Jump to content

DEM Primaries/Candidates thread


NorthSideSox72

Recommended Posts

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Mar 27, 2008 -> 05:30 PM)
Actually, you are suggesting a total re-haul in which the primary ends early, even though no one has reached the necessary delegates. The system was setup to have the super delegates determine a contest such as this. Now if YOU want a total re-do of the system, that is fine.

 

Edit: Unless, of course, you are suggesting all the supers jump in to disenfranchise Pennsylvania, Indiana, and whatever other state is left. Thats fine with me and it would obviously be well within the Democrat rules. And it sounds like a good plan. :D

One thing I don't understand...how is asking whether or not Hillary is going to leave once the math becomes such that it's difficult for her to have a shot any different than asking when Huckabee is going to get out of the Republican race after Super Tuesday, or asking if Romney was going to leave the race after Florida, or stretching back farther, asking when Edwards and Dean were going to drop out in 04, etc.?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 4.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 27, 2008 -> 08:28 PM)
One thing I don't understand...how is asking whether or not Hillary is going to leave once the math becomes such that it's difficult for her to have a shot any different than asking when Huckabee is going to get out of the Republican race after Super Tuesday, or asking if Romney was going to leave the race after Florida, or stretching back farther, asking when Edwards and Dean were going to drop out in 04, etc.?

 

I would say it's different because she is very close and can still win if she gets enough super delegates, as Democrat primary rules state. If she loses Pennsylvania she would have to bow out, or would really just be a Huckabee at that point.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 10:44 AM)

 

You know what? Bill Clinton and George Bush are both irrelevent at this point. They are both has beens, and I mean that in the most respectful way as they both held the title of Mr. President. But what they think and/or say should really be ignored as far the upcoming election is concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(YASNY @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 09:48 AM)
You know what? Bill Clinton and George Bush are both irrelevent at this point. They are both has beens, and I mean that in the most respectful way as they both held the title of Mr. President. But what they think and/or say should really be ignored as far the upcoming election is concerned.

I don't think that's the case at all. First of all, if Hillary Clinton is still running, then Bill Clinton is very much a part of the story, as there's never been a first husband, let alone a first husband who happens to be a former president and who would clearly have some influence in the administration. Secondly, there's the policy matters. If a candidate is advocating restoring a policy of the clinton administration (i.e. returning to Clinton-era tax levels) or advocating continuing a policy of the Bush administration (i.e. a few hundred more years in Iraq) then that puts either of those administrations on the table because there's no better way to evaluate the policies being advocated for than by looking at how they've already done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 10:52 AM)
I don't think that's the case at all. First of all, if Hillary Clinton is still running, then Bill Clinton is very much a part of the story, as there's never been a first husband, let alone a first husband who happens to be a former president and who would clearly have some influence in the administration. Secondly, there's the policy matters. If a candidate is advocating restoring a policy of the clinton administration (i.e. returning to Clinton-era tax levels) or advocating continuing a policy of the Bush administration (i.e. a few hundred more years in Iraq) then that puts either of those administrations on the table because there's no better way to evaluate the policies being advocated for than by looking at how they've already done.

 

Let me put it this way. What the candidates actually have to say is what's important. What Bush and Bill have to say are, comparatively, irrelevent. Better?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(YASNY @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 09:56 AM)
Let me put it this way. What the candidates actually have to say is what's important. What Bush and Bill have to say are, comparatively, irrelevent. Better?

What Bush has to say is pretty irrelevant to this campaign, on that I'll agree. And the sooner he's completely irrelevant the better our country is.

 

But I'll contend through the election even if Hillary somehow pulls out the primary that Bill Clinton's words should be treated as the words of a trusted and close adviser to the candidate. He should be considered to be at the "Dick Cheney" level, where he's guaranteed to have a lot of sway in the decision making and will probably be more powerful than anyone who has ever held that position before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 11:05 AM)
What Bush has to say is pretty irrelevant to this campaign, on that I'll agree. And the sooner he's completely irrelevant the better our country is.

 

But I'll contend through the election even if Hillary somehow pulls out the primary that Bill Clinton's words should be treated as the words of a trusted and close adviser to the candidate. [b/] He should be considered to be at the "Dick Cheney" level, where he's guaranteed to have a lot of sway in the decision making and will probably be more powerful than anyone who has ever held that position before.

 

Kinda like Jeremiah Wright is a trusted and close advisor to Obama.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 11:18 AM)
So Wright and Obama are married? If so, perhaps we need to merge this thread with the one about Obama and gay sex.

 

No, Obama is married to woman that has her own issues with America. Wright probably had some influence on her opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(YASNY @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 12:21 PM)
No, Obama is married to woman that has her own issues with America. Wright probably had some influence on her opinion.

 

....and neither of them are former US Presidents who hold an awful lot of political sway and power and recognition around the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(YASNY @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 12:35 PM)
I have heard enough of what Wright has to say about things without having to read his attempts to minimize his hatred and racists views. Michelle Obama marches the beat of his drum.

 

The letter was about his relationship with Obama and was published over a year ago. It does not mention Wright's own views.

Edited by StrangeSox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Mar 28, 2008 -> 11:38 AM)
The letter was about his relationship with Obama and was published over a year ago. It does not mention Wright's own views.

 

Let's see... how long ago were those sound bites that are so taken out of context?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obama IA director to head PA campaign

Paul Tewes, Obama's state director in Iowa, will head to the Keystone State tomorrow to take over the campaign's GOTV operation. Tewes has a strong track record. Under his leadership, the Obama campaign conducted an extensive grassroots effort in Iowa that helped the campaign win by 8 points.

 

Could this be evidence Obama thinks he can WIN Penn?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...