I reckon so.

2008-03-09 22:38:25

#1

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|7102|Canberra, AUS

It's been hinted several times that without an Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ticket, the Democrats will lose too many voters - if Clinton wins the primaries and doesn't have Obama as VP, the party will lose a lot of support from the voter base which supported Obama, and vice versa.

It would be pretty dumb, IMO, to put personal rivalries above the 'good of the party'. Not wrong, but just dumb.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2008-03-09 22:47:30

#2

{M5}Sniper3: Typical white person.; +389|7187|San Antonio, Texas

You're supposed to vote for the candidate who shares the same beliefs as you, not vote for the candidate for the "good of the party".

And "Other", the Democrats just lose in general.

2008-03-09 22:52:09

#3

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|7102|Canberra, AUS

{M5}Sniper3 wrote:
You're supposed to vote for the candidate who shares the same beliefs as you, not vote for the candidate for the "good of the party".

And "Other", the Democrats just lose in general.

Nah, the point is, if one doesn't choose the other as running mate, well, then, the Democrats IMO are screwed because of the loss of their own voterbase. Mutual dislike aside, I think they'd have to if they were to stand a chance.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2008-03-09 22:57:20

#4

Deadmonkiefart: Floccinaucinihilipilificator; +177|7133

Obama will win. Not that I like him, but I believe that too many people dislike Hillary to let her into office.

2008-03-09 22:58:48

#5

{M5}Sniper3: Typical white person.; +389|7187|San Antonio, Texas

I think both of their egos are too big to be on one ballot. But Hillary has been suggesting that she might go for a split ballot. Barack says it's too early to be talking about a split ballot.

From a Democrat's stand-point:
If Hillary wins, she should put Barack as veep so she would look good to the eyes of the Democrats.
If Barack wins, I think he shouldn't put Hillary as veep because she would undermine him the whole 4 years and might try to impeach him.

2008-03-09 23:08:52

#6

KuSTaV: noice; +947|6938|Gold Coast

{M5}Sniper3 wrote:
I think both of their egos are too big to be on one ballot. But Hillary has been suggesting that she might go for a split ballot. Barack says it's too early to be talking about a split ballot.

From a Democrat's stand-point:
If Hillary wins, she should put Barack as veep so she would look good to the eyes of the Democrats.
If Barack wins, I think he shouldn't put Hillary as veep because she would undermine him the whole 4 years and might try to impeach him.

I like the way your sig goes better :\

noice

https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/26774/awsmsanta.png

2008-03-09 23:09:04

#7

Home: Section.80; +447|7275|Seattle, Washington, USA

If Hillary won the primary and didn't choose Obama as her VP, then I think that would definitely hurt, but not as much vice versa. Obama attracts a more moderate crowd, so those moderates will switch to McCain if Obama loses, but the liberals that Hillary attracts would rather vote Obama than McCain.

2008-03-09 23:50:41

#8

usmarine: Banned; +2,785|7189

they are going to lose anyway. they fucked up another election because they suck at getting their message across.

2008-03-10 00:11:47

#9

S3v3N: lolwut?; +685|6945|Montucky

Black Man (not that I give a shit) + a White woman (I do give a shit)=no fucking way.

2008-03-10 00:23:01

#10

nukchebi0: Пушкин, наше всё; +387|6751|New Haven, CT

Hillary needs Obama, Obama not Hillary.

2008-03-10 00:45:31

#11

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|7102|Canberra, AUS

nukchebi0 wrote:
Hillary needs Obama, Obama not Hillary.

But on the other hand, lots and lots of Hillary supporters have said they won't vote for Obama.

Whether that's just political bullshit...

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2008-03-10 00:50:18

#12

nukchebi0: Пушкин, наше всё; +387|6751|New Haven, CT

Spark wrote:
nukchebi0 wrote:
Hillary needs Obama, Obama not Hillary.
But on the other hand, lots and lots of Hillary supporters have said they won't vote for Obama.

Whether that's just political bullshit...

I think it is.

I would explain, but since I really should be sleeping now, I don't want to take the time.

2008-03-10 02:12:36

#13

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6838|'Murka

Other. Only if Hillary gets the nom. As nukchebi0 said, she needs him. He doesn't need her.

But she's used to being in that position.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2008-03-10 02:14:51

#14

mtb0minime: minimember; +2,418|7082

I think it's possible it could actually help their cause. I think Obama and Clinton are very different and I wouldn't want them running together. As of now I'm thinking of voting for Obama, but if Clinton were his VP, then I'd go with McCain easily.

In any case, I don't want Clinton in the White House.

2008-03-10 18:05:49

#15

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|7028|132 and Bush

Ok.. I loled..

Completely owned tbh.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2008-03-10 18:36:15

#16

mtb0minime: minimember; +2,418|7082

^ lol indeed. Obama can throw down and slap that silly Hillary around.

2008-03-10 18:37:36

#17

Poseidon: Fudgepack DeQueef; +3,253|6965|Long Island, New York

mtb0minime wrote:
^ lol indeed. Obama can throw down and slap that silly Hillary around.

Yeah, but watch, she'll turn around and say "Shame on you, Barack Obama" and ask him to another debate.

Pitiful.

2008-03-10 18:40:19

#18

GunSlinger OIF II: Banned.; +1,860|7071

Spark wrote:
nukchebi0 wrote:
Hillary needs Obama, Obama not Hillary.
But on the other hand, lots and lots of Hillary supporters have said they won't vote for Obama.

Whether that's just political bullshit...

they would rather vote for Obama than Mccain

2008-03-10 18:41:50

#19

Schittloaf: not fulla schit; +23|6330|MN

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/10/2 … 70353.html

2008-03-10 18:47:50

#20

KEN-JENNINGS: I am all that is MOD!; +2,991|7059|949

The right-wing blowhards (Limbaugh, et al.) have been having a field day with this idea ever since Wolf Blitzer asked the question a few months ago.

I don't think they need each other as much as you (Spark) say. Obama could still decide to put Edwards or Pelosi on the ticket, maybe even Wesley Clark (which would be the best choice IMO). What I would be more interested in is the choices either would make as far as their advisors, confidants, and potential cabinet members, because they have much more power in shaping policy than the VP.

Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2008-03-10 18:48:41)

2008-03-10 19:04:37

#21

Schittloaf: not fulla schit; +23|6330|MN

limbaugh for president!!!!

2008-03-11 03:59:35

#22

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|7102|Canberra, AUS

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
I don't think they need each other as much as you (Spark) say. Obama could still decide to put Edwards or Pelosi on the ticket, maybe even Wesley Clark (which would be the best choice IMO).

Agree but I doubt it'll happen.

limbaugh for president!!!!

Mmmkay, "brainwashed".

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2008-03-11 04:01:07

#23

d4rkph03n1x: Member; +131|7177

How can Obama lose to Clinton at this stage? And furthermore, how could either of them lose to the 71 year old John Mccain, who's nearly geriatric for crying out loud?

2008-03-11 09:52:43

#24

Spearhead: Gulf coast redneck hippy; +731|7117|Tampa Bay Florida

Clinton/Obama ticket - lose

Obama/Clinton ticket - won't happen

Obama/whoever he picks as VP - win

Hillary supporters are too dumb to vote for someone else if Obama wins. They're sheep. (unlike a lot of Obama people, who might vote for McCain if he loses)

Last edited by Spearhead (2008-03-11 09:53:07)

2008-03-11 09:59:11

#25

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6838|'Murka

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
The right-wing blowhards (Limbaugh, et al.) have been having a field day with this idea ever since Wolf Blitzer asked the question a few months ago.

I don't think they need each other as much as you (Spark) say. Obama could still decide to put Edwards or Pelosi on the ticket, maybe even Wesley Clark (which would be the best choice IMO). What I would be more interested in is the choices either would make as far as their advisors, confidants, and potential cabinet members, because they have much more power in shaping policy than the VP.

Obama/Edwards would be a fairly unbeatable combo, based on polling.

Political suicide if Obama picks Pelosi or Clark. Clark would bring unbelievably bad PR to the table, weighing the ticket down and Pelosi is just as divisive as Hillary.

You've hit the nail on the head, though: the prospective key players in the administration would be what to watch for.

My guess is McCain will bring Colin Powell out of retirement...

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

Definitely lose	21%	21% - 7
Not definite but it doesn't help their cause	21%	21% - 7
Won't make a difference either way	28%	28% - 9
Will actually help their cause	12%	12% - 4
Other [please explain]	15%	15% - 5
Total: 32

BF2S Forums I reckon so.

Poll

{M5}Sniper3 wrote:

{M5}Sniper3 wrote:

nukchebi0 wrote:

Spark wrote:

nukchebi0 wrote:

mtb0minime wrote:

Spark wrote:

nukchebi0 wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Board footer