Democratic Presidential Primaries 2008

[North East Goon]

Can someone explain the superdelegate to me?

[troutman]

Originally Posted by North East Goon

Can someone explain the superdelegate to me?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/...ner/index.html

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

I think she has to pack it in. When taken into perspective she has found herself in states where she was supposed to be a run away winner. Obama has made huge gains across the board and is only picking up more steam. He's finding more support in every demographic and is out raising Clinton by massive numbers. I don't know why Clinton would carry on, other than to be vindictive and try to inflict as much damage on her political opponent as possible. Its tiem for the Democrats to get their house in order and focus on beating the Republicans rather than beating themsleves up. McCain is down in the polls to Obama, but up on Clinton, so the wise thing would be to ride the horse that has the best chance of winning the big race. Clinton ain't that horse, and the DNC should explain that fact to her ASAP.

Why? She has ONE kick at the can and this is it. Republicans are divided and have a very unpopular president. It should be the Dems in a cakewalk so why worry about a long campaign? Can McCain really pose that much of a threat when everything is going their way?

I would think she can carry on right to the convention and this clear the decks thing is just more media mumble jumble!!!

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Why? She has ONE kick at the can and this is it. Republicans are divided and have a very unpopular president. It should be the Dems in a cakewalk so why worry about a long campaign? Can McCain really pose that much of a threat when everything is going their way?

It should be the Dems in a cakewalk? Really? Why? Because McCain isnt a full blown right of center? The Republican base may not like their choices, but theyre going to come around and see that the alternatives (not showing up at the polls, voting Democrat) are two very scary options.

And yes, McCain can pose that much of a threat. As I said, and Lanny, the longer the Dems draw this out, the more divided their house becomes. A unified Democrat party has a 50/50 chance against a divided Republican party... now if both are divided or should the Republicans (grudgingly) unify... yikes. Further, the longer Hillary and Obama throw mud on each other and debate who's more Democrat, the further left they are going to wander. All of a sudden moderates are looking at the two of them and not being as enthused about their quasi-socialist platforms.

Hillary wont back down because she does only have one chance at history. But for the good of the party, she should and let Obama take the torch and run.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

It should be the Dems in a cakewalk? Really? Why? Because McCain isnt a full blown right of center? The Republican base may not like their choices, but theyre going to come around and see that the alternatives (not showing up at the polls, voting Democrat) are two very scary options.

And yes, McCain can pose that much of a threat. As I said, and Lanny, the longer the Dems draw this out, the more divided their house becomes. A unified Democrat party has a 50/50 chance against a divided Republican party... now if both are divided or should the Republicans (grudgingly) unify... yikes. Further, the longer Hillary and Obama throw mud on each other and debate who's more Democrat, the further left they are going to wander. All of a sudden moderates are looking at the two of them and not being as enthused about their quasi-socialist platforms.

Hillary wont back down because she does only have one chance at history. But for the good of the party, she should and let Obama take the torch and run.

Yet according to all the pundits the Democrats are a cinch to win. They have huge turnouts at their primaries etc. Obama drawing the big crowds. Bush and Iraq as downers. The economy in trouble. How could they possibly lose by just drawing out the campaign a few months.

That would say to me that Bush ain't much of a factor. Iraq ain't that big a deal. The economy is whatever.

Are you saying it's all about who gets their base out to vote? That if they fiddle long enough McCain can have every disadvantage that one could possibly think of and yet just because of that he beats them?

[driveway]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

It should be the Dems in a cakewalk? Really? Why? Because McCain isnt a full blown right of center? The Republican base may not like their choices, but theyre going to come around and see that the alternatives (not showing up at the polls, voting Democrat) are two very scary options.

No, it should be the Democrats in a cakewalk because we're coming to the end of 8 years of a Republican president at the same time as we're seeing a major downturn in the economy and the continuation of a pointless and brutally expensive war that most Americans just want to leave behind them.

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Yet according to all the pundits the Democrats are a cinch to win. They have huge turnouts at their primaries etc. Obama drawing the big crowds. Bush and Iraq as downers. The economy in trouble. How could they possibly lose by just drawing out the campaign a few months.

That would say to me that Bush ain't much of a factor. Iraq ain't that big a deal. The economy is whatever.

Are you saying it's all about who gets their base out to vote? That if they fiddle long enough McCain can have every disadvantage that one could possibly think of and yet just because of that he beats them?

...huh?

Which pundits? Democrats?

The second paragraph made no sense... and I dont understand the third.

Im saying that McCain is a threat and if people think otherwise, their too blinded by the hope that a Democrat will win without considering all the factors and consequences.

A long, drawn out primary battle is bad news for the Democrats because they wont have a leader until AUGUST. Even after that, if the nominee is named by Super-delegates, that is going to be a huge distraction for the start of the general election. Meanwhile, McCain can concentrate on unifying his party instead of trying to differentiate himself from someone on the same side as he is.

Hopefully this answered your post... although Im not sure...

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by driveway

No, it should be the Democrats in a cakewalk because we're coming to the end of 8 years of a Republican president at the same time as we're seeing a major downturn in the economy and the continuation of a pointless and brutally expensive war that most Americans just want to leave behind them.

Yup... voters never stay with party alliances despite previous poor performance.

And youre right, all voters in the US are stupid enough to see McCain = Republican, Bush = Republican... therefore.... McCain = Bush.

Tell me youre one of the many caught up in the punch word hysteria that surrounds Obama's campaign... "Change"... magical.

[Vulcan]

All you people calling for Hillary to step aside for the good of the party are missing one point. As long as Clinton still has a chance and wants to continue the battle, she should continue. If she steps aside she'll let down her supporters and we'll have a contrived result. A democracy should be just that with no back room deals unless they're tied.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

All you people calling for Hillary to step aside for the good of the party are missing one point. As long as Clinton still has a chance and wants to continue the battle, she should continue. If she steps aside she'll let down her supporters and we'll have a contrived result. A democracy should be just that with no back room deals unless they're tied.

Exactly.

And I wonder if all the people supporting Hillary would cast their vote for Obama.

[Azure]

As voters in Ohio, Rhode Island, Vermont and Texas headed to the polls potentially to decide the Democratic nomination for the presidency, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton on Tuesday urged voters to settle in for a nomination fight that could roll on for months to come.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/04/us...mpaign.html?hp

She's not giving up anytime soon.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

All you people calling for Hillary to step aside for the good of the party are missing one point. As long as Clinton still has a chance and wants to continue the battle, she should continue. If she steps aside she'll let down her supporters and we'll have a contrived result. A democracy should be just that with no back room deals unless they're tied.

So the 11 straight beatings, and yes, the majority of the losses were beatings, should have no bearing on the decisions of the DNC and their willingness to carry on the contest? The momentum and the polls suggesting that one candidate stands a much greater chance of winning the Presidental race should not be considered? This isn't a basketball game where there are 76 timeouts and the ability to foul your opponent to try and get back into the game. This is a political campaign where internal bickering by the party delegates can kill all momentum and put a bad taste in the mouths of the voters. Candidates drop out for many reasons, and the good of the party's chances are a reason that comes into play. Sadly, I don't think Hillary thinks that way. She'll keep driving, until Bill takes the keys away from her and tells her its over.

Originally Posted by Azure

Exactly.

And I wonder if all the people supporting Hillary would cast their vote for Obama.

Probably not. That happens all the time in elections, and it happens with more frequency in drawn out battles. The Dems need to wrap their heads around this. The longer it draws out, the more entrenched the voters will become with "their" candidate and the more likely they will be to either refuse to vote, or cast their vote opposite to the person who beat their favorite. The bitterness of a drawn out contest will just mean more votes for Nader, and a Republican victory in the end.

[Azure]

Well in that case...go Nader!

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

So the 11 straight beatings, and yes, the majority of the losses were beatings, should have no bearing on the decisions of the DNC and their willingness to carry on the contest? The momentum and the polls suggesting that one candidate stands a much greater chance of winning the Presidental race should not be considered? This isn't a basketball game where there are 76 timeouts and the ability to foul your opponent to try and get back into the game. This is a political campaign where internal bickering by the party delegates can kill all momentum and put a bad taste in the mouths of the voters. Candidates drop out for many reasons, and the good of the party's chances are a reason that comes into play. Sadly, I don't think Hillary thinks that way. She'll keep driving, until Bill takes the keys away from her and tells her its over.




.

If she gets beaten today, I imagine it's over but as of right now, she's still in it and to bow out while still so close will leave a stink. Maybe not the best of situations but those are the cards the Democrats have been dealt. Me, I'm
leaning slightly for Obama, for his policies and as he seems to be able to unite the country. This should overcome any advantage McCain may have.

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

If she gets beaten today, I imagine it's over but as of right now, she's still in it and to bow out while still so close will leave a stink. Maybe not the best of situations but those are the cards the Democrats have been dealt. Me, I'm
leaning slightly for Obama, for his policies and as he seems to be able to unite the country. This should overcome any advantage McCain may have.

If you think the country is divided now, if Obama gets elected, you'll see real division. He's too far left to be a uniting force, just as Bush was too far right.

If Obama is the next president, it's going to fire up conservatives like nothing else and I see Congress becoming more divided on issues.

"He seems to be able to unite the country" is wishful thinking... he definitely wont do that. Let's start by seeing if he can unite his party.

[HotHotHeat]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

If you think the country is divided now, if Obama gets elected, you'll see real division. He's too far left to be a uniting force, just as Bush was too far right.

If Obama is the next president, it's going to fire up conservatives like nothing else and I see Congress becoming more divided on issues.

"He seems to be able to unite the country" is wishful thinking... he definitely wont do that. Let's start by seeing if he can unite his party.

History has shown a left thinking mind is better at uniting a body of people much more convincingly than a right thinking one. We'll see.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

If you think the country is divided now, if Obama gets elected, you'll see real division. He's too far left to be a uniting force, just as Bush was too far right.

If Obama is the next president, it's going to fire up conservatives like nothing else and I see Congress becoming more divided on issues.

"He seems to be able to unite the country" is wishful thinking... he definitely wont do that. Let's start by seeing if he can unite his party.

Are you kidding me? Obama is attracting people from both sides of the aisle and from all demographics. I work with the most conservative people in the country, a lot of them voting for Bush twice, and they are inspired by Obama and what he represents. The only "conservatives" that Obama will fire up are the sheet wearing good old boys who don't want a "colored fella" in the White House.

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Are you kidding me? Obama is attracting people from both sides of the aisle and from all demographics. I work with the most conservative people in the country, a lot of them voting for Bush twice, and they are inspired by Obama and what he represents. The only "conservatives" that Obama will fire up are the sheet wearing good old boys who don't want a "colored fella" in the White House.

I also have very close contacts with conservative voters, columnists, advisors and pundits who also voted Bush twice. They look at Obama as threat to conservatism. The NRA and Evangelicals are just two groups that will line up against Obama. He's energizing people in his party and, for the first time in a long time, aspiring moderates and moderate Republicans to think twice about the status quo. But dont take that as unifying - the longer this primary race goes along, the less chance Obama has to unify his party, let alone the country.

Im not against Obama per se, Im withholding judgment until the primaries get sorted out because then the election can get down to the real core issues. I just dont think he's a unifying figure... he's too far left... IMO.

[Dan02]

Interesting, it's early but Obama has a 9 point lead in Texas atm. roughly 86k votes, if this holds the Clinton campaign is over.

[Johnny 99]

Originally Posted by Dan02

Interesting, it's early but Obama has a 9 point lead in Texas atm. roughly 86k votes, if this holds the Clinton campaign is over.

Clinton has an eighteen point lead in Ohio right now. Even if she only wins by half that, she owes it to her supporters to stay in the race.