This post will be progressively updated to follow the count in the Pennsylvania Democratic primary, starting from when I get out of bed (by which time it might well be all over). Real Clear Politics’ poll average shows a slight narrowing in Hillary Clinton’s lead since last week, from 47.4-40.4 to 49.5-43.4.
11.30am AEST. CNN reports Clinton leads 53-47 with 20 per cent of precincts counted. Their exit poll, if I’m reading it correctly, points to a result of about 52-48. They called it a “win” for Clinton about half an hour ago, for what that’s worth.
12.30pm. Clinton has just given a speech to claim victory of one kind or another: she now leads 54-46 with 75 per cent of precincts reporting.
12.50pm. As Obama gives his speech, the CNN’s count clicks over to 55-45 with 78 per cent of precincts reporting. They are giving Clinton 52 delegates to Obama’s 36 on television, but their web page is holding back on 37-31.
2.20pm. With 98 per cent of precincts reporting, Clinton’s has a lead of 54.8-45.2, which is at the higher end of market expectations.
Andrew, I think Obama’s talk about change has separated the true progressives from the conservatives.
Not long ago, someone like Obama would not have lasted this long, let alone topple a candidate with a massive profile (a former first lady) and someone who almost everyone thought would be the next Dem. candidate for POTUS.
Hillary supporters (and probably Republicans) put Obama’s success down to him somehow deceiving the public, but this is childish. The reason Obama is now standing on the cusp of being the first Black presidential nominee is because the world (and the U.S.) is changing. We reached the peak of conservatism a short time ago, and now we are gradually swinging the other way, facilitated in part by years of disillusionment under Bush and his neo-conservative agenda.
[I hereby appoint Noocat as my official spokeperson.]
Thanks Finns. I’d be happy to.
Kirri
#1172
I notice you can not defend yourself against my claim your defence of Bill Ayers in #1168/1170
“Kirri used misleading information/commentary on Bill Sayers in #1045 to almost exonerate Ayer’s terrorist reputation. This is an example of Kirri being so extremely anti american view based that he distorts Ayer’s past by his presentation”
You should retract your comments in #1045
Ron, let it slide. Ayers really isn’t all that relevant to either the Dems nominating process, or the wider U.S. Or if you really think he is, give us your take on why Hillary will be able to deflect the criticism she will receive about the Clinton Admin’s pardoning of two Weathermen.
Ron at 1203
What is the information in KR’s 1045 comment that is misleading?
From Growler’s WaPo link: Stewart v Colbert.
“……while Republicans are part of the Colbert Nation (49 percent to 21 percent)
Whoever said Seps don’t get irony might just be on to something…..
Here’s Colbert’s roast. You be the judge!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-869183917758574879
GG: “Colbert’s ’speech’ was one of the finest bits of satire ever?”
Certainly as far the present century and millennium goes, horse.
Catrina & Pancho
#1179/#1180 and #1173
Thank you for replying. You may wish to re-read my #1168 because I did not argue for or against Hillary’s comments (but am happy to discuss the points you brought up separately). Why I blogged #1168/1170 was because the issue I raised is decisive in selecting the POTUS and I think the 3 Candidates r different
What I was saying irrespective of Iran/nukes is I think in my opinion Robert/ Kirri
1/ have an overall opposition to the use of and threatened use of the US military deterrent power under any circumstances.
2/ in my opinion such a view is a wimpish-peacenik opinion which threatens Australian’s current & future familys very existence and safety, & other Countrys
3/ in my opinion Robert/Kirri will not give their view on either 1/ or 2/
4/ in my opinion Robert/Kirri oppose Hillary’s comment on Iran/nuke issue as an example of their opinion in 1/ & 2/ rather than the Hillary comment being treated on its own and debated on its merits on the various grounds this only raises
Kirri’s answer in #1172 as I predicted NEVER answered 1/ 2/ 3/ or 4/ and I do not think Robert will either because the anti war/US military,peacenik’s rarely try to argue their indefensible views. I also believe there are other bloggers here with similar anti war/US military, peacenik views. I do NOT make a personal judgement on anyone holding such views at all , but simply seek them to ‘out’ themselves rather than to use 4/ , so it can be debated because it affects the POTUS determination. And I was hopeful of a frank answer re the 4 points.
Note, I did say (for I assume bloggers like you & Pancho) : “Those that have genuine disquiet on “policy” grounds about Hillary’s comments can unwittingly foster a peacenik anti war/US military agenda”. Either of you are welcome to comment on what I said above as opposed to the Iran/nuke issue itself
1205
Catrina
Astonishing isn’t it? Put the facts ie Ayers did not say he wished he’d planted more bombs, in front of them and they retreat into the usual nonsense.
What’s the point? They can’t count (ie Obama is in the lead) and they cannot assess simple points of logic and fact.
I suspect there’s no actual event short of Obama actually winning the nomination that will shut them up, but then they’ll move onto another position that’s just as unjustifiable.
It’s what Glen did here: supported Howard until he was flogged at the election, and then started spruiking the Republicans! If Howard’s mob were bad enough, what in god’s name has the Bush administration done for America or mankind?
Such people live in a bubble of concocted reality and naivety such that no argument or fact ever shifts them.
Well, bring it on…I think Clinton will lose the nomination, it’s my opinion based on all the observable evidence, and the manufactured diversions being promulgated by the lunar right against Obama are transparent and errant drivel, (but appeal to certain posters here!).
Time well tell, but I know where I’ve got my money riding.
An interesting article for people on both sides of the debate.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/134012
KR at 833
Sorry for the delay in responding but at each step in the process of jhoining the dots in the GOP advertising saga new dots have appear on the horizon that undermine my assumptions. Anyway – the way things are heading it appears that the GOP machine is willing to
Woops …
(continuing my 1209 comment)
KR at 833
Sorry for the delay in responding but at each step in the process of jhoining the dots in the GOP advertising saga new dots have appear on the horizon that undermine my assumptions. Anyway – the way things are heading it appears that the GOP machine is willing to disregard McCain’s position on a clean campaign (and I don’t think this is just McCain playing nice while the machine moves ahead). I guess I’m still suspect about the position of power that McCain has within the party and that there may yet be a struggle in the background between the man and the establishment – but what makes this all the more interesting is that I figure McCain is onto the right idea with keeping things on the high ground simply because Obama can defeat him easily in this arena – but at the same time his party don;t seen ready to change tried and true tactics.
small qualification – when I said “because Obama can defeat him easily in this arena” I was meaning to assert the opinion that Obama can easily play low-level politics as evidence of the style and compare this with his theme of ‘we can be better’ and come out on top
Pancho
#1204 replying to your comment to me
I believe Ayers may end up being as equally more adverse to Obama as the Pastor issue on gross lack of judgement amongst others
Re my #1199 to you on the Dailykos point favouring Obama that I questioned
are you considering replying supporting the article’s premise
ok – I confess – I have a writing ability deficit
i assume by the silence that Finns, GG Ron et al would rather McCain than Obama. Extraordinary
Ron at 1213
Are you planning to respond to my specific questions at 1180?
(and just for reference I couldn’t follow you 1207 comment)
r/Ron @ 1207 @ 1168 [in my opinion such a view is a wimpish-peacenik opinion which threatens Australian’s current & future familys very existence and safety, & other Countrys … the anti war/US military,peacenik’s rarely try to argue their indefensible views] – I hadn’t read it all through until just now.
Well, there it is – out at last, for all to see, today. A classic piece of florid right-wing extremism emerging from the shallow end, unadorned and proud.
I think those views would generally be held by the forces lined up against Obama among the political/military/industrial power base, and the neocon right will go down fighting for a belligerant to be POTUS, whether McCain or Clinton.
I wonder if any of the other alleged ‘non-conservatives’ supporting Clinton agree with r/Ron?
Some are claiming that the Dem primary is in fact a civil war between the left and right of the party. Personally I don’t see Obama as particularlty ‘left’ and Clinton is, to me, just another neocon spruiking the same jingoistic fear mongering that we’ve had from Bush/Cheney/Rove for the last 8 years.
Sorry…the Dem nomination battle is a civil war….
…Too much shiraz…..again
Sun. April 27: Joker’s occasionally have wit. Nowadays, Billious is just a f*ck-wit.
http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/billschorr;_ylt=AnojM3QQedT_DtllhQGaF2YxvTYC
Sat. April 26: Stockholm Syndrome Nation.
http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/tedrall;_ylt=Arg8e2Qnn5P_IPOk.uHZd1xW_b4F
Sun.April 27: Laptop logo’s got bite.
http://news.yahoo.com/comics/nonsequitur;_ylt=AkCNSLl2KyYapBW.J.z00BRL6ysC
Andrew at 1215
What is really scary about the McCain/Clinton scenario is that both seem to have something to prove to themselves. McCain appears to need to prove that he can go from prisoner to president and in the process proving his own manhood (a personal victory to cap off his life story). Hillary Clinton on the other hand seems to want to prove that she can be tougher than any other boy on the block. I can rationalize where McCain is coming from but the more I see of Hillary the more she worries me – and with her recent Iran rants – is it unreasonable to reconsider the McCain/Clinton leaning. On the other hand – we have Obama who doesn’t appear to be trying to prove anything more than the suggestions that perhaps we can be between than who we were.
sorry – please substitute “between” with “better”
(no more wine for Catrina tonight)
j/v
#1217
You’ve selectively quoted as usual. Anyone who wishs to read my #1268/1207 in full can THEN form their opinions and no one should rely on your selective extraction there from.
Now j/v , since you hace referred to my #1207 , your answeres to the 4 questions will be of interest or will they be j/v qualified ????
Catrina #1216 , yes it will but it may be a short while to see what finns etc said
Andrew #1215 I did answer your first 2 questions , the 3rd could be answered theoretical. Hillary is ‘known’ to me on the 3 key issues , the other 2 are only known to me on healthcare (Obama’s is much better than McCain’s) whereas in foreign policy and economic management neither of them have so far from their mouths debated in detail these 2 matters sufficently for me to be satisfied with either and one hopes the POTUS race interviews , debates etc should clarify
but Andrew would not anyway vote for a Repug , but I may not turn up to vote for Obama depending on the above
1217
jaundiced view
It is truly beyond all human comprehension, n’est pas?
It seems a few bludgers have a peculiar compulsion to talk themselves into the furtherest rightwing corner can they can find.
They’ll be arguing to re-institute slavery at this rate! LOL
Gobsmacking doesn’t come near describing the lunar loopiness.
One ‘can’ too many.
With a good soundtrack we can have the Necon Can-Can!
Kick up your heels guys, and all together:
“Bomb, bomb, bomb…bomb,bomb Iran”
Debates so far have proven to be next to useless. A much bettwer option is to check out their respective sites. Obama’s site has a page detailing economic policy stuff – some of it pandering to the white middle class trash but most of it is looking forward towards longer term economic renewal and underlying restructuring. Clinton does not have a policy page on the economy but has a general issues page that lists lots of stuff. I should confess that I have read the Obama stuff because it was easier to find and assimilate whereas I’m not up to speed with the Hillary Clonton economy pitch.
By the way – even though I have read the kid’s policy papers – can I still call myself an Obamabot by PB standards?
1228 Catrina
Of course you can! And wear it with pride.
By the way, it’s a little known fact that ‘Obamabot’ is an abbreviation of ‘Obama-botrytis’ – defining those who are sweet on Obama, and enjoy a good wine.
1229
Ferny Grover
I’d go for a nice Spätlese myself Ferny, and I do a lovely summer jelly with fruit and berries and a bottle of the aforementioned in it!
Heaven on a plate!
Frank Rich can count too:
But as the doomsday alarm grew shrill, few noticed that on this same day in Pennsylvania, 27 percent of Republican primary voters didn’t just tell pollsters they would defect from their party’s standard-bearer; they went to the polls, gas prices be damned, to vote against Mr. McCain. Though ignored by every channel I surfed, there actually was a G.O.P. primary on Tuesday, open only to registered Republicans. And while it was superfluous in determining that party’s nominee, 220,000 Pennsylvania Republicans (out of their total turnout of 807,000) were moved to cast ballots for Mike Huckabee or, more numerously, Ron Paul. That’s more voters than the margin (215,000) that separated Hillary Clinton and Mr. Obama.
Those antiwar Paul voters are all potential defectors to the Democrats in November. Mr. Huckabee’s religious conservatives, who rejected Mr. McCain throughout the primary season, might also bolt or stay home. Given that the Democratic ticket beat Bush-Cheney in Pennsylvania by 205,000 votes in 2000 and 144,000 votes in 2004, these are 220,000 voters the G.O.P. can ill-afford to lose. Especially since there are now a million more registered Democrats than Republicans in Pennsylvania. (These figures don’t even include independents, who couldn’t vote in either primary on Tuesday and have been migrating toward the Democrats since 2006.)
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/27/opinion/27rich.html?hp
Catrina @ 1228
Unless you acknowledge that Hillary actually ran the Whitehouse during Bill’s two terms…or that she is in fact ahead in the Dem nom race…or that she really was under fire in Bosnia…or that Rev. Wright is going to be Obama’s VP…or that Obama is a Black Panther…or a Weather Undergrounder…… Then yes you are an “obamabot”.
and quite possibly an “elitist” too……..
#1228 – [can I still call myself an Obamabot by PB standards?] yes, another sacrificial lamb of the Obamaphile Mutual Admiration Society
How The Internet can hurt you if you have a “macaca moment”.
“At most of his Pennsylvania stops, the national press was represented mainly by a pair of young TV-network “embeds,” whom Clinton regards not as reporters but as media jackals who record his every utterance yet broadcast only his outbursts, a phenomenon that has helped transform him into a YouTube curiosity and diminished him—perhaps permanently.”
“The day before the primary, Bill Clinton lost his temper with a radio host who asked about the Jesse Jackson comments. Clinton went on a three-minute rant in which he posited the mysterious theory that Obama had played the race card against him. Then, not realizing that he was still on the air, he could be heard saying, “I don’t think I should take any shit from anybody on that, do you?” The clip was an Internet sensation. You can hear the whole thing in the Bill Clinton archive at YouTube. It’s already been listened to about three hundred thousand times.”
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/2008/05/05/080505ta_talk_lizza
Ph.Ds are currently being written about the influence of pseph/news/political blogs (like this one which has developed/evolved from more or less a straight pseph site into something far more dynamic) and their use of You-Tube and all the other instantly accessible goodies that Teh Internet has to offer. I’ve a hunch that Obi’s people have a better feel for gaining the most from the New Media than the other two cadidate’s teams.
Fox “News” has been strident in its attack on blogs who publish unspun facts aka the truth, instead of polished factoids, which in turn has propelled the curious in droves to New Media. Lots have stopped subscribing to MSM organs. The MSM have lost control of “The Message”. Their bottom line and ratings have suffered further when people realise how much fun they can have without having repetitious, ad-riddled histrionics and propaganda shoved down their throats on a 24/7 basis.
Why, it gives me such a thrill to be participating in history with antagonists like Ronaldo, horse and Finn. We should be so lucky already!
1235
Enemy Combatant
Amen to that!
It’s funny, but the preponderance of Clinton supportere’s opinions seems to come from the ‘factiod’ department, ( ie Krauthammer’s shonky piece on Obama where he conflates the deeds or opinions of third parties to slur him), whereas the Obamaphiles are arguing from reputable facts ie the actual numbers in polls and the history of voting patterns.
I see this division as strongly along the lines of MSM and new media. For every Drudge (rhymes with sludge for a good reason) there’s plenty of reputable sites getting the arguments out there without scraping up the sludge and presenting it as some kind of irrefutable fact.
Brave new world indeed.
Bring it on. I can really see McCain tapping into it, eh?
If anyone thought that Alberto Gonzalez, the last US Attorney General was a lousy excuse for a human being, and acted more like an inveterbrate (but without the moral sense of one), then get ready for his replacement:
Attorney General Michael Mukasey warned Wednesday that organized
criminal networks have penetrated portions of the international energy
market and tried to control energy resources.
In a speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in
Washington, he said similar efforts have targeted the international
financial system by injecting billions of illicit funds to try to
corrupt financial service providers.
…’coz this guy is doing cloud cuckoo land rants.
For a disturbing (and/or) amusing read:
http://www.dailyreckoning.us/blog/?p=793
Proving once again that the Bush administration is incapable of appointing sane, normal, rational, intelligent, non-partisan people to do a job.
After going through quite detailed reasons as to why the Syrian bombed biulding was most probably NOT a nuclear reactor, the writer of this well informed letter to Juan Cole concludes:
One more final consideration: the Yongbyon reactor, from the descriptions by inspectors in 1994, is a real hunk of junk, by contemporary standards. The inspectors could tell from the condition of the spent fuel rods that there were many operating problems and shutdowns because of problems. Nuclear safety at the site was marginal to non-existent. The bomb test using plutonium from it was very likely a fizzle yield. If the Syrians got a duplicate copy of the Yongbyon reactor, as the CIA claims, they were very likely wasting their money.
…which is incredibly funny.
What is NOT funny is the long list of reasons why this whole affair stinks of another US/Israeli set-up. Haven’t we been done this route one time too many already?
You spruiking that dangerous peacenik (now there’s a throwback to the 60’s huh?! Damn hippies!) propoganda again KR. You’re endangering our families y’know! I’ll tell Nixon on ya, ya b*st*rd!
This is the ‘sorry’ blog
FINNS sorry but on Autralian day we award OAM’s , so Blogoshere OMAS ?
Ferny#1229 Sorry to disappoint you but “Obamabot ” the full unabbreviated term. It is not an abbreviation , however I did throw up some pre fix/suffix for the 2 Amigo’ to
consider the other day (the “howard Obamabots” or Obamabotic howardism) and you lot seemed pleased with both but none asked what the additional meant.
But Ferny if you did answer the 4 questions in #1207 I could send you a gift
Harry #1233 sorry to disappoint you also but an Obamabot is definitively not automatically an ‘elitist’ opinion , heavens no , in fact many Obamabots have never qualified and sorry ,do not think you are in there
EC , sorry to disappoint you , earlier today talking about popular vote leads. now I know you read all my blogs carefully but you must have missed my one on the 23rd to Diogenes where I did say ClearRealPolitics have Hillary now with a big popular vote lead including Michigan & Florida but that in my opinion they had
made a notional calc error and it was about a tie then (& now). So guys use the
National RCP % for a week till NC then you can start quoting popular vote again
j/v sorry j/v for putting the pressure to work out the 4 answers in my #1207 but no doubt you will do so
No Kirri ,
did not forget you. Saving yours for a surprise
KR
i remember when Mukasey got appointed i was reading the blog “Firedoglake” at the time because of their great coverage of the Libby trial.
anyway, they were saying that the other nominations were that crazy that Mukasey seemed like the sanest option, although fully expecting him to be another shill.
This administration really knows how to attract a nutter.
As to the Syria nuke setup farce…the Israeli Likudists who are desperate to attack Syria and/or Iran are apparently being undermined by a few Doves in their own ranks.
To undermine the Syria story, someone from inside the Israeli Government leaked out the names of some Israeli spys inside America and they have had to backpeddle from the ratcheting up.
1242
HarryH
Picking duds has been raised to a new level in this administration, that is for certain.
__________________
Ron,
I look forward to it in ways you could not imagine.
1239
Ferny Grover
Damn Ferny! You’ve blown my cover. I’m conducting a deep secret survelliance of rightwing bloggers and have concluded they are probably comedy writers moonlighting as Democrat supporters on an Ozzie website!
You would not believe how devious this plot is (nor how hysterically funny!!) but that just goes to show how cunningly contrived their posts are. By removing most of the elements of structured logic, (not to mention grammar and syntax) they’ve designed an impenetrable code for sending subliminal messages! Occasionally they even use insults involving fecal matter so you don’t notice the rightwing message that’s encoded.
You may well laugh, but as you do, you absorb these messages without noticing!
Here are a few I’ve managed to isolate and decode after the laughter subsides, and I’ve reconstructed the posts using a word scrambling algorithm:
Obama is liberal.
Clinton is a Democrat.
They should have nuked Hanoi.
Clinton won the Demcrat nomination.
…as you can see, it’s powerful stuff! But don’t be fooled by the laughter, this stuff is incredible!
On a more serious note, the mayor of Kabul came awfully close to being taken out today.
It’s a real pity that the US, who’ve pushed Karzai as the face of a post Taliban Afghanistan, don’t even bother to protect him while they’ve got themselves bogged down in Iraq.
Imagine the political blowback if Karzai was assasinated?
Hard to imagine George “we’re makin’, like, progess, in er Afgunnistan”, spinning that into more dubious ‘good news’.
KR, I’ve just run your algorithm through my patented Obamabotometer, and, good god! You’re right. I’ve found a few other subliminals in this way:
Second equals first;
Loser equals winner; and conversely,
Winner equals loser;
Michigan is valid;
Democracy equals obliterating Iran.
There are more, but it’s too scarey to contemplate.
Prolonged exposure destroys all ability to reason logically or communicate coherently. So it’s a double whammy – subliminal messages unravel our reason, and, eventually, destroys the collective consciousness of the nation.
KR….the cause of freedom is forever in your debt.
By the way – Definition (The Free Dictionary): ‘peacenik’ is –
“someone who prefers negotiations to armed conflict in the conduct of foreign relations” , and
“someone opposed to violence as a means of settling disputes.”
I guess someone using the term in a perjorative sense wishes to exclude themselves from that group, r/Ron.
As Clinton move along this ‘nuke ’em’ path to try to wedge Obama, this is worth remembering:
“All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
-Hermann Goering at the Nuremberg war-crimes tribunal
Good company Hillary’s keeping now – the neocons and Hermann.
Sorry ‘pejorative’
Clinton’s Zimbabwe electronic polling machine
If BO > HRC Then HRC = (BO*2)
Primary.Print “HRC” “Winner”
End
Next State
Just been reading some comments over on the New York Times and I swear to you I had a PB moment. Just read the following response to Obama’s decision not to debate Clinton before the next round of competitions …