digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Obama wins Maine

edition.cnn.com — Despite claims from the Clinton camp they expected to win Maine, it looks like Obama has taken it. Yes we can!

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • vishcool1, on 02/11/2008, -21/+341***** YES.
    • HenvY, on 02/11/2008, -1/+98If Obama wins all three on tuesday too(which he should) I really think it will be the end for Hillary. His momentum will be unstoppable, and it will be even better if he gets the Edwards endorsement. :D
      • pyronik, on 02/11/2008, -1/+20edwards has been talking to both clinton and obama his decision isn't clear cut
        • crossmr, on 02/11/2008, -0/+6tell him to smarten up, the choice is obvious.
        • martalli, on 02/11/2008, -0/+4Edwards is as much a power politician as Clinton. He wants to angle for VP again probably, even though many better choices are already clear, such as Richardson.
          • LLamaStar, on 02/11/2008, -0/+4He would be a really weak choice as VP imo. He showed this in the 2004 elections when he couldn't help Kerry win SC which is his home state. Obama needs to find a governor or something.
        • cygnus2112, on 02/11/2008, -1/+2Edwards, who stands in the Ninth Ward of New Orleans as much as Giuliani did at the rubble of the WTC building to push forth his self-serving politics. Edwards, whose home is 28,200 square feet, 102 acres - worth $6 million, the self-proclaimed voice of the poor.

          Scumbag, through and through.
      • rgodfrey, on 02/11/2008, -1/+45Can we all agree never to use the term "O-mentum"?
        • turpenine, on 02/11/2008, -0/+28OBAMARAMAAAAA
          • martalli, on 02/11/2008, -0/+4I think the Daily Show can start playing angel music whenever they mention Obama's name again.
        • echolyean, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5Alright, but that's the first I've even heard that term.
          • martalli, on 02/11/2008, -0/+14The omentum is the connection between the back of the abdomen and the intestines, carrying the blood supply for the gut. It's a slimy thing your average fellow would never want to see, so I agree. Let's not mention "O-mentum" again.
          • FatLoser, on 02/11/2008, -0/+6I don't know if you're a doctor, medical school student, or lunatic, but I am going to accept that what you said is legitimate. ***** you for that lovely visual.
          • DrDigg, on 02/11/2008, -1/+7Not for the weak stomached - omentum picture
            http://www.emedicine.com/plastic/images/652652Omen ...
          • echolyean, on 02/11/2008, -0/+4Ok, now the humor of it all makes sense. I'm in full agreement. No use of that term to describe Obama's success. Thanks for the medical lesson.
      • bitspace, on 02/11/2008, -0/+7Except for Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania, each with a huge number of delegates, and each (at this point) expected to go in Clinton's favor. With the momentum Obama has now though, it's really a crap shoot. Also look for Colin Powell to endorse Obama very soon. I'm not sure how that would play out for Obama: sure, it would get a lot of moderate/centrist conservatives, but how would it impact Obama's relatively liberal base?
        • echolyean, on 02/11/2008, -0/+7Colin Powell didn't come right out and say whom he would endorse for the presidency, but watching him during his interview on CNN I did get the sense that he would be putting his support behind Obama. Powell may be a Republican, but at least he's one I, and I'm sure many other, Democrats/Independents can respect. An endorsement from him would, I think, bring even more "Obama Republicans" (as they're being called) over to his side this time around.
          • martalli, on 02/11/2008, -0/+11As much as the Reagan Democrats were socially conservative and tired of the Democrats in the 80's, I think many moderate Republicans like Powell and former Gov. Jim Edgar of Illinois are leaning away from the Bush wing of the party. Bush represents not the pinnacle of the Conservative movement, but the dry rot of the movement. During his senatorial race, Obama was introduced by for Gov. Jim Edgar (Republican) as a "fine son of Illinois". I couldn't imagine a better endorsement of Obama by Edgar without Edgar actually switching parties. Well, I could always hope for that... =)
        • nirav72, on 02/11/2008, -0/+4I dunno.Don't get me wrong. I'm all for Obama and will vote for him. But the kennedy endorsements didn't help Obama. Plus, a lot of people think that Colin Powell was part of the GWB establishment that got the country into a needless war. But any endorsement is good. Colin Powell is a good man. Its sad that he got suckered into something that jeopardized his reputation as a straight talker and a good person.
          • Gemfinder, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5Colin Powell was the only moderate voice in the GWB administration. Things went straight to Cloud Cuckoo Land when he left.
        • poxonyou, on 02/11/2008, -6/+4God, I hope Powell doesn't endorse Obama. That's an endorsement he doesn't really need, like Coulter is to Clinton. Everyone knows he's largely responsible for the Iraq war because people trusted him.
        • ICSU, on 02/11/2008, -1/+2Colin Powell is a ***** war criminal. Why he hasn't been tried yet?
      • jcm267, on 02/11/2008, -13/+4Is that piece of *****'s endorsement really worth anything?
        • CrimsonFate, on 02/11/2008, -3/+3I hope your brain is pieced back together in a new fashion after an innovative brain surgeon is paid enough by your wealthy family to try the experimental procedure.
      • bob501337, on 02/11/2008, -4/+2"relatively liberal?"
        He's the single most liberal voting congressman. Tell me how balanced that would be, imagine someone like Hitler (extremely authoritarian) being elected and you have a polarizing opposite end of the spectrum. The best thing for our country would be someone like Clinton or McCain who will serve to suit the needs of the majority.
    • augenblick2007, on 02/11/2008, -8/+93This makes it 5-0 for Obama. Hillary should now consider dropping from the race since she doesn't have much lies and tricks left to manipulate the American public. She first tried he is not black enough,it backfired. Then tried, only blacks will vote for him, backfired. Then said (in a very racist way, hispanics will not vote for him, backfired. She said he doesn't have enough experience, back fired and it actually added more points to Obama's campaign as he has better judgment and character. She said women will not vote for him (sexist), backfired big time.

      She is dividing the party, pushing away the independents and republicans that Obama attracts to build a coalition of change. While she still has some dignity left and not to ruin her husbands somewhat positive legacy she should quit the race gracefully and put her all energy and power to get Obama elected as president this November.

      • Gemfinder, on 02/11/2008, -4/+32Actually he did get whomped by Hispanic California on Super Tuesday. California has the largest Hispanic bloc in the nation.
        The rest of your points were good, so I Dugg you up anyway.
        • turpenine, on 02/11/2008, -15/+6that wasn't cause hillary said the hispanics won't vote for him. It was just cause hispanics hate black people.
          • LLamaStar, on 02/11/2008, -0/+14I'm hispanic. I don't hate black people. I hate do however hate prejudice people like you.
          • FatLoser, on 02/11/2008, -1/+6All hispanics hate prejudiced people.
        • augenblick2007, on 02/11/2008, -0/+10Just to clarify my point:
          " But the wholesale substitution of Hispanics for blacks on the Hallmark show is tainted by a creepy racial back story. Last month a Hispanic pollster employed by the Clinton campaign pitted the two groups against each other by telling The New Yorker that Hispanic voters have “not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates.” Mrs. Clinton then seconded the motion by telling Tim Russert in a debate that her pollster was “making a historical statement.”

          It wasn’t an accurate statement, historical or otherwise. It was a lie, and a bigoted lie at that, given that it branded Hispanics, a group as heterogeneous as any other, as monolithic racists. As the columnist Gregory Rodriguez pointed out in The Los Angeles Times, all three black members of Congress in that city won in heavily Latino districts; black mayors as various as David Dinkins in New York in the 1980s and Ron Kirk in Dallas in the 1990s received more than 70 percent of the Hispanic vote. The real point of the Clinton campaign’s decision to sow misinformation and racial division, Mr. Rodriguez concluded, was to “undermine one of Obama’s central selling points, that he can build bridges and unite Americans of all types.”

          If that was the intent, it didn’t work. Mrs. Clinton did pile up her expected large margin among Latino voters in California. But her tight grip on that electorate is loosening. Mr. Obama, who captured only 26 percent of Hispanic voters in Nevada last month, did better than that in every state on Tuesday, reaching 41 percent in Arizona and 53 percent in Connecticut. Meanwhile, the Clinton campaign’s attempt to drive white voters away from Mr. Obama by playing the race card has backfired. His white vote tally rises every week. Though Mrs. Clinton won California by almost 10 percentage points, among whites she beat Mr. Obama by only 3 points. "
      • BigBallistix, on 02/11/2008, -1/+6Yeah, good summary. Hillary needs to clean up her act and actually take things seriously. I get the impression she learned less from Bill than she did from TV.
      • rz8472, on 02/11/2008, -0/+25Hillary is waiting for Texas and Ohio, where she is above in both races. Basically she is doing a Giuliani.

        And even if she does lose either TX or OH, she might try some backroom deals with the superdelegates to deny Obama the nomination. I would not be surprised if her blind ambition causes her to bring down the entire Democratic Party along with her.
        • DeadFox1, on 02/11/2008, -1/+6God i hope you're wrong. Someone knock some sense into her.
        • rgodfrey, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5If she loses Texas and Ohio, she'll quit the race.
      • rstarr, on 02/11/2008, -0/+18Yeah um, from Maine here, winning Maine doesn't really shake the Hispanic thing.
        It's uh, pretty much Caucasia up there.
        • augenblick2007, on 02/11/2008, -1/+8I didn't mean Maine. Obama has also gained a lot of Hispanic vote in California. I was trying to point of bigotry of Hillary Clinton's campaign strategy.
        • bitspace, on 02/11/2008, -0/+9The striking thing is that Maine is largely working-class/blue-collar whites, which has typically favored Clinton as well. Obama tends to do better with white-collar, higher-income higher-education people.
        • echolyean, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5I'm in VT... literally the whitest state in the nation. Which is a shame; but I'm really interested in how well Obama is going to do here. It's not very often VT has much of a role to play after Super Tuesday has come and gone, but this time it could make a difference.
    • pyronik, on 02/11/2008, -14/+8shes winning, why would she drop out?
    • rz8472, on 02/11/2008, -3/+24Hillary Clinton - It's my (Democratic) party and I'll cry if I want to, cry if I want to, cry if I want to. You would do too if it happened to you!
      • al3x24, on 02/11/2008, -2/+21My Grandmother bought me a CD with that song on it. I don't know why I just wrote that....bury.
        • rstarr, on 02/11/2008, -1/+13I wanted to bury for you, but the jerk inside of me dugg it for everyone to see.

          I'm so sorry ((snicker)).
        • koft, on 02/11/2008, -2/+13Don't tell me how to digg! +1 for you
          • FatLoser, on 02/11/2008, -1/+8Your righteous indignation digg gets my digg... that's a popular digg these days.
    • Gabberwok, on 02/11/2008, -0/+17Obama is now ahead in total delegates!!!
      http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/2008_Democratic_ ...
      • counterplex, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5cnn.com shows him trailing 1148 to 1121. What gives?
    • stonedthot, on 02/11/2008, -7/+6Yes we can Yes we can Yes we can Yes we can Yes we can Yes we can Yes we can Yes we can! Yes we can! Yes we can! Yes we can! Yes we can! Yes we can! Yes we can! YESWECAN!YESWECAN!YESWECAN!YESWECAN! YES WE CAN!!!! Oooooh ooooh Oooooobbbbaaamaaa
      • molochi, on 02/11/2008, -0/+12Careful, that sort of thing killed Dean.
        • TheTaoOfBill, on 02/11/2008, -0/+4That and "YEEEAAAAHHHHHHH"
        • stonedthot, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2I know not of this Dean i'm afraid... is that the point?
        • stonedthot, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2And also i hope you realised it was mock sex noises i.e. everyone seems to have a hard on for obama on digg, not that i'm against him, just the really annoying Yes we can! crap, mibee i just don't get it cos i'm not american.
    • gettempapa, on 02/11/2008, -2/+7Yes we ***** can!
    • Ireland, on 02/11/2008, -0/+6Ireland for Obama!!!
    • PurpleSfinx, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3That may be the most useless comment I've ever seen.
  • bannus, on 02/11/2008, -8/+92only 44% reporting as of now
    Obama 962
    Clinton 702

    I'm hopeful though! G08AMA
    • HenvY, on 02/11/2008, -2/+1959% with Obama retaining the 57/42 lead...they'll project him winner soon.
    • holzp, on 02/11/2008, -0/+21Local Maine news is calling it for Obama. First hand accounts have an almost fanatical level of support from the young and independent voters while the party old guard was all Clinton. True to Maine, Kucinich also got a few votes here and there.
      • rstarr, on 02/11/2008, -0/+13Maine has always had some solid political picks and rarely see party lines, only qualified candidate. (Rep. Senators, Dem Representatives, Rep. Governor, former Independent Gov.). All of our congressmen/women have supported bipartisanship and have outwardly expressed their feelings against the administration. Maine might not have much, but we do have some solid political views...

        ..and lobster, a LOT of lobster and for insanely low prices.
        • greenlight2001, on 02/11/2008, -0/+7Mid summer for $3.99/lb baby! Buy them right at the shore.
        • bitspace, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5mmm, yes, mid-January, middle of lobstering season, meeting the lobstermen on the dock at Monhegan Island... lobster doesn't get any better than that.
          • UnoriginalMind, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3I was expecting you to say lobster island. After lobstering I thought you were ***** with mah englaiz skills.
    • slaizer, on 02/11/2008, -2/+3The Republican side baffles me as a non-US citizen. Have I missed something or why do 52% of the votes go for Mitt Romney, who has already retired from the race? What?
      • holzp, on 02/11/2008, -0/+18The Republican caucus in Maine was over a week ago. Before Romney dropped out.
    • MaxPayne3476, on 02/11/2008, -4/+5962 + 702 = 1654 peple

      *****, the whole state of main went out and voted. Nice!
      • ComeOutSwingin, on 02/11/2008, -0/+6Its a caucus right? So they don't have individual votes I don't think.
      • zKman, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3Those are state delegates. Each caucus selects only a few of these state level delegates, who then select the national delegates.
    • qpingu, on 02/11/2008, -1/+8Regardless, you spelled "Maine" wrong, so your opinion is invalid.
  • McCainHuck08, on 02/11/2008, -56/+3Obama should win Maine, but this is a fake Digg.
    • levenbreechvor, on 02/11/2008, -1/+17Its not a fake digg, its a preemptive digg. If you bothered to read the subheading "it LOOKS like Obama has taken it"
      • BigBallistix, on 02/11/2008, -10/+2It's still a misleading and not entirely accurate preemptive digg.
    • pintomp3, on 02/11/2008, -0/+4it's not fake digg, it's future digg!
  • porplem, on 02/11/2008, -6/+141Obama is on fire.
    • holzp, on 02/11/2008, -0/+17Actually on ice, this was some of the worst weather conditions in which the Democratic Primary was ever held. Gotta hand it to the guy he still inspired record turnout. A good number of sites had 2-3x the number of caucus goers compared to four years ago.
    • asauterChicago, on 02/11/2008, -0/+30*****, what?? Put him out, we need him alive!!!
      I keed....

      Oh, Obama 2008 YES WE CAN!
    • D0m0kun, on 02/11/2008, -1/+17Boomshakalaka!
    • redoctane, on 02/11/2008, -1/+3Joe McCarthy, Richard Nixon, Studebaker, Television, North Korea, South Korea, Marilyn Monroe
    • culbeda, on 02/11/2008, -0/+11It's pronounced "Fie-yah!"
    • outsid3rNo17, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3We dont need no water let the ***** burn.
  • zeiben, on 02/11/2008, -5/+161All over but the crying (which, as we know, should be any minute now...)
  • tboutcher, on 02/11/2008, -7/+26HenvY I'm holding you personally responsible idf she comes back in maine. They have not called the state yet.as of 6:45EST I hope you didn't jinx it
    • HenvY, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1070% @ 58-41, I think we're safe. It's a small state so with 44% reporting I was comfortable in my own prediction he'd win. :D
      • holzp, on 02/11/2008, -1/+2Except Portland has not yet reported, they were overwhelmed with the number of people. That could represent a huge swing. However local media has called it for Obama, Approx 50-something to 30-something.
  • kavery, on 02/11/2008, -4/+88Cue the Clinton spin machine.
    • Herv3, on 02/11/2008, -0/+31More like cue Mrs. Clinton crying.
      • RoroCo, on 02/11/2008, -0/+9I will have much respect for the woman if she can pull off crying on three strait Mondays. That move would take some serious balls.
        • pin0chet, on 02/11/2008, -1/+10Don't worry, her balls are undoubtedly bigger (and hairier) than yours.
    • cambob76, on 02/11/2008, -0/+7You mean the flat-out-lying-machine? I wonder if Clinton will admit that Obama has won the nomination when he does...
    • ell0bo, on 02/11/2008, -1/+4Am I the only one that read that and suddenly got a vision of the Clintons doing side by side robots and break dancing trying to get the young vote?
      • Jebral, on 02/11/2008, -1/+3Yes, but that just means you should write for a comedy show.
    • Jordan117, on 02/11/2008, -1/+8Latest Clinton campaign statement: "MAINE IS *****. ***** MAINE. ***** IT TO HELL. DAMMIT."
  • HenvY, on 02/11/2008, -5/+9http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/samg ...
  • TheTaoOfBill, on 02/11/2008, -2/+46We are like one more win from passing Clinton! Keep it up Obama fans. Be sure to show up to the polls!
    • JaybeasCorpus, on 02/11/2008, -0/+21Obama's already ahead in pledged delegates, I believe, which is all that matters at this point. Don't pay attention to the counts that include the superdelegates, as they can change their votes whenever they want.
    • pin0chet, on 02/11/2008, -0/+13Actually, Obama is beating Hillary 1137 to 1134 in total delegates now, by three. Even with superdelegates, Obama still is leading. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/presi ...
    • thebellmaster1x, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3pin0chet's link:
      http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/presi ...
    • ssn697, on 02/11/2008, -1/+10Is this you officially dropping your support for Ron Paul, TaoOfBill?
      • TheTaoOfBill, on 02/11/2008, -1/+7Of course not. Ron Paul is my first choice. But right now it's mathematically impossible for him to win the nomination unfortunately.

        The war is my main issue and I simply went to the next biggest anti war candidate. Though to be perfectly fair I was originally an Obama supporter and I never quite stopped supporting him. Ron Paul just gave me a new way to look at politics and for the first time conservatism made sense to me.

        But I still agree with Obama on several of his plans like his plan to make college more affordable by giving scholarships to students who give back to the nation and the world somehow. I don't agree much with welfare type plans but that plan is a good compromise because it forces students to earn money instead of getting free money.
    • bigmike504, on 02/11/2008, -10/+0no! do not go to the polls! STAY ON THE PORCH AND EAT YOUR WATERMELON!
    • dada0, on 02/11/2008, -0/+4It is to be kept in mind that most of these superdelegates went with Clinton while she was "inevitable". They aren't actually committed until the final conference, at which point they usually go with the popular vote. I don't think it's entirely accurate to include them in the delegate count. Either way, we can tell that the race is tilting towards Obama's favor.
  • amawg9, on 02/11/2008, -2/+70Obama's victory comes despite being down in all four polls of the state, and despite his loss in the primary in neighboring Massachusetts. Clinton had been thought to have a strong shot at winning in Maine, whose demographics -- largely white, heavily working-class -- are those that have typically favored her. She also had the support of the state's governor, John Baldacci, and of his organization.-politico.com
    • holzp, on 02/11/2008, -1/+64Maine has always been fiercely independent. A large number of independents registered Democrat at the caucus sites just to vote for Obama. They never received any calls from the Democrat pollsters. There were overwhelming numbers of people at every caucus site. Maine is mostly white, mostly working class, but they have one hell of a collective ***** detector and Clinton could not pass that test.
      • blankhorizons, on 02/11/2008, -0/+48Dugg for collective ***** detector
      • elipabst, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3I always thought the demographic and political leanings were similar to New Hampshire (which Hllary won), no?
        • elfofdoriath9, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3That was a month ago. Clinton's been setting of more an more ***** detectors as time has gone by. Every day gives Obama more support.
  • ChrisViz, on 02/11/2008, -2/+95I have supported Obama all the way but after seeing this unexpected victory, the thought in the back of my head that Hillary would inevitably win is gone.
    • Nougat, on 02/11/2008, -0/+7When Obama won Iowa, Clinton was no longer inevitable.
      • cheeseron, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3that doesn't count. huckabee won, too!
        • Nougat, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3Inevitable as the Democratic candidate, not inevitable as president. Although I have a hard time believing a Republican will be the next president, unless the Democratic candidate does (or has done) something reeeeeally stupid.
    • Jebral, on 02/11/2008, -0/+4Stole the words from my mouth.
  • brainboy77, on 02/11/2008, -2/+31clinton must feel edgy now!
    • tillerman00, on 02/11/2008, -1/+11CNN is reporting she actually just shat herself.
  • Mast3rDigg3r, on 02/11/2008, -1/+45cnn is now projecting obama as the winner
  • diggB, on 02/11/2008, -1/+7179% Reporting. They called it! Obama! Momentum is building like a ... (insert insightful metaphor here).
    • lamprey187, on 02/11/2008, -1/+16Momentum is building like a ... (insert insightful metaphor here) : wave of American voices speaking up like a chorus; lifting ourselves up, and uniting our country.

      YES WE CAN.
    • Emnsta, on 02/11/2008, -0/+27orgasm
      • PunkRampant, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5I can't wait for the climax
      • lovestospooge, on 02/11/2008, -0/+14Don't you mean Obamagasm?
        • culbeda, on 02/11/2008, -0/+10I often wonder, when we say stupid crap like this, if evangelicals are as incredulous as we are when we read their forums and see phrases like "God's Army" and "Huckabee has been ordained by God to be President".

          Obama '08
        • Laxaloot, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2Ogasm?
    • zephyr42, on 02/11/2008, -2/+759% - 41% Obama, Clinton 90% reporting
      • Amadeus2490, on 02/11/2008, -3/+1Momentum is building like a hatbox out of a shoehorn!
        Like a jew in a major city!
        Like alcohol at a dorm room!
    • Hoogs, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1caterpillar in quicksand?
    • dapht, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1Erector Set!
  • Ganja420, on 02/11/2008, -1/+82Obama 1,121 total delegates
    Pledged: 986
    Superdelegates: 135

    Hillary
    1,148 total delegates
    Pledged: 924
    Superdelegates: 224

    don't let the superdelegates control who's president. only 28 more to win!
    • DesignEx, on 02/11/2008, -6/+82This was mentioned in another article, but it would be a good idea right about now to write those superdelgates who are going against the popular vote of their region in order to vote for Clinton. They need to hear it from Obama supporters.

      Here is a list:
      http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/superdeleg ...
      • diggB, on 02/11/2008, -2/+14If I could digg your post up a thousand more times, I would. People should know who these superdelegates are. They have the power to influence the future of our country and most don't even know they exist!
        • iofthestorm, on 02/11/2008, -1/+3Uhh, they are basically every elected Democrat in office, so #1 they answer to their constituents and #2 people know who they are. The ones that have expressed a preference right now are not as likely to change, but the 2/3 that are left will probably go with the popular votes in their constituencies. Don't pester them unnecessarily.
        • Halukard, on 02/11/2008, -1/+4Bill Clinton is one... Think you can make him change his vote ?
      • Gemfinder, on 02/11/2008, -0/+19No, don't write the superdelegates! Campaign has plans for those already. Write Campaign and ask, "What can I do to help?" Teamwork will win it, maverickism will kill us.
        If you're in any of the states that haven't caucused or primaried yet, get involved in your state campaign and find your grassroots city campaign. Go to the meetings, do sign-waving rallies, have caucus, primary and debate-watch parties. If you register on National, these are nearly effortless to pull off.
        The national shop is backlogged 6-8 weeks on campaign materials, sign up on ObamaCycle and download official artwork to make buttons, stickers and rally signs with.
        • iofthestorm, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3I agree, don't pester the superdelegates, let the campaign handle it. Annoying them will only strengthen them in their convictions. Remember that only about a third of the superdelegates have expressed any preference, so the current numbers are meaningless.
        • hierophantus, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5Although you make good suggestions otherwise, I don't see why it would be a bad idea to write the superdelegates as well. Particularly if you actually write your letter, or at least type and sign it, and physically mail it (as opposed to emails), using your own words and arguments, this tends to make a stronger impression whenever you're trying to exert political pressure. It can't be a bad thing for the superdelegates to know that a whole lot of regular people, without the prompting of the campaign, care enough to take time out and think and write to them to try to persuade them.
          • Gemfinder, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2It would be better to write letters to the editor in the bigger cities in the superdelegates' districts. Remember the formula, 1 letter from a supporter = 50 who feel the same way but didn't write.
            Think of it as gently influencing the superdelegates, and influencing their voter base, too.
      • Jibberwalk, on 02/11/2008, -1/+19The Obama campaign put out a notice expressley asking people to NOT write the superdelegates. Let the campaign work things how they need to work them. You may be doing more harm than good.
        • bitspace, on 02/11/2008, -1/+7I wish I could digg this up higher in the comment hierarchy. At risk of redundancy, I wish to reinforce Jibberwalk's comment: The Obama campaign has specifically requested that we do _NOT_ contact the superdelegates, as that would surely sabotage any work the campaign already has underway to work with the superdelegates.
        • DesignEx, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3What they said was to not contact those undecided superdelegates, I was not suggesting that. I am talking about the superdelegates who are going against their citizens voting in order to select Clinton. They will undoubtedly be getting calls from a handful of these voters about it, but if more contacted them it could only help Obama since these are people who would be voting for Clinton otherwise.
      • petrodollar, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3I'm an Obama supporter, but this logic could backfire - should John Kerry and Ted Kennedy back Obama despite the fact that Massachusetts went for Clinton?
        • Gabberwok, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2Yes. If everyone follows these rules, Obama wins by a wide margin. Obviously they should only do this if everyone else promises to though, otherwise it defeats the purpose.
    • diggB, on 02/11/2008, -0/+21Agreed. I hope the superdelgates have enough wisdom to vote in accordance to the popular vote as oppose to any political favoritism.
    • Gabberwok, on 02/11/2008, -0/+9According to realclearpolitics.com the delegate difference was only 3 going into the Maine caucus. CNN tends to be very conservative about assigning the pledged delegates from states that have already held their primaries/caucuses, so the results from RealClearPolitics might be more indicative.
      http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/presi ...
      Update: Obama now leads, 1137 to 1134.
    • dball48, on 02/11/2008, -7/+1with a name like ganja420 you'd think that you would be supporting someone who's at least in favor of decriminalization.
      • Ganja420, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1and out of McCain Obama and Hillary which one is that?
        http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Barack_Obama.htm
        • Amadeus2490, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2From what he's said, it seems like he would be for decriminalization (non-enforcement) of marijuana laws and not legalization. This kind of goes along with the whole "we have much more important things to be looking after as a nation." thing. Make from that what you will.
          • dball48, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1he's intentionally vague so he can pander to both sides, here's the reality of what a tool he is
            http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7506
          • jkoke, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1I agree that he is playing it safe for the sake of his campaign, but come on -- you have know what his real belief is. He opposes federal marijuana laws, and has since he toked it up as a college student.
        • dball48, on 02/11/2008, -2/+1I would say Ron Paul, but I can tell voting based on principle is secondary to you when compared with "electability."
    • HannibalLecter, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5There are still another 400 some odd superdelegates who haven't endorsed either side yet. They could still swing it if Obama isn't careful. Puerto Rico, with its 63 delegates, can still swing it too. If I recall, Puerto Rico has as many delegates as Montana, Colorado, and Idaho combined.
    • crocodilexp, on 02/11/2008, -0/+6If Obama continues, superdelegates will almost certainly switch in droves. Individually, for most of them it would be political suicide to go against strong popular vote. Collectively, if Obama gets the nomination, the election is theirs to lose, but if Clinton wins it would be a struggle. The superdelegates are experienced enough to know this, just still hedging their bets.
    • jm4847, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1All sites give different numbers.
  • tmoney100, on 02/11/2008, -0/+36Bring on Tuesday. He's stacking em up.
    • powerfullogic, on 02/11/2008, -7/+2Hillary should commit suicide.
  • augenblick2007, on 02/11/2008, -17/+92This makes it 5-0 for Obama. Hillary should now consider dropping from the race since she doesn't have much lies and tricks left to manipulate the American public. She first tried he is not black enough,it backfired. Then tried, only blacks will vote for him, backfired. Then said (in a very racist way, hispanics will not vote for him, backfired. She said he doesn't have enough experience, back fired and it actually added more points to Obama's campaign as he has better judgment and character. She said women will not vote for him (sexist), backfired big time.

    She is dividing the party, pushing away the independents and republicans that Obama attracts to build a coalition of change. While she still has some dignity left and not to ruin her husbands somewhat positive legacy she should quit the race gracefully and put her all energy and power to get Obama elected as president this November.

    Obama will make a great president not just for USA but rest of the sane world. He will be the inspiration for all (around the world) who are trying to make a better life (than their parents). His background will pull the carpet out from the Cihadists (Christian and Muslim) feet. He is a uniter not a divider and he will restore the respect of USA once again by demolishing the torture camps.
    • inspecality, on 02/11/2008, -5/+8You replied to one of the first comments already with almost the exact same post. Geez, talk about desperate.
      • augenblick2007, on 02/11/2008, -3/+6No not that, I was trying to edit my original comment and it timed out so had to post it here.. All good.
    • petrodollar, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2She's not going anywhere until the racists in Tex-ass have their say.
    • daviddiaz, on 02/11/2008, -1/+7Personally, as a fiscal conservative I can't say I like Obama's domestic policies, but certainly he's better than the She-Devil or any of the dumbasses in the GOP (minus Ron Paul) who insist on waging war in the middle east.
      I truly hope he does win, even if that means bigger government. At least i think it'll be better government.
      oh and @petrodollar, Obama won in Georgia, and I personally haven't been to a place more racist than GA, especially outside of Atlanta. Personally I think that white southerners have more of a problem with Hillary's personality/agenda than with Obama's racial background.
      • bob501337, on 02/11/2008, -2/+1Or maybe you've noticed the fact that Obama has won states that are pretty much all typically conservative. Any state that usually votes democratic is pretty much voting for Hillary. Hillary should still win, Obama keeps winning these states that don't mean ***** and obviously most of the momentum is just people jumping on the bandwagon. When it comes down to it, see how Obama fares against a Republican in Georgia. Most people don't know about his EXTREMELY liberal voting record and are blinded by his truly exceptional gift for giving speeches. Do me a favor, tell me one policy Obama has worked for and I can tell you ten that Clinton or McCain have done. Don't get me started on Ron Paul. A nearly 250 year old document has almost no place in completely governing the way a country should run presently. It would be great if we could live in the world he imagines, it would be called Utopia. Get a clue and finally realize that life doesn't work idealistically.
    • TheWorm, on 02/11/2008, -2/+6Sorry but as much as some people hate Hillary "she should now consider dropping from the race" is just a retarded thing to say. Don't fool yourself into thinking it's over.
    • NBMFTW, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2Uhhhh. It wasn't a lie what Clinton said about Hispanics traditionally not voting for a candidate of ethnic background. It's a researched fact. It may not be entirely accurate now, but according to tradition, she was not lying.
  • felman87, on 02/11/2008, -5/+59***** those super delegates. That's anti-democracy!
    • shadowsurfr1, on 02/11/2008, -1/+6Welcome to America. Where democracy from long ago has become anti-democracy.
    • epiccollision, on 02/11/2008, -1/+10you seem to be confused on which system the US uses...its far from democracy
    • brokencode, on 02/11/2008, -3/+12America is a republic. Major difference.
      • smurfsahoy, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5No normal republic uses systems like this. In a republic, you're supposed to vote for representatives. Not vote for representatives who then vote for other representatives without consulting you.
      • coneheart, on 02/13/2008, -0/+0Democratically-influenced representative republic.
    • adrenaline33, on 02/11/2008, -2/+7Well first of all the parties can nominate whoever the ***** they want, however the ***** they want. Second of all, America is very much a republic and the superdelegate thing is pretty representative of that.
      • jm4847, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2You don't have to be such a dick about it.
  • Jofaba, on 02/11/2008, -3/+139I've been a Kucinich man, and I've watched the Ron Paul phenomenon with interest. Obama was never my top pick, but he is now. I participated in my first caucus today and it was also my first political meeting. That's basically what a caucus is, apparently. I've voted before, don't get me wrong, but it's in, punch a card, and get out. Today I saw the political process and the people with real passion for their candidates get to speak and sway undecided voters. And sway them they did. 80% of the undecided crowd moved into the Obama section to be counted. In the end, Obama secured over twice as many delegates as Hillary's did.

    If Obama continues this trend and secures the Democratic nomination, and by all accounts he'll be against John McCain for the race to the White House, I think that we'll have our first real presidential race in decades. So many things to vote for, so many problems to fix, so many ideas to finally recognize, and it almost seems inevitable at this point that progress will actually occur.

    I look forward to the nomination and the following Presidential race. Good luck to everyone.
    • holzp, on 02/11/2008, -0/+13If it makes you feel any better in my small Maine town my wife sat next to a Kucinich supporter. She was a lone voice but she counted. Obama won it.
    • MutatedNantuko, on 02/11/2008, -0/+14Caucuses are an entirely different atmosphere than primaries and elections; they're intense and powerful in an undefinable sense. This year was my first year voting, and the caucus I went to was amazing.
    • dball48, on 02/11/2008, -16/+2it's unfortunate that we have to vote for the lesser of evils once again. looks like i'll be voting for obama while choking back the vomit.
      • zeiben, on 02/11/2008, -3/+6Sorry, but you might as well stay home. Neither candidate needs your scorn. If you can't get excited about one of these candidates, it's never gonna happen for you.
    • thebellmaster1x, on 02/11/2008, -0/+6@dball48
      I've been a Kucinich supporter through and through, but I've never considered Obama to be "the lesser of evils." All I saw him as was the candidate I'd be voting for (since I knew from the beginning that Kucinich wouldn't win).
      The whole point of voting for a candidate is to pick somebody with whom you agree the most. You're always going for the lesser of evils unless you run yourself.
      • Amadeus2490, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2"we'll have our first real presidential race in decades."

        I feel the same way; it could either get alot better or alot worse.
    • Balath, on 02/11/2008, -1/+5What a damned good digger you are, sir. Your comment was easy to read but intelligently written. It wasn't inflammatory or ignorant. Good show, good show!
    • Van3ck, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2It would definitely be interesting to see a Obama/Kucinich team as President and Vice.
  • screwfanboys1, on 02/11/2008, -8/+3so whats the score?
  • birdly, on 02/11/2008, -0/+44Yes! Thank you Maine!!
    • nuclearpenguins, on 02/11/2008, -0/+15You're welcome! (I did my part today as a Mainer)
    • greenlight2001, on 02/11/2008, -0/+8Welcome.
    • CrimsonFate, on 02/11/2008, -3/+1Was a pleasure, dick.
    • patsfan456, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1You're welcome. Are there really only 4 Mainers on Digg?
  • Rapter09, on 02/11/2008, -0/+48Your Northern neighbors look forward to a future with America that has Obama in charge. If you elect him; we're happy for you.
    Well. I am, anyways.
    • GhostyBoy, on 02/11/2008, -0/+7Canadian here. I'm still ***** that the media ignored several fine candidates, and overplayed their hand in the selection...but out of the people who are left Obama is pretty alright, good work dudes.
  • vagrantwade, on 02/11/2008, -3/+54How delusional are some democrats to still be supporting Clinton when it is basically a consensus that she will lose to McCain in a general election. Is there pride that important to them that they would screw the entire country to keep it?
    • DukeMojo, on 02/11/2008, -4/+22Like those who still vote Paul? (Juuuust saying...)
    • jcm267, on 02/11/2008, -3/+7Just like Giuliani was a lock to win the Republican nomination? Clinton can win in the general elections, and Obama can lose them. You can't assume anything at this point.
      • ZenMojo, on 02/11/2008, -1/+5Yeah...Giuliani wasn't a lock to win the Republican nomination. No poll showed him with an advantage. What the polls SHOWED was that he could compete against Hillary Clinton.
        • jcm267, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3Wasn't he leading nationally with 40something% of likely voters?
    • jleems86, on 02/11/2008, -0/+4the short answer: Yes.
      the long answer: they are politicians, so Yes, they're more than willing to let what's good for them trump what's good for the people
    • jm4847, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1Don't take polls so seriously.
  • olbap, on 02/11/2008, -3/+27I hope my state of California becomes the Bay of Arizona for voting Hillary! :)
    • madroneDorf, on 02/11/2008, -0/+8The North and Central Coast voted for Obama, dont Jettison us into the Ocean!

      It was the Central Valley, LA/SD metro and interior region that voted for Clinton
      • ZenMojo, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5***** California and it's 500,000 absentee votes.
        • madroneDorf, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2Hey, I voted absentee, and voted for Obama,

          ***** California and it's 499,999 absentee votes.
    • tyler0is0sexy, on 02/11/2008, -2/+11I was never ashamed of being from Cali before this (oh yeah and we did elect that dude from Terminator as our governor.. oh and we did back down from the EPA... and we still don't allow gay marriage... marijuana is still illegal...)
      • Amadeus2490, on 02/11/2008, -2/+3Doesn't California have one of - if not the highest - rate of marijuana usage among its peoples?
        • Amadeus2490, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2I didn't mean that in a negative way. . .Californians are way more relaxed about this and I know alot of people - especially in the southern part - smoke it. I figure it's to help people deal with the stress of school, traffic, their careers, the transvestite hookers etc.
    • DrSpud, on 02/11/2008, -0/+6I most sincerely agree.

      /Learn to swim
  • CheLives, on 02/11/2008, -2/+12YEEEEEEEEEEEEAH BOY!
  • DTJunkie07, on 02/11/2008, -1/+11Yea! I can relax again lol Been nervous all day!! But I have a question: Can anyone tell me his odds and how he is favorited to perform in the Feb. 12 primaries?
    • merper, on 02/11/2008, -0/+12DC, Maryland, and Virginia are all predicted in his favor. Large black + affluent white demographic = Obama win.
    • happytron, on 02/11/2008, -0/+6Intrade has him at 69% for the nomination.
    • paxmaniac, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3He is an unbackable favourite for Virginia, Maryland and DC. He should win by the 2-1 margins he has be racking up regularly. He should also win his native Hawaii comfortably.

      The next challenge is Wisconsin, where a poll released yesterday put Clinton 10 points ahead. I would have expected Wisconsin to fall in line with neighbouring Minnesota, Iowa and Illinois, but perhaps there are different demographics at play.

      And the biggie of course is Texas and Ohio on March 4th. Clinton is strongly favoured to win both, but Obama's momentum in the coming weeks could stem the tide. It also may be significant that Texas has a hybrid primary/caucus, and Obama has so far done very well in caucus states.
  • sarcasticmango, on 02/11/2008, -0/+33The Clinton campaign's starting to sweat...
  • tinkafoo, on 02/11/2008, -1/+14The ghost of Wesley Willis comes back with the new smash hit "I whooped Hillary's ass!!"
    • hierophantus, on 02/11/2008, -0/+7Rock over London.
      Rock on, Chicago.
      Barack Obama: Change We Can Believe In.
      • Amadeus2490, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3And then Bruce Willis comes up and kicks everyone's ass.
      • stalzdiggity, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2this was the last story i was expecting to see a wesley willis reference
      • erikwithaknotac, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1Barack Obama is my friend to the frilly end, you are my buddy to the max!!!!
    • MN1962, on 02/11/2008, -0/+0Is Wesley Willis dead!! Shame :(
  • hanyoon, on 02/11/2008, -1/+52I really hope to see Obama in office Jan 20th 2009.
  • RobotCitizen, on 02/11/2008, -2/+160It must have been Maine's huge black vote that tipped things in Obama's favor.
    • HenvY, on 02/11/2008, -1/+34Yeah, I imagine his lack of experience played a part too!
    • diggB, on 02/11/2008, -32/+7Don't get me wrong, blacks have shown overwhelming support for Obama and that may have contributed to his win. But Obama is SO much more that the "black" canidate and is running his campaign as the canidate who can bring about the necessary changes in Washington by UNITING us regardless of race or political affiliation. So, I think he won based on the hope he inspires in us for a better tomorrow, not just because of the black vote.
      • diggB, on 02/11/2008, -0/+34Uhmmm ... just bury the above comment. I was too dense to realize that the above comment was sarcasm..
      • rstarr, on 02/11/2008, -0/+24You've never been to Maine, have you?
    • greenlight2001, on 02/11/2008, -1/+42All 6 of them...
    • Jibberwalk, on 02/11/2008, -1/+21Being from a small town in Maine, it wasn't until my 8th grade trip to Washington DC that I saw my first black person.

      It's weird looking back now, considering the bulk of the people I hang out are either Somalian or Sudanian.
      • greenlight2001, on 02/11/2008, -0/+6"considering the bulk of the people I hang out are either Somalian or Sudanian" "small town in Maine"

        Well that narrows down your location quite a bit. I'm gonna guess L/A area/surrounding communities?
      • MaximusD, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5That's a funny story. Not to be a complete douche, but it's Sudanese, not Sudanian. Sudanian refers to the climate/landscape of Sudan/Central Africa (i.e. Sudanian Savanna), while the people are Sudanese.
      • iyeeee, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3Jibberwalk are you from Lewiston because that's about the only town in Maine with a large number of Black voters.
        • Jibberwalk, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1I grew up outside Augusta, but live in Portland now.
    • erikwithaknotac, on 02/11/2008, -1/+7Jesse Jackson also won Maine in 1984 and 1988
  • chrishumphreys, on 02/11/2008, -27/+12Interesting..... Ron Paul came in a close 3rd place on the Republican side almost taking McCain.
    • iofthestorm, on 02/11/2008, -2/+18Considering everyone else except Huckabee and McCain has dropped out, that's not saying much.
    • hierophantus, on 02/11/2008, -5/+6Hey, I'm not a Ron Paul fan, either, but that *is* actually interesting. Also interesting: Romney beat McCain after dropping out?
      • Jibberwalk, on 02/11/2008, -0/+8The Republican caucus in Maine took place before Romney dropped out... the two parties did not caucus on the same date.
    • theutopian, on 02/11/2008, -1/+10Not really interesting since there are only three left in the race.
    • petrodollar, on 02/11/2008, -1/+9In other words he came in dead last.
    • coboman, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3Hey, third place in a three person race. That's awesome.
  • wilhoitm, on 02/11/2008, -41/+4Obamabots Unite!
  • daxsymbiont, on 02/11/2008, -75/+6you can suck his black fat *****.
    • MyDiggIsBig, on 02/11/2008, -20/+3they already are
    • darienphoenix, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3No need to be jealous, some girls like them small. You can get love too.
    • cRmtIMe, on 02/11/2008, -1/+2HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
      HILARIOUS!


      /sarcasm
    • bigmike504, on 02/11/2008, -5/+0all Obama fans are already doing that, and apparently are enjoying it
  • daxsymbiont, on 02/11/2008, -76/+7suck the black fat ***** of obama yeah.
  • Mateen, on 02/11/2008, -51/+2Mitt Romney was the best choice, unfortunetly we lost him, shame on us. He could brought many jobs to our country. He had great desires. he was the Man of action and the man of Economy.
    • jcm267, on 02/11/2008, -10/+2Romney should be back in 2012. Hopefully by then the idiot Huckabee supporters will have come to their senses and realized that Mitt is actually a guy who lives a "social conservative" lifestyle.
      • ssn697, on 02/11/2008, -0/+13Which version of Romney? The one now, or the one who was pro-choice and pro gun control a few years ago?
        • jcm267, on 02/11/2008, -1/+4Romney never signed a piece of legislation that advanced the pro-choice agenda. He ran saying that he was personally pro-life but wouldn't make that choice for anyone else, and said that as soon as he saw a piece of legislation on his desk that advanced abortion he just could not bring himself to signing it. I don't agree with Romney's positions on gun rights and when you look at the political posturing you can probably tell where he stands on gun rights (like most politicians, he's a gun controller). But the social conservatives are mostly concerned with abortion and obstructing gay rights, which is what Romney would do.

          And my point stands, Romney does personally live about as socially conservative lifestyle as I could imagine a President leading. He doesn't drink, opposes abortion and gay marriage, and raised five seemingly outstanding young men.
          • ssn697, on 02/11/2008, -0/+6Why exactly does conservative mean "oppose gay rights"?
          • ssn697, on 02/11/2008, -0/+7Just so I am clear, in 1994, Romney was ALL FOR gay rights. One of the tenets of conservatism is the government out of peoples lives.

            Romney in 94:

            “If we are to achieve the goals we share, we must make equality for gays and lesbians a mainstream concern,” Romney wrote. “My opponent cannot do this. I can and will.”
          • jcm267, on 02/11/2008, -1/+2Because the Republicans have historically needed the religious right to get elected. I think they still do. I hope to one day see the religious right's influence diminished and the small-government wing's influence increased. When people like the Ronbots grow older, wiser, and out of their parents basements hopefully some of them will moderate a bit but still represent small government conservatism.
          • jcm267, on 02/11/2008, -1/+2And the spin is that Romney is against activist judges who attack the institution of marriage, and not gay people themselves.

            My only real problem with the whole thing is that I think that a child needs strong male and female influences growing up.
          • ssn697, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2"My only real problem with the whole thing is that I think that a child needs strong male and female influences growing up."

            Trying so hard to avoid the cheap joke...

            Thanks for the reply. I lost track of the thread last night. I don't believe there is an actual conservative in the race on the Republican side, including Romney. He position changes seem WAY too convenient for my tastes. Interesting to me that the two most "Conservative" candidates barely made a dent, with Thompson being the most notable example.

            The religious right's takeover of the party for many years has come back to bite the Republicans in the ass, IMO. I also truly believe the Republicans do not want the White House this election. WAY too many problems to deal with. Easier to blame it on the Democrat in charge. Politics...
        • birdly, on 02/11/2008, -1/+3Because homophobes help them get elected.
    • echolyean, on 02/11/2008, -2/+4$35 Million investment and absolutely nothing to show for it. Yeah, excellent.
    • birdly, on 02/11/2008, -2/+4Hee hee hee! Romney the best choice! Hee hee hee!
    • Nougat, on 02/11/2008, -2/+8He was also the man of correlating a Democratic president with "surrendering to terror" in his concession speech. He is the biggest and most vinegary douchebag in the nation.
    • iainc, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1*cough* right *cough* Keep taking the meds.
  • chicoer2001, on 02/11/2008, -2/+17He'll win VA, DC, OR,etc... Those superdelegates should listen to the people. The DNC should stop taking delegates away from the states. Either have a democratic election or just have the DNC choose the candidate.
    • iofthestorm, on 02/11/2008, -1/+8Well, the DNC set their rules before MI and FL violated them, so blame the MI and FL Democratic parties for disenfranchising their states. And please don't talk in meaningless absolutes, it weakens your argument. There's a reason not everything is democratically elected, it's to moderate public opinion. Our country is a republic, not a pure democracy, and those are some of the strings that come with it. The idea was to check the ignorant masses slightly, at least when the Constitution was written.
      • bitspace, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5Your point is mostly valid, except the bit about "when the Constitution was written." The superdelegate system has only been in place since 1980.
    • petrodollar, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3He'll win HI too.
  • JointVenture, on 02/11/2008, -47/+3Obaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahma Obaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahma
    Talk about sheeple.
    • stormgren, on 02/11/2008, -0/+16Yes. You're absolutely correct. Showing support, in any way, for something or someone that is popular, makes one a... uh, what's the word? I guess it would be a "sherson." (the plural of which is obviously sheeple.)
      Rebel on, my friend!
    • hierophantus, on 02/11/2008, -0/+15Oh, my! I certainly don't want to be a sheeple! But from the sound of it, if I support any candidate that anyone else is excited about, I'll be a sheeple! What do I do???? I so badly want to meet your approval!
      • Nougat, on 02/11/2008, -2/+3I want to be different, like everybody else I want to be like
        I want to be just like all the different people
        I have no further interest in being the same,
        because I have seen difference all around,
        and now I know that that's what I want
        I don't want to blend in and be indistinguishable,
        I want to be a part of the different crowd,
        and assert my individuality along with the others
        who are different like me
        I don't want to be identical to anyone or anything
        I don't even want to be identical to myself
        I want to look in the mirror and wonder,
        "who is that person? I've never seen that person before;
        I've never seen anyone like that before."
        I want to call into question thevery idea that
        identity can be attached
        I want a floating, shifting, ever changing persona:
        Invisibility and obscurity,
        detachment from the ego and all of it's pursuits.
        Unity is useless
        Comformity is competitive and divisive and leads only to
        stagnation and death.
        If what I'm saying doesn't make any sense,
        that's because sense can not be made
        It's something that must be sensed
        And I, for one, am incensed by all this complacency
        Why oppose war only when there's a war?
        Why defend the clinics only when they're attacked?
        Why are we always reactive?
        Let's activate something
        Let's ***** ***** up
        Whatever happened to revolution for the hell of it?
        Whatever happened to protesting nothing in particular, just
        protesting cause it's Saturday and there's nothing else to do
        -----
        That clearly points at neo-hippies. Oddly, the "sheeple" callers don't even protest anything. They just sit around and yell at people.
    • JavanSClark, on 02/11/2008, -0/+4DUDE! YOU FORGOT TO YELL RON PAUL!!!
  • cjnkns, on 02/11/2008, -3/+62I am really going to be ***** off if Obama gets to the convention and the super delegates side with Billary....
    That will be a freaking greek tragedy.
    • epiccollision, on 02/11/2008, -5/+5umm its called the American way
    • tyler0is0sexy, on 02/11/2008, -1/+9YOU'RE GONNA JINX IT!!!!
    • MyDiggIsBig, on 02/11/2008, -15/+3hopefully that does happen. Bill Clinton is the shiz.
    • CoheednCambria, on 02/11/2008, -1/+11Just like the Electoral College needs to be eliminated, so do the super delegates.
      • echolyean, on 02/11/2008, -0/+7Well maybe not "eliminated" - but at least there should be a reformation of what role they play.
    • akatsuki, on 02/11/2008, -0/+8If they do that, they will basically be disenfranchising the entire future of their party... Every single college kid will know the system is fixed and that the Dems don't care about them. Another party could have an entire generation to scoop up.
    • ZenMojo, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5Obama's too nice to start a third party.


      But he could.
    • MaximusD, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5Democrats would be screwing themselves big time if they did that. I don't think even Bill and Hillary have the clout to force such a stupid mistake.
  • 00z003, on 02/11/2008, -35/+7STOP WITH THE OBAMA SPAM!! YOU OBAMA TARDS! Im so sick of seeing obama articles on here.. I cant click past them! to save my life!

    im only kidding =)
    • MyDiggIsBig, on 02/11/2008, -8/+4no your not. express your anger, these people have no lives except to suck the long arm of the government, and by arm i mean *****.
    • jcm267, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5I don't mind Obama submissions, I just don't like that digg is groupthink central and that all we pretty much see are Obama and Ron Paul submissions.
  • Twism123, on 02/11/2008, -0/+10So sweet....gonna take over the Potomac region in two days!
  • adinb, on 02/11/2008, -0/+16So what happens to Edward's 26 pledged delegates? Do they go with whoever he endorses...or is there a DNC ruling on how those delegates get split out? As there's only a 27 delegate difference ATM....
    • Kenorv, on 02/11/2008, -0/+4I heard on MSNBC that his delegates are now free to go to either Hillary or Obama but as far as I know none of those delegates has committed themselves to either candidate yet.
    • Jibberwalk, on 02/11/2008, -0/+4Edwards delegates go towards whomever he endorses... if he does not endorse, they're free to vote for whomever they care to.

      Related Link: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/10/ed ...
      • Kenorv, on 02/11/2008, -0/+6Edwards can tell his delegates to vote for either Hillary or Obama but they're still free to vote for who they wish. They'll probably vote for whomever John endorses but they're not obligated to do so. I found an article that dealt with Wesley Clark's delegates from 2004 so that pretty much answers what happens to Edwards's delegates.
        http://www.slate.com/id/2183326
    • nirav72, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3Right. Unlike the republican party - The democrat party system for delegates is a bit different. The pledges won't go anywhere unless the candidate that dropped out endorses someone else. The GOP does it differently. There they get split evenly I think or go to the majority winner. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
    • MaximusD, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3As far as I know, Edwards 'suspended' his campaign, which means he keeps his delegates until he officially drops out, and then they will go to who he endorses. If he doesn't endorse, they become superdelegates in the sense that they can vote for whoever they want. I'm pretty sure that's how it works.
  • Rejuevie, on 02/11/2008, -0/+29This is great news! However, what I hate about CNN and the rest of the newschannels, is that every time they mention a state that has a huge black population, they make it seem as though that is the only way he is going to win. What their forgetting is that Obama is winning in the states that have a huge white population as well.
    • jcm267, on 02/11/2008, -1/+4I do remember that blacks were what made the difference for Obama in South Carolina. Look at the numbers, he won the black vote by a landslide.
      • myusrnm, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2Yeah, he is winning blacks by a landslide (because race issues are still a strong point in this country), but he's won states like Washington (in my caucus by about 5:1), and there weren't that many black voters there. He's not getting only the black vote, because that would mean he'd surely lose, since the majority of our country isn't black.
      • Stevo23, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1I mean, sure, black voters help Obama. But old white women help Clinton.
        The point is that Obama's won in places like Utah, Idaho, North Dakota, and now Maine. Not places known for their huge African American population.
  • poploserdigg, on 02/11/2008, -35/+1OMG he's running away with it! Congrats, Diggnorami - you've proven that nonstop Obama-sock-cucking can mobilied 573 extra caucus goers!
  • nephrinn, on 02/11/2008, -1/+27I love the momentum Obama has, but I can't help but feel Hillary has something up her sleeves.
    • AndrewDB, on 02/11/2008, -2/+23Other than Kleenex to wipe away the tears?
    • topgigmedia, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2Agreed. Keep also in mind the closeness that Bill has with Bush senior and how many influential friends HE has.
    • petrodollar, on 02/11/2008, -0/+8Up her wizard's sleeve, at least.
      • daviddiaz, on 02/11/2008, -1/+9her vagine hang like sleeve of wizard!
        /Borat
        lol
    • bitspace, on 02/11/2008, -0/+6Yes, this troubles me as well. I don't think they're done with dirty politics by far. The Obama campaign has a tough and muddy battle ahead.
      • Amadeus2490, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3::Hillary puts on her robe and wizard hat::

        Oh, ***** no. . .
    • MaximusD, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5She's gonna go after the Latinos very aggressively in Texas -- she might do something dirty for those votes. Not that dirty -- get your mind out of the gutter.
    • mcduckov, on 02/11/2008, -1/+4It begins with a T and ends with an ass (the thing up her sleeve I mean).
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1The Snuke.
  • colonels1020, on 02/11/2008, -25/+8Yes we can? wtf is this? Bob the builder?
    • jcm267, on 02/11/2008, -4/+1It's a pretty dumb slogan, and I think that it's pathetic that catch-phrases actually matter in Presidential elections.
    • holzp, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1it is a exact copy of the Massachusetts Gubernatorial campaign. A young charismatic black lawyer who won. "Together, we can" was his slogan and it worked. By no accident was the same Governor giving a speech at the Portland, Maine caucus today.
      http://news.aol.com/elections-blog/2007/01/17/obam ...
  • Kenorv, on 02/11/2008, -1/+17Right now Obama has won the most states, the most delegates and has the most votes. If that holds true all the way until the convention then the super delegates have to vote for him. All the complaining that the democrats did in 2000 and 2004 about how the republicans stole those elections will be hypocritical if the super delegates go with Hillary and steal the election from Obama.
    • hierophantus, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2Why? We have no control over that, and we wouldn't like it any better. Hypocritical for Hillary supporters, yes, but not for Democrats.
      • Kenorv, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3I meant those inside the party, not the voters. You know. The big whigs. Say Gore for example who is a super delegate. I don't know who he will vote for at the convention. But say he votes for Hillary and Hillary gets enough super delegate votes to beat Obama. Wouldn't it be hypocritical of him to complain about 2000 and then vote for Hillary at the convention if Obama had won the most states, the most state awarded delegates and had the most votes? That's what I was referring to. Not the voters.
        • hierophantus, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2I thought that's what you probably meant, and as far as that goes, I certainly would be disappointed, probably even outraged, to see Gore participate in that kind of snubbing of the voters' wishes.

          It's an interesting question, though: what is the point of superdelegates, except to bring about that very scenario? After all, if the nominee should always be the one chosen by voters, the nominee will always be the one with the most pledged delegates. Where else do superdelegates fit in, if not to present the possibility of overriding the voters' choice? I don't see how this could be done, at least in these times, without causing great anger and disillusionment in the voters (as nirav72 also implies). My conclusion, then, is that superdelegates can no longer serve a useful purpose and should be taken out of the process unless they remain only as ceremonial delegates who follow the pledged delegate count.
        • fullphaser, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1Because there is this noble idea that somehow party leaders are more intelligent than the masses. That the ultimate failing of democracy is that people are stupid and you have to make decisions for them when things don't go your way. Its very much why Senators rarely vote in the manner the people of their state would wish.
      • nirav72, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3Well I think the super delegates have no choice, but to be fair about this. Because a lot of democrats have threatened to quit the party if those super delegate votes go based on early pledges to Hillary. Especially if Obama has a significant lead in the delegate count and popularity. It would tear the Democrat party apart.
    • zeiben, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2And everyone knows that hypocrisy and politics are like oil and... more oil..
  • ViSHiX, on 02/11/2008, -19/+3RON PAUL!!! wait whatever happened to him?
    • MyDiggIsBig, on 02/11/2008, -2/+10the bandwagon train moved on. digg users are migratory people that travel land to land once they ave exhausted their current resources. a bit uncivilized.
      • gdehms, on 02/11/2008, -1/+8Mob mentality pretty much. People here think they are completely right and that other opinions do not matter. I like Obama, and I will vote for him, but I don't think Hillary should receive all the ***** she does. Every Obama win will be dugg up, as well as every single piece of information about Hillary that could be held against her. I like Digg, but sometimes people just need to think for themselves.
        • StandupShowcase, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1yeah pretty hilarious the die hard hilary haters on here that love obama with just much passion--their policies are 98 percent the same. in fact hilary even has some better ones--like voting against that bs bankruptcy law the obama went along with.
    • orca94, on 02/11/2008, -1/+1FAIL
    • StandupShowcase, on 02/11/2008, -1/+197 percent of america saw he was an extreme right winger (no, being against iraq doesn't make you any less of a right winger--just not a necon).
    • futebollounge, on 02/14/2008, -0/+1ron paul won in my county :) i am no longer surrounded by people who i thought were primitive. it was a great day!
  • Jadhar, on 02/11/2008, -1/+53Clinton fired her campaign manager...lulz
    • cambob76, on 02/11/2008, -0/+11Yeah, like its his(her?) fault you're a stupid, evil, lying bitch Billary?
    • Joliman, on 02/11/2008, -0/+8I sure hope the replacement is "ready to go on Day One." (and yes, I'm being sarcastic)
  • pintomp3, on 02/11/2008, -1/+46as obama sweeps, hillary weeps.
  • Mateen, on 02/11/2008, -7/+1Mitt Romney was the best choice, unfortunetly we lost him, shame on us. He could brought many jobs to our country. He had great desires. he was the Man of action and the man of Economy
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 115 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.