Should Hill go after tomorrow?

Parent Cafe
1

<p>If Hillary wins Indiana and loses NC by 3-5% pts. Should she leave the race since she could say he was ahead in NC by 20, and I came back and only lost by a few thousand.</p>

<p>My guess is the NC contest will be a nail biter to the end. In PA she was only up 5% after exit polls and won by 9. Right now Obama is up by 7, she could easily lose by only a few points. Historically Obama always polls better than he actually does in the election</p>

<p>BTW I will be glad when the NC race is over so the commercials will stop. Obama has on at least 2 commercials an hr…Hillary running low on funds may have 1 a day in my market, or at least she is not playing them on the channels I watch that freuqently. I also find it interesting is Obama’s newest one on gas tax attack against her, pans in on the faces of white older gentlemen…if I recall right, when they did the exit polls out of PA, isn’t that the ones she beat him by more than 2 to 1? Then again maybe I have had to see it so often now, I know it to well and I am bored…Hillary’s plan according to him will save you less than 1/2 of a tank, he wants to give a 1K credit. The difference he is not asking for it right now, she is asking the sen. to pass it now. He says she is pandering, yet, her plan is for today, his plan is not!</p>

2

<p>b&p: By the time her plan is passed, summer will be over! $30? How far will it take someone in Indiana or North Carolina?</p>

<p>All economists that I’ve seen quoted, including her own, say it’s a bad plan. She says, ahem, she doesn’t listen to “elites.” A bit scary, that. Does it mean she’ll be appointing Joe Q. Public to the Fed or the Council of Economic Advisers instead of elitist economists?</p>

3

<p>Actually, I believe that we need to have short, med and long term. Last week they came out and said the largest oil reserve has been found in N.Dakota, where they can go in a horizontal direction and pump out, if we go into ANWAR, they say between the two we would not need any from OPEC. We also need to look into re-useable energy. </p>

<p>Yet, I do still have the belief that if the senate got off their butts, passed it right now for only 90 days, it would give relief to our economy. If the taxes are suspended @$0.40 per gallon, my tank take 18 gallons, I fill up every 2 weeks, which would be @ 45, add in my sons car, my husbands car, I am at $135 or more, because that does not include any travel plans and the fact that DH fills up every week (which just for him it would be $65). I would rather have that then wait until next April for his plan to give me a tax credit! BTW a tax credit converts into @$50 in actual money back in your pocket. Of course that tax credit may not even be eligible to me if he puts a AG limit on it! </p>

<p>For it to be only $30, that means 75 gallons. If your car gets 25 mpg =1650 miles in the next 90 days, that is @ 130 miles/week and less than 20 miles a day for every car you own. In other words in my house even though we only live 8 miles from DH’s office ea way, to only save 30 he will have to carpool (he only gets 18 mpg city) and nobody else can drive anywhere except to church and grocery shopping. Also remember our food goes up due to gas prices, so the tax would have a ripple effect</p>

<p>On a different note, I doubt that she will go until the DNC makes their decision on FL and MI, because she can than say I have the popular vote, and it will be hard for the DNC to say too bad, because that would smack of the 00 election…remember everyone, including my in laws would say Bush was selected and not elected.</p>

4

<p>Bullet the gas tax holiday would reieve drivers of paying $ .18 fed tax per gallon.</p>

5

<p>My bad your right, I added in NC tax also. Still in my family I am still way ahead of 30, since we have 3 drivers. I can’t get away with less than the 3, during summer, ds, works as a lifeguard @ 25 miles round trip, so it wouldn’t make sense for me to drive him. I am a stay at home Mom, so I can shorten my trips, but I still need to take them to piano lessons, grocery shopping and running errands. I only go about 100 miles p/wk., son goes 125 for work only, Bullet goes @100 work only, which = 325 per week, avg 20 mpg, that equals 16 gal., 3 a wk x 13, which is only 40, but that is also having absolutely no life, not going to church, out to dinner, or any summer vacation…in a few weeks my DS graduates, our families will drive 700 miles rd trip to come, should they not, to conserve. My side has a wedding this summer also, another 500 miles rd trip, should we not go? Because if you add in those 1200 miles, we are talking just on those trips, plus my DH retires in Aug, and DS will be going OOS college, have to go 2x orientation and move in, another 1000 miles. I am still way pass 30. The only way it is 30 is if you do not travel, live close to work and drive 1 car</p>

6

<p>b&p:
Remember that, in order to cover the $0.18 per gallon worth of relief, the deficit will have to grow:

[FactCheck.org:</a> Gas Relief Plans That Won’t Work | Newsweek Politics: Campaign 2008 | Newsweek.com](<a href=“http://www.newsweek.com/id/135323/page/2]FactCheck.org:”>http://www.newsweek.com/id/135323/page/2)</p>

<p>The same Newsweek article doubts that the cost of gas will even drop down since it is tied to supply and demand. In other words, your driving a bit more will keep prices high. Meanwhile, someone has to pay for the extra $8.5 billion worth of deficit. But, hey,we’re already in hock to the Chinese, what’s a few more billions?</p>

7

<p>You are right it is all about supply and demand, the problem is China and India’s demand has gone through the roof, thus even if we lowered our demand it would still remain high due to their needs…Ah only if they would just go back to their bicycles LOL</p>

<p>Now back to the Original question…will she leave? I can’t see her going until the DNC makes their decision about MI and FL, because she will still have an arguement that she won the popular vote!</p>

<p>Also call me cynical, but I think she wants Obama to have the nom, in hopes that he loses the nat. When 26% of her supported say they will swing to McCain if she is not the nom, that gives her better chance he will lose. Plus, if she takes it all the way to the convention, the 2 of them will be fighting ea other, and then the amt of dirt that was thrown at ea other will be hard to get the party back on track 90 days prior to the election. I can’t believe that she believes she has a chance, she is hoping for one (that is why she is hitting the Fox network now quite often), but if she doesn’t get it she will come out in Aug and support him, but I can’t see her hitting any stomps for him to convince her voters, esp. in FL and MI where they need to keep the dems on board for the nat. She’ll just come out and say I need to go back to work for my home state and that the campaign was so long and extended e will be taking a vacay in Sept.</p>

8

<p>There’s a pretty good article on Slate today about how difficult it would be for her to get the nomination at this point. She probably won’t even get the most popular vote, unless you want to count Michigan, where Obama wasn’t on the ballot. I think she may stay in until the end, though, because there is always the possibility that Obama will crash and burn due to some currently unknown problem, or some horrendous gaffe. I wouldn’t bet any of my personal money on her, though.</p>

9

<p>Why is the media clamoring for Clinton to get out of the race when they were perfectly happy to let Ronald Reagan, Jesse Jackson, and the Chappaquiddick Kid take their campaigns to the convention? </p>

<p>[Media</a> Matters - So now the press tells candidates when to quit?](<a href=“http://mediamatters.org/columns/200804300001?f=h_column]Media”>http://mediamatters.org/columns/200804300001?f=h_column)</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Let me guess? Can another hard-hitting journalistic piece on cleavage or cackling be far behind?</p>

10

<p>BTW, I’ve learned not to put any stock in polls so we’ll have to wait 'til tomorrow night for actual vote tallies… But, perhaps we should consider the question:</p>

<p>Should Barack go after tomorrow?</p>

11

<p>The media is far from clamoring for her to get out. If they were, they wouldn’t be pretending that she still has a strong chance to get the nomination. The media wants her to stay in as long as possible, because negative campaigning makes for good press.</p>

12

<p>

</p>

<p>I must admit that the Dems have a problem, b/c everyone says Hillary has no chance of getting the nod… Huckabee pulled out many months ago, b/c he realized there was no chance mathematically to get the numbers…yes, there are people who still vote for him…i.e. anti-vote against McCain (although my guess is that they will hold their noses and pull the lever for McCain in Nov). In the Hill and Barack sit. her supporters are still going strong with the belief that she can get the nom. </p>

<p>Barack has a huge problem since he has not been able to close the deal since Super Tuesday, which begs the question do you even want the nom? How will he be able to get Hillary’s supporters to support him? Howard Dean even stated on “Meet the Press” that it took him 3 mos. to convince his supporters to come out and vote for Kerry. That primary season did not have states that were not counted for delegate purposes. I would be passed the word ticked at the fact that political posturing did not allow my vote to be counted, I would still vote in Nov., but I would be a write in if I was from Florida…I would write in Minnie Mouse…our maybe GOOFY</p>

13

<p>So you’d throw away your vote because the leaders of your state party broke the rules? That seems pretty self-defeating.
The Democrats’ problem, if it really is a problem, is that they have two strong candidates–indeed, they initially had at least three. As it turned out, the Republicans really only had one from the beginning. Despite all the hand-wringing, once Obama gets the nomination officially, it really will be OK.</p>

14

<p>

</p>

<p>It will be OK in the sense that the Democratic Party will be finished as a national party and the political landscape will reshuffle with the Republicans moving quickly to grab the center and further consolidate the white vote.</p>

<p>Obama’s rejection by rank n’ file white voters has devastating implications for the future of the Democratic Party. Because African Americans dominate the Democratic Primary vote in so many states, a nomination-winning strategy is simple: a black candidate ensures 90% of the black vote plus a small fringe liberal element of white voters guarantees the nomination. In essence, the Democrats are unlikely to nominate anyone but a black candidate going forward.</p>

<p>In the general election, however, the black vote is small minority and the rejection of Democrats by white voters is insurmountable. Here are the exit polls from Kerry’s loss in 2004:</p>

<p>African American voters (11% of electorate):
Kerry: 88%
Bush: 11%</p>

<p>White voters (77% of electorate):
Kerry: 41%
Bush: 58%</p>

<p>Obama (and all future black Democratic nominees) can’t really do better than Kerry. 88% of the black vote is already essentially all of it.</p>

<p>But, that very same racial block voting drives white voters away (as we are seeing here). It’s not really race that is antagonizing, but racial block politics. So, if Hillary’s supporters leave the party, can the Democratic nominees beat Kerry’s 41% of the white vote? Obama isn’t even getting 40% of white Democrats in the recent big swing states.</p>

<p>In effect, the Democratic Party is pushing the Reagan Democrats out of the tent, dismissing them as “bitter” and “clinging” to religion.</p>

15

<p>

</p>

<p>Voting for a party is a choice. If voters perceive one party as failing to represent their views and/or interests, they vote for a different party.</p>

16

<p>Left out of the gas tax discussion are all the [wasteful</a> earmarks Congress (and the President) put through](<a href=“Conservative Partnership Institute”>Conservative Partnership Institute) using this tax revenue slush fund.</p>

<p>

</p>

17

<p>Post #14 = More unsubstantiated speculative Nonsense!</p>

18

<p>Just to make clear what I’m talking about in terms of racial bloc voting, let’s take an example state, perhaps one like North Carolina that has 40% black voters and 60% white voters in Democratic primary.</p>

<p>The black candidate gets 90% of the black vote:</p>

<p>.40 x .90 = 36%</p>

<p>So, he starts at 36% of the Democratic primary vote.</p>

<p>Now, he gets a pathetic 25% of the white vote:</p>

<p>.60 x .25 = 15%</p>

<p>Add the 15% to the 36% from the black vote and you have a 51% winning margin for the nomination.</p>

<p>But, here’s the grim general election math, when black voters are 20% of the electorate and white voters are 80%.</p>

<p>.20 x .90 = 18% (from black voters)
.80 x .25 = 20% (from white voters)</p>

<p>The Democratic nominee gets 38% of the vote in the same state against the Republican. There is an insurmountable disconnect between the Democratic Party nominating math and the general election winning math. </p>

<p>The Democrats are structurally configured to nominate losing candidates, unless they can figure out how to INCREASE their white vote in general election, not DECREASE it. Whatever Dukakis, Gore, and Kerry offered, didn’t work for white centrist voters. To win elections, Democrats need to figure out a nominating process that identifies candidates with appeal to white centrist voters.</p>

<p>Now, here’s the irony to end all ironies. As the black voting block gains more and more power over the Democratic Party (thru “white flight” to the Republicans), their chances of actully electing national and statewide Democratic leaders to push their agenda items decreases. For example, nominating Obama ensures a Republican win which ensures the one more Supreme Court justice necessary to drive a nail in the coffin of affirmative action.</p>

19

<p>1sokkermom: Do you ever contribute anything meaningful to discussions like this? Maybe a counterargument, showing Obama’s overall viability, or something?</p>

<p>Just saying “nonsense!” doesn’t make it so.</p>

<p>(On the other hand, idad isn’t exactly an unbiased political visionary either…)</p>

20

<p>I’ve never claimed to be unbiased.</p>

<p>Come to think of it, what fun would it be to be “unbiased” on an internet chat forum. That would be boring as heck.</p>

<p>“Well, I don’t know. I like all the candidates equally well. They are all swell. I think it really matters which way we vote, since they are all so gosh darn good, doncha think?”</p>

<p>Yaaaaawwwwn.</p>