Live Blogging the SC Primary / Primary Open Thread
By Nicole Belle Friday Jan 25, 2008 4:30pmBrave New Films and TYT will be live blogging the SC Primary and will have guests from the blogosphere to discuss, including our very own John Amato.
Here's the line up (all times in Eastern)
6:10 Nico Pitney, The Huffington Post
6:30 Steve Rosenfeld, Alternet
6:50 Christy Hardin Smith, Firedoglake
7:00 Melody Barnes, CAP Action Fund
7:10 Joe Garofoli, San Francisco Chronicle
7:20 Anthony Palmer, The 7-10
7:40 Alisa Valdes-Rodriguez, Multiplicative Identity
8:00 Kristina Wilfore, Ballot Initiative Strategy Ctr
8:20 Oliver Willis, OliverWillis.com
8:40 Zack Exley, Revolution in Jesusland
9:00 Andrew Rasiej, Personal Democracy Forum
9:10 John Amato, Crooks & Liars
9:30 Pam Spaulding, Pam's House Blend
Below is your very own South Carolina Primary open thread....
Login or Register to post comments.
I heard that there was a record turnout. God, I hope so. If the trends continue the Republican Party will be dust.
The is quite the All-Pro Blogger Roster - more power to every one of you!
I heard on MSNBC that turnout is just average...maybe that was limited only to a specific part of SC though.
tlb22, I hope not. The reason why our country is in such a sad state is because not enough people vote. The right-wing and relgious zealots vote all the time. That's why I encourage young people to vote. Anything to get this country back.
Off topic ... but, could someone please slip that big blowhard Tim Russert a mickey. He really bugs me. Nails on a chalkboard whenever he speaks. GAS BAG.
Go Obama. We love you and wish you the best. Barbara and her students in California!
Exit Polls
74% yes, country ready for female president
77% yes, country ready for black president
Homework: Please consider signing...
www.WexlerWantsHearings.com
http://www.GetItStraightBy2008.org
http://pol.moveon.org/paper2008
Can anyone please post a URL address to the streaming video on Brave New Films as I can't get the embedded stream to work.
Thank You
HSUK @ 9:
http://bravenewfilms.org/network?utm_source=rgemail
Nicole Belle @ 10:
Thank you Nicole....But it's the actual streaming video URL address I'm after, so i can use it to open up the stream in WMP player manually.
Here's the Digg address for the reporting going on over at Brave New Films... etc. Digg It if you have a shovel...
http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/SC_Primary_coverage_Live_interactive_a...
MSNBC projects Obama in a waltz.
7:00 pm EST.
Wow.. that looks like a great lineup, and professionally presented and arranged to boot. Maybe they coudl start doing an alternative Sunday talking heads show.
January 26, 2008
CNN projects Obama wins South Carolina Democratic primary
Posted: 06:59 PM ET
LOL. Projected Winner one minute after polls close.. Barack Obama.!! I still want to make sure the votes are counted accurately.
Voter Verified Paper Ballots with Random Audits ~ America's #1 issue. Needed.
Orangutan. @ 16:
Obama 0 0% 0 0%
reporting
Clinton 0 0% 0
Edwards 0 0% 0
So let's see. He won by a large margin with 0% of the precincts reporting and zero votes counted.
Didn't Kerry win in 2004 based on exit polls?
I realize he might win but seriously they should wait until at least enough of the votes are counted to make a call.
Areyoukiddingme @ 18:
LMAO.......is funny
Its all about skin color on MSNBC...PUKE!
IdahoMoe @ 20:
no kidding. Olberman is losing his credibility going on during these elections and after debates....yuck.
Gore was the projected winner in Florida 2000 too. I actually trust the exit polling more than I do the machines. The exit polls correctly predicted that Gore won in Florida, Kerry won in Ohio, etc. The machines come in and say no or in some cases Jeb Bush, Katherine Harris, and the Supreme Court take over. We still need election reform.
Can someone point me to a link that explains how these networks project winners when 0% of the polls are counted? I can't believe it all relies on exit polling.
I mean, it's not, right?
Right?
you would think the networks would at least EXPLAIN how they calculate Obama by a large margin when 0% have reported...alas, they don't.
Site Monitor: It's based on exit polls
How do we figure out the delegate count now that these projected results are in?
There are 45 delegates up for grab in South Carolina. Barack is expected to gain 20-25. Hillary is supposedly going to get 12-14. And Edwards needs to get at least 15% of the total vote to pull in his share. That is what I gathered from watching MSNBC and reading the Brave New Films scroll.
And Barack is currently leading by 2 delegates over Hillary. I think 2025 delegates are needed to wrap up the nomination and supposedly no one is going to be able to reach that number on Feb. 5th. Or what some people refer to as "Super Tuesday".
And as far as "Super Delegates" go. I don't know. It reminds of "Super Models" or some other dumb thing. I just hope the voting is fair, open, and verifiable, unlike the experiences in Florida and Ohio. And most recently in New Hampshire. Enough of this closed source private corporate run machines with no software oversight or anything. Damn it.
We need Voter Verified Paper Ballots with Random Audits and Congressmen who take our Voting Process more seriously than the ones we have now. Adios.
The Senator From Illinois!
Is it me, or does John Edwards sound exactly like Phil Simms, the NFL broadcaster?...
Seriously though. Here's a conspiracy theory to kick around-
Is there anything that would have prevented the Clintons from contacting John Edwards to woo him as a VP candidate? I think there is some loose evidece that this could be in the cards...
1) In the SC debate, Edwards seemed to pile on when Clinton leveled criticism at Obama regarding "present" votes in the Ill. Senate.
2) Edwards really didn't seem to go after Clinton much at all during that debate
3) Why is Edwards staying in the race? I happen to like him, but you'd think it would become apprent sooner or later that he needs to win some states... It seems that him staying in serves only to diffuse the anti-Clinton vote.
4) In his concession speech in SC, he started by saying "I'd like to join Senator Clnton and Bill Clinton in congratulating..."
I realize this may be a bit far fetched, but has this crossed anyone else's mind? If nothing else, I'd be interested in finding out the regulations regarding when and how VP running mates can be courted/chosen etc.
Is it me, or does John Edwards sound exactly like Phil Simms, the NFL broadcaster?...
Seriously though. Here's a conspiracy theory to kick around-
Is there anything that would have prevented the Clintons from contacting John Edwards to woo him as a VP candidate? I think there is some loose evidence that this could be in the cards...
1) In the SC debate, Edwards seemed to pile on when Clinton leveled criticism at Obama regarding "present" votes in the Ill. Senate.
2) Edwards really didn't seem to go after Clinton much at all during that debate
3) Why is Edwards staying in the race? I happen to like him, but you'd think it would become apparent sooner or later that he needs to win some states... It seems that him staying in serves only to diffuse the anti-Clinton vote.
4) In his concession speech in SC, he started by saying "I'd like to join Senator Clnton and Bill Clinton in congratulating..."
I realize this may be a bit far fetched, but has this crossed anyone else's mind? If nothing else, I'd be interested in finding out the regulations regarding when and how VP running mates can be courted/chosen etc.
Login or Register to post comments.