Democratic Nomination?

yes

Originally posted by BackFire
It would. I agree. I'd be fine if next election they did only Primaries. But, fact is, they were done this time, so they have to be counted. Especially if you use Clinton's argument that 'every vote must count'. They count as votes, so they must count.

I dunno. It's not my argument. It's Clinton's. She argues that every single vote needs to be counted, so they need to figure out a way to count those votes in some way, since they voted.

Can't have it both ways. Can't say with any validity that an unofficial primary like Michigan should count for the sake of including every vote, while saying that official caucuses shouldn't be counted towards the total in some way. For the sake of sense and practicality and consistency, they need to be counted in some way as well.

Personally, I don't care if they're counted or not. Because I don't subscribe to the idea that Michigan's popular vote should count to anything because I don't go with the idea that every single vote needs to count. The votes that make sense and were able to count fairly should be counted. Michigan doesn't qualify, and neither does a number of caucuses. So don't count any of them.

not only that, but they were instructed to not write in but rather vote 'uncommitted;' if they wanted to vote for obama, edwards, richardson, or biden. to then turn around and negate them all would be worse than disenfranchising the voters of michigan. it would be disenfranchising anyone who didnt vote for clinton.

when it made its ruling, the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee was operating under the premise that the "uncommitted" votes were essentially votes for Obama.

the clinton camp wasnt offering much of a compromise. i dont think the final outcome was fair, but a far shot more fair than clinton-all obama-none.

:edit: by unfair im only referring to the 4 delegates. apart from that it was a logical conclusion.

Oh that's just wonderful.

Thanks to the DNC's decision to count Florida and Michigan, neither one can win the nomination on pledged delegates. I guess tha was Hillary's plan.

I really would like to know what Hillary's real agenda is. She obviously will not win the nomination at this point, is she just setting herself up for a possible 2012 run (oh noes the real end of the world)?

edit: I was watching MNBC and did anyone else see the angry overtanned 50+ year old Clinton supporter yelling into the camera about how the Democratic party has pushed women aside or some BS? Hilarious.

I saw a FOX special that said Hillary can't be strong enough to be president because she was crying!!!!!!

Then (since I was watching this on youtube), the guy mentioned lots of republicans crying (most notably, George H. W. Bush crying when Jeb won Senate election in Florida.

Originally posted by lord xyz
I saw a FOX special that said Hillary can't be strong enough to be president because she was crying!!!!!!

Then (since I was watching this on youtube), the guy mentioned lots of republicans crying (most notably, George H. W. Bush crying when Jeb won Senate election in Florida.

Not surprised they believe that, but surprized they said that. Republicans want her to win the nomination, as Obama has a better chance of beating McCain.

The extreme Right, is torn, McCain isn't conservative enough for them.

Originally posted by Robtard
Not surprised they believe that, but surprized they said that. Republicans want her to win the nomination, as Obama has a better chance of beating McCain.

The extreme Right, is torn, McCain isn't conservative enough for them.

No, sorry but Republicans don't want Hillary to win the nomination; they want chaos to tear the Democrats apart.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No, sorry but Republicans don't want Hillary to win the nomination; they want chaos to tear the Democrats apart.

Rubbish. Someone has to win, ie someone will be nomimated, they'd prefer Clinton over Obama.

Originally posted by Robtard
Rubbish. Someone has to win, ie someone will be nomimated, they'd prefer Clinton over Obama.

My point is that they don't care. They plan on winning, and the best way to win is to have a divided Democratic party.

My point:

In the end though, there will be only one, divided or no. McCain has a better chance of beating Hillary than he does Obama.

Hillary is either a "love her or hate her" kind of runner, Obama appeals to a wider crowd.

Originally posted by Robtard
In the end though, there will be only one, divided or no. McCain has a better chance of beating Hillary than he does Obama.

Hillary is either a "love her or hate her" kind of runner, Obama appeals to a wider crowd.

I don't know who will do better against McCain, but I sure they are only supporting Hillary because she is behind. If Obama was behind, I believe the Republicans would be supporting him.

What you are perceiving as a preference is really just a strategy to support the under dog in order to create chaos.

Your "chaos" theory only works if come November, there isn't a chosen candidate. Otherwise, the "chaos" now doesn't really matter all that much, sure the media outlets love it, but when it comes to voting, doesn't matter, there will be a candidate.

Originally posted by Robtard
Your "chaos" theory only works if come November, there isn't a chosen candidate. Otherwise, the "chaos" now doesn't really matter all that much, sure the media outlets love it, but when it comes to voting, doesn't matter, there will be a candidate.

You said "Republicans want her to win the nomination". I am disagreeing with you on that only. I think they want a Republican to win. 😉

Ugh.

Originally posted by Robtard
Ugh.

Wow! I've never left you speechless before. 😆

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You said "Republicans want her to win the nomination". I am disagreeing with you on that only. I think they want a Republican to win. 😉

That's not what you said.

Also there's no Republican left in the Democratic Nomination.

Just STFU you numbwit.