Another voting day: Which way, Washington state?
The Democrat presidential nomination remains up in the air. This weekend brings a handful of fresh primaries that are hotly contested. There are also GOP caucuses taking place. Here’s the rundown.
Hill and Obama are fighting particularly hard for Washington state. Three top Democrat women officeholders split–Dem. governor Christine Gregoire went late for Obama, Dem Sens. Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell went for their Senate sister.
Hilary is now not only the candidate of both Change and Experience, she’s also the candidate of “Dreams and Practicality.”
In a packed Pier 30 at the Port of Washington in Seattle Thursday evening, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., made her case to supporters that she’s more qualified than her opponent in the presidential nomination race, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., suggesting that his lofty rhetoric about hope and unity is empty and meaningless.
“I am hoping to unify the country,” Clinton said, “but to unify it to do the work of the country. Not to unify it just for the sake of saying we are unified. In the meantime more and more people lose health care. More and more kids can’t afford college. We need to be unified with a common purpose.”
Clinton also seemed to be saying that her opponent’s desire for change was misleading Americans about how difficult such change would be.
“What is it we want to see in our country again, what kind of feeling and hope and dreams and aspiration and reality and practicality, because they go hand in hand?” Clinton asked. “We don’t want people just thinking we can do something, we have to be prepared &we have to be able to take the steps.”
Hillary Clinton: Fighting empty rhetoric with empty rhetoric.
What a nightmare.
***
On a less stultifying note, the intra-party spat among liberals over superdelegates keeps boiling. Donna Brazile’s ready to quit. And so’s this nutroots-er.
Looks like “dyspepsia” is a bipartisan phenomenon this year.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: 2008 campaign, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton
Power Line
» The Alarmists Do "Science": A Case Study
Power Line
» When In Doubt, DeleteGay Patriot
» How John Hoeven Can Save AmericaJustOneMinute
» The Topless Ann AlthouseEd Driscoll
» The Bears Are Who We Thought They WereStop The ACLU
» Senate Approves Motion to Proceed on ObamacareStop The ACLU
» Glenn Beck: The Man With The PlanPundit & Pundette
» Reports of Broder's retirement greatly exaggerated
Are you kidding? The only thing she’ll accomplish is irreparable harm.
I still think your cage fight idea would work best to pick a democrap candidate…
Thanks, but I prefer not to be unified by Comrade Clinton.
Empty rhetoric is a step in the right direction from Republican lying, pandering, and division rhetoric.
The greatest threat to America is gay marriage.
A vote or a Democrat is a vote for Al Qaeda to take over America.
Christians are becoming a persecuted minority.
I will cut your taxes, invade foreign countries (which isn’t free), and not cut anything but “waste”.
Unless we build an electric fence, Spanish will become the official language of he United States.
The really sad thing about this year’s election cycle there is no one that appears to be able to unite either political party. The Democrats are tearing themselves apart torn between race and sex and the Republican Party’s attempt at forcing a liberal RINO down our throats is ripping the conservatives away from the party. Maybe the time is right for a moderate third party choice that could save us from business as usual in DC.
I wish we could start over again.
It’s pretty much the same as every voting day in Washington: vote for the liberal democrat of your choice but vote (or just let the King County Machine vote for you).
Obama will win, if anybody cares.
My 15-year old daughter reported to me last night that a large number of her classmates skipped school to attend the Obama rally. Nothing similar for Clinton, so that tells you pretty much all you need to know.
I think “Governor” Gregoire went for Obama. Perhaps she can teach him how to stuff a ballot box – something she is an expert at!
Sorry. “Moderates” like McCain, Collins, Snowe, et al who vote with the liberal Democrats are the problem in Washington, not the solution. For that matter, when you say that, following
you’re not even being internally consistent.
Choosing between Hillary “no-woman-is-illegal” Clinton and Obama “Drivers-license-for-illegals” Obama.
Sounds like two sides of the same coin.
Don’t Feed Troll
What difference does it make which way the voters go in Washington State, the last election proved rather conclusively that the secretary of state will just put whoever they want as the winner.
Washington is, sadly, filled with non-thinking liberals. Whatever the results they are destined to be the demise of the deciders. Liberalism always creates the exact OPPOSITE of its stated intent.
Wait…non-thinking liberal is redundant.
Today I am participating in the Washington State caucus to elect Mitt Romney.
Despite of the fact the Mitt Romney has suspended his campaign (he did NOT quit; he could still be nominated!), and that Washington State is nearly hopelessly liberal, I feel it is paramount that we continue to support this man of high ideals, ethics, morals, and abilities – nobody ever said that fighting for a better America would be easy, and fighting for a better America is what I intend to do.
And I will NEVER support any RINO like John McCain or Mike Huckabee.
Never.
My two brothers will be caucusing for Obama today in Olympia(I am the white sheep of the family). They are very liberal and are caught up in the “history being made” atmosphere. They are openly hostile to Hillary and would not vote for her if she wins. So the Dems may have issues of their own. I think it was on instapundit where someone pointed out that Obama is the Peter Sellers character in “Being There”. “There will be growth in the spring”.
I live in the Socialist State of Washington. If you want to know the mentality of the Washington voter, just read the comment sections in the PI everyday.
Mitt was my candidate, too. However, if you do the math, he would have to get over 60% of the remaining delegates, Huckabee over 83%, but McClame only needs 40%. Mitt CANNOT get more than 50% of the remaining. Sorry.
Actually I think that would qualify as an “oxymoron” … with the emphasis on “moron” …
Hillary is probably more in line with her tactics…
Gov. Fraudiore – recount, recount and recount until you get the results you need/want.
Barack hasn’t been polluted yet. Give it time.
In the state of Washington we have both, caucus and primary vote. I voted for Mitt, well his name was on the ballot, and it was not a protest write in. I suppose having a caucus and primary vote enable the party powers to select the result they like best. But not matter, in November the election results will turn the state over to the Democrats when the Gregoire-Gore vote counting method is used (the Democrats are allow by the courts to continue finding uncounted votes until they have enough to win).
No, thanks. The Seattle Times is bad enough for me.
Caucus starts in 2 hours; I have no idea who to support. I can’t support McCain but Huckabee is no better. What do, what to do . . .
right_on~
But, still voting for Mitt, and by helping him gain more delegates, even if he can’t win, he will have those delegates in order to be more influential at the convention. And, although I don’t recall which blog I read it at, someone commented that there’s a long time between now and the convention, and McCain still has plenty of time to have his own version of the “Dean Scream”, in which case, since Romney only suspended his campaign, would give him the chance to “unsuspended” it and be a knight on a white horse to come to our rescue. While that might seem far-fetched, it still seems reasonable to still cast a vote for Romney if your primary/caucus hasn’t happened yet.
If conservatives continue to resist supporting McCain or Huckabee in increasing numbers (as I’m sure will be the case), delegates CAN be persuaded to switch their votes prior to the convention, you know…
But only if you fight for it.
I was supposed to be at the Kansas caucus today. In my first protest against McCain, I stayed home. My man is outta the race anyhow.
Will I do it in November? Well, I won’t stay home cause there are other races and issues, but not sure yet how or if I’ll vote for the Pres.
Michelle -
Just for informational sake -
Any Chance of a Reader Poll to measure the following …
I am wondering how many people would have voted differently had they had all the candidates on their ballot?
How many yet to vote were planning on supporting a candidate that is no longer on the ballot?
Many here that voted on Super Tuesday wanted to vote for Fred or Tancredo or Hunter but they were no longer an option for them by the time they got to vote because of the outcome in the early states that are open primary or caucus states and are mostly smaller states.
This front loading allows less than 10% of the population and less than 15% of the states to determine who stays in and who gets out. (The Phoenix valley has more people than some of those entire states.)
Many feel angst and more because their votes can not be counted as they wished them to be counted.
We need a national primary election day in late April or in May so every voter gets a voice in the candidate selection process. But that is probably just a dream along the lines of a line item veto and term limits.
DesertLover~
I haven’t had my chance to vote yet. My first choice (Thompson) was out after SC. My second choice (Romney) “suspended” his campaign. However, I don’t think a national primary is the way to go. It will be the same thing as the general: candidates pay homage to the high delegate count states only. That might be good for me here in Texas, but not so good for smaller states. There are some alternatives being proposed. I think the one where you have 3 primary dates, beginning with the small states, moving on to the medium states and ending with the large states seems best. Of course, since the parties control the primaries, and not the states, the Republicans could change how they do theirs, and the Dems could stick with what they have. But, I don’t think that would last long, as the disenfranchised Dems and the back of the current line might not be too happy about being further marginalized, as compared to Rs in their state… Definitely something to think about.
“meatpieandtatters said:
Wait…non-thinking liberal is redundant.”
LOL, but I think MPAT got it right , DL. – an oxymoron would be “thinking liberal”. (aka “a contradiction in terms”.)
I’m going to my first caucus today. I doubt that it will make any difference in Washington state, but it’s a start.
My hope is that someday I’ll be able to vote for a candidate who wins. But maybe I’ll just have to settle for a candidate who I want to vote for, instead of voting for the candidate that I want to vote against the least.
Miss Ladybug
I realize it still would not be perfect but at least we wouldn’t have people being forced out before all the voters have had a chance to make a choice from all the candidates …
My concern about the 3 dates proposal is they still want them to be several weeks apart … which still lets people be forced to quit the race …
The total voting should be across no more than a couple of weeks …
Maybe go by time zones with one from each half of the country voting at the same time to get a better cross section of voter concerns … Central and Mountain together … Eastern and Pacific together … Alaska and Hawaii would vote at same time as Pacific or else one with each of the other 2 groups … then rotate which group goes first each time …
Point being the ridiculous amount of money is what prevents some of continuing even when they are the favorite in states that are yet to vote …
There’s got to be a better way to do this … individual states “first” status be damned …
DesertLover, I whole heartedly agree with you on the need for a national primary election day. I also do not see it happening any time soon.
There are currantly four empty seats on the FEC’s 6 commissioner seats. There are supposed to be 3 Rep. & 3 Dem’s on the commission. The 2 seats are currantly filled by David Mason(D) and Ellen Wientraub (D). Every republican nominee for the FEC has been rejected by congress.
Well, we could merge the board of elections with the IRS & attach a primary ballot to the income tax form, and announce the winners on say May 1st… suspicious votes would trigger an audit.
Pooof! voter fraud gone.
Sounds good to me Red!
madchef
good point … I had forgotten about that one … thanks for the reminder
madchef, the libs would be horrified and of course call it a poll tax, but imagine what Washington would look like if every vote required a valid ss# & a signature… I too have a dream.
There is no perfect way to conduct the primaries/caucus.
First off, I really don’t like the caucus format: that disenfranchises everyone who can’t take a few hours on a specific day to go vote, and I especially don’t like that some are not done by secret ballot. People most likely to be unable to caucus are people with lower income jobs/shift work. Unfortunately, I don’t think that is something that can be legislated against.
A national primary sounds good at first blush. Everyone gets a say on the same day. But, as I mentioned above, many candidates, in order to get the most “bang for their buck” would do like is done in the general election: ignore the small states without a lot of delegates at stake. That’s nice for the big states (or winner-take-all states – another thing I dislike, especially in the primaries. John McCain has a disproportionate number of delegates compared to his share of the popular vote), not so good for the little states.
I still stand by my small-medium-large order preference. I like that best out of the proposals (national primary included). Some of the proposals (for those that didn’t take the time to follow the links above) call for regional and/or rotating primaries. Regional primaries don’t necessarily divide up the delgates at stake proportionally, either. And I can only imagine the mass confusion of trying to keep track of when your states primary is if it changes every presidential election cycle. I know some people here in Texas thought they were able to vote on Super Tuesday. Changing it all the time would make it worse.
I think the best solution is to start with the states with the least number of delegates at stake. Just because you win big here doesn’t mean you win big as the primaries continue to the medium and large delegate count states. I think this is the most fair and offers the highest chance of candidates sticking it out to the end. Maybe several weeks between these 3 primaries isn’t a smart idea, but maybe a week between each is better. In a national primary, candidates without a lot of money just can’t compete across the entire country. With 3 primary dates, that allows candidates to not have to have all their money up front and gives them more time to get their message out to everyone – small states to big ones. And candidates can’t get away with ignoring small states, because all the states will count (IMO). But, again, this is just my opinion. Try to convince me that another method is better.
Well I think that all 6 seats need to be filled before the general election. But you are right, they would squeal like a stuck pig, that’s for sure.
I’m thinking I might just vote for Huckabee in the primary just as “not-McCain” vote.
I don’t think anybody thinks McCain really has a snowball’s chance in hell in the general election with the utter deflation of the base.
Therefore, why not be a Maaaaaaaaaaaverick, and vote for a conservative third party candidate?
Miss Lady Bug, I like the national primary election day better since all the candidates would be on the ballot.
Have each party hold a set number of debates, say 4 or 5, with the questions and topics provided by registered voters of their party. Independents would be allowed to hold their own mixed party debate, but just one.
No avoiding the questions allowed.
HAH. HUCKABEE won the Kansas Caucus more than 2-1. The pundits aren’t saying it but I will. That was a direct vote AGAINST McCain. If Romney had been in the race he would have won, hands down.
madchef~
Not knowing how long it takes to do up ballots (for those entities that don’t do electronic voting machines like the county I live in now), if the 3 primaries were held one week apart, everyone would still be on the ballot. It would then be stupid for someone to drop out after the first round, when the last round takes place 2 weeks later (under my modified 3-date primary process). At any rate, getting it changed means getting involved with the party machines, at all levels… I, unfortunately, don’t have the time or resources to do so.
That would probably work if they were just one week apart.
Something else I would like to see is that they leave any currant seat that they hold before they can seek another one. There is an old saying “you can’t serve two masters”. If they want it bad enough they will resign the seat they hold. Their constituents deserve 100% of their time and no less.
I know what you mean. Obama, a first term Senator, has been campaigning for pretty much his entire time in that office. Can’t see that he’s serving the people of his state very well…
IGM I think your, well Retarded. For one, when have the Dems not lied? I recall It happening alot in the 90’s. So now let me rip you apart brick by brick.
“The greatest threat to America is gay marriage.” 1. Okay how’s it not? How won’t it lead to more and more morally lost ground? Also keep in mind Minority movements can gain ground. I for one don’t want to see a 50% population slash downwards as some one with a messed up mind wants to screw the same sex I ALSO Don’t want my taxes paying to cure, or hold back the type of Aids they will get. (FACT Most Homosexual couples make up 75% of current cases)
Rome’s fall started with the societly moral decline
“A vote or a Democrat is a vote for Al Qaeda to take over America.”
For once though your being “smart” your right. You see these people in that region have good memories, and unlike the west will finish a score before taking cash and setting down. IF Obama or Hillary wins who want out of the war IT WILL Be seen as submittance, NOT GOOD WILL OR POWER. But as godless cowards that have nothing and will give in with a little blood. Most of the problems that stream from that area originate from the FARKING CRUSADES.
“Christians are becoming a persecuted minority.” A Minority maybe not, but even a majority can be persecuted. If you wish to fight this, well I suggest you tell Black South Africans that aperhatty never happend.
“I will cut your taxes, invade foreign countries (which isn’t free), and not cut anything but “waste”. ”
I don’t recall that on the agenda, but hey, better to take than buy in a weaking economy is one way to see it. As to waste, well there is quite a bit, 13 police orignizations, massive pork spending, ON BOTH sides of the line, our envolvement in NATO and the UN, plenty to cut out on. And who doesn’t want to keep more of their money?
“Unless we build an electric fence, Spanish will become the official language of he United States”
A Wall like I said does no good, a manned wall will. And right now, maybe not in your area, but in many I’ve seen a clash of cultures is happening, By doing nothing on this problem its a sign of weakness, and by allowing them to stay sets up the path to bringing family over on visa’s. You effectivle triple the hispanic population overnight that all ready is the largest minority in the US. And growing with no attempts of assimilation among the bulk.
I’m far from a racist, but I know that tthis will lead to a huge problem soon uncheaked.
The republican party isn’t innocent lambs, but neither are the democrates.
I went to my caucus in Washington State. The largest discussion was who McCain would choose as a running mate.
The vote in our precinct was 80% Romney, 20% McCain. We had 15 people show up.
Looking at the results for the state as of 9:45pm (83% of precincts reporting). We also have a primary in 10 days to elect the other 1/2 of the delegates for the convention – Republicans only)
McCain 25.5 %
Huckabee 23.7 %
Paul 20.6 %
Romney 16.5 %
Other 1.1 %
Uncommitted 12.7 %
Talked to a few people from other precincts, seems to have been a bit confusing in some of the caucus locations. One precinct had 6 people show up, and the chairperson didn’t show up (probably couldn’t get a parking space). The two people that were for Ron Paul volunteered to go to the county convention.
Of course don’t ever forget that Washington state once upon a time voted for Pat Robertson for president.
Nothing to add … just ignoring the troll
Which precinct, Skeptic?
We had two show up for my precinct, including myself. Overall, however, Snohomish County had a pretty good turnout, at least for the GOP.
We never discussed the results of our caucus – I wonder where I can find them.
LGM the GOP is not faking the truth. Spanish is close to the number one language in this side of the state. You must not have many latinos in your area to think otherewise. Secondly LGM I am pretty sure that the terrorists would favor a democratic president who wants to withdraw all forces and henceforth giving them the space to fill that vacumn. You notice that Demos have no plan to stop terrorism don’t you? Take a look at Sodom of the bible to see if the Lord favors such things as gay marriage. I wouln’t call the Lord a liar there, but again you may do so. Since the Demos have such empty Chamberlain type answers it appears that they are correct.
Oh by the way I voted for Romney about 10 days ago before he dropped out of the race. It appears my vote in this state doesn’t matter now. Oh by the way LGM in my last sentence in the previous blog I meant that the GOP is correct in their assertions.