|Tigers Johnson| Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [quote name='Jamie_B' post='628411' date='Jan 30 2008, 03:51 PM']But that isnt what's happening is it? Obama is looking like he has a very good shot at winning, so if on the right I vote for Paul, Im still standing my by convinctions (which is never a wasted vote) and still get Obama on the left and if Paul wins more votes then it helps his cause on the right (because even if he doesnt win his message gets heard, by gaining a large percentage) and remember there is no "lose lose lose" as bengalrick tried to convey its about taking enough primamry votes. If the leaders keep changing and paul keeps taking 2nd, he could stand a good chance of winning it. So from a get the hell out of Iraq and stop funding the war machine Paul vs Obama is the only choice. Its about the future of this country. Also if Paul wins enough of a percentage it forces the other canidates to take a look at why and perhaps adopt some of his ideals, and that is NEVER a waste of a vote![/quote] It is in Ohio if Ludwig is a registered Republican..... Hence thats why I said Ron Paul will drop out before Ohio.... and no...not in the primaries it will not....(force other politicians to adopt some of his policies)...especially when he is being so soundly defeated.... Thats what kills me about Paul...the other Republican candidates are weak this year....if you ask me McCain is Bob Dole revisited.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bengalrick Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [quote name='Jamie_B' post='628431' date='Jan 30 2008, 03:22 PM']Rick there have been very few states in the whole thing vote yet, so his chance is still somewhat open isnt it? Stop believeing everything Rupport Murdoch tells you. VA is still a ways away so I have time to make that choice dont I? And again if he does win a good percentage it forces the others to look at it. [b]THAT IS NOT A WASTED VOTE![/b][/quote] first of all, what the fuck are you talking about? I was giving you MY opinion, and i don't give a fuck what Ruport Mordoch and fox news tells people... i thought you knew, but i'll fill you in again... i am workign full time and going to school full time... i don't have time for the news... the only news i get is on the internet and you should blame the drudge report i guess, if your looking for someone to bitch about... now that i said that, what i said i still true... and probably will be true even when you vote... barrack will either be fighting for his life or will be out of it by this point... the clinton machine is much too strong to go down w/out a fight... paul has no chance in hell, and if you think otherwise, then go ahead and [s]waste [/s]use your vote on him... the only people taking paul seriously are the far right and the far left... i purposely avoid both and advise you to do the same... not that i don't like some of what paul is saying, but facts are facts... he has no chance in hell, and obama does... if you don't care who wins between clinton and obama, then go ahead and use the vote on paul... but if you WANT obama to win, you better not assume that he will beat clinton... The race issue hurts obama much more than the sex issue hurts hillary... And that avenue has only started at getting talked about... also, hillary has bill to help her be in two places at once... and the name recognition... and there are less sexists than there are racists.... and if you think that by seeing liberals vote for paul will make conservatives look at his policies more, you ahve alot to learn about conservatives... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [quote name='Tigers Johnson' post='628440' date='Jan 30 2008, 03:35 PM']It is in Ohio if Ludwig is a registered Republican..... Hence thats why I said Ron Paul will drop out before Ohio.... and no...not in the primaries it will not....(force other politicians to adopt some of his policies)...especially when he is being so soundly defeated.... Thats what kills me about Paul...[color="#FF0000"]the other Republican candidates are weak this year....if you ask me McCain is Bob Dole revisited.[/color]...[/quote] He wolnt drop our because its about the message. And I agree with the red. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Tigers Johnson| Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [quote name='bengalrick' post='628448' date='Jan 30 2008, 04:45 PM']first of all, what the fuck are you talking about? I was giving you MY opinion, and i don't give a fuck what Ruport Mordoch and fox news tells people... i thought you knew, but i'll fill you in again... i am workign full time and going to school full time... i don't have time for the news... the only news i get is on the internet and you should blame the drudge report i guess, if your looking for someone to bitch about... now that i said that, what i said i still true... and probably will be true even when you vote... barrack will either be fighting for his life or will be out of it by this point... the clinton machine is much too strong to go down w/out a fight... paul has no chance in hell, and if you think otherwise, then go ahead and [s]waste [/s]use your vote on him... the only people taking paul seriously are the far right and the far left... i purposely avoid both and advise you to do the same... not that i don't like some of what paul is saying, but facts are facts... he has no chance in hell, and obama does... if you don't care who wins between clinton and obama, then go ahead and use the vote on paul... but if you WANT obama to win, you better not assume that he will beat clinton... The race issue hurts obama much more than the sex issue hurts hillary... And that avenue has only started at getting talked about... also, hillary has bill to help her be in two places at once... and the name recognition... and there are less sexists than there are racists.... and if you think that by seeing liberals vote for paul will make conservatives look at his policies more, you ahve alot to learn about conservatives...[/quote] SHHHHH your stomping on their mantra LONG LIVE THE INTERNET CRUSADES!!!! YOU DON'T KNOW SHIT UNLESS YOU LOVE PAUL>>>YOU WATCH TOO MUCH TV YOU MINDLESS FUCKS!!!!!111 Did I get it all.... I <3 Elitists...they walk around all day thinking in their heads that they all know something the rest of us peasants don't know. ITS OUR GOD DAMN WAY OR THE HIGHWAY! IF YOU DON'T AGREE WITH ME THEN YOU ARE WRONG! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [quote name='bengalrick' post='628448' date='Jan 30 2008, 03:45 PM']first of all, what the fuck are you talking about? I was giving you MY opinion, and i don't give a fuck what Ruport Mordoch and fox news tells people... i thought you knew, but i'll fill you in again... i am workign full time and going to school full time... i don't have time for the news... the only news i get is on the internet and you should blame the drudge report i guess, if your looking for someone to bitch about... now that i said that, what i said i still true... and probably will be true even when you vote... barrack will either be fighting for his life or will be out of it by this point... the clinton machine is much too strong to go down w/out a fight... paul has no chance in hell, and if you think otherwise, then go ahead and [s]waste [/s]use your vote on him... the only people taking paul seriously are the far right and the far left... i purposely avoid both and advise you to do the same... not that i don't like some of what paul is saying, but facts are facts... he has no chance in hell, and obama does... if you don't care who wins between clinton and obama, then go ahead and use the vote on paul... but if you WANT obama to win, you better not assume that he will beat clinton... The race issue hurts obama much more than the sex issue hurts hillary... And that avenue has only started at getting talked about... also, hillary has bill to help her be in two places at once... and the name recognition... and there are less sexists than there are racists.... and if you think that by seeing liberals vote for paul will make conservatives look at his policies more, you ahve alot to learn about conservatives...[/quote] Rick, he has came in 2nd in two primaries already and holds 6 delegats to McCain's 96 with MANY MORE STATE STILL TO VOTE. Telling me he has NO chance is nothing more than rehashed MSM crap, that becomes a self fufilling prophacy because people believe it and dont vote for him doesnt it? (which is telling). Obama just beat hillary in SC [b]BY A WIDE MARGIN[/b], if he can keep it up, then when it gets to VA Ill have a pretty easy choice to make as far as the primaries go wolnt I? Stop saying its a wasted vote, [b]voting for what you believe in is never a wasted vote!!!!!!!!![/b] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [quote name='Tigers Johnson' post='628453' date='Jan 30 2008, 03:53 PM']SHHHHH your stomping on their mantra LONG LIVE THE INTERNET CRUSADES!!!! YOU DON'T KNOW SHIT UNLESS YOU LOVE PAUL>>>YOU WATCH TOO MUCH TV YOU MINDLESS FUCKS!!!!!111 Did I get it all.... I <3 Elitists...they walk around all day thinking in their heads that they all know something the rest of us peasants don't know. ITS OUR GOD DAMN WAY OR THE HIGHWAY! IF YOU DON'T AGREE WITH ME THEN YOU ARE WRONG![/quote] So standing by my convictions makes me an Elitist? I say you telling me who I should not be voting for makes you one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bengalrick Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [quote name='Jamie_B' post='628458' date='Jan 30 2008, 04:00 PM']Rick, he has came in 2nd in two primaries already and holds 6 delegats to McCain's 96 with MANY MORE STATE STILL TO VOTE. Telling me he has NO chance is nothing more than rehashed MSM crap, that becomes a self fufilling prophacy because people believe it and dont vote for him doesnt it? (which is telling). Obama just beat hillary in SC [b]BY A WIDE MARGIN[/b], if he can keep it up, then when it gets to VA Ill have a pretty easy choice to make as far as the primaries go wolnt I? Stop saying its a wasted vote, [b]voting for what you believe in is never a wasted vote!!!!!!!!![/b][/quote] If you had your choice, who do you want to win the presidency at this point? If it is paul then you have a point... if it is obama you are wasting your vote... It is as simple as that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Tigers Johnson| Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [quote name='Jamie_B' post='628460' date='Jan 30 2008, 05:02 PM']So standing by my convictions makes me an Elitist? I say you telling me who I should not be voting for makes you one.[/quote] No...you treating me like I am an idiot and a sheep because I don't stand by YOUR convictions! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [quote name='bengalrick' post='628463' date='Jan 30 2008, 04:08 PM']If you had your choice, who do you want to win the presidency at this point? If it is paul then you have a point... if it is obama you are wasting your vote... It is as simple as that...[/quote] Well if I had a choice, thats pretty obvious but its not up to just me is it? [quote name='Tigers Johnson' post='628465' date='Jan 30 2008, 04:12 PM']No...you treating me like I am an idiot and a sheep because I don't stand by YOUR convictions![/quote] I said nothing of the sort, I said [b]IF[/b] YOU ARE ONLY LISTING TO WHAT YOU ARE TOLD AND ARE VOTING BASED ON THAT RATHER THAN TAKING A HONEST LOOK AT HE CANIDATES AND VOTING ON WHO MOST LINES UP WITH WHAT YOU BELIEVE IN THEN YES [b]THAT[/b] MAKES YOU A SHEEP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Tigers Johnson| Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [quote name='Jamie_B' post='628400' date='Jan 30 2008, 03:28 PM']If were talking about primaries in VA there is a open system that anyone can vote for any party but only once, meaning if in the republican primaries I vote for Paul I can not vote for Obama in the Dem primaries. In my opinion there are only two canidates that truly want to end this war and not make our problems worse by getting into it with Iran. They are Paul and Obama. I will vote for Paul in the primaies, even though Im not on board with his ecnomic ideals (but understand most would never pass in congress) based in principle, because he would need my vote much more than Obama would. If in the General Election Obama is the only canidate left that will bring the troops home then I will vote for Obama. This country is on the verge of an ecnomic collapse and we need to stop funding money into the war machine (and the fact that I work for the national guard, and doing such could effect my job should tell you how serious I am) and invest it in our own.[/quote] What makes you so sure Obama does not need your vote??? He is hardly a shoe in.... In fact, Clinton leads Obama 249 - 181. and Virginia's vote will be after Super Tuesday.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bengalrick Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [quote name='Tigers Johnson' post='628469' date='Jan 30 2008, 04:22 PM']What makes you so sure Obama does not need your vote??? He is hardly a shoe in.... In fact, Clinton leads Obama 249 - 181. and Virginia's vote will be after Super Tuesday....[/quote] He'd rather teach republicans a lesson apparently... Jamie, i don't understand your strategy but i will shut up about it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [quote name='Tigers Johnson' post='628469' date='Jan 30 2008, 04:22 PM']What makes you so sure Obama does not need your vote??? He is hardly a shoe in.... In fact, Clinton leads Obama 249 - 181.[/quote] Where do you get that info? Obama is leading 63-48 [url="http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/"]http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/[/url] With the VA primaries being after super tuesday (dont remember the exact date) I'll pretty much have a good idea wolnt I? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [quote name='bengalrick' post='628474' date='Jan 30 2008, 04:32 PM']He'd rather teach republicans a lesson apparently... Jamie, i don't understand your strategy but i will shut up about it...[/quote] If they havent learnt that the country is done with this war and doesnt want war with iran and wants to come home asap from the midterm elections then they will learn it in this one wolnt they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bengalrick Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [quote name='Jamie_B' post='628478' date='Jan 30 2008, 04:34 PM']If they havent learnt that the country is done with this war and doesnt want war with iran and wants to come home asap from the midterm elections then they will learn it in this one wolnt they?[/quote] If this country was done with this war, Paul would be leading in the polls, wouldn't he? That and the big bad media standing in his way... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [quote name='bengalrick' post='628480' date='Jan 30 2008, 04:35 PM']If this country was done with this war, Paul would be leading in the polls, wouldn't he? That and the big bad media standing in his way...[/quote] Then explain Obama leading in the polls. Then explain why Republicans lost the midterm elections. You cant possibly be that nieve Rick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Tigers Johnson| Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [quote name='Jamie_B' post='628476' date='Jan 30 2008, 05:33 PM']Where do you get that info? Obama is leading 63-48 [url="http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/"]http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/[/url] With the VA primaries being after super tuesday (dont remember the exact date) I'll pretty much have a good idea wolnt I?[/quote] [url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/interactives/campaign08/primaries/"]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/polit...gn08/primaries/[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer_Rice Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 My two bits, FWIW. Any vote is a calculation of sorts. In our system, the tension between principle and compromise is always present. But, a vote is not the only means by which the levers of power are manipulated. In fact, generally speaking, the act of casting a vote (in whatever venue--e.g. a primary, a general election, in a legislative body) is towards the end of a long process. In the course of defining the characteristics of a given policy process, it's often possible to gather a small coalition powerful enough to influence its content. I suspect that is what Paul is up to, and that this has been his primary goal from the start. Under those parameters, he's making the right move by trying to get to the convention with at least a small club in his hand. Compare a candidate of this sort to those who get out early, like Guiliani or Edwards. This sort of candidate tends to be more practical, perhaps overly so. I ask myself: What do the circumstances and the times require? That often determines the line in the sand between where I might compromise and where I might stand on principle. I've done both. The trick is to get the right action meshed with the right conditions. Imo, a Paul presidency would be an absolute disaster for the country. But I'm glad he is sticking to his guns because the weight of his effort might have a meliorating effect on the rest of the party. Conversely, I'm disappointed that Edwards got out today because there is a sneaking suspicion on my part that he is doing so partly because he is now positioning himself for a role in a possible Dem admin. (Though it could be his wife is getting sicker, or he's running out of money, or any number of other more palatable reasons.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Tigers Johnson| Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [url="http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/#D"]http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries...ts/scorecard/#D[/url] and 1 click into your site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bengalrick Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [quote name='Jamie_B' post='628484' date='Jan 30 2008, 04:39 PM']Then explain Obama leading in the polls. Then explain why Republicans lost the midterm elections. You cant possibly be that nieve Rick.[/quote] you think that rep's lost only b/c of the war? That is nieve as well my friend.. Rep's lost b/c they let spending control them, along w/ the immigration debate splitting the party into two... the iraq war certainly ddint' help b/c it ensured no democrat would switch over and vote republican so it definately effected the election, but it was far from the only reason, and imo not even the biggest reason... Obama is leading in what polls?? And does that mean that the candidate that you ultimately want to win doesn't need your help to win the nod? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Tigers Johnson| Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [quote name='Homer_Rice' post='628488' date='Jan 30 2008, 05:48 PM']My two bits, FWIW. Any vote is a calculation of sorts. In our system, the tension between principle and compromise is always present. But, a vote is not the only means by which the levers of power are manipulated. In fact, generally speaking, the act of casting a vote (in whatever venue--e.g. a primary, a general election, in a legislative body) is towards the end of a long process. In the course of defining the characteristics of a given policy process, it's often possible to gather a small coalition powerful enough to influence its content. I suspect that is what Paul is up to, and that this has been his primary goal from the start. Under those parameters, he's making the right move by trying to get to the convention with at least a small club in his hand. Compare a candidate of this sort to those who get out early, like Guiliani or Edwards. This sort of candidate tends to be more practical, perhaps overly so. I ask myself: What do the circumstances and the times require? That often determines the line in the sand between where I might compromise and where I might stand on principle. I've done both. The trick is to get the right action meshed with the right conditions. Imo, a Paul presidency would be an absolute disaster for the country. But I'm glad he is sticking to his guns because the weight of his effort might have a meliorating effect on the rest of the party. Conversely, I'm disappointed that Edwards got out today because there is a sneaking suspicion on my part that he is doing so partly because he is now positioning himself for a role in a possible Dem admin. (Though it could be his wife is getting sicker, or he's running out of money, or any number of other more palatable reasons.)[/quote] TY Homer....my thoughts exactly just stated in a more eloquent manner than I have demonstrated here...I just don't take kindly to be addressed in a condescending manner like I have been in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [quote name='Tigers Johnson' post='628486' date='Jan 30 2008, 04:43 PM'][url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/interactives/campaign08/primaries/"]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/polit...gn08/primaries/[/url][/quote] wtf? thats directly conflicting isnt it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [quote name='Homer_Rice' post='628488' date='Jan 30 2008, 04:48 PM']My two bits, FWIW. Any vote is a calculation of sorts. In our system, the tension between principle and compromise is always present. But, a vote is not the only means by which the levers of power are manipulated. In fact, generally speaking, the act of casting a vote (in whatever venue--e.g. a primary, a general election, in a legislative body) is towards the end of a long process. In the course of defining the characteristics of a given policy process, it's often possible to gather a small coalition powerful enough to influence its content. I suspect that is what Paul is up to, and that this has been his primary goal from the start. Under those parameters, he's making the right move by trying to get to the convention with at least a small club in his hand. Compare a candidate of this sort to those who get out early, like Guiliani or Edwards. This sort of candidate tends to be more practical, perhaps overly so. I ask myself: What do the circumstances and the times require? That often determines the line in the sand between where I might compromise and where I might stand on principle. I've done both. The trick is to get the right action meshed with the right conditions. Imo, a Paul presidency would be an absolute disaster for the country. But I'm glad he is sticking to his guns because the weight of his effort might have a meliorating effect on the rest of the party. Conversely, I'm disappointed that Edwards got out today because there is a sneaking suspicion on my part that he is doing so partly because he is now positioning himself for a role in a possible Dem admin. (Though it could be his wife is getting sicker, or he's running out of money, or any number of other more palatable reasons.)[/quote] Good post, and from a Paul ecnomic standpoint I agree. [quote name='Tigers Johnson' post='628493' date='Jan 30 2008, 04:51 PM']TY Homer....my thoughts exactly just stated in a more eloquent manner than I have demonstrated here...I just don't take kindly to be addressed in a condescending manner like I have been in this thread.[/quote] I never did, I said [b]IF[/b] because I dont know if you had or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 [quote name='bengalrick' post='628490' date='Jan 30 2008, 04:48 PM']you think that rep's lost only b/c of the war? That is nieve as well my friend.. Rep's lost b/c they let spending control them, along w/ the immigration debate splitting the party into two... the iraq war certainly ddint' help b/c it ensured no democrat would switch over and vote republican so it definately effected the election, but it was far from the only reason, and imo not even the biggest reason... Obama is leading in what polls?? And does that mean that the candidate that you ultimately want to win doesn't need your help to win the nod?[/quote] If you (as a war supporter, so I have to ask if your being honest with yourself) dont think the War was a Major reason they lost I dont know that to tell you. Im pretty sure I said the canidate I want to win does need my help to win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Tigers Johnson| Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 I know I am doing what I hate.... Democratic Race Will Last Past Tuesday By NEDRA PICKLER and BETH FOUHY – 1 hour ago WASHINGTON (AP) — Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama are locked in a drawn-out war of attrition for the Democratic presidential nomination, sure to be fighting for delegates beyond next Tuesday no matter who comes out ahead on the primary season's biggest day. Still, it is a very big day — coast to coast and then some. Democrats will have their say in 22 states and American Samoa. The sheer size of the Feb. 5 challenge could favor the former first lady. She is still better known than Obama and holds a lead in national polls. Obama won or came in a close second in four early states where he had extensive field operations and spent weeks in retail campaigning — an option not as available to him now as he's forced to bounce among nearly two-dozen far-flung contests. But with a sizable bank account and lots of attention from his win in South Carolina last Saturday, Obama is prepared to go toe-to-toe with Clinton. And he benefits from party rules that award delegates according to the share of the votes each candidate receives. There's no winner-take-all on Feb. 5, and that means he could still win a substantial share of delegates even if Clinton wins most of the states. The rivals split four contests in January. Their two-person race became official Wednesday when a third candidate, John Edwards, announced he would drop out, thus ensuring the Democratic nominee will for the first time be either a woman or a black man. [b]So far, Clinton has won 253 of the 2,025 delegates needed to secure the nomination, while Obama has 187. Tuesday's voting brings an avalanche of delegates — 1,681, or 83 percent of the total needed to nominate. Here's a look at the campaign in key Feb. 5 states:[/b] ___ CALIFORNIA (370 pledged delegates) With more than a fifth of the Feb. 5 delegates, California is Super Tuesday's richest prize. The state has long been a Clinton stronghold — so much so that her California campaign director already has predicted victory. "We've got it," director Ace Smith said, noting that the campaign has already met or exceeded early voting targets that are considered a strong indicator of primary day performance. About half of the state's Democrats are expected to cast absentee ballots, and many began nearly a month ago, on Jan. 7. Clinton is trying to consolidate strength in Los Angeles, where she has the backing of Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's political machine as well as large numbers of her base supporters, including lower- and middle-income workers and Hispanics. Obama's campaign is strongest in the San Francisco Bay area, where high-income white voters are backing him as they are nationwide. He is also popular among the state's black voters who mostly live in Oakland and parts of Los Angeles. With so many delegates at stake, Obama is investing heavily in the state in hopes of staying competitive. He's begun running television ads in Los Angeles, one of the nation's costliest TV markets, and has launched an aggressive outreach program to Hispanic voters who so far have shown little interest in his candidacy. ___ NEW YORK (232 pledged delegates) Clinton enjoys a home state advantage in New York, where she was re-elected to the Senate in 2006 with 67 percent of the vote. Even so, Obama is competing actively in the state in hopes of peeling off delegates. His campaign is focusing on four largely black congressional districts in New York City, and will begin broadcasting television ads there this week. ___ ILLINOIS (153 pledged delegates) Obama is expected to do well in his home state. But Clinton, a Chicago native, is competing actively for delegates here. ___ NEW JERSEY (107 pledged delegates) Clinton starts with an advantage here, since she's well known for representing neighboring New York. She's been promoting her plan to improve the economy, especially among women who have been hardest hit. But the Obama campaign predicts the election will be closer than many people anticipate, particularly with a large number of black voters in the state. Obama drew thousands to a rally in Jersey City the day after his loss in New Hampshire, and he has the backing of some big-city mayors who are helping him organize. He is running television advertising in New York and Philadelphia, two expensive media markets that cover most of New Jersey. ___ MASSACHUSETTS (93 pledged delegates) Polls show Clinton in a strong position here, but Obama has the support of Gov. Deval Patrick, the nation's only black governor, as well as Sens. Ted Kennedy and John Kerry. Kennedy and Kerry are helping organize the state for Obama and will campaign for him in other Feb. 5 states. The Obama campaign points out that Massachusetts, like New Jersey, allows independent voters to participate in the primary, a characteristic they believe favors his campaign. ___ BEST OF THE REST Polls show a handful of states to be true battlegrounds, including Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Missouri, New Mexico, Tennessee and Utah. Both campaigns acknowledge that Obama has an edge in six states holding caucuses — Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Minnesota, and North Dakota. But the Clinton campaign points out the caucuses are in relatively small states that account for less than 15 percent of the delegates up for grabs on Tuesday. Obama strategists have expressed confidence in their chances in Georgia and Alabama. Both are deep South states with large black populations like South Carolina, where he had a commanding victory delivered by black voters. But Edwards' exit could complicate matters, perhaps putting some of those states' white votes up for grabs. Clinton is counting on a victory in Arkansas, where she was once first lady, and she is also strong in neighboring Oklahoma. [url="http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iUmzhpKDYkzYIeGyArNNQRz0bnOgD8UGDJKO0"]http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iUmzhpK...z0bnOgD8UGDJKO0[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 CNN needs to update their page then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.