Hillary Only Needs 153% Of Remaining Delegates

[dgridley]

She can still win, people!!

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Clinton-Only-Needs-153--of-by-David-Swanson-080531-502.html

"Dumb People for Hilary" [sic] bumper stickers are showing up across the country and being shipped by the truck load to South Dakota, Montana, and Puerto Rico. (The trucks to Puerto Rico have been driving off bridges in the Florida Keys.) The stickers and other "dumb people" paraphernalia are being paid for by the Clinton campaign, even while the campaign's supporters have organized to stop making contributions and instead buy lottery tickets in all 50 states.

:p

 

[RogueWriter]

Obama and the other candidates pulled their names off the ballots in accordance to party rules.

Funny how you can pull your name from the ballots but still receive delegates, lol, THAT'S the joke. Had the shoe been on the other foot, no doubt the DNC would have made sure Hillary got 0 out of the deal.

It will be interesting to watch all of the not too subtle negotiating going on, I do think the Clintons should have kept their options open regarding challenging the Michigan/Florida situation until she received the VP nod, it would have given her more leverage.

The thing is, media is ciriticising her for not being subtle, for waiting for Obama to 'choose' her, like he ever would have without being pressured into it. She wants the VP nod, and she intends to beat it out of him, looks like, hehe.

 

[Jeff]

Of course, now she'd absolutely love the V.P. slot, but Obama doesn't need her to win the general ... my guess is that there will be a concession in a matter of a day or two, IMHO. Right now, she's leveraging as best she can for the V.P., and more importantly, Obama's assistance in erasing millions in debt that she has amassed in this thing!
I believe she'll get part of the latter ... but, again, not the V.P. (her demographics are good, but she's too polarizing to many). :gl: :imho:

The V.P. choice will be VERY interesting ... someone who can help to unite, but also reinforce and implement for REAL change ahead! :music:
Good Luck to us all,
-Jeff

 

[RogueWriter]

I just hope he picks someone who can actually define 'change' before the election, that would be nice to know.

 

[.X.]

As a Republican I hate to not support my party but I don't feel the party stands for anything close to what it once did. I'd never vote for McCain and I'm hoping other Republicans feel the same way.

I at least feel confident that Obama is a man of his word (so much as he can be) and a man of integrity. I don't feel the same way about Hillary tho I would have like to see a woman elected as well and Bill back in the White House might not have been a bad thing.

Ron Paul, as I've said, was my guy..

For those who vote for Obama, they better pray he is a man of his word,If he is not, you think we are screwed now, we will really be screwed, Huge Government, there is so much hinging on this election, as far as our future and way of life will go.

As things are right now, I don't feel confident to vote at all, I don't see any light at the end of tunnel with either nominee right now.

 

[dgridley]

I'm hoping for Edwards as VP or Attorney General... I really undecided whether Hillary will help or hurt the election as VP.

I'm "officially endorsing" Obama tho over McCain as you can see by my avatar.

I at least think Obama is sincere and intends to keep his word as best he can.. we often forget that he is not the end-all, be-all even if elected president. He can be over-ridden by red tape, special interests, etc. as could anyone.

Of course, now she'd absolutely love the V.P. slot, but Obama doesn't need her to win the general ... my guess is that there will be a concession in a matter of a day or two, IMHO. Right now, she's leveraging as best she can for the V.P., and more importantly, Obama's assistance in erasing millions in debt that she has amassed in this thing!
I believe she'll get part of the latter ... but, again, not the V.P. (her demographics are good, but she's too polarizing to many). :gl: :imho:

The V.P. choice will be VERY interesting ... someone who can help to unite, but also reinforce and implement for REAL change ahead! :music:
Good Luck to us all,
-Jeff

 

[-Alex-]

For those who vote for Obama, they better pray he is a man of his word,If he is not, you think we are screwed now, we will really be screwed, Huge Government, there is so much hinging on this election, as far as our future and way of life will go.

As things are right now, I don't feel confident to vote at all, I don't see any light at the end of tunnel with either nominee right now.

Well, if you are talking about McCain being a man of his word, he is FAR from it. Seeing that he opposed much of what Bush favored in 2000, and now he happens to not oppose it.

Obama is a much more man of his word than McCain is.... - factual once you look at the history.

I just hope he picks someone who can actually define 'change' before the election, that would be nice to know.

McCain has voted on 95% of the same things Bush favored in 2006. If anybody wonders what candidate brings change, Obama is the man. - again, factual.

I'm hoping for Edwards as VP or Attorney General... I really undecided whether Hillary will help or hurt the election as VP.

I'm "officially endorsing" Obama tho over McCain as you can see by my avatar.

I at least think Obama is sincere and intends to keep his word as best he can.. we often forget that he is not the end-all, be-all even if elected president. He can be over-ridden by red tape, special interests, etc. as could anyone.

100% agree with you m8. :D

Mind Pming me that avatar? I'd love to put it up

 

[Jeff]

John Edwards - and I really like the guy - would not be a good choice for V.P., IMHO. Gore lost in 2000 and Edward was on his very short list as a running mate ((now) McCain supporter Joe Lieberman became V.P. at the time), and then he lost with Kerry (ala Kerry/Edwards) in 2004 ... two strikes (and they can't afford a third!) and you're out! :blink: :imho:

Obama is all about hope and CHANGE ... and Clinton is all Washington establishment, plus she and her husband did a number on the African Americans in the primary!
She's out, although she will be paid handsomely for her support, and some type of role as it related to Health Care, IMHO.

Obama's needs are:
Someone with credibility and experience on defense and foreign policy (Sen. Jim Webb of Virginia has to be thought of here).
Someone who is not a Washington insider (remove Joe Biden) and can complement the need for change!
Someone who can help with attracting women (Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius) and blue-collar workers ... and, specifically, in the swing states of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Missourri, and Florida.
Someone who can help to gain the support of hispanics, as well.

I've been thinking about it since last night, and Bill Richardson is making a lot of sense! :lala: :imho:
ObamaRichardson << ... you heard it here first! :p

Please share your thoughts, as convenient.
-Jeff

 

[.X.]

The Wife and I, ate some fried chicken and watermelon to celebrate Obamas victory.

On to the election

 

[Ixix]

Funny how you can pull your name from the ballots but still receive delegates, lol, THAT'S the joke. Had the shoe been on the other foot, no doubt the DNC would have made sure Hillary got 0 out of the deal.

It will be interesting to watch all of the not too subtle negotiating going on, I do think the Clintons should have kept their options open regarding challenging the Michigan/Florida situation until she received the VP nod, it would have given her more leverage.

The thing is, media is ciriticising her for not being subtle, for waiting for Obama to 'choose' her, like he ever would have without being pressured into it. She wants the VP nod, and she intends to beat it out of him, looks like, hehe.

hillary broke party rules by campaigning there.

nobody should have gotten delegates.

while obama's name wasn't on the ballot in michigan 44% voted for 'other candidate' instead of Hillary. exit polls showed that they would have voted for obama had he been on the ticket.

For those who vote for Obama, they better pray he is a man of his word,If he is not, you think we are screwed now, we will really be screwed, Huge Government, there is so much hinging on this election, as far as our future and way of life will go.

As things are right now, I don't feel confident to vote at all, I don't see any light at the end of tunnel with either nominee right now.

i voted for george bush in 2000 and boy, did he turn out to be 100% different than how he was before.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ck0Dle9V7FQ

i felt really suckered

 

[dgridley]

Hopefully you don't mean that like it sounds..

The Wife and I, ate some fried chicken and watermelon to celebrate Obamas victory.

On to the election

 

[RogueWriter]

hillary broke party rules by campaigning there.

nobody should have gotten delegates.

while obama's name wasn't on the ballot in michigan 44% voted for 'other candidate' instead of Hillary. exit polls showed that they would have voted for obama had he been on the ticket.

And why, exactly does the democratic party think it's legal to disenfranchise Michigan in the first place? I'm willing to bet the average democrat citizen in Michigan could have sued the DNC for their "Party Rules", which were designed to deny them their right to participate in the election. Hillary did it exactly right. Further, 'other candidate' did not say "Obama" did it. He should have shown some balls and put his name on there and challenged party leadership to do the right thing.

Don't penalize Michigan voters simply because Obama and the DNC didn't aggressively protect citizens rights.

This doesn't matter anymore, it's just that I think the DNC overstepped their bounds, then tried to correct it in a manner that ensured Hillary could not win.

 

[Ixix]

And why, exactly does the democratic party think it's legal to disenfranchise Michigan in the first place? I'm willing to bet the average democrat citizen in Michigan could have sued the DNC for their "Party Rules", which were designed to deny them their right to participate in the election. Hillary did it exactly right. Further, 'other candidate' did not say "Obama" did it. He should have shown some balls and put his name on there and challenged party leadership to do the right thing.

Don't penalize Michigan voters simply because Obama and the DNC didn't aggressively protect citizens rights.

This doesn't matter anymore, it's just that I think the DNC overstepped their bounds, then tried to correct it in a manner that ensured Hillary could not win.

ahh, but hillary agreed with the dnc untill she got behind in the delegat count.

when you are playing a game, you gotta play by the rules. if you break the rules, you get penalized. the dnc didn't just wake up one morning and decide to strip michigan and florida of their delegates.

 

[dgridley]

Exactly as I see it as well..

ahh, but hillary agreed with the dnc untill she got behind in the delegat count.

when you are playing a game, you gotta play by the rules. if you break the rules, you get penalized. the dnc didn't just wake up one morning and decide to strip michigan and florida of their delegates.

 

[-Alex-]

And why, exactly does the democratic party think it's legal to disenfranchise Michigan in the first place? I'm willing to bet the average democrat citizen in Michigan could have sued the DNC for their "Party Rules", which were designed to deny them their right to participate in the election. Hillary did it exactly right. Further, 'other candidate' did not say "Obama" did it. He should have shown some balls and put his name on there and challenged party leadership to do the right thing.

Don't penalize Michigan voters simply because Obama and the DNC didn't aggressively protect citizens rights.

This doesn't matter anymore, it's just that I think the DNC overstepped their bounds, then tried to correct it in a manner that ensured Hillary could not win.

Ye. like already said. You've got to play by the rules. Take a look at this. HILLARY was perfectly fine during the New Hampshire primary that Michagen and Florida don't count. You know why? Because she was confident she would win the election.

oh wait...

then she started loosing...

oh ye...

she happens to want them to count...

 

[.X.]

Hopefully you don't mean that like it sounds..

??? that is what we had for dinner

And why, exactly does the democratic party think it's legal to disenfranchise Michigan in the first place? I'm willing to bet the average democrat citizen in Michigan could have sued the DNC for their "Party Rules", which were designed to deny them their right to participate in the election. Hillary did it exactly right. Further, 'other candidate' did not say "Obama" did it. He should have shown some balls and put his name on there and challenged party leadership to do the right thing.

Don't penalize Michigan voters simply because Obama and the DNC didn't aggressively protect citizens rights.

This doesn't matter anymore, it's just that I think the DNC overstepped their bounds, then tried to correct it in a manner that ensured Hillary could not win.

I agree

And when election day comes, Florida is going to be a HUGE in the outcome as always.

I feel as if Obama doesn't carry Clinton on his ticket, he has no chance of winning of the election, The up and coming will get more interesting, I can't wait to see Obama debate with McCain, this will show the people where credentials and experience play a key role in running a country.

I like Obamas speeches as well as anyone, but backing up the promises in office, is a whole nother ball game. If i told you exactly everything you wanted to hear, you might vote for me too.

 

[-Alex-]

??? that is what we had for dinner



I agree

And when election day comes, Florida is going to be a HUGE in the outcome as always.

I feel as if Obama doesn't carry Clinton on his ticket, he has no chance of winning of the election, The up and coming will get more interesting, I can't wait to see Obama debate with McCain, this will show the people where credentials and experience play a key role in running a country.

I like Obamas speeches as well as anyone, but backing up the promises in office, is a whole nother ball game. If i told you exactly everything you wanted to hear, you might vote for me too.

Ye same here, I really am awaiting the obama - mccain debate... I truly think obama is going to kill (figuratevely) mccain in the debate.... Obama has quick wit and is fast, Mccain doesn't.

 

[dgridley]

I reaslly feel experience in the coming years may not be as important as the willingness to try a different approach.. I can't see McCain instituting change.

I'd like to see those debates as well.. except for the constant "my friends" from McCain. That gets old real quick.

 

[.X.]

I reaslly feel experience in the coming years may not be as important as the willingness to try a different approach.. I can't see McCain instituting change.

I'd like to see those debates as well.. except for the constant "my friends" from McCain. That gets old real quick.

"instituting change" is the operative word. It seems as people are willing to take chances, with out certainty. I can understand being desperate to see change, look at the economy, gas prices, food prices are rising fast, electric companies are raising rates. All these prices are stretching our wallets thin, and we are not getting raises from our employers, they are hanging on as well.

So i want to see change as bad as any one else. my concerns are things only getting worse.

We have to get our troops out of Iraq, I agree with obama on that. we have to use that money to stimulate our economy, I agree with obama on that as well. the problem i fore see, I do not think all of these things can be done in the timely manner, It will take to get us back on our feet, therefore a recession could set in. once that happens, It will be a tough climb. we need all above to start right now.

So i can see and feel the need to be desperate in getting the above done, as soon as possible. Who is the answer, I do not know, I some what felt Clinton could achieve getting us out of the hole we are in.

 

[GILSAN]

"instituting change" is the operative word. It seems as people are willing to take chances, with out certainty. I can understand being desperate to see change, look at the economy, gas prices, food prices are rising fast, electric companies are raising rates. All these prices are stretching our wallets thin, and we are not getting raises from our employers, they are hanging on as well.

So i want to see change as bad as any one else. my concerns are things only getting worse.

We have to get our troops out of Iraq, I agree with obama on that. we have to use that money to stimulate our economy, I agree with obama on that as well. the problem i fore see, I do not think all of these things can be done in the timely manner, It will take to get us back on our feet, therefore a recession could set in. once that happens, It will be a tough climb. we need all above to start right now.

So i can see and feel the need to be desperate in getting the above done, as soon as possible. Who is the answer, I do not know, I some what felt Clinton could achieve getting us out of the hole we are in.

Once Obama starts getting closer to the White House we will start to see him talking diferently in relation what he´s been saying up till now. Just a month ago he was saying that the US should negociate with Iran, N Korea, Palestine etc. but presently he's already showing a tougher stance and has already angered the Palestinians about the Jerusalem isse. So, besides removing the US troops from Iraque which will take at least 12-18 months, his foreign policy will not differ greatly from the Republicans.

In Europe we allways find it odd that there are only 2 parties in the US. It seems that everything has to be YES or NO, BLACK or WHITE, DAY or NIGHT. Looks like there is no room for anything in between. I would have prefered Clinton but now that its gonna be Obama I do hope he can make the changes he's been talking about even though I don't believe that will happen except for the Iraq war. I do think he has a better chance than any other candidate to change the mentality of Africans to get rid of their pathetic leaders who have done nothing but plunder their countries, destroy their economies, and beg for Western aid while constantly putting us down. Let these African leaders go ask the Arab countries for aid. They are full of PetroDollars anyway.

Lets wait and hope there is real change, because whatever happens in the US affects the rest of the world. We are also waiting for change.

GIL

 

[dgridley]

Now comes the true test. Obama is gonna get hit with everything they can throw at him.

 

[Ixix]

does clinton have valuable experience she can contribute to the whitehouse? yes. i think that one day she might be a good president, but not know.

it seems like she just wants this presidency for herself. like it was planned the moment she ran for ny senat that in # years she would get the white house. seems to power hungry and arrogant imo.

maybe down the road i might vote for clinton, but definately not now. we need to take this country in a new direction

 

[dgridley]

I suspect we'll see Clinton again in 2012.. perhaps she'll have mellowed a bit by then. Right now, like you said, I think she feels the presidency was a lock for her and she scares me. I don't feel she had "us" at heart.. just looking forward to sleeping in the White House again.

 

[GILSAN]

Now comes the true test. Obama is gonna get hit with everything they can throw at him.

Yes we're gonna see him start to stutter on the tough questions and issues. Stiill, good luck to him.

GIL

 

[-Alex-]

"instituting change" is the operative word. It seems as people are willing to take chances, with out certainty. I can understand being desperate to see change, look at the economy, gas prices, food prices are rising fast, electric companies are raising rates. All these prices are stretching our wallets thin, and we are not getting raises from our employers, they are hanging on as well.

So i want to see change as bad as any one else. my concerns are things only getting worse.

We have to get our troops out of Iraq, I agree with obama on that. we have to use that money to stimulate our economy, I agree with obama on that as well. the problem i fore see, I do not think all of these things can be done in the timely manner, It will take to get us back on our feet, therefore a recession could set in. once that happens, It will be a tough climb. we need all above to start right now.

So i can see and feel the need to be desperate in getting the above done, as soon as possible. Who is the answer, I do not know, I some what felt Clinton could achieve getting us out of the hole we are in.

Well, like obama has already said many times... This isn't going to happen in the first month, or year, and probably for a few years. It will be a tough climb, and of course it will take around 2 terms of presidency to overcome it completely... Obama is the guy to start. (and Clinton is too, im just referring to obama seeing that he is the candidate of the democratic party )

 

[.X.]

Well, like obama has already said many times... This isn't going to happen in the first month, or year, and probably for a few years. It will be a tough climb, and of course it will take around 2 terms of presidency to overcome it completely... Obama is the guy to start. (and Clinton is too, im just referring to obama seeing that he is the candidate of the democratic party )

There in lyes the problem, we do not have 4 to 8 years, If you have lived through a recession, as i have, you know exactly what i am talking about, If you haven't,you better be prepared, It is going to be a tough road, should we go into a recession.