Superdelegate Primary: better to decide sooner then later. Gov Phil Bredsen hinting at Clinton endorsement.

Today, Governor Phil Bredsen of Tennessee proposed a superdelegate primary in June in order to cut the losses of a long and brutal fight for the nomination. This is a great idea considering that the superdelegates will decide this nomination anyways. Its not like anything will happen between the last primary in June and the convention in August that would be significant to the "INDEPENDENT" choice of each superdelegate. I don't know why it takes ideas from everyone in the party before the DNC takes initiative and actually takes action. In addition to the Florida and Michigan debacle, this long battle has really illustrated Howard Dean's failure as leader of the DNC.

And on another note, I watched Phil Bredsen on Lou Dobbs tonight and I think he may have given a veiled endorsement of Hillary Clinton. I am deriving this theory from a quote by Phil Bredsen saying, "Hope is not a strategy". Considering Obama's campaign is based in good part on hope I think Gov. Bredsen's statement might veil his opinion that Obama is all about the rhetoric of hope and not solid solutions. Watch his interview and see what you think.

Never call a race before it is finished. Clinton still has very real chances of winning nomination.

Hasn't the mainstream media learned that they shouldn't project a winner until all the votes are counted? How many time will they have to make incorrect predictions before they learn that they can't read minds no matter what statistics say about the favored candidate. Current polls show 29% of Clinton supporters defecting to John McCain if Obama is our nominee. Some political pundits scoff at this number but I can totally believe it. If Obama gets this nomination under false pretenses (excluding Florida/Michigan voters) than it will feel like a stolen election and many voters will rightfully be outraged. There is no reason Hillary should drop out now, she still has a very good chance of winning. She has a double digit lead in Pennsylvania, despite being outspent in advertising, and I can only hope her support will grow with the amazing grassroots efforts of the wonderful volunteers. When Hillary wins Pennsylvania her wave of momentum will only grow and superdelegates as well as the remaining democratic voters will have to decide whether the change in momentum correlates with a sense of buyer's remorse over Obama in light of his recent scandals.

So, Hillary supporters don't give up hope, you can help turn the tide of this election by volunteering your time to help her win the remaining states by large margins. If you would like more information on free calling to Pennsylvania,Indiana, or Oregon please e-mail:

Carlaforhillary@gmail.com or emery1742@hotmail.com

Also, if you haven't yet signed the petition to seat the delegates from Floida and Michigan please do so now in support of the fundamental right of every voter to have their voice heard.We are almost over 10,000 votes. Let's show the democrats how important it is to everyone, not just the residents of those two states, that everyone's vote is counted equally.
Visit http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/seatourdelegates/index.html

Calling for Hillary/Signing petitions for Hillary

I think it is very important for the DNC to hear everyone in the democratic party rally behind the right of Florida and Michigan voters to be heard in this election. If you believe in the fundamental principle of democracy, that every vote should count, then fight for it and sign the following petitions to let the DNC know that across the nation there is outrage over the democratic party even considering disenfranchising over two million voters.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/seatourdelegates/index.html


Please sign these petition to seat the delegates from Florida and Michigan. There are already almost 10,00 signatures and if enough people sign then the democratic party will have no choice but to bend to the will of the people.


And on another note, if you are a Hillary supporter now is the time to act. She still has a chance to win but she needs help. If calling on her behalf is cost prohibitive then there is a solution. E-mail: carlaforhillary@gmail.com for information on making free phone calls on Hillary's behalf to keep her momentum going to a win. Lets prove political news pundits wrong again and show them that they should never underestimate Hillary's chances of winning this nomination. You can currently make calls to Pennsylvania, Indiana, Oregon, and Texas without even dialing the numbers, an automatic system connects you to voters. It is crucial we make calls to Texas.As we have seen, delegates can be won and lost at county conventions. The county conventions in Texas will be particularly important, as the final delegate allocation in there is still very much uncertain. Given the closeness of the overall delegate count and the number of delegates at stake in Texas, a strong performance at the county conventions there is crucial for our campaign. It is essential that everyone who can make calls to Texas do so in the next couple of days because the county conventions are this Saturday, March 29th.

And also,
I am interested in starting a series of Campaign Call Center parties throughout the San Francisco Bay Area. If you know anyone who would like to be involved or have a location with access to multiple phone lines just e-mail me @ emery174@hotmail.com. It is crucial in the last stretch of this primary season that all Hillary supporters do all they can to get Hillary huge margins in the remaining states so she has an argument to take to the superdelegates alongside her fight for Florida/ Michigan delegates to be seated. I have a contact that can arrange for the calls to be paid for by the campaign so the only thing you have to do is donate your time.

What gives you the experience to be President, Mr. Obama? Can you substitute experience with good judgement? (if you even have that)

So, both campaigns would like people to pay more attention to the issues so I intend to start doing that today. Each day I will cover another one of the issues facing America.

Today I thought the most pressing issue was about the level of experience in each candidate. So far, Obama has called into question Hillary's foreign policy experience as first lady and that has blown up in his face because her schedules have shown her playing a role in foreign relations in many nations, including: Northern Ireland, China, and Macedonia. In addition, she has foreign policy experience that can't even be measured considering the countless hours of private counsel she inevitably gave President Bill Clinton behind closed doors. Even if the trips didn't have her participating in key peace talks they would still amount to more foreign relations skills than the zero experience Obama has.

Leaving foreign relations aside we can talk about legislative experience and the ability to create change. Obama claims that he can create monumental change in the White House but where does he base his claims. In his tenor on the Illinois state senate from 1997-2004 Obama voted "present" on over 100 pieces of legislation. This means he didn't want to take a firm position in either direction. Some of his present votes were on legislation related to the key issues of gun control and abortion. How can we nominate someone who either can't make their mind up on key issues or would purposefully vote that way so his voting record gives no clear view of his positions. In addition to his "present" votes in the state senate Obama missed 197 (37.4%) of the votes in this session of Congress. How is the public supposed to judge someone with an almost nonexistent record on the issues. I'm sorry but conviction and good judgment about Iraq are not good enough qualifications for president, you have to be able to take a stand on every issue, being "present" isn't enough.

Now, if we look at Hillary's career at least you can see a track record of voting on the issues and being an advocate for many of today's top issues. When Hillary first became first lady she was on a very active crusade for health care reform, something she still makes a cornerstone of her campaign. Hillary has even been an advocate for children ever since she graduated law school and participated in a review of our nation's child abuse laws. Even in the legislature she has been a vocal supporter of rights for children, with 40% of the bills she sponsored dealing with health care and/or kids. With seven years of experience in the Senate, Hillary is the obvious choice of people who really want change, because she knows the ropes of negotiating issues in the senate after being a part of it for seven years. In addition to her senate experience she has the countless relationships forged with other politicians over a decade involved in the democratic party with her husband. Furthermore, I think one the most valuable assets she would bring to the White House is her husbands huge depth of experience that he can share with her on a daily basis.

Obama:the hypocrit with double standards.Why Obama supporters should feel buyer's remorse

If you have been watching the news lately you may have seen all of Obama's surrogates making personal attacks on Hillary's character while Obama continues to speak against the divisive politics that have come out against him. Come on Obama, don't be hypocritical, if you detest the negative rhetoric then your advisers shouldn't be spewing it on almost a daily basis. For someone who tries to campaign on unifying our great nation he certainly seems to be accomplishing the exact opposite, a polarization of his own party. (Not even to mention the polarization that will occur in the general election when the Republicans use Reverend Wright's statements in a rigorous, and most likely effective, advertising blitz against Obama.)

SO MUCH FOR HIS MESSAGE OF HOPE and CHANGE. Where is the change from traditional politics Obama? It seems you are playing the same game as most every politician before you; making promises in public that won't translate into action when you get into office. The public first became aware of this when his advisers spoke with foreign diplomats in Canada and Britain that portrayed his view on Iraq and NAFTA in a different light then he was espousing on the campaign trail.But the most disturbing showing of his hidden lies came with the emergence of Reverend Wright's statements. At first he claimed he had never heard any of the statements but during his "epic race speech" he admitted to hearing "some" of the statements and denounced them. So he is trapped in yet another lie while the waves of controversy following Rev. Wright continue to slowly crush his chances of winning many demographics throughout the country.

Hopefully the superdelegates can come to their senses and realize that Hillary is the best option because of her improved showing in exit polls in almost every race/age group. Obama used to have strong showing amongst young voters, white men and his black following but has recently lost a lot of ground with young voters and white men. I don't see this as a coincidence. As a prior Obama supporter my support stayed steady until the Rev Wright statements surfaced and racial/religious tensions arose. I was personally displeased that Obama wouldn't denounce his pastor and I think I can speak for many people when I say he lost support because of this. From a logical perspective I think that most white churchgoers across the nation question why Obama would go to that church for 20 years hearing Wright's statements on a regular basis and never leave or confront the man on this issue.

In addition to the divisions Obama has created through his own lies I think perhaps the worst indiscretion in his campaign has been the problem of seating Florida and Michigan. In my mind, unity means the entirety of something. So, if Obama really wants to unify our country why would he want to alienate voters from Michigan and Florida so they are poised to vote against the democrats if he is the nominee. If he was really concerned about unity he would allow the majority of citizens in these two states to be heard through a revote regardless of the small amount of people who might be left out through small legal complications the Obama camp can find. If he was more concerned about unifying this country instead of just winning the nomination he wouldn't be worried about having revotes in these two states. If anybody should drop out of this race it should be Obama. If we are talking about who will lose the general election it will surely be Obama. I can tell you now that democrats have nothing to worry about in getting young people to vote come November even if Obama is off the ticket. I think there is more than enough hatred for the failed policy of the Bush administration that either democrat would easily fire up the passionate hatred for Bush and a third "Bush" term. Under the same logic I would also venture to say that democrats won't loose many black votes to McCain if/when Clinton rightfully gets the nomination.

Polls show Clinton would win against McCain in November general election while Obama would not.

Recent national polls show that Hillary would win in an election against McCain 274 to 240 electoral votes. While Obama used to have a strong showing against McCain in the national polls he has recently lost major ground and it appears as if he would lose against McCain 231 to 292 electoral votes. No big surprise that his approval has dwindled in the wake of the Reverend Wright scandal. This will more than likely carry over to the general election since many major republican strategists have eluded to the fact that Reverend Wright's statements will be easy to use in the more than effective attack ads that Republicans have become so good.

Many bloggers in cyberspace have critiqued the validity of Clinton's big state theory because as most explain "primary results don't necessarily translate in to results in the general election" , but I beg to differ with them all on the viability of this argument. The trend presented in the national polls lends credibility to Hillary Clinton's big state theory.

She claims that her victories in 7 of the ten biggest states (in order of population): 1.CA,2.TX, 3.NY, 4.FL, 7.OH,8.MI,and 9.NJ are important to wining the general election.It also looks like she will win the 8th out of ten when she wins the 6.PA primary. Obama has only won in two of the biggest ten states: 5.IL(his home state) and 10. GA( which he has no chance of carrying in the general election). So, according to the national poll do her wins translate? In some of the states it does look like the support carries over. As of right now she would win CA,NY,FL,NJ,IL,PA and is very close in TX,OH,and MI. On the other hand, Obama would only win in CA,NY, IL and would lose in TX,OH MI, FL, and PA while fighting a tie in NJ. So, it appears Clinton's argument has some viability especially when you factor in those people in Michigan and Florida(maybe even nationwide) that will likely change their vote to McCain if Obama prevents their delegates from being seated and he is unjustly chosen as nominee.

Why Reverend Wright's hateful rhetoric will destroy Obama's chances in the general election

Unless you have had your head in a hole over the last week you know about Obama and the current scandal he is now facing with the hateful, anti-American statements made by his Pasteur, Reverend Wright. I have found the best compilation of Reverend Wrights worst remarks on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jc2FCJ7zWEQ
But despite Obama's best efforts to diffuse this scandal with his amazing speech on race, this scandal will continue to haunt him throughout his campaign as his speech didn't address the worries of all the people appalled by the statements of Rev. Wright. He has undermined the key message that he can bring change from the political status quo. In his recent speech on race he can be caught in the most current lie in a long string of lies he has put forth throughout his campaign. As the first wave of the controversy emerged Obama claimed that he had never heard the inflammatory statements of Rev. Wright but admitted more recently that he had. This lie is just one in a long line of deception that is characteristic of the politics he so detests
His other lies include the difference in his public promises on NAFTA and Iraq from what one of his former key advisers, Samantha Powers has told foreign diplomats, plus his notorious connections with Louis Farrakhan and Jesse Jackson Jr. Many people may not know this but I have come upon surprising news that Jesse Jackson Jr equated Obama's nomination fight to O.J Simpson's murder of Nicole Brown shortly after the reults of the Iowa caucus and Obama has yet to denounce it. So much for Obama's other key message of unity. For someone who proclaims to want to bring our country together he certainly seems to associate himself with some very polarizing figures.
Obama's refusal to denounce his pastor may be a hard pill to swallow for many key voters he needs to swing in his direction to be competitive during the general election. Obama's appeal to Republicans and Independents used to be a credible argument for his viability as a nominee in the general election but recent CBS poll show that this base of support has significantly eroded with 47 % of responding Republicans saying they had a less favorable view of him and 36% of Independents responding the same. I'm sure the republicans are just salivating at the prospect of Obama as a candidate because he will be a lighting rod for attack ads that call into question his patriotism with regards to his 20 year relationship with Reverend Wright. Barack has already claimed that this man has helped change his life and who wouldn't believe that. Since Rev. Wright is a man that has been in Barack Obama's life for twenty years I think it will be hard to convince anybody that some of Reverend Wright's racist and anti-America commentary
hasn't rubbed off on Barack in some ways that may still be hidden to the public he is trying to woo.
I can already imagine that the attack ad will be sure to include one of the Reverend's worst inflammatory statements, "God damn America". I think that this statement alone could kill Obama's chances of winning a nationwide vote. So, I implore the superdelegates to vote for the nominee most likely to win an election against McCain instead of voting on an early wave of support that is likely to dwindle as more people become aware of the full breadth of Reverend Wright's hate filled sermons. Despite what the popular vote/ pledged delegates may show in the end I think this race is close enough that including other factors in measuring their chances in the general election should definitely come into play in a major way. Superdelegates are reserved to make their own decisions of nominee based on viability as a general election candidate so they should not be shackled by some non-existent rule that they have to vote in accordance with the popular vote/pledged delegates. Please make the right choice and choose Hillary Clinton for President. Who do we want ruling our country through the tumultuous times in our foreign relations and economy? If democrats don't remember we lost the election in 2004 in part due to the swift vote ads attacking John Kerry's patriotism. Do we really want to play into the Republicans hands and set ourselves up for the same mistake again with the burden of Obama's Rev. Wright scandal. If Obama becomes the nominee we will probably be doomed to a third term of a failed pro-Bush agenda. Superdelegates, please look at the big picture and the big states that wil prove crucial in this upcoming election. ( A discussion of the reasons why big states/large swing states should matter in the democrats choice of nominee to follow in tomorrow's blog entry.)