Democratic Presidential Primaries 2008

[Nehkara]

Delegate update:

Total Delegates:

Clinton 1269
Obama 1360 (91 ahead)


Pledged Delegates:

Clinton 1031
Obama 1184 (153 ahead)


Superdelegates:

Clinton 238 (62 ahead)
Obama 176


Obama gains 15 superdelegates to Clinton's 4.
Obama gains 26 pledged delegates to Clinton's 15.

Overall gain of 22 delegates by Obama.

[HotHotHeat]

CNN's National 'Poll of Polls' has Obama 10 points ahead of Hillary. Wow.



The last poll IIRC had Hillary 44% to Obama's 43%.

[Thunderball]

So, now our heroic Mr. Obama wants to force Canada and Mexico into a much more America-centric NAFTA, or they'll walk away?? Same with Hillary...

What kind of compassionate, progressive and educated democrats are these? Like Mr. Flaherty said, if they don't see the inherent positives with free trade between 2 of your top 5 providers of energy, then they're really missing the point. The result of their thoughtless policy would invariably be economic meltdown in Canada and the US (and Mexico... and they think they have illegal immigration problems now...)

Clinton and Obama have exposed themselves as being completely naiive, protectionist and careless. Funny you don't hear the Republicans agreeing with this nonsense. Maybe Democrats aren't as good for Canada as some people think?

Source: http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...hub=TopStories

[troutman]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

CNN's National 'Poll of Polls' has Obama 10 points ahead of Hillary. Wow.



The last poll IIRC had Hillary 44% to Obama's 43%.

Superdelegates might have to move to Obama now to avoid a big mess.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

So, now our heroic Mr. Obama wants to force Canada and Mexico into a much more America-centric NAFTA, or they'll walk away?? Same with Hillary...

What kind of compassionate, progressive and educated democrats are these? Like Mr. Flaherty said, if they don't see the inherent positives with free trade between 2 of your top 5 providers of energy, then they're really missing the point. The result of their thoughtless policy would invariably be economic meltdown in Canada and the US (and Mexico... and they think they have illegal immigration problems now...)

Clinton and Obama have exposed themselves as being completely naiive, protectionist and careless. Funny you don't hear the Republicans agreeing with this nonsense. Maybe Democrats aren't as good for Canada as some people think?

Source: http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...hub=TopStories

Just campaign promises for the rust belt of Ohio. After either is elected, I don't think a lot will change for Canada other than window dressing.
Hey, and if they do pull out, we'd probably be better off joining the Common Market anyways.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

So, now our heroic Mr. Obama wants to force Canada and Mexico into a much more America-centric NAFTA, or they'll walk away?? Same with Hillary...

What kind of compassionate, progressive and educated democrats are these? Like Mr. Flaherty said, if they don't see the inherent positives with free trade between 2 of your top 5 providers of energy, then they're really missing the point. The result of their thoughtless policy would invariably be economic meltdown in Canada and the US (and Mexico... and they think they have illegal immigration problems now...)

Clinton and Obama have exposed themselves as being completely naiive, protectionist and careless. Funny you don't hear the Republicans agreeing with this nonsense. Maybe Democrats aren't as good for Canada as some people think?

Source: http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...hub=TopStories

This is quietly going into the Republicans' playbook and will be used come election time. It's pretty funny how everyone is writing the Republicans off before the election even starts. Obama may look great now, but he still has to fight the Republican machine with a very capable leader at its head.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Just campaign promises for the rust belt of Ohio. After either is elected, I don't think a lot will change for Canada other than window dressing.

Problem is with campaign promises at the magnitude of this one is the concern that they will be held to it, to some extent. Especially since this kind of foolishness would play well with ignorant voters outside the Rust Belt as well.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by peter12

This is quietly going into the Republicans' playbook and will be used come election time. It's pretty funny how everyone is writing the Republicans off before the election even starts. Obama may look great now, but he still has to fight the Republican machine with a very capable leader at its head.

Agreed... the more Obama opens his mouth and spews stuff like this, the more material McCain is going to be able to bury him with. Fake promise or not, its a dumb thing to advocate. The Republicans are a finely-tuned machine, and can't be counted out.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Just campaign promises for the rust belt of Ohio. After either is elected, I don't think a lot will change for Canada other than window dressing.
Hey, and if they do pull out, we'd probably be better off joining the Common Market anyways.

Yeah rust belt people really dont' get it. Low-skilled manufacturing jobs paying $30 an hour are gone due to cheaper labor forces elsewhere in the world. This is a force that no politician can combat, America has a knowledge-based economy now and has had one since the 80s. If you want a good paying job acquire that 'knowledge' or prepare to be left behind. It's ecnomically unwise to continue to throw out subsidies and tariffs to protect these dying industries.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Just campaign promises for the rust belt of Ohio. After either is elected, I don't think a lot will change for Canada other than window dressing.
Hey, and if they do pull out, we'd probably be better off joining the Common Market anyways.

Once again we're trying to write off something Obama said as 'nothing.'

Like I've said before....the guy can say 'anything' and people will still like him.

Blind support at its best.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by Azure

Blind support at its best.

No, that's people who still support Bush. This is blind support at it's mild, or mediocre at best.

[Nehkara]

Lewis switches from Clinton to Obama

Rep. John Lewis has formally switched his support to Sen. Barack Obama in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, he told CNN affiliate WSB Wednesdy.

The respected voice on civil rights was one of Sen. Hillary Clinton's most prominent African-American supporters.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

No, that's people who still support Bush. This is blind support at it's mild, or mediocre at best.

It doesn't matter who it is.....blindly supporting him is bad no matter how you cut it.

If Obama is making moronic comments like this, he should be challenged....by his OWN supporters.

Not written off because he probably won't implement it in office anyways.

So whats better...a candidate that lies on the campaign trail, or one that says stupid things and puts them in play when he gets to office?

The strange thing is that Obama has created an image of himself as someone that would NOT lie.....who is straightforward and would give everyone 'hope and change'....still laughing at that comment.

Now Vulcan is saying its alright for him to lie on the campaign trail....? So in essence, Obama is just like every other politician.

So much for 'change.'

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by Azure

Now Vulcan is saying its alright for him to lie on the campaign trail....? So in essence, Obama is just like every other politician.

So much for 'change.'

It's been stated many times, that right now both people are just spewing what the party wants to hear. They don't get into their real feelings until the GE. I don't know enough about American politics to judge. If he keeps pushing some of this stuff in the GE, then yeah he needs to be called on it but right not it's lip service and the only way he can enact any of this change is by getting into the GE.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Problem is with campaign promises at the magnitude of this one is the concern that they will be held to it, to some extent. Especially since this kind of foolishness would play well with ignorant voters outside the Rust Belt as well.

That applies to the majority of Americans. The electorate is so uninformed on issues that they don't really have the ability to hold the candidate's feet to the fire on an issue. Clinton and Obama may say they will revisit NAFTA, and make it more America friendly, but the bottom line is that the last Democrat in the White House strengthened NAFTA, and that is the policy that exists. There are greater battles to be waged, and I doubt that either would honestly try to change the deal. It does not align with the policy of either party or their think tank establishment.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

It's been stated many times, that right now both people are just spewing what the party wants to hear. They don't get into their real feelings until the GE. I don't know enough about American politics to judge. If he keeps pushing some of this stuff in the GE, then yeah he needs to be called on it but right not it's lip service and the only way he can enact any of this change is by getting into the GE.

So you're saying Obama wouldn't say the same thing during the election campaign?

Right now he'll lie in order to get votes for the primaries...but he won't lie to get votes during the Presidential election campaign?

Right.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by Azure

So you're saying Obama wouldn't say the same thing during the election campaign?

Right now he'll lie in order to get votes for the primaries...but he won't lie to get votes during the Presidential election campaign?

Right.

I don't think he's 'lying' and he may very well plan to do something to try and buoy these industries in places they're flagging. But I don't think it would be something that would slap it's biggest trading partner and neighbour hard in the face.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

I don't think he's 'lying' and he may very well plan to do something to try and buoy these industries in places they're flagging. But I don't think it would be something that would slap it's biggest trading partner and neighbour hard in the face.

So its not 'Just campaign promises for the rust belt of Ohio.'

I don't think he's lying either....just ignorant, oh so ignorant.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by Azure

I don't think he's lying either....just ignorant, oh so ignorant.

I'll be honest, it seems almost every President has been ignorant towards Canada.

[CaptainCrunch]

I might be wrong, but the whole primaries campaign between Clinton and Obama has been based around optics more then actual issues and debates on the issues.

Clinton has tried to soften her image via tears, and portraying hurt but real feelings to dispel the notional that she's an emotionless fembot.

Obama has stolen right out of the Kennedy handbook and spoken in generalities in terms of change and vision and reconciliation over partisian politics and party boundries, but has offered little in the way of substance.

My guess right now is that Clinton or Obama might get slaughtered during the actual election process if they don't actually start to devise actual hard policies.

It reminds me so much of Paul Martin during the last federal election where he kept mentioning a nebulous plan, but never divulged anything in the plan, and he got slaughtered by a better prepared Harper.

I don't think Obama or Clinton can just magically switch gears in mid flow when they actually have to go after the American general public as oppossed to going after hardened democrat votes.