You have to hand it to the Republicans… they’re efficient.
With Mitt Romney out of the race, the Republicans have their man. John McCain will be the Republican candidate for president. Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul remain in the race in name only, and I would be very surprised if they’re around a week from now.
So while the Republican field is pretty much set, the Democrats don’t have a clue.
Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are virtually tied with a long fight ahead. And even with Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania still out there, along with some smaller states, it’s entirely possible the Democrats won’t decide their nominee until their August convention.
One of the reasons the two parties find themselves in such different positions is this: in many states, Republicans use the winner-take-all system for delegates. The whole thing goes much faster that way. The Democrats, on the other hand, divide their delegates proportionally making it much harder for one candidate to get enough delegates to win.
This enables the Republicans to set about unifying the party, and plotting their strategy and message for November.
While they’re doing that, Clinton and Obama fight on – spending millions of dollars trying to take each other out – money that could be used to fight John McCain in the fall instead of each other now.
http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/07/does-gop-have-an-edge-over-democrats/
Anonymous
Didn't Ron Paul say he will stay in the race and continue campaigning even if there is only 1 person supporting him?
We will overcome the libfaggotry
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>667160 lol, Ron Paul.....
Anonymous
>>667166 That's a CNN poll. There are a hell lot more liberals than conservatives on the internet.
MagnumOpus !NX9RILq6kY
At least 4 more years of republicans. Eeeeep.
Anonymous
>>it’s entirely possible the Democrats won’t decide their nominee until their August convention Good. This means Republicans will have to spend twice the resources they usually do on their dirty tricks campaigns. I'm not sad about that. Unemployed floozies willing to lie about having a lesbian tryst with Senator Clinton for $5 million deserve their money too. It's pretty much the only time a Republican ever gives anything to poor people. Some "left" media pundits just don't want a Democrat in the Whitehouse. Not only that, they don't want one LOUDLY. Our party is so infested with DINOs that they have their own caucass. Welcome to the Big Tent. This still doesn't mean that we can't ignore you.
Bush Fan No.1 !8bwUGEbACc
Quoted By:
>>667169 I thought the same thing. I was shocked when I saw a "Who would win: Hillary or McCain?" poll and they were dead tied.
It must be that damned Lou Dobbs telling everyone to turn independent. Oh, and liberal Republicans.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>667177 Dream on, RepubliCon.
Anonymous
>>667184 >Good. This means Republicans will have to spend twice the resources they usually do on their dirty tricks campaigns. Obama and Hillary will waste precious money, time, and resources battling against each other while the GOP will shore up enough money and resources to battle any Democrat in '08.
See you guys in 2016.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>667169 >>There are a hell lot more liberals than conservatives on the internet. Lol, no.
The internet skews very heavily towards white upper-class males. These people are not "liberals" as a rule.
Hence Ron Fail's laughable presidential bid.
Anonymous
>>667190 Cute, but you ignore the fact that the rate the Democrats have been raising money has been astonishing compared with the Republicans. Even if it takes months to decide the nominee, whoever it is will be able to swiftly overcome whatever slight cash deficit exists between the two sides and pull so far ahead of the republicans in cash it'll be a fucking joke.
Anonymous
>>667201 >Obama and Hillary will waste precious money, time, and resources >Obama and Hillary will waste precious money, time, and resources >Obama and Hillary will waste precious money, time, and resources >Obama and Hillary will waste precious money, time, and resources >Obama and Hillary will waste precious money, time, and resources >Obama and Hillary will waste precious money, time, and resources >Obama and Hillary will waste precious money, time, and resources >Obama and Hillary will waste precious money, time, and resources >Obama and Hillary will waste precious money, time, and resources >Obama and Hillary will waste precious money, time, and resources >Obama and Hillary will waste precious money, time, and resources Anonymous
>>667201 It'll be hilarious if the Dems still lose the election. OH HAI, THANKS FOR THE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. SORRY THAT WE DIDN'T WIN.
Anonymous
>>667190 >>Obama and Hillary will waste precious money, time, and resources battling against each other Nah, they'll both turn towards McCain now and try to distinguish themselves from him in the minds of voters. The person who polls the best against the Republican will be the nominee.
As such, it's not a waste of resources.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>667209 >Nah, they'll both turn towards McCain now and try to distinguish themselves from him in the minds of voters. So I guess that means Hillary will win the Democrat nomination.
Anonymous
>>667209 What will they criticise him on? His desire to not cut taxes? His initiation of an amnesty bill? His support for the surge which has resulted in casualty levels in Iraq plummeting an Al Qaeda being driven back.
What exactly will they criticise him on to distinguish themselves from him?
Anonymous
>>667207 Not really, unlike Ron Fail, both of them are influential Senators with long political careers ahead of them who will be able to pay back "favors" for years to come.
It's sad that US politics works like this, but it does.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
If McCain wins, we lose. I'd actually rather take theocrat Hickabee than warchief McCain. But Ron Paul would be the best man for President.
Anonymous
>>667218 >It's sad that US politics works like this You could always move to Canada.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>667217 >>What exactly will they criticise him on to distinguish themselves from him? Good question. We'll have to just wait and see.
Until then enjoy "ZOMG! The nigger's gonna win" and "ZOMG! The cunt's gonna win" threads until August, with much lulz in the cumulative sense.
I hope Republicans have stocked up on Pepto Bismol after hastily picking some victory-repellent RINO based on 6 month polling data on who would stack up to X Democrat candidate.
Anonymous
>>667205 Actually I think it'll make the Democrats even stronger. Think about it, while the news media will grow bored of McCain now that he's the nominee, what is the endless coverage going to be? Obama vs Hillary. As long as they don't get to the point of shredding eachother so much that they turn off the entire electorate, the constant coverage and debates where they'll be smashing away at the Republican policies will be a windfall in terms of publicity. "Mac" will be grumbling and groaning to little groups here and there making bad jokes and generally putting audiences to sleep, ignored for months on end by the masses.
Anonymous
>>667225 You're not a Canadian and this isn't an invitation, I take it?
Anonymous
>>667236 No, I'm an American and I want liberal-fags like you to move out of this country.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>667217 They can criticize him for flip flopping on the Bush tax cuts, "Oh I hate em!" "Oh wait, I wanna be prez, LOL I LUV EM". Or how about "100 years in Iraq!"? or "Bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran"?
Anonymous
>>667240 You're a liberal if you don't like corruption?
Anonymous
>>667235 >Actually I think it'll make the Democrats even stronger. I remember a couple months ago when the Democrats said the Republicans are weak because there was such fierce competition amongst the candidates.
Do I smell hypocrisy?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>667240 For all the good that it does you. You know Americans can vote overseas, right?
The Democrats just had their Global Presidential Primary on Feb 5th... and Obama won.
Anonymous
>>667247 Define "corruption."
Democrats lost the House in '94 due to Democrat corruption.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>667248 >>Republicans are weak Republicans are weak because they nominated a Democrat to be their President. The man was almost John Kerry's running mate, ferchrisakes.
Anonymous
>>667254 cor·rup·tion [kuh-ruhp-shuhn]
–noun
1. the act of corrupting or state of being corrupt.
2. moral perversion; depravity.
3. perversion of integrity.
4. corrupt or dishonest proceedings.
5. bribery.
6. debasement or alteration, as of language or a text.
7. a debased form of a word.
8. putrefactive decay; rottenness.
9. any corrupting influence or agency
What is taking money in exchange for the promise of political favours if not a bribe?
Anonymous
>>667268 I guess you're saying all conservatives are corrupt.
And I guess corrupt liberals don't exist.
*facepalm.jpg
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>667268 >>What is taking money in exchange for the promise of political favours if not a bribe? If nobody expected political favors, nobody would donate... Republican or Democrat. It also diminishes the political influence of the poor.
This was why McCain-Feingold was passed by a liberal Republican and a liberal Democrat.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>667273 I'm thinking that you're a troll or you're being a wee bit retarded.
In case it's the latter instead of the former, I'll elaborate.
Person A says he doesn't like the system of political favours in exchange for cash. Doesn't mention any political party.
Person B jumps in and accuses Person A of being a liberal.
Person Fucking Awesome questions rhetorically whether disliking corruption makes some a liberal in an effort to point out the flawed logic in Person B's assertion.
Someone, presumably Person B, asks for a definition. Person Fucking Awesome gives one. You accuse Person Fucking Awesome of being a liberal (hint: he's conservative). Then we come back to this post.
Hope that clears everything up.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
I just realized that with Romney out of the race, that means Ron Paul and Huckabee will have more time to speak in future debates. That is, unless they have McCain speak the whole time. :/