_Noone_ said:Apparently, I can't go. Dangit!
(Forbidden
You don't have permission to access / on this server.)
LMAO, are you serious? You actually got that message?
_Noone_ said:Apparently, I can't go. Dangit!
(Forbidden
You don't have permission to access / on this server.)
Sanguinius said:Just updating here with the news that Clinton has won Pennsylvania by ten points.
http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11079243&top_story=1
Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama, who has called for withdrawing U.S. combat troops from Iraq, said on Sunday he will vote to confirm the top commander there for a new job as head of the military's Central Command.
McCain said:"It's my intention, if we win this nomination, to reject Secret Service. ... Why do I need it?"
Griffith No More! said:http://www.theonion.com/content/video/mccain_declines_secret_service
This is actually somewhat based on a true story in that McCain has actually said shit like this about the Secret Service and until recently, had declined their protection.
Griffith No More! said:Well, Obama won NC as everyone knew he would, but it's literally 51/49 in Indiana in favor of Hillary right now.
Also interesting, if nonsensical:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/cq/20080507/pl_cq_politics/politics2717881
So much for Hillary's "I'm strengthening the party, not selfishly destroying it" rationale.
SMZKAH said:Yep, we're loving every minute of this. The longer this death match continues, the better it is for us.
Vampire_Hunter_Bob said:According to aids, Obama plans on declaring victory on may 20th.
SMZKAH said:I think the party really needs to consider electability on a grand scale before they make a decision.
SMZKAH said:Yeah, that Michigan and Florida thing is a mess. Apparently though, Michigan determined how they would seat their pledge delegates (can't remember exact numbers) and the DNC just needs to approve it. Can you really just leave two states out of it though?
SMZKAH said:No matter what happens at the end, someone is going to be upset. I'm not sure which one of the two deserves it.
SMZKAH said:On the one hand, Barack has the popular vote, but 2000 showed that popular vote means nothing. Barack has also won more states, but a large portion of those are red states that will stay red in November.
SMZKAH said:Hillary has won the big states and the important swing states from the past elections. I won't attempt an experience argument here.
SMZKAH said:I think the party really needs to consider electability on a grand scale before they make a decision.
"Hillary's voice is OUR voice, and she's speaking for all of us," said the ad, purchased by a group not affiliated with the Clinton campaign called WomenCount.
"We want Hillary to stay in this race until every vote is cast, every vote is counted, and we know that our voices are heard."
SMZKAH said:There's already been too much racism, sexism, and ageism in this election season. People won't vote for senator Obama because he's black. People won't vote for senator Clinton because she's a women. People won't vote for senator McCain because he's old. Then you have the people who will vote for senator Obama just because he's a younger black man, or senator Clinton just because she's a white woman, or senator McCain just because he's a white man.
I don't like it, but it seems to be reality in this country. It will take quite a philosophical revolution to change that mindset in this country.
SMZKAH said:Consider what happened yesterday in Kentucky. I know that senator Clinton was tailor made to appeal to KY democrats, but isn't there something more going on? For the past week, every major media corporation has been describing Obama as the likely candidate (with many proclaiming him to be the democratic candidate). He has even began campaigning for the general election, and senator McCain has started treating Obama as the candidate. Even after being painted as the candidate, senator Obama could only muster the votes of 25% of KY democrats. I don't think Kentucky democrats are blind to the realities in this presidential race. Isn't senator Clinton's landslide victory, when it seems that now more than ever she's beaten, indicative of some sort of divide?
SMZKAH said:And another thing I've been thinking about that warrants discussion. Obama really has a huge following when it comes to young voters. However, voters ages 18-25 have never really turned out in significant numbers and had an impact on the general election. Despite all of the "rock the vote" sorts of campaigns and programs to try to get young voters to the polls, younger people just don't vote in large numbers. Will this change with the 2008 election, or will we see more of the same trends?
Griffith No More! said:That's why his election would confirm and define a change like you're calling for in itself, much like his Iowa win changed the dynamic of this election.
Vampire_Hunter_Bob said:Well here's a question, do you think he'll be able to sway congress and the senate in his favor in order to effectively make the changes he has been talking about?
Griffith No More! said:Obama is the real life Griffith.