Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Democratic Primaries: Pennsylvania, key hellhole state

2456740

Posts

  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Speaker wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    I almost went Clinton 12-16, but settled for 8-12.

    Of course, I'm a pessimist.
    These kids just don't appreciate the inevitability of DOOM like we do.
    Pretty much.

    I spent the weekend in Portland registering Obama voters, though.

    Well yeah.

    No sense in giving up.

    Being walkers with the dawn and morning,
    Walkers with the sun and morning, we are not afraid of night,
    Nor days of gloom, nor darkness -
    Being walkers with the sun and morning.
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Super Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited April 2008
    Some number crunching, because I like numbers:

    Averaging out the polls in the OP gives Hillary a 5.4 point victory. Of course, there are a lot of undecideds, and undecideds will break strongly for Hillary, because they're just the people who haven't bothered paying attention for the entire goddamned campaign and will choose Clinton in the polling booth because they don't recognize that funny-looking O-word, except maybe it sorta sounds like that Osama guy, you know?

    Anyway, if you assume the undecideds in each case will break for Hillary by a 30-point margin, and you re-average the results, you wind up with Hillary winning by 8. I'm still going to go conservative and predict a 10-point win, and I still think double digits for Hillary is basically a coin-flip.

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Osama ad?

    Really?

    georgersig.jpg
  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Evander wrote: »
    Osama ad?

    Really?

    You haven't seen the travesty?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDap46WOCmA&eurl=http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/

    Also, Clinton's campaign has spoken and says it's a positive ad, and it's totally valid. Which is the same thing Penn said after the 3am ad.

  • <:__)~&lt;:__)~ Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    I would like to bring to everyone's attention that at my workplace the other night, I was surrounded by 3-4 young men, between the ages of 20 and 30, who insist that voting for Obama OR Clinton, will turn the US into a third-world country and open our borders to anyone who wants to show up.

    I feel lucky that my brain neither shut down nor insisted that I murder them in public view.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    kildy wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Osama ad?

    Really?

    You haven't seen the travesty?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDap46WOCmA&eurl=http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/

    Also, Clinton's campaign has spoken and says it's a positive ad, and it's totally valid. Which is the same thing Penn said after the 3am ad.


    Can't do Youtube at work. Mind telling me the gist of it?

    georgersig.jpg
  • WMain00WMain00 Registered User
    edited April 2008
    I'm gonna say 8 for Clinton.

    +/- 1.


    Yes.

    *strokes British beard*

  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Evander wrote: »
    kildy wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Osama ad?

    Really?

    You haven't seen the travesty?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDap46WOCmA&eurl=http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/

    Also, Clinton's campaign has spoken and says it's a positive ad, and it's totally valid. Which is the same thing Penn said after the 3am ad.


    Can't do Youtube at work. Mind telling me the gist of it?

    Relatively tame, never mentions Obama, the Osama bit is a picture of him and the phrase "who do you think has what it takes"

    Obama's response, amusingly, was to link people to a youtube video of Bill Clinton talking about voting for the person who wants you to think rather than the one who wants you to fear.

  • HedgethornHedgethorn Associate Professor of Historical Hobby Horses In the Lions' DenRegistered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Evander wrote: »
    kildy wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Osama ad?

    Really?

    You haven't seen the travesty?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDap46WOCmA&eurl=http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/

    Also, Clinton's campaign has spoken and says it's a positive ad, and it's totally valid. Which is the same thing Penn said after the 3am ad.


    Can't do Youtube at work. Mind telling me the gist of it?

    Narrator: It's the toughest job in the world.
    A bunch of historic news clips: FDR, Pearl Harbor, JFK, Cuban missile crisis, gas lines, stagflation, Berlin Wall, Bin Laden.
    Then a bunch of current news clips: Inflation, unemployment, recession, etc.
    Narrator: Harry Truman said, 'If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.' Who do you think has what it takes?
    Voice-Over: Paid for by Hillary Clinton for President.

  • SalSal Damnedest Little Fellow Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Don't feel down, people. If the Clinton campaign is really run like this, then they won't be able to exploit a PA victory effectively.

  • ElJeffeElJeffe Super Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited April 2008
    I actually don't find that Osama ad very bad. She's running through a laundry list of problems our nation has right now - gas prices, Iraq, mortgage crisis, terrorism. Each issue is marked by a half-second flash of some image. Now, if you're going to pick a single image to get across the idea of "terrorism", what do you use? Your choices are either the WTC burning or Osama bin Laden.

    It's not as stupid as the 3AM ads, and it's not as offensive as her comments that McCain is better than Obama. Maybe I'm just not as easily shocked anymore.

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    kildy wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    kildy wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Osama ad?

    Really?
    You haven't seen the travesty?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDap46WOCmA&eurl=http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/

    Also, Clinton's campaign has spoken and says it's a positive ad, and it's totally valid. Which is the same thing Penn said after the 3am ad.
    Can't do Youtube at work. Mind telling me the gist of it?
    Relatively tame, never mentions Obama, the Osama bit is a picture of him and the phrase "who do you think has what it takes"

    Obama's response, amusingly, was to link people to a youtube video of Bill Clinton talking about voting for the person who wants you to think rather than the one who wants you to fear.
    I think Bill Clinton will probably go back to being awesome once his wife isn't running for president anymore.

  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    I actually don't find that Osama ad very bad. She's running through a laundry list of problems our nation has right now - gas prices, Iraq, mortgage crisis, terrorism. Each issue is marked by a half-second flash of some image. Now, if you're going to pick a single image to get across the idea of "terrorism", what do you use? Your choices are either the WTC burning or Osama bin Laden.

    It's not as stupid as the 3AM ads, and it's not as offensive as her comments that McCain is better than Obama. Maybe I'm just not as easily shocked anymore.

    It's not horrible, it's just a tad pale to have a Dem candidate using terrorism as a campaign point, especially when her record on it's pretty weak, and in the last debate she brought up 9/11 multiple times.

  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    I actually don't find that Osama ad very bad. She's running through a laundry list of problems our nation has right now - gas prices, Iraq, mortgage crisis, terrorism. Each issue is marked by a half-second flash of some image. Now, if you're going to pick a single image to get across the idea of "terrorism", what do you use? Your choices are either the WTC burning or Osama bin Laden.

    It's not as stupid as the 3AM ads, and it's not as offensive as her comments that McCain is better than Obama. Maybe I'm just not as easily shocked anymore.

    I tend to agree. I don't think she has much of a leg to stand on, there, because she's been a Washington insider through all of those issues, and never seemed to do much to fixthem, but I don't think it's some kind of attack on Obama.

    georgersig.jpg
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    He's been lazy bout fucking up her campaign lately

  • ElkiElki hegemon globalSuper Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited April 2008
    Will, you goddamn jerk, stop anonymizing the polls.

  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Thanatos wrote: »
    kildy wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    kildy wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Osama ad?

    Really?
    You haven't seen the travesty?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDap46WOCmA&eurl=http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/

    Also, Clinton's campaign has spoken and says it's a positive ad, and it's totally valid. Which is the same thing Penn said after the 3am ad.
    Can't do Youtube at work. Mind telling me the gist of it?
    Relatively tame, never mentions Obama, the Osama bit is a picture of him and the phrase "who do you think has what it takes"

    Obama's response, amusingly, was to link people to a youtube video of Bill Clinton talking about voting for the person who wants you to think rather than the one who wants you to fear.
    I think Bill Clinton will probably go back to being awesome once his wife isn't running for president anymore.

    I will never be able to respect him as much as I used to.

    georgersig.jpg
  • ElkiElki hegemon globalSuper Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited April 2008
    12-16, my number is 16.

  • SithDrummerSithDrummer Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Elki wrote: »
    Will, you goddamn jerk, stop anonymizing the polls.
    fosho

    It's an easy game to hate
  • Irond WillIrond Will Dragonmaster Cambridge. MASuper Moderator, Moderator mod
    edited April 2008
    Elki wrote: »
    Will, you goddamn jerk, stop anonymizing the polls.

    Yeah I fuck that up a lot. Public ought to be the default.

    Wqdwp8l.png
  • ScooterScooter Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    So I went with 8-12 because I have even less faith in PAers than I do in Ohio.


    You are a terrible, terrible state, PA.

  • Pants ManPants Man Registered User
    edited April 2008
    i think hillary will win by just enough to give her an excuse to continue campaigning without the democrats rioting

    also i don't know how in the hell the PPP poll comes up with obama winning PA, but that'd be hilarious if it happened

    "okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
  • ElkiElki hegemon globalSuper Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited April 2008
  • HozHoz Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    God, you are such a whore, Elki.

    You can split this into a "Elki is a whore" thread.

  • SavantSavant Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    See, there is a factor you guys are missing with your predictions: turn out. The last day undecideds tend to break for Clinton, but this could easily be offset by high turnout of Obama supporters and suppressed outcome of Clinton supporters. Even with the backing of local political machines Clinton has very weak logistics compared to Obama. Add into that some of the demoralizers against her, such as all the "she can't win" talk and Tuzla, and some of her softer supporters may just decide to stay home.

    This is different from Ohio because Obama has had more time to strengthen and narrow the focus of his ground game, and Clinton has been taking fire directly from Obama too. Before Ohio Obama was mostly holding back against her.

  • Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Pants Man wrote: »
    i think hillary will win by just enough to give her an excuse to continue campaigning without the democrats rioting

    also i don't know how in the hell the PPP poll comes up with obama winning PA, but that'd be hilarious if it happened

    Maybe they polled people from the future.

    I hope, I hope!

  • Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    So is it fair to assume that everyone who comes out in support of Hilary tomorrow is under the impression that she can win, either because they don't understand that she can't compensate for Obama's lead or because they expect super-delegates to pee in the eye of the democratic process itself?

    I don't understand how a majority of Pennsylvanian votes could hold either view.

  • TachTach Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    So is it fair to assume that everyone who comes out in support of Hilary tomorrow is under the impression that she can win, either because they don't understand that she can't compensate for Obama's lead or because they expect super-delegates to pee in the eye of the democratic process itself?

    But it's not subverting Democracy if it's their candidate who wins, right? Right?

    BNsig.jpg
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    I'm sticking with my Clinton +9 prediction I made in the previous thread. Polling consensus seems to be somewhere around 50-44 and the people discussed in the split will go Clinton at a high level, so 54-45.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • deowolfdeowolf Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    I'm thinking he pulls it out. Because I am dumb with hope.

    [SIGPIC]acocoSig.jpg[/SIGPIC]
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    I still think it'll hover just around the double digit point. I'd be optimistic and say 9, but at this point I'm just consoling myself.

    tea-1.jpg
  • LavenlianLavenlian Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Anyone else curious about how the networks will spin the results?

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    So is it fair to assume that everyone who comes out in support of Hilary tomorrow is under the impression that she can win, either because they don't understand that she can't compensate for Obama's lead or because they expect super-delegates to pee in the eye of the democratic process itself?

    I don't understand how a majority of Pennsylvanian votes could hold either view.
    I think most of them probably just want their vote to count.

  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Drudge says a leak from the Clinton campaign puts their internal polling at an eleven point victory.

    Being walkers with the dawn and morning,
    Walkers with the sun and morning, we are not afraid of night,
    Nor days of gloom, nor darkness -
    Being walkers with the sun and morning.
  • OboroOboro __BANNED USERS
    edited April 2008
    12-16, banking on 13 for 13 delegates.

    The Terrible Thirteens!

    words
  • Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Thanatos wrote: »
    So is it fair to assume that everyone who comes out in support of Hilary tomorrow is under the impression that she can win, either because they don't understand that she can't compensate for Obama's lead or because they expect super-delegates to pee in the eye of the democratic process itself?

    I don't understand how a majority of Pennsylvanian votes could hold either view.
    I think most of them probably just want their vote to count.

    Yeah, I can't understand that at all. I mean, a vote for Clinton may count, but if it does then it'll count towards something horrible.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Gallup voters recover from momentary stupidity, realize debate really was retarded:

    042108DailyUpdateGraph1_verosy3.gif

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Gallup voters recover from momentary stupidity, realize debate really was retarded:

    042108DailyUpdateGraph1_verosy3.gif

    HAHAHAHA!!

    Being walkers with the dawn and morning,
    Walkers with the sun and morning, we are not afraid of night,
    Nor days of gloom, nor darkness -
    Being walkers with the sun and morning.
  • RandomEngyRandomEngy Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    I think Clinton's goal now is to hope to win a lot of the later states and then trick the superdelegates into thinking that they matter more than the earlier states.

    Anyway lately I have been pondering Clinton's motives. Why does she think it's worth it to tear down Obama to try and steal the nomination from him? I think there are several possibilities. Listed in order of most probable to least:

    1) She's simply deluded and thinks she would be a better candidate in the general.
    2) She's selfish and will do whatever it takes to make herself the president.
    3) She thinks having a woman as president is more important than having a black man as president.

    I've been leaning toward #1, but I can entertain the possibility that she just really wants to be president. #3 might tie into it a bit.

    Profile -> Signature Settings -> Hide signatures always. Then you don't have to read this worthless text anymore.
  • LionLion Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    McCain exits campaign money race
    John McCain is abandoning any hope of catching the Democrats in fundraising.

    Based on new financial disclosure reports released Sunday, and interviews with his finance team, the Republican Party’s presumptive nominee will instead accept taxpayer money to finance his general election and share other costs with the Republican National Committee.

    The strategy will allow McCain to stretch his campaign dollars by splitting the cost of television advertising and other campaign activity with the RNC.

    But the decision also puts the Arizona senator at risk of being badly outspent – even with RNC help – by a Democratic nominee who will be allowed to spend as much as he or she can raise on the November race.

    This is the best part to me:
    With the RNC focused now almost exclusively on protecting the party’s nominee, House and Senate candidates who don’t happen to be competing in presidential battleground states may be on their own.

    PSN: WingedLion | XBL: Winged Lion
This discussion has been closed.