www.ditl.org

Cool, nice to know. Thanks.

Captain Seafort wrote:At this point, prety slim - and even if she wins a massive proportion of them, Obama may still have enough from the primaries to win outright. It's more likely that most of the supers will vote for Obama due to his success in the primaries, and the fact that he's got a much better chance of beating McCain.

And he's paying off a large number of them.

Obama has also gained the endorsements of some large labor unions, including the Teamsters, which conventional wisdom had attributed solidly to Clinton. She has the AFL-CIO and UAW, but this could tighten the gaps in the big races coming up which everyone acknowledges that Clinton must win convincingly.

Plus, in some recent races, Obama nearly evenly split the vote of white females. (!)

Nader just announced he'd run again. This could be bad for the democrats. If he hadn't ran in 00' the democrats woulda won.

Though he does sort of have a point "If the Democrats can't landslide it this year they should just pack it in."

My guess is what he's hoping to have happen is for the democrats to win with enough margin that he can still get enough votes (I think 10%) to get official recognition as a party and governement money for future campaigns. I think that's how it works.

What're the actual chances of him getting in?

You mean getting on the ballot? Fairly good.

If you mean actually winning the presidency? Laughable.

But he's not really trying for that. I don't know the details. But if a party can get a certain percentage of the vote they're recognized or something and get access to the federal funds for campaign advertising like democrats and republicans do. Maybe some other stuff too. I'm not really sure.

Anyway I believe that's what he's trying for. And I think 10% is all he needs. Anybody know more about that?

I don't know, but last time he got less then 2% of the votes. I don't think Nader will ever win, but it would be nice to have more then two choices in the future.

This might actually be his best time to run. Polls are pretty solid in this country. If it becomes obvious the democrats will landslide than enough people might vote for him to get the govermentment funds or whatever.

Hey, wasn't there an election or something yesterday, too? Who won?

Also, I was thinking this morning that now is perhaps the worst time for anyone to become president of the USA. The entire Middle East hates the country. It's lost whatever respect it had in Europe. It's got troops stuck into two unwinnable wars in the Middle East. The economy is going downhill. Peak Oil is going to hit within the next decade or so. And that's only off the top of my head, I'm sure there's a multitude of problems that I can't even think of. I have the feeling that whoever wins this is going to end up coming into power just to have Bush's house of cards crash down on top of them.
This make sense, or am I totaly wrong?

Rochey wrote:Hey, wasn't there an election or something yesterday, too? Who won?

Clinton won three states, Obama one, and McCain all four - which makes him the official Republican candidate. Obamba's still over 70 delegates ahead of Clinton though.

Also, I was thinking this morning that now is perhaps the worst time for anyone to become president of the USA. The entire Middle East hates the country. It's lost whatever respect it had in Europe. It's got troops stuck into two unwinnable wars in the Middle East. The economy is going downhill. Peak Oil is going to hit within the next decade or so. And that's only off the top of my head, I'm sure there's a multitude of problems that I can't even think of. I have the feeling that whoever wins this is going to end up coming into power just to have Bush's house of cards crash down on top of them.
This make sense, or am I totaly wrong?

Sums it up pretty well. The only bit I'd disagree with is the assertion that Iraq and Afghanistan are unwinnable wars. Difficult certainly, but I would say that they're still winnable. Iraq in particular has improved drastically over the last year, and more importantly the US army has finally developed a coherent counterinsurgency doctrine. Indeed, thanks to the fact that their doctrine has been developed specifically to deal with Iraq, they're probably better at counterinsurgency than the British Army now.

Yet, Obama has kept the lead in delegates. Even though Clinton won Texas with just over 50%, Obama leads the still-in-progress caucus counting with approx. 55%.

And while any new president may be entering a viper's nest, remember what the change in administrations did in the Tehran hostage crisis, and subsequently what it did for Reagan's prestige. It's a very tough situation, but it should be relatively easy for the new president to look like he or she is making AT LEAST a nominal improvement in the way it's being handled.

The real problem for the Democrats right now is that McCain will be able to begin his general eelction campaign right away.

The situation being bad can be good for a president, since you have the chance to turn things around. And at the least probably won't make them worse. But regardless these people want the prestige and power. And I also disagree that Iraq and especially Afganistan are unwinnable.


Also at least Kosovo likes us!

As for the election tonight meant that Hillary will almost certainly go the distance. Which will make it interesting for states like mine that usually don't have any say at all in nominations. Ultimately it's going to be the 410 undeclared democratic superdelegates that get to decide the outcome. Obama will probably have the lead going into the DNC. However a 5% lead in delegates isn't exactly the clear will of the people that he's going to make it out to be. Since it sounds like the superdelegates lean towards Hillary this could go either way.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=sJMFic1ZL1A

LOL! That's great.

My speakers aren't working (again! ), so could you sumarise what it's about?