The depressing numbers behind Election 2016

I don't consider myself a numbers person, but I have been fascinated by the numbers behind the 2016 Presidential Election, going back to the primaries. And the numbers behind what is being called the most surprising (and shocking) U.S. presidential election ever are pretty interesting. So I thought I'd share some of them with you.

Here are a bunch from the United States Elections Project:

Here are some other interesting numbers:

Number of Americans registered to vote: 146,311,000 (per Statistics Brain, which has more statistics about the election on its site).

Number of registered voters who actually voted: 133,331,500*

This means nearly 13 million people who could have easily voted did not. And over 85 million who could have voted by registering couldn't be bothered. 

[You want a better world, Millennials? Go register and VOTE IN THE MIDTERMS. No effing excuses.]

Popular vote totals* as of 8:35 a.m. ET on 11/12/16:

Hillary Clinton:  60,467,601**
Donald Trump:   60,072,551
Gary Johnson:      4,123,115
Jill Stein:              1,237,138
Other candidates:    820,695

For those too lazy to do the math, Clinton now leads Trump by nearly 400,00 votes.

[Donald Trump was right. The electoral college is a disaster.]

To see state-by-state popular vote totals, click here.

As I mentioned on Facebook the other day, less than (or just over) 100,000 votes separated Clinton and Trump in Arizona, Florida, Michigan, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania. But the only way the outcome of the election would change is if those votes for Hillary were cast in Arizona and Michigan and either Florida and/or Pennsylvania.

Interestingly, as of November 9, Arizona, which Trump won by less than 100,000 votes, still had over 600,000 ballots to count. And, according to Heavy:

As of November 11, the Secretary of State in Michigan was reporting the following totals:

Trump: 2,277,914
Clinton: 2,264,807
Johnson: 172,726
Stein: 51,420
Castle: 16,125
Soltysik: 2,231

That’s a margin of victory of just 13,107 votes. A margin of under 2,000 votes triggers an automatic recount in Michigan, but candidates can seek a recount even if the margin is larger.

Speaking of razor thin margins, check out this fascinating article from The Washington Post titled "How Trump won the presidency with razor-thin margins in swing states," which notes that "Of the more than 120 million votes cast in the 2016 election, 107,000 votes in three states effectively decided the election."

Another excellent numerical read is the New York Times's exit poll stats. As Samantha Bee noted, "it's pretty clear who ruined America: white people." Indeed, 63 percent of white men and 53 percent of white women cast their votes for Trump. (To which I say, WTF ladies?)

And that concludes this lesson on why it's important for those of you unhappy with the results of Election 2016 to register to vote (if you have not done so already) and to actually go out and vote on election day -- and why 2018 will be a very important election.

This has been a public service announcement.

11/13/16 UPDATE: As of 6:07 p.m. ET today, Hillary Clinton's lead over Donald Trump increased to more than 650,000 votes. And when I checked earlier today, votes were still being counted in parts of Michigan and Pennsylvania, both close races that were being called for Trump, and California, which broke heavily for Clinton. But according to various reports I've read, even if Clinton has a million or two million more votes than Trump, because of where those votes were cast, Trump is still going to be President.


*These numbers will go up as votes are still being counted.
**According to many/most predictions, Clinton's popular vote lead will exceed 500,000 -- and some say over 1 million votes.

BREAKING NEWS: Second Presidential Debate format change

Donald J. Trump, the Republican candidate for President of the United States, has announced he will come out fighting in the second Presidential Debate of 2016, to be held this Sunday, October 9, at Washington University in St. Louis (at 9 p.m. ET).

So in the spirit of this year's presidential campaign, the Commission on Presidential Debates has changed the format of the upcoming debate from a Town Hall to a no-holds-barred boxing-cum-wrestling match between Trump and Democratic candidate for President Hillary Rodham Clinton.

"The American people are itching for a fight, and we plan on giving them one," said Mike McCurry, a co-chairman of the Commission on Presidential Debates.

As part of the new format, Michael Buffer, the boxing and wrestling announcer, who announced all of the boxing bouts at Donald Trump-owned casinos in the 1980s, will be calling the fight, I mean, debate. Refereeing the match will be ABC's Martha Raddatz, chief global affairs correspondent and co-anchor of "This Week" and CNN anchor (and CIA operative) Anderson Cooper.

So presidential debate fans, are you ready to rumble?

Preview: Lester Holt's debate questions for Clinton and Trump

The first presidential debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump takes place tonight at 9 p.m. ET at Hofstra University on Long Island and will run for 90 minutes, without commercial interruption. Around 100 million people are expected to tune in -- Super Bowl numbers.

Per the Commission on Presidential Debates, which sponsors the presidential debates:

The debate will be divided into six time segments of approximately 15 minutes each on major topics to be selected by the moderator and announced at least one week before the debate. 

The moderator will open each segment with a question, after which each candidate will have two minutes to respond. Candidates will then have an opportunity to respond to each other. The moderator will use the balance of the time in the segment for a deeper discussion of the topic.

          *****

Lester Holt, moderator of the first 2016 presidential debate, has selected the topics for that debate. Subject to possible changes because of news developments, the topics for the September 26 debate are as follows, not necessarily to be brought up in this order: 

America's Direction 

Achieving Prosperity 

Securing America 

What specifically will Lester Holt, the anchor of NBC Nightly News (and a registered Republican), ask the candidates? Here's a preview of some of the questions. [NB: Questions are not listed in the order they may appear.]

To Secretary Clinton: Do you feel America is headed in the right direction?

To Donald Trump: Can I have one of your "Make America Great" hats?

To Secretary Clinton: How would you handle illegal immigration?

To Donald Trump: What's your favorite color?

To Secretary Clinton: What specifically would you do to help improve the economy, to help those people who have lost jobs or are earning less than they did eight years ago?

To Donald Trump: How great is your plan to help America -- great, or really great?

To Secretary Clinton: How would you solve the situation in the Middle East and stop terrorism?

To Donald Trump: Remind us, what did Vladimir Putin say about you, that you were a genius?

To Secretary Clinton: Doesn't your role in Benghazi disqualify you from being President?

To Donald Trump: Running the Miss Universe pageant must have given you a lot of insight into international relations. Can you share some of the lessons you have learned?

To Secretary Clinton: Why did you use a private email server -- and why do you continue to refuse to share those speeches you gave to Goldman Sachs?

To Donald Trump: Do you feel the American people really need to see your tax returns?

To Secretary Clinton: What concerns you most about Donald Trump?

To Donald Trump: What concerns you most about Crooked Hillary; emails, Benghazi, or her terminal illness?

Feel free to suggest other questions via the Comments (which are also moderated, albeit not by Lester Holt).

Maybe Hillary should learn how to assemble an AR-15 rifle blindfolded

For those who haven't yet seen this brilliant ad by Jason Kander, a former Army captain who fought in Afghanistan, who is running against Roy Blount in the Missouri Senate race, it is a must see:



[H/T Balloon Juice]

Kander, who is a Democrat, created the ad in response to Blount and the NRA calling him weak on Second Amendment rights. (Meanwhile numerous polls have shown that approximately 90 percent of Americans support gun control measures, including expanded background checks.)

The good news is, you don't need to know how to assemble a rifle in order to stop Donald Trump from becoming President (though it probably wouldn't hurt Hillary Clinton if she could). You apparently just need a vagina.



[H/T, again, to Balloon Juice]

Women outnumber men in the United States and more women than men have voted in recent elections. (See this and this and this.) So ladies, if we want to send Trump back to his Tower, go out and vote for Hillary on November 8th. And bring along your husband -- or boyfriend or brother or male neighbor -- and have him vote for Hillary, too.

EXTRA EXTRA READ ALL ABOUT IT!  For those not keeping score, here is a handy cheat sheet of Donald Trump's various scandals. Also, be sure to check out the Cosmo interview with Ivanka Trump on her/her father's maternity leave policy, which is quite an eye opener (for those who had their eyes closed, fantasizing about Trump's busty blonde eldest daughter).

Of course, none of this -- or any facts -- is going to change the minds of Trump supporters or Hillary haters. But I felt like it was time to chime in.

2016 Democratic Primary Race Vote Update (No throwing chairs!)

So when this blog last printed the vote totals for Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton, back on April 27th, Hillary was leading Bernie by just over 3 million votes. So where do the Democratic candidates for President now stand?

Here is my updated table showing 2016 Democratic Primary & Caucus Vote Totals:

[Click on the image to enlarge it.]

As of this writing (with 96% of the votes reported for Oregon, which was the latest total as of this writing), Hillary Clinton is still leading Bernie Sanders -- by 2,890,670 votes.

Put in delegate terms, Clinton leads Sanders by 274 pledged delegates (which does not include super delegates), with Clinton having 1,768 pledged delegates and Sanders amassing 1,494 pledged delegates.

A few interesting facts about the recent Democratic contests:

* Hillary "crushed" Bernie in Guam, winning 59.5% of the vote to Bernie's 40.5%. Which just goes to show you how you need to read beyond the headlines. While it is true that Hillary, percentage-wise, "crushed" Bernie, in terms of actual votes, it wasn't a big deal -- 777 (Clinton) to 528 (Sanders).

* Clinton and Sanders were each awarded 27 delegates in Kentucky, even though, technically, Hillary "won." That's because the Democrats use the proportional method (which is not to be confused with the rhythm method, though can be just as or more confusing) of awarding delegates to candidates.

* States with large white populations (especially white, male, working class and/or young, white, male populations) and low black and Hispanic populations tend to vote Sanders whereas states that "look like the Democratic party" (i.e., are more diverse) tend to vote Clinton, which would seem to predict wins for Clinton in California and New Jersey (two delegate-rich states) and possibly New Mexico.

NEXT UP, contest-wise: The U.S. Virgin Islands on 6/4; Puerto Rico on 6/5; California, New Jersey, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, and South Dakota on 6/7; and Washington, D.C., on 6/14. So expect my next update on 6/8.

Hillary and Bernie Election 2016: The voters have spoken (again)

Before Super Tuesday IV, or the Acela Primary (as some pundits had been calling it), Hillary Clinton had been leading Bernie Sanders by over 2.5 million votes. Yesterday, Clinton increased her lead to just over 3 million votes, as you can see from my updated 2016 Democratic Primary & Caucus Vote Totals table below. (Click on the image to enlarge it.)

Of note, Clinton beat Sanders nearly 2 to 1 -- 533,656 vs. 281,700 votes -- in Maryland and by nearly 200,000 votes in Pennsylvania (918,649 vs. 719,911 votes), which was and is considered a must-win state in both the primaries and in the general election.

Connecticut was a bit of a nail biter, with Clinton ultimately beating Sanders by about 17,000 votes (169,763 vs. 152,895 votes). However, Sanders beat Clinton in Rhode Island, by a margin of 14,000, which was less than the margin of the Clinton wins, including Connecticut and Delaware, where she beat Sanders by over 19,000 votes.

Of course, as we all (or most -- or some -- of us) know, it's not ultimately votes that get you to the party convention and win you the nomination but delegates. Though in most states it's votes that get you delegates. And as of 7:30 this morning, Hillary Clinton had 1,640 pledge delegates to Bernie Sanders 1,331 pledged delegates*. Add in super delegates (who, btw, have never decided or compromised an election, voting with the majority of voters) and Hillary's total rises to 2,159 delegates and Bernie's to 1,370 -- with the magic number to win the Democratic nomination being 2,383.

Unless you believe in Bernie Math (see below) and unicorns, it seems pretty clear at this point that Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic nominee for President of the United States in 2016.

To be continued...?



*Depending on which news organization's number you use.

Hillary, Bernie + How New York Voted: Election 2016 Democratic Vote Update

So which Democratic candidate did New Yorkers vote for in the 2016 presidential primary? Was it Bernie, the Bro from Brooklyn, who left the City in 1960 to attend the University of Chicago, settled in Vermont in 1968, and went on to serve in the House of Representatives and the Senate representing Vermont (as an Independent, not a Democrat)?

Or was it the carpetbagger, Hillary, who grew up in Illinois, attended Wellesley in the 1960s, and then lived most of the 1970s and 1980s in Arkansas before moving to D.C. in 1993 and to Chappaqua, New York, in 1999 -- going on to represent her adopted state of New York as Senator in the 2000s (and serving as Secretary of State from 2009 to 2013)?

Even if you are not a news junkie (as I am), you probably already know that Hillary Clinton won the New York primary election -- and by a significant amount. What is a "significant" amount, you ask? With 98 percent of precincts having reported, Clinton had 1,037,344 votes while Bernie Sanders had 752,739. So Clinton beat Sanders by more than 250,000 votes -- or, put another way, by 16 percent.

Bernie Sanders had a strong showing in upstate New York, especially in rural areas touching or close to his home state of Vermont. (For those of you geographically challenged, Vermont is right next to the Northeast corner of New York State.) However, Hillary Clinton dominated the New York City metro area, i.e., New York City, Long Island, and Westchester -- and won in Buffalo, Rochester, and Syracuse, too.

So where do the candidates now stand, in terms of total number of votes (as opposed to delegates)? Here's my latest table, which now includes Wyoming, where approximately 7,000 Democrats caucused earlier this month, and New York, a closed primary state, where nearly 1.8 million Democrats voted.

[Click on the table to enlarge it.]


































So, as of today, Wednesday, April 20, more than 10.6 million people have voted for Hillary Clinton and more than 8 million have voted for Bernie Sanders. And Hillary leads Bernie by close to 2.6 million votes.

However, as most people know, it's not total votes that count or win elections, it's delegates. And Clinton currently has 1,446 pledged delegates (based on contests she has won), whereas Sanders has 1,200 pledged delegates (based on contests he has won). And when it comes to super, or unpledged, delegates, Clinton has 502 versus Sanders's 38. The magic number to win the Democratic nomination: 2,383.

While it is not impossible for Bernie Sanders to win the Democratic nomination for president, it's not going to be easy. And before any of you start squawking about the nominating process, I KNOW. It seems totally unfair, especially to Bernie supporters. But it is what it is -- and the system was set up long before Hillary ever ran for President. And even if you hate the delegate system, Clinton is still leading Sanders by nearly 2.6 million votes.

Hillary, Bernie & Wisconsin: Vote update

So, as I wrote on Monday, I've been following the primary (and caucus) process, and I was curious to know how many votes -- not delegates -- Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton had actually accrued. So I went online and looked up the official vote totals for each state.

However, I didn't initially realize that the totals for many caucus states, such as Iowa and Maine, were not actual votes but state delegates awarded (until a friend pointed out that 171,109 people voted in the Iowa Democratic caucuses). So, I went back and searched the Internet to find the total number of votes cast in each caucus state and, if I could not find a vote total for each candidate, divvied up the votes according to the percentage each candidate had won. Then I added up the votes, state by state -- and discovered that Hillary Clinton had garnered over 2.4 million more votes than Bernie Sanders -- and blogged (and tweeted) about it.

Then the spouse said to me, "You should make a table!" So I made a table, listing the number of votes cast for Hillary Clinton and the number of votes cast for Bernie Sanders in each state. And I just updated it to include the results from Wisconsin, which is an open primary state, meaning anyone can vote for anyone -- so perhaps not an accurate barometer of how people would vote in the general election (as there was a lot of chatter about Democrats voting for Cruz to make things difficult for Trump).

Regardless of how you feel, or who you plan to vote for, numbers don't lie. And even with Bernie Sanders's win in Wisconsin, by over 130,000 votes, Hillary Clinton still leads Bernie Sanders by 2,270,493 votes (give or take a few, or even a few hundred, votes, due to caucus counting). That's before you factor in super delegates, where Clinton has a substantial lead over Sanders. (Not saying it's fair. Just saying that's what it is.)

Here's the the table I created, so you can see for yourselves the state-by-state totals -- as well as vote totals for American territories and Democrats Abroad [H/T Glenn Kessler of The Washington Post] -- for Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders in their race to become the Democratic nominee for President of the United States. (Click on the image to enlarge it.)

I will continue to update the table after each primary. Btw, the next big primary is New York, on April 19th, which is a closed primary (meaning you have to be registered to vote for a specific party, Democrat or Republican, and can only vote in your party's primary).

Hillary + Bernie by the numbers: The facts

As many (if not all) of you regular J-TWO-O readers know, I am fascinated (and appalled) by politics -- and am a stickler for facts. (I majored in Political Science, and Russian, in college, and went on to get a Master's Degree in International Relations. And my first job was as a fact checker at a magazine based in New York City, where I often fact checked Donald Trump.)

I've been pretty quiet about this election because so many others have already voiced my thoughts. And I've been appalled by the uncivil discourse. I've been especially disturbed by some of the rhetoric and vitriol aimed at Hillary Clinton and her supporters by Bernie Sanders and his supporters. I thought that kind of name-calling, bullying, and telling or repeating of lies was limited to the Republican party -- and playgrounds. But I was wrong.

However, I do not want to focus on either Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders, the people or their campaigns or positions, in this post. I want to talk numbers -- and about the nominating process.

I am in agreement with Charles Blow (and many others) who say our nominating process is broken. The whole delegate system is whack -- and superdelegates and caucuses should go. The latter replaced by primaries.

It is crazy that 10,617 people, the total number of people who voted in the Alaska caucuses, should determine who the Democratic nominee for president is. And less than 24,000 people voted in the Idaho Democratic caucuses. That's just slightly more people than live in my little New England town! And what is considered an "insanely high" turnout in Maine? That would be 46,800 people, in a state with over 267,000 registered Democratic voters.

In Washington State, an estimated 230,000 Democrats came out to caucus, which sounds pretty good -- until you consider that there are over 7 million people living in Washington State and nearly 4 million of those had registered to vote as of January 31, 2016. I searched the Internet, and I couldn't find out the number of registered Democrats in Washington State, but I'm guessing it's over 230,000.

[For those interested in party registration by state, check out this table. As you will see, Washington State is not listed.]

As most people following the Democratic campaigns know, Bernie Sanders's "big wins" (or close calls) have come from these caucus states, where voter turnout tends to be low -- and peer pressure is high. Whereas Hillary Clinton has won more primaries, where far more people vote -- and voting is a private matter. (Those are not opinions. They are facts.) But I decided to dig a little deeper and count up not the number of delegates each Democratic presidential candidate has but how many people actually voted for Bernie and Hillary -- and I was pretty surprised by what I found.

As of today, Monday, April 4, 2016, 6,717,872* people have voted for Bernie Sanders -- and 9,136,072* people have voted for Hillary Clinton. Put another way, to date, over 2.4 million more Americans have voted for Hillary Clinton than for Bernie Sanders.

Granted, there are several big Democratic primary contests left -- most notably New York, Pennsylvania, and California (which doesn't hold it's primary until June 7th). And Bernie Sanders could conceivably garner a lot of votes in those races. But I'm guessing (and hey, I could be wrong) that if the pattern holds, Hillary Clinton will continue to rack up a substantial number of votes -- and delegates -- in those states. And, if she does, the Superdelegates will continue to stick with her, and she will be the nominee.

*NOTE 1: Here's another reason to abandon the caucus system: the winning numbers often  don't represent the number of votes won but the number of state delegates won. I neglected to read the fine print when I first calculated the total number of votes/voters -- and have revised my numbers for Iowa, Maine, Nevada, and Washington upward, to reflect the number of voters, not state convention delegates won.

For example, the actual number of Democrats who voted in Iowa was 171,109 [H/T Friend of the Blog Fact Lovin' Liberal], not 1,406, the number I had originally included, which was the total number of state delegate equivalents -- i.e., the numbers all the news outlets gave. Unfortunately, though, I am unable to find precisely how many of those who caucused in Iowa cast their vote for Bernie and how many voted for Hillary (or, more correctly, their delegates). Similarly, the number of Democrates who caucused in Washington State was estimated at 230,000, though, again, I could not find exact breakdowns, so I based the numbers on the percentage of votes each candidate won.

However, even correcting the state totals, Hillary still leads Bernie by more than 2.4 million votes.

NOTE 2: Please go to this post to see revised numbers, post Wisconsin and with American territories and Americans abroad factored in, and a state-by-state table. And check J-TWO-O after each primary for the latest vote counts.

Win a date with Bill Clinton!

Talk about pimping your ride!

In a further effort to retire her campaign debt, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is offering several exciting prizes -- including a day with former President Bill Clinton in New York -- to those making a contribution of $5 or more. Other exciting prizes include tickets to the American Idol finale in Los Angeles and a tour of the nation's capital with James Carville and Paul Begala (a policy wonk's wet dream!).












I couldn't decide between Bill and Simon, so I contributed twice. (You can only select one prize per contribution.)

To make your contribution and win a chance to spend the day with Bill (or James and Paul or Simon, Randy, Paula, and Kara) go to http://www.hillaryclinton.com.

Btw, if I win the date with Bill, I guarantee I will not be wearing a thong.

Let the sucking up commence! Hillary comes to the Hill. Or has the Hill come to Hillary?

I just caught a few minutes of Hillary Clinton's Senate confirmation hearing, for Secretary of State, and I swear there was more sucking up going on than at a vacuum cleaner convention.

Chris Dodd (D-CT) and John Kerry (D-MA) were bad enough. But after seeing the way Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) spoke of and looked at Hillary, with unabashed praise and admiration, and the way she looked back and thanked him for his friendship and help, I felt like I was intruding on some private moment. Indeed, the first few minutes of the hearings were nothing short of a Democratic love fest (though there were plenty of Republicans -- okay, Richard Lugar -- singled out for praise, too).

Of course, in the time since I turned off the TV things could have changed in the Senate chamber, but I somehow doubt it.

Anyway, here's a link to an MSNBC article on the hearing, as well as a live feed:

I wonder if this will make those PUMA (for Party Unity My Ass) people, i.e., bitter Hillary supporters, happy.... Eh, probably not.

Dear Obama for America Team: No, I will not help retire Hillary's debt or buy your official Obama calendar or anything else you are peddling...

until I receive the official limited-edited Obama-Biden victory t-shirt you promised me (pictured at left) right after the election for making a donation to the Democratic National Committee on behalf of the Obama-Biden campaign/administration.

I realize that my reticence or outright refusal to continue to donate to your pet causes is weakening (wrecking?) my chances of getting a job in the Obama-Biden administration, but I promise that once (if?) I receive the t-shirt that I paid lavishly for (well over retail -- and this in addition to the very generous donation I made directly to the Obama campaign in September) and am offered a job within the administration (say a mid-level communications post at the White House or State Department), I will be more than happy to contribute again.

However, as a show of good will, I am reprinting your donation requests here on my blog in case others are feeling more generous of spirit.

Want to help the DNC and get "an official Obama calendar"? Here's how (courtesy of Obama for America):

This holiday season, celebrate the historic accomplishment of our movement for change. Treat yourself or a loved one to a limited edition four-year calendar featuring some of the best images from the campaign trail. Make a donation of $35 or more right now and get an official Obama calendar to mark an amazing year:

Items purchased by December 15th are guaranteed to be delivered before December 25th. When you make your donation, you'll be supporting the Democratic National Committee. The resources they invested in the 50-state organizing strategy made this movement possible -- help us build for future victories together. Share this amazing moment with your friends and family. Thanks to supporters like you, we all have the opportunity to bring real change to America. Get your holiday Obama calendar today: https://donate.barackobama.com/calendar Thank you, Obama for America

Want to help Joe Biden help out a millionaire? Here's how:

President-elect Obama and I have been assembling our team, and we plan to hit the ground running next month.

We want to be ready to go, and that's why I'm asking you to help us honor an outstanding commitment we made during the election.

Our campaign pledged to help Senator Hillary Clinton -- one of the vital members of our team and our future Secretary of State -- retire her campaign debt. That's the money her campaign owes to the vendors across the country that make our political process possible.

Barack and I had the deepest respect for Hillary as an opponent on the campaign trail. Her undeniable intellect, talent, and passion strengthened Barack as a candidate and tested our movement for change.

We welcome Hillary as a partner in our administration, and I hope you will show your support by helping Barack fulfill our campaign promise.

Will you make a contribution of $100 or more now to retire Hillary's campaign debt?

I saw your generosity and commitment to this team throughout the election, and I know we can do it.

In the general election, Hillary was one of our strongest advocates. She traveled the country and did more than 70 events, raising money and bringing new supporters into our campaign.

As Secretary of State, she will be indispensable in furthering Barack's agenda for change.

Let's welcome Hillary to the team and thank her for her efforts in support of our campaign by helping to retire her debt to the hard-working individuals and small businesses that were a part of the election:

https://donate.barackobama.com/hillary

Your support and generosity got us this far, and I know I can count on it now.

Thank you,

Joe

I believe my work here is done. However you guys (I'm talking to you, David Plouffe, and you, John Podesta, and you, Joe Biden, and the rest of the Obama-Biden transition team) still owe me a t-shirt.

Obama's dream team, John Mara's Giant nightmare

While President Elect Barack Obama and his advisers are no doubt hoping Congress doesn't shoot down any of his picks for National Security when they go to the Hill for confirmation hearings some time next year, the Giants are dealing with a star wide receiver who apparently was so concerned about being shot down in the VIP room of a Manhattan nightclub Friday night that he shot himself -- with a gun he did not have a permit to carry in New York City. (Hey, at least Obama had the good sense not to nominate this guy for any national or homeland security post, even if he does have a Super Bowl ring.)

So who did Obama pick for his National Security Dream Team? I know this will come as a HUGE surprise (to no one at this point) but he nominated Hillary Clinton for Secretary of State. (And could she have looked any more miserable while he made the announcement? Were those tears in the Secretary Elect's eyes?)

Rounding out the Obama National Security Team [insert Chicago Bulls' player introduction with Barack Obama's dream team edited in here] are Defense Secretary Robert Gates, retaining his current post; Eric Holder as attorney general; Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano as homeland security secretary; Susan Rice (what is it about African-American chicks named Rice and international relations?) as United Nations ambassador; and retired Marine General Jim Jones as national security adviser at the White House.

Argue all you like about whether this is a change we can believe in or even much of a change (from the Clinton or Bush pere years), but I think it shows political savvy on Obama's part, in a lot of ways. However, only time -- and terrorists and whether we have more war or peace -- will tell.

Similarly only time (as in jail time) will tell what happens to Giants wide receiver Plaxico Burress, who I will henceforth refer to as Burr-ASS, who surrendered himself to the authorities earlier today.

Per an article in today's NYTimes.com, "According to state law, a person carrying a gun without a permit faces 3 ½ to 15 years in prison if prosecutors prove that the person intended to use the weapon on another person. If intent to use cannot be proved, the person may still face felony charges that could result in up to seven years in prison."

Buh-bye, Plax. What a waste. (Guess you'll have lots of time for that hamstring to heal now, though, huh? Though I wonder if the Giants will actually fire Burr-ASS or just suspend him for a few games and will have to honor his $35 million/five-year contract.)

But do not fear Giants fans -- or mourn for Burr-ASS. As they showed yesterday with their 23 - 7 defeat of the Washington Redskins in Washington, in miserable weather, the G-Men, lead by quarterback Eli Manning, continue to prove they can win without the likes of Burr-ASS, Tiki Barber, Jeremy Shockey, and Michael Strahan, thank you very much. (I will not discuss the Jets pathetic loss to the Broncos yesterday at Giants Stadium, 34 - 17.)

Coming up next (or soon): What is it about Anderson Cooper that makes women (and men) want to throw their panties at/make cupcakes for him?

UPDATED 1:43 P.M.: Just read this excellent article by John Feinstein in The Washington Post, about professional athletes and guns. A must read.

Hillary Clinton the Next Secretary of State?

As many of you probably know, the junior Senator from New York and former First Lady, Hillary Rodham Clinton, was at Transition HQ in Chicago yesterday, meeting with President-Elect Barack Obama. And I don't think it was to give him tips on how to raise children in the White House or to suggest China patterns, despite the Obama camp saying that the talks were strictly "personal" in nature. Whatever that means.

Odds are the President Elect met with Senator Clinton to discuss what role she would/will play in the Obama Administration -- and right now the oddsmakers and pundits and talking heads are saying Hillary could be the next Secretary of State.

Although several folks in the know have been pegging or touting Hillary for Secretary of State since (and even before) Obama passed her over for Vice President (which, I believe, was much more about Bill than Hill), I never really thought much about it. Until this morning. And I think it's an interesting, and a good, pick -- and a nice plum or reward for Senator Clinton, who has done more than any other defeated candidate for President to support her opponent (in terms of campaigning and fundraising) than anyone else in history.

I also happen to think Barry and Hillary look kinda cute together.

Don't you?

Oh, and if by some chance someone from Senator Clinton's staff or the Obama camp happens to come across this post, consider this blog part of my application to serve in a Hillary Clinton-led State Department. I even listed the State Department as one of the places I'd like to work in the Obama-Biden Administration on the Long Application for Employment I filled out earlier this week, before I knew Senator Clinton was in contention to be Secretary of State. (Oh, and did I mention, we both went to Wellesley? Where's that Old Girl Network when you need it?)

So Rahm (Emanuel) or Hillary, if you are reading this, please email or call me.

Thank you.

UPDATED 4:08 P.M.: Clearly, Hillary is THE BIG topic of the day (besides the stock market crashing again and the wildfire in Santa Barbara). I've been reading lots of articles and some blog posts on the topic, and I found this one in Slate particularly amusing.

UPDATED 7:31 P.M.: Heard a line this afternoon that the reason Barack Obama wanted Hillary for Secretary of State was so that she would be the one to answer the phone at 3 a.m. Made me chuckle. Oh, and Hillary, or Friends of Hillary (FOH), if you are reading this blog, please ignore or forgive any early entries that were less than favorable. Bygones? And did I mention, you looked absolutely stunning in that royal blue (or was it tourquoise?) pantsuit and in that number you wore to the Al Smith dinner?

Unity: Not just a town in New Hampshire

I just watched the video clips of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama (which is what those hot links go to) from their joint appearance earlier today in Unity, New Hampshire (where they each scored 107 votes during the New Hampshire primary -- go Unity!), and may I just say, Hillary looked absolutely stunning in royal blue (or maybe we should rename that shade of blue "Hillary blue" or "Democratic blue").

Looking at Barry and Hill together, hugging, smiling, mugging for the cameras, I thought to myself, they make such a nice couple. (But I still don't think Obama should pick Clinton to be his vice presidential running mate. Attorney General, yes; VP, no.)

Sarcasm aside, it was refreshing to listen to two such eloquent speakers (even as I kept imagining, in some 1960s-style dream-sequence-type special effect, Hillary strangling Barack or shrieking "I was supposed to be the candidate! It's not too late! You fools, forget about Obama and nominate me!").

So here's to Unity -- an inspired setting for this first joint campaign stop. Though may I suggest that if Bill Clinton comes around and decides to campaign with Obama, they avoid Intercourse, Pennsylvania.

(Photo credit: Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Top 10 Reasons Barack Obama Should Not Choose Hillary Clinton as His Running Mate

10. She'd be better off as governor of New York, where they could really use a governor who can keep her pants on.
9. You'll have to keep an eye on White House furnishings and gifts you receive.
8. Hugh and Tony Rodham
7. Racing to see who will answer the phone when it rings at 3 a.m. can be a real drag.
6. Never choose a running mate who can out shoot and out drink you.
5. Ask Al Gore how it felt to have her around.
4. Do you really want Michelle saying "I told you so" for the next four years?
3. Do you really want to hear "There you go again, Barry" for the next four years?
2. People will wonder who really wears the pants in the White House.

And the number one reason Barack Obama should not choose Hillary Rodham Clinton as his running mate...
1. Bill Clinton (If Hill couldn't control Bubba, what makes you think you can? You think he's going to sit tight over at the Naval Observatory or back in Chappaqua? Then you don't know Bill. Nor do you want to be mixed up with a potential Bill Clinton Librarygate scandal.)

Why I Now Hate the '80s, and Hillary Clinton

Okay, I exaggerate -- a bit. But for anyone who "came of age" in the 1980s, as I guess I did, last night's eighties theme on "American Idol" was like a very bad trip (or what I assume a bad trip must be like as I am one of the 14 individuals between the ages of 14 and 54 in the 1980s who didn't do drugs).

You just knew things were going to be bad when pretty boy/James "Dawson's Creek" Van Der Beek lookalike Luke (shouldn't that be "Luc"?) Menard came out singing "Wake Me Up Before You Go-Go." As much as I am embarrassed to admit this, I was very into Wham! But hearing that song sung last night made me want to go-go and change the channel.

As for David Cook's supposedly brilliant rendition of "Hello," I LOATHE Lionel Richie. (You sing "Hello," and I say "Goodbye.") And I don't care how "emo" or cool David Cook made it sound, and I like rocker David Cook, it made my skin crawl.

Ditto judge and audience favorite David Archuleta's rendition of Phil "Make Me Want to Kill Myself" Collins' "Another Day in Paradise," though props to you, Davie Boy, for putting Simon in his place with the line about the importance of the lyrics and their message in light of events like Hurricane Katrina and homelessness, especially as "Idol" keeps playing up the helping the less fortunate thang and "giving back."

The award for the worst performance, however, and the reason for my tirade and current depression (besides HRC's wins yesterday -- more on that in a minute), was Danny "Snaps to You" Noriega's AWFUL take on "Tainted Love," which was practically my high school class's theme song (along with the Talking Heads' "Psycho Killer," one of the most brilliant songs EVER).

I didn't think it was possible for me to hate the eighties, or "American Idol," but last night accomplished both. However, because I am a masochist and hoping that the girls will do the eighties (until last night, one of my favorite decades music-wise) justice, I will be watching again tonight.

As for Hillary... My favorite blog headline regarding her come-from-behind victories yesterday is "Obama Better Get Garlic and a Cross Next Time." To which I would add "And Some Wooden Stakes and Silver Bullets, Too."

There was a time I used to like, or at least admire Hillary (who I still think is intelligent and has a good command of the issues. I just think, excuse the cliche, that it's time for a change -- and a fresh face to show to the world). But what has so turned me off her is her growing similarities to George W. "I'm the Decider" Bush.

According to the many accounts I have read, Senator Clinton, while she can be bipartisan, is not a team player, unless everyone on the team happens to agree with everything she says. And we've seen, with the current administration, where that has gotten us. That's what makes me nervous about a President H. Clinton. I also don't think she's a good sport, though she appears to have a sense of humor.

On Monday's "The Daily Show" with Jon Stewart, when he had Hillary on as a guest, he asked her if the tables were turned, and she had been the one to win 11 primaries in a row, would she not be calling for Barack Obama, for the sake of the party, to "get out"? I thought it a great question -- so of course she didn't answer it. (Btw, for an interesting take on the topic check out this article on Yahoo! News titled "Hillary: The New Huckabee." )

Well, that's all I can stomach on these topics, for now. Check back here tomorrow for my take on "the women of 'American Idol'" and more.

UPDATE: On a totally unrelated note.... As many of you may recall, last week I blogged about a job interview I had. After several of you suggested that my comments might come back to bite me in the butt, I deleted the entry, and severed all links between my blogs. As it turns out, my (or your) paranoia was unfounded. Just got an email from my interviewer asking if I might be interested in some freelance writing assignments. Stay tuned....