PoliticalGroove Forums

Welcome to the PoliticalGroove Forums

We offer discussion, social groups and blogs in an open and free environment. Our free community you will have access to post topics, post blogs, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!



Go Back   PoliticalGroove Forums > Site Discussion > Election Center 2008
Share PG Forum Register Blogs FAQ Members List Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Sponsors
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-10-2008, 01:30 PM   #11 (permalink)
Truth Lion
Points: 6,748, Level: 53 Points: 6,748, Level: 53 Points: 6,748, Level: 53
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
Jonesy's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,554
Thanks: 10
Thanked 32 Times in 23 Posts
Jonesy is a famous PG member
Seems like the right strat. They would secure the woman vote (among many othaz Da Hill'z been getting). Republicans wouldn't be so anti, 'cause she would only be VP. At the same time, 'conservatives' would still somewhat like this ticket, since they seem to have a noodler for McCain.
Jonesy is offline   Top
Old 02-11-2008, 08:22 AM   #12 (permalink)
Puddy Tat Watch
Points: 13,550, Level: 75 Points: 13,550, Level: 75 Points: 13,550, Level: 75
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
jdanton's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 3,806
My Mood:
Thanks: 38
Thanked 51 Times in 38 Posts
jdanton is a famous PG member
Quote:
Originally Posted by itsmeeeeeee View Post
i find it fascinating that now, with hillary tanking, that some people are prematurely focusing on and predicting a disaster that may never materialize, yet alone, even be an issue a week or two, maybe a month, from now.

if the country continues to swing so dramatically toward one candidate, those super delegates would indeed be suicidal if they even attempted to throw the nomination to the candidate who so obviously LOST the popular vote in the primary process.

lest we forget that for years and years, everyone, all over the country has been bitching about the unfairness of a process in which a couple of early, extremely privileged, states were consistently allowed to severely limit the choices in candidate the rest of america had - resulting repeatedly in the coronation of extremely weak candidates.

thanks to super tuesday, the new system - for the first time in anyone's memory - the rest of the county is FINALLY being allowed to weigh in on what is arguably the most important part of the election process... who they want to be the nominee.

before this NEW primary process began, the old school's process of the coronation was still in place - and the establishment's candidate of choice was clearly hillary clinton. she was way ahead in every poll, and the pundants all predicted it was, indeed, hers to lose.

but then something remarkable happened.

the primaries began and the PEOPLE started to VOTE!

almost IMMEDIATELY in the primary process the presumptive queen's front runner status became challenged. and as the first super tuesday drew closer, even the polls revealed that the coronation of hillary clinton was extremely premature.

so - what the hell happened?

was hillary EVER that popular, or were those polls and coronation predictions simply made soooo early that they were basically flawed, because the average american hadn't yet taken the time to start thinking about, let alone research their options?

while the political pundants we love to hate (justifiably) do everything in their power to whip up this super delegate / dead heat drama and controversy... obama is clearly vexing the presumptive queen's followers and shocking the pundants by taking the country by storm by overwhelmingly emphatic margins. clinton is struggling now to even take states she was favored in just two weeks ago.


REALITY PILL:

THE LAST TIME I LOOKED AT THE CALENDAR IT WAS STILL JUST EARLY FEBRUARY!

with obama now quickly catching up to and obviously overtaking clinton in both delegates and a momentum that only appears to be accelerating exponentially, isn't the truth, in fact, looking more and more every day that it's less and less likely these candidates will remain locked in a dead heat much longer? and isn't it more and more likely that this nightmare scenario of the race remaining tied in a dead heat a month from now, let alone at the time of the convention, is in reality - just unnecessary hysterics?

as of last night, among PLEDGED (determined with votes) delegates, obama has taken a 30 point lead - 918 to 885, with 40 some delegates left to be assigned from counties with split districts in yesterday's caucuses. it's conceivable that by tomorrow, this lead very well could expand to 60 or 70 delegates.

so LET'S look ahead. but let's do it realistically. the clinton campaign has already conceded that they may very well not see another primary victory till march third. if that's the case - this dead heat looks to be short lived..

for the first time voters are getting the opportunity to say "nuh uh! not so fast!" and maybe all this panic over a dead heat going all the way to the convention, and super delegates is only shared by the media pundunts desperately attempting to MAKE a story - and the supporters of a candidate who's suddenly getting tromped!

i doubt like hell that this discussion will even be a issue a month from now if, in fact, obama continues to his impressive march to the convention to make another speech. this time, the acceptance speech for his parties nomination to be the next president of the united states!

I think it's too early to predict the delegate count when the primaries are over. Imagine if Obama wins the delegate count by a margin LESS than Hilllary won Florida and Michigan. That might be a disaster.

I don't hear any dislike for each other from either Obama or Hillary. I think that's a figment of the media's imagination.

Of course, I can only speak for me, and I have, many times, stated I will enthusiastically support him if he's the nominee, as, I'm sure, will Hillary.

I'm also sure that, if she's the nominee, he'll support her as well.

There is still a huge possibility of a problem coming. Hopefully it won't, but it might.

If you are a super delegate, how do you justify voting against the way your state voted?

It's also my opinion that we, the people out here, may be more concerned over someone losing the nomination than are either of the candidates. Sure, they both want to win, but they both acknowledge only one of them can.

At this point, both have raised the ceiling for people of color and women, no? It saddens me at this point that one of them must lose eventually, but that's life.
__________________
Author: Memoirs of a Sleepless Mind, a book you CAN judge by its cover.
jdanton is offline   Top
 

Sponsors

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC8
PoliticalGroove.com General political and social discussion