I find it really odd with the enormous Union support that Edwards is generating and the huge crowds

that anyone could possibly believe this primary is "over" Contrary to what the polls indicate, I think excitement about both their campaigns is "building". Something is very wrong about the reporting on these two guys.

I agree. But, this has been happening ever since before HRC was elected to the Senate.

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:


fly

I remember very well Walter Mondale getting huge crowds during the 1984 Presidential campaign...

Jimmy Carter had a very successful River Boat tour down the Mississippi in 1980...

Any competently run campaign can generate huge crowds...

The are not always the best avenues for getting your message across, and inhibit the personal touch type campaigning that is characteristic of these early primary states...

And news coverage makes it seems as though no one is interested.

In 1980 everybody had them. Notice how our elections made sense before 1978!

Ca-ching! Ca-ching!

I think he ended up w/31% to Carter's 59% in the Iowa Caucuses.

Obviously the most current example is Howard Dean and the crowds he attracted in October of 2003. Sadly, those crowds did not translate into caucus attendees.

and they vote!!

and they are vocal

and they participate!!

fly

And they are ahead in the polls. YEAH RIGHT! This has always been a potential problem with the rigged voting machines. If they are going to steal elections, they have to fix the polls too. People predicted this was going to happen three years ago and WALLA! Here it is. Completely phoney ass polls that aren't even close to reality.

almost all the polls just before an election are correct within their margin of error.

Caucuses are negotiations, not elections.

Rasmussen 10/11 - 10/14 750 LV 45 22 11 3 Clinton +23.0
American Res. Group 10/09 - 10/12 600 LV 45 20 13 3 Clinton +25.0
FOX News 10/09 - 10/10 377 LV 50 18 11 4 Clinton +32.0
Gallup 10/04 - 10/07 488 A 47 26 11 4 Clinton +21.0
AP-Ipsos 10/01 - 10/03 482 A 46 25 11 3 Clinton +21.0
ABC News/Wash Post 09/27 - 09/30 592 A 53 20 13 3 Clinton +33.0
CBS News* 09/14 - 09/16 Adults 43 22 16 -- Clinton +21.0
Gallup 09/14 - 09/16 531 A 47 25 11 5 Clinton +22.0
Reuters/Zogby 09/13 - 09/16 LV 35 21 10 3 Clinton +14.0
Pew Research 09/12 - 09/16 568 RV 42 25 14 3 Clinton +17.0
Cook/RT Strategies 09/13 - 09/15 405 RV 36 23 18 3 Clinton +13.0
FOX News 09/11 - 09/12 396 RV 43 24 13 1 Clinton +19.0
NBC/WSJ 09/07 - 09/10 Adults 44 23 16 4 Clinton +21.0
CNN 09/07 - 09/09 Adults 46 23 16 5 Clinton +23.0
NYT/CBS News* 09/04 - 09/09 Adults 44 26 17 -- Clinton +18.0
USA Today/Gallup 09/07 - 09/08 500 LV 45 24 16 2 Clinton +21.0

Are the nearly 200K donors a figment of the FEC's imagination?

Just kidding :7

:hi:

:)

It's the polls in the early primary states that matter. The race is very close in those states. These national polls are bullshit.

race, which I think is bullshit.

And there are a lot of people like me stilling deciding what the hell they want to do.

except for clinton detractors building a strawman.

on tweety...

not a frigging word!!

but don't worry they are cornating someone else!!:sarcasm:

till the Gorenator comes in!!

fly

Of course that won't necessarily be the case with Edwards.
Maybe he will at least get a lot of volunteer help.

a candidate that looks bad. NY is refusing to endorse anyone rather than endorse Clinton.It seems a lot od Labor objects to some of her positions.Fancy that.

I don't like what Obama said about merit pay, and I don't trust Edwards.

I also wonder what percentage of the voting population these particular unions are.

And AFSCME has also indicated it will endorse Edwards!

of beating up on the little guy and sucking up to big business... Don't confuse him with facts and figures.

We need to do something about this.