DEM Primaries/Candidates thread

[Balta1701]

So what do you think of the plan being floated in California to change the way that their electoral votes are awarded, esentially to award one vote per district winner, instead of winner take all in that state?

It's a good plan if it's done nationwide.

 

If it's only done in California, or in CA plus a few other states, it hands the election to the Republicans until enough states follow. A few years ago there was a measure in the Legislature here to do just that...if and when the equivalent of 270+ electoral votes worth of the country does the same thing, and that was a measure worth supporting. I believe it passed, but I'd have to look it up.

[Rex Kickass]

Hypothetical.

 

Rex, you're a swell guy.

 

Balta, you're a real jackass.

 

(now I'll be the fall guy... )

 

Kap, you're a swell jackass.

 

All three have different meanings but by word association things can be taken differently.

 

I've read several times today that you all are trying to say the Bush Administration said that Iraq had to do with 9/11. On a strict interpretation, no, that was NEVER said. Was it inferred? It was, if and only if, you then say Al Queda was involved in Iraq.

 

Or another sentance construction:

 

Iraq = Al Queda

9/11 = Al Queda

 

You all are trying to say that BushCo said therefore, 9/11 = Iraq, and that was never said. Only the first two elements were said, and that does not mean Iraq = 9/11 like you all keep saying it does.

 

Holy s***, it's reading. NOT INFERRING, READING.

 

You're right. Never did they explicitly say Iraq was responsible for 9/11.

 

However, the administration on several occasions said that lead hijacker Mohammed Atta met with senior Iraqi officials in Prague in April 2001. What other reason would he have to visit Iraq if not for material support for 9/11?

 

They consistently equated 9/11 with Al Qaida. They consistently equated Al Qaida to Saddam. It's really easy to make that leap of faith.

 

You're defending the same things that you criticize Clinton for having done - not tell the whole truth. It's shady as s*** and although Bush may not have explicitly said Iraq did 9/11, they most definitely did as much as they could to keep that idea alive.

[NorthSideSox72]

It's a good plan if it's done nationwide.

 

If it's only done in California, or in CA plus a few other states, it hands the election to the Republicans until enough states follow. A few years ago there was a measure in the Legislature here to do just that...if and when the equivalent of 270+ electoral votes worth of the country does the same thing, and that was a measure worth supporting. I believe it passed, but I'd have to look it up.

That is the key - has to be done across the board. Splitting just Cali will help only one party. Splitting all states is a move in the right direction, though still not nearly as effective as a national vote.

 

[Balta1701]

Well, it's only a single poll, and thus should be taken with a bunch of salt, but it is interesting:

5. If the Democratic caucus were being held today, and the candidates were: (Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Barack Obama, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, Dennis Kucinich, and Mike Gravel), who would you support?

 

NET LEANED VOTE:

 

7/31/07

Barack Obama 27

Hillary Clinton 26

John Edwards 26

Bill Richardson 11

Joe Biden 2

Dennis Kucinich 2

Chris Dodd 1

None of these (vol.) 2

No opinion 4

Iowa poll, ABC/WaPo. Statistically, that's a dead heat.

[NorthSideSox72]

Well, it's only a single poll, and thus should be taken with a bunch of salt, but it is interesting:

Iowa poll, ABC/WaPo. Statistically, that's a dead heat.

That is a big shift from the polls a couple weeks ago, particularly for Edwards. And I can actually tell you, from personal exprience, why this occurred...

 

I spent last week in Iowa on RAGBRAI. You may not have heard of it, but RAGBRAI is a huge annual event in Iowa, where 10 to 20 thousand bicyclists ride across the entire state. Lance Armstrong has done it the last few years, to draw attention to his Live Strong efforts.

 

Anyway, some Prez candidates used it as a tool. Romney was there at one point, and some of his sons rode a bit. Biden's wife was there, Clinton was in the area, etc., etc. Keep in mind that RAGBRAI is followed religiously by many in the state - its a big part of the news all over Iowa for the whole week. Iowans are generally very aware of RAGBRAI.

 

Well, Lance issued a statement to all the candidates in both parties, inviting any of them who wanted to, to join him on the ride. Only one chose to do so - John Edwards. He apparently went riding a few days prior in NC, to train, because he hadn't ridden in many years. But he actually came out for a day, and rode right next to Lance for a good long while in the summer heat and humidity. It was the front page story in just about every paper in Iowa. Edwards rides RAGBRAI, voices support for cancer research. Pretty darn good marketing yes?

 

I can virtually guarantee you that gave him a boost among Iowans. Probably a big one.

 

By the way, some fun notes about Edwards' appearance on RAGBRAI...

 

--The media were quick to note that, amazingly, after riding in that heat, he took his helmet off and did NOT have helmet hair.

--He had complained a few times about how sore is rear end was, at which point some other rider going by gave him a tube of chamois butter (which had to be explained to him).

--When he, Lance and that crowd were passing another crowd of slower riders, Edwards apparently just about wrecked trying to get past someone.

 

[Balta1701]

Edwards has actually been leading in Iowa in quite a few polls, or it's been him and Clinton, which isn't that surprising because he has the "Lieberman 04" type head start having been on the ticket 3 years ago. Here's the full TPM poll tracker: the big surprise if that one is accurate would be a surge of support for Barack.

Edited August 3, 2007 by Balta1701

[NorthSideSox72]

Edwards has actually been leading in Iowa in quite a few polls, or it's been him and Clinton, which isn't that surprising because he has the "Lieberman 04" type head start having been on the ticket 3 years ago. Here's the full TPM poll tracker: the big surprise if that one is accurate would be a surge of support for Barack.

You know what - I was thinking of the NH polls. Those had Edwards falling to 4th. Sorry.

 

Well, then maybe riding across Iowa didn't help at all. Sucks for him. On the other hand, Edwards Has been falling nationally, according to that site's other poll lists (outside Iowa). So maybe this kept him close.

[Balta1701]

And on another subject, is there anyone out there who honestly thinks it'd be a good idea to nuke a city in Pakistan under any circumstances?

[kapkomet]

And on another subject, is there anyone out there who honestly thinks it'd be a good idea to nuke a city in Pakistan under any circumstances?

Obama is starting to really hurt himself badly with these ignoramous comments.

 

[Balta1701]

Obama is starting to really hurt himself badly with these ignoramous comments.

Um, I'm agreeing with Barack there.

[NorthSideSox72]

Um, I'm agreeing with Barack there.

As am I.

 

There is just no situation where it would be a good idea to take out terror targets (a few people among many innocents) with a nuke.

 

[FlaSoxxJim]

As am I.

 

There is just no situation where it would be a good idea to take out terror targets (a few people among many innocents) with a nuke.

 

It's sad that this even needs to be said. But in this day and age of people believing that "tactical nukes" are morally acceptable armaments, and believing that America thumbing its nose at non-proliferation I guess it has to be said.

[Balta1701]

It's sad that this even needs to be said. But in this day and age of people believing that "tactical nukes" are morally acceptable armaments, and believing that America thumbing its nose at non-proliferation I guess it has to be said.

And more than that, it's certainly worth wondering exactly what kind of people would decide to go on the attack over that statement.

[kapkomet]

Nevermind... I thought this was the comment about us invading Pakistan that Obama started saying.

 

I should have actually clicked the link instead of assuming what it was about...

 

I'm sort of torn on this one. I wouldn't "attack" anyone over that statement, but I can see where you can't ever SAY you're going to take ANYTHING off the table.

 

 

[Rex Kickass]

Nevermind... I thought this was the comment about us invading Pakistan that Obama started saying.

 

Never seemed to hurt the White House's current resident.

[Balta1701]

Nevermind... I thought this was the comment about us invading Pakistan that Obama started saying.

 

I should have actually clicked the link instead of assuming what it was about...

 

I'm sort of torn on this one. I wouldn't "attack" anyone over that statement, but I can see where you can't ever SAY you're going to take ANYTHING off the table.

IMO, the only reason why someone would think it's a bad thing to say "I'm taking nuclear weapons off the table in all circumstances in this area" is that the folks running things right now have moved things so far off the deep end that sensible things look out there compared to what we've heard the last few years. (More terrorism? Nuke Mecca!)

 

Anyway, the invading Pakistan thing is a much more debatable issue, because I for one still have no idea what the right answer is. If you know UBL is in a village in Pakistan, do you risk going after him to grab UBL, but at the same time risk destabilizing or even knocking out the entire Pakistani government and letting its nukes fall into the hands of God knows who, or do you watch him and try to hope for a better chance to arise but at the same time risk losing him? Those damn nukes that country has makes this so freaking hard...

[kapkomet]

Never seemed to hurt the White House's current resident.

And again, that's not exactly what the Bush people have said, even regarding Iraq...

 

But back to the point at hand.

 

They told the government that they have to live up to certain expectations, or we won't give them economic aid. Big difference, compared to what's been implied.

 

You do have to realize that Musharraf is probably the only thing we can rely on over there. Who are we going to deal with? The Pakistani army, who will launch nukes at India, just because they want to play a little nuclear basketball? He holds power because we say he does right now. Pakistan has so many factions and issues - probably more then Iraq - but it's a known known as opposed to a known unknown.

Edited August 3, 2007 by kapkomet

[Rex Kickass]

And again, that's not exactly what the Bush people have said, even regarding Iraq...

 

But back to the point at hand.

 

They told the government that they have to live up to certain expectations, or we won't give them economic aid. Big difference, compared to what's been implied.

 

You do have to realize that Musharraf is probably the only thing we can rely on over there. Who are we going to deal with? The Pakistani army, who will launch nukes at India, just because they want to play a little nuclear basketball? He holds power because we say he does right now. Pakistan has so many factions and issues - probably more then Iraq - but it's a known known as opposed to a known unknown.

 

I meant about Obama saying "ignorant" things.

 

The Pakistani situation is a lot more complicated than you or I could even fathom right now.

[kapkomet]

I meant about Obama saying "ignorant" things.

 

The Pakistani situation is a lot more complicated than you or I could even fathom right now.

Ah, ok.

 

Indeed. Pakistan is a huge enigma. Has been for years, and really is now.

 

[Heads22]

I had no idea Edwards was on RAGBRAI.

 

I'm definitley hearing more buzz about Obama here.

[Chet Lemon]

Obama got it exactly right by saying that it he would not balk at ordering a strike against terrorists even if they were in Pakistan. This has been consistent w/ his position he stated in '04 that he was a hawk when it comes to terrorism at a Benedictine University forum. The reason I know is that I was there covering the Senate race for Downers Grove Reporter.

[Rex Kickass]

I had no idea Edwards was on RAGBRAI.

 

I'm definitley hearing more buzz about Obama here.

 

Yeah, he rode one day with Armstrong. But he wasn't the only candidate to do so IIRC.

[NorthSideSox72]

Yeah, he rode one day with Armstrong. But he wasn't the only candidate to do so IIRC.

I believe he was the only one. I was on RAGBRAI, and got the papers along the way every day. I have a hard copy of the Register that says that Edwards was the only candidate to ride with him. Other candidates' children or wives rode a few sections here and there, but not with Lance. See my earlier post. I figured others would, but they didn't.

 

I for one wanted to see Richardson on a bike.

 

 

[jackie hayes]

Good Kos!, good Kos!!!

 

From the Washington Post, on Hil-dog's reception at Yearly Kos:

 

The only time she was booed during the session was when she said she is a fan of the Chicago Cubs, not the Chicago White Sox.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7080401324.html

 

[Rex Kickass]

That's funny because Kos is a Cubs fan.