The Liberal Thread #2 - No Debate Please

[DISUNC]

That's comparing apples to oranges - the campaign hadn't even begun. We are now in the fourth quarter and need to unite behind a candidate. If the race Wednesday still as it is today, Hillary didn't accomplish what she had to: score two decisive wins in TX and OH.

The need to have a TRUE candidate far outweighs the unity thing. For sake of argument, say Hillary wins TX & RI, but not Oh & Vt. IF she drops out, not only will we never know for sure if she could have won. That will cause a major problem for the DNC. AND the GOP will have a field day with Baraks 'illigitimate" nomination!

Oh and come on about that quote about "playing her gender and giving in" - can you imagine Obama saying, "They want me to act like the inferior black man and give in to the white folks?" Why does she always need to remind the voters about her gender?

Because in this country sexism is very much alive & unfortunately very much accepted.

I really dont see a problem with taking this to Denver. We will all be at each others throats ...But we will survive. It is JUST stupid politics.

This whole primary process has opened are eyes.
How many of us even heard the word 'Super Delagates" 6 months ago?
How many of us ever realized that in many states Republicans can vote in the Democratic Primaries, but not vice versa?
How many of us knew that in many states people can show up the "Day of" the primary, register & vote, and weeks later the local election board dismisses their registration, but not their vote.
What would we have said a year ago if we all knew that FL & MI votes will not count, due to nothing more than a 'hissy fit"!

I say Howard Dean has some work cut out for him, and we should all be a bit miffed that this is happening and the Leaders of the DNC did nothing about it before hand.

The "unity thing" is the leaders of the DNC way of saying...."UH OH WE dont want to deal with this mess"

 

[NewJersey]

I think we both understand the math. I just haven't heard a logical reason how the democratic party could not include FL VOTERS & MI VOTERS in determining their candidate. I understand the the two state parties screwed the pooch...but,

how can the Democratic party state that these two swing state's voters don't "count"? Not only does it not make sense (to me), but it's a HUGE general election political mistake (for either dem. nominee).

there's a month between Tuesday's primary's & Penn's primary. Plenty of time to do a "do over". & they should do a do over.

I don't see how a nominee could be named.... who did not win....CA, NY, FL, MI, Mass, NJ, (possibly Ohio & TX) & Penn. The democratic nominee will need to win 7 or 8 of these states in November.

Good for him that he won ND & Idaho, but I'd rather know how these two heavyweights would fare in FL & MI. Give them 2 weeks to campaign & send the right message to these two states & to the country. Even BO would agree with this i suspect. If he has more delegates after Penn & those two states then he deserves the nomination.

But, if he claims victory w/o a vote in those states, & w/o a win in the 8 states named above..... (to me)..... it would be like going undefeated in the Big East or WAC in football & claiming you should be #1 over one loss SEC, Big 12 or Pac 10 teams. A weak & hollow win & not the way to start a general election against a war hero.

I highly doubt that Obama would lose NY, MA, NJ, CA, just as I don't think HRC wouldn't win DC, MD, CT, DE, IL. But I think it does say something that Obama is able to win swing states that Democrats are looking to turn blue this year - VA, MO, CO.

As far as MI and FL - take MI for example, she was the only person on the ballot - how the heck is it fair that she gets those delegates? While I think it was stupid to discount those votes in the first place, it was the rules the candidates all agreed to.

 

[eclectics]

how can the Democratic party state that these two swing state's voters don't "count"? Not only does it not make sense (to me), but it's a HUGE general election political mistake (for either dem. nominee).

there's a month between Tuesday's primary's & Penn's primary. Plenty of time to do a "do over". & they should do a do over.

While I agree with you that it's not fair to the voters, BOTH candidates decided to accept the party's decision and abide by it. They can't suddenly decide to change their minds after the fact. And the DNC can't suddenly decide they committed a faux pas and call a "do over". What's done is done. Learn from it, DNC, and don't do it again.

 

[DISUNC]

While I agree with you that it's not fair to the voters, BOTH candidates decided to accept the party's decision and abide by it. They can't suddenly decide to change their minds after the fact. And the DNC can't suddenly decide they committed a faux pas and call a "do over". What's done is done. Learn from it, DNC, and don't do it again.

I agree with you totally.....But on the other hand how would you feel if it was PA's votes they werent going to count?

What happens in November if FL & MI democrats stay home because of this?

 

[NewJersey]

I agree with you totally.....But on the other hand how would you feel if it was PA's votes they werent going to count?

What happens in November if FL & MI democrats stay home because of this?

And how would you feel if Obama was the only name on the MI ballot and he won the vote there and was calling for the delegates to be seated (for obvious reasons) and HRC was saying the rules are rules.

This can just keep going in circles - the rules were made, the rules should be kept, even as stupid as they are. Because it benefits your candidate doesn't mean the rules should now be changed.

 

[DISUNC]

Is it possible that Huckabee is staying in the GOP race, so that if One of the Dems drop out early...the GOP can Say...SEE WE LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE...Your party nominates in the Backroom!

 

[NewJersey]

Is it possible that Huckabee is staying in the GOP race, so that if One of the Dems drop out early...the GOP can Say...SEE WE LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE...Your party nominates in the Backroom!

No. I think he's doing it for more publicity and/or a possible run in 2012, or even to be considered for VP/cabinet position.

 

[DISUNC]

And how would you feel if Obama was the only name on the MI ballot and he won the vote there and was calling for the delegates to be seated (for obvious reasons) and HRC was saying the rules are rules.

This can just keep going in circles - the rules were made, the rules should be kept, even as stupid as they are. Because it benefits your candidate doesn't mean the rules should now be changed.

I agree with you on Michigan totally!!!!!!!! But THEy have to either do a doover or split the delagates. I would say Do Over...to support the voters!


Florida...not so sure about...they did have all the delagates, and There was a HUGE turnout. But if need be, a do over there too!

Hey it may come down too these two states in a Do Over!

The heck with the party politics....the VOTES MUST COUNT!

 

[DISUNC]

No. I think he's doing it for more publicity and/or a possible run in 2012, or even to be considered for VP/cabinet position.

NOT FOR A MINUTE do I think that!!!! The GOP would have forced him out by now if that was the case! Because unless McCain & Romney die, there is no flippen way he is gonna get his parties candidacy!

 

[eclectics]

I agree with you totally.....But on the other hand how would you feel if it was PA's votes they werent going to count?

What happens in November if FL & MI democrats stay home because of this?

It would stink, but if all parties, including both candidates told me my vote wouldn't count, there wouldn't be much I could do. And while I would be mad as hell at both of them for accepting the DNC's decision, I would be madder still if they both suddenly did an "about face" and decided they wanted my vote to count after all. THAT would keep me home, not the original fracas.

 

[eclectics]

NOT FOR A MINUTE do I think that!!!! The GOP would have forced him out by now if that was the case! Because unless McCain & Romney die, there is no flippen way he is gonna get his parties candidacy!

He thinks he's the "real" conservative, not Romney and he wants the crowing rights to say he was the number 2 guy who fought the good fight and stuck it out till the convention. He thinks that will help him in 2012. Doubtful.

 

[DISUNC]

It would stink, but if all parties, including both candidates told me my vote wouldn't count, there wouldn't be much I could do. And while I would be mad as hell at both of them for accepting the DNC's decision, I would be madder still if they both suddenly did an "about face" and decided they wanted my vote to count after all. THAT would keep me home, not the original fracas.

I did not know any of you in 2000! But how did you feel when the GOP said we dont need to count the votes in Florida? And why is it OK now.

This issue is more than 'feelings", to me this is a issue of Democracy. I dont think our government or our Political parties have ANY right to say 'We will NOT count votes" for any reason. That is a very slippery slope and very very dangerous. In all reality as citizens THATS ALL WE HAVE IS OUR VOTES.

I also believe this is a reason that Kerry, etc is calling for Clinton to step down, even though there is many votes still to go. If she does, all this "FL & MI votes dont count" problems will go away! If she stays, so will the issue.
We can possibly see Howard Dean step down from the DNC. That is what the DNC is MORE concerned about. It really has nothing to do with the Clinton/Obama horse race.

He thinks he's the "real" conservative, not Romney and he wants the crowing rights to say he was the number 2 guy who fought the good fight and stuck it out till the convention. He thinks that will help him in 2012. Doubtful.

I dont know what he thinks, But the GOP is letting him stay in for a very specific reason. My guess is for what I stated above.

 

[Hound 109]

I highly doubt that Obama would lose NY, MA, NJ, CA, just as I don't think HRC wouldn't win DC, MD, CT, DE, IL. But I think it does say something that Obama is able to win swing states that Democrats are looking to turn blue this year - VA, MO, CO.

I agree. (but think McCain would take VA & maybe Mizzou & NJ).

As far as MI and FL - take MI for example, she was the only person on the ballot - how the heck is it fair that she gets those delegates? While I think it was stupid to discount those votes in the first place, it was the rules the candidates all agreed to.

I don't AT ALL think that the MI & FL primary votes were 100% legit. The candidates never campaigned there nor went thru their media gauntlets.....but to say that "the candidates" agreed on the rules (that the Dem leaders said they had to agree to).....doesn't change the fact that those two states need to have a say in this....for several very important reasons.

A "do over" sounds stupid....but d*amned if i can think of a way to NOT disenfranchise 2 mega states & their voters that isn't a do over. (better than sending it to the Supreme Court ).

 

[eclectics]

I did not know any of you in 2000! But how did you feel when the GOP said we dont need to count the votes in Florida? And why is it OK now.

This issue is more than 'feelings", to me this is a issue of Democracy. I dont think our government or our Political parties have ANY right to say 'We will NOT count votes" for any reason. That is a very slippery slope and very very dangerous. In all reality as citizens THATS ALL WE HAVE IS OUR VOTES.

I also believe this is a reason that Kerry, etc is calling for Clinton to step down, even though there is many votes still to go. If she does, all this "FL & MI votes dont count" problems will go away! If she stays, so will the issue.
We can possibly see Howard Dean step down from the DNC. That is what the DNC is MORE concerned about. It really has nothing to do with the Clinton/Obama horse race.






I dont know what he thinks, But the GOP is letting him stay in for a very specific reason. My guess is for what I stated above.

2000 was about votes in a general election that were already cast that were being contested. I don't see any similarities whatsoever. In the primaries, voters knew beforehand that their votes would not be counted. I doesn't make the sting any less hurtful but the circumstances can't be equated, imho.

 

[DISUNC]

2000 was about votes in a general election that were already cast that were being contested. I don't see any similarities whatsoever. In the primaries, voters knew beforehand that their votes would not be counted. I doesn't make the sting any less hurtful but the circumstances can't be equated, imho.

Not all Floridians KNEW their votes wouldnt be counted.

Then why were the names on the ballots (in FL anyway)?
Then why did they go vote????

1.7 million of Florida Democrats showed up and voted. That's more than the number of Democrats who voted in any Democratic primary for anything in Florida history. The largest Democrat turnout EVER. That's more than the number of people who voted in the "early state" contests in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina combined.

I am still sticking with THEY MUST count the votes in BOTH STATES! Even if they have to do a do over.

 

[JARNJ3]

I also believe this is a reason that Kerry, etc is calling for Clinton to step down, even though there is many votes still to go. If she does, all this "FL & MI votes dont count" problems will go away! If she stays, so will the issue.
We can possibly see Howard Dean step down from the DNC. That is what the DNC is MORE concerned about. It really has nothing to do with the Clinton/Obama horse race.

That is a very good point!!!

I'm still hoping she wins 2 out of the 4 to stay alive........

TX will most likely be "red" in the general - OH will be more telling.......

 

[DISUNC]

And how would you feel if Obama was the only name on the MI ballot and he won the vote there and was calling for the delegates to be seated (for obvious reasons) and HRC was saying the rules are rules.

This can just keep going in circles - the rules were made, the rules should be kept, even as stupid as they are. Because it benefits your candidate doesn't mean the rules should now be changed.

Then do a do over! (that is hard to type)

This is STILL AMERICA and EVERY VOTE MUST COUNT. Whether you or I like the outcome of it is not important.

 

[DISUNC]

That is a very good point!!!

I'm still hoping she wins 2 out of the 4 to stay alive........

TX will most likely be "red" in the general - OH will be more telling.......

thanks!

Texas is a crazy state. The vote in the morning, then caucus!
Shouldnt it be the other way around?

 

[KikiFan]

We definitely do have a different POV. I just know the HRC camp would be screaming bloody murder for Obama to concede if he had lost 12 in a row and started in with negative campaign tactics. And they'd be right.

Well personally I don't think any candidate has the right to demand that another drop out. However, I would like to point out a difference. Had Obama lost 12 in a row he would have been a very long way behind HC. On the other hand Hillary lost 12 and she's still within 100 delegates. Even with the loses she's suffered she's still within striking distance. It doesn't make sense for her to drop out.

And for myself, if you expect me to suck it up later and vote for Obama (if he gets the nom) - then you better let my candidate finish to the bitter end. Because thats the only hope you've got of me, and a lot of other Hillary supporters, getting behind Obama.

That's comparing apples to oranges - the campaign hadn't even begun. We are now in the fourth quarter and need to unite behind a candidate. If the race Wednesday still as it is today, Hillary didn't accomplish what she had to: score two decisive wins in TX and OH.


Oh and come on about that quote about "playing her gender and giving in" - can you imagine Obama saying, "They want me to act like the inferior black man and give in to the white folks?" Why does she always need to remind the voters about her gender?

We really don't. There is plenty of time after the convention. I will tell you this as a Hillary supporter, if I feel that the Dem Party tries in anyway to short circut her campaign for the sake of "convenience" - they will not get my vote in the fall. It's that simple. I maybe a dem but I've got a memory like an elephant. I still haven't forgiven Gore for giving up in 2000. I appreciate Hillary for continuing to slug it out.

FYI the quote you're upset about wasn't made by Hillary but Stenheim

 

[Planogirl]

I too would be displeased if the Democratic Party tried to push Hillary to throw in the towel too soon. I believe that they owe her supporters the courtesy of seeing this through.