New Hampshire Primaries

[Lemur]

It's time for a new primaries thread. Iowa has come and gone. We all thrilled to the rumble in Wyoming. Pick your horse for the granite state, and please badger Don Corleone to vote for your pick. If we have any other New Hampsherinians, I suggest we harass them as well.

-edit-

Darn it, I forgot to make the poll public. Can one of the Backroom mods undo my mistake?

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Well, I'm hoping Ron Paul shows up strong. I didn't even know Alan Keyes was running though. My dad did a little campaigning for him in 2000 I think. Tilting at windmills, Keyes is.

[Lemur]

Just for kicks, here are some videos of campaigns behaving badly:

Romney supporters taking down McCain signs. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpmbHvX9KtY) I've never been involved in a political campaign, but is this considered fair game? I thought the idea was to put up more of your guy's signs, not to pull down the other guy's. In broad daylight. With cameras rolling. Is stupid, no?

Ron Paul supporters heckling Sean Hannity before last night's debates. (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1d4_1199722032&p=1) Sure, they have every right to be steamed that their guy was excluded from the debates, but I don't think this makes them look good.

Finally, Rudy Giuliani wants you afraid. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2iFhGtKO-Q&) Very afraid. If this was not posted to YouTube by the Giuliani campaign, I would have bet it was a parody.

Bill Clinton apologizing for the fact that he cannot make Hillary "younger, taller, male." (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKOjXho8dfE) This is a glimpse into the sexual fantasies of Bill that I really didn't need.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Romney

The guy came from a virtually unknown status among Washington insiders a year ago and you would have been hard pressed to find someone who had heard of him even 6 months ago unless they were in Mass or more politically savvy in surrounding states.

Now he is the punching bag because he is viewed as a front-runner. His policies are interesting and unique, his personality is being described as "too good to be true" and people don't like the idea that people can change their mind about an issue ONCE. He is the center right candidate with the least baggage and the best record on all of the issues that he supports.

People are saying that he has been "attacking" the political records of the other candidates. They have responded by attacking him on a personal level. Listen to the disputes and make up your own mind about who is fighting for the issues appropriately

I am totally impressed with this guy and I hope that people start really listening to him answer questions and explain his ideas.

If he loses in NH tomorrow, he will still have more delegates than any Republican candidate.

He came in second in Iowa
He came in first in Wyoming
(first or second) in NH?

He can go all the way with this bid, please give him a chance by listening to him objectively.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Also, I think it's funny that Ron Paul would be elected president of the back room. I love that guy, especially as President of the Backroom.

[Ronin]

Just for kicks, here are some videos of campaigns behaving badly:

Romney supporters taking down McCain signs. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpmbHvX9KtY) I've never been involved in a political campaign, but is this considered fair game? I thought the idea was to put up more of your guy's signs, not to pull down the other guy's. In broad daylight. With cameras rolling. Is stupid, no?



Over here that wouldn´t just be unfair....it´s damn illegal....

you guys over there let political campaigners get away with this kind of stuff?

[ICantSpellDawg]

Over here that wouldn´t just be unfair....it´s damn illegal....

you guys over there let political campaigners get away with this kind of stuff?

That video is ridiculous. That woman was either crazy or working for another campaign. The cameras were clearly filming her the entire time.

Who does it damage? Romney.

Who gained from this? Why would an intelligent supporter of Mitt do that right in front of a camera?

Infuriating - first that someone would do that and second - that you would report a youtube video to be cold fact, Lemur.

Numerous possibilities include:

"Did any of you stop to think that maybe these people owned the signs? That they changed their mind after seeing McCain flip-flop on the bush tax cuts -- within a single interview? Or that they finally figured out he was lying about amnesty? Or maybe that they got tired of his playground bully shtick the other day?"

Lets try not to judge this without knowing any facts about it, please.

[Lemur]

Here's some polling to chew on (http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=8757bfec-93fa-4e25-af88-8e77b51250cd). I believe this was conducted entirely in Iowa. Upshot: Iowa loves the Obama man very much. Also, Rudy Giuliani gets his buttocks handed to him at a much higher margin than any of the other Repubs.

Huckabee and McCain, however, do much better. Romney doesn't do a whole lot better than Giuliani, which is interesting. As summarized by NRO:

Obama defeats McCain by 17 points.

Obama defeats Huckabee by 23 points.

Obama defeats Romney by 26 points.

Obama defeats Giuliani by 40 points.

McCain defeats Clinton by 4 points.

Huckabee and Clinton tie.

Clinton defeats Romney by 8 points.

Clinton defeats Giuliani by 16 points.

-edit-

I see Mrs. Clinton has a new primary tactic: Cry. (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/01/clinton-gets-em.html)


After the event, Pernold Young told ABC News that she was glad Clinton showed emotion.

"That was real," Pernold Young said.

Another woman in the group, Alison Hamilton of Portsmouth, New Hampshire said she, like most of the people in the room, had been leaning toward voting for Obama before the event.

But after seeing Clinton become emotional, she said she was going to change her vote to Clinton.

"That was the clincher," Hamilton said.

[Ronin]

just think of it...if Hilary has a meeting with Ahmadinajacket all she has to do is open the waterworks and all will be solved...

well...this lady could re-write the book on international relations...:laugh4: :wall:

and people are changing their votes TO her over this?...talk about a joke...:inquisitive:

[Lemur]

This seems a little premature (http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/industries/media/article/obama-costs-irish-bookie-75000_425252_15.html):

Obama Costs Irish Bookie $75,000

DUBLIN, January 7, 2008 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Ireland's largest bookmaker, Paddy Power, are today claiming that the Democratic Nomination race is well and truly over and are already paying out on Barack Obama to be the successful Democratic nominee.

The early payout signals a massive EUR50,000 ($75,000) payday to lucky punters who backed Obama over the recent number of weeks at various odds ranging from 4/1 to 4/9.

The unexpected decision by the Irish bookmaking firm comes almost a week after the Iowa primary election and just a day before the New Hampshire primary election where Barack is now the odds on favourite at 1/12 to demolish his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton.

Paddy Power, said: "From a betting point of view we reckon that it's game over for Hillary. With each passing day Obama is looking more like a certainty to get the Democratic vote and as far as we're concerned he's already past the post. So well done to all who backed him, your winnings await!"

Barack Obama has also overtaken Hillary Clinton for the first time in the betting to become the next US President. Paddy Power now make him the odds on favourite at 10/11 to become the first African-American President over Hillary Clinton who has now drifted to an incredible 5/2.

[ICantSpellDawg]

This seems a little premature (http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/industries/media/article/obama-costs-irish-bookie-75000_425252_15.html):

Obama Costs Irish Bookie $75,000

DUBLIN, January 7, 2008 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Ireland's largest bookmaker, Paddy Power, are today claiming that the Democratic Nomination race is well and truly over and are already paying out on Barack Obama to be the successful Democratic nominee.

The early payout signals a massive EUR50,000 ($75,000) payday to lucky punters who backed Obama over the recent number of weeks at various odds ranging from 4/1 to 4/9.

The unexpected decision by the Irish bookmaking firm comes almost a week after the Iowa primary election and just a day before the New Hampshire primary election where Barack is now the odds on favourite at 1/12 to demolish his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton.

Paddy Power, said: "From a betting point of view we reckon that it's game over for Hillary. With each passing day Obama is looking more like a certainty to get the Democratic vote and as far as we're concerned he's already past the post. So well done to all who backed him, your winnings await!"

Barack Obama has also overtaken Hillary Clinton for the first time in the betting to become the next US President. Paddy Power now make him the odds on favourite at 10/11 to become the first African-American President over Hillary Clinton who has now drifted to an incredible 5/2.

That is excellent news BUT they must have never listened to the soap box of Yogi Berra "It aint ova till it's ova".

[Seamus Fermanagh]

just think of it...if Hilary has a meeting with Ahmadinajacket all she has to do is open the waterworks and all will be solved...

well...this lady could re-write the book on international relations...:laugh4: :wall:

and people are changing their votes TO her over this?...talk about a joke...:inquisitive:

Welcome to USA politics. The general rule is "!^(& policy, I want to know he/she cares about me...." Not sure how it works in Iberia, but here the key to an election is to secure the nincompoop vote.

Distaff Clinton cries, Bubba felt their pain, Edwards rails against the machine (for 40% of the jury award), and Obama looks toward the "radiant future."

Thompson puts together 17 minutes of video describing his stance on pretty much every issue and the collective response is a yawn. He should post a 17 minute youtube clip of him !^(&ing the missus instead. THAT would melt servers everywhere and get him a 10% bump.

Churchill claimed that the best argument against democracy was a 5 minute chat with the average voter. We've got it down to a 15 second sound bite.



P.S. Somebody wake Fred before NH please.

[Odin]

This seems a little premature (http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/industries/media/article/obama-costs-irish-bookie-75000_425252_15.html):

Obama Costs Irish Bookie $75,000

DUBLIN, January 7, 2008 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Ireland's largest bookmaker, Paddy Power, are today claiming that the Democratic Nomination race is well and truly over and are already paying out on Barack Obama to be the successful Democratic nominee.

The early payout signals a massive EUR50,000 ($75,000) payday to lucky punters who backed Obama over the recent number of weeks at various odds ranging from 4/1 to 4/9.

The unexpected decision by the Irish bookmaking firm comes almost a week after the Iowa primary election and just a day before the New Hampshire primary election where Barack is now the odds on favourite at 1/12 to demolish his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton.

Paddy Power, said: "From a betting point of view we reckon that it's game over for Hillary. With each passing day Obama is looking more like a certainty to get the Democratic vote and as far as we're concerned he's already past the post. So well done to all who backed him, your winnings await!"

Barack Obama has also overtaken Hillary Clinton for the first time in the betting to become the next US President. Paddy Power now make him the odds on favourite at 10/11 to become the first African-American President over Hillary Clinton who has now drifted to an incredible 5/2.

I'd say its premature, if I were him I would have waited until after super tuesday before the payout. Clinton looks weak and to be honest I am a little surprised she is dropping so fast given the expirence and money she has.

But if she can hold 2nd place until 02/05 she still has a shot.

[CountArach]

I remain the only person on the Kucinich bandwagon!

I think Clinton will just edge out Obama.

I thyought you might be interested in how this is being reported in Australia. Here (http://news.smh.com.au/obama-leads-opinion-polls-on-eve-of-new-hampshire-primary/20080106-1kg1.html) is an example from what I suppose you would call a Liberal newspaper. Here (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/01/07/2132905.htm) is what is arguably the most unbiased source in Australia (Public broadcasting). And here (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23010870-12335,00.html) is a Conservative Australian Newspaper.

As you can see, everyone has focused on the Democratic Nomination, with only brief mentions of the Republicans. They have all also given good reviews of Obama and not-so-good reviews of Hillary. Actually I read a great one-page story of how good Obama is from the first source yesterday. McCain had maybe an 5 paragraphs.

[AntiochusIII]

I remain the only person on the Kucinich bandwagon!If Romney is the Season's favorite flip-flopper, then Kucinich must be pancake.

The man rose to mayoralty using race politics for crying out loud! And he proceeded to prove how much of a massive fail he was by screwing his poor city further. Not that it wasn't already bad, but you know. At least Mitt Romney didn't destroy Massachusetts while he was Guv'ner.

Good riddance I say.

Welcome to USA politics. The general rule is "!^(& policy, I want to know he/she cares about me...." Not sure how it works in Iberia, but here the key to an election is to secure the nincompoop vote.

Distaff Clinton cries, Bubba felt their pain, Edwards rails against the machine (for 40% of the jury award), and Obama looks toward the "radiant future."

Thompson puts together 17 minutes of video describing his stance on pretty much every issue and the collective response is a yawn. He should post a 17 minute youtube clip of him !^(&ing the missus instead. THAT would melt servers everywhere and get him a 10% bump.

Churchill claimed that the best argument against democracy was a 5 minute chat with the average voter. We've got it down to a 15 second sound bite.Devil's Advocate time:

The quality of being charming might not necessarily have applications only for election politics, but also for the job of the President in general. Who knows? The no-nonsense all-policy guy might easily prove himself a failure in an office that combines the Head of State with the Great Compromiser, the Diplomat, the Leader, and the CEO of United States, Inc. precisely because he doesn't know how to charm.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I just read a comment on Politico that I liked (of course I would)

"People looking at Iowa hurts Romney? I don't think so,there's entirely different voter base in NH. Mitt cleaned up with the non-evangelical vote in Iowa. Now the media is in a complete state of confusion because their boys, Huck and McCain are going against each other and they don't know who to support to knock Romney off..There's a great irony emerging here.Huck and McCain have been giving each other a tongue bath but they might wind up splitting the anti- Romney vote and hand it to Romney in the process. McCain had the state to himself for over a month and could only eek a 2 point lead over Romney in NH.Romney has been fighting a 3 front war. MCain,Huck and the MSM and he's still near the top. Romney has a firm base of support because he has the intellectual part of the base. Huck's has the emotional and McCain has the old school support. If you put an old man like McCain up against Obama it would be Bob Dole all over again, not to mention the fact Huck or McCain would never raise the money needed to compete against the dem candidate who each have over $100 million."

I believe that Romney, Huckabee and Giuliani are the only ones who have a shot at drumming up enough support to win this election. Huckabee would do it because people would fear that the U.S. is slipping back to a "simpler" time. Take that how you will.

McCain as 2008's Bod Dole is a real concern for me. Then throw in his absolutely mixed record and, you know how it goes.

[Lemur]

Who knew (http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0108/The_Thatcher_parallel.html)? Hillary is really channeling the spirit of ... Margaret Thatcher?


"Guess who stepped to the plate in 1990. Margaret Thatcher," she said of Thatcher's early leadership on the issue, adding that the Iron Lady "happens to be a woman."

"We had one leader — I don't know how likable she was — we had one leader who made it a priority and got the job done," she said of Thatcher.

So if Obama is the new Kennedy, and Clinton is the new Thatcher, and every Republican except Ron Paul is the new Reagan, what does that make Edwards?

[Geoffrey S]

Are people voting based on principles of the candidates, or marketability to the other party in the real elections...?

[seireikhaan]

McCain as 2008's Bod Dole is a real concern for me. Then throw in his absolutely mixed record and, you know how it goes.
Could you please define "mixed" for me, in your context of the word?

[seireikhaan]

If we have any other New Hampsherinians, I suggest we harass them as well.
:cry: I never got harassed when the Iowa caucus was coming around...

[ICantSpellDawg]

-"McCain voted against President Bush's tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, though he voted to extend the tax breaks in 2005"

-One of only two Republicans to twice vote against the permanent repeal of the Estate Tax

-McCain Feingold (although it seems to have been fought in 2007 and the major problems were overcome)

-Went from being a supporter of anti-gun bills to being a lead sponsor

-John McCain's immigration policies have earned him a D grade from Americans for Better Immigration



But in reality - I don't mind McCain - I didn't mind Dole either. I think many of his policies are good. I think that he is an interesting man with a courageous history.

I believe that there is a better choice

[GeneralHankerchief]

I cannot, in any remote form of good health, vote for Romney.

If he gets the presidency, do you realize what will have happened the past two years?

- The Patriots go 16-0 and most likely will take the Super Bowl.

- The Red Sox win their second World Series and stand a good chance at getting Johann Santana.

- The Celtics get Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen, go on pace to break the NBA record for wins, and might win the NBA Finals for a record-setting 17th time.

- Romney, former governor of Massachusetts, takes the White House.

Make it stop already! :dizzy2:

[ICantSpellDawg]

I cannot, in any remote form of good health, vote for Romney.

If he gets the presidency, do you realize what will have happened the past two years?

- The Patriots go 16-0 and most likely will take the Super Bowl.

- The Red Sox win their second World Series and stand a good chance at getting Johann Santana.

- The Celtics get Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen, go on pace to break the NBA record for wins, and might win the NBA Finals for a record-setting 17th time.

- Romney, former governor of Massachusetts, takes the White House.

Make it stop already! :dizzy2:


Hahahaha

That is the best argument I've heard so far. I'm a New Yorker, too.

Bah - he's from Michigan anyway. So am I.

[seireikhaan]

-"McCain voted against President Bush's tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, though he voted to extend the tax breaks in 2005"

-One of only two Republicans to twice vote against the permanent repeal of the Estate Tax

-McCain Feingold (although it seems to have been fought in 2007 and the major problems were overcome)

-Went from being a supporter of anti-gun bills to being a lead sponsor

-John McCain's immigration policies have earned him a D grade from Americans for Better Immigration



But in reality - I don't mind McCain - I didn't mind Dole either. I think many of his policies are good. I think that he is an interesting man with a courageous history.

I believe that there is a better choice
Maybe Johnny's just "changed his mind", perhaps? :wink:

Hmm, frankly, I'm not familiar with this "Americans for Better Immigration" organization, perhaps some info or a link?

As for my opposition to Mitt: I believe his foreign policy is a disaster waiting to happen, and also, yes, he makes my skin crawl. :scared:

[ICantSpellDawg]

Maybe Johnny's just "changed his mind", perhaps? :wink:

Hmm, frankly, I'm not familiar with this "Americans for Better Immigration" organization, perhaps some info or a link?

As for my opposition to Mitt: I believe his foreign policy is a disaster waiting to happen, and also, yes, he makes my skin crawl. :scared:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NumbersUSA -

as an aside

I think Mitt shows an excellent understanding of foreign policy. Just because he refuses to opportunistically condemn the Bush Administration doesn't mean he is going to follow in it's footsteps. He has outlined a NEW policy, but not one that repudiates his predecessor.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I was watching the Fox GOP New Hampshire debate and I think you all should too.

I thought Romney did extremely well in it. In fact - compare him to the other candidates. The only one who came close was Giuliani. Thompson came off well enough. Paul said some crazy stuff, but then tempered it with some great stuff (ie his clash with Thompson)

here is the link (http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=Republican+Debate+January+5&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wv)

[Husar]

I have to say, apart from Romney and Huckabee they're quite....old, some of them sound a bit like they wouldn't even make it to the end of a possible second term. :sweatdrop:

[ICantSpellDawg]

watch the health care aspects episodes 5 and 6 - I think that if Romney hasn't converted you yet on at least that idea - he will tonight.

[AntiochusIII]

Man are you a Romney fanatic, or what? :beam:

[ICantSpellDawg]

I am. I can't vote in the primaries in my state because I am not a Republican, so I'm consigned to try and sway people here.

Watching debate after debate - reading political argument after argument; If I can do anything to get Romney into the nomination - I will try to do it.

I really believe that the other candidates are afraid of Romney. They are afraid, because if he means what he says and he is the person he seems to be - then he is a force to be reckoned with. He has years on his side (60 of them), he has exceptionally run companies in the private sector behind him, He is a gifted orator with a firm foundation in modern thought - one who looks 20 years younger than he is. He is also considered a genius by those around him and those who have met him in the past, something that I haven't heard of the other candidates so far.

His policies are right
His personal energy is right.
He is a Washington outsider.
His ideas are unique and his own (which is a rarity in presidential primaries)

I hope he gets a chance to go head to head with Obama or Clinton. If he does this I have the confidence that he will win. I don't have that confidence regarding the other candidates - I wish I did. This is the clincher in a very tough race and I think everyone on the G.O.P. side realizes this.

[Reverend Joe]

I see Mrs. Clinton has a new primary tactic: Cry. (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/01/clinton-gets-em.html)


After the event, Pernold Young told ABC News that she was glad Clinton showed emotion.

"That was real," Pernold Young said.

Another woman in the group, Alison Hamilton of Portsmouth, New Hampshire said she, like most of the people in the room, had been leaning toward voting for Obama before the event.

But after seeing Clinton become emotional, she said she was going to change her vote to Clinton.

"That was the clincher," Hamilton said.
Oh, god, I hate that woman... she's like a Democrat version of Richard Nixon, or an overramped Richard Daley. Women identifying with her is reminds me of the legend of the pied piper. For god's sake, she isn't a leader -- she's a politician: a manipulative, scheming, power-hungry politician. And to think I used to like her because universal health care was her vision. :wall:

Obama for me. I have a powerful gut feeling listening to him speak that he would be the best choice. There is iron in his words. Short of him, it would have to be Edwards, but Edwards does not have Obama's presence.

[seireikhaan]

I am. I can't vote in the primaries in my state because I am not a Republican, so I'm consigned to try and sway people here.

Watching debate after debate - reading political argument after argument; If I can do anything to get Romney into the nomination - I will try to do it.

I really believe that the other candidates are afraid of Romney. They are afraid, because if he means what he says and he is the person he seems to be - then he is a force to be reckoned with. He has years on his side (60 of them), he has exceptionally run companies in the private sector behind him, He is a gifted orator with a firm foundation in modern thought - one who looks 20 years younger than he is. He is also considered a genius by those around him and those who have met him in the past, something that I haven't heard of the other candidates so far.

His policies are right
His personal energy is right.
He is a Washington outsider.
His ideas are unique and his own (which is a rarity in presidential primaries)

I hope he gets a chance to go head to head with Obama or Clinton. If he does this I have the confidence that he will win. I don't have that confidence regarding the other candidates - I wish I did. This is the clincher in a very tough race and I think everyone on the G.O.P. side realizes this.
Umm, his "personal energy is right"? If that means what I'm interpreting, then I'd have to disagree. As I said earlier, this guy makes my skin crawl just trying to listen to him. Perhaps its all the bulls#$! he's said in the primaries just to get try to get elected(either he's the world's BIGGEST flip-flopper, or he's lying his arse off like crazy). As for beating Clinton? :scared: That election would be a nightmare for me, I really can't stand either one of them, and would strongly consider moving to Canada(no, not kidding). However, he has NO chance of beating Obama, imo. While Romney has made comments belittling Democrats and non-conservatives in general, Obama's been speaking of healing those wounds. Frankly, I think there are more people sick of the bipartisan bickering then they are purely convinced that the other is a bunch of evil baby killers or immigrant haters or whatever. Point is, Obama's message has been one of peace, while Romney's has been, at many points, of fear and anger. I think people are tired of Romney's view on it, hence why he failed to win Iowa despite heavily outspending every other Republican candidate. Don't fool yourself, Tuff: he REALLY wanted Iowa, and not winning it was a blow.

[Lemur]

FWIW, Mrs. Lemur only follows politics grudgingly, and only because I badger her about her democratic duty. So I guilted her into watching both ABC debates.

Understand, Mrs. Lemur is very well-educated and intelligent; it's just that she doesn't give a hairy hindquarter for politics.

She thought Mitt Romney was "really creepy." On the other hand, she liked McCain and Huckabee. Thompson, who I thought did okay, also creeped her out. "That man sounds like a jerk," she concluded.

The only Democrat she liked was Obama. Edwards and Clinton really turned her off.

Once I'd registered her impressions, I finally let on who I liked, but I was much more interested in her reactions.

(Note: I still favor Romney over many of the other candidates. I think his record is good, and any politician who bothers to balance the checkbook is okay in Lemur land. Her strong negative reaction to him took me by surprise.)

[ICantSpellDawg]

Umm, his "personal energy is right"? If that means what I'm interpreting, then I'd have to disagree. As I said earlier, this guy makes my skin crawl just trying to listen to him. Perhaps its all the bulls#$! he's said in the primaries just to get try to get elected(either he's the world's BIGGEST flip-flopper, or he's lying his arse off like crazy). As for beating Clinton? :scared: That election would be a nightmare for me, I really can't stand either one of them, and would strongly consider moving to Canada(no, not kidding). However, he has NO chance of beating Obama, imo. While Romney has made comments belittling Democrats and non-conservatives in general, Obama's been speaking of healing those wounds. Frankly, I think there are more people sick of the bipartisan bickering then they are purely convinced that the other is a bunch of evil baby killers or immigrant haters or whatever. Point is, Obama's message has been one of peace, while Romney's has been, at many points, of fear and anger. I think people are tired of Romney's view on it, hence why he failed to win Iowa despite heavily outspending every other Republican candidate. Don't fool yourself, Tuff: he REALLY wanted Iowa, and not winning it was a blow.

I meant personal energy as in he looks like a 45 year old running for Pres, rather than a 60 year old man.

I hear cautious optimism in his speeches.

He hasn't said much about the Democratic Congress, other than he has a history of working successfully with just that - The Democratic State congress in Massachusetts's.
What he has stated is that the Democrats need to be beaten this election. Should he not be saying that? I thought that was the whole idea? Is he supposed to either cede it to them in a non-partisan gift or share it with them in some way?

I'm not fooling myself. I have been down about his 2nd place. The fact that he did a stellar job in the past two national debates after winning Wyoming was a boost for me as well as him and the rest of his constituency.

Do you think McCain can beat Obama? Do you even like McCain?
How about Huckabee?

There is a long way to go after the candidates are nominated. We know from experience that Obama speaks a very charismatic but vague game and that any time he tries to outline his actual policies in detail he creates a few gaffes and comes up short of the "change" mantra that he eschews.

Don't count Romney out yet. His ideas are new and positive. Have you watched the most recent debates?:duel:

[ICantSpellDawg]

(Note: I still favor Romney over many of the other candidates. I think his record is good, and any politician who bothers to balance the checkbook is okay in Lemur land. Her strong negative reaction to him took me by surprise.)

Me too actually. My girlfriend loved him. Hopefully it is a too each his own thing.

Everybody in my family says I remind them of Mitt. Understandably I have been taking it personally when people say he is a phony or a creep...:embarassed:

I'm fighting for my own personality here.

[Lemur]

If it makes you feel any better, Bob Novak (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undead) thinks Mitt is "rallying (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24330)."


Romney made a remarkable comeback in Sunday night's Fox News debate, dominating his opponents. He capitalized on McCain's weaknesses on tax and immigration policy. We attended a focus group of mainly undecided Republican voters arranged for Fox by pollster Frank Luntz. They entered the room before the debate widely divided and left it after the debate heavily for Romney -- because of the immigration issue.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Bob Novak

HAHAHAHA. Undead.

You think I haven't read that already? I am freakin obsessed with this election.:dizzy2: :furious3:

If HE is out, I AM out.

After he leaves, I'm not sure we have a chance in hell

Last shot, G.O.P..:soapbox:


(PS - I'm going to start to use the angry soap box more often until Mitt wins. That is a warning)

[Fragony]

So Hillary dropped the A(l quaida)-bomb on Obama. She freaks me out.

http://www.nieuwnieuws.nl/archives/images/bui.obamaclinton.jpg

http://fusionanomaly.net/brookadamsinvasionofthebodysnatchers.jpg

[Productivity]

Your obsession/zealotry for Romney is seriously creepy TSMcG. While I can't vote, if I could you wouldn't be helping his cause...

[Fragony]

What the hell was that thing that just flew over?

[ICantSpellDawg]

Bah - Fine. I'll stop until after NH.

It's just a little optimism. Too many people have been saying "Neither side has fielded any half-way decent candidates".

That is just wrong. I'm saying that they have. Numerous candidates have their strengths. There are a few duds, but even the duds seem to be well established and interesting people.

Who is a decent candidate by that stroke?

[Husar]

If Romney is 60 that explains why he looked like an old man moving around on the stage in that Iowa video, it just didn't fit his younger looking face, another mystery solved, now on to what flew over Frag's house. :2thumbsup:

[Lemur]

I hope you won't mind if I jerk the thread back over to Hillary again, but I'm really enjoying watching her campaign implode. Today's message?

You're no Martin Luther King! (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/07/civilrights/) Oh, and even if you are, it wasn't Dr. King who got civil rights passed -- it was Lyndon Johnson! You heard me. A boring white person whom nobody really likes, that's the person you need!

Oh, and she also had a sock puppet on stage talking about how "Some people compare one of the other candidates to John F. Kennedy. But he was assassinated." Subtle, guys. Of course Hil distanced herself from the comments, even though they were made on stage right next to her.

Nixon in a pantsuit, man.

[Geoffrey S]

Heh. Even Edwards seems to be implying the possibility of running alongside Obama.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Edwards has been running his campaign like the vice-presidential primaries. You could see it in the way he attacked Hillary any time Obama went after her.

Nixon in a pantsuit. That's great.

[Lemur]

There was another politician who used the slogan "Experience Counts." He was also facing a younger, more charismatic opponent. Yup, it was Richard Nixon. And to be honest, I think he used it more skillfully against JFK than Hil's doing with Obama.

That "he got assassinated" line really ticks me off. That's the final argument, isn't it? Oh, you may like this guy, but he's gonna get whacked, 'cause there are nutjobs out there who don't want to see a negro president. Ugh.

-edit-

No, wait, he's not JFK, he's not MLK, he's not "the liberal Reagan" (as some are now saying), he's ... Princess Diana (http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/436296/princess-obama.thtml)!

[Louis VI the Fat]

Nixon in a pantsuit, man.Nixon? Quod non. An experienced politician who says what the rest doesn't dare to say. Namely, that Obama is a fine, smooth-talking young lad with great speech writers. He'd make for a good talkshow host. He's not a president.

Unlike Hillary.

I just love how she relegates Obama to the sandbox. :2thumbsup:


Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama have been in a running feud arising from her suggestion at Saturday’s debate that he was raising “false hope.”
Mr. Obama responded that Mr. Kennedy did not decide going to the moon was a false hope and that Martin Luther King, Jr. did not see ending segregation as such.

“Dr. King’s dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act,” Mrs. Clinton said when asked about Mr. Obama’s rejoinder by Fox’s Major Garrett after her speech in Dover. “It took a president to get it done.”

The Obama campaign declined to comment on either of those remarks.
Later, during an appearance in Salem, Mrs. Clinton refined her remarks on Fox:
“You know, today Senator Obama used President John F. Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. to criticize me. He basically compared himself to our greatest heroes because they gave great speeches.

“President Kennedy was in Congress for 14 years. He was a war hero. He was a man of great accomplishments and readiness to be president. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. led a movement. He was gassed. He was beaten. He was jailed. And he gave a speech that was one of the most beautifully, profoundly important speeches ever written in America, the “I have a dream” speech.
“And then he worked with President Johnson to get the civil rights laws passed, because the dream couldn’t be realized until finally it was legally permissible for people of all colors and backgrounds and races and ethnicities to be accepted as citizens.
“I’m running for president because I believe that there is not a contradiction between experience and change.”

[Louis VI the Fat]

I can't believe Obama even had the nerve to compare himself to Martin Luther King.* These are different times. MLK lived in a turbulent time in America's history. It took courage and vision to do what he did, and MLK paid a high price, long before being shot even. Obama, on the other hand, meets nothing but applause from a race-fatigued America.

Not only is Obama not a MLK or JFK, he is also, as Hillary so rightfully points out, in all his inexperience still unaware that fancy words are not enough. Change requires more than pretty words and the right minority status at the right time. It requires hard work, experience, cleverness, sophistication and determination. Qualities which Hillary, unlike Obama Luther King, has in abundance.

Meanwhile, while Obama has build an easy candidacy on minority status, Clinton is fighting the real battle for equality in America. Gender, not race is the most restricting force in America. If Hillary is unemotional, she is accused of being coldhearted, mean, calculating, to the point of being creepy. Then when she does imbue her candidacy with some emotion, she is derided for being fake. She's creepy again. Women who don't crave power should be a nurse, not a politician. However, when Hillary even dares to give the faintest hint of the slightest interest in power, she is immediately struck down. Meanwhile, her male colleagues, to a man possesed with an insatiable lust for power, are off the hook. Hillary can't win.

It is not Clinton who accused Obama of being an uppity negro, it is America who accuses Clinton of being an uppity madam. Half of the intense, and, frankly, to me: shocking, hatred for her is ultimately misogynistic in nature. The other half is a residue from rightwing America's incessant whining over Bill Clinton's presidency.

Article (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/08/opinion/08steinem.html?em&ex=1199941200&en=e3d49753c7f6da32&ei=5087%0A)

Gender is probably the most restricting force in American life, whether the question is who must be in the kitchen or who could be in the White House. This country is way down the list of countries electing women and, according to one study, it polarizes gender roles more than the average democracy.

That’s why the Iowa primary was following our historical pattern of making change. Black men were given the vote a half-century before women of any race were allowed to mark a ballot, and generally have ascended to positions of power, from the military to the boardroom, before any women (with the possible exception of obedient family members in the latter).

If the lawyer described above had been just as charismatic but named, say, Achola Obama instead of Barack Obama, her goose would have been cooked long ago. Indeed, neither she nor Hillary Clinton could have used Mr. Obama’s public style — or Bill Clinton’s either — without being considered too emotional by Washington pundits.

*Edit: okay, so he didn't really, but my post requires a dramatic opening line.

[Lemur]

It is not Clinton who accused Obama of being an uppity negro, it is America who accuses Clinton of being an uppity madam. Half of the intense, and, frankly, to me: shocking, hatred for her is ultimately misogynistic in nature.
Is it not possible to dislike a person for their person, rather than for their gender or color? Are we not allowed to form our own opinions about Hillary, or are we obliged to support her, because she is a woman?

And it was a Clinton staffer who (anonymously) described Obama as "uppity." So you're right, Hillary did not utter the word. Amazing how little control she has over her own campaign, all of these proxies saying horrible things about the man without her permission.

Really, Louis, your formulation is kinda weird: Support Clinton or you're a misogynist. ORLLY?

[Fragony]

Realisticly speaking a woman being the alpha in a men's world is a terrifying thing because it has to be one ruthles *cough* equality will have to wait until we are equal. Same with Obama, he just won't get over the fact that he is black, he will always be the black guy that did pretty well. Not fair but it is how it is.

[Reverend Joe]

Louis... you couldn't be more absurdly wrong, man. If you lived and breathed in America, you might realise that there has never been any "oh my goodness, is she really running?!" sentiment about Hillary. No one is acting misogynistic except in the imagination of Hillary's diehard supporters. Were it not for Obama, Hillary would have a clear path to the white house. She's the machine candidate, pure and simple.

And as for experience... what experience? She was the wife of the president, and a senator. Neither of these have any leadership experience inherent in them; the only thing she is experienced at is gaining power and working within the self-destructive machine that pervades Washington. She has no more experience than Obama, other than manipulating the machine. That is what makes Obama different: he will be a major shock to the system.

[Odin]

I can't believe Obama even had the nerve to compare himself to Martin Luther King.* These are different times. MLK lived in a turbulent time in America's history. It took courage and vision to do what he did, and MLK paid a high price, long before being shot even. Obama, on the other hand, meets nothing but applause from a race-fatigued America.

Race fatigued? How about no longer racist? I know it would probably kill some to think that there are those here in the U.S. that have moved past the 50's. That the social expirements of the 60's infact worked, but hey believe what you want.

Little hint though, Barak has Charisma, hilary dosent. That little trait trancends skin tone.


Not only is Obama not a MLK or JFK, he is also, as Hillary so rightfully points out, in all his inexperience still unaware that fancy words are not enough. Change requires more than pretty words and the right minority status at the right time. It requires hard work, experience, cleverness, sophistication and determination. Qualities which Hillary, unlike Obama Luther King, has in abundance.

Yes she is sophisticated, moving to NY to run for senate was very savy. You got us there Louis, she is a very calculating, determined, politically expirenced person, none of which seem to be positives this go round.


Meanwhile, while Obama has build an easy candidacy on minority status, Clinton is fighting the real battle for equality in America. Gender, not race is the most restricting force in America.

Nah, its wealth distribution thats the real restricting force but your ditribe has been entertaining thus far considering you really havent a clue as to the pulse of america circa 2008 (1987? maybe)


If Hillary is unemotional, she is accused of being coldhearted, mean, calculating, to the point of being creepy. Then when she does imbue her candidacy with some emotion, she is derided for being fake. She's creepy again.

Creepy would be an appropriate term for her. Did you catch her victory speech after Iowa? Bill clinton, Madeline albright, Wesley Clark.... It was a who's who of the 90's clinton era. Yep that was creepy.


Women who don't crave power should be a nurse, not a politician. However, when Hillary even dares to give the faintest hint of the slightest interest in power, she is immediately struck down. Meanwhile, her male colleagues, to a man possesed with an insatiable lust for power, are off the hook. Hillary can't win.

She had power as an insider of the clinton presidency, not only that she is in one of the most exclusive powerful clubs in the world, the U.S. senate. How has she been struck down from power exactly?

Being negativly portrayed for the ultimate position of power? Of which she hasnt lost yet?


It is not Clinton who accused Obama of being an uppity negro, it is America who accuses Clinton of being an uppity madam. Half of the intense, and, frankly, to me: shocking, hatred for her is ultimately misogynistic in nature. The other half is a residue from rightwing America's incessant whining over Bill Clinton's presidency.

Another misread of the american cultural situation at this time. Since 1988 (20 years now) either a Bush or a Clinton has been president. The vogue term of the day is "Change" and that is what people want. There isnt an incumbent running, no VP and no high profile cabinent member from the current admin.



[

[Cheetah]

That is what makes Obama different: he will be a major shock to the system.

Do you really think that one man can change the system?

Also, could someone explain the reasons for that elemental hatred against Hillary?

[ICantSpellDawg]

I think that much of the ire comes from her residence in the White house. She was never elected, but pushed her weight around like a #2. Not only that, but her policies turned out to be poorly implemented.

More than that, she was seen to be robotic and unemotional.

I don't even need to mention her record - I think it speaks for itself.



PS - Luois, we were calling Clinton "Nixon in a pantsuit", not Obama.

[Louis VI the Fat]

To paraphrase TuffStuffMcGruff: 'Understandably I have been taking it personally when people say Hillary is a creep...I'm fighting for my own personality here'. ~;)


Really, Louis, your formulation is kinda weird: Support Clinton or you're a misogynist. ORLLY?No, you can support or dislike Hillary for countless reasons. What I'm saying is that a fair chunk of the hatred for her is ultimately mysogynistic in nature. To quote my quoted article:
'But what worries me is that he is seen as unifying by his race while she is seen as divisive by her sex.

What worries me is that she is accused of “playing the gender card” when citing the old boys’ club, while he is seen as unifying by citing civil rights confrontations.

What worries me is that male Iowa voters were seen as gender-free when supporting their own, while female voters were seen as biased if they did and disloyal if they didn’t. '



Louis... you couldn't be more absurdly wrong, man. If you lived and breathed in America, you might realise that there has never been any "oh my goodness, is she really running?!" sentiment about Hillary. No one is acting misogynisticOh, please don't get me wrong. Every American is perfectly accustomed to a women in power suits and leadership positions. Nobody raises an eyebrow when a woman runs for president.

However, that is not the same as America (or the rest of the Western world for that matter) being a post-gender society. Gender expectations are so persuasive that they are most often not even noticed.

The mysogonism is not any aversion to a female president in itself - I think there is little of that. No, it is based in the expectations that people have about gender specific behaviour. Hillary, to my delight but to the detriment of her campaign, is infringing upon quite a few.

Let me explain in terms of race, another, but less persuasive division. Obama is a well-spoken, clean-cut, succesful black man reaching out across the racial barrier. Hence, he is embraced, and America congratulates itself for its post-raciality. Now imagine a succesful black man who has build his career on personal anger and drive. He will not be accepted. People will resent him, where they would've accepted, even embraced, these qualities from a working class white who had worked himself up, or from a white foreign refugee. Not all blackness is accepted. Both are succesful, but one is a threat, the other a consolation.

Similarly, I think many people will accept a Thatcher, but not a Hillary. Not all femininity is accepted. As above, both are similar at first sight: tough, mean and succesful female politicians. For Hillary, this is personal, for Thatcher, it was business. Only the latter is accepted.


PS - Luois, we were calling Clinton "Nixon in a pantsuit", not Obama.I know. I guess I didn't phrase my post properly then. The 'experienced politician' I mentioned refers to Hillary.

@Odin - the article I quoted, and from which I drew a lot of inspiration, was written yesterday, by an American.

[Odin]

@Odin - the article I quoted, and from which I drew a lot of inspiration, was written yesterday, by an American.

You should expand your information sources then.

[Reverend Joe]

Oh, please don't get me wrong. Every American is perfectly accustomed to a women in power suits and leadership positions. Nobody raises an eyebrow when a woman runs for president.

However, that is not the same as America (or the rest of the Western world for that matter) being a post-gender society. Gender expectations are so persuasive that they are most often not even noticed.

The mysogonism is not any aversion to a female president in itself - I think there is little of that. No, it is based in the expectations that people have about gender specific behaviour. Hillary, to my delight but to the detriment of her campaign, is infringing upon quite a few.

Let me explain in terms of race, another, but less persuasive division. Obama is a well-spoken, clean-cut, succesful black man reaching out across the racial barrier. Hence, he is embraced, and America congratulates itself for its post-raciality. Now imagine a succesful black man who has build his career on personal anger and drive. He will not be accepted. People will resent him, where they would've accepted, even embraced, these qualities from a working class white who had worked himself up, or from a white foreign refugee. Not all blackness is accepted. Both are succesful, but one is a threat, the other a consolation.

Similarly, I think many people will accept a Thatcher, but not a Hillary. Not all femininity is accepted. As above, both are similar at first sight: tough, mean and succesful female politicians. For Hillary, this is personal, for Thatcher, it was business. Only the latter is accepted.
Okay, I understand what you are saying now, but I still don't think you are right on. A lower-class white man "who has build his career on personal anger and drive" would still be rejected by the American populace. He would be seen as dangerously emotional and hotheaded, or possibly Machiavellian. Ambition needs to be well-hidden from the American voters for this reason; that's why most of the presidents we have elected have been friendly faces. Look at Al Gore and George Bush: Bush was elected because people saw him as a friendly little teddy bear; Gore, on the other hand, was a snobbish robot who was never quite able to hide his feelings of ambition and elitism. (Okay, so maybe Bush wasn't really elected, per se, but he would have stood no chance against Gore if he had had the same elitist attitude as Gore. It was his friendly, born-again image that gave him a shot. Actually, it's the same reason that Huckabee is beating Romney.)

What makes Obama so appealing, aside from the fact that he seems to have real substance behind his arguments (well, to me anyway) is that he combines emotion with a friendly coolheadedness that Americans require from their leaders.

[Lemur]

I just noticed our internal poll. Who the hell voted for Keyes? That had better be a joke ballot ...

[ICantSpellDawg]

I just noticed our internal poll. Who the hell voted for Keyes? That had better be a joke ballot ...

They are allowed to have their own opinions. I like Keyes, I just wish he wasn't so crazy.

He actually got a number of votes in Iowa, but THEY WERE NEVER TALLIED! The G.O.P. said that they wouldn't put him on the ballot so his name had to be written in. A number of people wrote in and the party actually said something like "we need time to count them before we can state the number"

!!!!!!
That is infuriating. They didn't think that he would get any votes but they need time to count all of them?

[Xiahou]

Nixon? Quod non. An experienced politician who says what the rest doesn't dare to say. Namely, that Obama is a fine, smooth-talking young lad with great speech writers. He'd make for a good talkshow host. He's not a president.
And I think that's pretty much all that voters know about Obama. He's charismatic, decent looking, and makes nice speeches about "hope" and "change". Does anyone know what his policies actually are? He's the ultimate "feel good" candidate imo.

[ICantSpellDawg]

And I think that's pretty much all that voters know about Obama. He's charismatic, decent looking, and makes nice speeches about "hope" and "change". Does anyone know what his policies actually are? He's the ultimate "feel good" candidate imo.

I agree. I just don't want to start talking about that until Hillary is out of the race.:laugh4:

[Sasaki Kojiro]

And I think that's pretty much all that voters know about Obama. He's charismatic, decent looking, and makes nice speeches about "hope" and "change". Does anyone know what his policies actually are? He's the ultimate "feel good" candidate imo.

That's what speeches are for...you'll have to watch the debate for policy. He goes more into his policy plan during the debate than most other candidates are willing to, especially hillary who prefers to talk about how she "supports fiscal responsibility".


'But what worries me is that he is seen as unifying by his race while she is seen as divisive by her sex.

Not true, she's seen as divisive because her and her policies. Nothing to do with her sex.


What worries me is that she is accused of “playing the gender card” when citing the old boys’ club, while he is seen as unifying by citing civil rights confrontations.

You're playing the gender card when you say "I should be elected to spite the misogynists" instead of "I should be elected because I'm the best candidate".


What worries me is that male Iowa voters were seen as gender-free when supporting their own, while female voters were seen as biased if they did and disloyal if they didn’t. '

From personal experience I've met lots of women who are supporting clinton just because she's a woman. Quite a few men too. They usually spend their time discussing misogyny and gender expectations rather than analyzing how much more hawkish she is than obama or edwards, how feasible her health care plan is, and how honest a campaign she's running.

[Odin]

And I think that's pretty much all that voters know about Obama. He's charismatic, decent looking, and makes nice speeches about "hope" and "change". Does anyone know what his policies actually are? He's the ultimate "feel good" candidate imo.

Well here is a bit on Foreign policy: (http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1655613,00.html) A cuban policy I agree with.


His specific platform in Iran (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/foreignpolicy/#iran) I am in favor of direct talks at the presidentail/sec state level now, before the any real drama.

Earlychildhood education (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/education/#early-childhood) seems a bit populist really.

His website is pretty well structured and easy to follow. While I am not onboard with this guy yet his overall plans seem to be in line with a democratic legislature.

Yeah he isnt expirenced but he will be able to move his domestic adgenda forward, and internationally well laying off the gas pedal might not be such a bad idea 1.5 trillion later.

[Lemur]

They are allowed to have their own opinions. I like Keyes, I just wish he wasn't so crazy.
He's crazy-crazy. Here's an old clip of Keyes and Obama (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SG5u04Gbg0A&) debating gay marriage. See if you can spot the well-spoken lunatic.

[ICantSpellDawg]

He's crazy-crazy. Here's an old clip of Keyes and Obama (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SG5u04Gbg0A&) debating gay marriage. See if you can spot the well-spoken lunatic.

I know he is crazy. I'd get his back in a fight, but I wouldn't like to see him as President.

As you know, I am not a political ally to (those who consider themselves and are considered by others) to be "gay" either.:soapbox:

[CountArach]

How long is it until we will see some results from this? Timezones always screw me up when trying to work this stuff out.

[GeneralHankerchief]

How long is it until we will see some results from this? Timezones always screw me up when trying to work this stuff out.

Polls close at 8:00 PM (20:00) local time. That's a little over 3 hours from now.

[CountArach]

Polls close at 8:00 PM (20:00) local time. That's a little over 3 hours from now.
Now, the next question: Is there anywhere I can watch the results coming in, like with the Iowa caucus sites?

EDIT: Nevermind, I forgot that I have CNN on TV anyway. I <3 Cable

[drone]

Now, the next question: Is there anywhere I can watch the results coming in, like with the Iowa caucus sites?
I haven't found any preliminary results online yet. Does NH do the right thing and not publish any results until the polls close?

Turnout is heavy, supposedly there are ballot shortages. For a primary. The career politician's worst nightmare, constituents that care! ~D

[AntiochusIII]

Turnout is heavy, supposedly there are ballot shortages. For a primary. The career politician's worst nightmare, constituents that care! ~D ~:cheers:

[Don Corleone]

Turnout WAS heavy. I live in a town of 7000, and it took me 1/2 hour to wait through line.

In the end, I went Romney. In the past few days, I've tried supporting each of the other 4 Republican candidates in turn. But I couldn't:

....believe that Fred Thomson is too lazy to campaign.
....forgive John McCain for amnesty for Mexico, or the "Ted Turner will now tell you what to think" law, aka McCain-Feingold.
....trust Rudy Giuliani not to turn into a big-government oligarch upon election.
....understand how it is that Mike Huckabee isn't a Democrat.

I even seriously flirted with the idea of Barrack Obama and Bill Richardson (you can change your party afiliation and re-register at the polling station in NH). Couldn't do it. Neither of them understand how disastrous a 'pull-out now, at any cost' would be for us globally. Even quietly doing just that, while publicly declaring victory, would be a better option.

Sorry for not participating more these past few days, here and in the Victonia election. Major crisis at work, not my fault but I'm part of the fireline. :skull: As in, the 'fire' (schedule slippage on a project) goes no further, not that I'm on the firing line. In fact, I'll be working on Powerpoint into the wee hours to watch the results come in.

My prediction is Obama and McCain. Obama has a groundswell of excitement and 'honk for hope' assemblies (cute college girls at busy intersections holding signs).

On the funny/pathetic side (you choose), one of the technicians at work talked about a town hall meeting at Salem High School in HN last night. Hillary talked for an hour straight and basically yelled at the audience, saying they should be embarrassed that the Democrats aren't smart enough to nominate her in a landslide. At the end of it, a guy stood up and asked the first question.... "Can you iron a few of my shirts?". Apparently, she lost it at that point.

[CountArach]

For anyone (like me) who can't watch this on TV, here is MSNBC's coverage:
mms://msnbc.wm.llnwd.net/msnbc_6_live_8828

[CountArach]

MSNBC just gave NH to McCain.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Cnn Exit polls showing obama victory.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Turnout WAS heavy. I live in a town of 7000, and it took me 1/2 hour to wait through line.

In the end, I went Romney. In the past few days, I've tried supporting each of the other 4 Republican candidates in turn. But I couldn't:

....believe that Fred Thomson is too lazy to campaign.
....forgive John McCain for amnesty for Mexico, or the "Ted Turner will now tell you what to think" law, aka McCain-Feingold.
....trust Rudy Giuliani not to turn into a big-government oligarch upon election.
....understand how it is that Mike Huckabee isn't a Democrat.

I even seriously flirted with the idea of Barrack Obama and Bill Richardson (you can change your party afiliation and re-register at the polling station in NH). Couldn't do it. Neither of them understand how disastrous a 'pull-out now, at any cost' would be for us globally. Even quietly doing just that, while publicly declaring victory, would be a better option.

Sorry for not participating more these past few days, here and in the Victonia election. Major crisis at work, not my fault but I'm part of the fireline. :skull: As in, the 'fire' (schedule slippage on a project) goes no further, not that I'm on the firing line. In fact, I'll be working on Powerpoint into the wee hours to watch the results come in.

My prediction is Obama and McCain. Obama has a groundswell of excitement and 'honk for hope' assemblies (cute college girls at busy intersections holding signs).

On the funny/pathetic side (you choose), one of the technicians at work talked about a town hall meeting at Salem High School in HN last night. Hillary talked for an hour straight and basically yelled at the audience, saying they should be embarrassed that the Democrats aren't smart enough to nominate her in a landslide. At the end of it, a guy stood up and asked the first question.... "Can you iron a few of my shirts?". Apparently, she lost it at that point.

I'm very disappointed. I am totally happy with your decision though, Don - if it matters to you at all.

Romney still pulls the most delegates, he's not out yet.

[Lemur]

Hillary is up. I can't believe it. The crying worked. Looks as though women are breaking for her. That thumping sound you hear is my head hitting the desk.

On the bright side, McCain is in the game with a solid win. Even the Club for Growth is issuing nicey-nice press statements about him. And Giuliani, who spent a lot of money, is going to get crushed by Ron Paul.

But really ... Hillary? Wha'happen?

[JAG]

To think, the ice lady showing emotion might have won her - if not the New Hampshire primary - a huge political victory.

Brilliant political maneuvering, her husband would have savoured.

Come on Obama by the way!

[Marshal Murat]

I hope Paul pulls through. It'll show he is a serious contender for the Republican nomination. Or at least a member of the party :inquisitive:

Hilldabeast seems to be pulling through with a 4,000 voter difference. Don, did you do something to those 4,000 voters?

[AntiochusIII]

Hillary is up. I can't believe it. The crying worked. Looks as though women are breaking for her. That thumping sound you hear is my head hitting the desk.Gods no.

New Hampshire, don't you fail America! Crocodile tears! CROCODILE TEARS! :balloon:

[Lemur]

It really was the crying. Color me amazed. Account after account I'm reading, people saying, "Oh yeah, once I saw those tears, I knew she was for real."

Unbelievable. As I've said before, if the Dems nominate her, they deserve to lose.

-edit-

Here's a sample (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/08/live-from-manchester-its-primary-night/index.html?hp):


In the end, the tear was almost a galvanizing moment. It shook a couple of voters of their mental fence and solidified others in support of Mrs. Clinton. Elaine Marquis, a receptionist from Manchester, went back and forth, but she was leaning to Mrs. Clinton when that moment came. Someone asked a personal question and the candidates eyes misted. “I think it was absolutely wonderful,” Mrs. Marquis said. “Women finally saw a woman. Perhaps a tough woman but a woman with a gentle heart.”

[GeneralHankerchief]

It's all up to the college towns now.

God help us all.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Bill's loss in NH in 1992 was a "good enough" loss to keep him in the game -- eventually he was running the table.

Hillary still has the machine and the money. Obama has charm and Oprah.

I'll cheerfully vote against either on policy issues -- but I admit Obama wouldn't make me cringe in horror if he's standing there at noon on 1/20/2009.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Looks like a hillary victory in NH even if she doesn't come out ahead--losing a close race just shows that she is still in this thing. I don't think it will last for her though, I can't imagine obama not getting most of edwards supporters when he drops out.

[seireikhaan]

:jawdrop: Dear lord, come on, New Hampshire, what's all this?

[CountArach]

Please NH, don't make me lose faith in humanity again... just when Iowa was re-instilling it.

[seireikhaan]

So is this election going to turn into a cry-fest of who can get more sympathy? :angry:

[Marshal Murat]

There's always South Carolina, Nevada....besides. Clinton didn't win the New Hampshire polls, but he pulled out. Obama could do the same.

[Lemur]

Looks like it's being called for Hillary. Yikes. Was it:

The tears
Independents breaking for McCain
The Bradley effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_effect)
New Hampsherinians just don't like being told who's the winner

[GeneralHankerchief]

I hope it's #2. I really do.

Fifteen years of evidence pointing to the contrary, and suddenly the country falls in love with Hillary because she shows she has a human side. Ecch.

[Proletariat]

Who really changes their vote because someone cries? Do you guys actually know anyone like that? I know you can find them on the news, but what can't you find there. This had nothing to do with her crying, they just like Hillary and have for awhile.

[seireikhaan]

At the end of it, a guy stood up and asked the first question.... "Can you iron a few of my shirts?". Apparently, she lost it at that point.
:laugh4: That man deserves a medal.:laugh4:

[Proletariat]

http://www2.strangesigns.org:81/albums/People/wei_feminist.jpg

Was it the guy in the background of this pic? :beam:

[Cheetah]

I ask again, why is this elemantal hatred vs Hillary? From here were I stand (sit ~;) which is far away from the US) it is not quite clear.

[Proletariat]

I don't like her and I don't understand myself, Cheetah. Judging from what you read on the backroom, you'd think Hillary was a fringe lunatic, under dog, darkhorse who has a slim chance at supplanting the nomination. In reality, many people have fond memories of Bill and genuinely like and believe in Hillary. Personally, she seems like a carpet bagging, corrupt shill but she's alot more accepted here stateside than what you see at the Org.

[AntiochusIII]

It's the Internet. We love Ron Paul for crying out loud. ~;)

Personally though, I find her potential nomination extremely discouraging for these reasons:


- She's a Clinton. Sweet, Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton. Welcome to the Kingdom of America.


- She's the Machine. Every good Democrat is behind her or they shamefully admit they're American first, Democrat second. I've had it with the baby boomers and their partisanship.


- She's the career politician. I want somebody new to shake down the system, an American Sarkozy, except we had so many Sarkozy's we're asking for somebody different.


- Her policies, err, sucks? They said she had good experience; they said Obama didn't. I read Obama's website and then hers, and, well, you know...

If I have a choice between two populists, I'd rather have the hopeful one instead of Mrs. Think of the Children, thankyouverymuch. Now of course it's not even certain that Obama is all populist, no substance as they like to say.


- Obama's rise was highly encouraging. Finally, somebody new! Finally, a black guy who doesn't play black! Finally, somebody who can convince the youth to vote! Finally, a guy who says he wants to extend a hand to the Right! Finally, somebody who pays attention to the Internet! Welcome to New America!

...and then the Dream is gone again. The Empire (the party machine, baby boomers, whatever) Strikes Back. Or is it? The race is not over. I hope Hillary had just won the last of the sympathy votes.


- 3 months ago Hillary was considered guaranteed. It was Hillary vs. Rudy Giuliani, and all the alternatives are dreaming. Not even McCain counted. I don't want that back. No imperial Presidents for me please, I'd keep my dictatorial fantasies to myself.


- Her campaign is dirty. She's been doing the character assassination thing since Obama became a serious threat. Rovian political tricks? No thanks!

:thumbsdown:

[Banquo's Ghost]

As an outsider, the thing that distresses me most about Hiliary's campaign is the sheer hatred for the Republicans.

I was watching the British Channel 4 News last night and her campaign manager was being interviewed before the results. His whole objection to Obama was that, and I paraphrase; "the senator doesn't get it - everything bad is Bush's and the Republicans fault. Obama likes to talk about healing - he's an idiot - this is about revenge and crushing and I wanna kill - killll - KILLL!"

(OK, apologies to Arlo for the last bit, the characterisation is not that over the top).

I hated this poison when the Republicans inflicted it onto Bill Clinton's presidency, and I hate Hiliary's campaign for continuing the vile tradition. Americans are far better than that and deserve far better than dynastic warfare.

Not to mention - jeez, the weeping? I threw up, and people changed their vote?

[Louis VI the Fat]

Hillary's won! :knight:

Ah...what a bit of crying, whining and an irritated tone won't achieve. Sheer bliss, this.

Me, of course I would never descent into any irritated whining in my defense of Hillary...~;)

[Odin]

She won. Somehow I came away with the impression from the media that it was an upset victory. But the victory margin was small, considering the amount of money and her front runner status for months and months.

A win is a win, but I'm more convinced then ever that she is vulnerable, but hey if she is the nominee then its 4 more years of polarisation and angst, yippee.

McCain bothers me, this guy actually wants to continue with Mr Bush's Iraq policy and proclaims it as some kind of a success. Meantime Billions get spent and the war is unpaid for. I'd be shocked if he continued his winning streak, If he does I would have to seriously open up the check book and fund the otherside and I dont want to do that.

This guy has status quo written all over him, I'll sign up for the change candidates at this point.

[Banquo's Ghost]

I often find Mark Steel's satirical commentaries funny, but this one is funny and apposite (http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/mark_steel/article3321365.ece). Should make Louis cry, anyway.

:beam:

Mark Steel: A few tears won't make Hillary more electable

Published: 09 January 2008

What a magnificent speech by Hillary Clinton, where she broke down in tears and spluttered, "Lots of people think elections are about who's up and who's down, but this is very personal for me. I've had such opportunities from this country."

At first glance it makes so little sense I thought if you chucked in a perpendicular and a polyunsaturate it could be one of Neil Kinnock's. But when you look again it's the scream of an articulate four-year-old. She's saying "Let ME be President because I WANT to. LET me LET me it's not FAIR." Maybe there's a bit they didn't show, where she said "And furthermore I say to Mr. Obama 'Hnnnng, yaaaaaaa go AWAY," and tips up a camera, and then Bill arrives to say "Now stop this at ONCE or you can't even be senator, do you understand?"

Most people seem to think this was a deliberate act, to win popularity by appearing human and vulnerable. Maybe at her next press conference she'll come on with a puppy. And her speech will be "This is Rosie." Then, fighting back tears she'll say "And this afternoon she's got to be put down. God bless America." And then the hall will fill up with balloons. Then, during a televised debate she'll respond to a question about energy policy with a botched suicide attempt.

But there may be other reasons why her campaign's slipped, which is she claims to be the best candidate to bring about "Change" from the days of Bush, but she's supported almost everything he's done, including the invasion of Iraq. Now she says she'll "Bring the troops home" so presumably her statement will be "When the war was popular I supported it. Then when it was unpopular I opposed it. So I am the only candidate who's consistently voted with the American people."

She supported the bombing of Lebanon, and her only criticism of Bush while he was planning to bomb Iran was that he "downplayed their threats". She also urged him to categorise the entire Iranian army as a "terrorist organisation". So she must be the only person in the world who thinks "We need a change – because Bush hasn't bombed enough places or called enough people terrorists."

If she ends up getting the Democrat nomination, she and the Republicans could get in a fascinating battle to see who can call most people terrorists. The CNN debate will involve the two of them stood there all evening taking turns to shout "Cubans" – "Syrians" – "Anyone who supports Chavez", until they get to Eskimos and the disabled.

This may be why, of all the candidates for either party, Hillary has received more donations from arms companies than any other. Because at last she might bring the change that's needed, and be a president prepared to take care of the impoverished arms companies. The Bush era has been lean hungry years for those poor souls. It's been their version of the dustbowl, weapons manufacturers forced to traipse across Oklahoma begging for someone to buy their withered laser-guided Tomahawk missiles so they can feed their children for another night.

But Hillary's prepared for change. Which is why the person she's suggested would be her Secretary for State is Richard Holbrooke, who first came to prominence when he helped organise the Indonesian invasion of East Timor. So the only change would be the return of people who fronted atrocities 20 years ago. It would be like if someone took over the BBC with the slogan "It's time for change" and brought back Noel's House Party.

Hillary's other slogan involves her "experience", proving she'd be "ready from day one". But her main experience as "First Lady" involved her plan to provide health care. After eight years in the job there was no plan, because the health companies objected it would dent their profits, and less people had health care than before. So by that logic Steve McLaren should ring the FA and demand his old job back, complaining, "This new manager can't be trusted, as unlike me he's not got any experiencing of buggering everything up."

There's a myth about the Clintons' rule, shaped by the times that followed them, that it was a period of peace and friendship, with occasional fun in the Oval Office. But the Clintons were crucial figures in shaping the idea that big business was not only the best way to run the world, it was the only way. Under their rule, the poor became poorer while the rich became super-rich.

Possibly the greatest hope for America lies not with Hillary, or Obama, but from the opposition to the war in Iraq, without which it's possible they'd have already bombed Iran, as suggested by Hillary.

And if her tearful act does rescue her campaign, Gordon Brown might try a similar tactic. In which case he'll splutter, "Lots of people think, ahem, economies are about (sniff) what's up and down, (pause) but (sniff) this is a deeply felt re-evaluation of fiscal indicators tending towards declining global growth requiring sustainable prudence within a homogenised market, and that's deeply personal for me (howl, splutter, sniff)."

[Geoffrey S]

Good old Mark Steel. Loved his lectures on famous people, such as Marx. Shows he hasn't lost his touch.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

So is this election going to turn into a cry-fest of who can get more sympathy? :angry:

YES!! Our voters are generally: a) well-meaning, & b) ignorant. However, they intuitively understand "passion" when they see real emotion displayed. If it's controlled -- "I'm compassionate but it doesn't leave me a mess" -- then many people flock towards it with their votes.

[Lemur]

Pretty much (http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/01/the-last-minute.html) sums up my feelings:


This was a victory based on the old party machine, the core partisan Democrats, and the Clinton loyalists. She takes the Democrats back to a bunkered partisan posture. It would be a disaster for them up against McCain in November. Or as one reader put it:

"Lets see ... A minority candidate of near-unprecedented rhetorical skill whom even the Republicans fear has a chance to reunite the country versus a party hack riding a wave of nepotism and backroom arm twisting."

I just have to keep telling myself that McCain won. That takes most of the hurt away. If I cry, will the rest of you vote for me?

[ICantSpellDawg]

Link to poll averages (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/nh/new_hampshire_republican_primary-193.html)

I was actually surprised by the Republican results last night. McCain was slated for 31.8% of the vote and Romney for 28.2.

In the end, the Voter turnout was record breaking and McCain was given 37% of the vote. You would assume that Romney would be the big loser, BUT he came away with 32% of the vote. This means, obviously that he got a higher percentage of the Republican vote than expected AND way more votes in general. Huckabee lost out by a little over 1 or 2% (or simply had no bounce in NH after Iowa) and Thompson lost half of his polled votes.

Very interesting.

This race has really become a four man show

Giuliani, McCain, Romney, Huckabee.

Do you think Thompson and Hunter will bow out right after South Carolina?


PS - Nader said he would probably run if Hildabeast recieved the nomination.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I just have to keep telling myself that McCain won. That takes most of the hurt away. If I cry, will the rest of you vote for me?

Vote: Lemur

:devilish:


I think Thompson will bow out if SC shows as badly for him as NH. He needs to show some strength there to validate his "effort."


Unless someone gathers momentum and starts taking multiple wins in a row (or concurrently), we're headed for 2 brokered conventions -- wouldn't that be fun.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Unless someone gathers momentum and starts taking multiple wins in a row (or concurrently), we're headed for 2 brokered conventions -- wouldn't that be fun.

In some ways it is. We can wait and see the Democrats pick their candidate first. We'll show our cards after.

[AntiochusIII]

Unless someone gathers momentum and starts taking multiple wins in a row (or concurrently), we're headed for 2 brokered conventions -- wouldn't that be fun.Oh yes, Hillary at her best.

...

:bigcry:

vote for me

[Geoffrey S]

Hillary's won! :knight:

Ah...what a bit of crying, whining and an irritated tone won't achieve. Sheer bliss, this.

Me, of course I would never descent into any irritated whining in my defense of Hillary...~;)
You know, I'd have thought the fact that Hillary had to resort to playing up to the female stereotype with her tears to gain votes would be a disappointment to you, considering your earlier posts...?