By LIZ SIDOTI
WASHINGTON
The Democratic presidential nomination his, Barack Obama reached out Wednesday to mend fences with his defeated rival as Republican opponent John McCain tried to frame the fall campaign on his own terms. "I think he has exercised very bad judgment on national security issues and others," McCain said.
Hillary Rodham Clinton was angling to become Obama's running mate and her aides ramped up the speculation on that matter Wednesday. "I think a lot of her supporters would like to see her on the ticket," Clinton campaign chairman Terry McAuliffe said. But Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs cautioned "there is no deal in the works."
Clinton has yet to acknowledge Obama's victory in the bruising Democratic race and her aides — also dodging that conclusion — said on the morning talk shows that she would take a few days to decide what comes next for her. Obama spoke by phone with her Tuesday night and both sides predicted he and Clinton would sit down together before long.
"When the dust settles and it makes sense for her, he'll meet whenever she wants to," Gibbs said. "She's accumulated a lot of votes throughout this country. We want to make sure that we're appealing to her voters."
On the final night of the primary season, Clinton won South Dakota on Tuesday while Obama took Montana — and a slew of party superdelegates who declared their support to help him clinch the nomination. He did it, according to The Associated Press tally, based on primary elections, state Democratic caucuses and support from superdelegates. It took 2,118 delegates to clinch the nomination at the convention in Denver this summer, and Obama had 2,154 by the AP count.
Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, a dogged Clinton supporter, recognized the brutality of the arithmetic.
"I am the last of the Mohicans, but it is over," he said.
But after all of Obama's struggles to win over white blue-collar workers and older voters who flocked to Clinton, Rendell said he remained "a little wary" about the Illinois senator's prospects.
"Senator Obama is an exciting candidate, he's smart as a whip, he's got the backbone," he said on CNN, "but he's got some work to do, no question about it."
Obama and Clinton were both back in Washington on Wednesday to address the national conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.
The Rev. Jesse Jackson, who ran twice for the Democratic nomination in the 1980s and made what was then historic progress for a black candidate, praised Obama's achievement in a phone interview from Serengeti National Park in northeastern Tanzania, where he is attending a meeting.
"Obama's nomination reflects phenomenal growth in America," he told The Associated Press. "The dream of a promised land is being fulfilled."
He said Clinton "should accept the defeat graciously" and the two longtime rivals should strive for a quick reconciliation so that the party is united in the fall.
Four Democratic leaders, also eager for unity, said in a joint statement Wednesday that "the voters have spoken" and the remaining uncommitted superdelegates should declare their support for a candidate by Friday. They were Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Democratic chairman Howard Dean and West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin, head of the Democratic Governors Association.
Former Vice President Walter Mondale, a superdelegate who had been a Clinton support and the 1984 Democratic presidential nominee, endorsed Obama on Wednesday.
The primaries behind them, Obama and McCain were drawing the battle line for a fall fight that will make history with the election of either the oldest first-term president in McCain or the first black commander in chief in Obama. In speeches marking the start of the general election, both maneuvered for the advantage with voters sour on the status quo. Both were competing beyond their party's base, too.
"The key to winning the election is independent voters and Democrats as well," McCain said in an interview shown Wednesday on ABC's "Good Morning America." Even so, he said "I don't think so" when asked on CBS whether he'd pick a Democrat as his running mate.
Obama's racial groundbreaking was noted everywhere from the White House to the house of his Kenyan relatives from his father's side of the family.
"I've just watched him on television, and as a family we are very happy," his uncle, Said Obama, told AP from Kisumu in western Kenya. "Really, it is something that is a trendsetter."
White House press secretary Dana Perino said on behalf of President Bush: "Senator Obama came a long way in becoming his party's nominee. And his historic achievement reflects the fact that our country has come along way, too."
In St. Paul, Minn., Obama, 46, ceded no ground on the reformer mantle and cast McCain as a continuation of the unpopular Bush's eight-year tenure.
"My differences with him are not personal; they are with the policies he has proposed in this campaign," he said Tuesday. "Because while John McCain can legitimately tout moments of independence from his party in the past, such independence has not been the hallmark of his presidential campaign."
The campaign is the first in half a century in which neither a sitting president nor a vice president is running for the highest office, and the first since 1960 in which a senator will assume the White House. A fragile economy and an ongoing Iraq war, as well as matters of age and race, serve as a backdrop.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
RE: Pretty sad
Hog Wash!
Ira
What EXACTLY is McCain's plan for the economy? How does he intend on reintergrating the United States into the rest of the world and away from the isolationist stance of the current administration? How does he plan on bringing our troops home? What's he going to do about our joke of a healthcare system? You ask for specifics on Obama, please, shed some light on your candidate's policies...
You offer news clips
I asked for substance and you offer news clips? Individual endorsements?
I believe you work for his campaign. You follow the same path of ignoring substantial questions.
Perhaps the Daily Mail says he has good taste in shoes?
Go McCain!
Pretty sad
That some individuals are not for any particular candidate, but seem to be adamantly against one specific candidate. Ignorance is truely contagious and there seem to be alot of people getting sick. As much as we all like to believe that we live in a progressive and enlightened nation, this message board proves there are many who continue to rely on archaic thinking. The only progress made by these few, is that their bigotry rather then being blatant, is now masked in illogical manufactured reasoning which proves to further their own subconscience agenda of baseless unprovoked hatred.
TR
I don't need Fortune Magazine, Nobel Prize winners, the media or you to tell me who to vote for and why I should do so. As I see it that's part of the Obama crusaid problem. Be happy the Obama train has stopped at your station, jump aboard and exercise your right to vote for the party of your choice and I'll do the same. The "second coming" has arrived, so rejoice. I don't see you changing anyone's mind!
Great post Mark Twine
After Hillary lost, George sees McCain as the best candidate, but cant elaborate on those JM's/GOPer positions that he very recently now values over the Dem positions. And George's comments negates the months of reporting which for the most part said that BO & HC had fairly close policy positions (excluding the comparison between HC's health care plan which mandated that people buy insurance while BO's plan did not make it a requirement... as one example). As MarkT said, they differ in degree. And then George finaly gets around to stating that he's worried about racial issues. Be it racism or reverse racism. I would hope that George would ignore his perceived racial issues concerning the candidates, and revisit the positions of BO/Dem v. JM/GOP.
Couple more
Fortune magazine writer: Clinton's Mortgage Plan Freeze Is "The Dumbest Solution To The Current Mortgage Mess I've Hear From A Top Presidential Contender" And "Would Be Disastrous."
Nobel Prize Winner Joseph Stiglitz: "President Obama Will Do A Better Job On The Economy" Than Clinton Or McCain.
Nobel Prize Winner Edmund Phelps: "It Would Be A Good Idea To Bet On President Obama" To Be Best On The Economy.
Former Reserve Chair Volcker: Obama is Offering a "Credible Approach" on the Economy.
Not BS ira - dont put your head in the sand
For me, the biggest issue is Iraqmire. A costly, disasterous blunder that we will be saddled with for a very long time. BO and JM have significantly different views on this. Some other reasons...
The Economist: BO's Stimulus Plan Is "Reasonably Sensible," While HC & the Republicans' "Look More Like a Fiscal Christmas Tree."
NYT: HC's Stimulus Plan "Has Generally Received Lower Marks From Economists Than Mr. Obama's Plan."
Oregonian: HC and JM are Pandering on the Gas Tax, "We Agree With Obama on This Issue. He Calls it a Short-Term Fix."
NYT: "Obama Has Endorsed The Best Idea Currently On The Table To Prevent Foreclosure."
Fair enough TR
"But you sound like you're just boiling w/ rage that your candidate lost, and so you are taking your ball and going home"
Show us the rational reason to vote for Obama. Remember the rules: no using the words "hope" or "change" without explanations of how they will actually be provided to the people. No talking in circles.
Wait until you taste those grapes in November TR.
BS
"he has managed to unite incredible numbers of blacks and whites and other nationalities in an effort to secure the nomination. With blacks representing only 12% of the population, they definitely weren't alone in guaranteeing Obama's victory."
Primaries are never a true reflection of the actual votes. In fact, ask Lieberman of Conn. In this case if you look at the actual poll numbers, you wil lseethat more blacks than ever appeared at the booths. Many whites did what they have dependably done in the past and stayed home for the primaries. Here in NC if I remember right, that 12% you cited were over 30% of his voters. The only thing he has united is the republican vote. This is the largest single mistake ever made by the democratic party. They run on substance and offer the people a man w/ little.
mark k asked who really chooses the candidates
Their names are Rockefeller, Rothschild, Astor, Bundy, Collins, Du Pont, Freeman, Kennedy, Li, Onassis, Reynolds, Russell, and Van Duyn- With help from the Disneys and McDonalds.
Reverse racism
There is no such thing as reverse racism. Racism is racism, no matter where it originates. And while you're assuming that Obama will further divide this country with racism, as far as I've seen, he has managed to unite incredible numbers of blacks and whites and other nationalities in an effort to secure the nomination. With blacks representing only 12% of the population, they definitely weren't alone in guaranteeing Obama's victory. What other politician can you say has ever accomplished what he has achieved?
Poorly infomed
"Poorly informed" is a comment made when others don't agree with you. Life happens people disagree, and it doesn't make anyone "poorly informed."
RE: I wonder why
"Racism is the most logical explanation, but I acknowldge you might simply be poorly informed."
Don't even go there with the racism word with me, you don't know me at all. I'm exercising my opinion which you can or cannot agree with. I don't care! You might take a look at reverse racism.
"Nevertheless, there is no sane reason for voting for McCain, unless you would like to see the last eight years repeated."
I stated my reasons for voting for McCain, they are mine, I'm entitled to them, and wheather you think they are sane or not is not important nor an issue.
Please vote for whom every you please and I'll do the same.
I wonder why
Barack Obama stands for a great deal more than change.
I suggest you read his most recent book - "The Audacity of Hope" or you visit his Website.
The two experiences will reveal that Obama's approach to governing is certainly different from Hillary's. But the issues he finds important are the same issues Hillary finds important. They differ in degree.
Whenever I see a "Democrat" or Hillary supporter who won't support Obama I assume it is for other reasons.
Racism is the most logical explanation, but I acknowldge you might simply be poorly informed.
Nevertheless, there is no sane reason for voting for McCain, unless you would like to see the last eight years repeated.
Why I will vote for McCain
As a Democrat who strongly feels Obama is the wrong choice as the Democratic candidate, I will be voting for McCain.
It is my opinion that Barrack Obama will divide this country more than any president we have seen. Partly because of Reverse Racism, and partly because the man has nothing to say but "change". This country needs change, but Obama is not the man or person to get the job done. McCain in my opinion is the lesser of two evils.
Sorry George
But you sound like you're just boiling w/ rage that your candidate lost, and so you are taking your ball and going home. Of course there will be mud. But your "only hillary can handle mud" position is baseless. Your inability to elaborate on your new found favoring of McCains/GOPs position's over BO/Dems make it sound more and more like angry sour grapes and spite, not position-based rationales.
HE'S TOUGHER THAN ANYONE EVER THOUGHT
Let's not forget Barack beat Hillary with FOX, Hannity and Rush holding one of his hands behind his back...of course...just to make it fair.
TR
"He's been slinging it back quite well, but i think your disgust w/ HC losing precludes you from even listening to the guy"
TR that's very presumptious of you. I have listened as I do with all candidates. I've heard the repeated "change" to the point it's sickening. It's a fairytail for Obama to think he can make all this change. It just isn't going to happen!
As for the war in Iraq, yes Hillary and McCain voted for it. That's a mute point! Many, elected officials vote on the Bush/Cheney/Rove war of lies. Obama didn't vote, but you don't seem to realize how often Obama didn't vote on anything.
Georges6155
You dont like Obama because you THINK he wont be able to handle the mudslinging? Sounds presumptuous & irrational. He's been slinging it back quite well, but i think your disgust w/ HC losing precludes you from even listening to the guy. I agree that missing votes is problematic, but its a problem for all candidates. According to the WaPo, McCain has missed 60% of the votes, BO 42%, & HC 32%. Not to give a pass, but vote missing can occur when your party/position will rule the day, or it doesnt stand a chance... among other reasons. And all 3 candidates did vote on the Iraq War auth, & we know how Hillary & McCain voted. So after your discussion last nite w/ family/friends, what positions of McCain/GOP do you favor over Obama/Dems? 50 more years in iraq, warrantless wiretapping, punting Geneva Conventions & habeas corpus, extraordinary rendition, torture?
Thereal issue
The real reason many of us will cross party lines is because Obama has no substance. Just for fun, I often question his supporters about how his promises and platforms can be obtained just to watch their eyes become bleary. TR on this site has been questioned multiple times and haas never offered an iota of substance. In the end, Obama is a novelty candidate. Read through these posts and see how many of HIS supporters mention race. Not his detractors, but his supporters. Not a single one of you, nor the candidate himself want to answer serious questions. This is why he missed over 130 votes in his short career in the Senate. So he would not have to defend his actions. At this point he has none. I am stunned that he SUPPORTS drivers licenses for illegals. We did manage to get that out of him.
Racist America
Racist America will never elect a black man president.
Racist America will prove that in November when it elects a 72-year-old white man who thinks the last eight years of war and economic turmoil should continue.
McCain has flip-flopped on issues important to conservatives so many times his middle name should be "Wind Sock"
But racist America will overlook any flaw in McCain because he's white and his opponent is black.
admire obama???
"Sneak attacks like this one will not derail Obama. The more you know about him, the more you admire."
I'm a Democrat and I do not admire Obama at all, so please tell me why you do.
mark twine
if you read my post carefully i said i know by whom it was written. you also blatantly ignored the fact she put in there (key word fact) that obama supporters dismiss anything she says about winning the popular vote when all democrats were arguing for gore! i disagree with her when she says words mean nothing to liberals, but a situation like this doesn't make me question why she'd make such a statement. and as far as her being objective, nothing is objective. liberal news like cnn is not objective nor is conservative news like fox. it's all about using both sources and forming your own opinions. it is impossible for anyone with an opinion to be objective. Sure there are people who lean more towards objective than coulter, but, as i said before, i know who she is, i know what she does, and for once, i think she actually has a point.
I actually originally liked obama, and i don't think he's a bad person, but the more i found out about him, the less i liked about him. so don't act like i'm some uninformed idiot because i am a responsible voter and i think for myself (not saying you dont), do my homework on the candidates, and make me decision accordingly.
dman
The article you refer to was written by Ann Coulter, one of the most rabid conservative commentators on the planet. She couldn't be objective with a gun to her head.
You are not a rational thinker. An article that starts with an ideological attack like, "Words mean nothing to liberals" deserves our contempt, not our time. You are either a terrible liar or delusional.
You won't find much objective thought on a blog - whether it is Harrington's blog or Coulter's blog. You will just find more of the same divisive garbage that has torn this country apart for eight years.
Sneak attacks like this one will not derail Obama. The more you know about him, the more you admire.
And this sort of deception - while more subtle than the usual ham-fisted posts on Obama here - simply proves his point about the need for change.
Six votes for Obama
It is a great time for our country when a person of color can draw this much interest in politics for positive reasons. Frankly, I don't care about race. In my family, we have six votes for Obama. McCain sold his right to represent us when he sold his sole to GW...
And for those hard core voters in Virginia who can't see anything but the words: race, liberal and Democrat, try remembering it is a national election and everyone from every region has a vote. Virginia is just one little part of our 50 wonderful state nation. Your harsh words are meaningless. Open your eyes and see what the rest of the country has already seen. Go Obama!!!
TR
To answer your questions. Hillary has 35 yers experience in the political arena, she's an active voice in the Senate, was an active Governors First Lady as well as an active President's First Lady. The experience of Hillary is overwhelming compared to Obama. No one can challenge Obamas's senatorial voting record because he doesn't have one. The talking heads of the news media got Obama the nomination, which is a mjor mistake. Obama will never be able to handle the mud the Republican party will start slinging in the Presidential race.
As a Dem, I will not be voting for Obama. My family and friends discussed this at great length last night, and we will all be voting for McCain. As much as we don't want 4 more years of Bush, we feel that strongly against Obama.
repost
i posted this comment on a similar obama article:
this commentary here is very interesting and should be read by all:
http://hillbuzz.blogspot.com/2008/06/popular-vote-is-unconcept.html
And no I'm not a conservative. I am simply a rational thinker who is afraid of the fanaticism surrounding Obama. Fanaticism is a dangerous storm. I was a Hillary supporter. I'm not sure who I'll vote for in the general election. I just think that article made an extremely good point, and all Democrats should stop and think on it (and I do realize who the author is).
Who really choses our candidates?
Let's face it: the media and big money choses our candidates these days, we the people don't. McCain, instead of being the maverick he once was that got him a lot of respect has turned into a patsy version of George W. Bush. The monied powers that be would love that, especially the oil companies and those that rely on illegal immigrants. Obama? There's a lot of promises and hot air there that will go away the moment he takes up residence in the White House. He's this decade's version of Jimmy Carter and will prove to be just as ineffective. Americans are left with nothing of substance again and are pretty much guaranteed of more the same garbage after November. God Save American politics from the influence of the Almighty Dollar, the real ruler of the country.
Prez
Either which way one votes, we're screwed. The question is, do you want vaseline with that screwing or not? Honestly, McCain is too old and Obama is too inexperienced. There is no happy medium in our presidential election (that I can ever remember anyways). I'm not convinced that Hillary would have been 'the happy medium', either.
But maybe Obama will surprise us and be a great president. Maybe McCain will learn how to play fairly with both sides of the aisle (unlike the current cowboy president). I'd like to think the new president would break the current status quo and take our important national issues by the horns and really remedy them in the most equitable manner possible, but only time will tell...