Democratic Doings in Texas, Ohio

Filed under:

Strange to say, every single Republican in the nation was rooting hard for Hillary Clinton in last night's crucial Texas and Ohio primaries. Half wanted her to win so there'd be a chance she'd actually get the nomination, seeing her as the weaker candidate, while the other half (including me) wanted her to expose Barack Obama as the general election weakling he is.

She whipped him in both contests. Republicans are still celebrating.

Clinton has now destroyed Obama in almost every major state except his home state Illinois, including New York, Texas and California. She's lagging behind him in the delegate count 1,451 to 1,365 according to CNN, meaning that only 86 votes, a thin 3% of the total, separates them -- and remember, the only reason that's so is that Clinton's party has refused to credit her wins in Florida and Michigan because those states fooled with their primary dates. Credit them, and she's in the lead. That can't bode well for Democratic unity in November, and could easily lead to a divisive and contentious brokered convention.

Emperobama has no clothes.

At 7:30 pm last night the Daily Kos, consumed with pathological left-wing denial, said: "Many of the early vote 'precincts' in Texas have largely been counted, and the election day precincts are beginning to allow Hillary Clinton to close the margin with Barack Obama. But a lot of the bigger counties haven't counted their early votes yet, so the margin could widen in Obama
s favor again."

At 8 pm it stated of Ohio: "As expected, though surprisingly enough, Obama is currently winning the delegate battle in the state, 32-28."

Then Obama lost Ohio, and the DK noted his campaign saying: "On losing Ohio, he said it doesn't matter if the campaign didn't win since a Democrat will win Ohio regardless -- due to the economic situation there."

Then he lost Texas, and the DK stated: "In both the Ohio and Texas primaries, more than twice as many votes were cast for Democrats than for Republicans today." They seemed to have forgotten that was because the Republicans no longer have a race (John McCain formally won a contest last night that had been over for weeks). But then they remembered, and said it was a good thing the Democrats still have a race (even though they'd previously said it was bad for the Republicans when they had a race) because this means George Bush will now endorse John McCain. If you can follow that, you're a better man than I am, Gunga Din.

Left-wingers are panicking, as they should be. The DK is babbling sheer unmitigated incomprehensible gibberish. Republicans are jubilant, triumphant. All is right with the world.

Social Bookmarking:

del.icio.us |

digg |

technorati |

stumble upon |

furl |

Comments

Aris Katsaris says:

"Clinton has now destroyed Obama in almost every major state except his home state Illinois, including New York, Texas and California."

Hmm, Washington? Missouri? Virginia? Georgia? Those all went for Obama too, no?

And "Destroyed"? A 51% to 47% defeat, getting a mere two more delegates or so, is "destruction"? Why are you so addicted to ludicrous hyperbole that simply makes you look ridiculous? She merely defeated him in those places. Most of Obama's victories are over 60%, most of Hillary's are less than than that (California was 52%, New York 58%, Massachusetts 57% etc -- in contrast Obama's victory at Georgia was 66%, Illinois 65%, Virginia 64%, etc).

The only place where Clinton "destroyed" Obama was Arkansas with a 70%. Unless you see no difference between "destroyed" and "defeated".

"They seemed to have forgotten that was because the Republicans no longer have a race"

Sure. Except that Democrats had lots more in previous states even when the Republicans did have a race. Not twice the number, but still much more than the Republicans.

Btw, I note this post of yours again has nothing to do with democratic revolutions, just with your ordinary Democrat-bashing.

Vova says:

It's delicious. It's the Iran-Iraq war all over again from the viewpoint of an American (vs. liberal).
Let the Hillbama fight continue for the good of the country. Too bad they both can't lose.
Capt. McCain is our next president. He will boot Putmedistan from G8 back into the stone age where they belong

Vova says:

Who knows, may be the patriots' dream comes true and we'll a brokered convention, a replay of Chicago '68 with certain elements of the society rioting in the streets--for every one to see what their party stands for

Aris Katsaris says:

It's delicious. It's the Iran-Iraq war all over again from the viewpoint of an American.

American conservatives think the Iran-Iraq war was a *good* thing? The war that entrenched two middle-eastern dictatorships (and thus kept the whole region a hellhole) for decades?

Horrific. But I guess certain kinds of people always think it good when muslims die.

Vova says:

Aris, where have you been since 9/11? You say that "certain kinds of people always think it good when muslims die" because Muslims belive it is good when infidels--that's us--die. Don't confuse cause and effect

Aris Katsaris says:

"Aris, where have you been since 9/11?"

I've been in the same ideological place of opposing genocide, where I have always been, and where I will always be.

"Don't confuse cause and effect"

Yeah, I guess, your love for Muslim deaths in the 1980s was caused by the Muslim support of 9/11 in 2001.

Or perhaps *some* Muslim support of 9/11 was caused by your support of Muslim deaths in 1980s. That makes atleast some chronological sense, no?

Since your love for muslim deaths, and *some* muslims' love of 9/11 are equally genocidal attitudes, I condemn them both.

Vova says:

I got it. The off-the-left-wall rhetoric. It's all out fault, we are such bad imperialists, and all those tinhorn left-wing dictators are there because we supported the wrong right-wing people. All we have to do is surrender, and the dictators will start loving us.
In the meantime I hope that enough political blood is spilled in the Billary-Hussein Obama fight so that whoever is the eventual nominee, the American Hero McCain will face a weak and demoralized opponent whom we know--regardless of the name--to be a kook

Aris Katsaris says:

Vova, I'm not playing your game of "who's to blame" in the first place, nor am I playing your game of "Why do we hate them", since I don't give a fucking damn of why you hate them, the same way that I don't give a damn of why they hate you.

I'm not a psychiatrist, and this isn't a psychology blog so that I need care about the deep-rooted causes for your respective bigotries, this is a political blog and as such I OPPOSE those bigotries and your genocidal attitude (and the Islamofascists' genocidal attitude too) without giving a damn about the psychological issues that have led you to such attitudes.

But for such overemotional conservatives as yourself, nothing has to do with right and wrong, nothing with ideals, everything has to do about your feelings. Your political attitude towards Islamofascism is all about your hatred, same as your political attitude towards homosexuality is about the icky factor. Nothing about right or wrong, nothing about common human values. All about your overemotional selves.

Vova says:

Aris, I don't need any excuses. One thing I know for sure is that I have nothing against homosexuals as long as they--any any one else for that matter--do not try to impose their lifestyles on us. Sexual preference is a private matter and should not figure at all.
Also, I am not a conservative, I am a Liberal. I just do not like America-haters and racists. I am against quotas and positive disctimination (the lunatic fringe and gutter fascists refere to it euphemistically as "affirmative action") because I am against any discrimination. Which leads me to my point: I am against Billary and Hussein Obama because they are emphatically FOR discrimination, and I find this repugnant.
Homosexuals should have the same rights as heterosexuals except that we should not know what people do in the bedroom.
Blacks should have the same rights as non-blacks and take same tests and have the same passing grades.
Women should have the same rights as men with the following caveat: if we legislate equality of sexes, women will have fifty percent of the money and all the pussy.
The Democrat party establishment is against equality and against America. But they have no problem with Islamofascism--they are quite willing to surrender, while Capt. John McCain, American Hero, never will surrender. And if things go well, he may even bomb Russia

Aris Katsaris says:

"One thing I know for sure is that I have nothing against homosexuals as long as they--any any one else for that matter--do not try to impose their lifestyles on us"

In what way has any homosexual tried to impose his/her "lifestyle" on you?

"Homosexuals should have the same rights as heterosexuals except that we should not know what people do in the bedroom."

Should not know? Do you mean you'd forbid gay people from actually stating they're gay? How freedom-loving of you.

"Blacks should have the same rights as non-blacks and take same tests and have the same passing grades."

Just like Obama seems to believe in an interview I read by him, I also believe that "affirmative action" should have primarily economic criteria, not racial ones.

Vova says:

Are you serious? "Do you mean you'd forbid gay people from actually stating they're gay?"
Why should anybody state in public what he does in the bedroom? Why whould one's eligibility depend on whether he is doing his wife doggy style or she gives him a blow job in the office?
Unless you a Democrat of course

elmer says:

Look, Aris is correct here in pointing out that for all the "win" talk by Billary, she did not win.

In Ohio, it was a slim margin.

In Texas, they are still counting the caucus votes - and Obama is ahead.

Texas has a "two-step" process - first, the primary. Then, in the evening, the caucuses, from about 7 till about 9:30 p.m.

Caucuses is where Obama excels.

Hitlery is a delusional liar. She has only blind ambition on her mind, and she lies every time she opens her mouth. She makes up stories.

Billary was 30 point ahead in the polls in Ohio and Texas. Obama cut that lead substantially, and it remains to be seen who really won Texas.

As between the 2, Obama, a graduate of Columbia Univ. and Harvard Law School, is clearly brighter - and at least he's human.

Billary's "experience"? Slate has already written about that one.

Children's Defense Fund? Legal Services Corp.? She was a federal public defender lawyer. What kind of "experience" is that?

She used taxpayer money to travel around the globe - for ceremonies. She took her daughter Chelsea with her.

That qualifies her to be commander of the armed forces? I don't think so.

And then she claims that she was instrumental in bringing peace in Ireland!

The Klintons love to tell big, whopping lies!!!!!!!!

She's been "tested"? At what - tolerating her husband's philandering for the sake of political power and money?

Just because you are married to an NFL quarterback doesn't qualify you to actually BE an NFL quarterback.

Aris Katsaris says:

I asked: "Do you mean you'd forbid gay people from actually stating they're gay?"

Vova replied: "Why should anybody state in public what he does in the bedroom?"

From his evasive non-reply, it's obvious his true response is "yes". Imagine "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" expanded to cover not just the army, but the whole of society.

You freedom-loving Republican you. Itching to forbid couples from kissing in public -- remind me again how very different you are from the Islamofascists?

Vova says:

Elmer, of course Billary didn't win. McCain won--partly because the Leninist and the Stalinist continue to bloody each other arguing who is more true to the Marxist dogma, and that's good for America.
Artis, since you know all about gays, who does the fudge-packing community support in this race?

Aris Katsaris says:

Vova, was that a lame attempt to "accuse" me of being gay? I'm not, not that there'd be anything wrong with that. :-)

I'm still amused at how a person like you who wants to ban people from kissing (and I also assume holding hands in public - anything that reveals homo- or hetero-sexuality) attempted to self-identify as a supposed "liberal".

Vova says:

Artis, you are no longer funny. I am not accusing you of packing fudge because it's not a crime. And I never suppotred a ban on kissing in public.
But McCain will be our next president whether you like this or not

Aris Katsaris says:

Vova, I asked you whether gay people should have a right to state in public that they are gay. You refused to answer directly, and instead heavily implied that nobody should have a right to indicate either their heterosexuality or their homosexuality in public. Obviously this includes kissing in public.

If you don't want to appear like a gutless chicken who just tries to evade the topic, state your clear position on these: Should gay couple be allowed to kiss in public, same as straight couples? Should they be allowed to marry, same as straight couples? Should they be allowed to adopt, same as straight couples?

And Vova, I'm not interested in mystical foretellings. We'll only know for sure in November who'll become president. On my part, I like both McCain and Obama, though I obviously prefer Obama. Among the current contestants Clinton's the only one I seriously despise and distrust, the only one I fear will be a catastrophe for the world if she gets elected.

Vova says:

Aris, this post is about the primaries, not about whether men should be able to get pregnant and give birth.
Life's unfair.

Aris Katsaris says:

Brave, brave sir Vova, bravely ran away. All hail this great specimen of supposed freedom-loving Republican who doesn't even dare state one way or another whether gay people should be allowed to kiss in public or not.

Way to protect human liberties!

Vova, gay rights are one of the many issues that distinguish Democrats from Republicans. It's also one of the things that distinguish Democrats from Islamofascists.

It's also one of the things that bring Republicans and Islamofascists together, obviously.

So, when one particular Republican-voter, namely you, implies that his vision of society regarding gay people comes close to that of the Islamofascists (that they must never make themselves visible), then I think it's worthy of further elaboration, to see whether I've understood him correctly.

It seems that I have. Next should come a discussion of what the legal penalty for open display of homosexuality should be according to your vision of society.

Vova says:

All men are created equal. Therefore all should have equal rights regardless of how they fuck, provided they do it without coercion and do not do it with minors. You seem to be obsessed with pederasty. What makes queer any different from redheads? Or bicycle riders? Or jocks? Why should fags and exhibitionists have special rights and normal people shouldn't?

idiot says:

"Strange to say, every single Republican in the nation was rooting hard for Hillary Clinton in last night's crucial Texas and Ohio primaries"

It's only 'strange' if you're retarded. This is like saying it was 'strange' for Britons to root for Stalin against Hitler

Aris Katsaris says:

Ah, I see we've gone straight to simple lying on your part.

Pretty sure I asked you about the exactly same rights that "normal people" have -- the right to kiss their significant others in public, the right to marry, the right to adopt.

You're still avoiding to answer these three quite specific questions. Backed to a corner you're resorting to simply lying.

"What makes queer any different from redheads? Or bicycle riders? Or jocks? "

One of the things that makes them different is that Islamofascists and Republicans don't object to redheads or bicycle riders. Nor will admitting to riding a bicycle get you kicked out of the US army.

elmer says:

Aris, this particular article is not about gays.

And Kim, when you add up all of the popular vote, Obama comes out on top so far - even if you include the Michigan and Florida non-votes, which then leaves them about 1,500 votes apart.

Michigan and Florida should not, of course, be included, because they did not follow the rules.

The Dimwitcrats are now talking about a possilbe do-over.

But remember - Hitlery was the only one on the list in Michigan, together with "none of the above."

And "none of the above" got 45% of the vote!

This year, the Dimwitcrats remind me of what Will Rogers once said:

"I'm not a member of any organized political party - I'm a Democrat."

Billary is treating the presidency like some kind of affirmative action program.

It's not.

Obama is treating the presidency like the presidency.

Of the 2 Democrats, he clearly is the better choice.

LibertyBoyNYC says:

Can anyone believe that the Democratic race has already been decided, within the party itself, and we are all being taken for ride while the Media enjoys a drawn out and well followed race to the end? I mean, this is starting to look like a pro wrestling match.

Vova says:

Aris, the article was about the primaries, not about perverts. Some Democrat party members even engage in zoophilia and coprophilia. Should they have special rights?
Es dreck! Do you need translation from Yiddish?

TrackBack

TrackBack URL: http://publiuspundit.com/mt/contages.cgi/684

Democratic Doings in Texas, Ohio

Filed under:

Comments

Post a comment

TrackBack