tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post730321000630857001..comments2023-11-05T02:58:27.295-05:00Comments on Campaign Diaries: Clinton to suspend campaign, says goodbye to staffTanielhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17333289018970623022noreply@blogger.comBlogger21125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post-65564745297729826122008-06-06T11:13:00.000-04:002008-06-06T11:13:00.000-04:00As for asserting that Obama can't carry the genera...<I>As for asserting that Obama can't carry the general, there's nothing to change that.</I><BR/>...<BR/><BR/><I>Obama is wishing for a six but anything less will be short.</I><BR/><BR/>These two statements are at odds with each other (assuming they're the same poster). If Obama can win with a six, that means it's not true that he "can't" win.<BR/><BR/><I>I haven't been wrong yet.</I><BR/><BR/>It's hard for others to give credibility to that statement from people to continue to post anonymously since there's no way to check it.dsimonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01997716795133693794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post-55611287750588948982008-06-06T10:05:00.000-04:002008-06-06T10:05:00.000-04:00Anonymous--It's "blind optimism" not to *foresee d...Anonymous--<BR/><BR/>It's "blind optimism" not to *foresee disaster*? So if the weather looks good, the weather forecast is good, and I live in a temperate northern climate, it's blind optimism not to expect a hurricane to start whipping down my street any minute?<BR/><BR/>Please. Clinton was a much better candidate than McCain, and even she couldn't take out Obama. There's no reason to just assume Obama's support is going to collapse because you personally are pissed off he beat Clinton.Stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15744706170470964887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post-26916032187015338222008-06-05T22:39:00.000-04:002008-06-05T22:39:00.000-04:00When some "stubborn facts" like tumbling polling f...<I>When some "stubborn facts" like tumbling polling for McCain come through, I'll feel better about putting Obama out front. I think it's blind optimism at this point not to foresee a disaster like McGovern happening.</I><BR/><BR/>There are plenty of stubborn facts in the form of state-by-state polling that show Obama even with McCain in the electoral college or slightly in front. Those number may change--in McCain's favor or Obama's favor--but to say now that Obama "can't" win can't be backed up with the evidence we have today.<BR/><BR/>For some different analyses that are based on more than sheer speculation, try:<BR/>http://www.electoral-vote.com/<BR/>http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/<BR/>http://uselectionatlas.org/<BR/><BR/><I>Dsimon-stay away from the casinos or you're doomed. Logic like that is their bread and butter.</I><BR/><BR/>I know math and logic. And I know better than to say something "can't" happen when the outcome is still very much in doubt.<BR/><BR/>To say something "can't" happen when there's a 5/6 chance it can happen is simply incorrect. And it's not verified when the 1/6 event happens; it just shows the predictor was lucky that time. Keep making that bet that it "can't" happen, and you'll lose badly.dsimonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01997716795133693794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post-81162554411712796062008-06-05T18:53:00.000-04:002008-06-05T18:53:00.000-04:00When some "stubborn facts" like tumbling polling f...When some "stubborn facts" like tumbling polling for McCain come through, I'll feel better about putting Obama out front. I think it's blind optimism at this point not to foresee a disaster like McGovern happening. Dsimon-stay away from the casinos or you're doomed. Logic like that is their bread and butter. At least you agree that it's a poor gamble. Obama is wishing for a six but anything less will be short.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post-39907238625945544812008-06-05T17:40:00.000-04:002008-06-05T17:40:00.000-04:00And the claim that Obama's failure wouldn't prove ...<I>And the claim that Obama's failure wouldn't prove he couldn't, rather that he didn't want to is just ludicrous.</I><BR/><BR/>"I thought I could roll a 1 through 5 on a die. When I rolled it, I got a 6. I guess that shows I couldn't roll a 1 through 5."<BR/><BR/>That sounds ludicrous. You can't judge probabilities after the fact.dsimonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01997716795133693794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post-28124324553271303962008-06-05T15:35:00.000-04:002008-06-05T15:35:00.000-04:00"Nothing will change my opinion on that until he d..."Nothing will change my opinion on that until he does otherwise."<BR/><BR/>Including poll numbers that consistently show McCain's sharp decline? Disastrous reversals in Iraq or attacks on Iran with McCain's endorsement? Revelations that John has been having unnatural connections with an armadillo? <BR/><BR/>I do admire your resolution. There doesn't seem to be a single chink in your iron-clad certainty for stubborn facts to squeeze through.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post-19591692343493063152008-06-05T15:11:00.000-04:002008-06-05T15:11:00.000-04:00Why admit to being wrong about something that hasn...Why admit to being wrong about something that hasn't happened yet? Aren't you guys forgetting something? And the claim that Obama's failure wouldn't prove he couldn't, rather that he didn't want to is just ludicrous. Does anyone think he'd choose not to win? I think you people are just a little too blind to be patting yourselves on the back before this thing is over. I think Obama's going to lose. Nothing will change my opinion on that until he does otherwise.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post-27254711804464402152008-06-05T14:04:00.000-04:002008-06-05T14:04:00.000-04:00Besides, an informed skepticism concerning one's o...<I>Besides, an informed skepticism concerning one's own views is the best defense against blind ideology</I><BR/><BR/>That is a great line. If more people in Congress followed it (or at least were willing to do so publicly instead of privately), we'd have a much less rancorous political environment and maybe get more done.dsimonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01997716795133693794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post-40462899354935629462008-06-05T13:39:00.000-04:002008-06-05T13:39:00.000-04:00Hurray for the two anons!!! Finally Clinton is don...Hurray for the two anons!!! Finally Clinton is done. Don't bother Mike, they won't admit to anything yet.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post-66437854224517344962008-06-05T12:14:00.000-04:002008-06-05T12:14:00.000-04:00Strange logic - making absolutist statements about...Strange logic - making absolutist statements about what will or will not happen in the future, then challenging others to 'prove' them wrong. I don't think there's ever 'proof' concerning opinions of any sort, let alone what may occur in the future - there's only persuasion. Besides, an informed skepticism concerning one's own views is the best defense against blind ideology, but maybe you haven't had enough of that.<BR/><BR/><B>The spirit of liberty is the spirit which is not too sure that it is right</B><BR/><BR/>Learned Hand, <I>The Spirit of Liberty (1944)</I>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post-8476658348110399772008-06-05T09:52:00.000-04:002008-06-05T09:52:00.000-04:00As for asserting that Obama can't carry the genera...<I>As for asserting that Obama can't carry the general, there's nothing to change that. The msm is now reporting that....If Obama actually wins the general, I'll admit that the data proving his deficiency was incomplete</I><BR/><BR/>There's plenty of evidence that Obama can carry the general. Several web sites studying state-by-state polls of him head-to-head against McCain show him slightly ahead in the electoral college. One may choose to discount this evidence, but it is evidence relevant to the question at hand. So to say he "can't" win at this point would seem to be a severe overstatement.<BR/><BR/>Moreover, a McCain victory would not prove that Obama couldn't win; it would show only that he didn't win. The eventual results don't bear on the question as to whether a particular outcome is possible beforehand. If I roll a five on a die, it doesn't mean I was correct in claiming I couldn't have rolled anything else; of course other outcomes were possible, or even more probable.<BR/><BR/>I'm not going to say McCain can't win. I do think that based on the available evidence that Obama is more likely to win, regardless of my personal feelings for or against either candidate.dsimonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01997716795133693794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post-70661667802557107622008-06-05T08:32:00.000-04:002008-06-05T08:32:00.000-04:00I'm not admitting that I'm wrong until he actually...I'm not admitting that I'm wrong until he actually gets nominated. He's not yet the nominee. Clinton is suspending her campaign, not quitting. She's keeping her delegates until August. As for asserting that Obama can't carry the general, there's nothing to change that. The msm is now reporting that. I haven't been wrong yet. I still think he's the wrong choice and I doubt the party would be stupid enough to put a loser on the ballot. If they do I'll admit I had higher expectations. If Obama actually wins the general, I'll admit that the data proving his deficiency was incomplete and that the time has come for an election free of prejudice. I feel pretty good about where I stand. I don't think you Obama supporters will feel too well when McCain gets sworn in. If I'm wrong, a Democrat is president. You guys have much more to lose. I'd rather keep my hand than risk having yours. Besides, a republican president makes me richer and you guys poorer. Obama makes me richer than Clinton too. So in August I'll admit that I was wrong about Obama making it, in November I'll admit I was wrong about it too. Obama hasn't done anything now to change my views or prove me wrong. You're putting the cart in front of the horse. We'll see who was right in their prognostications.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post-25973460942658860622008-06-05T08:21:00.000-04:002008-06-05T08:21:00.000-04:00Mike--What's the point of being anonymous if you c...Mike--<BR/><BR/>What's the point of being anonymous if you can't deny all responsibility for everything you've ever said?Stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15744706170470964887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post-90414433814361741702008-06-05T08:06:00.000-04:002008-06-05T08:06:00.000-04:00So here we have it Obama has won. For all the anon...So here we have it Obama has won. For all the anonymous people who posted on here the past 5 months saying he couldn`t win and how something would come up. You were wrong and please have the courtesy to admit it. I admit when I am wrong, but anon's on here do not.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post-3603330275745221872008-06-05T04:38:00.000-04:002008-06-05T04:38:00.000-04:00"Second, this allowed her to receive donations for..."Second, this allowed her to receive donations for one more night which is important to her as the campaign is in debt."<BR/>********************************<BR/>Without looking up her speech on YouTube, I recall one passage in the speech which could be read as a request for further financial support.<BR/><BR/>daniel greenfield: I doubt that she gives less than maximum effort. The same is true for Bubba. Clearly, the events of the last 6 months, and particularly the last 3-4 days, indicate that Clinton control over party affairs has dissipated. The party elders will clearly be on the look-out for any game-playing to subvert Obama's candidacy. Whatever other hopes she may secretly harbor, if she endorses, she will enthusiastically do what's requested. To do otherwise is to court political exile, at least within the Democratic party. Ditto, Bubba - if we don't see much of him, that will be Obama's doing, not Bill's.<BR/><BR/>(There will be lots of threatening about splitting away to form a new party, but unless very significant figures within Clinton's support groups are involved - people like Feinstein, Mikulski, etc. - that doesn't do anything for Clinton in practical terms. IMO, its much more likely that there will be an ideological battle within the party after November. We've been down that road before.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post-29790022663865267092008-06-04T23:34:00.000-04:002008-06-04T23:34:00.000-04:00Mr. Rational--Yoop, my mistake, thanks. I'll chang...Mr. Rational--<BR/>Yoop, my mistake, thanks. I'll change that to only-current-black-senator then, and the analogy hardly suffers.Stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15744706170470964887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post-81687969803892119832008-06-04T21:48:00.000-04:002008-06-04T21:48:00.000-04:00Tom: Though I have severe disagreements with both...Tom: Though I have severe disagreements with both Clinton and Obama, we should have moved past the point of seeing the loss of any candidate as a blow to his/her gender or race. Your comment was both unnecessary and offensive.<BR/><BR/>Stephen: Your statement is incorrect--Obama is, in fact, the third black Senator since Reconstruction. Edward Brooke (R-MA) served from 1967 to 1979. Carol Moseley Braun (D-IL) served from 1993 to 1999.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post-86467505198025729372008-06-04T21:36:00.000-04:002008-06-04T21:36:00.000-04:00Tom, what would you have preferred, the only black...Tom, what would you have preferred, the only black Senator since Reconstruction once again taking a back seat to a condescending white person because he doesn't "get" the mainstream culture?<BR/><BR/>You could cast victory for either as a personal blow for a historically disenfranchised group. But that's a painfully limited way of looking at things. Maybe it's better to think of it as two historic, world-class candidates coming to the end of a close contest, with one inevitably ahead of the other.<BR/><BR/>But somehow I doubt it serves your purposes to see it that way.Stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15744706170470964887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post-65671971462886474252008-06-04T21:05:00.000-04:002008-06-04T21:05:00.000-04:00one of a handful of women senators and the stronge...<I>one of a handful of women senators and the strongest female candidate for president thus far conceding to another cocky, self-serving male.</I><BR/><BR/>I continue to not understand the vitriol. Has he been any more self-serving than anyone else who runs for office? How has he been cocky? Seems to me that he's been pretty respectful during the campaign--though supporters on both sides have been less so.<BR/><BR/>And there are plenty of us who did not cast this contest in male/female terms, but tried to make up our minds on the merits of the two candidates. That one's opinion differs from plenty of others who have good reasons for doing so should not be a cause for such derision.<BR/><BR/>It is a great moment: the start of the general election and, hopefully, the restoration the principles that made this country worth admiring. That should be the case regardless of which candidate got the nod.dsimonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01997716795133693794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post-58749548855698344622008-06-04T20:56:00.000-04:002008-06-04T20:56:00.000-04:00Now this will be an historic moment: one of a hand...Now this will be an historic moment: one of a handful of women senators and the strongest female candidate for president thus far conceding to another cocky, self-serving male. Yep, promises to be a great moment in US history. Kudos for all you have done and continue to do for this country, Senator!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5027045200173644956.post-91381922320058596752008-06-04T20:48:00.000-04:002008-06-04T20:48:00.000-04:00Politico is saying that the event will be on Sater...Politico is saying that the event will be on Saterday, not Friday, in order accodomate more of her supporters who want to attend.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com