Clinton, Obama clash over campaign tactics in debate
Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama faced off Tuesday in the final debate before the March 4 primaries.
CLEVELAND, Ohio (CNN) -- Democrats Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama sparred with each other over negative campaigning, health care and free trade Tuesday, a week before key primaries in Texas and Ohio.
Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama faced off Tuesday in the final debate before the March 4 primaries.
Those contests are must-wins for Clinton if she is to continue to contest Obama for the nomination, as even former President Clinton suggests.
Debating at Cleveland State University, Clinton repeated angry claims from the campaign trail that Obama mischaracterized her stances on health care and NAFTA in political material mailed to voters in Ohio.
"I have a great deal of respect for Sen. Obama, but we have differences," she said. "In the last several days, some of those differences in tactics and choices that Sen. Obama's campaign has made regarding fliers and mailers and other information that has been put out ... have been very disturbing to me."
The mailers, which Obama defends, claim that Clinton's health care plan would force people who don't want insurance to buy it. They also say she has been inconsistent on NAFTA, which many in industrial states like Ohio blame for shipping blue-collar jobs overseas. Watch the candidates' exchange over health care »
Clinton said her health plan would cover everyone and would be affordable to everyone.
While she has made multiple statements saying NAFTA has helped the economy in some parts of the United States, Clinton said she has always maintained that it needs to be improved to provide better labor and environmental protections in Mexico and Canada. If that happened, she said, fewer American jobs would go overseas.
She blasted the health care mailing in particular, saying it's "almost as if the health insurance companies and the Republicans wrote it." Watch analysts break down the debate performances »
Obama said the mailings are common practice in political campaigns and raise valid differences between his stances and Clinton's. He said he, too, has been targeted by negative Clinton advertisements.
"Sen. Clinton has consistently sent out negative attacks on us," he said. "We haven't whined about it because I understand that's the nature of these campaigns.
"But to suggest that our mailer is somehow different to the kind of approach Sen Clinton has taken throughout this campaign certainly is not accurate."
With Obama having won 11 statewide contests in a row and a recent set of national polling suggesting he has the support of 50 percent of Democrats to her 40 percent, Clinton has sharpened her attacks on Obama in the past week.
According to CNN estimates, Obama leads Clinton in the delegate race, 1,360 to 1,269. In all, 2,025 delegates are needed to seal the Democratic nomination.
Even Clinton's husband, former President Bill Clinton, has suggested that if she does not win in Ohio and Texas, her campaign will face a dramatically difficult challenge keeping up with the surging Obama. Rhode Island and Vermont also hold primaries on March 4.
Clinton denied knowledge of a photograph of Obama wearing Somali tribal garb that was provided to the Drudge Report Web site Monday. Matt Drudge wrote that the photo was leaked to him by the Clinton campaign in what Obama called an effort to reinforce false notions that he is either foreign-born or a Muslim.
The picture was taken during a 2006 visit to Africa by the senator. It is common for political leaders to be given gifts and asked to wear traditional garb on such trips.
Clinton denied any knowledge of the photo coming from one of her staff.
"So far as I know, it did not," she said. "That's not the kind of behavior that I condone or expect from the people working in my campaign."
Obama, a senator from Illinois, said he believes her.
"I take Sen. Clinton at her word that she knows nothing about the photo," he said.
As in many of their debates, health care was a prime focus, with the first 16 minutes of the debate devoted to it. The two staked out familiar themes -- Clinton saying her plan would guarantee health coverage for all Americans and Obama touting a plan he says would make it affordable for everyone but not require them to buy it if they don't want it.
Responding to a question on NAFTA in which moderator Tim Russert listed comments he said show Clinton once supported the free-trade agreement, the New York senator appeared to lash out at media bias against her -- a claim members of her campaign have made repeatedly -- and in favor of Obama.
"I just find it kind of curious that I keep getting the first question on all of these issues," she said before adding, in reference to a "Saturday Night Live" skit, "Maybe we should ask Barack if he's comfortable and needs another pillow."
Son of Late Texas Gov. Richards Objects to Clinton Video Alluding to Mom’s Support
by Associated Press Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Facebook Stumble Upon del.icio.us Digg Email
AUSTIN, Texas — The two sons of Ann Richards, the late former Texas governor, are objecting to an Internet video published by Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential campaign that suggests their mother would have supported Clinton.
Clinton’s campaign had permission from Richards’ youngest daughter, Ellen, who said in a statement provided by the campaign that her mother was an “ardent feminist” who would be thrilled by her friend Hillary Clinton’s candidacy.
“I believe that if my mom were alive today that she would be stumping across Texas and around the country supporting Hillary for president,” her statement said.
Richards was governor from 1991-1995. She died in September 2006 at age 73. The two-minute video on Clinton’s campaign Web site comes a week before the Texas primary and targets women voters in the state.
“So many women around Texas and America are saying, `Wish Ann was here, for us and for Hillary,”‘ a female voiceover says on the video.
“Today Ann would be asking all of us to make a statement. She would be traveling to every small town and big city in Texas, urging us all to take a stand, be counted, to make a difference, to make history,” it says while a picture of Richards and Clinton appears on the screen. “This one’s for Texas. This one’s for our country. This one’s for Ann.”
But sons Dan and Clark Richards, partners at an Austin law firm, say nobody can know who the outspoken and opinionated former governor would have supported in the race between Clinton and Barack Obama.
“As her children, we never presumed to know her mind when alive and we are not prepared to make a claim as to who she would endorse or what she would do if she were still with us,” they wrote in an e-mail last week. “We are not granting permission for her name to be used in advertisements on behalf of either candidate.”
The e-mail, provided to The Associated Press by Dan Richards, was sent to Cathy Bonner, a friend of their mother’s and member of Richards’ administration. Bonner is working with Clinton’s campaign and sent Dan and Clark Richards an early copy of the video on Feb. 19 “to make sure you are okay with it.”
Dan Richards said in an interview Tuesday that they denied permission and he’s angry the campaign published the video anyway. He said the campaign contacted him again last Friday to ask him to reconsider, and he repeated his objections.
“They asked me if I would sue the campaign, and I said no, I wasn’t in the business of suing the campaign, but I didn’t think they should do it,” he said in a telephone interview. “To try to present who she would endorse a year and a half after she died is offensive to me.”
Cathy Bonner said in an interview that after Richards’ sons objected the video was edited to remove photos of the family. “We’re not saying we speak for the family,” Bonner said. She said the video is a statement from the former governor’s supporters about the strong bond between Clinton and Richards.
Ann Richards’ fourth child, Cecile, is president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America. A spokeswoman for the organization did not return a telephone call Tuesday night seeking comment from Cecile Richards.
Conservatives backing Obama? The times they are a-changin'
By Melvyn Krauss
Thursday, Feb 28, 2008, Page 9
Senator John McCain, the likely Republican presidential nominee for president, likes to say that he was a "foot soldier" in the Reagan Revolution. So was I, working out of the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. But, unlike McCain, a good man and a true American hero, I don't intend to vote Republican this November. I am voting for Senator Barack Obama.
Meritocracy is at the core of US conservative beliefs. So let's face it: George W. Bush has been the worst US president in memory. His administration has been inept, corrupt and without accomplishment. After this performance, why give the Republicans another turn at the helm?
Let's give the other party a chance, even if its policies are not exactly what conservatives may like. In the US, we call it "throwing the ***s out."
When meritocracy is downgraded, as it has been during the Bush years, bad things happen. Worst of all, racism has flourished, because productivity and social utility have become less effective in protecting targets of discrimination.
Nowhere is this better illustrated than in the current debate over illegal immigration. It is not so much the illegality of their entrance into the US that riles many conservative Republicans; it's the migrants themselves, especially Hispanics who can't speak English. Never mind that Hispanic migrants are among the hardest-working people in the US.
It is a bitter irony that John McCain, war hero, is considered a traitor by the conservative wing of his party because he has a compassionate attitude toward undocumented immigrants.
Sadly, the Republican Party has been hijacked during the Bush years by sloganeers using code phrases like "illegal immigration" and "protecting the middle class" to mask their racism, and "economic incentive effects" to justify tax policies that are blatantly tilted to the rich.
Responding to this politics of hate, Obama likes to call himself a "hopemonger," not a "hatemonger." It's a great line and it applies.
Hope always sells well in the US. Reagan understood that, and it is one of the reasons he was a great and beloved president, even if some of his policies were flawed. As Senator Hillary Clinton, Obama's rapidly fading rival for the Democratic nomination, is finding out to her dismay, policies can be an overrated commodity in presidential elections that really matter.
The hope that Obama is holding out for Americans is one of reconciliation -- racial, political, between the wealthy and the poor, and between the US and its allies. This is powerful stuff, and dwarfs the narrow technocratic instincts of Clinton, whose schoolgirl approach to the campaign has justly earned her defeat after defeat in the primaries.
Just as former US president Ronald Reagan had his "Reagan Democrats" who were attracted by his message of hope after the malaise of the Jimmy Carter years, Obama will have his "Obama Republicans," attracted by the hope of national reconciliation and healing.
Non-Americans must understand that there is yet another revolution brewing in the US, and that senators Clinton and McCain are both likely to be swept away by it. When conservative Republicans support liberal Democrats (Obama has been rated the most liberal member of the US Senate), "the times they are a-changin'," as Bob Dylan wrote 45 years ago.
Moreover, a crucial difference today is that the generational conflict that so characterized the 1960s -- "Your sons and your daughters are beyond your command," as Bob Dylan put it -- is absent. The young may be taking the lead -- what Obama calls "a revolution from the bottom up" -- but there is little opposition from today's parents.
Indeed, I personally know a successful US hedge fund manager who is quite conservative and consistently votes Republican, but who is thinking of supporting Obama. His daughter dates an African-American and, to his credit, he believes in racial reconciliation. True, an Obama victory would certainly increase his taxes, but some things -- for example, the promise of a multicultural America -- are simply more important.
There appear to be many Republicans and independents who feel the same way. Obama can lose these people, however, if he forgets that he is a reconciler, not a class warrior, and goes from tilting toward the poor to soaking the rich.
In any case, the country's allies should feel relieved by how the presidential election is shaping up. The US needs Obama, but McCain is a reasonable alternative. He is no Bush, and conservative Republican hatred of him is his badge of honor. He would stand up to the haters at home -- including those in his own party -- and to the terrorists abroad. That's a lot better than what we have today.
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg wrote in a New York Times op-ed that he will not run for president.
(CNN) -- New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has publicly flirted with the idea of a run for the White House as an independent, says he will not run for president.
"I listened carefully to those who encouraged me to run, but I am not -- and will not be -- a candidate for president," Bloomberg wrote in an op-ed posted on the New York Times Web site Wednesday night in advance of Thursday's paper.
The 66-year-old billionaire had publicly repeated that he was not a candidate for president in recent months, while leaving open the option that he could become one.
"Bloomberg only wanted to run if he thought he could win, and I think he sees very little room," said Mark Halperin, a senior editor for Time magazine.
A source close to the mayor told CNN in January that he had collected poll data assessing his chances and that the mayor was expected to make his final decision by March.
"The very appeal that Bloomberg would have brought to the race is the very appeal that [John] McCain and [Barack] Obama have for a lot of voters," Halperin said on CNN's "American Morning."
Bloomberg mentioned in his editorial that he would work to "steer the national conversation away from partisanship and toward unity; away from ideology and toward common sense; away from sound bites and toward substance."
Bloomberg, a former Democrat who won the mayor's office as a Republican, would have been on a strict timetable to start collecting signatures to get on the ballot, a process that varies from state to state.
At a summit designed to bridge the divide between Democrats and Republicans, Bloomberg said in January partisanship is limiting the nation's progress.
In the opinion piece, Bloomberg said he's hopeful that the current Democratic and Republican campaigns will address an independent approach to governing.
"I have watched this campaign unfold, and I am hopeful that the current campaigns can rise to the challenge by offering truly independent leadership," he said. "The most productive role that I can serve is to push them forward, by using the means at my disposal to promote a real and honest debate."
Bloomberg could also play a role in the election if he makes an endorsement. He is good friends with McCain, and he also likes Obama, Halperin said.
"If a candidate takes an independent, nonpartisan approach -- and embraces practical solutions that challenge party orthodoxy -- I'll join others in helping that candidate win the White House," he said in the opinion piece.
Bloomberg was elected mayor of New York in 2001, two months after the September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center. He was re-elected in 2005.
A native of Medford, Massachusetts, with an MBA from Harvard Business School, Bloomberg became a billionaire, first working with Wall Street securities bank Salomon Brothers then as founder of Bloomberg LP, a financial news and information service.
While some polls show that Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) is running even with Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) in general election matchups, the Republican has to be considered the underdog -- and will need a compelling positive vision for America to catch up.
McCain needs to advance a reformist-conservative alternative to Obama's "Yes, We Can" appeal -- perhaps updating his 2000 Theodore Roosevelt image -- and focus on the economy and health care as well as national security.
McCain said this week that if the Iraq War goes badly between now and November, "I lose," but it's not necessarily true that if Iraq goes well, he wins.
He ought to. On what used to be the most important issue in America, McCain was one of a bare handful of politicians, including Republicans, who believed America had to win the war and could.
If, this fall, the evidence shows he was correct, his Democratic opponent -- presumably Obama, but Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), too -- ought to be discredited as a potential commander in chief for advocating withdrawal and losing the war, as they do even now.
Sadly, though, politics doesn't work that way. History is strewn with leaders cast aside after a war because their countrymen wanted to "move on." The list includes Winston Churchill and George H.W. Bush -- and this war is not likely to be as decisively won as theirs were.
The country already has "moved on," making the economy Issue One, followed by health care, energy, education and immigration.
McCain is going to have to play both offense and defense on the economy -- proving that he does not represent, as Obama charges, "George Bush's third term," and that Obama's tax increases will be disastrous for the economy and that his own economic vision will produce growth, opportunity and higher incomes for workers.
Right now, Americans don't believe in Republican economics, and McCain is especially vulnerable because he has flip-flopped on Bush's tax cuts, once declaring them gifts to the rich and now saying he wants to extend them.
McCain is going to have to teach economics to a doubting country -- and, first, he is going to have to learn some himself. He also might want to select a running mate who is an expert on the subject, say former Rep. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) or even his detested former rival, Mitt Romney.
He is going to have to say more, when asked about the economy, than "we've got to cut spending," which he's been doing incessantly during primary debates. Americans plainly want the government to spend -- that is, invest -- in health care, education, infrastructure, science and alternative energy sources.
In his post-Wisconsin victory speech Feb. 19, delivered in Columbus, Ohio, McCain did lay out the beginnings of an agenda, promising to "save Social Security and Medicare without the tricks, lies and posturing that have failed us for too long" and "make the tax code simpler, flatter, fairer, more pro-growth and pro-jobs."
He also set as goals to reduce "our dangerous dependence on foreign oil with an energy policy that encourages American industry and technology," to "help Americans without health insurance acquire it without bankrupting the country" and "make our public schools more accountable to parents and better able to prepare our children for the challenges they'll meet in the world."
It was a good beginning, but it was only that. On health care, for instance, Obama and Clinton have full-blown plans for insuring all (or nearly all) Americans. McCain's proposed $2,500 refundable tax credit would not buy much insurance for the uninsured.
Former Sen. Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), now teaching health economics at Princeton, says Obama's and Clinton's health care plans will cost not $110 billion a year, as they say, but three times that. McCain needs to talk to Frist and adopt the argument, if he can prove it.
In his Feb. 19 speech, McCain declared: "I'm not the youngest candidate, but I am the most experienced. ... I know how Congress works, and how to make it work for the country and not just the re-election of its Members. I know how the world works. I know the good and evil in it."
He does have vastly more experience than Obama, but the experience argument was tried by Clinton and did not work. Arguably, it might work better in the general election, but that has to be balanced against McCain's age, health and the fact that he's "so Washington," and a friend of lobbyists, at that.
McCain has to remind people that for most of his career, he's been exactly the "change agent" that Obama promises to be. And he has to lay out an agenda of change.
He also needs to get Congressional Republicans to be part of his "change agenda" -- both to unify the party and to see to it that he's not dragged down by their negatives.
McCain hopes to show that Obama represents nothing but "an eloquent but empty call for change" and a return to liberal big government. He has every right to do so. Obama is short on accomplishments, especially of the bipartisan variety.
But McCain needs more. On Feb. 19, he promised that "we will make the right changes to restore the people's trust in their government and meet the great challenges of our time with wisdom and with faith in the values and ability of Americans for whom no challenge is greater than their resolve, courage and patriotism."
The words read like Ronald Reagan, but it was ponderous when McCain read them -- seemingly for the first time. To beat Obama, McCain also has to practice speechmaking.
Aww c'mon, Mrs. B., you too! curious about the mayor's "below the belt" matters?
Hi RoughN,
Hehehe, of course, who wouldn't? But, as they say, curiousity killed the cat, so maybe you can just pm me? LOL!
Hi ProudU,
I checked into that link and it's sooo helpful. I got some materials in there that I think the new immigrants would appreciate and will be posting it here too.
Do all the good you can, in all the ways you can, as long as ever you can.
For those who are interested in the timeline for the 2008 elections:
2008 Presidential Election Summary of Key Dates, Events & Information June thru October 2008
Preparation Stage The Federal Register prepares letters and instructional materials for the Archivist to send to the Governors of the 50 States and the Mayor of the District of Columbia. The materials include pamphlets on Federal election law and detailed instructions on how to prepare and submit the electors' credentials (Certificates of Ascertainment) and the electoral votes (Certificates of Vote). In October, the Federal Register begins contacting Governors and Secretaries of State to establish contacts for the coming election.
November 4, 2008
General Election Registered voters in each State and the District of Columbia vote for President and Vice President. They cast their vote by selecting a pair of candidates listed on a single Presidential/Vice Presidential ticket. By doing so, they also choose slates of Electors to serve in the Electoral College. Forty-eight of the fifty States and the District of Columbia are "winner-take-all" (ME and NE are the exceptions).
Mid-November thru December 15, 2008
Transmission of Certificates of Ascertainment to NARA The Ascertainment lists the names of the electors appointed and the number of votes cast for each person. The States prepare seven originals authenticated by the Governor's signature and the State seal. One original and two certified copies are sent to the Federal Register (the remaining six are attached to the electoral votes at the State meetings). The Governors must submit the certificates "as soon as practicable," after their States certify election results. They should be transmitted no later than December 15 (but Federal law sets no penalty for missing the deadline).
December 9, 2008
Date for Determination of Controversy as to Appointment of Electors States must make final determinations of any controversies or contests as to the appointment of electors at least six days before December 15 meetings of electors for their electoral votes to be presumptively valid when presented to Congress. Determinations by States' lawful tribunals are conclusive, if decided under laws enacted prior to election day.
December 15, 2008
Meetings of Electors and Transmission of Certificates of Vote to NARA The electors meet in their State to select the President and Vice President of the United States. No Constitutional provision or Federal law requires electors to vote in accordance with the popular vote in their States. NARA's web site lists the States that have laws to bind electors to candidates. The electors record their votes on six "Certificates of Vote," which are paired with the six remaining Certificates of Ascertainment. The electors sign, seal and certify packages of electoral votes and immediately send one set of votes to the President of the Senate and two sets to the Archivist. The Federal Register preserves one archival set and holds the reserve set subject to the call of the President of the Senate to replace missing or incomplete electoral votes.
December 24, 2008
Deadline for Receipt of Electoral Votes at NARA The President of the Senate and the Archivist should have the electoral votes in hand by December 24, 2008 (States face no legal penalty for failure to comply). If votes are lost or delayed, the Archivist may take extraordinary measures to retrieve duplicate originals.
On or Before January 3, 2009
Transmission of Certificates of Ascertainment to Congress As the new Congress assembles, the Archivist transmits copies of the Certificates of Ascertainment to Congress. This generally occurs in late December or early January when the Archivist and/or representatives from the Federal Register meet with the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House. This is, in part, a ceremonial occasion. Informal meetings may take place earlier.
January 6, 2009
Counting Electoral Votes in Congress The Congress meets in joint session to count the electoral votes (Congress may pass a law to change the date). The President of the Senate is the presiding officer. If a Senator and a House member jointly submit an objection, each House would retire to its chamber to consider it. The President and Vice President must achieve a majority of electoral votes (270) to be elected. In the absence of a majority, the House selects the President, and the Senate selects the Vice President. If a State submits conflicting sets of electoral votes to Congress, the two Houses acting concurrently may accept or reject the votes. If they do not concur, the votes of the electors certified by the Governor of the State would be counted in Congress.
January 20, 2009 at Noon
Inauguration The President elect takes the Oath of Office and becomes the U.S. President.
The Archivist of the United States, as the head of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), is responsible for carrying out ministerial duties on behalf of the States and the Congress under 3 U.S.C. sections 6, 11, 12, and 13. NARA is primarily responsible for coordinating the various stages of the electoral process by helping the States prepare and submit certificates that establish the appointment of electors and validate the electoral votes of each State. The Archivist delegates operational duties to the Director of the Federal Register. The Federal Register Legal Staff ensures that electoral documents are transmitted to Congress, made available to the public, and preserved as part of our nation's history. The Legal Staff reviews the electoral certificates for the required signatures, seals and other matters of form, as specified in Federal law. Only the Congress and the Courts have the authority to rule on substantive legal issues.
Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Aww c'mon, Mrs. B., you too! curious about the mayor's "below the belt" matters?
Hi RoughN,
Hehehe, of course, who wouldn't? But, as they say, curiousity killed the cat, so maybe you can just pm me? LOL!
Hi ProudU,
I checked into that link and it's sooo helpful. I got some materials in there that I think the new immigrants would appreciate and will be posting it here too.
Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) speaks at a rally Thursday, Feb. 28, 2008 in Houston.
LAREDO, Texas February 29, 2008, 01:59 pm ET · Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign has raised the possibility of a challenge to Texas' primary and caucus rules just days before the contest, drawing a warning against legal action from the state's Democratic Party.
Top strategists for Democratic rival Barack Obama said Friday they supported the party's action, suggesting the Clinton campaign was trying to block the reporting of caucus results.
Aides to Clinton said earlier this week they were alarmed at the lack of clarity about many of the caucus rules and expressed their concerns on a conference call with Obama's staff and state party officials. Texas has a two-step voting process, with a primary and then caucuses shortly after the polls close.
Specifically, Clinton aides questioned a provision allowing caucus attendees to vote to move the location if they choose to do so, and whether people who had cast so-called "provisional ballots" in the primary would have their votes counted in the caucus.
They also expressed concern about the automated phone system precinct chairs would use to call in the results of each caucus, saying the party hadn't yet trained anyone to use the system properly.
Clinton political director Guy Cecil said he asked party officials to spell out the rules in memo form and to send them to both campaigns.
"We want to see the results in writing, and we reserve the right to challenge something if we don't believe it reflects something that was discussed on the call," he said, insisting that if there were clear problems with how the caucuses were being run, "you are allowed to say something about it."
Cecil on Friday denied that the campaign planned to sue the party, which will manage roughly 8,700 caucuses Tuesday evening.
"There were no veiled threats of lawsuits of any kind," Cecil said of the conference call.
Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said the Clinton campaign was trying to minimize the results of the caucuses. The former first lady and her team have made clear their unhappiness with caucuses, believing that they cater to the hard-core party activists who tend to support Obama. The Illinois senator has won 13 caucuses so far, while Clinton has won just two.
"This takes it to a new level, which is they don't want the people who are participating in those caucuses to have their results reported in a timely fashion. And I assume that's a very self-serving decision," Plouffe said.
Texas party officials said they believed Cecil was threatening legal action and wrote a letter to him and to Obama senior strategist Steve Hildebrand reflecting that concern.
"If it is true that litigation is imminent between one or both of your campaigns and the Texas Democratic Party, such action could prove to be a tragedy for a reinvigorated democratic process that is involving a record number of participants here in Texas and across the nation," party attorney Chad Dunn wrote. "Litigation regarding the TDP could cripple the momentum of a resurging Texas Democratic Party and ultimately the November 2008 election."
The letter also noted that many of Clinton's senior campaign advisers in Texas had helped to develop the rules governing the state's caucus system. A Texas party official also noted that former President Clinton won the state's caucuses in 1992 and 1996 following the same rules.
Texas has 193 delegates up for grabs Tuesday. Of those delegates, 126 will come from the primary, and 67 from the caucus.
Clinton hints at sharing ticket with Obama, but nomination must be decided first
By JIM KUHNHENN Associated Press Writer | AP Mar 5, 2008
Hillary Rodham Clinton, fresh off a campaign saving comeback, hinted Wednesday at the possibility of sharing the Democratic presidential ticket with Barack Obama _ with her at the top. Obama played down his losses, stressing that he still holds the lead in number of delegates.
On a night that failed to clarify the Democratic race, John McCain Tuesday clinched the Republican nomination. Clinton won primaries in Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island, halting Obama's winning streak. Obama won in Vermont.
Both Democrats insisted on Wednesday they had the best credentials to go head to head _ or as Clinton put it "toe to toe" _ against McCain.
Asked on CBS's "The Early Show" whether she and Obama should be on the same ticket, Clinton said:
"That may be where this is headed, but of course we have to decide who is on the top of ticket. I think the people of Ohio very clearly said that it should be me."
Obama, who had hoped to knock Clinton out on Tuesday, said he would prevail against a tenacious candidate who "just keeps on ticking." Clinton acknowledged the race was close and said it would come down to her credentials on national security and the economy.
The two presidential contenders made the rounds of the morning network television news shows Wednesday, declaring only one thing certain _ that the campaign would go on and that the next big showdown would occur April 22 in Pennsylvania.
McCain, whose grasp on the nomination once seemed a distant reach, was headed for the White House Wednesday to have lunch with President Bush and get his endorsement. Bitter rivals in the 2000 presidential primaries, the two have forged an uneasy relationship during Bush's administration and have clashed on issues such as campaign finance, tax cuts, global warming and defining torture.
But the president planned a five-star ceremony, with a formal welcome at the White House's North Portico, lunch in Bush's private dining room and a formal endorsement in the Rose Garden.
Clinton's victories Tuesday night denied Obama a ripe opportunity to drive her from the Democratic presidential race. But Obama came away with a large share of delegates, too, in counting that continued Wednesday, meaning he's has a lead that's tough to overcome.
"We still have an insurmountable lead," Obama said. "We're very confident about where we're going to be and that we can win the nomination and the general election."
Clinton and Obama spent most of the past two weeks in Ohio and Texas in a bruising campaign, with the former first lady questioning his sincerity in opposing the North American Free Trade Agreement and darkly hinting he's not ready to be commander in chief in a crisis. Obama also confronted questions about one of his longtime political benefactors, businessman Antoin "Tony" Rezko, who went on trial Monday in Chicago on several felony fraud charges.
Clinton said Wednesday that so-called "superdelegates" _ nearly 800 party officials and top elected officials who also help decide the nomination _ should exercise "independent judgment" in selecting the party's nominee.
"New questions are being raised, new challenges are being put to my opponent," she said. "Superdelegates are supposed to take all that information on board and they are supposed to be exercising the judgment that people would have exercised if this information and challenges had been available several months ago."
She said voters are being drawn to her argument that she would be the better commander in chief, the best steward of the economy and that she can better confront McCain in the general election.
Obama countered Wednesday that on a key national security issue _ the war in Iraq _ "she got it wrong" by supporting Bush's call for authority to use of force.
"I ultimately think the American people are going to want a clear break from the Bush-Cheney foreign policies of the past because they haven't made us more safe and more secure," he said. "If she thinks that longevity in Washington is the primary criteria for winning the White House, then John McCain is going to beat her."
Clinton won about 54 percent of the Ohio vote in nearly complete returns. She was winning just over half in the Texas primary.
She still faced a daunting task trying to overtake Obama in the remaining contests. It was questionable whether she would make up much ground once the final results were in and the complexities of allotting the 370 delegates at stake in the four states were ironed out.
In the four-state competition for delegates, Clinton picked up at least 115, to at least 88 for Obama. Nearly 170 more remained to be allocated for the night, 154 of them in the Texas primary and the caucuses that immediately followed.
Obama had a lead in Texas caucuses before counting closed for the night Tuesday, to be resumed Wednesday.
Obama had a total of 1,477 delegates, including separately chosen party and elected officials known as superdelegates, according to the Associated Press count. He picked up three superdelegate endorsements Tuesday.
Clinton had 1,391 delegates. It takes 2,025 to win the nomination.
Wyoming offers 12 delegates in caucuses Saturday; Mississippi has 33 at stake next week. The biggest remaining prize is Pennsylvania, with 158 delegates, April 22.
Polling place interviews with voters in both states suggested the criticism hit home, finding Clinton was winning the votes of late deciders in Ohio and Texas, as well as Vermont.
Opinion polls had shown Obama overcoming significant and long-standing Clinton leads in Texas and Ohio, but his gains slowing in the final stretch.
Hispanics, a group that has favored Clinton in earlier primaries, cast nearly one-third of the Election Day votes in Texas, up from about one-quarter of the ballots four years ago, according to interviews with voters as they left their polling places.
Blacks, who have voted heavily for Obama this year, accounted for roughly 20 percent of the votes cast, roughly the same as four years ago.
Both Democrats called McCain _ a Senate colleague _ to congratulate him on his triumph in the Republican race.
The 71-year-old Arizona senator surpassed the 1,191 delegates needed to win his party's nomination.
He sealed a nomination race against odds that seemed steep only a few months ago, and all but impossible last summer.
Facing a couple of well-financed marquee candidates in a crowded field, he opened his comeback in New Hampshire's leadoff primary, rolled over Rudy Giuliani in Florida and finished off Mitt Romney after Super Tuesday on Feb. 5.
Mike Huckabee hung in until Tuesday night, gamely keeping up the fight weeks after dropping from long shot to afterthought. He went out as he came in _ never missing a chance for a wisecrack.
"It's time for us to hit the reset button," he said. "We started this effort with very little recognition and virtually no resources. We ended with slightly more recognition and very few resources."
On Tuesday night, McCain delivered a speech on the state of the union as he wants to make it: secure from Islamic extremism, victorious in Iraq, confident in trade, sound in its economy.
"Americans aren't interested in an election where they are just talked to and not listened to; an election that offers platitudes instead of principles and insults instead of ideas," he said.
"Their patience is at an end for politicians who value ambition over principle, and for partisanship that is less a contest of ideas than an uncivil brawl over the spoils of power."
After Pennsylvania, assuming that the race is still tight between the Democrat contenders, what other states are left for them to battle it out?
On the matter of vice-presidents, what are the frontrunner's considerations in choosing his/her running mate? (More specifically, who makes the decision, the frontrunner or the political party?)
Thanks!
Do all the good you can, in all the ways you can, as long as ever you can.
Add to del.icio.us
But, as they say, curiousity killed the cat, so maybe you can just pm me? LOL!
