DEM Primaries/Candidates thread

[mr_genius]

 

[BigSqwert]

How is this sort of post OK with the new 'buster rules?

[BigSqwert]

A little analysis on the ABC debate vs the others in this campaign season. ABC was in a class (or should I say no class) of its own.

[kapkomet]

How is this sort of post OK with the new 'buster rules?

Ok, I'll add a little substance to my observation.

 

Late in the week, he really came across as someone who was crying about his "tough treatment" and his comebacks of Hillary liked getting in the digs (paraphrase but it was exactly the point). Any time a politician plays "victim", they're screwed, and Obama definitely came across as crying and whining about the debate. Now, the polls show it.

[lostfan]

It wasn't so much the "tough treatment" he was complaining about, more the fact that they just asked a bunch of stupid questions he was tired of having to answer that didn't have much to do with the real issues, if at all. If anything, he's dropping in the polls because he didn't handle the questions well in the debates at all and spent half of it looking pissed off, not because he was whining.

 

Besides - Hillary has spent virtually the entire time since I've been paying attention to this process playing the victim and whining, it hasn't buried her yet. However I do find it amusing that she has the audacity to say "I got all those tough questions for months and I never complained" as if we are not capable of remembering anything that happened more than 2 weeks ago... she literally cried about it. Plus, in the debate the same night before, she complained again about having to answer the first question. lol.

Edited April 21, 2008 by lostfan

[Balta1701]

It wasn't so much the "tough treatment" he was complaining about, more the fact that they just asked a bunch of stupid questions he was tired of having to answer that didn't have much to do with the real issues, if at all. If anything, he's dropping in the polls because he didn't handle the questions well in the debates at all and spent half of it looking pissed off, not because he was whining.

But here's the other part of it. Obama also went after the media for being so stupid and vacuous. So, instead of reforming, the Media members, the gang of 500 overlords who are all wise and all knowing representatives of the things that All Americans truly believe in, start trying to focus on the fact that Obama is complaining, "oh he's whining, such a girly man", to defend themselves against having to actually work, learn things, or any of the like.

[lostfan]

But here's the other part of it. Obama also went after the media for being so stupid and vacuous. So, instead of reforming, the Media members, the gang of 500 overlords who are all wise and all knowing representatives of the things that All Americans truly believe in, start trying to focus on the fact that Obama is complaining, "oh he's whining, such a girly man", to defend themselves against having to actually work, learn things, or any of the like.

It gets ratings.

[Balta1701]

SUSA PA final pre-election poll- Clinton 53%, Obama 41%

 

Still a much bigger lead than most people are showing, but most people are showing Obama in the 40-45 range, which I think suggests that their poll may be better at pushing leaners and the leaners are staying in the Hillary camp.

[Balta1701]

It gets ratings.

Here's the other side of the token though. Please name for me a network that has tried something different. Name for me a network that doesn't spend 2/3 of their time focusing on stupid, empty, pointless topics that are important because the media decides its important?

 

It gets ratings because it got ratings at one point and no one has bothered to try anything other than to be clones of the (conservative) tabloid network that got ratings by doing so. Every time one of these networks loses ratings, or one of these newspapers loses subscribers, the solution is to cut back more on the journalism spending, to dumb it down more, and to spend more and more time on TMZ crap. And because they spend more time on it, they lose more viewers, and cut back even more.

 

Whether or not there's an 8 million a night audience available for an intelligent show, I doubt that. But there's a reason why Stewart and Colbert have become so popular. They're quite literally able to do more intelligent work in 5 minutes than most shows do in an hour. An intelligent news market is one that simply isn't being served right now. There's no modern William F. Buckley, there's no one filling the Bill Moyers role, there's just this crap, where all that matters is whether or not you'd rather have a beer with Bush or Gore, not whether or not they'd be able to do a decent job running the country.

[lostfan]

I was being semi-sarcastic, only semi because it's absolutely true. The only thing that matters to the corporate media is ratings. Literally. And that's not new to this decade, go back to like 1900 and it's the same damn thing.

[kapkomet]

But here's the other part of it. Obama also went after the media for being so stupid and vacuous. So, instead of reforming, the Media members, the gang of 500 overlords who are all wise and all knowing representatives of the things that All Americans truly believe in, start trying to focus on the fact that Obama is complaining, "oh he's whining, such a girly man", to defend themselves against having to actually work, learn things, or any of the like.

Notice what I didn't say. I didn't say that I agree with the whining, but he has certainly come across that way. For some reason, Hillary crying is better then Obama whining (even though I think the whole thing on both sides is junk). However, the reactions are what they are, and it appears that the race is tightening again.

 

[KipWellsFan]

Ok, I'll add a little substance to my observation.

 

Late in the week, he really came across as someone who was crying about his "tough treatment" and his comebacks of Hillary liked getting in the digs (paraphrase but it was exactly the point). Any time a politician plays "victim", they're screwed, and Obama definitely came across as crying and whining about the debate. Now, the polls show it.

 

I haven't been much more than a casual observer in the past week or so but I haven't noticed this line of thought in the media at all.

[kapkomet]

I haven't been much more than a casual observer in the past week or so but I haven't noticed this line of thought in the media at all.

It was my observation, not the medias. That might be why the polls have dramatically tightened post-debate gate.

 

We'll see how it plays out. Honestly, I wish Obama would win PA and get this over with.

[BigSqwert]

I know a lot of people despise him but Michael Moore is endorsing Obama...

 

...I've watched Senator Clinton and her husband play this game of appealing to the worst side of white people, but last Wednesday, when she hurled the name "Farrakhan" out of nowhere, well that's when the silly season came to an early end for me. She said the "F" word to scare white people, pure and simple. Of course, Obama has no connection to Farrakhan. But, according to Senator Clinton, Obama's pastor does -- AND the "church bulletin" once included a Los Angeles Times op-ed from some guy with Hamas! No, not the church bulletin!

 

This sleazy attempt to smear Obama was brilliantly explained the following night by Stephen Colbert. He pointed out that if Obama is supported by Ted Kennedy, who is Catholic, and the Catholic Church is led by a Pope who was in the Hitler Youth, that can mean only one thing: OBAMA LOVES HITLER!

 

...There are those who say Obama isn't ready, or he's voted wrong on this or that. But that's looking at the trees and not the forest. What we are witnessing is not just a candidate but a profound, massive public movement for change. My endorsement is more for Obama The Movement than it is for Obama the candidate.

 

That is not to take anything away from this exceptional man. But what's going on is bigger than him at this point, and that's a good thing for the country. Because, when he wins in November, that Obama Movement is going to have to stay alert and active. Corporate America is not going to give up their hold on our government just because we say so. President Obama is going to need a nation of millions to stand behind him.

[BigSqwert]

The Financial Times just endorsed Obama. (Need to be registered to access their website so I didn't link it.)

 

Couple this with Clinton being in the red and we see that Obama might be better at running the government. This long campaign is the closest that either one of them has been to running a business or government (granted it's not the same thing) and Obama has run a tight ship.

[HuskyCaucasian]

Rasmussen... 04/20 - 04/20... 722 LV... Clinton +5.0

Zogby Tracking...04/19 - 04/20... 602 LV... Clinton +6.0

Suffolk... 04/19 - 04/20... 600 LV... Clinton +10.0

PPP (D)... 04/19 - 04/20... 2338 LV...Obama +3.0

Strategic Vision ®... 04/18 - 04/20... LV... Clinton +7.0

Quinnipiac... 04/18 - 04/20...1027 LV... Clinton +7.0

SurveyUSA... 04/18 - 04/20... LV... Clinton +6.0

 

Interesting that the poll with the most surveyed voters has Obama +3! i dont think that is really true given the other polls, but interesting none the less. Of note is the SurveyUSA poll with Clinton only +6.

Edited April 21, 2008 by Athomeboy_2000

[HuskyCaucasian]

 

Vote for Clinton... or we will all die!!!

[lostfan]

The Financial Times just endorsed Obama. (Need to be registered to access their website so I didn't link it.)

 

Couple this with Clinton being in the red and we see that Obama might be better at running the government. This long campaign is the closest that either one of them has been to running a business or government (granted it's not the same thing) and Obama has run a tight ship.

It also helps that he gets fresh stacks of 100 dollar bills thrown at him every morning too.

[HuskyCaucasian]

Talk about a quick rebound...

 

[Balta1701]

Interesting that the poll with the most surveyed voters has Obama +3! i dont think that is really true given the other polls, but interesting none the less. Of note is the SurveyUSA poll with Clinton only +6.

Here's the actual SUSA poll data. Whatever I posted last night seems to have just been wrong. 50-44. That's a decent drop for Clinton, and I'd be more than happy with a 6 point loss. I still think it's going to be a bigger C win.

[HuskyCaucasian]

CLINTON INTERNALS SHOW 11-POINT LEAD IN PA

 

Controlled excitement is building inside of Clinton's inner circle as closely guarded internal polling shows the former first lady with an 11-point lead in Pennsylvania!

 

Clinton is polling near to nearly 2 to 1 over Obama in many regions of the state, a top insider explained to the DRUDGE REPORT.

 

[HuskyCaucasian]

should we create a Penn Primary Thread?

[HuskyCaucasian]

What does Clinton have up hear sleeve? Kiki McClean (god she is just as slimy has hillary) was just on MSNBC and was asked if there was anything between now and tomorrow that might cause undecided voters or even Obama voters swing to Clinton. She said it could happen when spouses sit round the dinner table this evening talking about who to vote for or..... tomorrow morning when they are in their car and they hear something they have never heard before.

 

hmmm...

[HuskyCaucasian]

Here's the actual SUSA poll data. Whatever I posted last night seems to have just been wrong. 50-44. That's a decent drop for Clinton, and I'd be more than happy with a 6 point loss. I still think it's going to be a bigger C win.

I just took a closer look at the Public Policy Polling numbers that came out today that have Obama +3 in PA. They surveyed 2300+ voters in a RoboCall. In TX, OH, and WI their survey compared to the actual results was within the margin of error. Take into consideration that this survey is TWICE the size of the second largest poll and nearly 3.5 times the average sample size, the numbers are very interesting.

 

The part I like about the poll is that they pressed undecideds to make a choice. Basically, if they answered undecided, they were asked who they were leaning towards. In the end only 5% were truly undecided.

[Balta1701]

I just took a closer look at the Public Policy Polling numbers that came out today that have Obama +3 in PA. They surveyed 2300+ voters in a RoboCall. In TX, OH, and WI their survey compared to the actual results was within the margin of error. Take into consideration that this survey is TWICE the size of the second largest poll and nearly 3.5 times the average sample size, the numbers are very interesting.

 

The part I like about the poll is that they pressed undecideds to make a choice. Basically, if they answered undecided, they were asked who they were leaning towards. In the end only 5% were truly undecided.

I would recommend this post over @ the great orange Satan's site if you want to try to get a better understanding of how the internals of these polls are breaking down to give each of these sets of results. It's not just the total number, it's the total number from each demographic balanced against the others that matters.