Breaking News: Barack Obama surges to early lead in voting
Sen. Barack Obama surged into a large 3:1 lead in the first returns from very early Democratic Party primary voting.
In Indonesia.
Where Obama spent four years of his childhood.
At midnight Tuesday Jakarta time, about 100 members of Democrats Abroad began voting at the Marriott Hotel. Unofficial first returns gave Obama 75% of the vote to Hillary Clinton's 25%. "There is a bit of rooting for the hometown boy," Tristram Perry, a public diplomacy officer at the U.S. Embassy, told the Associated Press.
"It's the first time someone who grew up in Indonesia is running for president," he added. Probably a pretty safe statement.
Under a special Democratic Party arrangement, thousands of its voters can cast their ballots around the world in such places as a donut shop in Cambodia, a Starbucks in Thailand, a pub in Ireland and even online. Democrats Abroad will have 22 delegates and 11 votes at the August convention in Denver.
Republicans Abroad is less organized and unrecognized by that party. So it can only assist party members to write their home counties to obtain absentee ballots.
Some 6 million Americans living abroad are eligible to vote. But, alas, only a small fraction bother.
-- Andrew Malcolm








Hillary's Teary (second) moment was staged. How did the media miss this one? Same set up, intimate setting, close cameras, trigger question. "I said I would not cry." Hillary was coached on this event and was trying to create the New Hampshire moment again but this time with less success. However the blind naive media bought into it again. Trying to depict Hillary has the sensitive type when in fact this was all staged for the media gullible. HOW blind is the media? And how gullible is America to fall for this "cheap soap act again."
Posted by: spoon2456 | February 05, 2008 at 02:19 AM
Congratulations to Obama. You have won in Indonesia where you lived as a child and is the extent of your experience on foreign policy!!! How many delegates did you win there? After all, it's all about the delegates was the last I heard after Florida.
Posted by: mona | February 05, 2008 at 03:52 AM
I've read all of Hillary Clinton's extensive positions and policies posted on her web site, but how can I find Obama's?
Posted by: Lea Crozier | February 05, 2008 at 04:41 AM
Change by inspiration vs. change by action.
Have you ever been the most qualified person in your company or department, the one who makes things work, has the experience, has paid your dues, only to have a less experienced smooth talker whose good in meetings brought in as your boss?
Have you ever dated someone who is good with the gifts and candy and sweet talk only to find out years later that they aren't around when the garbage disposal breaks or you need someone to stand with you in a firestorm?
That's the difference I see between Obama and Clinton. Inspiration excites, but action lifts.
R. Powers
Michigan
Posted by: R. Powers | February 05, 2008 at 04:51 AM
As always, Spoon, no matter how hard the media tries to come across as objective, they have their agenda, their preferences. Especially in a race as controversial as this one is. The vast majority of Hillary supporters are in denial. What sane person with their eyes wide open wants Hillary and Bill back in the Oval Office; with her breaking down and crying every time things get a bit sad or emotional, and him giving her plenty to cry about on a regular basis?
Posted by: Daniel Walker | February 05, 2008 at 05:09 AM
The fact is that the ethnic origin of Kenyan people is at least 6% islamic. This derived from and earlier as 17th18thcentury at the time it was a colony of the "Sultan of Oman".
Oman is a country on the street of Hormus opposite of Iran and to the border of Saudi-Arabia.
So again,
Teacher speaks:
In the case the facts are correct and obamas ancestors came from Kenya, nobody shall forget that the muslim population is there around 6 %.
In the 17th\ 18 th century the islamic "Sultan of Oman" was ruling over the Africans in Kenya(Mombasa, Zansibar).
The arabic invaders were as well using and selling african people as slaves("saqualiba"arabic) in the eastafrican arabic slave trade until the British intervened.
So it is irritating that "african-americans" are voting for a person
who is wrongly seen as an african-american to be part of the same heritage in America the african-american community had to got through by the white plantage owners.
Posted by: Steven R Breitzke | February 05, 2008 at 06:10 AM
The chocking moment did work in New Hampshire, but not this time Hillary. Not in Super-Tsunamis-monster-duper- Tuesday !! Asta la Vista Baby !!
Posted by: Edward Chacha | February 05, 2008 at 06:28 AM
I hope my fellow latinos don't fall for the trap Obama set for us. Hillary is the only candidate that cares about us. He only came for us once he felt he needed our vote. Latinos - Vote Hillary for President!
Posted by: Juan | February 05, 2008 at 07:17 AM
As a Republican-leaning independent, I can tell you why I will vote for Barack Obama if he is the Democratic nominee but I will not vote for Hillary Clinton if she is the Democratic nominee.
Barack Obama's "purported" limited experience doesn't even register as a problem for me when I compare it with the problem I have with Hillary Clinton's character.
A person's character is shaped and tested by their experiences which is why our next President's character should matter as much if not more than their experience.
1969 - While Barack Obama was being raised by a single mother and experiencing a life of racial and cultural diversity in Indonesia, Hillary Clinton was learning the art of triangulation and writing an admiring college thesis on Saul Alinsky whose fifth rule of political agitation was, "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon."
1979 - While Barack Obama was actively involved in the South African divestment movement to end apartheid, Hillary was reaping profits of almost 10,000% in the futures markets and leaving taxpayers with her real-estate losses in the Savings & Loan bailout.
1989 - While Barack Obama served as the Harvard Law Review's first black president in its 104 year history, Hillary Clinton then wife of the Arkansas governor was receiving payments from a law firm that was doing the state's business and receiving board of director payments from Wal-Mart where she remained silent about Wal-Mart's anti-labor union practices.
1999 - While Barack Obama was securing bipartisan support for health-care reform and passage of low-income tax credits and child care subsidies in the Illinois legislature, Hillary Clinton was urging her husband to bomb Yugoslavia and supporting his Iraq "regime change" policy in order to divert public attention from the president's marital, legal and ethical infidelities.
2007 - While Barack was promoting a restoration of balance between work and wealth and criticizing special interests for distorting U.S. tax codes, Hillary and her husband were liquidating their blind trust of the nearly $50 million amassed during their years in public office.
Hillary Clinton's positions on the issues are all based on political expediency with the goal of being president. Like her husband, Hillary has no attachment to any position, no leadership qualities and no legal, ethical or moral compass to guide her. Also like her husband, she will need to rely on the polls to guide her to a position.
Barack Obama possesses the leadership, principles and visionary qualities of character needed to unite and not divide our country as the global economy teeters on the brink of economic meltdown not unlike the Great Depression.
Afterall the Roaring Twenties decade that preceded the Great Depression, like the Irrational Nineties that preceded our current decade, were both a golden age for technology, scandal-plagued politicians, corporate greed, and unrestrained personal debt and speculation.
Posted by: John Patrick Smith | February 05, 2008 at 07:25 AM
Mr/Ms. Spoon above me wants to again try to bring down Mrs. Clinton based on more media patronizing of her. Ho-hum. When you have nothing to run on you go to character assassination. I really looked at both candidates and was excited about this decision -- Mr. Obama and his truly hateful supporters made the choice so very easy for me. When you are all style and no substance this is what happens. We have seen the GOP do this for decades -- their policies corrupt so they just spread hate and innuendo about their opposition. Paul Krugman in the NY Times (a paper not as biased against the woman as the LA Times) has a great article today showing how Mrs. Clinton's is the only health plan to work and Obama has once again been lying and cheating on the facts with a Harry and Louise style attack. So much for the politics of hope! If he gets the nomination Hillary will suck it up and get to work getting him elected (not that he or his supporters will ever be thankful); if she gets the nomination these people are too small -- they will cry and scream and work for her defeat. My party has no place for this kind of cheap shots and ugliness. Go to the GOP, you have a home there.
Posted by: Brady | February 05, 2008 at 07:30 AM
Are you serious? This is the stupidest piece of non-news I have seen all year. I have faith, though, that America is not blind and can see right through the media propping a candidate. Maybe you should write 75 PEOPLE instead of 75%.
Posted by: Allison | February 05, 2008 at 08:01 AM
To the Undecideds and to Clinton Supporters,
i'm writing to ask that you cast your vote for Sen. Obama today. Sen. Clinton is talented and capable, but she simply will not grow the party as Obama has done. She will not maintain such high level of voter turnout as Obama has. Obama is not only inspirational, he has the smart, detailed policy proposals and the command of a bi-partisan consensus needed to get the policies past.
He will unite us, and he will excite us. This is not idealism - this unity and excitement are necessary to create policy in a bipartisan way and to enable our country to surmount the challenges we face.
This vote matters. We need Obama in office. Please make the courageous vote.
Thank you
Posted by: Mo | February 05, 2008 at 08:11 AM
Democrats abroad know Barack will be a better president than Billary and Michelle will be a wonderful first lady.
Posted by: David | February 05, 2008 at 08:17 AM
Democrats abroad know Barack will be a better president than Billary and Michelle will be a wonderful first lady.
Posted by: David | February 05, 2008 at 08:18 AM
Spoon,
Whatever the fork does, the spoon makes its own spin. Hillary is not entitled to any kind of opinion or emotion. I know you want Obama to win, but to tear up a democrat makes you unfit in the big umbrella of the party. Remember for Obama to win the general election, you need these Hillary votes. The biggest question is: can the rhetorics of a neophyte Obama stop Osama?
Posted by: Don G. | February 05, 2008 at 09:02 AM
Indonesia's got it right.
Although I admire and respect the Clintons, I firmly believe that Hillary cannot win in the general election because of her Bill Baggage. She galvanizes Republicans who otherwise might stay home, and she does not attract the necessary Independents and Swing voters required to take back the White House.
Barack Obama has the wide appeal necessary to beat McCain. Hillary, fair or not, does not. Obama is a brilliant man with a vision that unites -- and he is a great statesman. And, if you look closely at the policies of Clinton and Obama, they are virtually the same.
If you don't want another four years of a Republican in the White House, Obama 08 is the way to vote.
Posted by: Stacy Casillas | February 05, 2008 at 09:04 AM
Clinton focuses on economy in Presidential race Obama focuses on RACE! " Obama Trinity United Church of Christ, an African-American mega-church Black Value System" encourages blacks to group together and separate from the larger American society by pooling their money, patronizing black-only businesses and backing black leaders," Would Obama put African tribal or family interests ahead of U.S. interests?" Obama Trinity United Church of Christ, an African-American mega-church unorthodox pastor Reverend Jeremiah Wright describing the September 11 attacks as a “wake-up call” to America for ignoring the concerns of “people of colour”, and for claiming that Americans “believe in white supremacy and black inferiority . . . more than we believe in God”. Wright travelled to meet Muammar Gadaffi, the Libyan leader, in the 1980s with Louis Farrakhan, the black supremacist leader of the Nation of Islam, and subscribes to the “Black Values System”, which preaches self-reliance but claims “middle-classness” is ensnaring blacks. Reverend Jeremiah Wright went to Tripoli to visit Colonel Gadaffi with Farrakhan., Obama offers white voters a chance to free themselves from white guilt! ( unbelievable and he is running on uniting all people)
Posted by: Jack | February 05, 2008 at 10:53 AM
Senator Obama going to say to republicans when asked why he favors granting drivers' licenses to illegal immigrants as Obama has admitted twice in debates? About Obama's present position that undocumented workers will not be covered in his healthcare proposal, yet when he was running for the Senate he said that children of undocumented workers should get the same healthcare benefits that citizens get? when they begin to ask him about negotiating in unstructured summits with the leaders of Iran, North Korea and Cuba without preconditions? What will Senator Obama say when Senator McCain asks him why he said in 2004 that he did not know how he would have voted on the Iraq war authorization and that his view of the Iraq war was not different from President Bush's? What will Senator Obama say when Senator McCain compares Obama's votes to fully fund the Iraq War in the Senate to Obama's rhetorical opposition to that war? What is Senator Obama going to say when Senator McCain questions Obama's claim to be "the most qualified person in America to conduct the foreign policy of the United States"? What is Senator Obama going to say when Senator McCain says that Obama is not one of the most qualified members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to lead this country in today's dangerous world but instead one of the most absent? Senator Obama has not conducted a single policy hearing as chairman of the subcommittee on European Affairs of the Foreign Relations Committee?
Posted by: Jack | February 05, 2008 at 10:57 AM
Claire McCaskill for VP?
Posted by: Ed | February 05, 2008 at 11:01 AM
California, Thank you for voting for Hillary!
Posted by: Paula | February 05, 2008 at 11:19 AM
The very first "cry" was staged for all who were so naive to see it. Whenever Hillary Clinton is losing in the polls, she stages the "cry baby" act. Enough is enough. I am sick of it.
Posted by: Dorothy Langshaw | February 05, 2008 at 11:32 AM
Jack,
People like you make me sick and you are the reason our country is in the shithole it is in today. You know Obama's church believes in the "black value system" which is a doctrine of self-reliance. Which is to say that they teach black people to be independent and work for themselves and rely on themselves as individuals and a community. It does not teach blacks to separate themselves from the larger society. Your white ass and others like you are always talking about black people relying on government programs and entitlements BUT his church teaches AGAINST this and you criticize. You suck, because you are disingenuous. Your people do not want black people to do for themselves and get ahead; that is the worst thing that could ever happen. You want to keep us stupid and poor, but we are not having it.
Posted by: Sidmore | February 05, 2008 at 03:57 PM
Lea Crozier, you asked where you can find Obama's extensive positions and policies. The answer is easy, they are posted on his website at http://www.barackobama.com/issues/ . The details are extensive, for example if you read the PDF file you will notice that just the Energy and Environment section is 11 pages long! The entire file is very large. Barack Obama will make the best USA President! Go Obama, Go!
Posted by: Gavin Young | February 05, 2008 at 04:13 PM
MY goodness folks...if you count the Regan years it's been a straight twenty-eight years in a row that America has had either a Bush or a Clinton in the top two positions in the white house and Capitol. We talk about change but when it's time to change OUR candidate (another Clinton) it's "oh no... we can't do that." If we keep doing the same old thing we'll keep getting the same result. I am a republican who will more than likely vote for Obama should he win the Democratic nomination... I would never (ever) vote the Clintons back in the White House. I am not being hateful but it's time for a change even if it's for the sake of change. And by the way. Just because someone is charismatic it doesn't mean they are not also qualified. And just because someone says they have experience, it doesn't mean they have the right kind of experience. Besides, experience can be way over rated... just ask the New England Patriots.
Don. (a non-democrat fence sitter who doesn't hate political candidates)
Posted by: Don | February 05, 2008 at 04:27 PM
Obama
Is about change he is intelligent and I feel he should be commander in chief. I watch the debate and Bill Clinton was always downplaying Obama. I wondered for a while who was Obama running against Bill or Hillary.
Vote Obama Vote Obama Vote Obama
Posted by: JAB | February 05, 2008 at 04:51 PM
The Clinton's should not be reelected again because they all have too many thing too handle for there self before the u.s needs and i am sure they will not be as good as Obama would be if you make him you'r choice
Posted by: OBAMA IS THE WAY TO GO | February 05, 2008 at 07:13 PM
I refuse to pick the lesser of two facists, oh I mean two evils. What about WTC 7? and who voted to go into Iraq?
Posted by: Anonymous | February 05, 2008 at 08:48 PM
A dose of reality:
States where Obama won the majority of Independents and Margins:
Arizona - 47% vs. 37%
California - 56% vs. 33%
Connecticut - 62% vs. 32%
Delaware - 50% vs. 44%
Georgia - 62% vs. 35%
Illinois - 72% vs. 22%
Iowa - 41% vs. 17%
Michigan - 51% vs. 37%
Missouri - 67% vs. 30%
Nevada - 47% vs. 33%
New Hampshire - 41% vs. 31%
New Jersey - 49% vs. 43%
New Mexico - 63% vs. 24%
New York - 55% vs. 40%
South Carolina - 42% vs. 26%
Tennessee - 47% vs. 43%
Utah - 68% vs. 26%
States where Clinton won the majority of independents:
Arkansas - 56% vs. 32%,
Florida - 40% vs. 30%,
Massachucetts - 54% vs. 42%,
Oklahoma - 41% vs. 38%.
They tied in Alabama.
Given Clinton's high negatives with Independents odds are on that those that voted for Obama will not vote for Clinton - even with Obama on a Clinton ticket. These votes are critical for winning a November election in most states. Simple answer - Obama needs to be the nominee without Clinton on his ticket.
Posted by: Jay | February 07, 2008 at 06:39 AM
Why does Obama keep getting a free pass? Why is any inquiry, or challenge to his record, or unsavory associations, met with accusations of racism? Jeramiah Wright, an obvious racist and anti-Semite, endorses, supports and praises Farakan … Obama is a lot more connected to Wright than a mere case of guilt by association. Obama himself has described Wright as his spiritual advisor and mentor of 20 years. Obama was going to have Wright speak at his announcement to run ceremony, until he realized it would be a bad political decision. Any fool can weigh 20 years of involvement against a momentary half hearted denouncement, motivated by personal political ambition. The left and the media has fashioned Obama into a sacred cow, who is above reproach. Obama’s record, and associations have become like the Emperor’s new clothes, even when the future of the world is at stake!
Posted by: Howard | March 13, 2008 at 10:32 PM