318)This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
Not a member? Sign-up today!
About Propeller | Frequently Asked Questions | Help
© 2003-2008 Propeller. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
I tend to agree with your assessment of Obama's chances. While I too favor Obama over the other two candidates, I think that the Democrats would have a better chance of winning with Clinton. True that Obama has won 31 states but the states that he has won are mostly Republican leaning states that would probably stay with the Republicans in the general election. States that tend to vote Democratic have favored Clinton over Obama. I think that the Democrat's best chance would be an Obama-Clinton/Clinton-Obama ticket but I don't foresee that happening.
I still don't see the logic here--the argument that since Clinton beat Obama in, say, New York, he will lose that state in the general election. There is no way that a Democratic stronghold like New York will back McCain over Obama, and I think that applies to several (although not all) of the delegate-rich states that Clinton has won. It will be a hard fought election, that I agree with, but to call Obama unelectable is to fly in the face of reality.
"There is no way that a Democratic stronghold like New York will back McCain over Obama, and I think that applies to several (although not all) of the delegate-rich states that Clinton has won."
It's the key "swing" states that matter, look at this map:
http://electoral-vote.com/
Now look at Ohio, Clinton BEATS MCCain by 10% but Obama LOOSES to McCain by 1%.
Now read this article:
http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/pr...
"Ohio is uncanny for its accuracy in picking presidential winners. From 1904 through 2004, the Ohio victor won the presidency 24 of 26 times. No Republican has won the presidency without carrying Ohio since Abraham Lincoln was elected in 1860."
If you are a TRUE democrat you want Hillary to win.
"If you are a TRUE democrat you want Hillary to win."
Oh Balderdash. You are getting your lines from the GOP. New York will vote for Obama and so will Michigan.
The polls you cite change all the time and are pretty much meaningless at this stage of the game. Clinton can't win the nomination and is showing herself as delusional as bush. In fact, with her support of the gas tax gimmick and her SUFFERING SUCCOTASH LET"S OBLITERATE IRAN remark, showing herself more like McCain. She is too much like McCain to win. We need a clear difference. And that difference is Obama.
I see you've been drinking the Obama kool-aid. Obama isn't going to "Change" anything, his plans almost mirror Hillarys. His a politician that uses people (Wright) just like anybody else. He's from CHICAGO, name me the last clean politician from my city, PLEASE.
He can't win the kew swing states and the polls, stats and primaries all show it.
You can deny it all you want but it is the truth.
You might want to see someone about your delusions that you are some kind of prophet and keeper of eternal truth.
Wow, way to refute my argument....
Care to provide anything factual that proves Obama can win any of those "swing" states?
Or even Ohio?
Quote your polls all you want Newbie, but remember things don't always happen as the polls say they will. Last night was a perfect example of that.
With such a compelling counter argument I don't know what to say jovial....
Just shutting you piehole will suffice. ;)
ditto?
Why should I refute anyone who thinks they can predict the future? That's not rational. Why bother?
Try this if you have a sense of humor:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/06/olberm...
EITHER Obama OR Clinton have a greater probability of changing things than does Bush III (McCain).
The people will not put up with a third term of Bush policies.
Of course, I don't understand why the people chose a second term of Bush policies - oh wait - the PEOPLE didn't.
oh please... get over yourself
Come on, newbie, the polls also predicted that Obama would win in New Hampshire. They're not exactly rocket science. And even if McCain is currently "beating" Obama by a single percentage point in Ohio, that means a statistical dead heat, not a McCain victory. I don't believe that Obama is a plaster saint--obviously he's got some hurdles to clear on the way to the White House. But in a country where 81 percent of the electorate thinks that the current Republican administration is messing up, McCain's got some problems too. And Hillary? Like it or not, she looks down for the count.
Balderdash,I always like that word
Newbi04020:
Your deep concern for the democrats, wanting them to make the best decision possible, is as touching as it is sincere.
I think we will go with Obama anyway.
"Your deep concern for the democrats, wanting them to make the best decision possible, is as touching as it is sincere."
At least you admit it is the best decision possible for the party.
I didn't mean to imply that Obama would lose the normally Democratic state, only that his wins in the primaries have come from normally Republican states and he would not win those states in the general election. So touting his 31 state victories rings somewhat hollow under those circumstances. And his wins have come with the considerable help of a huge African American majority vote which have come from those mostly Republican strength states. That vote will not help him as much in the general election. The Republican constituency will not be inclined to vote for Obama as much as say a segment of the female contingent of this constituency 'may' be inclined to vote for Clinton. This is my 'objective' take on what may happen even tho I intend to vote for Obama as I think he would be the Democratic candidate.
You are acting as if the DEM's that voted for Hill will not vote for Obama or the dems that voted for Obama will not vote for Hill. Like they will go hill is not here so i cm voting for McCain. I am sorry but i disagree with you and frankley your argument holds no water. This is the Demacratic primary, not the national election DEM's will galvinize behind whom ever our Nomonee is.