I dare guess that Al has more inside sources than you.
And his blog has had excellent information this whole primary season, making it one of the best, most read blogs out there.
Oh so you are attacking me, because I reported a link http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/5/22/ 113422/285 which has an indication that the Giordano story was "flatly denied." By the way you are completely correct on your other assertion, because if he just has one source, he has more than I have. I have no sources other than what I read and observe. I would venture to say like most of us here.
You're obviously touchy if you think that what I said was "attacking you". I believe I was merely responding to you.
Al has had great sources, and insight, this entire season. His story said that both camps were publicly denying it, which is all the talkleft diary posits.
As far as "credibility" goes, though, TalkLeft has absolutely none--especially after BTD's constant proclamations that the race was OVER after Super Tuesday. . . .boy how wrong he was.
Obviously we have some different views here, and I don't think there is anything wrong with that.
On the other matter where you say you were just responding to me, I accept that. It's no big deal. I think we all want the same thing here and that is for the democrats to have a lot of victories in November.
If Hillary would quit working against that goal... well, that'd be lovely.
If Obama can provide the leadership necessary to unify this party, it would be even more wonderful.
His speech in Iowa was amazing....and we (the crowd) did not boo...so things are creeping along.
Cheers to November victory.
Why should the crowd boo? He's an amazing person, who is destined to help America achieve many good things. However he needs to first be elected, and to do that he needs to unite his own party.
Oh sorry...my comment was vague.
I was disturbed by his crowd booing in Michigan when he lauded Hillary.
We didn't do that....so I was glad.
Did you see his speech in Iowa? Did you note that the crowd didn't boo? Now if Hillary's supporters would let her know that there are some places where, if she goes there, they won't follow that would sure help. (Should have done that months ago)
Look, it's not just me here being a troll asshole. Look around you outside of DD. She is becoming the object of ridicule. Lots of other candidates from both parties lost without becoming the object of ridicule. Don't pawn it off on sexism either. I am not so sexist as to give her a pass on responsibility for her actions. Her campaigning has been beyond the borders of fairness, good taste, and party loyalty. (That's what the SNL skit was written to point out.)
I may be a jerk, but I'm also correct. Think about is from this perspective: Whether her most ardent supporters want to admit it or not, this contest has been less than competitive since Baracks 11 straight wins. That being the case, in who's interest is it to sow disunity and in who's interest is it to try and unify?
Object of ridicule--I don't think so. All I can say is let's all unite and beware of trolls.
Quinnipiac University National poll is the second poll in a row showing a majority of Democrats favoring an Obama/Clinton ticket.
By a 60 - 33 percent margin, Democrats say Obama should pick Clinton as his vice presidential running mate.
That's almost 2 to 1 among a group that prefers Obama to Clinton for the nomination by a slim 45-41 margin.
It should be noted too that the poll finds that either Obama or Clinton at the top of the ticket would defeat McCain in November, Obama by 7 points, Clinton by 5.
Interestingly, Quinnipiac finds that Clinton and Obama perform quite similarly against McCain among white voters, among men and among women. The real difference between how each Democrat fares against John McCain comes among groups with whom Obama has traditionally held more appeal. In other words, when up against John McCain, Barack is stronger among Hillary's base than Hillary is among his.
In an Obama-McCain matchup, independent voters back the Democrat 48 - 37 percent, the independent Quinnipiac University poll finds. Men split with 45 percent for McCain and 44 percent for Obama, while women back Obama 49 - 36 percent. McCain leads 47 - 40 percent among white voters, while blacks back Obama 87 - 4 percent.
In a Clinton-McCain contest, independent voters split with 41 - 41 percent. Men go with McCain 46 - 42 percent while women back Clinton 51 - 36 percent. White voters back McCain 48 - 41 percent, the same margin as the Obama-McCain matchup, while black voters back Clinton 79 - 8 percent.
What I find most remarkable about these results is how close this contest is still. The poll was taken from May 8-12 in the wake of the results of last Tuesday's primaries, indeed, at the height of the post-IN & NC "it's over" talk. Yet Obama is up only 4 points above Clinton for the nomination and only fares 2 points better against McCain. It really shows you not only how popular Hillary Clinton is but also how solid her support continues to be and it really begs the question does Barack Obama want to expand the map and have a landslide victory in the fall as he has said he does or is he content to risk simply winning with 50+1? At the risk of sounding like a broken record, more and more I'm convinced that if we're really going to accomplish the former, finally, Hillary Clinton must be on the ticket.
Update [2008-5-14 21:11:59 by Todd Beeton]:I wanted to add that it's also striking how at odds the will of the voters is with conventional punditry. Not only does a majority of Democrats want Obama to pick Clinton for VP, which itself contradicts the "it'll never happen" chorus from the talking heads on the teevee, but there's also this result from the poll:
"Party leaders may be cringing over the potential damage to Democratic chances in November from the endless primary campaign, but two-thirds of the rank-and-file think Clinton ought to keep battling," Carroll added.
Take a look at the realities 1 year from now and remember what you wrote and what I wrote.
Come on, I probably won't remember what we wrote next week.:)
I'll remember for both of us. After she proves that males haven't cornered the market on ego making us do stupid shit by sacrificing her impact, legacy, and career potential on the altar of ambition, I will be happy to remind you.
If we're going to run our collective mouths, we should have the follow through to see who turned out to be correct. This way we know who has a record that lends credence to their statements and who should be dismissed as repeatedly wrong and how often we're each which.
For instance, a little over a month ago I mentioned that the farcical beauty contests in Florida and Michigan would not be seated as is based on the January results. One of the proprietors around here insinuated that I didn't know what I was talking about. We will see next Saturday. If they are penalized in any fashion at all, I will remind him that it was he who didn't know what he was talking about. (He doesn't know what he is talking about most of the time anymore. To stay reality based is to acknowledge that Obama is going to be the nominee and that the contest has been over since February.)
I'm happy you will remember for both of us; that shows an excellent memory, or is it a double memory. In your case it may even be triple or quadruple--maybe more. That's wonderful, and I'm sure it's a pleasant thing to go about reminding people that you were right and they were wrong. Maybe that's your message of unity, but you would know best on that. In any event feel free to contact me at pollbuster@hotmail.com, and let me know whenever you are right about something. I have a feeling that my inbox won't be overloaded.
The GOP unified behind incorrect and was just as willing as you seem to be to dismiss any concern for whether what they were thinking turned out to be correct or not. See how well it's worked out for the country?
Ever wonder why scientist go back and evaluate after the fact? It's part of the scientific method. It's how you reach valid conclusions. Does Bill O's track record of being full of utter shit not effect whether you chose to believe his words?
It is important to have some concern for these things. That fact that the proprietor that I mentioned is sans clues is a fact that could have helped with unity actually had we been in the habit of making such evaluations. This person has a large megaphone so to speak. A whole bunch of people have a distorted view of how this nomination race has happened, who has done what, how close it is, what things are likely or far fetched, etc. specifically because they base their willingness to believe his tripe based on the position that he holds rather than his track record. This has led to circumstances, opinions, and actions that otherwise might not have been. If we had a habit of following through with the evaluation regarding who is constantly correct or who is consistently not accurate in their assessment we would be in a much better position today.
Can you honestly say that you don't see the value in such a habit? Do you not ever mention to anyone that, after the fact, it has become clear that the Bush crime family was wrong about WMDs in Iraq or terrorist training camps in Iraq? Does Karl Rove's track record have no bearing on whether you think that his addition to Faux News lends credence to the broadcast? Do you not recognize that a failure on the part of so many to make such an evaluation of Faux News has led to a large group of uninformed voters and that, in turn, this has led to some of the biggest problems that our country has to face today (such as 8 years of W)?
Seriously, man to dismiss the idea that I am expressing here is to invite blunder after blunder.
Want unity? Fine, support Hillary but also make it clear to her that there are limits to what she can do and say and still have your support.
Things were not this hostile between Hillary supporters and supporters of the nominee back in February back when this race became no longer competitive. Math dorks have been saying so since that point. The course of events and further development of mathematical circumstances between then and now has only served to demonstrate that the math dorks were right all along. Honestly looking back and evaluating like I (and all of scientific history) have suggested could have put an end to all of this back in February (when it, in fact, did become no longer competitive) could have put an end to this before it built up to such a fevered pitch and we could have had 4 months of unity under our belts now. At least we could have already dismissed the intellectual dishonesty that is coming out of the Clinton camp on a daily basis... if only we would look back and evaluate who was right and who was not issue by issue, conflict by conflict.
Geez, looks like it won't even take a week.
You were saying?
You mean an object of ridicule at Kos. Thats a shocker.
Yes, because SNL gets its scripts written over at Kos.
Wake up.
