US Elections 2008

[Neki Ecko]

Originally Posted by SeedFreedom

True, after Bush, its going to be hard for Obama to lose this race. All the talk of division in the party will calm down and Hillary will throw her temper tantrum, but i doubt she will take it to the convention and ruin her party.

As for the joint ticket idea, theoretically it sounds like the perfect plan, but after she refuses to give Obama his spotlight, i doubt she'll end up getting the VP. The question would be, will Hillary ever give Obama the spotlight, even if she is second behind him. Don't think it will work.

I think so too, if Clinton does get the VP spot she will try to always take the spotlight from Obama. I think that a good V.P. for Obama will be Sam Nunn from Georgia with his experience and Kathleen Sebelius from Kansas, I think that she is so much better than Clinton would be good candiates for him, plus you can have Hagel, Richardson (second choice), Webb (third choice). But if I was Obama right now, I will go with Sebelius right now.

[Kang Seung Jae]

Originally Posted by Neki Ecko

I think so too, if Clinton does get the VP spot she will try to always take the spotlight from Obama. I think that a good V.P. for Obama will be Sam Nunn from Georgia with his experience and Kathleen Sebelius from Kansas, I think that she is so much better than Clinton would be good candiates for him, plus you can have Hagel, Richardson (second choice), Webb (third choice). But if I was Obama right now, I will go with Sebelius right now.

At the cost of the Clinton Loyalist?


Which is why I hope Clinton doesn't get VP.

[Neki Ecko]

Originally Posted by Kang Seung Jae

At the cost of the Clinton Loyalist?


Which is why I hope Clinton doesn't get VP.

Yes, they should be Democratic Loyalist, not just Clinton Loyalist. Besides if they want to switch over to McSame, then let them go but it will bite them on the butt when 2012 comes over and Clinton will try again but she will have to face against 18 million voters from Obama that wont be too happy about that.

Kathleen Sebelius will bring the alot of votes in including women as well, plus it can set up a chance for Obama to win Kansas for the first time since 1968. I had a chance to read up on her and she is really good.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathleen_Sebelius

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Neki Ecko

Yes, they should be Democratic Loyalist, not just Clinton Loyalist. Besides if they want to switch over to McSame, then let them go but it will bite them on the butt when 2012 comes over and Clinton will try again but she will have to face against 18 million voters from Obama that wont be too happy about that.

Kathleen Sebelius will bring the alot of votes in including women as well, plus it can set up a chance for Obama to win Kansas for the first time since 1968. I had a chance to read up on her and she is really good.

So you are blaming Clinton if Obama runs a crappy campaign and loses to McCain?

[Neki Ecko]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

So you are blaming Clinton if Obama runs a crappy campaign and loses to McCain?

Nope, I am not going to blame Clinton if that happens, in fact I wont blame her at all, she ran a awesome race and I hope that in the future, she will get the top spot. I will blame the Clinton supporters because they are so ill about Clinton not winning the nomination, that they will switch over to vote for McCain, look at her website and there is alot of people that will say that they will switch over because of that.

[Kang Seung Jae]

Originally Posted by Neki Ecko

Nope, I am not going to blame Clinton if that happens, in fact I wont blame her at all, she ran a awesome race and I hope that in the future, she will get the top spot. I will blame the Clinton supporters because they are so ill about Clinton not winning the nomination, that they will switch over to vote for McCain, look at her website and there is alot of people that will say that they will switch over because of that.

And how is that to affect CLINTON, given that she asked her supporters to help the Democrats?

If the Obama supporters tries to get "revenge" if Obama loses and Clinton runs in 2012, it'll show just how immature Obama supporters are.

[SeedFreedom]

Originally Posted by Kang Seung Jae

And how is that to affect CLINTON, given that she asked her supporters to help the Democrats?

If the Obama supporters tries to get "revenge" if Obama loses and Clinton runs in 2012, it'll show just how immature Obama supporters are.

Not really. Obama has stopped with the silly bickering with Clinton while she keep pushing her supporters away. She has made no effort to keep this party unified and if it falls it will be her fault. She was the one intent on dragging it out when he needed to focus on Maccain who was chosen a long while ago and has been preparing for the general election for a long time.

[Kang Seung Jae]

Originally Posted by SeedFreedom

Not really. Obama has stopped with the silly bickering with Clinton while she keep pushing her supporters away.

Interesting, since Obama did everything the same as Clinton. The only difference is that Obama gets the protection of the "race shield", where people can't directly against him without blowing up something.

[Irenicus]

Originally Posted by Kang Seung Jae

Interesting, since Obama did everything the same as Clinton. The only difference is that Obama gets the protection of the "race shield", where people can't directly against him without blowing up something.

...because Obama refused to concede the race even after he was clearly defeated, for apparently nothing more than personal pride.

Yeah.

And the race shield isn't half as strong -- or half as real, for that matter -- as Clinton supporters seem to think so. Obama practically avoided the topic or it'll turn his nomination into a race war, and even then he still get flak for what he didn't use. Epic.

[Kang Seung Jae]

Originally Posted by Irenicus

...because Obama refused to concede the race even after he was clearly defeated, for apparently nothing more than personal pride.

Yeah.

I never said he brought up the race issue: I'm saying that people can't attack him without being accused of being racist.

Also, I'm figuring Clinton hasn't conceded yet to get a few things before dropping out.

[Neki Ecko]

Originally Posted by Kang Seung Jae

Interesting, since Obama did everything the same as Clinton. The only difference is that Obama gets the protection of the "race shield", where people can't directly against him without blowing up something.

Then that happen? I never seen him using the "race shield". But I was looking at MSNBC today, and one of the senators was saying that he had some of the other senators that was working for Clinton want to come over and help out with Obama but she havent let them go. But if she won the nomination, Obama would set aside his differences and try to bring the party together.

[Kang Seung Jae]

Originally Posted by Neki Ecko

But if she won the nomination, Obama would set aside his differences and try to bring the party together.

Obama hasn't "won" yet. Stop making Obama seem like an angel: I'm sure Obama would stretch things a bit like Clinton to get some things out of the final deal.


I consider Obama a politician, not a statesman.

[Irenicus]

Originally Posted by Kang Seung Jae

I never said he brought up the race issue: I'm saying that people can't attack him without being accused of being racist.

Interesting, since I see people attack Obama everyday and pretty much only the real racists are being accused of racism.

On the other hand, Clinton milked the hell out of her gender, no pun intended.

Originally Posted by Kang Seung Jae

Also, I'm figuring Clinton hasn't conceded yet to get a few things before dropping out.

Then that does make her self-interested first, and partisan second, no?

[Kang Seung Jae]

Originally Posted by Irenicus

Then that does make her self-interested first, and partisan second, no?

And is Obama any different? I say no.

[Irenicus]

Originally Posted by Kang Seung Jae

And is Obama any different? I say no.

And how do you know? I won't claim I know either, but he hasn't done anything to that effect. Maybe he'll do the same if he's in her position, maybe not. Maybe he plays magnanimous because he can afford to; maybe he really meant what he said. But the fact lies is that Clinton did what she did, dragging the damn drama far longer than it should've been, while Obama, on the other hand, didn't.

We don't know what he would've done, but to claim that he *would* do such a thing with no proof is, well, plainly biased.

[Kang Seung Jae]

Originally Posted by Irenicus

We don't know what he would've done, but to claim that he *would* do such a thing with no proof is, well, plainly biased.

And to say that Clinton is self-interested first, and partisan second, because she is just doing a political thing, ISN'T biased?

[bayoab]

Originally Posted by Kang Seung Jae

Obama hasn't "won" yet.

Technically yes, superdelegates can always change their mind at the last second. However by almost ever proper measure, Obama is ahead in every single reasonable metric (popular vote, pledged delegates, superdelegates, total delegates (both with FL/MI at 50% and without)).

Originally Posted by Neki Ecko

Kathleen Sebelius will bring the alot of votes in including women as well, plus it can set up a chance for Obama to win Kansas for the first time since 1968. I had a chance to read up on her and she is really good.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathleen_Sebelius

Obama has to very careful about picking or not picking another woman. As mentioned, there are Clinton fans who claim to be backing her because she's a woman, but won't vote for another woman.

The issue with her is she doesn't add much to Obama's weak spots on the ticket and actually creates a few conflicts of position. She does help his weak points voting wise, but people aren't electing a VP.

[Kang Seung Jae]

Originally Posted by bayoab

Technically yes, superdelegates can always change their mind at the last second. However by almost ever proper measure, Obama is ahead in every single reasonable metric (popular vote, pledged delegates, superdelegates, total delegates (both with FL/MI at 50% and without)).

I know, I'm just saying the race isn't technically over since Clinton hasn't conceded yet.

[bayoab]

Originally Posted by Kang Seung Jae

I know, I'm just saying the race isn't technically over since Clinton hasn't conceded yet.

It doesn't really matter if they concede or not. All that matters is who gets nominated. Ron Paul hasn't conceded the republican race, but nobody considers it still ongoing because there is no way he could win.

Speaking of which:

Originally Posted by CNN.com

Hillary Clinton will officially suspend her campaign for the presidency by the end of the week, sources told CNN.

Originally Posted by CNN.com

Hillary Clinton's campaign confirms she will be host an event Saturday to thank her backers and express support for Barack Obama.

[Kang Seung Jae]

Originally Posted by bayoab

It doesn't really matter if they concede or not. All that matters is who gets nominated. Ron Paul hasn't conceded the republican race, but nobody considers it still ongoing because there is no way he could win.

You know, having less than 15% of the party's support is different from having more than 40%.