May 6, 2008

Here's the post to talk about the North Carolina and Indiana primaries.

I'm not live-blogging tonight. Sorry! It's up to you to write something here... at least until quite late.

ADDED: Obama wins North Carolina, as expected. CNN calls it. Hillary is ahead in Indiana though, so I'm predicting stasis. And I am going out. Sorry to pop back in when I said I was leaving.

AND: My son, Christopher Althouse Cohen, is writing a lot in the comments here. At 7:04 ET, he said:
Tim Russert just started talking about "Hillary Clinton's victory in Indiana..." and then corrected himself, "uh, if it happens." Interpret however you like.
Ha ha.

Carry on.

223 comments:

1 – 200 of 223   Newer›   Newest»
George said...

If Sen. Obama loses either race, he gets his eyes ripped out.

MISS said...

This was a tough decision to make, but I voted for Hillary today. I'm proud of her for sticking through this and not backing down. She's one tough chick!

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

Polls are closed now in Indiana. Too close to call. But it's 59-41 in her favor with 5% reporting, but they seem to be indicating that the black districts report late.

I have a theory that might help her: doesn't it seem like the uncommitted superdelegates must largely be Clinton supporters? If you were an Obama supporter and a superdelegate, wouldn't you declare your support by now? It seems like the main reason not to declare your support would be if you're personally for her and waiting to see if it could be politically possible to support her.

tony said...

CAC...

i think you're right about those clinton superdelegates. i heard some pundit say just that the other day...but his take on it was, she hasn't "closed the deal" (kinda tired of that line) i.e. if they really are for her, something is causing them to hold out, and that must be bad.

The Political Jerk said...

Prediction: Media types will say that tonight changes something, though tonight will not change anything.

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

Tony: If they're for her but holding back, it seems pretty obvious why they're holding back. If she can win under some measure of the popular vote, that could be enough for the ones who really want to go for her. I don't think it says anything negative about her that they're holding back at a point when it could end up that she lost the vote by all counts.

Up to 12% reporting now and it's 58-42. Still significantly larger than Pennsylvania ended up being. Fox News says they'll call it within the hour, which I interpret as meaning they'll call it for her. Seems like she won Indiana.

In fact, I can now project that Hillary Clinton has won Indiana. Heh.

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

If that wasn't clear enough, that was a joke. It hasn't been called yet by anyone but me.

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

I don't like the MSNBC has a big "BREAKING NEWS" sign, and then the news is "Indiana too early to call." Breaking news...we...don't know anything.

George said...

For the first time, one of my kids knocked Sen. Obama. This was shocking, as he's been all the rage among tweeners.

My daughter said he was "psycho."

Could be a turning point.

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

Obama wins North Carolina. I guess it's all about the margin now.

vbspurs said...

Fox News calling North Carolina for Obama. It looks like a healthy margin, too.

Cheers,
Victoria

vbspurs said...

This has gotta be the end of Hillary '08.

Today, McCain went after Obama about his justices nomination. Obama got in a good shot back.

This could be the start of the normal campaign, if only Hillary falls on her sword and does the right thing now.

BTW, whew, half of the Blogosphere must be online because this place is SLOW.

Cheers,
Victoria

MISS said...

I'm in NC and I know people who switched parties just to vote for Obama - not because they like him but because they think McCain can beat him.

George said...

Ok, we know the results. This is old news.

What exactly is Isabella Rossellini's problem?

Simon said...

It's still too close to call in Indiana, but the news that has to worry the superdelegates is that, "[a]ccording to early exit polls, half of Clinton's supporters in Indiana would not vote for Obama in a general election match up with Sen. John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee." As I've said before, "[t]he superdelegates will act rationally in giving Obama the nomination for fear of alienating his supporters only if the number of Obama supporters who can be projected to stay home, and/or cross party lines, should Hillary get the nomination is higher than the number of all other Democratic-leaning demographic groups who can be projected to stay home, and/or cross party lines, should Obama get the nomination."

Simon said...

George, when you're as beautiful as Isabella Rossellini, you can get away with being a little loony tunes - or even a lot loony tunes. (Although bad timing meant that, IMO, she is only the second most beautiful person to appear on Letterman last week: Tina Fey was on, too.)

Methadras said...

The fight will be over as to whether or not Michigan/Florida will eventually get their votes counted. This is where she will focus her intensity on. Deal or no deal, if Obama seriously thinks that Clinton will somehow take the high road on this, then he is dumber than he looks and is just another can in his naivete` pantry. There will not be a revote to legitimize these two states because the campaign dynamics are completely different at this stage. Not to mention that Howard Dean doesn't have the money to pay for a revote and will ask the respective states to pony up the cash and they will just tell him no. Howard Dean as the party chairman is finished after this, I think because his initial revocation of Michigan/Florida primaries will come back to bite him in the ass.

Furthermore, if Democrats were smart, which generally they aren't, they would ditch the superdelegate process and do it like Republicans do it. All the superdelegates have done is muddy the waters and game the system. CAC makes a good point about the uncommitted superdelegates and I agree with him in the fact that they are for Hillary, they are waiting for the convention to commit and Dean will ask all the delegates to get this done in one pass not 5, 6, or 7.

MadisonMan said...

[a]ccording to early exit polls, half of Clinton's supporters in Indiana would not vote for Obama in a general election match up with Sen. John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee

They say that now. They have to go through the 5 stages of mourning before they can bring themselves around to voting for someone who's not Beloved Hillary!.

Zachary Paul Sire said...

It seems like the main reason not to declare your support would be if you're personally for her and waiting to see if it could be politically possible to support her.

Doubt it. Nice wishful thinking though, Chris...you're cute!

Perhaps the Superdelegates are just waiting to actually reflect the "will of the people" and they're waiting to see the final tally on June 3rd.

If anything, Superdelegates have been running away, even former supporters and cabinet members, from the Clintons in droves. No one really likes her. They might fear (irrationally) the power of the Clinton name (Vince Foster! j/k), yes, but actually like Hillary...no way Jose.

vbspurs said...

What exactly is Isabella Rossellini's problem?

LOL! I love it. She's so refreshingly fruity, although ironically more Fellini than Rossellini.

When she did that homage to her old man, and dressed up as him, with a huge belly (then jumped up and down on "his" belly) -- that was a little weird.

Bug porn is delightful.

Oh and George, I am dying for you to post that "ripped eyes out" Michelle Obama quote in that other thread on her (so as not to riddle this one with that).

Not quite a smoking gun, but the gun is warming up.

Cheers,
Victoria

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

Tim Russert just started talking about "Hillary Clinton's victory in Indiana..." and then corrected himself, "uh, if it happens." Interpret however you like.

Simon said...

MadisonMan, why is it that when Obama supporters threaten to stay home if their preferred candidate doesn't get the nomination, they are taken at their word and assumed to be serious about staying home, whereas when Clinton supporters say they won't vote for Obama in the fall, there's a presumption that they will fall in line in due course? Why is it any more or less fair to assume that, when Clinton gets the nomination, those youths and blacks who make up Obama's core constituency may make noise about staying home, but they're just "say[ing] that now. They have to go through the 5 stages of mourning before they can bring themselves around to voting for someone who's not the Beloved" Vozhd?

George said...

Victoria--

She's an aging actress looking for buzz.

Whoever he is.

dix said...

Why would a superdelegate declare now? Maybe it will get him on the White House Christmas card list but not much more. If he waits until the convention and one or the other candidates needs 10 or fewer votes , this former low level party operative can parlay his vote into a cushy White House job somewhere.

Zachary Paul Sire said...

why is it that when Obama supporters threaten to stay home if their preferred candidate doesn't get the nomination, they are taken at their word and assumed to be serious about staying home

Because Hillary and McCain are basically the same person, in the eyes of this Obama supporter.

Plus...she's freakin Hillary! Gross.

Simon said...

Zach said...
"Plus...she's freakin Hillary! Gross."

Harumph. I think she's cute.

paul a'barge said...

From ABC News: About 91 percent of African American voters in N.C. supported Obama

Good lord. What if 91% of white people voted for a white candidate?

Why am I shocked that so few people are horrified by this? Clearly these people are voting for this guy because he's black.

Have we really made so little progress? Every African-American I see is now suspect in my eyes.

MISS said...

Good point Paul. So does that mean black people are racist?

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

Why won't they call Indiana? All the networks keep talking about calling it. Okay, now they're going to explain why they're not calling on CNN...

"Because we're conservative by nature. We believe in counting the votes."

Seems like they're waiting for the two districts that are closest to Chicago, where they have no votes at all in yet. And as he talks about it, her lead in Indiana shrinks to 10 points, while Obama's lead in NC stays at 30 points.

Oh, Fox News called Indiana for Clinton! Yay!

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

Correction: CBS News calls Indiana for Clinton, which Fox News is reporting on, but Fox is not yet calling it and is explaining why they are not yet calling the state.

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

I'm starting to worry I may end up having to vote for McCain. Oh well, a vote for McCain is really only three more years of George W Bush, since that's about how much time he has left.

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

Paul: Most people are too PC to say anything negative about those demographics. Still, he obviously wouldn't have won the black vote 9-to-1 if he weren't himself black, and that margin is what has consistently put him ahead in this race. He wouldn't be (potentially) the nominee without it. Doesn't the math, then, suggest that Geraldine Ferraro was right? I know that's not what people want to say, since you risk being accused of racism by saying it, but it seems pretty apparent.

Meade said...

Not only is it apparent, it's true, and I salute your courage for saying so, CAC

vbspurs said...

Ann says:

HA HA"

...My God, that is AWFUL. It looks like Ann was the loser in a bar brawl with Hillary and/or Michelle. Chick fight!

Sorry Ann! I'm off to dinner and that was the best I could do. I clearly need Paint tips from Chip. Oh well, ciao!

chickenlittle said...

"So does that mean black people are racist?"

Of course not, that's like saying Israelis sometimes act like Nazis.

Jennifer said...

Well, you heard it here first, folks. Visible Obama supporters are outnumbering visible Clinton supporters here by the dillions.

I actually had an Obama campaigner come to my door yesterday. She was very nice and rather old and befuddled and I didn't have the heart to tell her that at every other door she knocked on, she'd get the same answer she got at my door. A mile from post...? We're all military non-residents not registered to vote in NC. Sorry.

Meade said...

"Every African-American I see is now suspect in my eyes."


Every? That's dumb. The number is 91%, not !00%.

garage mahal said...

Simon
Good question. I think her supporters that say they won't vote for him are dead serious about not voting for him though; contrary to the spin. Exit polls from OH, PA, and now IN are pretty ugly if you're an Obama follower.

Meade said...

Looks like Obama is starting to close the gap in Indiana.

Finn Kristiansen said...

I am a black person (albeit a conservative) and will address the point of paul at 7:14.

When the campaign started, Hillary had her fair share of black support. The reason it moved away from her is because of her methods against Obama. Had she taken a different tact, she would have more support.

I would also make the argument that for as long as blacks could vote, blacks have voted for white presidents and helped put whites in office. We obviously have no trouble showing up for whites.

But then again, I think people forget too, that many blacks now have grandparents who couldn't even stay at the same hotels or take any career or marry any individual or live wherever they pleased and the concept of actually having a black president is like "wow."

It's kind of like when Croatians in the former Yugoslavia get their jollies when they actually get a country of their own.

So along comes Obama, similar in views to Hillary, more likeable, and satisfactory to a large number of whites. You cannot discount the desire by blacks to see a black person in office, most things being equal.

It's been a long time, given how long the country has been existence, the dirth of decent candidates, and how limited opportunity was as little as 50 year ago.

(And of course, in cases like Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court, we see that blacks don't automatically support the black candidate for a position).

In a world where NYC has St. Patrick's Day, celebrating all things Irish, and Columbus Day, where the Italians show up, and where I can turn on PBS and see chef Lydia bounce back and forth between Italy and the US with fondness, blacks often have nothing culturally to show. We have no homeland, no parades, and yet some of us have been here quite a while.

So yes if you have the same basic policy as the black candidate, but then proceed to dump on the black candidate and use race to siphon off votes, then yes you will lose lots of blacks.

Every time you hear the charge that Obama can't win white votes, despite shrinking the margins in Pennsylvania, or winning in white majority states, that is Senator Clinton making an argument not on issues, but racial appeals.

The only disgrace here, is that blacks don't have a habit of voting for both parties like other ethnic groups. Blacks should always diversify their vote across party and across race, but I certainly have an inkling of why they would pick Obama over Hillary.

vnjagvet said...

I am afraid no one can say that this race is not about race any more.

And as long as the race continues to be about race, it does not bode well for the candidate who could be what he wants to be but claims to be from a race which comprises less than 13 percent of the population.

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

Harold Ford Jr is talking about the possibility that Obama should pick Clinton as the VP, even if it ends up being a clear, uncontested victory for the nomination, as a way of uniting the party. I'm still holding out hope that for that ticket, even though many people don't think it's a good idea.

"Fox News to make Indiana projection soon." I hope so. Her lead there is down to 6 points, while his lead in NC is at 26 points with 21% reporting. I fear this may be over, even if it goes on.

AJ Lynch said...

Christopher:

Would you be so kind as to tell us why you would choose McCain over Obama?

MISS said...

I disagree about those two teaming up together. The last thing democrats need right now is to possibly lose another senate seat.

Revenant said...

It seems like the main reason not to declare your support would be if you're personally for her and waiting to see if it could be politically possible to support her.

That's what I've been thinking for a while now, yeah. There's another, more cynical, explanation, though -- the superdelegates are waiting to see what kind of offers they get from Obama (government posts, pet projects, etc) before they pledge their support for him.

After all, Obama can't win without them, so it is in their interests to hold out for the best offer.

Maxine Weiss said...

Why doesn't Chris liveblog on his own blog?

Since, he feels so strongly about Hillary, I'm surprised he hasn't used his own blog to get the message out.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

It seems like the main reason not to declare your support would be if you're personally for her and waiting to see if it could be politically possible to support her.

An alternative explanation would be that they want to support Obama, but see Hillary as a vindictive lady, and want to make sure that the stake is driven through her heart before they do something that could put them on the wrong side of the next president.

Revenant said...

Harold Ford Jr is talking about the possibility that Obama should pick Clinton as the VP

I don't see that happening, but I bet Ford would make a good VP pick for Hillary. His extended family is awesomely crooked, but Jr himself seems like a decent sort -- and he's got enough connections to the black political establishment that they'd have a chance of keeping black voters on board for the election.

garage mahal said...

Donna B snapping on CNN at the suggestion she is biased for Obama.

This election is reminding me more and more of Lord of the Flies.

vnjagvet said...

Lest I be misunderstood, I thought the BHO's early candidacy did precisely what he should do. Appeal to all voters regardless of their race. There is no question that he is bi-racial, and no more black than white.

Hillary's tactics forced him to pick one, and he should have stayed aracial. He tried to do that in the Philadelphia speech, but he couldn't hold that attitude.

He has the nomination sewed up, but he has alienated many of his white male would be admirers.

There were many out there, but they have abandoned him, probably irretrievably.

That will not serve him well in the general election, IMO.

Revenant said...

Good lord. What if 91% of white people voted for a white candidate? Why am I shocked that so few people are horrified by this?

I think the reason people aren't horrified is that they expect it to happen. What's amusing to me, though, is how we've heard so much about Hillary benefiting from white racism, and she's only getting like 60% of the white vote. Obama's getting 90% of the black vote and the only mention we hear of black racism is in relation to his spiritual adviser.

Revenant said...

Hillary's tactics forced him to pick one, and he should have stayed aracial. He tried to do that in the Philadelphia speech, but he couldn't hold that attitude.

I'd say the Philadelphia speech is where he explicitly rejected that view, by making the controversy over his pastor a racial issue and making race the central point of his speech. He could have made it a speech about, say, patriotism and and coming together as Americans, and rejected Wright's separatist/supremacist schtick. That would have let him stay a race-neutral candidate. Instead he focused on the race-specific aspects of the controversy and offered excuses for his mentor's racism. That was a serious strategic error on his part.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Why am I shocked that so few people are horrified by this? Clearly these people are voting for this guy because he's black

Paul. I'm not shocked. The entire process has been breaking down into racial lines for some time now. This is what the super delegates are afraid of and what they have no hope of stopping. The blacks are by and large voting exclusivity on racial lines. You are right to be horrified.

My completely politically incorrect prediction is that if Obama is the candidate you will be seeing southern and rural "whites" do two things. Lie about who they are going to vote for..... and then not vote for Obama because of his race. Sorry, but it is true.

John Stodder said...

Whoops, Obama just crapped on the media's gift to him, the "suspense" about the Indiana outcome. He congratulated HRC for winning there. Chris Matthews and Keith Olberman's heads just hit the desks.

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

finn: I can certainly understand why they're breaking for Obama, and I don't think it makes the nomination any less legitimate, assuming it happens. But it still confirms that Ferraro was right, and makes me wonder why that was such a controversy.

I've never understood why any minority group gets together and votes the same way. I've voted Republican before, even though I've certainly heard many people say that if you're gay and vote Republican, you're betraying your group in some way. Those kinds of ideas must be extremely prevalent in the African-American community, and there must be people saying, at least to their friends and family, that you're betraying your group if you vote against Obama. On the other hand, if a minority group does rally together, it can be a pretty powerful way of claiming a certain amount of control, so I can see why they do it. It's a complicated issue.

madawaskan said...

OK-

You know WTH!?

Obama just called Indiana for Clinton before most of the media except CBS.

Weirdest election-ever...

former law student said...

the candidate who could be what he wants to be but claims to be from a race which comprises less than 13 percent of the population.

Excuse me? Who claimed that?

Jake Tapper:

Bubba: Obama Is Just Like Jesse Jackson

January 26, 2008 8:18 PM

Said Bill Clinton today in Columbia, SC: "Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in '84 and '88. Jackson ran a good campaign. And Obama ran a good campaign here."

This was in response to a question from ABC News' David Wright about it taking "two Clintons to beat" Obama. Jackson had not been mentioned.

Boy, I can't understand why anyone would think the Clintons are running a race-baiting campaign to paint Obama as "the black candidate."

-- jpt

Zachary Paul Sire said...

Every African-American I see is now suspect in my eyes.

Uh oh. Every time there's a primary it seems like there's a race war in the Althouse comments. Let's hope that doesn't happen tonight.

P.S. I too would like to hear Chris justify a vote for McCain over Obama when Hillary concedes. At the very least, just don't vote!

P.P.S. Hi Maxine!

John Stodder said...

I do understand minority bloc voting and have no problem with it. Lots of Greek-Americans voted Dukakis, lots of Italian-Americans voted for Cuomo in NY, and Joe Lieberman got put on the 2000 ticket explicitly to bring in Jewish votes. I don't get why it isn't just as legitimate for blacks to show ethnic pride by voting for a guy they agree with who happens to also make them feel like America has taken a measurable step toward equality. In fact, I'm sure that among those 91 percent, there are a lot of black voters who are pro-life, pro-free trade, anti-card check and/or pro-war, voted for Obama anyway, just because they want to share in the moment.

Oy, Obama just said the dumbest thing ever on energy. Scary dumb. Oh well, it's okay, my leg is tingling.

former law student said...

half of Clinton's supporters in Indiana would not vote for Obama in a general election match up with Sen. John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee."

yep, Hillary has had the Midwestern white racist vote sewn up since Ohio.

madawaskan said...

John Stodder-

Damn it I missed it.

Kirby Olson said...

Well, both races are voting with their races.

So much for principles.

Seven Machos said...

Seconding Stodder. Greek-Americans voted Dukakis. Catholics went for JFK. This is how it goes, man. I'm breedless myself but if, say, a guy from my hometown were running for office, I'd probably vote for him.

I also note that I would expect many black people to vote for Rice or Powell -- not 91 percent, but a lot.

Nothing odd here. Move along.

madawaskan said...

Oy! His -

"I'm not perfect" line got about one cheer-I think it was from Michelle..

talk to our enemies like Roosevelt did, like Kennedy did-like truman did.

Truman!?!

Oh ya big whompom talk..

Jeebus!

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

AJ Lynch: I'm likely to support McCain over Obama, even though I'm liberal on most domestic issues, because I think it's much more important that the next President be prepared to defend the security of Israel, fight terrorism abroad, and respond appropriately in a crisis than that I agree with him in other areas. I have a slight preference for withdrawing troops from Iraq, but that doesn't mean I want someone who is running on a platform of pacifism. When he trashed Hillary for saying she would respond with military force if Iran launched a nuclear attack against Israel, I realized he was just too far to the left on foreign policy for me. And seeing Obama's supporters attack her on this issue makes me realize how different we are. How many of these people are the same ones who opposed the war in Afghanistan? I didn't take those people seriously then, so why should I vote for their candidate now?

On the other hand, if Hillary were the running mate, it would be different, because I know that if she were his Vice President and Iran attacked Israel, she would death-grip his balls until he responded to the attack in some way.

vnjagvet said...

He is trying to reclaim an aracial message in tonight's NC speech.

References to his dad, his mom, both his maternal grandparents all in a non-polarizing way.

That is a good beginning. I wonder if he can steer that path from now to November?

madawaskan said...

Christopher-

she would death-grip his balls until he responded to the attack in some way.

Ya that's called the "reverse eagle claw"-



Have you seen that mating dance-but um-first he has to have a set for that to work-not the other way around.

Seven Machos said...

It would be absolutely crazy from the perspective of actually governing for Obama to chain himself to Clinton given the opportunity to make a clean break.

It'll be Richardson.

Zachary Paul Sire said...

I think it's much more important that the next President be prepared to defend the security of Israel

Fascinating priorities.

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

"We may not look alike, we may not be the same color, but we share the same hopes." Was Don King paraphrasing, or was that an actual quote? I wasn't paying enough attention, but it's pretty bad either way.

Basically, you only voted against me because I'm black. Great. That's gonna go over well in the general.

John Stodder said...

Madawaskan,

He said something along the lines of we've got to get off oil entirely, and we can do that by forcing carmakers to raise fuel economy standards and by forcing oil companies to invest their record profits in clean energy.

Raising CAFE standards is a cop-out. It's the Democrats' way of reducing consumption sans the price signal. It seems pain-free, but it only moves the cost burden from the gas pump to the auto lot. At that point, the policy becomes self-cancelling. If new cars are more expensive, old cars stay on the road longer, and old cars are less fuel-efficient and pollute more, regardless of how well they performed when they still had that new car smell.

Another reality is that people with more efficient cars just drive more.

But even if CAFE worked out, it would cancel the next part of his plan: Using the power of government to force oil companies to invest their profits in clean energy technology. If you're reducing demand for gasoline by, in theory, making all cars more efficient, wha' hoppened to the oil company profits? Not to mention that it's unclear how much authority the government has to force the oil companies to spend their profits in a particular way, unless you just tax them and give the money to that legion of Enrico Fermis working 9-5 for the feds.

Energy policy in this country is an incoherent mess. To say the least.

Seven Machos said...

Zachary -- But Obama will bring us hope!

madawaskan said...

John Stodder-

Thaks for the explanation I missed that part of his speech.

Damn good argument you've got there but I think McCain doesn't fire too well on that piston either...

reader_iam said...

What I resisted doing tonight, apart from commenting: Phoning any of my (many) relatives in Indiana, a number of whom reside in a number of the counties (in various areas) that are preventing a formal call.

Whatever else one can say, yowza!--this ain't my mother's childhood Indiana!*** (Hometown: A teeny tiny one close enough to Lafayette that I don't remember not knowing where Lafayette is or when I first visited it.)

On balance, a good thing (given the history of Indiana, my early memories, and God knows, the memories passed on to me by my mother and generation above her).

***or even mine

madawaskan said...

Oh! Speaking of which-that reminds me-maybe I'm always at the wrong place at the wrong time or whatever-

But went to a NASCAR race in Las Vegas and saw a Hummer with an Obama sticker was in LA and saw a Prius with a Bush sticker...

Revenant said...

Lots of Greek-Americans voted Dukakis, lots of Italian-Americans voted for Cuomo in NY, and Joe Lieberman got put on the 2000 ticket explicitly to bring in Jewish votes. I don't get why it isn't just as legitimate for blacks to show ethnic pride

Well sure, Democrats can get away with stuff like that; identity politics are at the core of their political strategy.

But imagine a white Republican running for President on a direct appeal to white ethnic pride, with white folks turning out to vote against the black candidate 9 to 1. The last Republican Presidential candidate to try anything *close* to that was Nixon, and people are still bitching about how horribly racist the Southern Strategy was.

I agree that voting for someone because he's black is no worse than voting for someone because he's Catholic, Jewish, or Greek -- but I differ from you in that I think ALL four reasons are equally bad.

James said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
PR from NH said...

Why Obama's Kenyan father have an American flag draped over his coffin?

Windbag said...

I voted for "No Preference" in NC this afternoon. I'd love to see how many votes were cast for "NP". Tough call with Keyes and Ron Paul! there to tempt me.

Meade said...

"I agree that voting for someone because he's black is no worse than voting for someone because he's Catholic, Jewish, or Greek..."

It is worse. One can choose to be or not to be Catholic, Jewish, or Greek. Black and White are given.

John Stodder said...

I think McCain doesn't fire too well on that piston either...

I can't think of a single prominent elected official who makes any sense on energy nowadays.

I guess this is why the Lord gave us lobbyists. It's a pretty sick world when the only people with intellectual integrity (and please note my modifier) are oil industry lobbyists.

I'm a pro-growth, pro-market enviro. Set strict pollution limits, but don't also try to tell industry how to meet them. Let the industry figure it out for themselves. Let them build their way out of the problem -- cleaner refineries, for example. This was how we made such dramatic gains against pollution in the 70s. I trust engineers more than bureaucrats or activists to figure out how to get to a goal we all basically agree on.

I just drove a Prius for the past four days and loved it. I don't recall there being a regulation that forced the Prius into existence.

Meade said...

Voting for or against someone because they are Black or White gets to the very definition of racialism.

reader_iam said...

Meade: Why--not generically, but specifically in terms of why you chose it--"racialism" rather than "racism"?

vbspurs said...

Voting for or against someone because they are Black or White gets to the very definition of racialism.

Me back, and I agree with Meade straight off the bat.

My closest neighbours and I were having a discussion just now, and clearly I have mistaken the viewpoint a lot of Althouse commenters are touching on.

(BTW, the two sets of couples are both lifelong Democrats, both affluent and white albeit one is Cuban, one set voting for McCain, the other undeclared)

I didn't make a big deal of the 91-92% of black Americans voting for McCain, but my neighbours sure did. They find it completely offputting, and frankly racist.

It adds to their distaste of Obama, in fact, though how that translates into lost votes, I don't know.

Cheers,
Victoria

franglosaxon said...

PR- he flubbed the line-- it was supposed to be grandfather (the WWII vet)...

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

I feel like I've been watching this all night. Why can't they just finish counting the votes so I can watch American Idol?

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

vbspurs: You mean voted for Obama, right? Not McCain.

reader_iam said...

Christopher: ?? Watch American Idol with your laptop on your lap, or use the clicker to (or get up and) flip back and forth?

No offense, but ... .

John Stodder said...

Why can't they just finish counting the votes so I can watch American Idol?

This is the advantage of living on the west coast. Of course, I'm letting it go to waste, since I never watch AI. I'm just waiting to switch to a Dodger game.

reader_iam said...

Or, embrace the zen and go off, uncertain.

It'll all be there tomorrow, just as it is.

; )

vbspurs said...

On the other hand, if Hillary were the running mate, it would be different, because I know that if she were his Vice President and Iran attacked Israel, she would death-grip his balls until he responded to the attack in some way.

I'm going to be blogging about this in a second on my own blog.

Basically, my point will be that if she does this, bites the bullet and accepts the Veep spot, she will be the Estes Kefauver riding the Adlai E. Stevenson train into oblivion.

If she loses this nomination, waits 4 years, after perhaps a middling performance from McCain she has another shot at the White House.

I'll try to expand this on my post later tonight. What do you think?

Oh and Chris, it's awkward to put it this way, but I didn't know you were gay. Since you're pro-Hillary, I'm guessing you're not a Log Cabin Republican or anything?

Cheers,
Victoria

Revenant said...

It is worse. One can choose to be or not to be Catholic, Jewish, or Greek. Black and White are given.

How exactly does a politician go about choosing to be Greek? I guess he could emigrate to Greece, but the Greeks wouldn't consider him Greek; they'd consider him American.

Choosing to be Jewish is almost as hard, since most Jews really don't consider converts to be the real deal.

Seven Machos said...

Victoria -- I agree wholeheartedly. The only reason Obama would take Hillary would be if he believes he cannot win without her. He must understand, though, that he cannot govern with her. This isn't George H.W. Bush we're talking about.

As for Clinton, she only takes the veep slot if she believes Obama loses with or without her. But if she believes that, she'd be silly to take it. It's a circular no-brainer.

reader_iam said...

Consider History.

vbspurs said...

LOL! Oops, yes, indeed Obama not McCain. Sorry about that.

One more point about the divisions in voting:

I fully understand wanting to be part of history, and wanting to support someone of your own background.

I often wonder if I had been alive in 1960, would I have voted for Kennedy, since my religion actually means more than I like to let on.

The thing is, I didn't feel at all constrained to vote for Kerry in 2004 because he was Catholic.

But not one little iota of one little bit. Zilcho.

Even if a person with British-born parents somehow were running for President, that wouldn't even be in my top 100 reasons for voting for him or her.

I sometimes am very grateful to my own nature that I am this way, because I have no encumbrances, social or racial, to vote any way but my own world view.

I do however believe that we should be a little more forgiving of these preferences in local elections.

After all, the politicians there represent neighbourhoods which have a direct impact on our daily lives. Sometimes having a black, Cuban, Mexican, etc. politician makes them more liable to protect that demographic's interests.

But after the first "message vote" goes out to your Greek-American, or Catholic-American, black-American Presidential candidate, then continuing to vote for them based solely on those reasons is...racialist.

To use Meade's phrasing.

I guess only time will tell if black people will continue to vote 92% for a serious black candidate, on the national scale.

Cheers,
Victoria

former law student said...

I hope all you Voter ID proponents are happy -- you just disenfranchised a flock of nuns. Most likely Hillary backers (old, female, Catholic) to boot. Did they represent a fraud problem? No, because their fellow nun was checking for ID.

About 12 Indiana nuns were turned away Tuesday from a polling place by a fellow sister because they didn't have state or federal identification bearing a photograph.
ADVERTISEMENT

Sister Julie McGuire said she was forced to turn away her fellow members of Saint Mary's Convent in South Bend, across the street from the University of Notre Dame, because they had been told earlier that they would need such an ID to vote.

The nuns, all in their 80s or 90s, didn't get one but came to the precinct anyway.

"One came down this morning, and she was 98, and she said, 'I don't want to go do that,'" Sister McGuire said. Some showed up with outdated passports. None of them drives.

The convent will make "a very concerted effort" to get proper identification for the nuns in time for the general election. "We're going to take from now until November to get them out and get this done.

Meade said...

reader_iam said...
Meade: Why--not generically, but specifically in terms of why you chose it--"racialism" rather than "racism"?

"Racism" is such a loaded term and, more often than not, one that is misunderstood. "Racialism" is really what we are talking about here - not racial superiority/inferiority but policy and preferences based on "race" which, in and of itself, is a questionable concept especially when those "races" are described simply as "black" or "white." Obama could have been the "post-racial" candidate but with his Pastor Wright, he blew it.

Seven Machos said...

Let's look at this another way. Do you think 92 percent of all black people would vote for Condi Rice, Louis Farrakhan, Colin Powell, that guy who ran against Obama in Illinois for his current Senate seat, or Al Sharpton?

I doubt it on all of the above. It's a complex calculus and part of that calculus is demographic or "racialist," to use the term that is apparently hip these days.

Seven Machos said...

Former Law Student -- What stopped those nuns from getting some valid form of identification over the many months that said lawsuit percolated?

I could make basically the same argument you have made on behalf of a large number of aborted fetuses since 1972. But I won't.

Finn Kristiansen said...

Why Victoria, you are simply too special.

Pogo said...

fls
Looks like the nuns screwed up, and the photo ID system worked as advertised.

What's the problem?

John Stodder said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
vbspurs said...

I hope all you Voter ID proponents are happy -- you just disenfranchised a flock of nuns.

This Catholic ex-Clerk of a polling station for the Presidential election of 2004 is.

Happy is not the right word, but I'm satisfied the other nun followed the rules to the tee.

It's what separates the United States from so-called democracies which lets any old thing slide.

I've lived in too many of those countries to know just how precious to an incorruptible bureaucracy a hard ass is.

Cheers,
Victoria

vbspurs said...

Clintonesca speaks.

Randy (Internet Ronin) said...

former law student wrote: :

yep, Hillary has had the Midwestern white racist vote sewn up since Ohio.

Had no idea that about 45% of the Democratic Party has yet to abandon its racist roots. Thanks for the update.

FLS also wrote:

I hope all you Voter ID proponents are happy -- you just disenfranchised a flock of nuns.

Yes, I'm happy about denying those without proper identification a ballot. They chose not to provide identification, which it has been well-documented is easily available in the state of Indiana. They chose to make a political statement. Their occupation does not concern me. Thanks for asking.

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

vbspurs: I think I've made my political views pretty clear, but it depends on how you define it. I would generally lean Democrat.

John Stodder said...

Victoria,

That's the point. Kerry wasn't a "first." Obama is.

However, to roll history back, JFK wasn't the first beneficiary of a Catholic bloc vote. Al Smith was helped and (mostly) hurt by his Catholicism in 1928. That's why JFK had to make his famous speech.

I agree, I don't think 91 percent of all black voters would just vote for any black candidate. In fact, in the earlier primaries IIRC, Hillary did much better with blacks than she is now.

The differences are:

-- Obama has a chance to win.
-- Obama is perceived to be the victim of a race-card-playing campaign, thanks to Mr. Beetface.
-- Obama is a mainstream liberal Democrat, and blacks tend to turn out in big numbers for a mainstream liberal Democrat.

Add it all up and you've got an enthusiastic wave of black support that is partly racial pride, partly racial defiance, and partly ideological compatibility.

Nobody votes a candidate for just one reason.

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

Oh, Clinton's speaking. Bill and Chelsea both look like they're about to start crying at any moment. Chelsea always looks like that, though.

vbspurs said...

Well said, John, well said.

Chris, I didn't mean to pry, but thanks. :)

Cheers,
Victoria

Seven Machos said...

The local Catholic church must be too broke to pay for state identifications after paying out to settle all the lawsuits against its pedophile priests.

And I'm sure none -- none -- of those nuns had drivers' licenses.

garage mahal said...

Don't look like she's conceding.

LOL.

Expect to hear ALOT about MI & FL this month.

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

Is Bill Clinton falling asleep? What's going on back there? His mouth is hanging open, his head is tilted over and his eyes are barely open. He looks like he's about to keel over.

Randy (Internet Ronin) said...

John Stodder has the right take on the question of black voters voting for a black candidate, I think. This is absolutely no surprise and no big deal. I don't remember anyone complaining when 90%+ of the Armenian-Americans in California turned out in record-breaking numbers to vote for George Deukmejian. And a very large number of them crossed parties to do it, too.

vgnavet strikes the right message on Obama's desire to run an aracial campaign. Maybe he lost those voters vgnavet talks about, maybe he didn't. His performance in North Carolina among white Democratic Party voters was one of the best he's had to date. There is just no way to look at those numbers and not see it as an impressive accomplishment given the recent controversies (largely of his own creation). If he can do that after Wright & "guns & religion," he's not in all that bad of shape. His biggest problem now is that Hillary's presence keeps him tacking left when he'd prefer to tack towards the center.

Palladian said...

Go Hillary!

Ruth Anne Adams said...

A flock of nuns??
Were they Flying nuns?

Meade said...

"And I especially want to thank your wonderful governor, Evan Bayh... blah blah blah"

Zachary Paul Sire said...

If she wasn't so disgusting and a stain on the Democratic party, I'd almost feel sorry for her.

Now that she's out of the way, hopefully the party can unify.

Seven Machos said...

Clinton keeling over: It really would be an ideal way for him to depart this vale of tears, in so many ways and on so many levels.

Simon said...

Garage, maybe you've indicated this before, and my apologies if so, but would you count yourself as one of those Clinton supporters who won't vote for Obama in the fall? Not necessarily going so far as Chris indicated, and actively voting for McCain, but saying home, even?

Blue Moon said...

As much as I would like her to drop out, she really has nothing to lose at this point. She's the football coach of a team losing by 28 points in the 4th quarter who is still calling plays in an effort to win this game, but is primarily concerned about winning the next game. At this point, she is running for the dem nomination in 2012, and as upset as I have been with her during this run, in 4years I could actually see myself supporting her.

Simon said...

(Sorry to miss the fun above, I had a victory party to attend.)

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

There is nothing redder than Bill Clinton's face. Someone behind him just held up a pair of boxing gloves. Did not make for a flattering juxtaposition.

Simon said...

According to CNN, there's no results from Lake County - is that a glitch? That's dreadful news for Clinton if she's only leading by a few points and the county that's likely to go second most heavily for Obama hasn't even weighed in yet.

vbspurs said...

And I'm sure none -- none -- of those nuns had drivers' licenses.

They were 80-90 years old, according to the copy-paste. The article said they couldn't drive, I think.

In 2004, in the predominantly black precinct I was given to Clerk, a little old lady arrived, aged 98 years old -- I saw her passport. A reporter was interviewing her, because she had been turned away from voting.

I could tell the reporter was all set to do the big write-up on the situation, since I had to admonish them to stay 100 yards away from the polling station, and she was licking her chops to get the story out.

"Evidently elitist white British girl turns away Jamaican-born elderly handicapped voter".

When I knelt on the floor next to the old lady's wheelchair, holding her hand, I looked at her passport again. I thought, heck, she can vote "provisional" (i.e., Provisional Ballot). It's within the rules.

So we looked all over for her name in the registers, called Elections Central, the works.

Well, it turned out she hadn't registered to vote.

She thought she could come to any polling station, and because she was an US citizen, she could cast a ballot.

Do you have any idea how much it pained me to turn away this old lady? Not as much as it hurt her, I know.

But I did my job, efficiently, and I hope a certain amount of delicacy.

That article never did get written, BTW.

Cheers,
Victoria

Meade said...

"The party of FDR, and Truman, and JFK."

How come it's never the party of LBJ, Carter, and Clinton - the three most recent presidents of the Democratic Party?

Seven Machos said...

1. The law requires you to do A in order to do B.

2. You don't do A.

3. You don't get to do B, even if you are old, black, poor, a nun, or know the lady at the polling place, or all of the above.

This is called rule of law. It's important.

reader_iam said...

Regarding the nuns, here's a gut response from earlier in response to this AP story:

"I don't want to do that."

1) Then you don't want to vote that much, do you? 2) It's fair to wonder whether that response in reaction to a rule would have been acceptable to that nun in circumstances within her particular context; say, if she ever taught in a Catholic school. 3) What would Jesus do?

Seems like a relatively mild "rendering unto Caesar" moment, and far less stringent than most disciplines required by Christianity, much less Catholicism.

Chip Ahoy said...

zzzzzzzzzzzzz

wu wu wu wu wut?

zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Simon said...

Victoria, you have a lot more sympathy for people who don't play by the rules than do I. I hate to sound like a hardass, but the rules are established in advance, they are for the most part simple and clear, and in truth, if a person doesn't have the ability to figure out the rules, maybe we should celebrate the rules as having protected us from that person casting a ballot.

The voter ID requirement was not sprung at the last minute. It was enacted three years ago in a blaze of publicity, has been the subject of national controversy, and was recently - like, a matter of weeks ago - ruled on by the Supreme Court of the United States in another blaze of publicity. Simply put, if you didn't know that you needed picture ID to vote in Indiana, I don't want you voting. It means you're either dumb out totally out of touch with current events, neither of which makes me think you'd be a responsible voter!

One recalls Scott Adams' argument against internet voting - at least with in propria persona voting, the real idiots get lost on the way to the polling station.

reader_iam said...

I mean, please.

Meade said...

It's a 40,000 vote gap in Indiana with Lake County the only county not yet reporting. 40,000 is only 10% of the entire population of Lake County.

John Stodder said...

Jeff Toobin is raising the issue of vote fraud in Indiana -- Lake County's vote being held back until it's all counted smacks of the Daley type tactics of waiting to see how many extra votes are needed to achieve a result, he says.

He think Indiana sucks, basically.

Simon said...

Seven, re your 10:04 PM comment - there's a hoary old quote from Anatole France that "[t]he law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges." It's usually smugly trotted out by people who think that it's a damning indictment, but for myself, I always saw it the way implied in your comment. A law that asks the same of all people under its jurisdiction seems eminently reasonable to me.

AJ Lynch said...

Christopher:

Thanks for answering my question. I understand your hierarchy of needs now. Bit like your mother's you know and like her you tend to notice things others don't (ie.Clinton appearing to be semi-conscious).

Some have commented on black overwhelming support of Obama. In 1960, I lived in a Catholic neighborhood, JFK made a campaign stop down the main drag and I swear everyone turned out. I bet 90% of us Catholcs voted for him too. We humans are all members of one tribe or another after our immediate families. There is no shame in that- Obama may be able to take advantage of it like JFK did. We'll see huh.

vbspurs said...

Victoria, you have a lot more sympathy for people who don't play by the rules than do I. I hate to sound like a hardass

I'm Miss Hardass, Simon, fear not!

Ironically, in social-democratic countries that so many anti-ID proponents would love to emulate, the need for ID is ABSOLUTE. There's no backtalk there.

In Belgium, it's illegal not to vote. The same, in Brazil. In fact, if you don't vote in Brazil, you'll have your passport privileges suspended. Can you imagine that?

Furthermore, you have to take your National ID card, your CIC (like SSN), and your voters registration card to vote in your precinct. That's three IDs, no if ands or buts.

The rules are equally stringent all over the EU, save for you guessed it my fellow countryman, the UK.

In my Clerk manual, it says Miami-Dade and Broward Co. voters are allowed to combine IDs, to get a picture ID and a signature ID, in case you don't have one which has both...

And guess what? You can present a Costco card as your legal form of ID.

A frikkin' Costco card, people. In the US of A.

What a joke, I'm sorry. Sometimes, it's like people don't understand the ramifications of what they espouse just because it's not PC.

Cheers,
Victoria

madawaskan said...

Yep-the Prius-capitalism it works.

OK -for some reason when I think of the democratic fight so far this song keeps creeping -up-

"Rapture"

Toe to toe
Dancing very close
Barely breathing
Almost comatose
Wall to wall
People hypnotised
And they're stepping lightly
Hang each night in Rapture

Back to back
Sacrailiac
Spineless movement
And a wild attack

Face to face
Sadly solitude
And it's finger popping
Twenty-four hour shopping in Rapture

Fab Five Freddie told me everybody's high
DJ's spinnin' are savin' my mind
Flash is fast, Flash is cool
Francois sez fas, Flashe' no do
And you don't stop, sure shot
Go out to the parking lot
And you get in your car and you drive real far
And you drive all night and then you see a light
And it comes right down and lands on the ground
And out comes a man from Mars
And you try to run but he's got a gun
And he shoots you dead and he eats your head
And then you're in the man from Mars
You go out at night, eatin' cars
You eat Cadillacs, Lincolns too
Mercuries and Subarus
And you don't stop, you keep on eatin' cars
Then, when there's no more cars
You go out at night and eat up bars where the people meet
Face to face, dance cheek to cheek
One to one, man to man
Dance toe to toe
Don't move too slow, 'cause the man from Mars
Is through with cars, he's eatin' bars
Yeah, wall to wall, door to door, hall to hall
He's gonna eat 'em all
Rapture, be pure
Take a tour, through the sewer
Don't strain your brain, paint a train
You'll be singin' in the rain
I said don't stop, do punk rock

Well now you see what you wanna be
Just have your party on TV
'Cause the man from Mars won't eat up bars when the TV's on
And now he's gone back up to space
Where he won't have a hassle with the human race
And you hip-hop, and you don't stop
Just blast off, sure shot
'Cause the man from Mars stopped eatin' cars and eatin' bars
And now he only eats guitars, get up!


You Tube

garage mahal said...

Simon
I'm going to wait to see how this all plays out before I declare anything. I have a feeling it's going to get interesting and I want to see how exactly they plan on pushing her out. She lost the spin war horribly in the press and her camp was truly pathetic. Things like when the popular vote is totaled for comparison purposes [seeing the superdelegates will have to decide this for either candidate], her popular vote in FL is never counted. With just that, they're tied. In Ohio your vote is worth 1/37 of a voter in Alaska, and yet even mentioning the pledged delegate count isn't the best way to determine the true will of the people, you would booed and hissed of the floor.

Seven Machos said...

That was a groundbreaking song. Maybe this will be a groundbreaking campaign.

peter hoh said...

I like Obama. I also like McCain, but a little less. I will not vote for Clinton.

The presidency flipping back and forth between two families is the kind of thing I expect to see in a banana republic.

garage mahal said...

Simon
Here is a breakdown that should make anyone sane person's brain hurt when you look at how the Democratic Party elects its nominee.

former law student said...

This is called rule of law.

A wholly unnecessary law when applied to nonagenarians. But Republicans evidently care little for the rights of the aged who have spent their lives in service to their fellow man.

Simon said...

Garage - well, her popular vote in Fla. has to be counted, because regardless of whether the delegates count or not, those are still votes cast for her. Michigan is more problematic - the other fella wasn't on the ballot, which makes it hard to argue that it was a true contest wherein the votes for Hillary count, I would think.

Victoria - I used to like the idea of mandatory voting, but more and more as I've gotten older, I've come to feel that the state should be ambivalent about whether any given voter turns up. Quite the contrary: I think you ought to have some nominal hurdle to clear before voting, something that indicates you have some level of interest, and since the court's never going to overrule Harper (not that I'm arguing it was necessarily wrongly-decided), voter ID is a good start. The optimal situation is an intelligent, informed and educated electorate that participates fully. The next best option thereafter is not that everybody votes regardless of their familiarity vel non with the issues and regardless that they were coerced or bribed with the result that they voted for the top name in each race.

peter hoh said...

I'm watching Charlie Rose. Doris Kearns Goodwin seems to have aged dramatically since I last saw her. Is she ill?

Seven Machos said...

Voter I.D. law held constitutional; minorities, elderly hardest hit

Could mean nominal fee and trip out of apartment for many seniors

Constitutional law professors seen flailing arm

Mortimer Brezny said...

Polls are closed now in Indiana. Too close to call. But it's 59-41 in her favor with 5% reporting, but they seem to be indicating that the black districts report late.

RACIST!!!!

Seven Machos said...

Also, FLS:

IT'S A COOKBOOK

Simon said...

John Stodder, where are you reading that from Toobin?

Mortimer Brezny said...

Bill and Chelsea both look like they're about to start crying at any moment. Chelsea always looks like that, though.

HOT!!!

Revenant said...

I hope all you Voter ID proponents are happy -- you just disenfranchised a flock of nuns.

In the sense that I "disenfranchise" people who forget to register to vote. I can't say that I miss the votes of people who aren't bright enough to figure out HOW to vote.

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

garage mahal: Interesting article. Someone (perhaps one of y'all) should make a map of the United States based on how much an individual's vote counts for in a given state. So, Alaska gets to be 23 times the size of Ohio, for instance. And then Florida and Michigan are represented as nothing, or maybe a small X. Could be a very striking image. And give it a headline like, "This is what the country looks like, according to the DNC pledged delegate system." And that doesn't even touch on the issue of how the delegates are calculated in the individual states.

Problem is, none of that really matters if she's also behind in the popular vote by all methods of counting it.

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

And if you do that map, make Texas look really weird, by having most of the state really tiny, and a piece of it bulged out. The smallish, Texas-shaped one is the primary, and the big growth is the minority of people who caucused. Find some creative way to do that.

vbspurs said...

Peter, thanks! Carlos Rosa is on at midnight here, so thanks for the timely reminder.

Simon, I don't believe in national IDs. Nor do I believe there should be any hurdle to voting, based on intelligence qualifications, or other standards of that ilk (not that you're really suggesting that! Just saying).

It's the little bit of the libertarian I have inside me. TINY tiny but there it is.

How do I reconcile this with my views on IDs above?

It's because I believe a driver's licence or State ID is no hardship to get, plus it serves an important secondary purpose (it prevents fraud and regulates driving skills).

Fraud is very important in an election, as the two dead guys who tried to vote in each of the elections in my ex-polling station, taught me.

We called them Bernie #1 and Bernie #2. I'm guessing they thought no one would notice...

Cheers,
Victoria

reader_iam said...

FLS:

A wholly unnecessary law when applied to nonagenarians.

Why? Be precise and exact.

But Republicans evidently care little for the rights of the aged who have spent their lives in service to their fellow man.

I call bullshit on that, and most particularly because you decided to attach a party adjective to it.

C'mon, you know you can do better than that. Surely, you know better.

Seven Machos said...

This is actually very Democratic, CAC. The Party perceives a problem and gets a blue-ribbon panel to create a bunch of regulations to solve the problem. Presto! Problem solved until later when we find out that the problem isn't solved at all and, in fact, the regulations have made the problem worse and seemingly more complex.

I mean, this happens any time Democrats get in charge of something, all the time.

Revenant said...

A wholly unnecessary law when applied to nonagenarians.

Kind of like how the income tax law is wholly unnecessary when applied to me. After all, the rest of the country could pick up my share of the tax burden for something like one one-hundredth of a penny per person.

So I guess I don't need to pay taxes. Heck, it is completely unreasonable to expect me to pay taxes.

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

Uh oh...I think she might lose Indiana.

Simon said...

Chris, it's possible - I want to hear more about the Lake County issue that John Stodder referenced. Reading other entries on the blog that garage Mahal linked to, they've noticed that something funny is going on there, too.

Simon said...

That is, not to put too fine a point on it, if Clinton loses Indiana by a suspiciously convenient margin supplied by Lake County, which didn't release any voting information until the rest of the state was called, I think we're justified in getting all Greg Palast about it.

vbspurs said...

Uh oh...I think she might lose Indiana.

Game. Set. Tie-breaker...if she loses it will be impossible to justify even to her supporters, that she stay on.

Really, that would piss me off if I were a Democrat. And I think her chances for another go-'round in 2012 would be irreperably damaged.

Cheers,
Victoria

reader_iam said...

Metaphorically, within the ongoing narrative, she HAS lost Indiana. That would have been true several adjustments of the spread ago (and a couple of hours ago).

But now? At this current minute? At 51-49? She has LOST Indiana, is what she did, for all intents and purposes, in that larger, ongoing narrative. The thread has been dropped, or at least lost, in some crevice or another.

So it goes.

(I think I said a while ago, after the PA pri- ... oh, never mind, never mind at all, at all.)

Lamar63 said...

Just got back from working the polls in Marion County (Indianapolis) and Hillary supporter. Word DEM HQ is that Clinton will lose Indiana. Right now she is up 21,000 votes but not a single Lake County (attached to Chicago) precinct has reported in.

The primary is over tonight. Very interesting dynamics in DEM HQ. Lots of fussing and fighting. Not sure what will happen to Clinton supports in November. The higher-ups hope emotion wioll settle by then. If the general were held in next few weeks many Clinton people would stay home or vote for Mccain.

madawaskan said...

Lake County is reporting a 75% to 25% margin...

Remember how Obama claimed to be able to win or break the tie breaker by virtue of being "next door"...

*ugh*

Revenant said...

It's the little bit of the libertarian I have inside me. TINY tiny but there it is.

I don't get the libertarian objection to national ID. I get that many libertarians are afraid of the government keeping tabs on us, but, um, the government's been keeping tabs on us since the day we were born.

If the government is to provide services, and to accept control by its citizens in the form of voting, then it logically follows that the government needs to be able to tell who the heck the citizens ARE. What's the libertarian case for being able to (a) vote and (b) make use of government benefits... without the government knowing who the hell you are? I just don't get it.

Lamar63 said...

Here comes Lake County. http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/99999999/NEWS05/80326049

Meade said...

Lake County is in and now all that's left is Union County - Clinton country. But I agree with reader_... Clinton is toast. Nighty night sleepy tight.

Seven Machos said...

Rev -- This is pretty crazy, me making this argument to you, but I think these are the issues:

1. We already have a social security card. How is a national I.D. card better? If you want, beef up the social security card.

2. I should be able to opt out of American society to the extent that I want. If I'm homeless, say, or if I want to live in a van in central Montana, that's my right.

3. Having 50 different states doing identifications can increase fraud but it also distributes the power of information, making it less likely that a central government gone awry will be able to turn against the people.

peter hoh said...

I'm open to the idea that Lake County totals are suspect, but what do you make of Obama's conceding early?

vbspurs said...

oh, never mind, never mind at all, at all.)

Who remembers their Sex Pistols?

Never Mind the Bollocks / God Save the Queen

God save the queen,
The fascist regime,
They made you a moron,
Potential H-bomb.

God save the queen,
She ain't no human being.
There is no future,
In England's dreaming.

Don't be told what you want,
Don't be told what you need,
There's no future no future,
No future for you!


Requiem for Hillary...

Cheers,
Victoria

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

So, Obama essentially congratulated Hillary on winning Indiana before all the networks called it, and she might actually end up losing the state. I think he knew what he was doing, there. If she ended up winning, his mentioning it before it was really called would make it that much more anticlimactic. If she lost in the end, this would turn it into a shocking upset, reversed after it was "called," rather than a narrow squeaker.

There's also this ongoing question of why Lake County has been waiting to report. I think there are real questions there. They might be playing a media game there. The mayor of Hammond, which is in that county, reported their results to the county, and the county has been waiting all this time to report those results for no apparent reason.

vbspurs said...

So, Obama essentially congratulated Hillary on winning Indiana before all the networks called it, and she might actually end up losing the state.

Obama lied. Hillary cried.

Mortimer Brezny said...

The mayor of Hammond, which is in that county, reported their results to the county, and the county has been waiting all this time to report those results for no apparent reason.

Had to count absentee ballots. That's the reason.

Lamar63 said...

Lake County always reports last. Its there thing. Lots of talk of fraud but I can't recall any prosecutions.

Obama left Indiana this afternoon to go to NC where his internals should a big night. They also showed him losing Indiana by 5.

Simon said...

Chris said...
"the county has been waiting all this time to report those results for no apparent reason."

Don't be silly. How can they report their results until they know how many votes their man needs? ;)

Lamar63 said...

No. Absentee ballots are distributed to their precinct and counted there.

vbspurs said...

Peter, my word yes. Doris Kearns Goodwin looks like Bill Clinton and she just went on a three-day bender.

Mortimer Brezny said...

No. Absentee ballots are distributed to their precinct and counted there.

You wanted an apparent reason. That's an apparent reason.

As for a real reason, maybe it was payback for release of inaccurate numbers in PA, which led to a 10% victory story even though a final count showed only a single-digit win.

Revenant said...

Seven,

Beefing up the social security card (with a photo, biometric data, and citizenship information) would have the same function as a national ID card, so I don't see the effect there.

I agree that you should be able to opt out of the government if you want to -- but that means no voting, no use of public facilities (e.g. public roads), etc. Otherwise you aren't "opting out", you're just leeching.

As for having 50 different states doing IDs, I don't see the advantage for my safety. The federal government has access to all of the states' driver's license records. The 50-state system ONLY benefits people who want to make fake IDs -- it doesn't provide any protection whatsoever to people who legitimately acquire a real ID.

vbspurs said...

Fox News / Karl Rove doing a projection of the Electoral Votes already.

A splatter of red everywhere. He just needs to take one state, and McCain is in.

Christopher Althouse Cohen said...

Mortimer: All counties have to report absentee ballots. That's not the reason. And counties don't report the final vote totals all at once.

Lamar63 said...

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/05/06/gary_mayor_predicts_possible_i.html

Gary Mayor predicts Obama

Seven Machos said...

In case you are wondering.

vbspurs said...

Fox Panel just waiting on the producers calling it a day. The absentee ballots will be counted tomorrow, apparently!!

Oh boy, shenanigans city.

former law student said...

Why? Be precise and exact.
Generally those who advocate a change in the law must justify it. But I will help out my illogical and unpersuasive colleagues and postulate that requiring voter ID ensures that the voter truly is the person who's registered, and that the person is registered in only one location.

Here, the election official has ensured that the denied voter truly is the person who's registered because they live together, probably for years. They are not going to try to vote in more than one location because they are damn near immobile. They are likely not registered in more than one location because at 98 they probably have been retired to the mother house for a couple of decades -- I assume the rolls are purged at least once a decade.

In the sense that I "disenfranchise" people who forget to register to vote.

dude they registered to vote during the Great Depression. What they neglected to do was keep up their drivers licenses -- macular degeneration can make license renewal difficult.

madawaskan said...

So if the Lake County "trend" continues Obama pulls out the miracle win and wins by what?

A 40,000 vote margin that's if I've got my Gary,Indiana math right...?

6,000 absentee ballots WILL NOT be counted tonight according to mayor of Gary via FOX-in Vegas that's called-

Insurance.

Seven Machos said...

Actually, FLS, what you need to pass a law is over half the votes in the legislature. Justification is nice, and it's usually a byproduct of trying to get those votes, but it's wholly unnecessary.

vbspurs said...

FLS wrote:

probably

In a serious republic, and not a banana republic, there is no room for probably.

Cheers,
Victoria

madawaskan said...

Super Delegates are had by the reverse eagle claw now-

Want to contest the results?

Expose yeeeeaaaarrrrrsss of fraud.

It's OVER.

Hillary is gone.

Your looking at the Democrat nominee-Obama kept it close enough for Lake to eek it out.

They Cooked Clinton.

Seven Machos said...

What a drag it is getting old, especially if you live in Indiana.

I'll only briefly mention here my Aunt who couldn't walk. She always voted. And she never got old.

vbspurs said...

When it's this tight, and there is a chance for fudging, whatever machine is the most powerful and organised (or most corrupt and spidery, given your viewpoint), wins.

I think the Clinton Machine is more powerful, but we'll see.

Seven Machos said...

I don't know if my Aunt had a state ID. I bet she would have gotten one, though. Unlike those lazy nuns.

Lamar63 said...

Very odd not counting the ABs. Gary's demos have changed in the past 10 years. Lots more Hispanics than ever before.

Old math says Lake goes BHO 65-75%

If there is any cheatung I think IN DEMs will br at war and the Repub SoS & Gov will be more than happy to investigate Lake County's every vote.

p.s. Bayh won't be VP for Clinton even if she gets the nom.

(excuse poor writing -- been up since 4:30)

Seven Machos said...

Lamar -- Thanks for the dope.

madawaskan said...

*You're* looking at the Democrat nominee-

reader_iam said...

I do have some concern with regard to some counties, within the larger context.

I also think, within the narrower narrative, that those counties should not have been the issue, or at least not in term of how the narrative was, well, narrated. It's an extension of what I saw in PA, for example.

This is not hostility, people. It's not partisanship (intra or inter). It's observation, based on, well, what I've observed over time, and a a bit of knowledge, based on some experience and, well, knowledge, of the states involved.

FWIW, as far as feelings go (not a particularly useful paradigm in this context, for me and by my lights, and so that is the regard I give them), mine are mixed.

Lamar63 said...

Madawaskan is right. Thet can't afford to contest the votes. Too much to lose.

She's toast

Eli Blake said...

FOX News is reporting that Clinton has cancelled two morning show appearances tomorrow.

Randy (Internet Ronin) said...

I think you are right, Reader. You too, Victoria. (I also think the mayor of Gary is an ass, but that's to be expected in a one-party state (city), as is general incompetence of the ballot counting.)

Lamar: Published reports are saying that all Lake County absentee ballots were being counted by "little old lady" volunteers in a central locatiion, not in the precincts. The first report, 28% showing 75-25 for Obama was all from from Gary, the rest of the county is coming in now.

vbspurs said...

Randy, she has to pull out tomorrow for the Dem's own good.

I want this to go down to the wire, to mess up the Dems, but also the country doesn't need the drama.

Fat lady has sung, Hillary. You're down to 17,000 votes difference.

Ladies know when to say good night, gracefully, so I think I'll take me own advice.

Night guys. It's been...real. :)

Cheers,
Victoria

Randy (Internet Ronin) said...

I agree, Victoria. They can try, but there is no way to spin this to victory. Probably better to suspend her campaign and see what develops.

AJ Lynch said...

Rev & Paladian:

Re ID Cards, did you hear that the Galapagos Islands has imlemented a bio-metric / picture ID of some sort to restrict immigration in order to protect the turtles?

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 223   Newer› Newest»