Obama takes South Carolina
 

Here's an update:


Barack Obama dominated South caroilna primaries, 55% of the vote went to him, 27% to Hillary, and a miniscule % to Edwards.

Edward Kennedy has now come out to endorse Obama, which is making headlines around the news stations, as well as Caroline Kennedy.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/...ama/index.html



What's really amazing is how can the Clinton's really fuck up these many relationships? I mean, it's almost hard to reason with them being a democrat myself, I guess I feel better that the Republicans all hate McCain, so it's not just one side having issues. Fuck Hillary.

Kerry endorsed Obama as well, and a bunch of governors are going to tomorrow.

I wasn't planning to register to vote (being a Democrat in Illinois my vote is kind of worthless) but I will do it just to vote against Hillary, if she (god-forbid) wins the nomination.

P.S. If you live in:
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Kansas
Massachusetts
Minnesota
Missouri
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Dakota
Oklahoma
Tennessee
Utah

You should vote for Obama on February 5 (next tuesday).

True. I hope this endorsment can sway the shape of things as they sit now. Actually, I haven't checked recently but I think that Obama may be leading in Delegates ... not completely sure though.

Same here with Indiana.

Anybody watch the State of the Union last night?

Sure didn't. But Hillary somehow has the lead in delegates as of now, *(CNN guestimates their scorecard, so I'm not going to hold it against anybody). I just heard some of excerpts, and it's a nice sigh of relief that Bush has had is last state of the union, it's time for a change to this bullshit.

Hillary has a "lead" only because of superdelegates, who are important members of the Democratic party and act as delegates at the Democratic National Convention. Because everyone assumed Hillary would win easily and because she represents the establishment, she currently has more superdelegates "committed". They can change their mind up until the convention, though. Also, most superdelegates haven't picked anyone yet, and since practically everyone in the Democratic party now hates Hillary...

I'm very glad that Obama did in fact win the most states, as well as delegates. Hopefully those superdelegates will sway here in the next few weeks, we'll see. Also, Obama has been dominaiting the fundraising margain, it's amazing really to hear about how bad he's dominaiting Hillary. In fact, she has now had to borrow 5 million of her personal expenses for her campaign, which is funny considering the job pays like 400k a year. Odd math there?.. We'll see, this race could get quite complicated within the next few weeks.

anyone ever notice how obama kinda sounds like OSAMA heheh im so edgy

I have never in my lifetime seen anyone so gracefully speak about nothing so incredibly well.

Xenn do not tell people how to vote, you should vote for the person you think holds the same values and principals as yourself. And likewise do not vote because someone told you to, vote because you know that the person you are voting for will stand up for your own personal values.

Can anyone here name something Obama has accomplished in his life that validates his qualifications to hold the highest office in our country?

His incredibly well-run campaign, and success in the primaries? The system may not be perfect, but since that is the system we use I'd say that alone qualifies him.

The whole "empty suit" argument is just a non-conformist backlash against someone who has become popular. An argument could be made that inspiring speeches alone have an important effect. However, here are some concrete reasons you should vote for him anyways:

He was a community organizer (look up Project VOTE)
He was president of the Harvard Law Review.
He taught Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago.
He was in the Illinois State Senate for 8 years.
He has passed measures in the Illinois legislature to make the whole system more transparent (to make Congress more ethical)
He set up "KidCare" to get medical care for kids.
He has great judgement (see his speech in 2002 about the Iraq War)


http://www.time.com/time/politics/ar...704117,00.html

I also think it's notable that he has spent more time in elected office than Hillary.

To clarify, and add to what Xenn said, my point was that there are no specific requirements that need to be met in order to be president of our country. Were I 35 I'd say I was highly qualified to hold office. Much more than the blubbering moron in there right now.

I have to agree 100x over. I seen a faux interview on Foxnews? I believe it was where they had a bunch of airhead "OBAMA" supporters, if they even were and they asked the crowd to say what about Obama should make it where he should be elected into office, or something of that nature and none of them could think of anything. Ridiculous. They just picked the wrong crowd of kids, or the entire thing was fake.

All of the exit polls have shown that Obama's supporters are the more intelligent crowd, when in fact Hillary holds more of the hispanic and undereducated voters, that all have a tie back to Bill and want to get him back into the whitehouse, which I am personally against.

None of these things are of any particular signifigance, there's assloads of people who have accomplished mountains over that, that STILL do not qualify to hold our highest office. Nor does Hillary, but she's not the subject.

Adrenachrome, what qualifies someone to hold office, in your opinion?

Pro-gun
Pro-torture
Pro-ego
Pro-moron

Well, I recognize great speechmaking abilities are somewhat important, but I see a strong need for the person to believe in the constitution, and follow the philosohies of the men who made this great country possible, they fleed their homelands for freedom. Freedom from high taxes, freedom to practice their own religion, freedom to choose their own way of life. Just freedom from government.

They laid it out on paper, all of the things that were universally nessicary for freedom to exist, the most important thing to me is a smaller federal government. Mostly because when a state makes the rules you have a much bigger vote, when a state decides to do something you don't like you can move to a state that you want to live in. When the federal government bears down on the people you lose controll of the government, our government was designed to be of the people, not to the people. Competetion between states to me is important.

Foreign policy would be another important background to me. I don't feel that we should be involved in all these Nations internal affairs, I'm all for a big strong military, but not pushing weight all over the world, no sir.

We are not talking about senate duties, or teaching college students, we are talking about the Commander and Chief of the entirety of our armed forces.

Someone who is clear in their intentions.. Someone who recognizes individuals instead of special groups, I think group mentalities are a big problem.

I don't know, You are likely going to reply with some sort childish remark attacking me personally. If so, just save it that crybaby shit won't hurt my feelings.

I'd have to say, our current situation is still better than what we had 200+ years ago overseas, I wouldn't even compare it to being even remotely similar now.

The generalities that have paved the way for this country are not necessairly applying to today's standards. I'm sorry but if you can't notice that our society, technologies and envoirment is rapidly changing, our constituion should not be viewed as a set in stone document, but as a living document that should be ever changing to suit our needs and evolution.


Foreign policy? Foreign policy? Foreign policy? I'm so fucking tired of hearing about this. How much foreign policy did Bush have when he was reelected twice? You say that you don't feel we should be involved in all these "nations affairs" and yet don't mind that we're in Iraq trying to good-guy our presence in there, moronic? A strong mililtary is a good thing, but when you fill your government with leaders that are ignorant with their power nothing is going to go right..


Correct, which is why electing a female that is obsessed with power and uses the same dirty ass tricks of the other party, and you have a senior citizen with a grude being held against his captors from 50 years that he refferrs to in every speech, neither of them deserve this position. We need a level headed thinker who isn't going to put us into a perdicament that we are in at this current date and time.



It sounds adametly like you are describing Obama, not a flip-flopping pos like McCain.


Not really, I'm just tired of hearing the same arguments from the righty's, it's very repetitive.