|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 08:42 PM Original message |
The only number that matters is 2025 (the pledged delegate "lead" premise is utterly bogus) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
The_Casual_Observer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 08:44 PM Response to Original message |
1. You clearly aren't taking your cues from Axlerod today. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
leftofcool (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 08:47 PM Response to Original message |
2. Absolutely correct! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 08:50 PM Response to Reply #2 |
4. Half the fucking posts on DU are about who leads in delegates |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:22 PM Response to Reply #4 |
24. I'm glad someone had the courage to point out this obvious fact. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dansolo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 08:47 PM Response to Original message |
3. The ends justify the means, eh? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 08:51 PM Response to Reply #3 |
5. no - you deal with the rules you have, honorably |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Spider Jerusalem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:14 PM Response to Reply #5 |
15. You mean like the Clinton campaign's insistence on trying to seat FL and MI delegates? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:24 PM Response to Reply #15 |
27. That's exactly my point |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:25 PM Response to Reply #27 |
29. Actually, there's no rule against seating them either. A mere proposal at the DNC is all that is... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Rick Myers (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 08:56 PM Response to Original message |
6. FACT is: Every day this drags on hurts the party |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
anamandujano (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:57 PM Response to Reply #6 |
50. That is not a fact. The only thing hurting is our ears with this spin. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tom Rinaldo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:00 PM Response to Original message |
7. I agree that uncommitted Super Delegates need a good reason |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Omega3 (412 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:34 PM Response to Reply #7 |
38. what's the point of SD's if they're just suppossed to back the can. with the most delegates? Do you |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tom Rinaldo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:59 PM Response to Reply #38 |
52. Actually I think it is for situations like this among others |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
high density (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:01 PM Response to Original message |
8. So what would you guys propose |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:12 PM Response to Reply #8 |
14. No |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
high density (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:17 PM Response to Reply #14 |
22. Most of us feel the super delegates are very unlikely to "override" the pledged delegates |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:29 PM Response to Reply #22 |
33. But we don't know that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
high density (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:32 PM Response to Reply #33 |
37. What is the purpose of the primary season if the superdelegates are going to override the |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:35 PM Response to Reply #37 |
39. the superdelegates aren't "overriding" anything |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
high density (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:36 PM Response to Reply #39 |
40. They can change the rules next time all they want |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mudesi (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:02 PM Response to Original message |
9. Here is another FACT |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:08 PM Response to Reply #9 |
10. By your line of reasoning then we should seat Florida and Michigan |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mudesi (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:11 PM Response to Reply #10 |
13. I don't disagree |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nine (472 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 10:04 PM Response to Reply #13 |
54. And why is that "the right thing"? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tom Rinaldo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:15 PM Response to Reply #9 |
18. I'll make this extreme to make it simple |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AtomicKitten (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:09 PM Response to Original message |
11. Really? There's no second place in politics. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:22 PM Response to Reply #11 |
25. I'm happy you're happy |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JeanGrey (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:11 PM Response to Original message |
12. Then WHY bother to vote at ALL if the SD's can do |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:16 PM Response to Reply #12 |
19. Because the rules dictate that it's a COMBINATION of pledged and supers |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JeanGrey (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-06-08 06:02 PM Response to Reply #19 |
78. One candidate Will have more and more of the popular vote. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RiverStone (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:14 PM Response to Original message |
16. Check out this Delegate calculator, plug in the most... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:21 PM Response to Reply #16 |
23. You're apparently not getting the point |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RiverStone (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 11:27 PM Response to Reply #23 |
69. Define "preference" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:24 PM Response to Reply #16 |
28. Hillary needs 1.4 million more votes than Obama to tie in delegates. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RiverStone (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 11:29 PM Response to Reply #28 |
70. But would you agree if the SD's chose a candidate... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Obamaniac (297 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:15 PM Response to Original message |
17. It's "bogus" in your warped mind... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:17 PM Response to Reply #17 |
21. I'm saying we should play by the rules as written |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
high density (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:23 PM Response to Reply #21 |
26. In the thread title you said the pledged delegate lead is "bogus" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:26 PM Response to Reply #26 |
30. You don't think their decision would be fair? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
high density (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:28 PM Response to Reply #30 |
32. If they override the pledged delegates |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:38 PM Response to Reply #32 |
41. But they are, as the rules are currently written, a LEGITIMATE part of the process |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
high density (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:45 PM Response to Reply #41 |
45. We'll have to agree to disagree |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
anamandujano (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 10:09 PM Response to Reply #45 |
57. The pledged delegates are already reflecting the will of their constituents. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 10:19 PM Response to Reply #32 |
64. They wouldn't override the pledged delegates unless it's close, you know that. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eggman67 (745 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:17 PM Response to Original message |
20. The interesting thing is |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:27 PM Response to Original message |
31. And, in fact, there would be no PURPOSE for super-delegates if all they |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AZBlue (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:30 PM Response to Original message |
34. K/R |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kurt_and_Hunter (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:30 PM Response to Original message |
35. Yes, some folks have invented a set of imaginary rules and seek to will them into existence |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:32 PM Response to Reply #35 |
36. Exactly |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Little Star (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Mar-07-08 08:18 PM Response to Reply #35 |
81. Yep |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
writes3000 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:39 PM Response to Original message |
42. You NEED to believe the superdelegates will overturn the pledged delegates |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:41 PM Response to Reply #42 |
43. I don't "believe" either way |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
writes3000 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:44 PM Response to Reply #43 |
44. Then the pledged delegate lead premise ISN'T bogus. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:57 PM Response to Reply #44 |
51. The argument that they HAVE to vote for the pledged leader |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kurt_and_Hunter (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:48 PM Response to Reply #42 |
46. Good lord... have you ever seen a candidate collapse? I have. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
high density (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:50 PM Response to Reply #46 |
48. Well let's say he does collapse as you have proposed and then the |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kurt_and_Hunter (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 10:06 PM Response to Reply #48 |
56. Since I am not psychic, I want the SDs to help assure the strongest candidate |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
high density (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 10:11 PM Response to Reply #56 |
59. Telephone polls in August are not going to predict a win in November |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kurt_and_Hunter (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 10:17 PM Response to Reply #59 |
61. The Democratic Party does an incredible amount of polling not paid for by media |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
totodeinhere (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:50 PM Response to Original message |
47. Is that so? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 10:00 PM Response to Reply #47 |
53. why is that "thwarting the will" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
totodeinhere (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 10:24 PM Response to Reply #53 |
65. As I already said, everyone knows that the supers can vote for whomever. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ruggerson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 10:26 PM Response to Reply #65 |
67. I realize that's always a danger |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kurt_and_Hunter (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 10:10 PM Response to Reply #47 |
58. That's like arguing categorically against amending the constitution |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
totodeinhere (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 10:15 PM Response to Reply #58 |
60. The Clinton campaign is trying to change the rules. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kurt_and_Hunter (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 10:18 PM Response to Reply #60 |
63. fair distinction, sorry |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Orangepeel (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 09:53 PM Response to Original message |
49. Democrats telling the superdelegates they OUGHT to vote a particular way isn't changing the rules |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Redbear (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 10:05 PM Response to Original message |
55. Good luck banging your head against this wall. (n/t) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Little Star (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 10:18 PM Response to Original message |
62. Please send to MSNBC. They don't understand the rules or the |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Yossariant (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 10:24 PM Response to Original message |
66. Da ROOLZ iz da ROOLZ. Great thread. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stop the bleeding (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 10:28 PM Response to Original message |
68. Here is my 2 pennies ruggerson |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Radical Agitator (10 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-05-08 11:53 PM Response to Original message |
71. Reality -- Clinton leads in the critical swing states where it matters n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Little Star (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-06-08 08:24 AM Response to Original message |
72. k&r |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WDIM (267 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-06-08 08:30 AM Response to Original message |
73. They don't have to vote at all. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Little Star (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-06-08 08:52 AM Response to Reply #73 |
74. The system may need to be changed, I agree. The rules, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jennicut (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-06-08 09:05 AM Response to Original message |
75. All of you who hated Al Gore's defeat in 2000 should hate the Superdelgates overriding the people |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WVRevy (225 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-06-08 09:15 AM Response to Original message |
76. Tell it to the party leadership |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Little Star (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-06-08 05:23 PM Response to Original message |
77. kick |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LadyVT (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-06-08 06:03 PM Response to Original message |
79. Except for the times in our history when the one with lowest delegates won |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
latinolatteliberal (123 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-06-08 06:18 PM Response to Original message |
80. A few points of disagreement. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Sun May 05th 2024, 10:09 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC