Time to End this Debate
I could go on for two or three pages about the whole Michigan and Florida issue, but instead, i will make this very short and to the point by simply stating all of the obvious. I simply don't understand Hillary's argument. I really need one of her supporters to explain it to me. Before the primaries were held in both Michigan and Florida both Obama and Hillary agreed to the sanctions that would be imposed on the states if they broke the rules. If you are a Hillary supporter please think about this for a few seconds. Seriously, think about it. That means that when the party told Hillary: "Hillary if Michigan and Florida break the rules, their delegates will not be seated." For clarification, this means that they will not count. Which means that no matter how many people vote in each of the two states, the delegates in those states will not be seated in the convention. Which means that in a hipothetical situation, if Hillary Clinton gets 55% of the votes in one of those two states, the delegates will still not be seated. If she gets 60%, the delegates will still not be seated. And guess what, if she gets 100% of the votes, the selegates will still not be seated. However, if she only gets 10% of the votes, the delegates will still not be seated.
Now, i may not agree with the nomination process. Perhaps they should have all of the States vote in one day. Maybe that would make more sense. Perhaps they should punish states who move their primaries differently. But regardless of what I think, the fact is that when Hillary was told what the punishment will be, she didn't mention how unfair that was. She was not concerned about only counting 48 states and not 50. She didn't mention that she believed that the punishment was too harsh. But even if she did complain, what we know is that she agreed. She agreed. Think about that. That means that when she was told what the punishment will be she said: "fine." She agreed witht the punishment, which means that she understood that MIchigan and Florida will not count. She knew that. Knowing, as in, i know that my name is Hilary Clinton. She agreed, as in, I agree with the punishment. So Hillary agreed that the delegates should not be counted if the two states brake the rules. She said, "Ok." as in "Yes."
So can someone please, please, explain to me how after Hillary agrees with the punishment she disagrees with the punishment. How can anyone make the case that it is not fair, and therefore they should seat the delegates the way the votes were counted. How? How?! Is that fair?
It's also time to end the debate because the meeting is over.
May 31, 2008 10:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
The meeting is over but the dabate is not.
May 31, 2008 10:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary supporters, please go here:
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/05/an-honest-question-for-clinton.php
May 31, 2008 10:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with you, and would like to add this to it.
The Dems R&B decision today, allowed the votes cast to have representation.
The GOP, on the other hand, takes every vote that was not cast for the final winner and tosses them out. Winner takes all does not represent. It completely disenfranchises all those non-winner votes.
The GOP convention is a display of insider power. Maybe Cheney will re-appoint himself as VP again, like he did in 2000.
I have no doubt, that 2008's great voter turnout and interest will result in changes to the way we elect.
Transparent conventions, paper ballots, easier recounts, fewer lawsuits and court interventions, easier voting methods, following Wisconsin's voter registration system which is fraud proof, and the beginning of calling out the innuendo driven media.
The best change would be the prevention of any religious entity from politics.
We are on the right track.
May 31, 2008 10:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
But who cares what the rules were and what the rules are? Who cares what Ms. Clinton said a year ago or so? What matters is that Mrs. Clinton is entitled to the presidency and the Democratic party has no right to take that away from her. She must be the nominee and the next president, because otherwise she will be campaigning for the next 4 or 8 years - and you thought, 5 months of Democratic primaries and caucuses were too much? She will haunt you and never forgive you for not voting for her - she deserved 100% (sorry make that 99%, since we are not in Zimbabwe or the Soviet Union) of the votes. And she succeeded, because she got 100% of the votes that were cast for her - and you all know that the rest do not count. So where's the problem?
June 1, 2008 7:42 AM | Reply | Permalink