Are you really surprised? Most of the reputable polls were showing a 30 to 35 point win for Clinton.

 

yea i'm totally surprised. i haven't been looking at any polls or really following politics much lately

 

Barack is pretty much the nominee and could lose an important state for the Dems by 30 points. i didn't expect something like that to happen. figured the Dems would start to all support Obama now.

I refuse to believe those numbers. The Hard working white people of Oregon won't let Hillrod down!

Apparently, the women are shifting to Obama in OR....

there is movement in Oregon among women. 5 weeks ago, Clinton led by 7 among Oregon women. Today, Obama leads by 7.

Barack is pretty much the nominee and could lose an important state for the Dems by 30 points. i didn't expect something like that to happen. figured the Dems would start to all support Obama now.

 

Not in states like WV and Kentucky. With all do respect, but these are old and uneducated states and that favors Clinton. There is a racism factor too. Clinton could have dropped out 3-4 weeks ago and she would still win WV.

yea i'm totally surprised. i haven't been looking at any polls or really following politics much lately

 

Barack is pretty much the nominee and could lose an important state for the Dems by 30 points. i didn't expect something like that to happen. figured the Dems would start to all support Obama now.

WV was going red in 2008 no matter which Dem candidate got the nod. Same with KY, where Clinton will win by almost as much. Its not what I'd call an important state for the Dems.

 

Clinton or Obama, the only southern state that would be in play is AR, for Clinton. The rest are going McCain. The key differences between the two Dems are the rust belt (where Clinton would do better) and the west (where Obama would do better).

 

MSNBC Online Poll:

Did you anticipate Sen. Hillary Clinton's win in West Virginia?

90% - Yes. It was clear she had the support of the state's Democrats.

 

Do you think this win will give the Clinton campaign the momentum to go forward?

74% - No. The math is against her and Obama has all but won the nomination.

yea i'm totally surprised. i haven't been looking at any polls or really following politics much lately

 

Barack is pretty much the nominee and could lose an important state for the Dems by 30 points. i didn't expect something like that to happen. figured the Dems would start to all support Obama now.

From the beginning nobody expected Obama to win WV, nomination over or not over. The demographics favored Clinton heavily and she's still in the race. Even Obama said 20% would be a miracle or something like that (although he was just lowering expectations some). He's going to lose big in KY too. But it doesn't change anything, it's still basically mathematically impossible for Hillary to win, and he will get another blowout win in Oregon too next week.

WV was going red in 2008 no matter which Dem candidate got the nod. Same with KY, where Clinton will win by almost as much. Its not what I'd call an important state for the Dems.

 

actually from what polls i just saw on tv, Hillary beats McCain by close to 10 in WV. Bill Clinton won WV. I don't think a Dem has won the White House in like 100 years or something without winning WV. Seems kinda important, or at least it has been in past elections, for the Dems.

Edited May 14, 200817 yr by mr_genius

it's still basically mathematically impossible for Hillary to win, and he will get another blowout win in Oregon too next week.

 

totally. she's done.

actually from what polls i just saw on tv, Hillary beats McCain by close to 10 in WV. Bill Clinton won WV. I don't think a Dem has won the White House in like 100 years or something without winning WV. Seems kinda important, or at least it has been in past elections, for the Dems.

Just as important as Missouri, which Obama won.

it's still basically mathematically impossible for Hillary to win, and he will get another blowout win in Oregon too next week.

For all us sane people, it is officially next week. If Clinton wins Kentucky 65-35 and Obama wins Oregon 55-45, Obama then has 50.65% of all possible pledged delegates (including those who have not voted yet). Of course that does not include FL and MI, so Clinton will fight on to the end.

Just as important as Missouri, which Obama won.

 

i'm sure the dems want to carry Missouri too

Edited May 14, 200817 yr by mr_genius

Just as important as Missouri, which Obama won.

Clinton looks at it state by state while Obama looks nationally. With all do respect, but Obama wont spend a moment in WV. But he WILL go to NV, CO, NM, MT, and the Dakodas.

Not in states like WV and Kentucky. With all do respect, but these are old and uneducated states and that favors Clinton. There is a racism factor too. Clinton could have dropped out 3-4 weeks ago and she would still win WV.

 

Its no more racist than Obama getting 90% of the black vote.

Clinton supporters are claiming Hillary's speech tonight will be one of the best in the history of the United States.

Clinton supporters are claiming Hillary's speech tonight will be one of the best in the history of the United States.

Only if she concedes.

Seriosly, better than "Yes We Can", "I have a dream" and "we will go to the moon"? Yea, i doubt it.

 

Oddly, I wont be watching it.

Edited May 14, 200817 yr by Athomeboy_2000

Its no more racist than Obama getting 90% of the black vote.

Racism is doing something against another because of their race. Black people are not voting against Hillary because she is white. However, 1 in 4 West Virginians who voted fro Clinton voted for her because Obama is black. BIG difference.

Racism is doing something against another because of their race. Black people are not voting against Hillary because she is white. However, 1 in 4 West Virginians who voted fro Clinton voted for her because Obama is black. BIG difference.

 

No. It isn't different. Voting for someone because of their race is as bad as voting against someone because of their race because the same sentiment underlies both. One person is better than another because of their race.

Its no more racist than Obama getting 90% of the black vote.

/facepalm

 

As I got at in the other thread, this is wrong on so many levels.

No. It isn't different. Voting for someone because of their race is as bad as voting against someone because of their race because the same sentiment underlies both. One person is better than another because of their race.

Voting against a race = racism

Voting FOR a race = affirmative action.

 

That is my take and i am sticking to it.

Voting against a race = racism

Voting FOR a race = affirmative action.

 

That is my take and i am sticking to it.

It's not that either but it's a lot closer.

Clinton supporters are claiming Hillary's speech tonight will be one of the best in the history of the United States.

They are probably trying to get everyone to watch it so Clinton can plug HillaryClinton.com 7 times. She needs money man.

It's not that either but it's a lot closer.

right. Affirmative action is extreme, but it's the closest simple explanation I could think of in 10 seconds.

Voting against a race = racism

Voting FOR a race = affirmative action.

 

That is my take and i am sticking to it.

 

So if I am ONLY willing to vote for whites, I am not a racist? But if I vote against another group it is racist? That makes zero sense to me.

So if I am ONLY willing to vote for whites, I am not a racist? But if I vote against another group it is racist? That makes zero sense to me.

The black vote FAVORED Clinton before Iowa. She had over 60% of the black vote. So, obviously this isnt a "anti-white" movement. So, it's not a racist movement. It's something closer to affirmative action.. right or wrong.

Another reason to hate West Virginia for me.