Does Hillary Has a Chance to Snag the Nomination?

[Art Vandeleigh]

Any shops posting a number that this will or will not go to the convention? (IE, that it will or will not be decided before tht, either by one candidate getting the pledged votes needed, or one of them - Hilly most likley - throwing in the towel?)

My bet will be tht it doesn't go to the convention. But I think this is too general for any book to make a number on it.

Intrade has a contract available on whether the Democratic convention will be "brokered". It's currently being assessed at about a 15% chance it will be brokered.

In the rules of this contract, they specify "brokered" as follows:

"If the Presidential nominee is not decided after the first round of delegate voting at the party convention the convention will be considered "brokered" (i.e. it takes multiple rounds of voting by party delegates to decide the nominee)."

[imgv94]

[curious]

Billary will use every dirty trick in the book

You people know NOTHING about the Clintonistas if you think they don't already have plans in place to use every conceivable dirty trick to make the Clintonista first lady the nominee. They will use:
blackmail
bribery
extortion
murder
legal tricks
"suddenly" finding some serious skeleton in Obama ben Laden's closet

anything else you can imagine

[thegreatdiatchi]

Unless a real screwjob is in place I don't see Obama losing this primary. The worst thing that the dems can do is screw Obama out of the nomination too.

I think that Ron Paul can actually cost McCain votes if he goes on a full fledged independent/libertarian running. The Naderbaders won't mean anything in this election and Obama should handily get the white house provided he doesn't get someone extremely absurd for his running mate.

[curious]

Unless a real screwjob is in place I don't see Obama losing this primary. The worst thing that the dems can do is screw Obama out of the nomination too.

I think that Ron Paul can actually cost McCain votes if he goes on a full fledged independent/libertarian running. The Naderbaders won't mean anything in this election and Obama should handily get the white house provided he doesn't get someone extremely absurd for his running mate.

McCain will beat Obama.

[jjgold]

Dems need a white to run against McCain or it is over, many Dems are going to vote for a Rep if Obama gets nod only because he is black.

[willyback]

She’s dividing the party and locking up the presidential election for John McCain (Republicans Rejoice). Her shear determination to win and masterful skill for dirty politics will somehow (someway) get her the Democratic nomination…

But, she won’t win the main event. She’s alienating both the young and Black voters that “live and die” by Obama’s words of inspirational “Change.” She can’t win without their support (point blank).

It’s hilarious for her to say that Obama “can’t win the general election.” She has the same problems with many voters. There simply aren’t enough elderly white women to vote her into office. She needs the Black vote. She needs the youth vote. She’s phucking it up with all this bullsh*t.

[willyback]

John Edwards should have been the nominee with Barack as the vice president (bullet proof ticket). Then run Obama in 8 years (after whites get use to him). Guaranteed 16 years of progressive reform in the white house.

[ritehook]

John Edwards should have been the nominee with Barack as the vice president (bullet proof ticket). Then run Obama in 8 years (after whites get use to him). Guaranteed 16 years of progressive reform in the white house.

That would have been a winning ticket for thre Dems.

But I think it will be the reverse: Obama/Edwards

[willyback]

That would have been a winning ticket for thre Dems.

But I think it will be the reverse: Obama/Edwards

I agree.

[curious]

John Edwards should have been the nominee with Barack as the vice president (bullet proof ticket). Then run Obama in 8 years (after whites get use to him). Guaranteed 16 years of progressive reform in the white house.

Please son, put down the crack pipe and seek some rehab help. Edwards would have completely ruined the economy as he and Obama Ben Laden both espouse Jimmy Carter's economic policies.

Don't remember what the economy was like under Carter?
20% interest rates
10% inflation rates
10% unemployment
money supply so tight no one could get loans of any kind

Reagan saved this country from a full on depression.

[willyback]

Please son, put down the crack pipe and seek some rehab help. Edwards would have completely ruined the economy as he and Obama Ben Laden both espouse Jimmy Carter's economic policies.

Don't remember what the economy was like under Carter?
20% interest rates
10% inflation rates
10% unemployment
money supply so tight no one could get loans of any kind

Reagan saved this country from a full on depression.

Yeah... Reaganomics (genius economic policy).

Supply side economics. you produce a supply without a demand. Supply creates demand (since when).

Get you facts straight Curious. Reagan's economics policies were garbage.

[willyback]

And if you're talking about crack pipes than Reagan's your man. He oversaw the rise of crack-cocaine. Did little to stop it. Some reports suggest that he fueled it.

[willyback]

Just ask Freeway Ricky Ross.

[willyback]

Bush ruined the economy following Reagan inspired economic policies.

[willyback]

John Edwards merely wanted some balance: government regulation of business, workers' rights, strong unions, domestic manufactering, etc. All of the sh*t that made America strong.

[willyback]

If it's bullshit, it was probably authored by 'Curious.'

[curious]

Yeah... Reaganomics (genius economic policy).

Supply side economics. you produce a supply without a demand. Supply creates demand (since when).

Get you facts straight Curious. Reagan's economics policies were garbage.

Actually, they took us from the Carter disaster years of 20 % interest rates to 8% interest rates, from 12% inflation rates to 4% inflation rates, and from 10% unemployment rates to 5% unemployment rates.

Reagan also drastically cut taxes.

Most importantly Reagan made fundamental changes to fiscal policies (Reagan had a degree in Economics) which greatly increased the money supply and made credit available again.

Supply side economics refers to money supply.

Stop drinking the DemoCong koolaid.

[curious]

John Edwards merely wanted some balance: government regulation of business, workers' rights, strong unions, domestic manufactering, etc. All of the sh*t that made America strong.

It was the DemoCong social engineering experiments and onerous regulation that drove manufacturing offshore.

The United States has the most highly regulated society in the world.

Businesses must contend with over 15,000 pages of regulation in the Federal Register. Conflicting, obtuse, impossible to understand regulation.

Strong unions make businesses non-competetive in a global marketplace.

Manufacturing could easily be repatriated by creating an environment which does not punish companies for daring to be productive. The DemoCong could have pushed legislation like that through Congress anytime they wanted. They haven't even proposed it. So, what makes you think a DemoCong president will do differently?

[willyback]

Actually, they took us from the Carter disaster years of 20 % interest rates to 8% interest rates, from 12% inflation rates to 4% inflation rates, and from 10% unemployment rates to 5% unemployment rates.

Reagan also drastically cut taxes.

Most importantly Reagan made fundamental changes to fiscal policies (Reagan had a degree in Economics) which greatly increased the money supply and made credit available again.

Supply side economics refers to money supply.

Stop drinking the DemoCong koolaid.

Stop believing in that Conservative Think Tank bullshit. I don't drink Kool-Aid with Jim Jones. I look at the facts and assess the truth.

The entire housing crisis could be attributed to deregulation of business (courtesy of Ronald Reagan).

[curious]

Bush ruined the economy following Reagan inspired economic policies.

No. Bush the Elder sold out the Reagan Revolution. Bush the Lesser has continued the sell out.

Your saying this proves that you know nothing about Reagan's economic policies.

Both Bush the Elder and Bush the Lesser abandoned those economic policies.

The economy is in trouble because of:
1. Congressional failure to provide effective oversight of key industries such as mortgages.
2. Spending which is out of control, meaning budget deficits are out of control. Thank Congress for that again.
3. Trade deals which sold out America. Thank the Clintonistas for most of those. Especially the trade "deal" with China.
4. 500,000 workers being brought to America under schedule H visas, by companies who don't even pretend to find qualified American workers.
5. Failure by Congress to address the energy crisis. Instead they vote to continue the moratorium on exploration and drilling for oil on all federal lands and 85% of offshore areas.
6. Artificially increasing price of food due to the disastrous corn ethanol program. Corn ethanol is a financial and environmental disaster. Ethanol made from sugar cane can be produced for $1 per gallon. Unfortunately the powerful DemoCong senators who control the sugar cane industry have made it impossible to increase sugar cane yields enough to use sugar cane for ethanol production. Sugar cane ethanol production is basically illegal anyway thanks to these same senators.
7. Bowing to the environmental NAZIS and keeping engines made by European car companies out of America, engines which get 50 to 60 miles per gallon. The environmental NAZIS don't like this engine because it emits too much "particulate matter". Yet, the engine is perfectly acceptable in Europe which has much more stringent emissions controls than America does.

I could go on and on.

[curious]

Stop believing in that Conservative Think Tank bullshit. I don't drink Kool-Aid with Jim Jones. I look at the facts and assess the truth.

The entire housing crisis could be attributed to deregulation of business (courtesy of Ronald Reagan).

Sorry, I was in the construction business during the Carter disaster. I lived it. I am not getting any information from "Conservative Think Tank bullshit".

So, you are saying that interest rates were not 20% during the Carter years?
And inflation rates were not 10 to 12% ?
And unemployment was not 8 to 10%?
And the money supply was not incredibly tight?
And tax rates were not the highest they have been in decades?
And the poor were not obligated to pay the federal income taxes? (Reagan introduced the policies that exempted many of the poor from federal income tax).

That is what you are saying?

[willyback]

It was the DemoCong social engineering experiments and onerous regulation that drove manufacturing offshore.

The United States has the most highly regulated society in the world.

Businesses must contend with over 15,000 pages of regulation in the Federal Register. Conflicting, obtuse, impossible to understand regulation.

Strong unions make businesses non-competetive in a global marketplace.

Manufacturing could easily be repatriated by creating an environment which does not punish companies for daring to be productive. The DemoCong could have pushed legislation like that through Congress anytime they wanted. They haven't even proposed it. So, what makes you think a DemoCong president will do differently?

Corporate Greed drove manufactering offshore (lets be clear on that).

Federal regulations ensure that your workers are safe and the products are safe for the American people (no problems there). I wish they'd issue 15,000 pages in federal regualtions for Chinese toy manufacturers. Especially a page for "no lead."

Why are we so worried about the "global" market. Isolationism made America strong. If we convined people to buy American made goods, support American Industry, and protect American jobs, the US would have a very strong economy. The only thing we need is oil. We eliminate our foreign dependence on oil by going green.

**Unions are good policy.

Companies are only productive for shareholders, executives, and other private ownership. Somebody needs to protect the little guy - "the middle class." That's where government comes in. It's not anti-production.

[curious]

And if you're talking about crack pipes than Reagan's your man. He oversaw the rise of crack-cocaine. Did little to stop it. Some reports suggest that he fueled it.

Really? And you accuse me of believing "Think Tank bullshit"?

Some reports? Which reports? What are their titles? Who published them?

Government cannot stop illegal drug use. A strong demand will always produce a supply.

Reagan didn't start the war on drugs. And Reagan did not control its growth. That was a bi-partisan affair. The war on drugs expanded to unbelievable dimensions during Reagan's terms. This impetus came more from Congress.

So now you are accusing a former president of purposely creating and distributing crack cocaine?

You DemoCong assholes are unbelievable.

[willyback]

Sorry, I was in the construction business during the Carter disaster. I lived it. I am not getting any information from "Conservative Think Tank bullshit".

So, you are saying that interest rates were not 20% during the Carter years?
And inflation rates were not 10 to 12% ?
And unemployment was not 8 to 10%?
And the money supply was not incredibly tight?
And tax rates were not the highest they have been in decades?
And the poor were not obligated to pay the federal income taxes? (Reagan introduced the policies that exempted many of the poor from federal income tax).

That is what you are saying?

I'm saying that if government was regulating wall street a little bit more closely, they would've never allowed these corporate cheats to give free money to high risk borrowers.

Then where's the government regulators when wall street repackages the sub-prime debt as prime debt and sells it abroad. This is what Reagan wanted. This is where it lead us... what's shaping up to be a "near-depression" economic panic.

[willyback]

Really? And you accuse me of believing "Think Tank bullshit"?

Some reports? Which reports? What are their titles? Who published them?

Government cannot stop illegal drug use. A strong demand will always produce a supply.

Reagan didn't start the war on drugs. And Reagan did not control its growth. That was a bi-partisan affair. The war on drugs expanded to unbelievable dimensions during Reagan's terms. This impetus came more from Congress.

So now you are accusing a former president of purposely creating and distributing crack cocaine?

You DemoCong assholes are unbelievable.

Iran-contra, the CIA was supplying innercity dealers with crack-cocaine to fund rebel contras.

On April 17, 1986, the Reagan Administration released a three page report acknowledging that there were some Contra-cocaine connections in 1984 and 1985, arguing that these connections occurred at a time when the rebels were "particularly hard pressed for financial support" because U.S. aid had been cut off.

Curious... you're full of bullshit.

[curious]

Corporate Greed drove manufactering offshore (lets be clear on that).

Federal regulations ensure that your workers are safe and the products are safe for the American people (no problems there). I wish they'd issue 15,000 pages in federal regualtions for Chinese toy manufacturers. Especially a page for "no lead."

Why are we so worried about the "global" market. Isolationism made America strong. If we convined people to buy American made goods, support American Industry, and protect American jobs, the US would have a very strong economy. The only thing we need is oil. We eliminate our foreign dependence on oil by going green.

**Unions are good policy.

Companies are only productive for shareholders, executives, and other private ownership. Somebody needs to protect the little guy - "the middle class." That's where government comes in. It's not anti-production.

You are completely delusional. Burdensome regulations do not ensure that workers are safe? Have you ever worked in a manufacturing environment? I have. Whole departments dedicated to government paperwork that does NOTHING to ensure worker safety. Only ensures higher operating costs.

Why do I care about the global market? Oh, I don't know. Maybe because American businesses compete with foreign businesses. Maybe because we sell to the global market only to the extent that we are competetive.

Isolationist policies led directly to the great depression. Isolation policies only work when an industry is being created IF the government partners with that industry and provides R&D funding, education for workers, etc., while protecting the industry from foreign competition. The anti-business ideology of the DemoCong party ensures that our government won't take this approach.

The best way to convince people to buy american made goods is to provide a product with a better value proposition. Burdensome regulatory, tax, litigation, and insurance policies make that impossible.

Wal Mart forced US manufacturers to move to China or go out of business. Where were your DemoCong heroes then? Congress could have easily stopped that nonsense. I will never buy anything from Wal Mart again.

Wow, you really are delusional. "We eliminate our dependence on foreign oil by going green". You obviously know nothing about physics. Even at $100+ per bbl, petroleum still delivers more units of work at the axle than any other option, by several orders of magnitude. There is no way to get around that.

The only viable alternative is ethanol made from sugar cane. Can be produced at a reasonable cost. Doesn't get very good gas mileage though. Takes a lot of energy to produce.
Oh, I forgot the DemoCong senators that control the sugar cane industry have made it impossible for the US to have a sugar cane ethanol industry. So much for the DemoCong committed to "alternative fuel".

The environmental NAZIS, big DemoCong allies and supporters, are now attacking wind power and solar power. Every new large scale wind farm that is proposed is tied up for YEARS by endless public inquiry and lawsuits by the environmental NAZIS. Congress could stop that nonsense with one stroke of the pen.

[willyback]

Iran-contra was the white house's war... every knew that.

[curious]

I'm saying that if government was regulating wall street a little bit more closely, they would've never allowed these corporate cheats to give free money to high risk borrowers.

Then where's the government regulators when wall street repackages the sub-prime debt as prime debt and sells it abroad. This is what Reagan wanted. This is where it lead us... what's shaping up to be a "near-depression" economic panic.

And you are blaming Bush for that when it is Congress which has that oversight. A DemoCong controlled congress. Congress established the policies that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac operate under. They could at any time have banned the kind of funny money loans that got people in trouble. Reagan wanted the current mortgage crisis? Phuck you. Goddam liberal muther phucker.

[curious]

That would have been a winning ticket for thre Dems.

But I think it will be the reverse: Obama/Edwards

And an unmitigated disaster for America. But then you leftists hate America so you don't give a shit about that.

[ritehook]

Intrade has a contract available on whether the Democratic convention will be "brokered". It's currently being assessed at about a 15% chance it will be brokered.

In the rules of this contract, they specify "brokered" as follows:

"If the Presidential nominee is not decided after the first round of delegate voting at the party convention the convention will be considered "brokered" (i.e. it takes multiple rounds of voting by party delegates to decide the nominee)."

85% on the "not brokered" is high, but even higher is the possibility that it will go past the first ballot (hmm, when is the last time that happened, the 1950s?)

I assume Intrade is an exchange. How does the 85% actually translate into odds? Oh well, I'll check it out tonight.

[willyback]

Whoa is me for supporting government regualtions on big business.... what was I thinking.

why do we even need OSHA... it's all bullshit (right Curious).

Fill me in... why do we need to buy foreign goods and services? What do foreign nations have that we don't that's SOOOO GREAT!!!!

how does that make our economy SO STRONG???

I love speaking with Indians (who can't speak english) about my taxes, or computer problems, or even 911 (in certain parts of the country). Everything's being outsourced for what... is that the definition of being globaly competitive?

Yeah... ehtonol from sugarcane is an option, but your republicans friends don't want to do it, because it'll make cuba and south america rich (you know castro and Chavez).

Where are you going with these pointless rants...???

[jjgold]

Very few whites are voting for a black for Pres, heck they cannot even coach college and pro sports teams let alone running a country.

[thezbar]

I'm not voting race or gender. I'm voting for the ticket I view as the best hope for the United States's future.
This democratic race is extremely interesting and will create more of a buzz than the Republican convention. If their smart they will use that air time wisely. That could give them a jack rabbit start into the fall. We'll see.
My inner sicky gambler is still looking for the right side in all this to cash a wager. Lots of action in November!
I may vote one way and bet another.

[curious]

Whoa is me for supporting government regualtions on big business.... what was I thinking.

why do we even need OSHA... it's all bullshit (right Curious).

Fill me in... why do we need to buy foreign goods and services? What do foreign nations have that we don't that's SOOOO GREAT!!!!

how does that make our economy SO STRONG???

I love speaking with Indians (who can't speak english) about my taxes, or computer problems, or even 911 (in certain parts of the country). Everything's being outsourced for what... is that the definition of being globaly competitive?

Yeah... ehtonol from sugarcane is an option, but your republicans friends don't want to do it, because it'll make cuba and south america rich (you know castro and Chavez).

Where are you going with these pointless rants...???

Actually the Senators who are blocking ethanol from sugar cane are DemoCong Senators, not Republicans. Do some reading when you aren't busy "doing it in the streets with the real men".

So, the millions of acres of land in America which can grow sugar cane wouldn't be used and we would buy it from our enemies instead? LOL You are too funny.

Not making rants. Posting facts to which you reply with nonsense and scary talk about how you "do it in the streets with the real men". Like I am some white bread pussy who grew up in the phucking suburbs. Give me a phucking break.