In 1984 Mondale won AL, GA, TN, NC, and WV.....

[Zynx]

in the primaries. He lost them all in the General Election by the following margins:

Alabama: 60-38
Georgia: 60-39
Tennessee: 58-42
North Carolina: 62-38
West Virginia: 55-44

The ability to win a state primary is no indication of your ability to win that state in a general election. Hillary is not competitive in Oklahoma. Obama is not competitive in Georgia. Get over it.

[Benhurst]

1. Yeah, and we took the area like Grant took Richmond.

I'm still recovering from the wild and uninhibited victory celebration we had that year.

[Zynx]

2. Yeah that was something wasn't it?

I wasn't alive yet, but my parents both voted for Mondale and remember it well.

[NashVegas]

3. Going By the Sheer Numbers of Primary Voters

If they hold and vote along the lines of their primary votes, we'll have a Democratic POTUS.

If, however, they were only voting to determine the outcome of the party candidates and break, it's anyone's game.

[Zynx]

7. Democrats have had more voters in every primary year except 2000.

In 2000 in open primaries Democrats crossed in big numbers to vote for McCain.

[Thrill]

4. I think everyone knows this. But in the case of somewhere like VA

if Obama wins there big like he won in GA. That may be a sign of a flip in November

[Zynx]

5. Obviously a great many don't otherwise I wouldn't have felt the need to post this.

Virginia is also a drastically different state than Georgia. We'll see.

[AX10]

6. Also, he wan many caucus's.

They are not elections. They are meetings of party elites who have fallen in love with BHO.

[Zynx]

8. I didn't happen to have anything but the primaries in front of me, but yes.

[joshcryer]

12. Indeed.

[thevoiceofreason]

9. Non sequitur

He was running against a wildly popular president.

[Zynx]

10. It still was no indication of general election strength.

What happens in our primaries is an isolated affair from the state in general. Thats's what looking at historical primary data tells me.

[cd3dem]

11. I realized last night why caucuses don't go for Hillary

b/c the over 60 people don't go as much... it is late and many older people do not like to drive after dark... I was going to drive several seniors to caucus last night but they were scared to go... so they stayed home... if we had a primary they would have gone during the day... last night was a bunch or young clueless kids people who never walked a block dropping lit.... and never watched a debate I am sure... never spoke to a candidate and asked questions... never read about an issue...

was asked afterw the caucus... "don't you want change?" I said, "what change, how is it going to change? tell me something?" all she could say was "change" "change" "change"

can't believe it!!!

[Thrill]

13. Thats not why. Its about

grassroots and on the ground working. Which is why Clinton won in NV. She had a better operation. Caucuses are all about GOTV and interacting with people. Which is why Barack is going to win big in Washington. He has had a ton of offices and people working up there for a long time. Bottom line is he use to be a community organizer, so these are the type of things he is really really good at.

[Benhurst]

15. The caucuses are very undemocratic (small "d") and favor select

groups of voters.

All the "change" rhetoric is frightening. If unspecified change is what they want, they should have been very happy with George Walker Bush. The past eight years have brought more change (to the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, civil rights in general, and our moral --I should say immoral -- stance on the world scene) than we have seen for the past two hundred years.
Yeah, Change is wonderful, no matter what it is. What bloody absurdity!

[sniffa]

14. Welcome to DU Lanny Davis

:hi: