Re: BREAKING: Clinton pwns Obama
 

I'm only posting on this article that Prof. S mentioned, which says --

Which, unless I'm reading it wrong, says that he only voted against it because the measure was worded in such a way that defined all fetuses as children, which would threaten the right to abortion.

The article is unclear, so I may be wrong, but from my understanding that seems to be the case.

Re: BREAKING: Clinton pwns Obama
 

That is his explanation of the his decision, but like you, I don't know the exact wording of it. But considering his stance on partial birth abortion (a process that literally sucks the brain from a partially delivered late term child), I find it hard to give him the benefit of the doubt on this.

Regardless of his motivations, it will be quite easy for Republicans to have a field day with his decision on this.

Re: BREAKING: Clinton pwns Obama
 

Obama is starting to run out of steam, and Clinton is definitely putting her foot down by ripping apart his feel-good approach to the campaign. But is it too little, too late? After the half-ass job the Republicans did over the past 8 years, I think the democrats are going to win this election regardless if Hilary or Obama are running.

Re: BREAKING: Clinton pwns Obama
 

I would agree with you if it were anyone but John McCain. McCain does not have a heavy association with dyed in the wool republicanism/conservatism. Polls show the populace views him more of a rugged individualist, type. Because of this Dems will have a harder time labeling him with the past 8 years that is perceived as being so horrible to a large section of voters. Thats not to say that they can't hang George Bush around his neck, but it will be VERY hard for them to do so, especially with the well knwon dislike the two have for each other regardless of public pleasantries.

In the end, if the dialogue in the general election centers on whether or not we should have been in Iraq, the Dems will have the advantage. If it centers on current successes in teh region and dealing with it the ay it currently is, I think McCain will have a distinct advantage.

But with Clinton having a more nuanced opinion of the current war than Obama, and the fact that she was there when everything threw down, I think she has more credibility to offer in the dialogue.

It amazes me that no one has called Obama on his constant claims of "I was against the war from the beginning" by simply saying:

"You don't know what you would have been for or against. You weren't there. You saw none of the reports that I did, none of the evidence from foreign countries or intelligence agencies. You're just pandering based on your ignorance. Things aren't quite so black and white when your there, in the arena of consequence, swimming through miles of data that you never had the burden of dealing with or worrying about while commenting from the outside in. Now go play while the adults talk."

Its not enough to mention that Obama is inexperienced, you need to smear his face with it.

Re: BREAKING: Clinton pwns Obama
 

I couldve sworn someone said Obama was a dead man in the general election...who was that again? Oh yea...

Re: BREAKING: Clinton pwns Obama
 

Seriously. Do we really need to go back and rub stuff like this in?

Re: BREAKING: Clinton pwns Obama
 

Im not really rubbing anything in, im just showing everyone the Professor included that I was right and he was wrong. There's more to come, stay tuned:D

Re: BREAKING: Clinton pwns Obama
 

Jason, are you really this bored?

And by the way, I agree you were right on this election, but thats not through any special intellectual acuity on your part. If you throw paint against a wall long enough you'll eventually create the Mona Lisa, but that doesn't make you an artist...

And this was well before the economic collapse that changed EVERYTHING.

Re: BREAKING: Clinton pwns Obama
 

I think Obama still would have taken it without the financial implosion.

Re: BREAKING: Clinton pwns Obama
 

There is a decent chance that he would have won, but you have to admit that the race would have been much closer if the markets had remained steady and I think McCain would have had the upper hand, and the polls at the time reflect that as McCain was winning before the markets tanked. After the markets tanked, everyone forgot about the Saddleback forum, Obama's suspect personal relationships and the Georgia crisis, and all of those went solidly in favor of McCain. The economic crisis changed the entire dialogue of the campaign, and the social issues that would have heavily favored McCain became one questions footnotes in the debates.

There are more factors, including The Palin Effect that I'm going to write about in a separate thread, where I argue that Palin did more to hurt McCain's chances in the election, even though she energized the base. The fact of the matter is, the base of either party doesn't win elections...

But I think McCain would have lost regardless considering the current state of the economy. It sealed the deal for Obama.

Re: BREAKING: Clinton pwns Obama
 

It's not an implosion - it's affecting everybody.

Re: BREAKING: Clinton pwns Obama
 

I'm aware. i'm just tired of using the word crisis or collapse. But considering the market collapsed on itself I think implosion is a fair word.

Re: BREAKING: Clinton pwns Obama
 

I was watching CNN today and they ran some numbers, and they claimed that even if they eliminated the under 30 vote, as in hypothetically if nobody under 30 voted, the only states that woulve flipped would have been Indiana and one other, cant remember. Thats how big Obama won.