Raising Kaine endorses Barack Obama for President

By: Rob
Published On: 2/6/2008 1:00:00 AM

While it's no secret that there are a number of Barack Obama supporters on this website, this support has been unofficial. Until now.  

Raising Kaine is now officially endorsing Barack Obama for President and encourages all Virginians to vote for him in the Commonwealth's presidential primary this Tuesday, February 12, 2008. This endorsement is based on the unanimous support among the Raising Kaine editors as well as overwhelming support from our community.  

All of us are supporting Obama for different reasons, whether it's his strong consistent position against the war, his progressive stance on immigration, his strong pro-choice record, his devotion to civil rights and liberties, his strong cross-over appeal to independents and disaffected Republicans (especially in Virginia), his ability to unite the country, or something else about his wisdom, progressive positions, or character.  
However, all of these reasons thread into one key theme: change.  Barack Obama is our best hope for moving the country and the world in a new direction, past the partisan bickering and  adherence to the "conventional wisdom" way of thinking.

In addition, we believe that Obama is best suited to win Virginia this year for the Democrats. As we all know, Virginia is trending Democratic in recent years, a candidate that has exhibited true cross-over appeal and strength in the states won by the GOP in recent years will have a strong chance in the Commonwealth. We believe that person is Obama, while we believe that Clinton will not be able to make the same appeal (especially with  her potential weakness with independents   while she energizes the conservative base against her).

We will continue posting about news, events, and volunteer opportunities.  Also, we'll be adding an Obama button on the main page where we'll aggregate this sort of information so that it'll be easy to find.

Hopefully, we will be your "Obama Central" in Virginia this week. Clinton supporters are certainly welcome to continue being a part of our community -- our diaries and comments are open to fair posts by all. However, we encourage all Virginians to vote for Barack Obama next week for President.  

Comments



I agree (mikeporter - 2/6/2008 11:49:26 AM)
It is also worth noting that Virginians do not register by party, which allows independents to vote in either primary. That should help Obama, but it complicates all campaigns' efforts to target and predict likely voters, especially among newcomers.


That might have been a problem (LAS - 2/6/2008 12:28:53 PM)
if we didn't also have a Republican primary going on. I'd say any potential spoilers would rather vote in their own party's primary than come over and play in our sandbox.

The true independents--that's another story.

This is fun, isn't it? I wish we'd had something like this in '04--then maybe Wes Clark would have had a chance.  



Delegate Totals a Dead Heat: HRC ~1145 - BHO ~1075 (The Grey Havens - 2/6/2008 11:51:00 AM)
*** A Split Decision: The Clinton and Obama campaigns engaged in a furious game of spin before Super Tuesday, but Obama might have put it best when he said on TODAY and Morning Joe yesterday that it would end up being a split decision. In fact, after they traded state after state last night, it reminded us of "Rocky I" -- lots of drama, lots of punches landed and received, and ultimately a draw. And just like with that movie, we're now headed to a sequel to find a true winner. It looks like Obama, by the narrowest of margins, won last night's delegate hunt. By our estimates, he picked up 840 to 849 delegates versus 829-838 for Clinton; the Obama camp projects winning by nine delegates (845-836). He also won more states (13 to Clinton's eight; New Mexico is still outstanding), although she won the most populous ones (California and New York). And Obama's argument that he might be the most electable Democrat in a general election was bolstered by the fact that he won nine red states versus four for Clinton. Yet with Clinton's overall superdelegate lead (259-170, based on the lists they've released to us), and when you toss in the 63-48 lead Obama had among pledged delegates going into Super Tuesday, it appears Clinton has about 70 more overall delegates than Obama does (1140-1150 for Clinton versus 1070 to 1080 for Obama). It's that close, folks...


Link? (Lowell - 2/6/2008 11:52:41 AM)
n/t


I don't think I acutally have one... (The Grey Havens - 2/6/2008 12:12:48 PM)
It's from an email list...
It's from Chuck Todd on MSNBC

Let me see if they have it online.

ahh... here goes.



I've heard Hillary is trying to get the Florida and Michigan delegates seated (Rebecca - 2/6/2008 12:14:00 PM)
This is disgusting. She just can't seem to play by the rules. If she is nominated we can expect the signing statements to continue.

Every time I think I might decide to like her I read something like this and am turned off all over again.



That's called CHEATING (Lowell - 2/6/2008 12:16:17 PM)
If she tries that, there's going to be a major revolt, that's all I can say.  Dirty, dirty, dirty.


Blitzer pushing that line yesterday with Dean (WillieStark - 2/6/2008 12:32:17 PM)
He was arguing with Dean telling him that he should basically seat those delegates. That he should seat at least half the delegates from MI and FL.


It isn't cheating (aznew - 2/6/2008 12:55:57 PM)
If the party changes its mind and decides to seat those delegates, that's up to the party.

Asking for it is not cheating. I would say it falls more under the category of working the refs. But reasonable mind, I guess, can differ on that.

But that said, I don't think launching a controversial credentials fight would be productive at all. Were she to ask, and were the delegates to be seated, I could understand why Obama supporters would be livid.

But even so, here we are, with Obama supporters getting all ticked-off at Clinton not for something she actually did, but for something they heard she might do.



It would be extremely divisive (Lowell - 2/6/2008 1:07:29 PM)
and also not something the candidates should get involved in. This is a matter for the national party to work out with the states in question.  But the bottom line is this: you do NOT change the rules in the middle of the game. Period.


Ah, the lovely primary process (TheGreenMiles - 2/6/2008 1:12:00 PM)
Once the '08 elections are over, can we blow up the primary process? Between having tiny, homogeneous states like IA and NH go first and messy fights over whose delegates get seated, I'd love for all this to be an excuse to start over.


This is called "democracy" (Lowell - 2/6/2008 1:13:31 PM)
Would you rather go back to smoke-filled rooms?  Remember, primaries were put in place as an antidote to smoke-filled rooms and to encourage popular participation.  Well, this year we've seen MILLIONS of people go to the polls, tremendous interest and enthusiasm for the candidates, and a vigorous debate on the issues.  Actually, I WOULD call that "lovely," but not in a sarcastic way.


Agreed. (Rutchy - 2/6/2008 1:49:53 PM)
IA, NH and SC cut a strong Democratic field down to a mere two  contenders before the rest of us even had a say.  Why the party felt so compelled to leave IA and NH in first place - even to the point of denying MI and FL delegates - is beyond me.


I sorta agree (Scripple - 2/6/2008 1:08:33 PM)
Let's not get spun up into a tizzy about something that hasn't happened yet.

That being said, if Florida and Michigan want delegates sat at the DNC in Denver, they ought to have caucuses sometime this spring or summer.  There's still time for them to play by the rules!

I found it surprising that some of the CNN people last night were saying that the biggest losers last night were Democrats in Michigan and Florida. They said something along the lines of: "Look at how important these contests coming up will be! Imagine how influential Florida and Michigan could have been if they had played by the rules!"



I don't find that surprising at all.... (Doug in Mount Vernon - 2/6/2008 1:19:32 PM)
....because the commentators are absolutely correct.


You're not kidding Lowell (Doug in Mount Vernon - 2/6/2008 1:18:25 PM)
If I am an Obama delegate at the convention, and I hope to be, then I think that kind of dirty trick will make the convention very, very divisive, and end up hurting the party.


From the Obama campaign (soccerdem - 2/6/2008 2:17:34 PM)
Let's look at this from the Detroitnews.com

Obama campaign manager David Plouffe repeated the campaign's position that the Michigan and Florida contests will have no role in choosing the nominee, though he left open the possibility that Obama would support seating the delegations if he enters this summer's convention in Denver as the clear nominee.

So is Obama saying that rules can be broken?  

Punishment should be punishment, shouldn't it?



Once there's a clear nominee, (Lowell - 2/6/2008 2:37:39 PM)
WHOEVER that is, my guess is that some way will be found to seat the Florida and Michigan delegations. Again, that way must be found by the DNC and the states in question, but it's hard to believe that, in the end, Florida and Michigan will be excluded from participating in the Democratic convention (after the nominee is decided).


It's called a ground war (The Grey Havens - 2/6/2008 1:50:14 PM)
Obama needs to Lawyer up.

I saw Dean on the bobble-head talkies last night dodging the question of those delegates.  He wants to leave it up to some committee.

Bet your @$$ that the Clintons are doing everythign they can to own that committee.

James Boyce wrote about this yesterday...

Check it: here.

it seems virtually impossible that the campaign will end until the last superdelegate is counted. And they're not counted until the convention, but before we go there, consider the other possible problems looming.

In Nevada, and other states I presume, the state convention can impact and alter the final delegates to the National Convention.

We still have the Michigan and Florida problem (Note to Obama supporters, you better have enough delegates to win with those counting for Hillary, trust me on this. In fact, lawyer up now.)

Some superdelegates seem to think they should vote as their state voted, others could care less. A few superdelegates could be replaced at state conventions that happen between now and the convention.




Let's hope this isn't an issue (Newington VA - 2/6/2008 2:40:45 PM)
An explanation of the process here.  Key grafs:
A spokesman for the national party said that any speculation about resolving the issue is premature. "Any issues around the seating of delegates will be resolved by the Convention Credentials Committee. The full committee has yet to be appointed and will not meet until later this summer," said DNC spokesman Damien LaVera.

Under party rules, the credentials committee will have 186 members - 25 appointed by national party chairman Howard Dean and the rest allocated based on the breakdown of delegates per state won by the candidates in each primary or caucus.

If Clinton has the votes to force the party to seat the MI and FL delegations, then she already will have the votes to win the nomination outright without those delegates.  And if she doesn't have the votes to win outright without them, chances are very good the Credentials Committee won't be comprised of people sympathetic to her.  

Of course, if it's really close, and seating the two delegations would tip the scales, that would be a brawl, and I would hope the grown-ups, the superdelegates, would step in to prevent Team Clinton's battering ram mentality from fracturing the party.



Reston Volunteers (FishHead Dem - 2/6/2008 12:23:54 PM)
Organizing in the Reston community is going quickly. There are some efforts that will begin on Friday and will go right through election day. If anyone is interested, I can post the contact info.


Please do. (Rob - 2/6/2008 3:19:47 PM)


Obama Ground Efforts in Reston (FishHead Dem - 2/6/2008 3:28:57 PM)
The contact is Pat Hynes who can be reached at 703-209-9695 or fairfaxforobama@aol.com.

Canvassing will begin on Friday and will be headquartered at Brown's Chapel just off the corner of Baron Cameron and Whiele beginning at 9 AM. Pat can let you know of other locations up until Tuesday.



Yay! (Dan - 2/6/2008 12:31:03 PM)
He only lost by 10 in California.  He may have won 14 states to Hillary's 8, with New Mexico too close to call, but Obama in the lead!

If Hillary is the nominee, I will vote for her.  I like her, and think she would do a decent job.  I just think Obama will bring the country together.



Absentee ballots in California (Rebecca - 2/6/2008 12:37:16 PM)
There were 2.3 millions absentee ballots cast in California. I'm not sure how many were Democratic, but since they sent in before the Obama surge really took hold they probably don't reflect what the results would have been if these people had voted yesterday.

So basically, what I am saying is that the California results may well NOT represent the Obama surge.



COMMENT HIDDEN (SW Democrat - 2/6/2008 1:51:59 PM)


Boy, was that clever. (Lowell - 2/6/2008 1:58:18 PM)
I'll tell ya, you really dinged us good there!  Ha.


Today in Obamalexandria (pvogel - 2/6/2008 2:09:25 PM)
My neighbor, never  having any Yard signs before, knocked on my door asking about Obama signs.One for her, one for her sister in stafford.

I gave them to her. My job is easy this week!!!



Can you post some more info ... (Rob - 2/6/2008 3:20:33 PM)
... about how people can get involved in the campaign, including getting yard signs?


It is Important (RuralD - 2/6/2008 2:12:29 PM)
for Obama supporters to know the fact that Obama and Clinton essentially tied the popular vote:

http://www.wftv.com/politics/1...

"Clinton picked up at least 584 Democratic delegates -- including caucus states -- and got more than 7.2 million votes. Obama got 563 delegates based 7.1 million votes, based on results from CNN.com on Wednesday morning.

That's 50.4 percent for Clinton and 49.6 percent for Obama."

We  of course are hearing that Clinton won the primary Democratic states and Obama won in the red caucus states that we will never win in.

Well as you can see the popular vote was a tie.  Not to mention the fact that Obama won the indipendents by huge margins:

In NY by 15!

In CA by 30!

In MO by 37!

Now if you conisder that both canidates are well liked by Democrats (both have approval ratings in the 70s) winning in Democratic states is like getting your mom to vote for you . . . what is important are the indipendents, they are what is gonig to swing this election in the battle ground states.

These are important facts.  Someone please make a diary out of them, I already made my diary for the day.



sorry (RuralD - 2/6/2008 2:14:55 PM)
for the spelling mistakes . . . on a very slow computer and dialup at the moment.


I think the popular vote was more of a mixed bag (aznew - 2/6/2008 2:41:21 PM)
If you eliminate the four states the Democrats are unlikely to carry - Alabama, Georgia, Oklahoma and Utah, the popular vote in the remaining states was about 52-48 Clinton's way.

If you then eliminate the states Democrats are more than likely to carry -- Cal., Conn., Del., Ill., Mass., NJ, NY Okla., and Utah, it leaves four potential toss up states -- Arizona, Ark., Mo., and Tenn. In those states, Clinton won the popular vote 55-45.

Even if you remove Arkansas on the ground that it is a Clinton 'home' state, she still gets about 53% in those three swing states.  



Furthermore... (floodguy - 2/6/2008 2:44:10 PM)
I think you should extend this invitation to endorse Obama to the many disenchanted former Bush-voters, who are adamantly opposed to Hillary Clinton.  Many Republican & conservatives think an Obama v. any GOP'er general election is far better than a Clinton V. any GOP'er, which is why he has done far better in red and purple states than Clinton.  These developements are perplexing and may change the dynamics of politics from the blue versus red we saw develop during the Clinton-Bush candidacies.  Also, many voters on the right are seeking an element of change, just like many Democrats, and McCain, like Clinton, doesn't truly represent that change from what has taken place over the last 4 presidential terms.

One of the foundation blocks to change Obama speaks of, its the unity and coming together of America, by Americans from all walks of life, race, culture, income and political standing.  If they take up the offer to supplant Clinton from the nomination for Obama, these disenchanted former Bush voters will in turn give an ear to Obama down the road.  Some or many may indeed stick with Obama and not side with a McCain-Lieberman (of similar) ticket, paving the way for an Obama Presidential candidacy.



Obama opposes Mountaintop Removal in VA! (faithfull - 2/6/2008 2:51:40 PM)
He said so in DC and KY. We need to have him talking about this issue when he comes to Virginia this week. Mountaintop removal is absolutely wrecking havoc on SWVA, harming the economy, communities, and environment along with it.

Here's hoping Obama makes his opposition to mountaintop removal a big deal in Virginia!



disappointed (jasonVA - 2/6/2008 3:09:42 PM)
I haven't decided whom I support yet - I like both HRC and Obama.  But I am extremely disappointed that RaisingKaine is making this endorsement or any endorsement for that matter.  I think Kos made a much better decision in not endorsing anybody.

I have enjoyed this website as some of the best reading for Virginia Democrats.  However, the anti-Clinton stuff here over the past few weeks has become a real turn off though.  And I hate to see this site contributing to the borderline ludicrous Obama hype going on at that moment.  

Good luck with the website. I'll check back in 2009.



Markos endorsed Obama (Rob - 2/6/2008 3:22:43 PM)
And his front pagers made individual endorsements.  

I hope you come back when the nomination is decided.  That's when we all need to unify.



"However, the anti-Clinton stuff here over the past few weeks has become a real turn off though." (j_wyatt - 2/6/2008 4:24:32 PM)
Umm, perhaps that's because the Clintons are a big turn-off?

Her unapologetic vote for preemptive war plus her calculating embrace of the military industrial complex.

The People vs. Bush-Clinton-Clinton-Bush-Bush-Clinton-Clinton.

The People vs. corporate America.

New blood & fresh thinking vs. the 22nd Amendment.

Playing the race card.  Now it's Hispanics?

Electability vs. McCain.

Who is the best uniter/not a divider in terms of bringing in independents and Republicans?

Her freight train of personal/political baggage.

The 1990's redux would not just about bringing back all the good stuff from the '90's.

Billary vs. recasting the face America presents to the world.



I agee, Kaine should just be quiet (ssc - 2/7/2008 11:39:45 PM)
Endorsements don't make that much difference... Look at the Kennedys and HRC still took Mass...


Open borders and guest worker Visas is NOT Progressive (TurnVirginiaBlue - 2/6/2008 3:23:41 PM)
I'm truly disgusted by these claims.  Do you realize just how many people volunteering for the Webb campaign precisely over H-1B, L-1 guest worker Visas?  Do you realize that is precisely what "comprehensive" immigration reform means?

So, now you claim that all of these people, who worked their rear ends off should magically embrace a candidate who is going to enable global labor arbitrage on steroids?

That is just a true slap in the face and I'm plain sick of this.

That is not progressive.  To screw over so many workers by enabling unlimited H-1Bs, a new F-4 a H-2c and god knows what else is just not Progressive.



Reason for hope (FishHead Dem - 2/6/2008 3:48:39 PM)
As an Obama supporter, I was somewhat disappointed by the results last night. While they were good, I was really hoping to pull some big upsets. It just now seems that there is more work to be done.

This article in Politico gets me excited about what is in front of us...

http://www.politico.com/news/s...

Man...this is exausting...



Got big upsets in CT and MO. (Rob - 2/6/2008 4:34:29 PM)
Those were supposed to go for Hillary.  


True... (FishHead Dem - 2/6/2008 4:50:14 PM)
But I was really hoping for CA or NJ or Mass. In retrospect, there was a lot to overcome.

There was A LOT that was promising. The depth of his support and the spread accross the country was very encouraging. CT and MO (particularly MO) was fantastic.

I have gotten very gun shy about the upcoming weeks. The NH polls and results has me concerned. It was pointed out today (by Lowell, I believe) that the polls were very good yesterday. I would disagree to the extent that SOME of the polls were good, some were horrible (I believe that Zogby had him winning CA by double digits). Taken as a whole, it is easy to Monday morning QB, but on the day of the game, it really didn't help much.

So, don't worry about the polls...get the messege out...and let's win this thing!  



From what I understand there was an upset (Hugo Estrada - 2/7/2008 8:23:34 AM)
Right now the media is focusing on how the Latino vote was a firewall for Hillary. From what I understand, the vote didn't break out as solidly as she was hoping for.


still looking: a Republican willing to support Clinton (j_wyatt - 2/6/2008 5:22:38 PM)
Can someone somewhere come up with a single Republican who says they will vote for Senator Clinton?  (Someone other than Romney ... or Ann Coulter.)

Something like this:

Re: Saw it broadcast live
By Vivienne Today at 2:37 pm EST
This speech should be in a commercial. I have heard that this is not the time, I agree if not now when? The time is now. I am one of those over 60 Republians that want a better world for my grandchildren.

Go for it Senator Obama.
Re: Saw it broadcast live  
By Tracy 46 minutes ago
Hi Vivienne,

My Mom is another over 60 Republican supporting Obama. She drove 3 hours Monday to attend the Hartford rally with me. She got back home and called me today to tell me that a friend she has been giving information about Obama to and trying to get her in our camp ended up voting for Obama. This friend was firmly in the Clinton camp but got to the booth and switched at the last minute. So great!

http://my.barackobama.com/page...



Who Cares? (GeorgetownStudent - 2/6/2008 5:32:17 PM)
I like Kaine, but I'm still driving home on Tues to vote for Clinton. So is my mom, dad, and boyfriend.


Oops (GeorgetownStudent - 2/6/2008 5:35:05 PM)
Yeah I like the governor but his endorsement didn't effect me and neither will the endorsement of this blog. I don't think you guys needed to make an endorsement anyway. The blog turned from being interesting (what about actually covering the general assembly in detail, since we finally have a Dem. State Senate again) to basically being a mouthpiece of the Obama campaign.


Well, that is how democracy works (Hugo Estrada - 2/7/2008 8:57:11 AM)
GeorgetownStudent,

RK is a community blog of activists and soon-to-become activists. Its purpose is clearly political, and its goal, pretty much from day one (check the title of the blog), is to get people elected.

The site endorsing Obama at this point is little more than restating the obvious overwhelming support for Obama on this site. Even though the blog administrators had already endorsed Obama a month ago, they waited to handle an endorsement until most of the poll voting members made it clear that they supported Obama.

But you probably noticed that there are still strong Hillary supporters here. I don't know what other people think, but I believe that this is healthy for the site.

You too can become one of those Hillary supporters. :) As long as the discussion is civil, I would love to hear your opinions :)



Woohoo! (Will Write For Food - 2/6/2008 8:09:17 PM)
Whoever you support, remember to get out the vote next week! Especially those of you who may have thought yesterday was Virginia's primary election day ;)


Surprise! Surprise! n/t (totallynext - 2/6/2008 8:42:32 PM)


Washington State Caucus . . . (JPTERP - 2/7/2008 9:26:07 AM)
I haven't seen a formal poll yet for Saturday's contest, but if the head-to-head presidential match-ups from SurveyUSA are indicative, things are looking pretty good for Obama this Saturday.

http://www.surveyusa.com/elect...

McCain v. Clinton
McCain 53%
Clinton 43%
Undecided 5%

McCain v. Obama
Obama 55%
McCain 38%
Undecided 7%

Romney v. Clinton
Clinton 51%
Romney 41%
Undecided 8%

Romney v. Obama
Obama 61%
Romney 32%
Undecided 8%

In other words, in the head-to-head match-ups Obama is polling 10%-12% better than Clinton.  I'll be curious to see if the caucus results play out along similar lines.



Wow, those McCain-Clinton numbers (Lowell - 2/7/2008 9:30:06 AM)
are startling.  Could Clinton actually lose Washington State to McCain if she's the nominee?  What about other "blue" states, given that Washington's pretty darn blue?  Very troublesome.


Actually, those numbers don't look right to me (aznew - 2/7/2008 10:27:51 AM)
in the McCain v. Clinton matchup, if only because they add up to 101% (maybe a few Oregonians are sneaking across the state line :))

So I checked it out. McCain-Clinton are 46-46, with 8% undecided.

But I'm not too practiced at this stuff, so I may have it wrong.

Here is the link:

http://www.surveyusa.com/clien...

Anyway, the point holds that Obama is polling 10 points better than Clinton, though as I have said many times, I think this is somewhat deceptive in terms of measuring what will happen in the actual election. Should Obama be the nominee, expect that his support will come down once he he is subjected to months of negative GOP campaigning.

Clinton is a bit more inoculated from this, simply because she has already been on the receiving end of it for 17 years.



Correct . . . (JPTERP - 2/7/2008 11:02:54 AM)
The McCain v. Clinton numbers are Kentucky (unfortunately, SurveyUSA's pie-charts don't say which state they're in reference to -- I clicked a link for the wrong state on that one http://www.surveyusa.com/clien...

Correct numbers for Washington state are 46-46 with 8% undecided.

The range that we're looking at is 7-10% not 10-12%.