home
Sunday Afternoon Open Thread | 95 comments (95 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Unfortunately for you (none / 0) (#33)
by Deadalus on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 02:16:07 PM EST
Elections are not decided on who random commenters think is unelectable.  Senator Clinton is not in the best position to argue for electability as she has some of the highest negative ratings of any political figure nationwide.  Furthermore, her powerful electability should be reflected in primary wins, but it is not--she's losing handily.

[ Parent ]
Stretch (5.00 / 1) (#35)
by Stellaaa on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 02:18:37 PM EST
enator Clinton is not in the best position to argue for electability as she has some of the highest negative ratings of any political figure nationwide

So, Bush and Cheney have higher favorability ratings?  Honestly, consider the talking point before repeating it.  

[ Parent ]

Fine, (none / 0) (#38)
by Deadalus on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 02:21:16 PM EST
Democratic political figure.  

I should have said "on the left", but this would falsely portray Clinton as "on the left".  I should have said Democrat.  My bad.

[ Parent ]

Negatives? (none / 0) (#43)
by Stellaaa on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 02:24:03 PM EST
Obama's are on the rise, check out last weeks NY Times poll.  One half of a campaign and they are tanking.  

[ Parent ]
Which explains why he's up (none / 0) (#49)
by Deadalus on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 02:33:21 PM EST
ten points in Rasmussen nationwide and double digits in North Carolina and dramatically cut Hillary's lead in Pennsylvania.  If that's tanking, I'll take more of it.

[ Parent ]
Actually she is kicking a** in the primaries. (5.00 / 1) (#48)
by MarkL on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 02:30:03 PM EST
If you think the primaries should determine the nominee, then Clinton is your candidate!

[ Parent ]
Yeah, she got clobbered (none / 0) (#45)
by Democratic Cat on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 02:25:07 PM EST
In California, and Ohio, and Massachusetts. He just killed her in the primaries there.

[ Parent ]
3-state strategy working out for you? -nt- (none / 0) (#52)
by Deadalus on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 02:35:47 PM EST


[ Parent ]
You go look at the popular vote (5.00 / 1) (#57)
by Democratic Cat on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 02:46:50 PM EST
in the primaries, and then come back here and tell me he's handing it to her. Your comment is simply incorrect.

[ Parent ]
He's winning by an insurmountable pledged delegate (none / 0) (#59)
by Deadalus on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 02:53:32 PM EST
Lead.  

He will be the nominee contrary to what Senator Clinton told Katie Couric a while back.

Just answer me this:  what chance do you think Clinton will pull this off?  Seriously...what chance do you think she has of winning the nomination?

[ Parent ]

Pretty small (5.00 / 1) (#61)
by Democratic Cat on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 03:00:11 PM EST
Pulling a number out of the air, I'd give her a 15% chance.

Your earlier statement to which I responded was about primary votes, not about pledged delegates.

At the end of the day, Clinton will not have the pledged delegates to win.  Neither will Obama.

[ Parent ]

But he'll have more (none / 0) (#62)
by Deadalus on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 03:06:07 PM EST
and that will clinch it barring some unforeseen political relations disaster--hence why Clinton is still in the race.

Glad to see we're all on the same page.

[ Parent ]

Not sure we're on the same page. (none / 0) (#69)
by Democratic Cat on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 03:35:28 PM EST
A plurality is not a majority. Superdelegates will make their own decisions, and they may go with the candidate with a plurality of pledged delegates, or they may go with the candidate with a plurality of popular votes.

[ Parent ]
Obama will lead in both (none / 0) (#75)
by Deadalus on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 03:44:49 PM EST
It's been discussed ad nauseum, but I doubt she'll have the advantage by either metric. Super-delegates will "vote their conscience", but I doubt that any of the uncommitted ones are excited about casting a vote for Clinton as her campaign is just kind of sad at this point. It isn't uplifting, and probably not going to garner most super-delegate votes.

[ Parent ]
Electability (none / 0) (#46)
by Stellaaa on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 02:27:04 PM EST
I would say losing 20% of the Democratic base makes electability for Obama an issue

[ Parent ]
Love the Blackmail (none / 0) (#51)
by Deadalus on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 02:34:55 PM EST
So we should nominate the candidate who trails by every metric imaginable BECAUSE a few polls show her supporters won't vote for the winner.  What kind of logic is this?

For historical reference, please recall that 20 percent of voters in previous primaries have said the same thing to pollsters in both Republican and Democratic races.  

It's a meaningless statistic.

[ Parent ]

Winning in November (none / 0) (#65)
by waldenpond on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 03:26:01 PM EST
should be a consideration.  Obama can't survive a 20% drop in Clinton support.  Clinton, so far, can still win with a higher drop out from Obama supporters.

[ Parent ]
Heh... (5.00 / 1) (#78)
by Stellaaa on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 03:55:14 PM EST
You're candidate said we should use this metric, I never considered it: "my voters will not vote for her" and his wife, will consider the "tone".  

[ Parent ]
Not my candidate (none / 0) (#81)
by waldenpond on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 04:12:17 PM EST
Stellaaa, just checking....are you responding to me?  I was disagreeing with the previous person.  I think Obama's opinion is being refuted by all of the polls.  More of Clinton supporters say they will not vote for him.  Some believe people (looks like Deadalus in one) that Clinton supporters will 'get over it.'  I just think a larger of supporters on one side (Clinton's) are not going to 'get over it.'  I happen to think that attitude is condescending myself.

[ Parent ]

Sunday Afternoon Open Thread | 95 comments (95 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft