Log in

No account? Create an account
05 February 2008 @ 09:26 pm

"12:15 am ET: ABC calls California for Clinton"

Eventually i'll manage to pick a winner in a presidential race. Hopefully this fall. I think the last time must have been Gore in the 2000 primary.

At least Obama has won lots of other states, and he'll still probably pick up a significant number of delegates here, but everyone will probably be talking about Clinton winning California tomorrow =/
Current Mood: depresseddepressed
Pavajmpava on February 6th, 2008 05:42 am (UTC)
Actually, if I had to guess, everyone will be talking about Obama winning a whole bunch of traditionally red and swing states - far more important then Dem strongholds, especially given the delegates are NOT winner-take-all.

I think it's good you are really into this, and I'm starting to be quite excited with Obama victories myself. But its not like Clinton winning is a bad thing EITHER, ya know. They both are pretty good candidates, Obamas just more inspiring and a little less squidgy, I think.
DonAithnendonaithnen on February 6th, 2008 08:43 pm (UTC)
Yes, i agree that neither Obama nor Clinton are evil, at least as far as i can tell at the moment.

And i'm not anymore into it this time than i have been in any previous elections. Well, okay, in 2004 i might not have been quite as excited by the time Super Tuesday came around since Dean was already effectively out of it by that point =P

(I think i still voted for him anyways in the knowingly vain hope that if he could get a decent third-place showing he might be able to broker some kind of deal.)
Geoffthegreatgonz on February 6th, 2008 04:18 pm (UTC)
Clinton had a heavy lead in the California polls until recently, which combined with the amount of early voting in California made her very, very difficult to beat, so her winning California is not especially good news for her (and if it was close, it might actually be good news for Obama)
DonAithnendonaithnen on February 6th, 2008 08:39 pm (UTC)
Yeah, i noticed that as soon as they posted any information about CA at all Clinton was at 60%+ and Obama at 30-something% with a 100,000 or so vote spread between them, which i thought was a little weird. Perhaps it was due to all the early voting.
Kirinkirinn on February 6th, 2008 05:16 pm (UTC)
Yeah, given the split-delegates that Dem primaries allow (thank the Universe for small favors of sanity), this is hardly a crushing blow. The delegate count right now looks to be 845 to 765, out of over 2000 needed to lock up the nomination. So Obama is still very solidly in the race, which is I think what he really needed out of Tuesday.

What really depresses *me* about Tuesday is the fact the McCain is no overwhelmingly winning the Republican delegate race. This is bad for two reasons:
1) His policies lately have struck me as Bush light. Ugh.
2) The media is infatuated with pretending he's a moderate, even though his actual positions are *hugely* conservative. This could make independents/moderates/undecided-but-pissed-off-at-Bush voters more likely to vote for him in the final election. Ugh.
DonAithnendonaithnen on February 6th, 2008 08:38 pm (UTC)
as far as (1) goes would it have been any better if Romney or Huckabee had somehow pulled ahead? Of course the McCain/Huckabee ticket that some people have been theorizing about sounds like the worst of both worlds =P
Kirinkirinn on February 6th, 2008 08:52 pm (UTC)
Well, even in my more cynical moments I have a hard time imagining Huckabee actually winning the presidency, so consequentially him actually getting the nomination would sort of be good. Many of his policy position are probably even worse than McCain, though, yes. Although he at least seems to theoretically be for helping the poor, which makes him less hypocritical than most vocal religious-right conservative politicians.

As for Romney, while I'd be horrified by four more years of any Republican, I think I'd rather have him than McCain. He flips his positions so much, it makes him seem less hard-core conservative. If I must have a conservative, I'd rather have a wishy-washy one, since he might be more willing to compromise and let some progressive measures through. Also, the press seems to have fewer illusions about him. Also, he seems more "attackable" in a general campaign, although not all the ways he could be attacked are ways I'd necessarily approve of.

McCain/Huckabee does sounds pretty horrendous, though. >_