Page 101 of 294 FirstFirst ... 5191979899100101102103104105111151201 ... LastLast
Results 1,501 to 1,515 of 4400

Thread: Race for the White House

  1. #1501

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zephyr View Post
    I am a firm believer in the democratic process, even when it results in candidates being selected over the ones I support.Usually I am only moved to object when a candidate is using ways to sidestep, or influence extra legally, the election process. None of that is happening here as far as I can see, but a slightly 'lesser offence' is evident, and one cannot help but see it - Senator Clinton's single-minded obsession that shades into ruthlessness.
    I think you missed my point, or perhaps I missed yours. In a previous post you seemed to indicate a measure of dismay regarding voter behavior that would drive an Obama or Clinton supporter to not support the other candidate should the other candidate get the nomination. My post was a response intended to demonstrate the mindset of those individuals

    Quote Originally Posted by Zephyr View Post
    I don't "blame" Senator Obama for being unable to "put her away". Negative campaigning, and especially 11th hour negative campaigning, can be effective, and it was in these instances by stopping the chain of victories he had piled up. Watching the polls in Wisconsin through Ohio/Texas etc., I saw Senator Obama close very wide gaps where Senator Clinton was in the lead, with speeches, organisation, determination and yes, more money. Senator Clinton regained that momentum by resorting to tactics that look all too familiar in past Republican campaigns, orchestrated by Karl Rove. Howard Wolfson plays this time the Rovian persona.
    Irrespective of the tactics used against him, the fact remains that Obama has Hillary on the ropes prior to the New Hampshire as well as the Texas/Ohio et al. primaries. He also significantly outspent her at least in Texas and she is still standing. I agree Clinton has crossed a line more recently but the 3AM ads in Texas seem to be what put her over the top there, as that primary preceded her more recent comments regarding his qualifications vs. McCain. By contrast, the Texas/Ohio campaigns were negative but hardly over the line hardly Karl Rovish. My point is he can expect this many times over when the general campaign begins and he will need to know how to deal with it. John McCain will not go quietly into the night and I am beginning to worry about how Obama will do in the fall.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zephyr View Post
    Senator Clinton is not a puppet, and she is part-and-parcel to what this strategy both accomplishes and ultimately destroys.
    Agreed.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zephyr View Post
    The strategy got her a clear victory in Ohio, but not such a complete victory in Texas (see the course of the caucuses to date)
    Disagree. As I mentioned above, I do not consider the ads leading into Ohio and Texas to be over the line. In Texas the 3AM ad was designed to position her as experienced and strong on defense.Obama can and did make the argument that he is as qualified on this matter as she is if not more so. Both arguments are fair. For some reason, his was not as effective, or at least it did not appear to play as well with electorate. And he shot himself in the foot in Ohio on the NAFTA/ Canadian whisper issue.
    .
    Quote Originally Posted by Zephyr View Post
    What she may have destroyed is party unity and maybe even her own chances even if she survives to go on to the general election.
    Speaker Pelosi, former Clintonists, and a bevy of insiders are aware of this and we see that occasionally seeping out on the edges of the battle. I also believe this "lesser offence" is what angers a number of us here, some of whom were not even supporters of Senator Obama. either earlier. or even now. Just a general acknowledgement that a line has been crossed that could hurt more than Senator Obama. This is what I believe you are really seeing: not a negative reaction to a Democrat because she is a woman, or as someone other than Senator Obama. At least that is how I have interpretted it.
    To be clear, I never attributed criticisms of her here or elsewhere to her being a woman.


    Quote Originally Posted by Zephyr View Post
    According to Senator Clinton (and Mr. Wolfson), Senator Obama has not yet crossed the 'threshold' to even be a Vice Presidential candidate. Ironically, Senator Clinton on the other hand, can be accused of effectively crossing the threshold of campaign rhetoric to the point of entering a realm of personal attack that may do more than bring down her immediate opponent.
    Agreed, that comment was WAY over the line. But because it came after Texas and Ohio, it does not account for his losses there. I am not sure what does, but he needs to figure it out or it will be a tough fall for him and for that matter me.
    Last edited by eddhead; March 12th, 2008 at 10:42 AM.

  2. #1502

    Default







    Exit Polls: Clinton draws Republican support

    11.March.2008
    Posted: 08:53 PM ET

    (CNN) — Are some of Mississippi's Republicans trying to cause mischief? Thirteen percent of the voters in today's Democratic primary identified themselves as Republican; they voted for Clinton, 78 percent to 22 percent. And 37 percent of the Democratic primary voters have a favorable opinion of John McCain; this group also went for Clinton, 62 percent to 37 percent.

    Earlier this month, conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh told listeners that since the Republican race was all but over, they should turn out for Clinton, because of his view that she would be a weaker fall opponent for presumptive GOP nominee John McCain — but there is no statistical evidence to indicate his instructions played any role in the Mississippi results.

    –CNN's Paul Varian




    Exit polls: Mississippi Democrats divide on racial lines

    Obama and Clinton supporters in Mississippi appear divided among racial lines.

    11.March.2008
    Posted: 09:48 PM ET

    (CNN) – Mississippi Democratic voters were sharply divided among racial lines in Tuesday's primary, exit polls indicate.

    As has been the case in many primary states, Obama won overwhelming support from African-American voters. They went for him over Clinton 91-9 percent.

    But Mississippi white voters overwhelmingly backed the New York senator, supporting her over Obama 72 percent to 21 percent.

    According to the Associated Press, only two other primary states were as racially polarized — neighboring Alabama, and Clinton's former home state of Arkansas.

    The exit polls also indicated roughly 30 percent of Mississippi Democratic voters said race was an important factor in their vote, and 60 percent of those voters supported Obama.

    In Ohio, roughly 1 in 5 voters said race factored into their decision. Roughly 60 percent of those voters picked Clinton over Obama.

    – CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney


    © 2007 Cable News Network LP, LLLP. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.

  3. #1503

    Default

    Just some raw numbers:

    Obama will pick up 8 delegates from the California primary. A political blogger in California noticed that the news media still showed the Clinton delegate number at 207, which did not include absentee and provisional ballots. The correct total should be 203, which he reported to the state party officials. They confirmed that his count was correct with their unofficial 203-167. Numbers become official when the state Dem party certifies the results.

    Obama may pick up 2 more delegates from Ohio, and the Texas caucus, which Obama is leading will get him a few.

    The delegate spread in Mississippi will be about 5. The popular vote will be about +100,000 for Obama.

    So the way it stands going into PA: Obama has about a 160 vote lead in delegates. His popular vote lead is 700,000. With FL added, the lead is 400,000.

    We're at about the same place we were before the last firewall of OH and TX. After PA, which Clinton must win big, there are no more firewalls.

  4. #1504

    Default

    Aside from what you mentioned Zippy, there is still the mathematics of Michigan, with 156 delegates, and Florida, with 211 delegates. This makes for a grand total of 367, potentially in play.

    Much to my surprise, the previous stalemate has moved forward and taken a slightly different form. Florida receives nearly all the press, with Michigan sliding behind its shadow. Several hours ago, CNN went out on a limb, reporting what it initially called an “exclusive,” on the two-state do-over/re-do.

    The centre of this so-called "exclusive," was a division between Democratic Senator Bill Nelson of Florida – a Senator Clinton supporter – and nine (9) Florida Democrats in the U.S. House of Representative, with Debbie Wasserman-Schultz serving as spokesperson – also a Senator Clinton supporter. Senator Nelson wants a mail-in do-over/re-do, USHR Wasserman-Schultz and her group held firm for the original results determined in January.

    This morning, references to "exclusive" had all but disappeared, last I checked. The one residual article that remained: “Delivering a solution to Florida's primary woes” is the only evidence of the CNN story in any form.

    What confuses me most about this story, as I understand it thus far, is the breakdown. Note especially the last grouping:



    Florida USHRs*


    Senator Clinton supporters:

    Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (Weston Superdelegate)
    Corinne Brown (Jacksonville Superdelegate)
    Alcee Hastings (Miramar Superdelegate)
    Kendrick Meek (Miami Superdelegate)


    Uncommitted:

    Allen Boyd (Monticello Superdelegate)
    Tim Mahoney (Palm Beach Gardens Superdelegate)
    Ron Klein (Boca Raton Superdelegate)


    Senator Obama supporters:

    Kathy Castor (Tampa Superdelegate)
    Robert Wexler (Delray Beach Superdelegate)



    Both of Senator Obama's supporters are co-chairs for his campaign in Florida, despite the fact that Florida's election was initially punished by the DNC. Why they are supporting the original votes from January where Senator Clinton won big, has yet to be fully explained. As you would expect, there is an abundance of speculation on this apparently tactical move by Senator Obama's team. But most of that speculation is muted rather than intense.

    With another 11th hour action somewhere on the horizon, probably near convention, we may find this will be the most important of all in this stranger-than-fiction year, on the Democratic side.



    * - Table derived from Palm Beach Post (1); Palm Beach Post (2); The Field

  5. #1505

    Default



    Obama Says Ferraro Dividing Democrats

    By JOAN LOWY
    12 March 2008
    Associated Press

    WASHINGTON — Barack Obama assailed as "slice and dice" politics Geraldine Ferraro's assertion that he wouldn't be where he is in the presidential race if he weren't black.
    Ferraro countered Wednesday that her remarks were not racist and had been taken out of context.

    The back-and-forth between the two Democrat trailblazers — Obama, seeking to be the nation's first black president, and Ferraro, who was the first woman on major party presidential ticket — continued for a second day as they made appearances on network and cable morning news programs.

    "Part of what I think Geraldine Ferraro is doing, and I respect the fact that she was a trailblazer, is to participate in the kind of slice and dice politics that's about race and about gender and about this and that, and that's what Americans are tired of because they recognize that when we divide ourselves in that way we can't solve problems," Obama said on NBC's "Today" show.

    Ferraro — a supporter and fundraiser for Hillary Rodham Clinton — said that Obama's campaign had taken her remarks out of context and that she was merely commenting on the historic nature of his candidacy.

    "I was talking about historic candidacies and what I started off by saying (was that) if you go back to 1984 and look at my historic candidacy, which I had just talked about all these things, in 1984 if my name was Gerard Ferraro instead of Geraldine Ferraro, I would have never been chosen as a vice presidential candidate," Ferraro said on ABC's "Good Morning America." "It had nothing to do with my qualification."

    The controversy began Tuesday when the national media picked up on comments Ferraro made in an interview last week with the Daily Breeze newspaper in Torrance, Calif.: "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."

    Clinton rejected Ferraro's remarks.

    "I do not agree with that," Clinton said Tuesday in an interview with The Associated Press, and later added, "It's regrettable that any of our supporters — on both sides, because we both have this experience — say things that kind of veer off into the personal."

    "We ought to keep this on the issues. There are differences between us" on approaches to health care, energy, experience, Clinton said.


    Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

  6. #1506

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zephyr View Post
    [I]Aside from what you mentioned Zippy, there is still the mathematics of Michigan, with 156 delegates, and Florida, with 211 delegates. This makes for a grand total of 367, potentially in play.
    That's true, but neither are going to establish "momentum" for Clinton, since they will probably come into play at the end of the primaries. And momentum is what Clinton needs.

    If you've watched the map projections on TV (CNN and MSNBC), the scenario they make for Clinton is that she also wins handily in places like North Carolina and Oregon, where Obama has a lead. When they give her the entire map after a big win in PA, she still falls short.

    The 367 delegates for MI and FL are a lot, but there were 334 for TX and OH, and despite two wins, Clinton got less than a dozen extra delegates.

    I think the delegate race is effectively over.

    Other than (or in combination with) arguments to the superdelegates, that leaves only the popular vote. The important result from Mississippi was the voter turnout, 2.5 times normal. That gave Obama 100,000 more votes, almost half of what Clinton picked up in Ohio. She needs a big win in PA coupled with a major stumble in Obama's campaign.

    What sometimes happens when a tactical decision is made in a campaign that fits the moment is that the emotional effect is immediate, but over time, flaws in the argument and a more rational approach blunt the effect.

    When it was first proposed, a Clinton-Obama ticket drew a 70% favorable polling result; now that's down to about 50%, and Nancy Pelosi has all but shot that down. And the 3AM phone call ad has spawned negative (and comical) responses.

    So I suspect a new tactic for PA. I'm not convinced that the Geraldine Ferraro incident wasn't planned, coming just at the Mississippi primary, where it was known that the results would be polarized along racial lines.

    If you've heard that description, Pennsylvania is Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, with Alabama in between, look for race to be the next tactic.

  7. #1507

    Default

    ^^

    Zippy, the other piece of math missing from your analysis is the popular vote tallies. Since it is unlikely that either candidate will get to 2025 or whatever the required delegate count will be when Mi and Fa or sorted, the popular vote becomes important in that it will provide guidance to uncommitted and cross-over delegates.

    Currently Obama holds a 700K or so lead in the popular vote total. If you factor in the current Mi and FL totals that lead deteriorates to less than 100K. I am not advocating this approach, just stating a mathematical fact. A strong Clinton showing in a redo would obviously cut the lead to something between. Using the redo scenerio, I do not see her overcoming his lead, but if she does, all bets are off at the convention. If he has a delegate lead but cannot get a majority, and if she pulls ahead in the popular (unlikely) she has as much claim to the nomination as he does, and the uncommitted superdelegates will have the cover they need to move over to her.

    Here is the CNN tally I referred to. It includes current Mi and FL voters, but you can play with the totals and make your own determination of where a redo would put them. Sorry it is so difficult to read.
    http://flaminggrasshopper.com/wp-con...em20080305.htm

    Primary/Caucus popular vote totals: Democrats (as of March 5, 2008)
    Source: CNN, http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/pri...results/dates/
    From left to right in order of which candidate has the largest popular vote
    State Clinton Obama Edwards Other (Near) Total Democrat Popular Vote
    AK (caucus) 103 302 0 1 406
    AL 226,504 302,814 7,934 2,673 539,925
    AR 217,313 80,774 5,845 3,386 307,318
    AZ 228,158 191,681 23,587 0 443,426
    CA 2,306,361 1,890,026 179,109 0 4,375,496
    CO (caucus) 38,587 79,344 0 1,253 119,184
    CT 164,831 179,349 3,408 3,007 350,595
    DC 27,326 85,534 0 297 113,157
    DE 40,751 51,124 1,241 2,863 95,979
    FL 857,208 569,041 248,604 9,537 1,684,390
    GA 328,129 700,366 17,990 0 1,046,485
    HI (caucus) 8,835 28,347 0 65 37,247
    IA (caucus) 737 940 744 80 2,501
    ID (D-caucus, R-primary) 3,655 16,880 137 552 21,224
    IL 662,845 1,301,954 39,001 0 2,003,800
    KS (caucus) 9,462 27,172 53 8 36,695
    LA 136,959 220,588 0 0 357,547
    MA 704,591 511,887 19,889 7,766 1,244,133
    MD 285,440 464,474 0 10,400 760,314
    ME (caucus) 1,396 2,079 0 18 3,493
    MI 328,151 0 0 265,959 594,110
    MN (caucus) 68,607 141,725 980 1,306 212,618
    MO 395,287 405,284 16,747 3,135 820,453
    MT (R-caucus, D-primary) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
    ND (caucus) 6,948 11,625 283 0 18,856
    NE (D-caucus, R-primary) 12,445 26,126 0 99 38,670
    NH 112,251 104,772 48,681 18,400 284,104
    NJ 602,576 492,186 14,607 0 1,109,369
    NM 73,105 71,396 2,002 402 146,905
    NV (caucus) 5,355 4,773 396 36 10,560
    NY 1,003,623 697,914 19,725 0 1,721,262
    OH 1,203,924 976,368 0 0 2,180,292
    OK 228,425 130,087 42,718 0 401,230
    RI 106,471 73,609 0 1,012 181,092
    SC 141,128 295,091 93,552 551 530,322
    TN 332,599 250,730 27,644 3,123 614,096
    TX 1,452,776 1,354,553 0 0 2,807,329
    UT 48,719 70,373 3,525 0 122,617
    VA 347,252 623,141 0 0 970,393
    VT 54,222 84,274 0 0 138,496
    WA 294,718 327,553 10,983 11,084 644,338
    WI 452,795 646,007 0 859 1,099,661
    WV (caucus) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
    WY (caucus) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
    TOTAL 13,520,568 13,492,263 829,385 347,872 28,190,088
    Last edited by eddhead; March 12th, 2008 at 11:24 AM.

  8. #1508

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eddhead View Post
    Zippy, the other piece of math missing from your analysis is the popular vote tallies.
    Check my post #1514.

    It's why I mentioned the +100,000 in Mississippi. Although Clinton wrote off the state, I'm sure she was disturbed by the popular vote spread.

    No scenarios add Michigan to the mix, since Obama was off the ballot. Since Clinton is not going to do much better in a redo, and Obama is still going to win some states, the lead is significant. She will try to get close (whatever that means) in delegates and/or popular vote, and make some sort of case to the superdelegates.

    A lead is a lead. US presidential elections have always been close in the raw vote; 60-40 is described as a landslide.

    In 1960, the popular vote difference between Kennedy and Nixon was 112,800 - two tenths of one percent.

  9. #1509
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Manhattan
    Posts
    2,636

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zephyr View Post
    Aside from what you mentioned Zippy, there is still the mathematics of Michigan, with 156 delegates, and Florida, with 211 delegates. This makes for a grand total of 367, potentially in play.

    Much to my surprise, the previous stalemate has moved forward and taken a slightly different form. Florida receives nearly all the press, with Michigan sliding behind its shadow. Several hours ago, CNN went out on a limb, reporting what it initially called an “exclusive,” on the two-state do-over/re-do.

    The centre of this so-called "exclusive," was a division between Democratic Senator Bill Nelson of Florida – a Senator Clinton supporter – and nine (9) Florida Democrats in the U.S. House of Representative, with Debbie Wasserman-Schultz serving as spokesperson – also a Senator Clinton supporter. Senator Nelson wants a mail-in do-over/re-do, USHR Wasserman-Schultz and her group held firm for the original results determined in January.

    This morning, references to "exclusive" had all but disappeared, last I checked. The one residual article that remained: “Delivering a solution to Florida's primary woes” is the only evidence of the CNN story in any form.

    What confuses me most about this story, as I understand it thus far, is the breakdown. Note especially the last grouping:



    Florida USHRs*


    Senator Clinton supporters:

    Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (Weston Superdelegate)
    Corinne Brown (Jacksonville Superdelegate)
    Alcee Hastings (Miramar Superdelegate)
    Kendrick Meek (Miami Superdelegate)


    Uncommitted:

    Allen Boyd (Monticello Superdelegate)
    Tim Mahoney (Palm Beach Gardens Superdelegate)
    Ron Klein (Boca Raton Superdelegate)


    Senator Obama supporters:

    Kathy Castor (Tampa Superdelegate)
    Robert Wexler (Delray Beach Superdelegate)



    Both of Senator Obama's supporters are co-chairs for his campaign in Florida, despite the fact that Florida's election was initially punished by the DNC. Why they are supporting the original votes from January where Senator Clinton won big, has yet to be fully explained. As you would expect, there is an abundance of speculation on this apparently tactical move by Senator Obama's team. But most of that speculation is muted rather than intense.

    With another 11th hour action somewhere on the horizon, probably near convention, we may find this will be the most important of all in this stranger-than-fiction year, on the Democratic side.



    * - Table derived from Palm Beach Post (1); Palm Beach Post (2); The Field

    Obama in my opinion will do very well in Michigan, Clinton wont win that state by more then 10

  10. #1510

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZippyTheChimp View Post
    Check my post #1514.

    It's why I mentioned the +100,000 in Mississippi. Although Clinton wrote off the state, I'm sure she was disturbed by the popular vote spread.

    No scenarios add Michigan to the mix, since Obama was off the ballot. Since Clinton is not going to do much better in a redo, and Obama is still going to win some states, the lead is significant. She will try to get close (whatever that means) in delegates and/or popular vote, and make some sort of case to the superdelegates.

    A lead is a lead. US presidential elections have always been close in the raw vote; 60-40 is described as a landslide.

    In 1960, the popular vote difference between Kennedy and Nixon was 112,800 - two tenths of one percent.
    sorry, i missed our comments on Mississippi. I agree Michigan should not be included given Obama was not even on the ballot which is whyi went out of my way to indicate I am NOT advocating accepting the results as they stand. I also agree that under the circumstances the original Fla results should not be included either, but the results of both primaries may provide an indicative projection (VERY indicative) representation of how a redo would fall out (look at the "Other" column for Mi)

    Assuming the same number or registered democrats participate in the redos we are looking at maybe 2.4MM voters. I think the best case for Clinton is a 10% overall differential her favor or 240K votes. If she has a good day in PA she can maybe pick up another 125K. That still leaves her short of what what she needs to influence the superdelegates at the convention, which is why I think it is over for her.
    Last edited by eddhead; March 13th, 2008 at 03:40 PM.

  11. #1511

    Default Part One - Geraldine Ferraro

    A political soap opera deserves the proper setting:

    Two of Senator Clinton’s Superdelegates Resign on Same Day

    PART ONE – GERALDINE FERRARO



    ----- Past Connexions: Ferraro the Protector -----



    Female ex-candidate to 'protect' Hillary Clinton

    By Philip Sherwell in New York, Sunday Telegraph
    Last Updated: 1:34am BST 02/04/2007


    The first woman to run on a US presidential ticket has promised her friend Hillary Clinton that she will help her fight Republican "dirty tricks" in the race for the White House.

    "The only thing that can stop Hillary becoming the next president would be smears and dirty tricks," said Geraldine Ferraro, the Democrats' losing 1984 vice-presidential candidate. "I've told her I'll go anywhere and speak any time to make sure that doesn't happen."


    High-profile women like Geraldine Ferraro
    are backing Hillary Clinton’s White House bid


    She outlined her plans for a display of female solidarity with the Democratic presidential frontrunner last week in an interview in her office overlooking Ground Zero, where the World Trade Centre once stood in lower Manhattan.

    Miss Ferraro, 71, now the managing director of a large corporate public relations and consultancy firm, has joined the former US secretary of state Madeleine Albright and Billie Jean King, the former tennis star, in a "rapid rebuttal force" of well-known women on standby to defend and promote Sen Clinton's candidacy.

    "We've learned our lessons from 2004," she told The Sunday Telegraph, referring to the so-called Swift Boat campaign when some former Vietnam veterans who served with John Kerry, the Democrats' last White House nominee, questioned the medals he won for valour.

    "The Democrats' mistake was to sit back and think nobody would believe this garbage. But some of it stuck and the harm was done. This time we'll be out there fighting back," insisted Miss Ferraro, a feisty New York native who is a regular commentator on Fox News, the conservative television network.

    ….


    © Copyright of Telegraph Media Group Limited 2008




    ----- Denounce and Reject? No ... Disagree with Ms. Ferraro and Blame Senator Obama instead, for Dividing the Party -----







    Clinton Disagrees With but Declines to Press Ferraro

    By Perry Bacon Jr.
    Posted at 6:28 PM ET on Mar 11, 2008


    Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign declined today to force former Democratic vice-presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro from its finance committee, as her rival Sen. Barack Obama and his aides demanded, after Ferraro suggested Obama would not be in the position he is not if not for his race and gender.

    Instead, Clinton's campaign manager Maggie Williams sent out a statement repeating Clinton's remarks to the Associated Press from earlier in the day. "I do not agree with that," Clinton had said of Ferraro's comments, "and you know it's regrettable that any of our supporters on both sides say things that veer off into the personal. We ought to keep this focused on the issues. That's what this campaign should be about."

    In the same statement, Williams called the criticism of Ferraro "false, personal and politically calculated attacks on the eve of a primary."

    "These attacks serve only to divide the Democratic Party and the American people," Williams said.


    Williams' statement also invoked Obama's own words in defense Ferraro. In a presidential debate in January, Obama had condemned a memo his staff composed that recounted various statements from Clinton supporters that could be considered racially motivated. Obama had referred to that memo as "overzealous."


    © Copyright 1996-2008 The Washington Post Company



    ----- A Resignation without Apology -----






    March 12, 2008
    Breaking: Ferraro steps down


    Posted: 05:05 PM ET


    Ferraro stepped down after
    several days of controversial remarks.

    (CNN) – Geraldine Ferraro has stepped down from her role as a member of Hillary Clinton's finance committee.

    In a letter to Clinton obtained by CNN's Suzanne Malveaux — who spoke with the former vice presidential candidate shortly after she sent it to Clinton — Ferraro said she is stepping down so, "I can speak for myself and you can continue to speak for yourself about what is at stake in this campaign."

    In a phone conversation with Malveaux, Ferraro said she was not asked to step down by Senator Clinton or her campaign.

    Ferraro said thousands of people are part of the finance committee, saying it is not a staff position, but a voluntary one for those who raise money for the campaign. She also said she has raised $125,000 for Senator Clinton.

    When asked if she had any regrets about what she said, Ferraro replied, "absolutely not."

    "I am who I am and I will continue to speak up," she said. She added that she thought it was a shame that the Obama campaign was trying to block her First Amendment rights, and that she felt that was no way to conduct a campaign.

    She said, "it's not me slicing and dicing," a reference to Obama's comments earlier in the day accusing Ferraro of dividing the party.

    Ferraro said David Axelrod, Obama's campaign manager and an acquaintance, should have called her to ask her the intention of her remarks, which she says the Obama campaign used to hurt Clinton.

    When asked how she felt about Hillary Clinton distancing herself from her remarks, Ferraro replied, "I am perfectly fine," and that there were no hard feelings. She said she understands what Clinton is going through, and understands that being part of a presidential campaign is "very hard."

    Full letter:

    Dear Hillary –

    I am stepping down from your finance committee so I can speak for myself and you can continue to speak for yourself about what is at stake in this campaign.

    The Obama campaign is attacking me to hurt you. I won't let that happen.

    Thank you for everything you have done and continue to do to make this a better world for my children and grandchildren.

    You have my deep admiration and respect.

    Gerry

    (CNN's Matt Hoye contributed to this report.)



    © 2007 Cable News Network LP, LLLP. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.

  12. #1512

    Default Part Two - Eliot Spitzer

    Part Two of Two:

    Two of Senator Clinton’s Superdelegates Resign on Same Day

    PART TWO – ELIOT SPITZER



    ----- Past Connexions: Spitzer Gets Off the Fence -----



    Ending Speculation, Gov. Spitzer Says He’ll Back Clinton for President


    By MICHAEL COOPER and PATRICK HEALY
    May 9, 2007


    ALBANY, May 8 — After sitting on the fence for months, Gov. Eliot Spitzer said on Tuesday that he had decided to endorse Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, his fellow New York Democrat, for president.



    Nathaniel Brooks for The New York Times

    Gov. Eliot Spitzer in Albany, where he was asked
    about a report that he had decided to back
    Hillary Rodham Clinton for president.


    While Democrats close to Mr. Spitzer say he made the endorsement willingly, they also say it came in spite of some resentment in the Spitzer camp over Mrs. Clinton’s lack of assistance during the governor’s budget battles this winter. These Democrats say the governor was keenly aware that she did not help him when he was sparring with 1199 United Healthcare Workers East and some other Democratic interest groups.

    Mr. Spitzer did not push for her help — that is not his style — and other leading New York Democratic officials did not stand by his side either; Representative Charles B. Rangel even chided him for being too aggressive as he pushed for Medicaid and health care reforms.

    Still, it was only Mrs. Clinton who was seeking his endorsement this year, and Mr. Spitzer’s backing could tamp down concerns about any drift of Democratic support toward the candidacy of her main rival, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois.

    “Those of us who have worked with Hillary over the years, and seen her intellect and her capacity to accomplish, understand what a superb president she would be,” the governor said in a brief telephone interview. “She has a grasp of the issues, and a capacity to make the hard, tough decisions that we desperately need in a president.”

    The Democrats close to Mr. Spitzer, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the private views in the governor’s camp, made the point of saying that Mr. Spitzer’s politics, background and generational outlook were closely aligned to those of Mr. Obama of Illinois.

    An endorsement of Mr. Obama would have been dangerous for the governor of Mrs. Clinton’s adopted home state, however, and Democrats said Mr. Spitzer had never seriously considered backing Mr. Obama.


    Clinton advisers said privately on Tuesday that they were pleased to have the endorsement, and declined to comment on the views within the Spitzer camp.

    The endorsement by Mr. Spitzer — the de facto head of the New York Democratic Party — comes as Mrs. Clinton has been working to fend off a strong challenge on her own turf by Mr. Obama. He has not only shown fund-raising prowess when it comes to New York donors, but also picked up the endorsement of a local Democratic politician, State Senator Bill Perkins of Harlem.

    While Mr. Spitzer has long praised Mrs. Clinton publicly, he has declined for months to extend his formal endorsement, citing how far off the Democratic primary still is. But he did sign a law moving the New York primary to Feb. 5 from March, a change widely seen as beneficial to Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy.

    The formal announcement is set for Monday in Albany. Every statewide elected official is expected to be there: Lt. Gov. David A. Paterson, Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo and Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli, along with Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, Senate Minority Leader Malcolm A. Smith and many local officials.

    Mr. Spitzer first announced his decision to back Mrs. Clinton on Tuesday morning in an interview with The Associated Press. Asked about it later during a scrum with statehouse reporters, he declined to comment, saying people should wait for the formal announcement on Monday. Asked the thinking behind the endorsement, he said, “I guess she’d be the best one for the presidency.”

    Meanwhile, Gov. Martin O’Malley of Maryland was expected to endorse Mrs. Clinton in Annapolis Wednesday morning, according to a Democrat close to Mrs. Clinton.

    Michael Cooper reported from Albany and Patrick Healy from New York.


    Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company



    ----- Senator Clinton first supports Governor Spitzer’s Plan, then says that does not mean this Plan should be Implemented -----





    Clinton backs N.Y. driver's license plan for illegal immigrants

    Tries to steady her stance after debate stumble

    By Sasha Issenberg, Globe Staff
    November 1, 2007

    Hillary Clinton came out yesterday in support of a plan by Governor Eliot Spitzer of New York to offer limited driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, after she appeared tripped up by a question on the subject in Tuesday night's Democratic debate.

    "Senator Clinton supports governors like Governor Spitzer who believe they need such a measure to deal with the crisis caused by this administration's failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform," her campaign said in a statement. "As president, her goal will be to pass comprehensive immigration reform that would make this unnecessary."

    The statement sought to steady Clinton after her first serious stumble of the campaign, in which she - and aides pressed by reporters after the debate - proved unable to say whether she supported Spitzer's plan.

    In September, Spitzer changed a Department of Motor Vehicles policy so that illegal immigrants would become eligible for licenses. Spitzer described the move as a way to bring the estimated 500,000 qualifying New Yorkers "out of the shadows" and to improve road safety, driving down insurance costs as a result.

    The policy met resistance from advocates for tougher immigration laws and, according to a report cited in yesterday's New York Times from the US Department of Homeland Security. On Friday, Spitzer came forward with a more modest plan with tiered levels of state-issued driver identification. Those without legal papers will receive a license that will allow them to drive but not serve as identification for traveling by plane.

    When, in the waning moments of the debate's "lightning round," NBC's Tim Russert asked Clinton why she had told a New Hampshire editorial board that Spitzer's plan "makes a lot of sense," Clinton credited the governor with "filling the vacuum" in the absence of comprehensive immigration reform on the federal level.

    Only after Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd came out against the license plan did Clinton attempt to clarify her position. "I just want to add, I did not say that it should be done, but I certainly recognize why Governor Spitzer is trying to do it," she said.

    When Russert asked Clinton to pick a side, she accused him of playing "gotcha" - and her opponents were ready to join the game. "Senator Clinton said two different things in the course of about two minutes," former North Carolina senator John Edwards said.

    Added Senator Barack Obama of Illinois : "I can't tell whether she was for it or against it."


    (Note - The Videos ahead, were never in any version of this Article,
    I have drawn them from other sources, and included them here.
    The pictures used to "CLICK" each Video (reprinted twice), are Courtesy of Progressive Review, aka "ProRev".)



    The Politics of Parsing (- Part 1)
    (Including parsing of her support without
    implementation of Spitzer’s Plan in Debate)


    CLICK IMAGE BELOW TO ACCESS VIDEO FROM DEBATE



    Run Time 01:23

    _________________________


    The Politics of Parsing - Part 2
    (CNN’s Interview after Debate)


    CLICK IMAGE BELOW TO ACCESS VIDEO FROM INTERVIEW AFTER DEBATE



    Run Time 01:00


    Several GOP candidates were happy to take on the substance of a position they say would weaken enforcement of border laws, even though two Republican governors in Florida, Jeb Bush and Charlie Crist, embraced similar proposals in the past. "Senator Clinton's troubling answer on providing driver's licenses to illegal immigrants was emblematic of someone who is both dismissive of efforts to enforce our nation's immigration laws and entirely unwilling to offer a straight answer," said Kevin Madden, a spokesman for GOP hopeful Mitt Romney.
    Polls in New York have shown residents opposed to the idea.

    "The word immigration has a detonating charge attached to it," said Hank Sheinkopf, a Democratic consultant in New York. "You take a hit in some portion of the electorate for being against this, you take a bigger hit being for it. If you try to explain it, you get into more trouble," he said. …


    © Copyright 2007 Globe Newspaper Company.





    Theodore's World


    Uncredited in Theodore's World

    Spitzer said to abandon license plan

    WASHINGTON (AP)

    New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer has decided to abandon his plan to issue driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, officials familiar with the decision told The Associated Press Tuesday night.

    The governor is due to meet Wednesday morning with New York's congressional delegation, many of whom have openly opposed the program. Debate over the issue has spilled over into the presidential campaign of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

    The governor's office signaled to New York lawmakers Tuesday that the morning of the meeting, he will say he is shelving the plan and that immigration is a federal issue to be handled by Washington, according to congressional aides who spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity because no formal announcement had been made.

    Clinton has been criticized by her Democratic rivals for her non-committal answers on the subject. She has said she sympathizes with governors like Spitzer forced to confront the issue of immigration after the federal government has failed to pass immigration reforms. She has not taken a position on the actual plan offered by Spitzer.

    AP article cited in Theodore’s World.



    ----- Eliot and Bill have some things in common -----







    Spitzer's Troubles May Hurt Clinton

    Echoes of the Past Could Drown Out Campaign Messages

    By Peter Baker
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Wednesday, March 12, 2008

    For a supporter, New York Gov. Eliot L. Spitzer (D) sure hasn't done Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) any favors lately.

    After all, it was Spitzer who, in the view of her advisers, caused the slide that put her where she is today, fighting from behind for the Democratic presidential nomination. A question about his proposal to let illegal immigrants get driver's licenses tripped her up in a debate in late October and ended 10 months of unquestioned dominance in the race for the nomination.

    Now, his apparent involvement with a prostitution ring has not only distracted attention from her efforts to take down the front-runner, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), it has also brought back unhelpful memories of her own husband's dalliances in office. There on cable television again were pictures of Bill Clinton hugging Monica S. Lewinsky. And the image of Spitzer's wife standing painfully by his side while he acknowledged unspecified wrongdoing could not help but remind some of Hillary Clinton's own stand-by-her-man moment.

    This certainly is not the way Clinton's strategists would have mapped out this week on the campaign trail. They want voters to be thinking about that 3 a.m. phone call in terms of who is ready to handle a crisis in the White House, not in terms of where an unfaithful husband might be catting around town. And, sure enough, the late-night comedians wasted little time linking the Spitzer case to the Clintons. Jay Leno joked Monday night that Spitzer's scandal "means Hillary Clinton is now only the second angriest woman in the state of New York." David Letterman offered a Top 10 List of excuses Spitzer might cite, including the No. 1 excuse: "I thought Bill Clinton legalized this years ago."

    Hillary Clinton was asked about the case late Monday and, predictably enough, tried to brush it off without comment. "I obviously send my best wishes to the governor and his family," she told reporters. Still, it is hard to imagine that will be the last time she is asked about it.

    Spitzer has been a bad-luck charm for Hillary Clinton up to this point. His proposal on illegal immigrant driver's licenses arguably led to the first time she was truly thrown off stride in this campaign. Fairly or not, her muddled answer at a debate in Philadelphia about whether she supported it played into the narrative promoted by opponents that she is more about calculation than principle. That led to a bad patch for her that lasted all the way through the Iowa caucuses. Her advisers pinpoint that inartful two-minute answer as the moment when the race turned.

    Now Spitzer may throw her off stride again at a moment when she needs to keep her momentum going.


    © 2008 The Washington Post Company

  13. #1513

    Default The Ferraro Affair becomes a Watershed to Hillary Clinton's campaign

    "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position ...And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."

    Geraldine Ferraro
    Quoted in the Daily Breeze

    Before the above comment, almost twenty years ago, Ms. Ferraro made a similar statement about Jesse Jackson, that also involved her in a firestorm. Her exact words were reported in several places, but the one article that is most cited, comes from Howard Kurtz. It was written in mid April of 1988, when Kurtz was a reporter for the Washington Post. Here is an excerpt from that article:


    Placid of demeanor but pointed in his rhetoric, Jackson struck out repeatedly today against those who suggest his race has been an asset in the campaign. President Reagan suggested Tuesday that people don't ask Jackson tough questions because of his race. And former representative Geraldine A. Ferraro (D-N.Y.) said Wednesday that because of his "radical" views, "if Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race."

    Asked about this at a campaign stop in Buffalo, Jackson at first seemed ready to pounce fiercely on his critics. But then he stopped, took a breath, and said quietly, "Millions of Americans have a point of view different from" Ferraro's.

    Discussing the same point in Washington, Jackson said, "We campaigned across the South . . . without a single catcall or boo. It was not until we got North to New York that we began to hear this from Koch, President Reagan and then Mrs. Ferraro . . . . Some people are making hysteria while I'm making history."

    _______________


    Then there is this. On his own programme, "Countdown," Keith Olbermann gave an impassioned commentary that was critical of Hillary Clinton, and took almost ten minutes to deliver. He touches on many topics, chief among them is the Ferraro affair, which is still ongoing:


    Keith Olbermann: Special Comment on Hillary Clinton

    CLICK ON IMAGE BELOW TO ACTIVATE VIDEO



    Run Time 09:47

    Added: March 12, 2008

  14. #1514

    Default

    Florida officials are close to announcing a re-vote plan.

    Someone send a heads-up to the SCOTUS.

  15. #1515
    Moderator NYatKNIGHT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Manhattan - South Village
    Posts
    4,240

    Default

    Is it mail-in ballots? I heard that suggestion floated, it would cost far less.

Similar Threads

  1. Race to build at ground zero
    By Edward in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: August 16th, 2007, 02:12 PM
  2. Random House Building
    By MikeV in forum New York Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: May 21st, 2005, 04:32 PM
  3. The Porter House - 366 West 15th - Conversion/Addition by SHoP Architects
    By Kris in forum New York Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: February 1st, 2005, 02:37 PM
  4. The House Filmgoers Love to Hate
    By ZippyTheChimp in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: August 11th, 2003, 12:16 PM
  5. Town house market slips
    By Edward in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: February 18th, 2002, 11:07 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software