Members Adam Posted March 7, 2008 Members Share Posted March 7, 2008 The press is definitely helping Obama, there is no question about it. Hillary was justified in saying the media is not looking at this objectively. As I said, Obama is running on a movement and the media loves to report something like that. If the media maybe were to report on this a little more objectively, perhaps more people would see what Obama puts forward in inspiration, he more than lacks on true substance and vision. That's just my opinion. I personally think its great he is getting people so energized and this campaign is getting more people energized *(ust look at the numbers coming out to vote in these primaries) but I truly don't think he is ready to be the president of the united states. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roman Posted March 7, 2008 Members Share Posted March 7, 2008 From MSNBC's First Read: From NBC’s Domenico Montanaro Per the Toronto Globe and Mail, in a story that was the lead on the paper’s front page today, that call to the Canadian embassy was actually from the Clinton campaign, not Obama’s: “Mr. [ian] Brodie, [PM Harper’s chief of staff], during the media lockup for the Feb. 26 budget, stopped to chat with several journalists, and was surrounded by a group from CTV. The conversation turned to the pledges to renegotiate the North American free-trade agreement made by the two Democratic contenders, Mr. Obama and New York Senator Hillary Clinton. “Mr. Brodie, apparently seeking to play down the potential impact on Canada, told the reporters the threat was not serious, and that someone from Ms. Clinton's campaign had even contacted Canadian diplomats to tell them not to worry because the NAFTA threats were mostly political posturing. The Canadian Press cited an unnamed source last night as saying that several people overheard the remark. “The news agency quoted that source as saying that Mr. Brodie said that someone from Ms. Clinton's campaign called and was ‘telling the embassy to take it with a grain of salt.’ “The story was followed by CTV's Washington bureau chief, Tom Clark, who reported that the Obama campaign, not the Clinton's, had reassured Canadian diplomats. “Mr. Clark cited unnamed Canadian sources in his initial report. There was no explanation last night for why Mr. Brodie was said to have referred to the Clinton campaign but the news report was about the Obama campaign.” *** UPDATE *** The Clinton campaign responds: "Unlike the Obama campaign, we can and do flatly deny this report and urge the Canadian government to reveal the name of anyone they think they heard from. The Obama campaign has given a variety of misleading answers to the press and the public about its top economic adviser’s contacts with the Canadian government and should come clean about why they did so," writes campaign spokespman Phil Singer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members David_Vickers Posted March 7, 2008 Members Share Posted March 7, 2008 Florida and Michigan voters should NOT be penalized and THEIR votes should be counted. NOT COUNTING their votes would be like what happened to Gore in Florida. I would state this even if their delegates were Obama's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ryan Posted March 7, 2008 Members Share Posted March 7, 2008 Florida and Michigan knew they would be stripped of delegates because they held it so early. They didn't change it. If Hilary was ahead, Barrack was no where close to her, I bet it wouldn't be such a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevotedToAMC Posted March 7, 2008 Members Share Posted March 7, 2008 I think they should because these two states are very important in the general election. We may wind up actually taking Florida away from the Republicans and Michigan is considered a swing state. Let's see who both of those states want as the nominee and play it from there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevotedToAMC Posted March 7, 2008 Members Share Posted March 7, 2008 I agree....I do not necessarily want the current scores to be used but to have a revote and, as Kwing suggested, have the DNC pay for it (I am sure the DNC wants them to count, so long as they play by the rules this time, which they will) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roman Posted March 7, 2008 Members Share Posted March 7, 2008 And now Hillary says she does not want a recount and won't accept a caucus. This is after the truh of NAFTA cmes out, and the only thing her spokesman can do is compair Obama with Ken Starr. And this is the person I'm supposed to back? She's worrid about answering the phone at 3am? When she does answer it, whatis she going to say? I know....... "Bill.......it's for you." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevotedToAMC Posted March 7, 2008 Members Share Posted March 7, 2008 She should not have to accept a caucus...do a primary for both of those states and have a re vote. Unless both states hold a caucus? Not sure. I still want Florida and Michigan to count...the best thing to do is re vote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Roman Posted March 7, 2008 Members Share Posted March 7, 2008 She doesn't want a re-vote. Now, are you going to agree with her on that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevotedToAMC Posted March 7, 2008 Members Share Posted March 7, 2008 I do not agree with that and really do not agree with everything about her...but it may end up coming down to a re vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members stenbeck212 Posted March 7, 2008 Members Share Posted March 7, 2008 Nope, and now that the race is so close, Charlie Crist is channeling Katherine Harris to make sure Florida's votes count - how ironic. Anything to help his GOP buddies slaughter Clinton in November. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricaKane70 Posted March 8, 2008 Members Share Posted March 8, 2008 I think there should be a revote, because I don't think obama put his name on the ballots of MI and FL because the states broke the rules and their delegates wouldn't count. Its only fair that they should do a re-vote. I don't know why hillary is against this I think she definantly would get FL, but I don't know about MI. After reading about how much it would cost for the re-vote I don't think the states should do it, that money is better off spent somewhere else in need. An I was mistaken about FL, obama's name was on the ballot so imo that one should count. His name wasn't on the MI ballot so I think they should either leave it alone or give it hillary or shell out 10 million dollars. What I don't understand is if the government knew their voters votes weren't going to count why did they go ahead and hold primaries anyway? Didn't that waste taxpayers money? I can see why hillary doesn't want a re-vote, its a total of 366 delegates combined which would put her most likely in lead if they were counted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevotedToAMC Posted March 9, 2008 Members Share Posted March 9, 2008 I don't care how much it costs...a re vote is a guarantee that people's voices are heard in these states...either tax payer dollars pay for it or the DNC As for wasting taxpayer money, EK70, California did that in the recall election. They mailed out ballots that were inaccurate and hence had to issue out new ballots. So it is not foreign for a state to waste tax dollars over an election Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevotedToAMC Posted March 9, 2008 Members Share Posted March 9, 2008 I don't care how much it costs...a re vote is a guarantee that people's voices are heard in these states...either tax payer dollars pay for it or the DNC As for wasting taxpayer money, EK70, California did that in the recall election. They mailed out ballots that were inaccurate and hence had to issue out new ballots. So it is not foreign for a state to waste tax dollars over an election Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricaKane70 Posted March 9, 2008 Members Share Posted March 9, 2008 Now the clinotons are pushing for a clinton/obama ticket, with her as president and obama as vp. I'm not sure they should be pushing this at the moment considering he's beating her by over 100 delegates. I thnk they should of waited to see if she could take the lead and then push the ticket, it would of helped give her more momentum, pushing it now could backfire. An not that the clintons would ever do this , I think they are saying this now to gurantee that hillary gets VP just in case Obama wins the nom. They are pushing obama in the corner, because even if he does win he is gonna need hillary's supporters and they won't be thrilled if he doesn't pick her as his vp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.