NH Primary

[TheMason]

Well CBS & CNN has called McCain for the Republicans followed by Romney and then Huckabee. Paul and Rudy are within 1% of each other.

As for the Dems it is too close to call, right now Clinton leads Obama by 4%. I have a feeling the winner there will win by about 1-3% (or else it would've been called by now).

Also CNN has a real good explanation of the breakdown of the delegate system here: Delegates Explained

Also polls are saying the issues are the economy and the Iraq war.

Lots of independents (voting Dem). McCain is seen as the better Commander-in-chief, Romney as too negative.

Obama is seen as the best agent of change, Hillary is too negative.

[Imperator]

At 1/8/08 08:49 PM, TheMason wrote: Well CBS & CNN has called McCain for the Republicans followed by Romney and then Huckabee. Paul and Rudy are within 1% of each other.

Go Paul! Get 4th! Next state he'll get 3rd, and away we goooooooo! Knew he'd make an impression, either way. You just don't have that kind of grassroots org without people showing up to vote.....

I'd personally rather have McCain than Romney. He seems a little more level headed, although he still plays reindeer games with the rest of the political world.

Romney's "I believe in the Bible" answer to "do you interpret the Bible literally" question scared the hell out of me, just because he felt the need to play political games instead of being straightforward on what seemed a very VERY simple question.

CNN talked about demographics a little. I've asked in other threads, but what the hell:

What kind of demographics do you (all) think Ron Paul has? Is it mostly Libertarians, Republicans, Independents? Or is there no correlation at all?

[SmilezRoyale]

At 1/8/08 09:01 PM, Imperator wrote:

CNN talked about demographics a little. I've asked in other threads, but what the hell:

What kind of demographics do you (all) think Ron Paul has? Is it mostly Libertarians, Republicans, Independents? Or is there no correlation at all?

Young more socially liberal Republicans and libertarians. His veiws are a little too uncentrist to be an attractive force for independents if they are truely independents.

[TheMason]

ABC is projecting Edwards in third place. (OMG, I think I'm SO shocked I'm having a heart-attack!)

Huckabee is polling at 12%...good God I hope Rudy or Paul surges and beats Huckabee (I just don't trust him!).

With 29% Hillary is leading by 4%...Kucinich is in last place w/1%.

[TheMason]

At 1/8/08 09:05 PM, SmilezRoyale wrote:

At 1/8/08 09:01 PM, Imperator wrote: What kind of demographics do you (all) think Ron Paul has? Is it mostly Libertarians, Republicans, Independents? Or is there no correlation at all?

Young more socially liberal Republicans and libertarians. His veiws are a little too uncentrist to be an attractive force for independents if they are truely independents.

Pretty much...

I think he's also doing well with ppl who do not really care about politics on a regular basis but who are tired of the status quo.

[SmilezRoyale]

Kunnich 08 lulz...

[Imperator]

Just for the sake of extra conversation:

http://www.pollster.com/08-US-Rep-Pres-P rimary.php

This is a compilation of all the more scientific national polls done across the country. You can see the list, and the nice graph.

Now people were saying before that whenever Ron wins the internet polls it means nothing, because we just spam em.

And then they point to these national polls to show where Ron "really" stands (1-3%).

Well:
Payback's a bitch I guess. Giulianni certainly doesn't have anywhere near the 30-20% the polls say.

Reason:
They're phone polls. They need to call ground lines, which excludes a good number of people, including most people under 25.

They call during the day, and most people are at work.

So all these 'national polls" me thinks are actually indicative of retired people, and not much more.

[TheMason]

Republican Scorecard after NH:
Romney: 27
Huckabee: 20
McCain: 7
Thompson: 6

Magic number of delegates to win Republican nomination: 1,191
Source

Democratic scorecard going into NH:
Clinton: 174
Obama: 69
Edwards: 48
Richardson: 19
Kucinich: 1

Magic number of delegates needed to win the Democratic nomination: 2,025
Source

One of my collegues was talking today that he thinks McCain is the true Manchurian Candidate...he'll win only to be activated as a sleeper agent for the Chinese...

Also, will NH really prove to be a make it or break it?

[Ravariel]

At 1/8/08 09:22 PM, TheMason wrote: Also, will NH really prove to be a make it or break it?

It depends on who wins, really. McCain will certainly get a much-needed national bump by the win... but Romney and Huckabee still have strongholds of support in some of the larger states.

If Hillary loses NH, then she's probably done. If she wins, then it's a dogfight to the end.

[TheMason]

At 1/8/08 09:18 PM, Imperator wrote: They're phone polls. They need to call ground lines, which excludes a good number of people, including most people under 25.

This is a problem with poll data. Perhaps we need to go back to face-to-face polling like politicos do on social issues. It'll be expensive though...

However my friend, the fact that traditional polls have yet to adjust to a cellular society, that does not mean that internet polls are better...

[Ravariel]

sorry for the dp... but it now appears that the gap between Obama and Hillary is closing. Once as large as 4%, it's now about 2% with more than 60% of the numbers in.

[Imperator]

At 1/8/08 09:25 PM, TheMason wrote: However my friend, the fact that traditional polls have yet to adjust to a cellular society, that does not mean that internet polls are better...

Agreed. Did I insinuate otherwise?

The best poll would combine methods, and add more. Get out to as many people, in as many states as possible.

The problem with political polls is that they're all flawed pretty badly. Mostly because their source of information is limited, and thereby limits the possible responders. Mail surveys only get certain people, phones, internet, p2p, etc.

Unfortunately the only times we get fairly accurate "polls" are when people actually vote......

[Tony-DarkGrave]

ahahaha Ron paul LOST AGAIN and GUILIANI they might as well drop out no one cares about losers and nobody's

[Memorize]

C'mon Obama!

WIN WIN WIN!

[Slizor]

Does anyone else think that the primary system, in its first few stages, is undemocratic? I particularly have a problem with the level of participation that is experienced in the first few goes that determine the agenda of the others.

[cellardoor6]

Will someone please tell Ron Paul and his mindless followers that a gold standard currency is virtually impossible in this day and age? There's simply not enough gold in circulation to support our currency today.

The gold in Fort Knox - tons and tons of it - is only worth $100 billion. Let's see how we'd manage to support a $14 trillion per year GDP on it.

Economists laugh at the goof ball.

[TheMason]

Impy,
Well, you only really need 1,400 ppl to conduct a poll with 96% accuracy...

At 1/8/08 09:25 PM, Ravariel wrote:

At 1/8/08 09:22 PM, TheMason wrote: Also, will NH really prove to be a make it or break it?

It depends on who wins, really. McCain will certainly get a much-needed national bump by the win... but Romney and Huckabee still have strongholds of support in some of the larger states.

I think a McCain win means this will remain at least a three way race. I think Huckabee will do extremely well in the deep South. Romney in the Upper Midwest. McCain will do well in the SW. However, I think the East will be a shoot-out between McCain, Romney and quite possibly Rudy. If Rudy stays on until the NW, then it will be a shoot out between McCain and him...if he drops then McCain and Romney will battle it out here.

Obama is surging...39% for Hillary and 37% for Obama.

If Hillary loses NH, then she's probably done. If she wins, then it's a dogfight to the end.

Slizor,

I don't think that the primary system and the ways that is undemocratic is a bad thing. In fact I'd like to see it less democratic than it is; a return to party elites being the ones making the decision on who becomes the nominee. Think about it, the more egalitarian the political system the lower quality our candidates have become and the more the issues have become more emotionally manipulative...

Dante,

The surprise is Rudy...although winning now is not in his strategery...doing so poorly.

Ron Paul has always expected to loose.

[TheMason]

Fox is reporting Hillary is getting:
Women
Older
Union
Lower income

Obama's voters:
Male
Younger
Higher income

[Imperator]

Impy,

Well, you only really need 1,400 ppl to conduct a poll with 96% accuracy...

That's why I leave the stats, math, econ, etc to you guys.
I'm just the history guy.....

The surprise is Rudy...although winning now is not in his strategery...doing so poorly.

You know? I'm actually not all that surprised. I think a lot of people see him as just a slogan with a body ("911") rather than someone actually fit to run the country.

Ron Paul has always expected to loose.

If you visit his website, he always writes little blurbs about his hallmarks after big events (like the moneybombs or primaries).

He's broken fundraising records, become a top tier candidate (somewhat), and hasn't been doing much at all really, at least compared to how hard the other candidates are working.

I think the Ron Paul Movement surprised everyone a little, and I'm sure it surprised no one more than Ron Paul.......

[public-enemy1]

What do you all think about Hillary winning in New Hampshire?

Upset??

I thought Obama had this one in the bag. Looks like a two candidate race again.

[Memorize]

At 1/8/08 11:18 PM, public-enemy1 wrote: What do you all think about Hillary winning in New Hampshire?

It means New Hemphsire needs a smack back to reality.

[public-enemy1]

At 1/8/08 11:20 PM, Memorize wrote:

At 1/8/08 11:18 PM, public-enemy1 wrote: What do you all think about Hillary winning in New Hampshire?

It means New Hemphsire needs a smack back to reality.

I would have loved to have seen Hillary come in behind Edwards.

[TheMason]

I just hope that Huckabee drops further in the next few hours to be close to Rudy...or at the very least not meet the criteria to get any delegates...

[TheMason]

Hillary's win also probably knocks Edwards out of the race...unless he can win BOTH Carolinas...

[stafffighter]

The newscast here Said that John Mclain won for the republicans. I'd vote for him

[Bolo]

Obama, so close for so long.

Oh well, onward to the next state.

[Diablomo]

It seems that there's an all out 'basketball game' (if you excuse my metaphor) and the winner will become president. There's an even split between Obama and Clinton and the Republicans don't have much of a choice delegate either. Forgive my speedy post, but I'm watching the end of the NH Primaries.

At the Time 8:42 (PST):
{In Alphabetical Order}

Democrats (81% delegates in):
Clinton 39%
Obama 36%
Edwards 17%
Richardson 5%
Kucinich 1%
Biden 0%
Gravel 0%
Dodd 0%

Republicans(79% delegates in):
McCain 37%
Romney 32%
Huckabee 11%
Giuliani 9%
Paul 8%
Thompson 1%
Hunter 1%

[TommyGun]

McCain is a great candidate and I hope he does well for the rest of the campaign trail. However the democrats are interesting it's really anybodies game there

[stafffighter]

At 1/8/08 11:38 PM, stafffighter wrote: The newscast here Said that John Mclain won for the republicans. I'd vote for him

Just to clarify I didn't mistype that. The newslady actually did make the verbal slip up of saying the hero from die hard won the primary.

[Imperator]

At 1/8/08 11:56 PM, stafffighter wrote:

At 1/8/08 11:38 PM, stafffighter wrote: The newscast here Said that John Mclain won for the republicans. I'd vote for him

Just to clarify I didn't mistype that. The newslady actually did make the verbal slip up of saying the hero from die hard won the primary.

lol, I didn't even realize it till you pointed that out.....

"Mr. President, what's your response for the Russian Ambassador?"

"Yippie Ki-yay mother fucker!".