Atlantis Online
September 20, 2019, 12:48:23 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Towering Ancient Tsunami Devastated the Mediterranean
http://www.livescience.com/environment/061130_ancient_tsunami.html
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

Obama campaign used party rules to foil Clinton

Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Obama campaign used party rules to foil Clinton  (Read 50 times)
Tom Hebert
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1370


« on: May 30, 2008, 05:14:50 am »

Obama campaign used party rules to foil Clinton

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER

WASHINGTON (AP) — Unlike Hillary Rodham Clinton, rival Barack Obama planned for the long haul. Clinton hinged her whole campaign on an early knockout blow on Super Tuesday, while Obama's staff researched congressional districts in states with primaries that were months away. What they found were opportunities to win delegates, even in states they would eventually lose.

Obama's campaign mastered some of the most arcane rules in politics, and then used them to foil a front-runner who seemed to have every advantage — money, fame and a husband who had essentially run the Democratic Party for eight years as president.

"Without a doubt, their understanding of the nominating process was one of the keys to their success," said Tad Devine, a Democratic strategist not aligned with either candidate. "They understood the nuances of it and approached it at a strategic level that the Clinton campaign did not."

Careful planning is one reason why Obama is emerging as the nominee as the Democratic Party prepares for its final three primaries, Puerto Rico on Sunday and Montana and South Dakota on Tuesday. Attributing his success only to soaring speeches and prodigious fundraising ignores a critical part of contest.

Obama used the Democrats' system of awarding delegates to limit his losses in states won by Clinton while maximizing gains in states he carried. Clinton, meanwhile, conserved her resources by essentially conceding states that favored Obama, including many states that held caucuses instead of primaries.

In a stark example, Obama's victory in Kansas wiped out the gains made by Clinton for winning New Jersey, even though New Jersey had three times as many delegates at stake. Obama did it by winning big in Kansas while keeping the vote relatively close in New Jersey.

The research effort was headed by Jeffrey Berman, Obama's press-shy national director of delegate operations. Berman, who also tracked delegates in former Rep. Dick Gephardt's presidential bids, spent the better part of 2007 analyzing delegate opportunities for Obama.

Obama won a majority of the 23 Super Tuesday contests on Feb. 5 and then spent the following two weeks racking up 11 straight victories, building an insurmountable lead among delegates won in primaries and caucuses.

What made it especially hard for Clinton to catch up was that Obama understood and took advantage of a nominating system that emerged from the 1970s and '80s, when the party struggled to find a balance between party insiders and its rank-and-file voters.

Until the 1970s, the nominating process was controlled by party leaders, with ordinary citizens having little say. There were primaries and caucuses, but the delegates were often chosen behind closed doors, sometimes a full year before the national convention. That culminated in a 1968 national convention that didn't reflect the diversity of the party — racially or ideologically.

The fiasco of the 1968 convention in Chicago, where police battled anti-war protesters in the streets, led to calls for a more inclusive process.

One big change was awarding delegates proportionally, meaning you can finish second or third in a primary and still win delegates to the party's national convention. As long candidates get at least 15 percent of the vote, they are eligible for delegates.

The system enables strong second-place candidates to stay competitive and extend the race — as long as they don't run out of campaign money.

"For people who want a campaign to end quickly, proportional allocation is a bad system," Devine said. "For people who want a system that is fair and reflective of the voters, it's a much better system."

Another big change was the introduction of superdelegates, the party and elected officials who automatically attend the convention and can vote for whomever they choose regardless of what happens in the primaries and caucuses.

Much has been made of the superdelegates this year because neither Obama nor Clinton can reach the number of delegates needed to secure the nomination without their support.

A more subtle change was the distribution of delegates within each state. As part of the proportional system, Democrats award delegates based on statewide vote totals as well as results in individual congressional districts. The delegates, however, are not distributed evenly within a state, like they are in the Republican system.

Under Democratic rules, congressional districts with a history of strong support for Democratic candidates are rewarded with more delegates than districts that are more Republican. Some districts packed with Democratic voters can have as many as eight or nine delegates up for grabs, while more Republican districts in the same state have three or four.

The system is designed to benefit candidates who do well among loyal Democratic constituencies, and none is more loyal than black voters. Obama, who would be the first black candidate nominated by a major political party, has been winning 80 percent to 90 percent of the black vote in most primaries, according to exit polls.

"Black districts always have a large number of delegates because they are the highest performers for the Democratic Party," said Elaine Kamarck, a Harvard University professor who is writing a book about the Democratic nominating process.

"Once you had a black candidate you knew that he would be winning large numbers of delegates because of this phenomenon," said Kamarck, who is also a superdelegate supporting Clinton.

In states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, Clinton won the statewide vote but Obama won enough delegates to limit her gains. In states Obama carried, like Georgia and Virginia, he maximized the number of delegates he won.

"The Obama campaign was very good at targeting districts in areas where they could do well," said former DNC Chairman Don Fowler, a Clinton superdelegate from South Carolina. "They were very conscious and aware of these nuances."

But, Fowler noted, the best strategy in the world would have been useless without the right candidate.

"If that same strategy and that same effort had been used with a different candidate, a less charismatic candidate, a less attractive candidate, it wouldn't have worked," Fowler said. "The reason they look so good is because Obama was so good."


http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5ghb-cUeWpvC77LS_S8tI4aB7ENIQD90VR5SO2
Report Spam   Logged

Volitzer
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 11110



« Reply #1 on: May 31, 2008, 11:11:38 pm »

More like the Bilderbergers had a change in plans.

Nothing more !!!

 Roll Eyes
Report Spam   Logged
Volitzer
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 11110



« Reply #2 on: June 01, 2008, 01:12:18 am »



Young Hillary Clinton
Report Spam   Logged
Deanna Witmer
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 4983



« Reply #3 on: June 01, 2008, 02:58:53 am »

Good article, Tom! 

It's pretty clear that Obama was underestimated by Hillary all along! It's pretty obvious the Clinton people didn't know the rules that well, heck, Mark Penn thought the primaries were winner take all, like the Republicans!

They had no plan after Super Tuesday, which is why they lost eleven (actually twelve) in a row.

And they only began raising money on the internet after Pennsylvania.

Obama built his organization all by himself and took on, and defeated, the most powerful political organization in the country!  He is not only a brilliant speaker, he can raise the most money.  And he is very smart, too.  I have no doubt that he will be a great President, one for the people, for a change, and we will finally begin to get all this corruption and money out of politics so government can be for the people again.  Smiley

If Hillary or McCain got elected, it would just be Washington business as usual, run on behalf of all the lobbyists and insiders. That's why they are all so scared of him - he isn't one of them! He is someone who is more honest.
Report Spam   Logged
Tom Hebert
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1370


« Reply #4 on: June 01, 2008, 05:05:32 am »

Hi Deanna,

Yes, that's what impressed me about the article too.  While Clinton was resting on her laurels waiting to be crowned queen, Obama was busy pounding the pavement and playing by the rules--two good qualities for our next President in the wake of the Bush disaster.

Also, Obama managed his campaign finances much more efficiently--and with "clean" money!  Hillary raised considerable funds in the early stages of the race, but she squandered them as a result of mismanagement and miscalculation.  That says a lot about her leadership abilities and her fiscal responsibility--or lack thereof.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2008, 05:07:09 am by Tom Hebert » Report Spam   Logged
Volitzer
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 11110



« Reply #5 on: June 01, 2008, 01:21:35 pm »

Yes now you have a mulatto guy globalist versus a a white female globalist.

 Roll Eyes

Way to go.

I'm sure both he and McCain will be receiving their Bilderberg orders soon enough.
Report Spam   Logged
Tom Hebert
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1370


« Reply #6 on: June 01, 2008, 01:29:44 pm »

Vol,

You could certainly use a little more globalism in your diet.  It would be good for you!  It would help you to see a broader picture of life.  Cheesy

Report Spam   Logged
Volitzer
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 11110



« Reply #7 on: June 02, 2008, 11:57:17 am »

Vol,

You could certainly use a little more globalism in your diet.  It would be good for you!  It would help you to see a broader picture of life.  Cheesy



Sorry I'll go for Constitutional government over Global government any day.
Report Spam   Logged
Tom Hebert
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1370


« Reply #8 on: June 02, 2008, 12:49:22 pm »

I guess we'll just have to disagree on this one.   Sad
Report Spam   Logged
Kristina
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 4545



« Reply #9 on: June 02, 2008, 01:11:44 pm »

Yes now you have a mulatto guy globalist versus a a white female globalist.

 Roll Eyes

Way to go.

I'm sure both he and McCain will be receiving their Bilderberg orders soon enough.

Volitzer, I really wish you would stop bringing up the word "mulatto," I expected better of you than to dwell on people's race.

We actually do need more "globalism."  It's a global world whether we want to acknowledge it or not. There are less wars because the world has more interaction with one another - more trade, more international cooperation, more dependence on other countries.  Leaders who don't understand that are dinosaurs.  It's about trade these days, not protectionism.  I can't think of any better candidate in this field better positioned to understand the challenges of this new world than Barack Obama.
Report Spam   Logged

"Nothing gives one person so much advantage over another as to remain always cool and unruffled under all circumstances."

Thomas Jefferson
Volitzer
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 11110



« Reply #10 on: June 03, 2008, 01:28:43 am »

Yes now you have a mulatto guy globalist versus a a white female globalist.

 Roll Eyes

Way to go.

I'm sure both he and McCain will be receiving their Bilderberg orders soon enough.

Volitzer, I really wish you would stop bringing up the word "mulatto," I expected better of you than to dwell on people's race.

We actually do need more "globalism."  It's a global world whether we want to acknowledge it or not. There are less wars because the world has more interaction with one another - more trade, more international cooperation, more dependence on other countries.  Leaders who don't understand that are dinosaurs.  It's about trade these days, not protectionism.  I can't think of any better candidate in this field better positioned to understand the challenges of this new world than Barack Obama.

What happens when Bilderberg gets rid of the 13th and 19th Amendments in the name of Globalism ??

What then ??


Bilderberg wants to convert America into a Communist-China-like slave labor economy.  The fact that they let Communist-China get away with currency manipulation and other unethical economic practices is all a part of how the Globalists operate.

www.rense.com/general50/bej.htm

Roger W. Robinson Jr -- head of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission -- gave this testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives back in October 2003. He laid out the Chinese blueprint for undermining the U.S. economy:
 
First, they devalue their currency by as much as 40%
 
Then they issue tariffs on foreign goods
 
They cut foreign firms off from local marketing channels
 
They chaperone and handpick partners for international joint ventures
 
They give preferential loans to their own factories from state banks
 
Chinese companies get privileged listing on the Chinese stock market
 
Chinese companies get special tax breaks not available to foreigners

Now look at the 25 Tenets of the Illuminati.  Look at #9, #15, #20 and #21.

The Illuminati’s 25 Tenets:

1) Men are inclined to evil rather than good.

2) Preach Liberalism.

3) Use ideals of freedom to bring about class wars.

4) Any and all means necessary should be used to reach their goals as they are justified.

5) Believe their rights lie in force.

6) The power of their resources must remain invisible until the very moment that they have gained the strength so that no group or force can undermine it.

7) Advocates a mob psychology to obtain control of the masses

8 ) Promotes the use of alcohol, drugs, moral corruption, and all forms of vice to systematically corrupt the youth of the nation.

9) Seize citizens’ private property by any means necessary.

10) The use of slogans such as equity, liberty, and fraternity are used on the masses as psychological warfare.

11) War should be directed so that the nations on both sides are placed further in debt and peace conferences are designed so that neither combatant retain territory rights.

12) Members must use their wealth to have candidates chosen to public office who would be obedient to their demands, and would be used as pawns in the game by the men behind the scenes. The advisors will have been bred, reared, and trained from childhood to rule the affairs of the world.

13) Control the press, and hence most of the information the public receives.

14) Agents and provocateurs will come forward after creating traumatic situations, and appear to be the saviors of the masses, when they are actually interested in just the opposite, the reduction of the population.

15) Create industrial depression and financial panic, unemployment, hunger, shortage of food, use these events to control the masses and mobs. and use them to wipe out those who stand in the way.

16) Infiltrate Freemasonry which is to be used to conceal and further objectives.

17) Expound the value of systematic deception, use high sounding slogans and phrases, advocate lavish sounding promises to the masses even though they can’t be kept.

18) The art of street fighting is necessary to bring the population into subjection.

19) Use agents as provocateurs and advisers behind the scenes, and after wars use secret diplomacy talks to gain control.

20) Establish huge monopolies towards world government control.

21) Use high taxes and unfair competition to bring about economic ruin by controlling raw materials, organized agitation among the workers, and subsidizing competitors.


22) Build up armaments with police and soldiers who can protect and further Illuminati interests.

23) Members and leaders of the one world government will be appointed by the director of the Illuminati.

24) Infiltrate into all classes and levels of society and government for the purpose of teaching the youth in the schools theories and principles known to be false.

25) Create and use national and international laws to destroy civilization.

I just find it so hard to believe that black-Americans and women-Americans are so hell-bent on voting for a guy who plans to betray them to a group of Globalists who cares less about their Constitutionally Amended rights ??

 Lips sealed
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy