MERGED--> NH predictions + Hillary's win + NH recount? - Page 29 - 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 01-10-2008, 08:06 AM   #561
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: 1,700
Local Time: 07:37 AM
This is how FYM is currently voting in the second round of the Democratic primary:

Sen. Hilary R. Clinton 7 17.50%
Sen. Barack Obama 26 65.00%
Former Sen. John Edwards 4 10.00%

So, *I* did not suggest *we* (no worries here, since there is no actual such thing) endorse outside of that context.

Either way, it's a non issue beyond this board, because when I first mentioned it, it was actually a joke.

Then, I thought about actually covering the phenomenon on the mainpage, but quickly realized that if done there, it would be an article not an editorial, an analysis of the phenomenon not an endorsement of the man.
__________________

__________________
Stand up to rock stars!
Anu is offline  
Old 01-10-2008, 10:56 AM   #562
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 11:37 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram


I liked McCain in 2000. I thought he would be the nominee for a period of time then. I guess I never took Bush seriously.

He's certainly qualified, nothing about that has changed. But I no longer believe he's sincere. And his willingness to pander to what I consider to be the worst and most destructive constituency of American society makes him trust him less and question his judgment even more. If we all have a price, and this is his, than no thank you, I don't like the sale.
I don't disagree too much with anything that you said.

I was only referring to my reaction to his speech in NH that evening.
__________________

deep is offline  
Old 01-10-2008, 11:17 AM   #563
Blue Crack Addict
 
phanan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: in the darkness on the edge of town
Posts: 25,835
Local Time: 03:37 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep
I am not that impressed with Obama.

I have heard many paid inspirational speakers in my life.
Obama comes off well, so does Tony Robbins.

Obama's resume' is light. Light, light, light.




Come November I will choose between A or B.

I expect to vote for the Democratic candidate. Judicial appointments are key. Also many other appointments, Inspectors General, EPA, etc.

I hope the Dems do not give me a mediocre Senator that has no real record.

I have said it before. Obama needs a little more seasoning.

All you people that believe so strongly in him.

What are you afraid of?

In 4, 8 or 12 years - if he is for real he should be unstoppable.

I am not against Obama

There just is not enough "real stuff" there for me to be for him.
phanan is offline  
Old 01-10-2008, 11:37 AM   #564
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
2861U2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: watching the Cubs
Posts: 4,258
Local Time: 01:37 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep


I did listen to McCain's speech live on the radio in my car.

It was a great speech. This is a very decent, sincere man. That has lived a life of service.


I am not that impressed with Obama.

I have heard many paid inspirational speakers in my life.
Obama comes off well, so does Tony Robbins.
2861U2 is offline  
Old 01-10-2008, 03:16 PM   #565
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 28,170
Local Time: 03:37 AM
I think it's a sad day when people are bored with detailed answers about issues from Presidential candidates. Are some people that used to instant everything these days that they don't even have that attention span? I don't get it, especially when we have had a President who doesn't like answering questions and at times seems incapable of it.

The chicken soup candidate

By Joan Vennochi, Boston Globe Columnist | January 10, 2008

The media fell in love with Barack Obama. The women of New Hampshire didn't.

Granite State women came through for Hillary Clinton in a big way. But, maybe it wasn't a sympathy vote, as some analysts suggest. Maybe it was a vote for substance over sizzle; for rational thinking over puppy love.

After Clinton's eyes welled up during a Monday campaign event, women supposedly felt sorry for her and rushed to the polls to cheer her up.

Maybe these female voters saw something more than tears.

During the days between her third-place finish in Iowa and the New Hampshire primary, Clinton showed strength in adversity. While Obama was spouting poetry, Clinton stuck to what she knew best: unexciting but smart prose. Instead of giving voters goose bumps, she gave them chicken soup. In New Hampshire, it turned out to be what voters, especially women, wanted more than excitement.

At rallies like one at Pinkerton Academy in Derry on Sunday, it was "connection established," from the moment Obama arrived, two hours behind schedule. He dazzled a packed field house with a beautifully delivered speech, bursting with inspirational riffs. At the end, hands reached out to touch him, as if he were Bobby Kennedy. Obama's rhetoric, too, has a 1960s feel that many aging flower children could groove to. Ironically, that is the very constituency that Obama argues should pass on the baton - to him.

Clinton's question and answer sessions were dull by comparison. She was especially subdued at an afternoon event in Dover on Monday that took place after the morning's emotional interlude in Portsmouth. Some journalists walked out early (including me), and so did some voters, as Clinton patiently fielded a wide variety of questions, on topics ranging from the role of nonprofits to American policy in Bolivia.

But her patience at events like that was rewarded on primary day, especially by female voters. Women in New Hampshire made up 57 percent of the Democratic electorate and favored her by a nine-point margin.

Specific and unique events occurring in a compressed period of time also worked to her benefit on primary day.

For example, during the debate Saturday night, Clinton was asked to explain why voters found her less likable than some rivals like Obama. "Well, that hurts my feelings, but I'll try to go on," she said coyly. "He's very likeable, I agree with that. But I don't think I'm that bad."

"You're likeable enough," Obama responded, in a tone that came across as less charitable than it should have been.

If anyone should be crying now, it's John Edwards. He had two mean New Hampshire moments that didn't win him any votes and might have helped Clinton.

The first came during the debate Saturday, when Clinton tried to enlist Edwards as an ally, by suggesting that Obama was portraying Edwards as inconsistent.

Dramatically siding with Obama, Edwards said, "He believes deeply in change, and I believe deeply in change. And any time you're fighting for that, I mean, I didn't hear these kind of attacks from Senator Clinton when she was ahead."

In response, Clinton finally flashed some long-suppressed passion. "Making change is not about what you believe. It's not about a speech you make. It is about working hard," she said.

Edwards's sharp response to Clinton's damp eyes during the campaign event Monday was also less than chivalrous: "I think that what we need in a commander in chief is strength and resolve and presidential campaigns are tough business, but being president of the United States is also tough business," he said.

After her improbable primary victory, Clinton said she found her voice in New Hampshire. Voters elsewhere will be listening for it. Going up against Obama's powerful and persuasive voice will be a tough challenge. Besides, Obama now has the chance to win votes the same way she did, by showing strength in adversity.

In Iowa, Clinton trailed Obama among women. After New Hampshire, there's no guarantee she locked up women everywhere else. New Hampshire proves one thing: It's a lot easier to win the hearts and minds of the media than it is to win the woman's vote.
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 01-10-2008, 03:31 PM   #566
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 28,170
Local Time: 03:37 AM
Wall Street Journal

COMMENTARY

Why Hillary Won
By KARL ROVE
January 10, 2008; Page A15

What would Shakespeare's Jack Cade say after the New Hampshire Democratic primary? Maybe the demagogue in "Henry VI" would call for the pollsters to be killed first, not the lawyers.

The opinion researchers find themselves in a difficult place after most predicted a big Obama sweep. It's not their fault. The dirty secret is it is hard to accurately poll a primary. The unpredictability of who will turn out and what the mix of voters will be makes polling a primary election like reading chicken entrails -- ugly, smelly and not very enlightening. Our media culture endows polls -- especially exit polls -- with scientific precision they simply don't have.

But more interesting than dissecting the pollsters is dissecting the election returns, precinct by precinct. Sen. Hillary Clinton won working-class neighborhoods and less-affluent rural areas. Sen. Barack Obama won the college towns and the gentrified neighborhoods of more affluent communities. Put another way, Mrs. Clinton won the beer drinkers, Mr. Obama the white wine crowd. And there are more beer drinkers than wine swillers in the Democratic Party.

Mrs. Clinton won a narrow victory in New Hampshire for four reasons. First, her campaign made a smart decision at its start to target women Democrats, especially single women. It has been made part of the warp and woof of her campaign everywhere. This focus didn't pay off in Iowa, but it did in New Hampshire.

Second, she had two powerful personal moments. The first came in the ABC debate on Saturday, when WMUR TV's Scott Spradling asked why voters were "hesitating on the likeability issue, where they seem to like Barack Obama more." Mrs. Clinton's self-deprecating response -- "Well, that hurts my feelings" -- was followed by a playful "But I'll try to go on."

You couldn't help but smile. It reminded Democrats what they occasionally like about her. Then Mr. Obama followed with a needless and dismissive, "You're likable enough, Hillary."

Her remarks helped wash away the memory of her angry replies to attacks at the debate's start. His trash talking was an unattractive carryover from his days playing pickup basketball at Harvard, and capped a mediocre night.

The other personal moment came on Monday, when a woman in Portsmouth asked her "how do you do it?" Mrs. Clinton's emotional reply was powerful and warm. Voters rarely see her in such a spontaneous moment. It was humanizing and appealing. And unlike her often contrived and calculated attempts to appear down-to-earth, this was real.

Third, the Clintons began -- at first not very artfully -- to raise questions about the fitness for the Oval Office of a first-term senator with no real accomplishments or experience.

Former President Bill Clinton hit a nerve by drawing attention to Mr. Obama's conflicting statements on Iraq. There's more -- and more powerful -- material available. Mr. Obama has failed to rise to leadership on a single major issue in the Senate. In the Illinois legislature, he had a habit of ducking major issues, voting "present" on bills important to many Democratic interest groups, like abortion-rights and gun-control advocates. He is often lazy, given to misstatements and exaggerations and, when he doesn't know the answer, too ready to try to bluff his way through.

For someone who talks about a new, positive style of politics and pledges to be true to his word, Mr. Obama too often practices the old style of politics, saying one thing and doing another. He won't escape criticism on all this easily. But the messenger and the message need to be better before the Clintons can get all this across. Hitting Mr. Obama on his elementary school essays won't cut it.

The fourth and biggest reason why Mrs. Clinton won two nights ago is that, while Mr. Obama can draw on the deep doubts of many Democrats about Mrs. Clinton, he can't close out the argument. Mr. Obama is an inspiring figure playing a historical role, but that's not enough to push aside the former First Lady and senator from New York. She's an historic figure, too. When it comes to making the case against Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Obama comes across as a vitamin-starved Adlai Stevenson. His rhetoric, while eloquent and moving at times, has been too often light as air.

Mr. Obama began to find his voice at the Iowa Jefferson-Jackson Day dinner, when he took four deliberate swipes at the Clintons. He called for Democrats to tackle problems "that had festered long before" President Bush, "problems that we've talked about year after year after year after year."

He dismissed the Clinton style of campaigning and governing, saying "Triangulating and poll-driven positions . . . just won't do." He attacked Mrs. Clinton on Iraq, torture and her opposition to direct presidential talks with Syria and Iran. Then he rejected a new Clinton era by saying, "I don't want to spend the next year or the next four years re-fighting the same fights that we had in the 1990s." It deftly, if often indirectly, played on the deep concerns of Democrats who look at the Clinton era as a time of decline for their party and unfulfilled potential for their cause.

But rather than sharpen and build on this message of contrast and change, Mr. Obama chose soaring rhetoric and inspirational rallies. While his speeches galvanized true believers at his events, his words were neither filling nor sustaining for New Hampshire Democrats concerned about the Clintons and looking for a substantive alternative.

And Mr. Obama, in his own way, is often as calculating as Mrs. Clinton. For example, he was the only candidate, Democratic or Republican, to use a teleprompter to deliver his Iowa and New Hampshire election-night speeches. It gave his speeches a quality and clarity that other candidates, speaking from notes or the heart, failed to achieve. But what he gained in polish, he lost in connection.

The Democratic candidates left New Hampshire not liking each other. Mrs. Clinton, in particular, lets her feelings show. In her victory speech, as she listed her competitors, she put Mr. Obama at the tail end, behind Dennis Kucinich. Ouch!

Now the Democratic contest will go on through at least "Super Tuesday" -- Feb. 5. Mrs. Clinton is likely to win the Democratic beauty contest in Michigan on Jan. 15. But with no delegates at stake, it will have little impact.

Despite Sen. Harry Reid's son serving as her Nevada chairman, she's likely to lose that state's caucuses on Jan. 19. Then comes South Carolina on Jan. 26, where half the Democratic voters are likely to be African-American and Mr. Obama the probable victor. That means Florida on the 29th looms very large. The outcome of the contest in the Sunshine State is likely to have a disproportionate impact on the 23 contests on Super Tuesday.

With so many states voting on Super Tuesday, no candidate will have enough money, time or energy to cover all the contests. Burning in a single television ad in every Super Tuesday state will cost nearly $16 million.

Instead, candidates will pick states where they have a better chance to win and, by doing so, lock down more delegates. They will spend their time in cities with local TV and print coverage that reaches the biggest number of targeted voters possible. And they will spend their limited dollars on TV stations that deliver the largest number of likely supporters at the least cost. Memphis, for example, may be a smart buy, with its stations reaching western Tennessee and eastern Arkansas, both Feb. 5 states. Fargo, which reaches North Dakota and Minnesota, may be another effective buy.

At the end of Super Tuesday, it won't be just who won the most states, but who has the most delegates. In both parties, party elders and voters in later contests across the country will want to start consolidating behind a candidate.
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 10:09 AM   #567
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Jeannieco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: If the moonlight caught you crying on Killiney Bay oh sing your song let your song be sung
Posts: 4,992
Local Time: 12:37 AM
Kucinich asks for New Hampshire recount

January 10, 2008 07:25 PM Eastern Time
Kucinich Asks for New Hampshire Recount in the Interest of Election Integrity
DETROIT--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, the most outspoken advocate in the Presidential field and in Congress for election integrity, paper-ballot elections, and campaign finance reform, has sent a letter to the New Hampshire Secretary of State asking for a recount of Tuesday’s election because of “unexplained disparities between hand-counted ballots and machine-counted ballots.”

“I am not making this request in the expectation that a recount will significantly affect the number of votes that were cast on my behalf,” Kucinich stressed in a letter to Secretary of State William M. Gardner. But, “Serious and credible reports, allegations, and rumors have surfaced in the past few days…It is imperative that these questions be addressed in the interest of public confidence in the integrity of the election process and the election machinery – not just in New Hampshire, but in every other state that conducts a primary election.”

He added, “Ever since the 2000 election – and even before – the American people have been losing faith in the belief that their votes were actually counted. This recount isn’t about who won 39% of 36% or even 1%. It’s about establishing whether 100% of the voters had 100% of their votes counted exactly the way they cast them.”

Kucinich, who drew about 1.4% of the New Hampshire Democratic primary vote, wrote, “This is not about my candidacy or any other individual candidacy. It is about the integrity of the election process.” No other Democratic candidate, he noted, has stepped forward to question or pursue the claims being made.

“New Hampshire is in the unique position to address – and, if so determined, rectify – these issues before they escalate into a massive, nationwide suspicion of the process by which Americans elect their President. Based on the controversies surrounding the Presidential elections in 2004 and 2000, New Hampshire is in a prime position to investigate possible irregularities and to issue findings for the benefit of the entire nation,” Kucinich wrote in his letter.

“Without an official recount, the voters of New Hampshire and the rest of the nation will never know whether there are flaws in our electoral system that need to be identified and addressed at this relatively early point in the Presidential nominating process,” said Kucinich, who is campaigning in Michigan this week in advance of next Tuesday’s Presidential primary in that state.
Jeannieco is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 11:11 AM   #568
Blue Crack Distributor
 
LarryMullen's POPAngel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: I'll be up with the sun, I'm not coming down...
Posts: 53,698
Local Time: 02:37 AM
Shouldn't this go in the big massive thread we already have?
LarryMullen's POPAngel is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 11:34 AM   #569
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Jeannieco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: If the moonlight caught you crying on Killiney Bay oh sing your song let your song be sung
Posts: 4,992
Local Time: 12:37 AM
^^ Sure, I guess it could be moved to the NH thread, I just figured people would miss it...

Move you if you like...
Jeannieco is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 11:35 AM   #570
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 67,796
Local Time: 03:37 AM
sounds reasonable enough to me.
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 02:09 PM   #571
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 02:37 AM
Even the Dems are turning again Clinton, not looking good for her...
BVS is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 02:18 PM   #572
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Jeannieco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: If the moonlight caught you crying on Killiney Bay oh sing your song let your song be sung
Posts: 4,992
Local Time: 12:37 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
Even the Dems are turning again Clinton, not looking good for her...
I agree! Thank God!

You mean with all the Obama endorsements lately or what specifically?
Jeannieco is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 02:42 PM   #573
Blue Crack Addict
 
unico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Rage Ave.
Posts: 18,749
Local Time: 02:37 AM
wtf is up with the polls? can't they use a system that doesn't suck? why touch screen????? why can't we just push a button like we do for phones, computers, atms, etc.?
unico is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 02:45 PM   #574
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,142
Local Time: 07:37 AM
Good question. I always get so nervous with the touchscreen things that we have here. No paper trail!
U2democrat is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 02:47 PM   #575
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Jeannieco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: If the moonlight caught you crying on Killiney Bay oh sing your song let your song be sung
Posts: 4,992
Local Time: 12:37 AM
^^Exactly the machines are totally rigged IMO.

Diebold machines are bought and paid for by Rep. donor corporations.
It's disgusting. Obama won a slam dunk in Iowa because the votes were counted by hand not machine.

I am so glad Dennis is doing this investigation. Something is rotten. I saw online that there is a lawsuit filed to investigate voter fraud since last fall. I don't know how far it's gotten...
Jeannieco is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 02:49 PM   #576
Blue Crack Addict
 
phanan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: in the darkness on the edge of town
Posts: 25,835
Local Time: 03:37 AM
There hasn't been any discrepancies in NH before, and I doubt something happened this time, too.
phanan is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 02:58 PM   #577
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
coemgen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Black and White Town
Posts: 3,962
Local Time: 02:37 AM
They should recount it. How can the polls honestly be that off. I've always felt odd that just a few tears shed by Clinton threw off the polls by like 12 points or whatever over night. That's stupid.

On the other hand, it does seem that the media, other Dems and others are really wanting Obama in the White House. He's picking up support everywhere. We'll see what happens.
coemgen is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 04:49 PM   #578
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Jeannieco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: If the moonlight caught you crying on Killiney Bay oh sing your song let your song be sung
Posts: 4,992
Local Time: 12:37 AM
Ya, it's weird that the percentage by which Obama was leading in the polls pre-election day was almost the exact percentage of votes being tallied by machine. He won every county in which the votes were counted by hand.

It just makes you wonder.....
Jeannieco is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 06:29 PM   #579
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 02:37 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by unico
why can't we just push a button like we do for phones, computers, atms, etc.?
I'd take it a step further.

You push a button and then also fill out a scantron with the canidates name. If they don't match up or you can't spell then you're not intelligent enough to vote and it doesn't count.
BVS is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 06:32 PM   #580
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 08:37 AM
Speaking as a former auditor, I've always had serious concerns over this Diebold crap.
__________________

financeguy 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 02:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×