US Elections 2008 - III

05-31-2008, 11:53 PM

QUOTEBarak at 224
Hillary at 264 (mind you 270 is magic number)

I don't think this has much relevance now since democratic nomination is determined by proportional allocation of delegates from CDs. Either democrat will win states like NY, CA, IL, CT, VT, RI, ME etc. Kerry won 250+ electoral votes and I believe Obama will be able to hold on to almost all those states, but I can not say the same about Hillary.

As of now, I think he will put the following states in play that clinton can not
CO (9), IA(9), NM(5), WI(10), VA(13) and to a lesser extent NC(13)

Both could be somewhat equally competitive in the following
MO, OH

Hillary could be more competitive in the following
WV, FL

Hillary could lose the following states won by Kerry
WA, OR, WI and to a lesser extent MN

i.e. any advantage of Hillary winning FL will be neutralized by her losing some of the above. But Obama has a 46 electoral vote advantage over the states that only he can win (like CO, VA etc. without counting NC)

That is my $0.02

06-01-2008, 12:55 AM

Viren,
After drinking kool-aid, sky opens and fairy comes down to earth and ........ <!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' />

06-01-2008, 03:43 AM

QUOTE(Mudy @ Jun 1 2008, 12:55 AM)Viren,
After drinking kool-aid, sky opens and fairy comes down to earth and ........ <!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' />
[right][snapback]82230[/snapback][/right]

All the following republicans were drinking cool-aid or they were all "marxists". take your pick <!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' />

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/39067.html
QUOTEBeverly Fanning is among the campaign donors who'll be joining President Bush at a gala at Washington's Ford's Theater Sunday night, but she says that won't dissuade her from her current passion: volunteering for Barack Obama's presidential campaign.

She isn't the only convert. A McClatchy computer analysis, incomplete due to the difficulty matching data from various campaign finance reports, found that hundreds of people who gave at least $200 to Bush's 2004 campaign have donated to Obama.

"There is a large block of Republicans, particularly economic conservatives, who just feel that the Republican Party in Washington completely let them down" by failing to control spending and address other problems, Corrado said. "The Republicans have really given these donors no reason to give."

Lawyer Allen Larson of Yarmouthport, Mass., a political independent, contributed $2,000 to Bush's 2004 reelection campaign, but said he gave Obama the maximum $2,300 in hopes he can use his "unique skills" to rebuild fractured foreign alliances.
....

"I just can't get over it that my name is in there for sending money to that miserable president," she said. "I think Obama is something we all need badly, really badly.

Worried about the loss of manufacturing jobs to Third World countries, she said, she began volunteering early this year for Obama, who says he'd consider amending trade pacts to protect those jobs.

The 48-year-old mother of two has given Obama more than a dozen donations, hitting the maximum $2,300 for the primaries. She's even knocked on the doors of 300 homes in Orangeburg, S.C. and in the affluent Cleveland suburb of Shaker Heights.


Beverly Fanning is the wife of a COO and is from south. As I had stated before, it is not the fictitious marxists, but disaffected independents and republicans that is going to help Obama win the WH.

06-01-2008, 05:03 AM

Hillary is going to Denver. Great News for GOP.
Today RNC was a real circus. Now they have decided half delgates and snatching delegates from Hillary in MI. DNC is trying very hard to support its badly flawed candidate to stand, gosh his Pandora box is full of pastors, Sinclair, Rezko, Irag billionaire, Hamas, New Black Panther, Odinga. I am waiting when Osama-Bin-Laden will endrose him.

Today Barack Hussein resigned from his church. Next he may have to divorce his wife for "mean" "bitter" comment.
Lets see how Hannity will hammer him on Sunday.

Now why he resigned his beloved church of 20 years
BO Unfav 53% (highest in this primary)
BO Fav 45%

HRC Unfav 52%
HRC Fav 47% <!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' />

Longer he stays in race worse it will get.

Here is Hussein biggest supporter.
QUOTENew York State has issued a tax warrant against Keith Olbermann for failure to pay taxes on his humbly named personal corporation, Olbermann Broadcasting Empire, Inc. Olbermann is listed in legal records as the President of Olbermann Broadcasting Empire, Inc.
A call to the Albany County Clerk's Office in upstate New York confirmed that the warrant is still outstanding and that Olbermann has still failed to pay his back taxes. State records show that Olbermann's company failed to pay $2,269.50 in state taxes. A judgement was entered against Olbermann last summer (Docket Date: 8/21/2007), just weeks before Olbermann closed on a a luxurious $4.2 mm condo at Trump Palace, at 200 East 69th Street.

06-01-2008, 06:09 AM

Apteji,

QUOTEI believe Obama will be able to hold on to almost all those states, but I can not say the same about Hillary.

Don't let your anti-Hillary bias cloud your judgement. While I'll concede that Barak can pick up every Kerry '04 state. But so can Hillary and more. I don't for a minute buy that Barak can pick xyz state but Hillary can't.

QUOTELincoln was not very experienced when he ran for president, he was a single-term congressman from IL.
Issue is whether we want yet another term of inexperienced person? We saw how Bush fared.

Comparing Barak to Linclon is a bit stretch. Only thing common is that they are/were both from IL. And the tall stature and big ears maybe. That's where it ends.
Linclon reached to his opponents. Can you say same about Barak? How's his reading on Goodwin's book coming along?

And given Presidency of either Lincoln or Kennedy, I'd tell the Barak supporters to drop that comparison.

QUOTEI don't think Clinton and Gore were on speaking terms while Gore was running for office
Without Clinton years of economic prosperity, Gore couldn't get nomination against Bradley, let alone the popular vote in general elections. Would have been a re-run of his failed '88 attempt.
And the faux pas on Donna Brazil's part to not use Clinton for campaigning is still a topic of discussion in democratic circles.

QUOTEOn Obama advisor meeting with the canadians - wasn't he removed from the campaign ?
Yeah, they disappear after being exposed. Like Wright, Pfleger. Obama's now quit the racist church. Hallelujah!!

QUOTEIf you go by what Hillary is proclaiming these days, she was the VP.
Why not? When it comes to attacking her, not forgetting the tax-payer funded witch-hunt called Ken Starr, she bore brunt of the backlash on major issues. Even the bra-burning feminists couldn't seem to digest the way she handled the Monica issue when clearly she was the victim there.
If she's to be blamed for Clinton years of 90s, let's also give her credit. Or you want to nitpick here?

QUOTEOtherwise why do you think Clinton was fuming against "people with college degrees" ? Ironically it is those people with college degrees that did well during clinton era compared to the blue-collar workers supporting Hillary 
Entire nation did well in 90s. The reforms Clinton got for working class, welfare issues, minimum wage etc, he actually did something - despite no support from Gingrich congress. What you see in terms of voting in blue collar belt like PA, KY etc is the result of that.
Clinton's fuming at the media heads who with their suit and degrees claim to speak for nation - I'm refering to Matthew, Olberman, Russert etc. These guys are supposed to be neutral or they competing to be like a lame version of O'Rielly?

QUOTEUniversal Healthcare has been a democratic party principle for a long time. 
True, but heard the term Hillarycare. It was Hillary who did something about it even when it was clearly an unpopular issue. Rest are Johnny come lately on this who have been nodding their heads all these years.

QUOTETed Kennedy probably deserves far more credit on these domestic policy issues than Hillary or Bill
And Ted Chappaquiddick Kennedy deserves far more credit for stealing Carter's presidency than Hillary ever will. This guy took the battle all they way to convention till the minute he was about to speak - this was 80s. Iran hostage and Kennedy's rebelious behaviour supposed to have gone down in democratic history as a reason why Reagan won is 80. Now his followers are singing a different tune.

06-01-2008, 08:31 AM

BREAKING NEWS: Michelleâs Whitey ProblemQUOTENew and dramatic developments. This is a heads up. Iâll post the news Monday morning by 0900 hours. Now I know why people who have seen the videotape say it is stunning. Barackâs headaches are only starting.

06-02-2008, 09:02 AM

Virenji,
Whatever I posted regarding electoral college prospects of Clinton and Obama are based on the recent polls. Clinton is trailing in WI, OR and WA (at best they can be considered toss-ups, but the fact is she is trailing McCain which is not a good sign)

Also Obama does better in CO, NM and VA. A recent poll had put Obama in clear lead in VA. Only major swing state where Obama is not doing as well as Clinton if FL. But the six states that I mentioned where Obama does better than clinton should make up for that.

QUOTEIssue is whether we want yet another term of inexperienced person? We saw how Bush fared.


C'mon, you can do better. It will be intellectually dishonest to compare an intellectually incurious Bush (who didn't know who the president/PM of pakistan/India was when he was running for election) with Obama. Even conservatives like David Brooks admit that Obama has a firm grasp on policy matters (whether domestic or international)

QUOTEWithout Clinton years of economic prosperity, Gore couldn't get nomination against Bradley, let alone the popular vote in general elections.

IMO Clinton didn't have a lot to do with economic prosperity (from a policy perspective), for the most part Congress and President were at logger heads during most of his presidency and prosperity happened inspitre of all those. I should say Gore got the nomination inspite of Clinton's scandals and pecadillos. He had distanced himself from Clinton while he was running against Bradley (even otherwise, I don't think Bradley had a chance against Gore)

QUOTEIf she's to be blamed for Clinton years of 90s, let's also give her credit. Or you want to nitpick here?

We should give credit where credit is due. Clintons only significant involvement was around the healthcare reform and she failed on that miserably, primarily because she displayed an inability to work with others - even with those from her party. After the debacle, she was confined to the traditional role of a first lady, visiting foreign capitals and having tea with dignitaries (and occasionally coming under "sniper fire" where Bill or Al wouldn't go <!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /> )

QUOTEClinton's fuming at the media heads who with their suit and degrees claim to speak for nation - I'm refering to Matthew, Olberman, Russert etc.

Actually he as well as the campaign has made similar comments against more affluent voters. This is not the first time he has made such comments.

Also Clinton presidency was REALLY bad for the working class in america as it is the free-trade agreements by Clinton and his "China first" policy is what caused so much of job losses for blue collar workers. During his presidency he rode that with the help of an asset bubble - the stock market bubble fueled by internet stocks. Bush wasn't that lucky, his asset bubble based on real-estate collapsed (incidently both bubbles fueled by the master fraud greenspan)

QUOTETrue, but heard the term Hillarycare. It was Hillary who did something about it even when it was clearly an unpopular issue.

Not really true, Kennedy worked on that a lot longer than Clinton while Clinton was sitting on wal-mart board (wal-mart believes in dumping their workers to tax-payer funded healthcare). In an act of nepotism (something similar to Indira putting Rajiv in charge of asian games in '82), Bill put Hillary in charge of healthcare reform while there were clearly more capable leaders in democratic party to lead that reform.

QUOTEnd Ted Chappaquiddick Kennedy deserves far more credit for stealing Carter's presidency than Hillary ever will.

Rather lame excuse. Carter was doomed because of the stagflation, but Iran hostage crisis helped him to come out strongly against Kennedy in the interim, but ultimately caused his failure

QUOTEBO Unfav 53% (highest in this primary)
BO Fav 45%

I checked recent polling averages at rcp. Obama has the highest spread between favbv/unfav (~12) compared to Hillary (~4) or McCain (~10)

06-02-2008, 11:12 AM

Hillary campaign is letting the staff go per politico.com

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/060...f.html#comments
QUOTEMembers of Hillary Clinton's advance staff received calls and emails this evening from headquarters summoning them to New York City Tuesday night, and telling them their roles on the campaign are ending, two Clinton staffers tell my colleague Amie Parnes.

The advance staffers -- most of them now in Puerto Rico, South Dakota, and Montana -- are being given the options of going to New York for a final day Tuesday, or going home, the aides said. The move is a sign that the campaign is beginning to shed -- at least -- some of its staff. The advance staff is responsible for arranging the candidate's events around the country.


There were already reports about Patti Solis Doyle (former clinton campaign manager) looking for a job in Obama campaign.

Or as David Letterman once joked, even when Obama is inaugurated, Hillary will still be running <!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' />

QUOTEHillary is going to Denver. Great News for GOP.

I don't think anyone is going with her on that path

QUOTEToday RNC was a real circus. Now they have decided half delgates and snatching delegates from Hillary in MI.

As-if those four delegates given to Clinton would have made a big difference!!

There were rules set up before the primaries and both campaigns had agreed to those. Republicans also halved the delegation from FL and MI (actually giving half a vote to a delegate benefitted Hillary in FL, otherwise she would had a lead of 6, if the delegate slate was cut in half as the republicans did for punishment)

06-02-2008, 06:44 PM

Meanwhile, there is a rather unflattering article about Bill Clinton in Vanity Fair

Bubba Trouble
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/feature...7/clinton200807
QUOTEOld friends and longtime aides are wringing their hands over Bill Clintonâs postâWhite House escapades, from the dubious (and secretive) business associations to the media blowups that have bruised his wifeâs campaign, to the private-jetting around with a skirt-chasing, scandal-tinged posse. Some point to Clintonâs medical traumas; others blame sheer selfishness, and the absence of anyone who can say âno.â Exploring Clintonworld, the author asks if the former president will be consumed by his own worst self.
................
A longtime Clinton-watcher, who has had ties to the former president since his first campaign for governor of Arkansas, said of Clintonâs sometimes questionable associations, âI donât know what to make of any of that, if itâs a voyeuristic experience, or if heâs participating in it.â

06-02-2008, 08:38 PM

Apteji,
Give Bill Clinton a break, he is suffering from heart problem, working so hard for his wife, doing good work all around world by his Global initative. He love his country.
He is not like Obama sleeping with terrorist and enjoying meals with killers, Ayers, Auchi, Rashid Khalid, Hamas, PLO,.......

He is not Ted Kennedy either who left is girl friend dying in river. And shameless man had a gall to say a word.

I can understand you like Obama variety good for you, but show some respect for War hero McCain and Former President CLinton. They had served their country well.

06-02-2008, 10:00 PM

Apteji,

Okay, here's some talking points, not necessarily my endorsement pro/con anyone.

QUOTEIt will be intellectually dishonest to compare an intellectually incurious Bush (who didn't know who the president/PM of pakistan/India was when he was running for election) with Obama.

Are we electing a President or Mensa scholarship champion? If so, I'll recommend Ken Jennings.

Even this no good Bush had a track record of running Texas state. Can you list one legislation or record of Obama? Maybe then we can have a intellectually honest discussion. Till then it's only tu-tu-main-main.

QUOTEA recent poll had put Obama in clear lead in VA. 
Survey Polls taken in June for general election in Nov is not accurate. Example: Check '04 when Kerry was beating Bush in double digits around this time. Or in '00 where Gore had a lock over Bush.
In '92 around Jun, Bill Clinton was trailing Bush Sr and Perot!!

If it's a matter of scoring discussion points, here's some useless statistics (as of Monday am):
Obama has 1 point lead over McCain but Clinton has 2 point lead over McCain

QUOTEIMO Clinton didn't have a lot to do with economic prosperity (from a policy perspective), for the most part Congress and President were at logger heads during most of his presidency and prosperity happened inspitre of all those.

I'm glad you prefaced it with IMO. Because that opinion reflects the Bush/GOP line which stated in '00 that America prospered because of 'hard-working Americans'. Seems like suddenly Americans have become lazy or they just migrated elsewhere?
And if congress/senate is credited for economic prosperity in 90s, will Pelosi/Reid stand up and take credit for current debacle? Didn't think so.

QUOTEI should say Gore got the nomination inspite of Clinton's scandals and pecadillos.
Most people don't have problems with adults having consenting relationships, hence Clinton came out unscathed despite impeachment while his detractors (Starr, Livingstone, Gingrich, Hyde) are just a byline in history.
And why the heck did Kennedy, Gore etc stand by Clinton during impeachment proceedings?

If you think Gore didn't run on Clinton's prosperity years, what did he run on? His charm that's supposed to have inspired 'Love Story'? Or his record as inventor of internet?

QUOTEHe had distanced himself from Clinton while he was running against Bradley 
Yeah, would you have expected anything else given that Donna Brazil was his advisor? If he done otherwise, he'd have at least carried his own state.

QUOTEClintons only significant involvement was around the healthcare reform and she failed on that miserably, primarily because she displayed an inability to work with others - even with those from her party.
It was an unpopular issue then and some in her party cared for their own skin than take this issue head on. So it's okay if she went with her gut and failed. 30 years in Senate, what's Kennedy got to show on healthcare? She's got more battle scars on healthcare than anyone in the history of US and it's a fact. Current crop of Obama headnodders seem to have conveniently taking GOP stance when it comes to plant blame on her while hogging credit for whatever little's been achieved by her.

QUOTEAlso Clinton presidency was REALLY bad for the working class in america as it is the free-trade agreements by Clinton and his "China first" policy is what caused so much of job losses for blue collar workers.
New flash: Manufacturing job losses in US started back in 80s.
Question: You believe Obama can reverse it? I'm with you if you can convinence me otherwise.
Kerry and his crew went against outsourcing in '04. By the way, where are we on that?

As I stated earlier, 'hope' is not a strategy.

QUOTEClinton was sitting on wal-mart board (wal-mart believes in dumping their workers to tax-payer funded healthcare)
And Barak's served board with a former weather-underground terrorist. Please try again with better example.

And if Wal-Mart's as bad as you claim, will Barak's team will ask Wal-Mart shoppers to not vote for him? I don't think so. So please try again - talking points from Kos and HuffPo have no buyers here.

QUOTEthere is a rather unflattering article about Bill Clinton in Vanity Fair
Last I checked Hillary was running and not Bill. And checking the article, it's nothing new being stated or quoted.
If it's guilt by association for Hillary, Barak's got a lot more explaining to do with his Resko, Farahakhan, Aires etc ties.
And the Vanity Fair's itself clear: Nor, indeed, is there any proof of post-presidential sexual indiscretions on Clintonâs part, despite a steady stream of tabloid speculation and Internet intimations that the Big Dog might be up to his old tricks.


Anyway, the article seems more of 'Vainty. and hardly 'fair'.
Bill's published retort to this rag. Even Media Matters states: Vanity Fair finds no "proof" of Clinton affairs -- but spreads rumors anyway

QUOTEOr as David Letterman once joked, even when Obama is inaugurated, Hillary will still be running <!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' />
And Hannity (or was it lunatic Levin) who joked that Michelle will probabily be 'really' 'really' proud of her country only the day Barak's inaugurated.

And hey, nothing wrong for Hillary to keep running. And 2012's not far, she has the luxury to keep running if she can raise money - of which I have no doubt.
Pray Barak's focused on the job after inauguration and not going into a full time campaign mode for 2012 - Bush did it and see where the nation is today.

06-02-2008, 10:02 PM

contd..

QUOTEAfter the debacle, she was confined to the traditional role of a first lady, visiting foreign capitals and having tea with dignitaries (and occasionally coming under "sniper fire" where Bill or Al wouldn't go <!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /> )

She mispoke on 'sinper fire' and she's admited. Has Obama admitted about his mis-speak on his parents meeting in Selma? Or putting his grandpa under the bus (after doing so with grandma wasn't enough) with his Auschwitz liberation? Or him blaming aide on the 96 liberal survey which was later exposed by his own handwriting? The list is big for someone so new to national politics.

As for your comment about her tea with dignitaries, she's supposed to have been THE most prominent First Lady since Eleanor Roosevelt. If serving tea to VIP guests is bad enough, first lady Michelle could reverse it by serving tea to members of racists church or paid bloggers or weather underground members or some ghetto slumlords.

QUOTECarter was doomed because of the stagflation, 
I could also say that he was doomed because of animal lovers going off on him as he fended off a rabbit's right to attack him. <!--emo& Tongue

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tongue.gif' /> Or he was doomed by the alien-UFO hater community since Carter's supposed to have sighted UFO. I could come up with more excuses which are 100% factual, but it does not alter the fact that Kennedy hijacked the convention till the minute he went up to speak and split the party.
For Kennedy candle holders to give their gratuitous advise to Clinton now is dishonest. If there was justice he'd be serving time in jail cell (beyond the 2 months) rather than serving in senate for 30 years.

QUOTEAs-if those four delegates given to Clinton would have made a big difference!!
Oops, someone forgot to tell that former Obama delegate who just switched to Hillary in past weekend.

You see Apteji, at some point you commented about this forum 'degenrating' Obama and there's no 'honest discussion' here. We could do so in the manner you are doing, but then we'd be up in competition with the likes of HuffPo and DailyKos. If you need head-nodders for Obama, those blogs have the monopoly on this and we don't have money or resources match that.

I trust you'll continue to enlighten us in other threads pertaining to India, US, and NRI issues. If you are going on a single track in this one thread, one could mistake you for one of those paid bloggers who routinely stop by here to plug Obama.

You see, at this point, it's in Barak's interest for his mouthpieces to start building bridges to reach out Clinton supporters. If the radical voice in Hillary camp has it's say, you'll find that for Barak, building bridge to 50% of Hillary leaning democrats is not easy as selling a bridge to other 50% in pocket.

06-03-2008, 10:47 AM

Virenji,
As far as I can see, you are making a few snide remarks instead of trying to respond to what I posted here (best example would be the reason for carter's defeat).

So I will finish with few of my own.
QUOTEAnd 2012's not far, she has the luxury to keep running if she can raise money - of which I have no doubt.


Unfortunately Hillary has clearly showed that she can not manage campaign finances, let alone nation's finances. So she may want to start collecting money now , if she wants to run in 2020.

QUOTEShe's got more battle scars on healthcare than anyone in the history of US and it's a fact.

Just because you rubbed everyone in the wrong way and got scarred in the process means NOTHING.

QUOTEShe mispoke on 'sinper fire' and she's admited.

If you misspeak once you understand, but when you repeat the same (as was the case with RFK assassination), there is something seriously wrong.

This was one power-hungry woman who tried to run on the basis of her husband's tenure (not too different from Indira Gandhi or Sonia Gandhi). Her biggest mistake was touting her so-called "experience"(under sniper fire), when people wanted change

You had earlier mentioned about the bias in mainstream media. How about the bias in drudge report ?

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uui...01071753C5418A0
QUOTEAfter skewering Al Gore and lampooning John Kerry, heâs emerged as an unreliable ally for the GOP, while trumpeting Obamaâs victories and shrugging at his scandals.

âItâs clear to us that Barack Obama has won the Drudge Primary, and it's one of the most important primaries in this process,â conceded a senior aide to Hillary Rodham Clinton, who also acknowledged that Drudgeâs treatment of Obama could make the Illinois senator more electable in November.


Not just drudge, but most of the country has a clinton fatigue, tired of their arrogance and sense of entitlement that was displayed through the campaign.

06-03-2008, 10:55 AM

QUOTEit's say, you'll find that for Barak, building bridge to 50% of Hillary leaning democrats i

They can vote for anyone they chose to, especially after listening to the latest Cheney joke on west virginians(since many of these type of hardcore supporters live around appalachia) for loyally supporting Bush/Cheney for the last eight years. They were after all, voting on such criteria like the guys with whom they would rather have a beer, they vote for people who think shares their "values". However, based on Cheney's joke, I don't think he or Bush or McCain wants to have anything to do with those folks. For Cheney and the rich republicans, probably appalachian inhabitants means and a bunch of bigoted fools who can be easily misled over 3G - Guns Gays and God - practising incest. Even though Cheney's cousin, Obama will genuinely care about them compared to any of the republicans they have been voting for specious reasons for the last 3 decades. What I find amazing is how easy it is to dupe people to vote AGAINST their own economic interests through the use of certain code words or touchy issues.

If after all this, if they still feel that if Hillary is not in the race, the next person who shares their "values" is a republican, no amount of bridge building is going to help them. But I don't think this segment exceeds 10% of Hillary voters.

After all, as the old saying goes, people get the kind of leaders they deserve (probably already proven with Bush). So let us wait and see....

06-03-2008, 04:29 PM

Apteji,

QUOTEAs far as I can see, you are making a few snide remarks instead of trying to respond to what I posted here (best example would be the reason for carter's defeat).
Reading the vitriol you have reserved for one candidate without listing ONE accomplishment of other; I don't understand as to how you can expect others to take you seriously.
As for my remarks on Carter, he was attacked by a rabbit and he did see a UFO. No mis-speak there. Analysis might be faulty on that one, but I'm only living up to your standards here.

Here's Kennedy in 80s convention:
QUOTEKennedy came into the Democratic convention at Madison Square Garden in New York City with 1,225 delegates to Carterâs 1,981 and 122 uncommitted. Kennedyâs only chance to wrest the nomination from Carter, who had enough delegates to win, was to pass an âopen ruleâ motion.

Kennedy wanted the rules governing delegate voting thrown out, minority platform reports presented for floor vote requirement, pledged delegates must be released, the losing challenger must be allowed to address the convention and the president must take a loyalty pledge.
link

And here's a Kennedy supporter from 80s asking why what's good for the goose not good for the gander: link
QUOTEBut in 1980, while still a Democrat, I supported Teddy Kennedy for the nomination. I stayed with Teddy through the convention. It wasn't easy.

In 1980, Kennedy came into the Democratic convention at Madison Square Garden in New York City with 1,225 delegates to President Carter's 1,981, with 122 delegates uncommitted.

Kennedy stood on principle and people admired him for the fighting the good fight.

If Kennedy could take it to the convention when he trailed by 756 delegates, why can't Hillary go to the convention trailing by far less? Would it be so awful?

QUOTEIf you misspeak once you understand, but when you repeat the same (as was the case with RFK assassination), there is something seriously wrong.

RFK assassination was no mis-speak - try again. Even Robert Kennedy stood by Clinton - before and after the statement. Media clearly spun it despite clarification available on YouTube even a layman to watch. Obama leaning Time called that Obama bobblehead Olberman a 'gas bag' (your favorite site HuffPo quoting Time here) for taking that stance:
Time Critic: Olbermann's Special Comment Shows He's "Just Another Of The Cable Gasbags He Used To Be A Corrective To"
Read entire article here
Gas bags will continue to spin this. I guess the Colbert 'truthiness' baton has been passed to Obamaies.

QUOTEJust because you rubbed everyone in the wrong way and got scarred in the process means NOTHING.

You come back with some legislation or Acts by Obama or Kennedy on Healthcare and then we'll take discussion to next level.

06-03-2008, 07:54 PM

QUOTEHillary has clearly showed that she can not manage campaign finances, let alone nation's finances.
There's a proven record of a nation's finances during Clinton years. So your point is a none starter.

QUOTESo she may want to start collecting money now , if she wants to run in 2020.
Clintons borrowed money in '98 for their legal defense but by 2000 she was running a successful bid for Senate seat. She's rebound everytime people wrote her off; it'll be silly to underestimate her.

QUOTEHow about the bias in drudge report ?
Drudge came into existence breaking the Monica story and have spent over a decade beating up on Clinton. So get your facts straight, Drudge's a tabloid that's right leaning. Yesterday it was VanityFair article which has lost it's legs in 24 hours, today Drudge. Oh, brother.

QUOTEBut I don't think this segment exceeds 10% of Hillary voters.
Since this is a number pulled from a hat, let me talk through my hat. What if Hillary launches a third party bid (like that turncoat Liberman)? You did say she's a power hungry lady so we can speculate that too right? What if she runs with McCain's VP ticket - yeah I know, but if McCain can be speculated to run on Kerry's VP ticket, why not the other way. If either scenario pans out, there won't be hope kool-aid to brew a Obama presidency.
We know it'll not happen because Clintons have been life long democrats despite all the recent smear from fringe elements of the party.

QUOTEsince many of these type of hardcore supporters live around appalachia) for loyally supporting Bush/Cheney for the last eight years.
Hillary supports come Puerto Rico/MA/FL in east to TX in South to CA in West. If it's your point that Appalachia spreads across entire nation, I'll give you the point.

QUOTEAfter all, as the old saying goes, people get the kind of leaders they deserve (probably already proven with Bush). So let us wait and see....
Agreed. It's easy to beat up on a opponent, than to list accomplishments of Obama for all his experience in IL state or US Senate. Thought Obama was running a 'different' campaign; can't see his campaign money going to good use.

06-04-2008, 05:49 AM

Obama seals nomination; McCain eager for battle

06-04-2008, 08:20 AM

QUOTEObama seals nomination; McCain eager for battle
Not yet, At this moment BHO is counting SD, but they can switch. Till now neither Hillary had suspended or conceded her campaign.
Now real drama will start. <!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' />

06-04-2008, 11:22 AM

QUOTEWhat if Hillary launches a third party bid (like that turncoat Liberman)?

Lieberman won because of republican support. I don't see republicans ever voting for Hillary in large numbers, even if she runs with McCain (it will be hypocrisy especially after she urged her supporters not to vote for McCain). In the unlikely event that happens, independents and significant chunk of republicans will desert McCain, as that will be seen as a marriage of convenience devoid of any principle (how will she reconcile her universal health care with McCain's laissez-faire approach?). Voters are not that stupid.

Hillary is hanging on because she wants to be VP, that alone displays her hunger for power. Also she is hanging in there so that she can fleece her supporters for some more money - she is in a $20M hole with $11M of her own money on the line (30% of her assets). Until she gets that money back, I expect her to continue to run.

QUOTEHillary supports come Puerto Rico/MA/FL in east to TX in South to CA in West.

Puerto-ricans don't vote in GE. And any sensible person will claim that Obama will lose CA and MA because of Hillary.

QUOTESince this is a number pulled from a hat, let me talk through my ha

The only states where her hardcore supporters can cause a difference to Obama are in the appalachian states (OH, PA, WV and western part of VA). I don't see even Hillary winning KY, TN or OK even if she is the nominee. Around 25% of her supporters in the appalachian states indicated that they may vote against Obama or stay at home. I expect probably 60% of those folks to eventually embrace the democratic nominee (just like republicans have started embracing McCain). The remaining 40% - i.e. 10% of her supporters - may have trouble voting for obama. That is how I came up with the 10%, I didn't pull it out of any hat. I assumed a generous % of her supporters having trouble with accepting Obama (and I believe many of those voters wouldn't have voted for Kerry either). Obama need to bring new voters and independents to compensate for those supporters in those states

QUOTEYou come back with some legislation or Acts by Obama or Kennedy on Healthcare

Just because her husband, the president nominated her to a task panel, doesn't prove her expertise on the subject, as I stated before it was an act of nepotism. It was akin to a surgeon asking his unqualified wife to perform a surgery. As expected, in this case the patient died!! <!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' />

QUOTEo get your facts straight, Drudge's a tabloid that's right leaning. Yesterday it was VanityFair article which has lost it's legs in 24 hours, today Drudge. Oh, brother.

Had you bothered to read what I had posted, it says Drudge is leaning towards Obama much to the disappointment of republicans. Earlier I had posted a news item about how many republicans are actively supporting and campaigning for Obama.

Drudge /Vanity fair probably has a lot more credibility than some of the sources posted in this forum (like the recent one posted by Mudy). Just because Vanity fair chose not to reveal the sources doesn't mean the sources don't exist. After all, former Clinton Press secretary Dee Dee Myers is part of the editorial board of VF.

06-04-2008, 11:52 AM

QUOTEAt this moment BHO is counting SD, but they can switch.

Very true!! I heard a Clinton SD from CA switched to Obama today <!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' />

Yesterday I mentioned here that Clintons were the best narcissists. Today Jeffrey Toobin said the same on CNN about Hillary
http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalde...he_Clinton.html
QUOTEJust now, several of the CNN's panelists weren't buying the notion that this should actually Hillary Clinton's night, as her supporters told Gloria Borger.

Jeffrey Toobin chocked that idea up to the "deranged narcissism of the Clintons."

Acknowledging the Toobin statement, David Gergen noted that this could be a night when press gets criticized for appearing to harsh toward Clinton. Anderson Cooper replied: "Will that night be any different from any other night?"


On Last week's SNL, Amy Poehler's Hillary impersonation stated the following as the reason to elect Hillary

QUOTE1. I am a sore-loser
2. My supporters are racists
3. Unlike Obama, I have no ethical standards

Login




Remember me Lost Password?