The Fracturing of a Party... - Page 11 - 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 02-10-2008, 05:14 PM   #151
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 07:12 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by phillyfan26
Deep, I think you overrated Hillary and underrate Obama. You keep saying "electoral votes" and "certain states" but rarely why Hillary would do a better job in those states than Obama.

Quote:
Originally posted by deep
I believe Hillary still is the stronger in candidate in both Ohio and Florida.

And I believe there are current polls that support this.

These two states are most likely the key to the whole election


Something to keep in mind also.

The Latino or Hispanic vote, ( I don’t know which, if either is the preferred term) is a major consideration in this election. McCain has quite a bit of support there. Hillary has as much and probably more.

Obama is not strong there at all, the advantage could go to McCain. There are western states that could swing for McCain over Obama that Hillary might win.
the Florida vote?


the CA vote?

and all other states with Hispanic voting polulations- Hillary polls much higher than Obama


Quote:
Democrats have 141 delegates in Ohio to be allocated proportionally. A pre-Super Tuesday Columbus Dispatch poll had Clinton way out in front, winning 2 to 1 over Obama, and the state's mostly white working-class demographic suits her. Exit polls from Super Tuesday show Clinton leading Obama among voters earning less than $50,000 a year. But one of Clinton's key groups is largely missing from the state. "The wild card is we don't have the Latino population that California has," says Ohio University-Lancaster history professor Ken Heineman. Latino voters helped Clinton win California.
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
Old 02-10-2008, 06:38 PM   #152
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 10:12 PM
I appreciate the analysis, deep.

It really helps me understand why you'd prefer to see a Clinton nomination.

I'm still not absolutely certain that the Latino vote, for example, would swing McCain's way rather than Obama's. Again, I'm not sure that Democratic support is so candidate-specific that if their preferred candidate doesn't get the nom they'll stay home or vote for the Republicans. But then I suppose it wouldn't be about the Dems as much as it would the independents. And you're saying that these independents in states like FL or Ohio would swing towards Clinton but away from Obama. I'm doubtful of that, but, we'll see. . .

The goal is that we both be wrong. If Hillary gets the nomination, then she wins and I'm wrong. I could live with that. If Obama gets the nomination and he wins, then you're wrong and I know you could live with that too.
__________________

__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 02-10-2008, 06:53 PM   #153
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 10:12 PM
Hasn't Obama been winning more battleground primaries than Hillary though?
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 02-10-2008, 07:02 PM   #154
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 10:12 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by phillyfan26
Hasn't Obama been winning more battleground primaries than Hillary though?
Well, I know on Super Tuesday, Hillary won more of the states with lots of delegates (Massachusetts, New York, California). Wouldn't those states also have more electoral votes? My questions is whether a Clinton win in those states Democratic primaries translates into a Obama electoral college loss in the general election in those same states--or in Ohio or Florida. That's the part I'm not convinced of.
__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 02-10-2008, 07:08 PM   #155
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,290
Local Time: 10:12 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by maycocksean


Well, I know on Super Tuesday, Hillary won more of the states with lots of delegates (Massachusetts, New York, California). Wouldn't those states also have more electoral votes? My questions is whether a Clinton win in those states Democratic primaries translates into a Obama electoral college loss in the general election in those same states--or in Ohio or Florida. That's the part I'm not convinced of.
Do you honestly believe that a Republican is going to win Massachusetts, New York or California in the general? Not a chance.

Ohio/Florida are a different story, but the big states Hillary are Democratic strongholds anyway.
__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 02-10-2008, 08:26 PM   #156
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 2,451
Local Time: 09:12 PM
Re: Re: The Fracturing of a Party...

Quote:
Originally posted by deep


this wii die down a lot
once McCain locks up the nomination

and McCain can and will most likely beat Obama in Nov.

Hillary would give McCain a more difficult contest.
This is completely the opposite of what reality is...Clinton would NOT be a harder candidate to beat for John McCain. If Clinton is the nominee the Democrats will quite probably lose the election...and deservedly so - if they choose Clinton over Obama they will hand the Whitehouse to McCain. Nobody wants BUSH/CLINTON/BUSH/CLINTON - that would be absolute disaster. It's time for the Democratic party to wake the fuck up and take a chance for real change...for once!!!
__________________
Harry Vest is offline  
Old 02-10-2008, 08:34 PM   #157
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 07:12 PM
Re: Re: Re: The Fracturing of a Party...

Quote:
Originally posted by Harry Vest
BUSH/CLINTON/BUSH/CLINTON
what are you jibbery about?





nobody ever voted for that ticket

and it can not and will not be on the ballot this November
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 02-10-2008, 08:49 PM   #158
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 10:12 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram


Do you honestly believe that a Republican is going to win Massachusetts, New York or California in the general? Not a chance.

Ohio/Florida are a different story, but the big states Hillary are Democratic strongholds anyway.
No, I do not believe the Republicans will win those states, regardless of whether Obama or Clinton is the Democratic nominee. My question is this--is Florida/Ohio a different story in terms of outcome? The argument--at least as I understand it--is that swing voters in Florida/Ohio would vote for McCain over Obama but choose Clinton over McCain. I tend to think they won't. If anything, swing voters are more likely to swing towards Obama than towards Clinton.
__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 02-10-2008, 10:36 PM   #159
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 04:12 AM
You'd really need to have more information about who exactly the "swing voters" in those particular states are; it's not like that's a nationally uniform category demographically. And also some sense of why they voted in the particular party primary they did (if they did, since most swing voters don't vote in primaries). In theory, primary exit polls might help with that, but since Florida's Democratic primary didn't officially "count" this time, turnout may have been exceptionally nonrepresentative and therefore those results might be less reliable than usual. According to the exit polls, Hillary did win with independents in Florida's Democratic primary, 40% to Obama's 30%; while McCain got 44% of the independent vote in Florida's Republican primary. (Total Democratic turnout was 1.7. million; total Republican turnout, 1.9 million; independents comprised 17% of ~1500 exit poll respondents in both cases.)
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 02-11-2008, 06:17 AM   #160
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 10:12 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by yolland
You'd really need to have more information about who exactly the "swing voters" in those particular states are; it's not like that's a nationally uniform category demographically. And also some sense of why they voted in the particular party primary they did (if they did, since most swing voters don't vote in primaries). In theory, primary exit polls might help with that, but since Florida's Democratic primary didn't officially "count" this time, turnout may have been exceptionally nonrepresentative and therefore those results might be less reliable than usual. According to the exit polls, Hillary did win with independents in Florida's Democratic primary, 40% to Obama's 30%; while McCain got 44% of the independent vote in Florida's Republican primary. (Total Democratic turnout was 1.7. million; total Republican turnout, 1.9 million; independents comprised 17% of ~1500 exit poll respondents in both cases.)
Right, right. That's just what was I gonna say. I was just. . uh. . testing to see if you knew. . . Yeah, that's it.
__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 02-11-2008, 12:40 PM   #161
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,492
Local Time: 10:12 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Strongbow


It did not scream Gay to most of Florida's section of the Bible Belt. But it does seem to scream gay to people in this forum. Interesting.




these things don't "scream" gay to me. i know they are very common characteristics of gay men of a certain age. it's been written about all over Florida, and much more since he's been elected, and not before.

i'm sorry your boy Crist is gay and therefore unable to be on the ticket with McCain. he will receive scrutiny as a Veep pic that will go far beyond what he received as a candidate for governor, and with an entire nation of Republicans to choose from, i'm afraid he's not even going to make the short list, his popularity nonwithstanding.

it is too bad. and Karl Rove would quite disagree with you about the importance of getting gay bashing amendments on the ballot in 2004. he was quite right that something like this would mobilize the Republican base, and it certainly did in Ohio, and particularly in SE Ohio, which is quite conservative. 2004 was an election that was won by the base of the Republican party. they were able to mobilize their grassroots because they had superior organizational skills and because that amendment provided motivation for some evangelicals to get to the polls. and Ohio was the determining state. if Kerry had won Ohio, he would have won the election. Bush won the election because he won Ohio. and he won Ohio because of the gay bashing amendments.

it's quite simple.

there's a reason why David Dreier will only go so far in the Republican Party. it's the same reason that Crist will never be the Veep.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 02-11-2008, 03:36 PM   #162
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 03:12 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




if Kerry had won Ohio, he would have won the election. Bush won the election because he won Ohio. and he won Ohio because of the gay bashing amendments.

it's quite simple.

there's a reason why David Dreier will only go so far in the Republican Party. it's the same reason that Crist will never be the Veep.
Well, exactly how many people voted in Ohio for Bush because of the gay bashing amendment that would not have voted for Bush anyway?

Unless you can answer that question, its simply a theory that Bush won Ohio because of the amendment.

While Florida is a battleground state, its probably the one of the 7 the Republicans have to worry the least about in this election. Unemployment there is below the national average at 4.7% and McCain will obviously do well with Florida's much older population. In addition, active duty military personal get to pick their "home state" and many pick Florida(expecially career military officers) which will bode well for McCain in the general election. Florida has only voted for the Democratic President 4 times since World War II, and in 1996, the last time the Democrats won the state, they likely only won it because Perot was a candidate who took away nearly 10% of the popular vote there.

So, perhaps having Crist on the ticket is not really needed in order to secure Florida. The real battles in November will likely be in places like Ohio, Missouri, and New Hampshire. The Republicans could actually lose Ohio but win the election if they pick up New Hampshire, which McCain has an excellent shot of doing.
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 02-11-2008, 03:41 PM   #163
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 10:12 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Strongbow
Well, exactly how many people voted in Ohio for Bush because of the gay bashing amendment that would not have voted for Bush anyway?
It's more of how many people voted because of the gay amendment that would not have at all if it wasn't there.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 02-11-2008, 03:54 PM   #164
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 03:12 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by phillyfan26


It's more of how many people voted because of the gay amendment that would not have at all if it wasn't there.
Thats what I was saying. Again, tell me who would not have voted if the amendment had not been there.
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 02-11-2008, 03:55 PM   #165
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,492
Local Time: 10:12 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Strongbow


Well, exactly how many people voted in Ohio for Bush because of the gay bashing amendment that would not have voted for Bush anyway?

Unless you can answer that question, its simply a theory that Bush won Ohio because of the amendment.



what exactly is your point here? are you actually only going to concede the point that gay bashing helps get the Republican base out to vote if every voter filled out a form that says "i hate gay people"? the leaps and wild inferences you make when it comes to Iraq, and yet you won't even countenance this?

i am not saying that Bush won Ohio because of the gay bashing amendment. i am saying that the Republican base won the election for Bush, especially in Ohio, and one thing that encourages the Republican base is bashing gays. this is why Rove sought to get these amendments on the ballot in 2004, and that's one of the reasons why Bush won states with such amendments. it helped overall base turnout, which gave him the election. it's the Rove strategy. all he wants is a 50%+1 election victory.






Quote:
So, perhaps having Crist on the ticket is not really needed in order to secure Florida. The real battles in November will likely be in places like Ohio, Missouri, and New Hampshire. The Republicans could actually lose Ohio but win the election if they pick up New Hampshire, which McCain has an excellent shot of doing.

i'm glad you've conceded the point. it's too bad for McCain, especially now that he might almost have to choose Huckabee.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 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 10:12 PM.


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