Should Obama accept McCain's idea of the two of them visiting Iraq???

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
since you are such a fan of saying Hillary should 'hang it up'.

Election 2008: Presidential, Senate and House Races Updated Daily

She should hang it up because she has LOST according to the RULES which she was aware of PRIOR to the primary and yet she CHOSE to run a shitty, inept, pathetic campaign that DISREGARDED the caucuses and the way that delegates are ALLOCATED.

You can argue that the Democratic primaries are a sham. But Hillary and her people knew the deal beforehand and ran an awful campaign. If we should be rewarding this kind of stupidity and ineptness, then let's also bring Giuliani back.
 
She should hang it up because she has LOST according to the RULES which she was aware of PRIOR to the primary and yet she CHOSE to run a shitty, inept, pathetic campaign that DISREGARDED the caucuses and the way that delegates are ALLOCATED.

You can argue that the Democratic primaries are a sham. But Hillary and her people knew the deal beforehand and ran an awful campaign. If we should be rewarding this kind of stupidity and ineptness, then let's also bring Giuliani back.

She certainly has not lost,

and Obama certainly has not won.


Are you aware that Obama only has 1659 pledged delegates ?

These are delegates that are pledged to vote for him.

No other delegates than said 1659 have any obligation to vote for him.

It will require a minimum of 2025 to perhaps something like over 2200 delegates to get the nomination.
 
I didn't think that even pledged delegates had to vote a specific way.

I guess you think it would be a good idea for the superdelegates to go contrary to the majority of the pledged delegates.
 
:rolleyes:

That's all a post like this deserves.

Ok. Great. I wish I knew what that meant...

What? Are you telling me Obama making stupid or false statements or misstatements is a rare occurance? I could compile quite a list.

Yesterday, on Memorial Day, Senator Obama said this: "On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes – and I see many of them in the audience here today – our sense of patriotism is particularly strong."

:coocoo:

And you guys make fun of Bush for not being a master speaker.
 
I didn't think that even pledged delegates had to vote a specific way.

that would be called a "faithless" delegate

and I think that would be a bad idea

the way we elect Presidents,
I think there are something like 540 electors
one elector for each electoral college vote

well, an elector could vote different than the way he or she was selected to by their State, There have been"faithless" electors Faithless elector - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
one or two faithless electors could have flipped the 2000 election

I don't like the concept of "faithless" electors or delegates.


I guess you think it would be a good idea for the superdelegates to go contrary to the majority of the pledged delegates.

We have Statewide primaries here.

Obama won Iowa, South Carolina, Virginia to name a few, I am sure you are aware that he won the most states.

I would expect the superdelrgates from those states to respect the will of their citizens and support Obama the winner of the elections in their States.


I also would expect the superdelegates from New York, Massachusetts, California, West Virgina to respect the will of their citizens and support Hillary the winner of the elections in their States.


Come November the "electors" will respect the will of the voters in their states and vote the same way their Statewide elections turnout.

So choosing a candidate by superdelegates voting for the loser is odd.

This will be the first time that has happened, the loser gets the nomination. :shrug:
 
Ok. Great. I wish I knew what that meant...

What? Are you telling me Obama making stupid or false statements or misstatements is a rare occurance? I could compile quite a list.

A misspeak and a flat out lie are two completely different things. Obama has never been in a situation where he was even close to sniper fire, so everyone knows that would have been a flat out lie.

You try too hard, that's why that post deserved a roll of the eyes.

Honestly to pick on that paticular Memorial Day quote is just weak. Yes, technically it's wrong, but anyone with a sense of logic can see where he was actually going with that...

When Obama starts making up words and misspeaking in over 50% of his speeches then you can start comparing him to Bush.
 
Ok. Great. I wish I knew what that meant...

What? Are you telling me Obama making stupid or false statements or misstatements is a rare occurance? I could compile quite a list.

Yesterday, on Memorial Day, Senator Obama said this: "On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes – and I see many of them in the audience here today – our sense of patriotism is particularly strong."

:coocoo:

And you guys make fun of Bush for not being a master speaker.



do you have anything of substance to offer?

seriously. are gaffes all you have?

you sound like Michelle Malkin.
 
that is just a flat out silly claim

jesus, I was there in 92, I was 36

I know who the Perrot supporters were


I don't care what the right-wing AM radio talkers say.

I'm ready to explode now...I'll try not to swear...I will try...I will.
I followed the whole Ross Perot phenemenon from the very beginning and I know for a fact that out of the 18 or 19 million votes he received that most were from people who would never have voted for Bill Clinton...thus stealing the majority of votes from Bush. This was Perot's plan from the very beginning. He hated Bush and everything he stood for ever since Bush ignored him on the Vietnam veteren issue. Remember the debates?????
Remember how kinder Perot was to Clinton????? I've still got the debates on tape so I can prove it...mister " I was there in 92". Sorry, but the fact is that without Ross Perot Bill Clinton would have lost the election. As far as Hillary Clinton goes...don't even make an attempt to go there...It's over...Finished...Kapoot. Thank the Lord!!!!!!
 
The legalities of seating MI and FL:

WASHINGTON - A Democratic Party rules committee has the authority to seat some delegates from Michigan and Florida but not fully restore the two states as Hillary Rodham Clinton wants, according to party lawyers.
ADVERTISEMENT

Democratic National Committee rules require that the two states lose at least half of their convention delegates for holding elections too early, the party's legal experts wrote in a 38-page memo.

The memo was sent late Tuesday to the 30 members of the party's Rules and Bylaws Committee, which plans to meet Saturday at a Washington hotel. The committee is considering ways to include the two important general election battlegrounds at the nominating convention in August, and the staff analysis says seating half the delegates is "as far as it legally can" go.

Here.
 
seriously. are gaffes all you have?

Not at all. There are a million substantive reasons I don't like Obama. Verbal gaffes weigh in at about a 1.0 on the Richter Scale. I'm just sensing a little hypocrisy when it comes to fumbling up sentences, mispronouncing words, etc. If Obama says "hello, Sioux City" when he's actually in Sioux Falls, I really don't care. I'm sure the man is tired. But you need to be as forgiving and understanding when President Bush makes a similar mistake.
 
Hopefully they will go to Iraq with the best of intentions instead of using the troops as a photoshoot and political pawn.
 
Not at all. There are a million substantive reasons I don't like Obama. Verbal gaffes weigh in at about a 1.0 on the Richter Scale. I'm just sensing a little hypocrisy when it comes to fumbling up sentences, mispronouncing words, etc. If Obama says "hello, Sioux City" when he's actually in Sioux Falls, I really don't care. I'm sure the man is tired. But you need to be as forgiving and understanding when President Bush makes a similar mistake.


from an amusement standpoint, there's a world of difference between a factual misstatement, and the grammatical trainwreck that is GWB. but that's only humor, it isn't substantive from a policy standpoint, i do agree with that. however, GWB's misstatements -- made while president, not while exhaustively campaigning for 6 months -- appear to belie his well-known lack of intellectual curiosity and it adds grist to the mill for those who think that this president is quite a bit dimmer than those who typically occupy the Oval Office. this isn't necessarily a fair conclusion to draw, but you can't argue the point that Bush isn't helping himself get out of the he-really-is-stupid hole.
 
But you need to be as forgiving and understanding when President Bush makes a similar mistake.

Trust me Bush makes similar mistakes to that to which you stated everyday, those aren't the ones that make the headlines. Saying the wrong city shouldn't even be a blip on the screen.

If you can't honestly see the difference then you are the one that can't be equally critical.
 
apparently not
"John McCain's proposal is nothing more than a political stunt, and we don't need any more 'Mission Accomplished' banners or walks through Baghdad markets to know that Iraq's leaders have not made the political progress that was the stated purpose of the surge. The American people don't want any more false promises of progress, they deserve a real debate about a war that has overstretched our military, and cost us thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars without making us safer."
 
Back
Top Bottom