Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Clinton No Longer Ahead In NH  
User currently offlineCba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4531 posts, RR: 3
Posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2014 times:

Just saw this in the news. She and Obama are tied in a statistical dead heat. Things have sure got interesting in the runup to the primaries. Any thoughts?

Another note: the last time we had a presidential ticket without either a Clinton or a Bush on the ticket was in 1976:

1976: Carter vs. Ford
1980: Reagan/Bush vs. Carter
1984: Reagan/Bush vs. Mondale
1988: Bush vs. Dukakus
1992: Clinton vs. Bush
1996: Clinton vs. Dole
2000: W Bush vs. Gore
2004: W Bush vs. Kerry
2008: will the trend continue?

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j...urdSSdigTLtmCg6Ez87e67L_gD8TG2E800

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/2008/view.bg?articleid=1050357

30 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2010 times:



Quoting Cba (Thread starter):
Any thoughts?

Yeah, Oprah is ahead in new Hampshire, her campaign manager, Mr. Obama is keeping her on a tight leash, and running a heavy schedule in Iowa also.


User currently offlinePope From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2000 times:

Anyone want to be that she now claims to be a victim of something or other?

HRC has the same fundamental problem John Kerry had. The more the voters get to know her, the less they like her.

Let HRC be HRC.


User currently offlineCba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4531 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1984 times:



Quoting Pope (Reply 2):
HRC has the same fundamental problem John Kerry had. The more the voters get to know her, the less they like her.

Let HRC be HRC.

My point of view (as a centrist Democrat), is that Clinton is too much of a polarizing figure in that people seem to either love or hate her. Obama is a much more moderating candidate, and seems to be much more consistent on many issues.


User currently offlinePope From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1963 times:



Quoting Cba (Reply 3):
My point of view (as a centrist Democrat), is that Clinton is too much of a polarizing figure in that people seem to either love or hate her. Obama is a much more moderating candidate, and seems to be much more consistent on many issues.

As a fiscal conservative with a social conscious voting Republican my take is that HRC attracts as many people on the left as she loses in the middle. Add to this the fact that the far left is attacking her for not being liberal enough and I simply don't think she's electable to national office.

The GOP field is a mess but running against Obama would be a far more difficult hurdle than running against HRC.


User currently offlineCba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4531 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1946 times:



Quoting Pope (Reply 4):
As a fiscal conservative with a social conscious voting Republican my take is that HRC attracts as many people on the left as she loses in the middle. Add to this the fact that the far left is attacking her for not being liberal enough and I simply don't think she's electable to national office.

The GOP field is a mess but running against Obama would be a far more difficult hurdle than running against HRC.

Agreed. HRC would provide momentum for an "anyone but Hillary" campaign for whichever Republican gets the nod. Obama is nowhere nearly as polarizing. On the GOP side, Giuliani and Clinton seem to be suffering from the same problem you mentioned above (the more people get to know them the more they dislike them). I believe that Obama has the strongest chance in the general election, and nominating Edwards would be a tragic mistake as he is entirely too populist for mainstream voters.

Sadly, I think 2 of the best candidates in the field are McCain and Biden, as they have the most logical and realistic approaches to many of the problems we're facing. Unfortunately, being bluntly honest doesn't seem to resonate with a lot of voters.


User currently offlinePope From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1942 times:



Quoting Cba (Reply 5):
I think 2 of the best candidates in the field are McCain and Biden

I'll agree with you on Biden (I'd even support him in the general). While I have tremendous respect for Sen McCain as an individual, he's wandered way too far from his conservative base to get my support.

Quoting Cba (Reply 5):
I believe that Obama has the strongest chance in the general election

Sadly for the country I think if Obama gets the Dem nomination, we'll see just how prevalent racisim still is in the United States.


User currently offlineCba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4531 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1935 times:



Quoting Pope (Reply 6):
Sadly for the country I think if Obama gets the Dem nomination, we'll see just how prevalent racisim still is in the United States.

I truly hope that this will not be the case. Out of curiosity, who do you think bodes the best chances on the Republican side?


User currently offlinePope From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1914 times:



Quoting Cba (Reply 7):
Out of curiosity, who do you think bodes the best chances on the Republican side?

Depends who the opponent is. I think someone like Rudy is the only one who can go after HRC and hang with her in a rough and tumble fight.

With Obama as the democratic candidate Mitt probably matches up better.

I really can't get 100% behind any of the GOP candidates - none of them really inspire me. It will be interesting who the VP nominee will be for both parties as all the major candidates will need a VP who can complete the package.

One of Kerry's many mistakes was selecting Edwards who brought absolutely nothing to the ticket and in fact hurt him in Florida due to the attorney and medical malpracticeinitiatives on the 2004 ballot.


User currently offlineDeltaGator From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 6341 posts, RR: 13
Reply 9, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1896 times:



Quoting Cba (Thread starter):
Any thoughts?

2 of them.

1 - How often is the winner of New Hampshire not the party nominee? It happens a fair amount so don't read too much into it.

2 - Why can't we just elect a black lesbian muslim woman and knock it all out in one fell swoop? Who gives a crap if she does any good but it will finally get us past the horrible racism, sexism, and religious discrimination that the PC pantywastes and Euroweenies would have us to believe we are as a country.  Wink



"If you can't delight in the misery of others then you don't deserve to be a college football fan."
User currently offlineMadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10901 posts, RR: 37
Reply 10, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1887 times:

I would prefer to see HRC in the White House rather than BO. I hope she will get the nomination and win the election.

It is just a question of experience. HRC knows all about the job. BO doesn't.

It is time for change. A woman President, please!

Go Hillary!!



There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
User currently offlineCba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4531 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1879 times:



Quoting DeltaGator (Reply 9):
1 - How often is the winner of New Hampshire not the party nominee? It happens a fair amount so don't read too much into it.

2 - Why can't we just elect a black lesbian muslim woman and knock it all out in one fell swoop? Who gives a crap if she does any good but it will finally get us past the horrible racism, sexism, and religious discrimination that the PC pantywastes and Euroweenies would have us to believe we are as a country.  

1. Well, until very recently HRC was quite well ahead in the polls and looked like the sure candidate. Now the field is an effective toss-up between the two. Although it is possible to get the nod without winning Iowa and NH, winning both would provide a significant springboard for the candidate.

2. I disagree with the notion that people are going to HRC and BO because she's a woman and he is black. Of course, because they're the first of their race/gender to be serious contenders, the issue will come up. However, I suspect that people are choosing either him or her because they believe they will make the best president, and not because of their race and gender.


User currently offlinePope From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1866 times:



Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 10):
It is just a question of experience. HRC knows all about the job. BO doesn't.

What experience? She's in the first year of her second term as a US Senator. She's never run a single political governmental subdivision. She's never run a private company. She's never been responsible for payroll. She's never had P&L responsibility of anything. As for the argument that she was a first hand observe rto what when on in the Oval office over her husband's 8 year term - well we know that she wasn't aware of "everything" that went on in the Oval.

HRC's strength is that she is by all reports an intelligent woman. But I don't believe that her "experience" is a substantial difference from BO. If you disagree, please state why you think so.


User currently offlineFriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4107 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1864 times:

You forgot to mention that Obama and Edwards have also made up considerable ground in Iowa and SC, two other very important primary states. I believe there is a 3% gap between Hillary and Obama in IA, and that's with a 5% margin of error. Should be very interesting next month...

User currently offlineItsonlyme From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 149 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 1829 times:

There was some other story about Bill Shaheen - Clintons campaign co-chair in NH saying how Obama's past drug use will come back to haunt him, which seems weird. Hillary seems to be going more and more negative, almost in panic. She was 20 points ahead in NH a few weeks back. Obama is now ahead in IA and tied in SC. I also think the experience issue doesnt make said, as Pope pointed out. Obama was also a state legislator for what, 8 years? Hillary was going on name recognition - now people have got to now the candidates better things are moving. Also if people really wanted experience then the top two guys on the Dem side would be Richardson and Biden (whos gotta be pretty much a shoe in for Sec of State in a potential Dem administration.)

User currently offlineDeltaGator From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 6341 posts, RR: 13
Reply 15, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1819 times:



Quoting Cba (Reply 11):
I disagree with the notion that people are going to HRC and BO because she's a woman and he is black......I suspect that people are choosing either him or her because they believe they will make the best president, and not because of their race and gender.

Go back and re-read my response a little slower.  Wink

I'm just effing tired of hearing the news pundits, PC pantywastes, and the oh-so-enlightened Euroweenies go on and on about how much of a sexist, racist, muslim hating, homophobic society we are who would never vote in a black person, a woman, etc. I'm advocating that we find a black female muslim lesbian and knock them all out at one time and tell the media types to go eff themselves once and for all.



"If you can't delight in the misery of others then you don't deserve to be a college football fan."
User currently offlineCba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4531 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1800 times:

Should be indeed. Just hope

Quoting DeltaGator (Reply 15):
Go back and re-read my response a little slower.  

Took me a while to get the sarcasm there!

Quoting Itsonlyme (Reply 14):
if people really wanted experience then the top two guys on the Dem side would be Richardson and Biden

Agreed, these two definately have the most experience with public policy. Either of them would make an excellent Secretery of State, although I wouldn't be surprised to see Richardson get the VP nod.


User currently offlineUH60FtRucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 1792 times:



Quoting DeltaGator (Reply 9):
1 - How often is the winner of New Hampshire not the party nominee? It happens a fair amount so don't read too much into it.

Correct me if I am wrong, but no candidate has ever lost both Iowa and New Hampshire, and gone on to win the party's nomination. Sure there has been eventual nominees who lost either one, but never both.

Quote:
New Hampshire -- the "Live Free or Die" state -- appears more amenable to upsets (Hart, McCain, Kefauver, and Buchanan, for example).

From 1972 through 2004, seven of nine eventual GOP nominees won the New Hampshire primary (two won the New Hampshire primary, but not Iowa), as did six of nine Democrats (One -- Dukakis -- won New Hampshire alone).

And here's an interesting factoid from the New Hampshire Almanac, "Resulting from their primary campaign chairmanships, two sitting New Hampshire governors, Sherman Adams and John Sununu, were appointed Chiefs of Staff at the White House."

From 1972 through 2004, seven of nine Republicans who won Iowa went on to win the nomination (two won Iowa, but not New Hampshire). Among Democratic nominees, six of nine won Iowa (and one -- Mondale -- won Iowa alone). Two Democrats who won neither race went on to snag their party's nomination -- Bill Clinton in 1992 and George McGovern in 1972. Every GOP nominee won at least one of the Early Two.

Five Republican nominees won both contests; all were incumbents. Five Democrats won both; only two as incumbents. Incumbents generally do have an edge.

http://www.knbc.com/politics/14785303/detail.html

-UH60


User currently offlineCPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 6005 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 1775 times:

Heard a pretty good point on Countdown the other day, Hillary has been running with the 'I can beat Rudy' slogan & the other way around. With the stains hitting Saint Rudy's campaign recently & the subsequent dip in the polls, it might not be necessary to be able to beat Rudy at all. So as strange as it may sound, Hillary needs Rudy & Rudy needs Hillary.

Having said that though, I wouldn't be surprised if it ended up as a Hillary / Obama ticket. He's the bold new kid with some radical ideas, she has the experience & the international connections (through Bill).


User currently offlineRJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1751 times:

For a second I thought the title read "Clinton no longer giving head in NH". I was about to ask what's new, just ask Bill about that!   

She may be losing steam in NH and in IA, but she still has a commanding lead in many of the other states. Since the primaries are so bunched up this year, it would take a pretty dramatic loss in NH or IA for her to lose all of those other states as well. She may get a scare but I think she will still be accepting the nomination next summer.

If nothing else she can always say she is following in her husbands footsteps. Remember, he lost IA and NH in 1992.

[Edited 2007-12-13 01:25:38]

[Edited 2007-12-13 01:26:21]

User currently offlineMadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10901 posts, RR: 37
Reply 20, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1741 times:

I yet have to watch these videos posted on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdUdkFMFrkQ

Hillary Uncensored, Part 1 of 4



There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
User currently offlineUH60FtRucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 1714 times:



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 19):
Remember, he lost IA and NH in 1992.

Nope. Bill Clinton lost in Iowa, to Iowa's Senator Tom Harkin. However he won New Hampshire - which is what won him a lot of positive media coverage, and helped him win South Carolina. After that it was all down hill.

-UH60


User currently offlineDeltaGator From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 6341 posts, RR: 13
Reply 22, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1707 times:



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 21):
After that it was all down hill.

How dare you! That is nothing short of an attack.

Signed,

The A.net liberal glitterati  Wink



"If you can't delight in the misery of others then you don't deserve to be a college football fan."
User currently onlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20680 posts, RR: 62
Reply 23, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1703 times:

I'm confused.

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 17):
Correct me if I am wrong, but no candidate has ever lost both Iowa and New Hampshire, and gone on to win the party's nomination.



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 17):
Two Democrats who won neither race went on to snag their party's nomination -- Bill Clinton in 1992 and George McGovern in 1972.

Didn't the article you quoted here just say that Clinton lost both IA and NH in '92?

Regardless, I don't put too much emphasis on Iowa. It wasn't until '76 when Carter exploited the state with a grassroots effort to gain name recognition that anyone even realized Iowa had a caucus, for the most part. It wasn't until '80 that others followed. All of the emphasis used to be singularly on NH.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineUH60FtRucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1700 times:

@Westy

Yeah you're absolutely right. I totally read this wrong:

Quote:
The 1992 Iowa Democratic caucuses were ceded to home-state Sen. Tom Harkin, but his second place finish in the New Hampshire primary made scandal-beleaguered Bill Clinton the "comeback kid;" he won the party’s nomination and defeated the incumbent President George H.W. Bush.

I read that as saying Tom Harkin had the second place finish. Now I realize it was talking about Clinton.

-UH60


25 Post contains links AGM100 : Ahh shucks , I still enjoy this old favourite http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkS9y5t0tR0
26 Post contains images Pyrex : That could happen. Now a black lesbian atheist woman
27 Pope : Hey as long as we're dreaming, let's make her smoking hot, double jointed and bi-sexual at the same time.
28 STT757 : I think this has alot to do with Clinton's waning popularity amongst Democratic voters, Democrats (and Republicans) feel that Clinton's election woul
29 DeltaGator : I should have added with huge boobs and definitive ankles that looks good in a non-sensible set of shoes.
30 Pope : Boooooyaaaaaaaahhhhhhh! That's the right state of mind.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Dr. Martens No Longer Made In The UK? posted Thu Mar 25 2004 04:09:25 by JAL777
No Longer "Freedom Of Speech" In France :( posted Fri Oct 13 2006 23:53:48 by Wing
This Week In The NFL: Chiefs No Longer Perfect! posted Sun Nov 16 2003 22:33:06 by Alpha 1
A Lot Of Words May No Longer Be Censored In The US posted Wed Oct 8 2003 03:26:48 by Flyf15
Dutch TV No Longer Wants To Be Embedded In UK Army posted Thu Apr 3 2003 21:31:54 by Keesje
"no" Wins In Venezuela posted Sun Dec 2 2007 21:35:51 by RIHNOSAUR
"no" Wins In Venezuela posted Sun Dec 2 2007 21:34:49 by RIHNOSAUR
Monkey Business No Laughing Matter In Kenya posted Fri Oct 26 2007 08:36:19 by Airlinelover
10-17: No Attacks Reported In Baghdad posted Thu Oct 18 2007 15:32:59 by Falcon84
Useless Appendix May No Longer Be Thought Useless posted Sat Oct 6 2007 06:43:34 by Goldenshield