogether. May even work in Obama's favor. Personally I just wish people would vote for the candidate they thing is the best, as it was intended.

 

[The_Man]

Voted this morning.

Voted at 9:00AM. The 21º temperatures had all the campaign workers hiding in their cars when I snuck in.

Voted at 8:00 a.m. in the Del Ray neighborhood of Alexandria, VA (eclectic neighborhood with mix of working-class, hispanic, black, and white upper-middle). Many people in line indicated that this was the longest they'd had to wait. It is an "open" primary, so anybody can vote in either primary. The table where you sign in had a guy with a blue "democrat primary" book and a guy with a red "republican primary" book. In my half-hour wait, I didn't see one person sign-in at the redbook. When I finally got to the beginning, I said "you must be the loneliest guy in the world." He chuckled, and then both guys checked their notes: 350 people had signed-in for the Dem primary, and 30 had signed-in for the Repub. primary.

What's the feeling down there, is anyone speculating that this could hurt Obama? At this point, if Im a McCain supporter, I would be voting for Hillary.Sick of the different rules in every state.

If Independents are voting on the Dem side they are likely voting for Obama. On the other hand, I would think McCain supporters would be more interesting in making sure their candidate wins the state considering how things went over the weekend. Overall, Dems have turning out in record numbers and the Republican turnout hasn't been anywhere near as strong. I think what you are seeing is more apathy on the Republican side than anything else.

My parents are both Virginia Republicans. My dad is voting for Hillary today, because he wants a Dem candidate that McCain can beat. My mom thinks this is so antitheical to the democratic process, that she's voting for Obama just to cancel out my dad's underhanded ploy.

Clearly, not a lot of enthusiasm/interest in voting for McCain from either of them.

 

[valhallan]

Voted this morning.

Way to participate in the democratic process GBGWB

Thanks, GB. I've got quite a streak going now. All Republican up until a few years ago. All Democrat (Tim Kaine, Jim Webb, now Obama) since. Wonder why.

It just occurred to me that it must be atonement for voting for the other GWB twice. Oops.

Right there with ya.. this will be my first Dem vote in a presidential race.

 

[saintfool]

any guesses as to the spread today in the primaries?

 

[Sweet J]

So let me ask the FFA's opinion: If Edwards supports Obama in the next 2 weeks, is it over?

 

[Sweet J]

any guesses as to the spread today in the primaries?

VA and MD, something like 55-45 Obama. In DC, 65-35, maybe even 70-30.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Curious what opinion if any Obama supporters have to this commentary from TNR

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=...b7-82f6b74638b8

I laughed.

 

[culdeus]

So let me ask the FFA's opinion: If Edwards supports Obama in the next 2 weeks, is it over?

no. endorsements are vastly overrated. Sometimes labor group endorsements matter, but it's hardly ever worth the energy to print and air it.

 

[djcolts]

So let me ask the FFA's opinion: If Edwards supports Obama in the next 2 weeks, is it over?

I don't think it is over if that happens. But, it will help Obama to some extent with working-class white males.

 

[saintfool]

So let me ask the FFA's opinion: If Edwards supports Obama in the next 2 weeks, is it over?

no. endorsements are vastly overrated. Sometimes labor group endorsements matter, but it's hardly ever worth the energy to print and air it.

wouldn't obama pick up edwards' delegates?

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Curious what opinion if any Obama supporters have to this commentary from TNR

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=...b7-82f6b74638b8

I think it's tired.

got a cliff notes?

There are autonomous countries and cultures out there. The turbulence that I have described is not caused by misunderstandings. It is caused by the interests of powers and the beliefs of peoples. Beijing, Moscow, Tehran, Pyongyang, Islamabad, Gaza City, Khartoum, Caracas-does Obama really believe that he has something to propose to these ruthless regimes that they have not already considered? Does he plan to move them, to organize them, to show them change they can believe in? With what trick of empathy, what euphoria, does he hope to join the Shia, the Sunni, and the Kurds in Iraq? Yes, he made a "muscular" speech in Chicago last spring; but I have been pondering his remarks about foreign policy in the ensuing campaign and I do not detect the hardness I seek, the disabused tone that the present world warrants.

Based on how Obama has run his campaign so far (and that could change, of course), I think this is a pretty accurate line of criticism.

I'd be very disturbed if Obama ran around and promised he had the solution to all the world's problems.

 

[adonis]

Just got off the phone with an Edwards insider (I used to work with him at my old Firm). He worked on the Edwards campaign 4 years ago, and was a "senior policy advisor" on the now-defunct Edwards run this year. He and I were good buds when we worked together, but I hadn't talked to him in about 6 months. He is now working on the Obama campaign. Said he can't stand Hillary, and will vote for Paul before her if she were to win the primary. He still is close to Edwards, and apparently had lunch with him and another policy guy (Mudcat?? whoever that is) a few weeks ago.That being said, he is suprisingly upbeat about Obama's chances.So finally, I asked him. About his boy. I got a long pause. Finally, he said "you know, I really shouldn't say. But I don't think you will be disappointed. . . . We just need to work out the timing." Or conversation had to cut-off when my boss just walked in. Needless to say, I am VERY excited.

Yeah, like I said in my previous post, I think these big guys are sitting out until the vast majority of american people have spoken. Increasingly, they are saying they want Obama. He swept the last week, he has the delegates lead, and the state lead, and polls the best against the inevitable republican nominee. The stars are aligning right now to make Obama the best choice for the democrats.However, before the next few elections, no one would want to come out and endorse him and have Hillary pull off a surprise victory in a few states. So, the best play is for them to wait until after this set of votes, and they can make the strongest case yet that Obama should be the nominee, and that for the sake of party unity, they are throwing their support behind him because more than anything, they want a candidate who will win, and Obama shows that he's the most likely to win.I imagine either Richardson, or Edwards, or both will come out soon. I believe Al Gore might, but it's more likely he'll be encouraged to wait it out until the end and stay neutral, unless his vote is absolutely necessary. If Edwards and Richardson come out for Obama well before Ohio and Texas, I don't think Gore will need to pull for anyone.Also, one aspect of Obama's likelihood of getting the nomination hasn't been mentioned much. Sure, he's polling well against McCain. Sure, he's polling well in more states than HIllary, and has more delegates than her. But perhaps for party insiders, a very important part is that when a democrat is up for election, and in a tough race, which candidate would they want to come in and campaign for them? Hillary or Obama? Obama, in almost every single case. He brings excitement, crowds, and has the ability to draw in Independents and Republicans. Hillary is divisive and is not a sought after campaign guest. This is another huge reason why Obama is the best choice to be the democratic nominee, at least from the perspective of democratic insiders and politicians.

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

So let me ask the FFA's opinion: If Edwards supports Obama in the next 2 weeks, is it over?

I don't think it is over if that happens. But, it will help Obama to some extent with working-class white males.

The majority of Edwards voters probably moved to Obama anyway based on the shift in nation numbers, but agree it could help even more with that elusive sub 50K income bracket. I think it actually helps more with the superdelegate issue. The more prominant dems that come out publicly for Obama, the tougher it is going to be for the superdelegates to break for Clinton. Same with Richardson if he endorses; it may help some with the latino vote, but would have to be considered a major embarassment for the Clintons.

 

[Sweet J]

So let me ask the FFA's opinion: If Edwards supports Obama in the next 2 weeks, is it over?

no. endorsements are vastly overrated. Sometimes labor group endorsements matter, but it's hardly ever worth the energy to print and air it.

wouldn't obama pick up edwards' delegates?

Don't know. Does anybody know what happens to Edwards' "pledged" delegates?

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

So let me ask the FFA's opinion: If Edwards supports Obama in the next 2 weeks, is it over?

no. endorsements are vastly overrated. Sometimes labor group endorsements matter, but it's hardly ever worth the energy to print and air it.

wouldn't obama pick up edwards' delegates?

No. They clarified this on CNN the other night, Edwards does not retain control of his delegates. What they didn't make clear was wether those delegates go to the winner of the state, or are just pulled out of the mix.

 

[Sweet J]

So let me ask the FFA's opinion: If Edwards supports Obama in the next 2 weeks, is it over?

I don't think it is over if that happens. But, it will help Obama to some extent with working-class white males.

I think it actually helps more with the superdelegate issue. The more prominant dems that come out publicly for Obama, the tougher it is going to be for the superdelegates to break for Clinton.

That is my thinking, as well.

 

[saintfool]

I'd be very disturbed if Obama ran around and promised he had the solution to all the world's problems.

Sure, but he's also promised that he would aggressively pursue OBL and other terrorists without respecting sovereignty in places like Pakistan.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

So let me ask the FFA's opinion: If Edwards supports Obama in the next 2 weeks, is it over?

Nuthins over! - Hillarambo

 

[adonis]

So let me ask the FFA's opinion: If Edwards supports Obama in the next 2 weeks, is it over?

If Obama sweeps these next elections, I think it's probable that either Richardson or Edwards, or both will endorse Obama. If they both do, it's over. If Richardson does, it's over. If Edwards alone does, I think it increases his odds a little, but not significantly. Richardson would be huge because he could campaign with Obama in Texas and help reclaim some of the latino vote that Obama really needs to close this thing out. I don't think Edwards helps TOO much with that, but he'd give a little tick up for Obama.

 

[Pai Mei]

I'd be very disturbed if Obama ran around and promised he had the solution to all the world's problems.

Sure, but he's also promised that he would aggressively pursue OBL and other terrorists without respecting sovereignty in places like Pakistan.

Yes Obama is a big fan of unilateralism in war. We'll likely be attacking new nations in his administration.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

So let me ask the FFA's opinion: If Edwards supports Obama in the next 2 weeks, is it over?

I don't think it is over if that happens. But, it will help Obama to some extent with working-class white males.

The majority of Edwards voters probably moved to Obama anyway based on the shift in nation numbers, but agree it could help even more with that elusive sub 50K income bracket. I think it actually helps more with the superdelegate issue. The more prominant dems that come out publicly for Obama, the tougher it is going to be for the superdelegates to break for Clinton. Same with Richardson if he endorses; it may help some with the latino vote, but would have to be considered a major embarassment for the Clintons.

Richardson needs to come out for Obama this week if he's going to at all. Otherwise its "So what?"

 

[Tremendous Upside]

I'd be very disturbed if Obama ran around and promised he had the solution to all the world's problems.

Sure, but he's also promised that he would aggressively pursue OBL and other terrorists without respecting sovereignty in places like Pakistan.

Yes Obama is a big fan of unilateralism in war. We'll likely be attacking new nations in his administration.

This BGP prediction shtick never gets old

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

So let me ask the FFA's opinion: If Edwards supports Obama in the next 2 weeks, is it over?

no. endorsements are vastly overrated. Sometimes labor group endorsements matter, but it's hardly ever worth the energy to print and air it.

wouldn't obama pick up edwards' delegates?

Don't know. Does anybody know what happens to Edwards' "pledged" delegates?

They'll probably go for whoever he endorses for the most part. They don't have to, but like a recent article stated. elected officials like to get re-elected and going against your "pledged" candidate is political suicide.

 

[The Moz]

An Obama sweep today is not foregone. But if he does I think the DNC starts pressuring Hillary to sorta pull out. Obama easily beats McCain in November while Hillary would struggle and be 50/50.

Damn a few months ago it was Gulliani and Clinton as almost locks to be the nominees !

I think Clinton is making the same Gulliani mistake in lookng past the Feburary primaries counting on Ohio / Penn / and Texas.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

I'd be very disturbed if Obama ran around and promised he had the solution to all the world's problems.

Sure, but he's also promised that he would aggressively pursue OBL and other terrorists without respecting sovereignty in places like Pakistan.

Yes Obama is a big fan of unilateralism in war. We'll likely be attacking new nations in his administration.

Obama is also a huge fan of world wars. Probably start a couple of those his first term.

 

[goonsquad]

So how many of you guys have read The Audacity of Hope? I just picked it up this weekend. I'm only about a third of the way through but am really impressed.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

So how many of you guys have read The Audacity of Hope? I just picked it up this weekend. I'm only about a third of the way through but am really impressed.

 

[goonsquad]

I'd be very disturbed if Obama ran around and promised he had the solution to all the world's problems.

Sure, but he's also promised that he would aggressively pursue OBL and other terrorists without respecting sovereignty in places like Pakistan.

Yes Obama is a big fan of unilateralism in war. We'll likely be attacking new nations in his administration.

Obama is also a huge fan of world wars. Probably start a couple of those his first term.

Absolutely. Being raised in Hawaii, I hear he's a huge fan of Internment Camps as well. Only this time I hope they lock up Whitey!

 

[Oscar]

Voted this morning.

Voted at 9:00AM. The 21º temperatures had all the campaign workers hiding in their cars when I snuck in.

Voted at 8:00 a.m. in the Del Ray neighborhood of Alexandria, VA (eclectic neighborhood with mix of working-class, hispanic, black, and white upper-middle). Many people in line indicated that this was the longest they'd had to wait. It is an "open" primary, so anybody can vote in either primary. The table where you sign in had a guy with a blue "democrat primary" book and a guy with a red "republican primary" book. In my half-hour wait, I didn't see one person sign-in at the redbook. When I finally got to the beginning, I said "you must be the loneliest guy in the world." He chuckled, and then both guys checked their notes: 350 people had signed-in for the Dem primary, and 30 had signed-in for the Repub. primary.

What's the feeling down there, is anyone speculating that this could hurt Obama? At this point, if Im a McCain supporter, I would be voting for Hillary.Sick of the different rules in every state.

If Independents are voting on the Dem side they are likely voting for Obama. On the other hand, I would think McCain supporters would be more interesting in making sure their candidate wins the state considering how things went over the weekend. Overall, Dems have turning out in record numbers and the Republican turnout hasn't been anywhere near as strong. I think what you are seeing is more apathy on the Republican side than anything else.

My parents are both Virginia Republicans. My dad is voting for Hillary today, because he wants a Dem candidate that McCain can beat. My mom thinks this is so antitheical to the democratic process, that she's voting for Obama just to cancel out my dad's underhanded ploy.

Clearly, not a lot of enthusiasm/interest in voting for McCain from either of them.

Am I missing something here. If you are a republican, isn't your only choice in the primaries to vote for a republican candidate? How can your dad vote for Hillary if he's a republican?

 

[Giant Wooden Badger]

Am I missing something here. If you are a republican, isn't your only choice in the primaries to vote for a republican candidate? How can your dad vote for Hillary if he's a republican?

In VA you can vote in either primary but not both. When you show your ID they ask which ballot you want.

 

[ericttspikes]

I'd be very disturbed if Obama ran around and promised he had the solution to all the world's problems.

Sure, but he's also promised that he would aggressively pursue OBL and other terrorists without respecting sovereignty in places like Pakistan.

I agree with that. The guy who killed 3000+ Americans can just hide out in a "sovereign" nation indefinitely? I'm not sure how sovereign that part of Pakistan is anyway, but that's another issue. How many years do sovereign nations get to hide murderers who declare war on the US and not take action to expel them? Seven years seems like a long enough time.

 

[Oscar]

Am I missing something here. If you are a republican, isn't your only choice in the primaries to vote for a republican candidate? How can your dad vote for Hillary if he's a republican?

In VA you can vote in either primary but not both. When you show your ID they ask which ballot you want.

Is that right? Wow.

 

[Giant Wooden Badger]

So how many of you guys have read The Audacity of Hope? I just picked it up this weekend. I'm only about a third of the way through but am really impressed.

Fax it to me when you're done. TIA

 

[Jeremy]

Am I missing something here. If you are a republican, isn't your only choice in the primaries to vote for a republican candidate? How can your dad vote for Hillary if he's a republican?

In VA you can vote in either primary but not both. When you show your ID they ask which ballot you want.

Is that right? Wow.

It's the same in Wisconsin.

 

[scoobygang]

Curious what opinion if any Obama supporters have to this commentary from TNR

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=...b7-82f6b74638b8

I think it's tired.

got a cliff notes?

There are autonomous countries and cultures out there. The turbulence that I have described is not caused by misunderstandings. It is caused by the interests of powers and the beliefs of peoples. Beijing, Moscow, Tehran, Pyongyang, Islamabad, Gaza City, Khartoum, Caracas-does Obama really believe that he has something to propose to these ruthless regimes that they have not already considered? Does he plan to move them, to organize them, to show them change they can believe in? With what trick of empathy, what euphoria, does he hope to join the Shia, the Sunni, and the Kurds in Iraq? Yes, he made a "muscular" speech in Chicago last spring; but I have been pondering his remarks about foreign policy in the ensuing campaign and I do not detect the hardness I seek, the disabused tone that the present world warrants.

Based on how Obama has run his campaign so far (and that could change, of course), I think this is a pretty accurate line of criticism.

I'd be very disturbed if Obama ran around and promised he had the solution to all the world's problems.

There's a far more fundamental problem with that article.It shows how the second you talk about foreign policy, conservatives begin to sound like liberals. They equate the effectiveness of any policy with how much noise they make to show that they're doing something. "We're talking tough! We're engaging important problems!" Never mind whether it garners any results. Anyone remember all the people who said that the Iraq invasion would chill Iranian belligerance? The Iranians were popping jihadists over the Iraqi border as soon as our boots hit the ground.

There's always a good reason to START from a position of negotiation. You never rule out options in a crisis. That doesn't mean you bend over backwards for Pyongong. It just means that you listen to what they have to say. For one thing, that attitude is helpful when you have to go to Rome, Paris, and London and tell them that you've exhausted diplomatic options.

This isn't about Americans looking weak to the world. Its about us looking weak to ourselves. A segment of our political commentariat needs to understand that we can still be strong without swinging our ##### whenever we get the chance.

 

[goonsquad]

So how many of you guys have read The Audacity of Hope? I just picked it up this weekend. I'm only about a third of the way through but am really impressed.

Fax it to me when you're done. TIA

Will do. But I'll have to copy if by hand on to bar napkins first and then FAX those. That OK?

 

[The Moz]

Obama is something we haven't had in a long time as president -- a Good man !

A strong family man , good morals , a strong persona , compassionate , maybe the most well spoken canidate since the pre alzheimers Reagan.

Sorry but I can't judge a person by mistakes as a teenager with Drug use a few times or if he went to a Muslim school at age 10.

Actually I think the fact he has a Islamic name will help more than hurt especially in dealing with the middle east issues. Should give him much more credibility on that alone. We have spent years making enemies and alot of times we were right in what we did - But I think now is the time to start reaching out and making alies instead of enemies.

The real enemy is the forming Russia / China alliance and we need a leader that can Unite us with Europe and everyone else. Obama is the only canidate that could really make that happen - Hillary would be a healthcare nightmare and on Foriegn policy just like Bill in just trying to keep everyhting alfloat rather than really trying to make progress and improving relations. With Russia and China formaing a strong bond we need the same thing with the EU - The USA isn't as strong as it was and China is rising like a rocket on the world economic stage and is anxious to throw it's muscle around.

 

[Sweet J]

A segment of our political commentariat needs to understand that we can still be strong without swinging our ##### whenever we get the chance.

Speak for yourself, kimosabe.

 

[BuddyKnuckles]

Am I missing something here. If you are a republican, isn't your only choice in the primaries to vote for a republican candidate? How can your dad vote for Hillary if he's a republican?

In VA you can vote in either primary but not both. When you show your ID they ask which ballot you want.

Is that right? Wow.

There are actually 16 states that have open primaries - LINK

 

[Oscar]

Actually I think the fact he has a Islamic name will help more than hurt especially in dealing with the middle east issues. Should give him much more credibility on that alone. We have spent years making enemies and alot of times we were right in what we did - But I think now is the time to start reaching out and making alies instead of enemies.

Come on. You don't actually believe this, do you?

 

[flufhed]

Two things in response to posts above:

(1) On Hillary's strategy, or lack thereof. I agree, but I think what it really highlights is how AWESOME a campaign Obama has run. Think about what he is doing - he is going toe to toe with the most famous name in the Democratic party, and beating her, without her making any glaring mistakes at all. It is really unbelievable what we are witnessing. They left no state uncontested, no stone unturned, have fought for every single delegate, and it has paid off.

(2) The article cited above is what I have been saying - if Obama has the most pledged delegates, the Supers will not throw the election to Hillary, It will not happen. It would cause a rift in the Democratic party that maybe would never heal. I honestly think there would be a potential for riots from some blacks. And this is not to cast dispersions on blacks. I'm just saying that the prospect of having the base of your party be able to claim that the election was stolen from the first viable African American candidate by a bunch of old white guys in back rooms is not something the DNC wants. It will not happen. If it does, the DNC is lost and it's not worth worrying about anyway.

 

[Pai Mei]

Actually I think the fact he has a Islamic name will help more than hurt especially in dealing with the middle east issues. Should give him much more credibility on that alone. We have spent years making enemies and alot of times we were right in what we did - But I think now is the time to start reaching out and making alies instead of enemies.

Come on. You don't actually believe this, do you?

There are sects within Islam where they are willing to kill each other. And they all have Islamic names.

 

[Pai Mei]

Two things in response to posts above:(1) On Hillary's strategy, or lack thereof. I agree, but I think what it really highlights is how AWESOME a campaign Obama has run. Think about what he is doing - he is going toe to toe with the most famous name in the Democratic party, and beating her, without her making any glaring mistakes at all. It is really unbelievable what we are witnessing. They left no state uncontested, no stone unturned, have fought for every single delegate, and it has paid off.

Yes its quite remarkable I think. Also note that right now its down to Hillary, Obama, and McCain. 3 senators. A senator hasn't won the White House since JFK, and now its already a lock.

 

[Sweet J]

I honestly think there would be a potential for riots from some blacks. And this is not to cast dispersions on blacks.

They may even burn #### down.

 

[adonis]

Two things in response to posts above:(1) On Hillary's strategy, or lack thereof. I agree, but I think what it really highlights is how AWESOME a campaign Obama has run. Think about what he is doing - he is going toe to toe with the most famous name in the Democratic party, and beating her, without her making any glaring mistakes at all. It is really unbelievable what we are witnessing. They left no state uncontested, no stone unturned, have fought for every single delegate, and it has paid off.

Yes its quite remarkable I think. Also note that right now its down to Hillary, Obama, and McCain. 3 senators. A senator hasn't won the White House since JFK, and now its already a lock.

Not to mention two of them are minorities. Gonna be a big deal, no matter what this year. Probably, one of the most memorable elections in our lifetimes, and maybe a monumental one in the history of the US.

 

[Pai Mei]

Two things in response to posts above:(1) On Hillary's strategy, or lack thereof. I agree, but I think what it really highlights is how AWESOME a campaign Obama has run. Think about what he is doing - he is going toe to toe with the most famous name in the Democratic party, and beating her, without her making any glaring mistakes at all. It is really unbelievable what we are witnessing. They left no state uncontested, no stone unturned, have fought for every single delegate, and it has paid off.

Yes its quite remarkable I think. Also note that right now its down to Hillary, Obama, and McCain. 3 senators. A senator hasn't won the White House since JFK, and now its already a lock.

Not to mention two of them are minorities. Gonna be a big deal, no matter what this year. Probably, one of the most memorable elections in our lifetimes, and maybe a monumental one in the history of the US.

uh no.