Satty

Its Super Tuesday

51 posts in this topic

An ungodly number of states(22 maybe?) are holding primaries/caucuses today. Go vote. Yes, its just a primary, and yes all the candidates have flaws, but if you dont vote now you're not allowed to bitch about the candidates on the ballot in November.

My (rather safe) predictions:

Republicans: Romney has a strong showing in MA and UT, McCain squeaks by him in the rest of the states.

Ron Paul comes in a pretty respectable third, drops out of the Republican race, waits a bit, then announces he is running as a third party candidate (he ran as a Libertarian in '88) and becomes the first semi-viable third party candidate since Perot in '92.

Democrats: More of the same, votes will be split between Clinton and Obama (Mike Gravel may get a sympathy vote), this will drag for what seems like forever.

The important thing: GO VOTE!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The important thing: GO VOTE!

I am really sad with something I saw on TV last night regarding my country (Portugal), so GO VOTE! Participation means you get to choose and ensure the quality of Democracy does not deteriorate further.

Edited by ZL-1
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My state isn't part of Super Tuesday, but if yours is, I agree with Satty - GO VOTE!

If Ron Paul does go the third party route, I'd be pleased. I am a registered Libertarian after all.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really think he will, and I really think it will be a good thing for the country. He has raised a ton of money, but hasn't been able to turn that into votes. Everyone (it seems) knows who he is and what he's about, but Republican primary voters are passing over him. I really expected him to win New Hampshire. On Meet the Press several weeks ago, he refused to rule out running as a third party, like I said, if he does its good for the country. If people finally take him seriously, he could win, especially if Romney (maybe too conservative) and Clinton (very divisive figure) are the two major party candidates. Otherwise he's either going to be Perot (exit polls showed his voters would have split almost evenly between Bush and Clinton, so he didn't have a big outcome on the result) or Nader (cost Gore the election in 2000).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*gasp* you didn't mention huckabee. lol

everyone should know who i'm voting for. hehe

i bet 80% of democrat voters will be like... who's this Mike Gravel?

no predictions from me, only hope.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to caucus tonite....first time..(Colorado switched from primaries to caucuses a while back).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Huckabee actually has some excellent positions on a number of big issues, but he is way too much a part of the extreme religious right in the end.

The Republicans really shoot themselves in the foot with the social issues they allow to define them. Without that baggage, they could probably own the government for the forseeable future.

At least the ones like Huckabee.

But that's what Libertarians are for. :AH-HA_wink:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not out to start anything so nobody needs to pick up a rock and take aim... I am curious about the gay patrons of C & G and their view towards the Clintons. Is it favorable or unfavorable?

The reason I ask is I grew up working with three gay people in a company - two were brother and sister - and all of them hate what the Clintons did after the promises that were made. Just curious if that animosity still exists in your circles or if they have been forgiven.

I personally do not like ANY of the candidates, but wil say I would vote for Satan himself before I gave Billary a vote.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kudos to everyone who voted, I really envy every one of you. I guess now all the projections are in but MO (D) and AK ( R ) so I think I'll call it a night.

Edited by vonVeezelsnider
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I caucused...interesting experience, to say the least...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indiana (home state, current registration) isn't until May, but what the hell, I'll be voting absentee in a non-GE for the first time. I want change, and I want it in 2008.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Voted... provisional, because my absentee ballot never arrived, and I didn't want to drive 30+ miles to my original polling place.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the numbers are pretty fascinating. Guess I discounted Huckabee a little early, sorry Mike, you seem like a nice guy, I just really dont want you to be president. Obama did really well in Idaho, like 80%, that one surprised me, mostly because I figured there were only about 8 democrats in Idaho. Proportional delegate distribution is stupid and makes the process a pain to sort through, someone please forward this info to the DNC. Mike Gravel got no love, even in Alaska. He raised 10% of what Kucinich got, I just had to root for him. Didn't vote for him, but had to root for him. More surprising was the lack of Ron Paul votes.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm actually a fan of proportional representation with regards to delegates. Preserves more of the voice of the people. Oh, and Obama is definitely benefitting from it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see the benefit, but it would simplify the process to do away with it. I dont see how a brokered convention helps anything, that seems to be where the democratic race is heading, it will divide the party. Plus, it just seems strange, the way delegates are apportioned. Take Alabama for example, right now CNN shows 99% of precients in

Obama Clinton

300,097 222,887

56% 42%

17 17

The bottom number is the delegate count, how does a spread of 77xxx votes (and 14%) work out to give each the same number of delegates?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can see the benefit, but it would simplify the process to do away with it. I dont see how a brokered convention helps anything, that seems to be where the democratic race is heading, it will divide the party. Plus, it just seems strange, the way delegates are apportioned. Take Alabama for example, right now CNN shows 99% of precients in

Obama Clinton

300,097 222,887

56% 42%

17 17

The bottom number is the delegate count, how does a spread of 77xxx votes (and 14%) work out to give each the same number of delegates?

It is part and parcel of the game. Clinton won NH, but Obama took 1 delegate more than her.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

Loading...