I strongly disagree with #1. As for #2, Obama is supposed to be some sort of progressive superhero, since he deafeated "DLC, conservative" Clinton, so its funny to see him taking Max Baucus type positions on issues.
But consider these points
- What was "unfair" about our nomination process? All of the states and territories participated. Both candidates were on the ballot in all states with the exception of MI (and that worked to Hillary Clinton's advantage). There were over 20 debates held and millions of dollars spent on campaigning and ads.
- Presuming that the process was indeed unfair, what is your proposed path to remedying the injustice? Would that path create "collateral damage" to our party? Would it be worth it to pursue?
- If we criticize Barack Obama's positions on the issues, then we of course should criticize those of John McCain as well. I suspect that if you are a democrat of any stripe, or even a mainstream independnet, that you would find your list of disappointments with Senator Obama (or with Max Baucus or Hillary Clinton for that matter) to be FAR shorter than that of your disappointments with Senator McCain
- What is your proposed course of action that will productively serve our political agenda?
After 8 long years of a failed presidency, I want a nominee who can go all the way and fight for Democrats. If you think about the economic, foreign policy, and socil policy blunders that have occured, I don't think that's too much ask for. I know Obama is the nominee, I just want to see him stand and truly fight for us. If he doesn't do that, then we nominated the wrong person.
That's why I was first for Kucinich, then for Clinton. They were the real fighters in the bunch. Only time will tell whether Obama can be such a fighter too. I will be disappointed if he isn't strong. But regardless, there is no doubt that he is our nominee. And there is no doubt that he is a much much much better candidate than the individual on the Republican side. For these reasons, I am going to support him. Where he takes positions that make me unhappy, I will speak up. But I won't throw the baby out with the bathwater. I won't throw Obama under the bus.
His support of FISA, his refusal to count the votes in FL and MI and his dubious connections are all reasons I can't vote for him. I'm sorry, pile on if you must.
No pile on, just a question: Do you plan to sit out?
No I will find a progressive candidate to vote for, even if I have to write him or her in.
Both candidates were on the ballot in Florida. Obama actually ran ads there (as part of a national cable ad by). Neither campaigned there. In MI, Clinton was on the ballot, Obama was not. That clearly helped her, didn't it?
What's your concern about how FL was handled? Both candidates agreed not to campaign there with an understanding that the delegates wouldn't matter in the nominating process. The DNC reached a compromise to avoid pissing of FL voters. No matter how FL was decided, it would not have provided enough delegates to give Clinton the nomination.
Sorry, help me out with this.
I don't need to. It was within the purview of the DNC to decide how to do it. Clinton's margin of victory was undoubtedly higher over Obama because she was on the ballot and he was not.
Anyway, let's say the DNC gave Clinton 100% of the delegates from MI. The result of the nominating process would have been unchanged.
So what is your point other than to argue for argument's sake?
I was a strong, strong Clinton backer, but it is really silly to argue that the nomination was taken from her unfairly.
Mojo'd. I agree one hundred percent.
There is no count in which she wins the most pledge delegates. You just blatantly made that up.
Please supply some math to this, because you are being completely dishonest in my opinion, not its not my opinion, it is 100% fact that you are making that up. No matter what happened with FL and MI, which she she agreed to when she was "going to win easily" but that is a completely different issue.
Under no circumstances was she ever going to be able to get the pledge delegate lead. You are entitled to the facts, you are not entitled to your own version of them.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/ 2008/president/democratic_delegate_count .html
The math, in color.
She won the pledged delegate count!
Current pledge delegates
1766.5 1639.5 difference of 126
add 52.5 to Hillary and 33.5 to Obama for Florida
1800 1692
add 38.5 to Hillary and take away 29.5 from Obama, making it 100% instead of 50, and adding the 4 taken from Hillary
1770.5 1730.5
I just did the math, it may be off by a bit, but as you can see, unless I made a mistake somewhere, she still doesn't have the lead, closer, but she still loses.
By what metric did she win, or were you just making things up?
Nothing but Hillary dead ender propaganda, you people make me sick.
It's astonishing.
Oh, please chi! You're a repug troll. Everyone konw that.
by the DNC, which had the right to do so. There is no valid case here. Would love for Clinton to have pulled it out. WOuld have worked a lot harder for her than I will for Obama. But he won it fair and square.
However frequently you feign amusement. I get the impression you aren't really having a good time. You seem a bit apathetic about your Disruption and misplaced aggression of late.
