Why is Hillary still pushing Florida and Michigan? It makes no sense...

If the Florida delegates are split 50/50, and the Michigan delegates are split 55/45 in Hillary's favor, how does this even BEGIN to close her delegate gap? :shrug:

She'd net possibly 12 delegates out of Michigan, and Florida would break even, leaving her still about 160 delegates behind, so what's the big deal? Why is she pushing this? :shrug:

It's bizarre. :shrug:

You have finally identified her campaign strategy! :applause:

I'll be here all week, answering questions. If you need any help with your Quantum Mechanics homework, call anyone but me....

I guess he should've run there, no?

I can imagine the cows you guys would have if Clinton tried to get delegates from a state she didn't even run in.

I know this is your personal 'thang' or troll or whatever the hell it is, but it's bullshit, and I think you know it.

Hillary has lost. Whatever happens or doesn't happen re MI and FL is now pretty irrelevant. It's clear that a great many voters in MI were voting for Obama, with some for JE- and it's amusing how you always neglect to mention that JE took his name off the ballot as well. Also, you know that Hill said MI didn't count, and yet you have no problem merrily discarding that statement, and staunchly insisting that Hill get all her votes and delegates there. You make it clear that you could care less about MI voters- particularly those who supported Obama. In any case, your gal is toast. Get over it.

"listening to the will of the people". The people were given one choice - her name. The only other choice was "uncommitted" which received a pretty decent chunk of the vote. For her to demand that MI voters voices be heard while fighting to supress those who would like to have voted for Obama but did not have that choice, is hypocrisy. Plain and simple.

the primaries were still being contested, and then everything changed... LIKE WE CANNOT FIGURE OUT WHAT SHE'S HINTING AT???

and then McAuliffe was grinning from ear to ear when he mentioned "some catastrophe"...:grr:

they want "something" to happen to Obama..:grr:

It makes no sense, and Hillary is out of her fucking mind. :silly:

Clinton's only chance is to get to the convention and win the nomination on a second or third ballot. Making an issue of Michigan and Florida is a way for superdelegates to avoid making a commitment. It's a last-gasp effort, but Hillary's nothing if not stubborn.

I want you all to stonewall it . . .

She blames the DNC for all her woes. She also has no qualms in trying to make it look like Obama wants all the poor Michigan and Florida voters disenfranchised and that hillary, fighter that she is, will make sure she gets them all front row seats. There is no end to the lies, the spin and downright dishonesty and vindictiveness of this woman.

To answer your question, I'm not sure what she wants, to ruin Obama's chances so she can go again in 2012, the VP slot? For about two minutes one day last week, I even thought she just wanted to stay in, win WV and KY and leave on a high note, then I thought she was hanging around to squeeze some more campaign contributions from all those hard working white people she so highly speaks of. I'm not sure, I'm not even sure if she knows at this point. One thing I do know, she's taken a big toll on the party and she seems just fine with that.

Sticking it to Dean? Throwing shit at the fan? Mucking it up for Obama?

One thing is for sure: she doesn't give a shit about voters in those two states. :P

millions.

As you have seen many times: Michigan and Florida broke DNC rules and were advised that their primary wouldn't count. Hillary signed off on that, but now that she needs the delegates, she wants to rewrite the rules.

You can't do that in the middle of the game.

She only wants the people's voices to be heard because it works in her favor. If these had been votes and delegates for Obama, she wouldn't give a damn.

Hillary wraps a veneer of nobility around getting votes that she really, reeeeally needs and the rest of you put on your Hillary goggles and fall in step.

Florida was "disenfranchised" last August. If she was "fighting for the peoples voices to be heard" back then, she was doing it so discreetly no one knew about it. And what's Ickes still doing on the payroll when he's one of the bastards who disenfranchised them?

of voices stomped on.

you can't have it on in the GE.../ do you know if this is true..?

She was against revotes except for a short window inside March, not lobbying for months.

And to answer the question you won't:

So why didn't she speak up sooner about the need to count the votes of Florida Democrats, rather than wait until her campaign was in trouble after losses in Iowa and South Carolina?

"I was a little preoccupied," she said, laughing. "I was trying to stay alive, frankly."

http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/national/article456726.ece

We all remember the Great Sieges of August and December 2007, when Hillary was on the ropes trying to stay alive, and couldn't spare a minute for "empowering the people," right?

Again, why is Ickes still employed and not banished from Hillary's Crusade for the Downtrodden?

She is fighting because she's a fucking delusional egomaniac. :crazy:

That's her game now. Her whole spiel won't have any impact on the deal that is made eventually, but she will try to take credit for it.

:shrug:

And of course, beating BO in Fl by 300,000 would result in an even delegate split:shrug:

Bizarre indeed :shrug:

"I'm going outside the primary window," told me definitively.

"If I allow you to do that, the whole system collapses," I said. "We will have chaos. I let you make your case to the DNC, and we voted unanimously and you lost."

He kept insisting that they were going to move up Michigan on their own, even though if they did that, they would lose half their delegates. By that point Carl and I were leaning toward each other over a table in the middle of the room, shouting and dropping the occasional expletive.

"You won't deny us seats at the convention," he said.

"Carl, take it to the bank," I said. "They will not get a credential. The closest they'll get to Boston will be watching it on television. I will not let you break this entire nominating process for one state. The rules are the rules. If you want to call my bluff, Carl, you go ahead and do it."

We glared at each other some more, but there was nothing much left to say. I was holding all the cards and Levin knew it.


"I'm going outside the primary window," told me definitively.

http://fonksoapbox.blogspot.com/2008/04/what-would-mcauliffe-2004-say.html

FL/MI got punished, but it is seldom pointed out that NH and SC moved up their dates too, with 0% punishment.


Yes, and the “RULES” allow for 50% stripping of the delegates, not 100 %, so they broke their own rules.

Dean and Brazile are the worst of the lot. They should be brought up on charges

I never said I supported stripping FL or MI of 100% of their delegates, whatever the rules state (and the stripping of 50% is in the rules) is the only way that it should be done. Of course there are "simpletons" suggesting that they should be seated as is awarding none from MI to Obama of course because he did what the party requested and took his name off the ballot:

"There’s the fact that Hillary Clinton’s name and the uncommitted slate was the only thing that was on the ballot in Michigan because the Democratic National Committee asked the other candidates to withdraw their names from the ballot. So, here you have the institution itself asking people to pull their names off the ballot.



All of them, yes. That’s what--I don’t know what I just said-But, OK, that’s what I thought I said.

In any event, and you also have the uncommitted slate on the ballot—you have an uncommitted slate on the ballot and, you know, one of the proposals that came forward that I’ve seen is: Why not give half of the delegation to Clinton and half of it to Obama and that way it won’t make any difference and people can be seated. Well, what do you do with the fact that there was an uncommitted delegation that got votes and is entitled to delegates? I think that one is a whole big mess."

http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/05/dnc_rules_commi.html
and anyone should be able to get through the layers of stupid and unfair on that as well!

These days, the Hillary speeches I see are all about how she still has a chance, she still has a chance, she still has a chance, she's a fighter, she's not giving up, she can get the two states seated, she wants all 50 states to vote, etc.

Obama is talking about real issues and issues that will he will be facing in debates against John McCain. He is looking forward while Hillary is clogging up the party. She has more rhetoric than Obama does now. It would be fine if she stuck to talking about just the issues...

wow.

she can still win. The problem is it won't work. I have heard people people whine and moan that Florida and Michigan won't get seated it is bs. Dean has stated they will get seated and it is at the discretion of the nominee to seat those delegations IF the rules committee. I've said that I believe the delegates will get seated in some form or another. People may not be happy with how and when they get seated, but it will happen.

Political expediency.

She does not want them to really count. Just wants to come close so she can overturn the electorates votes.

and use it as leverage to show that she should be put on the ticket as VP which is probably what will happen. And before we get all angry about Obama putting her on the ticket, remember that we need to win in November. But, in typical Democratic fashion, we will get so angry about it and cause such turmoil that we will lose to McCain. I wish they would do it already so we can get going. She has over 16 million votes that he is going to need in the GE and it is the only way he will get them.

The only way to keep the Hillaryworld distortion of this primary season alive is to keep insisting on this irrational solution.

Hopelessness.