1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Running Primaries Thread

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Chi City 81, Feb 6, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 10 years too late, although the new blues in the NW and the Rockies will be fun when they start turning out candidates.
     
  2. zeke12

    zeke12 Guest

    Actually, the Ferraro comment was notable, to me, for a different reason.

    The throwaway line was intriguing.

    The gist of the original quote was, if Obama wasn't black, would he even be a problem for Hillary?

    She views the likely Democratic nominee as a "problem" for Hillary. Still. After he's won how many states? And you wonder where the entitlement talk comes from?

    Barack Obama isn't a problem for Hillary Clinton. Winning elections is.

    And, Fenian, yeah, I'll say it: If Obama were even 75 delegates behind and had lost 14 of 17 contests since Super Tuesday, he'd be out by now.

    She had a strategy. It failed. Now she's just trying to throw shit at the wall and see what sticks. Anyone not named Clinton would have been forced out by now.
     
  3. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member

    What's going to be mucky is that she's going to kick ass and take names in Pennsy.

    And all the syncophants will go, "Whoooooooooo".

    Though in terms of the overall math of the piece, won't mean shit.
     
  4. zeke12

    zeke12 Guest

    Yup. And then he'll win Oregon and North Carolina. But those won't matter. We'll be talking about Puerto Rico, or revoting in Michigan and Florida.

    And when we're all done, the numbers will look roughly like what they look like today.
     
  5. jagtrader

    jagtrader Active Member

    A 150 pledged-delegate gap using this system is large. Obama has won 14 of the last 17 contests by 17 points or more. People seem to have forgotten that little feat.
     
  6. DanOregon

    DanOregon Well-Known Member

    At the rate her campaign tends to turn more people off to her, I have a hard time believing Clinton will do better than 55 percent in Pennsylvania. I'm sure Clinton wished the PA vote was next Tuesday. Time hasn't been her friend.
     
  7. Armchair_QB

    Armchair_QB Well-Known Member

    But she's got a lot of time to work on lawsuits to get the Florida and Michigan delegates handed over to her.

    Speaking of that, I really hope Florida goes ahead with it's plan to conduct a mail-in primary in order to apportion the delegates.

    That'll be about as legitimate as a Tanzanian presidential election.
     
  8. jboy

    jboy Guest

    More states, more delegates, more popular votes.

    Repeat, repeat, repeat.

    After Pennsylvania, I would shout that over and over again. Obama's post-primary speeches should sound like victory speeches regardless of the results. Drill that into people's heads over and over.

    She still wouldn't have enough to overtake him.
     
  9. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member


    She keeps trotting these transparent surrogates out there, it'll backfire, for certain.
     
  10. zeke12

    zeke12 Guest

    Even if she got Florida and Michigan seated as is, she doesn't make up the gap.

    And, if they revote, Obama will do much better than he did -- unless anyone really thinks he'd get 0 percent in Michigan and 33 percent in Florida again.
     
  11. zeke12

    zeke12 Guest

  12. Football_Bat

    Football_Bat Well-Known Member

    Well, if Obama's already a lead-pipe lock, what does she have to lose?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page