Clinton
Convention Floor Liveblog
3:30 There is going to be a full delegation tonight, and the word isn't completely out about what this blogger is doing here. Trying to explain that sitting near the DSL plug is what I am supposed to be doing.
Senator Clinton's name is being put into nomination.
Next to me they are setting the camera and microphone height to fit Pat Waak. It looks like she will be answer to the roll call. I am told to expect Colorado to be called "in the C's". We'll see if American's Abroad and American Samoa get their spots or if they jiggle that around at all.
Senator Obama is being nominated. Anyone want to take bets on the outcome?
Senator Salazar is seconding the nomination. After the jump there will be more including a picture of him with a large animal.
Signing My Support for Obama
At this morning's California delegation breakfast - a daily affair we hold with 1,000 of our closest friends - I officially signed my support for Senator Obama on the delegation whip sheet for tonight's roll call vote.
California is a state that Senator Clinton won handily in February (by about 10 points). The signatures on the sheet of paper I saw were all for Obama, two signatures were for Clinton.
Doing my best to make full use of all of the "tools" that have come in our delegation goody bags, I've pulled out the Magic 8 ball to seek its wisdom: are we on our way to unity? Signs point to
YES!
(and on a similar note, pedometer update from Tuesday: 10,041).
Virginia Woman to Speak at Convention Tonight
I am very proud to announce that my friend and fellow Blue Star Family Member for Obama, Beth Robinson, will be speaking at the Democratic National Convention tonight during the 9:00pm EDT hour. Beth lives in Chesapeake. She will be speaking primetime, after President Clinton and before Senator Kerry.
(The
(The following is an interview of Senator Joe Biden, conducted by Josh Marshall in early Summer 2004.)
Josh Marshall: There's several points I wanted to touch on, and a number of these -- if you can answer them descriptively, or prescriptively I'd be interested in both. One of the main points of the piece, a hypothetical Democratic administration 9 months from now, what the continuities and discontinuities would be with where Clinton left off in 2000. I mean obviously the chessboard has moved all around, and that's a given, but on an issue like North Korea, an issue like Iran, the Atlantic relationship and so forth, and broad kind of questions about how you mix diplomatic muscle and military force. What would you identify as the main continuities and main discontinuities? Again, either descriptively or prescriptively.
New York Times: Hillary Speech Partly Driven By Ambition
There's a bit of buzz this morning about the fact that anonymous Hillary advisers supposedly suggested to The New York Times that her speech last night was partly driven by the fact that she would run for president in 2012 should Obama lose, and to that end wanted to preserve goodwill within the party.
For instance, MSNBC's political team, headed by Chuck Todd (one of the best and fairest in the biz), wrote this morning that it was an example of her "staff" screwing her over by leaking stuff anonymously that trampled on the speech.
This strikes me as a major jumping of the gun, however. The Times passage in question, by Patrick Healy, reads:
Recent comments
1 year 43 weeks ago
1 year 51 weeks ago
2 years 1 day ago
2 years 13 weeks ago
2 years 37 weeks ago
2 years 46 weeks ago
2 years 46 weeks ago
2 years 48 weeks ago
2 years 51 weeks ago
3 years 5 days ago