Obama wins

  • #1
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,842
989
Obama wins!!!

IMO the best candidate by far, a black man named Hussein Obama wins in Iowa.

This is a historic day in America. Maybe there is hope after all.
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Contrapositive
As long as Clinton loses, I'm happy.
 
  • #3
Astronuc
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
19,843
3,328
With 90% of precincts reporting, Edwards is 9 votes ahead of Clinton.

Interestingly in Iowa there are: 2,054,843 total registered voters -- 31% Democratic, 30% Republican, 39% Independent - so there is a reasonable chance for a 3rd party/independent to run.

Immigration and Iraq are apparently two key issues.
 
  • #4
239
0
Where are you getting these results, I can't find them on the news anywhere!
 
  • #6
Astronuc
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
19,843
3,328
I wonder if Obama-Edwards would work better than Kerry-Edwards?

Huckabee and ?

or

Romney and ?

I wonder if Thompson will pull back to third, or will he stay in.
 
  • #7
59
0
IMO the best candidate by far, a black man named Hussein Obama wins in Iowa.

This is a historic day in America. Maybe there is hope after all.

A white man named Obama wins.
 
  • #8
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,842
989
A white man named Obama wins.

Not black enough for you? :rofl:

Deny deny deny!!!

A black man won in what is often called the whitest state in the union.
 
  • #9
lisab
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
1,955
617
Historic, indeed!

I've been reading this forum for a while, and I'm happy to make my first post about Obama.

He can unite the country, I believe, and we haven't seen that in...what, two, three generations? Isn't everyone sick and tired of all of the animosity? We have to get out of the red-blue mentality.
 
  • #10
Evo
Mentor
23,534
3,150
The problem, as I see it, is even if he can win the Democratic platform, do you think he'd have enough support within America as a whole to win the Presidency? Sadly, realistically, I think not.
 
  • #11
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,842
989
I think it has already been shown otherwise, but let's see how he does in New Hampshire. If he can win in the NE and Iowa, he can win anywhere. What's more, he pulled more women voters than Hillary!

Just a reminder: My red-neck, racist, corn farming cousin in Illinois, whom I've never once heard utter a nice or even respectable word about black people, likes Obama! From my point of view, this is about as hard of a sell as one can find. And considering that something like 40% of all voters have said thay they would never vote for Hillary, it may well be that racism will be less a factor than Hillary's high negatives.

ps. I need to check that number but I think that's correct.

I just noticed also that if last night had been a general election, with nearly twice as many Dems turning out than Reps, Obama would have slaughtered Chuckybee.

Late edit: Here is a poll from October

While she is winning wide support in nationwide samples among Democrats in the race for their party’s presidential nomination, half of likely voters nationwide said they would never vote for New York Sen. Hillary Clinton, a new Zogby Interactive poll shows.
http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1376
 
Last edited:
  • #12
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,842
989
I've been reading this forum for a while, and I'm happy to make my first post about Obama.

He can unite the country, I believe, and we haven't seen that in...what, two, three generations? Isn't everyone sick and tired of all of the animosity? We have to get out of the red-blue mentality.

Welcome to the cage.

You are on the blue team. :biggrin:
 
  • #13
ShawnD
Science Advisor
668
1
What's more, he pulled more women voters than Hillary!

them silly womens, they'll vote for hillary because she a womens too

As long as Clinton loses, I'm happy.
Yeah, that ***** and her um policies. Can you even name 3 things she believes?
 
  • #14
One of the best arguments I've heard for Obama is: for two decades it's been Bush - Clinton - Bush. Do you want to make that Bush - Clinton - Bush - Clinton for maybe almost thirty years? (I guess that's essentially an argument for Edwards too.) Too much entrenchment - they'll get brittle bones and start to rot.

People say to me, "But Hilary's got so much experience!"

And I say, "Then she'll make a really great advisor. And Bill too." (Obama said that himself at some point, didn't he?)

And they say, "But it's not the same, she's been in the White House!"

So maybe, maybe she's had some kind of experience that Obama or Edwards just wouldn't be able to tap through an advisor. But along with Bill's experience comes Bill's political ties and debts.

In reality, I wouldn't mind her getting elected. But the carpetbagging thing in New York I found kind of unethical, and she admitted she was doing it herself and even flaunted it once she was sure it wouldn't cost too much politically. Between that, shady-looking things that came out during WhiteWater, and the inevitable IOUs that must still be lying around after the Bill Clinton presidency, she's looking too establishment for me to be totally comfortable with her.

But one big gold star on Obama is that he never supported the war. With a Marine brother just back from his 1st tour in Iraq that matters.

Obama not able to win nationally? I'm not seeing it, he hasn't done that badly in national polls has he? Even if so - I can accept that. I have not-infrequently voted for guys I wasn't sure would win, in both the primary and general election. He seems like the kinda guy I'll be proud to have voted for even if he didn't win.
 
  • #15
ShawnD
Science Advisor
668
1
But one big gold star on Obama is that he never supported the war. With a Marine brother just back from his 1st tour in Iraq that matters.

Very true. IIRC, he made a pretty bang on prediction of there being a long-term and very costly occupation following an invasion, and that's exactly what happened.
 
  • #16
turbo
Gold Member
3,147
51
The problem, as I see it, is even if he can win the Democratic platform, do you think he'd have enough support within America as a whole to win the Presidency? Sadly, realistically, I think not.
I spent a number of years doing consulting work in the deep south, and I have a hard time imagining that either Obama or Clinton could make a respectable showing there. The rednecks seemed to hate Bill Clinton with a passion that I could not fathom, and they will not vote for Hillary either. Obama is not going to have any easier time in the south, especially since in the last two elections, the Republicans have found a handy way to disenfranchise black voters. They pull up the names and addresses of registered black voters (voters in predominantly black areas) and send them notices by mail that requires a signature. If the person is not currently at the address under which they last registered to vote, and the mail is returned, the Republicans forward the voter's name to the registrar to be dropped from the list of registered voters. The citizen shows up to vote, only to be told that he/she is not a registered voter, and must re-register. In some cases, they might be able to re-register and vote, but in many locations, you cannot register on election day. These lists of likely Democratic voters are called "caging lists" and they have been used very effectively to disenfranchise many black voters, including many who are deployed to Iraq/Afghanistan and cannot sign for the mail that was sent to them because they are half-way around the world. In some cases, these voters still cast absentee ballots, but their ballots are "provisional", which means that they may well be disregarded.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caging_list
http://www.larouchepac.com/pages/breaking_news/2007/06/01/conyers_rove.asp [Broken]
http://www.gnn.tv/articles/3078/Do_Rove_s_Missing_Emails_Prove_Illegal_Caging
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #17
Evo
Mentor
23,534
3,150
The debate is not yet over, but Obama has won me over 110%. Hillary was composed and on track, but Obama speaking without his hokey Evangelistic style showed an intelligent side to him.
 
  • #18
Gokul43201
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,082
20
...but Obama speaking without his hokey Evangelistic style showed an intelligent side to him.
He uses that mainly in the south. It would be a bad idea to come off that way in front of a largely New England audience.
 
  • #19
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,842
989
The debate is not yet over, but Obama has won me over 110%.

WOW!!!
 
  • #20
Evo
Mentor
23,534
3,150
He uses that mainly in the south. It would be a bad idea to come off that way in front of a largely New England audience.
The fact that he is so direct, composed and literate in front of a normal audience speaks volumes for him. That is not something that can be coached. This guy is intelligent.
 
  • #21
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,842
989
The fact that he is so direct, composed and literate in front of a normal audience speaks volumes for him. That is not something that can be coached. This guy is intelligent.

If he can get you and I to agree, then he really is a uniter!
 
  • #22
Evo
Mentor
23,534
3,150
He is now at 125%. He's an intelligent speaker. He writes notes as his opponents speak and he speaks off the cuff to them. This is something I watch for carefully in a debate.
 
  • #23
The debate is not yet over, but Obama has won me over 110%. Hillary was composed and on track, but Obama speaking without his hokey Evangelistic style showed an intelligent side to him.

Aw come on, all good orators use soaring prose and dramatic pauses, not just religious orators. Something I've found notable about Obama is that he does not sound almost exactly like Martin Luther King, who most black American orators like Maya Angelou or Al Sharpton sound like to me. (Is that racist to say? I'm not sure. Heck, I'm probably going to vote for a black president, I hope that makes up for it.)

Hillary really annoyed me tonight in the way that she kept trying to pretend that when Obama or Edwards talk about "change" she has no idea that they're talking about being establishment and politically connected. Especially that point where she started waving her arms and yelling at Edwards; when she's responding to a point about change by talking about all the good or charitable stuff she's done it sounds to me like "I deserve to be president! So there!"

I think that Edwards "won" the Democratic debate. And despite all the arm-waving I think Hillary actually looks more presidential than Obama, as far as being regal and poised and dignified. But I still like Obama. And it was really cool when they had all the Democratic candidates come out while the Republican candidates were still on stage, it was like a cross-over in a comic book or TV show, like the CSI - Without a Trace cross-over episodes. :biggrin:
 
Last edited:
  • #24
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,842
989
He is now at 125%. He's an intelligent speaker. He writes notes as his opponents speak and he speaks off the cuff to them. This is something I watch for carefully in a debate.

Tsu and I seem to both arrive at the same conclusion: Yes, he lacks experience, but are we willing to bet that he is smart enough to compensate for that; for example, by surrounding himself with the right people and knowing how to get to the core of an issue? IMO, intellect and character will take care of the rest. And he certainly has the flair of a great orator, which is tremendously valuable. But he does also speak directly and with great clarity. He can also be quite insightful. If he said nothing of interest, no amount speaking talent would matter. Given that he is capable, to me the most important thing is whether he cares about the same issues that I do, in the way that I do.

The fact that he taught Constitutional Law is a huge plus as well.
 
Last edited:
  • #25
turbo
Gold Member
3,147
51
Obama is well-spoken, intelligent, and poised. I believe that he would do a better job than Clinton, and I believe that he is more electable than she, especially if vote-rigging can be suppressed this year (unlike the past couple of elections). He may still have tough sledding in the south, even if the elections are honest, but nationally, he should do OK. Right now, I don't see a Republican candidate that is capable of beating him, unless some independent candidate throws in and steals some of his support.
 

Related Threads on Obama wins

  • Last Post
2
Replies
25
Views
5K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
19
Views
4K
D
  • Last Post
6
Replies
143
Views
14K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
39
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
9
Views
886
  • Last Post
6
Replies
134
Views
13K
Top