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

M0RPH

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

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.
Please tell me which caucases are just like primaries where you show up, vote and leave? The truth is most are NOT like this, most require you to stick around and participate somehow. Not to mention thay are always held at specific times of the day, and if you can't make it at that time, you're out of luck.

Even in Texas, where the caucus was most like a primary in that you could just vote and leave, the caucus results were skewed by 15 points towards Obama compared to the primary results conducted on the same day with the same potential voter pool. Most normal people simply do not want to endure the inconvenience and other quirks of caucus voting.



 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,880
4,211
126
Either have full elections or none at all. The rules were known, and they defied them. At this point if the concern is to let MI and FL have a say, then do so when everyone knows it will count.
 

Painman

Diamond Member
Feb 27, 2000
3,805
29
86
Originally posted by: M0RPH
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.
Ignore the points that disfavor your argument, employ the parts that do. The guy who sells blinders doesn't care which party you belong to, it seems. Business is good for him these days. Can't blame him.

The details are yet to be sorted out, but it seems that online and mail-in voting are real possibilities.

Lemme riddle you this: I AM a Dem partisan, an Obama partisan, but I know exactly and precisely why. It's got a LOT more to do with my opinion that listening to her stump is about as enjoyable as chewing on a wad of tinfoil.

I've explained in another thread (which shouldn't be that hard for you to find) exactly why I'm an Obama partisan, though I didn't explicitly describe myself as such within. I've laid out why Obama partisans tend to intractably be what they are.

Regardless of who I happen to support, or why, your supposition re: caucuses is now officially worthy of of the monicker, "canard".

Really. The time to piss and moan about caucuses, and whatever advantage they gave or took from a particular candidate, was last year, BEFORE it became apparent that they may have favored one candidate or the other. That bus left the station on January 1st.

Your talking points are well past their sell-by date. I'm not buying them. Most of them stank in the first place.

Back to my riddle: I know exactly and precisely why I'm an Obama partisan. I laid out my rationale in here.

Can you articuate exactly and precisely why you support HRC? And why Obama is so bad in comparison?

I don't happen to think he ranks among luminaries like Jesus Christ (Despite HRC supporter accusations), but please tell the rest of us why we shouldn't look upon your favored candidate in a light similar to that of Richard Nixon or Joe Lieberman at this point.
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,820
1,123
126
Michigan will not be participating in any do-overs.

There are too many "financial and logistical hurdles" for holding another primary vote."

Levein says...
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,712
3,518
126
Originally posted by: lopri
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.
I agreed with you right up to the point where it became obvious that winning was more important to Hillary than the good of the Democratic party. When she was pig enough to rate McCain as more suited to be President than Obama all that became very clear. She's ready on day one but McCain's day one was years and years earlier. She claims experience when her opponent has it over her in spades. How totally stupid.
 

BarneyFife

Diamond Member
Aug 12, 2001
3,878
0
76
Only in the US would they have a prehistoric voting system with a caucas. That thing is STUPID. Just count people's votes.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,547
0
76
Originally posted by: Painman
Mail-in votes are a distinct possibility, as are online votes.
YIKES! Maybe Clinton will hire some former Paulbots to help her out with those... :D DOH!

Originally posted by: M0RPH
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.
OK, WTF?! For weeks we've been told that after 7pm is no good, and now 10am-6pm is no good for you... Just when the hell are all of the "hard-working" Clinton supporters available?! :confused:

bah.. what petty bullsh*t...
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,547
0
76
Originally posted by: SViscusi
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.
LOL! :D
 

SViscusi

Golden Member
Apr 12, 2000
1,200
8
81
Originally posted by: M0RPH
Originally posted by: SViscusi

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.
Please tell me which caucases are just like primaries where you show up, vote and leave? The truth is most are NOT like this, most require you to stick around and participate somehow. Not to mention thay are always held at specific times of the day, and if you can't make it at that time, you're out of luck.

Even in Texas, where the caucus was most like a primary in that you could just vote and leave, the caucus results were skewed by 15 points towards Obama compared to the primary results conducted on the same day with the same potential voter pool. Most normal people simply do not want to endure the inconvenience and other quirks of caucus voting.
Off the top of my head Maine, North Dakota, and Minnesota all are show up, vote and leave. New Mexico had a firehouse primary which is basically the same thing. Colorado allowed surrogates for those who couldn't attend.

I know that now that Clinton is losing caucuses every Clinton supporter has to demonize the process, but unless you're willing to pony up the money then the fact that they're significantly cheaper means they'll always be around.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
101,313
5,250
126
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
And in FL, would you even waste your time when you are told up front that your vote is absolutely meaningless and will not count because your state delegates will not be allowed to represent at the national convention?
a) there are other races that are going on in a primary, so yes, people will 'waste [their] time' to vote for those. and if you're there already you might as well cast a vote for the presidential election.

b) people figured that the DNC wouldn't really enforce the rule. there was record voter turnout, after all.

c) even if they did enforce the rule you'd still be sending a message and helping your candidate get money.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
101,313
5,250
126
Originally posted by: Moonbeam

The vote for the loser was 5 to 4. The 5 to 4 majority for states rights over federal interference voted 7 to 2 to interfere anyway.
have you actually read the decision, moonbeam?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY