Who had a Better night Obama or Clinton?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 04:04:17 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2008 Elections
  Who had a Better night Obama or Clinton?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7
Poll
Question: Who had a Better night on Feb. 5th Obama or Clinton?
#1
Obama
 
#2
Clinton
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 98

Author Topic: Who had a Better night Obama or Clinton?  (Read 9795 times)
Reignman
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,236


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -3.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #125 on: February 07, 2008, 01:51:38 AM »

looks like 38.7% of this forum are hillary hacks LOL

No kiddin. If she had such a great night, why'd she do her speech so far ahead of Obama?
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #126 on: February 07, 2008, 02:34:00 AM »

looks like 38.7% of this forum are hillary hacks LOL

No kiddin. If she had such a great night, why'd she do her speech so far ahead of Obama?

11:00 PM news in the East.  Same reason Obama didn't speak after winning California, oh wait, he didn't win did he?
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #127 on: February 07, 2008, 02:36:15 AM »
« Edited: February 07, 2008, 02:42:31 AM by Fmr Gov. Polnut »

looks like 38.7% of this forum are hillary hacks LOL

No kiddin. If she had such a great night, why'd she do her speech so far ahead of Obama?

11:00 PM news in the East.  Same reason Obama didn't speak after winning California, oh wait, he didn't win did he?

That was my thinking, but I also thought... "she's going just as the polls close in CA?"

Actually, neither of them had the night they needed. If Obama had taken CA, or Hillary managed to pull back CT, pulled in GA or managed to perform well in ANY of the caucuses (it still boggles my mind) - then there would have been some pressure. Obama won the states I expected (bloody CT... my only mistake!!) it's just the margins that were off. Clinton did badly in some places, but also exceeded recent expectations on others. Noobdy delivered a death blow, which means now, someone is going to die slowly. 
Logged
Platypus
hughento
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,478
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #128 on: February 07, 2008, 02:39:28 AM »

looks like 38.7% of this forum are hillary hacks LOL

I support Obama. I voted in this for Clinton. Obama needed to win two out of CA, MO and MA (I always had the impression NJ would go to Clinton, as did most of the public imho) (wow, that was a remarkable statement, but I can't find a better form of words...) and he didn't. Clinton needed to win all three, and she ddn't, but by denying him a 'come-from-behind' story she defended her lead and that's a win for her. Obama didn't fall further behind, but by being behind he at best tied and lost a very strong chance at taking the lead.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #129 on: February 07, 2008, 07:01:47 AM »

People are generally both more intelligent and less well informed than the political and media classes like to think.
And it's largely the political and media classes' fault. Grin
Logged
Democratic Hawk
LucysBeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,703
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: 2.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #130 on: February 07, 2008, 07:33:50 AM »

Obama. The only disappointments being in that California and Massachusetts weren't closer but he was never really, despite prominent endorsements, in contention in MA

All in all it was a draw but moving through February, it's advantage Obama. Texas on March 4 is Hillary's firewall. Furthermore, it's, arguably, now the only state in which Hispanics are a major demographict.

The good thing is, however, Obama has time to campaign intensely in TX, in a way he could not focus on CA, AZ and NM (and he did reasonably well among Hispanics in AZ). Hispanics just don't know him, relative to Hillary that is

Dave
Logged
Thomas Jackson
ghostmonkey
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 710


Political Matrix
E: 8.77, S: 8.79

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #131 on: February 07, 2008, 09:38:13 AM »
« Edited: September 12, 2008, 12:46:57 AM by WilliamWallace »

........



Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #132 on: February 07, 2008, 09:40:48 AM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

You think McCain is going to appoint hardcore conservatives? LOL!
Certainly hardcore conservatives in my book, yes. It might not quite be Scalia but more Alito's the best to hope for.
Logged
Joe Republic
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,044
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #133 on: February 07, 2008, 10:22:54 AM »

Please stop the tiresome exclamation of Hillary's name.  It serves no purpose.
Logged
Wakie
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,767


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #134 on: February 07, 2008, 10:47:43 AM »

How many Delegates were at stake last night? Did you really think it was 1561? (Which is where you math from the MSNBC numbers takes you.)

I will honestly tell you that I do not know the exact # of delegates which were at stake on Super Tuesday.  I will say that you pointed at MSNBC as being a source that we could agree was reliable and that the #'s on their website show that Clinton picked up 11 more delegates on Super Tuesday.

Now you have pointed to 2 stories (1 from "The Nation" and the other from Politico.com) which both say "The Obama Campaign Says They Won More Delegates".  When/IF the news source (MSNBC) which we agreed was reliable updates their #'s on their website to reflect what the Obama camp claims, then I will agree with you.  But since that hasn't happened you are just being intellectually dishonest.  You're going by the spin of the campaign.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

How does that Kool-Aid taste?  Obama may have exceeded his goals (I don't know what his goals were).  Hillary won the big prizes on Tuesday.  The Obama camp may claim they won MO, but if you notice the MSNBC site shows that each candidate got the same # of delegates from MO.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I've never heard anyone make such attacks on Hillary!. I have seen anti-male comments made by rabid Hillary! supporters however. [/quote]

You say you've been hanging around this forum?  Do you want some links to those attacks on Hillary?  And frankly I think your claim of "anti-male" comments is just laughable.  Yeah, the campaign is going to alienate 50% of the electorate.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I like how instead of offering up Obama's plans/ideas in a positive and constructive light you bash the Clinton healthcare program by dishonestly representing her position.

The wages garnishing was something suggested by JOHN EDWARDS.  Clinton said she wouldn't take anything off the table but she never said she would garnish wages.  In the real world the best way for government to enforce programs is via tax incentives.  Since your employer most likely pays your healthcare costs using money which could otherwise be given to you as wages (yes, I am an employer and I give my employees the choice) said unpaid money should be tax deductable.  If you choose NOT to take the healtchare then you should ask your employer to pay you the money they are saving by not covering your healthcare!  You would, of course, have to pay taxes on this money ..... something some would call "garnishing your wages".  Understand?

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

You're like the John Cleese character from the "Dept of Arguments" sketch.
Ok, take my example and strike the word EXECUTIVE from it (since you clearly don't know the difference between office executives and executive in terms of branch of government).  Hillary was a key advisor to Bill when he was in office.  The proof of that is that BILL SAYS SHE WAS.  And oddly enough I think he knows better than you about his administration.  8 years as a key advisor to the President followed by 8 years in the Senate is a lot more experience than 8 years in the IL state legislature.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oh really?  And what are the issues that are important to you which make your preference in candidate go Obama/McCain/Clinton?

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Considering that she has repeatedly said she will withdraw them I find that highly doubtful.  But this is a popular Obama attack.  So if Obama is so anti-war why did Obama vote against the Kerry bill to withdraw soldiers?  Why has he said he wants to reduce the # of soldiers, not withdraw them?

Obama saying "I never voted for war" is the same as me saying that.  Neither of us were in Congress at the time.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

A Scalia?  No.  An Alito?  Yes.  Watch the campaign.  I guarantee you that he comes out and tells you he will use abortion as a litmus test for Supreme Court Justices.
Logged
Thomas Jackson
ghostmonkey
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 710


Political Matrix
E: 8.77, S: 8.79

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #135 on: February 07, 2008, 12:05:50 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I do know how many delegates were at stake. 1681. Do a simple search and you would find that information. So if 1681 were at stake, how does your math add up?

You are claiming that MSNBC is saying Hillary! won with 786 to Obama 775. Do some simple math and you find that number equals 1561, Not 1681. You are over 100 delegates short in your count.

I'll repeate the relevant portion that is NOT coming from the Obama Campaign, but rather NBC news.

With the delegate count still under way, NBC News said Obama appears to have won around 840 delegates in yesterday’s contests, while Clinton earned about 830 — “give or take a few,” Tim Russert, the network’s Washington bureau chief, said on the “Today” show.

Obama won more delegates.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Obama was shooting for a -100 delegate Count. Did he exceed that?

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

The core Hillary! contigent could care less about alienating half the electorate. They blindly think that they can get all the women to vote for Hillary! to negate that effect. They don't realize how their negative anti-male attacks turn off not only Men, but also Conservative/Moderate Women.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

As you have already demonstrated not knowing the Delegate Count, Not knowing Obama's goals for the Night, it should be no suprise that you don't know Hillary!'s plan. Frankly however, I am suprised.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080203/ap_on_el_pr/campaign_rdp_30

"Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton said Sunday she might be willing to garnish the wages of workers who refuse to buy health insurance to achieve coverage for all Americans."

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ad Hominem.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Your additional Ad Hominem aside, An Office Executive would be the equivalent to the President. As both involve exercising management and leadership. Serving in the Senate does not come close by any stretch of the imagination. I find it telling that you don't understand your own argument.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hillary! was a key advisor in her own mind. She rode the coattails of her Husband and tries to paint that as something more than it was.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Strong Leadership, Willingness to bring Change to the Government, I like Obama's health care plan much better than Hillary!'s.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hillary!'s exact words on this issue betray her:

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members...It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well, effects American security. This is a very difficult vote, this is probably the hardest decision I've ever had to make. Any vote that might lead to war should be hard, but I cast it with conviction."

Neither she, nor you, can have it both ways.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ah abortion! That must be your key issue. Perhaps that's why you support Hillary! so much?

Can I ask you, are you female?

Regardless, are you aware that McCain has been attacked from the Right specficially because he said Alito was too Conservative?

For what it’s worth, I’ve been told the same thing John F. reported — that at a private meeting McCain said he would appoint justices like Roberts, but not like Alito — who wears his conservatism on his sleeve. The report of the comment — first in D.C. conservative circles and now in the WSJ — has set off alarm bells with conservatives who’ve worked on the judicial issues, for obvious reasons. We already got Alito despite a president who wanted to go in another direction. This time, folks feel like they’re being warned beforehand.
Logged
Thomas Jackson
ghostmonkey
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 710


Political Matrix
E: 8.77, S: 8.79

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #136 on: February 07, 2008, 12:08:35 PM »
« Edited: September 12, 2008, 12:47:40 AM by WilliamWallace »

.............
Logged
Kalimantan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 841
Indonesia


Political Matrix
E: -3.10, S: -1.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #137 on: February 07, 2008, 12:16:17 PM »

Seconds out, Round 8!

I find ghost monkey's arguments quite good, but I then I lean Obama. However that Clinton quote is out of context of the argument, which is whether she would withdraw now. In fact I think she justifies her vote for the war well, insofar as she was fed the lie by the crook Bush that Hussein still had WMD.


ding ding...
Logged
Joe Republic
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,044
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #138 on: February 07, 2008, 12:20:23 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

It serves an excellent purpose. You find it annoying. Yet whenever Hillary! speaks, that's exactly how it comes across.

Hence why Hillary! will always be referred to by me in this manner.

It's also very childish.

(I've ignored the rest of your post due to its irrelevance.)
Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,423
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #139 on: February 07, 2008, 12:23:35 PM »

Clinton.  She got more delegates and overcame some rather low expectations created by a reporting frenzy in favor of Obama--the Kennedy endorsements, the huge crowds, polls tightening in favor of Obama, a last-minute Zogby poll showing Obama up by 13 in California.

Speaking of delegates, the number you read depends on who's reporting.  They vary wildly:

NBC
Clinton: 582
Obama: 485

AP
Clinton: 845
Obama: 765

CNN
Clinton: 823
Obama: 741

CBS
Clinton: 1058
Obama: 984

New York Times
Clinton: 892
Obama: 716

Nuts.  The only thing that's consistent is that Clinton is consistently ahead of Obama.
Logged
Kalimantan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 841
Indonesia


Political Matrix
E: -3.10, S: -1.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #140 on: February 07, 2008, 12:38:45 PM »

Clinton.  She got more delegates

Well, they haven't all been counted yet but the prediction is that he will end up with slightly more on the night to go with the delegate lead he already had. But we won't know until all the results are in, tomorrow maybe. Also, most of the news stations are adding the committed superdelegates into the total, which is a bit disingenuous of them.
Logged
exopolitician
MATCHU[D]
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,892
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.03, S: -6.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #141 on: February 07, 2008, 12:39:33 PM »

Is New Mexico still up in the air...?
Logged
Eraserhead
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,405
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #142 on: February 07, 2008, 12:56:42 PM »

Clinton lost the spin war. Badly.

In the end that's all that matters.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #143 on: February 07, 2008, 01:22:01 PM »


Non. In the end nothing matters less.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #144 on: February 07, 2008, 01:23:47 PM »

I wonder how Obama and Clinton are doing WITHOUT SUPERdelegates.
Logged
Wakie
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,767


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #145 on: February 07, 2008, 01:34:07 PM »

Ok, ghostmonkey, lets take this item by item.

# of Delegates on Super Tuesday.  Here's the MSNBC website http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21660914
One would imagine that these are the official "most up-to-date" NBC #'s.  It is telling that the article you cited was published at 11 AM on Feb 6th.  I think 24 hrs later they have better info.

Below I list the states contested on Super Tuesday and the delegate count as listed by MSNBC.  Please let me know if I have missed any states or if I have misreported any of the MSNBC #'s or if I mistotal them.

AL - 25 Obama, 23 Clinton
AK - 9 Obama, 4 Clinton
AZ - 25 Obama, 31 Clinton
AR - 7 Obama, 24 Clinton
CA - 163 Obama, 202 Clinton
CO - 13 Obama, 6 Clinton
CT - 26 Obama, 22 Clinton
DE - 9 Obama, 6 Clinton
GA - 40 Obama, 23 Clinton
ID - 15 Obama, 3 Clinton
IL - 87 Obama, 44 Clinton
KS - 23 Obama, 9 Clinton
MA - 38 Obama, 55 Clinton
MN - 48 Obama, 24 Clinton
MO - 35 Obama, 35 Clinton
NJ - 42 Obama, 56 Clinton
NM - 12 Obama, 13 Clinton
NY - 93 Obama, 135 Clinton
ND - 8 Obama, 5 Clinton
OK - 14 Obama, 24 Clinton
TN - 29 Obama, 33 Clinton
UT - 14 Obama, 9 Clinton

TOTALS = 775 Obama, 786 Clinton

Now you have said that there were 1681 delegates in play on Tuesday.  Ok.  One would imagine that MSNBC would update there website as soon as they figure out where those remaining 120 delegates fall.  Until then these are the #'s we have.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

The core Hillary! contigent could care less about alienating half the electorate. They blindly think that they can get all the women to vote for Hillary! to negate that effect. They don't realize how their negative anti-male attacks turn off not only Men, but also Conservative/Moderate Women.[/quote]

Can you provide us with a link to one of these "anti-male" attacks?  If not it really just sounds like you are pulling the "say something long enough and people will believe it" tactic.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

When asked about the plan she said she wouldn't take any options off the table.  The question was repeated about whether she, like Senator Edwards, would be willing to garnish wages.  She said she wouldn't take anything off the table.  That is how you get to "MIGHT be willing".

We can debate health insurance if you want, but you do realize that someone without health insurance ultimately has it paid for by the tax payers, don't you?  You also realize that you are currently paying for your own health insurance whether you like it or not (if you want to opt out then you need to talk to your employer and explain how you are saving them money by opting out and how you want that money to be added to your paycheck).

People with health insurance are more likely to seek preventative care which is vastly less expensive than critical care.  If everyone has health insurance then everyone is more likely to seek preventative care and the cost to the system and to the population as a whole goes down.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Do you honestly believe that serving in the Senate does not require management and leadership?  You're forgetting about Senate committees, the management of their staff, the coalition building which is required to be a Senator, and the general familiarity with the issues.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I repeat that Bill Clinton has said she was a key advisor.  I think Bill Clinton is more familiar with his administration than you.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Strong Leadership, Willingness to bring Change to the Government, I like Obama's health care plan much better than Hillary!'s. [/quote]

2 red herrings and healthcare.

All the remaining candidates are strong leaders.  They wouldn't have gotten this far if they were not.

Change for the sake of change is just change.  Not all change is good.  When Lenin seized power in Russia that was change.

What do you like about Obama's healthcare plan?  Go ahead and sing its praises.


THE WAR AND VOTING - Again, if Obama is opposed to the war then why did he vote against the Kerry bill?  Now if you want to talk about why Hillary voted for the war ... well, she did it for the same reason several other Dem Senators did.  She voted for it because the White House told her and others that Hussein had acquired said weapons and that we had definitive proof of it.  Yes, she was duped by the lie.  Most people in this country were duped by the lie.  

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ah abortion! That must be your key issue. Perhaps that's why you support Hillary! so much?

Can I ask you, are you female? [/quote]

I have a Y chromosome.  But if I didn't my opinion would be equally valid.  [sarcasm]Are you a red-headed, blue-eyed Orthodox Jew who smokes?[/sarcasm]

Abortion is one of many important issues which I believe a Super-Conservative Supreme Court would threaten.  They would also go after the minimum wage, environmental protections, free speech, etc.
Logged
Thomas Jackson
ghostmonkey
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 710


Political Matrix
E: 8.77, S: 8.79

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #146 on: February 07, 2008, 02:25:21 PM »
« Edited: September 12, 2008, 12:47:58 AM by WilliamWallace »

.......
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #147 on: February 07, 2008, 03:57:55 PM »

The current MSNBC site has it 838/834 for Obama, without the Super Delegates.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21660914

Clinton is still leading overall, with a lot of strong and delegate rich states out there.
Logged
Flying Dog
Jtfdem
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,404
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #148 on: February 07, 2008, 04:01:27 PM »

The winner of the elected delegates will be the nominee. No matter who the Super Delegates are supporting in the present. If Obama is in the lead with elected delegates after March 4th then expect Dean starting to pull strings in order to get Obama a influx of supers. He wants this thing wrapped up soon.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #149 on: February 07, 2008, 04:03:13 PM »

The winner of the elected delegates will be the nominee. No matter who the Super Delegates are supporting in the present. If Obama is in the lead with elected delegates after March 4th then expect Dean starting to pull strings in order to get Obama a influx of supers. He wants this thing wrapped up soon.

No, that will split the party.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.056 seconds with 14 queries.