Politics 2008:The Caucuses and The Dem/Rep Conventions

[unspokenone25]

FYI (for those that are interested): Barack Obama to be in Houston on Tuesday, February 19th for "Stand for Change Rally" at the Toyota Center. Doors open at 6pm. Tickets are first-come, first served.

[shawneeeb]

This misleading blog piece has been proliferated throughout the internet. First of all, it compares apples to oranges. It attempts to understate Clinton's accomplishments by citing the number of bills she authored and passed into law. And then it attempts to over-inflate Obama's record by citing the total number of bills he sponsored (BOTH in state and federal congress).

If you look up the information for yourself (http://thomas.loc.gov/bss/110search.html) you can compare apples to apples:
- In the 109th Congress Obama sponsored 152 bills (26 were signed into law) and co-sponsored 427 (12 were signed into law). Clinton sponsored 177 (21 were signed into law) and co-sponsored 720 (19 were signed into law).

- In the 110th Congress Obama sponsored 113 (0 signed into law) and co-sponsored 375 (3 signed into law). Clinton sponsored 150 (0 signed into law) and co-sponsored 477 (4 signed into law).

- Grand Total Authored - Clinton 327 sponsored / 1197 co-sponsored vs. Obama 265 sponsored / 802 co-sponsored

- Grand Total Passed – Clinton 44 vs. Obama 41

THE FACT - During the time that Obama and Clinton were in Senate together, Clinton authored 23% more bills and co-sponsored 49% more bills. Clinton helped to pass 7% more bills than Obama. In addition, Clinton sponsored 299 bills and co-sponsored 1183 from 2001-2004 while Obama was not involved in national politics.

[SummerChild]

Shawneeeb,

What about the work that he did during his 8 years as an IL senator? That's a long time in the legislative business. As a past IL resident, I can say that he was instrumental in bringing and getting passed many pieces of legislation that were very significant in IL - statewide.

Additionally, I can personally vouch for his knowledge of our government and the processes therein as I was in his Constitutional Law class while in lawschool. He taught three classes each year while also serving as an IL legislator and working the process in Springfield. I had the pleasure of learning about Brown v. Board from this man (our class dealt with the portion of Con Law addressing separation and equality issues - women's rights, voting rights, etc.) and many, many other pivotal constitutional law cases - as did many other students. Each quarter, he would allow students to override into his classes, even given his busy schedule, b/c there was that much interest in taking Constitutional Law from him. At that time, he was not in the U.S. senate nor running for the U.S. senate. Students wanted to take his class b/c he was a great professor and knew his stuff. He also engaged the class in a way that made everyone feel as if they had something to contribute...which can be a rarity in law school classes. Finally, his classes were challenging and very thought-provoking. Further, I can say that the man actually is as genuine and down-to-earth as he appears to be on television. He could have acted any way that he wanted to with us as students - and many professors did - but he was always genuine and down-to-earth.

8 years in the IL legislator (which is quite some time) in addition to those year in the U.S. senate, I would wager to say, probably gives him more legislative experience.

Whether you agree or not. I think that it's safe to say that Obama has significant legislative experience - dispelling the incorrect rumors of the media.

SC

Originally Posted by shawneeeb

This misleading blog piece has been proliferated throughout the internet. First of all, it compares apples to oranges. It attempts to understate Clinton's accomplishments by citing the number of bills she authored and passed into law. And then it attempts to over-inflate Obama's record by citing the total number of bills he sponsored (BOTH in state and federal congress).

If you look up the information for yourself (http://thomas.loc.gov/bss/110search.html) you can compare apples to apples:

- In the 109th Congress Obama sponsored 152 bills (26 were signed into law) and co-sponsored 427 (12 were signed into law). Clinton sponsored 177 (21 were signed into law) and co-sponsored 720 (19 were signed into law).

- In the 110th Congress Obama sponsored 113 (0 signed into law) and co-sponsored 375 (3 signed into law). Clinton sponsored 150 (0 signed into law) and co-sponsored 477 (4 signed into law).

- Grand Total Authored - Clinton 327 sponsored / 1197 co-sponsored vs. Obama 265 sponsored / 802 co-sponsored

- Grand Total Passed – Clinton 44 vs. Obama 41

THE FACT - During the time that Obama and Clinton were in Senate together, Clinton authored 23% more bills and co-sponsored 49% more bills. Clinton helped to pass 7% more bills than Obama. In addition, Clinton sponsored 299 bills and co-sponsored 1183 from 2001-2004 while Obama was not involved in national politics.

[mccoyred]

I totally co-sign! The state level is much more hands on and grass roots level than the Senate so I think the experience is more than relevant, it is essential to understanding the common problems of ordinary people, something that this next president MUST have.

Also, I may add that while both hold law degrees, the causes they undertook with that credential are very different....

Originally Posted by SummerChild

Shawneeeb,

What about the work that he did during his 8 years as an IL senator? That's a long time in the legislative business. As a past IL resident, I can say that he was instrumental in bringing and getting passed many pieces of legislation that were very significant in IL - statewide.

Additionally, I can personally vouch for his knowledge of our government and the processes therein as I was in his Constitutional Law class while in lawschool. He taught three classes each year while also serving as an IL legislator and working the process in Springfield. I had the pleasure of learning about Brown v. Board from this man (our class dealt with the portion of Con Law addressing separation and equality issues - women's rights, voting rights, etc.) and many, many other pivotal constitutional law cases - as did many other students. Each quarter, he would allow students to override into his classes, even given his busy schedule, b/c there was that much interest in taking Constitutional Law from him. At that time, he was not in the U.S. senate nor running for the U.S. senate. Students wanted to take his class b/c he was a great professor and knew his stuff. He also engaged the class in a way that made everyone feel as if they had something to contribute...which can be a rarity in law school classes. Finally, his classes were challenging and very thought-provoking. Further, I can say that the man actually is as genuine and down-to-earth as he appears to be on television. He could have acted any way that he wanted to with us as students - and many professors did - but he was always genuine and down-to-earth.

8 years in the IL legislator (which is quite some time) in addition to those year in the U.S. senate, I would wager to say, probably gives him more legislative experience.

Whether you agree or not. I think that it's safe to say that Obama has significant legislative experience - dispelling the incorrect rumors of the media.

SC

[darling1]

what i don't get is how she is counting her role as first lady into her 35 years of experience.

Originally Posted by SummerChild

Shawneeeb,

What about the work that he did during his 8 years as an IL senator? That's a long time in the legislative business. As a past IL resident, I can say that he was instrumental in bringing and getting passed many pieces of legislation that were very significant in IL - statewide.

Additionally, I can personally vouch for his knowledge of our government and the processes therein as I was in his Constitutional Law class while in lawschool. He taught three classes each year while also serving as an IL legislator and working the process in Springfield. I had the pleasure of learning about Brown v. Board from this man (our class dealt with the portion of Con Law addressing separation and equality issues - women's rights, voting rights, etc.) and many, many other pivotal constitutional law cases - as did many other students. Each quarter, he would allow students to override into his classes, even given his busy schedule, b/c there was that much interest in taking Constitutional Law from him. At that time, he was not in the U.S. senate nor running for the U.S. senate. Students wanted to take his class b/c he was a great professor and knew his stuff. He also engaged the class in a way that made everyone feel as if they had something to contribute...which can be a rarity in law school classes. Finally, his classes were challenging and very thought-provoking. Further, I can say that the man actually is as genuine and down-to-earth as he appears to be on television. He could have acted any way that he wanted to with us as students - and many professors did - but he was always genuine and down-to-earth.

8 years in the IL legislator (which is quite some time) in addition to those year in the U.S. senate, I would wager to say, probably gives him more legislative experience.

Whether you agree or not. I think that it's safe to say that Obama has significant legislative experience - dispelling the incorrect rumors of the media.

SC

[mccoyred]

Originally Posted by shawneeeb

This misleading blog piece has been proliferated throughout the internet. First of all, it compares apples to oranges. It attempts to understate Clinton's accomplishments by citing the number of bills she authored and passed into law. And then it attempts to over-inflate Obama's record by citing the total number of bills he sponsored (BOTH in state and federal congress).

If you look up the information for yourself (http://thomas.loc.gov/bss/110search.html) you can compare apples to apples:

- In the 109th Congress Obama sponsored 152 bills (26 were signed into law) and co-sponsored 427 (12 were signed into law). Clinton sponsored 177 (21 were signed into law) and co-sponsored 720 (19 were signed into law).

- In the 110th Congress Obama sponsored 113 (0 signed into law) and co-sponsored 375 (3 signed into law). Clinton sponsored 150 (0 signed into law) and co-sponsored 477 (4 signed into law).

- Grand Total Authored - Clinton 327 sponsored / 1197 co-sponsored vs. Obama 265 sponsored / 802 co-sponsored

- Grand Total Passed – Clinton 44 vs. Obama 41

THE FACT - During the time that Obama and Clinton were in Senate together, Clinton authored 23% more bills and co-sponsored 49% more bills. Clinton helped to pass 7% more bills than Obama. In addition, Clinton sponsored 299 bills and co-sponsored 1183 from 2001-2004 while Obama was not involved in national politics.

What query parameters did you use? On first blush, I did not arrive at any of the numbers you used. Please advise.

[mccoyred]

Clinton http://www.votesmart.org/voting_cate...p?can_id=55463

Obama http://www.votesmart.org/voting_cate...hp?can_id=9490

Originally Posted by shawneeeb

This misleading blog piece has been proliferated throughout the internet. First of all, it compares apples to oranges. It attempts to understate Clinton's accomplishments by citing the number of bills she authored and passed into law. And then it attempts to over-inflate Obama's record by citing the total number of bills he sponsored (BOTH in state and federal congress).

If you look up the information for yourself (http://thomas.loc.gov/bss/110search.html) you can compare apples to apples:

- In the 109th Congress Obama sponsored 152 bills (26 were signed into law) and co-sponsored 427 (12 were signed into law). Clinton sponsored 177 (21 were signed into law) and co-sponsored 720 (19 were signed into law).

- In the 110th Congress Obama sponsored 113 (0 signed into law) and co-sponsored 375 (3 signed into law). Clinton sponsored 150 (0 signed into law) and co-sponsored 477 (4 signed into law).

- Grand Total Authored - Clinton 327 sponsored / 1197 co-sponsored vs. Obama 265 sponsored / 802 co-sponsored

- Grand Total Passed – Clinton 44 vs. Obama 41

THE FACT - During the time that Obama and Clinton were in Senate together, Clinton authored 23% more bills and co-sponsored 49% more bills. Clinton helped to pass 7% more bills than Obama. In addition, Clinton sponsored 299 bills and co-sponsored 1183 from 2001-2004 while Obama was not involved in national politics.

[Blacksocialite]

I have grown absolutely exhausted by the in-fighting and 'poison pen' emails of the Democrats in this recent primary. My jaw drops every time a read something negative about a Democratic candidate or the party sent by registered Democrats.

The last election should have been a 'lay up' for the Democrats given Bush's record. Either Clinton and Obama will be better than a continuation of the Republican Party's leadership in The White House. I fear that if the in-fighting doesn't stop, John McClain will become President.

I am soooo tired of the Democratic Party now (after being active in it for literally half of my life), that after I vote in my state's primary - I'm becoming Independent.

[mccoyred]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...010303303.html

EXCERPT

People who complain that Barack Obama lacks experience must be unaware of his legislative achievements. One reason these accomplishments are unfamiliar is that the media have not devoted enough attention to Obama's bills and the effort required to pass them, ignoring impressive, hard evidence of his character and ability.

Since most of Obama's legislation was enacted in Illinois, most of the evidence is found there -- and it has been largely ignored by the media in a kind of Washington snobbery that assumes state legislatures are not to be taken seriously. (Another factor is reporters' fascination with the horse race at the expense of substance that they assume is boring, a fascination that despite being ridiculed for years continues to dominate political journalism.)

[Little32]

If you have not seen this video, take a look. This young man helps to disspell the notion that Obama supporters are motivated by emotion rather than policy consideration.

http://thinkonthesethings.wordpress....y-to-railroad/


Of course, the word is that Obama receives a lot of support from the well-educated; that is a population that does not tend to be swayed by emotion.

[blklikeme]

Mccoyred: with a MOOR running what would I look like voting for a calcus man or woman

[mccoyred]

Ten straight victories! Clinton's little smear campaign had no effect. Obama won 76% of Hawaii voters and 58% of Wisconsin voters. Hawaii was a caucus but Wisconsin had a primary complete with exit polls. Hillary still won older/Baby Boomer voters but they split the female vote in half. One interesting tidbit is that Obama won decisively among Republicans as well as Independents.

[SummerChild]

And what was that attempted smear campaign about on Clinton's behalf? That was very unnecessary and absolutely does not make her look good. She is playing politics as usual and I think that the American people are tired of that. I know that I am.

Stick.to.the.issues.Clinton.

SC

[mccoyred]

Originally Posted by SummerChild

And what was that attempted smear campaign about on Clinton's behalf? That was very unnecessary and absolutely does not make her look good. She is playing politics as usual and I think that the American people are tired of that. I know that I am.

Stick.to.the.issues.Clinton.

SC

I was talking about when she/her campaign charged him with plagarism http://www.newsmax.com/politics/demo.../19/73934.html .


In addition, we now know why it took so long to decide New Mexico http://www.newsmax.com/politics/new_.../18/73582.html ! Since both campaigns were consulted and ultimately agreed, they avoided a Broward County/hanging chad type fiasco. Personally, I think that there needs to be a standardized process for Federal elections that ALL states should follow; what they do with their own officials is their business.

[TonyB06]

Originally Posted by mccoyred

In addition, we now know why it took so long to decide New Mexico http://www.newsmax.com/politics/new_.../18/73582.html ! Since both campaigns were consulted and ultimately agreed, they avoided a Broward County/hanging chad type fiasco. Personally, I think that there needs to be a standardized process for Federal elections that ALL states should follow; what they do with their own officials is their business.

I give New Mexico credit for their resolve to let the people be heard.