By now, it should be clear that 50% of the democratic and independent voters are for her. That is a very powerful block. It is not about her. The voters want inclusion. If not, the voters who may hate Obama may go for McCain, the only other choice.
~50% of primary voters voted for her, I would not say 50% of democrats and independents voted for her. The exact percentage of who voted for her is critical to understand who going to win: how many independents did vote for her? How many republicans that will vote mccain in the general no matter what voted for Hillary in the primary simply to throw a wrench in the democrats engine?
Where does the 10% of Operation Chaos fall into your fuzzy math? :shrug: Hillary's entire campaign was about Hillary and her legacy.
hillary math also excludes votes in the caucus states. You know most of the super delegates are not dumb and they can see through the hillary math to understand the truth of the story. That is why they are going to Obama.
Has John Edwards ever committed his vote to Obama? He could play an interesting role at the convention.
No it isn't. Not running against McCain in a general election. In many polls taken over many years, she has consistently scored the highest negative ratings of any Presidential candidate ever. And name recognition is not a factor in this. She is hated, fairly or unfairly, as much as or more than almost any other national politician. And politically she is what rightwing extremists call a "centrist", meaning a spineless or complicit pushover for current adminsitration efforts and a lifelong promoter of corporate interests in such matters as NAFTA. There are people who talk wildly about McCain picking her for VP is Obama doesn't. That's silly, of course, but it gives you an idea of her actual political position - it's what they think McCain represents. She's a standard Republican, in the eyes of those who haven't noticed what has happened to the Republican Party.
Re Percentage thinking Obama is Muslim Yep, it's total Tosh. I did hear it from a reputable source, but they must have got their figures mixed up. This source quotes 10%, 19% among rural voters http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2008-04-01-obama-muslim_N.htm Probably more people think that Elvis is still alive. Re The other question. Can Obama win without her help? I think he will find it much easier with her inside the tent pissing out rather than the other way around.
Surely you jest: Polling DataPoll Date Sample Clinton (D) McCain (R) Spread RCP Average 05/21 - 06/03 -- 47.4 44.4 Clinton +3.0 Gallup Tracking 05/29 - 06/03 4412 RV 48 45 Clinton +3.0 Rasmussen Tracking 05/29 - 06/01 1600 LV 44 46 McCain +2.0 USA Today/Gallup 05/30 - 06/01 803 RV 49 43 Clinton +6.0 Pew Research 05/21 - 05/25 1242 RV 48 44 Clinton +4.0 Newsweek 05/21 - 05/22 1205 RV 48 44 Clinton +4.0 According to 6 different polls 2 weeks ago Hill nicely beating McCain by at least 3 %....
Yeah but is anyone voting for elvis? I mean that is 1 out of 10 who won't vote for obama. Also women can't piss in or out, just downwards.
Now that is the subject of another thread. (Homer voice: must resist) One that would hit the cess pool very quickly.
Please, let's not inject numbers or accuracy into an entirely (for some) emotional discussion. You'll only confuse people.
Didn't understand all those figures, but I think I've got the gist. Regarding Obama's choice of Vice President. If Hilary is willing to be #2, then for Obama it's: Hilary for VP. No Brainer. He's got to have her. Unless he doesn't want someone who is so energetic, so clever, so downright nasty against opposition, such a friggin' bitch, that he feels he can't cope with her. In which case, please step forward the next President of the United States, John McCain. As regards the coverage of the election in the UK, both Sky and the BBC have better coverage than CNN. We are massively for Obama. Given that we are spending more time analysing the election than Americans, can we have a vote please? All previous elections (I don't know about Kennedy) have passed almost completely under our Radar. This one is headline news. I want my vote.
If it were up to me I would definately let you Brits vote. You have a much better voting record than we do in the United States.
Well, I thought we were referring to the 'now'. You know, that same now that is so frequently invoked to describe the populace's generalized and pervasive hatred for Hillary Clinton, which is then invoked as a reason to put Obama on the Democratic ticket - now. In the present. As with some of the arguments I've had on here, we seem to have accidentally become unseated in time-space as we carry on in our justifications. So: which time frame are we discussing this in? Last year, today, or six months from now? And how can you use the argument of popularity or present support to have Obama as the Democratic contender when - as you say - 'polls change'? They certainly do. But then if an election is reduced to a big popularity contest, and polls change, how can we know at what point to stop asking people their opinion? Best, Geoff
