|
|
Obama supporters as well as political pundits and talking heads of the media all claim the math is against Hillary Clinton and her race for the White House and there is no way she can win enough delegates.......but don't tell that to me.
Math means nothing in a race. Not just any race but a political race for this nations leader.
In 1984 the Democratic party took math out of the equation by creating super delegates for the sole purpose of making Politicians more important than individual pledged delegates. This enables the Supers to make a decision at the Convention.
You can't really use Super Delegates in the count. Forget the "Math" and just count, without the supers. Pledged delegates cannot be changed. Supers can.....and they will.
Now look at Florida and Michigan. Chair of the DNC's Voting Rights Institute, Donna Brazile has continued to call for the PEOPLE of these two states to be punished for the actions of politicians making choices as their representatives when the Party BIG WIGS, like Brazile herself are responsible for this mess. The DNC picked and chose specific states to allow to move their elections to give special treatment and more power to the few while saying no to others. Why? Does the party have rules about how many and who can move their primaries? This was a decision based on taking power from one state and attempting to give it to another. Well.....they created this mess so it is up to them to settle it. Brazile is quoted as saying "I do not want the Super Delegates to pick the Nominee". Why? That's what they're there for.
An odd fact and somewhat ironic is that Donna Brazile was made chair of the Voting Rights Institute after the 2001 Florida debacle. Look what she has wrought upon herself now.
While saying that she wants to punish the people of FL and MI from one side of her mouth.....seconds later she says she wants to make sure the delegates from those states are seated at the convention, out of the other side of her mouth. How many each candidate gets to be decided at "a later date". What date? By who? Exactly how?
This election is not about math. It's not about a convention with backroom deals.....no. Backroom deals have already been made and more will be happening ...probably as I type. It's time for the people given their super powers to use them. How they do that and who they vote for are the real matters. Many super delegates who's states voted for Clinton have moved to Obama even though Obama himself has stated that supers should vote by the vote of the people. When did he change his mind on that? probably when the supers from those states wanted to move to him while ignoring their constituents. That's fine....because they can switch back....without even saying a word publicly. If it were about the "Math"....numbers would not be able to move. Super Delegates can.
|
Posts:
2,957
Registered:
3/12/08
|
|
(36 of 36)
Re: Why it's not about the "math"
May 15, 2008 2:00 PM
|
> bump
>
> .... what's up with the boards?
Whats up with your hours?
4am?! jeez
|
|
|
Posts:
696
Registered:
12/16/05
|
|
(35 of 36)
Re: Why it's not about the "math"
May 15, 2008 4:00 AM
|
bump
.... what's up with the boards?
|
|
|
Posts:
4,731
Registered:
12/22/06
|
|
(34 of 36)
Re: Why it's not about the "math"
May 15, 2008 12:32 AM
|
|
It's better with age! LOL! Gotta love a good private joke!
|
|
|
Posts:
5,189
Registered:
9/27/05
|
|
(33 of 36)
Re: Why it's not about the "math"
May 15, 2008 12:25 AM
|
> 
>
> That would be a hilarious answer.....have the
> candidates do a "Math Off"!
> --
> Edited by MarkMiller at 05/14/2008 8:20 PM PDT
I'm glad you signed back on Mark..lol.. I knew most of the posters here (now) wouldn't get my joke.
--
Watching a train wreck full of clowns
|
|
|
Posts:
812
Registered:
2/22/08
|
|
(32 of 36)
Re: Why it's not about the "math"
May 15, 2008 12:23 AM
|
> Is that what they signed....???
yep.
> Funny...it seemed to
> me they were making a Pledge Not to do something...I
> don't think it was to agree that Fl and MI should be
> ignored from the process....
no sorry but you're wrong. no agreement was made to "not ignore" florida and michigan.
the agreement was that florida and michigan would essentially be ignored from the process: no campaigning, no local ads, and the delegates wouldn't count. and hillary agreed as did all the other candidates.
> that is the decision of
> the DNC and it is ridiculous.
it was also the rules of hillary clinton until she needed some extra delegates.
--
"We mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor"
--Declaration of Independence
|
|
|
Posts:
1,891
Registered:
3/25/08
|
|
(31 of 36)
Re: Why it's not about the "math"
May 15, 2008 12:19 AM
|
> Is that what they signed....??? Funny...it seemed to
> me they were making a Pledge Not to do something...I
> don't think it was to agree that Fl and MI should be
> ignored from the process....that is the decision of
> the DNC and it is ridiculous.
No. It was the decision of Michigan and Florida. The DNC set the rules before they moved up their primaries. They were aware of the consequences and proceeded anyway. If the voters in those states don't like what their state governments decided, they can vote the bums out in the next election.
And Hillary clearly stated before Michigan voted---while trying to curry favor with the Iowa voters (a lot of good that did, lol)---that Michigan's votes would not count.
To pretend that she wants to count them now because she "cares about the voters there" is utterly ridiculous. But I see why she would try....because she wants to win and backwhen she started the argument, she actually had a chance, albeit a small one. But again...let's not pretend that it's because she cares.
Reminds me of the old defense lawyer line....was she lying then or is she lying now?
--
"If you're gonna survive out here, you've got to know where your towel is."
|
|
|
Posts:
4,731
Registered:
12/22/06
|
|
(30 of 36)
Re: Why it's not about the "math"
May 15, 2008 12:05 AM
|
> i think it's funny how the obama and clinton camps
> have completely switched positions on this.
>
> earlier in the race, obama supporters were talking
> about how the superdelegates shouldn't be able to
> overturn the will of the people. back then, when
> clinton held a big edge in superdelegates, her
> supporters were all for letting the superdelegates
> decide the election. now, with her revised popular
> vote figures, clinton is saying what obama was saying
> 4 months ago. don't overturn the popular vote.
>
> don't worry. they wont.
>
> but obama is the popular vote winner too. it's
> bullshit to count florida and michigan. clinton
> signed an agreement, as did all the other candidates,
> that florida and michigan's delegates wouldn't count
> b/c they broke the rules. if clinton, the sudden
> voice for the common man populist, really had a
> problem with this, why'd she agree to it? and it's
> especially bullshit to count michigan where obama
> wasn't even on the ballot. if you were an obama
> supporter in michigan, and you were told that your
> vote wouldn't count, and that you couldn't even vote
> for obama (your best choice would be "undecided"),
> would you have gone to the polls? I wouldn't have.
>
> --
> "We mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our
> Fortunes, and our sacred Honor"
>
> --Declaration of Independence
Is that what they signed....??? Funny...it seemed to me they were making a Pledge Not to do something...I don't think it was to agree that Fl and MI should be ignored from the process....that is the decision of the DNC and it is ridiculous.
--
Edited by MarkMiller at 05/14/2008 9:06 PM PDT
|
|
|
Posts:
1,891
Registered:
3/25/08
|
|
(29 of 36)
Re: Why it's not about the "math"
May 15, 2008 12:01 AM
|
> but obama is the popular vote winner too. it's
> bullshit to count florida and michigan. clinton
> signed an agreement, as did all the other candidates,
> that florida and michigan's delegates wouldn't count
> b/c they broke the rules. if clinton, the sudden
> voice for the common man populist, really had a
> problem with this, why'd she agree to it? and it's
> especially bullshit to count michigan where obama
> wasn't even on the ballot. if you were an obama
> supporter in michigan, and you were told that your
> vote wouldn't count, and that you couldn't even vote
> for obama (your best choice would be "undecided"),
> would you have gone to the polls? I wouldn't have.
Nor would have I.
But Obama is so far ahead, he can afford to be magnanimous. They'll figure out something 5/31--probably seat Florida as is, and split the Michigan delegates (maybe even giving a slight edge to Hillary). They shouldn't seat them at all---why have rules if you're not going to enforce them?
But the fact remains that they will most likely count them somehow....and that it won't matter a lick as far as affecting the outcome.
--
"If you're gonna survive out here, you've got to know where your towel is."
|
|
|
Posts:
2,957
Registered:
3/12/08
|
|
(28 of 36)
Re: Why it's not about the "math"
May 14, 2008 11:52 PM
|
|
Even if you include FL, where Hillary had 2 fundraisers & a rally and Obama ran commercials, BO is up by 300,000 I mean 1/3rd of a MILLION people. THATS BIG BIG BIG NUMBERS. (doing my MSNBC impersonation)
|
|
|
Posts:
812
Registered:
2/22/08
|
|
(27 of 36)
Re: Why it's not about the "math"
May 14, 2008 11:29 PM
|
i think it's funny how the obama and clinton camps have completely switched positions on this.
earlier in the race, obama supporters were talking about how the superdelegates shouldn't be able to overturn the will of the people. back then, when clinton held a big edge in superdelegates, her supporters were all for letting the superdelegates decide the election. now, with her revised popular vote figures, clinton is saying what obama was saying 4 months ago. don't overturn the popular vote.
don't worry. they wont.
but obama is the popular vote winner too. it's bullshit to count florida and michigan. clinton signed an agreement, as did all the other candidates, that florida and michigan's delegates wouldn't count b/c they broke the rules. if clinton, the sudden voice for the common man populist, really had a problem with this, why'd she agree to it? and it's especially bullshit to count michigan where obama wasn't even on the ballot. if you were an obama supporter in michigan, and you were told that your vote wouldn't count, and that you couldn't even vote for obama (your best choice would be "undecided"), would you have gone to the polls? I wouldn't have.
--
"We mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor"
--Declaration of Independence
|
|
|
Posts:
2,299
Registered:
3/8/08
|
|
(26 of 36)
Re: Why it's not about the "math"
May 14, 2008 11:07 PM
|
rdfan.......
shows what Fascist money can do......
|
|
|
Posts:
4,731
Registered:
12/22/06
|
|
(25 of 36)
Re: Why it's not about the "math"
May 14, 2008 11:02 PM
|
> > The whole point of my thread is about the fact
> that
> > Supers do not have to stay with Obama and can
> as
> > easily move back to Clinton.
>
> I know....but they won't, unless something earth
> shattering occurs.
>
> > It's not a matter of math. It's a matter of
> Supers
> > doing the job they were elected to do.
>
> The job they were elected to do is nominate the
> candidate that is best for the party. I'm guessing
> that's the one that has the most votes, the most
> delegates, won the most states, raises the most money
> and brings in the most voters. That's Obama.
> There's no denying that.
>
> > I cannot say at this time that I would be
> willing to
> > support Obama. I don't know if I can support
> someone
> > with Obamas record as short as it is and on his
> stnce
> > on some issues as well as how he has treated
> > California politicians that I favor.
>
> So you would what? Vote for McCAIN??? Dienfranchise
> yourself??? What?
>
> --
> "If you're gonna survive out here, you've got to know
> where your towel is."
Sorry about not getting back to you. I have been out all day and just got back to this thread.
There is denying it, Sure. I don't know first of all......if how much money he raises is or should sway the super delegates. Second I don't know that Obama has the most votes. It is unclear as of last night and with weighing whether to count FL and MI and next weeks Primary in Kentucky.
I make no claims to ever wanting to vote for McCaine nor do I think I ever would.
--
Edited by MarkMiller at 05/14/2008 8:20 PM PDT
|
|
|
Posts:
4,731
Registered:
12/22/06
|
|
(24 of 36)
Re: Why it's not about the "math"
May 14, 2008 10:48 PM
|
That would be a hilarious answer.....have the candidates do a "Math Off"!
--
Edited by MarkMiller at 05/14/2008 8:20 PM PDT
|
|
|
Posts:
7,237
Registered:
6/12/07
|
|
(23 of 36)
Re: Why it's not about the "math"
May 14, 2008 10:22 PM
|
> This election is not about math. It's not about a
> convention with backroom deals.....no. Backroom deals
> have already been made and more will be happening
> ...probably as I type. It's time for the people given
> their super powers to use them. How they do that and
> who they vote for are the real matters. Many super
> delegates who's states voted for Clinton have moved
> to Obama even though Obama himself has stated that
> supers should vote by the vote of the people. When
> did he change his mind on that? probably when the
> supers from those states wanted to move to him while
> ignoring their constituents. That's fine....because
> they can switch back....without even saying a word
> publicly. If it were about the "Math"....numbers
> would not be able to move. Super Delegates can.
Clinton started the year - before a vote was cast - with a lead of 160 superdeleagtes.
Obama has been gaining in super's ever since.
Obama lost Ohio & Texas, yet he gained in supers.
He lost Pa and yet he continued to gain supers
He was gaining in supers at the height of the Rev Wright nonsense.
He gain a ton of supers after he lost VW by 41 points.
Unless a meteor falls out of the sky and hits him on the head....or he is found having sex with a picnic table.....he will continue to gain in supers.
Even as Cliton argues she is the more "electable" cadidate (laughable since her own party won't elect her), she continues to lose supers to Obama.
I don't see them switching back to her.....It's about the math.
|
|
|
Posts:
5,189
Registered:
9/27/05
|
|
(22 of 36)
Re: Why it's not about the "math"
May 14, 2008 8:38 PM
|
> Math means nothing in a race. Not just any race but a
> political race for this nations leader.
Au contraire mon amis! Where's Corky when you need him?
--
Watching a train wreck full of clowns
|
|
|
|
|
