Op Ed Why the "Math" doesn't matter! - Page 3

RK77 · 05-14-2008, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by poetrychic

psst!!! don't forget that her negatives are somewhere in the 50 percentile range now...half the country already thinks poorly of her, i'm not sure how they can translate that into "more electable"

These folks are beyond this now poetry. All their arguments are focused on someone kissing their asses to get them to unify with the party.

We are to overlook their racism.

We should forget their lies ---- oops no---"look over" their lies.

We should ignore that they do not believe in American principles like freedom of religion.

We should forget that they have willingly pissed all over the constitution to make the argument that Obama should be held to a religious test to be voted for.

We should just lower our standards of decency and fair play to the subterrestrial level that have dug themselves into so that they can feel "welcomed".

Lower the bar to the ground so that they can slither in.

THEIR candidate called them stupid racist hicks but we should ignore that observation and pretend they are all brainiacs!

winthrop · 05-14-2008, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by itsmeeeeeee

reality just sucks, doesn't it!
it can fuck you up from two directions at once!

It does often. But this does not "fuck me up", it disappoints me.
I point that out as reality as well, understanding no one is obligated to be concerned about it. Or fairness, either.

Speaking of which, are you watching Mr. Edwards' speech endorsing Mr. Obama? Did you hear the boos when he gave
Ms. Clinton respect? Did you see Mr. Obama laughing as he waved his hand to quiet the crowd? Did you seen him not
rise from his seat and call for Mr. Edwards to have his say?
I am disappointed in that as well (ditto to my previous comment about others' concern).

RK77 · 05-14-2008, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr. Zaius

Obama supporters as well as political pundits and talking heads of the media all claim the math is against Hillary Clinton and her race for the White House and there is no way she can win enough delegates.......but don't tell that to me.

Math means nothing in a race. Not just any race but a political race for this nations leader.

In 1984 the Democratic party took math out of the equation by creating super delegates for the sole purpose of making Politicians more important than individual pledged delegates. This enables the Supers to make a decision at the Convention.

You can't really use Super Delegates in the count. Forget the "Math" and just count, without the supers. Pledged delegates cannot be changed. Supers can.....and they will.

Now look at Florida and Michigan. Chair of the DNC's Voting Rights Institute, Donna Brazile has continued to call for the PEOPLE of these two states to be punished for the actions of politicians making choices as their representatives when the Party BIG WIGS, like Brazile herself are responsible for this mess. The DNC picked and chose specific states to allow to move their elections to give special treatment and more power to the few while saying no to others. Why? Does the party have rules about how many and who can move their primaries? This was a decision based on taking power from one state and attempting to give it to another. Well.....they created this mess so it is up to them to settle it. Brazile is quoted as saying "I do not want the Super Delegates to pick the Nominee". Why? That's what they're there for.

An odd fact and somewhat ironic is that Donna Brazile was made chair of the Voting Rights Institute after the 2001 Florida debacle. Look what she has wrought upon herself now.

While saying that she wants to punish the people of FL and MI from one side of her mouth.....seconds later she says she wants to make sure the delegates from those states are seated at the convention, out of the other side of her mouth. How many each candidate gets to be decided at "a later date". What date? By who? Exactly how?

This election is not about math. It's not about a convention with backroom deals.....no. Backroom deals have already been made and more will be happening ...probably as I type. It's time for the people given their super powers to use them. How they do that and who they vote for are the real matters. Many super delegates who's states voted for Clinton have moved to Obama even though Obama himself has stated that supers should vote by the vote of the people. When did he change his mind on that? probably when the supers from those states wanted to move to him while ignoring their constituents. That's fine....because they can switch back....without even saying a word publicly. If it were about the "Math"....numbers would not be able to move. Super Delegates can.

Did you write this bullshit Dr Z and then list it as an Op Ed? That would be a new low in dishonesty---even for you!

Harold Ickes and Donna Brazile are Clinton supporters---DUH!!! They BOTH sat on the Rules committee.

The link to the democratic rules has been posted here repeatedly---READ THEM!

IN FACT--- the rules committee did select 2 additional states to add to the primary pre-window. The rules are quite clear about states moving into the re window---AND what punishments could be leveed for failing to do so without approval.

The states were given--by the rules:

1) An opportunity to apply to the DNC to move into the pre-window. Florida did not apply.

2) Notification of an intent to take action if they did not move their primary's back into the window.

3) The alternative of holding caucuses or mail votes in the prewindow.

4) The opportunity to show cause for having broken the rules.

5) 30 days to submit a plan that would comply with the rules (for either caucus or mail voting).

This was NOT the first offense for either state.

This was all well publicized in Michigan as it unfolded---any dem who wanted to could have lodged a complaint before the rules were violated.

All delegates can change their votes. DUH!! The pledged delegates are bound to the first and maybe the second ballot. Clinton PLEDGED delegates have already changed their votes to Obama so there must be an alternative way before the convention to change.

The Superdelegates are part of the math---another part that Hillary is losing so only an total ass would be making an argument that the math doesn't count and then discussing the superdelegates as a solution.

Please provide the source of this document if you did not write it.

If you did write it ----wouldn't that be a blog and not an Op Ed?

ocealdia · 05-14-2008, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by winthrop

It does often. But this does not "fuck me up", it disappoints me.
I point that out as reality as well, understanding no one is obligated to be concerned about it. Or fairness, either.

Speaking of which, are you watching Mr. Edwards' speech endorsing Mr. Obama? Did you hear the boos when he gave
Ms. Clinton respect? Did you see Mr. Obama laughing as he waved his hand to quiet the crowd? Did you seen him not
rise from his seat and call for Mr. Edwards to have his say?
I am disappointed in that as well (ditto to my previous comment about others' concern).

No surprise to hear that. I missed it but I'm sure I'll I catch it later, as I'm sure it will be replayed over and over....so good. All the details will be duly noted by everyone.

ocealdia · 05-14-2008, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by poetrychic

psst!!! don't forget that her negatives are somewhere in the 50 percentile range now...half the country already thinks poorly of her, i'm not sure how they can translate that into "more electable"

Psst..!! how recent are these polls? When were they conducted, and they are obviously biased, as you are all wont to inform anyone that post a pro-Hillary poll.

Chantytown · 05-14-2008, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ocealdia

No surprise to hear that. I missed it but I'm sure I'll I catch it later, as I'm sure it will be replayed over and over....so good. All the details will be duly noted by everyone.

Yeah. Get right on that, will ya?

*mimes jack off motion*

What is he? A high school principle?

He supposed to make sure the crowd's noise level doesn't offend you?

You people are like 12 year old girls.

"And did you see that dirty look that He gave her? I was all like 'no he di-n't!'"

Comicsartist · 05-14-2008, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chantytown

Yeah. Get right on that, will ya?

*mimes jack off motion*

What is he? A high school principle?

He supposed to make sure the crowd's noise level doesn't offend you?

You people are like 12 year old girls.

"And did you see that dirty look that He gave her? I was all like 'no he di-n't!'"

Damn..that's great.

poetrychic · 05-14-2008, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ocealdia

Psst..!! how recent are these polls? When were they conducted, and they are obviously biased, as you are all wont to inform anyone that post a pro-Hillary poll.

hillary has always enjoyed high negatives, this has been ongoing and well publicised since the 90's so i'm not quite sure where you've been hiding...

RK77 · 05-14-2008, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ocealdia

Psst..!! how recent are these polls? When were they conducted, and they are obviously biased, as you are all wont to inform anyone that post a pro-Hillary poll.

Please---feel free to post any or all national polls you have that show Hillary with positive rating then! As a matter of fact ----find one that places her with less than a 40% negativity in the last 10 years.

This sort of diversionary tactic is dishonest.

It is EXACTLY why no one can feel really terrible about not associating with Hillary people. Amoral and unprincipled!

HarperLee · 05-14-2008, 05:11 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by ocealdia
Psst..!! how recent are these polls? When were they conducted, and they are obviously biased, as you are all wont to inform anyone that post a pro-Hillary poll.

ABC World News, Jake Tapper, April 16, 2008:

Clinton's Negatives Hit New High
A record high of 54 percent of Americans have an unfavorable opinion of the New York senator, according to the ABC News/Washington Post poll.

Her husband, former President Bill Clinton's unfavorability rating is almost as high at 51 percent — his highest level since leaving office.

Hillary's Negatives have never been below 40 since her health care fiasco in her husband's first term. Bill Clinton has traditionally enjoyed low negatives. I think his negatives were in the 30s during the impeachment mess.

05-14-2008, 05:11 PM	#30 (permalink)
HarperLee Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 3,849 Thanks: 1,131 Thanked 374 Times in 243 Posts	Quote: Originally Posted by ocealdia Psst..!! how recent are these polls? When were they conducted, and they are obviously biased, as you are all wont to inform anyone that post a pro-Hillary poll. ABC World News, Jake Tapper, April 16, 2008: Clinton's Negatives Hit New High A record high of 54 percent of Americans have an unfavorable opinion of the New York senator, according to the ABC News/Washington Post poll. Her husband, former President Bill Clinton's unfavorability rating is almost as high at 51 percent — his highest level since leaving office. Hillary's Negatives have never been below 40 since her health care fiasco in her husband's first term. Bill Clinton has traditionally enjoyed low negatives. I think his negatives were in the 30s during the impeachment mess. __________________ "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard." H. L. Mencken
	Top

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode