Florida

[camsmith]

If Rudy drops out, Huckabee stays in... its probably over for Romney.

Update:

9:10PM - A Mitt Romney spokesman tells RCP that the campaign has still not made a decision about television advertising in February 5 states. With six days to go until polls open, isn't that something he ought to take care of? We wonder, how damaging is a Florida loss to Romney? Has Romney held off on investing more in his campaign because he's re-evaluating, like he did before his Michigan win, and wondering whether the campaign is still worth it? - REID WILSON

http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2008/01/fl_primary_election_thread.html

 

[Fevola4God]

It looks like McCain will end up with the nomination. Surely this will influence the Democrats. They would be insane to pick Hillary over Obama to run against McCain.

 

[Dippers Donuts]

Exit polls that I've seen show the Cuban-Americans and Seniors vote is going to McCain.

Strangely voters who had the economy as the leading issue went with McCain by 4% (dont know how that works?). Military families are split between the two.

Those who said immigration was the leading issue went overwhelmingly with Romney.

Something I have said for a long time occurred again today. Evangelicals dont mind voting for Romney. Again he smashed Huckabee among Evangelicals.

http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/01/29/early-exit-polls-seniors-and-hispanics-strong-for-mccain/

Nowhere on that link does it say evangelicals voted for Romney (in any case you seem to misunderstand the point I have long made - a sizeable percentage of evangelicals will not vote for Romney because of his mormonism). "Conservative" does not necessarily mean evangelical.

Anyway, looks like McCain is the man for the GOP as I thought would happen.
Dems just have to make sure it is Obama who goes up against him.

 

[evo]

Yep. I'm going for Romney too. McCain is too electable.

McCain is the only guy who can conceivably beat Clinton out of the whitehouse,and even his chances are mighty slim.

It's 4 years of Billary ahead,I'm already resigned to it.

 

[camsmith]

McCain is the only guy who can conceivably beat Clinton out of the whitehouse,and even his chances are mighty slim.

It's 4 years of Billary ahead,I'm already resigned to it.

I know these polls are probably too early to be accurate. But:

RCP Average

McCain 46.3 v Hillary 46.2 v Undecided 5.8 = McCain +0.1

 

[evo]

Cam-If betfair is anything to go,and it invariably is,Romney is gawn.

Better get on the McCain bandwagon dude.

 

[Dippers Donuts]

McCain is the only guy who can conceivably beat Clinton out of the whitehouse,and even his chances are mighty slim.

It's 4 years of Billary ahead,I'm already resigned to it.

I'm not so sure about that.
Thanks to Bill's efforts, her core constituency is rapidly being reduced to the feminazis, which won't be enough to get her the democratic nomination.

 

[camsmith]

Cam-If betfair is anything to go,and it invariably is,Romney is gawn.

Better get on the McCain bandwagon dude.

Yeah FL really hurt him, as I've said in this thread. Looks hard for him now.

Still, not many people picked him to be the main challenger to whoever the leading candidate was. He's done pretty well.

Dont think I could ever get on the McCain bandwagon, I agree with him on everything he says regarding Iraq but cant stand him rabbiting on about global warming. So I guess like the lefties who would support Hillary "if they had to" I'd support McCain "if I had to".

 

[DaveW]

Cam-If betfair is anything to go,and it invariably is

I'd love to know where they had McCain October/November-ish.

 

[evo]

Knowing when to use it is the key Dave.

Mark my words McCain is an absolute monty for the Reps and Billary's going to the oval office.

 

[Elle]

Knowing when to use it is the key Dave.

Mark my words McCain is an absolute monty for the Reps and Billary's going to the oval office.

I wouldn't mark it in cement. Are you factoring in Bloomberg, Nader, and Diebold?

 

[Hawkamania!]

I wouldn't mark it in cement. Are you factoring in Bloomberg, Nader, and Diebold?

The Diebold (Premier Election Solutions) Machines were a help to Billary in New Hampshire.

Ralph Nader will run if Hillary is the dem nomination. The man knows evil when he sees it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Nader
http://wapedia.mobi/en/Ralph_Nader

 

[GuruJane]

Stunning win for McCain. Who would have thought 5 points in an all Repub primary.

The Repub right are gagging. Hannity's face is getting longer and longer.

Mcain will give this a real shake, Evo, mark my words!

 

[KissStephanie]

Yes, well the Clintons aren't above getting some cheaply won delegates without a fight

Cheaply? Is that how some Obama supporters refer to the people of the fourth most populated state, and probably the key state in November? The Democrats in Florida voted in good faith with the hope that their voice will be heard, and there is a good chance that it still will be.

trying to play the "good guy" by saying "Florida matters to us" when she suddenly needs some momentum after a loss in S.C.

What do you mean by "good guy?" Florida is one of the most important states. You don't agree? Of course some momentum and free national media coverage doesn't hurt, but those delegates still may play a role.

It will be interesting to see how she responds to Barack's offer of a fair contest held after Super Tuesday sometime, where the candidates can actually campaign like a regular primary.

I can't comment because I haven't heard anything about this offer. I must have missed it, so can you show me a link so I could read about it and reply please? I did a search for it and couldn't find anything.

She made no such wishes for these delegates to be restored while contesting the early primaries, why do you think that is??

Of course not because the immediate primaries were the focus of course. It was always one step at a time. Focus on Iowa, and then NH, and then NV, and then SC, and then think of FL, so it was at that time that the delegates became an issue.

Obviously it would of hurt her and probably lost her New Hampshire who take their place in the primary process very seriously.

That appears to be just your opinion, but in reality the people of NH did not want to see any campaigning in Florida, and nobody campaigned there, so she held up her bargain to NH.

I think he did spend a fair bit of time and money in New Hampshire, though he performed so humiliatingly there that his campaign downplayed it.

Rudy Giuliani is a laughing-stock of a politician in almost every possible way, and his campaign has been an absolutely joke from the moment that Pat Robertson endorsed him. He had absolutely no right to be thinking that he could run for president. I do recall him campaigning in NH though and spending a lot of it arguing with Romney about who is tougher regarding the border fence. An issue that he didn't even care about until an advisor told him that Republican voters care.

As it turned out, the people of NH did not care, and he ran away from the state and headed to FL when McCain was doing do well in the polls there. It would have to be one of the worst campaigns ever run from one of the least qualified candidates ever, and despite all of the money and time spent, Republicans in FL were able to see the person that he truly is. I pity John McCain for receiving what should be an endorsement from him later today.

Hillary making her "victory" speech. How desperate.

How is it desperate? She has an overall delegate lead, and has won two states previously, and she has strong numbers in key Super Tuesday states. That's not the sign of a desperate candidate. It was big result to out poll every other candidate from either party in a massively important battleground state, and when it costs so much to advertise, it is important to receive free national coverage when possible, and her time on air last night was certainly a lot more than a 30 second television commercial. Most importantly, she has the buffer of the FL delegates up her sleeve if needed, because I'm sure she could have them legally restored under Constitutional law if they made the difference for her. It's definitely better to win in FL, even under the circumstances, than not.

I wouldn't mark it in cement. Are you factoring in Bloomberg, Nader, and Diebold?

How are those three going to make a difference to who the Democrats and the GOP nominate?

If Bloomberg does get involved after the Democratic and GOP candidates are nominated, people don't know anything about him outside NY, and New Yorkers don't even want him involved. I don't think that any of those three would hurt any particular candidate to any great extent. In fact, in a Clinton v. McCain contest, he could hurt McCain in a number of 'purple' states, as much as he could hurt Clinton.

 

[Hawkamania!]

So this is the scenario involving Florida and Michigan for the dems.

Both states moved their primaries ahead against the wishes of the majority of dems around the USA. It was decided that if they did this, they would be stripped of their delegates by a majority of dems (note majority). The candidates agreed with a pledge not to campaign in any state that moves their primary/caucus ahead.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/02/u...ad36488d3&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

Three of the major Democratic presidential candidates on Saturday pledged not to campaign in Florida, Michigan and other states trying to leapfrog the 2008 primary calendar, a move that solidified the importance of the opening contests of Iowa and New Hampshire.

Hours after Senator Barack Obama of Illinois and former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina agreed to sign a loyalty pledge put forward by party officials in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York followed suit. The decision seemed to dash any hopes of Mrs. Clinton relying on a strong showing in Florida as a springboard to the nomination.

“We believe Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina play a unique and special role in the nominating process,” Patti Solis Doyle, the Clinton campaign manager, said in a statement.

Clinton agreed to this when she was ahead in the polls, but now that Obama is gaining momentum, Clinton breaks her word on this issue (no surprise here).

Now is it fair to reinstate these votes after the majority (note that word again) voted to punish those two states by stripping delegates? That is the key issue. If I was a dem in another state, I'd be livid that the rules were changed after the primaries were held for both states. That would be a slap in the face for any dem outside of these two states.

 

[FOOOOTY]

Cheaply? Is that how some Obama supporters refer to the people of the fourth most populated state, and probably the key state in November?

That's how i am referring to them, there was no campaigning, and no delegates on offer, so if the goalposts are moved after the fact, then they are cheaply won delegates, and if they are seated they will probably disenfranchise a lot of Obama supporters from voting for Hillary should she win the dem nom.

The Democrats in Florida voted in good faith with the hope that their voice will be heard, and there is a good chance that it still will be.

Yes, they very well could be, but it would be an absoloute disgrace, since you can't change the rules after the race is run, its not right, and you know it.

What do you mean by "good guy?" Florida is one of the most important states. You don't agree? Of course some momentum and free national media coverage doesn't hurt, but those delegates still may play a role.

Well im glad we agree that Hillary was after some free national media coverage and momentum, rather then actually beating her opponent's in a state on the campaign trail.

I can't comment because I haven't heard anything about this offer. I must have missed it, so can you show me a link so I could read about it and reply please? I did a search for it and couldn't find anything.

I saw it yesterday somewhere, hangon.... ah here we go.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/28/AR2008012802395.html?hpid=topnews

Obama officials said they would welcome an additional, DNC-sanctioned caucus or primary in March or April and would compete in such a contest.

Surely you can agree that would be fairer, with BOTH campaigns allowed to actually compete & campaign? Your response here will say a lot about whether you are a 'win at all costs' Hillary supporter or someone that actually beleives about winning on merits & issues, something the Florida voters can decide about with the actual candidates taking their message and vision to them with active campaigning.

Of course not because the immediate primaries were the focus of course. It was always one step at a time. Focus in Iowa, and then NH, and then SC, and then think of FL, so it was at that time that the delegates became an issue.

Sorry thats rubbish, she said nothing at all about the Michigan and Florida delegates before she 'needed some media attention and momentum'.

As in the article above,

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/28/AR2008012802395.html?hpid=topnews

Privately, several Clinton supporters acknowledged that she had openly embraced the votes in Florida and in Michigan, another state that violated DNC rules, only after the first two contests, in Iowa and New Hampshire, were over. Campaigning in banned states any earlier would have been certain to infuriate voters in Iowa and New Hampshire, who jealously guard their early status.

That appears to be just your opinion, but in reality the people of NH did not want to see any campaigning in Florida, and nobody campaigned there, so she held up her bargain to NH.

They didn't just want no campaigning there, they along with other big states were happy to see the Florida delegates stripped by the DNC for breaking the rules.

Florida were warned, they were give 30 days once the intial penalty was handed down to change their position and reschedule their primary, and they refused, you break the rules you should pay for it. Not expect to be 'let off or have special circumstances apply to you, because your an important state in the general election.

Far more people will be disenfranchised if those delegates are seated after breaking the rules and after no campaigning then the Florida hypocrites who thought they were above the rules.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/25/AR2007082500275.html?hpid=topnews

The DNC rules stipulate that states that have not been granted a special waiver must schedule presidential nominating contests after Feb. 5.

"Rules are rules," said DNC member Garry S. Shays, of California, at the meeting. "California abided by them, and Florida should, as well. To ignore them would open the door to chaos."

Donna Brazile, a member of the rules committee who argued for a swift and harsh punishment for Florida, said states' desire to be more relevant in the nominating process does not excuse violations of rules intended to make the system fair for everyone.

If Clinton had said she wants them restored earlier, i have no doubt it would've caused backlash in NH and thats not just my opinion as i have shown with the link above, it's simply her being two-faced and willing to say or do anything to win.

She has an overall delegate lead, and has won two states previously, and she has strong numbers in key Super Tuesday states. That's not the sign of a desperate candidate.

No she's not desperate yet, in fact probably still a strong favourite, but it was obvious that she was trying to get some of the spotlight back from Obama after S.C. and Teddy Kennedys endorsement.

It was big result to out poll every other candidate from either party in a massively important battleground state, and when it costs so much to advertise, it is important to receive free national coverage when possible, and her time on air last night was certainly a lot more than a 30 second television commercial.

It wasn't a big result because no delegates were awarded and no campaigning was done, as you point out what she got out of it was free national coverage.

Most importantly, she has the buffer of the FL delegates up her sleeve if needed, because I'm sure she could have them legally restored under Constitutional law if they made the difference for her.

Well, wouldn't that be great.. if your own party's rules don't suit you, goto the courts. The only fair way to seat the Florida & Michigan delegates is to re-do them soemtime after Super Tuesday with all candidates allowed to campaign and compete - if that can't happen, they should remain unseated, they broke the rules.

It's definitely better to win in FL, even under the circumstances, than not.

Yes, it is, but only for the cheap coverage Clinton got out of it, i doubt Obama would've been there holding a rally if he had won it, and i doubt Clinton would've been there holding one had she won S.C.