Official North Carolina Democratic Primary Discussion Thread

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Hey J. J., remember how Obama was overpolling so much due to the Bradley effect?

I thought it would be lower; I was surprised that Zogby got it right.

Maybe you can quit dismissing every Zogby poll by just saying "It's Zogby." while arguing that ARG and uni polls have validity. (Not that I'm totally sold on Zogby yet, but still...)

Getting it right once is noteworthy.  Getting it wrong for 4 years is laughable.

Actually that's three recent ones he's nailed as opposed to the records of your oh so beloved ARG and uni polls.

[J. J.]

Let's see, I've said that one Univ polll, F and M is good in PA, that I wasn't too overjoyed with ARG, and that generally Zogby is crap.  Zogby got NC right, for once.

I've also said, for a few months, that MI/FL will be seated.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Let's see, I've said that one Univ polll, F and M is good in PA, that I wasn't too overjoyed with ARG, and that generally Zogby is crap.  Zogby got NC right, for once.

I've also said, for a few months, that MI/FL will be seated.

When I've called non-F and M uni polls crap you pretty much responded with "LOLz@Zack the Barak Hack", you don't dismiss every single ARG poll with just saying "It's ARG" and have even flat out said ARG is more valid than Zogby. And I also have thought FL/MI will get seated...once they can't make a difference, which is the case now.

[elcorazon]

This racial divide is absolutely absurd. Obama is winning 92% of the black vote. Imagine if Hillary won 92% of the white vote? There would be day and night segments on CNN and MSNBC about how racist North Carolina was..

Imagine that Hillary Clinton were the first serious white candidate to ever run for President. Imagine that you, as a fifty-year-old white man, grew up being called a "cracker" and refused jobs because of your skin color. Imagine that you suddenly felt that maybe there was some chance that such things wouldn't happen to other white people in the future if only you could get a white person elected President and show the black majority that white people weren't lazy and incompetent criminals.

Then it wouldn't be so racist, would it?

What a crock of sh**t. We'd hear the Obama campaign cry wolf if Hillary won 90% of the white vote.

actually, I'm pretty sure that Jesse Jackson got smashed among whites when he ran... not to mention that dems routinely win about 90%of the black vote in the general.  but in those cases they are voting for white candidates.  Honestly, I don't find blacks voting for obama to be racist at all.

[Josh/Devilman88]

This racial divide is absolutely absurd. Obama is winning 92% of the black vote. Imagine if Hillary won 92% of the white vote? There would be day and night segments on CNN and MSNBC about how racist North Carolina was..

Imagine that Hillary Clinton were the first serious white candidate to ever run for President. Imagine that you, as a fifty-year-old white man, grew up being called a "cracker" and refused jobs because of your skin color. Imagine that you suddenly felt that maybe there was some chance that such things wouldn't happen to other white people in the future if only you could get a white person elected President and show the black majority that white people weren't lazy and incompetent criminals.

Then it wouldn't be so racist, would it?

What a crock of sh**t. We'd hear the Obama campaign cry wolf if Hillary won 90% of the white vote.

actually, I'm pretty sure that Jesse Jackson got smashed among whites when he ran... not to mention that dems routinely win about 90%of the black vote in the general.  but in those cases they are voting for white candidates.  Honestly, I don't find blacks voting for obama to be racist at all.

It's not raist at all, like Verily said, they want to have a black president. Also I think Clinton needs to be worried, because you almost didn't get above 60% on the white voters. Also Obama won 17-24 age group 70-29, thats bad, and Obama won the 17-60 age group by 60%.

[Franzl]

He's basically out of ideas. (and a bit delusional)

It was a bad night for him, having blindly supported Survey USA's numbers without listening to any opposition or criticisms from other posters about the numbers, while calling everyone else a hack when he himself is most clearly one of the most hackish on this forum.

[J. J.]

Let's see, I've said that one Univ polll, F and M is good in PA, that I wasn't too overjoyed with ARG, and that generally Zogby is crap.  Zogby got NC right, for once.

I've also said, for a few months, that MI/FL will be seated.

When I've called non-F and M uni polls crap you pretty much responded with "LOLz@Zack the Barak Hack", you don't dismiss every single ARG poll with just saying "It's ARG" and have even flat out said ARG is more valid than Zogby. And I also have thought FL/MI will get seated...once they can't make a difference, which is the case now.

One way or another, they would be seated.  If they were not, whomever was nominated would be seen a illegitimate (which is why I really wanted Dean to step in and have a revote).

The only really good univ poll that I've said was F and M (the old Millersville Univ poll).  I believe I've said that i wasn't overjoyed with ARG.

And yes, Obama should have ended it a while ago.  He finally met the test by holding Hillary over the April 22- May 5 period.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Let's see, I've said that one Univ polll, F and M is good in PA, that I wasn't too overjoyed with ARG, and that generally Zogby is crap.  Zogby got NC right, for once.

I've also said, for a few months, that MI/FL will be seated.

When I've called non-F and M uni polls crap you pretty much responded with "LOLz@Zack the Barak Hack", you don't dismiss every single ARG poll with just saying "It's ARG" and have even flat out said ARG is more valid than Zogby. And I also have thought FL/MI will get seated...once they can't make a difference, which is the case now.

One way or another, they would be seated.  If they were not, whomever was nominated would be seen a illegitimate (which is why I really wanted Dean to step in and have a revote).

Why do you care? It's not your party, so why does it matter to you? Also not like Dean could force a revote (and he really wanted one), but it's moot at this point. And no one in the party other than Hillary and the state parties seemed to care that much, rendering the "illegitimacy" issue moot, Obama would no doubt rather have those states disenfranchised than lose the nomination, and I have no problem with that.

The only really good univ poll that I've said was F and M (the old Millersville Univ poll).

You defended an obviously crap Marist U one that had McCain winning New York.

I believe I've said that i wasn't overjoyed with ARG./quote]

Yes, and I'm not overjoyed with Zogby. However they are more accurate than ARG. Yet you dismiss every single Zogby poll just by saying "It's Zogby" implying that Zogby is 100% worthless trash yet don't apply the same standard to ARG, implying they may not be that good but aren't 100% worthless. In fact when I proposed that ARG polls be banned from the database your counter-argument was "It's not Zogby." implying ARG is somehow better.

BTW if you note I actually underestimated Obama here (overwhelmingly in NC-12), so we can put an end to the "Zack the Barak Hack" nonsense.

[J. J.]

Let's see, I've said that one Univ polll, F and M is good in PA, that I wasn't too overjoyed with ARG, and that generally Zogby is crap.  Zogby got NC right, for once.

I've also said, for a few months, that MI/FL will be seated.

When I've called non-F and M uni polls crap you pretty much responded with "LOLz@Zack the Barak Hack", you don't dismiss every single ARG poll with just saying "It's ARG" and have even flat out said ARG is more valid than Zogby. And I also have thought FL/MI will get seated...once they can't make a difference, which is the case now.

One way or another, they would be seated.  If they were not, whomever was nominated would be seen a illegitimate (which is why I really wanted Dean to step in and have a revote).

Why do you care? It's not your party, so why does it matter to you? Also not like Dean could force a revote (and he really wanted one), but it's moot at this point. And no one in the party other than Hillary and the state parties seemed to care that much, rendering the "illegitimacy" issue moot, Obama would no doubt rather have those states disenfranchised than lose the nomination, and I have no problem with that.

I do have an interest, just simply that I don't wish to see either party nominee as being illegitimate.  The voters there do care.  I wouldn't want PA's Democratic delegates disenfranchised, for that matter.

I'll note that favor voter disenfranchisement for the future.

You defended an obviously crap Marist U one that had McCain winning New York.

I cited it, not defended it; I think most state polls of the general are way too early.

Yes, and I'm not overjoyed with Zogby. However they are more accurate than ARG. Yet you dismiss every single Zogby poll just by saying "It's Zogby" implying that Zogby is 100% worthless trash yet don't apply the same standard to ARG, implying they may not be that good but aren't 100% worthless. In fact when I proposed that ARG polls be banned from the database your counter-argument was "It's not Zogby." implying ARG is somehow better.

I'm implying that Zogby usually gets it very wrong and has since 2004 at least.  I imply nothing about ARG, except I'm not really enthusiastic about it.  I've stated that I trust Rasmussen and Mason-Dixon the most.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ah, you greatly overestimated Obama's vote in PA, which kinda runs counter to that.  And there your Pastor Wright's FF to HP switch.  L'il Zach the Barack Hack is well deserved (though you actually didn't criticize me for calling him very "articulate," for which I will give you credit).

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Let's see, I've said that one Univ polll, F and M is good in PA, that I wasn't too overjoyed with ARG, and that generally Zogby is crap.  Zogby got NC right, for once.

I've also said, for a few months, that MI/FL will be seated.

When I've called non-F and M uni polls crap you pretty much responded with "LOLz@Zack the Barak Hack", you don't dismiss every single ARG poll with just saying "It's ARG" and have even flat out said ARG is more valid than Zogby. And I also have thought FL/MI will get seated...once they can't make a difference, which is the case now.

One way or another, they would be seated.  If they were not, whomever was nominated would be seen a illegitimate (which is why I really wanted Dean to step in and have a revote).

Why do you care? It's not your party, so why does it matter to you? Also not like Dean could force a revote (and he really wanted one), but it's moot at this point. And no one in the party other than Hillary and the state parties seemed to care that much, rendering the "illegitimacy" issue moot, Obama would no doubt rather have those states disenfranchised than lose the nomination, and I have no problem with that.

I do have an interest, just simply that I don't wish to see either party nominee as being illegitimate.  The voters there do care.  I wouldn't want PA's Democratic delegates disenfranchised, for that matter.

And no Democrat cares what you thinks, nor should they. Just as no Republican should care what I think about their retarded winner take all contests or complete jokes in Wyoming, Montana and West Virginia.

I cited it, not defended it; I think most state polls of the general are way too early.

If it's crap, why cite it?

I'm implying that Zogby usually gets it very wrong and has since 2004 at least.  I imply nothing about ARG, except I'm not really enthusiastic about it.  I've stated that I trust Rasmussen and Mason-Dixon the most.

Zogby has certainly been better than ARG lately. You keep implying Zogby is somehow worse and that it's polls are 100% worthless trash like ARG is more like only 90% trash. Hence your citing of ARG in your utterly retarded "Wisconsin tightening" argument that not a single person has backed you up on.

Ah, you greatly overestimated Obama's vote in PA, which kinda runs counter to that.

3 points = greatly overestimated? From someone who was double digits off here? Plus my delegate numbers in PA were closer than your's. You have underestimated Obama greatly in every single contest. Though it's quite telling when even the forum's most extreme Hillary hack in you has admitted she is finished.