http://gamingtrend.com
October 01, 2014, 12:59:47 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Super Tuesday!  (Read 11422 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Canuck
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5474


I live in Japan


View Profile
« on: February 05, 2008, 04:53:21 AM »

It's this Tuesday right?  It's Tuesday here already.  God I'm excited.  American politics are infinitely more exciting than Canadian politics.
Logged
CSL
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1356


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: February 05, 2008, 08:07:57 AM »

My prediction - Obama wins California.

With renewed momentum and money sources going out of Super Tuesday Obama continues his polling upwards and begins sweeping further states like Pennslyvania and Virginia.
Logged
IkeVandergraaf
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2784


RRoD FTL! F MS!


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: February 05, 2008, 12:10:12 PM »

Quick story.

I passed an older gentleman on my way to the polls this morning holding an Obama sign.  As I passed him, I said, "I'm on my way, I'm on my way."  When I passed him on the way home, he said, "You know, we're winning in the exit polls."

I said, "Really?  Here in New York?  I'm surprised."

He said, "Well, here on 84th Street.  Among people who pass me."

I said, "Ok, so your exit poll."

"Yeah, my exit poll."

We had a nice chuckle.  Anyway I've been having kind of a shitty week, so that at least gave me a smile.  I don't expect Obama will win in New York, but it'd be nice if he made a strong showing.
Logged

Gamertag = IkeV
I KNOW DEEP IN MY NMIND THAT THIS DISGUSTING WEBSITE THAT IS OBIVOUSLY OPERATED BY HIGHSCHOOL DROPOUTS LIVING PURPOSELESS AND JOBLESS LIVES
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #3 on: February 05, 2008, 04:18:07 PM »

I still haven't fully been convinced to the rhetoric of change.

It's funny though, because all the so-called foreign policy hawks are whining because he doesn't have "foreign policy experience".  However, all these guys were the ones praising the GWB's Dream Team eight years ago... so my real surprise is that anyone is still listening to these idiots.

I don't think America can survive another one of these guy's dream teams.
Logged
Calvin
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13895

President of G.R.O.S.S.


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: February 05, 2008, 08:44:30 PM »

Quote from: CSL on February 05, 2008, 08:07:57 AM

My prediction - Obama wins California.

With renewed momentum and money sources going out of Super Tuesday Obama continues his polling upwards and begins sweeping further states like Pennslyvania and Virginia.

Wins California? LOL.
Logged
warning
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7325



View Profile
« Reply #5 on: February 05, 2008, 10:16:09 PM »

I voted against Clinton.
Logged
CSL
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1356


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: February 06, 2008, 03:14:46 AM »

Quote from: warning on February 05, 2008, 10:16:09 PM

I voted against Clinton.

If only more would.
Logged
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71766


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: February 06, 2008, 05:07:16 AM »

well, if it comes down to Obama vs McCain I'm not sure which way I'll go.  I don't like Obama's name, while McCain reminds me of the name McBain from the Simpsons, who was pretty cool.  Of course if Hil gets the nom then she's got my vote because I like Bill.

Of course if Nader gets in he's pretty close to Vader.....
Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3458



View Profile
« Reply #8 on: February 06, 2008, 04:04:42 PM »

Call me a flip-flopper, but I've decided to go with Obama (for now).  I've been a staunch Hillary supporter for a couple of years now, but after listening to Obama last night I've switched.  The reasons are two-fold:

1  Obama himself - while I consider him a bit too liberal for my tastes, I like the way he's conducted his campaign and he's an amazing speaker.  Hillary has done too badly (and is probably the more conservative candidate), but I'm a bit turned off by their tactics in SC. 

But the big reason is:

2.  I think Obama is the guy who can beat McCain.  I was a staunch McCain supporter in 2000.  You know, the guy who was the fiscally conservative candidate who was open on social issues.  But seeing as he's going to get the nomination, I've taken a hard look again at his positions and he's the biggest opportunity whore of the whole election (well, 2nd to Romney).  He's flipped on his social stances (especially abortion), his war rhetoric doesn't play well after two long and grueling conflicts and his financial stances are nothing more than "give big business whatever they want, shit on the little guy".  He has no health care plan, wants to extend the tax cuts for the superrich and basically has no financial plan for the struggling middle class.  Plus, I have a sneaky suspicion that he'll pick Huckabee for Veep, and there's no way in hell I want that religious nutbag ("change the Constitution") anywhere near the White House.

As such, he's turned into GWB Jr. and I've had enough of those failed policies.  I think Obama stands a better chance of attracting the Independent vote than Hillary that will be necessary in November.  McCain won't be able to position himself as the anti-establishmentarian candidate that he's run on in the past to attract Independents.  Religious Conservatives don't have the same hatred for Obama that they do for Hillary (never figured that one out...), so Obama won't likely galvanize and unite the religious right canvassing machine.  As such, I'm going towards Obama.  Of course, I still expect a skeleton to pop out of Obama's closet.  And if he goes down the race road I'll be the first rat to jump that ship. 
Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
denoginizer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6538


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: February 06, 2008, 06:27:05 PM »

I think it's funny that liberals are all trying to label McCain as a George Bush clone, and conservatives are trying to label him a Bill Clinton clone...

I think that means he must be doing someting right.   icon_biggrin
Logged

Xbox Live Tag: denoginizer
PSN Name: denoginizer
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3458



View Profile
« Reply #10 on: February 06, 2008, 06:37:00 PM »

Quote from: denoginizer on February 06, 2008, 06:27:05 PM

I think it's funny that liberals are all trying to label McCain as a George Bush clone, and conservatives are trying to label him a Bill Clinton clone...

I think that means he must be doing someting right.   icon_biggrin

No, it's just he's no longer trusted by either side.  You can't be the liberal maverick in 2000 and be the establishment conservative candidate in 2008 without having your morals and judgement understandably questioned.  McCain's reversed position on virtually every social issue out there, so how can anyone trust him?

I vastly prefer McCain to Bush because I don't think McCain will allow the further erosion of civil liberties and support torture.  I also think he's more fiscally responsible and more willing to compromise.  But on the war, helping big business while shitting on the little guy and health care, his positions are no different than GWB's failed policies.
Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
denoginizer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6538


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: February 06, 2008, 08:21:16 PM »

Quote from: Blackadar on February 06, 2008, 06:37:00 PM

No, it's just he's no longer trusted by either side.  You can't be the liberal maverick in 2000 and be the establishment conservative candidate in 2008 without having your morals and judgement understandably questioned.  McCain's reversed position on virtually every social issue out there, so how can anyone trust him?

Name a poiitician who hasn't changed positions on issues.  Especially one who has been around for a long time.  Social positions change because social conditions change. McCain tends to be liked by so-called left wing republicans and so-called right wing democrats.  In other words he is pretty much down the middle politically.  Which I like.  Honestly I don't really know where Obabma stands.  I have a feeling that if he were to become president he would more hawkish than he would admit to now. 
Logged

Xbox Live Tag: denoginizer
PSN Name: denoginizer
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3458



View Profile
« Reply #12 on: February 06, 2008, 09:32:48 PM »

Quote from: denoginizer on February 06, 2008, 08:21:16 PM

Quote from: Blackadar on February 06, 2008, 06:37:00 PM

No, it's just he's no longer trusted by either side.  You can't be the liberal maverick in 2000 and be the establishment conservative candidate in 2008 without having your morals and judgement understandably questioned.  McCain's reversed position on virtually every social issue out there, so how can anyone trust him?

Name a poiitician who hasn't changed positions on issues.  Especially one who has been around for a long time.  Social positions change because social conditions change. McCain tends to be liked by so-called left wing republicans and so-called right wing democrats.  In other words he is pretty much down the middle politically.  Which I like.  Honestly I don't really know where Obabma stands.  I have a feeling that if he were to become president he would more hawkish than he would admit to now. 

Hmmm...changed positions on abortion (for choice 2000, against 2008), "Don't Ask Don't Tell" (against mid-90s, for 2008), gay marriage (in 11 minutes! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeBw28tX5Nw), SC Confederate Flag (2000 for, 2008 against), Jerry Faldell ("agent of intolerance" in 2000, speaking at Liberty University in 2006), ethanol, campaign finance reform, tax cuts, blah, blah blah...

I think you'd have a hard time finding any candidate who has changed positions as many times as McCain in such a short period.  Only Romney could compete for the flip-flop title, which is why many social conservatives voted for Huckabee rather than Romney.

We're not talking about an "evolution" of positions over a long period of time.  We're talking blatent pandering and flip-flopping based on campaign strategy.  Hence the reason why social conservatives don't trust him and why liberals and now many true independents don't trust him.  Seriously, how can you even know what McCain stands for?
Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #13 on: February 07, 2008, 08:24:43 PM »

That's the great thing about McCain.  No matter what you opinion is, he was a staunch supporter of that position at one time or another.
Logged
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18545



View Profile WWW
« Reply #14 on: February 07, 2008, 08:26:15 PM »

So when does this crap all get decided?
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: February 07, 2008, 08:33:48 PM »

Quote from: Purge on February 07, 2008, 08:26:15 PM

So when does this crap all get decided?

Romney dropped out so the Republican nominee (McCain) is pretty much decided now.

Barring Clinton or Obama dropping out, the Democratic nominee probably won't be decided until the convention this summer. 
Logged
Laner
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4693


Badassfully


View Profile WWW
« Reply #16 on: February 07, 2008, 11:59:09 PM »

Quote from: Kevin Grey on February 07, 2008, 08:33:48 PM

Quote from: Purge on February 07, 2008, 08:26:15 PM

So when does this crap all get decided?

Romney dropped out so the Republican nominee (McCain) is pretty much decided now.

Barring Clinton or Obama dropping out, the Democratic nominee probably won't be decided until the convention this summer. 
Ick.

Where's Richard Pryor when you need him?
Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: February 08, 2008, 12:37:16 AM »

Quote from: Kevin Grey on February 07, 2008, 08:33:48 PM

Barring Clinton or Obama dropping out, the Democratic nominee probably won't be decided until the convention this summer. 

The party won't let that happen.  Dean's already said they'd intercede by mid-April.  No way does a candidate get chosen in late August and given 8 weeks to run a race.
Logged
denoginizer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6538


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: February 08, 2008, 03:17:31 AM »

Quote from: Brendan on February 08, 2008, 12:37:16 AM

Quote from: Kevin Grey on February 07, 2008, 08:33:48 PM

Barring Clinton or Obama dropping out, the Democratic nominee probably won't be decided until the convention this summer. 

The party won't let that happen.  Dean's already said they'd intercede by mid-April.  No way does a candidate get chosen in late August and given 8 weeks to run a race.

We'll see about that.  This is the Democratic party we are talking about here.  If there's a way to eff it up they will find it.  The Republicans have already started to form up behind McCain, while the Dems will be screwing around for months.  The Democrats need to run more winner take all primaries.  In the typical liberal way of thinking, they like to have everybody win something in those silly proportional delegate awards.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2008, 03:23:20 AM by denoginizer » Logged

Xbox Live Tag: denoginizer
PSN Name: denoginizer
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: February 08, 2008, 03:40:31 AM »

Quote from: denoginizer on February 08, 2008, 03:17:31 AM

Quote from: Brendan on February 08, 2008, 12:37:16 AM

Quote from: Kevin Grey on February 07, 2008, 08:33:48 PM

Barring Clinton or Obama dropping out, the Democratic nominee probably won't be decided until the convention this summer. 

The party won't let that happen.  Dean's already said they'd intercede by mid-April.  No way does a candidate get chosen in late August and given 8 weeks to run a race.

We'll see about that.  This is the Democratic party we are talking about here.  If there's a way to eff it up they will find it.  The Republicans have already started to form up behind McCain, while the Dems will be screwing around for months.  The Democrats need to run more winner take all primaries.  In the typical liberal way of thinking, they like to have everybody win something in those silly proportional delegate awards.

Rose colored glasses much?  Conservatives hate McCain - just look at Laura Ingraham's speech at CPAC today where she spent a great deal of time questioning his conservative credentials.  It was a classic moment - she was introducing Romney, but didn't know he was about to withdraw from the race during his speech.  Attendees at the conference were explicitly asked not to boo McCain.  Limbaugh says he won't vote for him.  Coulter says she'd rather vote for Clinton.  Glenn Beck says he'd rather sit in his garage with the car on than vote for McCain.

They'll all still vote for him, to be sure - but let's just say his popular support amongst the base of his party is lacking.

Meanwhile, Clinton and Obama have taken in 6 or 7 million dollars each since super Tuesday.  Voter turnout for the dem primaries/caucuses was fantastic.  The key is that democratic voters are excited about both candidates; I certainly have a preference, but I will be there on election day pulling the lever for whichever of the two is nominated, because they're both qualified and capable.

RightRoots.com, which is the conservative attempt to replicate ActBlue.com, has been placing banner ads across republican sites this week advertising a "fundraising bomb" called F7.  The ads say "F7:  Stop Hillary!" and ask for right-leaning donors to donate specifically on February 7th in order to make a point about their grassroots support.  Let's check Red State right now to see the status, shall we?

$2,440 dollars total.  28 donors.  Maybe the banner ads shouldn't show the live stats, huh?

Dean's done a reasonably good job running the party so far.  He had huge successes in 2006, and I'm inclined to believe he'll run 2008 well as well.   When he says the party will intercede if necessary, I believe him.

I am very very much looking forward to the record turnout at the Dem caucuses this weekend in Seattle, and I'm looking forward even more to the general election.
Logged
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #20 on: February 08, 2008, 03:46:22 AM »

LOL... claiming conservatives are "lining up behind McCain".

That's teh funny!

To be honest, I'm pretty shocked at the level of hatred conservatives have for McCain.  I figured people would grumble, but hold their nose and vote.  It seems they must really, really, really hate veterans.
Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: February 08, 2008, 04:07:53 AM »

It's delightful stuff.  Unlike the fractured lie-berals, the conservatives are united!  They're united against their nominee:

Michelle Malkin:

Quote
Just for the record: I am not convinced. One CPAC speech and a bunch of robo-calls repeating his “secure the borders” pledge are not enough.  Not at all.  Not when he has done nothing to repudiate his Soros-tied “Mexico First/”Free Flow of people”/”bloc, not a nation” Hispanic outreach director and his anti-English immersion national finance-co-chair.

Rush Limbaugh:

Quote
Rush Limbaugh kept up his relentless criticism of John McCain on Super Tuesday, opening his nationally syndicated radio program with a blast at McCain’s conservative credentials and integrity.

Limbaugh, whose show is heard on 600 stations across the country, accused the McCain camp of being “dishonest,” “insecure” and “resorting to the same kind of politics as Hillary Clinton.”

Ann Coulter:

Quote
We know the far right is upset with John McCain as nominee but this is really going pretty far: Ann Coulter on Fox News asserting that if he gets the GOP nomination she would not only "vote for" Hillary, she would "campaign for her if it's McCain."

Glenn Beck:

Quote
Discussing last night’s GOP debate on his radio show today, Glenn Beck and fill-in host Pat Gray mocked Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) by derisively calling him “Juan McCain.” Beck, who considers McCain’s sponsorship of a comprehensive immigration bill and the Mexican background of his national director of Hispanic outreach to be “an audacious slap in the face to the American people,” proudly advertised the segment in his daily e-mail to listeners today.


Logged
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #22 on: February 08, 2008, 03:23:59 PM »

OMG, I had no idea McCain was on Soros's payroll.  Is there anyone who isn't?
Logged
denoginizer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6538


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: February 08, 2008, 03:38:00 PM »

I'm not sure that any of those guys represent typical republicans any more than Al Frankin or Michael Moore represent typical democrats.  Personally I if I were McCain I would be happy to hear the Rush Limbaugh criticism.  At the end of the day the vast majority of his listeners are still going to vote for McCain in the general election over Hillary or Obama despite what Ann Coulter says.  But the Limbaugh criticism is only going to make McCain more appealing to independants and more conservative democrats.  History has shown that the party who settles on a candidate first has a much better chance in the general election.  A long drawn out Hillary/Obama campaign can only hurt the democrats' chances in November. 

I just wish they would settle on Obama and get down to business. I think Obama has an excellent chance against McCain.  While I think Hillary would probably lose the general election.  For that reason alone Obama should be the candidate. 
Logged

Xbox Live Tag: denoginizer
PSN Name: denoginizer
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #24 on: February 08, 2008, 04:23:55 PM »

McCain is caught in a Malachi Crunch now.  In one car is the perception of conservatives is that he's "too liberal", and that's not going away- these people have been cultivated because of their separation from reality.  There's no way they are going to start being swayed by petty facts.

And in the other car, there's his far-right voting record, which is going to turn off the majority of liberals or independents who might vote for him.  The guy just took a pass on voting to pass FISA, which shows he's weak on foreign policy and the Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism.  He also took a pass on voting for the Economic Stimulus Handout, which shows he's weak on domestic policy and the economy.  In both cases, his single vote really mattered, AND he was in Washington and could have voted.

And in the middle of these two speeding cars is John McCain and his bus.

Also... people sure can't vote against George W Bush, but they sure can vote against John McCain.  And when you look at their policies, it amounts to the same thing.

Then finally, there's ultra-low Republican voter turnout.  People just got through voting Democrat almost 2-to-1 over the Repubs.  The sub-25% of Americans who think Bush is a very successful president just aren't going to be enough to drag the country their way.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2008, 04:26:46 PM by unbreakable » Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: February 09, 2008, 05:30:03 PM »

Quote from: denoginizer on February 08, 2008, 03:38:00 PM

History has shown that the party who settles on a candidate first has a much better chance in the general election.

Please give me a history lesson here.  There've been three elections since 1900 where one of the nominees was not the incumbent President or Vice President:  1908, 1928 and 1952.  Do you consider those representative of the 2008 campaign?
Logged
denoginizer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6538


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: February 09, 2008, 05:47:53 PM »

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/08/dem.delegates/index.html

"The record shows the more divided the party, the more likely it is to lose in November.

As Dean observed, there have been three divided Democratic conventions in recent decades -- 1968, 1972 and 1980. Democrats lost each time."
Logged

Xbox Live Tag: denoginizer
PSN Name: denoginizer
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: February 09, 2008, 06:54:21 PM »

Dean's analogy (and yours) is flawed.  The only one of those you could make a case for is 1976, and that was a special case as well.

Nixon was an incumbent in 1972.  Incumbents always have an advantage in elections.

RFK was assassinated during the primary in 1968.

In 1976, Carter's nomination, as the incumbent, was contested by Ted Kennedy.  Carter's approval ratings then were where Bush's are now, and some members of the party were worried that Carter was too unpopular to get re-elected.  That's the only modern era presidential election where the incumbent president was challenged in a primary.

Dean is just trying to make the right noises to encourage the candidates to find common ground.
Logged
denoginizer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6538


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: February 09, 2008, 09:27:46 PM »

Quote from: Brendan on February 09, 2008, 06:54:21 PM


In 1976, Carter's nomination, as the incumbent, was contested by Ted Kennedy.  Carter's approval ratings then were where Bush's are now, and some members of the party were worried that Carter was too unpopular to get re-elected.  That's the only modern era presidential election where the incumbent president was challenged in a primary.


I think you mean 1980.

No chance in hell I am going to read that MIT paper you referenced.   icon_biggrin

But I'm not sure how you could argue that a long drawn democratic out primary with McCain already being able to focus on November wouldn't hurt the eventual Democratic nominee.  I think at the beginning of this process most figured that the Republican race was the one that would take the longest.  In the meantime I am quite sure that the Republicans are going to do everything in their power to see that Hillary gets the nomination. 
Logged

Xbox Live Tag: denoginizer
PSN Name: denoginizer
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: February 09, 2008, 10:43:11 PM »

Yeah, you're right - 1980.  Oops!

The MIT paper basically, as you might expect, concludes that incumbents typically have an advantage (depending on type of race, etc) from 2-8 percentage points.  It's not a thrilling read, but I wanted to cite sources.

There's a couple of things that a long primary process could hurt:  fundraising for the eventual winner, voter turnout, and the ability to prepare to face the republican opponent.

Fundraising - even if the nominee isn't chosen until July - is not going to be a problem.  Obama, in particular, is doing incredibly well.  Voter turnout for democrats is insane right now, and I (and this is just opinion) don't think there's many people proportionally who're going to switch their vote from the losing democratic candidate to support McCain.  Turnout is going to be great for the dems.  The only thing that the republicans really get an advantage with is the ability to take potshots at the dems without much of a response.
Logged
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3458



View Profile
« Reply #30 on: February 10, 2008, 04:11:22 AM »

Speaking of primaries....

...Obama won WA, Nebraska and LA today.  Given his money situation and the recent results, I dare say you have to anoint him as the Dems front-runner now.   If he wins it'll be one of the biggest political stories since Truman / Dewey.  Not just because he'll be the first minority to be nominated by either major political party, but also because Hillary was a virtual lock when this started.  I keep waiting for the other shoe to drop on Obama...the skeletons to come out of the closet and take the bloom off him.  It hasn't happened yet and I figured if there was dirt, the Clinton campaign machine would have found it by now. 

On the Republican side, Huckabee continues to be a thorn in McCain's side, winning Kansas, looking like he'll take LA and running neck-and-neck with John-the-Two-Faced in WA.  I'd rather have McCain because I think Huckabee is a frickin' nut, but at least you know where he stands.  At the very least, McCain will have to concentrate on winning the nomination a bit more and won't be able to spend as much time taking potshots at the Dems.  Not to mention having to spend a bit more money to secure his nomination....something that's tighter on the Republican side this go-around as compared to the Democrats.

I think you can summarize the primaries this way:

The Democrats are torn over which candidate they like the most.
The Republicans are torn over which candidate they hate the least.

Heck, at this rate, even the primary in NC in May may actually mean something.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2008, 04:13:33 AM by Blackadar » Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
Canuck
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5474


I live in Japan


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: February 10, 2008, 06:48:07 AM »

Obama may be the front runner but only by a measly few votes.  Clinton still has the advantage with some of the bigger states, notably Penn., Ohio and Texas.  It ain't over by a long shot!
Logged
Canuck
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5474


I live in Japan


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: February 10, 2008, 06:49:16 AM »

Quote from: CSL on February 05, 2008, 08:07:57 AM

My prediction - Obama wins California.

With renewed momentum and money sources going out of Super Tuesday Obama continues his polling upwards and begins sweeping further states like Pennslyvania and Virginia.

BTW, did you predict the  Patriots to win in a blowout as well? smile
Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: February 10, 2008, 07:40:03 AM »

Quote from: Canuck on February 10, 2008, 06:48:07 AM

Obama may be the front runner but only by a measly few votes.  Clinton still has the advantage with some of the bigger states, notably Penn., Ohio and Texas.  It ain't over by a long shot!

There's almost a month until March 4th; the momentum is all Obama's, and he has plenty of cash on hand.  Besides, even if she wins any of those states, it'll be by much smaller margins than he's winning states, so the delegates will be apportioned fairly evenly.
Logged
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3458



View Profile
« Reply #34 on: February 10, 2008, 02:42:33 PM »

Quote from: Canuck on February 10, 2008, 06:48:07 AM

Obama may be the front runner but only by a measly few votes.  Clinton still has the advantage with some of the bigger states, notably Penn., Ohio and Texas.  It ain't over by a long shot!

No, it's not over.  But Obama has the $$$ right now and it's not just that he won yesterday, it's how he won.  68% in Washington.  68% in Nebraska.  57% in LA.  These were large margins of victory, much larger than most over the previous results.  With the money and momentum, Obama is on a roll - and he has 3 states (VA, MD and DC) that all should go his way.  I bet Hillary's perceived advantages in states like PA is evaporating and she doesn't have any safe havens anymore.  I'd also bet that her supposed super-delegate advantage is eroding.  Maine will be a good test - if she can't carry that, it's over. 

I think many people thought that Hillary would knock Obama out during Super Tuesday - or at least she would emerge as the clear favorite.  When that didn't happen, the essential tie on Super Tuesday became an Obama win.  People took a longer look at Obama and started evaluating his chances to beat to McCain (as opposed to Hillary's) and switched.  I know that's what happened with quite a few people, inlcuding me. 
« Last Edit: February 10, 2008, 02:44:15 PM by Blackadar » Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
denoginizer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6538


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: February 10, 2008, 04:10:10 PM »

Hillary is a pretty bad stump speaker.  Some of her recent speeches have been cringe worthy. While giving speeches at political rallies is a  huge Obama strength.  It's not policy that's killing Hillary, it's the delivery.

Look for Bubba to get back out there in a big way in Ohio Texas and PA.
« Last Edit: February 11, 2008, 02:07:04 AM by denoginizer » Logged

Xbox Live Tag: denoginizer
PSN Name: denoginizer
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: February 11, 2008, 12:53:35 AM »

So, for those of you who think the dems are tearing themselves apart with this contested primary...

Huckabee won Kansas and Louisiana (and possibly Washington) yesterday, and McCain got crushed in Maine today by Romney, who dropped out of the race last week.  Clearly the republicans are lovin' McCain.  There's no disagreement within the ranks of the party.

When the debacle with the republican causcuses here in Washington is settled, it's possible that the putative nominee will have lost every primary/caucus since he was anointed the front runner.  I love it.
Logged
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3458



View Profile
« Reply #37 on: February 11, 2008, 01:07:19 AM »

Well, Obama took Maine pretty convincingly, 57 to 42, in a State that was supposed to be a virtual lock for Hillary.  And now Hillary has replaced her campaign manager.  Things ain't lookin' too good at Camp Clinton.
Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
denoginizer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6538


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: February 11, 2008, 11:36:08 AM »

Since there are not enough delegates remaining to give Huckabee the nomination and Republicans are still voting for him it is clear that the party doesn't like McCain.  I wonder if Romney is having second thoughts?

In the meantime the silly democratic caucus and partial credit system is going make "Superdelegate" a household word between now and this summer.  Somehow despite the fact that Obama has won 8 more states and has more total votes than Hillary, she still has a 25 delegate lead when superdelagtes are included.   icon_confused

It now looks like the Democrats may have to revisit Fla and Michigan.  I can't wait to see the legal bickering that comes about when that happens.

The American political system.  It's fantastic.
Logged

Xbox Live Tag: denoginizer
PSN Name: denoginizer
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3458



View Profile
« Reply #39 on: February 11, 2008, 12:24:25 PM »

Quote from: denoginizer on February 11, 2008, 11:36:08 AM

Since there are not enough delegates remaining to give Huckabee the nomination and Republicans are still voting for him it is clear that the party doesn't like McCain.  I wonder if Romney is having second thoughts?

In the meantime the silly democratic caucus and partial credit system is going make "Superdelegate" a household word between now and this summer.  Somehow despite the fact that Obama has won 8 more states and has more total votes than Hillary, she still has a 25 delegate lead when superdelagtes are included.   icon_confused

It now looks like the Democrats may have to revisit Fla and Michigan.  I can't wait to see the legal bickering that comes about when that happens.

The American political system.  It's fantastic.

The Superdelegtes haven't pledged yet and don't have to until the Convention.  The last known poll of them was prior to Super Tuesday and I wouldn't be surprised if many of them have changed their minds about Obama.  You're right, the FL and MI votes are looming large.  Both went to Hillary pretty convincingly, but they're not supposed to be seated.  MI is a solid blue state, but the Dems may need to carry FL and can't afford to turn off voters there.  That could be a real mess.

I think Howard Dean is hoping that Obama will carry the next 4-5 states and establish himself as the clear front-runner.  He can then ask Hillary and Bill to back off and not have a fractured Convention.  The Dems are really in the front seat this election, but they can't afford another 1968.  Then again, I think Dean is strong enough to keep things under control.
Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.153 seconds with 103 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.035s, 2q)