Today's Quote of the Day...
Reminds me of my safari in Africa. Somebody forgot the corkscrew and for several days we had to live on nothing but food and water.
-W.C. Fields
Well, we can safely assume that if W.C. Fields were still alive today, he, as a wine drinker, would be voting Democratic.
How do I know? A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll of course.
Anyway, thought you might find that interesting. I wonder if they had done a further survey about the types of beers people drink if the McCain numbers would have been consistant throughout all of them. I'm betting not.
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Thoughts on Ferraro's Comments
Comments made by former Vice Presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro have stirred up some controversy as well as brought race back into the race. Ferraro claimed that the only reason Obama is the democratic front runner is that he is a black man.
I personally believe that these comments are racist, although Ferraro has denied that and defended her claims. I'm not saying that Ferraro is a racist, merely that her comments are racist. I don't believe that the reason that Barack Obama is in the position that he is in has that much to do with his race. Does his race play some part of it? Sure, it's possible that part of the appeal of Obama is in the fact that he is a black man, but it is far more then that. I've spoken fairly extensively in this blog the reasons why I (a white male) support Barack Obama, and none of those reasons have anything to do with the color of his skin.
Earlier in the campaign, Bill Clinton compared this run by Obama to the 1984 run of Jesse Jackson (coincidently the same election in which Ferraro was chosen as the Vice Presidental mate to Walter Mondale). That comment raised some racial concerns as well and was quickly repudiated by both sides. I bring it up again to show the diferences between Obama's run for the nomination and that earlier run by Jackson. Jesse Jackson, like many people who run without much hope of winning, was running to bring notice to a particular issue. Barack Obama is running to win. His being black has nothing to do with it. Jackson, on the other hand, probably ran, in part, to show that a black man could run for president.
If there was truth to Ferraro's comments, then any particular black man could have been, and in fact would be had they run, in this exact position. This strikes me as "patently absurd" to use Senator Obama's words. Barack Obama is the right person at the right time. He's saying the right things and striking a cord with the American people that needed to be struck. The fact that he also happens to be black is not what has put him in this position and to imply that such is the case is a racist thing to do. I don't think that Ferraro is a racist, but her comments most certainly were.
I personally believe that these comments are racist, although Ferraro has denied that and defended her claims. I'm not saying that Ferraro is a racist, merely that her comments are racist. I don't believe that the reason that Barack Obama is in the position that he is in has that much to do with his race. Does his race play some part of it? Sure, it's possible that part of the appeal of Obama is in the fact that he is a black man, but it is far more then that. I've spoken fairly extensively in this blog the reasons why I (a white male) support Barack Obama, and none of those reasons have anything to do with the color of his skin.
Earlier in the campaign, Bill Clinton compared this run by Obama to the 1984 run of Jesse Jackson (coincidently the same election in which Ferraro was chosen as the Vice Presidental mate to Walter Mondale). That comment raised some racial concerns as well and was quickly repudiated by both sides. I bring it up again to show the diferences between Obama's run for the nomination and that earlier run by Jackson. Jesse Jackson, like many people who run without much hope of winning, was running to bring notice to a particular issue. Barack Obama is running to win. His being black has nothing to do with it. Jackson, on the other hand, probably ran, in part, to show that a black man could run for president.
If there was truth to Ferraro's comments, then any particular black man could have been, and in fact would be had they run, in this exact position. This strikes me as "patently absurd" to use Senator Obama's words. Barack Obama is the right person at the right time. He's saying the right things and striking a cord with the American people that needed to be struck. The fact that he also happens to be black is not what has put him in this position and to imply that such is the case is a racist thing to do. I don't think that Ferraro is a racist, but her comments most certainly were.
Monday, March 10, 2008
I Was Going to Post Something Non-Political, But Then...
I felt like doing something a little different today, since this blog has been so dominated by politics lately. I decided to check and see what the trusty Quote of the Day had to say, and I got this, which shows that the world is not ready for me to stop the Political Talk as of yet.
Today's Quote Of The Day...
"If we don't change direction soon, we'll end up where we're going."
-Professor Irwin Corey
I don't make these up, folks. I get them right here.
You can't tell me that this isn't a sign, a sign that retrospective reflections needs to continue its support of Senator Obama across the world wide web.
This weekend saw the Wyoming caucus, and another big win for Obama, who typically does better in the caucuses then Clinton has thus far. Tuesday is the Mississippi primary, and a chance for Barack Obama to fully regain the lead he had going into last Tuesday.
In other news, the Democratic party continues to look for ways to re-do the Michigan and Florida votes in a fair and affordable way. One possibility appears to be a mail-in vote, but there are problems to that as well it seems. This continues to be the most interesting story going on the Democratic side as Obama and Clinton look to try and win the nomination.
On the Republican side, McCain has won the requisite number of delegates and recieved an endorsement from President Bush (no word on whether he actually wanted it, however). Mike Huckabee who had been performing well in Republican races since Super Tuesday officially ended his campaign last Tuesday after McCain reached his magic number, apparently deciding that both math and miracles were against him now. Ron Paul, on the other hand, vowed that his campaign is never over, saying that he disagrees with McCain on many issues and is not likely to support him. Could he possibly be inclined to enter the race as a third party candidate (or maybe fourth party considering Nader has already thrown his hat into the ring)? Something else to watch, anyway.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Not Too Much To Say, But A Few Things
I'm not really going to talk about the quote of the day today, because it's a little dark, but I'm putting it up anyway. Do with it what you will.
"A friend is someone who will help you move. A real friend is someone who will help you move a body."
-unknown
Yeah, I wouldn't take credit for it either.
On to some happier news, yesterday I talked about Barack Obama speaking in the city of Houston, well, my cousin and his family went. To see some great pictures of them Ba-Rocking the Vote there you can visit Erica's blog fifth of forever. The picture of Oliver, their beautiful baby, actually made the local FOX news. Check it out here, Oliver's about halfway through.
I'm excited that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton will be debating in the great city of Austin tomorrow and even more excited that Texas is more then just an afterthought in the Presidential Election.
I'd write more today, but I'm about blogged out due to my novel length post on the Top Ten Films of 2007, feel free to check that out if you're interested.
"A friend is someone who will help you move. A real friend is someone who will help you move a body."
-unknown
Yeah, I wouldn't take credit for it either.
On to some happier news, yesterday I talked about Barack Obama speaking in the city of Houston, well, my cousin and his family went. To see some great pictures of them Ba-Rocking the Vote there you can visit Erica's blog fifth of forever. The picture of Oliver, their beautiful baby, actually made the local FOX news. Check it out here, Oliver's about halfway through.
I'm excited that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton will be debating in the great city of Austin tomorrow and even more excited that Texas is more then just an afterthought in the Presidential Election.
I'd write more today, but I'm about blogged out due to my novel length post on the Top Ten Films of 2007, feel free to check that out if you're interested.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Primaries Plus Democrats in TEXAS?!?!?
The trouble with weather forecasting is that it's right too often for us to ignore it and wrong too often for us to rely on it.
-Patrick Young
Today's quote of the day is rather appropriate, I think. But the forecasting that I'm thinking of today is political not weather.
If you think back to June of 2007, back before everyone knew that Clemens was a steroid user, political forecasters foresaw a couple of things for sure, John McCain was done, the Republican Primary would probably go to Rudy Gulianni, but if Fred Thompson entered the race, he could become a viable candidate, and on the Democratic side, Barack Obama was interesting, for sure, but the race would be over very quickly with Hillary Clinton as the Democratic nominee.
Well, as we travel from the past back to the present, we can see that Gulianni and Thompson are both out of the race, and with the backing of Mitt Romney and former President Bush, McCain should have the nomination sown up by early next month at the latest. Meanwhile, on the Democratic side, while prognosticators where correct in regards to the interest the nation has taken in Senator Obama, they handed Senator Clinton victory a little too quickly.
Sticking with the idea given us by Mr. Young in the quote of the day, we've seen many projections and polls in politics that have proved to be false. As recently as the New Hampshire Primary, polls showed Hillary Clinton trailing, and yet, she won the Primary.
As it stands right now, Senators Clinton and Obama are polling neck and neck in Wisconsin (the State of Cheese). A victory here would be huge for Clinton as just last week she was given no chance. She appeared to be following a "keep your eyes on the big states" type of strategy looking ahead towards Texas and Ohio next Tuesday and Pennsylvania on April 22nd, conceding everything in between to Obama. Her strategy shifted, however, perhaps due to the critiques her plan was recieving throughout the media, and she began to spend some time and money in Wisconsin.
At the very least, she's made things interesting again. I'm beginning to believe more and more that the Democratic nomination will not be decided until the Democratic convention in August.
Texas remains important, though. If Senator Clinton pulls out a victory in Wisconsin tonight, then getting less delegates from Texas then Senator Obama doesn't become as big of an issue as it would if she gets swept out of February after Super Tuesday.
The interesting thing about Texas is the fact that Clinton could win the overall vote in Texas, but be awarded less Texas Delegates then Obama. The reason for this is that the Democratic delegates are weighted by the amounts of Democratic voters in the county in the last election for Governer. A county in which 75% of the vote went Democratic will award more delegates then a place where only 25% of the vote went Democratic. So, if you're a Democrat in Texas, your lonely vote for Chris Bell might actually have meant something after all. What makes this important is that in that election, the areas with a strong Latino presence, Hillary Clinton's strong constituancy, are in primarily Republican counties.
You may recall the redistricting scandal a few years back when the Republican controlled State Congress redrew the voting lines primarily to break up the strong Latino voting districts (which voted primarilly Democratic) and placed them as smaller pieces into largely Republican districts, removing some seats from Democrats. This is the main reason why the areas with Latino voters will have a smaller number of delegates to give then other areas, areas with younger, more affluent, and better educated voters, and areas with a large number of African Americans, all of whom tend to vote in larger numbers for Barack Obama. Add to that the fact that polls now have Obama nearly spliting the woman's vote and the elderly vote with Clinton, the gender and age group that she used to dominate, and Clinton's one remaining strength (the Latino vote) is less of a strength then one might have originally thought it would be in Texas. So while Senator Clinton is counting on the large number of Latino voters in Texas to propell her to victory here, the delegates will be larger in the areas where Senator Obama has the edge, meaning Clinton might win the state, but Obama's delegate lead will still grow.
But, like I said at the beginning, polls and predictions can often be wrong, at least often enough for us to be stupid to put our faith in them completely, but they also are right often enough for them to be worth paying attention to.
Either way, the fact that today in the city of Houston, Barack Obama will be giving his post primary speech in the Toyata Center excites me. Last week, Hillary Clinton was in El Paso. Thursday they will be debating in Austin. How crazy is this, Democrats who are running for President are campaining in Texas? W.'s state?
Enjoy it while it lasts Texas Democrats, because things like this don't happen too often around here.
-Patrick Young
Today's quote of the day is rather appropriate, I think. But the forecasting that I'm thinking of today is political not weather.
If you think back to June of 2007, back before everyone knew that Clemens was a steroid user, political forecasters foresaw a couple of things for sure, John McCain was done, the Republican Primary would probably go to Rudy Gulianni, but if Fred Thompson entered the race, he could become a viable candidate, and on the Democratic side, Barack Obama was interesting, for sure, but the race would be over very quickly with Hillary Clinton as the Democratic nominee.
Well, as we travel from the past back to the present, we can see that Gulianni and Thompson are both out of the race, and with the backing of Mitt Romney and former President Bush, McCain should have the nomination sown up by early next month at the latest. Meanwhile, on the Democratic side, while prognosticators where correct in regards to the interest the nation has taken in Senator Obama, they handed Senator Clinton victory a little too quickly.
Sticking with the idea given us by Mr. Young in the quote of the day, we've seen many projections and polls in politics that have proved to be false. As recently as the New Hampshire Primary, polls showed Hillary Clinton trailing, and yet, she won the Primary.
As it stands right now, Senators Clinton and Obama are polling neck and neck in Wisconsin (the State of Cheese). A victory here would be huge for Clinton as just last week she was given no chance. She appeared to be following a "keep your eyes on the big states" type of strategy looking ahead towards Texas and Ohio next Tuesday and Pennsylvania on April 22nd, conceding everything in between to Obama. Her strategy shifted, however, perhaps due to the critiques her plan was recieving throughout the media, and she began to spend some time and money in Wisconsin.
At the very least, she's made things interesting again. I'm beginning to believe more and more that the Democratic nomination will not be decided until the Democratic convention in August.
Texas remains important, though. If Senator Clinton pulls out a victory in Wisconsin tonight, then getting less delegates from Texas then Senator Obama doesn't become as big of an issue as it would if she gets swept out of February after Super Tuesday.
The interesting thing about Texas is the fact that Clinton could win the overall vote in Texas, but be awarded less Texas Delegates then Obama. The reason for this is that the Democratic delegates are weighted by the amounts of Democratic voters in the county in the last election for Governer. A county in which 75% of the vote went Democratic will award more delegates then a place where only 25% of the vote went Democratic. So, if you're a Democrat in Texas, your lonely vote for Chris Bell might actually have meant something after all. What makes this important is that in that election, the areas with a strong Latino presence, Hillary Clinton's strong constituancy, are in primarily Republican counties.
You may recall the redistricting scandal a few years back when the Republican controlled State Congress redrew the voting lines primarily to break up the strong Latino voting districts (which voted primarilly Democratic) and placed them as smaller pieces into largely Republican districts, removing some seats from Democrats. This is the main reason why the areas with Latino voters will have a smaller number of delegates to give then other areas, areas with younger, more affluent, and better educated voters, and areas with a large number of African Americans, all of whom tend to vote in larger numbers for Barack Obama. Add to that the fact that polls now have Obama nearly spliting the woman's vote and the elderly vote with Clinton, the gender and age group that she used to dominate, and Clinton's one remaining strength (the Latino vote) is less of a strength then one might have originally thought it would be in Texas. So while Senator Clinton is counting on the large number of Latino voters in Texas to propell her to victory here, the delegates will be larger in the areas where Senator Obama has the edge, meaning Clinton might win the state, but Obama's delegate lead will still grow.
But, like I said at the beginning, polls and predictions can often be wrong, at least often enough for us to be stupid to put our faith in them completely, but they also are right often enough for them to be worth paying attention to.
Either way, the fact that today in the city of Houston, Barack Obama will be giving his post primary speech in the Toyata Center excites me. Last week, Hillary Clinton was in El Paso. Thursday they will be debating in Austin. How crazy is this, Democrats who are running for President are campaining in Texas? W.'s state?
Enjoy it while it lasts Texas Democrats, because things like this don't happen too often around here.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Thoughts on Politics
This is always a fascinating time for me, when the world pays attention to our (as in these United States of America) process of electing our officials, and specifically, the race to elect the next "Most Powerful Man in the World". The reason that this election in particular is so fascinating is that there is the possibility that the next "Most Powerful Man in the World" won't actually be a man.
Yes, we are witnessing history in the making, as the Democratic Nominee for President of the United States will for the first time ever on either side of the political aisle, either be a woman (Hillary Clinton) or a black man (Barack Obama).
Would anyone have believed this possible just a few short years ago?
Meanwhile, John McCain appears to be the presumptive Republican nominee, but many Republicans who consider themselves especially "Conservative" aren't very fond of him, propelling Mike Huckabee, a former Southern Baptist minister, into a few big primary wins and a few other surprisingly close races.
Therefore, the Republican race is staying interesting as well. Sure it doesn't have history backing it the way that the Democratic race does, but it certainly has its fair share of drama.
McCain is going to win the nomination on the Republican side, it would take a miracle for him not to. (Although I did enjoy the Huckabee quote, "I didn't major in math in college, I majored in miracles.") The question becomes, when he does win the nomination does he add on a very conservative running mate to appease the Republican base, change his stance on the issues that bother the conservatives the most, or decide that he doesn't need the conservatives at all (which would either fracture the Republican party or cause them to run a super conservative third party canidate)? These questions make the Republican situation fun to watch.
Besides history on the Democratic side, there is the question of Super Delegates. In order to win the Democratic nomination, you need a total of 2,025 delagates, won primarily by the votes cast in Caucases and Primaries. However, there are also 796 Super Delegates (generally Democratic members of Congress, Governers, National Comittee Members, and Party Leaders) who are free to back whomever they choose. Due to how close the race is (at this posting, Obama leads Clinton 1,096 to 977 not counting the Super Delegates) it is unlikely that either canidate will win the requisite number of delagates through the primary process, meaning that ultimately it will be the Super Delagates that decide this election. If Obama continues to hold on to his lead based on the voting public, but the Super Delagates propell Clinton to victory, the Democrats could be faced with a party fracturing possibility as well.
I'll especially be watching the results March 4th in Ohio and Texas (where I am a registered voter and will be exercising my political right). If Hillary Clinton doesn't win both of those states, it will be very hard for her to continue her campaign. If she does win them both, we very likely could be looking at a situation where the Super Delagates decide the election.
Whether you normally follow politics or not, whether you think that they are all a bunch of overpayed publicity hounds or whether you think that they actually care about the people they represent, you can't deny that this is some high drama, much better then the reality shows that are so prevalent across the television landscape. At least it is in my opinion.
Yes, we are witnessing history in the making, as the Democratic Nominee for President of the United States will for the first time ever on either side of the political aisle, either be a woman (Hillary Clinton) or a black man (Barack Obama).
Would anyone have believed this possible just a few short years ago?
Meanwhile, John McCain appears to be the presumptive Republican nominee, but many Republicans who consider themselves especially "Conservative" aren't very fond of him, propelling Mike Huckabee, a former Southern Baptist minister, into a few big primary wins and a few other surprisingly close races.
Therefore, the Republican race is staying interesting as well. Sure it doesn't have history backing it the way that the Democratic race does, but it certainly has its fair share of drama.
McCain is going to win the nomination on the Republican side, it would take a miracle for him not to. (Although I did enjoy the Huckabee quote, "I didn't major in math in college, I majored in miracles.") The question becomes, when he does win the nomination does he add on a very conservative running mate to appease the Republican base, change his stance on the issues that bother the conservatives the most, or decide that he doesn't need the conservatives at all (which would either fracture the Republican party or cause them to run a super conservative third party canidate)? These questions make the Republican situation fun to watch.
Besides history on the Democratic side, there is the question of Super Delegates. In order to win the Democratic nomination, you need a total of 2,025 delagates, won primarily by the votes cast in Caucases and Primaries. However, there are also 796 Super Delegates (generally Democratic members of Congress, Governers, National Comittee Members, and Party Leaders) who are free to back whomever they choose. Due to how close the race is (at this posting, Obama leads Clinton 1,096 to 977 not counting the Super Delegates) it is unlikely that either canidate will win the requisite number of delagates through the primary process, meaning that ultimately it will be the Super Delagates that decide this election. If Obama continues to hold on to his lead based on the voting public, but the Super Delagates propell Clinton to victory, the Democrats could be faced with a party fracturing possibility as well.
I'll especially be watching the results March 4th in Ohio and Texas (where I am a registered voter and will be exercising my political right). If Hillary Clinton doesn't win both of those states, it will be very hard for her to continue her campaign. If she does win them both, we very likely could be looking at a situation where the Super Delagates decide the election.
Whether you normally follow politics or not, whether you think that they are all a bunch of overpayed publicity hounds or whether you think that they actually care about the people they represent, you can't deny that this is some high drama, much better then the reality shows that are so prevalent across the television landscape. At least it is in my opinion.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
