A Touch of Hyperbole?
In Billings, Montana, Tuesday night, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, said — per ABC News’ Eloise Harper — “Who is the stronger candidate against John McCain? We have not gone through this exciting unprecedented historical election only to lose. So you have to ask yourself who is the stronger candidate?
"And based on every analysis of every bit of research, and every poll that’s been taken and every state that a Democrat has to win – I am the stronger candidate against John McCain in the fall.”
Every analysis of every bit of research and every poll in every key state?
Really?
- jpt
Email
CPAC: Romney Struggles to Convince Voters
Obama Backs Off Birth Control Battle?
Yeah, EVERY one.
Just like NO one ever could’ve predicted she would win in Texas, or Indiana, or any other state where she outpolled Obama by on average by 20 pts.
Posted by: Andy E | May 28, 2008, 7:48 am 7:48 am
then WHY is she LOSING?
Delusional….
Posted by: carol | May 28, 2008, 7:55 am 7:55 am
It’s over, Hillary, go home.
Posted by: marc456 | May 28, 2008, 7:56 am 7:56 am
Some folks call this lying.
Some call it stretching the truth.
In politics, it is called hyperbole or misspoke.
Posted by: Ivan | May 28, 2008, 8:00 am 8:00 am
Well it is what the polls say and since I hear they really don’t need her supporters she should run as a independent.
Posted by: Bishop | May 28, 2008, 8:01 am 8:01 am
I know she is trying to make a case for herself, but I have had enough of our leaders stretching the truth. I wish she would just say it like it is. I would have more sympathy for her argument.
Posted by: jmc663 | May 28, 2008, 8:04 am 8:04 am
Posted by: carol | May 28, 2008 7:55:30 AM says, “then WHY is she LOSING?Delusional….”
For your information, not even Obama in pledged delegates withoutthe help of superdelegated but Hillary is winning the BIG states and the popularity votes which include MI and Florida. Obama win states are voting for Hillary between 75% – 82% if she runs against Mccain. Truth Hurts for Obama and his legions of doom but truth is truth. No one can deny it. She’s more electable than the 2-year starter Illimois senator who stole his position from Alice Palmer through unfair means
Posted by: neil1785 | May 28, 2008, 8:12 am 8:12 am
She isn’t winning – get it…..
Big people talk about ideas, little people talk about other people…
So she must be a little person –
Posted by: jozy | May 28, 2008, 8:15 am 8:15 am
neil1785
IF you had done your homework you would know that Obama’s total number of years in politics is 12 – not 2 – you must be a Clinton fan as she cannot do the math correctly either….
Posted by: jozy | May 28, 2008, 8:17 am 8:17 am
Posted by: jmc663 | May 28, 2008 8:14:05 AM
Hillary’s not yet lost. Obama hasn’t won either. He’s just ahead of the pledged delegates but the rule is to reach 2026. Hillary is ahead in popularity vote and against McCain. With the remaining primaries, no one reach the finish line. Superdelegates would need to decide wisely based on electoral map and gallup polls. We cannot afford to put an inexperienced starter senator to resolve our world issues.
Posted by: neil1785 | May 28, 2008, 8:19 am 8:19 am
Here is the simple fact of the matter
were obama a white male, who didnt have such massive support, who hadnt shattered fundraising records, who didnt offer hope and a dream… .then possibly…. possibly after june 3rd they would give it to hillary clinton…
but here IS the simple fact…
We have the first african american and the first women running. Which ever one of them is ahead in pledge delegates at the end of the primaries
how could anyone take away the nomination from the front runner on this historic election?
you cant…
that simple… for super d;s to not give this to obama WHO IS THE FRONT RUNNER, it would be massively upsetting
clinton has lost this… she can claim anything she wants, but she lost because of POOR PLANNING…
The state argument can surely work in kansas and west virginia… obama just does not do well there, but states that are usually democrat that in the last 4 elections have been democrat…
will probably stay democrat
same with the red states…
I mean one thing we have to all remember is that, obama is up against the brand name… hes tab cola, shes coca cola…
The primaries in michigan and florida will be seated but with half votes…
these contests werent fair more to obama then to clinton… where whomever goes into vote sees the name clinton and marks it down
She has lost, this last ditch effort is a wet dream of hers that if she can spike the popular vote high enough she might have a case
all polls out right now are skewed because on one hand you have obama supporters who know their candidate will be our nominee, and are at the stage in the game where they know that voting for the democrat in the election is the best thing to do
hillary supporters are still in contention, they are still all riled up… give them a few months to come down, and i think a big majority of them will do the right thing.
Posted by: bhrandon | May 28, 2008, 8:27 am 8:27 am
neil1785
your first fact is a lie in which case it makes the reader stop reading
bill clinton did a BANG up job in the 90′s no doubt
but as we know with hillary, she takes the good stuff from her husbands presidency and claims it as her own, but any of the bad that isnt her baggage
Posted by: bhrandon | May 28, 2008, 8:30 am 8:30 am
neil1785,
You talking smack…
Obama has held public office for 11.5 years
Hillary Clinton for 6
talk facts and maybe Ill read the rest of your writings !
Because your either not telling the truth or dont know what your talking about !
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 8:30 am 8:30 am
Maybe someone need to show Clinton that out of seven polls only one shows her in better standing the Barack Obama.
REAL POLITICS POLL OF ALL POLLS May 25 08:
National Obama +2.8 Clinton +1.5
Pennsylvania Obama +5.8 Clinton +11.7
Ohio Obama +1.3 Clinton +8.3
Wisconsin Obama +1.6 McCain +3.4
Virginia McCain +1.3 McCain +10.4
Florida McCain +8.3 Clinton +3.0
California Obama +11.5 Clinton +11.3
While both Hillay and Obama beat john McBush Obama is winning by more !!!
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 8:33 am 8:33 am
Hillary is more intelligent than Bill. Even in the 90′s I had already been hearing reports that the woman is the one actually running the White House affecting most of the President’s decisions and judgements. The Clinton Administration may have ups and downs but in general they were able to give American people true peace and economic prosperity.
Posted by: neil1785 | May 28, 2008, 8:36 am 8:36 am
neil1785
People voting for Obama are…
“people jealous of Hillary”?…lol
you are kidding right. Could it be that her election (now incredibly apparent to most) was all about Hillary and not what’s best for the country.
and mention of African Americans but no mention of the majority of white women over 50 coming out for Hillary… or less educated people voting for Hillary.
and considering that your “mindless youths”
include the majority of demographic of people under the age of 50… that is a lot of mindless people…
your statements are hogwash… and almost all “mindful” people know that.
Posted by: dl | May 28, 2008, 8:36 am 8:36 am
Hillary Clinton’s one poll which shows her leading by more was done by… Drum roll please…….KARL ROVE
GIVE ME A BREAK!
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 8:38 am 8:38 am
Obama has won 33-18 contest..
When Obama was winning in states won:
It doesnt matter how many states you have won, we both need to get to need 2025 to win the nomination.”-Hillary Clinton 2-9-08
Obama is 48 shy of the nomination…So now what… Now we get this from her
Its over the people have spoken she put up a tough fight after june 3rd its over and time to get on with beating John McBush.
Of the Polls are right it will end up being 35-19 Obama will be the nominee and will be the 44th President of the United States of America.
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 8:54 am 8:54 am
Posted by: jozy | May 28, 2008 8:39:50 AM
You sound guilty….
Posted by: neil1785 | May 28, 2008, 8:54 am 8:54 am
OBAMA SPELLS DISASTER. GOD HELP US IF HE BECOMES THE NEXT PRESIDENT. AMERICA WILL FURTHER GO DOWNWARD SPIRAL. WE NEED THE CLINTONS BACK IN THE WHITE HOUSE. NOW.
Posted by: neil1785 | May 28, 2008, 9:04 am 9:04 am
Hillary and Bill need to look at the polls again.
Real Clear Politics poll average is considered the best indicator among polls.
Just looking at a handful of the critical states…
Ohio (both Obama and Hillary win)
Pennsylvania (both Obama and Hillary win)
New Jersey 15 EV (both Obama and Hillary win)
Washington 11 EV (both Obama and Hillary win)
California 55 EV (both Obama and Hillary win)
Minnesota 10 EV (both Obama and Hillary win)
Florida 27 EV (Hillary wins, Obama loses)
Michigan 17 EV (Obama wins, Hillary loses)
Wisconsin 10 EV (Obama wins, Hillary loses)
Iowa 7 EV (Obama wins, Hillary loses)
Oregon 10 EV (Obama wins, Hillary loses)
Summary, the only state that Hillary wins that Obama does not is Florida. Florida is worth 27 Electoral votes.
On the other hand, Obama wins Iowa, Wisconsin, Oregon, and Michigan. Obama’s four states are worth 44 Electoral votes.
These are among the 20 battleground states that parties are fighting over. I only noted states where there is enough polling information to provide an average and states where a Democrat leads. If the limited polls from other battleground states are used, Obama maintains his lead over Hillary in Electoral votes.
Why do the Clintons lie about the polls?
Ed Rendell also lied about these polls last night. When these numbers were brought up by the moderator, he said he didn’t know about these numbers.
Posted by: Debbie | May 28, 2008, 9:06 am 9:06 am
neil,
If HRC was sooo right on the Gax Tax Holiday, why doens’t she talk about it anymore?? Did she write up any Legislation about it?
No, huh?
Typical stump speech pandering.
Posted by: jmc663 | May 28, 2008, 9:06 am 9:06 am
Many women who are avowed Hillary Clinton supporters are declaring they won’t vote for Barack Obama in the fall. I get the anger and the disappointment. But to quote SNL’s Amy Poehler and Seth Meyers: Really? You’d rather vote for John McCain, a man who has a 25-year history of voting against a woman’s right to choose? A man who over the last eight years that NARAL has released a pro-choice scorecard has received a 0 percent rating? A man whose campaign website says he believes Roe v. Wade “must be overturned”? A man who has vowed that, as president, he will be “a loyal and unswerving friend of the right to life movement”? Really?
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 9:14 am 9:14 am
jmc663,
True but its better to try and fail then not try at all….Isnt it (LOL) ?
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 9:15 am 9:15 am
bhrandon,
Lucky you posted that I was thinking about going to protest! Thanks : )
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 9:17 am 9:17 am
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008 9:07:58 AM
yeah, right. Ruth Marcus is a die-hard obama supporter. I have read an article from an independent budget management body and all praises go to Hillary’s economic plans.
And besides, Obama’s policies are similar to
Hillary’s because he stole most of them from her. He is unable to talk in-depth about any of them as proven at the 4 debates he had with Hillary. I have no faith or confidence in his ability to get the job done. McCain, on the other hand was courted by John Kerry to run with him as vice president. I have researched McCain, and why I don’t agree with all of his views, I am far more comfortable with him as POTUS than I am with Obama, a man with more questions than answers. I also think Obama is racist and ruthless, with more leanings to Farrakahn than MLK. He leaves me cold.
Posted by: neil1785 | May 28, 2008, 9:18 am 9:18 am
Its funny that obama almost never mentions hillary anymore…and when he does, he issues lavish praise to her and her campaign…
and yet all she can do is continue to divide the party…
most people when having no clear path to victory do whats right for the party and get out…
im not calling for her to get out, but most people would have got out by now… but its ok, only 6 more days of the clintons…
that is unless they decide to go to the convention, in which case we know what her plan is…. run again in 2012
the only problem with that is….
her legacy will now be roped around the fact that she destroyed the democrats chances of winning in a year the democrats should have an easy time winning, and i dont think anyone will look back kindly on that….
Posted by: bhrandon | May 28, 2008, 9:19 am 9:19 am
Neil1785
so you have no idea what you are talking about and with every post you make that blindingly clear
obama stole hillarys policies LOL
sooo then, you will vote for obama when he wins because these policies are what attract you to hillary
amiright?!
Posted by: bhrandon | May 28, 2008, 9:24 am 9:24 am
Posted by: geevill | May 28, 2008 9:18:35 AM
I couldn’t agree more. He’s gonna be roasted alive in GE. What’s even more exciting if Hillary runs as independent. Everything will be divided but the slight edge goes to her side. The astrological stars are in favor of her that’s why she’s not quitting.
Posted by: neil1785 | May 28, 2008, 9:24 am 9:24 am
geevill,
Ive read the report and that not what is says at all!
It says Obama wins not only with black but wins with all groups that are highly educated…
question geevil why do you care ? I think the only reason you want Clinton to win is so the republican will united because even you hate your man john McBush am I right ?
Ive read the other blogs I know your a republican !
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 9:26 am 9:26 am
Posted by: bhrandon | May 28, 2008 9:24:12 AM
You are damn, right! I’m still voting for Hillary, whatever happens and millions of people supporting her will do the same thing if not for John McCain. If John McCain picks up a balanced running mate like Mitt Romney who’s well-versed in economy that will fill up his disadvantage, so much the better. We will never vote for Barrack HUSSEIN Obama. He’s a toast.
Posted by: neil1785 | May 28, 2008, 9:28 am 9:28 am
neil1785,
Newsflash Hillary cant run as an independent she would have needed to have applied for ballot access by Jan 1 08
So its too late for that your just going to have to pick a team and make up your mind who is better for you and your nation. John McBush or Barack Obama
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 9:31 am 9:31 am
Hillary’s “Justifications”
I am the inevitable nominee – Sept 07
We know
It’s the pledged delegates who chose the nominee – Dec 07
Oh wait,
It’s the Super delegates who should chose the nominee – Mar 08
What I’ve ALWAYS said was
It’s the popular vote that really matters – Apr 07
I’m still losing? Hold on, what I meant was
It’s uh…electability? Did I try that one yet? May 07
Posted by: Time to Punt | May 28, 2008, 9:36 am 9:36 am
Neil out of interest are you really a democrat or are you too a republican ?
If you are a democrat have you always voted democrat ?
Because i answered all the question of you rank and they were all things Clinton has done or was worse at.. So why are you so angery and hate filed towards Barack ?
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 9:36 am 9:36 am
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008 9:31:55 AM
Dream on, Kate. Hillary will end up with the nomination. You’re counting the chickens too early. One more mistake from Obama… I believe he misspoke/lied about his Ghost Uncle in WWII?
Hillary ’08
Posted by: neil1785 | May 28, 2008, 9:37 am 9:37 am
A Touch of Hyperbole?
No not really I just call it lies.
Posted by: Thinking | May 28, 2008, 9:41 am 9:41 am
Hillary can unite the party.
Hillary can beat McCain.
Hillary is the most electable.
I’m an independent educated voter.
Posted by: Nicholas | May 28, 2008, 9:52 am 9:52 am
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008 9:50:08 AM
I have all my reliable sources intact. Obama’s a fake… There’s no sense in explaining things to you because you are too caught up in your false beliefs
Posted by: neil1785 | May 28, 2008, 9:54 am 9:54 am
geevill,
You are a republican! Its your writing I read you type the same!!!
Ive watched the video and obama is singing the words and looks the most patriotic of them all there…
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 9:55 am 9:55 am
neil1785,
“I have all my reliable sources intact. Obama’s a fake… There’s no sense in explaining things to you because you are too caught up in your false beliefs”
Enlighten me then Ive done my research if you have something else I should look at add to my knowlage!
false beliefs of what ?
I provided you with information to back up my statements why wont you do the same ?
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 10:00 am 10:00 am
Obama’s latest gaffe:
Obama said his grandfather enlisted the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, which was December, 1941.
“My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton’s army. He saw the dead and dying across the fields of Europe; he heard the stories of fellow troops who first entered Auschwitz and Treblinka. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil, and he did not fight in vain.
WWII Kansas Veterans Index: His grandfather, Stanley A. Dunham, enlisted in the Army on June 18 1942, six months after Pearl Harbor.
Posted by: countallthevotes | May 28, 2008, 10:03 am 10:03 am
DEMAND THAT THE MEDIA ASKS THE ‘RIGHT’ QUESTIONS ABOUT OBAMA NOW!
DEMAND THAT THE MEDIA ASKS THE DNC TO COUNT ALL VOTES!
LET PEOPLE VOTE!
LET THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS RUN ITS COURSE!
THIS RACE WILL END AT THE CONVENTION – AND THAT IS THE ONLY DEMOCRATIC WAY TO END THIS RACE!
Posted by: Average Joe | May 28, 2008, 10:05 am 10:05 am
THIS RACE WILL END AT THE CONVENTION – AND THAT IS THE ONLY DEMOCRATIC WAY TO END THIS RACE!
Posted by: Average Joe | May 28, 2008 10:05:05 AM
*********
Yes, with Obama getting the nomination, just as he should, being AHEAD and all.
Good, glad we are on the same page now.
Posted by: jmc663 | May 28, 2008, 10:06 am 10:06 am
i just cant belive you people cannot see through hillary why did she not fight for the people of mi and fl in the beginning why now come on people really ask yourself that does she really care about them no only their votes you know i wish i could have been in fl when she was there because i would have asked her why did you not care in the beginning and signed her names to the rules you are really mindless if you cannot see through her if she steals this nomonation from obama im not gonna vote for mccain i will just stay home hillary you are aliar rulebreaking cheater and you my sweetie i do not want for president!!!!!!
Posted by: angiee | May 28, 2008, 10:15 am 10:15 am
If you cant trust what she says now then she cant be our president after bush we know how important that is!
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 10:17 am 10:17 am
bhrandon,
LOL!! Like I said, try to keep up.
Posted by: jmc663 | May 28, 2008, 10:24 am 10:24 am
jmc663,
Hillary will not steal the nomination…
THATS CRAZY TALK!!!
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 10:24 am 10:24 am
kate,
I don’t think she will either. The Supers are well aware of her negative poll numbers and those are among Democrats. 53% of Democrats do not trust her.
Posted by: jmc663 | May 28, 2008, 10:27 am 10:27 am
Why this liar have any support? I mean really? I could not honestly stand to live in my skin if I supported someone who lies like this unhinged woman does! Too much is at stake this election with the supreme court and the war and the economy. Imagine if she got in office! Bush lied to us about WMD and then her? OMG
Posted by: Brian | May 28, 2008, 10:31 am 10:31 am
So why did we go through all these primaries and caucuses? Why did we even bother voting? We could have just decided the election based on polls and saved everyone a lot of time and money.
Posted by: Cindy | May 28, 2008, 10:32 am 10:32 am
jmc663,
My stomach turmed when I read it…
She does think she is our queen and that she can make things go her way..
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 10:32 am 10:32 am
Oh I love the media being biased lie LOL My favorite! If Obama had lied about sniper fire, if Obama had used race baiting, if Obama had stated he was staying in the race in the event Clinton was shot, if Obama had hired people to work for him that fought and cussed each other and had to be fired then he might have been covered 24/7 too but because he didn’t? LOL Hillary the unhinged says the media is biased. More lies.
Posted by: Brian | May 28, 2008, 10:33 am 10:33 am
LOL You really must be one of the uneducated people supporting Hillary the Unhinged. Obama WON the majority of pledged delegates even if you include the faulty elections held in FL and MI
Posted by: Brian | May 28, 2008, 10:36 am 10:36 am
we all know what the truth is about FL and MI:
Hillary wanted a re-vote
DNC wanted a re-vote
Obama fought against the fundamental right of people to VOTE!
why? and why isn’t the media asking obama why he has a problem with people VOTING?
—————
I think the above posting deserves repeating. Why did Obama send his lawyers to block legitimate revotes of these two major states when the people, the Dem Party and all others said let’s sit down and find a way to give the good Dems of FLA and MI a voice in the nomination process? Fact is, Obama shut them down and perpetuated this dispute.
Posted by: hopesprings52 | May 28, 2008, 10:37 am 10:37 am
Straight facts.
Hillary the Unhinged vote that the votes in FL and MI would NOT count until she needed them. Just like those voters would not have counted when she was in office. LOL ONLY when she needs them. Those are the facts to any educated person who can read and assumilate information.
Posted by: Brian | May 28, 2008, 10:38 am 10:38 am
To the Clinton supporter,
What so you guys think will happen if FL and MI where seated as Clinton NOW wants ?? (remembering that she didnt care about their votes till she need them and needed a cause to push)
Do you think that it would mean she would be in the lead then ?
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 10:38 am 10:38 am
get the facts straight? sure here they are:
a number of democratic leaders have offered to pay for the cost to re-run the elections in LF and MI – fully.
what did the obama boy do?
he took the donors money from the voters in FL and MI and then used their money to pay lawyers to STOP the voters from exercising their right to VOTE!
we all know what the truth is about FL and MI:
Hillary wanted a re-vote
DNC wanted a re-vote
Obama fought against the fundemantal right of people to VOTE!
why? and why isn’t the media asking obama why he has a problem with people VOTING?
the obama people have been trying very hard to stop the voting process!
the obama people are trying to stop the delegates from exercising their right to VOTE!
that, my firends should bother every single one of us.
why is obama sooo opposed to letting people VOTE?
we elect officials in this country.
Let the people VOTE!
let the delegates VOTE!
and
COUNT ALL THE VOTES!
Posted by: Average Joe | May 28, 2008, 10:39 am 10:39 am
Count MI and FL….because ya know what? Hillary would NOT have received any more votes than she did since she was already on the ballot and guess what? She still can’t catch Obama in pledged delegates even when you add those in.
Posted by: Brian | May 28, 2008, 10:41 am 10:41 am
She is delusional and looking worse every day.
For being down with the working class, she sure has a lot of her own money to throw around. Let’s see what happens when she pays herself back before the grocery stores in Iowa. Then we will see how she feel about the working class.
Posted by: g | May 28, 2008, 10:41 am 10:41 am
First lie. Not a number of democrats offered to pay for it. Clinton supporters offered to pay for it and ONLY if they voted the way Hillary the Unhinged wanted them too. SHE nixed the caucus vote OFFER so go lie somewhere else.
Posted by: Brian | May 28, 2008, 10:42 am 10:42 am
and all you hillary suppoters thinks she is gonna bring our troops home yeah right she was for the war in iraq and she said she would start a war in iran if they attacked irsael hillary is suppose to be a smart strongminded woman in your eyes than why did she agree with bush on the war we the people knew it was wrong and the smart hillary didnt give me a break i can see it now those troops wont come home and shell just be feeding us more of her lies on why they cant come on people wake up to her nonsense THINK THINK THINK you have a brain use it!!!!
Posted by: angie | May 28, 2008, 10:42 am 10:42 am
Kate,
No Clinton would not be ahead.
But I hear she will win under the following scenario:
1. Give Alaska back to Russia
2. Let Japan have Hawaii
3. Annex Michigan to Canada
4. Take off the “New” in New Mexico
5. Don’t count the votes of Montana and South Dakota, since they have more cows than voters, and cows can’t vote.
Voila! HRC wins!
See…..it’s simple!
Posted by: jmc663 | May 28, 2008, 10:42 am 10:42 am
and all you hillary suppoters thinks she is gonna bring our troops home yeah right she was for the war in iraq and she said she would start a war in iran if they attacked irsael hillary is suppose to be a smart strongminded woman in your eyes than why did she agree with bush on the war we the people knew it was wrong and the smart hillary didnt give me a break i can see it now those troops wont come home and shell just be feeding us more of her lies on why they cant come on people wake up to her nonsense THINK THINK THINK you have a brain use it!!!!
Posted by: angie | May 28, 2008, 10:42 am 10:42 am
Whatever way the votes came down, so be it. But the obvious solution in March seemed to be to revote them, to solve the crisis and enfranchise the Dems of FLA and MI. It’s simply wrong to shut those Dem voters down, whichever way the vote goes.
Also, I’m sick and tired of Obama supporters saying that Clinton supporters are uneducated and stupid. That is not only dead wrong, it drives home the arrogance and elitism that will sink Obama’s candidacy in the general election!
Posted by: hopesprings52 | May 28, 2008, 10:44 am 10:44 am
That revote was to be financed with clinton money
please
and as far as i have read his lawyers never STOPPED any revote, they questioned its lagisitcs as many did….
he has repeateadly said that we shoudl come to some resolution but ultimately it was up to teh rules committee to decide what to do
if you are going to argue with that then why did hillary say the votes wouldnt count? why was she fine with it?
and now that she is losing she is unfine with it?
this wouldnt be happening on her side if she were winning, and you can take that to the bank
Posted by: bhrandon | May 28, 2008, 10:45 am 10:45 am
Even IF Mi and FL are counted, she still will not catch Obama in the pledged delegates. Now the lawyers for the DNC have stated in a 38 page brief thay since THEY went against the rules, MI and FL can ONLY have 1/2 votes under the law.
Not even Clinton can change those rules regardless of how unhinged she becomes or lies like the one about leading in the polls. Check out Real Clear Politics if you have any questions as to her latest lie.
Posted by: Brian | May 28, 2008, 10:46 am 10:46 am
He isn’t. When MI came up with a caucus he agreed and Hillary the unhinged is the one who said No. Remember, only when it benefits her will she agree.
Posted by: Brian | May 28, 2008, 10:47 am 10:47 am
Average Joe:
The article itself says it all: hyperbole. Do you know what that means?
Of course Clinton wanted a re-vote in Michigan and Florda. She’s BEHIND. She certainly wouldn’t be calling for a re-vote if she had Obama’s lead!
Also, how much power to you think the Obama campaign has? Wow! They had so much power that they were the ones who stopped the re-vote? NO. It was the inaction of Michigan’s legislature that didn’t vote on redoing the primary. One of the reasons why is because the Clinton campaign wanted a “closed” primary for Democrats only. Well, in the state of Michigan, we have “open” primaries, where anyone can vote.
So, again, I say to you: get your facts straight, please.
You obviously don’t live in Michigan. We get it. You don’t.
Posted by: Mary | May 28, 2008, 10:49 am 10:49 am
AVERAGE JOE,
ONCE AGAIN…………..
Privately funded elections in MICHIGAN are illegal.
They have to BE FUNDED by the STATE or by THE DNC.
What don’t you get?
Should I say it sllloooowwweeeerrr?
—
sure, go a bit slower, could you..
what private money are you talking about?
because i am talking about donor money – and that is fine in any state of this great nation of ours!
why do you obama supporters insist in coming up with all teh crap in the world to justify not letting people exercise tehir right to VOTE!
you really like that don’t you..
we VOTE in america!
even if obama doesn’t like that!
even if you obama supporters don’t like that!
LET PEOPLE VOTE!
LET THE DELEGATES VOTE!
LET THE DEMOCRAIC PROCESS RUN ITS COURSE!
Posted by: Average Joe | May 28, 2008, 10:49 am 10:49 am
this was lifted from a post by someone saying if she wants to start using polls to decide this thing about the GE then
“I’m with her on this. She wants to base the nomination on polls?
OK. She’s behind Obama in California. She has to cede California. A brand new poll says he beats McCain in Ohio by 9. She has to cede Ohio.
It’s the most ridiculous argument I’ve ever heard.”
and i agree
the clintons like to claim one thing, but not hte other
count all the votes, but only until i start to lose
if you cant take the heat get out of the kitchen, everyone is against us
this will be over feb 5th, this wont be over until we all vote
we dont watch polls, according to all the polls (or at least the ones we care to look at)
Hillary is winning, she is losing because of sexism, conspiracy, because people voted against her
Posted by: bhrandon | May 28, 2008, 10:49 am 10:49 am
So you too think that since Obama followed the rules and removed his name in MI that makes it a fair vote? what about all his supporters who have sent notice to the DNC that they stayed home since they were told their votes would not count? Fair? Not hardly. Only to a Hillary the Unhinged supporter.
Obama agreed to a caucus when MI proposed it.
Posted by: Brian | May 28, 2008, 10:50 am 10:50 am
Obama wasnt agaist a revote he said that himself. He raised concerns about the Clinton campaign funding and organising a primary…. not ran by the DNC I wouldnt let the Clinton run an election if I was the apponent… would you ?
In Michigan he told them that running the election at the later stange was unfair as all the collages that had students where on holidays durring Clintons newly proposed time for the election.
Obamas letter to the DNC stated that the would prefer to stick to the DNC aproved nominating schedule and at the end of the process the DNC can determin the best course of action…
Guess what that what he has done!
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 10:50 am 10:50 am
Obama agreed to a caucus when MI proposed it.
Posted by: Brian | May 28, 2008 10:50:10 AM
****
True, but you have to remember that according to HRC, caucus states don’t count.
Posted by: jmc663 | May 28, 2008, 10:52 am 10:52 am
Talking slower does not work with the Hillary the Unhinged crowd. Only when you lie to them do they feel like they are getting the truth.
Posted by: Brian | May 28, 2008, 10:52 am 10:52 am
AND if you READ any news article you will find that what occurs in the primary stage never applies in the GE LOL IF Obama was not fighting Hillary the Unhinged he would beat McCain in the electoral vote…oh by the way the one I am reading at Rasmussen does not agree with your numbers. Where did you find them?
Posted by: Brian | May 28, 2008, 10:56 am 10:56 am
The votes have been counted
–
really, what votes are you talking about?
you might not know this but.. tehre aer still millions of people who have not voted yet.. and there are over 4 thousands delegates who have not voted yet..
LET PEOPLE VOTE!
LET THE DELEGATES VOTE!
LET THE DEMOCRAIC PROCESS RUN ITS COURSE!
Posted by: Average Joe | May 28, 2008, 10:56 am 10:56 am
Just more of what we have all come to expect from Hillary the Unhinged, more lies.
I just went to Real Clear Politicsw where they average all 7 of the major polling data..Obama beats Hillary the Unhinged by 10.7 today and beat her in ALL 7 pools from Rasmussum to Gallup.
IF I were a Hillary the Unhinged supporter? I would be really be concerned that she thought I was stupid
Posted by: Brian | May 28, 2008, 10:58 am 10:58 am
Just more of what we have all come to expect from Hillary the Unhinged, more lies.
I just went to Real Clear Politicsw where they average all 7 of the major polling data..Obama beats Hillary the Unhinged by 10.7 today and beat her in ALL 7 pools from Rasmussum to Gallup.
IF I were a Hillary the Unhinged supporter? I would be really be concerned that she thought I was stupid
Posted by: Brian | May 28, 2008, 10:58 am 10:58 am
Only when you lie to them do they feel like they are getting the truth.
Posted by: Brian | May 28, 2008 10:52:49 AM
*************
Oops, I forgot. My bad.
Only Hillary can win the GE.
Only Hillary can save the World.
Hillary Clinton is the smartest woman ever born.
Hillary Clinton can believe “It’s Not Butter”
Hillary Clinton can beat Mothra and Superman in a two-on-one.
Better?
Posted by: jmc663 | May 28, 2008, 10:58 am 10:58 am
would an obama supporter join me and say (i know it is very hard for you to do it, but try it.. it feels good, for your children’s sake..):
LET PEOPLE VOTE!
LET THE DELEGATES VOTE!
LET THE DEMOCRAIC PROCESS RUN ITS COURSE!
Posted by: Average Joe | May 28, 2008, 11:00 am 11:00 am
Average Joe
WHY is obama opposing counting ALL THE VOTES?
The basic Principle that Hillary seems to forget when on her rants is that:
ELECTIONS SHOULD BE FREE AND FAIR
TELLING PEOPLE THAT AN ELECTION DOESNT MATTER IT WILL NOT COUNT!!! ONLY THEN TO SAY HA HA HA TRICKED YA IT COUNTS NOW!
DOESNT MATER YOU DIDNT GET TO CAMPAIGN THERE !
DOESNT MATER THAT PEOPLE KNEW ME BEFORE BECAUSE I WAS THE FIRST LADY THATS HUSBAND CEATED ON ME AND WAS IMPEACHED !
IT DOESNT MATER THAT YOU AND ALL THE OTHER REMAINING CANDIDATES REMOVED THEIR NAME FOR THE BALLOT THAT I WAS THE ONLY ONE ON THERE AND STILL ONLY GOT 50%
THAT IS REALLY MORE LIKE ZIMBABWE THAT IS WHAT YOU CALL AN INJUSTICE
OUR NATION IS BUILT ON FRE AND FAIR ELECTIONS
RULES ARE RULES !!
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 11:02 am 11:02 am
i’ve read that you oabama supporters will stage a rally to stop counting the votes in FL!
boy ooh boy.. here we go again..
LET PEOPLE VOTE!
LET THE DELEGATES VOTE!
LET THE DEMOCRAIC PROCESS RUN ITS COURSE!
Posted by: Average Joe | May 28, 2008, 11:02 am 11:02 am
Ya know Hillary the Unhinged had this race to lose…and she has lost through lying to people, race baiting and using the poor voters in MI and FL. While she thinks the DNC will save her she fails to realize these are the same people who said MI and FL could not vote early and if they did they lose their votes. Now she wants them to say “oh sorry” we were wrong. Not happening and so Hillary the Unhinged has decided to encite her supporters to the point that McCain wins in November. Yep she cares about the American people just as much as she cared about the voters in MI and FL in the beginning.
Posted by: Brian | May 28, 2008, 11:03 am 11:03 am
Average Joe:
You’re obviously talking about delegates voting at the convention in August.
Go ahead and state your lame case, but pledged delegates are NOT going to switch their votes from Obama to Clinton.
Or, you could go ahead and latch onto Bill Clinton’s lame argument that Ted Kennedy took it all the way to the convention in 1980 and nobody told him to quit.
Well, Bill Clinton seems to have trouble with the facts, just like his wife. People did urge Ted Kennedy to quit, and he didn’t. Guess what happened then? The Democratic Party was fractured and Ronald Reagan won the general election.
So, go ahead, and keep making your lame argument about PLEDGED DELEGATES voting at the convention.
Posted by: Mary | May 28, 2008, 11:04 am 11:04 am
Obama, once again, has taken the high road and ask his supporters to not rally at the DNC meeting.
Posted by: Brian | May 28, 2008, 11:04 am 11:04 am
ELECTIONS SHOULD BE FREE AND FAIR
–
wow… what a concept..
YES
so they were in LF and MI! according to their states representatives who signed off on the final results!
LET PEOPLE VOTE!
LET THE DELEGATES VOTE!
LET THE DEMOCRAIC PROCESS RUN ITS COURSE!
Posted by: Average Joe | May 28, 2008, 11:04 am 11:04 am
Ready on Day 1? More crow anyone?
Vetted with the most experience? More Crow?
The best candidate? Deep fried crow?
Honest? Baked crow?
Skeletons? Buffet of crow?
It’s a total CROW DOWN! Hotsauce?
Posted by: Jack | May 28, 2008, 11:05 am 11:05 am
Yep the people in charge in FL and Mi are actually the ones to blame for the problems those states are in now for holding faulty elections. Problem is that Hillary the Unhinged agreed with them just like she agreed with Bush to go to war. Poor judgement all the way around.
Posted by: Brian | May 28, 2008, 11:06 am 11:06 am
florida and mi did not count-if they counted from the beginning than obama would have won mi and won florida!!
Posted by: william | May 28, 2008, 11:07 am 11:07 am
Average Joe:
You’re obviously talking about delegates voting at the convention in August.
Go ahead and state your lame case, but pledged delegates are NOT going to switch their votes from Obama to Clinton.
—
excuse for asking this.. but that surely sounds like a threat to me..what exactly do you mean by that? and how exactly do you know that before the delegates actually VOTE??
LET PEOPLE VOTE!
LET THE DELEGATES VOTE!
LET THE DEMOCRAIC PROCESS RUN ITS COURSE!
Posted by: Average Joe | May 28, 2008, 11:07 am 11:07 am
The bottom line is no FL or MI counted and included, no voting.
Americans who feel this is a slap to ALL voters…..STAY HOME IN NOV…..
we do not count either!
Posted by: HP Boston | May 28, 2008, 11:08 am 11:08 am
average joe
just because you say something over and over doesnt make it true…
ill take time out of my day to correct your falacies yet again
he asked his supporters to NOT intervene with the DNC meeting
unlike HILLARY CLINTON
who told her supporters to intervene
i hope they all end up in jail
Posted by: bhrandon | May 28, 2008, 11:08 am 11:08 am
That latest Rasmussen Tracking polls show McCain with a 4% lead over Obama in the General Election.
They also show that McCain has the support of 83% of Republicans, and 43% of Unaffiliated voters.
Obama has only 70% of support from Democratic voters, and 40% from Unaffiliated voters.
Sounds like trouble for Obama to me.
Posted by: SandyB | May 28, 2008, 11:10 am 11:10 am
What states did Barack Obama win after the Reverend Wright/Bill Ayers/Bittergate controversies came to light? North Carolina and Oregon.
What states did Hillary Clinton win after these controversies? Pennsylvania by a large margin, Ohio by a large margin, West Virginia by a huge margin, Kentucky by a huge margin. Indiana by a few votes.
It is very possible that Obama is ahead in the “math” because Super Tuesday occurred before the Obama scandals started making national headlines. Since you seem to have the math at your fingertips, can you give us a post-Reverend Wright pledged delegate and popular vote breakdown? I’ve read several places that she has been beating him by a substantial margin since the Reverend Wright issue came to light but I don’t have a ready link to post.
Posted by: jlynne | May 28, 2008, 11:11 am 11:11 am
Average Joe:
Once again, you seem to have trouble with the facts.
Obama came out with a press release to all of his supporters asking them to NOT hold any protest at the committee meeting on Saturday.
He did that for PARTY UNITY. Why hasn’t Clinton come out to say the same? I’ll tell you why. Because she cares more about HERSELF than what’s good for the party.
Posted by: Mary | May 28, 2008, 11:12 am 11:12 am
Obama just picked up two more supper delegates !
Can you feel Hillary’s momentum ?
I guess those super D’s missed the poll that Clinton is talking about!
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 11:12 am 11:12 am
In his March 25, 2008 column in the NY Times, Obama supporting David Brooks ticks off this as a reason why Hillary should get out of the race, as a proud accomplishment of the Obama campaign:
“Second, Obama’s lawyers successfully prevented re-votes in Florida and Michigan.”
Posted by: hopesprings52 | May 28, 2008, 11:12 am 11:12 am
DUCK!
Hillary’s catching up!
Oops, sorry.
She’s so far back in the rear view mirror of this whole primary, we need a satellite to spot her.
Posted by: Jack | May 28, 2008, 11:15 am 11:15 am
It’s not the case of which party should win this fall. What’s more important is who is the most deserving, most qualified candidate who can deliver soutions to our issues, regardless of party affiliations. If Obama is representing the dem party then we’d rather have someone else who is qualified with experience and sound judgement. Obama is not the man for this delicate position.
Posted by: neil1785 | May 28, 2008, 11:17 am 11:17 am
“Obama, once again, has taken the high road and ask his supporters to not rally at the DNC meeting.”
If he didn’t fear them why would he have to ask them to stay away? Can’t they have a ‘positive uplifting gang fight’?
Obama knows his supporters are out of his control and if confronted will act as they have on these blogs. Once the nation sees that, his future is a bit of soggy velveeta on wheat.
We will not unite. We will not support the DNC’s rules. We will carry it all the way to November and if that means McCain is in the White House, so be it.
Posted by: len | May 28, 2008, 11:19 am 11:19 am
OBAMA GETS:
–Guam Senator and Democratic National Committeeman Ben C. Pangelinan
–Oregon Democratic Chair Meredith Wood Smith.
–Colorado Democratic Chair Pat Waak.
Today’s tally: Obama 3, Clinton 0.
*********
Guess the Super aren’t buying her arguments either.
Only 46 more to go!!
Posted by: jmc663 | May 28, 2008, 11:20 am 11:20 am
Average Joe:
Since you keep with the same rhetoric, I’m convinced that you are nothing more than a Republican in disguise.
Done.
Posted by: Mary | May 28, 2008, 11:20 am 11:20 am
news flash
FLORIDA COURT THROWS OUT CLINTON COURT CHALLANGE!!
THE PARTY SEAT THE RULES AND ONLY THE PARTY CAN CHANGE THEM!
: )
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 11:23 am 11:23 am
Len:
You’re the one sounding “a little out of control.”
I am an Obama supporter. But, if Hillary had won the nomination, I would have voted for her. Can you say the same? Obama supporters want unity. It doesn’t sound that way at all in the Clinton camp.
What we want most is to defeat John McCain.
Posted by: Mary | May 28, 2008, 11:24 am 11:24 am
Mary,
OBAMA IS BETTER THEN HILLARY and mcbush
Hillary is better than mcbush
true..
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 11:27 am 11:27 am
Obama has collected the personal data for his 1.8 million donors and is selling that data to the super delegates. Win, lose, or draw he walks away from this election with a $200 million asset — he is Washington’s newest and most powerful power broker.
The supers are not selecting him for the good of the nation — they are selecting him for their own political gain.
Posted by: jlynne | May 28, 2008, 11:29 am 11:29 am
because in this country we DO count the votes!
*********
Unless we DON’T. like the 238,000 uncommited voters in MI.
In that case, they don’t count, because, well…errr…they don’t.
ONLY votes for HRC count.
Get your FACTS right, Average Joe.
Posted by: jmc663 | May 28, 2008, 11:29 am 11:29 am
Hillary takes the low road,
Obama takes the high road,
and he’ll get to the
white House before her!
Posted by: rhbate | May 28, 2008, 11:32 am 11:32 am
Kate:
Appreciate your opinion.
Clinton was a great candidate who unfortunately ran a poor campaign. Now, though, it’s time to come together as one Democratic Party to defeat McCain.
Let’s hope for the future together!
Posted by: Mary | May 28, 2008, 11:32 am 11:32 am
Kate,
I see a DREAM TICKET for HRC
Clinton/Mugabe ’08
They both don’t like the RULES!!
Posted by: jmc663 | May 28, 2008, 11:33 am 11:33 am
I can’t vote for Barack Obama because of his stance on abortion, gun control, and the war on drugs. As much as the party may want unity, the party is asking me as a conservative democrat to do more than step out of my comfort zone — the party is asking me to support someone whose positions I find unconscionable. John McCain isn’t bad enough for me to do that.
Posted by: jlynne | May 28, 2008, 11:36 am 11:36 am
jmc663,
HAHAHAHAHA
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 11:37 am 11:37 am
“What we want most is to defeat John McCain.”
What we want most, Mary, is competent leadership for the sake of our country. Party allegiance went out the window when the DNC began its death march to the sea for that donor list.
Posted by: len | May 28, 2008, 11:38 am 11:38 am
FACT is that peopl voted uncomitted and that is the way they counted those votes :)
don’t like it huh?
*********
Soooo, HRC origianlly pledged, along with the other candidates to take her name off.
Then pulls the old switcherooo and keeps her name on.
Then UNOPPOSED, she “wins” MI, in it’s ILLEGAL election.
Then, pulls ANOTHER switcheroo, and wants to count the “illegal” election.
This playing “FAST and LOOSE” with the Rules is what we have had in the White House for the last 8 years.
WHY in the H#LL would I want to elect someone like that?
Clinton = Bush at this point
Posted by: jmc663 | May 28, 2008, 11:39 am 11:39 am
jilynee
so you wouldnt be voting for hillary either
thanks for the input
Posted by: bhrandon | May 28, 2008, 11:39 am 11:39 am
jlynne wrote:
As much as the party may want unity, the party is asking me as a conservative democrat to do more than step out of my comfort zone –
********
Thank you for the honest analysis. I respect your views.
I wish more bloggers would just debate the issues like you have.
My best to you.
Posted by: jmc663 | May 28, 2008, 11:41 am 11:41 am
When Bill Clinton came to the White House in1993, Democrats were a congressional majority, with 258 seats in the House. When he left in 2001, they were a minority with 46 fewer seats. There were 30 Democratic governors, when he arrived, 21 eight years later.
A recent ABC News/Washington Post poll found nearly 60 percent of voters think Clinton is dishonest and will lie whenever she thinks she needs to.
Posted by: rhbate | May 28, 2008, 11:42 am 11:42 am
neil,
Since Mugabe only counts the votes that were cast FOR him, the comparison is really quite telling.
Posted by: jmc663 | May 28, 2008, 11:48 am 11:48 am
average joe
does hillary support the vote?
all signs point to the fact that she was against it up until she needed it
what does that tell you about her?
how have the clintons been acting lately?
They are desperate, so desperate they are doing and saying anything to plead their case…
This was their election to lose, and they lost,
to borrow a line from bill
“and dont let anyone tell you differently”
Posted by: bhrandon | May 28, 2008, 11:48 am 11:48 am
YES, YES,YES
But within the confines of the ORIGINAL RULES, as spelled out at the beginning of the campaign.
—
wow.. we are making good progress here:
here is the thing: there is only ONE rule by which ‘people’ VOTE!
and that is NOT set by the DNC!
people VOTE based on the rules set by their states!
now, DELEGATES vote based on the DNC rules. and that is another story altogether.
on the DNC rules:
DELEGATES (both pledged and super) follow the DNC rules and they VOTE at the convention.
to date, there has be not a sinlge – not ONE – VOTE by any delegate!
so if you agree that people should VOTE – why not let them VOTE.
so,
1. Let all people finish voting without proclaiming that obama won until all the votes are in and COUNTED!
2. Let all DLEGATES vote at the Convention!
fair deal?
Posted by: Average Joe | May 28, 2008, 11:50 am 11:50 am
Average Joe wro. Let all people finish voting without proclaiming that obama won until all the votes are in and COUNTED!
2. Let all DLEGATES vote at the Convention!
fair deal?
*******
Agreed, 100%!
See, we are not that far apart.
Posted by: jmc663 | May 28, 2008, 11:53 am 11:53 am
I would vote for Hillary but not Barack Obama –
I believe a woman should have the right to choose whether to continue a pregnancy if it effects her health or if the child may have a birth defect. I think those are deeply personal choices best left to individuals not governments. I do not believe a woman should be able to have an abortion because she forgot to take the pill and the baby is an inconvenience — and I can’t stomach the thought of preventing a doctor from treating a newborn whose only crime is that he or she survived an abortion procedure. Hillary’s views are in line with mine. If the choice is between no abortion and allowing children to die because they are unwanted, I would choose no abortion. I have outlined why it won’t come to that in an earlier post … but if it does … it does. I would give up the right to choose before I would condone infantcide.
When Republicans run adds accusing democrats of being to liberal, I am part of their target market–and not just on the abortion issue. I do have a tendency to move to the right instead of the left. That’s why you have to have a centrist democrat to draw my vote. I don’t want to vote Republican this year — but if Obama is the candidate I won’t have a choice.
Actually, I am almost to the point where I think somebody like Al Gore should step in at the convention and take the nomination away from them both … that might be the only way to get to party unity this year.
Posted by: jlynne | May 28, 2008, 11:54 am 11:54 am
Average Joe wro. Let all people finish voting without proclaiming that obama won until all the votes are in and COUNTED!
2. Let all DLEGATES vote at the Convention!
fair deal?
*******
Agreed, 100%!
See, we are not that far apart.
–
cool! i didn’t think we were :))
Posted by: Average Joe | May 28, 2008, 11:55 am 11:55 am
Careful Average Joe,
I may start liking you after all.
:)
Posted by: jmc663 | May 28, 2008, 11:55 am 11:55 am
Average Joe
“and that is NOT set by the DNC!
people VOTE based on the rules set by their states!”
***********I POSTED THIS BEFORE BUT I GUESS YOU MISSED IT*******************
FLORIDA COURT RULES AGAINST CLINTON
JUST HAPPENED WATCH SOME CNN
The Floria Court Does not buy your argument.
Court Rules the National party sets the rules that all parties agree too.
Court says it doesnt have the atority or inclanation to seat the delegates!
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 12:03 pm 12:03 pm
***********I POSTED THIS BEFORE BUT I GUESS YOU MISSED IT*******************
FLORIDA COURT RULES AGAINST CLINTON
JUST HAPPENED WATCH SOME CNN
The Floria Court Does not buy your argument.
Court Rules the National party sets the rules that all parties agree too.
Court says it doesnt have the atority or inclanation to seat the delegates!
—
yeah, they talk about seating the delegates not the actual VOTES.
media is soooo croocked on this one..they try to muddle to waters between the popular vote and the delegate vote..they make it look like the delegates have voted already when they haven’t and that the popular vote doesn’t count – while that is the ONLy vote that we have now.
the DNC can do nothing about the actual number of VOTES in FL. That’s where teh argument regarding the popular vote comes from. and people in the media should report that popular vote in FL and MI – they have absolutely no reason not to report the way people cast their VOTE.
The DELEGATES wll make the ultimate judgement on that one at the Convention.
However, it is important to note that there is a precedent here:
The convention in 1984 (i think) had the same issue with iowa and new hampshire and they agreed to seat ALL delegates after a big huge fight.
Posted by: Average Joe | May 28, 2008, 12:11 pm 12:11 pm
You know you Dems had an opportunity to fix this little MI and FL problem right AFTER Gore lost to Bush. If you didn’t want SD’s and Pledged Delegates to be the final determination…if you wanted it to be all about the “popular vote”, you could have fixed it then. If you didn’t want to hold caucuses, you could have changed it then. Why didn’t you?
All this stuff Hillary is throwing out now to completely rewrite the primary rules based on her losing results is insane and flies in the face of what I call a democracy.
All you people crying to count all the votes need to look back at ALL the signatures TO NOT SEAT MI AND FL if they voted early. Those signatures included one Hillary Clinton’s signature. You need to understand that caucus states can’t just be tossed out because they didn’t go in her favor.
I suspect you didn’t change the rules up front because they have served your party well over the years. I suspect many thought it was no contest; thought Hillary would be coronated, crowned the democratic nominee. I suppose she didn’t insist that MI and FL not be penalized if they voted early because it would play right into her “thru by Super Tuesday” plan.
Guess what…America felt differently. We started hearing about this guy called Obama. Many of those who listened were Republicans and Independents. We started really paying attention to him and his message. We went to see him speak and found we DO WANT AND BELIEVE IN CHANGE. Some of us got to looking at the Republican lineup and decided maybe that wasn’t the game for us this time. And, we got out and started working for Obama, donating to him and voting for him. We started saying “not this time”. We didn’t want a couple of candidates shoved down our throats. We wanted more than a choice between bad and worse for President. We felt it was time to take back our nation and rid it of destructive special interests and lobbyists.
The democratic party has a problem that will get “fixed” Saturday. No one is going to be happy. FL and MI should have “protested” earlier…right after the penalities were announced. You knew the risk; you took the risk and now you want the rest of America to feel sorry for you? There are no “fixes” after an election is in progress, half over, three quarters over. The rules are the rules and anything less than enforcing them is a huge sign of weakness on the part of the Democratic party.
If the Democratic primary is up-ended by this pathetic woman and her husband, we have all lost a part of our freedom. It would not just be about FL and MI breaking the rules anymore. It would be that a fair and honest election cannot be held in America. I assure you if that happens, McCain WILL win.
Posted by: Former Republican Voter | May 28, 2008, 12:26 pm 12:26 pm
“You cannot violate the rules of the process and then expect to get forgiven for it,” Howard Dean
Judge Richard Lazarra sided with the party, saying political parties have the right to make their own rules.
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 12:27 pm 12:27 pm
“based on every analysis of every bit of research, and every poll that’s been taken and every state that a Democrat has to win – I am the stronger candidate against John McCain in the fall.”
“Really”
Yes! Really.
Jacksmith… Working Class :-)
Posted by: jacksmith | May 28, 2008, 12:30 pm 12:30 pm
Former Republican Voter,
The Party has to cut her lose shes going down and taking everyone with her its time to turn the page on the Clintons and toss the book in the bin crush the bin and burry it under some deep cement, I think !
Enough is enough !
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 12:32 pm 12:32 pm
Posted by: Mary | May 28, 2008 11:24:53 AM says,
“I am an Obama supporter. But, if Hillary had won the nomination, I would have voted for her. Can you say the same? Obama supporters want unity. It doesn’t sound that way at all in the Clinton camp.”
Mary, that’s baloney. You’re just saying that because you can see that Obama is almost getting a majority of support from superdelegates to win the dem nomination. If it’s otherwise, you would be saying this – it’s either Obama or McCain or stay home.
The democratic party is so divided, the position may end up with the republicans. Superdelegates are not seeing and deciding wisely…. OBAMA is NOT QUALIFIED regardless, period.
Posted by: neil1785 | May 28, 2008, 12:39 pm 12:39 pm
Maybe someone need to show Clinton that out of seven polls only one shows her in better standing the Barack Obama.
—
why do you need polls now? afraid to actually count the VOTEs?
count ALL the votes! and you will see who the winner of the popular vote is.
just wait another week or so and we will know!
no need for polls at this point – just look at the real numbers, state by state hillary can get more electoral votes than anyone else in the race. just count the VOTEs.
Posted by: Average Joe | May 28, 2008, 12:45 pm 12:45 pm
They will say HRC is another 4 years of Bill Clinton, and that aint good.
—
why not? those were the only times in recent memory when we as a country were actually paying off the national debt, creating wealth like never before in history, creating jobs, etc. etc.
i happen to think that having bill there is a good thing.
i don’t think we as a country can afford to pay for obama’s education. it will takje obama 5 years to just learn the ropes..
i mean, look at what he is doing now: engaging mccain in a national conversation?
why?
if nothing else, it is way premature because it really insults the intelligence of every single voter out there yet still to cast his/her vote.
that aside, engagin mccain at this point is really really stupid.. shows that obama does not have experience.
mccain was dying for a reason to get media attention – obama put that on a silver plate for him. so, mccain can raise some money right? he needs it. as he needs FREE publicity. sorry, not free because obama is paying for it :))
i mean, seriously, what was wrong with the clinto years? stock market was going throught the roof, we were paying off the national debt and every single counrty in the wrold wanted to be like us..
clinton went to war and won without one single casualty! in yugoslavia.
i want those times back! i really do. hillary can do it. obama needs time to be able to actually do what he wants. he will never tell you that but, think about it. if experience and knowledge doesn’t count, why do we send our kids to school for?
Posted by: Average Joe | May 28, 2008, 12:56 pm 12:56 pm
The Stock Market was high due to “Irrational Exhuburance”, then promptly TANKED. Remember the “dotcom bust”. It was falsely inflated.
When Clinton left, we were in a recession.
You can’t Cherry Pick history.
—
no you can’t!
let me tell what the ‘history’ is:
in april 2000 – last year clinton was in office rememeber! – greenspan came out (i still remember that day, was first week in april i think) and said: this economy is growing so fast (it was growing at 5% gdp rate at that point) that we cannot stop it and we have to do something about it.
and he did! he bumped up the interest rate by 0.5% – just like that.
now, i just happen to remember that year was also an election year and our darling bush was running around the country and ordering his troops that he could not win if the economy were to keep growing like that. he DID actually say that on national tv!
so his friends at goldman sachs came out and said SELL and his buddy republican greenspan went out and bumped up the interest rate as much as he could get away with at the time.
now now.. let’s do a bit of arithemtic here: how was the country in a recession if the gdp was over 5% in q1’2000 and over 3% in q2? that is a tough one.
but stop and think for a second. that election cycle even bush was talking abut what to do with the ‘surplus’ – nobody forecasted there wasn’t going to be one..
so you are right, You can’t Cherry Pick history.
Posted by: Average Joe | May 28, 2008, 1:09 pm 1:09 pm
Average Joe,
2000 is like 2008. “Maybe yes, maybe no”.
Here is a link on CNN about it from November 20, 2000. Right BEFORE the election Gore v. Bush
Posted by: jmc663 | May 28, 2008, 1:39 pm 1:39 pm
the article is another proof that tehre was no recession during 2000. they revised teh numbers after bush took office. btw, within two weeks in office bush changed clinton’s budget! nobody talks about that one! – so, the final year of the clinton era was drastically altered by bush himself.. i am not clear how he was allowed to do that but he did it.
as he did so many other things.
but my question to you was: forget what the pundits said at the time for a moment. the entire country was talking about the surplus for years to come!
how could that have been a recession?
while talking about trillions in surplus? i don’t think so. it doesn’t make sense.
btw, cnn still refuses to post the popular vote numbers not even to this day!
now, how can a media organization post the numbers of people who have not cast their votes yet but insist in not posting the numbers of the ACTUAL VOTES?
cnn has a different agenda and that is neither mine nor yours..same thing with msnbc..
media organizations have NO right not to tell the truth about the real numbers of this election!
in fact, by not posting the total number of actual votes to date, they are misleading the american people.
Posted by: Average Joe | May 28, 2008, 1:56 pm 1:56 pm
Many women who are avowed Hillary Clinton supporters are declaring they won’t vote for Barack Obama in the fall. I get the anger and the disappointment. But to quote SNL’s Amy Poehler and Seth Meyers: Really? You’d rather vote for John McCain, a man who has a 25-year history of voting against a woman’s right to choose? A man who over the last eight years that NARAL has released a pro-choice scorecard has received a 0 percent rating? A man whose campaign website says he believes Roe v. Wade “must be overturned”? A man who has vowed that, as president, he will be “a loyal and unswerving friend of the right to life movement”? Really?
Posted by: Kate | May 28, 2008, 2:58 pm 2:58 pm
i don’t know but obama’s view on how he counts the votes, on how he campaigns for the GE now – a slap in the face of all democrats! – and what his campaign tried to pull the awful morbid thing the other day when making hillary look like she was calling for some sort of assassination.. honestly, mccain has not done anything that comes even remotely close to all that.
i really don’t know this guy called obama and what he really wants to do – he talks one thing and does something totally different..tally undemocratic
he knows foa fact that there are still people who to vote out there. he knows for a fact that the convention is the place.
seriously, i don’t tnk he is going to make it.
some things you just don’t do..
Posted by: Average Joe | May 28, 2008, 3:09 pm 3:09 pm
Neil1785:
I would NEVER vote for John McCain so he can take away my right to choose.
Do not put words in my mouth. I am a supporter of the Democratic nominee–whoever that may be.
But, like it or not, it’s going to be Obama.
Posted by: Mary | May 28, 2008, 5:50 pm 5:50 pm
Am I missing something? Isn’t it the elected/appointed delegates from the states and territories that determine the candidate that each party will put forward to run for the Office of President of the US in the general election? Since when does popular vote have anything to do with this process. If I recall correctly in past elections the individual who received the majority of convention delegate votes was selected as the party candidate. I would imagine that Senator Clinton understood the process when she declared her intentions to run for the nomination so many months ago. Now that she is apparently not going to have the majority of delgate votes she wants to change the rules. I say that the time to establish the rules is before the game starts. It is to late to change the rules after all the votes have been cast and the delegates elected. Seems to me once all the primary elections have been completed, whoever has the designated majority of elected/appointed delegates is the party candidate. At that point any individuals not meeting the designated number should gracefully withdraw.
Posted by: R. Baker | May 28, 2008, 11:09 pm 11:09 pm
The most important reason I could not vote for Hillary is that she is a manifest liar. The second reason is that she lacks the necessary foreign policy experience, to wit, her experience in Bosnia. How could I respect a leader who is in a plane that makes a “corkscrew landing” all the while fighting off snipers and the only backup she has is her then twelve-year-old daughter, a guitar player and a comedian. She could have at least brought along a sax player.
Posted by: rhbate | May 29, 2008, 2:18 am 2:18 am
FIGURES DON’T LIE – BUT LIARS CAN FIGURE
Posted by: rhbate | May 29, 2008, 12:50 pm 12:50 pm