Obama blames the media.

[peewee's lovechild]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/06/obamas-new-strategy-bla_n_90167.html

************************************************** ******************

Oblame the media! In the wake of Tuesday's game-changing defeats in Texas and Ohio (and hey, Rhode Island), Barack Obama is clearly steamed that the media turned on him. Yesterday in a media avail on his plane, he accused the media of being complicit in Hillary Clinton's "kitchen sink" strategy and allowing themselves to be "persuaded that you had been too hard on her and too soft on me." This, Obama seemed to feel, was clearly an injustice and had resulted in the press' abdication of their duty: "Hopefully now people feel like everything's evened out and we can start actually covering the campaign properly." Oh, snap! Step up, media, you really dropped the ball this time. (See video below.)

This improper coverage he's referring to presumably includes Tuesday's press conference, which was variously described as "combative" and "contentious" during which he was "grilled"
in "the toughest news conference of his campaign." According to the Washington Post's Dana Milbank, Obama's initial smile upon greeting reporters was "quickly replaced by the surprised look of a man bitten by his own dog." But according to accounts of that press conference, the questions seemed legitimately driven by the news cycle, given the recent (and evolving) story of the report of an Obama staffer's backroom meeting with the Canadian embassy in Chicago to reassure them over NAFTA (which has since been dubbed "NAFTA-Gate" in some quarters, which can't thrill the Obama camp), and the kickoff of the Tony Rezko trial this past Monday. Also, according to Chicago Sun-Times columnist Lynn Sweet, the toughness was helped along by the presence of some Chicago-area media who have covered Obama for longer and as such were not as "shy" about asking for specifics (she mentioned Sun-Times political columnist Carol Marin, who is cited in numerous reports on the press conference, along with Sweet, as being particularly inquisitive). The grilling sounds like it was more like a quick pan-searing, too — Obama cut off questioning with exasperation, saying (in the most-quoted line of the press conference), "Come on guys. I answered like eight questions. We're running late." Then he left. He didn't come back to talk to the press on his plane later, either.

Like, eight questions! Press, get your act together. You've got a campaign to cover .

Obama, the candidate almost always described as "cool," seems to be betraying more than a touch of annoyance lately. Now that the heat is being turned up, and another long slog looms ahead before Pennsylvania, it will be interesting to see not only how the press behaves with respect to both candidates, but also how Obama responds under the harsh new glare — and whether he submits himself to it willingly or continues his pattern of keeping the press carefully at arm's length.

In the meantime, chief campaign strategist David Axelrod clearly knows that the best defense is a good offense, brazenly turning the media-favoritism meme around and throwing it back: "The point we want to raise is that the vetting of Hillary Clinton has yet to start and that the hard questions haven't been asked of Sen. Clinton. And as I said yesterday, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. We think that there ought to be the same standard held to both candidates."

The same standard held to both candidates? Wow - dare to dream. In the next few weeks, we may just see it happen.

[JoeChalupa]

Political forum.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Political forum.i don't think he hablas

[JoeChalupa]

That damn liberal media!!! :cuss

[JoeChalupa]

i don't think he hablas

SI SE PUEDE!!!

[mrsmaalox]

He hasn't complained about the debate moderators yet has he? :lol

[peewee's lovechild]

Political forum.

Bitch forum.

[polandprzem]

Damn I never saw a person winning the fight with media.

I thought he was smarter

[MannyIsGod]

Whats the point of this post? Hillary did it, it worked for her, now he's doing it.

Welcome to politics?

[peewee's lovechild]

Whats the point of this post? Hillary did it, it worked for her, now he's doing it.

Welcome to politics?

But, Obama is above old school politics.

He said.

He promised.

[Hillary]

Bitch forum.

Damn right!!

[Extra Stout]

But, Obama is above old school politics.

He said.

He promised.


No, Canada, don't worry. We're not going to get rid of NAFTA. We're just lying to those rubes in Ohio so they'll vote for us.

[AlamoSpursFan]

But, Obama is above old school politics.

He said.

He promised.

A politician who lies.

What are the odds?

:lmao

[Extra Stout]

They said, "you can't get away with claiming to be the candidate for change and for honesty, while telling voters craven bald-faced lies to get them to the polls."

But we said, "YES WE CAN!"

[Extra Stout]

They said, "you can't act all indignant when the press finally starts vetting you, after giving you a free ride for six months."

But we said, "YES WE CAN!"

[JoeChalupa]

Bitch forum.

:lmao

BARACK ON!!!

[MannyIsGod]

Please, Obama is very much above the kind of politics the Clinton campaign is running. She's throwing muslim shit out, running adds with a darkened picture of Obama and running attack ads like there's no tomorrow. She's making direct references to Obama being worse than McCain, whining about inequity of the media's coverage, pointing to Tony Rezco (which I find fucking ironic as hell considering the clinton's scandal history) all while she has NO chance to win the nomination.

Yeah, this is entirely the same thing.

You ever make it to Obama's site to read what I linked you PeeWee? I'd bet money you didn't.

[mrsmaalox]

Please, Obama is very much above the kind of politics the Clinton campaign is running. She's throwing muslim shit out, running adds with a darkened picture of Obama and running attack ads like there's no tomorrow. She's making direct references to Obama being worse than McCain, whining about inequity of the media's coverage, pointing to Tony Rezco (which I find fucking ironic as hell considering the clinton's scandal history) all while she has NO chance to win the nomination.

Yeah, this is entirely the same thing.

You ever make it to Obama's site to read what I linked you PeeWee? I'd bet money you didn't.

Just curious---no judgement being made: have you read Clinton's site? Have you found any source of info that has no bias?

[MannyIsGod]

Of course I've read Clinton's site. My question at Pee Wee was directed at comments he made before about Obama not telling us how he planned to get things done. He has on his site and I linked Pee Wee to it. He made some excuse why he wasn't going to read it.

I'm sick of the no substance behind Obama bullshit posts and how that shit is repeated through the media. It is ridiculous to take any talking points from any campaign at face value.

Are there any non biased sources? I don't know. But there is a ton of information out there to be had for those that would actually like to inform themselves instead of wandering around like ignorant parrots.

[peewee's lovechild]

Please, Obama is very much above the kind of politics the Clinton campaign is running. She's throwing muslim shit out, running adds with a darkened picture of Obama and running attack ads like there's no tomorrow. She's making direct references to Obama being worse than McCain, whining about inequity of the media's coverage, pointing to Tony Rezco (which I find fucking ironic as hell considering the clinton's scandal history) all while she has NO chance to win the nomination.

Yeah, this is entirely the same thing.

You ever make it to Obama's site to read what I linked you PeeWee? I'd bet money you didn't.

Yea, I went to his site.
What's your point?

Anyway, show me the proof about the muslim thing and all the other hillarious bullshit Bama supporters are spewing out.

As for her chances to win the nomination, you forget about the Super Delegates and about the redo in Michigan and Florida.

[AlamoSpursFan]

The last total I saw included Super Delegates and had Obama on top, by a slim margin, but on top.

And Billary doesn't want a redo in Michigan and Florida. She wants the delegates seated as is because Obama wasn't even on the ballot in those states.

[peewee's lovechild]

Of course I've read Clinton's site. My question at Pee Wee was directed at comments he made before about Obama not telling us how he planned to get things done. He has on his site and I linked Pee Wee to it. He made some excuse why he wasn't going to read it.

I'm sick of the no substance behind Obama bullshit posts and how that shit is repeated through the media. It is ridiculous to take any talking points from any campaign at face value.

Are there any non biased sources? I don't know. But there is a ton of information out there to be had for those that would actually like to inform themselves instead of wandering around like ignorant parrots.


I never said he didn't explain his plans on his website. I said he never explains it during his powerful, mind blowing, out of the stratosphere speeches.

Great, he has a website. I'm sure he spent many sleepless nights working on the site. I'm sure he stood behind a typist making sure all his words were being recorded verbatim.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s110-2433

[peewee's lovechild]

The last total I saw included Super Delegates and had Obama on top, by a slim margin, but on top.

And Billary doesn't want a redo in Michigan and Florida. She wants the delegates seated as is because Obama wasn't even on the ballot in those states.


Hillary would welcome a redo of the primaries.

She does exceptionally well with Hispanics, which compose a large percentage of Florida's population.

She does very well with working class folk, which compose a great percentage of the Michigan constituency.

[AlamoSpursFan]

She does exceptionally well with Hispanics for a reason...

[Extra Stout]

Yea, I went to his site.
What's your point?

Anyway, show me the proof about the muslim thing and all the other hillarious bullshit Bama supporters are spewing out.

As for her chances to win the nomination, you forget about the Super Delegates and about the redo in Michigan and Florida.
The "Muslim" thing was started by Insight Magazine, which as far as I know has no ties to the Clinton campaign.

[atxrocker]

Hillary would welcome a redo of the primaries.

She does exceptionally well with Hispanics, which compose a large percentage of Florida's population.

She does very well with working class folk, which compose a great percentage of the Michigan constituency.


how dare you suggest she doesn't just quit and bow out to the great black hope??

[MannyIsGod]

He's not giving policy speeches Pee Wee, he's giving campaign speeches. There is a very large difference between the two types of speeches and one is not going to be used when campaigning. I'll leave it up to you to decide which of those two that is. The point stands that he has explained how he's going to do things.

It is absolutely foolish to bring up Obama and a typist. If you want to compare who's staff does more of the speechwritting and which of these candidates has had their carreers molded for them you may want review things with the person you love to bash and the person you apparently simply love.

Obama is writes many of his own speeches. Clinton? No. Clinton had her path to the presidency carved out for her by her advisors who icked a place for her to run where she'd easily win a seat in the senate and have great exposure. You think NY is her home state?? Have you ever heard of the term carpet bagger? Obama isn't the one running off the name given to him by a spouse.

The Muslim thing has been well documented. You can't prove that her camp released that photo, but you can certainly look at her quotes regarding the situation. Its obvious. Are you seriously trying to claim that Clinton isn't running a dirty in the mud campaign? You can't possibly be serious when they really aren't denying this. You want me to give you the links (or can you actually search for them?) on where Clinton keeps comparing Obama to McCain saying he's worse?

As for her chances, its pure math. She has to crush Obama in EVERY state from here on out by 20% or so to come close to catching him in delegates. Considering she's going to lose several states from here on out just how do you propose she has a shot to win the nomination?

[peewee's lovechild]

She does exceptionally well with Hispanics for a reason...


Why don't you lay down the reason as to why that is?

Go ahead, finish that thought.

[MannyIsGod]

Hillary would welcome a redo of the primaries.

She does exceptionally well with Hispanics, which compose a large percentage of Florida's population.

She does very well with working class folk, which compose a great percentage of the Michigan constituency.You're out of your fucking mind. Not only do you spew bullshit, you spew bullshit contrary to what the Clinton campaign is saying themselves. They do NOT want a do over because a do over wouldn't gain them very many delegates.

They've come out and said they won't support do overs, so how exactly do you figure they'd welcome it?

:lol

[peewee's lovechild]

He's not giving policy speeches Pee Wee, he's giving campaign speeches. There is a very large difference between the two types of speeches and one is not going to be used when campaigning. I'll leave it up to you to decide which of those two that is. The point stands that he has explained how he's going to do things.


Hillary talks about how she'll get things done in her campaign speeches. I guess Bama is just incapable of doing that.




It is absolutely foolish to bring up Obama and a typist. If you want to compare who's staff does more of the speechwritting and which of these candidates has had their carreers molded for them you may want review things with the person you love to bash and the person you apparently simply love.


Career being molded??
:lol

Hillary has been in politics since before you were born. She's done more for the Democratic Party than Bama can ever dream of. That's just a retarded statement.




Obama is writes many of his own speeches.


Looks like you need some one to write your posts for you.



Clinton? No. Clinton had her path to the presidency carved out for her by her advisors who icked a place for her to run where she'd easily win a seat in the senate and have great exposure. You think NY is her home state?? Have you ever heard of the term carpet bagger? Obama isn't the one running off the name given to him by a spouse.



It's easy to write your own speeches when you repeat what other people have said.

Name given to him by a spouse?
Are you retarded?

It's her fault she's married?

Illinois isn't Bama's home state either, so what's your point?



The Muslim thing has been well documented. You can't prove that her camp released that photo, but you can certainly look at her quotes regarding the situation. Its obvious. Are you seriously trying to claim that Clinton isn't running a dirty in the mud campaign? You can't possibly be serious when they really aren't denying this. You want me to give you the links (or can you actually search for them?) on where Clinton keeps comparing Obama to McCain saying he's worse?


Proof of the muslim picture??
Provide the proof.
If you can.

As for mud and all that shit, name me one clean campaign by either side in the history of U.S. Presidential races. It was done as early as Thomas Jefferson.

Read a history book.




As for her chances, its pure math. She has to crush Obama in EVERY state from here on out by 20% or so to come close to catching him in delegates. Considering she's going to lose several states from here on out just how do you propose she has a shot to win the nomination?



Super Delegates.

Do you know about them?

[peewee's lovechild]

You're out of your fucking mind. Not only do you spew bullshit, you spew bullshit contrary to what the Clinton campaign is saying themselves. They do NOT want a do over because a do over wouldn't gain them very many delegates.

They've come out and said they won't support do overs, so how exactly do you figure they'd welcome it?

:lol

No, no.

You obviously can't read.

The Clinton Campaign doesn't want to Caucus the two states, which is what Bama is pushing for.

They are responsive, though, to a redo of the primaries.

[MannyIsGod]

Barak does talk about how he's going to get done in speeches. He just doesn't give detailed plans. Neither does Hillary. There is very little difference in what they do in their speeches with the exception that Clinton isn't nearly as good at it as Obama is. Politics 101 - take one of your opponents strengths and make it a weakness. Thats why they attack him on this front. Not because there is any substance behind what the attacks say, but rather because people like you buy it hook line and sinker.

No doubt that Hillary Clinton has a done a lot in her early years but I don't know what to tell you if you don't understand that everything she has done since her husband was in the white house has been done in order to advance her goal of becoming president.

Obama has a history in Illinois that goes beyond politics. He was there as an activist and has lived there for quite some time. He did not move to that state simply for political reasons. This is indisputable.

Clinton, on the other hand, DID move to New York simply to run for the Senate. This is ALSO indisputable. Why NY and why not Arkansas? Because the exposure the NY seat brought her in order for a run at the presidency.

I don't know if she stayed with Bill soley based on political aspirations, but I do know that it had to come up at some point. Had Hillary gotten divorced from Bill Clinton during the many times he has cheated on her you could kiss any type of presidential run goodbye.

[MannyIsGod]

Simple question here:

If Clinton is behind in both the popular vote and pledged delegates do you feel the super delegates should overturn that or vote along the lines that the people have set forth? Do you believe there is any chance of them overturning the popular vote and/or pledged delegates?

[AlamoSpursFan]

Why don't you lay down the reason as to why that is?

Go ahead, finish that thought.

Apparently, I don't need to.

:lol

But for those not paying attention, I will.

She's not black.

Race card played.

Next?

[peewee's lovechild]

Apparently, I don't need to.

:lol

But for those not paying attention, I will.

She's not black.

Race card played.

Next?

So, it's her fault she's white?

But, what does all that have to do with the Hispanic vote?

[peewee's lovechild]

Simple question here:

If Clinton is behind in both the popular vote and pledged delegates do you feel the super delegates should overturn that or vote along the lines that the people have set forth? Do you believe there is any chance of them overturning the popular vote and/or pledged delegates?

The Super Delegates get to vote any which way they want, regardless of anything else.

[MannyIsGod]

So, it's her fault she's white?

But, what does all that have to do with the Hispanic vote?Dude, he's saying htat hispanics voted for her over Obama because she's not black.

[MannyIsGod]

The Super Delegates get to vote any which way they want, regardless of anything else.Thank you for stating the obvious. Thats not what I asked. I asked if you thought they should vote opposite of what the pledge delegate count and poplular vote are.

I did not ask if they could. I asked if you thought they should.

Wanna try to answer again?

[atxrocker]

i'd vote for a black president if i felt he were more genuine and if i actually bought into all his bullshit. so no, as a hispanic, i did not vote for hillary because she was not black. way to stereotype... i guess.

[AlamoSpursFan]

Dude, he's saying that hispanics voted for her over Obama because she's not black.

I'm not saying ALL Hispanics did. But a large number did. I've heard from several of my Mexican-American friends that the word myate (sp?) has a much bigger negative connotation than the N-bomb.

[MannyIsGod]

You know what PeeWee, I have already lost interest in whatever you respond to my question. You're too stupid to realize the ramifications of the superdelegates overturning the popular vote and pledged delegate count either way, so any point I was about to make would simply fly over your head.

Either way, the super delegates overturning what the people have voted for would pretty much be the end of the party. They realize it and there is no way they'd do it. Even so, she'd need such a large number of super delegates for such a victory that is is also extremely unlikely.

Right now Clinton's only shot at the nomination is something as awful as an assassination or scandal. Otherwise she has no chance at catching Obama in the pledged delegate count and no chance at having the super delegates defect to her in such numbers as to overturn the pledged delegate lead. Yeah, no chance sound about right.

[midgetonadonkey]

I enjoy the blacks.

[Extra Stout]

Right now Clinton's only shot at the nomination is something as awful as an assassination or scandal. Otherwise she has no chance at catching Obama in the pledged delegate count and no chance at having the super delegates defect to her in such numbers as to overturn the pledged delegate lead. Yeah, no chance sound about right.
Snipers for Hillary

[AlamoSpursFan]

I have a feeling that if Obama wins the nomination and he picks Billary as his veep, we could be mourning another assassinated President soon. The Klintons will do ANYTHING to get back in the Oval Orifice.

[peewee's lovechild]

Thank you for stating the obvious. Thats not what I asked. I asked if you thought they should vote opposite of what the pledge delegate count and poplular vote are.

I did not ask if they could. I asked if you thought they should.

Wanna try to answer again?


I did answer the question.
They can vote which ever way they want.

You didn't get that?

The DNC set it up that way.

[peewee's lovechild]

Dude, he's saying htat hispanics voted for her over Obama because she's not black.

So, all Hispanics are racist?

Who's playing the race card here?

[peewee's lovechild]

I'm not saying ALL Hispanics did. But a large number did. I've heard from several of my Mexican-American friends that the word myate (sp?) has a much bigger negative connotation than the N-bomb.

###### is much, much stronger than Mayate.

It's not even close.

[Extra Stout]

I have a feeling that if Obama wins the nomination and he picks Billary as his veep, we could be mourning another assassinated President soon. The Klintons will do ANYTHING to get back in the Oval Orifice.
Complete with designated fall guy wearing "I-heart-James Dobson" T-shirt.

[MannyIsGod]

You didn't answer the question. But whatever. I've established you're dense.

[MannyIsGod]

Clinton has zero chance at getting the VP nom too for that matter.

[peewee's lovechild]

You know what PeeWee, I have already lost interest in whatever you respond to my question. You're too stupid to realize the ramifications of the superdelegates overturning the popular vote and pledged delegate count either way, so any point I was about to make would simply fly over your head.

Either way, the super delegates overturning what the people have voted for would pretty much be the end of the party. They realize it and there is no way they'd do it. Even so, she'd need such a large number of super delegates for such a victory that is is also extremely unlikely.

Right now Clinton's only shot at the nomination is something as awful as an assassination or scandal. Otherwise she has no chance at catching Obama in the pledged delegate count and no chance at having the super delegates defect to her in such numbers as to overturn the pledged delegate lead. Yeah, no chance sound about right.


You're obviously too stupid to realize that the DNC set it up so that the Super Delegates can vote which ever way they want.

If it's a problem for you, bitch to the DNC, or vote Republican.

[spurs_fan_in_exile]

Snipers for Hillary
No way that group exists. The DC sniper was a black muslim guy, just like Obama.

[Holt's Cat]

You know what PeeWee, I have already lost interest in whatever you respond to my question. You're too stupid to realize the ramifications of the superdelegates overturning the popular vote and pledged delegate count either way, so any point I was about to make would simply fly over your head.

Either way, the super delegates overturning what the people have voted for would pretty much be the end of the party. They realize it and there is no way they'd do it. Even so, she'd need such a large number of super delegates for such a victory that is is also extremely unlikely.

Right now Clinton's only shot at the nomination is something as awful as an assassination or scandal. Otherwise she has no chance at catching Obama in the pledged delegate count and no chance at having the super delegates defect to her in such numbers as to overturn the pledged delegate lead. Yeah, no chance sound about right.

She has no shot as long as you believe the Clintons and their inner circle believe in fair play, honor, and care about their party's future.

[peewee's lovechild]

You didn't answer the question. But whatever. I've established you're dense.

Dense?

You're the dumb ass that doesn't get that the Super Delegates get to vote which ever way the want.

There isn't a wrong or right, regardless of how you want to make it so.

They get to vote for whomever they feel like.

Do I have to draw it out for you?

[AlamoSpursFan]

If it's a problem for you, bitch to the DNC, or vote Republican.

6 of one, half-dozen of the other...

:lol

(Thanks for the shitty candidate, DNC!)

[AlamoSpursFan]

No way that group exists. The DC sniper was a black muslim guy, just like Obama.

Ralphie May flashback...

:lol

[SpursWoman]

No way that group exists. The DC sniper was a black muslim guy, just like Obama.


Yeah, I just choked on my Crystal Light ... thanks. :lmao

[peewee's lovechild]

No way that group exists. The DC sniper was a black muslim guy, just like Obama.

:lol

[CuckingFunt]

Dense?

You're the dumb ass that doesn't get that the Super Delegates get to vote which ever way the want.

There isn't a wrong or right, regardless of how you want to make it so.

They get to vote for whomever they feel like.

Do I have to draw it out for you?That doesn't answer the question that Manny asked you, which is if/why you think they should vote against the popular vote.

Everyone is perfectly clear on their ability to do so.

[MannyIsGod]

Pee Wee, YES, the get to vote how they want. That ISN'T up for contention. However, there are CONSEQUENCES to them overturning the pledged delegate count.

Not once have I said that the super delegates have some written in stone rule stating they must abide by the pledged delegate count, but there would be a HUGE backlash should they overturn the popular vote and/or pledged delegate count. This is what you fail to understand.

I was asking you for your personal opinion on shat they should do, not what they could do. It really isn't a difficult question to understand.

God damn, I'd have an easier time speaking with your daughter on the subject. At least there would be a logical reason why she didn't understand.

[peewee's lovechild]

That doesn't answer the question that Manny asked you, which is if/why you think they should vote against the popular vote.

Everyone is perfectly clear on their ability to do so.

There is no "should they", "shouldn't they".

There is no wrong or right.

You're not understanding that.

How the hell can I make claim to what they should or shouldn't do if they have the legal right to do what they want?

[MannyIsGod]

BTW, for all the news coverage Clinton got for "winning" Texas, she's going to end up with fewer delegates because of the caucus. Nice win.

[MannyIsGod]

There is no "should they", "shouldn't they".

There is no wrong or right.

You're not understanding that.

How the hell can I make claim to what they should or shouldn't do if they have the legal right to do what they want?

:lol

You're such a fucking idiot. Why did I waste so much time in this and another thread with you?

[peewee's lovechild]

Pee Wee, YES, the get to vote how they want. That ISN'T up for contention. However, there are CONSEQUENCES to them overturning the pledged delegate count.

Not once have I said that the super delegates have some written in stone rule stating they must abide by the pledged delegate count, but there would be a HUGE backlash should they overturn the popular vote and/or pledged delegate count. This is what you fail to understand.

I was asking you for your personal opinion on shat they should do, not what they could do. It really isn't a difficult question to understand.

God damn, I'd have an easier time speaking with your daughter on the subject. At least there would be a logical reason why she didn't understand.


I gave you my answer.
My opinion is that they should do what they consider is right.

Once again, there is no wrong or right.

Consequences?
Take it up with the DNC, they set it up.

[Holt's Cat]

Will she ever stop campaigning? When was the last time a Clinton had to give a concession speech? 1976?

[peewee's lovechild]

:lol

You're such a fucking idiot. Why did I waste so much time in this and another thread with you?


Just because you make a great physical impression of a gorilla doesn't mean you have to think like one.

You're trying to goat me into saying that it would be so wrong for them to vote for Hillary. You're trying to make your boy into a martyr by citing consequences.

But, what your ape brain doesn't understand is that the DNC set it up this way!!!!

There is no wrong or right.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

uh oh. the Sonny and Cher power hour is about to start.

[MannyIsGod]

Just because you make a great physical impression of a gorilla doesn't mean you have to think like one.
Oh that shit hurts coming from the Stay Puff himself



You're trying to goat me into saying that it would be so wrong for them to vote for Hillary. You're trying to make your boy into a martyr by citing consequences.

But, what your ape brain doesn't understand is that the DNC set it up this way!!!!

There is no wrong or right.Actually I wanted your honest opinion, not that it would be wrong. However, it would be wrong and it would be seen in a horrible light regardless of the the DNC set it up.

There are consequences whether or not you want to acknowledge them or not, but if the super delegates end up nominating someone that hasn't been choosen through the primary process then you can pretty much consider the Democrats dead because there will be huge problems within te party.

[peewee's lovechild]

Oh that shit hurts coming from the Stay Puff himself

Actually I wanted your honest opinion, not that it would be wrong. However, it would be wrong and it would be seen in a horrible light regardless of the the DNC set it up.

There are consequences whether or not you want to acknowledge them or not, but if the super delegates end up nominating someone that hasn't been choosen through the primary process then you can pretty much consider the Democrats dead because there will be huge problems within te party.


So, Democrats would not vote for Hillary?

Is that what you're saying?

After 8 years of George W. Bush, they'd back McCain because the Super Delegates backed Hillary?

Interesting.

But, both you and I know that will never happen.

[peewee's lovechild]

There won't be consequences.

Some might be pissed for a while, but they'd vote for Hillary in November.

[MannyIsGod]

God damn man, I have to go into a history of the democrats and popluar votes (See 2000) for you to understand it seems. I'm too lazy to do that. Read some of the Democrats "blog-o-sphere" and maybe you'll understand.

[peewee's lovechild]

God damn man, I have to go into a history of the democrats and popluar votes (See 2000) for you to understand it seems. I'm too lazy to do that. Read some of the Democrats "blog-o-sphere" and maybe you'll understand.


Why don't you start by posting all these consequences you're talking about.

Enlighten us.

[BigZak]

if obama wins the popular vote but loses the nomination on super delegate votes get your riot gear ready...datz da consequences...

[peewee's lovechild]

if obama wins the popular vote but loses the nomination on super delegate votes get your riot gear ready...datz da consequences...

That's not going to happen.

He's not O.J. Simpson.

Bama would have to kill a white bitch and her lover, and get away with it, in order for that to happen.

Well, maybe if he kills Hillary . . .

[Mr. Peabody]

Why don't you start by posting all these consequences you're talking about.

Enlighten us.

1968 Democratic National Convention

The most contentious modern convention was the 1968 Democratic convention in Chicago. The party’s liberal, anti-war wing backed Eugene McCarthy, but delegates gave the nomination to Hubert Humphrey, who hadn’t won a single primary.

How did people react?

It was chaos. Anti-war activists staged massive protests outside the convention, which devolved into riots when police moved in with tear gas and batons. The debacle shamed the party, which then instituted reforms to transfer power from insiders to grass-roots voters.

[peewee's lovechild]

1968 Democratic National Convention

The most contentious modern convention was the 1968 Democratic convention in Chicago. The party’s liberal, anti-war wing backed Eugene McCarthy, but delegates gave the nomination to Hubert Humphrey, who hadn’t won a single primary.

How did people react?

It was chaos. Anti-war activists staged massive protests outside the convention, which devolved into riots when police moved in with tear gas and batons. The debacle shamed the party, which then instituted reforms to transfer power from insiders to grass-roots voters.


You're right.
But, Humphrey hadn't won a single primary.

We haven't had an anti-war movement such as the one in '68.

Obama's lead in delegates is a slim lead.
He's no McCarthy.

[BigZak]

c'mon peewee, oprah will be leading a million man march, torch in hand brah...

[peewee's lovechild]

c'mon peewee, oprah will be leading a million man march, torch in hand brah...

:lol :lol :lol

[Spawn]

So, Democrats would not vote for Hillary?

Is that what you're saying?

After 8 years of George W. Bush, they'd back McCain because the Super Delegates backed Hillary?

Interesting.

But, both you and I know that will never happen.

Or they could stay home or vote for a third party. Just ask Bush the 1st when he took for granted votes and Ross Perot ended up getting 19% of the vote.

[manufor3]

:wrongf