Two Against One: Is McCain 2008 a done deal?

[calmblueocean]

This is not a declaration of defeat, it's a question.

It's clear to me that Hillary is going to work to destroy Obama all the way to the convention floor. I would love to be wrong on this, but you can't listen to Harold Ickes or other Hillary surrogates and think anything else.

Meanwhile, the media is going to spend 90% of their time covering Hillary vs. Obama, while McCain sits in the shade and watches the world go by. This is the stuff Republican dreams are made out of.

If you grant that Hillary takes this fight to the convention floor, I don't see how we win in November. Hillary will have agitated her supporters into a deep hatred of Obama, and a sense that they've had the nomination stolen from them. They won't switch to Obama. Not when emotions run this high.

And Obama supporters damn sure won't vote for Hillary, mostly for the same reasons. Hillary cannot take the nomination from the man who won the most pledged delegates without alienating Obama's base.

Which leaves McCain coasting to an easy win. The whole election over before it's even begun.

Like I said, though: This is not a declaration of defeat, it's a question. Where am I wrong? I want to be wrong here.

[gateley]

1. If Obama gets MORE than the magic number of delegates --

if he gets more than Hillary's version of the magic number -- would she concede then?

I'm not sure she would. The RULES are it's the delegates, stupid, but I think she would then switch her focus to pushing her popular votes argument.

[Franks Wild Years]

3. Obama should call her bluff

And finally start talking about her demented sense of entitlement which runs contrary to the rules of the race and how it has become apparent that she's fighting for herself and that any pretentions that she's doing it for the country are out of the window.

Look, her campaign at this stage is based on tapping into the simple minds of vulnerable and fragile people. She stirs them into a frenzy and they believe all they hear. She doesn't expect Obama to expose her in the media, but if he comes out with a big statement which lists - point by point - incidences of her changing her position and moving the goalposts then she'll be shamed into either plumbing such depths of dementia that she becomes a laughing stock even to the media who are desperate to have her continue to aid McCain or into shuffling quietly into the distance.

[gateley]

16. I've always thought that we, the people,

would benefit from a PowerPoint presentation listing the points showing the Then and Now of Bush's statements. The Bush statement with the proof of his lie printed right there beside it.

I feel the same about Hillary's statements.

It's so much easier to absorb if you see it in writing, in a well-laid out presentation.

So I'm with you on the point-by-point thing -- and it needs to be a visual.

[MonkeyFunk]

2. She's hasn't tried to destroy him.

She's tried to beat him for the nomination. You guys get a little hysterical over politics.

[WA98070]

6. She has tried to destroy him and she WILL destroy the party.

[MonkeyFunk]

10. Wrong and wrong

she's run against him. I know that pisses you guys off to no end, but that's all that's happened. I swear, this must be the first election most of you guys have ever observed.

[MADem]

11. Well, if a primary candidate can destroy the party, it was a piece of shit to begin with.

And it will be NO LOSS, if that's all it takes.

And if a primary candidate can "destroy" an opponent, then the opponent is a piece of shit, too.

It's not a coronation, you know. Or maybe....you don't.

Hyperbolic, much?

[calmblueocean]

23. So it's no loss if McCain wins in November? I'm not understanding you.

I'm asking something pretty simple: how does either Democratic candidate win in November if Hillary takes her fight for the nomination to the convention?

You don't think her supporters will be too emotionally invested to switch to Obama? And vice versa?

[MADem]

32. You might try listening to what the candidates actually SAY about this stuff, instead

of listening to the panic-stricken, vicious acolytes.

Obama is going to have to put someone on his ticket to bring those people in. Same way Clinton will have to put someone on HER ticket to bring Obama voters in. And they'll have to reach out to their own people and pull it together.

Absent that, they're both fucked.

And it isn't anyone's "fault."

Other candidates have taken their fight to the floor. No one remembers, because they're either too young, too dumb, or slept through history, that LBJ took HIS fight to the convention floor. JFK didn't have enough delegates, either.

The world didn't end. LBJ ended up on the ticket.

Teddy Kennedy took HIS fight to the floor, too. The world didn't end, he and his FEW (not like Clinton, he didn't have many) delegates folded, and he went back to the Senate to become "the Lion."

I'm pretty tired of the bullshit and hyperbole I see here. It would be avoided if some of these more vociferous but academically-vapid Obama supporters would bother to read history.

Funny how no one griped at those two guys for taking their fight to the floor. Why should they? It's PART OF THE PROCESS.

And let's not forget the guy who was on his WAY to a MASSIVE three-way floor fight when he got shot.

Funny how no one told RFK to "STOOOOOP!!!! Get out! You CAAAAAAN'T win! It has to be HUMPHREY, not YOU! You're DESTROOOYING the PAAARTY...." When RFK said ON TO CHICAGO he was talking about a floor fight at the convention to be held in Chicago.

It's almost like people are being deliberately stupid because facts are inconvenient. We're talking three occasions where we've seen knock-down floor fights in the modern political era.

And like I said, the world didn't end.

[LiberalFighter]

39. Man!!!! So many times our DU people have been ignorant about history.

As if they know everything but they never bothered checking the facts. What is wrong with people? I would hope they do some research or ask for the facts. I think they are getting their facts by these POS political pundits not realizing that their job is to sway people.

And they probably think that once a candidate garners the necessary delegate votes they will be the nominee. Forgetting that the time period between that and the convention many things could happen.

How many candidates had to drop out because of something they were hiding? Hart for one. He did it before the primary season was over but it could happen between now and the convention.

And how many of the posters on this board are even involved in local party politics? Why should their input or complaint be considered if they aren't?

If everyone on this board was involved locally we could probably win this election in a landslide!

[MADem]

7. You got that right.

I find it funny that they call Clinton supporters "low information voters." The ones with a shortage in the facts and history departments aren't the Clinton supporters.

[calmblueocean]

21. I think it's a matter of semantics, but let's use your terms.

For the longest time, my sig said, "Hillary or Obama, I'll vote for either of them." I'm not a big partisan in this battle.

Tell me how you see a Democrat in the White House if Hillary takes her fight for the nomination to the convention?

You don't think her supporters are going to be too emotionally invested to switch to Obama? Or vice versa?

I'd like your thoughts on the substance of the question.

[MADem]

4. Don't blame Clinton if Obama can't cut it. It's not her fault if he doesn't have what it takes.

But how interesting that you've already mapped out the guy's defeat, and managed to blame someone other than HIM for it. Quite frankly, a guy who can get "beaten" by a fellow Democrat isn't a strong general candidate.


It may be "clear to you" but it isn't clear to anyone else. If "mean old Hillary" can "work to destroy Obama" then Obama is a SHITTY CANDIDATE.

You imbue her with SUPERPOWERS, apparently.

If Obama's such a hot shit, he'll convince the voters. He'll win them over with his swell ideas and his soaring rhetoric.

If he isn't, he won't.

I think the GOP will smile if Obama gets the nom. He's the easiest of the two to beat. And that's just down to his own life story, his associates, his sketchy record, his CV...the oppo ads write themselves.

[Thrill]

8. He has more Delegates than her. Hillary is the one who can't cut it. The one who was so inevitable

[MADem]

14. Yeah, and in Bush World, the only thing that counts are delegates.

That's the American way, now. Fuck those voters. Fuck counting votes, too. It's all about delegates.

Ask President Al Gore.

[EFerrari]

17. You people sound more unhinged every day.

This isn't BushWorld. This is our party's process. It is all about delegates and that was fine with Mrs. Clinton until she started to lose -- about the same time she noticed Obama was black.

[MADem]

19. Yeah, because only "unhinged" people think votes should be counted!

:rofl:

There's sure some unhinging going on up in here, you did get that right.

[EFerrari]

22. You can't count suppressed votes. n/t

[MADem]

25. Whine away. I really don't care. NT

[EFerrari]

27. I'm not whining. The meeting yesterday was a great outcome. n/t

[Thrill]

24. She is only ahead if you don't count caucus state voters

I guess its only ok to disenfranchise when its convenient for you.

[MADem]

26. Oh, you mean the people who might vote in the general, but didn't show up at the

caucus because they had to work? Extrapolation?

Yeah...sure. That's the way to do it--count people who WEREN'T even THERE.

That's Happytalk Enfranchisement!!!

[Thrill]

37. Yeah you know. Like you want to count Michigan votes when Obama wasn't even on the ballot

Or counting Puerto Rico. People who can't vote even vote in the GE. Hypocrisy at its finest.

[fed_up_mother]

13. She'll never get the nomination in four years

Give it up.

Or would you prefer to sink all democrats chances just because your candidate didn't win.

[MADem]

18. Don't talk to ME like you "know" me.

Or you know what I think. Or what I intend to do.

It's what way too many of you people do. You make these false arguments (Who's "gloating?" What dark and dumb place did you pull that shit out of?) and get all huffy and righteous--like anyone gives a shit about your wrongheaded and cockeyed perspective. Particularly when you are so far off the mark you aren't even on the same shooting range.

If your candidate doesn't win, that's YOUR CANDIDATE's fault. This isn't a "Special Needs" election, where you coddle one candidate because he's "exceptional" in a Special Olympics kind of way. If he can't take the hits, he will fall. And if he falls, it's his fault. If he wins, it is to his credit--no one else's.

He either competes, or he doesn't. If he wins, it is HIS victory.

And if he doesn't, that's HIS fault. No one else's.

[fed_up_mother]

20. Love that unity speech! (sarcasm)

[MADem]

34. Gee, like that DISUNITY crap you EDITED out of your post? With all those vicious remarks?

You're a helluva one to talk about UNITY.

And you've got the courage of a gnat, too, that you ran and erased your insulting comments when you saw how cravenly insincere they made you appear.

Good thing you were able to EDIT your remarks, because they weren't terribly UNFIED, were they?

You came across as a whining, vicious partisan. Gee, how surprising. And then you ran and ERASED what you wrote. Cluck, cluck, cluck.

At least you had the sense to be ASHAMED of yourself. There may be hope for you. I won't hold my breath, though.

[fed_up_mother]

36. Ummmm...what did I edit out?

[MADem]

35. Gee, like that DISUNITY crap you EDITED out of your post? With all those vicious remarks?

You're a helluva one to talk about UNITY.

And you've got the courage of a gnat, too, that you ran and erased your insulting comments when you saw how cravenly insincere they made you appear.

Good thing you were able to EDIT your remarks, because they weren't terribly UNFIED, were they?

You came across as a whining, vicious partisan. Gee, how surprising. And then you ran and ERASED what you wrote. Cluck, cluck, cluck.

At least you had the sense to be ASHAMED of yourself. There may be hope for you. I won't hold my breath, though.

[calmblueocean]

33. I don't imbue Hillary with superpowers, just supporters who are fond of her and will follow her lead

That's all.

And, like I said above, my sig for the longest time was, "Hillary or Obama, I'll vote for either of them." So I'm not a partisan in this fight.

Realistically, the party apparatus is behind Obama at this point because he has more delegates. Hillary can mount a full-scale charge to fight for the nomination at the convention, but not without making both Obama and herself unelectable. Emotions are already running high, and months more of political attacks are going to leave both camps too invested in their candidates to unite behind either candidate as the nominee.

Do you disagree with that?

If Hillary doesn't take it to the convention, and gets behind Obama in a meaningful way, all this changes. You seem to think she won't take it that far, and I hope you're right, but I'm just basing my opinion on what I've seen so far.

All that matters to me is a Dem in the White House in 2008. I think Hillary's chance for that has slipped away, but she retains enough Democratic loyalty to divide the party against Obama if that's her choice.

Do you think Hillary should get behind Obama after the primaries are done, or stay in it? And if she does stay in, how does she win?

[fed_up_mother]

5. I don't know what she would gain from doing that

She'll never get the nomination in four years if she does.

Surely, she's not that far removed from reality???

[Speck Tater]

9. All it will take for Obama to take the general election is...

for him to appear ONCE on stage with McCain in a debate.

Obama will easily expose McCain for the bumbling fool he is.

[calmblueocean]

30. Obama will school McCain handily in the debates. But after 2004, I doubt that's enough.

I mean, Kerry vs. Bush was a blowout. Kerry was masterful, really took Bush apart. People were laughing at Bush afterward.

But Kerry still lost.

The debates will help Obama a lot, to be sure, but Obama can't level the same kind of verbal firepower against Hillary that he can against McCain. He needs to win over Hillary's supporters. So I don't think the debates are going to be enough, at least not yet.

[Rosemary2205]

12. never ever forget - we picked LIEBERMAN for Veep in 2000

it should have been a done deal - Clinton was considered a FABULOUS president, highly popular. Gore more than qualified. Bush was a little better back then at putting his words together but he was obviously an idiot even then.

And then we picked Lieberman.

Proof it's never too late to fuck it up.

[calmblueocean]

31. That's what's so crazy about being a Democrat. We've got great ideas, but lousy political instincts.

Just the opposite of Bush and friends, who have lousy, terrible, destructive, idiotic ideas, but sure know how to campaign. And how to fall in line with the party when the time comes.

[EFerrari]

15. No. He'll be fine. This won't go to the convention

although there may be some dead enders protesting there.

He'll be a great candidate in the GE. McCain can't even stand on the same stage with Obama and be credible. Watch. :)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

28. As long as McGoofy has that big shiny (R) plastered on his ass, Obama can't lose.

All he has to do is run as the "Not Republican".

[WeDidIt]

29. Relax, she will bow out next week

Possibly on Wednesday. MAybe even Tuesday night since she'll be in New York.

[Bensthename]

38. Obama will beat McCain/Billary, dont worry. He has done it thus far.

[GoesTo11]

40. I just posted about this on another thread

Don't know how to link to other threads, so here's my post.


Right around mid-February, something changed. Rush called for donations to her and she started getting big internet inflows. Rush called for people to vote for her, and they did and tipped a few states. She and McCain started with coordinated attacks, and sharing advisors, and she was talking with Rove.

Ever since, she has been acting more consistently with the theory that she wants McCain to win than with any other theory.

Why?

Supreme Court Justice maybe? 2012 - with RW support maybe? Maybe pull a Lieberman and run as an R who pulls a lot of Ds?

I don't know what happened, but something's very fishy.

[dems_rightnow]

41. No chance

It might be closer than a lot of people think, but Obama's going to win this thing.