posted
Actually, if he were really machiavellian, he'd do everything he could to help Huck, creating a dogfight for the Republican nomination similar to the chaos on the Democratic side right now, and even possibly get perhaps a candidate even more likely than McCain to lose in November the Republican nomination, thus clearing the way in 2012.
Posts: 794 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
At this point, Sen. McCain has 843 delegates. 1,191 are needed to secure the nomination. That means McCain only needs 348 more delegates. The earliest that could happen is April 22--unless Gov. Romney can pledge his delegates to McCain, which could give McCain the nomination by March 4. If Gov. Huckabee were to drop out of the race now and pledge his delegates to McCain along with Romney, then they could deliver the nomination to McCain right now.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
"I also came across clips from a documentary called, "Missing, Presumed Dead." It talks about Senator McCain legislating to block access to records of MIA/POW vets. This is the first I've heard of this. Is it true?"
Only in the most absurdist sense of the meaning of true. How would having access to eg a soldier's job performance evaluations help locate that missing soldier or identify his body? Do you really think that there is a vast USmilitary conspiracy to keep MIAs from being found? When they've been using eg DNA technology on grandnephews/etc to give names to UnknownSoldiers all the way back to WWI? (Maybe even earlier, but I haven't read of preWWI UnknownSoldiers actually being identified in that manner.)
McCain has always been in the forefront of applying political pressure, heavy political pressure to find MIAs or to identify their bodies. On the other hand, he doesn't like flim-flam artists creating false hopes to prey on MIA families.
I haven't the slightest clue as to the political leanings of those who made that particular video, but it sounds like mere repetition of the extreme rightwing conspiracy-pushing blowhards who hate McCain and don't give a tootle about MIAs using those flim-flammers' fabrications as ammunition.
posted
That is what I thought as well, which was why this surprised me. I was wondering where these accusations came from and what (if any) validity they had. I thought someone might have more information or might have seen the documentary.
I haven't watched it because I'm at work. I don't even know if that was the whole thing.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Romney can't pledge his delegates. He can only release them -- making them uncommitted -- then recommend another choice. Same with Huckabee.
Neither McCain nor Huckabee nor the RepublicanParty want the contest to end. Since neither side is being vicious toward the other, the contest&debates between McCain and Huckabee is free advertisement in the form of news media coverage, which would disappear the moment Huckabee drops out.
Though not as strongly as Obama is for the Democrats, Huckabee is drawing in new people and more importantly a new generation of political activists as Republican donors and Republican campaign workers. For those drawn into the GreatGame, American politics can easily become as addictive as EverCrack and WoW is to gamers.
Both McCain and the RepublicanNationalCommittee as well as the local Republican parties and candidates are drooling at the prospect of gaining support from Huck's Army. Which gives Huckabee strong leverage on the 2008RepublicanPlatform and strong future leverage in the RepublicanNationalCommittee. Which in turn gives Huckabee strong incentive to continue the contest and to continue his recruitment of newcomers.
And there's always 2012. McCain might find himself feeling too old&tired to run for another term. Clinton or Obama might become politically weakened enough from dealing with the mess Dubya left behind to be beaten.
quote:...if he [Romney] were really machiavellian, he'd do everything he could to help Huck, creating a dogfight for the Republican nomination...
quote:That would be so beautifully evil.
And too clever by half. Ever wonder why Kerry jumped on the Obama bandwagon at the first opportune moment? Or why Gore hasn't come out for the Clintons?
I --ing hate clever. -- Mr.Tulip*
If anything machiavellian were going on, and there probably isn't, Romney would be tossing his support to McCain now in hopes of slowing down Huckabee's gain of ever more political strength (for 2012) as the contest continues.
quote:Ever wonder why Kerry jumped on the Obama bandwagon at the first opportune moment? Or why Gore hasn't come out for the Clintons?
You think either of them are trying to sabotage things for a run of their own in 4 years? Kerry would have to be stupider than dirt to think he has a shot at being the nominee, let alone president.
Gore would have a shot, but he'd be a one issue candidate I think, and a lot of people feel as strongly about him as they do about Clinton. I think the election would come down to whether or not you believe in global warming.
And neither of them will be a VP candidate. Gore would make an excellent energy secretary, or maybe even some sort of climate change tsar. Other than that, I think it's because they both realize Clinton is the wrong horse to back if they want some favors in the future, so they're switching sides. Besides, I don't think Gore has any special affection for the Clintons. Hillary basically shoehorned him out of the Oval and took his job as co-president.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nope. Referring to payback for the Clintons' "help" in 2000 and 2004 in anticipation of Hillary's (once possible) run in 2004 and her current candidacy in 2008.
posted
It looks like the fight over Michigan and Florida is really heating up.
Obama is saying he's okay with a do over caucus in both states, where Clinton is saying that's unfair since nowhere near as many people will participate. But party elders are starting to get nervous over what looks like a floorfight at the convention. Superdelegates are starting to rumble that whoever wins the popular delegate vote should be the winner, regardless.
This whole thing might be decided in the next month, if Clinton loses Ohio and Texas, or just splits the difference, she'll have failed even by her own standards, and Obama will keep his lead. Superdelegates might flock to him in droves, pushing him over the top and making Florida and Michigan insignificant.
Personally, as a resident of Michigan, I either want a new vote, or I don't want ours to count. For it to count as it is isn't fair. Obama wasn't even on the ballot and neither of them campaigned here. Allowing a vote to count where one of the main candidates wasn't even on the ballot is crap. I want a redo, with both names on the ballot fairly, and give them a week or two to campaign here. Or I just don't want it to count. It's all or nothing.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here in Florida, my impression is that Clinton did campaign. I mean, she gave her victory speech from Davie, Florida, for one thing.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, the pundits were on her for that one. She didn't make a single campaign stop in Florida, and spent no ad dollars there (so far as I know, feel free to correct me). So for all intents and purposes, she did zero campaigning, won, and then took a victory lap before moving on.
posted
I wonder at what time of day she flew in on primary day. I mean, if she spent the whole day in Florida, technicality though it might be, I'm inclined to count it. Because plenty of people do wait until the last minute to make up their minds, and a lot of people are swayed by the most meaningless things, like whom they saw live, or who was in their town, or who came off as a nice person to them.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
If memory serves, she pretty much just flew in for the party then left. You can check me on that one because honestly I'm not positive, but I think I remember her flying in just for the celebration, speech, and then skipping town, which is why a lot of people kind of cried foul about it.
If she flew in earlier in the day and spent the day in Florida, I'd agree, and would call it campaigning, albeit a very small amount.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Clintons began attending their series of Florida fundraisers in September2007 and continued making such appearances throughout the campaign season on a frequent basis. And made sure that the Florida media could not remain unaware (or silent) about their appearances. Hillary didn't fly in for her Florida victory speech, she had already flown in two days before for two more fundraisers on the day before the election. Her national campaign office generated more media buzz about those two fundraisers and her "non"campaign through their inquiries a few days earlier about renting the MiamiConventionCenter for a Clinton rally on the day before the FloridaPrimary.
To keep Obama from having that clear victory, all Clinton needs to do is make sure that the combination of her currently-official pledged-delegates and the currently-official delegates-pledged-uncommitted-by-vote totals at 1535 or more. Then it's a floorfight over seating Michigan's and Florida's currently-disqualified pledged delegates. A floorfight decided by the superdelegates. Which is gonna get really ugly if Obama were to have more-than-1626 but less-than-1719 currently-official pledged-delegates by the time of the Convention.
I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a Democrat. -- Will Rogers
quote: Sen. Hillary Clinton last night said she does not view Ohio as a must-win firewall to keep Sen. Barack Obama from winning the Democratic presidential nomination.
“I really don’t think about it like that,” Clinton told The Dispatch following a 35-minute speech to 2,600 in Ohio State University’s French Field House.
“I think about doing the very best I can. I’ve got a good campaign here. I’ve got wonderful, broad support across the state and we’re just going to work like crazy to get as many votes as we possibly can and hopefully we’ll do well.”
Anyone else think that sounds like massaging expectations in case she loses? I have this feeling that even though her biggest supporter is saying Ohio and Texas are must-win states for her, if she loses them she might still stay in and drag it out.
posted
And she's done it again. Completely changed her tack when it appeared the previous one wasn't getting her anywhere. Her willingness to do this so readily shows just how much of a politician she is. And that's exactly what I don't want in the White House right now. I want someone who's politically clever enough to out maneuver people -- but one who won't do it so bloody obviously, and will at the core stick to their guns.
Posts: 3295 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Senator Obama's plan are quite substantial and very detailed. I don't know how he can communication that better without losing the inspiring aspect of his speeches.
Use more numbers? I don't know that people actually take note of the details of plans during campaign speeches or know what they mean.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by twinky: Dag, just to be clear, I didn't address your main point about the misstatement because I agree with it. I do support Obama now, but I've never thought he was perfect.
That's what I figured based on your first post.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Senator Obama's plan are quite substantial and very detailed. I don't know how he can communication that better without losing the inspiring aspect of his speeches.
Use more numbers? I don't know that people actually take note of the details of plans during campaign speeches or know what they mean.
He gave a perfect specific in his last speech, 4-5,000$ credit for college students in return for some volunteer work.
IP: Logged |
posted
I know. And there are tons of very specific plans on his website and when you look closely. I'm trying to figure out how to address the perception of a lack of specifics (which has become Senator Clinton's new talking point. Well, not new exactly...)
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: I know. And there are tons of very specific plans on his website and when you look closely. I'm trying to figure out how to address the perception of a lack of specifics (which has become Senator Clinton's new talking point. Well, not new exactly...)
I'm still stuck on the math for her claim of having 36 years of experience getting things done in Washington. I can't begin to work on her other statements.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It was 36 years of change, as I recall. Though she does date that from her involvement in the Nixon hearings.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by aspectre: The Clintons began attending their series Florida fundraisers in September2007 and continued making such appearances throughout the campaign season on a frequent basis. And made sure that the Florida media could not remain unaware (or silent) about their appearances. Hillary didn't fly in for her Florida victory speech, she had already flown in two days before for two more fundraisers on the day before the election. Her national campaign office generated more media buzz about those two fundraisers and her "non"campaign through their inquiries a few days earlier about renting the MiamiConventionCenter for a Clinton rally on the day before the FloridaPrimary.
To clarify though, neither Obama nor Clinton were barred by the DNC from fundraising in Michigan or Florida, only actively campaigning. I guess you can decide for yourself where the line is.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Senator Obama's plan are quite substantial and very detailed. I don't know how he can communication that better without losing the inspiring aspect of his speeches.
Use more numbers? I don't know that people actually take note of the details of plans during campaign speeches or know what they mean.
I know. I remember that perception being out there (and I shared it, in fact) back when I researched all the Democratic candidates months ago. Then I found his specifics and satisfied myself (not that I agree with them all). I've even had this debate with other people, going back over a month . . . they'd name issues and I'd tell them Obama's position on them. Who goes into numbers and such at campaign rally speeches? Certainly Clinton and McCain don't. But Obama gets targeted for not having any positions, but people who have not watched the debates, I suppose. I guess because if the message is a feel-good message, it must be empty, right? But geez, is it so hard to go to his website or to Wikipedia and look up his political positions?
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: $4-5,000 credit for college students in return for some volunteer work.
Yeah, but he (and Clinton for that matter) thinks getting rid of the FFELP program and making all Stafford loans Direct Loans is simple.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: 4-5,000$ credit for college students in return for some volunteer work.
Yeah, but he (and Clinton for that matter) thinks getting rid of the FFELP program and making all Stafford loans Direct Loans is simple.
posted
Blayne, why do you insist in screwing $5,000 up over and over again? Lisa didn't screw it up, she fixed it, and sticking to your awkward punctuation just makes you look foolish. Again.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Listen to Icarus Blayne. It looks stupid. As right as it MAY be, it looks stupid.
Posts: 1287 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
quote:Originally posted by Icarus: Blayne, why do you insist in screwing $5,000 up over and over again? Lisa didn't screw it up, she fixed it, and sticking to your awkward punctuation just makes you look foolish. Again.
I don't care, it is my notation, it is how I write it, and it is how I will always write it.
IP: Logged |
posted
I don't see why anyone else cares so much about how he writes it. Insisting on correcting it every time you quote him just looks petty, in my opinion.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
And honestly, I don't see how it's any different from insisting on putting commas and periods outside of quotation marks, even though that goes against American style.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Do you think Hilary's negative ads will help or hurt her? I would like to see them hurt her because I would like to see the end of negative ads, but it seems like in general, it is a lot easier to tear your opponent down then to build yourself up.
Posts: 1001 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
February 11th - Barack Obama 50%, Hillary Clinton 39% February 13th - Barack Obama 47%, Hillary Clinton 43%, Undecided 10% February 14th - Barack Obama 47%, Hillary Clinton 42%, Undecided 11%
it's tied, for all intents and purposes. The undecideds will push it one way or the other.
Texas
Lots of new numbers here:
January 10th - Hillary Clinton 46%, Barack Obama 28%, John Edwards 14%, Dennis Kucinich 1%, Mike Gravel 1%, Undecided 10% January 31st - Hillary Clinton 48%, Barack Obama 38%, Mike Gravel 3%, Undecided 12% February 13th - Hillary Clinton 49%, Barack Obama 41%, Undecided 8% February 14th - Barack Obama 48%, Hillary Clinton 42%, Other 3% Undecided 7% Hillary Clinton 54%, Barack Obama 38%, Undecided 9% Hillary Clinton 48%, Barack Obama 41%, Undecided 11%
When you take into account margin of error and undecideds, it could easily be a tied race, but he's behind by anything from 7 to 16 points, depending on the poll you use. Still, even with the 16 point margin, that's with a plus minus of four, which puts them eight apart, and that could be covered by undecideds. In other words, Texas is up for grabs, but it will all come down to those undecideds. A concern for Obama might be that in the last two weeks since the January 31st poll, he hasn't made any headway in the state, but then neither has Clinton, it's stayed largely the same, and when polls keep spitting out the same numbers, margin of error looks less likely. I'd be holding onto that one poll that has him in the lead like it was a gold brick. The poll that has Obama in the lead by the way is from American Research Group.
Clinton's chances are still looking good in Wisconsin, Ohio and Texas, but Obama is catching up.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by scholar: Do you think Hilary's negative ads will help or hurt her? I would like to see them hurt her because I would like to see the end of negative ads, but it seems like in general, it is a lot easier to tear your opponent down then to build yourself up.
To be perfectly honest? Help her. She's hitting Obama on the one thing that a lot of people have in the back of their minds, that Obama is all flash and no substance. Now, this isn't actually true, and I know Icarus will tell anyone that Obama actually DOES have a lot of plans for a number of issues, and he even talks about those issues in his speeches. But Clinton is painting him as all talk, even giving him credit for it being good talk, but that she is in the "solutions business."
You're starting to hear Obama hit back with criticizing Clinton's mischaracterization of his "lack of positions." And he's using the phrase "hope monger" more now, which I like and I think is clever. But Obama will need to give more wonkish speeches and give more details, or Clinton's attacks will stick.
That's why these upcoming debates are maybe more important for him than her in a way. He needs to spend the debates rattling off plans and numbers, not platitudes, especially in the states they'll be in. He has some great plans for our problems, not as detailed as hers, but not bad, he just needs to sell them better. People WILL be watching these debates looking for specifics and ideas, especially in Ohio with all the blue collar union workers.
If he turns the image issue back around, then her attacks will reflect badly on her, otherwise people won't consider them attacks, they'll think they are justified.
Edit to add: Watch CNN right now. He's doing it as we speak.
posted
I talked to a lady who worked at Wal mart this morning, who thought Obama is muslim and at the same time thinks he hangs out with gangsta rappers. I guess the only consolation is this person wouldn't vote democrat anyway. I told her he was Christian but I didn't know the denomination off the top of my head. I better learn that.
Oh, she also told me a joke about Hillary Clinton which I actually thought was pretty funny. It was the one where she makes it to the whitehous and gets visited by several presidential ghosts.
Maybe I'm just as biased as her but refuse to acknowledge it.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
That Obama=muslim meme is disturbing. I hope it doesn't take root in too many people.
THERE'S ALWAYS 2012: A Rotten Way to Pick a President :good WP article on how parties choose candidates. And why reform is needed. The authors, Princeton history professors, express hope that meaningful reform could happen before 2012. I'm more cynical and only expect incremental reforms by that time.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was waiting for a table at a restaurant and the group next to me was very loudly discussing politics. This was Thursday. One woman was talking about how she hates McCain and hopes Guiliani wins. Or maybe Romney. Her friend then told her that just that day Romney had dropped out. They then went on to bash Hilary for a while (even if Obama wins, they'll still be stuck with Hilary cause everyone knows Hiliary is going to be VP if not pres). And I was sitting there biting my tongue. If you are going to loudly deabte politics in public, please atleast be current. Romney had dropped out over a week ago, not that day and Guiliani even longer. To be honest, listening to them, made me dislike democracy. The fact that people that ignorant get to vote just irks me. I don't really mind when people make an informed decision that disagrees with everything I think, but I would like to see some effort at thought.
Posts: 1001 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let's hope we swung a few undecideds our way today in Wisconsin. Though most that I talked to will vote for Senator Obama if they get to the polls.
quote:What do you think of Barack Obama?--by worrying aloud about his "Muslim background." I'm always quick to tell them that he's not a Muslim, but it rarely makes a difference. Take Vicki Hercsky, 47, a teacher from Boca Raton, Florida. "Obama, I don't even know how he got where he is," she told me after a Rudy Giuliani event late last month. "Why do you say that?" I asked. "He's Muslim," she replied, matter-of-factly. I stammered. "Well, um, his father was raised Muslim but was an agnostic by the time Barack was born," I said. "Obama is a Christian." Hercsky wasn't swayed. "Yeah, but he has it in his blood," she said. "You can't take away what's given to you. It's given to you for a reason, and that's who you are. That's who he is." I'm not sure what she meant by "it," or "who he is"--and I'm not sure I want to know.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
