reflections on "Super Tuesday"

[earendel]

I'm no political pundit, but this is what the situation looks like to me:

It's looking more and more like the Democratic convention may be a brokered convention, since neither Clinton nor Obama are likely to secure a majority of delegates beforehand. That makes the so-called "superdelegates" critical to the process. I fully expect to see a ticket that features both Obama and Clinton, in either order. I think a lot of Democrats would like to see Clinton as president and Obama as VP, then have Obama run in 4 or 8 years for the top spot.

On the Republican side, the conservative vote seems to be split between Romney and Huckabee - the social conservatives supporting the former, the religious conservatives the latter. That kind of split pretty much assures that McCain will get the nod. One of the other two probably should drop out and throw his support to the other one, but I don't see that happening. And it might not matter, either, since I suspect the two groups of conservatives couldn't agree on either Romney or Huckabee.

[gsabc]

Maybe I've tuned out Romney, but his speech last night (pre-California results) was better than 90% of what I've heard till now from ANY candidate. I still won't vote for him, but speeches like that should get votes from elsewhere. Or at least get the voters' attention.

Romney's toast, even so. His "win" in MA was by a margin, the last time I saw counts, of 48% to 43% over McCain. Independents can vote in primaries here, and I don't know how many chose the Republican ballot. But that sort of dislike from both Republicans and independents in his home state, where he was recently governor, does not say much for his ability to win a national election.

[ne1410s]

I think a lot of Democrats would like to see Clinton as president and Obama as VP, then have Obama run in 4 or 8 years for the top spot.

It seems to me that anyone who would take the VEEP on Hillary's ticket would be at least third in line behind WJC. Now, as John Nance Garner said, "The Vice-presidency isn't worth a bucket of warm piss" just think how vestigial the office of VP would be for 4 or 8 years.

[Tocqueville3]

I'm no political pundit, but this is what the situation looks like to me:

It's looking more and more like the Democratic convention may be a brokered convention, since neither Clinton nor Obama are likely to secure a majority of delegates beforehand. That makes the so-called "superdelegates" critical to the process. I fully expect to see a ticket that features both Obama and Clinton, in either order. I think a lot of Democrats would like to see Clinton as president and Obama as VP, then have Obama run in 4 or 8 years for the top spot.

On the Republican side, the conservative vote seems to be split between Romney and Huckabee - the social conservatives supporting the former, the religious conservatives the latter. That kind of split pretty much assures that McCain will get the nod. One of the other two probably should drop out and throw his support to the other one, but I don't see that happening. And it might not matter, either, since I suspect the two groups of conservatives couldn't agree on either Romney or Huckabee.

I agree except for one thing. I don't think Clinton wants to be VP. She is in this thing all or nothing. It's really interesting to see how things will turn out, though.

What you said about the Republicans is spot on. Right now Mitt Romney wants to kill Huckabee. I would really like to see Mitt Romney get out of the race just to see what it will do for Mike Huckabee. A race between Huckabee and McCain would be fun to watch. A Republican ticket with McCain and Huckabee would be ever more fun to watch. I'm not quite sure that will happen though. I think McCain will pick Lindsay Graham as his running mate.

I saw some chick with a Ron Paul sticker on her van this morning whilst taking Samantha to school. Ron Paul is a kookoo whacko and I can't understand how anyone in their right mind would pull the lever for him. In the last debate I wanted to smack his smug face. I also wanted to smack Mitt's smug face, too. Maybe we should do like a small cage death match between those two.

[earendel]

I think a lot of Democrats would like to see Clinton as president and Obama as VP, then have Obama run in 4 or 8 years for the top spot.

It seems to me that anyone who would take the VEEP on Hillary's ticket would be at least third in line behind WJC. Now, as John Nance Garner said, "The Vice-presidency isn't worth a bucket of warm piss" just think how vestigial the office of VP would be for 4 or 8 years.

That is as may be, but getting Obama into the loop, as it were, would provide him with the experience that some claim he lacks. It would also mend a lot of political fences. But truth be told I don't think that either one of the candidates would be willing to take a back seat to the other.

[ne1410s]

A Republican ticket with McCain and Huckabee would be ever more fun to watch.

Howzabout a Demo ticket of Obama and Webb (D VA)?

[Sir_Galahad]

What you said about the Republicans is spot on. Right now Mitt Romney wants to kill Huckabee. I would really like to see Mitt Romney get out of the race just to see what it will do for Mike Huckabee. A race between Huckabee and McCain would be fun to watch. A Republican ticket with McCain and Huckabee would be ever more fun to watch. I'm not quite sure that will happen though. I think McCain will pick Lindsay Graham as his running mate.

Graham doesn't want the VP spot. He is sucking up for Attorney General. He is a freaking lawyer, after all.

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

I think McCain will pick Lindsay Graham as his running mate.

Graham doesn't want the VP spot. He is sucking up for Attorney General. He is a freaking lawyer, after all.

Heads will explode all over the blogosphere.

[NellyLunatic1980]

A Republican ticket with McCain and Huckabee would be ever more fun to watch.

Howzabout a Demo ticket of Obama and Webb (D VA)?

Personally, I'd like to see Gov. Kathleen Sebelius on the ticket with Obama.

[Sir_Galahad]

A Republican ticket with McCain and Huckabee would be ever more fun to watch.

Howzabout a Demo ticket of Obama and Webb (D VA)?

Personally, I'd like to see Gov. Kathleen Sebelius on the ticket with Obama.

Seriously?? How can you vote for someone based strictly on charisma? What has he done that gives him creedence to earn your vote? I don't understand that thinking at all.

[nitrah55]

One point made on every channel last night was that Latinos generally do not vote for African American candidates.

If Obama gets nominated, I see Bill Richardson as VP.

If Hilary gets nominated, I don't see Obama taking VP for a reason stated here already: if under normal circumstances, the VP is Throttlebottom, with HRC and WJC in the front office, the VP would be non-existant.

Of course, that makes me wonder who'd be desperate enough to take the VP job in such circumstances. Someone who really wants to run for president in 8 years, and doesn't mind humiliation.

[ne1410s]

I will probably vote for McCain. He reminds me of the Rockefeller Republicans that ruled the GOP before the right wing loonies and bible thumpers co opted it.

[Rexer25]

One point made on every channel last night was that Latinos generally do not vote for African American candidates.

If Obama gets nominated, I see Bill Richardson as VP.

If Hilary gets nominated, I don't see Obama taking VP for a reason stated here already: if under normal circumstances, the VP is Throttlebottom, with HRC and WJC in the front office, the VP would be non-existant.

Of course, that makes me wonder who'd be desperate enough to take the VP job in such circumstances. Someone who really wants to run for president in 8 years, and doesn't mind humiliation.

I'll make the sacrifice for the good of the country. Even if my job is nothing but to keep the bimbos away from WJC, I'll undertake the task for the good of the country.

Hey, it's gotta be a pay raise from what I'm making now, free housing and all the perks. I'd be so bold as to take the job from either party.

Hmmmmmm...I feel a new MM coming on

[PlacentiaSoccerMom]

One point made on every channel last night was that Latinos generally do not vote for African American candidates.

If Obama gets nominated, I see Bill Richardson as VP.

If Hilary gets nominated, I don't see Obama taking VP for a reason stated here already: if under normal circumstances, the VP is Throttlebottom, with HRC and WJC in the front office, the VP would be non-existant.

Of course, that makes me wonder who'd be desperate enough to take the VP job in such circumstances. Someone who really wants to run for president in 8 years, and doesn't mind humiliation.

I never voted for Bill.

I think that Hillary should give him some ambassadorship in some remote country like Bhutan and let him work his magic there.

[bazodee]

There won't be a brokered convention. All candidates other than Obama and Clinton will release their delegates. By definition, with only two candidates, one of the candidates will achieve a majority on the first ballot.

Perhaps we have different definitions of what a brokered convention means. It is an indecisive first ballot, which then results in the release of all delegates from previous commitments and an environment where a oligarchy of politicoes seems to be able to influence the votes of many delegates.

I do agree there will be some deal making in the attempt to secure commitments from the super delegates; that alone does not define a brokered convention.

It will be finished after the first ballot.

[eyégor]

Howzabout a Demo ticket of Obama and Webb (D VA)?

Personally, I'd like to see Gov. Kathleen Sebelius on the ticket with Obama.

Seriously?? How can you vote for someone based strictly on charisma? What has he done that gives him creedence to earn your vote? I don't understand that thinking at all.

somebody at my wife's workplace told her yesterday that he hasn't felt 'this way' about a candidate since Kennedy.

She asked him if he had fond memories of The Bay of Pigs too.

[Bucket Of Warm Spit]

One point made on every channel last night was that Latinos generally do not vote for African American candidates.

If Obama gets nominated, I see Bill Richardson as VP.

If Hilary gets nominated, I don't see Obama taking VP for a reason stated here already: if under normal circumstances, the VP is Throttlebottom, with HRC and WJC in the front office, the VP would be non-existant.

Of course, that makes me wonder who'd be desperate enough to take the VP job in such circumstances. Someone who really wants to run for president in 8 years, and doesn't mind humiliation.

{clearing throat] I'm available...

[Tocqueville3]

I will probably vote for McCain. He reminds me of the Rockefeller Republicans that ruled the GOP before the right wing loonies and bible thumpers co opted it.

Hey!!

That's not nice.

[trevor_macfee]

Golly I'm tired this morning - stayed up way too late watching the results come in last night. Lots of fun, though, watching with my wife and her cheering every time Hillary won a state and me doing the same when Obama took one. It'll be good, though, to be supporting the same candidate after it's all sorted out.

As much as I would love an Obama/Clinton/Clinton/Obama ticket, I don't see it happening. Like someone said earlier, I think Hillary wants the top spot or nothing, and Obama isn't going to take the second spot to play second fiddle to Bill Clinton.

Two things I'm happy about - one is that the Maryland primary next Tuesday will actually matter. That hasn't happened in the 20 years I've lived here. The second is that it looks like McCain will be the republican nominee, and for the first time in my memory there'd be a republican candidate who didn't scare me - I agree with Rush and Hannity et al, McCain's not as conservative as he's having to play in the primaries, and he'll move to the center as soon as the nomination is wrapped up. For me, that's a good thing, as is his willingness to "reach across the aisle."

[eyégor]

I will probably vote for McCain. He reminds me of the Rockefeller Republicans that ruled the GOP before the right wing loonies and bible thumpers co opted it.

I agree. Doesn't mean I like him, but I can see that.

Made me look back for a moment and thought.....
Javits was a Republican??????

[Oral B Roberts]

I will probably vote for McCain. He reminds me of the Rockefeller Republicans that ruled the GOP before the right wing loonies and bible thumpers co opted it.

Speaking of Rockefeller, you can send me a large seven figure check for that uncalled for shot at those of us in the moral majority. And if I don't have that generous gift in my hands before the next primary, I'll tell the Lord when I speak with Him over lunch today to flood your house with rivers of warm piss!

[ne1410s]

uncalled for shot at those of us in the moral majority.

I dispute "moral" and "majority" as accurate terms.

The check is in the mail.

[mellytu74]

I was writing my ramblings and got timed out because I had to go back and do some work. Work!

Sir G -- as far as what Obama has done. He was my best friend's state senator for years.

For most of his time in the state senate, he was in the minority, so a lot of things he introduced weren't passed. But he did develop a reputation as a guy who could work with Republicans -- such as working on welfare reform.

He helped reform Illinois' death penalty. He required that police videotape suspect interrogations. He backed a measure to let retired police officers and military carry concealed weapons.

He's for disclosure of earmarks - the targeted federal spending projects - including the sneaking them into bills that have nothing to do with the main subject of the bill.

He got his start as a grassroots organizer. I happen to like that very much.

If Chicago is anything like Philadelphia, and I think it might be, then that means you have to know how to build consensus from the bottom. Which sometimes is a very tough thing. It is not a skill that I dismiss easily.

Based on what he said and his votes, I believe that Obama will conduct the war on terror better, with a better focus. He and I agree that the war
on terror has been handled poorly.

There's nothing wrong with adding more and more resources at the Afghan/Pakistan border. There is certainly nothing wrong with looking at our allies as providing safe havens for al-qaedi. there's nothing wrong with looking at our allies as funding terrorism. You think the terrorists aren't massing at the Western Pakistan border as we speak?

You cannot cut services to combat veterans when you are creating more combat veterans. You cannot extend the US military so thin that it cannot defend this country's interests in other parts of the world.

You cannot borrow so much money for the war and make yet deeper cuts in money to repair our aging infrastructure.

Getting out of Iraq does not mean giving up on the war on terror. I believe it means conducting a smarter war on terror and that's what we need.

That's what he said. That's what I believe.

It may not be a record you like, but that's not what you asked. It's a record.

[earendel]

There won't be a brokered convention. All candidates other than Obama and Clinton will release their delegates. By definition, with only two candidates, one of the candidates will achieve a majority on the first ballot.

Perhaps we have different definitions of what a brokered convention means. It is an indecisive first ballot, which then results in the release of all delegates from previous commitments and an environment where a oligarchy of politicoes seems to be able to influence the votes of many delegates.

I do agree there will be some deal making in the attempt to secure commitments from the super delegates; that alone does not define a brokered convention.

It will be finished after the first ballot.

Well, as I understand it, 20% of the delegates to the convention are so-called "superdelegates" - elected officials, party hacks, and others - who are not committed to any candidate (although they may announce support, they are not bound to vote for anyone). It's conceivable that the convention could begin with neither candidate having an absolute majority and after an inconclusive first ballot the "superdelegates" become the kingmakers. It's not likely to be the old "smoke-filled back room" type of conventions, but it ends up the same way - in that scenario the primaries' importance shrinks.

[ToLiveIsToFly]

It's looking more and more like the Democratic convention may be a brokered convention, since neither Clinton nor Obama are likely to secure a majority of delegates beforehand.

Probably I'm missing something obvious that I could easily look up elsewheres, but it's more fun to ask y'all.

I looked on line at some point last night and it said that Edwards has like 24 delegates, and none of the other also-rans have any. Whatever tv station my wife turned on last night when she was worried about having to watch Wolf Blitzer explode all over our screen said that basically all the superdelegates are pretty much committed to one candidate or the other (though of course they can change their minds).

Are you saying you expect Obama and Clinton to be within 24 delegates of each other come convention time, or is there some other reason neither of them will have a majority?