Obama willing to go "more than half-way" on Florida and Michigan

Discussion in 'Congress' started by Jon, May 21, 2008.

  1. Jon
    Offline

    Jon The CPA

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Messages:
    8,101
    Thanks Received:
    1,276
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Fayetteville, AR
    Ratings:
    +1,281
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Ravi
    Offline

    Ravi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    81,335
    Thanks Received:
    12,695
    Trophy Points:
    2,205
    Location:
    Hating Hatters
    Ratings:
    +29,785
    What's more than halfway? 3/5? So Florida voters count as 3/5ths citizens?

    So ironic.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. RetiredGySgt
    Online

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,559
    Thanks Received:
    5,900
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +8,973
    You must be aware that the last time 3/5ths was used was Slaves ( good play there Ravir)
     
  4. Care4all
    Offline

    Care4all Warrior Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Messages:
    32,769
    Thanks Received:
    6,623
    Trophy Points:
    1,170
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +11,098
    If they do not come to a fair agreement and it goes to the DNC rules committee on May31st, then the selection of the nominee could go all the way to the convention in August, is what I heard last night.

    This May 31 committee, has procedures and a timeline schedule to follow, in order to resolve these rules issues writen in to the bilaws that would bring this nomination to the convention.

    Hillary has this in her favor to bargain with.

    There is no way in my opinion that Obama wants it to go all the way to the convention....

    Politically, the favorable decision for him to do is to count all of Florida and Michigan imo...maybe splitting the michigan votes between him and hillary as a compromise, so he can appear to care about the disenfranchised voters....

    And then, let the Primary contest go from there....more than likely Obama would still be leading, and will still win the delegate count to win the nomination.

    Care
     
  5. MsWikia
    Offline

    MsWikia Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    183
    Thanks Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +5
    Well I guess it's ok for states to do as they please when it comes to primaries; FL has been having issues for a minute now. Plus Obama wasn't even on the Michigan ballot, but I guess that doesn't matter either. :rolleyes:
     
  6. Care4all
    Offline

    Care4all Warrior Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Messages:
    32,769
    Thanks Received:
    6,623
    Trophy Points:
    1,170
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +11,098

    Obama withdrew himself from the Michigan ballot, thinking it would help him politically, because he was going to lose it I would suppose? This is a political contest, thus my thinking it was a political decision....

    He did keep his name on the florida ballot by choice.

    Who knows why he made these political decisions and what he was thinking when he and his team of advisors made them.

    It is NOT Hillary's or the people of Michigan's fault that Obama chose to take his name off the ballot in Michigan, and leave it on the ballot in Florida is it?

    Very early on, when there was time for a recount, Hillary offered up such, but Obama balked at splitting the costs of it....his team advised him NOT TO give these states a recount i suppose?

    I am not certain it is as clear cut as you seem to think it is...Wikia.

    And for Michigan, maybe obama should be given 1/2 or 1/3 of the delegates, but this would be guessing and taking away from the people of Michigan that did vote for Hillary...perhaps?

    I think the two teams will work it out before the May 31st cut off, Obama will not want to continue this contest and bring it to the convention imo.



    Care
     
  7. Larkinn
    Offline

    Larkinn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,598
    Thanks Received:
    174
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +175
    So if I rebut this crap again, will you actually respons as opposed to just saying the same shit on other threads?

    The bullet points:

    Obama withdrew from MI as a sign of good faith (so did Edwards).

    He legally COULD NOT withdraw from FL.

    You are advocating a continuance of the crap primary system we have.

    You don't change the rules AFTER the vote has been held. Thats just dishonest.
     
  8. Care4all
    Offline

    Care4all Warrior Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Messages:
    32,769
    Thanks Received:
    6,623
    Trophy Points:
    1,170
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +11,098
    You don't seem to understand Larkin, IT IS IN THE RULES.

    When there is a situation like this, if it had not been settled by the candidates and the DNC by the May 31st date, the rules committee meets and starts the process IN THE RULES to settle these disputes to determine the fate of unseated delegates....which is on a specific schedule that leads to the convention. THESE ARE THE RULES, they are not outside of the rules Larkin....which will just drag this thing on.....giving the candidates a reason to come to a compromise before that process starts.

    As far as in "good faith" crud for him withdrawing from michigan, malarky!!!

    It was done because it was in his best political interest, for the people of the USA NOT see obama lose to the front runner, Hillary at the time.... and to think otherwise is politically naive imo. I am not trying to "have one up " on ya Larkin, but this is just simple logic.

    How did Edwards and Biden and Richardson and Kucinich and all of the other candidates manage to take their names off the ballot in Florida, they were still legally in the contest at that time... Larkin....since it was illegal, the others should be charged with a crime for doing such....?

    His decision WAS A POLITICAL decision Larkin....a bad political decision. It has also been a political decision of his, to Balk and Postpone Hillary getting the delegates due to her through a compromise until this point....it has been to his political advantage to not have the media reporting the total delegates of Hillary's with Florida in it, that's for certain....sooooooooo, he played politics, as expected, in a political race, i would suppose...?

    But it is down to the wire now and he needs to make a decision to compromise.

    the leaders of the DNC need to be fired over this fiasco.

    The people of Florida and Michigan FOLLOWED THEIR LEGAL RULES and voted the day their state delegated according to LAW....they should have never been disenfranchised of their votes, the DNC should have compromised upfront and settled the dispute when it happened last march-may of 07...they FAILED at their jobs of ensuring their members, ALL OF THEIR MEMBERS, get a chance to vote.



    care
     
  9. Larkinn
    Offline

    Larkinn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,598
    Thanks Received:
    174
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +175
    I'm aware of that. Its also the rules that these delegates should NOT be seated. They might change those rules, which is unfair and stupid.

    Obama isn't an idiot. The media counted hillary v. no candidate votes and assigned those to Obama. He surely knew that was going to happen, so how exactly did this help him politically again?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Democratic_primary,_2008

    Candidates Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, Dennis Kucinich, and Bill Richardson dropped out of the presidential race before the Florida primary. However, they remained on the ballot.

    You are aware that it was HILLARY who said no to Michigans solution, right?

    By the way, tell me your version of a fair compromise.

    As opposed to Hillary, right? Do I need to remind you, again, that Hillary supported not counting the delegates until she needed those states to win?

    Hillary needs to compromise as well. Actually it doesn't really matter what they think, since the DNC will decide on May 31st, and then Hillary will lose this election.

    And no, the leaders of the DNC did nothing wrong. The state reps of Florida and Michigan played chicken with their peoples votes, and lost. Not the DNC's fault.

    Thats not their responsibility. Their responsibility is to set up a system to decide who will be the democratic candidate in the general. They can do that however they want.
     
  10. Care4all
    Offline

    Care4all Warrior Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Messages:
    32,769
    Thanks Received:
    6,623
    Trophy Points:
    1,170
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +11,098
    He wasn't the Leader at the time either.

    He CHOSE to leave his name on the ballot in Florida, while other candidates managed to remove their names. He chose to take his name off the ballot in Michigan because it was politically benefitial to him, there is no other reason than a political one imo.

    There absolutely was NO PLEDGE to the 4 early states by the Candidates to take their names off the ballot and for people to claim such is simply not true.

    There was also not a pledge: to not have fund raisers and a team working in said states....before that stuff gets thrown out AGAIN at us....both Hillary and Obama held fund raisers in Florida and had campaign teams working there and Obama spoke to the press in Florida and he also ran ads in florida...supposedly by mistake for the press conference and on the Ads he ran, he said he could not pull them from the florida region, it was a package buy or something like that....?

    Care
     

Share This Page