|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: The political junkie POTUS prediction thread
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gort:
If that were the case, I'd be in for several consecutive life terms without the possibility of parole.
You just bought an old wooden boat. What's the diff?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
I'm 45, and I think he's pretty hot, but it's not why I'm supporting him. Though I will admit that some of the reasons I have for being sorry that I didn't meet Barack Obama during the one year he and I were both at Occidental College are somewhat shallow. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
OMG, Ruth! Give us the dirt... did you turn down a date? You could have been up there on the podium when he makes his acceptance speech! [although I'm not sure if Ruth Obama has the right ring to it] quote:
Originally posted by MouseThief:
You just bought an old wooden boat. What's the diff?
After the Dems snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, I'll write you from a south sea island and explain it all. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
There's no dirt! Unfortunately. I never met him. *sigh*
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Living in Gin:
(Compare to Chicago, where you're permitted to vote for the Democrat of your choice.)
The way God intended, before the fall...
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
quote:
Originally Posted by tclune: quote:
Originally posted by Living in Gin:
(Compare to Chicago, where you're permitted to vote for the Democrat of your choice.)
The way God intended, before the fall...
--Tom Clune
There's one of the best arguments against "intelligent design" I've heard in a while. ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
Does that mean that Richard J Daley can claim the divine right of sovereignty? ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
ROTFL!
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
My ROTFL was re tclune's "The way God intended, before the fall...", but perhaps fits Mirrizin's Mayor Daley comment, too. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
Thanks for the credit. I'll be sure to try harder next time.
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
I'm so angry, I could spit. Govs. Charlie Crist (Republican) of Florida and Jennifer Granholm (Democrat) of Michigan have issued a joint statement asking for their state delegates to be seated at the Democratic national Convention. quote:
The right to vote is at the very foundation of our democracy. This primary season, voters have turned out in record numbers to exercise that right, and it is reprehensible that anyone would seek to silence the voices of 5,163,271 Americans. It is intolerable that the national political parties have denied the citizens of Michigan and Florida their votes and voices at their respective national conventions.
Anyone?..."it is reprehensible that anyone would seek to silence the voices of 5,163,271 Americans"?? I'll focus my ire on Mr. Charlie Crist, Republican pretty-boy Governor from the disorganized, fucked-up state of Florida: JOHN McCAIN HAS WON THE NOMINATION OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY! Did you miss the memo? When asked by a reporter why he (Mr. Crist) supported Florida's primary date change (signed into law) when he knew both party's penalty, he replied, "Party bosses in Washington should not be allowed to deny Floridians the right to be heard." Tell me, arsewipe, have you suddenly become so egalitarian that you simply MUST support the voting rights of the Democrats that YOU and your Republican controlled state congress disenfranchised when you rescheduled your primary in defiance of the Democratic National Party rules? Since it no longer matters if Florida Republican delegate's voices are heard (nevermind that the RNC only penalized you HALF of their delegates as opposed to ALL of the DNC's) Why, exactly, are you so interested in seeing Democratic delegates from Florida counted at the DNC convention?
[Raps knuckles on metal helmet] Gosh! Could it be you're interested in influencing the Democratic Party nomination process, knowing full well that Clinton won your meaningless primary, that the delegates YOU disenfranchised will swing the nomination to Clinton and that Clinton hasn't got the odds of a one-legged christian in an ass-kicking contest of beating McCain? Nah. You just want Florida voters to be heard. Right.
Fucking tool.
--------------------
--Formerly: Gort--
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mirrizin:
Thanks for the credit. I'll be sure to try harder next time.
Well, given where you live, I'll just say "post early, post often".
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mirrizin:
How's this for a joke?
Apparently, Obama has become so popular that he's inspired a flavor of ice cream. It's called Yes, Pecan!
Hmmm...well, I'd rate your joke more highly if you sent me some ice cream!
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
What Gort said.
![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
And more ...
A friend sent me a link to this blog, where there are screen grabs and videos that show that the Clinton campaign darkened Obama's skin in one of their ads.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
And more ...
A friend sent me a link to this blog, where there are screen grabs and videos that show that the Clinton campaign darkened Obama's skin in one of their ads.
Of course, this will upset Obama. Muslims are always upset at being seen as black...
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
What RuthW said.
Surely, these states were aware of the consequences of their actions. Like it or not, folks, the primaries are a Party-run institution, not a federally run one. If you don't want to play by the party's rules, then please don't whine when the party punishes you accordingly.
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amazing Grace
High Church Protestant
# 95
|
Posted
What Gort said. Conniving asswipe.
A rap on the knuckles to Gov. Grandholm as well. Apparently (and if I am wrong, I sincerely apologize) she wanted to be a big shot by jumping the gun, so she should take her lumps.
I did hear a piece about the possibility of "do-overs" on the Nipper this morning. The parties don't want to pay, the candidates don't want to pay, but it's classed as soft money so if someone else wants to bankroll about $10 mil a pop, they can.
In the "hourly news summary" on NPR's Morning Edition yesterday, I heard a teaser for discussion about possible running mates for McCain. Unfortunately I was 1) asleep again during the first run and 2) had turned the radio off to prepare for a phone interview for the second one.
Did anyone hear it or have other reasonable sources for who's being talked about? It can help take my mind off shenanigans in my (regular) party's contest.
[tangent](Must reregister and insist my phone number be taken off. Am getting creepy robocalls about Defense of Marriage again. AS IF marriage could be "defended" by a *vote* ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif) .)[/tangent]
Charlotte
--------------------
WTFWED? "Remember to always be yourself, unless you suck" - the Gator
Memory Eternal! Sheep 3, Phil the Wise Guy, and Jesus' Evil Twin in the SoF Nativity Play
Posts: 6593 | From: Sittin' by the dock of the [SF] bay | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Living in Gin
Liturgical Pyromaniac
# 2572
|
Posted
Keith Olbermann is my new hero, Samantha Power is right, and Hillary Clinton is beneath contempt.
It's obvious that she's trying to poison the well so that if she can't get the party nomination this year, she's willing to ensure that Obama loses to McCain so she can run again in 2012. She is completely shameless. I may have been willing to vote for her in the general election as recently as two weeks ago (albeit while holding my nose), but not now... And I'll do everything I can to help New York voters send her back to Arkansas when her Senate term is over in a couple years.
This blog does a good job of summing up my feelings about Hillary: You are NOT a Victim
[typo]
[ 07. March 2008, 15:43: Message edited by: Living in Gin ]
--------------------
It's all fun and games until somebody gets burned at the stake.
Posts: 1893 | From: Cincinnati, USA | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mirrizin:
Surely, these states [MI and FLA] were aware of the consequences of their actions. Like it or not, folks, the primaries are a Party-run institution, not a federally run one. If you don't want to play by the party's rules, then please don't whine when the party punishes you accordingly.
The problem that I have with this idea is that the party bigwigs are not the ones being disinfranchised. If they want to strike a compromise where the superdeligates from both states are disallowed, while the vote is done over, that would be fine with me. But the average voter of these states had no say in when the vote would be held, and should not be removed from the process because of the posturing at the top.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
It isn't exactly posturing at the top - more of posturing at the middle, i.e. the top of the state. And in Florida, not even the top of the state party but the top of the state government.
Still, there is absolutely no fair way to seat any of the delegates from these states without a do-over. I'm glad they are disallowing the super delegates as well - the argument could have been made that the super delegates should count since they would only make their vote at convention anyway. But since there is not reliable data on the preference of the party members/voters in these states, I think it is reasonable to disallow the delegates entirely.
I have no objection to a do-over. I don't have an easy answer on the funding, though. The last thing the national party needs is to have to foot the bill to clean up after asswipes at the state level; it would only encourage more trouble in the future.
The rules are the rules. Following them is the only way to ensure a fair process.
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
...and should not be removed from the process because of the posturing at the top.
The publically elected officials of both states' congresses proposed and both states' publically elected governors signed into law the primary date change knowing well in advance the results of that change in defiance of both partys' rules. Where was the voice of the people who knew their delegates would not be seated? The only "posturing" I see is that of the two governors who signed away their constituency's representation in the party process.
They should suck it up and deal. The public will still be able to vote in the general election and have it count. In the mean time, Michigan and Florida voters need to dump all the state representatives who signed it into law.
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
The problem that I have with this idea is that the party bigwigs are not the ones being disinfranchised. If they want to strike a compromise where the superdeligates from both states are disallowed, while the vote is done over, that would be fine with me. But the average voter of these states had no say in when the vote would be held, and should not be removed from the process because of the posturing at the top.
What about all the voters who stayed home because they knew their votes in these primaries wouldn't count?
Honestly, a do-over is the only fair thing, and the states should pay for it, as they're the ones who fucked up in the first place.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
agrgurich
Shipmate
# 5724
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
The problem that I have with this idea is that the party bigwigs are not the ones being disinfranchised. If they want to strike a compromise where the superdeligates from both states are disallowed, while the vote is done over, that would be fine with me. But the average voter of these states had no say in when the vote would be held, and should not be removed from the process because of the posturing at the top.
What about all the voters who stayed home because they knew their votes in these primaries wouldn't count?
Honestly, a do-over is the only fair thing, and the states should pay for it, as they're the ones who fucked up in the first place.
In Michigan, the Republicans control the State Senate. They won't agree to spend one penny on a new Democratic primary. The Democrats screwed it up. They can pay for it. The Republicans would prefer to have all of their delagates seated, but they'll settle for half. It doesn't really matter with McCain having won.
--------------------
Life is a comedy to those who think & a tragedy to those who feel.-Horace Walpole
AJG
Posts: 4478 | From: Michigan's Copper Country | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
All this hubbub is moot. According to The Democratic Party website, the window closes for all state primaries and caucuses – June 10, 2008. Florida state primary officials are saying it takes at least 90 days to organize a primary election (voting locations, observers, pamphlets, paper records...) so, if someone doesn't come up with $10 million by this coming Monday March 10, a new primary just ain't gonna happen. Fifteen counties are still installing optical scanners and don't expect to be finished till July.
Other options like mail-in ballots are far too likely to end up with court challenges delaying results even further. Sorry, Florida. Looks like you won't get to booger-up the Presidential election again by installing another Republican by your disorganized mess.
Too bad, so sad.
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
They can still make a lot of mischief, though. Obama is up by about 100 delegates now, depending on whose count you use. It really doesn't look like Clinton will be able to overtake, but she will probably remain pretty close. Assuming she'll fail at getting delegates from Michigan and/or Florida seated, she will still try to convince more super delegates to support her than Obama. Her pitch will be that she 'won' the popular vote, and that the super delegates shouldn't ignore 'the will of the people', even if their leaders disenfranchised them by screwing with the primaries. Having folks from Michigan and Florida kvetch and moan help her argument.
I guess it will be up to the credentials committee? I wonder how much influence Howard Dean has; it could be his finest hour.
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Choirboy:
...Her pitch will be that she 'won' the popular vote, and that the super delegates shouldn't ignore 'the will of the people'...
This would be the same pitch wherein she claims to have won the Texas primary when in fact the caucuses from that state (now being totalled) are giving Obama a combined total of three more delegates than Clinton.
Billary is a contentious gasbag who would rather abandon her Democratic Party principles in order to see McCain elected so that she can have a better opportunity in 2012.
The sooner we can see Obama vs. McCain in the debate, the better. The poor, old, befuddled, Republican Bush-hugger is gonna be chewed-up in the debates this summer. I am so looking forward to seeing McCain pop a vein during a face-to-face Obama attack.
Obama, to his credit, has been holding back on a full broadside attack against Clinton in order to maintain a semblance of Democratic unity against the Republicans. Clinton, on the other hand, has actually been praising McCain's presidential readyness by claiming they both are more experienced for the job than Obama.
Somehow Hillary's sleepless nights in the Whitehouse while hubby was having his knob gobbled by an aide gives her more credibility for the position of chief executive. Go figure.
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Swish
Shipmate
# 8566
|
Posted
It seems to me that the most damaging thing to happen to the Democrats could actually be happening. For me, that would be an incredibly negative campaign from Clinton which wouldn't be matched by Obama, who goes on to win the delegate count minus the supers while being slight ahead on the popular vote minus Michigan and Florida, but behind including them. Clinton then persuades the supers to go with her through a mixture of negative campaigning and pork barrel politics and wins the nomination. Facing McCain (who she has been praising all week) with a whole load of accusations that she hasn't faced in this campaign.
On another note, are there any Democrats out there who would prefer McCain to be president than Clinton? McCain seems to me to be quite moderate (for a Republican) while Clinton has done nothing but annoy and anger me for the majority of the campaign. Plus another 4 years of the same will make Obama's message of change all the more necessary. At this moment in time, from what I've seen of the campaign and looking at both McCain and Clinton, I can't help myself thinking that I'd prefer McCain to Clinton, and as a lefty Brit that is very unusual.
--------------------
Sorry Ted. I was concentrating too hard on looking holy.
Posts: 114 | From: Sheffield | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gort:
This would be the same pitch wherein she claims to have won the Texas primary when in fact the caucuses from that state (now being totalled) are giving Obama a combined total of three more delegates than Clinton.
You're exactly right. However, the claim is not entirely without merit in the sense that more people vote in the primary; the delegates awarded by the caucuses, where Obama gets a good proportion of delegates in Texas and elsewhere, are in general decided by fewer voters.
The argument against this at the moment is that she is still losing in the popular vote unless BOTH Michigan and Florida are counted. So Obama needs to keep it close in Pennsylvania.
While the Governor of Florida can't do a damn thing to get the delegates seated, he can stir the shit over the popular vote, so he is not entirely toothless here.
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Swish:
On another note, are there any Democrats out there who would prefer McCain to be president than Clinton? McCain seems to me to be quite moderate (for a Republican) while Clinton has done nothing but annoy and anger me for the majority of the campaign. Plus another 4 years of the same will make Obama's message of change all the more necessary. At this moment in time, from what I've seen of the campaign and looking at both McCain and Clinton, I can't help myself thinking that I'd prefer McCain to Clinton, and as a lefty Brit that is very unusual.
As I find Clinton detestable, I've many of the same thoughts, but then someone said three words that changed my mind: Supreme Court appointments. Clinton's would be slightly left of center (from an American POV), and McCain's would be slightly right of center, and with the court so narrowly divided, issuing 5-4 rulings so much of the time, it really, really matters that the next few justices be appointed by a Democratic president.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
IconiumBound
Shipmate
# 754
|
Posted
Pardon me if this has already been raised, but just what is Clinton's experience that she touts over and over? Aside from her one and a half terms in the Senate and considerable time with a prestigous law firm as a "rainmaker" does she have any real claim to either issues of national security or foreign policy. The experience of First Lady at tea and biscuits or giving a written speech at Bejing's Women's Conference are pretty thin excuses for experience in foreign policy.
Or perhaps it was those nights when the red phone rang and she answered, "No he's not here. Can I help you?"
Posts: 1318 | From: Philadelphia, PA, USA | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Living in Gin
Liturgical Pyromaniac
# 2572
|
Posted
Remember the sleeping girl in Hillary's "3 AM" ad? Turns out she's a volunteer in Obama's campaign.
I hope somebody from the Obama camp is on the phone with her right now to get her to appear in a good rebuttal ad.
--------------------
It's all fun and games until somebody gets burned at the stake.
Posts: 1893 | From: Cincinnati, USA | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Living in Gin:
Remember the sleeping girl in Hillary's "3 AM" ad? Turns out she's a volunteer in Obama's campaign.
Well, yes, that's a mildly funny for ten second. But hardly embarrassing. But she's an actor (or was). She was paid to act. Do you assume that people in Coca-Cola ads actually drink Coke? Does the man who mows the President's lawn have to vote for him?
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Presleyterian
Shipmate
# 1915
|
Posted
quote:
Iconium Bound wrote: Pardon me if this has already been raised, but just what is Clinton's experience that she touts over and over? Aside from her one and a half terms in the Senate and considerable time with a prestigous law firm as a "rainmaker" does she have any real claim to either issues of national security or foreign policy. The experience of First Lady at tea and biscuits or giving a written speech at Bejing's Women's Conference are pretty thin excuses for experience in foreign policy.
First, Iconium Bound, you're much too generous. Once you cross the Arkansas line, a mid-sized law firm in the 121st largest city in the United States is not even in the remote realm of "prestigious."
But aside from that, you've articulated my concerns perfectly. I'm willing to consider Hillary Clinton's actions as a Senator with eight years' experience, but aside from that, her "record" -- such as it is -- is solely her experience as "wife of..." And as others have observed, being married to a pilot doesn't mean you know how to fly a plane.
The two substantive tasks her supporters crow about -- her role in the abortive 1993 healthcare plan and her speech in Beijing -- provide further evidence of the disaster she would be as president. President Clinton was warned by Lloyd Bentsen, Robert Reich, and Donna Shalala -- people who know how to get things done -- that his wife was the wrong person for the job. She set the cause of universal coverage back two decades by running it behind a veil of secrecy that Dick Cheney would envy.
As for Bejing, the speech was excellent, but according to reports, she gave it over the express objection of the State Department officials who were concerned about its effect on foreign relations. That she may have been right is irrelevant. It speaks volumes about her judgment and ego that she thought it was just fine to go off on an international frolic and detour staking positions at odds with the Administration's.
Of course, Senator Obama dares not raise that issue for fear of alienating a certain sub-category of female voters. But to my way of thinking, Hillary Clinton's claim of "35 years of experience" is an insult to the hundreds of thousands of women who did the real work while she enjoyed the pick-and-choose accountable-to-nobody perks of being "wife of..."
A feminist icon? Oh, please. Everything Senator Clinton claims as her own accomplishment -- her experience on corporate boards, her position at the Rose Law Firm, her carpet-bagging election to a safe seat in the Senate -- is because she is Bill Clinton's wife. She stands as a tawdry testament to the fact that in some circles, it's still easier for a woman to sleep her way to the top than to earn a place there based on her own merits.
Posts: 2450 | From: US | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Joyeux
Ship's Lady of Laughter
# 3851
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Living in Gin:
...And I'll do everything I can to help New York voters send her back to Arkansas when her Senate term is over in a couple years.
Actually, wasn't she born and/or raised in Chicago?
--------------------
Float?...Do science too
Posts: 4318 | From: over th... no, there! | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jerry Boam
Shipmate
# 4551
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
As I find Clinton detestable, I've many of the same thoughts, but then someone said three words that changed my mind: Supreme Court appointments. Clinton's would be slightly left of center (from an American POV), and McCain's would be slightly right of center, and with the court so narrowly divided, issuing 5-4 rulings so much of the time, it really, really matters that the next few justices be appointed by a Democratic president.
I have made the same calculation. But It's hard to even think about.
A shit sandwich by any other name smells just as foul.
--------------------
If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving is not for you.
Posts: 2165 | From: Miskatonic University | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Re Hillary and the 3 AM ad:
Obama had a nearly identical ad in response that hit the air either that same day or shortly after. It was only mentioned a little on the news, AFAIK. IMHO, either his team knew her ad was coming and were prepared...or they have some ace people who could throw an ad together within hours. Given that his team responded ably with an ad of their own, and that Hillary's ad didn't trash him (or even allude to him)*, IMHO, I don't think this is a horrible situation.
They've both been very negative in other ways, and I think it's great that Speaker Nancy Pelosi verbally and publicly knocked their heads together!
I'm not enormously thrilled with any of the candidates, other than the chance to break some glass ceilings and get a Democrat into the Whie House. (I will be ecstatic over both those things! ) Hillary and Obama both have good and bad aspects. I don't think either is particularly worse ethically than the other...nor is either a messiah.
I do think they should be treated equally by the media, which really has been much easier on Obama than on Hillary. There were real reasons for those "Saturday Night Live" skits about the media and the debate moderators fawning over Obama. Case in point: After Hillary's appearance on SNL, there was a discussion on NPR's "Morning Edition" with Cokie Roberts and a regular host. They, by their words and tone, were shocked and bewildered that she would do such a thing. Neither mentioned that Obama did the same thing some time ago.
*The comments I heard in the media were along the lines of "Oh no, she said Barack couldn't handle the big decisions; what a meanie!" Well, they've both been saying that kind of thing about each other. But her ad just said *she* could handle that 3 AM red-phone call. Plus the obvious-to-me idea that it would be good to have a mom answer that phone, for a change. The ad goes from a mom checking on her child to Hillary at her desk in the White House.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Choirboy:
I think he meant " not (too hard working or having a sense of destiny)", i.e. you are in agreement.
Whoops, I misread! ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
Thanks, Choirboy, and sorry, Sioni Sais!
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Littlelady
Shipmate
# 9616
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
*The comments I heard in the media were along the lines of "Oh no, she said Barack couldn't handle the big decisions; what a meanie!" Well, they've both been saying that kind of thing about each other. But her ad just said *she* could handle that 3 AM red-phone call.
I saw a clip of a satire on the 3am call idea on Fox today. I gotta say it was funny, but it came across as a piss-take on both of them: Obama calling Clinton for help and blubbering over the phone, Clinton wearing her face mask in bed and telling Obama to 'man up'.
Did something happen in Wyoming by the way? It seems to have passed us by here (unless I wasn't my usual alert self, which is always possible). I heard briefly that Obama won something. A caucus? A primary? Or what?
What do people think about the Mississippi primary? Is it an Obama shoo-in?
--------------------
'When ideas fail, words come in very handy' ~ Goethe
Posts: 3737 | From: home of the best Rugby League team in the universe | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
SeraphimSarov
Shipmate
# 4335
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Re Hillary and the 3 AM ad:
Obama had a nearly identical ad in response that hit the air either that same day or shortly after. It was only mentioned a little on the news, AFAIK. IMHO, either his team knew her ad was coming and were prepared...or they have some ace people who could throw an ad together within hours. Given that his team responded ably with an ad of their own, and that Hillary's ad didn't trash him (or even allude to him)*, IMHO, I don't think this is a horrible situation.
They've both been very negative in other ways, and I think it's great that Speaker Nancy Pelosi verbally and publicly knocked their heads together!
Actually, Barack's campaign is usually negative only in response and makes the right decision of responding immediately instead of trying to remain "above the fray" which let's an attack remain in the air for days and take hold. A very effective strategy. It reminds me of Labour's press machine in Millbank Tower during the 1997 election which never let a Tory attack rest without an immediate response and helped greatly in that campaign.
[ 09. March 2008, 14:52: Message edited by: SeraphimSarov ]
--------------------
"For those who like that sort of thing, that is the sort of thing they like"
Posts: 2247 | From: Sacramento, California | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
SeraphimSarov
Shipmate
# 4335
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Littlelady:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
*The comments I heard in the media were along the lines of "Oh no, she said Barack couldn't handle the big decisions; what a meanie!" Well, they've both been saying that kind of thing about each other. But her ad just said *she* could handle that 3 AM red-phone call.
I saw a clip of a satire on the 3am call idea on Fox today. I gotta say it was funny, but it came across as a piss-take on both of them: Obama calling Clinton for help and blubbering over the phone, Clinton wearing her face mask in bed and telling Obama to 'man up'.
Did something happen in Wyoming by the way? It seems to have passed us by here (unless I wasn't my usual alert self, which is always possible). I heard briefly that Obama won something. A caucus? A primary? Or what?
What do people think about the Mississippi primary? Is it an Obama shoo-in?
Wyoming was a caucus which Obama won 7 delegates out of 12 (won 58% to Clinton's 41%)
Yes, Mississippi should be a shoo-in for Obama.
It is Pennsylvania which is the next large haul of delegates followed by North Carolina.
--------------------
"For those who like that sort of thing, that is the sort of thing they like"
Posts: 2247 | From: Sacramento, California | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SeraphimSarov:
Yes, Mississippi should be a shoo-in for Obama.
It is Pennsylvania which is the next large haul of delegates followed by North Carolina.
This perspective is a tribute to the effectiveness of the Clinton machine in setting the agenda of this campaign. All of the states in which Obama is favored have been cast in people's minds as "Obama should win" states. All the states in which Hillary is expected to win are cast as "battleground states that will determine who is the better candidate."
The truth is that all the states that are left will be split pretty much down the middle. Yes, Obama won Wyoming by landslide numbers. The result? A net three delegates. Whoever wins Pennsylvania will pick up a few net delegates. Whoever wins North Carolina will pick up a net few delegates.
None of this throws light on who will be a better candidate against McCain in the fall. If Hillary tends to win the traditionally-Democratic states against Obama, it does not suggest that they will be in play in November if she's not the candidate. Similarly, if Obama wins Idaho against Hillary in a Democratic contest, it doesn't mean that there is any chance it will go Democratic in the fall.
The plain, unpleasant fact is that the nomination in the Democratic Party will be determined by superdelegates and how the party chooses to react to the the absurd excesses of Florida and Michigan. It will leave a bad taste in everyone mouth except the Republicans.
Meanwhile, Hillary has managed to hedge her bets by starting a groundswell among the party insiders to give her the vice presidency. I think she has decided that her fallback plan is to get elected with Obama and then shoot him...
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SeraphimSarov:
It reminds me of Labour's press machine in Millbank Tower during the 1997 election
Well that will let us all sleep safer in our beds ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
ORGANMEISTER
Shipmate
# 6621
|
Posted
There seems to be some sort of move afoot to do something with the Fla. and Mich. delegates. Yesterday I hear Gov. Ed Rendell and Sen. Jon Corzine offering to raise $ 15 million or about 1/2 the cost of a revote in Fla.
I haven't done the math, but if there is a Fla revote, and if Hillary wins big, how does the delegate count stack up......and if she wins big in both Fla and Mich what happens? Will it remain with the Super-delegates to annoint a winner?
Posts: 3162 | From: Somerset, PA - USA | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mere Nick
Shipmate
# 11827
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ORGANMEISTER:
There seems to be some sort of move afoot to do something with the Fla. and Mich. delegates. Yesterday I hear Gov. Ed Rendell and Sen. Jon Corzine offering to raise $ 15 million or about 1/2 the cost of a revote in Fla.
I haven't done the math, but if there is a Fla revote, and if Hillary wins big, how does the delegate count stack up......and if she wins big in both Fla and Mich what happens? Will it remain with the Super-delegates to annoint a winner?
That leaves them $15 million short. Parties should either fully fund the cost of their primaries or anyone eligible to vote at all gets to vote in them, regardless of any political affiliation.
Istm, btw.
[ 10. March 2008, 19:00: Message edited by: Mere Nick ]
--------------------
"Well that's it, boys. I've been redeemed. The preacher's done warshed away all my sins and transgressions. It's the straight and narrow from here on out, and heaven everlasting's my reward."
Delmar O'Donnell
Posts: 2797 | From: West Carolina | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Joyeux
Ship's Lady of Laughter
# 3851
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ORGANMEISTER:
I haven't done the math, but if there is a Fla revote, and if Hillary wins big, how does the delegate count stack up......and if she wins big in both Fla and Mich what happens? Will it remain with the Super-delegates to annoint a winner?
That's a big if, Hillary winning big. IIRC, Obama didn't promote his own candidacy in Fla because the DNC had decided to not seat any of those delegates. Should there be any revote, I can't imagine that Obama wouldn't have a presence.
--------------------
Float?...Do science too
Posts: 4318 | From: over th... no, there! | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
SeraphimSarov
Shipmate
# 4335
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by SeraphimSarov:
It reminds me of Labour's press machine in Millbank Tower during the 1997 election
Well that will let us all sleep safer in our beds
compared to Labour's usual victimization by the Tory Press during elections, it was a revelation in defense technique.
Don't read post-1997 events into what was effective for a short time then
[ 11. March 2008, 02:46: Message edited by: SeraphimSarov ]
--------------------
"For those who like that sort of thing, that is the sort of thing they like"
Posts: 2247 | From: Sacramento, California | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
The Huffington Post is reporting that Keith Olbermann's "Special Comment" tonight will be against Hillary Clinton. Usually he's going off on Bush et al., though he did lay into the Dems for not ending the war after took over Congress. I don't know if Olbermann does anything but preach to the choir, but I know I'll be looking for it on YouTube.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
jlg
What is this place?
Why am I here?
# 98
|
Posted
I drove up to Exeter this afternoon to run some errands and stop by the local independent bookstore and Lo! and behold there was the McCain campaign bus parked there by Town Hall. I gawked long enough to spot my fellow bellringer (she's been volunteering) get on the bus, but went back to browsing books without spotting the candidate.
Is anyone here following the Republican side of things? What's he doing back in New Hampshire?
Posts: 17391 | From: Just a Town, New Hampshire, USA | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
agrgurich
Shipmate
# 5724
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by jlg:
I drove up to Exeter this afternoon to run some errands and stop by the local independent bookstore and Lo! and behold there was the McCain campaign bus parked there by Town Hall. I gawked long enough to spot my fellow bellringer (she's been volunteering) get on the bus, but went back to browsing books without spotting the candidate.
Is anyone here following the Republican side of things? What's he doing back in New Hampshire?
I read he's organizing a series of Town Meetings throughout the country to talk to the voters & also doing fundraising in various places.
--------------------
Life is a comedy to those who think & a tragedy to those who feel.-Horace Walpole
AJG
Posts: 4478 | From: Michigan's Copper Country | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Thread closed
Printer-friendly view
