kansas?

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Obama getting 46% in Kansas? Give me a break. You people are unreal.

[WalterMitty]

Obama getting 46% in Kansas? Give me a break. You people are unreal.

they are in the throes of obama delirium. 

it is absolutely disgusting.

ive always thought that men that are pussy-whipped to be the lowest form of human life,  but some of these obama kool aid drinkers really take the cake...

[Aizen]

Obama getting 46% in Kansas? Give me a break. You people are unreal.

You said earlier that Massachusetts will be in play against Obama. Sorry buddy boy but you simply cannot have it both ways.

“Revenge is scarred into my soul. Agonizing for its arrival our wishes become our relief. Sleep where you are equable.”

[Lief 🗽]

Obama getting 46% in Kansas? Give me a break. You people are unreal.

they are in the throes of obama delirium. 

it is absolutely disgusting.

ive always thought that men that are pussy-whipped to be the lowest form of human life,  but some of these obama kool aid drinkers really take the cake...

Christ Walter, you've become as fanatically anti-Obama as you accuse us of being pro-Obama.

[Aizen]

Obama getting 46% in Kansas? Give me a break. You people are unreal.

they are in the throes of obama delirium. 

it is absolutely disgusting.

ive always thought that men that are pussy-whipped to be the lowest form of human life,  but some of these obama kool aid drinkers really take the cake...

I'm not saying Obama will win Kansas or come close but is this type of behavior really neccesary Walter? Is this how you get your jollies? The only thing that is absolutely disgusting is your attitude.

“Wishing for tomorrow... my soul shatters. My pride is broke. My wing is broken. I am no longer able to fly...”

[WalterMitty]

Obama getting 46% in Kansas? Give me a break. You people are unreal.

they are in the throes of obama delirium. 

it is absolutely disgusting.

ive always thought that men that are pussy-whipped to be the lowest form of human life,  but some of these obama kool aid drinkers really take the cake...

Christ Walter, you've become as fanatically anti-Obama as you accuse us of being pro-Obama.

if the election were hel today, id probably vote obama.

i dont have a lot of problems with obama..other than his superficiality.  his supporters tend to be rather obnoxious.

[ottermax]

Hey, let's cool down and actually talk about the topic.

I may sound stupid or ridiculous, but I do believe that Obama has a shot of making the race close in Kansas. I highly doubt he could win because it is so conservative, but the GOP is completely broken there, and the Democrats are rather strong. Kansas' economy isn't doing too bad which tends to help Obama. He seems to connect to Plains voters. I say he could bring the race as close as 55-44 in a good scenario (basically a landslide). As I've said before, the election map this year is bound to be different from usual.

In the same way, I can see Clinton bringing a state like Tennessee into the running, although not winning it, she could shift it to a close race where McCain would have to spend money.

[jesmo]

The answer is, No, probably not. Obama has very little shot in Kansas. Even with Sebelius on the ticket he would have an uphill battle. This is not a state he should play in. When I say, "NOT EVERY $#@(*$@# ELECTION WILL BE LIKE 2004 FOREVER!, I do not mean that Kansas will go Democrat.

Now guys, calm down, don't make me get texaslefty here to settle this.

[memphis]

He's not going to win Kansas.  To think that he could is just ludicrous.  He may make it closer than in 2004, but Clinton could even do that.  Kansas will go at least 57% for McCain.

....but Oklahoma will be competitive  Seriously, the whole line of states from Texas north to North Dakota is super safe GOP in presidential elections. Not really sure why the Dakotas like liberal senators and conservative presidents, but that's just the way it is.  

[jesmo]

He's not going to win Kansas.  To think that he could is just ludicrous.  He may make it closer than in 2004, but Clinton could even do that.  Kansas will go at least 57% for McCain.

....but Oklahoma will be competitive  Seriously, the whole line of states from Texas north to North Dakota is super safe GOP in presidential elections. Not really sure why the Dakotas like liberal senators and conservative presidents, but that's just the way it is.  

memphis,

Like I said before, sometimes people say things just for kicks, and do not really mean it.

[specific_name]

Once Obama establishes his thousand year reign, Kansas will surely surrender it's pitiful electoral votes to him.

[Gustaf]

Bgwah, I'm glad to see you prove to us that you are a reformed, new person who excercises tolerance and kindness to his fellow forumites. I didn't believe you when you said you had changed and wanted to improve the spirit and debate level of the forum, but I see now that I was merely prejudiced. After all, it's not like every post you made int his thread was a personal attack and none of them actually discussed the topic at hand, right?

Walter: when you're in the minority it's easy to be frustrated, I know. But remember that you have to conduct yourself so as to not sink to their level. I think you can do that because I believe you to be a much better person than most of your detractors.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

What a charming thread.

Anyway, the last time a Democratic nominee broke 40% in Kansas was back in 1988 and the last time one broke 45% was in 1964 (LBJ won with 54%). Before then the last time was in 1936. Sometimes historical perspective is a good thing.

[agcatter]

Yeah, stick the Kansas governor on the ticket and Obama wins Kansas.

What do they give you Obama cultists at those rallies?  Get me some.  I mean, yesterday we had a thread started by someone who claimed McCain had to spend money to keep NC away from Obama.  The day before some Obamiac listed West Virginia as an Obama swing state.  Now we have a thread on whether Kansas is in play and various Obamiacs actually saying (and I have no doubt believing) that Kansas could possibly even fall to this guy if they have the right VP.

Is there any limit to what will constitute the new Obama nation?

God, some of you people have lost all touch with reality.  It's actually funny but scary at the same time.

[ChrisFromNJ]

Yeah, stick the Kansas governor on the ticket and Obama wins Kansas.

What do they give you Obama cultists at those rallies?  Get me some.  I mean, yesterday we had a thread started by someone who claimed McCain had to spend money to keep NC away from Obama.  The day before some Obamiac listed West Virginia as an Obama swing state.  Now we have a thread on whether Kansas is in play and various Obamiacs actually saying (and I have no doubt believing) that Kansas could possibly even fall to this guy if they have the right VP.

Is there any limit to what will constitute the new Obama nation?

God, some of you people have lost all touch with reality.  It's actually funny but scary at the same time.

Do you need to be so demeaning? Just say no and move on.

Obama isn't winning Kansas, with or without Sibelius on the ticket.

On the flip side, I have heard McCain supporters say Massachusetts and California are in play. So both sides are guilty of this.

[JSojourner]

Let's all take a deep breath, step back, count to ten and maybe start touching ourselves.

(Oh wait -- you weren't supposed to see that last part.)

Seriously -- I think we can do better than this.

Thus spake the realistic, pessimistic Obama supporter.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Yeah, stick the Kansas governor on the ticket and Obama wins Kansas.

What do they give you Obama cultists at those rallies?  Get me some.  I mean, yesterday we had a thread started by someone who claimed McCain had to spend money to keep NC away from Obama.  The day before some Obamiac listed West Virginia as an Obama swing state.  Now we have a thread on whether Kansas is in play and various Obamiacs actually saying (and I have no doubt believing) that Kansas could possibly even fall to this guy if they have the right VP.

Is there any limit to what will constitute the new Obama nation?

God, some of you people have lost all touch with reality.  It's actually funny but scary at the same time.

Do you need to be so demeaning? Just say no and move on.

Obama isn't winning Kansas, with or without Sibelius on the ticket.

On the flip side, I have heard McCain supporters say Massachusetts and California are in play. So both sides are guilty of this.

You're new here, so stick around a few months and then you'll understand why we are so touchy on this issue.

And no one ever said Massachusetts was in play as a swing state. I have stated that it will be ]b]competitive[/b] based on the polls that have come out over and over showing it a tied race, McCain slightly, and Obama slightly ahead. No Republican has made outlandish statements claiming McCain will carry Massachusetts. To the contrary, I have said I expect Obama to win the state by at least 10%.

The type of hackery that goes on with Obama supporters is way out of line. They are talking about him carrying about every state in the union. I've heard people say he may carry 2 congressional districts in Nebraska of all places. There is no limit to what some of his delusional supporters believe. I've also heard Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Kansas, Montana, and the Dakotas. I mean, it's really unreal. Comparing the two is really an invalid comparison.

[JSojourner]

AHDuke says >>>> The type of hackery that goes on with Obama supporters is way out of line. They are talking about him carrying about every state in the union. I've heard people say he may carry 2 congressional districts in Nebraska of all places. There is no limit to what some of his delusional supporters believe. I've also heard Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Kansas, Montana, and the Dakotas. I mean, it's really unreal. Comparing the two is really an invalid comparison.  <<<<<

I agree it's utterly absurd for Obama supporters to suggest he will win, or even compete, in Kansas.  Or North Dakota.  As an Obama backer, I *wish* he would win those states.  But I know he won't.

So please, qualify your remarks.  It's "some" Obama supporters.  Not all.

Also, I trust you will be equally bothered by predictions of McCain wins in California, New Jersey, Massachusetts and Hawaii.  I mean, fair is fair, no?

[ChrisFromNJ]

You're new here, so stick around a few months and then you'll understand why we are so touchy on this issue.

Ok. I've lurked for a few months, and I've seen an equal amount of hackery from both sides.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So wait. Let me get this straight. McCain will be competitive in MA, but he will not make it a swing state? Isn't that kind, of you know, contradicting yourself? If he makes the state competitive, it will mean that he has a chance to win the state. Thus, what you are saying is that McCain will make Massachusetts a swing state. Which is it?

You've criticized Obama supporters for saying the same thing about North Carolina. It seems you have a double standard here.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

When? Where? Who has said Obama will carry every state in the union? Is this just mindless hyperbole, or do you have a link.

I've been here for a few months, and let's just say you have no reasonable boundary to talk about hackery....

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Proof?

Is this really any different from the numerous McCain supporters who say he will put California and New Jersey in play?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, it is a valid comparision. Just because you don't want to hear doesn't make it invalid. There is an equal amount of hackery on both sides from what I've seen.

[agcatter]

For the record, no way no how does McCain even come within 12 points in Massachusetts.  McCain would be thrilled to death to get that close.  Anyone saying McCain makes that state competitive is smoking something.  NJ?  Hell no.  He'll lose as badly there as Bush did against Kerry.  Washington?  No!!  Oregon?  Get real.

Passion about your candidate?  Fine.  I wish I had some of that about our nominee.  Just give us a break on the LBJ landslide stuff.  Hacks on BOTH sides are getting annoying.

[JSojourner]

For the record, no way no how does McCain even come within 12 points in Massachusetts.  McCain would be thrilled to death to get that close.  Anyone saying McCain makes that state competitive is smoking something.  NJ?  Hell no.  He'll lose as badly there as Bush did against Kerry.  Washington?  No!!  Oregon?  Get real.

Passion about your candidate?  Fine.  I wish I had some of that about our nominee.  Just give us a break on the LBJ landslide stuff.  Hacks on BOTH sides are getting annoying.

This is why I like Ag.  I rarely agree with him, but he's always fair-minded and reasonable.

And I do think we can have conversations about McCain being competetive in New Hampshire or Wisconsin...or Obama having a shot at Colorado.  But yeah -- this "my guys wins a 48 of 50" is too ridiculous to even be called "wishful thinking".

The only way that happens for either guy is if the other is found in bed with a dead woman or a live boy.

[jesmo]

For the record, no way no how does McCain even come within 12 points in Massachusetts.  McCain would be thrilled to death to get that close.  Anyone saying McCain makes that state competitive is smoking something.  NJ?  Hell no.  He'll lose as badly there as Bush did against Kerry.  Washington?  No!!  Oregon?  Get real.

Passion about your candidate?  Fine.  I wish I had some of that about our nominee.  Just give us a break on the LBJ landslide stuff.  Hacks on BOTH sides are getting annoying.

This is why I like Ag.  I rarely agree with him, but he's always fair-minded and reasonable.

And I do think we can have conversations about McCain being competetive in New Hampshire or Wisconsin...or Obama having a shot at Colorado.  But yeah -- this "my guys wins a 48 of 50" is too ridiculous to even be called "wishful thinking".

The only way that happens for either guy is if the other is found in bed with a dead woman or a live boy.

Just keep in mind that not everything will be exactly based on 2004 for every future election.

And thank you guys for making this thread calm down. Y'all wouldn't want texaslefty to settle this, would ya?

[ottermax]

Why are does everyone find it utterly horrifying to have different ideas?!
Just because someone may think Kansas can be won by Obama, or McCain can win Massachusetts, doesn't mean that we have to attack them about their ideas. Some of you are being quite upset about a few people being politically incorrect. What kind of forum would this be if every idea that doesn't agree with the status quo were shoved down people's throats? Stop attacking, and start talking! Let's stop the hackery and the accusations of hackery.
We really shouldn't feel that this sort of discussion becomes a "touchy" subject, slightly overreacting, aren't we...

[Keystone Phil]

Why are does everyone find it utterly horrifying to have different ideas?!
Just because someone may think Kansas can be won by Obama, or McCain can win Massachusetts, doesn't mean that we have to attack them about their ideas. Some of you are being quite upset about a few people being politically incorrect. What kind of forum would this be if every idea that doesn't agree with the status quo were shoved down people's throats? Stop attacking, and start talking! Let's stop the hackery and the accusations of hackery.
We really shouldn't feel that this sort of discussion becomes a "touchy" subject, slightly overreacting, aren't we...

It's hackery and it's annoying when both sides do it. I don't want to hear how savior of the world Obama will make a state that gave Bush 62% into a swing state nor do I want to hear about how McCain will make MA competitive.

These aren't "ideas;" they are statements motivated by extreme partisan allegiances.

[ottermax]

Why are does everyone find it utterly horrifying to have different ideas?!
Just because someone may think Kansas can be won by Obama, or McCain can win Massachusetts, doesn't mean that we have to attack them about their ideas. Some of you are being quite upset about a few people being politically incorrect. What kind of forum would this be if every idea that doesn't agree with the status quo were shoved down people's throats? Stop attacking, and start talking! Let's stop the hackery and the accusations of hackery.
We really shouldn't feel that this sort of discussion becomes a "touchy" subject, slightly overreacting, aren't we...

It's hackery and it's annoying when both sides do it. I don't want to hear how savior of the world Obama will make a state that gave Bush 62% into a swing state nor do I want to hear about how McCain will make MA competitive.

These aren't "ideas;" they are statements motivated by extreme partisan allegiances.

What's wrong with someone who thinks a state could be competitive even if it goes against the mainstream thought. If I say that Kansas could be competitive, do I become a hack automatically?