jasmine621
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-23-08 05:10 PM
Original message |
If ALL super delegates must follow the will of the people than by all means |
|
Every superdelagate in CA and MA must vote for Hillary. Obama folks can't have it both ways. It will have to be that way all over the nation.
|
angie_love
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-23-08 05:11 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Thats fine. If they do that then Obama still wins. So I think every superdelegate should do that. |
thesubstanceofdreams
(625 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-23-08 05:13 PM
Response to Original message |
2. If all SDs endorse whoever won in their state, then |
|
Obama will pick up a LOT more from Hillary than viceversa. Many many more SDs from states Obama won are supporting Clinton than the other way around. There was a calculation in the WSJ there other day (yes I know, the WSJ, but this is a simple fact, not opinion).
Be careful what you wish for. You have just made a huge point for Obama.
|
lapfog_1
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-23-08 05:15 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Is it a deal then? Whoever won each state gets the same proportion of Supers from that state as their proportion of the vote? Sort of Direct Representation? No funny apportionments or stuff, and if there is a "half Super delegate" left over, the candidates flip a coin for them.
Fair?
|
XemaSab
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-23-08 05:17 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Should it be state-by-state or district by district? |
|
'Cause if it's the latter, the delegates from San Francisco, Boston, and OKC among others will have to vote for Sen. Obama. :shrug:
|
Renew Deal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-23-08 05:17 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Ummmm..... You'd still lose by this measure. |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Mon May 06th 2024, 02:08 PM
Response to Original message |