southsider2k5 Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 8, 2008 -> 11:07 AM) Who the Hell cares what a candidate does to improve their appearance? Why does this matter at all? Is John McCain a wuss because he has makeup put on to make his head look less shiny when he's appearing on TV? I agree one hundred per cent here. This is one area where sexism is still really prevalent in our society. Do you hear anyone talking about Obama hiding gray hair, or McCains wrinkles? Yet there is an entire webpage of horrible pictures of Hillary. Of all of the reasons I don't like Hillary Clinton, who really gives a s*** what she looks like or what she does to cover it up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 (edited) QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 8, 2008 -> 12:28 PM) The next time you see a 60+ year old woman on the street somewhere, I expect you to point and laugh. I will. It will be hilarious. In all seriousness, I think a certain level of the Presidency honestly should consider appearance. Do I want a feeble, horrible looking grandmother as the main representative of this country? No. I think my question asking whether she'd keep with the Botox/facelifting that she's obviously been doing is a valid one. The way she "fixes" herself up works for me, I actually think she looks remarkable considering her age. However, who knows if once elected (which isn't happening anyway, so this is hypothetical), would she keep it up? Edited May 8, 2008 by Steve9347 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 QUOTE (Steve9347 @ May 8, 2008 -> 12:24 PM) I will. It will be hilarious. In all seriousness, I think a certain level of the Presidency honestly should consider appearance. Do I want a feeble, horrible looking grandmother as the main representative of this country? No. I think my question asking whether she'd keep with the Botox/facelifting that she's obviously been doing is a valid one. On the tax payer's dime, no less, I'm sure. Who cares? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 8, 2008 -> 01:27 PM) Who cares? I obviously did as I brought it up... Duh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 Per DCW, Clinton's superdelegate lead now in single digits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ May 8, 2008 -> 04:31 PM) Per DCW, Clinton's superdelegate lead now in single digits. Seven, to be specific (per CNN). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 If i said you lost your bearings, do you think I am calling you old? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ May 9, 2008 -> 12:19 AM) If i said you lost your bearings, do you think I am calling you old? If you say that to me it means I'm lacking in good sense and judgment and/or I'm not conducting myself properly. I have no idea what the big deal is here and no clue how somebody can draw the conclusion that Obama is being "ageist." First off it has to be taken in context what Obama was responding to (McCain's distortion of Obama's position on Hamas, making him out to be a terrorist sympathizer, which Obama was taking offense to when he said that) and secondly, hell, even McCain makes fun of himself for being old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KipWellsFan Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 (edited) QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ May 8, 2008 -> 11:19 PM) If i said you lost your bearings, do you think I am calling you old? Well I'm not old so I wouldn't, but the thought did cross my mind about McCain's age when I saw the headline earlier. Of course that doesn't mean the McCain camp is any less stupid for implying that what Hamas thinks should matter. Edited May 9, 2008 by KipWellsFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 QUOTE (KipWellsFan @ May 8, 2008 -> 11:36 PM) Of course that doesn't mean the McCain camp is any less stupid for implying that what Hamas thinks should matter. But he and his wife said they wouldnt run a negative campaign. OOPS! Guess they forgot to tell the staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 maybe i was hearing/seeing things this morning because I was in a rush, but I swear ABC had a story at the top of the hour, actually more than a story they had the "breaking news" label on it, that Obama took over the superdelgate lead. Was I just half hearing the story that he's narrowing in? I haven't seen anything on the net about it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 (edited) QUOTE (SoxFan562004 @ May 9, 2008 -> 08:33 AM) maybe i was hearing/seeing things this morning because I was in a rush, but I swear ABC had a story at the top of the hour, actually more than a story they had the "breaking news" label on it, that Obama took over the superdelgate lead. Was I just half hearing the story that he's narrowing in? I haven't seen anything on the net about it It's on the front page of Huffington. DCW, CNN, AP, and NBC still have her barely leading. (Check out the 2nd chart on the left side of DCW) Edited May 9, 2008 by BigSqwert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 (edited) QUOTE (SoxFan562004 @ May 9, 2008 -> 08:33 AM) maybe i was hearing/seeing things this morning because I was in a rush, but I swear ABC had a story at the top of the hour, actually more than a story they had the "breaking news" label on it, that Obama took over the superdelgate lead. Was I just half hearing the story that he's narrowing in? I haven't seen anything on the net about it George "Clinton Suck-up" Stephanopoulos said Obama had the superdelegate lead which is inaccurate. Edit: Well, ABC says their version of the Superdelegate count has Obama ahead... ABC OBAMA 267 CLINTON 265 Edited May 9, 2008 by Athomeboy_2000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ May 9, 2008 -> 09:19 AM) George "Clinton Suck-up" Stephanopoulos said Obama had the superdelegate lead which is inaccurate. Edit: Well, ABC says their version of the Superdelegate count has Obama ahead... ABC OBAMA 267 CLINTON 265 Yeah, he was on ABC this morning during the segment, so it seems like ABC is trying to break the story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 QUOTE (SoxFan562004 @ May 9, 2008 -> 09:27 AM) Yeah, he was on ABC this morning during the segment, so it seems like ABC is trying to break the story. I dont doubt that to their knowledge this is true, but I find it odd they are the ONLY wans with Obama ahead. All the others have it 7+ for Clinton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 Every media source keeps their track of superdelegates differently because it's not like there is an official list or scoreboard with everybody's name on it. They just go off what was said in public or what have you so there is margin for error. I've been following mainly CNN's delegate count since the beginning and they have Clinton +7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 QUOTE (lostfan @ May 9, 2008 -> 08:54 AM) Every media source keeps their track of superdelegates differently because it's not like there is an official list or scoreboard with everybody's name on it. They just go off what was said in public or what have you so there is margin for error. I've been following mainly CNN's delegate count since the beginning and they have Clinton +7. DCW is pretty solid since they have a link to every single endorsement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ May 9, 2008 -> 10:55 AM) DCW is pretty solid since they have a link to every single endorsement. Nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ May 9, 2008 -> 07:55 AM) DCW is pretty solid since they have a link to every single endorsement. The issue is always going to be, given a couple hundred public statements...how specific is each public statement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 Monty Obama... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 QUOTE (lostfan @ May 9, 2008 -> 07:54 AM) Every media source keeps their track of superdelegates differently because it's not like there is an official list or scoreboard with everybody's name on it. They just go off what was said in public or what have you so there is margin for error. I've been following mainly CNN's delegate count since the beginning and they have Clinton +7. The fun part of this over the next week or two is going to be...each count is different, so each network is going to give him the lead in superdelegates at a different point. Which means that this same story is going to be published about a dozen times over the next week or two, as ABC, NBC, CBS, Faux, the NY Times, the USA Today, the LA Times, and various internet sources that are doing counts each have the count flip. So basically, if you get your news from more than one source, you're going to get the "Obama takes the Superdelegate lead" meme absolutely pounded in to your head over the next week as it actually happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 Rasmussen Ends Daily Tracking Poll of Dem Primary While Senator Clinton has remained close and competitive in every meaningful measure, she is a close second and the race is over. It has become clear that Barack Obama will be the Democratic nominee. With this in mind, Rasmussen Reports will soon end our daily tracking of the Democratic race and focus exclusively on the general election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ May 9, 2008 -> 08:55 AM) DCW is pretty solid since they have a link to every single endorsement. Lead is down to 5.5. 269.5 - 264 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 If the California Primary were held today, Obama wins. Poll via SurveyUSA While voters in the California Democratic Presidential Primary backed Clinton by a 10-point margin, a new SurveyUSA poll shows that if given the chance to vote again, Californians would choose Barack Obama by a 6-point margin, 49%-43%. The poll was conducted on May 7 and 8 and has a margin of error of 4%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 The most recent superdelegate endorsement from Vernon Watkins (CA) sums it all up nicely: "The election is over, everybody knows that. Obama has won" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts