It is NOT one state, it is WVA and almost the entire South…
hey what happens to edwards delegates? and the delegates that other dropouts received? also what happens if you have the most deletes in you party but mot the 50% majority?
Those delegates are “free to move about the convention” when the DNC or RNC rolls around.
Schneider: Democrats split by education and age
Posted: 10:11 PM ET(CNN) — Beyond race and gender, national exit polls tonight are showing Democrats a varying divisions based on education and age. The more educated the voter, the more likely he or she is an Obama supporter.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/
I think that says a lot about hillary. she is winning the votes by people who don’t really know that much and are just voting because there like I remember when Bill was prez. and everything was good. ( the old people) It seems obama is winning most of the states but hillary is getting the two big ones. He lost New York and is going to lose California. so i’m not sure who’ll come out on top. I think if obama can get 40% of clifornia he’ll have the most delegates today. i just glanced over the results so my predictions are probablly wrong.
how does edwards have votes? stupid callifornian voting for a dropout. http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#CA
From what I see, it’s about 45% Romney, 50% McCain 5% Huchabee. I don’t think he’s out yet. A lot of those states are ratio states (as opposed to all or nothing.)
Anyway, rather surprised to see Switch rooting for another Bush. I thought you didn’t like Bush?
how does edwards have votes? stupid callifornian voting for a dropout. http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#CA
Absentee ballots sent in months ago, probably.
It is not “rooting for”… it is rooting AGAINST.
Romney is a serious problem for me, and I am glad to see that his campaign is now effectively over with his loss in California (a state he poured everything into winning)
As for Edwards votes… his name was still on the ballot, and I can see folks wanting another option besides Obama and Hillary…
@Cmdr:
AFAIK she’s a socialist/communist. (Communist in the mold of China and the Soviet Union; socialist in the mold of the actual definition.)
Ugh, now is a communist! :-P I don’t think she want make the revolution or ban the private property. She is capitalist. As much, she could be socialdemocrat, but she is not near of any socialdemocrat european party in ideology. She is not Shroeder (spelling?), Segolene Royale or Zapatero and sure she is not Chavez, Morales or Jiang Zemin (spelling again?)
I think no one who has socialist or communist ideology can win the USA presidential election. If Rodman were socialist, Obama would win the primaries with no work (of course, if Obama would be socialist too, Mc Cain would have a walk in the park).
@Guerrilla:
@M36:
We have socialists such as Clinton
Wait… Hillary Clinton… ? Socialist? :-o
She definitely fits the description… Biggest example in my mind at the time: Wasn’t she the one that wanted to instigate a State Run Health Care Program back when her husband was in the White House?
Support for social programs does not a socialist make.
@Cmdr:
AFAIK she’s a socialist/communist. (Communist in the mold of China and the Soviet Union; socialist in the mold of the actual definition.) She wants to seize the pharmaceutical companies and the medical providers and force them to be equitable to everyone (which will result in Americans going to SE Asia and Scandinavia to get medical treatment instead of America accepting Canadians, Europeans, etc here for medical treatment. A faster devaluation
You obviously don’t understand the term or application of socialism or communism. But we can claim Bush and his ilk Nazis and call it even, if you want.
BTW, something MUST be done about our medical sector. Big Pharma has way too much influence in lobbying, kills thousands each year without adequate oversight, and is trying to monopolize YOUR health. Do you want that?
@Cmdr:
That may be true, but McCain is CLAIMING to be Reagan and his RECORD is very close to Bush, only more radical. More radical in support of the military, and more radical in support of democrat style legislation.
The only person I’ve seen claim that they are the new Reagan is Romney. McCain hasn’t done so.
@M36:
CNN proved their incompetence beyond a reasonable doubt when they announced Al Gore as the winner of Florida. You can’t really trust that information.
I don’t think it was incompetence. It was jumping the gun. You do know how close that election was, right?
Support for social programs does not a socialist make.
Totally agree. A good and simple explanation. :-)
Support for social programs does not a socialist make.
Totally agree. A good and simple explanation. :-)
Imagine Yoda saying it and it makes it even better. :mrgreen:
No it doesn’t necessarily, but I was using that as a primary example, not the only one… Nor was I saying that she is the “extreme” form of socialism.
GG
When the girl says that she wants to TAKE the hospitals and TAKE the pharmaceutical companies and RUN them under the control of the STATE, I think she fits the definition of socialist.
I’m sorry if that causes you to be disillusioned, but remember, to be disillusioned you would first have to be illusioned.
And it’s a shame Romney’s chances are slim now. He can still win, but it’s not highly likely. That means we will have two democrats running for President in November. The “compassionate conservative” democrat John McCain, in the same mold as President Bush; and Hillary Clinton, in the same mold as Joseph Stalin.
Which ever you want. Not saying Bush or Stalin is “bad” or “good.” Just saying that’s how the mainstream conservatives view these two based on their speeches and votes in recent history. (Before 2000 is NOT recent.)
Anyway, I’ll keep an eye on Paul. He might still run 3rd party. Only reason he wouldn’t have quit before now, IMHO.
And no, I am NOT going to change my mind. I will NOT vote for McCain. You can call that a half-vote for the Democrats if you want too. And I’m sure I’m not alone, considering all the phone calls to all the different radio shows and all the letters to all the editors, etc of people like me saying basically the same thing.
There’s a reason why McCain’s only getting votes from republicans who call themselves liberals. It’s because conservatives do not want him to be the standard bearer for the party. We’d rather hope we get enough senators and congressmen in November to stop Hillary.
indeed, ron paul was set to run as a 3rd party no matter who the major parties were going to nominate.
thats why he has gotten so much time on youtube and other internet sites. someones trying to let him get a lot of attention b/c democrats have figured out the only way to beat a republican is to have a spoiler. they learned from ross perot.
and again, my God, McCain is not ONLY getting votes from people who call themselves liberal. Jesus Christ, you’re simply amazing……you just say whatever you want, it doesnt even have to be close to true.
oh and trust me, you can cry like ann colter and rush and hannity all you want, but when hillary gets nominated, everyones coming out of the woodwork to vote against her. this is a great year for republicans. they will finally show the talk radio ilk that they dont matter once and for all and that will be final.
McCain/Huckabee all the way son.
Balung,
ALL, and I mean ALL the polls show that the people who say they voted for McCain also say they view themselves as liberals. Yes, he’s got 17% of his votes from people who identify themselves as conservatives. 17%<83% of those who say they are moderates or liberals.
Just face it. His support comes from the people who normally vote Democrat anyway so he has no chance in November. Unless Hillary or Obama have a Howard Dean moment, I’ll bet you dimes to dollars that McCain loses in November. Quite possibly with at least an 8 point spread, but more likely with a 20 to 30 point spread.
And Ron Paul would only be a spoiler if the Republicans nominated a conservative. They don’t appear to be doing so. So Ron Paul is a rallying point for Conservatives who have no conservative candidate to chose from the two major parties and thus, this is THE year for Paul. I don’t think he’ll win in November. But if it’s Hillary, McCain and Paul, I will make my prediction: 60% Hillary (a full 12-15% more then her Husband got in a 3 way game); 20% McCain, 20% Paul with 10% of the Republicans voting for Hillary.
This nation is pretty much 50/50 between Republicans and Democrats. Has been since the polarization of the Clinton years. Any candidate that can drive party members AWAY from the party is going to lose. None of the candidates are strong enough to pull party members TOO them.
To many republicans, McCain is as negative as Hillary Clinton. Clinton will be more socialist then McCain, but we can at least blame the Democrats in 2010 for all of her messes if she’s in office. If McCain is in office, we’ll have to suffer under a man who only passes and votes for liberal legislation AND the consequences of the passage of said legislation. The greater HARM to the Republican party is to vote McCain. The greatest GOOD to the Republican Party is to vote 3rd party. The lesser HARM to the Republican party is to vote Clinton or Obama (think it’s gunna be Clinton though.)
this is a great year for republicans. they will finally show the talk radio ilk that they dont matter once and for all and that will be final.
unless i missed something, but talk radio is conservative in most casses. if what your saying is true, then there would be less listeners to talk radio then there are. the impresion i get from what your saying is that talk radio is not the voice of conservatives. if thats the case, then who listens? if it’s liberals, then why are there so few liberal talk shows on the radio, and those that are (Air Amarica) went under or are having more trouble then those that call them selfs conservative.
i don’t mind your passion for McCain, even if i think it is miss placed. but you should pay attention to what your saying more. if conservative radio is the one out of step, why has there been more listeners to it in the last years then there were before or are on liberal radio?
show me those polls.
and his backing isnt from democrats. only republicans could vote in the republican primary on super tuesday and McCain won that. here in the mid-west plains states, we are super conservative and people like McCain. they like a maverick. he is a strong leader, not a follower.
thats just silly. let hillary make all this mess, but when socialist policies come into being, they can never be taken away. its just impossible. Can you really think people can take away welfare, medicaid, social security, on and on and on. once they get in, they never go away. why would you do that. go cry in a corner and let the big boys handle the country.
and pervav, yes talk radio is conservative, but it doesnt mean you have to follow everything a few of them say. other talk radio guys are fine with McCain, just the loudmouths that make republicans look bad to the rest of the country dont like McCain. thats fine, we shall show them they are irrelevant.
and liberal radio isnt tough to beat when their listening group is about 100 people, conservative radio will always beat liberal radio. b/c they have the news, tv shows, movies, pop culture, etc.
I already linked the ones to Florida, complete with the questions and I retyped it into the post for those who were too lazy to click the link, Balung.
Basically, Romney pulled more people who thought they were conservative, McCain pulled almost exclusively those who thought they were liberal (the rest were moderates, he got 2% of those who thought they were conservative.)
It might be in the Romney thread. But I suggest going through and finding it instead of claiming I didn’t post it.
k
