Harry Chappas Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 6, 2008 -> 08:23 AM) That is just awesome. When Hillary talks about another Bush term in office, she must be talking about if she gets elected. She would absolutely start a 5th term consecutive of lies, deceit and corruption, in the Presidency, because she is already doing it in her campaign! The thing that really pisses me off is that this specific lie is new but the idea of her being a liar, cheater and self righteous is overlooked and should be the foremost media point regarding this campaign. She is turning it ugly because she was getting smoked. The media will gloss over this and move on to something new. Her smear campaign may in the end give McCain the White house and she does not care yet the dolts that are the Democratic party will not mess with the machine. If she beats Obama the GOP will trash her and Big Bad John will be the president. Then Obama can take a run at him or whoever the GOP put up in 2012. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
koch44 Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 The dirts really starting to come out now... Clintons ties to Rezko Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 i love talkingpointsmemo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KipWellsFan Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 (edited) QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 6, 2008 -> 08:23 AM) That is just awesome. When Hillary talks about another Bush term in office, she must be talking about if she gets elected. She would absolutely start a 5th term consecutive of lies, deceit and corruption, in the Presidency, because she is already doing it in her campaign! Argh, too bad neither the media nor Obama have gone after her on it yet. Edited March 6, 2008 by KipWellsFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Mar 6, 2008 -> 07:30 AM) Cool. Just joined. me too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 (edited) QUOTE(koch44 @ Mar 6, 2008 -> 11:17 AM) The dirts really starting to come out now... Clintons ties to Rezko oh snap! I'd like to see her weasel her way out of this. Edited March 6, 2008 by Athomeboy_2000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted March 6, 2008 Author Share Posted March 6, 2008 The FL and MI situation is getting a little uglier. A senator from FL is telling Howard Dean that the DNC should either accept the original results, or pay for a do-over. Dean says a do-over is all good, but that the DNC will not pay for it. What kills me here is that the voters in FL and MI, and the rest of the nation indirectly, are now paying for the poor decision making of whomever in FL and MI decided to move their primaries up too far. My question is, who are those people, and if they still have jobs, why? They will need to come to a decision pretty quick. As it stands now, the re-addition of 2 big primaries probably helps Clinton the most, since she is behind. I have a feeling they will end up re-doing both primaries, and splitting the costs somehow. And that changes the math a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 6, 2008 -> 12:41 PM) The FL and MI situation is getting a little uglier. A senator from FL is telling Howard Dean that the DNC should either accept the original results, or pay for a do-over. Dean says a do-over is all good, but that the DNC will not pay for it. What kills me here is that the voters in FL and MI, and the rest of the nation indirectly, are now paying for the poor decision making of whomever in FL and MI decided to move their primaries up too far. My question is, who are those people, and if they still have jobs, why? They will need to come to a decision pretty quick. As it stands now, the re-addition of 2 big primaries probably helps Clinton the most, since she is behind. I have a feeling they will end up re-doing both primaries, and splitting the costs somehow. And that changes the math a bit. As I understand it, it was a state-wide decision to move up the primaries, not just the DNC. Many democrats were opposed to it, but were overruled by the republican majority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 Clinton's "Big State" Myth: Why Barack Obama Remains the Most Electable Democrat This Fall 1) Most of the "Big States" she has won are not battleground states in the fall. New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts and California are solid blue states where Obama would do as well or better than Clinton in a general election against McCain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 Obama brings in $55 million in February... SHATTERS the previous record, held by him! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 6, 2008 -> 12:41 PM) The FL and MI situation is getting a little uglier. A senator from FL is telling Howard Dean that the DNC should either accept the original results, or pay for a do-over. Dean says a do-over is all good, but that the DNC will not pay for it. What kills me here is that the voters in FL and MI, and the rest of the nation indirectly, are now paying for the poor decision making of whomever in FL and MI decided to move their primaries up too far. My question is, who are those people, and if they still have jobs, why? They will need to come to a decision pretty quick. As it stands now, the re-addition of 2 big primaries probably helps Clinton the most, since she is behind. I have a feeling they will end up re-doing both primaries, and splitting the costs somehow. And that changes the math a bit. Howard Dean needs to be fired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 6, 2008 -> 11:51 AM) Howard Dean needs to be fired. Yeah, because that 2006 election and his whole 50 state strategy turned out to be absolute disasters for the Democrats. "Bye!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted March 6, 2008 Author Share Posted March 6, 2008 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 6, 2008 -> 02:51 PM) Howard Dean needs to be fired. Howard Dean is the least at fault here. He made the right call, in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 6, 2008 -> 12:41 PM) The FL and MI situation is getting a little uglier. A senator from FL is telling Howard Dean that the DNC should either accept the original results, or pay for a do-over. Dean says a do-over is all good, but that the DNC will not pay for it. What kills me here is that the voters in FL and MI, and the rest of the nation indirectly, are now paying for the poor decision making of whomever in FL and MI decided to move their primaries up too far. My question is, who are those people, and if they still have jobs, why? They will need to come to a decision pretty quick. As it stands now, the re-addition of 2 big primaries probably helps Clinton the most, since she is behind. I have a feeling they will end up re-doing both primaries, and splitting the costs somehow. And that changes the math a bit. I could be wrong but wasn't it determined by the govenors of the respective states? Jed Bush says hi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Mar 6, 2008 -> 01:49 PM) Obama brings in $55 million in February... SHATTERS the previous record, held by him! Wow. In 2 months he has raised $91M. That is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 it's just tragically funny. States (from how I understood it) moved up their primaries to up their importance since recently primaries have been shored up Before or on super tuesday. They try to do that and the democratic party punishes them. In the year they do that, may be the first split convention since...er, I'm too young to know, and their states votes would be incredibly important in the campaign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 (edited) For Clinton, Two Different Stances On Two Pentagon Contracts This past week, Sen. Hillary Clinton derided the Pentagon's decision to award a $40 billion defense contract to build mid-flight refueling tankers to a team consisting of Northrop Grumman and EADS, a European company. "I am deeply concerned," she said, "about the Bush administration's decision to outsource the production of refueling tankers for the American military." But just three years ago, Clinton was on the exact opposite side of the military-contracting debate. In January 2005, the New York Senator deftly maneuvered -- from her perch on the Senate Armed Services Committee -- a multi-billion-dollar contract to buy presidential helicopters from a consortium that also included European companies. Flip-Flopper Edited March 6, 2008 by Athomeboy_2000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 A lot of people are saying the math is against Hillary, so I did the math... Assuming Obama wins Wyoming and Mississippi in the next week by a 60-40 margin, Hillary would need to win 65% of the remaining delegates to take the pledged delegate lead. That's beating Obama by 30 points in EVERY STATE from now till June. In fact, if you facotr in how delegates are awarded, she'd probably have to win by MORE than 30 points in every state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KipWellsFan Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Mar 6, 2008 -> 03:36 PM) A lot of people are saying the math is against Hillary, so I did the math... Assuming Obama wins Wyoming and Mississippi in the next week by a 60-40 margin, Hillary would need to win 65% of the remaining delegates to take the pledged delegate lead. That's beating Obama by 30 points in EVERY STATE from now till June. In fact, if you facotr in how delegates are awarded, she'd probably have to win by MORE than 30 points in every state. I'm not willing to assume that Obama is going to win by that much in Wyoming and Mississippi, but I tend to agree with your assessment of the math. Of course the psychological impact is also important, or at least that's what the pundits tell me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ Mar 6, 2008 -> 03:39 PM) I'm not willing to assume that Obama is going to win by that much in Wyoming and Mississippi, but I tend to agree with your assessment of the math. Of course the psychological impact is also important, or at least that's what the pundits tell me. Even if Hillary becomes "presumptive" I have a hard time believing she wins by 30 in EVERY state. She has a hard time breaking 55% in most states. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Mar 6, 2008 -> 02:02 PM) As I understand it, it was a state-wide decision to move up the primaries, not just the DNC. Many democrats were opposed to it, but were overruled by the republican majority. Yeah, it was decided by a bill passed by state legislature and signed by Gov. Crist back in May. It was an idiotic move and both the DNC and RNC told Florida exactly how they would be penalized if they leapfrogged the Feb 5th primaries. Dean and the DNC are doing the right thing here and Florida needs to learn how not to be the epicenter of every national election breakdown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 I bet there is a redo in Florida and Michigan. Hillary wins both http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8...;show_article=1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 Did some more math- Total Votes To Date (includes caucus "delegates" which count as one vote) Obama - 12,747,492 Clinton - 12,398,606 Edwards - 684,633 Total - 26,225,940 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 Barack wins hypothetical November Matchup... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 It'll come down to Ohio and Florida, as it seems to always do nowadays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts