Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (369711)	2/3/2008 12:39:56 PM
From: RetiredNow	Respond to of 1583406

Yes, I know. I think they read the tea-leaves and saw Obama surging and realized they don't have ANYONE in the Republican party that can beat him, but that if they are to have a shot at all, then they had to get behind someone who is closer to the center than Romney. That someone is McCain. The truth is that in the polls, McCain is in a statistical dead heat with Obama, but Obama consistently beats him by 1-2 %. So let's see how this pans out. Here's what's interesting. The one thing the Republicans do a damn sight better than the Democrats is organize and enforce party discipline. They always do what's best for the party. That almost always results in putting forth the most electable candidate. The Democrats, on the other hand, are less disciplined. They are more likely to be governed by inertia, than to grasp a new strategy that has the best chance of delivering them victory. But even more true to the Democratic party, they tend to BE more Democratic in who they choose. This is what we're all counting on to get Obama to the top. So which part of the party will win? The inertia-driven part or the bold, Democratic part? Ultimately, that will determine whether there is a Democrat in the White House come 2009.