Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 5th July 2008 Change Date

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register

Real winner in Democrats' race for White House is Republican



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Clinton won in Pennsylvania, but not by enough to convince that she can lead a divided party, writes ALEX MASSIE
AND so it goes on. Hillary Clinton's victory in Tuesday's Pennsylvania primary matched expectations perfectly: a narrow victory would have increased pressure on her to concede defeat, an overwhelming triumph might have opened the way to an improbable...



The full article contains 1107 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 23 April 2008 7:07 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Barack Obama , US elections
 
1

Wally,

By The Rivers Of Babylon (USA) 25/04/2008 02:26:44
you know many get excited by all this 'spin' given to us for the sake of news stories. Above they say that McCain is the real winner in Pennsylvania. I read there's 3.2 million registered republican voters in Pennsylvania. and 579,000 voted for McCain. So about 1 in 6 republican voters actually turned out to vote for McCain. Doesn't sound like there's a strong propensity to vote for McCain to me. Huckabee is a republican candidate who officially dropped out of the race. Yet his name was still on the ballot and 90,000 republicans voted for him. Ron Paul is a candidate who has not dropped out of the race, but is considered impossible to beat McCain and Paul got 127,000 votes. These candidates that stand no chance got over 200,000 votes, and those voters didn't care to vote for alleged party leader McCain.

As you know Americans are notorious for staying home on election day. after all, we feel they're both crooks is our normal attitude. Where's the evidence that people are excited over McCain?

2

Wally,

By The Rivers Of Babylon (USA) 25/04/2008 02:29:20
I'm not sure of the exact number, but I think there's 3.6 million registered democrats in Pennsylvania. Obama got 1.04 million votes and clinton got 1.25 million votes. So, clinton & obama both got a higher percentage of eligible voters to come out & vote than McCain did. But the democrats had a race and the republicans did not.

My gut feel is that only a minority like any of these 3 individual candidates. All 3 have very high negatives among the voters as the pollsters would say.

3

Wally,

By The Rivers Of Babylon (USA) 25/04/2008 02:36:04
Here's something interesting to consider. In 2000 Bush won the election by a very small margin, you remember the federal court actually decided and commanded that the state of Florida stop its recount which it was doing. Then due to Bush not following his campaign promises many Republican voters became disenchanted with Bush. and in 2004 Bush won another very close election. How did he do that with so many unhappy voters on his side we wondered. In 2004 the Republicans used the ploy that they would protect america from homosexual marriage, and they had many christian preachers shilling for the Republicans. Meanwhile a gay prostitute, Jeff Gannon, visited the white house for unexplained overnight visits. and the Department of Education effectively controls the public schools all over America even though Americans would prefer local government to do the job allowed very pro-homosexual indoctrination of children. So it was really amazing that Bush won in 2004. and then since 2004 many more republicans are disenchanted with the republicans. McCain does nothing to bring in new voters to his party. He's been a public figure for over 20 years. He inspires few quite frankly, only the war-nuts smitten by this 'war on terror'.

Obama brings in many new democrat voters, but has high negatives. Clinton also has high negatives, she's been a public figure for a long time too and has much controversy in her track record.

The winner will be escorted to victory by the mass media that will manipulate people with negative info about the winner's opponents. Any of the 3 candidates are wide open to such negative info.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.