That poll strikes me as rather meaningless, and possibly even evidence that Clinton would be a poor VP choice. Fine, 45% of African-Americans are okay with Clinton as VP. But that doesn't mean she's their first choice. Consider this: If voters--black or otherwise--were polled about other VP choices would any candidate hit 35% opposition? Do you think 35% of African-Americans or voters in general would be opposed to Bill Richardson or John Edwards or Sebelius or McCaskill or Webb as VP? I highly doubt it.

Posted at June 5, 2008 11:33 AM in response to Poll: Nearly Half Of African Americans Want Hillary On Ticket

The following are based on Rothernberg's CD ratings.

Obama won the primary in the following Dem districts that are at risk in the fall:

GA-3
KS-2
LA-6

And he won the primary in the following districts, which have a strong possibility of turning blue in the fall:

VA-11
IL-11
WA-8
NC-8
LA-4
IL-10
AK
NM-1
MS-1
MN-3

The same for Clinton, based on Rothenberg starting with at-risk Dem seats:

AL-5
CA-11
FL-16
PA-10
TX-22
NH-1

Potential new Dem districts where Clinton won the primary:

NY-25
NJ-3
NY-29
NY-26
OH-10
OH-15 (only won by 1%)
NJ-7 (guess)
NJ-3 (guess)
AZ-1

Posted at May 9, 2008 1:35 PM in response to Hillary Campaign Emails Out "Electability" Power-Point To All House Dems

I'm not sure she's got a good argument in any of the three New York districts, since she's the home state Senator, and Arcuri's seat is listed as "Democrat Favored" by CQ Politics. So it's not exactly a "tough district." Donnelly, Ellsworth, Space, and Shuler are also listed as "Democrat Favored." 7 of the remaining 8 are "Leans Democrat" and only Mahoney in Florida is a true toss-up. I'm sure someone could make a very long and convincing list of toss-up seats and potential Democratic turnover districts where Obama won the primary. This is a pretty pathetic argument for handing the nomination to the loser.

Posted at May 9, 2008 12:14 PM in response to Hillary Campaign Emails Out "Electability" Power-Point To All House Dems

I have on a good source that Renzi's insurance clients are almost exckusively pro-life "crisis pregnancy" resource centers acrosss the country, which at the very least is a pretty huge conflict of interest if he's doing any self-funding from his insurance income.

Posted at February 22, 2008 12:05 PM in response to Breaking: GOP Rep Renzi Indicted

Really felt like McCain was lying his ass off in that presser, didn't it? He said he's never done anything, ever, to violate the public trust... Keating, anyone? And he said his aides never approached him about the relationship, which seems improbable unless Weaver's statements to the Times were totally fabricated. He also flat-out lied and said he'd never spoken directly to the Times about the story before he corrected himself and admitted he had a one-on-one phone call with Keller. But I suspect that the fact that he stood confidently and answered reporters' questions will be what most commentators focus on, and they'll let him off the hook. Apparently that's all it takes to look like a "straight talker" these days.

Posted at February 21, 2008 10:06 AM in response to What Does it All Mean?

Talk about desperate measures...

Posted at February 18, 2008 11:54 AM in response to Hillary Campaign: Obama Plagiarized Speech From Supporter

It looks like they're hoping to get disillusioned Obama-hating Clinton supporters to go with McCain, doesn't it? Can't wait to see MyDD turn into a pro-McCain site after the convention.

Posted at February 18, 2008 9:21 AM in response to Republicans Gearing Up To Attack Obama

Eh? And what does his cause gain by making no pick at all? Do you think if he endorsed Obama and Clinton won, Hillary would turn away from solving the climate crisis? I know she and Bill have a reputation for getting even with people who get in their way, but that's a little extreme.

Posted at October 12, 2007 12:37 AM in response to Gore Nobel Discussion