Florida and Michigan: Completely Resolved

[Latrinsorm]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/31/dems.delegates/index.html

Short version: the committee decided to give Clinton a 10 delegate edge in Michigan and a 38 edge in Florida. Obama's still ahead by 178, and it's still totally impossible for Clinton to catch him, and as she's a rational human being capable of doing arithmetic I expect her to drop out of the race any day now. :yes:

[Tsa`ah]

It's not resolved.

She's going to take it to the next committee ... and then to the convention floor (if FL and MI don't get full votes, she doesn't get her full portion ... and Obama gets anything from MI).

[Peanut Butter Jelly Time]

She lost, who cares? A woman will eventually make it to the White House, but it wont be some crazed hooker with a seventies male haircut to do it.

[Latrinsorm]

It's not resolved.:facepalm:

[Mabus]

It's not resolved.

She's going to take it to the next committee ... and then to the convention floor (if FL and MI don't get full votes, she doesn't get her full portion ... and Obama gets anything from MI).
0 votes for Obama in Michigan after he, and a few others, took their name off the ballot voluntarily. There was no ruling stating that candidates must take their names off the ballot, but certain candidates looked at the polls, and decided to attempt to deny Clinton any momentum she might achieve with a win, then they removed their names as a political gamble.

It worked for Obama. Obama received O votes in Michigan, (according to the official election results) (http://miboecfr.nictusa.com/election/results/08PPR/01000000.html) and he receives 59 delegates (28.5 delegate votes).

Now that is "unifying the party", comrade!

Just as an aside:
Kucinich delegates (he received 21,715 votes): 0
Obama delegates (he received 0 votes): 59

It would seem the fairest solution in this case would have been to award Clinton, and the other candidates, the delegates they did win and then to allow the uncommitted votes to be uncommitted delegates that could vote how they wished. That and the 1/2 vote together would seem a much fairer outcome, and have stayed within the will of the voters.

Clinton should challenge this ruling, as there is nothing in the DNC Charter allowing it.

Perhaps she should also challenge the Florida delegates, as Obama campaign commercials did air there despite a ban on campaigning in Florida.

DNC Delegate Selection Rules, Rule 20 Section C, 1-b:
"A presidential candidate who campaigns in a state where the state party is in violation of the timing provisions of these rules, or where a primary or caucus is set by a state’s government on a date that violates the timing provisions of these rules, may not receive pledged delegates or delegate votes from that state."

So both challenges should be brought, and could either be won or force a floor fight at the convention.

I had thought Obama would "play it smart" He should have given Clinton everything she wanted (within the rules, a 50% cut in delegates or 1/2 per delegate vote), and he could have appeared completely accomodating. He would still win the nomination, and look presidential. Instead he made a grab for Michigan, and that will haunt him come the convention and the general election.

[Apathy]

Now that is "unifying the party", comrade!
Careful before you give yourself away.



It would seem the fairest solution in this case would have been to award Clinton, and the other candidates, the delegates they did win and then to allow the uncommitted votes to be uncommitted delegates that could vote how they wished. That and the 1/2 vote together would seem a much fairer outcome, and have stayed within the will of the voters.
Actually the fairest solution is not to count those states at all since they willfully violated party rules.



I had thought Obama would "play it smart" He should have given Clinton everything she wanted (within the rules, a 50% cut in delegates or 1/2 per delegate vote), and he could have appeared completely accomodating. He would still win the nomination, and look presidential. Instead he made a grab for Michigan, and that will haunt him come the convention and the general election.
Where do you see Obama as actively seeking votes for these (this) state? He has been preaching his Obama-math for months...

[Mabus]

Where do you see Obama as actively seeking votes for these (this) state?

"Allan Katz, a Rules Committee member and Obama supporter, said the Obama campaign had enough votes on the committee to support the campaign's proposal to split the delegates 50-50 in Michigan."

Obama's Michigan plan originally wanted half of all the delegates from a state he won zero votes in, but instead settled for taking 4 delegates from Clinton and 55 from the uncommitted votes (for a total of 59).

[Xaerve]

Mabus, you're honestly the voice that I love hearing, because my friends and I really do not think that people as dumb as you exist out there.

[Mabus]

What do you think the possible outcomes are?

Will Clinton be offered a SCOTUS position? Attorney General? VP?

Will Clinton take it to the next rules committee meeting (allowing her more fund raising time) present her case, then leave?

Will it go to the convention?

I do not think she has the balls (despite what many of you think lies between her legs) to take it all the way to the convention. She might, but I doubt it.

[Mabus]

Mabus, you're honestly the voice that I love hearing, because my friends and I really do not think that people as dumb as you exist out there.
So quoting Obama campaign spokesmen, news sources and providing opinions that turn out to come true are "dumb"...

Keep those friends close. You will need them to make you feel important.

[Daniel]

Mabus will make some stupid post at some point in this thread.

Look @ me posting opinions that will prove true. I r win politics.

[Stanley Burrell]

Mabus will make some stupid post at some point in this thread.

Look @ me posting opinions that will prove true. I r win politics.

But what if he posts something that is also undoubtedly true? Surely the two truths will cancel each other out in a violent explosion of antimatter and the universe as we know it shall end, no?

If you think about this enough, you've thought about it too much.

[Parkbandit]

Mabus will make some stupid post at some point in this thread.

Look @ me posting opinions that will prove true. I r win politics.

You might not agree with Mabus' opinion.. but at least he's contributing to the thread.. something obviously you rarely do.

I doubt that Clinton will be able to take this fight to the convention as I had hoped... not with Dirty Harry and Pelosi pushing as hard as they have been over the past week to have this wrapped up this month.

[Mabus]

I doubt that Clinton will be able to take this fight to the convention as I had hoped... not with Dirty Harry and Pelosi pushing as hard as they have been over the past week to have this wrapped up this month.
What some people (Obama supporters, media pundits) neglect to mention is that neither candidate will have the pledged delegates to outright win after the primaries end.

Both need the super delegates to win. Super delegate votes are not set in stone, until the final vote at the convention. They can (and have done so) switch at any time until a nominee at the convention goes over the delegate count needed in a recorded vote, at the convention.

The media counts all super delegates as if they were pledged, which is misleading. Even if Obama goes over the new delegate count this week he will still be the "presumptive nominee of the Democratic party".

From her speech in PR, where she again trounced Obama (but did congratulate him and his supporters), Clinton did not sound like she was stepping down.

I wonder how the better then 2/3 win in PR was done. Perhaps it was all those "racist white voters" in PR that we have been told are responsible for her wins in other states?

[Back]

Obama is our next president. Get used to it.

[Daniel]

You might not agree with Mabus' opinion.. but at least he's contributing to the thread.. something obviously you rarely do.


Obviously?

Oh really PB?

Is this gonna be like the time you accused of me avoiding posts and questions and I then asked you to answer a question to prove that you were a hypocrite that was full of shit and you avoided my post and question?

I think so. Let's see:

Care to point out how I "obviously" rarely contribute to threads? Moreso then you? Let's avoid the retardness of posting all of my points for five days of less than 6 words with no sense of comparison, i.e. how many one line posts you yourself have or how many posts I've had with more than 6 words.

Thanks.

[landy]

I wonder how the better then 2/3 win in PR was done. Perhaps it was all those "racist white voters" in PR that we have been told are responsible for her wins in other states?

Hmmm, what other ethnic group has been voting Hillary at an extremely large percentage rate, and could possibly live in Puerto Rico... Hmmmm.

Are you being serious? Should your posts be read as if they are in italics?

[Mabus]

Hmmm, what other ethnic group has been voting Hillary at an extremely large percentage rate, and could possibly live in Puerto Rico... Hmmmm.
So you are stating these people, and others in the past, are voting for Clinton solely based on race?

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

So you are stating these people, and others in the past, are voting for Clinton solely based on race?

That's not what she's saying at all.

Clinton has had a stronger lead these entire primaries in Latino voters.

[TheEschaton]

Obama is our next president. Get used to it.

Once again, Back being retarded. The general election will be ridiculously contentious, and that's if Obama is lucky.

[Parkbandit]

Obviously?

Oh really PB?

Is this gonna be like the time you accused of me avoiding posts and questions and I then asked you to answer a question to prove that you were a hypocrite that was full of shit and you avoided my post and question?

I think so. Let's see:

Care to point out how I "obviously" rarely contribute to threads? Moreso then you? Let's avoid the retardness of posting all of my points for five days of less than 6 words with no sense of comparison, i.e. how many one line posts you yourself have or how many posts I've had with more than 6 words.

Thanks.

Do your own research chump. Pull up all of your political posts in the past 100 days. I'm lik 100% positive they are all nonsense.

100% positive.

[Daniel]

I thought so.

[Parkbandit]

Obama is our next president. Get used to it.



Gore is our next president. Get used to it.



Kerry is our next president. Get used to it.


Going for 3 in a row?

[Parkbandit]

I thought so.

Don't include this in your bullshit responses.. since it's less than 6 words.

6 words is the new cutoff.

[Warriorbird]

I don't think YOU want to impose that one Parkbandit.

(look, 10 there!)

[Back]

Going for 3 in a row?

Thanks for at least posting the little button that actually links back to my actual words. I never really found the whole manipulating someone else’s posts as particularly funny, or at all clever.

[Clove]

Thanks for at least posting the little button that actually links back to my actual words. I never really found the whole manipulating someone else’s posts as particularly funny, or at all clever.Just for your own personal reference when you are the butt of someone's joke... nobody gives a flying fuck if you think it's funny. I know you're trying to play it off and be cool and all... but you're not in Jr. High- it just doesn't work as well here.

[Back]

Just for your own personal reference when you are the butt of someone's joke... nobody gives a flying fuck if you think it's funny. I know you're trying to play it off and be cool and all... but you're not in Jr. High- it just doesn't work as well here.

If I am the butt of the joke I think I have the right to judge if its funny or not. And, just so we are clear... I don’t particularly give a flying fuck what you think.

[Daniel]

I don't think YOU want to impose that one Parkbandit.

(look, 10 there!)

Of course he doesn't. That's why he ran away with his tail between his legs when I challenged him to post his one sentence replies.

PB because much more of a joke everyday.

[Clove]

If I am the butt of the joke I think I have the right to judge if its funny or not. And, just so we are clear... I don’t particularly give a flying fuck what you think.Of course, and you end up sounding more retarded than you normally do. You fucking waterhead... because obviously the target of a joke would have a meaningful opinion on the subject unbiased by emo bullshit.

[Back]

Of course, and you end up sounding more retarded than you normally do. You fucking waterhead... because obviously the target of a joke would have a meaningful opinion on the subject unbiased by emo bullshit.

Find your happy place, dude.

BTW, is plain fucking simple English your second language?

[Clove]

Find your happy place, dude.

BTW, is plain fucking simple English your second language?No, Italian is and then Spanish. Do you speak any English at all?

[Back]

Abbastanza. Capische?

Salut.

[Clove]

Capisco. Ora statazit.

Nadie quiere eschucarlo mas.

[Daniel]

che katzo??

[Clove]

che katzo??I don't speak French.

[Back]

C’est la vie.

A votre sante.

[Parkbandit]

If I am the butt of the joke I think I have the right to judge if its funny or not. And, just so we are clear... I don’t particularly give a flying fuck what you think.


We're not laughing with you.. we're laughing at you. Since when can the butt of the joke determine if it's funny or not? Normally, the butt thinks it's dumb.. while everyone else is laughing their ass off.

A humor pundit you are not... unless of course you feel it necessary to redefine the term "pundit" again.

[Warriorbird]

I think all of us are laughing AT each other. Backlash has just lost credibility with a higher percentage.

[Parkbandit]

Of course he doesn't. That's why he ran away with his tail between his legs when I challenged him to post his one sentence replies.

PB because much more of a joke everyday.

Dude.. there is nothing you can do to ever make me run away... real life or on the internet. You are a complete joke in both places.

So wait.. you think you won teh internet because I chose not to post all of your 6+ word replies that had shit to do with the topic? Dude, that would take me all day. You rarely EVER post about anything on topic..

On topic: Obama took his name off MI because he knew he was going to get his ass kicked.. and hoped that by doing so, he would lessen his loss against Hillary. Worked like a charm.

[Daniel]

I don't speak French.

non francois

[Daniel]

Dude.. there is nothing you can do to ever make me run away... real life or on the internet. You are a complete joke in both places.

So wait.. you think you won teh internet because I chose not to post all of your 6+ word replies that had shit to do with the topic? Dude, that would take me all day. You rarely EVER post about anything on topic..

On topic: Obama took his name off MI because he knew he was going to get his ass kicked.. and hoped that by doing so, he would lessen his loss against Hillary. Worked like a charm.

I don't care if you ever run away. If anything I'd prefer if you stay. You would ruin half my fun if not.

For instance, I find it funny that you have so much time to post all of my 6- posts but don't have the time to do all the 6+ replies but still have the stupidity to say that the majority of my posts are 6-.

Good show.

[Back]

We're not laughing with you.. we're laughing at you. Since when can the butt of the joke determine if it's funny or not? Normally, the butt thinks it's dumb.. while everyone else is laughing their ass off.

A humor pundit you are not... unless of course you feel it necessary to redefine the term "pundit" again.

Am I supposed to cry now? QQ? Do you mind if I laugh at you instead?

Why are you so stuck on that Pundit thing? That was at least two years ago.

[Kembal]

On topic: Obama took his name off MI because he knew he was going to get his ass kicked.. and hoped that by doing so, he would lessen his loss against Hillary. Worked like a charm.

Unlikely. Hillary had not turned into a working class populist until the runup to Ohio, and Obama was polling decently well there just based on Name ID alone even before Iowa. Here's the link to the polls, scroll down past the chart to see the pre-ballot removal polling:

http://www.pollster.com/08-MI-Dem-Pres-Primary.php

Don't think he would've won, but it would have probably been within 10.

[Gan]

... (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/31/dems.delegates/index.html)and as she's a rational human being ... :yes:
Your first mistake.


Will Clinton be offered a SCOTUS position? Attorney General? VP?
Thie first two are stupidly offered. At a minimum she's after a VP slot. But with about half of the popular DNC (and some GOP) vote - she's got every reason in the world to stay in.


Will Clinton take it to the next rules committee meeting (allowing her more fund raising time) present her case, then leave?
Dont be silly.


Will it go to the convention?
Exactly


Obama is our next president. Get used to it.
Ahhh, the pundit speaks. I was going to say I've heard you predict before - but PB beat me to it. :lol:


Just for your own personal reference when you are the butt of someone's joke... nobody gives a flying fuck if you think it's funny. I know you're trying to play it off and be cool and all... but you're not in Jr. High- it just doesn't work as well here.
PWNNNND.


I don’t particularly give a flying fuck what you think.
Other than humor value - thats what many feel about your posts. Emo boy.


That was at least two years ago.
So there's a limit on how long ago we can dig back and pull up your nonsensicle bullshit and laugh at you with, especially when you seem to recycle it adnauseum?

[Gan]

And this thread's troll award goes to Daniel, who has the lead posts so far (7) and yet to have posted on topic. :clap:

[Gan]

(CNN) — In the latest sign Hillary Clinton isn't yet preparing to bow out of the presidential race, the New York senator is launching a new television ad Monday that highlights her claim she is beating Barack Obama in the popular vote.

The spot is set to run in the remaining two primary states — Montana and South Dakota — and argues Clinton has won “more votes than anyone in the history of the Democratic primaries.”

“Some say there isn’t a single reason for Hillary to be the Democratic nominee,” the ad's announcer states. “They’re right. There are over 17 million of them.”

Clinton echoed that argument in her Puerto Rican victory speech Sunday evening, declaring, "When the voting concludes on Tuesday…I will lead the popular vote."

"The decision [on who will be the nominee] will fall on the shoulders of those leaders in our party empowered by the rules to vote at the Democratic Convention," she also said.

more...
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/images/06/01/art.clintonad.cnn.jpg

[Clove]

“Some say there isn’t a single reason for Hillary to be the Democratic nominee,” the ad's announcer states. “They’re right. There are over 17 million of them.”Gore Redux. The candidacy isn't a popular vote, it's a delegate vote- and she's not picking up 90% of the remaining super delegates.

[Parkbandit]

Gore Redux. The candidacy isn't a popular vote, it's a delegate vote- and she's not picking up 90% of the remaining super delegates.

Hey, at least she's consistent.. unlike those who were crying (ala TheE apparently) that while Gore won the popular vote, he didn't become President... and now use the "This isn't about popular vote" as a defense to any Clinton bitchfest.

She needs to take it to the convention and make sure every vote is counted imo.

[Parkbandit]

And this thread's troll award goes to Daniel, who has the lead posts so far (7) and yet to have posted on topic. :clap:

If they are less than 6 words, you can't count them.

[g++]

Hey, at least she's consistent.. unlike those who were crying (ala TheE apparently) that while Gore won the popular vote, he didn't become President... and now use the "This isn't about popular vote" as a defense to any Clinton bitchfest.

She needs to take it to the convention and make sure every vote is counted imo.


She is only leading the popular vote if you exlude caucus votes entirely and include Michigan with Obama receiving 0 votes in Michigan. While its technically true he got 0 votes in Michigan its not a very good representation of what an unrigged popular vote there would produce. According to raw popular votes hes still up 25k popular votes after puerto rico(the popular vote media usually uses). She didnt win as big in puerto rico as alot of people were expecting. Unless your watching a Clinton commercial they usually mention that depending on how you calculate it either of them can have the popular vote.

[Gan]

Gore Redux. The candidacy isn't a popular vote, it's a delegate vote- and she's not picking up 90% of the remaining super delegates.

Tell that to the voting constituency, representing supporters of Clinton, who will be voting for the elected officials who make up the majority of that delegate vote.

That and the fact that the delegate vote has not 'voted' yet. A verbal confirmation of whom they are voting for is not a contract that requires follow through at the convention. Until their vote is officially cast (and cant be withdrawn or changed) then at best its hearsay.

Now if the DNC requires the delegates to cast their ballott prior to the convention, then the delegate justification has legs to stand on.

In the mean time, this gives Hillary a few more months to continue to scare up support, raise funds, and dig up dirt on Obama. She's hoping for the hail mary pass/suprise witness that will take Obama out in one fell swoop. And she's crazy if she has that information already and releases it now - so as to give Obama time to defend against it. If she's smart (she is politically) she'll wait until right before the convention and then spring it. ;)

[Tsa`ah]

:facepalm:

Perhaps if you wanted to convey the humor, irony ... or whatever literary device you were going for ... you would have used italics to convey it.

The "Rules" comittee handed down thier ruling with a particularly pro-Clinton slant. I know ... I know ... they were being typical Nazi appeasers, but it was about all they could do for Clinton .... and she wants more (and less).

At the end of the hearing, one of her campaign people did state that Clinton had empowered him to say they would take this fight to the "credentials" committee ... and on to the convention floor.

She wants FL and MI to have full representation, she doesn't want any of the MI representation to be for Obama ... She wants every vote to count that was cast for her, but she doesn't want the caucus vote to have any impact on that number.

Change the rules, move the goal post .... keep doing it. It's more of the same.


...

I just can't bring myself to read your retardation anymore ... let alone invest the energy in a response (past this effort).

[Warriorbird]

"My brother Bilo has a really funny retardation!"
-Borat

[Kembal]

Perhaps if you wanted to convey the humor, irony ... or whatever literary device you were going for ... you would have used italics to convey it.

The "Rules" comittee handed down thier ruling with a particularly pro-Clinton slant. I know ... I know ... they were being typical Nazi appeasers, but it was about all they could do for Clinton .... and she wants more (and less).



Pro-Clinton slant? What? Are you kidding me? A pro-Clinton ruling (within the bounds of the rules) would've been to make it 73-51 in Michigan. And slicing the superdelegate votes in half for FL and MI was not required...considering that Clinton had more announced superdelegate endorsements from both states before the meeting, that was pretty much anti-Clinton. (Not exactly pro-Obama either, since most of the Rules committee members from FL and MI that were unpledged announced for Obama on Monday, and that'd mean they cut their own votes in half.)

They ended up doing a good compromise. You're the first Obama supporter I've heard of that isn't ok with the ruling.

[Clove]

That and the fact that the delegate vote has not 'voted' yet. A verbal confirmation of whom they are voting for is not a contract that requires follow through at the convention. Until their vote is officially cast (and cant be withdrawn or changed) then at best its hearsay.I think you're reaching if you don't think a public announcement of whom you're voting for doesn't equate to a commitment.

[Tsa`ah]

Pro-Clinton slant? What? Are you kidding me? A pro-Clinton ruling (within the bounds of the rules) would've been to make it 73-51 in Michigan. And slicing the superdelegate votes in half for FL and MI was not required...considering that Clinton had more announced superdelegate endorsements from both states before the meeting, that was pretty much anti-Clinton. (Not exactly pro-Obama either, since most of the Rules committee members from FL and MI that were unpledged announced for Obama on Monday, and that'd mean they cut their own votes in half.)

They ended up doing a good compromise. You're the first Obama supporter I've heard of that isn't ok with the ruling.

I never said I wasn't OK with the ruling ... but you have to be blind to not see that Clinton made out like a bandit (and still isn't happy about it).

The ruling was in Clinton's favor considering that this still disenfranchises everyone that didn't vote because they were under the assumption that it was pointless to do so. Anyone claiming Obama or Clinton would have won either state is speaking purely on conjecture. We really don't know what the outcome would have been if they had not voted (or not) under DNC penalties.

Clinton walked away from the rules committee with a lion's share of the delegates and her foot in the credential committee's door. Had they ruled to uphold the penalties, she would have been stopped cold. So yes ... a pro-Clinton slant.

[Parkbandit]

I never said I wasn't OK with the ruling ... but you have to be blind to not see that Clinton made out like a bandit (and still isn't happy about it).

The ruling was in Clinton's favor considering that this still disenfranchises everyone that didn't vote because they were under the assumption that it was pointless to do so. Anyone claiming Obama or Clinton would have won either state is speaking purely on conjecture. We really don't know what the outcome would have been if they had not voted (or not) under DNC penalties.

Clinton walked away from the rules committee with a lion's share of the delegates and her foot in the credential committee's door. Had they ruled to uphold the penalties, she would have been stopped cold. So yes ... a pro-Clinton slant.


Made out like a bandit? 4 delegates were taken from her and given to Obama.. then 55 undecided delegates were given to Obama.

Not sure I would use 'bandit'. It was probably the most fair way to decide what to do with the 2 states.. but I don't see it as a huge Clinton win.

[TheEschaton]

1) I don't cry about Gore winning the popular vote and not being President. My main point of contention is that the Republicans used dirty tricks to steal Florida, which prevented him from winning the electoral vote.

2) Clinton leads the popular vote EVEN IF you count caucus states, but like someone said, this relies on counting MI fully, and giving 0 to Obama.

3) It was pretty common knowledge that Obama withdrew from MI to focus on other states he thought he could win - I think that should be taken into consideration.

4) Clinton has always championed herself as a fighter for middle class workers, not just in the lead up to Ohio. It's how she won her NY Senate seat.

5) The ruling wasn't pro-Clinton, nor was it pro-Obama. I guess that's a sign of a good compromise? Dean has been saying for 2 months that they were going to have to seat the FL and MI delegations, and that his original hope in disqualifying them would be that the nominee would have been more clearcut, and in a gesture of kindness, would have allowed them to be seated out of his/her own magnamity.

All this being said, rumors are floating around that she is in the process of pulling the plug, and those rumors have been ramping up since yesterday out of her campaign. Bill even said something about yesterday probably being "his last campaign stop" ever.

[Parkbandit]

1) I don't cry about Gore winning the popular vote and not being President. My main point of contention is that the Republicans used dirty tricks to steal Florida, which prevented him from winning the electoral vote.

2) Clinton leads the popular vote EVEN IF you count caucus states, but like someone said, this relies on counting MI fully, and giving 0 to Obama.

3) It was pretty common knowledge that Obama withdrew from MI to focus on other states he thought he could win - I think that should be taken into consideration.

4) Clinton has always championed herself as a fighter for middle class workers, not just in the lead up to Ohio. It's how she won her NY Senate seat.

5) The ruling wasn't pro-Clinton, nor was it pro-Obama. I guess that's a sign of a good compromise? Dean has been saying for 2 months that they were going to have to seat the FL and MI delegations, and that his original hope in disqualifying them would be that the nominee would have been more clearcut, and in a gesture of kindness, would have allowed them to be seated out of his/her own magnamity.

All this being said, rumors are floating around that she is in the process of pulling the plug, and those rumors have been ramping up since yesterday out of her campaign. Bill even said something about yesterday probably being "his last campaign stop" ever.


1 - :rofl: You are starting to sound more and more like Backlash everyday.

2- So she's not really winning the popular vote then.

3- Common knowledge.. or common theory? No one knows why except Obama and his advisors.

4- Is this the same 'champion of healthcare' we came to laugh at in the '90's? She's never held the belt.. she's a self promoter.

5- Agreed

[g++]

Cool spreadsheet I thought people here would have fun with..


http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/06/popular-vote-scenario-tester.html

[Kefka]

Pro-Clinton slant? What? Are you kidding me? A pro-Clinton ruling (within the bounds of the rules) would've been to make it 73-51 in Michigan. And slicing the superdelegate votes in half for FL and MI was not required...considering that Clinton had more announced superdelegate endorsements from both states before the meeting, that was pretty much anti-Clinton. (Not exactly pro-Obama either, since most of the Rules committee members from FL and MI that were unpledged announced for Obama on Monday, and that'd mean they cut their own votes in half.)

They ended up doing a good compromise. You're the first Obama supporter I've heard of that isn't ok with the ruling.

It was pro-Clinton that she received any delegates at all from Michigan and Florida. Even more so that it wasn't a 50/50 split. Obama threw her a bone and she's complaining it's not big enough.

[Kefka]

What some people (Obama supporters, media pundits) neglect to mention is that neither candidate will have the pledged delegates to outright win after the primaries end.

Both need the super delegates to win. Super delegate votes are not set in stone, until the final vote at the convention. They can (and have done so) switch at any time until a nominee at the convention goes over the delegate count needed in a recorded vote, at the convention.

The media counts all super delegates as if they were pledged, which is misleading. Even if Obama goes over the new delegate count this week he will still be the "presumptive nominee of the Democratic party".

From her speech in PR, where she again trounced Obama (but did congratulate him and his supporters), Clinton did not sound like she was stepping down.

I wonder how the better then 2/3 win in PR was done. Perhaps it was all those "racist white voters" in PR that we have been told are responsible for her wins in other states?

That's more of a pipe dream. So far in this race, it's only been Clinton losing SD's. She actually lost a pledged, as well.

[CrystalTears]

3) It was pretty common knowledge that Obama withdrew from MI to focus on other states he thought he could win - I think that should be taken into consideration.


3- Common knowledge.. or common theory? No one knows why except Obama and his advisors.
And the other four candidates that withdrew because Michigan was not complying with DNC rules.

[Clove]

The media counts all super delegates as if they were pledged, which is misleading. Even if Obama goes over the new delegate count this week he will still be the "presumptive nominee of the Democratic party".Really that's just ridiculous. Superdelegates aren't publicly pledging their support at this point in the race to pull a "psyche-out" and fuck with their party more at the Convention.

The recent sway in superdelegates is an obvious signal from the party and if enough SD's come over to bring him over the delegate count the only one who will consider it presumptive, is you.

[Keller]

Really that's just ridiculous. Superdelegates aren't publicly pledging their support at this point in the race to pull a "psyche-out" and fuck with their party more at the Convention.

The recent sway in superdelegates is an obvious signal from the party and if enough SD's come over to bring him over the delegate count the only one who will consider it presumptive, is you.

I can just see Ted Keneedy with white cotton gause turban from his hospital bed saying, "I had my fingers crossed! Neener neener neener!"

[Clove]

Ted's excused he has a tumor.

[Parkbandit]

Really that's just ridiculous. Superdelegates aren't publicly pledging their support at this point in the race to pull a "psyche-out" and fuck with their party more at the Convention.

The recent sway in superdelegates is an obvious signal from the party and if enough SD's come over to bring him over the delegate count the only one who will consider it presumptive, is you.

Are you implying that no Super Delegates have switched their votes in the past 6 months? McCain has no one fighting against him for the nomination, but he's still considered by everyone as the 'presumptive nominee'... because nothing is set in stone until the actual delegates cast their votes.

[CrystalTears]

Are you implying that no Super Delegates have switched their votes in the past 6 months? McCain has no one fighting against him for the nomination, but he's still considered by everyone as the 'presumptive nominee'... because nothing is set in stone until the actual delegates cast their votes.
No, what he's probably saying is that the delegates have publicly announced their decision. To go back on their word and vote for the other candidate would be a really unwise and quite frankly stupid thing to do.

[Parkbandit]

No, what he's probably saying is that the delegates have publicly announced their decision. To go back on their word and vote for the other candidate would be a really unwise and quite frankly stupid thing to do.

It's the Dumbercrat party, doll... they do alot of dumb things. I imagine what.. 10-20 have done that 'frankly stupid thing" already... no?

[Keller]

Are you implying that no Super Delegates have switched their votes in the past 6 months?

No. He's implying that the democrats that have shifted their pledges and the uncommitted delegates that are now pledging are doing so to end the race. They are not going to form a firm coalition in support of Obama just to switch their votes at the convention for your entertainment.

[CrystalTears]

Well according to you they haven't officially voted yet, so what do you care? :tongue:

Anyway, those 10-20 announced publicly that they were switching. I believe it's a different thing to say you'll vote for someone and then secretly vote for the other. Then again that's how I feel about most voting polls.

[Clove]

It's the Dumbercrat party, doll... they do alot of dumb things. I imagine what.. 10-20 have done that 'frankly stupid thing" already... no?Like I said, while it may be technically true that they can still switch their vote, and while you may not have any respect for the Democrat political philosophy; they still aren't retarded enough to jerk around their political career by waffling publicly about the candidate they support.

Yes SD's have switched their commitments in the race- but at the moment, I think it's very unlikely that they'll be switching again at the last minute. You're just playing Devil's Advocate. I think you secretly <3 Mabus. :P

[Gan]

Really that's just ridiculous. Superdelegates aren't publicly pledging their support at this point in the race to pull a "psyche-out" and fuck with their party more at the Convention.

The recent sway in superdelegates is an obvious signal from the party and if enough SD's come over to bring him over the delegate count the only one who will consider it presumptive, is you.

Dude, this is politics... nothing's definite until the vote has been cast and cant be recinded.

Dont be so sure about pledges, they're people too. ;)

[Parkbandit]

I think you secretly <3 Mabus. :P

No.. just not a blind Obamamaniac that will attack anyone that says anything against Obama.

[Clove]

Dont be so sure about pledges, they're people too. ;)Oh without a doubt, but Hillary is out of money and (obviously) she doesn't give good head.

[TheEschaton]

Clinton would have to promise them the world, and she doesn't have the world to promise them, and they know that.

-TheE-

[Clove]

No.. just not a blind Obamamaniac that will attack anyone that says anything against Obama.Neither am I, which we've already previously established. I think it's also the general consenus that Mabus is the Obamaniac on this board.

The Democrats haven't been pushing for a decision these past two months only to fuck it up more by switching allegience at the last minute.

This is one of those arguments that you can make and never be wrong and it's pointless, because in the end (when we discover the SD's stuck to their commitments) you'll be able to say but they could have still switched!.

Sure. Ted Kennedy could live another 10 years too.

[Parkbandit]

Neither am I, which we've already previously established. I think it's also the general consenus that Mabus is the Obamaniac on this board.

Obamaniac is someone who blindly supports Obama.. regardless of his actions or policies. If the general consensus is that Mabus fits that definition.. then the general consensus of this message board has a reading problem. He's the direct opposite of an Obamaniac.





The Democrats haven't been pushing for a decision these past two months only to fuck it up more by switching allegience at the last minute.

This is one of those arguments that you can make and never be wrong and it's pointless, because in the end (when we discover the SD's stuck to their commitments) you'll be able to say but they could have still switched!.

Sure. Ted Kennedy could live another 10 years too.

Here's the thing though.. and probably the only reason Hillary will suspend her campaign instead of outright conceding the nomination... if something comes out about Obama that is a huge political blunder, she's able to still get the nomination.. since the Delegates haven't actually voted for the nominee yet. Once that happens at the Convention, Obama stops being referred to as the presumptive nominee and becomes the Democratic nominee.

[CrystalTears]

Obamaniac is someone who blindly supports Obama..
More like someone who obsesses over Obama.

[Kranar]

Obamaniac is someone who blindly supports Obama.. regardless of his actions or policies. If the general consensus is that Mabus fits that definition.. then the general consensus of this message board has a reading problem. He's the direct opposite of an Obamaniac.


I would call anyone who is obsessed with Obama an Obamaniac. I think Mabus is more obsessed with Obama than anyone else on these forums.

It's good for a laugh.

[Clove]

Obamaniac is someone who blindly supports Obama.. regardless of his actions or policies. If the general consensus is that Mabus fits that definition.. then the general consensus of this message board has a reading problem.
We're going to argue over the definition of fictional word? I think you get the idea. CT sure does (but maybe you have to be a former semi-conservative to understand my point). :D


He's the direct opposite of an Obamaniac.
Someone who blindly discounts Obama regardless of his actions or policies? What's the word for that?

Yes Obama could make a huge political blunder, but as skillfully as he's run his campaign to date- are you really expecting that?

[Parkbandit]

More like someone who obsesses over Obama.

The term isn't used to describe someone who is negatively obsessed with Obama.. it's used to describe someone who is positively obsessed with Obama. It would make no sense to say "Man, that guy hates Obama so much, he must be an Obamaniac!"

[Parkbandit]

We're going to argue over the definition of fictional word? I think you get the idea. CT sure does (but maybe you have to be a former semi-conservative to understand my point). :D

We're not arguing.. you are. If you use a term incorrectly, expect someone to call you out on it. This discussion is like how Backlash tried to redefine "Pundit" to suit his need.



Someone who blindly discounts Obama regardless of his actions or policies? What's the word for that?


I doubt anyone has come up with one yet... so feel free. Obamahater maybe?



Yes Obama could make a huge political blunder, but as skillfully as he's run his campaign to date- are you really expecting that?

I'm not expecting anything from him to be honest.

[CrystalTears]

You want to argue over a fake word? Really? Pundit is a real word! I think the cheese has slid off your cracker.

Mabus has a bug up his ass about Obama. Call it whatever you want.

[Gan]

obsessed

One entry found.

obsess

Main Entry: ob&#183;sess Pronunciation: \əb-ˈses, &#228;b-\ Function: verb Etymology: Latin obsessus, past participle of obsidēre to frequent, besiege, from ob- against + sedēre to sit — more at ob- (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ob-), sit (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sit) Date: 1531

transitive verb : to haunt or excessively preoccupy the mind of <was obsessed with the idea.

intransitive verb : to engage in obsessive (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/obsessive) thinking : become obsessed (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/obsessed) with an idea.

[Clove]

Well PB, we are in fact arguing. I sarcastically labelled Mabus as an Obamamaniac (which apparently everyone but you got) and you launched off to correct my definition. Feel free to look it up in the dictionary and post it.

Incedentally, I also didn't attack him, I attacked his assertion that Obama is the presumptive candidate.

[Keller]

Well PB, we are in fact arguing.

You'll have to understand the PB has never argued in his life. He just asserts his opinion and claims victory.

[Clove]

You'll have to understand the PB has never argued in his life. He just asserts his opinion and claims victory.Aw, PB's not that bad, he just doesn't like Obama's policy suggestions. I'm not very comfortable with some of them either.

Unfortunately for PB the enemy of my enemy isn't always my friend. Sometimes, he's just a retard.

[Parkbandit]

Well PB, we are in fact arguing. I sarcastically labelled Mabus as an Obamamaniac (which apparently everyone but you got) and you launched off to correct my definition. Feel free to look it up in the dictionary and post it.

Incedentally, I also didn't attack him, I attacked his assertion that Obama is the presumptive candidate.

Ah.. so you were being sarcastic. Gotcha. So I guess I was the ONLY person in the world that didn't get your sarcasm, instead of you using the term incorrectly... as you now post is the case.

PS - You may want to send PMs to Kranar, CT and yourself.. since you tried to define it later on as well to be anyone who is obsessed with Obama.. good or bad.

[Parkbandit]

Aw, PB's not that bad, he just doesn't like Obama's policy suggestions. I'm not very comfortable with some of them either.

Unfortunately for PB the enemy of my enemy isn't always my friend. Sometimes, he's just a retard.

Maybe you can join Keller and Daniel in becoming Parkbanditiacs. I'll get you guys tee-shirts, fan club packs and 8x10 autographed glossies, suitable for framing.

[Clove]

Maybe you can join Keller and Daniel in becoming Parkbanditiacs. I'll get you guys tee-shirts, fan club packs and 8x10 autographed glossies, suitable for framing.Only if send the ones of you with Moses.

[Mabus]

The recent sway in superdelegates is an obvious signal from the party and if enough SD's come over to bring him over the delegate count the only one who will consider it presumptive, is you. (bold my own)

I will skip the rest of the unfounded insults and focus on the factual inaccuracy of this statement.

A presidential nominee with the nominating majority is the "presumptive nominee" until they receive the official nomination at their party's convention.

That means McCain is the presumptive nominee of the GOP, and Obama will be the presumptive nominee of the Democrats.

It is not a pejorative term, it is simply fact.

Now you can all go back to insulting me. I apologize for this moment of truth in your childish antics.

[Clove]

I will skip the rest of the unfounded insults and focus on the factual inaccuracy of this statement.If you consider that an insult, maybe you ought to avoid the PC politics folder. Here's a direct insult though- grow up.


A presidential nominee with the nominating majority is the "presumptive nominee" until they receive the official nomination at their party's convention.Which makes you captain obvious, but it doesn't really change the fact that McCain is considered the presidential nominee as is Obama. It's a petty point that you throw out there like a 10 year old whining "you only won because you got held back a year!!! You're not the real winner!"

[Mabus]

If you consider that an insult, maybe you ought to avoid the PC politics folder. Here's a direct insult though- grow up.

Which makes you captain obvious, but it doesn't really change the fact that McCain is considered the presidential nominee as is Obama. It's a petty point that you throw out there like a 10 year old whining "you only won because you got held back a year!!! You're not the real winner!"
Don't hate because the facts prove you wrong! Just admit you were wrong, and then you too can "grow up", as I did decades ago.

You do not have to believe me (which likely you do not, even though the facts are on my side). Look up the rules and definitions used in our campaigns.

He is the "presumptive nominee" of the Democratic Party until he wins the vote at the convention.

[Parkbandit]

Only if send the ones of you with Moses.


Ageist.

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e6/belike53/fightLogo_sm_3.gif

[Clove]

Well unfortunately nobody is denying the technicality. Reading comprehension FTL. McCain is the presumptive nominee, but it isn't presumptive (as you suggested) to call him the nominee. And isn't for Obama either. Have a Reeses and a Midol and a good cry and I promise, you'll feel better tomorrow.

[Gan]

I dont know... something in the back of my mind keeps saying that its foolish to think Hillary will walk away so easily. She's way too crafty for that. And since she's just 'suspending' her campaign, there's always that hope that Obama will misstep or the skeleton in the closet will exist and be found.

I just dont trust the bitch. No sirrreeee.

[Parkbandit]

I think there is still some big dirt on Obama.. and it's going to be held until it's useful in defeating him in November.

[Daniel]

And this thread's troll award goes to Daniel, who has the lead posts so far (7) and yet to have posted on topic. :clap:

Thanks for the tally chief. I apologize for impeding the oh so important discussion of what an Obamamaniac is.

I trust you'll be pursuing all threads with this level of vigilance, or rather getting off my nuts?

[Gan]

Thanks for the tally chief. I apologize for impeding the oh so important discussion of what an Obamamaniac is.

I trust you'll be pursuing all threads with this level of vigilance, or rather getting off my nuts?

There you go fantasizing about another man and your nuts again.

Sorry dude, I dont roll like that.

[Daniel]

You must have me confused with someone else.

[CrystalTears]

There you go fantasizing about another man and your nuts again.

Sorry dude, I dont roll like that.


You must have me confused with someone else.
Dudes, it's Tsa`ah that thinks we're on his nuts and/or humping his leg. Get it right!

[Gan]

You must have me confused with someone else.


I trust you'll be pursuing all threads with this level of vigilance, or rather getting off my nuts?

No, I'm spot on. You're the one who's trying to bring your nuts into this.



+9

[Daniel]

Dudes, it's Tsa`ah that thinks we're on his nuts and/or humping his leg. Get it right!

Exactly.

Gan, I fully expect you to apologize for your lies and attacks on my character. Otherwise you are irrelevant to me and a fucking liar.

[Gan]

Irregardless...

+10