Obama i SAD (2008-2016)

[jeza u ledja]

It's specifically designed for the purpose of having the insiders ... have some sort of final decision over who the nominee is going to be, regardless of what the voters want."

dje su oni "excited" od neki dan!!

Sta hoces da kazes?

[walkabout]

Mecka josh nije zaigrala...

Ili mozda jeste?

...3 hours ago, from Fox News...

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

George H.W. Bush stood shoulder to shoulder with John McCain on Monday, offering an endorsement to the presumptive Republican presidential nominee.

Mathematically, statistically, symbolically and politically, McCain is just inches from winning the nomination, and the former president’s endorsement offers a signal that the Republican powerhouse family is coalescing around the candidate. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush has already endorsed McCain for president.

“I did not come here to tell any other candidate what to do, a very wise man once said influence is something you always have until you actually try to exert it,” Bush said from the Houston Hobby Airport in Texas, where he was joined by his wife, Barbara.

“Now is the right time for me to help John in his effort to start building the broad base coalition it will take for our conservative values to carry the White House this fall. His character was forged in the crucible of war. His commitment to America is beyond any doubt, but most importantly he has the right values and experience to guide our nation forward at this historic moment,” said the former president.

“I think that President Bush’s endorsement honors me, I believe it will help us enormously in that process of uniting our party as we move forward,” McCain said with his wife, Cindy, by his side. “President Bush, Barbara, I can ensure you that Cindy and I will do everything we can to make sure that you are proud and that your support of our candidacy will be something that you can look back on as having been the right thing to do.”

McCain campaign officials say they expect the current President Bush to endorse the candidate once he has numerically clinched the nomination. Once that happens, the McCain campaign must build its national organization for a general election.

Five or six senior campaign insiders spent the weekend at the senator’s ranch in Sedona, Ariz., to hold a private powwow on who they should hire for that campaign; what their national electoral college map should be; how best to use President George W. Bush on the stump in terms of fundraising and campaigning; which members of Congress McCain needs to court and spend time with; and who McCain will stump for on the campaign trail.

But most pressing among those questions is how they will craft a strategy for the Democratic nominee, who is undetermined at this time. The campaign is beginning to develop to competing scenarios to challenge either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton.

For McCain, among his biggest challenges will be to fend off from either Democratic candidate claims that a McCain victory would amount to a third Bush term. Speaking Sunday, McCain said he has been a critic of the Bush administration’s conduct of the war, and pointed to fighting global warming and wasteful government spending as two major differences between him and the current president.

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

Vec cujem voditelja na nekoj od Fox TV stanica, avgusta 2008-e...:


Ladies and Gentlemen,
Please welcome our presidential candidates - John Sidney McCain and our black candidate Barack Hussein Osama...


A Joe Average slusa, i trebat ce mu dobrih 5 sekundi da odluci...

Samo je neizvjesno da li ce mu bit potrebno "ponoviti" jos jednom da bi "cementirao" odluku...

PS. Eno, prije 5 sati Obama imao susretanje sa Edwardsom - ko biva munta ga da mu pomogne...ako je kake koristi...

[jeza u ledja]

Friski rezultati danas iz Wisconsina:

Obama 58%
Clinton 41%



Lagano.

[pitt]

sto kazu republikanci........life is a bitch.....don't vote for one :D:D:D

[jeza u ledja]

Friski rezultati sa Havaja:

Obama 76%
Clinton 24%


Idemo dalje.




PA-RAM-PAAAA
PA-RAM-PAAAA

(muzika iz Rockyja)

[repeater]

.. His commitment to America is beyond any doubt, but most importantly he has the right values and experience to guide our nation forward at this historic moment,” said the former president.

hoce reci, to pull us out of shit.
zasto se nije nasao neki mangup da ga pita:
Mr. President and what if McCain dies of heart failure on his first flight to China.
Answer: (smirk) That's why I am endorsing Huckabee as a VP ..

[walkabout]

sto kazu republikanci........life is a bitch.....don't vote for one :D:D:D

Da li se zna ko je vlasnik The Economist-a?

PS. @repeater, da, za neke bi McCain/Huckabee bio "dream team"...

[pitt]

kakve veze ima ko je vlasnik? Ovo je bila anketa, a slicni su rezultati i sa drugih izvora. Negativna kampanja koju je hilari zapocela se gadi i bogu i narodu.

[jeza u ledja]

PS. @repeater, da, za neke bi McCain/Huckabee bio "dream team"...

Ma taj Huckabee je zalutao u politiku. Totalno neozbiljan lik, od pocetka pa evo i sad.

[walkabout]

kakve veze ima ko je vlasnik?

Zar ti mislis da nema?

Ovo je bila anketa,

Pise u novinama, mora da je istina...

a slicni su rezultati i sa drugih izvora.

Bilo koja informacija iz realnosti se moze uzeti i podebljati, samo ako sluzi krajnjem cilju - a to je?

Negativna kampanja koju je hilari zapocela se gadi

Izgleda da sam sretan sto to ne moram svakodnevno gledati na TV

i bogu

Pa zar si i ti vjernik - ah, da, zaboravio sam - mekteblija

i narodu.

Narod ko narod, sve nekako pregura...

@repeater, ne bih ja rekao da je Huckabee neozbiljan (nastranu sto to tako jeste sa nekog (nama?) normalnog stajalista) - treba samo posmatrati one koji ga podrzavaju , kako birace tako i donosioce odluka. Huckabee je tu i on upotpunjuje ukupnu sliku danasnje US, svidjalo se nama ili ne.

[Hantraga]

hikmeta i hantraga hajde ba recite otvoreno da ne volite crnje, nemojte više toga okolo okolo vrtilo se kolo ko oko sokolovo

A ti karabaja priznaj da si sovinista, jel nembi mogo podnjet da ti je zena komadant...

Kao sto rekoh i prije, nek vala izaberu najboljeg kandidata, sam da se republikanac skine sa fotelje...Briga me jel, crn, bjel, zensko ili musko...

Ja razumijem euforiju promjena, isto ko kad se raja na ovom Websitu napali na Komsica, ali u realnosti stvari izgledaju puno drugacije...

Ja zivim na Midwestu, i gledam oko sebe...Pola ih nemere zamisliti da zena bude predsjednik, a ona polovina nemoze da zamisli da crnac bude predsjednik...

Sto potvrdjuje posljednja anketa u drzavi Missouri, da nebitno ko ide protiv McCaina, hilari ili Obama, McCain dobija Missouri...

A inace je Missouri jedna od onih drzava na kojoj se moze prelomiti, tam ili vam...Znaci nije tradicionalno crvena drzava...

pricajte vi kolko hocete, ali kad Zeljo ili Sarajevo udje u Ligu Sampiona, tad ce mozda i crnac biti predjsednik USA...

Zasto je onda u Missouriju na prajmariz za Dems glasalo 800k+, a za Reps manje od 600k?

(Oba su bila open primaries, oba su bila u isto vrijeme i oba su bila kad su Romney i Huckabee jos bili aktuelni)

Pa to jeste cudno, zato sma i napisao da je u nedavnoj anketi McCain dobio, nebitno protiv Obame ili Hilari...


Sve mi se cini da ce Obama shrvati Hilari, ali se bojim da nemoze pobjediti McCaina...

[jeza u ledja]

kakve veze ima ko je vlasnik?

Zar ti mislis da nema?

Ovo je bila anketa,

Pise u novinama, mora da je istina...

a slicni su rezultati i sa drugih izvora.

Bilo koja informacija iz realnosti se moze uzeti i podebljati, samo ako sluzi krajnjem cilju - a to je?

Negativna kampanja koju je hilari zapocela se gadi

Izgleda da sam sretan sto to ne moram svakodnevno gledati na TV

i bogu

Pa zar si i ti vjernik - ah, da, zaboravio sam - mekteblija

i narodu.

Narod ko narod, sve nekako pregura...

@repeater, ne bih ja rekao da je Huckabee neozbiljan (nastranu sto to tako jeste sa nekog (nama?) normalnog stajalista) - treba samo posmatrati one koji ga podrzavaju , kako birace tako i donosioce odluka. Huckabee je tu i on upotpunjuje ukupnu sliku danasnje US, svidjalo se nama ili ne.

Valjda se meni obracas?
Mislim, neozbiljan je kao kandidat, kao politicar. Cijela kampanja mu je totalno neorganizirana. Recimo sjecam se kad je u decembru kao napravio napadacku reklamu protiv Romneyja, onda pozvao novinare i rekao im kako je u posljednjem trenu odlucio da ne pusta tu reklamu u promet, ali ipak eto da im pokaze sta je napravio, da ne bude da je blefirao.
Onda je izjavio kako bi ukinuo IRS u potpunosti, a taxe bi naplacivao na prodajnim cijenama. Mislim ono, to ni Ron Paul ne bi lupio.
Zajebava se na debatama, zbija sale, svirucka. Mislim sve je to fino, ali ako nemas nikakvu substance ostavljas dojam dilajle.
I evo sad kao vrhunac, trosi pare u kampanji takmiceci se bez ikakve sanse da pobjedi. Ocigledno ga je neko nagovorio (neocons) da sjebaje koncepciju McCainu da se pokaze kako iza njega ne stoji baza. Cemu to sluzi osim da im razjedinjuje partiju? Eto on kao uziva u kampanji, pa nije to zajebancija pa da uzivas. Recimo i Bush je pricao istu pricu kao ovaj, ali je barem imao ozbiljnu organizaciju iza sebe. Ovaj je samo sarlatan koji je naucio drzati govore u crkvi gdje svi vicu 'ej-men'. Mislim, zao mi je covjeka posto je ocigledno dobrica, ali mi je potpuno jasno kako bi ga izmuzli neocons i upravljali njim jos gore nego sa Bushom.
McCain je ozbiljan cova i nema sanse da zaposli ovog zajebanta.

[jeza u ledja]

A ti karabaja priznaj da si sovinista, jel nembi mogo podnjet da ti je zena komadant...

Kao sto rekoh i prije, nek vala izaberu najboljeg kandidata, sam da se republikanac skine sa fotelje...Briga me jel, crn, bjel, zensko ili musko...

Ja razumijem euforiju promjena, isto ko kad se raja na ovom Websitu napali na Komsica, ali u realnosti stvari izgledaju puno drugacije...

Ja zivim na Midwestu, i gledam oko sebe...Pola ih nemere zamisliti da zena bude predsjednik, a ona polovina nemoze da zamisli da crnac bude predsjednik...

Sto potvrdjuje posljednja anketa u drzavi Missouri, da nebitno ko ide protiv McCaina, hilari ili Obama, McCain dobija Missouri...

A inace je Missouri jedna od onih drzava na kojoj se moze prelomiti, tam ili vam...Znaci nije tradicionalno crvena drzava...

pricajte vi kolko hocete, ali kad Zeljo ili Sarajevo udje u Ligu Sampiona, tad ce mozda i crnac biti predjsednik USA...

Zasto je onda u Missouriju na prajmariz za Dems glasalo 800k+, a za Reps manje od 600k?

(Oba su bila open primaries, oba su bila u isto vrijeme i oba su bila kad su Romney i Huckabee jos bili aktuelni)

Pa to jeste cudno, zato sma i napisao da je u nedavnoj anketi McCain dobio, nebitno protiv Obame ili Hilari...


Sve mi se cini da ce Obama shrvati Hilari, ali se bojim da nemoze pobjediti McCaina...

U kakvoj anketi je McCain dobio? Ne kontam. Ja govorim kako su u MO Dems dobili vise glasova od Reps, a dovoljno je par tih swing states da Dems uzmu predsjednistvo.

Svaka Obama vs McCain anketa koju sam ja vidio donosi vise boba ovom prvom.

[pitt]

ja sto me naljepi :D:D
Pa economist je vecinsko vlasnistvo Financial Times, to jest Pearson PLC, dok ostatak su individualni investori, vecinom radnici. Novina jeste konzervativna ali to se samo odnosi na ekonomiju. Do sada nisu podrzali niti jednog od kandidata.

[walkabout]

Evo jednog clanka, maloprije procitah...

McCain zadaje aperkat Obami...

Obama se zahuktava i izgleda da prestize Hillary...

Drama se intenzivira...

Bolje nego bilo koja safunica...

PS. @jezha, da , bilo je za tebe, promaklo mi, izvini...

PS. vidjoh i pitt-ov komentar...hvala na informacijama za The Economist...a nije lijepljenje...radije diskusija...valja nam rijesiti ove svjecke probleme...

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

Anne Davies Herald Correspondent in Washington
February 21, 2008

THE leading Republican presidential candidate, John McCain, has Barack Obama in his sights, launching a pointed attack on the Illinois senator as the Democratic contender stormed to victory in contests in Wisconsin and Hawaii.

Senator McCain's broadside on Tuesday night signalled that the Republicans now view Senator Obama as their most likely opponent in the general election for president.

Senator Obama won the contest in Wisconsin with a healthy 58 per cent of the vote to Senator Hillary Clinton's 41 per cent.

In Hawaii, which held caucuses - a series of town hall meetings where people vote in an open forum - Senator Obama won handily, taking his number of straight wins to 10.

What will unnerve the Clinton campaign strategists most are signs in the Wisconsin exit polls that Senator Obama is making deeper inroads into Senator Clinton's key support groups.

The surveys revealed that of people who made up their minds in the last 20 days, 62 per cent chose Senator Obama.

Until now Senator Clinton has done better among women, older voters and among the working class. The economy has also been her issue.

But Senator Obama held Senator Clinton to a statistical tie among people who said they had a union member in their household - 50 per cent for Senator Clinton to 49 per cent for Senator Obama - and scored higher among women, 51 per cent to 49 per cent. Some 55 per cent of people who nominated the economy as the No. 1 issue nominated Senator Obama as the best person to deal with it, compared with 43 per cent for Senator Clinton.

He also won another crucial measure - who is more electable - by 63 per cent to Senator Clinton's 37 per cent.

Senator McCain comfortably won the Republican primary in Wisconsin with 55 per cent of the vote to the former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee's 37 per cent. And he was leading easily in the Washington state caucuses at press time. He has already begun honing the lines he will use against Senator Obama.

"I will do everything in my power to make sure the American people are not deceived by an eloquent but empty call for change," he said from Ohio in his victory speech.

Senator Obama's words offered "no more than a holiday from history and failed policies that rely on government intervention in the lives of Americans", he said.

Senator McCain vowed to save America from the risk of a "confused leader" who had proposed bombing America's ally Pakistan, and who has said he would sit down with America's enemies.

Senator Obama shot back in a speech he delivered before 20,000 people in Houston, Texas. "Strong countries and strong presidents talk to their enemies, without resort to war," he said.

"John McCain is a genuine American hero but when he embraces George Bush's failed economic policies, when he says he will send troops into a 100-years war, he represents the failed policies of yesterday."

Senator Obama continued his attack on Senator Clinton as the establishment candidate, although he did not name her. He said the problem was not a lack of good ideas, but that Washington was the place where "good ideas went to die".

In the Democratic race, the battle now turns to Texas and Ohio, which vote on March 3. Both are must-win states if Senator Clinton wants to keep her presidential hopes alive.

A new SurveyUSA poll has Senator Clinton leading 52-43 in Ohio (down from 56-39 a week ago), while in Texas the two candidates are said to be neck and neck.

[pitt]

ovo je naslovnica zadnjeg economista:



Barack Obama

But could he deliver?

Feb 14th 2008
From The Economist print edition


It is time for America to evaluate Obama the potential president, not Obama the phenomenon


THIS has been an extraordinary week for the man who could become America's first black president. Barack Obama has now won all eight of the primaries and caucuses held since Super Tuesday on February 5th, which ended, more or less, in a dead heat with Hillary Clinton. He has won by much larger margins than most people expected, trouncing his rival not just in heavily black states, such as Louisiana, but in ones that are almost completely white, such as Maine. On February 12th he took all three prizes in the “Potomac primary”—Washington, DC, Maryland and, by a socking 29-point margin, Virginia.

Mr Obama now has more pledged delegates than his rival—and he is likely to remain the front-runner for at least another three weeks (see article). Revealingly, Mrs Clinton made her Virginian concession speech from Texas—a state which votes alongside Ohio on March 4th and is already being billed as her last stand. Mr Obama is raising money at the rate of $1m a day, twice as fast as she is; indeed, she has been forced to lend her campaign $5m of her own cash and fire the two people who run her campaign (although her husband has a big say).

Whatever happens, Mr Obama is already that rare thing—a political phenomenon. It is not just that he has managed to survive the Clintons' crude onslaught with grace. He has persuaded huge numbers of people around the world to reconsider politics in an optimistic way. To many Americans, a black man who eschews both racial politics and the conservative-liberal divide is a chance to heal the country's two deepest divisions. To many foreigners, he represents an idealistic version of America—the hope of a more benevolent superpower. Although Mr Obama's slogan “Yes We Can” has been turned into a pop video, the theme of his campaign echoes the Clintons' old tune—“Don't stop thinking about tomorrow”.

Optimism is a powerful emotion, but as that song warned, “tomorrow will soon be here.” That is why the real questioning of Mr Obama should begin now. With the brief exception of those four heady days after the Iowa caucuses, he has never been a front-runner; now he will be more fully scrutinised. The immediate focus will be on the horse race: can he win? But the bigger issue, which has so far occupied too little attention, is this: what would a President Obama, as opposed to Phenomenon Obama, really mean for America and the world?



Yes, you can; but not immediately
Begin with the horse race. Mrs Clinton is in a bad way—and deservedly so. The Clintons have fought a leaden and nasty campaign; at present, the prospect of a “Billary presidency” (even before you take into account the dynastic Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton aspect) is hardly enthralling. But Mrs Clinton is tough and smart, and now her rival will be under the media microscope. In debates she trumps Mr Obama on mastery of detail—and the race could well be a long, grinding one, perhaps decided in the end by the 796 “super delegates” from the Democratic Party's establishment. These people have tended to be loyal to the Clintons—though many might defect if polls still showed Mr Obama doing better against John McCain.

Mr McCain, whose lock on the Republican nomination looks stronger than ever following his own triple victory in the Potomac primary, is another part of tomorrow Mr Obama's euphoric supporters might think about. The Republicans are a mess, and the elderly Arizonan senator has plainly failed to stir up his party's supporters in the same way as either of the main Democrats. But Mr McCain is a brave man, with huge experience of international affairs and a much longer record of reaching out to his opponents in politics. Why should independent voters, who have often backed Mr McCain in the past, turn to the less proven man?



Of magnets and magic dust
That question is partly answered by Obama the phenomenon. His immediate effect on international relations could be dramatic: a black president, partly brought up in a Muslim country, would transform America's image. And his youthful optimism could work at home too. After the bitterness of the Bush years, America needs a dose of unity: Mr Obama has a rare ability to deliver it. And the power of charisma should not be underrated, especially in the context of the American presidency which is, constitutionally, quite a weak office. The best presidents are like magnets below a piece of paper, invisibly aligning iron filings into a new pattern of their making. Anyone can get experts to produce policy papers. The trick is to forge consensus to get those policies enacted.

But what policies exactly? Mr Obama's voting record in the Senate is one of the most left-wing of any Democrat. Even if he never voted for the Iraq war, his policy for dealing with that country now seems to amount to little more than pulling out quickly, convening a peace conference, inviting the Iranians and the Syrians along and hoping for the best. On the economy, his plans are more thought out, but he often tells people only that they deserve more money and more opportunities. If one lesson from the wasted Bush years is that needless division is bad, another is that incompetence is perhaps even worse. A man who has never run any public body of any note is a risk, even if his campaign has been a model of discipline.

And the Obama phenomenon would not always be helpful, because it would raise expectations to undue heights. Budgets do not magically cut themselves, even if both parties are in awe of the president; the Middle East will not heal, just because a president's second name is Hussein. Choices will have to be made—and foes created even when there is no intention to do so. Indeed, something like that has already happened in his campaign. The post-racial candidate has ended up relying heavily on black votes (and in some places even highlighting the divide between Latinos and blacks).

None of this is to take away from Mr Obama's achievement—or to imply that he could not rise to the challenges of the job in hand. But there is a sense in which he has hitherto had to jump over a lower bar than his main rivals have. For America's sake (and the world's), that bar should now be raised—or all kinds of brutal disappointment could follow.

[jeza u ledja]

Na kraju ce u Tx Obama uzeti i trka ce biti gotova za dvije sedmice. Pazite sta sam vam rekao.

U svakoj drzavi do sada kad su pravili ankete 3-4 sedmice unaprijed Clintonova je bila 20-30 boba ispred. Kako se prajmari u toj drzavi priblizava razlika se smanjuje i na kraju Obama vecinu njih uzme. Tako ce biti i u Tx, a u Oh ce mozda izgubiti, ali sa malom razlikom.

Analiticari su rekli da Clintonovoj trebaju visoke pobjede u OH i TX (60-40%) da uopste ostane u utrci.

[pitt]

i dva odlicna clanka o obje trke

The Democratic race

His to lose
Feb 14th 2008 | WASHINGTON, DC
From The Economist print edition

Barack Obama is now the clear front-runner for the Democratic nomination

SATURDAY February 9th an overflowing crowd of Virginians got a chance to see the Democratic presidential candidates giving duelling speeches at the Jefferson-Jackson dinner in Richmond. More interesting than anything the candidates said, however, was the detritus afterwards. The crowds stripped the place clean of Obama signs, tearing every last one off the walls. Hillary signs were abandoned on chairs and trampled under foot.

Abandoned and trampled upon: that has been the story of Mrs Clinton's week. Since her successes on Super Tuesday, Barack Obama has won eight primaries and caucuses by wide—sometimes astonishing—margins. He won the Washington state caucus by 37 points. In Garfield County 100% of voters plumped for him. He won Maine by 19 points, Louisiana by 21 and Nebraska by 36.

The so-called Potomac primary completed his winning streak: he won Virginia by 29 points, Maryland by 23 points, and the District of Columbia by the minor matter of 51 points. He has now won 22 of the 35 races, beating Mrs Clinton in the last eight. In the delegate count estimated by CNN he leads by around 120 if you count only pledged delegates and over 40 if you include “superdelegates” (bigwigs with ex officio vote at the convention). He is ahead of Mrs Clinton for the first time in national polls.

The Clinton machine has done its best to minimise Mr Obama's victories. He can only win in caucus states, the argument goes; or only in small states; or among young voters; or in states with large black populations. Mr Obama has crushed all these claims. Maine and Washington are white states with older than average voters. Virginia and Maryland both hold primaries. Virginia is exactly the sort of big Southern state that the Democrats would dearly love to win in November (it voted for George Bush in 2000 and 2004).

Mr Obama has not only solidified his hold over his core constituents—blacks, the young, independents and educated white liberals. He has driven a truck into Mrs Clinton's coalition. In Virginia he won 52% of the white vote to Mrs Clinton's 47%, 54% of the (admittedly small) Latino vote to Mrs Clinton's 46%, 55% of people 65 and over to Mrs Clinton's 45%. He won every income group handily.



Mrs Clinton's decision to campaign in Texas rather than Wisconsin after her defeats shows how defensive she has become. Wisconsin (which holds its primary on February 19th) is full of the sort of white working-class voters who ought to be solid Clinton supporters—and who handed the state to her husband twice in the 1990s.

The Billary campaign is in turmoil. Over the weekend Mrs Clinton fired her campaign manager, Patti Solis Doyle, and replaced her with Maggie Williams, her former chief of staff. On Tuesday night her deputy campaign manager, Mike Henry, also resigned. This housecleaning was a bid to shore up support among panicky donors and superdelegates. But it also reflects a troubled organisation. Mrs Clinton's campaign has been riven by faction-fights between the “white boys” who are close to her husband and “the Hillary klix” who are close to her. It has also been hobbled by the reluctance of her advisers to bring the boss bad news. Mrs Solis Doyle's departure was reportedly precipitated by her failure to tell Mrs Clinton that her campaign was running out of money. Mrs Clinton, it seems, had to lend the campaign $5m of her own cash.

This turmoil is significant for more than the obvious reason that it is dangerous to switch key staff in the middle of a campaign. It suggests that Mrs Clinton underestimated the challenge posed by Mr Obama. She expected everything to be wrapped up by Super Tuesday, and is now putting together her campaign on the fly. It also undermines her claim to be a CEO-type figure who will be ready to run the country on day one. Mr Obama has run a steadier campaign. He has consistently out-organised and out-planned his rival.

Can the Clinton machine recover? Mrs Clinton has three things on her side. The first is her “firewall”—the states of Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania. At least one in three of Democratic voters in Texas will be Latino, a group that has favoured Mrs Clinton in the past. Mrs Clinton is ahead in the polls in Ohio, a classic blue-collar state, by almost 20 points. These two vote on March 4th. Much of Pennsylvania, which votes on April 22nd, is also Clinton-friendly, and the popular governor, Ed Rendell, is working hard on her behalf. Between them, the three states choose 492 delegates.



The second is time. Mr Obama's message of “change” and “hope” is becoming a little tiresome. As he becomes the front-runner, media klix is bound to intensify. And Mrs Clinton will take every opportunity, not least in two forthcoming debates, to attack him on substance, particularly about national security and the economy. Is Mr Obama tough enough to stand up to John McCain on security (security-minded voters tend to favour Mrs Clinton by a wide margin)? Is he experienced enough to save the economy from free-fall? Her quip on Tuesday night—that Mr Obama is “all hat and no cattle”—will provide the subtext of everything she says.

Her third advantage is the peculiar arithmetic of the delegate race. Even if Mr Obama wins every contest from now on by a five-point margin he will not gain the magic number of pledged delegates needed to secure the nomination. The Clintons are lobbying the superdelegates furiously. They are even prepared to push hard to seat the “ghost delegates” from Florida and Michigan in the convention. These are delegates elected in those states in primaries held in defiance of party rules (and hence not recognised by the party). Mr Obama's name did not appear on Michigan's ballot.

For the New York senator, everything has to go as right in the next three weeks as it has gone wrong in the past three. Her survival depends not just on winning all three big states but on winning them convincingly. But some Texan delegates are chosen in caucuses, forums which have proved friendly to Mr Obama in the past, and Texan Latinos will not necessarily behave like their Californian cousins (who voted for her). Ohio has a lot in common with Missouri, which Mr Obama won. Mr Obama's chances in Pennsylvania will be boosted by Philadelphia, which has a large black population, and Pittsburgh, where John Kerry and his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, are powerful forces. If Mr Obama can prevent Mrs Clinton from winning the triple, then no amount of arm-twisting of superdelegates will save her campaign.

[pitt]

The Republican race

Cannon to the right of him

Feb 14th 2008 | RICHMOND
From The Economist print edition


The Republican front-runner keeps clearing hurdles, but more lie ahead



A GRUMPY protester stood outside a museum full of fighter planes where Senator John McCain was about to give a speech. “No to amnesty” said his home-made placard. Mr McCain has resisted securing the border for ten years, he fumed, and his plan to give illegal immigrants a path to citizenship is a disgraceful reward for criminal conduct.

So whom will he vote for in November? Well, the Democrats are all socialists, he says, so he'll reluctantly have to pull the lever for, er, Mr McCain.

This anecdote could illustrate either of the two most popular theories about the front-runner for the Republican nomination. One is that since many conservatives detest Mr McCain, they will stay at home in November and the fired-up Democrats will thrash him. The other theory is that Republicans will rally round their leader to keep those ghastly lefties out of the White House. Mr McCain can certainly take heart from the knowledge that some of those picketing his stump speeches plan to vote for him anyway. But his problem with conservatives is nonetheless acute.


In many ways, it has been a good week for Mr McCain. After winning primaries in Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia, plus a caucus in Washington state, he now has, by CNN's estimate, 827 of the 1,191 delegates needed to clinch the nomination. His closest rival, Mitt Romney, dropped out of the race last week. His only remaining challenger is Mike Huckabee, who charms the heck out of evangelicals but cannot plausibly overtake him.

Still, as Mr McCain admits, the race is too interesting for comfort. Mr Huckabee shows no sign of dropping out. On February 9th he won Louisiana (narrowly) and Kansas (handily). He is a more gifted orator than his rival, and with Mr Romney gone, is collecting protest votes as well as his usual tally of born-again Christians.

At the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), a meet-up for red-meat conservatives, he gave a flame-grilled speech. He playfully quoted Ecclesiastes: “A wise man's heart directs him toward the right, but the foolish man's heart directs him toward the left.” He said Americans would welcome a hungry immigrant who knocks on the front door, but God help you if you break through a window in the night. He lambasted the government (ie, Mr McCain) for putting a ladder up against the window. And he thundered that any judge who invokes international law to decide an American case should be “summarily impeached”.

Mr McCain, who is 71, sounds tired on the trail. The younger Mr Huckabee sounds like he is having fun. He plays each crowd like a laughing, cheering, “Amen”-hollering violin. He pokes fun at the national media for not taking him seriously. But he offers profoundly unserious policies, such as raising military spending from under 4% to 6% of GDP while simultaneously abolishing income tax. As he said in another context, “Folks, I didn't major in math. I majored in miracles.”

The question is not whether Mr Huckabee can win but whether his campaign will hurt the eventual nominee. On the one hand, the competition should sharpen Mr McCain's skills and keep the Democrats from hogging the evening news completely. On the other, a long fight could drain cash and energy that Mr McCain will need to fight the general election. Plus, if Mr Huckabee irritates him enough, he might lose his temper.

Mr McCain has the tricky task of mending fences with conservatives while continuing to attract moderates who applaud his stances on climate change, immigration and torture. His speech to CPAC was humble, yet firm: “I have made many mistakes. You can attest to that...but need not.” He stressed where he agrees with conservatives, on abortion, national security and government waste. He yielded little in other areas, saying he does not make promises he does not intend to keep. He was booed, but also cheered. “Well, he's just convinced me,” said June Nichols, a former Giuliani supporter.

Among the conservative elite, Mr McCain's most implacable foes are those who make a living by mouthing off. Talk-show hosts such as Rush Limbaugh loathe him. But Republicans who have worked in government and understand the need for compromise are flocking to his side. President Bush all but endorsed him this week. On the stump in Virginia, Mr McCain was flanked by two former governors, which was all the excuse he needed to tell a joke about two jailbirds in the prison chow line. “The food was better here,” one says, “when you were governor.”

For what little they are worth, the polls suggest that Mr McCain would beat Hillary Clinton but lose to Barack Obama. The badges and bumper stickers at CPAC offer a clue as to why. Anti-Hillary slogans are plentiful and angry. “Life's a bitch; don't vote for one.” “Happiness is Hillary's face on a milk carton.” But your correspondent saw only one anti-Obama badge, the mild “Obama? You gotta be kiddin' me.”

Republicans find it much harder to attack Mr Obama. This is partly because he is black, but also because he is unsullied by scandal and because they don't hate him as they do Mrs Clinton. Which is why Mr McCain hopes to face Mrs Clinton in November but expects to face Mr Obama.

[ulpinian]

Mah... priroda nije nanijetila da Hillary bude predsjednik/ca. Bit ce isto kao i sa izborima u Francuskoj... javnosti će se postaviti pitanje " Moze li vrhovni komadant nositi suknju ? " Iako bi mi u Bosni trebali potajno da navijamo za Hillary... iole je upucena u dešavanja u BiH.

[jeza u ledja]

E jesu ga uslikali sa ovom pozadinom ofirno.

Hvala na clancima.

[pitt]

nema frke. meni se svidjaju jer su dosta dobro analizirali sve kandidate kao i sve moguce varijante.

[walkabout]

Na kraju ce u Tx Obama uzeti i trka ce biti gotova za dvije sedmice. Pazite sta sam vam rekao.

U svakoj drzavi do sada kad su pravili ankete 3-4 sedmice unaprijed Clintonova je bila 20-30 boba ispred. Kako se prajmari u toj drzavi priblizava razlika se smanjuje i na kraju Obama vecinu njih uzme. Tako ce biti i u Tx, a u Oh ce mozda izgubiti, ali sa malom razlikom.

Analiticari su rekli da Clintonovoj trebaju visoke pobjede u OH i TX (60-40%) da uopste ostane u utrci.

Cekaj samo dok superdelegati zaigraju kozaracko....

@pitt, dobar clanak iz The Economist-a, evo jos nekoliko stize, lakse ba ugusi nas...

[Hantraga]

Zasto je onda u Missouriju na prajmariz za Dems glasalo 800k+, a za Reps manje od 600k?

(Oba su bila open primaries, oba su bila u isto vrijeme i oba su bila kad su Romney i Huckabee jos bili aktuelni)

Pa to jeste cudno, zato sma i napisao da je u nedavnoj anketi McCain dobio, nebitno protiv Obame ili Hilari...


Sve mi se cini da ce Obama shrvati Hilari, ali se bojim da nemoze pobjediti McCaina...

U kakvoj anketi je McCain dobio? Ne kontam. Ja govorim kako su u MO Dems dobili vise glasova od Reps, a dovoljno je par tih swing states da Dems uzmu predsjednistvo.

Svaka Obama vs McCain anketa koju sam ja vidio donosi vise boba ovom prvom.

MA ja gledo na Kanalu 5 lokalne televizije, nesjecam se ko je sprovodio anketu...

Ali vjeruj mi, zena i crnac nemogu dobiti Missouri...

Vecinsko stanovnistvo je ruralno, a oni su strogi hooseri...

[pitt]

Evo jos jedan.....o znacaju i razmisljanju nas Independents :D:D

Lexington

A declaration on independents

Feb 14th 2008
From The Economist print edition



Independents are back from the wilderness and ready to determine the outcome of the presidential election

ONE of the most interesting political videos on YouTube features a young Obama supporter, Derrick Ashong. A camera-wielding interviewer collars Mr Ashong in the street and starts to pepper him with questions. The interviewer assumes that his victim's casual appearance—he is wearing a baseball hat, a shell necklace and is chewing gum—betokens an equally casual approach to politics. “Do you have any specifics?” he demands aggressively. “What are their policies?” Mr Ashong delivers a series of carefully argued replies that could form the basis of an editorial in a serious newspaper. The interviewer is increasingly abashed. But, having delivered his defence of Barack Obama, Mr Ashong concludes the interview by saying “I'm independent. I'm not a Democrat. I might vote for McCain.”

Independent voters have been marginalised over the past decade. Armies of partisans have marched over the political battlefield. Elections have been much more about energising the faithful than reaching out to wavering voters. The 2004 election was the electoral equivalent of the Somme—trench warfare between the blue army and the red army enlivened by the occasional daring raid.

There are growing signs that this era of American politics is coming to a close. George Bush, America's polariser-in-chief, has an approval rating of little more than 30% at a time when Arnold Schwarzenegger, an advocate of “post-partisanship”, scores double that. Colin Powell, no mean judge of the American mood, has declared that he will vote for the presidential candidate who can “do the best job for America”, whether that candidate is “a Republican, a Democrat or an independent”. Michael Barone, the co-author of the indispensable “Almanac of American Politics”, speculates that we are moving from an era of “trench warfare” to an era of “open-field politics”.

Over 30% of Americans call themselves independents—more than call themselves Republicans and about the same as call themselves Democrats. These independents are younger and better educated than the average American. They are pragmatic, anti-ideological and results-oriented, hostile to both Big Labour and Big Government but quite prepared to see the government take an active role in dealing with problems like global warming.

Over the past decade or so, independents have been forced to act like either “soft” Republicans or “soft” Democrats—reluctant conscripts into one or other of America's armies. But in this election the opposite is happening—more and more partisans are thinking and acting like independents. Polls show that at least two-thirds of Americans think the country is headed in the wrong direction. A Washington Post poll last year showed that 77% of voters would consider voting for an independent.

By a chapter of accidents the Republicans have ended up with their one presidential candidate ideally suited to attracting independents. The party's thumping in the 2006 mid-term election was almost entirely due to its waning fortunes among independent voters. Conservatives pulled the Republican lever in the usual numbers. But independents voted for Democrats by 57% to 39%. John McCain is thus a gift from heaven.

The very qualities of Mr McCain that infuriate Republican loyalists endear him to independents. He has frequently clashed with Mr Bush, a man whom independents loathe. He has wrestled with special interests in Washington, and repeatedly gone into battle with his own party, particularly over immigration reform. Mr McCain has demonstrated his strength among independents: he led the field among them by ten points in New York, 23 points in California and 31 points in Illinois.

This gives him a chance of pulling off a surprise upset in the general election. Most analysts expect the Democrats to carry all the states John Kerry won in 2004, plus Ohio, which has shifted to the Democratic column. But Mr McCain might scramble these calculations by winning New Hampshire, where more than 40% of the electorate are independents and where the Arizona senator is almost an honorary citizen. That would give him a 270-268 victory in the electoral college.



A case for Obama?
This suggests Democratic primary voters need to pay close attention to independents. The polls suggest hard-core Democrats would be happy either with Hillary Clinton or Mr Obama. But there is no doubt who does better with independents. Until this week, Mrs Clinton's strength has been her ability to turn out the vote in solid Democratic states such as California and solid Democratic constituencies such as blue-collar voters. But she repels many independents who associate her with Beltway business-as-usual.

In contrast, Mr Obama sounds the themes that most appeal to independents—frustration with America's broken politics; hope of finding pragmatic solutions by reaching across the partisan divide. And independents have not disappointed him. Mr Obama beat Mrs Clinton among such voters almost everywhere, even in her strongest states such as New York and California. A recent Pew poll suggests Mr Obama has a 62% approval rating among independents, the highest of any candidate.

This should weigh heavily on the minds of the Democratic “superdelegates” (office holders and party elders who have an ex officio vote in the convention) if they are called upon to break a tie in the delegate race. Mrs Clinton's biggest problem is not that she is being out-campaigned by the silver-tongued Mr Obama. It is that she seems to belong to the previous era of American politics—the one of battling political machines. Republicans have accidentally stumbled through to the next age of politics, although the message has not yet reached the backwoods wing of the party. The big question now for many Democrats is whether their party can do likewise.