Roseanne Barr Hates Oprah

According to what I’ve read and heard by the pundits, superdelegates have no rules, however their “guilt” towards their constituents might influence them to vote according to their districts…however that leaves the superdelegates who are not districted and free from literally representing a certain specific group to vote anyway they want. These superdelegates are heads of the democratic party for each state and local-districts, union leaders which actually help HRC. Most of the superdelegates have committed to HRC so far but they can change their minds and that is the big question…apparently once committed to HRC or Obama and it is a “word of honor” thing, they are less likely to change…that is the reason why Bill clinton and Chelsea have been hitting the phones to superdelegates because according to the punits again, the Clintons have great influence in the political inner circles…which is what Obama is concerned about i.e. his rhetoric about “change”, you don’t want the same old politicians running the government (I’m paraphrasing), I think his underlying tone is the Clintons are so entrenched through the system aka the superdelegates that he doesn’t really want to go in that direction because he has a greater chance of losing…he needs to gather a great majority and widen the distance between him and HRC to show the superdelegates that they have no choice but to vote for him because he “clearly” is the choice and out-distancing her in being able to defeat McCain. However as long as she is neck-in-neck with him, he can’t claim that the superdelegate no rule will be in her favor.
And of course you are right, what is the point of the superdelegates…but same goes for the more often case of the regular state delegates..ie the Gore public win versus the Bush electorate vote in the national elections. IMO, they should get rid of both and just count the public vote and that’s it…politicians years ago decided they wanted more control and devised this back up system to counter the public vote if it didn’t go the politicans way…Its the old premise that tell the public that have a “right” to voice their opinion, “right” to complain, “right” to vote, but even down to the city level, decisions are really decided without regard to public opinion for the majority of the case especially if it doesn’t involve mass public notification. Unless there is massive public outcry, politicians will do what they want to do…so keep the public as little informed and they won’t complain. However with the internet, it’s becoming more and more difficult to do.

How I know this is because I have friends who are elected officials on a city level, campaign and work for senators, congressmen, etc and they know the scoop before the public does, one of my friends had already told me that the candidate she worked for had already confirmed the win for the senate seat way before counting votes was completed. Most established politicians have their own private field polling companies or use their volunteers to do specific polling on a higher political level aka local/district/statewide officials who have ground knowledge and stats on their constituents and districts. The only group politicians cannot control are the independents and there are more and more of them outside traditional party lines and crossing over…and usually it’s because these independents are distrustful and angry over how the system is set up and who the candidates are…of course many articles have been written as op-ed pieces criticizing the system but the conclusions are usually the same…it’s the best one out there.

I don’t know if this is an accurate depiction in all areas, for all elected officials but I do know it was true in two cases where I was privy to be told this. And to be honest these two individuals were active participants and high up with the National Women’s Political Caucas so they had more access to this kind of knowledge.
There has been a low level ground swelling to get rid of the electorate procedure because it doesn’t really make sense in the public eye…what happened to Gore brought the whole question to a peak.

PS I hope I didn’t insult or offend you re: my last post. Religion is a touchy subject for some and if you attend gospel ceremonies through your religious affiliations…my apologies…not a criticism, just an observation on my part…forgive.

FALP, what do you think??? Is he toast?
You know, I think the owner of Fox is a republican. Fox is destroying or trying to destroy BHO and after that it will try to destroy HRC! Fox wants to crown McCain.

Hey, FALP. I thought you’ve left JJ. Hope your computer gets bettter.
Hillary is the underdog. I hope she can get back!
Post in the latest Brad&Angie thread as soon as you’re back online.

Orchid,
so sorry for my horrible error…California does not have 2000 superdelegates…gads, don’t know where that came from. California only has 65 and 1/3 are uncommitted.
You must have freaked when you read that…my apologies…multitasking consequences.

Superdelegates urged to vote how they see fit
Dean says that popular votes shouldn’t be a deciding factor for those who most likely will pick Democratic nominee
By Mark Z. Barabak
LOS ANGELES TIMES
04/02/2008 03:00:30 AM PDT

WASHINGTON — Citing Democratic rules, national committee Chairman Howard Dean on Tuesday said that the superdelegates who are poised to select the party’s presidential nominee are free to back whomever they wish at the end of the primaries, regardless of who leads in the popular vote or pledged delegates.
“They should use whatever yardstick they want,” he said. “That’s what the rules provide for.”

In response to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s suggestion that superdelegates should exercise independent judgment and not feel bound by the standings after June 3 — the day the nominating season ends — Dean replied: “That’s what the rules say, and I enforce the rules.”

He also said that superdelegates are free to weigh the disputed primary results in Florida and Michigan, two states Clinton carried in the absence of campaigning by rival Sen. Barack Obama. The two campaigns have spent weeks wrangling over a plan that would seat delegates from the states, which violated party guidelines by voting earlier than allowed.

Although his comments amounted to a restatement of party rules, Dean’s stance undercut an argument pressed by Obama and his backers. They have said that the candidate who has the most pledged delegates should automatically win the support of any uncommitted superdelegates after the primary balloting ends.

Earlier Tuesday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, appeared to back away from that view.

“These superdelegates have the right to
vote their conscience and who they think would be the better president, or who can win,” she said on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”
.

The expression “it ain’t over until the fat lady sings” comes from one of two sources:
1. a baseball saying, the game isn’t over until it’s over essentially but more likely from
2. an opera saying based on typically the last aria of an opera is sung by the “fat lady”, then the audience knows the opera is over.

This is a fascinating video re: Tim Russet does the numbers state by state re: Clinton and McCain and comes up with a dead heat, then he states that it may go to the House of Representatives to decide!!! I elminiated the http
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23933119#23933119

re: sheri. sheri would probably admit herself she is emotional. Remember when she offended some regulars with her “rant” about lack of focus on the lower ninth by the JP fans was because people didn’t care about poor blacks? I’m paraphrasing because it’s been awhile but that was the gist as I recall it. She is passionate and displays it emotionally.
Most people including JP fans who for the most part are very intelligent and sophisticated and come in all forms. Emotions will blind logic and as we have discussed Obama ’s charisma “works” for the emotional, those lacking a variety of life-experiences aka the young vote and those wanting to believe in something for lack of answers within themselves i.e. those tending towards hope versus reality as “the” answer. After all reality can be ugly but a grounded person will deal with the ugliness and not hope or dream for it to be better. Consider the magnetism of Obama similar to a quasi-religious encounter for those who feel a little lost and helpless with Bush.

438 first and last post @ 04/03/2008 at 2:19 pm

re: sheri. sheri would probably admit herself she is emotional. Remember when she offended some regulars with her “rant” about lack of focus on the lower ninth by the JP fans was because people didn’t care about poor blacks?
——-
No, I don’t know anything about that. So often when I visit JJ, there are a few hundred posts already, and it would take way too long to read them all. I usually start on the last/latest page and read back, and often I don’t read all the way back, or I just pick a page.
There’s nothing wrong with being passionate, and being emotional
shouldn’t stop you from debating, but stick to the subject. She didn’t.
In the middle of our argument about Obama having gone to an Islamic school in Indonesia, she said, “Have you met Hillary? ???

Anyway, that’s over. I told her she doesn’t have to check anymore, because Obama himself said in his book that he (also) went to a predominantly Islamic school in Indonesia. Why do his people not want voters to know this?

Yes, Obama is charismatic. That’s how he attracts voters. I never knew the changes he is proposing, until I found the site

http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com

The changes he wants to make are radical. Good luck to him.
I wonder how many voters would agree to all that in the general election, if he is the candidate.
It’s most unfortunate that Democrats have to choose between two firsts (first woman or first African-American) to face McCain.
Voters didn’t know how Bush was going to be. Now they do and regret picking him!

Remember Geraldine Ferraro getting in trouble for what she said? Well, I just heard that Obama himself said in 2005 that his race was an advantage to him…….

Both HRC and BHO want to withdraw the troops from Iraq. I agree with Angie. They should stay there, not to fight, but to help people.
The coalition should rebuild the infrastructure they have destroyed, help refugees move back and resettle in their country, etc.

Just watched Rim Russet’s video. Very interesting.

Hi Orchid,
NYTimes article for you…signs of a change in the trend? I had to cut off the end, it was too long to post here since I am the “awaiting moderation” queen as verified from above…but the gist is here.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/04/us/politics/04campaign.html?ei=5087&em=&en=8d54d037b5e28a75&ex=1207454400&pagewanted=print

April 4, 2008
Obama’s Support Softens in Poll, Suggesting a Peak Has Passed
By ADAM NAGOURNEY and MEGAN THEE

WASHINGTON — Senator Barack Obama’s support among Democrats nationally has softened over the last month, particularly among men and upper-income voters, as voters have taken a slightly less positive view of him than they did after his burst of victories in February, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

The survey suggests that Mr. Obama, Democrat of Illinois, may have been at something of a peak in February, propelled by a string of primary and caucus victories over Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, and that perceptions of him are settling down.

Mr. Obama’s favorability rating among Democratic primary voters has dropped seven percentage points, to 62 percent, since the last Times/CBS News survey, in late February. While that figure is by any measure high, the decline came in a month during which he endured withering attacks from Mrs. Clinton and responded to reports that his former pastor had made politically inflammatory statements from his church’s pulpit in Chicago.

Still, the events of the last month do not appear to have fundamentally altered the race for the party’s nomination or provided what Mrs. Clinton’s campaign has been seeking: evidence of a collapse in Mr. Obama’s standing or an overwhelming preference voiced for Mrs. Clinton by Democratic voters in polls, developments that could be used to persuade uncommitted superdelegates to sign on with her.

The poll showed that Mr. Obama now leads Senator John McCain of Arizona, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, 47 percent to 42 percent; his lead was 50 percent to 38 percent in late February, when Mr. McCain still faced primary opposition from Mike Huckabee. The latest poll shows Mrs. Clinton leading Mr. McCain, 48 percent to 43 percent, in a similar match-up.

Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama are now effectively tied among Democratic voters, with 46 percent saying they want the party to nominate Mr. Obama, compared with 43 percent for Mrs. Clinton. In late February, 54 percent of Democrats said they wanted Mr. Obama to win the nomination, compared with 38 percent for Mrs. Clinton.

Mr. Obama’s lead among men has disappeared during that period. In February, 67 percent of men wanted the party to nominate him compared with 28 percent for Mrs. Clinton. Now 47 percent back him, compared with 42 percent for her, a difference within the poll’s margin of error. Similarly, his lead has shrunk among whites, voters making more than $50,000 annually and voters under age 45.

Long time coming til June.

442 first and last post @ 04/04/2008 at 1:16 pm
——-
So many polls with different results. You’re right. It’s a long time till June. Especially in politics!
The Bosnia story has hurt her, but have people seen Obama’s list of
lies? The press is not interested in the audacityofhypocrisy website because they are pro Obama. They concentrate on the Bosnia story.

People who are against Obama are called racist, but what about Obama himself. I found the following post.

*
Listen up!
Quote directly from “Dreams of My Father”………..Obama’s words not mine.

“I ceased to advertise my mother’s race at age 12 or 13 when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites. I found solace in nustsing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother’s race.”

That’s what he thinks of his white side. His words, not mine.
“WORDS MATTER” - ANOTHER OF OBAMA’S QUOTES.
Now tell me he’s not the one that is a racist. You can’t deny it or cut it any other way.
*

Is ‘nustsing’ a word? I guess the poster intended to type ‘nursing.’ ???

I saw on TV that black superdelegates who are for Obama are now putting pressure on black superdelegates who are for Clinton!
This is quite a fight. Very interesting, but it must be stressful and draining. Btw, I’m glad Nancy Pelosi changed her mind!

Until AJ gives birth or at least until a new thread, there is not much JP news to discuss, so I check in here and in the other “politics thread.”

Orchid,
isn’t this ridiculous? I’ve tried posting the article using two different browsers, splitting it in half, posting only the link…never say die…onward.

Earlier Tuesday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) appeared to back away from that view.

“These superdelegates have the right to vote their conscience and who they think would be the better president, or who can win,” Pelosi said on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”

A spokesman later denied that Pelosi was shifting her view.

“Her position all along has been that these individual superdelegates will consider many issues when making a choice,” Nadeam Elshami said. “However, if it is perceived that the superdelegates as a whole overturn the will of the people, that would be harmful to the Democratic Party.”

again trying with link only
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-superdelegates2apr02,1,7387579.story
eliminated the http