Fighting for Every Texas Delegate

Gunny

Gold Member
Dec 27, 2004
44,689
6,860
198
The Republic of Texas
Monday, Mar. 31, 2008
By HILARY HYLTON/AUSTIN

In the compressed, fast-moving primary calendar this election year, the Texas contest of March 4 may seem like ancient history. But since the complicated hybrid voting affair in the Lone Star State involved a caucus as well as a primary, the hotly contested counting of delegates for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton is still going on, and this past weekend both campaigns did all they could to try to gain the upper hand.

Across Texas, over 100,000 Democrats gathered Saturday at county conventions — the second tier of the complicated three-step caucus process to select 67 delegates to the national convention — joining the 126 delegates chosen in the primary voting that same day. With her 51% win of the popular vote, Hillary Clinton won 65 delegates to Barack Obama's 61 in the actual primary. But late Saturday, his campaign declared it had 99 total delegates to Clinton's 94. Clinton's camp disputes that, and by Monday morning it appeared that Obama's lead had shrunk to three delegates.

more ... http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1726719,00.html

This is just wrong. The system here in Texas a mechanism by which one can win the popular vote and STILL have most of the delegates stolen by caucuses.

Hillary won the popular vote. Obama supporters just flat screwed her.
 
This is just wrong. The system here in Texas a mechanism by which one can win the popular vote and STILL have most of the delegates stolen by caucuses.

Hillary won the popular vote. Obama supporters just flat screwed her.

The delegates weren't stolen and Obama's supporters did not "screw" Clinton. The parties can implement any system they choose. If they want to reward strength of support in addition to breadth of support, they are free to do so. There is nothing wrong about it, and neither Obama nor Clinton do anything wrong by winning caucuses. One may disagree whether it makes sense to implement such a system, but there you have it. Maybe they will amend it for the next presidential election cycle.
 
I wonder if the delegates are aware of how 'slick' Obama is on oil?

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obamas_oil_spill.html

Obama's Oil Spill
March 31, 2008
Obama says he doesn't take money from oil companies. We say that's a little too slick.

Summary
In a new ad, Obama says, "I don’t take money from oil companies."

Technically, that's true, since a law that has been on the books for more than a century prohibits corporations from giving money directly to any federal candidate. But that doesn’t distinguish Obama from his rivals in the race.

We find the statement misleading:

* Obama has accepted more than $213,000 from individuals who work for companies in the oil and gas industry and their spouses.

* Two of Obama's bundlers are top executives at oil companies and are listed on his Web site as raising between $50,000 and $100,000 for the presidential hopeful.
....
 
Cute... the right's starting with the "slick" stuff again.

After 7 years of the most corrupt, incompetent self-serving administration I've seen in my lifetime, I really don't think y'all have standing to say word one about anyone else's candidates.

Clean your own house.
 
Cute... the right's starting with the "slick" stuff again.

After 7 years of the most corrupt, incompetent self-serving administration I've seen in my lifetime, I really don't think y'all have standing to say word one about anyone else's candidates.

Clean your own house.

Jillian, you are comfortable with the facts? Funny, I'm way not comfortable with McCain on several fronts and have made that clear. You on the other hand, seems to excuse anything, is that what you wish to elect?
 
GunnyLAh ha..that explains your attitiude, I've yet to see a single Texan that will denounce Bush..

Now you know that you can't stand Hillary and could care less if she got screwed...
The republicans want Hillary to win because they know the dumb bitch doesn't stand a chance against MCCain.
Luckily people are waking up..I'm sure America will end the insanity and elect a man with the mental capacity necessary
to run this country. Barack Obama!!!!
VOTE FOR HONESTY AND INTEGRITY>>>>>GO OBAMA!!!!!
Help elect Barack Obama President of the United States: Sign-up now.. http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/semr?source=SEM-register-google-obama-search-national

For a newbie, you sure like to run your mouth without knowing WTF you're talking about. I've denounced Bush plenty of time. Guess that takes care of that little bit of stupidity.

Second, this thread is not about Bush.

Third, don't presume to tell me what you think I do and don't care about when you can't even think for yourself.

The facts are pretty simple for someone who isn't so brainwashed to partisan bullshit and steeped in hatred for one man based on it.

I'd prefer Hillary to win because she isn't as loony tune left as Obama. Hell, in comparison, she appears almost conservative.

Then there's the fact I don't support McCain that kind of just shows your running off at the mouth for what it is.

Feel free to go get an education and come back when you know WTF you're rambling on about.
 
Jillian, you are comfortable with the facts? Funny, I'm way not comfortable with McCain on several fronts and have made that clear. You on the other hand, seems to excuse anything, is that what you wish to elect?

It's not about comfort level with "facts". It's about the persistence of defamatory comments by the right when the right demands "proof" of even things that have been proven over and over and over and over and over....

I'm still waiting for the outrage on the right that Cheney created his energy policy behind closed doors with oil company lobbyists or the other myriad corrupt actions taken by this admin.

So yes, I'd say worry about your own house first. Because, ultimately, whatever Obama's relationships, they're a lot healthier and less corrupt than the ones this admin has had with oil company lobbyists, Haliburton, corporations and the wealthy.

I hope that clarifies. Nothing personal, I'm just bored to tears with the phony self-righteousness of the right..,.. when it comes to the people with whom they disagree, of course.
 
This is just wrong. The system here in Texas a mechanism by which one can win the popular vote and STILL have most of the delegates stolen by caucuses.

Hillary won the popular vote. Obama supporters just flat screwed her.

Like Bush screwed Gore in Florida?
 
This goes to show that our entire election system is jacked up. When candidates can "screw" (No pun intended) each other over, that's not popular sovereignty. Now I know our election system is, unfortunately not based on the popular vote (sorry to spill the beans on our government), but it should be more so than delegates and how exactly the states decide they want to split up or not split up their votes. I believe that states should be able to have their own system for voting, but when one state doesn't split up it's votes at all, but gives them all to the guy with the most votes (%40) and another stands splits theirs up equally, that's not fair on a national level.

Blunt: Bush has been denounced several times by many Texans, oh that's right....you don't live here (have you ever been?) so you havn't a clue. I'm sure we'll here one of your famous "comebacks" now...like, "Thanks for apologizing, I accept." or "Thanks for the attention." What a lune. I'm just waiting for you to unleash the real "cutdowns" like , "I'm rubber and you're glue..." and "My dad's bigger than your dad," or "You're not coming to my birthday party!" Go get an education and come back after college.
 

Forum List

Back
Top