:eek:If he wins Penn state its truly over for the Clinton campaign,there is just no way she could win,average polls suggest in every other state Obama has her beat by large points and with time Obamas power increases with states.Wow its really not looking good for the Clinton campaign.

She can win with superdelegates.

Obama is like a predator,how he just hunts you down on your territory and demolish your support base lol.I see why Bill is so========>:mad:

I'm skeptical of him winning. It just reminds me of New Hampshire, California, and Texas. He suddenly surges from behind in a crucial state and then loses.

Obama is like a predator,how he just hunts you down on your territory and demolish your support base lol.I see why Bill is so========>:mad:

Yes, he is a very good campaigner.

Obama is like a predator,how he just hunts you down on your territory and demolish your support base lol.I see why Bill is so========>:mad:

Although he has nothing but rhetoric going for him. Talk is cheap, he hasn't done anything to prove who he really is except promise everyone everything!:(

I'm skeptical of him winning. It just reminds me of New Hampshire, California, and Texas. He suddenly surges from behind in a crucial state and then loses. There's a possibility that the media are being guided a bit, in these stories.

A few months ago, Clinton was far in the lead everywhere (over Obama). The story of Clinton losing big leads in one state after another as soon as Obama shows up to campaign is not the right story - the right story is Obama falling short of the big hype.

If Obama actually wins Pennsylvania - very unlikely - the superdelegates can hardly vote en masse for Clinton. If he loses - far more likely, given the ground he has to make up and the Clinton organization there - it will matter by how much.
Yes, he is a very good campaigner. Which in his case takes organizational and executive talent - he wasn't handed a national campaign organization.

We have slim pickins here on evidence of competence and executive ability - McCain seems to be weak and corrupt, Clinton muddled and corrupt - and little clues like that become important as all we have to go on.

I'm skeptical of him winning. It just reminds me of New Hampshire, California, and Texas. He suddenly surges from behind in a crucial state and then loses.

True, name recognition is what's carrying Hillary in the larger states. Her political machine is to entrenched in those states. I don't think he'll win Pennsylvannia. If he can keep it in the single digits, then he'll be fine. But then he'll have to win really big in Carolina. And something tells me that Edwards will endorse Hillary just before to curtail his lead.

Today I read Hillary is leading by 20 pouints after Obama's "bitter" remark.

I got an Obama DVD in the mail, but i threw it out. In case of him actually winning, it could reach a good price on Ebay...

Although he has nothing but rhetoric going for him. Talk is cheap, he hasn't done anything to prove who he really is except promise everyone everything!:(

his record as a state senator and a us senator show he can get things done

I'll bet $10 bucks (which will have inflated in value in a few weeks to $5) that obama is NOT going to win Pennsylvania, I hope for but would be surprised if he loses by less then 10 % points. Obama gets a boost from the Bradly effect. It should be noted though that Pennsylvania is a closed primary which will make it hard for republicans to vote for Hillary (the one they can most likely defeat in the general election) but this will also make it hard for obama to get independents he needs.

Syzygys,

Today I read obama is losing by 6% meaning the bitter thing did little or nothing.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/04/15/polls-clinton-up-slightly-in-pennsylvania/

She can win with superdelegates.

Will win, spider. Will win.

~String

Obama and McCain both appeared before the nation's editors and their reaction to the candidates was interesting.
John McCain and Barack Obama both appeared before the nation's newspaper editors yesterday. The putative Republican presidential nominee was given a box of doughnuts and a standing ovation. The likely Democratic nominee was likened to a terrorist.

At a luncheon for the editors hosted by the Associated Press, AP Chairman Dean Singleton quizzed Obama about whether he would send more troops to Afghanistan, where "Obama bin Laden is still at large?"

"I think that was Osama bin Laden," the candidate answered.I'm sure we'll see more of this.
The past few days have left a bad taste in the mouth of the Democratic front-runner. In his worst gaffe of the campaign, he asserted (in San Francisco!) that Middle Americans have turned to God and guns and against immigrants because they are "bitter" about their economic lot.
That comment may well dog him for the rest of the primary season as well as the general election should he get the nomination.
That let Hillary Clinton and McCain portray Obama as a member of the effete elite, alongside John Kerry (Turnbull & Asser shirts) and John Edwards ($400 haircuts).

To shed the elitist label and regain his common-man credentials, Obama picked an inauspicious venue -- the annual gathering of the media elite, the American Society of Newspaper Editors. The result is likely to make the Democrat even more bitter. On the same day, the two media darlings of the presidential election cycle came to address their base -- and McCain easily bested his likely opponent.

McCain's moderators, the AP's Ron Fournier and Liz Sidoti, greeted McCain with a box of Dunkin' Donuts. "We spend quite a bit of time with you on the back of the Straight Talk Express asking you questions, and what we've decided to do today was invite everyone else along on the ride," Sidoti explained. "We even brought you your favorite treat."

McCain opened the offering. "Oh, yes, with sprinkles!" he said.

Sidoti passed him a cup. "A little coffee with a little cream and a little sugar," she said.

The dueling appearances by McCain and Obama nicely captured the current dynamic in the presidential cycle. McCain, his nomination secure, had the luxury to joke and pander. Obama, wounded by the Democrats' internecine fighting, was defensive and somber.

McCain was indeed in high spirits as he entered the ballroom and invited the editors' "questions, comments or insults." Reading from a teleprompter, McCain said he was among friends. "I made a decision to be as accessible to the press as the press would prefer me to be, and perhaps even more than they would prefer." Accepting the doughnuts, McCain had a gift for the editors, too -- his support for a law shielding reporters from identifying their sources.

This left everybody in a good mood for the criticism of Obama that McCain tacked on the end of his speech. Americans don't "turn to their religious faith and cultural traditions out of resentment," he said.
Again Osama, errrr, Obama pays for his "bitter" remark. Could that remark be the equivalent of the Dean scream?
The candidate (McCain) then took a seat with the two AP reporters and crossed his legs casually for the questions. Asked about his advanced age, he pretended to nod off in his chair. "Watch me campaign," he challenged. "Come on the bus again, my friends, all of you."

McCain got a standing ovation -- an honor Obama did not receive when his turn came two hours later.This is pretty impressive. I've really been expecting the press to turn on McCain despite his years as their favorite Republican.
The room and crowd were larger for Obama. The atmosphere was colder (this time, editors had to pass through metal detectors) and more formal (wine on each table and flowers on the dais). And the candidate was uncharacteristically flat.

The first question: "Can a Democrat talk about guns, God and immigration without getting in trouble?"

"I actually think it's possible," said the candidate.

Recent experience, however, argues otherwise. And Obama couldn't hide his pique -- particularly when the moderator asked if Clinton should "step aside."

"I have tried to figure out how to show restraint," he said, to avoid harming the ultimate nominee. "Senator Clinton may not feel that she can afford to be as constrained. But I'm sure that Senator Clinton feels like she's doing me a great favor, because she's been deploying most of the arguments that the Republican Party will be using against me in November."

Not that he's bitter about it. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/14/AR2008041402633_pf.html
Is Obama in trouble?

Obama-Osama the muslim will loose in Pennsylvania

This is pretty impressive. I've really been expecting the press to turn on McCain despite his years as their favorite Republican. A what point does the penny drop, and you realize that the press has been turning on the Obamas of this world consistently, and sucking up to the McCains, for many years now ?

And that press is where you are getting your political views ? The guys who gave you this: Again Osama, errrr, Obama pays for his "bitter" remark. Could that remark be the equivalent of the Dean scream? as the summation of political effect, the residue of their reporting.

The Dean scream - a media creation - gave you Kerry, and then the Swiftboating of Kerry - a media creation - gave you W redux - an extra trillion at least in government debt alone, plus not only lack of federal regulatory action but interference in state attempts to curb the mortgage bubble, are just a couple of the major items on the list of consequences. Before that it was Gore inventing the internet and acting the snob, a media creation that gave you W in the first place: two wars still going, massive debt, several domestic disasters, and the worst federal administration the US has ever had.

Now you see the same pattern unfolding, and you blame the candidate - you seem pleased to see him run foul of a media that is fawning over McCain, and not at all disturbed about what that implies for your own ability to cast a reasonable vote come November. Apparently you believe yourself immune to the effects of this media BS - as if your own opinions were reasonably derived, and it did not matter how others' were formed.

I've seen several interviews with people in Pennsylvania, on youtube, who have said that Obama's remarks struck them as simply accurate and reasonable. That includes a couple of old folks who weren't going to vote for him anyway. That appears to be the story, here. But you prefer the spin - regardless of where the spin has taken you in the past.

Obama-Osama the muslim will loose in Pennsylvania

I agree Dragon, he is loosening up in Pennsylvania! Going bowling having shots, etc;)

Yes the media sounds like they are going to really rip "Barack" a new one over this obama-osama stuff:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qm7DrMGLGpY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZignEOmHhs

Zogby has Obama in a dead heat with Clinton in PA now. Pretty amazing job yet again by his campaign staff, but I still think she'll win the state. We've seen this before with him looking good running up to the vote, only to fall short on the day of the primary. Something about the polling is consistently misleading, so I wouldn't put too much stock in the polls right now.

Zogby has Obama in a dead heat with Clinton in PA now. Pretty amazing job yet again by his campaign staff, but I still think she'll win the state. We've seen this before with him looking good running up to the vote, only to fall short on the day of the primary. Something about the polling is consistently misleading, so I wouldn't put too much stock in the polls right now.

Bradley effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_effect)

Zogby has Obama in a dead heat with Clinton in PA now. Pretty amazing job yet again by his campaign staff, but I still think she'll win the state. We've seen this before with him looking good running up to the vote, only to fall short on the day of the primary. Something about the polling is consistently misleading, I would flip a coin to guess whose staff (including McCain's) if anyone's, was more responsible for this. This is going to be spun as a Clinton victory, I think, and surprisingly low real vote numbers for Obama would help that story.

Besides the Bradley effect, the crossover effect in primaries is often not measured accurately by advance polls.

And there's the Zogby factor,which might be especially exaggerated in a race with a lot of white folks who aren't on line nevertheless showing up to vote:

http://www.mason-dixon.com/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.Article&ContentRecord_id=f1e66ca1-1372-fa49-99bd-58f6c5a4e505
But the performance of Zogby Interactive, the unit that conducts surveys online, demonstrates the dubious value of judging polls only by whether they pick winners correctly. As Zogby noted in a press release, its online polls identified 18 of 19 Senate winners correctly. But its predictions missed by an average of 8.6 percentage points in those polls -- at least twice the average miss of four other polling operations I examined. Zogby predicted a nine-point win for Democrat Herb Kohl in Wisconsin ; he won by 37 points. Democrat Maria Cantwell was expected to win by four points in Washington ; she won by 17. (Zogby cooperated with WSJ.com on an online polling project that tracked some Senate and gubernatorial races.)

Again Osama, errrr, Obama pays for his "bitter" remark. Could that remark be the equivalent of the Dean scream?

Oh, yeah. It's really hurting him. At least, among people who never would have voted for him, anyway.

Meanwhile, back in the realm called reality:

It is notable that while the “bitter” flap has roiled the Washington punditry, it has caused little stir in Pennsylvania itself. It has been difficult for bourgeois journalists to find workers who were outraged over being described as “bitter.”

USA Today, reporting from conservative York County, Pennsylvania, found that, “in more than a dozen interviews here, even conservative Republicans couldn’t muster the sort of outrage over Obama’s remarks that Clinton backers were expressing Sunday... nearly everyone allowed that, in fact, many small-town residents are indeed bitter” over the state of the economy. A retired telephone worker told the newspaper, “Hell, yeah, they’re bitter.”

When Clinton sought to use the issue at a forum in Pittsburgh attended by steelworkers, many audience members shouted, “No!” as she declared, referring to Obama, “Many of you, like me, were disappointed by recent remarks he made.” When she continued, saying that voters in Pennsylvania might find these remarks “offensive,” there were further shouts of “No!” according to press accounts.

(Martin (http://wsws.org/articles/2008/apr2008/obam-a17.shtml))

What do the mainstream press, Republican shills, and the Clinton campaign have in common? They all, apparently, know what people think better than the people do.

The elitism of a bunch of Republicans and a rich Republican-lite telling everyday people what they think is astounding. It's worth mentioning that this article was pointed out to me by a Trotsky sympathizer who does not support Obama (http://dreamcafe.com/words/2008/04/17/obamas-mistake/). Imagine that: while the GOP and Hillary Clinton—both of whom have a stake in discrediting Obama—would distract us by complaining that it's morally offensive to state something that is at once unpleasant and true, a Trotskyist Obama opponent—who we might think would also have an interest in discrediting the candidate—would rather seek truth and deal with substantial issues.

Imagine that. I know it's hard for some people, especially conservatives, to grasp, but like I said: Meanwhile, back in the realm called reality ....
____________________

Notes:

Martin, Patrick. "The Obama 'mistake': Breaking the taboo on discussing class in America". World Socialist Web Site. April 17, 2008. http://wsws.org/articles/2008/apr2008/obam-a17.shtml

That debate a brutal for Obama, Attack attack attack thats all he got from the mods and from clinton.

Well, apparently the press is trying to put the whole "liberal media conspiracy" to rest.

Maybe. At best (http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1822914&postcount=137).

I wish that were the case...

Well, you know. I'm just trying to be hopeful (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=monyiOsoKxg).

Well, you know. I'm just trying to be hopeful ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KB6qvvO_Oo4).

If only I had speakers on my comp :(

Aarrgh. It's a good song. No headphones, earbuds, anything you can plug in?

Aarrgh. It's a good song. No headphones, earbuds, anything you can plug in?

Sigh no ....not at work :bawl:

Ah. Sucks. Although, I'm not sure that song is safe for work.

The Clinton campaign is a hotbed of conniving, maliciously-intended cocksuckers. It's unbelievable how much bullshit Obama has taken because of one ridiculously and unfairly overplayed comment. What's so bad about the comment, anyway? Also, Hillary can't speak out on behalf of the people the comment was intended to, considering her "anti-elitist" self was cracking tens of millions of dollars over the last couple years. When the Republican party is doing everything in its power to illustrate Obama as an elitist secret-Muslim, you know something's up. When stalwart Republicans adamantly and publicly support Hillary over Obama, you know something's up. I think it's time people move on from this one harmless (and generally accurate) comment. I used to think both Obama and Hillary would make half-decent presidents, but now I know that bitch Hillary is just as bad as that ugly old fear-mongering prick. All of the undeserved criticism Obama has faced as of late is simply another reason to vote for the guy.

If Hillary is elected a real cunt will be running the world.

They said Obama drew over 35,000 in latest PA political rally. That's huge for a state the size of PA. Eventhough I don't believe it, Philidelphia Conservative talk show host Michael Smerconish is predicting an Obama win. Sounds to good to be true. Clintons begone already!

They said Obama drew over 35,000 in latest PA political rally. That's huge for a state the size of PA. Eventhough I don't believe it, Philidelphia Conservative talk show host Michael Smerconish is predicting an Obama win. Sounds to good to be true. Clintons begone already!

As much as I want it there is no way obama will win PA.

As much as I want it there is no way obama will win PA.
Um yes there is,the likely hood is he wont,however Obama can afford a lost,Hilary not only cannot afford a lost,she cannot afford even a close win either.Either way she is doomed!

As much as I want it there is no way obama will win PA.

And you are an imbecile. When you go sit in your little classroom and the teacher hands out a test dont answer any questions. Just write on top in all CAPS 'I AM AN IMBECILE'. Your teacher will\should give you 100%, I know I would.

Edit: I quoted the wrong post from Fetus. Sometimes i dont know why i even bother, should have been HIS post above it. I dont even want to repeat it because it is so disgusting.:mad:

And you are an imbecile. When you go sit in your little classroom and the teacher hands out a test dont answer any questions. Just write on top in all CAPS 'I AM AN IMBECILE'. Your teacher will\should give you 100%, I know I would.

Edit: I quoted the wrong post from Fetus. Sometimes i dont know why i even bother, should have been HIS post above it. I dont even want to repeat it because it is so disgusting.:mad:

Did I hit a nerve? Wow, that orgasmic outburst of rage was awesome! I want to do it again, how did I do it before?

LOL. Not really, you just said something really stupid and the rest was just being creative.:D

LOL. Not really, you just said something really stupid and the rest was just being creative.:D

Oh please tell me what I said, let me be your muse!

Cant you follow along with the posts?

Cant you follow along with the posts?

Sure I can: your were just being manic and was not responding to anything I did at all.

You understand of course that Obama cannot ever live up to his promise of change because he is running for the Presidents job not Congress. He says he will CHANGE everything and make Congress stop doing what it has done since it was there, take in lobbyists and be undermined by the military/industrial complex. He really talks about so many changes but never tells anyone just how he is going to do it. In order to change the rules that Congress now has they must vote on banning lobbyists and everyone else away from them so as not to persuade them to vote for something some company wants. That will never ever happen. :(:mad:

You understand of course that Obama cannot ever live up to his promise of change because he is running for the Presidents job not Congress. He says he will CHANGE everything and make Congress stop doing what it has done since it was there, take in lobbyists and be undermined by the military/industrial complex. He really talks about so many changes but never tells anyone just how he is going to do it. In order to change the rules that Congress now has they must vote on banning lobbyists and everyone else away from them so as not to persuade them to vote for something some company wants. That will never ever happen. :(:mad:

First of all he does explain how he going to do things, change things, you actually have to listen through his speeches, or you can go to his website. Second Lobby reformed will depend on congress but at least in the unlikely event we do get enough votes, we know the president won't veto it.

. Second Lobby reformed will depend on congress but at least in the unlikely event

HA! HA! I had my good laugh of the morning on that one, thanks.;)

HA! HA! I had my good laugh of the morning on that one, thanks.;)

Pleased to be of service:D

:eek:If he wins Penn state its truly over for the Clinton campaign,there is just no way she could win,average polls suggest in every other state Obama has her beat by large points and with time Obamas power increases with states.Wow its really not looking good for the Clinton campaign.

They said exactly the same thing in Ohio. She won it handily.

I see this going ALL the way to the convention and then, who knows!

~String

They said exactly the same thing in Ohio. She won it handily.

I see this going ALL the way to the convention and then, who knows!

~String

The era in politics of OHIO are totally different from the era that exist today with Pennsylvania.Hilarys campaign is broke,if they dont win by large margins of least 7 to 15 points it is a total wrap,even the delegate count could still rise more for Obama.Hilary has to win big or its a wrap,she has went to far too long to continue and just the title of a win is not good enough for her.She is breaking a sweat in this campaign,while Obama has spent millions of dollars more that he can afford and has recently as of 4 days ago lashed out a fury of professional attacks toward Clinton taking every advantage he may have at demolishing her campaigns entire existence within the Presidential race..REAL TALK.If Obama loses Penn,the talk is not going to be the end of his campaign,even if he loses by large margins this just falls into his strenghts of always being able to bounce back easily from the most damaging attempts.Seriously many political analyst are saying the chances of a obama win is not big,however the chances of a OBAMA SHOCKER is great.In politics of OBAMA V.S CLINTON that statement totally makes sense.

I think 7-15% is guaranteed for her. I would expect for her to have a chance at winning the nomination she needs 15% difference and greater. Something like 60/40 ratio, then she might be able to persuade super delegates, win the nomination via superdelegate vote and lose the election via constant talk of undemocratic primary.

I think 7-15% is guaranteed for her. I would expect for her to have a chance at winning the nomination she needs 15% difference and greater. Something like 60/40 ratio, then she might be able to persuade super delegates, win the nomination via superdelegate vote and lose the election via constant talk of undemocratic primary.

15 percent is highly unlikely,not with Obama outspending her by so much,i just dont see it.Her top endorser said today he doesnt think she will win by double digits.

Just dont be too disappointed if Obama ends up losing the main election. Thats all i'm saying.

61-39 for Clinton.

which means?

Zilch...treading water... Obama is still way out in front and can't lose.

I think 7-15% is guaranteed for her. I would expect for her to have a chance at winning the nomination she needs 15% difference and greater. Something like 60/40 ratio, then she might be able to persuade super delegates, win the nomination via superdelegate vote and lose the election via constant talk of undemocratic primary.

Agreed. But the super delegates are aware of this. there's NO way they will not support the candidate with the most delegates. Black voters walk away. Also, not to be too cynical, but what a chance for the Republicans if they put Rice on the ticket! The results would be Reps winning 58 to 42 or so....with Rice on the Ticket. Against Obama I'd say 53-47 for the Demos.

15 percent is highly unlikely,not with Obama outspending her by so much,i just dont see it.Her top endorser said today he doesnt think she will win by double digits.

We will see, I think the Bradly effect will kick because it is a closed primary with only 10% black population. But even so if Clinton takes 7% lead does she still have and argument to continue the race?

Just dont be too disappointed if Obama ends up losing the main election. Thats all i'm saying.

I'm not at all, I find all 3 candidates far better then anything we have had for decades, even Mccain is a significant improvement over the bushs and reagan and will likely make a great and unifying president... who will go down like Herbert Hoover when peak oil hits hard. This next presidency might just go down as the "Great Scapegoat Presidency" were all blame for the coming unstoppable problems will fall despite the fact that these problems have been built up over decades by the combined stupidity and greed of present and previous presidents, senators and government officials... why would anyone want this presidency?

We will see, I think the Bradly effect will kick because it is a closed primary with only 10% black population. But even so if Clinton takes 7% lead does she still have and argument to continue the race?

She has the argument yes of course,how much strenght will the argument have? not much at all,in fact Obama could still pick up more delegates.Hilary is at tough odds going into this battle,its either DO OR DIE here.Tomorrow very well could be the end of the Clinton presidential campaign,Obama could win by 1 point and it would deliver a crushing blow to Clinton ending her entire bid for white house.

61-39 for Clinton.

which means?

Zilch...treading water... Obama is still way out in front and can't lose.

I am talking about the Presidential election. This is just a joke watching them both claw their way through this.

She has the argument yes of course,how much strenght will the argument have? not much at all,in fact Obama could still pick up more delegates.Hilary is at tough odds going into this battle,its either DO OR DIE here.Tomorrow very well could be the end of the Clinton presidential campaign,Obama could win by 1 point and it would deliver a crushing blow to Clinton ending her entire bid for white house.

Even if obama wins (by 1 point) she does not seem like the kind of person to quite after investing (and wanting this) so much. She seems like she going to go down kicking and screaming all the way to the convention.

We will see, I think the Bradly effect will kick because it is a closed primary with only 10% black population. But even so if Clinton takes 7% lead does she still have and argument to continue the race?



I'm not at all, I find all 3 candidates far better then anything we have had for decades, even Mccain is a significant improvement over the bushs and reagan and will likely make a great and unifying president... who will go down like Herbert Hoover when peak oil hits hard. This next presidency might just go down as the "Great Scapegoat Presidency" were all blame for the coming unstoppable problems will fall despite the fact that these problems have been built up over decades by the combined stupidity and greed of present and previous presidents, senators and government officials... why would anyone want this presidency?

Good insight.

I also think McCain and Hillary would make good Presidents. I hate 'the bitc..' but the US might need a Hillary at this time. She knows the pitfalls and will put her nose to the grindstone. Her husband is well respected around the world and it would go a long way to restoring the USA's image to being 'a good guy' instead of being despised.

Obama is a bit of a black box (excuse the pun). We tend to endow him with plusses or minuses based on what we want to believe rather than facts. He could be a great president or a dud. Anyone with an extreme position on the guy is really just reflecting their own bias. He's a bit of a gamble.

McCain? He won't take any guff or play politics if elected. Iraq is the big albatross around his neck. He's boxed the USA in if things don't improve and that keeps things in neutral. Domestically he'd do fine as he's not an ideologue..he could be running as a Demo or Rep. the President is the president of 'everyone' and not just those who voted for him. McCain would fit the office as a unifier.

Even if obama wins (by 1 point) she does not seem like the kind of person to quite after investing (and wanting this) so much. She seems like she going to go down kicking and screaming all the way to the convention.

Its not over till its over.

Its not over till its over.

Even when you cut off the chicken's head it still runs around.

Thanks. I think what will enhd up with is GWB 2.0.

Thanks. I think what will enhd up with is GWB 2.0.

Hey, version 2, that means it is an improvement... at this point I'll be happy with any kind of improvement.

Even if obama wins (by 1 point) she does not seem like the kind of person to quite after investing (and wanting this) so much. She seems like she going to go down kicking and screaming all the way to the convention.

She will be forced out under so much pressure she cannot withstand.She is not dimwitted enough to continue a race that is placing her entire career and reputation at jeopardy.If ole girl loses tomorrow its the end of the road,period,point blank,so much rage and hate occur for her if she continues after a lost tomorrow,if Obama wins in close margins its still a likely end to her campaign,her campaign is broke!,they will never raise enough money up to compete with Obama if she loses even slightly.The democratic party is prepared to kick hilary out on her ass if she becomes that stubborn.The Clintons are fighters indeed,they have fought long enough,tomorrow is DO OR DIE.Simply no ifs,ands or butts,Hilary better do good or its bye bye.

Good insight.

I also think McCain and Hillary would make good Presidents. I hate 'the bitc..' but the US might need a Hillary at this time. She knows the pitfalls and will put her nose to the grindstone. Her husband is well respected around the world and it would go a long way to restoring the USA's image to being 'a good guy' instead of being despised.

Obama is a bit of a black box (excuse the pun). We tend to endow him with plusses or minuses based on what we want to believe rather than facts. He could be a great president or a dud. Anyone with an extreme position on the guy is really just reflecting their own bias. He's a bit of a gamble.

McCain? He won't take any guff or play politics if elected. Iraq is the big albatross around his neck. He's boxed the USA in if things don't improve and that keeps things in neutral. Domestically he'd do fine as he's not an ideologue..he could be running as a Demo or Rep. the President is the president of 'everyone' and not just those who voted for him. McCain would fit the office as a unifier.


LMFAOOOOOOOO

you truly believe this?.

Have fun convincing America better yet the world this.

Mccain a unifer? LMFAOOOOOOOOO

FALLS ON THE GROUND:D


Anyone with an extreme position on the guy is really just reflecting their own bias. He's a bit of a gamble.

You may be reflecting your own bias with Mccain.People with extreme positions toward Obama want change,period!.Obama speaks change and thats what they want,they are tired of old ass politics,the crappy games Hilary and John play which is old politics,focusing attention on senseless crap like extreme patriotism or why he has never worn an american flag pen.I think the american flag is hideous(LET ME GUESS SOME CONSERVATIVE WOULD MAKE A BIG DEAL OUT OF MY PERSONAL OPINION BASED ON HIS SO CALLED PRIDE),patriotism stinks! and todays patriotism are nothing but pathethic examples of huge superiority complexes.Mccain aint got a chance,he better seek a cheat.

LMFAOOOOOOOO

Mccain a unifer? LMFAOOOOOOOOO

FALLS ON THE GROUND:D





I agree, McCain will probably not be able to unify the country if he wins.
But not because McCain lacks the skill or potential, but because much of the left-wing in the U.S. has become so radical in the last couple decades.
They stubbornly will not go along with anything until the U.S. is a Socialist or Communist state.
Like I said before, GWB (or any other republican) could go before the cameras and hold a card up stating "2+2=4", and the radical left would go to the trouble of making their own math book that found "2+2=something else".....:)

I agree, McCain will probably not be able to unify the country if he wins.
But not because McCain lacks the skill or potential, but because much of the left-wing in the U.S. has become so radical in the last couple decades.
They stubbornly will not go along with anything until the U.S. is a Socialist or Communist state.
Like I said before, GWB (or any other republican) could go before the cameras and hold a card up stating "2+2=4", and the radical left would go to the trouble of making their own math book that found "2+2=something else".....:)

the left is what its always been in this country the right has been getting more and more extreme.

I agree, McCain will probably not be able to unify the country if he wins.
But not because McCain lacks the skill or potential, but because much of the left-wing in the U.S. has become so radical in the last couple decades.
They stubbornly will not go along with anything until the U.S. is a Socialist or Communist state.
Like I said before, GWB (or any other republican) could go before the cameras and hold a card up stating "2+2=4", and the radical left would go to the trouble of making their own math book that found "2+2=something else".....:)

Same thing for the radical right, both parties have been polarizing but this election has been a victory for the moderates: Clinton the party favorite is hanging on for life, the republicans are stuck with a moderate who is already giving his party the finger despite 8 years of licking their asses to get to the nomination and then their is this wild card obama.

McCain? He won't take any guff or play politics if elected. Iraq is the big albatross around his neck. He's boxed the USA in if things don't improve and that keeps things in neutral. Domestically he'd do fine as he's not an ideologue McCain will play politics and give out guff as President just as he has all along, and he will remain firmly in the extreme rightwing corner that the entire leadership of the Republican Party has painted itself into.

His entire campaign is being run by corporate lobbyists, religious fanatics, and Rovian tacticians. They will be around helping him set up his administration, and it is going to look like Reagan again, only taking over from Ayn Rand bubble acolytes in a war instead of Paul Volker's saner setup.

Slightly more reasonable than the oil executive zoo story we've been watching operate does not put someone in a "straight talk" category - McCain has been cleverly polishing his image for a while now, schmoozing with the media and doing the Reagan thing, but he is on record as supporting lunatic fringe positions like privatizing Social Security. And he has no executive competence or historical familiarity in the major issues facing the country.

Hillary is a conservative, corporate friendly, rightwing politician with a record of spineless compromise on key issues and no record of accomplishment. She has failed every single gut check she has faced.

That leaves Obama, who at least says reasonable things and runs a competent, non-destructive campaign. He has a chance. He's pretty far to the Right of the reasonable center, featuring "reform" non-starters such as employer-based health care, but he is not demonstrably hopeless.

And those are the choices.

LORD_VOLDEMORT,

Lets talk about the most likely scenario where Clinton wins by 5-10%, what happens then?

Hey, version 2, that means it is an improvement... at this point I'll be happy with any kind of improvement.

ha ha, yeah...just saying

LORD_VOLDEMORT,

Lets talk about the most likely scenario where Clinton wins by 5-10%, what happens then?

Clinton could win by 56 points and still it wouldnt solidify her position as the Democratic presidential candidate.The argument will be Pennsylvania has always been HILARY TERRITORY,either way like political analyst say Hilary is set up to lose.She is going to be demolished in Indiana and North Carolina(were the african american population is huge)

Clinton could win by 56 points and still it wouldnt solidify her position as the Democratic presidential candidate.The argument will be Pennsylvania has always been HILARY TERRITORY,either way like political analyst say Hilary is set up to lose.She is going to be demolished in Indiana and North Carolina(were the african american population is huge)

Scenario 1: (most likely) Hillary wins by less then 10 points: Both sides have a victory as Hillary wins the state, but the delegate count remains essentially the same and Barack can claim momentum by sapping Hillary's much larger earlier lead. The fight will go one but chances will be in Baracks favor has the trend in super delagetes goes towards him, the nomination will presumptively be his after the final primary. Because of the damage already done to democrat unity, Obama's unknown VP selection (and McCain's) as well as the normal cycle of media political crap the general election outcome could go either way.

Scenario 2: (likely) Hillary wins by more then 10 points: Hillary will continue to argue that she is the best candidate for the general election. The super delagetes will remain divide or in her favor and the fight will go on all the way to the convention were it will have to be decided, the out come could be either of those two or even a randomly selected other, complete chaos! The general election will be practically in John's pocket as the resulting division of the democrats will have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

Scenario 3: (Unlikely) Barack wins by even the smallest margin: Hillary will likely drop out before the primaries are over. Obama will likely win the general election. Dream on.

//////

My bet is Hillary wins PA by 5%, probably more. I am not sure how many extra delegates it means...

//////

Seriously regardless of what scenario Hilary is going to lose either today or on May 6th,she is doomed,everyone is trying to figure out just what in the hell her plan is even if she wins,the womans campaign is broke and if she wins by big margins and it takes her to May6th its definetly the end of the road.

the left is what its always been in this country the right has been getting more and more extreme.

John F. Kennedy cut taxes, stood up to Communism, spent billions on National Defense, authorized the covert invasion of a country (Cuba) to secure US interests and the overt support of another (Viet Nam) to do the same. Nowadays Move on would call him a pro-corporate, war-monger and he would be sidelined by the party similar to the way Liebermann has been.

One cannot imagine a Democrat doing anything approaching what Kennedy did — in contemporary terms, though Bill Clinton was pretty damn moderate on a lot of big issues. And while there has been an obvious rightward drift on social issues among the Republicans and an even more obvious fiscal irresponsibility on their part, ignoring the leftward swing of their opposites seems daft in the extreme. The Democrats are a party being led by Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean — two people who are so detached from the plurality of the country that words fail me...

John F. Kennedy cut taxes, stood up to Communism, spent billions on National Defense, authorized the covert invasion of a country (Cuba) to secure US interests and the overt support of another (Viet Nam) to do the same. Nowadays Move on would call him a pro-corporate, war-monger and he would be sidelined by the party similar to the way Liebermann has been.

One cannot imagine a Democrat doing anything approaching what Kennedy did — in contemporary terms, though Bill Clinton was pretty damn moderate on a lot of big issues. And while there has been an obvious rightward drift on social issues among the Republicans and an even more obvious fiscal irresponsibility on their part, ignoring the leftward swing of their opposites seems daft in the extreme. The Democrats are a party being led by Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean — two people who are so detached from the plurality of the country that words fail me...

they are not liberal enough for the plurality of americans

Seriously regardless of what scenario Hilary is going to lose either today or on May 6th,she is doomed,everyone is trying to figure out just what in the hell her plan is even if she wins,the womans campaign is broke and if she wins by big margins and it takes her to May6th its definetly the end of the road.

May6th? The convention is not tell August 25. Sure she probably going to lose Indiana, North Carolina but her victory today will give her some boost in funding and super/delegates, maybe enough to last her all the way until August 25, scorching the earth behind her and completely ruining party in her mad useless quest for power, BIIIIIIITCH!

And while there has been an obvious rightward drift on social issues among the Republicans and an even more obvious fiscal irresponsibility on their part, And a rightward drift on economic issues, and a rightward drift on political issues, and - hey, it's a rightward (and authoritarian) drift ! For thirty years now.

And what do you find, way over on the Authoritarian Right,

in privatized "social security" and steeply regressive tax structures and mercenary paramilitaries and deregulated banking and governmental policies written by corporate representatives to be enacted by their coopted legislators,

where you end up after thirty years of "drift" ? Do you recall the name of that political ideology ?
ignoring the leftward swing of their opposites seems daft in the extreme. The Democrats are a party being led by Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean — two people who are so detached from the plurality of the country that words fail me... Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi are a little to the Right, economically and politically, of Richard Nixon.

Nixon was to the Right, economically and politically, of Kennedy.

Kennedy was, and would be now, a little to the Right and significantly to the Authoritarian of the plurality of the country.

Lol.

iceaura: What're you using to figure the political position of the plurality?

His crystal ball.

the majority of Americans favor liberal ideas. A plurality probably are liberal.

the majority of Americans favor liberal ideas. A plurality probably are liberal.

Same question to you: what're you using to figure this?

Same question to you: what're you using to figure this?

look at polling. The liberal positions tend to have the most support.

look at polling. The liberal positions tend to have the most support.

What polling do you want me to look at? The ones that show the public wants more social programs and lower taxes?

Not on gay marriage or immigration. I mean, what issues are you talking about?

Not on gay marriage or immigration. I mean, what issues are you talking about?

um universal health care. supporting the troops. abortion. taxation. controls to stop government abuse of power. the envierment.

What polling do you want me to look at? The ones that show the public wants more social programs and lower taxes?

Huuum, which is hated more taxes, or the insurance companies? Considering that a universal health care tax will end up costing less then health insurance, even so the insurance is not mandatory, huuum it a tough call.

I wasn't asking for the merits of a universal health care tax. I'm asking for specific data that gives credibility to iceaura's idea that practically every single politician is to the right of the American plurality. How did he (she?) come to this conclusion?

um universal health care. supporting the troops. abortion. taxation. controls to stop government abuse of power. the envierment.

Where are these figures you're getting ? link please
I'm sure some of those may be true, but not all of them.

I wasn't asking for the merits of a universal health care tax. I'm asking for specific data that gives credibility to iceaura's idea that practically every single politician is to the right of the American plurality. How did he (she?) come to this conclusion?

um the fact they have to kiss corporate ass to get the money they need?

That's seriously the best answer you have? Why not drop it and let iceaura answer whenever he gets a chance.

That's seriously the best answer you have? Why not drop it and let iceaura answer whenever he gets a chance.

there are other factors but being forced to pander to the wants of coporations is going to help push things towards the right

What's the "envierment" ?

What's the "envierment" ?

in relation to the word "environment" misspelled.

Where are these figures you're getting ? link please
I'm sure some of those may be true, but not all of them.

http://mediamatters.org/progmaj/report

What's the "envierment" ?

Some people have a brain disorder were they can't compensate for mis-spelled words, it helps it you try to sound it out and think of other words that sound the same or similar, also think about how the word is used in context, using these strategies you should be able to compensate for your disorder.

Some people have a brain disorder were they can't compensate for mis-spelled words, it helps it you try to sound it out and think of other words that sound the same or similar, also think about how the word is used in context, using these strategies you should be able to compensate for your disorder.

don't worry about it. It doesn't bother me when people do it.

don't worry about it. It doesn't bother me when people do it.

I wasn't worried about you, everyone misspells words now and then, I was worried about countezero, he couldn't figure out what "evierment" was, that seems like a major brain funk on his part, maybe he had a stroke?

What's the "envierment" ?

Come on count, I don't think English is his first language:) However, he did raise some good points.

Anyways, Drudge is reporting that the PA exit polls breakdown as follows.

Clinton 52%

Obama 48%


Women

Clinton 55%

Obama 44


Men

Clinton 47%

Obama 53%


www.drudgereport.com

Only 4%??? NO FUCKING WAY!?!

Come on count, I don't think English is his first language:) However, he did raise some good points.

english is my first language? but i was exposed to alot of german in my youth

Only 4%??? NO FUCKING WAY!?!

Yeah, I think it's the Bradley effect. Allot of the would be voters don't want to admit they didn't vote for Obama. You know, to be P.C.

I wasn't worried about you, everyone misspells words now and then, I was worried about countezero, he couldn't figure out what "evierment" was, that seems like a major brain funk on his part, maybe he had a stroke?

No, I'm just tired of reading juvenile posts. Nobody is perfect, so far as usage is concerned, but the flagrant lack of care PJ fills his posts with should be offensive to the rest of us. That is, those of us who try to present as clean a piece of copy as possible. PJ doesn't return that favor, and in my mind, he should be ridiculed for it relentlessly. I mean, we're talking about some of the most serious political issues of the day here — not the latest pop song or comic book flick. A little gravity is highly recommended.

Yeah, I think it's the Bradley effect. Allot of the would be voters don't want to admit they didn't vote for Obama. You know, to be P.C.

Agreed, lets see the results I'm still keeping my bet on clinton double digits, $5, I'll mail it out to anyone that will go against me!

No, I'm just tired of reading juvenile posts. Nobody is perfect, so far as usage is concerned, but the flagrant lack of care PJ fills his posts with should be offensive to the rest of us. That is, those of us who try to present as clean a piece of copy as possible. PJ doesn't return that favor, and in my mind, he should be ridiculed for it relentlessly. I mean, we're talking about some of the most serious political issues of the day here — not the latest pop song or comic book flick. A little gravity is highly recommended.

i do my best to be as clear as possible. i am much better in a spoken debate rather than a written. i have tried to do things to improve my spelling but all have failed so i would really like if you didn't act like a dick about. Yes gravity would be nice. Respect for the other side is also nice when you planing on starting to show it.

No, I'm just tired of reading juvenile posts. Nobody is perfect, so far as usage is concerned, but the flagrant lack of care PJ fills his posts with should be offensive to the rest of us. That is, those of us who try to present as clean a piece of copy as possible. PJ doesn't return that favor, and in my mind, he should be ridiculed for it relentlessly. I mean, we're talking about some of the most serious political issues of the day here — not the latest pop song or comic book flick. A little gravity is highly recommended.

That's why you should join us on the left, and vote to rebuild our public schools!:D

No, I'm just tired of reading juvenile posts. Nobody is perfect, so far as usage is concerned, but the flagrant lack of care PJ fills his posts with should be offensive to the rest of us. That is, those of us who try to present as clean a piece of copy as possible. PJ doesn't return that favor, and in my mind, he should be ridiculed for it relentlessly. I mean, we're talking about some of the most serious political issues of the day here — not the latest pop song or comic book flick. A little gravity is highly recommended.

Take up s/he lack of forum hygiene on the "about members" forum, or contact the moderators in private, doing it here only distracts attention and could be mistaken for a Red Herring.


pjdude1219,

Get a spell check or copy/paste, its very simple: open up word or a writing program, highlight the text you have written, press ctrl+c, then go and press 'post reply' on the forum, then press ctrl+v, done.

Or you could download Ispell into your tool bar. Works wonders;)

Or you could download Ispell into your tool bar. Works wonders;)

Firefox 'just works'

Intersting: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hIfAwkkooVUzxAU-nYymJicF5kXwD907595G1

Wonder if this is republicans coming in to vote for Clinton to throw a wrench in the 'democratic' system (gremlins if you will), or republicans coming to vote for obama because "god help us if we have that Clinton bitch as president" I guessing the former is stronger then the latter. These gremlins are likely to lie and say they voted for the opposite. Lets say 70% of the 10% newbie democrates are really gremlins that would mean a 7 percent skew in Clinton's favor, with a 7% skew in obama's favor in the exit polls, which means; Clinton is actually winning by 18% not 4%!

When did switching parties end for PA? Could you switch parties yesterday or was their a several week or month dead line? To long ago would likely mean reduced gremlin population in the vote.

Looks like Hillary will win by a huge 25-30% margin in PA, thanks to the Diebold machines. This is the Reps way to make the race harder for the Dems. Ifn case I am wrong on this, that means that older Americans prefer Hillary, something to think about...

Also, how come that prepolls were showing only a 7-10% lead and she is winning by 25%???

Edit: This was posted with only 1% reporting.

Looks like Hillary will win by a huge 25-30% margin in PA, thanks to the Diebold machines. This is the Reps way to make the race harder for the Dems. Ifn case I am wrong on this, that means that older Americans prefer Hillary, something to think about...

Also, how come that prepolls were showing only a 7-10% lead and she is winning by 25%???

MSNBC is showing 53% to 47% Clinton. With 9% reporting.

Anyways, as sickening as it sounds, as I've predicted before, this will end up being an Obama/Clinton Ticket when it's all said and done. If Obama doesn't get the nomination, Black Voters will stay home in Novemeber = loss for Dems. And Obama needs the woman swing vote to counteract McCains advantage with Males. So if he doesn't add Hillary, the scornful Hillary supporters will vote for McCain out of spite.

It's at 53/47 (6% difference) at 14% reporting, this will probably the last time tonight we will see single digit lead.

MSNBC is showing 53% to 47% Clinton. With 9% reporting.

Yeah, I was early with only 1% reporting... Would have been fun though...