European Tribune

Display:
I could be wrong, but my sense is there's little to it in New Hampshire.  (No doubt some of the crazies in the Obama camp on dKos will jump on it, though.)  I'm guessing what happened last night was due to a whole combination of things, but a few stick out at me:

(1) the treatment of Clinton in the press after her "crying" incident, and
(2) the determination of her volunteers to fight it out after being pretty shaken up by Iowa.

Even if it were possible, I don't see why Diebold would steal it for Clinton.

WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

by Drew J Jones (blahblahblah@blahblahblah.com) on Wed Jan 9th, 2008 at 06:10:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well if you were truly paranoid, the one result that would make it most easy for the republicans to win, and thus require the least fixing in the national polls is Mcain vs Clinton.

Life should consist in at least fifty percent pure waste of time, and the rest doing what you please.
by ceebs (bunchofwankers (at) gmail (dot) com) on Wed Jan 9th, 2008 at 06:19:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Even if it were possible, I don't see why Diebold would steal it for Clinton.

Cos Clinton could lose in November ?

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Wed Jan 9th, 2008 at 06:24:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yep. Clinton is very beatable. Obama and Edwards wouldn't be.
by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Wed Jan 9th, 2008 at 06:26:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Maybe, but the business world has always been reasonably comfortable with the Clintons, while it seems to be decidedly less so with the two guys most likely to win on the other side, McCain and Huckabee.

Granted, it's possible.  But, still, I think a lot of people were (rightly) offended by the behavior of much of the press in recent days.

I'm mindful of the greater probability of losing with Clinton, though, setting aside Diebold.  And with McCain winning last night, I'm very concerned we're going to see a justifiably rejuvenated, -- again, love her or hate her (and assuming there's no Diebold issue), major props to the folks on the ground for Clinton -- but even more hawkish, Hillary Clinton.

O and E had better get their shit together real quick.  If they weren't collaborating before, they'd better start.

WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

by Drew J Jones (blahblahblah@blahblahblah.com) on Wed Jan 9th, 2008 at 06:36:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I think a lot of people were (rightly) offended by the behavior of much of the press in recent days

wtf has that got to do with who will be the better candidate for President ? Crikey, is it down to a pity vote ? Next up, richardson's new kitten dies, surge of support expected. Yech !!

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Wed Jan 9th, 2008 at 06:55:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No, no, I wholly agree.  When I say "rightly," I mean "rightly offended".  I'm just telling you what I think part of the reason might've been.

WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
by Drew J Jones (blahblahblah@blahblahblah.com) on Wed Jan 9th, 2008 at 06:57:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You know, something does occur to me, though:  The polling data was only wrong on Obama and Clinton.  Not Edwards, Richardson, or the Republicans.

WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
by Drew J Jones (blahblahblah@blahblahblah.com) on Wed Jan 9th, 2008 at 06:52:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Recommended Diaries
The Puritan Edge
by rg - Nov 20
72 comments

Early Friday Photography Blog No. 62
by LEP - Nov 20
18 comments

Help oppose Sarko's three strike nonsense
by nicta - Nov 20
2 comments

So I met Bill McKibben
by SacredCowTipper - Nov 20
1 comment

LQD: Geoengineering Ranked
by nanne - Nov 19
16 comments

The Purpose of Education
by rdf - Nov 20
1 comment

Trains in Moravia
by DoDo - Nov 16
72 comments

LQD: The real orgasmic Puritans
by Ted Welch - Nov 20
2 comments

Debates
Campaigns
Occasional Series