Running Primaries Thread

HRC's pleas for near-term debates aren't going to wash. If she were comfortably in front, she wouldn't consider it, herself. But she's not where she thought she'd be, so she's desperate.

NYT quote:

"Mrs. Clinton's aides said the delegates should make their decision based on who they thought would be the stronger candidate . . . "

Is that so? If so, the junior senator from New York . . . loses.

 

I'd figure that her planning was largely based on the projected budget available . . . which reflects a goodly measure of remarkably shitty planning, up and down the lline . . .

 

C'mon, all you righties. This is right up your alley. Jump right in!

 

OBAMASSACRE!

 

Her margin hasn't yet budged in Ohio and Pennsylvania, and it should have.

 

Agree . . . but will note that Quinnipiac ain't high on my list of preferred pollsters.

 

OK.
But no matter how flawed the design, there is no logical reason for the numbers to have stayed completely stagnant. Not this year.

 

Texas is beyond huge?

For Obama? For HRC? Or just in the general scheme of things?

 

Agree.

Just as I agree with Yogi.

There's miles to go before this one is laid to rest.

 

Scheme.

And HRC's pretty cocky about her prospects, there.

Would like to see a real poll, out of there. Haven't seen one.

 

Here, here.

 

Of course she is, Texans elected Ann Richards. So obviously, they're more likely to be racists than misogynists. [/crossthread]