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

[Annie]

They aren't Democratic rules. The state decides when the primary is. Not the state DNC, the state of Florida, Michigan, etc, etc.

Well, duh! That is the problem for the Dems, obviously. You seemed to insinuate the same for the GOP, but I admit to not seeing that.

 

[Ravi]

Good post....

Thanks. The irony was too hard to pass up.

 

[Gunny]

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

Obama withdrew his name from the Michigan primary voluntarily. He should get ZERO.

You're wasting your breath on Ms Wikia. She's so far up Obama's posterior nothing to do with reality is going to get through.

 

[Ravi]

The latest lawsuit claims, among other things, that the DNC is violating equal protection since it allowed NH and Iowa to hold early primaries without penalty.

 

[Larkinn]

Well, duh! That is the problem for the Dems, obviously. You seemed to insinuate the same for the GOP, but I admit to not seeing that.

Republicans have control of the Florida state government.

 

[Larkinn]

Obama withdrew his name from the Michigan primary voluntarily. He should get ZERO.

You're wasting your breath on Ms Wikia. She's so far up Obama's posterior nothing to do with reality is going to get through.

So punish him for trusting that the rules won't be changed after the contest is held? Amazing idea.

 

[Care4all]

So punish him for trusting that the rules won't be changed after the contest is held? Amazing idea.

The question should be, is WHY did he take the stance that disenfranchising Florida Voters was the RIGHT decision in the first place? Why has he always supported such, the opposite position which the Democratic Party took in 2000 when they believed that EVERY VOTE SHOULD COUNT, regardless of previous Rule cutoffs for recounting the Vote?

This maneuver of not wanting to count the people's vote for some power struggle between the DNC and the States, is the position the Republicans took in 2000....only a struggle to win the election, AT ANY COST, including the discerning of WHO the people actually voted for....was thrown to the side, for the "sake of the win" but "forsaking" the citizen's true will.

That's NOT democratic, but a system of elitists....

This sure doesn't seem like he is the "Candidate of Change", but a DNC butt licker, like the rest who are not FIGHTING for the CITIZEN and their chance to participate, in our Democracy, by NOT disenfranchising them, just for some control freaks in the Democratic Party that refused to negotiate on old time Party favoritism of some states?


Tsk, Tsk, Tsk.....shame on you and shame on Obama, and the biggest Shame on the DNC!

Care

 

[Larkinn]

The question should be, is WHY did he take the stance that disenfranchising Florida Voters was the RIGHT decision in the first place? Why has he always supported such, the opposite position which the Democratic Party took in 2000 when they believed that EVERY VOTE SHOULD COUNT, regardless of previous Rule cutoffs for recounting the Vote?

I find it extremely telling that you feel the need to ask why Obama felt that way, when Hillary felt that way as well, and may well have influenced the decision to not count those votes.

And I don't know why he personally held that view, but I've explained why I hold that view.

This maneuver of not wanting to count the people's vote for some power struggle between the DNC and the States, is the position the Republicans took in 2000....only a struggle to win the election, AT ANY COST, including the discerning of WHO the people actually voted for....was thrown to the side, for the "sake of the win" but "forsaking" the citizen's true will.

No, its really not. This is not the same thing the Republicans did in 2000.

That's NOT democratic, but a system of elitists....

And the hysterics come out again.

This sure doesn't seem like he is the "Candidate of Change", but a DNC butt licker, like the rest who are not FIGHTING for the CITIZEN and their chance to participate, in our Democracy, by NOT disenfranchising them, just for some control freaks in the Democratic Party that refused to negotiate on old time Party favoritism of some states?

I've asked you numerous times for a realistic solution. All you've given me is some rotating crap. You really think that Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina would agree to some rotating crap?

By the way...if Hillary is so ethical and the like, why did she wait until after the early states to say that FL and MI should count? I'll let you figure that one out on your own.

Tsk, Tsk, Tsk.....shame on you and shame on Obama, and the biggest Shame on the DNC!

Care

Have fun with the broken primary system from now on.

 

[Ravi]

I've asked you numerous times for a realistic solution.

Get Obama to give his delegates to the other candidates since he is the only one that violated the rules. Probably not realistic, but certainly the most ethical solution.

 

[Care4all]

I find it extremely telling that you feel the need to ask why Obama felt that way, when Hillary felt that way as well, and may well have influenced the decision to not count those votes.

And I don't know why he personally held that view, but I've explained why I hold that view.



No, its really not. This is not the same thing the Republicans did in 2000.



And the hysterics come out again.



I've asked you numerous times for a realistic solution. All you've given me is some rotating crap. You really think that Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina would agree to some rotating crap?

By the way...if Hillary is so ethical and the like, why did she wait until after the early states to say that FL and MI should count? I'll let you figure that one out on your own.





Have fun with the broken primary system from now on.

she ALWAYS KNEW they would count, the rules allowed for the seating of these delegates by a Dnc called committee, where they in the majority, would be represented by the Democratic Presidential nominee...is what I had read.

She was always the front runner in the early polling and she was always the leading Presidential Nominee early on....so she knew that she would have her people that would be put on this committee that had to choose whether to seat these delegates or not, that she would have her people do such....

There was no reason to believe that Hillary Clinton has ever been against Florida counting....she did make a statemnt about Michigan later on in the process, after some other DNC meetings that showed the DNC not willing to compromise with the states and also when being question about the future Michigan ballot, and why she did not take her own name off the ballot, and pressured on it, somelike, 'it is clear that the micigan votes won' t count.....yahdeedah", but THAT NEVER MEANT she took the POSITION of being against seating the delegates....

Even on the June announcement of the DNC regarding Florida, she said she was campaigning in EVERY STATE.....going against the DNC's proposals coming out.... only until the DNC made it's final meet and final decision in August sometime did she agree with the "Early States" that she would not campaign there, but SHE NEVER, EVER said that Florida and Michigan SHOULD BE DISENFRANCHISED as Obama is touting, for mere political posturing.

so enough of this shit that Hillary was for their votes not counting...she would NEVER BE SO POLITICALLY STUPID to take that position, and OBAMA should NOT take that position EITHER.

So if they seat the Delegates, are they going to follow the rule that the ones that broke the rule to campaign there give up their delegates to the other candidates?

 

[Larkinn]

I've asked you numerous times for a realistic solution.

Get Obama to give his delegates to the other candidates since he is the only one that violated the rules. Probably not realistic, but certainly the most ethical solution.

Sure, the 0 delegates from Florida? Done.

And I was asking for a realistic solution to the broken primary system, not for FL and MI.

 

[Yurt]

Obama withdrew his name from the Michigan primary voluntarily. He should get ZERO.

You're wasting your breath on Ms Wikia. She's so far up Obama's posterior nothing to do with reality is going to get through.

exactly. that wuss decided to ignore voters on purpose. to bad obama..... you reap what you sow.

 

[Larkinn]

she ALWAYS KNEW they would count, the rules allowed for the seating of these delegates by a Dnc called committee, where they in the majority, would be represented by the Democratic Presidential nominee...is what I had read.

Really? So why did she specifically say early on that MI didn't count for anything? Are you calling her a liar?

She was always the front runner in the early polling and she was always the leading Presidential Nominee early on....so she knew that she would have her people that would be put on this committee that had to choose whether to seat these delegates or not, that she would have her people do such....

Yeah and the committee decided BEFORE they voted. When she had all the power, they decided NOT to count the votes. You still haven't explained why she changed her mind, and why you accept that.

There was no reason to believe that Hillary Clinton has ever been against Florida counting....she did make a statemnt about Michigan later on in the process, after some other DNC meetings that showed the DNC not willing to compromise with the states and also when being question about the future Michigan ballot, and why she did not take her own name off the ballot, and pressured on it, somelike, 'it is clear that the micigan votes won' t count.....yahdeedah", but THAT NEVER MEANS she took the POSITION of being against seating the delegates....

So why did she sign a pledge to honor the DNC's rules exactly? She not only took a position on being against seating the delegates, she signed a pledge stating as much.

so enough of this shit that Hillary was for their votes not counting...she would NEVER BE SO POLITICALLY STUPID to take that position, and OBAMA should NOT take that position EITHER.

You mean like going back from signing a pledge? That kind of politically stupid?

You mean like losing a massive edge against Obama to lose the nomination? That kind of politically stupid?

So if they seat the Delegates, are they going to follow the rule that the ones that broke the rule to campaign there give up their delegates to the other candidates?

So you want to break some rules, but not others, eh? What a surprise.

 

[Larkinn]

exactly. that wuss decided to ignore voters on purpose. to bad obama..... you reap what you sow.

Actually they both ignored voters in FL and MI.

 

[Yurt]

Actually they both ignored voters in FL and MI.

the same? are you sure?

 

[Larkinn]

the same? are you sure?

Well one ignored them 59% and one ignored them 61%. No, they didn't do the exact same thing, but Hillary said that the votes shouldn't count in FL and MI before they voted, so did Obama. Neither did any major campaign stops, despite the claims that Hillary's "fundraisers" were bogus, or that Obama talking to reporters for 5 minutes was campaigning.

 

[shan83]

Obama is most fomous in all nationalities but hilary is not
.......................
shan

 

[jillian]

the same? are you sure?

why do you care? just wondering, since you want them both to lose.

 

[Care4all]

Really? So why did she specifically say early on that MI didn't count for anything? Are you calling her a liar?

no, the Dnc said that they wouldn't count, but they still were negotiating with the states...she was answering a question where she was hounded on why others took their names off the ballot and she didn't...



Yeah and the committee decided BEFORE they voted. When she had all the power, they decided NOT to count the votes. You still haven't explained why she changed her mind, and why you accept that.

You are being soooo disingenuous it is pathethic. HILLARY WAS THE FRONT RUNNER in both Michigan and florida....SHE HAD NO REASON to NOT WANT these votes to count....only a brain dead or brain washed individual can not recognize THIS.

ALSO, Michigan and Florida Democratic Parties spent an incredible amount of time advertising and getting out the message that EVERY VOTE COUNTED, regardless of WHAT THE DNC was saying....they campaigned on getting out to vote for their presidential candidate and were TOLD that being an earlier state, their voices would be HEARD on who they wanted as President.

Those votes in Michigan and in Florida were votes for WHO THESE DEMS WANTED as President, and in Michigan they were told how to handle the candidates that did not leave their name on the ballot....(which was TOTALLY FOOLISH of Obama to take his name off the ballot when he was still in the race, he spat in the voters faces and as the Candidate of Change, of breaking away from the bureacracy of Wahington DC, he stuck with the DC'ers and with the INSIDERS and pulled his name off...choosing bureacracy OVER THE PEOPLE.)


So why did she sign a pledge to honor the DNC's rules exactly? She not only took a position on being against seating the delegates, she signed a pledge stating as much.

How many times does this have to be said? Are you that dense? What's up with you?

The Candidates signed a pledge with the 4 early states to not campaign there as punishment....

They did not sign a pledge with the DNC, They did not every agree with the DNC that these delegates would not be seated....not be counted.




You mean like going back from signing a pledge? That kind of politically stupid?


What the heck are you talking about? The PLEDGE WAS WITH THE 4 EARLY STATES to NOT campaign there.....?

And Hillary DID NOT CAMPAIGN THERE, but Obama DID with his National ads...

For the last time, YOUR CANDIDATE is the one who BROKE HIS PLEDGE with the Early states...

NOT Hillary, but Obama....now swallow THAT!

You mean like losing a massive edge against Obama to lose the nomination? That kind of politically stupid?

When you have every media outlet, supporting one candidate over another, and hounding one candidate to quit, when the race was not even won yet, it makes it a tad difficult to get the money one needs to run a solid race....

This IS WHAT happened. And even with ALL OF THAT, Clinton is STILL GETTING 50% of the Democratic vote!

So you want to break some rules, but not others, eh? What a surprise.

The rules have always allowed for this DNC meeting on May 31, to make the final decision on whether to seat Florida and Michigan...

Clinton did not make up this rule, Clinton did not organize the May 31st meeting, clinton just KNEW the rules BETTER than oBAMA and knew that this meeting on May 31 has always been part of the rules and she has always counted on the seats of the floridians and Michiganites being seated....Politically, she has always known it would be the right thing for the DNC to do...

 

[Care4all]

Also Larkin...

WHY DID OBAMA run a National Ad in Florida/Michigan if Florida/Michigan Democratic voters were not going to count?

Can you explain that....hmmmmm?

Doesn't make any sense to me, coming from the Marketing and Advertising arena, that was a whole bunch of WASTED MONEY running ads in states that would SUPPOSEDLY NOT COUNT?

don't fool yourself...your guy Obama is a POLITICIAN, as with the rest of the candidates and is NO CANDIDATE of Change....don't want you to be let down in the future on that....pay attention now and get that notion out of your head. They are all Politicians and they all bastardize themselves....

Care