![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
May. 29th, 2008 02:46 pmOff to the store meeting. Perhaps the new (interim?) manager will be there.
May. 29th, 2008
I'm with you, Voltaire
May. 29th, 2008 04:30 pmI have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it.
Voltaire (1694 - 1778)
Voltaire (1694 - 1778)
(no subject)
May. 29th, 2008 05:30 pmPlan to split delegates is "flawed".
So the DNC has this idea, right? Split the Michigan delegates as follows: 69 to Clinton, 59 to Obama. Now, I'm not going to say if this is a good idea, or a bad idea.
What I am going to say is that I am not surprised by the reaction that people from the Clinton camp are having. They're saying (among other things) that the above plan is "fatally flawed". One of the plans a Clinton supporter (Joel Ferguson - who is a top Clinton supporter in Michigan) has come up with would be 73 delegates to Clinton, 55 to "uncommitted".
Well, who the fuck is uncommitted? Well, let's see... when the Michigan primary was held, several Democratic candidates had taken their names off of the ballot. They were Bill Richardson, John Edwards, Joe Biden, and Barack Obama. Dennis Kucinich tried to get his name taken off of the ballot, but was unable to do so. Hillary Clinton, Mike Gravel and Christopher Dodd kept their names on the ballot.
Now, obviously, out of all those names, only Clinton and Obama are still in the running. If the delegates had been counted (you know, if Michigan had decided to not jump the gun) Clinton would get 73 delegates, so on the face of things, it doesn't seem like her supporters aren't asking for anything special.
But they are.
You see, all the candidates agreed that Michigan (and Florida) were breaking the rules and needed to be reprimanded for it. It was only after Clinton won both those states and then failed to wrap the nomination up by Super Tuesday (or really, in the two weeks after Super Tuesday, where she lost all 12 contests) that she changed her mind on whether they should count. Because let's face it, if Clinton had swept Super Tuesday, it wouldn't matter if Michigan and Florida counted. The DNC could hit them with a slap on the wrist of losing half their delegates, and it wouldn't be an issue.
If she had lost both those states, she wouldn't be saying shit right now about them needing to be added. If she had wrapped up the nomination, it wouldn't matter one way or the other. It's only with Obama ahead in delegates that she is trying to play up this slim chance to steal the nomination by pretending that her party shouldn't play by the rules that they set forth. It's only now that this is really her last chance to seize the brass ring that she's comparing what's happening to Florida and Michigan to third-world dictators stealing votes to stay in power.
Unfortunately, I do not see the DNC wrapping this up on Saturday. I see them sitting on their thumbs and fucking this whole process over to the day of the convention.
So the DNC has this idea, right? Split the Michigan delegates as follows: 69 to Clinton, 59 to Obama. Now, I'm not going to say if this is a good idea, or a bad idea.
What I am going to say is that I am not surprised by the reaction that people from the Clinton camp are having. They're saying (among other things) that the above plan is "fatally flawed". One of the plans a Clinton supporter (Joel Ferguson - who is a top Clinton supporter in Michigan) has come up with would be 73 delegates to Clinton, 55 to "uncommitted".
Well, who the fuck is uncommitted? Well, let's see... when the Michigan primary was held, several Democratic candidates had taken their names off of the ballot. They were Bill Richardson, John Edwards, Joe Biden, and Barack Obama. Dennis Kucinich tried to get his name taken off of the ballot, but was unable to do so. Hillary Clinton, Mike Gravel and Christopher Dodd kept their names on the ballot.
Now, obviously, out of all those names, only Clinton and Obama are still in the running. If the delegates had been counted (you know, if Michigan had decided to not jump the gun) Clinton would get 73 delegates, so on the face of things, it doesn't seem like her supporters aren't asking for anything special.
But they are.
You see, all the candidates agreed that Michigan (and Florida) were breaking the rules and needed to be reprimanded for it. It was only after Clinton won both those states and then failed to wrap the nomination up by Super Tuesday (or really, in the two weeks after Super Tuesday, where she lost all 12 contests) that she changed her mind on whether they should count. Because let's face it, if Clinton had swept Super Tuesday, it wouldn't matter if Michigan and Florida counted. The DNC could hit them with a slap on the wrist of losing half their delegates, and it wouldn't be an issue.
If she had lost both those states, she wouldn't be saying shit right now about them needing to be added. If she had wrapped up the nomination, it wouldn't matter one way or the other. It's only with Obama ahead in delegates that she is trying to play up this slim chance to steal the nomination by pretending that her party shouldn't play by the rules that they set forth. It's only now that this is really her last chance to seize the brass ring that she's comparing what's happening to Florida and Michigan to third-world dictators stealing votes to stay in power.
Unfortunately, I do not see the DNC wrapping this up on Saturday. I see them sitting on their thumbs and fucking this whole process over to the day of the convention.