Looks like evangelicals reign supreme in VA. Huckster is ahead of McstayinIraq. At least TN isn't alone in our embarrassment of voting for southern Baptist nut jobs...
Submitted by Bbeanster on Tue, 2008/02/12 - 8:09pm.
It looks like evangelicals might not be quite that strong, since MSNBC is reporting that a large number of independents and even 8 % of traditional Republicans chose to vote in the "open" Democratic primary.
Submitted by SteveMule on Tue, 2008/02/12 - 9:17pm.
On the Dem side Obama is giving Hillary a first class thumping! As I read the CNN exist polls he's winning in almost every catagory! All of the demographic catagories that were Hillary's strengths Obama now has the lead. The margins aren't big for some but still.
Submitted by CathyMcCaughan on Tue, 2008/02/12 - 9:28pm.
I know there's an election in DC because my brother called my mother this morning and casually remarked that he just voted for Obama. She gasped and asked if he knows that Obama is a Muslim. My brother and I died a little bit.
Submitted by Eleanor A on Wed, 2008/02/13 - 11:29am.
Should he win the nomination, it'll be talking point #1 against Obama. Not that I agree with that, but people can't seriously be surprised the Republicans are putting this out already, can they...?
Submitted by JustJohnny on Tue, 2008/02/12 - 9:29pm.
Not A Caucus, Not just African Americans, Not Just White Men, Not Just White Women, Not Just Latinos, Not Just Rich, Not Just Poor, Not Just Urban, Not Just Rural, Not Just Christians, Not Just Democrats.
Not Just Another Campaign. This is my campaign. This is your campaign. This is our campaign.
Disclaimer: if HRC wins the nomination, she'll be my gal. For now, though, YES WE CAN
Submitted by Carole Borges on Tue, 2008/02/12 - 10:53pm.
I appreciated the smart shift in Obama's WI speech as he begins to take on McCain. He is starting to shoot back at the cynics who laugh at the hope the American people have to see a change in Washington politcs. He's also returning to the Iraq war. He understands that the American people are seething still from being duped into it by the Bush administration and the elected officials who couldn't see through the lies or weren't strong enough to stand up and tell George Bush NO!
The best news of the night though was the fact that Obama is beginning to chip away at groups that were once a sure thing for Clinton.
Every trick in the book will be played now. The nomination will not come easy, but as Barack has said,"I'm skinny, but I'm a scrapper". This man is much tougher than people think.
Every day it looks more and more possible he can win the big states everyone predicted were in the bag for Clinton.
Submitted by Eleanor A on Wed, 2008/02/13 - 11:30am.
Same song, a bit of a different verse. VA is a red state that hasn't gone for a Dem in the Presidential since 1964. Obama split the white vote evenly with Clinton and picked up most of the 30% of the electorate that's Af-American in Maryland - as of 1999, the most recent census, 64% of MD families made more than 50K per year, 40% of them took home over 75K per year...D.C.'s vote is also disproportionately African-American, and it includes many of the most wealthy, highly educated white folks in the country.
Some of the demographics are favorable, but A LOT of the white voters in MD/VA are also more affluent and educated than average.
We'll see if the trend holds, but these states are not your average bear in many ways.
Submitted by Carole Borges on Wed, 2008/02/13 - 8:10am.
His concern about health is one of the reasons I will vote for him. He supports preventative medicine. Universal healthcare without the club of total mandated government involvement appeals to me. It's more realistic. Mandated health insurance is not in my humble opinion the way to go. As is shown in this article assessing Romney's MA plan.
"The core problem with the law was that Governor Mitt Romney, running for the Republican nomination in 2008, developed the individual mandate part of the plan in collaboration with the rightwing Heritage Foundation, including its health staffers, Bob Moffit and Ed Haislmaier. The explicit goal was to undercut progressive alternatives such as expanding Medicaid to cover more of the uninsured or having employers take more responsibility for covering their employees. And Romney is trying to pitch the passage of the Massachusetts bill -- including its heavy burden on working families through the individual mandate -- as undermining the case for covering the uninsured through expansions of Medicaid or Medicare. "The old single-payer canard is gone," crowed Romney." Link...
I'm glad Obama is speaking about his physical fitness. It sets a good example.
Carole, I'm surprised you are advocating against universal single-payer health insurance. I'm guessing you hadn't thought much about it and didn't really know much about the policy issues prior to getting on board with Obama.
You should spend some more time studying it instead of repeating GOP talking points. The (unsigned) analysis of the Massachusetts program at the progressive website points out some problems, but when it says that "having employers take more responsibility for covering their employees" is a "progressive goal" I have to be very suspect. Having employers involved at all is a major part of the problem. Even John McCain has said this.
Are you familiar with HR676? Why do you not think it would work? Early on, you said you liked Kucinich and said you might vote for him as a protest, saying that his ideas were more aligned with yours but you just couldn't see him as President. He is the sponsor of HR676.
You said the following about one of the debates:
Kucinich as usual said what most Democrats are really feeling.
So now as a Democrat you aren't really feeling that universal single payer health insurance is a good idea? I realize Obama said if we were starting from scratch that single-payer would be his preference, but that we couldn't get it done now with the systems we have in place. Clinton said she will uphold the Democratic Party principle of health care for everybody and would fight to get it done.
I'm really surprised that you would take this position on health care. Neither Obama nor Clinton's health care plan is a single payer universal health insurance system, but Clinton's comes closer. Frankly, I think you are being influenced away from your core values because of a campaign. You ought to dial it down a notch and think more about some of the things you post here before blurting out the first talking point from the automatic reply playbook.
Also, in that same post about the debate, you said:
It's getting a bit painful to watch Obama struggle to keep up with the candidates who are so obviously more experienced than he is--when they point to their own records he has nothing to respond with other than his "intent". I really like Obama, but he just doesn't seem to have the experience needed to run the government well.
And:
Hillary is still heads and shoulders above the others when it comes to confidence and polish.
And in another comment:
I think it will be an Clinton/Obama ticket. Many, many woman will vote for Clinton. Partly because she is a woman and partly because of her record on health care (proven)and partly because we all know how popular Bill is with the ladies. What a great pay-back for the stogie-in-the-office incident to be able to see Bill trailing along behind what could be conceived of as the victor in that mess.
Most Blacks will end up choosing Clinton over Barack in spite of the fact that he talks the talk. He appears a bit too green to be president and a bit too wealthy and educated to appeal to the frustrated masses. Though the frustrated masses don't always necessarily vote in large numbers. If he is Clinton's choice for VP it will bring out Black voters in droves though.
[..]
Kuckinich would be a wild president! He has a lot of really wonderful radical ideas, but that's the reason he will never get the nomination. If you want to vote for the "should be" candidate, he's your guy. Last election remember he was having trouble even finding a date. He's just not photogenic enough for the traditonally shallow average voter to go for him.
Everybody is entitled to change their mind as they process more information. It's natural and healthy. But still...
Submitted by Carole Borges on Wed, 2008/02/13 - 1:11pm.
"Kucinich as usual said what most Democrats are really feeling."
Actually I wasn't talking specifically about his health care plan when I said that, I was talking about the war and the global economy and several other of his talking points that I thought were things most Democrats wanted.
I am for a one agency healthcare system for those who enroll in a government plan, but I don't see that actually happening.
My point in posting the article was to question the mandate portion of Clinton's plan. That's what bothers me. I know first hand the mandate is not going down well with many working-class people in my home state of MA. They don't want the government mandating more things, and in certain circumstances which I think I have already related here, it can be financially a burden. Maybe I'm wrong but I thought all plans included some kind of employer involvement? Re-reading HR676, I see it never mentions employers, so I guess not. I have to think about that more.
My main point is the issue of mandates. I'm not saying that only because that's Obama's point of view. It is through actual experiences my family in Masschusetts have had and conversations I have had with friends there.
I haven't changed my mind one bit about Kuchinch. I don't have to agree with every single idea he has put forth, but I respect him a lot. I think Obama's health plan has a better chance of actually changing things because too many people wouldn't vote for universal healthcare that is single-payer right now.
It's getting a bit painful to watch Obama struggle to keep up with the candidates who are so obviously more experienced than he is--when they point to their own records he has nothing to respond with other than his "intent". I really like Obama, but he just doesn't seem to have the experience needed to run the government well.
This WAS a serious concern of mine, but as the weeks went on Obama began showing his strength more and more and in the end I realized it was a matter of style. Obama has a quieter more gentle approach that leaves room for finding new solutions. He is not shouting promises we've heard over and over again. He was awkward at first. His first few debates were indeed a bit painful to watch, but as soon as he got his feet under him, it was clear just how strong he was. and I think he is terrific in debates and in his public appearances. His issue statements on his website express his talking points. It works for me.
Hillary is still heads and shoulders above the others when it comes to confidence and polish.
I still think Clinton is more far adept at using the expected style we've seen from politicians in the past. She exhibits total confidence, memorizes her talking points well, and reads them well. Personally, the more I saw the contrast between her and Obama's style, the more I realized their styles reflected the way they would approach problems and find solutions. Hillary does show total confidence, but I realized that was even when she was worried or her campaign wasn't doing very well she looked the same. Clinton sounds like she's going to get things done, but think about it--do we really need someone adept at fighting each other in Washington? I think we need someone who can bring people together. So though I was impressed with Clinton's delivery in the beginning, I have see it more now as a polished politician presenting well-written talking points very well. Obama's approach has more appeal to me, that's all. He talks about listening to people, consulting with others, including Independents and Republicans. Including foriegn tyrants. I think the country is tired of politicians who think winning cannot include compromise or thinking that isn't set in stone, but open to possibility.
I think it will be an Clinton/Obama ticket. Many, many woman will vote for Clinton. Partly because she is a woman and partly because of her record on health care (proven)and partly because we all know how popular Bill is with the ladies. What a great pay-back for the stogie-in-the-office incident to be able to see Bill trailing along behind what could be conceived of as the victor in that mess.
Obviously I wasn't quite accurate in my assessment. Many women are not voting for her, and I have to say I had no idea how many people hate her and will not vote for her or any Democrat if she's the nominee. I have been shocked. Her health care initiative and ideas were not successful, but I was talking about her early entry into proposing universal healthcare. I think it is one of her strong points. I've always respected Hillary for that, though I don't like the mandate part of her current plan. And yes, Bill and Hillary cannot be expected to NOT be full of glee if they both end up in the White House again. It would seem likely they just might feel it was a great payback to all those who pushed his impeachment over the cigar issue.
Most Blacks will end up choosing Clinton over Barack in spite of the fact that he talks the talk. He appears a bit too green to be president and a bit too wealthy and educated to appeal to the frustrated masses. Though the frustrated masses don't always necessarily vote in large numbers. If he is Clinton's choice for VP it will bring out Black voters in droves though.
Well I sure was wrong about that one, though there is a certain segment of blacks who do feel that way, though they have turned out to be a very tiny percentage. I wasn't saying I thought he appears too green and educated to me, just that many black voters would see him that way.
Somehow my goal in life, Neal, has never been to not have a change of heart or mind about things. I hope this satisfies the "but still..."part of your confusion about the evolution or source or mistakes in my thinking.
Submitted by Pam Strickland on Wed, 2008/02/13 - 3:14pm.
In the 60 Minutes piece on Sunday he said that there's a group that plays on the day of every primary or caucus. This because he didn't play the day of NH primary, but did in SC. :) I love me some superstition.
"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut
I'm proud to say. I outed him -- I'm the one who outed him on the smoking. That was one of my prerequisites for, you know, entering this race, is that, you know, he couldn't be a smoking president."
Interesting exit polls in VA. Link...
Looks like evangelicals reign supreme in VA. Huckster is ahead of McstayinIraq. At least TN isn't alone in our embarrassment of voting for southern Baptist nut jobs...
It looks like evangelicals might not be quite that strong, since MSNBC is reporting that a large number of independents and even 8 % of traditional Republicans chose to vote in the "open" Democratic primary.
Looks very good for Obama.
McstayinIraq pulling ahead of Huckster. Obama is thumping HRC.
On the Dem side Obama is giving Hillary a first class thumping! As I read the CNN exist polls he's winning in almost every catagory! All of the demographic catagories that were Hillary's strengths Obama now has the lead. The margins aren't big for some but still.
Take Care, Be Good and don't play in the street!
SteveMule
Looks like HRC will need to pull so dirty tricks out of her hat and gain the FLA delegates. Warm up the lawyers....
There's an election going on?
Who'd thought?
I know there's an election in DC because my brother called my mother this morning and casually remarked that he just voted for Obama. She gasped and asked if he knows that Obama is a Muslim. My brother and I died a little bit.
Should he win the nomination, it'll be talking point #1 against Obama. Not that I agree with that, but people can't seriously be surprised the Republicans are putting this out already, can they...?
Not A Caucus, Not just African Americans, Not Just White Men, Not Just White Women, Not Just Latinos, Not Just Rich, Not Just Poor, Not Just Urban, Not Just Rural, Not Just Christians, Not Just Democrats.
Not Just Another Campaign. This is my campaign. This is your campaign. This is our campaign.
Disclaimer: if HRC wins the nomination, she'll be my gal. For now, though, YES WE CAN
I appreciated the smart shift in Obama's WI speech as he begins to take on McCain. He is starting to shoot back at the cynics who laugh at the hope the American people have to see a change in Washington politcs. He's also returning to the Iraq war. He understands that the American people are seething still from being duped into it by the Bush administration and the elected officials who couldn't see through the lies or weren't strong enough to stand up and tell George Bush NO!
The best news of the night though was the fact that Obama is beginning to chip away at groups that were once a sure thing for Clinton.
Every trick in the book will be played now. The nomination will not come easy, but as Barack has said,"I'm skinny, but I'm a scrapper". This man is much tougher than people think.
Every day it looks more and more possible he can win the big states everyone predicted were in the bag for Clinton.
Same song, a bit of a different verse. VA is a red state that hasn't gone for a Dem in the Presidential since 1964. Obama split the white vote evenly with Clinton and picked up most of the 30% of the electorate that's Af-American in Maryland - as of 1999, the most recent census, 64% of MD families made more than 50K per year, 40% of them took home over 75K per year...D.C.'s vote is also disproportionately African-American, and it includes many of the most wealthy, highly educated white folks in the country.
Some of the demographics are favorable, but A LOT of the white voters in MD/VA are also more affluent and educated than average.
We'll see if the trend holds, but these states are not your average bear in many ways.
,"I'm skinny, but I'm a scrapper".
He also said he can still play basketball.
His concern about health is one of the reasons I will vote for him. He supports preventative medicine. Universal healthcare without the club of total mandated government involvement appeals to me. It's more realistic. Mandated health insurance is not in my humble opinion the way to go. As is shown in this article assessing Romney's MA plan.
"The core problem with the law was that Governor Mitt Romney, running for the Republican nomination in 2008, developed the individual mandate part of the plan in collaboration with the rightwing Heritage Foundation, including its health staffers, Bob Moffit and Ed Haislmaier. The explicit goal was to undercut progressive alternatives such as expanding Medicaid to cover more of the uninsured or having employers take more responsibility for covering their employees. And Romney is trying to pitch the passage of the Massachusetts bill -- including its heavy burden on working families through the individual mandate -- as undermining the case for covering the uninsured through expansions of Medicaid or Medicare. "The old single-payer canard is gone," crowed Romney." Link...
I'm glad Obama is speaking about his physical fitness. It sets a good example.
Carole, I'm surprised you are advocating against universal single-payer health insurance. I'm guessing you hadn't thought much about it and didn't really know much about the policy issues prior to getting on board with Obama.
You should spend some more time studying it instead of repeating GOP talking points. The (unsigned) analysis of the Massachusetts program at the progressive website points out some problems, but when it says that "having employers take more responsibility for covering their employees" is a "progressive goal" I have to be very suspect. Having employers involved at all is a major part of the problem. Even John McCain has said this.
Are you familiar with HR676? Why do you not think it would work? Early on, you said you liked Kucinich and said you might vote for him as a protest, saying that his ideas were more aligned with yours but you just couldn't see him as President. He is the sponsor of HR676.
You said the following about one of the debates:
Kucinich as usual said what most Democrats are really feeling.
So now as a Democrat you aren't really feeling that universal single payer health insurance is a good idea? I realize Obama said if we were starting from scratch that single-payer would be his preference, but that we couldn't get it done now with the systems we have in place. Clinton said she will uphold the Democratic Party principle of health care for everybody and would fight to get it done.
I'm really surprised that you would take this position on health care. Neither Obama nor Clinton's health care plan is a single payer universal health insurance system, but Clinton's comes closer. Frankly, I think you are being influenced away from your core values because of a campaign. You ought to dial it down a notch and think more about some of the things you post here before blurting out the first talking point from the automatic reply playbook.
Also, in that same post about the debate, you said:
It's getting a bit painful to watch Obama struggle to keep up with the candidates who are so obviously more experienced than he is--when they point to their own records he has nothing to respond with other than his "intent". I really like Obama, but he just doesn't seem to have the experience needed to run the government well.
And:
Hillary is still heads and shoulders above the others when it comes to confidence and polish.
And in another comment:
I think it will be an Clinton/Obama ticket. Many, many woman will vote for Clinton. Partly because she is a woman and partly because of her record on health care (proven)and partly because we all know how popular Bill is with the ladies. What a great pay-back for the stogie-in-the-office incident to be able to see Bill trailing along behind what could be conceived of as the victor in that mess.
Most Blacks will end up choosing Clinton over Barack in spite of the fact that he talks the talk. He appears a bit too green to be president and a bit too wealthy and educated to appeal to the frustrated masses. Though the frustrated masses don't always necessarily vote in large numbers. If he is Clinton's choice for VP it will bring out Black voters in droves though.
[..]
Kuckinich would be a wild president! He has a lot of really wonderful radical ideas, but that's the reason he will never get the nomination. If you want to vote for the "should be" candidate, he's your guy. Last election remember he was having trouble even finding a date. He's just not photogenic enough for the traditonally shallow average voter to go for him.
Everybody is entitled to change their mind as they process more information. It's natural and healthy. But still...
"Kucinich as usual said what most Democrats are really feeling."
Actually I wasn't talking specifically about his health care plan when I said that, I was talking about the war and the global economy and several other of his talking points that I thought were things most Democrats wanted.
I am for a one agency healthcare system for those who enroll in a government plan, but I don't see that actually happening.
My point in posting the article was to question the mandate portion of Clinton's plan. That's what bothers me. I know first hand the mandate is not going down well with many working-class people in my home state of MA. They don't want the government mandating more things, and in certain circumstances which I think I have already related here, it can be financially a burden. Maybe I'm wrong but I thought all plans included some kind of employer involvement? Re-reading HR676, I see it never mentions employers, so I guess not. I have to think about that more.
My main point is the issue of mandates. I'm not saying that only because that's Obama's point of view. It is through actual experiences my family in Masschusetts have had and conversations I have had with friends there.
I haven't changed my mind one bit about Kuchinch. I don't have to agree with every single idea he has put forth, but I respect him a lot. I think Obama's health plan has a better chance of actually changing things because too many people wouldn't vote for universal healthcare that is single-payer right now.
It's getting a bit painful to watch Obama struggle to keep up with the candidates who are so obviously more experienced than he is--when they point to their own records he has nothing to respond with other than his "intent". I really like Obama, but he just doesn't seem to have the experience needed to run the government well.
This WAS a serious concern of mine, but as the weeks went on Obama began showing his strength more and more and in the end I realized it was a matter of style. Obama has a quieter more gentle approach that leaves room for finding new solutions. He is not shouting promises we've heard over and over again. He was awkward at first. His first few debates were indeed a bit painful to watch, but as soon as he got his feet under him, it was clear just how strong he was. and I think he is terrific in debates and in his public appearances. His issue statements on his website express his talking points. It works for me.
Hillary is still heads and shoulders above the others when it comes to confidence and polish.
I still think Clinton is more far adept at using the expected style we've seen from politicians in the past. She exhibits total confidence, memorizes her talking points well, and reads them well. Personally, the more I saw the contrast between her and Obama's style, the more I realized their styles reflected the way they would approach problems and find solutions. Hillary does show total confidence, but I realized that was even when she was worried or her campaign wasn't doing very well she looked the same. Clinton sounds like she's going to get things done, but think about it--do we really need someone adept at fighting each other in Washington? I think we need someone who can bring people together. So though I was impressed with Clinton's delivery in the beginning, I have see it more now as a polished politician presenting well-written talking points very well. Obama's approach has more appeal to me, that's all. He talks about listening to people, consulting with others, including Independents and Republicans. Including foriegn tyrants. I think the country is tired of politicians who think winning cannot include compromise or thinking that isn't set in stone, but open to possibility.
I think it will be an Clinton/Obama ticket. Many, many woman will vote for Clinton. Partly because she is a woman and partly because of her record on health care (proven)and partly because we all know how popular Bill is with the ladies. What a great pay-back for the stogie-in-the-office incident to be able to see Bill trailing along behind what could be conceived of as the victor in that mess.
Obviously I wasn't quite accurate in my assessment. Many women are not voting for her, and I have to say I had no idea how many people hate her and will not vote for her or any Democrat if she's the nominee. I have been shocked. Her health care initiative and ideas were not successful, but I was talking about her early entry into proposing universal healthcare. I think it is one of her strong points. I've always respected Hillary for that, though I don't like the mandate part of her current plan. And yes, Bill and Hillary cannot be expected to NOT be full of glee if they both end up in the White House again. It would seem likely they just might feel it was a great payback to all those who pushed his impeachment over the cigar issue.
Most Blacks will end up choosing Clinton over Barack in spite of the fact that he talks the talk. He appears a bit too green to be president and a bit too wealthy and educated to appeal to the frustrated masses. Though the frustrated masses don't always necessarily vote in large numbers. If he is Clinton's choice for VP it will bring out Black voters in droves though.
Well I sure was wrong about that one, though there is a certain segment of blacks who do feel that way, though they have turned out to be a very tiny percentage. I wasn't saying I thought he appears too green and educated to me, just that many black voters would see him that way.
Somehow my goal in life, Neal, has never been to not have a change of heart or mind about things. I hope this satisfies the "but still..."part of your confusion about the evolution or source or mistakes in my thinking.
I wish people would talk about "universal health insurance" (HR676) instead of "universal health care" (GOP: "socialized medicine").
In the 60 Minutes piece on Sunday he said that there's a group that plays on the day of every primary or caucus. This because he didn't play the day of NH primary, but did in SC. :) I love me some superstition.
"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut
He quit smoking, too!
Link...
Yeah, the wifey forced him to quit.
I'm tempted to drag this way too far off topic, but I figure a universal healthcare thread can't be too far off in coming to this board, can it?
Gee, you don't think we've ever talked about that here on the "board" before? Take your pick...
Link...
which is more important..the primary or the state senate district caucus?
Clinton will take which ever she can win
Post new comment