quote:Is McCain getting any delegates for doing so? Ron Paul is getting 3 delegates for throwing his support to Huckabee in WV.
The story I just saw indicated that Huckabee got all the delegates. I'll check CNN. I despise them, but they show how many delegates came from which state. CNN shows 18 WV delegates for Huckabee, and also, under Paul, no delegates from WV.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
If McCain had such a deal, it was not reported on his website's news room. I did, however, find out that he has sworn to pursue Osama bin Laden to the gates of hell. Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think McCain actually wants to go to hell. I've never heard anyone reference the gates of hell as much as he has. Even today he said it while campaigning.
I guess he's not a fan of Camp David?
He also credited an oft quoted John Winthrop phrase, "city on a hill," to Reagan. That desperate to paint yourself as a Conservative?
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Um, that phrase goes back a bit before John Winthrop. Unless you're talking about a longer Winthrop quote that that quote is part of.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is concerning me that they are acting like the democratic primaries are all or nothing winner-take-all cases. I think that it is confusing when we are used to that in the general elections. Here it is the delegate count that matters.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just got back from my caucus and I must say a word about the turnout: WOW! Cars were backed up for blocks, most of the curbside parking and all of the lots for nearby businesses were filled for blocks. The middle school was packed with lines of voters going down the hall from most of the rooms where the individual precincts were. I lucked out on parking, got in, wandered a bit trying to find which room I was supposed to vote in, and got out without waiting for the other misc caucus business. On my way out there were still huge lines of people waiting to vote and cars waiting to get in. From the people I talked to or overheard in the halls, many of them were there for their first caucus. On the nearest major street there was at least half mile line of cars waiting to turn right. NPR was reporting similar situations at other caucus locations, with huge lines and traffic jams. It looks like turnout is blowing away anything Minnesota has seen for previous primaries!
posted
Mine was like that too, Enigmatic Just got home myself a little while ago. People were lined up literally around to the other side of the block at the junior high school where I went (turned out I actually needed to go to the commons at the college a couple blocks down, but I figured it out eventually). I was watching all the cars fighting their way through and feeling thankful I live just a block from my polling place. When I finally got in to vote, they'd run out of official ballots, so I wrote Obama's name on a blue Post-It note and dropped that in the ballot box.
Posts: 957 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dkw: Um, that phrase goes back a bit before John Winthrop. Unless you're talking about a longer Winthrop quote that that quote is part of.
I was talking about the speech he gave some 400 years ago when they first landed in Massachusetts. "For we must consider that we shall be as a city upon a hill. The eyes of all people are upon us." Etc etc. I know it's taken from a Biblical reference, but I don't know of anyone else using the phrase before that in any meaningful way.
Where else was it used before then?
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
My caucus site was packed as well, but it was very well organized and they were moving people through pretty fast. Registration was supposed to start at 6:30, and when I showed up at 6:30 exact there was no parking and the line to get into the school was all the way down the sidewalk. (About 50'.) But that was because there were ranks of volunteers standing in the lobby with clipboards with maps helping people find which room they were supposed to go to, since most didn't know their precinct. Once I got to the gym where my precinct was, the line was about twice as long to register and vote, but again they had plenty of volunteers and were well organized and moved us right through. The whole thing took less than 20 minutes from when I parked. When I left, the line to get into the school stretched over a block, but was still moving very well. And there were more people arriving in droves.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"A city on a hill cannot be hid" appears in the Sermon on the mount, somewhere between Matthew 5-7 I believe.
If Huckabee takes MO, that will be something as it was the only winner-take-all he was in contention for. He won't win, but it puts a dent in McCain.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think intrade.com is the easiest way to follow the updates. When I checked in around 8 Hillary was around $46 - now she's up to $57.7.
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have my own problems with religious culture, but this anti-LDS backlash in the southern states and mid-western states is really something. I'm not a fan of Mitt Romney, and I'd like him to lose, but I don't want him to lose because of bigotry. It would be nice if one of the religious conservative leaders came out and took Christian conservative America to task about this. It makes me feel bad about the country.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
If a lot of these things stay the same or even get a little better, I'd say Obama is doing just fine, and McCain is having a great night. Romney is having some serious issues.
I don't even know why they bother calling winners for the Democratic side. It's useless. The winner does get some bonus delegates, but it's the count that matters. McCain is a fourth of the way to the magic number.
quote:Originally posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong: I have my own problems with religious culture, but this anti-LDS backlash in the southern states and mid-western states is really something. I'm not a fan of Mitt Romney, and I'd like him to lose, but I don't want him to lose because of bigotry. It would be nice if one of the religious conservative leaders came out and took Christian conservative America to task about this. It makes me feel bad about the country.
What evidence do you have that his poor performance is due to him being Mormon? There is certainly some of that but there are also many other problems with Romney (not that I think being a Mormon is a problem).
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think being a robot hurts more than being LDS. Besides, the LDS vote will help him out west, whereas the android vote generally has a very low turnout.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:What evidence do you have that his poor performance is due to him being Mormon?
Evidence. Bah. I look at the numbers, pull a wishbone, lay out some pig entrails and divine the truth.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
Edwards is winning the Dems by a landslide. :snicker:
To be fair, those are probably early voting results, from before he withdrew. Obama is expected to win Utah.
quote:What evidence do you have that his poor performance is due to him being Mormon? There is certainly some of that but there are also many other problems with Romney (not that I think being a Mormon is a problem).
He's had publicity that money can't buy from the AM hosts ever since Florida, and he's come up some, but Huckabee is winning a lot of states that were polling even.
posted
I was going to keep updating the state by states, but, it's too much work for something you can see easier on CNN, besides, they don't much matter, what matters is the delegate count.
posted
Those are CNN's numbers; I believe they do. link
And a lot of these states that Obama is winning, he is doing 70/30, and that's really going to add up. They tend to be red states, but that's where Hillary's divisiveness shows up. Sure you don't need those states if you're banking on the electoral college.
I mean, it would be kind of fun to watch Hillary win the presidency with a 50 million deficit in the popular vote.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I keep looking at Georgia and looking at the exit polls and shaking my head. Missouri too. I mean, I can see the pre-polling being off, but those exit polls are really off.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
No. I was hoping it was with the supers. I think that if California is not a disaster (and the hispanic vote worries me) then Obama will have he time and the resources to really contest the later states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and so forth. Time tends to favour him.
So I'm being cautiously optimistic. It also looks like they have not assigned a lot of delegates in states where Obama won by a larger margin. Of course, there aren't a lot of delegates in some of those states...
Edit: and on intrade, Clinton is selling at $58 even, Obama at $40.8, and on the Republican side John McCain has pulled away at $89.2 with Romney at $5.9.
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The latino vote nation wide is on Clinton's side, but, in the southwest it's a much narrower lead. It might even break even in some states.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: I think being a robot hurts more than being LDS. Besides, the LDS vote will help him out west, whereas the android vote generally has a very low turnout.
Yes because the LDS vote is comparable to the Southern Evangelical vote. Either protestantism just lost millions of adherents without anybody noticing or else Mormonism has had explosive growth that nobody is aware of.
If you watch the polling history from just before the Iowa debates, (the debate being the point where Huckabee made himself known) up until South Carolina's primary, you can see Romney dipping and then dipping some more while Huckabee comes out of nowhere and breaks ahead of Romney come primary day.
It's more evangelicals were willing to tolerate Romney until they realized they didn't have to because Huckabee, one of their own, was suddenly a media darling.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nope. Romney has been running as Money, and running a negative campaign. Then got nailed by the backlash.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by aspectre: Nope. Romney has been running on Money and paying for negative campaign ads. And got nailed in the backlash.
Oh I agree that negative ads did hurt his campaign. I didn't mean to say that Huckabee was the only factor the effected Romney's campaign negatively.
But to say Romney was running on money is not accurate. He ran on the same credentials as other candidates. He just happened to have more money and was able to use that to his advantage.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The latino vote nation wide is on Clinton's side, but, in the southwest it's a much narrower lead. It might even break even in some states.
But dig this: If the race is between Obama and McCain, conceivably, working class white men could go for Obama and latinos for McCain, which would make the electoral map look much more unpredictable, and less like a Civil War map, forcing both parties to redefine themselves as the deeply pro-immigration wing of the Left goes to McCain and a splinter of white men go with the democrats and Obama. It would make for a fascinating national dialogue. It may even be good for the nation.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is Obama actually against immigration, though? That's what he'd need to be to draw the crazy conservatives, and I think those conservatives will settle down by convention. Immigration was intended as a strategy issue, which actually did more harm than good to the party.
P.S. McCain and Huckabee are less than 200 votes apart in Missouri, winner takes all!
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, he isn't against immigration. He is the son of an immigrant, but he did throw some support behind the idea of a fence. Either way, immigration is and should be a big issue, and it's going to be one of the issues if Obama and McCain get nominated. Most importantly, the issue could break up party factions on both sides. Which would be a good thing.
PS. I think Obama is going to be crushed in California.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Correct my previous statement above to "running as Money". The problem being too many "I don't care how much campaign funding I receive from supporters, I can still run." sounds too much like "I can buy the election." Still woulda been okay spun as "I can't be bought"... ...if his statements&ads against other Republicans hadn't torqued off those candidates enough to throw their support to "anybody but Romney."
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, he essentially supports a practical "amnesty" (that oh so horrible word), but of course he'll never say that out right.
Posts: 1945 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Re: votes for Edwards, a lot of those are absentee ballots from before he dropped out.
I don't think Obama will quite be "crushed" in CA. He's likely to "lose", but we're talking about a proportional division of delegates. The California Exit Pollis what I've been staying up to see. Though now I have to see Missouri declared. Obama has more of the Latino vote in CA in certain age groups than Clinton has of the total vote in a lot of Southern states.
Missouri is rounding out for McCain, he leads by thousands now.
posted
"why are people voting for edwards in california? thats 10% that can go to Obama..."
As I mentioned before, most mail-in voters had already sent their ballots in before Edwards had dropped out. And considering that there are a total of 15million eligible voters and 5million mail-in ballots had been sent out, the mail-in votes for Edwards are gonna screw up the results in Clinton's*favor.
* Admittedly annecdotal from my talks&emails with mail-in voters, but the overwhelming majority of Edwards' supporters would have voted for Obama as second choice.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
California can still tighten up. I think a majority of the mail-in ballots were counted first in the partial results, and those left to be counted were mailed after Edwards dropped out.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's midnight and MO still has not been called. I guess I'll wait up to see Alaska's exit polls. Alaska has had no polling, and it's its own region. Anyone want to bet on the winner there?
I'll go out on a limb and grant that if Ron Paul could win any state, it would be Alaska.
P.S. I predict that by morning, Clinton and Obama will have won approximately the same number of states, but Obama will have more delegates (not counting supers). But that's just my guess. Obama picked up three states on my spreadsheet so far, though it looks like Clinton got NM.
I think Beltway Tuesday (as I call the 12th) is going to be a landmark for Obama.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Just got home myself a little while ago. People were lined up literally around to the other side of the block at the junior high school where I went (turned out I actually needed to go to the commons at the college a couple blocks down, but I figured it out eventually). I was watching all the cars fighting their way through and feeling thankful I live just a block from my polling place. When I finally got in to vote, they'd run out of official ballots, so I wrote Obama's name on a blue Post-It note and dropped that in the ballot box.
