mr_genius Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ May 13, 2008 -> 06:58 PM) Are you really surprised? Most of the reputable polls were showing a 30 to 35 point win for Clinton. yea i'm totally surprised. i haven't been looking at any polls or really following politics much lately Barack is pretty much the nominee and could lose an important state for the Dems by 30 points. i didn't expect something like that to happen. figured the Dems would start to all support Obama now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 13, 2008 -> 06:41 PM) I refuse to believe those numbers. The Hard working white people of Oregon won't let Hillrod down! Apparently, the women are shifting to Obama in OR.... there is movement in Oregon among women. 5 weeks ago, Clinton led by 7 among Oregon women. Today, Obama leads by 7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 QUOTE (mr_genius @ May 13, 2008 -> 07:08 PM) Barack is pretty much the nominee and could lose an important state for the Dems by 30 points. i didn't expect something like that to happen. figured the Dems would start to all support Obama now. Not in states like WV and Kentucky. With all do respect, but these are old and uneducated states and that favors Clinton. There is a racism factor too. Clinton could have dropped out 3-4 weeks ago and she would still win WV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted May 14, 2008 Author Share Posted May 14, 2008 QUOTE (mr_genius @ May 13, 2008 -> 07:08 PM) yea i'm totally surprised. i haven't been looking at any polls or really following politics much lately Barack is pretty much the nominee and could lose an important state for the Dems by 30 points. i didn't expect something like that to happen. figured the Dems would start to all support Obama now. WV was going red in 2008 no matter which Dem candidate got the nod. Same with KY, where Clinton will win by almost as much. Its not what I'd call an important state for the Dems. Clinton or Obama, the only southern state that would be in play is AR, for Clinton. The rest are going McCain. The key differences between the two Dems are the rust belt (where Clinton would do better) and the west (where Obama would do better). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 MSNBC Online Poll: Did you anticipate Sen. Hillary Clinton's win in West Virginia? 90% - Yes. It was clear she had the support of the state's Democrats. Do you think this win will give the Clinton campaign the momentum to go forward? 74% - No. The math is against her and Obama has all but won the nomination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 QUOTE (mr_genius @ May 13, 2008 -> 07:08 PM) yea i'm totally surprised. i haven't been looking at any polls or really following politics much lately Barack is pretty much the nominee and could lose an important state for the Dems by 30 points. i didn't expect something like that to happen. figured the Dems would start to all support Obama now. From the beginning nobody expected Obama to win WV, nomination over or not over. The demographics favored Clinton heavily and she's still in the race. Even Obama said 20% would be a miracle or something like that (although he was just lowering expectations some). He's going to lose big in KY too. But it doesn't change anything, it's still basically mathematically impossible for Hillary to win, and he will get another blowout win in Oregon too next week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 (edited) QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ May 13, 2008 -> 07:16 PM) WV was going red in 2008 no matter which Dem candidate got the nod. Same with KY, where Clinton will win by almost as much. Its not what I'd call an important state for the Dems. actually from what polls i just saw on tv, Hillary beats McCain by close to 10 in WV. Bill Clinton won WV. I don't think a Dem has won the White House in like 100 years or something without winning WV. Seems kinda important, or at least it has been in past elections, for the Dems. Edited May 14, 2008 by mr_genius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 QUOTE (lostfan @ May 13, 2008 -> 07:20 PM) it's still basically mathematically impossible for Hillary to win, and he will get another blowout win in Oregon too next week. totally. she's done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 QUOTE (mr_genius @ May 13, 2008 -> 06:22 PM) actually from what polls i just saw on tv, Hillary beats McCain by close to 10 in WV. Bill Clinton won WV. I don't think a Dem has won the White House in like 100 years or something without winning WV. Seems kinda important, or at least it has been in past elections, for the Dems. Just as important as Missouri, which Obama won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 QUOTE (lostfan @ May 13, 2008 -> 07:20 PM) it's still basically mathematically impossible for Hillary to win, and he will get another blowout win in Oregon too next week. For all us sane people, it is officially next week. If Clinton wins Kentucky 65-35 and Obama wins Oregon 55-45, Obama then has 50.65% of all possible pledged delegates (including those who have not voted yet). Of course that does not include FL and MI, so Clinton will fight on to the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 (edited) QUOTE (BigSqwert @ May 13, 2008 -> 07:30 PM) Just as important as Missouri, which Obama won. i'm sure the dems want to carry Missouri too Edited May 14, 2008 by mr_genius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ May 13, 2008 -> 07:30 PM) Just as important as Missouri, which Obama won. Clinton looks at it state by state while Obama looks nationally. With all do respect, but Obama wont spend a moment in WV. But he WILL go to NV, CO, NM, MT, and the Dakodas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ May 13, 2008 -> 07:11 PM) Not in states like WV and Kentucky. With all do respect, but these are old and uneducated states and that favors Clinton. There is a racism factor too. Clinton could have dropped out 3-4 weeks ago and she would still win WV. Its no more racist than Obama getting 90% of the black vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 Clinton supporters are claiming Hillary's speech tonight will be one of the best in the history of the United States. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 (edited) QUOTE (fathom @ May 13, 2008 -> 07:44 PM) Clinton supporters are claiming Hillary's speech tonight will be one of the best in the history of the United States. Only if she concedes. Seriosly, better than "Yes We Can", "I have a dream" and "we will go to the moon"? Yea, i doubt it. Oddly, I wont be watching it. Edited May 14, 2008 by Athomeboy_2000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 13, 2008 -> 07:43 PM) Its no more racist than Obama getting 90% of the black vote. Racism is doing something against another because of their race. Black people are not voting against Hillary because she is white. However, 1 in 4 West Virginians who voted fro Clinton voted for her because Obama is black. BIG difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ May 13, 2008 -> 07:53 PM) Racism is doing something against another because of their race. Black people are not voting against Hillary because she is white. However, 1 in 4 West Virginians who voted fro Clinton voted for her because Obama is black. BIG difference. No. It isn't different. Voting for someone because of their race is as bad as voting against someone because of their race because the same sentiment underlies both. One person is better than another because of their race. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 13, 2008 -> 07:43 PM) Its no more racist than Obama getting 90% of the black vote. /facepalm As I got at in the other thread, this is wrong on so many levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 13, 2008 -> 07:57 PM) No. It isn't different. Voting for someone because of their race is as bad as voting against someone because of their race because the same sentiment underlies both. One person is better than another because of their race. Voting against a race = racism Voting FOR a race = affirmative action. That is my take and i am sticking to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ May 13, 2008 -> 09:00 PM) Voting against a race = racism Voting FOR a race = affirmative action. That is my take and i am sticking to it. It's not that either but it's a lot closer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 QUOTE (fathom @ May 13, 2008 -> 07:44 PM) Clinton supporters are claiming Hillary's speech tonight will be one of the best in the history of the United States. They are probably trying to get everyone to watch it so Clinton can plug HillaryClinton.com 7 times. She needs money man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 QUOTE (lostfan @ May 13, 2008 -> 08:01 PM) It's not that either but it's a lot closer. right. Affirmative action is extreme, but it's the closest simple explanation I could think of in 10 seconds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ May 13, 2008 -> 08:00 PM) Voting against a race = racism Voting FOR a race = affirmative action. That is my take and i am sticking to it. So if I am ONLY willing to vote for whites, I am not a racist? But if I vote against another group it is racist? That makes zero sense to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 13, 2008 -> 08:05 PM) So if I am ONLY willing to vote for whites, I am not a racist? But if I vote against another group it is racist? That makes zero sense to me. The black vote FAVORED Clinton before Iowa. She had over 60% of the black vote. So, obviously this isnt a "anti-white" movement. So, it's not a racist movement. It's something closer to affirmative action.. right or wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted May 14, 2008 Share Posted May 14, 2008 Another reason to hate West Virginia for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts