Not that this is really news since it's been long apparent that it's going to happen, but according to the AP tally Barack Obama has effectively clinched the Democratic nomination. Hillary as noted in the other thread is now begging for a VP slot.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080603/ap_on_el_pr/primary_rdp

CNN has now also projected Barack Obama has clinched the nomination.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/03/election.democrats/index.html

Obama wins!  FATALITY.

Or does he?  I doubt she'll go quietly :P

McCain has now offically acknowledged Obama as his opponent in the general election.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/mccain

This will put me in a real bind. There is no way I will pull the lever to give us 4 more years of insanity
and the same Bush mentality but on the other hand, I really don't want to follow the Pied Piper.
What to do, what to do???

This will put me in a real bind. There is no way I will pull the lever to give us 4 more years of insanity
and the same Bush mentality but on the other hand, I really don't want to follow the Pied Piper.
What to do, what to do???
isnt ron paul in? bob barr is also running, and also ralph nader. although i personally would encourage you to vote for obama, i think a lot of that "kool aid" obamabot stuff is overwrought.

this was in my in-box, i'm on his mailing list.

***

"Michael --

I'm about to take the stage in St. Paul and announce that we have won the Democratic nomination for President of the United States.

It's been a long journey, and we should all pause to thank Hillary Clinton, who made history in this campaign. Our party and our country are better off because of her.

I want to make sure you understand what's ahead of us. Earlier tonight, John McCain outlined a vision of America that's very different from ours -- a vision that continues the disastrous policies of George W. Bush.

But this is our moment. This is our time. Our time to turn the page on the policies of the past and bring new energy and new ideas to the challenges we face. Our time to offer a new direction for the country we love.

It's going to take hard work, but thanks to you and millions of other donors and volunteers, no one has ever been more prepared for such a challenge.

Thank you for everything you've done to get us here. Let's keep making history.

Barack"

i just saw hillary clinton's non-concession speech. it actually wasn't a bad speech but i liked her line, "i'm not gonna be making any decisions tonight." and i was thinking, um, yeah, cuz they were just MADE FOR YOU. ::)

She's winning South Dakota, which Obama was supposed to win...what does this mean? 

isnt ron paul in? bob barr is also running, and also ralph nader. although i personally would encourage you to vote for obama, i think a lot of that "kool aid" obamabot stuff is overwrought.



This is why I say I'm in a bind, the Electoral College is an archaic, useless system in todays society and it would
take an act of a so called God to get a third party candidate into office. To me, any third party vote is a wasted
vote. I will probably vote Obama but I wont be to happy about it.

She's winning South Dakota, which Obama was supposed to win...what does this mean? 


Nothing?

She's winning South Dakota, which Obama was supposed to win...what does this mean? 

It means...something, but not enough to make a dang bit of difference.  We're about to hear from Montana in a minute...

Nothing?


Probably. 

Barack wins Montana!

This is why I say I'm in a bind, the Electoral College is an archaic, useless system in todays society and it would
take an act of a so called God to get a third party candidate into office. To me, any third party vote is a wasted
vote. I will probably vote Obama but I wont be to happy about it.
hmm, well, in a sense the thing that would get a 3rd party candidate in would be if one year enough people didn't think their vote was wasted by voting for who they really wanted to get into office. i personally actually like obama a great deal but i've also been a big proponent of breaking up the two-party system and to me it does just seem like a matter of people voting their desires instead of just voting for who they think will win anyway. the "wasted vote" thinking process to me has always struck me as an odd idea. cuz here's the thing: your vote IS going to be wasted, no matter who you vote for. not in a cynical way but just because no matter what happens, no one person's individual vote will decide the election. that isn't a reason not to vote, it's a reason to vote for who you really want. if everybody did that the democrats and republicans wouldn't have the hold on politics that they do.

i also read somewhere that if we all just clicked that donate-$3-to-the-presidential-campaign-fund box one year, it would basically make it possible to make elections publicly funded. dunno if it's true but it's a fun rumor.

Yay, white people DO like Obama!

I wonder why Obama won North Dakota but Hillary won South Dakota?
???

hmm, well, in a sense the thing that would get a 3rd party candidate in would be if one year enough people didn't think their vote was wasted by voting for who they really wanted to get into office. i personally actually like obama a great deal but i've also been a big proponent of breaking up the two-party system and to me it does just seem like a matter of people voting their desires instead of just voting for who they think will win anyway. the "wasted vote" thinking process to me has always struck me as an odd idea. cuz here's the thing: your vote IS going to be wasted, no matter who you vote for. not in a cynical way but just because no matter what happens, no one person's individual vote will decide the election. that isn't a reason not to vote, it's a reason to vote for who you really want. if everybody did that the democrats and republicans wouldn't have the hold on politics that they do.

i also read somewhere that if we all just clicked that donate-$3-to-the-presidential-campaign-fund box one year, it would basically make it possible to make elections publicly funded. dunno if it's true but it's a fun rumor.


In a way I agree, but it's like the"Let's not buy gas for one day," idea. A good idea that would never work because you couldn't
get everyone to agree to do it. There isn't enough people to like a third party candidate and the more people that run without
a major party affiliation the more it pollutes the field. Let's face it, running for president is a rich man's game and when people say
"You can be anything you want to be in life even the President of the United States," they are lying through their teeth. I would
love to see the two party system abolished but far too many people adhere to the system to change it and no matter how liberal
or conservative people may be, they will always fear change.

I wonder why Obama won North Dakota but Hillary won South Dakota?
???


It's the South, that's why.  ;)

Hillary won't concede defeat...STFU n00b!  :P

Congratulations to Senator Obama. I will be voting for him in November, and hope to see him inaugurated on January 20, 2009.

But, the republican's have been warming up the attack machine in the bullpen for the past few months and within the next few months you could expect to see them hitting Obama hard. I have a feeling this is going to be a very nasty general election :-\\

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080604/pl_nm/usa_politics_obama_vicepresident_dc

Interesting list...I wonder if choosing Hagel will make the Republican base crap their pants.

Congratulations to Senator Obama. I will be voting for him in November, and hope to see him inaugurated on January 20, 2009.

Me too. O0


But, the republican's have been warming up the attack machine in the bullpen for the past few months and within the next few months you could expect to see them hitting Obama hard. I have a feeling this is going to be a very nasty general election :-\\

I sure hope it doesn't get rigged again 8-P

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/03/obama.speech/index.html

Obama speech FTW.

Hillary as noted in the other thread is now begging for a VP slot.


http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i105/Rooster866/bueller.jpg

Hillary...  Are you still here?  It's over.  Go home.  GO!

Congratulations to Senator Obama. I will be voting for him in November, and hope to see him inaugurated on January 20, 2009.

But, the republican's have been warming up the attack machine in the bullpen for the past few months and within the next few months you could expect to see them hitting Obama hard. I have a feeling this is going to be a very nasty general election :-\\


I think you are right.  It is going to be bad, but I think it will come from both sides. :-\\

Yay, white people DO like Obama!


Alot of white people like Obama.  Even a few that voted for Bush.  Obama's just a swell guy. :)

Ugh...that's all I have to say. 8-P

So the self-proclaimed agent of change who is not a typical Washigton politician won the nomination because of cigar chomping super delegates whereas to women he called a typical Washington politician won most of the popular vote, the people's choice. Hmm... can you say "hypocrite" about a black man and not be called a racist?

So the self-proclaimed agent of change who is not a typical Washigton politician won the nomination because of cigar chomping super delegates whereas to women he called a typical Washington politician won most of the popular vote, the people's choice. Hmm... can you say "hypocrite" about a black man and not be called a racist?
hillary did not win most of the popular vote. they keep saying that, it keeps not being true.

So the self-proclaimed agent of change who is not a typical Washigton politician won the nomination because of cigar chomping super delegates whereas to women he called a typical Washington politician won most of the popular vote, the people's choice. Hmm... can you say "hypocrite" about a black man and not be called a racist?


Hypocrisy knows no color.

However, do you not understand the electoral system? If not, um, well, you know. The popular vote is one thing (which is negotiable anyway); but, a president (or candidates) isn't voted in based on popular  votes. If that was the case, Gore would've been president in 2000.

hillary did not win most of the popular vote. they keep saying that, it keeps not being true.


I think she's counting all the stuff in Michigan..."uncommitted" = "did not vote for Obama" in her language :)

There is no way to tally the caucuses-many of them didn't even keep a tally of how many people participated in them.



Cat

Hypocrisy knows no color.

However, do you not understand the electoral system? If not, um, well, you know. The popular vote is one thing (which is negotiable anyway); but, a president (or candidates) isn't voted in based on popular  votes. If that was the case, Gore would've been president in 2000.




Of course I understand how the electoral system works. I just think it's hypocritical that the "agent of change" is no different to any other "typical Washington politician" who's party gave him the nomination based on the opinion of their cigar chomping superdelegates and not on the opinion of the people. I know how the electoral system works, I also know how it's supposed to work. This time around, and many times before, it hasn't worked the way it's supposed to. The party is suppose to elect a nominee based on the popular vote. The popular vote doesn't elect a nominee but it's supposed to serve as an indication of how the delegates should vote. But yet again the American people were duped by the system and got the nominee a select few wanted instead of who they wanted. It's yet another blatantly obvious sign that the US electoral system does not work. It's supposed to be a democratic process but the vote of the people means nothing. A select view decide the nominee and the president. It's not fair and I think it's hypocritical for Obama to ride in on this process, win the nomination by speaking privately with a number of superdelegates and then call Clinton a "typical Washington politician" when she's the one who's been most adament about letting the people have their say and not letting the superdelegates once again go against the popular vote.

That Mexican Wizard is wrong, he predicted that Hillary won but she didn't.

Of course I understand how the electoral system works. I just think it's hypocritical that the "agent of change" is no different to any other "typical Washington politician" who's party gave him the nomination based on the opinion of their cigar chomping superdelegates and not on the opinion of the people. I know how the electoral system works, I also know how it's supposed to work. This time around, and many times before, it hasn't worked the way it's supposed to. The party is suppose to elect a nominee based on the popular vote. The popular vote doesn't elect a nominee but it's supposed to serve as an indication of how the delegates should vote. But yet again the American people were duped by the system and got the nominee a select few wanted instead of who they wanted. It's yet another blatantly obvious sign that the US electoral system does not work. It's supposed to be a democratic process but the vote of the people means nothing. A select view decide the nominee and the president. It's not fair and I think it's hypocritical for Obama to ride in on this process, win the nomination by speaking privately with a number of superdelegates and then call Clinton a "typical Washington politician" when she's the one who's been most adament about letting the people have their say and not letting the superdelegates once again go against the popular vote.
see though? you keep making this popular vote claim but it's not substantiated. the best claim you can make is that no one knows who got more of a popular vote, but the fact of the matter is, hillary clinton was the front runner early in the race and ran on a strategy of getting the big battleground and large-delegate democrat states like california and new york and snapping up the race on super tuesday. obama ran on gleaning caucus states and paying attention to states that the party establishment had long neglected, and he also rose up from a position of being an underdog. so if you were gonna make an argument that either campaign ran on a populist platform, obama really did much more of that than clinton, who was counting on name recognition and his established position of power in the democratic party.

i'll give you that she MAY have won the popular vote, if it were measurable (which it's not), then again, obama may as well -- it's simply too close to call. you keep saying hillary definitely won the popular vote, but unfortunately, this continues to be an undemonstrated claim. therefore everything you conclude based on it is also unsubstantiated.

i mean, she lost, and i understand that's a drag, but trying to turn it into a rerun of the 2000 contest is not only ill-advised, it's likely to open up scars among democrats that are best not opened, at least not if we're gonna look with hope toward the future.

I think picking Chuck Hagel (assuming he'd agree to be on the ticket) would be an excellent move.

Just heard underground buzz that a recent tape exists which Obama's wife says something derrogatory about 'whites', which sounds they will pull out near Nov. to dissuade voters.


Wonder if my source is correct..we'll see near the vote time.

Just heard underground buzz that a recent tape exists which Obama's wife says something derrogatory about 'whites', which sounds they will pull out near Nov. to dissuade voters.


Wonder if my source is correct..we'll see near the vote time.
i've heard that rumor too. if it's true i bet we'll hear about it sooner because the obama people will probably leak it earlier to diffuse it.

I think picking Chuck Hagel (assuming he'd agree to be on the ticket) would be an excellent move.

An excellent move if the Dems want to make sure another Republican gets in the Oval Office in eight years!
::)


Just heard underground buzz that a recent tape exists which Obama's wife says something derrogatory about 'whites', which sounds they will pull out near Nov. to dissuade voters.


Wonder if my source is correct..we'll see near the vote time.

They've got software that can make anybody sound like they're saying anything.  I fully expect the most vitriolic, crooked, vicious, deceitful, low-down and filthy smear campaign the likes of which the country has never seen.  McCain can't win a clean race, he's as mad as a March hare.

Apparently Hillary will be suspending her campaign Saturday and announce her support for Obama.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/04/democrats.wednesday/index.html

An excellent move if the Dems want to make sure another Republican gets in the Oval Office in eight years!
::)
They've got software that can make anybody sound like they're saying anything.  I fully expect the most vitriolic, crooked, vicious, deceitful, low-down and filthy smear campaign the likes of which the country has never seen.   McCain can't win a clean race, he's as mad as a March hare.



The message sounds they have a credible soundbite...the same guy who knew about Rove being caught up in the mix last time knows of this tape..hilbuzz.com
has much about it.


McCain blows Obama away with experience and when/if they do the debate, it will show the facade of Barack with no idea of 'what' change heis promoting...

An excellent move if the Dems want to make sure another Republican gets in the Oval Office in eight years!
::)


How so? By having a Republican in the white house? I assume you mean Hagel would run? Would that be such a bad thing?

A lot of Dems were claiming that they were going to vote McCain if Obama wins the nomination... I like Obama, but I have to say I'm a little worried now. Nothing I can do though, so I should probably stop worrying.

A lot of Dems were claiming that they were going to vote McCain if Obama wins the nomination... I like Obama, but I have to say I'm a little worried now. Nothing I can do though, so I should probably stop worrying.


No loss to them, they BOTH are Dems.  I hope experience wins out.

How so? By having a Republican in the white house? I assume you mean Hagel would run? Would that be such a bad thing?


The general idea is to run the sitting VP as the next presidential candidate.  Cheney isn't going to run because he has a bad ticker and nobody can stand the SOB anyway.  Cheney is not your typical VP.

A quick run-down of the presidency since FDR:

VP Harry S Truman succeeded Roosevelt after Roosevlt's sudden death in 1945.
Truman went on to beat NY governor Thomas Dewey in 1948.
President Truman withdrew from the race after losing the NH primary in 1952.
Truman's VP, Alben W. Barkley (Democratic senator from KY) withdrew his bid in the summer of 1952.
Illinois governor Adlai Stevenson became the Democratic nominee in 1952.
The Republican ticket Eisenhower/Nixon defeated Stevenson and held office from 1953 to 1961.
VP Richard Nixon lost by a razor thin margin to John F. Kennedy in the race of 1960.
VP Lyndon Johnson succeeded Kennedy upon the Kennedy assassination on 11/22/63.
Johnson easily routed the Republican Barry Goldwater/William E. Miller ticket in 1964.
Johnson declined the nomination for a second term and VP Hubert Humphrey lost to former VP Nixon in 1968.
Nixon handily beat Sen. George McGovern (D-SD) in 1972.
Nixon resigned over Watergate in 1974.  VP Spiro Agnew resigned facing corruption charges ten months earlier in 1973.
Speaker of the House Gerald R. Ford (R-MI) succeeded the presidency for the remainder of Nixon's term, but lost to Carter in 1976.
Jimmy Carter lost to Ronald Reagan in 1980.
Reagan creamed Carter's VP Walter Mondale (D-MN) in 1984.
Reagan's VP George H.W. Bush beat Governor Michael Dukakis (D-MA) in 1988.
Bush lost his second-term bid to Bill Clinton in 1992.
Bush's VP Dan Quayle (R-IN) failed his bid for the next race, which went to Bob Dole (R-KS), who lost to Clinton in 1996.
Clinton's VP Al Gore won the popular vote, but the U.S. Supreme Court handed the election to George W. Bush in 2000.
George W. beat John Kerry (D-MA) in 2004.

Since FDR, the only vice presidents never to run for president are Spiro Agnew and Dick Cheney. 
Barkley, Quayle, and Ford's VP former governer of NY Nelson Rockefeller all ran for president but did not secure the nomination.  Thus, it would be unusual for Chuck Hegel to decline to seek the presidency if he became Obama's VP.

The general idea is to run the sitting VP as the next presidential candidate.  Cheney isn't going to run because he has a bad ticker and nobody can stand the SOB anyway.  Cheney is not your typical VP.

A quick run-down of the presidency since FDR:

VP Harry S Truman succeeded Roosevelt after Roosevlt's sudden death in 1945.
Truman went on to beat NY governor Thomas Dewey in 1948.
President Truman withdrew from the race after losing the NH primary in 1952.
Truman's VP, Alben W. Barkley (Democratic senator from KY) withdrew his bid in the summer of 1952.
Illinois governor Adlai Stevenson became the Democratic nominee in 1952.
The Republican ticket Eisenhower/Nixon defeated Stevenson and held office from 1953 to 1961.
VP Richard Nixon lost by a razor thin margin to John F. Kennedy in the race of 1960.
VP Lyndon Johnson succeeded Kennedy upon the Kennedy assassination on 11/22/63.
Johnson easily routed the Republican Barry Goldwater/William E. Miller ticket in 1964.
Johnson declined the nomination for a second term and VP Hubert Humphrey lost to former VP Nixon in 1968.
Nixon handily beat Sen. George McGovern (D-SD) in 1972.
Nixon resigned over Watergate in 1974.  VP Spiro Agnew resigned facing corruption charges ten months earlier in 1973.
Speaker of the House Gerald R. Ford (R-MI) succeeded the presidency for the remainder of Nixon's term, but lost to Carter in 1976.
Jimmy Carter lost to Ronald Reagan in 1980.
Reagan creamed Carter's VP Walter Mondale (D-MN) in 1984.
Reagan's VP George H.W. Bush beat Governor Michael Dukakis (D-MA) in 1988.
Bush lost his second-term bid to Bill Clinton in 1992.
Bush's VP Dan Quayle (R-IN) failed his bid for the next race, which went to Bob Dole (R-KS), who lost to Clinton in 1996.
Clinton's VP Al Gore won the popular vote, but the U.S. Supreme Court handed the election to George W. Bush in 2000.
George W. beat John Kerry (D-MA) in 2004.

Since FDR, the only vice presidents never to run for president are Spiro Agnew and Dick Cheney. 
Barkley, Quayle, and Ford's VP former governer of NY Nelson Rockefeller all ran for president but did not secure the nomination.  Thus, it would be unusual for Chuck Hegel to decline to seek the presidency if he became Obama's VP.


Right, I'm with you, especially because is 'only' 61 now. He'd be 70 when elected to office. Although I'd rather have a slightly younger President I don't think I'd have too much of an issue with a Hagel administration.