Clinton has ‘keys’ to the White House in November
I thoroughly enjoy Hardy Haberman’s columns and agree with them 97 percent of the time. However, I must disagree with his editorial asking Hillary Clinton to "step aside" ("Thanks for everything Hillary; now step aside," Dallas Voice, May 23).

I believe that Clinton certainly has an equally legitimate claim on the Democratic nomination for several different reasons that I will evince in this letter. Yes, it’s true that Obama is ahead in the current delegate count, but anything can happen at the convention.

Fortunately for Obama, the Democrats do not have a "winner-take-all" system like the Republicans, or Clinton would have been the nominee early in the primary season. Obama’s strength can be attributed to the "caucus system" as opposed to "primaries."

Having worked at the polls and conducted my precinct convention in March, I can personally attest to the strength and aggressiveness with which the Obama voters asserted themselves in the caucuses.

Nonetheless, on June 4, I believe that Hillary Clinton will have received more total votes than Barack Obama.

Let’s not forget what happens when we ignore the popular vote, or disenfranchise certain states like Florida and Michigan, two critically important swing states in November. Obama has indeed won more states, but for the most part they are relatively small states, electorally speaking, or "red" states that have a long Republican voting history and will not be in play in November, contrary to the argument being put forth by the Obama campaign.

Current polling shows that McCain has double-digit leads in Virginia, North Carolina and Georgia despite Obama’s big wins in those states. And if you think Utah, Wyoming and Nebraska are in play, I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn I’d like to sell you.

There has not been a contest for the Democratic nomination that has been this razor thin in our lifetimes, and we most likely will not see the likes of it again. With Obama ahead in the delegate count, but with Clinton likely to win the popular vote, and more importantly running significantly stronger in the critical swing states, the role of the superdelegate ultimately must be one of supporting and choosing the candidate they believe will be the one able to win in November regardless of their own personal preference.

There are multiple and somewhat subjective ways of measuring this of course, but one cannot ignore the "four horsemen" of the Electoral College that determine who will get to live in the White House: Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Missouri.

The polling information cited in his letter was gathered from, which averages polling done by various organizations on a regular basis.

Current polling shows Obama losing to McCain in Florida by 8 percent, but Clinton winning Florida by 5 percent — a 13 percent difference.

The same is true in Missouri: McCain is preferred over Obama by 6 percent or better, but Clinton defeats McCain in that state by nearly 4 percent.

That’s a 10 percent difference. That’s significant.

Finally, polls show that either Obama or Clinton "could" carry Pennsylvania and Ohio. Yet that same polling also shows that Clinton runs significantly stronger with voters in those two absolutely critical states this fall.

I personally believe the "key" that unlocks the White House will be the candidate that ultimately wins and carries Ohio in November. Obama may indeed be able to eke out a win in Ohio and Pennsylvania, yet it seems clear that Clinton would carry both states quite handily — and with it, the "keys" to the White House.

Let’s "keep our eyes on the prize."

Jay Narey, secretary
Stonewall Democrats of Dallas

Focus on today’s GLAAD, not ‘ancient history’
As a Media Circle member of the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation and someone who loves the organization, I am grateful for the exposure for the growing chapter here in Dallas ("GLAAD to be back: Dallas chapter sees new life," Dallas Voice, May 23).

However, I am highly confused as to why the article would focus so heavily on GLAAD’s past difficulties instead of the positive work on the ground. The individual and structure quoted in the article were from 1995, more than 13 years ago.

I do hope that in the future the Dallas Voice will be much more involved with the present works of GLAAD instead of ancient history.

Dawn Meifert

Texans should support California marriage fight
Once again, LGBT Americans are celebrating another victory in the fight for equality in our country.

Our brothers and sisters in California have now joined the ranks of Massachusetts state residents who enjoy the right to live their lives uninterrupted by restrictive, antiquated standards.

Unfortunately, this new freedom is already being challenged.

The California Supreme Court’s recent decision in favor of gay marriage is not merely a California issue. It is a national issue.

Although Gov. Schwarzenegger has already stated that he will not support any effort against the court’s decision, opponents in the state have already come out in full force for an initiative on the November ballot, amending the state’s constitution and scrapping the court’s action.

The ramifications of an invalidated California Supreme Court decision would quickly reach Texas and other conservative states. In our state, social conservatives would garner easy ammunition to further constrict the battle for LGBT rights and equality.

Now is the time for Americans to say, "Enough!"

We must look beyond partisan posturing and focus on the issues that will bring our country together, not divide us. Our financial support and other support sent to California during this challenge will not only help fight the battle there, but it will help Texas and the rest of the country move forward toward equality for all Americans.

James R. Nowlin, board of directors
The Texas Challenge PAC

These letters appeared in the Dallas Voice print edition May 30, 2008.

семантическое ядро seo