.
May 21st, 2008
02:22 PM ET

Why is Hillary Clinton still in the race?

ALT TEXT

Clinton has said to her camp she will stay in the race until June because she believes she can still be the nominee. Click the Play Button to see what Jack and our viewers had to say. (PHOTO CREDIT: AP PHOTO)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Barack Obama took another big step toward becoming the Democratic presidential nominee last night. He now has a majority of the pledged delegates – which means it is now impossible for Hillary Clinton to catch him. He also reminded those superdelegates who remain uncommitted that if they endorse Clinton now, they will be going against the will of the voters.

None of this matters to Hillary Clinton. She's staying in, telling supporters she's determined to see every vote counted. She's $19.5 million in debt, hopelessly behind and probably further damaging the party's chances in November, but no big deal. This is all about Hillary.

The New York Times reports she has told her inner circle she thinks she can still be the nominee. And, if she isn't, she can still accomplish some final goals. For one thing, Clinton is now saying that sexism – not racism – has played a key role in her loss. Advisers say by fighting on she's showing young women she's not a quitter.

Clinton clings to the hope that Michigan and Florida will magically be awarded to her despite both states primaries being invalid. She'll press that case when the DNC rules committee meets at the end of the month.

Oh, and about those who say Clinton is dividing the Democratic Party, or causing more of a racial divide among some white voters, by staying in the race, she disagrees. She believes that if and when she quits, her supporters will quickly support Obama.

Here’s my question to you: Why does Hillary Clinton continue on when Barack Obama now has a majority of pledged delegates and her campaign is almost $20 million in debt?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

Posted by
Filed under: Barack Obama • Hillary Clinton
May 19th, 2008
04:50 PM ET

What role did sexism play in Clinton’s likely defeat?

 Click the play button to see what Jack and our viewers had to say.

Click the play button to see what Jack and our viewers had to say.

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Hillary Clinton says she's running for president "to break the highest and hardest glass ceiling" in the United States. But every day, it looks less and less likely that she'll succeed.

The New York Times reports today about what Clinton's all-but-certain defeat will mean for women. Clinton set records for a campaign by a woman, raising more than $170 million, often getting better debate reviews than her male competitors, rallying older women and getting white men to vote for her.

There are even those who believe Clinton was able to use sexism on the trail to her advantage, by bringing in more votes and donations after instances where many believed she was being unfairly picked on because she is a woman.

There is no question she has done exceedingly well only to finish second behind Barack Obama. Nevertheless, many of her supporters insist the race was unfair – focusing on things like her clothing, her voice and calls to exit the race. Some, including Clinton supporter and former vice presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro, even think Barack Obama was sexist.

But despite the new markers for what women can do in a presidential campaign, there's still work to be done. Clinton had difficulties with some of the classic hurdles that face female politicians – things like trying to show toughness and warmth at the same time. Also, many women say they wish Clinton had inspired some kind of deep, national dialogue about gender issues between the sexes like what Obama did on the topic of race.

Here’s my question to you: How much of a role did sexism play in the likely defeat of Hillary Clinton?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

Posted by
Filed under: 2008 Election • Hillary Clinton
May 19th, 2008
02:56 PM ET

5th McCain aide resigns due to lobbying ties

ALT TEXT

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

If John McCain keeps firing people with ties to lobbyists, there won't be anyone left to run his campaign. His national finance co-chairman resigned from the campaign yesterday because of his ties to lobbyists. That makes him the fifth campaign adviser in about a week to leave due to increasing questions about whether lobbyists have too much influence over John McCain.

These folks have been cutting ties with McCain since the campaign issued a new policy that requires all staffers to either step down or end their relationships with lobbying firms or outside political groups.

The issue here is that John McCain has built his reputation on ethics and fighting special interest groups. The appearance of all these people with ties to lobbyists working for him doesn't seem to wash with his image as a self-described "straight talker." In fact, his campaign manager Rick Davis, who ran a lobbying firm for several years, has taken a leave of absence from his job. And, top political adviser Charlie Black, who was the head of a Washington lobbying firm, has resigned from that firm. McCain defends both of them, saying they've been "out of" the lobbying business.

When asked if he was worried about all the departures, McCain said his campaign's new conflict of interest policy should solve the problem.

He better hope it does. Of the latest resignation, Barack Obama said, "It appears McCain is very much a creature of Washington"... which doesn't represent the kind of change Americans are looking for. The McCain campaign shot back saying it looks forward to a debate about Obama's associations and what they say about his judgment, pointing to people like William Ayers, a former member of the radical Weather Underground group.

Here’s my question to you: What does it mean when five John McCain campaign aides have resigned in a week because of lobbying ties?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

Posted by
Filed under: 2008 Election • John McCain
May 19th, 2008
02:17 PM ET

What does 72,000 at Obama rally mean for GOP?

ALT TEXT
Barack Obama spoke to an estimated 72,000 people on Sunday in Portland, Oregon. (PHOTO CREDIT: AP PHOTO)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Barack Obama was a part of something pretty amazing yesterday – an event that looked more like a Rolling Stones concert than a political rally.

Obama drew the largest crowd of his campaign so far in Oregon, estimated at about 72,000 people. The pictures look like Woodstock, with cheering supporters going on and on as far as the eye can see.

"Wow, wow, wow” is how Obama summed it up when he got on stage and checked out the crowd. Tens of thousands crammed into a riverside park... with another 15,000 left outside.

Obama has achieved many "firsts" in this presidential campaign: the first African-American with a serious shot at his party's nomination, the first candidate in a long while to mobilize this nation's youth and get them to the polls, and now crowds that could fill a football stadium.

Obama says he's planning to go to Iowa to await the results of tomorrow's primaries because "it would be a terrific way to bring things full circle". Of course, the Iowa caucus is where he scored his first big win over Hillary Clinton. He says if things go "as we hope” after Oregon and Kentucky vote, he'll have a majority of pledged delegates which would be a "pretty significant mark."

Obama insists he won't be declaring victory at that point, but it does bring him one step closer to being the Democrats' nominee for president. In the meantime, his campaign has already stepped up attacks on John McCain – primarily tying him to President Bush, and has sent teams into battleground states hoping to sign up millions of Democrats in the next 6 months.

Here’s my question to you: What message does it send the GOP when 72,000 people show up for a Barack Obama campaign rally?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

Posted by
Filed under: 2008 Election • Barack Obama • John McCain
May 16th, 2008
05:59 PM ET

GOP targeting Michelle Obama?

ALT TEXT
Click the Play Button to see what Jack and our viewers had to say. (PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

The Tennessee Republican Party has set its sights on Michelle Obama – the wife of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.

A new web video highlights her controversial comment earlier this year, saying she was proud of America "for the first time in my adult life." Obama later clarified the remark saying she meant she was proud of how Americans were engaging in the political process, and that she was always proud of her country.

Nonetheless, the GOP video replays her remark six times and mixes in commentary by people who live in Tennessee on why they're proud of America. The party says it's always been proud of this country, and it requested that state radio stations play patriotic music in honor of Michelle Obama's visit there yesterday.

The Obama campaign calls the attack "shameful”. It says that the Republican Party's "pathetic" attempts to use similar smear tactics have already failed in elections in Mississippi and Louisiana, and will fail again in November. The campaign calls on the Tennessee Republican Party to address Senator Obama directly next time, instead of going after his family.

Meanwhile, it's not the first time the GOP in Tennessee has made waves. Earlier this year, in a truly low-rent stunt, it used Barack Obama's middle name "Hussein" in a news release questioning his support of Israel and showing a photo of him wearing what it called "Muslim attire." The Republican National Committee denounced that piece of garbage.

Here’s my question to you: Is it a good strategy for Republicans to go after Michelle Obama?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

Posted by
Filed under: Elections • GOP • Michelle Obama
May 16th, 2008
05:05 PM ET

Will gay marriage be a factor in prez race?

ALT TEXT
California's Supreme Court ruled that gay couples in the nation's biggest state can marry. (PHOTO CREDIT: AP PHOTO)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

There's a chance the issue of gay marriage could make an appearance in yet another election cycle.

The ruling by California's Supreme Court yesterday to overturn the ban on same-sex marriage has put the issue back in the political spotlight. It's something the three presidential candidates pretty much agree on. John McCain, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton all oppose gay marriage – saying marriage should be between a man and a woman. They also say it should be up to the individual states to decide.

In 2004, Republicans used the issue of gay marriage to get socially conservative voters to come out and support President Bush in the battleground state of Ohio. But four years later it's very much an open question whether voters facing a shaky economy, skyrocketing gasoline prices, an ongoing war in Iraq will even make gay marriage a priority.

One Republican strategist told The New York Times, "At best, it doesn't move voters, and at worst for Republicans, it works against them." He says the GOP could face a backlash for focusing on gay marriage when there is so much more at stake. A gay rights group also says it doesn't see this being "the same kind of issue that it was in 2004."

A poll taken last fall found that 55% of those surveyed said gay marriage would be not at all important or not too important in their vote for president. And that was before gasoline was flirting with $4 a gallon and the economy was staring at a recession.

Here’s my question to you: Will California's decision to legalize gay marriage be a factor in the presidential election?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

May 16th, 2008
02:01 PM ET

Slogan for Republican Party?

ALT TEXT

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

The Republicans are "busy dying” while the Democrats are "busy being born."

That's a stark assessment coming from Peggy Noonan in a column called "Pity Party" in today's Wall Street Journal.

Noonan paints a pretty bleak picture for the Republicans come November describing them as "frozen, not like a deer in the headlights but a deer in the darkness, his ears stiff" at the approaching sound of a hunting party.

In light of the string of GOP losses in special elections this spring, Noonan points to many party leaders in Washington she says are stupid and detached. She suggests that Republicans goofed big-time by not breaking on principle with the Bush administration on issues ranging from the Iraq war to immigration to government spending.

If the GOP had pushed back against President Bush in the last few years, Noonan says they could have separated the party's fortunes from the president's. She says it would have left the party broken, but not with a ruined "brand."

Speaking of branding, House Republicans say they have no plans to alter their new campaign slogan "Change you Deserve”. You know, the same one that's used to market the anti-depressant drug Effexor.

Minority Leader John Boehner says the slogan is "working out just fine." Really? For the Democrats, maybe. They're having a field day, saying that, "Democrats, not drugs, is what with American people need."

Here’s my question to you: What slogan would you pick for the Republican Party?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

Posted by
Filed under: GOP
May 15th, 2008
05:21 PM ET

Should speed limit be lowered to 55 mph?

ALT TEXT
Click the Play Button to see what Jack and our viewers had to say.(PHOTO CREDIT: AP PHOTO)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Gasoline prices rose to a record today – for the 8th day in a row. The AAA says the national average for a gallon of regular unleaded is now $3.78. That's a 12% increase in just the last month. $4 a gallon is clearly in sight now, and if some experts are right, it could go a lot higher.

Surveys show that drivers have been changing their habits in order to cut fuel costs. They're doing things like shopping for cheaper gas or putting less in the tank instead of filling up. But how about slowing down?

Cars are most fuel efficient when driven between 30 mph and 60 mph. Above 65 mph, mileage drops sharply. This isn't rocket science. If drivers are forced to slow down, we would all use less gasoline. And if demand went down, prices might just follow.

One expert says reducing highway speeds from 70 mph to 60 mph would reduce gasoline consumption between 2% and 3%. That could translate into a price reduction of as much as 10%. At today's price, almost 38 cents a gallon.

This is exactly what happened in 1974 during the Middle East oil embargo. President Nixon and Congress imposed a national speed limit of 55 mph. Congress repealed the national speed limit law in 1995, and today there are 32 states with speed limits of 70 mph or higher. In Texas, you can even drive 80 mph on some roads.

But there doesn't appear to be much interest in Congress for a new national speed limit. John McCain and Hillary Clinton would rather pander to voters with the idea of a three-month vacation from the 18 cents a gallon federal gas tax which will never happen. And if it did, would save drivers a whopping 70 bucks.

Here’s my question to you: Should the highway speed limit be lowered to 55 mph to conserve gasoline?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

Posted by
Filed under: Oil Prices • Speed Limit
May 15th, 2008
05:00 PM ET

Should Republicans run away from McCain?

ALT TEXT

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

John McCain peered into the future this morning... delivering a speech that looked ahead to what the U.S. and the world would be like in 4 years, after the first term of a McCain presidency.

Some of the highlights: he thinks the Iraq war will be won, Iraq will be a functioning democracy and violence there will be "spasmodic and much reduced." McCain believes the U.S. will have welcomed home most of its troops. He thinks the threat from al Qaeda and the Taliban won't yet be eliminated – even though bin Laden will be captured or killed. It's a pretty bold move to lay out objectives like this – gives critics a lot to measure you against.

In any case, John McCain seems to be one of the few things Republicans have going for them this fall. After a string of GOP defeats in special elections, many are hoping that the maverick appeal of McCain will help other Republicans on the ballot. This is all kind of ironic, when you consider the Arizona senator has been at odds with his own party for years on issues like immigration, campaign finance reform and global warming.

But Republicans are facing a dismal scenario. One GOP congressman is calling this year's political atmosphere "the worst since Watergate" adding "the Republican brand is in the trash can... if we were dog food, they would take us off the shelf."

Some folks are predicting Republicans could come out of November with a 70 seat deficit in the House alone.

Here’s my question to you: Should Republicans facing congressional races in November run away from – or run with – John McCain?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

Posted by
Filed under: Congress • GOP
May 15th, 2008
02:17 PM ET

How does Edwards’ endorsement affect Dems’ nomination battle?

ALT TEXT
(PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

John Edwards has joined the growing chorus of voices who think the Democratic nomination battle is all over.

In his endorsement of Barack Obama yesterday, Edwards emphasized that it's time for the party to come together behind Obama. The timing of Edwards' endorsement was absolutely perfect. At a rally of more than 12,000 cheering Obama supporters, it was a masterstroke that literally wiped Clinton's big West Virginia headlines out of the news.

And, there's already some pay-off for Obama. He's now picked up eight of Edwards' 19 delegates. This puts him 180 delegates ahead of Clinton and just 127 short of clinching the nomination.

Edwards' endorsement goes a long way toward quieting the voices that say Obama can't win working-class, blue-collar voters. This is Edwards' constituency. Edwards has particular credibility on "issues of poverty and the plight of working people."

Actually, Obama may not need as much help among these working-class voters as some people think. Today, the United Steelworkers union – all 600,000 of them – endorsed Obama. It's another big loss for Senator Clinton as she had been aggressively seeking their endorsement.

And finally, Obama picked up three more superdelegates today – two of them influential members of Congress. Henry Waxman heads up the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and Howard Berman, who chairs the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Here’s my question to you: How does John Edwards' endorsement of Barack Obama affect the Democratic primary race?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

Posted by
Filed under: 2008 Election • Barack Obama • John Edwards
« older posts
newer posts »