Talk:Super Tuesday

Graffiti?

At the end of the article, someone added info on an Aswin Sindar (sp?). Looks like graffiti to me.

Typo?

under 2008, that should say in the Spring of 2007 right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.181.211.115 (talk) 19:14, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mortgage Industry

The author is not aware the mortgage industry also has a "Super Tuesday" in which many States have court-approved Tuesdays on which a foreclosure sale is allowed to occur. Somebody close to the mortgage industry should compile this as a separate article. I do not have enough requisite knowledge.

--Greg

2008's Super Tuesday

No one is calling Feb 5 "Giga Tuesday." The article referenced by the author is apparently the only news organization to call it such. Terms like "Mega Tuesday" and "Super Duper Tuesday" are much more common. If no one objects, I am going to remove the reference to Giga Tuesday, and fix the reference to something that is both more mainstream and which perhaps even discusses the name itself. Brash 19:29, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

States could not have decided in Spring of 2008 to change their primaries to February of 2008. Most states made the change in Spring of 2007.

216.87.243.7 (talk) 14:41, 9 January 2008 (UTC) Dan[reply]

I have only heard the term "Super Tuesday" used in the media to refer to the upcoming Feb 5th 2008 primary. Are there any contemporary sources for the term "Super Duper Tuesday"? Perhaps the articles should either be combined into "Super Tuesday" or "Super Duper Tuesday" moved to "Super Tuesday (2008)" -- Macduff (talk) 16:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This was answered at Talk:Super Duper Tuesday. --Kralizec! (talk) 19:15, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it has. My main concern is that I continue to encounter many media sources that refer to the upcoming Feb 5th 2008 primary as Super Tuesday. While there are sources that refer to it as Super Duper Tuesday or Mega Tuesday or something similar, the way that things are currently arranged in Wikipedia gives the strong impression that the term "Super Tuesday" is no longer in use. This is misleading. -- Macduff (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 20:38, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I was not aware of that. What do you feel gives the impression that the term Super Tuesday is no longer in use? Certainly anything implying that should be re-written to indicate that Super Duper Tuesday is most likely a one-time event. As I indicated in the SDT article talk page, I have seen Super Duper Tuesday used to describe 2/5 and Super Tuesday used to describe 3/4. --Kralizec! (talk) 14:38, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Graph

A republican delegate graph should be added--if one exists. Brahim 20:06, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Graph

I am removing the graph for the following reasons:

1. It is simply incorrect in regards to the numbers and proportions of delegates for each candidate. 2. The bar graphs are imprecise. 3. Standings are likely to change often. 4. The expression of erroneus poll results in an objective medium like Wikipedia is likely to affect a viewers perspective of the candidates, this can have an effect on the nomination of said canditates, and as such does not consitute neutral information.

-D —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.104.234.21 (talk) 19:48, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merger Proposal

Super Tuesday appears in over 3000 news stories (via Google News [1]); Super Duper Tuesday appears in only about 500 [2]. They refer to the same event, which is why I am recommending they be merged. Kallahan (talk) 00:44, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it is the same event- User GovStar13

see Talk:Super Tuesday (2008) for discussion.-----Adimovk5 (talk) 13:13, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Saying that the event occurs in "early February or March" is odd - does this mean that it can occur either in early February or anytime in March? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.147.7.44 (talk) 00:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the same so I removed the 'early'.

Which Super-Tuesday?

Article talks about several different Tuesdays, some in Feb, some in March, and isn't very clear (throughout the article) as to which are which.

Also, there are no totals, to give readers an idea of how these dates have snowballed in importance over the last couple decades. It appears (from the article) that:
2008-02-04 == 24 states
2004-02-03 == 5 states - according to this article, in different wiki article* they claim 7 states (which is it?)

2004-03-02 == 10 states (democratic mostly?) - CNN was calling this Super Tuesday

-2, poorly written and boo on locking it. ~ender - 2008-02-05 11:12:AM MST —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.240.27.45 (talk • contribs) 13:06, 5 February 2008

The naming issue is complicated by the fact that some years have had multiple "Super Tuesday" election events. As an example, there were three Super Tuesdays (sometimes referred to a Super Tuesday I, Super Tuesday II, and Super Tuesday III). In 2004 there was Mini-Tuesday (sometimes referred to as Super Tuesday I) in February, and then the main Super Tuesday election (sometimes called Super Tuesday II) in March.

The 2004-02-03 election you refer to is covered by the Mini-Tuesday article. This day had five states holding primaries and two holding caucuses (for seven total).

Both the Super Tuesday and Super Tuesday (2008) articles are semi-protected due to the large amount of vandalism by un-registered editors. Editors with registered accounts are still able to edit the articles. --Kralizec! (talk) 18:37, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poorly worded disambiguation note

"This article is about the primary day" is only useful if you already know what a "primary" is, in which case you probably already know what Super Tuesday is likely to mean. So that sentence is not helpful.

Instead, how about "This article is about a significant day in the United States presidential primary process" ? - 198.144.208.11 (talk) 22:33, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

This portion was found at the end of this entry as of 5 Feb 2008 5:30 AM GMT:

Indeed, Ashwin Sundar will be the Republican and Democratic nominations in this year's elections, making him the first candidate in US history to win the White House as both a Republican and Democrat. Heil Ashwin.[5]

Vandalism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.75.17.223 (talk) 05:30, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that Nooges (talk · contribs) caught and started to clean this up about eight minutes after it was added. --Kralizec! (talk) 06:29, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proportional representation

Are the Democrats' primaries always proportional, or are there any exceptions where the winner gets all the delegates in a state? Vints (talk) 19:45, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Democratic Party (United States) presidential primaries, 2008 article indicates that under Democratic Party rules, all delegates are awarded using proportional representation as long as the candidate reached at least a 15% minimum threshold. --Kralizec! (talk) 13:07, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]