It looks very close to becoming official. I wonder what Hillary is bargaining for?
VP? A Cabinet position? Supreme Court? All very interesting speculation.
====================================
Obama nears win amid signs Clinton may admit loss
By DAVID ESPO –
WASHINGTON (AP) — Barack Obama crept close to victory in the marathon Democratic presidential race Monday on the eve of the final primaries amid signs that Hillary Rodham Clinton was preparing to acknowledge defeat once he gained the final delegates needed.
Said a confident-sounding Obama: "I told her that once the dust settled I'm looking forward to meeting with her at a time and place of her choosing." He was disclosing the contents of a conversation the two rivals had on Sunday night but did not describe her response.
The former first lady has given no hint of quitting the race, and she has said repeatedly she may continue her candidacy even beyond the end of the primaries.
But her husband, former President Clinton, strongly suggested otherwise. "This may be the last day I'm ever involved in a campaign of this kind," he said as he worked for his wife in South Dakota. That state, and Montana hold the final primaries of the campaign on Tuesday.[MORE]
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hLPqTxd4Fe7e5EymHU-kTUgweRDQD9126S980
Monday, June 2, 2008
Almost A Done Deal?
Monday, February 11, 2008
Obama’s Path to Victory
Obama’s Path to Victory
By WILLIAM KRISTOL
The New York Times
February 11, 2008
Op-Ed Columnist
Last summer, George W. Bush told The Washington Examiner’s Bill Sammon that Hillary Clinton would probably be the 2008 Democratic nominee. “She’s got a national presence and this is becoming a national primary,” he said. “And therefore the person with the national presence who has got the ability to raise enough money to sustain an effort in a multiplicity of sites has got a good chance to be nominated.”
This seemed a reasonable judgment at the time. It may still turn out to be right. But today Barack Obama is neck-and-neck with Clinton in the national polls — and he’s shown a greater ability to raise money. After his strong showing over the weekend, it is Obama who now has the clearer path to his party’s nomination.
I’ll avoid a false precision in the numbers that follow. There are minor differences among news organizations in projecting delegate allocations in states that have already voted, and in counting preferences among the 796 elected officials and party leaders — the “superdelegates” — who vote according to their choice, not voters’ instruction.
Obama leads Clinton by roughly 70 delegates among about 2,000 chosen so far in primaries and caucuses. (There are still about 1,200 delegates outstanding.) Among the superdelegates, Clinton is ahead by about 100 superdelegates among the 300 who have declared a preference (though any of them can change their mind, so a count of them now is in large measure premature). All in all, Clinton seems to be slightly ahead.
She won’t be for long. On Tuesday Obama is expected to prevail in Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia. So around 9 p.m. Tuesday night, television networks probably will be announcing, for the first time, that Barack Obama holds an unambiguous delegate lead.
His lead in votes — which is already in the neighborhood of 200,000 — will probably have widened. And Obama should be able to increase those delegate and popular vote totals on Feb. 19, when Wisconsin and Hawaii go to the polls.
Next comes March 4, when Ohio, Texas, Vermont and Rhode Island vote. Clinton’s campaign believes Ohio and Texas will constitute her firewall. Will it hold?
I suspect not. Obama will have momentum. He will likely have more money than Clinton for advertising. His ballot performance among Hispanics and working-class whites has generally been improving as the primary season has gone on. He intends to push a more robust economic message that could help him further narrow the gap among lower-income voters. And an interesting regression analysis at the Daily Kos Web site (poblano.dailykos.com) of the determinants of the Democratic vote so far, applied to the demographics of the Ohio electorate, suggests that Obama has a better chance than is generally realized in Ohio.
As for Texas, look for a couple of possible endorsements to help Obama there. If John Edwards campaigns for Obama in East Texas, and Bill Richardson defies the pleas of Bill Clinton and travels across the border from New Mexico to help out, Obama could prevail.
If Obama wins Ohio and Texas — or even wins one — he’ll be in good shape. He should take Wyoming on March 8 and Mississippi on March 11. Then there’s over a month until the next contest, in Pennsylvania on April 22. That stretch of time could be key. It could be the moment for many of the uncommitted superdelegates to begin ratifying the choice of Democratic primary voters, and to start moving en masse to Obama.
Many of these superdelegates are elected officials. They tend to care about winning in November. The polls suggest Obama matches up better with John McCain. And the polls are merely echoing the judgment of almost every Democratic elected official from a competitive district or a swing state with whom I’ve spoken. They would virtually all prefer Obama at the top of the ticket.
All of this will move the superdelegates to Obama — perhaps as early as just after March 4, or perhaps not until April 22, or perhaps not even until the last match-up on June 7. But the superdelegates will want to avoid a situation in which they could be in the position of seeming to override the popular vote, or of resolving a bitter battle over whether and how to count votes from Florida and Michigan, at the convention.
And there are, as a final resort, two super-superdelegates (so to speak) who would have the clout to help Democrats achieve closure: Al Gore and Nancy Pelosi.
If they stepped forward at the right time, they would earn the gratitude of their party. And they might also enjoy contemplating a derivative effect of their good deed — the fall of the house of Clinton.
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Obama claims delegate lead
Obama claims delegate lead
By: Mike Allen
February 6, 2008 11:09 AM EST
In a surprise twist after a chaotic Super Tuesday, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) passed Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) in network tallies of the number of delegates the candidates racked up last night.
The Obama camp now projects topping Clinton by 13 delegates, 847 to 834.
NBC News, which is projecting delegates based on the Democratic Party's complex formula, figures Obama will wind up with 840 to 849 delegates, versus 829 to 838 for Clinton.
Clinton was portrayed in many news accounts as the night’s big winner, but Obama’s campaign says he wound up with a higher total where it really counts — the delegates who will choose the party’s nominee at this summer’s Democratic convention.
With the delegate count still under way, NBC News said Obama appears to have won around 840 delegates in yesterday’s contests, while Clinton earned about 830 — “give or take a few,” Tim Russert, the network’s Washington bureau chief, said on the “Today” show.
The running totals for the two, which includes previous contests and the party officials known as “superdelegates,” are only about 70 delegates apart, Russert said.
The bottom line is that the two are virtually tied.
Race, sex divide Dems; ideology splits GOP
Super Tuesday: A split decision
Media restrained in Super Tuesday coverage
Obama won 13 states, some of them smaller, and Clinton won eight.
On Wednesday morning, the battle was on to shape public perceptions about Tuesday.
The Clinton campaign said it was crunching its delegate numbers but was not sure it was correct that Obama got more.
The Obama campaign sent an e-mailed statement titled: “Obama wins Super Tuesday by winning more states and more delegates.”
Campaign Manager David Plouffe said: “By winning a majority of delegates and a majority of the states, Barack Obama won an important Super Tuesday victory over Sen. Clinton in the closest thing we have to a national primary.”
“From Colorado and Utah in the West to Georgia and Alabama in the South to Sen. Clinton’s backyard in Connecticut, Obama showed that he can win the support of Americans of every race, gender and political party in every region of the country,” Plouffe said. “That’s why he’s on track to win Democratic nomination, and that’s why he’s the best candidate to defeat John McCain in November.”
The Obama campaign attached an Excel spreadsheet containing “state-by-state estimates of the pledged delegates we won last night, which total 845 for Obama and 836 for Clinton — bringing the to-date total of delegates to 908 for Obama, 884 for Clinton.”
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Super Tuesday...Cheat sheet
Here is the cheat sheet for watching Super Tuesday. MJ
Barnes: States to Watch Today
FRED BARNES
In Super Tuesday
You don't have to pay attention to every state on Super Tuesday. Some are more important than others. So concentrate on those and you'll get a pretty good understanding of what the results mean for the presidential races in both parties.
On the Democratic side, three states stand out in my mind: New Jersey, Missouri, and California. America is a nation of suburbs and New Jersey is a state of suburbs. That's reason enough to pay attention to it. Missouri is a microcosm of America, with big cities, suburbs and lots of rural areas. It's a bellwether state. And California is, well, California. It's important because it's big. If Barack Obama wins all three of these states, he becomes the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination. If he wins two of three, he's still in good shape. Winning one would be painful for his campaign. Losing all three - that would be Hillary Clinton's dream come true.
On the Republican side, John McCain should win a majority of the states and the delegates. But he may do more, namely put together a delegate blowout by beating Mitt Romney in the winner-take-all states. That means New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut in the East, plus Missouri and four other states. McCain could pile up such a large lead in delegates that it would sharply reduce Romney's chances of overtaking him. So on the Republican side, the delegate count is the name of the game.
Sunday, February 3, 2008
Super Tuesday: Is This Hillary's Last Hurrah?
Super Tuesday: Is This Hillary's Last Hurrah?
February 3, 2008 8:04 AM
Kareem: Sky hooks for Obama
by Roger L. Simon
If either party's nominating process reaches a conclusion on Super Tuesday, conventional wisdom has it that it will be the Republicans with McCain sweeping the Northeast and California.
But a surprise may be brewing on the Democratic side. Obama fever is clearly growing.
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
The latest California Field poll shows McCain up eight, but more unexpectedly shows Obama within two points of Clinton in the nation's most populous state. Other polls are less favorable to Barack, but it's clear the younger man is surging.
Hillary is lucky the primary is this Tuesday. Another week and she could be toast. In the long run, she could be anyway.
What does this mean for the Republicans? Nothing good. Running against Hillary would not be difficult for them. The country is experiencing Clinton fatigue and what with recent revelations like Bill's nuclear finagling in Kazakhstan (probably just the tip of an endless iceberg) Hillary presents them with an easy target and likely victory.
Not so Obama. He is the "cool kid" on the block and getting cooler. Everyone wants to be part of him. "Yes, We Can" - a new video by Black-Eyed Peas featuring Scarlett Johansson and Kareem Abdul Jabbar, among others – although based on the usual campaign rhetoric, radiates an optimism about a future with and through Obama, which we haven't seen since Reagan, ironically.
Furthermore, Obama's lack of record or experience, while obviously something any concerned voter should be concerned about, may be an advantage for him. There's less to shoot at.
In a head-to-head, Obama's glamour could be lethal. McCain would look like Barack's crotchety old father and Romney—even worse—a starchy, clueless businessman (in Huckabee's words, "the guy who fires you"). I don't have to tell you, the facts are not operative here. Images rule.
This was writ large by Frank Luntz's focus group after the recent California debate at the Kodak Theater. Unlike the pundits, the people in Luntz's group overwhelmingly declared Obama the winner, although he had spoken largely in generalities throughout the entire debate. Hillary, the wonk, had focused on the details of her programs. Who wants to hear about them? Again ironically, they just contribute to Clinton fatigue.
Like it or not, people are more interested in being inspired.
So, on Super Tuesday, all eyes will be on whether McCain can administer a knockout blow on the Republican side.
But the spotlight should be shared equally with the Democrats. Hillary, even more than McCain, needs to win with some deciseveness on Tuesday. Otherwise, she will be on the wrong side of a juggernaut.
http://pajamasmedia.com/2008/02/super_tuesday_is_this_hillarys.php
Thursday, January 31, 2008
NY Times Sets Up Hillary For A Fall
NY Times Sets Up Hillary For A Fall
CONFEDERATE YANKEEE
In 2005, Bill Clinton accompanied mining financier Frank Giustra to Kazakhstan, provided dictator Nursultan A. Nazarbayev with a propaganda coup that undermined American foreign policy and glossed over Kazakhstan's dismal human rights record. For Clinton's trouble, Giustra walked away with shared mining rights to 1/5 of the world's known uranium reserves.
Clinton subsequently picked up $131 million dollars in donations and pledges from Giustra for the William J. Clinton Foundation as a result, including a donation of $31.3 million within months of the mining deal being finalized.
On the surface, this sounds like peddling influence for cash—and truth be told, I can't easily come up with any other rational explanation.
This is rather a bizarre time to be publishing an accusation of an incident that occurred several years ago, with only days left before Hillary Clinton engages Barack Obama in the Super Tuesday Democratic presidential primaries, and occurring just days after the New York Times publicly endorsed Clinton as their candidate of choice.
Are we to believe that the Times editors were unaware of the pending article on Bill Clinton's apparent influence peddling when they gave Hillary their endorsement less than one full week ago?
In a large news organization it is indeed possible that the editorial staff who wrote Clinton's endorsement was unaware of the pending Bill Clinton/Giustra article... but I doubt it. And it is the Times editors that chose when to publish an article that was not locked into a specific time-sensitive news cycle, but was, as they say, "evergreen." This could have waited until after Super Tuesday, without a loss of importance... but then it would lack the colossal political influence that this story now may have.
Publishing the Clinton/Giustra article on this day, so close to Super Tuesday, seems indicative of ill intent on behalf of the Times.
Perhaps Hillary isn't their real choice for President after all.
http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/archives/253602.php
A Longer Race Benefits Obama
A Longer Race Benefits Obama
By David Broder
WASHINGTON -- Heading into Tuesday's unprecedented day of voting in nearly two dozen states, a degree of order is finally emerging in the dramatic races for the presidential nominations of both parties.
Public opinion and leadership support are finding their way to the same destinations, pointing to a clear favorite and a single viable alternative in each race.
John McCain has the easiest path remaining to the Republican nomination, with Mitt Romney needing some kind of dramatic breakthrough Tuesday to keep his hopes of an upset alive.
On the Democratic side, the battle is more even, but the advantage has shifted back to Barack Obama -- thanks to a growing but largely unremarked tendency among Democratic leaders to reject Hillary Clinton and her husband, the former president.
The New York senator could still emerge from the "Tsunami Tuesday" voting with the overall lead in delegates, but she is unlikely to be able to come close to clinching the nomination. And the longer the race goes on, the better the chances that Obama will ultimately prevail, as more elected Democratic officials and candidates come to view him as the better bet to defeat McCain in November.
As the race has moved from contests in small states such as Iowa and New Hampshire to the national dimension of Tuesday's voting, the role of the endorsements and leadership testimonials has increased. The candidates simply lack the time and resources to make personal appeals to very many voters.
Had McCain not invested that personal time in New Hampshire, with more than 100 town meetings where he argued for the correctness of his views on the Iraq War, he could not have reversed the summertime disaster that overtook his campaign, when he ran out of money and lost most of his senior staff.
But after turning back Romney in New Hampshire, the Arizona senator picked up significant establishment backing in South Carolina and Florida -- the hard-core Republican states where he had to show his credentials. He campaigned in South Carolina flanked by Tom Coburn and Jack Kemp, icons of social and fiscal conservatism, and won Florida thanks to last-minute endorsements from Gov. Charlie Crist and Sen. Mel Martinez.
Now, with defeated Rudy Giuliani adding his voice to the chorus of endorsements, and with Mike Huckabee remaining in the race to challenge Romney from the religious right, McCain appears poised to lock up the nomination.
Unelected conservative ideologues -- Rush Limbaugh and George Will -- can mutter in frustration, but Republican politicians recognize what was written here as long ago as last Dec. 2: "If the Republican Party really wanted to hold on to the White House in 2009 ... it would grit its teeth, swallow its doubts and nominate a ticket of John McCain for president and Mike Huckabee for vice president -- and president-in-waiting."
The Democratic race remains harder to handicap, in part because Clinton already has demonstrated her resilience by fighting uphill battles to prevail in New Hampshire and Nevada and because she retains formidable alliances and organizational strengths.
But the last two weeks have seen a remarkable shift of establishment opinion against her and against the prospect of placing the party's 2008 chances in the hands of her husband, Bill Clinton.
The prominence of his role in New Hampshire and South Carolina, and the mean-spiritedness of his attacks on Obama, stunned many Democrats. Clinton's behavior underlined the warning raised in this column before Iowa, by a prominent veteran of the Clinton administration, that the prospect of two presidents both named Clinton sharing a single White House would be a huge problem for the Democrats in November if she is the nominee.
The negatives on the Clintons have brought much support to Obama, most notably that of Ted Kennedy, the most prestigious figure in the Democratic establishment in Washington. But it is also Obama's own appeal that is being talked about across the country from Massachusetts to Arizona by the younger generation of governors, senators and representatives who share with him an eagerness to "turn the page" on the battles of the past.
Obama is not inevitable, but the longer the race continues, the greater that hunger. And the growing recognition of McCain's appeal to independents also works in Obama's favor.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/01/a_longer_race_benefits_obama.html
