Hillary Supporters unite part 2; no bashing please

[ammo]

We do differ on our views on the caucus states. I don't believe caucuses reflect the will of the people. Too many people don't attend caucuses.

You make a good point. Caucuses are designed to give more power to people who are very active in the party. They are not for people who show up only on election day.

On the plus side, very few states use caucuses. And other than Texas (which uses a bizarre half-primary/half-caucus), no large states use caucuses.

 

[Dolce27]

Well, just a quick search and not a full research for stimulating, thought provoking, pages and pages of charts and graphs showing exactly who one the popular vote; but ABC news, as of today, June 05, including Montana's vote, still shows Hillary as the popular vote winner when counting MI and FL.

Democratic
Delegates Votes (MI and FL included) Votes (MI and FL excluded)
.
Clinton 1919.......17,802,135....................16,602,840
Obama 2166.......17,501,599....................16,925,385

 

[Buzz's Girl]

The MI argument is getting old. Obama and Edwards chose to take their names off the ballot, but technically they were still on the ballot. Obama had them put uncommitted on the ballot and it was publicized to vote for Obama or Edwards under 'uncommitted'. Polls going into the MI primary showed Obama doing horribly (believe me, had Obama been polling well, his name would still have been on that ballot!) and the polls also indicated that the majority of the 'uncommitted' votes were for Edwards, not Obama.

And I agree on the Hillary statement; she did say that. The SD's can go with whoever they want. Even if I think they're making a horrible decision.

How do you know this? I cannot imagine any state giving the power to a candidate to dictate something like that.

 

["Got Disney"]

Polls are not votes!! Therefore it is ridiculous to claim to have won something that can not even be counted!! to act like something was taken away from hillary is silly...it was extremly close and she lost.....

It is a spin !!!

to act like something was taken away from hillary is silly...it was extremly close and she lost.....

Yes it was close and she did loose....

As for the way the system worked and everyones views including the pundits all believe that only primaries are the way to go. And also to do as the REP do when it comes to winner takes all.

Hope they also learned that not to disinfranchise states or voters.....they need to punish a state in another way and not make the voters pay for the states politicians stupididty.

 

[Brianne]

Hope you don't mind a republican's point of view on this one. If McCain picks Huckabee, the hair on the back of my neck will stand at attention. I do NOT want some bible thumper being a VP. I am a more moderate conservative and while I lean more to the right, I like the way McCain seems to be more in the middle.

Kristine

I won't derail this thread any more, but I will say that my reaction to Huckabee being VP would be exactly as yours. Living in the I-4 corridor, you hear so many things about both political parties, both good and bad; it seems a good few of Reps here seem to like him.

 

[Dolce27]

so you just discount entire states and say she won???? That is funny

talk about disenfranchising citizens!!!

Media said she's won the popular vote and the've been more in favor with Obama than Hillary throughout this primary.

 

[chobie]

Well, just a quick search and not a full research for stimulating, thought provoking, pages and pages of charts and graphs showing exactly who one the popular vote; but ABC news, as of today, June 05, including Montana's vote, still shows Hillary as the popular vote winner when counting MI and FL.

That still excludes those 4 caucus states. There are no numbers for them. This popular vote argument is specious.

 

[ammo]

[QUOTE="Got Disney";25526892]Yes it was close and she did loose....

As for the way the system worked and everyones views including the pundits all believe that only primaries are the way to go. And also to do as the REP do when it comes to winner takes all.

Hope they also learned that not to disinfranchise states or voters.....they need to punish a state in another way and not make the voters pay for the states politicians stupididty.[/QUOTE]

What other way would act as a true disincentive?

If the voters in MI and FL are unhappy with what happened, they should throw their elected politicians out of office.

 

[akhenaten]

Well, just a quick search and not a full research for stimulating, thought provoking, pages and pages of charts and graphs showing exactly who one the popular vote; but ABC news, as of today, June 05, including Montana's vote, still shows Hillary as the popular vote winner when counting MI and FL.

and how were michigans votes allocated in this total?

and the caucuses are still not addressed....

I am not going to bother looking up additional numbers.... i am sure they are out there.....

But you also have given a good example of why some OS were upset with hillarys speech the other night.... she highlighted the spin of winning the popular vote in her speech... thus perpetuating your upset over the nomination!!

 

[Brianne]

Well, just a quick search and not a full research for stimulating, thought provoking, pages and pages of charts and graphs showing exactly who one the popular vote; but ABC news, as of today, June 05, including Montana's vote, still shows Hillary as the popular vote winner when counting MI and FL.

To be fair in terms of the FL votes, I do believe many did not go out to vote because we were told it wouldn't count anyway. Plus, those who did go may have voted for a candidate only because they didn't want to not vote for someone, but were only really there to vote for our homestead exemption ruling.

Also, since FL is a closed primary, no one registered as anything but Democrat cannot participate, which would keep out any independents wishing to vote for either party.

Ultimately, I don't think we'll ever really know what really could've been the outcome.

 

[DISUNC]

I assume you are a Hillary Supporter. The Clintons have also been involved with shady types over the years (probably all people who rise very high in either party have made some embarrassing connections).

Considering the title of this thread, Your assumptions are accurate. I assume you are a Republican by bring up the unfounded shady types of the Clintions some 12 years after the fact.

Do you acknowlege Hillary's mistakes, or are you selectively holding Obama to a different standard?

We have acknowledged HC mistakes here. However since BO is unknown, he must be scrutinized & vetted with more precisely. Along with that the ONLY individuals (his resume's Refrences) that we know of are !

Why do you think that? He's disassociated himself from Rev. Wright after Wright's second round of craziness..

20 years too late!

But Obama has surrounded himself in his campaign with longtime Democratic movers and shakers, not radicals. He's put Caroline Kennedy on his VP search committee for heaven's sake.

Caroline Kennedy is a "Mover & Shaker"????????

Obama isn't running on experience. He isn't running on a long record of getting things done in Washington.

He's running on changing Washington. Saying he's the same as everyone else should be used more in his stump speeches if that's going to be his defense when little things like this come up. See how that works for him.

BTW he is already backtracking on his "ending the war" !!!!

From a vast right-wing conspiracy to a vast left-wing conspiracy. Do you really believe that all of those mainstream Democrats in charge of the party have been fooled by Obama for all these years? They are comfortable with Obama, so that should alleviate our concerns about hidden NOIs, anti-Americanism, etc.

They want what is best for the Democratic party -- not a presidential nominee who will destroy it!

Fooled NO! They see Obama as the perfect Puppet! They can control him. They didnt see that in Hillary.

Obama has claimed throughout his campaign as reforming how Washington works now, ending the coroption...blah blah blah. Yet the people he speaks of, are the same who back him for President.
You dont find that odd?

Those mainstreem democrats are behind Obama because they see him as their Bush. They beleive they will be the power behind the "hope and change"
facade

I don't see anyone acting like that - I guess it's in the eyes of the beholder. BTW, how do you accurately count the caucus states that did not release popular votes?

Well Obama counts them as " PROOF" that America wants him! He called them 'landslide victories". So if he & his supporters can count the caucases as landslide victories.....HC & Supporters can count the actual amount of people who clicked on her name in a voting booth!

 

[Dolce27]

How do you know this? I cannot imagine any state giving the power to a candidate to dictate something like that.

I read an article a couple of weeks ago that referenced another article on this topic that was published in the Des Moines Register late last year. I went through the archives of the Des Moines Register to read the actual article, I may have found it, but I'd have to pay money to even view it to see if it really is the article I'm looking for and I decided that I'm not paying money just to prove a point. I did happen across this on wikipeida:

On December 10, 2007, the Michigan Democratic Party issued a press release stating that the primary would be held on January 15, 2008, and that the Democratic ballot would contain only six choices: Hillary Clinton, Christopher Dodd, Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich, Uncommitted, and Write-in.[12] The press release also urged supporters of Biden, Edwards, Obama and Richardson to vote "uncommitted" instead of writing in their candidates' names.[12]

http://www.michigandems.com/121007prs.html

9. Supporters of Joe Biden, John Edwards, Barack Obama and Bill Richardson are urged to vote “uncommitted” instead of writing in their candidates’ names because write-in votes for those candidates will not be counted.

This at least backs my point that the people of MI were told to vote uncommitted for Obama by the MI Democratic Party.

 

[ammo]

I assume you are a Republican by bring up the unfounded shady types of the Clintions some 12 years after the fact.

Bad guess about my party affiliation. I just choose to apply the same standards to people that I support as I do to people in the other party.

You honestly believe that everyone around the Clintons during their political careers has been squeaky clean? Don't you even remember the Marc Rich pardon (that was less than 12 years ago) around the time of a major Rich family contribution to Hillary's first Senate campaign?

Or are you using a double standard?

 

["Got Disney"]

I won't derail this thread any more, but I will say that my reaction to Huckabee being VP would be exactly as yours. Living in the I-4 corridor, you hear so many things about both political parties, both good and bad; it seems a good few of Reps here seem to like him.

No derailing you are welcome here ....I think Huckabee would be to much of a radical choice. It may get McCain the Born again vote but that might be all he can do for him. If he were to go that route than he is better off picking Romney...I was impressed with Jihad(is that his name, the GOV of Louisiana)...but I am told he is very far right but he seemed much more moderate in his speeches. I am keeping an eye on both McCasin and Obama and who there chouices will be because one of them will be the POTUS

 

[JimFitz]

Good Riddance to the Clintons!

 

["Got Disney"]

Good Riddance to the Clintons!

There is still 4 years from know and dont forget Chelsea and her kids and there kids and so on and so on

 

[Guy Incognito]

[QUOTE="Got Disney";25527200]...I was impressed with Jihad(is that his name, the GOV of Louisiana)...[/QUOTE]



Jindal is the gov.....


Jihad is a holy war

 

[Dolce27]

Good Riddance to the Clintons!

Uh... wrong thread. You were looking for the thread that began with a letter 'O' for Obama.

 

["Got Disney"]

Jindal is the gov.....


Jihad is a holy war

Thanks could not remember the spelling... and yes I did spell it that way didnt I.....

 

[akhenaten]

Uh... wrong thread. You were looking for the thread that began with a letter 'O' for Obama.

That was rude.... he more than likely would rather be on the 'M' mccain or
'c' conservative thread......

those are the real clinton haters....or did you begin to believe them when they were being nicey nicey to you HS during the primaries????