@Truthman

@Horus,
So because obama is black (african-american) he should be president?

When did [b]I [/b]said that?
Can you show me by using a quote?

I-man:

@Dayokanu

Mudslinging is not the exclusive preserve of the Clinton campaign. Obama won't be where he is today if he didn't mount a successful campaign about the sexual impropriety of his Democratic challenger when they were running for the Senatorial primaries.

Have you seen the amount of mud thrown at Clinton? Imagine,Bill said that Obama's fictional stories about his Iraq stance were the biggest fairytale he had ever heard and they accused Bill of racism.Have you seen media attacks on Clinton's femininity.I have seen more anti-Clinton bile over the past 12 months than anti-Obama.

PS:The best thing Obama said in this campaign was that the Republican party was the party of ideas A rare candid admission of an obvious fact from the Democrats.

At this point I think the Obama camp should propose a debate between Barack Obama and former President Bill Clinton because it is becoming clearer who will run the white house if Hilary becomes President.
Americans will simply be seeing a President Bill Clinton proxy third term. - The Obama camp should formalize it and offer Bill Clinton the chance to tell the American people his plans for them

@Iyke-D

Clinton won the popular votes in Nevada by 6%. As for the delegates, you will have to wait till something on April before they are allocated going by the rules of Nevada democratic party. What is being reported in the papers are projected delegate counts for Nevada and as usual none of the MSM bothered to check the rules governing delegate allocation.

His campaign managers are the one misleading him making a concession takes nothing away from a candidate!!!

@Mckren
Haven't you heard: two for the price of one!!

@ these posters
.Abegi who win for the democrat side in south carolina

Truthman:

@Mckren
Haven't you heard: two for the price of one!!

Well unfortunately if that happens the future of America will be determined more in the Clinton Bedroom than in Oval office.

Uche2nna:

@ these posters
.Abegi who win for the democrat side in south carolina

South Carolina will vote democrats on saturday.

thx

@Truthman

@Horus,
So because obama is black (african-american) he should be president?

When did I [/b]said that?
Can you show me by using a quote?
[b]I am stil waiting your answer.

Uchenna,
the democratic primary will be held on saturday. If you are chanced, you can watch the debate btw the 3 candidateson CNN international in the early hours of 2moro.

@horus,
Isimply asked a rhetorical question!!!

@Mckren,
Are you married? Don't you know that 90% of good decisions couples make originates from the bedroom

LOL

Personal and family decisions yes, may be even 99%

But not National Security

Truthman:

@Iyke-D

Clinton won the popular votes in Nevada by 6%. As for the delegates, you will have to wait till something on April before they are allocated going by the rules of Nevada democratic party. What is being reported in the papers are projected delegate counts for Nevada and as usual none of the MSM bothered to check the rules governing delegate allocation.

His campaign managers are the one misleading him making a concession takes nothing away from a candidate!!!

Nobody has established that the projection is inconsistent with the laid down rules. The Nevada Democratic Party will not allocate delegate numbers by choice, they will be guided by set rules which implication can only be an extension of the caucuses held on Saturday.

It does not matter whether Nevada Democratic Party wish to make a formal announcement on delegates in April or November. The Obama campaign are very much in the know what these rules are and they have announced it to reassure their supporters that their race is still on track while those who present the argument that it was not a formal announcement from the Democratic party are just trying to undermine the Obama camp.

At the end of the day, this whole confusion is part of a wider battle for voter psychology and momentum.

@Mckren,
I beg to disagree. The Chair person of the Nevada Democratic primary came out to say delegates had not be allocated.
The projection these people are making is based on past primaries. The rules are different this time around.

I hate spin and I do not like people who trive on spin. the rules are clear, let us wait till april before we can conclude on who won the highest number of delegates.

Meanwhile, did any one watch the debate? I think HRC did very well against a very aggressive Obama on healthcare, economy and national security. Obama did well on Iraq.

well, i was overWhelm with the debate tonight, Obama performed pretty well, infact it s now Crystal clear that he is running against the Clinton's.
i think America is ready 4 change, the question now is who will bring about change?
OBAMA 08

Is it not two front-runners or three?
1-Barack Obama
2-Hilary Clinton
3-Bill Clinton?

Why Bill Clinton is participating to this debate?
Who is running against who?
Is Bill Clinton running for President?or Hilary Clinton?
Are there three people in this debate, not two?
This is confusing!!

Truthman

When was this so called rules set, will it be after the Nevada Caucuses?

Except someone is plotting to go to court once again to change the rules.

Rules are rules, they have been made before the start of elections and they will not change.

@Horus
Do you have any problem with Bill campaigning for his wife? Oprah, Kerry etal have all be campaigning on obama's behalf. Besides, Obama started all this when he called senator Clinton the senator from Punjab, now when he hit with some legit questions on some decisions he made in the past, he complains.

@ Mckren,
I am really enjoying this discussion. The rules were set before the caucus and to further explain, Senator Clinton won 51% of the state elected delegates to Senator Obama's 46%. A state convection will still be held in Nevada where the issue of national delegates will be sorted out.

nope she won 51% of popular votes not elected delegates.

Lets apply common sense here, may be the delegate Maths is becoming complicated lets draw an analogy with ordinary numbers.

Hypothetically: there are 5 villages in a town: A (40people), B(40people), C(20), D(20), E(20).
A & B are obviously densely populated than C,D, and E. But the rules says and have always been you win a village to secure their delegate.

Candidate John gets votes A(25votes), B(25 votes), C( 8 ), D( 8 ), E( 8 )
While Candidate James gets A(15votes), B(15), C(12), D(12), E(12)

John has a total popular vote of 74 of the 140 people  (approx 53%) in the town but won 2 villages and hence 2 delegates
James gets 66 of the 140 people (approx 47%) in the town but won 3 villages and hence gets 3 delegates.

So how is the above rocket science, and why should James have to wait to know that he is expecting to have a larger share of the delegates going by the set rules. Should the rules be changed half way in the electoral process because of this anomally?

Mckren teach them but dont blame them b/c the system is a lil bit strange to nigerians. the delegate system has always been in the states for centuries. even bush won the 2000 elections without having the highest popular votes. he had more delegate votes than gore(in the general election it is called electoral college votes).

teach them pls

DARFUR/MCREN

Electoral college is antithetical to democracy because democracy thrives on numerics not on some complex political equations. Demoracy must be based on winning the popular vote. There is no justice in giving power to somebody with 8 votes above someone with 12 votes. This goes to show that there is no perfect democracy anywhere. Perfect democracy should not be afraid to expunge some retrogressive rules when it comes to electing a popular president. Electoral college encourages winning election through the backdoor against the popular wish of the people. Population is population whether you live in New York or Idaho.

The so called Nevada Democratic Party leader should have gone ahead to state clearly that the Obama camp is lying going by the new rules.

The party leader may not have lied about the number of delegates alocated being formally announced in April but he/she is being economical with the truth on whether the new rules were inconsistent with the projection of the Obama camp.

This whole confusion is For just one reason, to incite hopelessness in Obama supporters.

Aleksys:

DARFUR/MCREN

Electoral college is antithetical to democracy because democracy thrives on numerics not on some complex political equations. Demoracy must be based on winning the popular vote. There is no justice in giving power to somebody with 8 votes above someone with 12 votes. This goes to show that there is no perfect democracy anywhere. Perfect democracy should not be afraid to expunge some retrogressive rules when it comes to electing a popular president. Electoral college encourages winning election through the backdoor against the popular wish of the people. Population is population whether you live in New York or Idaho.

Accepted but rules should be changed before or after elections but not during election. Rules should not be changed during elections when it does not favour those who made them.

aleks,

there is no such thing as a perfect democracy.
2. the reason why this delegate system was put in place is to attempt to institute parity among peoples. if we go by population alone, then those with higher majorities will always win. imagine the former western region, if an election is held there, whoever is popular in lagos will always win the election b/c lagos has more population than the other states combined. so someone can decide to win elections by campaigning in lagos only. but no, delegates are awarded to the others too. so candidates will go for the others too and they wont be ignored.

even in nigeria, elections are not won by numbers alone. we have a system that values spread of votes. that is why we put those issues like being able to win at least 33% of the votes in 66% of the states.

@Mckren,
This should enlighten you more about the Nevada race.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nevada_Democratic_caucuses%2C_2008.
http://www.nvdems.com/

It further clarifies the difference between a caucus and a primary, a distinction most people don't understand. Thus, Senator Clinton did win 51% of the elected delegate for the Nevada state convention.

Furthermore, I did not say Senator Obama lied, what I simply said is that I hate spin and truly detest people who thrive in it. Let us wait till the democratic process is completed till April.

@ dafur
Bush wasn't the only one that won via the electoral college, it happened in 1824,1876 and 1888.

Then Nigeria electoral law is more on the side of justice and fairness than that of the US. If you win 33% of votes in 66% of the states in Nigeria then you must have majority votes because nobody can win 100% of votes in any of the states. You used Western region as an example, let's face it, if you win 100% of votes cast in Lagos state does not give you numerical advantage if you loose other states in the region. In any election, we are talking about people not some statistics. We have 50 million voters, where they live is immaterial what matters is that each person cast his/her vote according to their conscience. When you reduce that vote to mere statistical expression based on geography (electoral college) you have succeeded in alienating or disenfranchinsing the majority in favor of the minority. I still believe in simple majority.

guy, winning all the votes in lagos can give you numerical advantage over the other candidates especially if there are 3 or more candidates sharing the votes of the other states. lagos has up to I5-20 million people and still counting. forget that una census. how many people are in ondo state?

ok, let us assume that ondo and ogun state have 4 million each. and there are 5 candidates. I takes all the lagos votes. cool 20 milla votes, leaving the others to share the remaining votes. he wins the elections with only lagos votes. next time, he wont care about ondo people since he needs only lagos votes for re-election. he will develop only lagos and damn the rest.

e good?

but with the nigerian electoral law, if he doesnt win at least 33% of the votes in ondo and ogun, he wont be declared winner.
so he has to hussle ondo people too. and he wont take them as irrelevant.

Horus:

Is it not two front-runners or three?
1-Barack Obama
2-Hilary Clinton
3-Bill Clinton?

Why Bill Clinton is participating to this debate?
Who is running against who?
Is Bill Clinton running for President?or Hilary Clinton?
Are there three people in this debate, not two?
This is confusing!!

Obama and his supporters should quit crying. When his wife and Edwards wife threw dirt on HRC no one complained, welcome to hell that's all I can say.

Bill Clinton has a right to openly support his wife so help him God.

Obama is such a sulking child, how can he say he does not know who he's running against? Well dont run for president then, rubbish. So if there is a securty issue in the mid-east you'd come crying about not knowing who your enemies are?

This guys takes every chance he can to get blacks to vote for him. He's as dirty as the rest of them so he should stop lying. We know politics and he's just a fraud.

@horus. cool

Dear Somze,
You are correct IMO about B.C. having the right to openly support his wife, as Edwards supports Obama, but I think it's a bit much to call Obama a sulking child when Hillary has also been prone to resorting to 'low blow' tactics at gaining electoral support. There are several terms used here during the election year including Sniping Season, where Candidates will openly and willingly Shoot the heads off oponents with remarks, retorts and rebuttle at ease. Living in the Washington DC, I've seen it all from politcal campaigns and rallies to 'Non-affiliated' commercials bashing each other (it get's worse as Election day get's closer!)

I am not taking sides yet, because on the Democratic end it is a mere factor of picking the lesser of both evils. Or maybe even the BETTER of both GOOD. Because at the end of the day, no lobbyist nor campaign director is going to have a direct effect on what stand the voter takes at the polls. It is ultimately the most appealing of the TWO. And don't think that for a second, Hillary is not soliciting for the Black vote, because that is just as important as the female vote.

I got a few indepth RSS feeds that I'd like to share to those interested that would explode your imagination and thinking regarding the campaigning tactics and methods of some of these Candidates!!!

somze:

Obama and his supporters should quit crying. When his wife and Edwards wife threw dirt on HRC no one complained, welcome to hell that's all I can say.

Bill Clinton has a right to openly support his wife so help him God.

Obama is such a sulking child, how can he say he does not know who he's running against? Well don't run for president then, rubbish. So if there is a securty issue in the mid-east you'd come crying about not knowing who your enemies are?

This guys takes every chance he can to get blacks to vote for him. He's as dirty as the rest of them so he should stop lying. We know politics and he's just a fraud.

oboma.
his father is from Kenya,if he wins,"they" may assassinate him before long.

rrapstarr:

Dear Somze,
You are correct IMO about B.C. having the right to openly support his wife, as Edwards supports Obama, but I think it's a bit much to call Obama a sulking child when Hillary has also been prone to resorting to 'low blow' tactics at gaining electoral support. There are several terms used here during the election year including Sniping Season, where Candidates will openly and willingly Shoot the heads off oponents with remarks, retorts and rebuttle at ease. Living in the Washington DC, I've seen it all from politcal campaigns and rallies to 'Non-affiliated' commercials bashing each other (it get's worse as Election day get's closer!)

I am not taking sides yet, because on the Democratic end it is a mere factor of picking the lesser of both evils. Or maybe even the BETTER of both GOOD. Because at the end of the day, no lobbyist nor campaign director is going to have a direct effect on what stand the voter takes at the polls. It is ultimately the most appealing of the TWO. And don't think that for a second, Hillary is not soliciting for the Black vote, because that is just as important as the female vote.

I got a few indepth RSS feeds that I'd like to share to those interested that would explode your imagination and thinking regarding the campaigning tactics and methods of some of these Candidates!!!

Yeah, I understand how this rat race is fought and won but I don't get Obama's - "who am I running against?" - cry out. By the way what did he say Clinton was lying about? His records? Please spare me, or just say "present" when your name is called.

You can give me the links to the feeds man.

Thanks.

I understand how this rat race is fought and won but I don't get Obama's - "who am I running against?" -  cry out

When did Barack Obama said: "who am I running against?",give us a link please.Stop lying please,just stop lying.!!. .It is NOT Barack Obama who complained about that,but John Edwards who said: Are there three people in this debate, not two?
(See link below)


Are there three people in this debate, not two?
(John Edward)

Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7201709.stm

@Horus
I watched the debate and Obama actually made that remark. You can check on CNN for the transcript of the debate.