This is the Presidential Campaign Thread.

Barack Obama Vs. John McCain.

Edited November 6, 200817 yr by Toups

I think they should count the people's votes in Michigan and Florida (obviously that would put her ahead)...we will see if the pledged delegates get seated next Saturday when they meet with the rules committee

They are not going to count the Michigan and Florida votes, nor should they. Hillary agreed that those votes should not be counted. Had she not made that agreement, I would have more sympathy for her now. All she is doing now is backing out on her previous agreement and that is not a good thing. No way should the D's count those votes.

Finally, those pledged are NOT going to get counted. My hunch is by May 31, it will be over and there will be an agreement to seat the delegations and their votes will be halved between the two candidates -- or divided proportionate to the two candidate vote totals across all primaries. If they counted those votes, it would be rewarding bad behavior on the part of the two states, and I know some don't want to hear this, and also bad behavior on the part of Hillary Clinton.

I also think they have already cut a deal.

Oh, and Mulder, it was Moonlite. That is some of the best BBQ that I have ever eaten.

Edited May 20, 200817 yr by Jess

They should count the votes from MI and FL because those are people who have the right to vote...if they want to not seat the delegates, fine but count those who voted.

They won't half the delegates because that is saying one half is more superior while the other is not worthy of being seated...dividing them up equally won't work because it would be pointless since Obama would be ahead by the same amount. And I don't see them accepting the ban because then the meeting would be pointless

They should count the votes from MI and FL because those are people who have the right to vote...if they want to not seat the delegates, fine but count those who voted.

They won't half the delegates because that is saying one half is more superior while the other is not worthy of being seated...dividing them up equally won't work because it would be pointless since Obama would be ahead by the same amount. And I don't see them accepting the ban because then the meeting would be pointless

Hillary Clinton agreed they should not be counted. Obama agreed they should not be counted. They can't be counted. It's a primary and not a general election. Primaries are functions of the political party and not the state. The party said here are the rules and Hillary, Obama, Edward, Biden, ect. ect. said they agreed with those rules. You can't change them now. They entire right to vote thing is a bit misleading in my opinion because primaries are tools of the party. If the democratic party decided tomorrow that there would be no primaries and there would be no caucuses and that candidates in the future would be decided by party leaders (as it was done prior to 1972) then that would be the way it would be. We are not picking a president. We are picking who we believe should represent our party in the fall election. Personally, I think returning to the old system might be better. By the way, had the democrats not adopted primaries as the main way to NOMINATE candidates in 1968 then republicans would not have primaries either.

Hillary Clinton agreed they should not be counted. Obama agreed they should not be counted.

And they probably have already come to a different agreement and perhaps, if they have, it will be accepted by the DNC on May 31st.

The only agreement I can see is seating the delegates as is (the delegates in the "other" column go to her as well) because I already explained why the other scenarios are unlikely....to avoid the uproar and overcome the backlash, she will pick Obama as VP.

Plus, if they allow the people's votes in both states, then she would be ahead in the popular vote and would be deserving of their delegates and the rest of the SDs

Here we go again.

Obama as her VP even though he's beating her.

Jess, you are right my dear. She is so busy telling everyone that every vote should count, yet she signed a document taking away those very same votes. So.......

Whose the hypocrite here?

Obama as her VP even though he's beating her.

If you count the Michigan and Florida votes of the people, then she is beating him in the popular vote

And they probably have already come to a different agreement and perhaps, if they have, it will be accepted by the DNC on May 31st.

The only agreement I can see is seating the delegates as is (the delegates in the "other" column go to her as well) because I already explained why the other scenarios are unlikely....to avoid the uproar and overcome the backlash, she will pick Obama as VP.

Plus, if they allow the people's votes in both states, then she would be ahead in the popular vote and would be deserving of their delegates and the rest of the SDs

That is not going to happen :lol: I think you know it's not going to happen.

There is no way, none, that Obama would say "yep HIllary, you are backing on your agreement and that's fine. I'll go along with you."

That is not going to happen :lol: I think you know it's not going to happen.

There is no way, none, that Obama would say "yep HIllary, you are backing on your agreement and that's fine. I'll go along with you."

You never know but I cannot see any other agreement outside of seating the delegates as is and having the ones in the "other" column go to her. I am also referring to counting the popular vote in both states.

And don't laugh at my suggestions. I don't do that to you

If you count the Michigan and Florida votes of the people, then she is beating him in the popular vote

Yeah, the same people who voted in two states he didn't campaign in, one state of which his name wasn't on the ballot.....

Because they BOTH agreed to punish the states for breaking the rules.

Of course she won MI.........his name wasn't on the ballot.

Why is that so difficult to understand?

Oh.........I get it.

HRC gets that by cheating, so therefor everything should be cool.

I'm sorry. I was wrong.

Here we go again.

Obama as her VP even though he's beating her.

Jess, you are right my dear. She is so busy telling everyone that every vote should count, yet she signed a document taking away those very same votes. So.......

Whose the hypocrite here?

It's worse than a hypocrite. I think we should try to determine how many people in all the states that have had primaries did not vote because they were ill or because they knew Obama was going to win that state. We add them in and Obama wins hands' down. It's the same thing as counting the votes of people in states where the candidates did not campaign because they all agreed the votes would not count.

Yeah, the same people who voted in two states he didn't campaign in, one state of which his name wasn't on the ballot.....

Because they BOTH agreed to punish the states for breaking the rules.

Of course she won MI.........his name wasn't on the ballot.

Why is that so difficult to understand?

Oh.........I get it.

HRC gets that by cheating, so therefor everything should be cool.

I'm sorry. I was wrong.

Neither one campaigned in either state...he chose to take his name off the ballot while she did not. That is his fault.

I don't agree with the punishment of stripping their delegates. Impose a fine but don't disenfranchise millions of people.

Yes she won MI and it was a deserved win...Obama was a fool to take his name off the ballot. It is not cheating if she keeps her name on and he does not...one was foolish, the other was not.

I think we should try to determine how many people in all the states that have had primaries did not vote because they were ill or because they knew Obama was going to win that state. We add them in and Obama wins hands' down.

Ill is a pathetic excuse, unless it is really serious like the flu. You can still vote while being ill and, if people did not vote due to projecting who the winner was, that is their fault and they don't count because they did not cast a vote

You never know but I cannot see any other agreement outside of seating the delegates as is and having the ones in the "other" column go to her. I am also referring to counting the popular vote in both states.

And don't laugh at my suggestions. I don't do that to you

You know what, there is no way to discuss it without laughing. Feel free to laugh at my suggestions. You know it is just not going to happen. :lol: What you are saying is that the Democratic Party is going to say, OK, we change our minds and Obama is going to say, well yes, I think Hillary should have those delegates. It's tantamount to the Democrats and Obama saying, oh well, we were just kidding.

It's worse than a hypocrite. I think we should try to determine how many people in all the states that have had primaries did not vote because they were ill or because they knew Obama was going to win that state. We add them in and Obama wins hands' down. It's the same thing as counting the votes of people in states where the candidates did not campaign because they all agreed the votes would not count.

But see, Jess, that's where we are messing up.

See, we are supposed to overlook all that bullshit because HRC is entitled to the nom. No matter that every vote that was cast for Obama would be null and void. You know how you keep hearing that every vote should count?

What does that tell everyone that voted for him? That, in the end, you voting for the person you believe in doesn't matter, because some fat cats will broker some backroom deal and shaft you end the end.

And you know something else? If McCain had did the very same thing she has done, the same people looking the other way would be shouting through the roof about it.

But see, Jess, that's where we are messing up.

See, we are supposed to overlook all that bullshit because HRC is entitled to the nom. No matter that every vote that was cast for Obama would be null and void. You know how you keep hearing that every vote should count?

What does that tell everyone that voted for him? That, in the end, you voting for the person you believe in doesn't matter, because some fat cats will broker some backroom deal and shaft you end the end.

And you know something else? If McCain had did the very same thing she has done, the same people looking the other way would be shouting through the roof about it.

It also ignores the fact that the Democratic Party made the decision regarding Michigan and Florida for the right reason and Hillary and Obama and the other candidates agreed it was the right reason. Hillary is not going to win the primary, but she made the right call the first time. We can't continue to push these primaries back. The presidential race is starting almost three years before the election. The first primaries are a year before the elections. Hillary already had to borrow $23 million. The reason the democrats, including Hillary, signed that agreement is because they acknowledged that it's wrong to continue pushing back the primary calendar. It is tough losing an election. I do think Hillary knows it isn't going to happen and I also think she has agreed to a plan that will seat the delegates. I can't imagine her taking it much further than she already has.

Feel free to laugh at my suggestions.

Not a chance. I don't go that low

What you are saying is that the Democratic Party is going to say, OK, we change our minds and Obama is going to say, well yes, I think Hillary should have those delegates. It's tantamount to the Democrats and Obama saying, oh well, we were just kidding.

The Democrat Party may have no choice if both candidates have an agreement. We might be better off seating the MI and FL delegates because, if we don't, then both MI and FL people will vote Republican this November and we lose both states...they are critical to a win. And the backlash with seating them (which there would be) can be quieted with having a Hillary/Obama ticket.

The other possibilities I listed do not have merit and I explained why...I can't think of another agreement that would work besides the one above.

Hillary is not going to win the primary, but she made the right call the first time.

You don't know that she won't win...if they seat MI and FL (which is smart right now..for more, see what I just wrote), she gets it.