Ganz einfach weil dieses Thema über die nächsten 12 Monate wohl kaum mehr aus den Nachrichten und Schlagzeilen verschwinden wird. Erst recht nicht wenn sich die Tendenz der ersten Vorwahl in Iowa fortsetzten sollte. Dann steht nichts anderes als ein Generationswechsel vor der Tür wie es ihn seit 45 Jahren nicht mehr gegeben hat.

Eine erste Übersicht ;):

The Iowa Message

Democrats may be ready to "move on" from the Clinton era.

Saturday, January 5, 2008 12:01 a.m.

Iowa's caucus-goers shook up the conventions of American politics Thursday night, and to our mind mostly to the good. Barack Obama's convincing Democratic triumph, based on a huge increase in Iowa voter turnout, is at least a historic cultural moment and maybe a political one. Mike Huckabee's Republican victory probably has less long-term meaning but also has some salutary effects.

Mr. Obama's message of "change" and a new national unity clearly captured the imagination of Democrats, drawing in nearly double the number of participants who have ever attended an Iowa caucus. As a black man running in a nearly all-white state, Mr. Obama's triumph should also put to rest the canard that Americans won't vote for a black President.

We've long believed the country is ready to do so and might have elected Colin Powell had he run. But Mr. Obama is the first serious African-American candidate who has explicitly avoided race-specific appeals. Like Catholicism to Jack Kennedy, Mr. Obama's race is part of his political character but doesn't define it. His success marks a watershed in American political history.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/images/storyend_dingbat.gif

The Illinois Senator's performance is also welcome as a sign that most Democrats want to "move on," as some of them like to say, from the Clinton era. Bill Clinton has described his wife Hillary's campaign as a case of "back to the future," even as she too has claimed to be an agent of change. But inevitably, if she were the nominee, the baggage of their earlier co-Presidency would attend her campaign and might help defeat her in November.

Something like half of the American people say they could never vote for Senator Clinton, and Democrats who are eager to retake the White House know this. Mr. Obama promises a break from these polarizing politics, as well as from the dynastic Presidential chain of Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton. Mr. Obama's call for change has its ambiguities, to say the least, but one of its explicit themes is a promise to end the partisan feuds of the last 15 years--which for the Clintons are nearly bloodfeuds. This strikes us as healthy both for Democrats and the country.

Mr. Obama's campaign rhetoric is also notable for its optimism, in contrast to John Edwards's angry populism. Mr. Edwards is now citing his second-place Iowa finish as a vindication of his call for "change." But he's taken to running essentially like the trial lawyer he is, as if he is prosecuting a giant tort case against all of American business and politics. Mr. Edwards speaks of villains and victims, Mr. Obama of aspiration and opportunity. The latter is what Americans want from a President.

This is not to say that either Mr. Edwards or the Clintons will go quietly into retirement. The Clintons in particular are experts at attack, though Mrs. Clinton has to guard against making herself even more unlikable than she already seems. She might have the most luck hammering at Mr. Obama's greatest liability, which is his lack of national security experience. This remains a post-9/11 country, and Americans know they are electing a Commander in Chief in wartime. Mr. Obama has often sounded naive in the extreme in discussing Iraq, Iran and the overall war on terror, and Mrs. Clinton can point out that Republicans are sure to make that argument in the autumn.

Mr. Obama's other potential weakness in November is his orthodox policy liberalism. We can't recall a single issue on which he has broken with a Democratic interest group. On taxes, he is to the left even of Mrs. Clinton in that he wants to raise the income limit on payroll taxes above its current ceiling of $102,000. Combined with his vow to repeal the Bush tax rates, this would be the biggest tax increase in history by far. Sooner or later this liberal agenda, assuming Mr. Obama believes it, will have to be squared with his rhetoric of "bipartisanship" and national reconciliation.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/images/storyend_dingbat.gif

As for Mr. Huckabee, he shares at least one trait with Mr. Obama--both come across as likable men with an easy charm. But we have our doubts that the former Arkansas Governor's victory will have the same political impact. He won in a caucus where his fellow evangelicals were 60% of the vote, and this won't be true in other states. Mr. Huckabee is also only now being discovered by most Republican voters. His innocence (or ignorance) on foreign policy, penchant for borrowing liberal economic attack lines, and even his rejection of Darwin's theory of evolution deserve to be understood by voters before they make him their standard bearer.

Yet there is also something refreshing about Mr. Huckabee's rise from nowhere to win in Iowa. He showed that money matters less than message in politics, defeating Mitt Romney despite being vastly outspent. His victory has jumbled the GOP field in a way that means John McCain, Rudy Giuliani and even Fred Thompson will all have more time to make their case. Just when you think that politics is dominated by cynics and pollsters, along come the voters to show us again that it is also about idealism and our better aspirations. For a change.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/weekend/hottopic/?id=110011086

As a black man running in a nearly all-white state, Mr. Obama's triumph should also put to rest the canard that Americans won't vote for a black President.


Zum Original-Beitrag (http://www.stock-channel.net/stock-board/showthread.php3?p=1107082#post1107082)


ehrlich gesagt habe ich daran meine zweifel.....und aus dem iowa sieg obamas diese schlussfolgerung zu ziehen, könnte etwas voreilig sein.

details zu iowa:



http://images.politico.com/global/v2/finalresults.gif

quelle (http://www.politico.com/)

Obama spins magic, Clinton feels chill in New Hampshire

Anne Davies, Nashua, New Hampshire
January 7, 2008

HAD Democrat frontrunner Hillary Clinton seen the long queue for Barack Obama's rally at Nashua High School on Saturday, she might well have felt physically ill.

The line in this southern New Hampshire town snaked up a gentle incline and around a bend for more than a kilometre. Traffic was at a standstill as organisers scrambled to find extra parking away from the roadsides that are walled by snow banks of up to 1.5 metres after the state's snowiest December on record.

The organisers had planned for a crowd of 2200 in the school's spacious new gym. They organised an overflow room in the old gym just in case.

It soon became clear that those arrangements were inadequate for the 4000-plus crowd that turned out to see the man who defied the odds and won the first contest of the 2008 presidential elections.

Obama magic is sweeping New Hampshire. Even the jaded Washington press corps is amazed. One old-timer said he had never seen such turnouts — certainly not in 2004, when John Kerry was the great hope of the Democratic Party.

Marilyn Quail and her husband, Tom, came from Bedford, New Hampshire, to hear Senator Obama. "I am interested in Obama because he's generating so much excitement, and he does seem to give us hope that things can change after Bush," she said.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/us-federal-election-2008/obama-spins-magic-clinton-feels-chill-in-new-hampshire/2008/01/06/1199554485772.html

New Hampshire, Hillary und ihr Problem aufholen zu müssen ohne zu negativ zu wirken dabei :schwitz ...

RBInMaine Sun Jan-06-08 08:37 AM

First, I'm from Maine, have family in NH, and NOT all Independents in New Hampshire are "libertarians." MANY are very moderate, or even left-of-center. New Hampshire is tracking more and more blue: popular Dem governor, two new Dem congress members, many more Dems in the legislature, voted for Kerry last time, many people have come into NH from the bluer states of Mass. and VT, ... As she always does, Hillary sounded smart and sharp last night. But here's the conundrum she's in: when she goes negative, which she basically has to do now, she starts showing those teeth and claws that serve to reinforce the negative images people already have of her. She did that last night: looked downright nasty after Edwards called her "the status quo." Hillary's negatives remain high, and she'd have a damn hard time overcoming them in the general election. She is by far the most electorally risky of the top Dem candidates, and that may have even worsened last night. Hillary showed once again that she smart as a tack and well-qualified, but what she also did last night was to solidify her position in the overarching narrative of this election: change vs. experience/Washington establishment. Yes, she tried hard to bridge the two, but her emphasis, as it has been, was on her "experience." The reinforcement of that narrative combined with the claws that came out last night pin her further into the negative image that, fair or unfair, too many people have of her. Obama and Richardson held their own last night (both looked tired which is understandable give the grueling schedule), but Edwards stood out and did very well. Very arguably, it was Edwards (who ideally remains my first choice with Obama a close second), not Hillary, won the debate. He was very focused and on-message, and he successfully drew out that "nasty" response from Hillary. Obama has shown that he can draw support fom across the political divide in a way that Hillary so far has not. If he wins NH, and especially if Edwards comes in second or even a close third, Hillary will be in real trouble because Obama will then go on to win SC. It is tough to recover from too may early state losses even with the money and organization of the Clinton machine. I would like to this, more objectively. The amount of "change" that Hillary has actually affective could, arguably, be described as minimal. She failed on healthcare during Bill's presidency, from what I understand she has but a modest Senate record (much credit though for her big election win in NY), apparently she did some good work in education back in Arkansas but can only so much credit. Obama has already done some good things in the Senate, did many good things in the Illinois legislature, and was a community organizer in Chicago who certainly created "change" for people on the front lines. Edwards has some Senate accomplishments, ran a poverty center, started afterschool programs, beat down big corporations in court time and again, has started the One-Corps organization, has been an active union organizer, and done other things affect real "change" for people. Also, Hillary has taken A LOT of corporate money. She virtually defended that corrupt system last summer. How can she create "change" when she takes the money of those who purpose in life it is to block change??? THAT was the BEST point made all night, and EDWARDS made. it. In the last analysis, Edwards and Obama have the best chances of defeating the R's in the general election. If trends remain, Obama could prove to be a bonafide RFK type political phenomenon. Don't get me wrong, I like Hillary and would work like hell for her if she were nominated, but she would have a VERY tough time overcoming her negatives in the general election.
People are HUNGRY for change, whether or not that term seems like something of a political cliche'.¨

They want something new, something exciting, something different. The presidential vote is the most personal vote, for better or worse. People are excited and juiced up about Obama. He has a magic that Hillary just doesn't have, and if he can continue to build the kind of coalition he won with in Iowa and show that he is credible on the issues, Christ help the R's come November.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3967288&mesg_id=3967370

Die letzte Umfrage derzeit:



Barack Obama leads John Edwards among men 42% to 21%, with 19% for Hillary Clinton. Among women, Obama leads Clinton 35% to 31%, with 20% for Edwards. Clinton leads Obama among Democrats 34% to 32%, while Obama leads Edwards among undeclared voters (independents) 49% to 21%.

John McCain leads Mitt Romney among men 42% to 21% and McCain leads Romney 35% to 30% among women. McCain leads Romney 44% to 19% among undeclared (independent) voters, with 18% for Huckabee. Undeclared voters are now 27% of the total Republican vote.
http://americanresearchgroup.com/

Interessant dabei: Clinton und Obama haben die Position seit dem 16. Dezember getauscht, bei der GOP kann sich McCain weiter absetzten und hat den Staat wohl auf sicher, Giuliani ist wohl ein Auslaufmodell was die Wahl 08 betrifft. Womit Romney als ehemaliger Favorit und "Finanzleader" dann nach den zwei umstrittenen Vorwahlen mit leeren Händen dastehen muss und einzig den kleinsten Staat Wyoming gewann. Und selbst da droht ihm noch der Verlust der Hälfte der Wahlmänner da die GOP Wyoming sich noch im Streit mit der nationalen Partei befindet, sie haben den Wahltermin "unerlaubt" vorverlegt. Die Demokraten da wählen erst viel später dieses Jahr.

Mal noch ein ganz witziger Beitrag, was die Amis so von der Obama-Welle in Deutschland halten. Wobei man da D auch gern mit CH ersetzten kann, unsere Tageszeitungen sahen nicht anders aus:

January 6, 2008

Germany’s Got a Crush on Obama

By Nicholas Kulish

BERLIN — Germany has developed a serious case of Obama-mania.

Barack Obama’s high standing in Germany goes beyond his opposition to the unpopular war in Iraq. The country’s sudden crush is bound up with near-constant comparisons here between the young senator from Illinois and President John F. Kennedy Jr. – still admired in Germany and particularly in Berlin.

The Berliner Morgenpost over the weekend ran with the headline, “The New Kennedy.” The tabloid Bild declared, “This Black American has become the new Kennedy!” And the headline for the editorial in the Frankfurter Rundschau read simply: “Lincoln, Kennedy, Obama.”

“Only a small, informed minority knew about Barack Obama in December,” said Christoph von Marschall, Washington bureau chief for the Tagesspiegel newspaper, whose book, “Barack Obama, The Black Kennedy,” came out then. He said after the Iowa Caucuses last week, interest in Mr. Obama and sales of the book – which is presently sold out on the German Amazon Web site – suddenly surged.

Mr. Obama’s newfound popularity among Germans underscores not only the breadth of his appeal but also the opportunity he might have as president – though far from even his party’s nomination – to mend fences abroad.

“There are similarities between JFK’s time and today,” said Karsten Rossow, 49, of Berlin, who was visiting the small Kennedy Museum by the Brandenburg Gate Sunday, on a dark, snowy afternoon, with his wife. “People are ready for the politics of change.”

While the whole world follows American elections, Germans learned to pay particularly close attention because of the unparalleled influence that the United States had as both occupier and protector after their country lost World War II.

Some are reserving judgment. “It’s too early,” said Udo Schacht, 53, at a train station on Friedrichstrasse, the street where the
Checkpoint Charlie border crossing once stood, “to say that he’s the new Kennedy.”

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/06/germanys-got-a-crush-on-obama/

January 06, 2008

The gaffe that will cost him the nomination

Posted by James Ostrowski at January 6, 2008 12:17 PM
John McCain said in this clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf7HYoh9YMM&eurl=http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/) that we may stay in Iraq for 100 years.

Has this statement jeopardized national security by giving our enemies grist for their recruiting posters?

This is exactly what many in the Arab and Moslem worlds had feared but no one had actually spelled out until now: permanent American occupation of the Middle East.

McCain says he's been involved in every security crisis in the last twenty years. Not that that's anything to brag about but I believe he just created a new security crisis.


http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/018323.html

...wie kann ein Vietnam-Veteran so was von sich geben :rolleyes

06 January 2008

Hillary Punches Back

http://timesonline.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/01/05/blog_gbaker_2.jpg (http://timesonline.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/01/05/blog_gbaker_2.jpg) As for the Democrats, I doubt Hillary moved many people in her direction tonight. The most telling moment, I think, was when it became clear that John Edwards has decided to side with Obama in the post-Iowa competition, and attack Hillary for not being serious about change.

There's already been much attention devoted on the blogs to her response (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07u6uffKvpA), during which she appeared to get ratty. I agree the exchange only serves to underline one of her great weaknesses - that people don't like her. But I thought her response demonstrated a more serious problem - that she doesn't really get what the clamour for change among Democrats is about. She did what she always does now in answer to the challenge that she does not represent enough change, by reeling off a list of things she has actually managed to do in Washington.

It's an impressive list - children's health insurance, support for US troops - but as important and concrete as these things are they don't seem to match up to the much bigger, almost spiritual dimension of change that I think Obama represents. The critique of Obama - fairly - is that what he says is all very inspirational but hopelessly vague and ethereal. But Hillary's problem is that this is what people seem to like. The desire for change is about more than a desire to change a few policies here and there. it is about transforming the very nature of politics and the fact is, with her baggage, Hillary just can't do that.

http://timesonline.typepad.com/uselections/2008/01/hillary-punches.html

:schwitz ....der Ehrgeiz und die Verbissenheit machen sie nicht eben sympathischer :rolleyes

January 6, 2008 1:03 pm EST

MANCHESTER, NEW HAMPSHIRE – Republican presidential candidate and Texas Congressman Ron Paul’s campaign will be hosting its own forum on New Hampshire television, following Dr. Paul’s exclusion from a Fox News Republican “forum” tonight.

The one hour townhall will be broadcast on Manchester television station MCAM TV-23 from 5-6 PM ET. The event will also be simulcast online at www.RonPaul2008.com (http://null/).

“By unfairly excluding Congressman Paul, Fox News is turning its back on New Hampshire voters who are tired of business as usual in Washington that overtaxes, overspends and tramples our personal liberties,” said Ron Paul spokesman Jesse Benton. “Dr. Paul’s message of freedom, peace and prosperity is a natural fit with the Granite State’s ‘live free or die’ philosophy.”

Congressman Paul was excluded from the Fox News event despite routinely polling higher in New Hampshire than other candidates included in the Fox forum, and raising nearly $20 million dollars last quarter.


January 06, 2008

Ron Paul FOX Hunt

Posted by Lew Rockwell at January 6, 2008 12:41 PM
Good for CNN for repeating the ABC Republican and Democratic debates tonight when FOX plays its neocon simulacrum of a debate. FOX wants to hurt Ron Paul by excluding him. Instead, like everyone who has gone after Ron, from Rudy to Bill Kristol, FOX itself has been hurt, and shown up as a pure tool of the regime.

January 06, 2008

Jay Leno Invites Ron Paul Again

Posted by Lew Rockwell at January 6, 2008 01:48 PM
Ron will make his second Tonight Show appearance Monday night. Jay, btw, is also upset at FOX's exclusion. Plus, of course, he wants good ratings, and that's what Ron brings.




...Ron Paul - der wird in vielen Ami-Boards geliebt :) zumindest bei den Gold-Überzeugten ;) (da lese ich eben meistens)

Jup, vergessen wir den Internethype nicht ganz :)

06. Januar 2008, 22:52

Aussenseiter mit viel Geld

Präsidentschaftskandidat Ron Paul überrascht mit stark gewachsenen Wahlkampfeinnahmen. Der Republikaner hat wenig Chancen in seiner Partei, er könnte aber als Unabhängiger antreten.

Paul bestätigte im Fernsehsender CNN, dass er im letzten Quartal 20 Millionen Dollar eingenommen habe - so viel wie die stärksten demokratischen Bewerber Hillary Clinton und Barack Obama.

Der 72-jährige Texaner führte den Erfolg auf sein Interesse für die von der Politik der Regierung enttäuschte Mittelschicht zurück. Es gebe eine grosse Gruppe von Menschen, die Geld schickten, weil sie sich «eine Fortdauer des revolutionären Geistes» wünschten.

Unabhängige Kandidatur?

Der ehemalige Kongressabgeordnete Paul gilt als Querdenker in der Republikanischen Partei von US-Präsident George W. Bush. So gibt er den USA selbst die Schuld für die antiamerikanische Stimmung in der Welt.

Paul werden keine Chancen auf die Präsidentschaftskandidatur eingeräumt. Es gibt aber Spekulationen, wonach er dank seiner vollen Wahlkampfkasse als unabhängiger Kandidat antreten könnte. Bei der Vorwahl in Iowa hatte er zehn Prozent der Stimmen erhalten.

http://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/dyn/news/ausland/829059.html

Wobei ich dabei bleibe: er wird solange er in der GOP verbleibt keine Bedeutung haben was den nächsten Präsidenten betrifft, dazu sind seine Positionen zu extrem (völlige Waffenfreigabe, Abtreibungsverbot, Ausstieg aus allen internationalen Institutionen, Abbau Bildungs- und Sozialabgaben) und wenn er in New Hampshire sich gegenüber Iowa nicht stark verbessert wird er parteiintern untergegangen sein. Wonach es wenig aussieht nach allen Umfragen seit Iowa. Da hat Huckabee und McCain auf Seiten der GOP zugelegt und der grösste Teil der Unabhängigen ging an Obama.

Mit etwas Glück wird er da auf den 4. Platz kommen und damit erneut vor Giuliani, was zumindest ein Achtungserfolg wär und bei seinen Fans wohl fast gleich viel wert wär wie ein 1. Platz.

...ist nur Info - es kann sich ja noch so vieles ändern



http://www.drudgereport.com/hnh.jpg

TALK OF HILLARY EXIT ENGULFS CAMPAIGNS
Mon Jan 07 2008 09:46:28 ET

Facing a double-digit defeat in New Hampshire, a sudden collapse in national polls and an expected fund-raising drought, Senator Hillary Clinton is preparing for a tough decision: Does she get out of the race? And when?!

"She can't take multiple double-digit losses in New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada," laments one top campaign insider to the DRUDGE REPORT. "If she gets too badly embarrassed, it will really harm her. She doesn't want the Clinton brand to be damaged with back-to-back-to-back defeats."

Meanwhile, Democrat hopeful John Edwards has confided to senior staff that he is staying in the race because Hillary "could soon be out."

"Her money is going to dry up," Edwards confided, a top source said Monday morning.

MORE

Key players in Clinton's inner circle are said to be split. James Carville is urging her to fight it out through at least February and Super Tuesday, where she has a shot at thwarting Barack Obama in a big state. But others close to the former first lady now see no possible road to victory, sources claim.

Developing...

[The dramatic reversal of fortunes has left the media establishment stunned and racing to keep up with fast-moving changes.

In its final poll before Iowa, CNN showed Clinton with a two-point lead over Obama. Editorial decisions were being made based on an understanding the Democratic primary race would be close, explained a network executive.]

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/new_hampshire/election_2008_new_hampshire_democratic_primary

An dem Chart sieht man eindeutig, daß die Politik den Stromriesen auf die Füße treten wird.

http://isht.comdirect.de/charts/large.chart?hist=6m&type=CONNECTLINE&ind0=VOLUME&&currency=&lSyms=EOA.ETR&lColors=0x000000&sSym=EOA.ETR&hcmask=
Und danach wie immer den Schwanz einzieht.

:o

January 7, 2008

Republicans worried about Obama

CNN's Jessica Yellin

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Hillary Clinton isn't the only one worried about Barack Obama's post-Iowa momentum. A former top Republican official tells CNN Obama could win a significant portion of the Republican vote in a general election, if he becomes the Democratic nominee.

The leading Republican strategist, who requested anonymity because this person advises a number of Republican presidential candidates, told CNN "I think Barack Obama is a potential Robert Kennedy or Reagan figure." And "in terms of raw political horsepower, he is the most electable of any of the Democrats and potentially more electable than Bill Clinton. If he ran the right campaign he could appeal to a substantial number of Republicans and Independents."

This person insists an Obama nomination isn't a done deal. "He could make a mistake. His people could get overconfident. He needs to continue to push his theme even as she continues to hit him on different issues."

In the days since he won the caucuses, the New York senator's campaign has hit Obama on a number of issues, including his decision to hire a former lobbyist to manage his New Hampshire campaign, and his past position on the Patriot Act. Former President Bill Clinton compared Obama's early position on the Iraq war to President Bush's, and national reporters were summoned to an urgent conference call because some callers on the 'Do Not Call' registry had received robo-calls from Obama's campaign that Clinton's staff alleges did not fully comply with election law.

Yet Obama now holds a 10-point edge over Clinton in the new CNN/WMUR poll of New Hampshire primary voters released last night, and an even larger advantage in some other surveys.

This top Republican explains that Obama "is incredibly nice, he's likable. People want to like him. He's the personification of bringing people together. He's the personification of unity. People like that and it works."

He says Senator Clinton "lacks a gut level connection" with voters. "I'd rather run [a Republican] against her because she turns out our base. He [Obama] doesn't have the baggage she has and he appeals to Republicans and Independents in this post-partisan way."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/01/07/republicans-worried-about-obama/

@syr - kannst Du mir dieses Video erlären - danke - ich bin erschrocken :rolleyes
die apple Farben - das Obama.com :schwitz wer macht so was :confused oder bin ich :dumm :rolleyes:confused
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkvB7LQeydk&feature=related

Die machen sowas lunar :):

About This Video by http://guerrillaradio.ioblo...

Make up your o... (more)
Added: August 23, 2007
by http://guerrillaradio.iobloggo.com/

Make up your own mind. Decide for yourself who should be our next president. NOTE: This is a mashup of the famous Apple 1984 Super Bowl ad.

by the ANTI US and ANTI WAR site: http://guerrillaradio.iobloggo.com/ (less)


aus der Quelle bekommen wohl alle ihr Fett ab, "anti us" :confused

Wird auch so noch genug schmutzig werden, Obama wird noch Probleme bekommen mit einem Vater der den Islam als Religion hat und seinem zweiten Namen, Hussein. Da wird noch Störfeuer kommen, vorallem im Süden.

danke syr - na ja ich weiss nicht - das bringt wohl höchstens Verwirrung und wem soll's nützen, ob man anti-ami ist oder nicht, einen neuen Präsidenten bekommen sie ja so oder so :rolleyes ob Apple nicht dagegen hält :rolleyes
ist das ein Drecksgeschäft auf allen Ebenen :bad

und eventuell gibt es noch einen lachenden dritten :rolleyes :

US-PRÄSIDENTSCHAFT Demokraten bibbern vor Bloomberg-Kandidatur

Von Gregor Peter Schmitz, Washington

Er ist die unbekannte Größe im Rennen ums Weiße Haus: Michael Bloomberg hat eine Kandidatur bislang nicht offiziell gemacht - doch aus seinen Ambitionen macht New Yorks Bürgermeister keinen Hehl. Jetzt läuft er sich warm - zum Schrecken der politischen Gegner.

weiter (http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,526973,00.html)

Sorry Hillary, falscher Knopf gedrückt die Tage :ne ...

Al-Qaeda watching US election: Clinton, in Obama swipe

9 hours ago

DOVER, New Hampshire (AFP) — Hillary Clinton on Monday warned that Al-Qaeda watched US elections, urging Americans not to risk electing an inexperienced president, in her latest implicit swipe at rival Barack Obama.

In one of her most overt plays of the national security card yet, the senator from New York noted that days after Gordon Brown became British Prime Minister, militants planted bombs which failed to explode.

"I don't think it was by accident that Al-Qaeda decided to test the new prime minister," Clinton said here, referring to two devices which did not go off in London and a car which was crashed into Glasgow airport in June.

"They watch our elections as closely as we do ... they play our allies."

The former first lady's comments day before the New Hampshire primary, in which Obama is poised according to opinion polls to inflict a second damaging defeat on her White House campaign, after his Iowa caucuses victory last week.

"Let's not forget, you are hiring a president not just to do what a candidate says he or she will do in an election," Clinton said.

"You are hiring a president who will be here when the chips are down, and problems pile up, because that's when you really need somebody who knows exactly what has to be done, to make the tough decisions."

"I hope I don't face any of those in my first 100 days, but if it do, I think I will be ready," Clinton said.

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jB8n288YSUL-mMk3_2pTlq43xjoA

08. Januar 2008

USA IN WECHSELLAUNE

Republikaner kapern Obamas "Project Change"

Aus Nashua, New Hampshire, berichtet Gregor Peter Schmitz

Change, Change, Change: Bei den Republikanern zeichnet sich immer noch kein Favorit ab - jetzt kopieren Romney, McCain, Huckabee, Giuliani & Co das Erfolgsrezept der Konkurrenz. Mit Barack Obamas Versprechen eines großen Wandels wollen auch sie siegen.

Nashua/New Hampshire - Steve steht an einer Ecke der Main Street von Nashua, und er wünscht sich "change". Die letzten Jahre waren nicht richtig gut für Steve, man sieht es an der abgewetzten Hose und dem fleckigen Kapuzenpulli. Jetzt steht er hier und fragt Passanten nach "change" - so heißt das Wechselgeld auf Englisch.

Doch jetzt hat Steve unerwartet Konkurrenz bekommen, überall auf der Straße rufen sie nach "change". Selbst Leute im feinen Zwirn, die ihn sonst kaum anschauen, beten es wie ein Mantra immer wieder vor. Republikanische Präsidentschaftsbewerber. "Klingt schon komisch", sagt Steve. Auch wenn die Politiker natürlich die andere Bedeutung des Wortes meinen - Wechsel, Wandel, Veränderung.


Mitt Romney verkündete gleich um die Ecke: "Ich bin der Mann für den Wandel." John McCain versprach im knallrotem Pulli: "Ich will den Wandel." Und an diesem Morgen ist Rudy Giuliani vorbeigerauscht, der einst als New Yorker Bürgermeister die Metropole von Obdachlosen und Bettlern säubern wollte. Er besuchte ein Schnellrestaurant und hatte eine Menge Reporter im Schlepptau, die ihn nach seiner Wahlkampfstrategie befragten. Giuliani fiel es zum Glück rasch ein: "Ich will den Wandel."

Die Forderung nach der großen Veränderung ist derzeit die einzige Konstante im republikanischen Vorwahlkampf, der sich nicht ganz so übersichtlich präsentiert wie das Rennen der Demokraten, wo sich ein Durchmarsch von Barack Obama abzuzeichnen beginnt.

Huckabee ohne Chance, McCain liegt vorn

Mike Huckabee, der Ex-Baptistenprediger, hat zwar unter den evangelikalen Christen in Iowa triumphiert. Doch in New Hampshire, wo mehr als 40 Prozent der Wähler sich als "independents" - Unabhängige ohne Parteibindung - bezeichnen, wird er höchstens auf den dritten Platz kommen.

Hier liegt John McCain, Senator aus Arizona, in den letzten Umfragen deutlich vor Mitt Romney, dem Ex-Gouverneur von Massachusetts. New Yorks ehemaliger Bürgermeister Rudy Giuliani, der in den nationalen Umfragen nach wie vor knapp führt, hat in New Hampshire kaum Wahlkampf geführt - und wird unter ferner liefen landen. Er hofft nach wie vor auf Siege in großen Vorwahlstaaten wie Florida oder Kalifornien, die erst in einigen Wochen abstimmen.

Vor allem aber hat die Euphorie im demokratischen Lager die Republikaner tief verunsichert. Dass George W. Bush und sein Vermächtnis die Wähler eher schrecken, war schon vorher klar. Doch die offensichtliche Begeisterung der Wähler für einen echten Neuanfang in Washington, wie ihn Obama verspricht, hat sie dessen Rhetorik rasant kopieren lassen. "Jeder redet ja jetzt über den Wandel", sagt der demokratische Senator aus Illinois trocken.

"Bei mir ging es von Anfang an um Wandel"

Am radikalsten hat diesen Schwenk Mitt Romney vollzogen, den seine Rivalen wegen häufig wechselnder Positionen zu Abtreibung oder Schwulenehe ohnehin als Wackelkandidaten verspotten. "Meine Bewerbung drehte sich von Anfang an um den Wandel", sagt der nun. Romney hetzt von Treffen zu Treffen, kaum einer hält mehr Veranstaltungen ab als er. Es geht für ihn schon fast um das politische Überleben - er hat auf Siege in Iowa und New Hampshire gesetzt. Immerhin war er bis vor kurzem Gouverneur im benachbarten Massachusetts.

Darüber redet er aber kaum noch. Viel lieber erzählt Romney davon, wie er als erfolgreicher Geschäftsmann oder als Organisator der Olympischen Spiele in Salt Lake City große Veränderungen bewirkt habe. Halt das Gegenteil eines Washington-Insiders, soll das wohl suggerieren. Denn: "Washington ist im Eimer. Wir können uns nicht leisten, Leute ins Weiße Haus zu schicken, die dort versagt haben."

Einer dieser Insider ist John McCain. Dennoch kommen zu dessen Reden viel mehr Menschen als zu Romney. Rund tausend drängen sich vor den Stufen des State House in Concord, sie halten Schilder hoch: "Mac is back".

McCain hat ein doppeltes Comeback geschafft: Vor acht Jahren siegte er schon einmal triumphal in New Hampshire gegen George W. Bush - der ihn schließlich im Vorwahlkampf besiegte. Noch vor einem halben Jahr schien seine Bewerbung am Ende, weil er zum Irak-Krieg und zur Einwanderungspolitik unbequeme Positionen bezog - und kaum noch Spendengelder hatte. Aber er hat nun alles auf New Hampshire gesetzt, seine Berater arbeiten umsonst für ihn.

Und die Menge aus alten und jungen Leuten feiert ihn für diesen Kampfgeist, so wie Peter aus dem nahen Bedford. Er trägt trotz der Kälte Shorts, er ist 22, gerade mit dem College fertig, McCain ist 71. "Aber er ist cool. Weil er seine Meinung nicht einfach ändert", sagt Peter. Weil er als unbequeme Stimme in Washington gilt.

Vielleicht reagiert McCain deshalb so pikiert auf Romneys Angriffe. Als ihn ein Reporter danach fragt, guckt der Senator voll Verachtung, als sei der Rivale kaum eine Antwort wert. Dann presst er doch hervor: "Ich habe immer für den Wandel gekämpft, aber nicht des Profits wegen. Sondern aus Patriotismus."


Zumindest für den Moment hat McCain im Kampf gegen Romney einen starken Verbündeten. Iowa-Sieger Mike Huckabee steht in einem prallvollen Lokal in Concord und beißt genüsslich in einen "Huckaburger". Der Hamburger wurde gestern nach ihm benannt. Einfaches Essen, und zu Huckabees Auftritten kommen einfachere Leute als sonst bei den Republikanern. Auch jüngere.

Seine Werbespots über seinen tiefen Glauben, die Iowas evangelikale Christen begeisterten, hat er eingemottet. Mit seiner sanften Stimme, seinen volkstümlichen Anekdoten präsentiert er sich nun als Anwalt der kleinen Leute unter den Republikanern - und Gegenentwurf zum harten Geschäftsmann Romney.


"Erinnert Ihr Euch nicht lieber an einen guten Kollegen als an den Boss, der Euch gefeuert hat?", fragt er lächelnd. So eine Botschaft - die freilich mit dem durchaus Reichen-freundlichen Steuerprogramm Huckabees kontrastiert - ist für die Republikaner schon eine Art Wandel. "New York Times"-Kolumnist Frank Rich verglich den Ex-Prediger deshalb schon mit Obama. Bei der TV-Debatte am Samstag hatte Huckabee auch die beste Antwort parat auf die Frage, wie Republikaner gegen den beliebten Demokraten antreten könnte. Er lobte ihn einfach: "Obama hat viele Personen begeistert, die früher nicht gewählt haben." Huckabee sprach über Obama. Aber eigentlich redete er über sich selber.

Doch natürlich steht er viel schlechter da. Mehr als Dritter wird Huckabee in New Hampshire nicht werden. Um weiter mitzuhalten, muss er viel mehr Geld einsammeln. Bislang ist sein Team noch so klein, dass nicht einmal ein professioneller Fotograf den Moment festhalten konnte, als Huckabee vom Sieg in Iowa erfuhr. Seine Frau musste einspringen - mit ihrer eigenen Digitalkamera.

Solche Probleme hat Rudy Giuliani nicht. Aber jede Menge andere. Durch seine Strategie, die ersten Vorwahlstaaten zu ignorieren, ist er fast von der Bildfläche verschwunden. Der Ex-Bürgermeister taucht zwar gestern in Nashua auf. Doch die Fragen der Reporter drehen sich keine Sekunde um New Hampshire. "Rudy, wann gewinnst Du das erste Mal?", krähen sie, und eine TV-Moderatorin spricht direkt neben ihm in die Kamera: "Giuliani braucht vor allem Aufmerksamkeit".

Selbst in den nationalen Umfragen ist sein Vorsprung mittlerweile geschmolzen. Doch macht sich Giuliani wenig Mühe, das Image zu korrigieren, er ignoriere als Großstädter die ländlichen Regionen der USA. Kaum ist er mit den Reportern fertig, verschwindet er erst einmal in einem teuren Juwelierladen.

Auf der Straße wird sein Team schon umkreist von laut schreienden Ron-Paul-Unterstützern. Der 72 Jahre alte Arzt und Kongressabgeordnete hat im Internet und vor allem unter jungen Studenten eine treue Fangemeinde. Die haben für ihn in den vergangenen drei Monaten mehr als 20 Millionen Dollar gesammelt - und sie springen quer durch New Hampshire, um bei Auftritten von Pauls Rivalen lautstark an ihren Favoriten zu erinnern.


Als John McCain vor dem State House auftritt, haben sich Pauls Anhänger mit großen "Ron-Paul"-Schildern schon auf einer Anhöhe die besten Plätze gesichert. Ein Mädchen mit rot gefärbten Haaren reckt ihr Schild hoch, neben ihr stehen Kapuzenträger mit Hängejeans. Doch das alternative Outfit täuscht, auf ihren Schildern steht: "Stop the amnesty" - Keine Amnestie für illegale Einwanderer. Paul vertritt zur Einwanderungspolitik stramm rechte Parolen. Seine Werbespots fordern, illegalen Einwanderern alle Sozialleistungen zu streichen, Studenten aus "Terroristen"-Staaten Visa zu verweigern, die Grenzen zu sichern.

Am Himmel über New Hampshire schwebt ein Flugzeug mit einem Banner. Es verspricht die "Ron-Paul-Revolution". Paul will das Steuersystem abschaffen, er will ganz raus aus Irak. Er hält wütende Reden über das imperiale Regime in Washington. Immerhin: Niemand kann ihm vorwerfen, nicht für Veränderungen zu stehen. Doch in allen seriösen Umfragen liegt Paul weit abgeschlagen.

So viel Wandel wollen die Republikaner dann doch nicht.

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,527258,00.html

New Hampshire Turnout 'Absolutely Huge'

January 08, 2008 12:37 PM

ABC News' Karen Travers Reports: New Hampshire Deputy Secretary of State Dave Scanlan told ABC News that turnout among primary voters today is "absolutely huge" -- and there are concerns about running out of ballots in towns like Portsmouth, Keene, Hudson and Pelham.

"Turnout is absolutely huge and towns are starting to get concerned that they may not have enough ballots," Scanlan said. "We are working on those issues. Everything else seems to be going smoothly."

Scanlan said that the Secretary of State's office is sending additional ballots to Portsmouth and Keene (traditionally Democratic strongholds), Hudson (Republican leaning with significant numbers of independents) and Pelham (large number of independents).

According to Scanlan, the ballot strain seems to be on Democratic ballots, which suggests that the undeclared voters are breaking for the Democratic primary. New Hampshire Secretary of State William Gardner predicted that 90,000 undeclared voters would vote in the Democratic primary compared to 60,000 voting in the Republican primary.

Deputy Secretary Scanlan said based on a formula anticipating higher turnout, they printed additional ballots, but in most cases towns will go "right down to the wire with ballots they need." The extra ballots will be insurance ballots in most places so election officials have a comfort level.

Scanlan said reports from polling places show that turnout has been steady and high though the morning but typically high activity periods will be lunch and after work.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/01/new-hampshire-t.html

Es gibt sowas wie eine "Revolution" in den USA, wenn auch keine RonPaul Revolution :rolleyes

http://www.abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id=4102345

dieses Hick-Hack :rolleyes

...ich stell jetzt den vom Tagi rein ;) es werden ja noch etliche Kommentare folgen :)

09. Januar 2008 Überraschungssieg für Hillary Clinton (http://tagesanzeiger.ch/dyn/news/ausland/830078.html)

Bei den Vorwahlen im US-Staat New Hampshire hat sich bei den Demokraten Hillary Clinton überraschend gegen ihren Konkurrenten Barack Obama durchgesetzt. Update 07:38 » weiter (http://tagesanzeiger.ch/dyn/news/ausland/830078.html)



New Hampshire: Die meisten Sieger wurden Kandidat (http://tagesanzeiger.ch/dyn/news/ausland/830082.html)
Dossier: US-Wahlen 2008 (http://tagesanzeiger.ch/dyn/news/dossiers/ausland/799.html)
http://tagesanzeiger.ch/praesentationen/newhome_alt/pics/icon_bilder-galerie_s.gif Sieger und Verlierer in New Hampshire (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:%20popupURL%28810,680,%27/dyn/news/galerie/ausland/2086.html%27%29)
http://tagesanzeiger.ch/praesentationen/newhome_alt/pics/icon_video-clip_s.gifObama ging als Favorit ins Rennen (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:%20popupURL%28810,680,%27/dyn/news/video/830078.html?videoid=14969&rid=181%27%29)
http://tagesanzeiger.ch/praesentationen/newhome_alt/pics/icon_info-grafik_s.gifInfografik: Vorwahl in New Hampshire (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:%20popupURL%28700,320,%27/medienlinks/14/14986.gif%27%29)
Blog: Der Amerikanist (http://amerikanist.kaywa.ch/)
http://tagesanzeiger.ch/media/images/321/329414.jpg (http://tagesanzeiger.ch/dyn/news/ausland/830080.html) «Ich werde eine Präsidentin sein, die für euch alle da ist» (http://tagesanzeiger.ch/dyn/news/ausland/830080.html)

Von Martin Kilian, Manchester, New Hampshire Durch den Sieg Hillary Clintons bei der Vorwahl in New Hmpshire bliebt der Kampf um die demokratische Nominierung weiter offen. Barack Obama verlor auch deshalb, weil Frauen mehrheitlich für die Senatorin votierten. » weiter (http://tagesanzeiger.ch/dyn/news/ausland/830080.html)

....sie hat auch die Frauen für sich zurückgewonnen, vor der drohenden Niederlage zeigte sie sich als verletzbarer Mensch und nicht nur als ehrgeizige und verbissene Kandidatin :) hmmmm.....sollte das "gespielt" gewesen sein - dann war es zumindest überzeugend :rolleyes

******************

Obama Says He's Still Fired Up and Ready http://img.breitbart.com/images/ap.gif (http://www.breitbart.com/partner.php?source=ap) http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif Jan 8 11:23 PM US/Eastern
By NEDRA PICKLER
Associated Press Writer http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif http://img.breitbart.com/images/2008/1/8/D8U24PH80/D8U24PH80_preview.jpg
http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif
View larger image (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8U24PH80&show_article=1&image=large)
http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif
http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif NASHUA, N.H. (AP) - Barack Obama pronounced himself "still fired up and ready to go" after a second-place finish in New Hampshire (http://search.breitbart.com/q?s=%22New+Hampshire%22&sid=breitbart.com)'s Democratic primary. "You know, a few weeks ago no one imagined that we'd have accomplished what we did here tonight in New Hampshire," he told supporters. "For most of this campaign, we were far behind. We always knew our climb would be steep.

"But, in record numbers, you came out and you spoke up for change. And with your voices and your votes you made it clear that at this moment in this election there is something happening in America."

He congratulated Hillary Rodham Clinton (http://search.breitbart.com/q?s=%22Hillary+Rodham%20Clinton%22&sid=breitbart.com) on a hard-fought victory and asked the crowd to give her a round of applause...... :supi

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8U24PH80&show_article=1

January 9, 2008

The Empire Strikes Back

Back From the Dead in New Hampshire

By ALEXANDER COCKBURN
and JEFFREY ST. CLAIR



http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn01092008.html

:supi Artikel

Frage ist nun etwas was Edwards macht, der hat nun zweimal nur den 3. Platz gemacht. Aber ich find es gut das Hillary wieder "da" ist, Rennen über 51 Staaten nach 2 Stück zu beenden wär nicht wirklich demokratisch und 3% Rückstand für Obama ist kein Riesensprung. Wird in der GOP nun ähnliche Diskussionen geben, McCain gilt als RINO und ist nicht eben beliebt, denen wär Romney lieber gewesen.Und auch der hat zweimal verloren. Dafür ist der Hype um Paul wohl vorbei, im libertärsten Staat nur 4. Platz ist zu wenig. Da hatte der Tag wohl Recht mit den Amis die einen Wechsel wollen aber halt keinen so drastischen wie ihn Paul möchte.

:)

NYT, Kommentar zur Wahl in New Hampshire:

January 9, 2008

Unite, Not Divide, Really This Time

The New Hampshire primary has done Americans a service by leaving both parties’ nominating contests open and giving a truly broad range of voters a chance to participate in these vitally important choices. The coming contests will be colored in large part by how the contenders and their backers answer a basic question: Just how far are they willing to go to win?

If the Republican fringe plays to type and decides to savage John McCain, the party’s winner in New Hampshire, once again, and if the Clinton camp continues to allow its baser instincts to rule, they will do more harm than good to themselves, to their parties and to the political process. The danger signs are there on both sides, but are glaringly evident among the Democrats.

Senator Barack Obama did not refrain from dropping cutting comments about Senator Hillary Clinton into his speeches. “I’m not running because I think it’s my turn, that it’s somehow owed to me,” he would say. But he generally pitched his speeches on notes of inspiration and hope.

Mrs. Clinton ran an angry campaign in New Hampshire, and polls showed that voters noticed. She won narrowly, but came perilously close to injecting racial tension into what should have been — and still should be — an uplifting contest between the first major woman candidate and the first major African-American candidate.

In the days before the voting, Mrs. Clinton and her team were so intent on talking about how big a change a woman president would be — and it surely would — that some of her surrogates even suggested that it would be a more valuable change than an African-American president. Mrs. Clinton managed to energize the women’s vote in New Hampshire to win the contest, but the Democratic Party should be celebrating its full diversity, a refreshing and notable difference from the field of Republican contenders.

In Mrs. Clinton’s zeal to make the case that experience (hers) is more important than inspirational leadership (Mr. Obama’s), she made some peculiar comments about the relative importance of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and President Lyndon Johnson to the civil rights cause. She complimented Dr. King’s soaring rhetoric, but said: “Dr. King’s dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. ... It took a president to get it done. ”

Why Mrs. Clinton would compare herself to Mr. Johnson, who escalated the war in Vietnam into a generational disaster, was baffling enough. It was hard to escape the distasteful implication that a black man needed the help of a white man to effect change. She pulled herself back from the brink by later talking about the mistreatment and danger Dr. King faced. Former President Bill Clinton, who seems to forget he is not the one running, hurled himself over the edge on Monday with a bizarre and rambling attack on Mr. Obama.

Mr. Clinton has generally been a statesman as ex-president, and keeping up this sort of behavior will undermine his credibility and ability to do more good.

We understand, and usually admire, Mrs. Clinton’s determination. Allowing her team’s wearyingly familiar strong-arm instincts to take over would be damaging for the Democrats in the fall, no matter who gets the nomination. Polls in Iowa and New Hampshire show that Democratic voters liked all of their candidates — they simply chose one. It would be a mistake for a politician whose unfavorable ratings across the nation have long been stuck in the 40 percent range to erase that good feeling about her party.

In 2000, after Mr. McCain beat George W. Bush in New Hampshire, the Republican Party’s right wing savaged the Arizona senator and his family during the South Carolina primary. It was the nation’s first taste of the politics of division practiced by Mr. Bush and Karl Rove that became the guiding principle of Mr. Bush’s presidency: winning justifies denying any role to the losers — even dissenting Republicans.

This year the Republicans have joined the Democrats in the chorus of change, and American voters have a right to expect it. The Republicans have not held back from criticizing each other, but not with the ferocity or the small-mindedness perfected by Mr. Rove. Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, ran a negative campaign, and he lost in his neighboring state.

Mr. McCain, despite some pandering, is still not the choice of social conservatives or religious conservatives. As with the Democrats, however, Republicans have done well with voters by talking about leading all Americans.

That is not to say theirs has been an uplifting campaign. The Republicans happily accuse the Democrats of advocating socialized medicine, which anyone who has listened to them knows is nonsense. Rudolph Giuliani has built his entire bid for the White House feeding fears of terrorism. But Mr. McCain, Mike Huckabee and even Mr. Romney talk about how disillusioned Americans are with Washington and about their intent to unite the country.

Americans have had seven painful and disillusioning years. The last thing they want is for either party to drag out the old playbooks of division and anger. We doubt now whether Mr. Bush ever intended to deliver on his 2000 pledge to unite, not divide. Americans still want, and deserve, a leader who will fulfill that promise.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/09/opinion/09wed1.html?_r=2&ref=opinion&oref=login&oref=slogin

...ob da was dran ist oder nicht :nw später wird man es (vielleicht) wissen :rolleyes

http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/january2008/090108voters.jpg Ron Paul Votes Not Counted In New Hampshire District

Wednesday, January 9, 2008


Major allegations of vote fraud in New Hampshire are circulating after Hillary Clinton reversed a mammoth pre-polling deficit to defeat Barack Obama with the aid of Diebold electronic voting machines, while confirmed votes for Ron Paul in the Sutton district were not even counted.

According to a voter in Sutton, New Hampshire (http://www.ronpaulwarroom.com/?p=655), three of her family members voted for Ron Paul, yet when she checked the voting map on the Politico website, the total votes for Ron Paul were zero.

With 100% of precincts now reporting, the map still says zero votes for Ron Paul as you can see below.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/january2008/090108screen1.jpg (http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/january2008/090108screen.jpg)
CLICK FOR ENLARGEMENT

full.story:http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2008/010908_not_counted.htm

:rolleyes .... Schönes Skript für weitere 4.5 Jahre neuer Verschwörungstheorien :hihi :hihi :hihi . Jahr 2000 und 2004 "Wahlbetrug", 2006 wie nach Wunsch also ok, 2008 wie erwartet aber nicht dem Winsch aller entsprechend -> "Wahlbetrug". Siehe dazu auch:


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/9/134532/8188/515/433738

Eine "progressive" Webseite, ganz auf die Demokraten ausgerichtet. Insbesondere die Kommentare sind interessant ;)

John Edwards decides 2008 on the DNC floor

by ManfromMiddletown (http://manfrommiddletown.dailykos.com/)

Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 11:01:34 AM PST

Due to the frontloading of the 2008 primary season, we are rapidly approaching a scenario in which Democratic nomination will not be decided until August. Let me start by explaining what superdelegates (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate) are, and why they matter. In 2008, there will be 4,040 delegates to the DNC convention in Denver, a candidate needs 2,020 in order to win. Of these 4,040 only 3,248 (80.2%) will be chosen through primaries and causes, the other 792 (19.2%) are elected Democratic Governors, US Senators, US Representatives, DNC members, and distrinquished party leaders.

http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/8131/2008dnc1zc8.png


ManfromMiddletown's diary (http://manfrommiddletown.dailykos.com/) :: ::
Looking at it another way, in order to win the nomination without the support of superdelegates, a candidate must win 62.2% of the delegates elected in primaries and caucuses in order to secure the nomination. This is a monumental task, and in an environment where we have 3 candidate who have announced their intention to stay in the race until the convention the possibility of a brokered convention looms large. Just to put what I've said above in graphic terms, see below.

http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/479/dnc20082zu8.png

As it stands now in the elected delegate count, Obama has 25 (37.3%), Clinton 24 (35.8%), and Edwards 18 (26.9%). Only 2% of the elected delegates have been chosen at this time, so the situation is fluid, however the February 5th primaries will provide 1,698 elected delegates (52.3%), and by that date a cumulative 2,148 elected delegates (66.1%) will have been awarded. Assuming that in the long run, Obama carries 38% of the elected delegates, Clinton 38%, and Edwards 24%, this would give the following delegate count: Obama 1,234 Clinton 1,234 Edwards 780. Again to illustrate this graphically, see the following. In order to win on a first ballot with 2,020 delegates, either Clinton or Obama would have to win more than 99% of the superdelegates.

http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/2672/dnc3sm0.png

2008 is unique in that the fron loading of the primaries present the potential that we could go from a highly contested but winnable race on Feb 4th, to a race that's deadlocked until the convention by Feb 6th. Another twist is that Barack Obama draws much of his support from Republicans and Indepedents, so that he's likely to do better in states with open primaries (where independents and sometimes Republicans can vote) than in those with closed primaries (limiting voting to registered Democrats) where Clinton is likely to do much better. Looking to Feb 5th, the delegate heavy states of the Northest (NY, NJ, CT, MA) are closed primaries. California allows independents to vote, but has a strong Democratic registration. In short, it's likely to create a fairly even division between Clinton and Obama, with Edwards taking a strong third in many of these states. I've mapped out states with closed primaries in dark blue, and open (or semi-open) primaries in light blue below.

http://img86.imageshack.us/img86/5339/superdupertuesday2008ib5.png

After Feb 5th, it's likely that the delegate count will create a deadlock that means that the nomination won't be decided until August.

And to be honest, I'm all for John Edwards staying in until the election, because he has forced the party to confront issues that make the donor class uncomfortable. If John Edwards goes to Denver with the block of delegates needed to determine whether Obama or Clinton is the nominee, he can push for the party to adopt a strong platform. And while in this case John Edwards may never be President of the United States, he will be remembered as a great leader who forced te Democratic party to return to its roots on mandating universal healthcare coverage, pushing the party to adopt populist economics, and ensuring a new New Deal Majority.

I trust that John Edwards know that this election is not about him, it's about the people killed by the amorality of our health insurance system, the men and women who have worked hard on the assembly line and played by the rules only to see their jobs shipped to countries where workers have few rights, and the young working class men and women for whom the hope of being part of the student vote is an illusion because they can't afford college.

We're counting on you, John. And when the time comes in Denver, I hope that you make my vote for you count.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/9/115957/8561/622/433655

:hihi :hihi :hihi

BILL TO PAUL SUPPORTERS: 'YOU’RE NUTS'

From NBC/NJ’s Mike Memoli

KEENE, NH -- Several Ron Paul supporters shadowed a much larger Clinton entourage as Bill Clinton greeted supporters downtown. The former president later called them "nuts."

During his third stop of the day, the former president posed for pictures and shook hands as he strolled down Main Street on this unseasonably warm Primary Eve day. Across the street, a few Paul supporters shouted his name.

Eventually, Clinton stopped outside a bakery, offered some remarks, and took questions. As he was answering one on Iraq, one of the Paul backers interrupted and shouted that the Sept. 11 attacks were an inside job, and that the U.S. didn’t need to be in Iraq and Afghanistan.

When he dropped an F-bomb, the crowd booed. Clinton, who had tried to talk over the man, gave up.

"You wanna know what I think?” Clinton said. “You guys who think 9/11 was an inside job are crazy as hell. My wife was the senator from New York when that happened. I was down at Ground Zero. I saw the victims' families. You're nuts."

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/07/556622.aspx

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=147328&title=new-hampshire-punditry

Eventual GOP nominee faces tough general election

Story Highlights:
- Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama would get over half the vote, poll finds
- John McCain is the GOP candidate nearly tied with Democratic front-runners
- Mitt Romney has the highest percentage of people who definitely will not vote for him

By Rebecca Sinderbrand
CNN Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Republican presidential field appears to face a tough general election fight in a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll released Saturday.

According to the survey, both of the Democratic front-runners, Sens. Hillary Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois, hold mostly double-digit -- and statistically identical -- advantages over Republican presidential candidates Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee, drawing greater than 50 percent support in each hypothetical matchup.

The Republican candidate who gives Clinton and Obama the closest race in the new poll is Arizona Sen. John McCain, who is essentially tied with both: He draws the support of 48 percent of those surveyed to Clinton's 50 percent and Obama's 49 percent.

Clinton leads the front-running candidates of both parties -- Obama, McCain, Giuliani, Huckabee and Romney -- in the percentage of voters who say they would definitely vote for her if she won her party's nomination, with 37 percent. But she trails the pack in the percentage of voters who do not support her, but say they might consider voting for her under those circumstances, with 19 percent.

Obama is second to Clinton in potential voters who say they would definitely vote for him in the general election, with 30 percent. McCain, who is third in that category with 22 percent, is first among voters who say they'd consider voting for him if he were the Republican nominee, with 35 percent.

The poll contained some worrying news for Romney: 62 percent of those surveyed say they will definitely not vote for the former Massachusetts governor in the general election, compared with just 13 percent who say they will definitely support him -- the worst showing of any of the major candidates.

The poll also suggests that two of his GOP primary opponents might also face an uphill climb this fall, with more than half of those polled saying they would definitely not vote for either man in November: 55 percent said they would not consider backing Giuliani, and 52 percent said the same of Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas.

Just one other candidate in the race, McCain, competes with Obama in both categories, with a favorability rating of 54 percent and an unfavorability rating of 29 percent. McCain is the only Republican included in the poll with a favorability rating of greater than 50 percent.

McCain's closest GOP competition in the favorability category appears to be Giuliani, former New York City mayor, at 46 percent favorable to 39 percent unfavorable. In the unfavorability category, Mike Huckabee is viewed negatively by just 30 percent of those polled -- but viewed positively by just 38 percent. One-fifth of those polled have no opinion of the former Arkansas governor.

The Republican Party seems to have made a bit of a comeback from a June poll that found it was viewed unfavorably by 53 percent of the country, though more Americans still say they have an unfavorable than a favorable view of the party, 48 to 41 percent. The numbers for the Democratic Party are 55 percent favorable and 34 percent unfavorable, also a slight improvement over their June showing, 51 percent favorable and 38 percent unfavorable.

The telephone survey of 1,033 Americans, including 840 registered voters, was conducted January 9-10, and has a margin of error of plus-or-minus 3 percentage points. The hypothetical matchup results came from the registered voters; that poll had a margin of error of plus-or-minus 3.5 percentage points.

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/12/poll.matchups/index.html

...auch wenn man lieber die andere Seite beleuchtet - das gehört ja auch dazu ;)

Romney Wins Convincing Michigan Victory
(http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:eMail_Friend%28540,%20540%29;)

Jan 16, 6:31 AM (ET)

By LIZ SIDOTI and GLEN JOHNSON http://ak.imgfarm.com/images/ap/thumbnails//Romney_2008.sff_MIKS124_20080115230348.jpg (http://apnews.myway.com/image/20080115/Romney_2008.sff_MIKS124_20080115230348.html?date=20080116&docid=D8U6UN580)(AP) Republican presidential hopeful, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney speaks to his supporters at...
..... In Michigan, with most precincts reporting, Romney had 39 percent of the vote, McCain had 30 percent and Huckabee 16 percent. No other Republican fared better than single digits.......

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080116/D8U6UN580.html

(http://apnews.myway.com/image/20080115/Romney_2008.sff_MIKS124_20080115230348.html?date=20080116&docid=D8U6UN580)

...auch wenn man lieber die andere Seite beleuchtet - das gehört ja auch dazu ;)
Zum Original-Beitrag (http://www.stock-channel.net/stock-board/showthread.php3?p=1110520#post1110520)

Finde ich Spitze, damit ist nach McCain und Huckabee mit Romney einer mehr länger im Rennen auf Seiten der GOP. Giuliani hat seine Ambitionen vom Ausgang in Florida abhängig gemacht. Hoffentlich gewinnt der da, dann verbleiben wohl 4 Kandidaten im Rennen. Mit dem entsprechenden Aufwand, auch finanziell. Kann nur gut sein für die Demokraten, je länger die GOP intern zerstritten ist desto länger werden schmutzige Angriffe ausbleiben:lach

http://images.ucomics.com/comics/crmlu/2008/crmlu080117.gif ...na das wollen wir aber nicht hoffen :rolleyes

hmmmm...... :rolleyes:schwitz

http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif Clinton, Obama Clash at Debate http://img.breitbart.com/images/ap.gif (http://www.breitbart.com/partner.php?source=ap) http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif Jan 21 09:36 PM US/Eastern
By NEDRA PICKLER
Associated Press Writer http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif http://img.breitbart.com/images/2008/1/21/D8UALEPG0/D8UALEPG0_preview.jpg
http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif
View larger image (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8UALEPG0&show_article=1&image=large)
http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif
http://www.breitbart.com/images/related-video.gif

http://www.breitbart.tv/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/hilbarack.jpg

Myrtle Beach Bash: Obama, Clinton Throw Down Hard on CNN (http://www.breitbart.tv/html/33454.html)

http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif MYRTLE BEACH, S.C. (AP) - A simmering feud between Democrats Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama erupted into charges of distortion and exaggeration in a gloves- off presidential debate Monday, with Clinton accusing him of representing a Chicago slumlord and Obama countering that she was a corporate lawyer for anti-union Wal-Mart. Even in the superheated atmosphere of their fight for the party's nomination, the statements and exchanges between Clinton and Obama were unusually acrimonious and personal. The debate came as the two campaigns continued to complain about dirty politics and disenfranchisement of voters in last Saturday's Nevada caucuses.

As Obama tried to defend his recent comments about Republican ideas and Ronald Reagan, Clinton interrupted and said she has never criticized his remarks on Reagan.

"Your husband did," said Obama, who has accused the former president of misrepresenting his record.

"I'm here. He's not," she snapped.

Obama persisted, suggesting the Clintons were both practicing the kind of political tactics that had alienated voters.

"There was a set of assertions made by Senator Clinton as well as her husband that are not factually accurate," Obama said. "I think that part of what people are looking for right now is someone who is going to solve problems and not resort to the same typical politics that we've seen in Washington."

Clinton countered: "I believe your record and what you say should matter."

John Edwards, who badly trails his two rivals, tried to stay above the fray while pleading for equal time.

"Are there three people in this debate, not two?" he asked.

"We have got to understand, this is not about us personally. It's about what we are trying to do for this country," Edwards said to applause from the audience.......

full story: http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8UALEPG0&show_article=1

http://www.latimes.com/media/alternatethumbnails/graphic/2007-06/30390930.gif (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/)
« Bill Clinton and the spotlight simply go together (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/01/bill-clinton-th.html) | Main (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/) | Bill Clinton 'marks' Martin Luther King Jr. Day » (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/01/bill.html)

New poll: U.S. more ready for black prez than female one

A new poll just out from CNN/Opinion Research tied to Martin Luther King Day today finds blacks and whites optimistic and pretty much in agreement -- 84% whites, 78% blacks -- that a lot or moderate progress has been made toward the civil rights leader's dream of equality in American society.

But hidden near the bottom of the survey of nearly 1,400 adult Americans Jan. 14-17 is some disturbing news for Sen. Hillary Clinton heading into tonight's Democratic debate in South Carolina and the party's primary there Saturday.

The survey's numbers show that Americans are more ready for a black president than a female president. You read that right.

In Saturday's Nevada caucuses, Clinton beat Barack Obama in the total....


vote, but Obama captured something more than 80% of the black vote from the wife of the president sometimes called "the first black president." That already augured ill for her fortunes heading into South Carolina where half the Democratic vote is African American.

But the CNN poll today shows that 72% of whites and 61% of blacks believe the country is ready for a black president. That's up from 65% and 54%, respectively, two years ago. (Both polls have a margin of error of +/-4.5%.)

But asked if the country is ready for a female president, blacks and whites both are in agreement; they're less sure -- only 63% of both whites and blacks answer yes. That's up slightly (from 58%) for whites but down among blacks from 67% since December, 2006.

Interestingly, men and women remain in agreement on this issue, too. In 2006, 60% of both genders said yes and this time it's 65% female and 64% male.

Food for thought, or maybe some debate questions in a few hours.

--Andrew Malcolm - http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/01/blacks.html

War bisher der Meinung G.W. sei der Grösste !

McCain hält Putin für deutschen Präsidenten

Erschienen am 24. Januar 2008

John McCain, Präsidentschaftskandidat der Republikaner, kennt sich außerhalb seines Landes scheinbar nicht wirklich aus, berichtet die "Bild"-Zeitung. In einer Rede bezeichnet er Russlands Präsidenten Wladimir Putin als deutschen Präsidenten, wie ein jetzt aufgetauchtes Video zeigt.

Zum Original-Beitrag (http://showthread.php3?p=1113984#post1113984)
http://www.bild.t-online.de/BILD/news/politik/2008/01/24/mccain-putin/mccain-haelt-putin-fuer-deutschen-praesidenten,geo=3568766.html (http://www.bild.t-online.de/BILD/news/politik/2008/01/24/mccain-putin/mccain-haelt-putin-fuer-deutschen-praesidenten,geo=3568766.html-%3Cimg%20src=%22images/smilies/eek.gif%22%20border=%220%22%20alt=%22%22%20title=%22Staunen%22%20smilieid=%22119%22%20class=%22inlineimg%22%20/%3E%3Cimg%20src=%22images/smilies/schwitz.gif%22%20border=%220%22%20alt=%22%22%20title=%22Schwitz%22%20smilieid=%22224%22%20class=%22inlineimg%22%20/%3E%3Cimg%20src=%22images/smilies/rolleyes.gif%22%20border=%220%22%20alt=%22%22%20title=%22%C3%84hm%21%22%20smilieid=%22117%22%20class=%22inlineimg%22%20/%3E%3Cimg%20src=%22images/smilies/pfarrer.gif%22%20border=%220%22%20alt=%22%22%20title=%22Pfarrer%22%20smilieid=%22150%22%20class=%22inlineimg%22%20/%3E)
:eek:schwitz:rolleyes:farrer (http://www.bild.t-online.de/BILD/news/politik/2008/01/24/mccain-putin/mccain-haelt-putin-fuer-deutschen-praesidenten,geo=3568766.html-%3Cimg%20src=%22images/smilies/eek.gif%22%20border=%220%22%20alt=%22%22%20title=%22Staunen%22%20smilieid=%22119%22%20class=%22inlineimg%22%20/%3E%3Cimg%20src=%22images/smilies/schwitz.gif%22%20border=%220%22%20alt=%22%22%20title=%22Schwitz%22%20smilieid=%22224%22%20class=%22inlineimg%22%20/%3E%3Cimg%20src=%22images/smilies/rolleyes.gif%22%20border=%220%22%20alt=%22%22%20title=%22%C3%84hm%21%22%20smilieid=%22117%22%20class=%22inlineimg%22%20/%3E%3Cimg%20src=%22images/smilies/pfarrer.gif%22%20border=%220%22%20alt=%22%22%20title=%22Pfarrer%22%20smilieid=%22150%22%20class=%22inlineimg%22%20/%3E)
ich hoffe das Video bleibt erhalten ;)

Entfesselter Bill Clinton attackiert Obama (http://tagesanzeiger.ch/dyn/news/ausland/835684.html)

Von Martin Kilian Am Samstag finden im Südstaat South Carolina demokratische Vorwahl statt. Während des Wahlkampfs musste sich Barack Obama vor allem Bill Clintons erwehren. » weiter (http://tagesanzeiger.ch/dyn/news/ausland/835684.html)





Republikaner: Finanzkrise im Zentrum der Debatte (http://tagesanzeiger.ch/dyn/news/ausland/835504.html)
«New York Times»: Für Clinton und McCain (http://tagesanzeiger.ch/dyn/news/ausland/835507.html)
Dossier: US-Wahlen 2008 (http://tagesanzeiger.ch/dyn/news/dossiers/ausland/799.html)
Blog: Der Amerikanist (http://amerikanist.kaywa.ch/myrtle-beach-south-carolina/ein-freund-namens-tony.html)
......Bill Clintons vehementer Einsatz wirft nun die Frage auf, ob wie 1992, als er während des Wahlkampfs seine Gattin zur potenziellen Kopräsidentin erklärte, schon wieder «zwei zum Preis von einem» erhältlich seien. Barack Obama wiederum versuchte, dem Gespann mit taktischen Abwehrmanövern zu begegnen, doch befindet sich der Senator in einer kaum beneidenswerten Position: Verliert er in South Carolina, wo Afroamerikaner nahezu die Hälfte der demokratischen Vorwählerschaft stellen, werden die Clintons flüstern, er könne nicht einmal bei seinesgleichen reüssieren. Gewinnt Obama hingegen, wird es heissen, der Sieg sei so wertvoll nicht, da seinesgleichen eben für den Senator votiert habe. Die Granden der Partei beobachten unterdessen das Gebolze ihrer Spitzenkandidaten mit wachsender Sorge und vermerken konsterniert, dass der Ex-Präsident sein Vermächtnis aufs Spiel setzt. Bill Clintons Verhalten, sagte Senator Patrick Leahy, der sich für Obama erklärt hat, sei «unter der Würde eines früheren Präsidenten». Und Dick Harpootlian, ehemals Vorsitzender von South Carolinas Demokratischer Partei, warf Clinton sogar vor, ein Schmutzfink vom Stil des legendären republikanischen Strategen Lee Atwater zu sein.......

:kopf er hat sie wohl nicht mehr alle..... :rolleyes



Breaking Up Is Hard to Do

By PEGGY NOONAN
January 25, 2008; Page W14

We begin, as one always must now, again, with Bill Clinton. The past week he has traveled South Carolina, leaving discord in his wake. Barack Obama, that "fairytale," is low, sneaky. "He put out a hit job on me." The press is cruelly carrying Mr. Obama's counter-jabs. "You live for it."

In Dillon, S.C., according to the Associated Press, on Thursday Mr. Clinton "predicted that many voters will be guided mainly by gender and race loyalties" and suggested his wife may lose Saturday's primary because black voters will side with Mr. Obama. Who is raising race as an issue? Bill Clinton knows. It's the press, and Mr. Obama. "Shame on you," Mr. Clinton said to a CNN reporter. The same day the Web site believed to be the backdoor of the Clinton war room unveiled a new name for the senator from Illinois: "Sticky Fingers Obama."

Bill Clinton, with his trembly, red-faced rage, makes John McCain look young. His divisive and destructive daily comportment—this is a former president of the United States—is a civic embarrassment. It is also an education, and there is something heartening in this.......

http://online.wsj.com/article/declarations.html

Akt. 27.01.08; 06:12 Pub. 27.01.08; 06:12 pat

Obama überrollt Clinton und Edwards in South Carolina

Aufwind für Barack Obama: Nach zwei enttäuschenden Abstimmungen hat der schwarze Präsidentschaftsbewerber der Demokraten bei den US-Vorwahlen in South Carolina einen überragenden Sieg errungen.

Obama kam nach Auszählung fast aller Stimmen auf 55 Prozent der Stimmen und distanzierte damit seine schärfste Konkurrentin Hillary Clinton, die lediglich 27 Prozent der Stimmen erreichte, überraschend deutlich.

Politische Kommentatoren meinten nach der Abstimmung am Samstag, damit sei die Kandidaten-Kür der Demokraten nach wie vor völlig offen. Eine Entscheidung sei frühestens am "Super-Dienstag" am 5. Februar zu erwarten, wenn in 22 US-Bundesstaaten Vorwahlen anstehen.

Ersten Wahlanalysen zufolge verdankte der 46-jährige Obama seinen Erfolg im Südstaat South Carolina vor allem der übergrossen Zustimmung unter schwarzen Wählern. Obama äusserte sich optimistisch, das Rennen im Herbst um das Weisse Haus zu gewinnen. "Ja, wir können den Wandel bringen. Ja, wir können diese Nation heilen", rief er seinen jubelnden Anhängern zu.

Eindringlich machte er klar, dass es ihm nicht nur um die Anliegen der Afro-Amerikaner gehe. Eines seiner Hauptziele sei es, den eingefahrenen Parteienstreit in Washington zu überwinden. "Wir wollen nicht nur einen Wechsel im Weissen Haus", sagte Obama. "Wir wollen den Status quo in der Politik überwinden."


Clinton gesteht Niederlage ein

Die ehemalige First-Lady Clinton gestand ihre Niederlage ein. "Ich gratuliere Senator Obama", sagte sie vor Anhängern in Nashville im US-Bundesstaat Tennessee. "Jetzt richten wir unsere Augen aber auf den 5. Februar".

Clinton hatte bereits vergangene Woche ihren Wahlkampf in South Carolina praktisch eingestellt und sich ganz auf die bevölkerungsreichen und politisch einflussreichen Bundesstaaten konzentriert, in denen am 5. Februar abgestimmt wird.

Senator John Edwards, der aus South Carolina stammt, kam abgeschlagen auf lediglich 18 Prozent der Stimmen. Trotz des enttäuschenden Abschneides machte er deutlich, dass er nicht aufgebe und seine Kandidatur aufrechterhalten werde.


Rennen ist weiter offen

Der Wahlsieg Obamas fiel weitaus deutlicher aus, als es Umfragen vorausgesagt hatten. "Jetzt kommt es darauf an, wer von den Kandidaten über die meisten Wahlkampfmittel verfügt", sagte ein TV- Kommentator. Clinton hatte bisher im Vorwahlreigen die Abstimmungen in New Hampshire und Nevada gewonnen, Obama lediglich in Iowa.

Allerdings gibt es bereits Experten, die nicht ausschliessen, dass auch nach dem "Super-Dienstag" weiterhin ein Patt zwischen Obama und Clinton herrscht. Offiziell werden die Kandidaten erst auf den Parteitagen der Parteien im Spätsommer gekürt. Die Präsidentenwahl ist am 4.November.

http://www.20min.ch/news/dossier/uswahlen/story/21576119

Nun folgt noch Florida, da bleibt Hillary wohl die Favoritin und nach dem 5. Februar wird man wohl klarer sehen wer das Rennen macht, dann kommen auch die grossen Brocken wie Kalifornien & NYC :)

Op-Ed Contributor

A President Like My Father

By CAROLINE KENNEDY
January 27, 2008

OVER the years, I’ve been deeply moved by the people who’ve told me they wished they could feel inspired and hopeful about America the way people did when my father was president. This sense is even more profound today. That is why I am supporting a presidential candidate in the Democratic primaries, Barack Obama.

My reasons are patriotic, political and personal, and the three are intertwined. All my life, people have told me that my father changed their lives, that they got involved in public service or politics because he asked them to. And the generation he inspired has passed that spirit on to its children. I meet young people who were born long after John F. Kennedy was president, yet who ask me how to live out his ideals.

Sometimes it takes a while to recognize that someone has a special ability to get us to believe in ourselves, to tie that belief to our highest ideals and imagine that together we can do great things. In those rare moments, when such a person comes along, we need to put aside our plans and reach for what we know is possible.

We have that kind of opportunity with Senator Obama. It isn’t that the other candidates are not experienced or knowledgeable. But this year, that may not be enough. We need a change in the leadership of this country — just as we did in 1960.

Most of us would prefer to base our voting decision on policy differences. However, the candidates’ goals are similar. They have all laid out detailed plans on everything from strengthening our middle class to investing in early childhood education. So qualities of leadership, character and judgment play a larger role than usual.

Senator Obama has demonstrated these qualities throughout his more than two decades of public service, not just in the United States Senate but in Illinois, where he helped turn around struggling communities, taught constitutional law and was an elected state official for eight years. And Senator Obama is showing the same qualities today. He has built a movement that is changing the face of politics in this country, and he has demonstrated a special gift for inspiring young people — known for a willingness to volunteer, but an aversion to politics — to become engaged in the political process.

I have spent the past five years working in the New York City public schools and have three teenage children of my own. There is a generation coming of age that is hopeful, hard-working, innovative and imaginative. But too many of them are also hopeless, defeated and disengaged. As parents, we have a responsibility to help our children to believe in themselves and in their power to shape their future. Senator Obama is inspiring my children, my parents’ grandchildren, with that sense of possibility.

Senator Obama is running a dignified and honest campaign. He has spoken eloquently about the role of faith in his life, and opened a window into his character in two compelling books. And when it comes to judgment, Barack Obama made the right call on the most important issue of our time by opposing the war in Iraq from the beginning.

I want a president who understands that his responsibility is to articulate a vision and encourage others to achieve it; who holds himself, and those around him, to the highest ethical standards; who appeals to the hopes of those who still believe in the American Dream, and those around the world who still believe in the American ideal; and who can lift our spirits, and make us believe again that our country needs every one of us to get involved.

I have never had a president who inspired me the way people tell me that my father inspired them. But for the first time, I believe I have found the man who could be that president — not just for me, but for a new generation of Americans.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/opinion/27kennedy.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

:rolleyes

da wird es wohl nicht mehr viel Veränderung geben, ist wohl nur auf der einen Seite spannend:

Republicans in close battle for Florida

McCain, Romney vie for Sunshine State's GOP voters as Clinton leads Obama

By Robert Schroeder, MarketWatch
Last update: 11:49 a.m. EST Jan. 29, 2008Print E-mail RSS Disable Live Quotes

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- Republicans John McCain and Mitt Romney were neck and neck in polls taken ahead of Tuesday's Florida primary, while on the Democratic side Hillary Clinton comfortably led Barack Obama as voters went to the ballot boxes.

In an average of polls compiled by RealClearPolitics, Arizona Sen. McCain was edging out former Massachusetts governor Romney by a hair, 30.7% to 30.1%.

Florida's contest may be make or break for former New York City mayor Rudolph Giuliani, who staked his campaign on winning large numbers of votes from New York-area retirees. But Giuliani is pulling in only 14.9% in the same average of polls. Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee trails with 12.7%.

On the Democratic side, Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York is handily leading rival Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, 47.8% to 29%. Former North Carolina senator John Edwards lags both Obama and Clinton, with 14.4%.

Florida is the last primary to go before Feb. 5's Super Tuesday, when about two dozen states hold primaries or caucuses.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/republicans-close-battle-florida/story.aspx?guid=%7B3A3D7C9B%2DB046%2D4F72%2DA701%2D14469F07B289%7D

und ob die Wahl auf der Seite der Demokraten überhaupt eine Bedeutung hat ist auch noch offen, derzeit ist sie es noch wie auch Michigan da die zwei von der Convention ausgeschlossen wurden. Weil sie ihre Wahltermine ohne Zustimmung der eigenen Partei jeweils vorgezogen haben. Und Giuliani geht unter bevor er wirklich im Wahlkampf war;) :zz

Eins ist klar: aus dem offenen Rennen bei den Republikanern verbleibt nun auch wie bei den Dems einzig noch ein Zweikampf. McCain vs. Romney, die restlichen Kandidaten werden nicht mehr weiter von Bedeutung sein. Eigentlich bis dato alles wenig überaschend :zz

30. Januar 2008, 05:37 Uhr
REPUBLIKANER-VORWAHL

John McCain triumphiert in Florida - Giuliani vor dem Aus

Der Rennen war knapp, am Ende siegte der Gemäßigte: John McCain hat die Vorwahlen der Republikaner im umkämpften US-Bundesstaat Florida knapp vor Mitt Romney gewonnen. Kontrahent Rudy Giuliani erreichte nur 15 Prozent - seine Kandidatur steht vor dem Aus.

Miami - Er führte zunächst nur knapp, aber er gab den Sieg dann nicht mehr aus der Hand. Senator John McCain hat die mit Spannung erwartete Vorwahl der Republikaner in Florida für sich entschieden. Er hatte sich ein spannendes Kopf-an-Kopf-Rennen mit dem Ex-Gouverneur von Massachusetts, Mitt Romney, geliefert - doch dieser musste sich schließlich ein weiteres Mal geschlagen geben.

Nach Auszählung von 96 Prozent der Stimmen liegt McCain mit 36 Prozent vor Romney mit 31 Prozent. McCain bekommt nun 57 Delegiertenstimmen für die Nominierung zum Präsidentschaftskandidaten - die höchste Anzahl aller Vorwahlen der Republikaner bisher. Der Irakkriegsgegner und Vietnamveteran McCain gilt als liberalster unter den republikanischen Kandidaten. Er ist gegen ein Abtreibungsverbot, fordert mehr Rechte für Homosexuelle und setzt sich für die Umwelt ein.

In einer ersten Stellungnahme sagte McCain: "Das Ergebnis zeigt eins: Ich bin die konservative Führungskraft, die die Partei vereinen kann." Der Sieg gebe ihm viel Rückenwind, "aber wir haben noch eine harte Woche und viele Staaten vor uns".

Seine Unterstützer empfingen ihn am Abend mit "Mac is back"-Rufen. "Ich danke euch von ganzem Herzen", erwiderte McCain. Seinen Konkurrenten zollte er Respekt, auch seinem Erzrivalen Romney. "Die Stimmen, die uns heute voneinander trennten, geben mir nicht das Recht, mich damit zu brüsten - und seinen Anhängern keinen Grund zu verzweifeln."

McCain hat sich nun in eine optimale Ausgangsposition für den "Super Tuesday" in der kommenden Woche gebracht. Bei den dann anstehenden Vorwahlen und Wählerversammlungen in mehr als 20 US-Bundesstaaten ist bereits eine Vorentscheidung möglich. Dann stehen 1023 Delegiertenstimmen auf dem Spiel - für eine Nominierung zum Präsidentschaftskandidaten auf dem Parteitag im Sommer sind 1191 Stimmen nötig. McCain hat nun 93 Stimmen gesammelt, Romney 59, Huckabee 40 und Giuliani 1.

Mitt Romney zeigte sich enttäuscht über seine neue Niederlage. Die einzige Vorwahl, die er für sich entscheiden konnte, war die in seinem Heimatstaat Michigan. Er gewann außerdem die Caucuses in Wyoming und Nevada. In einer Rede vor seinen Anhängern in St. Petersburg brachte er sich abermals als Wirtschaftsexperten ins Spiel - und machte sich ein Thema der Demokraten zu Eigen: "Wir müssen etwas in Washington ändern, und der Wandel beginnt mit uns.":hihi :hihi :hihi

Umfragen zufolge profitierte McCain von der Zustimmung gemäßigter Republikaner, Latinos und älterer Wähler. Romney hingegen punktete bei Menschen, die sich gegen Abtreibung und einfachere Einbürgerung illegaler Einwanderer aussprechen. Als wichtigste Themen nannten die Befragten die Entwicklung der Wirtschaft (fast 50 Prozent), den Kampf gegen den Terror, den Irak-Krieg und den Bereich Immigration. Mehr als die Hälfte der Wähler in Florida, das als Rentnerstaat bekannt ist, ist den Angaben zufolge älter als 65 Jahre.

Romney und McCain hatten sich in der vergangenen Woche einen harten Schlagabtausch geliefert. Romney hatte seine Erfahrungen als Manager in Zeiten drohender Rezession geltend gemacht. McCain dagegen hatte erwidert, sein ökonomisches Wissen sei bestens, zudem sei er durch seine militärische Karriere und seine Laufbahn im Kongress geeignet, das Land in Zeiten des Terrors zu führen.

Der frühere New Yorker Bürgermeister Rudy Giuliani, der nach seinem bisherigen schlechten Abschneiden bei den Abstimmungen über den republikanischen Präsidentschaftskandidaten dringend einen Sieg benötigte, kam auf nur 15 Prozent. Er hatte seinen Wahlkampf auf Florida konzentriert. Diese Strategie hatten Experten stets als hochriskant kritisiert, nun scheint Giuliani gescheitert. Einer seiner Mitarbeiter sagte, Giuliani werde seinen Wählern für die Vorwahl in Kalifornien am kommenden Mittwoch McCain empfehlen. Das deutet darauf hin, dass sich Giuliani aus dem Rennen zurückzieht.

Der einstige Baptistenprediger Mike Huckabee kommt bislang auf 14 Prozent. Er hatte die Vorwahl in Iowa überraschend gewonnen, seinen Erfolg aber in weiteren Staaten nicht wiederholen können. Er will aber weiterkämpfen. Der vierte Bewerber, Ron Paul, liegt bei drei Prozent:schwitz :hihi und dürfte aus dem Rennen sein.

Bei den Demokraten hat die Entscheidung keinen Einfluss auf den Prozess der Kandidatenfindung. Zwar gewann hier Senatorin Hillary Clinton das Rennen. Sie liegt nach Auszählung von 96 Prozent der Stimmen bei 50 Prozent, während Kontrahent Barack Obama 33 Prozent erhielt. Auf John Edwards entfallen 14 Prozent.

Delegiertenstimmen bekommt Clinton dafür allerdings nicht. Die Parteiführung hatte Florida alle Stimmen gestrichen, weil sich die dortige Demokratische Partei über die Anordnung hinweggesetzt hatte, die Vorwahl frühestens am 5. Februar anzusetzen. Daraufhin verpflichteten sich alle demokratischen Bewerber, in Florida auf jeglichen Wahlkampf zu verzichten. Zu Beginn der Woche hatte sich der einflussreiche Senator Edward Kennedy noch offiziell hinter Clintons schärfsten Konkurrenten gestellt, Barack Obama.

Vor jubelnden Anhängern in der Stadt Davie dankte Hillary Clinton ihren Wählern. Auch wenn die Delegiertenstimmen in Florida nicht gezählt würden, sei das Votum aus dem Bundesstaat extrem wichtig. "Ich nehme eure Stimmen mit, eure Sorgen, eure Hoffnungen und Träume", rief sie den Zuhörern zu. "Amerika ist zurück, und wir nehmen unser Schicksal wieder selbst in die Hand."

ffr/AP/dpa

URL:
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,531938,00.html

http://images.ucomics.com/comics/crmlu/2008/crmlu080129.gif ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgbQviUqndg

Mitt Romney


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0rju8nswws

CBS asks Ted Kennedy if he fears Obama assasination

(http://maruthecrankpot.blogspot.com/2008/01/mittsurfing.html)

Aus dem Dreikampf wird ein Zweikampf, dies noch vor dem 5. Februar womit sich zumindest wohl bei den Demokraten kein Patt mehr ergeben dürfte.

Edwards to quit presidential race

By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 55 minutes ago

Democrat John Edwards is exiting the presidential race Wednesday, ending a scrappy underdog bid in which he steered his rivals toward progressive ideals while grappling with family hardship that roused voter's sympathies but never diverted his campaign, The Associated Press has learned.

The two-time White House candidate notified a close circle of senior advisers that he planned to make the announcement at a 1 p.m. EST event in New Orleans that had been billed as a speech on poverty, according to two of his advisers. The decision came after Edwards lost the four states to hold nominating contests so far to rivals who stole the spotlight from the beginning — Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama.

Noch hat er sich nicht geäussert wen nun seine Anhänger wählen sollen.

Und noch einer, wie erwartet :cool

Giuliani quits, says McCain is best qualified for president

By Rex Nutting
Last update: 6:19 p.m. EST Jan. 30, 2008

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani ended his quest for the presidency Wednesday and threw his support to Arizona Sen. John McCain. In an appearance with McCain at the Reagan Library in California, Giuliani said McCain was "the best prepared to be president of the United States at a time of great peril." Giuliani was once considered the front-runner for the Republican nomination based on polling and fund-raising, but was unable to translate that lead into votes. McCain, on the other hand, had nearly run out of money and his dreams for the White House were given almost no chance before he emerged as the leader in the race to succeed President Bush with dramatic victories in New Hampshire, South Carolina and Florida.

:rolleyes

Vietnam Veterans Against McCain

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFM1xqqTX_g

Die Kommentare haben etwas, das heisst der Grossteil darunter. Andere US-Veteranen sehen das wohl anders:

AverageVoter (11 hours ago)

Wow! I hope most of the people who have typed responses here never get called for jury duty. The general theme seems to be that just because someone makes a movie and says something like "we have heard reports," or "we have information" everyone jumps to the conclusion not only that there are transcripts, but that they contain embarrassing material; which of course, is the reason some government agency is keeping them secret. Give me a break.

:hihi :hihi :hihi

Hillary Clinton's Ruthless Campaign

By Steven Rosenfeld, AlterNet
January 31, 2008

Democrats have long complained that they need a presidential candidate who knows how to fight and win.

On Tuesday night, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, flew to Florida for a "victory rally" in a state that was awarding no delegates, because it was penalized by national party officials for holding an unauthorized early primary. Last summer, she and the other candidates pledged not to campaign in the Sunshine State. Still, Clinton held the rally, declaring victory on national television. Millions of people in the 22 states who will vote next Tuesday probably saw her, not knowing the Florida vote was moot. And in Florida, Clinton pledged to seat its delegates at the Democratic National Convention.

"Hillary won the highest turnout Democratic primary in Florida history," her website gushed, on a page giving daily talking points to supporters. "Hillary received more votes in Florida than Sen. (John) McCain, the winner of the Republican primary. Hillary also received more votes in Florida alone than Sen. (Barack) Obama received in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina."

If Clinton's boast makes you grimace -- she also charged that Sen. Barack Obama, D-IL, was first to break the DNC's no-campaigning pledge by running a national cable ad that was seen in Florida and by getting good press after winning big in South Carolina -- then these brazen moves give a very clear view of Clinton's leadership style. Regardless of her center-left positions on issues, Hillary Clinton is fighting to win.

In fact, there may be no better illustration of the divide-and-conquer style of politics that Obama seeks to overcome than the tactics of his most aggressive rival, Hillary Clinton.

"The (Florida) vote turned out to be more than symbolic," Mark Penn, Clinton's chief strategist said in an e-mail Tuesday night, spinning the result. "Well over 1.5 million Democrats cast their ballots, more than twice the number of voters who came out to vote in the 2004 primary. Most of the voters in Florida fully expect that their votes will not be wasted again -- they (expect) to have a voice at the convention, and Hillary has asked her delegates to support their being seated."

Penn omitted any mention of labor union organizing for Clinton in Florida, which could be construed as a violation of the no-campaigning pledge. In contrast, Obama did not use major surrogates in the state. While no campaign can control all of its supporters, candidate Obama stayed away.

Such finessing of the nominating process was not Clinton's first attempt to win delegates with the help of state party officials. In New Hampshire, Democratic officials helped to block Obama volunteers from observing who signed in to vote at precincts -- thwarting their get-out-the-vote efforts. In Nevada, party officials turned away blue-collar voters at precincts in Las Vegas casinos that were thought to be Obama strongholds, informing clearly upset voters they had to work an afternoon shift that day to participate. Clinton's campaign also gave out a manual telling precinct captains to lock caucus doors a half-hour early. Obama's campaign formally complained to party officials.

But the Clinton campaign does more than bend the rules. It also knows how to distort the results to declare it is en route to winning the nomination. In Nevada, state party officials announced Clinton won the popular vote among its caucus-goers, and the national media duly reported she won the state. But that afternoon, it became clear that Obama actually had won one more delegate than Clinton. There was no correction by party officials. The media mostly reported she won, confusing the popular vote with the delegate count.

The same spinning was used in Florida, where Penn staged a victory rally after the vote -- even though exit polls found voters who had not turned in early ballots were nearly split between Clinton and Obama.

"This result comes after Senator Obama ran TV commercials that reached Florida homes and after the enormous publicity he received for South Carolina and for the Ted Kennedy endorsement," Penn said in his statement that painted the no-delegate state into a major victory while smearing Obama's gains. "Any (Obama) momentum seemed to run out today."

Seasoned and cynical political observers will say presidential politics is not for anyone who is naïve enough to run purely on principle. They say it is not about being honest; it is about winning. And they say the Democratic nominating contest will be a cakewalk compared to the contest with Republicans in the fall, necessitating a strong and seasoned candidate to retake the presidency.

But the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination is no ordinary contest. Obama is running a principle-based, grassroots campaign that rejects established and cynical Washington ways of campaigning to win. So far, Obama's appeal to bring out the best in Americans based on shared common interests has been successful attracting new voters, from young people to independents to Republicans. In short, his run threatens the Democratic careerists who have lined up for Clinton.

Just look at the response by New York NOW to Obama's endorsement by Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-MA, where the local affiliate of the National Organization for Women accused Kennedy of "betraying women" by not standing with Clinton. That was an outburst by a longtime Clinton ally that seeks to share in the spoils after their candidate claws their way to victory, by any means necessary.

Hillary Clinton may be the ruthless campaigner that Democrats lacked in the past two presidential elections. She may know what it takes to win and is deliberately moving toward the nomination step-by-step, manipulating the process on the way. The question raised by the Obama campaign, however, is whether that slippery style of politics is where Democrats -- and Americans -- want to go.

http://www.alternet.org/story/75523/

Köstlich :hihi ! Man mag vom Spiegel halten was man will, aber der eine oder andere hat eine Feder die selbst harte "Politfights" mit etwas Ironie passend abschmeckt...

AUFTRITT IN HOLLYWOOD

Neues Drehbuch für das Demokraten-Traumpaar

Aus Los Angeles berichtet Gregor Peter Schmitz

Wenige Tage vor dem wichtigsten Abstimmungstag der US-Vorwahlen sind Experten ratlos, ob Barack Obama oder Hillary Clinton die Nase vorn hat. Beim letzten TV-Duell starteten beide eine Charmeoffensive - als mögliches Traum-Team wollen sie deswegen aber noch lange nicht gelten.

Los Angeles - Die Vorwahlen der US-Demokraten sind eigentlich ein ewig langer Fortsetzungsfilm. Mehr als ein Jahr streckt der sich schon, mit jeder Menge Episoden: 17 TV-Debatten, Hunderte Wahlkampfreden, Tausende Werbespots. Ein Nebendarsteller nach dem anderen scheidet dahin - und jetzt, endlich, sind zwei Hauptdarsteller übrig: der junge Held, der ein Hoffnungsträger ist. Die Charakterdarstellerin, die schon in vielen Rollen brilliert hat.

Barack Obama. Hillary Clinton. Der erste aussichtsreiche schwarze Bewerber, die erste ernsthafte weibliche Bewerberin. In Hollywood würde man so was ein "Dream Couple" nennen, ein Traumpaar eben.

Deshalb ist nur passend, dass Obama und Clinton gestern Abend am Beginn ihrer ersten Zweier-Debatte auf der Bühne des Kodak Theatre im Herzen Hollywoods stehen. Es ist ein gewaltiger Stein-Tempel, den sich die Traumfabrik für historische Momente gebaut hat. In rund drei Wochen verleihen sie hier wieder die Oscars. In den Zuschauerreihen sitzen Warren Beatty, Pierce Brosnan, Steven Spielberg.

Die ganze Welt umarmt

Doch schon nach ein paar Minuten ist klar: Hier wird heute kein neues Drehbuch geschrieben, und keine Rolle neu besetzt. Dafür sorgt Barack Obama. 90 Sekunden hat der für seine Eröffnungsbemerkungen, und er schafft es, darin die ganze Welt rhetorisch zu umarmen. Zu der gehört - Rivalin Clinton. "Ich bin mit Hillary Clinton vor Beginn dieses Wahlkampfes befreundet gewesen", sagt der Senator und strahlt sie an, "und ich werde danach mit ihr befreundet sein. Weil wir beide dieses Land lieben."

In den vorigen Tagen war Obama unter Beschuss geraten, weil er Clinton bei George W. Bushs Rede zur Lage der Nation nicht die Hand geschüttelt hatte. Die gab eigens ein Fernsehinterview, in dem sie betonte, leider vergeblich die Hand ausgestreckt zu haben. Sie wollte ihn nachtragend aussehen lassen, und kleinlich. Sie wollte mit aller Macht den Aufwärtstrend stoppen, den Obama durch seinen triumphalen Sieg in South Carolina und die öffentliche Unterstützung von Demokraten-Legenden wie Ted Kennedy erfuhr - in der Woche vor dem wichtigen "Super-Tuesday" am 5. Februar, wenn gleich 22 US-Bundesstaaten abstimmen.

Doch Obama lächelt diese Taktik einfach weg. So charmant-zahm tritt er auf, dass der CNN-Moderator nach einer Dreiviertelstunde fast entnervt zu einer etwas unklaren Obama-Bemerkung fragt: "War das jetzt gerade ein Seitenhieb auf Clinton?". "Nein, natürlich nicht", beteuert Obama und streckt den Arm freundschaftlich zur Gegnerin aus. Etwas später bohrt der Moderator erneut nach möglicher Kritik, aber nun gucken sich gar beide Bewerber nur an und lächeln: "Wir haben doch eine wundervolle Zeit hier."

Die neue Herzlichkeit lässt zum ersten Mal seit langem Zeit für echte Politik-Debatten. Die Rivalen reden über ihre Pläne zur Krankenversicherung für alle Amerikaner. Ein wichtiges Thema in einem Land, in dem 47 Millionen Menschen ohne Versicherungsschutz leben. Zu 95 Prozent seien ihre Vorschläge identisch, meint Obama - aber er wolle arme Menschen nicht zwingen, sich zu versichern, er wolle ihnen Geld geben, damit sie es sich leisten können. Clinton hält entschlossen dagegen: "Wir Demokraten müssen für eine Pflicht-Krankenversicherung für alle Amerikaner eintreten, sonst verwässert die Gesundheitslobby unsere Pläne." Sie zitiert Studien, sie jongliert Zahlen. Ihre Position zur Gesundheitspolitik ist besser zu erklären als die von Obama.

Dann reden die Rivalen über Irak. Clinton hat im Senat für den Krieg gestimmt, Obama hat früh eine flammende Rede gegen den "dummen, den falschen Krieg" gehalten. Clinton gibt zu bedenken, niemand habe vorhersehen können, wie Präsident Bush ihre Unterstützung missbrauchen würde. Doch Obama lässt das nicht gelten: "Es war eine Stimme für den Krieg. Senatorin Clinton mag behaupten, sie habe mehr Erfahrung, um vom ersten Tag an zu regieren. Aber es ist wichtiger, vom ersten Tag an das Richtige zu tun." Seine Position zu Irak ist weit besser zu erklären als die von Clinton.

Fröhliches Dauerlächeln

Sie kabbeln sich sanft zur Einwanderungspolitik, die wichtig ist in Kalifornien mit seiner gewaltigen Latino-Bevölkerung. Wer hat nun was gesagt zu Führerscheinen für illegale Einwanderer, die Obama will und sie nicht? "Hillary hat eine Weile gebraucht, um dazu eine Position zu finden", stichelt er ein wenig. "Du konntest die Frage auch nicht beantworten", kontert sie. Doch dann lächeln sie beide schon wieder. Sie sind sich ja einig: Sündenböcke für die miese Wirtschaftslage dürfen die illegalen Einwanderer nicht werden.

Denn eigentlich, so scheint die Marschroute, haben beide die Augen ja bereits auf den möglichen republikanischen Gegner gerichtet. Der könnte John McCain heißen, der moderate Senator aus Arizona - in Umfragen schneidet der gegen beide Demokraten erstaunlich gut ab. Also übertreffen sie sich in hämischen Bemerkungen über McCain, der Bushs desaströse Steuersenkungen unterstütze und noch 100 Jahre im Irak bleiben wolle. Und der andere republikanische Bewerber Mitt Romney, der die USA als ein Unternehmen beschreibt und seine Erfahrung als Geschäftsmann betont? "Wir hatten mit Bush doch gerade erst einen Business-Typen im Weißen Haus", sagt Clinton und fügt hinzu: "Ich war mit dem Ergebnis nicht so zufrieden!" Das Publikum jubelt.

Rätselhafte Kuscheldebatte

Nur: Eigentlich geht es ja noch um den Zweikampf bei den Demokraten. Und was heißt diese Kuschel-Debatte nun für den? Darüber rätseln unmittelbar nach dem 90-Minuten-Austausch die Experten in den Fernsehstudios, auf den Blogs und in den Chatrooms. Wirft die plötzliche Harmonie Obama zurück, weil sein Plädoyer für Wandel dadurch entkräftet wird? Schadet ihr, dass ihre wacklige Irak-Haltung wieder eine Rolle spielte? Wer profitiert, wenn beide Hauptdarsteller liebenswert, führungsstark, kompetent wirken? Die vielen Experten reden und schreiben jede Menge - "aber eigentlich weiß keiner etwas", gibt Journalistenlegende und Watergate-Enthüller Carl Bernstein auf CNN offen zu.

Der 5. Februar könnte eine wichtige Vorentscheidung bringen. In Umfragen führt Clinton in vielen der 22 Vorwahlstaaten. Aber Obama holt auf - und gestern schockte er Clinton mit der Nachricht, allein im Januar 32 Millionen Dollar Wahlkampfspenden gesammelt zu haben, ein neuer Rekord.

Also könnte sich der erbitterte Kampf noch weit länger hinziehen. Und damit würde ein anderes mögliches "Happy End" in der Clinton/Obama-Saga immer unwahrscheinlicher. Dass deren Film irgendwie selbst nach den Vorwahlen weitergeht und beide noch eine Rolle spielen. Als Kandidaten für das Amt des US-Präsidenten und Vizepräsidenten. So ein "Dream Couple" würde alle Zielgruppen erreichen: die Jungen, die Alten, die Schwarzen, die Weißen. Wähler, die einen erfahrenen Kandidaten wollen, und Wähler, die einen inspirierenden wünschen.

Viele Demokraten träumen von diesem Drehbuch-Kniff. Allein, die Hauptdarsteller zieren sich natürlich beharrlich. Der CNN-Moderator fragt ganz am Schluss offen danach. Obama sagt, das sei gar kein Thema, es gehe doch um Wandel. Clinton sagt: "Ich kann ihm nur in allem zustimmen."

Zumindest bis Dienstag.

URL:
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,532466,00.html

...wäre wirklich einfach :supi nur wer Pres/Vice :confused es müsste so was wie "ein Jahr er/sie - ein Jahr sie/er" geben ;):D

Der Anfang vom Ende eines der zwei Kronfavoriten auf Seiten der GOP ;) ?

Romney aims for a split in California

By GLEN JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer
Sat Feb 2, 2:00 AM ET


DENVER - Republican Mitt Romney is conceding the bulk of the Northeast to rival John McCain, counting instead on his home state of Massachusetts, a split in California and wins in a series of caucus states to extend his presidential campaign beyond Super Tuesday.

Missing from Romney's latest campaign schedule were winner-take-all states of New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, which account for 180 of the 1,023 delegates at stake. The omissions were telling with voting in 21 GOP contests on Tuesday.

The former Massachusetts governor was in Colorado Friday and planned to attend the funeral of Mormon church President Gordon B. Hinckley on Saturday in Utah. Romney also scheduled campaign events in Minnesota, Illinois, Missouri, Tennessee, Georgia and West Virginia before arriving home Tuesday.

Colorado and Minnesota are caucuses states where a grass-roots effort could help secure a win, while West Virginia will award its delegates at a convention Romney plans to address before flying to Massachusetts to both vote and await the returns.

Romney has also deployed four of his five sons to Maine, Montana and Idaho, which hold caucuses on Saturday and Tuesday, and Alaska, which has a party convention on Tuesday.

If he fails to capture enough delegates to offset McCain's likely wins in other states and strong showing in California, where the Arizona senator has the backing of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Romney could end his campaign in Boston on Wednesday.

During a news conference Friday outside a Ford dealership here, he passed up three opportunities to declare he would carry on if he fails to surpass McCain in the Super Tuesday voting.

"I really thought it would all be over, you know, early in January, and now we're going to go into February, and I just can't predict what will happen in February," he said, "so we'll see what happens."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080202/ap_on_el_pr/romney

Super Tuesday - Super Staates :sss

McCain has edge in GOP, polls say

Steven Thomma, McClatchy Newspapers

Republican John McCain leads in all four corners of the country heading into a rush of primaries Tuesday, while Democrats Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama were locked in a close struggle for delegates coast to coast, according to a new series of McClatchy-MSNBC polls.
With many Republican contests winner-take-all delegate bonanzas, the surveys suggest that McCain could emerge with a commanding lead for the Republican nomination.

The regional taste of the 22 Democratic contests suggests that Clinton and Obama will carve up the country, each emerging with a big block of delegates and the nomination far from clear.

And in each of these regional bellwether states, at least 10 percent of Democratic voters remained undecided.

"For the Republicans, McCain is clearly the front-runner. He's ahead in every state," said Brad Coker, the managing partner of Mason-Dixon Polling & Research, which conducted the nine polls.

"For the Democrats, [Clinton's] ahead everywhere except Georgia. But the leads aren't so big that it's a slam-dunk."

Indeed, as primaries have shown throughout this volatile year, the actual vote can differ greatly from polls as voters change their minds or surge to the vote in numbers that overwhelm expectations.

ROMNEY WINS MAINE

Mitt Romney coasted to a win in presidential preference voting by Maine Republicans on Saturday, claiming his third victory in a caucus state and fourth overall. He had 52 percent of the vote with 68 percent of the towns holding caucuses reporting.
John McCain trailed with 21 percent, Ron Paul was third with 19 percent, and Mike Huckabee had 6 percent. Undecided votes accounted for 2 percent. The nonbinding votes are the first step to electing 18 Maine delegates

DEMOCRATIC RACES

ARIZONA
Clinton, 43 percent
Obama, 41 percent
undecided, 13 percent

CALIFORNIA
Clinton, 45 percent
Obama, 36 percent
undecided, 16 percent

GEORGIA
Obama, 47 percent
Clinton, 41 percent
undecided, 10 percent

MISSOURI
Clinton, 47 percent
Obama, 41 percent
undecided, 10 percent

NEW JERSEY
Clinton, 46 percent
Obama, 39 percent
undecided, 12 percent

REPUBLICAN RACES

CALIFORNIA
McCain, 40 percent
Romney, 31 percent
Huckabee, 13 percent
Ron Paul, 3 percent
undecided, 11 percent

GEORGIA
McCain, 33 percent
Romney, 27 percent
Huckabee, 18 percent
Paul, 4 percent
undecided, 17 percent

MISSOURI
McCain, 37 percent
Huckabee, 27 percent
Romney, 24 percent
Paul, 1 percent
undecided, 11 percent

NEW JERSEY
McCain, 46 percent
Romney, 31 percent
Huckabee, 5 percent
Paul, 4 percent
undecided, 12 percent

conducted by telephone Jan. 30-Feb. 1. The margin of error was plus or minus five percentage points.
http://www.newsobserver.com/politics/story/920176.html

Alle diese Vorwahlen sind bei den Demokraten Proporzwahlen, bei der GOP "winner takes it all", da zählt einzig der Sieg und sonst nichts ;)

Eines steht für mich schon vor dem 5. Februar fest: McCaine wird der Kandidat der GOP sein im Herbst, möglicherweise mit einem Vize Giuliani. Huckabee und Paul sind in der Bedeutungslosigkeit angekommen, endgültig.

Bei den Demokraten könnte es dagegen selbst nach dem 5. Februar noch offen sein und so bleiben bis auch Ohio und Texas am 4. März folgen :verbeug

03. Februar 2008

SUPER TUESDAY

Obama und Clinton liefern sich Kopf-an-Kopf-Rennen

Washington - Das Rennen zwischen den demokratischen Präsidentschaftsbewerbern Barack Obama und Hillary Clinton wird neuen Umfragen zufolge immer spannender. Zwei Tage vor dem Super Tuesday hat der Senator seine Konkurrentin in vielen Bundesstaaten eingeholt - und in Kalifornien überholt.

Nach einer Umfrage von Reuters/C-Span/Zogby führt Obama in Kalifornien knapp vor Clinton und liegt in New Jersey und Missouri praktisch gleichauf mit seiner Konkurrentin. Man könne fast sicher sein, dass das Rennen zwischen Obama und Clinton zu eng ist, als dass am Dienstag eine Vorentscheidung über den Gesamtsieger bei den Demokraten falle, sagt Meinungsforscher John Zogby.

Einen deutlichen Vorsprung hat Barack Obama auf Clinton demnach in Georgia - er liegt vor allem bei den schwarzen Wählern klar vor seiner Konkurrentin.

Bei den Republikanern liegt der Umfrage zufolge John McCain in New York, New Jersey und Missouri mit einem zweistelligen Vorsprung vor seinem Konkurrenten Mitt Romney. In Kalifornien ist das Rennen zwischen den beiden indes knapp. Dort führt Romney mit 37 Prozent vor McCain, der auf 34 Prozent kommt. Die Fehlerquote der Umfrage liegt bei 2,9 Prozent.

Bei einer landesweiten Umfrage des Instituts Gallup unter republikanischen Wählern kam Mitt Romney nur auf 24 Prozent, während sich 44 Prozent für McCain aussprachen. Dritter war der ehemalige Baptistenpfarrer Huckabee mit 16 Prozent.

Bei den Demokraten sah die Gallup-Umfrage die New Yorker Senatorin Clinton mit 48 Prozent vor Obama mit 41 Prozent. Damit hat der Senator aus Illinois seinen Rückstand innerhalb einer Woche um acht Prozent verkürzt.

Ähnlich ist das Ergebnis einer "Washington Post"/ABC-Umfrage: In der Befragung sprachen sich 47 Prozent der demokratischen Wähler für Clinton und 43 Prozent für Obama aus.

Unterdessen hat im Rennen um die Präsidentschaftskandidatur der Republikaner Mitt Romney die letzte Abstimmung vor dem Super Tuesday für sich entschieden.

Romney gewann am Samstag die Wählerversammlung im US-Staat Maine mit 52 Prozent der Stimmen. Das Ergebnis hat aber zunächst nur symbolischen Wert, da die 18 Delegierten für den Nominierungsparteitag der Republikaner erst später bestimmt werden. Die drei anderen Bewerber der Republikaner wurden von Romney deutlich distanziert: Der in der Gesamtwertung führende Senator John McCain kam nach vorläufigen Ergebnissen auf 21 Prozent, Ron Paul auf 19 und Mike Huckabee auf 6 Prozent.

Romney sagte, die Abstimmung in Maine sei ein gutes Vorzeichen für die Abstimmungen am Dienstag, wenn bei den Republikanern Wahlen und Wählerversammlungen in 21 Staaten anstehen.

Die New Yorker Senatorin Clinton hat ihren Konkurrenten Obama während ihres Wahlkampfs in Kalifornien scharf attackiert: In dem größten der 22 Staaten, in denen die Demokraten am Dienstag über ihren Favoriten für die Präsidentschaftskandidatur entscheiden, warf sie Obama vor, dass dieser im Unterschied zu ihr keine allgemeine Gesundheitsversicherung anstrebe.

"Ich glaube, dass ich mich bewährt habe und bin bereit, die Wirtschaft zu retten, die Republikaner zu besiegen und Oberbefehlshaber zu sein", sagte Clinton weiter. Die USA könne es sich nicht leisten, wie bei der Wahl von George W. Bush jemanden zu wählen und hinterher von dessen Entscheidungen überrascht zu sein. "Die beste Art das zu verhindern, ist eine Kandidatin, die uns sagt, was sie tun wird", so die Senatorin aus New York. Obama sei in seinen Ankündigungen hingegen "undeutlich" geblieben.

Obama trat gestern im Staat Idaho auf, wo er versuchte, die Bedenken von zwei einflussreichen Wählergruppen zu zerstreuen: Er versicherte, dass er an Jesus glaube, und erklärte, dass er nicht die Absicht habe, den Bürgern ihre Schusswaffen wegzunehmen.

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,532793,00.html

Obama & Clinton Deadlocked in Massachusetts

2/4/2008

Barack Obama (46 percent) leads Hillary Clinton (44 percent) by a razor-thin margin among likely Democratic voters, according to a poll released today by 7NEWS/Suffolk University. Seven percent of Democratic and independent voters were undecided. However, 27 percent of Democratic voters and 24 percent of Republican voters say they may change their minds before tomorrow.

Obama was strong among men (49 percent-to-30 percent), independents (43 percent-to-35 percent), in Middlesex & Essex counties (46 percent-to-36 percent) and among voters ages 18-45 years (55 percent-to-31 percent). Clinton’s areas of strength contrasted sharply with Obama’s: She led among women (52 percent-to-35 percent), in the Worcester/West area (52 percent-to-34 percent) and among voters ages 66 years and up (59 percent-to-26 percent).

http://www.suffolk.edu/26798.html

Wird wohl wirklich die spannendste Vorwahl die es seit langem gab, plus/minus 2-3% ist schlicht in jeglicher statistischen Fehlerquote drin und bei der Anzahl an noch nicht festgelegten Wählern bedeutungslos. Nur eines ist klar: Obama hat deutlich aufgeholt zur Vorwoche und die Wahrscheinlichkeit dass sich bei den Demokraten am 5. Februar noch nichts entscheidet wird immer grösser...

@syr :) just for fun ;):hihi

:hihi :hihi

wow, whats happening.. record turnouts everywhere

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4409992

Clinton, Obama Split States, Delegates

Obama Wins Kan, Ill., Ga., Ala., Del., N.D., Minn., Conn., Colo., Mo., Idaho & Utah

Clinton Takes Ark., Okla., Tenn., Mass., N.J., N.Y. & Ariz.

McCain Racks Up Big State Victories

McCain Wins N.J., N.Y., Okla., Conn., Ill., Del. & Ariz.

Huckabee Takes W.Va., Ark., Ala., Tenn. & Ga.

Romney Wins Mass., Utah, N.D., Minn., Mon. & Colo.

Noch offen Kalifornien :)

Total Delegate Count

Democrats | 2,025 Needed to Clinch
CLINTON 740
OBAMA 629

Republicans | 1,191 Needed to Clinch
MCCAIN 415
ROMNEY 128
HUCKABEE 117

http://www.cbsnews.com/

Nachdem alles ausgezählt ist und die Delegierten verteilt wird das Bild auf der einen Seite klarer, auf der anderen noch weniger.


Bei der GOP ist McCain praktisch durch die Ziellinie und Romney ist wohl der grosse Verlierer des Super Tuesdays, Huckabee hat ihm dazu ein paar Staaten zuviel abgenommen.

Dagegen ist es bei den Demokraten beinahe das perfekte Patt, einzig durch die Superdelegierten hat Clinton die Nase vorn. Dagegen liegt sie bei den durch das Volk gewählten hinter Obama. Clinton hatte eigentlich Glück mit New York und Kalifornien zwei Schwergewichte gewonnen zu haben, ansonsten sähe das Bild wesentlich anders aus...

Clinton lends her campaign $5 million

By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer
10 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Hillary Rodham Clinton loaned her campaign $5 million late last month as Barack Obama outraised and outspent her in the Democratic presidential race.

"The loan illustrates Senator Clinton's commitment to this effort and to ensuring that our campaign has the resources it needs to compete and win across this nation," Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson said.

Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign, lagging far behind Barack Obama's fundraising this year, expects to be outspent by Obama in upcoming Democratic nominating contests just as it was in Feb. 5 states, her strategists conceded Wednesday.

Officials with both campaigns have said Obama raised $32 million in January and that Clinton raised $13.5 million, a significant gap between the two that allowed Obama to place ads in virtually every Super Tuesday state and to get a head start on advertising in primaries and caucuses over the next week.

In a teleconference with reporters, Clinton chief strategist Mark Penn said Clinton was having a "record day" raising money over the Internet on Wednesday.

"We will have funds to compete," he said, "but we're likely to be outspent again."............

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080206/ap_on_el_pr/campaign_money

:rolleyes

GOP sources: Romney to suspend campaign

(CNN) -- Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney will suspend his bid for the Republican presidential nomination, GOP sources tell CNN.

http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/2008/POLITICS/02/07/romney.campaign/art.romney.gi.jpg Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is expected to suspend his campaign Thursday, sources say.

A candidate may "suspend" his or her campaign rather than dropping out, and technically remain a candidate. In this case, he or she is entitled to keep any statewide pledged delegates as well as their district-level delegates.

Candidates who officially drop out must forfeit statewide delegates.

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/07/romney.campaign/index.html

Obama Campaign Raises More Than $6 million Post Super Tuesday

By Sarah Lai Stirland http://blog.wired.com/images/icon_email.gif (stirland@gmail.com)February 06, 2008 | 1:58:12 AMCategories: Election '08 (http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/election_08/index.html)


Illinois senator Barack Obama raised more than $6 million since the polls closed (http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/samgrahamfelsen/CGGpp) on Super Tuesday, matching the one-day fund-raising record (http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/12/ron-paul-suppor.html)set by Texas Republican congressman Ron Paul in December.

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/images/2008/02/06/obama_300x.jpg (http://blog.wired.com/.shared/image.html?/photos/uncategorized/2008/02/06/obama_300x.jpg)

That's according to a widget on Obama's blog (http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/samgrahamfelsen/CGGpp), which as of 10.27 pm Wednesday night showed that the senator's campaign had raised $6.23 million. The widget is updated almost instantaneously as donations pour in.

Supporters responded to a late afternoon fund-raising e-mail sent out by Obama campaign manager David Plouffe that said that the campaign had raised $3 million post Super Tuesday, but that the it needed to match the $5 million that rival Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had loaned her own campaign in January.

That $5 million was made to supplement the $13 million that Clinton raised that month. Obama raised more than double that amount with $32 million -- the majority of which came through the Internet.

Plouffe said in his e-mail that 650,000 people in all have donated to Obama's campaign.

The two candidates are deadlocked in a heat (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/07/us/politics/07campaign.html?hp) in the contest to win the Democratic nomination for president, and they need to campaign and advertise extensively in the upcoming primaries (http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P08/events.phtml?s=c) to give themselves a decisive edge.

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/02/obama-campaign.html

...also ich stell das einfach mal rein :rolleyes keine Ahnung ob's Hand und Fuss hat :confused

California Election Fraud

They did not count one vote!

Silver Stock Report

by Jason Hommel, February 8, 2008

"And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God." --Romans 8:28

This is truly frightening. I've not been more concerned and upset than I was in 1998, when I first learned about the biochip implants that exist that could be used to enforce the mark of the beast of Revelation 13.

The California Election results are totally fraudulent, no question about it. They did not count one vote! And it's easy for anyone to see, look at the election results by district, in all 53 districts:

http://vote.ss.ca.gov/Returns/rcd/index.htm

I don't believe the election results, because the results are essentially the same in every district in the entire State of California.....

full story: http://silverstockreport.com/2008/california_fraud.html

Die Frage ist nur wer hat etwas davon, vorallem da sowohl auf Seiten der Demokraten wie auch der GOP von "Wahlbetrug" gesprochen wird. Vom Gesetz her ist es keiner, da ist die Sprache klar: man hat sich vor der Wahl zu registrieren und wer dies unterlassen hat war nicht wahlberechtigt. Und ich halte es für einen sehr gefährlichen Trend für eine Demokratie jede Wahl immer gleich als Betrug zu bezeichen. Denn ohne Wahl, oder ohne ausreichende Wahlbeteiligung, ist es dann wirklich nur noch ein kleiner Schritt zur Diktatur.


Da nunmehr aber eigentlich nur noch 3 Kandidaten wirklich im Rennen sind, werden da die Direktvergleiche interessanter für den weiteren Verlauf.

Clinton vs. McCain

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_clinton-224.html#polls

Obama vs. McCain

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html#polls

Fazit: McCain hat gute Chancen zum Sieg gegen Hillary und ist beinahe chancenlos gegen Obama :schwitz

Obama stuns Missouri, more than doubles votes of Republican front-runner

By Chris King Of the St. Louis American

This was U.S. Rep. Wm. Lacy Clay’s spontaneous remark when he saw the crowd of Barack Obama supporters assembled Tuesday night at the Moolah Theatre to watch the election returns.

The group was mixed in every way - by race, gender, age, dress code. Clay, one of Obama’s earliest and most active congressional supporters, was seeing the campaign message of change made manifest in his hometown.

“He defines America - who we are,” Clay said of Obama.

On Tuesday, Missouri Democrats decided Obama defines who they want in a president. At press time, Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan had reported Obama with 405,470 votes (49.2 percent) to Hillary Clinton’s 394,991 votes (48.0 percent).

Obama’s margin of victory in St. Louis City and St. Louis County were even larger. In St. Louis City, Obama won 47,675 votes (71.07 percent) to Clinton’s 18,291 votes (27.27 percent). In St. Louis County, Obama won 117,108 votes (62.55 percent) to Clinton’s 66,886 votes (35.72 percent).

These numbers are remarkable for several reasons. As U.S. Rep. Russ Carnahan, another early Obama supporter, pointed out Tuesday, Missouri is “a bell-weather state” with an uncanny record of predicting who will win the presidency.

Obama’s 405,470 votes in Missouri on Tuesday more than doubled the number of votes received by the winner of the Republican Primary in Missouri, John McCain, who got 194,119 votes.

Also, polls leading up to Tuesday’s primary had Obama trailing Clinton in most states, including Missouri, but steadily gaining ground.

“This campaign closed gaps in many states to win tonight,” Clay told the American on Tuesday. “In some cases, we were double digits down.”

Tuesday night, Obama also won primaries and caucuses in Illinois, Georgia, Delaware, Alabama, Utah, Connecticut, Kansas, Minnesota, Colorado, North Dakota, Idaho and Alaska.

Clinton won in California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Arkansas, Arizona and American Samoa.

Obama’s victory in Missouri also was important because it was won by an electorate energized at record levels. According to Robin Carnahan, the 2008 primary set records for turnout, surpassing 2004 totals by approximately 870,000 votes and 2000 totals by nearly 670,000 votes. Overall, more than 1.4 million Missouri voters cast ballots on Tuesday.

“He is expanding the base of his party,” Clay said of Obama.

Though voter demographics were unavailable, it was evident by some of the states where Obama won - and by the local crowd at the Moolah - that his appeal has crossed over barriers such as race and gender.

“He won in Kansas and Idaho,” U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill, yet another critical Obama supporter in Missouri, told the American, before jesting, “Are there any black people in Idaho?”

http://www.stlamerican.com/articles/2008/02/07/news/local_news/localnews01.txt

February 9, 2008, 1:13 am

Ron Paul Concedes Race, Sort Of

By Ariel Alexovich

In a message to supporters sent just before 11 p.m. Friday night, Representative Ron Paul, a long-shot G.O.P. candidate from Texas, basically conceded that he’s not going to win the party’s nomination.
That said, he’s scaling back his campaign — but not entirely.

He said:

With Romney gone, the chances of a brokered convention are nearly zero. But that does not affect my determination to fight on, in every caucus and primary remaining, and at the convention for our ideas, with just as many delegates as I can get. But with so many primaries and caucuses now over, we do not now need so big a national campaign staff, and so I am making it leaner and tighter.

Mr. Paul clearly stated that he will not run as a third-party candidate. Right now, his priorities are serving the residents in his Texas congressional district and winning re-election.

If I were to lose the primary for my congressional seat, all our opponents would react with glee, and pretend it was a rejection of our ideas.

From what we can make of the letter, Mr. Paul is staying in the race on a peripheral level, just so he can keep participating in policy discussions (and maybe use up all that money he’s amassed?).

“In the presidential race and the congressional race, I need your support, as always,” Mr. Paul wrote. “And I have plans to continue fighting for our ideas in politics and education that I will share with you when I can, for I will need you at my side. In the meantime, onward and upward! The neocons, the warmongers, the socialists, the advocates of inflation will be hearing much from you and me."

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/09/paul-concedes-race-sort-of/

Akt. 10.02.08; 10:15 Pub. 10.02.08; 06:15 pat

Obama auf Überholspur: 1070 zu 1095

Mit triumphalen Siegen bei vier Vorwahlen hat der demokratische Bewerber Barack Obama seine Konkurrentin Hillary Clinton im Rennen um die Präsidentschaftskandidatur seiner Partei fast eingeholt. Obama siegte am Samstag in den Staaten Louisiana, Nebraska und Washington sowie in dem US-Territorium Jungferninseln mit deutlichem Vorsprung.

Bei den Republikanern gab es bei zwei von drei Entscheidungen Dämpfer für den führenden Senator John McCain, der nach dem Rückzug seines grössten Konkurrenten Mitt Romney aber weiter klar in Führung liegt.

Nach Zählung der Nachrichtenagentur Associated Press führt bei den Demokraten Clinton nur noch mit 25 Delegiertenstimmen vor Obama: Die New Yorker Senatorin kann demnach bisher mit 1.095 Delegierten rechnen, der Politik-Neuling aus Illinois mit 1.070. Darin sind bereits die sogenannten Superdelegierten enthalten, das sind Parteifunktionäre, die nicht bei Vorwahlen und Wählerversammlungen auf einen Kandidaten festgelegt wurden und die in ihrem Abstimmverhalten bei dem Nominierungsprozess im August frei sind. Für die Nominierung benötigt werden mindestens 2.025 Delegierte.

Obama, der in Washington seine erste Amtszeit als Senator im US-Kongress absolviert, nutzte seine Siegesansprache in Richmond zu Angriffen auf die Politikveteranen Clinton und McCain. Seine Partei habe die Alternative, im Kampf um das Weisse Haus darüber zu debattieren, wer die meiste Erfahrung habe. Oder sie könne den Republikaner McCain mit der Frage herausfordern, wer wohl in Washington nach der Präsidentenwahl am meisten verändern werde. «Denn das ist eine Debatte, die wir gewinnen können», erklärte Obama. «Heute sind Wähler von der West- bis zur Golfküste und dem Herzen Amerikas aufgestanden und haben gesagt: «Yes we can.» (»Ja, wir können es schaffen.»)

Clinton ging in Richmond vor Obama ans Rednerpult und ging in ihrer Ansprache nicht auf die Siege ihres Konkurrenten ein. Über den führenden republikanischen Bewerber McCain sagte sie, der 71-Jährige Senator stehe für «mehr vom selben» der Politik von Präsident George W. Bush. Sie verliess den Saal, bevor Obama eintraf.

Bei den Republikanern sorgte der ehemalige Baptisten-Prediger Mick Huckabee mit Siegen in Kansas und Louisiana für eine Überraschung, McCain setzte sich nur in Washington durch. In Louisiana verfehlte er allerdings die Schwelle von 50 Prozent der Stimmen, die ihm sofort alle 20 Delegiertenstimmen des Staates gesichert hätten. Die endgültige Entscheidung fällt auf einem Sonderparteitag in der kommenden Woche.

Trotz der beiden Dämpfer führt McCain bei den Republikanern sicher mit 719 Delegiertenstimmen vor Huckabee mit 234 Stimmen, nachdem sich Romney am Donnerstag aus dem Rennen zurückzog. Um Präsidentschaftskandidat der Republikaner zu werden, sind 1.191 Stimmen nötig. Huckabee will weiterkämpfen: Er glaube noch immer an Wunder, sagte er auf einer Wahlkampfveranstaltung.

Die Siege in den Staaten Washington und Nebraska fielen für den Demokraten Obama mit etwa zwei Dritteln der Stimmen deutlich aus. Auf den Jungferninseln, wo es drei Delegiertenstimmen gibt, bekam er sogar fast 90 Prozent. Etwas knapper war das Rennen in Louisiana: Dort holte Obama 57 Prozent, Clinton kam auf 36 Prozent. Wie bereits in Alabama, Georgia und South Carolina bekam der schwarze Politiker breite Unterstützung von afroamerikanischen Wählern.

http://www.20min.ch/news/dossier/uswahlen/story/10499559


:respekt

Obama landslides could break deadlock

By: Ben Smith
Feb 9, 2008 11:03 PM EST

Barack Obama’s landslide victories in four mid-sized states Saturday suggest that he has the opportunity build a significant lead over Hillary Rodham Clinton among the locked-in “pledged” delegates before the candidates face off in the big battlegrounds of Ohio and Texas on March 4.

The results in Washington and Nebraska vindicated Obama’s strategy of preparing expensive efforts to organize votes after the Feb. 5 contests that many expected – wrongly — effectively to decide the race. Clinton’s campaign, meanwhile, downplayed its own efforts in the states, though she did air television ads in both Washington and Nebraska.

Obama also won in Louisiana, buoyed by taking nearly 90% of the support of black voters, according to exit polls. And he won overwhelmingly in the U.S. Virgin Islands, winning all three of the territory’s pledged delegates.

In squeezing every delegate out of the small and mid-sized states between now and March 4, and every dollar out of his supporters, Obama is hoping to build a head of steam this month that will make him unstoppable and will lure free-floating superdelegates to his camp.

Clinton, meanwhile, aims to keep the debate national in scope and sharply competitive in the national media, if not on the ground in the primary states.

Though turnout in the Washington and Nebraska caucuses overwhelmed the state parties, the raw numbers of voters were relatively small: About 26,000 people, in total, participated the Nebraska caucus, for instance.

But in what was a test of enthusiasm and organization, Obama showed an ability not just to win but to rack up the landslide margins necessary to build a delegate lead. He seemed set to gain on Clinton by a margin of well over 40 delegates Saturday night, according to preliminary estimates. (A Democratic candidate needs 2,025 delegates to claim the nomination.)

“Today, voters from the West Coast to the Gulf Coast to the heart of America stood up to say that it is time to turn the page,” Obama told the Virginia Democratic Party’s Jefferson-Jackson dinner in Richmond, according to his prepared remarks. He told the gathering that he represents “real change,” and touted his appeal to independent voters.

Clinton, meanwhile, didn’t congratulate Obama in her speech to the Richmond gathering earlier in the evening. Instead, she continued to draw sharp contrasts with her rival, and associated him with the likely Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain of Arizona.

“I am the only candidate left in this race, Democrat or Republican, with a healthcare plan to cover every single man, woman and child,” she said.

Her campaign also sought to introduce a measure of good news by releasing word, as polls closed in Louisiana, that she had raised $10 million from more than 100,000 donors this month.

Obama’s campaign shot back that more than 350,000 donors have given him money this year.

Though high turnout and a surge of new voters have been regular features of this primary cycle, they still seemed to strain untested primary and caucus systems in state unused to being the focus of national attention.

In Louisiana, the Obama campaign complained of “irregularities” after, it said, Democrats claiming their party registration had been switched were not permitted to cast provisional ballots.

However, it was unclear whether Obama's supporters had actually registered as Democrats and were turned away improperly, or were in fact independents and unable to vote in the primary.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8416.html

10. Februar 2008, 15:10, NZZ Online

Immer engeres Rennen um demokratische US-Präsidentschaftskandidatur


http://www.nzz.ch/images/Barack%20Obama%20_lead_1.668909.jpg (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:showPopup%28%27popup-zoom0%27%29)http://www.nzz.ch/static-images/popup-open.gif (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:showPopup%28%27popup-zoom0%27%29)
Barack Obama dankt seinen vielen Anhängern für die Unterstützung. (Bild: Reuters)


http://www.nzz.ch/static-images/pixel.gifObama mit Clinton fast gleichauf

Immer engeres Rennen um demokratische US-Präsidentschaftskandidatur

Mit triumphalen Siegen in vier Vorwahlen hat der demokratische Bewerber Barack Obama seine Konkurrentin Hillary Clinton fast eingeholt. Obama siegte in den Staaten Louisiana, Nebraska und Washington sowie in dem US-Territorium Jungferninseln mit deutlichem Vorsprung. Bei den Republikanern gab es für Senator John McCain einen Dämpfer. ...

Mit triumphalen Siegen in vier Vorwahlen hat der demokratische Bewerber Barack Obama seine Konkurrentin Hillary Clinton fast eingeholt. Obama siegte in den Staaten Louisiana, Nebraska und Washington sowie in dem US-Territorium Jungferninseln mit deutlichem Vorsprung. Bei den Republikanern gab es für Senator John McCain einen Dämpfer.


(ap) Nach Zählung des USA-Korrespondenten der NZZ liegt bei den Demokraten Clinton nur noch mit 11 Delegiertenstimmen vor Obama: Die New Yorker Senatorin kann demnach bisher mit 1142 Delegierten rechnen, der Politik-Neuling aus Illinois mit 1131. Darin sind bereits die sogenannten Superdelegierten enthalten, das sind Parteifunktionäre, die nicht in Vorwahlen und Wählerversammlungen auf einen Kandidaten festgelegt wurden und die in ihrem Abstimmverhalten bei dem Nominierungsprozess im August frei sind. Für die Nominierung benötigt werden mindestens 2025 Delegierte.

Obama attackiert Clinton und McCain

Obama, der in Washington seine erste Amtszeit als Senator im US-Kongress absolviert, nutzte seine Siegesansprache in Richmond zu Angriffen auf die Politikveteranen Clinton und McCain. Seine Partei habe die Alternative, im Kampf um das Weisse Haus darüber zu debattieren, wer die meiste Erfahrung habe. Oder sie könne den Republikaner McCain mit der Frage herausfordern, wer wohl in Washington nach der Präsidentenwahl am meisten verändern werde. «Denn das ist eine Debatte, die wir gewinnen können», sagte Obama. «Heute sind Wähler von der West- bis zur Golfküste und dem Herzen Amerikas aufgestanden und haben gesagt: «Yes we can.»
http://www.nzz.ch/static-images/pixel.gif
Clinton begab sich in Richmond vor Obama ans Rednerpult und ging in ihrer Ansprache nicht auf die Siege ihres Konkurrenten ein. Über den führenden republikanischen Bewerber McCain sagte sie, der 71-Jährige Senator stehe für «mehr vom selben» der Politik von Präsident Bush. Sie verliess den Saal, bevor Obama eintraf.

McCain siegt nur in Washington

Bei den Republikanern sorgte der ehemalige Baptisten-Prediger Mick Huckabee mit Siegen in Kansas und Louisiana für eine Überraschung, McCain setzte sich nur in Washington durch. In Louisiana verfehlte er allerdings die Schwelle von 50 Prozent der Stimmen, die ihm sofort alle 20 Delegiertenstimmen des Staates gesichert hätten. Die endgültige Entscheidung fällt an einem Sonderparteitag in der kommenden Woche.

Trotz der beiden Dämpfer führt McCain bei den Republikanern sicher mit 719 Delegiertenstimmen vor Huckabee mit 234 Stimmen, nachdem sich Romney am Donnerstag aus dem Rennen zurückzog. Um Präsidentschaftskandidat der Republikaner zu werden, sind 1191 Stimmen nötig. Huckabee will weiterkämpfen: Er glaube noch immer an Wunder, sagte er an einer Wahlkampfveranstaltung.

Die Siege in den Staaten Washington und Nebraska fielen für den Demokraten Obama mit etwa zwei Dritteln der Stimmen deutlich aus. Auf den Jungferninseln, wo es drei Delegiertenstimmen gibt, bekam er sogar fast 90 Prozent. Etwas knapper war das Rennen in Louisiana: Dort holte Obama 57 Prozent, Clinton kam auf 36 Prozent. Wie bereits in Alabama, Georgia und South Carolina bekam der schwarze Politiker breite Unterstützung von afroamerikanischen Wählern.


http://www.nzz.ch/static-images/pixel.gif http://www.nzz.ch/static-images/article_readmore.gif Analyse: Kampf um progressive Mitte (http://www.nzz.ch/nachrichten/international/kampf_um_amerikas_progressive_mitte_1.667967.html) Link: http://www.nzz.ch/nachrichten/international/kampf_um_amerikas_progressive_mitte_1.667967.html

http://www.nzz.ch/static-images/article_readmore.gif Dossier: Vorwahlen in den USA (http://www.nzz.ch/magazin/dossiers/usa_vorwahlen_praesidentschaft_2.45172) Link: http://www.nzz.ch/nachrichten/international/usa_vorwahlen_praesidentschaft_2.45172


http://www.nzz.ch/static-images/pixel.gifhttp://www.nzz.ch/nachrichten/international/obama_vorwahlen_1.668885.html

....ooops :rolleyes sehe eben - ist ein bisschen doppelt gemoppelt ;):verbeug

Macht doch nix :)

Hillary Clinton's advisers 'in a state of panic'

By Tim Shipman in Washington and Philip Sherwell in Chicago
Last Updated: 11:53am GMT 10/02/2008

Hillary Clinton's most senior advisers are in a state of "panic" about her presidential prospects and are plotting to enlist Democrat leaders in Congress to thwart her rival Barack Obama's ambitions.

The Clinton camp is braced for Mr Obama to win a series of primary elections over the next three weeks, which they fear could hand the Illinois senator unstoppable momentum in the race for the White House.

Mr Obama has begun calling those "super delegates" - 795 congressmen and senior party officials who could break a dead heat - who are committed to Mrs Clinton, asking them to change their minds and help him wrap up the nomination.

As of tonight, the two candidates were neck and neck but Mr Obama appeared to be gaining momentum.

"He's saying: 'Hey, I won your state and I won your congressional district, why are you supporting her?'" a Democrat strategist revealed.

The Clinton camp hopes to stop the Obama bandwagon by winning Texas and Ohio primaries on March 4, after which Mrs Clinton is planning to call on party grandees including Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives and Harry Reid, the party's leader in the Senate, to persuade Mr Obama to stand down.

Clinton aides have privately admitted that Mr Obama would only consider such a move if offered the position of vice presidential running mate, something Mrs Clinton has always been reluctant to consider.

A senior Democrat who has discussed Clinton campaign thinking with a member of her inner circle said: "The Clintons are in a state of panic. She has to win both Texas and Ohio."

But he added that this might prove impossible if Mr Obama maintains his momentum and wins most, or all, of the nine contests which come before that.

Mr Obama won yesterday's primary elections held in Washington state and Nebraska, and is expected to do well in Louisiana.

He is also favourite to sweep Maryland, Virginia, and Washington DC, which all vote on Tuesday, as well as Wisconsin and Hawaii, where he once lived, on February 19.

Only in Maine is Mrs Clinton confident, though Virginia and Wisconsin may also go her way.

Asked about the upcoming states, Mr Obama's chief strategist David Axelrod told The Sunday Telegraph: "We feel comfortable with them. What was once inevitable is no longer inevitable. The momentum has switched in this race.

"We closed a 20 point gap in the national polls in the last two weeks. The more people are exposed to his message, the better he does."

But he added: "We are up against the Clinton machine. We are the perpetual underdog and will be throughout this process. We're ready to go all the way to the convention."

Clinton aides believe that if Mr Obama does not deliver a knock-out blow before March 4, the advantage will swing back to her and she will argue for a deal in which uncommitted super-delegates unite behind her, to preserve party unity.

But the prospect of a deal behind closed doors, that could brush aside the views of voters in the primaries, is already creating fury in the party.

Donna Brazile, an African American strategist, said last week: "If 795 of my colleagues decide this election, I will quit the Democratic Party."

But the Clinton camp fears that a failure to engineer a deal could lead to bitter battles at the Democrat convention in Denver in late August, which could even end with Al Gore, the former vice president, emerging as a compromise candidate.;)

"There's a five per cent chance of that happening, but that's five percent too high," the Clinton source said.

Mrs Clinton is also under financial pressure.

She claimed that she received $7.5m in donations after admitting lending her campaign $5m last week.

But the source claimed that her campaign is actually in far worse financial trouble than they are letting on.

There will be no proof of how much she raised for three months, when the totals are formally declared to election watchdogs.

The one thing the Clinton and Obama camps can agree on is that John McCain, who is popular with independents and moderate Democrats, is their "worst nightmare".

They now fear that he could pick Colin Powell or former congressman JC Watts, both of whom are African American, as his running mate.

But Mr McCain still has to shore up his conservative base and is actively looking at the Governors of Minnesota, South Carolina, Indiana, Mississippi, Florida and Texas: Tim Pawlenty, Mark Sandford, Mitch Daniels, Haley Barbour, Charlie Crist and Rick Perry.

Allies of President Bush are making the case for Rob Portman, a former White House Budget office director and Ohio congressman.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/09/wus509.xml

"cheating" :escht

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3175564

10. Februar 2008

Clinton feuert ihre Wahlkampfchefin - Obama siegt auch in Maine

Washington - Paukenschlag im Vorwahlkampf der Demokraten. Hillary Clinton hat ihre Kampagnenmanagerin Patti Solis Doyle abgesetzt - nach einer Serie deutlicher Niederlagen gegen Barack Obama, die sich in dieser Nacht fortsetzt: Die frühere First Lady hat auch den Caucus in Maine verloren.

Die demokratische US-Präsidentschaftsbewerberin Hillary Clinton hat ihre Wahlkampfmanagerin Patti Solis Doyle abgesetzt und stattdessen ihre langjährige Vertraute Maggie Williams mit der Führung ihrer Kampagne betraut.

Clinton dankte Solis Doyle für ihre "Freundschaft und die herausragende Arbeit". Sie werde auch in den kommenden Wochen weiter auf ihren Rat hören. Williams war Clintons Stabschefin zu deren Zeit als First Lady. Der US-Fernsehsender ABC meldete, Rücksicht auf ihre Familie sei mit ein Grund für den Rückzug Doyles gewesen. Sie bleibe aber Beraterin im Clinton-Wahlkampf.

In einer Mail informierte Solis Doyle ihren Mitarbeiterstab heute von dem Wechsel an der Spitze des Wahlkampfteams. Sie sei stolz, diese Kampagne geleitet zu haben. "Noch stolzer bin ich, Hillary nach mehr als 16 Jahren noch meine Freundin nennen zu können." Ihre Nachfolgerin sei eine bemerkenswerte Person und werde ihre Aufgabe sicher hervorragend erfüllen, schrieb Solis Doyle weiter.

Die Entscheidung gilt als Reaktion auf schwere Probleme in Clintons Vorwahlkampf. Sie ist als Favoritin in den Wettbewerb der Kandidaten gestartet, kann sich gegen ihren Rivalen Barack Obama aber immer schwieriger durchsetzen. Er schafft es in unerwartet vielen Staaten, Clinton in ein Kopf-an-Kopf-Rennen zu ziehen, und hat sie in mehreren anderen Staaten deutlich geschlagen.

Klarer Vorsprung für Obama in Maine

Die frühere First Lady hat erst an diesem Samstag wieder bei drei Vorwahlen in Louisiana, Nebraska und Washington Niederlagen gegen ihren innerparteilichen Rivalen Barack Obama einstecken müssen - und in dieser Nacht auch den Caucus im Bundesstaat Maine verloren, der eigentlich als ihr Revier galt.

Nach Prognosen mehrerer US-Medien hat Obama in dem Staat an der Ostküste einen überdeutlichen Vorsprung vor seiner Rivalin. Nach Auszählung der Ergebnisse in 87 Prozent der Wahlbezirke kommt er auf 59 Prozent der Stimmen, Clinton auf 41 Prozent.

Dass Obama jetzt auch in Clintons vermeintlich sicheren Staaten siegt, schürt im Lager der Bewerberin die Angst vor einem eindeutigen Stimmungsumschwung zugunsten des Rivalen. Wie Clinton einen solchen Obama-Trend stoppen will - abgesehen von der Neubesetzung ihrer Kampagnen-Führung -, ist derzeit nicht abzusehen.

Während sich Obama am Wochenende bei einem Wahlkampfauftritt in Virginia von seinen Anhängern feiern ließ, erwähnte Clinton die Erfolge ihres Rivalen bei derselben Veranstaltung mit keinem Wort und verließ die Veranstaltung vor Obamas Auftritt bereits wieder.

Das Kopf-an-Kopf-Rennen um die Stimmen der Delegierten für den Nominierungsparteitag im Sommer setzt sich damit bis auf Weiteres fort. Insgesamt liegen beide Bewerber derzeit etwa gleichauf, was die Zahl ihrer Delegierten für den Nominierungsparteitag im Sommer angeht.

Die genauen Schätzungen der Delegierten gehen in den US-Medien zwar auseinander - unter anderem weil es neben den gewählten Delegierten noch parteiintern benannte sogenannte Superdelegierte gibt, die sich persönlich zwischen den Bewerbern entscheiden können. Doch in allen US-Medien sieht es derzeit nach einem Patt zwischen Clinton und Obama aus, mit minimalem Vorteil für die frühere First Lady - obwohl sie noch vor Monaten noch als klare Favoritin galt.

als/AP/Reuters

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,534353,00.html

:rolleyes

Gallup :) :cool

Poll: Obama leads Clinton; Americans paying keen attention to 2008 election

For the first time, Sen. Barack Obama leads Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in the USA TODAY/Gallup Poll.

The latest survey shows Obama is drawing support from 47% of Democrats, while 44% say they plan to support Clinton. More than half of Republicans favor Sen. John McCain. Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee has seen a slight uptick, going from 18% to 27% over the last week. (The margin of error for this part of the survey is five percentage points.)

And say what you like about the 2008 presidential campaign, but it has definitely seized the public's attention.

The poll shows that more than three of four people are paying "quite a lot of attention" to the Democrats and Republicans who want to move into the White House next year.

Check out USA TODAY's On Politics blog for more on this and other aspects of the campaign.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2008/02/poll-obama-lead.html

@syr - ich hoffe nur, dass nicht letztendlich McCain der lachende Dritte sein wird bei dieser "Schlacht" :rolleyes:schwitz
Du stellst sicher noch etwas "direkt aus den USA" rein und wie dort die Stimmungslage ist :)

International: 13. Februar 2008, 08:40
Obama bleibt auf der Überholspur (http://www.nzz.ch/nachrichten/international/obama_kann_auf_vorwahlsiege_an_der_ostkueste_hoffen_1.669943.html)

Clinton bei Vorwahlen in drei Ostküstenstaaten geschlagen (http://www.nzz.ch/nachrichten/international/obama_kann_auf_vorwahlsiege_an_der_ostkueste_hoffen_1.669943.html)

Barack Obama hat auch die Vorwahlen zur amerikanischen Präsidentschaft in den Bundesstaaten Virginia und Maryland sowie in der Hauptstadt Washington gewonnen. Bei den Republikanern entschied John McCain diese drei Vorwahlen für sich. (http://www.nzz.ch/nachrichten/international/obama_kann_auf_vorwahlsiege_an_der_ostkueste_hoffen_1.669943.html) ...http://www.nzz.ch/static-images/headline_topic_more.gif (http://www.nzz.ch/nachrichten/international/obama_kann_auf_vorwahlsiege_an_der_ostkueste_hoffen_1.669943.html)
http://www.nzz.ch/static-images/pixel.gif http://www.nzz.ch/static-images/news_readmore.gif Interview: Clintons Redenschreiberin (http://www.nzz.ch/nachrichten/international/hillary_wird_mit_argumenten_gewinnen_1.669950.html)
http://www.nzz.ch/static-images/news_readmore.gif Obama: Siegesserie (http://www.nzz.ch/nachrichten/international/obamas_siegesserie_macht_clinton_zu_schaffen_1.669744.html)

Lunar :), wird er nicht, keine Chance :).

Ich würde gern eine virtuelle Wette machen :p..... Mein Tip: Obama wird die Nominierung erhalten und am 4. November gegen McCain antreten. In der GE tippe ich auf 55-60% für Obama, landesweit, und 350-400 Wahlmänner die ihn zum nächsten Präsidenten der USA wählen werden. Kann dagegen setzen wer will, ist mir je Tip 50€ wert :verbeug


13. Februar 2008, 13:32 Uhr

Umfrageschock für Clinton - Angst um Ohio und Texas

Von Friederike Freiburg

Hillary Clinton läuft die Zeit davon. Ihre letzte Hoffnung für die Präsidentschaftskandidatur sind die Riesenstaaten Ohio und Texas, wo Rivale Barack Obama in Umfragen hinten liegt - noch. Neueste Prognosen zeigen: Er holt auch dort dramatisch auf.

Hamburg - Die jüngsten Umfragen aus dem US-Bundesstaat Wisconsin dürften Hillary Clintons Wahlkampfstrategen Kopfschmerzen bereiten. Dort führt Erzrivale Barack Obama laut einer Erhebung von Public Policy Polling mit 50 Prozent vor Hillary mit 39 Prozent. Was das Ganze noch schlimmer macht: Vor nicht einmal einer Woche sah es genau umgekehrt aus, da sah eine Umfrage der American Research Group Clinton noch mit mehr als zehn Prozentpunkten vorn.

Sollte sich der Trend bestätigen und Clinton auch Wisconsin verlieren, droht ihr der Absturz ins Bodenlose. Wisconsin ist zwar ein kleinerer Staat, in dem nur 92 Delegierte für den Nominierungsparteitag zu vergeben sind, aber das Ergebnis könnte dennoch Signalwirkung haben. Die Vorwahl dort findet am kommenden Dienstag statt, gleichzeitig mit dem Caucus in Hawaii (29 Delegierte) - und danach kommt zwei Wochen lang nichts, bis zum Mini-Super-Tuesday am 4. März, wenn unter anderem die großen und wichtigen Staaten Texas und Ohio entscheiden.

Sollte Clinton Wisconsin verlieren, stünden ihr zwei harte Wochen bevor. Gegen die Negativschlagzeilen nach einer neuen Niederlage anzukommen, dürfte ihr schwerfallen.

Und die Umfragewerte für Ohio und Texas, wo es um 389 Delegiertenstimmen geht, verheißen für Clinton ebenfalls wenig Gutes. Noch führt die 60-Jährige zwar deutlich vor Obama: in Texas mit 48 Prozent vor Obama, der bei 38 Prozent liegt (IVR Polls, vom 30./31. Januar); und in Ohio sogar mit 56 Prozent gegenüber 39 Prozent für Obama (Survey USA, vom 10./11. Februar).

Doch die Entwicklung von Obamas Umfragewerten lässt es immer fragwürdiger erscheinen, ob sich Clinton bis zum 4. März an der Spitze halten kann. Die letzte Umfrage aus Ohio (Columbus Dispatch Control), die von Ende Januar stammt, sah Obama noch bei mageren 19 Prozent - er hat also seinen Anteil seither verdoppelt. Auch Clinton hat zugelegt, aber nur um 14 Prozent.

Die dramatischen Stimmenzuwächse stammen übrigens von Wählern, die sich zuvor für Mitbewerber John Edwards entschieden hatten - oder noch unentschlossen waren.

In Texas, dem größten noch ausstehenden Staat, der bei den Demokraten 228 Delegiertenstimmen zu vergeben hat, ist das Rennen noch enger. Ende 2007 führte Clinton hier mit 51 zu 17 Prozent. Bei der nächsten Umfrage, die Anfang bis Mitte Januar erhoben wurde, sackte Hillary auf 46 Prozent ab, und Obama kam auf 28 Prozent heran. Im jüngsten Meinungsbarometer - Ende Januar bis Anfang Februar von IVR Polls durchgeführt - konnte sich Clinton zwar auf 48 Prozent verbessern - doch Obama rückte gleichzeitig auf 38 Prozent vor.

"Wir werden um jede Stimme kämpfen"

Clintons Wahlkampfteam verbreitet nun Durchhalteparolen. Sprecher Howard Wolfson sagte der "Washington Post", das Team werde in Wisconsin "um jede Stimme kämpfen". An einen Sieg Clintons dort glaubt allerdings auch er nicht mehr. Man bleibe aber "optimistisch", was Texas und Ohio angehe, sagte er.

Beide Staaten schätzen die Strategen als pro-Hillary ein - Texas wegen seiner vielen Latino-Wähler (die in bisherigen Vorwahlen vorwiegend für Hillary stimmten), Ohio wegen seiner schwächelnden Wirtschaft und der vielen gewerblichen Arbeitnehmer (die ebenfalls bislang eher zu Clinton tendierten).

Die Latino-Wähler allerdings, die sich noch im Dezember im Verhältnis 70 zu 7 für Clinton entschieden hätten, wenden sich inzwischen stärker Obama zu (Mitte Januar: 63 zu 18).

Der größte Unsicherheitsfaktor für die Clinton-Strategen dürfte allerdings eine andere Wählergruppe sein: die Frauen. Eine der bittersten Niederlagen, die Hillary Clinton während des Vorwahlkampfs einstecken musste, kam direkt zu Beginn in Iowa. Und es waren maßgeblich die weiblichen Wähler, die ihr diese Schlappe beibrachten. Kurz darauf, in New Hampshire, kehrten die Frauen zu ihr zurück und verhalfen ihr zum Sieg.

In Ohio nun muss sich Clinton auf ihre Geschlechtsgenossinnen verlassen können: Laut Survey USA würden sich derzeit 62 Prozent der Frauen für sie entscheiden - und nur 33 Prozent für Obama. Sollte diese Wählergruppe der einstigen First Lady wegbrechen, wäre Obama kaum mehr aufzuhalten.

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,druck-535019,00.html

Wobei ich mich frage warum es ein Schock sein soll: bis auf einen TV-Spot hat Obama noch gar keinen Wahlkampf geführt bis zum vergangenen Wochenende in Texas wie Ohio. UInd bis dahin verbleiben ihm noch 3 Wochen, mit voller Kriegskasse.

Hillary braucht nun nach den letzten paar Niederlagen Texas UND Ohio, zudem in beiden Rennen mindestens 60% der Wählerstimmen da auch dies Proporzwahlen sind. Meiner Einschätzung nach und bei dem Aufwind bei Obama wird sie das nicht schaffen :verbeug.

:sss

Who Would The World Elect for
the President of the United States?


http://www.whowouldtheworldelect.com/images/flags/de.png GERMANY Votes for:
1565 votes for Ron Paul
792 votes for Dennis Kucinich
537 votes for Barack Obama
203 votes for Hillary Clinton
81 votes for Tom Tancredo
34 votes for Mike Gravel
30 votes for John Edwards
18 votes for John McCain
18 votes for Rudy Giuliani
11 votes for Mitt Romney
8 votes for Fred Thompson
7 votes for Bill Richardson
6 votes for Mike Huckabee
6 votes for Sam Brownback
5 votes for Duncan Hunter
4 votes for Chris Dodd
4 votes for Joe Biden

http://www.whowouldtheworldelect.com/images/flags/ch.png SWITZERLAND Votes for:
290 votes for Ron Paul
97 votes for Barack Obama
39 votes for Dennis Kucinich
24 votes for Hillary Clinton
8 votes for John McCain
6 votes for Rudy Giuliani
5 votes for Mike Gravel
5 votes for Fred Thompson
3 votes for Tom Tancredo
3 votes for Mitt Romney
2 votes for Bill Richardson
1 vote for Chris Dodd
1 vote for John Edwards
1 vote for Duncan Hunter
1 vote for Joe Biden

...ist schon erstaunlich - bis jetzt würde die Welt Ron Paul wählen :eek zumindest ginge es via Internet :cool

hier wählen ---> http://www.whowouldtheworldelect.com/ (http://www.whowouldtheworldelect.com/)

Japan's Obama city cheers U.S. Democrat contender

Wed Feb 13, 3:42 AM ET


TOKYO (Reuters) - A Japanese city called "Obama", hoping to boost its profile at home and abroad as a tourist attraction, cheered Barack Obama's victories in three more Democratic nominating contests on Tuesday.
http://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=yw6CNkWTcuqQF7PMRuHEngt_VP0mnUe1XsoACCOj&T=1b9gakfj0%2fX%3d1203068618%2fE%3d91526046%2fR%3dnews%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d2.1%2fW%3dH%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d2320507201%2fH%3dY2FjaGVoaW50PSJuZXdzIiBjb250ZW50PSJob21lO0RlbW9jcmF0aWM7aGVscDtlbGVjdGlvbjtIaWxsYXJ5IENsaW50b247cGFzc3BvcnQ7V2hpdGU7SG91c2U7cmVmdXJsX3d3d19nb29nbGVfY2giIHJlZnVybD0icmVmdXJsX3d3d19nb29nbGVfY2giIHRvcGljcz0icmVmdXJsX3d3d19nb29nbGVfY2gi%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d28719345&U=13b2jfclh%2fN%3dIZYDt0LEYrU-%2fC%3d635353.12269017.12673088.1414694%2fD%3dLREC%2fB%3d5202623
"Hurray! That's really great," said Seiji Fujiwara in the port city of Obama, population 32,500 in central Japan. "Has he scored seven consecutive wins? He is truly riding on a wave of victories."

Fujiwara, 55, launched a group of campaigners to help Obama win the U.S. presidential election so that the city with the same name can share his fame....

....."If he becomes the president of the United States, we want to make a courtesy call on the White House," he said. "We really want him to visit Japan and hold talks with the Japanese prime minister in Obama." (Reporting by Teruaki Ueno; Editing by Bill Tarrant)

Obama
小浜市
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4c/Map_Obama_en.png/235px-Map_Obama_en.png .
Obama's location in Fukui (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukui_Prefecture), Japan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan). - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama,_Fukui

Obama in Japanese means "small shore".

We Have a NEW Heavyweight Champion of the World!! (http://maruthecrankpot.blogspot.com/2008/02/we-have-new-heavyweight-champion-of.html)

Champion of Flip Flopping
Poor old McInsane --he's so muddled that he forgot that he was against torture before he voted for it. But he's a Man of Honor (http://thinkprogress.org/2008/02/13/mccain-waterboarding-fail/) Mr. McCain, a former prisoner of war, has consistently voiced opposition to waterboarding and other methods that critics say is a form torture. But the Republicans, confident of a White House veto, did not mount the challenge. Mr. McCain voted “no” on Wednesday afternoon.He’s such a maverick he disagrees with himself. http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/mccainsalute83.jpg

Flipper (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLKSV5pJBBw)

http://media.gallup.com/poll/graphs/021508DailyUpdateGraph2.gif


http://www.pollster.com/USTopzDems600.png


http://www.pollster.com/USTopzReps600.png

http://www.pollster.com/08-US-Rep-Pres-Primary.php

February 16, 2008

Unofficial Tallies in City Understated Obama Vote

By SAM ROBERTS

Black voters are heavily represented in the 94th Election District in Harlem’s 70th Assembly District. Yet according to the unofficial results from the New York Democratic primary last week, not a single vote in the district was cast for Senator Barack Obama.

That anomaly was not unique. In fact, a review by The New York Times of the unofficial results reported on primary night found about 80 election districts among the city’s 6,106 where Mr. Obama supposedly did not receive even one vote, including cases where he ran a respectable race in a nearby district.

City election officials this week said that their formal review of the results, which will not be completed for weeks, had confirmed some major discrepancies between the vote totals reported publicly — and unofficially — on primary night and the actual tally on hundreds of voting machines across the city.

In the Harlem district, for instance, where the primary night returns suggested a 141 to 0 sweep by Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, the vote now stands at 261 to 136. In an even more heavily black district in Brooklyn — where the vote on primary night was recorded as 118 to 0 for Mrs. Clinton — she now barely leads, 118 to 116.

The history of New York elections has been punctuated by episodes of confusion, incompetence and even occasional corruption. And election officials and lawyers for both Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton agree that it is not uncommon for mistakes to be made by weary inspectors rushing on election night to transcribe columns of numbers that are delivered first to the police and then to the news media.

That said, in a presidential campaign in which every vote at the Democratic National Convention may count, a swing of even a couple of hundred votes in New York might help Mr. Obama gain a few additional delegates.

City election officials said they were convinced that there was nothing sinister to account for the inaccurate initial counts, and The Times’s review found a handful of election districts in the city where Mrs. Clinton received zero votes in the initial results.

“It looked like a lot of the numbers were wrong, probably the result of human error,” said Marcus Cederqvist, who was named executive director of the Board of Elections last month. He said such discrepancies between the unofficial and final count rarely affected the raw vote outcome because “they’re not usually that big.”

On primary night, Mrs. Clinton was leading with 57 percent to Mr. Obama’s 40 percent in New York State, which meant she stood to win 139 delegates to Mr. Obama’s 93, with 49 others known as superdelegates going to the national convention unaffiliated.

Jerome A. Koenig, a former chief of staff to the State Assembly’s election law committee and a lawyer for the Obama campaign, suggested that some of the discrepancy resulted from the design of the ballot.

Candidates were listed from left to right in an order selected by drawing lots. Mrs. Clinton was first, followed by Gov. Bill Richardson and Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., who in most election districts received zero votes, and by John Edwards, who got relatively few. Mr. Obama was fifth, just before Representative Dennis J. Kucinich.

Mr. Koenig said he seriously doubted that anything underhanded was at work because local politicians care more about elections that matter specifically to them.

“They steal votes for elections like Assembly District leader, where people have a personal stake,” he said.

A number of political leaders also scoffed at the possibility that local politicians, even if they considered it vital that Mr. Obama or Mrs. Clinton prevail in the primary, were capable of even trying to hijack such a contest.

Still, for those inclined to consider conspiracy theories, the figures provided plenty of grist.

The 94th Election District in Harlem, for instance, sits within the Congressional district represented by Charles B. Rangel, an original supporter of Mrs. Clinton.

Assemblyman Keith L. T. Wright, a Clinton supporter who represents the same area, said he was confident that there was an innocent explanation for the original count giving Mr. Obama zero votes.

“I’m sure it’s a clerical error of some sort,” Mr. Wright said. “Being around elections for the last 25 years, no candidate receives zero votes.”

But Gordon J. Davis, a former New York City parks commissioner and an Obama poll watcher in the district, remained skeptical, even after being informed of the corrected count.

“First it was reported at 141 to 0, now it’s 261 to 136 in an Assembly district that went 12,000 to 8,000 for Barack,” Mr. Davis said on Friday.

“I was watching like a hawk, but how did I know the machine had a mind of its own?” he added. “And I speak as one who grew up on the South Side of Chicago where we delivered the margin of victory for John F. Kennedy at 4 in the morning.”

At the sprawling Riverside Park Community apartments at Broadway and 135th Street, Alician D. Barksdale said she had voted for Mr. Obama and her daughter had, too, by absentee ballot.

“Everyone around here voted for him,” she said.

The 53rd Assembly District, in Brooklyn, is represented by the borough’s Democratic chairman, Assemblyman Vito P. Lopez, another Clinton supporter. He said the party faithful have produced lopsided margins of as much as 160 to 4 and that on Primary Day he fielded election captains in every district to galvanize Hispanic voters for Mrs. Clinton.

“We ran it the old-fashioned way,” he said. Still, he said, the 118 to 0 vote “has to be a mistake.”

At the Archive, a cafe and video store on the border of Bushwick and East Williamsburg, the manager, Brad Lee, agreed. “There were Obama posters in everyone’s windows,” he said. “There was even Obama graffiti.”

Most election-night anomalies are later reconciled by the official canvass of the machines and in the formal count of absentee returns and of paper affidavit ballots issued on Primary Day, to people who do not appear to be eligible but demand the right to vote, and later validated.

On Feb. 5, Mrs. Clinton carried 61 of the state’s 62 counties but won Brooklyn by a margin of less than 2 percent. Because delegates are awarded proportionately on the basis of the primary vote in each Congressional district, Obama supporters expressed hope that if the official count continued in their favor, they might gain an additional delegate or two.

Kate Hammer and Robin Stein contributed reporting.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/16/nyregion/16vote.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

Um es klarzustellen: es wird noch immer gezählt und die Delegierten sind noch nicht abschliessend verteilt. Veröffentlicht wurden aber am 5. Februar die inoffizielle Zählung und die war offensichtlich schlicht falsch und dies einzig auf einer Seite. Aus welchen Gründen auch immer...

Friday, February 15, 2008

Pelosi: Don't overrule the voters

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi -- who may be the most super delegate of all as chair of the Democratic national convention in Denver -- gave an interview with Bloomberg TV's Al Hunt in which she laid down the law for super delegates:

Don't veto the people's choice.

"I think there is a concern when the public speaks and there is a counter-decision made to that," she said, adding quickly, "I don't think that will happen."

She said the governors, lawmakers, DNC members and others picked as super delegates are chosen through a grassroots process and are accountable to the party's voters.

"I do think that they have a respect -- it's not just following the returns, it's also having a respect for what has been said by the people," Pelosi said. "It would be a problem for the party if the verdict would be something different than the public has decided."

That message will be music to the ears of Barack Obama, who's building a lead in pledged delegates and is urging the super delegates to follow the voters. He now leads 1,133 to 996 in pledged delegates, while Hillary Clinton has a 242-163 edge among super delegates, according to the latest tally by RealClearPolitics. Obama holds the overall edge, 1296-1238.

Pelosi had one more stunner in the interview: She said the Florida and Michigan delegates should not be seated if those delegates would decide the nomination. ;)

"Well, I don't think that any states that operated outside the rules of the party can be dispositive of who the nominee is. That is to say they can't make the difference because then we would have no rules," she said.

Pelosi added, "But I do think that the best outcome for us is if one of the candidates pulls ahead and this issue is disposed of long before we get to the convention. We certainly don't want to ignore Florida and Michigan, but we can't ignore the rules which everyone else played by."

For a play-it-safe speaker who's pledged to stay neutral, these are sharp words. And she will be one of key referees if this fight isn't settled before Denver.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/indexn?blogid=14

....mal schaun wie dann die Realität ist :schwitz:rolleyes;)

MMA Comments For The Week Beginning February 18 Written by Raymond Merriman Review and Preview

There are few areas of study that are more fascinating than the movement of planets through the zodiac and their correspondence to events affecting human activity. This, of course, is the study of Mundane Astrology. Of particular interest in this regard is the forthcoming election for the office of President of the United States. As indicated in prior columns, this year’s election will take place on November 4, 2008, the same date that the first of five passages of Saturn in opposition to Uranus will take place. In the study of Astrology, Uranus represents the unexpected, the new, and something unconventional that defies tradition or history. Saturn, on the other hand, represents tradition or history, the Establishment, the expected, or that which is planned for. The cycle of Saturn and Uranus is a 45-year periodicity. The last time the opposition occurred was in 1965-66, a time when the youth revolted against the values and laws of the Establishment throughout the world. The youth and minority groups found their power, and affected elections and governments in many countries, including the United States. Prior to that, this same aspect unfolded in a five-phase passage from 1918 through 1920, and a similar movement of the youth against the Establishment erupted, as did a society that was not about to obey the new laws of prohibition, let alone accept the lack of rights or opportunities to women any longer.

As we approach the election of 2008, many Mundane and Financial Astrologers have been wondering how this rare planetary phenomenon was going to play out this time. Would the first woman ever be elected as President of the United States? It seemed quite possible over the past year. But what didn’t seem possible was that a young African American could be elected to this post – not in the United States, not yet. But folks, this is Uranus. And out of nowhere just a few months ago, Barack Obama has now soared to become the leading candidate of the Democratic Party with 8 consecutive stunning primary victories in a row – many by double digit margins. Youth, minority group leader, charismatic…. he fits all the characteristics of Uranus. And who is Saturn? John McCain, potentially the oldest man ever to assume the role of President, and a candidate who wants to continue the mantle of the United States as the world’s sole military leader, even if it means remaining in Iraq for another 10,000 years according to post on YouTube (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gwqEneBKUs#). YouTube is one of the phenomenal social networking internet sites of today’s youth, referred to previously as an important social phenomenon in this column.

Can Barack Obama continue this surge right into the White House? Or are his recent victories a product of Mercury retrograde, a time when few trends makes it out alive, and he is about to encounter the realities of “reversals in life” as Mercury now resumes its direct motion this week? It is interesting to observe all this, especially in light of last week’s comments, which ended with, “As this two-year (Saturn-Uranus) aspect takes place, I think you will see the youth becoming more and more involved, just like they did 45 years ago when this aspect last occurred. But on Election Day itself, I think the Saturn part of this aspect holds reign… unless somehow the youth become active agents for change in the next couple of weeks, and show up to vote at the primaries and get someone in who is not recognized as “part of the Establishment.”

Right now, it looks like the youth are indeed getting involved. Let’s see what happens now that Mercury turns direct. Will Uranus represent the first minority race, or the first female ever to run as its party’s presidential nominee? Or will Uranus continue to cause the favorite of this election to change over and over again? Or both? Or maybe some other unexpected event will take place that will cause yet an entirely different dynamic that no one (or very few) has dared to think about. After all, Pluto is also now in Capricorn. There may be some forces lurking in the shadows that will do whatever it takes to maintain the traditions and history of the Establishment. They may see it as their calling. Whenever there is a new force of light that enters the awareness of the collective, you can almost anticipate that there will be an equal force of darkness to oppose it. That’s Uranus and Saturn too, with a bit of Pluto mixed in. After all, these three planets are moving towards a Cardinal T-Square as well. The “Empire Builders” are not about to give up their power easily. But they will eventually make colossal errors in judgment and lose their power as a result, as they have at similar junctures in history under similar signatures, especially when Pluto has transited through Cancer or Capricorn.

http://www.mmacycles.com/weekly-preview/mma-comments-for-the-week/mma-comments-for-the-week-beginning-february-18/

Easy Answers Elude Mich., Fla. Delegates

By NEDRA PICKLER
The Associated Press
Saturday, February 16, 2008

MILWAUKEE -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton desperately wants meaningless wins in Florida and Michigan to turn into votes she can count on. It won't be easy with the Democratic National Committee rules standing in her way.

The DNC is refusing to back down from the tough sanctions it imposed on the two states, which held early contests in violation of party rules. They have been stripped of all their delegates to the national convention in August where either Clinton or rival Sen. Barack Obama will be nominated for president.

The DNC has offered Florida and Michigan a couple ways out in compliance with party rules. First, they could hold second nominating contests, but Democratic leaders in both states reject that idea. Or they can appeal to the DNC's credentials committee, a 186-member body that usually operates in obscurity and has a complicated membership and rules process that will require deft maneuvering in this divided campaign.

Just like the some 800 superdelegates, this committee could hold the cards in helping decide the Democratic nominee if the race stays close.

Obama said Friday that he wants Michigan and Florida _ two key states in the general election campaign _ to participate in the convention without affecting the outcome of the election. He did not provide specifics about conditions except to say it wouldn't be fair for Clinton to get the majority.

"I want to make sure that the Michigan and Florida delegates have the means to participate," he said at a news conference. "There are probably a whole slew of different solutions that could be come up with that would both achieve the interests of making sure that Michigan and Florida delegates participate without skewing the delegate count."

Clinton's campaign insists the delegates should be seated in accordance with more than 2 million votes cast in the two states last month.

"I think that the people of Michigan and Florida spoke in a very convincing way, that they want their voices and their votes to be heard," Clinton told reporters. "The turnout in both places was record-breaking and I think that that should be respected."

Clinton did not object to the DNC stripping the states of their delegates when the decision was made last year. Some of her backers were on the committee that made the decision to do so and actively supported it.

"Now, when they believe it serves their political interests, they're trying to rewrite the rules," Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said in a call with reporters.

As of Thursday, the delegate count stood at 1,280 for Obama and 1,218 for Clinton. If the DNC were to award Michigan and Florida's 313 delegates based on the vote in their primaries, she would be ahead because she won both states.

That would be unfair, Obama said, because the candidates had promised not to compete in those renegade states.

"I think even my 6-year-old would understand it would not be fair for Senator Clinton to be awarded delegates when there was no campaign," he told reporters Friday.

Clinton's operatives want DNC chairman Howard Dean to come up with a resolution, but Dean is staying out of the fight for now. Dean spokesman Karen Finney said Florida and Michigan still have a choice to follow the rules.

"At this point, there are still more than 1,000 pledged delegates to be determined and 33 percent of our party has yet to have the opportunity to have their voices heard, so it would be premature to speculate," Finney said. Dean declined an interview request.

On Friday, Florida House Democratic Leader Dan Gelber suggested on his blog that Democrats hold a vote-by-mail "runoff." That would mean all 4.1 million Florida Democrats would be mailed another ballot to vote for either Obama or Clinton. The state party, though, has said it is going to stick with the results of the primary vote. Part of the problem is cost _ it's estimated the party would need to spend about $4.5 million to hold the revote.

Most of the credentials committee members will be appointed by the Clinton and Obama campaigns, depending on how they perform in nominating contests across the country, with Dean having already named 25. Although Obama has won more contests so far, Clinton has won most of the larger states _ and larger states get more seats. So there's the potential for the committee to be closely divided if the race stays tight.

The credential committee would meet in July or August, and its decision would be in the form of a recommendation to all the delegates at the convention. They have a range of options to consider, including recommending reinstatement of all or some of the delegates divided any way they see fit between Obama and Clinton. The recommendation would become the first order of business at the convention on Aug. 25.

One Clinton adviser, speaking on a condition of anonymity, said there are no legal options to pursue in courts, which give parties wide latitude in crafting their rules.

The Clinton adviser suggested a compromise where perhaps the Michigan delegates could be split evenly among the two since Obama's name wasn't even on the ballot there. But the Florida delegates should be bound by the primary results, the adviser argued, because Obama's name was on the ballot in that case. The Illinois senator didn't have the option of removing it like he did in Michigan.

That's a compromise that the Obama campaign would be unlikely to accept without a fight. And Florida Sen. Bill Nelson, who has been leading the fight to get his state's delegates reinstated and is backing Clinton, said he doesn't think it will matter. He suggested he would just like to see the delegates seated, even if they aren't favoring Clinton.

He said he is encouraging the DNC to at least declare that the Florida delegates will be seated regardless of who they are awarded to so at least they can make their travel plans to go to Denver.

"The likelihood is one way or another we're going to know the nominee by late June at the latest, in which case it will be then moot about who the delegation is pledged to and all of that," Nelson said.

Michigan and Florida had moved up their dates to gain prominence in the presidential selection process, but ironically they would be more relevant if they had stayed put. Florida was originally scheduled to vote March 4 and Michigan on March 9, and both would no doubt have been pivotal in the hotly contested race between Clinton and Obama.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/16/AR2008021600918_pf.html

February 16, 2008

Unofficial Tallies in City Understated Obama Vote

Zum Original-Beitrag (http://www.stock-channel.net/stock-board/showthread.php3?p=1123359#post1123359)
:kopf :kopf :kopf

17. Februar 2008, NZZ am Sonntag

Die Macher von Obama

Der Demokrat verdankt den Vorsprung in den Vorwahlen auch seinen Beratern

Als jung und unerfahren stellt Hillary Clinton ihren Gegner Barack Obama gerne dar. Nun hat er sie überholt – auch dank seinem gewitzten Team.

Andreas Mink, New York

«Egal, ob Sie Aussenseiter sind oder Favorit – wir helfen Ihnen, Geschichte zu machen.» So preist die Consultingfirma AKP&D Message and Media in Chicago ihre Dienste an. 1985 vom ehemaligen Reporter David Axelrod gegründet, hat das Büro schon prominente demokratische Politiker wie Bill Clinton und John Edwards beraten. Axelrod hat auch wiederholt junge, charismatische Afroamerikaner bei Wahlen für Bürgermeister- oder Gouverneursposten unterstützt. Geschichte könnte er aber nun mit einem Aussenseiter machen, dem er an die Spitze des Rennens um die US-Präsidentschaft verholfen hat: Barack Obama.
http://www.nzz.ch/static-images/pixel.gif
Erprobte Slogans

Obama, der junge Senator von Illinois, und Axelrod, der Berater, kennen sich seit über 15 Jahren. Axelrod leitete 2004 Obamas Wahlkampf für den US-Senat. Zur Vorlage der heutigen Strategie von Obama wurde jedoch die Gouverneurswahl in Massachusetts im Jahr 2006: Damals trug Axelrod zum Überraschungssieg des Afroamerikaners Deval Patrick bei, indem er ihn als jungen Hoffnungsträger darstellte, der jenseits von Klassen- und Rassenschranken Gemeinsinn mit pragmatischen Zielen verbindet. Axelrods Slogan «Yes We Can!» war für Patrick so erfolgreich, dass er ihn an Obama weitergereicht hat – der damit seit Monaten die Zuhörer begeistert....
ganzer Artkel: http://www.nzz.ch/nachrichten/international/die_macher_von_obama_1.672695.html

Man mag ja davon halten was man will, aber es mehren sich etwas die Zeichen dass Hillary selber nicht mehr damit rechnet nach dem 4. März wieder in Front zu sein. So hat sie ihren Wahlkampf in Wisconsin vorzeitig abgebrochen und ihr Kampagnenchef redet nun bereits vom Juni als Monat der Entschêidung. Nur: dann sind alle grossen Staaten durch. Gut sieht es für sie noch in Ohio und Pennsilvanya aus, dagegen wackelt offensichtlich Texas, die Nr. 2 hinter Californien.

Eine interessante Umfrage da El Paso fest in Händen der Hispanics ist und Hillary bis anhin auf diese Bevölkerungsgruppe zählen konnte ;):


El Paso Democrats split

By Ramon Bracamontes / El Paso Times
Article Launched: 02/17/2008 12:00:00 AM MST

El Pasoan Ruth Mojica-Hammer is being pulled in different directions in this year's Democratic presidential nomination race between Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama.

Mojica-Hammer admits that her feminism and her Hispanic heritage draw her to Clinton.

But it's Obama who has won her over.

Mojica-Hammer is representative of the El Paso Times/News Channel 9 poll that shows El Paso Democrats are being pulled apart. According to the poll conducted Feb. 11-12 by The Reuel Group, 33 percent of the voters support Clinton and 32 percent support Obama.

Another third of the voters, or 35 percent, remain undecided, the poll states. The poll's margin of error is plus or minus 5.5 percentage points.

On the Republican side, voters who say they plan to vote in the GOP primary overwhelmingly support Sen. John McCain of Arizona, who has emerged as the party's front-runner.

Though 24 percent of voters polled confessed to being undecided, 674 percent said they support McCain compared with 8.3 percent supporting former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

The Democratic results do not surprise El Paso Community College political science instructor Beatrice Chaslus-Cuartas...........

"I support Barack Obama because I am tired of war," said Mojica-Hammer, who has had family members in World War II, the Korean War, Vietnam and now the war in Iraq. "I really think he is the one who can make a difference there."

Despite the poll results, U.S. Rep. Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, said he still thinks that Clinton will carry El Paso and Texas, and that she will do it easily.

"I've always said that she knows the issues and especially the border counties," Reyes said. "I'm surprised she didn't track much higher, but it may be that those who are undecided haven't focused on the race."

State Rep. Norma Chávez, D-El Paso, said the poll bodes well for Obama.

"It's great polling numbers considering that the Clintons had eight years in the White House and that Obama has yet to have a community introduction here," said Chavez, who is a member of Obama's Texas campaign. "This is a great place for Obama to be right now."

http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_8285220

:kopf :kopf :kopf

Zum Original-Beitrag (http://www.stock-channel.net/stock-board/showthread.php3?p=1123557#post1123557)

Weiss auch nicht was der Sinn daran sein soll provisorische Resultate die derart lückenhaft sind zu veröffentlichen, ausser natürlich man denke wirklich an billige Tricks, ist ja die zweite Heimat von Hillary.

Identisches zählt übrigens auch für Kalifornien (erst 54-42% jetzt 52-43% für Clinton) und New Mexiko, da verblieb noch 1% Vorsprung für Hillary.

Eine interessante Umfrage da El Paso fest in Händen der Hispanics ist und Hillary bis anhin auf diese Bevölkerungsgruppe zählen konnte ;):

Zum Original-Beitrag (http://www.stock-channel.net/stock-board/showthread.php3?p=1123592#post1123592)
....ich kann mir nicht helfen - aber ich meine ihr Bill hatte ihr da vor einiger Zeit gehörig in die Suppe gespuckt, natürlich beabsichtigte er das Gegenteil :rolleyes
ein Schelm, der böses usw. usw. (...ist aber mein ganz persönliches Empfinden - mag sein, dass ich total daneben liege ;))

Da liegst Du wohl nicht daneben, Das Echo auf die Kommentare von Bill war katastrophal :schwitz. Ist wohl eine Kombination aus allem etwas. Auf der einen seite ein begnadeter Redner mit einem super Team der nach anfänglichen Schwierigkeiten mittlerweile eine übervolle Kriegskasse verfügt, auf der anderen Seite ein desolates Wahlkampfteam mit diversen wichtigen Wechseln über die letzten Monate mit offensichtlichen Finanzproblemen an wichtigen Zeitpunkten. Ansonsten hätte Hillary den kleinen Überbrückungskredit aus der eigenen Kasse nicht benötigt. Die Reden von ihr sind an sich solide, die wären schon ok. Nur, bei dem Konkurrent :schwitz. Dazu noch Bill und die Sache mit Michigan und Florida. Sind viele Faktoren und eigentlich ist noch gar nichts entschieden. Sind noch drei Wochen bis es wirklich wieder wichtig wird, da kann noch viel passieren. Mir persönlich kommt Obama etwaszu glatt durch derzeit, irgendwann kommt immer mal wieder eine Stolperfalle im Leben.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/02/13/662535.aspx

Die Kommentare haben es in sich :schwitz

Bill spars with Obama supporter

Posted: Sunday, February 17, 2008 5:21 PM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: 2008 (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/category/1023.aspx), Clinton (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/category/1199.aspx)

From NBC/NJ's Mike Memoli
CANTON, OH -- Robert Holeman came to Timken High School here today with a message to deliver to Bill Clinton. He did -- and he said the former president wasn’t happy about it.

Clinton spoke to a capacity crowd in this Northeast Ohio town, the third of five events today in the Buckeye State. He told voters that the contest was “the power of speeches against the promise of solutions by a world-class change maker.”

Throughout the event, as Clinton made his case for his wife, Holeman’s dissenting voice could be heard. At times he simply shouted Obama’s name. When Clinton would set up a sure applause line, Holeman could be heard heckling. As soon as Clinton finished speaking, the Canton native made a beeline to the ropeline to give Clinton a piece of his mind.

“I asked the president to please stop the bickering between the campaigns,” Holeman said in an interview afterwards. “All this name calling is like the bully in the yard. He can’t get his way, he can’t get nothing done.” Holeman said he thought Clinton was “gasping for air.”

“This is the last hurrah. After March 4, Hillary Clinton will be out of the race for good, and Obama will take the commanding lead,” he said. “She should back him with her delegates immediately. That’s what I’m asking them to do.”

Holeman said that Clinton responded by saying Obama came after him first. Holeman also described Clinton’s reaction to him as “irate.”

“I think he even hit me in the face with his hand,” he said. “He did give me a little pop. It was okay, because I understand his tenacity for his wife.” Clinton did engage Holeman for a few minutes, at times pointing directly at him. It was unclear whether he did make physical contact, however.

Holeman said he did support Bill Clinton during his campaigns, but that now the country wants a “new perspective.” “I think the president’s trying hoodwink us, bamboozle us, put us back in the okie doke,” he said. “He had eight years to do what he was supposed to do. All the things he said that she’s gonna do, he had the same authority that he wants her to have. Now if one Clinton, the male Clinton can’t get it done, how is Ms. Clinton [going to].”

Several Clinton supporters who saw the exchange came up to Holeman after to -- shall we say delicately -- express their disapproval for his actions. More negativity, Holeman said. “Hillary Clinton has started the most negative campaign I have ever seen, other than what the Republicans can launch,” he said. “I think we need to come together on those issues.”

*** UPDATE *** Obama spokesperson Ben LaBolt said Holeman was "absolutely not" a plant by the campaign. And a spokesperson for President Clinton who was near the president said there was no physical contact.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/02/17/673670.aspx

....ziemlich confusing :rolleyes diese Art von Wahlkampf schadet den Demokraten sicher :schwitz

http://www.drudgereport.com/jb.jpg

FLASH: McCain advisers will ask White House to deploy president for fundraising but don't want president to appear too often at McCain's side... Developing...

:rolleyes ....de Foifer unds Weggli :hihi (wobei das Weggli schon etwas schimmlig sein könnte)

Akt. 20.02.08; 06:07 Pub. 20.02.08; 06:07 jeb

Obama zwingt Clinton weiter in die Defensive

Mit dem neunten Vorwahlsieg in Folge hat Senator Barack Obama seinen Anspruch auf die Präsidentschaftskandidatur der Demokratischen Partei bekräftigt.

Für Hillary Clinton wird es nach der Niederlage in Wisconsin langsam eng. Bei den nächsten Vorwahlen am 4. März in Ohio und Texas benötigt sie nach Angaben aus ihrem Wahlkampfteam mindestens einen Sieg, um dem Eindruck der Verliererin entgegenzuwirken. Bei den Republikanern ist Senator John McCain die Präsidentschaftskandidatur nach einem weiteren Sieg in Wisconsin nahezu sicher.

Nach Auszählung von zwei Drittel der Stimmen entfielen 57 Prozent auf Obama und 42 Prozent auf Clinton. Obama stahl Clinton auch bei den Fernsehsendern die Schau: Nahezu alle Sender brachen die Übertragung einer Ansprache Clintons ab, als Obama in Houston vor seine Anhäger trat.

Zu den Vorwürfen Clintons, er habe keine Erfahrung, sondern nur schöne Worte zu bieten, sagte Obama, er sei nicht naiv. Es mangle Amerika nicht an guten Ideen. «Aber Washington ist ein Ort geworden, in dem gute Ideen sterben.» Deshalb müssten neue Leute in den politischen Prozess einsteigen, sagte Obama, dessen Rede immer wieder von Sprechchören «Yes we can» (Ja, wir schaffen es) unterbrochen wurde. «Der Wandel, den wir anstreben, ist noch Monate und Meilen entfernt», gab Obama zu bedenken. Seine Anhänger in Texas rief er auf, von der Möglichkeit der vorzeitigen Stimmabgabe vor der Vorwahl am 4. März Gebrauch zu machen.

Auch Clinton blickte bereits auf die nächsten Vorwahlen und erwähnte die Niederlage in Wisconsin mit keinem Wort. In Wisconsin waren 72 Delegiertenstimmen für den Nominierungsparteitag der Demokraten im August zu vergeben. Obama baute seinen Vorsprung vor Clinton auf mindestens 70 Stimmen aus und sicherte sich nach der Zählung der Nachrichtenagentur AP zunächst 1.303 Stimmen. Für die Wahl zum Präsidentschaftskandidaten sind mindestens 2.025 Stimmen erforderlich. Am Dienstag wurde auch im US-Staat Hawaii gewählt, wo weitere 20 Stimmen zu vergeben waren.

Obama gelang es in Wisconsin offenbar, in diejenigen Wählergruppen einzudringen, die bislang Clinton den Vorzug gegeben hatten. So erhielt er nach Ergebnissen von Wählernachfragen mehr Stimmen der weissen Wähler als Clinton. Bei den Frauen konnte er mit seiner Rivalin gleichziehen. Von den demokratischen Wählern in Wisconsin nahmen 15 Prozent zum ersten Mal an einer Vorwahl teil. Wichtigstes Thema der demokratischen Wähler waren Wirtschaft und Handel. Sieben von zehn Befragten gaben an, dass sie besorgt darüber seien, dass der Handel mit anderen Ländern auf Kosten der Arbeitsplätze in Wisconsin gehe.

http://www.20min.ch/news/dossier/uswahlen/story/12235437

http://www.drudgereport.com/msn.jpg

NBC reprimands employee for using picture of bin Laden behind Obama story... (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=cp_fpfs1pmkq14&show_article=1)

:mad

Beste Antwort auf die (erwartete) Schmutzkampagne: ein weiterer Sieg :dd !


20. Februar 2008

10:0 für Obama - Clintons Chancen schwinden

Von Gregor Peter Schmitz, Washington

Last exit Texas: Nach den desaströsen Niederlagen in Hawaii und Wisconsin muss Clinton nun die Vorwahlen in Texas und Ohio unbedingt gewinnen, wenn sie ihre Chancen wahren will. Doch immer mehr Clinton-Stammwähler laufen zu Obama über. Ihre letzte Bastion - weiße Frauen über 50.

Washington - Sechs Minuten nach Schließung der Wahllokale in Wisconsin steht fest: Hillary Clinton hat auch diese Vorwahl haushoch verloren. Und Tim Russert, Starmoderator des TV-Senders NBC, stellt erbamungslos fest: "Die einzige Gruppe, die ihr noch bleibt, sind weiße Frauen über 50."

Alle Vorhersagen, die Russert analysiert, zeigen in eine Richtung: Auch in Wisconsin hat Barack Obama breite Lücken in die Wählergruppen geschlagen, die bislang überwiegend auf Clintons Seite standen: Die mit geringen Einkommen, Frauen, Wähler mit wenig Ausbildung. Russert jongliert mit Zahlen und Trends, und während er spricht, scheinen diese Lücken eher zu Kratern zu wachsen.

Rund zwanzig Minuten später sind Russerts Vorhersagen Gewissheit, als Obama zum Sieger erklärt wird. Und das Endergebnis ist ernüchternd für Clinton: Ihr Rivale siegt überdeutlich, mit 58 zu 41 Prozent der Stimmen. Mit einem Triumph später in dieser Nacht in Hawaii - wo er geboren wurde und als klarer Favorit galt - baut Obama die Siegesserie weiter aus. Er schlägt Clinton mit weit über 70 Prozent.

Damit liegt er nun 10:0 in Führung seit dem "Super Tuesday" am 5. Februar. Schlimmer noch für Clinton: Befragungen der Wähler an den Urnen Wisconsins zeigen, welche Woge der Begeisterung Barack Obama derzeit zum Sieg trägt. Danach erhielt er zwei Drittel der Stimmen derer, die sich erst im vorigen Monat entschieden haben. Da galt Wisconsin noch als ein eher Clinton-freundlicher Staat - mit seiner fast ganz weißen Bevölkerung, die zumeist in Vororten lebt und Angst hat vor Arbeitslosigkeit oder Rezession.

Die Fernsehsender haben Clinton abgeschrieben

Die Senatorin ist bereits in Youngstown in Ohio, als sie sich an diesem Abend zu Wort meldet. Ohio ist neben Texas ein Schutzwall, den Clinton bei der nächsten Vorwahlrunde am 4. März gegen die Obama-Welle errichten möchte. "Hallo Youngstown, ich bin so glücklich, heute hier zu sein", beginnt Clinton mit lauter Stimme. Die Menge jubelt, doch der Satz erinnert fatal an einen ähnlichen Auftritt in Texas vor sieben Tagen nach ihrer Niederlage in drei anderen Vorwahlstaaten - er betont, dass Clinton seit Wochen wirklich allen Grund hat, am Wahlabend nicht mehr dort sein zu wollen, wo gerade abgestimmt wurde.

Sie beginnt ihre Rede mit einem ganzen Stakkato an Angriffen auf ihren Rivalen, dem sie nicht einmal gratuliert. "Amerika braucht einen Präsidenten, der sich nicht bloß auf Worte verlässt, sondern auf harte Arbeit", ruft Clinton. "Wir können nicht nur Reden hören, wir brauchen Lösungen." Hinter ihr sind Anhänger mit dem Schild "Wir stehen hinter Dir" zu sehen, sie klatschen, als die ehemalige First Lady Obama zum x-ten Mal zu seiner Gesundheitspolitik angreift - doch die ganze Szenerie wirkt bemüht, fast pflichtschuldig.

Und auch die US-Fernsehsender behandeln Clinton bereits wie eine Verliererin. Während sie noch redet, tritt Obama im texanischen Houston schon vor rund 20.000 Anhänger. Einige TV-Kanäle schalten gleich zum Wahlsieger um, CNN gönnt Clinton wenigstens noch eine halbe Bildschirmseite. Doch auch hier avancieren die beiden Ansprachen zu einer Art Schreiduell, weil der Jubel von Obamas Anhängern Clintons Rede immer mehr zu übertönen droht. Nach ein paar Minuten zappt auch CNN Clinton fort und räumt den gesamten Schirm für Obama frei.

Eigentlich macht man das nicht, laut US-Wahlkampfetikette: Seine Rede beginnen, während der Gegner noch spricht. Es ist ein Zeichen für die eisige Stimmung zwischen den beiden Lagern, dass Obama es dennoch tut - und wohl auch eine Retourkutsche für Clintons versäumte Gratulation (sie holt die freilich in einem Telefonat später nach, berichtet "NBC").

Es ist aber kein überschwänglicher Wahlsieger, der den Bildschirm füllt: Obama beginnt seine Rede mit ausführlichen technischen Anweisungen, wie die Anwesenden jetzt schon in Texas wählen könnten. Und als er schließlich ansetzt, ist einer seiner ersten Sätze einer, der glatt aus Clintons Mund kommen könnte: "Es braucht mehr als große Versammlungen, mehr als inspirierende Reden." Obama wirkt ernster als sonst, zurückhaltender. "Wir glauben immer noch, dass Wandel möglich ist", ruft er. Aber es klingt heute nicht leidenschaftlich, er spricht es eher gleichmütig wie eine Tatsache aus.

Einige Minuten lang scheint der neue Redestil wie der Versuch eines inspirierenden Bewerbers, sich nun auch als souveräner Staatsmann zu profilieren. Doch wenn dies das Ziel war, fremdelt Obama in dieser Rolle. Der Senator aus Illinois redet, und redet, fast 45 Minuten lang, er verliert sich in den Details von Erziehungspolitik oder Energiezukunft. Der große Orator ist am Tag seines möglicherweise vorentscheidenden Durchbruchs eher der große Langweiler.

Vielleicht ist der Senator aus Illinois aber auch einfach erschöpft vom epischen Ringen mit Clinton. Das Ehepaar Obama schien sehr mit sich selbst beschäftig zu sein in den vergangenen Tagen. Der Bewerber musste sich gegen Vorwürfe verteidigen, er habe für seine Reden Zitate geklaut. Seine Frau Michelle wiederum hatte vielleicht zu unverblümt ihre eigenen Worte benutzt. Am Montagnachmittag stand Michelle Obama auf einer Bühne in Madison, sie hielt eine flammende Rede für ihren Ehemann, die Zuschauer jubelten, und sie sprach den Satz, der sie seither verfolgt: "Das erste Mal als Erwachsene bin ich stolz auf mein Land. Und nicht nur, weil Barack gut abschneidet - sondern weil so viele Menschen nach Wandel hungern", sagte sie.

Republikanische Wahl-Strategen haben sich auf diese Bemerkung bereits gestürzt. Mark Halperin meint auf "Fox News": "Das könnte ein Satz sein, der Republikaner wieder mobilisiert." Der konservative TV-Haudegen Pat Buchanan stimmt ihm bei: Solche von manchen als unpatriotisch empfundenen Äußerungen sprächen in einem Wahlkampf direkt das Bauchgefühl der Wähler an.

Stehen die Duellanten schon fest?

Es ist bezeichnend, dass die TV-Experten am Wahlabend schon solche Fragen eines möglichen Duells zwischen Barack Obama und dem republikanischen Kandidaten John McCain debattieren. Als ein MSNBC-Moderator seine Gäste fragt, ob jemand noch an ein Comeback von Hillary Clinton glaube, winken die fast einmütig ab. Chuck Todd von "NBC" rechnet später vor, bei einem normalen weiteren Verlauf der Vorwahlen müsste Clinton in Ohio und Texas bis zu 65 Prozent der Stimmen gewinnen, nur um Obamas aktuellen Vorsprung an Delegierten auszugleichen.

John McCain hingegen kanzelte bei den Wahlen in Wisconsin und in Washington State seinen letzten verbliebenen ernsthaften Rivalen Mike Huckabee ab. In seiner Rede spricht McCain weltmännisch über die Gefahren eines nuklearen Pakistans, über Afghanistan, über Lage in Kuba und Pakistan. "USA, USA", rufen die Zuhörer ihm zu. Und McCain greift Barack Obama direkt an. "Amerikaner lassen sich nicht täuschen von einem eloquenten aber leeren Ruf nach Wandel", ruft er.

Seine Frau Cindy hat sich laut einem Bericht der "New York Times" schon früher am Tag vor Wählern in Wisconsin als Wahlhelferin betätigt - mit einem Seitenhieb auf Michelle Obama und ihre umstrittenen Worte. "Ich bin stolz auf mein Land", sagte Frau McCain. "Ich weiß nicht, wie es ihnen geht, als sie diese Bemerkungen früher hörten. Ich bin sehr stolz auf mein Land."

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,536448,00.html

Und in Texas laufen die Dems scharenweise zu Obama über, hat sich Hillary selbst eingebrockt mit dem "Plagiatsskandälchen" welchen sie Obama anhängen wollte. Nur dumm hat auch Hillary einen Redenschreiber und nutzte noch viel mehr Zitate anderer Persönlichkeiten :bad

Nun wird es ganz mies, man lagert die Drecksarbeit aus :kotz

New Pro-Clinton 527 to Ding Obama in Ohio

ABC News has learned that a group of Democratic politicos have set up a new independent 527 organization called the American Leadership Project (ALP) with the express purpose of helping Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, beat Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, in Ohio, and possibly Texas and Pennsylvania as well.

Free from campaign finance rules,;) ALP will not be legally permitted to coordinate with the Clinton campaign, but it is clearly intended to help her.

The group is targeting through TV ads, mail, and phone communications white women under 50 in the Ohio area -- specifically Cleveland, Columbus, Youngstown, Charleston (WV), Wheeling- Steubenville, Zanesville, and Parkersburg (WV).

White men will also be a focus, and if there are any excess funds Latinos in Texas and middle class families in Pennsylvania will also be targeted.

ALP has developed three ads aimed at tarnishing Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, as a talker and not a doer -- the ads are called “If speeches could solve problems" -- and they will contrast Obama and Clinton on issues of importance to middle class voters, such as the economy, health care, and the mortgage crisis.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/02/new-pro-clinton.html

Genau die gleichen Mittel die Bush's Freunde gegen Kerry eingesetzt haben. Wie tief muss man sinken :ne

:schwitz auch wenn ich mich wiederhole - exgüsi - hoffentlich gibt's nicht einen lachenden Dritten :rolleyes

NY MAYOR MIKE BLOOMBERG CLAIMS VOTE 'FRAUD’

David Seifman

February 19, 2008 -- Mayor Bloomberg charged yesterday that "fraud" was behind the unofficial results in the New York Democratic presidential primary that produced zero votes for Barack Obama in some districts.

"If you want to call it significant undercounting, I guess that's a euphemism for fraud," said the mayor.

Unofficial tallies on election night gave Obama no votes in 78 out of more than 6,000 election districts.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/02192008/news/regionalnews/mike_bloomberg_claims_vote_fraud__98367.htm

Hmmm, wie würde sich wohl Bloomberg als VP von Obama machen als Unabhängiger.... die Gerüchte um den VP-Posten gehen seit Tagen um und so deutlich hat sich der Bürgermeister von NYC noch nie zur Vorwahl geäussert. Ausgerechnet aus NYC, immerhin ist Hillary Clinton da Senatorin :schwitz

...das wäre natürlich unschlagbar :supi :D

auf DU hätten da aber wohl einige ein Problem damit, die wollen Edwards :schwitz :)

Aber eines steht fest: 77% der US-Amerikaner sind froh wenn GWB weg ist :dd

http://americanresearchgroup.com/economy/

Das ist Allzeitlow, nicht einmal Nixon lag annähernd so tief :bump

...ich bin kein Bloomberg Fan, ich könnte mir aber vorstellen, das einige dann Obama besser "ertragen" könnten - mit einem Geschäfts-/Börsen-/Wallstreetkenner an seiner Seite fällt ihnen das vielleicht leichter :rolleyes:schwitz:cool

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20080220/i/r3496952206.jpg?x=400&y=281&sig=.ZS.2whJczttZl3iWjJ00Q--
NOW THAT HE'S SECURED NOMINATION: NYT DOWNLOADS ON MCCAIN (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21mccain.html?ei=5065&en=30275248afff65bf&ex=1204174800&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print)

McCain says New York Times lobbyist story not true
9:07 AM ET, Feb 21, 2008 - 32 minutes ago

McCain wird "abgeschossen" werden, aber nicht von den Demokraten sondern vom rechten Flügel der GOP. Denen ist er viel zu liberal und die hatten auf Romney gesetzt. Ann Coulter ist nur ein Aushängeschild die ganz offen bekannt hat Hillary zu unterstützen falls McCain die Nominierung erhält. Denn die wollen lieber einen Demokraten drin um es dann in 4 Jahren wieder mit einem gläubigen, abtreibungs- und immigrationsablehnenden Rechtsaussen zu probieren als 8 Jahre McCain zu riskieren ;) .... Wenigstens ist die Konstelation nun mehr oder weniger klar ausser für paar ewig hängengebliebene Freaks:bäh

McCain says New York Times lobbyist story not true
9:07 AM ET, Feb 21, 2008 - 32 minutes ago

Zum Original-Beitrag (http://www.stock-channel.net/stock-board/showthread.php3?p=1125536#post1125536)

Gefunden auf DU, da war wohl "Drudge" mal wieder bestens informiert schon vor Wochen ;)

MEDIA FIREWORKS: MCCAIN PLEADS WITH NY TIMES TO SPIKE STORY
Thu Dec 20 2007 10:49:27 ET

Just weeks away from a possible surprise victory in the primaries, Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz has been waging a ferocious behind the scenes battle with the NEW YORK TIMES, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned, and has hired DC power lawyer Bob Bennett to mount a bold defense against charges of giving special treatment to a lobbyist!

McCain has personally pleaded with NY TIMES editor Bill Keller not to publish the high-impact report involving key telecom legislation before the Senate Commerce Committee, newsroom insiders tell the DRUDGE REPORT.

The paper’s Jim Rutenberg has been leading the investigation and is described as beyond frustrated with McCain’s aggressive and angry efforts to stop any and all publication.

The drama involves a woman lobbyist who may have helped to write key telecom legislation. The woman in question has retained counsel and strongly denies receiving any special treatment from McCain.
Die Geschichte ist der NYT offenbar schon länger bekannt, aber sie haben McCain im Dezember wohl erhöhrt und damit gewartet bis er die Nomination praktisch auf sicher hat.

Wobei, spannend ist es ja schon, möglicherweise ein Grund warum Huckabee noch dabei ist obwohl er im Normalfall keinerlei Chance mehr hat, schon rein mathematisch :schaf...

...also um McCain ist es wirklich nicht schade ;) aber diese ganze Schlammschlacht auf allen Seiten ist einfach widerlich :(
und stell Dir vor Huckabee hätte dann die Nase vorn :schreck

er scheint auch nicht erfreut zu sein :rolleyes

Jackson to Dems: Play nice

By: Roger Simon (http://www.politico.com/reporters/RogerSimon.html)
Feb 20, 2008 03:43 PM EST

http://images.politico.com/global/080220_jackson_simon.jpg
Jesse Jackson warns Dems that fallout from Clinton-Obama clashes could hurt the party "irreparably."
Photo: AP

The Rev. Jesse Jackson, the civil rights leader and two-time presidential candidate, warned Wednesday that Democrats “could hurt themselves substantially, perhaps irreparably, in November” if fallout from the clash between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton is not addressed quickly.......
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8606.html

http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif Clinton: Obama 'Change You Can Xerox' http://img.breitbart.com/images/ap.gif (http://www.breitbart.com/partner.php?source=ap) http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif Feb 22 01:22 AM US/Eastern
By DAVID ESPO
AP Special Correspondent http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif http://img.breitbart.com/images/2008/2/21/D8UV6LLO0/D8UV6LLO0_preview.jpg
http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif
View larger image (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8UV6LLO0&show_article=1&image=large)
http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif
http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif AUSTIN, Texas (AP) - Hillary Rodham Clinton accused presidential rival Barack Obama (http://search.breitbart.com/q?s=%22Barack+Obama%22&sid=breitbart.com) of political plagiarism Thursday night, but drew boos from a Democratic debate audience when she ridiculed him as the candidate of "change you can Xerox." Obama dismissed the charge out of hand, then turned the jeers to applause when he countered, "What we shouldn't be spending time doing is tearing each other down. We should be spending time lifting the country up."..........


http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8UV6LLO0&show_article=1

...diese Gifteleien bringen sie nicht weiter :rolleyes er wirkt souveräner - ist natürlich auch einfacher, wenn man auf der Überholspur ist ;)

**************************************************************

...hier noch die deutsche Ansicht:

22. Februar 2008

TV-SCHLACHT DER DEMOKRATEN

Clintons letzte Offensive gegen die Obama-Mania

Von Gregor Peter Schmitz, Washington

Sie charmiert, sie argumentiert, sie kämpft. Und bewegt ihr Publikum. In der zentralen Fernsehdebatte in Texas warf Hillary Clinton Barack Obama vieles vor: Reden abzukupfern, ein Politiker für Worte statt Taten zu sein, ungeeignet fürs Weiße Haus - aber kann sie so den Trend noch drehen?

Washington - Hillary Clinton gegen Barack Obama - es ist ein Drama, und CNN verkauft es auch so. Stunden vor der entscheidenden Fernsehdebatte der beiden in Texas beginnt der Countdown. In einer Art Identitätsdrama befasst sich eine Reporterin mit Clinton, der Frau, die jetzt wirklich kämpfen muss - Arbeitstitel: Eine Frau sucht ihre Rolle. Welche Clinton werden wir heute Abend sehen? Die charmante? Die detailverliebte? Die aggressive?

Und dann sitzt Clinton neben Barack Obama auf der Bühne der Lyndon-B.-Johnson-Präsidentenbibliothek in Austin. Rasch ist klar: Heute gibt es nicht eine dieser Hillary Clintons.

Sondern alle drei.

http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,1104323,00.jpg REUTERS
Obama, Clinton: Frühere First Lady in drei bis vier Rollen

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,536986,00.html

Posted on Thu, Feb. 21, 2008


Police concerned about order to stop weapons screening at Obama rally :schwitz


By JACK DOUGLAS Jr.
Star-Telegram Staff Writer


http://media.star-telegram.com/smedia/2008/02/21/05/108-324450-268988.embedded.prod_affiliate.58.jpg (http://media.star-telegram.com/smedia/2008/02/21/05/416-324450-268988.standalone.prod_affiliate.58.jpg)
STAR-TELEGRAM/RODGER MALLISON
Barack Obama speaks Wednesday at a Democratic rally in Dallas' Reunion Arena. Police were told to stop screening people for weapons before the rally began.


DALLAS -- Security details at Barack Obama's rally Wednesday stopped screening people for weapons at the front gates more than an hour before the Democratic presidential candidate took the stage at Reunion Arena.

The order to put down the metal detectors and stop checking purses and laptop bags came as a surprise to several Dallas police officers who said they believed it was a lapse in security.

Dallas Deputy Police Chief T.W. Lawrence, head of the Police Department's homeland security and special operations divisions, said the order -- apparently made by the U.S. Secret Service :rolleyes -- was meant to speed up the long lines outside and fill the arena's vacant seats before Obama came on.

"Sure," said Lawrence, when asked if he was concerned by the great number of people who had gotten into the building without being checked. But, he added, the turnout of more than 17,000 people seemed to be a "friendly crowd."

The Secret Service did not return a call from the Star-Telegram seeking comment.

Doors opened to the public at 10 a.m., and for the first hour security officers scanned each person who came in and checked their belongings in a process that kept movement of the long lines at a crawl. Then, about 11 a.m., an order came down to allow the people in without being checked.

Several Dallas police officers said it worried them that the arena was packed with people who got in without even a cursory inspection.

They spoke on condition of anonymity because, they said, the order was made by federal officials who were in charge of security at the event.

"How can you not be concerned in this day and age," said one policeman.

JACK DOUGLAS Jr., 817-390-7700
jld@star-telegram.com

http://www.star-telegram.com/667/story/486413.html

A Hole in McCain’s Defense?

An apparent contradiction in his response to lobbyist story.

By Michael Isikoff
Newsweek
Updated: 11:33 AM ET Feb 22, 2008

A sworn deposition that Sen. John McCain gave in a lawsuit more than five years ago appears to contradict one part of a sweeping denial that his campaign issued this week to rebut a New York Times story about his ties to a Washington lobbyist.

On Wednesday night the Times published a story suggesting that McCain might have done legislative favors for the clients of the lobbyist, Vicki Iseman, who worked for the firm of Alcalde & Fay. One example it cited were two letters McCain wrote in late 1999 demanding that the Federal Communications Commission act on a long-stalled bid by one of Iseman's clients, Florida-based Paxson Communications, to purchase a Pittsburgh television station.

Just hours after the Times's story was posted, the McCain campaign issued a point-by-point response that depicted the letters as routine correspondence handled by his staff—and insisted that McCain had never even spoken with anybody from Paxson or Alcalde & Fay about the matter. "No representative of Paxson or Alcalde & Fay personally asked Senator McCain to send a letter to the FCC," the campaign said in a statement e-mailed to reporters.

But that flat claim seems to be contradicted by an impeccable source: McCain himself. "I was contacted by Mr. [Lowell] Paxson on this issue," McCain said in the Sept. 25, 2002, deposition obtained by NEWSWEEK. "He wanted their approval very bad for purposes of his business. I believe that Mr. Paxson had a legitimate complaint."

While McCain said "I don't recall" if he ever directly spoke to the firm's lobbyist about the issue—an apparent reference to Iseman, though she is not named—"I'm sure I spoke to [Paxson]." McCain agreed that his letters on behalf of Paxson, a campaign contributor, could "possibly be an appearance of corruption"—even though McCain denied doing anything improper.

McCain's subsequent letters to the FCC—coming around the same time that Paxson's firm was flying the senator to campaign events aboard its corporate jet and contributing $20,000 to his campaign—first surfaced as an issue during his unsuccessful 2000 presidential bid. William Kennard, the FCC chair at the time, described the sharply worded letters from McCain, then chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, as "highly unusual."

The issue erupted again this week when the New York Times reported that McCain's top campaign strategist at the time, John Weaver, was so concerned about what Iseman (who was representing Paxson) was saying about her access to McCain that he personally confronted her at a Washington restaurant and told her to stay away from the senator.

The McCain campaign has denounced the Times story as a "smear campaign" and harshly criticized the paper for publishing a report saying that anonymous aides worried there might have been an improper relationship between Iseman and McCain. McCain, who called the charges "not true," also told reporters Thursday in a news conference that he was unaware of any confrontation Weaver might have had with Iseman.

The deposition that McCain gave came in the course of a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of his landmark campaign finance reform law, known as McCain-Feingold. The suit sheds no new light on the nature of the senator's dealings with Iseman, but it does include a lengthy discussion of his dealings with the company that hired her, including some statements by the senator that could raise additional questions for his campaign.............

http://www.newsweek.com/id/114505/output/print

:rolleyes :a

AP survey: Superdelegates jump to Obama

AP News
Feb 22, 2008 17:27 EST

The Democratic superdelegates are starting to follow the voters — straight to Barack Obama.

In just the past two weeks, more than two dozen of them have climbed aboard his presidential campaign, according to a survey by The Associated Press. At the same time, Hillary Rodham Clinton's are beginning to jump ship, abandoning her for Obama or deciding they now are undecided.

The result: He's narrowing her once-commanding lead among these "superdelegates," the Democratic office holders and party officials who automatically attend the national convention and can vote for whomever they choose.

As Obama has reeled off 11 straight primary victories, some of the superdelegates are having second — or third — thoughts about their public commitments.

Take John Perez, a Californian who first endorsed John Edwards and then backed Clinton. Now, he says, he is undecided.

"Given where the race is at right now, I think it's very important for us to play a role around bringing the party together around the candidate that people have chosen, as opposed to advocating for our own choice," he said in an interview.

Clinton still leads among superdelegates — 241 to 181, according to the AP survey. But her total is down two in the past two weeks, while Obama's is up 25. Since the primaries started, at least three Clinton superdelegates have switched to Obama, including Rep. David Scott of Georgia, who changed his endorsement after Obama won 80 percent of the primary vote in Scott's district. At least two other Clinton backers have switched to undecided.

None of Obama's have publicly strayed, according to the AP tally.

There are nearly 800 Democratic superdelegates, making them an important force in a nomination race as close as this one. Both campaigns are furiously lobbying them.

"Holy buckets!" exclaimed Audra Ostergard of Nebraska. "Michelle Obama and I are playing phone tag."

Billi Gosh, a Vermont superdelegate who backs Clinton, got a phone call from the candidate herself this week.

"As superdelegates, we have the opportunity to change our mind, so she's just connecting with me," Gosh said. "I couldn't believe she was able to fit in calls like that to her incredibly busy schedule."

In Utah, two Clinton superdelegates said they continue to support the New York senator — for now.

"We'll see what happens," said Karen Hale. Likewise, fellow superdelegate Helen Langan said, "We'll see."

Other supporters are more steadfast.

"She's still in the race, isn't she? So I'm still supporting her," said Belinda Biafore, a superdelegate from West Virginia.
Obama has piled up the most victories in primaries and caucuses, giving him the overall lead in delegates, 1,362 to 1,266.5. Clinton's half delegate came from the global primary sponsored by the Democrats Abroad.

It will take 2,025 delegates to secure the nomination at this summer's national convention in Denver. If Clinton and Obama continue to split delegates in elections, neither will reach the mark without support from the superdelegates.
That has the campaigns fighting over the proper role for superdelegates, who can support any candidate they want. Obama argues it would be unfair for them to go against the outcome of the primaries and caucuses.

"I think it is important, given how hard Senator Clinton and I have been working, that these primaries and caucuses count for something," Obama said during Thursday night's debate in Austin, Texas.

Clinton argues that superdelegates should exercise independent judgment.

"These are the rules that are followed, and you know, I think that it will sort itself out," she said during the debate. "We will have a nominee, and we will have a unified Democratic Party, and we will go on to victory in November."

Behind the scenes, things can get sticky.

David Cicilline, the mayor of Providence, R.I., indicated this week that his support for Clinton might be wavering after — he contended — members of her campaign urged him to cave to the demands of a local firefighters union ahead of her weekend appearance there. The firefighters, in a long-running contract dispute with Cicilline, have said they would disrupt any Clinton event the mayor attends. A Clinton spokeswoman said the campaign would never interfere in the mayor's city decisions.

Obama has been helped by recent endorsements from several labor unions, including the Teamsters on Wednesday.

"He's our guy," said Sonny Nardi, an Ohio superdelegate and the president of Teamsters Local 416 in Cleveland.

The Democratic Party has named about 720 of its 795 superdelegates. The remainder will be chosen at state party conventions in the spring. AP reporters have interviewed 95 percent of the named delegates, with the most recent round of interviews taking place this week.

The superdelegates make up about a fifth of the overall delegates. As Democratic senators, both Clinton and Obama are superdelegates.
So is Cincinnati Mayor Mark Mallory, which is one reason his phone rings often.

He is a black mayor, and Obama has been winning about 90 percent of black votes. His state has a March 4 primary with 141 delegates at stake. The Democratic governor, Ted Strickland, is stumping hard for Clinton — and perhaps a spot on the national ticket.

A phone call from former President Clinton interrupted Mallory's dinner on a recent Saturday.

"I continue to get calls from mayors, congresspeople, governors, urging me one way or another," said Mallory, who is still mulling his decision. "The celebrities will be next. I guess Oprah will call me."

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/SUPERDELEGATES?SITE=MAQUI&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

February 24, 2008

The Audacity of Hopelessness

By FRANK RICH

WHEN people one day look back at the remarkable implosion of the Hillary Clinton campaign, they may notice that it both began and ended in the long dark shadow of Iraq.

It’s not just that her candidacy’s central premise — the priceless value of “experience” — was fatally poisoned from the start by her still ill-explained vote to authorize the fiasco. Senator Clinton then compounded that 2002 misjudgment by pursuing a 2008 campaign strategy that uncannily mimicked the disastrous Bush Iraq war plan. After promising a cakewalk to the nomination — “It will be me,” Mrs. Clinton told Katie Couric in November — she was routed by an insurgency.

The Clinton camp was certain that its moneyed arsenal of political shock-and-awe would take out Barack Hussein Obama in a flash. The race would “be over by Feb. 5,” Mrs. Clinton assured George Stephanopoulos just before New Year’s. But once the Obama forces outwitted her, leaving her mission unaccomplished on Super Tuesday, there was no contingency plan. She had neither the boots on the ground nor the money to recoup.

That’s why she has been losing battle after battle by double digits in every corner of the country ever since. And no matter how much bad stuff happened, she kept to the Bush playbook, stubbornly clinging to her own Rumsfeld, her chief strategist, Mark Penn. Like his prototype, Mr. Penn is bigger on loyalty and arrogance than strategic brilliance. But he’s actually not even all that loyal. Mr. Penn, whose operation has billed several million dollars in fees to the Clinton campaign so far, has never given up his day job as chief executive of the public relations behemoth Burson-Marsteller. His top client there, Microsoft, is simultaneously engaged in a demanding campaign of its own to acquire Yahoo.

Clinton fans don’t see their standard-bearer’s troubles this way. In their view, their highly substantive candidate was unfairly undone by a lightweight showboat who got a free ride from an often misogynist press and from naïve young people who lap up messianic language as if it were Jim Jones’s Kool-Aid. Or as Mrs. Clinton frames it, Senator Obama is all about empty words while she is all about action and hard work.

But it’s the Clinton strategists, not the Obama voters, who drank the Kool-Aid. The Obama campaign is not a vaporous cult; it’s a lean and mean political machine that gets the job done. The Clinton camp has been the slacker in this race, more words than action, and its candidate’s message, for all its purported high-mindedness, was and is self-immolating.

The gap in hard work between the two campaigns was clear well before Feb. 5. Mrs. Clinton threw as much as $25 million at the Iowa caucuses without ever matching Mr. Obama’s organizational strength. In South Carolina, where last fall she was up 20 percentage points in the polls, she relied on top-down endorsements and the patina of inevitability, while the Obama campaign built a landslide-winning organization from scratch at the grass roots. In Kansas, three paid Obama organizers had the field to themselves for three months; ultimately Obama staff members outnumbered Clinton staff members there 18 to 3.

In the last battleground, Wisconsin, the Clinton campaign was six days behind Mr. Obama in putting up ads and had only four campaign offices to his 11. Even as Mrs. Clinton clings to her latest firewall — the March 4 contests — she is still being outhustled. Last week she told reporters that she “had no idea” that the Texas primary system was “so bizarre” (it’s a primary-caucus hybrid), adding that she had “people trying to understand it as we speak.” Perhaps her people can borrow the road map from Obama’s people. In Vermont, another March 4 contest, The Burlington Free Press reported that there were four Obama offices and no Clinton offices as of five days ago. For what will no doubt be the next firewall after March 4, Pennsylvania on April 22, the Clinton campaign is sufficiently disorganized that it couldn’t file a complete slate of delegates by even an extended ballot deadline.

This is the candidate who keeps telling us she’s so competent that she’ll be ready to govern from Day 1. Mrs. Clinton may be right that Mr. Obama has a thin résumé, but her disheveled campaign keeps reminding us that the biggest item on her thicker résumé is the health care task force that was as botched as her presidential bid.

Given that Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama offer marginally different policy prescriptions — laid out in voluminous detail by both, by the way, on their Web sites — it’s not clear what her added-value message is. The “experience” mantra has been compromised not only by her failure on the signal issue of Iraq but also by the deadening lingua franca of her particular experience, Washingtonese. No matter what the problem, she keeps rolling out another commission to solve it: a commission for infrastructure, a Financial Product Safety Commission, a Corporate Subsidy Commission, a Katrina/Rita Commission and, to deal with drought, a water summit.

As for countering what she sees as the empty Obama brand of hope, she offers only a chilly void: Abandon hope all ye who enter here. This must be the first presidential candidate in history to devote so much energy to preaching against optimism, against inspiring language and — talk about bizarre — against democracy itself. No sooner does Mrs. Clinton lose a state than her campaign belittles its voters as unrepresentative of the country.

Bill Clinton knocked states that hold caucuses instead of primaries because “they disproportionately favor upper-income voters” who “don’t really need a president but feel like they need a change.” After the Potomac primary wipeout, Mr. Penn declared that Mr. Obama hadn’t won in “any of the significant states” outside of his home state of Illinois. This might come as news to Virginia, Maryland, Washington and Iowa, among the other insignificant sites of Obama victories. The blogger Markos Moulitsas Zúniga has hilariously labeled this Penn spin the “insult 40 states” strategy.

The insults continued on Tuesday night when a surrogate preceding Mrs. Clinton onstage at an Ohio rally, Tom Buffenbarger of the machinists’ union, derided Obama supporters as “latte-drinking, Prius-driving, Birkenstock-wearing, trust-fund babies.” Even as he ranted, exit polls in Wisconsin were showing that Mr. Obama had in fact won that day among voters with the least education and the lowest incomes. Less than 24 hours later, Mr. Obama received the endorsement of the latte-drinking Teamsters.

If the press were as prejudiced against Mrs. Clinton as her campaign constantly whines, debate moderators would have pushed for the Clinton tax returns and the full list of Clinton foundation donors to be made public with the same vigor it devoted to Mr. Obama’s “plagiarism.” And it would have showered her with the same ridicule that Rudy Giuliani received in his endgame. With 11 straight losses in nominating contests, Mrs. Clinton has now nearly doubled the Giuliani losing streak (six) by the time he reached his Florida graveyard. But we gamely pay lip service to the illusion that she can erect one more firewall.

The other persistent gripe among some Clinton supporters is that a hard-working older woman has been unjustly usurped by a cool young guy intrinsically favored by a sexist culture. Slate posted a devilish video mash-up of the classic 1999 movie “Election”: Mrs. Clinton is reduced to a stand-in for Tracy Flick, the diligent candidate for high school president played by Reese Witherspoon, and Mr. Obama is implicitly cast as the mindless jock who upsets her by dint of his sheer, unearned popularity.

There is undoubtedly some truth to this, however demeaning it may be to both candidates, but in reality, the more consequential ur-text for the Clinton 2008 campaign may be another Hollywood classic, the Katharine Hepburn-Spencer Tracy “Pat and Mike” of 1952. In that movie, the proto-feminist Hepburn plays a professional athlete who loses a tennis or golf championship every time her self-regarding fiancé turns up in the crowd, pulling her focus and undermining her confidence with his grandstanding presence.

In the 2008 real-life remake of “Pat and Mike,” it’s not the fiancé, of course, but the husband who has sabotaged the heroine. The single biggest factor in Hillary Clinton’s collapse is less sexism in general than one man in particular — the man who began the campaign as her biggest political asset. The moment Bill Clinton started trash-talking about Mr. Obama and raising the specter of a co-presidency, even to the point of giving his own televised speech ahead of his wife’s on the night she lost South Carolina, her candidacy started spiraling downward.

What’s next? Despite Mrs. Clinton’s valedictory tone at Thursday’s debate, there remains the fear in some quarters that whether through sleights of hand involving superdelegates or bogus delegates from Michigan or Florida, the Clintons might yet game or even steal the nomination. I’m starting to wonder. An operation that has waged political war as incompetently as the Bush administration waged war in Iraq is unlikely to suddenly become smart enough to pull off that duplicitous a “victory.” Besides, after spending $1,200 on Dunkin’ Donuts in January alone, this campaign simply may not have the cash on hand to mount a surge.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/24/opinion/24rich.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin

Boom :dd Nachschlag ist angesagt :schwitz

February 23, 2008

Files and McCain Letter Show Effort to Keep Loophole

By STEPHEN LABATON
The New York Times

WASHINGTON — In late 1998, Senator John McCain sent an unusually blunt letter to the head of the Federal Communications Commission, warning that he would try to overhaul the agency if it closed a broadcast ownership loophole.

The letter, and two later ones signed by Mr. McCain, then chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, urged the commission to abandon plans to close a loophole vitally important to Glencairn Ltd., a client of Vicki Iseman, a lobbyist. The provision enabled one of the nation’s largest broadcasting companies, Sinclair, to use a marketing agreement with Glencairn, a far smaller broadcaster, to get around a restriction barring single ownership of two television stations in the same city.

At a news conference on Thursday, Mr. McCain denounced an article in The New York Times that described concerns by top advisers a decade ago about his ties to Ms. Iseman, a partner at the firm Alcalde & Fay. He said he never had any discussions with his advisers about Ms. Iseman and never did any favors for any lobbyist.

One of the McCain campaign’s statements about his dealings with Ms. Iseman was challenged by news accounts on Friday. In discussing letters he wrote regulators about a deal involving another of Ms. Iseman’s clients, Lowell W. Paxson, the campaign had said the senator had never spoken to her or anyone from the company. But Mr. McCain acknowledged in a 2002 deposition that he had sent the letters after meeting with Mr. Paxson.

On Glencairn, the campaign said Mr. McCain’s efforts to retain the loophole were not done at Ms. Iseman’s request. It said Mr. McCain was merely directing the commission to “not act in a manner contradictory to Congressional intent.” Mr. McCain wrote in the letters that a 1996 law, the telecommunications act, required the loophole; a legal opinion by the staff of the commission took the opposite view.

A review of the record, including agency records now at the National Archives and interviews with participants, shows that Mr. McCain, Republican of Arizona, played a significant role in killing the plan to eliminate the loophole. His actions followed requests by Ms. Iseman and lobbyists at other broadcasting companies, according to lobbying records and Congressional aides.

Over the years, Mr. McCain has taken varying positions on broadcast ownership issues. He has supported the relaxation of the ownership rules, but he has also been sharply critical of rules that permit too much concentration of ownership in a single market.

By November 1998, the F.C.C. was planning to strike down broadcasting marketing agreements, a potentially ruinous development for Glencairn. But after receiving Mr. McCain’s Dec. 1 letter, it put off consideration of the issue.

“To the extent the F.C.C. shows itself incapable of following Congressional intent,” the letter said, “these issues will become part of our overall review of the commission’s functions and structure during the next session of Congress.”

The letter, sent from Mr. McCain’s office by his staff at the commerce committee, was also signed by Senator Conrad Burns, Republican of Montana and chairman of a communications subcommittee. It was uncharacteristic of Mr. McCain, according to a review of dozens of letters sent by him to the commission during the same period.

It was the only letter that contained a suggestion that a failure to act would result in the possible overhaul of the agency.

The letter said that “as a leading participant in the passage of the 1996 Act, I have a very clear understanding” of the law’s intent and why it required the ownership loophole to be preserved. Mr. McCain was one of five senators — and the only Republican — to vote against the act. He has also been an outspoken critic of it.

While other companies also complained to Congress about the plan to close the loophole, the issue was particularly important to Sinclair because it had more marketing agreements than any in the nation. For its part, Glencairn appeared to have been getting little support in Congress until it retained Ms. Iseman in 1998.

Edwin Edwards, who was the president of the company at the time, said in a recent interview that after retaining Ms. Iseman, he was able to get heard by Mr. McCain.

“We were pounding the pavement in Washington,” Mr. Edwards said. “We recruited help from as many people as we could. We knocked on every door just trying to get support.”

The campaign said that Mr. McCain never spoke with Ms. Iseman about the issue, but that she did speak to his staff about it. Mr. Edwards and Mr. McCain met on July 20, 1999, according to the campaign.

After the commission postponed consideration of the issue, Mr. McCain signed a second letter to the agency on Dec. 7, 1998, in support of local marketing agreements, and a third one on Feb. 11, 1999. The third letter was signed by four other lawmakers. Ultimately, the F.C.C. loosened the rules to permit a company to own two television stations in some markets.

The letters Mr. McCain wrote to the commission in the Paxson matter were sent in late 1999 and prompted the agency’s chairman to chastise him for interfering in a licensing matter. The incident embarrassed Mr. McCain, then making his first presidential run, because Mr. Paxson was a campaign contributor and fund-raiser.

While the campaign said Thursday that Mr. McCain never spoke to anyone from Paxson or Ms. Iseman’s lobbying firm before sending those letters to the commission, an article posted Friday on Newsweek’s Web site said Mr. McCain had previously acknowledged first speaking to Mr. Paxson. Recounting that conversation, Mr. McCain testified in the deposition, “I said I would be glad to write a letter asking them to act.”

The Washington Post reported Friday on its Web site that Mr. Paxson acknowledged in an interview that he had met with Mr. McCain to discuss the letters before they were sent and that Ms. Iseman was probably at the meeting.

In three interviews with The Times since December, Mr. Paxson has provided varying accounts about the letters. In the first, he said Ms. Iseman was involved in the drafting of them and had lobbied Mr. McCain. He later said he could not recall who had been involved.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/23/us/politics/23lobby.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1203877069-rZ2oepiFe9huoAfs1EbDWg

Nader Announces New Bid for White House
(http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:eMail_Friend%28540,%20540%29;)

Feb 24, 12:35 PM (ET)

By HOPE YEN http://ak.imgfarm.com/images/ap/thumbnails//US_Nader_Candidacy.sff_WX101_20080224093505.jpg (http://apnews.myway.com/image/20080224/US_Nader_Candidacy.sff_WX101_20080224093505.html?date=20080224&docid=D8V0QN100) (AP) Ralph Nader, seen during a news conference in this July 14, 2007, in Reading, Pa., announced that...

WASHINGTON (AP) - Ralph Nader said Sunday he will run for president as a third-party candidate, criticizing the top White House contenders as too close to big business and pledging to repeat a bid that will "shift the power from the few to the many."

Nader, 73, said most people are disenchanted with the Democratic and Republican parties due to a prolonged Iraq war and a shaky economy. The consumer advocate also blamed tax and other corporate-friendly policies under the Bush administration that he said have left many lower- and middle-class people in debt.

"You take that framework of people feeling locked out, shut out, marginalized and disrespected," he said. "You go from Iraq, to Palestine to Israel, from Enron to Wall Street, from Katrina to the bumbling of the Bush administration, to the complicity of the Democrats in not stopping him on the war, stopping him on the tax cuts."

"In that context, I have decided to run for president," Nader told NBC's "Meet the Press......

...... Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, speaking shortly before Nader's announcement, said Nader's past runs have shown that he usually pulls votes from the Democrat. "So naturally, Republicans would welcome his entry into the race," the former Arkansas governor said on CNN.......

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080224/D8V0QN100.html


:kopf muss das wirklich sein - reicht es nicht, dss er das letzte mal Bush auf den Thron geholfen hat :gomad
(http://apnews.myway.com/image/20080224/US_Nader_Candidacy.sff_WX101_20080224093505.html?date=20080224&docid=D8V0QN100)

http://www.drudgereport.com/oa.jpg
CLINTON STAFFERS CIRCULATE 'DRESSED' OBAMA
Mon Feb 25 2008 06:51:00 ET

With a week to go until the Texas and Ohio primaries, stressed Clinton staffers circulated a photo over the weekend of a "dressed" Barack Obama.

The photo, taken in 2006, shows the Democrat frontrunner fitted as a Somali Elder, during his visit to Wajir, a rural area in northeastern Kenya.

The senator was on a five-country tour of Africa.

"Wouldn't we be seeing this on the cover of every magazine if it were HRC?" questioned one campaign staffer, in an email obtained by the DRUDGE REPORT.

In December, the campaign asked one of its volunteer county coordinators in Iowa to step down after the person forwarded an e-mail falsely stating that Barack Obama is a Muslim.

Obama campaign manager David Plouffe quickly accused the Clinton campaign Monday of 'shameful offensive fear-mongering' for circulating the snap.

Developing...

:dumm wie billig soll's denn noch werden :kopf

Pure Verzweiflung, anders kann man das gar nicht mehr nennen :bad . Mochte ja Bill gut in den 90er-Jahren, leider ist der schöne Lack mittlerweile mehr als ab. Und mit einem etwas besseren Team würde Hillary bemerken dass all die Angriffe unter der Gürtellinie über die letzten paar Wochen einzig einem geschadet haben jeweils in den folgenden Vorwahlen: ihr selbst. Anders hätte sie South Carolina und vorallem Wisconsin nicht bzw. weitaus nicht so deutlich verloren. Und in Texas droht ihr wohl ein weiteres Desaster :supi.

Obama Camp Hits Hillary Over Drudge Story

By Greg Sargent - February 25, 2008, 9:50AM

Matt Drudge is leading with a story saying that Clinton staffers "circulated" a photo of Obama in a turban and Somali village elder garb over the weekend.

Drudge's story doesn't report who the photo was "circulated" to, who provided it to him, what level of Clinton "staffer" circulated it, or how widely it was circulated.

We've contacted the Hillary campaign and they've not said anything about it yet.

The Obama campaign is already out with a statement from campaign manager David Plouffe condemning the Hillary campaign and saying it's part of a "disturbing pattern" from Camp Hillary:

“On the very day that Senator Clinton is giving a speech about restoring respect for America in the world, her campaign has engaged in the most shameful, offensive fear-mongering we’ve seen from either party in this election. This is part of a disturbing pattern that led her county chairs to resign in Iowa, her campaign chairman to resign in New Hampshire, and it’s exactly the kind of divisive politics that turns away Americans of all parties and diminishes respect for America in the world."

It's unclear whether the Obama camp has any evidence or info as to what happened beyond what appeared on Drudge.

More in a bit.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/obama_camp_hits_hillary_over_d.php

last1standing (1000+ posts) Mon Feb-25-08 12:44 PM
Original message

I can't believe I've finally decided between Clinton and Obama.

I supported Edwards and since he dropped out of the race, I've been trying to find something that could get me to support one of the remaining candidates over the other. Both have good qualities and both have bad. For me they're both far too "moderate" and have not really been addressing the most important issues we face as a nation in any substantive way. However, after the non-denial by the Clinton team regarding the picture of Obama in Somali garb and reports that they are smearing Obama with the Jewish community, I have to come down on the side of Obama for the election.

I'm not so very starry eyed that I think that any negative campaigning is evil. Nor do I think that Obama has played a clean game. Personally, I think we need someone who can throw some effective dirt if we're to stand any chance in the general election. My problem with the Clinton team's methods, though, is that they are scorched earth tactics. Clinton is making sure that if she does not win the nomination, Obama will never stand a chance in November. I think too much of Clinton to believe this is for spite, but I do believe its in order to ensure herself another run in 2012 instead of 2016 when she may feel she will be too old. Unfortunately, that will mean another four years under a repub and it will be the fault of Clinton when this happens. I can't support this so my vote goes to Obama. The devastation of our economy under four (or eight) more years of "trickle-down" economics, free-trade policies and deregulation is unacceptable to me. Therefore, I will never support Clinton in any nomination process again. The health of our nation is far more important than the future of her political career.

And when all the flamers come in to practice their own miniature versions of scorched earth tactics I won't respond, only click the "ignore" button.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4760163&mesg_id=4760163

Nur eine von vielen Meinungen dazu da drüben, die Amerikaner nennen den Effekt "Backfire"...

...was schreiben sie denn zu Nader :confused ich finde es einfach eine Frechheit - man sollte das nicht zulassen :mad

Nader ist auf DU seit 2000 ein "no go"..... "Blut an den Händen" :verbeug

Clinton Blasts Obama's Foreign Policy Readiness

Democratic Contender Implies Obama Is Impulsive, Indecisive Like Bush

By JAKE TAPPER and ELOISE HARPER
Feb. 25, 2008 —

Hoping to regain some momentum from perhaps her strongest political asset, her perceived experience, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., delivered a foreign policy speech in Washington, D.C., this afternoon that assailed rival Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., as unwise, inexperienced, impulsive and indecisive  in short, a risk to the nation.

Clinton said that Obama "wavers from seeming to believe that mediation and meetings without preconditions can solve some of the world's most intractable problems to advocating rash unilateral military action without cooperation among allies in the most sensitive region of the world."

With a half-dozen retired generals standing behind her, Clinton said she was the only candidate who could restore a U.S. foreign policy that had the right combination of diplomacy and military might.

A sign on the podium proclaimed her election "Strengthening America."

Clinton Links Obama & Bush Experience

To a packed auditorium at George Washington University, Clinton seemed to imply Obama's lack of foreign policy credentials might mean he'd be a Democratic version of President Bush.

"We've seen the tragic result of having a president who had neither the experience nor the wisdom to manage our foreign policy and safeguard our national security," she said. "We can't let that happen again."

Clinton also mocked Obama by implication suggesting he would need a manual to understand the complexities of foreign diplomacy.

"The American people don't have to guess whether I understand the issues or whether I would need a foreign policy instruction manual to guide me through a crisis, or whether I'd have to rely on advisers to introduce me to global affairs," she said.

Mocking Obama

She directly criticized two facets of Obama's foreign policy proposals from the last year.

On Obama's suggestion he would meet with the leaders of nations hostile to the United States, she said, "We simply cannot legitimize rogue regimes or weaken American prestige by impulsively agreeing to presidential level talks that have no preconditions. It may sound good & but it doesn't meet the real world test of foreign policy."

She also went after Obama as a reckless poseur for a speech he made last year where he said that with actionable intelligence he would be willing to send U.S. troops into Pakistan to take out high-level al Qaeda targets, with or without permission of the government of Pakistan.

"One thing the American people can be sure of," she said, "I will not broadcast threats of unilateral military action against a country like Pakistan just to demonstrate that I'm tough enough for the job. We have to change our tone and change our course."

With eight days until the critical March 4 primaries in Texas and Ohio, Clinton's tone today was measured and somber, even presidential  a contrast to the inconsistent tones marking her campaign appearances as of late.

At a debate Thursday she was effusive and warm toward Obama.

On Saturday, upset about two misleading Obama mailers she said, "Shame on you, Barack Obama!" On Sunday in Rhode Island she mocked Obama's lofty rhetoric with dismissive sarcasm.

After being criticized this morning as "divisive" by the Obama campaign for allegations that her staffers were circulating a photograph of Obama dressed in African garb during a trip to that continent in 2006, Clinton announced plans to meet this afternoon with a convention of members of a predominantly black sorority in Washington, D.C.

She will head to Ohio, Tuesday morning.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=4340399&page=1

http://i32.tinypic.com/x7l89.jpg

http://i26.tinypic.com/rlgw8p.jpg

http://i25.tinypic.com/2lwrak3.jpg

http://i25.tinypic.com/11v5h81.jpg
bush hat etwa von Mr. Bean :rofl

In den 5 aktuellsten Umfragen hat Obama Clinton in Texas überholt, in den neusten 2 Umfragen hat er einen zweistelligen Vorsprung. Vordergründig kämpft man noch um die letzte kleine Chance, im Hintergrund laufen wohl die Vorbereitungen für was ganz anderes........

February 24, 2008

Somber Clinton Soldiers On as the Horizon Darkens

By PATRICK HEALY
To her longtime friends, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton sounds unusually philosophical on the phone these days. She rarely uses phrases like “when I’m president” anymore. Somber at times, determined at others, she talks to aides and confidants about the importance of focusing on a good day’s work. No drapes are being measured in her mind’s eye, they say.

And Mrs. Clinton has begun thanking some of her major supporters for helping her run for the Democratic presidential nomination.

“When this is all over, I’m really looking forward to seeing you,” she told one of those supporters by phone the other day.

Mrs. Clinton has not given up, in her head or her heart, her quest to return to the White House, advisers say. But as resolute as she is, she no longer exudes the supreme confidence that was her trademark before the first defeat, in Iowa in January. And then there were more humbling blows, aides say: replacing her campaign manager on Feb. 10, then losing the Wisconsin primary and her hold on the women’s vote there last Tuesday.

If she is not temperamentally suited to reckon with the possibility of losing quite yet, advisers say, she is also a cold, hard realist about politics — at some point, she is known to say, someone will win and someone will not.

“She has a real military discipline that, now that times are tough, has really kicked into gear,” said Judith Hope, a friend and informal adviser to Mrs. Clinton, and a former chairwoman of the New York State Democratic Party. “When she’s on the road and someone has a negative news story, she says, ‘I don’t want to hear it; I don’t need to hear it.’ I think she wants to protect herself from that and stay focused.

“That said, she knows that there will be an end,” Ms. Hope said. “She is a very smart woman.”

Over take-out meals and late-night drinks, some regrets and recriminations have set in, and top aides have begun to face up to the campaign’s possible end after the Texas and Ohio primaries on March 4. Engaging in hindsight, several advisers have now concluded that they were not smart to use former President Bill Clinton as much as they did, that “his presence, aura and legacy caused national fatigue with the Clintons,” in the words of one senior adviser who spoke on condition of anonymity to assess the campaign candidly.

The campaign’s chief strategist, Mark Penn, and its communications director, Howard Wolfson, have expressed frustration with the difficulty of “running against a phenomenon” in Senator Barack Obama; their attacks have not stopped Mr. Obama from winning the last 11 contests. Some aides said Mr. Penn and the former campaign manager, Patti Solis Doyle, had conceived and executed a terribly flawed campaign, something Ms. Solis Doyle disputes. Both she and Mr. Penn have been especially criticized as not planning a political strategy to compete in the primaries after Feb. 5.

“I do believe we built a good organization — 700 people, $100 million, nationwide offices, and a strong base of support and endorsements that helped us win big states like California and New Jersey,” Ms. Solis Doyle said in an interview. “Every time people have written us off, like after Iowa, we’ve come back.”

There is a widespread feeling among donors and some advisers, though, that a comeback this time may be improbable. Her advisers said internal polls showed a very tough race to win the Texas primary — a contest that no less than Mr. Clinton has said is a “must win.” And while advisers are drawing some hope from Mrs. Clinton’s indefatigable nature, some are burning out.

Morale is low. After 13 months of dawn-to-dark seven-day weeks, the staff is exhausted. Some have taken to going home early — 9 p.m. — turning off their BlackBerrys, and polishing off bottles of wine, several senior staff members said.

Some advisers have been heard yelling at close friends and colleagues. In a much-reported incident, Mr. Penn and the campaign advertising chief, Mandy Grunwald, had a screaming match over strategy recently that prompted another senior aide, Guy Cecil, to leave the room. “I have work to do — you’re acting like kids,” Mr. Cecil said, according to three people in the room.

Others have taken several days off, despite it being crunch time. Some have grown depressed, be it over Mr. Obama’s momentum, the attacks on the campaign’s management from outside critics or their view that the news media has been much rougher on Mrs. Clinton than on Mr. Obama.

And some of her major fund-raisers have begun playing down their roles, asking reporters to refer to them simply as “donors,” to try to rein in their image as unfailingly loyal to the Clintons.

And yet, advisers say, the mood was even grimmer in early February, when the campaign was running out of money and the possibility of losing some major Feb. 5 primaries, like California and New Jersey, was unsettling Mrs. Clinton, of New York, and her aides. (She ended up winning those states.) The turbulence this time, some advisers say, has turned into greater focus and determination toward clear targets: the Ohio and Texas primaries.

In interviews with 15 aides and advisers to Mrs. Clinton, not a single one expressed any regrets that they were not working for Mr. Obama. Indeed, some aides said they were baffled that a candidate who had been in the United States Senate for only three years and was a state lawmaker in Illinois before that was now outpacing a seasoned figure like Mrs. Clinton. And to a person, these aides and advisers praised Mrs. Clinton and said that she had been a better candidate than her campaign strategy and operation reflected.

“Whatever frustrations she may have, or that exist with the campaign and the missteps, her commitment to our country and her reasons for running are her guiding force now,” said Robert Zimmerman, a Democratic national committeeman from New York and a major fund-raiser for the campaign.

“That doesn’t mean she’s too disciplined or without feeling — it means just the opposite,” Mr. Zimmerman said. “It means her beliefs speak to real faith and dedication.”

As part of that focus, Mrs. Clinton has avoided giving pep talks to her aides, because a pep talk might suggest that the campaign is heading in an irretrievable direction. Instead, as she always has, she talks to her aides on the trail and at headquarters about the tasks at hand, pursuing them in checklist fashion —impressing some with her hardiness, while suggesting a joyless or workmanlike feel to others.

“We talked recently and she sounded totally resolute, totally in it until the end, and in typical style she just isn’t getting into regrets,” said Susan Thomases, an old friend of Mrs. Clinton and a former aide to Mr. Clinton. “Hillary is not a fatalistic person — this is no woe-is-me woman.”

Mrs. Clinton has, though, increasingly sought to keep her fate in perspective. In her debate in Texas on Thursday with Mr. Obama, she delivered what some viewers saw as a valedictory — but what she said was a simple expression from the heart — when she spoke warmly about the race and her rival.

“I am honored to be here with Barack Obama. I am absolutely honored,” she said. “And you know, whatever happens, we’re going to be fine.”

She found herself explaining on Friday that the remark was not meant as some sort of farewell. Yet to some friends, she is in fact acting differently; to others, the situation has become simply heartbreaking. When Mr. Clinton said last week that his wife had to win in Texas and Ohio, it was not only the first public admission by a senior member of her circle that her candidacy was on the line, it was also a moment that deepened the feeling of shock felt by some of her supporters.

“A lot of her friends are just feeling, ‘How could this be happening to her?’ ” said James Carville, a friend of the Clintons and a former strategist to Mr. Clinton. “It’s just hard to understand. She is a very sympathetic person. I hope it turns around for her.”

Through it all, Mrs. Clinton has not retreated into a shell. She asks her aides about their children, spouses and partners. She tries to keep the mood upbeat on the campaign plane, such as recently joking about how Ohio is so diverse that it sometimes feels like five different states. She looks and seems at her happiest after working rope lines and talking to people after round tables, hearing their stories and receiving hugs.

On occasion she has looked backward. The strategy hatched by her advisers, her husband and herself — to run as an incumbent on a strength-and-experience message — was clearly not enough to carry her for 13 months. (It did work well for a time, if polls were any measure.) But mostly she has tried to look forward, and has pointedly not talked to her staff about the notion that she might drop out someday.

“Hillary is incredibly tough — she grew up with two brothers and a strong father in the Midwest, so she knows a challenge,” said Ms. Solis Doyle, the former campaign manager, who has worked for her on and off since 1991 until she was replaced this month. “She has gone through so much, where someone like me would hide under the covers. But she gets up. She works. She tries.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/24/us/politics/24mood.html?_r=3&hp=&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1203858135-KEHD9B2RUsyYWYrKlErJsA&pagewanted=print

http://www.pollster.com/08TXPresDems600.png
http://www.pollster.com/08-TX-Dem-Pres-Primary.php

In Ohio sieht es für Clinton noch nach einem Sieg aus, allerdings einem knappen Ausgang. Was ihr wenig helfen würde. Wobei, wenn sie Texas verliert, nützt ihr auch ein überragender Sieg in Ohio nix mehr :verbeug

http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gifhttp://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20080227/i/r4271146233.jpg?x=305&y=345&sig=KfbEX4GEj.CKcY_rgZRZfw-- THAT'S A WRAP (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080227114519.l2mdt040&show_article=1)

Obama parries Clinton offensive at crunch debate

http://img.breitbart.com/images/LogoAFPsmall.jpg (http://www.breitbart.com/partner.php?source=afp) http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif Feb 27 06:46 AM US/Eastern

http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif http://img.breitbart.com/images/2008/2/27/080227114519.l2mdt040/CPS.MNP16.270208124230.photo04.quicklook.default-245x151.jpg
http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif
View larger image (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080227114519.l2mdt040&show_article=1&image=large)
http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif
http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif Democrat Hillary Clinton threw some sharp jabs at White House rival Barack Obama in their final debate before crucial primaries, but Obama parried the blows to score some hits of his own. The former first lady came out fighting at the debate late Tuesday, which was billed as her last chance to derail Obama's stunning momentum heading into the nominating clashes in Ohio and Texas on March 4.

Clinton accused the Illinois senator of copying the scare tactics of health insurers and Republicans in attacking her healthcare plan, and once again portrayed him as a political neophyte unprepared for foreign policy crises.

But Obama, 46, counter-punched with the argument that Clinton had betrayed a critical lack of judgment on the Iraq war, and insisted that he was best placed to take on Republican heir apparent John McCain.

"I still intend to do everything I can to win, but it has been an honor, because it has been a campaign that is history-making," Clinton, 60, said at the end, pointing to the prospect of the first female or black president.

Obama said Clinton would be "worthy as a nominee" and would be a "much better president than John McCain," but that he himself would be better at healing America's political wounds.

The emollient tone at the debate's close was in sharp contrast to much of the 90-minute encounter in Cleveland, with the New York senator berating the "false, misleading and discredited information" in Obama's campaign literature.........

Copyright AFP 2008, AFP stories and photos shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any

**************************************************

...in den CH-Nachrichten von heute morgen: "Eine Spitze hatte Mr. Obama noch zum Abschied - er sei stolz mit Mrs. Clinton bei den Vorwahlen gewesen zu sein" :eek

Vielleicht eine Kleinigkeit - immer die Hände aus den Taschen wenn man einem Menschen die Hand reicht :cool

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20080226/capt.cdd99b418df443c1ad1bcb3a6ed21fc7.bill_clinton_txtg101.jpg?x=241&y=345&sig=JN6oyDG0cAG6TUVAAnjbiw--

FOR BILL CLINTON, A SHORT LEASH AFTER SOUTH CAROLINA.... (http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/02/26/america/clinton.php)

:schwitz:hihi

http://images.ucomics.com/comics/crmlu/2008/crmlu080226.gif :rolleyes

:ironie
So, Sen. Osama -- as president, when could we expect you to bomb America? (http://maruthecrankpot.blogspot.com/2008/02/so-sen-osama-as-president-when-could-we.html)

With a WH operative blowing Timmy Junior beneath the podium, habitual GOP enabler Tim Russert spews rethug talking points during last night's Democratic debate.
TIMMEH: "On Sunday, the headline in your hometown paper, Chicago Tribune: "Louis Farrakhan Backs Obama for President at Nation of Islam Convention in Chicago." Do you accept the support of Louis Farrakhan?"

SEN. OBAMA: "Sweet Chocolate Jesus... what are you, fucking retarded? How many times do I have to explain this to you nincompoops before you finally get it?? 'Research,' motherfucker: get to know it. Shit. Here... I... go... again. Try to keep up. I have been very clear in my denunciation of Farrakhan's anti-Semitic comments. I think that they are unacceptable and reprehensible. I did not solicit this support. Got that? Or is Karl Rove's dick still in your ear? Fucking cracker."Well, he should have, anyway. :ironie

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/logoprinter.gif

February 28, 2008
McCain’s Canal Zone Birth Prompts Queries About Whether That Rules Him Out

By CARL HULSE (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/h/carl_hulse/index.html?inline=nyt-per)
WASHINGTON — The question has nagged at the parents of Americans born outside the continental United States for generations: Dare their children aspire to grow up and become president? In the case of Senator John McCain (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/john_mccain/index.html?inline=nyt-per) of Arizona, the issue is becoming more than a matter of parental daydreaming.

Mr. McCain’s likely nomination as the Republican candidate for president and the happenstance of his birth in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936 are reviving a musty debate that has surfaced periodically since the founders first set quill to parchment and declared that only a “natural-born citizen” can hold the nation’s highest office.

Almost since those words were written in 1787 with scant explanation, their precise meaning has been the stuff of confusion, law school review articles, whisper campaigns and civics class debates over whether only those delivered on American soil can be truly natural born. To date, no American to take the presidential oath has had an official birthplace outside the 50 states.

“There are powerful arguments that Senator McCain or anyone else in this position is constitutionally qualified, but there is certainly no precedent,” said Sarah H. Duggin, an associate professor of law at Catholic University who has studied the issue extensively. “It is not a slam-dunk situation.”.....

full story: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/us/politics/28mccain.html?_r=2&ei=5090&en=45d24e7c7a991183&ex=1361941200&oref=slogin&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin

:kopf also ich bin ja nun wirklich kein McCain Fan - aber was da alles ausgegraben wird :kopf

Bloomberg passes on White House run

(CNN) -- New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has publicly flirted with the idea of a run for the White House as an independent, said he will not run for president.

The current presidential candidates were showing signs of the "independent leadership" he believes the nation needs, Bloomberg said during a press conference Thursday.

He also said he would support the candidate who "does the right things" and helps get "the ideologues out of the decision-making process."

Bloomberg pressed the candidates to show voters "concrete plans" for the problems facing the nation that include details on how those plans will pass Congress and how the programs will be funded.

"We all have a responsibility to help move our country forward," he said. "It's time for people to move away from just saying 'I am for motherhood and apple pie.'"

Bloomberg, a former Republican who become an independent while in office, announced his decision in an op-ed posted on the New York Times Web site Wednesday night and published in the paper's Thursday edition.

"I listened carefully to those who encouraged me to run, but I am not -- and will not be -- a candidate for president," Bloomberg wrote.

The 66-year-old billionaire had publicly repeated that he was not a candidate for president in recent months, while leaving open the option that he could become one.

"Bloomberg only wanted to run if he thought he could win, and I think he sees very little room," said Mark Halperin, a senior editor for Time magazine.

A source close to the mayor told CNN in January that he had collected poll data assessing his chances and that the mayor was expected to make his final decision by March.

"The very appeal that Bloomberg would have brought to the race is the very appeal that [John] McCain and [Barack] Obama have for a lot of voters," Halperin said on CNN's "American Morning."

Bloomberg mentioned in his editorial that he would work to "steer the national conversation away from partisanship and toward unity; away from ideology and toward common sense; away from sound bites and toward substance."

Bloomberg, a former Democrat who won the mayor's office as a Republican, would have been on a strict timetable to start collecting signatures to get on the ballot, a process that varies from state to state.

At a summit designed to bridge the divide between Democrats and Republicans, Bloomberg said in January partisanship is limiting the nation's progress.

"People have stopped working together, government is dysfunctional, there's no collaborating and congeniality," he said. "America is being held back."

In the opinion piece, Bloomberg said he's hopeful that the current Democratic and Republican campaigns will address an independent approach to governing.

"I have watched this campaign unfold, and I am hopeful that the current campaigns can rise to the challenge by offering truly independent leadership," he said. "The most productive role that I can serve is to push them forward, by using the means at my disposal to promote a real and honest debate."

Bloomberg could also play a role in the election if he makes an endorsement. He is good friends with McCain, and he also likes Obama, Halperin said.

"If a candidate takes an independent, nonpartisan approach -- and embraces practical solutions that challenge party orthodoxy -- I'll join others in helping that candidate win the White House," he said in the opinion piece.

Bloomberg was elected mayor of New York in 2001, two months after the September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center. He was re-elected in 2005.

A native of Medford, Massachusetts, with an MBA from Harvard Business School, Bloomberg became a billionaire, first working with Wall Street securities bank Salomon Brothers then as founder of Bloomberg LP, a financial news and information service.

http://www.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=Bloomberg+passes+on+White+House+run+-+CNN.com&expire=-1&urlID=26823490&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fedition.cnn.com%2F2008%2FPOLITICS%2F02%2F28%2Fbloomberg%2Findex.html&partnerID=212106

28. Februar 2008

SCHMUTZWAHLKAMPF

Clinton unterstellt Obama Israel-Feindlichkeit

Von Gregor Peter Schmitz, Washington

Obama ein Feind Israels, der sich von Antisemiten wählen lässt - mit schwerem Geschütz legt Hillary Clinton vor den entscheidenden Vorwahlen in Ohio und Texas auf ihren Rivalen an. Sie will die jüdische Wählerschaft gewinnen. Dafür riskiert sie das Spiel mit heiklen Ressentiments......


2. Teil: Jetzt kommt Obamas zweiter Vorname ins Spiel: Hussein

.....Und: Obama muss sich seit langem des Gerüchts erwehren, er sei ein Muslim. Dabei waren zwar die kenianischen Vorfahren seines Vaters muslimischen Glaubens, er selber ist aber bei seiner amerikanischen Mutter als Christ in den USA aufgewachsen. Doch eine so komplexe Biographie lässt den Boden für Gerüchte über Israel-Feindlichkeit noch fruchtbarer werden - die sind schon mit dem Verweis auf seinen vollen Namen "Barack Hussein Obama" immer wieder leicht anzuheizen.

Welche Rolle dieser Name im Wahlkampf spielen wird, zeigte eine Episode am Dienstag. Bei einer Wahlkampfveranstaltung von John McCain in Texas führt ein konservativer Talkshow-Moderator namens Bill Cunningham den Kandidaten ein. Der beschimpft Obama als korrupt und gefährlich, und er nennt ihn dreimal genüsslich bei seinem vollen Namen: "Barack Hussein Obama". McCain hat sich dafür umgehend ausführlich entschuldigt. Aber auf dem ganz rechten Flügel der Republikaner ist Cunningham über Nacht eine Art Held geworden. :kopf

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,538276,00.html

Wird wohl nichts mit einem raschen Ende der Vorwahl-Schlacht, Hillary baut schon mal vor für den Fall dass sie Texas verlieren sollte :hihi

Time Magazine reports this.

Mark Halperin on the page at time.com

Clinton campaign memo highlights Obama’s winning-streak momentum, ad outspending in Texas, Ohio, Vermont and Rhode Island, says if he can’t win all four, then the message that Democrats are “having second thoughts” is clear. Read it here.

To: Interested Parties

From: The Clinton Campaign

Date: Friday, February 29, 2008

RE: Obama Must-Wins

The media has anointed Barack Obama the presumptive nominee and he’s playing the part.

With an eleven state winning streak coming out of February, Senator Obama is riding a surge of momentum that has enabled him to pour unprecedented resources into Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont.

The Obama campaign and its allies are outspending us two to one in paid media and have sent more staff into the March 4 states. In fact, when all is totaled, Senator Obama and his allies have outspent Senator Clinton by a margin of $18.4 million to $9.2 million on advertising in the four states that are voting next Tuesday.

Senator Obama has campaigned hard in these states. He has spent time meeting editorial boards, courting endorsers, holding rallies, and - of course - making speeches.

If he cannot win all of these states with all this effort, there’s a problem.

Should Senator Obama fail to score decisive victories with all of the resources and effort he is bringing to bear, the message will be clear:

Democrats, the majority of whom have favored Hillary in the primary contests held to date, have their doubts about Senator Obama and are having second thoughts about him as a prospective standard-bearer.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4819849&mesg_id=4819849

Erst sollte der "Super Tuesday" alles klar machen für sie, dann folgte der "Firewall" Texas & Ohio und nun hofft sie wohl auf Pennsylvania, die halten die Vorwahl erst am 22. April. Der einzige Bundesstaat von Bedeutung der danach noch kommt, ist North Carolina, vergleichbar mit Ohio, am 6. Mai. Und da hat Obama in allen Umfragen zwischen 14-20% Vorsprung.

Eigentlich gäbe es für sie schon rein mathematisch mit einer Niederlage in Texas kaum mehr eine Möglichkeit Obama einzuholen. Also darf man gespannt sein wann Hillary Klage einreichen wird um die Stimmen aus Florida und Michigan zu erhalten. Wobei sie als einzige aller Demokraten ihren Namen auf der Liste liess in Michigen und in Florida ein paar nette Bekannte hatte die die Kampagne für sie übernommen haben.

Die Frage ist wie lange da die Führung der Partei, namentlich Howard Dean und Nancy Pelosi, dieses "Spiel" mitmachen werden;)...

Und macht Hillary so weiter, verbleibt bald einmal keine Munition mehr für McCain falls Obama sein Gegner wird :rofl...

February 29, 2008

Clinton: Obama a 'blank screen'

Posted: 12:13 PM ET

(CNN) — Hillary Clinton Thursday jabbed at Sen. Barack Obama for being a first term senator and called her rival for the Democratic presidential nomination a "blank screen."

In an interview on ABC's Nightline Thursday night, Clinton dismissed notion's Barack Obama voters are uninformed, but said the Democratic presidential front-runner aptly described himself in his 2006 book, "The Audacity of Hope."

"I think the best description, actually, is in Barack's own book, the last book he wrote, 'Audacity of Hope,' where he said that he's a blank screen," she said in the interview. "And people of widely differing views project what they want to believe onto him. And then he went on to say, 'I am bound to disappoint some, if not all of them.'"

"He was in the state Senate, what, three years ago, four years ago?" Clinton said in continued jabs. "It's hard to know exactly what his positions are because they have changed rather rapidly in that four-year period. But there is something very appealing, and people have a right to vote for whomever they want."

The comments came a day before the Clinton campaign launched a tough new ad in Texas that aims to portray Clinton as considerably more prepared to handle a foreign policy crises than Obama. Over scenes of sleeping children, the ads narrator asks, "Who do you want answering the phone the phone?" at 3 in the morning.

Obama Campaign Manager David Plouffe forcefully responded to that ad in a conference call with reporters Friday morning.

"We don't think the ads are going to be effective at all, because Senator Clinton has already had her red phone moment. It was a decision whether to allow George Bush to invade Iraq, and she answered affirmatively," Plouffe said.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/29/clinton-obama-a-blank-screen/

Könnte auch ganz gut noch zu einem ausgewachsenen Problem für die GOP werden im Jahresverlauf, aufgewärmt sind dann identische Tricks kaum mehr wirklich effektiv :zz

Clinton appealing to Hispanic voters, poll shows

10:29 PM CST on Friday, February 29, 2008

By BRAD WATSON / WFAA-TV
There are new results in our exclusive Belo Texas WFAA tracking Poll.

We're four days out and the Democratic race for president remains a see-saw battle.

Republican results, however, have changed little since Tuesday.

Hillary Clinton is back in the lead - 46 percent to 45 percent.

Barack Obama held the same advantage yesterday.

The sampling error on the Democratic side is plus or minus 3.7 percentage points.

Clinton says she's a fighter and she needs to be in this very close Texas primary race.

The WFAA tracking poll finds with four days to go that her resolve to strengthen her base of Hispanic voters is working.

"She has been working extremely hard with this group shoring up support with them and it's beginning to show," said David Iannelli, public strategies pollster.

Since Thursday, Clinton enjoyed a positive 11 point swing - further widening her already large lead among Hispanics.

She now commands a 40 point gap over Obama among Hispanics likely to vote in the Democratic primary - 67 to 27 per cent.

Obama still is well ahead among African-American voters.

The race most likely will be decided by these blocks of voters.

"The real question at this point in time is turnout and who can get their supporters out on election day," Iannelli added.

And of course, who can get their voters back out on election day night for the caucuses that will ultimately decide who gets 67 delegates.

Obama has won nearly all caucus states so far and the numbers indicate an advantage in Texas.

"We've seen time and time again that Obama has the ability to energize and mobilize his voters in the caucus process," said Iannelli.

The best indication of that in our tracking poll is of the voters who cast ballots so far in early voting - 58 to 42 per cent supported Obama.

http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dws/wfaa/localnews/news8/stories/wfaa080229_lj_poll.e0a05d6.html


http://media.gallup.com/poll/graphs/022908DailyUpdateGraph1.gif

http://www.pollster.com/USTopzDems600.png

:rolleyes

Thu, Feb. 28, 2008

Officials: Clinton aides threatened lawsuit over Texas caucuses

By JAY ROOT
McClatchy Newspapers

The Texas Democratic Party warned Thursday that election night caucuses scheduled for next Tuesday could be delayed or disrupted after aides to Hillary Clinton threatened to sue over the party's complicated delegate selection process.

In a letter sent out late Thursday to both the Clinton and Barack Obama campaigns, Texas Democratic Party lawyer Chad Dunn warned a lawsuit could ruin the Democrats' effort to re-energize voters just as they are turning out in record numbers.

Spokesmen for both campaigns said there were no plans to sue ahead of the March 4 election.

"It has been brought to my attention that one or both of your campaigns may already be planning or intending to pursue litigation against the Texas Democratic Party,'' Dunn wrote in the letter, obtained by the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. "Such action could prove to be a tragedy for a reinvigorated Democratic process.''

Democratic sources said both campaigns have made it clear that they might consider legal options over the complicated delegate selection process, which includes both a popular vote and evening caucuses. But the sources made it clear that the Clinton campaign in particular had warned of an impending lawsuit.

"Both campaigns have made it clear that they would go there if they had to, but I think the imminent threat is coming from one campaign,'' said one top Democratic official, referring to the Clinton campaign. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity.

Another Democratic official who was privvy to the discussions confirmed that Clinton representatives made veiled threats in a telephone call this week.

"Officials from Sen. Clinton's campaign at several times throughout the call raised the specter of 'challenging the process,' the official said. "The call consisted of representatives from both campaigns and the Democratic Party.''

The source, who asked not to identified by name because he did not have authorization to speak about the matter, said Clinton 's political director, Guy Cecil, had forcefully raised the possibility of a courtroom battle.

But Adrienne Elrod, Clinton's top Texas spokeswoman, said campaign and party officials had merely discussed election night procedures and that the campaign was merely seeking a written agreement in advance. She could not elaborate on the details of the agreement the Clinton campaign is seeking.

"It is our campaign's standard operating procedure that we need to see what we are agreeing to in writing before we agree to it,'' Elrod said. "No legal action is being taken. We have no reason to take any legal action.''

Obama spokesman Josh Earnest said the Obama campaign had no plans to sue.

http://www.kansascity.com/449/story/510802.html

billige Tricks :bad

Clinton team vows to fight on after Ohio, Texas

by Stephen Collinson
18 minutes ago

AUSTINTOWN , Ohio (AFP) - Hillary Clinton's camp vowed Sunday she will resist calls to abandon the White House trail after pivotal nominating contests in Ohio and Texas, where rival Barack Obama hopes to land a knockout.

The Democratic foes were rumbling across gritty midwestern Ohio, with polls showing the race deadlocked in the two states which could Tuesday decide the increasingly nasty Democratic race.

Obama ally, Senator Richard Durbin, suggested Clinton should rexamine her prospects after Tuesday's contests, which polls suggest she is unlikely to win in the landslides she needs to top his lead among Democratic delegates.

"I hope that there's an honest appraisal of her chances to win the nomination after Tuesday," Durbin told Fox News Sunday, as Democrats eye a general election clash with presumptive Republican nominee John McCain.

"And having made that appraisal... I hope she'll understand that we need to bring our party together and prepare for a victory in November, which is the ultimate goal."

Former Democratic candidate Bill Richardson meanwhile, yet to endorse either of his former rivals, also weighed in.

"D Day is Tuesday. We have to have a positive campaign after Tuesday," Richardson, who abandoned his own White House bid in January, said on CBS News.

"Whoever has the most delegates after Tuesday, a clear lead, should be in my judgment the nominee."

Obama strategist David Axelrod meanwhile warned on ABC "the hour is getting late. And I think the party is coalescing around a candidate who represents change and who can bring that case to John McCain."

But Clinton's communications chief Howard Wolfson was adamant the race would go on after Tuesday, into the next key showdown in Pennsylvania in April.

"What I'm saying is, we're going to have a great day on Tuesday. We're going to win this nomination. This nomination fight is going to go forward after Ohio and Texas," he said on ABC television.

"We're going to go to Pennsylvania, where a lot more Americans are going to vote, and we're going to be the nominee in Denver."

Clinton on Sunday cranked up her attacks on first-term senator Obama's capacity to serve as commander in chief.

"You never know what crisis is going to happen," Clinton said in Austintown. "I know that I will be able to defend our country."

Earlier, she had told fired-up supporters in another Ohio town, Westerville, that "this is a wartime election." :bad

"For some people, this election is about how you feel. It is about speeches. That is not what it is about for me," she said. "It is about solutions."...........

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080302/pl_afp/usvote

US- VORWAHLEN

High Noon in Texas (http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,538908,00.html)

In Texas geht es für die Demokraten morgen um alles. Wer hier gewinnt, heißt es, hat die Nominierung sicher. Clinton und Obama liegen gleichauf, doch Prognosen sind unmöglich: Texas ist größer als Frankreich, politisch unberechenbar - und hat ein Wahlsystem, das selbst Insider kaum verstehen. Aus Austin, Texas, berichtet Marc Pitzke mehr... (http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,538908,00.html) [ Forum (http://forum.spiegel.de/showthread.php?t=3213) ]

Hillary's Joe Lieberman moment, or, why I will not support her in November

There's been a lot of discussion, I'm sure, about Hillary's comments today where she came right out and stated that she believes that John McCain is more qualified to be President than Barack Obama. I've tried to stay out of the fray and avoided most of the discussions here in GD , other than a cursory glance, but today Hillary has crossed the Rubicon, and so must I.

Mrs. Clinton, today you openly endorsed the Republican candidate, should you not win the nomination. That is unforgiveable.

Today, Mrs. Clinton, you abrogated your status as a leader in the Democratic Party, and made manifest your desire to divide and destroy that Party if you don't get your way.

Today, Mrs. Clinton, you joined the ranks of such Party luminaries as Strom Thurmond, Henry Wallace, George Wallace, and Ralph Nader, who put their own egos ahead of the principles that the Party stands for in a vital election year.

Today, Mrs. Clinton, you have betrayed your Party the same way your husband betrayed you on numerous occasions. The difference is, we are not as saintly or as stupid as to forgive you.

You have divided our Party, Mrs. Clinton, perhaps beyond repair. I will not work for a Party who would select someone like you as its leader. I will not be a member of a Party that has you as its standard-holder.

If my Senators, Frank Lautenberg and Robert Menendez, and my Governor, Jon Corzine, do not revoke their endorsements of you and vote against you in Denver, I swear by all that is Holy that I will work feverishly to defeat them; in their next Primary if possible, in their next General if necessary.

If my County Chair, Lou Magazzu, does not renounce his endorsement of you after this stunt you pulled today, then I will campaign to oust him as Chairman, even if I have to run against him myself.

And if you, through some mixture of chicanery, blackmail, and legal maneuvering, take the Party's nomination, then I will be saying goodbye to the Party that my family worked hard to build to dominance on our local level. As someone who worked on every campaign since Walter Mondale's quixotic bid in 1984, it will be difficult to say the least, but I will. I will find another candidate whose platform I can support, and I will actively work for your defeat in November.

Your actions have been unforgiveable. If you have any shred of decency left, if you ever had one to begin with, you will go on television after the polls have closed tomorrow night and announce your withdrawal. You do not deserve anyone's vote, and for you to continue asking for them is the height of hubris.

Goodbye, Mrs. Clinton.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4869911&mesg_id=4869911

Hoffentlich, hoffentlich, hoffentlich ist die Sache morgen vorbei. Denn ob all den schmutzigen Tricks und kopierten Rove-Varianten bin ich mir mittlerweile sicher:

- Hillary wird nicht aufgeben wenn sie auch nur einen Bundesstaat Texas oder Ohio gewinnt und wird die Sache bis Ende April weiter pflegen

- in dem Fall stehen die Chancen für McCain sehr gut und die demokratische Partei wird eine innere Krise erleben wie noch nie zuvor, bis hin zur möglichen Spaltung

Hätte ich nie gedacht von jemandem mit dem Namen "Clinton" :kotz

Hillary’s Math Problem

Forget tonight. She could win 16 straight and still lose

By Jonathan Alter
Newsweek
Mar 4, 2008

Hillary Clinton may be poised for a big night tonight, with wins in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island. Clinton aides say this will be the beginning of her comeback against Barack Obama. There's only one problem with this analysis: they can't count.

I'm no good at math either, but with the help of Slate’s Delegate Calculator I've scoped out the rest of the primaries, and even if you assume huge Hillary wins from here on out, the numbers don't look good for Clinton. In order to show how deep a hole she's in, I've given her the benefit of the doubt every week for the rest of the primaries.

So here we go: Let's assume Hillary beats expectations and wins Ohio tonight 55-45, Rhode Island 55-45, Texas, 53-47 and (this is highly improbable), ties in Vermont, 50-50.

Then it's on to Wyoming on Saturday, where, let's say, the momentum of today helps her win 53-47. Next Tuesday in Mississippi—where African-Americans play a big role in the Democratic primary—she shocks the political world by winning 52-48.

Then on April 22, the big one, Pennsylvania—and it's a Hillary blowout, 60-40, with Clinton picking up a whopping 32 delegates. She wins both of Guam's two delegates on May 30, and Indiana's proximity to Illinois does Obama no good on May 6, with the Hoosiers going for Hillary 55-45. The same day brings another huge upset in a heavily African-American state: enough North Carolina blacks desert Obama to give the state to Hillary 52-48, netting her five more delegates.

Suppose May 13 in West Virginia is no kinder to Obama, and he loses by double digits, netting Clinton two delegates. The identical 55-45 result on May 20 in Kentucky nets her five more. The same day brings Oregon, a classic Obama state. Oops! He loses there 52-48. Hillary wins by 10 in Montana and South Dakota on June 3, and primary season ends on June 7 in Puerto Rico with another big Viva Clinton! Hillary pulls off a 60-40 landslide, giving her another 11 delegates. She has enjoyed a string of 16 victories in a row over three months.

So at the end of regulation, Hillary's the nominee, right? Actually, this much-too-generous scenario (which doesn't even account for Texas's weird "pri-caucus" system, which favors Obama in delegate selection) still leaves the pledged-delegate score at 1,634 for Obama to 1,576 for Clinton. That's a 58-delegate lead.

Let's say the Democratic National Committee schedules do-overs in Florida and (heavily African-American) Michigan. Hillary wins big yet again. But the chances of her netting 56 delegates out of those two states would require two more huge margins. (Unfortunately the Slate calculator isn't helping me here.)

So no matter how you cut it, Obama will almost certainly end the primaries with a pledged-delegate lead, courtesy of all those landslides in February. Hillary would then have to convince the uncommitted superdelegates to reverse the will of the people. Even coming off a big Hillary winning streak, few if any superdelegates will be inclined to do so. For politicians to upend what the voters have decided might be a tad, well, suicidal.

For all of those who have been trashing me for saying this thing is over, please feel free to do your own math. Give Hillary 75 percent in Kentucky and Indiana. Give her a blowout in Oregon. You will still have a hard time getting her through the process with a pledged-delegate lead.

The Clintonites can spin to their heart's content about how Obama can't carry any large states besides Illinois. How he can't close the deal. How they've got the Big Mo now.

Tell it to Slate's Delegate Calculator.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/118240

:rolleyes

March 4, 2008

As Four States Vote, Clinton Talks About a Long Battle

By JODI KANTOR

As voters in Ohio, Rhode Island, Vermont and Texas headed to the polls potentially to decide the Democratic nomination for the presidency, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton on Tuesday urged voters to settle in for a nomination fight that could roll on for months to come.

“You know this is a long process,” Mrs. Clinton told reporters Tuesday morning outside a polling place in Houston.

It was an entirely different message from the one delivered by former President Bill Clinton just a few weeks ago, when he told Ohio and Texas voters that his wife would not succeed without victories in those delegate-rich states.

Turnout appeared to be heavy. In Cleveland, heavy rains did not deter voters, and parts of Texas reported particularly strong turnout even though people had been voting there since Feb. 19.

"Best I can tell it’s a tsunami of voters,” said Gerry Birnberg, chairman of the Harris County Democratic Party, which encompasses Houston and its environs. At some polling sites there, as many as 100 voters lined up before the polls opened at 7 a.m., Mr. Birnberg said. A record 180,000 voters cast Democratic ballots in early voting in Harris County and some 300,000 more were expected today, far surpassing the 75,000 in the 2004 presidential election.

While the Mrs. Clinton projected determination to soldier on, the Obama campaign issued reminders of Mr. Clinton’s earlier statements saying that Mrs. Clinton needed to win Texas and Ohio.

“Three weeks ago, when they led polls in Texas and Ohio by 20 points, the Clinton campaign set their own test for today’s primaries,” Bill Burton, a spokesman, said in an e-mail statement. He set expectations for his candidate’s performance fairly low, saying Mr. Obama will maintain his delegate lead. But behind the scenes, leading supporters of Senator Barack Obama were working to persuade Democrats, particularly the superdelegates who could decide the nomination, to step forward and coalesce behind him as soon as Wednesday.

A few months ago, today’s voting was not expected to count much, thanks to a front-loaded calendar that was supposed to settle the nominations of both parties early. Instead, with the path to the Democratic nomination still unclear, voters in Texas flooded the polls.

But today Mrs. Clinton reached back much further in time, citing her husband’s nomination victory in June of 1992 as well as the long-lost days when parties chose candidates at summertime conventions. Her campaign “is just hitting its stride,” Mrs. Clinton said, even though she has been running for well over a year, in a race that has gone on longer than anyone expected.

“We’re just beginning to draw those contrasts and those differences and that’s when voters start to zero in,” she said, expressing optimism despite 11 straight losses to Mr. Obama in recent contests.

On a conference call with reporters, representatives from her campaign played up upcoming contests particularly Pennsylvania’s April 22 primary ;) , where Mrs. Clinton is the early favorite.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/04/us/politics/04cnd-campaign.html?_r=2&nl=pol&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&emc=pol&adxnnlx=1204664838-rtcrSEjErMZ31uIF64eymA

:zz :zz :zz

Clinton scrambles to freeze defectors

By: Mike Allen (http://www.politico.com/reporters/MikeAllen.html) and Ben Smith (http://www.politico.com/reporters/BenSmith.html)
Mar 4, 2008 07:29 PM EST



A behind-the-scenes battle broke out late Tuesday over superdelegates who had secretly committed to Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), with Clinton campaign officials scrambling to “freeze” them before they announced support for him.

The battle reflects the trench warfare that both campaigns expect if the battle for the Democratic presidential nomination stretches on to the Pennsylvania primary on April 22.

Democratic officials involved in the conversations said Obama was lining up a package of superdelegates — the party insiders whose votes help select the Democratic nominee — with plans to announce their support as a bloc.

Obama also plans to announce he raised more than $50 million in February, considerably more than Clinton’s $35 million.

The Obama theory was that the separate announcements would convey juggernaut-like momentum if Obama had big wins on Tuesday, and would help turn the page if he had a disappointing showing in the Texas or Ohio primaries.

But aides to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) became convinced by network exit polls and her own data that she would have a stronger-than-expected showing. So they immediately began urging Obama’s prospective superdelegates to withhold their support.

An Obama aide said: "Despite last-minute Clinton pranks, the rumor they're floating about a massive superdelegate rollout tomorrow is not true."

One Democratic lawmaker described “pushback” from the Clinton campaign but did not elaborate.

A senior Clinton aide said her supporters were scrambling to "freeze" members of Congress on the verge of announcing for Obama, and said a good night for Clinton would be key to forestalling the move.

The Obama campaign had an extensive “whip” organization set up to track and woo these officials, including members of Congress.

“We’ll wake up tomorrow and we’ll see where folks are,” an Obama aide said. “We have new support every single day.”

Obama forces responded to the Clinton overtures by telling superdelegates that regardless of Tuesday’s outcome, Obama would retain the lead in elected delegates.

An Obama official said his campaign plans to argue that even if she scored one or more victories on Tuesday, it would be “virtually impossible” for her to catch up in the delegate count.

An Obama statement said: “Three weeks ago, when they led polls in Texas and Ohio by 20 points, the Clinton campaign set their own test for today's primaries. They confidently predicted that they would win by landslide margins and wipe out the substantial edge Barack Obama has built in pledged delegates.

“But what we've seen is that voters in Ohio, Texas, Vermont and Rhode Island share the same urgent desire for change we have seen throughout the country. That's why we're confident that Barack Obama will maintain his delegate lead, leaving the Clinton campaign to explain why they failed their own test and exactly how they plan to win a nomination that, after tonight, will be virtually out of reach.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/8838.html

Clinton sees ticket with Obama :eek:rolleyes

By: Mike Allen (http://www.politico.com/reporters/MikeAllen.html)
Mar 5, 2008 08:15 AM EST
The morning after reviving her candidacy with two big primary wins, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) hinted Wednesday that she and Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) may wind up as ticket mates.

“That may, you know, be where this is headed, but of course we have to decide who’s on the top of ticket,” Clinton said with a laugh on the CBS's “The Early Show.” “I think that the people of Ohio very clearly said that it should be me."

Clinton's wins in Texas and Ohio mean the race will go on for at least seven weeks, to the Pennsylvania primary on April 22. Each side expects to harden its attacks on the other, creating potential complications in swiftly becoming a ticket.

Democratic strategists say Clinton would be more likely to pick Obama than vice versa, for two big reasons:

Obama has attracted tens of thousands of young supporters who are loyal to him, not to the Democratic Party. Clinton, on the other hand, has strong support among party regulars.





Clinton's lesson: Attacking Obama works (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/8843.html)
Exit polls: Why Clinton won Ohio (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/8844.html)
Exit polls: Why Clinton won Texas primary (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/8848.html)



So if Clinton became the nominee, inviting Obama aboard her ticket would help keep that support. Obama might be reluctant to join, figuring that if Clinton lost, he’d be able to run for the top job four years later. But he might accept her invitation at the behest of the party.

Obama would have much less reason to pick Clinton. He has made his campaign about the future, and her presence on the ticket would complicate that message. And she has not brought in voters he would automatically have trouble attracting.

Both candidates did a round of interviews with the network morning shows.

Asked about voters’ view of Obama, Clinton said on NBC’s “Today” show: “I think they’re starting to ask some hard questions, and I think voters want this race to go on because they … are now really concerned about who can best go against Senator [John] McCain.”

Obama said on “The Early Show”: “We had won 12 state contests. Senator Clinton was due.”

Obama added ABC’s “Good Morning America”: “I think it’s going to be very hard for her to catch up on the pledged delegate count.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/8852.html

Hillary als "Siegerin";)? Nicht wirklich, Bill war da näher an der Wahrheit als er vor zwei Wochen deutliche Siege in Ohio und Texas als zwingend bezeichnete. Obama hat den Caucus in Texas gewonnen in dem es um 1/3 der Delegierten ging, Hillary knapp die normale Wahl, Rhode Island und Vermont heben sich gleichzeitig auf was die Anzahl Delegierten betrifft.

Nach den vorliegenden Resultaten:

Vermont (15 delegates)

Obama 9
Clinton 6

Rhode Island (21 delegates)

Clinton 12
Obama 8

Texas

Primary (126 delegates, Link)

Clinton 64
Obama 62

Caucuses (67 delegates; tentative results based on a straight percentage from 34% reporting)

Obama ~37
Clinton ~30

Total (Nowhere near final)

Obama ~99
Clinton ~94

Ohio (141 delegates, punching in results with 97% reporting here)

Clinton 73
Obama 68

So total for the night, thus far, is Clinton 185 and Obama 184.

http://www.dailykos.com /

Der "Sieg" hat Hillary einen ganzen Delegierten mehr gebracht als Obama :dd ! Somit ändert sich an seinem Vorsprung von 110-130 Delegierten je nach Zählung rein gar nix :hihi .

Für Hillary wäre es der ideale Moment mit einem Sieg im guten Licht die Kampagne zu beenden, sind damit ihre Chancen doch praktisch auf 0 gefallen. Alle restlichen Vorwahlen muss sie nun gewinnen, und alle mit mindestens 60%, ansonsten bleibt sie 2. bis zum Schluss.

www.slate.com hat einen praktischen Delegiertenrechner für theoretische Spiele mit den kommenden Vorwahlen:)

Ganz witzig wird der Umstand wenn man gerade in Texas etwas in die Tiefe geht. Da liefen offensichtlich gezielte Aktionen seitens der GOP um Hillary im Rennen zu halten und so den Demokraten zu schaden. Dumm an der Sache ist nur eines: damit sind sie bis nach November nur noch bei den Demokraten wahlberechtigt. Zu dumm, da haben sie sich ins eigene Knie geschossen:

Disgruntled in Texas

It's hard to know how seriously to take things like Rush Limbaugh's call on his listeners to vote for Hillary as the only hope for GOP victory in the fall; there's not much evidence that people ever cast tactical votes like that in meaningful numbers.

Still, an interesting report from a reader in Dallas:

On the local conservative radio stations, many Republicans are calling and complaining about feeling “disenfranchised”.

Apparently, they didn’t realize that by implementing Rush Limbaugh’s strategy of voting for Hillary in the Primaries to prolong the Democrats fist-fight, they would not be allowed to vote for any of the Republicans on the rest of the ballot.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith

:hihi :hihi :hihi

Und all die werden in der eigentlichen Wahl sicher nicht Hillary wählen ;)...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cN10_6pyshQ&eurl=http://maruthecrankpot.blogspot.com/

McCain: McSame as Bush

06.03.08

Clinton? Obama? Al Gore for President!

von Peter Blunschi

Der Zweikampf zwischen Hillary Clinton und Barack Obama wird härter, ein Ende ist nicht in Sicht. Die Demokraten suchen fieberhaft nach einer Lösung. Schlägt nun die Stunde von Al Gore? Wird er am Ende gar als

Gestern liess sie sich als grosse Siegerin feiern. Heute zeigt sich: Hillary Clinton konnte am Dienstag ihren Rückstand auf Barack Obama nur um zwölf Delegiertenstimmen verkleinern. Obama verfügt nach Angaben der Nachrichtenagentur AP nun über 1567 Stimmen. Clinton kommt auf 1462 Stimmen. Und noch sind nicht alle Caucus-Wahlen in Texas ausgezählt. Bei diesen Parteiversammlungen dürfte Obama besser abschneiden als Clinton. Er hat denn auch bereits erklärt, er sei der eigentliche Sieger von Texas. ;)

Für die meisten Beobachter ist klar: Geschieht nichts Aussergewöhnliches, kann die Senatorin ihren Kontrahenten bis zum Parteitag im August nicht mehr einholen. Es droht ein langer, schmutziger Wahlkampf, an dessen Ende die so genannten «Superdelegierten» entscheiden müssten, wer von den beiden dann möglicherweise arg ramponierten Kandidaten gegen den Republikaner John McCain antreten wird.

Al Gore wie Charles de Gaulle?

Kein Wunder wird in den US-Medien heftig über einen Ausweg aus dieser Bredouille spekuliert. Dabei taucht ein Name auf, mit dem kaum noch jemand gerechnet hat: Al Gore. Der renommierte Ökonom und «New York Times»-Kolumnist Paul Krugman hat ihn bereits im Februar in einem Interview mit der deutschen Zeitung «taz» erwähnt: «Möglicherweise gibt es erst am Nominierungsparteitag im Sommer eine Entscheidung. Gott weiss, wie das ausgeht. Vielleicht steigen beide aus und sie geben Al Gore die Kandidatur.»

Paul Abrams, Polit-Blogger der Internet-Zeitung «The Huffington Post», vergleicht Gore mit Charles de Gaulle, der sich 1958 «zur Verfügung stellte», als sich Frankreich in einer tiefen Krise befand. Er wurde Präsident, führte das Land aus dem Sumpf des Algerien-Kriegs und trieb das Konzept eines vereinigten Europas voran. «Ist die Zeit für „Al de Gore“ gekommen, sich für sein Land zur Verfügung zu stellen?» fragt Abrams.

In den Kommentaren seines Blog fallen die Antworten teilweise enthusiastisch aus: «Ein Gore/Obama-Ticket wäre nicht aufzuhalten», schreibt ein Leser. In der Tat eine faszinierende Vorstellung. Al Gore ist nach wie vor eine der profiliertesten Figuren in der US-Politik. Als Warner vor dem Klimawandel hat er den Oscar und den Friedensnobelpreis gewonnen. Zudem hat Al Gore – immerhin der ehemalige Vize von Bill Clinton - sich bisher im Wahlkampf nicht auf einen Kandidaten festgelegt.

Frage nach der Legitimation

Doch so verlockend die Idee, so viele Einwände gibt es. So ist fraglich, ob Barack Obama und vor allem Hillary Clinton einfach zu seinen Gunsten verzichten würden. Ganz besonders nach einem harten, aber auch packenden Wahlkampf. Paul Abrams glaubt zwar, dass «85 Prozent der Delegierten und der Wählerschaft ihn begeistert unterstützen würden». Doch Fragen nach seiner Legitimation würden unweigerlich aufkommen. Ein weiterer Schönheitsfehler: Statt erstmals eine Frau oder einen Schwarzen zu nominieren, würden die Demokraten am Ende doch wieder einen älteren weissen Mann aufstellen.

Fraglich bleibt auch, ob Gore überhaupt zu einer Kandidatur bereit wäre. Seine «Niederlage» gegen George W. Bush bei den Wahlen 2000 durch ein Urteil des Obersten Gerichts hat er lange nicht verwunden. Will er sich das wirklich nochmals antun? Trotz heftigem Drängen seiner vielen Fans war er nicht bereit, im diesjährigen Wahlkampf anzutreten. In seiner Rolle als Klima-Retter liefert er zudem zahlreiche Angriffsflächen.

Gore als Schiedsrichter?

Doch es gibt noch eine andere Möglichkeit für Al Gore, sich in den Wahlkampf einzuschalten: Als Schiedsrichter zwischen Clinton und Obama. «Wenn die Demokraten Glück haben, wird Al Gore oder ein anderes hochrangiges Parteimitglied einschreiten, um einen Frieden auszuhandeln», sagte Larry Sabato, Politik-Professor an der University of Virginia, im Magazin «Time». Eigentlich wäre das ein Fall für Bill Clinton, doch der komme für diese Rolle nicht in Frage. «Bleibt also nur Al Gore», so Sabato.

Noch weiter geht ein Kommentar in der Zeitung «New York Post». Sie fragt, wo sich das rote Telefon einer Partei im Zustand der Selbstzerstörung befinde, und wo der Parteiführer mit Respekt, Statur, Weisheit und Einfluss, der es abnehmen könnte? Ihre Antwort: «Al Gore ist die einzige Person mit Erfahrung, die den Hörer abnehmen und ein friedliches Ende dieses Bürgerkriegs erzwingen könnte.» Die Frage sei nur, ob er auch den Schneid dafür habe.

Wird der Friedensnobelpreisträger zum Friedensstifter? Rettet Al Gore die Demokraten? Gelingt ihm gar der lang ersehnte Einzug ins Weisse Haus? Noch handelt es sich bloss um Spekulationen. Doch im Wahlkampf 2008 scheint vieles möglich.

http://www.20min.ch/print/story/28189430

Was sicher ein genialer Schachzug wär, nur will ja Gore bis jetzt selber nicht zur Verfügung stehen :rolleyes

Offensichtlich hat Obama die Lektion gelernt: wer Präsi werden will der kann nicht immer nur Mr. Nice sein :schwitz :dd

'Most secretive politician in America'?

Wednesday, March 05, 2008 6:34 PM
by Domenico Montanaro
From NBC/NJ's Aswini Anburajan and Domenico Montanaro

The Obama campaign is stepping up the rhetoric. Campaign Manager David Plouffe went so far as to call Hillary Clinton the "most secretive politician in America today."

The tough talk underscored not only the negative shift in tone of the Obama campaign in the past 24 hours, but just how contentious this fight for the nomination is becoming.

Part of what the Obama campaign would like the focus to be on is ethics -- something adviser David Axelrod said they would be glad to have a debate over. But the Obama campaign may be a victim of time, since an argument on ethics could be tough to steer with the ongoing Rezko trial.

"I think that you know Sen. Clinton has talked a lot about disclosure in the last few days,” Plouffe told reporters. “Sen. Clinton is the most secretive politician in America today. This has been a pattern throughout her career of the lack of disclosure.”

Echoing Axelrod, Plouffe said the campaign would be more than willing to tangle with the Clintons, appearing to suggest that if needed they would raise issues like Whitewater that plagued the Clintons in the 90s.

"As it relates to ethics and transparency,” Plouffe said, “we're surprised that they would want to have an extended conversation about contributors and land deals and ethics issues. I don't think that's a lengthy conversation that's probably going to work out very well for them.

"So we are obviously not going to allow these attacks to go unanswered, and we think things like who has the strongest ethics, who has the chance to really bring about reform, who's going to be the most open with the American people that that's a real distinction," he said.

He added that because the Clinton campaign couldn't win on pledged delegates, it would try to devise "alternative nomination strategies." He added that the Obama campaign would fight back and "raise questions on things like disclosure, like ethics, like foreign policy."

He added that Clinton "exaggerated her experience and can't name anything she's done."

"The only thing she talks about, by the way, is a speech she gave in China,” Plouffe said. “She criticizes us for giving a speech. There's an exaggeration there. Her experience, they believe, is just conferred on her; we have to prove ours somehow. She is not a candidate with deep experience on these matters.”

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/05/734818.aspx

Hillary hatte auch ihre Skandale, Whitewater ist nur einer davon. Und wer Präsidentin werden will, aber nicht ihre eigentlichen "Sponsoren" nennen will, der macht sich angreifbar & verdächtig...

March 5, 2008, 11:36PM

Bottom line: It'll take the convention to determine Democratic nominee

Neither Clinton nor Obama can win enough delegates before the convention

By RICHARD S. DUNHAM
Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle

Resting up after a bruising primary battle, Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama left Texas in their rearview mirrors Wednesday and headed home to plan for three more months of political combat.

But even as the candidates tried to decipher the daunting math required to lock up the closest Democratic presidential race in a half-century, their surrogates squabbled over which candidate actually won the most delegates in Texas.

The Lone Star State's complicated delegate-selection methods gave both campaigns a plausible reason to claim victory. In final, unofficial results, Clinton won the popular vote, 51 percent to 48 percent. But Obama backers boasted that the Illinois senator had won a majority of the state's pledged delegates — a result of his ability to mobilize supporters in the evening caucuses, which account for about one-third of the delegates selected Tuesday.

"It could be our Texas version of 'Dewey Defeats Truman,' " said Waco Rep. Chet Edwards, an Obama supporter, referring to the infamous Chicago Tribune headline that misstated the 1948 election results. "After all the confetti and uncorked champagne bottles, it could turn out that Obama won Texas.":hihi

Projections released Wednesday afternoon by the Texas Democratic Party based on still-incomplete caucus returns indicated that Obama would receive 98 delegates elected Tuesday to Clinton's 95.

Clinton led Obama in delegates selected as a result of primary voting, 65 to 61, while Obama appears headed for a 37-to-30 edge among delegates selected through the caucuses.

Including elected officials and party leaders with automatic "superdelegate" status, the two candidates are dead even at 107 Texas delegates, with 14 superdelegates still uncommitted.

But whichever campaign ends up with Texas bragging rights, Clinton's narrow 12-delegate edge in Tuesday's contests in Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont has done little to change the intricate delegate dynamics of 2008.

Bottom line: With just 600 delegates up for grabs and front-runner Obama 658 short of the 2,025 needed for victory, it is mathematically impossible for either candidate to clinch the nomination before the process is scheduled to end with Puerto Rico's June 7 caucuses.

Obama remains in the overall delegate lead, 1,567 to 1,462, according to Associated Press estimates.

With neither candidate able to wrap up the nomination during the primary season, Clinton and Obama must try to seal the deal by courting the 350 still-uncommitted superdelegates, including 14 from Texas. These party insiders get invitations to the Democratic National Convention in Denver based on their elected positions or leadership role in the party.

"The key to the nomination is the superdelegates," said University of Houston government professor Christine LeVeaux-Haley. "The superdelegates seemed to lean to Clinton before Super Tuesday. With her now proving that she is a viable candidate — again — the superdelegates who have been leaning toward Clinton will stick with her."

Going after superdelegates

To influence any undecided superdelegates, Clinton and Obama will try to build a sense of momentum over the next three months. Their goal is to be the candidate with the most elected delegates — something that is becoming increasingly difficult for Clinton to do. The former first lady would need to win more than 60 percent of the remaining primary election delegates to catch up with Obama.

"We are vigorously talking to the uncommitted automatic delegates," Clinton adviser Harold Ickes told reporters. "The Obama campaign is doing the same thing."

Clinton's aim in the next two months is to convince currently uncommitted superdelegates that she is the Democrat most likely to defeat Arizona Sen. John McCain in swing states such as Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida.

But Obama, who has won far more states and total votes than Clinton, counters by citing polls indicating that he runs stronger than Clinton against McCain. He also tells superdelegates that it is their moral obligation to back the choice of most rank-and-file Democrats.

"I cannot imagine party insiders, behind closed doors, overturning the votes of millions of Democrats," said Edwards. ............

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5596700.html

McCain wird sich die Hände reiben auch wenn er derzeit noch gegen beide verlieren würde, Obama wie Clinton. Aber in 3 Monaten weiterer Wahlschlacht kann noch sehr viel passieren :schwitz

McCain wird sich die Hände reiben auch wenn er derzeit noch gegen beide verlieren würde, Obama wie Clinton. Aber in 3 Monaten weiterer Wahlschlacht kann noch sehr viel passieren :schwitz

Zum Original-Beitrag (http://www.stock-channel.net/stock-board/showthread.php3?p=1131723#post1131723)
...der lachende Dritte - das war ja meine Befürchtung bei dieser Schlammschlacht :rolleyes aber wenn man es sich überlegt, jeder der hier antreten muss/darf steht vor einem fast unüberwindbaren Dreckshaufen - fast möchte man es Mme. Hillary gönnen durch diesen Sumpf zu waten, wird zwar ihre Gesichtszüge auch nicht eben verfeinern :rolleyes

Es wird immer klarer: ohne Hilfe der Republikaner hätte Hillary in Texas klar verloren :lach . Dumm nur ging der kleine Trick zu Gunsten ihrer Erzfeindin auf :ne

Rushing to Reason?

5:37 PM Wed, Mar 05, 2008 | Permalink
Mike Hashimoto E-mail News tips

Not that I'd ever take the word of someone who blogs for Reason magazine ("Free minds, free markets") over "Mancrush" Landauer, but David Weigel puts pencil to paper in analyzing the Clinton victory in Texas and determines that the Rush Limbaugh call to listeners to cross over may have swung the popular vote her way.

Go and check the exit polls. In Wisconsin, Republicans made up 9 percent of the Democratic primary vote. Obama won them 72-28 over Clinton. Just as tellingly, 14 percent of primary voters said they were "conservative," and Obama won them 59-40, a bigger margin than he won with liberals or moderates. Tactical voters who said Obama stood a better chance of winning in November? They went for him 87-13.

Now, look at Ohio. Once again 9 percent of voters were Republicans, but Obama and Clinton split them evenly, 49-49. Once again, 14 percent of voters were "conservatives," and Obama and Clinton split them 48-48. (Obama did better with them than he did with liberals and moderates.) Those tactical voters who thought Obama could win gave him a 80-18 victory, a margin twelve points smaller than the margin in Wisconsin.

It's a similar story in Texas, where Limbaugh has the most listeners of any of these states. Obama won the Republican vote 52-47, but conservatives (22 percent of all voters, up from 15 percent in the Kerry-Edwards primary) went against Obama. For the first time since Super Tuesday, they were Clinton's best ideological group: She won them 53-43. And Clinton won 13 percent of the people who said Obama was the most electable candidate.

Ohio didn't wind up being very close, but Clinton won the Texas primary by about 98,000 votes out of 2.8 million cast. If the exits are right, about 252,000 of those voters were Republicans, and about 618,000 were conservatives. Clinton truly might have won the Texas primary on the backs of Rush Limbaugh listeners. :bad

Weigel, for the record, doesn't sound like he agrees with the wisdom of this, if it in fact happened.

http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2008/03/rushing-to-reas.html

Die etwas über 800'000 Stimmen werden Hillary im Herbst in Texas fehlen, wenn sie denn den Dreh noch hinbringt. Was nach der reinen Mathematik nicht mehr möglich ist :schaf

3/06/2008
Advice to Barack Obama: You Can Take Clinton Apart and Still Respect Yourself in the Morning (Profanity-Free For the Kiddies):

So, like, Barack, here's the conundrum you find yourself in: you wanna keep the Hope Train running, so you're shoveling coal into that engine like you're Casey Jones on the Illinois Central. You know that Hillary Clinton and her minions, like Howard Wolfson and Mark Penn, are gonna start tossing way, way more than the kitchen sink at you. You better be ready to duck, 'cause the whole house is whirling your way, Twister-style.

And you're stuck. You know you gotta start jumping in the mud with both feet, but you built this whole movement on staying so above-it-all. Here's the thing: you don't have to join Hillary Clinton for a wallow. You don't need someone associated with your campaign to go on CNN and question, say, whether or not she's a Muslim.

Yes, her bizarre refusal to release her tax returns means that she has something to hide, and it will become a trust issue in a general election, so you may as well make a huge deal about it now. Here's a couple of other tactics:

1. Question the legitimacy of her victories. Sure, sure, Ohio was clearly a Clinton victory. But that Texas win? Well, let's hear from rude reader CW:

"I can tell you that Clinton did not *win* the popular vote in Texas. We are the state of the 19-percenters, Huckabee-lovers and Hagee. Republicans knew that McCain would win Ohio and since in Texas we have open primaries, the RNC, Texas Repubs and Rush had been telling all their zombies to vote Clinton because they think they can beat her. My own mother, who hasn't voted for a Democrat for 40 years, told me that she voted for Hillary because 'you know, I support McCain, so I voted for her like everyone else up here.' My mother wasn't our only contact to verify our suspicions. All those rural counties with few votes...Republicans to the core and they HATE Hillary with the fiery passion of a thousand suns. Although I live in an Obama county near the George HW Bush Presidential Library, we must have had a huge number of crossovers ourselves because Huckabee nearly beat McCain here."

Get some research going, man. How widespread was a Republican vote in Texas because of the open primary? How has the open primary benefited Clinton before because Republicans want to run against her and not you? C'mon, if her people can question the legitimacy of caucuses, you can question the legitimacy of the open primary.

As CW continues regarding Texas, "Watch the caucus results. Those are going to be far more accurate because only the true-blue Democrats return for the meetings after the polls close. The delegate representation is determined by how many supporters for each candidate show up for the caucus. The popular vote has nothing to do with how these delegates are chosen. At the caucus we vote on delegates to the county and state conventions as well as resolutions for the party platform, so the Republicans stay away lest they be outed or contaminated with our Democratic ideals."

2. Go after who is associated with her campaign. The hammers of Rezko and Farrakhan will keep bludgeoning you. So howzabout a little payback? If there's anything we've learned from the Rove school of media manipulation, little things can take the big things off the table: how quickly did we forget about whether or not George W. Bush blew off his National Guard duties once we were told that Dan Rather might have been given a forged document? Also, moral equivalency can be ludicrously imbalanced.

For instance, did you know that Hillary Clinton's "top election lawyer" in New Jersey, Peter Cammarano, is under investigation by the state Election Law Enforcement Commission for what seems to be a clear violation of the law? Yeah, Cammarano chaired a PAC that raised funds for Democrats while still an elected councilman. Funds might not have gone to the Clinton campaign, but this is exactly the kind of rule-bending that reminds people of what they don't like to remember about the Clintons (fairly or unfairly, but this ain't really about fair). And, c'mon, Clinton's election lawyer might be violating election law? Surely, there's a few superdelegates in the state that this might matter to.

It's a little thing, but the little things add up, Barack. They provide the foundation for an argument against someone. And that's where you are. You gotta say why not to vote for Hillary Clinton, not just why to vote for you.

Oh, and don't forget about McCain and Bush. But the Rude Pundit can't talk about that and keep his profanity-free pledge.

http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/

Obama Raises $55 Million in February
(http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:eMail_Friend%28540,%20540%29;)

Mar 6, 5:39 PM (ET)

By JIM KUHNHENN http://ak.imgfarm.com/images/ap/thumbnails//Obama_2008.sff_TXAB103_20080305094855.jpg (http://apnews.myway.com/image/20080305/Obama_2008.sff_TXAB103_20080305094855.html?date=20080306&docid=D8V876DG0)(AP) Democratic presidential hopeful, Sen. Barack Obama D-Ill., talks to reporters on the plane in San...

WASHINGTON (AP) - Democratic Sen. Barack Obama raised a record $55 million in February for his presidential campaign, eclipsing rival Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's own substantial fundraising for the month. All told, Obama has raised $193 million during his yearlong bid for the White House.

The campaign's announcement Thursday came two days after Obama lost three of four primaries to Clinton. Her victories stopped his winning streak and extended the race into an unpredictable future.

Obama's February total was his second fundraising record. He raised $36 million in January, more than any other presidential candidate who has ever been in a contested primary. His combined January and February totals nearly matched what he raised last year.

"That's a humbling achievement, and I am very grateful for your support," Obama said in another fundraising appeal. "No campaign has ever raised this much in a single month in the history of presidential primaries. But more important than the total is how we did it - more than 90 percent of donations were $100 or less ..." :supi


http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080306/D8V876DG0.html

Clintons blocking release of pardon papers

March 7, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

Remember how Barack Obama called Hillary Clinton one of the most secretive politicians in America? That apparently applies to both Hillary and her husband as a team. Archivists at the Clinton Presidential Library have decided to keep the records of Bill’s pardons locked away from prying eyes — such as those of Obama, John McCain, and the media:

Federal archivists at the Clinton Presidential Library are blocking the release of hundreds of pages of White House papers on pardons that the former president approved, including clemency for fugitive commodities trader Marc Rich.

That archivists’ decision, based on guidance provided by Bill Clinton that restricts the disclosure of advice he received from aides, prevents public scrutiny of documents that would shed light on how he decided which pardons to approve from among hundreds of requests.

Clinton’s legal agent declined the option of reviewing and releasing the documents that were withheld, said the archivists, who work for the federal government, not the Clintons.

The decision to withhold much of the requested material could provide fodder for critics who say that the former president and his wife, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, now seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, have been unwilling to fully release documents to public scrutiny.

Hillary is a curious candidate. She wants to run on her “experience” as First Lady in the Clinton administration — but she wants us to see as little evidence of that experience as possible. In fact, she says that “experience” is so compelling that we would want her in the White House answering the phone at 3 AM when a crisis occurs. If it really is that impressive, why is she and Bill going to such lengths to hide it?

The pardons present a very tricky problem for Hillary. That really does speak to the character of the Clinton administration, and obviously not in glowing terms. In the final days of his administration, Clinton pardoned Marc Rich, who had been a fugitive from American justice for tax evasion and other indictments, apparently because his ex-wife donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to the presidential library that now hides those records. The Department of Justice had asked Clinton not to issue a pardon to Rich, as precedent had been not to grant clemency to fugitives, but that didn’t stop Clinton.

Marc Rich demonstrated why the Clintons had such faith in him by proceeding to become a major figure in the Oil-for-Food scandal.

But Rich isn’t the only questionable figure in the pardons scandals, and he’s not the only family member under suspicion. Hillary’s brother Tony Rodham represented Edgar and Vonna Gregory for a pardon, which Bill granted so that Gregory’s business could get federal contracts. Edgar and his wife had convictions for bank fraud that interfered with United Shows, and the Gregorys needed connections. Not only did they hire Rodham to represent them, they donated $10,000 to Hillary Clinton — half before the pardon, and half afterwards, in 2000.

The story doesn’t end there. The Gregorys then made a series of “loans” to Tony Rodham totaling over $100,000, the last of which came right before they declared bankruptcy in 2002, leaving creditors holding the bag once again. Rodham never made a single payment to repay these loans, and the Gregorys never made any attempt to collect them. Only after the United Shows books came under the scrutiny of bankruptcy courts did anyone press Rodham to repay the debt as an asset of United Shows.

The Clintons have plenty of reasons to hide their handiwork on pardons. If they released them, the only way people would want Hillary to answer that phone at 3 AM is if John McCain hired her as a switchboard operator.

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/03/07/clintons-blocking-release-of-pardon-papers/?print=1

:schwitz

Go Already!

Hillary Clinton, fratricidal maniac.

Jonathan Chait, The New Republic
Thursday, March 06, 2008


The morning after Tuesday's primaries, Hillary Clinton's campaign released a memo titled "The Path to the Presidency." I eagerly dug into the paper, figuring it would explain how Clinton would obtain the Democratic nomination despite an enormous deficit in delegates. Instead, the memo offered a series of arguments as to why Clinton should run against John McCain--i.e., "Hillary is seen as the one who can get the job done"--but nothing about how she actually could. Is she planning a third-party run? Does she think Obama is going to die? The memo does not say.

The reason it doesn't say is that Clinton's path to the nomination is pretty repulsive. She isn't going to win at the polls. Barack Obama has a lead of 144 pledged delegates. That may not sound like a lot in a 4,000-delegate race, but it is. Clinton's Ohio win reduced that total by only nine. She would need 15 more Ohios to pull even with Obama. She isn't going to do much to dent, let alone eliminate, his lead.

That means, as we all have grown tired of hearing, that she would need to win with superdelegates. But, with most superdelegates already committed, Clinton would need to capture the remaining ones by a margin of better than two to one. And superdelegates are going to be extremely reluctant to overturn an elected delegate lead the size of Obama's. The only way to lessen that reluctance would be to destroy Obama's general election viability, so that superdelegates had no choice but to hand the nomination to her. Hence her flurry of attacks, her oddly qualified response as to whether Obama is a Muslim ("not as far as I know"), :bad her repeated suggestions that John McCain is more qualified.

Clinton's justification for this strategy is that she needs to toughen up Obama for the general election-if he can't handle her attacks, he'll never stand up to the vast right-wing conspiracy. Without her hazing, warns the Clinton memo, "Democrats may have a nominee who will be a lightening rod of controversy." So Clinton's offensive against the likely nominee is really an act of selflessness. And here I was thinking she was maniacally pursuing her slim thread of a chance, not caring--or possibly even hoping, with an eye toward 2012-that she would destroy Obama's chances of defeating McCain in the process. I feel ashamed for having suspected her motives.

Still, there are a few flaws in Clinton's trial-by-smear method. The first is that her attacks on Obama are not a fair proxy for what he'd endure in the general election, because attacks are harder to refute when they come from within one's own party. Indeed, Clinton is saying almost exactly the same things about Obama that McCain is: He's inexperienced, lacking in substance, unequipped to handle foreign policy. As The Washington Monthly's Christina Larson has pointed out, in recent weeks the nightly newscasts have consisted of Clinton attacking Obama, McCain attacking Obama, and then Obama trying to defend himself and still get out his own message. If Obama's the nominee, he won't have a high-profile Democrat validating McCain's message every day.

Second, Obama can't "test" Clinton the way she can test him. While she likes to claim that she beat the Republican attack machine, it's more accurate to say that she survived with heavy damage. Clinton is a wildly polarizing figure, with disapproval ratings at or near 50 percent. But, because she earned the intense loyalty of core Democratic partisans, Obama has to tread gingerly around her vulnerabilities. There is a big bundle of ethical issues from the 1990s that Obama has not raised because he can't associate himself with what partisan Democrats (but not Republicans or swing voters) regard as a pure GOP witch hunt.

What's more, Clinton has benefited from a favorable gender dynamic that won't exist in the fall. (In the Democratic primary, female voters have outnumbered males by nearly three to two.) Clinton's claim to being a tough, tested potential commander-in-chief has gone almost unchallenged. Obama could reply that being First Lady doesn't qualify you to serve as commander-in-chief, but he won't quite say that, because feminists are an important chunk of the Democratic electorate. John McCain wouldn't be so reluctant.

Third, negative campaigning is a negative-sum activity. Both the attacker and the attackee tend to see their popularity drop. Usually, the victim's popularity drops farther than the perpetrator's, which is why negative campaigning works. But it doesn't work so well in primaries, where the winner has to go on to another election.

Clinton's path to the nomination, then, involves the following steps: kneecap an eloquent, inspiring, reform-minded young leader who happens to be the first serious African American presidential candidate (meanwhile cementing her own reputation for Nixonian ruthlessness) and then win a contested convention by persuading party elites to override the results at the polls. The plan may also involve trying to seat the Michigan and Florida delegations, after having explicitly agreed that the results would not count toward delegate totals. Oh, and her campaign has periodically hinted that some of Obama's elected delegates might break off and support her. I don't think she'd be in a position to defeat Hitler's dog in November, let alone a popular war hero.

Some Clinton supporters, like my friend (and historian) David Greenberg, have been assuring us that lengthy primary fights go on all the time and that the winner doesn't necessarily suffer a mortal wound in the process. But Clinton's kamikaze mission is likely to be unusually damaging. Not only is the opportunity cost--to wrap up the nomination, and spend John McCain into the ground for four months--uniquely high, but the venue could not be less convenient. Pennsylvania is a swing state that Democrats will almost certainly need to win in November, and Clinton will spend seven weeks and millions of dollars there making the case that Obama is unfit to set foot in the White House. You couldn't create a more damaging scenario if you tried.

Imagine in 2000, or 2004, that George W. Bush faced a primary fight that came down to Florida (his November must-win state). Imagine his opponent decided to spend seven weeks pounding home the theme that Bush had a dangerous plan to privatize Social Security. Would this have improved Bush's chances of defeating the Democrats? Would his party have stood for it?

http://www.tnr.com/story_print.html?id=ba30ff16-a5af-4035-a883-cf15ffee406c

In ähnlichen News: Kalifornien hat endlich ein endgültiges Resultat. Omaba gewinnt 3 Delegierte dazu, Hillary verliert 3. Sind in der Summe 6 Gewinne für Obama gegenüber Clinton und damit die Hälfte ihres Vorsprungs vom 4. März :bäh

.....so ganz geschickt gehen Obamas Leute die Sache aber auch nicht immer an :rolleyes
mit Kommentaren

Blog Results: Page 1 2 (http://dyn.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/index.cfm/CurrentPage/2/category/BarackObama) 3 (http://dyn.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/index.cfm/CurrentPage/3/category/BarackObama) 4 (http://dyn.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/index.cfm/CurrentPage/4/category/BarackObama) 5 (http://dyn.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/index.cfm/CurrentPage/5/category/BarackObama) 6 (http://dyn.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/index.cfm/CurrentPage/6/category/BarackObama) 7 (http://dyn.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/index.cfm/CurrentPage/7/category/BarackObama) 8 (http://dyn.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/index.cfm/CurrentPage/8/category/BarackObama) 9 (http://dyn.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/index.cfm/CurrentPage/9/category/BarackObama) 10 (http://dyn.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/index.cfm/CurrentPage/10/category/BarackObama) http://images.politico.com/global/right.gif (http://dyn.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/index.cfm/CurrentPage/2/category/BarackObama) http://images.politico.com/global/rright.gif (http://dyn.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/index.cfm/CurrentPage/11/category/BarackObama)
March 07, 2008
Read More: Barack Obama (http://dyn.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/index.cfm/category/BarackObama)

Plouffe: "You have to wonder whether she'll be open and honest with the American people"

Obama campaign manager David Plouffe returned to the issue of Clinton's secrecy today, pointing to a USA Today story (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-03-06-clinton-library-foia_N.htm?csp=34) that reports that Bill Clinton's instructions to the National Archive have resulted in copious redactions to documents concerning his pardons.

"Behind closed doors, they’re trying to prevent the American people from evaluating [Clinton's White House] experience," he said. "You have to wonder whether she’ll be open and honest with the American people as president."

He also noted, again, that Clinton doesn't need to wait until April 15 to release the last six years of tax returns.

Clinton is "one of the most secretive politicians in America today," he said.

Plouffe, floating the attacks, used more or less the same excuse that Clinton's advisors have in attacking -- aka "vetting" -- Obama.

"The Republicans certainly aren’t going to consider anything out of bounds," he said.

He also responded to Samantha Power's suggestion that Obama's plan for Iraq is nothing more than a "best case scenario."

Obama's plan is a "rock-solid commitment," he said.

ALSO: Plouffe suggested that the campaign had mishandled the Goolsbee story.

"We regret how it was handled and wish all the information had been provided at the first moment," he said, though he maintained that Goolsbee had been misquoted.

http://dyn.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/index.cfm/category/BarackObama

Ich weiss nicht, wenn ich die Kommentare so überfliege kriegt Obama davon sicher in 2/3 den "Vorteil":

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/Plouffe_You_have_to_wonder_whether_shell_be_open_and_honest_with_the_American_people.html#comments

:rolleyes

...über das bin ich auch froh :) es liegt ja nicht direkt an ihm, wenn so unnötige Ausrutscher passieren - eben unnötig :rolleyes er braucht das ja gar nicht :cool
ist aber schon ein elendiges Schei**spiel :(

ist aber schon ein elendiges Schei**spiel :(
Zum Original-Beitrag (http://www.stock-channel.net/stock-board/showthread.php3?p=1132467#post1132467)
Ich nenne das fast schon Krieg, mit einem neuen Höhepunkt heute. "Obama ist ein Muslim", aus Clintons Anhang :kotz.... War schon bekannt und ist heute mal wieder aufgetaucht


Here's The Obama Muslim Smear E-mail Sent Out By The County Chair Volunteering For Hillary

By Greg Sargent (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/gregsargent.php) - December 5, 2007, 3:13PM

We've just obtained a copy of the Obama Muslim smear email -- smear-mail? -- that the Iowa county chair volunteering for Hillary sent out. Key quotes:

"Obama's parents met at the University of Hawaii . When Obama was two years old, his parents divorced. His father returned to Kenya . His mother then married Lolo Soetoro, a RADICAL Muslim from Indonesia . When Obama was 6 years old, the family relocated to Indonesia . Obama attended a MUSLIM school in Jakarta."

And:

"Since it is politically expedient to be a CHRISTIAN when seeking major public office in the United States , Barack Hussein Obama has joined the United Church of Christ in an attempt to downplay his Muslim background."

Ben Smith notes (http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1207/Clinton_staffer_on_antiObama_email_chain.html) that one of the people on the chain of this email is a Clinton staffer named Ryan Callanan, who received the email on November 21. It's unclear what level Callanan occupies or what exactly this means. alles: http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2007/12/heres_the_obama_smearmail_sent_out_by_the_county_chair_volunteering_for_hillary.php

Wird ein spannendes Wochenende:schwitz

Spokesman: Ron Paul will end presidential run

(CNN) -- A spokesman for Ron Paul's presidential campaign said Friday that the Texas congressman is ending his run for the White House.

"We are acknowledging that Ron will not be the nominee and that we are winding down the campaign," said Jesse Benton, the Paul campaign's communication manager.

Paul hinted the end was near in a video to supporters posted on YouTube on Thursday.

"Though victory in the conventional political sense is not available in the presidential race, many victories have been achieved due to your hard work and enthusiasm," Paul said in the video.

His comments came two days after Sen. John McCain became the presumptive GOP nominee.

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, announced Tuesday he was quitting the race after McCain victories in Tuesday's primaries, leaving Paul as his only opponent.

Benton said the campaign encourages supporters to continue to take part in primary process and that Paul would honor requests from supporters to speak.

"We still think we can influence the debate and build an organization moving forward that brings the GOP back to its roots," Benton said.

Paul, who ran for president as a Libertarian in 1988, is the sole Republican candidate to call for a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. He is a distant fourth in the GOP delegate count, behind McCain, Huckabee and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney...............

http://www.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=Spokesman%3A+Ron+Paul+will+end+presidential+run+-+CNN.com&expire=-1&urlID=27009892&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fedition.cnn.com%2F2008%2FPOLITICS%2F03%2F07%2Fron.paul%2Findex.html&partnerID=212106

Buh-Bye Spoiler Paul, wurde auch Zeit bevor es zu lächerlich wird :schaf

Clinton: Bought and Paid for By Saudi Arabia and China


by The Bagof Health and Politics
Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 10:39:46 AM PST

There's a reason she hasn't released her tax returns--Bill is on the payroll of the Saudis and the Chinese Communist Party.

Hillary Clinton still hasn’t released her tax return. We don’t know what she’s hiding, but if her tax return was clear, we’d have long since seen the return (which was filed in April of 2007). After 8 years of Dick Cheney raiding the public treasury for the benefit of his Halliburton stock, we must know the financial interests of potential future Presidents and the conflicts they pose. Since Clinton won’t release her tax return, I will speculate as to what may or may not be contained therein.

Bill Clinton has been active on the international scene. We already know about the $131 million kickback Bill took from an Asian dictator. Still, Bill has been remarkably secretive about the funding for his presidential library. The full list of donors has never been released. But we know two things: the Clinton Library cost $165 million to build and fully 10% of that cost was covered by Saudi Arabia.

Since he left office, Bill Clinton has mainly earned a living as a speaker, writer and "consultant." Companies, governments, and organizations pay him huge fees to speak at a gathering or lend his name to the business. Bill has lent his name to shady businessmen, like Ron Burkle. Clinton’s speeches have earned him millions; a typical speech with the former President costs href="25,000. Foreign interests in Japan, Australia, and Europe have all been more than happy to throw money at the Clintons. This has led the man who was making $45,000 a year as Governor of Arkansas to spectacular wealth; the kind of wealth that can buy million dollar vacation homes. Worse, this is also the kind of wealth that can cause politicians to be indebted to foreign interests and undermine our national interests and security.

According to the Washington Post, a Saudi Arabian investment company with ties to the Saudi government and Royal Family has paid Bill Clinton at least $600,000 in lecturing fees. A quick search on Bill’s travel itinerary reveals that Bill Clinton met with the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia in Riyadh in June of 2003. Two years later, Clinton met with the Crown Prince again, this time in the United States. One wonders what Bill promised in exchange for the $600,000 check. Other foreign interests who have paid Clinton include: $650,000 from a pro-NAFTA Canadian investment firm and $200,000 from a real estate firm which is controlled by the Chinese Communist Party.

This is all money which can be turned around by the Clintons to support their political interests. By law, Hillary Clinton is entitled to use half of her spouse’s wealth to back her presidential campaign. In this campaign, she has already done this by donating $5 million to her campaign. Let’s think about the net effect of this; this allows Bill’s income to be used for political purposes. In effect the Saudis have given a $300,000 donation to her campaign, the Canadians have donated $325,000, and the Chinese Communist Party has donated $100,000.

With gas at $4 a gallon, I don’t want anybody who is on the Saudi payroll near the Oval Office. It’s clear that foreign governments and the Clintons have been colluding to buy off the American process and open the store to foreign interests—like the Saudis and the Chinese Communist Party. This is why Hillary Clinton must be defeated in the Democratic Primary. Our national security depends on it.

Hillary Clinton knows this. It is why she won't release her tax returns. Those returns will prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that she and her husband are on the payroll of corrupt foreign entities--like the Chinese Communist Party and the Saudi Arabian government. Enough is enough; let's not elect the Democratic version of Dick Cheney to the Presidency and allow this country to be swindled into poverty.

Updates: Ourhispanicvoices wrote a diary yesterday which shows that the Clintons are also receiving large sums of cash from Dubai--the nation which tried to buy our ports!

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/3/7/132849/9985/... (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/3/7/132849/9985/416/471466)

MORE ON DUBAI PORTS WORLD BUYOUT OF AMERICAN PORTS:

Back in 2002, the Yucaipa Co. LLC hired the former president as a "senior adviser." He won't say how much that pays; Hillary's disclosure forms only put it at "more than $1,000" a year. A company lawyer recently disclosed that he gets a percentage of profits, if they're above 9 percent -and also says the firm's been averaging about a 40 percent.

And Yucaipa last year with the Dubai Investment Group to create a new U.S. company: DIGL Inc, with, which invests the private funds of the Crown Prince. So Bill and Yucaipa have a big stake in keeping a positive image for the Dubai royals and their many companies.

-----------------

Severing the tie to Dubai, a U.S. ally, will remove a potentially tricky problem for Mrs. Clinton. Questions raised about the activities of sovereign wealth funds -- giant pools of money controlled by foreign governments -- have become a campaign issue, as the funds have made a spate of multibillion-dollar investments in such corporate giants as Citigroup Inc. and Merrill Lynch & Co. In a recent interview with The Wall Street Journal, Mrs. Clinton said such purchases are "a source of concern," partly because the foreign funds "lack transparency" and could be used by foreign governments as "instruments of foreign policy."

...

In an October filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission concerning the Xinhua investment, Yucaipa disclosed that one member of its global fund's general partnership was Dubai Investment Group (YGP) Ltd., which is connected to a much larger group of entities owned by Sheik Mohammed that has investments around the world.

Since leaving the White House, Mr. Clinton has had various contacts with Dubai. For example, Sheik Mohammed last year pledged financial support to a Clinton charitable initiative, and the former president's foundation has a scholarship program at the American University in Dubai in cooperation with the emirate's ruler.

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB1200974240219058... (http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB120097424021905843.html)

Obama wins Democratic contest in Wyoming

Sat Mar 8, 2008 6:30pm EST
By John Whitesides, Political Correspondent

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrat Barack Obama beat rival Hillary Clinton in Wyoming's nominating contest on Saturday, bouncing back from a string of losses that gave Clinton new life in their hotly contested presidential battle.

Obama's victory in the nominating caucus in sparsely populated Wyoming slowed Clinton's momentum after she won three of four contests on Tuesday in their tight duel for the right to face Republican John McCain in November's presidential election.

With 91 percent of caucus sites reporting, Obama led Clinton by 58 percent to 41 percent.

Heavily Republican Wyoming has just 12 delegates to the August convention that will pick the Democratic nominee, one of the smallest hauls in the race, but every state has become crucial in the prolonged battle between the two senators.

Both Obama and Clinton campaigned in Wyoming on Friday, but the two candidates took the day off at home on Saturday. Next up is a primary in Mississippi on Tuesday before Obama and Clinton square off in Pennsylvania on April 22.

The win allowed Obama to add slightly to his almost insurmountable lead in the pledged delegates who will help decide the nominee. The exact breakdown of delegates in Wyoming was not immediately clear.

Neither Obama nor Clinton is likely to reach the 2,025 delegates needed to clinch the nomination without help from 796 "superdelegates" -- party officials and insiders free to back any candidate.

:kiss

It’s over

By Dick Morris
03/06/08

The real message of Tuesday’s primaries is not that Hillary won. It’s that she didn’t win by enough:

The race is over.

The results are already clear. Obama will go to the Democratic Convention with a lead of between 100 and 200 elected delegates. The remaining question is: What will the superdelegates do then? But is that really a question? Will the leaders of the Democratic Party be complicit in its destruction? Will they really kindle a civil war by denying the nomination to the man who won the most elected delegates? No way. They well understand that to do so would be to throw away the party’s chances of victory and to stigmatize it among African-Americans and young people for the rest of their lives. The Democratic Party took 20 years to recover from the traumas of 1968 and it is not about to trigger a similar bloodletting this year.

John McCain’s nomination guarantees that the superdelegates wouldn’t dare. A perfectly acceptable alternative for most Democrats, McCain would harvest so large a proportion of Obama’s votes if Hillary steals the nomination that he would probably win. Even putting Obama on the ticket would not allay the anger of his supporters; it would just make him complicit in the robbery.

Will Hillary win Pennsylvania? Who cares? Even if she were to sweep the remaining primaries and caucuses by 10 points, she would move just 60 votes closer to Obama’s total of elected delegates. And she won’t sweep them all. Even if Hillary wins Pennsylvania, the largest prize up for grabs, Obama will probably win North Carolina, which is almost as large. He’s likely to win Mississippi and Wyoming and has a good shot in Oregon and Indiana. The most likely result of these coming contests is that Obama will be roughly where he is now, about 140 elected delegates ahead of Hillary.

Suppose that Hillary will carry those states by enough to offset Obama’s delegate lead. The proportional representation system makes a knockout impossible and so mutes relatively narrow victories as to make them almost inconsequential. Little Vermont, with 600,000 people, gave Obama a net gain of four delegates, half of what Hillary won from the Texas primary, a state with 20 million residents. Even after Hillary won big-state victories in Ohio and Texas, she drew only 20 closer to Obama’s total of elected delegates.

Hillary won’t withdraw. That much is for sure. The tantalizing notion that 800 insiders can offset a season of primaries and caucuses will drive both Clintons to ever-escalating rhetoric. Will their attacks hurt Obama? Likely all they will achieve is to give him needed experience in the cut and thrust of media politics.

Left out of the entire equation is poor John McCain. Unable to get a word in edgewise and unsure of which Democrat to attack, he will have to watch from the sidelines as Hillary and Obama hog the headlines. If the superdelegates deliver the nomination to Hillary in the dead of night without leaving fingerprints at the crime scene, McCain’s nomination will be worth having. If Obama prevails, it won’t be worth the paper on which it is written. The giant killer, Obama will have soared to new heights of popularity and McCain won’t be able to bring him back to Earth in the nine weeks that will remain.

Suggestion for Obama:

The next time Hillary uses the recycled red phone ad, counter with one of your own. When the phone rings in the middle of the night, have a woman’s voice, with a flat Midwestern accent, answer it and say, “Hold on” into the receiver. Then she should shout, “Bill! It’s for you!”

Because with Hillary’s complete lack of any meaningful experience in foreign affairs, and her lack of the “testing” that she boldly claims, she’ll be yelling for Bill.

Morris, a former adviser to Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and President Bill Clinton, is the author of Outrage.

http://thehill.com/dick-morris/its-over-2008-03-06.html

:rolleyes

Islamodancing in the Streets (http://maruthecrankpot.blogspot.com/2008/03/islamodancing-in-streets.html)

b. HUSSEIN Osama Obama wins yet another latte-sipping boutique state that doesn't count, Islamocommienazijihadifascist terrorists throw Huge Street Parties (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iNm4SMXcUGBoGLsr1C_q-1y61oWgD8V90JF80)
An Iowa Republican congressman said Friday that terrorists would be "dancing in the streets" if Democratic candidate Barack Obama were to win the presidency.
Rep. Steve King based his prediction on Obama's pledge to pull troops out of Iraq, his Kenyan heritage and his middle name, Hussein.
"The radical Islamists, the al-Qaida ... would be dancing in the streets in greater numbers than they did on Sept. 11 because they would declare victory in this war on terror," King said in an interview with the Daily Reporter in Spencer.And the entire world will be dancing in the streets once Pretzelnitwit Smirky and gang are out of the White House and out of power.
Why do David Bowie and Mick Jagger hate America? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7y-x2fWKbmo)
Posted by Undeniable Liberal at 3/09/2008 11:21:00 AM (http://maruthecrankpot.blogspot.com/2008/03/islamodancing-in-streets.html) 2 comments (http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3330328&postID=5713324955959835888&isPopup=true)

Hillary’s Dysfunctional Campaign: Preview of a Clinton II Administration?

Monday, March 10, 2008
By John Kinsellagh

As I wrote last week, one of the great myths of this campaign season was the idea that Hillary as the candidate of experience is much better equipped than Obama to fill the role of Chief Executive. I stated that, “To this day, the very public bickering, backstabbing and internal conflict that has plagued her campaign continues unabated. Voters viewing this spectacle may wonder in trepidation that if a Clinton II Presidency in any way mirrors the inept handling of her own campaign, it would be a national catastrophe.”

An article in today’s New York Times raises similar issues:

http://beaconstreetjournal.com/Blog/2666808B-04CD-4966-B68E-40FF1EF84232_files/shapeimage_1.png

Still ready to lead from Day One Hillary?…

http://beaconstreetjournal.com/Blog/2666808B-04CD-4966-B68E-40FF1EF84232.html

12. März 2008

US-VORWAHLKAMPF

Obama gewinnt Mississippi - Gefahr einer Schlammschlacht wächst :rolleyes (...ist ja jetzt schon übler :()

Aus Jackson, Mississippi, berichtet Gregor Peter Schmitz

Barack Obama hat bei der Vorwahl in Mississippi seine Rivalin deutlich geschlagen. Bis zur nächsten Vorwahl wird jetzt sechs Wochen mit harten Bandagen gekämpft - der Zweikampf könnte eskalieren: Clinton hält an einer Beraterin fest, die Obamas Hautfarbe thematisiert hatte.....

....Schon munkeln die Wahlkampfauguren, Clinton wolle demonstrativ an Ferraro festhalten, um bei rustikaleren weißen Vorwählern zu punkten. Es könnte der Beginn einer noch radikaleren Strategie sein, die auch vor heiklen Rassendebatten nicht zurückschreckt - nachdem einige andere Clinton-Vorstöße in den vergangenen Tagen schiefliefen.

Clintons Team hatte gehofft, durch Siege in Ohio und Texas am vorigen Dienstag ihre Bewerbung neu beleben zu können. Doch mittlerweile ist klar, dass Obama in Texas nach Auszählung aller Stimmen mehr Delegierte erhalten wird als Clinton......

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,540883,00.html

http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gifClinton Apologizes to Black Voters http://img.breitbart.com/images/ap.gif (http://www.breitbart.com/partner.php?source=ap) http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif Mar 12 11:16 PM US/Eastern
By DEVLIN BARRETT
Associated Press Writer http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif http://img.breitbart.com/images/2008/3/12/D8VC9QC80/D8VC9QC80_preview.jpg
http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif

http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif


http://www.breitbart.com/images/common/dot.gif WASHINGTON (AP) - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton did something Wednesday night that she almost never does. She apologized. And once she started, she didn't seem able to stop. The New York senator, who is in a tight race with Illinois Sen. Barack Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination, struck several sorry notes at an evening forum sponsored by the National Newspaper Publishers Association, a group of more than 200 black community newspapers across the country.

Her biggest apology came in response to a question about comments by her husband, Bill Clinton (http://search.breitbart.com/q?s=Bill%20Clinton&sid=breitbart.com), after the South Carolina primary, which Obama won handily. Bill Clinton said Jesse Jackson (http://search.breitbart.com/q?s=Jesse%20Jackson&sid=breitbart.com) also won South Carolina when he ran for president in 1984 and 1988, a comment many viewed as belittling Obama's success.

"I want to put that in context. You know I am sorry if anyone was offended. It was certainly not meant in any way to be offensive," Hillary Clinton (http://search.breitbart.com/q?s=Hillary%20Clinton&sid=breitbart.com) said. "We can be proud of both Jesse Jackson and Senator Obama."....
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8VC9QC80&show_article=1

...Germa würde wohl sagen "...da brennt der Kittel" :hihi

Keith Olbermann: Special Comment on Hillary Clinton


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXBXD2zizIY


Wow, und das zur Primetime in einer der beliebtesten US-Politikshows der USA ........ sink her Keith :rofl:respekt

(ich geh davon aus, dass Clintons Entschuldigungsflut direkt im Zusammenhang steht mit dem Bash in der Sendung, die lief am Vortag ;))

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXBXD2zizIY

Zum Original-Beitrag (http://www.stock-channel.net/stock-board/showthread.php3?p=1135038#post1135038)
:eek :eek :eek :supi :eek :eek :eek

und das auf MSNBC :bang

"Backlash" nennen die Amerikaner sowas :kiss

Gallup Daily: Obama Leads Clinton 50% to 44%
McCain presents stiff competition for Obama and Clinton

USA Election 2008 Gallup Daily Americas Northern America

PRINCETON, NJ -- Barack Obama leads Hillary Clinton in national Democratic nomination preferences by a statistically significant 6-percentage point margin, 50% to 44%, according to Gallup Poll Daily tracking interviews from March 11-13.

This is the largest advantage either contestant has had in the race since late February. Obama had a strong showing in Thursday night interviews, which added to his slim lead in interviews conducted Tuesday and Wednesday gives him his current 6-point margin.

Obama attained a 5-point lead in tracking interviews from March 7-9. However, he did not sustain this lead beyond that one three-day period, and the race reverted to being roughly even. Obama's current margin reflects two days of interviewing subsequent to his victory in Mississippi Tuesday night.
www.gallup.com

Friday, March 14, 2008

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows Barack Obama leading Hillary Clinton 50% to 42% in the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination (see recent daily results). This is the first time Obama has ever reached 50% in fifteen months of daily polling on the race. Among African-American voters, Obama leads 84% to 9%. Among White voters, Clinton leads 50% to 39%. Two-thirds of voters who now support Clinton are women. Among white women Clinton leads by twenty-five. In Pennsylvania, Clinton leads 51% to 38%.

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll


:Appl

Bill Clinton: Now all of the delegates don't count - only popular vote - move those goal posts

After Iowa it wasn't going to be the number of wins - "Its the number of delegates"

. . . Obama pulls ahead in delegates

Then it was Super Tuesday - "Whoever wins Super Tuesday is going to be the nominee of the party"

. . . Obama wins Super Tuesda

Then it was "February was a good month for Obama, but March will be a good month for me"

. . . .Obama wins more delegates in March

At the same time Bill is saying "She has to win Ohio and Texas and she will be the next nominee of the party"

. . . Obama narrowly loses in Texas, wins the caucus and wins more delegates in Texas

Then we had a brief interelude where delegates were split up into new cateogires - automatic delegates, elected delegates, caucus delegates

. . . Frankly didn't really get beyond the laugh stage- of course it could be that everyone was too lazy to re engineer their spreadsheets.

Well now all talk about delegates is gone - now who ever wins the popular vote will be the next nominee - of course this means that all of the caucus states are out because the turn out is much lower for a caucus than a primary. I guess they want to do away with delegates completely and simply have a popular vote decide it.

I wonder if that means that they are going to cancel the primaries that occur after Pennsylvania if HRC finally sneaks by Obama in popular vote.

I guess we can cancel the convention in Denver, the delegates are no longer needed. :hihi


(Moving the goal posts comes at 2:00)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xWuVc-xkwE

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5090087

:a

Influential fundraisers for HRC threaten to withhold donations to DNC if FL, MI not seated

Delegate Battles Embroil 2 States

March 15, 2008
By MICHAEL LUO and JOHN M. BRODER

Democrats in Michigan and Florida struggled Friday to resolve the impasse over their disputed January primaries, coming up with a plan to hold a June primary in Michigan while remaining deadlocked in Florida.

Reflecting how tense the situation has become, influential fund-raisers for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton have stepped up their behind-the-scenes pressure on national party leaders to resolve the matter, with some even threatening to withhold their donations to the Democratic National Committee unless it seats the delegates from the two states or holds new primaries there.

The committee penalized Michigan and Florida for holding their primaries early in violation of national party rules, barring their delegates from being seated at the Democratic convention this summer. But with the Democratic contest now a scramble for every remaining delegate, the allocation of delegates from the two states could have a substantial impact on the nomination.

Mrs. Clinton won the primaries in both states, but the contests were not sanctioned by the party, neither candidate campaigned in the states and Mr. Obama did not even put his name on the ballot in Michigan.

Pushing to seat the Florida delegates, at least one top Clinton fund-raiser, Paul Cejas, a Miami businessman who has given the Democratic National Committee $63,500 since 2003, has demanded Democratic officials return his 2007 contribution of $28,500, which they have agreed to do.

“If you’re not going to count my vote, I’m not going to give you my money,” said Mr. Cejas, who was the United States ambassador to Belgium from 1998 to 2001. ......

Meanwhile, Senator Bill Nelson of Florida, a Clinton supporter, raised the possibility of seating his state’s delegates based on the January vote — which Mrs. Clinton won 50 percent to 33 percent — but awarding each Florida delegate only half a vote at the August convention. That would mean that Mrs. Clinton would narrow the delegate gap with Mr. Obama by a net of 19 delegates, rather than the 38 she would have gained under the January result. She trails Mr. Obama by more than 100 delegates, according to most counts.

Mr. Nelson discussed the plan with Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton on Thursday on the Senate floor. A Nelson aide said they told him they wanted the Florida problem resolved but did not endorse his half-a-vote plan. Other Florida Democrats said the Nelson proposal was only one of many ideas floating around............

As for the latest Michigan proposal, aides to Mrs. Clinton signaled they were likely to go along with the plan, but the Obama campaign was more skeptical, according to people involved in the process.

“We have to do something,” said State Senator Tupac A. Hunter, a co-chairman of the Obama Michigan campaign, “but I don’t know if this is even legal.”

A Clinton spokesman, Mo Elleithee, said of the Michigan proposal: “Nearly 600,000 Americans participated in the Michigan primary in January, and we have a solemn obligation to ensure that their voices are heard. The best way to make that happen is to honor their votes, but if that isn’t possible there should be a new state primary that doesn’t leave taxpayers footing the bill.”

He said the Clinton campaign was waiting to hear more details. .......

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/15/us/politics/15donate.html?hp

Nur würde auch das wenig ändern an der Differenz der Delgierten und einzig die Schwelle von 2025 nötigen Delegierten zur Mehrheit um rund 150 anheben :rolleyes

Obamas Vorsprung weitet sich aus, und Hillary macht sich wohl ihre Gedanken ob es denn klug war die kleinen Staaten als "unbedeutend" zu bezeichnen ;):

Sunday, March 16, 2008; Page A12
COUNTY CONVENTIONS

Obama Gains 14 More Delegates

CHICAGO -- On a day when Sen. Barack Obama picked up more pledged delegates in Iowa and California, the senator from Illinois told a crowd in suburban Indianapolis on Saturday that it is time to turn away from the "forces of division," and to choose instead "a different path that says: We have different stories, but we have common dreams and common hopes."

The escalating bitterness in the Democratic presidential campaign provided a tart subtext to Obama's speech before about 3,200 people in Plainfield, Ind.

Obama spent much of Friday distancing himself from comments on race by his former pastor, and he alluded to that Saturday, saying: "When people say things like my former pastor said, you have to speak out forcefully against them. But what you also have to do is remember what Bobby Kennedy said: that it is within our power to join together to truly make a United States of America."

While Obama was speaking in Indiana, thousands of Democrats in Iowa were taking part in county conventions, the second step in allocating the state's delegates to the national convention.

Obama gained eight of the 14 delegates won in the Jan. 3 caucuses by former senator John Edwards, who has since dropped out of the Democratic presidential race, along with one won by Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, according to the Obama campaign. Caucus-night projections showed Obama getting 16 delegates and Clinton 15.

With the other six Edwards delegates standing firm, Obama's camp claimed 25 delegates from Iowa, compared with 14 for Clinton. The Associated Press reported late Saturday that, in final counts from California's Feb. 5 primary, Clinton picked up two more pledged delegates and Obama gained five.

According to AP's count, the Iowa and California results give Obama a national lead of 119 pledged delegates and superdelegates over Clinton.

"This is a very significant improvement for us," Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said, referring to the Iowa result.

If the numbers hold at the June 14 state convention, Obama will have won more than half of Iowa's delegates. On Jan. 3, he was backed by 39 percent of caucusgoers, compared with 30 percent for Edwards and 29 percent for Clinton.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/15/AR2008031502431.html

Damit hat Clinton mit Iowa alleine mehr verloren als sie in Ohio gewann :dd

Nimmt mich wunder ob es ihm etwas nutzt :schwitz ... Guter Redner ist er ja. Aber irgendwie erschreckend dass es Clinton und nicht McCain aus der GOP ist der den Wahlkampf zu dem Punkt gebracht hat der sowas nötig macht :bad . Denn die Geschichte an sich ist alt und war bekannt...

March 17, 2008

Obama plans major race speech tomorrow


Barack Obama will give a major speech on "the larger issue of race in this campaign," he told reporters in Monaca, PA just now.

He was pressed there, as he has been at recent appearances, on statements by his former pastor, Jeremiah Wright.

"I am going to be talking about not just Reverend Wright, but the larger issue of race in this campaign," he said.

He added that he would "talk about how some of these issues are perceived from within the black church issue for example," he said.

He also briefly defended Wright from the image that has come through in a handful of repeatedly televised clips from recent Wright sermons.

"The caricature that’s being painted of him is not accurate," he said.

The speech could offer Obama an opportunity to move past the controversy over his pastor, and to turn the conversation to a topic he'd rather focus on: his Christian faith. But the speech also guarantees that the Wright story will continue to dominate political headlines.

Mitt Romney's attempt directly to address his Mormonism last year never decisively put the issue to rest for some voters.

Obama's schedule puts him in Philadelphia tomorrow.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/Obama_plans_major_race_speech_tomorrow.html

Clinton says "we cannot win" Iraq war (...ist ja ganz was Neues :rolleyes)

Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:32pm EDT

By Jeff Mason

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrat Hillary Clinton (http://www.reuters.com/news/globalcoverage/hillaryclinton) charged on Monday the Iraq war may cost Americans $1 trillion and add strain to the sagging U.S. economy as she made her case for a prompt U.S. troop pullout from a war "we cannot win."

This week marks the fifth anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, but the economy's woes competed for attention as the top issue facing voters when they choose their next president in November.

Clinton, the former first lady who is trying to convince Americans she has foreign policy gravitas, hurled criticism over Iraq at her two rivals, Illinois Democratic Sen. Barack Obama (http://www.reuters.com/news/globalcoverage/barackobama) and Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain (http://www.reuters.com/news/globalcoverage/johnmccain).

New York Sen. Clinton pointedly noted that while Obama insists he will withdraw U.S. troops in Iraq within 16 months of taking office, his former foreign policy adviser, Samantha Power, had said he might not follow through on the pledge.

"In uncertain times, we cannot afford uncertain leadership," Clinton said. Power resigned after a British newspaper quoted her calling Clinton a "monster."

Obama, who routinely scolds Clinton for having voted for a 2002 Senate resolution that authorized the war, fired back: "It was an unwise war which is why I opposed it in 2002 and why I will bring this war to an end in 2009.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN1440646120080317?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews&rpc=22&sp=true

Obama's Bold Gamble on Race

By JAMES CARNEY

Politicians don't give speeches like the one Barack Obama delivered this morning at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia. Certainly presidential candidates facing the biggest crisis of their campaigns don't. At moments like these — when circumstances force them to confront and try to defuse a problem that threatens to undermine their campaigns — politicians routinely seek to clarify, diminish and then dispose of the problem. They play down the conflict, whatever it is, then attempt to cut themselves off from it and move on, hoping the media and electorate will do the same. What they don't do is give a speech analyzing the problem and telling Americans that it's actually more complicated than what they believed. They manifestly do not denounce the offensive comments that stirred up the trouble to begin with and then tell Americans to grow up and deal with the fact that those same remarks, however wrong and offensive, are an elemental part of who they are, and who we are.

.......

Obama did what politicians so rarely do — acknowledge complexity, insist that the issue currently roiling the presidential campaign — the story of Jeremiah Wright's words — is not a story that is clear-cut between right and wrong, or between black and white for that matter.

.........

Obama's speech was profound, one of the most remarkable by a major public figure in decades. One question — perhaps the question —is whether its sheer audacity makes for good political strategy. By confronting the Wright controversy head-on, Obama ensured that it would drive the narrative about his campaign, and his race against Hillary Clinton, for days and perhaps weeks to come. He and his advisers no doubt calculated that nothing they could do would change that fact. But if one of the appeals of Obama's candidacy has been the promise of a post-racial politics, how will voters respond to a speech acknowledging that the future is not now, that race still divides us?

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1723302,00.html

Die Presse zur Rede :)

There are moments — increasingly rare in risk-abhorrent modern campaigns — when politicians are called upon to bare their fundamental beliefs. In the best of these moments, the speaker does not just salve the current political wound, but also illuminates larger, troubling issues that the nation is wrestling with.

Inaugural addresses by Abraham Lincoln and Franklin D. Roosevelt come to mind, as does John F. Kennedy’s 1960 speech on religion, with its enduring vision of the separation between church and state. Senator Barack Obama, who has not faced such tests of character this year, faced one on Tuesday. It is hard to imagine how he could have handled it better.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/19/opinion/19wed1.html?ref=opinion

SEN. BARACK Obama's mission in Philadelphia yesterday was to put the controversy over inflammatory statements made by the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., his spiritual mentor and pastor for 20 years, behind him. But Mr. Obama (D-Ill.) went deeper than that. He used his address as a teachable moment, one in which he addressed the pain, anger and frustration of generations of blacks and whites head-on -- and offered a vision of how those experiences could be surmounted, if not forgotten. It was a compelling answer both to the challenge presented by his pastor's comments and to the growing role of race in the presidential campaign.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/18/AR2008031802704.html

BARACK OBAMA could have made a much shorter speech. He could have protected his campaign yesterday by denouncing and rejecting his former pastor, Rev.Jeremiah Wright, as a crank. Then Obama could have rushed on, hoping that someone else's scandal would push his own out of the headlines.

Instead, Obama took the opportunity to engage the question of race in America, starting a bold, uncomfortably honest conversation. He asked Americans to talk openly about the deep wells of anger and resentment over racism, discrimination, and affirmative action. It's a call to break out of the country's racial stalemate and finally reach a new national understanding.

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/2008/03/19/obamas_history_and_americas/

usw..... Blendende Kritiken quer durch den Blätterwald, verbleibt eine Frage: sehen das die Wähler identisch ;)

Obama's lead over Clinton narrows: Reuters poll

Wed Mar 19, 2008 1:35pm EDT
By Steve Holland

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrat Barack Obama (http://www.reuters.com/news/globalcoverage/barackobama)'s big national lead over Hillary Clinton (http://www.reuters.com/news/globalcoverage/hillaryclinton) has all but evaporated in the U.S. presidential race, and both Democrats trail Republican John McCain (http://www.reuters.com/news/globalcoverage/johnmccain), according a Reuters/Zogby poll released on Wednesday.

The poll showed Obama had only a statistically insignificant lead of 47 percent to 44 percent over Clinton, down sharply from a 14 point edge he held over her in February when he was riding the tide of 10 straight victories.

Illinois Sen. Obama, who would be America's first black president, has been buffeted by attacks in recent weeks from New York Sen. Clinton over his fitness to serve as commander-in-chief and by a tempest over racially charged sermons given by his Chicago preacher.

The poll showed Arizona Sen. McCain, who has clinched the Republican presidential nomination, is benefiting from the lengthy campaign battle between Obama and Clinton, who are now battling to win Pennsylvania on April 22.......


http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1824791220080319?feedType=RSS&feedName=politicsNews&rpc=22&sp=true


....der lachende Dritte - hoffentlich nicht :rolleyes

Aus heutiger Sicht würde ich mein Geld auf McCain setzen, hat wohl die besten Chancen. Hillary demontiert Obama über die Rassen- und Religionsfrage, die Demokraten selbst stehen fast vor der Spaltung, dazu wird es wohl auf einen Entscheid der Superdelegates hinauslaufen am Konvent (Carter lässt grüssen, als der Niedergang der Demokraten begann), Florida stellt sich quer, sieht alles sehr, sehr gut aus für McCain.... :ne. In dem Fall hat dann Hillary 2012 die nächste Chance :kotz

Und die Rightwinger aus der GOP portieren nun offen Hillary, die hätten sie wohl lieber in der GE:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23697447#23697447

:bad

Wednesday, Mar. 19, 2008

Can GOP Voters Spoil the Dem Race?

By Hilary Hylton/Austin

As if Democrats didn't have enough problems deciding upon their presidential nominee this year, now they must contend with the possibility that Republicans are deliberately crossing party lines to prolong the bitterly contested race between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. In recent weeks, conservative talk radio stars Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham have urged loyal listeners to vote for the much-despised Clinton in open Democratic primaries so as to prevent Obama from sealing the nomination, and there are some indications that their calls have already been heeded in states like Texas and Mississippi.

Even in the crucial swing state of Pennsylvania, where the April 22 primary is closed to independents and Republicans, there are signs that some Republicans are going so far as to switch their party registration by the March 24 deadline to participate in what Limbaugh has dubbed "Operation Chaos." In the last five months, there has been a 2.2% increase in the number of registered Democrats in Pennsylvania versus a tiny dip of 0.12% in Republican numbers. Veteran Pennsylvania pollster Terry Madonna expects some 100,000 new Democrats to vote on April 22, about 5% of the total expected to vote. In historic Gettysburg, Adams County Elections Supervisor Monica Dutko told the local newspaper, The York Daily Record, she was a seeing an unprecedented steady stream of switchers, some of whom volunteered they were changing registration from Republican to Democrat at the urging of Limbaugh.

Madonna, however, believes most of those new Dems will go for Obama, which goes against the Limbaugh conspiracy theory. It is also exactly what the upstart candidate himself been working toward. Obama, who until recently was winning the lion's share of Republican votes in open Democratic primaries, is running radio ads in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia calling on voters to register as Democrats this week.

The first clue that Republicans might be making this kind of mischief came in the crucial Texas primary on March 4, a contest that most observers claimed Clinton had to win — along with Ohio — to keep alive her hopes for the nomination. Dave Mann, a political writer for the progressive Texas Observer, was driving to Fort Worth on that primary day when he heard various callers to the Laura Ingraham radio show claiming they had followed her and Limbaugh's call. One even admitted he would now have to go to confession and repent his sins. As he listened, Mann dismissed the idea that Republicans would have a significant impact on the Democratic outcome in Texas.

But the next day, after examining the exit polls from Texas and earlier states, he changed his mind. "As Republican participation increased, Hillary got more votes," Mann said. Some of them came from Allison Cavey's family. "My whole family actually voted for Hillary in the Texas primaries and we are all McCain supporters," said Cavey, 32, a Dallas resident who works for a medical software company. "We all thought it would be easier to beat Hillary in the fall. Also, we all agreed that if for some reason a Democrat won the election we would be better off with Hillary than Obama...scary thought!"

In both Ohio and Texas, Republicans and independents were a higher percentage of the votes than in other states. "Based on past results, you would think that favors Obama, who has done well in 'open' Democratic primaries where Republicans can crossover on election day," Mann said. Obama won among California independents 58-32%; Virginia Republicans went for him 72-23; and he won Missouri Republicans 75-21. But in Texas and Ohio the two Democrats split the Republican/independent vote. "The Hillary Republicans cost Obama Texas," Mann said. The Mississippi results a week later confirmed the trend. "There was a complete reversal," Mann said, and Obama was now losing Republicans and independents two to one to Clinton. "Without a doubt, Rush, and to a lesser extent me, had some effect on the Republican turnout," Ingraham told Fox News. "When you look at those exit polls, it is really quite striking."

Proving that claim is still not easy. Prior to Texas primary day, longtime political numbers cruncher Royal Masset, a former GOP state party political director, dismissed the notion of a talk radio impact as "hogwash" and "urban myth." But during the two-week early voting period, down ballot Republican officeholders were nervous as they watched a record number of early voters ask for Democratic ballots, even in traditionally red counties. On election day, poll officials reported record requests for Democratic ballots in the reddest areas of the state. In Collin County, just north of Dallas where there is not a single Democratic officeholder, more voters chose to cast Democratic ballots — some 72,543 — than had voted in the November election for John Kerry, who got 69,000 votes. In 2000, only 3,735 voted in the Democratic primary, and the number was not much higher in 2004, some 6,493. "I can't put my finger on it," Dennis Simmons, a political scientists at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, said on election day as he saw red counties recording big blue turnouts.

After looking over the election day numbers in detail, Masset concluded that half a million Republicans had voted in the Democratic primary, but that many had done it not to support Clinton, as urged to by Limbaugh, but for Obama. In Collin County, for example, 57% voted for Obama, but declined to cast a vote in down ballot races. Only 41,894 — a dropoff of 43% — voted in a competitive Democratic U.S. Senate primary race.

"Those 500,000 Republicans who voted in the Democratic party couldn't even bring themselves to vote for a Democratic candidate for U.S. Senator," Masset said. He believes some crossed over at the urging of talk radio, but more crossed over to vote for Obama, caught up in the excitement of a horse race; still, only detailed follow-up polling might provide more insight into the Republican crossover votes.

Not all pollsters agree with Masset's analysis. Citing his respect for both Masset and Limbaugh, Republican pollster Michael Baselice said his examination of the numbers leads him to believe the number of Republicans participating in the Texas primary this year was similar to past primary elections. "The bigger story," Baselice said, "is how many people came out and voted in a primary for the first time." In Dallas County 58% of the voters had never voted in either party's primary, while in Harris County, home to Houston, an astounding 64% of the primary voters had no primary voting history record. Obama won in those two large urban areas.

But while pollsters crunch the numbers, Limbaugh is relishing the Democratic battle. On primary day in Mississippi he told listeners: "I'm not going to tell Republicans to go over there and vote, because I don't think I have to anymore. I think everybody understands here. But I want Obama to win this tonight. I want Obama to win Mississippi. I want Obama to win everything 'til we get to Pennsylvania. Then it's a different ballgame. Then we start being "un-American" again, to quote liberals," Limbaugh said laughing. "Then we start to sabotage all over again. The key about that, though, is you've gotta be registered with the party you intend to vote in Pennsylvania by March 24th. That's early. That's almost a month before the election date, which is April 22nd. So be thinking about that, folks."

Other talk radio hosts have taken up the cause. In Oregon, where voters must register by party by April 29 to vote in the May 20 primary. Conservative talk radio host Victoria Taft has been pushing Republicans to re-register as "dummocrats." Elections officials are seeing an increase in switchers, but voters' motives may not be divined until the Oregon exit polls are released.

Meanwhile, Limbaugh opened his program Wednesday with a victory cry: "Operation Chaos is exceeding all objectives...this is just fabulous." Dubbing the Obama-Clinton face-off a "soap opera," Limbaugh says he will carry his campaign through to the final primaries in early June.

"I want our party to win. I want the Democrats to lose," Limbaugh said. "They're in the midst of tearing themselves apart right now. It is fascinating to watch. And it's all going to stop if Hillary loses." :bad

http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1723756,00.html

..dieser Zynismus ist erschreckend - mit einem Funken Anstand scheint man in der Politik nicht weit zu kommen :mad

Wobei auch Hillary Probleme bekommt, von ihren Beteuerungen von wegen sie sei in der internationalen Politik erfahrener und sei insbesondere im irischen wie bosnischen Friedensprozess direkt beteiligt gewesen bleibt nichts mehr übrig nach der Veröffentlichung ihrer Termine über die betreffende Zeit:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23697447#23722476

Ausser natürlich man schaut Shoppingtouren und Teetrinktermine als politische Erfahrung an :schwitz

Schmutzige Tricks, aber für einmal erwischt :lach :schwitz

US State Department: Someone snooped in Obama's passport file


(CNN) -- On three occasions since January, Sen. Barack Obama's passport file was looked at by three different contract workers, said State Department spokesman Sean McCormack.

The contractors accessed information in the file in an unauthorized way, he said.

Two contractors were fired and one was disciplined by the contractor's company, McCormack said.

He said the contractors are not linked.

The State Department hires contractors to design, build and maintain their systems and help employees with searches. McCormack said two of the contractors in the Obama case were "low-level" personnel and the other was in a mid-level position with no management role.

The breach seems like "imprudent curiosity" among the contract workers, said McCormack, adding that senior management at the State Department was not aware of the incidents until Thursday afternoon. Breaches occurred January 9, February 21 and March 14.

Obama's campaign is asking for a complete investigation to find out who looked at Obama's passport file and why.

"This is an outrageous breach of security and privacy, even from an administration that has shown little regard for either over the last eight years," said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton in a statement.

"Our government's duty is to protect the private information of the American people, not use it for political purposes."

Doug Hattaway, a spokesman for Sen. Hillary Clinton, Obama's rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, said, "If it's true, it's reprehensible, and the Bush administration has a responsibility to get to the bottom of it."

The White House declined comment Thursday evening, just hours after the State Department upper management learned of the breach.

State Department officials say Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice was told Thursday what happened and that she told her staff she wanted a full investigation.

The department would not speculate whether the information had been shared with anyone else.Watch Anderson Cooper discuss the controversy »

"That obviously is something we are investigating," said Under Secretary of State Pat Kennedy. "I have no reason to believe they did, but I certainly am not going to be dismissive of what is a serious and valid question."

Kennedy said he will brief Obama's senior staff on Friday.

The news was reminiscent of a breach of Bill Clinton's passport information during the 1992 presidential campaign. The FBI launched an investigation after the State Department reported that someone had ripped out pages from his passport file from the late 1960s and '70s.

The department concluded that a search of Clinton's passport records was an attempt to influence the presidential election, reportedly by trying to show that Clinton tried to seek citizenship in another country to avoid the draft. Clinton was running against President George H.W. Bush.

Then-State Department Inspector General Sherman Funk found no evidence the White House ordered department staffers to dig for political dirt in Clinton's passport files. However, Funk said the White House probably knew it was happening.

Sen. Joseph Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, issued a statement late Thursday.

"I am deeply troubled that State Department contract employees sought access to Sen. Barack Obama's passport files. Firing or disciplining those responsible is an important first step. But we need to understand why these employees had access to this information in the first place, why they sought the information, and why it took over two months for this matter to come to light. I urge the Secretary of State to promptly refer this matter to the State Department Inspector General for investigation."

http://www.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=State+Department%3A+Someone+snooped+in+Obama%27s+passport+file+-+CNN.com&expire=-1&urlID=27308077&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fedition.cnn.com%2F2008%2FPOLITICS%2F03%2F20%2Fobama.passport%2Findex.html&partnerID=212106

Eine der 3 gefeuerten Mitarbeitern war die ehemalige Botschafterin in Paraguay unter Clinton :verbeug

Fragen über Fragen...

Thursday, March 20, 2008

BARACK OBAMA

Somebody Was Snooping in Obama's Passport File?

A weird campaign cycle gets even weirder - three State Department contract employees have been caught nosing around in Barack Obama's passport file. Two were fired, one was disciplined. The first breach was on January 9; the inspector general is launching an investigation.

Still, what did the snoopers expect to find? The only information on the passport that wouldn't be in the public domain would be his Social Security number.

The only other information that would be in there would be his travel history, which wouldn't be useful unless...

A little while back, the Hillary campaign — specifically Lee Feinstein, the campaign's national security director, asked a question:

As voters evaluate you as a potential Commander-in-Chief, do you think it's legitimate for people to be concerned that you have traveled to only one NATO country, on a brief stopover trip in 2005, and have never traveled to Latin America?

I remember hearing their charge that Obama had only visited one NATO country in his life and it seemed pretty hard to believe... out of countries like Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Turkey, etc., Obama had only been to one? The boy who grew up in Indonesia, and visited relatives in Africa, never made it to any of those European countries? The guy who lived in Chicago and went to Harvard never made it to Canada? (I presume Canada wasn't the site of the brief stopover trip.)

Now, I'm not saying that the Hillary camp did the snooping in the passport file. But in asking that question, they seemed awfully certain that Obama had never been to one of those countries earlier in his life, didn't they? Note they didn't say, "you have traveled to only one NATO country as a senator", (it wouldn't be all that surprising that Obama had only taken a few foreign trips since taking office in January 2005); they worded the question so that it encompasses his entire life.

The question came from the Hillary camp on March 12; two of the breaches were before that date. One breach occurred two days later.

Hmmm...

http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZGE1ZjIyZjA3ODA2ZDBlM2ZiYjcyZTRhNmI2ODYwNmE=

Sodele, nun hat Hillary ihren eigenen Skandal.

Dazu sind auch noch Fotos aufgetaucht die die Clintons mit dem Pastor von Obama im Weissen Haus während der 90er-Jahre zeigen :dd ... Bad luck Hillary, mal die Umfragen nächste Woche abwarten :kiss

Und noch eine Lüge über Nacht aufgeflogen, Hillary & NAFTA

Senator Clinton made her “opposition” to NAFTA a cornerstone of her Ohio campaign. There was only one problem: she wasn’t telling the truth to Ohio voters.

Misrepresenting your position and carefully parsing your words when you don’t think you’ll get caught are the hallmarks of the kind of politics that Barack Obama is running to change. That’s the kind of politics that led us into war in Iraq and gave us a tax code that lets those with offshore investments pay a lower tax rate than the average working family in Pennsylvania.

It’s about trust.

Working Americans are looking for a President who will be consistent in standing up for American workers—and have the integrity to be consistent in his or her views. Senator Clinton has failed that test: though she now rails against NAFTA on the campaign trail, her records as first lady show that she actively lobbied for NAFTA’s passage.

Thousands of pages of Hillary Clinton’s White House schedules released yesterday show that she was one of the administration’s top proponents of NAFTA, attending at least four meetings to advocate for its passage.

That was then. Now that she’s running for President, Clinton has changed her tune. Less than a month ago, Clinton said at a debate that “I have been a critic of NAFTA from the very beginning. I didn't have a public position on it, because I was part of the administration, but when I started running for the Senate, I have been a critic.”

Really? Attendees at the 1993 NAFTA briefing where Clinton served as the closing act say that she was “totally pro-NAFTA and what a good thing it would be for the economy.”

American workers are already facing the uncertainly of a changing economy. The last thing they need is another President who changes views when there’s an election coming up.

“A CRITIC OF NAFTA FROM THE VERY BEGINNING”?

Clinton Said “I Have Been A Critic Of NAFTA >From The Very Beginning.” Clinton: “You know, I have been a critic of NAFTA from the very beginning. I didn't have a public position on it, because I was part of the administration, but when I started running for the Senate, I have been a critic.”

Clinton Said That NAFTA Was “Negotiated Under President George H.W. Bush And It Was Passed During My Husband’s Presidency. But I Was Always Uncomfortable About Certain Aspects Of It, And I Have Always Made That Clear.” Clinton on her position: NAFTA was “negotiated under President George H.W. Bush and it was passed during my husband's presidency. But I was always uncomfortable about certain aspects of it, and I have always made that clear.”

Clinton: “I Had Said That For Many Years” That We Should Fix NAFTA. Asked how she would “fix” NAFTA, Clinton responded, “Well, I had said that for many years, that, you know, NAFTA and the way it’s been implemented has hurt a lot of American workers. In fact, I did a study in New York looking at the impact of NAFTA on business people, workers and farmers who couldn’t get their products into Canada despite NAFTA. So, clearly we have to have a broad reform in how we approach trade. NAFTA’s a piece of it, but it’s not the only piece of it. I believe in smart trade. I’ve said that for years.”

Clinton Campaign: “Clinton Has Been Voicing Serious Concerns About Trade Agreements For Years.” In response to criticism of Clinton’s trade stance, Clinton’s spokesperson said “Senator Obama must have been talking about himself because as recently as 2004, he was saying the United States should pursue trade deals like Nafta. The fact is that Senator Clinton has been voicing serious concerns about trade agreements for years.”

THE RECORD: NAFTA MEETINGS IN THE WHITE HOUSE

NOVEMBER 10, 1993: Clinton Served “As The Closing Act During A Briefing On NAFTA, The Trade Agreement She Now Assails.” Clinton served “as the closing act during a briefing on NAFTA, the trade agreement she now assails.” According to her schedule, at 11:30 am - 11:45 am Clinton did a “NAFTA briefing drop-by” with approximately 120 expected to attend and Clinton concluding the program.

Ø ABC: Two Attendees Said “It Wasn’t A Drop-By It Was Organized Around Her Participation” And “Her Remarks Were Totally Pro-NAFTA And What A Good Thing It Would Be For The Economy.” “Two attendees of that closed-door briefing, neither of whom are affiliated with any campaign, describe that event for ABC News. It was a room full of women involved in international trade. David Gergen served as a sort of master of ceremonies as various women members of the Cabinet talked up NAFTA, which had yet to pass Congress. ‘It wasn’t a drop-by it was organized around her participation,’ said one attendee. ‘Her remarks were totally pro-NAFTA and what a good thing it would be for the economy. There was no equivocation for her support for NAFTA at the time. Folks were pleased that she came by. If this is a still a question about what Hillary's position when she was First Lady, she was totally supportive if NAFTA.’ That first attendee recalls that the First Lady's office in the East Wing put together ‘the invitation list, who was invited authorizations and all that stuff.’ And what is this attendee's response to Clinton today distancing herself from NAFTA? ‘For people who worked hard to pass NAFTA and who support the importance of markets opening for the economy in the long term, they're very upset. A number of the women who were there are very upset. You need to have some integrity in your position. The Clintons when Bill Clinton was president took a moderate position on trade for Democrats. For her to repudiate that now seems pretty phony.’ Recalls a second attendee, ‘they were looking for women in international trade who supported NAFTA. Senator Clinton came by at the end. And of course she asked for our support and help in passing NAFTA.’ Women who attended that event, the second attendee says, have been incredulous to see Clinton distance herself from the trade agreement as she campaigns today. ‘They're all saying, ‘What's this all about?’ We all heard it firsthand.’ She says Clinton isn't being honest with voters today.”

AUGUST 9, 1993: Clinton Attended Back-To-Back Meetings On NAFTA. According to Hillary Clinton’s schedule, she attended a NAFTA meeting that was tentative with the President at 5:10 pm and a NAFTA/Health meeting with the President at 6 pm.

OCTOBER 5, 1993: Clinton Attended Meeting On NAFTA. According to Hillary Clinton’s schedule, she attended a NAFTA meeting that from 10:30am-12am.

MEET ME IN OHIO!

Clinton Criticized Obama For Sending Out A NAFTA Mailer And Said “I Have To Express My Deep Disappointment That He Is Continuing To Send False And Discrediting Mailings With Information That Is Not True To Voters Of Ohio. … It Has Been Discredited. It Is Blatantly False And Yet He Continues To Spend Millions Of Dollars Perpetuating Falsehoods” And Added That Newsday Had Corrected The Record About Her Views On The Agreement. Clinton: “We’ve been drawing contrasts in this campaign, and I think that's important for voters so that they know where we stand, what our records are, what it is we will do as president. Today, in the crowd, I was given two mailings that Senator Obama's campaign is sending out, and I have to express my deep disappointment that he is continuing to send false and discredited mailings with information that is not true to the voters of Ohio. He says one thing in speeches and then he turns around and does this, and we have consistently called him on it. It has been discredited. It is blatantly false and yet he continues to spend millions of dollars perpetuating falsehoods. That is not the new politics that the speeches are about. It is not hopeful; it is destructive. … This mailing about NAFTA, saying that I believe NAFTA was a, quote, boon, quotes a newspaper that had corrected the record. We have pointed it out. The newspaper has pointed it out. Time and time again, you hear one thing in speeches and then you see a campaign that has the worst kind of tactics reminiscent of the same sort of Republican attacks on Democrats. Well, I am here to say that it is not only wrong, but it is undermining core Democratic principles. … Enough with the speeches and the big rallies and then using tactics that are right out of Karl Rove's playbook. This is wrong, and every Democrat should be outraged because this is the kind of attack that not only undermines poor Democratic values, but gives aid and comfort to the very special interests and their allies in the Republican Party who are against doing what we want to do for America. So, shame on you, Barack Obama. It is time you ran a campaign consistent with your messages in public. That’s what I expect from you. Meet me in Ohio. Let’s have a debate about your tactics and your behavior in this campaign.”

NEW EVIDENCE CONTRADICTS PREVIOUS MEDIA REPORTS

Obama’s Attack On Clinton’s NAFTA Position Is, “Most Observers Say, Misleading.” “As the 2008 campaign shifts to economically hard-hit states like Ohio, so too do the topics of political debate. This week, Sen. Barack Obama's campaign has attacked Sen. Hillary Clinton on trade, arguing that she was once a supporter of the North American Free Trade Agreement that contributed to the loss hundreds of thousands of American jobs. ‘A little more than a year ago,’ an Obama mailer reads, "Hillary Clinton thought NAFTA was a 'boon' to the economy.’ The piece goes on to argue that the New York Senator is ‘changing her tune’ now that she's campaigning in the Buckeye State. The attack is, most observers say, misleading. The "boon" line, a paraphrase lifted from a September 2006 Newsday article, has yet to be confirmed as an authentic quote. But, more importantly, the mailer misrepresents what former Clinton administration officials and biographers say was Hillary Clinton's long-held opposition to the legislation.”

Mickey Kantor Said “Hillary Clinton Was One Of The Great Skeptics” Of NAFTA. “’In August in 92, we had to make a decision,’ Mickey Kantor the former U.S. Secretary of Commerce, Clinton adviser, and free trade advocate recalled for the Huffington Post. ‘President Clinton had to make a decision as governor, whether or not he would support NAFTA, and of course he did... Hillary Clinton was one of the great skeptics in the discussion as to whether he should do. So she was always skeptical beginning in 1992 and onward.’”


David Gergen Said Clinton “Was Extremely Unenthusiastic About NAFTA. “I was actually there in the Clinton White House during the NAFTA fight and I must tell you Hillary Clinton was extremely unenthusiastic about NAFTA. And I think that’s putting it mildly. I’m not sure she objected to all the provisions of it but she just didn’t see why her husband and that White House had to go and do that fight. She was very unhappy about it and wanted to move on to health care. So I do think there’s some justification for her camp saying, you know, she’s never been a great backer for NAFTA."

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/samgrahamfelsen/gGBHYM

Sieht ganz so aus als hätte das Obama-Lager endlich den "Attack"-Knopf entdeckt nach dem Durchhänger letzte Woche :a

Am Rande, aber auch ein kleiner Erfolg :supi

OBAMA'S SPEECH MAKES YOUTUBE HISTORY

Barack Obama's "A More Perfect Union" speech is the most popular video in the world today, drawing an unusual 1.2 million full views in its first 24 hours on YouTube – double the views of the next most popular clips. YouTube only counts visitors who watch an entire video :ek , so hundreds of thousands of additional visitors probably watched part of the 37-minute address.

While commentators and Democratic leaders predict that "A More Perfect Union" will ultimately be seen as a historic contribution to American race relations, it is already making history in YouTube politics. At this pace, it will be the most watched contemporary political speech in Internet history. In about a day, it is already the second most viewed item on Obama's innovative YouTube channel, which boasts 810 videos and 13 million channel views. (For comparison, that is nine times the views of Clinton's channel and 21 times the views for the McCain channel.)

Obama's all-time top video, a 4-minute response to President Bush's State of the Union recorded exclusively for YouTube, ultimately drew 1.3 million views. An Obama aide tells The Nation that video took about two weeks to reach one million views -- this longer Philadelphia address broke one million views in a single day, with visitors voting it the top rated and most "favorited" video on YouTube. And over at MSNBC.com, an excerpt of Obama's speech was also the most popular clip, drawing over 360,000 views.

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters?pid=300367

Mar 21, 2008 10:50 am US/Eastern

Rice Apologizes To Obama For Passport Breach

WASHINGTON (CBS) ― Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice says she has apologized to Barack Obama for an incident in which State Department contractors unnecessarily reviewed his passport file.

The episode raises questions as to whether the actions of three contractors, two of whom have been fired, were politically motivated.

Rice said she spoke with Obama and told him she was sorry.

"I told him that I was sorry, and I told him that I myself would be very disturbed if I learned that someone had looked in my passport file," Rice said.

Two of the contract employees were fired for the security breach and the third was disciplined but is still working, the department said Thursday night.

It would not release the names of those who were fired and disciplined or the names of the two companies for which they worked. The department's inspector general is investigating.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said that for now it appears that nothing other than "imprudent curiosity" was involved in three separate breaches of the Illinois senator's personal information, "but we are taking steps to reassure ourselves that that is, in fact, the case."

It is not clear whether the employees saw anything other than the basic personal data such as name, citizenship, age and place of birth that is required when a person fills out a passport application.

Bill Burton, a spokesman for Obama's presidential campaign, called for a complete investigation.

"This is an outrageous breach of security and privacy, even from an administration that has shown little regard for either over the last eight years," Burton said. "Our government's duty is to protect the private information of the American people, not use it for political purposes."

"This is a serious matter that merits a complete investigation, and we demand to know who looked at Senator Obama's passport file, for what purpose and why it took so long for them to reveal this security breach," he said.

The breaches occurred on Jan. 9, Feb. 21 and March 14 and were detected by internal State Department computer checks, McCormack said. The department's top management officer, Undersecretary Patrick Kennedy, said certain records, including those of high-profile people, are "flagged" with a computer tag that tips off supervisors when someone tries to view the records without a proper reason.

The firings and unspecified discipline of the third employee already had occurred when senior State Department officials learned of the breaches. Kennedy called that a failing.

"I will fully acknowledge this information should have been passed up the line," Kennedy told reporters in a conference call Thursday night. "It was dealt with at the office level."

In answer to a question, Kennedy said the department doesn't look into political affiliation in doing background checks on passport workers. "Now that this has arisen, this becomes a germane question, and that will be something for the appropriate investigation to look into," he said.

The department informed Obama's Senate office of the breach on Thursday. Kennedy said that at the office's request, he will provide a personal briefing for the senator's staff on Friday. No one from the State Department spoke to Obama personally on Thursday, the officials said. ............

http://cbs3.com/national/obama.passport.breach.2.682052.html

Story behind the story: The Clinton myth

By: Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen
March 21, 2008 03:12 PM EST

One big fact has largely been lost in the recent coverage of the Democratic presidential race: Hillary Rodham Clinton has virtually no chance of winning.

Her own campaign acknowledges there is no way that she will finish ahead in pledged delegates. That means the only way she wins is if Democratic superdelegates are ready to risk a backlash of historic proportions from the party’s most reliable constituency.

Unless Clinton is able to at least win the primary popular vote — which also would take nothing less than an electoral miracle — and use that achievement to pressure superdelegates, she has only one scenario for victory. An African-American opponent and his backers would be told that, even though he won the contest with voters, the prize is going to someone else.

People who think that scenario is even remotely likely are living on another planet.

As it happens, many people inside Clinton’s campaign live right here on Earth. One important Clinton adviser estimated to Politico privately that she has no more than a 10 percent chance of winning her race against Barack Obama, an appraisal that was echoed by other operatives.

In other words: The notion of the Democratic contest being a dramatic cliffhanger is a game of make-believe.

Politico’s top editors draw on their experience at the nation's largest news organizations to pull back the curtain on coverage decisions and the media mindset.

The real question is why so many people are playing. The answer has more to do with media psychology than with practical politics.;)

Journalists, for instance, have become partners with the Clinton campaign in pretending that the contest is closer than it really is. Most coverage breathlessly portrays the race as a down-to-the-wire sprint between two well-matched candidates, one only slightly better situated than the other to win in August at the national convention in Denver.

One reason is fear of embarrassment. In its zeal to avoid predictive reporting of the sort that embarrassed journalists in New Hampshire, the media — including Politico — have tended to avoid zeroing in on the tough math Clinton faces.

Avoiding predictions based on polls even before voters cast their ballots is wise policy. But that's not the same as drawing sober and well-grounded conclusions about the current state of a race after millions of voters have registered their preferences.

The antidote to last winter's flawed predictions is not to promote a misleading narrative based on the desired but unlikely story line of one candidate.

There are other forces also working to preserve the notion of a contest that is still up for grabs.

One important, if subliminal, reason is self-interest. Reporters and editors love a close race — it’s more fun and it’s good for business.

The media are also enamored of the almost mystical ability of the Clintons to work their way out of tight jams, as they have done for 16 years at the national level. That explains why some reporters are inclined to believe the Clinton campaign when it talks about how she’s going to win on the third ballot at the Democratic National Convention in August.

That’s certainly possible — and, to be clear, we’d love to see the race last that long — but it’s folly to write about this as if it is likely.

It’s also hard to overstate the role the talented Clinton camp plays in shaping the campaign narrative, first by subtly lowering the bar for the performance necessary to remain in the race, and then by keeping the focus on Obama’s relationships with a political fixer and a controversial pastor in Illinois.

But even some of Clinton’s own advisers now concede that she cannot win unless Obama is hit by a political meteor. Something that merely undermines him won't be enough. It would have to be some development that essentially disqualifies him.

Simple number-crunching has shown the long odds against Clinton for some time.

In the latest Associated Press delegate count, Obama leads with 1,406 pledged delegates to Clinton’s 1,249. Obama’s lead is likely to grow, as it did with county conventions last weekend in Iowa, as later rounds of delegates are apportioned from caucuses he has already won.

The Democratic Party has 794 superdelegates, the party insiders who get to vote on the nomination in addition to the delegates chosen by voters. According to Politico's latest tally, Clinton has 250 and Obama has 212. That means 261 are uncommitted, and 71 have yet to be named.

An analysis by Politico's Avi Zenilman shows that Clinton’s lead in superdelegates has shrunk by about 60 in the past month. And it found Clinton is roughly tied among House members, senators and governors — the party’s most powerful elite.

Clinton had not announced a new superdelegate commitment since the March 4 primaries, until the drought was broken recently by Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) and West Virginia committeeman Pat Maroney.

Clintonistas continue to talk tough. Phil Singer, the Clinton campaign’s deputy communications director, told reporters on a conference call Friday that the Obama campaign “is in hot water” and is “seeing the ground shift away from them.”

Mark Penn, the campaign’s chief strategist, maintained that it’s still “a hard-fought race between two potential nominees” and that other factors could come into play at the convention besides the latest delegate tally — “the popular vote, who will have won more delegates from primaries [as opposed to caucuses], who will be the stronger candidate against McCain.”

But let’s assume a best-case scenario for Clinton, one where she wins every remaining contest with 60 percent of the vote (an unlikely outcome since she has hit that level in only three states so far — her home state of New York, Rhode Island and Arkansas).

Even then, she would still be behind Obama in delegates. .........

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9149.html

:kiss

Skandal @ Fox News

Nr. 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiIK8jh3ZCE

Nr. 2: http://www.redlasso.com/ClipPlayer.aspx?id=19ba5a61-9510-4da5-abeb-e9a546cdc33a

:respekt

Richardson says Clinton phone call got 'heated'

Friday, March 21, 2008 7:05 PM by Chuck Todd
From NBC's Lee Cowan

PORTLAND -- Bill Richardson described the conversation he had with Hillary Clinton on his decision to endorse Barack Obama as "heated" in an exclusive with NBC Nightly News today.

Both Richardson and Obama shared the spotlight this afternoon at a press conference and later in a sit down interview with NBC's Lee Cowan. (Please insert link to NN spot)

Richardson described the conversation that he had with Clinton last night "tough."

"It was tough to make the call, but I did. It got a little heated. It got a little tense. But it was understood, and I'm proud of my decision."

He stressed that his decision to endorse Obama came a week before, but it was reinforced by the speech Obama gave on race last Tuesday. He cited his own racial background as a Hispanic to underscore why the speech was so significant.

"I'm a Hispanic and I felt that what he said about being a nation of what all of us being together really clenched it," he said.

Calling for unity, Richardson claimed that Democrats would be "wounded" if the drawn out battle between Clinton and Obama continued.

"We have a man who's won many, many primaries. Who's won the most primaries and delegates. Who's unifying the party and the country. Senator Clinton has run a great race, I'm not saying she should withdraw that's her decision. But we can't be wounded heading into Denver and the Democratic convention with negative campaigning. And this campaign has gotten too negative," he said. ;) :)

"But I do so now just with enormous enthusiasm but enormous respect. I believe that Senator Obama is going to be the nomnee. I'm not asking anybody to get out of the race, but I believe it's time to get behind a nominee who can win," Richardson said.

Obama stressed that Richardson's endorsement provides him with more legitimacy on foreign policy.

"There's no doubt on national security he's got the kind of experience that Senator Clinton and John McCain talk about but has a set of concrete accomplishment that they can't compare with," Obama said.

"I know this man can be Commander-in-chief," Richardson said.

As for any hint that the two seated together might be harbinger of a vice presidential nod for Richardson, Obama called it "a premature ticket."

"I can tell you that there are very few people in American public life that have the breadth and depth of experience that Bill Richardson has," Obama said, adding that he would play a role in the campaign and hinting that he would have a role in a future Obama administration.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/21/795679.aspx

Richardson, einziger Hispanic-Gov. in ganz Amerika, langjähriger Freund der Familie Clinton, ehemaliger Präsikandidat und Superdelegate der Demokraten empfiehlt Obama zur Wahl und ruft zur Einheit in der Partei auf. Verständlich war Hillary mehr als unzufrieden :dd ...

Obama Aide: Bill Clinton Like McCarthy


Mar 22, 3:58 AM (ET)

By MATT APUZZO http://ak.imgfarm.com/images/ap/thumbnails//Clinton_2008.sff_NCSD204_20080321214545.jpg (http://apnews.myway.com/image/20080321/Clinton_2008.sff_NCSD204_20080321214545.html?date=20080322&docid=D8VIBPN00)(AP) Former president Bill Clinton speaks to 600 people at the Cary Senior Center as he campaigns for...

SALEM, Ore. (AP) - Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign is trying to clarify comments by former President Clinton that seemed to question Barack Obama's patriotism - comments an Obama aide likened to Joseph McCarthy.

Clinton's campaign said the comments were being misinterpreted and quickly posted a clarification on its Web site. But retired Air Force Gen. Merrill "Tony" McPeak said he was disappointed by the comments and compared them to those of McCarthy, the 1950s communist-hunting senator.

The former president made the comments while speculating about a general election between his wife and Republican John McCain.

"I think it would be a great thing if we had an election year where you had two people who loved this country and were devoted to the interest of this country," said Clinton, who was speaking to a group of veterans Friday in Charlotte, N.C. "And people could actually ask themselves who is right on these issues, instead of all this other stuff that always seems to intrude itself on our politics."

McPeak, a former chief of staff of the Air Force and currently a co-chair of Obama's presidential campaign, said that sounded like McCarthy.

"I grew up, I was going to college when Joe McCarthy was accusing good Americans of being traitors, so I've had enough of it," McPeak said.

Clinton campaign spokesman Phil Singer rejected the comparison.

"To liken these comments to McCarthyism is absurd," Singer said. He said McPeak was "clearly misinterpreting" the remarks and suggested that might be an intentional effort to divert attention from a recent controversy involving controversial statements by Obama's former pastor.

In a posting on Hillary Rodham Clinton's Web site Friday, the campaign said the former president was simply talking about the need to keep the race focused on issues, "rather than falsely questioning any candidate's patriotism."

McPeak, who served under Clinton and the first President Bush, was skeptical.

"It's a use of language as a disguised insult. We've seen this before, this little clever spin that's put on stuff," McPeak said. "I have no idea what his intentions are, but I'm disappointed in the statement. I think Bill Clinton is, or ought to be, better than that."

The former president has attracted criticism over earlier comments during the heated Democratic primary race. Following South Carolina's primary in January, he was accused of fanning racial tensions for appearing to cast Obama as little more than a black candidate popular in state with a heavily black electorate.

He also criticized the news media for making a race story out of his comments.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080322/D8VIBPN00.html

...ob Clinton vielleicht gar nicht so begeistert ist einen "Prinzgemahl" abzugeben :confused er schadet ja seiner Lady mehr als er ihr nützt :rolleyes

Candidate Watch

Hillary's Balkan Adventures, Part II



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2008/03/20/PH2008032002697.jpg
Greeting ceremony, Tuzla military airport, Bosnia, March 25, 1996.


"I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."
--Hillary Clinton, speech at George Washington University (http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/speech/view/?id=6553), March 17, 2008.

Hillary Clinton has been regaling supporters on the campaign trail with hair-raising tales of a trip she made to Bosnia in March 1996. In her retelling, she was sent to places that her husband, President Clinton, could not go because they were "too dangerous." When her account was challenged by one of her traveling companions (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/sleuth/2008/03/sinbad_unloads_on_hillary_clin.html), the comedian Sinbad, she upped the ante and injected even more drama into the story. In a speech earlier this week, she talked about "landing under sniper fire" and running for safety with "our heads down."

There are numerous problems with Clinton's version of events.

alle Unstimmigkeiten: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/03/hillarys_balkan_adventures_par.html

The Pinocchio Test

Clinton's tale of landing at Tuzla airport "under sniper fire" and then running for cover is simply not credible. Photographs and video of the arrival ceremony, combined with contemporaneous news reports, tell a very different story. Four Pinocchios.

http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/interactives/factchecker/pinocchio.gifhttp://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/interactives/factchecker/pinocchio.gifhttp://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/interactives/factchecker/pinocchio.gifhttp://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/interactives/factchecker/pinocchio.gif




(die Kommentare sind interessant)


WHY DOESN'T ANYONE CARE, SHE FLAT OUT LIED!!!!?

OUTRAGEOUSLY, HILARIOUSLY, BLATANTLY, LIED!

So ridiculous, it's really funny!


Posted by: julie | March 21, 2008 12:42 PM

Awwww c'mon,. this is one of Clinton's smaller whoppers.

I can hear Mark Penn now...with regards to the tarmac picture..."Not only was Hillary ducking from the sniper fire, she used her body as a human shield to protect a young Muslim girl, saving her life....

How many lies can Hillary's supporters take?


Posted by: robertell | March 21, 2008 12:52 PM

Regarding Hilary's comment:

"I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."

She is actually putting it lightly here. In fact, my recollection (I was there) was the pilot was shot and Hillary landed the plane herself. The plane was surrounded by enemy fighters and the plane was taking fire. Then Hillary burst out with an M60 belt fed machinegun blazing and took out the enemy fighters one by one in a terrific burst of fire with Chelsea ducking right behind her. She finished a few off with carefully aimed hand grenades (I specifically recall Hillary pulls the pins out with her teeth). At the end of the engagement she had killed almost two hundred enemy and recaptured the airport. This is the kind of woman we need as President.

Posted by: Sgt. Rock | March 21, 2008 09:22 PM

:rofl:rofl:rofl

March 23, 2008

Release of Clinton Schedules Offers Chance to Test Campaign Assertions

By DON VAN NATTA Jr. and JOHN M. BRODER

When the World Trade Center was attacked for the first time on Feb. 26, 1993, President Bill Clinton flew to New York to be briefed on the attack and the response by city, state and federal authorities. According to newly released White House calendars of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s time as first lady, Mrs. Clinton stayed behind in Washington to attend a photo shoot with Parade magazine and a performance of “Jesus Christ Superstar.”

Seven years later, in October 2000, Mr. and Mrs. Clinton were enjoying a quiet weekend at their new home in Chappaqua, N.Y., when word came that the Cole, an American destroyer, had been attacked in a Yemen port. Mr. Clinton rushed back to the White House to deal with the crisis. Mrs. Clinton returned to the campaign trail in her run for the Senate.

As Mrs. Clinton runs for president, a central theme of her candidacy has been that her years in the White House gave her firsthand experience in dealing with foreign crises. In her now-famous TV advertisements that ran before the Ohio and Texas primaries, she portrayed herself as the candidate best prepared to answer a 3 a.m. phone call to address a sudden crisis.

While there is no doubt that she had an intimate view of foreign policy during her husband’s presidency, her claims that she was a central player on counterterrorism, Ireland, Africa and the Balkans have come under intense scrutiny in recent weeks.

The release last week of more than 11,000 pages of her public schedule as first lady presents an opportunity for a closer examination of those claims.

Mrs. Clinton’s aides argued that the calendars backed up her argument that her time as first lady was marked by substantial foreign policy experience, although they emphasized that the calendars only show her public events and do not reflect the wide sphere of influence she had with her husband and others.

“The schedules are only a guide for Senator Clinton’s time in the White House and by their nature don’t include a lot of the very kinds of things that gave her deep experience in her eight years there — calls with world leaders, impromptu meetings and strategy sessions are all omitted from the schedule,” said Jay Carson, a Clinton campaign spokesman. “And some of her greatest influence and experience was as the president’s trusted adviser — precisely the kind of thing that is invaluable but doesn’t make it on a daily schedule.”

Melanne Verveer, Mrs. Clinton’s top aide in the White House, said that she served as “her husband’s closest adviser.”

“She was the first lady,” Ms. Verveer said. “She was not the commander in chief or the director of counterterrorism. But she certainly saw what her husband was going through and had a ringside seat for all these crises. And often, as in the case of the Macedonian border issue, had an active role.”

Senator Barack Obama’s campaign has seized on the schedules to accuse Mrs. Clinton of exaggerating her role in substantive matters. Obama aides and supporters say the documents demonstrate that her claims of broad influence on policy are hollow.

Gregory B. Craig, who was a senior State Department official in the Clinton administration and is now a policy adviser to Mr. Obama, said Friday that the White House records showed that Mrs. Clinton was absent when critical foreign policy decisions were made and that her trips abroad were largely ceremonial.

“The fact is, and this was established by the White House schedules, that she did not attend N.S.C. meetings or routinely meet with the secretary of state or the national security adviser,” said Mr. Craig, a lawyer who represented Mr. Clinton in his 1998-99 impeachment and trial. “She did not routinely get briefed by the intelligence community, and there is no evidence that she participated or asserted herself in any of the crises that took place during the eight years of the Clinton presidency.”

A top White House aide said that after the terrorism episodes, Mrs. Clinton made a concerted effort to maintain her normal schedule to avoid giving the impression of panic or tip off possible targets of retaliation.

The schedules do not reflect private discussions with outsiders, with administration staff members or with her husband. Indeed, federal archivists and Clinton aides edited out more than 10,000 items on her calendars to preserve the privacy of people with whom she met, so the full range of her activities are not reflected in her public schedules.

But a former senior Clinton White House official who supports Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy but is not authorized to speak for it, said that Mrs. Clinton routinely called top White House and administration officials to inquire about policy matters or make her views known. Top aides to Mrs. Clinton also participated in high-level policy and political sessions from the first days the Clintons moved into the White House, he said.

“If there was something that she was interested in weighing in on, I don’t think she ever hesitated to go ahead and call,” the aide said. He said her interests and advocacy ranged across the entire domestic and foreign policy landscape. He said she participated in various ceremonial duties, both in the United States and abroad, but foreign leaders took her seriously as an emissary of the American government.

Earlier this month, Mrs. Clinton pointed to her work behind the scenes in Northern Ireland, which she visited five times as first lady, as instrumental in helping Mr. Clinton forge a peace treaty there. Her campaign has argued that her lobbying efforts “at the grass roots and behind-the-scenes helped cultivate the conditions necessary for the peace to take hold and last,” according to a memo from her press office.

On her first trip, on Nov. 30 and Dec. 1, 1995, Mrs. Clinton attended a Christmas tree lighting ceremony, a rededication of a World War II stone and a reception. On two occasions, her calendar indicates that Mr. Clinton was holding private talks after Mrs. Clinton departed and returned to a local hotel.

Two weeks ago, on the campaign trail, Mrs. Clinton acknowledged that she was not directly involved in peace negotiations, but she emphasized the importance of her behind-the-scenes role.

“I helped to bring peace to Northern Ireland,” she told CNN in early March.

At a campaign event in New Hampshire in early January, Mrs. Clinton recalled “bringing together a meeting” at the Belfast town hall of Catholic and Protestant women, saying the discussion was a breakthrough for women who recognized their similarities rather t