iowa predictions

Onceler said:
I have Hillary issues; I'm aware of them, but have yet to seek professional help.

I didn't try the Bailey's thing over the holidays, but certainly had an adequate fill of beer & wine. I'm actually hopeful about today, but I tend to gear up for the worst, so I can be surprised, rather than get my hopes up, so they can be shattered all over the pavement.
Click to expand...

I get that.
 
Cypress said:
Cheer up man. Always so gloomy!

I'm pretty sure Edwards or Obama are going to win the nomination. And as much as I dislike Hillary, we've had After 8 years of Bush junior, and 8 years of reagan. I really don't put her on that level.
Click to expand...

Nah - I don't either. Regardless, whoever wins will be a vast improvement over the past 7 years.

I'd be shocked if Edwards actually got the nomination in the end, but stranger things have happened. I would enthusiastically support either him or Obama for the Presidency.

It would also be great to hear O'Reilly's reaction if Edwards won the whole thing, which he would if we were the nominee.
 
Onceler said:
Nah - I don't either. Regardless, whoever wins will be a vast improvement over the past 7 years.

I'd be shocked if Edwards actually got the nomination in the end, but stranger things have happened. I would enthusiastically support either him or Obama for the Presidency.

It would also be great to hear O'Reilly's reaction if Edwards won the whole thing, which he would if we were the nominee.
Click to expand...

Ha! O'Reilly would have a heart attack if Edwards won. That would almost be worth the price of admission.

I'm kind of down on Obama, but even Obama would be a massive improvement over BushCo.
 
Darla said:
I have been feeling that way too, but DH makes a good point on another thread. Maybe it is an “I don’t know anyone who voted for Nixon” thing. Maybe we are all elitist liberals? I don’t feel very elitist. I got a flat tire on the way to work this morning, maybe that is why.
Click to expand...


I don't know. I feel disenchanted about the entire thing at this point. I just feel like the media has made their choice and we're going to be stuck with it.
 
Superfreak said:
Well then, please oh wise one.... criticize away.....
Click to expand...


It's a fucked up system. First of all, it's exclusionary by its very nature. You have to show up at a given time to have your vote counted at all. No absentee voting at all, for any reason, period. Second shift workers are screwed. All of them. No voice for them at all. People with childcare issues are screwed. People with transportation issues are screwed. Soldiers on active duty are screwed. Etc . . . Not a good start.

Second, it can be highly coercive. No secret ballot like any other election. You have to stand up in front of your peers and possibly employer and show who you support. That's rife for coercion.

Third, there is no such thing as one person one vote in the Iowa Democratic caucus. Votes are weighted proportionately to past levels of participation. A candidate could receive the most votes from caucus-goers and still lose. Oh, but you would never know about that because the actual vote numbers are never provided.

As I said, it's a fucked up system, but to have it all boil down to "whatever state Dem leaders decide" is a bridge too far.
 
Dungheap said:
It's a fucked up system. First of all, it's exclusionary by its very nature. You have to show up at a given time to have your vote counted at all. No absentee voting at all, for any reason, period. Second shift workers are screwed. All of them. No voice for them at all. People with childcare issues are screwed. People with transportation issues are screwed. Soldiers on active duty are screwed. Etc . . . Not a good start.

Second, it can be highly coercive. No secret ballot like any other election. You have to stand up in front of your peers and possibly employer and show who you support. That's rife for coercion.

Third, there is no such thing as one person one vote in the Iowa Democratic caucus. Votes are weighted proportionately to past levels of participation. A candidate could receive the most votes from caucus-goers and still lose. Oh, but you would never know about that because the actual vote numbers are never provided.

As I said, it's a fucked up system, but to have it all boil down to "whatever state Dem leaders decide" is a bridge too far.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything you stated. Which is why I also dislike the whole idea of a caucus. However, that does not change the fact that up until this year, the Dem leaders in Iowa could indeed do exactly as I stated given that they refused to release the actual totals. This year will be the first that they will release the figures.... or at least that is what they are saying at this point.
 
LadyT said:
I don't know. I feel disenchanted about the entire thing at this point. I just feel like the media has made their choice and we're going to be stuck with it.
Click to expand...

well then, you should just stay home this year and not worry about voting. The dems will carry Jersey easily. No need for you to vote. Stay home. Relax. Don't fret about it. Tell your friends to do the same. No worries. The dems will carry your state easily. Why go out in the November cold? Stay warm.

:rolleyes:
 
LadyT said:
I don't know. I feel disenchanted about the entire thing at this point. I just feel like the media has made their choice and we're going to be stuck with it.
Click to expand...

what sucks about this system, is that by the time the primaries get to our states, usually there's only two choices left. Everyone else drops out.

So, if Edwards craters and drops out, I'm going to vote for Kucinich or Gravel if they hang around.

Or, I might write in Hugo Chavez :)
 
Cypress said:
Ha! O'Reilly would have a heart attack if Edwards won. That would almost be worth the price of admission.

I'm kind of down on Obama, but even Obama would be a massive improvement over BushCo.
Click to expand...

Massive doesn't even express it. Obama is someone I could consider a leader, a decider. Even if I don't like his positions on issues, he is someone who could get us some respect back as a nation.
 
I can't stand Huckabee. Sorry, I'd rather Fake ass Romney win than Huckster. I'm tired of the Republican party being controlled by people with 'Values'. Those 'Values' aren't going to do jack shit for this country.
 
Cypress said:
what sucks about this system, is that by the time the primaries get to our states, usually there's only two choices left. Everyone else drops out.

So, if Edwards craters and drops out, I'm going to vote for Kucinich or Gravel if they hang around.

Or, I might write in Hugo Chavez :)
Click to expand...

Naturally that's what I'm doing.
 
DigitalDave said:
I can't stand Huckabee. Sorry, I'd rather Fake ass Romney win than Huckster. I'm tired of the Republican party being controlled by people with 'Values'. Those 'Values' aren't going to do jack shit for this country.
Click to expand...


I only like (by like I mean makes me laugh with a bit of schadenfreude) Huckleberry because he is everything that W pretended to be. Bush was a money man playing the folksy game to gain the values voters. Huckleberry is a folksy guy giving the money men in the party the finger. It'd be the Republican moneyed elites reaping what they've sown.
 
I hope Huckleberry gets the Republican nomination and then the Republicans are exposed for the frauds they are!
 
Jarod said:
I hope Huckleberry gets the Republican nomination and then the Republicans are exposed for the frauds they are!
Click to expand...

I thought they already were exposed with G W Bush. Now you want to fuck the country up even worse just to prove it some more? Wow... party politics at it's best.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top