Official NH Primary Results Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Father_Brain said:
Are you seriously implying that both parties are equally to blame for the current situation in Washington?
No; by looking at this thread obviously the far-left Dems are more to blame.
 
Lou Dobbs can fuck himself.
 
StoOgE said:
obama cant compete on super tuesday. he needed a 4 state k.o. beforehand.

Yep. I laid it out earlier. He was a fairly sizable underdog overall before the primaries started and he needed a fuckton of momentum to change that in huge states like NY, Cali and NJ. I thought he got it after Iowa. I called it wrong. Obama will probably still win SC, but I have very little doubt she mops up on Super Tuesday.

Ah well, I may like Barack 100000x more as a person, but my biggest issue is national healthcare, and I like her plan a little better than Obama's. Still majorly disappointed, though, because she's gonna lose to WHOMEVER the Republicans throw up there.
 
TheKingsCrown said:
This is not fucking true and you know it. The people in the Republican camp are riddled with crazies. And Hillary may be more of the same Clinton-era-ness that was annoying and ridiculous, but at least she isn't fucking crazy. She doesn't want to quarantine AIDS patients, or stay at war in a country just for the sake of it, rather than for creating stability, or stop large groups of people from getting equal rights under the law. And most importantly she is a woman. At the end of the day, she can jiggle her breasts and repair possibly the most damage that has been done to our image since the country was created.

If you want radical change you have to wait until the country is stable enough to survive it. This country is in no way stable. Its currency is going down the shitter and its economy might go with it, its political pull is approaching zero in the world, and its debt is absolutely ridiculous. Our lives are getting harder. Ridiculously fucking rapid change makes things harder, especially for the unprotected. Its a vicious product of capitalism especially. So how about we stabilize our country, a country riddled and divided by 9/11 before we try to destroy everything we have become?

I agree with you that Washington is a mess, the country's state was far from perfect before 9/11, but there are things we need back from that era before we can change things rapidly, ASSUMING that an Obama president would even change things.

joke post?

president hillary jiggling her breasts would cause world war 3
 
kbear said:
Why don't they matter? I'm not really familiar with this

They both bumped up their primary dates against the wishes of the Democrat National Committee. So they got blacklisted and get 0 delegates
 
I currently have a vision of Hillary crying in front of Ahmadinejad and then having make up sex.

Help me. I can't take this for 8 years.
 
APF said:
No; by looking at this thread obviously the far-left Dems are more to blame.

Look who's trying to sound balanced and non-biased.
 
TheKingsCrown said:
This is not fucking true and you know it. The people in the Republican camp are riddled with crazies. And Hillary may be more of the same Clinton-era-ness that was annoying and ridiculous, but at least she isn't fucking crazy. She doesn't want to quarantine AIDS patients, or stay at war in a country just for the sake of it, rather than for creating stability, or stop large groups of people from getting equal rights under the law. And most importantly she is a woman. At the end of the day, she can jiggle her breasts and repair possibly the most damage that has been done to our image since the country was created.

Exactly. This is why Amir0x and other similarly minded Obama supporters are, IMO, either insane or just stupid. There was not a single fact about either candidate in his post - just a bunch of vague assertions, and a ludicrous suggestion that both parties are equally to blame for the political status quo.
 
Mii said:
I currently have a vision of Hillary crying in front of Ahmadinejad and then having make up sex.

Help me. I can't take this for 8 years.
Posts like this--of which there are *many* in this thread--show there's more to my tongue-in-cheek comments about anti-Hillary fanboyism having roots in misogyny.
 
Y2Kev said:
I would like to hear more on this.


Well, here's their record on the 69 votes concerning Iraq (they agreed on 68 of them .. scroll all the way down for the votes). I will dig up more on their records on general policy issues (I would just assume they are all very similar .. except for issues where each candidate "ducked" the vote (sometimes for legitimate personal reasons .. other times for political ones.)
 
Zozz said:
Dude I just won't vote, I can't believe this bitch is fucking up my first election so badly.
Mine was Bush/Gore...how do you think I feel?

I'll tell you this much, I'll completely be turned off by politics if a guy like Obama can't win in this country.

What a sad fucking country we live in if a guy like Obama can't win.
 
HOLY SHIT

Hillary -- 9 delegates
Obama -- 9 delegates
Edwards -- 4 delegates

22/22

Hillary just got screwed over a little. Despite her lead she didn't get any additional delegates. So Obama technically tied with Hillary in the primary
 
Father_Brain said:
Exactly. This is why Amir0x and other similarly minded Obama supporters are, IMO, either insane or just stupid. There was not a single fact about either candidate in his post - just a bunch of vague assertions, and a ludicrous suggestion that both parties are equally to blame for the political status quo.

It's a waste of time to argue. You are dealing with people who are feverishly caught up in a trend they want to believe. Logic plays very little part in this although people will pretend it does.
 
APF said:
Posts like this--of which there are *many* in this thread--show there's more to my tongue-in-cheek comments about anti-Hillary fanboyism having roots in misogyny.

I didn't have this image in my mind until yesterday. But Clinton blew her image in my eyes. I'm not living with a pushover in the White House, male or female.

I disliked Clinton for being a robotic fraud before. But this is worse.
 
Father_Brain said:
I also suspect that the oft-reiterated claims of Clinton's unelectability are greatly exaggerated, but it's impossible to prove that.
Really as if Obama isn't as polarizing as Hillary for his youth and race as well?
 
Obama's actual record is strikingly-close to Hillary's, and as I mentioned before he's to the right of her on a few issues. Oh, but she doesn't have "hope" on her side!!
 
perfectchaos007 said:
Well, at least Obama got the same amount of delegates as Clinton.

She's on the rampage!!

Oh, wait.

Honestly, I was concerned that the time between this primary and the next would be enough to dissipate the enthusiasm behind Obama and it would be replaced with a sense of inevitability if he won. Now his supporters know it's not a lock, and it's going to take work. The campaign will be much better for it.
 
All the left-leaning voters on here are scaring me with their anti-Hillary rhetoric. It's a no-brainer that Obama is preferable in many aspects to Hillary. But don't act like there's no difference between her and the Republicans. If she takes the nomination don't make this another 2000.
 
TheKingsCrown said:
This is not fucking true and you know it. The people in the Republican camp are riddled with crazies. And Hillary may be more of the same Clinton-era-ness that was annoying and ridiculous, but at least she isn't fucking crazy. She doesn't want to quarantine AIDS patients, or stay at war in a country just for the sake of it rather than for creating stability, and she doesn't want to stop large groups of people from getting equal rights under the law. And most importantly she is a woman. At the end of the day, she can jiggle her breasts and repair [internationally] possibly the most damage that has been done to our image since the country was created.

If you want radical change you have to wait until the country is stable enough to survive it. This country is in no way stable. Its currency is going down the shitter and its economy might go with it, its political pull is approaching zero in the world, and its debt is absolutely ridiculous. Our lives are getting harder. Ridiculously fucking rapid change makes things harder, especially for the unprotected. Its a vicious product of capitalism especially. So how about we stabilize our country, a country riddled and divided by 9/11 before we try to destroy everything we have become?

I agree with you that Washington is a mess, the country's state was far from perfect before 9/11, but there are things we need back from that era before we can change things rapidly, ASSUMING that an Obama president would even change things.

.
 
APF said:
Obama's actual record is strikingly-close to Hillary's, and as I mentioned before he's to the right of her on a few issues. Oh, but she doesn't have "hope" on her side!!


But hes the agent of change, brings change, super duper change, refreshing change loving change. chachachagangeesss.
 
avatar299 said:
What you don't understand is that she doesn't have anything locked up. Iowa proved she wasn't infallable and NH proves Obama hasn't convinced everyone yet, however he still had a far better showing in this primary compared to Hillary in Iowa.

it's to early to call anyone for either side. I seriously wonder how many of you know how the primaries work.


Obama already had an uphill battle to win enough states on Super Tuesday even after his Iowa victory. To change that, he needed constant momentum going forward. This loss, even if it was a narrow one, shutdown almost all his momentum. He need hugh victories in SC and NV for him to even have a decent shot on Feb 5th. And that will probably not happen.
 
Everyone here knows that if McCain can get past the whacked out religious right and get the nomination Hillary will lose the general. Please.
 
grandjedi6 said:
They both bumped up their primary dates against the wishes of the Democrat National Committee. So they got blacklisted and get 0 delegates

Disenfranchisement is less important than tradition. Didn't know they actually went through with this.
 
MassiveAttack said:
Great attitude.

2 people on the ballot and if I don't believe either of them should be president I should vote for the lesser of two evils anyway? If there was another choice it would be nice.
 
ToxicAdam said:
Well, here's their record on the 69 votes concerning Iraq (they agreed on 68 of them .. scroll all the way down for the votes). I will dig up more on their records on general policy issues (I would just assume they are all very similar .. except for issues where each candidate "ducked" the vote (sometimes for legitimate personal reasons .. other times for political ones.)

This is basically what I have read. With the media narrative, you'd think Hilary's record screams old establishment and Barack votes his heart. They...uh, have very similar voting records.

Grecco said:
But hes the agent of change, brings change, super duper change, refreshing change loving change. chachachagangeesss.

Yeah, this is what I am referring to. I'd like some change too. But I doubt any politician can single handedly bring real change...or necessarily even spur it.
 
AdmiralViscen said:
Disenfranchisement is less important than tradition. Didn't know they actually went through with this.

To be fair they were warned and could get it back if they moved the date back. If the DNC didn't do this then every state would be jumping into December
 
APF said:
Obama's actual record is strikingly-close to Hillary's, and as I mentioned before he's to the right of her on a few issues. Oh, but she doesn't have "hope" on her side!!

Hillary voted for the Iraq War, Obama didn't (cause not there).

Look how that turned out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom