Okay... we have under 55 minutes before the first polls close. If you are online, jump in and venture a bet... who wins and by how much?
C'mon.... you have been pontificating all semester -- put the text where your mouth is! Lets see if you have what it takes to put it in writing on the blog! Oh, and we can tell time as well as you can.. the dare is for any strong and willing soul to tell us who will win on the D side tonight... but winners only add a post before the gate opens and the horses run. Do you have what it takes to be a "true" Political Communciation Jayhawk???
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
7 comments:
Can we call this a come back for Hillary? I didn't see Dr. B's post until the polls had closed, so I couldn't place my bet. However, I think I might be right... The tides are turning. Obama is old news and his message has lost its power. Unless his campaign gets a 2nd wind, Hillary might be making a come back for the history books!
I still support Obama, but for me the shine is certainly starting to fade. However, as he dims, my dislike of Hilary only grows by the minute. Her campaign style continues to turn me off and her relentless attacks are making me sick. I don't care if she's attacking democrats or republicans, the amount of needless personality and biographical attacks are too much for me. While I may not be as "hopeful" as I once was, I still believe that Obama represents a step in the right direction. .
I understand Carl's point. The negative campaigning doesn't bother me; I guess I am just kind of numb to those tactics. I am not sure Obama is totally innocent when it comes to negative attacks. Not to say his ads are as negative, but he is definitely fighting back. My concern is who will still have momentum come November. I think it might be Hillary... Plus, her resilience and determination make me like her more. Ultimately, I will vote D, but I think Hillary is making a good case for her ability to win the general election.
Wow, a comeback? I like Hillary. I am very excited about the prospect of her as president. I even believe she will be a better president than her husband was, and it seems like he did ok to me. However, a comeback?
Last I checked she needed to win all 3 of these states by 80% to make the delegate count competitive. Also, last I checked, Obama still shaved 10 points of her lead in Pennsylvania.
If she wins the nomination it will be because of the same back door deals at the convention that it would have required had she lost this last primary by 10 points.
I think stories like "Obama was supposed to miraculously pull to within 4 points, he only cut the lead in half, COMEBACK!!!" are manufactured spin designed to create a political environment in which the super delegates can justify not selecting the candidate with the lead in states won, delegates and popular votes.
Given the impossibility of a mathematical comeback, Hillary must be banking on dirty politics at the convention. Good plan, squander the Democratic momentum in an extended and dirty campaign so you have a chance to rip the party apart at the convention.
well then Ben, I'm just going to have to give that last comment two big thumbs up.
Heheheheheehe... Ben you get so riled up! I understand that she cannot win based on delegate count, but I think she is making a good case to super delegates. I just don't really agree with your comment that it can only happen through shaddy "back door deals." It seems to me that the superdelegates should (emphasis on should) be making their decision based on who they believe has the best shot to win in the general election. Hillary's ability to win big states in conjunction with Obama's fading momentum might make her attractive. I posed the comeback question primarily because I think many were already counting her out. I think she has shown this is far from over.
As for ripping the party apart at the convention.... I don't think you can blame her for this situation. Obama could bow out too, you know to save the party. This situation is the result of a what appears to be a flawed primary process. Don't blame her if the party is ripped apart, as you put it. It is no more her fault that Obama's, the party's, or most importantly Democrat voters. As a party the only thing we can ever seem to agree on is that we don't care for Republicans... If D voters don't show up in the general election like they did in the primaries I think it points to a bigger problem that is only minimally related to these particular candidates.
I did try to make my post provocative, and I am a bit riled up about it. However, I still think Kelly portrays the situation differently than it actually is. Yes, the electoral system is odd, and most of what is happening is the fault of a strange primary set up. However, the question seems to fundamentally be this: do the super delegates use their power to enact the will of the voters (i.e. pick the candidate who swept the three primary categories) or do they vote for who they want?
If they vote for who they want then it could either be back door deals (aka dirty politics)--a danger because whoever emerges may have to sell their souls to get the nomination--or it could be their honest assessment of who is most likely to win (or who has the longest coat tails). Even if they think objectively Hillary has the best chance to win, shouldn't they be concerned that there would be substantial back-lash in a party who feels that the nomination is a result not of the will of the people but the opaque decisions of party elites? Shouldn't they carry out the will of the voters because that is the best way to unify the party?
Forgive the debate analogy: when two teams from the same school meet in elims you advance the team with the best record because it is least controversial. If you select the lower team on the basis that they have the best chance of winning you risk dividing the team and inviting controversy. Right now Obama is the top seed, he should be advanced to the finals.
Post a Comment