Wouldn't it be something if Hillary loses Pa.?

~~slayer~~ · 04-05-2008, 03:57 PM

Polls are polls. They usually are all over the map but all of them show her once insurmountable lead being surmountable.

She has run one of the worst campaigns this side of Rudy Giuliani. To think those two were annointed by the media for months and months.

Not only has she made mistake after mistake, her loudmouth husband has become the new Mrs. Kerry...a real albatross.

If she loses the popular vote, or even the delegate count, she needs to step down. She will get thumped in NC and even Indiana is in play. The big question will be if her angry followers will sit out the general or vote for McCain.

I believe that they will mostly relax and vote for Obama. It's really the only unknown between now and November because I feel the republicans will definitely all vote for McCain because that's what they do. They are desperate to keep the WH and will settle for sloppy seconds.

The House and Senate look even more dismal for the repubs. All I really care about is getting this country back on it's feet locally and globally. I just don't see McCain being able to do that. Obama inspires people whether you dislike him or not. He's a good man and is weathering the Wright smear; much to the chagrin of the diehard righties.

ban basketball · 04-05-2008, 05:23 PM

In all honesty, if this thing that comedian Rush Limbaugh has been organizing works like it did in Texas and Ohio, she will be tough to beat. She was not expected to beat Obama in either of those places and did because of the comedian's strategy that the robots are willing to take part in.

For those who don't know what I'm talking about, here's an item about it. It's been working effectively.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...e-for-clinton/

Flop The Nuts · 04-05-2008, 06:56 PM

The big question will be if her angry followers will sit out the general or vote for McCain.

As opposed to Obama's happy followers, like you? You don't seem angry at all.

He's a good man and is weathering the Wright smear

Wright's words stand on their own. His words don't (and didn't) need anyone from the right to point out the anger and racism behind them. It's comical and desperate how anyone who criticizes Wright is called a hater and a smearer. It's like someone defending David Duke.

ban basketball · 04-05-2008, 07:21 PM

Originally Posted by Flop The Nuts

The big question will be if her angry followers will sit out the general or vote for McCain.

As opposed to Obama's happy followers, like you? You don't seem angry at all.

He's a good man and is weathering the Wright smear

Wright's words stand on their own. His words don't (and didn't) need anyone from the right to point out the anger and racism behind them. It's comical and desperate how anyone who criticizes Wright is called a hater and a smearer. It's like someone defending David Duke.

I, personally, have yet to see the hate in Wright's words, as comparable to Duke.

sgallan · 04-05-2008, 07:26 PM

His words don't (and didn't) need anyone from the right to point out the anger and racism behind them. It's comical and desperate how anyone who criticizes Wright is called a hater and a smearer.

That's because you are also a hater and a smearer just from a different side of the tracks.

PS - This isn't a partisan observation as I am voting for the home state guy in McCain.

therick · 04-05-2008, 08:43 PM

In all honesty, if this thing that comedian Rush Limbaugh has been organizing works like it did in Texas and Ohio, she will be tough to beat. She was not expected to beat Obama in either of those places and did

Actually, it was Obama that surprised everyone by making Texas and Ohio close. She had huge leads in all of the polls in those two states less than a month before the primaries. The Obama campaign had pretty much conceeded the fact that she would probably win those states well before the vote, and that's when they changed their tact and started talking about how she'd have to win by 15-20% in both states in order to close the gap in the delegate count.

She'll probably end up winning the state by a very slim margin like she did in Ohio and Texas and Obama will beat her in NC by a huge margin and Indiana, but this thing is going to the convention because Hillary will never conceede and she'll fight for every super delegate in her quest to win the nomination. The sad part is that in her zeal to win at all costs, she may end up costing herself and the party the WH in the process.

sgallan · 04-05-2008, 09:35 PM

I tend to side with your analysis but the other possible take is..... the Clintons are pulling out all stops in a very interesting primary that has a lot of peoples attention. The Republicans have a very sophisticated attack machine, but honestly.... so do the Clintons. What will be left for them in the general election that the Obama team won't already have an answer for. In an ironic way it is the same sort of "trial by fire" advantage Clinton had in 92.

Just a thought, and I still tend to side with your view.

ban basketball · 04-05-2008, 10:08 PM

Originally Posted by therick

In all honesty, if this thing that comedian Rush Limbaugh has been organizing works like it did in Texas and Ohio, she will be tough to beat. She was not expected to beat Obama in either of those places and did

Actually, it was Obama that surprised everyone by making Texas and Ohio close. She had huge leads in all of the polls in those two states less than a month before the primaries. The Obama campaign had pretty much conceeded the fact that she would probably win those states well before the vote, and that's when they changed their tact and started talking about how she'd have to win by 15-20% in both states in order to close the gap in the delegate count.

She'll probably end up winning the state by a very slim margin like she did in Ohio and Texas and Obama will beat her in NC by a huge margin and Indiana, but this thing is going to the convention because Hillary will never conceede and she'll fight for every super delegate in her quest to win the nomination. The sad part is that in her zeal to win at all costs, she may end up costing herself and the party the WH in the process.

Huh?! Maybe a month beforehand, as you indiacate, but the week of the votes, Obama was to win both states. That's why it blindsided everyone when Hilary won.

sgallan · 04-05-2008, 10:40 PM

Hmm.... I wonder if this is one of those issues where it depends on where you get your information from. Because I was channel surfing, newspaper surfing, and blog surfing, everything I could find, and wasn't in the least bit surprised with the results.

FWIW..... anybody who states anything is a surprise, or a done deal, in this electorial season hasn't been following closely enough. I mean wasn't McCain out of money, getting rid of his staff, and flying coach, and now he is the current front runner for the most powerful position in the world? Who knew?

therick · 04-05-2008, 10:45 PM

I'll agree that in the days right before the vote that the polls were really close, which was amazing since she'd had 20% leads only a month or two earlier. He had closed the gap and was leading in a couple of the polls, but most still had her in the lead. But given how wrong the polls had been in previous states the pundits were all guessing that his momentum might put him over the top.

These are the poll results for Texas and Ohio.

http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=1183

The media then made it out to be a big shock that she won and called it a comeback.

What's interesting is that after the caucuses in Texas, Obama actually came out with more delegates in that state.

Wouldn't it be something if Hillary loses Pa.?

Politics & Religion