anyway, Obama easily won the debate... Clinton did terrible... I think we can call it
kenny olav
Posts: 3,319
no?
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Well, i think he won tonight, Kenny, but i'm biased. She had to really score, and i don't think she did. All Obama had to do was not fuck up which is a much easier task. i don't know about calling it. For that we'll have to wait until Tuesday. How many people actually watch these things that closely and how many people are smart enough to get much from them. Its pretty sad when you use Saturday Night Live to make a point in a presidential debate.
i'm sorry, that just made me laugh.
i don't mean to make light of the situation, b/c really...it is no laughing matter. but hell yes, when you see all the mess preceeding it does make comments like 'just has to not fuck up'...all the more enjoyable. that, or it's late...and i no longer normally post at night.......:D
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
It does sound a little funny, but it is really the truth. He is ahead. He has the clear momentum. She had the harder task of knocking him off course. She didn't do that. All Obama had to do was remain cool and not make any huge mistakes. He succeeded IMO.
She has no one to blame but herself, Bill, and Mark Penn for putting a horrible plan together. No plan for post February 5th? Allowing Obama to win eleven straight by an average of 33%? Not putting any resources into Wisconsin which should have been a taylor made state for the Clintons? Misusing the former President? Driving your campaign broke by paying millions of dollars for strategists and stupid charges of donuts?
This campaign has just been one big cluster fuck, and if the campaign gives any signs as to what a Hillary Clinton White House would be like...it's no wonder she is about done.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
Obama vs. McCain, could there be two more contrasting candidates? Diametrically different on almost every aspect of Government.
You know, I think this same way.
I listen to a local talk radio guy that asked a question on my behalf to one of the political correspondents of CNN in their daily talk. I asked:
"at some point, is someone going to point out that her campaign is in disarray in numerous areas. (People leaving, low on cash/making loans to herself, losing 10 states in a row, can't focus on one personality for herself). As a candidate for President, can't we look to her campaign as an indication of how she might run the White House?"
the CNN correspondent said "that is an excellent point. Too bad the minds of most people in America don't think that way".
I felt smart for about 10 seconds.
Its true. People don't tend to think that way and its really pretty sad. i think back to an earlier debate when Obama sincerely mentioned that he tends to misplace papers, and hillary jumped all over that saying he lacks managerial aptitude needed to be president. Well, if one analyzes the management of the two respective campaigns, it becomes very obvious that its HER managerial skills that are TRULY sad. Its crazy how horrible she has managed her campaign. Obama on the other hand has done very well managing his. People don't notice this kind of stuff, yet they get fired up when someone says Obama doesn't wear a flag on his lapel. Sad.
All that being said, there is a lot of talk about hillary being in the position she's in due to a poorly managed campaign, and there is definitely something there. i think however that it is being understated that Obama is just a better candidate. Her campaign has indeed been a "cluster fuck", but i would like to see Obama recieve some credit for his success and not just as the beneficiary of a clinton failure.
It's official she's his biotch now.
the other foot in the gutter
sweet smell that they adore
I think I'd rather smother
-The Replacements-
I agree with you. She has managed a terrible campaign. I really hope that Mark Penn is paying close attention to what David Ploufe and David Axelrod have been doing for Obamas campaign.
I read an article the other day where it was talking about how organized the Obama campaign was in Texas on February 6th. They were telling their supporters about the prima-caucus that Texas uses and finding ways to not only get their supporters to the polls in the morning, but to the caucus at night. It's that type of campaigning and organization that wins elections. The Clinton camp had no post Super Tuesday plan, and it will cost them the nomination.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
http://www.myspace.com/brain_of_c
I'm going WMA on my ballot.
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
I havent understood how Clinton has made it this far, but she keeps suprising me
If she wins Texas and Ohio, she's right back in it. I don't think she will, but the polls are close in both states.
for the least they could possibly do
well she really has to dominate to have a shot at the title. winning isnt enough now. if she barely wins, she wont get enough delegates to catch Obama.
good point. She's fuckin' toast.
for the least they could possibly do
In my best Tony Montana accent....
"She's a fucking cockaroach."
the other foot in the gutter
sweet smell that they adore
I think I'd rather smother
-The Replacements-
The average poll right now is about a 5 point lead for Clinton. That isn't enough to gain but maybe one or two delegates out of that state. Obama has a very small lead in Texas right now, but if she somehow manages to win the popular vote he could still walk away with a couple more delegates. Pennsylvania is a state where Obama seems to be gaining VERY quick. A month ago she was up 20, and now it is right around 5. That election isn't until April 22. That lead for Clinton wouldn't make it another 2 weeks w/ the money and resources that Obama could pump into that state.
With the trend in the polls and the Superdelegates starting to show how they will be heading, if Clinton doesn't win Texas and Ohio both next week, then this thing is over. Not only does she need the popular vote, but she needs to come out with a commanding advantage of the delegates from those two states. To do that she would have to win with somewhere around 60% of the vote, and I don't see any way of that happening.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
Are you including the delegates from Michigan and Florida in your calculations? Because you just know those will magically end up counting if they secure Hill-Bill the nomination.
for the least they could possibly do
True. Just another reason why a "close call" in Texas or Ohio will not be enough to kill the wicked witch. A loss in Texas or Ohio, and she's done. There is not much disputing that, even from her camp. Not even from her finger wagging, sperm shooting husband. Two wins in those states, even by the smallest of margins, however, and she will be emboldened enough to pull some crazy shit like sue for those delegates to be seated, strong arm super delegates, and generally destroy her party to ensure she achieves what she believes to be her manifest destiny.
If that happens, it will rank up there with the Florida mess in 2000 and the Ohio mess in 2004 as one of the most screwed up abortions of the will of the people ever.
If this thing goes past this Tuesday, it will happen, though. At least cunton we'll do her damnedest to see that it happens. She will do whatever it takes without remorse or fear of reprecussion.
Call me a slow-witted mom used to reasoning with a seven year old, but... doesn't it work that someone lays out the rules of the game, then the players play the game, and then someone wins?
What Hillary will say -- what she is already saying -- is that it is unconstitutional to essentially "disenfranchise" voters in these two states, and their voices should be heard too, and yada yada yada.
If nothing else, you can bet it will be shrill.
for the least they could possibly do
The problem with that is, she voted in favor of those rules when they were set. She obviously didn't have a problem with those rules then. She now has a problem with the rules because she is losing.
Well, yeah. The time to speak up on behalf of the poor, voiceless Democrats in Michigan and Florida would have been several months ago. Not now. But that won't stop HIll-Bill from trying.
Maybe she could use the old, "I voted for it before I voted against it" defense.
for the least they could possibly do
i won't call you that
Fair enough. It's still changing the rules after the fact. Surely they won't count the results of the primaries that were held in January, right? It appears that the state won't pay for new primaries, so the DNC will have to pay for new ones. And Obama surely will not lose either state by a large enough margin.
The game of scheduling primaries is pretty dumb anyway.
Oh, no Hillary wants to count the results of the January primaries, in which she ran uncontested because everyone else, you know, followed the rules.
for the least they could possibly do