Political Hippo Circle Jerk - America, farg YEAH!

[Phanatic]

and yes as of now I am voting for McCain over clinton or obama.  

You were never not voting for McCain. This is what searates the parties right now. Republicans will vote republican no matter who the candidate is. Bush winning twice is proof enough of that.

Though Kerry was a horrible option in that 2nd election. I almost didn't vote at all.

[phillymic2000]

Uhhhh if anything Democrats not following one candidate would indicate that they're not sheep but whatever.

Uhhhh the drones of Clinton lovers are just getting in line.

[phillymic2000]

Uhhhh if anything Democrats not following one candidate would indicate that they're not sheep but whatever.

shhhh, someone told him to say that...

It was my unicorn

[phillymic2000]

and yes as of now I am voting for McCain over clinton or obama.  

You were never not voting for McCain. This is what searates the parties right now. Republicans will vote republican no matter who the candidate is. Bush winning twice is proof enough of that.

I would never vote for Hillary, she scares the hell out of me, but Obama has not been all that impressive to me. McCain's pandering to the Dems over the last couple years and his stands on some issues worry me, but to me he is the best of the three, I am interested to see who he picks for his VP.

[Father Demon]

The thing that scares me about Hillary's nuclear threat is, Israel has it's own nuclear weapons, so it's not a protectionism about smaller power attacking higher power, but Hillary saying she is OK with starting a third world war if Iran decides to go (and use) it's nuclear weapons.  The Israel part was just to make this seem like a defensive mode rather than an out-an-out threat.

Going nuclear on Iran will put Bush's war to shame.

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

The final tally is actually less than 9%: 54.3% to 45.7%.

NOT a double digit victory for Hillary, FWIW.

[Cerevant]

stop counting delegates...delegates have been out of the equation for quite a while...its now all about hillary being able to sway the undecided supers into believing she is the better general election candidate for the dems...if she can do that she wins if she cant she loses

Agreed, that's why I said that Obama needs to campaign against McCain.  If he can heat things up with that battle, it can help him in several ways:

1) Ignoring Hillary gives the impression that she is irrelevant.
2) Putting some dents in the McCain armor would help in the polls, and by extension the electability argument.
3) Drawing media attention away from Obama v. Hillary.  The only reason she still has a chance is because the press says she still has a chance.

[fansince61]

Does anybody know how many electorial votes Hillary and Obama would have if the primary was like the general election and on a winner take all basis

[Cerevant]

See:

http://www.electoral-vote.com

Problem is that it doesn't have the most current poll data, but it gives you the general idea that both can beat McCain.

[rjs246]

and yes as of now I am voting for McCain over clinton or obama.  

You were never not voting for McCain. This is what searates the parties right now. Republicans will vote republican no matter who the candidate is. Bush winning twice is proof enough of that.

Though Kerry was a horrible option in that 2nd election. I almost didn't vote at all.

Agreed. And I didn't vote.

The "anybody but Bush" mantra wasn't exactly inspiring...

[Rome]

i'm fairly certain that we have a treaty with israel that stipulates that if anyone attacks them with wmd's then we retaliate in kind.  i could be wrong but i remember reading it around the time of gulf war 1.

hillary still shouldn't be making comments like that, though, because they pretty much go without saying and no good can come from making such incendiary threats.  the region is unstable enough already.

[ice grillin you]

protecting isreal isnt the problem it was her comment in the last debate that she wants a quasi nato type set up in the middle east where if iran or any middle eastern country attacks another the us will intervene "with extreme force"


im certainly not an isolationist but we need to get our own farging house in order...before we go trooping round the world at first sign of a fight

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

We have too many resources to go with the all-or-nothing view of foreign policy.

I think Hillary Clinton would agree but is trying to distinguish herself from Obama (a.k.a. "moving right").  Fearful people love to hear more about bombing mean brown people.

[Phanatic]

protecting isreal isnt the problem it was her comment in the last debate that she wants a quasi nato type set up in the middle east where if iran or any middle eastern country attacks another the us will intervene "with extreme force"


im certainly not an isolationist but we need to get our own farging house in order...before we go trooping round the world at first sign of a fight

If she modifies that idea a little it's not horrible. Nato defends and maintains its own troops so a middle eastern entity of countries would do the same and require no US involvement. Of course the minute they're united they'll probably unite against us infidels anyways...

[Phanatic]

and yes as of now I am voting for McCain over clinton or obama.  

You were never not voting for McCain. This is what searates the parties right now. Republicans will vote republican no matter who the candidate is. Bush winning twice is proof enough of that.

I would never vote for Hillary, she scares the hell out of me, but Obama has not been all that impressive to me. McCain's pandering to the Dems over the last couple years and his stands on some issues worry me, but to me he is the best of the three, I am interested to see who he picks for his VP.

I never can understand this attitude. Does this mean that true republican candidates can never work with a democrat or think they have a good idea or it's pandering? Isn't government about working with each other to accomplish something? Why is it that every problem has to be applied to one of two principles so called conservative or so called liberal across the board.

Do you really believe that conservative principles are appropriate for every problem? Same to the otherside. Are liberal principles the only answer?