One week to Pennsylvania Primary

[iplaw]

One thing is certain....the bloodbath continues for at least 3 more months if not more.  I bet Howard Dean went out and bought stock in Excedrin and Jack Daniels after last night.

Good night for Clinton;

Bad night for Obama;

Even worse night for the party....

[USRufnex]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588
...And being 600,000 votes behind in the popular vote is hardly what I would call being "almost caught up."

I know that you like to round up for Obama and round down for Clinton...According to this website...Clinton is now ahead in popular vote. Obama gets to count the estimated totals in Iowa, Nevada, Maine and Washington and Hillary gets to count Michigan and Florida. Don't say that Michigan and Florida popular votes don't count. They may not be counted for assigning delegates, but those citizens still voted.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

Hillary is now ahead in popular vote by 11,721 votes. Obama has been ahead for months and now Hillary is ahead. If Obama doesn't win North Carolina, he is through. Two weeks is forever in campaigns. I would worry if I were you.

Your arguments for Hillary personify why so many dems and independants are sick of hearing the Clinton machine twist the truth...

I guess "it depends on what the meaning of the words 'is' is."

Unfortunately, Hillary Clinton's campaign is not about a stronger Democratic Party... HRC's campaign is about the "Clinton Legacy"... and I think history will show Bill Clinton to have been a weak president...

QUOTES...

"It depends on what the meaning of the words 'is' is." –Bill Clinton, during his 1998 grand jury testimony on the Monica Lewinsky affair

"It depends on how you define alone..." –Bill Clinton, in his grand jury testimony

"There were a lot of times when we were alone, but I never really thought we were." –Bill Clinton, in his grand jury testimony

"When I was in England, I experimented with marijuana a time or two, and I didn't like it.  I didn't inhale and never tried it again." –Bill Clinton

"We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans" -- Bill Clinton in 1993 from USA Today

You know the one thing that's wrong with this country? Everyone gets a chance to have their fair say." -- Bill Clinton in 1993, Philadeplphia

"I'm not going to have some reporters pawing through our papers. We are the president" -- Hillary Clinton commenting on the release of subpeonaed documents.

"This vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for President" -- Hillary Clinton

"Bill Clinton is an unusually good liar"- Bob Kerry, Democrat, 1996

"I'm not sure what he meant. His words are subject to multiple interpretations." -- Dem. Rep. Pete Geren on Clinton in 1994

"The President has kept all of the promises he intended to keep." - George Stephanopolous, 1996

"I just got sick and tired of lying for the fella." -- Jim McDougal on Clinton

[cannon_fodder]

OBAMA WASNT EVEN ON THE BALLOT

How, for the love of god, do you count an election when only one candidate was on the ballot?  

Obama +316,588   +1.0%, without Michigan.

In Florida, they did not "compete."  But Hillary won?  You can't win a non-competition.  If Hillary  "won" then she competed in violation of party rules and should drop of immediately.

Obama +611,360   +2.1%
- - -

Seriously, explain how Michigan counts.

Then explain how you win a state that you did not compete in.

[RecycleMichael]

I still believe Hillary is ahead. Obama folk will argue forever that Michigan and Florida don't count. They must think those voters weren't really voting when they went to the polls that day. Obama folk have done everything they can to disenfranchise them, including stopping any new elections.

But under any scenario, Hillary is closing ground fast. Obama could have put her away (and shut me up) if he had gotten more votes in Pennsylvania. But he didn't.

Here is Fred Barnes column today from the National Review...

Forget delegates and the popular vote for the Democratic presidential nomination. The most important thing Hillary Clinton gained by winning the Pennsylvania primary yesterday was a better argument -- indeed, a much better argument.

Chances are, Clinton will trail Barack Obama in the delegate count when the primaries end on June 3, as she does now. And while she may cut into his lead in the popular vote in the Democratic contests, she's not likely to exceed his vote total. So the only way she can capture the nomination is by convincing roughly 300 uncommitted super-delegates that Obama cannot defeat Republican John McCain in November but she can.

This isn't an easy case to make, especially with the super-delegates who will provide the margin of victory for whoever captures the 2,025 delegates needed to win the Democratic nomination. And at the moment, they appear strongly inclined to back Obama if he leads in delegates when the primary season is finished.

But after Pennsylvania, Clinton's argument that she's a stronger opponent against McCain will be impossible to ignore or dismiss. And it's not just because Clinton was outspent by nearly 3 to 1 by Obama and got tougher coverage from the media, yet trounced him by a substantial margin in a state that the Democratic presidential nominee must win in November.

The key was how she won in Pennsylvania. She clobbered him among the voting blocs that are critical to a Democratic victory: union households, women, Catholics, working class and downscale voters, and those who didn't attend college. The Democratic nominee who doesn't win a solid majority of these voting groups is all but certain to lose in November.
In fact, she ran stronger among these voters than she had in Ohio, another state where she topped Obama. Ohio, too, is a must win state for the Democratic nominee in November.

And there was a telling number from the exit poll of voters. Nearly one-third of Clinton voters said they wouldn't vote for Obama if he's the nominee. Now, it's likely many of these voters will change their minds. But a sizeable number may remain alienated from the nominee and vote for McCain. A smaller percentage of Obama voters said they wouldn't vote for Clinton if she wins the presidential nomination.

Clinton, of course, will stress this point. She'll emphasize how important the Democratic groups she won are to the party's coalition. And she will point to her pickup of around 200,000 more popular votes than Obama in Pennsylvania -- an impressive margin.

If the votes in the Michigan and Florida primaries are included, Clinton actually is ahead of Obama in popular votes. For now anyway, the Democratic National Committee has ruled that the Michigan and Florida votes won't be counted because the states voted too early.

Her argument boils down to this: I can hold the traditionally Democratic voters critical to winning the general election and he can't, and thus I can defeat McCain and he can't. Sure, he's ahead in delegates, but he won many of them months ago, before the halo over his campaign was knocked off.

In the Democratic debate last week, she said "yes, yes, yes" when asked if she thinks Obama can defeat McCain. But, in private, she and her allies make the opposite argument: Obama can't win.

Before Pennsylvania, Clinton made the same argument, but her case was weaker. Now it's not only stronger, but it's changed the political environment. Clinton is no longer a hopeless underdog. Yes, she's still an underdog, but one with an argument and a prayer.

[Gaspar]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

I still believe Hillary is ahead. Obama folk will argue forever that Michigan and Florida don't count. They must think those voters weren't really voting when they went to the polls that day. Obama folk have done everything they can to disenfranchise them, including stopping any new elections.

1.) they weren't, the Dem party disenfranchised them before the election.  They, Obama, Hillary, and anyone with access to a TV, radio, or newspaper knew that the Florida and Michigan votes were nothing more than an exercise.  If Hillary had lost she would be demanding that the rules of her party be followed to the letter and the renegade states not be counted.  You know that!!

quote:
Clinton, of course, will stress this point. She'll emphasize how important the Democratic groups she won are to the party's coalition. And she will point to her pickup of around 200,000 more popular votes than Obama in Pennsylvania -- an impressive margin.

2.) Popular vote means nothing.  We are not a Democracy. It is a very impressive margin, but it fits the demographic for her.  She appeals more to older low income, and union constituents.  Her margin fit PA.  

3.) Once again because of the Democrat party's proportional-representation system (designed to weaken some states and strengthen others in the primary process) she gets $cr3wed again because it only yields her 10 to 15 delegates.

4.) Now she is broke, behind, and must face primaries in states with larger African American, young, and wealthy populations.

The only thing she is doing is helping the Republican party.  As long as a 3rd party candidate fails to emerge (very unlikely at this point), she has very little chance of winning the nomination.  Obama has no reason to drop out and unite the party behind her, so do you think she should march this war right up to the doors of the convention?

[rwarn17588]

Here's a startling stat I just learned:

Clinton has to win 71 percent of the remaining pledged delegates to catch up to Obama.

Outside of possibly her former home base of Arkansas, I can't think of a single state in which Clinton won 70 percent.

Also: Clinton has gained a grand total of five pledged delegates since March 4.

Say goodnight, Hillary.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

I still believe Hillary is ahead. Obama folk will argue forever that Michigan and Florida don't count.

I can tell you for certain I was aware of the fact that Michigan and Florida weren't going to count when they moved the primary dates.  They were warned not to by the DNC, told the consequences, and the votes don't count.  No matter how you slice it, they don't count.

That's a shame that the states and party got sideways and there are voters whose votes don't count, but that was the penalty and it was known well in advance of those primaries.

Again, Fla. and Mich. don't count.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

Here's a startling stat I just learned:

Clinton has to win 71 percent of the remaining pledged delegates to catch up to Obama.

Outside of possibly her former home base of Arkansas, I can't think of a single state in which Clinton won 70 percent.

Also: Clinton has gained a grand total of five pledged delegates since March 4.

Say goodnight, Hillary.

Nope, not till Denver.  She's got the same mentality on this as RM, she thinks she's got the lead.

[FOTD]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

One thing is certain....the bloodbath continues for at least 3 more months if not more.  I bet Howard Dean went out and bought stock in Excedrin and Jack Daniels after last night.

Good night for Clinton;

Bad night for Obama;

Even worse night for the party....

Your personal attacks are immature.

Hundreds of thousands are registering who will not vote for Johnnie B. Goode. Hilldog is not hurting the party. She's hurting herself.

The dems will slaughter the repugs in November because of the new voters between 18 and 30 and because the repugs are running on a lame duck's failures.

[RecycleMichael]

My grandfather used to say, "Don't throw away the old bucket until you know if the new one holds water."

[cannon_fodder]

You still didn't explain how Hillary gets to count votes in a state where her opponent was not on the ballot.

Nor how she "won" a state she did not "compete" in.
- - -

In a poll in Europe Obama was favored over Clinton by 6%.  There are about 710,000,000 people in Europe.  That's 42.6 Million vote in favor of Obama.

Their votes don't really count, but their opinion should matter.  Obama + 43,000,000!

Freedom to invent reality is fun.

[FOTD]

McCain Celebrates Huge Pennsylvania Win
'Happiest Night of My Life,' Says Mac

Presumptive G.O.P. nominee John McCain appeared at a mammoth rally in Philadelphia last night to celebrate the results of the Pennsylvania primary, calling the contest "a huge victory for me and my campaign."

A jubilant Sen. McCain said that as the results poured in, "It became abundantly clear that the people of Pennsylvania want to send the Republicans back to the White House for another four years."

Overjoyed McCain supporters packed the ballroom at the Philadelphia Hyatt to help their candidate celebrate what he called "the happiest night of my life."

"My friends, tonight the people of Pennsylvania have delivered the White House to me on a silver platter," he said, his eyes glistening. "This is the best thing to happen to me since I married a beer heiress."

At a campaign rally of her own, Sen. Hillary Clinton also savored the results of the primary, declaring that she was "one step closer to getting my hands on a nuclear bomb."

Turning towards her husband, former President Bill Clinton, she said, "I hope that my having a nuclear arsenal at my command will make you think twice before you do anything foolish this time."

Blood visibly draining from the former president's face, Sen. Clinton glared at him sternly, adding, "I'm not kidding."

In an effort to clarify Sen. Clinton's remarks, aides later denied that she had threatened her husband with obliteration.

Elsewhere, Sen. Barack Obama agreed to a televised debate on CBS moderated by Katie Couric, saying, "If I make a gaffe, at least no one will be watching."
Andy Borowitz

[cannon_fodder]

Did you write that article?  Because I did not see a link, or a source. I thought it was written by Andy Borowitz for the Huffington Post, but maybe that's you and you didn't sell the rights to Huffington.

Again, that is stealing.  You can not just grab articles from the net and display them elsewhere.  No more than I could paste a copy of Harry Potter on the web.

You can not post any portion of an article without at least a decent citation.

You CAN, use parts of an article with proper citation to discuss a point under the "fair use" doctrine.

[FOTD]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

Did you write that article?  Because I did not see a link, or a source. I thought it was written by Andy Borowitz for the Huffington Post, but maybe that's you and you didn't sell the rights to Huffington.

Again, that is stealing.  You can not just grab articles from the net and display them elsewhere.  No more than I could paste a copy of Harry Potter on the web.

You can not post any portion of an article without at least a decent citation.

You CAN, use parts of an article with proper citation to discuss a point under the "fair use" doctrine.

Another one of your personal attacks. %99 of the time I put the link in the post and then I get ripped for not being original. You are after my arse, but this came to me vis a vie email and I placed the authors name at the base.
Here putz: http://www.borowitzreport.com/

Happier now?

I'm not into your gotcha game.

[cannon_fodder]

That was, in no way shape or form a personal attack.  How is calling plagiarism plagiarism  a personal attack?  You took an article wholesale from a commercial site and posted it on another site on the internet.  It doesn't matter if someone stole it first and put it in an email list, or if you read it and retyped it, or cut and pasted it.

You can't do that.  Nothing personal, just what the law is.

If it seems that I am picking on you, it is because you are the primary offender who posts entire articles about 3 times a day.  It's annoying, and illegal.  So I finally called you on it.

Again, explain to me how that was a personal attack?