Jump to content

Going, Going, almost Gone.


Guest Patriot
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Patriot

Obama's shell is cracking before our eyes. He was destroyed in the debate with the Ice Queen. Now

we read that his racist pastor is building a huge mansion in a white neighborhood which will also

carry a 10 million line of credit for the Reverend's dalliances.

I'm sure the poor blacks that attend the good Rev.'s church will be invited to the big house warming

party that Obama's sure to attend. Obama could also score some points with the bitter whites in PA.

if he brought some of them along to the party (check the guns and bibles at the door).

McCain has pulled even with Obama in the latest polls and willl continue pull ahead as long as the

the Ice Queen continues to beat up Obama in speeches and debates. Obama was missing his big

smile in the debate, he was nervous and his eyes blinked constantly, he's sees the White House

slipping away as his luster fades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
Obama's shell is cracking before our eyes. He was destroyed in the debate with the Ice Queen. Now

we read that his racist pastor is building a huge mansion in a white neighborhood which will also

carry a 10 million line of credit for the Reverend's dalliances.

I'm sure the poor blacks that attend the good Rev.'s church will be invited to the big house warming

party that Obama's sure to attend. Obama could also score some points with the bitter whites in PA.

if he brought some of them along to the party (check the guns and bibles at the door).

McCain has pulled even with Obama in the latest polls and willl continue pull ahead as long as the

the Ice Queen continues to beat up Obama in speeches and debates. Obama was missing his big

smile in the debate, he was nervous and his eyes blinked constantly, he's sees the White House

slipping away as his luster fades.

Yup, no doubt about it, his bags are packed and ready to go.

Forward his mail to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, D.C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
Obama's shell is cracking before our eyes. He was destroyed in the debate with the Ice Queen. Now

we read that his racist pastor is building a huge mansion in a white neighborhood which will also

carry a 10 million line of credit for the Reverend's dalliances.

I'm sure the poor blacks that attend the good Rev.'s church will be invited to the big house warming

party that Obama's sure to attend. Obama could also score some points with the bitter whites in PA.

if he brought some of them along to the party (check the guns and bibles at the door).

McCain has pulled even with Obama in the latest polls and willl continue pull ahead as long as the

the Ice Queen continues to beat up Obama in speeches and debates. Obama was missing his big

smile in the debate, he was nervous and his eyes blinked constantly, he's sees the White House

slipping away as his luster fades.

So much blabbering to try and cover up what a terrible candidate the Republicans have. Good luck winning an election with a guy who's for the war when the vast majority of Americans are against it, and with a guy who admits he doesn't know the economy, when the economy is a close second (sometimes a first depending on the poll) priority for Americans.

The free ride is over. Get used to it. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obama's shell is cracking before our eyes. He was destroyed in the debate with the Ice Queen. Now

we read that his racist pastor is building a huge mansion in a white neighborhood which will also

carry a 10 million line of credit for the Reverend's dalliances.

I'm sure the poor blacks that attend the good Rev.'s church will be invited to the big house warming

party that Obama's sure to attend. Obama could also score some points with the bitter whites in PA.

if he brought some of them along to the party (check the guns and bibles at the door).

McCain has pulled even with Obama in the latest polls and willl continue pull ahead as long as the

the Ice Queen continues to beat up Obama in speeches and debates. Obama was missing his big

smile in the debate, he was nervous and his eyes blinked constantly, he's sees the White House

slipping away as his luster fades.

As a betting man, I would wager YOU think the United States of America WON Vietnam! LOL!

Maybe you think the former Saigon is now named Richard Milhous Nixonville? LOL! (or LBJ Junction!!?? LOL!!!)

Watch out for those WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION we seized and dismantled in Iraqnam.........heheheheheh!

BOO!!! A TERRORIST BEHIND YOU !!!! CALL HOMELAND SECURITY!!!!

HAW!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obama's shell is cracking before our eyes. He was destroyed in the debate with the Ice Queen. Now

we read that his racist pastor is building a huge mansion in a white neighborhood which will also

carry a 10 million line of credit for the Reverend's dalliances.

I'm sure the poor blacks that attend the good Rev.'s church will be invited to the big house warming

party that Obama's sure to attend. Obama could also score some points with the bitter whites in PA.

if he brought some of them along to the party (check the guns and bibles at the door).

McCain has pulled even with Obama in the latest polls and willl continue pull ahead as long as the

the Ice Queen continues to beat up Obama in speeches and debates. Obama was missing his big

smile in the debate, he was nervous and his eyes blinked constantly, he's sees the White House

slipping away as his luster fades.

These self-proclaimed "Patriots" are nothing but Bush deadenders saturated by Rish Limpie radio to the point where denial of reality becomes their standard..............contrast the following news article with the assertions in the post that started this thread..........

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080418/ts_nm/...itics_time_dc_1

Obama keeps rolling as Clinton running out of time

By John Whitesides, Political Correspondent

Fri Apr 18, 1:37 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - After a tough six-week stretch of campaign gaffes, roaring controversies and heightened scrutiny, Barack Obama's presidential bid appears as strong as ever -- and rival Hillary Clinton is running out of time to change the script.

Obama has expanded his lead on Clinton in many national polls and gained ground on her in the next battleground of Pennsylvania ahead of Tuesday's vote, despite furors over his remarks on small-town residents and inflammatory comments by his former pastor.

Clinton's image appeared to take a heavier hit after wrongly claiming she faced sniper fire in Bosnia in 1996. A Washington Post poll this week found more Americans have an unfavorable impression of her than at any time since she entered the national limelight in 1992.

"It hasn't been a bed of roses for Obama. He's had some problems. But she is the one whose negatives are going up," said Phil Noble, head of the South Carolina New Democrats group and an Obama supporter.

Obama has a nearly unassailable lead on the New York senator in delegates to the August nominating convention and in popular votes won in the first three months of the primary battle.

Clinton hopes a big Pennsylvania win ignites a strong run through the final nine contests, fundamentally reordering the race and giving her fresh evidence to argue she is the strongest candidate to face Republican John McCain in November's presidential election.

But polls show Obama has whittled her once substantial double-digit lead in Pennsylvania to single digits. A Zogby poll on Friday put her lead at 4 points, a Rasmussen poll showed it at 3 points and a Los Angeles Times poll earlier this week had it at 5 points.

A narrow Clinton win probably would be enough to keep her in the race, but would not stem another round of calls among Democrats for her to step aside and let Obama concentrate on the race with McCain.

OBAMA LEAD GROWS

Obama has expanded his national lead in several polls. A Reuters/Zogby poll released earlier this week put it at 13 points, and a daily Gallup tracking poll had it at 7 points, down from his high of 11 earlier in the week.

Obama continues to steadily win endorsements from superdelegates, the nearly 800 Democratic Party insiders who are free to back any candidate and who hold the key to winning the nomination.

"It doesn't seem like she has the power to alter the dynamic of the race anymore," said Simon Rosenberg, head of the Democratic advocacy group NDN.

Rosenberg said Clinton's scenario for winning the Democratic nomination was no longer believable.

"In every way you can measure it, he's won more delegates, he's won more states, he's raised more money, he has a better organization -- all the metrics one has of how to evaluate the race indicate he is winning and she is losing," he said.

Obama, an Illinois senator who would be the first black U.S. president, weathered a flap in March about the controversial comments of his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, by giving a widely praised speech on race.

He ignited another firestorm last weekend when his comments about small-town residents at a private San Francisco fundraiser became public. He said small-town residents were clinging to religion and guns out of bitterness about their economic struggles.

In the six-week lull between the last contest in Mississippi, which Obama won, and Tuesday's vote in Pennsylvania, those flaps and Clinton's Bosnia controversy dominated the campaign debate.

But so far, none of the controversies appears to have the strength to derail Obama.

"Voters in the end may not be that agitated about these kinds of things," said Linda Fowler, a political analyst at Dartmouth College in New Hampshire. "They really are more concerned about the war and the economy and which candidate is more effective."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
Obama's shell is cracking before our eyes. He was destroyed in the debate with the Ice Queen. Now

we read that his racist pastor is building a huge mansion in a white neighborhood which will also

carry a 10 million line of credit for the Reverend's dalliances.

I'm sure the poor blacks that attend the good Rev.'s church will be invited to the big house warming

party that Obama's sure to attend. Obama could also score some points with the bitter whites in PA.

if he brought some of them along to the party (check the guns and bibles at the door).

McCain has pulled even with Obama in the latest polls and willl continue pull ahead as long as the

the Ice Queen continues to beat up Obama in speeches and debates. Obama was missing his big

smile in the debate, he was nervous and his eyes blinked constantly, he's sees the White House

slipping away as his luster fades.

Awww, are you still trying to cope with the fact that you're not going to get to run against Hillary? Boo hoo, deal with it. Hillary would need to win EVERY remaining primary by THIRTY POINTS to surpass Obama in pledged delegates.

Feel free to hold your breath for that, Patrat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest

May I quote a small excerpt I'd like to emphasize?

"In the days since the surfacing of Obama's worst gaffe of the campaign — an observation that small town Americans are bitter folk who cling to religion and guns out of frustration — he has gained six convention superdelegates, to four for Clinton." --http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080418/ap_on_go_pr_wh/delegate_challenge

In other words, nice try, guys, but Obama's the Unstoppable Force here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 2smart4u
As a betting man, I would wager YOU think the United States of America WON Vietnam! LOL!

Maybe you think the former Saigon is now named Richard Milhous Nixonville? LOL! (or LBJ Junction!!?? LOL!!!)

Watch out for those WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION we seized and dismantled in Iraqnam.........heheheheheh!

BOO!!! A TERRORIST BEHIND YOU !!!! CALL HOMELAND SECURITY!!!!

HAW!!!!!

See kids, this is what Kool-Aid does to the brain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PRINCETON, NJ -- Gallup Poll Daily tracking shows that Hillary Clinton now receives 46% of the support of Democrats nationally, compared to 45% for Barack Obama, marking the first time Obama has not led in Gallup's daily tracking since March 18-20.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/106606/Gallup-D...6-Obama-45.aspx

It's a tribute to Obama, of course, that he can have such a horrible month but still have supposedly objective journalists and sycophants like Mancrush telling us how he's on a roll.

Great article at Politico:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0408/9718.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PRINCETON, NJ -- Gallup Poll Daily tracking shows that Hillary Clinton now receives 46% of the support of Democrats nationally, compared to 45% for Barack Obama, marking the first time Obama has not led in Gallup's daily tracking since March 18-20.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/106606/Gallup-D...6-Obama-45.aspx

It's a tribute to Obama, of course, that he can have such a horrible month but still have supposedly objective journalists and sycophants like Mancrush telling us how he's on a roll.

Great article at Politico:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0408/9718.html

I guess I must be making this stuff up!! LOL!!

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/elec...ll_N.htm?csp=34

Obama widens national lead in USA TODAY/Gallup Poll

WASHINGTON — Barack Obama has widened his lead nationally for the Democratic presidential nomination despite a furor over his comments about small-town Americans, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds. Rival Hillary Rodham Clinton is getting more of the blame among those who say their contest has become too negative.

As the candidates make a final push for votes in today's Pennsylvania primary, Obama leads the survey by 50%-40% among Democrats and voters who lean Democratic. That's a bigger edge than the 7 percentage-point lead he held in the USA TODAY poll last month.

Efforts by Clinton and John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, to characterize Obama as elitist for his remarks at a San Francisco fundraiser seem to have failed. Seven of 10 say Obama "respects working-class Americans" rather than looks down on them — a slightly more positive reading than that for McCain or Clinton.

In words he later described as ill chosen, Obama said earlier this month that economic hard times had prompted Americans from small towns in Pennsylvania and elsewhere to "get bitter" and "cling to guns or religion or anti-pathy to people who aren't like them."

Meanwhile, President Bush set an unwelcome record, scoring the highest disapproval rating — 69% — in the history of the Gallup Poll, which dates to Franklin Roosevelt's tenure. Bush's approval rating is 28%, matching the low point of his presidency.

Harry Truman still holds the record for the lowest approval rating, at 23%.

A record number of Americans, 63%, now say the invasion of Iraq was a mistake.

In the survey, Obama edges McCain 47%-44% among registered voters. Clinton beats McCain 50%-44%. Both leads are within the margin of error.

Democrats are split on whether the continuing primary campaign is damaging the party's prospects in November.

Half say it is hurting the party and leaders should get together and back one of the contenders; half say it isn't hurting the party and should continue until a candidate clinches the nomination.

Democrats are divided, too, about whether the contest has become too negative. Among the half who say it has, 43% blame Clinton, 3% blame Obama. Fifty-three percent blame both equally.

Both campaigns have sharpened their attacks campaigning and in TV ads in Pennsylvania, where today's primary looms as a crucial test for Clinton's campaign. Statewide surveys show her ahead, but her onetime 20-percentage point lead has narrowed.

The telephone survey of 1,016 adults, taken Friday through Sunday, has a margin of error of +/- 3 points for the full sample. The error margin for the sample of 552 Democrats is 5 points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
I guess I must be making this stuff up!! LOL!!

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/elec...ll_N.htm?csp=34

Obama widens national lead in USA TODAY/Gallup Poll

WASHINGTON — Barack Obama has widened his lead nationally for the Democratic presidential nomination despite a furor over his comments about small-town Americans, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds. Rival Hillary Rodham Clinton is getting more of the blame among those who say their contest has become too negative.

As the candidates make a final push for votes in today's Pennsylvania primary, Obama leads the survey by 50%-40% among Democrats and voters who lean Democratic. That's a bigger edge than the 7 percentage-point lead he held in the USA TODAY poll last month.

Efforts by Clinton and John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, to characterize Obama as elitist for his remarks at a San Francisco fundraiser seem to have failed. Seven of 10 say Obama "respects working-class Americans" rather than looks down on them — a slightly more positive reading than that for McCain or Clinton.

In words he later described as ill chosen, Obama said earlier this month that economic hard times had prompted Americans from small towns in Pennsylvania and elsewhere to "get bitter" and "cling to guns or religion or anti-pathy to people who aren't like them."

Meanwhile, President Bush set an unwelcome record, scoring the highest disapproval rating — 69% — in the history of the Gallup Poll, which dates to Franklin Roosevelt's tenure. Bush's approval rating is 28%, matching the low point of his presidency.

Harry Truman still holds the record for the lowest approval rating, at 23%.

A record number of Americans, 63%, now say the invasion of Iraq was a mistake.

In the survey, Obama edges McCain 47%-44% among registered voters. Clinton beats McCain 50%-44%. Both leads are within the margin of error.

Democrats are split on whether the continuing primary campaign is damaging the party's prospects in November.

Half say it is hurting the party and leaders should get together and back one of the contenders; half say it isn't hurting the party and should continue until a candidate clinches the nomination.

Democrats are divided, too, about whether the contest has become too negative. Among the half who say it has, 43% blame Clinton, 3% blame Obama. Fifty-three percent blame both equally.

Both campaigns have sharpened their attacks campaigning and in TV ads in Pennsylvania, where today's primary looms as a crucial test for Clinton's campaign. Statewide surveys show her ahead, but her onetime 20-percentage point lead has narrowed.

The telephone survey of 1,016 adults, taken Friday through Sunday, has a margin of error of +/- 3 points for the full sample. The error margin for the sample of 552 Democrats is 5 points.

And your point is .........??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I must be making this stuff up!! LOL!!

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/elec...ll_N.htm?csp=34

It just shows how the Politico story is on-target in portraying the media as gung-ho for Obama. The story completely downplays the daily tracking poll that I cited directly from Gallup in favor of (apparently) a composite poll that rolled up a spread of recent results into one total that was more favorable to Obama.

Though it would have been fair for you to note that Gallup's latest daily tracking poll shows Obama leading Clinton again (49-42 +/- 5%). But still trailing in Pennsylvania.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BamaSpin
Awww, are you still trying to cope with the fact that you're not going to get to run against Hillary? Boo hoo, deal with it. Hillary would need to win EVERY remaining primary by THIRTY POINTS to surpass Obama in pledged delegates.

Feel free to hold your breath for that, Patrat.

Wow, do you realize that's inaccurate? Clinton would have to win each of the 10 remaining scheduled contests by TWENTY points each in order to overtake Obama in pledged delegate counts. But neither Obama nor Clinton can win the nomination on pledged delegates alone. As a result, this will be decided by the superdelegates. Why? Because Democratic "leaders" have decided Florida and Michigan don't count. Yup, two key states Democrats MUST win in November are being told you don't count because your State legislature held your election too early. If I'm a Democrat in Florida about now, with a Republican State Legislature and Republican Governor who adopted a January election primary date, I'd be really, really disgusted with the Democrats for saying I don't count.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
Wow, do you realize that's inaccurate?

Head on over to Slate's delegate calculator, give Clinton a 65/35 lead on Obama using the 'master' scrollbar up top, and look at the results. Then tell me how inaccurate it is.

Clinton would have to win each of the 10 remaining scheduled contests by TWENTY points each in order to overtake Obama in pledged delegate counts. But neither Obama nor Clinton can win the nomination on pledged delegates alone.

The superdelegates would be committing political suicide if they did anything than go with the will of the people. They wouldn't do that. They will support Obama as they should.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The superdelegates would be committing political suicide if they did anything than go with the will of the people. They wouldn't do that. They will support Obama as they should.

Clinton may yet capture the popular vote.

This would eliminate Obama's current popular vote margin, without including Florida and Michigan totals and even if you use imputed vote totals for the four caucus states (Iowa, Nevada, Maine, and Washington) where Democrats did not disclose vote totals. The current popular vote margin for Obama on realclearpolitics.com is, under those favorable assumptions, 827,498. My spreadsheet numbers would give Clinton a 106,186 margin. The Obama margin if you don't give him his imputed margin in those four caucus states is 717,276. My results would convert that to a Clinton popular vote margin of 216,408.

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/barone/2008/3/...gate-count.html

Worried?

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
Head on over to Slate's delegate calculator, give Clinton a 65/35 lead on Obama using the 'master' scrollbar up top, and look at the results. Then tell me how inaccurate it is.

The superdelegates would be committing political suicide if they did anything than go with the will of the people. They wouldn't do that. They will support Obama as they should.

Correcting myself, now that the Pennsylvania vote is in.

Clinton would now need an average of 69% in every remaining primary to catch up in pledged delegates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BamaSpin
Head on over to Slate's delegate calculator, give Clinton a 65/35 lead on Obama using the 'master' scrollbar up top, and look at the results. Then tell me how inaccurate it is.

The superdelegates would be committing political suicide if they did anything than go with the will of the people. They wouldn't do that. They will support Obama as they should.

If you count the "will of the people" as including Florida and Michigan, then Clinton is now very slightly AHEAD in the popular vote. If you don't, then she's behind by about 500,000. So what "should" the superdelegates do with respect to the "will of the people." We'll see come August, but if they decide that Florida and Michigan votes don't count, either by ignoring them or cancelling them out through a 50/50 allocation, how do you expect to carry those swing states in November??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
If you count the "will of the people" as including Florida and Michigan, then Clinton is now very slightly AHEAD in the popular vote. If you don't, then she's behind by about 500,000. So what "should" the superdelegates do with respect to the "will of the people."

Well, we have the delegate system for a reason. They should support whichever candidate has the most pledged delegates.

Maybe we shouldn't have a delegate system, but until/unless that system is changed, that is what the supers should do, as delegates are what decides which candidate is ahead in the current system.

We'll see come August, but if they decide that Florida and Michigan votes don't count, either by ignoring them or cancelling them out through a 50/50 allocation, how do you expect to carry those swing states in November??

The Florida and Michigan situation is a negative for BOTH Democratic candidates, so it's irrelevant here. The outcome of the actual voting shouldn't count because Obama wasn't even on the ballot, and there was no campaigning going on. Democrats in general were disenfranchised, not just Clinton supporters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, we have the delegate system for a reason. They should support whichever candidate has the most pledged delegates.

No doubt you've never made a peep about Gore winning the popular vote in 2000. :blink:

But seriously--kudos if you really didn't make a peep about it.

Maybe we shouldn't have a delegate system, but until/unless that system is changed, that is what the supers should do, as delegates are what decides which candidate is ahead in the current system.

The Florida and Michigan situation is a negative for BOTH Democratic candidates, so it's irrelevant here. The outcome of the actual voting shouldn't count because Obama wasn't even on the ballot, and there was no campaigning going on. Democrats in general were disenfranchised, not just Clinton supporters.

Obama was not on the Michigan ballot. Obama was on the Florida ballot.

The irony that the party that whined so loudly about voter disenfranchisement disenfranchised the voters of two large states via party rules continues to stagger the imagination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Radagast
No doubt you've never made a peep about Gore winning the popular vote in 2000. :blink:

But seriously--kudos if you really didn't make a peep about it.

Obama was not on the Michigan ballot. Obama was on the Florida ballot.

The irony that the party that whined so loudly about voter disenfranchisement disenfranchised the voters of two large states via party rules continues to stagger the imagination.

Bryan,

I want to say up front that I'm deeply touched by your concern about the mechanics of the Democratic Party selection process. I can't understand why your imagination isn't staggered by the fact that the Republican National Committee stripped Florida of half of it's delegation for the same reasons. Somehow when they do it it's not disenfranchisement. Of course, no one's going to notice the Florida shortage at the Republican Convention because the nominee has already been decided.

Michigan and Florida will be represented at the Democratic Convention after the Democratic nominee has been decided also. That will likely be by mid June. It will be Barack Obama. I'll give the odds at this battle going to the Convention about 10-1 against. (Sorry, Bryan.)The party will unite around him. There will be some who walk away, just as some Republicans have walked away from John McCain. However, for the most part, the party faithful will line up behind their respective candidates and move forward.

As far as popular vote in the Democratic Primaries are concerned, the only way Clinton can claim she has won it is by including Michigan where Obama got '0' votes because he was not on the ballot. I'm sure if he were on the ballot he might have gotten a few more.

He has more delegates. He has more of the popular vote. He will be the nominee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bryan,

I want to say up front that I'm deeply touched by your concern about the mechanics of the Democratic Party selection process. I can't understand why your imagination isn't staggered by the fact that the Republican National Committee stripped Florida of half of it's delegation for the same reasons.

It's only roughly half as bad, of course. Tu quoque fallacies are great, aren't they?

Somehow when they do it it's not disenfranchisement. Of course, no one's going to notice the Florida shortage at the Republican Convention because the nominee has already been decided.

Exactly what the Democrats expected when they did double the disenfranchising.

Michigan and Florida will be represented at the Democratic Convention after the Democratic nominee has been decided also.

Wow. That is so wonderful! :)

That will likely be by mid June. It will be Barack Obama.

Probably correct.

I'll give the odds at this battle going to the Convention about 10-1 against. (Sorry, Bryan.)

I don't know why you'd apologize, unless you just happen to agree with me that he's a worse candidate than Clinton. McCain should compete well against either one. I think you may want to adjust your odds, though. The Gallup daily tracking poll has Clinton even with Obama among Democrats (47-47), and she has a realistic shot of overtaking him with the popular vote. That was the argument many have been using to support Obama's candidacy. It will be tough to reverse field on the basis of pledged delegates alone.

The party will unite around him.

Exits polls such as those in Pennsylvania suggest that might not be the case. Relatively high percentages of Clinton voters said they would not vote for Obama, and a smaller but considerable percentage of Obama voters said that they would take McCain over Clinton. Not the stuff of which united parties are made. Obama now appears as damaged goods, and Clinton has simply made herself decreasingly likable even while drawing even in the polls. Though early national election polling means relatively little (since much can change), McCain is extremely competitive against either Democratic candidate.

http://www.pollster.com/08-US-Pres-GE-MvC.php

http://www.pollster.com/08-US-Pres-GE-MvO.php

Politically savvy Democrats are beside themselves that the national polling is as close as it is, and self-preservation will motivate quite a few superdelegates (you know, those delegates that the Democrats created especially in their party to overrule the voters when the voters don't vote at the party leadership would prefer--good luck with a tu quoque on that one).

There will be some who walk away, just as some Republicans have walked away from John McCain. However, for the most part, the party faithful will line up behind their respective candidates and move forward.

...forward into the past of failed socialist policies. The ones Europeans are now realizing have kept them from being economically competitive with the U.S. for years even though they lean so heavily on us for their military needs. Oh, goody. If the electorate is stupid, the Dems win. If enough are educated regarding the damage Dem policies will do to our economy and international standing then McCain wins. And that outcome is more likely if Obama is the nominee. Obama is a radical leftist, not a centrist. McCain is the only candidate with a reasonable claim of being a centrist willing to work both sides of the aisle. Obama is wearing the label, but it doesn't fit him.

As far as popular vote in the Democratic Primaries are concerned, the only way Clinton can claim she has won it is by including Michigan where Obama got '0' votes because he was not on the ballot. I'm sure if he were on the ballot he might have gotten a few more.

Incorrect. The analysis I linked had Clinton turning out the winner based on winning future primaries not including Michigan or Florida.

He has more delegates. He has more of the popular vote. He will be the nominee.

He now has more baggage, astoundingly. His friendships with radicals Wright and Ayers (including board service) and his association with Bernadine Dohrn (aka Mrs. Ayers) have begun to reveal him as a radical leftist. The press is starting to turn on your golden boy.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/HughHew...p;comments=true

It won't worry me if Obama is the candidate unless he wins the general election. That's bad news for America and the rest of the Western world if that happens. It might be very good for Syria and Iran among others, however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Radagast
It's only roughly half as bad, of course. Tu quoque fallacies are great, aren't they?

Exactly what the Democrats expected when they did double the disenfranchising.

Wow. That is so wonderful! :)

Probably correct.

I don't know why you'd apologize, unless you just happen to agree with me that he's a worse candidate than Clinton. McCain should compete well against either one. I think you may want to adjust your odds, though. The Gallup daily tracking poll has Clinton even with Obama among Democrats (47-47), and she has a realistic shot of overtaking him with the popular vote. That was the argument many have been using to support Obama's candidacy. It will be tough to reverse field on the basis of pledged delegates alone.

Exits polls such as those in Pennsylvania suggest that might not be the case. Relatively high percentages of Clinton voters said they would not vote for Obama, and a smaller but considerable percentage of Obama voters said that they would take McCain over Clinton. Not the stuff of which united parties are made. Obama now appears as damaged goods, and Clinton has simply made herself decreasingly likable even while drawing even in the polls. Though early national election polling means relatively little (since much can change), McCain is extremely competitive against either Democratic candidate.

http://www.pollster.com/08-US-Pres-GE-MvC.php

http://www.pollster.com/08-US-Pres-GE-MvO.php

Politically savvy Democrats are beside themselves that the national polling is as close as it is, and self-preservation will motivate quite a few superdelegates (you know, those delegates that the Democrats created especially in their party to overrule the voters when the voters don't vote at the party leadership would prefer--good luck with a tu quoque on that one).

...forward into the past of failed socialist policies. The ones Europeans are now realizing have kept them from being economically competitive with the U.S. for years even though they lean so heavily on us for their military needs. Oh, goody. If the electorate is stupid, the Dems win. If enough are educated regarding the damage Dem policies will do to our economy and international standing then McCain wins. And that outcome is more likely if Obama is the nominee. Obama is a radical leftist, not a centrist. McCain is the only candidate with a reasonable claim of being a centrist willing to work both sides of the aisle. Obama is wearing the label, but it doesn't fit him.

Incorrect. The analysis I linked had Clinton turning out the winner based on winning future primaries not including Michigan or Florida.

He now has more baggage, astoundingly. His friendships with radicals Wright and Ayers (including board service) and his association with Bernadine Dohrn (aka Mrs. Ayers) have begun to reveal him as a radical leftist. The press is starting to turn on your golden boy.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/HughHew...p;comments=true

It won't worry me if Obama is the candidate unless he wins the general election. That's bad news for America and the rest of the Western world if that happens. It might be very good for Syria and Iran among others, however.

What's good for Syria and Iran is fodder for another discussion another day. I don't think Obama has anymore baggage now than he had prior. It is just being propelled by a desparate Clinton camp and Obama is not returning similar fire. She is actually doing him a favor by emptying the septic tank now since it will take the edge off repeated attacks by the Republicans in the Fall. It kind of forces them to find new stuff to throw because the public will have already been bathed in Ayers and Wright. Guilt by association only goes so far. It ain't a closer for McCain by any means. If you give Clinton Indiana by a small margin, throw in West Virginia and Kentucky, she still loses North Carolina, Oregon and Montana. In short, she can't win. After she's is out of the race, the poll numbers will start to clarify between Obama and McCain.

McCain's biggest enemy isn't on issues. Even his extremely unpopular stand on Iraq isn't as big as the unargued issue of his age. Although close in age to McCain, Ronald Reagan was able to overcome the age issue by not looking or acting his age, until after 1984, anyway. In my view, McCain looks and acts like an old man now.

Also, McCain has attached himself at the hip to Bush's policies. That will bring him kudos among Republican's for loyalty but where does that get him in November? If Bush is as unpopular in the Fall as he is now, McCain will have to make the sharpest U Turn in political history after Minneapolis and even that likely won't help.

Even if I were Republican, I don't think I would be very optimistic about the General Election. Unless something good begins to happen with the economy or Iraq, I think it's over. I certainly don't think it's a lock but ..advantage Democrats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Kearny Republican
What's good for Syria and Iran is fodder for another discussion another day. I don't think Obama has anymore baggage now than he had prior. It is just being propelled by a desparate Clinton camp and Obama is not returning similar fire. She is actually doing him a favor by emptying the septic tank now since it will take the edge off repeated attacks by the Republicans in the Fall. It kind of forces them to find new stuff to throw because the public will have already been bathed in Ayers and Wright. Guilt by association only goes so far. It ain't a closer for McCain by any means. If you give Clinton Indiana by a small margin, throw in West Virginia and Kentucky, she still loses North Carolina, Oregon and Montana. In short, she can't win. After she's is out of the race, the poll numbers will start to clarify between Obama and McCain.

McCain's biggest enemy isn't on issues. Even his extremely unpopular stand on Iraq isn't as big as the unargued issue of his age. Although close in age to McCain, Ronald Reagan was able to overcome the age issue by not looking or acting his age, until after 1984, anyway. In my view, McCain looks and acts like an old man now.

Also, McCain has attached himself at the hip to Bush's policies. That will bring him kudos among Republican's for loyalty but where does that get him in November? If Bush is as unpopular in the Fall as he is now, McCain will have to make the sharpest U Turn in political history after Minneapolis and even that likely won't help.

Even if I were Republican, I don't think I would be very optimistic about the General Election. Unless something good begins to happen with the economy or Iraq, I think it's over. I certainly don't think it's a lock but ..advantage Democrats.

You're not considering another factor. Whoever loses, Hillary or Obama, their supporters will not

switch their vote automatically to the winner. Polls show that a third to a half of the losers supporters

will either not vote or vote for McCain. Polls also show McCain running a close second to both Hillary

and Obama. Democratic voters that switch or stay home can swing a close contest to McCain's side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
You're not considering another factor. Whoever loses, Hillary or Obama, their supporters will not

switch their vote automatically to the winner. Polls show that a third to a half of the losers supporters

will either not vote or vote for McCain.

The story will change after there is a clear nominee, and those Dems' focus moves to McCain instead of the other candidate. Polls taken before the Dems have a nominee are not going to tell the full/accurate story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...