|
|
Post by QUIET As Kept on Feb 12, 2008 19:19:56 GMT -5
VA goes to Barack
|
|
|
|
Post by Prissy New Year!!! on Feb 12, 2008 19:36:19 GMT -5
He will definately win DC, I think they are predicting Maryland will be close. Obama may actually win the Democratic nomination. I am surprised by the number of white voters he is attracting.
|
|
|
|
Post by QUIET As Kept on Feb 12, 2008 19:44:51 GMT -5
On Meet the Press this weekend, they were saying if he wins VA, DC & Maryland by enough of a margin, he might be able to pull even and possibly slightly ahead of Clinton
|
|
|
|
Post by Prissy New Year!!! on Feb 12, 2008 19:47:37 GMT -5
On Meet the Press this weekend, they were saying if he wins VA, DC & Maryland by enough of a margin, he might be able to pull even and possibly slightly ahead of Clinton Which is why those so called Super Delegates are going to be so important. It will be close either way. |
|
|
|
Post by coldfront06 on Feb 12, 2008 20:02:56 GMT -5
Hillary basically conceeded these contests...she is banking on winning Ohio and Texas. If she loses either/both of those, it looks good for Obama.
|
|
konfucius1911
OOA pledge
"Failure (in itself) is NOT a sin, but LOW AIM most definitely is."
Posts: 204
|
Post by konfucius1911 on Feb 12, 2008 20:31:43 GMT -5
Hillary basically conceeded these contests...she is banking on winning Ohio and Texas. If she loses either/both of those, it looks good for Obama. Well, I can't speak for the Hispanic/Latino population in TEXAS, but I'm a resident of SAN ANTONIO; and most BLACKS here ain't feeling Hillary; 4Real. She is scheduled to debate OBAMA at University of Texas next week, I believe; and I attend to be there |
|
|
|
Post by Prissy New Year!!! on Feb 12, 2008 20:48:24 GMT -5
Hillary basically conceeded these contests...she is banking on winning Ohio and Texas. If she loses either/both of those, it looks good for Obama. CNN is estimating that Obama now has more delegates than Clinton. He is leading by 2, this includes elected delegates and super delegates. If it keeps going like this, it will be too late for her by the time they get to Ohio and Texas. |
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Feb 13, 2008 9:29:57 GMT -5
Based on what I saw last night... Obama needs to run the table and he needs to win by significant margins when he does win. Because Democrats do proportional delegates the more you win by - the more delegates you get. This is an election where basically every vote cast counts. Your 1 vote means alot, because it's not just about winning it's about how much you win by.
They showed some projections last night where if Obama (or Hillary) win every remaining primary by a percentage of 55 to 45 NEITHER one of them will reach the number of delegates required to win the nomination. It would be decided at the Convention. And if it's decided at the convention my hope is that Obama is ahead at the time which will make it much more difficult to justify nominating Hillary on the basis of Super Delegates.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gee-Are on Feb 13, 2008 10:51:48 GMT -5
It just seems wrong that if either Obama or Hillary wins more states, more votes, AND more pledged delegates that there would be any question as to what the superdelegates should be doing.
They'd better figure it out or it WILL be a cakewalk for the Repblicans...how many people are going to go vote when they feel like it won't matter just like 2000?
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Feb 13, 2008 10:57:31 GMT -5
I know the Clinton Machine is like the Dark Lord of Sith in politics...
...but I have to hope and believe that the DNC will not be so stupid as to allow the Super Delegates to over rule the popular vote. I think like Ghost that the energy the Democrats have now basically ensure a win in November, but pulling a fast one like that will disenchant many folks
|
|
|
|
Post by ACES on Feb 13, 2008 11:11:01 GMT -5
our primary is next tuesday and the Obama machine is making it's way through 'Sconsin...folks around here are pumpin' up our primary as if it could swing things in either direction (clinton or obama) but I just don't see wisconsin as being that significant. Surely not as significant as Texas, Ohio or Pennsylvania....
|
|
|
|
Post by Gee-Are on Feb 13, 2008 11:24:48 GMT -5
It could be significant Aces if the margin is by a lot. Texas likes winners, and as much as Clinton has a hold on the Latino and white woman vote there, white males and some women and blacks will be swayed to vote for the person they feel will win. The only time this doesn't hold up is when it's red vs. blue. It will take a miracle of the highest order to switch Texas over to a Blue state.
Also, the fact that Clinton is using a play from the Giuliani playbook doesn't bode well for her. To skip over Wisconsin and not even really mention them is a problem. People take notice that she's discounting citizens' votes and don't appreciate it. You've got to prove that you have nationwide appeal, not just in the biggest states.
Plus with the constant leadership shakeups in the past few days and the string of losses, adding another loss will only break down the Clinton camp's psyche more. It was already discussed that they felt they would have the nomination wrapped up by Super Tuesday and when they didn't is when the organizational fracturing started. They'd spent most of their money thinking they wouldn't need it after then and were too confident only to be disappointed. They obviously didn't care enough about the heartland, focusing only on the "big" states not realizing how much they actually mattered.
How can you be trusted to run the country and you can't spend your campaign finances correctly? and your leadership needs to be shaken up in the home stretch?
The funny thing is, they might have had the nomination wrapped up if Edwards had stayed in the race, but oh well.
|
|
|
|
Post by ACES on Feb 13, 2008 11:30:44 GMT -5
good points Ghost....
|
|
|
|
Post by QUIET As Kept on Feb 13, 2008 11:34:56 GMT -5
Also wanted to point out that in recent races, he also appears to be chipping away at her core groups (particularly women), and in areas where black and Latinos tend to get along/work together he does well, and that is the case in Texas as much as Clinton has a hold on the Latino and white woman vote there, white males and some women and blacks will be swayed to vote for the person they feel will win. |
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Feb 13, 2008 11:52:03 GMT -5
The Clinton campaign is in defense mode right now. You can expect them to step up more forceful (and likely) negative campaigns in the future. She is betting her nomination on Texas and Ohio - she is making her stand there. If she can't hold off Barack there (and he's building momentum) then she'll likely go into the convention "circling the drain". Again, at that point we just have to hope the superdelegates don't overrule the popular vote
|
|
|
|
Post by Champs Elysees on Feb 13, 2008 12:34:30 GMT -5
This is absolutely fascinating to me!
Fact of the matter is, the more Obama wins, the more he wins! How does Hillary only count on Texas and Pennsylvania when she HAS NOT WON IN THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY???
When Obama won Iowa, we saw that "white" people are voting for him and we jumped on board. Then, more whites jumped on and now Latinos are on board. The Change Express is real. It's damn real! And believe it or not, Obama is gonna give Hillary a run for her money in Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania.
The TJMS crew were asking Roland Martin if Obama (or Michelle) should make an appearance at Tavis Smiley's State of the Black Union forum in Louisiana because of his string of recent Clinton defeats. Absolutely not was his answer.
Obama is now in the lead. He is etching away at Hillary's base of support and if he is to sew this thing up and make himself the obvious choice, he has to campaign as hard in the remaining states as he did in the beginning. Hillary, however, will be at the forum.  She is losing the black vote with each race and sorely needs it if she's going to do anything.
People are talking about the Latino vote in Texas. Yes, they are faithful to the Clintons, but they are a MINORITY. Let's not forget the WHITE people. More of whom are jumping on the Change Express with each primary and caucus. Obama's victories have been more and more decisive with each contest because of WHITE VOTERS.
I say, Obama, kill the mosquito with a hammer! 
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Feb 13, 2008 12:46:41 GMT -5
Good posts. I think Ghost made a really good point. Texans are a different kind of people and they're proud of it. They like everything big, and you can ask Tony Romo if you don't believe me, Texas LOVES a winner. Hillary might be campaigning hard for the Latino vote, but as Lady L pointed out, the largest demographic there is white people. Obama's been doing good with men... plus there's a good amount of black people in Houston (which was 3 million plus the last time I checked which was years ago). He's chipping away at women, but I expect Hillary to pull out all the stops because, she's basically betting her nomination on Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. I expect the campaigning to go negative.
|
|
|
|
Post by FatalDST on Feb 13, 2008 14:40:26 GMT -5
Dont yawl worry.... we down with Obama... and let me make clear Latinas are not quite the same as Mexicans.. least not here.. the latinas may like Billary, but mexicans like Obama cause his father was a imigrant like most of them and their ppl!
|
|
She is losing the black vote with each race and sorely needs it if she's going to do anything.
"They get two Roos and a snap." ~ perroloco{=}http://s2.images.proboards.com/tongue.gif{/=}{=}http://s2.images.proboards.com/tongue.gif{/=}