Obama wins big in S Carolina

[billay]

And things are worse for Hillary than they appear. Edwards is doing little more than syphoning off a portion of support from Obama's camp. If and when he quits, the hole she is in only gets bigger.

 

I just don;t think Bill and Hillary thought they were going to get any competition. Bill thought this was going to be his time for revenge, and despite the "clean consicence" he says he has for everything that has happened over the last 7 years, I think it's obvious from his apparent negative impact on Hillary's campaign, that some degree of the American public does hold him accountable for getting Bush elected, and consequently, this mess that we're in.

[TheShiznit]

I also want to give Obama credit as well: I'm tired of the "I'll govern by 51%" which began under Clinton, but was perfected by Bush. Come to think of it, Clinton never even got 50%.

 

To be fair, Clinton also had to run against a third party candidate both times in the name of Ross Perot. Hell...in 1992 Perot got almost 20% of national vote and almost 15% in 1996. That makes it tough to hit 50%.

[Pope Flick]

To be fair, Clinton also had to run against a third party candidate both times in the name of Ross Perot. Hell...in 1992 Perot got almost 20% of national vote and almost 15% in 1996. That makes it tough to hit 50%.

 

 

But that's a result of what a weak candidate he was both times. John Anderson was the last 3rd party candidate prior to Perot and got rolled by Reagan handily. Why? Reagan was a stronger candidate during that election.

 

I voted for Perot, in large part because he was the only one pointing out how insane the budget deficit was becoming. Clinton didn't do squat on that until Gingrich took the Speakership. So despite what type of "Camelot memories" DLC dems have on this guy at the time he simply wasn't very strong. He was a heck of a campaigner, but 3rd party candidates don't pull 20% unless there's a perception that the 2 party candidates aren't what people want.

[Egret]

To be fair, Clinton also had to run against a third party candidate both times in the name of Ross Perot. Hell...in 1992 Perot got almost 20% of national vote and almost 15% in 1996. That makes it tough to hit 50%.

In 1992, Bush would have been re-elected without Perot in the mix.

[Pope Flick]

In 1992, Bush would have been re-elected without Perot in the mix.

 

 

That's actually always been very debatable: the AP reported at the time that exits polls showed a 38ish-38ish-20sih split on who Perot voters would have voted for had he not run, with the 20ish being Libertarian or other 3rd party.

 

I've read enough that I don't buy it, personally. I would have voted for Clinton in all likelihood instead of Perot.

[Bill Swerski]

Did anybody hear Obama's victory speech? WOW. That guy is an incredibly talented and inspirational speaker. If I didn't completely disagree with his economic policies, I'd probably volunteer to work on his campaign.

[Big John]

Did anybody hear Obama's victory speech? WOW. That guy is an incredibly talented and inspirational speaker. If I didn't completely disagree with his economic policies, I'd probably volunteer to work on his campaign.

Linked on post #8.

[Ursa Majoris]

Did anybody hear Obama's victory speech? WOW. That guy is an incredibly talented and inspirational speaker. If I didn't completely disagree with his economic policies, I'd probably volunteer to work on his campaign.

I like his economic policies, especially the tax ones (simplification of taxes, EITC, opportunity tax credit, etc) but I'm not clear on how it will all be funded. Can anyone out there clarify this? I'm guessing No, because I don't see anything on his economic policy page mentioning funding.

[moneymakers]

I like his economic policies, especially the tax ones (simplification of taxes, EITC, opportunity tax credit, etc) but I'm not clear on how it will all be funded. Can anyone out there clarify this? I'm guessing No, because I don't see anything on his economic policy page mentioning funding.

 

Try here

 

20 year membership

 

spin

[AtomicCEO]

I like his economic policies, especially the tax ones (simplification of taxes, EITC, opportunity tax credit, etc) but I'm not clear on how it will all be funded. Can anyone out there clarify this? I'm guessing No, because I don't see anything on his economic policy page mentioning funding.

 

I really hope it's a comprehensive audit and restructuring off all government offices from the Boll Weevil Eradication Unit to the "War on Terror".

 

I think if we spent a billion dollars just going over receipts and asking questions, we'd end up saving two trillion.

 

Call me a crazy dreamer.

[Ursa Majoris]

I really hope it's a comprehensive audit and restructuring off all government offices from the Boll Weevil Eradication Unit to the "War on Terror".

 

I think if we spent a billion dollars just going over receipts and asking questions, we'd end up saving two trillion.

 

Call me a crazy dreamer.

Auditing that cesspool known as the Pentagon would double the national debt.........but it's got to be done.

[AtomicCEO]

Auditing that cesspool known as the Pentagon would double the national debt.........but it's got to be done.

 

The simple fact that one small company got away with fraudulently charging 20 million dollars worth of bogus shipping for over ten years should really be sounding some alarms.

 

But... it's not. And if you question military spending, you are a terrorist sympathizer.

[Wolverines Fan]

I have been trying to keep an open mind as to the democratic nominee, but I must agree that these Clintonian tactics are tired and ther is now little to no chance that I could support Hillary. What I have trouble deciding is whether or not they have been this slimy since the very beginning, or they are are worse now due to either by being so taken aback by Obama's success that their bitterness is showing through, or that 16 years of watching and listening to Republicans perfect these techinque that they have now sunk to a new, lower level.

 

I liked Edwards heading into Iowa, but it's obvious that he is not going to win the nomination. I was planning to cast a reluctant vote for Hillary in our Feb. 5 primary here, but after watching her and Bill crap on Obama in South Carolina, I can't support her either. I will vote for Obama. If he doesn't win the nomination and she does, I may just stay home during the Nov. election.

 

I'm wondering if what they did to Obama is going to backfire in their faces on Super Tuesday.

 

 

...I think it's obvious from his apparent negative impact on Hillary's campaign, that some degree of the American public does hold him accountable for getting Bush elected, and consequently, this mess that we're in.

 

I hold him accountable to a degree. I also blame Ralph Nader in part.

Edited January 28, 2008 by Wolverines Fan

[wiegie]

I think he's miscalculated and believes his own hype. His thinly veiled racist statements have become an albatross for HRC and people like me who were ready to vote for her are switching over to Obama. I have, and I know others who have as well.

I think this is pretty much the case for me as well. Bill Clinton's comment about Jesse Jackson was the straw that broke my back. Even the Swiss news (which is actually doing a great job of covering the US primary races) said that it was a dirty trick.

 

Did anybody hear Obama's victory speech? WOW. That guy is an incredibly talented and inspirational speaker. If I didn't completely disagree with his economic policies, I'd probably volunteer to work on his campaign.

me too

 

Despite my objections to his stated economic policies, I still think I am going to vote for him (with the only other candidate that would make me think very hard about not voting for him being John McCain).

[Azazello1313]

Obama's Rout Rejiggers the Race

 

i wonder if bill clinton wrote that headline

[DemonKnight]

Obama's Rout Rejiggers the Race

 

i wonder if bill clinton wrote that headline