Showing posts with label Senator Hillary Clinton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Senator Hillary Clinton. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 19, 2007

Senator Barack Obama Outworks Senator Clinton in Senate - Stats Prove It



For all of those who pick at Senator Barack Obama for having little experience, he sure is a hard working Senator.

Since he entered the Senate in 2005, Barack Obama's sponsored 152 bills according to the Library of Congress , or about 76 each year. GovTrak says that his record of getting those bills out of committee is "average" but overall his record is miles ahead of his presidential challenger, Senator Hillary Clinton.

According to GovTrack, Senator Hillary Clinton has sponsored 308 bills since 2001, or about 44 each year. That breaks down to one sponsored bill every 8.29 days.

By contrast, Senator Barack Obama has a rate of one sponsored bill over every 4.8 days.



In other words, Senator Obama sponsors an average of one bill each week, where's Senator Clinton sponsors an average of one bill every two weeks.

When it comes to getting those pieces of legislation out of committee, again, Senator Obama tops Senator Clinton. Senator Obama's "out of committee" rate is considered "average" according to GovTrack, but Senator Hillary Clinton's rate is not just ranked as "poor" but "very poor."

This raises the question of how effective Senator Clinton will be as president if she's not successful in getting bills out of committee.

Monday, June 18, 2007

June 17th USA Today / Gallup Poll Rigged - Redone To Place Clinton Ahead

Question: Why are you a Democrat? Click for answers here.

OK. Get this. Just get this. Two weeks ago, Senator Barack Obama was tied -- that's right, tied -- with Senator Hillary Clinton for the 2008 Democratic Presidential race in the then latest USA Today / Gallup Poll. Now, USA Today / Gallup didn't do a poll in May, and certainly not two weeks apart, but this new one says that Senator Clinton has a large lead.

What?

The critical eye would have a question. I've got several. But the bottom line is the second round of polling was rigged. Why? Because someone didn't like the outcome and doesn't want Senator Barack Obama to win, so they immediately ordered another poll and worked to obtain results they wanted to see.

The poll effort was rigged. That's right, rigged.

You can't even find the poll on the Gallup website. How in the hell can you explain the supposed "double-digit lead" Senator Clinton has, but then she's behind in South Carolina? That observation about the black vote being the reason is pure bull shit.

Don't believe it because there's no proof for it.

This is what the USA Today's "Gallup Guru" , Frank Newport, reported in his blog - the smoking gun, in part, is here:

Thursday, June 14, 2007

Clinton, Obama, immigration and Russian attitudes

New polling data from several survey organizations – including pending data from Gallup -- make it clear that Sen. Hillary Clinton is maintaining or strengthening her lead for the presidential nomination over Sen. Barack Obama among Democrats. Our early June USA Today/Gallup poll showed the two tied, as discussed here and here. But that finding apparently did not signify a significant change in the structure of the race. The latest polls from the Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg and Wall Street Journal/NBC show Clinton in her accustomed role as leader when Democrats are asked whom they want to be their party’s nominee. It looks as if the June 1-3 USA Today/Gallup poll either picked up a short term change, or as noted here, was a function of unusual sampling which happened to pick up Democrats who were more pro-Obama than the underlying population.

We have a Gallup poll now in the field, with results to be reported early next week. Preliminary indications are that this poll will find Clinton back in her typical leadership position as she has been for the most part this year.


What? In other words, Whoops! We can't believe the outcome, so we've got to talk to a new set of people and get the outcome we want. We can't -- just can't -- be forced to report that Senator Obama is tied with Senator Clinton.

What the Gallup Guru does not explain is why they did a new poll so close after the first one, and without having done a poll two weeks before?

I'll tell you why. Because USA Today and CNN are reporting these polls and don't want Senator Barack Obama to win the Democratic race for the White House.

They don't want a president who happens to be Black, and so they're trying to engineer a win for Senator Clinton. First, CNN consistently focuses on the race issue, then reports any small seemingly negative information about Senator Obama. Any positive information is either downplayed or avoided altogether, or rigged, as in the case of this polling process.

I think the USA Today, CNN, and Gallup all should appologize to Senator Barack Obama. I seriously doubt Frank Newport just decided to do a new poll -- the USA Today paid him to do a new poll because they didn't like the outcome of the first one.

That's crass. Noam Chomsky was right in his classic work "Manufacturing Consent" -- the old media (USA Today) is trying to manipulate the public.

They have to explain the South Carolina poll as well as why the Mason-Dixon pollsters shared their error data, where the USA Today / Gallup Poll people did not. One can argue that the latest USA Today Gallup Poll has a huge margin of error considering the games they play with these polls. This is totally irresponsible on the part of USA Today and Gallup.

Thursday, June 14, 2007

CNN's Anti-Barack Obama Stance - Fear Of A Black President



CNN's so afraid of a Black president they've given to actually either hiding the truth or just plain giving their negative impressions.

Let's take CNN's Jacki Schechner's take on the YouTube Barack Obama page, where she issues critical comments which really are not her telling the news but giviing an opinion. It's the first time I've seen her do this, rather than just be a journalist and keep her ideas to herself.

But CNN's people are so afraid of Barack Obama's success, they'll do anything. I mean whatever it takes to misrepresent his position and popularity. I watched the Situation Room yesterday and CNN's Wolf Blizer took time to not tell us that Senator Obama was tied with Senator Clinton, but that an averaging of past polls shows Clinton ahead.

What!

Anything to avoid reporting Barack's success.

This is a total crime. We've got to take steps to make CNN behave fairly. It's obvious they're not going to play fair, so we've got to make them do it!

Let's roll!

Tuesday, June 12, 2007

Senator Hillary Clinton's Poll Lead Due To Women - Washington Post

According to the Washington Post , Senator Hillary Clinton's poll leads -- until recently -- came due to her support from "less educated women" where Senator Obama fared better with women with higher education.

It will be interesting to see if this remains as we get more into the debate season.

Monday, June 11, 2007

Gallup Poll - Senator Obama Ties Hillary Clinton In USA Today / Gallup Poll

In a USA Today / Gallup Poll conducted June 5th, Senator Barack Obama has tied Senator Hillary Clinton. According to Gallup, "The poll was conducted June 1-3, 2007, and almost all of the interviews were completed prior to the Democratic candidate debate held in New Hampshire on Sunday, June 3. Republican candidates will debate one another in New Hampshire on Tuesday night, June 5...

The poll asked Democrats and independents who lean toward the Democratic Party who they are most likely to support for the Democratic nomination for president next year. Obama and Clinton are now tied, with 30% supporting Obama and 29% supporting Clinton. Seventeen percent of Democrats support former Vice President Al Gore for the nomination, and 11% support former North Carolina Senator John Edwards. No other candidate registers better than 3% support.

Wednesday, April 04, 2007

Senator Barack Obama - Raises $25 Million To Shock Hillary Clinton!

Much as Muhammed Ali promised to shake up the World, Senator Barack Obama's run for president is doing just that. This report is just amazing and proves that this campaign is for real, with power and legs!

Obama Raises $25M to Rival Clinton Camp
By NEDRA PICKLER

The Associated Press
Wednesday, April 4, 2007; 1:28 PM

DAVENPORT, Iowa -- Democrat Barack Obama raked in $25 million for his presidential bid in the first three months of 2007, placing him on a par with front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton and dashing her image as the party's inevitable nominee.

The donations came from an eye-popping 100,000 donors, the campaign said in a statement Wednesday.

Democratic presidential hopeful U.S. Sen. Barack Obama talks to a crowd at the VFW during a campaign stop in Rochester, N.H., Tuesday, April 3, 2007. (AP Photo/Jim Cole) (Jim Cole - AP)

The figures were the latest evidence that Obama, a political newcomer who has served just two years in the Senate, has emerged as the most powerful new force in presidential politics this year. It also reinforced his status as a significant threat to Clinton, who'd hoped her own $26 million first quarter fundraising total would begin to squeeze her rivals out of contention.

The campaign reported that the figure included at least $23.5 million that he can spend on the highly competitive primary race. The Clinton campaign has yet to disclose how much they can use for the primary verses money that is designated for the general election.

While Clinton has honed a vast national fundraising network through two Senate campaigns and her husband's eight years as president, Obama launched his bid for the White House with a relatively small donor base concentrated largely in Illinois, his home state. But his early opposition to the Iraq war and voter excitement over his quest to be the first black president quickly fueled a powerful fundraising machine.

Since he formally declared his presidential campaign in February, Obama has been traveling the country with a focus on urban areas where he could build his momentum and bring in new donors. He attracted big-money Hollywood and Wall St. executives along with families who came out to his stops in places like Oklahoma that sometimes are neglected by other candidates.

More than half the donors contributed via the Internet for a total of $6.9 million, the campaign said.

"This overwhelming response, in only a few short weeks, shows the hunger for a different kind of politics in this country and a belief at the grassroots level that Barack Obama can bring out the best in America to solve our problems," said Obama finance chairwoman Penny Pritzker.

Donors are limited by law to contributions of $2,300 for the primary election, but Clinton, Obama and some other candidates also have been raising money for the general election. That allows them to take another $2,300 from each donor, but the money has to be returned if they don't win the nomination.

Clinton's campaign often solicited the $4,600 donations, while Obama's campaign focused on recruiting small dollar donors. In the coming months, he can return to those donors and ask those who haven't maxed out to give more.

Unlike Clinton, Obama says he doesn't take money from the lobbyists or political action committees that are frequent contributors on other campaigns.

Clinton campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle said, "We are thrilled with our historic fundraising success and congratulate Senator Obama and the entire Democratic field on their fundraising, which demonstrates the overwhelming desire for change in our country."

Obama was visiting Iowa Wednesday, holding an evening rally at a community college in Mason City.

Among the other Democratic candidates, aides to former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards said his $14 million in new contributions included $1 million for the general election.

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said he had raised $6 million and had more than $5 million cash on hand.

Aides to Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd said he raised more than $4 million and transferred nearly $5 million from his Senate campaign, for a total of $9 million in receipts and $7.5 million cash on hand. Delaware Sen. Joe Biden lagged behind, with his staff reporting that he had total receipts of nearly $4 million, nearly half of which was transferred from his Senate campaign account.

Edwards, speaking to Davenport, Iowa, television station KWQC, complained that the pressure to raise huge sums was distorting the political process.

"We should actually be publicly financing these campaigns," Edwards said. "We shouldn't be doing these money contests. They're not healthy, they're not good for democracy. Public financing is the answer.

"While we still have this system, you have to compete the best way you can. What's clear is I think we're going to have at least three candidates on the Democratic side who have plenty of money to run a very serious campaign."

Among the Republican candidates, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney was the top money-raiser with $23 million, another eye-catching sum that place him in the same league with Clinton and Obama and left his GOP rivals in the dust.

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani raised $15 million for the quarter, while Arizona Sen. John McCain posted $12.5 million. Giuliani leads the GOP field in national popularity polls, followed by McCain.

Tuesday, April 03, 2007

Philip de Vellis Details Production of "1984 Hillary" Video

Philip de Vellis, the creator of the "1984 Hillary" Video, explains how he created the now classic clip. He says that he used a Mack Book equipped with Final Cut Pro and Motion 2, which means I can make the same video right now. But here's the video.

Saturday, March 31, 2007

Hillary Clinton Buying Endorsements - Cheating Her Way To The Top of Polls

If you think Senator Hillary Clinton's getting endorsements because she's popular, think again. Many of her supporters on a high level are bought and paid for. This is something backers of Senator Barack Obama should focus on the explain to anyone they talk to.

This information must be spread!

Want an example? Take this one from the Corruption Chronicles:

Hillary Buys Black Support In South Carolina

For a few hundred thousand dollars Hillary Clinton has obtained the highly pursued endorsement of an influential South Carolina senator who also happens to be the pastor of the state’s largest black church.

Or how about the Iowa example, where she retired the govs campaign debt?

It must be communicated that her candidacy is one of the machine and not of the grass roots!

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Senator Barack Obama Picks Up Six Percentage Points In Iowa Poll

Even with Presidential Candidate John Edwards recent annoucement of his problems with his wife's spreading cancer, and Senator Hillary Clinton's buying of support for the Iowa governor, Senator Barack Obama picked up six points in a poll of Iowa Democrats by Zogby on March 27th, 2007. It's Edwards 27 percent, Clinton 25 perent, Obama 23 percent, and the error is +- 4.5 points, so it's anyone's race.

This makes the race too close to call, even with the "bought" advantage of Senator Clinton.

Chris Matthews - Bill Clinton and Senator Hillary Clinton Jealous Of Senator Barack Obama

On Chris Matthews "HardBall" show he asserts that both former President Bill Clinton and Senator Hillary Clinton are jealous of Senator Barack Obama, and gives reasons why. Watch the video below:

Senator Clinton Pays Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack Debt; Vilsack Endorses Her



Wow. I just saw this story behind the Story over at The Blue State. Here's what I read:

Yesterday, as it had been expected for almost a week, Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack officially endorsed Hillary Clinton. There may have been two reasons behind that move.

First, Clinton will likely pick a Midwesterner as her VP -- possibly Vilsack or Evan Bayh. Secondly, the Iowa Governor has a debt issue that Clinton agreed to help pay off. "Before ending his presidential bid on Feb. 23, Mr. Vilsack had accumulated a debt of about $430,000," said the Caucus Blog. "The Clinton campaign has agreed to help erase at least some of that debt. A fund-raising appeal on his behalf could be landing in mailboxes of her donors soon."

(So by donating to Hillary Clinton, you are helping pay off another politician's debt.)


The New York Times' Caucas Blog goes a step further:

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton won’t know until the night of the Iowa caucuses whether the backing of Tom and Christie Vilsack, the state’s former governor and first lady, who formally announced today that they were endorsing her, will pay off. But Mr. Vilsack could reap benefits sooner.

Before ending his presidential bid on Feb. 23, Mr. Vilsack had accumulated a debt of about $430,000. The Clinton campaign has agreed to help erase at least some of that debt. A fund-raising appeal on his behalf could be landing in mailboxes of her donors soon.

Aides to Senator Clinton and Mr. Vilsack say there was no quid pro quo. Instead, they said, there is a personal connection. As a young lawyer, Mrs. Clinton served on the Watergate Committee with Mrs. Vilsack’s brother, Tom Bell.

“Senator Clinton has been close to the Vilsacks for years and if she can be helpful, she will,” said Phil Singer, a spokeswoman for the Clinton campaign.


Uh, yeah. Right. Let's see. The Watergate Committee was a long time ago and she served on it with his brother. But if they're that chummy, why did they have to reach back 30 something years to report the last connection they had?

If the Gov was really on the up-and-up, he'd have taken the debt help, then backed Senator Obama.

Tuesday, March 13, 2007

Senator Hillary Clinton Thinks She's JFK! - Trying To Steal Barack Obama's Style Not Likely To Work

I just saw this article in the New York Post where Senator and presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's comparing herself to John F. Kennedy, apparently hoping to both fire up her supporters and take some of the "Kennedy" tag off Senator Barack Obama.

Well, one thing I've learn is to let others call you JFK and not yourself. Remember Dan Quale? Recall the debate with the now Late Senator Lloyd Bentson, where he says to Quale, "I knew John F. Kennedy, and you're no JFK!"

Seems Hillary just set herself up for the punchline.

Thursday, February 22, 2007

Hillary Problems - Judicial Watch Claims Hillary Clinton Illegally Obtained Files On Political Opponents



Wow. This is getting deeper, the anti-Hillary news. And While I'm not anti-Hillary, I'm certainly pro-Barack and am concerned that the Clinton camp's wrongly attacking Barack Obama , almost portraying him as their enemy.

And according to the website Judicial Watch, we all know what Hillary does to her enemies. The site explains:

"In the early 1990’s, President and Hillary Clinton violated the privacy rights of their perceived political enemies by wrongly accessing and misusing the FBI files of the Reagan and first Bush Administration staffers, among others. Over 900 files were illegally gathered. This scandal became known as “Filegate.”

In an effort to discredit the women who charged President Clinton with sexual misconduct, personal files and papers were illegally obtained and released. The courts found, under the Privacy Act, that privacy of Linda Tripp and Kathleen Willey had been violated.

When faced with discovery, the Clinton-Gore White House further compounded their legal troubles by launching a cover-up and failing to turn over documents as required by subpoena. (Learn more about White House E-mail Scandal.)

Through pre-trial discovery, Judicial Watch was able to link Mrs. Clinton directly to the center of the Filegate controversy.


That was then, I can understand why Hillary would want to strike back. The question is does the Clinton campaign still have the files and have they honed and refined their practice of gathering negative information to focus on people like Senator Obama?

This is the question Senator Clinton must answer.