| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 4:54:39 PM |
will diss 600,000 Michigan voters and well... there's a lot more to it...
Either way, the 600,000 voters would have been 'dissed'. I felt dissed because my candidate was not on the ballot. Yes it was his choice, but he thought he was complying with the rules. Are we to believe that just because Hillary was the only one on the ballot that all 600,000 voters went out for her? | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 5:02:36 PM |
DUH!!! Of course he has "zero" votes in Michigan ... No one voted for him there.
Oh I get it ... I suppose now we should GIVE him votes that don't exist?
My point was that Clinton cannot whine about voters in Michigan not being represented when the vote that took place was clearly not representative of anything. | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 5:25:28 PM | From what I understand ... at least here in Florida, it was Republican officials that set up the early primary ...
The idea of moving up the primary was to give Florida — one of the nation’s largest and most diverse states — more prominence in the nominating process. The Republican-led Legislature embraced the idea, as did Republican Gov. Charlie Crist.
Many Democratic leaders also liked the idea of Florida having more sway, but the state party officially took the position of favoring a Feb. 5 primary to avoid breaking national party rules. Democratic lawmakers halfheartedly tried to change a bill setting the primary date, knowing they didn’t have the votes to overcome their Republican colleagues’ will.
I still think we should hold all the primaries on one day ... the same way we hold the national election on one day. I don't place any value on these so-called super delegates either. | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 5:27:26 PM | Recent numbers:
Independents:
Obama 44%
McCain 42%
Clinton 41%
McCain 46%
Republicans:
Obama 12%
McCain 84%
Clinton 8%
McCain 88%
Democrats:
Obama 76%
McCain 15%
Clinton 84%
McCain 10%
So McCain is going to keep 80% of Republican votes then nets about 40% of the Independent vote as well as about 10% of the Democrat vote.
Obama and Clinton each have their loyalists which essentially is about 50-50. It would stand to reason that Clinton would lose typical Democrat voter support among traditional Democrat voters even if in single digit percentages as she would validate the "power at all costs" argument... nothing to support that just general human nature.
There's no logic at all whatsoever to support anything but a McCain win in this scenario. | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 5:30:07 PM | I can't believe I'm going to say what I am about to...because I am NOT for Clinton at all...
but...
I watched the entire CSPAN deal and a detailed outline was given for the meeting of the rules and regs (and the history) which brought about the present 'mess'.
It was clear and concise that no Candidate was required at all to remove their name. The others 'got it'. Obama's camp I could conclude, if I wanted to, used it as bait and switch tactic.
At least they did an actual hand count in Florida in 2000 and Bush still won that state... here, in this Dem. Primary, they, the DNC, took away at least 600,000 votes for Clinton. People who actually took the time to vote. Then, they gave the 'untitled' ones and gave em to Obama. They GAVE votes for other Candidates to Obama. Get it?! Wow!
Hands down, the DNC has now taken top spot in History of the USA for stealing votes. They, a committee of 30 took away votes - which belonged to at least 600,000 Americans -, shifted votes, etc. If this doesn't pizz off quite a few Clinton Supporters and Independents... I'll be surprised. | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 6:08:44 PM |
It was clear and concise that no Candidate was required at all to remove their name. The others 'got it'. Obama's camp I could conclude, if I wanted to, used it as bait and switch tactic.
Hands down, the DNC has now taken top spot in History of the USA for stealing votes. They, a committee of 30 took away votes - which belonged to at least 600,000 Americans -, shifted votes,
I watched it from about 12:30 on too. It was clear and consice that no candidate was required to remove their name. Obama's representative stated that Obama was complying with the rules as he understood them...and Edwards, Richardson, and others did the same thing. Hillary, Gravel, Kucinich chose to keep their names on the ballot obviously. Now this is the important part. They all signed a document stating they were not going to campaign in this state, and that they were all in agreement that the delegates would not be receiving their seating privledges.
The DNC stole no votes whatsoever. If Hillary would have received the 73 that they were pushing for, I would have felt that my vote had been stolen. And again.....600,000 voters were not all voting for Hillary. | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 6:14:20 PM |
At least they did an actual hand count in Florida in 2000 and Bush still won that state...
I thought the counting was stopped and Bush won because the SoS certified an incomplete vote. | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 6:16:19 PM | | You're right, RedTory, the counting was stopped. The hand count was not finished, and it was a huge mess. See the HBO movie Recount...it's all there. I just pray to God that nothing of this monumental stupidity happens in November. | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 6:18:24 PM | Did all of the American Voters understand what the Candidates signed? See... point is.. the DNC stole votes. What they did with them... they did. I don't care what the Candidates signed. I don't care what their understanding was. The DNC took it out of the hands of the American Voters. Period. No matter what spin is put on it. The Voters got rooked.
It probably would have been better to toss both states than to give Votes to a Candidate (Obama) which he did not receive.
Edit:
The monumental stupidity happened today. Nothing can top this. Nothing. | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 6:22:21 PM | Sorry, I don't think you can argue that he didn't receive the votes. You watched it, you saw those people talking about how uncommitted was perceived, and how many many people in both states simply stayed home. There are a lot of what ifs in this, and I do not feel any votes were stolen.
With the line of thinking 'every vote must count'....Obama would have received zero delegates in Michigan, because technically they can't count an uncommitted or write in vote (of which there was 30,000). Do you think that would have been fair? To give him zero in MI? | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 6:27:23 PM | | If every vote must count, so must the vote of the DNC rules committee - after hearing both sides. This was the arbitration process, and it decided the issue. | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 6:29:34 PM |
They all signed a document stating they were not going to campaign in this state, and that they were all in agreement that the delegates would not be receiving their seating privledges.
Clinton was NOT "in agreement that the delegates would not be receiving their seating privledges" ...
(January 2008...)
Clinton said, "Floridians wanted their voices heard...I am thrilled to have had this vote of confidence you have given me here today. I will do everything I can to make sure that not only are Florida's Democratic delegates seated, but Florida is in the winning column for the Democrats in 2008."
In fact, Florida Democratic Party Chair Karen Thurman told CBS News' Peter King tonight that she expects the Florida delegates to eventually be seated.
"In talking with [House] Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi and then confirmed by [DNC Chairman Howard] Dean, they both said that they believe that it would happen," Thurman said.
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/01/29/politics/fromtheroad/entry3767920.shtml
and-
(September 2, 2007...)
Even though the candidates signed a written document, the practicality of the pledge remained an open question, particularly given that a Democratic forum is scheduled next Sunday in Miami and candidates already have events on their schedules for the coming weeks and months. Democratic officials in Florida said they were assessing the implications of the pledge.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/02/us/politics/02dems.html?ex=1346385600&en=e280c05ad36488d3&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all
***even the Dem officials in Florida didn't really understand the pledge- "they were assessing the implicaton of the pledge", so to say that Clinton agreed to not seating the delegates is totally bogus- | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 6:32:46 PM | Ok, maybe in Florida she was against it, I honestly have been more concerned with Michigan. And in Michigan, she was fully aware and in agreement.
| |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 6:33:20 PM | Those delegates were reseated, with an accessed penalty correctly applied (for breaking the rules). Had they not been penalized, then the next primary season would have been a free for all.
Had they not been seated, it would have invalidated democracy in those two states, and left them out of the process - which would have been unfair and wrong.
Saying Obama's camp DIDN'T want them to be seated is also totally bogus. | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 6:41:19 PM |
Had they not been penalized, then the next primary season would have been a free for all.
this is an absurd comment-
first, the voters should not have been the ones penalized, the republican gov of Florida had a big hand in this- what exactly did the voters do to deserve it?
second, and there will be a "free for all"
oh pleezzzzz, it was obvious from the get go that the DNC totally screwed up and that next primary season, big, big big changes will have to be made, so another candidate isn't losing his or HER popular votes and delegates due to the DNC's incompetence !
BELOW...
I wouldn't have missed it for the world...yes, I watched, and realized early that 30 people were going to band aid the DNC's big gaping wound -
HISTORY is going to have a fvcking field day with this one- first female and black candidate and the DNC manages to turn something wonderful and historic into something that has split this party more than unified it-
the DNC served McCain very well- | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 6:45:12 PM | | Edisto did you watch it? I think the free for all statement is a valid concern. Michigan has fought hard to get other states to be the ones to hold the primaries. They made a decision to include other states than IA and NH, and then went back on that. Michigan was trying to continue on with the original decision made by the DNC and ousted by NH. If someone doesn't set a precedent, it will be a free for all. I see now that that's what MI and FL were trying to do. | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 6:48:16 PM |
Those delegates were reseated, with an accessed penalty correctly applied (for breaking the rules). Now that's laughable ... especially when you consider that they have known the whole time that it was the doggone "Republicans" who set up the voting time to begin with.
"I feel like we should not penalize them for something they did not cause and couldn't prevent," said Alice Huffman, a California superdelegate for Clinton, noting that it was a Republican legislature that changed the date.
Why the Hell should any "Democrat" be accessed with penalties (for breaking the rules) when they were not the ones who set the rules (changed the voting dates)? Once the "Republicans" set the rules ... the Democrats were supposed to do what? Just tell the Democrats of the whole state not to go out and vote at the primary? | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 6:48:27 PM |
his is an absurd comment-
Absurd ?
Why do you think those rules are there to begin with ? Not following them sets a precedent for any state to do what they want, anytime they want. In such an important process, one cannot allow it to become on open season without any central control.
That said, I think all parties should work together in allowing some changes to be made, like rotating the primary sequence. I don't think it's fair that the same four states get the lead in each and every election either. | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 6:57:25 PM | OMG... now, blame is on the Rep. Gov.
How about this. The Democrat Party get their act together, know the rules and inform their delegates of said rules. Advertise changes of any party to it's Public. Give the Voters a fair opportunity to cast their votes. I'm not saying babysit Voters... just inform them.
Quit blaming the Republicans for everything. Geez!!!!! | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 6:59:27 PM | In Florida Jedi, there's zero doubt about who was to blame. A Republican governor moved the primary up ONE WEEK past deadline. Why were those seven days so important ?  | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 7:07:55 PM | Nope Montreal Guy... no dice. If it was illegal/was going to cost the Democratic Voters their Vote...the DNC could have stepped in and avoided all this. This is nothing more than 'aftermath' spin to take the heat off the Dem. Party. Nothing more or less. Period. You know it. I know it. Everyone knows it. Just a matter of who will admit it.
Next thing we know, it'll be the Republicans fault if someone somewhere, on the face of the Earth, drives off the road and gets injured. A Democrat will jump up and point fingers at the Republican party because a Highway Dept. Manager happens to be a Rep. and didn't order the dip in the road fixed which caused the Democrat driver's car to hit it and go off into a ditch. | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 7:15:18 PM | | So Jedi, answer why those seven days were so important ? Placing it seven days LATER , and not invalidating it, would have done WHAT exactly ? | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 7:18:45 PM |
In Florida Jedi, there's zero doubt about who was to blame. A Republican governor moved the primary up ONE WEEK past deadline. Why were those seven days so important ?
The Florida legislature moved up the primary; the Governor just signed it. Between the senate and house, there were only two votes against the measure.
Moving up the primary was a screwup caused by Republicans AND Democrats. | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 7:25:41 PM | No MG,
I shall not go into that since I am not an expert on the matter. I don't have all the details. Only enough Common Sense to know a 'spin' when I see one. The DNC did this to their own party. The Democratic Voters were the victims of a Democratic Party mess. Period.
It's a shame it happened. It truly is. And, it's even more of a mockery to try to pin it on the Republicans. It doesn't fly this time.
If the Voters and Candidates should stand on a decision handed down by the DNC today (as a Poster...maybe you? pointed out, via another thread, they should)...why not take the decision handed down by the Supreme Court in 2000 election?
And, why dispute that decision and not the one put forth by the Supreme Court when they upheld Roe vs. Wade. Get my point?
It's a matter of 'convenience'. Wouldn't you say. | |
|
| If Clinton Doesn't Get the Nomination...
Posted: 5/31/2008 9:38:14 PM | The only way the Democrats win is if Obama and Clinton share the ticket, no matter who is the person on top, so to speak!
I for one would vote McCain if either Clinton or obama leaves the other off.
In my opinion this has been the most racsist election I have seen. Simply put Obama is winning based upon the black vote and Clinton upon the white. Yes there are some other factors but thats the basic boiled down version. | |
|
Home
login 
