Support NeoGAF

[GhaleonEB]

Hardball's Quinnipiac poll put PA at 50% to 44%.

With the exception of SUSA, every recent poll puts the race at 10 points or less. I have a feeling it's going to stay that way, right through the results.

 

[terrene]

Jesus people, get off APF's nuts. You people must get really mad at the Colbert report, huh?

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Jesus people, get off APF's nuts. You people must get really mad at the Colbert report, huh?

One reason I love APF.

Reminds me of a Hillary centered Colbert.

 

[Mumei]

Mumei: I've answered this question a bunch of times here; I assume you mean, when Obama is the Dem nominee, will I vote for him? Yes, but I might just stay home instead. If I lived in a state where my vote really counted, I'd definitely vote for him. Otherwise I see no reason to, since I'm really not a strong supporter of his candidacy.

No, I'm not asking if you'll vote for him when he's the nominee; I'm asking who you'd prefer, all things being equal.

If you would vote for him, would you prefer voting for Hillary, or are you ambivalent towards both?

I am aware you've probably answered these questions before, but I probably missed them.

 

[CoolTrick]

With the exception of SUSA, every recent poll puts the race at 10 points or less. I have a feeling it's going to stay that way, right through the results.

You're not looking at those numbers the right way.

The only poll that has ever given Obama more than 44% in PA is ARG, and RCP isn't even counting that. THAT poll is a true outlier.

Obama cannot win Pennsylvania with an average of 42% of the vote.

You need to follow his numbers, not hers.

Remember the Golden Rule: Undecideds always break for Hillary.

Even in Wisconsin.


As of now, no poll (except that ARG poll RCP won't count) has shown Obama majorly close the gap in Pennsylvanoa/

 

[thekad]

First off, hello lovelies.

Second, Chris Matthews didn't air all of Hillary's comments. (Anti-Clinton bias from MSNBC, what else is new.)

Third, that Oregon poll is great: It reassures what I thought -- Oregon should not be ceded to Obama based on the results of the California and non-bonding Washington primary.

Fourth, that SurveyUSA poll is wonderful, wonderful stuff. I'm now super confident Hillary IS going to win by 12-14%.

13%? That'll show him.

 

[AniHawk]

Pennsylvanoa

This is what I'm calling Pennsylvania from now on.

 

[pxleyes]

Well, you've succeeded in making me have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, so yay you I guess... Normally people don't admit, like you are, that they're baiting and trolling people however.


mashoutposse: so only that candidate should have her decisions and history analyzed? I don't see your point here.

I'm not baiting. I'm just playing your game. I'm sorry, is that against the rules?

 

[harSon]

You're not looking at those numbers the right way.

The only poll that has ever given Obama more than 44% in PA is ARG, and RCP isn't even counting that. THAT poll is a true outlier.

Obama cannot win Pennsylvania with an average of 42% of the vote.

You need to follow his numbers, not hers.

Remember the Golden Rule: Undecideds always break for Hillary.

Even in Wisconsin.


As of now, no poll (except that ARG poll RCP won't count) has shown Obama majorly close the gap in Pennsylvanoa/

What exactly are you trying to argue? I don't think anyone on this forum, in the media, or nation wide believes Obama is going to take Pennsylvania.

 

[GhaleonEB]

What exactly are you trying to argue? I don't think anyone on this forum, in the media, or nation wide believes Obama is going to take Pennsylvania.

Or in either campaign.

 

[Amir0x]

The attack ad on David Gregory is the one I heard today.

I thought it was pretty decent, as far as ads go. Would be convincing to the uninformed.

 

[Frank the Great]

You're not looking at those numbers the right way.

The only poll that has ever given Obama more than 44% in PA is ARG, and RCP isn't even counting that. THAT poll is a true outlier.

Obama cannot win Pennsylvania with an average of 42% of the vote.

You need to follow his numbers, not hers.

Remember the Golden Rule: Undecideds always break for Hillary.

Even in Wisconsin.


As of now, no poll (except that ARG poll RCP won't count) has shown Obama majorly close the gap in Pennsylvanoa/

what do you think hillary's chances of getting the democratic nomination are?

 

[Triumph]

You're not looking at those numbers the right way.

The only poll that has ever given Obama more than 44% in PA is ARG, and RCP isn't even counting that. THAT poll is a true outlier.

Obama cannot win Pennsylvania with an average of 42% of the vote.

You need to follow his numbers, not hers.

Remember the Golden Rule: Undecideds always break for Hillary.

Even in Wisconsin.


As of now, no poll (except that ARG poll RCP won't count) has shown Obama majorly close the gap in Pennsylvanoa/

You're right, we're not looking at them in the way that benefits Hillary. Our bad.

Oh well, at least some things never change.

 

[maynerd]

No, I'm not asking if you'll vote for him when he's the nominee; I'm asking who you'd prefer, all things being equal.

If you would vote for him, would you prefer voting for Hillary, or are you ambivalent towards both?

I am aware you've probably answered these questions before, but I probably missed them.

If there's one thing to know about APF is that he rarely answers a question directly and many times never answers direct questions at all.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

You're right, we're not looking at them in the way that benefits Hillary. Our bad.

Oh well, at least some things never change.

Are you trying to spin that Hillary winning PA by a margin of 5-10% isn't better then her winning by the 20-25% victory that was predicted two weeks ago?

Even while being outspent 3:1?

 

[Triumph]

Are you trying to spin that Hillary winning PA by a margin of 5-10% isn't better then her winning by the 20-25% victory that was predicted two weeks ago?

Even while being outspent 3:1?

No, I'm responding to CoolTrick, noted maniac and Hillary shrill. Of course Obama closing the gap is a big deal, but according to CoolTrick that's not what's happening! You just have to look at the numbers the right way.

 

[Elfforkusu]

Jesus people, get off APF's nuts. You people must get really mad at the Colbert report, huh?

See but Colbert is funny.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

See but Colbert is funny.

APF has his moments.

 

[APF]

No, I'm not asking if you'll vote for him when he's the nominee; I'm asking who you'd prefer, all things being equal.

If you would vote for him, would you prefer voting for Hillary, or are you ambivalent towards both?

I am aware you've probably answered these questions before, but I probably missed them.

OIC; yeah I'd prefer Hillary. Or Edwards, really, if it came down to that.

 

[Particle Physicist]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/09/clinton-camp-its-a-miracl_n_95883.html

Clinton Camp: It's A Miracle We're Not Behind In Pennsylvania

.. wow.

 

[terrene]

See but Colbert is funny.

I find the traps he sets to be pretty amusing and usually the kernel of truth that's floating around in there is worth consideration. It has become thread-destroying before when GAF overresponded, and he's pushed too hard before on his end and gotten banned, but I think overall he contributes something pretty awesome to these threads. Being uptight about it does not.

 

[Frank the Great]

.. wow.

how do they get away with this -_-

i have a question for APF:

what do you think hillary's chances of winning the nomination are?

 

[Thunder Monkey]

how do they get away with this -_-

i have a question for APF:

what do you think hillary's chances of winning the nomination are?

I'll answer for him since we seem to have molded into gelatinous polymorphic self.

She has no chance of winning legitimately, but that won't stop me/him from pissing off others.

 

[GhaleonEB]

what do you think hillary's chances of winning the nomination are?

Related note: Slate's Hillary Deathwatch contunues to be amusing.

In case you haven't noticed, the Hillary Deathwatch operates a lot like the health meter in Gears of War. As long as you're not getting shot at, your health goes up. In Hillary's case, nothing too crazy happened in the past 24 hours—a solid performance at the Petraeus hearing, a slight post-Penn morale boost, and a superdelegate regained. Which, in total, bumps Clinton up 0.1 points to a flat 10 percent chance of winning the nomination.

Clinton and Obama showed off their grilling skills at yesterday's Senate hearings with Gen. David Petraeus and Ryan Crocker but didn't offer much more than their usual bleak assessments. Clinton drew contrasts with John McCain, saying she "fundamentally" disagreed with his assessment that troop withdrawals are irresponsible—but stopped short of her "willing suspension of disbelief" remarks last time. Spoken like a true future majority leader.

http://www.slate.com/id/2188627/

 

[CoolTrick]

You're right, we're not looking at them in the way that benefits Hillary. Our bad.

Oh well, at least some things never change.

The unfortunate part is you're failing to see why you screwed up so badly in Ohio and Texas. Time after time. It's going to screw you in Pennsylvania.

Go to pollster. They have a fantastic short analysis on the recent polls that shows what I'm talking about. If you refuse I'll post it but I'd rather people see it for themselves because they won't like to hear it from me.

 

[Cheebs]

The unfortunate part is you're failing to see why you screwed up so badly in Ohio and Texas. Time after time. It's going to screw you in Pennsylvania.

Go to pollster. They have a fantastic short analysis on the recent polls that shows what I'm talking about. If you refuse I'll post it but I'd rather people see it for themselves because they won't like to hear it from me.

But does it even matter anymore? The nomination isn't within her grasps. Even if she somehow won by over 10%.

 

[reilo]

I love it.

PA polls aren't being looked at correctly, and Obama has no chance, but Obama's double digit lead in Oregon means that Clinton has a chance to win the state.

Lovely.

 

[Frank the Great]

The unfortunate part is you're failing to see why you screwed up so badly in Ohio and Texas. Time after time. It's going to screw you in Pennsylvania.

Go to pollster. They have a fantastic short analysis on the recent polls that shows what I'm talking about. If you refuse I'll post it but I'd rather people see it for themselves because they won't like to hear it from me.

why did you ignore my question, my friend?

ill ask again because you probably just didn't see it: what do you think hillary's chances of winning the nomination are?

 

[Thunder Monkey]

The unfortunate part is you're failing to see why you screwed up so badly in Ohio and Texas. Time after time. It's going to screw you in Pennsylvania.

Go to pollster. They have a fantastic short analysis on the recent polls that shows what I'm talking about. If you refuse I'll post it but I'd rather people see it for themselves because they won't like to hear it from me.

...

Obama won Texas.

 

[reilo]

...

Obama won Texas.

Didn't you know? It's the popular vote that wins you the nomination.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Didn't you know? It's the popular vote that wins you the nomination.

And here I was willing to believe Hillary when she said four months ago that it was pledge delegates that won the nomination.

Guess I can't believe that liar anymore.

 

[scorcho]

:lol

http://instaputz.blogspot.com/2008/04/heh-indeeb.html

If McCain can't spell his name properly, how can we expect him to beat the terrorists?

(To his credit, this might explain his problems distinguishing between Iraq and Iran.)

 

[CoolTrick]

Didn't you know? It's the popular vote that wins you the nomination.

It might not win the nomination, but it's a damn good electability argument. Especially when Obama's official lead comes from many areas that aren't really conducive to Democrats' chances in November.

PA polls aren't being looked at correctly, and Obama has no chance, but Obama's double digit lead in Oregon means that Clinton has a chance to win the state.

That's because there's been no heavy campaigning in Oregon.

How can people honestly go "WELL OBAMA CLOSED A 25 POINT GAP AND STILL LOST BY A NOT TOO BAD AMOUNT HOW IS THAT A CLINTON VICTORY" and in the same breath cite a poll which touts numbers from a non contested state right now? It's like the Indiana polls.

All that Oregon poll shows is how much of an uphill climb the challenger faces the favorite in that state.

If people here think Obama can win Indiana once he starts campaigning, why couldn't she tighten up Oregon? She won the California primary and lost the Washington primary by only a few %.

ill ask again because you probably just didn't see it: what do you think hillary's chances of winning the nomination are?

I don't understand. What's your point? I can't assign a number to that. What if I asked you what were Obama's chances of knocking out Hillary Clinton by a victory in a state?

 

[Thunder Monkey]

It might not win the nomination, but it's a damn good electability argument. Especially when Obama's official lead comes from many areas that aren't really conducive to Democrats' chances in November.

Not how the game is played.

Hillary went into this nominating process fully aware of how the winner is chosen. Delegates.

Why does she feel the right to complain when someone comes in and wins more of those precious delegates?

She knew how the game was played, she just didn't realize she might lose.

That's the kind of arrogance Democrats don't need going into this election. We need someone who's out to win, not someone who thinks they've won.

 

[reilo]

It might not win the nomination, but it's a damn good electability argument. Especially when Obama's official lead comes from many areas that aren't really conducive to Democrats' chances in November.

And she is going to make up 700K in votes... how?

That's because there's been no heavy campaigning in Oregon.

How can people honestly go "WELL OBAMA CLOSED A 25 POINT GAP AND STILL LOST BY A NOT TOO BAD AMOUNT HOW IS THAT A CLINTON VICTORY" and in the same breath cite a poll which touts numbers from a non contested state right now? It's like the Indiana polls.

All that Oregon poll shows is how much of an uphill climb the challenger faces the favorite in that state.

If people here think Obama can win Indiana once he starts campaigning, why couldn't she tighten up Oregon? She won the California primary and lost the Washington primary by only a few %.

Name one state she was behind, rallied, and then won the state.

 

[CoolTrick]

Not how the game is played.

No, what YOU'RE describing is not how the game is played. If Obama's pledged delegate lead comes from areas the Democrats won't win in November, and Hillary Clinton has won the popular vote, and all the major states, if Superdelegates do decide to weigh that into consideration and by some stretch hand her the nomination, THAT is how the game is played.

 

[Kaeru]

This message is hidden because CoolTrick is on your ignore list.

thank god for this, now if people just could stop quoting him too..

Sooo, any new polls?

 

[reilo]

No, what YOU'RE describing is not how the game is played. If Obama's pledged delegate lead comes from areas the Democrats won't win in November, and Hillary Clinton has won the popular vote, and all the major states, if Superdelegates do decide to weigh that into consideration and by some stretch hand her the nomination, THAT is how the game is played.

:lol

I am bailing out of this early.

 

[CoolTrick]

Name one state she was behind, rallied, and then won the state.

...............................................................................................She wouldn't still be in it if she were the nominee. I don't even need to answer that question it's so obvious.

And she is going to make up 700K in votes... how?

Scary thing is she can knock out around half that in PA if she does well.

And no matter what any of you rabid sheeple say, Superdelegates ARE looking at that Florida popular vote.

 

[gcubed]

And she is going to make up 700K in votes... how?



Name one state she was behind, rallied, and then won the state.

dont use common sense!!!

At least APF makes arguements but gets people riled up. CoolTrick comes off as a joke account

 

[schuelma]

And no matter what any of you rabid sheeple say, Superdelegates ARE looking at that Florida popular vote.

Is that why he's been dominating new super announcements since Super Tuesday and continuing after Ohio/Texas? Must not be looking too closely...

 

[CoolTrick]

thank god for this, now if people just could stop quoting him too..

Sooo, any new polls?

Yeah, Insider Advantage has Clinton regaining her numbers, at +10.

But more importantly it also has Obama at 38% I believe.

 

[reilo]

Scary thing is she can knock out around half that in PA if she does well.

And no matter what any of you rabid sheeple say, Superdelegates ARE looking at that Florida popular vote.

I love this!

You are arguing that we should not discount Oregon because neither candidate has campaigned in that state [which is FALSE, both Obama and Hillary were in Oregon in the past two weeks], but then you are completely okay with counting Florida as is, eventhough neither campaigned in it.

Love your logic.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

No, what YOU'RE describing is not how the game is played. If Obama's pledged delegate lead comes from areas the Democrats won't win in November, and Hillary Clinton has won the popular vote, and all the major states, if Superdelegates do decide to weigh that into consideration and by some stretch hand her the nomination, THAT is how the game is played.

It's really difficult to have a conversation with you.

So... just because I live in Kansas, and my state won't go for a Democrat this election makes my choice worthless? Even though my choice happens to be the leader in Pledge Delegates, and popular vote?

I don't see how any Democrat can actually think Cali or New York will go for a Republican.

 

[CoolTrick]

Is that why he's been dominating new super announcements since Super Tuesday and continuing after Ohio/Texas? Must not be looking too closely...

Neither are you. Clinton has barely been getting any Superdelegates but Obama hasn't been ratching them up at quite the pace that you're implying.

 

[schuelma]

Neither are you. Clinton has barely been getting any Superdelegates but Obama hasn't been ratching them up at quite the pace that you're implying.

He's steadily closed the gap my friend.

 

[reilo]

Neither are you. Clinton has barely been getting any Superdelegates but Obama hasn't been ratching them up at quite the pace that you're implying.

LOL.

Barely getting any? By that do you mean, LOSING supers?

 

[PhoenixDark]

Penn. is going to be another Ohio, ie a bunch of polls showing Obama somehow being competitive in a state where all the demographics go against him, then voting day arrives. I see this as a 10% Clinton victory at the least. But really, it doesn't matter unless Hillary wins by 30-40 points which isn't going to happen.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Neither are you. Clinton has barely been getting any Superdelegates but Obama hasn't been ratching them up at quite the pace that you're implying.

Hasn't he gained 40 in the span that Hillary has gained 1?

I still can't get over this crap about certain states "Not counting".

My vote matters as much as anyones... except when it goes against the will of Queen Hillary.

 

[CoolTrick]

I love this!

You are arguing that we should not discount Oregon because neither candidate has campaigned in that state [which is FALSE, both Obama and Hillary were in Oregon in the past two weeks], but then you are completely okay with counting Florida as is, eventhough neither campaigned in it.

Love your logic.

Sigh. You're so naive.

You fail to understand it works both ways. You can't discount Oregon as I'm sure you don't want to discount Indiana. Their margins are almost exactly the same. If you feel Obama can tighten it up in Indiana, so can she in Oregon. Both states have not seen heavy campaigning in them yet. What's so hard to understand?

So... just because I live in Kansas, and my state won't go for a Democrat this election makes my choice worthless? Even though my choice happens to be the leader in Pledge Delegates, and popular vote?

I don't see how any Democrat can actually think Cali or New York will go for a Republican.

1) It doesn't make it worthless, but the fact is, this race is so close, that the eventual nominee likely IS going to be picked by voters like you -- voters from states that are not going to be helpful to the Democrats come November. Superdelegates need to decide how important that is.

2) Considering the Democratic base has a sizeable number of electoral votes, I don't really understand why you'd write off their Primary victors as "Oh they'll go Democratic no matter what" when what actually has given Obama his delegate lead are from states that WON'T go Democratic no matter what.

3) So when you're left with the swing states, those favor Clinton, too. Ya know.