Poll: Obama vs Clinton on remaining pledged delegates

Tchocky · 03-23-08, 06:17 PM

Of course she helped. But it's not the kind of helping that should be argued as competence for the Presidency. See what David Trimble has to say on the matter.

I agree with you on Obama. I mean, what's the point in having a Senate if all they do is cut ribbons and bake cookies?

TDK1044 · 03-24-08, 06:15 AM

We live in a society where most people can name the contestants on American Idiol, but they don't know who their State Representatives are. Barack Obama will flourish in such an environment.

Currently he has 1,622 pledged delegates and Hillary has 1,485, giving him a 137 delegate advantage. Michigan and Florida are now almost certainly out of the picture. Looking at what's left, Hillary will win PA comfortably. Some people mistakenly belevie that Puerto Rico is a winner take all deal. It is only that if one candidate polls less than 15 percent of the total vote. That's not going to happen and Hillary will win by something like a 60 to 40 percent margin. The remaining States are either Obama States or too close to call.

The end result of all this will be Obama having a delegate lead of over 100 at the point where the super Delegates get involved. Regarding the SDs, bear in mind that whatever they say for public consumption, these men and women are elected officials and politicians whose primary goal is to get re-elected. Most of them will therefore vote the same way as the pledged delegates in their State. A classic example of that was Representative John Lewis from Georgia. He publicly endosed Hillary at the start of the campaign, and then announced that he would vote for Obama once the Georgia Democrats voted heavily for Obama in their primary.

A handful of brave souls will vote against their pledged Delegates because of genuine concerns regarding a candidate, but in the end, Obama will win and either he or John McCain will be the next President.

geetrue · 03-24-08, 10:10 AM

I always thought this bickering would end in Senator John McCain's favor ...

Democrats voting for McCain

Quote:

Republicans -- for the first time, polls are showing that John McCain leads Clinton and Obama in a presidential match-up.

TDK1044 · 03-24-08, 10:19 AM

You'll hear a lot of Democrats proclaiming that they either won't vote at all or will vote Republican if 'their guy' doesn't win the Democratic nomination, and you'll hear some conservative Republicans saying that they won't vote at all rather than vote for McCain.

The reality is that such comments are usually a lot of hot air. The Presidential election will be a hard fought contest between McCain and Obama in my view.

ReallyDedPoet · 03-24-08, 10:26 AM

Another interesting factor will be those voting who never voted before ( sorry if this has been said already ), I am speaking more about the younger population, I would think youth would identify with Obama much more than McCain, for obvious reasons.

Edit:Oops, wrong thread

RDP

geetrue · 03-24-08, 10:31 AM

Obama isn't on the ticket yet, but John McCain is ... if Hillary a contoversial candidate as she is can run a close race against Obama what can McCain do?

More from the link above: Democrats voting for McCain

Quote:

And what has to be alarming for Democratic Party leaders, some supporters of Obama and Clinton appear to be so angry with the other contender that they say they will vote for McCain if their candidate doesn't make the 2008 presidential ballet.

"I think I'd have to vote for McCain. I'm just not a Barack Obama fan," one Clinton supporter said to CTV News.

"I'd have a hard time voting for Hillary Clinton," says an Obama supporter.

Obama has the edge -in delegates, money and big-name support -- but that doesn't seem to dissuade Clinton. It's unlikely she will walk away from this fight and this is one battle that might not be decided until June.

From now until then McCain won't need to spend much time tearing down his potential opponents - they'll be doing that for him.

ReallyDedPoet · 03-24-08, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by geetrue

From now until then McCain won't need to spend much time tearing down his potential opponents - they'll be doing that for him.

This probably will happen, however McCain will have his own issues to deal with, things that may not directly be his, however he now inherits them, the economy, IRAQ, etc.....in other words the Bush baggage.

RDP

Von Tonner · 03-25-08, 09:40 AM

And now we have Tuzla-gate.

Hillary Clinton explains:
"Now let me tell you what I can remember, OK -- because what I was told was that we had to land a certain way and move quickly because of the threat of sniper fire. So I misspoke -- I didn't say that in my book or other times but if I said something that made it seem as though there was actual fire -- that's not what I was told. I was told we had to land a certain way, we had to have our bulletproof stuff on because of the threat of sniper fire. I was also told that the greeting ceremony had been moved away from the tarmac but that there was this 8-year-old girl and, I can't, I can't rush by her, I've got to at least greet her -- so I made a -- I took her stuff and then I left, Now that's my memory of it."

Misspoke, misspeak is defined as pronouncing a word or phrase incorrectly. Not creating an imaginery scene or situation. Watching the rerun of her standing at the podium telling her story I listened carefully to hear if any word or phrase fitted that definition. No, "sniper fire" was pronounced correctly, so was "running with our heads down" an acceptable phrase. She even affirmed her account of the event not once but twice at the end.

Not even her most ardent supporter can defend the claim that her original speech at the podium was a calculated and deliberate lie to support her inflated claim at been the most qualified to be commander in chief from day one.

This is an insult not only to the intelligence of every American but a slight on McCain and all who have served their country in conflict. McCain is a man who has been in an ACTUAL war zone, had his arms brocken repeatedly in interrogation while holding onto his sanity and silence in defence of his country and this woman, in her greed for power, tries to lie her way into that sacred sanctity of brave men and women who have and still do, live under hostile fire in defence of their country. I wonder how all those war vets who recently supported her feel now. Cheated I would think.

And what does this say about those senior superdelegates such as Dean, Edwards, Al Gore et al. They could come out in mass and put an end to this tomorrow. Their silence is becoming deafining.

In the exit polls in Missisisippi on the question: Is Clinton honest and trustworthy 52% said yes and 48% said no. On the 18th March in a gallup poll the same question was put. 44% yes and 56% said no. After this lie this figure will drop even further which begs these two questions.

1) Can the Democratic Party continue to sit on the side lines while this woman loses credibility among the American people?
2) Can they argue that the perception of honesty and trustworthyness do not count for squat in electing a candidate, be it a nominee or president?

If not, then for the love of God dump this woman now before this contest becomes more farcial than it already is.

View Poll Results: Poll: Obama vs Clinton on remaining pledged delegates
Clinton will close to within 50 on Obama lead	3	8.33%
Clinton will overtake Obama lead	6	16.67%
Obama will increase lead	27	75.00%
Voters: 36. You may not vote on this poll

03-23-08, 06:17 PM	#1
Tchocky Navy Seal Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 5,874 Downloads: 6 Uploads: 0	Of course she helped. But it's not the kind of helping that should be argued as competence for the Presidency. See what David Trimble has to say on the matter. I agree with you on Obama. I mean, what's the point in having a Senate if all they do is cut ribbons and bake cookies? __________________ [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

03-24-08, 06:15 AM	#2
TDK1044 Ocean Warrior Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Georgia, USA Posts: 2,674 Downloads: 25 Uploads: 0	We live in a society where most people can name the contestants on American Idiol, but they don't know who their State Representatives are. Barack Obama will flourish in such an environment. Currently he has 1,622 pledged delegates and Hillary has 1,485, giving him a 137 delegate advantage. Michigan and Florida are now almost certainly out of the picture. Looking at what's left, Hillary will win PA comfortably. Some people mistakenly belevie that Puerto Rico is a winner take all deal. It is only that if one candidate polls less than 15 percent of the total vote. That's not going to happen and Hillary will win by something like a 60 to 40 percent margin. The remaining States are either Obama States or too close to call. The end result of all this will be Obama having a delegate lead of over 100 at the point where the super Delegates get involved. Regarding the SDs, bear in mind that whatever they say for public consumption, these men and women are elected officials and politicians whose primary goal is to get re-elected. Most of them will therefore vote the same way as the pledged delegates in their State. A classic example of that was Representative John Lewis from Georgia. He publicly endosed Hillary at the start of the campaign, and then announced that he would vote for Obama once the Georgia Democrats voted heavily for Obama in their primary. A handful of brave souls will vote against their pledged Delegates because of genuine concerns regarding a candidate, but in the end, Obama will win and either he or John McCain will be the next President. Last edited by TDK1044; 03-24-08 at 07:26 AM.

03-24-08, 10:26 AM	#5
ReallyDedPoet Canadian Wolf Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Canada. The one and only, East Coast Posts: 10,890 Downloads: 946 Uploads: 5	Another interesting factor will be those voting who never voted before ( sorry if this has been said already ), I am speaking more about the younger population, I would think youth would identify with Obama much more than McCain, for obvious reasons. Edit:Oops, wrong thread RDP __________________ Back in the Day

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

03-24-08, 10:19 AM	#4
TDK1044 Ocean Warrior Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Georgia, USA Posts: 2,674 Downloads: 25 Uploads: 0	You'll hear a lot of Democrats proclaiming that they either won't vote at all or will vote Republican if 'their guy' doesn't win the Democratic nomination, and you'll hear some conservative Republicans saying that they won't vote at all rather than vote for McCain. The reality is that such comments are usually a lot of hot air. The Presidential election will be a hard fought contest between McCain and Obama in my view.

03-25-08, 09:40 AM	#8
Von Tonner Seasoned Skipper Join Date: May 2005 Location: South Africa Posts: 711 Downloads: 44 Uploads: 0	And now we have Tuzla-gate. Hillary Clinton explains: "Now let me tell you what I can remember, OK -- because what I was told was that we had to land a certain way and move quickly because of the threat of sniper fire. So I misspoke -- I didn't say that in my book or other times but if I said something that made it seem as though there was actual fire -- that's not what I was told. I was told we had to land a certain way, we had to have our bulletproof stuff on because of the threat of sniper fire. I was also told that the greeting ceremony had been moved away from the tarmac but that there was this 8-year-old girl and, I can't, I can't rush by her, I've got to at least greet her -- so I made a -- I took her stuff and then I left, Now that's my memory of it." Misspoke, misspeak is defined as pronouncing a word or phrase incorrectly. Not creating an imaginery scene or situation. Watching the rerun of her standing at the podium telling her story I listened carefully to hear if any word or phrase fitted that definition. No, "sniper fire" was pronounced correctly, so was "running with our heads down" an acceptable phrase. She even affirmed her account of the event not once but twice at the end. Not even her most ardent supporter can defend the claim that her original speech at the podium was a calculated and deliberate lie to support her inflated claim at been the most qualified to be commander in chief from day one. This is an insult not only to the intelligence of every American but a slight on McCain and all who have served their country in conflict. McCain is a man who has been in an ACTUAL war zone, had his arms brocken repeatedly in interrogation while holding onto his sanity and silence in defence of his country and this woman, in her greed for power, tries to lie her way into that sacred sanctity of brave men and women who have and still do, live under hostile fire in defence of their country. I wonder how all those war vets who recently supported her feel now. Cheated I would think. And what does this say about those senior superdelegates such as Dean, Edwards, Al Gore et al. They could come out in mass and put an end to this tomorrow. Their silence is becoming deafining. In the exit polls in Missisisippi on the question: Is Clinton honest and trustworthy 52% said yes and 48% said no. On the 18th March in a gallup poll the same question was put. 44% yes and 56% said no. After this lie this figure will drop even further which begs these two questions. 1) Can the Democratic Party continue to sit on the side lines while this woman loses credibility among the American people? 2) Can they argue that the perception of honesty and trustworthyness do not count for squat in electing a candidate, be it a nominee or president? If not, then for the love of God dump this woman now before this contest becomes more farcial than it already is.