Politics News

Ernie Fitzpatrick asked:


We’ve had a sub-prime meltdown in the market that’s led to a financial markets meltdown, but the Feds are giving away money to prevent a Wall Street meltdown. So, here’s the question of the day. Is there anything that can be done to prevent a complete Clinton meltdown. Or is it too late for a modern day resurrection?

On the West coast it was Bill Clinton doing his red-faced, finger-pointing, and neck vein exploding act! Bubba was on the West coast trying to woo some super delegates. But guess what happened?

According to those at the meeting, Clinton, who flew in from Chicago with bags under his eyes, was classic old Bill at first, charming and making small talk with the 15 or so delegates who gathered in a room behind the convention stage. But as the group moved together for the perfunctory photo, Rachel Binah, a former Bill Richardson delegate who now supports Hillary Clinton, told Bill how “sorry” she was to have heard former Clinton campaign manager James Carville call Richardson a “Judas” for backing Obama.

It was as if someone pulled the pin from a grenade! That’s Bubba again.

“Five times to my face (Richardson) said that he would never do that,” a red-faced, finger-pointing Clinton erupted. The former president then went on a tirade that ran from the media’s unfair treatment of Hillary to questions about the fairness of the votes in state caucuses that voted for Obama. It ended with him asking delegates to imagine what the reaction would be if Obama was trailing by just 1 percent and people were telling him to drop out.

“It was very, very intense,” said one attendee. “Not at all like the Bill of earlier campaigns.” Bill just isn’t himself these days of is it that the Democrats never saw the real bill, the kill Bill personality that Dick Morris has mentioned that he had experienced: even having been tackled by Bubba!

Back on the East side of the country, it seems as though Hillary was having a poll meltdown in Pennsylvania. On Tuesday it was reported that her one-time 26 point lead which had dropped to 15 points a month ago was now just 5 points according to a Rasmussen poll.

But on Wednesday the latest Public Policy Polling survey had Obama up 45-43%! That’s a major meltdown for Hillary and major Obama momentum!

But of course we have almost three more weeks in which anything can happen! While the numbers are nbot out, nor official, it appears that Obama kept his advertising budget lead with what’s rumored to be $30 million to $20 million advantage for March donations. We’ll know officially in a few more days.

Meltdown does seem like a proper description of the overall Clinton campaign.

James William Smith asked:


Hillary Clinton’s campaign for the Democratic Party Presidential nomination has been over since early March. However, during the last two months, the Clinton campaign has exploited some very dubious Democratic primary election rules and a compliant media which profits from an uncertain Presidential race, to continue to run her failed Presidential campaign.
It is likely that both Clintons have realized for several months that Hillary Clinton would not be the Democratic Party nominee in 2008. In addition to craving the power of elected office, the Clintons are, if nothing else, very politically astute. So why does Mrs. Clinton continue her futile 2008 campaign? The answer to that question is becoming increasingly apparent with each passing day. She is using it as a political platform to launch her next campaign for the Presidency in 2012.
Make no mistake that at the right political time, after all the primaries and caucuses end in June, she will concede the 2008 Democratic party nomination to Barack Obama. Her concession speech will occur before the Democratic convention but only after all the delegates from Michigan and Florida have been seated.
In her speech, she will say that she is withdrawing from this close election for the good of the party and that she is acting for the high purpose of party unity. She will also say that she has stayed in the race to insure that the interests of every delegate in Florida and Michigan are treated properly.
Of course, prior to her public concession speech, she will have secured from the Obama campaign her own prime time televised speech at the Democratic convention and a pledge to absorb her campaign’s multi million dollar debt. Her reward for finally acknowledging the reality of her election defeat will be several more months of positive political visibility and an improvement in her finances to pursue a future campaign.
In addition she will experience the good will of a Democratic Party trying to avoid a divisive August Democratic convention. She will also be seen fighting for the victims of the Democratic primary rules in the states of Michigan and Florida. Overall, it is a 2008 political ending with the potential to launch another Presidential campaign for her in the future.
However, after the Democratic convention, Hillary Clinton will need some political luck in the fall. The truth is that she needs Barack Obama to lose the November Presidential election. His defeat cannot be traced back to either Hillary or Bill Clinton in any way. Surely, there will be many Clinton promises to campaign hard for Obama, but the actual effort by them for the Obama campaign will surely be constrained as it was for Democratic candidate John Kerry four years ago.
Two terms of Barack Obama in the White House and in control of the Democratic Party would leave both Clintons on the political outside looking in. In eight years, Hillary Clinton would probably be too old to seriously challenge for the Presidency, since she would be sixty nine years of age in the year 2016. Therefore, a Barack Obama victory in November 2008 would end for good the Presidential hopes of Hillary Rodham Clinton.
However, the outlook for the Clinton’s is much improved with a John McCain election victory in November. In fact, four years of Republican John McCain in the White House would provide one final opportunity for Mrs. Clinton to campaign for the nation’s highest office in the next Presidential election.
In 2012, John McCain would be celebrating his seventy sixth birthday. It is very likely that he would not run for a second term in office at that age. If he did, his advanced age would certainly be a major campaign issue. It is also very likely that with Republican, John McCain, in the White House, the 2012 election would once again provide a wide open field for Mrs. Clinton as the potential Democratic nominee.
Many mainstream political pundits are speculating that Mrs. Clinton may be offered the spot of Vice President on the 2008 Democratic ticket. The truth is that it is hard to see how such a ticket helps either candidate. In fact, such a ticket could create several major problems in the fall for the Obama campaign. First, it would bring the Clintons’ political baggage into the November campaign. Remember, she is currently viewed as untrustworthy in current public opinion polls by 6 of every 10 voters. Next, it would be hard to keep her husband focused on the campaign trail. He is a campaign trail liability as was in evidence in the recent Democratic primaries. In addition, both Clintons would probably upstage Barack Obama throughout the fall campaign and even into his first term of office in the White House.
It is also unclear what Hillary Clinton actually brings to the Democratic ticket for Obama. The fact is that Hillary Clinton’s primary base of support is white Democratic women. It is a voting demographic which should vote for Barack Obama without her on the ticket anyway. In addition, having Hillary Clinton as a running mate would compromise the Obama campaign of change while adding little actual experience in the area of United States foreign policy.
The Clintons’ thirst for a return to the White House is still clearly evident. However, the end of Hillary Clinton’s 2008 Presidential campaign is near. Her current political motivation is to position herself in defeat with a future Presidential campaign in mind. If Barack Obama loses in the fall general election, her next campaign for the Presidency in 2012 will have already begun.

Ernie Fitzpatrick asked:


It’s a modern-day “rags to riches” story. If you ever wondered why a person would put them through the rigors and the hell of an election, now you know. The Hill and Bill team didn’t own a home, had almost no net worth when they came to Washington in 1992. And for eight years they lived on a meager $350,000 a year. But, sicne leaving the White House, together they have eared $109,000,000.00! Cinton income is good baby!

On the same day that Hillary proposed creating a cabinet-level position devoted to ending poverty, Hillary Clinton and her husband reported earning more than $109 million over eight years in newly released tax data. Now we know the following-

>They paid $33,000,000 in taxes

>They made $30,000,000 off the book royalties

>They gave $10,000 to charties (all to their own!)

Campaign funding is such a delicate matter. So, now we don’t know.

The campaign released tax returns from 2000 through 2006 and gave highlights from their 2007 return. The Clintons have asked for an extension for filing their 2007 tax returns, citing the dissolution of a blind trust last year. The itemized earnings the Clinton campaign provided in its summary only added up to $94 million, leaving $15 million unaccounted for. Wonder why the $15,000,000 or thereabouts is left unknown? When it comes to the Clinton’s one has to wonder don’t they!

Gurumurthy Kalyanaram asked:


We (consumers) make choices based on their reference points/anchor points. Or put it differently, we evaluate our choices as prospects given our own reference frame based on past experience and other information. Given a particular situation (prospect) with two potential but very different choices/options, two individuals may adopt the two different choices and both would be considered rational and reasonable by the individuals because their choices are consistent with their reference framework and experiences. Colloquially, sometimes we call this as “optics.”

Two behavior psychologists (Kahneman and Tverskey, 1979) discussed this at length and proposed a general theory to explain choices made by human beings. Kalyanaram and Little (1994) demonstrated the application of this theory to marketing, particularly, to pricing.

The prospect theory is applicable to the current Democratic party presidential contest too. Both Senators Obama and Clinton earnestly believe that they have a reasonable path to party’s nomination. Using the formal expected utility theory, Clinton should not be so hopeful but she is because she is seeing the nomination road through a different frame than Obama is seeing. That’s why this is such a dogged race. Only when one of them — Clinton or Obama — perceives his/her prospect dimly will the race for the nomination end.

The report filed by Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic (based on the conference call with the reporters by the two campaigns on May 1, 2008) clearly illustrates the different optics/frame employed by the two candidates.

“THE OBAMA UNIVERSE is governed by the reality that every night, when the Clinton campaign turns out the lights in Arlington, Clinton is not really any close to winning the nomination that when the first intern trudged in at the crack of dawn. The math hasn’t changed. Obama is 283 delegates away from declaring victory. Obama is winning two superdelegates for every one she wins; every additional superdelegate he receives equals at least 1.X more superdelegates that Clinton must pick up. Not a single pledged delegate has switched to Clinton — indeed, when was the last time a pledged delegate ever switched sides; not a single superdelegate has switched to Clinton; a few superdelegates who’ve counseled patience (like freshman Bruce Braley of Iowa) say they now support Obama. The progressive media establishment — the Olbermanns and Chris Matthews of the world — are regularly inveighing against Clinton’s decision to stay in the race. Obama has way more money to spend, the support of the party’s most reliable constituencies, the ability to expand the map. His divorce with Rev. Wright takes a general election hot pot off the table. He is much more likeable and seen as much more honest than Clinton; Republicans and independents still have warmer feelings for him than they do with Clinton. Clinton’s embrace of a gas tax pause shows that her campaign isn’t serious about policy and voters perceive that. Oh, and voters in Indiana and North Carolina aren’t watching cable news and aren’t really paying attention to Rev. Wright. And besides, they’re tired of all of this: tired of the noise, tired of the distractions, tired of old politics, and ready for change. This long race is hurting the party; superdelegates know this, and the tipping point has been reached.

IN THE CLINTON UNIVERSE, Clinton has all the green cards. Victory, (enough) money, momentum in the national polls, the public acknowledgment of Republicans that she’d be the tougher candidate, the fact of undecided superdelegates, and the testicular fortitude that impresses white working class voters… A month of scrutiny has noticeably eroded reduced Obama’s standing with critical constituencies, and in many critical states, Clinton’s brand is a winner: according to three new telephone surveys by Quinnipiac, in Florida, Clinton leads McCain by eight points; Obama and McCain are tied. In Ohio, Clinton leads by ten points; Obama and McCain are tied. Both Clinton and Obama lead McCain in Pennsylvania; Clinton’s margin is twice that of Obama’s. Most of the remaining superdelegates represent white working class districts (about 75% of them, in the estimation of one Clinton strategist.) They haven’t come out for Obama when was winning; they surely won’t support him when he’s losing. They’ll wait for information to see who’ll beat John McCain, and right now, that evidence points to Clinton. After Indiana (and depending on the margin in North Carolina), it will point even more to Clinton. Obama has proven himself out of touch and unable to dent Clinton’s standing with a critical swing constituency; even if African American turnout exceeds 100 percent, Obama would not be able to win Ohio with a double-digit deficit among white, working class voters. Clinton’s victory in Pennsylvania precipitated a change in the fundamental dynamic of the race. Obama no longer appeals to independents; Clinton and Obama now have roughly the same appeal to independents. In a (near) recession, with expensive gas and good prices, with foreclosed homes and rising health care premiums, Clinton has the knowledge and leadership to turn this economy around, and that explains why she’s done so well. Finally, she’s an underdog, and Democrats root for the underdog. This long race is helping the party; Democrats are excited; Superdelegates perceive this, and the tipping point is coming soon.”

Robert asked:


Democrat presidential hopeful Barack Obama from Illinois is accused of plagiarizing speeches from a 2006 speech by Deval Patrick, the Democratic governor of Massachusetts. The Obama speech entitled “Words Matter” was delivered in Feb. 16, 2008 during a meeting in Wisconsin and had several similarities with the Patrick speech delivered in 2006.

Particularly noticeable are the passages wherein both Obama and Patrick list famous historical quotes such as “I have a dream”, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal” and “We have nothing to fear but fear itself” in an effort to demonstrate the power of words.

Both speeches were delivered in an effort to defend the use of speeches and rhetoric as a campaign strategy. Obama has recently received criticism from Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. Clinton’s side claims that Obama does not have enough political experience to be able to act as a president and that his campaign was built solely on words.

In response, Obama delivered his “Words Matter” speech wherein he insists that words have the power to change minds and inspire citizens. The Clinton campaign then latched on to the accusation of plagiarism, bringing to fore the similarities between the Obama and Patrick speeches.

Both Obama and Patrick declared that no plagiarism has taken place. Obama reasons out that he and Patrick are good friends and that they often talk about strategies. Patrick delivered his “Just Words” speech in 2006 as retaliation to criticism that he was ill equipped to handle real political problems and that his campaign was running solely on well-versed speeches. According to Patrick, after Clinton made the same accusations of his friend Obama, he encouraged the Illinois senator to defend himself the same way Patrick did in 2006.

Political commentators note that both Obama and Patrick use the same campaign team, particularly the campaign leader David Axelrod, which may be the reason why their strategies are so similar. Obama even retorted that Clinton herself had begun to use some of his campaign buzzwords.

These accusations of plagiarism are reminiscent of the incident in 1988 when Democratic presidential candidate Joe Bidden had to drop out of the race after coming under fire for plagiarizing a speech by Neil Kinnock of the British Labour Party.

Barack Obama began his political career after he announced his intentions of running for the Illonois Senate in 1995. He became a senator for Illinois in 2005, which was also the time when he was officially sworn in.

Hillary Rodham Clinton was first exposed to politics as the First Lady during the term of her husband former American President Bill Clinton, which began in 1993. As a first lady, Clinton was appointed the chairwoman of the Task Force on National Health Care. At the end of her husband’s term, she was elected senator for New York in 2000 and was re-elected in 2006.