MERGED--> NH predictions + Hillary's win + NH recount? - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-05-2008, 01:54 PM   #46
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 04:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2
Are you going to vote for an experienced, tested military man who has over a quarter-century history in Congress, countless political friends and has proven he can reach across the aisle (not to mention supports victory in Iraq) or the young, new guy who hasn't done any of that stuff, but can give a speech?
It's not about supporting "victory" in Iraq. At all.
__________________

__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 01-05-2008, 02:01 PM   #47
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
2861U2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: watching the Cubs
Posts: 4,255
Local Time: 04:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




and this is why Obama would beat McCain in the general.

I'm not so sure. The head-to-head matchups I've seen are about even. Assuming Obama gets the nomination, I'm confident that in the next 10 months, the Obama hype will cool down. I think as people research him beyond his charisma, by summer he will look, seem and act just like every other politician that he continuously insists he is not. I know all Obama likes to talk about is change and hope and the future. That's fine and all, but that alone won't carry him to November. He's going to have to prove himself and show he knows what he's talking about. I just don't know if he's got it in him.
__________________

__________________
2861U2 is offline  
Old 01-05-2008, 02:23 PM   #48
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 04:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




and this is why Obama would beat McCain in the general.

are you going to go for a 70 year old who happily says he'll keep troops in Iraq for the next 100 years, or are you going to vote for a youthful, splendid looking orator who looks like the face of the future and not the ROTC side of the 1960s past?
In this case, yes:O)

But again, any other republican, Obama is my choice.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 01-05-2008, 03:09 PM   #49
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 04:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2


I'm not so sure. The head-to-head matchups I've seen are about even.
In head-to-head matchups in most places Hillary was way ahead and she's still way ahead nationally.

All of the energy and momentum is on Obama's side. If he's figured out how to get the youth to vote, and the independents, it will be over.

The base hates McCain. There is no more solid and dependable group of voters than evangelicals. Why would they vote for McCain when they find him as transparent as a cheap piece of glass.

If McCain doesn't win NH, I think he's done.
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 01-05-2008, 03:14 PM   #50
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 03:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2


Or you could look at it this way:

Are you going to vote for an experienced, tested military man who has over a quarter-century history in Congress, countless political friends and has proven he can reach across the aisle
All of that experience and he still let idiot Bush smack him in the face. Yep, that's who I want as my president.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 01-05-2008, 04:44 PM   #51
Anu
Editor
 
Anu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: There ain't no place I'd rather be, baby won't you carry me back to Tennessee
Posts: 1,695
Local Time: 09:53 AM
Clinton Operation vs. Obama Movement

By Major Garrett

MILFORD, N.H. — In politics there are operations and movements.

There is an operation in every campaign and the best one always wins. Unless it comes up against a movement.

Operations understand the fundamentals of a campaign and execute them with awe-inspiring precision — everything from the candidate’s message and TV ads, to voter identification and mobilization, to interest group wooing and massaging, to on-site bunting and balloons.

In a national campaign this is a massive undertaking. Getting all these fundamentals right signals important attributes about a future president: discipline, organization, vision and diligence — they always have and always will.

Movements, however, are different and they can sometimes rise up and challenge superior political operations. Movements possess passionate supporters, one or two over-arching causes and a leader with genuine charisma who can attract people even without the well-financed voter identification efforts possessed by a rival’s “operation.”

Movements can be powerful and movements can win. But in my experience, most movements die because they can’t sustain themselves against the overwhelming pressure applied by a superior national “operation.”

I’ve witnessed the following movements come and go: Dean in 2004, Pat Buchanan in 1996 and Ross Perot in 1992.

They all lost. In fact, they didn’t come close. They touched a chord, drew big crowds, attracted massive press coverage and even drove important issues into the debate (Dean the Iraq war, Buchanan trade, Perot the deficit). But they all lost to the superior operations because one or many things broke down, chief among them the leader’s inability to broaden the audience beyond the original “movement” believers.

What we are seeing in the Democratic race for the presidency, I am now convinced, is a movement that may in fact succeed.

It is the Obama movement.

The results in Iowa expanded the known universe of what was possible in Democratic Party politics. Some of the party’s most brilliant and successful leaders have competed in Iowa (save for Bill Clinton, but I’ll be back to him in a minute), and not one of them came close to doing what Barack Obama achieved on Thursday with his win over Hillary Clinton. What everyone thought they knew about Iowa and the caucuses is now irrelevant. Obama changed the game and changed it forever. That is a massive, movement-like accomplishment and what’s even more amazing is this: Obama said it was possible and it happened.

The distance between theory and reality is often what crushes movement because what is dreamed for rarely comes to pass. It did in Iowa and that matters not only at a political level, it matters enormously at a psychological level because movements thrive on the intangible emotional synergy of hope, aspirations and dewy-eyed dreaming — yes, all those things wise observers of politics have long scorned because they flame out and die so frequently.

What’s different about Obama and this moment is the movement has operational tendencies, which is to say it doesn’t live off of its good intentions and good vibrations. This movement gets in the trenches and fights it out — but on its terms, with its gusto and with its inventive tactical precision.

Never was that on display more clearly than at the 100 Club Dinner here Friday night. This is the New Hampshire Democratic Party’s big celebration. It was held in a big dome covering a football field surrounded by a synthetic running track — the biggest venue ever for the event.

What you need to understand about the dinner and the venue is this: it was supposed to be a Clinton room.

The Clinton brand name among Democrats is golden. The party love affair goes back to before 1992 when the Clintons first began campaigning for the White House in 1991. The legend of “The Comeback Kid” and Bill and Hill’s regular and celebratory visits back to the state throughout their presidency and thereafter have made them something akin the party royalty here.

So last night was the perfect night for the Clinton operation to demonstrate that Iowa was a fluke, New Hampshire is home and things will be different on primary Tuesday.

It didn’t happen. The operation tried but just like in Iowa it lost to the Obama movement.

Hillary Clinton’s tables were well within camera range of the TV riser and far closer to the stage than the Obama tables (this is what you can do when your operation seeks to own the room). The Obama tables were on the far end of the domed facility, near the trailers holding the portable toilets.

When Clinton hit the stage, her well-positioned supporters rose up en masse and waved her signs carrying her new one word slogan: “Ready.” It was an impressive crowd and full of energy. By standard operational measurement, it all worked really well. The crowd was bunched right before the TV riser and the “Ready” placards waved happily before the cameras and Clinton beamed at what must have felt like a warm and nerve-soothing homecoming of sorts.

But the first indication of trouble came when she warned that Democrats must not be beguiled by “false hopes” (an obvious shot at Obama) and a ripple of boos arose from the Obama tables.

Clinton’s stump speech was warmly received — of that there can be no doubt — and she certainly appeared to have charmed if not won the room (after all, it was supposed to be hers).

Then Bill Richardson spoke and the Obama movement swung into action.

As Richardson boomed about ending the war in Iraq, team Obama pre-positioned men, women and young adults with Obama signs smack-dab in front of the stage. Hundreds upon hundreds marched silently and cheerfully (some were literally dancing barely suppressed jigs) from their distant tables and into the center of the “football” field, clogging all available space and encircling the tables of the amazed and slightly disconcerted Clinton supporters.

As soon as Richardson finished and Obama was waiting to be announced, Obama supporters hefted placards in bouncing waves and began chanting “Fired Up, Ready to Go” as the fire marshals frantically raced around to keep lanes open for people to walk around the TV riser. Rhythmic chants of “Obama” also arose in the arena as the round O-shaped Obama placards appeared to float by the hundreds in mid-air creating a mesmerizing sea of Obama signs that rocked and rolled before an empty stage.

So intense was the crowd up front, that an announcement was made that Obama wouldn’t be brought out until the crowd returned to their distant seats in Siberia. The Obama legions booed, made a token move away from the stage, but largely held their ground.

When Obama took the stage the response was thunderous and jubilant, three times as loud as that for Clinton. Obama said “Thank you” as a means to quiet the crowd, one woman yelled out “Thank YOU” and the crowd burst out in a roar and cheer.

“In four days you can do what Iowa did last night,” Obama said.

Obama, his voice hoarse, moved through an abbreviated stump speech and called for “one nation, one people.”

“We started last night, attracting not only the tried and true Democrat, but the independent and the Republican.”

On this night, the speeches mattered less than the moment. And at an event filled with party die-hards supposedly devoted body and soul to Hillary and the Clinton cause, the Obama demonstration generated more body and more soul and rolled over the Clinton operation like a tractor tire over an anthill.

And that is why I believe we are witnessing the birth of a movement that may be on the verge of defeating an operation. That would be rare enough on its own. But this particular contest is of generational importance because the Clinton operation is the most formidable modern American politics has ever seen and it would take quite a movement to knock it down.

And in Milford, on Clinton’s best turf, it did.
__________________
Stand up to rock stars!
Anu is offline  
Old 01-05-2008, 04:47 PM   #52
Anu
Editor
 
Anu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: There ain't no place I'd rather be, baby won't you carry me back to Tennessee
Posts: 1,695
Local Time: 09:53 AM
Over at CSPAN, there's a 3-hour-ish, unedited clip of the entire 100 Club Dinner you can watch online.

If you cue to the 2:40 spot, enjoy the Obama chants competing with "Where the Streets Have No Name" and then Obama entering to "City of Blinding Lights."

The speech is solid, and the crowd response incredible.

Apparently, Obama fans rushed the stage, rock-concert style. Quite a show.

Looking forward to the debates tonight, but really looking for to Tuesday's returns.
__________________
Stand up to rock stars!
Anu is offline  
Old 01-05-2008, 04:49 PM   #53
ONE
love, blood, life
 
U2isthebest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vision over visibility....
Posts: 12,332
Local Time: 05:53 AM
^^That's a fascinating article. I've never heard the movement vs. operation comparison before, but I love it.
__________________
U2isthebest is offline  
Old 01-05-2008, 05:21 PM   #54
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
2861U2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: watching the Cubs
Posts: 4,255
Local Time: 04:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


All of that experience and he still let idiot Bush smack him in the face. Yep, that's who I want as my president.
What, a guy can't lose in a primary without his entire political credentials going out the window?
__________________
2861U2 is offline  
Old 01-05-2008, 05:24 PM   #55
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 04:53 AM
It's not the fact that it was a primary ... it's the fact that it was George W. Bush.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 01-05-2008, 05:45 PM   #56
Anu
Editor
 
Anu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: There ain't no place I'd rather be, baby won't you carry me back to Tennessee
Posts: 1,695
Local Time: 09:53 AM
More Obama promise:

Barack Rolls: Two New Polls Show Obama Opening Up Big Lead in New Hampshire

By E&P Staff

Published: January 05, 2008 4:50 PM ET

NEW YORK The first two poll results based on survey taken in New Hampshire after the Iowa caucuses both show Barack Obama opening up a double digit lead over previous leader Hillary Clinton.

The new American Research Group poll gives Obama a 12-point lead over Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire, 38% to 26%, a 16% swing since the previous poll. John Edwards moved up on Clinton, at 20%, gaining 5% from his previous percentage.

Most interesting detail deep in the ARG numbers: Hillary actually leads Obama 34% to 32% among confirmed Democrats, while he tops her 49% to 12% among independents, which may make up one-third of the tally.

Earlier today the new Rasmussen survey emerged showing a surprising, but now possibly confirmed, 10% Obama lead. Edwards trailed badly in that one.
__________________
Stand up to rock stars!
Anu is offline  
Old 01-05-2008, 06:08 PM   #57
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 03:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2


What, a guy can't lose in a primary without his entire political credentials going out the window?
Yeah, that's what I said.

He lost in a very embarassing way in 2000, his own campaign had financial issues already this time around, and he's kissing too much evangelical ass...


This doesn't speak well of his experience to me. Experience doesn't automatically make you a leader.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 01-05-2008, 06:37 PM   #58
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 01:53 AM
Quote:
CLINTON AIDE ACCUSES OBAMA OF FATHERING TWO BLACK GIRLS

Posted January 4, 2008 | 11:07 AM (EST)


Manchester NH -- Mark Penn, senior political strategist for the Hillary Clinton campaign, today urged Barack Obama to "come clean" and admit that he has fathered two African American girls.

"I'm merely pointing out that the senator has two children", Penn said, "yes they were born in wedlock, but the fact of the matter is they are not white and it's merely something for rural New Hampshire women over age 65 to consider". Penn added he had no "specific evidence" that Obama had "ever given or sold" the girls drugs.

In a related development, long time Clinton bagman Terry McAuliffe urged independent Granite State voters to "find something else to do next Tuesday". "For this to be a change election", he said, "we need our kind of turnout".
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 01-05-2008, 06:47 PM   #59
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 04:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2


What, a guy can't lose in a primary without his entire political credentials going out the window?


my problem with McCain -- who i'd still prefer over all the other Republicans -- isn't even so much with his Iraq views, and how he shamelessly uses the troops to score political points.

it's what the Bush/Rove machine did to him in 2000 and the fact that the two men loathe each other, and yet McCain completely and totally whored himself out to Bush in 2004 under the agreement that he'd get his support in 2008:

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 01-05-2008, 06:52 PM   #60
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 04:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 2861U2


Or you could look at it this way:

Are you going to vote for an experienced, tested military man who has over a quarter-century history in Congress, countless political friends and has proven he can reach across the aisle (not to mention supports victory in Iraq) or the young, new guy who hasn't done any of that stuff, but can give a speech?
You know it takes a Bush supporter to type all of that with a straight face.
__________________

__________________
anitram is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com