Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hmmm, so two people and invested and worked hard toward a goal and then that reward is redistributed to another who did nothing but claim to deserve it?
Okay, sounds as reasonable as tax the rich and rebates to everyone who did not earn enough to pay taxes.
Hmmm, so two people and invested and worked hard toward a goal and then that reward is redistributed to another who did nothing but claim to deserve it?
Isn't that the dems fundamental philosophy? Redistribution of income, wealth, votes?
Interesting article in Time magazine. Worth a read IMO
Which brings us back to Al Gore. Pish-tosh, you say, and you're probably right. But let's play a little. Let's say the elders of the Democratic Party decide, when the primaries end, that neither Obama nor Clinton is viable. Let's also assume—and this may be a real stretch—that such elders are strong and smart enough to act. All they'd have to do would be to convince a significant fraction of their superdelegate friends, maybe fewer than 100, to announce that they were taking a pass on the first ballot at the Denver convention, which would deny the 2,025 votes necessary to Obama or Clinton
Al Gore can only be a serious candidate in the realm of fantasy, used only by those desperate to keep that black man from winning. Gore has no business even being considered. He had his moment. It's Obama's time now.
Obama cannot win enough committed delegates for the nomination
Clinton cannot win enough committed delegates for the nomination
It is going to fall into the hands of the Uncommitted Super Delegates.
IF, and admittedly it's a BIG if - but, if the super delegates split their votes (remember, they are uncommitted), it would mean that NEITHER candidate can win the nomination on the first ballot.
Then, it becomes open season - nominations from the floor included.
What does Gore bring to the table that NEITHER Obama and Clinton have? Real experience. It was in on foreign policy decisions. He was in the War room. He brings very little baggage - unlike the other 2.
He brings activism - he brings visibility (non political to boot).
He brings credibility - the Nobel Prize
Mind you - I don't like Gore. BUT, he is everything that Obama and Clinton are not.
AND, if it goes past the first ballot - and it might - it is going to be a wonderful political sight to behold!
IF, and admittedly it's a BIG if - but, if the super delegates split their votes (remember, they are uncommitted), it would mean that NEITHER candidate can win the nomination on the first ballot.
If all of the superdels vote, and they vote for either Clinton or Obama, then one of these two candidates will get nominated on the first ballot.
If all of the superdels vote, and they vote for either Clinton or Obama, then one of these two candidates will get nominated on the first ballot.
I acknowledge that. Hence my comment - IF the Super Delegates SPLIT on who they vote for - NEITHER will be nominated on the first ballot
There is absolutely no way - no guarantee to determine who ALL the Super Delegates are going to vote for - and, because NEITHER candidate will have a sufficent number of committed delegates - this convention is going to be, more than likely, a brokered convention - OR a real doney brook!
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,766,887 times
Reputation: 3587
An endorsement from Al Gore would be more useful. It would pretty much settle it. He should endorse Obama.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.