| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:30 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| It's at this point in the race that I really, really miss Biden and/or Richardson. Even Dodd. |
Amen, brother. You know Dodd was an alumnus of University of Louisville Law School. I'm putting you on notice: watch what you say about the man! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Milwaukiedave
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Location: Goseong
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:02 pm Post subject: Re: Clinton spin: Obama needs to sweep Mar 4 |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| I have my own reservations about Clinton. Her economic populism is upsetting, to say the least. But Obama has not distinguished himself in this regard. Yes, he could have won my vote by saying: "I think Hillary is wrong on NAFTA, it has helped the American people." But instead, he attacks her as being part of the establishment that created NAFTA. |
You can claim 35 years of experience and then say you aren't part of the establishment. Argue one or the other. She's clearly arguing the experience and establishment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:23 pm Post subject: Re: Clinton spin: Obama needs to sweep Mar 4 |
|
|
| Milwaukiedave wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| I have my own reservations about Clinton. Her economic populism is upsetting, to say the least. But Obama has not distinguished himself in this regard. Yes, he could have won my vote by saying: "I think Hillary is wrong on NAFTA, it has helped the American people." But instead, he attacks her as being part of the establishment that created NAFTA. |
You can claim 35 years of experience and then say you aren't part of the establishment. Argue one or the other. She's clearly arguing the experience and establishment. |
Thank you, Barack. I'll tell you what, if I want to hear Obama's talking points, I'll suscribe to his online newsletter.
My point was that I LIKED the Clinton establishment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 10:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Dodd was an alumnus of University of Louisville Law School |
Now I have TWO bones to pick with the man. One, that I can't for the life of me spell the name of the state he's from--and therefore he's ineligible for the presidency, and two,... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 10:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Another Obama spam thread. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 10:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Dodd was an alumnus of University of Louisville Law School |
Now I have TWO bones to pick with the man. One, that I can't for the life of me spell the name of the state he's from--and therefore he's ineligible for the presidency, and two,... |
Ha ha.
An alumnus of my law school was a Presidential candidate! Meh-long  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Milwaukiedave
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Location: Goseong
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 12:43 am Post subject: Re: Clinton spin: Obama needs to sweep Mar 4 |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Milwaukiedave wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| I have my own reservations about Clinton. Her economic populism is upsetting, to say the least. But Obama has not distinguished himself in this regard. Yes, he could have won my vote by saying: "I think Hillary is wrong on NAFTA, it has helped the American people." But instead, he attacks her as being part of the establishment that created NAFTA. |
You can claim 35 years of experience and then say you aren't part of the establishment. Argue one or the other. She's clearly arguing the experience and establishment. |
Thank you, Barack. I'll tell you what, if I want to hear Obama's talking points, I'll suscribe to his online newsletter.
My point was that I LIKED the Clinton establishment. |
I did for the most part as well. I've stated at multiple times in this forum that I voted for Bill Clinton twice. That doesn't mean I have to believe his wife would make a good president.
So please tell give me an honest answer, how can you claim 35 years of experience and argue that you are not part of the establishment?
While we are at it, explain how you can support NAFTA (because she's claiming her 8 years as First Lady are part of that experience) and then turn around and claim you never supported it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 8:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
MD reported:
| Quote: |
"Senator Obama has campaigned hard in these states," the memo continues. "He has spent time meeting editorial boards, courting endorsers, holding rallies, and - of course - making speeches."
The memo came out moments after Obama campaign manager David Plouffe finished a conference call with reporters, during which he said the New York senator needs big victories in Texas and Ohio Tuesday if she hopes to chip away at Obama's now 153 pledged delegate lead � according to CNN's latest estimate.
"The Clinton campaign needs to begin wining big states by big margins to have any hope of eliminating this delegate lead they are facing," he said. |
God forbid Obama would continue to have the temerity to campaign so hard. Why, this is just uncouth, unfair, and whatever other un- Hillary can think of next.
HILL-BILL HAD BETTER FACE THE FACTS: SHE MUST WIN BY AT LEAST 10 PERCENTAGE POINTS IN OHIO TO RACK UP MOST OF THE DELEGATE COUNT THERE.
But if she squeaks out a victory, the Clinton campaign spin will be that she's on the upswing.
Plouffe is running a great campaign whether one likes Obama or not. Consider this:
I sent Obama a personal letter via email on an issue I disagree with. Not only did I get an email auto-reply acknowledgment of its receipt but a followup letter of encouragement from a campaign assistant and since then I've been on their mailing list without even asking. I've also received unsolicited letters from two other Obama email addresses. Now that's what I call tenacious campaigning of the best sort. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 8:31 am Post subject: Re: Clinton spin: Obama needs to sweep Mar 4 |
|
|
| Milwaukiedave wrote: |
So please tell give me an honest answer, how can you claim 35 years of experience and argue that you are not part of the establishment?
While we are at it, explain how you can support NAFTA (because she's claiming her 8 years as First Lady are part of that experience) and then turn around and claim you never supported it? |
Perhaps you mistook me for Hillary Clinton. I'm guessing that like Barack, she's pandering. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 9:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
MilwaukieDave:
I think that Bill's well-advertised advice to his wife to quit if she doesn't win Ohio was just another Slick Willy ploy. By this I mean that the publicity surrounding it was intended to rally the troops and to impress upon those thinking of defecting to the Obama camp to think twice before abandoning the cause.
Indeed, I don't think the Clintons care that much if her Ohio victory--which now seems assured- is by a wide or narrow margin. Why, you might ask? Because the Hill-Bill potion motion will MANUFACTURER momentum in the mainstream media, if need be.
Bill is shrewd; he knew that getting his wife to raise the issue of media bias would get their attention, smarting as they still are from the charge of being AWOL in the buildup to the war.
Do you concur?
Kuros:
Your smarmy retorts to MD are getting old fast. He's a true believe in Obama; deal with it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Milwaukiedave
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Location: Goseong
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 1:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Steve,
Well the rally the troops call and complaining about the bias coverage worked. What also worked was the Clinton's smear and fear campaign against Obama. The smear was a combination of things: 1) Releasing the photo of Obama 2) Her statement that Obama was all words (which will make for a nice TV commercial for McCain later in the year, thanks Hillary) and 3) Her campaign and supporters continually insisting that Obama did something illegal with his ties to the guy on trial (when it really has been investigated repeatedly with every time no wrong doing found on his part).
The fear factor was the red phone commercial, which many had mistaken as a McCain commercial when they first saw it. Given Bill's statement back in 2004 about voting for fear vs. voting for hope, it goes to show the Clintons are hypocrites.
As for Kuros, she can't wipe her mouth let alone answer any of my questions. I'm still waiting for the answer about the 10 minute tirade by the Clinton surrogate in Ohio.
Last edited by Milwaukiedave on Wed Mar 05, 2008 3:09 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 2:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
How is Obama going to spin these MAJOR loses into minor bumps in the road? That is going to be difficult. After 11 straight wins, he loses 3 of 4 in one day. The first time he's a front-runner and he fumbles the ball.
What does this say about electability?
All afternoon I've been expecting to see IGTG's "The Fix Was In" post. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Saxiif
Joined: 15 May 2003
Location: Seongnam
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 2:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
How is Obama going to spin these MAJOR loses into minor bumps in the road? That is going to be difficult. After 11 straight wins, he loses 3 of 4 in one day. The first time he's a front-runner and he fumbles the ball.
What does this say about electability?
All afternoon I've been expecting to see IGTG's "The Fix Was In" post. |
1. Due to delegate math his pledged delegate lead will drop by less than then and might even INCREASE depending on how things work out in Texas.
2. Look at pollster.com See where Obama was poll-wise in Ohio and Texas a month ago. Compare that to the actual results.
3. Basically the way delegrate math works out unless you win a blowout you only end up very marginally ahead of of the other person in the Democratic primaries. Obama has one significantly more blowouts than Clinton (who only really stomped Obama in Arkansas, while Obama won some crushing victories across a swath of the Great Plains and the Deep South). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 2:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
But yesterday he was ahead. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Milwaukiedave
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Location: Goseong
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 2:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Saxiif is correct, Obama was down by 20 or more points in Ohio. I thought Clinton would win by 5-8% because he has outperformed the polls most of the time (look at South Carolina, Virginia and Wisconsin).
Also the delegate math is still going to be an uphill battle still for Clinton. As of right now, not counting Texas because the totals are still coming in, she gained all of 16 delegates more then Obama between VT, OH and RI (most of those coming from Ohio). The delegate counts out of Texas haven't been figured out yet for both the primary and the caucus, I'd bet they will be really close.
This weekend is Wyoming and next week is Mississippi. Both small red states, states she's said don't count (I should also mention Wyoming is a caucus state so it REALLY doesn't count).
The question is can she extend her winning streak beyond 3 (Ohio, RI and a weak win in Texas)? Can she start actually winning a majority of the pledged delegates?
Last edited by Milwaukiedave on Wed Mar 05, 2008 3:15 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
