View current page
...more recent posts

The 2008 Democratic National Convention, where the Democratic presidential ticket is formally agreed upon, has 796[3] superdelegates, although the number is not final until March 1, 2008. Superdelegates to the Democratic Convention include all Democratic members of the United States Congress, Democratic governors, various additional elected officials, as well as members of the Democratic National Committee.[4] A list of superdelegates can be found here.

A candidate needs a majority of the combined delegate and superdelegate votes to secure the nomination. Democratic delegates from state caucuses and primaries number 3,253, resulting in a total number of votes of 4,049. The total number of delegate votes needed to win the nomination is 2,025.[3] Superdelegates account for approximately one fifth (19.6%) of all votes at the convention. Delegates chosen in the Democratic caucuses and primaries account for approximately four fifths (80.4%) of the Democratic convention delegates.[3][5] Note: All numbers in this section assume that Michigan and Florida's delegates are not counted, as per current Democratic National Committee rules. If the rules change before or during the convention, the numbers above will change as appropriate.

- dave 2-06-2008 6:47 pm [link] [1 comment]

Getting Past the '60s? It's Not Going to Happen


Good flashback on the reactionaries who are so often forgotten. Here's one I'll never get over:

"If it takes a bloodbath, let's get it over with." California Governor Ronald Reagan, April 7, 1970, in reference to using state violence to suppress protests at UC Berkeley.

- mark 2-06-2008 1:15 am [link] [add a comment]

lessig speaks up for obama.

- dave 2-05-2008 6:22 pm [link] [4 comments]

This is not a story about the presidential horse race. It’s not about the policy positions of a freshman senator and candidate for national office. It’s about the enduring character of a boy and a young man, and how that character has emerged in adulthood. The Barack Obama who wrote so poignantly of adolescent alienation and the search for racial identity is the same Barack Obama who learned, the hard way, how to deal with the likes of Emil Jones Jr., a man whose cell-phone ring tone is the theme from The Godfather. Obama’s good looks and soft-spoken willingness to ponder aloud some of the inanities of modern politics have masked the hard inner core and unyielding ambition that have long burned beneath the surface shimmer. He is not, and never has been, soft. He’s not laid-back. He’s not an accidental man. His friends and family may be surprised by the rapidity of his rise, but they’re not surprised by the fact of it.

- dave 2-05-2008 5:14 pm [link] [add a comment]

i thought it unlikely that anyone would pony up the money for a political spot during the superbowl. i was wrong about the patriots too.

- dave 2-04-2008 6:48 am [link] [add a comment]

first family?

- dave 2-01-2008 1:24 am [link] [add a comment]

And this is without the Dems campaigning in Fla.

Clinton	856,944
McCain	693,425
Romney	598,152
Obama	568,930
Giuliani	281,755
Huckabee	259,703
Edwards	248,575

from here

- mark 1-31-2008 12:43 am [link] [add a comment]

On the Democratic side, Clinton beat rival Barack Obama in a tight Nevada contest. She won the popular vote but Obama won more delegates. (???) I guess I need a civics lesson.
- jimlouis 1-20-2008 4:15 pm [link] [10 comments]

the other night coward fineman could not stop gushing about tim russerts skill and fearsomeness as an interviewer and that hillary was brave to submit to an hour in his presence. judge for yourself right now but dont look directly into his eyes or you may not live to comment again.

- dave 1-13-2008 6:30 pm [link] [add a comment]

Here's a comment to a Matt Yglesais post, with an excerpt from Matt's post in italics:

That said, all the available evidence points to there being more people with friendly feelings toward Obama than there are with friendly feelings toward Hillary.

OTOH, there are greater limits to the grossest ways in which the Republican candidates can dog whistle on HRC than on Obama. Republicans weren't going to get the black vote anyway. The main reason to seem friendly to black voters is to reassure white female voters (or so I think Rove said). But attacking HRC on dog whistle gender grounds seems at least as likely to cost Republicans those white women voters, whom they currently win by (I think) 10%, as attacking Obama on race-related dog whistle grounds. Even K-Lo gets irritated by some of the gender related HRC-bashing, and occassionally gets frustrated by the lack of Republican female politicians.

I don't think the issue is as clear cut as you're making it out to be.

This isn't making me change my mind, but this is the first argument for Clinton vs. Obama that has made any sense at all to me. What do you guys think?

Overall I still say that since Clinton is stronger with the dem base, and Obama is stronger with independents, he's a better candidate in the general election since the base is going to vote for whoever the dem nominee is anyway, while the independents can easily break the other way (or just split or just stay home) if it's Clinton.
- jim 1-10-2008 11:38 pm [link] [6 comments]