home
Demographics | 307 comments (307 topical)
Fair and square? (5.00 / 4) (#28)
by kenoshaMarge on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:43:11 PM EST
Without FL and MI voters having their say? Nonsense.

[ Parent ]
I'm not wonky enough to work the calculators, so (none / 0) (#44)
by sarissa on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:48:04 PM EST
answer me this:

Would Hillary be ahead in delegates or popular vote if both MI and FL were included as is?

[ Parent ]

I think she would be within 14 (5.00 / 5) (#57)
by bjorn on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:51:00 PM EST
delegates, and after WV and KY she would be ahead, so yes, it would have changed everything had those states counted.  It would have had a measurable impact on his momentum after those states primaries, imo.

[ Parent ]
He wasn't on the ballot in MI (1.00 / 0) (#74)
by AdamSmithsHand on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:54:24 PM EST
How close she'd be if both had actually campaigned an been on the ballot in all states is an open question.

She agreed to these rules until she decided that she didn't.

[ Parent ]

The RULES allow for a revote (5.00 / 3) (#86)
by bjorn on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:56:41 PM EST
that is what you keep leaving out.  And by the way, if you read the pledge all she agreed to was not to campaign. She did not agree the votes would never count.

[ Parent ]
I keep leaving out? (1.00 / 0) (#111)
by AdamSmithsHand on Wed May 07, 2008 at 05:03:34 PM EST
Show me anothe rcomment where I left it out.

I fully supported a re-vote.  Tough for a good portion of the time, Hillary Clinton opposed one.  In fact back in the early part of thsi year I used to find it curious how most of the Hillary supporters on the blogsphere ignored the suggestion.

[ Parent ]

Chorus: he asked to have his name (5.00 / 4) (#105)
by oculus on Wed May 07, 2008 at 05:01:12 PM EST
taken off the ballot in MI.  He did campaign in FL.

[ Parent ]
Wrong wrong wrong (5.00 / 4) (#110)
by Trickster on Wed May 07, 2008 at 05:03:20 PM EST
Clinton fully honored every agreement she entered into regarding the campaign.  She NEVER agreed that the Michigan and Florida delegations should not be seated, (nor did any other candidate, by the way, even to this day).

[ Parent ]
IIRC, Hillary was ahead in the popular vote (5.00 / 2) (#70)
by Joelarama on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:54:04 PM EST
before last night if you counted Michigan and Florida.  The delegates are uncertain, I believe, because Florida and Michigan would have to apportion them.

As I understand it, the argument about Florida and Michigan is all about the popular vote.  It's unclear to me if WV and KY, etc., could make up for Hillary's lost ground in NC.

I think both states need to be seated and counted, and the decision must be made pronto.  

Otherwise, we'll lose any chance in both states, because Obama slow-walked and blocked the revotes.

[ Parent ]

Not quite (none / 0) (#273)
by IzikLA on Wed May 07, 2008 at 06:06:19 PM EST
But she would be very close, and the whole narrative that was built against her would not have been in the media every day of this campaign.  And once these last 6 contests were done, they would probably be about even, thus ensuring that the SD's could just make decisions based on their own electability assessments rather than the media calling this whole thing for us.

[ Parent ]

Demographics | 307 comments (307 topical)

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft