Clinton Collapse?

[Embar Angylwrath]

She lost in the Iowa caucuses. Looks like she lost in New Hampshire as well. Will she continue after such major upsets? I'm betting she'll continue through Super Tuesday, and if she doesn't win in a significant state, she'll throw in the towel. Also, if she doesn't win in the New York primary, her campaign is dead.

[Ddrak]

That makes sense for any candidate. There's no sense dropping out before Super Tuesday. Iowa and New Hampshire really don't matter that much in the big picture.

You think McCain will win the GOP nomination?

Dd

[Partha]

There's really no sense in dropping out until Edwards does. Many of the states are not winner takes all, and Hillary has more than half of the 'superdelegates' already - staying around until she's mathematically out of it looks like her best bet. Oddly enough, Edwards may only do well enough to play kingmaker, but that may be all he needs.

[Rsak]

I would not be surprised with a Obama/Edwards ticket for the democratic side and I think it actually has a decent chance of winning. With Clinton on the ticket I fear there will be too much opposition for power reasons then actual issues, just as a Jeb Bush campaign will have a natural bias against it.

[Embar Angylwrath]

That makes sense for any candidate. There's no sense dropping out before Super Tuesday. Iowa and New Hampshire really don't matter that much in the big picture.

You think McCain will win the GOP nomination?

Dd

Man.. thats a tough call. It's cerainly a strong possibility. However, my gut says that Huckabee will end up with the nomination.

[superwalrus]

Yah, I don't think Guiliani's Super Tuesday strat is the right one.

Walrus

[Arkaron]

Some thoughts:

I don't think she's collapsing yet, but I think something other than numbers voting is going to do something that'll torpedo one of the three top democratic numbers.

Huckabee just needs to guest spot on Biggest Loser and tell his story (lost 110 pounds), find a good VP to hit the north and he'll give whoever gets the nod from the DNC a good run.

Whoever the DNC picks will need to tap into the working class/rural ethic which so far hasn't happened as far as I can tell. Edwards refering to the American poor as an undifferentiated mass shows he doesn't really get it and Clinton...eh. I've said it before, I'm tired of the dynasty. We'll see how February plays out in places like California.

[Embar Angylwrath]

If this is, indeed, the beginning of the end for Hildabeast, I will be gratified not only because that spawn of Satan won't ever sign a bill into law, but because a bit of my faith in the American people will be restored (just a bit, because most Americans are dumbshits), in that it will still take more than $100 million in campaign funds to buy an election.

[Mukik]

I think the biggest contribution was obama's camp exposing her and her husband's interest outside of the states to the general public. I wasnt aware of her interests in india until that came to light and I checked into it. All I have to say is shame on her for putting out a book that shed her as someone for the working class american and then pull that shit. Huckabee is a religious fanatic, if you read between the lines of his polling. And as for obama. A black man with a muslim name coming out of no where should scare the simplist of americans. Good luck with that one.

I frankly see Huckabee hitting the office cause he identifys on his ads (cause people dont research shit) more than the rest.

[Ddrak]

A black man with a muslim name coming out of no where should scare the simplist of americans.

But only the very simplest, given that he's not the traditional "black", "Barak" or "Obama" aren't muslim names and he hardly came out of nowhere.

I think if he wins the nomination (which I still think is only an outside chance) he'll try to get a VP that will be very "traditional", and most of the base voting will end up with the usual BS attack ads.

Dd

[superwalrus]

If you think America is ready for Obama LULZ at you. Just wait for the actual presidential race to start, talk about Obama's membership in a black separatist church should really scare anyone.

Walrus

[Partha]

Maybe America IS ready for Obama.....and you're not.

That's ok, though. Really.

[superwalrus]

Am I ready for a crazy liberal that has 0 experience in anything and once belonged to a church that preached blacks would separate themselves from the rest of America? No, no I am not. Am I ready for a black president who I agree with? Sure, why not.

Walrus

[Klast Brell]

Yes and proof that it is a black separatist church will be pretty thin on the ground.

Do you have any evidence at all to back that up, or is it more crap you heard on your AM radio?

Here i'll toss you a freebie. It's based on a document from 1981. http://www.tucc.org/scholarship_pdf/bla ... system.pdf

Conservative hacks like to quote it out of context.

“The God of our weary years” will give us the strength to give up prayerful passivism and become Black Christian Activist, soldiers for Black freedom and the dignity of all humankind.

Picking out the red text and ignoring the blue.

Now do you have anything to show that this church which includes whites in it's congregation is black separatist?

[Garrdor]

It seems that "Muslim" and "Terrorist" define themselves as whatever Americans fear, or don't understand.

[superwalrus]

I don't listen to AM Radio, next!

But seriously, its funny to see all you liberals defend your guy. But you think he can get elected?

1) His policies are something a lot of people strongly disagree with
2) He has no experience with anything, how long has he been a Senator? What did he do while a Senator?
3) Notwithstanding all these other things that would bar most people from getting elected, he is also black and has a "funny" sounding name in an age where image is way more important than substance to a significant number of voters.

Explain to me how you think in HELL he has a chance to get elected?

Walrus

[Embar Angylwrath]

I don't listen to AM Radio, next!

But seriously, its funny to see all you liberals defend your guy. But you think he can get elected?

1) His policies are something a lot of people strongly disagree with
2) He has no experience with anything, how long has he been a Senator? What did he do while a Senator?
3) Notwithstanding all these other things that would bar most people from getting elected, he is also black and has a "funny" sounding name in an age where image is way more important than substance to a significant number of voters.

Explain to me how you think in HELL he has a chance to get elected?

Walrus

Guess you don't understand the primary and caucuses. If he wins the primaries, he'll get the Democratic nomination. If he gets the nomination, he'll be the person running against the Republican candidate.

You really are kinda dense. If his policies were something that a lot of people reeally disagree with, why is he winning the caucuses and primarys, which are more indicative of populist sentiment than the actula election.

[Finglefinn]

When it comes down to the final vote, if Obama is the Dem candidate and whoever is the Rep candidate, I just don't see Obama winning. I cannot believe that this country is mature enough to elect a black man President. Sad, but true. I still think that someone else is going to get the Dem nomination outside of Hillary and Obama.

As far as the Republicans go, I've said before that I'm in favor of Paul, but the Huckster looks strong early. We'll see...

[Ddrak]

But seriously, its funny to see all you liberals defend your guy. But you think he can get elected?

1) His policies are something a lot of people strongly disagree with
2) He has no experience with anything, how long has he been a Senator? What did he do while a Senator?
3) Notwithstanding all these other things that would bar most people from getting elected, he is also black and has a "funny" sounding name in an age where image is way more important than substance to a significant number of voters.

Explain to me how you think in HELL he has a chance to get elected?

I dunno that Obama is the "liberal's guy" - wouldn't that be someone a little more radical? Remember, only about 10% of the US identifies themselves as "liberal".

i) I doubt this strongly. He wouldn't be winning votes if people disagreed with them, but more to the point, policies rarely make an election victory. Having the better attack ads tends to win elections, and I'd say the election will depend a lot on public feeling towards the end of the year on US foreign policy and how each candidate relates. If Iraq blows up in a McCain v Obama battle (for example) then Obama will blow him away. In the same battle, if Osama is captured and Iraq becomes pretty then McCain will win. GWB's god-awful popularity doesn't help the GOP either, so the Dems have a bit of latitude this time around.

ii) He has at least the experience that Jack Kennedy had, and Kennedy continues to be one of the most popular Presidents ever. Not having done much tends to be a positive as much as a negative - less to attack over and you end up with "omg his name rhymes with Osama" or "we found this church..." type of extreme stuff.

iii) You misunderstand what wins elections here - these are probably the *most* important things against him. It only takes 2-3% of the population to dislike "blacks" (despite Obama's distinct non-american-black heritage) to lose him the votes. Same if he was Mormon, or a New Englander running as a Conservative, or whatever... It's all up to managing public opinion - those can be turned positive too because getting 2-3% more blacks out to vote will win the elections. It's why candidates try to appeal to the extremes a lot more than the center.

I'd say he has the same chance of being elected as GWB did in 2004 - just run a failure up against him that can trivially be attacked by lies and misdirection and he's a shoe in. Same for any other candidate, except Paul who could *only* win on policies rather than negativity.

Dd

[superwalrus]

Wow, Embar calling someone dense, how ridiculous. (insert pot meet kettle jokes) Embar you need to take a lesson in reading comprehension. If you notice, I used the term "elected" to refer to him winning the office of the Presidency, if I had used the word "nominated" then I would have been referring to the Primaries we are in. My 3 point bulletin was in reference to his electability as President, I was not referring to Democrats voting for him in the Primaries. So, I'll take that apology.

Have you guys ever done an actual critical analysis one day of your life ever? I guess my big lawyer brain takes things for granted. Here is my argument spelled out for you:

Obama has too many negatives to be able to get elected to the Presidency. His liberal social ideas and his lack of any experience whatsoever are a negative to many people who will vote in the Presidential election. His race and religious background are something I also put in the negative category. Regardless of whether you like it or not, people don't like African-Americans, and they might not even consciously know it. He has an uphill battle to climb. He does have many positives too, the fact that he is seen as a Washington outsider, that many liberal white democrats will vote for him just to prove to themselves that they aren't racist, he is a very eloquent speaker, he has charisma, and he has a strong message of "I'm not them." Overall though, I think that he can't win the Presidency because of the negatives I listed above.

Walrus

edit: changed the tense of some things