Recent Posts

Greatest Hits

Good Company

  • Locations of visitors to this page
Cost of the War in Iraq
(JavaScript Error)

« Resemblance | Main | Cults »

February 11, 2008


Indpendent NW

At this point I don't see how either will win the general. It think if it were to happen it would have to be Obama, but he has major problems with blue dog dems and latinos. I really don't see how either can win now that this is likely to drap out into June and beyond.

If anyone thinks that an Obamo/Clinton ticket is the answer no matter who is the headline, think again. While many of the traditional blue states might love this I think you would see an underground vote which doesn't show up in the polls give every red state Bush took to McCain. Change is hard and this ticket is simply to much for the electorate to handle.

James F. Trumm

Your post should remind Democrats that they should not be too confident about this election. It's never too late for the Democrats--or the Red Sox--to fuck things up. Still, I don't share your apparent pessimism about the strength of the racist/sexist vote. How many of them would be voting for the Democrat anyway?


I live in Florida. . We Voted for Hillary, and are not even "counted". But will be. We made our choices based on more than momentum, the word "change" and media favoritism. We want someone in the White House whom will fight for us, and "not just be present".

As for the war, right after 911 the people in this country were not so againist it as now. That was a different time. So she voted for it then, so did many others.

I for one am sick to death of Obama's slick, comments toward Hillary. Every chance he get's he does another dig towards her. What Arrogance!

The Democratic party & Obama have shunned this state. Guess who this will bite in the butt? The Democrats of course. Go on don't listen to the people here - nominate the wrong person, and the next President will be Republican.

Indpendent NW

I think there are a significant number of white men that are union and have traditionally voted with the Dems who will not support a woman/black man ticket. There is evidence that Obama is feeling this in some of the primary states that are not dominated by the black vote (e.g. California). There are many whites who will not admit that they will not vote for a black man during a polling and there are many Dem. men who will not admit that they will not support Billary. I think the Dems have already missed the boat by not nominating Edwards; he was a shoe in for President.

Looking at the States that went for Bush I just don't see enough going for either Billary or Obama when given the choice to support a moderate like McCain. There are several sites that are running mock elections given recent polling evidence and neither Billary or Obama win more than 3% of the trials and Obama doesn't win that much. The South will not support him in the general election. He looses 45% of the Dem. white vote in the south and Billary looses 22% of the Dem. men and only gains 13% of the Rep. women. The Dems have done it again, nominated on redical popularity rather than the candidate with the best chance of winning. There wasn't a hairs width of diffence in policy between the three top tier but Edwards was a lock for the general. So what did the Dems do, went with someone else of course.

The comments to this entry are closed.