The PA Democratic Party has an online poll here (self-selected, so unscientific).
You can register for the PA College Democrats 2008 Convention here.
8 comments:
Anonymous
said...
John K. says: Don't you just love those conservatives. They crossed over and voted for Sen. Clinton to keep her in the race. Now we get to watch the loony left bash each other and spend their money well into June. This beats watching monkeys at the zoo. LMAO
The more I see conservatives giving a yahoo like Huckabee 30 to 40 percent of the Republican vote AFTER the race was decided, the more I like conservatives.
Democrats are outnumbering Republicans nearly 2-1 in primary voting across the United States, and McCain can barely get a majority among the Republicans even after it was hopeless for Huckabee.
And that is before the Democrats use their enormous financial advantage to tie Bush (Iraq, economy) around McCain's neck.
There is much ground to cover between today and November, but any Republican laughing today is foolish.
Sadly, certain national commentators are suggesting that it's bad for the party that the Pennsylvania primary will have significance because it means Hillary and Barack will be beating up on each other into April as opposed to the GOP.
What does that tell you about the prudence of holding our primary so late? I suppose we should apologize that we think it's nice we actually have a say in selecting the party's nominee. Heaven forbid.
I'm not sure I buy into the conventional wisdom that it is bad for the Democrats to have a protracted nomination battle. Both candidates will continue to get free media, while McCain may well disappear from the headlines until summer. And there's a greater likelihood that anything scandalous about either Obama or Clinton will come out early, when it can do less harm. I certainly think Kerry could have benefited by being more battle-tested in 2004. (So to speak.)
A little trivia -- it was George H.W. Bush's victory in the 1980 Pennsylvania primary that helped earn him a spot as Reagan's running mate. The nomination was already sewn up for Reagan but Bush's victory demonstrated that he could contribute something to the ticket.
Which, if you consider that becoming vice president led to Bush becoming president, which led to his son becoming president, means we bear an inordinate amount of blame for the past eight years.
8 comments:
John K. says: Don't you just love those conservatives. They crossed over and voted for Sen. Clinton to keep her in the race. Now we get to watch the loony left bash each other and spend their money well into June. This beats watching monkeys at the zoo. LMAO
Thanks, John. I needed that.
The more I see conservatives giving a yahoo like Huckabee 30 to 40 percent of the Republican vote AFTER the race was decided, the more I like conservatives.
Democrats are outnumbering Republicans nearly 2-1 in primary voting across the United States, and McCain can barely get a majority among the Republicans even after it was hopeless for Huckabee.
And that is before the Democrats use their enormous financial advantage to tie Bush (Iraq, economy) around McCain's neck.
There is much ground to cover between today and November, but any Republican laughing today is foolish.
Sadly, certain national commentators are suggesting that it's bad for the party that the Pennsylvania primary will have significance because it means Hillary and Barack will be beating up on each other into April as opposed to the GOP.
What does that tell you about the prudence of holding our primary so late? I suppose we should apologize that we think it's nice we actually have a say in selecting the party's nominee. Heaven forbid.
I'm not sure I buy into the conventional wisdom that it is bad for the Democrats to have a protracted nomination battle. Both candidates will continue to get free media, while McCain may well disappear from the headlines until summer. And there's a greater likelihood that anything scandalous about either Obama or Clinton will come out early, when it can do less harm. I certainly think Kerry could have benefited by being more battle-tested in 2004. (So to speak.)
A little trivia -- it was George H.W. Bush's victory in the 1980 Pennsylvania primary that helped earn him a spot as Reagan's running mate. The nomination was already sewn up for Reagan but Bush's victory demonstrated that he could contribute something to the ticket.
Which, if you consider that becoming vice president led to Bush becoming president, which led to his son becoming president, means we bear an inordinate amount of blame for the past eight years.
Are you attempting to imply that Bush Jr. wouldn't have made it on his own?
(Hint: The answer does not depend on the definition of "it,")
Bill Cinton did not become the presumptive nominee until JUNE, so everyone just calm down.
Infinonymous, I agree with you wholeheartedly. This could be a very good year for the Dems if we play our cards right.
Post a Comment