• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Official Feb. 9-10th Primary/Caucus Thread (Obama = Weekend Sweep)

Status
Not open for further replies.
mrmyth said:
I can agree with the general sentiment, but this gut based politics pisses me off. Go fucking vote on American Idol if you just want to see your favorites win. This is my life you're fucking with too here.

I would hesitate to say that a white woman in her late 60s has worked harder than a black man in his. Let's face facts - if Obama was Antoine Jackson from Philly we wouldn't even be this far along. The man has survived because he is 'partial' black, and exotic black at that. IMO we'll have multiple white women Presidents in the next century. It'll be a good 50 years before we get another good shot at a black President.


Unless Sam Jackson runs.

I agree. If he was darker than Chauncey from Blackstreet he'd be out of the race by now
 

Sharp

Member
All the polling organizations report their MOEs, right? I think if that were somehow incorporated into the table it would be a little more telling when it came to the accuracy of the polls, since as it stands I have no idea whether Zogby consistently promises more reliable results than they actually deliver, or whether they just have really large confidence intervals and people tends to miss them because of their excitement and/or dismay.
 
Rur0ni said:
fixed-active-hi-level-pollster-report-card-through-020608.JPG


So everyone knows the deal.

Interesting. I've been looking for something like that. Thx.
 

Mandark

Small balls, big fun!
There's a story in the Post today about the three major local endorsements (Kaine and Fenty for Obama, O'Malley for Hillary).

Apparently Kaine has been in Obama's camp for a long time, as opposed to a lot of the last minute type endorsements Obama's been getting (Kennedy, Sebelius, etc.). If the early VA polls are accurate, part of that could be the effects of the Kaine/Warner organization.
 

Flo_Evans

Member
PhoenixDark said:
Did someone faint or something? Obama seemed to be making fun of some poor woman

I think so :lol I just turned it on and he saying "don't worry there are EMTs here"

The audio on this feed sucks ugg.
 

mrmyth

Member
The Lamonster said:
That's bullshit. Look how far David Palmer got. He was pretty dark.


You joke, but that is what's carrying Obama. The confidence he exudes. People want that after 8 years of the Chimp.
 

sangreal

Member
Rur0ni said:
Edit: One thing I noticed. There is only so much a man can say. So it becomes a bit redundant if you watch these all the time.

If you have seen one Obama stump speech, you have seen them all. Its just mixed up a little bit for local issues each time.

That is true for all campaigns though

Shouta said:
Yeah, a woman was dizzy and Obama noticed so he told folks to get her a chair and make some way.

I've even seen this at other Obama stumps

Flo_Evans said:
I think so :lol I just turned it on and he saying "don't worry there are EMTs here"

The audio on this feed sucks ugg.

The CNN one seems fine
 

mosaic

go eat paint
I sure hope all those college kids at that rally are registered voters. Nothing makes my heart sink more than the statistics that show those vocal youngsters don't actually get out and vote come election day. The scary thing is how easy it actually is for college students: the local polling place is often right on campus! (or within a couple blocks)

Call me insane, but I think "vote or die" should be a law. At the very least, you should have to show up or mail in a "non-committed" ballot.
 

Cheebs

Member
mosaic said:
I sure hope all those college kids at that rally are registered voters. Nothing makes my heart sink more than the statistics that show those vocal youngsters don't actually get out and vote come election day. The scary thing is how easy it actually is for college students: the local polling place is often right on campus! (or within a couple blocks)

Call me insane, but I think "vote or die" should be a law. At the very least, you should have to show up or mail in a "non-committed" ballot.
hillary won the 18-29 vote in MA and California
 

Mandark

Small balls, big fun!
Obama answered the criticism by acknowledging the opposition to his agenda, specifically citing Exxon's attachment to its profits as an example, and by saying it could be overcome by popular political will.

It's a simple concept: Use popular opinion as a lever on elected officials to get results you wouldn't otherwise. Which was more or less Edwards' take on how to do things.

Obama's basically making the old Edwards case that you should support ambitious change if it's the right thing, rather than assuming it's politically impossible, because it's the very act of voting for it that makes it possible.

It's all about the Overton window.

I know some people would disagree that it could work like that, but it's an actual argument. It's fluff if you're not paying attention.
 

maynerd

Banned
mosaic said:
I sure hope all those college kids at that rally are registered voters. Nothing makes my heart sink more than the statistics that show those vocal youngsters don't actually get out and vote come election day. The scary thing is how easy it actually is for college students: the local polling place is often right on campus! (or within a couple blocks)

Call me insane, but I think "vote or die" should be a law. At the very least, you should have to show up or mail in a "non-committed" ballot.

Just a heads up about something I heard today. I heard that Obama Girl the singer girl...she didn't even vote in NJ at all. What a freakin loser.

Also, I agree with you to an extent but what are we going to do to people who don't vote?

One thing we should definately be doing is having the election run from Friday till the end of day on Sunday instead of just half a day.
 

Flo_Evans

Member
Mandark said:
Obama answered the criticism by acknowledging the opposition to his agenda, specifically citing Exxon's attachment to its profits as an example, and by saying it could be overcome by popular political will.

It's a simple concept: Use popular opinion as a lever on elected officials to get results you wouldn't otherwise. Which was more or less Edwards' take on how to do things.

Obama's basically making the old Edwards case that you should support ambitious change if it's the right thing, rather than assuming it's politically impossible, because it's the very act of voting for it that makes it possible.

It's all about the Overton window.

I know some people would disagree that it could work like that, but it's an actual argument. It's fluff if you're not paying attention.

Who are you, who are so wise in the ways of science?
 
My wife and I will be at our precinct's (the Greenlake neighborhood of Seattle) Democratic caucus tomorrow afternoon to cast our votes for Obama. The turnout is supposed to be huge, but luckily for us our local caucus site is the high school right across from our house, so we won't have to go far.
 
Mandark said:
Obama answered the criticism by acknowledging the opposition to his agenda, specifically citing Exxon's attachment to its profits as an example, and by saying it could be overcome by popular political will.

It's a simple concept: Use popular opinion as a lever on elected officials to get results you wouldn't otherwise. Which was more or less Edwards' take on how to do things.

Obama's basically making the old Edwards case that you should support ambitious change if it's the right thing, rather than assuming it's politically impossible, because it's the very act of voting for it that makes it possible.

It's all about the Overton window.

I know some people would disagree that it could work like that, but it's an actual argument. It's fluff if you're not paying attention.

I heard blind sentimental fluff, which is what Obama's campaign is built on. While the idea of using popular opinion to pressure those in power to change is indeed intriguing, I'm not particularly convinced by Obama's use of it. He certainly hasn't done much of anything to put this process into action, which has always been a criticism of him in general, and one he also addressed in the speech: he talks a good deal about change and revolution, but when it comes down to hit he hasn't done much in the senate to back his words up, instead opting to brag about things he said before he entered the senate (his Iraq opposition) while staying quiet on his numerous inactive votes while in the senate
 

Mandark

Small balls, big fun!
Maybe that's because his victory over Alan goddamn Keyes was (correctly) not interpreted by politicians or pundits as a national mandate for for an ambitious liberal program?

This is like saying his theory of negotiating with America's enemies are intriguing, but he's failed to sign any treaties with Iran.
 
Mandark said:
Maybe that's because his victory over Alan goddamn Keyes was (correctly) not interpreted by politicians or pundits as a national mandate for for an ambitious liberal program?

This is like saying his theory of negotiating with America's enemies are intriguing, but he's failed to sign any treaties with Iran.

Eh, not really. I'm not asking him to walk on water, I'm merely saying that for someone who talks of change so much it's odd that he has yet to really do much of anything in the senate - outside of use it as a spring board for his presidency of course.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom