2008 Primaries Thread 2: THE QUICKENING

Yo jhøshea, come to dazzle ships tonight broheems

XPOST

how pathetic is it that in this election cycle the Republicans rallied around their candidate, McCain (who a fair portion of the party doesn't even like) quicker than the Dems did around theirs.

most dysfunctional party ever.

Even so I still don't see Hillary pulling this out. At this point she's just damaging the party's chances in November.

dazzle ships is 2 heathers jon?

@heathers

the GOP didn't have a choice, Shakey

shakey the diff is that the democrats have more than one candidate who is actually somewhat fit to be president

xpost xackly

little factoid via yglesias

2,833,000 Texans voted for John Kerry in the 2004 general election, but 2,857,000 people voted in last night's Democratic primary.

interpret plz

yeah you're right, shakey, i guess the democratic party needs to be more self-loathing to run a successful general election campaign

hillary's not dead yet, my condolences

I imagine that big factors in that number are a) population growth and b) the fact that no sane person thought George Bush would lose Texas. It still may bode very well.

i guess the democratic party needs to be more self-loathing to run a successful general election campaign

I have no idea what you mean by this

i was a t a bar last night and they were playing the rangers/islanders game and theres like one guy watching the fucking shoot out then they put the election comes on and everyone immediately crowds around and and starts talking abt super delegates and the texas caucus - its a national obsession everyone is an expert - i blame the blogs

-- jhøshea, Wednesday, March 5, 2008 10:45 AM (41 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

i think this is awesome

-- deej, Wednesday, March 5, 2008 11:46 AM (8 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

yah i mean fundamentally i think its a v good thing for the country that everyone cares so much - but on the other hand this election is driving me fucking insane

How Pennsylvania Shapes Up Demographically.

Sullivan: it's Limbaugh's fault.

unbelievable

jhøshea, Heathers tonight

so theres talk of obama going negative
http://thepage.time.com/2008/03/05/change-versus-more-of-the-same-part-ii/

is that really a good idea?

Clintons will NOT be stopped. Til McCain....

is that really a good idea?

we'll see! I think probably it is, its their only option. If they don't respond aggressively and control the news cycles, Hillary will press her advantages. otoh, Hillary will invariably respond with more "poor widdew me" antics and crying etc

(also I think where their going IS totally legit - Hillary's "foreign policy expertise" is bullshit, and the Clintons have all kinds of ethics skeletons in their closet)

he should make a commercial of her bragging abt her "important work" in bosnia then cut to footage of her singing w/sinbad

hahaha, otm

roflz

so apparently Hillary's victories last night have not narrowed Obama's delegate lead at all...? way to go shrillary

I think the 'talk' of Obama going negative is now 'reality'. Or maybe, to be fair, he's just determined to get tougher with HRC starting now. Curious to see how this plays out.

Given the fact she is able to loan her campaign $5 million, you would think the Clintons would be able to hire an accountant.

lolz

i gotta go in a min but can someone explain to me why SUPERTICKET is so laughable on its face beyond the obv animosity b/w the two right now? would clinton as veep really kill o's independent appeal?

dont mind the haters SUPERTICKET rules

maybe they can work something out where obama gets to be president on odd days, hillary on evens?

would clinton as veep really kill o's independent appeal?

it would kill his appeal to me.

hillary get to be president in 2016

Obama's turning to negative campaigning as a means of embracing Hil's tactics is like when your girlfriend is always throwing stuff at you in arguments but you're cool and collected but one day you snap and chuck a lamp and quite possibly you sleep on the curb that night.

lolz

I am not okay with any arrangement wherein Hillary is in the WH/closer to the presidency

x-post

wimmin always be trickin us

can someone explain to me why SUPERTICKET is so laughable on its face

It isn't so much laughable as improbable. IIRC, the last time a nominee put his nearest challenger on the ticket as veep was when JFK offered and LBJ accepted. Since then similar offers have been made, but always rejected. Once a candidate sets his or her heart on the office of POTUS, being the vice seems like small beer and a step into obscurity.

It is only recently (post 1980) that the vice president has been given any real work to do at all. Reagan started it, mainly because he didn't care to work very hard and liked to delegate as much as he could.

Don't forget: Reagan's people floated the idea of a "co-presidency" with Ford in 1980.

I'd say it started with Carter, who actually, you know, MET with Mondale and treated him as a member of Cabinet.

IIRC, the last time a nominee put his nearest challenger on the ticket as veep was when JFK offered and LBJ accepted.

Uh, Kerry/Edwards?

And before that Reagan/Bush 1980.

SUPERTICKET

clearly you just like the sound of that word.

http://media.gallup.com/poll/graphs/030508DailyUpdateGraph1.gif

bahh i'm kind of reaching burnout right now. i need to take a break from reading about this election

lol voters are mindless drones

http://media.gallup.com/poll/graphs/030508DailyUpdateGraph1.gif

-- Mark Clemente, Wednesday, March 5, 2008 1:37 PM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

motherfucker! what is wrong with you people

good analysis here - way to fuck it up Democrats

I take comfort in the fact that the existence of this thread and just the hysterics and paranoia means that, hopefully this year for once, the Democrats actually have energy for this presidential election. (lol, except maybe for "omg I was too busy on ilx to vote!!!1")

Was the 2004 Primaries thread anything close to this on a level of micro-micro-micro-tea-leaf reading?

Just looking back at Democratic nominees for the past three decades or so:
Kerry
Clinton
Clinton
Dukakis
Mondale
Carter
Carter
McGovern

..I mean, there isn't a precedent for 2008 for the Democratic nominee candidates. There definitely isn't a precedent for the GOP situation in 2008 too, which is more key and more overlooked.

There definitely is a precedent for nominee races lasting until June as recently as Bill Clinton, fwiw.

So, follow Tracer's advice. Be vigilant yet chill. This is going to last until the convention. Enjoy Spring and Summer 2008 while you can. I love you guys.

Also, you can never use mccainbushhug.jpg enough this year

Dems wasting time (and most importantly $$$) in-fighting while McCain consolidates campaign resources/money/hones message = C/D

this is bad bad bad for the Democrats in the fall, there's no denying it. all of us are feeling election fatigue, and there's SIX MONTHS to go. this "enthusiasm" will not last that long, it will be replaced by bitterness and disenchantment.

And either way, a huge segment of the Democratic base will feel bruised.

and the fact that Hillary is ensuring this in the hopes that she can finagle a coronation via some procedural loophole in defiance of the popular vote = FUCK YOU I HATE YOU ARRGHGHGHGH