PastaJoe Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 A 35% win in another swing state, one that was won twice by Bill Clinton in the general election, and is again in play in 2008. The momentum in swing states is clearly on Hillary's side, and with her once again taking the lead in popular votes, the superdelegates are going to have to decide if they're going to vote with their heads and choose her or vote with their hearts for Obama. Despite Obama and his supporters declaring Mission Accomplished prematurely last night, the majority of voters have said that Hillary is their choice. Obama just hasn't put any meat on the 'change' bones to convince blue collar workers that he'll fight for them and their issues. And on a side note, I wonder why Obama has his young children in Iowa on stage after 9pm on a school night. What kind of message does that send on the importance of education. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 Flightsuit! Flightsuit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yall Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 A 35% win in another swing state, one that was won twice by Bill Clinton in the general election, and is again in play in 2008. The momentum in swing states is clearly on Hillary's side, and with her once again taking the lead in popular votes, the superdelegates are going to have to decide if they're going to vote with their heads and choose her or vote with their hearts for Obama. Despite Obama and his supporters declaring Mission Accomplished prematurely last night, the majority of voters have said that Hillary is their choice. Obama just hasn't put any meat on the 'change' bones to convince blue collar workers that he'll fight for them and their issues. And on a side note, I wonder why Obama has his young children in Iowa on stage after 9pm on a school night. What kind of message does that send on the importance of education. Do you ever stop drinking the Kool-Aid long enought to check your facts against reality? http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/20...vote_count.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 A 35% win in another swing state, one that was won twice by Bill Clinton in the general election, and is again in play in 2008. The momentum in swing states is clearly on Hillary's side, and with her once again taking the lead in popular votes, the superdelegates are going to have to decide if they're going to vote with their heads and choose her or vote with their hearts for Obama. Despite Obama and his supporters declaring Mission Accomplished prematurely last night, the majority of voters have said that Hillary is their choice. Obama just hasn't put any meat on the 'change' bones to convince blue collar workers that he'll fight for them and their issues. And on a side note, I wonder why Obama has his young children in Iowa on stage after 9pm on a school night. What kind of message does that send on the importance of education. "Swing State" is now a set of racist code words for "white voters." Or as Hillary said, "hard working white voters." Amazing that the "progressive" Clintons would resort to racist campaign tactics huh? If she manages to steal the nomination from Obama, I think that many AAs would stay home and assure a repub victory. That said, it's a done deal. The only ones who think she has a chance are her, and perhaps you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 Do you ever stop drinking the Kool-Aid long enought to check your facts against reality? http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/20...vote_count.html With FL and MI, which is the total she has been pressing anyway, though I don't think its going to make any difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yall Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 With FL and MI, which is the total she has been pressing anyway, though I don't think its going to make any difference. Nor should it. But lets use some math and play around with the whole FL & MI nonsense. FL & MI had a total of 1,775,509 votes in play. The the total vote lead for Obama is 441,558 (not counting FL & MI). If we take the 1,775,509 and split it up between the 2 candidates using Clinton's largest margin of victory (WV at 67.0 %) that makes the split in favor of Clinton 17,397,578 to 17,235,463. Not a huge lead and that is assuming she would win those states by the WV %. Now looking at reality - she didn't even win by that % when she was the only candidate on the ballot. Hell -She almost lost to undecided! If you use the average % in all of the elections to calculate what would have been the likely voter response and turnout had MI & FL played by the rules, common sense tells us Obama would be in front. This popular vote talk is fckin nonsense. It's a sore loser playing on emotion and trying to change the rules with 10 seconds left in the games. Pathetic. Edit : I'd even be up for a re-vote knowing it would shut up this popular vote drivel in a heartbeat, but the overall point is, the Dem's are right in punishing MI & FL for being turds. Capitulating at this point will only serve to encourage more a$$-hatery down the road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 A 35% win in another swing state, one that was won twice by Bill Clinton in the general election, and is again in play in 2008. The momentum in swing states is clearly on Hillary's side, and with her once again taking the lead in popular votes, the superdelegates are going to have to decide if they're going to vote with their heads and choose her or vote with their hearts for Obama. Or with their heads and vote for Obama. Good try. And on a side note, I wonder why Obama has his young children in Iowa on stage after 9pm on a school night. What kind of message does that send on the importance of education. That is the sound of your fingers grasping at the cliff's edge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 A 35% win in another swing state, one that was won twice by Bill Clinton in the general election, and is again in play in 2008. The momentum in swing states is clearly on Hillary's side, and with her once again taking the lead in popular votes, the superdelegates are going to have to decide if they're going to vote with their heads and choose her or vote with their hearts for Obama. Despite Obama and his supporters declaring Mission Accomplished prematurely last night, the majority of voters have said that Hillary is their choice. Obama just hasn't put any meat on the 'change' bones to convince blue collar workers that he'll fight for them and their issues. And on a side note, I wonder why Obama has his young children in Iowa on stage after 9pm on a school night. What kind of message does that send on the importance of education. Trying to find a silver lining. Understandable. So where are we now? Obama has won 33 states to her 17? And the nonsense about her taking the lead with the popular vote. Now are you discounting the caucus states and including Florida and Michigan? So maybe her camp is using "fuzzy math". Let's face it at best they will distribute the delegates for Florida and Michigan to both camps. In no way will they just give her huge numbers for both states. No way. She signed on to the rules when it was good for her. Now that she has pretty much lost, she wants to change them. That is the type of politics people are sick of. Hillary for the blue collar worker. HAHAHAHA worked out well in NY state huh? She will do anything and say anything to win. On a side note... your side note is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 1,953 down... 73 to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 Remember: It's only racism if it's a black person voting for another black person. Pasta Joe loves them West Virginians and down home Kentucky folk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sketch Soland Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 A 35% win in another swing state, one that was won twice by Bill Clinton in the general election, and is again in play in 2008. The momentum in swing states is clearly on Hillary's side, and with her once again taking the lead in popular votes, the superdelegates are going to have to decide if they're going to vote with their heads and choose her or vote with their hearts for Obama. Despite Obama and his supporters declaring Mission Accomplished prematurely last night, the majority of voters have said that Hillary is their choice. Obama just hasn't put any meat on the 'change' bones to convince blue collar workers that he'll fight for them and their issues. And on a side note, I wonder why Obama has his young children in Iowa on stage after 9pm on a school night. What kind of message does that send on the importance of education. *HILLARY SLURP HILLARY SLURP * Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 Nor should it. But lets use some math and play around with the whole FL & MI nonsense. FL & MI had a total of 1,775,509 votes in play. The the total vote lead for Obama is 441,558 (not counting FL & MI). If we take the 1,775,509 and split it up between the 2 candidates using Clinton's largest margin of victory (WV at 67.0 %) that makes the split in favor of Clinton 17,397,578 to 17,235,463. Not a huge lead and that is assuming she would win those states by the WV %. Now looking at reality - she didn't even win by that % when she was the only candidate on the ballot. Hell -She almost lost to undecided! If you use the average % in all of the elections to calculate what would have been the likely voter response and turnout had MI & FL played by the rules, common sense tells us Obama would be in front. Results with uncommitted going to Obama: 17463927 vs 17407282, around a 60k lead or so for him. Given the demographics of Michigan, and the polling that I saw, the +15 was close. In Florida, I think her vote might have actually been understated a bit if they were both campaigning there, again given the demographics and polling info leading up to the election. In both cases, more people would have shown out to vote, making this count likely closer, not that it matters much either way. This popular vote talk is fckin nonsense. It's a sore loser playing on emotion and trying to change the rules with 10 seconds left in the games. Pathetic. Edit : I'd even be up for a re-vote knowing it would shut up this popular vote drivel in a heartbeat, but the overall point is, the Dem's are right in punishing MI & FL for being turds. Capitulating at this point will only serve to encourage more a$$-hatery down the road. Honestly, I think the entire primary system should be scrapped and we should go back to the original system of picking the candidates at conventions, as its largest effect so far has been to move the candidates further away from the middle (and where most American's lie) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yall Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 Honestly, I think the entire primary system should be scrapped and we should go back to the original system of picking the candidates at conventions, as its largest effect so far has been to move the candidates further away from the middle (and where most American's lie) I would support that 100%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 Hillary has every right to remain in the race. She is not hurting things. In fact this horse race has totally kept attention on the Dems and away from McCain. So it's all good. The fact that she wins in an election where the only choice is Dems in states that always go GOP really doesn't mean a lot. It is mildly interesting that a high percentage Obama voters in KY said they'd support Hillary if she was the nominee, but among Hillary supporters the greater preponderance said they'd not support Obama, either voting for McCain or not voting. So in one capacity or another Hillary is going to have to made good on her boast that she can deliver these voters for the party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yall Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 Hillary has every right to remain in the race. Sure she does. I don't think anyone on the planet has questioned her 'right' to remain in the race. It is mildly interesting that a high percentage Obama voters in KY said they'd support Hillary if she was the nominee, but among Hillary supporters the greater preponderance said they'd not support Obama, either voting for McCain or not voting. If anything it shows that Obama supporters are rational compared to Clinton supporters. To be a registered Democrat and vote Republican because the candidate with a d1ck beat the one with the v@g is fcking retarded. It means the gender or race of a president is more important than policy, considering that Clinton and Obama are pretty damn close in terms of issues and policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted May 21, 2008 Author Share Posted May 21, 2008 So many people with so many mistakes, I don't know where to start. Let's see, Ohio, Penn., WV, Florida, Michigan, and Kentucky are racist because they're swing states that went for Hillary. White people voting for Hillary are racist because she's white, black people voting for Obama because he's black aren't racist. Women vote for Hillary because she's a woman, men vote for Obama because he's inspirational, not because he's a man. So much for consistancy. If she gets the nomination by getting enough superdelegates to vote for her, which is the requirement since neither can win with pledged delegates, she's stealing it, even though Obama hasn't won it yet. But if Obama gets the nomination by convincing enough superdelegates to vote for him, he's not stealing it, even if she gets more popular votes. In Michigan Obama took his name off the ballot, it wasn't required, because he knew he was going to lose and wanted a way to discredit Clinton's projected win. He still told voters to vote Uncommitted, and of those votes, not all can be claimed by him since many may have been for Edwards. And I was always for a revote in both states, as was Hillary, but Obama's representatives blocked it, because they knew it was politically advantageous to disinfranchise those voters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 In Michigan Obama took his name off the ballot, it wasn't required, because he knew he was going to lose and wanted a way to discredit Clinton's projected win. He still told voters to vote Uncommitted, and of those votes, not all can be claimed by him since many may have been for Edwards. And I was always for a revote in both states, as was Hillary, but Obama's representatives blocked it, because they knew it was politically advantageous to disinfranchise those voters. Where do you get this stuff? So I guess Edwards did the same thing? What about the other candidates? Only Hillary was on the ballot against party rules. There could have been a re-vote in Florida, they ran out of the time... they could not decide on who would pay for it. I know this because I designed the re-vote ballot, the firm I work with had it ready to go to print. We just needed a final approval or clearance. Obviously never came. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 *HILLARY SLURP HILLARY SLURP * Hillary wins the swing States -> Hillary is a swinger. Who knew??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sketch Soland Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 So many people with so many mistakes, I don't know where to start. Let's see, Ohio, Penn., WV, Florida, Michigan, and Kentucky are racist because they're swing states that went for Hillary. White people voting for Hillary are racist because she's white, black people voting for Obama because he's black aren't racist. Women vote for Hillary because she's a woman, men vote for Obama because he's inspirational, not because he's a man. So much for consistancy. If she gets the nomination by getting enough superdelegates to vote for her, which is the requirement since neither can win with pledged delegates, she's stealing it, even though Obama hasn't won it yet. But if Obama gets the nomination by convincing enough superdelegates to vote for him, he's not stealing it, even if she gets more popular votes. In Michigan Obama took his name off the ballot, it wasn't required, because he knew he was going to lose and wanted a way to discredit Clinton's projected win. He still told voters to vote Uncommitted, and of those votes, not all can be claimed by him since many may have been for Edwards. And I was always for a revote in both states, as was Hillary, but Obama's representatives blocked it, because they knew it was politically advantageous to disinfranchise those voters. Do you have an "on/off" switch at the base of your brain stem? Just wondering Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sketch Soland Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 Hillary wins the swing States -> Hillary is a swinger. Who knew??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts