The Obama Photo Album

So the big buzz going around political circles today is that there is a ‘bad’ photo being circulated of Barack Obama. It shows him dressed as … well … this; wearing a traditional Somali outfit. It’s not that the photo is bad or anything, it’s that the photo has popped up on a website that claims Obama is a Muslim. Of course, he isn’t, but it’s another malicious rumour that the Clinton campaign started up a while ago, and the feed the flames every now and then.

Now, it’s not as bad as claiming Obama is the Antichrist – something that Ninglun has blogged about previously. No, he didn’t make the claim, he merely pointed out the stupidity of (and scariness of) the claim. And he has found success with that post. There have been some real loonies commenting on that post. Check them out if you have a firm grip on reality. But it really goes to the heart of some of the stupid rumours and claims that get spread, born through fear and fueled by hate.

Anyway, this photo has been connected with the ‘Muslim rumour’, and the Obama campaign has gone up in arms about it. They say that it’s vilification, fear mongering, and bad politics. They even said that it was:

“The most shameful, offensive fear-mongering we’ve seen from either party in this election.”

And that’s a big call, because it includes all the crud that the Republicans threw at one-another. But it’s true. The Clinton campaign (who, let’s face it, have done this) has carried out the worst and lowest trick to date with this.

But I was alarmed by something else. It wasn’t all this; it wasn’t that vicious and flagrant lies were being propagated by a campaign team. No, it was that in searching for a copy of that now infamous photo, I found actual disturbing and worrying photos. They were accompanied with facts. No lies, no attacks, no smears. Facts. And I was shocked at where they had come from. They hadn’t been leaked by some Clinton cronies, or by the Republican attack dogs. They had come straight out of the Obama campaign. Straight from Obama himself! It was worrying for me, a staunch supporter of Obama.

What photos am I talking about? I’m talking about really bad photos like this:

Obama had an afro!!! An afro! What was he thinking? It might have been the ‘it’ think back then, but didn’t he think that doing something like that would come back to haunt him one day!? But wait! You think that it’s just one photo? Check this out:

He had an afro guys!!! Did he had the comb stuck into it it like typical 70’s stereotypes? Platform shoes? A purple suit? Maybe he even walked around with one of those monster boom-boxes (a.k.a. ghetto-blasters) back in the day.

Now we know that yearbook photos are never good, and I guess that Barack Barry Obama wasn’t immune. But you would have though with age that he would have wisened up. But no. Even later on, his afro-tendencies were still lingering:

But of all the photos I found, none, including the Somali outfit one, would be as embarrassing as this:

Or any others that show you getting along with the most repugnant and disgusting of opposing candidates. I think Obama would rather have the afro pictures thrown instead of those that show him and Clinton smiling together. I know I’d rather it. Maybe I should skip that haircut tomorrow …

Thomas.

New banner

Look up and you’ll see the new banner. This time, a cricketing theme. After the Australian team won their 3rd, yes, their 3rd, World Cup, they came home to a very welcoming reception. The gathering would occur at Martin Place, and there was expected to be a throng of people. I went in with Andrew, who wasn’t working at the time. At the time, I blogged something quick about going in.

I took my camera in, expecting to get at least one good photo. We arrived at least an hour early to find the place, not stand there for so long. But when we got there, we saw that we’d be at least 4 deep if we started standing around then and there. So we stood around for a while. The rest of day’s adventures are blogged about here. A good read, if I do say so.

Anyway, I thought that seeings cricket is the flavour of the month, what with O.D.I. finals coming up, and the Indian cricket league taking up column inches, I’d jump on the bandwagon. I also liked the photo quite a bit. I have another one, with a whole heap of confetti, but when I cut it down to banner size, it wasn’t as good.

So that’s the new banner.

Thomas.

Polls and statistics – TX, OH, VT, RI

Monday comes to an end in the U.S., and the latest rounds of polls have been released concerning the major races that are likely to decide the future of the Democratic race. Texas and Ohio, with their large delegate counts, are the two states that will determine if the Democratic primaries will continue past March 4th or not. The theory goes that if Hillary Clinton doesn’t win both Texas and Ohio, and by significant margins of 10% or more, then she should drop out of the race because no one can foresee her catching Barack Obama on the delegate count. If she loses one, or both, everyone is saying she should (and will) pull out. That’s why the states will decide the future of the race.

There are two other states voting on the same day – Vermont and Rhode Island. Since South Carolina, when Obama became a main player in the race, Vermont was ruled his, and Rhode Island Clinton’s. Nothing’s changed from the looks of things in the latest polls. The latest polls for the state show big leads for their expected winners. Rasmussen has Rhode Island reporting in with a 15% lead for Clinton – 53% to Obama’s 38%. As for Vermont, Rasmussen has Obama up by a huge 24% – 57% to Clinton’s 33%. Expect both candidates to come out even when only these two states are added together. Vermont has 15 delegates tied to the vote, Rhode Island 21. Taking the numbers in the polls, Clinton wins Rhode Island with 12 delegates, leaving Obama 9, while Obama wins Vermont with 9, leaving Clinton 6. That’s 18 a piece.

So we return to Texas and Ohio to make the real and substantive difference for the day. Remembering that Clinton needs to win both by large margins, we turn to the polls. Ohio is up first. And it’s a confusing race going on there. A blue-collar worker state that favours Clinton more than Obama. From the 28th of January, 2007, to the 13th of February, 2008, Clinton had posted double-digit leads on Obama in every poll to be taken in the state. No if’s or but’s. Then it slowly started to get pegged in. 9%, 8%, then 7% leads were the trend. Now her average lead is at 8.3% – Clinton on 49.6%, Obama on 41%.

American Research Group conducted a rather in-depth poll on Ohio voters for the upcoming vote. They had Clinton up by 10% – 49% to 39%. This lead came off the back of women voters by their numbers, in which Clinton was leading 56% to 31% – a big lead in that demographic this late in the race. Obama was still leading among the men though – 49% to 37%. Contrast this to PPP’s latest poll in which that company puts the race at a much closer juncture – 50% for Clinton, 46% for Obama. That, in terms of delegates awarded, is a tie.

Quinnipiac has the race at an 11% Clinton lead in the state – 51% to 40%. But the rundown of their poll felt the need to stress that Obama has been making significant progress in Ohio. They pointed out that the numbers on February 14 were 55% to 34% (a 21% lead) Clinton’s way. Effectively, they say, Obama has cut his deficit in half, and if the current trend continues, then it could turn out a delegate tie. On the whole, they are preempting the poll PPP released – a 71 to 70 delegate split either way. If that’s what happens, then it might be redundant to take a look at Texas.

But I’m going to anyway. Why? Because in the latest rounds of polling has Obama winning! Winning in the biggest Southern state available. Winning in Texas, where he has only led in one other poll, that being back on the 14th of February. The first poll released was by Rasmussen again, and that had Clinton up by 1% – a statistical tie when the error rate is +/- 4%. The raw numbers for that were 46% to 45%. This follows up Rasmussen’s poll released over the weekend that had Clinton up by just 3%.

Then the polls started coming in that had Obama up. CNN had Obama up by 4% – 50% to 46%. CNN listed that main factor of change (a 6% difference from their last poll, where Obama trailed by 2%) as the Democratic debate in Austin last week. American Research Group then had Obama up by a huge 8% – 50% to 42%. Apparently, too, these numbers haven’t calculated in the early voting that Texas has. It’s hard to understand, but in essence, you can vote early on paper, and then turn up to the caucus meetings that are being held on March 4 and vote for Obama again. For this early voting, the numbers, so far, and rumoured to being going heavily Obama’s way. Some polls indicate as much as 30% of the prospective voters have already voted early, and that number can still grow. Obama has also romped home in: a) caucuses; b) red states, and; c) red states with caucuses. His chances, then, of turning Texas into a large delegate win without a vote percentage lead that reflects it is good.

The American Research Group poll, that has Obama up by 8%, says that his numbers come from demographics. While Clinton has a narrow lead among Democratic voters in Texas, Obama absolutely walks it in with Republican voters (who can vote in the Democratic primaries) and Independents – 71% to 25%. Also, Clinton’s lead has narrowed among the Hispanic voters – down to 40% from 50%. Number-crunchers say that she needs to get well past the 60% mark with the ‘Latino’ vote if she is to stand any chance in Texas. This is because Obama’s numbers among African-America voters stands at an unprecedented 83% to 9%. Seeings as how this is the first race of its kind, no one really knows how to predict the ‘Latino’ and ‘black’ votes. The size of the demographics can swing the polls, and thus the vote, should one come out and the other note. While the African-American population in Texas is put at 11%, the Hispanic or Latin-American figure is at 32%, with 54% reporting as ‘White’. The groundwork is there for Obama to win, but it will be contingent on a few things.

Because of these numbers, it will be easy to predict what Obama will be doing in terms of campaigning. Knowing that he currently has enough votes in Ohio to force a ‘tie’ (or at least not a substantial gain of delegates for Clinton), will lose Rhode Island, but win Vermont anyway, he may focus everything on Texas to turn that into a delegate win for him, and put the final nail in Clinton’s campaign. Similarly, if he doesn’t think he can turn Ohio into a win, but can enforce the tie, then he may just camp out in Texas until the 4th to ensure the final blow to Clinton. Splitting the day in terms of states won, but winning on the delegate count, will receive a lot of media coverage. And with speculation already running rampant that Clinton is close to conceding, this will put even more pressure on her to drop out the race.

And that’s nothing compared to the pressure the Democratic party ‘elders’ will put on her to drop out should she lose March 4. Because anything less than double-digit wins in Ohio, Texas, and Rhode Island is a loss for her.

Thomas.

Misleading headlines

When I was checking out Google News this morning (as I always do), I was intrigued to see the headlines ‘Cuba’s Ruling Communists Shore Up Power‘. With a headline like that, I expected something like this to be happening. I thought that maybe it was a ‘communist thing’. Of course, the article just listed business as usual in Cuba.

Another misleading headline was ‘Aust-India saga takes new turn‘. Here’s me thinking that maybe India had got over being a half-decent team and sucked it up. You know, acted a little tougher on the field and traded in their glass jaws. But the truth is that the ’saga’ hasn’t taken a new turn. The headline should read ‘Indian Cricket Team: Waa Waa Waa!”. What a joke that team has turned into here.

Thomas.