The 2008 presidential field at-a-glance

[KAPital PHINUst]

Originally Posted by srmom

That may be true, but I can't see the delegates so willfully disenfranchising hundreds of thousands of people nationwide who voted in the primaries. McCain won the majority of the votes, that's it. Ron Paul only got around 7% or so in each state - so it is kind of delusional to think/hope that the delegates would give him the nomination

The delegates are sent to the convention as representatives of the voters, supposedly they have some moral compass that would keep them from just getting together and saying, "to he** with what the voters want, we'll just pick whoever we want."

The delegates' obligation to vote for McCain is only to the extent that they are a legally (as opposed to morally) bound delegate. That's it.

Ex. Ohio (I think) is a "winner take all" state. McCain won Ohio. But guess what? The delegates are under NO obligation to vote for him--Ohio's delegates are unbound.

The MSM is presuming that because Romney and Huckabee threw their support to McCain, their delegates automatically get assigned to McCain as if they are legally bound. Not so. Hence in part the presumption that the nomination is hemmed up. Those delegates can vote for whoever they wish, frontrunner status be darned.

IMO, I think the MSM's numbers on McCain's delegates are significantly, if not grossly, inflated. If McCain had the nomination locked up, we wouldn't have a need for a convention to decide it.

[KAPital PHINUst]

Originally Posted by nittanyalum

There's no having intelligent discourse with a zealot. Paul is a blip on the screen. He will never hold national office. KIM.

Uhhh, he already holds a national office. He is a U.S. Representative (who btw secured his re-election to Congress).

P.S. Intelligent discourse isn't naively making decisions based on a biased source that are perpetuating myths, misconceptions, and half-truths and passing them off as fact (read: the MSM).

"We're not a respectable (TV) network. We're a whorehouse network. We take [ratings and profits] any way we can get it." ~Frank Hackett (Robert Duvall), from the movie Network.

[nittanyalum]

Originally Posted by KAPital PHINUst

Uhhh, he already holds a national office. He is a U.S. Representative (who btw secured his re-election to Congress).

I meant executive office. But thanks for clarifying a point that everyone already knows. He's got a nice, cozy, no-opponent-in-the-general-election congressional seat there that he can stay comfortable in. And enjoy.

ETA: I just read your edited/added parts and again, don't assign all your big-word-mumbo-jumbo to me 'cuz you don't know me, and I'd caution you that making decisions based on zealot-driven websites, blogs and I don't know how else the Paulettes communicate, leaflets, maybe?, is the best way to go either. And oo, a movie quote against "the system". That's unique. And effective in "intelligent discourse"! But hey, you do you.

[texas*princess]

Originally Posted by srmom

While Hill and Obama are spending their campaign $$$ smearing mud on each other, McCain will be setting himself up as "the statesman" above the fray. It would be better for the dems to broker some deal, because if not, they are going to waste months and money on the fight for the nomination - BUT, I don't see that happening.

I don't see that happening either... they will both fight until the bitter end I think.

Hill did hint to a joint ticket with Obama as her VP, but I don't think he'll go for it.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by nittanyalum

I meant executive office. But thanks for clarifying a point that everyone already knows. He's got a nice, cozy, no-opponent-in-the-general-election congressional seat there that he can stay comfortable in. And enjoy.

ETA: I just read your edited/added parts and again, don't assign all your big-word-mumbo-jumbo to me 'cuz you don't know me, and I'd caution you that making decisions based on zealot-driven websites, blogs and I don't know how else the Paulettes communicate, leaflets, maybe?, is the best way to go either. And oo, a movie quote against "the system". That's unique. And effective in "intelligent discourse"! But hey, you do you.

Don't they communicate by racist Ron Paul newsletters, according to the press about a month ago?

Perhaps even more funny than Kapital PhiNust's claim that the Republican delegates are all going to abandon McCain is the idea that if they did, they'd go for Ron Paul because despite his inability to win many delegates in the primaries, more people will be interested in voting for Ron Paul in the general election.

It's worth a chuckle to really think it through.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by srmom

That may be true, but I can't see the delegates so willfully disenfranchising hundreds of thousands of people nationwide who voted in the primaries. McCain won the majority of the votes, that's it. Ron Paul only got around 7% or so in each state - so it is kind of delusional to think/hope that the delegates would give him the nomination

The delegates are sent to the convention as representatives of the voters, supposedly they have some moral compass that would keep them from just getting together and saying, "to he** with what the voters want, we'll just pick whoever we want."

Particularly when things have ended up as decisive for McCain with GOP voters as they have, and he's polling as well against the Democratic candidates as he is.

It's not that I think he will necessarily win the general, but he won't end up with the GOP equivalent of of Mondale and Dukakis results, I don't think.

[texas*princess]

Why is Obama making such a huge deal about the tax returns? Is it to prove he makes less than her and is more like "one of us" to try to make himself more appealing or something?

What does it really matter what any of them make? They are politicans.... Hill is even married to a Former President... I'm sure they make a ton of money just for speaking at events and such.

I guess I don't get it why it's such a huge deal? Maybe I'm missing something?

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by texas*princess

Why is Obama making such a huge deal about the tax returns? Is it to prove he makes less than her and is more like "one of us" to try to make himself more appealing or something?

What does it really matter what any of them make? They are politicans.... Hill is even married to a Former President... I'm sure they make a ton of money just for speaking at events and such.

I guess I don't get it why it's such a huge deal? Maybe I'm missing something?

I'm guessing, and that's all it is, is that he expects that the sources of the Clinton's income, in terms of Bill's outrageous speaking fees and maybe even some corporate boards, will rub a lot of people the wrong way, and maybe even just a little bit of how hard it will be for them to keep selling "we speak for the common" man when people see the amount and sources of income.

The Obamas are rich by most people's standards, but I don't think their household income will seem as bad in comparison.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by SECdomination

All the sorostitutes and fratdaddies are overanalyzing everything again.

Uh...at a loss?

Originally Posted by SECdomination

I wasn't trying to imply that Barack Obama is a terrorist. What I WAS implying is that international terrorists groups that hate America would be thrilled to see Obama put in office, as opposed to McCain or Hillary.

Then just say this.

Osama Obama has been used over and over and it's usually used to play-up his name and the general fear of Islam, rather than a discussion of his views on terrorism. So there's no way to assume that you mean it differently than others have used it.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by SECdomination

All the sorostitutes and fratdaddies are overanalyzing everything again.

I wasn't trying to imply that Barack Obama is a terrorist. What I WAS implying is that international terrorists groups that hate America would be thrilled to see Obama put in office, as opposed to McCain or Hillary.

pssst ......guess what everytime you do the "Osama Obama" thing.....you aren't doing anything but helping it along....


try focusing on an issue.....a RELEVANT issue

[DaemonSeid]

and this is being whispered along

(US News) Senior Democratic strategists, many of whom had previously panned talk of a Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton ticket, are now talking up the idea of a ticket headed by Barack Obama with Hillary Clinton as his running mate.

"The campaign has created a lot of hurts, but it might be the only way she can get to the top job," said a party strategist with ties to the Clintons.

"It would give her a chance to deal with all her negatives, but she'd have to prove herself in the job," said the strategist. Another suggested that the twinning is unlikely but might be the best way to rally the party against John McCain, the likely Republican nominee. "If it happened--if, if--they might be able to build on the change message by saying this is the biggest change in politics ever."

What's more, he said, by having Clinton as vice president, it would mean that former President Bill Clinton wouldn't have as large an office in the White House as he would as first husband, meaning his actions would win less attention by the media. Both Democratic and Republican lawmakers have said in the past that women face a glass ceiling in politics and that grabbing the vice presidency is the best way to break through.

Republican officials, told of the Obama-Clinton buzz, said that it would be an easy ticket to beat because it would include two very liberal candidates who've proposed massive new spending programs and who lack McCain's experience.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/...n3900078.shtml

[DSTCHAOS]

The Obama "how rich am I" comparison is lost on me, too. I know that he is doing what other politicians do and that's try to appeal to as many people as you can appeal to. So getting his endorsement from the labor union and some of his initiatives will lead to an attempt to say "I'm not in the top % of this country, I'm closer to the rest of this country than Clinton is."

****

Does Obama have corporate sponsors or not? My friend and I were talking about how all of these endorsements can lead to a conflict of interests. Whose agenda do you really push if you're being funded by corporations AND labor unions? The interest of the corporations directly conflicts with that of the labor unions in most regards. Even when workers and labor unions are having their demands met, it is still in the best interest of corporate profit and capitalism. So that is one thing that some of us question when it comes to politics.

The only reason I'm asking this about Obama specifically is because his supporters basically had a parade when he was endorsed by the labor union.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

The Obama "how rich am I" comparison is lost on me, too. I know that he is doing what other politicians do and that's try to appeal to as many people as you can appeal to. So getting his endorsement from the labor union and some of his initiatives will lead to an attempt to say "I'm not in the top % of this country, I'm closer to the rest of this country than Clinton is."

****

Does Obama have corporate sponsors or not? My friend and I were talking about how all of these endorsements can lead to a conflict of interests. Whose agenda do you really push if you're being funded by corporations AND labor unions? The interest of the corporations directly conflicts with that of the labor unions in most regards. Even when workers and labor unions are having their demands met, it is still in the best interest of corporate profit and capitalism. So that is one thing that some of us question when it comes to politics.

The only reason I'm asking this about Obama specifically is because his supporters basically had a parade when he was endorsed by the labor union.

I thought the Teamsters was a really big deal.....now I am wondering....

[texas*princess]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

I'm guessing, and that's all it is, is that he expects that the sources of the Clinton's income, in terms of Bill's outrageous speaking fees and maybe even some corporate boards, will rub a lot of people the wrong way, and maybe even just a little bit of how hard it will be for them to keep selling "we speak for the common" man when people see the amount and sources of income.

The Obamas are rich by most people's standards, but I don't think their household income will seem as bad in comparison.

If that is really the case (which I know you are only guessing, 'cause so was I), then I think he's more lame now than I thought he was before.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by texas*princess

If that is really the case (which I know you are only guessing, 'cause so was I), then I think he's more lame now than I thought he was before.

Yeah, it seems a little lame, but as he gets a little sullied with the Rezko situation, he probably thinks that he is still clean in comparison, and I think he probably is. So, he's looking for ways to remind people of that.