Every TV political pundit is twisting and turning as hard as he or she can to tell us what the primaries yesterday meant, all with a slant, bias or whatever based on the network they’re on, what party they represent and what gives the best ratings. Here is the list of the winners yesterday. Simply put, what do you think the results mean? Who do you predict we will have to choose from in November? If you voted yesterday and want to share your selection, why that person?
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Bad Behavior has blocked 11614 access attempts in the last 7 days.
I will vote for Ron Paul.
If he is not a choice, I will vote for ANYBODY other than McCain, Romney, Huckabee, Obama, or Clinton.
Call it a wasted vote if you want to. I have to vote my conscience.
It’ll be Clinton/Obama vs. McCain/Huckabee, I’d bet money on it. Then, it’s anyone’s race, but I think a Democratic win is inevitable.
I wonder how the left would respond to a McCain presidency? I don’t think it would take long for liberals to vilify McCain as well.
In almost all of the states, the delegates are split according to the vote. The list linked here doesn’t even give the percentages, just one candidate per party per state, which is not very useful. CNN kept doing similar things last night (they kept “calling” states for a candidate in each party).
While I agree it will be a McCain/Huckabee ticket on the Republican side. I just don’t see the Democrats not having at least one white guy on the ticket. If they go with a Clinton/Obama ticket it might be the only way they can NOT win the election. And there is no way in hell Hillary would take the VP spot.
#3 Al, that’s only for the Dem primaries. The Republican are winner take all.
I’m actually quite surprised McCain has managed to win outside of the New Hampshire. With a battle between the hawkish, anti-freedom McCain vs. Obama’s recycled ideas from the 60s that did us few favors the first time they were in fashion, I have no idea how this election is going to pan out.
No way it will be McCain/Huckabee. Republican insiders know Huckabee is poison, and is the only way to absolutely ensure a Clinton victory. Yes, the religious right wants Huckabee, but Republicans need to win an election and there are enough smart people at the smoke filled room level to know that once the ticket is chosen they have to win a general election (and that the religious right has nowhere else to go, no matter who the Republicans run). Yes, the religious conservatives can threaten to stay home, but pragmatism will draw them to the polls (McCain is way better than Clinton to the right).
The biggest worry, for the Republicans, would be if Hillary does NOT get the nomination. She’s the great motivator that will get their base to the polls. Take her away, and they do have to start worrying that the right wing of the base will stay home.
Maybe a McCain/Liebermann?
Two points:
1) If it gets to a point where nobody has enough delegates to get the nom, which after last night is a definite possibility, Huckabee can promise his delegates to whomever makes him his running mate. The party won’t have any choice.
2) Last night showed that McCain and Romney are both weak in the South, while Huckabee is strong. Given that the Republicans can’t take the White House without the South, Huckabee might be worth it even with his trade-offs.
I think if the Democrats are smart, they will go with Edwards for the number two spot, regardless of whether its Obama or Clinton at the top of the ticket. He is a proven motivator, and it would give them a chance at getting some votes out of the South
Clinton vs McCain; McCain wins.
#7 – That logic won’t work if Hillary is the most conservative of the final two, going off of Ann Coulter’s logic.
#7 Huckabee’s showing in the South yesterday changed everything. There is no way for the Republicans to have a chance unless they carry the South and of the six Southern states that have had primaries Huckabee has won four.
#11 Not that it means a thing but Edwards has said at least three times that he will not take a VP spot. I do agree though that the DNC should pressure him to.
As other posters have pointed out – the media coverage has become so bad that it’s impossible to know what’s really happening. It’s 90% celebrity hype, focussing on supposed personal conflicts between the candidates.
As the last 2 presidential elections have shown, the Democrats are NOT smart.
Geez… it’s so hard to pick from such a great lineup of polished politicians.
I know it won’t be Huckleberry because he wants to make our country a Christian-only state. That guy truly scares me.
Romney is a rich guy with nothing to prove yet he wants the power that a US Prez gains… he also scares me. I wonder what charities he gives to, I mean isn’t that what devout religious people do… help the poor?
Obama has gotten a lot of press recently and is being endorsed by a growing number of liberal celebrities. But is he really for change? Even having the power of a US Prez doesn’t give you the ability to truly change things. Will he have the fortitude to do the right things for the country? I like what DeNiro recently said, in short Obama is inexperienced, too inexperienced to let the special interest groups run the country. DeNiro said he could get used to Obama’s inexperience.
Clinton… do we really need another Clinton in the WH? BushClintonBushClinton… for 24 years, maybe 28? Lets not forget Bush Sr. was VP for 8 years. Ugh… we do need a change.
McCain, I liked him back in 2000, but he is an old fart who doesn’t understand technology and I fear he would inhibit the US from gaining ground lost in certain areas of science and technology. I don’t really want a republican back in the WH so soon either.
I guess Obama, mainly because he is new and would hopefully at least try to do things differently.
If Hillary gets the nomination, the vast majority of Obama voters will either not participate or vote for McCain. The Democratic party needs to wake up. Hillary is about the only way the Republicans can beat the Democrats this year. If the convention gives the nod to Hillary, the Dems deserve to lose.
The reason: Obama may not be ideal but he will inspire Americans and the rest of the world. That is a form of leadership the US lacks and Hillary can’t deliver. Hillary is just more of the same old divisive politics.
Heheheh,
Yup, it is all coming together. Once the Republicans all die from strokes and heart attacks at Hillarys inauguration there will be more than enough money to pay for national health care. But that is the easy way out, it is Gitmo and FEMA re-education camps for the rest of you.
Then in 8 years Chelsey will be old enough to run for presidency. Chelsey for NY senator in ’10! Yay!!!!
I guess you could just say I’ve been Hannitized. Lol!
Can someone please explain how the voting by the people of each state matters? It sounds to me that the popular vote doesn’t mean a whole hell of a lot if it’s the delegates who do the deciding. These votes seem to be only a suggestion to the delegates and carry no weight. How wrong is that view?
Thanks.
The talking heads who select our political people for us have kicked out the quality candidates as not drawing enough viewers, leaving the dems with what they now have and the repubs with only one person left who might not be bad.
Hate to say it but this is one I’ll sit out.
People who think Hillary is going to win the Democratic nomination are barnacleheaded “fanboys”.
Obama, whom I like very much, is an inexperienced and until recently, mostly unknown figure.
Normally, someone who is inexperienced and unknown gets 10-15% of the vote and is out 2-3 weeks into the campaign.
But Obama is steadily gaining ground and if Hillary was a strong candidate to begin with, this shouldn’t be happening at all — let alone the race should not be close.
Hillary is doing very poorly considering the circumstances and this speaks to the fact she does not have a likable personality.
There is “blood in the water” and the old perception of inevitability has been replaced by doubt and concern. She does not look strong as a presidential candidate.
The next 3 primaries are states with very high African American populations. Obama is going to handily win those states and he will be able to focus on individual states as there are no more Super Tuesdays that strain his talent for being able to connect with people.
McCain/Obama is tough to call because although McCain is likable, some people are going to question whether or not they want another Republican administration vs. turn the page.
I think people are going to want to turn the page and Obama will win.
#22 Expect the Clinton, mug slinging, dirty tricks machine to switch into high gear during the next week or so. The Clinton’s want back in the White House and they will stop at nothing to make that happen.
#22 Expect the Clinton, mug slinging, dirty tricks machine to switch into high gear during the next week or so. The Clinton’s want back in the White House and they will stop at nothing to make that happen.
This is undoubtedly true, 110%. But what tricks can they have up their sleeves? Their divide and conquer approach to black/white voters is doing them more harm than good. The Obama drug stuff never seemed to get much traction. The Obama as friend to a slumlord is silly. The Obama’s “radical” church story plays well in some places, but not among Dems.
I wonder if they’ve been saving up some other other bombshells for use when needed?
I think it means that the repugnicans had only one decent mainstream business as usual candidate, so he got an overwhelming majority. I think it means the democraps had two halfway decent mainstream business as usual candidates, so there is no clear majority.
I think it means that the media can control our brains and convince us that some candidates are “unelectable”. I think it means that when corporations have failed to buy certain candidates (i.e. Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich), they will not be allowed enough air time for we the morans to consider them seriously.
I think it means that until the web becomes an even bigger source of information we haven’t got whelk’s chance in a supernova of having an election between a real fiscally conservative libertarian and a real for the people liberal.
It’s too bad really. The fourth place finishers in NY would have given this country something real to think about, despite Ron Paul’s horrifically bad anti-choice stance. This could have been an election with two candidates with views I could at least respect, even though I obviously only agree with one of them.
Still though, I guess now it will be Clinton/Obama or Clinton/Edwards or Obama/Edwards on the Democrap side and McCain/BaseballGlove or McCain/Yuckabee or some such on the Repugnican side.
If we don’t get the Democraps this year, Canada will be looking even more attractive, eh? Good thing I’ve already got a tuque.
I’ll say this, I was reading Obama’s stances. He has a lot of passionate, empathic, sensitive stances. But, all I could think of while reading his ideas was “cha-ching” as the costs skyrocketed. We are already running a deficit, where’s all this money going to come from!?!?! Cleaning out the wallets of the rich isn’t even enough to pay for all of that.
#22, “The next 3 primaries are states with very high African American populations. Obama is going to handily win those states… “
Thanks for reinforcing the idea that blacks are just mindless fools who pick their candidates because of similar skin tones. The sad thing is that most of the so-called “interest groups” in this country can be predicted to do exactly that.
I think newcomer Obama needs a little more experience to prove his chops before he can become president. He has no record. How can you vote for that? “Change,” in biological evolution terms anyway, is almost always detrimental and fatal. I would have thought people had learned their lesson re voting on sentimentality – largely responsible for getting Bush Jr. elected in the first place. In Obama’s case you have sentimentality + racial motivation. How wrong is that? (Personally, those are the reasons I could vote for him.) But he’s clearly young enough to first develop a nice, solid & revealing public service track record before having any business being president.
Hillary is more credible as a prez because we already know so much about her/(them) and she really would be ready to govern on Day 1. But, most Republicans outright just can’t stand her.
As opposed to McCain who has support even on the Democrat side. The conservative right-wing threat to vote for Hillary, given the choice, is just manipulative bluff.
RBG
Forgot to add, there was a question about my vote. I see some slight differences between Obama and Clinton. However, the differences were small enough that I could barely form a preference for one over the other. So, I voted for the person I really wanted to win, even though he has already dropped out of the race. I voted for Kucinich.
This is definitely a wasted vote in terms of the fact that he will not get the nomination no matter what at this point. However, I feel that the votes that were cast for Kucinich just may have some small effect in making a statement that some people want real change. Perhaps it will help nudge the frontrunners a tad to the left.
Clinton and Obama are both about 25 meters to the right in a room that is 100 meters wide. They stand a few millimeters apart at that distance. I am hoping, by my “wasted” vote to help nudge these two a little to the left toward the center.
For comparison, I stand about 42 meters left of center and am horrified to see our country so far right-shifted that even the New York Times, still a conservative paper, is seen by some as a liberal rag.
So, I will vote for either Clinton or Obama in the general election, but hope to have made some small statement in the primary since I couldn’t definitively pick between the two anyway.
#16 – gquaglia,
As the last 2 presidential elections have shown, the Democrats are NOT smart.
At least 2 presidential elections have shown that the American people are NOT smart.
We don’t even know when we’ve been had. Even when a voting machine in Valusia county Florida reports -19,000 votes for Gore (yes, negative nineteen thousand), we still can’t tell we’ve been had. We the idiots are getting what we (collectively, though I’d like to believe not individually) are getting exactly what we deserve.
Now what?
Well McCain is the Republican nominee. He has over 60% of the delegates he needs, and more than the others combined.
Hillary and Obama are headed to the convention. The delegate split is too narrow with little chance of a breakout. So the Dem nominee will be ‘selected not elected’. Maybe if it stays really close, they’ll go past the first two ballots, there’ll be candidate Gore?