5 March 2008
News and Comments - 03/05/08
Posted by Joy Bischoff under: What's News .
23 Comments so far...
Cavetrollhead Says:
5 March 2008 at 1:57 am.
Former White House political guru Karl Rove is urging that Sen. John McCain pick Mitt Romney as his running mate, writes veteran Washington columnist Robert Novak.
According to Novak, Rove and other GOP bigwigs want Romney in the No. 2 spot despite the bad blood that exists between the former Massachusetts governor and McCain, an enmity that grew out of their heated rivalry during the Republican presidential primaries.
Insiders say that having Romney, who is worth between an estimated $190 million to $250 million, would bring an infusion of big bucks into the cash-strapped McCain campaign. Moreover, conservatives unhappy with McCain (like author Ann Coulter) who are threatening to vote for the Democratic candidate say they’ll back McCain if he picks Romney.
Some of Romney’s closest advisors are dead set against his taking the vice presidential slot, Novak adds, reporting that they have been “injecting into the political rumor stream an unsubstantiated report that McCain obtained the vital endorsement of Florida Gov. Charlie Crist by promising him the vice presidential nomination.”
He adds that their floating that rumor “reflects the anger in the Romney camp over the late endorsements of McCain by Crist and Sen. Mel Martinez of Florida. Until then, the Romney insiders claim, their private polls showed a lead in the Jan. 29 Florida primary that in fact delivered a crushing victory for McCain.”
Cavetrollhead Says:
5 March 2008 at 2:01 am.
maybe that is old news. I just noticed it is from the 2nd. Sorry.
Terrie Soberg Says:
5 March 2008 at 7:42 am.
News to me–thanks for posting it. I can’t imagine Romney would accept, even if VP was offered to him. Stranger things have happened. That is probably the only way McCain has a chance to win.
Roy Bischoff Says:
5 March 2008 at 9:17 am.
CTH–regarding the California elections and elections in general. The media projects winners based on their exit polls (they question voters as they leave the polling place). These polls can be off because they cannot be a completely random sample. They also look at reported results which can change rapidly in the early stages because voters are often grouped together ie people in one area may tend to prefer one candidate over another instead of an even distribution throughout a state. This can result in big swings in numbers but as more results come in the true picture will be in place unless of course their is a large amount of voter fraud. Also when we look at polls prior to elections when need to realize what we are looking at. The most accurate polls will be those that are targeting likely voters. It doesn’t matter what you think if you are not going to vote. Polls that don’t target likely voters can be way off the mark and are often used to try to create momentum.
Cameron Says:
5 March 2008 at 9:42 am.
This cracks me up. This lady is so arrogant it’s incredible. She has only the slimmest chance to win and she hints at this?
Clinton hints at shared ticket
WASHINGTON - 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.
Cameron Says:
5 March 2008 at 9:55 am.
California’s top court ponders gay marriage
Reuters | Wednesday, 05 March 2008
Four years after San Francisco ignited a heated national debate by briefly allowing gay marriage, California’s top court is hearing arguments about whether matrimony should be limited to a man and a woman.
The hearing brings into focus the highest-profile US fight over gay rights in recent years and the outcome could end up influencing legislation and litigation in other states on a matter that has been a hot-button issue in election campaigns.
“California’s a bellwether state. What happens here, blows east,” said Larry Bowler, a retired deputy sheriff from Sacramento, who opposes gay marriage, outside the courthouse.
San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom forced the issue by suddenly issuing gay marriage licenses in February 2004. More than 4000 homosexual couples took him up on the offer, before a lower court halted the process.
Mac Says:
5 March 2008 at 10:21 am.
Man, Hillary has a set of ‘em. She is way behind but she would be so freaking gracious as to offer Obama the spot under her. I agree Cameron. Very funny.
Peter Says:
5 March 2008 at 10:24 am.
The media might be like children who rebelled against mommy and went out to play with Obama. They may get scared now that mommy seems tougher and go back home.
Jesse Says:
5 March 2008 at 1:40 pm.
You may be right Peter. I like your analogy. Let me tell you I’m glad she isn’t my mama.
Matt Says:
5 March 2008 at 1:51 pm.
Obama says it is ‘premature to talk about a joint ticket’
On a joint ticket:
“We are just focused on winning the nomination. That is my focus. I respect Sen. Clinton. She has been a tenacious opponent. It is premature to talk about a joint ticket.”
E.E. Says:
5 March 2008 at 3:06 pm.
I think Peter is probably going to turn out right. Look how the press finally went after Obama with real questions this week.
M.G. Says:
5 March 2008 at 3:54 pm.
I’m having a hard time caring about the dems. All I care about today is that Huckabee is out. His hatred of Mormons ruined things for Romney.
Saddened Says:
5 March 2008 at 4:13 pm.
No kidding M.G. It will be great not seeing his spoiler face. I don’t think he is an honorable man.
Cavetrollhead Says:
5 March 2008 at 4:48 pm.
Roy,
Thank you.
Yes I agree and see your point on exit polls and not being completely random. Small sampling = large margin of error. Also, the personality trait of talking openly about your choice may manifest itself in your voting choice. The more “paranoid” Ron Paul types, for example, may not wish to discuss their vote. Or on the other hand the more “angry” Ron Paul types may wish more to proclaim it. LOL
Another big factor that I see in the California exit polls is that the eastern and southern races on Super Tuesday were going for McCain and Huckabee. Since people tend to go out more for the expected winners than the expected losers, early returns tend to sway later returning states toward the winners of the earlier states. This may well have effected Romney badly in Ca. So since the exit polls were taken in the early evening, before early returns in the east, they show Romney ahead more. Then pro-Romney people stayed home because they perceived him as losing in the east. Get it?
The problems I am still having with California is that I looked at the early returns. I actually printed them out. With 30% statewide reporting, Romney was down BIG in EVERY single precinct. This is an extremely unlikely pattern. Some districts SHOULD go heavily for McCain and others SHOULD go heavily for Romney, but instead they all went heavily, and in a uniform manner, for McCain in the earlies- even with almost all precincts reporting a significant amount (10%+) However, things then began to inexplicably even out for Romney. It seemed statistically impossible.
Cavetrollhead Says:
5 March 2008 at 4:54 pm.
Cameron,
We will now see if California’s Supreme Court is a court, or an unelected legislative arm. Or maybe there really is a right for Same Sex Marriage (SSM) embedded somewhere in the Ca constitution. If they find there is, it is only a matter of time before polygamists sue for the legal right to marry.
Then Iffer and Pickles can share Stumpy!
Cavetrollhead Says:
5 March 2008 at 6:01 pm.
I still think Obama is the Anointed one of the media and the party in general. It is just that if they upset Hillary and she wins, maybe she will make them pay. I don’t really know though. I don’t see Hillary as quite the demon others do. I would say that she and McCain are birds of a feather.
Roy Bischoff Says:
5 March 2008 at 7:49 pm.
Cave, I think with California it was part what I wrote and part voter fraud or at the least, a big mix-up. We saw the video of the guy who wasn’t allowed to vote and heard hundreds of reports of that kind of thing. Also in New Hampshire, there were districts with no votes for Ron Paul or Mitt Romney where plenty of people claimed they had voted for them. And that doesn’t even touch the mess in Florida. So I do think it both problems.
Ghost Says:
5 March 2008 at 8:13 pm.
I’m kind of surprised how happy it makes me that Huckabee is gone. It isn’t as if I like McCain. Anyway, I hope he is very upset if he doesn’t get made VP. I really think he thought he earned it by destroying Mitt’s chances.
Stumpy Says:
5 March 2008 at 8:30 pm.
Yup and I finely quit my hucupping.
E.E. Says:
5 March 2008 at 8:49 pm.
I don’t know, Cave. It was Hillary then Obama but if Hillary looks like she has any chance and they’re afraid she’ll come back to life, the press might be scared of a big smack down from her power machine. They could jump back in line. They’ve been all Obama lately but let’s see if that changes just a little in the future. We’ll know they’re still totally Obama by the kind of Clinton pictures they put up. Lately they have been so horrible. That must drive her bonkers.
Jesse Says:
5 March 2008 at 10:13 pm.
If you don’t want to think bad of Hillary, then don’t read anything about the things that happened with her and the Rose Law Firm and Whitewater, or Mena and drug trafficking, or any number of other things. The Clinton mafia is a powerful force. Then you also don’t want to look into the forced campaign donations in New York, or her major fundraisers, the ones in jail, or…I’m tired.
Jesse Says:
5 March 2008 at 10:14 pm.
Oh and Stumpy, glad you got rid of your huckabeeups.
Cavetrollhead Says:
6 March 2008 at 12:42 am.
I am also glad that Hiccuppypuppy is out of the race. He still hasn’t passed Romney in delegates.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.