Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

McCain, Clinton Win New Hampshire

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the its-that-time-again dept.

Well the title says it. I figured some of you guys might be interested in the results of New Hampshire. Next week is Michigan, where I live. Somehow I don't expect any of the campaigns to ring me up.

3 of 724 comments (clear)

  1. Clinton/Obama *TIED* in New Hampshire by Torodung · · Score: 5, Informative

    That's right: Clinton took 9 delegates and Obama took 9 delegates in NH. Edwards took the remaining 4.

    This was not a popular election. It's about the delegates. How the press could report this as anything other than a tie is beyond me.

    There's no shame in second place in a Democratic primary. So long as you take 15% of the vote, you get delgates, and you are not a "loser" by any stretch of the imagination. Especially in such a tiny state. It takes over 2000 delegates to be nominated.

    And don't forget, Democrats have "super delegates," that are unpledged, to spoil a close race towards the Will of The Party, regardless of what the popular vote says.

    Here's a good look at it: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/02/delegate.explainer/index.html

    But all the major news outlets cover our civic process like it was a soap opera. The primary reporting is just incompetent and wrong, if not bloody-minded lying.

    --
    Toro

  2. All of what we're seeing now is confusion by Quila · · Score: 5, Informative

    Because it is not part of the Constitution, not part of the official process.

    Our two ruling parties have so taken over our process that what they do is effectively the process. We hold multimillion dollar conventions to select the candidates on the taxpayer's dime, and they are really just functions of the two parties. Minority leader, majority leader, minority/majority whip, etc., all just a power structure within our government invented by the two parties, yet they get paid more, get a bigger staff, etc. The only legitimate one is the House Speaker.

    The electoral college is peculiar to us because of our original situation. It is designed for the now unfortunately antiquated idea that the individual states are sovereign and have only created a federal government for their common defense and other things best managed as a group, such as coining money and international relations.

    But we don't try to export our way of democracy. Notice that Iraq and Afghanistan have parliamentary systems.

  3. votebyissue.org by raddan · · Score: 5, Informative

    I highly suggest that everyone have a look at votebyissue.org. I consider voting to be my civic duty, and so I spent about an hour on Saturday reading through the blurbs and checking off boxes. The results were surprising. Before taking the quiz, I considered Edwards to be my top choice, followed by Obama. Surprise, surprise-- Clinton and Kucinich were actually better aligned with my views (although Edwards was still on top). Ron Paul was the only Republican to make it into the "positive points" column, and I apparently despise Tancredo. Obama ended up being dead last for Democrats; just about tied with Ron Paul.

    BTW, if you don't agree or disagree with a blurb, leave the checkbox blank. The software takes this into account at the end. The instructions were not clear on this. After I had my tallies, I formulated a simple tally system-- +1 point if I agreed, -1 point if I disagreed, and -.5 if I did not answer. I did not answer if I thought the candidate was being purposefully vague.

    This is worth your time, and much more time-efficient than trawling through the fluff on the candidates' websites.