Obama LOSES Another BIG State.

[Industrialsize]

Hey Indy...missed you too. :smile: I disagree, I believe the lead in the Popular Vote at the moment is argumentative. This is a very complicated race. The caucuses are unofficial. MI and FL are official because they have been certified. So, the candidates are making an argument of actual votes cast by Voters and Votes that are official at this point in the race - Clinton has an argument which SuperDelegates and upcoming Voters can consider. It is only a distinction of a lead because the popular vote has yet to be decided. It is one way to look at the popular vote in this Primary for two reasons...Florida and Michigan will count in the General Election and even Howard Dean is expecting the MI and FL delegations at the convention.

Granholm: Clinton really is popular vote leader

Posted by Peter Luke | mlive.com April 25, 2008 16:01PM

Gov. Jennifer Granholm backed up Hillary Clinton's claim to the national popular vote lead that relies on counting the disputed Michigan presidential primary. The Jan. 15 election produced 328,309 votes for Clinton, but none for Barack Obama, who removed his name from the ballot. Uncommitted received more than 238,000 votes.

Counting those results, and those from that other disputed election in Florida, gives Clinton a popular vote lead of 122,855. Add in unofficial caucus turnouts in Iowa, Nevada, Maine and Washington state where Obama won and the lead shrinks to 12,633, according to Friday's updated tally at the Web site Real Clear Politics. Give Obama Michigan's uncommitted vote and he regains his lead.

Clinton, pretty much unable to surpass Obama in pledged delegates won with nine contests to go, says a popular vote lead following Tuesday's victory in Pennsylvania counts just as much. So does Granholm.
"If you look at the popular vote, that's one aspect that the super delegates can consider in deciding who would be the strongest candidate in the general election," Granholm told reporters.

Granholm was asked why Clinton should receive credit for votes she
didn't campaign for. Adhering to party rules that barred campaigning in rogue states that violated the Democratic National Committee's nominating calendar, Clinton didn't step foot in the state prior to Jan. 15.
"She did come here and ask for votes in that she kept her name on the ballot," Granholm said. "She chose to compete here by at least leaving her name on the ballot and allowing people the opportunity to choose her.

(Obama) chose to take his name off the ballot."Clinton moreover, deserves those votes because back in March she supported a do-over election that was blocked by Obama's allies in the Legislature, Granholm said. That wasn't "fair for the voters of Michigan."

Granholm also doesn't see the nominating fight ending in a nasty battle at the Democratic National Convention in Denver over whether Michigan's disputed delegates are seated. Based on the Jan. 15 results, Clinton picked up at least a net 18 delegates in Michigan.

"In the end, truly I believe our delegates are going to be seated and
we're going to be seated properly before the convention," Granholm said. "Nobody wants to see a fight on the floor of the convention."
Except, she said, the media. And not Clinton, if it would land her the nomination?
Email Peter Luke: pluke@boothnewspapers.com

Trinity Trinity Trinity!..Now you know the superD's are a smart group. There is no way that they are going to buy into a popular vote metric that awards Clinton votes for Michcigan and ZERO votes for for Obama. Even a 5 year old knows that's right, NO MATTER WHAT THE REASON OBAMA TOOK HIS NAME OFF THE BALLOT.........I'm sure they are also NOT amused that Hillary leaves out the caucus states......You know.....some superD's are from caucus states.

 

[Trinity]

Did I see someone actually try to claim a popular vote lead for Hillary based on including the results of the Michigan primary?
Didn't Hillary herself justify her leaving her name on the ballot by saying "I think everyone knows it's not going to count"?
That was not a real election, it was a farce. If you want to include Michigan in this process, then they need to hold a legitimate election, where people know they can expect their vote to count, not where it is ignored until the trailing candidate decides it would help their argument.

Yes, Hillary did justify leaving her name on the ballot by saying that.

However, that is not all Sen. Clinton said. The election was neither a farce nor a "Beauty Contest" as Obama delights in referring to MI and FL votes. Obama is clearly out of touch.

MI and FL held legitimate elections that have been certified. The DNC sanctioned the states by stripping their delegations to the convention. The people voted however their votes have not been counted in the Primary. At the time Sen. Clinton had the interview, she was defending herself for staying on the ballot. Which was what Obama wanted...Sen. Clinton to look bad for remaining on the ballot alone. That is why Obama worked to get the other candidates to remove their names along with him.

Sen. Clinton's statements clearly acknowledge why she signed the Four State Pledge - recognizing the historical honor of the traditional first primaries. Her statements also clearly acknowledge that she understood that the DNC sanctioned MI and FL for breaking the rules. At that time, the votes would not count however, by leaving her name on the ballot she was keeping her hat in the ring for the future...and even had to defend herself to do it! Obama was unwise.

Clinton Defends Michigan Ballot Stand
[SIZE=-1]The Associated Press
Thursday, October 11, 2007; 4:21 PM[/SIZE]

CONCORD, N.H. -- Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton said it would be foolish to take her name off Michigan's primary ballot and sacrifice her chances against the Republican nominee.

As the only top tier Democrat remaining on Michigan ballot, Clinton is all but guaranteed to win the state's primary. Michigan is tentatively slated to send 156 delegates to the 2008 Democratic National Convention, but national party officials have threatened to take away those delegates if the state persists in holding its primary on Jan. 15.

"It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything," Clinton said Thursday during an interview on New Hampshire Public Radio's call-in program, "The Exchange." "But I just personally did not want to set up a situation where the Republicans are going to be campaigning between now and whenever, and then after the nomination, we have to go in and repair the damage to be ready to win Michigan in 2008."

Speaking in the first primary state, Clinton said she understands concerns about her refusal. Rivals Barack Obama, John Edwards, Bill Richardson and Joe Biden took their names off Michigan's Jan. 15 primary ballot this week, and Michigan's hope for nominating clout all but evaporated.

Clinton's comment reflects an optimism she will win her party's nomination to face the Republican nominee in November 2008. She said any snub to Michigan could hurt her _ and all Democrats' _ chances to defeat the Republicans there.

Clinton was prompted by a caller who said, "It strikes me that this is politics as usual, where politicians say one thing and do something else."
Clinton brushed aside the comment.

"I did not believe it was fair to just say, 'Goodbye Michigan' and not take into account the fact we're going to have to win Michigan if we're going to be in the White House in January 2009," she said.

The Democratic presidential candidates already had pledged not to campaign in Michigan because the state had broken Democratic National Committee rules by scheduling its primary ahead of Feb. 5. The rules ban states from holding their 2008 contests before Feb. 5, except Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina.

The candidates are allowed to visit Michigan to raise money and can send their spouses to campaign, but they can't run advertisements, hold rallies or do most of the other things that would help give them a leg up on their opponents.

Clinton said she wouldn't campaign there, but isn't about to hurt her own chances.

"If you look at the some of the states we have to win, the margins have been narrow. And it wasn't, in my view, meaningful, but I'm not going to say there's an absolute, total ignoring of the people in all these other states that won't come back to haunt us if we're not careful about it."

© 2007 The Associated Press​

 

[Trinity]

Trinity Trinity Trinity!..Now you know the superD's are a smart group. There is no way that they are going to buy into a popular vote metric that awards Clinton votes for Michcigan and ZERO votes for for Obama. Even a 5 year old knows that's right, NO MATTER WHAT THE REASON OBAMA TOOK HIS NAME OFF THE BALLOT.........I'm sure they are also NOT amused that Hillary leaves out the caucus states......You know.....some superD's are from caucus states.

Obama and his six year old and You Indy, and your five year old...lol. Sorry but the fact of the matter is Obama did take his name off the ballot and by doing so created a mess for himself, disenfranchised his own supporters in Michigan by not allowing them to vote for him and then proceeded to block a revote. So, basically this popular vote count at this moment (which is only a lead count) is fact. Obama has no votes in Michigan by his own actions. Clinton still has a lead with the caucuses included with MI and FL. It's one way to consider the popular vote count according to Real Clear Politics.

Super-Delegates are smart people and looking at the different counts is highlighting like a bright Neon Sign Obama's foolish mistakes (taking his name off the ballot), the need to count MI and FL (got to have those states in November) and how Obama was actually the candidate that never wanted them to count in the first place because he knew he couldn't win them (plus Obama blocked a revote).

 

[Shelby]

If the Clinton machine steals this nomination I'm gonna laugh my ass off at the chaos that ensues.

Talk about unelectable.

On the other hand I take it back. Barack Obama will no doubt do all in his power to quell the storm. I'm sure that's part of what the shrew counts on as she mercilessly attacks.

 

[tripod]

trinity, you're blind support for Hillary has made you unable to see the crux of the matter. Obama did NOT make a mistake by taking his name off of the ballot in Michigan, he did the RIGHT thing. He didn't make a mistake by not campaigning in Florida, he did the RIGHT thing.

Florida and Michigan should have NEVER moved up their primaries... they are the ones that made a mistake and the people of Florida and Michigan made an even bigger prior mistake when they elected the officials in charge of the elections to office.

The voters of FLA and MI made a choice and must now reap the effects of that said choice.

Americans must be careful who they elect to office.

You and the other Hillary supporters are clinging to this because you are unfair, little spoiled brats who want to win at all cost and see this as a potential avenue... you see this as the only opportunity for your candidate to win.

I actually am beginning to hate Hillary and her supporters. You are so idealistic that you are gonna give your candidate the go ahead to wage an even more bloody war with Iran and spark the descent of the Western world as a result of that catastrophic decision. By electing her, you would be guaranteeing that that would happen.

Do you have something against Western Civilization? Why would you give her the ability to ruin it... SHE IS TOO STUPID TO KNOW WHAT A WAR WITH IRAN WOULD MEAN... or maybe she isn't? Maybe she WANTS to destroy out current way of life? Maybe she WANTS a perpetual police state as the United States of America and $1000 a barrel oil? I have no idea why she would... in fact, I have no idea why you would Trinity?

Why do you wan to ruin our country and subsequent way of life?

 

[Industrialsize]

Obama and his six year old and You Indy, and your five year old...lol. Sorry but the fact of the matter is Obama did take his name off the ballot and by doing so created a mess for himself, disenfranchised his own supporters in Michigan by not allowing them to vote for him and then proceeded to block a revote. So, basically this popular vote count at this moment (which is only a lead count) is fact. Obama has no votes in Michigan by his own actions. Clinton still has a lead with the caucuses included with MI and FL. It's one way to consider the popular vote count according to Real Clear Politics.

Super-Delegates are smart people and looking at the different counts is highlighting like a bright Neon Sign Obama's foolish mistakes (taking his name off the ballot), the need to count MI and FL (got to have those states in November) and how Obama was actually the candidate that never wanted them to count in the first place because he knew he couldn't win them (plus Obama blocked a revote).

Keep saying it, but no one of any intelligence believes Hillary is leading the popular vote...too many ifs. If you count florida, IF you count Michigan, and the big one, IF you give Obama zero votes for MICHIGAN. Like I said, the superd's ain't stupid and won't be hoodwinked and bamboozled by "creative" vote massaging.

OPTIMAL CLINTON SCENARIO
North Carolina (turnout proportion similar to Virginia)
Obama (54&#37 - 580,932
Clinton (46%) - 494,868
Indiana (turnout proportion similar to Missouri, much higher than Tennessee)
Obama (48%) - 385,008
Clinton (52%) - 422,293
West Virginia (turnout proportion similar to Mississippi)
Obama (38%) - 100,193
Clinton (62%) - 163,474
Oregon (turnout proportion similar to Connecticut)
Obama (54%) - 186,391
Clinton (46%) - 158,777
Kentucky (turnout proportion similar to Connecticut)
Obama (36%) - 124,200
Clinton (64%) - 220,800
Puerto Rico (turnout proportion similar to Connecticut)
Obama (46%) - 158,700
Clinton (54%) - 186,300
South Dakota (very low turnout)
Obama (54%) - 27,000
Clinton (46%) - 23,000
Montana (very low turnout)
Obama (54%) - 37,800
Clinton (46%) - 32,200
FINAL RESULTS
Now based on that, here are the final results based on various metrics, three of them which I would consider overly favorable to Clinton:
Raw Total (no MI/FL, no IA/ME/NV/WA)
Obama - 16,166,608
Clinton - 15,616,905
Winner: Obama by 549,703
The Clinton Metric (add MI/FL, no IA/ME/NV/WA)
Obama - 16,742,822
Clinton - 16,816,207
Winner: Clinton by 73,385
Clinton Favorable Metric (add MI/FL and IA/ME/NV/WA estimates)
Obama - 17,076,906
Clinton - 17,040,069
Winner: Obama by 36,837
Clinton Semi-Favorable Metric (as above, w/ 60% of MI’s "Uncommitted" to Obama)
Obama - 17,219,807
Clinton - 17,040,069
Winner: Obama by 179,738

 

[Trinity]

trinity, you're blind support for Hillary has made you unable to see the crux of the matter. Obama did NOT make a mistake by taking his name off of the ballot in Michigan, he did the RIGHT thing. He didn't make a mistake by not campaigning in Florida, he did the RIGHT thing.

Florida and Michigan should have NEVER moved up their primaries... they are the ones that made a mistake and the people of Florida and Michigan made an even bigger prior mistake when they elected the officials in charge of the elections to office.

The voters of FLA and MI made a choice and must now reap the effects of that said choice.

Americans must be careful who they elect to office.

You and the other Hillary supporters are clinging to this because you are unfair, little spoiled brats who want to win at all cost and see this as a potential avenue... you see this as the only opportunity for your candidate to win.

I actually am beginning to hate Hillary and her supporters. You are so idealistic that you are gonna give your candidate the go ahead to wage an even more bloody war with Iran and spark the descent of the Western world as a result of that catastrophic decision. By electing her, you would be guaranteeing that that would happen.

Do you have something against Western Civilization? Why would you give her the ability to ruin it... SHE IS TOO STUPID TO KNOW WHAT A WAR WITH IRAN WOULD MEAN... or maybe she isn't? Maybe she WANTS to destroy out current way of life? Maybe she WANTS a perpetual police state as the United States of America and $1000 a barrel oil? I have no idea why she would... in fact, I have no idea why you would Trinity?

Why do you wan to ruin our country and subsequent way of life?

I do not have blind support for Hillary Clinton. You have your support and I have mine. Obama definitely made a critical error in removing his name from the Michigan ballot. And "doing the right thing" was NOT apart of Obama's reasoning only the "appearance."

CNN's Senior Political Analyst Bill Schneider suggested the Democrats who withdrew may have calculated that it was simply in their best political interest to do so.​

"If there's no campaign, the candidate most likely to win Michigan is Hillary Clinton," Schneider said. "Her Democratic rivals don't want a Clinton victory in Michigan to count. They want Iowa and New Hampshire, where they have a better chance of stopping Clinton, to count more." ​

But Clinton may also benefit from staying and winning even a non-competitive primary, Schneider said.​

"It will earn her a lot of good will in Michigan if the state schedules a later caucus to pick its delegates," he said. -CNN​

Obama campaigned in Florida by not pulling a national ad that aired in Florida. Michigan Democratic elected officials moved up their primary, however the voters do not deserve to be punished for what the legislature did. Florida Democrats did NOT move up their primary. Florida Republicans moved up the primary and Democrats tried to stop them but were out voted in a Republican Controlled Legislature. The Republican plan in Florida was so spiteful that they only moved the Primary up 1 week before the required dated. They moved the Primary to Jan. 29 instead of after February 5th. So, No. Florida Democrats - Voters and Legislators do not deserve to be punished or sanctioned by the DNC. The DNC should not disenfranchise the voters of MI either if they want that state to help them in November. Howard Dean and the DNC should have sanctioned MI in a fair way to begin with instead of hampering the Democratic race in this close Primary. The RNC made a fair sanction. The Democratic Primary is harder due to proportional allocation therefore the sanction should have taken that into account.


Nobody wants a War anywhere on the planet. However, living in the real world, we have to deal with the real threats that exist.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has repeatedly called the Holocaust a "myth" and said Israel should be "wiped off the map" and its Jews returned to Europe. The Associated Press​

I do not want Ahmadinejad or Iran having nuclear weapons. I agree with Sen. Clinton:

"U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal: We cannot, we should not, we must not permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons," the Democrat told a crowd of Israel supporters. "In dealing with this threat ... no option can be taken off the table." The Associated Press.​

Sen. Clinton has been in the senate for 7 years and serves on the Armed Services Committee, the Emerging Threats and Capabilities Sub Committee, Readiness and Management Support Sub Committee, and Sen. Clinton has been endorsed by 34 flag rank military officers.


Sen. Clinton said it best in regards to Iran:

"We need to use every tool at our disposal, including diplomatic and economic in addition to the threat and use of military force," she said. The Associated Press​

 

[Industrialsize]

I do not have blind support for Hillary Clinton. You have your support and I have mine. Obama definitely made a critical error in removing his name from the Michigan ballot. And "doing the right thing" was NOT apart of Obama's reasoning only the "appearance."

CNN's Senior Political Analyst Bill Schneider suggested the Democrats who withdrew may have calculated that it was simply in their best political interest to do so.​

"If there's no campaign, the candidate most likely to win Michigan is Hillary Clinton," Schneider said. "Her Democratic rivals don't want a Clinton victory in Michigan to count. They want Iowa and New Hampshire, where they have a better chance of stopping Clinton, to count more." ​

But Clinton may also benefit from staying and winning even a non-competitive primary, Schneider said.​

"It will earn her a lot of good will in Michigan if the state schedules a later caucus to pick its delegates," he said. -CNN​

Obama campaigned in Florida by not pulling a national ad that aired in Florida. Michigan Democratic elected officials moved up their primary, however the voters do not deserve to be punished for what the legislature did. Florida Democrats did NOT move up their primary. Florida Republicans moved up the primary and Democrats tried to stop them but were out voted in a Republican Controlled Legislature. The Republican plan in Florida was so spiteful that they only moved the Primary up 1 week before the required dated. They moved the Primary to Jan. 29 instead of after February 5th. So, No. Florida Democrats - Voters and Legislators do not deserve to be punished or sanctioned by the DNC. The DNC should not disenfranchise the voters of MI either if they want that state to help them in November. Howard Dean and the DNC should have sanctioned MI in a fair way to begin with instead of hampering the Democratic race in this close Primary. The RNC made a fair sanction. The Democratic Primary is harder due to proportional allocation therefore the sanction should have taken that into account.


Nobody wants a War anywhere on the planet. However, living in the real world, we have to deal with the real threats that exist.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has repeatedly called the Holocaust a "myth" and said Israel should be "wiped off the map" and its Jews returned to Europe. The Associated Press​

I do not want Ahmadinejad or Iran having nuclear weapons. I agree with Sen. Clinton:

"U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal: We cannot, we should not, we must not permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons," the Democrat told a crowd of Israel supporters. "In dealing with this threat ... no option can be taken off the table." The Associated Press.​

Sen. Clinton has been in the senate for 7 years and serves on the Armed Services Committee, the Emerging Threats and Capabilities Sub Committee, Readiness and Management Support Sub Committee, and Sen. Clinton has been endorsed by 34 flag rank military officers.


Sen. Clinton said it best in regards to Iran:

"We need to use every tool at our disposal, including diplomatic and economic in addition to the threat and use of military force," she said. The Associated Press​

Actually when asked what she would do if Iran nuked Israel, she said"We would OBLITERATE them".....a bit too quick on the draw. First, Israel has its OWN NUKES. 2nd of all, in this world talking of Obliterating another country is not a good thing. Aren't there innocent civilians who would be obliterated? Her Obliterate comment seems to have slipped under the radar in the USA but it did NOT go un-noticed by world leaders and to a one, they were not pleased. This includes our European and Middle eastern allies.

 

[Trinity]

Keep saying it, but no one of any intelligence believes Hillary is leading the popular vote...too many ifs. If you count florida, IF you count Michigan, and the big one, IF you give Obama zero votes for MICHIGAN. Like I said, the superd's ain't stupid and won't be hoodwinked and bamboozled by "creative" vote massaging.

OPTIMAL CLINTON SCENARIO
North Carolina (turnout proportion similar to Virginia)
Obama (54%) - 580,932
Clinton (46%) - 494,868
Indiana (turnout proportion similar to Missouri, much higher than Tennessee)
Obama (48%) - 385,008
Clinton (52%) - 422,293
West Virginia (turnout proportion similar to Mississippi)
Obama (38%) - 100,193
Clinton (62%) - 163,474
Oregon (turnout proportion similar to Connecticut)
Obama (54%) - 186,391
Clinton (46%) - 158,777
Kentucky (turnout proportion similar to Connecticut)
Obama (36%) - 124,200
Clinton (64%) - 220,800
Puerto Rico (turnout proportion similar to Connecticut)
Obama (46%) - 158,700
Clinton (54%) - 186,300
South Dakota (very low turnout)
Obama (54%) - 27,000
Clinton (46%) - 23,000
Montana (very low turnout)
Obama (54%) - 37,800
Clinton (46%) - 32,200
FINAL RESULTS
Now based on that, here are the final results based on various metrics, three of them which I would consider overly favorable to Clinton:
Raw Total (no MI/FL, no IA/ME/NV/WA)
Obama - 16,166,608
Clinton - 15,616,905
Winner: Obama by 549,703
The Clinton Metric (add MI/FL, no IA/ME/NV/WA)
Obama - 16,742,822
Clinton - 16,816,207
Winner: Clinton by 73,385
Clinton Favorable Metric (add MI/FL and IA/ME/NV/WA estimates)
Obama - 17,076,906
Clinton - 17,040,069
Winner: Obama by 36,837
Clinton Semi-Favorable Metric (as above, w/ 60% of MI’s "Uncommitted" to Obama)
Obama - 17,219,807
Clinton - 17,040,069
Winner: Obama by 179,738

Thanks for posting that Indy. It's cool. I don't believe there is any hoodwinking going on. Just legitimate arguments being made for the Super Delegates to consider. Notice on the Real Clear Politics link that Obama never leads by more than 2.1% and that's based on an estimate of popular vote in the caucuses. Awarding 60% of uncommitted to Obama is "favorable" to Clinton to an Obama supporter but to a Clinton supporter that is generous to Obama. He should have never made that critical error. Even highly regarded Political Analysts like Bill Schneider of CNN agree.

 

[Industrialsize]

But come June 3rd, 0.1% will be all that's necessary(and 1 candidate's path is MUCH simpler)

 

[Trinity]

Actually when asked what she would do if Iran nuked Israel, she said"We would OBLITERATE them".....a bit too quick on the draw. First, Israel has its OWN NUKES. 2nd of all, in this world talking of Obliterating another country is not a good thing. Aren't there innocent civilians who would be obliterated? Her Obliterate comment seems to have slipped under the radar in the USA but it did NOT go un-noticed by world leaders and to a one, they were not pleased. This includes our European and Middle eastern allies.

Not quite Indy:

In response to a question on what she would do if the Islamic republic were to attack US ally Israel, Clinton told ABC News: "I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran.​

"In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them."​

All presidents must consider innocent lives in a time of War, however I believe she was discussing should a threshold be crossed that has consequences she was giving Iran pause to know and understand those consequences.

"My view is that the United States' special relationship with Israel obligates us to be helpful to them in the search for credible partners with whom they can make peace, while also supporting Israel in defending itself against enemies sworn to its destruction," - Barack Obama

"The world must work to stop Iran's uranium enrichment program and prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. It is far too dangerous to have nuclear weapons in the hands of a radical theocracy. And while we should take no option, including military action, off the table, sustained and aggressive diplomacy combined with tough sanctions should be our primary means to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons." - Barack Obama

 

[tripod]

CNN's Senior Political Analyst Bill Schneider suggested the Democrats who withdrew may have calculated that it was simply in their best political interest to do so.​

"If there's no campaign, the candidate most likely to win Michigan is Hillary Clinton," Schneider said. "Her Democratic rivals don't want a Clinton victory in Michigan to count. They want Iowa and New Hampshire, where they have a better chance of stopping Clinton, to count more." ​

But Clinton may also benefit from staying and winning even a non-competitive primary, Schneider said.​

"It will earn her a lot of good will in Michigan if the state schedules a later caucus to pick its delegates," he said. -CNN​

Who the hell is Bill Schneider and why should I give a crap what he says? How do I know that he is not a Clinton operative and you are cleverly quoting him to bolster your opinion?
​

Obama campaigned in Florida by not pulling a national ad that aired in Florida. Michigan Democratic elected officials moved up their primary, however the voters do not deserve to be punished for what the legislature did. Florida Democrats did NOT move up their primary. Florida Republicans moved up the primary and Democrats tried to stop them but were out voted in a Republican Controlled Legislature. The Republican plan in Florida was so spiteful that they only moved the Primary up 1 week before the required dated. They moved the Primary to Jan. 29 instead of after February 5th. So, No. Florida Democrats

That was a real cool explanation of what happened, I have never read it in that detail. Rules were broken and the democrats in Florida need to work a little harder to elect honest members of the state legislation. Rules were broken, I don't give a shit who broke them. You play, you pay.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has repeatedly called the Holocaust a "myth" and said Israel should be "wiped off the map" and its Jews returned to Europe. The Associated PressI do not want Ahmadinejad or Iran having nuclear weapons. I agree with Sen. Clinton:

"U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal: We cannot, we should not, we must not permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons," the Democrat told a crowd of Israel supporters. "In dealing with this threat ... no option can be taken off the table." The Associated Press.​

Sen. Clinton said it best in regards to Iran:

"We need to use every tool at our disposal, including diplomatic and economic in addition to the threat and use of military force," she said. The Associated Press​

​

YOU DON'T HAVE ANY KNOWLEDGE WHATSOEVER THAT IRAN IS BUILDING A NUCLEAR WEAPON!!!!! WHERE DO YOU GET OFF WITH SAYING THAT? ISRAEL IS AND HAS BEEN A ROGUE STATE FOR YEARS... THEY HAVE AN UNDISCLOSED NUCLEAR PROGRAM THAT ISN'T EVEN UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE IEAA. ISRAEL ARE THE ONES WHO ARE IRAN'S ENEMY, NOT THE US. WHAT THE FUCK HAS IRAN EVER DONE TO AMERICA? THEIR OVERTHROW OF THE SHAH IN 1979 WAS A BLOWBACK IN RESPONSE TO OUR COUP THAT THE CIA SPONSORED IN 1953 TO OVERTHROW THEIR DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED LEADER. AMERICA HAS ACTED LIKE SEVERE ASSHOLES TO IRAN EVER SINCE 1979, LIKE SPOILED BRATS WHO ARE PISSED THAT OUR DESPOTIC PUPPET WAS REMOVED FROM OFFICE AND WILL DO EVERYTHING IN OUR POWER TO DESTROY THEM.

IRAN HAS BEEN PREPARING FOR AN AMERICAN ASSAULT FOR 7 YEARS. THEY HAVE BEEN DIGGING IN AND ARMING THEMSELVES WITH THE REQUIRED WEAPONS AND SUPPLIES TO WAGE A LONG AND BLOODY GUERILLA STYLE INSURGENCY. IT IS A GODDAMN TRAP!!!!! OIL WILL SURGE TO $1000 A BARREL AND TERRORISM WILL VISIT THE WEST LIKE IT HAS NEVER SEEN BEFORE.

AND YOU AND THE OTHER HILLARY SUPPORTERS WANT TO BE ALL JINGOISTIC ABOUT THE ISSUE AND BOLDLY DENY THE FACTS IN FAVOR OF YOUR SICK SCENARIO. YOU QUOTE THAT CRAZY LITTLE GUY WHO IS THEIR PRESIDENT WITH GLEE BECAUSE IT SUPPORTS YOUR ERRONEOUS REALITY.
AMERICA HAS ZERO INTELLIGENCE ON IRAN... FUCKING ZERO.

ONE THING WE DO KNOW IS THAT AMERICA ALSO FUNDED IRAQ IN THEIR AGGRESSIVE WAR AGAINST IRAN IN 1980 AND THAT IRAN WERE THE GOOD GUYS WHO WERE DEFENDING THEMSELVES AGAINST AN ILLEGAL LAND GRAB BY SADDAM HUSSEIN, REMEMBER HIM?

IRAN HASN'T ATTACKED ANOTHER COUNTRY IN OVER 300 YEARS. DID YOU EVEN KNOW THAT? DO YOU CARE?

WE NEED TO OPEN UP RELATIONS WITH IRAN AND END OUR AGGRESSIVE STANCE AGAINST THEM, IT IS RIDICULOUS.

FUCK ISRAEL TOO, THEY DO NOTHING BUT HARM OUR NATIONAL SECURITY WITH THEIR ILLEGAL SETTLEMENTS AND REPRESSION OF THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE.THEN THEY WANT OUR MILITARY TO TAKE OUT IT'S ENEMIES WITH AMERICAN CITIZEN'S TAX DOLLARS... OH, AND THEY ARE THE LARGEST RECIPIENT OF FOREIGN AID!!!!! WE GIVE MORE MONEY TO A VIOLENT FIRST WORLD COUNTRY THEN WE DO TO HARMLESS THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES. IT IS AN ABOMINATION AND NOT ANYWHERE NEAR A SENSIBLE FOREIGN POLICY.


​

 

[Industrialsize]

Not quite Indy:

In response to a question on what she would do if the Islamic republic were to attack US ally Israel, Clinton told ABC News: "I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran.​

"In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them."​

All presidents must consider innocent lives in a time of War, however I believe she was discussing should a threshold be crossed that has consequences she was giving Iran pause to know and understand those consequences.

"My view is that the United States' special relationship with Israel obligates us to be helpful to them in the search for credible partners with whom they can make peace, while also supporting Israel in defending itself against enemies sworn to its destruction," - Barack Obama

"The world must work to stop Iran's uranium enrichment program and prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. It is far too dangerous to have nuclear weapons in the hands of a radical theocracy. And while we should take no option, including military action, off the table, sustained and aggressive diplomacy combined with tough sanctions should be our primary means to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons." - Barack Obama

I'm wary of any candidate that has the word "OBLITERATE" in their vocabulary.

 

[Industrialsize]

The history of Michigan. It seems in other elections Mr Mcauliffe has had other ideas about seating the Michigan delegation when they went outside of the Primary window. This is a conversation between Carl Levin and terry McAuliffe as documented inMr. McAuliffe's own book:

"I'm going outside the primary window," [Michigan Sen. Carl Levin] told me definitively.

"If I allow you to do that, the whole system collapses," I said. "We will have chaos. I let you make your case to the DNC, and we voted unanimously and you lost."

He kept insisting that they were going to move up Michigan on their own, even though if they did that, they would lose half their delegates. By that point Carl and I were leaning toward each other over a table in the middle of the room, shouting and dropping the occasional expletive.

"You won't deny us seats at the convention," he said.

"Carl, take it to the bank," I said. "They will not get a credential. The closest they'll get to Boston will be watching it on television. I will not let you break this entire nominating process for one state. The rules are the rules. If you want to call my bluff, Carl, you go ahead and do it."

We glared at each other some more, but there was nothing much left to say. I was holding all the cards and Levin knew it.

 

[Trinity]

I'm wary of any candidate that has the word "OBLITERATE" in their vocabulary.

I'm not. I'm wary of Tripod.

The history of Michigan. It seems in other elections Mr Mcauliffe has had other ideas about seating the Michigan delegation when they went outside of the Primary window. This is a conversation between Carl Levin and terry McAuliffe as documented inMr. McAuliffe's own book:

"I'm going outside the primary window," [Michigan Sen. Carl Levin] told me definitively.

"If I allow you to do that, the whole system collapses," I said. "We will have chaos. I let you make your case to the DNC, and we voted unanimously and you lost."

He kept insisting that they were going to move up Michigan on their own, even though if they did that, they would lose half their delegates. By that point Carl and I were leaning toward each other over a table in the middle of the room, shouting and dropping the occasional expletive.

"You won't deny us seats at the convention," he said.

"Carl, take it to the bank," I said. "They will not get a credential. The closest they'll get to Boston will be watching it on television. I will not let you break this entire nominating process for one state. The rules are the rules. If you want to call my bluff, Carl, you go ahead and do it."

We glared at each other some more, but there was nothing much left to say. I was holding all the cards and Levin knew it.

"Move your primary too early," Terry McAuliffe warned, "and Michigan will lose half its delegates to the 2004 Democratic convention."

Again, Howard Dean and the DNC should have never sanctioned Michigan by stripping their entire delegation and hampering this tight Democratic Primary against the easier won Republican Primary which is winner-take-all rather than complicated proportional allocation. Now, Howard Dean and the DNC will have to revisit that mistake and correct it for the sake of the party.

The only thing the excerpt you posted from McAuliffe's book proves is that McAuliffe was DNC chair and he has unique experience with DNC Rules and how they work. Sen. Clinton and her people, many of whom have worked in the DNC play by the rules. Dean had the leadership skills to make sure his problem never happened. McAuliffe made sure his "chaos" never occurred in 2004 in Boston. Dean's lack of leadership created a mess and now Dean and the DNC have to fix it.

Without a revote, the DNC may choose to seat the delegation.

 

[playainda336]

Again, Howard Dean and the DNC should have never sanctioned Michigan by stripping their entire delegation and hampering this tight Democratic Primary against the easier won Republican Primary which is winner-take-all rather than complicated proportional allocation. Now, Howard Dean and the DNC will have to revisit that mistake and correct it for the sake of the party.

Maybe Hillary should've run Republican.

 

[HazelGod]

Maybe Hillary should've run Republican.

If she had, she'd be the Democratic nominee already... :biggrin1:

 

[Industrialsize]

This is where Hillary is DANGEROUS:
Hillary Strangelove

April 27, 2008
AMERICANS have learned to take with a grain of salt much of the rhetoric in a campaign like the current Democratic donnybrook between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Still, there are some red lines that should never be crossed. Clinton did so Tuesday morning, the day of the Pennsylvania primary, when she told ABC's "Good Morning America" that, if she were president, she would "totally obliterate" Iran if Iran attacked Israel.







This foolish and dangerous threat was muted in domestic media coverage. But it reverberated in headlines around the world.
Responding with understatement to a question in the British House of Lords, the foreign minister responsible for Asia, Lord Mark Malloch-Brown, said of Clinton's implication of a mushroom cloud over Iran: "While it is reasonable to warn Iran of the consequences of it continuing to develop nuclear weapons and what those real consequences bring to its security, it is probably not prudent in today's world to threaten to obliterate any other country and in many cases civilians resident in such a country."
A less restrained reaction came from an editorial in the Saudi-based paper Arab News. Being neighbors of Iran, the Saudis and the other Gulf Arabs have the most to fear from Iran's nuclear program and its drive to become the dominant power in the Gulf.
But precisely because they are most at risk from Iran's regional ambitions, the Saudis want a carefully considered American approach to Iran, one that balances firmness and diplomatic engagement.
The Saudi paper called Clinton's nuclear threat "the foreign politics of the madhouse," saying, "it demonstrates the same doltish ignorance that has distinguished Bush's foreign relations."
The Saudis are not always sound advisers on American foreign policy. But they understand that Rambo rhetoric like Clinton's only plays into the hands of Iranian hard-liners who want to plow ahead with efforts to attain a nuclear weapons capability. They argue that Iran must have that capability in order to deter the United States from doing what Clinton threatened to do.
While Clinton has hammered Obama for supporting military strikes in Pakistan, her comments on Iran are much more far-reaching. She seems not to realize that she undermined Iranian reformists and pragmatists. The Iranian people have been more favorable to America than any other in the Gulf region or the Middle East.
A presidential candidate who lightly commits to obliterating Iran - and, presumably, all the children, parents, and grandparents in Iran - should not be answering the White House phone at any time of day or night.

 

[Trinity]

Maybe Hillary should've run Republican.

If she had, she'd be the Democratic nominee already... :biggrin1:

That simple minded rhetoric is funny for a few comedic laughs however, those who understand politics actually know that Democrats have to be smarter than Republicans in order to take back the White House. The Democrats intended their rules to be more democratic however, this Primary race is revealing areas that can be detrimental to the Party and must be addressed in the future:

• Super-Delegates
• Elected Delegate Proportional Allocation
• Sanctions of States that break DNC Rules
  • Democrats held hostage as in FL
  • Democrats not held hostage as in MI, but should the voters be disenfranchised...how does that help the party?
• If a Candidate does not reach 2024 delegates, what is the most democratic way to select the Nominee?
• The Caucus System

While Clinton has hammered Obama for supporting military strikes in Pakistan, her comments on Iran are much more far-reaching.

She seems not to realize that she undermined Iranian reformists and pragmatists. The Iranian people have been more favorable to America than any other in the Gulf region or the Middle East.
A presidential candidate who lightly commits to obliterating Iran - and, presumably, all the children, parents, and grandparents in Iran - should not be answering the White House phone at any time of day or night.

Sen. Clinton's answer was no more far-reaching than Sen. Obama's.

SEN. OBAMA: Well, our first step should be to keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of the Iranians, and that has to be one of our top priorities. And I will make it one of our top priorities when I'm president of the United States.

I have said I will do whatever is required to prevent the Iranians from obtaining nuclear weapons. I believe that that includes direct talks with the Iranians where we are laying out very clearly for them, here are the issues that we find unacceptable, not only development of nuclear weapons but also funding terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah, as well as their anti-Israel rhetoric and threats towards Israel. I believe that we can offer them carrots and sticks, but we've got to directly engage and make absolutely clear to them what our posture is.

Now, my belief is that they should also know that I will take no options off the table when it comes to preventing them from using nuclear weapons or obtaining nuclear weapons, and that would include any threats directed at Israel or any of our allies in the region.

never please( only as an absolute total LAST resort if Iran threatened the USA strategically at home)(BTW Israel has its OWN nukes and can take care of themselves)

Your candidate Obama is aware of Israel's military capabilities however disagrees with your point:


"My view is that the United States' special relationship with Israel obligates us to be helpful to them in the search for credible partners with whom they can make peace, while also supporting Israel in defending itself against enemies sworn to its destruction," - Barack Obama


SENATOR OBAMA: As I've said before, I think it is very important that Iran understands that an attack on Israel is an attack on our strongest ally in the region, one that we -- one whose security we consider paramount, and that -- that would be an act of aggression that we -- that I would -- that I would consider an attack that is unacceptable, and the United States would take appropriate action.

also btw from the Obama website on Iran and nukes:

And while other candidates have insisted that we should threaten to drop nuclear bombs on terrorist training camps, Obama believes that we must talk openly about nuclear weapons – because the best way to keep America safe is not to threaten terrorists with nuclear weapons, it's to keep nuclear weapons away from terrorists.

Obama was referring to Pakistan. Obama is however in favor of the use of force to take them out, just not the use of nuclear weapons or the threat of the use of nuclear weapons:

Obama said if elected in November 2008 he would be willing to attack inside Pakistan with or without approval from the Pakistani government, a move that would likely cause anxiety in the already troubled region.
"If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will," Obama said. -Reuters

 

[Industrialsize]

He never used the word Obliterate........that is Saber rattling at its most dangerous and here words DO matter.