|
|
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
|
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
"Opus" wrote in message
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/...n2383247.shtml I love the presentation: Clinton, 45%, Obama, 28%, Neither one, 11%. Call me silly, but if you take 45% and 28% out of 100%, "Neither one" would seem to garner more like 27%. 'Course, I'm living in a fact-based universe. :-) (FWIW, no way in hell do I believe 45% of Dem voters prefer HRC. Thay have *got* to be making that **** up.) Joe F. |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
rb608 wrote: "Opus" wrote in message http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/...n2383247.shtml I love the presentation: Clinton, 45%, Obama, 28%, Neither one, 11%. Call me silly, but if you take 45% and 28% out of 100%, "Neither one" would seem to garner more like 27%. 'Course, I'm living in a fact-based universe. :-) (FWIW, no way in hell do I believe 45% of Dem voters prefer HRC. Thay have *got* to be making that **** up.) Joe F. Man, I hate early overanalysis of elections. I always felt that the analyses often swayed voters more than the issues. In this particular one, however, I was too distracted by determining when they chose to use the spelled-out numbers "three" or when they chose to use the digital representation "3". Sometimes they even used both in one sentence: "three in 10". Aren't there guidelines for this type of stuff? --riverman |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
"riverman" wrote in message
In this particular one, however, I was too distracted by determining when they chose to use the spelled-out numbers "three" or when they chose to use the digital representation "3". Sometimes they even used both in one sentence: "three in 10". I recently started trying to use voice recognition software (Dragon) for writing reports. It's actually quite good, but that number thing can be annoying. It seems to be programmed to use the spelled out version for anything less than ten, so if I dictate "three in ten", it will transcribe it exactly as you wrote it, "three in 10". Joe F. |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
riverman typed: rb608 wrote: "Opus" wrote in message http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/...n2383247.shtml I love the presentation: Clinton, 45%, Obama, 28%, Neither one, 11%. Call me silly, but if you take 45% and 28% out of 100%, "Neither one" would seem to garner more like 27%. 'Course, I'm living in a fact-based universe. :-) (FWIW, no way in hell do I believe 45% of Dem voters prefer HRC. Thay have *got* to be making that **** up.) Joe F. Man, I hate early overanalysis of elections. I always felt that the analyses often swayed voters more than the issues. In this particular one, however, I was too distracted by determining when they chose to use the spelled-out numbers "three" or when they chose to use the digital representation "3". Sometimes they even used both in one sentence: "three in 10". Aren't there guidelines for this type of stuff? http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handou...eslnumber.html -- TL, Tim --------------------------- http://css.sbcma.com/timj/ |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
rb608 wrote:
"Opus" wrote in message http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/...n2383247.shtml I love the presentation: Clinton, 45%, Obama, 28%, Neither one, 11%. Call me silly, but if you take 45% and 28% out of 100%, "Neither one" would seem to garner more like 27%. 'Course, I'm living in a fact-based universe. :-) (FWIW, no way in hell do I believe 45% of Dem voters prefer HRC. Thay have *got* to be making that **** up.) Joe F. if she garners the nomination, the red state south will become a neon bright crimson state south. folks down here don't give a damn if she's a capable candidate. the visceral vibes alone kill her as someone who can carry the south. imo, the dems only hope down here is for a new blood moderate... i'll be surprised if she gets 25% of the dem vote in nc, but the party machine and the general swell of humiliation, fear, and disgust with bush politics and policies might surmount even such a "wrong candidate" in nc. we'll see. i'm still on the obama train til we get derailed... |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
"jeff" wrote if she garners the nomination, the red state south will become a neon bright crimson state south. folks down here don't give a damn if she's a capable candidate. the visceral vibes alone kill her as someone who can carry the south. imo, the dems only hope down here is for a new blood moderate... i'll be surprised if she gets 25% of the dem vote in nc, but the party machine and the general swell of humiliation, fear, and disgust with bush politics and policies might surmount even such a "wrong candidate" in nc. we'll see. i'm still on the obama train til we get derailed... I gave Obama a few of my hard earned bucks the day his Exploratory Committee was announced. From what I have seen so far I can vote FOR him, not against whoever else is on the ballot. But I think his is an uphill battle. As for Red states turning crimson ... on election day, once a red state, even a pink one, it doesn't much matter if by 1% or 45% ... our system simply isn't suited to a modern world where the electronic media powered interaction of ideas leads to far less geographical uniformity of thought than 200 years ago. Hell, I hear there are even liberals in North Carolina now !! and I heard a rumor of one being seen in Texas. It ain't going to happen, but IMHO we need both Instant Runoff Elections and results based on the true popular vote, all voters matter not just those in 'swing states'. |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
Larry L wrote: "jeff" wrote I gave Obama a few of my hard earned bucks the day his Exploratory Committee was announced. From what I have seen so far I can vote FOR him, not against whoever else is on the ballot. Can someone give a summary of what is so liked about Obama? The only thing I know about him is that he apparently gave a really good speech at some event. - Ken |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
jeff wrote:
if she garners the nomination, the red state south will become a neon bright crimson state south. folks down here don't give a damn if she's a capable candidate. the visceral vibes alone kill her as someone who can carry the south. I believe that. Media polls & posturing be damned, I haven't seen any group of progressive or Dem voters who really think she ought to be the Dem nominee. Shoot, on the progressive blogs, she's somewhere around #5, depending on the blog & the poll. I have to think she is the RNC wet dream of a candidate. F the media coverage, they stopped reporting the facts years ago. The HRC & Obama frenzy sells ad space; but I don't believe it accurately reflects the mood of the Dem voters on either side of the Mason-Dixon line. I could tinfoil hat some of the possible reasons behind the media coverage; but I'll defer. Joe F. |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
"rb608" wrote in news:1169575551.381430.204290
@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: I could tinfoil hat some of the possible reasons behind the media coverage; but I'll defer. Yeah. Where's Snedeker when you need him? -- Scott Reverse name to reply |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
"rb608" wrote in message
news:Bdmth.13182$pb7.2379@trndny09... I recently started trying to use voice recognition software (Dragon) for writing reports. It's actually quite good, but that number thing can be annoying. It seems to be programmed to use the spelled out version for anything less than ten, so if I dictate "three in ten", it will transcribe it exactly as you wrote it, "three in 10". This follows the style rule The Associated Press promulgated (not necessarily first) before 1940. -- Don Phillipson Carlsbad Springs (Ottawa, Canada) |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
jeff wrote:
rb608 wrote: "Opus" wrote in message http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/...n2383247.shtml I love the presentation: Clinton, 45%, Obama, 28%, Neither one, 11%. Call me silly, but if you take 45% and 28% out of 100%, "Neither one" would seem to garner more like 27%. 'Course, I'm living in a fact-based universe. :-) (FWIW, no way in hell do I believe 45% of Dem voters prefer HRC. Thay have *got* to be making that **** up.) Joe F. if she garners the nomination, the red state south will become a neon bright crimson state south. folks down here don't give a damn if she's a capable candidate. the visceral vibes alone kill her as someone who can carry the south. imo, the dems only hope down here is for a new blood moderate... i'll be surprised if she gets 25% of the dem vote in nc, but the party machine and the general swell of humiliation, fear, and disgust with bush politics and policies might surmount even such a "wrong candidate" in nc. we'll see. Point being that she won't be running against Bush. And whoever runs on the other side will likely not position themselves in a pro-Bush profile. So if the repubs nominate a moderate to soft conservative that is not aligned with Bush, they'll likely pull enough anti-Bush red and blue moderates to take the election. HRC has too many skeletons and can't overcome her controversial position. Even a favorable press would have a field day with her. Obama doesn't have enough skeletons or track record even if he is on the foreign relations sc. Ill. legislature experience isn't gonna cut it, Chicago machine ain't what it used to be. He probably can't get the nod at the convention. So the dems will have to find somebody's favorite son or an also ran and we'll have to put our weight behind that candidate. |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
xorbit wrote:
jeff wrote: rb608 wrote: "Opus" wrote in message snip snip snip snip snip snip snip *SNIP* It's *JANUARY 2007*, goddam it. |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
On Jan 23, 3:24 pm, "Don Phillipson"
wrote: This follows the style rule The Associated Press promulgated (not necessarily first) before 1940. Yeah, it's generally the convention I use in normal writing; but when dictating an engineering report with a lot of numerical references, it's inconveniently inconsistent. Joe F. |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
"JR" wrote in message ... xorbit wrote: jeff wrote: rb608 wrote: "Opus" wrote in message snip snip snip snip snip snip snip *SNIP* It's *JANUARY 2007*, goddam it. Yeah! Ain't it GREAT! Op |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
"xorbit" wrote in message ... Point being that she won't be running against Bush. And whoever runs on the other side will likely not position themselves in a pro-Bush profile. So if the repubs nominate a moderate to soft conservative that is not aligned with Bush, they'll likely pull enough anti-Bush red and blue moderates to take the election. HRC has too many skeletons and can't overcome her controversial position. Even a favorable press would have a field day with her. Obama doesn't have enough skeletons or track record even if he is on the foreign relations sc. Ill. legislature experience isn't gonna cut it, Chicago machine ain't what it used to be. He probably can't get the nod at the convention. So the dems will have to find somebody's favorite son or an also ran and we'll have to put our weight behind that candidate. That didn't stop the Dems from nominating Carter and Clinton. And I imagine there are numerous other examples of candidates having no REAL presidential experience, on both sides of the isle. What will matter to the Dems is the public poll ratings of the out front candidate, IMMHO. Op |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
xorbit wrote in :
HRC has too many skeletons Yeah, for all we know, she's a recovering alcoholic with 3 DWI's -- Scott Reverse name to reply |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
riverman wrote:
Man, I hate early overanalysis of elections. I always felt that the analyses often swayed voters more than the issues. In this particular one, however, I was too distracted by determining when they chose to use the spelled-out numbers "three" or when they chose to use the digital representation "3". Sometimes they even used both in one sentence: "three in 10". Aren't there guidelines for this type of stuff? --riverman There are guidelines. Typically, you spell out numbers one through nine, unless they are part of a unit of measure. Numbers 10 and above are always used as numerals. Hence the three in 10. Numbers are spelled out at the beginning of a sentence. Tim Lysyk |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
Opus wrote: That didn't stop the Dems from nominating Carter and Clinton. And I imagine there are numerous other examples of candidates having no REAL presidential experience, on both sides of the isle. What will matter to the Dems is the public poll ratings of the out front candidate, IMMHO. Op Both were governors, not freshmen senators. |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
"xorbit" wrote in message ... Opus wrote: That didn't stop the Dems from nominating Carter and Clinton. And I imagine there are numerous other examples of candidates having no REAL presidential experience, on both sides of the isle. What will matter to the Dems is the public poll ratings of the out front candidate, IMMHO. Op Both were governors, not freshmen senators. And that somehow makes the two of them more qualified, in what manner? Op |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
Opus wrote: "xorbit" wrote in message ... Opus wrote: That didn't stop the Dems from nominating Carter and Clinton. And I imagine there are numerous other examples of candidates having no REAL presidential experience, on both sides of the isle. What will matter to the Dems is the public poll ratings of the out front candidate, IMMHO. Op Both were governors, not freshmen senators. And that somehow makes the two of them more qualified, in what manner? Op Certainly a disappointing question. The last elected president that came out of the U.S. Congress or Senate was Nixon and he was VP under Eisenhower. So he had experience in the executive branch. Governors have experience in executive government. Certainly a disappointing question. |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
"xorbit" wrote in message ... Certainly a disappointing question. The last elected president that came out of the U.S. Congress or Senate was Nixon and he was VP under Eisenhower. So he had experience in the executive branch. Governors have experience in executive government. Certainly a disappointing question. Certainly a disappointing response. So, in your opinion, the only person qualified to be president is a former Senator, Governor, or Congressman? Very disappointing indeed! It's no wonder that we end up with the likes of Bush, if folks like yourself are incapable of considering candidates with out prior political experience. Funny, I don't recall seeing such a requirement for presidential candidates anywhere in the founders written documents. Op |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
On Jan 23, 3:04 pm, JR wrote: xorbit wrote: jeff wrote: rb608 wrote: "Opus" wrote in message snip snip snip snip snip snip snip *SNIP*It's *JANUARY 2007*, goddam it. Not to worry, JR......I know these boys.....they'll catch up. Wolfgang |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
Opus wrote:
"xorbit" wrote in message ... Certainly a disappointing question. The last elected president that came out of the U.S. Congress or Senate was Nixon and he was VP under Eisenhower. So he had experience in the executive branch. Governors have experience in executive government. Certainly a disappointing question. Certainly a disappointing response. So, in your opinion, the only person qualified to be president is a former Senator, Governor, or Congressman? i didn't give any opinion at all, and I didn't say that. You are saying that. I only gave the historical perspective. I also said that the last congressman or senator elected to president was Nixon and he had also been a VP prior to that. That makes the last 5 presidents former governors. |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
Larry L wrote:
"jeff" wrote if she garners the nomination, the red state south will become a neon bright crimson state south. folks down here don't give a damn if she's a capable candidate. the visceral vibes alone kill her as someone who can carry the south. imo, the dems only hope down here is for a new blood moderate... i'll be surprised if she gets 25% of the dem vote in nc, but the party machine and the general swell of humiliation, fear, and disgust with bush politics and policies might surmount even such a "wrong candidate" in nc. we'll see. i'm still on the obama train til we get derailed... I gave Obama a few of my hard earned bucks the day his Exploratory Committee was announced. From what I have seen so far I can vote FOR him, not against whoever else is on the ballot. But I think his is an uphill battle. if we can get a strong voter turnout, particularly minority voters, he has a chance in some of the south. a brilliant moderate democrat who can find acceptance in a broad range of the demo party and independents. As for Red states turning crimson ... on election day, once a red state, even a pink one, it doesn't much matter if by 1% or 45% ... our system simply isn't suited to a modern world where the electronic media powered interaction of ideas leads to far less geographical uniformity of thought than 200 years ago. Hell, I hear there are even liberals in North Carolina now !! and I heard a rumor of one being seen in Texas. umm...if you get any names, please let me know. it's been mighty lonely here. hope to find you one of these summers when i'm out west. you can only hide so long. g jeff jeff |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
"xorbit" wrote in message ... i didn't give any opinion at all, and I didn't say that. You are saying that. I only gave the historical perspective. I also said that the last congressman or senator elected to president was Nixon and he had also been a VP prior to that. That makes the last 5 presidents former governors. Well you never answered my original question. Just because the last five presidents have been former governors doesn't mean that the electorate won't shift to a senator or congressman in the future, or some populist candidate who has never held public office, for that matter. It is my considered opinion that Obama is as qualified as any other person, who might be considered for the office of POTUS. History is replete with congressmen and senators being elected to POTUS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...l_occu pation Which governor out of the following lists do you expect to see in the White House in 2008? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Officia...can_candidates http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Officia...tic_candidates Op |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
..... i'm still on the obama train til we get derailed...
What are your words of wisdom about Edwards, Jeff? vince |
Dems give up hope of 2008 Presidential bid?
vincent p. norris wrote:
..... i'm still on the obama train til we get derailed... What are your words of wisdom about Edwards, Jeff? vince though i'm rarely short on words, i've no wisdom on anything political [as well as innumerable other things]. edwards is tainted by the last run, imo. great guy, capable, intelligent, works very hard at everything he undertakes. really was a good and compassionate lawyer. not as good a senator, primarily because he abandoned the job early to try to get a better one. i'm ****ed at him. i gave money & worked locally to help elect him to the senate as a democrat. we needed him as a senator, for the good of our state. despite his iraq stance, he had real potential to make a difference. he gave up the senate too early in his political career to pursue a personal and larger ambition that allowed his seat in the senate to go to Dole. perhaps he thought he might not get reelected to the senate, but i doubt it. nc needed him in the senate, not as a vice president. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:39 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2006 FishingBanter