Jump to content

Barack Obama Elected President!


Max

Recommended Posts

  • Members

Something tells me they have already worked out a deal. They just need the DNC to accept it

Also, I don't care who has the bigger lead over the other between Obama and Hillary...I am looking for who leads by more with McCain. One poll shows her and the other him. As long as they both are beating him, I am happy :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 8.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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. B) 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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That is not going to happen :lol: :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."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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: :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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Given the cuts being made to treatment and research funding along with RFK Jr's quack theories about HIV/AIDS, it is probably more relevant than in some time, but I know GH is not going to really go there in explaining why (and I'm not sure they could have even back in the day).
    • Who's a bigger pathetic pick me? Brooke or Katie and Katie is a freaking moron given how Brooke has backstabbed her continually Ridge should have told patchwork girl to STHU 
    • To me, it helps solidify Ted as a character; Johnson was stiff (except for his excessive swaying) and could not emote one iota in his scenes. It was a recast that was well done. Knowing what Robinson is capable of doing, he's an asset to the cast. If they've just established it as a soap opera that patients have watched prior, I doubt the characters would appear in-universe; that wouldn't make sense at all.
    • Will I be Gio's champion? I am so there LOL  I'm happy to know that so many people agree with me about how good his performance was at the NB.   I don't see GM lasting any longer on GH than Nicholas Alexander Chavez did. Damn, I was struck by Sawandi's "moves."  Rhythm Nation passed him by. At least he got in that head spin when he resorted to break dancing. But P.S. The guy is gorgeous.   -- I understand all the criticism here about the Nurses Ball, and I pretty much agree with all of it. However, I love seeing it, and I miss it when we don't get it.      I love the stuff that's so cheesy and bad that I can't believe I'm watching it, and I love trashing it. It's awesome television to snark at (see: Spinelli in his cowboy boots). Regardless of how slick it is or is supposed to be, it's clear A LOT of work is put into the final product, and I'm grateful when a soap is willing to pull out the stops like this. -- Haven't seen today's show yet, so stay tuned for more performance reviews LOL -- In the meantime, here's a decent look backstage at GH....a video improved greatly by the presence of Giovanni Mazza.

      Please register in order to view this content

           
    • And what happens once the secret is out? He still walks around owning them? Nah, that's lame. The recast messes up Ted and Bill presence for me.
    • Please register in order to view this content

      I've always been convinced "Russel Kubeck" is Henry Slesar.   There are 3 different mystery/suspense/crime writers whom I instantly identified as Henry Slesar after reading their works.  Those three are "Sley Harson", "Eli Jerome", and "Russel Kubeck".  Slesar's estate has subsequently verified that "Sley Harson" and "Eli Jerome" were indeed pen names used by Henry Slesar.  No word yet on "Russel Kubeck".   I wish Slesar's kids, his agent, or P&G would ultimately acknowledge whether or not "Kubeck" was one of Slesar's pen names.   Here's what I think happened:  I believe P&G approached Slesar and said, "We're pulling the plug on Somerset in December unless you can get the ratings up to a 6.0 for a 13-week period".  [Or some other target they had in mind.]  Slesar took the job but knew the chances of failure were far greater than the chances of success, so he used a pseudonym for it.   Look at it this way.  A few years later, in 1983, P&G dismissed Henry Slesar from The Edge of Night and went out soliciting a new mystery writer to take his place.  They settled on Lee Sheldon.  If "Russel Kubeck" were a real person (other than a pen name of Slesar's), don't you think P&G would've hired Kubeck instead, since they'd already worked with him on Somerset.   I believe P&G was fully aware that the paychecks written in 1976 to Russel Kubeck had gone directly into Slesar's account, and there was no sense in interviewing Mr. Kubeck to take Slesar's place on EON in 1983.  
    • New Ted ain't it. Loved the reference to Tamara Tunie's time on ATWT. hopefully they can make a Law & Order SVU reference. I wonder if ATWT characters will ever cross over because the homeless lady and Nicole acknowledged Jessica and Duncan as soap characters from "As the World Turns". Then again, Marge was watching a soap with B&B's theme on Y&R and Katherine Chancellor crossed over to Guiding Light despite Reva's clone and Cassie  acknowledging Y&R as a tv show.
    • Damn GIO was excellent. Great cliffhanger 
    • I kind of feel like its still to early to call. Ted should be broken,  confused,  vulnerable at this point if we're to believe he loves his wife and his family at this moment.      Martin certainly hasn't played weak against Bill and neither has Vernon. We haven't really seen him with his son in law so not sure how they'll play that. 
    • Because it gives him power over them. That's why, and plays into the idea Bill Hamilton holds power over them, hence his involvement in the Martin secret.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy