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.
If I were a citizen of Michigan or Florida knowing that my vote wouldn't count if I went to the polls, I would have gone anyway. Why is the government of a free country telling me that my vote doesn't count. I honestly thought we lived in a Democracy. What if the government said that your vote doesn't count for one reason or another, would that make you happy. Put yourself in their place. I would be mad as hell and although I am not an Obama or Clinton fan If there were a re-vote I would never vote for Obama because he said that he is against a new primary and that I don't count in the first place. Shame on the Government and on Obama and on Clinton for agreeing with the whole stupid mess then saying they should be counted. (I think that they should have counted in the first place. And as unconventional as it sounds I think all states should have primaries on the same day. NO CAUCUSES, what a fiasco)
. . . . .
CNN's Senior Political Analyst Bill Schneider suggested the Democrats who withdrew may have calculated that it was simply in their best political interest to do so.
"If there's no campaign, the candidate most likely to win Michigan is Hillary Clinton," Schneider said. "Her Democratic rivals don't want a Clinton victory in Michigan to count. They want Iowa and New Hampshire, where they have a better chance of stopping Clinton, to count more."
So Obama may have taken his name off because in was "in [his] best political interest" as your own link clearly states. The fact remains, Hillary has received more votes than any other presidential candidate. The discussion is just which ones, and how many, Obama and the democratic party want to toss out.
If I were a citizen of Michigan or Florida knowing that my vote wouldn't count if I went to the polls, I would have gone anyway. Why is the government of a free country telling me that my vote doesn't count. I honestly thought we lived in a Democracy. What if the government said that your vote doesn't count for one reason or another, would that make you happy. Put yourself in their place. I would be mad as hell and although I am not an Obama or Clinton fan If there were a re-vote I would never vote for Obama because he said that he is against a new primary and that I don't count in the first place. Shame on the Government and on Obama and on Clinton for agreeing with the whole stupid mess then saying they should be counted. (I think that they should have counted in the first place. And as unconventional as it sounds I think all states should have primaries on the same day. NO CAUCUSES, what a fiasco)
The democratic comittees of both states knowingly broke the rules. Why whine & complain when they were given ample warning? Should a basket that sinks in after (or in this case, before) the buzzer count?
Yes they did break the rules but the citizens should not be punished for the lack of judgement of the DNC. In Florida it was the Republicans that had them change. I am not whining nor complaining as I dont live in either of the states but I can't see discounting a groups votes. So I guess you are saying that blacks and women shouldn't have whined or complained because they couldn't vote at one time. How sorry is that.
Are you mad???
YOU are the one who is counting votes that don't exists. Obama supporters need only count REAL numbers - states won, delegates pledged, and popular vote.
Someone is counting the votes. . . and yes, they do indeed exist.
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,763,471 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alanw
Yes they did break the rules but the citizens should not be punished for the lack of judgement of the DNC. In Florida it was the Republicans that had them change. I am not whining nor complaining as I dont live in either of the states but I can't see discounting a groups votes. So I guess you are saying that blacks and women shouldn't have whined or complained because they couldn't vote at one time. How sorry is that.
Obama left his name on the ballot in Florida and Florida will probably be counted in the end. As for Michigan, it was the Dems that chose to thumb their noses at the national party and do what they were clearly warned not to do and they have to suffer the consequences for it.
So Obama may have taken his name off because in was "in [his] best political interest" as your own link clearly states. The fact remains, Hillary has received more votes than any other presidential candidate. The discussion is just which ones, and how many, Obama and the democratic party want to toss out.
And the Post article paragraph three says? Please when she says clearly wouldn't count and she wanted to stay in their good graces for the general election. I posted both articles for balance and the full perspective. Please respond to both. You are an intelligent person and can differentiate between the analysis and conjecture of the reporter and the quote of Clinton in the Post article.
I understand there are reasons why some feel all votes shouldn't count but I beat this issue for three reasons:
- Superdelegates can and will consider the voters of FL and MI even if the democratic party will not.
- Pledged delegates will consider these voters as the convention process unfolds.
- The irony after endlessly listening to the "every vote counts" junk from the dems; implying that republicans don't want to count every vote, is just priceless.
Note that Hillary's gotten more votes than any other candidate.
Of particular interest is the Truth and the Rules. Popular votes are nice but this is a DELEGATE contest, and perhaps one in which the Clinton campaign was very poorly prepared for, if the current contest is any indication.
Of particular interest is the Truth and the Rules. Popular votes are nice but this is a DELEGATE contest, and perhaps one in which the Clinton campaign was very poorly prepared for, if the current contest is any indication.
Agreed. They were poorly prepared for a delegate contest under democratic primary rules. They are excellently positioned for an electoral college vote under general election rules.
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.
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.
