• from the tenor of your post, you are really having a bad day.  On second thought, you've been havina a bad week, a bad month, a few months; hell, your year has been pretty much a downer!

    I feel sorry for you, just a bit sorry. You see, I am keeping busy working for Obama.  I get to see the nation move in positive ways and nearly all the people I meet and talk to are not filled with hate likeyou are. Knowing that my efforts thughly throw you into a tizzy is my motivation. Knowing there are people like you adds to both my motivation and my reward.

    I can't imagine what must be going through your mind..the hate, the anger, the emotion.  So much so that it has obviously clouded your judgment.

    Well, enough for now.  I'm off again to work towards victory.

    One last qestion though.  When Obama wins in a landslide, what does that do to your argument? I suppose you'll say it proves your point. My view is that the landslide destroys your argument and stands as a rejection of your hate.

    Have a nice day.

  • comment on a post Barack Obama Speech Thread over 6 years ago

    Nice Comments Todd.  I appreciated the chance to have read them.

    And you are absolutely right...It. Is. On.

  • comment on a post Open Thread over 6 years ago

    I don't think you will have to clean up any messes, from Ed Schultz or otherwise.  The obama campaign has a high functioning rapid response team in place.  

    Btw, Schultz is not an official surrogate of the Obama campaign.  He is, however, what the MSM foists upon us as "repreentative" of progressive thinking in the media.

  • on a comment on Post PR delegate update over 6 years ago

    I supported that amendment btw.

  • comment on a post Post PR delegate update over 6 years ago

    Another way of looking at it is that the Clinton amendment was a crass change of position by a campaign that was driven by political expediency rather than a firm set or values and beliefs.

    Clinton agreed that Michigan did not count (verified and documented).

    Clinton changed her position only when the election was lost (because of  terribly run campaign).

  • and Obama has won the day...yet again.

    3 supers declare for Obama
    2 supers declare for HRC

    and from a MYDD newsbit from earlier today

    Bill Richardson appeared on Hardball Tuesday night and hinted there may be more super delegates going for Barack Obama from New Mexico; there are three SDs from NM who haven't endorsed a candidate, and two - maybe all three -look to be leaning towards Obama.

    Seems to me, Obama is the one Supers think is most electable.

  • on a comment on Open Thread over 6 years ago

    All the states that Htrt won "didn't matter" for one reason or another.  Hmmm...sounds familiar.

  • on a comment on Open Thread over 6 years ago

    Why would someone want to do this?  It sounds like a horrible waste of time.

  • comment on a post Edwards Not Expected To Endorse over 6 years ago

    Is this the same Politico that said HRC has no chance of winning the nomination?

    Thought so!

  • on a comment on By the numbers over 6 years ago

  • comment on a post By the numbers over 6 years ago

    No word yet as to who is the chosen one!

  • on a comment on By the numbers over 6 years ago

    They are imporant from one standpoint.  They are used to establish the expectations game.  In that regard, HRC loses because they double digit spread will assuredly narrow to within a couple of points.  Look at TX as the prime example of where he brought it down to a couple of points. Of course, there are many other examples.  WI is a great exmaple of where she loses the election and the expectations of her early double-digit lead make the loss that much more painful.

  • on a comment on By the numbers over 6 years ago

    Excellent points!

  • comment on a post By the numbers over 6 years ago

    This post is so off on so many levels it's not even funny.

    First, did you see Jonathon's post on campaign finances?  HRC is in debt with little prospect of matching the Obama haul.  Obama's contributions are way up since the race speech. He will saturate markets until HRC loans herself anopther five millions.

    Second, polls are turning at all levels since mid-week with a long time to go. What you describe as toss-ups are actualy at or outside margain of error with Obama leading.  Remember TX and OH three weeks out? (Objects in the rear view mirror are closer than they appear.)

    Third, Obama is on the ground in every state and on the air, not quite at saturation levels in PA. HRC is not. HRC cannot match advertising in PA or NC. Obama has had huge events in Oregon over the past two days. HRC at home in NY.  Advance teams are arranign huge events in NC and IN as we speak.  Obama is back to the strategy of plaing states ahead of HRC...she will focus almost exclusively on PA while he is in OR, NC, IN, MT, etc.

    Fourth,  Bill has once again shot off his mouth to the detriment of the HRC campaign.

    Fifth,  Richardson endorsement on the heels of "the speech" will continue to move superdelegates to commit publicly.  They have already committed privately and are surrently "wait and see."  Wait and see is now over.

    Sixth, Obama has coat-tails, HRC does not (evidence Il-14 and otehrs).  All undecided delegates, super and pledged will look to this factor first in determining support.  Quite frankly, it's not even close in terms of coat--tails.

  • comment on a post Clinton Up 9 Points in Rhode Island in New Poll over 6 years ago

    I think HRC will win Rhode and Obama will will Island. Nearly an even split in delegates regarless of percent of popular vote.


Advertise Blogads