Members Southofnowhere Posted May 20, 2008 Members Share Posted May 20, 2008 California would have picked the winner! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members David_Vickers Posted May 20, 2008 Members Share Posted May 20, 2008 Don't be SO sure. Lie much. Many people in FL and MI want their votes counted, saying they don't is stupid and absurd. Many want MI & FL counted. There's a petition to the DNC regarding that btw. You nor I or anyone else knows how the MI & FL delegates are going to be counted, whether they're gonna be split down the middle of halfed (which is the SAME thing btw, lol). Obama being Hillary's running mate or vice versa will VERY LIKELY HAPPEN . Some votes could be losted but NOT many and MOST DEFINIELY NOT forever. Roman if people who think like you don't vote for Hillary if she ends up being the Democrat nominee, then you're voting for McCain even if you don't vote at all. BTW, Hillary did NOT lose the primaries, she's won some, Obama's won some. SIMPLE. The Democrat party needs to support and vote for whomever the nominee is. I intened to so whether the nominee is Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. Anyone who cares about this country should do the same. I think it is wrong to just vote for Hillary because she's white or a woman, or to vote for Barack because he's a man or African-African, but that's what some are doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevotedToAMC Posted May 20, 2008 Members Share Posted May 20, 2008 You are right here...I have seen the petition and signed it because now I think it would be smart to count the votes since, if we don't, odds are both MI and FL go Republican this November...that is not a risk we should take. I don't see the votes being halfed because that says one half is more superior to be seated and the other isn't so that would be unfair to the half that is not counted...I cannot see them distributing them equally since he would be ahead by the same amount so what is the point. I don't see the ban being accepted since the meeting with the rules committee would be pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roman Posted May 20, 2008 Members Share Posted May 20, 2008 I'm not sure. I'm positive. Then none of them should be seated. He shouldn't be penalized for having honor. He kept his word, she didn't., but he should be messed over while she benifits? BS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevotedToAMC Posted May 20, 2008 Members Share Posted May 20, 2008 He took his name off the Michigan ballot but not the Florida one...that does not make sense. I see an agreement being made because, if there is not one, what would be the point of the meeting with the DNC? I think it would be smart to seat MI and FL now so as not to risk them going red/Republican in November Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roman Posted May 20, 2008 Members Share Posted May 20, 2008 Dude, he took his name off after he signed that agreement. You know, I tried to be down the middle on this, but you want her to get delegates she herself said should not be seated when she signed that agreement. I now agree with the others wholeheartedly. NONE of them should be seated if this is the game that will be played. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevotedToAMC Posted May 20, 2008 Members Share Posted May 20, 2008 Right she said they should not be seated and then she changed her mind...she can do that along with anyone else. I think it is only fair they be seated and the popular vote be counted (I see them counting the popular vote, which she would then be in the lead). They agreed to not seat them but there can be a new agreement...they did not have as a stipulation that their names should be off the ballot. That is Obama's fault that he did not put his name on the ballot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roman Posted May 20, 2008 Members Share Posted May 20, 2008 Whatever. She flip-flopped just like the current president we have. Which means she won'yt keep her word just like he doesn't keep his. You've made your point clear, Devoted. No matter what, by hook or crook, she should have the nom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevotedToAMC Posted May 20, 2008 Members Share Posted May 20, 2008 If she gets MI and FL seated, with Obama's agreement, then yes she should get the nomination If we don't seat them, we risk losing both states to the Republicans in November Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roman Posted May 20, 2008 Members Share Posted May 20, 2008 Glad you made that clear. Then say hello to John McCain, your next president. Every Obama supporter will stay at home. You want Hillary so bad, you can have her. Guess I have to get used to saying President McCain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevotedToAMC Posted May 20, 2008 Members Share Posted May 20, 2008 John McCain won't win if Obama is on the ticket with her...they are both beating him in polls so it makes sense to make them the ticket. That way, no Democrat from MI and FL votes Republican and no Obama supporter stays home Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roman Posted May 20, 2008 Members Share Posted May 20, 2008 Oh, no, no, no. Find some other running mate for her. Hell DAMN no. You screw him out of the nom, and expect him to now play second fiddle? No. This is your idea, so she can do it withut him. You are the one saying she is the much stronger candidate, so she won't need him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevotedToAMC Posted May 20, 2008 Members Share Posted May 20, 2008 I think she would need him since there will be some upset if they seat MI and FL. If they are seated or unseated, some people will be upset. The way to NOT upset them is allowing them to be seated and putting him on as VP. He would not be screwed over anything if he agrees to it. For the sake of the party and a win, he should agree to it so we don't lose MI and FL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roman Posted May 20, 2008 Members Share Posted May 20, 2008 Then the Party should lose both states. That's offensive. The person who did what he was supposed to do gets screwed, then HE has to bow down like a good boy and be happy to be VP. After HE BEAT HER! Shockingly offensive. No. You are the one saying she can do this much better than him. He should not be on the ticket. No way in hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevotedToAMC Posted May 21, 2008 Members Share Posted May 21, 2008 You tell me this...who should be screwed? Obama out of the presidency when he can be in The White House as vice president or the million plus people who voted in both states? I don't want us to lose both states because they are critical...it is not a risk to take. In order to not take the risk, seat the delegates and, to avoid uproar with Obama's second place finish, put him on as VP so those people will still vote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.