Does anyone really believe that Hillary is wanting FL & MI seated "as is"

reflects a principle of not disenfranchising those voters? What a bunch of bullshit.

If this situation was reversed, she would be doing exactly what Obama is doing...insisting on keeping the rules. Anyone who thinks differently is deluded, IMO.

My bet, Obama will seat MI and FL in a way that is FAIR. He will seat Florida as is, and MI in the way that the MI party and the DNC agreed to. If Hillary doesn't like that, and refuses to go along, she should be told "TOUGH SHIT!"

Even if Hillary gets what she wants, with Obama getting ZERO delegates from Michigan, leaving the uncommitteds to make up their minds, Hillary would need to get the rest of the supers and uncommitteds remaining at a 64% clip. Obama would need 36%.

Hillary threatening a convention floor fight over this should tell everyone exactly what Hillary Clinton is all about.

I used to respect her.

when Obama wasn't even on the ticket in MI? If I had to "win" that way, I'd be embarrassed.

really be "wanted"? I felt that way about Bush - by the time they got through with the numbers, he BARELY eked ahead of Kerry. Can a candidate take pride in that, knowing that fully half of the country DIDN'T want them?

Seriously. How fucked up is that!

I'd be embarrassed to even SUGGEST that. What kind of a 'victory' is that, if I'm the only one on the ticket? That just makes no sense. Unless you're Hillary, I guess. :eyes:

How does she get away with this shit? If she wasnt a female with the last name of Clinton, there is no way she'd be coddled like this. Its disgusting.

in michigan, through his own fault.

Doesn't seem that fucked up to me.

The other candidates removed their names from the ballot except for Hillary. It was an action they took as a statement of solidarity, after signing and agreeing with the DNC's pledge. Which Hillary signed and agreed to too, by the way.

How can he be "faulted" for doing the right thing along with his fellow candidates?

there were four democrats still on the ballot in Michigan.

Obama removed his name, thus got no votes.

Nobody made him do it. He chose to.

be *punished* for honoring his pledge in good faith? How can you possibly think it's fair that Hillary be rewarded in a *VASTLY* disproportionate manner for ENABLING a state that DID break the rules?

The mind truly boggles at the mental gymnastics you must undergo to see this as "fair".

Actually what's more boggling is the idea that the outstanding *superdeletes* will find this argument "fair". Good luck with that.

but it's probably "just". If Obama wanted delegates, he should've stayed on the ballot. "Fair" or not, I don't see how he deserves delegates from a race he dropped out of.

What would've been fair would've been for the DNC not to impose such draconian and arbitrary penalties. Even fairer would've been to fix the problem that caused states to change their dates. But that didn't happen.

I don't think there's any "fair" to be had anymore. It's certainly no more fair to disenfranchise two large states. It's no more fair to deny Clinton the votes she earned.

Is it fair to his supporters, those who voted or would have voted for him?

support of the DNC and in support of each other. Why didn't Hillary?

there were 48 states that still followed the rules.

MI chose to violate the rules, thus no delegates.

Nobody made them do it. MI chose to.

Obama is anyone but Hillary. Just saying.

:mad:

"At long last, have you no decency?"
That famous line from the 1950s doesn't work any more. Now winning is the only thing.


Good thing she's on our side, doing it all for the working people of America.




:puke:


I tried, but I just couldn't swallow that.


Back in the 1980s, James r Lileks wrote a piece in the Minnesota Daily where he joked that conservatives got lobotomies, since that was the only way they could believe their conservative principles was by having their cerebral cortex removed. He said that's why Reagan's head wobbled. They put the counterweights in wrong. He wrote this as part of fictional humour ala Art Buchwald. (Later he made above median income as a writer and became conservative himself. Sort of a Disraeli lobotomy or heart-removal surgery.)

Anyway, I bring this up because it seems that Hillary supporters must have gotten lobotomies or something. Previously decent, intelligent, logical, honorable people are now disgarding decency, intelligence, logic, truth an honor for one over-riding 'principle' - Victory for Hillary. The other alternative is worse, sort of the idea behind "Looking out for Number #1" - that logic, decency, truth and honor as just thin layers of bullsh*t which cover our real motivations. When push comes to shove, the naked self interest comes shining through.

Having ones name on the ballot is competing. Its really as simple as that.

Are you telling me her word word is meaningless?

This is what she signed: http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/070831_Final_Pledge.pdf

she'd push that line and claim that it was fair, just like you might argue that a day's wage for a day's work was fair.

The only criteria are: is it good for Hillary? How good? And will I get away with it?

Despite Hillarys confusion. This is a primary. Not the same. Get it?

How many people didn't vote because they were told it wouldn't matter. THOSE people just got screwed Hillary style.

She said it wasn't going to count, so why waste her time? Her husband was going to vote, too, but didn't bother and she also mentioned several friends who didn't vote for the same reason. By the way, they were all Obama supporters. I'm sure there must be a lot of other people in MI who did the same. Anyone who says that election was fair is nuts.

(if you give the Michigan votes for "not Hillary" to Obama)

according to the rules that penalty can be lightened to 50%. Idiots who go around saying that this issue "needs to be settled" are just moving the goal posts

If they are in their right minds, they will let them sit but with only a half vote, if FL and MI get a full delegation, whats to stop 10 or 15 states from moving their primaries, and the DNC threatens to strip their votes again, they'll say "but you didn't do it to FL and MI in 08!".

Otherwise, she'd rather just use it as an issue.

because they were as victimized as the voters were.

The DNC shouldn't completely disenfranchise the MI/FL voters (though they were warned that the votes would not count). But seating the delegates as is would reward the MI/FL Dems who deliberately violated the rules by moving the primary dates (though THEY were warned that the votes would not count).

The DNC also has to consider the message their solution will send to:
- the states that DID obey their rules
- those in MI/FL who didn't vote because they believed the DNC when they were warned that the votes would not count.

So the DNC needs a solution which:
- preserves their authority
- punishes the people responsible for moving the primary dates
- discourages other states from breaking the rules
- seats the delegates in way which acknowledges that people voted (though they were warned their votes wouldn't count)
- doesn't give either candidate an advantage (since the DNC warned everyone involved that the votes would not count)

I myself think that seating the delegates 50/50 and not seating the superdelegates is the best way to do that.

:headbang:
rocknation

The super delegates should not get a vote-they were the ones who allowed this problem to happen. They new the risks and they would have had more power to stop it than the average voter.

I like voices of reason.

Even if she gets the nom, she is not going to win the GE. She's run a shitty campaign and
I think all of the newly-enfranchised voters will go right back to being dis-enfranchised.

Of course, I could be wrong...that's my perspective from a state that will definitely go red if she's the nom.
I think there's a chance Barack could win here.

That when the DNC Rules Committee voted to strip FL and MI, the only person to vote against it was Obama supporter Allan Katz:

"The rules committee was largely unmoved; only one member -- Florida's Allan Katz -- voted against imposing the sanctions."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...

Clinton had 13 supporters on the DNC Committee (the largest block) ALL of them voted to sanction FL & MI. surprising she hasn't brought this up. surprising that Obama hasn't brought this up, well not really...

pushed for these sanctions. She thought she would wrap it up by Super Tuesday. She peed in her Wheaties.