tularetom
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-14-08 01:45 PM
Original message |
If Hillary gets the nomination after some backroom deal |
|
with superdelegates or Michigan/Florida delegates, and then loses in the GE, she won't be able to get elected dogcatcher in NY.
and Bill Clinton won't be able to show his face anywhere in democratic circles. He's already on thin ice.
IMO she may want to reconsider how hard she wants to pursue these possibilities especially the MI and FL "delegates".
|
JimGinPA
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-14-08 01:47 PM
Response to Original message |
1. It's All About The Clintons |
Benhurst
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-14-08 02:03 PM
Response to Original message |
2. The majority of Democrats who have voted, have voted for neither |
|
Edited on Thu Feb-14-08 02:12 PM by Benhurst
Clinton nor Obama. The rules, which they both agreed to, set up the requirement for a majority needed to secure the nomination. The contest was not set up as The Biggest Loser, but rather The Majority Rules.
If the calculations I have seen are correct, neither Clinton nor Obama will recieve the majority of votes by the time this is over.
I wish they had included a provision for a runoff between the top two candidates, but they didn't. And neither Clinton nor Obama objected.
No matter which of the top two candidates is selected, he or she will have been voted against by the majority of those Democrats who bothered to participate and will win only because of additional votes from Democratic functionaries known as super delegates.
Will the supporters of the candidate not selected feel cheated? Probably. Is the system a good one? I don't think so. But the DNC would never have listened to my long-held objections. They would have given a U.S. Senator a hearing. Neither candidate objected nor suggested alternatives, though. And neither, if not selected, has a leg to stand on when it comes to raising so-called moral objections.
The objections should have been raised last year, as I wish they had been done. As Oliver Hardy might have said, "It's a fine mess they've gotten us into."
|
dmallind
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-14-08 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
Since when were the rules that a nominee had to have 50%+ of the overall popular vote?
If you're talking about delegate count requirements then sure but remember that always included superdelegates, and there certainly will be a winner when they are counted who has a definite majority. It's not like the rules need a majority of delegates WITHOUT including superdelegates.
|
tularetom
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-14-08 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
4. What you say is all true but perception unfortunately becomes reality |
|
and the perception is (with some help from the media) that it is the Clinton campaign that is in the process of making sleazy deals with the superdelegates. And I think there is more than a perception that it is Clinton who is making an ex post facto attempt to seat the Michigan and Florida delegates that the DNC has already announced won't be seated.
Obama will not be the victim of perception if he is the nominee, at least not to the extent that Hillary will. And ironically she will become the poster girl for rigged elections. she should look beyond her ambition and think about whether or not she wants the office that badly.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu May 02nd 2024, 08:00 PM
Response to Original message |