Originally Posted by WickedLou9 They are saying that Obama is going to re-gain some ground after the TX caucuses are over. Hillary's big wins don't seem to amount to much after all. They weren't big wins. They were marginal at best compared to what she really needed. 51% in Texas ...
| | #21 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ ![]() ![]()
| Originally Posted by WickedLou9 They weren't big wins. They were marginal at best compared to what she really needed. 51% in Texas and 54% in Ohio is basically what the polls showed before going in. And everyone was saying beforehand that she would need to do A LOT better than that if she wanted any chance at leading in the delegates. As it stands now Obama will win the rest of the southern states as well as the mountain states. He pulls big numbers in those regions. But even if he loses them all, Hillary still has to pull extremely large numbers in every remaining primary if she wants any chance at beating him in delegates.
Also 51% in Texas is not much in the primary. According to Slate, as of right now she's only picked up 3 delegates in Texas. And she'll likely lose them all in the caucus. Ohio hit Obama, but not really hard enough. Ohio was her best result, and if every remaining primary goes like Ohio did last night, she still loses. So yea, even though she won three states last night she didn't have any real gains in her viability of winning the nomination. She needs much stronger gains than she got last night if she wants any chance at winning. So even though she won three primaries, she actually moved herself further from the nomination. The more under performing primaries we get through the less likely it is for her to get the lead in delegates. She had a huge chance in Texas and Ohio last night to make some headway against Obama and she blew it. Two weeks ago she had a 10 point lead in Texas. Now it looks like she's going to have lost delegates there... that's devastating to her viability. She had a 20 point lead in Ohio two weeks ago which was cut in half.
__________________ No good decision was ever made in a swivel chair. Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid: As we look back in history, the Founding Fathers would be cringing to hear people talking about eliminating earmarks. Last edited by JaJae; 03-05-2008 at 01:46 PM. | ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #22 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ ![]() ![]()
| Originally Posted by Publius But because of the structure of Texas the delegate counts, Obama's percentages will be worth a greater percentage of the delegates. If Obama and Hillary break even on percentages, it's very likely Obama will come away with more delegates. And in return he could actually win Texas.
Hillary won the popular vote in Nevada by 6 points, but lost the delegate count... We could easily see a similar scenario in Texas. | ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #23 | ||||
| Ignore list is for pussies. Realist ![]() ![]()
| he needs 60-ish percent of the remaining delegates to win she needs 95% of the remaining ones........ where's the fat lady? | ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #24 | ||||
| Never, never, never give up Conservative Party High Point, NC ![]()
| I just can't see Obama doing this. Especially with him in the back seat. No way. | ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #25 | ||||
| Ignore list is for pussies. Realist ![]() ![]()
| |||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #26 | ||||
| Dirty Liberal Democrat South Jersey ![]() ![]()
| |||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #27 | ||||
| Ignore list is for pussies. Realist ![]() ![]()
| |||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #28 | ||||
| no es mi culpa Independent Beantown ![]()
| Originally Posted by David Octavius i meant for the democrats, i'm a mccainer too, but as far as i'm concerned obama or clinton, same thing, one's just more likable than the other....
__________________ There is small disproportion betwixt a fool who useth not wit because he hath it not and him that useth it not when it should avail him. | ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #29 | ||||
| no es mi culpa Independent Beantown ![]()
| Originally Posted by 7960 indeed. unfortunately i think too many will vote purely based on those "issues".
| ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #30 | ||||
| Governments should fear their people Paleolibertarian ![]()
| |||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #31 | ||||
| Ignore list is for pussies. Realist ![]() ![]()
| Originally Posted by Linzyhop oh, I know
I'm never sure if I should laugh or get violent when a woman says "they're only voting for obama because he's black, but it's time this country elected a woman!" or when a black says "they're only voting for clinton because she's a woman, but it's time this country elected an african american!" | ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #32 | ||||
| Political Genius Republican Yorba Linda Ca. ![]()
| Originally Posted by Publius
And how should they answer a direct question? I sounded to me like Hillary might accept Obama as her VP and he was rather put off by the question. Both are slinging mud at each other today, so the make nice party ticket will be long in coming if ever.
__________________ Sock It To Me! ![]() "Bureaucracy is a Parasite that Preys on Free Thought and Suffocates Free Spirit!" - Douglas Adams | ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #33 | ||||
| Political Genius Republican Yorba Linda Ca. ![]()
| I have said it before, and I will repeat it again. I think it would be foolish for Obama to risk his political future by hitching up to the Clinton Wagon. Her negatives and her scandal problems might well continue. I would bet on it. He has plenty of other chances to run with more experiance not tied to her record. | ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #34 | ||||
| Lurker libertarian Kutztown PA ![]()
| I would lose a lot of respect for Obama if he entertains this idea, it also seems like (another) desperate campaign move by Clinton. I don't think theres anyway in Hell that she would even be thinking about Obama as a VP if she were up by 100+ delegates. Plus I don't see any positives that Clinton brings to the ticket that Obama doesn't, the only one you can kind of make an argument for is her "experience". Outside of the fact that shes been riding her husbands coattails I don't see what she has over Obama. | ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #35 | ||||
| 100% L.A. Livin' Independent Los Angeles, CA ![]()
| Obama won't accept. These two really don't like each other now. They're just playing nice on camera, but if you had them in a private conversation, I bet $50 that they would drop f-bomb's and just rip them apart. | ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #36 | ||||
| helluo librorum The Lab Moderator Humanist Chicago Suburbs ![]() ![]()
| | ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #37 | ||||
| 100% L.A. Livin' Independent Los Angeles, CA ![]()
| Originally Posted by 7960
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() HAHAHA!!! I almost fell out of my chair reading that. Don't you think Bill wouldn't of cheated on her, if she did that? | ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| Register to Post a Reply |
| Bookmarks |
| ||||||
| Thread Tools | |
| |
| vBulletin 3.7.2 -- Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. | Custom Artwork and Theme (TM) 2006, Liberty Lounge |