Edwards to endorse Obama (Extra)
US News
May 14, 2008, 21:52 GMT
Other features coming soon.
Talkback
page: 1
Shame on Edwards.
At least he is showing his true colors. He is as ruthless and politically expedient as Obama. They belong together.
Is anyone surprised? Edwards is looking for a spot on Obama's ticket. Well, I have news for him, Kentucky will not be fooled. Don't forget Edwards is a wealthy lawyer first and foremost. He cares about getting on board with the perceived nominee for his own selfish reasons. He has a wife with cancer and small children at home that need emotional support. But no matter, he's going to out politicking when his wife is on her deathbed.
Vote for Obama... or you are a racist pig.
Abridged:
'Seeking Superdelegates
As the Democratic Party's superdelegates decide whether to support Clinton or Obama, will they take into account the $900,000 they've received from the candidates?
By Lindsay Renick Mayer
February 14, 2008 | (Story updates and chart available here).
(Figures in this story have been adjusted to reflect Sen. Ted Kennedy's contributions from the two candidates, which were overlooked in the original posting. Changes are in bold.) At this summer's Democratic National Convention, nearly 800 members of Congress, state governors and Democratic Party leaders could be the tiebreakers in the intense contest between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. If neither candidate can earn the support of at least 2,025 delegates in the primary voting process, the decision of who will represent the Democrats in November's presidential election will fall not to the will of the people but to these 'superdelegates'—the candidates' friends, colleagues and even financial beneficiaries. Both contenders will be calling in favors.
And while it would be unseemly for the candidates to hand out thousands of dollars to primary voters, or to the delegates pledged to represent the will of those voters, elected officials who are superdelegates have received at least $904,200 from Obama and Clinton in the form of campaign contributions over the last three years, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama, who narrowly leads in the count of pledged, 'non-super' delegates, has doled out more than $698,200 to superdelegates from his political action committee, Hope Fund, or campaign committee since 2005. Of the 82 elected officials who had announced as of Feb. 12 that their superdelegate votes would go to the Illinois senator, 35, or 43 percent of this group, have received campaign contributions from him in the 2006 or 2008 election cycles, totaling $232,200. In addition, Obama has been endorsed by 52 superdelegates who haven't held elected office recently and, therefore, didn't receive campaign contributions from him.
Clinton does not appear to have been as openhanded. Her PAC, HILLPAC, and campaign committee appear to have distributed $205,500 to superdelegates. Only 12 percent of her elected superdelegates, or 13 of 109 who have said they will back her, have received campaign contributions, totaling about $95,000 since 2005. An additional 128 unelected superdelegates support Clinton, according to a blog tracking superdelegates and their endorsements, 2008 Democratic Convention Watch.
Because superdelegates will make up around 20 percent of 4,000 delegates to the Democratic convention in August--Republicans don't have superdelegates—Clinton and Obama are aggressively wooing the more than 400 superdelegates who haven't yet made up their minds. Since 2005 Obama has given 52 of the undecided superdelegates a total of at least $363,900, while Clinton has given a total of $88,000 to 15 of them. Anticipating that their intense competition for votes in state primaries and caucuses will result in a near-tie going into the nominating convention, the two candidates are making personal calls to superdelegates now, or are recruiting other big names to do so on their behalf. With no specific rules about what can and can't be done to court these delegates, just about anything goes.
www.capitaleye.org/capital_eye/inside.php?ID=336
Of course what you meant to say is that both Obama and Clinton have donated this money to these politicians campaign. 'Buyoff' is such a harsh word and I know you of all people would not want anyone to think you were telling a 'half truth'?
The only reason this makes any news is the super delegate thing is new, but is working exactly how it is suppose to. Politicians donating money to other politicians campaigns has been happening for years, the Republicant's do it all the time.
I know your intent was not to mislead???????
and take ess pee along
'Buyoff' is such a harsh word and I know you of all people would not want anyone to think you were telling a 'half truth'?'
The whole truth is that they are both buying off these inherently unrepresentative, anti-democracy and outright morally wrong 'superdelegates'. The whole truth is that Obama has spread a whole lot more money around among them in order to buy his position.
Deny that.
'The only reason this makes any news is the super delegate thing is new, but is working exactly how it is suppose to.'
Yes, it is subverting the democratic process and bringing power out of the hands of the people and putting it in the back rooms of the DNC where money talks and the will of the people walks. You are correct, that is exactly what it was meant to do. Subvert democracy and make a bunch of political cronies king makers. Why are you not outraged by this?
Seriously: Why are you not outraged by this and the fact that the DNC can negate the vote in Florida and Michigan? This is no longer democracy speaking, it is dirty back room politics which Obama excels at. (Just look at Chicago.)
' Politicians donating money to other politicians campaigns has been happening for years, the Republicant's do it all the time.'
Are Republican 'superdelegates' deciding the race? If there were such things and if they were deciding who the nominee was do you think they would have nominated McCain? No, you are being willfully blind to the seriously obscene bastardization of the democratic process by the DNC/Howard dean/George Soros political machine that makes Tammany Hall look like a Sunday school picnic.
Why aren't democrats insisting on better? This is not democracy.
All the skitzo gang is here I see.
Abridged:
Hillary, Barack, want my vote? Just $20 million, please
Associated Press
LOS ANGELES - What will it take for a Democratic presidential candidate to win the support of California superdelegate Steven Ybarra?
Say, $20 million.
The Democratic National Committee member doesn't parse his words when it comes to what he wants from Barack Obama or Hillary Rodham Clinton - an ironclad promise to spend that heady amount to register Mexican-American voters and get them to the polls in November.
In a telephone interview Wednesday, he said he plans to remain undecided in the tight contest until 'someone shows me the money.'
When will he settle on a candidate?
'Nobody showed me any money yet,' he said.
He's not kidding. To Ybarra, a Sacramento lawyer, the stakes are no less than winning the presidency in November.
He predicted that as many as 1.3 million Mexican-Americans could be added to voter rolls in New Mexico, Colorado, Florida and other swing states, a potentially decisive edge for the eventual Democratic nominee.
With that investment of funds, Mexican-Americans would realize Democratic leaders 'care about us,' Ybarra said, referring to Mexican-Americans.
------------------------------------------------------------
See, the DNC in action...
And dumba-s when the $20 mm is paid get back to me. Cry, cry, cry you pathetic wagger.
'The whole truth is that they are both buying off these inherently unrepresentative, anti-democracy and outright morally wrong 'superdelegates'. The whole truth is that Obama has spread a whole lot more money around among them in order to buy his position. '
What a liar, I guess that the fact that he has won more states has nothing to do with where he is at? What a joke you are.
'Deny that. '
Deny stupidity?
'Yes, it is subverting the democratic process and bringing power out of the hands of the people and putting it in the back rooms of the DNC where money talks and the will of the people walks. You are correct, that is exactly what it was meant to do. Subvert democracy and make a bunch of political cronies king makers. Why are you not outraged by this? '
Because it is working as it is suppose to work. Just because it does not fit into your little pathetic neo-con world does not mean it is not working. Too bad you have nothing to say about it (at least nothing but your 1 vote).
'Seriously: Why are you not outraged by this and the fact that the DNC can negate the vote in Florida and Michigan? This is no longer democracy speaking, it is dirty back room politics which Obama excels at. (Just look at Chicago.) '
It was agreed to beforehand by both Obama and Clinton---the states did it to themselves, they broke the rules and they have to pay. Your other comments just show how bigoted you are and exposes you as a typical neo-con liar.
'Are Republican 'superdelegates' deciding the race? If there were such things and if they were deciding who the nominee was do you think they would have nominated McCain? No, you are being willfully blind to the seriously obscene bastardization of the democratic process by the DNC/Howard dean/George Soros political machine that makes Tammany Hall look like a Sunday school picnic.'
You are stuck with your hero, it was his turn. Remember the Democrats elect theirs, the Republicant's take turns. Your turn to lose.
'Why aren't democrats insisting on better? This is not democracy.'
Why didn't you Republicant's do a better job? Lost the Afghan war, loosing the Iraq war, dollar is worthless, gas at $4.00, economy on the brink of ruin, etc., etc. Give us a turn we could hardly pull off the same losses as you have. But your boy did give up golf, he never gave anything else in his life.
'What a liar,'
So these articles I have posted are 'lies'?
'I guess that the fact that he has won more states has nothing to do with where he is at? What a joke you are.'
But you are not going to count all the states are you?
'Deny stupidity?'
That wasn't a denial, that was weaseling out in the most spoiled brat, infantile, too stupid to hold your end of the conversation way. Other then that is was very clever.
'Because it is working as it is suppose to work. Just because it does not fit into your little pathetic neo-con world does not mean it is not working'
It is WORKING TO REMOVE THE POWER TO ELECT THE NOMINEE TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES FROM THE VOTERS AND PUT IT IN THE HANDS OF PEOPLE WHO NO ONE VOTED FOR AND WHO ARE ACTING IN THEIR OWN ECONOMIC INTERESTS!
Only someone who is as brain dead as you are could possibly say that it was 'working' in the same context as 'democracy'. Your only little lame refuge is to call me a 'neo-con'. You are a lemming. Your democratic process has been robbed from you and you are too stupid to even have an issue with that fact.
'It was agreed to beforehand by both Obama and Clinton'
The question is: Why has it been agreed to by you and the rest of you sheeple? Superdeligates are inherently undemocratic. They are the stuff of banana republics and they are going to decide who your nominee is and, amazingly YOU think the system is 'working' you unbelievable moron. They are being BOUGHT OFF, George Soros's money has more of an effect on American democracy then the will of the American people and you say the system is 'working'?
'. Your other comments just show how bigoted you are and exposes you as a typical neo-con liar.'
Once again you retreat to calling everything you do not want to hear 'bigotry and lies'. It is pathetic. Where is the bigotry and lies? (I know, you won't be able to find any but you will incessantly repeat it to get back in to your mental safety zone. Your capacity for denial is truly incredible, you simply ignore reality.)
'You are stuck with your hero, it was his turn.'
I am not 'stuck' with anyone, you missed the point of the question because you only see what you want to see.
'Why didn't you Republicant's do a better job?'
What does that have to do with your nominee buying votes?
' Lost the Afghan war,'
Hardly. Yes, here we go with your take on all things military which you completely resent, are completely ignorant about yet you are a self proclaimed expert on after glancing at a few rants about it on Kos.
'loosing the Iraq war,'
Wrong again.
'dollar is worthless, '
Give me your worthless dollars then.
'gas at $4.00,'
Because the defeatocrats wont let us drill in Alaska, Up and down the west coast, Colorado, have limited drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, Wyoming, off Baja, North Dakota up and down the east coast... We have enough oil to last for the next 50 years in the USA but the democrats wont let us touch it.
Additionally, think what gas will cost if your incompetent, lying, bribe taking, bribe giving, criminal child of a nominee actually gets elected and turns over 80% of the worlds oil reserves to Iran and al Qaeda? When Iran chokes off the Strait of Hormuz oil will shoot up to $500 a barrel, and it will be the fault of your fad-in-chief. Does any of this penetrate that empty skull of yours? No.. all badness that you shut out.
' Give us a turn we could hardly pull off the same losses as you have. '
No, your losses will be far more catastrophic for the country that I love and the country that you look down your nose at.
'But your boy did give up golf,'
Idiot, he is not running. You are confusing your persona's again as well.
Better shut your eyes and jamb your fingers in your ears: Your candidates are bribing the undemocratic superdeligates and buying their way in to power:
Superdelegates get campaign cash
by Foon Rhee, deputy national political editor February 14, 2008 03:54 PM
Many of the superdelegates who could well decide the Democratic presidential nominee have already been plied with campaign contributions by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, a new study shows.
'While it would be unseemly for the candidates to hand out thousands of dollars to primary voters, or to the delegates pledged to represent the will of those voters, elected officials serving as superdelegates have received about $890,000 from Obama and Clinton in the form of campaign contributions over the last three years,' the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics reported today. [...]
Obama's political action committee has doled out more than $694,000 to superdelegates since 2005, the study found, and of the 81 who had announced their support for Obama, 34 had received donations totaling $228,000.
Clinton's political action committee has distributed about $195,000 to superdelegates, and only 13 of the 109 who had announced for her have received money, totaling about $95,000.
www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/02/superdelegat es.html
Not democracy, cronyism. I pity the people who voted for either of these clowns because it has been decided already who your nominee was going to be and you might as well have stayed at home. Your vote counts less then their cash.
'And dumba-s when the $20 mm is paid get back to me.'
English? Nope...
'Cry, cry, cry you pathetic wagger.'
You are confusing your personas again.
come on sp4 do your thing
probably pulled it off by now!
B. HUSSEIN OBAMA is a foolish little MARXIST 'wannabe' while JONH'the-faggot-so-christened-by-Anne-Coulter'EDWARDS wants everyone to believe he i a populist while he 'studies' poverty from his HEDGE-FUND profits!!! Two DEMBHOLES capable of onky ruining this country!!!
page: 1
Similar articles
- ANALYSIS: On Obama's election anniversary, Republicans claim victory
- Republican victories in first election test for Obama (Roundup)
- Republican victories in first election test for Obama (3rd Lead)
- Republican victories in first election test for Obama (2nd Lead)
- Republicans take Virginia in first election test for Obama (1st Lead)
Latest Headlines in US
- 1. Sniper who terrorized US capital faces execution 0200 GMT
- 2. Powder sent to foreign missions in New York harmless (2nd Roundup)
- 3. White powder sent to foreign missions in New York harmless (Roundup)
- 4. Dutch arrest Somali for alleged terrorist activities in US
- 5. Report: White powder sent to three foreign missions in New York
USA
Your Talkback on this Story