MyDD :: Rove & Co: Clinton Stronger v. McCain

Rove & Co: Clinton Stronger v. McCain

by Zebra01, Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:14:43 PM EST

Electoral maps put together by the consulting firm helmed by Karl Rove, and obtained by ABC News, show Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, to be a stronger general election candidate in a hypothetical general election match-up against Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., than Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois.

Click HERE to see the maps and charts from Karl Rove & Co. provided by ABC.

Of special interest in the link, check out the two charts showing polling trends, and you'll see that Hillary Clinton is the ONE candidate of all three who has had signficiant momentum from March through May.

Hope the Superdelegates are paying attention!

Cross-posted at TexasDarlin

Tags: hillary clinton, momentum, electoral votes, rove (all tags)

Permalink :: 80 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Rove & Co: Clinton Stronger v. McCain (none / 0)

This time, we can win Florida!

by Zebra01 on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:16:28 PM EST

BREAKING: Rove to ABC News (2.00 / 2)

Hillary will be Greeted as Liberators"

"McSame: He's Constipated and Ready to GO!

by Al Rodgers on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:27:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Here's another one (none / 0)

► Rove to ABC News: "Hillary is Inevitable !!"

See - this is hilarious, the one liners just flow.

"McSame: He's Constipated and Ready to GO!

by Al Rodgers on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:30:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

you said: "we can win Florida!" (none / 0)

not with Obama

Welcome to a Landslide without white Working class, Latinos, Women, Seniors and holding-on sweeties

by engels on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:32:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: you said: "we can win Florida!" (2.00 / 1)

You really are the white-noise anti-Obama poster. You don't even try that hard anymore. How are you supposed to sow dissent when you're phoning it in?

by upstate girl on Mon May 19, 2008 at 07:17:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's not about who is stronger. (2.00 / 1)

Both could win as nominee. The trick is who we want to win. Who will lead us as we want to be led? That would be Obama, according to the pirmaries.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:16:54 PM EST

Er, "primaries." (2.00 / 3)

Also, two more things:

A) Don't put your faith in Florida. They have a gay marriage amendment on the ballot this year and Crist will be gerrymandering like crazy for McCain.

B) Why are we listening to Rove again?

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:19:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Er, "primaries." (2.00 / 2)

Agreed and agreed..

Does anyone reading this tripe actually believe that Karl freakin' Rove WANTS a Democrat in the White House...? Could it be a game he's playing...?

Let's see, he cannot tell the truth to anyone including Congress... why would he start now.

But yes, I know... he is telling some of you want you already believe, so I expect to see this one on the rec list shortly.

That ought to make his little cyber-trolls excited as they o back to talk to the Boss...

Like the nominee, don't like the nominee... Our nominee is still better than John McCain...

by JenKinFLA on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:32:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I can't wait... (none / 0)

Congress REALLY needs to send their baliff out to arrest Rove. The Department of Justice ain't going to do it, so Reid and Pelosi have to take matters into their own hands.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:43:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I can't wait... (none / 0)

Now that would be breaking news that I could get excited about...

It's usually bad news.

Like the nominee, don't like the nominee... Our nominee is still better than John McCain...

by JenKinFLA on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:46:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Er, "primaries." (none / 0)

and Crist will be gerrymandering like crazy for McCain

What does that mean?

by markjay on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:50:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Er, "primaries." (none / 0)

Charlie Crist is the governor of Florida.

Gerrymandering is the process of manipulating the shape of voting precincts in order to influence an election. It's possible to redraw the map in order to favor certain parties based on the historical voting records in each area.

I don't think this is likely to happen between now and November, though. As I understand it, it can only be done in a census year, so if Crist wanted to gerrymander he'd have to wait till 2010 to do it. If he's still Governor then.

Proud member of the Wikipedia Generation of American politics

by BishopRook on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:40:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Er, "primaries." (none / 0)

How do you gerrymander a Presidential race? Unless they're going to increase the size of Florida to give it more population, which would increase it's electoral votes, I don't think you can.

John McCain believes "Women shouldn't have a choice."

by jturn17 on Mon May 19, 2008 at 07:44:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's not about who is stronger. (none / 0)

Hillary is sure winner. Obama may win, although I doubt it.

by handsomegent on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:37:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh ye of little faith (none / 0)

Obama has been the longshot candidate this entire primary season. The key is campaigning as if you're 10 points down no matter what the polls look like.

If Clinton had campaigned the whole time like she did in Pennsylvania, we'd probably be talking about her as the nominee even now.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:41:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Oh ye of little faith (none / 0)

If Clinton had run as the front-runner the entire time and not listened to Mark Penn, she would have had this sewn up...

Like the nominee, don't like the nominee... Our nominee is still better than John McCain...

by JenKinFLA on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:47:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Oh ye of little faith (none / 0)

That I agree with.

by herenow on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:40:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's not about who is stronger. (none / 0)

McCain is not a strong candidate... he was the strongest candidate from an historically weak field.

Like the nominee, don't like the nominee... Our nominee is still better than John McCain...

by JenKinFLA on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:41:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Are you kidding? (none / 0)

Hillary and Obama are both tied with McCain in the polls right now. And this is after Obama has had to spend weeks fending off a tag-team assault from Hillary and the GOP, while Hillary has been given a pass. That should tell you all you need to know.

by Angry White Democrat on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:54:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Actually Obama leads by 7 points. (none / 0)

► http://www.abcnews.go.com/images/Polling Unit/1064a208Election.pdf

"McSame: He's Constipated and Ready to GO!

by Al Rodgers on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:00:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Rove & Co: Clinton Stronger v. McCain (2.00 / 4)

Wow, all Democrats should take Karl Rove's word at face value. What a find! Thanks!

I was just reading about the Detroit Pistons' coach saying that the Celtics would be much tougher if they sat Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett in the upcoming series. "They're good players, no doubt, but we think that the Celtics are a bit easier to handle when they have Pierce and Garnett in the line-up."

by Pat Flatley on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:18:47 PM EST

Nostrodamous (2.00 / 1)

Oh Gawd, remember before the Midterms when Karl said "the Math©" said they would retain the House and Senate!

ahhahahahahhahahahahhahhahahhahah

"McSame: He's Constipated and Ready to GO!

by Al Rodgers on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:23:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Rove & Co: Clinton Stronger v. McCain (2.00 / 1)

I don't find myself overwhelmed with confidence by the projections Rove is doing, especially without any actually back end numbers to support his claims.

A lot of those states he's giving McCain at 4-5% I expect to see in Obama's column at the end of the night November 5th.

by werehippy on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:20:29 PM EST

Re: Rove (2.00 / 4)

Wait, wait, wait. Hold on here. Are you suggesting that Karl Rove might have ulterior motives here?

I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on here.

by Pat Flatley on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:22:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm SHOCKED, too!! (2.00 / 1)

"McSame: He's Constipated and Ready to GO!

by Al Rodgers on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:24:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

BWHWHWHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHH! (2.00 / 2)

I LOVE IT!

Mississippi has them peeing in the pants!

Now they're ...ahem, ahem... planting "double-super-secret internal data" to George Stephanopoulos!

MEMO to Rove:

Darlin' - never let them see ya sweat!

Oh GAWD, I can't stop laughing. Oh, my ribs!!

"McSame: He's Constipated and Ready to GO!

by Al Rodgers on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:20:36 PM EST

Is this based on The Math (tm)? (2.00 / 3)

John McCain on social security.

by heresjohnny on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:20:45 PM EST

Trademark - Copywrite (none / 0)

The Math©

The Math<sup>TM</sup>

The Math®

The Math☺

The Math☻

The Math ( o )( o )

"McSame: He's Constipated and Ready to GO!

by Al Rodgers on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:34:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Some of us are at work :P (none / 0)

[ Donate to Barack Obama ]

by semiquaver on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:52:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Rove & Co: Clinton (2.00 / 3)

Yeah. Let's all do what Karl Rove says is best!

by Reaper0Bot0 on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:20:47 PM EST

Wolf: your sheep are safe with me! (2.00 / 5)

by JJE on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:20:57 PM EST

Re: Rove & Co: Clinton Stronger v. McCain (2.00 / 2)

Well, if Karl Rove says it, you know it must be true.

Proud member of the Wikipedia Generation of American politics

by BishopRook on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:22:26 PM EST

Re: Rove & Co: Clinton Stronger v. McCain (none / 0)

Though I must say, I DO find it funny that DC doesn't even have a percentage. There aren't even any poll numbers, it's just a given that it'll go Democratic.

Proud member of the Wikipedia Generation of American politics

by BishopRook on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:25:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Well yeah (none / 0)

If you had to deal with Republicans cutting you off in traffic, you'd vote Democratic, too.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:31:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Rove & Co: Clinton Stronger v. McCain (2.00 / 1)

is this diary snark or for real

by aaaa05 on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:22:29 PM EST

Re: Rove & Co: Clinton Stronger v. McCain (2.00 / 1)

So Rove, the most dishonest piece of crap should be listened to and trusted? Why, because he supports Hillary Clinton? Maybe he is just trying to cause trouble or trying to get the weaker candidate against McCain?

Matt Drudge, Karl Rove, John McCain and Dick Cheney say Hillary better candidate, so we better nominate her! Yeah, right, ok.

Now, if it comes form someone who champions progressive causes instead of trying to thwart them at every turn, I'll give it a close listen.

United we stand, divided we fall.

by mefeck on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:22:51 PM EST

You do realize (2.00 / 2)

Rove's playing you with reverse psychology. It happens every time.

If Republicans tell you something, believe the opposite and you'll be fine.

by McNasty on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:23:25 PM EST

Yep (2.00 / 1)

We should definetly listen to Karl Rove tell us who to nominate. Yes, great plan!!

by southernman on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:23:59 PM EST

Oh My. (2.00 / 1)

Is this the same Karl Rove who said that the GOP would have a generatinal majority?

by Mike S on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:24:22 PM EST

Re: Rove & Co: Clinton Stronger v. McCain (2.00 / 3)

Rove? Really?
I mean, Karl Rove? We really want to nominate someone based on what Turdblossom thinks? Do I think Hillary is the stronger person running? Maybe. But I'm sick of getting talking points posted on here from GOP shills because you think that they are really telling the truth.

I swear, every single day:
"OMGZ RUSH SAID THAT OBAMA SUX WHY ARENT THE SUPERDELEGATES WATCHIN OMG HE SAYS THAT HILLZ IS BETTER"

"OMGZ HANNITY AND ROVE SAY THAT HILLARY IS MORE ELECTABLE"

Of course they do, and they would be saying the exact opposite if Obama was behind and Hillary was ahead too.

This is my recommendation to you:

Hillary supporter for Barack Obama in 2008

by zcflint05 on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:36:00 PM EST

That's Hillary's biggest mistake (none / 0)

aside from voting for the war, Hillary's biggest mistake was hiring Mark Penn, instead of the well respected Karl Rove

"McSame: He's Constipated and Ready to GO!

by Al Rodgers on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:42:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

seriously.... (none / 0)

cute kitty...

Like the nominee, don't like the nominee... Our nominee is still better than John McCain...

by JenKinFLA on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:43:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

FREE KARL ROVE!!!!! (2.00 / 1)

Oops.

Forgot.

He's not in jail YET.

by emptythreatsfarm on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:36:48 PM EST

Well I wish people had seen this, cuz i agree, but (none / 0)

too late, HRC will keep up the good fight and I admire her for it, but shes not gonna win... Oh well, maybe another time, I wish Obama inspired me, otherwise ill vote for him, and maybe with time be more enthused about him

DEMOCRATIC 08!

by rigsoHC on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:38:38 PM EST

Re: Rove & Co: Clinton Stronger v. McCain (none / 0)

I love how they first tell us Clinton would be easier, then Obama becomes our nominee, and they basically just admitted they tricked us into nodding Obama. Reverse psychology worked

"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States

by DiamondJay on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:43:06 PM EST

overthinking it. :) (none / 0)

Either that or they just want people to get scared and stampede to Clinton and muck things up for the democrats. :P

Clinton's got decades of baggage and negatives at historic highs. Anyone who doesn't think they're desperately trying to run against them is nuts.

Btw, they tried to run against Obama twice already and it failed twice. Where? In congressional seats, even in super strong hasn't-gone-democrat-in-40-years strong districts. And they still lost decisive elections.

And their fundraising has been anemic.

No, the only one they feel can save them at this point is Hillary Clinton because the Clinton brand, fairly or not, brings out the republican base.

by Yalin on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:48:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Don't forget Denny Hastert's seat... (none / 0)

...when Obama was actively working for Foster, the Democrat, and they wiped the floor with the Republicans.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:58:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: overthinking it. :) (none / 0)

the only reason those seats went Dem was because no one other than Dems were paying attention to Wright, and in that part of LA, there are no Dems out there. Same with the other seats they lost. If you think this won't matter come the general, when everyone will give a fuck, then you're mistaken.

"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States

by DiamondJay on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:31:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: overthinking it. :) (none / 0)

DiamondJay, are you from Louisiana? If not, then maybe you shouldn't make stupid assumptions about the demographics of LA-06.

John McCain believes "Women shouldn't have a choice."

by jturn17 on Mon May 19, 2008 at 07:53:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

not really (2.00 / 2)

Actually, that was Rush's tactic when his Operation Chaos failed. "Oh, I meant for Obama to be the nominee ALL ALONG!" Its called saving face.

And I don't know a single Democratic voter who made their choice for candidate based on what Rove of all people had to say about it. Give me a break.

by upstate girl on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:50:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The answer is pretty simple (none / 0)

When you ignore Karl Rove and let him play no role in how you vote, you don't end up with these conundrums.

I do have to say... You folks were supposed to be the 'tough ones' - the ones that could withstand the GOP onslaught. I find it puzzling that you all seem so fearful of idiots like Rover and company say, whether they're playing double/triple/quadruple fake out mind games, etc.

by zonk on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:53:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Remember this little jewel? (2.00 / 4)

This is the map that Rove was pushing at the GSA meeting that cost the director her job.

Rove's maps aren't worth very much.

by notme54 on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:43:24 PM EST

Oh my that is great (none / 0)

The fact that Pryor is unopposed, Johnson is facing some guy less popular than a guy who robbed corpses as a business, in NJ the best R candidate is an Ron Paultard, that Harkin is in any danger. There isn't a credible republican pick up at this time, he was kind of accurate about the R-defense though as at least 4 of them are dem pickups, but he bombed on AK...

Student Guy=JoeMentum. No really Student Guy=JoeMentum, after all JoeMentum was an embarrassment so is Student Guy. This sig is FAIL!!

by Student Guy on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:12:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Karl wouldn't... (2.00 / 2)

...put anything out there to try and mindfuck Democrats, would he? Of course not! Sowing discord among Democrats in an election year that look to be a fundamental reshaping of American politics is the furthest thing from his mind.

He's like that damn snake in Jungle Book..."look into my eyesssssss"

Don't buy what he's sellin'.

Often wrong; seldom in doubt.

by Goober Pea on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:43:46 PM EST

Hello McFly! (2.00 / 2)

"Electoral maps put together by the consulting firm helmed by <<<<<KARL ROVE>>>>>, and obtained by ABC News, show Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, to be a stronger general election candidate in a hypothetical general election match-up against Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., than Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois"

A secret poll analysis just happens show up from KARL ROVE!?!?!?!?! And people is taking this at his word? For God's Sake you are putting your trust in a document with the inscription "Karl Rove & Co" in the upper right hand corner. You think this just happened to show up at the same network that George S works, and therefore it's gospel?

Blind loyalty only goes so far to cover this type of stupidity. We aren't looking at Gallup or Rasmussen or SUSA or ARG; KARL ROVE & CO. has the final word on who is the strongest canididate.

It is finally weird enough for me

"You might well think that. I couldn't possibly comment"

by xenontab on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:47:42 PM EST

every Back to the Future reference is insta-mojo (none / 0)

[ Donate to Barack Obama ]

by semiquaver on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:07:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Rove & Co: Clinton Stronger v. McCain (none / 0)

let's dance with Karl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9SAxKIw2 xo

"harlequin speech of suicide, demanding instantaneous lobotomy"

by nogo postal on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:50:37 PM EST

Re: Rove & Co: Clinton Stronger v. McCain (none / 0)

So now Hillary supporters are using KARL ROVE to endorse her run for the White House? There is something very appropriate yet ironic going on here.

by rf7777 on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:55:07 PM EST

Re: Rove & Co: Clinton Stronger v. McCain (2.00 / 1)

Let's see Rove got 06 wrong. And now he is a pundit on Fox.

So his motives for this projection. How might I help keep the party divided? How might I help get this to go all the way to the convention?

Since when do Democrats take marching orders from Rove.

Finally there are a number of maps showing either Dem candidate capable of winning the GE Obama puts different states into the mix while Hillary's is a more conventional scenario.

TD I know you are a devout Hillary supporter and good on ya, but please don't go to Rove to prove or make points. It gives the appearance that you don't have valid points.

Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof.

by jsfox on Mon May 19, 2008 at 05:57:13 PM EST

the maps and charts from Karl Rove & Co. (none / 0)

The day Democrats let Karl Rove pick their nominee is the day they deserve to lose -- as in 2004.

Fool them once......

Anybody's vote is worth having. But not everybody's vote is worth campaigning for.

by Freespeechzone on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:04:04 PM EST

Re: Rove & Co: Clinton Stronger v. McCain (none / 0)

Karl Rove? This actually got a diary?

Obama/Clark (still dreaming)

by spacemanspiff on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:04:55 PM EST

Re: Rove & Co: Clinton Stronger v. McCain (none / 0)

I hate Karl Rove as much as the next guy, but what he's doing here isn't much different than what all sorts of other sites do.

For the vast majority of the time period he has tracked, Obama was shown as a much better bet. This changed around PA.

So what are you conspiracy theorists really arguing? Did he initially portray Obama as the tougher opponent because he wanted to go against Obama and now, post Wright, is portraying Clinton as the tougher opponent because he wants to go against her? That makes a lot of sense.

Occam's Razor: Its just another political consulting firm doing the same kind of analysis as a million others, and that analysis now suggests that Clinton might be slightly tougher.

John McCain: Extending SCHIP would be an "unfunded liability."

by Fuzzy Dunlop on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:05:16 PM EST

hurr (none / 0)

Actually you're wrong, Karl Rove is a republican operative and if you think he's just parroting statistics he saw you're kidding yourself.

"So what are you conspiracy theorists really arguing? Did he initially portray Obama as the tougher opponent because he wanted to go against Obama and now, post Wright, is portraying Clinton as the tougher opponent because he wants to go against her? That makes a lot of sense."

It doesn't make sense, but that's also not what he's doing. He knows full well that the republicans are going to go up against Obama, he also knows full well that there is a faction in the democratic party that supports Clinton fanatically and the more "evidence" they see that Clinton should be the nominee the harder it will be to reconcile with them in the GE when Obama is the nominee.

Plays like this are what inspired the coining of the phrase "Rovian".

by You are an idiot on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:30:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: hurr (none / 0)

The firm has been averaging poll data and coloring in states according to a formula they established in late February. Its not that complicated.

He of all people should have known for a long time that Obama was the likely nominee. If their intent was purely to manipulate the data in way to drive divisions in the Democratic Party, why would they have spent most of this time predicting that Obama was also the stronger candidate in the general?

John McCain: Extending SCHIP would be an "unfunded liability."

by Fuzzy Dunlop on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:47:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: hurr (none / 0)

It's not about manipulating data, it's about how the data is disseminated.

by You are an idiot on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:55:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

None of us need Rove's help (none / 0)

to be dissatisfied about how the nomination has turned out or to decide that we are reluctant to back Obama. Some of the divisions revealed in this primary have roots that far predate Karl Rove's arrival on the political scene (The 1952, 1956, and 1972 elections, for example).

Rove's electoral estimates are relatively consistent with electoral maps that have been provided by other outlets. I see nothing in them that I haven't seen before.

by lombard on Mon May 19, 2008 at 07:28:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Rove is laughing at you (none / 0)

by Slim Tyranny on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:11:28 PM EST

The terms (none / 0)

Karl Rove and credibility don't go together unless there is a negative in there like Karl Rove lacks credibility or Karl Rove is not credible. Frankly there are a lot of states that disagree with the month's averages of polls...

Student Guy=JoeMentum. No really Student Guy=JoeMentum, after all JoeMentum was an embarrassment so is Student Guy. This sig is FAIL!!

by Student Guy on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:14:52 PM EST

I disagree (none / 0)

He is first and foremost a political strategist and analyst and second a Republican. Like Michael Barone, he is clearly a partisan (and a ruthless one when hired), but his job now is as an analyst and when I have watched him he has shown why he is consulted.

by lombard on Mon May 19, 2008 at 07:21:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Rove & Co: Clinton Stronger v. McCain (none / 0)

I love how people with no clue how the political process in this country works eat up things like this. Karl Rove is a republican operative and this whole primary season he's been trying his hardest to sow the seeds of dissent in the democratic party. Of course he is going to come out and throw more fuel onto the blazing pyre of pseudo-feminist vitriol towards Obama for "stealing" their election (because you know, if Clinton were to ever lose an election it could only possibly be because of sexist thieves).

by You are an idiot on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:25:19 PM EST

Re: Rove & Co: Clinton Stronger v. McCain (none / 0)

Rove, Buchanan, Morning Joe, and every other Republican seem to be rooting for Hillary. I would not take my political advice from any of them. They have been gearing up to run against her since 2004. The Republicans do not have our best interests at heart. After all, Karl Rove has "the" math.

by blue jersey mom on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:30:16 PM EST

Clinton Stronger v. McCain! (none / 0)

see almost the same here (which is not pro-GOP site):
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Cl inton/Maps/May19.html
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Ob ama/Maps/May19.html

Welcome to a Landslide without white Working class, Latinos, Women, Seniors and holding-on sweeties

by engels on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:34:10 PM EST

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha (2.00 / 1)

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ah ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha h ah ah ah ah a hah aha haha ahah ahahahha ahah ahah ahahahah aha ah aha ah aha aha hah aa hhah aha hahaahahha aha ahahahah ahah ahaha ahhahhah ahahah aha aa............ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ah aha ha ha ha ha ha ha .

good ole karl!

by citizendave on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:50:16 PM EST

I guess that passes for a rebuttal in your world (none / 0)

by lombard on Mon May 19, 2008 at 07:17:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I guess (none / 0)

who could i possably quote to re-butt KARL ROVE.

oh did i mention that the info was approved by KARL ROVE.

KARLROVEKARLROVEKARLROVEKARLROVEKARLROVE .

btw, my world is the one where KARL ROVE is the fucking idiot...

tell me about your world.

by citizendave on Mon May 19, 2008 at 07:23:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'd rather not. Your style doesn't exactly fill (none / 0)

me with desire for further discourse with you.

by lombard on Mon May 19, 2008 at 07:29:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'd rather not. (none / 0)

suits me

by citizendave on Mon May 19, 2008 at 07:32:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Who cares? (none / 0)

Jesus Christ, it's KKKarl fucking Rove.

Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.

by sricki on Mon May 19, 2008 at 07:21:56 PM EST

Re: Rove & Co: (none / 0)

Still it is not to early to start a serious discussion about the electoral college and the electoral map.

First off i dont beleive that either Clinton or BO would or could lose MI. No way. And come on like McCain is going to beat BO in WI. I have been to Madison and it may be the most liberal city in the USA.

But there is a difference between HRC and BO. HRC would have won OH and it 20 electoral votes and would have lost big in CO. BO on the other hand IMHO is not going to win OH but could and must win CO. That imho is the big tuna of the election in Nov.

CO and is 9 electoral votes. And one last thing. If you add all the electoral votes from states that Gore won and add CO's 9 votes that gets you too 269 i think that a real possibility. Thomas Jefferson ring a bell?

david

by giusd on Mon May 19, 2008 at 07:50:30 PM EST

Clinton v. McCain (none / 0)

Well, if Karl Rove says so.......

This administration is not sinking. This administration is soaring! If anything, they are rearranging the deck chairs on the Hindenburg!

by venavena on Mon May 19, 2008 at 11:28:57 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.