Reply With Quote
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, to the DNC, or vote Republican.
Clinton has zero chance at getting the VP nom too for that matter.
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, to the DNC, or vote Republican.
No way that group exists. The DC sniper was a black muslim guy, just like Obama.
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.
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?
6 of one, half-dozen of the other...
(Thanks for the ty candidate, DNC!)
Ralphie May flashback...
Yeah, I just choked on my Crystal Light ... thanks.
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.
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.
There is no "should they", "shouldn't they".
There is no wrong or right.
You're not understanding that.
How the can I make claim to what they should or shouldn't do if they have the legal right to do what they want?
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.
You're such a ing idiot. Why did I waste so much time in this and another thread with you?
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.
Will she ever stop campaigning? When was the last time a Clinton had to give a concession speech? 1976?
You're such a ing 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.
uh oh. the Sonny and Cher power hour is about to start.
Oh that 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.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.
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.
There won't be consequences.
Some might be pissed for a while, but they'd vote for Hillary in November.
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.
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 and her lover, and get away with it, in order for that to happen.
Well, maybe if he kills Hillary . . .
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
