»   Committee to Protect Journalists publishes a strongly-worded letter criticising Cameron's plans to curb social media http://t.co/OpZPK6o 2 hrs ago

»   Jon Stewart (Daily Show) on how the US media, especially Fox, is screwing over Ron Paul. Wow. http://t.co/YPRrn0Q 10 hrs ago

»   Turns out Libdems were against 'fluorescent bibs' for offenders and now they're for them http://t.co/r2Jiduu another u-turn? 10 hrs ago

»   Amnesty International sharply criticise police use of Tasers after man dies http://t.co/UjGBgc5 14 hrs ago

»   Odd that Spectator's @frasernels keeps pushing discredited figs on immigration & jobs while saying he's for immigration http://t.co/tGC2q76 15 hrs ago

» More updates...


  • Family

    • Liberal Conspiracy
  • Comrades

    • Andy Worthington
    • Angela Saini
    • Bartholomew’s notes
    • Bleeding Heart Show
    • Bloggerheads
    • Blood & Treasure
    • Campaign against Honour Killings
    • Cath Elliott
    • Chicken Yoghurt
    • Daily Mail Watch
    • Dave Hill
    • Dr. Mitu Khurana
    • Europhobia
    • Faith in Society
    • Feminism for non-lefties
    • Feministing
    • Gender Bytes
    • Harry’s Place
    • IKWRO
    • MediaWatchWatch
    • Ministry of Truth
    • Natalie Bennett
    • New Statesman blogs
    • Operation Black Vote
    • Our Kingdom
    • Robert Sharp
    • Rupa Huq
    • Shiraz Socialist
    • Shuggy’s Blog
    • Stumbling and Mumbling
    • Ta-Nehisi Coates
    • The F Word
    • Though Cowards Flinch
    • Tory Troll
    • UK Polling Report
  • In-laws

    • Aaron Heath
    • Douglas Clark's saloon
    • Earwicga
    • Get There Steppin’
    • Incurable Hippie
    • Neha Viswanathan
    • Power of Choice
    • Rita Banerji
    • Sarah
    • Sepia Mutiny
    • Sonia Faleiro
    • Southall Black Sisters
    • The Langar Hall
    • Turban Head



  • Technorati: graph / links

    Obama wins three more states


    by Sunny
    13th February, 2008 at 5:07 am    

    After winning 5 states over the weekend, Obama racked up three more states last night: Virginia, Maryland and District of Columbia. That makes it 8 straight wins since Super Tuesday. And look at the margins:

    DC: Obama 75% / Clinton 24%
    Maryland: Obama 60% / Clinton 37%
    Virginia: Obama 64% / Clinton 35%

    He is also eating into her traditional base:

    In Virginia and Maryland, they were splitting whites almost evenly, according to an exit survey conducted for The Associated Press. Even white women were beginning to move toward the Illinois senator — Clinton won sixty percent of their votes, a much lower percentage than in contests past. Clinton has based her candidacy in large part on her appeal to white women. In addition to his usual strong showing among young voters, Obama was also running about even among those over 65, a group Clinton usually dominates.

    And Obama was winning 66 percent to 33 percent among independents, who made up a fifth of the Democratic electorate in Virginia. He did even better — 70 percent to 26 percent — among Republicans, who made up 8 percent of the Democratic vote.


                  Post to del.icio.us


    Filed in: Current affairs,United States






    39 Comments below   |  

    Reactions: Twitter, blogs


    1. Ravi Naik — on 13th February, 2008 at 10:00 am  

      Obama is now the frontrunner - he got the most popular votes, number of delegates and number of states so far. If this is the result of “lack of experience”, then who needs it? :)

      I think democrats should reflect at the results - if Clinton is losing so badly in most of the country - in a Democrat’s election - then she will be a liability if she gets the nomination.

    2. Letters From A Tory — on 13th February, 2008 at 10:25 am  

      Hillary has fired her campaign manager and her deputy campaign manager ‘stepped aside’ over the last 24 hours as well, according to the Guardian.

      You can smell the fear from this side of the Atlantic!

      http://lettersfromatory.wordpress.com

    3. cjcjc — on 13th February, 2008 at 11:50 am  

      Amazing (and excellent) that Obama is now 2/1 on favourite.

      But I do hope he sorts this idiot out…

      http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2008/02/obama_che_guevara_flag_scandal/

    4. Parvinder — on 13th February, 2008 at 12:19 pm  

      and your point is? what’s wrong with having Che Guevara’s picture and the Cuban flag on the wall?
      The Castro regime has its faults, undemocratic and anti-liberatarian but the US blockade is also insane…
      would you prefer to have a poster of the corrupt US-backed Cuban pimp, Batista on the wall ?

      Che Guevara is hardly some mass murderer to be vilified

    5. Bhargavi — on 13th February, 2008 at 12:23 pm  

      Following on the Cuba angle - this a beautiful piece by Fareed Zakaria in Newsweek as to how Clinton and Obama differ on this issue …. and the courage of Obama in standing up to long-accepted dogma …

      http://www.newsweek.com/id/107578/

    6. cjcjc — on 13th February, 2008 at 12:57 pm  

      “Che Guevara is hardly some mass murderer to be vilified”

      Opinions differ on that one.

      http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-should-che-be-an-icon-no-394336.html

      Urging Kruschev to start a nuclear war…go Che!

    7. Parvinder — on 13th February, 2008 at 3:09 pm  

      well I never. Sucked in by Motorcycle Diaries I suppose. thanks cj. Relations between cuba and US has to change so there’s hope there with BO I suppose

    8. SalmanR — on 13th February, 2008 at 3:24 pm  

      Let’s not forget that Obama is currently running against one of the most reviled women in American history.

    9. Ravi Naik — on 13th February, 2008 at 3:30 pm  

      She is reviled by Republicans not Democrats.

    10. SalmanR — on 13th February, 2008 at 3:45 pm  

      Right but that certainly enters into the Democratic voter’s calculus. A true blue Dem does not want to match up the most reviled woman in American history (Clinton) against an elite warrior Senator (McCain).

      BTW, McCain has two sons serving in Iraq.

    11. cjcjc — on 13th February, 2008 at 3:45 pm  

      Parvinder - completely agree the Cuban embargo is wholly counterproductive.
      Hope whoever wins changes that.

    12. Bhargavi — on 13th February, 2008 at 3:48 pm  

      not true … i point you to pretty much any article on the Huffington Post, the New Republic or any “liberal” american media …. they all revile her too …

    13. sonia — on 13th February, 2008 at 4:30 pm  

      America’s policy on Cuba is definitely counter-productive, they’re the ones losing out. It’s ridiculous that ordinary citizens can’t even go over and take a look, talk about the iron curtain

    14. sonia — on 13th February, 2008 at 4:35 pm  

      but i’d say the shoe’s on the other foot now really. Clearly obama doesn’t have a clue really either.

    15. Leon — on 13th February, 2008 at 4:52 pm  

      Clearly obama doesn’t have a clue really either.

      What makes you say that?

    16. sonia — on 13th February, 2008 at 5:24 pm  

      because he is still talking about cuba from the point of america being the big strong one, to help little poor cuba out. Frankly in my opinion, the US ( and the rest of us) is going to be needing to learn from cuba having faced the reality of peak oil, and surviving, and doing well. of course it is not just obama, but the whole mindset of ‘capitalism’ will ‘open up’ cuba. etc. ” oh we should let cuban-americans visit’ - no you sillies, you should let everyone visit, because we could learn something from them, not ‘oh we take pity on them so we should ‘ease’ our policies’. This is a brilliant documentary, made by some sensible americans, whose government sure doesn’t get it.

    17. sonia — on 13th February, 2008 at 5:30 pm  

      and any environmentalists here and elsewhere would be well advised to watch that documentary, i am hoping London starts taking the issue of growing local food seriously.

      so that’s why i meant Obama doesn’t have a clue, he, like all the other contenders, is still very much within the ‘american dream’ glory thing, a reality check or two would be smart.

    18. fugstar — on 13th February, 2008 at 5:41 pm  

      at the end of his speech theres two points he makes. that we need to think about the enlightenment and the sharia (he only uses islam for its symbolic power i dont think his argument would have generated interest amongst chritians if he used their own religon to make this point).

      Two symbolic issues that two groups take a lot of (often fase) civilisational pride in. The shallow poisoning from exmuslims was always to be expected, as time goes on i wonder how the ‘enlightenment consensus’ will be reflected upon.

    19. Leon — on 13th February, 2008 at 7:08 pm  

      *reads fugstar’s post, looks at thread title, grins*

    20. Ravi Naik — on 13th February, 2008 at 7:35 pm  

      “*reads fugstar’s post, looks at thread title, grins*”"

      :D

    21. Ravi Naik — on 13th February, 2008 at 7:45 pm  

      not true … i point you to pretty much any article on the Huffington Post, the New Republic or any “liberal” american media …. they all revile her too …

      I agree that the media and Huffington Post seem to be more pro-Obama than pro-Clinton, but I think “revile” is a strong word - a lot of people criticise her for being too calculist and somewhat unethical in regards to her opposition, which is different from the kind of bile she has endured from Republicans since she was the First Lady.

    22. Ravi Naik — on 13th February, 2008 at 8:03 pm  

      “no you sillies, you should let everyone visit, because we could learn something from them, not ‘oh we take pity on them so we should ‘ease’ our policies’. This is a brilliant documentary, made by some sensible americans, whose government sure doesn’t get it.”

      Nice post, Sonia. I do agree with you that Cuba in a lot of ways shames the US, as the movie “Sicko” has shown. In particular its commitment to help the poor.

      However, I am not sure Cuba recovered after the USSR collapsed - it is a pretty poor country, not to mention that political opposition and freedom of speech has been wiped off for decades.

      I think Obama is courageous for breaking this taboo about Cuba - Clinton certainly isn’t, and pragmatic because capitalism can be used to empower people and create richness to the country. I certainly believe that socialism and capitalism go well together, and the US and Cuba can benefit each other. I also agree that it is best to approach without a complex of superiority.

    23. SalmanR — on 13th February, 2008 at 10:32 pm  

      Obama is demagogue - he is incapable of talking specifics. He’s not what American or the world needs right now. McCain is the better choice.

    24. Bhargavi — on 13th February, 2008 at 11:43 pm  

      So you’re saying the world and America need someone who would keep us in Iraq and possibly embroil us militarily in Iran? I’d rather take the hope demagogue.

    25. Bhargavi — on 13th February, 2008 at 11:57 pm  

      McCain - who by the way - has just voted to preserve torture …

    26. SalmanR — on 13th February, 2008 at 11:58 pm  

      Every U.S. politician knows that it will be impossible to withdraw comletely from Iraq and that it has been long-term U.S. policy to have a permanent U.S. stronghold in the Middle East…

      Obama is running the ‘ol bait ‘n switch…

    27. digitalcntrl — on 14th February, 2008 at 12:19 am  

      @ Bhargavi

      “So you’re saying the world and America need someone who would keep us in Iraq and possibly embroil us militarily in Iran? I’d rather take the hope demagogue.”

      This is exactly why I am voting for McCain instead of Obama. It maybe nice to indulge in the fantasy that if the US left Iraq everything would be fine. Obama IMO is naive idealist. The man even advocates sending troops into Pakistan to clear out the militants there. Was invading Iraq a bad idea? Definitely. But we can only make the best decisions today not fret over previous decisions made by a moron.

    28. The Dude — on 14th February, 2008 at 12:15 pm  

      If a nuclear power ( the U.S ) establishes a permanent foothold in Iraq, then what in the hell do we expect the Iranians to do? Obama knows this and that’s why he is the only one willing to talk to them. He knows that Iran has just cause to be fearful of the presence of the “Great Satan”, in the Middle East. Obama maybe the world’s last best hope of bringing some semblance of peace in that troubled region.

    29. Ravi Naik — on 14th February, 2008 at 12:17 pm  

      “McCain - who by the way - has just voted to preserve torture …”

      That’s consistent with his track record on inconsistencies - he is now trying to court the hard-right. Pathetic.

    30. Ravi Naik — on 14th February, 2008 at 12:22 pm  

      “This is exactly why I am voting for McCain instead of Obama. It maybe nice to indulge in the fantasy that if the US left Iraq everything would be fine”

      I think his point is that if the US left Iraq it would be better than if the US stayed for another 100 years.

    31. Ravi Naik — on 14th February, 2008 at 12:23 pm  

      (One should ask McCain if prolonging an unwinnable war is a strategy for success, why didn’t the US stayed in Vietnam until now?)

    32. sonia — on 14th February, 2008 at 12:42 pm  

      Ravi i dont think Obama isn’t courageous - he definitely is. In the end, my wider concern is really that its all relative though, that’s really my point. Is he talking about letting any american citizen visit Cuba? Not as far as I am aware. Its courageous compared to all the shitty stuff that has gone on before, but still, what is it actually offering? And the real reason I think the US is wary of lifting restrictions on its citizens visiting - those who choose to do so anyway - is that they might see its not all that bad, and that the capitalism/communism divide they’ve been brought up with - is not that clear cut.

      There is nothing really progressive coming out of the USA as far as i can see - and there are significant constraints on any individual who takes the White House. Focusing in the presidency is really a bit of a red herring - ( the whole leadership thing is generally a bit of a red herring, the wider system is problematic in my opinion.)

      for example - both Obama’s- and Clintons’ positions on healthcare - they talk the talk, as does Clinton, but what are they really proposing? As far as I understand, ( and admittedly its difficult to work out what they are all actually proposing) they are both talking about making the health insurance plans available from insurance companies more affordable and hoping it covers everyone that way. Whilst that would certainly be an improvement on the current situation, still, it leaves much to be desired. All i can see - is what kind of crazy situation do you have to be in when cheaper health insurance seems to be a wonderful solution.

      Anyhow, i’m not suggesting that Obama might not be a better choice compared to the other who’re running, but i am pointing to wider issues. Overall, i think the Americans are in for a nasty shock when their economy collapses, and I can’t really see that the govt is doing much about this, ( there is this huge belief that nothing can happen to them) and anything they are doing to shore up their strength is all military based. And that i find very worrying.

    33. digitalcntrl — on 14th February, 2008 at 2:48 pm  

      “If a nuclear power ( the U.S ) establishes a permanent foothold in Iraq, then what in the hell do we expect the Iranians to do? Obama knows this and that’s why he is the only one willing to talk to them. He knows that Iran has just cause to be fearful of the presence of the “Great Satan”, in the Middle East. Obama maybe the world’s last best hope of bringing some semblance of peace in that troubled region.”

      Nothing. They really have not done anything since the US had a foothold in Afghanistan. Realistically an attack on Iran is far fetched. Probably Cheney’s wet dream. Another reality is that most Iranians were glad that Saddam was taken out of power given their personal animosities vis a vis the Iraq/Iran War. Saddam’s fall allowed the Shia majority to come out from being under the Sunni Baathists. The average Iranian has a greater hatred for the Sunni Arabs to the west than Americans.

    34. digitalcntrl — on 14th February, 2008 at 3:04 pm  

      “I think his point is that if the US left Iraq it would be better than if the US stayed for another 100 years.”

      “One should ask McCain if prolonging an unwinnable war is a strategy for success, why didn’t the US stayed in Vietnam until now?”

      I do not think this conflict is unwinnable. The typical insurgency lasts for about 10 years. What it takes is patience and commitment. Its true the strategy up till now with Rumsfeld was pathetic. However with current surge/strategy you are seeing many Iraqis fed up with the violence of the insurgents joining Awakening Councils that are sucessfully calming the situation down. The comparison between Vietnam and Iraq is faulty. Vietnam was never an insurgency. Rather it was one country successfully overtaking another.

      http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18921312

    35. digitalcntrl — on 14th February, 2008 at 3:10 pm  

      “Anyhow, i’m not suggesting that Obama might not be a better choice compared to the other who’re running, but i am pointing to wider issues. Overall, i think the Americans are in for a nasty shock when their economy collapses, and I can’t really see that the govt is doing much about this, ( there is this huge belief that nothing can happen to them) and anything they are doing to shore up their strength is all military based. And that i find very worrying.”

      Economic collapse is bit rich, however, healtcare in the US is very inefficient. We spend more per capita than Europe but have less coverage, though higher quality, than Europe. I don’t agree that the US is not progressive. Compared to Europe it is progressive on some fronts and regressive on others (e.g. healthcare). On the other hand the US has a far better situation with immigration. American muslims do suffer from discrimination here but it pales in comparison with the problems in Europe.

    36. SalmanR — on 14th February, 2008 at 3:21 pm  

      Obama is basically an isolationist, and a populist, targeting his message to poor blacks and whites and young people who have no grasp of global macroeconomics.

    37. sonia — on 14th February, 2008 at 3:33 pm  

      heh, well it depends on what you’re talking about isn’t it. not even having a concept of a public healthcare system or the right to a free education isn’t progressive at all, in my humble opinion. this country will realise soon just what a watershed it was introducing tuition fees, and a steady slide towards the US situation is what we can worry about for our future. do you even have an idea of how much it costs to go to university over there, hmm? Progressive attitude towards immigration my foot.

    38. digitalcntrl — on 15th February, 2008 at 12:42 am  

      “heh, well it depends on what you’re talking about isn’t it. not even having a concept of a public healthcare system or the right to a free education isn’t progressive at all, in my humble opinion. this country will realise soon just what a watershed it was introducing tuition fees, and a steady slide towards the US situation is what we can worry about for our future. do you even have an idea of how much it costs to go to university over there, hmm? Progressive attitude towards immigration my foot.”

      Eh, ye foot be in the wrong place :P .

      http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/22/america/muslims.php

      http://www.theglobalist.com/DBWeb/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=5142

      In Europe they debate whether or not to grant the refugees refugee status. In the US we debate whether to give the illegals a path to citizenship : )

      As for college level education, the given facts are misleading. It is true college is expensive here. However most students usually recieve scholarships to counter their tutition expenses. And if you are needy generous grants will either cover all or a significant chunk of your expenses. In short, If your dad is a janitor you will be funded for your college education. If you are Bill Gate’s kid, sorry dad is gonna have to dish out the dough.

    39. digitalcntrl — on 15th February, 2008 at 12:54 am  

      “Obama is basically an isolationist, and a populist, targeting his message to poor blacks and whites and young people who have no grasp of global macroeconomics.”

      /AGREE

      http://www.reason.com/news/show/120893.html

      Is Obama the next Lou Dobbs???

    Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

    Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
    With the help of PHP and Wordpress.