A Touch of Hyperbole?

FIGURES DON'T LIE - BUT LIARS CAN FIGURE

The most important reason I could not vote for Hillary is that she is a manifest liar. The second reason is that she lacks the necessary foreign policy experience, to wit, her experience in Bosnia. How could I respect a leader who is in a plane that makes a "corkscrew landing" all the while fighting off snipers and the only backup she has is her then twelve-year-old daughter, a guitar player and a comedian. She could have at least brought along a sax player.

Am I missing something? Isn't it the elected/appointed delegates from the states and territories that determine the candidate that each party will put forward to run for the Office of President of the US in the general election? Since when does popular vote have anything to do with this process. If I recall correctly in past elections the individual who received the majority of convention delegate votes was selected as the party candidate. I would imagine that Senator Clinton understood the process when she declared her intentions to run for the nomination so many months ago. Now that she is apparently not going to have the majority of delgate votes she wants to change the rules. I say that the time to establish the rules is before the game starts. It is to late to change the rules after all the votes have been cast and the delegates elected. Seems to me once all the primary elections have been completed, whoever has the designated majority of elected/appointed delegates is the party candidate. At that point any individuals not meeting the designated number should gracefully withdraw.

Neil1785:

I would NEVER vote for John McCain so he can take away my right to choose.

Do not put words in my mouth. I am a supporter of the Democratic nominee--whoever that may be.

But, like it or not, it's going to be Obama.

i don't know but obama's view on how he counts the votes, on how he campaigns for the GE now - a slap in the face of all democrats! - and what his campaign tried to pull the awful morbid thing the other day when making hillary look like she was calling for some sort of assassination.. honestly, mccain has not done anything that comes even remotely close to all that.
i really don't know this guy called obama and what he really wants to do - he talks one thing and does something totally different..tally undemocratic
he knows foa fact that there are still people who to vote out there. he knows for a fact that the convention is the place.
seriously, i don't tnk he is going to make it.
some things you just don't do..

Many women who are avowed Hillary Clinton supporters are declaring they won't vote for Barack Obama in the fall. I get the anger and the disappointment. But to quote SNL's Amy Poehler and Seth Meyers: Really? You'd rather vote for John McCain, a man who has a 25-year history of voting against a woman's right to choose? A man who over the last eight years that NARAL has released a pro-choice scorecard has received a 0 percent rating? A man whose campaign website says he believes Roe v. Wade "must be overturned"? A man who has vowed that, as president, he will be "a loyal and unswerving friend of the right to life movement"? Really?

the article is another proof that tehre was no recession during 2000. they revised teh numbers after bush took office. btw, within two weeks in office bush changed clinton's budget! nobody talks about that one! - so, the final year of the clinton era was drastically altered by bush himself.. i am not clear how he was allowed to do that but he did it.
as he did so many other things.
but my question to you was: forget what the pundits said at the time for a moment. the entire country was talking about the surplus for years to come!
how could that have been a recession?
while talking about trillions in surplus? i don't think so. it doesn't make sense.
btw, cnn still refuses to post the popular vote numbers not even to this day!
now, how can a media organization post the numbers of people who have not cast their votes yet but insist in not posting the numbers of the ACTUAL VOTES?
cnn has a different agenda and that is neither mine nor yours..same thing with msnbc..
media organizations have NO right not to tell the truth about the real numbers of this election!
in fact, by not posting the total number of actual votes to date, they are misleading the american people.

Average Joe,

2000 is like 2008. "Maybe yes, maybe no".

Here is a link on CNN about it from November 20, 2000. Right BEFORE the election Gore v. Bush

The Stock Market was high due to "Irrational Exhuburance", then promptly TANKED. Remember the "dotcom bust". It was falsely inflated.

When Clinton left, we were in a recession.

You can't Cherry Pick history.

---

no you can't!
let me tell what the 'history' is:
in april 2000 - last year clinton was in office rememeber! - greenspan came out (i still remember that day, was first week in april i think) and said: this economy is growing so fast (it was growing at 5% gdp rate at that point) that we cannot stop it and we have to do something about it.
and he did! he bumped up the interest rate by 0.5% - just like that.
now, i just happen to remember that year was also an election year and our darling bush was running around the country and ordering his troops that he could not win if the economy were to keep growing like that. he DID actually say that on national tv!
so his friends at goldman sachs came out and said SELL and his buddy republican greenspan went out and bumped up the interest rate as much as he could get away with at the time.

now now.. let's do a bit of arithemtic here: how was the country in a recession if the gdp was over 5% in q1'2000 and over 3% in q2? that is a tough one.
but stop and think for a second. that election cycle even bush was talking abut what to do with the 'surplus' - nobody forecasted there wasn't going to be one..
so you are right, You can't Cherry Pick history.

They will say HRC is another 4 years of Bill Clinton, and that aint good.

---
why not? those were the only times in recent memory when we as a country were actually paying off the national debt, creating wealth like never before in history, creating jobs, etc. etc.

i happen to think that having bill there is a good thing.
i don't think we as a country can afford to pay for obama's education. it will takje obama 5 years to just learn the ropes..
i mean, look at what he is doing now: engaging mccain in a national conversation?
why?
if nothing else, it is way premature because it really insults the intelligence of every single voter out there yet still to cast his/her vote.

that aside, engagin mccain at this point is really really stupid.. shows that obama does not have experience.
mccain was dying for a reason to get media attention - obama put that on a silver plate for him. so, mccain can raise some money right? he needs it. as he needs FREE publicity. sorry, not free because obama is paying for it :))

i mean, seriously, what was wrong with the clinto years? stock market was going throught the roof, we were paying off the national debt and every single counrty in the wrold wanted to be like us..
clinton went to war and won without one single casualty! in yugoslavia.

i want those times back! i really do. hillary can do it. obama needs time to be able to actually do what he wants. he will never tell you that but, think about it. if experience and knowledge doesn't count, why do we send our kids to school for?

Maybe someone need to show Clinton that out of seven polls only one shows her in better standing the Barack Obama.

---
why do you need polls now? afraid to actually count the VOTEs?
count ALL the votes! and you will see who the winner of the popular vote is.
just wait another week or so and we will know!

no need for polls at this point - just look at the real numbers, state by state hillary can get more electoral votes than anyone else in the race. just count the VOTEs.

Posted by: Mary | May 28, 2008 11:24:53 AM says,
"I am an Obama supporter. But, if Hillary had won the nomination, I would have voted for her. Can you say the same? Obama supporters want unity. It doesn't sound that way at all in the Clinton camp."

Mary, that's baloney. You're just saying that because you can see that Obama is almost getting a majority of support from superdelegates to win the dem nomination. If it's otherwise, you would be saying this - it's either Obama or McCain or stay home.

The democratic party is so divided, the position may end up with the republicans. Superdelegates are not seeing and deciding wisely.... OBAMA is NOT QUALIFIED regardless, period.

Former Republican Voter,

The Party has to cut her lose shes going down and taking everyone with her its time to turn the page on the Clintons and toss the book in the bin crush the bin and burry it under some deep cement, I think !

Enough is enough !

"based on every analysis of every bit of research, and every poll that’s been taken and every state that a Democrat has to win – I am the stronger candidate against John McCain in the fall.”

"Really"

Yes! Really.

Jacksmith... Working Class :-)

"You cannot violate the rules of the process and then expect to get forgiven for it," Howard Dean

Judge Richard Lazarra sided with the party, saying political parties have the right to make their own rules.

You know you Dems had an opportunity to fix this little MI and FL problem right AFTER Gore lost to Bush. If you didn't want SD's and Pledged Delegates to be the final determination...if you wanted it to be all about the "popular vote", you could have fixed it then. If you didn't want to hold caucuses, you could have changed it then. Why didn't you?

All this stuff Hillary is throwing out now to completely rewrite the primary rules based on her losing results is insane and flies in the face of what I call a democracy.

All you people crying to count all the votes need to look back at ALL the signatures TO NOT SEAT MI AND FL if they voted early. Those signatures included one Hillary Clinton's signature. You need to understand that caucus states can't just be tossed out because they didn't go in her favor.

I suspect you didn't change the rules up front because they have served your party well over the years. I suspect many thought it was no contest; thought Hillary would be coronated, crowned the democratic nominee. I suppose she didn't insist that MI and FL not be penalized if they voted early because it would play right into her "thru by Super Tuesday" plan.

Guess what...America felt differently. We started hearing about this guy called Obama. Many of those who listened were Republicans and Independents. We started really paying attention to him and his message. We went to see him speak and found we DO WANT AND BELIEVE IN CHANGE. Some of us got to looking at the Republican lineup and decided maybe that wasn't the game for us this time. And, we got out and started working for Obama, donating to him and voting for him. We started saying "not this time". We didn't want a couple of candidates shoved down our throats. We wanted more than a choice between bad and worse for President. We felt it was time to take back our nation and rid it of destructive special interests and lobbyists.

The democratic party has a problem that will get "fixed" Saturday. No one is going to be happy. FL and MI should have "protested" earlier...right after the penalities were announced. You knew the risk; you took the risk and now you want the rest of America to feel sorry for you? There are no "fixes" after an election is in progress, half over, three quarters over. The rules are the rules and anything less than enforcing them is a huge sign of weakness on the part of the Democratic party.

If the Democratic primary is up-ended by this pathetic woman and her husband, we have all lost a part of our freedom. It would not just be about FL and MI breaking the rules anymore. It would be that a fair and honest election cannot be held in America. I assure you if that happens, McCain WILL win.

***********I POSTED THIS BEFORE BUT I GUESS YOU MISSED IT*******************

FLORIDA COURT RULES AGAINST CLINTON
JUST HAPPENED WATCH SOME CNN

The Floria Court Does not buy your argument.

Court Rules the National party sets the rules that all parties agree too.

Court says it doesnt have the atority or inclanation to seat the delegates!

---

yeah, they talk about seating the delegates not the actual VOTES.
media is soooo croocked on this one..they try to muddle to waters between the popular vote and the delegate vote..they make it look like the delegates have voted already when they haven't and that the popular vote doesn't count - while that is the ONLy vote that we have now.
the DNC can do nothing about the actual number of VOTES in FL. That's where teh argument regarding the popular vote comes from. and people in the media should report that popular vote in FL and MI - they have absolutely no reason not to report the way people cast their VOTE.
The DELEGATES wll make the ultimate judgement on that one at the Convention.
However, it is important to note that there is a precedent here:
The convention in 1984 (i think) had the same issue with iowa and new hampshire and they agreed to seat ALL delegates after a big huge fight.

Average Joe

"and that is NOT set by the DNC!
people VOTE based on the rules set by their states!"

***********I POSTED THIS BEFORE BUT I GUESS YOU MISSED IT*******************

FLORIDA COURT RULES AGAINST CLINTON
JUST HAPPENED WATCH SOME CNN

The Floria Court Does not buy your argument.

Court Rules the National party sets the rules that all parties agree too.

Court says it doesnt have the atority or inclanation to seat the delegates!

Careful Average Joe,

I may start liking you after all.

:)

Average Joe wro. Let all people finish voting without proclaiming that obama won until all the votes are in and COUNTED!
2. Let all DLEGATES vote at the Convention!

fair deal?
*******
Agreed, 100%!

See, we are not that far apart.

--
cool! i didn't think we were :))