| Feb 16 @ 4:52 PM |
Count Every Vote |
|
Gallows_Humor

Posts: 7,784
|
........
am so surprised no courts have been invoked to restrain the DNC for its unlawful rules in violation of public policy.
Is there anyone who can provide me with a quote from any federal source which purports to allow a private club to nullify a state or federal law?
what state or federal law was violated here???
Contract law states that both parties must have a meeting of the mind..or there is no contract...
there is no contract here..and the DNC does not have to seat them...
|
|
 |
|
| Feb 16 @ 5:01 PM |
Count Every Vote |
|
MusicMonster

Posts: 2,954
|
GH I think you are speaking from a rather biased perspective, with a specific candidate in mind you'd like to promote.
I'd suggest if the tables were turned, you very well might see it in quite another light..
But, that's human nature for ya..
-MM
|
 |
|
| Feb 16 @ 5:07 PM |
Count Every Vote |
|
Gallows_Humor

Posts: 7,784
|
well you could think that... but remember that I predict/ed it will go to a dark horse convention..
and I really am pissed at those two states for trying to pull a fast one... what if next time, california decides to be the first one to hold a primary? .... or new york...
|
|
 |
|
| Feb 16 @ 5:13 PM |
Count Every Vote |
|
SyndilLucian

Posts: 1,046
|
I hate to admit I was not paying attention in Civics (Mr. Burroughs will be horrified) but what effect do the primaries have on who is the nominee from each party? Do the numbers gotten from each state during their primaries determine how their delegates to the DNC will vote? If so, then why do we need to have the convention? It sounds like it was already decided before the convention was even seated.
|
 |
|
| Feb 16 @ 5:16 PM |
Count Every Vote |
|
Say_Yes

Posts: 1,779
|
well you could think that... but remember that I predicted it will go to a dark horse convention..
and really am pissed at those two states for trying to pull a fast one... what if next time, california decides to be the first one to hold a primary? .... or new york... A. Neither of them were the first, or even the second for that matter. Michigan was third on 1/15/08 & Florida was sixth on 1/29/08.
B. So what if another state is first? Why should Iowa & New Hampshire be the first two? I'm not saying that they shouldn't be first, I'm simply asking what is in those two states, which gives them the right to be first and why would be so wrong if CA, NY or some other state was the first to hold a primary or caucus?
Could it be that Hillary was very strong in the demographics in Michigan (lots of union votes) and in Florida (lots of old people)? Did the DNC want to prevent her from being the nominee?
Also, why strip the super delegates from Florida & Michigan? The fact that the primaries were early in those states, would have no effect on the super delegates, since they do not have to commit, until the convention. Still, the DNC stripped three US senators, 15 congressmen & 1 govenor from the list of super delegates, because they are located in those states.
|
|
 |
|
| Feb 16 @ 5:44 PM |
Count Every Vote |
|
Gallows_Humor

Posts: 7,784
|
hi SL...
links... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_%28United_States%29_presidential_primaries%2C_2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_2008_Republican_Party_presidential_primaries
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_Party_%28United_States%29#2008_Presidential_nominating_process
Could it be that Hillary was very strong in the demographics in Michigan (lots of union votes) and in Florida (lots of old people)? Did the DNC want to prevent her from being the nominee? thinking it was more a case of...it isnt broken so why try to fix it.. and not an attempt to scuttle hillary...
besides..Obama did well in michigan.. she only had about a 30 delegate advantage over He and Edwards... and there is no telling just what the outcome would heve been if those two were listed on the ballot?
http://www.mlive.com/elections/index.ssf/2008/02/michigan_dems_allocated_delega.html
and..if california or new york went first... think of all the money that would have to be spent right out the gate...
[Edited on 2/16/2008 5:47 PM]
|
 |
|
| Feb 16 @ 5:46 PM |
Count Every Vote |
|
iam7545

Posts: 4,151
|
gh - Obama was not on the Ballot in Mich -
|
|
 |
|
| Feb 16 @ 5:49 PM |
Count Every Vote |
|
Gallows_Humor

Posts: 7,784
|
helloooo Iam.... they (obama and edwards voters.).were told to vote undecided... To not write them in as those never get counted... Hillary should not have been on it either..but some way..some how....she was....
|
 |
|
| Feb 16 @ 5:55 PM |
Count Every Vote |
|
iam7545

Posts: 4,151
|
so then how did obama do well in Mich as you posted?
He was not on the ballot - Howard Dean should be hung for allowing the Dems to be in this position.
They have made a mockery of the election. Obama and Billary have paid more than ONE MILLION DOLLARS to the super delegates for their votes. Most of these so called super delegates are OLD WHITE MEN that are in the Senate and COngress or were in the Senate and Congress-
There will be fighting in the streets if they allow Mich and FL delegates to be seated!
How wonderful
|
|
 |
|
| Feb 16 @ 6:11 PM |
Count Every Vote |
|
Gallows_Humor

Posts: 7,784
|
so then how did obama do well in Mich as you posted? semantics "r" us???
hillary recieved 55 percent of the tainted vote.. the others received... 45 percent... you all are talking like she swept the election by a landslide......and that she will be robbed of the nomination come convention time... all the while blaming the DNC... I still say..blame the two states...
|
 |
|
| Feb 16 @ 6:14 PM |
Count Every Vote |
|
iam7545

Posts: 4,151
|
the others?
How does that interpret to delegates??? As far as I understand he gets NONE?
Just what are you taking about GH?
|
|
 |
|
| Feb 16 @ 6:22 PM |
Count Every Vote |
|
Gallows_Humor

Posts: 7,784
|
go back and think it over...none of them get any at this point..but if one were to extrapolate the results as to how they should have been..( something that evidently... your brain cannot fathom here..) hillary would have won some..and lost some... there is not a winner take all delegate election.....
just for you Iam... here is a repost of the link you might have missed in your haste to post...
http://www.mlive.com/elections/index.ssf/2008/02/michigan_dems_allocated_delega.html
|
 |
|
| Feb 16 @ 6:29 PM |
Count Every Vote |
|
iam7545

Posts: 4,151
|
gh - where do you read that any of the delegate are committed to Obama?
Anything they do that resembles that will result in lawsuits.
Any Al Sharpton has already declared war if they do.
|
|
 |
|
| Feb 16 @ 6:36 PM |
Count Every Vote |
|
Gallows_Humor

Posts: 7,784
|
gh - where do you read that any of the delegate are committed to Obama
... my last post here...you are tedious (today...)
1) no democratic delegates from michigan will be seated at the convention unless they redo their primary to current DNC rules...
2) some people are saying that Hillary is losing delegates big time because of this..and just maybe the nomination... I don't see it...
3) you come in here not to contribute to the topic.... but to try to discredit my posts with 1/2 truths, tangents and red herrings... ( as usual.... )
|
 |
|
| Feb 16 @ 6:51 PM |
Count Every Vote |
|
iam7545

Posts: 4,151
|
gh - you are truly a noodlehead -
You need to layoff of wiki for a while - you have lost it!
|
|
 |
|
| Feb 16 @ 7:49 PM |
Count Every Vote |
|
Bj864

Posts: 3,110
|
I still say..blame the two states... I think there is something "fishy" about this entire situation.
I live in Florida and no one asked me if I wanted an early primary. Who exactly made this decision? They made it. in spite of the fact the DNC said that is would NOT be legal.
Isn't it kinda strange that both states were Hillary supporters?
Again I say that something is fishy!
edited to show information I found about WHO made the decision. See the following and some of you will probably feel as sick as I do right now.
The DNC's Rules and Bylaws Committee, meeting Saturday in Washington, decided to sanction Florida after the state passed a law — approved by a Republican-led legislature and signed by Republican Gov. Charlie Crist — calling for both major parties to hold primaries on Jan. 29. At the time the law was signed, that would have put Florida's primaries before all others except Iowa and New Hampshire. DNC rules say that only those states, as well Nevada and South Carolina, can vote before Feb. 5, 2008 and have their delegates counted.
WHY hasn't this been made clear to all of us, that the republicans were behind it?
[Edited on 2/16/2008 8:18 PM]
|
 |
|
| Feb 16 @ 9:11 PM |
Count Every Vote |
|
Say_Yes

Posts: 1,779
|
WHY hasn't this been made clear to all of us, that the republicans were behind it? Were they behind it in Michigan too? BTW, the repubs also punished florida for having their primary early, by only seating 1/2 of the delegates that they normally would receive. Of course, the repubs had the sense to make this decision and put it in place, prior to the primary. The dems of course, just stuck their heads in the sand and chose to ignore the problem.
BTW, the florida legislature chose to have the primaries on January 29, because the state was already holding an election on that day, to decide several state wide initiatives. Combining the two into a single event was done as cost savings measure, not as some nefarious way to screw the Dems.
Florida's state party chair, Karen L. Thurman, showed no signs of backing down yesterday. The former congresswoman said she will consult with state Democrats but added that she expects all the presidential candidates to ignore the national party's edict and campaign vigorously in advance of the Sunshine State's primary. .....
State party officials also said they prefer to keep the official voting on Jan. 29 because a property tax initiative they hope to defeat will be on the ballot that day......Defeating a horrible referendum on Jan. 29 . . . is a top priority for every constituent group I am aware of," said Terrie Brady, a DNC member and former chair of the Florida state party. The decision was made in April of 2000 and Florida Dems requested a waiver of the rules by the DNC, saying that they had no control over the matter. Their appeal was denied.
The DNC rules stipulate that states that have not been granted a special waiver must schedule presidential nominating contests after Feb. 5.
"Rules are rules," said DNC member Garry S. Shays, of California, at the meeting. "California abided by them, and Florida should, as well. To ignore them would open the door to chaos."
Donna Brazile, a member of the rules committee who argued for a swift and harsh punishment for Florida, said states' desire to be more relevant in the nominating process does not excuse violations of rules intended to make the system fair for everyone. Source - Washington Post
|
|
 |
|
| Feb 16 @ 9:31 PM |
Count Every Vote |
|
Gman762

Posts: 3,291
|
Hillary Campaign Says Superdelegates Deserve More Power Than The People
A top strategist to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) on Saturday countered the recent claims of some prominent Democrats that party elders would be wrong to override the will of their constituents in their choice for the Democratic presidential nominee.
MORE....
The fun and games begin...LOLOL.
|
 |
|
| Feb 17 @ 1:22 AM |
Count Every Vote |
|
Paralegal_at_Law

Posts: 5,066
|
what state or federal law was violated here??? The DNC purports to overide the Michigan and Florida election laws by refusing to seat the Democrats elected as delegates to the Democratic National Convention.
|
|
 |
|
| Feb 17 @ 11:44 AM |
Count Every Vote |
|
Bj864

Posts: 3,110
|
2) some people are saying that Hillary is losing delegates big time because of this..and just maybe the nomination... I don't see it...
Yes, this could easily cost Hillary the election. You can't lose your votes from 2 big states when you have a close race.
I think there was some long term planning about this and I suspect the republicans knew exactly what they were doing. It is NO coincidence that Florida is again the state where votes are lost forever...................
|
 |
|
|