Finally the end in sight for Obama
May 12th, 2008 at 11:23 am by David FarrarMost media organisations are now reporting that Obama now has a lead amongst super-delegates as well as pledged delegates. There is no official site for super delegate counting but I use Real Clear Politics who has it Obama 275 to Clinton 271.
Clinton will probably stay in the race until the last primary, just so every vote counts but her money will now be dried up. Her only hope has been that her attacks on Obama would make him unelectable, and that super delegates would decide it for her. But now he can almost ignore her as he takes aim at McCain.
It is premature to post on the historic nature of Obama’s achievement, until it is official, but it is truly historic.
If Obama picks up half the delegates in the six primaries to go, he will add on 109 to his 1,866 to be at 1,975 – just 50 short of the 2025 he need. I suspect he will have those or get those by the 3rd of June.
Related posts:
- Obama closer but not quite there
- McCain and Obama win
- Obama in the lead
- Obama wins South Carolina by
May 12th, 2008 at 11:27 am
has anyone read Dick Morris’ columns lately?
he thinks hillary has stayed in this long, just so she can damage obama enough that he will lose come november. then she will have another go in 2012…
sounds like a good conspiracy theory, but dealing with the clintons, ya never know.
he also talks about how bill have virtually zero support to the snapperhead kerry last election – paving the way for hillary to run for nominee this time.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 11:32 am
We’ll see. I don’t think Obama has the numbers. And Michigan and Florida will be seated as well.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 11:39 am
sounds like a good conspiracy theory, but dealing with the clintons, ya never know
Heh, heh, heh. There has been quite a bit of speculation along these lines since the last set of primaries. However, if one wants it portrayed in a side-splitting way you cannot do better than this Tuesday morning YouTube treat.
Vote:
May 12th, 2008 at 11:45 am
Either way, it would be an historic nomination.
Here’s an interesting read, by the way: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-kass_bd11may11,0,4134722.column
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 11:51 am
Yesterday I had an ephinany
Unfortunately, Barack Hussein Obama will be the next president because his middle name is more like a last name
For all presidents since JFK except for Carter this has been the case
George Walker Bush
Vote:William Jefferson Clinton
George Herbert Walker Bush
Ronald Wilson Reagen
James Earl Carter
Gerald Rudolph Ford (born Leslie Lynch King)
Richard Milhous Nixon
Lyndon Baines Johnson
John Fitzgerald Kennedy
May 12th, 2008 at 11:52 am
I don’t know… I doubt that Obama can take McCain… Especially if he doesn’t offer Hillary the VP slot… But could the two work together?
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 11:52 am
sounds like a good conspiracy theory, but dealing with the clintons, ya never know
Heh, heh, heh. There certainly have been many speculative pieces of writing on this topic on political blogs (especially left-wing ones) in the US. But for my money none of them some it up like the following YouTube link.
——-
Sigh! Bloody filters.
Go to YouTube (http :// http://www.youtube.com /watch?v =B6Lstkiexhc)
Warning – do NOT have hot coffee in your hand while viewing this
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 11:53 am
The irony is that when Hilary was much younger she was one of the reformers (during the McGovern campaign) who democratised the primary processby turning it from “winner takes all” (as it still is with the Republicans) to a proportional split.
Vote:Had the Democrats still had the winner takes all system Hilary would have been the victor some time ago.
May 12th, 2008 at 11:53 am
sounds like a good conspiracy theory, but dealing with the clintons, ya never know
Heh, heh, heh. There certainly have been many speculative pieces of writing on this topic on political blogs (especially left-wing ones) in the US. But for my money none of them sum it up like the following YouTube link.
——-
Sigh! Bloody filters.
Go to YouTube and then…… /watch?v=B6Lstkiexhc
Warning – do NOT have hot coffee in your hand while viewing this
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
DAFT has been considering running a presidential candidate in the US elections. I mean after all, we just won the mayoralty of London.
Through our own polling, it is predicted that DAFT would gain about 37% of the popular vote, not matter who ran as DAFT candidate.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
1.
If the states were winner-takes-all, the campaigns would have been run very differently.
2.
Vote:Total delegates in states where Obama has won a majority of delegates: 1931
Total delegates in states where Clinton has won a majority of delegates: 1731
May 12th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
Under winner take all, Owen’s right, Obama would have been smashed at the starting gate and he’d be lining up in the VP queue today. Unintended consequences are often as harsh as they are inevitable.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 12:16 pm
One idea doing the rounds is that she wants her campaign debts paid off by the DNC.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
emmess..that’s funny..!
and i don’t mean to jeer..(ahem!)..
..but where oh where is kiwi in america..?
..with his convoluted/hindsight/fox-’talking-points’-driven ‘explainations’ of how hillary was going to defeat obama..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
It is premature to post on the historic nature of Obama’s achievement, until it is official, but it is truly historic.
How so? Because he’s a nigger? Sure
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
tom hunter – haha i love those videos.
there is a brilliant one about the band ‘Dream Theatre”. during their aussie tour they kept having venues changed etc. check it out. some funny shit!
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
sonic..obama has already offered to pay her debts..
and it would seem the door is also open to her to be vice-president..
http://whoar.co.nz/2008/obama-makes-clearest-hint-that-clinton-could-be-running-mate/
(i reckon that’s the ‘deal’ she’s brokering..
and..why not..?..
together ..they would just have to lean over..and mop up mccain..)
phil(whoar.co.nz))
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
This is good news.
Not only because I think the US needs Obama to run as the Democrat nominee (so that it can finally put the whole ‘black man as President’ behind it), but also because McCain will absolutely annihilate Obama.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
@berend
Under what scenerio would Obama not have the numbers? He leads the pledged and super-delegates. The remaining primaries don’t carry a lot of delegates.
As for Florida and Michigan, they will only be seated in a way that won’t change the outcome.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 12:38 pm
Hillary would get about 56 net delegates by seating Florida and Michigan. So it wouldn’t even bring his lead under 100 delegates. At this point Obama would benefit from seating the delegates, because it would stop the Clinton campaign from using the issue to muddy the waters.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
Well, just now I myself “had an epiphany” too – it goes like this:
It doesn’t really matter how many people harbour ridiculous, childlike opinions around Obama’s foreign-sounding middle name, (a la “anyone with Hussein in his name MUST be up to no good”) as long as those people are not entitled to vote in the US Presidential election…
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
“McCain will absolutely annihilate Obama”
In order for a Republican to “absolutely annihilate” a Democrat, a la the 1980s, they’d need to win the likes of California, New York, and Illinois (which total over 100 electoral votes between them). Those three states have not voted Republican in 20 years, and will not do so again for a generation.
There is really a hell of alot of wishful thinking going on among the NZ Right, both about the current state of the US Republican Party (which is in full-scale electoral meltdown right now – a few days ago it lost a House seat in Louisiana it had held for over thirty years), and about the ideological inclinations of the GOP in general, which is much, much, much further to the Right than anything you’d see in New Zealand. It’s not Democrats = Labour, Republicans = National, it’s closer to Democrats = National, Republicans = ACT + Destiny + the National Front. McCain was the least nuts of those running for the Republican nomination, but that isn’t saying much. He’s also over 70, and has health issues – if he picks a right-wing nutter as VP to satisfy the Base, things have the potential to get very, very scary.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Dazedmw, the super delegate count isn’t correct. And how many superdelegates have pledged support for Obama? It’s a trickle of a support, not a surge. Too many are not showing their hands. I don’t see the numbers yet and what does “pledge” mean? These super-delegates can change their mind any time. No one knows what they’re gonna do or have promised to do.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
” if he picks a right-wing nutter ”
Same old same old Stalinist drumbeat of propaganda- anyone challenging leftist dogma is naturally insane.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
philu
Once again you re-write history. I have expressed the opinion that Obama would be the Dems nominee in several recent posts. Most conservatives believe Obama to be the easier candidate to beat. A quick look at the RCP average in the swing states points to why:
General Election McCain-Obama McCain-Clinton
Pennsylvania Obama +1.2 Clinton +6.8
Ohio McCain +3.4 Clinton +5.4
Florida McCain +9.0 Clinton +1.7
On average Clinton does 8% better than Obama against. Boy – that’s a winning strategy for the Dems – pick a candidate that polls almost 10% less than his competitor in the key battleground states that are must wins to get the 271 Electoral College votes. You keep cheering on your boy phil. As for us on the right, we relish the thought of taking on this neophyte had core lefty.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
It’s not Democrats = Labour, Republicans = National, it’s closer to Democrats = National, Republicans = ACT + Destiny + the National Front.
Your opinion is not fact. And your gross generalisations only prove that you are rather dimwitted.
How so? Because he’s a nigger? Sure
Dressed to the Left, has anyone ever told you that you are a racist prick? If not let me be the first.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
Dressed To The Left – well done in lowering the tone of kiwiblog. this is the last time you get a response from me.
hopefully dave bans you for being a dick.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
“And your gross generalisations only prove that you are rather dimwitted”
That’s far too kind. Anyone so ignorant of politics as to think that the objectives of the National Front and ACT were similar in any way is a complete and utter fuckwit. The National Front (AFAIK) stand for big powerful government. This makes them (on the political spectrum) much closer to Decadentmeekat and the rest of such propagandising socialist rabble than anyone else.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
decadentmeerkat
He has “health issues”. Is there something you know that the media and general public in the US doesn’t know? His skin cancer was succcessfully removed and there have been numerous tests done since then that show no reoccurance and complete cure. He is releasing his full medical records on Memorial Day (in about 2 weeks). Oh – I suppose the Daily Kos posters have alerted you to some suppressed medical problem that I’m sure you can elaborate on.
The GOP has challenges in some Congressional races but not all. McCain’s not the ideal candidate but then name one ideal candidate on both sides ever. His maverick centrist status gives him much greater cross over appeal to Independants and the so-called Reagan Democrats. Indeed this demographic won him the key early GOP primaries in NH and SC (both open or semi open Primaries). He’s ideally suited to pick up the white blue collar working class Dems who are strong for Hillary (28% of whom say they’ll vote for McCain if Obama wins – oops when he wins the nomination). Most of these will hold their nose and vote for Obama but, in a tight race in PA for example, if only 3 – 5% of the Clinton’s people dont forget Obama’s bitter about guns and God comment, McCain will win PA. Obama is behind him in OH and FL. There just aren’t enough current Rep states that Obama can switch to make up the combined haul from OH, FL and PA. As the primary has worn on, Obama percentage of working class whites has dwindled not increased especially as this demographic learns more about his radical associations that take him so long to really disassociate himself from. Without all this demograph on his side, he will never win OH or FL.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
“Your opinion is not fact. And your gross generalisations only prove that you are rather dimwitted.”
Yes, they were generalisations. Generalisations are inevitable when trying to draw analogies between different political parties in different countries. The fact remains, however, that the Republicans have, broadly, an ‘ACT-on-steroids’ faction (see its alignment with the Club for Growth), a ‘Destiny’ faction (see Mike Huckabee, a creationist), and a ‘fascist’ faction of ultra-bigots and authoritarians (Tancredo and his mob on immigration, George Allen the Confederacy-loving freak, and so on). Hence my attempt to try and translate the US spectrum into NZ terms, to point out that NZ Tories, who may favour the Republicans out of a sense of conservative solidarity, are likely aligning themselves with a bunch of people they might not want to be associated with if they actually knew what they were talking about.
You, Bevan, clearly do not know what you are talking about, since rather than present a coherent counter-argument for my admittedly loose categorisation, you’ve gone for a weak “your opinion is not fact” (so yours is, is it?), and pathetic personal attacks. Grow up.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
“pathetic personal attacks. Grow up.”
That’s right Bevan.. Grow up and follow Dumbfuckmeerkat’s example- he calls anyone who has a political idea that challenges leftist doctrine a fascist, or a bigot, or an ultra-bigot, or a “scary right wing nutter”, but he doesn’t ever indulge in pathetic personal attacks.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
KIA:
McCain may once have been a “maverick”. However, since he got shafted by the Republican Establishment in 2000, he’s done nothing but lick the boots of the very people who shafted him. The Base still, of course, hates him (he actually has the nerve to be anti-torture, and that’s a big negative in the current Republican Party), and any attempt to pander to them in order to shore up his core vote will distract McCain from winning over independents (a section Obama, unlike Hillary, does very well in).
The “working class whites” thing about Obama is nonsense. Those people are low information voters. They’re not stupid – it’s just that politics is not something they live and breathe. They voted Clinton in the primary out of nostalgia for the 1990s, and in November will vote for whomever the Democratic nominee happens to be. The comments about crossing over to vote for McCain are nothing more than bluster, and no different from Republicans’ earlier suggestions that they’d vote Democratic out of dissatisfaction with their primary choices.
As for your wishful thinking about Pennysylvania (a state which has not voted Republican in 20 years, which has a Democratic Governor, and saw the Democrats pick up four House seats in 2006 on a GOP-gerrymandered map), two can play that game. Let me just suggest that an Obama/Richardson ticket could well flip Texas, especially given the massive fundraising advantage Obama has over McCain, and the number of blacks who relocated to Texas after Hurricane Katrina.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
KIA, McCain ahs a chance only if the Dems decide to channel Basil Faulty and don’t mention the war.
John’s “we’ll stay in Iraq for 100 years” comment wil run and run,
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
decadent
The GOP base has nowhere else to go. I know many many conservative Republicans who hate McCain with a passion but the prospect of a lefty like Obama on the tiller of power means they say they will hold their noses and vote for him. These are the same people, who, during the GOP primary season said they would stay at home and suffer a Clinton Presidency. McCain’s choice of VP will be crucial – I will grant you that.
The numbers of people saying they will vote for McCain if Obama is the nominee are higher than ever in the history of polls. Your assertion that all registered Dems (or Republicans for that matter) vote for their nominee is the only nonsense written in this arguement. In all elections, there is cross over voting and the extent of that crossover is the subject of much post-election thorough analysis by the likes of Michael Barone. Also, it is very easy to match the pre-election polls on the issue of crossover voters with the actual crossover votes cast in the Presiential elections proper. For example: 7% of registered Republicans voted for Kerry in 04 – about 50% of the number in the pre-elections polls. If, for arguments sake, we ignore the polls taken in the midst of the current Dem primary hostilities that focus on the voting intentions of Obama’s and Clinton’s supporters should their nominee be spurned and look only at the generic Obamican vs McCainocrat polls, even on this front McCain is about 17 to 9 (17% of Dems saying they’ll vote for McCain v 9% of Repubs for Obama). This means twice as many Democrats say they’ll vote for McCain as Republicans say they’ll vote for Obama. But of even greater significance is that the numbers of Democrats saying they’ll vote for the GOP nominee is TWICE as high as the polling numbers taken at about this stage in the cycle in 04 where it was clear it would be Bush 2 v Kerry.
In PA, Obama has a 1% RCP lead over McCain so a GOP pickup there is not wishful thinking. McCain is outpolling Obama in Michigan (another Dem state) and polling very close in MA, NY and NJ and miles closer than GWB ever got to Kerry. The number of blacks moving to TX after Katrina will not flip TX for Obama – that is wishful thinking of the highest order.
Still waiting for the evidence of McCain’s health problems by the way.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Sonic
Vote:Where have you been all these months? All the McCain camp has to do is run the whole quote (not the first 15 secs that Obama’s team runs) where McCain tells the full story and puts the length of stay of US troops in Iraq on the same footing as the 66 year presence of US troops in Germany which no one here objects to. Even the left leaning MSN realise that dog wont hunt and have accused Obama of lying about what McCain said. Nice try.
May 12th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
The party that brought us Swiftboat veterans for Bush and Rush Limbauagh complains about a out of context quote!
Has anyone got any thread my sides have split?
Finally KIA, remember what Obama has already achieved, he beat the most heavily favoured candidate in years to the nomination
Indeed he beat a Clinton, something your side never seemed to manage!
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Having seen numerous posts from “Dressed to the Left” I think it is finally time to call it as a troll along the lines of Robert Owen, Robinsod, with all the usual tactics.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Sonic
Clinton has made some strategic blunders based on her and her husband’s hubris (no on-the-ground organisation post Super Tuesday to cite but 1). No – the real reason for Obama’s victory is the Democrat’s bizarre proportional delegate allocation system. That alone is the reason for this long protracted race and for Obama’s ascendency. If the Dems had the GOP winner-take-all system, Clinton’s victories in the big states (CA, NY, NJ, TX, OH PA etc) would’ve seen her win enough delegates by Super Tuesday to have severely wounded Obama – TX, OH & PA would’ve pushed her over the top. The Democrats penchant for caucuses vs primaries in smaller states also played in his favour – many more of their primaries were decided this way than the GOP. Caucuses result in extremely small turnouts (eg in Iowa with 3.5 million people, only 120,000 Democrats voted which is less than 10% of registered voters. Caucuses are time consuming and are only held in weeknight evenings and so historically (on both sides) they favour the activists. On the Dems side, the activist base is far more left wing and so the caucus results favoured the more left wing Obama over the more centerist Clinton.
Obama deserves full marks for understanding and working the Dems silly system better than Clinton but if you think his slight delegate vote lead in such a convoluted system means he will dominate the general electorate the same way, you’re going to have the same surprise that the MSM had when Bush beat Kerry.
Oh and in case you forgot, Clinton won in 92 and 96 thanks to Perot splitting the right. He only got 42% and 47% of the popular vote respectively. GWB’s 04 result was the first President to get over 50% of the popular vote since his father in 1988.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
You, Bevan, clearly do not know what you are talking about, since rather than present a coherent counter-argument for my admittedly loose categorisation, you’ve gone for a weak “your opinion is not fact” (so yours is, is it?), and pathetic personal attacks. Grow up.
Read Redbaiters comment slightly below mine. The comments you have made and the relationships you state are absolute nonsense – you have attempted to make connections and insinuations to make the party you disapprove of seem even worse. And if you want to play the which party is the most racist, then answer me this: Which US political party currently has a party president that “wanted to be the president for guys with confederate flags on their pickups”?
Fact is all sectors of society have dispicable elements, but that should not tarnish a whole society or grouping because of the actions or views of a few individuals? If so do you have a membership to Southern Kinks as well?
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
The party that brought us Swiftboat veterans for Bush and Rush Limbauagh complains about a out of context quote!
Please dont tell me you believe the Democrats never engage in this kind of activity?
I’ll need more than thread – my sides have split!
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
” No – the real reason for Obama’s victory is the Democrat’s bizarre proportional delegate allocation system”
You mean it is Democratic?
If you think McCain can beat any democrat in this economy and with the war still dragging on you are in for a surprise mate, still perhaps if he runs on the golden legacy of George W Bush!
Still you can always blame the emm sss mmm and enjoy another 8 years of peace and prosperity!
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
Exceprts from my own blog this a.m.:
For those who missed it, a Huffington Post report cited a “senior” Clinton insider on the campaign’s exit strategy; winning as many votes as possible by 3 June, taking a week or so to pitch to the superdelegates, and wrapping up by 15 June…
So the question is, if she is to bring the plane down, say in mid-June, how bumpy a landing will it be?
Carl Bernstein says that those who know her well are increasingly of the view that it will be, “Just bumpy and scary enough to shake the Obama campaign one last time and get her into the hangar as the vice presidential nominee on the Democratic ticket.”
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
Dressed to the Left, has anyone ever told you that you are a racist prick? If not let me be the first. Well done in lowering the tone of Kiwiblog.
How so, faggots? What the fuck else would David be implying in that sentence? If Obama was a white man there would be no ‘historic’ nature in his achievement. Who remembers how Will Clinton or George W Bush secured their nominations, or John Kerry for that matter? Being a President is a historical achievement. Securing your party’s nomination is not, in David’s words, “truly historic”, unless you are a black man.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
How so, faggots?
If your only objective is to be a complete and utter wanker, then congrats – you’ve succeeded.
Hey decadentmeerkat, using the logic you were earlier to try and make the Republicans look bad using the old guilt by association tactic. Does that mean the the entire Left Wing in NZ can now be generalised by Dressed To The Left’s disgusting comments?
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Sonic
Call it democratic all you want – the system has favoured the candidate on the left and protracted the race. The system gave Obama a tail wind downhill run at the nomination so spare us the expert campaigner rhetoric. For us on the right, we couldn’t be happier – the farther to the left the Democrat nominee is, the more difficult it is for him/her to win the General. Obama is in good company – he has Stevenson’s elitism, McGovern’s dovish troop withdrawal policy, Dukakis’ doctrinnaire liberal positions on abortion and other issues and Kerry’s flip flopping all nicely overlaid with a smorsgasbord of hard left associates that he only disavows when their extreme positions become difficult to shake off. Add to that a small hard core of working class white Clinton supporters who cant bring themselves to vote for a black candidate – McCain’s people cant wait!
If McCain is dug tucker, why does he lead Obama in the key swing states on FL and OH? Obama favours withdrawal from Iraq. US opinion since the Petraeus’ strategy’s succesful implimentation has moved more towards allowing him to finish the job. People still oppose the war but oppose troop withdrawal. I wonder which candidate is on the right side of this more recent trend. You do need to keep up.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
If your only objective is to be a complete and utter wanker, then congrats – you’ve succeeded.
Attacking the person instead of the argument there Bevan? Seriously, explain to me how what I said was not what David was referring to or fuck up. And since when did a meathead like you get so PC that a nigger is somehow disgusting?
I’m a Right-winger who dresses to the left by the way, you dumbass.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
Attacking the person instead of the argument there Bevan?
Let me remind you of the first personal attack in this exchange:
How so, faggots?
Remember who uttered those words? Or is your tactic to be as offensive as possible then cry when called on it?
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Having seen numerous posts from “Dressed to the Left” I think it is finally time to call it as a troll along the lines of Robert Owen, Robinsod, with all the usual tactics.
Having seen your crappy post, I think it’s time to call you a retard who attacks the person and not the argument. Anyway, I got my language from computer games, see: http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2008/05/grand_theft_auto_iv.html – not my fault it’s not illegal.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Actually Bevan you were first by calling me a prick, you dumb shit. You still haven’t addressed my point that the statement regarding Obama securing the nomination being historical would not be so historical if he wasn’t black.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
I know it is a popular opinion to say that McCain is going to “destroy” – or some such term – Obama, but I really don’t think so. I mean, what strategy is McCain going to employ to beat Obama so easily? People may not have noticed (too much FOX news perhaps) but George W Bush is actually quite unpopular at the moment, hence every candidate and their dog singing the “Change” song from day 1. The Democrats will tie McCain to Bush, and so they should, as McCain is just too similar to Bush. They differ on torture and global warming, but apart from that they hold a lot of the same positions. People want a president with judgement, competence, and intelligence, and Obama will give them that. Hillary would too, but she isn’t going to be the nominee, or the VP candidate either, I don’t think. People see the incompetent federal response to Katrina and want something different, they see the Bush adminstration loading every available position with cronies who now oversee the industries they used to lobby for, they see the Bush administration sell them down the river for foreign oil, and they see the Bush administration pander to the Saudi dictatorship while slamming the Iranian government. They see the hypocrisy, the incompetence, the complete absence of reality. But don’t worry people, the long nightmare is almost over. Ladies and gentlemen, it’s time to restore competence and accountability to the White House. Bring on November.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Actually Bevan you were first by calling me a wanker, you dumb shit.
Idiot, I called you a wanker at 3.55pm, you called myself and dime faggots at 3.48pm – how in the fuck did I make the first personal attack? So who is the dumb shit then?
Maybe its historic cause for the first time ever the US has had a primary where a woman and a black man were the front runners? Or can you not see through all the racial hatred pent up inside you?
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 4:29 pm
KIA, McCain has had a free ride for two months, yet his numbers have not moved.
He should be streets ahead but is stuck, not a good omen.
“US opinion since the Petraeus’ strategy’s succesful implimentation has moved more towards allowing him to finish the job”
Got a number on that, last poll I saw had an even bigger majority wanting out of the Iraq morass than ever.
You are aware that Petraeus’ has already left Iraq? Do try and keep up mate
Oh I forgot, thats probably more evil mmmm ssssssss mmmmmm lies.
Did you read Pat Buchanan’s comment on McCain?
“the jobs are not coming back, the illegals are not going home, but expect lost more wars!”
Yup, thats a winning platform and no mistake.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 4:40 pm
KIA:
“The GOP base has nowhere else to go.”
They could stay at home. The Libertarian ones could vote for Ron Paul, who may be intending to run as an independent. They certainly won’t be motivated to turn out and vote against Obama in the same way they would turn out and vote against Hillary.
“The numbers of people saying they will vote for McCain if Obama is the nominee are higher than ever in the history of polls.”
Perhaps because, you know, Hillary has turned the primary into an exceptionally bitter one? As soon as she drops out, and (assuming she cares about the good of the party) endorses Obama, those people will engage in a few days of sulking before falling into line. No way will the Democrats vote for a continuation of the last eight years.
“Your assertion that all registered Dems (or Republicans for that matter) vote for their nominee is the only nonsense written in this arguement.”
Where did I say that *all* registered Democrats or Republicans vote for their nominee? I’m very well aware that there are plenty of registered Democrats in the South who have probably never voted for a Democratic Presidential candidate in their lives. My point is that it is silly to think that Clinton supporters will prefer McCain over Obama. Pretty much any Democrat who votes for McCain wouldn’t have voted for Hillary in November anyway.
“In all elections, there is cross over voting and the extent of that crossover is the subject of much post-election thorough analysis by the likes of Michael Barone. Also, it is very easy to match the pre-election polls on the issue of crossover voters with the actual crossover votes cast in the Presiential elections proper. For example: 7% of registered Republicans voted for Kerry in 04 – about 50% of the number in the pre-elections polls. If, for arguments sake, we ignore the polls taken in the midst of the current Dem primary hostilities that focus on the voting intentions of Obama’s and Clinton’s supporters should their nominee be spurned and look only at the generic Obamican vs McCainocrat polls, even on this front McCain is about 17 to 9 (17% of Dems saying they’ll vote for McCain v 9% of Repubs for Obama). This means twice as many Democrats say they’ll vote for McCain as Republicans say they’ll vote for Obama. But of even greater significance is that the numbers of Democrats saying they’ll vote for the GOP nominee is TWICE as high as the polling numbers taken at about this stage in the cycle in 04 where it was clear it would be Bush 2 v Kerry.”
McCain is his party’s clear, undisputed, nominee. Kerry, at the same point in 2004, was his party’s clear, undisputed, nominee. Obama is still in the middle of a primary battle (well, he’s to all intents and purposes the nominee, but he’s still confronted with Hillary’s last-ditch attempt to kneecap him). Wait until Hillary finally drops out, and a fairer comparison can be made.
“In PA, Obama has a 1% RCP lead over McCain so a GOP pickup there is not wishful thinking. McCain is outpolling Obama in Michigan (another Dem state) and polling very close in MA, NY and NJ and miles closer than GWB ever got to Kerry.”
The most recent poll out of Pennsylvania gives Obama a nine-point margin over McCain. If Obama imploded, then yes, I could see McCain winning the state, but its recent track record is giving Democrats narrow wins (Wisconsin is similar – it hasn’t voted for a Republican Presidential candidate since Reagan in 1984, but the margin is always tight). Massachussetts, New York, and New Jersey are cases of sulky Clinton supporter syndrome. They won’t go Republican, and in fact New Jersey is famous for leading the Republicans down the garden path in terms of getting their hopes up only to dash them in the actual voting.
“The number of blacks moving to TX after Katrina will not flip TX for Obama – that is wishful thinking of the highest order.”
Not by themselves, but if Obama picks Richardson as his running mate, you’ll be looking at very high minority turnout in a state where a majority of the population is now non-white. If McCain has to spend time and money (of which he is kind of short) playing defence in Texas, then that’s resources he can’t spend on Ohio and what have you.
“Still waiting for the evidence of McCain’s health problems by the way.”
His melanoma has been of the recurring variety (1993, 2000, and 2002). In 2001 he had surgery for an enlarged prostate. He apparently suffers from arthritis in his shoulders and knee as a result of wartime wounds. Given that McCain, if elected, would be the oldest person ever to enter the White House, is it not unreasonable to fear the prospect of, say, Vice-President Huckabee?
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
Obama is a true political phenomenon.
Aside from any other factor there has never been a political fundraiser like him: US$195 million raised and just for a primary. This is unprecedented.
Under Federal Election laws Clinton has to the Convention to replay the US$11 million personally advanced to her campaign – after the start of the Convention she can only recover US$200,000. It’s probably not a too bigger issue for the Clinton’s: they (mostly President Clinton) have earned US$100 million since President Clinton left the Whitehouse.
She is unlikely to be the democratic nominee for Vice President. Despite Republican claims (advanced for partisan reasons), she has a number of weaknesses and baggage – she would incentive Republicans out to vote in the way that Obama and his VP candidate (assuming its not Clinton) would not. Also the Democratic Party will not want to incentivise the sort of behaviour that Clinton has engaged in, in the future. Plus it breaks the theme of his campaign: change.
Don’t put any store on polling that says poor white folks without college education in big states won’t vote Obama but instead a significant number will go McCain. Why would poor white folks without college education buck the general trend of voters against the GOP. I suspect they more the hear and see of Obama the more they will like him once Clinton is outta the way.
My friend Kiwi in America never acknowledges the fundamental problems faced by the GOP. They have just lost two special Congressional elections (Illinois and Louisiana) in a row and may lose a third in northern Mississippi (where Bush got 60% of the vote).
They are facing a mood for change with an elderly candidate, who the GOP establishment didn’t want, who is out of sorts with the GOP base on Immigration, who doesn’t really like the Evangelicals and they don’t like him, with an incumbent President who is deeply unpopular. No sign yet the McCain’s fundraising is dramatically picking up.
McCain’s strength and that of the GOP is national security and defence – in all other policy areas they are well behind the Democrats. The problem might be that the US election is fought on domestic issues within a background of general dissatisfaction with Iraq.
As to the assertion that Republican voters have no place to go – a few will cross and go for Obama because they are impressed with him as an individual. The problem for McCain is that to win he’s got to all the voters identified as Republican (a reduced number) plus two thirds of independents breaking for him – this is a big ask even with McCain’s appeal to independents.
The biggest danger for the GOP is that Republican and Independent voters simply don’t fear an Obama Presidency – they are somewhat indifferent to the fortunes of the GOP.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 5:16 pm
dacedent
The GOP base were motivated for sure to vote against Clinton mainly because of her policy proscriptions. Obama is even more to the left. I mingle with grumpy conservatives all the time. They dislike Obama ideologically more than Clinton. The Clinton’s always triangulated and were essentially centerists. Obama is a doctrinnaire lefty. Ron Paul is a nutter. He may run on a Libertarian ticket. He’ll get the same number of votes from the far right as Nader as the Green candidate will get on the far left. Paul and Nader will cancel each other out.
“They voted Clinton in the primary out of nostalgia for the 1990s, and in November will vote for whomever the Democratic nominee happens to be”. The poll stats I posted refute that assumption. You seem to be unable to read the poll questions. The pollsters ask their preferences assuming Obama or Clinton is actually the nominee and so the results are not diluted by the primary race. You fail to address the issue of crossover voters. You are blithefully assuming that Obama has the magical power to defy history. The polls show that about 50% of those who say during the primary season that they will cross vote do actually cross vote. Obama’s poll numbers show that twice as many Dems say they will cross over than with Kerry. We all know they all wont but we also know that some do and we know pretty much how many do.
One poll in PA is not a trend. The RCP average has Obama and McCain has them tied at a time when the press attention has been 80% Obama 20% McCain – that will even up especially as the policy positions between Obama and McCain come into more sharper focus as the media have been focussing on a the battle on the left. McCain will never win NY or NJ but to poll so much closer to Obama than Bush ever polled to Kerry means Obama must spend time in so-called blue states holding off McCain’s undoubted North East state appeal.
You assume gets the Richardson VP slot – a very long shot. Plus your figures on TX are as way off as your opinion. 2000 breakdown of registered voters in TX White 52%, Hispanic 32% African-American 11.5 http://www.eagleton.rutgers.edu/News-Research/NewVoters/Ethnicity_tbls.html#table1
Your health stuff is all supposition. It presupposes a reoccurence of his melanoma – there is no medical evidence of that. More men die with prostrate cancer than of it and the survival rate of anyone having surgery is very high. Arthritis – it is not debilitating. After all Franklin Roosevelt was President for 12 years with polio damage, using crutches and a wheelchair and fighting a world war, I’m sure McCain will be fine with a sore shoulder and a stiff knee. His age is an issue. I do not believe that Huckabee will be the VP. The odds in conservative circles are on MN Gov Tim Pawlenty having the inside running.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 5:16 pm
“The biggest danger for the GOP is that Republican and Independent voters simply don’t fear an Obama Presidency – they are somewhat indifferent to the fortunes of the GOP.”
Then they and other Americans must be made to fear an Obama presidency.
There’s his leftist leanings, dodgy friends and mentors and questionable foreign policy for starters.
The hard right blogs are already on to him.
It won’t take long before such discoveries of Obama make it to the mainstram, especially if the blogs have anything to do it.
http://www.nominister.blogspot.com has posted on the unsuitability of Obama several times already.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
Sonic
You dont understand the trend in polls. If you look at Bush v Gore in 2000 then Bush v Kerry in 2004 the trend in polls went roughly as follows.
* In the primary race the Dem candidate was slightly ahead (McCain is ahead in the battleground states so that is against the trend)
* The Dems usually hold their convention first and the candidate gets a bounce (this range from Dukakis who was 17% up on Bush post convention in 88 to Kerry who was only about 10% up on Bush)
* The GOP convention hauls that back to a closer race
* The General Election campaign is when voters really pay attention (in 88 Bush easily overhauled Dukakis after the Willie Horton ads, Bush and Gore went down to the wire Bush led by 3 until the 3 days before polls stuff on his drink driving came out and they were level pegging. In 2004 Bush overhauled Kerry graually through October to be up by 5 and Kerry pegged that back slightly to lose by 2.5)
Bottom line – McCain is doing just fine.
Pew Research’s March 2008 poll on the war in Iraq states: “American public support for the military effort in Iraq has reached a high point unseen since the summer of 2006, a development that promises to reshape the political landscape.
According to late February polling conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, 53 percent of Americans — a slim majority — now believe “the U.S. will ultimately succeed in achieving its goals” in Iraq. That figure is up from 42 percent in September 2007.
The percentage of those who believe the war in Iraq is going “very well” or “fairly well” is also up, from 30 percent in February 2007 to 48 percent today.” http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=A553EE3A-3048-5C12-00094F73CEC7BAD1
Pat Buchanan wandered off the mainstream conservative reservation years ago and is not respected or listened to (except by lefties looking to manufacture conservative in house fighting) since he bitterly opposed the Iraq war in 1991 so his comments on this war in Iraq do not reflect anything other than his extreme isolationist views.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
“The Clinton’s always triangulated and were essentially centerists. Obama is a doctrinnaire lefty.”
KIA, do you base this on any policy differences? I can’t see any sort of difference between them except for quite narrow ones. He’s a centrist.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Chris Diack
Congressional races and Presidential races have for many elections produced quite differing results. Reagan won re election in a landslide but lost the Senate in 1984. Similarly Clinton lost the House hugely in the 1994 and 1996 yet easily won re-election. If McCain was as affected by the Louisiana loss as you claim, he’d be polling way behind Obama all over the show and the fact is he’s not. I dont know if you’ve ever voted here. People vote all over the ticket. Only a percentage vote what is called straight ticket.
Like decadentmeerkat, you make generalisations about crossover voters that are based on the hope that Obama will wave his wand and the Independents and Reagan Democrats will jump into line. You fail to address the actual polls. If Obama is so magical, why is there such a historically high number of Dems saying they’ll vote for McCain. Oh – because naughty Hillary is saying bad things about him. What the Clintons can and do attack Obama on is a mere shadow of the attacks he will get from the right and we saw what happened in the Philadelphia debate when he gets asked the hard questions and isn’t shielded by an adoring media – he fell apart. He makes great stump speeches but has a glass jaw when asked the hard questions. Clinton is so close to Obama ideologically that there was a huge raft of issues she could never attack him on – all issues that McCain (or 527s on the right on his behalf) will gleefully attack him on.
You rightly identify the GOP’s danger. The reality of an Obama Presidency will focus the minds of the right. I’m witnessing the process amongst my social conservative McCain hating friends right now. Many have held off on donating until he announces his running mate. The funding gap will not be as big nor as relevant. McCain has boxed Obama in on the federal funds issue – Obama said he will accept the $85m federal funds cap and now wants to renege. McCain wins both ways – if Obama honours his pledge then there will be no gap. If Obama reneges, McCain will be able to raise enough and tag Obama with the flip flop tag that worked so well against Kerry.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 5:55 pm
NeilM
Politicians leave legislative tracks as markers to their ideology. Trouble with Obama is he has so little history to go on. When he was in the IL Senate he voted “present’ 140 times and usually on the tricky ideological issues like gun control to avoid getting tagged. However his blocking of the IL State version of the Federal Infant Born Alive Act (designed to force abortion providers to resuscitate any infant that survived a late term abortion) was unique in all legislatures State and Federal. This Act passed the Senate 99-1 (even pro-abortion lions such as Kennedy and Boxer voted in favour). It passed most state legislatures either unanimously or in huge lop sided bi-partisan majorities. Obama’s views are so extreme on this issue that he used his power as IL State Senate Chairman to block the IL version from ever coming to the floor for a vote. That not a centrist position.
Clinton said she would not negotiate with Iran without some demonstrable evidence that they were canning their nuclear programme – Obama said he would talk to Iran, Cuba, North Korea and Venezuela WITHOUT preconditions. That’s hardly centrist. Maybe that’s why Hamas and Hugo Chavez are on the record rooting for an Obama win.
Bill Clinton voted for welfare reform – something that is an anethma to the left.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
Chris Diack: “My friend Kiwi in America never acknowledges the fundamental problems faced by the GOP.”
I think that it’s still too early to expend a lot of energy trying to surmise the outcome of the Presidential election. But, if anything, Chris’ point about the “the fundamental problems faced by the GOP” is understatement. Consider…
Perceptions about the state of the Union. Rasmussen 22 April: “Just 16% of Likely Voters believe the Unites States is moving in the right direction… 77% disagree and say the nation is heading down the wrong track.”
Not helpful when the other side will spend a record amount of money portraying you as more of the same and there are lots of lovely images for them to use of you embracing the most unpopular president for countless generations…
Record energy on the Democratic side: Rasmussen again: “During the month of April, 41.4% of Americans considered themselves to be Democrats. Just 31.4% said they were Republicans and 27.2% were not affiliated with either major party… The partisan gap now shows the Democrats with a 10.0 percentage point advantage over the Republicans. That’s the largest advantage ever recorded by either party. In fact, before these past three months, the previous high was a 6.9 point percentage point edge for the Democrats in December 2006.”
And the list of endangered GOP Congresspeople and Senators keeps growing. We can add Dole now. Rasmussen 11 May: “The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in North Carolina Hagan attracting 48% of the vote statewide while Dole earns support from 47%. A month ago, Dole led Hagan by thirteen percentage points.”
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
kiwi in america – thanks for all your interesting contributions and unique insight. Contributions from the other side like jafapete’s and Chris Diack’s are useful, too.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Thanks ISeeRed. I have to say that some of the comment on this particular thread is of a very high quality.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 6:26 pm
Kiwi in America
1. “Congressional races and Presidential races have for many elections produced quite differing results….”
Yes but these elections are occurring now in Republican held Districts (Louisiana GOP for 30yrs) during the primary in the run up to the general election… not two years after a Presidential election or during a re-election attempt by an incumbent President.
We also know that House Republican’s aren’t financially supporting the defence of these seats …. that tells us about the money and the psychology.
2. “generalisations about crossover voters that are based on the hope that Obama”
Not at all. The Indianna Primary was an open one – Limbaugh and Co invited Republicans to vote Clinton on the basis of picking the candidate that the GOP wants to face.
In addition of course more Clinton affiliated voters will say they will – switch she’s the underdog and is loosing but isn’t out of the race yet. There is a higher level of confidence from Obama voters that their candidate will be the nominee.
When Obama is confirmed as the nominee, we will see.
The point remains that the number of GOP affiliated voters is smaller and McCain has to win the vast bulk of Independents in order to win – a tall order.
I don’t actually believe in a Messianic Presidency nor that Obama is magical or a wizard. He has simply knitted together all the ingredients needed for the successful campaign better than any other Democratic opponent. Plus he is brave.
You seem to have a lot invested in the outcome.
3. Unleashing the Hounds of Hell against Obama
You are correct the Republican’s and their associated groups might try this – their own candidate (to his credit) isn’t into this sort of thing – it might also backfire – tone will be important. In politics one needs to adapt the tactics to the situation faced – and the situation faced by the GOP is different.
4. Federal Matching Funds
Actually Obama has said he is keen to take matching funds (and therefore cap overall expenditure) but only if he and McCain can reach agreement on the 527’s (third party groups). Otherwise he as said he will privately fund the campaign – this means no spending cap. This would be a significant development in US politics.
5. Fear in Politics – to know Obama is to fear him.
Fear always plays a part in politics but I guess it will probably cut both ways.
6. A permanent Presence in the Middle East
Foreign Policy expertise is a big issue for Obama he may address it in the VP candidate. Actually the middle east is in no way comparable to Germany, Japan and Korea historically or culturally or religiously. And a permanent presence won’t necessarily deal with the Iran issue. I thought it one of the more unfortunate things said by McCain.
7. IBAA
You have raised this before here is my reprinted reply
Re the Infant Born Alive Act, actually Goldwater would probably agree with Obama’s reasoning here – medical decisions about abortions are left between women and her doctor there is no government interest in the matter once the lawful right to an abortion is established. The IBAA is from my reading is just as I described – it covers 1% of abortions most of which are occurring because something is seriously wrong with the foetus in the first place.
It’s the sort of politics that has brought the Republican Party into such difficulty – an excessive focus on issues of personal morality at the expense of the fundamentals – ever rising government expenditure and hugely expensive foreign entanglements.
And actually I guess it might be somewhat rich to have pro life issues trust in one’s face by people who support the Government’s right to indefinitely imprison without charge and without due process and engage in reprehensible “coercive interrogation techniques” picked up from the Nazi’s … yes very pro life. At least McCain has publicly committed to ending this sort of behaviour. Terrorism doesn’t justify dropping one’s own standards – it actually requires upping them.
What you do to the least of mine (add in undeserving) you do to me – applies surely not only to infants but to adults too.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 6:36 pm
jafapete
Agreed – a bit premature.
McCain is fighting in an environment undoubtedly hostile to the GOP. He has differed enough from Bush esp on the war to be less tagged by Bush. If all these state of union polls and enery of the base polls were so damaging to McCain’s chances – he’d be so far behind the Democrat and yet he’s not nor is he heading that way. Truth is the Dems have flirted with two weak candidates who’ve spent $150m and 9 months bashing each other up.
McCain is a dogged come from behind fighter who was not my first choice as many will know from earlier posts. He won on the back of a coalition of Independents, GOP voters and some (but not huge numbers) of Reagan Democrats. This will be his formula in the fall. Social conservatives will grumble and mumble but when faced with a choice, will bite the bullet. Most of Clinton’s people will do the same. The key to McCain success is the cross over vote. Obama will be a victim of the Bradley effect (Bradley was the former AA major of LA who ran for CA Governor – polls had him easily 5 points up on his white opponent and yet he lost by 3). It is hip for academics and the urban left to support an AA candidate – in ‘bitter’ land far from the media elites in Manhatten that shape mainstream media opinion (that is fawning all over Obama), things are less ‘progressive’ shall we say.
Obama is precisely the kind of candidate that GOP strategists believe can assist in turning what in normal years would be likely defeat into victory. He is a joy to someone like Karl Rove – an only partially ploughed field who, with only cusoring digging has produced gold aplenty for the fall elections. Obama’s left leaning ideology and associates mean little in a race involving voters on the left, it will matter hugely in the general. We love the Dems – nominating ideological lefties with little experience.
Folks – its been a pleasure but its bedtime here.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
Idiot, I called you a wanker at 3.55pm, you called myself and dime faggots at 3.48pm – how in the fuck did I make the first personal attack? So who is the dumb shit then?
Maybe its historic cause for the first time ever the US has had a primary where a woman and a black man were the front runners? Or can you not see through all the racial hatred pent up inside you?
Read my post again, I had edited it – you the the first to call me a prick, fool. And how the fuck does what I say differ from what you said, that David was referring to Obama’s race? In fact, Obama (or at least his spokesperson) a few weeks back detested the fact that Bill Clinton said this would be historic because of his race, so you’re the racist one dickhead.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
you are so ‘full of it”..kia..
do you plan on subjecting us to this ’till november..?
what happened to all your (convoluted/purported) reasons for/factors in ‘clintons certain defeat of obama’..eh..?
you gave him a snowballs chance in hell..and none..of defeating clinton..
cos’ she blah blah blah blah..!!
on and feckin’ on..
as i said..
you are so ‘full of it’..
phil(whoar.co.nz
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
Dressed To The Left – youre the one that called obama a nigger.
typical hateful little victim leftist.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 6:57 pm
KIA,
Obama’s not the only one with a few embarrassing things in his past. I think I heard him say over the past few days something about the “Keating 5″.
I also look forward to the MSM looking a little more closely at the sources of McCain’s funding (apart from his wife). They’ve already started to do that.
Now, aren’t you glad politics isn’t like that here…
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 7:02 pm
Dressed To The Left – you’re the one that called Obama a nigger.
Typical hateful little victim Leftist.
I was saying exactly what David was thinking – and making the point that that is the exact sort of racist thinking that he was expressing, by saying that it was historic because he was black. And I’m not a Leftist you dumb shit, I supported Mitt Romney. You’re the one who said you wouldn’t respond to me anymore, fool.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
“And I’m not a Leftist you dumb shit”
You sure talk like one, from what I have read here you are just another of the left wing pinko trolls.
It might pay to get used to the idea of a conservative world, Brown is on his way out, McCain will be the next Pres and comrade Clark is toast.
Vote:Our cousins across the ditch will wake up and toss Crudd out at the next election and the world will be a much better place.
May 12th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
Well it’s not my fault you’re an idiot who doesn’t know I’ve voted ACT in the last two elections big bruv and that I don’t act like the rest of the Dad4Justice type Right-wingers here who think Helen Clark is the devil and funnily enough, likes to label anyone who disagrees with them as pinko trolls rather than attacking the argument.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
“I don’t act like the rest of the Dad4Justice type Right-wingers here who think Helen Clark is the devil and funnily enough, likes to label anyone who disagrees with them as pinko trolls rather than attacking the argument.”
You’ll find that such nuanced non-conformity doesn’t go down too well around here, Dressed To The Left. You’re either with us, or you’re with the terrorists.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 7:30 pm
Riiiiiiiiight….you have a screen name “dressed to the left” and you claim to be an ACT voter yet you are more than happy to abuse people at the drop of a hat, you also have a soft spot for Clark despite nine years of abuse of power and endless examples of corrupt governance.
Silly me, for a moment I thought you were just another of the tiresome left wing trolls, why on earth would anybody doubt you?
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
hey, dressed. you may imagine that you’re entitled by distance or some special other bit of wankerhood to use the word “nigger” but you’re not. Using it to make whatever point makes you a racist. Automatically. Forever. There’s no doubt DPF meant that a man of colour becoming a first tier candidate for President would be historical. Calling Obama a “nigger” is about as redneck, retarded and pissant poor as you can get. Next you’ll be calling HC a “cunt”. Just because you can. Just because it’s he internet. Grow the f up.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
Who else thinks that francis is blissfully unaware that he’s just effectively called himself a racist?
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 8:21 pm
Smug. Pointless. Mind-free. Maybe Poneke was right.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 8:22 pm
Calling Obama a ‘nigger’ is about as redneck, retarded and pissant poor as you can get. Next you’ll be calling HC a ‘cunt’. Just because you can. Just because it’s the internet. Grow the fuck up.
Guess what? Obama is black, therefore he’s a nigger. It’s the word black people fucking use themselves, in case you’ve never heard of rap music. This is the internet, so grow some balls and stop being such a PC cockface. You’re about as retarded as someone who finds it offensive to be called a homosexual as if there was anything wrong with it (http://www.themiddlewing.blogspot.com/).
Riiight… You have a screen name “Dressed to the Left” and you claim to be an ACT voter yet you are more than happy to abuse people at the drop of a hat, you also have a soft spot for Clark despite nine years of abuse of power and endless examples of corrupt governance. Silly me, for a moment I thought you were just another of the tiresome Left wing trolls, why on earth would anybody doubt you?
Believe it or not, I don’t actually give a fuck about what you think. And Dressed to the Right doesn’t exactly rhyme.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
There’s no doubt DPF meant that a man of colour becoming a first tier candidate for President would be historical.
Hey guess what, Obama does not actually appreciate you mentioning that, you racist. He actually called Bill Clinton out on it too dumbass. Do you think maybe that’s why David pussied out of saying it outright himself?
You may imagine that you’re entitled by distance or some special other bit of wankerhood to use the word ‘nigger’ but you’re not. Using it to make whatever point makes you a racist. Automatically. Forever.
Hey guess what, you just used it yourself to make a point, dumbass. By the way you sound like a complete retard. Automatically. Forever.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
KIA, we’ve discussed before your rather dodgy selective attitude to statistics. (iirc it invloved proving that the crime rate was lower in the USA as long as we ignored murder)
On Iraq you do the same thing I’m afraid
http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm
“Do you favor or oppose the U.S. war in Iraq?”
Lowest ever in April
Well I could go on, but key stat.
“Which comes closest to your view about what the U.S. should now do about the number of U.S. troops in Iraq? The U.S. should send more troops to Iraq. The U.S. should keep the number of troops as it is now. The U.S. should withdraw some troops from Iraq. OR, The U.S. should withdraw all of its troops from Iraq.”
David Paul Kuhn’s opinions do not a fact make I’m afraid.
Also, you neglected to respond to my point about the economy or the legacy of George W Bush.
You seem to be relying on the the Bradley effect” without explicitly admitting what that is.
Your hopes rest on the opinion that most Americans will not vote for a black man?
A slender hope.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
Oh and David, can we lose this dressed to the left doughball?
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 8:29 pm
BB: “It might pay to get used to the idea of a conservative world…”
Wouldn’t be in such a hurry there Bruv. The Dems are odds on to make significant further gains in both houses of Congress, and McCain’s got some big obstacles to negotiate (see above) before he gets to the Whitehouse. Note that Rasmussen Markets data “gives Democrats a 61.8% chance of winning [the wh] in November”.
I guess the Labor Government in Oz might count as conservative, but I’ll be surprised if they’re tossed out at the next election. Rudd’s a little to clever to stuff up that much I’m thinking. And have you seen the state the Libs are in?
Edit: I’m inclined to agree with Sonic on the doughball.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 8:39 pm
I suppose you’d support the banning of Grand Theft Auto as well, Sonic? Or South Park?
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
Nope just you for being a doughball, if you cut out the “me me me me me me” style of your discourse who knows. However given your comments above I think a spell in the sin bin is warrented.
Not my call of course, but if you went to my blog and acted like that I’d ban your ass in a second.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
Bloody Hell….I find myself agreeing with Sonic twice in one day!
Dressed…… I am glad that you do not care what I think, seeing as that is the case then you will not be distressed when I say that I think you are a complete and utter fuckwit who seems to derive some cheap thrill from using the word nigger, you are one sad individual.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 8:44 pm
Well it’s a shame your blog blows too much ass for me to visit it. I don’t do the me me me bullshit, dickheads just decided to get all PC and worked up over my comment regarding DPF’s sentence. By the way, your posts are pretty shit themselves, and you’ve done 1403 of them.
Big Bruv… What’s the difference between calling someone an utter fuckwit and someone a nigger? Anyway, I’m not surprised by your double-standards considering your use of D4J-style vocabulary in that final sentence.
[DPF: This thread should end now. Someone is very close to another 100 demerits which would be a two month ban]
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 8:45 pm
Hey Sonic
Do you ban people at your blog for blatant trolling?
Edit: Dressed, the term “Nigger” is highly offensive, in your case the term “fuckwit” is a statement of fact.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
I think we’ve given doughball boy enough attention today bruv old bean.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 8:52 pm
Yeah fair point…..anyway, how long before you ban my ass from your blog for blatant trolling Sonic?
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 8:54 pm
What name you using?
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 8:54 pm
Dressed, the term ‘nigger’ is highly offensive, in your case the term ‘fuckwit’ is a statement of fact.
Hey, the Chief Censor in NZ seems to think it’s OK so long as it’s R18. Don’t blame me, I’m just an innocent computer game enthusiast who enjoys watching South Park on C4. If you are a Right-winger, aren’t you against hate-crime legislation anyway? If you want me to stop using the word nigger then tell your Churches to stop using the word sinners.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
Oh and KIA
At the polls, it has been a massacre. In recent weeks, Republicans have lost a Louisiana House seat they had held for more than two decades and an Illinois House seat they had held for more than three. Internal polls show that next week they could lose a Mississippi House seat that they have held for 13 years.
“In the polls, they are setting records (and not the good kind). The most recent Gallup Poll has 67 percent of voters disapproving of President Bush; those numbers are worse than Richard Nixon’s on the eve of his resignation. A CBS News poll taken at the end of April found only 33 percent of Americans have a favorable view of the GOP — the lowest since CBS started asking the question more than two decades ago. By comparison, 52 percent of the public has a favorable view of the Democratic Party.”
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10238.html
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 9:19 pm
Obama might well win the nomination. But the Clinton’s have smeared Obama so thoroughly as an elitist liberal who has black radical friends that Obama will lose in November (see Bill Clinton’s recent speeches in West Virginia if you want to see a really good example of how to slime an opponent).
Vote:Which sets up Hillary Clinton for 2012…
(Watching the Clintons in action makes Karl Rove look idealistic and naive).
May 12th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
Sonic
You are quite right – the polls all show the Democrats well ahead of the Republicans.
But we all know that if anyone can totally screw up the perfect situation, the Democrats can.
Vote:May 12th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
Obama would be utterly mad to have Clinton as is VP, he
Vote:would need a dozen food tasters as President.
With Clinton stating that Obama will have trouble with the so
called bitter white voters does he need a running mate far to
the right of him ?
One like Senator Webb, a Marine platoon commander in
Vietnam, ex- Republican and a right prickly sod.
Very pro gun etc.
Not a bloke to back down as he showed with a run in with
Bush.
It would take care of the, I worship my firearms and then the bible Democratic types.
May 13th, 2008 at 7:25 am
Sonic, jafapete and Chris Diack
You fail to differentiate between generic public opinion about the war in general (still very opposed) compared to the specific policy of immediate troop withdrawal (Obama’s position). The Pew poll reveals a more nuanced position. It is perfectly logical to oppose the war but still let Petraeus finish the job. Oh and he’s actually been promoted to the entire Middle East theatre command (including of course Iraq). His understudies will carry on his successful tactics – in case you missed all that detail. If all you have to go on is MSM reports of Iraq then believing that all is lost in Iraq is understandable.
I’ve stated in earlier posts – the Presidential vote and the Congressional vote are often separated. People tend to vote more their generic party affiliation for Congress and vote more the man (or women) for President. That is why the crossover voting is so crucial. It is interesting to note the tactics of the successful Democrat candidates who won the special elections you (and others) make reference to. Both ran as so-called Blue Dog Dems. Both put maximum distance between them and Obama (interesting tactic) and ran on pro-gun, anti abortion anti illegal immigration positions. I wonder what Obama’s position is on those issues (oh – thats right he’s pro gun control, very pro abortion and sanguine about illegal immigration). So if the point you are making is that Obama will benefit from the sentiment coming from these two special elections, I’d venture to say that the position is a whole lot more complicated.
Congressional approval ratings are now less than half Bush’s poor ratings and guess who controls both Houses of Congress. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi poll very low in approval after a relatively short time in the job and the approval of Congress is at an ALL TIME polling low. George W Bush at just over 30% is low but nowhere near the lows plumbed by Truman or Nixon. He is a drag but not as much as would be the case with the other GOP nominees. This is because Americans remember McCain and Bush’s bitter 2000 nomination battle. McCain has been a thorn in Bush’s side plenty of times and has been opposed to Bush on the best Iraq strategy.
On the economy, it is a drag on the GOP for sure. The war in Iraq was going to be the killer issue that was destined to fell any GOP candidate in 08. It was a net minus for them in 06 for sure. With improved conditions, the media here are eerily silent – silence on Iraq news usually means good news that ought not be reported less the left’s meme of defeat in Iraq be somehow interrupted. Unemployment has bottomed out and in fact the unemployment rate ticked down below 5% last month after 6 months of small rises. The 1st quarter 08 GDP growth was a paltry 0.6% but many were predicting negative growth. Remember – a recession is 2 consecutive quarters of negative growth and the last Q07 was 1.4%. The stock market has stabilised and has had some steady rises and with the mortgage crisis, the worst seems to have passed. There is still major hurt in the property market but a good friend is a 20 year veteran of up and down markets in Arizona and he feels their market has bottomed and AZ is one of the 7 states hit hard by the sub prime meltdown. The point is that, like Iraq, steady improvements in the economy as they take hold through the year will act as less of a head wind to McCain. Obama is campaigning on tax increases – I know it worked for Helen Clark in 1999 but every candidate for the Presidency in the US who has campaigned on raising taxes has come a cropper.
Vote:May 13th, 2008 at 7:32 am
Chris Diack
Vote:We’ve really thrashed this abortion thing and the IBAPA (the P is for Protection as that is the Act’s full name). My point (and it will be the point that McCain and/or the 527 surrogates will make) is not the specifics of abortion policy. Your comments reflect I feel a realistic assessment on the state of US debate on abortion. The issue is Obama’s ideological position. His conduct on the IBAPA puts him fair and square on the hard left. This issue will be melded with others (his associations with troublesome lefties but one) to portray him as out of touch with mainstream America. He was so far out of mainstream on this issue that tagging him will be a cinch. It is one of the few legislative footprints he left since he broke the IL record for voting “present’.
May 13th, 2008 at 8:12 am
is cocaine really cheap in america at the moment..?
(anyone else got any other explanations..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:May 13th, 2008 at 8:26 am
KIA, I see you are still pushing the emmmm ssssss emmmm are not reporting the good news from Iraq meme.
In fact since bottoming out in December the US death toll is steadily rising again. 30 in Feb, 40 in March and 52 last month.
The US media may not be reporting it, but the situation remains a defeat.
Vote:May 13th, 2008 at 8:58 am
The US media may not be reporting it, but the situation remains a defeat.
Yep, Saddam is grinning to himself right now from his Presidential Palace laughing in the face of the global community. Oh wait.
Vote:May 13th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
While the US army wallows in flowers and sweets thrown by grateful locals!
Oh wait.
Vote:May 13th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
While the US army wallows in flowers and sweets thrown by grateful locals!
Oh wait.
Shit sonic, by your definition, when did the War against Japan finish? The unconditional surrender in 1945? Or was it when the last Japanese soldier surrendered?
Vote:May 14th, 2008 at 10:49 am
“when did the War against Japan finish?”
When the Allies stopped losing 3/4 men dead a day.
Still lets all agree, the war is over so now the US can withdraw the 150,000 troops they have in Iraq?
Vote:May 14th, 2008 at 10:53 am
Sonic
How would you feel about the Yanks giving the Burmese Generals 10 hours to sort out their shit before coming in to save the hundreds of thousands of people at risk?
Vote:May 14th, 2008 at 11:05 am
Bruv, have you not learned any lessons from Iraq?
It seems not.
Vote: