erynthered Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KACQuZVAE3s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 The REAL Pasta Joe.... http://cache.valleywag.com/assets/resource...ushComputer.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KACQuZVAE3s That's not me, I don't wear that shade of lipstick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted June 2, 2008 Author Share Posted June 2, 2008 That's not me, I don't wear that shade of lipstick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SD Jarhead Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 So PJ-Are you really going to vote for McCain now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 So PJ-Are you really going to vote for McCain now? I can't vote for McCain because I disagree with his proposed policies. The question is whether I will vote for Obama if he's the nominee. Sometimes I think I'd vote for him, but then I get turned off due to his obnoxious supporters. Maybe it's time to look at a 3rd party candidate, or a write-in vote for Clinton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 obnoxious supporters. When used please refer to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KACQuZVAE3s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 When used please refer to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KACQuZVAE3s That's not obnoxious, that's angry. Angry at a party that disregards the popular vote and disrespects the candidate. Obnoxious is telling someone who is still in contention to quit prematurely because they're not their preferred choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted June 2, 2008 Author Share Posted June 2, 2008 That's not obnoxious, that's angry. Angry at a party that disregards the popular vote and disrespects the candidate. Obnoxious is telling someone who is still in contention to quit prematurely because they're not their preferred choice. Do you quit in the 4th Qrt with 2 minutes left and no time outs down by 2? I'm glad she stayed in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 That's not obnoxious, that's angry. Angry at a party that disregards the popular vote and disrespects the candidate. Obnoxious is telling someone who is still in contention to quit prematurely because they're not their preferred choice. Oh my god, stop spouting Hillary's talking point - no popular lead unless you do fuzzy math. Ok, so she'll quit tomorrow? At least then the primary and caucus season will be over or should she take this to Denver now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In-A-Gadda-Levitre Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 Do you quit in the 4th Qrt with 2 minutes left and no time outs down by 2? I'm glad she stayed in. but I'm winning in total yards and more fans like me than the Giants! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 Oh my god, stop spouting Hillary's talking point - no popular lead unless you do fuzzy math. Ok, so she'll quit tomorrow? At least then the primary and caucus season will be over or should she take this to Denver now? Fuzzy math? Dems gave uncommitted to Obama, so popular vote w/MI uncommitted going to Obama is Clinton +65,555. Yes, it is fair to say Clinton leads in the popular vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In-A-Gadda-Levitre Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 Fuzzy math? Dems gave uncommitted to Obama, so popular vote w/MI uncommitted going to Obama is Clinton +65,555. Yes, it is fair to say Clinton leads in the popular vote. not counting caucuses, so still fuzzy math Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 Oh my god, stop spouting Hillary's talking point - no popular lead unless you do fuzzy math. Ok, so she'll quit tomorrow? At least then the primary and caucus season will be over or should she take this to Denver now? It's only fuzzy math when Republicans or candidates I don't support do it. Sincerely, Pasta Joe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 It's a debatable point. Clinton counts the results of Michigan, a state that until Saturday had been denied delegates because it jumped ahead of other states in violation of Democratic Party rules. Though Clinton was on the ballot, Obama withdrew his name from contention in that primary. Clinton received 328,309 votes in Michigan to none for Obama. Clinton's claim also includes estimates for caucuses in Iowa, Nevada, Maine and Washington state, where no official candidate popular vote is available. Obama won Iowa, Maine and Washington state. She also includes the results from Florida, where none of the Democratic presidential candidates campaigned in advance of its primary earlier this year because the Democratic Pary had declared its delegates ineligible. Clinton won more votes than Obama in Florida. Without Florida and Michigan in the count, Obama leads Clinton by nearly 450,000 votes in the combined popular vote in primaries and caucuses where delegates were at stake. Moreover, under Democratic Party rules, the popular vote does not determine who the nominee is; delegates do. On that count, Obama has 2,068 delegates, leaving him 50 shy of the number needed to secure the nomination, with two primaries remaining. Clinton has 1905.5, according to the latest tally by the AP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 not counting caucuses, so still fuzzy math No, thats not fuzzy math, caucuses have never counted toward the Democratic primary vote total. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 not counting caucuses, so still fuzzy math Even if you include the caucuses, more people have voted for Hillary than Obama; 17,873,000 to 17,703,000. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/02/dem...race/index.html Fuzzy math is assuming all the people who voted uncommitted were voting for Obama. You can say they didn't vote for Clinton, but you can't say who they did vote for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 It's a debatable point. No, its not. It is fair to say that Clinton is leading in the popular vote. Clinton counts the results of Michigan, a state that until Saturday had been denied delegates because it jumped ahead of other states in violation of Democratic Party rules. Though Clinton was on the ballot, Obama withdrew his name from contention in that primary. Clinton received 328,309 votes in Michigan to none for Obama. Hay, did you know that the Democrats awarded Obama the "Uncommitted" vote? Clinton's claim also includes estimates for caucuses in Iowa, Nevada, Maine and Washington state, where no official candidate popular vote is available. Obama won Iowa, Maine and Washington state. She also includes the results from Florida, where none of the Democratic presidential candidates campaigned in advance of its primary earlier this year because the Democratic Pary had declared its delegates ineligible. Clinton won more votes than Obama in Florida. Hay, did you know that they went ahead and seated Florida? Hay, did you also know that regardless of the caucuses (which aren't included in Democratic popular vote totals), Clinton has the lead that I posted. Without Florida and Michigan in the count, Obama leads Clinton by nearly 450,000 votes in the combined popular vote in primaries and caucuses where delegates were at stake. Hay, did you know that they seated Florida and Michigan? Moreover, under Democratic Party rules, the popular vote does not determine who the nominee is; delegates do. On that count, Obama has 2,068 delegates, leaving him 50 shy of the number needed to secure the nomination, with two primaries remaining. Clinton has 1905.5, according to the latest tally by the AP. Hay, did you know that this has NOTHING to do with the statement that Hillary is leading the popular vote being fair? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 Fuzzy math? Dems gave uncommitted to Obama, so popular vote w/MI uncommitted going to Obama is Clinton +65,555. Yes, it is fair to say Clinton leads in the popular vote. The committee didn't in any way count the votes. They are not official. In fact, part of the ruling staurday was that the votes do not count. The primary still does not count according to the people that do the counting, the Democratic party and ruling committee. Hillary does not get the 700,000 votes because the primary even after the ruling was not made official in any way. They only used the votes as a guideline to make an arbitrary decision on how the delegates would be seated. That's it. They did not make the primary votes suddenly valid. They established the fact that the primary was invalid and no votes were counted. http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2...ns_endgame.html The machinery of the Democratic Party has now coalesced around Obama, a dramatic role reversal over the past 17 months. Clinton began as the establishment candidate and is now on the outside looking in. Obama began as the outsider, the insurgent, and is now the toast of the establishment. If any further evidence of this shift were needed, it came Saturday. Obama saw his nomination hastened by a behind-closed-doors deal of the Democratic National Committee's Rules and Bylaws Committee that settled disputes over Michigan and Florida in a way that did nothing to derail Obama's route to victory. The most important outcome of Saturday's Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting was to render Michigan's primary illegitimate, a huge blow to Clinton's popular vote strategy. The allocation of delegates agreed upon by the committee bore no resemblance to the popular vote in the state. Sen. Carl Levin, in an exchange with Clinton senior adviser Harold Ickes, debunked the idea of trying to use the results of the primary to determine how the delegates would be apportioned. "You're calling for a fair reflection of a flawed primary," Levin said. Without Michigan's votes, Clinton's argument of winning the popular vote beings to crumble. The Real Clear Politics calculations of the popular vote give Obama the lead under all scenarios, except the inclusion of Michigan. The latest figures show Obama leading by 24,524 votes. That includes both Puerto Rico and, now, Florida, whose primary results were blessed by the Rules and Bylaws Committee on Saturday in the compromise that seated that state's delegation. Sorry, Joe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 Even if you include the caucuses, more people have voted for Hillary than Obama; 17,873,000 to 17,703,000. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/02/dem...race/index.html Fuzzy math is assuming all the people who voted uncommitted were voting for Obama. You can say they didn't vote for Clinton, but you can't say who they did vote for. On Saturday, they officially ruled the votes in Michigan DID NOT count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts