Bonus Question: Does Mike Huckabee have an obligation to get out of the race and unify the GOP or does he have an obligation to fight for every vote and every delegate while as he says: "giving voters a choice?"
Dems Links:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22477414/
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/2/8/222029/9679
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120241780172051641.html
http://blogs.wsj.com/numbersguy/more-on-the-delegate-discrepancy-272/?mod=blogs
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/08/AR2008020803801.html?hpid=topnews
GOP Links:
http://www.truveo.com/Gov-Mike-Huckabee-Speaks-at-CPAC/id/4028670326
http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/02/09/washington-state-3-others-become-unlikely-battlegrounds-for-dems/
35 comments:
Obama has Advantage Against McCain
Ok off topic here.
Surprise.
But just something to think about for those Clinton supporters out there who still want a democrat in the white house.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Sen. John McCain became the likely Republican nominee after Mitt Romney decided to suspend his campaign Thursday. Now, the Democrats are debating who would do better against the Arizona Republican.
Democrats are debating who would do better against Sen. John McCain, the GOP front-runner.
Two polls this month have asked registered voters nationwide how they would vote if the choice were between McCain and Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton.
A CNN poll, conducted by the Opinion Research Corporation February 1-3, shows Clinton three points ahead of McCain, 50 percent to 47 percent. That's within the poll's margin of error of 3 percentage points, meaning that the race is statistically tied..
A Time magazine poll, conducted February 1-4, also shows a dead heat between Clinton and McCain. Each was backed by 46 percent of those polled.
Sen. Barack Obama believes he can do better, arguing "I've got appeal that goes beyond our party."
In the CNN poll, Obama leads McCain by 8 points, 52 percent to 44 percent. That's outside the margin of error, meaning that Obama has the lead.
And in the Time poll, Obama leads McCain by 7 points, 48 percent to 41 percent -- a lead also outside of the poll's margin of error of 3 percentage points.
In both polls, Obama looks stronger than Clinton. Why?
Obama's explanation: "I think there is no doubt that she has higher negatives than any of the remaining Democratic candidates. That's just a fact, and there are some who will not vote for her."
That was three weeks ago. Now, only two Democratic candidates remain.
Clinton does have higher negatives than Obama -- and McCain. Forty-four percent of the public say they don't like Clinton, compared with 36 percent who don't like McCain and 31 percent who don't like Obama, according to the CNN poll conducted February 1-3.
Why does Obama do better against McCain than Clinton? Obama does do a little better than Clinton with independents and Republicans.
But the big difference is men: Men give McCain an 18-point lead over Clinton, 57 percent to 39 percent, according to the CNN poll. The margin of error for that question was plus or minus 5 percentage points.
But if McCain and Obama went head to head, McCain's lead among men shrinks to three, 49 percent to 46 percent -- statistically a tie.
Women, on the other hand, vote for either Clinton or Obama by similar margins.
Some Democrats may be worried about how Obama will fare with white voters. Whites give McCain a 15-point lead over Clinton, (56 percent for McCain, 41 percent for Clinton).
But Obama actually fares better than Clinton with white voters. McCain still leads, but by a smaller margin, (52 to 43 percent).
Obama argues that he can reach across party lines. And he does do a little better than Clinton with Independents and Republicans, at least in these polls.
But the big difference is that Clinton doesn't draw very well with men. Obama does.
Even though I could go on for hours why I think Sen. Obama should be in the White House over Sen. Clinton, their stances on issues are pretty close... So if you are a Hillary supporter, think about what it truly comes down to--Having Hillary as the democratic candidate or having a Democrat in the White House. McCain did say that we could be in Iraq for a thousand years... do we really want to put him in the White House?
I don't mean to stay on the topic of your comment that is off topic, but the link below may help to clarify Sen. McCain's position and help some to determine how they feel about. The quote that usually is cited says McCain has no problem with a 100 year presence although some left-leaning websites make reference to other comments that support the 1000 year comment. FYI
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/288/
I believe that the reason that as of right now Clinton does worse than Obama in the polls is that Obama hasn't had very many attacks from the GOP yet... If it comes down to him being the nominee the GOP is likely to stress the fact that Obama was drinking out of a bottle while McCain was making critical policy choices and that Obama is still a 1st term senator with no experience in any aspect of government. If that is not enough they will also point out Obama's use of Cocaine, pott and underage drinking. Hillary just by being a Clinton has been under attack from the GOP from the beginning with her stake as a front runner.
McCain appeals to the independent mostly because of the fact that he is pretty much, a liberal with some conservative values
I think that for the Dems, Clinton is the better choice to beat the GOP, now after thinking about it because she has proven to handle pressure and has less to rip on her about.
People say it doesn't matter but as of right now I don't think the Dems could have picked to worse candidates than a Clinton and a fricken 1st term senator!!!! The dems should have had this election locked up, but I think we will see McCain for another 4 years
sorry for still being off topicall1626
I realize Obama is a "fricken 1st term senator" but (i'm sorry to quote Newt Gingrich on this one) "Abraham Lincoln served two years in the U.S.House, and seemed to do all right."
Wait--did you really just say that Sen. Obama had no experience in government?
What would you call experience? Other candidates may been governors, or had longer terms in Congress before taking office, but what does that really mean? Maybe it just prepares a person to work within the system, not to change it. As it has been pointed out before, two of the most experienced people in Washington, Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney, have led us to disaster in Iraq.
Obama has had ten years experience in public office (4 more years than the two other leading Democratic candidates).
In the Illinois State senate he had to work with both Democrats and Republicans to help working families get ahead by creating programs like the state earned Income Tax Credit (which by the way, in three years gaev over $100 million in tax cuts to families across the state). He helped expand early childhood education, and worked with law enforcement to require the videotaping of interrogations and confessions in all capital cases.
It's not like he doesn't have foreign policy experience either. He serves on three of the four Senate Committees dealing with foreign policy issues including the Foreign Relations; Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs; and Veterans' Affairs committees and is the Chair of the Foreign Relations Subcommittee on European Relations which is responsible fore U.S. relations with European countries, the European Union, and NATO.
Even before his career in politics, he went to work as a community organizer in Chicago. He helped some of Chicago's poorest residents recover from a steel mill closing through job training programs. At Harvard law, he became the first black editor of the Harvard Law Review. Instead of seeking a high paying job upon graduating from Harvard, he returned to Chicago and went back to the neighborhood communities by organizing and helping to register 150,000 voters. He then began working at a civil rights firm and went on to teach constitutional law at the University of Chicago.
Not to mention Obama has shown he can work with republicans on issues and has pushed to pass many bi-partisan bills through congress, like the lugar-obama act.
When it comes down to it, Obama has the ability to inspire people--Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike. At a time in our nation's history when people are feeling less proud of and more unsure of their country everyday, don't we need someone who can inspire us that change can happen and tomorrow can be better?
I fear that if McCain becomes president the situation in our country will either stay the same as under President Bush or become worse. McCain becomes a perfect cookie cut out of the Republican party more and more each day and has lost the spark that made him so exciting to people years and years ago. McCain has realized that to win an election he has to become exactly what the Republican party expects a candidate to be. It may win him the election, but it is also the reason why I believe a McCain presidency would hurt this nation globally, economically, and prolong what has been 7 years of problems.
Ok. I just have to say it. I just can't understand why people still consider John McCain the "maverick" straight-talk express! I just don't get it.
But before i say all of this, there are of course things about McCain that I truly respect. He served his country well during the vietnam war, being a prisoner of war for 5+ years, enduring terrible torture from the N.Vietnamese. I wish though... he would have stood up and said something when the swiftboaters attacked another vietnam veteran, john kerry, during the 2004 election.
You say "McCain is a maverick and has bold, new ideas for the nation."
What bold new ideas? There isn't one significant stand McCain takes that deviates much from traditional GOP ideology except for maybe campaign finance reform. Then I actually heard someone say that his personal life is beyond criticism. Give me a break. He dumped his first wife who was with him through his years of imprisonment in N. Vietnma, then married a woman 18 years younger. Then of course there's the fact that he gambles compulsively and is very superstitious (believing in good luck charms, talismans and meaningless rituals--then going to and staying at the exact same places and talking to the same people in N.Hampshire).
Oh and what the hell happened to straight talk express? I hear him saying that he wants an end to negative campaigning and there will never be negative campaigning by him on Meet the Press, and what does he do a week later? Goes and bashes romney (and lies about what romney did and said) and attacks Republicans and democrats alike, many of the times with completely false information.
Stop calling McCain a moderate too.
He is a typical conservative Republican. That is how he refers to himself AND that is what his voting record shows him to be. He is even farther right than Pres. Bush on abortion. Yes. McCain worked with Feingold on campaign finance reform and has taken a few moderate stands. But, in fact he is just a conservative Republican who will move toward the right on basically every issue to plase GOP primary voters.
FYI on Swift Boating:
msnbc.com Aug. 5, 2004
WASHINGTON - Republican Sen. John
McCain, a former prisoner of war in Vietnam, called an ad criticizing John Kerry’s military service “dishonest and dishonorable” and urged the White House on Thursday to condemn it as well.
The White House declined.
“It was the same kind of deal that was pulled on me,” McCain said in an interview with The Associated Press, comparing the anti-Kerry ad to tactics in his bitter Republican primary fight with President Bush...
Kerry was less concerned with this topic and said, "I just wish bloggers would stick to the original post so students of government and politics can discuss the issue before they finish their essay on it."
Editorial: No wonder he lost!
haha fair enough mr bretzmann
i apologize for any other inconsistencies/errors i may have expressed
the original topic is far from my interest tonight though, sorry.
Well, it's obvious that every political source has different reports of delegate counts. I'm not following a single source, rather I'm taking all the sources (CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, etc.) and looking at them all. And from what I've seen, Clinton is leading but her lead is so insignificant that it's OK to call it even. Obama will most likely win Wisconsin because of the types of voters here, and because of the politically active liberal students at UW Madison, so hopefully he'll be in the lead soon. In my opinion, it was great Obama won the primaries yesterday and I was shocked that Huckabay won a single state. This week I'm registering to vote, if it's not too late to do so. I advise you all to do the same if you haven't already.
I would attribute the amount of delegates each candidate has to them both having comparable strengths in different areas. According to CNN(the only site I found that differentiated between pledged and super delegates)Clinton has about a 60 delegate lead. Obama leads in pledged delegates, which could be attributed to his extreme likability and appeal to voters. However Clinton leads by more in superdelegates, which could be attributed to her having more connections with political figures, or that she isn't as outspoken against lobbying (hmm... I wonder why?) as Obama is, resulting in many important political figures wanting to protect their interests.
I always keep my eye on CNN for the latest delegate totals. They list the number of pleged and super delegates. i think that is is important to have to most pleged delegates as of now. the super delegates can always change their minds between now and the convention.
I haven't really considered it yet, but now that you've asked... I think it is important to count the super delegates because they do have an effect on the race. In terms of what numbers to go with, I'm not really sure other than the fact that super delegates should be counted.
In terms of Mike Huckabee, I think that if he wants to have a chance at winning...he would be better off giving the voters a choice.
I think i understand the delegates, but it is slightly confusing. I'm not too worried about the super delegates yet since they can change their minds. And a side note, any one can make Hillary look bad, just depends what ur stand is and if you like her or not. But no one seems to be bashing her at the moment. Even though I keep up to date with the amount of delegates on the news... I'm trying not to worry about it too much.. and who knows.. if the democrats win the election.. Obama and Hillary could be P/VP vice versa.
For the bonus question...
I believe Huckabee should stay in the race to end McCain's arrogance and to not unite the GOP. It's a good sign when people like Ann Coulter support Clinton rather than McCain.
I'm comparing between MSNBC and CNN, and really it is just too close to call (that's for Caroline). Just kidding Mr. Bretzmann. Anyways... I am comparing between those two sources, and because it is so close, I've actually pretty much been considering it a tie and really am just looking forward towards the upcoming primaries and will be counting the delegates as though from right now it is tied. And I'm hoping, of course, that Obama is the one who wins them.
And sidenote... what is this essay I read about in your comment?
I wasn't at 7th hour on Friday because our bus wouldn't start during the field trip, so is this something that's due tomorrow?
The essay is due Wednesday. I don't have it in front of me, but it's something like this:
How many delegates does each of the Democratic candidates for president have? Give at least two reasons for your conclusions.
Consider:
1. Different news organizations' totals
2. Super Delegates (Some have committed on either side, is it democratic, there are 400-ish not committed, they can change their opinions when things change, they are elected officials, they represent people throughout the U.S., this is the process-live with it)
3. Michigan and Florida
To determine who has what number of delegates, I'm not doing anything. Everytime you look online it's a different story from what the news says. And every station says something different. I like Obama so I hope he continues to do well. I'm 17 till July, so doesn't look like I'll be voting in this primary. :( It sucks. I also think Huckabee should stay in the race, because McCain is no good, and I absolutely HATE him! To me, it seems as if he has two personalities. The one you see in the media, which seems to be a good guy. And then there is the other side we don't see. I imagine him to be a real arrogant meathead with a large attitude. When I see him on TV it always looks like someone is telling him to smile, because it seems so unnatural when he does smile.
I feel that it is unfair to count superdelegates into the total, especially this early when they can still easily change thier mind. To me it doesn;t seem as if the candidates truly "earn" these delegates. It makes the average, nonsuperdelegate voter feel loike thier voice and opinion is worth very little when in fact thier opinions and voice should be as important as anyones'. Why should these super delegates get a whole vote and represent one person's opinion while one normal delegate reepresents many people's opinions. If they end up being the deciding factor in choosing the Democratic nominee, many people will be very upset and question the valididty of having superdelegates.
It's a tie on the democratic side in my mind. I'm watching cnn.com to judge the race. However, with Obama's momentum, we might not have to wait until the convention to figure out who the nominee is going to be.
To determine the number of delegates for each candidate on the Democratic side, I'm using the numbers that were earned legitimately in each state's primary/caucus: Sen. Obama with 986 pledged delegates and Sen. Clinton with 924. Yes super delegates are part of the nomination process, but they should adhere to the relationship they have with the people who elected them into their offices in the first place and vote for who those people want to get the nomination. SO, in my opinion, Obama is leading in the number of delegates with 1910 delegates awarded to date and 359 super delegates not technically awarded yet.
To answer the other question, I don't think that Huckabee should stay in the running for GOP candidate. It's impossible for him to get the nomination and it's a waste of time and money that could be spent on other, more important, things.
Wow I had no idea there were so many levels of delegates... I'm not going to lie, I'm still kind of confused by it. But I think counting the pledged delegate is what counts for now. We could make educated guesses about how the superdelegates are going to vote based on how the state voted and on the individual stances of the superdelegate. As the delegate number changes and more time, debates, and campaigning goes on, the superdelegates may also change thier vote so how can we really attibute a superdelegate to one candidate? I would go with the constant delegate number for now. And in response to the question about Mike Huckabee, is it really his role to unite the GOP? It is an election after all-- every man for himself. And how do the republicans that "absolutely HATE" McCain vote? Unless Romney's coming back, I think the Republicans need another option. And who knows anyway? Did anyone expect Huckabee to do as well as he did in the primary? And that was with three GOP nominess. I think it would be a very poor decision on Huckbees part to drop out now.
I don't believe in super delegates. I believe that if anybody who is a super delegate wants to be counted they should vote just like everybody else to becoming part of pledged delegates.
I understand the concern of the majority voting for somebody who is unqualified, but this isn't the case. I believe they unbalance the situation and aren't necessary to choose the nominee.
Bonus: I believe that Huckabee should stay in the race. Look at the southern states that he has won. It shows that McCain isn't completely unifying the GOP. Also, I don't believe attempting to unify the GOP is a good thing necessarily. What I mean is it sounds like a good idea, but in reality it depends on the candidate you are talking about. Is McCain the right guy for the job? I don't think so.
As for the lates number of delegates I watch CNN. I do like that the democrats use a method in which all of the voters are herd and the delegates are seperated. I beleive it will come down to the supper delegates to decide who has won, and what about edward's delegates?
As for Huckabee, he should stay in the race. If anything he should McCain that there is a power other than him the people want. Huckabee should present strong for a VP.
I wasn't really looking at anything, but by reading the blog people were saying that they check out cnn so thats what I'm going to look at.
Personally I believe superdelegates are a bunch of who-ha. The race as it stands according to NBC should be what is thought of as the number of delegates for the Democratic side. When other polls state that Hilary is in the lead with the inclusion of Superdelegates, this leads to confusion. When a variable can change at anytime and is not finalized until the end, I do not believe it should be factored in during current race statistics. That is just my personal opinion though. I think that's enough for a blog, bedtime.
I think that it would be a smart move for Hackabee to drop out of the race. It would unite the GOP and give him a shot at VP. I dont think that he will be able to win the nomination and if he stays in anf it will create some tension between him and McCain. IF Huckabee droped out now it would gaurantee McCain's nomination and maybe a spot on the ballot for him. I think that a McCain, Hukabee ticket would put up a good fight against the dems.
I really don't think that Hillary should be considered ahead right now, rather I believe it's a tie or with Obama slightly ahead. The super delegate count is not a strong enough support to hold onto a lead with when they are still up for grabs. I am basing my count soley on the number of delegates.
For the extra credit question, I think that Huckabee should drop out of the race. It might be better if he just let the Republican Party try to start accepting McCain as their nominee and move on with it. I think he's just giving people a false hope right now that will create more tension later on.
Just a little comment about Mike Huckabee, it doesn't matter if he wins the nomination, because he is only 51. He can just build his name up for the future.
Oh yea, Mr. Bretzmann, about Modern English. A rock band best remembered for their song "I Melt With You" which was an MTV staple in 1982, and has appeared in various commercials and movies over the years. In 1982, or any years before, The Cure never came out with song titled like that. SO MODERN ENGLISH OWNS!!
DID ANYBODY GET A TICKET FOR THE RACINE OBAMA EVENT? PLEASE E-MAIL ME AT jbretzmann at mnsd.k12.wi.us if you did. Thanks.
I don't actually think Joanna's first post is too off topic. I think, with the whole Superdelegates system, it's pretty important to look at the polls, and who the public think would more likely become president over McCain.
Isn't it the job of the superdelegates to go with who is more likely to get elected?
But really, I think that system's kind of screwy.
I just want to say Mr. Bretzmann... that unfortunately you'll be seeing me in class tomorrow :(
Josh (McCain supporter) and Adam got tickets but I didn't get one. I'm actually really upset about it. So just forewarning you.
Haha Angelina, I emailed him about it earlier today. :P
And both Obama and McCain swept the primaries today. Momentum is strong. I believe that those two people, Obama and McCain, will be the nominees.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tP6OCGCkhU
Si se puede.
Odd.
P.S Obama was great today :-)
First of all, I agree with Jamie that Obama was awesome today.
Second, I think that in writing this essay we all got a little bit POed about super delegates (scanning the replies I don't think I saw any posts saying "Super delegates are awesome! They should have the final say in all of the elections!)The fact that Clinton and Obama are very close means that super delegates may potentially decide the outcome of the Democratic nomination. It kind of feels like they're taking democracy away from us.
Anywho, here's a petition from moveon.org about superdelegates. The petition states:
"The Democratic Party must be democratic. The superdelegates should let the voters decide between Clinton and Obama, then support the people's choice."
So go, "sign," and enjoy.
I don't think superdelegates will play that much of an issue. If it comes down to a heavy pledged support for one candidated (as it's starting for Obama) the superdelegates will, I think, represent the people. Also, no one wants a recreation of the riots that happened in Chicago in the '60s.
Post a Comment