Chilly Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 Obama wants Florida and Michigan to count now that he's won Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swede316 Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 Funny how he changes his tune after he's won...If he wins the White House I wonder what other positions will he change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 Should that have happened during the Primary? No. Now that it's over of course he's going ask for that to happen now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 Should that have happened during the PrimaryWhen it actually counted? No. Now that it's over Hillary concededof course he's going ask for that to happen try to save face now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted August 4, 2008 Author Share Posted August 4, 2008 Should that have happened during the Primary? No. Now that it's over of course he's going ask for that to happen now. At least you're admitting here that he's no different from any other one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 I only hope the fine folks of Michigan and Florida take it to heart that their opinions matter to Obama and will be counted. Unless it matters, in which case they only count if they agree with him... BTW - does this mean we can finally acknowledge that Clinton beat Obama in the popular vote? Or is the Obama camp saying that the FL/MI delegates count but not the voters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 All in all, it's old news. He said during the primary that their votes should count. However, he also said in a nutshell that rules are rules. His campaign followed them, hers did not. Again, old news. And Florida and Michigan shouldn't blame Obama, they should blame their state party officials. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted August 4, 2008 Author Share Posted August 4, 2008 All in all, it's old news. He said during the primary that their votes should count. However, he also said in a nutshell that rules are rules. His campaign followed them, hers did not. Again, old news. And Florida and Michigan shouldn't blame Obama, they should blame their state party officials. And now he's saying there are only rules when he feels like it would benefit him politically to have them. Sounds like another President I know, I think his name has a "W" somewhere in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 And now he's saying there are only rules when he feels like it would benefit him politically to have them. Sounds like another President I know, I think his name has a "W" somewhere in it. Andrew Johnson? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 And now he's saying there are only rules when he feels like it would benefit him politically to have them. Sounds like another President I know, I think his name has a "W" somewhere in it. William Jefferson Clinton? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 Obama wants Florida and Michigan to count now that he's won I dont know why you're all over Obama. He's always been a proponent of "change." He didnt want the votes to count, and now he's "changed" and thinks they should count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 And now he's saying there are only rules when he feels like it would benefit him politically to have them. Sounds like another President I know, I think his name has a "W" somewhere in it. Fwankwin Dewano Woosevewt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 I dont know why you're all over Obama. He's always been a proponent of "change." He didnt want the votes to count, and now he's "changed" and thinks they should count. "Belief we can change in". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 The question is... Is he diferent than the other only viable side (that is the Republicans)... The answer is yes, of course he is. Unless you want the same as we had the last 8 years... He is the only change in the equation. Now we don't know what he holds... Except that it seems a lot of people seem really scared of something they haven't seen yet. Like I said... We take the known or the unknown... The known is pretty bad. I say take the unknown, even if it scares the bejesus out of you... Oh well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 Fwankwin Dewano Woosevewt? Is that you Barbara Walters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 Unless you want the same as we had the last 8 years... He is the only change in the equation. The only change in the equation? I beg to differ: Chuck Baldwin (Constitution) Bob Barr (Libertarian) Cynthia McKinney (Green) Brian Moore (Socialist) Ralph Nader (Independent) Ted Weill (Reform) All represent a change in the equation. The only difference between the above and Obama equation is the coefficient of voters who don't realize they have more choices than Tweedle-Rep and Tweedle-Dem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 The only change in the equation? I beg to differ:Chuck Baldwin (Constitution) Bob Barr (Libertarian) Cynthia McKinney (Green) Brian Moore (Socialist) Ralph Nader (Independent) Ted Weill (Reform) All represent a change in the equation. The only difference between the above and Obama equation is the coefficient of voters who don't realize they have more choices than Tweedle-Rep and Tweedle-Dem Cynthia McKinney represents change? You want to rethink that one, maybe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 Cynthia McKinney represents change? You want to rethink that one, maybe? Just pulled a list of 3rd party candidates off the internet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 Cynthia McKinney represents change? You want to rethink that one, maybe? Cynthia is living proof that no matter how bad things get, there are still people who could make them dramatically worse. p.s. good opportunity to post my all time favorite separated-at-birth pics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 p.s. good opportunity to post my all time favorite separated-at-birth pics. :wallbash: Is VABills her campaign manager? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts