Tuesday Primary Results

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2008-02-12 08:11pm

Wow, even in this thread we see the Obama effect, we have people changing their party affiliations just to vote and someone like Shep, a true relaible Republican threatening to cross party lines. This is truly historic.

And also a little frightening. I'm an Obama supporter, and I've been a loyal footsoldier for him here in the Potomac region, but I'm a little worried about the messianic quality of his campaign. It's not something I can quantify, but there's an air about it as though he's basically the redeemer come to save America from the last seven years. Those sorts of expectations are not realistic nor are they particularly conducive to a productive republic.

Starglider · Post by **Starglider** » 2008-02-12 08:11pm

Surlethe wrote:Now, the parties would never go for this (:roll:), but what if we did away entirely with the primary system and simply let all the candidates who register run for the election proper? That way, we could at least have an honest-to-God field of candidates instead of two candidates whittled down by party machinery and back-door politics.

That would absolutely suck with the current, archaic single vote system; the 'but can this candidate actually win' question would overwhelm 'who is the best candidate' even more than it currently does. In other words image and bandwagoning would overrule actual platforms/policies even more. Single vote starts bad and gets worse and worse at capturing preferences as you add more candidates.

It would however be great with ranked voting (single transferrable vote is probably best, the theoretical advantages of the more complex systems aren't worth the opacity to the average voter). Even approval voting would probably be enough to make direct elections better than the broken-two-round system the US has (though sad to say, even that is better than the archaic general election system the UK has).

Pu-239 · Post by **Pu-239** » 2008-02-12 08:11pm

Did my part to ensure Hillary's defeat in VA, despite freezing rain.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2008-02-12 08:12pm

Stravo wrote:someone like Shep, a true relaible Republican threatening to cross party lines.

It's more of a:

Okay, this is what we have:

1.) HUCKASANITY - PRAISE JESUS! JESUS FORGIVES ALL, PRAISE THE LAWD! (oh god, *pulls eject lever*)

2.) Mitt Romney (Basically, Bush Mark 3; only one who was really acceptable to me, I may not be enthuastic over him, but he hasn't spent 8 years urinating publically on the base like our next contestant). Unfortunately, he dropped out.

3.) JOHN MCCAIN! - Mr. I love to use as many amendments as possible to wipe my ass with; and the pentultiminate RINO. Why should I vote for him, after he's spent the last 8 years basically poking me in the eye? Because he had a come to jesus 'conversion' at CPAC? Don't make me laugh.

So the Republican field is pretty much retarded this year; with it now essentially being McCain and Huckasanity. So my vote for them is out.

Coming up to the Democrat Field; Hillary is well Hitlery. I don't trust the woman any further than I can throw her. And that leaves well, BLACK HUSSEIN OSAMA.

FSTargetDrone · Post by **FSTargetDrone** » 2008-02-12 08:15pm

By the way, for those interested in the Republican results, it's still too close to call in Virginia.

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2008-02-12 08:16pm

Its ridiculous, they're less than 200 votes apart by some counts.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2008-02-12 08:18pm

I do love the fact it's now Huck vs. McCain. The GOP establishment must be preparing their 'Going to spend more time with money' resignation letters for the next period until they can mount an insurgency.

You know, when everyone forgets how bad they fucked up when given power.

Gigaliel · Post by **Gigaliel** » 2008-02-12 08:21pm

Surlethe wrote:
Stravo wrote:WTF?! In other words, let's give those states with early primaries an even bigger voice because, you know, it sucks to have an primary process that still counts for something for states down the road. And more importantly it smells of "We didn't get the results we wanted so let's make sure this shit doesn't happen again."
Now, the parties would never go for this (:roll:), but what if we did away entirely with the primary system and simply let all the candidates who register run for the election proper? That way, we could at least have an honest-to-God field of candidates instead of two candidates whittled down by party machinery and back-door politics. I would much prefer to have eight or twelve candidates to choose from in November instead of the two candidates I'll get, just on general principle.

The main benefit of holding primaries in a sequence instead of one election is that unknown candidates can get publicity and 'legitimacy' through focusing on one state at a time until their popular enough to run a campaign. Consider if Hillary or McCain had won the Iowa caucus* and the consequences thereof.

Or at least that's what I'm seeing. I can't think of any cases of unknown candidates suddenly coming out of nowhere well into the primaries. 'Well into' being defined as roughly..~4.

*Yes I am aware that a rural corn state is not representative of the electorate. The point is the sequence. Not necessarily the members.

Shinova wrote:I've heard Obama's relative lack of experience in politics cited as a demerit against him. How much will this factor into his presidency assuming he gets elected?

I always thought that argument was a bit silly, Obama worked for the Illinois State Senate from 1997 to 2004 and U.S. Senate 2005 to the present. That's really not that bad for political experience. Foreign policy and other national-only issues you could argue.

Of course, several factors of Republican Foreign policy are not popular, so not that big a deal.

brianeyci · Post by **brianeyci** » 2008-02-12 08:25pm

SirNitram wrote:I do love the fact it's now Huck vs. McCain. The GOP establishment must be preparing their 'Going to spend more time with money' resignation letters for the next period until they can mount an insurgency.

You know, when everyone forgets how bad they fucked up when given power.

Who was the establishment candidate for the GOP? I know it's not McCain, and Huck is anti-big business and pro-poor. Romney is Mormon... was it Giuliani?

The tent is totaled.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2008-02-12 08:29pm

brianeyci wrote:
SirNitram wrote:I do love the fact it's now Huck vs. McCain. The GOP establishment must be preparing their 'Going to spend more time with money' resignation letters for the next period until they can mount an insurgency.

You know, when everyone forgets how bad they fucked up when given power.
Who was the establishment candidate for the GOP? I know it's not McCain, and Huck is anti-big business and pro-poor. Romney is Mormon... was it Giuliani?

The tent is totaled.

The Establishment liked Romney, for all his blatant fakery and Mormonism; the Religious Right is footsoldiers. The core is the Foreign Policy Hawks and Big Business. He's good for both. Guiliani had support as well, particularly from the growing authoritarian wing of the establishment.

FSTargetDrone · Post by **FSTargetDrone** » 2008-02-12 08:34pm

Many of the experts and numbers are saying Clinton will take Pennsylvania, but I wonder about that. These results tonight, if they are indicative of anything at all about the feeling of the voters in the Mid Atlantic region of the country, they suggest the results in my state might be just a little more interesting than the supposed outcome is projected to be.

FSTargetDrone · Post by **FSTargetDrone** » 2008-02-12 08:38pm

Okay, finally some brief news for the Republicans:

BREAKING NEWS

NBC News and news services

updated 6 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Sen. Barack Obama was projected to win Democratic presidential primaries in Virginia and the District of Columbia on Tuesday, NBC News reported, adding to his string of recent victories over Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

In the Republican primaries, NBC projected that Sen. John McCain would defeat former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee in Virginia while the network said it was too early to make a call in the D.C. GOP race.

Voters also were going to the polls Tuesday in Maryland, but polls there were kept open an extra 90 minutes because of traffic problems caused by bad weather.

Note the extended close time for the vote in Maryland.

Turin · Post by **Turin** » 2008-02-12 08:39pm

FSTargetDrone wrote:Many of the experts and numbers are saying Clinton will take Pennsylvania, but I wonder about that. These results tonight, if they are indicative of anything at all about the feeling of the voters in the Mid Atlantic region of the country, they suggest the results in my state might be just a little more interesting than the supposed outcome is projected to be.

He'll sweep Philadelphia, but not being a PA native I'm not sure what the Democratic primary voters in "Pennsyl-tucky" are like... my guess is a lot of blue-collar union-card-carrying white folks. How's Obama been doing with them?

Fleet Admiral JD · Post by **Fleet Admiral JD** » 2008-02-12 08:39pm

So if Obama takes MD, he pulls ahead, right?

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2008-02-12 08:42pm

Stravo wrote:BTW I've heard things like "Democratic leadership is looking to tinker with the primary system so as to ensure a front runner as early as possible in the process because they can't afford to have it still undecided this close to the convention next time."

WTF?! In other words, let's give those states with early primaries an even bigger voice because, you know, it sucks to have an primary process that still counts for something for states down the road. And more importantly it smells of "We didn't get the results we wanted so let's make sure this shit doesn't happen again."

Just when I think I'm living ina vibrant democracy that can oust hacks and charlatans like Hillary this comes up and reminds we why the two party system is not true democracy because they frame the rules that make it work.

Meanwhile, they're actively BARRING states from trying to move their primaries up (FLA and MI). I guess that Iowa and New Hampshire have to represent the entire country in determining who should get the party nod for president.

The Original Nex · Post by **The Original Nex** » 2008-02-12 08:44pm

Fleet Admiral JD wrote:So if Obama takes MD, he pulls ahead, right?

Well if you count only pledged delegates, he's already ahead by 56 delegates. I think it's premature to count the even the supposedly pledged super-delegates at all since they're free to change their minds. But yes, I think if he sweeps these three contests he goes ahead of Clinton even with super-delegates counted.

Fleet Admiral JD · Post by **Fleet Admiral JD** » 2008-02-12 08:49pm

CNN shows Obama ahead by 2 delegates including pledged and supers.

CmdrWilkens · Post by **CmdrWilkens** » 2008-02-12 09:04pm

Well I found out not too long ago that despite Maryland allowing new registration up to 30 days prior you can't change parties unless you switch afiliation at least 90 days prior. What that means is my old (R) status prevented m from placing an active vote for Obama. I did the next best thing which was vote for the Republican candidate with the lowest electability possible (and the greatest chance of keeping mcCain from starting a general election campaign early) in the Huckleberry.

So my wife and I both pulled the lever (or rather touch the stupid Diebold machine of potential lawsuits) for Huckster the only difference being that she actually likes his politics and I was voting to slow up McCain rather than supporting him.

On the overall notes I am pleased as punch that Obama won every gender/racial breakdown except for White Women in Virginia. I will be watching closely all through the evening to see how the final numbers shape up in DC and MD but the size of the margins is just the most heartening thing to me.

Soontir C'boath · Post by **Soontir C'boath** » 2008-02-12 09:15pm

MSNBC:Hillary's deputy campaign manager has resigned.

Clinton deputy manager quits
Henry's departure comes a day after manager's replaced
The Associated Press
updated 8:56 p.m. ET, Tues., Feb. 12, 2008

Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton's deputy campaign manager has stepped down amid a string of losses to rival Barack Obama.

Mike Henry announced his departure Tuesday, a day after Maggie Williams replaced Patti Solis Doyle as Clinton's campaign manager. Solis Doyle had recruited Henry to join the team last year.

Henry was the campaign's main field architect and was best known for penning a memo last spring urging Clinton not to compete in Iowa. He called it "our consistently weakest state." The memo was leaked to the media, which embarrassed Clinton as she was beginning to build an organization in Iowa.

Clinton placed third in Iowa, behind Obama and John Edwards, who has since left the race. Her campaign has struggled since then.

This is certainly going well for Obama.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2008-02-12 09:21pm

I'm feeling it people, I'm feeling another clean sweep. That leaves February 19: Hawaii and Wisconsin and then finally March 4th and her last shot. We already know she's not going to win in the 19th, so if she does not get one win on the March 4th, where can she go? What can she do? Except hope to try and swipe the election via the super-delegates?

That NOS Guy · Post by **That NOS Guy** » 2008-02-12 09:32pm

Mr Bean wrote:I'm feeling it people, I'm feeling another clean sweep. That leaves February 19: Hawaii and Wisconsin and then finally March 4th and her last shot. We already know she's not going to win in the 19th, so if she does not get one win on the March 4th, where can she go? What can she do? Except hope to try and swipe the election via the super-delegates?

A 9 in a row streak eh? If that happens, going into March 4th if she loses either Ohio or Texas she's done for. That has to be the scary part for her, she's gotten herself in a situation where she needs to pull out two big victories when Obama has time to actually campaign in those states. Nevermind the Guiliani effect.

FSTargetDrone · Post by **FSTargetDrone** » 2008-02-12 09:42pm

Fleet Admiral JD wrote:So if Obama takes MD, he pulls ahead, right?

And he's indeed taken Maryland, as has McCain:

Obama sweeps in Maryland, Va., D.C.

NBC projects McCain wins GOP contests in Maryland, Virginia

BREAKING NEWS

NBC News and news services

updated 9:37 p.m. ET, Tues., Feb. 12, 2008

WASHINGTON - Sen. Barack Obama was projected to defeat Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in Maryland's Democratic primary, NBC News said, completing a sweep Tuesday in the race for the party's presidential nomination.

In the GOP primaries, Sen. John McCain defeated former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee in Virginia and Maryland, according to NBC projections on Tuesday. NBC said it was too early to make a call in the D.C. GOP race.

With the victory in Virginia after the unexpectedly tough challenge from Huckabee, McCain would pick up all 60 delegates at stake, adding to his vast lead.

String of wins

Obama was projected to win Democratic presidential primaries in Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia, adding to his string of recent victories over Clinton.

With 168 delegates at stake on Tuesday, Obama was set to build on the lead that he has gained in the past week in NBC News' delegate count over Clinton, who, according to her aides, is now depending on victories the big states of Ohio and Texas in her struggle to keep up in a race she once commanded.

So says NBC, anyhow.

Guardsman Bass · Post by **Guardsman Bass** » 2008-02-12 09:51pm

Master of Ossus wrote:
Stravo wrote:BTW I've heard things like "Democratic leadership is looking to tinker with the primary system so as to ensure a front runner as early as possible in the process because they can't afford to have it still undecided this close to the convention next time."

WTF?! In other words, let's give those states with early primaries an even bigger voice because, you know, it sucks to have an primary process that still counts for something for states down the road. And more importantly it smells of "We didn't get the results we wanted so let's make sure this shit doesn't happen again."

Just when I think I'm living ina vibrant democracy that can oust hacks and charlatans like Hillary this comes up and reminds we why the two party system is not true democracy because they frame the rules that make it work.
Meanwhile, they're actively BARRING states from trying to move their primaries up (FLA and MI). I guess that Iowa and New Hampshire have to represent the entire country in determining who should get the party nod for president.

I suppose they at least tried to get a broader spectrum of states by adding a southern state (South Carolina) and a Southwestern State (Nevada), but it's still a flawed system. I'm more in favor of collating the primaries into a small number of regional super-primaries, then imposing spending caps and television advertisement limitations during the primary season.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2008-02-12 09:52pm

Stravo wrote:Wow, even in this thread we see the Obama effect, we have people changing their party affiliations just to vote and someone like Shep, a true relaible Republican threatening to cross party lines. This is truly historic.

I know, I was just like...

Imperial Overlord · Post by **Imperial Overlord** » 2008-02-12 09:57pm

Illuminatus Primus wrote:
Stravo wrote:Wow, even in this thread we see the Obama effect, we have people changing their party affiliations just to vote and someone like Shep, a true relaible Republican threatening to cross party lines. This is truly historic.
I know, I was just like...

As I said to Hotfoot a little earlier in the day "You know the Republicans are fucked when they've lost the Shep vote."