DNC panel agrees to seat Michigan, Florida - Page 2

WickedLou9 · 06-02-2008, 05:20 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

It's just as dishonest, if not more, for him to accept delegates from a contest where no one voted for him.

He doesn't really get to choose which delegates he accepts.

motivez · 06-02-2008, 05:29 PM

Originally Posted by David Octavius

You still discount (from what I've read in an earlier post) those who were disenfranchised in MI because their candidate was not on the ballot - there was nothing democratic about that primary at all, seating them is worse then not seating them from a democratic perspective, a revote first makes more sense. I do agree that FL was pretty fair and should stand with half delegates as a punishment.

If they aren't going to revote, it is what it is. The only one who disenfranchised them from being able to vote for their chosen candidate is the candidate himself. Obama chose to remove his name from the ballot, he didn't have to.. Clinton didn't. I suppose they could have written someone in, but I'm not sure about that.

Originally Posted by David Octavius

If the people really meant that much to the party they would of made this process easier for them instead of worrying about what the candidates think. Hillary made a mess of MI and Obama made a mess in FL - if they lose those states in the general then it is the fault of their political process and shows just how much they still care for their own party then for the people themselves.

I'm not really sure what you mean by this

WickedLou9 · 06-02-2008, 06:15 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

If they aren't going to revote, it is what it is. The only one who disenfranchised them from being able to vote for their chosen candidate is the candidate himself. Obama chose to remove his name from the ballot, he didn't have to.. Clinton didn't. I suppose they could have written someone in, but I'm not sure about that.

I'm not really sure what you mean by this

It's not quite that simple. Clinton SHOULD have removed her name from the list, like EVERY other candidate, but she did not. She agreed when the DNC made thier ruling that these primaries should not count. Now that she can use the votes she has changed her tune and she wants the votes to count. That's shifty.

kinggovernor · 06-03-2008, 01:17 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Yeah, I'm not sure how that happened exactly. They basically took several of Hillary's and said, "Here, have a few of these." .. that isn't right

they brought up exit poll data from MSNBC as evidence of how the votes should be distributed, unbelievable.

motivez · 06-03-2008, 08:20 PM

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

It's not quite that simple. Clinton SHOULD have removed her name from the list, like EVERY other candidate, but she did not. She agreed when the DNC made thier ruling that these primaries should not count. Now that she can use the votes she has changed her tune and she wants the votes to count. That's shifty.

She was under no obligation to remove her name from the ballot, so why should she have?

And I agree, it's a complete change in position for her to want them to count now, and certainly shifty.. but it is what it is.

WickedLou9 · 06-03-2008, 08:59 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

She was under no obligation to remove her name from the ballot, so why should she have?

And I agree, it's a complete change in position for her to want them to count now, and certainly shifty.. but it is what it is.

Because it was the right thing to do. i know, I know, doing what is right is a strange concept in politics.

JaJae · 06-04-2008, 12:41 AM

Originally Posted by motivez

She was under no obligation to remove her name from the ballot, so why should she have?

And I agree, it's a complete change in position for her to want them to count now, and certainly shifty.. but it is what it is.

Hillary and Obama both agreed to the party rules and they both agreed MI would not count. They also both agreed to take their name off the ballot. Perhaps Obama was a bit niave to trust Hillary Clinton, but I don't think he should be punished for not being a dirty politician and Hillary certainly doesn't deserve to be rewarded for being a conniving shirker.

Rewarding Hillary with all the delegates from MI because Obama carried out their agreement would be a complete and total disservice to Democracy. There would be absolutely nothing fair about it. That would be advocating the type of dirty, disgusting politics we need to move away from, not reward.