Is Clinton vs. Obama really necessary?

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
The desperation is palpable when Hillary refers to Karl Rove's breakdown of the numbers and Trinity cites National review. Whoare they going to sidle up to next, Rush Limbaugh?

Has it never occurred to them that these parties might be just a little disingenuous? Too funny.

It is too funny that I've had to watch Fox News instead of CNN because CNN is in the tank for Obama...(and several others media outlets too). While the conservative news outlets have by no means lived up to their claim of being fair and balanced in the truest or purest sense...they have added some balance into the Democratic Primary for their own diabolical reasons. As Gov. Ed Rendell noted, "They hate both our candidates equally..." By covering Hillary Clinton where others haven't, giving her media time, covering issues more indepth that Obama's world want to ignore such as the article in the National Review.

There are millions of voters who aren't on Obama's bandwagon...conservatives cover it. CNN makes big news of "private talks" of fundraisers teaming up with the Obama campaign as if Obama needs any help from Hillary Clinton's people in fundraising. That is pro-Obama b.s. The story of millions of voters who aren't with Obama that's the real story...if Obama wants to be President.
 

B_boynextdoorkpt

Experimental Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Posts
892
Media
0
Likes
13
Points
103
Location
Isle of Palms SC
Sexuality
60% Straight, 40% Gay
I have changed my mind, that is a good thing about American, we can change our minds. And your right, a vote for McCain is a vote to continue the bush legacy.
I believe that this democratic nomination has been a mess from the start. The idea that Michigan and Florida voters will not be counted is beyond my comprehension. The rules were made up by republican legislators in both states to change the dates of the primaries, so now we are going to let those people's votes go uncounted?
I feel that Hillary is the best choice the DNC could make. BUT, regardless who gets the democratic nod, I will work hard and donate to make sure they win.
Landon
 

Skull Mason

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2006
Posts
3,035
Media
6
Likes
110
Points
193
Location
Dirty Jersey
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
How is a vote for mccain a continuation of the bush legacy first of all? Do you guys really believe that obama crap? Mccain is barely loved by his own party because he is more of a liberal conservative than anything else. Hell, if you guys want "change" the best thing would probably be for him to become president, because that would force conservatives to move a little more to the middle and be accepting of certain liberal values. Obama is as socialist as you can get and if you think that is going to bring about "change" your trippin.

And to what Trinity said, it is embarrassing how cnn and msnbc cover obama, they are totally on his nuts. It is a sad sad day when I have to watch fox news to get decent no spin coverage on the democratic race. And if you actually watched Karl Rove on fox he does in fact know what he is talking about and everything he predicts pretty much comes true. Of course demos just hate him because he is karl rove but the man is a mad scientist when it comes to this shit, he actually impressed me. Isn't he the mastermind of two elections won by the most retarded man to ever serve as president? Not many people can make that happen.

Don't hate the player, hate the game.
 

bosatbk

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2007
Posts
94
Media
0
Likes
67
Points
488
Location
USA
Gender
Male
It is too funny that I've had to watch Fox News instead of CNN because CNN is in the tank for Obama...(and several others media outlets too). While the conservative news outlets have by no means lived up to their claim of being fair and balanced in the truest or purest sense...they have added some balance into the Democratic Primary for their own diabolical reasons. As Gov. Ed Rendell noted, "They hate both our candidates equally..." By covering Hillary Clinton where others haven't, giving her media time, covering issues more indepth that Obama's world want to ignore such as the article in the National Review.

There are millions of voters who aren't on Obama's bandwagon...conservatives cover it. CNN makes big news of "private talks" of fundraisers teaming up with the Obama campaign as if Obama needs any help from Hillary Clinton's people in fundraising. That is pro-Obama b.s. The story of millions of voters who aren't with Obama that's the real story...if Obama wants to be President.

Trininty,

Normally I try to be respectful of others opinions but with you I am sorry, you just come across as bitter. I have read several of your posts amongst several threads and your stance makes no sense. If Clinton does lose and you dont vote for Obama (whether you write in Clintons name or dont vote or vote for McCain) you are going against everything Clinton believes in and you make her vision for the democratic parter even harder to come true. A Repub president can still hamper progress that the democrats want to make with vetoes of their bills and programs of his own. If you are a Hillary supporter, then by default, you need to be an Obama supporter. If not, then you never were in it for the party and the good of the country but for the person. This is bigger than just Obama or Clinton, it is about remaking America, bringing it back to where it once was and with attitudes such as yours, I can see that this task may be one that does not come through to fruition. You need to take a deep look into the direction your candidate wants this country to go in and where you want it to go in and make an informed decision. Voting against your party is ridiculous!
 

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
Trinity,

Normally I try to be respectful of others opinions but with you I am sorry, you just come across as bitter. I have read several of your posts amongst several threads and your stance makes no sense. If Clinton does lose and you dont vote for Obama (whether you write in Clintons name or dont vote or vote for McCain) you are going against everything Clinton believes in and you make her vision for the democratic parter even harder to come true. A Repub president can still hamper progress that the democrats want to make with vetoes of their bills and programs of his own. If you are a Hillary supporter, then by default, you need to be an Obama supporter. If not, then you never were in it for the party and the good of the country but for the person. This is bigger than just Obama or Clinton, it is about remaking America, bringing it back to where it once was and with attitudes such as yours, I can see that this task may be one that does not come through to fruition. You need to take a deep look into the direction your candidate wants this country to go in and where you want it to go in and make an informed decision. Voting against your party is ridiculous!



This is from CNN:
If Clinton throws her support to Obama and the party rallies behind him, Clinton's supporters will probably follow suit, Peffley said.​
Right now, Democrats are choosing between Clinton and Obama, who have similar policies. In the general matchup, the differences between the Democratic candidate and McCain will be much more distinct.​
"I can't imagine that anyone who would vote for Hillary Clinton would end up voting for McCain. If you look at the issues, there's a huge divide between Hillary and McCain," Peffley said.​
Stephen Voss, a specialist in elections and voting behavior and a professor at the University of Kentucky, said that given the disappointment of Clinton's likely loss coupled with Obama's liberal leanings, it's quite possible some of her more moderate supporters might switch to McCain, but not enough to shake up the election.​

If Obama can line himself up with Clinton and line McCain up with the Bush administration, he'll have a better chance of winning over the working class, according to the experts.​
"The associations with George Bush are just too devastating for them to cross party lines at this point," Peffley said.​
I'm posting the article from CNN because it is saying the same thing you are...that they hope and believe that Dems who support Hillary won't cross party lines...that they can't.

Get this...Many Democratic supporters of Hillary Clinton supporters can and will cross party lines or stay home if Obama is the Nominee or the top of the Democratic Dream Ticket (I say that because Obama's camp is starting to show signs they are recognize that his chances are heading the way of McGovern, Dukakis and Kerry and throwing out symblance of compromise and may eventually work up to that)

It doesn't matter if the expert PhD keeps saying it because he wants someone to believe it or you attempt to impose some idealogical persuasion of shame by taking a manufactured high political Democratic and patriotic moral ground. Voters are prepared to stay home, write in Hillary or go for McCain. Obama's problem with some Blue Collar workers, some White Working Class are also referred to as Reagan Democrats because sometimes for several reasons they vote across party lines. There are more Democrats than Republicans because of Defections to Dems and Indeps. Reagan Democrats and Blue Collar Workers have strong support for Hillary Clinton because she has represented their issues and voiced their concerns. This is about class. Not race. Obama should NOT need Hillary Clinton to persuade them to vote for him. If Obama is unable to reach them then that candidate is not electable. More of Obama supporters will support Hillary Clinton than vice versa. And it has nothing to do with race or education...it has to do with class and Obama's bitter comments and membership in a church for 20 years that publically ridiculed the nation Obama wishes to lead. Calling a strong base of voters rednecks, racist, and implying they are unable to reason correctly and without prejudice and at the same time insinuating that their concerns with Obama's judgment for his membership in that type of church amounts to racial bias against Obama, is a sure way of completely alienating that base. Millions of Women as a party base have made it clear that they will make their voice heard with their vote if the Party continues to ignore their valuable support for Hillary Clinton.

Millions do not believe Obama will make the best President. Millions do not believe or trust his rhetoric. Millions may not accept Obama as the lessor of the two evils. It cannot be put any more simple than that.

Foremost is the unfairness in the Party selection of a nominee. Clinton and Obama have been throughout this race running neck and neck, evenly matched and in need of a tie breaker. So many people have stated that FL and MI should not decide the nomination and the SuperDelegates should not decide.

If those two factors should not make the ultimate decision of who the Nominee should be then that required the primary race for pledged delegates to be completely fair, clean and unbiased in anyway. If we are basing the nomination on a small lead which does not secure the nomination then the small lead must be garnered in the fairest most Democratic fashion. That did not happen in this Primary.

Everybody is arguing about not changing the rules after the fact but if there ever was a time for a Party to make some adjustments in the middle of the race this is it! Several times, Howard Dean and party leaders have stated early on they never invisioned that the race would be so tight. It has never been so close. This primary is so close that neither candidate is able to reach the required number in pledged delegates without SuperDelegates. The proportional allocation of pledged delegates was in many cases arguably unjust. The caucuses arguably were unjust. The decision and manner of sanction to FL and MI unjust. The gender bias unjust. Media partiality unjust. All together the injustices coupled with a long race and the fear of damage to the Democratic brand led to calls for the woman in the race to concede before the race was even over, and continuous propaganda that she was unable to win. Voters were influenced by this and so were SuperDelegates...unfairly. And still the candidates are only separated by less than 2 percent.

The closeness of the race dictates that something be done to add back in the fairness otherwise, the coronation of Obama will be short lived. The best solution is a Clinton/Obama Democratic Dream Ticket. Obama could run for President for 8 more years and have 16 years leading this nation. But it seems that it takes millions of people doing what I believe they will do for some people to go with the best solution when its staring them right in the face. If Obama supporters only care about beating the Republicans they would have no problem with Clinton being selected as the nominee by the SuperDelegates.

If Florida and Michigan being seated "as is" will result in the same outcome, then the Obama should agree to seat them that way. Obama only maintains his lead with SuperDelegates...who probably wouldn't have been so quick to jump to the Obama camp if Hillary Clinton had been up in the delegate count with her wins in those two important states for November.

"In it for the Party and in it for the good of the country..." I definitely want the best for my country. Are there circumstances that I would accept the lesser of two evils to ensure the future of our Nation? Perhaps...if the the Nation and Party were standing on the principles of Democracy and fairness. I do not feel we have. I had enough with of accepting a sham of our election system after Gore was made to give up the Presidency and Kerry was swiftboated. I don't feel it is right for half of my party to demand I accept all of the unfairness in this primary out of fear of the Republicans. We need to fix the issues in our election system overall, correct the issues that don't work in our Democratic Party rules and as a society address the gender and race issues that reared their ugly heads in this presidential race. In order to bring this race to a unified conclusion we must do two things...make it fair so that a validated Nominee can be selected and if we were truly the party we claimed to be and you believed everything you said to me: compromise on both sides and go for the Dream Ticket: Clinton/Obama 2008.

otherwise forcing Obama may result in him winning the battle but losing the War.
 

dong20

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Posts
6,058
Media
0
Likes
28
Points
183
Location
The grey country
Sexuality
No Response
Get this...Many Democratic supporters of Hillary Clinton supporters can and will cross party lines or stay home if Obama is the Nominee or the top of the Democratic Dream Ticket (I say that because Obama's camp is starting to show signs they are recognize that his chances are heading the way of McGovern, Dukakis and Kerry and throwing out symblance of compromise and may eventually work up to that)

It doesn't matter if the expert PhD keeps saying it because he wants someone to believe it or you attempt to impose some idealogical persuasion of shame by taking a manufactured high political Democratic and patriotic moral ground. Voters are prepared to stay home, write in Hillary or go for McCain. Obama's problem with some Blue Collar workers, some White Working Class are also referred to as Reagan Democrats because sometimes for several reasons they vote across party lines. There are more Democrats than Republicans because of Defections to Dems and Indeps. Reagan Democrats and Blue Collar Workers have strong support for Hillary Clinton because she has represented their issues and voiced their concerns. This is about class. Not race. Obama should NOT need Hillary Clinton to persuade them to vote for him. If Obama is unable to reach them then that candidate is not electable. More of Obama supporters will support Hillary Clinton than vice versa. And it has nothing to do with race or education...it has to do with class and Obama's bitter comments and membership in a church for 20 years that publically ridiculed the nation Obama wishes to lead. Calling a strong base of voters rednecks, racist, and implying they are unable to reason correctly and without prejudice and at the same time insinuating that their concerns with Obama's judgment for his membership in that type of church amounts to racial bias against Obama, is a sure way of completely alienating that base. Millions of Women as a party base have made it clear that they will make their voice heard with their vote if the Party continues to ignore their valuable support for Hillary Clinton.

Millions do not believe Obama will make the best President. Millions do not believe or trust his rhetoric. Millions may not accept Obama as the lessor of the two evils. It cannot be put any more simple than that.

Foremost is the unfairness in the Party selection of a nominee. Clinton and Obama have been throughout this race running neck and neck, evenly matched and in need of a tie breaker. So many people have stated that FL and MI should not decide the nomination and the SuperDelegates should not decide.

If those two factors should not make the ultimate decision of who the Nominee should be then that required the primary race for pledged delegates to be completely fair, clean and unbiased in anyway. If we are basing the nomination on a small lead which does not secure the nomination then the small lead must be garnered in the fairest most Democratic fashion. That did not happen in this Primary.

Everybody is arguing about not changing the rules after the fact but if there ever was a time for a Party to make some adjustments in the middle of the race this is it! Several times, Howard Dean and party leaders have stated early on they never invisioned that the race would be so tight. It has never been so close. This primary is so close that neither candidate is able to reach the required number in pledged delegates without SuperDelegates. The proportional allocation of pledged delegates was in many cases arguably unjust. The caucuses arguably were unjust. The decision and manner of sanction to FL and MI unjust. The gender bias unjust. Media partiality unjust. All together the injustices coupled with a long race and the fear of damage to the Democratic brand led to calls for the woman in the race to concede before the race was even over, and continuous propaganda that she was unable to win. Voters were influenced by this and so were SuperDelegates...unfairly. And still the candidates are only separated by less than 2 percent.

The closeness of the race dictates that something be done to add back in the fairness otherwise, the coronation of Obama will be short lived. The best solution is a Clinton/Obama Democratic Dream Ticket. Obama could run for President for 8 more years and have 16 years leading this nation. But it seems that it takes millions of people doing what I believe they will do for some people to go with the best solution when its staring them right in the face. If Obama supporters only care about beating the Republicans they would have no problem with Clinton being selected as the nominee by the SuperDelegates.

If Florida and Michigan being seated "as is" will result in the same outcome, then the Obama should agree to seat them that way. Obama only maintains his lead with SuperDelegates...who probably wouldn't have been so quick to jump to the Obama camp if Hillary Clinton had been up in the delegate count with her wins in those two important states for November.

"In it for the Party and in it for the good of the country..." I definitely want the best for my country. Are there circumstances that I would accept the lesser of two evils to ensure the future of our Nation? Perhaps...if the the Nation and Party were standing on the principles of Democracy and fairness. I do not feel we have. I had enough with of accepting a sham of our election system after Gore was made to give up the Presidency and Kerry was swiftboated. I don't feel it is right for half of my party to demand I accept all of the unfairness in this primary out of fear of the Republicans. We need to fix the issues in our election system overall, correct the issues that don't work in our Democratic Party rules and as a society address the gender and race issues that reared their ugly heads in this presidential race. In order to bring this race to a unified conclusion we must do two things...make it fair so that a validated Nominee can be selected and if we were truly the party we claimed to be and you believed everything you said to me: compromise on both sides and go for the Dream Ticket: Clinton/Obama 2008.

otherwise forcing Obama may result in him winning the battle but losing the War.
You made a recent statement that the Democratic party's responsibility was to represent itself - well it occurred to me that the primary responsibility of a political party is in fact to represent voters, or rather it should be. This is a key element of the broader issue you doggedly avoided earlier. You argued that half the party should not be asked to ignore the other half, that millions do not support Obama - that's quite true and Trinity that's fine, but those very same arguments cut both ways. It's this simple reality that you seem unwilling to accept.

Trinity, I argue with you not because you support Clinton (I couldn't care less about that), or that you dislike Obama (I couldn't care less about that either) but because you are so transparently disingenuous, negative and duplicitous while doing so.

Your argument, while perfectly valid from a perspective of personal preference, is fundamentally flawed from most others, not the least of which is expressed voter preference. And ultimately, right or wrong choice, that's what elections are about, people making a choice. Abstaining is one's right, but it should be done for the right reasons. You say it's only because you believe Obama is unfit, honestly I'm unconvinced that's the whole truth.

I believe your motives are personal, not 'patriotic', I think you prefer division where it's the opposite of what's required if you can't get your own way. If you honestly believe that another Republican administration is preferable to not having Hillary as nominee that's your choice of course, but however conveniently and 'patriotically' you seek to rationalise your stance, with claims of unfairness and injustice - your latest comments simply reek of sour grapes.
 

HazelGod

Sexy Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2006
Posts
7,154
Media
1
Likes
31
Points
183
Location
The Other Side of the Pillow
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
you are so transparently disingenuous, negative and duplicitous

That's what I've been saying for months now...it's transparent to the degree that one can only deduce that it's either one of the stupidest examples of the species (not entirely unlikely, as HRC does seem to have a strong following amongst the mouthbreathers), or it's deliberately trolling.
 

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
You made a recent statement that the Democratic party's responsibility was to represent itself - well it occurred to me that the primary responsibility of a political party is in fact to represent voters, or rather it should be. This is a key element of the broader issue you doggedly avoided earlier. You argued that half the party should not be asked to ignore the other half, that millions do not support Obama - that's quite true and Trinity that's fine, but those very same arguments cut both ways. It's this simple reality that you seem unwilling to accept.

I made no such statement in regards to the party. And of course it cuts both ways...nothing I've said contradicts that.

Trinity, I argue with you not because you support Clinton (I couldn't care less about that), or that you dislike Obama (I couldn't care less about that either) but because you are so transparently disingenuous, negative and duplicitous while doing so.

Nowhere have you shown me to be disingenuous, negative or duplicitous. I believe you rarely know what you are talking about and seem never to really support your arguments or prove your points. Your negative review is a compliment coming from you.

Your argument, while perfectly valid from a perspective of personal preference, is fundamentally flawed from most others, not the least of which is expressed voter preference. And ultimately, right or wrong choice, that's what elections are about, people making a choice. Abstaining is one's right, but it should be done for the right reasons. You say it's only because you believe Obama is unfit, honestly I'm unconvinced that's the whole truth.

You don't dictate what the "right reasons" are for someone to hold a view. You did not identify fundamental flaws in voter preference in my post. You simply express your opinion that my views were flawed. Again, You don't dictate what is right and wrong.

I believe your motives are personal, not 'patriotic', I think you prefer division where it's the opposite of what's required if you can't get your own way. If you honestly believe that another Republican administration is preferable to not having Hillary as nominee that's your choice of course, but however conveniently and 'patriotically' you seek to rationalise your stance, with claims of unfairness and injustice -

Of course my views are personal to me. And my views are also patriotic. People throughout history have stood up to be a voice of dissent not to be divisive but to make our government and our laws work for all citizens and so that everyone could be represented fairly. You have been and continue to read want you want despite the fact that the words typed are very clear. No where in my post did I say what you state about another Republican administration. And no where did I rationalize my views because I do not have to rationalize anything when my views are just as valid as yours.

your latest comments simply reek of sour grapes.

There are no sour grapes in my post. I believe that everything can work out and will work out...if we work together. It may not go exactly the way I want it but I do hope for the best. That doesn't change my views. If you and the other Obama fans do not agree with my views that is your choice, but that does not invalidate my views in any way or mean they are flawed.

That's what I've been saying for months now...it's transparent to the degree that one can only deduce that it's either one of the stupidest examples of the species (not entirely unlikely, as HRC does seem to have a strong following amongst the mouthbreathers), or it's deliberately trolling.

Everytime you've posted in reference to me Hazel you looked stupid. Check each one then try that again. You've ended up with egg on your face for months now. You've always ended up either using profanity or just name calling because you could not respond with anything else.

again, it's a flawed assumption that every person voting for Obama or Hillary is a democrat.

*cough* *cough* independents *cough* *cough* ideals my arse *cough* *cough*

I mentioned independents in the post above. I'm not making any flawed assumptions. And I've discussed Dems Indeps and Reps in my most recent posts so I recognize that Independents are playing a huge part in this election.
 

D_Gunther Snotpole

Account Disabled
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Posts
13,632
Media
0
Likes
73
Points
193
How is a vote for mccain a continuation of the bush legacy first of all? Do you guys really believe that obama crap? Mccain is barely loved by his own party because he is more of a liberal conservative than anything else. Hell, if you guys want "change" the best thing would probably be for him to become president, because that would force conservatives to move a little more to the middle and be accepting of certain liberal values.

Apart from his militarism, McCain would certainly shift the center in a big way. But the militarism, um ...
Interesting, though.

Obama is as socialist as you can get and if you think that is going to bring about "change" your trippin.

You know, Skull ... only an American could think that.

If you actually watched Karl Rove on fox he does in fact know what he is talking about and everything he predicts pretty much comes true. Of course demos just hate him because he is karl rove but the man is a mad scientist when it comes to this shit, he actually impressed me. Isn't he the mastermind of two elections won by the most retarded man to ever serve as president? Not many people can make that happen.

A backhanded compliment (very:biggrin1:), but a real one too.
 

B_jacknapier

Experimental Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Posts
672
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
103
Location
Pittsburgh
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
I'm a misanthropist, and I thought initially that the best thing from that POV would be for
A. McCain to win (liberals become dispirited)
B. Hillary to get the primary based on superdelegates (disenfranchise african americans and youth)

but now I'm thinking that there's an even better outcome... for Obama to win.

His promises of great and immense change have been bought hook, line, and sinker by the fresh-faced liberal youth of our nation. When he fails to achieve this change, and is simply another president, these same young and impressionable voters will become jaded and die a little inside. The ideal of Hope that he runs on will turn sour in their mouths as the realities of politics set in after he gets into office. This dissatisfaction with their messiah figure will be aided by the fact that we are going to be deep in recession for the next president's first, and possibly second term.
 

bosatbk

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2007
Posts
94
Media
0
Likes
67
Points
488
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Trinity -

I have no idea what kind of Kool Aid you drank but whatever kind it was it clearly has you thinkning incoherently ...
 

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
Trinity -

I have no idea what kind of Kool Aid you drank but whatever kind it was it clearly has you thinkning incoherently ...

My thinking is far from incoherent. That is the problem...it is so right on Obama supporters would rather characterize it as incoherent, bitter or just sour grapes rather than intelligently and fairly examining the views of millions of voters.


Hillary Clinton Leads in the Swing States - Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll
May 22, 2008

McCain Leads Obama In Two Of Three Key Swing States, Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll Finds; Clinton Has Big Leads In Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania --- FLORIDA: Clinton 48 - McCain 41; McCain 45 - Obama 41; OHIO: Clinton 48 - McCain 41; McCain 44 - Obama 40: PENNSYLVANIA: Clinton 50 - McCain 37; Obama 46 - McCain 40
Plagued by a defection of Clinton supporters and white working class voters, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, the leading Democratic presidential contender, trails Arizona Sen. John McCain, the likely Republican candidate, in Florida and Ohio, according to simultaneous Quinnipiac University Swing State polls released today. Sen. Obama is six points ahead in Pennsylvania. New York Sen. Clinton wins handily in all three states. No one has been elected President since 1960 without taking two of these three largest swing states in the Electoral College. Results from the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University polls show:
  • Florida: Clinton tops McCain 48 - 41 percent; McCain leads Obama 45 - 41 percent;
  • Ohio: Clinton beats McCain 48 - 41 percent; McCain tops Obama 44 - 40 percent;
  • Pennsylvania: Clinton tops McCain 50 - 37 percent; Obama leads McCain 46 - 40 percent.
In the McCain-Obama matchups, 26 to 36 percent of Clinton supporters in each state say that if Obama is the nominee they would switch to the Republican in November. Only 10 to 18 percent of Obama supporters say they would defect to McCain if Clinton is the nominee.
"The numbers for Florida and Ohio are good news for Sen. John McCain and should be worrisome for Sen. Barack Obama. That is especially true about Ohio, which decided the 2004 election. Ohio's economy is worse than the rest of the country and the Republican brand there is in disrepute. McCain's Buckeye lead may be a sign that nationally this may not be the easy Democratic walk to the White House that many expected," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.
"In the Democratic primaries Sen. Obama won in most states among whites with college educations. But this data show him losing among Florida and Ohio white college graduates by six points or more," Brown added.
President Bush's approval ratings are:
  • 28 - 68 percent in Florida;
  • 26 - 68 percent in Ohio;
  • 23 - 72 percent in Pennsylvania.
Florida
In a Clinton-McCain matchup, she leads 54 - 37 percent among women, while men back McCain 45 - 42 percent. In an Obama-McCain matchup, men back McCain 48 - 39 percent, while women split, with 43 percent for Obama and 42 percent for McCain.
Florida voters give Clinton a 48 - 43 percent favorability rating, with 44 - 40 percent for Obama and 45 - 37 percent for McCain.
Florida Democrats split 41 - 41 percent on whether they want to see Clinton or Obama nominated. Democrats say 64 - 31 percent that Clinton should stay in the race and 61 - 31 percent that Obama should pick her as his vice presidential running mate.
Democrats who want Clinton to win the nomination, would vote 91 - 6 percent for her against McCain, but only 43 - 36 percent for Obama against McCain.
The economy is the most important issue in their vote, 47 percent of Florida voters say, while 19 percent list the war in Iraq. Health care and terrorism each get 11 percent. Voters split 46 - 44 percent on whether they trust Obama or McCain to handle the economy. By a 52 - 42 percent margin, they trust McCain more to handle the war in Iraq and trust McCain more, 58 - 34, percent to handle terrorism. Voters trust Obama 50 - 37 percent to handle health care.
A total of 86 percent of Florida voters say they would be "entirely comfortable" or "somewhat comfortable" with an African American President.
A total of 65 percent of voters say they would be "entirely comfortable" or "somewhat comfortable" with a President who enters office at age 72.
Because of his association with Rev. Jeremiah Wright, 43 percent of Florida voters say they are less likely to vote for Obama, while 52 percent say it won't affect their vote.
The same number, 43 percent, say they are less likely to vote for McCain because of his association with President Bush, while 45 percent say it won't affect their vote.
"Sen. Obama is losing the white vote by 14 - 18 points in Ohio and Florida, which is enough to keep him from victory despite overwhelming support from African Americans. In Ohio, more than a quarter of Clinton voters say they will support McCain. In Florida, more than a third of them say they will back McCain against Obama. If he can't win a decent chunk of them back, he's got an uphill climb in these pivotal states," said Brown.
Ohio

McCain edges Clinton 46 - 44 percent among men, as she takes women 53 - 37 percent.
Men back McCain over Obama 47 - 39 percent while women tip to Obama 42 - 40 percent.
Ohio voters give Clinton a 52 - 42 percent favorability, with 44 - 38 percent for Obama and 43 - 36 percent for McCain.
Democrats say 50 - 37 percent they would rather see Clinton win the nomination. These voters say 65 - 30 percent that she should stay in the race and say 59 - 30 percent that Obama should pick her as his running mate. Democrats who back Clinton would vote for her 95 - 4 percent over McCain, but would vote only 50 - 26 percent for Obama over McCain.
The economy is the most important issue to Ohio voters, 53 percent say, followed by 16 percent who list the war in Iraq and 15 percent who cite health care. By a 46 - 40 percent margin, voters trust Obama more than McCain to handle the economy. They trust McCain more, 51 - 37 percent, to handle the war in Iraq. And they trust Obama more, 54 - 31 percent, to handle health care.
In all, 86 percent of Ohio voters say they would be "entirely comfortable" or "somewhat comfortable" with an African-American President. And 59 percent would be "entirely comfortable" or "somewhat comfortable" with a President who is 72 at the start of his term.
Because of Obama's association with Rev. Wright, 40 percent of Ohio voters are less likely to vote for him, while 56 percent say it doesn't make a difference.
Because of McCain's association with President Bush, 44 percent are less likely to vote for him, while 47 percent say it doesn't make a difference.
"Voters say they are much more comfortable with a black candidate than someone age 72, as is Sen. McCain," Brown said. "Given that the United States has never had a black President, but Ronald Reagan was 73 when he was re-elected, one has to wonder whether respondents are giving what they perceive to be the politically correct response. Still, McCain's age is a problem with many voters."
Pennsylvania Clinton tops McCain 57 - 31 percent with women. He has a 43 - 41 percent edge with men. Obama tops McCain 49 - 37 percent with women. Men split 43 - 42 percent.
Clinton gets a 50 - 42 percent favorability, with 50 - 34 percent for Obama and 42 - 37 percent for McCain.
Pennsylvania Democrats prefer Clinton to Obama 47 - 40 percent and say 65 - 33 percent that she should stay in the race. Obama should pick Clinton as his running mate, Democrats say 59 - 31 percent. Democrats who back Clinton would vote for her over McCain 93 - 5 percent, but would vote for Obama over McCain 51 - 32 percent.
The economy is the top issue for 48 percent of voters, followed by 22 percent who list the war in Iraq and 13 percent who cite health care. By a 50 - 39 percent margin, voters trust Obama more than McCain to handle the economy. They trust McCain more, 49 - 43 percent, to handle the war in Iraq and trust Obama more, 57 - 30 percent, to handle health care.
A total of 88 percent of voters are "entirely comfortable" or "somewhat comfortable" with an African-American president.
A total of 59 percent are "entirely comfortable" or "somewhat comfortable" with a President who is 72 years old.
Because of his association with Rev. Wright, 39 percent of voters are less likely to vote for Obama, while 57 percent say it doesn't make a difference.
Because of his association with President Bush, 47 percent of voters are less likely to vote for McCain, while 47 percent say it makes no difference.
"Sen. Barack Obama's lead in Pennsylvania is probably because historically it has been the most Democratic of the three swing states. Sen. Obama trails Sen. John McCain by four points among white voters in the Keystone State and the Democrat loses working class whites by eight points, while McCain wins them by double digits in Ohio and Florida," said Clay F. Richards, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.
From May l3 - 20, Quinnipiac University surveyed:
  • 1,419 Florida voters with a margin of error of +/- 2.6 percent;
  • 1,244 Ohio voters with a margin of error of +/- 2.8 percent;
  • 1,667 Pennsylvania voters with a margin of error of +/- 2.4 percent.
The Quinnipiac University Poll, directed by Douglas Schwartz, Ph.D., conducts public opinion surveys in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Florida, Ohio and nationwide as a public service and for research. For more data -- Quinnipiac University Polling Institute - Quinnipiac University, or call (203) 582-5201.
 

Notaguru2

Experimental Member
Joined
May 20, 2008
Posts
1,519
Media
0
Likes
10
Points
123
Location
Charleston, SC
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
<snip....>


If you know anything about statistics (which it seems you don't), you are comparing two things that are akin to apples and oranges. Primary results have nothing to do with General results. You can't compare performance in a primary to project results of a general election.

Lets be clear; the "swing" states you are referring to are republican strongholds - democrats haven't won WV or KY since before you were born. Florida and Michigan aren't really going to be in play because of how the DNC has treated them this primary season.

Where dems WILL make up ground is winning huge in formerly reagan -democrat red states in the midwest. These are the very areas that went heavily for Obama and barely turned out for McCain. The midwest is the most energized this election season and will determine the next President.

Hillary *MIGHT* get invited to the ticket if she cools the rhetoric.

There is no argument for Hillary to win the nomination. She will not have enough delegates; period. The popular vote and which states you win have no influence on the nomination rules. The rules are simply this; 2205 delegates = nominee.

By the way, only Obama can reach the 2205 mark. The math is there in the open. Hillary is trying to change the rules at the end of the game. it has never worked and won't work this time.

The earlier you concede this, this better off you'll be. The democratic primary rules are not rocket science. It doesn't help that not a SINGLE super delegate has lined up for Hillary since before the last primary. This is proof positive that the supers know the rules better than Hillary.
 

Industrialsize

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
22,254
Media
213
Likes
32,176
Points
618
Location
Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Hillary Clinton Leads in the Swing States - Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll
May 22, 2008

McCain Leads Obama In Two Of Three Key Swing States, Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll Finds; Clinton Has Big Leads In Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania --- FLORIDA: Clinton 48 - McCain 41; McCain 45 - Obama 41; OHIO: Clinton 48 - McCain 41; McCain 44 - Obama 40: PENNSYLVANIA: Clinton 50 - McCain 37; Obama 46 - McCain 40
Plagued by a defection of Clinton supporters and white working class voters, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, the leading Democratic presidential contender, trails Arizona Sen. John McCain, the likely Republican candidate, in Florida and Ohio, according to simultaneous Quinnipiac University Swing State polls released today. Sen. Obama is six points ahead in Pennsylvania. New York Sen. Clinton wins handily in all three states. No one has been elected President since 1960 without taking two of these three largest swing states in the Electoral College. Results from the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University polls show:
  • Florida: Clinton tops McCain 48 - 41 percent; McCain leads Obama 45 - 41 percent;
  • Ohio: Clinton beats McCain 48 - 41 percent; McCain tops Obama 44 - 40 percent;
  • Pennsylvania: Clinton tops McCain 50 - 37 percent; Obama leads McCain 46 - 40 percent.
Trinity.........did you know there are more swing states than the Clinton Campaign cares to admit??? How well does Senator Clinton do in Wisconsin? Iowa? Virginia?...answer? not very well. Other polls show Obama doing just fine in Ohio and Pennsylvania. Typical of the Clinton campaign to cherry pick 1 poll favorable to the Senator.....And i agree with the sentinment many have mentioned. Disingenuos? YES Transparent? YES Incoherent?YES...have you eaten the Clinton talking points???
 

B_CBTallthetime

Sexy Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Posts
271
Media
0
Likes
34
Points
103
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
U boil this whole thing down, and Hillary should have won it. But the Clintons are so annoying and played the race card, that they deserve to lose it.
 

Industrialsize

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
22,254
Media
213
Likes
32,176
Points
618
Location
Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
U boil this whole thing down, and Hillary should have won it. But the Clintons are so annoying and played the race card, that they deserve to lose it.
I agree with you but would have used "could have" instead of "should have"