News US Presidential Primaries, 2008

[Astronuc]

Obama came to my school today. I waited in the cold in line for an hour, but we all got in. I clapped. It was O.K.

Hes not a very good orator, but he did give it the old college try.

Obama +1, tomorrow.

Could be that he is tired as Ivan mentioned, or perhaps he doesn't extemporize very well.

 

[turbo]

I wonder if Huckabee is staying in just to establish himself as the presumptive VP? He has no real chance against McCain outside of districts that are heavily evangelical-conservative. McCain has infuriated the extreme right-wing of the GOP with his stance on many issues, so a lot of Huckabee's support to this point may have come from the "anybody but McCain" ranks of the GOP. If this is true, McCain should choose a different running-mate because choosing Huckabee would scare lots of independents and add little Republican support. Despite what Limbaugh and Coulter say, they will hold their noses and vote for McCain to keep the White House in Republican control. We have a Congress so fearful and weak that it cannot bring itself to challenge this Imperial Presidency, and if McCain is elected, he may well elect to continue the secrecy, deception, and disregard of the Constitution practiced by the current administration.

Pelosi and Reid are gutless and are seemingly incapable of challenging Bush/Cheney. We might be better-served by a Parlimentary form of government with short terms for all "ministers" and the real possibility of no-confidence votes to remove the prime minister. [/rant]

 

[Gokul43201]

Obama is definitely showing signs of tiredness. I watched some video of a speech he gave a couple days ago (on CNN), and the difference is clearly noticeable.

 

[BobG]

I wonder if Huckabee is staying in just to establish himself as the presumptive VP? He has no real chance against McCain outside of districts that are heavily evangelical-conservative. McCain has infuriated the extreme right-wing of the GOP with his stance on many issues, so a lot of Huckabee's support to this point may have come from the "anybody but McCain" ranks of the GOP. If this is true, McCain should choose a different running-mate because choosing Huckabee would scare lots of independents and add little Republican support. Despite what Limbaugh and Coulter say, they will hold their noses and vote for McCain to keep the White House in Republican control.

Huckabee is running against Romney. The idea is to pick up enough wins, headlines, and delegates that Huckabee becomes the true runner-up and Romney becomes just another body. It makes a difference for 2012 or 2016.

Both Romney and Huckabee have exaggerated their 'far right social credentials' at least a little bit in this campaign (Romney a lot more than Huckabee). When it comes to performance, Romney was a good governor, but Huckabee was better. You can point to some compromises both had to make in order to govern effectively if you want trash their principles as fiscal conservatives, but both were good governors over all. Both could have had a lot more general appeal if they'd emphasized that part of themselves instead of pandering to the social right. Of course, with McCain and Giuliani running, the social right was the only group they had a chance to appeal to. They ran on McCain's and Giuliani's weaknesses instead of their own strength. If they go against each other in 2012 or 2016, I'd expect a completely different campaign from both of them.

 

[Cyrus]

Could be that he is tired as Ivan mentioned, or perhaps he doesn't extemporize very well.

Even on his best days, I don't like the style in which he speaks. I perfer someone who uses precise words and is very clear and eloquent. I don't think does any of that.

In fact, I think all the candidates suck at public speaking.

 

[Evo]

Obama has improved significantly from when I first saw him, or maybe it's just that when I see him lately he's not jumping around on bleachers and acting like an Evangelist. I was very put off by his theatrics in the beginning, but in serious debates, he does quite well.

Dan Rather was interviewed by the BBC recently and was saying that the primary process is a "proving ground" for Presidential hopefuls, if they can't keep up with the strain of the campaign, it's a sign that they are not cut out for the strain of the office.

 

[Astronuc]

Even on his best days, I don't like the style in which he speaks. I perfer someone who uses precise words and is very clear and eloquent. I don't think does any of that.

In fact, I think all the candidates suck at public speaking.

I would certainly appreciate a great orator.

But I also would like to hear how the next president will reduce government spending, while meeting all obligations. I would like to hear how he or she plan to withdraw US force from Iraq and leave in place a stable government that observes some semblance of human rights. I want to hear about how the next president will encourage energy independence and greater efficiency in transportation, while reducing air and water pollution. I would like to hear about plans for universal health care, or at least affordable health care. I would like to hear about education programs.

 

[Astronuc]

A rather critical assessment of Clinton and her lack of success recently.

Analysis: Facing losses, Clinton recasts

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080212/ap_on_el_pr/campaign_dems_analysis

WASHINGTON - Democratic Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has found a lot of ways to explain her string of losses to Sen. Barack Obama.

Caucus states, the former first lady says, are undemocratic and cater only to party activists. Southern states, like Louisiana, have "a very strong and very proud African-American electorate" naturally predisposed to favor a black candidate. And so-called "red" states like North Dakota, Idaho and Kansas — all of which Obama won on Super Tuesday — will never choose a Democrat in the general election anyway.

By this logic, only certain states really matter, such as New Hampshire and New Jersey, states that Clinton has won. Or Texas and Ohio, states she must capture to stay in the race.

The list of excuses is long, but the justifications are wearing thin as Obama was expected to win primaries in Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia on Tuesday after a four-state sweep last weekend plus the Virgin Islands. All the contests Clinton has suggested don't count are proving in size and scope that they do.

"Every day the numbers show the true state of the race," Democratic strategist Jenny Backus said. "Obama is moving and gathering a bigger coalition, and Hillary's coalition is diminishing."
. . . .

In the face of such numbers, Clinton strategists have taken a risk — all but pinning her candidacy to the outcome of primaries in Texas and Ohio on March 4. The two states are large and delegate-rich, and their demographics — working-class white voters in Ohio, a large Hispanic population in Texas — have so far favored her candidacy.
. . . .

Obama has begun to make inroads in those voting blocs — winning a caucus in Maine on Sunday that was dominated by white, working-class voters. He has prevailed with blacks, another cornerstone of the Democratic base, while creating a new alliance of voters not always associated with the party, including independents, affluent voters, young people and men.

Obama's major challenge is attracting working-class women — loyal Democrats who form the base of Clinton's constituency.

. . . .

It looks like Obama won in Virginia, and may win a majority in MD and Washington DC.

 

[Cyrus]

I would certainly appreciate a great orator.

But I also would like to hear how the next president will reduce government spending, while meeting all obligations. I would like to hear how he or she plan to withdraw US force from Iraq and leave in place a stable government that observes some semblance of human rights. I want to hear about how the next president will encourage energy independence and greater efficiency in transportation, while reducing air and water pollution. I would like to hear about plans for universal health care, or at least affordable health care. I would like to hear about education programs.

Thats exactly what Obama did NOT say when he was on campus. He said things like, "get out of iraq", "lower college tuition", etc. Now, he did not, (Nor does any cadidate), say HOW they plan on doing this.

They all suck. I just picked the least worst person, the one I thought was electable. I don't see Hillary as being electable. Too much baggage.

Evo, that's exactly what I DONT like about him.

 

[G01]

A rather critical assessment of Clinton and her lack of success recently.

Analysis: Facing losses, Clinton recasts

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080212/ap_on_el_pr/campaign_dems_analysis It looks like Obama won in Virginia, and may win a majority in MD and Washington DC.

He has been projected the winner in MD and DC, by substantial margins. They (MSNBC) are saying that Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania (Go My Home State!) are going to become make or break states for Clinton, in that in order to keep up she is going to have to win by some impressive and hard to achieve margins, as in >55%.

MSNBC usually leans towards Obama, so I don't know how much truth there is in this analysis. What do you guys think?

 

[lisab]

MSNBC usually leans towards Obama, so I don't know how much truth there is in this analysis. What do you guys think?

Well, he certainly has tremendous momentum. More than enough to sway those caucus goers and primary voters who may still be on the fence. In most polls I read, the "undecided" are about 10 - 15% of the electorate.

 

[RobertR]

I think America is toast. There is not a single candidate left in the race that seems to understand the ideals and principles that built America and made it a great country.

Obama specifically takes his strategy from Saul Alinsky, Rules for Rebels. It's in every speach he makes. The fact that it "rings" with people is testiment to how pervasive the status of victimhood has sunk into the American consciousness. For that is the whole Alinsky technique, which he probably stole from military boot camp.

It consists of tear people down by appealing to their insecurity as victims, then lead them by offering hope.



The problem is, if your a victim there must be a bad guy who you are the victim of. Obama's bad guy is traditional American values of justice, equal opportunity, individual responsabality, and freedom. There is no self responsibality, the problem is all out there and none within. It is ultimatly destructive as it creates scape goats, and engenders hate, division, and real victims.. I can think of few things worse than to believe of ones self, that they are a victim who needs a leader before hope exists.

On the world scale it ultimatly leads to world war. Teaching people to hate their neighbor even if indirectly by convencing them that they are victims, eventually leads to rebelion. The technique already has increased the crime rate in some parts of America by several thousand percent and destroyed a few million lives.

No great leaders who accomplished great things, took this route as it ignores human potential and turns it against itself. It is destructive, because it destroys people by destroying their belief system about their self. It does the same thing to citizens as the technique does to soldiers in boot camp, except there is never any rebuilding that takes place. Hope eventually fades into hate, hate into crime and violence, crime and violence into a failed society, which then needs the likes of Obama for hope. 40 years of it have set the stage for that kind of leader.

Such a people as this are no match for the challenges the world faces today. They will get creamed, and so will America. As America goes , so does the world.

Abjectly disgustingly pitiful. You got to look a little deeper than the likes of Obama, he is all on the surface, and all about surface emotions.

Albert Schwitcher said : Success does not lead to happiness, hapiness leads to success.

Virtually everyone in America used to know why socialism doesn't work, it is not only because it is to materialistic, but also because it destroys people. Now only a few remain who do. Most people today are to young to know what we have lost, and no one has told them, and if someone did, they would not believe it.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I think America is toast. There is not a single candidate left in the race that seems to understand the ideals and principles that built America and made it a great country.

Obama specifically takes his strategy from Saul Alinsky, Rules for Rebels. It's in every speach he makes. The fact that it "rings" with people is testiment to how pervasive the status of victimhood has sunk into the American consciousness. For that is the whole Alinsky technique, which he probably stole from military boot camp.

It consists of tear people down by appealing to their insecurity as victims, then lead them by offering hope.

The problem is, if your a victim there must be a bad guy who you are the victim of. Obama's bad guy is traditional American values of justice, equal opportunity, individual responsabality, and freedom. There is no self responsibality, the problem is all out there and none within. It is ultimatly destructive as it creates scape goats, and engenders hate, division, and real victims.. I can think of few things worse than to believe of ones self, that they are a victim who needs a leader before hope exists.

On the world scale it ultimatly leads to world war. Teaching people to hate their neighbor even if indirectly by convencing them that they are victims, eventually leads to rebelion. The technique already has increased the crime rate in some parts of America by several thousand percent and destroyed a few million lives.

No great leaders who accomplished great things, took this route as it ignores human potential and turns it against itself. It is destructive, because it destroys people by destroying their belief system about their self. It does the same thing to citizens as the technique does to soldiers in boot camp, except there is never any rebuilding that takes place. Hope eventually fades into hate, hate into crime and violence, crime and violence into a failed society, which then needs the likes of Obama for hope. 40 years of it have set the stage for that kind of leader.

Abjectly disgustingly pitiful.

Please give specific examples of what you mean by quoting Obama, providing sources - reputable links - and relating those to your accusations.

 

[Astronuc]

He has been projected the winner in MD and DC, by substantial margins. They (MSNBC) are saying that Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania (Go My Home State!) are going to become make or break states for Clinton, in that in order to keep up she is going to have to win by some impressive and hard to achieve margins, as in >55%.

MSNBC usually leans towards Obama, so I don't know how much truth there is in this analysis. What do you guys think?

Obama seems to be a rising star, while Clinton's campaign seems to be floundering.

Obama wins 3 primaries, leads delegates
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/campaign_rdp

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/campaign_dems_analysis;_ylt=AvZfqFNCJWM5Ncm10qKq_I9h24cA

WASHINGTON - Hillary Rodham Clinton has set up Texas and Ohio as her firewall, but the results from Democratic presidential rival Barack Obama's most recent victories give her plenty of reason to worry it will hold up.

Obama won sweeping victories in Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia on Tuesday, cutting into her lead among her most reliable base voters and adding to a glut of bad news for Clinton. Combine the shake-up of her senior campaign staff, the candidate's $5 million loan to keep her campaign afloat, her eight straight losses in the past week and there's not much that makes Clinton look like a winning candidate. That's counting the prospect of more losses next week in Obama's native Hawaii and in Wisconsin, next door to the Illinois senator's adopted state.

Clinton should not be counted out, however. She's overcome expectations twice already in this primary with wins in New Hampshire and Nevada that revived her when she looked like she might be on the way out. If she's able to win delegate-rich Texas and Ohio, she will be back.

But her strategy is reminiscent of another New Yorker who once was a front-runner for the 2008 presidential nomination. Republican Rudy Giuliani also argued he could survive a month of losses and then come back in Florida, but by the time that vote came all the momentum had shifted away from him.

Virginia

Obama   619,036  64%  50 
Clinton 345,018  35%  26

Maryland

Obama       439,979  60%  11 
Clinton     273,828  37%   5 
Uncommitted   9,600   1%   0

McCain won his races over Huckabee.

Virginia

McCain   242,578  50%  60 
Huckabee 197,742  41%   0 
Paul      21,877  5%    0 
Romney    17,023  3%    0

Maryland

McCain   157,906  55%  13 
Huckabee  84,021  29%   0 
Romney    17,993   6%   0 
Paul      17,242   6%   0

Source: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I'm going to see Obama tomorrow morning! I'll try to get a photo with him!

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Here are two photos from the Milwaukee Rally!

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Cool! How was it? Did he make a good showing?

I hope to see him here in Oregon.

 

[Evo]

Nice picture Greg!

Obama did really well when he was here a few weeks ago. The girl in the cube next to me went to his rally here and said it was like a rock concert.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Cool! How was it? Did he make a good showing?

I hope to see him here in Oregon.

Nice picture Greg!

Obama did really well when he was here a few weeks ago. The girl in the cube next to me went to his rally here and said it was like a rock concert.

It was neat. It was my first political rally, so I can't compare, but Obama is a great speaker. I was never bored and the energy was always on high.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

He seems to be a true Obamenon.

 

[Astronuc]

I met George (HW) and Barbara Bush a couple of times during his presidential campaigns. Really nice couple of people, even if I didn't necessarily agree with his views. One time I just happen to be walking past the exit of the building where GB had been doing his speech, the door opened and out they strode. I was actually near there car. So they stopped and just chatted. That was also the rally where a couple of Moonies tried to recruit me.

A guy I grew up with was the son of one of Bush's PR managers, so we had some common background. George and Barbara used to come over to their house back when ran for US Congressman the first time.

It would be interesting to hear Obama in person.

 

[lisab]

He seems to be a true Obamenon.

He's got Obamomentum, too.

 

[lisab]

It was neat. It was my first political rally, so I can't compare, but Obama is a great speaker. I was never bored and the energy was always on high.

Sounds like an Obamarama! I want to go, too!

 

[Astronuc]

Black Leader, a Clinton Ally, Tilts to Obama
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/15/us/politics/15clinton.html
By JEFF ZELENY and PATRICK HEALY

MILWAUKEE — Representative John Lewis, an elder statesman from the civil rights era and one of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s most prominent black supporters, said Thursday night that he planned to cast his vote as a superdelegate for Senator Barack Obama in hopes of preventing a fight at the Democratic convention.

“In recent days, there is a sense of movement and a sense of spirit,” said Mr. Lewis, a Georgia Democrat who endorsed Mrs. Clinton last fall. “Something is happening in America, and people are prepared and ready to make that great leap.”

Mr. Lewis, who carries great influence among other members of Congress, disclosed his decision in an interview in which he said that as a superdelegate he could “never, ever do anything to reverse the action” of the voters of his district, who overwhelmingly supported Mr. Obama.

“I’ve been very impressed with the campaign of Senator Obama,” Mr. Lewis said. “He’s getting better and better every single day.”

His comments came as fresh signs emerged that Mrs. Clinton’s support was beginning to erode from some other African-American lawmakers who also serve as superdelegates. Representative David Scott of Georgia, who was among the first to defect, said he, too, would not go against the will of voters in his district.

The developments came on a day in which Mrs. Clinton set out anew to prove that the fight for the Democratic nomination was far from over. Campaigning in Ohio, she pursued a new strategy of biting attack lines against Mr. Obama, while adopting a newly populist tone as she courted blue-collar voters.

. . . . And she and former President Bill Clinton prepared for a new fund-raising blitz to try to counter Mr. Obama’s edge of several million dollars in campaign cash.

Yet even as the Democratic rivals looked ahead to the primaries in Wisconsin, Ohio and Texas, Mr. Lewis said he and other prominent African-American party leaders had been moved by Mr. Obama’s recent victories and his ability to transcend racial and geographic lines.
. . . .

Interesting times.

 

[Art]

I've watched a few of Obama's speeches. The first one was impressive but the rest were nearly identical with very slight modifications to tailor it to the particular audience and so became steadily less impressive.

So far he reminds me of a stage performer with a very limited repertoire. The first time you see a comedian live on stage the punch lines are hilarious but less so when you hear him do the same routine 3 nights running.

It would be reassuring to see a little more breadth and depth from him in his speeches as at the moment one can only credit him with having a good speech writer who to date has written just one good speech.

Another slightly worrying point is the content of his standard speech is ominously very reminiscent of Tony Blair when he first stood for PM in the UK with lots of talk of consensus politics, lots about change etc. I say ominous because once elected TB singularly failed to deliver on a single promise and so I hope Obama is not simply Tony Blair part 2.

Perhaps Obama is the real deal and speaks from heartfelt conviction and the extraordinary resemblance to TB's election winning speeches and promises is just coincidence and I'm just being a little overly cynical, I certainly hope so as if he wins the nomination and gets elected president it would be very demoralising for most Americans and the rest of the world if he fails to live up to his billing.

 

[Gokul43201]

Yes, the repetition is getting to me too. I can now complete just about every sentence he begins. But I'm sure his campaign staff insist on not changing anything in a speech that seems to be working so far. It's also probable that the vast majority of folks haven't listened to more than one or two of his earlier speeches when they show up at an event.

 

[OmCheeto]

Yes, the repetition is getting to me too. I can now complete just about every sentence he begins. But I'm sure his campaign staff insist on not changing anything in a speech that seems to be working so far. It's also probable that the vast majority of folks haven't listened to more than one or two of his earlier speeches when they show up at an event.

I haven't listened to a political speech since 1968. Yes, it was repetitive even back then. And I was only 9. Listen once. Pay attention. Vote.

 

[Evo]

I haven't listened to a political speech since 1968. Yes, it was repetitive even back then. And I was only 9. Listen once. Pay attention. Vote.

I think listening once would be a recipe for disaster. How can you possibly ascertain anything from a single speech? It's hard enough after listening to several, but at least you can tell if it's live or if it's Memorex.

 

[binzing]

Just a question? How old is Obama, in character he seems fairly young.

 

[binzing]

Ivan, your in Oregon? What city/town? Most of my family are in Oregon and Washington. The old "Home Place" is in Corvallis.

 

[Astronuc]

Obama was apparently born August 4, 1961, so is now 46 yrs of age.

 

[OmCheeto]

I think listening once would be a recipe for disaster. How can you possibly ascertain anything from a single speech? It's hard enough after listening to several, but at least you can tell if it's live or if it's Memorex.

Well, I haven't listened to a speech in how many years? But I know Obama's voting record for the last couple of years. As I told a young Jordanian the other day, "You know how we can tell when our politicians are lying? Their lips are moving." Stop listening. See how they voted.

 

[chemisttree]

Well, I haven't listened to a speech in how many years? But I know Obama's voting record for the last couple of years. As I told a young Jordanian the other day, "You know how we can tell when our politicians are lying? Their lips are moving." Stop listening. See how they voted.

Obama's voting record. http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=9490

I thiink it is difficult to square his voting record with his positions. He is also evasive as to where he stands on the issues.

Senator Barack H. Obama Jr. repeatedly refused to provide any responses to citizens on the issues through the 2008 Political Courage Test when asked to do so by national leaders of the political parties, prominent members of the media, Project Vote Smart President Richard Kimball, and Project Vote Smart staff.

http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=9490

 

[Gokul43201]

No more evasive than the other major candidates, from your link.

Just for the record:

Senator John Sidney McCain III repeatedly refused to provide any responses to citizens on the issues through the 2008 Political Courage Test when asked to do so by national leaders of the political parties, prominent members of the media, Project Vote Smart President Richard Kimball, and Project Vote Smart staff.

http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=53270

Michael D. 'Mike' Huckabee repeatedly refused to provide any responses to citizens on the issues through the 2008 Political Courage Test when asked to do so by national leaders of the political parties, prominent members of the media, Project Vote Smart President Richard Kimball, and Project Vote Smart staff.

http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=1657

Representative Ronald Ernest 'Ron' Paul repeatedly refused to provide any responses to citizens on the issues through the 2008 Political Courage Test when asked to do so by national leaders of the political parties, prominent members of the media, Project Vote Smart President Richard Kimball, and Project Vote Smart staff.

http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=296

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton repeatedly refused to provide any responses to citizens on the issues through the 2008 Political Courage Test when asked to do so by national leaders of the political parties, prominent members of the media, Project Vote Smart President Richard Kimball, and Project Vote Smart staff.

http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=55463

 

[Ivan Seeking]

No more veasive than the other major candidates, from your link.

Just for the record:


http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=53270


http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=1657


http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=296


http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=55463

Hah, I knew something was wrong here but didn't spot it when I checked the link.

 

[Astronuc]

So all the candidates refuse to respond on the record?! Hmmm.

OR - they just don't like the format, which could be used to provide misleading propaganda against them.

http://www.votesmart.org/pdf/2008/2008_Pres_Political_Courage.pdf

 

[Gokul43201]

One candidate did take the Political Courage Test: Mike Gravel

http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=69496

But we already knew that Gravel has loads of political courage when he made this campaign ad: http://youtube.com/watch?v=0rZdAB4V_j8

 

[OmCheeto]

Obama's voting record. http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=9490

I thiink it is difficult to square his voting record with his positions. He is also evasive as to where he stands on the issues.

http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=9490

I posted my research of Obama's voting record on key bills last month in the https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=1572557&postcount=49" thread. He voted the same way I would have. He therefore represents my values. I will therefore vote for him, regardless of what he says. Because it's been my experience that in order to get elected, all successful politicians will say whatever they think you want to hear.

Hence, I never listen to any of them.

<insert old adages here>

 

[chemisttree]

Only McCain has taken the political courage test as a US Senator (where he would be voting on national issues). John McCain has even been a member of the Board of Directors of Project Vote Smart. Clinton never has taken one. Obama has taken one as a state Senator but not one as a US Senator.

IMO, these questions should be the only ones allowed at any presidential debate.

http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=22369" (as a Governor) is illuminating. The way I read it, not much has changed since he filled out that form.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I really despise Hillary's attempt to seat the Mi and Fl delegates. The candidates all agreed to the exclusion if the States violated the election rules, and now Hillary wants to change the rules after the fact. This is a great example of why we don't want another Clinton in the White House!

 

[turbo]

I really despise Hillary's attempt to seat the Mi and Fl delegates. The candidates all agreed to the exclusion if the States violated the election rules, and now Hillary wants to change the rules after the fact. This is a great example of why we don't want another Clinton in the White House!

Not only that, she left her name on the ballot in MI after the other candidates had removed theirs, so her only opponent was "undecided" and she campaigned in FL the day of the primary, although she claimed that she really wasn't campaigning because she campaigned at events that were not open to the public. It all depends on what the meaning of "is" is if you're a Clinton.

 

[chemisttree]

What's most infuriating about it is Ickes' leading the charge! He voted to strip Michigan and Florida of their delegates in the first place! I just know that the first order of business Hillary will enact will be to change everyone's zip code to end in 666... God help us all!

 

[turbo]

The only fair thing to do is set up another primary/caucus for each of these states, and whoever has the most momentum and the best message going into them will get their delegates. The big fear in the Clinton camp is that she won't be the winner and Obama will benefit from all those delegates she's trying to claim as her own now. What a slime!

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I just know that the first order of business Hillary will enact will be to change everyone's zip code to end in 666... God help us all!

Oh please, this is a common tag used every generation to villify someone who is not a nutty fundamentalist extremist.

 

[Gokul43201]

Scores (hope I haven't screwed anything up):

         Prev. Total    LA+NE+WA+ME  VA+MD+DC  New total
BobG        111             04         12        127
Gokul       112             10         12        134
Ivan        112             10         12        134
Astronuc    103             12         12        127
Evo         95              04         -         99
Art         35               -         -         35
lisab       54              10         -         64

Let's get our predictions in for Tomorrow:

Wisconsin
Dem=
Rep=

Hawaii
Dem=
Rep=

 

[Astronuc]

Wisconsin
Dem= 1. Obama, 2. Clinton
Rep= 1. McCain, 2. Huckabee

Hawaii
Dem= 1. Obama, 2. Clinton
Rep= 1. McCain, 2. Huckabee

Hawaii - Obama is a native son, but I think he'll win Wisconsin. He's on a roll.

 

[Gokul43201]

Wisconsin is going to be close for the Dems.

Wisconsin
Dem= Obama
Rep= McCain

Hawaii
Dem= Obama
Rep= McCain

Edit: Just saw a poll by Amer. Res. Group (Feb 15/16) that gives Clinton a 6% lead in WI. Also, new polls in TX are calling a dead heat there.

 

[D H]

Also, new polls in TX are calling a dead heat there.

I predict every pollster will be wrong on Texas. While Texas Republicans are indeed holding a primary on March 4, the Democrats are not. They're hold a http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/02/texass_unique_primaucus.php" . Two thirds of the delegates will be chosen based on voting in the Democratic primary, with an incredibly convoluted allocation scheme to boot. What about the other third? The Democrats are holding a caucus that starts fifteen minutes after the primary polling ends. Nobody knows what kind of mess this will create. The idea of a mixed primary/caucus was apparently created to give the party bigwigs more of a say.

Why do the Democrats have such incredibly convoluted and undemocratic rules (e.g., superdelegates)?

 

[Poop-Loops]

Because this nation was built on the ideas of equality. If Republicans can be giant hypocrites by saying they are fiscally conservative while trying to outspend each other, then by golly, the Democrats can do the exact opposite of what their party name would suggest. It's the American way.

 

[lisab]

While Texas Republicans are indeed holding a primary on March 4, the Democrats are not.

Whaaaaaat? There are still Democrats in Texas?

I've been hearing so much about this subject lately. I think some people miss what's really going on here.

Look, what we're seeing is how a party chooses its candidate. That's decided on a state level, by the party. If you're unhappy with the rules, you will need to JOIN the party and get involved with the nitty-gritty business of making the rules. If the party wants to pick its candidate by thumb-wrestling, divining, or pinning-the-tail-on-the-donkey (or elephant), well, that's their perogative.

Where I live, the Dems allocate 100% of the delegates in caucuses. The Reps use the part-caucus, part-primary system - very similar to the Dem's system in Texas.