U2 Feedback

U2 Feedback (http://www.u2interference.com/forums/)
-   Free Your Mind Archive (http://www.u2interference.com/forums/f290/)
-   -   Fracturing of a Party Part II The Democrats (http://www.u2interference.com/forums/f290/fracturing-of-a-party-part-ii-the-democrats-184186.html)

Dreadsox 02-13-2008 06:23 PM

Fracturing of a Party Part II The Democrats
 
[Q]Dem Delegate Fight Pits Sharpton Vs. NAACP
February 13, 2008 9:24 AM

Interesting development in the Democratic delegate fight -- one that pits civil rights leader against civil rights leader.

As you know, the DNC stripped the Michigan and Florida Democratic parties of its delegates as punishment for moving up their primaries to earlier in the process than the national party wanted them to.

With no candidate campaigning having taken place in those states, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, cruised to early victories in Michigan on January 15 -- where hers was the only name on the ballot -- and in Florida on January 29, and is now claiming those delegates. Needless to say, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, disputes this.

The DNC has said both states can holds caucuses to comply with party rules and have recognized delegates.

Yesterday, Clinton's side of the argument got a boost when NAACP chairman Julian Bond wrote to DNC chair Howard Dean to express "great concern at the prospect that million of voters in Michigan and Florida could ultimately have their votes completely discounted." Not seating the Michigan and Florida delegations would remind Americans of the "sordid history of racially discriminatory primaries," Bond said.

This morning, Rev. Al Sharpton sided with Obama, writing to Dean to express the opposite sentiment.

"I firmly believe that changing the rules now, and seating delegates from Florida and Michigan at this point would not only violate the Democratic party's rules of fairness, but also would be a grave injustice," Sharpton wrote. "Changing the rules in the middle of a presidential contest is patently unfair both to the candidates (including Senator Edwards) and to Democratic voters everywhere."

Sharpton said that Bond's argument of disenfranchisement "should have been made many months ago before the decision was made to strip these states of their delegates, and, once the decision was made, it should have been vigorously objected to and contested by those who felt it disenfranchised voters. To raise that claim now smacks of politics in its form most raw and undercuts the moral authority behind such an argument."

[/Q]

OMG - I agree with Sharpton - The Apocalypse is here now!!!!

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...legate-fi.html

If Hillary gets away with this, it is CRIMINAL!!!!!!!!!!!

BVS 02-13-2008 06:30 PM

Wow, I agree with Sharpton as well, I guess if you take enough shots you'll make a basket every once in awhile.

But on that note, I wouldn't exactly call this a fracturing of a party:shrug:

So quit trying to steal my thunder:wink:

Dreadsox 02-13-2008 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
Wow, I agree with Sharpton as well, I guess if you take enough shots you'll make a basket every once in awhile.

But on that note, I wouldn't exactly call this a fracturing of a party:shrug:

So quit trying to steal my thunder:wink:

Haha!!! I thought your thread would be about the Dem's originally.

I truly believe the Dems are equally as fractured. This system was set up to get her the nomination quickly so she could use the massive amount of money to win the general election.

This, would DESTROY the party for the general election if she succeeds in doing this.

BVS 02-13-2008 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dreadsox


Haha!!! I thought your thread would be about the Dem's originally.

I truly believe the Dems are equally as fractured. This system was set up to get her the nomination quickly so she could use the massive amount of money to win the general election.

This, would DESTROY the party for the general election if she succeeds in doing this.

True, but I don't see quite the fracturing in idealogy than I do with the Reps...

phillyfan26 02-13-2008 06:45 PM

I think you're talking about two already fractured parties. I think the GOP is just fracturing at a higher rate of speed right now.

Dreadsox 02-13-2008 06:48 PM

I think the GOP is done fracturing. There is not much more to fracture at this point.

I would say the Democratic party has a fault line building up pressure, and the question is how big a magnitude will the earthquake be?

BVS 02-13-2008 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dreadsox


I would say the Democratic party has a fault line building up pressure, and the question is how big a magnitude will the earthquake be?

Good point...

phanan 02-13-2008 08:25 PM

Damn, I agree with Sharpton, too.

Yikes.

U2democrat 02-13-2008 09:46 PM

Hooray Rev. Al!


:lol:

yolland 02-13-2008 11:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dreadsox
I would say the Democratic party has a fault line building up pressure, and the question is how big a magnitude will the earthquake be?
What would the source of the pressure be? Are you saying you see the present tight primary race as a manifestation of tensions within the party that were already there, and if so, which tensions?

I don't think the Democratic leadership has any intention of seating Florida's and Michigan's delegates, unless perhaps they're freed to vote for either candidate or split 50-50 by fiat.

Dreadsox 02-14-2008 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by yolland

What would the source of the pressure be? Are you saying you see the present tight primary race as a manifestation of tensions within the party that were already there, and if so, which tensions?

I don't think the Democratic leadership has any intention of seating Florida's and Michigan's delegates, unless perhaps they're freed to vote for either candidate or split 50-50 by fiat.

I would say without any hesitation that:

1) This system was designed to give her the nomination quickly to save her $$$$$. It didn't and there is tension because of this.

2) Democracy broke out and the Clintons, through their tactics have created a fault line, purposefully thinking he was the "black candidate". Painting him as such, and their comments in doing this have created a division in the party between the African American Democrats and the party. If Obama loses because of FL & Michigan - uh oh - will voters turn out in Nov.?

3) Obama is now with each passing week breaking down the alleged barriers that the Clintons relied upon. Latin voters have slowly been moving twards him. THis was a division they counted on to win in TX - BIG in TX. Women are also starting to increase in moving his way.

4) SHe was the ONLY candidate on the ballot in FL. SHe feels she deserves all of those delegates. They want it at all costs. If this happens the divisions and fracturing will be immense.

anitram 02-14-2008 06:23 AM

I honestly believe all the super delegate stuff and MI and FL are blown out of proportion and will only come into play if we have a statistical tie.

Hillary needs to win OH and TX huge. And PA. She's going to essentially lose everywhere else and probably by enormous margins. Can she win OH and TX by double digits? I think it's early to speculate at this point but I'd say TX is a no go and OH is a better shot. If she and Obama essentially tie or she wins by such a small margin that the delegate difference is negligible, the writing will be on the wall for her.

The Clintons never give up; this much is true. But I think she cares about her legacy and she is not done in life and there is no chance that she will behave as some pundits suggest. This is not a woman who hasn't been publicly humiliated before (in much worse ways than losing the nomination for the presidency), and it isn't a woman who is completely politically unsavvy.

If she wins huge, which at this point is very debatable, then at most I could see a re-vote in those states. But that is the worst case scenario. Maybe I have too much faith in the Clintons. But I just think that they are intelligent enough to realize the personal costs that would come to them, and they will abide by the rules of self-preservation.

kellyahern 02-14-2008 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dreadsox


4) SHe was the ONLY candidate on the ballot in FL. SHe feels she deserves all of those delegates. They want it at all costs. If this happens the divisions and fracturing will be immense.

I think that was only in Michigan. In Florida, Obama was on the ballot, along with Edwards and even the other guys who had dropped out already.

The trouble is that a lot of democratic primary voters might not have bothered to vote because they were under the impression that it didn't count. So the result of the Florida primary might not be an accurate representation of what Florida democrats want, which is why it should not count.

CTU2fan 02-14-2008 08:07 AM

Wow I generally agree with Al but not this time. Votes in MI and here in FL ought to count, and most of the talk surrounding this issue was that in the end the party would cave and the MI & FL delegates would end up being seated. While it's possible that some voters stayed home under the assumption that their votes wouldn't count it's pretty silly to think that only potential Obama voters would feel this way.

In the end hopefully it doesn't matter, you'd like to see one of these 2 candidates accept defeat so the other can move on to campaigning for November.

MaxFisher 02-14-2008 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dreadsox
4) SHe was the ONLY candidate on the ballot in FL. SHe feels she deserves all of those delegates. They want it at all costs. If this happens the divisions and fracturing will be immense.
I agree. Hillary will fight tooth and nail to the very end. She'll pull out all the stops. Florida/Michigan 2008 will make Florida 2000 look like a tea party.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:00 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com