For some reason this makes me remember that there was a fairly high-up staffer in McCain's campaign who had said he would have to quit if it came down to McCain and Obama, because he wouldn't be part of going negative on Obama. Can't recall his name. Does anyone know his status?

I actually expected more of McCain than terms like "hysterical diatribes" and complaints of "tired, partisan rants" ... immediately before indulging in one. Instead of saying there needs to be a debate, why doesn't he start actually debating some of the point Obama raised?

But ... at least it IS on an important issue.

Posted at May 16, 2008 2:01 PM in response to McCain Responds: Americans Have "Every Reason To Doubt" Whether Obama Can Keep Us Safe

I'm not sure that putting a woman on the ticket *other* than Clinton is a good idea (and I definitely thing putting Clinton on there is NG). It's hard to see how it wouldn't be perceived as -- and in fact be -- a slap at Sen. Clinton, and it would remove one of the more impartial and legit (therefore face-saving) reasons for not making HRC the VP candidate: asking the American public to take two huge leaps simultaneously might be a bit too much and would risk losing a number of voters.

I had always thought that our first black major office-holder would be in the VP position (which is why I was all agog about the idea of Gore/Obama early on). But - on reflection - maybe it's a lot better for the first black ... AND the first woman ... to be right at the top and showing they can do the big job! If that top point is reached, then everything below becomes open to anyone, equally.

In fact, it would probably be just as well if any first top-ticket minority (race or gender) isn't in the 'subservient' position.

Posted at May 16, 2008 1:38 PM in response to U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill As Obama's VP?

16 hours late?? Not everyone is a political junkie and it takes at least 24 hours for news of even a major (mis)statement to get around. I'd far rather have a candidate -- and president -- who spends some time checking the facts and thinking about what to say, rather than shooting from the hip.

He doesn't need to be, and shouldn't be, part of the front-line quick reaction team. In fact, Biden, Kerry and Clinton did just a fine, fine job of that. Nothing wrong with letting the people who are aware of the story spend a little time waiting to hear what he is going to say.

Posted at May 16, 2008 1:03 PM in response to Obama Hits Back: Debate With McCain And Bush Over Foreign Policy Is One "I Will Win"

Amen! Obama/Biden '08!!

Posted at May 16, 2008 8:54 AM in response to Joe Biden, I

Very delayed response to Desidero's "I didn't read them either, but it seems both his mother and his grandmother were the really strong people in his life, yet he eulogizes the missing father and his grandfather. Someone who's read more can tell me if I missed it with this synopsis."

Best to read the books, then -- esp the forward to the re-issue of "Dreams From My Father" in which he acknowledges that when he wrote the book he had no idea that the truly important parent in his life, his mother, wouldn't be around for many, many years to come. Also, he doesn't "eulogize" his father -- the book is about his journey to come to grips with his father, not a paen to the man himself. To the contrary - esp. in contrast to the very strong, deep woman his mother was shown to be. And while it was clear that both grandparents were very central to his upbringing, his grandmother stood right beside (and sometimes a step or two ahead of) his grandfather. The first book especially is a very, very good work - forget who it's about, if you must, and enjoy.

As to the 'sweetie' comment - In 9th grade I was very tired one morning and in a heated discussion with some of my friends when our teacher said something 'cautionary' to me. And I responded entirely instinctively "yes, Mother" Obama has two young daughters who, I'm sure, frequently ask him questions or want his attention when his mind is on something else. Nuff said. I think we have to stop expecting our candidates for president to be super-human; I'd really prefer to have a real person being in the office. (Be a nice change, in fact.)

Posted at May 16, 2008 8:49 AM in response to Sweetie?

I think Joe Biden should be put at the top of the list today on the basis of just one word!

Posted at May 15, 2008 3:57 PM in response to Jim Webb for Not VP (the veepstakes parlor game continues)

Well, it really is over except for that wonderful possibility floated by wayitwas. Shudder! But see letter to PA Democrats from Rendell *and* Casey on another post. I don't think even Clinton's most fervent supporters would stick with her if her plan - her only possible plan - was to put SDs under tremendous pressure AND subvert "pledged" delegates and convince them to switch.

Posted at May 15, 2008 12:04 PM in response to Obama Could Clinch Majority Of Pledged Delegates On May 20th -- Even If Florida And Michigan Are Seated!

Last night (5/14), I worked out the math for an earlier, now-disappeared post and am re-posting it here, with slight tweaks. This focuses ONLY on the PLEDGED delegates because, barring some horrid scandal, I don't think that the SDs could deny the nomination to whoever wins the pledged delegates .. not without risking intraparty civil war.

Bottom line: Without counting MI & FL or any Edwards delegates, Obama gets majority of pledged delegates on May 20. ---- Counting MI & FL but not counting any Edwards delegates, Obama gets the majority of all pledged delegates on June 1. ---- If you factor in Edwards' 18, then Obama gets the majority of all delegates on May 31.

WITHOUT FL and MI:
Total pledged delegates -- 3253
Needed for majority of pledged delegates -- 1627

WITH FL and MI:
Total pledged delegates -- 3566
Needed for majority of pledged delegates -- 1783

1599 - Obama's current pledged delegates
(using conservative estimates for upcoming contests)
18 - KY: 65/35 for Clinton
28 - OR: 47/53 Obama
1645 pledged delegates as of May 20
(18 more than majority w/o FL & MI)

55 MI - (# of delegates for 'uncommitted')
73 FL - (# of delegates Obama 'won')
1773 as of May 31
(10 short of majority w/ FL & MI)

19 - PR 65/35 for Clinton
1792 as of June 1
(9 more than majority w/ FL & MI)

9 - MT 45/55 for Obama
8 - SD 45/55 for Obama
1809 as of June 3
(26 more than majority w/ FL & MI)

If Edwards' 18 pledged delegates are added in (and not just considered to be 'superdelegates' since Edwards can only request), then Obama could have the majority of pledged delegates, even counting MI and FL, as of May 31.

Using the same estimates, here are Clinton's numbers on pledged delegates:
1447 - current total for Clinton
33 - KY
22 - OR
1502 as of May 20
73 - MI
105 - FL
1680 as of May 31
36 - PR
1716 as of June 1
7 - MT
7 - SD
1730 as of June 3

Take out MI and FL altogether, and Clinton would have 1552 at the end of all the contests; Obama would have 1681. (Difference belongs to Edwards, other candidates)

It really is over.

Posted at May 15, 2008 11:57 AM in response to Obama Could Clinch Majority Of Pledged Delegates On May 20th -- Even If Florida And Michigan Are Seated!

Thanks, acanuck - nice to have someone else obsessing on this as well. And now we're in good company -- Chuck Todd pointed out the same aspect this morning on MSNBC!! (Do you suppose he saw our posts?)

Couple of tweaks: Edwards has, I believe, 18 pledged delegates and 1 superdelegate. Of course they all act as superdelegates now since Edwards can request but not require. (one has already announced he's going along with the request.)

Also, the number of total delegates (and therefore the number required for a majority) has been moving around, mainly up, as a result of changes, such as the acquisition of several nice, juicy Republican house seats. Smile! Some parallel changes in superdelegate numbers, such as when Spitzer stepped down as NY Gov and David Paterson, his successor, was already an SD and a member of the DNC.

So ..... it will essentially be over by May 20. Question is: will HRC recognize that fact?

BTW, I think the 'recommend' feature on this post is broken - I can't make the number go up. ??

Posted at May 15, 2008 8:49 AM in response to How Edwards Endorsement Can End This in the Next Few Days

I believe Edwards has 18 pledged delegates and 1 superdelegate. At least that's what Chuck Todd said at some point last night.

Posted at May 15, 2008 8:34 AM in response to NH Edwards Delegate Announces Support for Obama