| Author |
|
Neil Lindholm
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 12 January 2005
Location: China
Posts: 4942
|
| Posted: 23 April 2008 at 8:43am | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
The Clintons have been around since 1992 and have been in the spotlight for decades. Obama was an unknown. Yes he has to spend more yet he is still winning. If Clinton was so strong, she should have been a lock for the nomination. Yet she still is behind.
If the superdelegates decide to go for Clinton, the Republicans will win the election, since people will rightly feel that it was stolen from Obama by the politics of old. Sad.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Kevin Brown
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 31 May 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 9126
|
| Posted: 23 April 2008 at 9:17am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
If the superdelegates decide to go for Clinton, the Republicans will win the election, since people will rightly feel that it was stolen from Obama by the politics of old. Sad.
********************************
If the superdelegates do that, then they will literally destroy the Democratic party. I really don't foresee them donig that. Right now I think it's more important for these undecided superdelegates to decide NOW. You can say all you want about Clinton dragging things out, but if the remaining superdelegates just declarded their allegiance, we could be done and have a candidate.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Geoff Gibson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 21 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5744
|
| Posted: 23 April 2008 at 9:24am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
Don't expect politicans to have a backbone Kevin!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Jason Czeskleba
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 30 April 2004
Posts: 4638
|
| Posted: 23 April 2008 at 3:08pm | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
Scott Richards wrote:
| Clinton has shown she can carry the states that are necessary for a Democratic win. Obama has failed to do that. |
|
|
This argument is specious, because it seems to presuppose that Clinton and Obama will attract the same percentage of votes in the general election against McCain that they are attracting in the primary against each other, which is ridiculous. The fact that Clinton won 55% of the Pennsylvania Democratic Primary votes to Obama's 45% hardly means they would poll the same numbers against McCain in the general. Look at the California primary... Clinton won and Obama lost. Yet that certainly doesn't mean that Obama would lose California in the general election against McCain. Of course he wouldn't. By the same token Clinton won the Texas primary, yet that certainly doesn't mean she has a ghost of a chance of winning Texas in the general election.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Jason Czeskleba
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 30 April 2004
Posts: 4638
|
| Posted: 23 April 2008 at 3:12pm | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
Christopher Alan Miller wrote:
| After outspending Clinton three to one in Pennsylvania Obama lost by ten points. That's not going to impress the superdelegates. |
|
|
Or you could say that after outspending Clinton 3 to 1 he reduced a 20+ point lead to merely 10. And he did so despite a month of exceeding bad publicity. That's kind of impressive.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Christopher Alan Miller
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 26 October 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 2787
|
| Posted: 23 April 2008 at 3:26pm | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
Clinton didn't exactly have good publicity in that month.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 14911
|
| Posted: 23 April 2008 at 3:33pm | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
Clinton won and Obama lost. Yet that certainly doesn't mean that Obama
would lose California in the general election against McCain. Of
course he wouldn't.
---
I think you could run a toaster on the Democratic ticket, and it would win California. It'd have to be a moderate toaster though. It would need those crossover conservative votes from San Diego, Orange County, and Central California.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Geoff Gibson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 21 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5744
|
| Posted: 23 April 2008 at 3:45pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
I think you could run a toaster on the Democratic ticket, and it would win
California. It'd have to be a moderate toaster though. It would need those
crossover conservative votes from San Diego, Orange County, and Central
California.
Call me a bigot but I refuse to vote for a Cylon president!!!!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Bob Neill
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 03 December 2007
Posts: 877
|
| Posted: 23 April 2008 at 3:48pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
The country went to hell when toasters were given the vote!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Christopher Alan Miller
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 26 October 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 2787
|
| Posted: 23 April 2008 at 3:48pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
This may be of interest to some. State by state polls showing how Clinton and Obama do against McCain
http://www.presidentelectionpolls.com/2008/presidential-matc hups/barack-obama-vs-john-mccain.html
http://www.presidentelectionpolls.com/2008/presidential-matc hups/hillary-clinton-vs-john-mccain.html
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Christopher Alan Miller
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 26 October 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 2787
|
| Posted: 23 April 2008 at 3:49pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
The country went to hell when toasters were given the vote!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Twelve Colonies of Kobal sure had it rough.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Bob Neill
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 03 December 2007
Posts: 877
|
| Posted: 23 April 2008 at 3:52pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
Polls like this will be more interesting in about six months, but it still questions the 'Obama matches up much better against McCain' theory.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Topic Closed)
