What follows is an attempt, to the best of my abilities, to demistify the Super Tuesday primaries/caucuses which will be held Wednesday our time. Those with a better understanding of these matters are invited to scrutinise my work for errors or significant omissions.
The Democratic candidate will be chosen by 4049 delegates at the party’s national convention from August 25-28. This includes 796 “superdelegates” who attend by virtue of holding senior party positions, and who are not pledged to particular candidates. By the reckoning of the 2008 Democratic Convention Watch blog, 198 superdelegates have declared their intention to support Hillary Clinton against 107 for Barack Obama, with 415 undeclared. The six primaries and caucuses that have been held so far have chosen 63 delegates pledged to Obama, 48 to Clinton and 26 to John Edwards, who has since withdrawn. The Super Tuesday primaries and caucuses will determine 1688 of the remaining 3253, representing 22 states along with American Samoa and “Democrats Abroad”.
In most cases a state’s pledged delegates are awarded by a two-tier system of proportional representation. Slightly over a quarter are allocated proportionately to the statewide vote, with candidates needing to clear a 15 per cent threshold to win representation. A little over half are tied to congressional districts, with each choosing between three and six delegates depending on the district’s party turnout at recent elections. The effect is similar to Australian upper house systems in which a limited number of members are chosen from each state or region, reducing the proportionality of the overall result by locking out the smaller players. States variously conduct primaries or caucuses, the salient difference being that the latter do not provide a secret ballot. These can be “open” (all voters may participate regardless of party registration), “closed” (only voters registered with the party may participate) or “semi-open” (voters may participate regardless of party registration, but only in one party’s primary or the other).
Poll averages listed below are calculated from results listed at Electoral-Vote.com. The numbers in brackets show the number of polls from which the average was determined. A small number of polls with an unusually high undecided vote have been deemed untrustworthy and excluded.
CALIFORNIA
Semi-open primary
370 tied delegates: 129 by statewide PR, 241 by district-level PR
71 superdelegates
Fortnight poll average (9): Clinton 45/Obama 39
NEW YORK
Closed primary
232 tied delegates:81 by statewide PR, 151 by district-level PR
49 superdelegates
Fortnight poll average (6): Clinton 52/Obama 32
ILLINOIS
Open primary
153 tied delegates: 53 by statewide PR, 100 by district-level PR
32 superdelegates
Fortnight poll average (2): Obama 56/Clinton 32
NEW JERSEY
Semi-open primary
107 tied delegates: 37 by statewide PR, 70 by district-level PR
20 superdelegates
Fortnight poll average (6): Clinton 48/Obama 38
MASSACHUSETTS
Semi-open primary
93 tied delegates: 32 by statewide PR, 61 by district-level PR
28 superdelegates
Fortnight poll average (3): Clinton 53/Obama 31
GEORGIA
Open primary
87 tied delegates: 30 by statewide PR, 57 by district-level PR
16 superdelegates
Fortnight poll average (5): Obama 50/Clinton 39
MINNESOTA
Open caucuses
72 tied delegates: 25 by statewide PR, 47 by district-level PR
16 superdelegates
Fortnight poll average (1): Clinton 40/Obama 33
MISSOURI
Open primary
72 tied delegates: 25 by statewide PR, 47 by district-level PR
16 superdelegates
Fortnight poll average (7): Clinton 45/Obama 37
TENNESSEE
Open primary
68 tied delegates: 24 by statewide PR, 44 by district-level PR
17 superdelegates
Fortnight poll average (4): Clinton 50/Obama 32
COLORADO
Closed caucuses
55 tied delegates: statewide PR
15 superdelegates
Fortnight poll average (1): Clinton 32/Obama 34
ARIZONA
Closed primary
56 tied delegates: 19 by statewide PR, 37 by district-level PR
11 superdelegates
Fortnight poll average (3): Clinton 42/Obama 36
CONNECTICUT
Closed primary
48 tied delegates: 17 by statewide PR, 31 by district-level PR
12 superdelegates
Fortnight poll average (3): Clinton 44/Obama 41
ALABAMA
Open primary
52 tied delegates: 18 by statewide PR, 34 by district-level PR
8 superdelegates
Fortnight poll average (5): Clinton 43/Obama 37
ARKANSAS
Open primary
35 tied delegates: 13 by statewide PR, 22 by district-level PR
12 superdelegates
No poll available
OKLAHOMA
Closed primary
38 tied delegates: 13 by statewide PR, 25 by district-level PR
9 superdelegates
Fortnight poll average (1): Clinton 44/Obama 19
KANSAS
Closed caucuses
32 tied delegates: district-level PR
9 superdelegates
Fortnight poll average (1): Clinton 27/Obama 22
NEW MEXICO
Closed primary
26 tied delegates: 9 by statewide PR, 17 by district-level PR
12 superdelegates
No poll available
UTAH
Semi-open primary
23 tied delegates: 8 by statewide PR, 15 by district-level PR
6 superdelegates
Fortnight poll average (1): Obama 53/Clinton 29
DELAWARE
Closed primary
15 tied delegates: 5 by statewide PR, 10 by district-level PR
8 superdelegates
Fortnight poll average (1): Clinton 44/Obama 42
IDAHO
Open caucuses
18 tied delegates: district-level PR
5 superdelegates
No poll available
NORTH DAKOTA
Closed primary
13 tied delegates: statewide PR
8 superdelegates
No poll available
ALASKA
Closed caucuses
13 tied delegates: statewide PR
5 superdelegates
No poll available
The Republican candidate will be chosen at the convention to be held from September 1-4 by 2380 delegates, including 1917 who are pledged to particular candidates and 463 who are unpledged (not normally referred to as “superdelegates” in the Republican case, but essentially the same thing). Super Tuesday will see 1014 pledged delegates chosen from 21 states. The eight states which have held primaries and caucuses so far have chosen 95 delegates pledged to John McCain, 85 to Mitt Romney, 26 to Mike Huckabee and six to Ron Paul. A further two unpledged delegates are committed to support McCain, seven to Romney and three to Huckabee. The Republicans make life easier for election watchers by allocating a number of states’ delegates on a winner-takes-all basis, while other states operate similarly to the normal Democratic practice. Poll averages shown below from New York and New Jersey have been limited to the past week to account for the withdrawal of Rudi Giuliani, who has thrown his support behind John McCain. If anyone can explain to me in reasonably simple language how the Colorado, Minnesota and Alaska caucuses work, I shall be most grateful.
CALIFORNIA
Closed primary
170 tied delegates: 11 to statewide winner, 159 to district winners
3 unpledged RNC delegates
Fortnight poll average (10): McCain 36/Romney 30/Huckabee 13/Paul 5
NEW YORK
Closed primary
101 tied delegates: winner takes all
Week poll average (4): McCain 54/Romney 25/Huckabee 7/Paul 5
GEORGIA
Open primary
69 tied delegates: 33 to statewide winner, 39 to district winners
3 unpledged RNC delegates
Fortnight poll average (4): McCain 29/Romney 26/Huckabee 25/Paul 7
ILLINOIS
Open primary
57 tied delegates: District-level PR (3 to 6 per district)
10 unpledged statewide delegates
3 unpledged RNC delegates
Fortnight poll average (2): McCain 41/Romney 30/Huckabee 10/Paul 7
MISSOURI
Open primary
58 tied delegates: winner takes all
Fortnight poll average (6): McCain 31/Huckabee 28/Romney 24/Paul 5
TENNESSEE
Open primary
52 tied delegates: 12 by statewide PR, 27 by district-level PR (3 per district)
3 unpledged RNC delegates
Fortnight poll average (4): McCain 30/Huckabee 26/Romney 22/Paul 7
ARIZONA
Closed primary
50 tied delegates: winner takes all
3 unpledged RNC delegates
Fortnight poll average (1): McCain 46/Romney 27/Huckabee 9/Paul 3
NEW JERSEY
Semi-open primary
52 tied delegates: winner takes all
Week poll average (5): McCain 49/Romney 26/Huckabee 7/Paul 5
ALABAMA
Open primary
45 tied delegates: 24 by statewide PR, 21 by district-level PR (3 per district)
3 unpledged RNC delegates
Fortnight poll average (6): McCain 34/Huckabee 30/Romney 17/Paul 4
COLORADO
Closed caucuses
43 tied delegates
3 unpledged RNC delegates
Fortnight poll average (1): Romney 43/McCain 24/Huckabee 17/Paul 5
MASSACHUSETTS
Semi-open primary
40 tied delegates: 10 by statewide PR, 30 by district-level PR (3 per district)
3 unpledged RNC delegates
Fortnight poll average (3): Romney 54/McCain 29/Huckabee 6/Paul 3
OKLAHOMA
Closed primary
38 tied delegates: 23 by statewide PR, 15 to district winners
3 unpledged RNC delegates
Fortnight poll average (1): McCain 37/Huckabee 28/Romney 19/Paul 6
MINNESOTA
Open caucuses
38 tied delegates
3 unpledged RNC delegates
Fortnight poll average (1): McCain 41/Huckabee 22/Romney 17/Paul 5
UTAH
Closed primary
36 tied delegates: winner takes all
Fortnight poll average (1): Romney 84/McCain 4
ARKANSAS
Open primary
31 tied delegates: 19 by statewide PR, 12 by district-level PR (3 per district)
3 unpledged RNC delegates
No poll available
WEST VIRGINIA
Closed caucus
18 tied delegates: winner takes all, run-off (i.e. preferential) voting
9 tied to May 13 primary
3 unpledged RNC delegates
No poll available
CONNECTICUT
Closed primary
27 tied delegates: winner takes all
3 unpledged RNC delegates
Fortnight poll average (3): McCain 46/Romney 27/Huckabee 9/Paul 3
ALASKA
Closed caucuses
26 tied delegates
3 unpledged RNC delegates
No poll available
NORTH DAKOTA
Open caucuses
23 tied delegates: statewide PR
3 unpledged RNC delegates
No poll available
MONTANA
Closed caucuses
25 tied delegates: winner takes all
No poll available
DELAWARE
Closed primary
15 tied delegates: winner takes all
3 unpledged RNC delegates
Fortnight poll average (1): McCain 41/Romney 35/Huckabee 7/Paul 5
UPDATE: News Limited blogger Paul Colgan has a very useful aggregation of links on the subject. Like it or not, the definitive entry comes from Fox News.
225 Comments
The Clinton/Obama struggle is the one to watch on so many different levels. To begin to elaborate all the angles would be exhaustive. I think Hillary will get over the line by a ‘negligible’ margin. Then what next?
The obvious end game would be a Clinton/Obama ticket against a McCain /Huckabee ticket. Come November its Old conservative against New female/black progressives. A new historic threshold is at hand.My call is a Democrat win. The change factor will carry it!
1098
HarryH
(from previous thread)
Obama, as you point out, did not vote, and neither did McCain.
(See:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00349)
But, for extra points, tell me, which of them sang:
“bomb,bomb,bomb…bomb,bomb,bomb, I-RAN” ?
William, I’m disappointed in the title for this thread.
I thought “Super Tuesday for Ignorant Loathing Lefties” would have been more in keeping with the decidely lowbrow tone we keep around here! LOL
“Dummies” just isn’t pejorative enough, not for our special brand of ‘ignorance’.
Can you change it?
I think we can put Arkansas down as a Huckabee win. He is former governor there afterall.
Clinton should also win there as it’s really her home state despite her New York senatorship.
William, this is simply beautiful, and it makes me wish more people posted here to appreciate it.
Good work.
beautiful ?
has Diogenes been working on William ?
KR,
i believe Mr John McCain would be the Brian Wilson wannabe. i saw it the day he sang it and the bile is still in the back of my throat.
KR,
McCain co-sponsored the resolution with his pal Joe but didn’t bother turning up to vote on it. The numbers were safe.
guess William will take this personally rather than constructive:
whilst the fortnightly Poll averages are terrific info , we do have an usual campaign where Obama is making a huge late surge in the last 3 to 5 days
making the fortnightly Poll average somewhat less meaningful
EXAMPLE California , the most delegates 370 up for grabs
Williams fortnight average is Clinton 45/39
but the Rasmussen Poll 2/2 48 hours ago has Clinton 44/45
and the Suffolk Poll 3/2 24 hours ago has Clinton 40/39
suggesting the narrowing is real close
8
HarryH
Well done HH!
For that neatest correctest (sic) answer, you win….(drum roll>>>)
A personally signed edition of the bill by Joe and John, and a map of all the Iranian sites to be obliterated in President McCain’s first month of office!
Congratulations!! A fine memento of a thoroughly mad experiment in genetically crossing a Democrat and a Republican!
In California, Clinton and Obama are pretty even in the polls, the intrade futures and on betfair. It is going to be an intriguing poll.
HarryH, the fact Obama did not turn up for the Iran ‘war’ vote
“due to political campaigning”
Had Clinton done so , surely we would castigate her
Much of Obama’s support is based on the notion he is not an expedient pollie
& presents change in leadership character…..hmmmm ..keep the faith ?
Beautiful work alright William, not thinking of putting out a cheap paperback on the subject are you?
Ron,
in case you missed it i am criticizing Obama, although also noting that he offers SOME hope as against Hilary’s NO hope.
The interesting thing in the Democratic race is that it will be extremely difficult for either candidate to win by much of a majority.
Take a state like California. All districts have between 3 and 7 delegates. In those with 4 or 6 (and there is a lot), short of a landslide they will split evenly between Clinton and Obama. The many even-numbered-delegate districts across the country will be effectively cancelled out.
The end result is that, short of a national landslide, the Democratic race will continue onwards into March and quite possibly the very last primary.
RECENT POLLING VS FORTNIGHTLY AVERAGE POLLS
gives hope for Obama in the following States vs William’s fortnight average:
California Rasmussen Poll. 2/2 Clinton 44/45
California new one ARG….2/2 Clinton 47/39
California Suffolk Poll…….3/2 Clinton 40/39
Fortnightly average……………Clinton 45/39 (without ARG very promising)
Arizona Mason Dixon……..1/2 Clinton 43/41
Fortnightly average………….. Clinton 42/36
New Jersey Mason Dixon…1/2 Clinton 46/39
New Jersey Zogby………..2/2 Clinton 43/42
Fortnightly average………….. Clinton 48/38
Other states recent Polls have not moved or the margin is so huge any ‘narrowing’ is irrelevant
on the recent Poll figures Hilliary will win tomorrow overall but not knock Obama out as many others have already said
A bunch of new polls are up on realclearpolitics.com.
California: Obama +1 (Suffolk), Obama +6 (Zogby)
New Jearsy: tie
Gorgia: Obama +17
Missouri: Obama +5
Democratic Nomination: Clinton +1 (USA Today/Gallop), tie (CBS News)
sorry HarryH missed your blog reply , could not agree more !
Well, well, well…and so we march into history, but not necessarily certain, (at least, not AS certain as we once were) that HRC would sweep all opponents aside and assume her rightful place in the Democratic pantheon of dynastic certainties.
It’s sometimes strange to watch Americans, who on the one hand had the gumption (their word!) to chuck off the colonial shackles, kick the British out of their New World, but who yet seem quaintly addicted to the idea of their very own monarchical dynasties. Mix it up with Puritannical hangovers of God’s divine purpose, Hollywood fantasies of the triumphant blasting of Good Vs Evil, and a dash of gladiator toga and sandal smiting the corrupted vileness of autocrats, and you’ve got a ripper show to accompany popcorn and cola.
BHO Vs HRC is the quintessential American soap opera, replete with stars of bygone eras, mega stars of today’s media saturated world, and the good old elements of a Bailey and Barnum circus show.
Welcome to the Greatest Show on Earth!
Nobody does circus like the American political circus! And here we are, like kids at a show, lined up on our seats, agog at the highwire act of the young and lithesome Barack Obama, as he tries to steal the show from the Wonderful Hillary, lion tamer, husband tamer, and trapeze artiste extraordinare! Watch how she sommersaults, turns and twists, and all the while manages to never drop into the net so far below!
And here’s Obama, the strippling youth, with flaming torch being tossed high as he works his way across the thin tight wire, so high, so amazingly high, you can hear the crowd draw breath at every step!
It’s all elephants and donkeys and more money than we ever meant to spend, but somehow, it’s enthralling, and we cannot take our eyes off it.
Thank you William. Being a dummy, this thread makes this noxious weed of a system clearer – to a certain extent…
Who can fathom exactly why it was set up this way – let alone exported as a model of functionable democracy?
Makes me Thank The Heavens Above that we live under our system…
#20 KR its simply prose – don’t ever stop.
A preview of the calm before the storm …
From Hillarys bucker:
From the Obama camp:
And as morning breaks across the northern states …
Wall Street Journal, “The Obama Opportunity”
Washington Post, “Obama vs. the Phobocracy”
Chicago Tribune, “Why I Back Barack Obama”
Los Angeles Times, “Maria Shriver Endorses Barack Obama”
New York Times, “Michelle, Maria, Caroline and Oprah on the Hustings in California”
Chicago Sun Times, “Star Power for Obama in LA”
Boston Herald, “Obama for the Dems”
Houston Conicle, “Keillor, Michelmen back Obama”
New York Post, “Hillary’s Loosing Women”
Wall Street Journal, “Obama closes in on Clinton…”
The New York Times, “Inspired by Obama, Filmmaker takes on Politics”
It had to happen …
Hillary Clinton cries in Connecticut
4th February 2008 – in time for the evening edition
With a few updates to the Zino engine …
Generating Clinton at 922 (51.11%) and Obama with 882 (48.89%), a difference of just over 2% in favor of the dynasty – i.e. we are heading into a season 2 – staring Barack (best leading man), Hillary (the leading lady), and Bill (best supporting actor).
William, don’t see why “dummies” should get all the remedial attention. Here’s a little something for the Complete Cretin.
http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?parm1=105
The deadpan humour of Bob “Charisma Bypass” Benenson and team will amuse hardcore pol. junkies while providing useful instruction to those challenged by the arcane machinations of “the greatest democracy on earth”.
Four cautions about the Super Tuesday Polling.
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/february_5_polls_four_cautions.php
Nice link EC. Fits in well with most of the “informed” comment here.
steve @28, I saw the name Adam in the comments section making an impactful contribution. Wonder if that was our very own Dr Adam Carr?
GG, I do believe it is a high probability.
This ought to clinch it for Obama. How can you go wrong when you have will.i.am of the Black Eyed Peas on board?:
“Obama’s strong support among younger voters was given another shot of street cred over the weekend when rapper will.i.am of group The Black Eyed Peas posted an unofficial campaign video on Youtube.
The video features celebrities including Scarlett Johansson and Herbie Hancock singing along to excerpts from an Obama speech.” (SMH)
Think of the ’street cred’ you could garner with a couple of dots in your name too William B. You’d have to put them in different places though so as not to be confused with will.i.am. How about: W.illia.m?
So – what happens to the delegates that are tied to a presidential nominee that has withdrawn (such as Giuliani or Edwards)? Do they still turn up to the national conventions and vote for the nominee despite their withdrawal, or do they change their vote to the person who the withdrawn candidate nominates?
Sorry if this is a dumb question for some, I’ve not turned up an answer on this one.
William
My compliments on your lead in with the clearest, simplest explanation of what is at stake in each contest I have read anywhere. It leaves the MSM for dead.
As for predictions, regardless of what my heart my wish for, I think Clinton will win. Again, looking at her poll lead in the big (i.e. many delegate) NE states, unless Obama can pull off California she must be the winner. With Edwards dropping out early the number of third party delegates to negotiate over is actually going to wind up fairly small. So a win today will see Hillary Clinton get the democrat nomination IMO.
Obviously, barring major scandal McCain has the Republican one sewn up.
As for the November contest, unless an economic miracle happens (which is beyond George Bush’s ability to deliver anyway) the US will be in recession and still in Iraq, and any half competent Democrat will win. Looks like Hillary.
28
steve Says:
February 5th, 2008 at 8:21 am
Four cautions about the Super Tuesday Polling.
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/february_5_polls_four_
the site certainly canvasses the Polls at different depths with a surprising ’surge’ of Democrat voters vs 2004.
Wonder whether this is a reflection of Senator Kerry 04 or Obama 07
Is this the Hip hop wrapper Barbarians vote fighting back against the Christians
Ron, the figures look just as good in tabular form as they did in graphs yesterday afternoon.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/4/13564/87220/932/449601
Being VP is pretty meaningless, Cheney is the great exception. Either Hillary or Obama would rather stay in the Senate where they would be crucial to getting legislation through and where some moderate Republicans will have to be brought on side to reach 60 votes to break a filibuster.
How many millions of Americans will vote to chose the nominees, how many Australians selected Rudd over Beazley or Nelson over Turnbull? Makes the US look good but then again remember Florida in 2000.
yes the tabular form is concise
surprising variances in some Polls for same States ?
Fortunately for Obama he cann’t get knocked out in Super Tuesday & still can win the Nominee Steve as the delegates gained are proportional to votes in each congressional district and each state (unlike the Republican system)
Right, it is early morning US time, day before voting begins.
Anyone want to make a prediction as to whether a ‘big’ endorsement is made today to take the news cycle?
I don’t know if endorsements are made on the last day of campaigning, it strikes me as the wrong time and risks changing the message from what the candidate wants. However, in somebody was to endorse Obama, it would add to his only current message: momentum is mine.
I keep wondering about Edwards, because the more you think about it the more his decision seems strange. Will he endorse somebody today, at the 11th hour? Him endorsing somebody after Super Tuesday makes little sense, as by staying in he could have done that anyway – only with a few hundred delegates to boot as well.
Predictions?
the Stats indicate Edwards supporters tend to support obama whic since his withdrawal may accunt for some of Obama’s late increase
yes Max , the non endorsement is politically strange on leverage grounds as you’d hardly think he thinks the Candidates are equal.
A cynic may attribute some advantages in saying nothing ?
well max , a week ago on this site when Hillary was well ahead in Cal. etc I predicted 49& overall Obama & a 50 delegate shortfall
that was based on significant accelerating mean trends lines since Dec. to Obama (+ with some optimism) but a few national Polls seemed to knock by prediction for six
The last few days Polls in some States are showing an even more dramatic
mean trend to Obama which statistically is abit questionable but does support a possible 50 delegate shortfall to Obama…and a masive momentum springboard
Daidoff has done some very indepth analysis overnight & shows a similar Obama %
If Edwards was going to endorse anyone he’d have done it by now. A week ago the press was reporting that Gore was considering endorsing Obama after Super Tuesday. Strange timing – unless Obama is confident of matching Hillary tomorrow and wants to save some ammunition for the final push.
The big concern for Obama, in California especially, is the high percentage of primary voters who vote early. Up to 20% of voters may have voted back when Clinton still had a big lead. The one saving grace would be if the percentage of voters voting early is less than expected due to the expected massive increase in participation. Early voting is the sort of thing you’d expect of the usual crowd of rusted on politically aware types who normallly have primaries to themselves.
Very informative. I didn’t realize how complicted the delegate system can be but and this really helps me to understand it better.
FG @ 39 – That must be the situation I think. Obama has plenty of momentum just now, and believes he can stay in the race after today’s votes given the narrowing, so the big endorsements can be held back for when some new impetus is needed in the months before the convention.
Steve @ 28 – I just cannot believe the variation in the polls in some states. Look at California – 3 combined polls have it 46/40 to Obama but Survey USA has it 41/53 in Clinton’s favour. Someone is very wrong – what questions are they asking?
Similar in Massachussets -Suffolk poll has Obama up 46/44 but Survey USA has him down 39/56.
Maybe Survey USA is owned by the Clintons.
JV I would think that most of the variance would be because of the huge pool of undecideds who are still making up their minds. Swinging voters are notorious for wanting to run with the last pollie they heard from but not being quite sure.
Some of those voter turnout figures from last elections are atrocious too. Tomorrow will see a lot of voters who have been totally disengaged in previous elections. California itself has moved forward in the year and turned itself from a nothing primary into a vital state.
Steve- Do you agree a big turnout of Democrats is more likely to assist Obama?
44 In states like California
If they are young, they undoubtedly will.
Here’s the interesting guts of an article by Walter Shapiro in Salon, one for the tragics, and those of us ‘dummies’ who need more edjamacatin’:
Georgia — The first returns of the night will begin to roll in when the polls close at 7 p.m. (EST). While no one will be proclaiming, “As Georgia goes, so goes the nation,” it will be illuminating to see if Obama attracts anything like the 78 percent of the African-American vote as he did in neighboring South Carolina. In South Carolina, John Edwards (who has since dropped out) finished first among white men, with 44 percent in a three-way race. It will be worth watching how Georgia now splits in a race between a woman and an African-American.
Alabama and Tennessee — The polls here close at 8 p.m. (EST) and these states should quickly indicate whether the trends from the Georgia exit polls can be extrapolated through the South.
Illinois — Obama’s home state (8 p.m. EST closing time) should not offer much suspense about the outcome. But this is another place where it would be worth watching to see how white male Democrats split their vote in downstate Illinois.
Massachusetts — At 8 p.m. (EST) we will also get a quick test of the power of endorsements. From Sens. Ted Kennedy and John Kerry to Gov. Deval Patrick, this state has become the launching pad of Obama campaign surrogates. But Massachusetts also has a vibrant blue-collar Democratic tradition — and Clinton’s performance among lower-income voters could be a bellwether for the evening.
Connecticut — The candidates’ own polls clearly indicated that Connecticut is up for grabs, since both Clinton and Obama were campaigning in the state Monday. (The best way to read a campaign’s strategy is to watch where they send the candidate.) With the polls closing at 8 p.m. (EST), we should know fast the power of Obama-mania in Clinton’s backyard. Working against Obama is that this is a primary open only to registered Democrats.
New Jersey — Results from the fourth largest delegate haul of the evening will start coming in at 8 p.m. EST. Since independents can vote in the Garden State (unlike New York and Connecticut), we will soon know whether Obama is demonstrating his crossover appeal to these swing voters.
Arizona — At 9 p.m. (EST) we will get our first look at the Latino vote in a primary out West. If Clinton does not roll up a large margin among this group in Arizona, it does not bode well for California, where the polls close at 11 p.m. (EST).
Minnesota — While it is always difficult to draw larger conclusions from caucuses (since only a fraction of registered Democrats participate), Minnesota has perhaps the most vibrant caucus tradition in the Democratic Party, aside from Iowa. The caucus voting should be over by 9 p.m. EST — and we should get another snapshot of how Obama is doing among party activists.
By the time we finally learn what happened in American Samoa (either Clinton or Obama will presumably come out with a 2-to-1 majority in the caucuses), our attention will probably have shifted to next Tuesday’s Potomac primary with Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia all voting Feb. 12. Even though a numerical majority of Democratic delegates will have been selected by the time the final returns trickle in on Wednesday, the real Super Duper Party Pooper Tuesday may come on March 4 when Texas and Ohio hold primaries that could (note the conditional) select the nominee.
41
jaundiced view
yeah, the polls for this primary mega-bash are all over the shop.
When I looked at them last night I did notice that the spread for McCain over Romney was consistenly high and with a big spread between high and low, but that Clinton’s was much narrower and with a smaller spread between her highest and lowest lead over Obama.
For what it’s worth, and I don’t have any idea, but it seemed to confirm the notion that Clinton has most certainly had her lead eroded and it’s not just one ‘outlier’ poll that says so.
I get the feeling that Obama is ready to slug this out, especially as neither of them spent everything on today’s vote, $11 and $8 mill respectively, which means they’ve still got a huge pile to go on with.
I think that videoes like the one put out by the Black eyed peas can make a huge difference in getting to voters who normally are immune to the political process.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yq0tMYPDJQ
I just saw an interesting article on Andrew Barlett’s blog noting that a small number (variously reported as 11 to 28) delegates were allocated to overseas resident registered democrats. He pointed out that if the race was close, 20 or so delegates were important. Any viewss on how they would split? Or when they vote?
Socrates, here is some info.
http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=59115&archive=true
It’s pure Groundhog day: “it’s the economy, stupid”
With recent polls showing the economy as the really big concern nationally, we are catapulted back to the past:
Only 19 percent of Americans now rate the nation’s economy positively, the fewest to say so since June 1993, when the Clinton administration was grappling with a struggling economy. On the eve of the last midterm elections, 55 percent assessed the state of the national economy as “excellent” or “good.” Now, about nine in 10 Democrats and independents give the economy a negative review; nearly two-thirds of Republicans agree.
…all the gory poll detials are here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/03/AR2008020303148.html
RBA announces +1/4%
Just a note on the economy in the US, and an interview I saw on Lehrer recently, you know, the usual sombre economist, talking about the latest Federal Reserve rate cut, and the gigantic sieze up in the credit markets, the whole enchilada.
What struck me about this guy, so serious, so knowledgable, so articulate in all things money and central banking, was what a complete load of sh!t he was talking!
“Yes, the Federal Reserve has acted swiftly to calm the markets”…ah, they’ve been saying for nearly a year there was nothing to worry about! Now, however, they are more than ‘worried’, they are in full panic mode!
“Bernanke has moved to give us more medicine”…ah, no, he’s pouring even MORE of the same poison that’s almost killed the economy, even more ‘cheap’ money, and it will not ‘cure’ anything!
On and on, he spoke in Orwellian double-speak, each claim as patently wrong as the last, and not once did he ever seem to actually doubt what he was saying.
But he assured everyone that it all showed just how well the Fed had it’s finger on the pulse (what’s left of it!), and how everyone should feel somehow assured that everything was under control.
My god! And this on PBS! Just where, in god’s name, does anyone EVER, tell the poor punters the truth?
56
Basil Fawlty
No surprise! Especially after seeing the shocker inflation numbers. And if you think this is bad now, just imagine what the US are going to be seeing while they hold the overnight rate well below inflation.
Stevens is doing what he must, and we should thank our lucky stars we live in a country where the central bank is not the whore of the market.
Now, that is truly ‘medicine’, it hurts, yes, a bit, but the disease it eventually cures is a bloody damned sight worse.
To Notch @32
There are complicated rules about delegates being ‘released’ from their ties to their candidate, those rules being set by legislation in each state.
Some pledged delegates are not really forced to vote for their candidate at all, and can use either their own discretion or their candidates instructions on how to vote at the convention.
Some delegates, depending on their state of origion, are bound to vote for their candidate, even if that candidate has dropped out, for either one, two, three or even more rounds of voting at the convention.
Forget all the polls. There is only one poll and it’s tomorrow.
#33 – Socrates – It looks like WB will get my $50.
KR @ 57 – Maybe they won’t tell the truth because if they did a lot of Americans would take to the life rafts and start paddling to China or, even worse, Cuba! ;(
Rates go up……and taxes go down….and the wheels on the bus go round and round….
KR55
Thansk for that article link. Despite all the money spent, I suppose this is where I find teh reporting of the US race surprisingly unsophisticated. Not only are their poll samples small and highly variable, but they don’t rate cndidates against issues. For example, whoever among Obama, Clinton and McCain is rated best for “economic management” or “most likely to fix the economy” will surely win in November. Perhaps I have been looking in the wrong places, but I don’t seem to see this anywhere.
By comparison, I remember in the last Oz campaign as interest rates started rising then Howard’s lead for economic management began to be eroded. So you coudl see the impact on voting. Indeed, Possum did an excellent analysis of the quantitative effect. Surely similar efects will hold in the US, religeous fanatics or not. An unemployed religeous fanatic who has lost his house will still surely be reluctant to vote for the republicans?
For the candidates policies on Global Warming there is a summary and links on my blog post ‘Fighting Global Warming US Style’. They do have them. Obama’s is very detailed. In the last debate, Clinton mentioned the issue as one the new President should address as a top priority.
Man I’m getting anxious, I’m swept up in the hysteria! IT’S NOT EVEN MY COUNTRY WHY DO I CARE?
Gobama! :p
60
MayoFeral
Ha,ha! This thought has occured to quite a few people I suspect! Although I can’t quite remember where, but I’ve seen a spoof where Americans are crossing the border into Mexico as ‘economic refugees’ and the Mexican government has to tighten border controls.
Satire, sure, but like all good jokes, there’s a grain of truth in it.
64
Erytnicam
Mac, you’ve got an excuse, it’s all the neuro mind-altering consciousness stuff you’ve been forcing yourself to master.
62
Socrates
Good point Socrates, in some ways our polling seems much more sophisticated, despite their sheer mind-boggling quantity, it doesn’t seem nearly as ‘issues’ focused.
Oh well, it is only a presidential nomination, after all! LOL
God, he’s so close to winning California I can almost smell it. If he wins it, the narrative would be just awesome for him. I still assume HRC will finish the night ahead by 30-80 delegates before counting super delegates, but the states after that are all pure Obama territory, including the fact that I think he is very likely in Ohio, Texas etc.
61
Ferny Grover
You forgot to add the next verse:
And the bloggers on the bus go
Chatter,chatter,chatter
68
Erytnicam
Calm, there Mac!
The circus is exciting, we’re all enthralled, but don’t spill your popcorn! LOL
(It would truly surprise me if he pulled off a majority vote in California, but I’ll happily settle for a very close second. That will severly dent the aura of invincibility the Clinton machine assumed as their right.)
Erytnicam @ 64,
I am anxious too. I think it’s becuse i’m hoping that the US elects a President who doesn’t divide this country over whether or not we should be supporting their wars.
Many people in many other countries will be hoping the same I think.
Obama would be suicide for the Democrats – the USA has not elected a northern liberal as President since 1960 and probably won’t ever again – the votes needed to win the presidency are in states where a “northern liberal” would be poison and the words “ACLU” are treated the same as “NSDAP”.
Well KR….if it were set in the US the song would be:
Rates go down…and taxes go down….and the wheels on the bus go…pppfffffttttt
#69
And here I am – crawling on the floor picking up my popcorn.
72
Ferny Grover
Classic! ROFLOL
The ‘other’ side of Hillary is well explored by David Brooks in this neat little expose of the Hillary ‘wronged’:
Cooper, who, not surprisingly, supports Barack Obama, believes that Clinton hasn’t changed. “Hillary’s approach is so absolutist, draconian and intolerant, it means a replay of 1993.”
…a good read, especially if you’ve got doubts about Hillary Clinton’s ability to ‘unite’ the nation she so eagerly wants to lead.
“The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country” (Hermann Goering).
Do you think we’ve finally stopped falling for that?
#75
Ferny Grover
I think the possibilities for large scale manipulation are much weaker – and for only one reason – the Internet. It is only 15 years since the terms url and http were introduced. In this time we have accumulated historical information at a level never before seen and we constantly developing new tools that help us find and evaluate information. It is my opinion that this is the driving force behind policies of openness and ethics that we see in campaigns like Kevin07 and Obama08. On the other-hand – watching the post 9/11 fallout would suggest that we still have a way to go.
I was keen to get a breakdown of how many of the California districts had odd numbered delegates in the Democratic race. For those who don’t know the significance of this, the delegates are awarded by congressional district in numbers varying from 3 – 7. If the numbers are even then, as happens in the ACT and NT, Senate race its an even split unless there’s a landslide. So the only point is the contests in the districts with odd-numbered delegates.
Goolgling found me this: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/4/155020/1046
It’s an analysis from someone who is clearly an Obama partisan and he/she seems a bit over-keen to assume that the demographics favour Obama in some seats. However, his most compelling arguyment is that no Latino district has odd numbers and three of the biggest African/American districts do.
To continue…(I was rudely interrupted). Also the vast majority of the seats are even numbered and this appears to be especially the case in suburban LA which is Clin ton’s strongest area. Apparently there are more odd numbered seats in the more liberal northern areas of the state (especially the Bay area) and the rural areas which he/she speculates will favour Obama in the same way that rural Nevada seats will. The basic argument is that if the vote is close enough then Obama’s inbuilt advantage re delegates is enough to overcome even the extra delegates Clinto will get out of the 129 allocated on the basis of the overall vote.
with the narrowing of the overall State California Poll feeding into Congressional districts & being distributed proportionally plus the odd number factor explaineed by Robert , California is unlikely to impact on who will be the Nominee
Who would have believed the biggest State’s importance gets marginalised when a fews months ago it was one of Obama’s albatross
79
Robert Bollard
Without raking through the details it’s an interesting thesis, and the sort of thing I’ve been reading ie Obama is in with a shot to hold close enough to Clinton to make the post “Super Choose Day” a real contest.
Bloody ‘ell, this is an amazing ‘narrowing’ of the sort that the Coalition could only have dreams about! LOL
Here’s the core of the post I link to above:
“There are 6 districts which allocate 6 delegates, where it is still likely to be an even scenario, but where a strong showing could give a 4-2 split (I think a candidate would need close to 60% of the vote for that to happen). These districts, the most Democratic in the state (the allocation is based on Democratic turnout in primaries), are CA-06 (Woolsey), CA-08 (Pelosi), CA-09 (Lee), CA-12 (Lantos), CA-14 (Eshoo) and CA-30 (Waxman). As these are districts populated with liberals, and given that some of them are high-income (06, 08, 12, 30), they seem to trend toward Obama. I think CA-09, Barbara Lee’s district serving heavily African-American Oakland as well as some other East Bay cities, offers the best chance for a 4-2 split. Let’s say that Obama gets one of these. The number is now 71-69 Obama.
As I said, there are two districts with 3 delegates: CA-20 (Costa) in the Central Valley, and CA-47 (Loretta Sanchez) in Orange County. (As an aside, this means that these two districts turn Democrats out to primaries at the lowest rates. And they both have Democratic Congressmen. Way to go, Bush Dogs!) I project that CA-47 will go to Clinton, and think that CA-20 is up for grabs. There are a decent amount of campesinos in that area, but rural districts in Nevada went strongly for Obama. So let’s hold off on that for now. The number is now 72-71 Obama, with 3 delegates outstanding.
Now we come to the real electoral prize: the 19 districts which offer 5 delegates. There are quite a few advantages for Obama in these districts. First, all three heavily African-American districts in Southern California are in this group: CA-33 (Watson), CA-35 (Waters) and CA-37 (Richardson). Obama should be able to attract a majority here. Then there are two districts in the far north of the state: CA-01 (Thompson) and CA-04 (Doolittle). Based on how their Nevada neighbors voted, I project them to Obama. Third, there are three districts in the Bay Area that fall into this category, and in the most recent Field Poll, Obama was stronger in the Bay Area than Southern California. I expect him to take CA-07 (George Miller) and CA-13 (Stark), but lose CA-10 (Tauscher) because that’s a more suburban district. That’s so far a 7-1 split for Obama.
Clinton’s strength is in the suburbs and in Southern California, as well as among Latinos. But very few of those districts fall into this grouping. There are three in the San Fernando Valley: CA-27 (Sherman), CA-28 (Berman) and CA-29 (Schiff). But Adam Schiff has strongly endorsed Obama, and his Pasadena district is more liberal and upscale. I see a 2-1 split for Clinton here. NONE of the Orange County districts offer 5 delegates.
Going into the wild cards, we have 8 districts for Obama and 3 for Clinton. The rest include CA-05 (Matsui) in the Sacramento area, CA-15 (Honda) in the San Jose area, CA-17 (Farr) in Monterey, CA-23 (Capps) in Santa Barbara, CA-36 (Harman) in the South Bay of Los Angeles, CA-50 (Bilbray) in the San Diego suburbs, and CA-53 (Davis) in San Diego. If I were to guess, I’d say that CA-23 and CA-36 have some built-in advantages for Obama (upscale, highly educated, “wine track” liberal), making it an 11 to 3 split, with 5 outstanding.
So, before the polls close, we can reasonably project a 111-102 split for Obama, with 28 delegates up for grabs, as well as the 129 that will go proportionally to the winner. If you split the rest of the district-level delegates evenly, I think you end up with anywhere from a 7 to 12 delegate advantage that Clinton would have to make up in the popular vote. At the lowest level she would need 53% of the vote or a 6 percentage-point victory to make this up; at the highest level, 55-56% of the vote or a 10 to 12-point victory. Given the polling recently, and the fact that there has been an unusually slow rate of return of absentee ballots until after the South Carolina primary, I think the final result is likely to be narrower. And so, despite the possibility of Hillary Clinton winning the popular vote in the Golden State, I’m not sure she’s favored to win the majority of delegates, given the reality of the allocation.”
More on the issue of odd and even delegate numbers here.
If one were to design the ultimately silly electoral system, it would be really hard to go one up on this thing in the US that we all seemed to be mesmerized by.
84
Robert Bollard
It’s utterly fascinating, thanks for that. (I’d decided not to go to the link and wade through the details, but it is worth a detailed look into the Alice and Wonderland of the Democratic system of primary voting.)
Re the junior senator from Illinois:
“He’s definaitely hooking up with my better angels”
http://news.yahoo.com/comics/uclickcomics/20080204/cx_db_uc/db20080204
Supporting the silly-season supposition of the Comitator at eighty-six. Sir, when it’s all said and done, they’re bloody Seppos. What do expect, simplicity? These people are masters of manglespeak and obsfucation. Until they learn to spell and pronounce aluminium properly they remain beyond redemption.
http://news.yahoo.com/comics/uclickcomics/20080131/cx_nq_uc/nq20080131
Both Clintons field questions during forums in San Francisco
How long before she nominates Bill as her VP running mate?
To highlight the gross mis reporting by the Murdoch Press , they lauded Hillary for winning Nevada but omitted to headline that due to the proportional congressional districts allocation…Obama actually won 1 more delegate !
A repeat in California would simply be a repeat of Nevada , but as indicated California looks increasingly of academic interest rather than being decisive
As for Bill MaoFeral…I feel sorry for him because a month ago it looked like Hillary would be so busy as POSTUS that he had 4 Hillary-less years of casanova in front of him
#86 – Poss, i think this time the singers are much more interesting than the song. Usually, the singers and the song are boring.
90 – MayoFeral
Does that mean Chelsea would be First Lady???
Hello is anyone there on the other side?
#94. Considering the usual slant of this forum. And the bang up job the republicans (bush in particular) have been doing for the past 7 years even the few conservatives here probably think the dems should win.
Just a little bit of data to put Bush’s “stimulus” into perspective (it’s about $150 billion, depending on what actually makes it past the Senate):
Between 2004 and 2006, Americans pulled more than $800 billion a year from their homes via sales, cash-out mortgages and home equity loans.
…and that money got spent to keep the American dream alive…for a wee bit longer. Of course the housing ATM no longer exists, so you can scrub that source of ‘free money’.
I’d fit the Republican model – bar a few differences – given I essentially think the government should for the most part piss off and let us live our lives. I have found myself classed as a ‘libertarian’ quite a few times, so I seem to be in the middle somewhere.
However… I can’t bring myself to think McCain would be a better option for the world than Obama. 72 years old vs 46. Yes there are risks, as there are with everything, but a leader who can inspire his people is something we could all do with right now. A break with the past is what the US desperately needs.
Having said that, should Clinton win I will be barracking for McCain (or, to a lesser extent, Romney) all the way.
I think you would find there are many many many conservatives out there who feel exactly the same way. Wouldn’t surprise me if a lot of Dem’s felt that way as well – minus, of course, the voting for a Republican.
Max
Having said that, should Clinton win I will be barracking for McCain (or, to a lesser extent, Romney) all the way.
McCain talks of US bases in Iraq for posibly 100 years , a form of colonialism that guarantees terrorist responses
I don’t think the presidential debates make a huge difference, but I would love to see Obama debate McCain. IMO McCain would be left well behind. McCain, ‘We are winning in Iraq all because of me’ (or something of that sentiment) will be torn apart.
Darryl @ 95 There are not many of us lefties on here who are overly confident of a Democrat victory. The prevailing view seems to be that against McCain the Dems will have a real fight on their hands. From this far out, it looks like neither side has a runaway lead.
Ron, I disagree with a lot of views you express about Iraq and other Middle East countries. I just don’t like debating the war – or anything to do with it – on blogs like this because they are so dominated by people on the left and a lot of them are unwavering in their views. Which is fine, but is why I don’t rise to any debate about foreign policy. We will agree on some things and not others.
Either way, there are other reasons for supporting a candidate than Iraq.
Love that old movie It’s a Mad, Mad Mad World. So if it’s Clinton Vs McCain in November shoot-out. On one hand, you have conservatives and the far rights cannot stand McCain because he is not conservative enough and will vote for Hillary. On the other side, the Liberals and far lefts cannot stand Hillary because she is not liberal enough and will vote for McCain. Yes, it’s a Mad, Mad Mad World.
McCain’s TV ads are a two-pronged effort to show that he’s:
a) A ‘true’ conservative and Reagan hugger
b) A true patriot and the force behind their ‘winning’ in Iraq
Given that the whole Reagan myth is pretty much that, ie myth, and that the second proposition that the ’surge’ is ‘winning’ Iraq is in the same category, you’d have to conclude that McCain is only going to appeal to a pretty narrow group of die hard Reaganites and Neocon’s while the socially conservative ones are going to find him anathema.
If these are his best claims for presidency, I can’t see him winning, even against Clinton, despite what the polls are currently trying to say.
102
The Finnigans
yep, there’s something quite surreal about both parties nominating a candidate for whom there is such a large amount of outright hostility! (if McCain and Clinton are the two nominated).
Maybe the historians can remember a similar match-up, but it looks pretty weird.
#102
The graphs at the following links are interesting – the first graphs McCain versus Clinton in the general election. The second graphs McCain versus Obama. Both graph cover a little over 12 months. In the case of Clinton/McCain is difficult to make a conclusion as the favorite keeps swapping. In the case of Obama/McCain the trend is Obama steady growth leading to a point where he is leading.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_clinton-224.html
#102 the Finnigans
The Liberals (progressives) will not vote for McCain because they hate Hillary. Those who hate Hillary may stay home but I suspect that most will ‘hold their noses’ and vote for her if indeed she is the nominee.
KR, I really love your posts. Was suprised to see you quoting David Brooks in regard to Hillary all the same. He is such an opioniated prat.
In response to STROP at 94
Which other side are you referring to?
The dark side?
The north shore?
Republicans???
I’m recently back from a trip to the States, and the vibe I picked up on was for a quiet, strong sense of relief that McCain is showing Mormon Mitt a clean pair of heels
opinionated
The Democratic Senator from Illinois and the Democratic Senator from New York are both northern liberals.
Adam had a post way back when (#583 in the NH thread – how do you link to individual comments?) arguing that carrying the south was no longer required for the Democrats. In fact Northern liberals are in a better position to win the Presidency than they have been for a century. (Of course Adam thought Obama could/would lose for other reasons.)
107
whatgoesaround
Brooks may be a conservative, but he’s got a genuine humane view of people, and can see both the Faustian compromise and raging idealist in the same individual. Not many journalists can do this, so I respect his style, even when I do not necessarily agree with him. (Like his long pro-war stance I thought was patently wrongly argued, and I suspect he’s toned it down quite a bit since it started too)
Hitchens is another I love to read, not because I always agree, I often don’t, but because he argues honestly and honourably, and that always gets my respect, and oh yeah, he’s got the best literay put-down of any writer I can think of! LOL
I like writers who are not just dull purveyors of statistics or rabid ideologues, but who can wrap an argument into a good story and give it a meaning beyond the petty tabloid opinion, stretch the reader, inform, and hopefully, give you something of who they are.
I think the dems are energised regardless of who wins they will have a reasonable platform.
Is anybody watching on ABC about the “Jihad Sheila”? A fascinating story of two Australian women who became Muslim. To paraphrase Possum’s post earlier, #86 – “If one were to write the ultimately Hollywood story, it would be really hard to go one up on this mesmerising one”.
#110
Martin B asked:
Each blog entry has a date stamp that is also a URL. Most browsers let you copy the link location. So for example – you post can be referenced using the url:
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/?p=800&cp=2#comment-123135
s/you/your
109
whatgoesaround
I’d have thought quoting Krugman on Obama’s Health Plan was a greater sin to all ‘liberals’! LOL (Maybe you didn’t see that one!)
But maybe the counter argument, and made in some broad philosophical distinctions between Obama and Clinton is worth citing:
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/daniel_koffler/2008/01/substance_not_style.html
…of course this probably isn’t what many voters are focused on!
KR,
Your wanker drive is on warp speed overdrivel. Pull out before you explode!
“I like writers who are not just dull purveyors of statistics or rabid ideologues, but who can wrap an argument into a good story and give it a meaning beyond the petty tabloid opinion, stretch the reader, inform, and hopefully, give you something of who they are”.
A day before the Big Jumbo Primary, the POTUS tables his budget, and it’s pretty revealing that even some in his own party have to distance themselves from it:
Revealing the extent of Bush’s diminished political capital, even members of his own party gave the budget little credence. Judd Gregg, the senior Republican on the Senate budget committee, released a statement that pointed out where the president fell short.
“Any budget, to be effective, needs to address the unsustainable growth of entitlement spending, which is the single biggest factor contributing to the long-term fiscal crisis we face,” Gregg said. “A budget also needs to honestly address the numbers contributing to its bottom line, such as fully funding the expected costs of the war on terror.”
…and if you think that’s a bit critical, the Democrats were scathing of another bit of Bush bullsh!t and dodging. Considering that they get to inherit this fiscal wreck, it’s no wonder they are p!ssed off.
Oh, how lovely it was here without badmouth Cartman!
pity, the loud and aggressive little critter has returned to show us all how really ‘tough’ and clever he is.
Are we impressed? OOOOOOOOOh, yes!
In Florida:
The two candidates were essentially even among white voters, with 33 percent for Mr. McCain and 34 percent for Mr. Romney. But Latino voters, including Cuban-Americans and others, favored Mr. McCain by 54 percent to 14 percent for Mr. Romney. (Mr. McCain is known among Latinos for backing an immigration bill offering legal status to illegal immigrants that was defeated last year by conservatives from his party.)
…which must make the white anti-immigrant section of the Republicans go absolutely ballistic.
Greensborough Growler
You sir are a cad!
Kirribilli Removals,
Obviously, for you,
“OOOOOOOOOh, yes!” (after prison)
……………….., no! (before prison)
The tapes are on YouTube.
Now, that’s a narrowing!
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/charts/?poll_id=191
I would have thought a widening KR.
KR, I totally understand you loving the narrative well told, but David Brooks is some kind of closet conservative who ‘hugs’ the story, being oh so reasonable, when he is often distorting facts to fit his own narrative.
I actually feel the same way about Hitchins, funny enough. I totally agree with you about his assessment of the Iraq war – terrible. And although I have usually had a few wines by the time I have the pleasure of seeing Hitchins on the odd occasion on Lateline, I am always left wondering just how many he has consumed considering the judgemental vitorol he is capable of.
That being said you did post an article of his the other day and for the life of me I can’t remember who he was putting down, but it was well done – not surprising either I suppose.
Where Obama will increasingly attract Democrat votes post Super Tuesday , is the perception he has a better chance of beating McCain.
As Davidoff has said the polls now reflect this liklihood , but also Obama’s claim he can attract independent voters & independent voters more than Hillary
Democrats will want to be on a winner & Obama’s political claim is compelling
correction
and Republican voters
Hi strop @ 121,
Is that because quoting people’s own words back at them is unreasonable?
#128, Kirribilli Removals has a correct left perspective, you sir do not.
125
whatgoesaround
Probably his flensing of the beastly Ann Coulter, as I put it. A better slicing to the bone you couldn’t imagine…he is truly the master of it.
Obama is a great orator and has genuine passion for change. I think the Republicans will crucify him. If he is nominated I truly hope I am so wrong but all this hype, the free pass from the press and his ideals of bipartisanship with the Republicicans seems naive rather than visionary, considering the state of the USA today.
Hillary will gain a lot of Obamas supporters if she is the nominee and she will fight the Republican machine. Yes, with the lobbyists in tow….but fighting is going to win over hoping at this time in America I believe.
Head-to-head GOP/Dem polls re McCain/Clinton or whoever need to be treated with a large grain of salt at this stage. The electorate is still focussed on the primaries and hasn’t yet turned its attention to the big gig in the northern Autumn. Once the nominations are in and the comparisons are made during the campaign, then the polls will be instructive.
KR, yes it was Ann Coulter and yes as you put it so well, a lovely slicing to the bone! (no more than she deserves)
132
Ferny Grover
Have to agree FG, especially since the Republicans will have more agro from their own ranks than the Democrats, regardless of which one gets nominated.
Try a bit of Pat Buchanan on McCain to really feel the vitriol that some of these social conservatives engender:
http://www.amconmag.com/2008/2008_02_11/buchanan.html
….eeek, this stuff is really deep and toxic, and for all her faults, Hillary Clinton can ride the tiger and survive, McCain may not prove so light on his feet.
Hey Strop @ 129,
Are you saying that KR is the high priest of a mountain of bulldust.
And, I am not?
131
whatgoesaround
“Hillary will gain a lot of Obamas supporters if she is the nominee “, they’ll be disappointed, but they won’t be holding off electing a Democrat to the Whitehouse. There are “Hillary Haters”, but they can’t be a sizeable group compared with those who truly loath and detest what Bush has done to their country (and a few others!)
There are none more savage, KR, than the rabid right wing followers of the Prince of Peace. McCain will spend the campaign dodging the righteous boot of Christian fellowship regularly offered by the religious right of his own team.
I found today’s editorial in the NY Times the most devastating attack on the Bush budget so far.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/opinion/05tue1.html?hp
You have to wonder whether a Republican will ever win the Presidency for a generation after what Bush has done to the American dream.
I can’t understand any claim that Obama is a great orator..
if you saw him perform in the black caucuses debate, he was beaten all over by Hilary as a debator.
He’s good at downloading memorised rev-up speeches, but doesn’t make it when he has to think on his feet
Zedder@138, it only took them one term after the evils of Nixon to re-elect a Republican. The Americans seem to have a well developed forgettory.
On the contrary Mr Squiggle (139) I found his put down of Howard after Howard accused him of being Al Qaeda’s friend impressive. That question came from left field and Obama handled it easily.
I’m confident that the Democrats will win with either candidate. What the polls don’t measure is the level of engagement and enthusiasm. That’s crucial in US elections because of the low turnout. That’s why Rove won elections for Bush by appealing to the religious right rather than the middle ground. The problem for the Republicans this time is that disaster in Iraq and a looming recession have demoralised their base. Look at the tiny turnouts to Republican primaries and election rallies. McCain and Huckabee can press hands with gun-nuts and evangelicals and the odd retiree. Obama and (to a lesser extent Clinton) can fill stadiums – 15,000 in Idaho for chrissake!
2004 saw a larger turnout of Democrat voters which the right matched with a last ditch scare about gay marriage. But Rove was still in charge and the right were still confident and united. I can see parallels with 1928 when Al Smith first cobbled together the alliance of northern liberals and southern Democrats that Rooseveldt would later lead to victory. He massively increased the Democrat vote but was beaten by a corresponding turnout of redneck protestants who hated the idea of a Catholic president. Now the Republicans are tearing themselves apart.
I only wish that those who are now flocking to Obama and Clinton could get an administration that actually did something for them: got them decent healthcare; ended the war. They won’t of course. But that’s another story. At least we can enjoy the psephological spectacle, and this is a particularly fascinating one.
Whoops! I’m teaching American History this semester – the ’20s and ’30s. I think I’d better learn to spell Roosevelt.
Ferny , perhaps its reasonable for you to argue the head to head Polls of say McCain vs Obama normally needs to be ignored at this stage.
However the Poll trends for over a year have shown a very consistent narrowing of the gap for Obama …in fact he now has a narrow lead.
And that most of Obama’s gains have been from Independents and “soft” Republicans who were the groups McCain had previously captured.
Its the very voter blocks Hillary is weak in. Its a view
You mean FG “forgettery”, I had to check to see whether it was a made up word… It isn’t but not well used. Mind you I tend to find on this blog that there are a lot of unknown words. As Paul Keating once said,” You must of swallowed a F$%#*n dictionary”.
I thought Obama spoke well at his victory speech for the Iowa primary
Gee Zedder….and I thought I’d made it up!
Please.
Will my fellow left wingers please stop bitch slapping each other trying to play out some high brow intellectual to & throw. KR & GG please take it some where else as its really gone off topic. Its 0 / 0 so far!
I have enjoyed this evenings Foreign Correspondent on Hillary’s tilt at the Presidency. Lets see what numbers will come up tomorrow from the States.
KR @ 103,
Not sure if I agree with your logic about Reagan – after all, it’s only Americans that vote, and nearly all Republicans and plenty of independents as well would still like Reagan, I reckon.
On the war, McCain’s position is fraught with danger – if the war turns sour(er) he could be up the creek. But again, if the “surge” is still viewed positively in November (unlikely perhaps, but who knows?), his position might be a plus.
They elected George twice – therefore no reason to think McCain is unelectable. Apart from anything else, he’d have to be a lot smarter than Bush!
Ron @ 144. You may end up being right, of course. But I think the narrowing you speak of is a reflection of Obama’s growing recognition factor and may not, at this stage, tell us much about preferred President. The electorate really isn’t focussed on that question yet. So the head to head polls are interesting sideshows at this stage. They will become more valuable under the intense scrutiny of the real campaign.
Dyno “They elected George twice – therefore no reason to think McCain is unelectable. ” One reason for not getting hopes up. However, I would point out the smashing the GOP received at the mid term (2006) vote. Agree with you about Reagan. I don’t think he could take any other position on iraq now.
Do all Democrat voters cast a donkey vote?
Ron, those voter blocks will start to look a lot different after the nominee is chosen. I suspect the Republicans are lying low on Obama cause they want him to win, just as many Democrats would prefer McCain to lose, as he is their strongest player.
And ironically it looks like he is going to win and I wonder at that, do the voters know best after all, considering that his campaign was a white wash a few months ago?
KR, it looks like it is going to be a really exciting ride for the Democrat nominee over the next few months, may the best person to beat the Republicans win! Thank goodness the ALP won our election, else this would be really, really agonizing! ( Still just feel relieved constantly…….:) )
Agree FG, the head-to-head polls are only a rough guide at this stage.
Although I wouldn’t write off McCain, you’d have to think the Dems should be significantly favoured to win this, whoever is running for them.
148
Aussieguru01
I don’t have any ‘it’ to take eslewhere! At least not as far as GG is concerned.
Engaging with moronic abusers is of no interest to me, and I was more than comfortable seeing the last one get slapped by William for a being a repeat offender.
fair point Ferny
the sleeper issue for McCain facing any Democrat is that he is more right than Bush in being ‘pro life’ and anti abortion
Whilst the religious blocks are very strong in the US , I suspect McCain’s zero abortion under any circumstances will favour the Democrats
under any circumstances
149
Dyno
What I was trying to convey there Dyno was the whole mythology of Reagan stands on a couple of pillars, one is the myth that he somehow improved the US economy by slashing taxes (while running the budget into deficit). In other words, the utterly ham-fisted ‘tax cut’, “look at me, I’m a re-run of Reagan”, which Bush has foistered on them, is now looking like a nasty bait and switch.
The upper decile of earners got the bait and the rest of them got the switch.
This mantra of supply side economics is all but worn threadbare, and even some serious conservatives must be looking in horror at what Bush has bequeathed them. McCain can hug Reagan all he likes, but I think the mystic is wearing thin, and independents will be more sceptical of a recipe which they are seeing fail (big time), right before their eyes.
That’s what I was trying to say in shorthand.
Mr KR,
You sir are to be congratulated for putting Liberal scum like the Greensborough Growler in their place. Keep the dream alive.
Someone said McCain would be smarter than George W which is true but only just. George W has an IQ (lets not quibble about using IQ as a measure of intelligence) of about 127, which is actually much the same as almost all the candidates who are 120-130. There are a couple higher with McCain, Obama, Paul and Richardson in the low 130s and the highest (not surprisingly IMHO) being Hillary at 140.
ah, that should be “mystique” and not “mystic”, but then again, considering Nancy’s proclivities, maybe ‘mystic’ is not that far wrong! LOL
159
Diogenes
ha ha! By that system the Evil Genius would win every vote! (Oh, except Evil Geniuses almost never enter elections! Damn!)
Diogenes do you have a link on that IQ stuff? Sounds interesting.
With trepidation Diogenes given your undoubted qualifications in this area , but IQ’s you quoted made George Bush close to Obama, Paul and Richardson on IQ
which makes me believe commonsense of which bush would appear to have a minus in is unrelated to IQ ?
Thankyou Willam for all this work it is much appreciated.
Time reported McCains IQ as 133 a while back. The rest are here. Some of the famous people’s IQs can only be highly speculative, although the politicians are always the lowest…
http://www.kids-iq-tests.com/r-prez.html
http://www.kids-iq-tests.com/d-prez.html
http://www.kids-iq-tests.com/famous-people.html
Bruce Shapiro as I thought I heard it on Philip. California tech voting system broken. Correction welcome if I fail to report accurately.
Reverting to pencil and paper.
Hanging chads scenario.
This, of all States.
Darryl. Obama did speak well. Try YouTube for even more elevating speeches..look for ‘Yes, we can’.
Bear in mind, though, that elevating speeches do not necessarily move the turgid from their self imposed immersion in muddied flats, or even quicksand.
157 KR,
Don’t underestimate the electoral power of low taxes. There’s a lot of people who take the attitude that they can spend their own money better than the Government can. (I might even be one of them!)
Should add that George W really does have that IQ. His SAT certificate from Yale is on the internet somewhere. The Washington Post published it. The scores are 566 (of 800) for verbal and 625 (of 800) for Math. This equates to an IQ of 127. I’m not surprised verbal was less than math.
Clinton vs Obama latest California Polls
California SurveyUSA Feb. 3 53% 41%
California SurveyUSA Feb. 4 52% 42%
California Zogby……. Feb. 3 40% 46%
California Zogby……. Feb. 4 36% 49%
One strongly for clinton and one strongly for Obama
One Pollster will be embarassed
What a joke! Muhhamed Ali has an IQ of 78 and Spiro Agnew has an IQ of 135? Give me a break.
It is all about the character of the individual.
Mohammed could steal your money on the street.
Agnew could steal your money from an office.
Who ya gonna call.
167
Dyno
Believe me, I know what you mean! LOL
However in the US context it’s almost like the Civil War never finished, not just between the North and the South, but the whole idea of a Federal Government is anathema to so many who are either state parochials or outright anarchists. I don’t get the feeling we have anything like this intensity here, and judging from their loopiest exponents, we don’t get the violent seccessionists who want to leave ANY system of taxation and central government.
The whole Reagan myth, like it’s religious component, panders shamelessly to these ignorant folk, who see government as some impediment to society, and not the very glue that holds it together.
well I know you I would not front to get my money back
Same old, same old, but no swallowing.
Good news sport fans, the Zimmer frame is in the shed, alas for maintenance.
The bad news, ABC FC Report on the good ship lollypop for all day suckers.
Hilly Silly Willy says ‘We must resume our leadership of the world’. Oh dear…the PNAC lifeline…off the bow…
Hussein says ‘We must show more care & thought on “exiting” Iraq than entering’…the PNAC lifeline…off the stern…
This is choice…the dog, it’s mine, here, f*ck it (Sorry ESJ, bitsa) & while you’re at it, b*gger me gently.
& some senior citizen McSame says ‘there will be more wars’ & ‘sprints’ clear ‘on’ the other side. Ah, such pace.
Seriously, they just don’t get it. Lilly pads forever.
Hey Diogenes, from my diagnosis I’ve concluded he’s nuts and a clear & present danger, as they say in the jungle. Can confirm?
It could be worse; saw Kerry eat Brendan; he did chew but didn’t swallow; just spat; will Superman get the same treatment?
Hey KR what orifice don’t you get up round here? I see the horse is now naying at your nether. Or, there abouts. Smacked the pony, ay?
142
Robert Bollard
Enjoyable post, thanks.
(Apart from one dreary exception, the quality of this board has improved immeasurably since a certain badmouth got the boot.)
Dyno politically you are right.
Howard tried it in 07 as its an historical election winner
expecting Labor as per history not to offer tax cuts but to spend the equivalent on social issues etc and lose
Kevin07 did not take the bait…of course economically those tax cuts are a problem but guess its better to be in power to fix the economics than be pure in opposition
KR @ 172, if you look at the quality of American governance over the last 200 odd years, those raccoon hat wearing, pitchfork wielding, secessionist nutters have a bit of a point.
KR @172,
Agree with you that the US has more than its fair share of loonies. Put it this way, more people have been attacking McCain for being too left than for being too right so far in this campaign.
On the role of government, I actually don’t see it an an impediment, or as the “glue …”. Somewhere in between the two, in my view.
174
codger
Love it!
just don’t go changin’, you hear?
I think the Billy Bo Jangles did the slappin’, which was ironic, what?
If the arse-end of the horse snorts too much, he’ll be needing a change of costume, what would you recommend?
I just lurv gittin’ up the dullwads or-e-fiss, gives ‘em a frill!
I’ve just read an opinion article on the NYT site titled “Yes, You Can Dance to It”. The article is basically rubbishing the recent YouTube Yes We Can video (posted 3 days ago and already viewed more than 1.2 times). Now given that this is The New York Times, a paper that has endorsed Hillary, and according to the polls – representing a pro-Hillary community (Hillary ahead by 18%) – one would expect a balanced or even pro-Hillary commentary on the article from the public. Instead – and this is the interesting bit – the vast majority of comments are pro-Obama (some are really impressive), several opposing the NYT bias, and only a couple pro-Hillary or supporting of the article.
177
Possum Comitatus
ROFLOL!
Gotta admit, you have one hell of a point there Possum, but instead of delivering the entire country to the point of Deliverance, maybe improving the standard of said governance would be a step in the right direction!
what “Gory Glory” vs “Dixie” KR ,
the South may have lost the war but not the battle how to brew
#180
should have said “viewed more than 1.2 million times”
178
Dyno
yeah, attacking McCain as a ‘lefty’ is so friggin’ bizarre, it makes me wince to think of where their heads are at!
As for the ‘glue’, well I offer you the Kenyan elections…
(you get my point, we’d be shooting each other in the street within days without a collective sense of government which we can change in a civilised fashion, and hopefully get some good done from, even occasionally!)
codger- I posted on the last thread that 49% of POTUS had a diagnosable mental illness, with 27% exhibiting signs during their term enough to affect them. I’ll repost an article from earlier.
There is a great article comparing levels of psychopathology on 291 world famous men. The groups were (including a % of severe psychopathology using DSMIIIR); scientists (18%), composers (31%), politicians (17%), artists (37%), thinkers (26%) and writers (46%).
Reference: Brit J Psychiatry (1994), 165, 22-34.
Listing all the politicians in terms of severity;
None: Briand, Franco, Gandhi, Metternich, Smuts, Stresemann, Thiers
Mild: Asquith, Ben Gurion, Bethmann-Hollweg, Garibaldi, Lenin, Mao-Zedong, Masaryk, Mazzini, Nkrumah, Poincare, FD Roosevelt, Sun-Yat-Sen
Moderate: Adenauer, Cavour, Chiang Kai-Sek, Churchill, Clemenceau, Gambetta, Gladstone, De Gaulle, Lloyd George, Mussolini, Nasser, Nehru, Palmerston, Parnell, Peel, Peron, Pilsudsky, Stalin, Venizelos
Severe: Bismarck, Bulow, Disraeli, Hitler, Ataturk, Lincoln, O’Connell, Woodrow Wilson.
Davidoff
“fair & balanced” Fox news believe the NYT is ‘left’ biased
now we have ‘left of left’ biased vs ‘right of left’ bias
no wonder hip hop took off
But it’s just not as much fun that way KR, and it’s damn hard to place the idea of “competent government administration and policy development” into grand messianic narratives involving lots of rugged individualist types overcoming the adversity of Armageddon in the backwoods of Montana
183
davidoff
Zino!
We knew that!
But hey, not bad for something which has been posted for a day! Crikey, if all those youtubers (sounds like some strange cloning vegetable in the garden) actually leave their computers long enough to vote…
Arh, a day or ‘three’, but who is counting?
Possum #177 From the mouths of lunatics half-truths often emerge.
As an example of the sort of left/right semi-convergence this can lead to – Gore Vidal struck up an interesting relationship with the Oklahoma bomber on the basis of a realisation that there was an underlying, albeit twisted, logic to his motivation. And IMHO you can’t do much better than Vidal for a starting point for understanding the American Republic. He has no answers – no solutions. But he comes from the heart of the ruling elite and dissects it with the honesty of an artist. A great anatomist if no physician.
187
Possum Comitatus
Except when it end like Waco there’s a tendency for the mythology to be self-perpetuating.
Maybe the nutters have a point. (But is it worth getting immolated for, ah, there’s the question!)
New polls out today,
Seems absolutely nobody has a clue as to who is going to win California. About 50-50 in all – I think one poll had Obama winning by 6?
If a published poll is, for example, at 47-45, does that (in the US) mean the missing percentage are undecided? Or those who are voting for a withdrawn candidate (such as Edwards) anyway?
184 KR,
Sense of government and respect for the rule of law and the constitution – yes it is a big part of the glue.
Government itself – only maybe.
190
Robert Bollard
And Gore, unlike Wolfe, actually had enough revulsion to leave and make his life outside of it.
Max , I don’t understand the huge variances
Clinton vs Obama LATEST California Polls
California SurveyUSA Feb. 3 53% 41%
California SurveyUSA Feb. 4 52% 42%
California Zogby……. Feb. 3 40% 46%
California Zogby……. Feb. 4 36% 49%
Must go to bed now. Gong Xi Fa Cai! Chinese New Year tomorrow, which means that I have to transport the family to the other side of the city at noon and spend the whole afternoon and evening with my Chinese in-laws. Great food, but Christ I’ll be stressing out for some info re the results.
193
Dyno
One is the ideal, for which we all like to claim we aspire, while the other is the actuality, which sure, ain’t the former, but it’s what we have. Either live with it, improve it, or we descend into anarchy (with racoon skin caps!)
196
Robert Bollard
Gong Xi Fa Cai!
To you too, Pollbludgin’ tragic!
Ron… I can only assume they ask slightly different questions? I’d say one of the two companies are going to look pretty stupid come end of polling, but chances are the result will be somewhere in the middle…
RCP average has Obama up by 1.2… which, when considering margin of error, is probably post accurate.
The shadow thats cast for the home of capitalism is the strengh of the dollar
is the basis of their consumerism & living standards
which is only strong whilstever the Arab oil richs are sold uin US dollars AND the Chinese but US dollars from the US Treasury at approx 1 billion a day
the ultimate irony …the pagan Arabs and the communist Chinese are US saviours
….for the moment
William,
Would it be possible to open up a new thread tonight or tomorrow morning for Super Tuesday ramblings? Your guide in the above post, while extremely useful, does ensure a lot more scrolling needs to be done before one reaches the comments, due to it’s comprehensive nature. Which would be fine if not for the fact a lot of refreshing will undoubtedly be done tomorrow!
Just a thought, no big deal either way
199
Max
Whatever the actual result, it’s one hell of a rocket ride for the Obama side!
A week ago Clinton was unassailable.
Who said “a week is a long time on Pollbludgers”?
#192 Max:
My understanding is the possible polling options would be ‘Hillary Clinton’, ‘Barack Obama’, ‘Mike Gravel’, or ‘undecided’.
hadn’t thought of that Max #199 ,
the inconsistency is frustrating as is the ‘undecided running at approx 15% in ALOT of the State Polls
Ah, Gore Vidal… a man with an incisive wit. I’ll never forget this magnificent gem of his:
“The trouble with Australian politics is that you only see the tip of the icecube”
that was almost Keatings quote about Costello ?
But more appropriately for this thread, Gore said:
Any American who is prepared to run for president should automatically, by definition, be disqualified from ever doing so.
Almost Ron, I’d imagine that’s where Keating got it from
thx Possum
is that one line that’s gotta now come out of the stage play ‘Keating’
Robert at 190, Gore vidal could perhaps be described as more of a vivisector. People are wide awake as he wields his scalpel. His tomes can be a tad turgid, but his essays rarely fail to stimulate.
“As societies grow decadent, the language grows decadent, too. Words are used to disguise, not to illuminate, action: you liberate a city by destroying it*. Words are to confuse, so that at election time people will solemnly vote against their own interests.” G.V.
cf. Hue and Fallujah
It ain’t lookin’ like a happy day on Wall Street:
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — Growth in the nonmanufacturing side of the U.S. economy contracted sharply, the Institute for Supply Management reported Friday. The ISM nonmanufacturing index fell to 41.9% in January from 54.4% in December. The reading was well below the 53.0% expected by economists. Readings below 50% indicate most firms are contracting. The ISM services index was released early. ISM gave no explanation for the early release.
…that’s a shocker, and the Fed has not dolloped out enough juice to make Mr Market happy.
Looks like a depressing start (no pun intended) to Super Choose Day
KR enough with the frills; I’m under strict orders not to ever be frilled again. Hey , that’s sad isn’t it?
Gallop…gallop…You big horse shoe err you! Btw will the mossie do it? & can we please have Dr A & ESJ back; Please? Gowawwn.
First hard numbers from overseas came in from Indonesia (unverified).
Obama 75%
Clinton 25%
Concrete info about the Indonesia results (confirming the 75/25 for Obama).
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080205032213.c22hhesj&show_article=1
#212
codger – this one is dedicated to you
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080205032213.c22hhesj&show_article=1
Preliminary results from Tokyo
Obama 83%
Clinton 13%
http://www.demsjapan.jp/node/267
Diogenes @ 185 thanks, but I have followed your threads with interest; what I was asking for was your opinion on the current crop; accept the historical fwiw.
I was serious about McSame; I personally think he’s nuts; that’s all, a clear & present danger imho. Just another ‘hero’ captive to Cheney’s embeded chums et al etc etc… Indeed ripe for it.
Low hanging fruit if ever I saw it. But then again, I suppose, who in this circus isn’t? Just asking. & watching the percolated angst here and elsewhere, as if it’s going to make a difference. Same tent, same show, different top hat. Big deal.
And of course, what are Mr. Rudd & Mr. Smith going to say & do about ‘this’? & sell us? Should be interesting. Will.
From Seattle’s Stone Gossard, Matt Cameron, Jeff Ament, Mike McCready, Barrett Jones and Boom Gasper. Based on the classic tune “Rock Around The Clock”, the song is entitled “Rock Around Barack”
http://my.barackobama.com/page/-/external_organizing/Rock%20Around%20Barack.mp3
While tracking through the noise on the candidate blogs – the following comments had me chucking away to myself sufficient to promt a sharing moment with you guys/gals.
Someone with the alias SvK over on the Obama site discovered the black and white graph on polster.com with the bubbles indicating delegate magnitude and greyscale level indicating recency (dark is more recent, lighter is further away in time). His comment on the blog was:
Another poster with the alias m4rk0 posted a reply …
I had to think about that for a moment or two then it hit me … I guess I just have to accept that I’m a little too familiar with the graph and not sufficiently tunned to more on the ground issues.
s/chucking/chuckling
A note from Joe in Vermont …
Voter experience in South Jersey
Quote from Dobson of the religious extreme right in Carpetbagger indicates that they will not vote rather than voting for McCain, dear me, how sad (rotfl)
“But what a sad and melancholy decision this is for me and many other conservatives. Should John McCain capture the nomination as many assume, I believe this general election will offer the worst choices for president in my lifetime. I certainly can’t vote for Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama based on the virulently anti-family policy positions. If these are the nominees in November, I simply will not cast a ballot for president for the first time in my life.”
More from Carpetbagger on the US deficit, predicted to be $9.7 trillion by the time the Village Idiot leaves next January:
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/14473.html
There’s a new thread up, so I’m closing this one.