. April 23, 2008 SouthAmerica: I loved the results of the Pennsylvania primaries. I hope Hillary Clinton is able to take the fight all the way to the Democratic Party convention floor. Hillary and Obama should continue splitting the Democratic Party even further â we probably already have passed the point where either candidate have any chance of winning in November 2008. But they should continue destroying each other chances for the general election. In the mean time Al Gore should stay away from their fight and keep his attention on Global Warming. At this point Al Gore canât irritate any portion of the Democratic Party constituency since he will need to unite the Democratic Party when he becomes the Democratic Party nominee at the convention. At this point I hope Al Gore will keep his mouth shut and stay away from the Democratic Party candidatesâ way in the next 4 months. Please just say something if Howard Dean starts putting pressure on the super delegates for them to pick a candidate before the Democratic convention. Be prepared for the time when you receive the call after you are drafted to be the Democratic Party nominee. Probably there are millions and millions of Americans who still have not given up on you as yet, and our hopes is that you will be drafted at the convention. In the meantime I hope the fight between the current Democratic Party candidates gets even nastier, and make each otherâs constituencies as mad as hell. .
don't forget.. the oligarchs can still tie things up in the courts with mich and fla. it really does look like they want chaos in Denver. with the global warming scam being exposed... i still think the fake call for Gore will be a tough sell. talk about lame.. now they are calling it "climate change"... duh!!!
TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE: HILLARY'S PENNSYLVANIA WIN By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN Published in the New York Post on April 23, 2008. Hillary Clinton refuses to die. Having been given up for dead after losing Iowa, she rebounded in New Hampshire. Then a string of 11 straight consecutive losses - followed by a win in Ohio and a tie (in delegates) in Texas. Now, she's won Pennsylvania. Problem is, it doesn't mean anything. Because of the Democratic Party's arcane proportional-representation rules, her win stands to give her a net gain of 10 to 15 delegates when all is counted. That means that Barack Obama will fall from a lead of 161 in elected delegates to about 145 or so. Big deal. The primaries coming up in the next two weeks - Indiana and North Carolina - are likely to give Obama back a goodly portion of those delegates. By the time all the primaries have been held, after June 3, there is no doubt that Obama will lead by more than 100 elected delegates, and likely 150. From there, it will be an easy route to the nomination. The Democratic superdelegates aren't about to risk a massive and sanguinary civil war by taking the nomination away from the candidate who won more elected delegates. If they ever tried it, we'd see a repeat of the demonstrations that smashed the 1968 Chicago convention and ruined Hubert Humphrey's chances of victory. Clinton won Pennsylvania for two key reasons: Only Democrats could vote in the primary, and the Keystone State electorate is dominated by the elderly, who are staunchly for Clinton. Despite her claims of electability, Hillary has never done well among independent voters. And Obama usually loses the Democrats. Pennsylvania's closed-primary rules gave her a key advantage. Older voters are flocking to Clinton as fears mount of what Obama might do as president mount. But those under 45 - less focused, perhaps, on race - are moving toward Obama. Here, that split helped her. Of the 50 states, only Florida has a higher over-65 proportion of its population. But there's a key difference: Florida's elderly moved there - Pennsylvania's are the folks that are left after the young people moved away. Pennsylvania Democrats, in other words, suffer from future shock. They welcome old, established ways and embrace dynasties happily because they are so familiar. (Look at the Bob Caseys - dad was governor, the son is senator.) But don't expect the open primaries of Indiana and North Carolina to behave like Pennsylvania's geriatrics. Both states are younger, especially North Carolina, and independents can vote in each primary. (North Carolina is where a lot of the young people who fled Pennsylvania winters and job losses ended up). Over the next two weeks, we'll be treated to much hoopla about how the Democratic race is once again up for grabs. Then, on May 5, Hillary's hopes will be dashed once more. And then? After the votes are counted in all the primaries, look for the Gang of Four - Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi, Howard Dean and John Edwards - to join together and issue a challenge to the superdelegates: Make up your minds. Together, they'll probably demand that these appointed delegates commit to one candidate or the other by mid June. And since the primaries will have lifted Obama over 1,900 delegates (elected and super), he'll only need about 100 more, out of about 300 uncommitted superdelegates. Their hands forced, enough superdelegates will go to Obama to put him over the top - he'll be the candidate. That's all, folks.
Yes, Dick Morris makes sense, the guy McCain will trounce in November will be Obama! One key element of this that he missed, however, was that Hillary's win will redouble the intra-Democratic-Party power struggle over the next few weeks/months, helping the Republicans. And we never look a gift donkey in the mouth, right?
Wrong. http://www.fairvote.org/?page=1801 North Carolina is a closed primary. Dick is a dolt. But Al Gore will not be the democratic presidential nominee. Surprised to see this thread is still alive. It's old news that Al ain't interested. Global warming is a farce. While plenty of dolts believe it, the facts will surface if Gore runs - and he knows it. Gore will not accept the nomination, should they be so stooopid as to try to give it to him. A case can be made that the party rulers should choose a neutral third candidate. There are pros and cons, and plenty of trouble to be had. But it won't be Gore.
. April 24, 2008 SouthAmerica: Reply to Tgregg Why are you surprised that this thread still going on? The Democratic Party doesnât have a nominee as yet. The Democratic Party convention is only at the end of August, and we still have 9 states primaries to go. If anything the Democratic Party nomination it is far from over and completely open at this time. Besides we still have 4 months to go until the convention, and a lot of things can happen from now to the end of August. The game is not over until it is over. Al Goreâs potential nomination at the convention is more alive than ever as the current candidates of the Democratic Party kill each other during the primaries. The Democratic Party rules allow for someone to be drafted at the convention and become the nominee even if that person had not participated on the primaries. I am sure that these two candidates are already completely damaged goods and the Democratic Party will not be able to win the general election in November 2008 with either candidate. I doubt that when Al Gore is drafted during the convention that he would turn down the nomination â he has been groomed to be president of the United States his entire life. When the time comes and Al Gore becomes the nominee only idiots on the Democratic Party would not unite behind him for a spectacular victory in November 2008. Al Gore is the Secretariat of the Democratic Party and please just wait until that horse reaches the stretch and is flying passing the finish line and the other horse on the race is not even on the picture. You might be too young to remember when Secretariat won the triple crown, but that horse was the best horse I ever saw racing anywhere â he was a speed machine. After Al Gore is nominated at the convention that is how I picture him winning in November 2008. If you are a Republican you should be afraid to death that Al Gore accepts the nomination, because that would mean not just a defeat for John McCain in November 2008. It would mean to lose in a humiliating fashion when the final results of the election are finally available. If the Democratic Party wants to win in November 2008 then they should nominate Al Gore to run on the general election. On the other hand, if the Democratic Party wants to be humiliated in November 2008 when they manage to lose an election that was on the bag â then the Democratic Party should nominate Hillary or Obama for certain defeat. You donât need to be a rocket scientist here to figure this one out: Hillary or Obama = Humiliating Defeat in November 2008 for the Democratic Party. Al Gore = Spectacular Victory in November 2008 for the Democratic Party with a strong mandate. .
. April 25, 2008 SouthAmerica: If the Democratic Party nominates Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama then the Democratic Party deserve to lose the general election in November 2008, because only an idiot has not realized at this point that these two candidates are completely damaged goods. I never under estimate the incompetence of the power brokers who manipulate the Democratic Party â these people are experts in losing elections that everybody thought was on the bag. Anyway this would be the most costly defeat the Democratic Party ever had because of what it is at stake â the replacement of maybe 2 Supreme Court Judges in the coming years. And a John McCain win in November would mean a Supreme Court radically tilted to the right. Forget about minority rights, womanâs right, and so on, since the new Supreme Court would turn the clock back to the 1940âs in many of these issues, and woman would be lucky if the clock is not turned back even further and they lose the right to vote. I still hope that some of the Democratic Party elders come to their senses and keep enough super delegates from giving their support to either candidate until the Democratic Party convention. And at that point they draft a candidate who can win the election for the Democratic Party in November 2008 - Al Gore. I canât even imagine all the dirty tricks that the Republican Party is cooking up right now for the general election against Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. The Republican Party is going to eat alive either of these 2 candidates â and when you take in consideration how the Democratic Party is split right now and beyond any chance of repair by the November 2008 Election Day. And when you further consider that in an age when a few thousands votes makes the difference if a candidate carries this state and that other swing state â plus a lot of pissed democrats probably would give his protest vote to Ralph Nader or to John McCain â You donât need to be a rocket scientist to figure out today that the Democratic Party is going to be defeated in November 2008. Now there is the winning option for the people with common sense â the Democratic Party drafts Al Gore to be the nominee. At this point Al Gore has everything going on his favor â his global stature as a statesman, his government experience during a good time in US history, his savvy and understanding on how the business world of the future works since he understands so well the role that technology plays, and the impact that it has on the new economy. Al Gore more than anybody else can put in place the policies for the reinvention of the US economy to be environment friendly and create a better world for future generations. This reinvention of the US economy would create millions and millions of new jobs in the United States during the transition period to this new economy. Al Gore understand the importance of education, the importance of national health insurance, and I have no doubt he would be a person that commands immediate respect from the rest of the world â that means people would look up to the US once again, because the world would recognize than the American people would have voted for a person of substance, high character, smart, and a man of vision about the future. I have given a lot of thought about this issue in the last 3 years that is why I think that it is imperative that Al Gore becomes the new president of the United States. If Al Gore is the Democratic Party nominee the Republican machine probably would not have enough time to use their old dirty tricks, and the new player would throw off the Republican Party game plan. In the meantime a fresh Al Gore would sprint to victory in November 2008 â a strong victory will a real mandate. If the Democratic Party is smart and really want to win in November 2008 then there is only one candidate that can deliver that victory â Al Gore. ***** âSelf-Inflicted Confusionâ By PAUL KRUGMAN Published: April 25, 2008 The New York Times After Barack Obamaâs defeat in Pennsylvania, David Axelrod, his campaign manager, brushed it off: âNothing has changed tonight in the basic physics of this race.â He may well be right â but what a comedown. A few months ago the Obama campaign was talking about transcendence. Now itâs talking about math. âYes we canâ has become âNo she canât.â This wasnât the way things were supposed to play out. Mr. Obama was supposed to be a transformational figure, with an almost magical ability to transcend partisan differences and unify the nation. Once voters got to know him â and once he had eliminated Hillary Clintonâs initial financial and organizational advantage â he was supposed to sweep easily to the nomination, then march on to a huge victory in November. Well, now he has an overwhelming money advantage and the support of much of the Democratic establishment â yet he still canât seem to win over large blocs of Democratic voters, especially among the white working class. As a result, he keeps losing big states. And general election polls suggest that he might well lose to John McCain. Whatâs gone wrong? According to many Obama supporters, itâs all Hillaryâs fault. If she hadnât launched all those vile, negative attacks on their hero â if she had just gone away â his aura would be intact, and his mission of unifying America still on track. But how negative has the Clinton campaign been, really? Yes, it ran an ad that included Osama bin Laden in a montage of crisis images that also included the Great Depression and Hurricane Katrina. To listen to some pundits, youâd think that ad was practically the same as the famous G.O.P. ad accusing Max Cleland of being weak on national security. It wasnât. The attacks from the Clinton campaign have been badminton compared with the hardball Republicans will play this fall. If the relatively mild rough and tumble of the Democratic fight has been enough to knock Mr. Obama off his pedestal, what hope did he ever have of staying on it through the general election? Let me offer an alternative suggestion: maybe his transformational campaign isnât winning over working-class voters because transformation isnât what theyâre looking for. From the beginning, I wondered what Mr. Obamaâs soaring rhetoric, his talk of a new politics and declarations that âwe are the ones weâve been waiting forâ (waiting for to do what, exactly?) would mean to families troubled by lagging wages, insecure jobs and fear of losing health coverage. The answer, from Ohio and Pennsylvania, seems pretty clear: not much. Mrs. Clinton has been able to stay in the race, against heavy odds, largely because her no-nonsense style, her obvious interest in the wonkish details of policy, resonate with many voters in a way that Mr. Obamaâs eloquence does not. Yes, I know that there are lots of policy proposals on the Obama campaignâs Web site. But addressing the real concerns of working Americans isnât the campaignâs central theme. Tellingly, the Obama campaign has put far more energy into attacking Mrs. Clintonâs health care proposals than it has into promoting the idea of universal coverage. During the closing days of the Pennsylvania primary fight, the Obama campaign ran a TV ad repeating the dishonest charge that the Clinton plan would force people to buy health insurance they canât afford. It was as negative as any ad that Mrs. Clinton has run â but perhaps more important, it was fear-mongering aimed at people who donât think they need insurance, rather than reassurance for families who are trying to get coverage or are afraid of losing it. No wonder, then, that older Democrats continue to favor Mrs. Clinton. The question Democrats, both inside and outside the Obama campaign, should be asking themselves is this: now that the magic has dissipated, what is the campaign about? More generally, what are the Democrats for in this election? That should be an easy question to answer. Democrats can justly portray themselves as the party of economic security, the party that created Social Security and Medicare and defended those programs against Republican attacks â and the party that can bring assured health coverage to all Americans. They can also portray themselves as the party of prosperity: the contrast between the Clinton economy and the Bush economy is the best free advertisement that Democrats have had since Herbert Hoover. But the message that Democrats are ready to continue and build on a grand tradition doesnât mesh well with claims to be bringing a ânew politicsâ and rhetoric that places blame for our current state equally on both parties. And unless Democrats can get past this self-inflicted state of confusion, thereâs a very good chance that theyâll snatch defeat from the jaws of victory this fall. Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/25/opinion/25krugman.html?hp .
. April 25, 2008 SouthAmerica: Here is another interesting article about Al Gore and they also have a cartoon showing what is going to happen in the general election in November 2008. ***** âGore festâ - The democratic race is getting messy, which can only mean one thing: itâs time to recruit Al Gore By STEVEN STARK April 24, 2008 The Phoenix â¦Therefore, if the Democrats want to have their best chance to win an election in November that six months ago it looked like they couldnât lose, they may have only one option at this point: they can turn to Al Gore. Source: http://thephoenix.com/article_ektid60249.aspx .