<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BG7 Lavigne @ Jan 26 2008, 08:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Jan 26 2008, 08:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I can't wait for Edwards to drop, what the hell is wrong with that guy? He's wasting millions of dollars for nothing.</div> Not sure what Edwards is doing. I think he is going to end up the Vice President, and not in a cabinet position or supreme court justice. He already said that Obama was his ally in change, so I think he should just form a ticket with Obama already. </div> John Edwards would never be considered as a Supreme Court Justice. For obvious reasons.
New Delegate Count: Obama 63 Clinton 48 Edwards 26 From South Carolina: Obama 25 Clinton 12 Edwards 8
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Black Mamba @ Jan 27 2008, 01:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't know much about politics, does Obama have a pretty commanding lead?</div> I don't either but from what I've been watching/reading/hearing, yeah.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Black Mamba @ Jan 27 2008, 01:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't know much about politics, does Obama have a pretty commanding lead?</div> Its like a Celtics-Knicks blowout.
Next question, is it safe to say that Obama will be the Democrat's choice for presidency? Realistically, what are his chances compared to Mccain, Romney, and Huckabee?
2025 delegates are required to win the Democratic nomination. It's a long way from over, and it's like having a 6-4 lead in Q1 of a basketball game so far. 22 states' delegates up for grabs on super Tuesday, February 5th. I see the general election going to Obama if he runs against McCain. Both are going after the undecided/independent voters, and I think majority of those go to Obama. I do think it would break the logjam in the electoral college where most states' outcomes are secure and it comes down to who wins 2 of 3 of Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida. Obama vs. McCain and the outcomes aren't so secure. It'd be great to see. McCain would do well against Hillary. He'll get the undecided/independents. It could get dirty with the Clintons talking about the black bastard child McCain fathered (LOL) and the republicans digging up old dirt about whitewater and all the rest of the clinton scandals.
Denny, who do you see pulling out the bids for presidency from both sides? Is Rudy's campaign pretty much dead?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Black Mamba @ Jan 27 2008, 01:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't know much about politics, does Obama have a pretty commanding lead?</div> He's got a slight delegate lead that can be erased fast on Super Tuesday, but he has huge momentum, that could carry him to victories in states like New Jersey and California. He is likely to win all of the Caucus states on Super Tuesday, Clintons aren't even campaigning in them, conceding them to Obama. Illinois is a lock, and likely to be an even bigger rout than South Carolina. He has key endorsements in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania, so he will probably win those. If he got the endorsement of Ted Kennedy (which he might), he could get a huge blow out in Massachusetts with both Kennedy and Kerry endorsing him. The "A President Like My Father" endorsement should help him out too. I don't see why the Democrats don't concede the nominee to Obama other than selfishness on the Clinton's power hungry selves. Obama would win the general election pretty securely. He just inspires people to get out and vote. Like look at South Carolina, he got more votes than McCain, Huckabee, and Guliani combined. While Clinton, she wouldn't have the support of independents like myself, that Obama gets, and would lose soundly, because a lot of the independents hate her just as much as the Republicans do.
I honestly don't know who's going to win at this point. It's been a close race on both sides. Rudy and Hillary looked like the likely nominees, but as the voters have scrutinized the candidates more, their national leads have shrunk or worse. That match up would be something to watch, too - both are from NY, and we should have seen it before for the senate seat there if Rudy didn't come up with prostate cancer and had to withdraw. Rudy certainly has misplayed a wonderful hand he's been dealt by being invisible for most of the race so far. His record in NYC is outstanding, but it can't be all he runs on. I think people want to see campaign promises made - something to give you an idea of what the candidate will do if elected. Other things I notice: The Democratic voters seem to think their candidates are great. The Republicans aren't thrilled with any particular candidate. Both parties have entrenched power structures that are really being challenged this time around. Hillary was supposed to be the inevitable candidate, Obama annointed but this is not his turn/time. Romney is the candidate of the republican power structure (he was recruited to run for governor of Massachusetts as a carpetbagger and won). There are rumors that Romney's choice for VP will be Jeb Bush. History says that Edwards has the best chance of winning the presidency on the Democrats' side, and Romney or Huckabee on the Republicans' side. Sitting senators (Hillary, Obama) have been elected president twice in the last 150 years or so. History is silent on Rudy's chances. GW Bush did a remarkable thing in choosing, and sticking with, Cheney as VP. Cheney's the first sitting VP with no further ambitions for political office (e.g. the presidency). This guaranteed us a wide open race on both sides in 2008. If Cheney stepped down and let someone else be VP the last year, we might be seeing that person as clear favorite (say, Condoleeza Rice?).
I don't know much about politics either but I've been following the primaries more recently since I'll be 18 for the general elections. I haven't really heard much about the Republican party but McCain doesn't sound too bad. Living in the Bay Area I hear a ton about the democrats and I am completely turned off by Hilary. Some of the ideas she brings up are nice and I like what her husband did as president but it seems like she talks more about why you shouldn't vote for other candidates then why you should vote for her. Its really sickening to be honest, I understand its a part of politics but its getting to ridiculous levels with her. Now shes disobeying the democratic party and she and her husband are constantly shit talking and menacing. Obama and Edwards both seem to want to get away from that kind of politics. I like both of them as candidates though Edwards stands little or no chance of getting the nomination. I like Obama because hes not as hardcore democrat as Hilary, hes appealing to the undecided and I just think his policies seem more realistic than Hilary/Edwards. Hilary/Edwards both have some nice ideas, like I said, but where the hell are we gonna get the money and resources to pull this off? Pulling out of the war is one example, Hilary said if she becomes president she'll have them out within a few months, a nice thing to think about but it seems like shes just setting herself up to fuck it up by putting a set date on when they need to be out. Obama on the other hand says he'll have them out as soon as is safely possible, which makes much more sense even if it isn't the sexy answer. Anyway I still don't know much but its interesting to hear you guys give opinions and break it down for us ignorants.
Ted Kennedy to Endorse Obama anuary 27, 2008 12:26 PM ABC News' Rick Klein Reports: Senator Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., will endorse Barack Obama's presidential bid on Monday in Washington, a source close to Kennedy tells ABC News. The endorsement gives Obama a boost in the eyes of the Washington establishment, and comes after some prominent Democrats criticized Senator Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and former president Bill Clinton for their campaign tactics before Obama's landslide victory in South Carolina. Caroline Kennedy, the late President John F. Kennedy's only daughter, announced her endorsement of Obama in an Op-Ed for the New York Times on Sunday. And in an exclusive "This Week" interview, Obama hinted that the senior senator from Massachusetts might be next. "I'll let Ted Kennedy speak for himself. And nobody does it better. But obviously, any of the Democratic candidates would love to have Ted Kennedy's support. And we have certainly actively sought it," Obama said. "I will let him make his announcement and his decision when he decides it's appropriate." Obama also spoke out on Bill Clinton’s involvement in his wife’s campaign after a week of mounting tension between the two camps. In response to Bill Clinton’s comments comparing Obama’s South Carolina win to those of Jesse Jackson in 1984 and 1988, Obama suggested Bill Clinton’s "frame of reference" and racial politics may be outdated. "His frame of reference was the Jesse Jackson races. That's when, you know, he was active and involved and watching what was going to take place in South Carolina. I think that a lot of South Carolinians looked at it through a different lens. . . As long as we were focused on those issues, we thought those would transcend the sort of racial divisions that we've seen in the past," he said. The 55 percent won by Obama in South Carolina was more than double the 27 percent of the vote that went to Clinton, with Edwards coming in third at 18 percent. But Obama did clarify, however, that he did not think Clinton’s comments this week were intended to negatively harm his campaign. "I don't think they were trying to demonize me, but I do think that there is a certain brand of politics that we've become accustomed to, and that the Republican Party had perfected and was often directed against the Clintons, but that all of us had become complicit in, where we basically think anything is fair game," he said. He also reiterated that the "slash-and-burn politics" that exists in Washington today "is not the Clintons' fault. It is all of our faults, in the sense that we've gotten into these bad habits and we can't seem to have disagreements without being disagreeable. So part of what I think we have to do is to set a new tone in politics. Not a naive one." ABC News' Mary Bruce contributed to this report. http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/20...kennedy-to.html
I think the Democrats penalized Florida for changing the date of their primary, and no delegates are awarded.
