February 5, 2008 Super Tuesday

[U2isthebest]

Originally posted by unico

Are you and John gonna do lunch next week?

[Vincent Vega]

I don't have the time to look through the whole thread, and the German media doesn't mention it, but I'm curious, how did the Republican frontrunner Ron Paul fare?

[U2isthebest]

Originally posted by Vincent Vega
I don't have the time to look through the whole thread, and the German media doesn't mention it, but I'm curious, how did the Republican frontrunner Ron Paul fare?

Ron Paul was never a frontrunner. He never really had a chance at the nomination, which is a shame, because he's the only Republican willing to stand up for what he believes and now cower under the militant conservative wing. I don't recall hearing about him winning any states.

[phillyfan26]

Yeah, at no point was he ever a frontrunner.

[onebloodonelife]

Originally posted by U2isthebest


Ron Paul was never a frontrunner. He never really had a chance at the nomination, which is a shame, because he's the only Republican willing to stand up for what he believes and now cower under the militant conservative wing. I don't recall hearing about him winning any states.

It is good that he stands up for being anti-war, but really, the guy has a whole lot more insane ideas than good ones, IMO.

But, anyway, he was never a frontrunner.

[Vincent Vega]

Originally posted by U2isthebest


Ron Paul was never a frontrunner. He never really had a chance at the nomination, which is a shame, because he's the only Republican willing to stand up for what he believes and now cower under the militant conservative wing. I don't recall hearing about him winning any states.

Was my try at being sarcastic.

I was just curious how many percentages he has gotten as certain posters here so vehemently predicted him winning every state.

[U2isthebest]

Originally posted by Vincent Vega


Was my try at being sarcastic.

I was just curious how many percentages he has gotten as certain posters here so vehemently predicted him winning every state.

Ah ok, I figured you knew he wasn't a frontronner and might have just made a mistake in wording. I don't see how anyone could've thought he would've had any major victories yesterday. Granted this has been an odd campaign from Huckabee's surprising wins to McCain rising from the political dead, but they've both had a lot of momentum behind their campaigns in recent weeks/months. Paul hasn't been so lucky.

[Vincent Vega]

Infinitum still believes he has a chance. Hope dies last I guess.
Ron Paul seems too far out I would say. And besides him being against the Iraq war everything else I've heard about him didn't make me feel comfortable at all.

[Axver]

In Infinitum's absence, let me assure all of you that Ron Paul is going to win every single delegate from here on out.

I promise you. It's going to happen, just like how U2 were going to release Solar in 2003.

Oh, wait ...

[Strongbow]

Originally posted by Irvine511




now, now. let's not get sloppy again and derive conclusions from facts that don't support them.

I really don't think people that are seriously against the war in Iraq will be voting for McCain in the fall in significant numbers. Some people that claim to be anti-war but are really more on the fence about the issue might be swayed to vote for McCain though.

that the surge is unsustainable

The surge numbers could be sustained in a number of different ways if the President chose to do so. Brigades already there can be extended further. National Guard Brigades that have already done their 18 months abroad in a 5 year period, could be sent back. Active Army and Marine Brigades that are at home could also be sent back. Its true that there is a serious short fall in equipment meaning that many units are temporarily not deployable, but there are many ways that can be quickly fixed in order to produce more brigades on the ground in Iraq or elsewhere. General Petraeus has already explained this in his testimony before congress.

and troops will begin to come home in 2009

Whether that happens will depend on who the President is and what the conditions on the ground in Iraq are like. Obama may be hell bent on withdrawal, but the Military, Defense Department, and State Department may convince him not to if conditions on the ground in Iraq warrent their continued presence. While Bush and his cabinet may be leaving in January 2009, many of the key Military, Defense Department, and State Department heads, in Washington DC and Iraq, will still be there and their views could have an impact.

Iraq is having elections in December 2009 and it will be an opportunity for Sunni's who boycotted the 2005 election to get more representation in the government. It would be unwise to start withdrawing before such important elections.

The Iraqi military has made great progress, but it still has a long way to go. Perhaps progress will be much more rapid in 2008. But regardless of how rapid the security forces and political situation improves, withdrawing military forces that are performing key missions in Iraq before there is an Iraqi military element to replace them would be foolish and could put the gains and progress made the past 5 to 6 years at risk.

the question is not to withdraw, but how to withdraw.

No, the question is when will conditions on the ground improve to the point that a withdrawal will not destabilize or harm the country.

and, of course, you do realize that it's McCain's history of working with Democrats that causes him to be despised by the base, right? the guy lost the entire south to a creationist baptist minister. McCain has no base. so, for all his bipartisanship, as an overall advantage, it's kind of a wash in the general.

Most evangelicals and conservatives live in the Bible Belt. They live in the dark red states that won't be going blue any time soon, regardless of who the Democrats nominate. The majority of these people who are upset at McCain's nomination will come around to vote for him in the fall because their voting against the Dem candidate. Those that sit at home, likely a small number, won't make any difference, because the State is going to be going red anyways. There might be some more weight to this if the current anti-McCain group lived primarily in Swing states, but they don't.

Independents are often skeptical of both parties, but McCain does have a record of bipartisanship that they will be able to take a look at, while Obama and certainly Clinton, do not.

This is not to say that I think McCain is going to have it easy. I think its still an uphill battle for him to win in November, but he is well positioned and does have a serious chance.

[anitram]

Serious question for Republicans here, because I don't follow that primary as closely - do you have fund raising stats for 2008 thus far?

[Diemen]

Originally posted by Strongbow
The surge numbers could be sustained in a number of different ways if the President chose to do so. Brigades already there can be extended further. National Guard Brigades that have already done their 18 months abroad in a 5 year period, could be sent back. Active Army and Marine Brigades that are at home could also be sent back.

Support the troops: keep them in harm's way longer than we said we would.

[Strongbow]

Originally posted by Diemen


Support the troops: keep them in harm's way longer than we said we would.

When and for how long troops are deployed into conflict area's is always partly dependent on conditions there and the overall situation for the US armed forces at the time. The Defense Department prefers to limit the deployment of National Guard combat brigades to no more than 18 months in a 5 year period. But its not something that can't be rescinded if the security needs of the nation warrent it. Rumsfeld kept to the 18 month rule, but Gates has already said he is ready to send National Guard Brigades back sooner if needed. 40% of the United States ground combat Brigades are in the National Guard, and when they can't be used, the entire burden of the effort falls on the active Army and Marine Corp. Brigades have been getting extensions on their original deployment orders at various times since 2003. In World War II, there was no such thing as extensions of deployments, because once a unit was deployed, it stayed there until the war was over. There was no rotation back to the United States.

[Strongbow]

Originally posted by anitram
Serious question for Republicans here, because I don't follow that primary as closely - do you have fund raising stats for 2008 thus far?

CNN has the totals for each candidate for the entire campaign so far. Just go to the politics section and find the candidates name highlighted. Then go to profile and it will tell you money raised, money spent, cash on hand.

If I remember correctly Hillary has raised over $130 million dollars and Obama has raised over $90 million dollars for the whole campaign so far. I think they both had a little over $30 million dollars in cash on hand.

McCain has raised a little over $40 million dollars and has almost $3 million dollars in cash on hand.

[anitram]

Yeah, but CNN only has numbers from 2007. There has been a significant amount raised from Jan 1 to now and I was interested in seeing those. I'll see if anyone has them up.

The Dems have released their January numbers:

Obama, $32 million
Hillary, $13.5 million + $5 million self-loan

[unico]

Originally posted by U2isthebest



Are you and John gonna do lunch next week?

i'm torn b/c he went to flame country to speak in 2006. but huck visited in nov. i'm so torn. and now ron paul is coming on friday!!!! i'll need to consult with my bestest friend jfj.

[watergate]

Okay I'm starting to get frustrated, but the big problem is that there were lots of voters that weren't on the Democratic Party list on the day of the caucus and they had to vote provisional. The only way to solve this is to get people to re-register to vote, since the last county clerk that we had was an idiot.

N.M. Democrats to recount all caucus ballots

The New Mexico Democratic Party announced Thursday that it will recounting all of the votes cast in Tuesday’s presidential caucus in addition to the 17,000 provisional ballots that haven’t yet been counted.

Party chairman Brian Colon says the party and the campaigns of Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama all agreed it was important to conduct a recount in order to assure that there is an accurate tally of all ballots cast.

There was no prediction when the recount would be completed.

Initially, the party announced that the only obstacle to a final tally was counting the 17,000 provisional ballots – paper ballots cast by people who showed up at the wrong polling place or voters whose eligibility was in question.

Party officials, election judges, campaign representatives and others gathered Thursday at the Northeast Heights accounting firm that is tabulating the ballots.

New Mexico is the last of 22 states that held Democratic primaries and caucuses to report a winner.

With 183 of 184 of precincts reporting, Hillary Rodham Clinton held a lead Thursday of 1,123 votes over Barack Obama.

[U2isthebest]

Originally posted by watergate
Okay I'm starting to get frustrated, but the big problem is that there were lots of voters that weren't on the Democratic Party list on the day of the caucus and they had to vote provisional. The only way to solve this is to get people to re-register to vote, since the last county clerk that we had was an idiot.

N.M. Democrats to recount all caucus ballots

The New Mexico Democratic Party announced Thursday that it will recounting all of the votes cast in Tuesday’s presidential caucus in addition to the 17,000 provisional ballots that haven’t yet been counted.

Party chairman Brian Colon says the party and the campaigns of Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama all agreed it was important to conduct a recount in order to assure that there is an accurate tally of all ballots cast.

There was no prediction when the recount would be completed.

Initially, the party announced that the only obstacle to a final tally was counting the 17,000 provisional ballots – paper ballots cast by people who showed up at the wrong polling place or voters whose eligibility was in question.

Party officials, election judges, campaign representatives and others gathered Thursday at the Northeast Heights accounting firm that is tabulating the ballots.

New Mexico is the last of 22 states that held Democratic primaries and caucuses to report a winner.

With 183 of 184 of precincts reporting, Hillary Rodham Clinton held a lead Thursday of 1,123 votes over Barack Obama.

That's incredibly unfortunate. I hope New Mexico is able to reform all the problems in their voting system before the general election. I wish we could do a major voting system overhaul in the entire country, but that will take a lot of work.

[watergate]

I got this e-mail last night and they are looking for volunteers to count the votes in New Mexico. This is messed up.
Four days after New Mexico got the opportunity to participate in a historic presidential election, our performance has been branded "a disappointment," "embarrassing" and "quirky."
It's none of the above.
Yes, we faced long lines at some voting sites on Tuesday and we're still facing difficulties in counting the ballots. To me, that proves democracy is alive and well – and that it only thrives when people are willing to do their part.
Clearly, Election Day persuaded Democrats to do their part. For the first time, we were players in the national election, and the national candidates responded. In a matter of days, the campaigns landed here, set up shop and drew thousands of New Mexicans to hear the candidates speak.
Thousands more lined up on Election Day, defeating predictions of a lackluster turnout. New Mexico cared. New Mexico showed up. New Mexico mattered.
It's time to matter again.
Both candidates have agreed to a vote-counting process. The State Democratic Party needs your help to conduct it. Do you care that New Mexico finally had a chance to make a difference in who will next lead our country? Then I ask you to support the party however you can.
You can volunteer to count ballots by going to:

[joyfulgirl]

Originally posted by watergate
I got this e-mail last night and they are looking for volunteers to count the votes in New Mexico. This is messed up.
Four days after New Mexico got the opportunity to participate in a historic presidential election, our performance has been branded "a disappointment," "embarrassing" and "quirky."
It's none of the above.
Yes, we faced long lines at some voting sites on Tuesday and we're still facing difficulties in counting the ballots. To me, that proves democracy is alive and well – and that it only thrives when people are willing to do their part.
Clearly, Election Day persuaded Democrats to do their part. For the first time, we were players in the national election, and the national candidates responded. In a matter of days, the campaigns landed here, set up shop and drew thousands of New Mexicans to hear the candidates speak.
Thousands more lined up on Election Day, defeating predictions of a lackluster turnout. New Mexico cared. New Mexico showed up. New Mexico mattered.
It's time to matter again.
Both candidates have agreed to a vote-counting process. The State Democratic Party needs your help to conduct it. Do you care that New Mexico finally had a chance to make a difference in who will next lead our country? Then I ask you to support the party however you can.
You can volunteer to count ballots by going to:

Well said, watergate. I wish I could volunteer to help but I just can't right now. But thanks for all you're doing.

I voted early and while there weren't long lines at that point, there were early warning signs of problems. There were maybe only 30 people in front of me and the line just wasn't moving and I could see they were struggling to find names on the list. I kind of shrugged it off as "this is SOOOO New Mexico" but the bright side is that this is happening now instead of November and like U2Democrat says, I really really hope we can work out the kinks before then.

New Mexico