comment #1

D.Z. says ...

Bah. Like I said, one state won't save her from losing.

comment #2

rocco says ...

Maybe now you'll stop being so smug? Seriously, if you're so passionate about Obama, you should be trying to convince others to feel the same instead of bludgeoning them (us) with your blind devotion.

comment #3

americanrat says ...

You lefties think the Bushes are the only ones can steal an election?

comment #4

raygo says ...

McCain rolled over and played dead four years ago rather than take on Bush when it could have changed the course of Iraq. He was too old then, and now he's 70. Is this our future?

comment #5

Walter Sobchak says ...

Ah, sweet irony. Those sub-literate, knuckle-dragging, fly-over, red state, low thread-count yahoo rubes of Iowa went overwhelming for Jeffrey's fave Obama. New Hampshire still might and South Carolina (yee-haw!) almost certainly will as well.

Meanwhile, Hillary's prospects will most likely be saved by those urban, sophisticated, Euro-gazing Blue State types in New York and California.

BTW
Has anyone seen "Zodiac"? Is it worth checking out?

comment #6

Dirty Harry says ...

If you've been watching MSNBC you can also see how much Olbermann and Mathews hate each other. It's like watching Dan Rather and Connie Chung.

HATE each other.

I don't blame Matthews. He earned his bones the hard way, Olberman's a clown.

comment #7

D.Z. says ...

Walter: Um, California and New York were voting for minority leaders long before the "states' rights" skinheads.

comment #8

le corbeau says ...

D.Z., actually Iowa was not in the Confederacy.

comment #9

gruver1 says ...

Wells to delbomber.: Smug? Hundreds of thousands of people and every last pollster and every last commentator everywhere have been saying since last weekend that it's an Obama win waiting to happen. 7% to 10%, somewhere in there. Even with the 4% margin of error up on her side and down on his side, they should at least be neck and neck. But she's ahead by 4 points right now...it's mind-blowing.

comment #10

Jay T. says ...

Like I've been trying to tell you, POLL DATA is less accurate than ever. You've got to stop obessing over polls and film tracking data.

comment #11

D.Z. says ...

Mgmax: True, but the KKK calls it home, anyway...

gruver: You mean delbomber. And it's not really that surprising, considering this is the same coast which gave Joe Lieberman another win in '06.

comment #12

christian says ...

Jeff, you really believe everything you read or even in polls?
Nobody knows...you know.

And Mgmax, Matthews is an insufferable clown. Watch Jon Stewart shred him on their interview. Matthews is one lucky motherfucker. Only in America could such a nincompoop end up with millions a year and a position of media influence. Well, I'm sure it happens everywhere.

Hopefully whomever becomes president saves us from genuine war conspiracies. Like the Gulf of Tonkin incident, which today will be erased from history as was taught to me and others. Made public today by the NSA:

"That was a reported North Vietnamese attack on American destroyers that helped lead to president Lyndon Johnson's sharp escalation of American forces in Vietnam.

The author of the report "demonstrates that not only is it not true, as (then US) secretary of defense Robert McNamara told Congress, that the evidence of an attack was 'unimpeachable,' but that to the contrary, a review of the classified signals intelligence proves that 'no attack happened that night,'" FAS said in a statement.

"What this study demonstrated is that the available intelligence shows that there was no attack. It's a dramatic reversal of the historical record," Aftergood said.

"There were previous indications of this but this is the first time we have seen the complete study," he said."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080108/pl_afp/usvietnamintelligence512

comment #13

americanrat says ...

Gruver - Wait until the college town precincts report in. Hillary's lead will evaporate. Obama is the most potent candidate the Dems have fielded since Jimmy Carter.

comment #14

Walter Sobchak says ...

The KKK? I've heard of them. Isn't there a U.S. senator who used to be a member of the KKK? Yeah, Robert Byrd, that's his name. He MUST be a Republican, right?

comment #15

Monument says ...

Larry David on Barack Obama

"Aren't you tired of the old? Don't you want to put on some clean clothes? Voting for Hillary would be like doing Frasier again on TV. Don't you want something fresh, new and creative? I mean, haven't we had enough with Bushes and Clintons and Bushes? The country needs a shower, a good, long, hot shower. That's what Obama is, a hot shower. So fresh you can smell him. Delicious."

comment #16

Walter Sobchak says ...

(Ohmigod, I'm actually responding to D.Z.)

"States Rights Skinheads"? So you're a bigot, eh?

And my point is, Hillary will almost certainly win NY and California, while those "states rights skinheads" turned out big for Obama.

comment #17

Monument says ...

and another...

"Would it help if I told you that Lincoln only had two years of experience in Congress before he became president and the times could not have been more turbulent. And did anybody have more experience than Bob Dole, who had been in the Senate for over 25 years when he ran? And how awful would that have been if he had won? Plus, just imagine how the rest of the world will see us the day they wake up to Obama as president."

comment #18

D.Z. says ...

Walter: At least he renounced his membership. I wish the same could be said about Strom Thurmond.

christian: Speaking of Tonkin, I'm kind of disappointed that they're trying to bring it back with Iran. That's sad that that's the best they can come up with now.

comment #19

christian says ...

"He MUST be a Republican, right?"

Only if he doesn't refute and apologize for his past, Walter.
Strom comes to mind.

comment #20

rocco says ...

Jeff...iowaelsewhere has been rife with smugness since Barack's Iowa victory...hopefully this will bring some humility to the Obama camp...

I dig your passion, and as someone on the fence about the entire pool of candidates both republican and democrat, I'd love to understand the substance behind your cheerleading.

comment #21

Walter Sobchak says ...

"Aren't you tired of the old? Don't you want to put on some clean clothes? Voting for Hillary would be like doing Frasier again on TV. Don't you want something fresh, new and creative? I mean, haven't we had enough with Bushes and Clintons and Bushes? The country needs a shower, a good, long, hot shower. That's what Obama is, a hot shower. So fresh you can smell him. Delicious."

Eww. I agree to some degree, but eww.

comment #22

Dirty Harry says ...

I'm flipping and just saw an exit poll on FOX showing Clinton won NH by 2-points.

Astonishing if it comes true. And the best news for we right-wing extremists since Iowa.

What's troublesome for Obama is that win in NH or no, Hillary is winning Democrats. If Obama wins it will be thanks to independents. Most states don't allow independents to cross over.

comment #23

christian says ...

I'm ascared DZ and I posted the same response.

comment #24

D.Z. says ...

Harry: Hillary's only winning with entrenched Democrats. The fact that she still had to duke it out with Obama, when she was guaranteed a landslide a few months ago, proves it.

comment #25

gruver1 says ...

I hate to admit this, but Dirty Harry is right. Obama's win is probably going to be dependent upon independents and under-30 voters. And you can't trust the youth vote. They're out drinking and getting laid and wondering who to hook up with...you can't trust 'em, they're not dependable as far as going out to the polls. (The boyfriend might call, the girlfriend might call, etc.) If Oabama loses the nomination, it'll be time to dust off the old "Generaton of Shame" rants from '04. Did Hillary pull ahead because she cried and then her female supporters rallied 'round? The pollers need to be smacked around and told to get their methodology together. Obama will win South Carolina, but I need to find a hole to get sick in.

comment #26

K. Bowen says ...

I was wondering how long it would take to hear the first allegations of fraud. Naturally this website didn't disappoint. :)

comment #27

le corbeau says ...

Christian, why the fuck are you talking to ME about Chris Matthews?

Jeff, voting correlates with age and homeownership like sunlight correlates with the morning, no point in complaining about it. In any case, so far it's not that Obama lost the youth vote (and anyway, Durham, home of UNH, hasn't reported) but that Hillary is winning with women, which she didn't do in Iowa. So blame the ladies, not the kiddies.

comment #28

gruver1 says ...

The college youth vote got cocky, became persuaded that an Obama win was in the bag, and they decided to kick back and maybe drink and party instead of go to the polls. Just a theory. Keep that term nearby in case you need to use it again -- the "generation of shame."

comment #29

SpinDozer says ...

'I need to find a hole to get sick in.'

You've mistaken Obama for Bobby Kennedy, he and Hill are both Huberts. Forget about students getting laid, despite what the pundits say 'famously independent', NH is a pretty conservative state.

comment #30

D.Z. says ...

Jeff, don't worry. Hillary has no chance anywhere else, because she's not rural or populist enough like her hubby, Bill. New Englanders don't normally vote for movers and shakers, because they don't have to worry about the state of the country like the rest of us-what with their lack of an industry and all...

comment #31

christian says ...

I'm glad the yuts have hope in Obama, but they also love "Laguna Beach." Generational ADD will work against him.

comment #32

christian says ...

Sorry Mgmax, my Matthews comment was aimed at DH.
All you neo-cons look alike;]

comment #33

le corbeau says ...

That's racist!

comment #34

jjgittes says ...

Still not convinced Obama can win a general election. I say go Hilary, if Obama is vulnerable let's see it now - not in a general election because I can not stand the thought of 4 more years with a Republican.

And, just for the record, Obama's zombie like performance in the last debate deserves some kind of punishment like a primary loss.......what was so exciting about that?

Love Larry David, but that was a cold shower.......

comment #35

Walter Sobchak says ...

I've just heard an interesting theory on the radio.
(I won't say who it's from, since the mere mention of his name will discount the opinion and cause several on here to scream "member of the fascist hate-machine!)

This person pointed out that since Independents in NH are allowed to vote on either side, many who would've voted for Obama didn't because they've been told it was foregone and Obama would clober Hillary. Therefore, many of them decided to mix things up and throw their votes at McCain, thus helping him beat Mitt.

By the way, these people are running for President of the United States of America: Mitt, Hillary, Rudy, Obama and Fred. Sounds like that cast of a high school-based sitcom.

comment #36

christian says ...

And don't forget the creepy neighborhood kids, Huck and Chuck.

comment #37

le corbeau says ...

By the way, these people are running for President of the United States of America: Mitt, Hillary, Rudy, Obama and Fred. Sounds like that cast of a high school-based sitcom.

Election of 1868 (pres and vp): Ulysses, Schuyler, Horatio, Francis

comment #38

fielding says ...

This is even better news than the cancellation of the Globes. If Clinton ultimately wins the nomination, then there will definitely be another Republican in the White House in 2009 (hopefully McCain).

comment #39

le corbeau says ...

Walter, Pollster.com says that the turnout of independents on each side was high-- well, that's how you get high turnout-- and not appreciably different for either party; 43% of Dem primary voters are independents, 38% of GOP primary voters are. So there might be a little bit of that effect, but it's not a decisive factor in the race.

comment #40

Dirty Harry says ...

WELLS: The good news for Obama is that NH is only about 3% black -- the next states coming up: MI, SC, NV, etc... have a much bigger black population. Chances are they won't completely make up for the loss of NH independents, but it will help.

What's really matters now is where Edwards's votes go. Whether Edwards stays in the race means nothing. His vanity can't change the fact that this is now a two person race and Edwards's voters will be moving on so their vote means something.

Edwards has a lot of union voters -- they like Hillary. Edwards has a lot male voters -- they like Obama. Regardless of who wins tonight it's gonna be close between Obama and Hillary, meaning the most important piece of information to read tomorrow will be the exit poll statistics of who went for Edwards.

This is a dogfight now and we right-wing extremists are loving it.

NOTE TO ROB REINER: Stop production on the Obama ass-kissing video now.

comment #41

Zoidberg says ...

Pathetic....
JUST when it started to look like the Democrats MIGHT actually make a smart decision, and award their presidential nomination to Obama, it appears as though those STUPID MOTHERFUCKERS have gone ahead and picked Clinton.

This is a perfect example of why I haven't bothered to vote since 2000. It's fucking hopeless; a complete waste of time.

I could never be a Republican because they're assholes; but I couldn't be a Democrat because they're fucking incompetent. Completely incapable of bringing about any real reforms.

I have no faith whatsoever in the political process.

Good job, New Hampshire Democrats. So, what's it gonna be now? President McCain, or President Romney?

comment #42

Dirty Harry says ...

You know, I've never yelled "GO HILLARY" before. It's an entirely new experience.

comment #43

Dirty Harry says ...

The AP just called NH for Hillary.

comment #44

gruver1 says ...

Wells to Zoidberg: I hear you, man. But grim up. New Hampshire voters have always been ornery and independent....gone their own way. South Carolina and Nevada await.

comment #45

le corbeau says ...

The good news for Obama is that NH is only about 3% black

Same as Iowa, as it happens.

Race seems not to have mattered; age and sex did. It'll be interesting to see how the South goes, given that, rumor has it, race does matter there.

comment #46

Dirty Harry says ...

The good news for we right-thinkers is that Obama and Hillary will be moving way-left to get the Edwards vote and out-liberal each other.

I'm listening to Obama now and he sounds like Joseph Stalin's empty suit. Platitudes, platitudes. platitudes -- give Iraq to al Queda, blah, blah, blah...

Great night!

comment #47

SpinDozer says ...

Christian:

In a pretty conservative state...

Kucinich - 2958
Thompson - 2180

Keep the faith, baby!

comment #48

christian says ...

Oh yes. Mcain will capture the nation.

comment #49

christian says ...

Booyah for Kucinich! He beat Rush's boy, Fred.

comment #50

SpinDozer says ...

The RW'ers bible reads that race don't matter (wink & nod). It does. I know WAY too many probable Democratic voters who cannot support Obama to make up for a 100% black turn-out. If, it is a two person race for the democratic nom, and you appreciate the difference between a conservative/moderate Democratic President & an Extremely Conservative GOP candidate, we'd be far better off with Hillary. It'd suck, but it's better than the alternative.

comment #51

Dirty Harry says ...

Good heavens, Hillary's speech was better than Obamas.

Hey, props to the Dems -- you guys didn't buy into the 24/7 media Obama/hope/change love-fest. You voted for the substantive and more serious candidate and deserve credit for that.

comment #52

bo4pres says ...

The national polls have Clinton and Obama effectively in a dead heat. Some have Clinton slightly ahead, but her lead isn't significant. The problem for Obama is that a loss in New Hampshire could slow down the momentum he had from Iowa.

It's true that Hillary has lost the 15-20 percent lead she had in late October, but a lead like that is fairly meaningless at that point because most people being polled are only going off of name recognition. Look at the Republican polls from that period. Giuliani had a double digit lead and Huckabee was a nonfactor. Both races will come down to the last week of January and the first week of February, when most states have their primaries.

comment #53

AJW says ...

Wow, bo4pres, a reasonable response that makes sense. Where did you come from?!?!

comment #54

T. S. Idiot says ...

"New Hampshire voters have always been ornery and independent....gone their own way." Wells' man lost, so NH doesn't matter? If BO had won, he'd be singing a different song.

I just realized that if BO were to become president, he would be the skinniest since the Rail Splitter. Maybe this is the secret of his attraction for Wells, an offshoot of his avoirdupois aversity.

comment #55

jeffmcm says ...

DZ, shut the f$#@ up. You do not know what you are talking about and you are intellectually dishonest.

comment #56

Scanlon says ...

Dirty Harry, Obama would give away Iraq to Al Qaeda? Like the way we ceded Afghanistan to Al Qaeda the moment we invaded Iraq? What's worse, losing to a group that was spun off(Al Qaeda in Iraq, thanks to our invasion) or to the Al Qaeda central leadership in Afghanistan? At the moment, a Republican victory means we would(like with Vietnam) continue to hump the possibility of democracy blooming in the way we see fit, a possibility that is unlikely as it is delusional. Remember, if deposing the Taliban is our success story, then the acceptable standard for a democracy is one that passes death sentences on converts to Christianity and executes by mass firing squad. All this, as more Americans lose their lives for the PNAC and their intelligence-challenged agenda. I'm sorry, I forgot about "the surge". Troops will lose their lives at a slower rate, as no-bid contractors make out like bandits. Oh, and your comparison of Obama to Stalin is clear example to why it is hard to take people like you seriously. But you could have not have chosen a better alias, that of an action "hero" who sneers at civil liberties and is willing to "torture" for the better good.

comment #57

Dirty Harry says ...

"But you could have not have chosen a better alias, that of an action "hero" who sneers at civil liberties and is willing to "torture" for the better good."

EXACTLY! It's all about the better good. I'm a better good kinda guy.

I fed the rest of your post through my Liberal-Spittle-Flecked-Translator -- It reads: "I hate Bush so fuck the Iraqis and let them die."

comment #58

D.Z. says ...

Harry: "I hate Bush so fuck the Iraqis and let them die."

Wait, I thought it was the people who love Bush who love seeing Iraqis die, what with them not being Christian and white and all...

comment #59

affiliatesreview says ...

really good post :) Thank you
Best regards!
----------------
Free pc games
Affiliate review