Wednesday, February 06, 2008

Is your vote part of Super Tuesday results? - 2.6.2008.1

**The I Love America That's Why I vote! campaign is not partisan. No matter who you choose, the important thing is to have your voice heard with your vote. Register today.**

The number of people that have come out to vote today has been remarkable among the Democrats. Not nearly so for Republicans, but the voice of America is being heard. And that voice is matching what my polls have long said, in one manner.

In my poll which has run from 2007 until today, there has been an overwhelming outcry for Senator Barack Obama [seen on Black Entertainment USA]. 51% of all votes have chosen Senator Obama, and the next closest choice lags far behind. Senator Clinton is the 2nd choice in my poll, but trails Senator Obama 2:1. In terms of the Republican candidates, Senator John McCain dominates all other challengers by more than 3:1. In comparing the top 3 no Presidential is more favored than Senator Obama.

And in Super Tuesday voting we saw that this is a trend in the nation. Out of the 21 states that voted today clear statements were made, though the issue of delegates is less so. 61% of the states voted in favor of Senator Obama, on the Democratic race. Looking at the voting percentages, 52% of the Democrats picked Senator Obama. If this were the actual Presidential Race, the news would now be that the popular vote was won by Obama. But that news would be singed by the fact that the delegate voting has gone to Clinton.

I think nothing would be more devastating to the nation than to have the public pick one candidate, and the electoral college deciding that someone else won. After the highly debated and problematic 2000 and 2004 elections clarity in the voice of America is needed. The only way I know that this can not be a factor is to have the voice of America, your voice, clearly stated. That means voting.

Register for the vote. Not because I am important, or you like my writing. Vote, not because I am successful or that I am asking you to. Vote because your life, and those of your loved ones will be directly affected by the outcome. Your vote could be the difference between how the war in Iraq is resolved, which direction taxes go, whether illegal aliens will gain or lose their position in America, and the quality of life of your children and grand-children. These are all things that only you will be able to affect, and you would do so via your Constitutional Right.

That Right is something that many in the world envy and die for. That Right is coveted by the candidates. And you hold that power. But it’s an impotent power if you don’t register and vote.

Here are the results, as of 2 am. If there is any result you disagree with, there is only one answer. Vote for someone and change the answers you see.

    Alabama Democratic Vote Republican Vote
    56% - Obama 41% - Huckabee
    42% - Clinton 37% - McCain

    Alaska 74% - Obama
    26% - Clinton

    Arizona 50 % - Clinton 47% - McCain
    41% - Obama 34% - Romney

    Arkansas 69% - Clinton 61% - Huckabee
    27% - Obama 20% - McCain

    California 54% - Clinton 44% - McCain
    34% - Obama 26% - Romney

    Colorado 67% - Obama 59% - Romney
    32% - Clinton 19% - McCain

    Connecticut 51% - Obama 52% - McCain
    47% - Clinton 33% - Romney

    Delaware 53% - Obama 45% - McCain
    42% - Clinton 33% - Romney

    Georgia 66% - Obama 34% - Huckabee
    31% - Clinton 32% - McCain

    Idaho 80% - Obama
    17% - Clinton

    Illinois 64% - Obama 47% - McCain
    33% - Clinton 25% - Romney

    Kansas 74% - Obama
    26% - Clinton

    Massachusetts 56% - Clinton 51% - Romney
    41% - Obama 41% - McCain

    Minnesota 67% - Obama 42% - Romney
    32% - Clinton 22% - McCain

    Missouri 49% - Obama
    48% - Clinton

    Montana 38% - Romney
    25% - Paul

    New Jersey 54% - Clinton 55% - McCain
    44% - Obama 28% - Romney


    New York 57% - Clinton 51% - McCain
    40% - Obama 26% - Romney

    North Dakota 61% - Obama 36% - Romeny
    37% - Clinton 23% - McCain

    Oklahoma 55% - Clinton
    31% - Obama

    Tennessee 54% - Clinton 34% - Huckabee
    41% - Obama 31% - McCain

    Utah 57% - Obama 90% - Romney
    39% - Clinton 5% - McCain

    West Virginia 52% - Huckabee
    47% - Romney

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Friday, February 01, 2008

Hillary Clinton’s polispeak on Wal-Mart

Oh how the facts just get in the way. There have been released tapes that reveal Democratic Presidential candidate and NY Senator Hillary Clinton’s position on labor unions while she was a board member of Wal-Mart. As a Democrat, Senator Clinton has been outspoken about her support of unions, and has several that have endorsed her campaign.

But back in the late 1980’s through early 1990’s it seems that Senator Hillary Clinton had other views. It has been proven that in several meetings of the board members, of which she was a member for 6 years, she NEVER took a stance to help unionize or support unions in the company. Board members have been quoted as stating that beyond the recordings, they have zero memory of a single confrontation or commitment by Senator Clinton on behalf of Unions.

Now in general I’m not a big fan of unions. In general I don’t care what board members do or do not think of, if they are not stocks that I own. But I am interested in who will be the next President of the United States. And I do note hypocrisy in the Presidential candidates.

As a proponent of unions Senator Clinton has attacked Wal-mart and its policies. That’s fine, as it’s the big enemy of ultra-liberal Democrats these days, and that’s an opinion some have. But considering that she was a member of this same company and did nothing to improve their corporate actions, it’s too faced.

Add to this fact, that she has publicly refused campaign donations from this company, and then quietly taken 4x as much money ($20,000) from executives and lobbyists of that same company privately.

Last year Senator Clinton stated

“Now I know that Wal-Mart's policies do not reflect the best way of doing business and the values that I think are important in America.”


So in over a decade, on top of 6 years as a board member of the company Senator Clinton had no knowledge of the anti-union policies of Wal-Mart. And as she has stated she was an advocate of women in the company.

“I don't doubt the sincerity of her efforts, but we don't see much evidence that conditions for women at Wal-Mart changed much during the late 1980s and early 1990s," said Joe Sellers, one of the lawyers suing Wal-Mart on behalf of the women.”


So a question that might show her sincerity would be if Senator Clinton would return the $20,000. But she has stated through her campaign that “no basis to return the money.”

That sounds incredibly like when it was found that Senator Clinton’s campaign took $1 million from legal fugitive Norman Hsu or the questionable Abdul Rehman Jinna.

“To summarize Mr. Hsu was wanted with a warrant for his arrest from California for over a decade. Mr. Hsu recently started to bundle funds for donation to Sen. Clinton. Initially, when his identity and warrant came to public attention, the Clinton campaign first stated their surprise, and then as pressure mounted offered to give back roughly $32,000. Then as the media checked into the story and it was found that the actual donations made totaled 1 million dollars which was possibly gotten from funds scammed from 3rd parties. The Clinton campaign offered to give the money to charity. The answer was they had not known he made the donations.”


All of this seems to go back to a thought I had back in November 2005. I would suggest that members of unions, and Democrats consider the following, and the apparent election year flip mentioned above, as well as the questionable acceptance of funding from active criminals evading prosecution.

“There are more votes, my point is Sen. Clinton seems very confused on several issues. Sen. Clinton promotes the idea that she is for families and individuals (ie raise wages, leaving SS alone, improving bicycle safety) yet she also has voted to do the opposite (no motorcycle safety, repeal '93 tax, ethanol, AIDS funding). My thoughts are not about the outcome of the actual votes, but how Sen. Clinton has voted. That is far more important. It seems to project an image of someone looking to say anything to get elected, but not caring what the constiuents want as much once elected.”


I hope everyone that can will vote on Super Tuesday. I hope even more vote in the Presidential election in November. I just hope that the candidates of both political parties are worthy choices for the American public.

Labels: , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Fred Thomspon out of Presidential race, who is next?

So Fred Thompson is out of the Presidential race for the 2008 election. No shock at all. Considering the poor 3rd place results in South Carolina, and the speech made by Thompson that same day, this is not a surprise. Though it is a bit of a shame as the ex-Presidential hopeful did finally start to show a bit of a spark in recent debates and speeches. But his late entry into the race and the poor decisions early in his campaign too their toll on his overall chances.

Rudy Giuliani should take heed.

Just yesterday I was discussing with a friend the fact that so far the entirety of Giuliani’s campaign seems to be New York centric. The biggest draw for this Republican Presidential candidate started with the fact of his actions on 9/11. This has been something that Rudy has not let anyone forget. It’s a constant comment in every speech and debate I have heard him have.

But on top of reminding us that he did perform amazingly on that troubled day, and those that followed it, he has given us little else. And when I say us I mean New Yorkers. Rudy has focused on those from the City, and the state, to carry him to this stage. His near-exclusive attention to Florida is testament to that. For those that are unfamiliar, many older and retired residents of NYC tend to move to Florida. So his focus is basically preaching to the choir to some extent.

If the loss of Fred Thompson is any example, then Rudy’s plan will fail horribly. In addition the fact that he has consistently under-performed Ron Paul in virtually every Primary to-date is no positive for the one-time presumed front-runner.

I won’t even begin to go into my multiple questions on Rudy Giuliani. Suffice to say that his actions as Mayor involved far more than just 9/11. Many have concerns about his social policies, especially in regards to crime prevention, law enforcement, individual rights, and minorities. Little has been spoken on this, and Rudy has dance around the issues, but if he stays in past Florida I virtually guarantee that they will come up. Some of my own questions can be seen from a letter I wrote to his campaign back in April 2007.

Now the questions of when Dennis Kucinich and John Edwards will drop out are beginning to be asked. Ron Paul I expect to see stay in the race until he completely loses all hope on Super Tuesday. Kucinich has consistently gotten about 5% at ever Primary and Caucus, and is the ONLY candidate to answer (or even willing to speak about) the question of an official apology to African Americans for slavery, and reparations. But even that is not enough to gain attention in the major news media. [Sadly I think that may have contributed to his virtual media blackout.]

John Edwards is out. There is no real question that he has the claim for 3rd place, and will be give an offer of the Vice-Presidency again. I will say that if he is given that offer, and he accepts, the Democrats will be odds on favorites to lose. His prior loss, and his less than stellar performance in this election cycle bode badly for anyone he might be matched with.

And I might believe his desire to help out the poor a bit more if I were to see his voluntary contributions to the IRS for the past decade. By that I mean that if he paid MORE than his required taxes of his own volition in past years. Just for the good of the nation. But of course non e of the candidates have done that, though Democrats insist that the top earners in the nation (like themselves) must pay more money on taxes. Yet they won’t do it themselves.

Sorry, I got sidetracked by the obvious 2 faced and diametrically opposed actions of some candidates in the face of what they are calling for on behalf of the nation.

So, in short time we will be finding out that the race will be quite smaller before Super Tuesday. Besides the candidates in both parties that have no real chance but are struggling to fight the good fight, I expect a couple of the big names to fall by the wayside shortly.

Labels: , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates

Wednesday, January 09, 2008

What happens after the New Hampshire primary?

So we continue to hear that Senator Obama is leading the Democratic candidates as the nomination for the Presidential election draws near. The further the day goes, the more we are hearing that the initial results from the midnight voting are proving more accurate.

Record turnouts, bolstered by unseasonably warm weather, are trending in favor of the candidate that 1 year ago was considered a joke, and a minor distraction to the inevitable nomination of Senator Clinton. Well the pundits were wrong, and 1 year later reports are surfacing that the Clinton campaign is grasping for the political advisors that were critical for the elections of President Bill Clinton.

On the Republican side, there is a less clear view. Senator John McCain entered New Hampshire with a strong lead, but Mitt Romney and his huge television ad spending are whitling away at that lead. Independants, the majority of New Hampshire voters, are the most critical factor. The beliefs are that independents will trend towards Obama, though many will also favor McCain.

Even with a solid win by Senator McCain, the final result is not nearly as clear as with the Democratic race. This is an odd election year indeed. Normally the fractioning seen in the Republican race has been something more akin to Democrats. It is very possible that the Republican candidate will be unknown well into, and possibly after the Super Tuesday vote in February. Effectively Mitt Romney, Senator McCain, Mike Huckabee, and Fred Thompson all have the ability to pull off first place wins, with 2nd or 3rd place finishes in multiple states before February.

All of this is causing turmoil in campaigns dubbed inevitable by media pundits in 2007. Senator Clinton has had a very public emotional breakdown, which many felt was a critical blow against her. In the campaign for Senator Clinton it is rumored that key individuals responsible for President Clinton are going to get involved, as I mentioned above. This is currently being denied, and if true seems to kill the concept of change promoted by the campaign. The addition of these figures indicates a return to the era of the 90’s, which in many ways has no place in the 21st century.

One thing that is beginning to creep into the pundits conversation is one thing that gives me pause though. Since the win by Senator Obama in Iowa, I have heard more about the racial breakdown of the various races than I have in all my life. Not just the racial make-up of South Carolina, where the African American vote is critical, but about New Hampshire where Blacks are easily outnumbered.

This is a negative, and it’s a subtle and backhanded way of bringing race forefront in the election. The real question being asked is will White Americans vote for a Black President? Had Senator Clinton been in the lead, I’m sure the question of women voters would be investigated, but the degree to which it would be questioned is unknown. But the big question after a solid and dramatic win by Senator Barack Obama will undoubtedly be the one I have asked.

Few will come out and say it. Most will hide the question in words like electability, or likeability. Polispeak for Black. Polispeak for is America still so racist as to refuse a popular, educated, qualified, and enigmatic candidate solely on the basis of the color of his skin? Polispeak for the question, Can America give up the stereotypes that have been built and relied upon for centuries?

If America can do that, and I believe that regardless of the eventual outcome we are moving to that day anyway, then what will happen? Because this would be more than just a Presidential candidate. It would signify a cultural change in America that has never occurred before. It would imply and justify an equality that any candidate, bereft of polispeak, would admit does not exist today.

No matter what, New Hampshire will have a demonstrative effect on the candidates of both parties. The implications are far reaching and only now being addressed by pundits across the media. Only now are some Americans realizing the implications. What will that result be?

However this continues to go, I must restate, your vote counts. Do not give it away cheaply. Don’t base it solely on the gender, religion, or color of the candidates. That is the least of all reasons to pick a candidate. Pick whomever you feel is best for America. Because that vote, and only that, will benefit the entire nation.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,



Ask for ad rates
Ask for ad rates