[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

besson admitting that the Dems are in trouble is almost as revelatory a change for him as admitting to belief in the Lord God of Israel.

They are in trouble, but so are the Republicans.

We will have to wait to see how things will shake out...

[Chongo]

Why Hillary is still eating Obama's dust
NYT: OBAMA COULD DO 'JUST AS WELL' AS CLINTON IN BIG STATES IF NOMINEE...

[Eug]

Polls

Clinton and Obama are now dead even at 47 percent among likely Democrats, according the newly released numbers. That number remains unchanged from a tracking poll released Saturday and represents a 5-point gain for Clinton since her Pennsylvania win.

Meanwhile, a Newsweek poll released Saturday also shows gains for Clinton, but finds the New York senator continuing to trail Obama. In that poll, Obama holds a 7 point lead over Clinton. That margin is more than half of the 19 point lead Obama held in a similar Newsweek poll taken shorlty before the Pennsylvania primary.

[besson3c]

Eug: the polls show swings after each victory in a state, it is not surprising to see a slight Clinton surge after PA. I wish the electorate weren't as dumb as to be influenced by the bandwagon effect (no matter who benefits from it), but...

Most predictions indicate that Obama will gain back everything he lost from PA in NC, and that Indiana will be very close either way leaving no meaningful impact on the delegate count. As it stands now, even including Florida and Michigan, Clinton comes up short in total delegates, and it is unlikely that the Supers will swing in her favor at the margin required for her to win.

Really, the polls are pretty much useless at this point if we are using delegate counts and popular vote as the sole means of choosing a victor (as we should). Even though I think the electorate as a whole is as dumb as a rock, I still believe that as long as we are saying that we are a Democracy that the delegate totals should be what is used to determine the nominee. As many of you may already know, the popular vote totals are meaningless for a number of reasons:

1) Many caucus states did not release popular vote totals

2) States differ in whether their primaries or caucuses are open, closed, and whether they invite independents. There have been examples of states that carry far more electoral weight turned out fewer voters due to being a closed primary

3) Months ago the Clinton camp was saying "it's all about the delegates", but that has changed now. Why should the rules change part way into the process? The same can be said for Michigan and Florida. Their state leadership should be blamed, not the DNC, not the political candidates (who agreed upon these very rules prior to the election). The irony of this is that the primary reason for pushing up their primaries (money) totally backfired. If they were to have held their primaries now, at a time when historically the race is usually called, they would be bringing in beaucoup advertising revenues into their respective states.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Eug: the polls show swings after each victory in a state, it is not surprising to see a slight Clinton surge after PA.

Uh, yeah, which is why I posted it. Some may have believed otherwise.

I wish the electorate weren't as dumb as to be influenced by the bandwagon effect (no matter who benefits from it), but...

The bandwagon effect is one of the reasons Obama did so well. It works both ways.

As it stands now, even including Florida and Michigan, Clinton comes up short in total delegates, and it is unlikely that the Supers will swing in her favor at the margin required for her to win.

No argument there... unless more of these "revelations" like Rev. Wright (again) starting showing up.

[BRussell]

It's totally irrelevant. Obama has won. It's over. The only thing that can happen is that Clinton can play the Mike Huckabee role for a while longer. I don't understand why the media keeps talking about who has to win this or that state - well, yes I do, they want something to talk about. But back in the real world, it's over, and has been for some time.

[Big Mac]

It's interesting you think that, BRussel. It looks a little different here in America. There's a race and a divided Democratic party. We'll be at the convention soon - it's not over by a long shot, and I am loving every second of it. Either way both candidates are unelectable, but they don't know that and are happily taking each other down. It's a really wonderful thing.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Eug 

The bandwagon effect is one of the reasons Obama did so well. It works both ways.

True.

No argument there... unless more of these "revelations" like Rev. Wright (again) starting showing up.

I kind of hope that he does and gets people actually talking about race in a meaningful way, building on what Obama started with his race speech in Philly. It is nothing short of disgusting how the media/political opponents of Obama have turned Wright into a fanatical, angry, anti-American, anti-white person cult-like figure. I'm glad that Obama didn't denounce him, because there was nothing to denounce.

It is *extremely* difficult to approach issues of race in ways that don't involve in mud slinging and purely emotional response, and Wright is to be commended for his attempts. To reduce the complexities of what he is saying (and they are indeed full of nuance and qualifications that aren't heard in the 10 second soundbytes) into these soundbytes is disgusting.

The very fact that there are so many knee jerk reactions about Wright in and of itself is excellent rationale behind why we as a nation do need to start talking about these issues in productive ways. It is wrong to tear somebody like Wright down for trying, it is time we stopped pretending that this issue doesn't exist.

Like I said before, Americans are really good at celebrating what is good about America, but are quick to turn a blind eye to what is not good.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

It's interesting you think that, BRussel. It looks a little different here in America. There's a race and a divided Democratic party. We'll be at the convention soon - it's not over by a long shot, and I am loving every second of it. Either way both candidates are unelectable, but they don't know that and are happily taking each other down. It's a really wonderful thing.

My pet project: to get people like you to start making points with some substance, rather than pure emotion. We are all well aware that you dislike both candidates and want McCain to win, but I've yet to hear a rational and reasoned argument why this is so.

This is precisely what makes Colbert's shtick so brilliant...

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

It's interesting you think that, BRussel. It looks a little different here in America. There's a race and a divided Democratic party. We'll be at the convention soon - it's not over by a long shot, and I am loving every second of it. Either way both candidates are unelectable, but they don't know that and are happily taking each other down. It's a really wonderful thing.

It's the result of "Identity Politics" You don't vote for Obama, you're a racist. You don't vote for Hillary, you're a misogynist..

Identity Politics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Identity politics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

The very fact that there are so many knee jerk reactions about Wright in and of itself is excellent rationale behind why we as a nation do need to start talking about these issues in productive ways. It is wrong to tear somebody like Wright down for trying, it is time we stopped pretending that this issue doesn't exist.

What to you look like knee jerk reactions look like something else to many others. To others it looks like Obama sat around for 20 years while a virulently hateful man preached to him and guided him as an "advisor." Are you entirely sure you're capable of evaluating the subject with anything resembling objectivity?

Like I said before, Americans are really good at celebrating what is good about America, but are quick to turn a blind eye to what is not good.

I agree with that to an extent. Certainly the media likes to dwell on negative things. People don't like to hear negativity, but when the country has been confronted with major challenges in the past it has risen to meet them.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

What to you look like knee jerk reactions look like something else to many others. To others it looks like Obama sat around for 20 years while a virulently hateful man preached to him. Are you entirely sure you're capable of evaluating the subject with anything resembling objectivity?

Once again, he we are trying to deconstruct the characters of those involved rather than discussing what is actually being said.

Since an actual substatative debate seems like a pipe dream for the time being, I'll humor you... Would you be able to put together an argument that states what is hateful about Wright's sermons? Have you listened to more than just the 10 second clips?

I agree with that to an extent. Certainly the media likes to dwell on negative things. People don't like to hear negativity, but when the country has been confronted with major challenges in the past it has risen to meet them.

And would you say that we have addressed the differences in cultural chasms that occur across racial boundaries?

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

We are all well aware that you dislike both candidates and want McCain to win, but I've yet to hear a rational and reasoned argument why this is so.

Wait, you don't know why I want McCain to win over your candidates? I posted a thread on it before McCain clinched the nomination.

http://forums.macnn.com/95/political...ain+nomination

The big problem is, besson, you claim everyone you disagree with provides nothing substantive. Your argument is fallacious.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Wait, you don't know why I want McCain to win over your candidates? I posted a thread on it before McCain clinched the nomination.

http://forums.macnn.com/95/political...ain+nomination

The big problem is, besson, you claim everyone you disagree with provides nothing substantive. Your argument is fallacious.

I didn't remember this thread, I'll go over it and read it. Should I respond in here?

My grievances with your posting has nothing to do about whether or not I agree with you, it's based on sheer boredom of the repetition of you sharing your feelings, of which there is really no productive way to respond to.

I feel the exact same way when I read the idiotic comments on the CNN political ticker site, stuff like "Hillary is a liar OBAMA 08!!" (substitute McCain 08 in there too). There is absolutely nothing there we can sink our teeth into, and all this sort of posting does is potentially agitate, divide, and just turn up the volume on a message that is already cranked up nearly to its limits thanks to the failings of the mass media to actually report on substantive issues.

I would much rather us discuss McCain's economic policies or something than this sort of thing - even if I disagree with you in a deeply personal, enormously strong manner.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

It's interesting you think that, BRussel. It looks a little different here in America. There's a race and a divided Democratic party. We'll be at the convention soon - it's not over by a long shot, and I am loving every second of it. Either way both candidates are unelectable, but they don't know that and are happily taking each other down. It's a really wonderful thing.

It looks different only if you naively listen to the media, who of course want a race where none exists. I love it when they say "it's so important for X to win Indiana." Uh, no it's not important. The race is over. Obama won.

But I'm not sure why it's a wonderful thing to have one party (in your [wrong] view) being unelectable and taking each other down...

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

They are in trouble, but so are the Republicans.

Damned right the Republicans are in trouble, they nominated a moderate Democrat, for God's sake. What's even worse, most have gotten comfortable with the idea.

Oh well, President McCain will definitely have no issues reaching across the aisle to make deals, he's been doing it since he was elected to congress.

But I'm not sure why it's a wonderful thing to have one party (in your [wrong] view) being unelectable and taking each other down...

As if you wouldn't be saying the same thing if the shoe were on a Republican's foot.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

But I'm not sure why it's a wonderful thing to have one party (in your [wrong] view) being unelectable and taking each other down...

You don't? Aren't political parties in general a bad thing, a (currently) necessary evil?