2008 US Presidential Election - Page 7
Forum Index > Closed |
miNi
Korea (South)2010 Posts
| ||
MenzieK
United States123 Posts
Edit: Fine no caps, but this just shows how the elections are prone to being rigged, and its not taken too seriously. Oh my god, just look at the two guy's face, it even speaks guilty, like two boys caught stealing something. I knew something was wrong with how things were going, btw I can't believe some people here are actaully stupid and moronic enought to vote for Mitt romney. ROFL at Obama, Clinton and Edwards being honest and genuine people just ROFL. | ||
BlackJack
United States10304 Posts
| ||
MenzieK
United States123 Posts
| ||
Xeris
Iran17695 Posts
| ||
Rev0lution
United States1805 Posts
and Obama will gain huge momentum with this victory of 55% to Clinton's 27%. | ||
Titusmaster6
United States5937 Posts
Too bad I can't vote ![]() | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
Nick_54
United States2230 Posts
| ||
Xeris
Iran17695 Posts
| ||
PobTheCad
Australia893 Posts
You Americans seriously don't believe your economy and your currency is going down the toilet? | ||
Xeris
Iran17695 Posts
| ||
funkie
Venezuela9374 Posts
I just like when he smiles, and I hope he rapes Chavez. :D | ||
Sean.G
Spain889 Posts
On January 27 2008 12:42 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: I find it interesting that it was by that much, even though Bill Clinton basically said it would be because he is black. I wonder if over 50% margin is all black voters... I read somewhere that 50% of the voters were african americans | ||
miNi
Korea (South)2010 Posts
On January 23 2008 21:14 a-game wrote: I think that Obama's win in south carolina may actually help Clinton win the nomination in the long run. That's a good article.this article matches exactly what i've been thinking the last few weeks. the clinton's love the fact that this has become a racially charged nomination, and it also reinforces my opinion that losing nevada was at the same time, losing the nomination for obama http://thehill.com/dick-morris/how-clinton-will-win-the-nomination-by-losing-s.c.-2008-01-23.html + Show Spoiler [article] + How Clinton will win the nomination by losing S.C. Hillary Clinton will undoubtedly lose the South Carolina primary as African-Americans line up to vote for Barack Obama. And that defeat will power her drive to the nomination. The Clintons are encouraging the national media to disregard the whites who vote in South Carolina’s Democratic primary and focus on the black turnout, which is expected to be quite large. They have transformed South Carolina into Washington, D.C. — an all-black primary that tells us how the African-American vote is going to go. By saying he will go door to door in black neighborhoods in South Carolina matching his civil rights record against Obama’s, Bill Clinton emphasizes the pivotal role the black vote will play in the contest. And by openly matching his record on race with that of the black candidate, he invites more and more scrutiny focused on the race issue. Of course, Clinton is going to lose that battle. Blacks in Nevada overwhelmingly backed Obama and will obviously do so again in South Carolina, no matter how loudly former President Clinton protests. So why is he making such a fuss over a contest he knows he’s going to lose? Precisely because he is going to lose it. If Hillary loses South Carolina and the defeat serves to demonstrate Obama’s ability to attract a bloc vote among black Democrats, the message will go out loud and clear to white voters that this is a racial fight. It’s one thing for polls to show, as they now do, that Obama beats Hillary among African-Americans by better than 4-to-1 and Hillary carries whites by almost 2-to-1. But most people don’t read the fine print on the polls. But if blacks deliver South Carolina to Obama, everybody will know that they are bloc-voting. That will trigger a massive white backlash against Obama and will drive white voters to Hillary Clinton. Obama has done everything he possibly could to keep race out of this election. And the Clintons attracted national scorn when they tried to bring it back in by attempting to minimize the role Martin Luther King Jr. played in the civil rights movement. But here they have a way of appearing to seek the black vote, losing it, and getting their white backlash, all without any fingerprints showing. The more President Clinton begs black voters to back his wife, and the more they spurn her, the more the election becomes about race — and Obama ultimately loses. Because they have such plans for South Carolina, the Clintons were desperate to win in Nevada. They dared not lose two primaries in a row leading up to Florida. But now they can lose South Carolina with impunity, having won in Nevada. But don’t look for them to walk away from South Carolina. Their love needs to appear to have been unrequited by the black community for their rejection to seem so unfair that it triggers a white backlash. In this kind of ricochet politics, you have to lose openly and publicly in order to win the next round. And since the next round consists of all the important and big states, polarizing the contest into whites versus blacks will work just fine for Hillary. Of course, this begs the question of how she will be able to attract blacks after beating Obama. Here the South Carolina strategy also serves its purpose. If she loses blacks and wins whites by attacking Obama, it will look dirty and underhanded to blacks. She’ll develop a real problem in the minority community. But if she is seen as being rejected by minority voters in favor of Obama after going hat in hand to them and trying to out-civil rights Obama, blacks will even likely feel guilty about rejecting Hillary and will be more than willing to support her in the general election. | ||
PobTheCad
Australia893 Posts
On January 27 2008 16:14 Xeris wrote: who said that? lol. everyone here knows our economy sucks right now lol Point being more of the same isn't going to work Paul is the only candidate calling for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq and overseas US bases Good starts for getting the budget back on track , certainly better than Hillarys 'Universal Healthcare' scheme. | ||
gravity
Australia1768 Posts
On January 27 2008 15:04 PobTheCad wrote: I'm not getting this 'Paul is crazy' thing. You Americans seriously don't believe your economy and your currency is going down the toilet? For one thing Paul supports returning to the gold standard which is retarded. | ||
a-game
Canada5085 Posts
i think the fact that it was a huge rout in both the popular vote and the delegates awarded was really important (people expected obama to win, so if clinton made it kind of close then that would've been a form of victory for her). even then i think S.C. largely will get dismissed as a racial vote, even though obama really didn't do that bad among white voters, the clintons will still benefit from the perception that it was a black vote. still one has to think the clinton's might of been hoping for a bit closer result than it was. edit: barack obama's victory speech from South Carolina (pretty good imo) part 1 part 2 | ||
PobTheCad
Australia893 Posts
On January 27 2008 17:44 gravity wrote: For one thing Paul supports returning to the gold standard which is retarded. Which is more retarded - a gold standard which the US had until 1971 or running a 800billion trade deficit every year with no effort to decrease it? | ||
gravity
Australia1768 Posts
On January 27 2008 21:13 PobTheCad wrote: Which is more retarded - a gold standard which the US had until 1971 or running a 800billion trade deficit every year with no effort to decrease it? A trade deficit has nothing to do with the gold standard, and people are way too alarmist about the deficit to begin with. | ||
| ||