February 15, 2008
Obama Outspends Hillary on Superdelegates
It's nice to see that Democrats are finally finding more efficient ways to spend money. Rather than blow $billions buying votes from little people with phony "economic stimulus" packages, why not just pay bribes directly to superdelegates? From Political Intelligence:
Many of the superdelegates who could well decide the Democratic presidential nominee have already been plied with campaign contributions by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, a new study shows.
"While it would be unseemly for the candidates to hand out thousands of dollars to primary voters, or to the delegates pledged to represent the will of those voters, elected officials serving as superdelegates have received about $890,000 from Obama and Clinton in the form of campaign contributions over the last three years," the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics reported today.
B.O. has outspent Shrillary about 3 to 1 in this shopping spree — further evidence that anyone flying with the Clintons should start looking for a parachute.
On a tip from ent.
Posted by Van Helsing at February 15, 2008 9:17 AM
"I smirk at your over-broad beam, too."
Posted by: Ed Flinn at February 15, 2008 9:36 AM
I hear the moonbats are planning to recreate 1968 at the Democratic Convention. Does this mean lot of riots, protests, burning and looting? This should be fun with plenty of cracked skulls when its over. Imperialism rules!
Posted by: General Jack D. Ripper at February 15, 2008 1:18 PM
Isn't this called "bribery?"
Posted by: chsw at February 15, 2008 3:10 PM
Where is B.O. getting the money?
He hasn't even been in politics for very long.
Posted by: UCA at February 15, 2008 4:33 PM
"Where is B.O. getting the money?"
Plus, donations from fools who haven't one clue regarding any substance of his policies or beliefs and are utterly "hope-notized", as he grows increasingly arrogant and condescending towards them.
Posted by: hashfanatic at February 15, 2008 5:13 PM
England gives us a glimpse into what true "Statism" is all about...
Posted by: mega at February 16, 2008 6:08 AM
Was that really you? Do you not support Obama?
If not, please tell who your candidate is.
I am not ashamed to say I supported Huckabee. I believe he is a "good" man like his words or not.
Posted by: UCA at February 16, 2008 7:00 AM
I am disenchanted by them all and I don't have a candidate at this point.
I don't believe any of them are really worthy of the job.
"I am not ashamed to say I supported Huckabee. I believe he is a "good" man like his words or not."
You shouldn't be ashamed, because that's your opinion and you have to go with your own unique perspective on the issues.
It's one thing to be Mack-trucked into supporting a candidate the media picks for you out of pragmatism, but another thing entirely for anyone to make you feel guilty because you saw a better alternative, and were willing to stand up for your principles, no matter how "politically incorrect".
Posted by: hashfanatic at February 16, 2008 10:30 AM
Whatever happened to After seven years of a President who listens only to the special interests, you’re ready for a President who brings your voice, your values, and your dreams to your White House.? We thought you were talking about the voices of the "little people..."
Posted by: Elisa at February 16, 2008 10:59 AM
What about voting against a candidate?
I must admit, I voted against Kerry more so then voting for Bush.
It seems as though every electoral season there are less and less reasons to get excited about any of our choices. I do, however, still believe in taking part in the process. Even after the Florida fiasco, our voices are still heard.
It almost seems already that it will be McCain vs. Obama. They are definitely and decisively different on the issues.
So what do you think?
Voting against somebody?
Posted by: UCA at February 16, 2008 11:29 AM
I must agree with one thing.
I am not crazy about any of the candidates, and Huckabee is for the most part finished.
Posted by: UCA at February 16, 2008 11:31 AM
I, too, usually vote against a candidate rather than for one. There will never be a candidate who represents my views 100%, so I look for the one who is less likely to make a royal mess of those issues that are most important to me.
When it comes to politics I wish politicians followed the doctors' creed, "First do no harm."
Posted by: Elisa at February 16, 2008 12:03 PM
"So what do you think?
Voting against somebody?"
You CAN do this, but not without compromising your own integrity and principles, because you are still ultimately supporting the policies of the candidate you wind up voting for.
I believe the proper, honest thing to do, if there is no acceptable candidate to vote for, is to not participate in that particular election cycle entirely, but we are human beings and it's hard to abstain when election day comes, because you naturally do not want the enemy candidate to prevail, and you feel like a traitor for not having done what little you can to prevent that.
Posted by: hashfanatic at February 16, 2008 12:18 PM
"When it comes to politics I wish politicians followed the doctors' creed, "First do no harm."
The problem is, I'm not sure the doctors follow that creed anymore, either.
Posted by: hashfanatic at February 16, 2008 12:19 PM
Get paid, keep the beemer and beach house in check, and make sure people know that you are a doctor.
I used to think that if you had the ability to take part in the political process then you need to if you want the right to complain. Now I am not so sure.
Posted by: UCA at February 16, 2008 2:46 PM
I'm impressed,you've given well thoughtout and insightful responses. Here I thought you were just a rebel rouser. Well back to the fields. My neighbors have got some cool crops in their grain bins. I've never heard of the crop though, they call them ICBM's. Have a great weekend all. Hmmm,ICBM's. I wonder if they'd go with a good buffalo steak?
Posted by: Farmer Ted at February 16, 2008 3:12 PM
Who are you and what did you do with hashfanatic!?
Posted by: KHarn at February 16, 2008 4:40 PM
Isn't this called "bribery?"
I think it's called "jetting around money".
Posted by: Morris at February 17, 2008 9:27 AM