OT: 2008 Elections

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 10:06 pm

Obama trounces HC in VA. To the point that the pundits are talking like he could win that state in the general.

HC is holding some event in El Paso as TX because must-win for her. Still strange to try to put up and upbeat front on a day where she got beat so bad.

Pundits are talking like Obama will win the nomination and then already starting to talk about what his vulnerabilities will be -- some belief that he's a closet Muslim, that he won't pledge allegiance, that he has a 100% ADA record.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 11:53 pm

JackB1 wrote:boy did this thread go off the topic

How so?....

JRod · Post by **JRod** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 11:59 pm

wco81 wrote:Obama trounces HC in VA. To the point that the pundits are talking like he could win that state in the general.

HC is holding some event in El Paso as TX because must-win for her. Still strange to try to put up and upbeat front on a day where she got beat so bad.

Pundits are talking like Obama will win the nomination and then already starting to talk about what his vulnerabilities will be -- some belief that he's a closet Muslim, that he won't pledge allegiance, that he has a 100% ADA record.

This is why the media is 100% per BS.

She's only down 50 delegates. The media is talking wins when in reality she's right back in this thing with Texas and Ohio.

If Obama wins Texas and Ohio, I think Hillary will drop out. If Hillary wins those states, we are going to the convention. Obama hasn't done as well in states without a large african american base. He lost California and Texas and Ohio have somewhat similar makeups.

I wish the media would just report and not try to play magic 8-ball.

FatPitcher · Post by **FatPitcher** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 12:12 am

JRod wrote:
wco81 wrote:Obama trounces HC in VA. To the point that the pundits are talking like he could win that state in the general.

HC is holding some event in El Paso as TX because must-win for her. Still strange to try to put up and upbeat front on a day where she got beat so bad.

Pundits are talking like Obama will win the nomination and then already starting to talk about what his vulnerabilities will be -- some belief that he's a closet Muslim, that he won't pledge allegiance, that he has a 100% ADA record.
This is why the media is 100% per BS.

She's only down 50 delegates. The media is talking wins when in reality she's right back in this thing with Texas and Ohio.

If Obama wins Texas and Ohio, I think Hillary will drop out. If Hillary wins those states, we are going to the convention. Obama hasn't done as well in states with a large african american base. He lost California and Texas and Ohio have somewhat similar makeups.

I wish the media would just report and not try to play magic 8-ball.

Obama is winning in places where he was 20+ points down in polls just 3 months ago. Like I said a few pages up, Obama's on the way up and Clinton is on the way down. That's why the media is treating Obama like a big winner lately.

As far as your point about Texas and Ohio, wasn't South Carolina in the same category? http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/states ... olina.html

I have a feeling Obama will be crushed in the general election once the media starts tearing down what it built. Of course, the same prediction could be made for McCain.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 12:17 am

CNN claims that if Obama won the rest of the states by a 55-45 margin, he'd still be short of the required number of delegates.

Even with the lead after today, he'd have to do better than 60-40 in every remaining state to barely reach the required number for nomination.

Someone suggested now, it's impossible for Clinton to come out with more delegates after all the primaries. Best they may aim for is to minimize the lead to like 30 delegates fewer than Obama and then argue at the convention that she should get the nomination.

FatPitcher · Post by **FatPitcher** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 12:20 am

I think the Michigan/Florida situation will loom larger and larger and be the source of a lot of acrimony. They had better schedule new nominating events there before it gets bad.

JRod · Post by **JRod** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 2:10 am

FatPitcher wrote: Obama is winning in places where he was 20+ points down in polls just 3 months ago. Like I said a few pages up, Obama's on the way up and Clinton is on the way down. That's why the media is treating Obama like a big winner lately.

As far as your point about Texas and Ohio, wasn't South Carolina in the same category? http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/states ... olina.html

I have a feeling Obama will be crushed in the general election once the media starts tearing down what it built. Of course, the same prediction could be made for McCain.

Polls don't mean anything from 3 months ago. The political landscape changes instantly these days. Obama was an unknown commodity early on and Clinton was the frontrunner because she was the most recognizable.

Texas and Ohio are different monsters. More blue collar workers in Ohio which Hillary has done well with. Texas is a different monster all together.

It's going to come down to the Super Delegates. That might be where Hillary gets a bit of an advantages. She does better with the party establishment which are what these people are.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 2:14 am

There will be hell to pay if Obama gets more votes and more elected delegates but the Clintons steal the nomination because of these super delegates.

Dream come true for McCain in that case, especially since McCain seems to raise a lot of conflicted feelings in the GOP. They want to win but the conservatives have strong reservations about McCain

Strong possibility of a one-term presidency for whoever wins. Lot of problems to be inherited.

Inuyasha · Post by **Inuyasha** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 2:20 am

wco81 wrote:There will be hell to pay if Obama gets more votes and more elected delegates but the Clintons steal the nomination because of these super delegates.

Dream come true for McCain in that case, especially since McCain seems to raise a lot of conflicted feelings in the GOP. They want to win but the conservatives have strong reservations about McCain

Strong possibility of a one-term presidency for whoever wins. Lot of problems to be inherited.

The clintons are scum so I don't think it's far fetched if that happened. They would only hurt themselves since most of the Obama people they would screw over would never vote for Hillary.

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 2:31 am

wco81 wrote:There will be hell to pay if Obama gets more votes and more elected delegates but the Clintons steal the nomination because of these super delegates.

Dream come true for McCain in that case, especially since McCain seems to raise a lot of conflicted feelings in the GOP. They want to win but the conservatives have strong reservations about McCain

Strong possibility of a one-term presidency for whoever wins. Lot of problems to be inherited.

I agree that there will be hell to pay, but it would also be incredibly ironic. Obama is just the sort of insurgent, outsider candidate that the Superdelegates were designed to eliminate. Yet if they serve their function they may end up casting aside their better chance at winning the general election.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 2:43 am

Just hope they would see the writing on the wall, if Obama has say 200 more delegates, and they accept the will of the people.

But OTOH, they've been laying the groundwork for 10 years, a lot of work involved there. Few politicians would just walk away at that point.

She may end up getting more votes this primary season than anyone but Obama.

She may have gotten more votes in VA than McCain for instance, even as she was trounced by Obama.

JRod · Post by **JRod** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 4:29 am

Right now it's so close if the Super Delegates go against Obama and towards Clinton, aside from some people crying, this will blow over.

If it's a significant margin and they go over to Clinton, that's when it could spell trouble for the super delegates, the party, and clinton.

TRI · Post by **TRI** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 2:02 am

No matter who wins the nomination, the next president is likely one term. The problems with the credit crisis, CDOs, and falling real estate prices will likely get worse with time. The financial institutions have lent money very foolishly causing a lot of pain and problems with subprime mortages and CDOs. All of the candidates are flawed and not very appealing and they do not have a clue about how to fix the financial problems if it is even possible. Hope your favorite candidate loses because it will not be fun to be president.

greggsand · Post by **greggsand** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 3:05 am

TRI wrote:No matter who wins the nomination, the next president is likely one term.

Man, I said that same thing when "W" got elected. If "W" can do 2 terms, anyone can.

JRod · Post by **JRod** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 4:07 am

TRI wrote:No matter who wins the nomination, the next president is likely one term. The problems with the credit crisis, CDOs, and falling real estate prices will likely get worse with time. The financial institutions have lent money very foolishly causing a lot of pain and problems with subprime mortages and CDOs. All of the candidates are flawed and not very appealing and they do not have a clue about how to fix the financial problems if it is even possible. Hope your favorite candidate loses because it will not be fun to be president.

Seeing as FDR inherited the country left by Hoover, the worst shape this country was in since, at least financially, he served 4 terms.

The next President will be a two termer and if he/she gets it right will probably be a top 7 President.

matthewk · Post by **matthewk** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 10:05 am

JRod wrote: Seeing as FDR inherited the country left by Hoover, the worst shape this country was in since, at least financially, he served 4 terms.

The next President will be a two termer and if he/she gets it right will probably be a top 7 President.

I think you're giving this crop of candidates too much credit. I don't see an FDR in this group. I see 3 almost interchangable options that will more than likely mess things up more than what they are right now.

I have to look this up onlione, but I saw a blurb on the news last night that itemized some of Obamas economic plans. One of the items was tripling the minimum wage. He gets that done and we'll be talking about a depression, forget a recession.

*Quick edit: Just looked it up, and what he's talking about is tripling the EIC for min. wage earners. He wats to make sure the Min. wage increases with inflation. That's better.

There has also been talk that if McCain wins, he'll only do one term and step down.

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 10:23 am

matthewk wrote:
JRod wrote: Seeing as FDR inherited the country left by Hoover, the worst shape this country was in since, at least financially, he served 4 terms.

The next President will be a two termer and if he/she gets it right will probably be a top 7 President.
I think you're giving this crop of candidates too much credit. I don't see an FDR in this group. I see 3 almost interchangable options that will more than likely mess things up more than what they are right now.

I gotta agree with that statement. This election boils down to Diet Coke vs. Diet Pepsi. And we have our wonderful corrupt two party system to thank for that.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 10:37 am

"If he/she gets it right" is a big if.

The next president will inherit fiscal problems and possibly a recession which may last longer than the one in 2001 or in the early '90s.

On top of that, there will be battles about letting the Bush tax cuts expire or extending them in 2010-2011, not to mention what to do in Iraq, which is a big drain.

Then there are the campaign promises. Clinton didn't take the economic course he campaigned on, which was increasing spending on public works to create jobs. Instead he pursued deficit reduction:

http://www.slate.com/id/2183941/nav/tap3/

One of the reasons Bush has had budget problems is that he followed through on his campaign promise for the prescription drug benefit. And the reason he did that was for his re-election bid, strong-arming members of his own party to get that bill passed.

If health care really is a big issue this year, then the new president may feel compelled to try to enact a new program, which would add to the fiscal problems unless it's financed with new tax revenues.

Slumberland · Post by **Slumberland** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 1:52 pm

The return of John Edwards!

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8525.html

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 2:07 pm

Slumberland wrote:The return of John Edwards!

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8525.html

Holy sh*t -- this is the pinnacle of hypocrisy. No candidate has accepted more money from lobbyists and special interests than Hillary, and now she's denouncing big business?

I guess we shouldn't be surprised. She's desperate, and she's a Clinton. So shameful hypocrisy always will be part of the equation.

Take care,
PK

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 2:11 pm

Well she's having money problems trying to keep up with Obama.

Maybe the big money sources dried up.

Edit: Not surprising she's doing this in OH. She's fighting for her life now and OH is economically distressed.

If the corporations and lobbyists fund her after these speeches, then they have a problem as well.

I know the Chamber of Commerce was ready to stop Edwards at all costs because of his populism.

Even rumors that if Edwards won the nomination or headed towards the nomination, that would have been the trigger for Bloomberg to enter the race, to siphon votes away from Edwards.

JackB1 · Post by **JackB1** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 2:45 pm

I think Hillary will win Texas and Obama will win Ohio. That would leave the race too close and it will go down to the Super Delegates, which is B.S. in my opinion. The people should be able to choose the nonimee...not some insider Super Delegates, who is now being courted and wooed by each candidate.

JackB1 · Post by **JackB1** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 3:01 pm

Slumberland wrote:The return of John Edwards!

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8525.html

If Hilary gets elected and gets just one of those major points accomplished, I would be impressed. Are we supposed to believe she will really get all that done? If she could, I would vote for her in a heartbeat. Problem is that these Pre-President promises are a dime a dozen.

Slumberland · Post by **Slumberland** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 3:24 pm

JackB1 wrote:Problem is that these Pre-President promises are a dime a dozen.

Especially when they mark a sudden change in message, made by a desperate campaign, in Ohio, before their make-or-break primary.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 3:57 pm

Slumberland wrote:
JackB1 wrote:Problem is that these Pre-President promises are a dime a dozen.
Especially when they mark a sudden change in message, made by a desperate campaign, in Ohio, before their make-or-break primary.

Well, you must give the phoniest woman in American politics credit: The faux populism is working. Hillary has a double-digit lead over Obama in Ohio:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23164926/

What a f*cking fraud. Next thing you know, she'll pull Lou Dobbs and Michael Moore out on the stump to campaign for her.

Hopefully Obama will eat her alive -- figuratively, one would hope -- during their next debate when she tries to pull this populist sh*t on him. Her political house is wallpapered with special-interest and lobbyist money.

And who knows? Maybe Slick Willie will turn into a populist attack dog for his wife in Ohio. Obama's campaign could jump on that hypocrisy by reminding voters of the various scandals involving Chinese lobbyists and letting lobbyists sleep in the Lincoln Bedroom in return for donations and favors during the Slickster's terms in office.

The Clintons have balsa-wood legs when it comes to populism. Very easy for Obama and his campaign to chop to shreds. Problem is, will the gullible American public continue to fall for the forbidden fruit of populism, which sounds so great but delivers so little?

That's the challenge for Team Obama.

Take care,
PK