Hillary's momentum hits a brick wall

[pmcalk]

Yet another poll by PEW Research with bad news for Hillary.  She's now down 10% against Obama.  Her negatives seem impossible to overcome--51% of voters believe that she is hard to like, 46% believe that she is phony, and 46% believe she is not honest.

Up against McCain, Obama does slightly better than Clinton.  Oddly, regardless of whom they support, the clear majority of voters think that Obama would beat McCain, while the majority of voters think that McCain would beat Clinton.

Like Nancy Pelosi, 63% of democrats believe that the winner should be chosen by whomever received the most support in the primaries, not by the superdelegates.

[RecycleMichael]

Of course. All Obama supporters don't want superdelegates to have any say in this election. Sorry. You don't get to change the rules.

But I am sure that FOTD will find some obscure blogger that believes that she made up the rules and that they are racist.

Hillary has always been ahead in superdelegates. Obama will do and say whatever it takes to stop their votes from even being heard. It worked for him in Michigan and Florida...who is to say it won't work in Denver?

[USRufnex]

No wonder you're attracted to Hillary Clinton's campaign, RM..... spin, spin, spin...

HRC wants to make up her own new rules for Michigan and Florida... and not abide the rules she agreed to months ago...

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/03/03/7428/

quote:(Michigan Voter)  "There is something wrong with this. People don t even have a choice to vote for the person we want to vote for. The only name I even recognize here is Hillary Clinton. It appears people are trying to control how to vote."

"You know," Senator Clinton remarked, "it's clear the election they're having isn't going to count for anything. Obama's name did not even appear on the ballot in Michigan." (Obama was not allowed to withdraw his name in Florida.)

Superdelegates are the Democratic Party's version of the House of Lords.

[pmcalk]

quote:

quote:Like Nancy Pelosi, 63% of democrats believe that the winner should be chosen by whomever received the most support in the primaries, not by the superdelegates.

Originally posted by RecycleMichael

Of course. All Obama supporters don't want superdelegates to have any say in this election.

Hillary has always been ahead in superdelegates.

Are you saying that 63% of democrats are Obama supporters?  

While Clinton started with more Superdelegates, Obama has gained at least 60 superdelegates since supertuesday.  Hillary actually lost some, though she's gained a few new ones as well.  According to the New York Times, the difference in the number of superdelegates that support Clinton vs. Obama is less than 20.

[FOTD]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

Of course. All Obama supporters don't want superdelegates to have any say in this election. Sorry. You don't get to change the rules.

But I am sure that FOTD will find some obscure blogger that believes that she made up the rules and that they are racist.

Hillary has always been ahead in superdelegates. Obama will do and say whatever it takes to stop their votes from even being heard. It worked for him in Michigan and Florida...who is to say it won't work in Denver?

RM....knock it off. I have always said play by the rules. Be true to your word is my motto.

What do you know about the game of golf? Do you understand what somebody does when they take mulligans all over the course?

I don't care how it unfolds. I just know it will work itself out when they sit down to add up the score.

[cannon_fodder]

lol, you forgot the obscure blogger post FOTD.

RM,

The difference is Obama is not trying to change the rules.  He is trying to persuade the super delegates which way to vote, but f that is by saying they shouldn't ignore the will of the voters (who, even counting MI and FL still support him).  There is a huge difference between persuading votes and trying to go back on an agreement.

I'm still trying to figure out if you are just following the Clinton line or if you really believe such nonsense .  Certainly Obama's "will of the people line" is to get elected, just like Hillary couldn't care less about MI or FL if she didn't think she needed them to have a chance.

While Obama just seems to be doing the standard political crap - Hillary continues to reinforce my image of her being a person who will do or say anything (no matter how obvious the lie) to get elected.    Some horse play is expect, by Bill's line that "if you don't want to be attacked don't run for office" is a sad statement of how the Clinton's view politics.

[RecycleMichael]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder
I'm still trying to figure out if you are just following the Clinton line or if you really believe such nonsense .  

"In politics, an absurdity is not a handicap."

Napoleon Bonaparte

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

lol, you forgot the obscure blogger post FOTD.

RM,

The difference is Obama is not trying to change the rules.  He is trying to persuade the super delegates which way to vote, but f that is by saying they shouldn't ignore the will of the voters (who, even counting MI and FL still support him).  There is a huge difference between persuading votes and trying to go back on an agreement.

I'm still trying to figure out if you are just following the Clinton line or if you really believe such nonsense .  Certainly Obama's "will of the people line" is to get elected, just like Hillary couldn't care less about MI or FL if she didn't think she needed them to have a chance.

While Obama just seems to be doing the standard political crap - Hillary continues to reinforce my image of her being a person who will do or say anything (no matter how obvious the lie) to get elected.    Some horse play is expect, by Bill's line that "if you don't want to be attacked don't run for office" is a sad statement of how the Clinton's view politics.

I think Hillarity might seriously be a sociopath.  At the very least she and her husband are political sociopaths.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Wow, it took roughly 700 words or so to say "Obama good, Clinton bad".

I guess that's why they pay essayists the big bucks for "news".

Geez Conan. You really need to understand what's considered "news" and what's editorial.

Huh?  This coming from the postie that goes from one bizarre blog to another to try and back up his political opinions?

Come on dude say an "Om" with me and swear off the lib-tard blogs, they are clogging the blood vessels in your brain.