Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I still don't understand the logic behind Hilary beating McCain if she couldn't beat Obama...that's like a football team losing almost every game but people saying they can win the superbowl. I'm confused. I guess us Obama supporters aren't as educated as allot of us thought we were. I better pull out my handy dandy map and try to find KY!
The problem with your football analogy is that football is all about skill on the field and scoring points. Elections are more like a beauty pageant or other popularity contest. Super Bowl champs aren't chose by vote but by skill; we vote for a President. Also...
A candidate in the General election can't win unless they get most of their party's base plus pull some from the other side. Right now, the Dems are divided. Whoever gets the nomination must be able to pull the party together AND pull in some from the Right. Hillary has the best chance of doing that.
While many Republicans have traditionally not liked the Clintons, many are not thrilled with McCain, either. Ann Coulter was not kidding (and she's not alone) when she said she'd vote for Hillary over McCain.
In this election cycle, the Republicans must overcome the Iraq war and Bush. The only thing that might make that issue less important is for the Democrats to nominate an extreme left wing candidate who appears to be naive or inexperienced. That would be Obama. And that would be how McCain attracts the moderate Democrats and keeps his Republican base.
Q: What happens when the losing team scores a run in the bottom of the ninth inning?
A: They still lose.
Rasmussen Reports™: The most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a presidential election. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/oregon/oregon_obama_leads_mccain_by_six_mccain_leads_clin ton_by_six - broken link)
Rasmussen Reports™: The most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a presidential election. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/oregon/oregon_obama_leads_mccain_by_six_mccain_leads_clin ton_by_six - broken link)
Exactly what am I supposed to conclude from an Oregon poll taken back in March?
My former manager used to always rank on this guy at work from Kentucky. I remember one time he told him, "the only good thing to ever come out of Kentucky was an empty Greyhound bus".
This guy used to collect those special commemorative US quarters, and he was real excited when the Kentucky quarter was about to be released. So one day the boss walks up to him all excited, and says "look, I got one of those new Kentucky quarters!". The guy comes running over to see it, and the boss whips out two dimes and a nickel, he had glued together. The whole office just about peed their pants laughing.
Obviously this has nothing to do with politics, but as long as we're ripping on Kentucky, I figured I'd share my story....
LMAO! I still can't stop laughing...trying to contain myself at work. This is priceless...cruel, but priceless!
The problem with your football analogy is that football is all about skill on the field and scoring points. Elections are more like a beauty pageant or other popularity contest. Super Bowl champs aren't chose by vote but by skill; we vote for a President. Also...
A candidate in the General election can't win unless they get most of their party's base plus pull some from the other side. Right now, the Dems are divided. Whoever gets the nomination must be able to pull the party together AND pull in some from the Right. Hillary has the best chance of doing that.
While many Republicans have traditionally not liked the Clintons, many are not thrilled with McCain, either. Ann Coulter was not kidding (and she's not alone) when she said she'd vote for Hillary over McCain.
In this election cycle, the Republicans must overcome the Iraq war and Bush. The only thing that might make that issue less important is for the Democrats to nominate an extreme left wing candidate who appears to be naive or inexperienced. That would be Obama. And that would be how McCain attracts the moderate Democrats and keeps his Republican base.
Actually, I wasn't really talking about the whole process of winning (skill vs popularity) I was talking about speculation. People speculate based on prior performances. No one would speculate that a team that lost the majority of it's games would have a chance in the superbowl...so I don't understand how people are speculating she will beat McCain if she couldn't beat Obama. If she was such a sure thing - wouldn't she have been able to beat him hands down?
Not necessarily. You need something different to win the general than the primary.
In the primary, you're basically competing against someone who is very similar to yourself, trying to get votes from a group of people who basically think the way you do. That group of people will not be enough to win the general election; you have to be able to pull from the other side as well. In other words, these are two very different races.
Also, because this is a popularity contest, you have to look at how each stacks up against the November opponent. While Obama may do better than Clinton within their party, Clinton does better outside of the party while still pulling in a substantial number of Democrats. Not all Republicans are happy with McCain. If the Democrats run the right person, Republicans will be more likely to defect to the left.
Using old number (from 2000, I think) there are 63 million Democrats, 47 million Republicans and 32 million Independents. The Democratic nominee must retain the Democratic base and pull in some independents to win, as does the Republican nominee. Clinton has greater pulling power than Obama. Also, many of Clinton's supporters will defect to the right if she doesn't get the nomination while Obama's supporters are less likely to do so if Clinton is the candidate. Some may claim racism but I see it as more of an issue with experience.
Not necessarily. You need something different to win the general than the primary.
In the primary, you're basically competing against someone who is very similar to yourself, trying to get votes from a group of people who basically think the way you do. That group of people will not be enough to win the general election; you have to be able to pull from the other side as well. In other words, these are two very different races.
Also, because this is a popularity contest, you have to look at how each stacks up against the November opponent. While Obama may do better than Clinton within their party, Clinton does better outside of the party while still pulling in a substantial number of Democrats. Not all Republicans are happy with McCain. If the Democrats run the right person, Republicans will be more likely to defect to the left.
Using old number (from 2000, I think) there are 63 million Democrats, 47 million Republicans and 32 million Independents. The Democratic nominee must retain the Democratic base and pull in some independents to win, as does the Republican nominee. Clinton has greater pulling power than Obama. Also, many of Clinton's supporters will defect to the right if she doesn't get the nomination while Obama's supporters are less likely to do so if Clinton is the candidate. Some may claim racism but I see it as more of an issue with experience.
I see that you are located in WV. No wonder you have such a flawed analysis - actually your analysis is not flawed i believe. Actually, it's not even an analysis since you have nothing to back up these claims. They are pretty much your own way of thinking. On that note, what you are thinking is not exactly what everyone else is thinking. The way WV-irginians think is certainly soooo 1970s according to the election exit polls so as to speak.
I see that you are located in WV. No wonder you have such a flawed analysis - actually your analysis is not flawed i believe. Actually, it's not even an analysis since you have nothing to back up these claims. They are pretty much your own way of thinking. On that note, what you are thinking is not exactly what everyone else is thinking. The way WV-irginians think is certainly soooo 1970s according to the election exit polls so as to speak.
I suppose if you can't debate on point, then tossing insults around proves your superior intellect. Nothing left for me to say here, then.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm confused. I guess us Obama supporters aren't as educated as allot of us thought we were. I better pull out my handy dandy map and try to find KY!
Too Funny!
