Hillary Supporters unite....no bashing please! only smiles

[Peter Pirate 2]

I don't trust him and I don't think he will make a good president. He is WAY too inexperience and to me he seems smug.

Totally agreed.

But still, if the choice is (4 more years of bush policy) McCain and Obama how can you not just vote for the lesser of two evils (again)? I mean I agree that he's not proven any leadership ability but I DON'T WANT McCAIN. So, IMO, you must put those emotions aside and vote Obama and pray like crazy that we (the Obama naysayers) are wrong. I wouldn't mind being wrong on this one.

 

[MyManGoofy!]

Frankly, I think the notion of "letting" Hillary Clinton become president because "it's her turn" is incredibly sexist. Wasn't the whole point of the ERA that women should have equal opportunity, that they didn't have to be "let" anything, that they could earn their way?

I guess I should say "our" way since I am female.

I would be insulted if I were competing against a male for any title and he "let" me win because I'm a girl and it's my turn. I would expect/hope HRC would feel the same way.

Oh for Cripes Sake! Apparently I did not choose a snarky enough smilie to convey the sarcasm of my statements. Is this one better? You see - I just don't get how to use them - which is probably why I hardly ever do.

 

[va32h]

Oh for Cripes Sake! Apparently I did not choose a snarky enough smilie to convey the sarcasm of my statements. Is this one better? You see - I just don't get how to use them - which is probably why I hardly ever do.

So you were being sarcastic? As in meaning the opposite of what you actually said?

 

[Planogirl]

That McCarthy bit is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Don't they have a clue as to what McCarthy was all about? All I hear is "when Obama runs against McCain" type statements and when Bill Clinton makes one about Hillary suddenly he's the devil incarnate?

I've had enough. I have no intention of debating any further or paying attention to the silliness. I'll just hang out here for a while. Once the Democratic nominee is in place then I'll play again but right now I'm very tired of the whole thing.

 

[MyManGoofy!]

So you were being sarcastic? As in meaning the opposite of what you actually said?

Yes - I find the thought of people voting for Hillary solely because she is a woman as ignorant as those who would vote for Obama because he is black.

ETA: But it was also in response to several things that I have seen about those who think Hillary should drop out and the rather lame reasons for that as well.

 

[DISUNC]

Hillary-Backer Evan Bayh: Super-Delegates Should Back Hillary Because Of Electoral CollegeBy Eric Kleefeld - March 24, 2008, 9:09AM


Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN), one of Hillary Clinton's top surrogates in the Senate, is floating a new metric by which super-delegates should decide to back Hillary: That the states she's carried in the primaries represent more electoral votes than the state Barack Obama has carried.

"So who carried the states with the most Electoral College votes is an important factor to consider because ultimately, that’s how we choose the president of the United States," Bayh said yesterday on CNN.

The tally shows it's not an overwhelming difference: Hillary has carried states representing 219 electoral votes, plus 44 from the rogue primaries in Florida and Michigan, while Obama has thus far carried states making up 202 votes.


http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/hillarybacker_evan_bayh_superd.php

 

[MyManGoofy!]

Just found this - thought it was interesting.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Clinton/Maps/Mar24.html

Electoral votes:
Clinton 268
McCain 246
Ties 24 (these states being too close statistically to call)


http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Obama/Maps/Mar24.html

Electoral votes:
McCain 292
Obama 231
Ties 15

 

[jacksonsmom]

Totally agreed.

But still, if the choice is (4 more years of bush policy) McCain and Obama how can you not just vote for the lesser of two evils (again)? I mean I agree that he's not proven any leadership ability but I DON'T WANT McCAIN. So, IMO, you must put those emotions aside and vote Obama and pray like crazy that we (the Obama naysayers) are wrong. I wouldn't mind being wrong on this one.

See, if the general election were held tomorrow and the candidates were McCain & Obama I could not in my heart vote for Obama. Would I vote for McCain? I doubt it very much. My pencil has never touched the Rep side in any election. I would either leave it blank or write in someone (Mickey Mouse! )

I feel strongly that Obama will make a horrible leader of this Country. It really worries me so no, I could not vote for him even if it is the "good of the party".

I did this last election. I voted for John Kerry although I really did not like him one bit.

I just can not do it again.

Besides I really believe if the Supers put Obama through as the Dem Candidate then the Dems lost their chance for the White House.

 

[KikiFan]

I guess I've been really lucky. When it comes to presidential elections I've voted for Clinton twice, Gore, and then Kerry. And I genuinely liked all of them. I never saw any of them as "the lesser of two evils"

So the thought of voting for Obama because he's "the lesser of two evils" pretty much turns my stomach. And I'm not entirely sure he is the lesser of two evils. There is a huge unknown element to Obama that really bothers me. Everytime I find out something more it's not good. What's going to happen between now and Nov?

DISUNC The issue about the electorial college is an issue that needs to be discussed. But Obama people are so convinced that he can beat McCain. But those numbers don't support their claim.

 

[DISUNC]

I guess I've been really lucky. When it comes to presidential elections I've voted for Clinton twice, Gore, and then Kerry. And I genuinely liked all of them. I never saw any of them as "the lesser of two evils"

So the thought of voting for Obama because he's "the lesser of two evils" pretty much turns my stomach. And I'm not entirely sure he is the lesser of two evils. There is a huge unknown element to Obama that really bothers me. Everytime I find out something more it's not good. What's going to happen between now and Nov?

DISUNC The issue about the electorial college is an issue that needs to be discussed. But Obama people are so convinced that he can beat McCain. But those numbers don't support their claim.

Notice how the media does not cover this issue!!!!

Obama people are fixated on the "he won 12 states in a row" thing. My answer to that is "soooooooooooooooooooooooooo"

1) Just so happens those states are 12 in a row.
2) Most of them WILL go GOP in Nov....WINNER TAKE ALL. The question is will the traditional DEM states...CA, NY...etc go Dem if Obama is the candidate????

Nevertheless when the Primaries are done in early June, there WILL be one DEM nominee with a majority of popular votes (which is a nail biter...but we will see how it plays out), and the SD will have to go with what the SD are suppose to go with. That is WHO CAN WIN the GE!!!!

Not only do SD have to look at who won the pivotal states, BUT who won the closed elections (true untainted DEMOCRAT results). The answer to both is Hillary Clinton.

 

[MerryPoppins]

Not only do SD have to look at who won the pivotal states, BUT who won the closed elections (true untainted DEMOCRAT results). The answer to both is Hillary Clinton.

But will they look at who could actually win the GE? Or will they be too afraid of making Obama's huge following mad? In some ways I think many would rather lose the election for the Democrats than rock the boat.

 

["Got Disney"]

Hillary-Backer Evan Bayh: Super-Delegates Should Back Hillary Because Of Electoral CollegeBy Eric Kleefeld - March 24, 2008, 9:09AM


"So who carried the states with the most Electoral College votes is an important factor to consider because ultimately, that’s how we choose the president of the United States," Bayh said yesterday on CNN.



http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/hillarybacker_evan_bayh_superd.php

Notice how the media does not cover this issue!!!!

Obama people are fixated on the "he won 12 states in a row" thing. My answer to that is "soooooooooooooooooooooooooo"


The answer to both is Hillary Clinton.

But will they look at who could actually win the GE? Or will they be too afraid of making Obama's huge following mad? In some ways I think many would rather lose the election for the Democrats than rock the boat.

The thing is it has never mattered who won more states or who had the popular votes all together. It has always come down to the Electoral votes.
As for the Electoral votes Hillary beats both Obama and McCain with a large percentage. Thgis is one of the key things that the SD can not ignore. WHO CAN BEAT MCCAIN..not how Hillary can beat Obama.

But you are right to say that if Hillary no matter what wins the nod that there will be a lot of trouble from the Obama campaign. Mostly from the young voters that just don't get politics and have no idea how it has worked for many moons. Obama has won by caucuses and small states and we all know how wonderful and fair those caucuses are

If the electoral votes are to continually play a important role in this and any elections than the media better step up and run it over and over again so all can see it and the Obama supporters cans understand what is being looked at. Not that it will matter to them.

Obama to me was always cocky and he is worse now. He seems so snooty to me. I am so tired of all this and all the media games and all the Obama supporters that treat this election as if it is just saying/...ha ha we are better than you are...nanny nanny....

I don't get Obama and never will, and I did not get him before I jumped on the Hillary bandwagon. If we can see the trouble brewing if Hillary wins just imagine the SD what they see. They may very well want Hillary but will not want to cause a riot by choosing her. After all if they were Obamafied they would have already all turned his way.

WE need Edwards to back Hillary....and he should since his campaign was much as her when it came to the middle class workers in addition the states he may have won are voting for her. So where is he??????

As for Richardson...I smell a snake and cant believe that he just went over there because he feels Obama is the best. He was offered something that was so appealing that he gave up his friendship and loyalty to the Clinton's.

JMO

 

[DISUNC]

[QUOTE="Got Disney";23990252]WE need Edwards to back Hillary....and he should since his campaign was much as her when it came to the middle class workers in addition the states he may have won are voting for her. So where is he??????
[/QUOTE]

That would be nice. The 'rumor mill' says he will!

Me thinks everyone is waiting to see what happens in PA. But his silence is deafining.

FYI I am in Pa, and my local news lead story was the Voting Regisration boards is staying open late tonight. They are SWAMP with people switching parties for the PA Primary.
But being 'Local news" they didn't say who is switching!!!!

 

["Got Disney"]

That would be nice. The 'rumor mill' says he will!

Me thinks everyone is waiting to see what happens in PA. But his silence is deafining.

FYI I am in Pa, and my local news lead story was the Voting Regisration boards is staying open late tonight. They are SWAMP with people switching parties for the PA Primary.
But being 'Local news" they didn't say who is switching!!!!

I think that that is terrible. Either way. It messes up the true democratic vote.

I posted this on the Richardson thread to another poster that said that the electoral vote does not more or less matter....they asked me to show prove...this is what i posted...

Here have at it and can get ya about 50 more if you would like.....seems to me that those that if you are not familiar with how electoral votes have played into elections for ever and find a chuckle about how Hillary is pulling this stunt ...have note followed politics for very long. If so you would have been following this all along as many have been. And if you new to follow this than you would have already been aware of how Hillary is getting most of the Democratic voters to vote for her. When was the last time you herd of the POTUS winning due to only popular vote or most states won????? that did not have the most electoral votes.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/p...gosuntimes.php


http://www.archives.gov/federal-regi...llege/faq.html

How is it possible for the electoral vote to produce a different result than the nation-wide popular vote?
It is important to remember that the President is not chosen by a nation-wide popular vote. The electoral vote totals determine the winner, not the statistical plurality or majority a candidate may have in the nation-wide vote totals. Electoral votes are awarded on the basis of the popular vote in each State.
Note that 48 out of the 50 States award electoral votes on a winner-takes-all basis (as does DC). For example, all 55 of California's electoral votes go to the winner of that State election, even if the margin of victory is only 50.1 percent to 49.9 percent.
In a multi-candidate race where candidates have strong regional appeal, as in 1824, it is quite possible that a candidate who collects the most votes on a nation-wide basis will not win the electoral vote. In a two-candidate race, that is less likely to occur. But it did occur in the Hayes/Tilden election of 1876 and the Harrison/Cleveland election of 1888 due to the statistical disparity between vote totals in individual State elections and the national vote totals. This also occured in the 2000 presidential election, where George W. Bush received fewer popular votes than Albert Gore Jr., but received a majority of electoral

 

[DISUNC]

[QUOTE="Got Disney";23992448]I posted this on the Richardson thread to another poster that said that the electoral vote does not more or less matter....they asked me to show prove...this is what i posted................ [/QUOTE]


It like being asked to PROVE that there is OXYGEN in the air! OIY!
Now prove why Birds fly & Fish swim!

ITS ALL ABOUT ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTES!! Always has been.

[QUOTE="Got Disney";23992448]
This also occured in the 2000 presidential election, where George W. Bush received fewer popular votes than Albert Gore Jr., but received a majority of electoral[/QUOTE]

This is all the Proof one needs!

 

["Got Disney"]

It like being asked to PROVE that there is OXYGEN in the air! OIY!
Now prove why Birds fly & Fish swim!

ITS ALL ABOUT ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTES!! Always has been.



This is all the Proof one needs!

You would think but the Obama supporters will be all over what I left them telling me that I am crazy and have no clue. They will find a way to poo poo it and me at the same time. And also that Hillary is a looser no matter what.

Could not believe that a OS that is always on the liberal thread said "O yea...can ya back that up?" well he/she made my day

 

[Hound 109]

That would be nice. The 'rumor mill' says he will!

Me thinks everyone is waiting to see what happens in PA. But his silence is deafining.

FYI I am in Pa, and my local news lead story was the Voting Regisration boards is staying open late tonight. They are SWAMP with people switching parties for the PA Primary.
But being 'Local news" they didn't say who is switching!!!!

I'm back after a few days away. Random thoughts:

So Bill is now "McCarthy" for stating his opinion that his wife & McCain are two decent people who would run a good race.

BO is courageous for stating that we need to talk about race. (uh yeah....the water coolers i've been hanging around have had lots of talk about race & pastors).

Mathews almost had a blood vessel pop out of his forehead because Carville (Mr. Irreverent) decided to be himself. (& the Ragin Cajun always cracks me up).

DisUnc, I think Edwards (& Gore) & other heavyweights are wise to keep their mouth shuts. BO is trending downward & HC could very well pull close in popular vote (& if FL is included move ahead).

If she defeats him handily in Penn & then does well in NC & Ind. (maybe even wins these states because of Pastorgate), then Edwards / Gore or any other heavyweight would make a much larger statement if made at that time (if they decided that she was the most electable).

 

[DISUNC]

[QUOTE="Got Disney";23992771]You would think but the Obama supporters will be all over what I left them telling me that I am crazy and have no clue. They will find a way to poo poo it and me at the same time. And also that Hillary is a looser no matter what.

Could not believe that a OS that is always on the liberal thread said "O yea...can ya back that up?" well he/she made my day [/QUOTE]

Yep! I believe!

I have developed a ZERO Tolerance Policy for the rabid Obama Supporters! I will debate any issue like a adult with anybody, but many OSers just either ignore or come back with childish posts!

 

[Hound 109]

It like being asked to PROVE that there is OXYGEN in the air! OIY!
Now prove why Birds fly & Fish swim!

ITS ALL ABOUT ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTES!! Always has been.



This is all the Proof one needs!

I agree (& of course know that the electoral college elects the president). But, in order to decide who to vote for, the SDs will need "reasons" to select a nominee.

- The electoral college is a huge one.
- The popular vote (if one includes FL & possibly MI) would be another.
- A string of wins ending the primary season would be another.
- Number of final delegates would be (should be) after the three above.

I really hope Penn, NC & Indiana come thru for HC.

 

[DISUNC]

So Bill is now "McCarthy" for stating his opinion that his wife & McCain are two decent people who would run a good race.

You missed this......

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/24/campaign.wrap/index.html

Obama supporter brings up the "Blue Dress"!!!!

So glad 'Mr. I am not gonna run a negative campaign" has his legions who will do his dirt work!