April 23, 2008 7:25 AM
Game still on; Clinton scores in Pennsylvania
For Hillary Clinton, it's not about the math, it's about the momentum.
Her 10-point victory in Pennsylvania didn't make it much more likely she'll be able to overcome Barack Obama's lead in delegates and the popular vote but it kept her in the game and bought her more time to convince party leaders that she is the Democrats' best hope of defeating John McCain.
The New York senator's comfortable win sends the race on to North Carolina, where the flush-with-money Obama is favored; and Indiana, where the two are close.Obama was able to stave off an eyebrow-arching blowout by Clinton even while falling short in his effort to bring the polarizing competition effectively to a close. Clinton beat him by about 10 points.
"Some counted me out and said to drop out," the former first lady told Philadelphia supporters who roared their disapproval of that idea and cheered her victory in a state where Obama outspent her 2-to-1. "But the American people don't quit. And they deserve a president who doesn't quit, either."
Clinton's victory raises the question of why Obama can't seal the deal, writes Rocky columnist Mike Littwin.
When campaigning early Tuesday in suburban Philadelphia, Clinton raised a point that will dog Obama until, or if, this race ends. She told a group of reporters, "Considering his financial advantage, the question ought to be, why can't he close the deal? Why can't he win a state like this?"It was a self-serving question, of course, but, hey, this is politics, and self-serving is always the first serving you get. But it's a question Democrats have to be asking themselves with increasing urgency, particularly in light of how negative the campaign has become.
Obama, who had all the momentum, who still has a huge money lead, is - to use the obligatory sports metaphor - playing out the clock, staying just far enough ahead to win.
He didn't get blown out in Pennsylvania, but he didn't come nearly as close as he had hoped. He spent nearly three times as much money on TV ads as Clinton did in a state where he had six long weeks in which to make his case. That's a lot of time and lot of money to overcome demographics. The issue of race, which no one likes to talk about, is being talked about again.
Why did Clinton win?
Writing on politico.com, David Paul Kuhn reports it was the same base of white women, working-class voters and white men that revived her candidacy in Ohio last month. The demography that has defined the Democratic race went largely unchanged, according to exit polls.
There were few surprises in Pennsylvania, according to the exit polls conducted by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International for television networks and The Associated Press. Clinton held about 65 percent of white women and about 55 percent of the key swing bloc of white men, a strong showing though slightly weaker than her Ohio showing.Clinton has now won white men in 12 states and Obama has done the same in 10 states.
Obama did win more than nine in 10 black voters, continuing his unbroken support of African-Americans. And Clinton continued her trend of winning white women in all but a couple of contests. But other trends may prove disconcerting for Obama.
Obama won six in 10 voters age 29 and under. But Clinton split young white voters, as she did in Ohio. In early February, Obama heavily lost whites in Missouri but narrowly won the state with the help of 57 percent of the white youth vote.
So where does it go from here? If Clinton wins Indiana and runs a close race in North Carolina will superdelegates and party officials have buyer's remose about Obama? If you're a Democrat who is your best candidate against McCain? If you're a Republican, who would you rather run against?
April 23, 2008
8:16 AM
SASQUATCH writes:
OPERATION CHAOS will force the pissing, whinning and moaning soap opera to continue while America watches these two onions get peeled in public to their rotten cores. The more we learn about these 2, especially BO, the better McCain looks.
Let the stink continue!
April 23, 2008
8:35 AM
JW writes:
You wingnuts are just a bunch of media parrots. They say the Clinton/Obama battle is hurting the dems...you buy it. Thinking? Yea, thats for the rest of us apparently.
NY Times is running this same BS this morning. Screaming about how Hillary is hurting the dems chances, and how shes SOOO negative. Funny, the polls don't show this duel doing ANY damage what-so-ever, and if you actually define "rovian" instead of using it as a meaningless catchphrase, Obama was the first Dem to use Rove's playbook. In other words, all this crap is one big op-ed piece with NO supporting evidence.
Journalism is DEAD in this county. We now have MARKETING posing as news. Congrats America! You are now so incredibly stupid that you allow corporations to chose your leaders, even with the disaster called BUSH offering you OBVIOUS, IN YOUR FACE lessons as to why thats a bad move.
April 23, 2008
8:59 AM
Anonymous writes:
Just when I thought JW couldnt get any dumber, all the polls show you femdems are divided you idiot. Furthermore, never have the polls been right come election time you tool. Frankly its funny watching you libtards run yourself in circles right now, and like the last two elections you will put up a douche that cant seal the deal then you will blame the voters for being so stupid. You seriously need to get a life JW, blogging here day and night cannot be good for you, how do you find time to type between beating your girlfriend and screaming at the TV set?
April 23, 2008
9:10 AM
Shaggy aka Obamas typical bitter white person writes:
I guess JW doesn't think the last debate had anything to do with Hillarys blow out.
Obamas refusal to dissociate himself with the terrorist and the bigoted reverend is coming home to roost.
If McCain vs. Obama, 28% of Clinton Backers Go for McCain.
19% of Obama supporters who would support McCain if Obama is not the nominee -- and Clinton is.
Keep it going Hillary...we want it decided in here in Denver...
April 23, 2008
9:20 AM
JW writes:
"If McCain vs. Obama, 28% of Clinton Backers Go for McCain.
19% of Obama supporters who would support McCain if Obama is not the nominee -- and Clinton is."
You are making assumptions based on this data that are not supported by more relevant data. Education brother...its for everyone.
April 23, 2008
9:31 AM
Shaggy aka Obamas typical bitter white person writes:
JW,
Nothing is ever relevant data to you when it goes against your beliefs.
Your party is divided and the proof is showing in the primaries, just wait until it explodes in the General.hehe
April 23, 2008
9:51 AM
JW writes:
"JW,
Nothing is ever relevant data to you when it goes against your beliefs."
This is simply not true.
"Your party is divided and the proof is showing in the primaries,"
This is true, and the data you presented backs it up. Terming it "your party" is disingenuous though. Its only my party for this election because the republicans are running Bush again.
"just wait until it explodes in the General.hehe"
The data you presented in no way supports this. There is more relevant data regarding this claim that directly refutes it. The data regarding what the current fight between Obama and Hillary is doing to their competitiveness against McSame shows that it is not hurting them at all. In head to heads, McSame has been in a tie with either Obama or Hillary for months. Whether or not the party is divided, this continues to be the case, and is more relevant data regarding your claim that the dems are hurting themselves against McSame.
April 23, 2008
9:57 AM
JMH writes:
I do think JW has a point about the media. Truth is the "media" WANTS this stretched out. It gives them nonsense to talk about for hours on end, because godforbid they do any REAL reporting. It is all about fluff today and celebrity news and this is celebritry news now. Sadly... it isn't about policy or anything that matters, it is becoming about who wears a friggin' pin or which millionaire is more like the rest of us...
I'm sure today the wingnuts out there will post over and over about how this is killing the Democratic party, how McCain is gonna win it all, yada-yada... While it is true that the party is divided about who is the better canidate, the party (and most of the country) is pretty united around the idea that another Bush term (AKA McSame) would be disasterous for this country. Have no illusions, the Dems and most Independants will unite around whomever ends up as the nominee!
Personally I think this is over, for all the fluff and stupid talking points coming out of the "media" about what Hillary's win in Pennslyvania means, let's look at the reality. All these last 6 weeks and the resulting victory has done for Clinton is her making up 16 delegates... 16!!! It almost means nothing. Obama probably gets them back when he wins North Carolina like expected. This really does nothing for anyone.
Obama will win it, he is too far ahead. This "Clinton Win" is like a football team kicking a late FG with 20 seconds left to get the score to change from 20-13 to 20-16, all the while, the other team is just runnning out the clock. The Clintons can hope to recover the onsides kick (hey anything can happen but it would have to be epic), but at this point Obama is just gonna take a knee and run out the clock!
April 23, 2008
10:18 AM
JW writes:
"Obama will win it, he is too far ahead. This "Clinton Win" is like a football team kicking a late FG with 20 seconds left to get the score to change from 20-13 to 20-16, all the while, the other team is just runnning out the clock. The Clintons can hope to recover the onsides kick (hey anything can happen but it would have to be epic), but at this point Obama is just gonna take a knee and run out the clock!"
Delegate count, true. Pop vote, not true. In fact, if Mich and Florida are counted, Hillary is winning TODAY. Granted, this isnt realistic to count, because Obama didnt run in those states. At this point, I think its the central problem causing all this crap. If the DNC hadnt been idiots, they would have let Mich and Florida vote. If Obama had put himself on the ballots there, we would have relevant votes regardless of the DNC. Neither happened, and now we have an argument that cannot be resolved in any equitable way because either the candidates get screwed, or the people of those states get screwed, or both. It pretty much sucks.
April 23, 2008
10:35 AM
SASQUATCH writes:
DRAG IT ON AND EXPOSE THE FRAUD--BO:
BO WAFFLES without a prepared speech, a teleprompter and an adoring crowd. Left to his own extemporaneous devices, he fumbles and "waffles." Is this an empty and vacant suit, an intellectual midget and stumblebum or what?
Asked to comment on Jimmy Carter's meeting with Hamas officials, the BO replied sternly, "Why can't I just eat my waffle?" When the reporter repeated the question, the candidate bit into his breakfasts and replied, "Just let me eat my waffle."
He said it was not his place to criticize Carter... "I'm not going to comment on former President Carter. He's a private citizen. It's not my place to discuss who he shouldn't meet with." With the State Department and both Republican and Democratic members of Congress condemning the visit, BO finally agreed that it was "not a good idea."
Why did BO angrily snipe at the reporter's question? Clearly he was at the working-class diner as part of his campaign effort to show that he was not elitist, and he took time to sign autographs for adoring fans. Accustomed to being the darling of the press, BO bristles and angrily snaps at the tough questions. The first incident was a barrage of questions about new revelations about Obama's ties to Tony Rezko, who is on trial for corruption. BO, who was prepared for another press love fest with Chicago reporters, was stunned at the grilling and responded by berating Carol Marin of NBC, snapping at reporters and then storming out, after answering only 8 questions.
BO expected the mainstream media to throw him softballs and to accept his reply as gospel. Perhaps the press may have continued to give Obama a free ride were it not for the Saturday Night Live parody of the pro-BO bias in the Democratic debates. I laughed my hairy buttox off watching it. Then Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos did the unthinkable, they asked BO uncomfortable questions about his cordial relationships with men who hate and condemn America and "whitey" and to explain why those relationships won't be a problem. BO muttered and sputtered even though he was not chewing on anything but his own words. The following morning, his media minions were apoplectic at the line of questioning.
BO and his myth is crumbling before America's eyes. He's as shallow as a bird bath and he presents a very weak, fragile and empty suit. BO is not ready for prime time and Howard Dean's worst nightmare is front and center--BO can't close. BO got crushed in spite of his massive spending, he's rapidly getting flushed down the mahoola by his own devices! Neither one of the Dem hamster-like candidates can win in November.
Howard Dean has been put on the DNC's "suicide watch." He doesn't have a viable candidate and its almost May.
April 23, 2008
10:47 AM
JW writes:
Yet again a wingnut posts a bunch of inflamitory bs, full of insinuations and unsupported conclusions, totally devoid of ANY mention about...policy.
April 23, 2008
10:59 AM
Shaggy aka Obamas typical bitter white person writes:
"It gives them nonsense to talk about for hours on end"---JMH
So having a racial hate whitey hate America preacher as a hand picked spiritual adviser is nonsense for someone running for President othe U.S.?
Having shared a board with a known and admitted terrorist is nonsense?
Ayers made a statement on 9/11/2001 that he wished he would have done more damage when he bombed the Pentagon.
Obamas wife not proud until recently.
People are bitter and cling to guns and religion.
Having ties to Louis Farrakhan and joining him in the million man march.
I guess if I understand JMH, all of this is nonsense and played no part in why people chose not to buy what Obama is selling.
The fact that Obama cannot seal the deal speaks volumes why people are backing away from him.
From what I have heard from the experts from both parties is that this will not play out as much in the primaries as it will in the general.
They have also stated it would be disastrous for the Democratic party if this goes all the way to Denver before they elect a nominee, however they see no other way out.....Hillary is not going anywhere and either is Obama and both have the right to stay in as long as they want/can.
Another concern they have is that Obama has a shady past and what will happen if something else in Obamas closet is exposed that is really detrimental..
JW,
Hypothetical:
Lets say Obama gets the nomination and Hillary bows out.
What would happen if something really explosive gets exposed about Obama after he gets the nomination that makes him in no way electable...
Would Hillary then come back and be the nominee with out another popular vote.
Wouldn't this also mean the other candidates could come back and try it again?
Would the super D's just go ahead and defy the people and choose for them?
I don't know the answer to this but with the way it has been going this could be a very real scenario.
April 23, 2008
11:01 AM
jay writes:
the math hasn't changed since 2.19
she isn't going to win either the popular or the delegate vote
time to call it
April 23, 2008
11:07 AM
JMH writes:
JW,
As far as Michigan & Florida, they were told that if they moved up their primaries, they would lose their votes. They knew this and did it anyway. It is their fault and now teh situation "is what it is".
While I agree with you that a full count of every state would be better, these two states thought they didn't have to abide by the rules set down and now they have no say. Sorry but that is the way it is...
It is fruitless to agrue over "what could have been".
April 23, 2008
11:18 AM
JW writes:
"she isn't going to win either the popular or the delegate vote"
Last I checked she was down 750k if Florida and Michigan are left out.
She pulled back 250k of it in Penn.
"JW,
Hypothetical:
Lets say Obama gets the nomination and Hillary bows out.
What would happen if something really explosive gets exposed about Obama after he gets the nomination that makes him in no way electable..."
That would be American politics as usual, because it would NOT be about his policies. McSame probably wins, despite his policies.
"Would Hillary then come back and be the nominee with out another popular vote."
I dont see how that could happen.
"Wouldn't this also mean the other candidates could come back and try it again?"
Again, dont think it can happen.
"Would the super D's just go ahead and defy the people and choose for them?"
Again, once someone drops out, they are out, so I dont think it can happen.
"I don't know the answer to this but with the way it has been going this could be a very real scenario."
Accept that...it cant happen, which makes it a totally unreal scenario.
JMH,
"As far as Michigan & Florida, they were told that if they moved up their primaries, they would lose their votes. They knew this and did it anyway. It is their fault and now teh situation "is what it is"."
I agree, but if you lived in Michigan or Florida, Im not sure that this would be an adequate solution. Fairly sure they are going to be pissed. Its not like the people of those states voted to move up their primaries. A select group decided to do it, and a select group decided to disenfranchise those entire populations because of it. Based on the importance of Florida in previous elections, this was FOOLISH in the extreme. Were I part of the DNC, I would be screaming BLOODY MURDER about it, and demanding that something be done to include these two states equitably (re run the primary).
"While I agree with you that a full count of every state would be better, these two states thought they didn't have to abide by the rules set down and now they have no say. Sorry but that is the way it is..."
That is a very unempathetic point of view.
"It is fruitless to agrue over "what could have been"."
As I said, there is no equitable soulution to the argument, so I would agree. The main point of what I said is that the DNC and the Democratic committies of those states have created a problem that has exaserbated this issue of Obama or Hillary. In that sense, even these wingnuts are correct at some level in that the Dems are self destructive. They are totally wrong about how they are destructing because they rely on media, but they are correct that dems have done this to themselves. Its unfortunate, because only the people will suffer.
April 23, 2008
11:24 AM
JW writes:
"While I agree with you that a full count of every state would be better, these two states thought they didn't have to abide by the rules set down and now they have no say. Sorry but that is the way it is..."
As I said, unempathetic. From a strategic point of view, I think this statement is self-defeating and incredibly ignorant. Again, this issue gives Hillary's arguments legitimacy. This issue inflames those on both sides. This issue disinfranchises Democratic voters in one of the most pivotal states from the last two elections. This issue creates a situation in which there is NO way to settle the debate "Obama or Hillary" in an equitable way (a way in which everyone will think it is fair, even should their personal choice not receive the nomination).
"You dont like it, Tough" sounds, er, well, tough I guess. But its short sighted and extremely narrow minded in a strategic sense.
April 23, 2008
11:25 AM
DR writes:
Hey JW, let's talk for a bit about your comment "Its only my party for this election because the republicans are running Bush again."
I see your initial thought, but I have to wonder, is MC really just like Bush? Granted, he has said he will not simply begin immediate troop reductions if elected. But is that bad or wrong? What of the potential power vacuum and the reported threats that Iran would move in? Can we be positive that it wouldn't disrupt the entire middle east? I think this one topic alone has plenty of room for explosiveness. We shouldn't be there in the first place, but I am afraid of what might happen if we leave without the situation as stable as possible and Iraq able to protect its borders, not to mention agreement between the Sunni, Shia, and Kurds (is that even possible?).
In other areas such as the economy, immigration reform, jobs, etc., can anyone be as bad as Bush? I've read a number of articles where MC is closer to Clinton than Bush (thankfully), and on a number of very important issues I'm still unclear where BO stands - he acknowledges that there is a problem with the economy, but I've seen very little of what he suggests to be done about it.
April 23, 2008
11:30 AM
jay writes:
it still comes down to the math
http://www.slate.com/id/2185278/
fl and michigan invalidated their own elections
April 23, 2008
11:38 AM
SASQUATCH writes:
SELECTED (by super-delegates), NOT ELECTED!!!
That's what happens in Denver this August, and that puts Demo blacks and women in a Civil War!
Omaha Beach, here we come. I hope that the CO National Guard has been alerted and that Hick has adequate supplies of tear gas and water cannons.
April 23, 2008
11:40 AM
Anonymous writes:
DR,
"I see your initial thought, but I have to wonder, is MC really just like Bush?"
This question is easily answered. Go to his web site and read his "issues" page. Lockstep with Bush save a few minor and questionable differences (ex; cut spending. Yea right. When did that EVER happen? Reagan cut SOCIAL spending, and then ramped up military spending. Result; Net GAIN in spending. Same with EVERY person who has claimed they would "cut spending").
"Granted, he has said he will not simply begin immediate troop reductions if elected. But is that bad or wrong? "
My reasons for thinking this is a bad move are completely economic. The spending is hurting our economy, and Ive been saying that for over a year at this point.
"What of the potential power vacuum and the reported threats that Iran would move in?"
Fairly ridiculous. First off, to think that Iran can be stopped from having relations with a predominantly Shia Iraq REGARDLESS OF WHAT WE DO is silly. They will have relations, period. Secondly, to think that the rest of the arab world would just sit back and let Iran annex Iraq is equally ridiculous, and we havent even mentioned the rest of the world.
"Can we be positive that it wouldn't disrupt the entire middle east?"
Certainly not. But...what we have done HAS disrupted the entire middle east to some extent.
"In other areas such as the economy, immigration reform, jobs, etc., can anyone be as bad as Bush?"
This is my PRIMARY reason for refusing to consider a vote for McSame. If he has exaclty the same policies on these issues, then yes, its quite possible that McSame will be just as bad as Bush in these areas.
"I've read a number of articles where MC is closer to Clinton than Bush (thankfully), and on a number of very important issues"
Which issues are these? I cannot think of any. None.
"I'm still unclear where BO stands - he acknowledges that there is a problem with the economy, but I've seen very little of what he suggests to be done about it."
As with McSame, you can check Obama's issues page. He ranges from conservative to liberal on economic issues, which is why I support Hillary rather than Obama (she is far more conservative regarding free trade, taxes, and job protection).
"fl and michigan invalidated their own elections"
Sounds tough. Strategically assinine.
April 23, 2008
11:40 AM
Captain America writes:
Considering Hillary's margin of victory in Pennsylvania, the DNC will probably let this go through May 6 (only a couple of weeks from now, after all) to see what happens in Indiana and North Carolina. After that, I think party leaders will do all they can to shut this primary race down, and allow the winner to finally start running against McCain instead of having two Democrats tearing at each other like this.
The more these two run against each other, the more each side comes to dislike the other candidate. I doubt too many Democrats will choose to vote McCain over holding their nose and voting the Democrat, but that could change as this primary season gets more and more contentious.
April 23, 2008
11:55 AM
Shaggy aka Obamas typical bitter white person writes:
I think it was a good thing for the American people especially the Dems that Obamas closet finally got a little exposer before all the Dem candidates got out leaving him as their only option....I think many would have defected to McCain....actually I still think many will defect to McCains side if Obama is the nominee.
Too bad the other Candidates got out before he got exposed for the shady character he is.
April 23, 2008
12:15 PM
DR writes:
JW -
I noticed what seemed like some similarities in trying to reduce costs in the area of health care, border enforcement, immigration reform, and desiring changes in the (un)Patriot Act to restore Constitutional freedoms - but of course a lot of that is subject to reading the fine print and analyzing it which can be challenging with how vague some of the planks are defined. Neither here nor there really - I was mainly interested in what you thought about the situation in Iraq and how it could come into play.
Also, Shaggy has referenced some numbers in one of his posts about the numbers of Dems who "jump ship" to vote for MC if BO or HC are nominated - he may be referring to an article that appeared perhaps 3 or 4 weeks ago where the pollsters gave numbers of defectors based on that scenario, and then also offered the caveat that one had to use caution in evaluating those numbers because at times, people would "threaten" one thing, such as defecting to the other party, but end up not really doing it in the end. But it was still reported to be fairly high numbers and I recall being somewhat surprised by it. I don't have much time between tantrums of the kiddies at work here today, but I'll see if I can find it, and if so I'll post the link.
April 23, 2008
12:20 PM
DR writes:
Shaggy -
Is this the article? I am unable to read it, but thought I'd post it in case it is.
April 23, 2008
12:34 PM
JMH writes:
"So having a racial hate whitey hate America preacher as a hand picked spiritual adviser is nonsense for someone running for President othe U.S.?
Having shared a board with a known and admitted terrorist is nonsense?
Ayers made a statement on 9/11/2001 that he wished he would have done more damage when he bombed the Pentagon.
Obamas wife not proud until recently.
People are bitter and cling to guns and religion.
Having ties to Louis Farrakhan and joining him in the million man march." - shaggy
Yes shaggy, this is all the stupid things I am referring to. I know you are a GOP sheep with absolutly no critical thinking skills, but the truth is, only you wingnuts that wouldn't vote for Obama anyway are the ones that believe Obama is some sort of Black Panther intent on killing "whitey"... Let's look at the BS...
"So having a racial hate whitey hate America preacher as a hand picked spiritual adviser is nonsense for someone running for President othe U.S.?"
Guilt by association. I have friends and relatives who are racist, homophobic, etc. doesn't nessicaraly make me one. Besides Obama is half white numbnuts! So he must hate half himself and the "white side" of his family that raised him huh? Just goes to show you will buy anything fed to you by FOX News.
"Having shared a board with a known and admitted terrorist is nonsense?"
I guess having shared business dealings with terrorists is OK though huh? Bush family and the bin Ladens! Besides this is just more smear. He hardly knew the guy.
"Obamas wife not proud until recently."
Totally taken out of context and you know it! Hell I'm not very proud of America right now myself. Not after all the crimes and misdemenors the Bush's have done in America's name. Anyone with a bit of sense knows she was talking about America's shamefully history when it comes to race.
"People are bitter and cling to guns and religion."
This is true. Sorry it offends your delicate sensablities... That's right, politicians should say nothing but nice things and blow smoke up peple's asses... how dumb. Truth is, people are bitter. I know I am after the position the GOP has put all of us in at this point. No one is happy but you 19%ers! That's a fact you need to accept.
"Having ties to Louis Farrakhan and joining him in the million man march"
Farrakhan endoced him. Nothing more. David Duke endorced McSame, does that make him a Nazi? As far as the million man march, it was about black pride and getting black males to stand up and be more responsible. Man your racism really shows on that comment, like teh Million Man March was some kind of anti-American movenemnet or something. Why don't you just come out and call them all smelly niggers shaggy?
JW is 100% right. You wingnuts are nothing but emotion and easily lead by the BS coming from the corportate media!
While you wacko's worry about flag pins and make your choices totally on smear tactics, the rest of us worry about real things that matter in a president. Who can get us out of Iraq? Who can better fix the economic problems given to us by a GOP that has been totally bought by lobbists and corporations? Who will actually fight for a better health care system? Etc.
Shaggy, I know this will never pierce your little NeoCon bubble, but these are things America is fighting over. There is a reason everyone is transfixed on the Dem nomination and there is not a bit of excitement coming from the GOP. The wheels have already fallen off that wagon.
So you keep gobbling up whatever FOX News feeds you. The rest of us know this is all nonsense, but I guess whan you have NO ACCHIEVEMENTS or SUCCESSES to run on, smear is all you got. Have fun with that, the rest of us aren't buying it anymore!
April 23, 2008
12:37 PM
JW writes:
DR,
You could say that McSame's ideas on healthcare are closer to Clinton's RHETORICALLY, but they are closer to Bush's in reality because:
Like Bush's supposed "tort reform", McSame's "tax cuts" and "personal responsibility" will probably amount to nothing. However, on this one issue, for the sake of argument, I am willing to concede that McCain is not McSame.
Regarding boarder security and immigration reform, this is just a hot topic, and Ive seen little from any of the candidates (Other than Tommy "I hate brown people" Tancredo) that really nails them down. In this issue, I would say they are all the same, and all very close to Bush.
Lastly, regarding restoring freedoms by fixing the unpatriotic act...I find McSame to be quite vexing. Yes, I did support his statements to date. Then he went and voted against stoping torture. Sigh...McSame. While I think the whole "Trustworthy" issue is over rated, when you have someone saying their policy is one thing, and voting the other way at the exact same time, I think it becomes more of an issue. Some will confuse this and say Hillary is guilty of the same because she voted for Iraq and now disagrees with it, but that is because of lessons learned, and the change has come over time. Quite different.
As for Shaggy's data,
It is useful to confirm that democratic voters are infact pissed enough to jump ship should their candidate not be chosen. But it is USELESS regarding whether or not this primary is hurting Dem chances in a General Election. The data that is useful in this regard are head to heat polls with either Hillary or Obama against McSame. These polls have both Hillary and Obama in statistical ties with McSame, and this trend has not changed during the primary debate, suggesting that all of this fear of the primarys hurting dems chances in November has no basis in fact.
April 23, 2008
12:40 PM
SASQUATCH writes:
USS OBAMA:
http://www.uscg.mil/history/gifs/Pendleton_Sinking_Ship.jpg
April 23, 2008
12:57 PM
Kevin Jones writes:
People aren't looking close enough at the churchgoing demographics. From CNSNews.com, we find that Clinton won a majority of all voters who went to church at least once a year.
Clinton won 51 percent of those who attend church more than weekly and 61 percent of those who attend church weekly. She won those who attend church monthly and a few times a year by 54 percent and 55 percent, respectively.
In a vote analysis broken down by religious observance, Obama defeated Clinton only among Pennsylvania voters who said they never go to church, winning by a margin of 54 to 44 percent.
And check out Hillary's astounding performance among Catholics:
Among Pennsylvania Catholics who said they attend church weekly, Senator Clinton won 74 percent of the vote. Catholics who said they attend church less than weekly went for Clinton by 65 percent, according to CNN exit polling. Regular and irregular Catholic churchgoers each constituted 18 percent of the poll respondents.
As some guy at the New Republic has written, Obama could be a throwback to the failed McGovern coalition. He gets stuck with obnoxious secular activist support, while Clinton's cynical centrism doesn't put off as many voters.
Perhaps "Above it all" Obama's comments about clinging to religion had an effect after all.
April 23, 2008
1:00 PM
DR writes:
JW -
I omitted the link:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/rasmussen/20080401/pl_rasmussen/paprimary20080401_1
Thanks for your comments - I want to read through and mull them for awhile, but you did strike a nerve with the vote on ending torture - that really pissed me off - I understand that there is a valid argument on some level about them trying to keep Americans "safe" - but I don't condone us breaking our own laws, or those we claim to hold dear of other nations and conventions when it's convenient.
April 23, 2008
1:08 PM
JW writes:
"but I don't condone us breaking our own laws, or those we claim to hold dear of other nations and conventions when it's convenient."
This has been one of my main issues with the Bush admin. A few cave dwellers got lucky once in a way that will never be repeated (try holding up a plane with box cutters today, and get a free sky diving lesson from 30k feet without a parachute). Because of that, we need to commit torture and hold people without due cause, while frobiding them their day in court or even access to the evidence against them and a lawyer? habeus corpus has been the foundation of civil liberties for 1200 years.
This country is founded on the idea that these liberties are ABSOLUTE. Yet in the last two years alone we have seen laws enacted alowing the president to name anyone, citizen or other, and "enemy combatant" and strip them of ALL their constitutional rights. We have seen freedom of speech CONDEMNED by our government, even though every single member of that body SWEARS an oath to uphold the constitution.
Instill a bit of fear, and Americans are ready to give up what makes us America in the name of perceived freedom. Our forefathers would be DISGUSTED.
April 23, 2008
1:13 PM
jay writes:
good post on mcsame jw...it's even tougher arguing with it after laying it out again
i will say that your thoughts on getting out of iraq for economic reasons are getting a lot more traction these days because of the state of nation's fiscal woes
April 23, 2008
1:20 PM
JMH writes:
Good post JW... Couldn't have said it better myself.
April 23, 2008
1:22 PM
Shaggy aka Obamas typical bitter white person writes:
DR,
Last night they were posting a variety of polls on that little thingy ma gigger on the bottom of the screen that you see on the stock market reports..
I did post two or three week old polls. Sorry..Thought they were the updated ones.
I think they were actually a little higher but fairly close to those....
One commentator asked another if those mean anything or if it is just people saying that now but would join with whomever is the nominee and the other commentator made a nice analysis by saying those numbers were taken in the now so they are probably fairly accurate. They will fluctuate a little either way of course.
I'll look for the latest numbers after a while..
A little busy this afternoon.
Hey Bam Bam....Don't be so Bitter.hehe
"Guilt by association."
Yea right...20 years of listening to his racial hate speech....tell that to the Voters.
"I guess having shared business dealings with terrorists is OK though huh?"
I didn't realize Bush was running for President..hmmm
Louis Farrakhan is one if not the biggest racial bigot in America.
I luv it when you little femdems get all flustered hehe.
I wonder how many of you loons will just pop with all that hot air bottled up when McCain wins the election.
Obama is a loser and will not be elected...you all would be better off with Hillary even though she will get crushed too.
Too funny....
April 23, 2008
1:40 PM
JW writes:
"I wonder how many of you loons will just pop with all that hot air bottled up when McCain wins the election."
Actually, if that happens I'll probably laugh my ass off. Of course, Ill be less than a year from my MBA, which means Ill be able to complete in the worst of the worst economies if McSame takes us that direction.
Have you felt the effects of the recession yet Shaggy? Those orders for remodeling coming in a bit slower? Sales taking a dive? Polishing up the old resume in case you end up folding and have to get a job?
If not...its in the mail.
April 23, 2008
2:12 PM
Ashley writes:
From a political junkie who came out of the womb a Democrat and has only drifted more staunchly left, I say shame on you all for the loud, hateful comments spewing from all three sides -- McCain's, Obama's and Clinton's. I'm content to let the two Dems fight it out, although I admit to a little bit of primary weariness -- everyone has the right to have a say. If the Democrats don't win in November, regardless of who the nominee is, then we don't deserve to have the White House and you can hand me a one-way ticket to Switzerland.
April 23, 2008
2:46 PM
Shaggy aka Obamas typical bitter white person writes:
"Have you felt the effects of the recession yet Shaggy? Those orders for remodeling coming in a bit slower? Sales taking a dive? Polishing up the old resume in case you end up folding and have to get a job?"---JW
I keep hearing we are in a recession.
Sorry to disappoint you but I haven't had to lay anyone off and I am finding myself busier than ever.
I really appreciate the heart felt sentiment of my wellbeing though...Thanks bud.
Let me know if you need a job and I will hire you on as a grunt on one of the crews.
One thing I am doing though is buying a new car that gets better gas so I don't have to waste all these precious fossil fuels and lower my carbon footprint.
If gas gets too high for you let me know and I'll have one of my employees come pick you up and drop you off at your cubicle so you don't have to spend 3/4 of your paycheck on gas.
April 23, 2008
2:47 PM
JMH (Bam-Bam) writes:
"I wonder how many of you loons will just pop with all that hot air bottled up when McCain wins the election.
Obama is a loser and will not be elected...you all would be better off with Hillary even though she will get crushed too." - shaggy
Consideriong that you spit out every prediction that you get from your NeoCon "sources" the last few years and they have ALL been proven wrong, it is probably safe to say McSam gets pounded, Hillary is the weaker Dem in the general election (and the one you NeoCons really want to face) and Obama will be president.
I mean really shaggy, can you name ONE prediction that you have made (well that you really heard on right-wing propaganda stations and just repeat it here like a parrot) that has come to fruition? Just one?
Thanks for the predictions shaggy. kind of like what we been getting form the GOP and Bush all these years - take whqat they say, turn it around 180 degrees and you get the truth! Keep it up... hehe...
P.S.
I kinda like the "Bam-Bam" name... that is kinda funny. I'll give you props for at least being witty once and awhile...
April 23, 2008
2:56 PM
DR writes:
Hey Shaggy -
Here's the one I'm checking out - no kidding - I normally only buy American, and I still might b/c there are several that I really like, but this little thing is pretty cool and the one my neighbor has gets almost 50mph and still has fairly decent pickup even with the AC on:
http://www.smartusa.com/smart-fortwo-pure.aspx
April 23, 2008
3:01 PM
JW writes:
"Sorry to disappoint you but I haven't had to lay anyone off and I am finding myself busier than ever."
Im actually glad to hear it. Wouldnt wish the poor house on anyone.
That said,
Its in the mail. Your market has shrunk. The credit crunch will take its toll.
If youve half the brain I think you do, youre building up cash reserves and getting prepared for leaner times.
"I really appreciate the heart felt sentiment of my wellbeing though...Thanks bud."
Yea, its a nasty ballance between wanting everyone to do well no matter who they are, and wanting idiots to reap what they sow. Id feel sorry for you if you did go under and I dont wish it on you. On the other hand, people like you are the reason that stuff happens, so it would be fitting.
Thanks for the job offer, but my skills go far beyond being able to use a hammer.
April 23, 2008
3:08 PM
Shaggy aka Obamas typical bitter white person writes:
Hey Bam Bam,
Name a prediction that I haven't nailed in the cross hairs.
My last prediction was that Hillary will run out of gas and Obama will become the nominee.
hmmm...looks like that might happen...she is begging for money right?
Then I predicted that McCain will win against Obama because he repeatedly refuses to dissociate himself of the Racial Reverend, the terrorist Ayers and the very very Racial Farrakhan.
Amongst other scummy dealings that keep floating out of Obamas closet.
April 23, 2008
3:16 PM
Anonymous writes:
"Name a prediction that I haven't nailed in the cross hairs."
LOL! Shaggy, I realize that youre not the sharpest tool in the shed, but I hadnt realized you have long term memory problems as well.
You were wrong about pretty much EVERYTHING you said before the 06 elections. Youve been wrong about EVERY SINGLE prediction regarding Iraq, though Ill give you credit, youve got that Bush tactic of "Move the goal line when youre caught being totally and unforgiveably wrong" DOWN!
April 23, 2008
3:24 PM
JW writes:
You cant make this stuff up...
"John McCain visited Gee’s Bend, Alabama, yesterday, in order to take a ferry ride across the Alabama river. It was a nice, little photo-op on a key piece of local infrastructure. As a Republican National Committee spokesperson said, “The ferry he will be riding is very important to that community. It’s both a good and terrible symbol. It’s good that it now exists, but it’s terrible it took so long to build it.”
The message started to fall apart, however, when we learned that Gee’s Bend’s ferry was paid for by a congressional earmark. If McCain had his way, the “very important” ferry wouldn’t be there. Oops."
April 23, 2008
3:39 PM
Shaggy aka Obamas typical bitter white person writes:
Dr,
I have been seeing more and more of those on the road.
At first look it looks like my golf cart.
Like you I have never owned anything but a Ford or GMC.
Right now I am looking at a Subaru Impreza WRX wagon with the turbo. Lots of scoot and decent gas. It's only a four banger.
JW, You are right about saving for a rainy day and I have been saving just in case the worst case scenario happens and that would be if Hillary or Obama actually get into the WH.
Serious now, I just ran and got a haircut and was listening to Glenn Beck and he made a great point.
If we actually went into a depression, we would be screwed and wouldn't fair as well as our grandparents did.
They knew how to conserve.
They grew gardens and canned food.
They weren't as dependent on cars, gas, oil, luxury, ect.... and just everyday technologies.
Look what happens when the power goes out or a city's water gets tainted.
Just think if this happened on a huge coast to coast scale.
We wouldn't have a problem with finding people to pick fruit and veggies would we?
3:16 PM,
"You were wrong about pretty much EVERYTHING you said before the 06 elections."
Listen up cruton, I have never posted anything on RTL pre 2006 so I guess this dull knife just ripped you a painful new one.
Back it up or shut it up..got it???
April 23, 2008
3:46 PM
JMH writes:
Shaggy, that last poster wasn't me, but I think he sums up what I would say...
The prediction about Hillary running out of gas, I don't rememeber you making that one, but I'll give it to you, though that prediction wasn't really jumping out on a limb. Once everyone could see the excitement Obama was generating, I think everyone could see that coming. But when it comes to the economy, Iraq, the election in 2006, etc. you haven't hit one. None of you NeoCons have... but keep those "talking points" coming. If anything they are pretty funny...
Hugs and Kisses, Bam - Bam
P.S.
About this - "Then I predicted that McCain will win against Obama because he repeatedly refuses to dissociate himself of the Racial Reverend, the terrorist Ayers and the very very Racial Farrakhan.
Amongst other scummy dealings that keep floating out of Obamas closet."
For one, Hillary did Obama a favor with this. She went to the "Roavian" attack machine and it really hasn't made a dent. Probably wont find much else and all this is "guilt by association" even if you wish it would stick. He took what you on the right discribe as one of the "meanest, dirtiest players in politics" best shots, was wobbled a little but is still standing strong with hardly a dent.
Two, no one except those of you who wont vote for him anyway believes that Obama is a "Whitey hating, Muslim who wants to bomb America and kill all the white people (except half of himself of course)."
and for 3, just wait until a career, establishment politician that has been in the GOP (we all know they are no chior boys) and in Washington for decades (McSame) has dirt dug up on him and his record is picked apart and exposed. It wont be pretty. I'm sure there are a ton of dealings, etc. that will be brought up there. Reminding the public about the "Keating 5" scandle comes to mind right away...
April 23, 2008
3:51 PM
JW writes:
"Listen up cruton, I have never posted anything on RTL pre 2006 so I guess this dull knife just ripped you a painful new one.
Back it up or shut it up..got it???"
Actually that was me. Sorry, I get you wingnuts confused, and there were PLENTY of you spouting off about how the Dems werent winning ANYTHING.
The Iraq comment was right on though, and I notice you didnt even bother denying it. Congrats!
The Glen Beck thing was a good thing to post, but I dont see us hitting a Depression. Recession is on, but not a depression.
And I understand why you would think the worst would happen with Hillary in office. You have nothing to say about her policies, but apparently her statements about Bosnia in 96 are enough to cause a recession all on their own. We got a nasty recession after Reagans "Lower taxes, up spending, and just throw it on debt", then a really small recession after Clinton's "Keep it responsible fiscally". Now it looks like we are getting a recession like the one after Reagan because of Bush's "just spend, who gives a crap about debt".
So, historically speaking, you got noting supporting your position (nothing new there), but if the future goes TOTALLY against all historical precident...youre gona be spot on!
April 23, 2008
3:59 PM
Shaggy aka Obamas typical bitter white person writes:
Hey you all, does anyone find something wrong with this statement of Obamas.
'My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world and I hope you'll join with me as we try to change it.' (B. Obama)
April 23, 2008
4:24 PM
Shaggy aka Obamas typical bitter white person writes:
"The Iraq comment was right on though, and I notice you didnt even bother denying it. Congrats!"---JW
Not sure what you mean or if you were even directing this to me.
As far as Hillary is concerned, I have addressed her national socialized heathcare before.
The Bosnia spoof was just typical Clintonism.
Did you hear the latest on Billy C. and his latest lie?
"I think that they played the race card on me," Clinton began. "We now know, from memos from the campaign that they planned to do it along."
He went on to say, "you have to really go some to play the race card on me."
Today, however, he completely denied the remarks when confronted by a reporter he apparently knew.
The conversation when like this:
REPORTER: "Sir, what did you mean yesterday when you said that the Obama campaign was playing the race card on you?" the reporters began.
CLINTON: "When did I say that, and to whom did I say that?"
REPORTER: "On WHYY radio yesterday"
CLINTON: "No, no, no. That's not what I said. You always follow me around and play these little games, and I'm not going to play your games today. This is a day about election day. Go back and see what the question was, and what my answer was. You have mischaracterized it to get another cheap story to divert the American people from the real urgent issues before us, and I choose not to play your game today. Have a nice day."
REPORTER: "Respectfully sir, though, you did say …"
(Story continues below)
CLINTON: "Have a nice day. I said what I said, you can go and look at the interview. And if you'll be real honest, you'll also report what the question was and what the answer was."
REPORTER: "They asked you if you regretted your comparing Jesse Jackson to Barack Obama on the day after the South Carolina primary."
CLINTON: "And I pointed out that I did not do that, and that I complimented them both. And that Jesse Jackson took no offense. And I called him myself, I said, 'Did you find that offensive?' And he said no.
During the Pittsburgh radio interview, thinking he was off-mic, Clinton added a vulgar remark.
"I don't think I should take any sh-- from anybody on that, do you?" he said, apparently speaking to someone in the room.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/?pageId=62304
Does this seem to take like twice as long to post a comment than it used to or is it just me?????
Anyhoo, gotta go.....
April 23, 2008
4:54 PM
ELECT HILLARY! writes:
Hillary Clinton is clearly the underdog in this race, yet Obama keeps whining that he's the underdog. Obama seems to be doing everything he can to make himself appear to be a victim in this election, and it's getting old.
April 23, 2008
7:47 PM
Shaggy writes:
"Id feel sorry for you if you did go under and I dont wish it on you. On the other hand, people like you are the reason that stuff happens, so it would be fitting."---JW
I hope it doesn't happen either.
It can happen to anyone that is for sure.
I try not to take anything for granted...I very seldom lose a bid/job because most of my customers are repeats, but you are right , if no one is remodeling or building it not only hurts me it hurts everyone down the line and does a domino effect.
What helps me is I have a few solid contracts that I have had for 35yrs so I do bank on that and use it as my cushion so to speak...I have a few plan b's too.
April 23, 2008
8:38 PM
Dave writes:
Immigration has direct massive negative consequences on today's and yesterdays economy.
Are you now living from paycheck to paycheck, wondering how your going to feed your family, making your mortgage payment.
You need to be aware of how much Uncle Sam is secretly skimming off your taxes and diverting into government freebies
for immigrants and illegal foreign nationals.
This is a document that should disturb you, because the globalist open border, free traders do not want you to see it. This is an thoroughly researched analysis of immigration costs, that the hierarchy of the U.S. government and special interests groups do not want you to read.
Now you can read the disturbing details in the new 70-page document called “The Economic and Fiscal Impact of Immigration” by Edwin S. Rubenstein (eagleforum.org/sources). A Manhattan Institute adjunct academic with a mile-long scholarly resume, he has been doing financial analysis ever since he directed the studies of government waste for the Grace Commission of 1984.
Did you know that taxpayers are supporting immigrants to the tune of $9.000 each. That means your subsidizing each family of four with $36.000.
More than 37 million immigrants in the United States, both legal and illegal, cost the federal government more than $346 billion last year, twice as much as the nation's fiscal deficit, according to a report released yesterday. The loss estimates, the report said, included $100 billion in federal taxes lost "from the reduction of native incomes caused by immigrant workers." He also stated that even programs that are not usually associated with immigration, he said, have actually added financial burdens to the taxpayers.
Our students are short-changed in overcrowded classrooms, because teachers must spend more time with illegal immigrant children.
The financial burden immigrants inflict on education starts with the 3.8 million K-12 students enrolled in more-expensive classes for the non-English-speaking. When we add up the costs of hiring specialized teachers, training regular teachers, student identification and assessment, and administration costs, the total amounts to an estimated $1,030 per pupil, or $3.9 billion. Of the 48.4 million public school children, pre-K through 12th grade, 9.2 million or 19 percent are immigrants or the children of immigrants. In the next few years, immigration will account for almost all the increase in public school spending.
Look at the $1.5 billion cost of incarcerating 267,000 criminal aliens in federal prisons. That's not the worst of it; prison capacity is limited, so 80,000 to 100,000 other criminal aliens have been prematurely released to prowl our streets. Then their is the expenditure to hunt down 676,847 fugitive warrants by (ICE) and special agents. Actual cost for incarcerating illegal foreign nationals since 2001, over $1,407.798.965 dollars.
The Manhattan Institute report includes all sorts of costs that pundits conveniently ignore, such as the Earned Income Tax Credit. EITC gives an average cash payment of $1,700 per year to 25 percent of immigrant households.
The emergency medical treatment given 'gratis' to illegal immigrants is another enormous cost, causing many border state hospitals and emergency rooms to close. Emergency means any complaint from morning sickness to athlete’s foot, gunshot wounds to AIDS.Even after some restrictions were imposed in 1996, 24.2 percent of immigrant households still receive Medicaid, whereas the figure for native-born Americans is 14.8 percent.The stiudy calculates that Hispanics account for 19.2 percent of Medicaid enrollment, while they are 13.7 percent of the U.S. population.
This is just the tip of the iceberg about these outrageous costs.
Please go to (eagleforum.org/sources) and know what your taxes are paying for...?
Please copy & paste and distribute freely
April 24, 2008
3:28 AM
JW writes:
btw, Shaggy, in order to buy me MBA, I need to list someone as my employer. Can I list you since nobody else will hire me?
April 24, 2008
8:23 AM
JW writes:
Shaggy,
You know, I call you stupid all the time, but I think that only applies to your political thinking. Looks like youre pretty sharp regarding how you handle your business. Id be great if you could discover the difference in how you make your business decisions, and how you make your political ones. They are different in some respects, yes, the but the analytical framework should be the same.
Useless sack posing as my name...
The day you finance over $60k for an education, you can start talking that trash. Till then, take your uneducated, trailer park livin ass and stfu.
April 24, 2008
9:24 AM
Shaggy writes:
LoL JW,
I happen to like my political decision making process.
The Business next to me had their fleet of trucks robbed of gas last night. They actually cut the hoses underneath and drained the gas. On others they punch the locking gas caps with a screwdriver and tore the caps out and siphoned the gas out.
He noticed he was low on gas and went to fill up and once he started to fill it, it just fell on the ground because the hoses were cut from the filler to the tanks. Now it is going to cost him just to replace the hoses to get gas into his tanks.
I would bet many gas stations are seeing drive offs increasing big time.
Looks like once I get my little car to drive around I will have to park my big truck inside at night.
Is this what it is all coming to be?
April 24, 2008
10:09 AM
benn writes:
FYI Mark - Please stop peddling the crap that the MSM is peddling. HRC won by 9%, not 10%. I know it is only 1 percentage, but last I checked, 9.2% didn't round up to 10%.
Thanks
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0408/92.html
April 24, 2008
10:17 AM
there, there now writes:
Uh, benn, WAY overtime to lighten up, brutha!
April 24, 2008
10:27 AM
benn writes:
Uhh... when I go to all the main media sites like CNN, Fox, and MSNBC and see headlines "Clinton gets huge double-digit win" it makes me want to vomit. The dishonesty displayed by the media (who obviously wants this to go on forever) is disgusting.
http://www.electionreturns.state.pa.us/ElectionsInformation.aspx?FunctionID=12&ElectionID=27
April 24, 2008
10:40 AM
JW writes:
Benn,
Im amazed youre so angry about a few percentage points, but go right along with the "Hillary is negative rovian, but Obama is a saint" bullshit.
April 24, 2008
10:49 AM
benn writes:
Hey JW - Don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say that did I?
I am pissed because it us abundantly clear that HRC gained absolutely nothing on Tuesday. Zero, zilch, nada (okay, 12 delegates).
I have already told you that I would vote for HRC if she wins the nomination. (previous thread)
My problem is that 10% is a psychological difference, as well as blatantly dishonest. They can toss out the 'Double Digit Victory' crap as some sort of dominating victory for HRC, despite the fact that she was up 20pts not two months ago.
I think it is a perfect illustration of the fact that the media is going to manipulate this to make the 'race' (which is over) seem a lot closer than it is. Again, 9.2% rounds to 9%, not 10%. There is a difference there.
April 24, 2008
10:56 AM
Shaggy aka Obamas typical bitter white person writes:
Yea....don't take away anymore than you have to from Obama...His followers don't want to see the truth and the truth is that he got his ass handed to him.
He hasn't won in the last three primaries and his margins are growing.
The fact he lost so big was because he is being exposed to the people and he fell flat on his face in the last debate and now he is pouting and refusing to attend another debate.
Obamas groupies don't want to know who he really is.
I for one am glad he is beginning to be exposed for who he and his friends are before the nomination process ends.
No wonder why Obama and his groupies want Hillary to bow out quickly.
Hillary needs to stay in for the Democratic party's own good.
If/when more of Obamas disgusting past comes to light they are going to need someone they can place as their nominee when it is proven Obama will not have a chance in the General.
April 24, 2008
11:15 AM
JW writes:
"Hey JW - Don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say that did I?"
Ive seen you say it in the past. Hillary is negative and Obama is not. Blah blah blah.
As for the 12 delegates, yep, means nada.
The 250k popular vote though...
Again, this DNC screw up of bouncing Mich and Florida is a huge mistake. Hillary is now arguing she's winning the pop vote, and if you include those states, she is.
April 24, 2008
11:25 AM
benn writes:
Ummm, no JW.
Don't get so paranoid - i haven't attacked HRC in any form on this thread. And we did have a past discussion about HRC v Obama... and we even reached an agreement on that.
I am attacking the media however, and it surprises me (Mr. Critical Thinking) that you think it is okay for the media to lie about the margin of victory for any candidate, and then use that margin to drive their headlines.
April 24, 2008
12:00 PM
jay writes:
Hillary's pop vote argument is ridiculous.
Individual votes in several states weren't even tallied...and obama wasn't even on the ticket in michigan and didn't campaign at all in florida.
it's a chump's position. it is absolutely meaningless.
her math problem hasn't changed in more than 2 months.
at this point...according to the math...even if she somehow manages to split the remaining delegates, she still has to convince 2/3rds of the uncommitted delegates to vote for her...without the popular vote lead.
prolonging the inevitable.
April 24, 2008
12:18 PM
JW writes:
"I am attacking the media however, and it surprises me (Mr. Critical Thinking) that you think it is okay for the media to lie about the margin of victory for any candidate, and then use that margin to drive their headlines."
I dont disagree. Im just so unimpressed with media in general, I guess its just one more thing on a pile of things, so Im having trouble really getting pissed about it. Besides, the Avs are playing the Wings tonight! In true American style, Ive got better things to think about!
"Hillary's pop vote argument is ridiculous."
If you dont believe in democracy, I suppose thats true.
But you know, it is kind of THE POINT of holding elections-to elect the person the most people want representing them.
"Individual votes in several states weren't even tallied"
Thats not very good procedure in a democracy, even a representative one.
"...and obama wasn't even on the ticket in michigan and didn't campaign at all in florida."
Again, the DNC has royally screwed this up. On the one hand, this is a democracy and so people's votes should count. On the other, your argument above. There is NO equitable solution. Neither argument is any more valid than the other, because neither works out in a way that is fair to everyone. They need to fix this.
"it's a chump's position. it is absolutely meaningless."
Sounds tough jay! You been working out?
BTW, you just said that all the people who voted in michigan and florida are meaningless. Thats pretty stupid, and amazingly self-centered. If I were one of them, I might reply with something like "Fuck you commie MF'er. This is America! I get to vote even if your chump commie ass doesnt think I should!".
As for the rest, whatever. You dont even care that people are being disinfranchised from voting. You got your vote (or atleast the oportunity to vote and have it count). Its hypocritical to say the fact that others didnt doesnt matter just because you want to see Obama get the nod. Youd be FREAKING OUT in their place.
April 24, 2008
12:30 PM
JW writes:
Its funny, but Ive said before that the abortion debate is pretty much an example of how all political debate in this country goes, and in this case its true as well.
With abortion, youve got two sides with ideological stances so strong they refuse to budge even a bit, and the result is that neither see the real solution which actually would benefit both sides.
In this case, same scenario;
Obama-Rules are rules.
Hillary-Pop vote means more than delegate.
Obama's is unsatisfactory because it disinfranchises two states voters. Its also strategically stupid, particularly in the case of Florida based on its importance in General Elections.
Hillary's is unsatisfactory because it relies on totals from two states in which Obama was not represented, meaning that those totals are not truely indicative of how that vote would actually bear out.
The solution is quite simple; rerun those states votes and have them count. It would be fair. No one gets disinfranchised.
But Obama people are so emotionally locked in, they dont care. Hillary people are the same. And neither side can back off enough to just say "fuck it! Hold the elections again and lets settle this crap once and for all!"
Stupid.
April 24, 2008
2:23 PM
Shaggy aka Obamas typical bitter white person writes:
Heres my two cents on the Michigan and Florida issue as an outsider with very little interest.
First off, the Democratic leaders made the rules and made everyone aware of the rules and the penalties if the rules were to be broken.
That in a nutshell should be the end of it right there. Michigan and Florida should not count.
Then we have Hillary and Obama BOTH agreeing that they shouldn't count, with Obama withdrawing his name and not even Campaigning.
End of story...no re-vote…no count.
However, Hillary looks to be the stronger Candidate ever since Obama past has been exposed.
If they don't allow Michigan and Florida play a role, they will feel betrayed and will be pissed off. Most of these people will be Hillary supporters, that should raise a red flag for the Dem leaders because these people may Vote McCain in protest.
Then again, if they let them count and Hillary takes the popular vote (still not sure if this is possible) or at least convince the Super D's that she will be the one to best match up against McCain and steals it from under Obama they will have another group of pissed off people that may defect.
Bottom line is both Candidates have legitimate concerns but beings Michigan and Florida both knew the rules about opening up early and were repeatedly warned about the consequences if they did so and the FACT that BOTH Hillary and Obama agreed before hand that they shouldn't be allowed should be the final word on this.
Turn it around.
If Hillary was in the lead and Obama might be able to secure the nominee if they counted, we would have Hillary screaming bloody murder.
Besides from what I have heard Hillary still would be around 250,000 votes short of Obama.
Several experts who have done the math suggests that Hillary will need 58% of the votes in the coming primaries to catch Obama and still would come up short.
Hillary makes a good point about being the best Candidate because she is on a role and Obama seems to be fading with all of his garbage getting exposed and who knows what else will surface.
I think if these primaries were to be held from scratch and knowing what we know now about Obama, she would have sealed the deal many moons ago.
Obama gained his delegates and popular before his god like syndrome was exposed.
Don't see anyone fainting over him anymore.
Anyhoo, thats my two cents on the matter.
Obama and Hillary are both very poor candidates whichever way one looks at it.
Here is my question though.
How many people voted for Hillary because there is no way they will vote for the very left Liberal Obama?
In my opinion, Hillary would be the tougher candidate because Obama has too many unknowns and too little experience. We all know they are both liars.
Having the media not ask Obama any tough questions early on actually hurt him and the Democratic Party because they may get stuck nominating the weaker Candidate.
If he were exposed early on chances are he would have been dropped along time ago.
April 24, 2008
2:38 PM
jay writes:
"However, Hillary looks to be the stronger Candidate ever since Obama past has been exposed."
you sounded so good until you slipped back into hyperpartisan hackery
April 24, 2008
2:55 PM
jay writes:
"If you dont believe in democracy, I suppose thats true."
This is a strawman argument. i believe in democracy enough to understand that the "popular vote" that hillary is still using as an excuse to stay in an winnable race doesn't represent an accurate tally of the popular vote. period. it's just corrupted data if you like.
furthermore, if we rerun mi and fl (which I’m all for) then we also have to rerun all the states in which the popular vote wasn't tallied…which granted is a shoddy way to run a primary…but that’s the situation with which we’re dealing.
it still comes down to the math.
“Again, the DNC has royally screwed this up.”
The DNC has certainly handled the aftermath poorly…but they didn’t “screw this up”…that was fl and mi by refusing to abide by the primary rules already in place. Their behavior invalidated their votes because both candidates weren’t given the opportunity to compete for the voters allegiances. We need to keep those details in mind when handing out the blame, if there’s even a need for it, because it still doesn’t change the math.
“BTW, you just said that all the people who voted in michigan and florida are meaningless. Thats pretty stupid, and amazingly self-centered. If I were one of them, I might reply with something like "Fuck you commie MF'er. This is America! I get to vote even if your chump commie ass doesnt think I should!".”
Again..this is a strawman argument. I don’t think “all the people who voted in mi and fl are meaningless”…I think that their votes are meaningless because of the corrupted process that failed to represent a true democracy in that both candidates weren’t allowed to compete for the states. It just comes down to the quality of the data…and in this case the folks in the states have nothing to do with that. It isn’t their fault. It is the fault of the local election committees who chose to invalidate their own results because of their irresponsible behavior.
“You dont even care that people are being disinfranchised from voting.”
This is another strawman argument. Of course I would care if people were being disenfranchised from voting. Here too we have to remember who invalidated these vote results and what the process would entail in order to get a complete set of data representing the accurate popular vote. I am all for that process…but that would entail revoting in at least six states…all of which have already voted…and two of whom still haven’t been open to the candidates’ campaigns. Again…I’m all for doing that…but I think we can agree that it’s probably not realistically going to happen…which once more brings us back to that pesky math.
She can split the delegates for the rest of the remaining few primaries and would still have to sway 2/3rds of the remaining uncommitted superdelegates…without the popular vote.
As I said earlier, I hope that she chooses to stop prolonging the inevitable and accept reality and start helping the dems with their race for the presidency instead of hindering it.
April 24, 2008
3:16 PM
Shaggy aka Obamas typical bitter white person writes:
jay,
Who really cares what you think?
You post hear-say shit as coming directly from the source and never back it up with a direct link which in turn gives you zero credibility.
April 24, 2008
3:36 PM
Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) Republican, because not everyone can be on welfare. writes:
JW,
I agree with most of your points that you posted. I contrast that with your personal attacks on so many posters. For all your knowledge you would do well to learn that personal attacks do nothing to bolster your points. Your anger creates a toxic environment that poisons your points. With your knowledge you build a solid structure and then your anger destroys it.
For all of you who put such value in polls, you need to discount them based on the win in PA and the avalanche of money that came to Hillary following the win. Those two things scream louder than any poll.
April 24, 2008
5:41 PM
Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) Republican, because not everyone can be on welfare. writes:
JW,
In answer to your question about my proposal for income tax, if you look at the link below, you will see that 70% of the income tax is paid by people earning more than $103,000 per year. McCain says he can cut spending by 30%. I could cut it by a lot more, so my $100K cut off would leave the government with more money than it deserves. And by shielding each person up to the $100K, families would get total relief from the Stalinist thieves. I would cap defense spending to 5% of GDP without a declared war, and with a declared war I would require compulsory military service for everyone 18 and over.
Department of:
Agriculture Eliminate
Commerce Only international and interstate trade
Department of Defense Stays
National Intelligence Program Stays
Department of Education Eliminate
Department of Energy Eliminate
Department of Health and Human Services Eliminate
Department of Homeland Security Stays
Department of Housing and Urban Development Eliminate
Department of the Interior Eliminate
Department of Justice Stays
Department of Labor Eliminate
Department of State and Other International Programs Stays
Department of Transportation Only for interstate transporation facilities
Department of the Treasury Stays
Department of Veterans Affairs Stays
Corps of Engineers - Civil Works Eliminate
Environmental Protection Agency Can only enforce pollution that extends beyond a states borders
National Aeronautics and Space Administration Eliminate
National Science Foundation Eliminate
Small Business Administration Eliminate
Social Security Administration Eliminate
http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=6
April 25, 2008
10:02 AM
William Shakespeare writes:
Most learned Hogar -
Savest thou breath in counsel of the young and foolish JDumbya. As I wrote, "He is as a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, yet signifying nothing"
April 26, 2008
12:22 PM
jayisanidiot writes:
Careful Jay, your typing style is shifting again. Keep that up and people will start to think that you post in multiple aliases.
April 26, 2008
12:28 PM
jayisanidiot writes:
Or maybe JW hit Return too quickly when this list of previously used names popped up with "jay" when he began typing JW.
Either way, you are busted again moron.
April 26, 2008
3:32 PM
It's True writes:
I have been reluctant to agree with someone who seems to like to flame more often than not - but jayisanidiot points out a very curious happenstance. A post signed by jay is an answer by JW to previous posts directed at him. How could that happen? JW would have had to miss capitalizing the J, add another small case letter by mistake, and add a third letter also by mistake. Seems the theory holds water.