Super Tuesday

13468912

  Comments


  • or Missouri

  • motown67motown67 4,513 Posts
    anytime he damned well pleased

    U.S. Attacks Baghdad for Four Days During Ramadan

    December 16-19, 1998

    Read up on your read ups...

    http://www.ccmep.org/usbombingwatch/1998.htm#ramadan

    Do you realize that after those raids Saddam finally gave up any hope of maintaing his WMD program and effectively ended it????

  • motown67motown67 4,513 Posts
    Early exit polls show Clinton winning California. That's it for Obama. He'll continue his campaign until the Democ. Convention, but he won't have the delegates to win.

    He won't? Isn't he only 10% behind Clinton?

    He's still going to be behind in delegates. He's gotta win CA not come in a close second.

  • or Missouri

    Unfortunately, that one gets split. It's still a momentum-builder, though.

  • Early exit polls show Clinton winning California. That's it for Obama. He'll continue his campaign until the Democ. Convention, but he won't have the delegates to win.

    He won't? Isn't he only 10% behind Clinton?

    He's still going to be behind in delegates. He's gotta win CA not come in a close second.

    I think this is an overstatement.

    Surely Obama has to make a showing in CA, but this "superdelegates" business is not set in stone, and Obama is cleaning up between the two coasts. I wouldn't trust the winner of MA, NY, and CA to carry the country.

    But that's just me.

  • Early exit polls show Clinton winning California. That's it for Obama. He'll continue his campaign until the Democ. Convention, but he won't have the delegates to win.

    He won't? Isn't he only 10% behind Clinton?

    He's still going to be behind in delegates. He's gotta win CA not come in a close second.

    I think this is an overstatement.

    Surely Obama has to make a showing in CA, but this "superdelegates" business is not set in stone, and Obama is cleaning up between the two coasts. I wouldn't trust the winner of MA, NY, and CA to carry the country.

    But that's just me.

    Exactly. Where have the Democrats gotten throttled in recent elections?

  • Early exit polls show Clinton winning California. That's it for Obama. He'll continue his campaign until the Democ. Convention, but he won't have the delegates to win.

    He won't? Isn't he only 10% behind Clinton?

    He's still going to be behind in delegates. He's gotta win CA not come in a close second.

    If he were to come in close second in CA (which at this point is not looking the case) then he would nearly split the CA bounty of delegates with Clinton.

    BTW, I was just looking at the vote breakdown for CA thus far and John Edwards has 10 percent of the vote. WTF? Does this mean these early results are mostly absentee ballots that may have been sent in before he dropped out?

  • motown67motown67 4,513 Posts
    Early exit polls show Clinton winning California. That's it for Obama. He'll continue his campaign until the Democ. Convention, but he won't have the delegates to win.

    He won't? Isn't he only 10% behind Clinton?

    He's still going to be behind in delegates. He's gotta win CA not come in a close second.

    I think this is an overstatement.

    Surely Obama has to make a showing in CA, but this "superdelegates" business is not set in stone, and Obama is cleaning up between the two coasts. I wouldn't trust the winner of MA, NY, and CA to carry the country.

    But that's just me.

    The superdelegates will go for the winner and if Hillary has the most delegates going into the convention ......

  • mannybolonemannybolone Los Angeles, CA 15,025 Posts
    Does this mean these early results are mostly absentee ballots that may have been sent in before he dropped out?

    Could be, certainly.

  • CNN projects CA is carried by Clinton.

  • jleejlee 1,539 Posts
    the democratic candidate will definitely not be decided tonight. even with Hillary winning Ca (which at 15% seems pretty pro-active for organizations to call it so soon).

    the next 2 weeks bode well for Obama (LA, DC, VA, MD) while OH and TX should fall to Hillary.

    IMO, delegates won't be Obama's demise, it will be a lull in momentum and a push by the Republican party to establish Hillary as the Dem candidate prior to the democratic party electing its own. Republicans know Hillary all too well, so i suspect its in their best interest to run against her (i.e "better to stick with the devil you do know than the devil you don't")


    Huge night for Huckabee. I am willing to put money on a McCain/Huckabee ticket right now.

    Romney is done by valentines day.

  • These results are burning my ass to say the least. Obama was supposed to be neck and neck with Clinton but he's not even at 33 percent!?!

  • damn.

  • mannybolonemannybolone Los Angeles, CA 15,025 Posts
    These results are burning my ass to say the least. Obama was supposed to be neck and neck with Clinton but he's not even at 33 percent!?!

    Yeah - a lot of the pollsters are going to wonder wtf happened.

    I mean, Obama didn't get beat...he got TROUNCED in CA.

  • fuck.

  • These results are burning my ass to say the least. Obama was supposed to be neck and neck with Clinton but he's not even at 33 percent!?!

    Yeah - a lot of the pollsters are going to wonder wtf happened.

    I mean, Obama didn't get beat...he got TROUNCED in CA.

    Still hoping his numbers inch up throughout the night (polls are still open at some places here) but yeah, pretty disappointing.

  • I wouldn't speak so soon about Obama getting "trounced" in California. I think the final results will be a bit closer.

    Let's not forget that Obama is still looking to win the majority of the states up today.

  • Cali done fucked up the money.

    Oh well, can't you see Bubbah Clinton strolling the White House lawn, stoned, in a robe, blowin' his sax?

  • mannybolonemannybolone Los Angeles, CA 15,025 Posts
    I wouldn't speak so soon about Obama getting "trounced" in California. I think the final results will be a bit closer.

    Let's not forget that Obama is still looking to win the majority of the states up today.

    Oh, I'm not saying Obama is dead in the water. But dude, Clinton has a 21 point lead on Obama. Sure, that's with less than 20% precincts reporting but it's hard to imagine that Clinton won't maintain a double-digit win over Obama by morning. Absentees probably hurt him on this too.

  • jleejlee 1,539 Posts
    These results are burning my ass to say the least. Obama was supposed to be neck and neck with Clinton but he's not even at 33 percent!?!

    Yeah - a lot of the pollsters are going to wonder wtf happened.

    I mean, Obama didn't get beat...he got TROUNCED in CA.


    i fear that this is going to lend itself to the media inducing more race baiting conflicts between Hispanics & Blacks with respect to the latino vote. i don't dismiss it, but if the media harps on it, that too will be a bad look for the democratic party as a whole.

    i would rather hear from the media that Obama got beat for many reasons in CA (which is most likely the case), not just a Latino vs Black issue.

  • mannybolonemannybolone Los Angeles, CA 15,025 Posts
    These results are burning my ass to say the least. Obama was supposed to be neck and neck with Clinton but he's not even at 33 percent!?!

    Yeah - a lot of the pollsters are going to wonder wtf happened.

    I mean, Obama didn't get beat...he got TROUNCED in CA.


    i fear that this is going to lend itself to the media inducing more race baiting conflicts between Hispanics & Blacks with respect to the latino vote. i don't dismiss it, but if the media harps on it, that too will be a bad look for the democratic party as a whole.

    i would rather hear from the media that Obama got beat for many reasons in CA (which is most likely the case), not just a Latino vs Black issue.

    I feel you. I don't want to overplay the race card but it's hard not to play it, under the circumstances.

  • another bad poll from zogby

    very disappointing

  • I feel you. I don't want to overplay the race card but it's hard not to play it, under the circumstances.
    they had a latino spokesperson on NPR recently explaining why Clinton was so favored
    he denied the racial issue but had no more explanation than hispanics fondly remember when Bill was president. seems weak.

  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,517 Posts
    as vulgar as it is, it does reveal the possibility that sexism superscedes racial bias in a presidential candidate? dont know if i used the term supercede correctly but you know what i mean. anyhow i see a black/female/any other ethnicity as prime minister here in canada before america ever gets close to the same with their president, you guys(i mean your country as a whole) did kinda elect bush 2 terms in a row?!?!

    Ah, we already had a female PM. Not that she lasted long. But still...

    I totally forgot about that! but there's the proof. Canada for president!

    I can't think of a good female leader in world history.

    (THAT'S SEXIST!)

    seriously, someone help me out; I am stating objective fact: I can't think of one right now.

    Golda Meir not to mention Esther and Sheba and many others.


  • LaserWolfLaserWolf Portland Oregon 11,517 Posts
    I feel you. I don't want to overplay the race card but it's hard not to play it, under the circumstances.
    they had a latino spokesperson on NPR recently explaining why Clinton was so favored

    he denied the racial issue but had no more explanation than hispanics fondly remember when Bill was president. seems weak.

    There are lots of good reasons to support Clinton (just ask KVH). You don't have to be racist to support Clinton. I think the bulk of her support comes from name recognition, better organizing inside the Latino community and more endorsements from Latino leaders. I think when we see the break down of Latino voters in New Mexico and Arizona it will be a lot closer.

  • mannybolonemannybolone Los Angeles, CA 15,025 Posts
    I feel you. I don't want to overplay the race card but it's hard not to play it, under the circumstances.
    they had a latino spokesperson on NPR recently explaining why Clinton was so favored

    he denied the racial issue but had no more explanation than hispanics fondly remember when Bill was president. seems weak.

    There are lots of good reasons to support Clinton (just ask KVH). You don't have to be racist to support Clinton. I think the bulk of her support comes from name recognition, better organizing inside the Latino community and more endorsements from Latino leaders. I think when we see the break down of Latino voters in New Mexico and Arizona it will be a lot closer.

    Perhaps. Explain the 3/4 Asian vote going Clinton's way though.

  • deejdeej 5,125 Posts
    ugh california wtf.

    i think for the good of soulstrut we should ban all CA residents until this thing blows over.

  • ugh california wtf.

    armchair liberals and suburban sprawl.

    it is what it is.

  • mannybolonemannybolone Los Angeles, CA 15,025 Posts
    ugh california wtf.

    armchair liberals and suburban sprawl.

    it is what it is.



  • jinx74jinx74 2,287 Posts
    how did contra costa cty run out of ballots? just saw the news report that said they handed out sheets of paper to write in their vote.
Sign In or Register to comment.