By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only.

Over at Daily Kos, a front page post includes this:

[I]f Obama and Clinton split the remaining pledged delegates 50/50, Obama would need only 35% of the unpledged delegates (aka superdelegates) who haven't yet committed to a candidate, while Clinton would need 65% of them.

I am not sure on the math or the assumption that the remaining pledged delegates will be split 50/50, but I do appreciate the honest admission that it will be the Super Delegates who decide the nominee. The candidates understand this of course, and are spinning hard for reasons why the Super Delegates should support their respective candidacies. The rules are the rules and wooing the Super Delegates seems to be a part of them.

Let's hope people are not shocked by the fact that the candidates are trying to win the Super Delegates. This is an Open Thread.

NOTE- Comments are closed.

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

"I think what America feels about a woman becoming president takes a very secondary place to Obama's campaign - to a kind of campaign that it would be hard for anyone to run against," she said. "For one thing, you have the press, which has been uniquely hard on her. It's been a very sexist media. Some just don't like her. The others have gotten caught up in the Obama campaign.

So far so good. Insightful even. Then she goes off the rails:

By Big Tent Democrat

Wolcott. This is an Open Thread.

Note - Comments are now closed. A note of thanks to Flyerhawk for being a very good sport while we picked on him. Note to all of us, we should not have done that.

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

. . . the following?

Clinton loses among men by five points or more in 43 states. Clinton does better with women than men in every state, with the biggest gender gap of 31 points in Colorado.

And if it is not, why would it then be racist to point out that Obama does much better with African Americans and Clinton does much better with whites, as Chris Bowers does, and as I did this morning?

By Big Tent Democrat

Watching ABC This Week, George Stepanopoulos's show, George and his panel fully understand and explain two things: one, that Hillary Clinton is ready and eager to do revotes in Florida and Michigan and Barack Obama will try and squirm his way out of them and; two, that there has to be a unity ticket, Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton. They also properly said that not only will there be pressure on the nominee to pick the other as the VP candidate, there will be pressure on the "not nominee" to accept the VP slot. Exactly right imo.

Face The Nation discusses Michigan and Florida at the top of its broadcast. Howard Dean on to discuss it. Dean says the "rules will be followed" but speaks encouragingly about a revote. Particularly about a mail in primary. Even says it is a "great party building exercise." Discusses raising money for funding it. Bill Nelson coming up. I'll update on the flip.

This is an Open Thread.

By Big Tent Democrat

What Tristero said, mostly:

I'll say it only once. I don't have a favorite between Obama and Clinton. They are both excellent [NOTE: I do not think either is even a particularly good political candidate but both will be good Presidents, but I think Obama is more electable] candidates (which is not to say I'm necessarily in favor of a joint ticket). Neither are manufactured manly-men-with-their- straight-shooters-shooting-straight-at -you-can-you-take-it. By comparison with St. John - all image to obscure his consistent behavior as a rightwing operative - both Obama and Clinton invite critical examination (please read the first clause of this sentence before ranting about Candidate X's deviousness and willingness to hide his/her true agenda/earnings/actions). So I think it not surprising, nor terribly important, that I find it easy to support them both while at the same time often disagreeing with the particulars of their platforms. The point is that even when I think they are wrong, I recognize they are both serious people, not clowns who want to inherit the dubious mantle of George W. Bush's codpiece.

By Big Tent Democrat

Your turn again. But I have bashed enough bloggers today for all of us. Let's leave that out of this Open Thread. Anything but that. Deal? If not, your comments might be deleted.

Have a good evening. Hasta luego, as we pesky Latinos say.

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only.

I tell you, today is quite a day in the blogs. Look at what Chris Bowers writes today:

Clinton's primary coalition thus far has been largely kept afloat by older Reagan Dems who also tend to be white southern Baptists. And yes, they also tend to be older, as exit polls have shown. . . . I don't care if Democrats never make up any ground among Reagan Democrats ever, as long as we lock up the support of expanding groups like the creative class, white non-Christians, Latinos and Asians for a generation. . . . While Clinton's advantage among Latinos and Asians does not make it a perfect match, Obama's primary coalition is far closer to the coalition we need for an expanding future of the Democratic Party, while Clinton's primary is a lot more like the coalition we have been chasing after for the past twenty-five years or so. . . .

Yep. Except for those pesky Latinos and, of course those older women, and white working class men - I hate the Clinton coalition and I love the way Obama does not make appeals to Reagan Democrats. Why yes, that is what I really love about Obama - the way he is sharply partisan against the Republicans and has not run one of those Unity Schtick campaigns to appeal to Reagan Democrats. Heck never would Obama even say a word of praise of Reagan EVER. And Republicans? No where to be seen in that Obama coalition. Nosirree.

Some things can not be parodied. More

By Big Tent Democrat

Because the continuing pattern of railing against everything Clinton and defending, excusing and praising everything Obama has been prevalent in the Media and the blogs, I think the point has been reached, as it was during the 90s with rabid Republicans, that most people simply do not pay attention to these shrieks from the usual suspects. Their outrage at everything Clinton and their effusive praise or defense of everything Obama is of course the subject of SNL parody, but consider this wild post by Spencer Ackermann that seems beyond parody:

I've got court this morning so it's up to you to keep each other informed. What's of interest in the news and what's on your mind today?

I'll be back late this afternoon.

Bumped by BTD.

By BTD Apropos to nothing, here's one of my favorite artists singing a song by one of the greatest, if not the greatest, songwriters:

NOTE - Comments closed. New Open Thread.

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only.

If there is one thing that has truly has bothered me about the reactions of some of the Left blogs is the blatant hypocrisy they have displayed. The outrage they have voiced on behalf of every perceived slight of Barack Obama and his campaign has been just plain laughable while they have excused every smear, sexist or otherwise against Hillary Clinton.

Note - Comments are closed.

The comments are getting really off-topic to our posts. We can only accommodate 200 or so comments per thread because of our fixed width (which I happen to like and am not changing) so in order for everyone to get a say on the topic of the post, off-topic comments are deleted. If you want to pick the topic, please do it in an open thread.

Like this one.