What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
See the new YouTube feature trailer for Dragon Age: Origins view!
youtube.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
538 Comments
- franklymister, on 05/03/2008, -16/+247I know there are a few Clinton supporters around Digg - can anyone of you provide an answer to the author's question?
Name a plausible scenario in which Clinton can win. Not why you think she ought to, but how it could actually happen.
(and no, "Obama makes a giant unprecedented mistake and loses 100% of his support" isn't a plausible scenario) - jstohler, on 05/03/2008, -9/+164I ask this question to everyone who tells me they support Clinton, and so far no one has an answer. It's a willful suspension of disbelief on the part of everyone who supports her.
- tcbishop12, on 05/03/2008, -8/+111There is no scenario save and except for the suspension of the rules and the utter abandonment of good conscience (not to mention common sense).
- tcbishop12, on 05/03/2008, -9/+102As James Zogsby noted earlier: There is a bizarre, and even tragic, unreality to the continuing drama playing out in the Democratic primary. As noted by this article, partly due to the tenacity and temerity of the Clintons, and mostly due to the fantasy speculation being fueled by the media, this election is being presented as close and not yet over. But it is over. Dragging it out any longer only serves to indulge the Clintons' narcissism, while damaging the Democratic party's chances for victory in November. The only way she could possibly win is either by changing the rules of the game in Michigan and Florida, or convincing a substantial number of superdelegates to cast their ballots for her - overturning the results of the elections to date. That’s clearly not what has been occurring with the superdelegates, who continue to wise up and choose Obama. But either of the two now remote scenarios by which Clinton could possibly steal the nomination would cause a devastating upheaval within the party. It is over, Stephanopoulis, ABC. It is over CNN. MSNBC and Olbermann know it is over, as do most knowledgeable reporters not actively attempting to game the system. Obama will be the nominee. Hillary Clinton's PA primary victory gave her campaign just enough gas to keep from collapsing but without diminishing Barack Obama's chances of ultimately capturing the Democratic presidential nomination. Clinton needed a landslide of more than 20 points to change the shape of the race. Obama's team expects to recoup any loss of delegates in PA with the results in North Carolina, even if Indiana is close. Six contests will remain and the chances of Clinton's winning enough of the remaining delegates to overtake Obama appears out of the question. James Zogsby also stated: "The numbers are clear: Clinton cannot surpass Obama's elected delegate total in the contests that remain. It is not unlike a fifty-two lap motor race. In the first forty-three laps, Obama has passed her twice, and built up a lead that is insurmountable. Now, in the midst of the 44th lap, it only appears to be close, but it is not." It is over, Hillary. Get over it.
- inactive, on 05/03/2008, -8/+98The problem is that the majority of Clinton's voters aren't paying attention to what is actually happening. The people who are actually paying attention tend to go Obama. The exit polls show this.
- EnviroChem, on 05/22/2009, -5/+93In many ways what I think we are seeing from the Clinton camp is an all out attempt to destroy Obama to the point that even if Hillary can't win the nomination, Obama can't win the general election. Rev. Wright's actions were part of this.
The LA Times pointed out that Rev. Wright's appearance at the National Press Club was set up by Rev. Dr. Barbara Reynolds who is a long time staunch supporter of Hillary Clinton. Also, Rev. Wright is a long time supporter of the Clintons and even visited them when they were in the White House. To make sure the National Press Club event was totally over the top, Rev. Wright was even flanked by members of the Nation of Islam. There can be no other conclusion than this event was intentionally designed to do maximum damage to Obama. Why would Rev. Wright do this to his own parishioner?
1) He wanted his 15 minutes of fame turned into 30 minutes.
2) He is more loyal to the Clintons.
3) "Jeremiah Wright needs for Obama to lose so he can justify his anger, his hostile bitterness against the United States of America," (Huckabee statement after Wright's appearance at the National Press Club).
See:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/04 ...
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/20/phot ... (includes photo of Wright and Bill Clinton shaking hands in White House)
http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/archi ... (Huckabee statements on Wright's National Press Club appearance)
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/shared-blogs/ajc/ ... (Huckabee defending Rev. Wright's "fiery sermons" prior to the National Press Club appearance) - greenm1981, on 05/03/2008, -8/+77Well, if the Clintons are capable of exerting influence on the media, which I believe they are, this explains the sudden relentless attack on Obama by the media.
- Turbojugend27, on 05/03/2008, -12/+79Here's proof she has a chance, you dumb ***** elected and then re-elected Bush. So anything is possible.
- ggnictee, on 05/03/2008, -7/+74Ok just stick with me here: Clinton is trying to help Obama. See: by making insane attacks on him (many fueled and provided by her doppelgangers on the equally wako end of the conservative side) she's doing two things: 1) in the more controlled environment (of my theory) with a fellow Dem. saying he's muslim or unamerican or whatever they ('the dems') can control the flood gates better. 2) When he wins and his opponents bring the same attacks it will allow him to laugh it off with "we already went over this"
Also (and I think this is very important) as long as there is a Clinton in the race the wako right (not the rational moderate republicans (yes i know you're out there, this isn't you.)) but the lunatic fringe: they'll be at least a little distracted. Thus theoretically giving Obama a little more room to manuver during the primaries.
shrug, either that or she is insane and all she can see is the office and nothing else and maybe she really thinks she can pull it out. But I like my way better because not only does it have intrigue and danger (Bond style) but it also would mean that the Clintons were taking a huge personal and professional hit to help Obama. And I'd rather people be nice. - thirdcoastborn, on 05/03/2008, -10/+75I only hear crickets coming from the clinton supporters. What, no answers at all? Not one?
- jstohler, on 05/03/2008, -7/+62So, they ignore the will of the majority of voters and install their preferred candidate. How do you predict that will go over?
- inactive, on 05/03/2008, -2/+39Hillary is waiting for a "miracle" scandal which would make Obama (er...) "unelectable". I'm sure there's more crap Rev Wright stylee coming for him til Novemeber.
- goomba323, on 05/03/2008, -5/+39McCain will ONLY win against Obama if Americans are either a.) inherently racist or b.) retarded.
oh *****.......you might actually have a point. - tcbishop12, on 05/03/2008, -4/+36I opt for the bit where Hillary is an insanely mad - but shrewd -- power seeker, who cares little for anyone or anything beyond her own ambition.
- inactive, on 05/03/2008, -4/+34I only have one problem with your post. Please use paragraphs, It's difficult to read.
- inactive, on 05/03/2008, -7/+37Frankly, if it comes down to it, and it's Hillary vs. McCain, I'm voting for McCain. And it's not simply a matter of spite, either. After the absolutely appalling campaign she's run so far, between her low, dirty tactics and her bouts of sheer insanity (sniper fire, NAFTA, etc.), I simply cannot support her, and though I disagree with McCain on virtually everything, I have more respect for the man than I ever will for that psychotic bitch.
- brad3378, on 05/03/2008, -11/+41http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results ...
Hillary needs roughly 450 more delegates to win.
Obama needs about 300 more delegates to win.
now bury me. - rficwizard, on 05/03/2008, -3/+30Go Hillary! Go McCain! And don't come back!
- toshibu, on 05/03/2008, -1/+28Please cite your sources as to why Obama "NO CHANCE of winning in November". If it's so obvious that you must SCREAM then prove it.
- SwedishNinja, on 05/03/2008, -5/+29I think it's cute how the media keeps perpetuating the myth that Hillary is strong with "blue collar union workers" and will win them every time. The only group Hillary can consistently win are old people and women.
- bysin, on 05/03/2008, -4/+27You gotta pick a side on this one.. Obama is either Islamic or he has a crazy christian paster, you cant claim both.
- inactive, on 05/03/2008, -3/+26God it's so true. I asked this very same question on digg about a week and a half ago in a very polite, thought out way and I didn't get a response from anyone saying how it could happen. A couple arguments about how and why supers work but that's it. I even read a poll on Yahoo saying that high school graduates were more likely to vote for Clinton and Obama has a lead on college grads. So her army or voters or coalition whatever you want to call it are unfortunately uniformed and uneducated. Considering the last two terms of Bush, this is a dangerous combo in my mind.
- robdiggity, on 05/03/2008, -3/+24"... the rational moderate republicans (yes i know you're out there, this isn't you.) ..."
I know it sounds cheesy and corny and all that, but it really brightened my day to read this. We are out here :) In all sincerity, thanks man! - Mejari, on 05/03/2008, -1/+22More importantly, Obama needs like 30 or so more superdelegates to make it mathematically impossible for Clinton to win.
- Devotia, on 05/03/2008, -4/+24The only way the popular vote is even close is to count a state where only 1 candidate's name was on the ballet, and 2 where Obama didn't even campaign. Any other possible combination has Obama ahead by at least 200,000.
- alk509, on 05/03/2008, -6/+25Because he has to, obviously: Hilldog's whole campaign has been about a "don't vote for the scary negro!" message which, left unchallenged, would do a lot more harm to Obama. He can't afford to just pack his bags and let her drag him down without a fight.
- mattus, on 05/03/2008, -2/+21STOP SHOUTING. Oh, and stop being a moron.
- emjaymj, on 05/03/2008, -2/+21Ha! It really shows the Obama-haters are reaching when the best they can come up with is the fact that his pastor made a distasteful remark. You're totally right man! And a little birdy told me that the Clintons' babysitter made some anti-gay remarks. Well, not really, but it's just as irrelevant.
- InfamousAtheist, on 05/03/2008, -2/+20I agree with almost all of your post and dugg you up. However, MSNBC, even if they do know the race is over, love to hate Obama and are acting like there's still a chance for Hilldog to win.
***** THE MSM. The coverage is a joke designed to capture ratings, and that's all. They won't admit the race is over until they've sucked the ratings fountain dry. - SilverStandard, on 05/03/2008, -7/+25I fear Obama could be assassinated or Clinton has something up her sleeves.
- inactive, on 05/03/2008, -7/+25Obama dies? That's much more likely to happen, however unlikely it is.
- EnviroChem, on 05/22/2009, -2/+20If Hillary is so electable and Obama doesn't stand a chance of beating McCain, how come Rush Limbaugh and other "Right Wing" talking heads are spending so much effort trying to get Republicans to switch sides to vote for Hillary in the primaries???
- orangedude, on 05/03/2008, -5/+23He asked for a "plausible" scenario.
- KyleGoetz, on 05/03/2008, -1/+18Your comment is the kind of dickishness that alienates Clinton supporters and makes them not want to vote for Obama. So kindly shut the ***** up and stop splitting up the party by taunting Clinton supporters. Rise above it and show that Obama supporters (and, by some weird psychological proxy drive all humans seem to obey, Obama) can be gracious winners.
Otherwise, many Clinton supporters won't want to see Obama in Nov. win just because they don't want to eat crow. - PFinn, on 05/03/2008, -3/+20The popular vote of the democratic party dwindles down because of the outrage on behalf of all the new obama supporters who see that this is just politics as usual and decide not to vote in the 2008 elections...thus handing the election to McCain......
a decision to go against the popular vote in this contest could alienate an entire new generation of voters, then what happens in the next election? - zazzalicious, on 05/03/2008, -3/+19Plausible scenario: Obama is assassinated.
- Gerz1219, on 05/03/2008, -1/+174) Reverend Wright felt hurt and betrayed that Obama distanced himself from his pastor after twenty years. He began to see Obama as an opportunist who used his church to build credibility among the black community in Chicago's South Side, then disowned Wright and his church when the association became a political liability on the national stage. In private, Obama's campaign strongly suggested to Wright that he go hide under a rock until the second week of November. Unable to see the larger picture, Wright took this slight personally. Fueled by his characteristic narcissism and self-righteousness, Wright defiantly set out to inflict maximum damage on Obama's campaign, without really stopping to consider the harm he might do to race relations in the country (or to the prospects of the first credible black presidential candidate in American history).
There's no conspiracy here. Rev. Wright is a bitter, petty, short-sighted demagogue. If he now supports Clinton, it is only out of spite. - str1fe, on 05/03/2008, -8/+24BAHAHAHAHA, that minister is about the only baggage Obama carries. Do you want me to start listing Clinton's baggage?
- tcbishop12, on 05/03/2008, -2/+18Just to let you know,my friend, I did use paragraphs. When I went back to edit a comma, and resubmitted, Digg joined the post together. So it is what it is.
- kh99, on 05/03/2008, -2/+17There are a couple of things I don't get: 1) why does it bother anyone what the media thinks? If you feel it's impossible for Clinton to become the candidate, who cares what they say? 2) I don't know why everyone talks about "ignoring the voters". This isn't an election for office, it's choosing a candidate, and the party leadership has it arranged so that it's not dependent on the outcome of the primaries (however unfair it may seem to you). Howard Dean is the head of the party and he says it will be done based on who they think can get elected.
And franklymister, you've made you question unanswerable since you will no doubt simply declare any answer to be implausible. Here's one I think is very possible - the party leadership decides who they want, and they convice enough delegates to go along wit it to make it happen.
Don't take this to mean I'm pro-Clinton. I'd actually like to see Obama as the candidate, but I'm just not going to be stupid about it. - TheUserFactor, on 05/03/2008, -1/+16Throw out all the other arguments, and this is still a good point. After seeing Bush even be competitive in the first election, and then steal it, and THEN seeing Kerry piss away 2004, I wouldn't be surprised.
- repick3, on 05/03/2008, -4/+18I'd rather watch Rick than Fox >_>
- inactive, on 05/03/2008, -9/+23There are still 3 very good ways she can win/stay in the race
1) It is still very possible that superdelegates WILL overturn the majority vote and elect clinton for the sake of "electability", whatever that is..but don't pretend its not possible even with the predictable public outcry..
2) She wants to make sure Obama looses to mccain so it is more than likely she can run against him after 4 years, instead of waiting 8+ to run again.
3)Use the "nader effect"..run as third-party candidate in general elec' to make sure good portion of dems vote for her and not obama and..see #2.
I don't support any of this, or her, just saying... - life036, on 05/03/2008, -5/+18"We all know that the O-man has a hard time with difficult questions."
Elaborate, please. I would argue that he answers tough questions quite well, as opposed to Clinton and McCain, who conveniently choose not to answer them by laughing them off or chastising the inquirer. - pixelate, on 05/03/2008, -3/+16Alright, I'll attempt to answer it.
The author is right that superdelegates tend to follow the will of the electorate. The problem here is that he makes an additional logical step in equating 'the will of the electorate' to the built-up insurmountable lead of delegates and even popular vote tallies that Obama has by now.
The problem is, (and this is undoubtedly the case Hillary hopes to make) is that these numbers don't necessarily reflect the current national mood. And while it could be unduly influenced by things like the more recent Rev. Wright flare-up, the undeniable reality is that Obama has had slowing or stalled momentum for quite a while now, and Hillary is going the other way. This is absolutely an understandable consideration for superdelegates when trying to decide who will be more palatable in November. The fact of the matter is that superdelegates (even wanting to follow the will of the voters) could see Hillary with the momentum, some of the key states for the general election, better numbers among independents (depending on which polls you're looking at) and believe they are following the will of the voters by choosing Hillary. That's how close this thing is.
/Obama supporter. - goomba323, on 05/03/2008, -2/+15I wanna slap Hillary every time I hear her include the Michigan votes in her popular vote count.
- dannyboy3020, on 05/03/2008, -0/+12Unfortunately, women and old people are pretty damn big groups.
- joeanon, on 05/03/2008, -6/+18If the media tell the people Clinton is the top candidate, and the people continue to tune in, then the media will effectively re-educate the people.
It's happening right before your eyes.
Hey Hilary may be dirty, but damn the Clinton's don't go down without a fight.
If Hilary had ANY good ideas, I'd pick her over Obama, but the reality is, they all suck.
No ideas = NO change. - quiksliver, on 05/03/2008, -2/+14maybe thats the unintended consequence of her being in the race, but Clinton wants to win, period and she will do anything to get it
- FlaG8r, on 05/03/2008, -12/+24Of course Hillary is much more electable than Obama even though he has more delegates and votes and blew away every record for fund raising. Who doesn't understand that logic?
-
Show 51 - 100 of 552 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is