• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF Thread of THE END and FIST POUNDS (NYT: Hillary drop out/endorse Saturday)

Status
Not open for further replies.

DrForester

Kills Photobucket
killakiz said:
How can you say with a straight face that this primary can be divided in Hillary's 73-55 way fairly, it should be 50/50 or none at all, hell even the Michigan Democratic Party's number is almost fair, but 73-55 is in no way fair.


Well, much as I hate Hillary, that IS the way the people voted. 55% of people in Michigan voted for Hillary, 55% of whatever delegates are awarded should go to Clinton.

Should the remaining go to Obama? Yes (Especially since the other candidates with their name off the ballot have endorsed Obama)

Do I think the results would have been different if Obama had been on the ballot? Yes.

Do I think that a panel for 30 people should be able guess after the fact what the people would have said and take votes away from a candidate? no, even if it is Hillary.



Tamanon said:
So they can look like they lost their challenge. So Clinton can't claim Obama took it.

That's a really good theory there.
 

reilo

learning some important life lessons from magical Negroes
DrForester said:
Well, much as I hate Hillary, that IS the way the people voted. 73% of people in Michigan voted for Hillary, 73% of whatever delegates are awarded should go to Clinton.

Should the remaining go to Obama? Yes (Especially since the other candidates with their name off the ballot have endorsed Obama)

Do I think the results would have been different if Obama had been on the ballot? Yes.

Do I think that a panel for 30 people should be able to change the votes based on exit polls and other questionable data? No way.

73%?

Wtf?

55% voted for Hillary. Where do you get 73% from?
 

grandjedi6

Master of the Google Search
DrForester said:
Well, much as I hate Hillary, that IS the way the people voted. 73% of people in Michigan voted for Hillary, 73% of whatever delegates are awarded should go to Clinton.

Should the remaining go to Obama? Yes (Especially since the other candidates with their name off the ballot have endorsed Obama)

Do I think the results would have been different if Obama had been on the ballot? Yes.

Do I think that a panel for 30 people should be able guess after the fact what the people would have said and take votes away from a candidate? no, even if it is Hillary.
Hillary got 55% of the vote, not 73%

Also Biden hasn't endorsed Obama
 

Diablos

Member
killakiz: What's more, is why SHOULDN'T the uncommitted votes in Michigan go to Obama? If those people wanted to vote for Hillary Clinton, they would have. They didn't. They're uncommitted for a reason. Nobody was forcing them to vote against Hillary, her name clearly being on the ballot. They wanted to vote for either Obama, Edwards, or Richardson. Most of them likely wanted to vote for Obama. Edwards told his delegates to do whatever they wanted to freely; he let them go, which would have applied to delegates he would have won in Michigan. Richardson really wouldn't have got enough votes for it to make a difference that would impact Hillary. Hell, Edwards probably wouldn't have either. And what Sen. Levin is proposing allows Hillary to win anyway. What else does she think she can get?
 

killakiz

Member
DrForester said:
Well, much as I hate Hillary, that IS the way the people voted. 73% of people in Michigan voted for Hillary, 73% of whatever delegates are awarded should go to Clinton.

Should the remaining go to Obama? Yes (Especially since the other candidates with their name off the ballot have endorsed Obama)

Do I think the results would have been different if Obama had been on the ballot? Yes.

Do I think that a panel for 30 people should be able guess after the fact what the people would have said and take votes away from a candidate? no, even if it is Hillary.
Giving votes to Hillary is still taking some away form Obama, since the primary was flawed you can't use the 55% because some people couldn't vote for their first choice, so if I was an Obama supporter, but his name wasn't on the ballot, then I would vote for my second choice Clinton.
 

sangreal

Member
Diablos said:
killakiz: What's more, is why SHOULDN'T the uncommitted votes in Michigan go to Obama? If those people wanted to vote for Hillary Clinton, they would have. They didn't. They're uncommitted for a reason. Nobody was forcing them to vote against Hillary, her name clearly being on the ballot. They wanted to vote for either Obama, Edwards, or Richardson. Most of them likely wanted to vote for Obama. Edwards told his delegates to do whatever they wanted to freely; he let them go, which would have applied to delegates he would have won in Michigan. Richardson really didn't get enough votes for it to make a difference that would impact Hillary. Hell, Edwards probably wouldn't have either. And what Sen. Levin is proposing allows Hillary to win anyway. What else does she think she can get?
The Clinton argument is that it would disenfranchise Uncommited :lol
 

reilo

learning some important life lessons from magical Negroes
These motherfuckers are so close to disenfranchising millions of voters like me if they hand this nomination to Hillary.
 

DrForester

Kills Photobucket
reilo said:
These motherfuckers are so close to disenfranchising millions of voters like me if they hand this nomination to Hillary.


There is no realistic decision that could be made today that would give Hillary a net gain of more than 50 delegates (and 50 is incredibly optimistic for the Hillary camp)and Obama's lead is over 200.
 

Xeke

Banned
reilo said:
These motherfuckers are so close to disenfranchising millions of voters like me if they hand this nomination to Hillary.

What? That isn't even a remote outcome of this meeting...
 

Amir0x

Banned
reilo said:
These motherfuckers are so close to disenfranchising millions of voters like me if they hand this nomination to Hillary.

what's with the futzing here

seriously, NOBODY IS GOING TO AGREE to ANY ALLOCATION that allows Hillary to snatch the nomination from Obama.

Nobody.

So stop worrying
 

Diablos

Member
sangreal said:
The Clinton argument is that it would disenfranchise Uncommited :lol
Yeah, I know, and it's bullshit. I don't know how people who support her can spew this crap with a straight face.
 

reilo

learning some important life lessons from magical Negroes
Amir0x said:
what's with the futzing here

seriously, NOBODY IS GOING TO AGREE to ANY ALLOCATION that allows Hillary to snatch the nomination from Obama.

Nobody.

So stop worrying

But they are giving her ammunition to let her run well into the convention.
 

sangreal

Member
Diablos said:
Yeah, I know, and it's bullshit. I don't know how people who support her can spew this crap with a straight face.

I still can't believe this guy actually said people in Michigan had no idea their vote wouldn't count
 

Insertia

Member
Been watching for a couple of hours and it boils down to this:

Obama as well as other candidates took their name off the ballots because that was the rule.
That's all there is to it. You split both states 50/50 because coming back to change the rules once it's over is unfair to both candidates. Almost cheating.

edit: donna brazile agrees
 

Diablos

Member
Amir0x said:
what's with the futzing here

seriously, NOBODY IS GOING TO AGREE to ANY ALLOCATION that allows Hillary to snatch the nomination from Obama.

Nobody.

So stop worrying
Hillary's supporters not shutting up and defying logic with nearly every word that comes out of their mouth ensures a lack of party unity (to some extent, how much has yet to be seen), and that alone makes me worry regardless of outcome. And, you're right, nobody is going to let her steal the nomination from Obama. Yet she could keep marching on for as long as possible and just complicate things even further. The fact that this debate is even happening is awful. If Hillary's people actually had something called common sense, Hillary would have understood by now that she has no chance no matter what happens in MI and FL. Instead, she'd rather keep pushing forward for no good reason. I think McCain will prove to be a formidable candidate (many of his critics underestimate him); Obama can't afford to be putting up with crap from someone in his own party while also going up against the GOP.
 

scorcho

testicles on a cold fall morning
Insertia said:
Been watching for a couple of hours and it boils down to this:

Obama as well as other candidates took their name off the ballots because that was the rule.
That's all there is to it. You split both states 50/50 because coming back to change the rules once it's over is unfair to both candidates. Almost cheating.
i think there was some gamesmanship involved. Clinton led polls there for quite some time and the other candidates likely tried to preemptively disarm to force Clinton to as well.
 

iapetus

Scary Euro Man
reilo said:
YOU JACKASS. You fucked this up to begin with by BREAKING THE DNC RULES by voting early.

The fact that this is even relevant shows how fucked up the system is in the first place. If nothing else, this shitstorm should convince them to look at fixing the basic system.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom