What is Digg?125 Comments
- ncc1701, on 04/25/2008, -2/+50Clinton: "I", "me"
Obama: "us", "we"
To me, that says a lot. - diggeradoo, on 04/25/2008, -30/+67Jon Stewart tackles the spin on The Daily Show http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Jon_Stewart_on_H ...
- GhostyBoy, on 04/25/2008, -0/+25All the media who cover this election are seeing ratings they haven't seen in a while.
The truth is that Obama has pretty much sealed the deal, and that he will destroy the general. McCain has almost no chance after the damage that Bush has done to the Republican party.
But the media is trying to stretch it out for those ratings, and then they will try to say that the dem primary war "damaged" the party and now the general is really tight so they can exploit those ratings for a while. This whole thing is ridiculous.
If all the talking heads would shut the ***** up Obama would glide effortlessly to the White House. I'm not even a fan, I liked Kuccinich a lot better, but it's time to just tell it like it is. - KidTechno, on 04/25/2008, -6/+28hillary, just drop out.... all you're doing is hurting obamas chance to win....
- bozeKitty, on 04/25/2008, -2/+22This "if you count as I count" shtick is empty and pointless, but it's all Clinton has left. She can hang around and continue to embarrass herself on the off chance Obama gets assassinated or abducted by aliens, but there's nothing she can do to win. The 10% win in PA only gained her one delegate, and I think the $10m she raised off it was about equal to the debt she was carrying already.
- EnviroChem, on 05/22/2009, -2/+18Notice Hillary's statement about "more votes by people who have voted," her claim DOES NOT COUNT individual votes from many caucus states as these states typically break down their results by pledged delegates, NOT individual votes. There is no question that if the individual votes in caucus states were counted towards the overall popular vote, Obama would be leading the nation wide popular vote in addition to leading in the delegate count.
In Hillary's view of things caucus states should not count towards who gets nominated because she can't win when the voters actually sit down and discuss the candidates before casting their vote. - orangefly, on 04/25/2008, -1/+13i think that's the plan man....
- Smiths, on 04/25/2008, -2/+13That's some A+ trolling there...
- x0rcist, on 04/25/2008, -0/+11Her statement about "more votes by people who have voted" do not count the people who voted uncommitted in Michigan because Obama's name was not on the ballot. If those uncommitted voters go to Obama, and keep in mind it was something like 40% still voted for him when he wasn't even there, Obama is ahead.
Hey Hillary, if you're going to count all the "people who have voted" then let's count ALL of them. - GhostyBoy, on 04/25/2008, -1/+11I don't really like Obama at all (he won't get out of Iraq, just watch), but Hillary is the worst candidate in the race. They made an agreement and now she wants to go back on it. She is willing to change the rules until they say what she wants them to say.
- tcbishop12, on 04/25/2008, -9/+19Brilliant, Diggeradoo. This and the Olbermann piece made my evening.
- colomboj, on 04/25/2008, -1/+10And since I live in a caucus state there is nothing that pisses me off more that the words "popular vote". Hillary Clinton argues that "everyones vote should count" but hay screw those caucus states anyway right?
- sugarazor, on 04/25/2008, -0/+8Except Olbermann uses ya know, facts.
- crombenevolant, on 04/25/2008, -0/+8Two months ago I would have agreed with you. Today, though, is a much different story.
The sad and awful truth is that McCain could very well win the general at this point. The animosity between Clinton and Obama (and likewise between their supporters) has gotten so bad that I know a lot of people who would either vote Republican than for the other (or not vote at all) if their candidate does not get the nomination. While I doubt that they would actually vote Republican, it is pretty realistic that they would abstain.
Bottom line is that through infighting, Clinton/Obama have turned an election that was pretty much a lock into a real contest. And that could swing into a lock for McCain if something hinky happens at the convention and primary voters feel disenfranchised...... - PhoenixAvatar2, on 04/25/2008, -0/+7Don't like political stories then disable the political category in your profile.
Digg isn't moderated past porno/illegal stuff. It's up to the users and the users want political stories. - geneticlone, on 04/25/2008, -0/+7Does anyone else feel like these are the presidential elections? I mean it's always about Obama or Hillary its like there is no one else running :D
- TheUserFactor, on 04/25/2008, -0/+6Hillary Clinton's remarks like "I am proud that I have received more votes..." are as despicably false and misleading as any in political campaign history. She's completely full of *****. Hillary Clinton supporters are this year's Dean voters: totally and completely out of touch with the mainstream and the big picture.
- flintmecha, on 04/25/2008, -1/+7Actually, Obama took his name off the ballot because he was following party rules. All of the other Democratic nominees at the time did the same thing. Clinton was the only one who didn't, in an effort to be sneaky.
- philwalsh, on 04/25/2008, -0/+6all this (that both olberman and jon stewart bring up) is so extremely in-your-face obvious yet it mostly goes unreported.
why is this? i really can't my head around how there are many things are just ignored by the mms. - snotrokit, on 04/25/2008, -2/+8She is working on 2012. She knows damned good and well she can't win.
- oeidesign, on 04/25/2008, -0/+5Olbermann makes an excellent point at the end of that video. As time goes on (and more people are informed about the candidates), Obama's numbers go up while Hillary's go down. With the exception of NH, I think it is a true and very telling statement.
- orangefly, on 04/25/2008, -1/+542....the answer is 42....
- kipmartin, on 04/25/2008, -3/+7olbermann is rapidly becoming my favorite commentator. hes right up there with stewart and colbert in the humor department, but hes also real analysis and opinion. hes making a difference.
- fani, on 04/25/2008, -1/+5All this is fine, but ultimately pointless. The ignorant mass of fools in PA and elsewhere aren't reading Digg or watching Presidential debates, CNN. All they watch is American Idol and other *****.
And they vote for her because she's white and women vote for her because she's a woman. They pick up little things and base an entire vote on that - eg. Obama's bitter comment.
KO, Tim Russert, whoever can yell all they want. Not many are listening. We're all listening on digg, but many here can't vote, many are internationals, many already finished voting. Its like creating a ruckus in a small park, where no one else goes, so there's no impact outside the park. - olik, on 04/25/2008, -1/+5Some of the blame needs to go to the Democratic leadership. Howard Dean has done a miserable job of managing this thing, assuming you can call sitting on his hands as management. We need a leader to step in and make the rules very clear or else this is just going to drag on. If Clinton won 20% in PA we would be saying she has a fair chance; if PA split 50/50 everyone would tell her to get out; it's no surprise PA came out 10% for Clinton, and if he keeps looking for a decisive moment in the future that will save him from having to make the hard decisions that political leadership calls for then he is quite simply not doing his job.
- azzhair12, on 04/25/2008, -0/+4~sigh~ just like Rush Limbaugh does every day for the extreme right to achieve the daily hard-on
- wild, on 04/25/2008, -3/+7Magic number is 43!
- kylere, on 04/25/2008, -2/+6If Hillary is the nominee of the Democrats then they deserve to lose. Vote Libertarian 2008!
- purzzzell, on 04/26/2008, -0/+3um - no, he actually hasn't - sorry to break it to you.
- JakobVirgil, on 04/25/2008, -0/+3her net gain was 7 delegates.
-Jake - StarlessKnight, on 04/25/2008, -1/+4The job of an opponent, of the same party, should be to show why they're better while doing as little as possible to damage the likelihood of the eventual, party candidate being elected come the General Election, whichever candidate that may be. Unless, of course, you don't support your party, which is all well and good for the individual, but kinda of awkward for a party politician. Probably won't help get the party backers to support them ever again since they do tend to work along party lines.
- defska42, on 04/25/2008, -0/+3You have obviously been influenced by Hilary's hype. Your 1.7% total doesn't include 4 caucus states where the popular vote was never released. Predicting popular vote count based on caucus results, the vote total is actually a 2.1% Obama lead, a spread of over 610,000 votes. That total still doesn't include Texas' caucus votes.
Furthermore, if you combine Clinton's popular vote win in her last three big state popular vote victories (PA, TX, OH), her vote spread was less than 550,000 votes. There isn't a single state of the 9 remaining (including Guam and P.R.) anywhere near the size of any of those (NC is closest and Obama is favored). Obama's lead in popular vote is insurmountable. Period.
Furthermore, POPULAR VOTES DON'T DECIDE THE ELECTION. Obama's lead is even larger in delegate votes (about 4%). Get over yourself.
Source: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/presi ... - jedmed, on 04/25/2008, -3/+6If Hillary wins the primary, I will definitely vote for John McCain or Ron Paul. Anyone but Hillary.
At this point in the process the DNC needs to know that a Hillary Democratic Presidential nominee could very likely result in the demise of the Democratic Party. At the very least it will undoubtedly result in John McCain being elected President. What a disaster. - wejmahtin, on 04/25/2008, -0/+3Don't be fooled. The shadowy puppetmasters are going to slip McCain into the office like they did Bush. Clinton is just making it easier for them by destroying either of our democratic candidates chances of getting into office.
- skipdog172, on 04/25/2008, -1/+4Damned him for following party rules!
- BinaryDelt, on 04/25/2008, -1/+3Keith is the freaking man.
- snareguy17, on 04/26/2008, -0/+2To *us, that says a lot.
- purewwfrage, on 04/26/2008, -0/+2***** that guy above me. fani, brilliant observation.
- MaximusD, on 04/25/2008, -0/+2I wish he said more about the metric for caucus votes, since the number of representatives is different from the number of people who casted ballots. But definitely the best debunking on MSM I've seen so far.
- Aadain, on 04/25/2008, -0/+2It's all about money (like most everything in the US). While the general populous views the primary as a close race that could go either way (it can't), they stay tuned to the news channels looking for results/information. This drives up ratings, leading to more money to the companies that own the MSM. Anything that shatters this perception of a close race would lead to a drop in ratings, and a loss of money. I wouldn't be surprised at all if all the news directors at all the MSM outlets have been told in no uncertain terms by their corporate offices to not run any story that proves Clinton can't win the election at this point.
- DEIx15x8, on 04/25/2008, -12/+14Don't comment spam your stories! You posted this story in that ones comments.
- infamousjre, on 04/25/2008, -1/+3Hillary ran unopposed in michigan. Obama wasn't even on the ballot and therefor could not get votes. This is the only reason she would lead if they were counted.
- crweaks23, on 04/25/2008, -0/+2I dugg you up. The more people that think that, the better for Obama. It's going to be great watching that flip flopper squirm in presidential debates... as long as it's not about the economy, since he'll just say he's brain dead about that topic so he can't answer the question.
- StarlessKnight, on 04/25/2008, -1/+3Seems Hillary doesn't share your sentiment, claiming she's got the upper hand (if you count FL and MI). Since she thinks its an important gauge to go by, why shouldn't KidTechno?
- StarlessKnight, on 04/25/2008, -2/+4News flash: The sun could explode tomorrow. Stop trying to use your "ESP" and we'll continue to watch as things happen when they happen.
- TheUserFactor, on 04/26/2008, -0/+2Aw, look at you, trying to polish a sentence up special just for me (and failing). Strike a nerve, did I? Answer me this, genius: how do you proudly tout vote totals cast in a state whose results you've explicitly said yourself "don't count", as Hillary has done? If I didn't know better I'd think she were joking.
- hinchb, on 04/26/2008, -1/+3You realize that over time in almost every contest that they've been in he has gained votes and she's lost them to him? You know, that point that he brought up in the video.
- sugarazor, on 04/25/2008, -1/+3I seem to remember people being unhappy with the last two Democratic nominees... which got us eight years of Bush. I'm no Hillary fan, but anything is better than the continued policies of the Bush Administration. Voting for McCain is just plain stupid.
- serif69, on 04/25/2008, -0/+2So get your tin-foil-covered ass down to your local voting center in November and do something about it.
- NonLeftistDiggr, on 04/25/2008, -0/+2Okay, I'll dumb it down for you, everytime I watch his show I get tired of listening to him endlessly drone on about other people's shows. I am capable of watching programs on my own and making decisions about them. All he does is bag on other journalists, Oreily is hardly the only one.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 125 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is