• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Michigan to hold caucasus, Hillary objects... also objects to Florida "do-over"... heads explode

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,926
18
81
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: sirjonk
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Rules should favor only my candidate and that's the way they should stay. Just sorry you picked the person running for herself rather than the one running for change. You have passion, if misplaced.

Moonie, you haven't read any of my posts in this thread very critically have you.

Originally posted by: sirjonk
Florida should not be seated as is. This is pretty clear I think...FL broke the rules, so if any future rules want to have any meaning, the DNC can't take the results as is and seat at the convention.

MI caucuses disadvantage her b/c she tends to win primaries and lose caucuses. Did you think she'd be happy about it? That said, what's she gonna do? So what if she doesn't accept it, I don't see how it's her call. The party will decide and she'll just have to deal.
Originally posted by: sirjonk
I'm sure some people didn't vote, but you have no evidence Obama supporters stayed home in larger numbers than Clinton voters. All evidence is this was a full and fair primary. It still shouldn't count, but your arguments are weak.
Sorry, I was speaking with a Hillary mindset in the first part of my post and lamenting your support for her in general in the last. I unintentionally looks like I was critical of you I guess. She is the one who wants to change the rules to her advantage and you spoke against it. I am saddened to see a person with integrity have to admit the person they have hope for isn't up to those standards. I remember how I felt believing her husband didn't have sex with THAT WOMAN.
Your faith was justified, he didn't have sex with her. :)
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,926
18
81
What do floridians think?

http://www.miamiherald.com/top...ries/story/438271.html
But the survey of 400 Democrats by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research found that the biggest chunk of voters -- 28 percent -- said Florida should hold another vote so the candidates could campaign in the state and earn delegates.

That would potentially end the stalemate over the nomination, as neither candidate is currently within reach of the 2,025 delegates needed to close the deal.

Twenty-four percent said the national party should allow Clinton's Florida win to count toward delegates. And 15 percent said Florida Democrats knowingly broke the rules and should accept the penalty, while 13 percent said the state should send an equal number of Clinton and Obama delegates to the convention -- so they can participate but not influence the outcome.
***********

The poll also showed that independent voters in Florida would help Republican John McCain trump either of the Democratic contenders, according to a Mason-Dixon sampling of 625 registered voters that included a proportional cross-section of Republicans, Democrats and unaffiliated voters.

In a potential general election matchup, McCain wins by 47 to 37 percentage points over Obama, and 49 to 40 over Clinton, according to poll results. McCain got at least half of the independent vote in both contests.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,136
37
91
Originally posted by: loki8481
is it really any fundamentally different than the Obama people calling for caucuses?
Caucuses are far cheaper than primaries. If Hillary doesn't want that, then she and the state parties should pay for the primaries.
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,926
18
81
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: loki8481
is it really any fundamentally different than the Obama people calling for caucuses?
Caucuses are far cheaper than primaries. If Hillary doesn't want that, then she and the state parties should pay for the primaries.
Yeah, it's not like accurate reflections of the voting public matter, as long as it's cheap (and my candidate is likely to win) who cares? :roll:
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,136
37
91
Originally posted by: sirjonk
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: loki8481
is it really any fundamentally different than the Obama people calling for caucuses?
Caucuses are far cheaper than primaries. If Hillary doesn't want that, then she and the state parties should pay for the primaries.
Yeah, it's not like accurate reflections of the voting public matter, as long as it's cheap (and my candidate is likely to win) who cares? :roll:
Who's going to pay for it then? IMHO, the people that broke the rules should pay for it, not the tax payers or the national parties. If it's the latter, then I'm willing to bet they'll go the cheaper route.
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,586
11
76
Man, the democrats are really screwing this up bad. Talk about ruining a sure thing.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,214
2
0
Originally posted by: Nebor
Man, the democrats are really screwing this up bad. Talk about ruining a sure thing.
We mustn't be surprised. It is the democrats destiny to have elections handed to them on a silver platter and like a spoiled child given five candies when he wanted six, throw their hand up and having everything on it shatter to the floor.

 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
23,003
770
126
Originally posted by: Nebor
Man, the democrats are really screwing this up bad. Talk about ruining a sure thing.
You can just hear the GOP snickering with glee. It's like Hillary is a secret GOP operative.

 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,733
3,557
126
Originally posted by: sirjonk
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: sirjonk
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Rules should favor only my candidate and that's the way they should stay. Just sorry you picked the person running for herself rather than the one running for change. You have passion, if misplaced.

Moonie, you haven't read any of my posts in this thread very critically have you.

Originally posted by: sirjonk
Florida should not be seated as is. This is pretty clear I think...FL broke the rules, so if any future rules want to have any meaning, the DNC can't take the results as is and seat at the convention.

MI caucuses disadvantage her b/c she tends to win primaries and lose caucuses. Did you think she'd be happy about it? That said, what's she gonna do? So what if she doesn't accept it, I don't see how it's her call. The party will decide and she'll just have to deal.
Originally posted by: sirjonk
I'm sure some people didn't vote, but you have no evidence Obama supporters stayed home in larger numbers than Clinton voters. All evidence is this was a full and fair primary. It still shouldn't count, but your arguments are weak.
Sorry, I was speaking with a Hillary mindset in the first part of my post and lamenting your support for her in general in the last. I unintentionally looks like I was critical of you I guess. She is the one who wants to change the rules to her advantage and you spoke against it. I am saddened to see a person with integrity have to admit the person they have hope for isn't up to those standards. I remember how I felt believing her husband didn't have sex with THAT WOMAN.
Your faith was justified, he didn't have sex with her. :)
I know. He had it with her dress.
 

M0RPH

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2003
3,305
1
0
Originally posted by: Phokus

Wait wait wait, she's 'concerned' about disenfranchised voters, but won't accept a do-over in Florida even though many people stayed home and did not vote because they thought their votes won't get counted??? HAHAHAHAHAA OK whatever :roll:

How can ANY Hildabeast voter justify this? That's absolutely ridiculous. Basically Hillary wants to have it her way and she could give a rat's ass about the 'will of the people'.
Caucases do NOT accurately represent the 'will of the people' and this has been show clearly in Texas, where when people are given a chance to vote normally in a primary, Clinton wins, but when the same group of people vote in a caucus, the results are 15 points different.

This election is F*D up enough already due to skewed caucus results. Don't try to drag Michigan into that sewage.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,733
3,557
126
Damned if Obama played by the nomination rules and won. It violates the will of the people who also happened, via the activism or lack thereof, to make those very rules.

Have you no shame, MORPH?
 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,916
172
106
Man, I love reading the comments from the Hillary supporters.

They make it sound like caucuses were invented by Satan soley to fvck with her and her supporters.

I can't help but LOL reading these threads.

Of course caucuses reflect the peoples choice. That, and because they're cheaper, is why states use them.

Fern
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,826
83
91
Originally posted by: Fern
Man, I love reading the comments from the Hillary supporters.

They make it sound like caucuses were invented by Satan soley to fvck with her and her supporters.

I can't help but LOL reading these threads.

Of course caucuses reflect the peoples choice. That, and because they're cheaper, is why states use them.

Fern
I, for one, still blame the caucus system for the '04 election ;)

it just seems mind boggling that we'd pick party nominees in such a different fashion than the general election is conducted in; caucuses seem like a poor way to judge mass appeal (ie: Kerry winning... anything.)
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,136
37
91
Originally posted by: loki8481
Originally posted by: Fern
Man, I love reading the comments from the Hillary supporters.

They make it sound like caucuses were invented by Satan soley to fvck with her and her supporters.

I can't help but LOL reading these threads.

Of course caucuses reflect the peoples choice. That, and because they're cheaper, is why states use them.

Fern
I, for one, still blame the caucus system for the '04 election ;)

it just seems mind boggling that we'd pick party nominees in such a different fashion than the general election is conducted in; caucuses seem like a poor way to judge mass appeal (ie: Kerry winning... anything.)
Seeing that you're an admitted political junkie, you should've voiced your opinion before the voting began. It's too late to start crying about the process now. Fern is right, only the Hillary supporters are crying like girls over this whole thing. Obama accepted things as they were and so did Hillary, but only one of them is flip-flopping on their previous agreement.
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,826
83
91
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: loki8481
Originally posted by: Fern
Man, I love reading the comments from the Hillary supporters.

They make it sound like caucuses were invented by Satan soley to fvck with her and her supporters.

I can't help but LOL reading these threads.

Of course caucuses reflect the peoples choice. That, and because they're cheaper, is why states use them.

Fern
I, for one, still blame the caucus system for the '04 election ;)

it just seems mind boggling that we'd pick party nominees in such a different fashion than the general election is conducted in; caucuses seem like a poor way to judge mass appeal (ie: Kerry winning... anything.)
Seeing that you're an admitted political junkie, you should've voiced your opinion before the voting began. It's too late to start crying about the process now. Fern is right, only the Hillary supporters are crying like girls over this whole thing. Obama accepted things as they were and so did Hillary, but only one of them is flip-flopping on their previous agreement.
you're welcome to crawl through old posts dating back to 2004 about me bitching about caucuses :p
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,136
37
91
Originally posted by: loki8481
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: loki8481
Originally posted by: Fern
Man, I love reading the comments from the Hillary supporters.

They make it sound like caucuses were invented by Satan soley to fvck with her and her supporters.

I can't help but LOL reading these threads.

Of course caucuses reflect the peoples choice. That, and because they're cheaper, is why states use them.

Fern
I, for one, still blame the caucus system for the '04 election ;)

it just seems mind boggling that we'd pick party nominees in such a different fashion than the general election is conducted in; caucuses seem like a poor way to judge mass appeal (ie: Kerry winning... anything.)
Seeing that you're an admitted political junkie, you should've voiced your opinion before the voting began. It's too late to start crying about the process now. Fern is right, only the Hillary supporters are crying like girls over this whole thing. Obama accepted things as they were and so did Hillary, but only one of them is flip-flopping on their previous agreement.
you're welcome to crawl through old posts dating back to 2004 about me bitching about caucuses :p
No. How about you provide a link before this election cycle. I want to see how you complained about it before Hillary and Barack went at it. If anything, I bet you thought this was going to be a cakewalk for Clinton and that's why you had no complaints this time, right;)?
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,667
13,747
136
Ultimately, of course, it's up to the Democrats in Florida and Michigan to decide if they want their delegates to count at the convention. Currently, they won't, and that was known prior to the votes being taken in violation of DNC rules. Following DNC rules is the price paid to have full participation in party affairs. Very straightforward.

And it's up to the state democratic parties involved to choose which method, if any, they'll use to achieve that end. I disagree with either candidate trying to interfere in that process, and also with the pre-emptive sour grapes ravings about one method being essentially fairer than the other, which is malarkey, and just more attempted meddling in the affairs of the state parties... No matter if it's a primary election or a caucus, everybody who's eligible has the right to participate. The idea that the two methods may yield different results is immaterial, given that they're both eminently fair...
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,826
83
91
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: loki8481
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: loki8481
Originally posted by: Fern
Man, I love reading the comments from the Hillary supporters.

They make it sound like caucuses were invented by Satan soley to fvck with her and her supporters.

I can't help but LOL reading these threads.

Of course caucuses reflect the peoples choice. That, and because they're cheaper, is why states use them.

Fern
I, for one, still blame the caucus system for the '04 election ;)

it just seems mind boggling that we'd pick party nominees in such a different fashion than the general election is conducted in; caucuses seem like a poor way to judge mass appeal (ie: Kerry winning... anything.)
Seeing that you're an admitted political junkie, you should've voiced your opinion before the voting began. It's too late to start crying about the process now. Fern is right, only the Hillary supporters are crying like girls over this whole thing. Obama accepted things as they were and so did Hillary, but only one of them is flip-flopping on their previous agreement.
you're welcome to crawl through old posts dating back to 2004 about me bitching about caucuses :p
No. How about you provide a link before this election cycle. I want to see how you complained about it before Hillary and Barack went at it. If anything, I bet you thought this was going to be a cakewalk for Clinton and that's why you had no complaints this time, right;)?
you're the one trying to call me out, you deal with AT's crappy search function :p

I heard today that they're talking about mail-in ballots now... less costly than a primary, more democratic than a caucus. I liked the idea.
 

lopri

Elite Member
Jul 27, 2002
12,845
325
126
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Damned if Obama played by the nomination rules and won. It violates the will of the people who also happened, via the activism or lack thereof, to make those very rules.

Have you no shame, MORPH?
There are many evidences that caucus rules were broken in Texas. And you didn't answer his question regarding the legitimacy of Texas caucus, which took place on the same day of the primary yet yielded different result. And if you were to support 'rules' so enthusiastically, I'd expect you to support the rules regarding super delegates? Last time I've heard that they're supposed to vote using their best judgment. But that is not something you like, I suppose.

Look, people. If you're not a democrat, your grumbling about either Hillary or Obama is at your leisure, I guess. But if you're a democrat - the biggest interest by far should be the win in general election, no? "I'd rather vote McCain if Hillary/Obama is not nominated" is really a pathetic line. We have two great candidates who are not only more qualified than the republican candidate, but also happen to represent two of the most oppressed groups of people in this country. (Heck, when do you guys think something like this would happen in republican party?) We should take pride in this and stop hating each other. It's getting ridiculous.
 

Painman

Diamond Member
Feb 27, 2000
3,805
29
86
As much as some of you may recoil in horror at stuff like Daily KOS diaries, realize that many folks there are authorities when it comes to Dem party mechanics.

It would seem that a MI Caucus would be a CINO (Caucus In Name Only).

It's anonymous.

It's not held at 7 in the evening.

Mail-in votes are a distinct possibility, as are online votes.

At least that's what I can gather, after sorting through the partisan chaff.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyo...181841/8676/104/470777

Personally I wouldn't object to something like that.

Florida also needs a do-over IMO.

Rationale - Candidates didn't campaign there, and FL should be allowed to hear each side's sales pitch. Clinton has brand recognition, but Obama should be allowed the opportunity to tell FL voters why he thinks he's better. Clinton should be allowed the opportunity to tell FL voters why the established brand of Donkey is the one to stick with. They can then make their decision based upon whatever merits they do or do not see.

Dems *did* turn out in record droves for that potemkin primary (note that there was also a property tax proposal on the ballot that evening), but I'll maintain the assertion that "underdog" candidates didn't get the opportunity to make their case to FL voters beforehand.

I'm an Obama guy, but you can hardly dispute that HRC came into FL as a known quantity, while the other candidates did not, and should have been afforded the opportunity to make their sales pitch to the voters.

I think the best candidate (in the eyes of FL voters) should win - FWIW, I think Obama would still lose FL in the popular vote.

But I think MI might be another story.
 

M0RPH

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2003
3,305
1
0
Originally posted by: Painman

It would seem that a MI Caucus would be a CINO (Caucus In Name Only).

It's anonymous.

It's not held at 7 in the evening.

Mail-in votes are a distinct possibility, as are online votes.

At least that's what I can gather, after sorting through the partisan chaff.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyo...181841/8676/104/470777

Personally I wouldn't object to something like that.
It would still be limited in hours and locations. In the link you give someone says 10am-6pm. Great, what about the people who actually have jobs. The more limitations like this, the more like a caucus it is and the more it will be skewed towards Obama. Clinton will not accept this and she shouldn't.

Florida does not need a revote. The disadvantage to Obama in FL because of his lack of campaigning and name recognition is nothing compared to the heavy advantages he has had due to the caucus voting in numerous states.
 

SViscusi

Golden Member
Apr 12, 2000
1,200
8
81
Originally posted by: senseamp
Caucuses are not real elections, they are a joke.
All Hillary is saying is let's have a real vote, not people standing around in rooms.
Not every caucus is like Iowa's. Most are just like primary's with the only real difference being who runs them. You show up, you vote, you leave. Hell some even have absentee voting.

Don't just buy the b.s. spin from the Clinton camp.
 

SViscusi

Golden Member
Apr 12, 2000
1,200
8
81
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: senseamp
And GWB supporters wanted recount stopped and the first vote to count. Hillary also wants the first vote to count.
soooooo Hillary = GWB supporters? and that's a good thing?! OK, got it... :Q
Well much like Bush, Hillary also endorsed McCain for president this week.
 

miketheidiot

Lifer
Sep 3, 2004
11,072
1
0
i'm not sure if it was cnn or fox where i heard this, but so far michigan and florida are the only states where more republicans voted in their primaries than democrats.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY