*
*
Home
Help
Search
Login
Register
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Apr 24, 2014, 07:38:51 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search: Advanced search
657253 Posts in 9253 Topics by 3396 Members Latest Member: - vlozan86 Most online today: 80 - most online ever: 494 (Jul 01, 2007, 02:59:53 PM)
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 22
Print
Author Topic: Super Tuesday 2! Election primary 08  (Read 62514 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
elpollodiablo
Registered user

Posts: 32624


« Reply #225 on: Mar 06, 2008, 08:25:22 PM »

Dude! That story's source is unnamed, and the unnamed source is citing something he or she supposedly overheard. On top of which:

"For the Canadians, a key point of concern was Obama's sharp criticism of the North American Free Trade Agreement. DeMora wrote Wilson that in the Chicago meeting, Goolsbee "candidly acknowledged the protectionist sentiment that has emerged, particularly in the Midwest, during the primary campaign" but reassured Rioux that Obama's NAFTA-bashing "should be viewed as more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans." Three weeks later, Canada's CTV News reported that a "senior member" of Obama's campaign had phoned Wilson personally to advise him to "not be worried about what Obama says about NAFTA." The Obama campaign denied that story, which (if you believe DeMora's account) was only slightly off the mark, and declined to elaborate. On March 3 the Associated Press released the DeMora memo, which by then had circulated widely within the Canadian government. Asked once again to comment, Obama said his campaign provided Canada no such reassurance while Goolsbee maintained that DeMora "misinterpreted" his comments. For its part, the Chicago consulate smoothed things over with a statement saying, "there was no intention to convey, in any way, that Senator Obama and his campaign team were taking a different position in public from views expressed in private."'

Does that sound like a flat-out denial to you? Cuz it doesn't to me. They said Goolsbee's comments were misinterpreted, not that the meeting never took place.

Meeting, not a phone call.
Logged

think 'on the road.'
elpollodiablo
Registered user

Posts: 32624


« Reply #226 on: Mar 06, 2008, 08:27:41 PM »

Seriously man I know you think Clinton is the Wicked Witch of the West, capable of any crime or injustice because she's started to use some less than savory campaign tactics, but who in FUCK is going to read a misreported story and use it as an attack against their rival KNOWING FULL WELL that all it would take is a little checking up to prove it utterly false and in fact the exact opposite of what actually happened? That's just dumb!
Logged

think 'on the road.'
Antero
Registered user

Posts: 7526


« Reply #227 on: Mar 06, 2008, 08:31:29 PM »

You mean like the Obama-is-a-Muslim story?

----

Clinton's campaign insists that Michigan and Florida primaries should count, despite agreeing to abide by the decision of the DNC when she was presumptive nominee.

I have officially decided to not vote for Clinton if she is nominated.  I've had quite enough of rule-flouting any-means-necessary scoundrels.

Previously I would defend Clinton against her foes, believing their characterization of her to be largely unfair and insidiously sexist.  I would like to apologize; their characterization of her was accurate and insidiously sexist.
Logged

Quote from: nonotyet
this has been OPINIONS IN CAPSLOCK
elpollodiablo
Registered user

Posts: 32624


« Reply #228 on: Mar 06, 2008, 08:32:33 PM »

Yeah see that shit's fucked up and I have no rejoinder. I am through defending her campaign tactics. But I will not stop defending her.
Logged

think 'on the road.'
davy
Registered user

Posts: 24822


« Reply #229 on: Mar 06, 2008, 08:35:47 PM »

You mean like the Obama-is-a-Muslim story?

yeah, i was going to bring up the FL/MI issue, but you beat me to it.
Logged

The drummer IS the foundation, p3wn.
dieblucasdie
Registered user

Posts: 24493


« Reply #230 on: Mar 06, 2008, 10:15:49 PM »

In fairness to both Clinton and Obama, the calls to Canada were probably undertaken by their economic advisers with little input from the candidates themselves.  They ain't got time for shit like that just now.
Logged

he was basically your only chance at making the world love you.
elpollodiablo
Registered user

Posts: 32624


« Reply #231 on: Mar 07, 2008, 12:26:19 AM »

Hey former Deaniacs: your boy thinks it's best to do FLA and MI again
Logged

think 'on the road.'
dieblucasdie
Registered user

Posts: 24493


« Reply #232 on: Mar 07, 2008, 12:56:31 AM »

I actually agree.

I mean, let the people vote and the chips fall where they may; I just don't want Clinton to win through back-room wheeling and dealing.
Logged

he was basically your only chance at making the world love you.
davy
Registered user

Posts: 24822


« Reply #233 on: Mar 07, 2008, 12:58:28 AM »

it's either a do-over or it's nothing. they certainly can't seat them as they are now--obama's name wasn't even on the MI ballot.
Logged

The drummer IS the foundation, p3wn.
elpollodiablo
Registered user

Posts: 32624


« Reply #234 on: Mar 07, 2008, 01:07:48 AM »

Clinton will take FLA for sure
Logged

think 'on the road.'
dieblucasdie
Registered user

Posts: 24493


« Reply #235 on: Mar 07, 2008, 01:08:44 AM »

Yeah, but probably not by enough for it to matter in the pledged delegate count.
Logged

he was basically your only chance at making the world love you.
elpollodiablo
Registered user

Posts: 32624


« Reply #236 on: Mar 07, 2008, 01:15:44 AM »

They're so close at this point it matters more for public perception and momentum
Logged

think 'on the road.'
dieblucasdie
Registered user

Posts: 24493


« Reply #237 on: Mar 07, 2008, 01:19:49 AM »

Well, that's not really true.  Even if Clinton wins PA by 20 points (doubtful), Obama will still finish with the pledged delegate lead and the popular vote lead.
Logged

he was basically your only chance at making the world love you.
elpollodiablo
Registered user

Posts: 32624


« Reply #238 on: Mar 07, 2008, 01:24:28 AM »

Well... yeah. But a 100 delegate difference? That's really fucking close.
Logged

think 'on the road.'
El_Josharino
Registered user

Posts: 7483


« Reply #239 on: Mar 07, 2008, 03:42:33 AM »

Really close, yes, but where is Hillary going to find a net gain of 100 delegates?
Logged

Hey sexy mama, wanna kill all humans?
davy
Registered user

Posts: 24822


« Reply #240 on: Mar 07, 2008, 09:16:31 AM »

Well... yeah. But a 100 delegate difference? That's really fucking close.

by any relevant measure, though, it's not that close at all. like josh is saying, when you consider that there's 10-12 states left to vote, and the winner optimistically nets 5 or 6 delegates on average, a 100 delegate lead is pretty solid. what hillary has going for her is the claim to "big states." but in the face of a decisive pledged delegate lead, and a lead in the popular vote, that shouldn't take precedence.
Logged

The drummer IS the foundation, p3wn.
FreddyKnuckles
Registered user

Posts: 11705


« Reply #241 on: Mar 07, 2008, 11:04:18 AM »

awesome, awesome, awesome  Very Happy

Clinton a "monster"
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gBpcYuzkAvUs73pgP7rAa1xiwkBAD8V8KUV80
« Last Edit: Mar 07, 2008, 11:12:45 AM by FreddyKnuckles » Logged

Quote from: Heathcote
I'm in with Greg Nog, IT'S FUCKING FAFFLE TIME!
Andrew_TSKS
Registered user

Posts: 39426


« Reply #242 on: Mar 07, 2008, 11:06:01 AM »

Dude! That story's source is unnamed, and the unnamed source is citing something he or she supposedly overheard. On top of which:

"For the Canadians, a key point of concern was Obama's sharp criticism of the North American Free Trade Agreement. DeMora wrote Wilson that in the Chicago meeting, Goolsbee "candidly acknowledged the protectionist sentiment that has emerged, particularly in the Midwest, during the primary campaign" but reassured Rioux that Obama's NAFTA-bashing "should be viewed as more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans." Three weeks later, Canada's CTV News reported that a "senior member" of Obama's campaign had phoned Wilson personally to advise him to "not be worried about what Obama says about NAFTA." The Obama campaign denied that story, which (if you believe DeMora's account) was only slightly off the mark, and declined to elaborate. On March 3 the Associated Press released the DeMora memo, which by then had circulated widely within the Canadian government. Asked once again to comment, Obama said his campaign provided Canada no such reassurance while Goolsbee maintained that DeMora "misinterpreted" his comments. For its part, the Chicago consulate smoothed things over with a statement saying, "there was no intention to convey, in any way, that Senator Obama and his campaign team were taking a different position in public from views expressed in private."'

Does that sound like a flat-out denial to you? Cuz it doesn't to me. They said Goolsbee's comments were misinterpreted, not that the meeting never took place.

Meeting, not a phone call.

ok, it's the next day and i'm calmed down, plus i posted an apology on the last page so i hope you saw that anyway. but i'm going to try to explain my understanding of this situation as i've gotten it from watching the story unfold over the past few days. we appear to have a very different one from each other. once i've explained, maybe then we can start digging up news articles and figuring out which of us is misunderstanding.

this is what i'm getting: there was a phone call to a canadian official saying not to worry about the nafta "political posturing". said canadian official, which appears from articles i've read to have been brodie, the prime minister's chief of staff. this was, i believe, on the 29th. but brodie said it was the CLINTON campaign, and the first reporter who reported it misreported it as the OBAMA campaign. the obama people were like "that call didn't happen." then someone found a memo confirming a MEETING between goolsbee and a canadian official. not confirming anything about what was discussed in said meeting, just that it took place. obama's camp said "ok, there was a meeting, yes, but nothing like what was reported was said in that meeting." then big hill hammered obama for being two-faced. this all happened on like the 3rd and the 4th. then yesterday, the 6th, it came out that brodie had originally been talking about the clinton campaign after all. so it turns out, there was BOTH a meeting AND a phone call, one of which was with obama's people, one of which was with clinton's people. and the "political posturing/don't worry about it" quote came from the clinton campaign's phone call, not anything obama's people did. we actually have no information about what was said in goolsbee's meeting with canada's people other than the official response from the obama campaign about what was said in the meeting. so it's not like the canadians are saying one thing and obama's saying another--the canadians are saying one thing about what CLINTON said and obama is saying another thing about what OBAMA said. meanwhile, clinton's denial has been proven to be a lie.

ok, i just googled and found this article. looks like the interpretation i just typed up is slightly wrong.

Quote
A top aide of Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper meanwhile was identified as the likely source of an alleged leak that provoked a diplomatic fiasco involving both US Democratic presidential contenders.

Last month, Harper's chief of staff, Ian Brodie, purportedly made impromptu remarks to journalists about Clinton's US presidential bid, said Canadian reports.

The offhand comments apparently sought to downplay the potential impact on Canada of Clinton and Obama's attacks on the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) during stops in the US state of Ohio.

Brodie told reporters that the Clinton campaign had called the Canadian embassy in Washington to tell officials to take her anti-NAFTA rhetoric "with a grain of salt," said local media.

Around the same time, a news agency reported that a Canadian government memo detailed a meeting between Obama's chief economic advisor Austan Goolsbee and officials from the Canadian consulate in Chicago.

The memo reportedly said Goolsbee noted Obama's attacks on NAFTA should not be taken out of context, citing fiercely protectionist sentiment in Ohio about the pact and political positioning as a motivation.

Thursday, US Ambassador David Wilkins told public broadcaster CBC this amounted to Canadian political interference in the US political process. "It certainly shouldn't have happened; it was interference," he said.

The affair has certainly embarrassed Canada's diplomatic corps and may have cost Obama votes in the crucial Ohio primaries earlier this week.

so the only thing i got wrong was that we didn't know what goolsbee said to canada. apparently we do. so i guess they both have said things to that effect to canada. hmm.

this just makes me think, again, that the problem, if anything, is with mexico and not canada, but i have nothing to back that up other than a somewhat educated guess. but either way, they're both making comments. however, hillary lied about hers, and now she's been busted. obama's camp tried to spin theirs, but never lied and said they didn't take place.

so the question remains: who thinks what about nafta?
Logged

I just want to be myself and I want you to love me for who I am.
Andrew_TSKS
Registered user

Posts: 39426


« Reply #243 on: Mar 07, 2008, 11:12:42 AM »

In fairness to both Clinton and Obama, the calls to Canada were probably undertaken by their economic advisers with little input from the candidates themselves.  They ain't got time for shit like that just now.

interesting point. i really don't know what to think of all this at this point.
Logged

I just want to be myself and I want you to love me for who I am.
FreddyKnuckles
Registered user

Posts: 11705


« Reply #244 on: Mar 07, 2008, 11:14:18 AM »

what they think about nafta depends on who their talkin to
Logged

Quote from: Heathcote
I'm in with Greg Nog, IT'S FUCKING FAFFLE TIME!
elpollodiablo
Registered user

Posts: 32624


« Reply #245 on: Mar 07, 2008, 11:17:28 AM »

Quote
"In Ohio, they are obsessed and Hillary is going to town on it, because she knows Ohio's the only place they can win," Power is quoted as saying. "She is a monster, too that is off the record she is stooping to anything."


Pfffhahaha
Logged

think 'on the road.'
slow west vultures
Registered user

Posts: 2326


« Reply #246 on: Mar 07, 2008, 11:18:54 AM »

what they think about nafta depends on who their talkin to

its the ghost of ross perot, haunting their minds i tells ya.

Logged

Ocean in view! O! The joy!
Andrew_TSKS
Registered user

Posts: 39426


« Reply #247 on: Mar 07, 2008, 11:31:13 AM »

perot was right about nafta. i will always give him credit for that.
Logged

I just want to be myself and I want you to love me for who I am.
andronicus
Registered user

Posts: 6515


« Reply #248 on: Mar 07, 2008, 12:09:45 PM »

No one was ever right about NAFTA.

Hell I'm not even right about NAFTA, and I'm right about most everything.
Logged
elpollodiablo
Registered user

Posts: 32624


« Reply #249 on: Mar 07, 2008, 02:09:12 PM »

Quote
"In Ohio, they are obsessed and Hillary is going to town on it, because she knows Ohio's the only place they can win," Power is quoted as saying. "She is a monster, too that is off the record she is stooping to anything."


Pfffhahaha


Also

Quote
"You just look at her and think, 'Ergh'," Power is quoted as telling the newspaper. "But if you are poor and she is telling you some story about how Obama is going to take your job away, maybe it will be more effective. The amount of deceit she has put forward is really unattractive."

Stupid poor people. Don't they know we wealthy urban liberals know what's best for them?
Logged

think 'on the road.'
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 22
Print
LPTJ | Archives | The Hangar | Topic: Super Tuesday 2! Election primary 08
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines
Board layout based on the Oxygen design by Bloc