GP Poll: Who Will Win Pennsylvania Primary?

The Democratic presidential nomination could turn on tomorrow’s primary in Pennsylvania. And while both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have had their issues with video games, this campaign has far deeper ramifications.

As a Keystone State resident, I can assure you that the candidates are working overtime with appearances, rallies and the like. And phone calls…

Here at GPHQ we’ve received about a dozen calls since last week, evenly divided between the Clinton and Obama camps. Phone calls from volunteers, recorded messages from candidates, and even one from Bill Clinton.

So we’re running a poll today and tomorrow to ask GamePolitics readers who they think will win in Pennsylvania.

Be sure to vote!

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. 0
    Austin Lewis ( User Karma: 0 ) says:


    Actually asshat, I’m a criminologist. You talk about things that you don’t understand or that you saw on TV (PROTIP: TV IS NOT A RELIABLE SOURCE OF INFORMATION). Law and order doesn’t make you an expert on the criminal justice system.

    Juries are easily bribed (even when sequestered). Pleading Guilty doesn’t help you at all unless you plea-bargain. Many of the things you said were, in fact, wrong.

    You, like Kanders, ought to pull your head out of your ass. If you think you know more about the judicial system, you’re sadly mistaken.

  2. 0
    Shadowfox ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @ Austin

    … You really don’t know how the judicial system works… Normally, I’d say that I’d hate to see you in court, but it’d be too damn funny to see you trying to bribe the jury.

    As for Psychology… Well, I’ll just leave it at that you will be advised NOT to plead insanity, as well as go into psychology (although it would enlighten you on actual psychology, nonetheless).

  3. 0
    Austin Lewis ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @ Ravenhawk
    I believe it, having looked at them.

    A lot of the things democrats have been pushing are things that pretend to help the needy, and just help their lobbyists and personal interests.

  4. 0
    Ravenhawk ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Sure this discussion is over, but I’d just like to throw one little note out:

    @Austin Lewis: No self-respecting communist would ever support Hillary. The programs she supports aren’t socialism. They’re insurance scams PRETENDING to be socialism that will do little to actually help the working class and will do all the more to buffer up interests of the entrenched insurance and pharmaceutical industries.

  5. 0
    Austin Lewis ( User Karma: 0 ) says:


    To begin with, pleading guilty doesn’t reduce jack-shit unless you plea bargain. Plea-bargainning cuts down on the time spent in court. Say I murdered someone, and they know it. We could go to court for a year and a half, or I could go from premeditated murder to something like manslaughter (with time served), and they don’t have to worry about me winning, and I don’t have to worry about spending life in prison.

    In summation, pleading guilty doesn’t reduce your sentence on its own.

    You can bribe a jury, it’s actually done fairly often. You can also have an effect on the selection of a jury, which is the most amazingly clever way of assuring the outcome you want.

    Being a lawyer is about litigation. Except in Hillary’s case, it was more about how much money she could bring in for her firm. SHE WAS A RAINMAKER.

    As to insanity, it is amazingly easy to find someone with a degree in Psychology, Psychiatry, or something akin, to say ‘oh yeah, that dude is batshit nuts. If you look at DSM-IV-TR, it says he suffers (name obscure ‘disease’ here)’.

  6. 0
    Shadowfox ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Actually, it’s not about finding loophole and gaps in the laws themselves. District and State police forces often mess up something in terms of procedural due process (that’s why all police officers are asked to read your rights from a card, so that they can’t mess up if they just read the card). It’s also not about who can bribe the most people. You can’t bribe the jury, and a judge would be stupid to take a bribe. Being a lawyer is either about making the jury believe your side or creating believeable doubt in the procecution’s case. Remember: there is no verdict such as “innocent,” only “not guilty.”

    In fact the system that’s broken is the election process itself, and with congressmen, once they get into office, the lobbyists take hold! Although, that wouldn’t be a problem if American politicians were amoung one of the least paid politicians world-wide.

    Maybe our founding fathers would be pissed, considering that out constitution was supposed to be a temporary system to last 20 years at the most. Maybe they’d be amazed at that fact. Also, considering that, historically, it’s the shortest AND longest-lasting constitution in the world, I’d figure that they would be at least a little bit amazed.

    … Also, on a side-note, if insanity is pleaded, it must be proved. Pleading guilty, on the other hand, just reduces your sentance.

  7. 0
    Austin Lewis ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @Jon kanders
    Well jackass, let me explain something to you.

    Being the first blank to do something isn’t an achievement. It doesn’t make you better than the people who did it before.

    The first woman to go to West Point? Worthless as a soldier and leader. Wasted a slot, and was hated by faculty and cadre alike. She was there just so she could claim to be the first.

    Unlike most partners, she rarely litigated at her law firm. You see, she was what lawyers call a rainmaker; someone who has a name that brings in cases. THAT is why she was made a full partner, not because she’s a great lawyer.

    The college is spelt Wellesley by the way, and the only reason she got to give the speech was because the 400 graduates demanded she be able to give it to comment on the Senator’s actions of late.

    Giving a commencement speech doesn’t make you intelligent; it means you have charisma. Big fucking deal.

    Obama wasn’t the first black editor, he was the first black president. But I do appreciate your ability to talk with half truths and poor opinions. Come back when your short response doesn’t contain glaring grammatical errors and stupidity.

    You, sir, are a dumbass the likes of which I haven’t encountered in the last five years.

  8. 0
    Jon Kanders ( User Karma: 0 ) says:


    You’re right. Hillary is an idiot. She was the first woman partner at her law firm because she was stupid. She was the first student to deliver the commencement address at Wellsely because she was banging her professors and not because she was extraordinarily bright. Your claims that she only knows the issues because she has advisors is just idiotic. Your claims that Obama, the first black editor of the Harvard Law Review, is not bright is also pretty stupid on it’s face. Basically you are a dumbass.

  9. 0
    Bill ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    That’s funny the poll is missing.

    Well this poll goes to show that the majority of the voters who participated don’t pay attention to the current events which has shown Hillary was likely to win in Pennsylvania.

    It appears more people voted what they wished would happen instead of what was likely.

  10. 0
    Austin Lewis ( User Karma: 0 ) says:


    She knows nothing of the issues. What she says are the regurgitated words of the people who write her speaches. The only issues she knows a damn thing about are the ones that she wants to use to turn the USA into a communist nation.

    By the way, its been proven that Hillary appeals more to lower-class people who are, for the most part, without college and highschool diplomas. Why? Because her policies are pro-communism, and anyone who knows anything about history could draw some clear parallels between what she says and what other communists have said.

    Hillary is one of the biggest liars of all time. On many policies (medicare and medicaid, for example) the only thing she has to say is what has been written for her. Now, when it comes to things like her Fairness Doctrine, she can speak for 2 hours from the heart (because she shouldn’t have to pay a cent of tax on her and her husband’s 10 million dollars a year, but the people who do REAL work to earn 250 thousand a year should have to pay 52 percent tax, right?) about how it’ll be better for the ‘country’ (ie her constituents). If you want to find a bigger hypocrite than Hillary, you’ll be hard pressed.

    For the record Kanders, I never claimed Obama was intelligent either.

    By the way, before you try and talk down to me, I suggest you pull your head out of your ass and go meet the candidates. The only reason Hitlery can give a two hour speech on anything is because she’s been prepped for all the ‘issues’ that people ask her about on TV.

  11. 0
    Austin Lewis ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Here’s the thing.

    Hillary will win the primary, with the same tactics she’s using right now (plus maybe some of those good old fashioned ‘making people disappear’ tactics she borrowed from her husband). She’ll go up against McCain, who enough democrats will vote for out of spite that McCain will win. This is the best way for things to go, really.

    Hillary panders to stupid people. Seriously. That’s all there is to it. She’s got no leadership potential, knows nothing about the issues, and is a complete fucking communist (fairness doctrine).

    Obama really isn’t much better. He’s all for signing on to certain UN agreements, including one in which we would send .8 percent of our GDP (It’s either .8, .9, or .6) more to African nations in need (where they will promptly turn it into Ak47s and continue oppressing their own people). The other side of this agreement is that civilians are no longer allowed to own Pistols, Assault rifles, sniper rifles (by the way, many of our hunting rifles are classifiable as sniper rifles under this agreement) and any other destructive device. He’ll sell us out to the UN, which has a long history of trying to screw us over, nevermind that we pay for the UN building. Part of the problem is that countries like Nigeria get an equal say to countries like England and the USA.

    McCain is somewhat anti-gaming, as they all are, but not to the point where it will dominate his presidency. Actually, he’ll probably drop it once he’s in office. Remember, campaign promises aren’t very accurate. Look at their overall record from before they started campaigning.

    Moral of the story?

    They all suck, but McCain sucks the least, followed by Obama, and Hitlery is by far the worst.

  12. 0
    Brandon says:

    It really doesn’t matter, but most likely Obama. They are all professional liars. And all give a shifty vibe to me, well Hilary and Barak anyways, damn attention whores. And look at the voters they are getting, when you look for voters on YouTube you really are aiming at bottom of the barrel trying to get everything you can, which works cause they are young and stupid (they haven’t persoanlly witnessed a representative of their voice betray them yet). And before any little turds spout racism or sexism let me make this clear, I don’t care who takes the job as long as they are a decent human being. Be it woman, black, white, or Martian, I don’t care. :)

    I really don’t care what there stance are on videogames, I know Hilary and buddies Liberman ride with the JT nutjob so I have little faith in her… Barak… I can’t tell, the dude is a shifty little bugger i know that. I can tell when I look at these people and he just looks like a freakin’ rubicks cube… McCain looks like he couldn’t care less, which is good and bad. He probably wouldn’t bother videogames but wouldn’t think to hard about not signing bans. And despite being Republican (and expected congress puppet) he actually looks like a decent person, the only one I would vote for if I had a gun to my head.

    [little off tangent, but may be interesting for those with an open mind]
    And for some reason the “Mabus” term from Nostradamus’ prediction is ringing a bell…

    While osaMABUSh works… so does obaMABUSH.

    Bush started this “epic” war, and no matter what Obama will continue it. If he keeps the troops there, a lot of people are gonna die over there. We bring the troops back home, well guess where the war will move too… home as well. These people are not going to stop, they are commited to bringing this place down at any cost.
    [/open minded thought over]

    So all in all Obama will win presidency and America will continue the spiral into economic downfall (oh noes! The almighty dollar! :O), immigration continues to balloon (not just Mexico to blame), and crime will increase (thanks to gang members for your excellent contributions!), kinda like Russia at the end of the Cold War, only we’ll have a fukkin war to deal with as well. :)

    Just remember the next election (after this years) is 2012, another coincidence maybe? We’ll see… 😀

    I’m thinking about voting for Buckethead, he would make for a fun president! 😀

    Peace :)

  13. 0
    Shadowfox ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @ Gray17

    Actually, lies. It’s the way that the government works with the three branches and powers given to each branch to counter other branches (Executive can veto, Legislative creates spending limits, Judicial can smack down co-op actions of the Legislative and Executive, etc.).

    Obama is running a campaign mainly on “Change.” The change? To make some of the politics in Washington, D.C., fair so that the people are more accurately represented. How? Lobbyists. Now, in all fairness, a lot of stuff goes down in D.C. that would surprise you. In any other city, in any other occupation, it’s pretty much taboo at the least. For Congressmen? It’s business! Now, in that sense, and only considering that information, change sounds good, very good.

    But the President can’t change that.

    Obama’s idea of instating change is to become president so that he can change some of the ways that the Legislative branch works, which, quite frankly, isn’t how it works. In order for Obama to change how Congress works in that area, he’d have to stay in congress and be a team player — which he’s against — and change it from the inside. That means that he has to take money from lobbyists and companies (which, from his wording, I’d say that he already does (since he says that he’s the only candidate that doesn’t take money from OIL companies, leaving out every other type of company there is)), as well as party politics. Things that he opposes.

    However, I find it odd that he’s so proud of not taking money from companies. How many books does he have out? I think I remember reading that he’s written 2 books… One dirty trick of companies paying their respects is to buy thousands of copies of books written by congressmen (Senators and Representatives alike), so the congressman gets money. However, it’s not in a healthy donation to their campaign funds. It’s straight to their own bank accounts.

    We run into some other issues as well. Most congressmen who decide to run for president often face a single common problem: they have a record. Look at Obama: he’s attacking Hillary because (and I’m paraphrasing here) “she sent troops to Iraq.” Honestly, all that bill said was that, if diplomacy failed, military action could be taken, which was the only way Bush would let that pass (otherwise, he’d probably just send the troops in anyway). Also, they all like to play a little trick: they “passed a law.” Passing a law doesn’t mean that it went into effect. It could have been vetoed and then shot down during the second run of votes. It was still passed.

    Unfortunately, something that I’ve been saying would happen has: many votes are coming down to either race or gender. Hey, here in Philly, Mayor Nutter is being criticized for supporting Hillary and not Obama. Quite frankly, no matter their race, if the deciding factor for voting for someone is their race, that’s racism. Same goes for sexism in this case.

    In my honest opinion, I’d rather have Hillary in office. Hey, she’s not perfect, and she’s using as many little tricks as Obama is (but she’s not lying that she will change the way congress works). If Obama really does go through with his platform, and he does become president, things will be catastrophic. He needs experience, he needs to actually understand how things work in D.C. He can’t force the Republicans to do anything, but he would have some leeway over the Democratic congressmen. If he says, “Alright, Democrats, vote however your people want you to,” well, it’ll be even more elitist, I can tell you that, and the Republicans will continue to stick together and have their way. Nothing will get done, and, overall, we’ll have a very unproductive government in the works.

    This presidential campaign is very unappealing to me. Not to long ago (well, when I was 10, but…), I was excited that this presidential election would be the first election I’d ever get to vote at. Hillary has experience, and knows how things work. I hate republicans (Philly is 85% registered Democrat, you know, or at least that’s what my AP Government & Politics teacher says), so no McCain there. If Obama is the Democratic candidate, I won’t vote. Voting third-party is pretty much useless, and I won’t give the Republicans another 4 years. I can’t vote for Obama. He’s pretty much running his entire campaign on one big, fat lie that people are rallying behind. It’s not that I don’t want to see a black president, or prefer to see a female president. It’s not the party affiliation. It’s just the lie that prevents me from wanting to vote for Obama. Granted, give me a few months and I might be saying, “Well, I sure don’t want McCain in office, so I might as well vote Obama.”

    The guy’s just lying to the American people, and doing pretty damn good, too. That’s what’s bugging me the most.

  14. 0
    Father Time ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    “And phone calls…”

    Did you get any at 3 AM?

    Although I can’t vote because I live in California, unfortunately though I turned 18 after the primary so I couldn’t vote (although it makes my job easier since now come election I only have to research 2 candidates).

  15. 0
    Aaron says:

    Well i’m sure Hillary will win PA. But i really don’t care if Hillary or Obama kill each other. Those two are Marxist filth anyway. McCain i’m not too happy about either but this country can’t afford a pinko in the White House who will take away a lot more than just my games. I gotta go with McCain and hope that the folks that really care about our country keep his feet to the fire if he becomes president.

  16. 0
    Icehawk ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @ J C

    Game Politics. This is simply the political side of that. The vast majority of items we get here are game based without much of a hint of the political, seems only fair to have the adverse.
    Besides who wins the next election could have a major impact on our games so it is best to keep advised as to the going-on’s and that does belong here.

  17. 0
    Neeneko ( User Karma: 0 ) says:


    I am guessing the republicans do not believe McCain will win. Otherwise they would not have used a rebate-based economic package like they just did. Such stimulus packages are generally designed to gain short term good will at the expense of whoever will be in office next april.

  18. 0
    Neeneko ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    *ponders* I find it interesting how many obama supporters rail against how negative clinton is and she should quit the race, yet they fail to look at their own behavior. obama has supporters doing the dirty work for him.

    if you look at how negative the whole mess is, I see far more bile coming from obama’s camp then clinton’s.

    Beyond that, people keep talking about how opportunistic, power hungry, dodgy, etc clinton is. of COURSE she is, she is running for president! All three candidates are pulling stuff like that.. the only difference is clinton is a woman and american’s have an image of how powerful women should behave.. and it’s not like powerful men (which is how she is basically acting).

    Though for the record, I’m not a clinton supporter or even a democrat so this is coming from a bit of an ouside perspective.

  19. 0
    Overcast says:


    yep… doesn’t matter – the public loses.

    It’s just that some people decide that one set of lies told by a person is better than another set of lies told by a different person.

    All depends on who’s lies you choose to believe.

  20. 0
    Jack Wessels ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I can’t vote yet, and I’m gonna miss the General Election by about 2 months.

    But, also being a native Pennsylvanian, I’m really hoping Obama comes out on top here.

  21. 0
    Syco ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @ Conejo

    He said video games aren’t the most important thing in the world. Some people cant seem to understand thats not the same as wanting to censor them

  22. 0
    Conejo ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    anyone who bashes Obama over his “put down the games” comment is a grade-A moron. period.

    if Obama wins, it will be monumental. if Hillary wins, it won’t be by enough.
    either way it’ll be a tough slog through the DNC.

    and voting Hillary over Obama is a guaranteed vote to ban your vidja games.

  23. 0
    Icehawk ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Gauling as it might sound I think Jon Kanders and Schadenfreude are correct (though the presentatoin was questionable). The poll was Who will win in PA. Not who do you want to win. The general concesus seems to be that that Hiterlery will win. Pity. Still, it seems unlikely (to the put of “who are you trying to kid?) that she will win with enough of a margin to do her any good.

  24. 0
    Shih Tzu says:

    ~the1jeffy: I’m sure there are some cosmetic differences, but his foreign policy is just as (if not more) hawkish: McCain is 100% behind continuing the war in Iraq, and hasn’t exactly shown reservations about Iran either.

  25. 0
    GruntyThirst713 ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I do hope that Obama will win, but I somehow doubt he will in Pennsylvania. With the recent controversies regarding his speach about how Pennsylvanians turn to “God and guns” and media accusations that he’s an elitist, and the fact that Clinton has been hammering away at those controversies, I don’t think he will. I don’t think Clinton will beat him by a large margin, though, and a big victory is what she will need in order to get the nomination as Democratic nominee.

  26. 0
    Schadenfreude says:

    Fools are voting who they WANT to win, not who actually WILL win. Clinton has been strong and projected to win PA for months. I’m an Obama supporter, but I can’t see him pulling a victory there; At best, it’ll be a small margin loss for Obama.

  27. 0
    Cathy says:

    Hillary will win. Obama has huge crowds to be sure. But Hillary has an older population that will not necessarily turnout at an event. I don’t know that her margin will be huge. I think it may run tight, similarly to Texas.

  28. 0
    AdioBam says:

    whoever wins the general election, be it Obama, Clinton, or McCain (to a much lesser extent) we lose.

    the democrats want to take away as much as possible from you, and McCain just flat out is…McCain.

  29. 0
    ~the1jeffy says:

    McCain is basically running for a third term for George W. Bush?

    Are you kidding? Look, I’m no big fan of McCain, but that statement is uninformed in the extreme.

    Oh wait, this is the internet – Obama rulezz! /sigh

  30. 0
    Loudspeaker ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Unfortunately as this whole process drags on it further’s McCain’s cause. Mark my words, when someone is FINALLY decided as the Democratic candidate for President, McCain and the Republican party will harp on the fact it took soooo long to finally decide on who’s going to run against him and if it takes that long to make such a decision how effective will they be in the White House? Ugh, you know it’s coming and it sucks.

    Politics FTL.

  31. 0
    X37V says:

    There’s a big difference between who I think will win and who I want to win. I’m sure Clinton will win Pennsylvania, she’s been way up in the polls since the beginning (though Obama has closed much of the gap). I would like it if Obama won Pennsylvania, but I’m confident he will win the nomination (just look at the math of how many pledged delegates he’s likely to end up with) so I’m not concerned.

  32. 0
    GoodRobotUs ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I’m not a US resident, but my money is riding on Obama, he seems to have the crest of the wave at the moment.

    And take it from a UK Resident, female leaders are nothing special, the last one we had was more of an authoritarian control freak than anything else. Though, in all fairness, that was more down to the person than the gender, but I don’t see Hilary being a million miles from Thatcher in that respect either.

  33. 0
    Paulrus ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Yeah. I’d LOVE for Obama to win… but Hillary may take it since people are SOOOO desperate for a female president.

    I’m still not forgiving my state (Ohio) for voting for Hillary.

  34. 0
    Monte ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    One thing that concerns me about the victor is the likely hood that the next president will be appointing new judges to the supreme court… bush already managed to stack two of them in there… Quite frankly, i would not trust Hilary at all for choosing Supreme court justices… between Clinton and McCain, i think i would rather trust McCain more with that responsibility… as far as Republicans go, i think he’s more moderate than most conservatives and is more willing to compromise… With Clinton, i just KNOW she will put on “nanny-state” justices… With McCain, i feel that, while conservative, he will put on more moderate justices…

    Not exactly… despite the difference in delegates Clinton still has a real chance of getting the nomination. Neither of them will reach the 2025 delegates they need to automatically win the candidacy and as such the decision will come down the Democratic Convention which can pretty much vote however they please… if they really want, they can give the candidacy to Clinton despite her lower delegate count. However it will take a lot for the convention to vote against the majority delegate count; would likely result in a lot of backlash.

    Right now, Clinton’s strategy is to prove that Obama is a poor choice and can’t win the final election against McCain… essentially she’s trying to prove that this is a case where the majority voters are wrong.

    What’s so problematic about the whole thing is that if Obama wins the candidacy she will have done considerable damage to his campaign. First, by having the democratic nomination run into June, McCain is able to campaign unopposed and gain support. 2nd, her tactics are more about mud slinging Obama and convincing people he’s bad, as opposed to the MUCH more tasteful tactic of just trying to convince people she’s better. The mudslinging she uses against Obama and the damage she’s done will carry over to the general election; it will weigh Obama down and give McCain some aid (If McCain wins he should send a gift basket to Hillary to thank her for helping knock Obama down a few pegs)

    really, unless she actually thinks McCain would be a better choice for president, then she’s a complete idiot, is thinking of only of herself and fails to see the bigger picture. If she and Obama really do carry some of the same views and if she would rather a democrat win as opposed to McCain, then she should be willing to take one for the team, and do what she can to support Obama to make sure we get a democrat in the whitehouse… At the very least, if she wanted to still take a shot for the whitehouse, she should continue her campaign in such a way that what she says can’t be used against Obama during the general election

  35. 0
    Jon Kanders ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    wow, I thought GP users were savvy. Looking at the poll, the majority are dumbasses. The Q isn’t who do you want to win, it’s who is going to win.

  36. 0
    Mona Mackel says:

    Clinton UGH

    I pray it is Obama but afraid it will be Clinton / she will do anything to win

    evan be filmed throwing back A SHOT followed by a beer
    so every one knows she is one of the boys.

    I have always hoped I would see a woman president. but not this one she makes women look cheap.

  37. 0
    Vake Xeacons ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @ the 1 jeffy,

    You’re right: not voting does protest anything (although, I made a pretty logical argument for non-voting earlier this year; it was pretty convicing). Vote 3rd party.

    Actually, I’ll probably go with Alan Keyes in the final election; he’s the one I should have voted for last time, regardless of his chances. His values line up closest with mine, and he hasn’t said anything against games yet.

    Games aren’t the only thing that matters to me; I’m obviously not voting for some scumbag, no matter how much they claim to support games.

    If push comes to shove, I’ll vote for myself, just to show I don’t support any major candidate.

  38. 0
    Tom says:

    The delegate math says that the contest has been decided for a while now, but the media is enjoying the ratings so they’re portraying the race as closer than it actually is. Even giving Clinton extremely generous projections for the remaining primaries, she can’t catch up to Obama in delegates. Even giving her every single super delegate who hasn’t come out supporting either candidate, she wouldn’t be able to reach the magic number to clinch the nomination.

    It’s just scorched earth politics for the Clinton right now. She wants to do as much damage to Obama as possible so that he’ll lose the general election and she can run again in 4 years.

  39. 0
    Nagaina ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Clinton will “win” Pennsylvania, but not by a large enough margin to overtake Obama in the delegates count. It’ll come down to a knife-fight at the Democratic Convention this summer.

  40. 0
    ~the1jeffy says:


    Just vote third party. Not voting doesn’t protest anything. A silly write-in won’t even be counted (unfortunately they count as a provisional ballot and only are counted if the state is heavily contested. They are counted eventually, for history, but not in delegating electoral votes).

  41. 0
    Neeneko ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I’m not sure how much it actually matters at this point.

    After months of bickering too many people from either camp won’t vote for the other now. Obama supporters have become as acidic to Clinton has the republicans at this point…. and many Clinton supporters are just giving up on the party.

    The democrats are probably too fractured and self-destructive now. Republicans will probably get the whitehouse now.

  42. 0
    ~the1jeffy says:

    Clinton will take PA. Remember, only D’s can vote, so the Republican middle counties don’t count for squat. I’ll be getting up early to drive back to my old district to vote. Obama might take Philly, but Obama’s (much over-hyped) recent comment probably nixed him the western PA hunter vote, and any straggling D’s in the center of the state. Silly, what will change people’s mind on voting.

    I just go to and look at voting records. Obama’s far too much a leftist for me to vote for him in the General Election, but he’s consistant, whereas Hitlery will flip for a vote on the thin edge of a dime.

  43. 0
    James says:

    Thanks, Canary from the UK, for asking so nicely. Barack Obama will become our 44th President, evicting Bush from the White House and ending our long national nightmare.

    Hillary Clinton will win Pennsylvania (ugh!), though not by much. Considering she was leading Obama by 16 points only a few weeks ago, he’s done an excellent job tightening up this race, despite her very negative and destructive campaign.

  44. 0
    Vake Xeacons ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Well, obviously, Obama’s the lesser of the two evils. But I still worry about his hypocritical message, saying kids should be more involved in art and music, then turn around and tell parents to put the games away.

    Is there no candidate on our side?

  45. 0
    TBone Tony ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    From what I have heard, I don’t think they both would not be any good for the Videogame Industry.

    Sure I may be an Australian and I would perfer Obama over Clinton anyway since Obama’s views on Videogames are only just his opinions.

    Clinton’s opinions are so extreme that she wants to turn them into law.

    So I would ask you Americans to do what you can to chose Obama for your Democrat Candidate, but think verry carefully when you decide either Republican or Democrat as it is that the Anti-gamers can be from one or the other depending where you guys live.

  46. 0
    Shadowfox ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    PA is, district-wise, mostly Rebuplican due to its many suburban and country areas. In that sense, I think that Clinton has a good chance of winning. However, with Obama’s political nonsense that he spouts at every rally, he’s attracting quite a crowd, and I wouldn’t be very surprised if he won. I admit, change is a very appealing platform, but he’s campaigning on lies… That work, nonetheless. That’s politics for you.

  47. 0
    RedThorn says:

    The poll should have different options for the margin of victory. Clinton will most likely win PA, I think the real question is whether she can win with a big enough margin to make any real headway in the overall delegate count.

  48. 0
    jadedcritic ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Don’t know. I hope Barak wins, because I can’t vote for Billary or McCain. If he doesn’t carry the democratic nomination I’m gonna have to either not vote or vote for some ridiculous write-in candidate.

  49. 0
    Dracis says:

    As much as I want Obama to win Pennsylvania, I don’t think he will. He won’t lose by much mind you, but with the “Kitchen sink” politics of the Clintons, I just think he’s not had enough time after the latest few gaffes he and his campaign have made.

    I hope I’m wrong though and I hope Pennsylvanians prove me wrong.

  50. 0
    Brandon says:

    Since when have lawyers been intelligent?! (JT ring a bell?!)
    Cause they were lawyers, they equal awesome? Dear Lord…

    I didn’t think it was that hard to claim “insanity” for you guilty ass client is it really? The law is not a challenge to work in because it’s FUCKING BROKEN! You can do whatever you want! It’s a game of who the better BSer is, who can find the most loopholes, who can bribe the most people… it really is a big fucking joke.

    Oh man… America is in deep shit… the founding fathers would be pissed. Hahaha!

    And Austin +1 lol

  51. 0
    Jon Kanders ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    @Austin Lewis

    Hillary “knows nothing about the issues”? I challenge you to find one article written by any journalist that claims Obama knows more about the issues than Hillary. She is a policy wonk through and through. She could give a 2 hour speech on any political issue you can think of. Obama has been criticized for months for being vague on his policies. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Just like the idiots you claim Hillary panders to.

  52. 0
    Kajex ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    It’s not going to matter, because their stances on every issue and nearly the exact same friggin’ thing, and they know it- so they’ve resorted to name-calling and just about every political dirty trick known in the book.

    And in the end, McCain is probably going to win. -.-

  53. 0
    Cheater87 ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    I’m importing my games from Europe if Hillary wins. The censorship she will bring will be worse then the comics code authority from the 50s. :'(

  54. 0
    Shih Tzu says:

    Hillary will probably win Pennsylvania, but she has no way of overtaking Obama’s delegate lead. It’s pretty much over. And since McCain is basically running for a third term for George W. Bush, who 75% of the nation hates, I think it shouldn’t be too hard for him to take the White House (presuming our media actually talks about real issues at some point instead of focusing on meaningless campaign nonsense like who did what in Bosnia or does someone have an elitist vibe, which means I take that back and we’re all doomed to four more years of Bush).

    Under our current system, voting third-party is basically the same as not voting at all, so I heartily endorse this option for all Republicans unhappy with McCain.

  55. 0
    Benji ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Hillary needs a big win in PA to make herself seem a serious contender, and it looks like she’s not getting that big win. Hillary wins the battle, but odds are Barack wins the war.

  56. 0
    Gaddez ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Clinton’s going to win; last weeks “debate” (more like a 3:1 mugging) spent the first half dredging up every stupid non-issue POS gaffe that could be found on obama, and he hasn’t had the chance to bounce back from that flurry of bullshit.

    Obama’s still gonna win though, unless the Supers decide to ignore the fact that he’s won more states, more delegates, and the popular vote.

    As to Obama’s hypothetical chances in the election: I’m thinking pretty good. Mcain seems to be willing to carry on bush’s policies regarding iraq, and that’s gonna hurt him big time. The fact that he doesn’t grasp that the economy is weak right now will not work out in his favor.

  57. 0
    T5 ( User Karma: 0 ) says:

    Anyone else bothered by the fact that all three canidates at the moment are Washington insiders, senators no less, and senators have a very sketchy record in the white house (at lest from a modern perspective)

  58. 0
    Jenosavel says:

    I think Hillary will win, remember that she started off this long stretch between primaries up by 20. However, I think the gap will have closed enough that her win won’t have enough delegates associated with it to mean much. That won’t stop her from wringing every drop of worth she can out of even a tiny victory, but in the end it will be hard to spin the math.

    I understand the wariness of some gamers over Obama’s “put down the games” comments… but really, isn’t that what we’ve been wanting all along? For government to advocate responsible parenthood as opposed to legislation? Never did Obama say stop playing games altogether, just that occasionally parents do need to make their kids take a break to do other things too. It seems reasonable enough to me.

    Clinton, you can rest assured, would love to legislate games into oblivion.

    One last thought that I would like to leave, is that while the candidates stances on games aren’t all that meaningful in light of other issues, how it reflects on their attitudes towards broader technology is somewhat important. The fact that Obama understands the importance of net neutrality, and is taking advice from Lawrence Lessig, means a great deal to me.

  59. 0
    Gray17 ( User Karma: 0 ) says:


    Voting for a third party, or a non-silly write in is probably a better protest than not voting or voting for something silly.


    Lies, or empty promises? Because there is a difference.

Leave a Reply