PoliGAF Official April 22nd Primary Thread (Democrat Apocalypse)

Status
Not open for further replies.
v1cious said:
not to mention everyone who watches Countdown knows he hates Hillary.

I can't stand Olbermann but he does have some balls. I wonder if he'll be the first media person to run down the situation for Hillary, to her face. IE even if she wins the rest of the states with big margins (60-40) she still won't surpass Obama's delegate lead. And then ask her if she honestly thinks black people will come out and vote for her if it's perceived the nomination was stolen from Obama
 
You know what is most awesome about Obama rallies with a lot of african americans?

The old black ladies. They have some balls. They always grab obama by th face and give him a big kiss on the lips. I have seen it happen at least 5 times. :lol It's always the old chubby black ladies too. I love it.
 
PhoenixDark said:
There's the paranoia again. If she blows him out and gains a 200,000+ popular vote victory of course it'll be treated as a big victory. But why you guys are scared of the big bad media is beyond me.

The media has kept her in the race. Every Hillary slanted Primary is the same:

Hillary is up 15-20 points with weeks till the Primary, she must win this state by large margins.

A week or two pass, Obama has cut into her lead. The media now says she must win period, large or small.. it does not matter.

With a few days left Obama has completely wiped away her lead and in many cases is leading. The media has Hillary on death watch.

Primary day is here, Hillary wins by either 1) A small margin or 2) the margin she was supposed to win by. The media labels it as a miraculous comeback by Clinton and scrutinize Obama for not being able to seal the deal.
 
The media narrative for tomorrow is VERY different than March 6th.

March 6th was:
Will Obama end the nomination fight?

April 22nd is:
Can Clinton hold on?
 
Cheebs said:
The media narrative for tomorrow is VERY different than March 6th.

March 6th was:
Will Obama end the nomination fight?

April 22nd is:
Can Clinton hold on?

And when she does hold on like she is supposed to, they'll be amazed at her resiliency and scrutinize Obama for not being able to wrap up the nomination.
 
Running a campaign is like running a Country. It's an organization, that requires leadership, good people running things and good fiscal management. In fact none of the candidates have ever been a CEO or the chief exec of an organization. These campaigns are the first chance they have to show the public how well they run things.

So based on this performance, which of the three has shown the best leadership ability?

Obama- Flushed with more cash than the other two combined. Has not taken any money from special interests. His campaign has rarely made a mistake and have been consistently on message.

Hillary- Awash in a see of red ink. This campaign has had to retool it's message multiple times. High up people have been repeatedly fired. The campaign made major blunders including thinking all would be over after super Tuesday. It's debt was caused in part by lavious living by the campaign itself.

McCain- Had to retool his campaign and needed a government bail out to prevent it from going belly up. His campaign is run by special interest groups.
 
Deus Ex Machina said:
Running a campaign is like running a Country. It's an organization, that requires leadership, good people running things and good fiscal management. In fact none of the candidates have ever been a CEO or the chief exec of an organization. These campaigns are the first chance they have to show the public how well they run things.

So based on this performance, which of the three has shown the best leadership ability?

Obama- Flushed with more cash than the other two combined. Has not taken any money from special interests. His campaign has rarely made a mistake and have been consistently on message.

Hillary- Awash in a see of red ink. This campaign has had to retool it's message multiple times. High up people have been repeatedly fired. The campaign made major blunders including thinking all would be over after super Tuesday. It's debt was caused in part by lavious living by the campaign itself.

McCain- Had to retool his campaign and needed a government bail out to prevent it from going belly up. His campaign is run by special interest groups.

George Bush ran one of the best campaigns in American history in 2000 & 2004. It was done with pure genius and not a single mistake. His campaign was more or less ran perfectly.

Really showed how good of a leader he was huh?
 
Cheebs said:
George Bush ran one of the best campaigns in American history in 2000 & 2004. It was done with pure genius and not a single mistake. His campaign was more or less ran perfectly.

Really showed how good of a leader he was huh?


Don't know if it was one of the best run in history, but very valid point.
 
Deus Ex Machina said:
Running a campaign is like running a Country. It's an organization, that requires leadership, good people running things and good fiscal management. In fact none of the candidates have ever been a CEO or the chief exec of an organization. These campaigns are the first chance they have to show the public how well they run things.

It speaks more to who they surround themselves with rather than their competence in tactics.

George Bush could delegate but couldn't think his way out of a paper bag.
 
Cheebs said:
George Bush ran one of the best campaigns in American history in 2000 & 2004. It was done with pure genius and not a single mistake. His campaign was more or less ran perfectly.

Really showed how good of a leader he was huh?

Most things have an exception :P Although I do agree that a campaigns management does not completely reflect a person's ability to run the country.
 
Cheebs said:
George Bush ran one of the best campaigns in American history in 2000 & 2004. It was done with pure genius and not a single mistake. His campaign was more or less ran perfectly.

Really showed how good of a leader he was huh?

No his campaign wasn't ran perfectly he just had terrible competition and people are complete idiots :)
 
CowboyAstronaut said:
No his campaign wasn't ran perfectly he just had terrible competition and people are complete idiots :)
Come on. Karl Rove knew how to run a campaign. Rove was VERY VERY VERY good at what he did.
 
Deus Ex Machina said:
Running a campaign is like running a Country. It's an organization, that requires leadership, good people running things and good fiscal management. In fact none of the candidates have ever been a CEO or the chief exec of an organization. These campaigns are the first chance they have to show the public how well they run things.

So based on this performance, which of the three has shown the best leadership ability?

Obama- Flushed with more cash than the other two combined. Has not taken any money from special interests. His campaign has rarely made a mistake and have been consistently on message.

Hillary- Awash in a see of red ink. This campaign has had to retool it's message multiple times. High up people have been repeatedly fired. The campaign made major blunders including thinking all would be over after super Tuesday. It's debt was caused in part by lavious living by the campaign itself.

McCain- Had to retool his campaign and needed a government bail out to prevent it from going belly up. His campaign is run by special interest groups.

To be Tamanon, Obama's campaign is full of former lobbyists.

I guess that's an improvement in US politics, but Obama still is knee deep with special interests.
 
According to Drudge, Hillary's internals show 11 point lead. "Controlled excitement is building" in her inner circle.
 
Instigator said:
To be Tamanon, Obama's campaign is full of former lobbyists.

I guess that's an improvement in US politics, but Obama still is knee deep with special interests.

but i get the feeling that my interests sits at the same table as the special interests.
 
schuelma said:
According to Drudge, Hillary's internals show 11 point lead. "Controlled excitement is building" in her inner circle.

Great, so if she wins by less than 11, epic fail. Nice work leaking that, geniuses.

I wonder what Obama's internals show.
 
v1cious said:
don't what? SurveyUSA has never been wrong. you don't think an upset is possible?

in any case, a six point victory is still a win for Obama regardless.

They were wrong with Missouri, I believe.
 
Ah, I see. They leaked the 11 point numbers because they're trying to paint that as some amazing, widening margin.

CLINTON INTERNALS SHOW 11-POINT LEAD IN PA
Mon Apr 21 2008 11:10:14 ET

**Exclusive**

Controlled excitement is building inside of Clinton's inner circle as closely guarded internal polling shows the former first lady with an 11-point lead in Pennsylvania!

Clinton is polling near to nearly 2 to 1 over Obama in many regions of the state, a top insider explained to the DRUDGE REPORT.

A strong coalition of middle-class and religious voters has all but secured a Clinton victory Tuesday, with headline-making margins, the campaign believes.

"It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of how much," a senior campaign source said Monday morning.

When pressed if the dramatic internal polling numbers could somehow be flawed in a state as demographically complex as Pennsylvania, and with new voter registration surging to unseen levels, the campaign insider held firm.

"Senator Obama would be wise not to unpack his bags quite yet."


MORE

With less than 24 hours to go until the beginning of the end of primary season voting, Obama has handedly captured Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, but has failed to dominate suburban sprawl, the campaign's polling reveals.

An 11-point victory in Pennsylvania for Clinton would expand on margins scored in Ohio.

Clinton will quickly move to feverishly focus on Indiana starting Tuesday night, hoping to somehow convince superdelegates that she not only has superior stamina but has crucial swing state appeal.

Without superdelegate intervention, Clinton still faces impossible math to nomination.

Developing...
 
gkrykewy said:
Ah, I see. They leaked the 11 point numbers because they're trying to paint that as some amazing, widening margin.
Again campaigns always downplay expectations. This logic makes no sense.
 
Cheebs said:
Again campaigns always downplay expectations. This logic makes no sense.


*puts on tin foil hat*


Unless their real internals are even higher..
 
Cheebs said:
Again campaigns always downplay expectations. This logic makes no sense.

The only thing logical is that someone pro-Obama (perhaps a mole in the Clinton camp) "leaked/made up" those numbers to up expectations for Clinton.
 
monchi-kun said:
Sporsk..what happened? Did you take one for the team (and lose modship) by banning APF?
It appears as though his disagreements with the site redesign led him to be demoted for some reason...

Still trying to figure out what that reason is...
 
RubxQub said:
It appears as though his disagreements with the site redesign led him to be demoted for some reason...

Still trying to figure out what that reason is...



NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
 
any McCain news?


RubxQub said:
It appears as though his disagreements with the site redesign led him to be demoted for some reason...

Still trying to figure out what that reason is...

I've been having 40 seconds of loading time for each thread problems but what redesign?
 
harSon said:
Mccain was dumb to say "You could make the argument...", there is no argument to be made :lol

Obama was disingenuous in failing to mention the second part of McCain's statement, totally distorting his intended meaning.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom