Game On for Obama and Clinton

In less that 24 hours we will know the result of the crucial Pennsylvania primary.

The wait has been the longest since the voting season began, and it has been nothing if not eventful.

From the Rev. Wright saga, to dodging bullets on the Bosnian tarmac, it has been back and forth between Obama and Clinton for the last month. (And in the meantime, John McCain has kept his head down.)

And in the last few days, the race has become particulary nasty. Starting with that ABC debate (can we call it that? or was it a reality tv show?), and ending with yet another negative 3am ad from Clinton. Yet another one from the Republican playbook.

But Obama has a convincing lead in the popular vote so far - a lead that is unlikely that Clinton will catch. He also leads the pledged delegate vote, and nothing short of a miracle would see Clinton overtake him.

Hillary does however lead in the superdelegate stakes, but only just. Obama has been steadily eroding her lead, and by this rate will overtake her come the convention.

By all reports, Clinton will win in Pennsylvania - but it may not be enough for her to avoid the calls for her to pull out of the race. If this race continues until the Democratic Convention, John McCain can sit back while the internal Democrat fighting does his job for him.

Read The Full Article:
http://2008obama.blogspot.com/2008/04/game-on-for-obama-and-clinton.html

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

Obama Everywhere in Pennsylvania

Another great youtube clip brought to you by the Obama team. Barack Obama has been everywhere in Pennslyvania.


video details and more



Read The Full Article:
http://2008obama.blogspot.com/2008/04/obama-everywhere-in-pennsylvania.html

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

Voting has started

Hello friends,

Voting begins today on MoveOn.org's "Obama in 30 Seconds" contest. My submission made it past the screening and now it is up to people like you to get me into the next round.

The winner of the contest will win a $20,000 certificate good for professional Video equipment. I will be going up against many professionals, so if anyone needs the equipment, it's poor little me (where are all those tiny violins when you need a good pity party). At any rate here is the link to my video.

http://obamain30seconds.org/vote/?v=view-420-RJrCZD

Now, what I need from everyone. Please, please, please, write a post about the contest and include my link. If possible, put a link to my ad on your sidebar. Also, send an email to everyone you know and send them to my ad. Here are the rules and the way voting works.

The first way is to have one of the 10 highest-rated ads. In order to rate ads, people will go to the Obama in 30 Seconds website and click to get started. Then, they?ll be brought to a voting screen and shown their first ad. While they?re rating ads, voters will not be able to choose what ads they see; we?ll choose for them. This ensures that all of the ads get seen by lots of voters and that nobody is able to pump up an ad?s rating by asking people to just go and vote on that one ad. And of course, each voter will only be shown each ad once.

In the rating system, viewers will give each ad 1-5 stars in each of three categories: Overall Impact, which counts for 50%; Originality, which counts for 25%; and Positive Message, which counts for 25%. At the end of voting, the 10 ads with the highest average rating, using those criteria and weightings, will be finalists.

The second way to become a finalist is to have one of the five ads that?s watched by the highest number of unique viewers on the Obama in 30 Seconds website. For these ?direct hits,? we?ll send you a link to your ad as soon as voting opens on Monday. We encourage you to pass the link around to friends and family, post it on your blog, or do anything else creative to drive people to the site to watch it. Each time someone follows that link and watches your ad on our site, we?ll count that toward your total viewers. Of course, people who watch an ad this way will have to enter their email address before they?re counted; this prevents fraud and makes sure it?s not one person just hitting refresh over and over.

It?s important to note that people who see your ad through the automatic voting system won?t be counted toward the number of viewers. But, on the voting page, we?ll provide the direct link to the ad they?re watching. That way, if somebody sees your ad while voting and loves it, they can show it to all their friends. And when they do, since their friends will be using the direct link to your ad, all of those viewers will count toward your total.

It's not often a lowly blogger wins this kind of contest. Hey, I decided to give it a shot. Now, please, give a fellow blogger a hand. If you're not an Obama supporter, that's okay, think of it as helping a fellow blogger. If you are an Obama supporter, then you have a chance for another Obama supporter's home made ad to run on National TV.

Here's thanking you in advance for your cooperation.

Robert

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/blogspot/zgdF/~3/275028763/voting-has-started.html

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

Michael Moore

April 21st, 2008 4:46 pm
Michael Moore backs Obama over 'disgusting' Clinton

WASHINGTON (AFP) ? Outspoken documentary film-maker Michael Moore Monday endorsed Democratic White House hopeful Barack Obama, decrying the "downright disgusting" campaign tactics of Hillary Clinton.

Moore, whose latest movie "Captain Mike Across America" tracks John Kerry's doomed 2004 bid for the presidency, said he had not given a "rat's ass" who won the nomination this year as long as a Democrat triumphs in November.

But having excoriated Clinton for her 2002 vote in support of the Iraq war, the Oscar-winning writer and director now accused the New York senator of "stoking the fears of white America" against the mixed-race Obama.

Writing on his website on the eve of the Pennsylvania primary, Moore said that in recent weeks, "the actions and words of Hillary Clinton have gone from being merely disappointing to downright disgusting."

He cited Clinton's mention of radical US Islamic leader Louis Farrakhan during a televised debate last week, in connection with Obama's controversial former pastor Jeremiah Wright.

That, according to Moore, was an attempt to "smear the black man" (Obama) so as to sway Democratic grandees known as superdelegates who look set to decide the presidential nomination.

"You have devoted your life to good causes and good deeds," Moore said in addressing Clinton, but now she was like "a bigot stoking the fires of stupidity."

The director of "Sicko" and "Fahrenheit 9/11" said he was endorsing the movement for change represented by the "exceptional" Obama, in order to end the war in Iraq and to hold corporate America to account.

And Moore said the Democrats could yet lose to Republican John McCain in November.

"We know there are still many Americans who will never vote for a black man. Hillary knows it, too. She's counting on it."

Read The Full Article:
http://obamaendorsements.blogspot.com/2008/04/michael-moore.html

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

Bill Clinton

video details and more



Read The Full Article:
http://obamaendorsements.blogspot.com/2008/04/bill-clinton.html

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

London Financial Times

From London's Financial Times

Democrats must choose Obama
Published: April 21 2008 03:00 | Last updated: April 21 2008 03:00

Barack Obama goes into tomorrow's Pennsylvania primary as strong favourite, whatever happens, to secure the Democratic presidential nomination. Yet the vote on Tuesday could still go either way.

This is a sign of how close this race has been and how deeply it has divided the party.

Mr Obama and Hillary Clinton are both strong candidates and each appeals powerfully to distinct segments of Democratic support. This has heightened the risk of bitter division.

After tomorrow's vote, the Democrats should move quickly to affirm Mr Obama's nomination. That is not just because his lead in elected delegates is already unassailable and the contest should be brought to a swift conclusion. It is also because he is, in fact, the better candidate.

The contenders' differences on policy look small and in reality are even smaller. Their disagreement on healthcare mandates, for instance, frequently emphasised by Mrs Clinton, is of little practical significance. A mandate to obtain insurance, as proposed by Mrs Clinton, does not achieve universal coverage unless enforced with punitive sanctions, which she does not advocate.

Both candidates, in effect, are proposing near-universal coverage. The virtues of their schemes (much improved access, no denial of insurance to those with pre-existing conditions) as well as the defects (weak control of costs) are much the same.

In almost every area of policy, whether their thinking is good (as with improved support for displaced workers), bad (their opposition to liberal trade) or too vague to say (Iraq), there is little to choose between them.

As voters understood all along, this has therefore been a contest of character, temperament and (sadly but inevitably) identity. Mr Obama's most loyal supporters, once they were persuaded that he might actually succeed, have been black. Mrs Clinton's, certain at the start she would win, are women.

Mr Obama has fought a brilliant campaign, out-organising his opponent, raising more money, and convincing undecided Democrats as well as the country at large that he was more likeable, more straightforward and more worthy of trust.

On form, he is a spell-binding orator and holds arena-sized audiences in thrall. He is given to airy exhortations, it is true, but genuinely seeks consensus and has cross-party appeal.

Mrs Clinton's campaign, in contrast, has been a shambles. She and her team expected to have it all sewn up long ago; they made no plans for a long struggle, ran short of money and had to reorganise on the run.

Her speaking style is pedestrian, when it is not actually grating. Those who dislike her tend to do so with a passion: her disapproval ratings started high and after months of campaigning are climbing still. It is a tribute to her tenacity and to the loyalty she commands in the party that her fate was not sealed weeks ago.

How much the way that a campaign is run tells you about a candidate's fitness to be president is debatable - but it does tell you something, especially if the candidate with the misfiring strategy is running on a claim of management expertise.

In fact, the campaigns have underlined the contenders' respective strengths and weaknesses.

Mr Obama's consistent and relaxed demeanour attested to his coolness (in both senses, his swooning young admirers would add); it seemed to affirm his authenticity. In contrast, Mrs Clinton's hyperactive advisers dressed her in a new personality each day, sometimes several in the course of an interview. They wheeled out Bill Clinton, to remind people of the 1990s, then reeled him back, to help them forget.

Too many course corrections, not enough course.

Mr Obama has had some travails - over his association with Jeremiah Wright, the ranting demagogue pastor, and most recently over condescending remarks about small-town Democratic politics.

In the first case, he responded with a masterly speech about race that may even have improved his standing. In the second, he was evasive and unconvincing - yet the public seems to have given him the benefit of the doubt.

The US has the urge to be inspired a little. Electing the country's first woman president ought to be very inspiring. But not this woman - with her dynastic baggage and knack for antagonising the undecided - running against this man.

The Democratic party has waited an awfully long time for a politician like Barack Obama. Enough already.

Read The Full Article:
http://obamaendorsements.blogspot.com/2008/04/london-financial-times.html

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

What will the Pundits say about a Hillary Win

What spin can we expect from the media following a Clinton win in Pennsylvania? Probably about the same we got when she won in Texas (sort of), and Ohio. And then before that, in Massachusetts.

And that is, "its a comeback for Clinton and she is still in the race." I'm sorry? Say that again please?

Only a few months ago, Barack Obama was well behind in the national polls. On Super Tuesday, Hillary Clinton was expected to wipe the floor with Obama. It didn't happen.

In Massachusetts on super Tuesday, Clinton had led with double figures in the long lead in to the primary. Obama secured Kennedy's endorsement the week before the vote. The media reaction when Clinton still won the state? Kennedy's endorsement wasn't worth as much as it was thought and Clinton had prevailed.

This of course flew in the face of the fact that Obama has gained on Clinton, so significantly that his vote in Massachusetts ended up in the 40's - much greater than was predicted.

Then we had Texas and Ohio. In Texas, Clinton was expected to benefit from the large Latino community, and in fact had led consistently in the polls until a couple of weeks before the vote. She won on the day, just, with a subsequent final figure showing that Obama had in fact secured more delegates. Go figure.

Yet the spin continued. Another victory for Clinton.

But perhaps the most remarkable was Ohio. Barack Obama was never expected to win there. He didn't lead in the polls - in fact for months he was way behind. The best he could do was a few days before, when he came very close, before those negative 3am ads. Clinton prevailed, but only by 54 to 44 - a 5 point split.

The spin from the pundits? You got it, Clinton scores a remarkable victory. Not only that, they repeatedly ran with the line that she put out, that only she could carry the swing states. Ahem, umm, what happened to the swing state of Missouri? Oh yes, Obama won that one.

I'm not sure what part of the polls the media don't seem to understand. In states where Obama doesn't win, but increases his proportion of the vote against his historical poll data, the result can only be regarded as a victory for him, and not Clinton.

Victory in politics is not always secured by just recording a pure numbers win.

And thus we await what the pundits will say tomorrow - when Clinton will likely win, albeit with a much smaller margin than was predicted just weeks ago.

Its probable we will hear the same - "welcome back Hillary. How long can this campaign go on?"

And if that is the case, no doubt we wont be hearing about Obama's solid popular vote lead, his substantial lead in the pledged delegate stakes, and his moving within 24 votes of Clinton in the superdelegate race.

Yes, it's sometimes all about spin - not reality. I think the media just like the contest. After all, for them, this is the general election.

Read The Full Article:
http://2008obama.blogspot.com/2008/04/what-will-pundits-say-about-hillary-win.htm
l

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

My Vote's for Obama (if I could vote) ...by
Michael Moore

April 21st, 2008

Friends,

I don't get to vote for President this primary season. I live in Michigan. The party leaders (both here and in D.C.) couldn't get their act together, and thus our votes will not be counted.

So, if you live in Pennsylvania, can you do me a favor? Will you please cast my vote -- and yours -- on Tuesday for Senator Barack Obama?

I haven't spoken publicly 'til now as to who I would vote for, primarily for two reasons: 1) Who cares?; and 2) I (and most people I know) don't give a rat's ass whose name is on the ballot in November, as long as there's a picture of JFK and FDR riding a donkey at the top of the ballot, and the word "Democratic" next to the candidate's name.

Seriously, I know so many people who don't care if the name under the Big "D" is Dancer, Prancer, Clinton or Blitzen. It can be Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, Barry Obama or the Dalai Lama.

Well, that sounded good last year, but over the past two months, the actions and words of Hillary Clinton have gone from being merely disappointing to downright disgusting. I guess the debate last week was the final straw. I've watched Senator Clinton and her husband play this game of appealing to the worst side of white people, but last Wednesday, when she hurled the name "Farrakhan" out of nowhere, well that's when the silly season came to an early end for me. She said the "F" word to scare white people, pure and simple. Of course, Obama has no connection to Farrakhan. But, according to Senator Clinton, Obama's pastor does -- AND the "church bulletin" once included a Los Angeles Times op-ed from some guy with Hamas! No, not the church bulletin!

This sleazy attempt to smear Obama was brilliantly explained the following night by Stephen Colbert. He pointed out that if Obama is supported by Ted Kennedy, who is Catholic, and the Catholic Church is led by a Pope who was in the Hitler Youth, that can mean only one thing: OBAMA LOVES HITLER!

Yes, Senator Clinton, that's how you sounded. Like you were nuts. Like you were a bigot stoking the fires of stupidity. How sad that I would ever have to write those words about you. You have devoted your life to good causes and good deeds. And now to throw it all away for an office you can't win unless you smear the black man so much that the superdelegates cry "Uncle (Tom)" and give it all to you.

But that can't happen. You cast your die when you voted to start this bloody war. When you did that you were like Moses who lost it for a moment and, because of that, was prohibited from entering the Promised Land.

How sad for a country that wanted to see the first woman elected to the White House. That day will come -- but it won't be you. We'll have to wait for the current Democratic governor of Kansas to run in 2016 (you read it here first!).

There are those who say Obama isn't ready, or he's voted wrong on this or that. But that's looking at the trees and not the forest. What we are witnessing is not just a candidate but a profound, massive public movement for change. My endorsement is more for Obama The Movement than it is for Obama the candidate.

That is not to take anything away from this exceptional man. But what's going on is bigger than him at this point, and that's a good thing for the country. Because, when he wins in November, that Obama Movement is going to have to stay alert and active. Corporate America is not going to give up their hold on our government just because we say so. President Obama is going to need a nation of millions to stand behind him.

I know some of you will say, 'Mike, what have the Democrats done to deserve our vote?' That's a damn good question. In November of '06, the country loudly sent a message that we wanted the war to end. Yet the Democrats have done nothing. So why should we be so eager to line up happily behind them?

I'll tell you why. Because I can't stand one more friggin' minute of this administration and the permanent, irreversible damage it has done to our people and to this world. I'm almost at the point where I don't care if the Democrats don't have a backbone or a kneebone or a thought in their dizzy little heads. Just as long as their name ain't "Bush" and the word "Republican" is not beside theirs on the ballot, then that's good enough for me.

I, like the majority of Americans, have been pummeled senseless for 8 long years. That's why I will join millions of citizens and stagger into the voting booth come November, like a boxer in the 12th round, all bloodied and bruised with one eye swollen shut, looking for the only thing that matters -- that big "D" on the ballot.

Don't get me wrong. I lost my rose-colored glasses a long time ago.

It's foolish to see the Democrats as anything but a nicer version of a party that exists to do the bidding of the corporate elite in this country. Any endorsement of a Democrat must be done with this acknowledgement and a hope that one day we will have a party that'll represent the people first, and laws that allow that party an equal voice.

Finally, I want to say a word about the basic decency I have seen in Mr. Obama. Mrs. Clinton continues to throw the Rev. Wright up in his face as part of her mission to keep stoking the fears of White America. Every time she does this I shout at the TV, "Say it, Obama! Say that when she and her husband were having marital difficulties regarding Monica Lewinsky, who did she and Bill bring to the White House for 'spiritual counseling?' THE REVEREND JEREMIAH WRIGHT!"

But no, Obama won't throw that at her. It wouldn't be right. It wouldn't be decent. She's been through enough hurt. And so he remains silent and takes the mud she throws in his face.

That's why the crowds who come to see him are so large. That's why he'll take us down a more decent path. That's why I would vote for him if Michigan were allowed to have an election.

But the question I keep hearing is... 'can he win? Can he win in November?' In the distance we hear the siren of the death train called the Straight Talk Express. We know it's possible to hear the words "President McCain" on January 20th. We know there are still many Americans who will never vote for a black man. Hillary knows it, too. She's counting on it.

Pennsylvania, the state that gave birth to this great country, has a chance to set things right. It has not had a moment to shine like this since 1787 when our Constitution was written there. In that Constitution, they wrote that a black man or woman was only "three fifths" human. On Tuesday, the good people of Pennsylvania have a chance for redemption.

Yours,
Michael Moore

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/blogspot/zgdF/~3/274702915/my-votes-for-obama-if-i
-could-vote-by.html

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

Michael Moore, Superdelegate Go for Obama

Activist and documentary filmmaker Michael Moore has today endorsed Barack Obama for President, taking a swipe at Hillary Clinton in the process saying her "actions and words...have gone from being merely disappointing to downright disgusting."

On Moore's website, he said that the final straw was the ABC debate last week. "I've watched Senator Clinton and her husband play this game of appealing to the worst side of white people, but last Wednesday, when she hurled the name "Farrakhan" out of nowhere, well that's when the silly season came to an early end for me. She said the "F" word to scare white people, pure and simple." Moore said in his statement.

"Of course, Obama has no connection to Farrakhan. But, according to Senator Clinton, Obama's pastor does -- AND the "church bulletin" once included a Los Angeles Times op-ed from some guy with Hamas! No, not the church bulletin!"

Moore says that although he cant vote in Michigan, the voters of Pennsylvania have a chance to "set things right. It has not had a moment to shine like this since 1787 when our Constitution was written there. In that Constitution, they wrote that a black man or woman was only "three fifths" human. On Tuesday, the good people of Pennsylvania have a chance for redemption.

And in yet another blow to the Clinton campaign, superdelegate from Ohio Enid Goubeaux has today also endorsed Obama ahead of Clinton. In the superdelegate race, Obama is catching Clinton, trailing by only 24 votes, 238 to 262.

Read The Full Article:
http://2008obama.blogspot.com/2008/04/michael-moore-superdelegate-go-for.html

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

Scorecards for the PA Primary Night

Photo: PA Youth Sign Up for Obama

More Than One
Way To Win
- And Lose!

[Here's a variety of goalposts and scorecards to keep in mind when watching the PA primary returns Tuesday night. --CarlD]

"Once again, Senator Clinton's campaign has resorted to denying both the obvious ? and their previous comments ? by saying they'd be pleased with a narrow victory in Pennsylvania on Tuesday.

"After enjoying a 20-point lead in the polls and the support of nearly every member of Pennsylvania's political establishment, Senator Clinton needs a blow-out victory on Tuesday to meet expectations. Meanwhile, Senator Obama is pleased with our campaign's progress in building support among Pennsylvania voters of all ages in every corner of the Keystone State and is looking forward to a strong showing on Tuesday night,"

--Pennsylvania's Obama communications director, Leslie Miller.

--------------------

PUNDITS AND CLINTON CAMPAIGN AGREE:
HILLARY MUST WIN "BIG" IN PENNSYLVANIA

Bill Clinton: Hillary's "Got To Win A Big Victory. If She Wins A Big, Big Victory In Pennsylvania, I Think It'll Give Her A Real Big Boost Going Into The Next Primaries." After a rare two-day hiatus, Bill Clinton returned to the campaign trail today in Pennsylvania, a state he promised that his family expects to cover "like a wet blanket between now and April 22." The former president again set the bar for his wife's campaign, saying, "She's got to win a big victory" in the Keystone State. "If she wins a big, big victory in Pennsylvania, I think it'll give her a real big boost going into the next primaries," he said in a crowded senior center in this Western Pennsylvania town. [MSNBC, 3/11/08]



WSJ: "Anything Less Than A Double-Digit Victory Could Solidify The Perception" That Obama Is The "Inevitable Nominee." "Anything less than a double-digit victory could solidify the perception that Illinois Sen. Barack Obama is the inevitable Democratic nominee, sparking a flow of superdelegates to his side." [WSJ, 4/18/08]



Philadelphia Inquirer: "The Consensus With The Political Community" Is That Clinton Has To Win The State By Double Digits "To Be Able To Claim She'd Won It A Way That Matter In The Overall Nomination Struggle." "The consensus within the political community has been that Hillary Rodham Clinton had to take the state big, perhaps by double digits, to be able to claim that she'd won it a way that matters in the overall nomination struggle -- given her deficits in both the delegate race and the overall popular voter." [Philadelphia Inquirer, 4/3/08]

Newsweek: If Clinton Wins By Less Than 10 Points, The "Noise Will Grow Louder For Her To Drop Out." "If Obama upsets Clinton in Pennsylvania on April 22, all sides seem to agree that it's game over. If Clinton wins narrowly?by less than 10 points?the noise will grow louder for her to drop out and crescendo if she loses Indiana." [Newsweek, 4/14/08]

New York Times: Clinton Has To "Swamp" Obama In PA. "Clinton not only has to win Pennsylvania on April 22, she has to swamp Mr. Obama there. And she has to go on and post a convincing win against Mr. Obama in Indiana, a state where the two appear evenly matched." [New York Times, 3/24/08]

Halperin: Clinton Has To Win The Popular Vote By More Than 10.5% And Has To Cut Into Obama's Popular Vote Lead And Meaningfully Slice In Obama's Delegate Lead. "She has to win the popular vote by more than 10.5% or the media will say she didn't beat expectations (and her Ohio margin); She has to cut into Obama's national popular vote lead with a big Pennsylvania popular vote win and high turnout; She has to net enough delegates to meaningfully slice into Obama's lead (or you will hear the Obama campaign yawn loudly)." [The Page, 4/2/08]

The Hill: "Analysts Agree That A Single-Digit Win For Clinton Would Actually Be Viewed As A Loss." "Given the large leads the New York senator held from the time the focus shifted to Pennsylvania, analysts agree that a single-digit win for Clinton would actually be viewed as a loss." [The Hill, 4/1/08]

Shrum: Clinton "Should Win The State By Double Digits?And She Has To." Bob Shrum: "Pennsylvania, the next test, is both ideal ground for this message and a demographic nightmare for Mr. Obama. She should win the state by double digits ? and she has to." [Bob Shrum, NYT, 4/4/08]

Sabato: Clinton Needs To Win By "A Landslide" of 10 Percent or More To Have A Chance At Winning The Nomination. "To have any chance, however, Clinton can't merely win Pennsylvania, said [Larry] Sabato. 'She needs a landslide,' normally a victory margin or 10 percent or more, to ignite support in the remaining states, he said." [Star-Ledger, 3/30/08]

Chicago Tribune's Paul West: "Anything Less Than The 10-Point Spread Of Her Ohio Victory Could Well Be Seen As A Setback." "To Remain A Credible Contender," Clinton Needs To Win PA By More Than 10 Points. "To remain a credible contender, she needs to win Pennsylvania, preferably by a substantial margin (anything less than the 10-point spread of her Ohio victory could well be seen as a setback) and then surprise him in several of the May primaries, including North Carolina, the last big state to vote. Former President Bill Clinton has said that his wife needs to run up the score in the remaining primaries to convince superdelegates that she would be the stronger candidate against McCain and deserves their vote." [Chicago Tribune, 3/26/08]

Noam Scheiber: Obama Getting Within 10 Points Of Clinton "Would Be A Moral Victory Of Sorts." "I still don't think he (Obama) can win, but he's got a shot of getting within ten points, which would be a moral victory of sorts." [TNR, 3/28/08]

CLINTON CAMPAIGN AND ITS SURROGATES
HAVE PREDICTED CLINTON WILL CARRY PENNSYLVANIA

Rendell: "I Think [Hillary] Can Win By Double Digits." Ed Rendell: "I told you there was no way we were 16 points. We have been outspent somewhere between 3 and 4 to 1. For her to win by 8 points will be terrific. I think she can win by double digits, but for her to win by 7 or 8 points being outspent 4 to 1, guys. That almost never happens in politics." [Fox News, 4/15/08]

Rendell: "We'll Win It Somewhere Between 5 And 9, 5 And 10 Percentage Points." Gov. Ed Rendell: "So I'm saying that we will win this state, but we'll win it somewhere between 5 and 9, 5 and 10 percentage points. But any victory over a man who outspends you 3-to-1 and is a good a campaigner as Barack Obama is, is an impressive victory." [MTP, 4/6/08]

Murtha: Clinton's Going To Win PA By Double Digits. Murtha: Sure. I think he could win Pennsylvania in the end. I think Hillary Clinton's going to win it by a double-digit figure. There is no question in my mind about that. Matthews: Double digits. Murtha: Double digits. [MSNBC, 4/1/08]

Rendell: "I Always Believe That If We Got To Pennsylvania, Hillary Clinton Would Carry The State. It's A Very Good State For Her; People Forget It's Really Her Hometown." Rendell: "Well, I always believe that if we got to Pennsylvania, Hillary Clinton would carry the state. It's a very good state for her; people forget it's really her hometown. It's where she grew up in the northeast section of the state. She'll do very well there; she and Bill Clinton probably were in southeast Pennsylvania more than any other big city in the country. The Philadelphia area. They contributed to the turnaround of the city of Philadelphia in the '90s. It's the second oldest state in the Union, second only to Florida. The demographics are good, the history is good. She'll do very well." [MSNBC, 3/5/08]

Rep. Allyson Schwartz: "Hillary Clinton Will Carry Pennsylvania." "Hillary Clinton will carry Pennsylvania," Representative Allyson Schwartz, who represents part of northeast Philadelphia and nearby suburbs, said in an interview on Bloomberg Television's "Political Capital with Al Hunt." [Bloomberg, 3/7/08]

Clinton Spokesman Mark Nevins: "We Operate From The Assumption That Pennsylvania Is Clinton Country." "We operate from the assumption that Pennsylvania is Clinton country," said Mark Nevins, Clinton's state spokesman. Nevins, who joined the campaign two weeks ago, said Clinton's operation essentially mirrors what Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) had in place four years ago when he beat President Bush in Pennsylvania. "We can build a team here that is unbeatable," Nevins said. "Even if the other side runs more television ads or sends more mailings, they can't beat us on the ground. We've got the support of the people that control the infrastructure here in the state. We've got that institutional structure that can deliver people on Election Day." [Washington Post, 3/7/08]

OUTSIDE GROUPS ARE SPENGING BIG
FOR CLINTON AND INTEND ON SPENDING MORE

American Leadership Project Has Spent $450K On TV Advertising For Clinton. "The American Leadership Project, a 527 group supportive of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton that recently began broadcasting commercials in Pennsylvania, increased its purchase of television time today in the state. The group had started out with about $250,000 in television advertising, a relatively small amount, in northeastern and central Pennsylvania in the Altoona and Scranton/Wilkes-Barre television markets, according to representatives of the group. Today, it added its commercial that praises Mrs. Clinton on health care to the Pittsburgh market, spending an additional $200,000." [NYT, 4/17/08]

Clinton Is Getting Help From The American Federation Of Teachers And Emily's List, Which Have "Both Spent Heavily On Mailings And Radio Ads. "Clinton advisers said they think that Obama's edge on the airwaves in Pennsylvania has been neutralized by extensive media coverage and that the support of key elected leaders, including Pennsylvania Gov. Edward G. Rendell, will help them offset whatever organizational advantages Obama may have. Clinton is also getting help from the American Federation of Teachers and the women's political group Emily's List, which have both spent heavily on mailings and radio ads in recent days. Aronchick said that calls for Clinton to leave the race have boosted her support." [Washington Post, 4/4/08]

The AFT Spent More Than $300K Already On A Radio Buy And Was Considering A TV Ad. The American Federation of Teachers reported today it has bought more than $329,000 in radio ads to support Democrat Hillary Clinton's presidential bid, and may have a television ad coming soon to compliment the radio buy. [Washington Post, 3/31/08]

CLINTON HAS LONG HAD A LARGE LEAD
IN POLLING IN PENNSYLVANIA

Clinton Led Obama By 17 Points 4 Weeks Before The PA Primary According to An Average Of Polls. Clinton leads Obama by 17 percentage points, according to an average of Pennsylvania polls by the website Real Clear Politics, and polls show that most voters have already made up their minds. She has the backing of the popular Gov. Ed Rendell and the mayors of the state's two largest cities, Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, not to mention an impressive slew of congressmen, county chairmen and assemblymen, making her unquestionably Pennsylvania's establishment candidate. Clinton has also installed her A-team in the Keystone state. Mary Eisenhower, granddaughter of Dwight D. and a force in Pennsylvania politics, is her state director. Mark Nevins, John Kerry's state director in 2004, is also onboard, as is Nick Clemens, who ran Clinton's campaign in New Hampshire. They have 12 offices open now and expect to soon open another eight. And they have over 200 paid staff in the state. [Time Magazine, 3/25/08]

Survey USA: 6 Weeks Before The PA Primary, Clinton Led Obama By 19 Points. According to polling done by Survey USA that was released on 3/11, Clinton led Obama by 19 points 55% to 36%. [Survey USA, 3/11/06]

Rasmussen: 6 Weeks Before The PA Primary, Clinton Led Obama By 15 Points. According to polling done by Rasmussen Reports that was released on 3/6, Clinton led Obama by 15 points 52% to 37%. [Rasmussen Reports, 3/6/08]

http://progressivesforobama.blogspot.com

Read The Full Article:
http://progressivesforobama.blogspot.com/2008/04/scorecards-for-pa-primary-night_
21.html

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!