 | rrtopper@excite | | NewsGroup User |
| Top 10 Reasons That The Superdelegates Should Select Hillary Over | 4/25/2008 1:06:37 PM |
| 0 |   |
| The Top 10 Reasons That The Superdelegates Should Select Hillary Over
Barack
By John Hawkins
Friday, April 25, 2008
Although I'm supporting John McCain for President in 2008, I have to
admit that I'd rather see Hillary Clinton as his opponent. That's not
because I think she'd be a weaker candidate; it's because I'd love to
see that smug tin god, Barack Obama, humbled and forced to taste
bitter defeat at Hillary's hands.
Ironically, just a few months ago, I would loved to have seen Hillary
beaten by Barack because she seemed to have such a sense of
entitlement about the Democratic nomination. So now, the shoe is
completely on the other foot.
Come to think of it, that may be Barack Obama's only significant
accomplishment: he has been the first Democrat who has ever made
conservatives see any good at all in Hillary Clinton.
Additionally, in the spirit of Operation Chaos, I'd like to see the
Democratic fight over the nomination be as long and bloody as
possible. Moreover, believe it or not, I have developed the slightest
twinge of "sympathy for the devil" since the mainstream media has
started treating her like an "honorary Republican" for daring to try
to defeat Obama.
So, when the MSM essentially adopts the Obama campaign's position and
argues that Hillary should get out now, even though she can still win,
I feel the chivalrous urge, counter-productive though it may be, to
defend her just a bit -- especially since Hillary Clinton does have a
very strong case to make to the Democratic superdelegates who will
decide the winner of the race. What case would that be? Well...
1) Hillary's voters are more likely to defect to McCain than Obama
voters are if their candidate doesn't get the nod. In fact, according
to a Gallup poll last month, 19% of Obama voters would vote for McCain
if Barack lost, but 28% of Hillary's voters would do the same if the
situation were reversed. Of course, the percentages wouldn't turn out
to be that high, but however you slice it, the conventional wisdom
about Obama's supporters being the ones that sit home or defect if he
loses appears to be wrong.
2) According to a study done at Yale, "(i)n House races, white
Democrats are 38 percentage points less likely to vote Democratic if
their candidate is black."
Think about those numbers and then consider that McCain is a moderate
who may genuinely appeal to many white middle-of-the-road Democratic
voters and that Obama has refused to disavow his connection with anti-
white racist, Jeremiah Wright. It's not a pretty picture for Obama, is
it?
3) In a number of states, including Pennsylvania, Barack did
significantly worse than his poll numbers indicated that he would.
What that suggests is that there is a Bradley Effect happening in
large swathes of the country that is making Obama's numbers look 4-5
points higher than they are in reality. Take away that bump,
especially in key states like Pennsylvania, and Obama would clearly be
a weaker candidate against McCain than Hillary Clinton.
4) Hillary has beaten Obama in the large swing states like
Pennsylvania, Michigan, Florida, and Ohio. Chances are, these states
are going to decide who the winner of the 2008 election is and Hillary
seems to be running stronger in all of them than Barack so far.
5) In a Republican winner take-all system, Hillary would be ahead of
Obama. Granted, "If wishes were horses, then beggars would ride," but
it's still worth noting that Barack only has more delegates than
Hillary because he has managed to game the Democrats' wacky primary
system.
6) Despite the fact that Obama is raising more money than Hillary, she
is still out-raising McCain. Moreover, given that Hillary is beating
Obama in states where he's outspending her by a considerable margin (3
to 1 in Pennsylvania, for example), you have to question whether
Obama's fundraising prowess will turn out to be any more important
than Howard's Dean knack for raising cash was in 2004.
7) Although Hillary has a lot more baggage than Obama, she has also
proven to be much more adept at dealing with scandal than Barack. Keep
in mind that we're talking about a guy who was so stunned by getting a
few tough questions at an ABC debate that he cancelled his next debate
in North Carolina. For all her faults, Hillary has proven that she can
take the heat while Barack has looked like a bumbling wimp under
fire.
8) Obama, who hasn't even completed a single term in the Senate, comes
across as unqualified when he's up against a man with as much
experience as McCain -- especially if voters are worried about a 3 AM
crisis. On the other hand, Hillary has completed a term in the Senate,
has been re-elected, and since her husband was President, voters will
give her some credit for his experience. McCain would still have an
advantage over Hillary in the experience category, but many more
voters would consider her to be at least qualified to do the job in
the first place.
9) If Obama wins the Democratic nomination, it will only be because
black voters overwhelmingly voted for him because he is black. That
has been his ace in the hole so far, but it would mean nothing in a
general election because black voters already break 90% towards the
Democrats anyway. His other potent voting block, young voters, are
notoriously unreliable. Today they may be pulling the lever for Obama,
but in November, they may be too busy playing video games to show up
and vote. On the other hand, Hillary's strongest voting blocks, white
women and older white voters, do show up to vote and they're much more
up for grabs in a general election than Obama's core supporters.
10) Hillary is arguing that if you count the vote totals in Michigan
and Florida -- and haven't Democrats been saying "count every vote" --
then she has a lead on Obama in the popular vote. So, if the
superdelegates want to respect the "will of the people," shouldn't
Hillary be their choice?
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/JohnHawkins/2008/04/25/the_top_10_reasons_that_the_superdelegates_should_select_hillary_over_barack
|
| Buck Mulligan < | | NewsGroup User |
| Re: Top 10 Reasons That The Superdelegates Should Select Hillary Over Barack | 4/25/2008 2:09:53 PM |
| 0 | |
| In talk.politics.guns rrtopper@excite.com wrote:
>Ironically, just a few months ago, I would loved to have seen Hillary
>beaten by Barack because she seemed to have such a sense of
>entitlement about the Democratic nomination. So now, the shoe is
>completely on the other foot.
That's my favorite part. For a woman whose only qualification seems to
be that she is the spouse of a former president, it's gratifying to
watch this insignificant puppy give her such a difficult time.
>Additionally, in the spirit of Operation Chaos, I'd like to see the
>Democratic fight over the nomination be as long and bloody as
>possible. Moreover, believe it or not, I have developed the slightest
>twinge of "sympathy for the devil" since the mainstream media has
>started treating her like an "honorary Republican" for daring to try
>to defeat Obama.
It will get really interesting after the primary. While McCain takes
notes, Obama and Hillary beat each other with pillows. They can't
fight hard, because to do so will give McCain too much to work with.
After all, they're on the same side. If Hillary wins, she'll want to
avoid the 'bitch" label she'll invariably end up with. I predict we'll
see more tears as time rolls on.
|
| jtnospam@yahoo. | | NewsGroup User |
| Re: Top 10 Reasons That The Superdelegates Should Select Hillary Over | 4/27/2008 5:29:56 PM |
| 0 | |
| On Apr 25, 6:06=A0am, rrtop...@excite.com wrote:
> The Top 10 Reasons That The Superdelegates Should Select Hillary Over
> Barack
> By John Hawkins
> Friday, April 25, 2008
>
> Although I'm supporting John McCain for President in 2008, I have to
> admit that I'd rather see Hillary Clinton as his opponent. That's not
> because I think she'd be a weaker candidate; it's because I'd love to
> see that smug tin god, Barack Obama, humbled and forced to taste
> bitter defeat at Hillary's hands.
>
> Ironically, just a few months ago, I would loved to have seen Hillary
> beaten by Barack because she seemed to have such a sense of
> entitlement about the Democratic nomination. So now, the shoe is
> completely on the other foot.
>
> Come to think of it, that may be Barack Obama's only significant
> accomplishment: he has been the first Democrat who has ever made
> conservatives see any good at all in Hillary Clinton.
>
> Additionally, in the spirit of Operation Chaos, I'd like to see the
> Democratic fight over the nomination be as long and bloody as
> possible. Moreover, believe it or not, I have developed the slightest
> twinge of "sympathy for the devil" since the mainstream media has
> started treating her like an "honorary Republican" for daring to try
> to defeat Obama.
>
> So, when the MSM essentially adopts the Obama campaign's position and
> argues that Hillary should get out now, even though she can still win,
> I feel the chivalrous urge, counter-productive though it may be, to
> defend her just a bit -- especially since Hillary Clinton does have a
> very strong case to make to the Democratic superdelegates who will
> decide the winner of the race. What case would that be? Well...
>
> 1) Hillary's voters are more likely to defect to McCain than Obama
> voters are if their candidate doesn't get the nod. In fact, according
> to a Gallup poll last month, 19% of Obama voters would vote for McCain
> if Barack lost, but 28% of Hillary's voters would do the same if the
> situation were reversed. Of course, the percentages wouldn't turn out
> to be that high, but however you slice it, the conventional wisdom
> about Obama's supporters being the ones that sit home or defect if he
> loses appears to be wrong.
>
> 2) According to a study done at Yale, "(i)n House races, white
> Democrats are 38 percentage points less likely to vote Democratic if
> their candidate is black."
>
> Think about those numbers and then consider that McCain is a moderate
> who may genuinely appeal to many white middle-of-the-road Democratic
> voters and that Obama has refused to disavow his connection with anti-
> white racist, Jeremiah Wright. It's not a pretty picture for Obama, is
> it?
>
> 3) In a number of states, including Pennsylvania, Barack did
> significantly worse than his poll numbers indicated that he would.
> What that suggests is that there is a Bradley Effect happening in
> large swathes of the country that is making Obama's numbers look 4-5
> points higher than they are in reality. Take away that bump,
> especially in key states like Pennsylvania, and Obama would clearly be
> a weaker candidate against McCain than Hillary Clinton.
>
> 4) Hillary has beaten Obama in the large swing states like
> Pennsylvania, Michigan, Florida, and Ohio. Chances are, these states
> are going to decide who the winner of the 2008 election is and Hillary
> seems to be running stronger in all of them than Barack so far.
>
> 5) In a Republican winner take-all system, Hillary would be ahead of
> Obama. Granted, "If wishes were horses, then beggars would ride," but
> it's still worth noting that Barack only has more delegates than
> Hillary because he has managed to game the Democrats' wacky primary
> system.
>
> 6) Despite the fact that Obama is raising more money than Hillary, she
> is still out-raising McCain. Moreover, given that Hillary is beating
> Obama in states where he's outspending her by a considerable margin (3
> to 1 in Pennsylvania, for example), you have to question whether
> Obama's fundraising prowess will turn out to be any more important
> than Howard's Dean knack for raising cash was in 2004.
>
> 7) Although Hillary has a lot more baggage than Obama, she has also
> proven to be much more adept at dealing with scandal than Barack. Keep
> in mind that we're talking about a guy who was so stunned by getting a
> few tough questions at an ABC debate that he cancelled his next debate
> in North Carolina. For all her faults, Hillary has proven that she can
> take the heat while Barack has looked like a bumbling wimp under
> fire.
>
> 8) Obama, who hasn't even completed a single term in the Senate, comes
> across as unqualified when he's up against a man with as much
> experience as McCain -- especially if voters are worried about a 3 AM
> crisis. On the other hand, Hillary has completed a term in the Senate,
> has been re-elected, and since her husband was President, voters will
> give her some credit for his experience. McCain would still have an
> advantage over Hillary in the experience category, but many more
> voters would consider her to be at least qualified to do the job in
> the first place.
>
> 9) If Obama wins the Democratic nomination, it will only be because
> black voters overwhelmingly voted for him because he is black. That
> has been his ace in the hole so far, but it would mean nothing in a
> general election because black voters already break 90% towards the
> Democrats anyway. His other potent voting block, young voters, are
> notoriously unreliable. Today they may be pulling the lever for Obama,
> but in November, they may be too busy playing video games to show up
> and vote. On the other hand, Hillary's strongest voting blocks, white
> women and older white voters, do show up to vote and they're much more
> up for grabs in a general election than Obama's core supporters.
>
> 10) Hillary is arguing that if you count the vote totals in Michigan
> and Florida -- and haven't Democrats been saying "count every vote" --
> then she has a lead on Obama in the popular vote. So, if the
> superdelegates want to respect the "will of the people," shouldn't
> Hillary be their choice?
>
> http://www.townhall.com/columnists/JohnHawkins/2008/04/25/the_top_10_...
The thought of that howling nannybitch 2nd grade teacher smartest girl
in the class control freak being in charge if the national microphone
for the next 4 years is more than I can bear. I will turn off my
cable, stop the paper, not replace the analog radio or tv, maybe move
into a cave. It would be worse than the Catholic Purgatory.-Jitney
|
|