Dave Ammons breaks the story and quickly divines a key factor:
But Obama is quite popular in the Democratic strongholds of Seattle and other urban areas, and the Obama endorsement could help centrist Gregoire there.
Better put, Gregoire's leap onto the Obama bandwagon gives her hope of making nice with the liberal Seattle base that isn't actually too fond of her.
Posted by Eric Earling at February 08, 2008 08:24 AM | Email ThisLOVING IT.
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on February 8, 2008 08:45 AMSo the empty head endorses the empty suit.....sometimes things do make sense in this state.
Posted by: Rick D. on February 8, 2008 09:13 AMThis endorsement will help Gregoire enormously among independents and moderates. In fact, the latest SurveyUSA poll has Obama beating McCain 55% to 38% in Washington, and even drawing 25% of the Republican vote. Clinton, on the other hand, merely ties McCain in Washington.
And I think Gregoire wants to have a Democratic president elected in November 2008. Obama wins in national polls by several points over McCain, while McCain in turn defeats Clinton by several points nationally.
Posted by: Richard Pope on February 8, 2008 09:23 AMIf (OK, When, since the Queen Bee will step over however many bodies it takes in her pursuit of power) Hilliary gets the nomination, downticket Democrats will be riding her coattails in the wrong direction. Not to mention I know a lot of people who aren't going to get out to vote for McCain but damn sure are going to get out to vote against Hillary.
Personally, I'll probably hold my nose and vote McCain to keep the killer D's out anyhow, but I have to admit to being torn about whether it would better to abstain and let a one-term Ocarter administration to take the hit for the brewing economic downturn. I don't think McCain will do much for it. Hillary, though, simply can not win the White House - I will happily vote for any R running against her, EVER.
Posted by: ShillBull on February 8, 2008 10:05 AMThe fight between the Democrat camps is great. Let them lay waste to each other, burning up dollars and good will, while McCain focuses on bringing Republicans together and getting his "government is the problem" message out. Lord knows he's got plenty of ammunition to prove the point.
While the media was telling us how the GOP was fractured it was the Democrats all along. Hmmm, imagine that.
What's the matter duff. Our Gov let you down.
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on February 8, 2008 10:28 AMBTW, can anyone tell me just what CG has done over the last few years? I can't recall a single significant action taken by here at all that wasn't "disaster" related...
Posted by: Kraegarth on February 8, 2008 10:58 AMGregoire and Clinton are two peas in a pod. I'll bet anyone about ten grand that Clinton gave the okay for the betrayal endorsement.
You know, there is the talk of who helps out Gregoire, but that discussion was completely missing on which R candidate helps Rossi out. I can't see the McCain helping the Rossi candidacy; and I think it will hurt. We'll see, though.
Even with my guy out of the hunt, I hate it when people compare polls in February when the voting for President between the Rs and the Ds is in November. So what? Bush was ahead of Gore 65-35 at this time in 2000 and it was a nail-biter at the end. What is different this time?
Obama isn't going to be able to avoid tough questions this summer. For the primary, he weathered the storm, but still may not win; for the general, if he wins the primary, there is a new set of issues. Like the Rs with have to answer the Ds, the Ds will have to answer R issues.
Posted by: swatter on February 8, 2008 11:30 AMDuffy tends to do this when "his candidate" takes a hit. His tendency to tuck-tail and run from conflict is telling, no? Makes you wonder.
Posted by: Quality Controlz on February 8, 2008 11:33 AMKarl Rove was on Hannity last night with his chalkboard. Obama is expected to do well the next few weeks (maybe sweep) but will only gain a handful of delegates. Clinton, on the other hand is concentrating on delegate rich Texas and Ohio which would bring her back. However, he could pull a Giuliani and lose some momentum.
However, have no fear. With the closeness of the race, the DNC may have to allow Michigan and Florida to field and allow those state's delegates to vote. Clinton won both winner-take-all states.
So, contrary to the Duffer and my worst nightmares, Clinton could still pull it out.
The machinery favors Clinton while the emotion favors Obama. Just think what an Obama-Clinton ticket would mean. If Clinton won, there is no way another VP other than Obama would be acceptable. On the other hand, Obama wouldn't have to include Clinton.
A bigger question is how old codgy McCain can excite the young 'uns to join his schtick and to stop the Obama momentum.
Posted by: swatter on February 8, 2008 12:10 PMWe can make guesses about his policies based on his voting record, but all this really shows is what the Dem party line was for the last few years. Freshmen senators and congressmen rarely veer too far from that in either party.
This may result in it being really difficult to campaign against him, assuming of course that McCain chooses to do this rather than campaign FOR something.
It might be interesting to have campaigns FOR something though. It certainly would represent a refreshing change in presidential politics.
Posted by: deadwood on February 8, 2008 12:41 PMI'm also curious as to who Burner is going to endorse. I did some digging and didn't find anything online.
Didn't Obama mistakenly call her "Marcy" in front of the crowd at a political rally here a few years ago?
Then there's that sour grapes remark that she made after losing in 2006. Something to the effect that the reason she lost was that the district just wasn't ready for a woman to represent them in Congress.
If she does end up siding with Obama, then maybe someone should ask her if the reason is that she thinks that Hillary would lose because the country isn't ready for a woman president.
Posted by: Smoley on February 8, 2008 01:17 PMI wonder if Obama gave the ok for Maria Cantwell to go for Hillary. She brought him to town a year to help rally her campaign, she didn't bother to return the favor.
Does anyone really stand for something? Does anyone really know what time it is?
Posted by: swatter on February 8, 2008 04:37 PMOne reason why it was a good call: she wasn't required to stand on the same stage as Gary Locke.
Another reason: Obama brings new voters to the polls who will vote for Gregoire.
Another reason: when Gregoire defeated Ron Sims in the primary she lost a lot of African American voters in the general because the Sims campaign raised the race card from her sorority days. Gregoire got those voters back today.
The best reason for Gregoire backing Obama: he attracts many voters who typically identify with Republicans and lots of Democrats.
It was a good call for Gregoire. It looks like Obama may well be the nominee. He'll draw huge numbers of new voters to the polls in our state. They won't be voting for Dino.
That possibility. combined with a depressed GOP vote because of McCain, could be the makings of a landslide for Gregoire.
Posted by: redflag on February 8, 2008 05:17 PMWhat stuff...doesn't matter...something...anything.
Posted by: John Bailo on February 8, 2008 06:05 PM1. After 9/11, she worked diligently to secure funds to recover and rebuild. She fought to provide compensation to families of the victims, small businesses and front line workers at Ground Zero and improve homeland security.
2. In her work on the Senate Armed Services Committee, she has been working to see that our military has the necessary resources. She has visited Iraq and Afghanistan to learn first hand the challenges our combat forces are facing.
3. Hillary passed legislation to track the health status of our troops so that conditions like Gulf War Syndrome would not be misdiagnosed.
4. She is an original sponsor of legislation to expand health benefits to members of the National Guard and Reserves.
5. She has introduced legislation to tie the Congressional salary increases to increase in the minimum wage.
6. She has supported a variety of middle-class tax cuts: marriage penalty tax, property tax relief, reduction of the Alternative Minimum Tax
7. She passed legislation to create jobs in struggling communities through the Renewal Communities program.
8. She has championed legislation to bring broadband internet access to rural America which helps support the economic growth of the community.
9. She continues to strengthen the Children's Health Insurance Program which she developed to help low income and working families.
10. She has authored legislation that has been enacted to improve the quality and lower the cost of prescription drugs.
11. She has sponsored legislation in the global fight against HIV/AIDS
12. She has passed legislation that will bring more qualified teachers into the classroom
13. She is one of the original sponsors of the Prevention First Act to increase access to family planning.
14. She introduced the Count Every Vote Act in 2005
I could go on, but suffice it to say, Hillary's hard work has touched all of our lives.
Thank you, Hillary
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120241915915951669.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries (Title - Can Hillary lose with grace ?)
I would agree that Hillary has more substance than Obama, but you should know that substance vs. style wins a few and loses a bunch in this, the age of stupidity...
Posted by: KS on February 8, 2008 08:23 PMHere's a hot one for you. Her Hillarycare will garnishee wages of the people that don't buy health insurance. Cute.
You know what I'd like to see? How much of the reported 15 million has she ever given to a poor family or a starving street person. Let me help you out: Not one red cent. She doesn't even tip waitresses. It's pretty easy to be expansive with somebody else's money sweetie, little tougher to use your own.
Posted by: G Jiggy on February 8, 2008 08:45 PMme thinks she is trying to prove that she isn't really a racist. Really.
Posted by: Bobby on February 8, 2008 09:29 PMme thinks she is trying to prove that she isn't really a racist. Really.
Posted by: Bobby on February 8, 2008 09:29 PMWith that said, she is as calculating as the Cliintons, offers little leadership and is a part of the she-ocracy (the two Senators support Hillary and the nanny state) of this blue State. She also loves that status-quo too and an expansion of the nanny state.
Posted by: KS on February 9, 2008 09:48 AM