With popular vote, she meant if all the people in USA(including republicans and others) would had to vote between Hillary and Obama, she would win because most republicans would vote for her instead of Obama.
Why doesn't the vote of the people matter? This country is fucked up. I thought this democracy was true and not with some shitty ass delegates. Anyways, who was the dumbasses that ruled that delegates should choose the candidates, and the electoral college? There must be a way to reform the government of this country seriously and abolish delegates and the electoral college.
There are many news articles online that can give you the answer to your question regarding the Clinton choice of not to withdraw from the MI ballot. WOW! Upset much, guess so. Someone once rightly labeled you as being a partisan, and it really made you angry. Now when someone/something indirectly makes you angry, you try applying that same stategy. Not very original, and definitely not effective. Soul searching? Like you would know anything about that. You need to seek info on that too, ha!
Hillary has the popular vote. Obama is being forced down our throats, just as Bush was in the 2000 election. Let's not allow this to happen again. The people of Florida and MI. should be counted, because political red-tape is no fault of theirs. We have a broken voting system in our country, it needs to be fixed. The people should get who they choose in office, and the superdelegates and an electoral college should have no place in the structure unless there was a tie (that wouldn't happen).
get a grip and take off your partisan hat. forced down our throats? you are joking, right? how is it that barack leads in ever statistical catergory that matters? forced? yes or no. WAS IT NOT HILLARY THAT ONCE SAID THAT THE MICHIGAN VOTE WILL NOT COUNT ANYWAY? HOW COME EVERYONE TOOK THEIR NAMES OFF THE BALLOT, EXCEPT HILLARY? FACE THE FACTS, HILLARY LOST. BARACK RAN A BETTER CAMPAIGN. I STARTED OUT AS A HILLARY SUPPORTER. NOW I WILL BACK BARACK AGAINST MC:INSANE. GO DO SOME SOUL SEARCHING.
She toots that Florida had a record turnout of 1.7 million and should therefore count. Well 1.6 million voted in North Carolina a state that has half the population. The equivalent for Florida would be 3.2 million and it might have been a lot more given the importance of Florida.
I mean 3.5 million voted in the 2004 presidential election in North Carolina and 7.6 million in Florida, more than double the amount. A turnout of 3.5 million in Florida would have be likely in the primaries.
Come on give it up. I hope you're not a Clinton supporter putting this crap up about Obama lies. If so you really need to think about what you're saying when it comes to lies.
Hillary Clinton is crap. She claims that she should be president because she has the popular vote. Want to know why she has the popular vote? Republicans are voting for her because they know that she cannot beat McCain. For such an incredibly smart person she not only managed her campaign atrociously but she has slandered a true American, Barack Obama. I believe in the voting process but if Hillary Clinton gets elected, I will move to Canada.
Also get this. She only claims the popular vote if Michigan and Florida count exactly the way they are. Remember Michigan didn't have Obama's name on the ballot so all of those undecided votes wouldn't count for anything which means Obama wouldn't get anything from Michigan. How low-down and cheap is that? The Clintons need to give up these arguments cause the superdelegates aren't listening anymore.
Fuck Hillary! Because she's the one who started in with this reverend Wright nonsense! It's unbelievable the bullshit people will eat up in this country. Its all about fear mongering, white people have always been afraid of what black people are really up to, like in church, around the dinner table etc- and now look. They are making it look like the dude's church is a radical Black Panther meeting every Sunday. GET REAL or GET BENT.
[Yes, you read that right; under Rule 20.C.1.a., Florida, Iowa, Michigan, New Hampshire, and South Carolina would have all lost their super delegates and had their pledged delegates reduced by half since they all violated Rule 11.A.
However, Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina weren't punished fairly. In fact, they weren't punished at all.
And we all know what happened to FL and MI.
Y'all need to wake up and see who is really bamboozling Americans. No one is blameless.]
Let me see if I have this right. Dems ruled Fla votes would not count in advance of the election cuz they moved the primary up too much. That was the decision. Now Hillary wants the votes counted. And you are made at Obama cuz maybe he would press for the same if he was losing? Yikes.
Hillary is proving to be the tougher candidate. i like Barack a lot...but i adamantly think he should debate. we need to see how people behave under pressure and without a script. he is losing his center of gravity with each passing day.
I'm just waiting for Obama to EFF up again, and again, and again. Who cares about popular vote or delegate math, when Obama is so capable of sinking his own ship. Hopefully he'll do it before the convention so the delegates can change their minds. ;p
You boys need to really just chillax and stop getting your panties in a wad. It's so unattractive. lol
oldjoe5, do you never read the newspaper or online news? Or blogs? Or listen to anyone that doesn't agree with your own point of view? Even those who were pulling for Obama are concerned about his "mistakes" "missteps" and "associations". Open your mind to dissenting opinions and views, it's so obvious.
I guess you cannot dispute the point that those "missteps" in fact were anything but. Your view is that they must have been because the media and pundits say they were. My view (the reality) is that they were political attacks. Five minutes of videotape take from 30 years worth of sermons by the Pastor at Obama's church is an Obama misstep? huh?
florida and michigan vote in the general election, they should be included in a popular vote count. You democrats need to get ya'lls shit in order. I don't want McCain for president!!!
Watching Hillary run for POTUS is like watching the multiple personalities of Sybil on display. Sometimes she begins speaking with clarity and sense, then one of the immature personalities takes over, making her act childish and silly, or she acts like a rebellious teen, THEN, before she's finished, one of the stronger, crazy, nut job personalities takes over!!! That's when she's shrill and sounds like a lunatic. Maybe she's schizophrenic! Who knows. Hillary, another Sybil. SCARY!!!
Where do i start with you? Obama does not hate America. People like you love America like a four year old who does not want to hear anything bad about their "Mommy". Most of us (Obama Supporters), have critical thinking thinking skills and love America like adults and are willing to confront and change the things that America is doing wrong and has done wrong. You are the type of voter that has disgraced our country with moronic arguments like this. I bet u even voted for Bush too.
I wonder how it could be fun or worthwhile to run for the presidency if you hate the country? I think people who say that he hates America are really silly. Now personally, I wonder why he would want to be president after the country has been screwed over for almost 8yrs and is in worse shape than ever in modern history.
How racist and prejudicial! If all Hillary Clinton's voters are like you, no wonder why she's loosing! I don't want to associate myself with Her for the simple fact that racist bigots like you will be seated beside me during her meetings... No way!
She is one nutty bitch. She includes Florida and Michigan, then ignores four caucus states that aren't counted. Even if she gets to include Michigan & Florida, she's still losing by a half million after four caucus states are included in the "popular vote". Say no to Hitlary! We don't need another Bush or Clinton anywhere near the White House.
Thevoting system isnt fair and its all a scam; LOOK at how Bush got in. Who cares if Hillary gets to be president and Barac doesent. Barac wont become president because the people in the Upper parts of government wont have a black man as president, ever and they will do whatever to make sure it doint havppen. America isnt ready for a black man , they are hardly ready for a woman.
Actually America is ready for a black man. Remember, the voters who are winning Barack Obama those primaries are white voters. There are not enough black votes to win those primaries for Barack Obama. Even in those heavily black states. Think through your arguments before making accusatory posts like that. It's not responsible or true.
Hillary Clinton is a bully. She continues this behavior knowing that Barack Obama will not return a like strike. She is a classic Destructive Narcissistic Personality. Google it and read the definitions. It's Hillary Clinton to a tee.
HRC has shown herself up to be a pathetic joke of a woman. Just because you are losing a political race, that doesn't give you the right to move the goalposts so that the race suddenly favours you. The sooner she steps aside in this race, the better it will be for the Democratics. She's an embarrassment.
What? Americans believe in voteing? All your candidates have been pre elected by Zionist Israel, Sure your vote counts but it doesn't matter,because, whichever candidate is elected by the people of the US will be a puppet president of AIPAC and will fullfill the orders of Israel! Just as in recent years the Bush Family has been doing Israel's dirty work! Such as the invasion of the Iraq! America didn't go into Iraq to save people, they went in to pave the way for Israeli Zionist influence!
Good call westphalianprinz... more new deal style programs, more spending, when we are already overspending... Try, reducing the size of the federal government, a bigger assertion for state rights and then start focusing on what more the government can do... I find it amusing that liberals empasize individualism and choice, yet feel that the Federal Gov's programs, which are broad stroking, are better than states... PA, is different from CA... we need to get back to our founding principles
It's complete and utter nonsense. These people are operating with DLC assumptions, assumptions that have done nothing but destroy the Democratic Party. Yes, move to the center! But that doesn't mean kissing the ass of every corporation and accepting neoliberalism as God. They could stand to respect gun owners and religious voters. But they need progressive economic policies if they ever want to be relevant, and by this I mean New Deal style programs (extensive ones).
Lets put all this fighting to rest.Can Hillary and her supporter pick out any one "measurement parameter" on which base this election should be called and lets talk abt it DEMOCRATICALLY? By DEMOCRATICALLY,i mean the person with the majority at the end of it all wins.I have noticed,they keep changing what measurement criteria to be used every time.They started by Only delegates matter after Iowa,They went to only primaries are indicative,then Popular votes.And now Hillary says popular votes
Is their anyone in the media that is not in denial that Hillary just WON Rhode Island, Ohio, Texas, and Pensylvania in a row against the "front runner". And she was outspent 3 to 1 in Pensylvania by Obama & Hillary's campaign was in dept & Obama had $41 million dollars, & yet WE WON working 3 times harder 2 overcome media bias that pretends Hillary has no supporters, claims her winning in an election is dammaging the party, tries 2 deflate them by saying we can't win. So sick of the blind bias.
The media isn't biased. HRC and the Hillbots are delusional. And it's not so much the Hillbots' fault but the fact that they're being fed lies by the HRC camp. PA didn't matter, that's a fact. Ohio and Texas didn't even matter anymore. But the miserable results in those states made it even worse for HRC. The race has long been lost for HRC and now she is trying to fuck up the process. I understand that you're frustrated, but that's only because you're relying on lies.
And get over Obama's money edge. HRC had the Rendell political machine, Rush Limbaugh's operation chaos, FOX News, the Republican smear machine, McCain, ABC debate, HRC smear tactics and the demographics on her side. She needed a min 30 point lead and she blew it. Obama is leading by more than 1.1mill in the popular vote, he has 160 more pledged delegates and HRC needs to win 70% in ALL remaining states in order to just catch up in pledged dels. These are facts that the media are reporting on.
The media isn't biassed?!! How would u like it if every time your candidate won they say he's "dammaging the party" 4 competting in an election & tries 2 force him 2 drop out. They'd cry racism.This is a democracy & you're suppossed 2 have a choice.They told us we couldn't win NH, Calafornia,Texas,Ohio & Pensylvania & we won them all & they still try 2 force us 2 give up. Our reponse: YES WE CAN WIN, as we have a candidate that doesn't give uo on herself or us.We earned the right 2 compete 2 win
Look at the dynamics you idiot. There is no way for her to surpass the delegate count. The race has already been won by Barack Obama and she is just delaying the inevitable out of sheer stobborness. It's not a racist or gender issue. Hillary Clinton is destroying the chances of Barack obama to beat John McCain! What part of this do you not understand? Jackass!
You are right on one level. But the fix may be in for Hillary as far as the super delegates. The Lobby (you know who) may be able to squeeze these super delegates to pick Hillary
Point of correction,SHE DID NOT WIN TEXAS. I dont know what u refer to as ON THE ROW. Those mentioned contest came in this order,Ohio Texas,Rhode Island,Vermont on the same day.Of those,Obama won Vermont and Texasthats is 2 on 5. Then followed that was Mississippi which Obama won and then now PA which she has won.So what is your meaning on "On a Row"
I appologise, I thought Mississippi was b4 the joint Texas- Rhode Island- Ohio- Vermont day. So yes, I give credit 2 him 4 winning Mississippi & Vermont. Yet people are in complete denial that Hillary won Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island & Pensylvania. Even u are saying Obama won Texas. Hillary WON the popular vote in the Texas primary, just like she won the popular vote in Nevada & somehow he got more delegates, so do people care about the popular vote or not. We earned those victories with no credit
kkvh also forgets what happened in the race overall. HRC excludes caucus states from her popular votes calculations. That's very convenient, because Obama won 4 of these states with 50 to 60 point leads and he had anywhere from 20 to 40 point leads in the other caucus states, except for Iowa which was early and Nevada which he lost by 6 points. HRC had a huge row of embarrassing losses and now she acts as if it never happened. Her strategy was completely botched and she should just admit it.
No one is in denial that she won the states that she won, but HRC is in denial to the fact, that Obama leads her by over 1.1 mill in the popular vote. Read my comments above and check the links on that.
And she's overcome it. Now Obama is the one acting in denial about how he's winning when he just lost in Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island, and Pensylvania. He also lost in NH & Calafornia. They said we couldn't win any of these states & that the campaign ended there. So if our victories don't count then why should yours. Also Obama is selective in the popular vote counting aswell as he claims 2 win Nevada & Texas but only in delegates, & I don't see u calling him a hypocrit as we can't critise him.
Whatever, you're apparently in willful denial. NO ONE IS DENYING HRC's WINS. It's plain stupid to say HRC'S victories don't count. They are included in every calculation. In fact for the 1.1mill lead I included the Texas primaries and not the Texas caucuses. Yet HRC claims she leads the popular vote. It's ridiculous. California btw was HRC land. But it's really pointless arguing with you at this point. Your logic is fuzzy at best, willfully ignorant more likely. HRC is lying to you. Period!
She hasn't overcome anything. She was behind before Super Tuesday, she was behind by more AFTER Super Tuesday and Obama's February march-through finished her off. Her wins in Texas, Ohio, PA, Rhode Island were too late and too flimsy both in delegate counts and popular vote. I'm sorry for you, but it's true.
Hillary is NOT the answer! During the last debate, she mentioned going back to the policies of the Clinton years, yet, she also says her husband made policy mistakes. Uggh!
You're wrong, Hillary believes Obama is a fatally flawed candidate that can't win in November (I agree). She believes she CAN win the White House for the Democrats and is pulling out all stops to try to make that happen. She doesn't want a third Bush term, she wants to end the Iraq war. If Obama loses, she won't look selfish or demented, she will look like the hero who tried to save her country and party. Just because you've bought into the B.S. fed to you, doesn't make you correct.
Jeez Hillary is just delusional now, she really needs to get off her high horse and face reality that it is nearly impossible for her to win the nomination in terms of delegates
Not really. Who in their right mind would give the nomination to a person who had the lower total pledge delegate count. You try to equate the two arguments but one candidate has a better argument than the other.
You have a good point Cenk. Although I think you support the idea of these TINY states having a huge impact, the idea that Iowa and New Hampshire make any difference is preposterous, and they should have been ignored before this race even started.
I respect you making the choice you believe is right. But the idea that these little states have such a big impact is hugely UNdemocratic. I'm not a big Hillary supporter, and I don't think she's a particularly good candidate. But to pretend that Iowa should have more impact than California borders on clownish.
No one ever said that Iowa should have more impact than California. That's a complete strawman argument. Iowa needs to be included in the popular vote according to the number of people who voted in that state. HRC is excluding them and in the caucus tallies, that's also not the case. See argument below.
Each candidate is running for the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES of America. Not the bigger states of America. Its Undemocratic to minimize, discount, disregard states simply based on size. You are raising a false argument/ a clownish argument by your own definition. No one stated Iowa has more an impact than California. Hillary's argument is that smalls states don't matter which is MORONIC and from her very mouth and thats not made up.
John Edwards, what he's saying is that the way the caucuses are counted, they're represented underproportionately in the popular vote, because the caucuses don't show individual votes but caucus delegate votes.
tinyurl . com / 6yhm7b
The total lead of Obama in the overall ballots cast is over 1.1 million including PA, but the popular vote doesn't show that, because of these caucus delegates. Check the link!
E.g. Iowa reported 940 votes for Obama and 737 for Clinton. That's not cause there were only 1,600 people voting for them in the whole of Iowa, but because these are caucus delegate votes, representing anywhere from 5 to 100 individual votes each. If you apply the minimum factor of 5 to caucuses Obama's lead in the popular vote is over 1.1 mill including PA. Including FL his lead is STILL over 900,000. That's the minimum.
Calif reported over 4mill votes for Obama and Clinton (compared to Iowas 1,600). Iowa may be smaller than Calif, but not 3,000 times smaller. In fact they're only 18 times smaller. That's why the popular vote count disenfranchises Iowa voters, because they're not counted individually.
What caucus nonsense? HRC wants to EXCLUDE the caucuses from the popular vote count, but still use the popular vote for her argument. That's the only nonsense I can see. You completely miss the point. No one said Iowa had a bigger impact than California, but that Iowa needs to be included and be included proportionately according to the actual individuals who voted in that state. HRC distortions are ridiculous.
A lot of tiny states don't matter. It's just that some small states that are competitive between the Dems and the GOP are crucial. Nobody cares about Utah for instance in a general election. If anything it's the winner takes system that is the culprit. But I don't think America is ready for a change in that. It basically will mean the end of the two party system and a lot of fragmentation and coalition rule and debate.
I think that some of the states, have extremely strange rules too. For instance, Hillary Clinton clearly won the popular vote in a Texas primary, and still ended up getting less delegates. The entire caucus system is a crock, and I would go as far to say UNDEMOCRATIC. Don't get me wrong, I think Obama would probably win anyway, but this process is horrendous.
Perhaps but the Democratic Party there probably wants to reward the candidate and voters that are more dedicated to the state, not neccesary the one that gets more votes. It's likely they will be more motivated to vote in November will come and contest the state.
In small states caucuses are plausible because of the cost of primaries. If nobody cares about the state's outcome outside of the primaries well why spend a ton of money? A lot of states and voters are pretty much ignored currently.
With popular vote, she meant if all the people in USA(including republicans and others) would had to vote between Hillary and Obama, she would win because most republicans would vote for her instead of Obama.
MrWittiness 1 year ago
Why doesn't the vote of the people matter? This country is fucked up. I thought this democracy was true and not with some shitty ass delegates. Anyways, who was the dumbasses that ruled that delegates should choose the candidates, and the electoral college? There must be a way to reform the government of this country seriously and abolish delegates and the electoral college.
SlipknotDJ 3 years ago 4
@SlipknotDJ
Answers:
Why doesn't the vote of the people matter? It DOES. You just don't understand the CONSTITUTION.
You then say:
"I thought this DEMOCRACY..." This is where you're wrong again. The United States is NOT a democracy. It is a REPUBLIC.
The "dumbass" as you put it were the founding fathers.
The reason we have an electoral college is because we live in a political system where REPRESENTITIVES cast votes on our behalf.
sspiega 1 year ago
There are many news articles online that can give you the answer to your question regarding the Clinton choice of not to withdraw from the MI ballot. WOW! Upset much, guess so. Someone once rightly labeled you as being a partisan, and it really made you angry. Now when someone/something indirectly makes you angry, you try applying that same stategy. Not very original, and definitely not effective. Soul searching? Like you would know anything about that. You need to seek info on that too, ha!
buchanan061 3 years ago
Hillary has the popular vote. Obama is being forced down our throats, just as Bush was in the 2000 election. Let's not allow this to happen again. The people of Florida and MI. should be counted, because political red-tape is no fault of theirs. We have a broken voting system in our country, it needs to be fixed. The people should get who they choose in office, and the superdelegates and an electoral college should have no place in the structure unless there was a tie (that wouldn't happen).
buchanan061 3 years ago
get a grip and take off your partisan hat. forced down our throats? you are joking, right? how is it that barack leads in ever statistical catergory that matters? forced? yes or no. WAS IT NOT HILLARY THAT ONCE SAID THAT THE MICHIGAN VOTE WILL NOT COUNT ANYWAY? HOW COME EVERYONE TOOK THEIR NAMES OFF THE BALLOT, EXCEPT HILLARY? FACE THE FACTS, HILLARY LOST. BARACK RAN A BETTER CAMPAIGN. I STARTED OUT AS A HILLARY SUPPORTER. NOW I WILL BACK BARACK AGAINST MC:INSANE. GO DO SOME SOUL SEARCHING.
sambah009 3 years ago
Actually, Hillary won texas by like 2 points. It was a squeker. She sucks!!!!
UGOTDAJACK 3 years ago
She toots that Florida had a record turnout of 1.7 million and should therefore count. Well 1.6 million voted in North Carolina a state that has half the population. The equivalent for Florida would be 3.2 million and it might have been a lot more given the importance of Florida.
I mean 3.5 million voted in the 2004 presidential election in North Carolina and 7.6 million in Florida, more than double the amount. A turnout of 3.5 million in Florida would have be likely in the primaries.
tubebunny7 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Obama is a FRAUD. Read all fo Obama's MANY lies on channel: barackobamaLIED
See all of Obama's nasty and unpunished (by the media) attacks on Hillary @
attacktimeline com.
2025DPlaza 3 years ago
Come on give it up. I hope you're not a Clinton supporter putting this crap up about Obama lies. If so you really need to think about what you're saying when it comes to lies.
FreakinForte 3 years ago 2
Hillary Clinton is crap. She claims that she should be president because she has the popular vote. Want to know why she has the popular vote? Republicans are voting for her because they know that she cannot beat McCain. For such an incredibly smart person she not only managed her campaign atrociously but she has slandered a true American, Barack Obama. I believe in the voting process but if Hillary Clinton gets elected, I will move to Canada.
OBAMA '08
Barack and Roll
Barack the vote
nickMAN1025 3 years ago 9
Also get this. She only claims the popular vote if Michigan and Florida count exactly the way they are. Remember Michigan didn't have Obama's name on the ballot so all of those undecided votes wouldn't count for anything which means Obama wouldn't get anything from Michigan. How low-down and cheap is that? The Clintons need to give up these arguments cause the superdelegates aren't listening anymore.
FreakinForte 3 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
America PROOF you vote black you have a new war in your own country, MUST WATCH watch?v=iMQboMD8Io4 ...... watch?v=-kUQ-CNi360
before it is far too late...please watch and kill this in its tracks...
ilovegarthie 3 years ago
Fuck Hillary! Because she's the one who started in with this reverend Wright nonsense! It's unbelievable the bullshit people will eat up in this country. Its all about fear mongering, white people have always been afraid of what black people are really up to, like in church, around the dinner table etc- and now look. They are making it look like the dude's church is a radical Black Panther meeting every Sunday. GET REAL or GET BENT.
preludedriver226 3 years ago 3
& its sad becuase she may end up helping McAim get elected. Unsupprising if you realize her husbad is pretty chummy with the bushes.
preludedriver226 3 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
the president is elected by electoral votes and Hillary won the big states. anyway it is irrelevant. "President McCain" say it and get used to it.
McCain '08
azintp 3 years ago
If by "President McCain" you mean "President Obama", then I will get used to it!
Obama '08/'12
billybobthortansbro 3 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Reverend Wright + Obama = McCain '08
read it and weep.
azintp 3 years ago
This is directed to the tards who can't count-Hillary is a big disappointment
for a wo-MAN running.shes cheating.
as Florida did before.Play by the rules fools~
If you can count-
if you are aware of whats happening in
your own life-even in Fla.
if you are not color blind-
just get the numbers right-
gloryat777 3 years ago 4
If Obama had won in Florida and he were behind right now, you fools would be up there saying how unfair the rules are.
NewYorkViolets 3 years ago
Exactly!
[Yes, you read that right; under Rule 20.C.1.a., Florida, Iowa, Michigan, New Hampshire, and South Carolina would have all lost their super delegates and had their pledged delegates reduced by half since they all violated Rule 11.A.
However, Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina weren't punished fairly. In fact, they weren't punished at all.
And we all know what happened to FL and MI.
Y'all need to wake up and see who is really bamboozling Americans. No one is blameless.]
R0SEBUD789 3 years ago
Let me see if I have this right. Dems ruled Fla votes would not count in advance of the election cuz they moved the primary up too much. That was the decision. Now Hillary wants the votes counted. And you are made at Obama cuz maybe he would press for the same if he was losing? Yikes.
oldjoe5 3 years ago
I voted too in florida but if it don't count
i blame florida for that not Obama like hillary wants you too.
DereckLamar 3 years ago 7
I don't blame Obama, I blame Florida and I want my vote counted. it's that simple.
NewYorkViolets 3 years ago
Ok....
DereckLamar 3 years ago
Hillary is proving to be the tougher candidate. i like Barack a lot...but i adamantly think he should debate. we need to see how people behave under pressure and without a script. he is losing his center of gravity with each passing day.
NewYorkViolets 3 years ago
I voted in Florida. I want my vote counted. FUCK YOU YOUNG TURKS!
NewYorkViolets 3 years ago
I vited in Florida. I want my vote counted. FUCK YOU YOUNG TURKS!
NewYorkViolets 3 years ago
I'm just waiting for Obama to EFF up again, and again, and again. Who cares about popular vote or delegate math, when Obama is so capable of sinking his own ship. Hopefully he'll do it before the convention so the delegates can change their minds. ;p
You boys need to really just chillax and stop getting your panties in a wad. It's so unattractive. lol
R0SEBUD789 3 years ago
Obama F'ed up when? When he attended a church over a 20 year period? When he noted the working class has gotten screwed over and is mad about it?
oldjoe5 3 years ago
oldjoe5, do you never read the newspaper or online news? Or blogs? Or listen to anyone that doesn't agree with your own point of view? Even those who were pulling for Obama are concerned about his "mistakes" "missteps" and "associations". Open your mind to dissenting opinions and views, it's so obvious.
R0SEBUD789 3 years ago
I guess you cannot dispute the point that those "missteps" in fact were anything but. Your view is that they must have been because the media and pundits say they were. My view (the reality) is that they were political attacks. Five minutes of videotape take from 30 years worth of sermons by the Pastor at Obama's church is an Obama misstep? huh?
oldjoe5 3 years ago
9/11 was an Inside job,
WTC 7 WAS a controlled demolition,
AIrforce stood down and left the Pentagon COMPLETELY DEFENSELESS for OVER an Hour!
And no,the "AL Qaeda" boogieman didnt have the means to do that
Only traitors inside the government could have done that
NO ONE was fired or court martialed, and the Bush-controlled 9/11 Commission was a COMPLETE whitewash by the white house.
That is PROOF of a conspiracy right there.
Its as simple as that.
The TRUTH about 9/11-
watch?v=9yTgbZSATTU
Iconoclasm333 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hillary is a named defendant in a CIVIL FRAUD TRIAL going on right now in Los Angeles court. RIGHT NOW!!
go to LASUPERIORCOURT. ORG
click under Civil column: CASE SUMMARIES
enter case #: BC304174
gentemia 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hillary is a named defendant in a CIVIL FRAUD TRIAL going on right now in Los Angeles court. RIGHT NOW!!
go to LASUPERIORCOURT. ORG
click under Civil column: CASE SUMMARIES
enter case #: BC304174
gentemia 3 years ago
florida and michigan vote in the general election, they should be included in a popular vote count. You democrats need to get ya'lls shit in order. I don't want McCain for president!!!
spudea 3 years ago
Watching Hillary run for POTUS is like watching the multiple personalities of Sybil on display. Sometimes she begins speaking with clarity and sense, then one of the immature personalities takes over, making her act childish and silly, or she acts like a rebellious teen, THEN, before she's finished, one of the stronger, crazy, nut job personalities takes over!!! That's when she's shrill and sounds like a lunatic. Maybe she's schizophrenic! Who knows. Hillary, another Sybil. SCARY!!!
doubletaketwice 3 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
It's an embarassing time to be a Democrat when we've got an America-hater like Osama running for the Presidency. Wow.
Obama 08' Yeah! We'll nominate a carbon copy of McGovern, Kerry and Dukkakis, and then we'll "hope" for a different result. What a bunch of MORONS.
THE ONLY CHOICE = Hillary Rodham
2025DPlaza 3 years ago
Where do i start with you? Obama does not hate America. People like you love America like a four year old who does not want to hear anything bad about their "Mommy". Most of us (Obama Supporters), have critical thinking thinking skills and love America like adults and are willing to confront and change the things that America is doing wrong and has done wrong. You are the type of voter that has disgraced our country with moronic arguments like this. I bet u even voted for Bush too.
beatbaker 3 years ago 2
I wonder how it could be fun or worthwhile to run for the presidency if you hate the country? I think people who say that he hates America are really silly. Now personally, I wonder why he would want to be president after the country has been screwed over for almost 8yrs and is in worse shape than ever in modern history.
doubletaketwice 3 years ago 2
How racist and prejudicial! If all Hillary Clinton's voters are like you, no wonder why she's loosing! I don't want to associate myself with Her for the simple fact that racist bigots like you will be seated beside me during her meetings... No way!
medaa25 3 years ago
The whole system of having Primaries sucks.
It should be re-vamped.
We need to have something like...'National Primaries Day', and have them all on the same day in every state.
This long drawn-out process is nuts.
SeekerNLife 3 years ago
Watch the entire show at theyoungturks(.)com
TheYoungTurks 3 years ago
She is one nutty bitch. She includes Florida and Michigan, then ignores four caucus states that aren't counted. Even if she gets to include Michigan & Florida, she's still losing by a half million after four caucus states are included in the "popular vote". Say no to Hitlary! We don't need another Bush or Clinton anywhere near the White House.
dayglowgreendoor 3 years ago
Thank you for that clarification. So, essentially Hillary Clinton is being misleading again.
michaelrobert1974 3 years ago
Thevoting system isnt fair and its all a scam; LOOK at how Bush got in. Who cares if Hillary gets to be president and Barac doesent. Barac wont become president because the people in the Upper parts of government wont have a black man as president, ever and they will do whatever to make sure it doint havppen. America isnt ready for a black man , they are hardly ready for a woman.
DRDNIBOY 3 years ago
Actually America is ready for a black man. Remember, the voters who are winning Barack Obama those primaries are white voters. There are not enough black votes to win those primaries for Barack Obama. Even in those heavily black states. Think through your arguments before making accusatory posts like that. It's not responsible or true.
michaelrobert1974 3 years ago
hard to win a nomination
if he shows softness and don't punch back like kerry, he won't win the nomination
he needs to learn how to hit hard like clinton
rocketman10owen 3 years ago
Hillary Clinton is a bully. She continues this behavior knowing that Barack Obama will not return a like strike. She is a classic Destructive Narcissistic Personality. Google it and read the definitions. It's Hillary Clinton to a tee.
michaelrobert1974 3 years ago 3
Wow you're right! She is a despicable sub human too. No regard for her party,this country just power. She'd throw Chelsea under the bus to win.
morpheus2k2 3 years ago 2
HRC has shown herself up to be a pathetic joke of a woman. Just because you are losing a political race, that doesn't give you the right to move the goalposts so that the race suddenly favours you. The sooner she steps aside in this race, the better it will be for the Democratics. She's an embarrassment.
ezekielthemack 3 years ago 2
What? Americans believe in voteing? All your candidates have been pre elected by Zionist Israel, Sure your vote counts but it doesn't matter,because, whichever candidate is elected by the people of the US will be a puppet president of AIPAC and will fullfill the orders of Israel! Just as in recent years the Bush Family has been doing Israel's dirty work! Such as the invasion of the Iraq! America didn't go into Iraq to save people, they went in to pave the way for Israeli Zionist influence!
Ayasdantsi 3 years ago
I heard HC is taking delegates from MI including the uncommitted...what BS. Why doesn't Dean and Pelosi call her in this?
winklestraat 3 years ago
Good call westphalianprinz... more new deal style programs, more spending, when we are already overspending... Try, reducing the size of the federal government, a bigger assertion for state rights and then start focusing on what more the government can do... I find it amusing that liberals empasize individualism and choice, yet feel that the Federal Gov's programs, which are broad stroking, are better than states... PA, is different from CA... we need to get back to our founding principles
soliloqy 3 years ago
It's complete and utter nonsense. These people are operating with DLC assumptions, assumptions that have done nothing but destroy the Democratic Party. Yes, move to the center! But that doesn't mean kissing the ass of every corporation and accepting neoliberalism as God. They could stand to respect gun owners and religious voters. But they need progressive economic policies if they ever want to be relevant, and by this I mean New Deal style programs (extensive ones).
westphalianprinz 3 years ago 2
Lets put all this fighting to rest.Can Hillary and her supporter pick out any one "measurement parameter" on which base this election should be called and lets talk abt it DEMOCRATICALLY? By DEMOCRATICALLY,i mean the person with the majority at the end of it all wins.I have noticed,they keep changing what measurement criteria to be used every time.They started by Only delegates matter after Iowa,They went to only primaries are indicative,then Popular votes.And now Hillary says popular votes
beteck123 3 years ago
..popular votes shouldnt determine the winner. How then should the winner be decided?
beteck123 3 years ago
Is their anyone in the media that is not in denial that Hillary just WON Rhode Island, Ohio, Texas, and Pensylvania in a row against the "front runner". And she was outspent 3 to 1 in Pensylvania by Obama & Hillary's campaign was in dept & Obama had $41 million dollars, & yet WE WON working 3 times harder 2 overcome media bias that pretends Hillary has no supporters, claims her winning in an election is dammaging the party, tries 2 deflate them by saying we can't win. So sick of the blind bias.
kkvh4026 3 years ago
The media isn't biased. HRC and the Hillbots are delusional. And it's not so much the Hillbots' fault but the fact that they're being fed lies by the HRC camp. PA didn't matter, that's a fact. Ohio and Texas didn't even matter anymore. But the miserable results in those states made it even worse for HRC. The race has long been lost for HRC and now she is trying to fuck up the process. I understand that you're frustrated, but that's only because you're relying on lies.
vertigate 3 years ago
And get over Obama's money edge. HRC had the Rendell political machine, Rush Limbaugh's operation chaos, FOX News, the Republican smear machine, McCain, ABC debate, HRC smear tactics and the demographics on her side. She needed a min 30 point lead and she blew it. Obama is leading by more than 1.1mill in the popular vote, he has 160 more pledged delegates and HRC needs to win 70% in ALL remaining states in order to just catch up in pledged dels. These are facts that the media are reporting on.
vertigate 3 years ago
The media isn't biassed?!! How would u like it if every time your candidate won they say he's "dammaging the party" 4 competting in an election & tries 2 force him 2 drop out. They'd cry racism.This is a democracy & you're suppossed 2 have a choice.They told us we couldn't win NH, Calafornia,Texas,Ohio & Pensylvania & we won them all & they still try 2 force us 2 give up. Our reponse: YES WE CAN WIN, as we have a candidate that doesn't give uo on herself or us.We earned the right 2 compete 2 win
kkvh4026 3 years ago
Look at the dynamics you idiot. There is no way for her to surpass the delegate count. The race has already been won by Barack Obama and she is just delaying the inevitable out of sheer stobborness. It's not a racist or gender issue. Hillary Clinton is destroying the chances of Barack obama to beat John McCain! What part of this do you not understand? Jackass!
michaelrobert1974 3 years ago 3
You are right on one level. But the fix may be in for Hillary as far as the super delegates. The Lobby (you know who) may be able to squeeze these super delegates to pick Hillary
oldjoe5 3 years ago
Point of correction,SHE DID NOT WIN TEXAS. I dont know what u refer to as ON THE ROW. Those mentioned contest came in this order,Ohio Texas,Rhode Island,Vermont on the same day.Of those,Obama won Vermont and Texasthats is 2 on 5. Then followed that was Mississippi which Obama won and then now PA which she has won.So what is your meaning on "On a Row"
beteck123 3 years ago
I appologise, I thought Mississippi was b4 the joint Texas- Rhode Island- Ohio- Vermont day. So yes, I give credit 2 him 4 winning Mississippi & Vermont. Yet people are in complete denial that Hillary won Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island & Pensylvania. Even u are saying Obama won Texas. Hillary WON the popular vote in the Texas primary, just like she won the popular vote in Nevada & somehow he got more delegates, so do people care about the popular vote or not. We earned those victories with no credit
kkvh4026 3 years ago
kkvh also forgets what happened in the race overall. HRC excludes caucus states from her popular votes calculations. That's very convenient, because Obama won 4 of these states with 50 to 60 point leads and he had anywhere from 20 to 40 point leads in the other caucus states, except for Iowa which was early and Nevada which he lost by 6 points. HRC had a huge row of embarrassing losses and now she acts as if it never happened. Her strategy was completely botched and she should just admit it.
vertigate 3 years ago
No one is in denial that she won the states that she won, but HRC is in denial to the fact, that Obama leads her by over 1.1 mill in the popular vote. Read my comments above and check the links on that.
vertigate 3 years ago
And she's overcome it. Now Obama is the one acting in denial about how he's winning when he just lost in Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island, and Pensylvania. He also lost in NH & Calafornia. They said we couldn't win any of these states & that the campaign ended there. So if our victories don't count then why should yours. Also Obama is selective in the popular vote counting aswell as he claims 2 win Nevada & Texas but only in delegates, & I don't see u calling him a hypocrit as we can't critise him.
kkvh4026 3 years ago
Whatever, you're apparently in willful denial. NO ONE IS DENYING HRC's WINS. It's plain stupid to say HRC'S victories don't count. They are included in every calculation. In fact for the 1.1mill lead I included the Texas primaries and not the Texas caucuses. Yet HRC claims she leads the popular vote. It's ridiculous. California btw was HRC land. But it's really pointless arguing with you at this point. Your logic is fuzzy at best, willfully ignorant more likely. HRC is lying to you. Period!
vertigate 3 years ago
She hasn't overcome anything. She was behind before Super Tuesday, she was behind by more AFTER Super Tuesday and Obama's February march-through finished her off. Her wins in Texas, Ohio, PA, Rhode Island were too late and too flimsy both in delegate counts and popular vote. I'm sorry for you, but it's true.
vertigate 3 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
you suck
tidusquall10x 3 years ago
Madona Clinton is becoming delusional .
Be scared be very scared.
STEAMWORKER 3 years ago 4
Hillary is NOT the answer! During the last debate, she mentioned going back to the policies of the Clinton years, yet, she also says her husband made policy mistakes. Uggh!
AaamishBread 3 years ago 3
I fucking hate hillary.
t66wood 3 years ago 10
You only hate her, they have yet to invent a word on how I feel about her.
lestliness 3 years ago 11
Well you could say you loathe her, but she'll probably call you an elitest...
Ezekiels1 3 years ago 4
Hillary Clinton is all about changing the rules to suit her purposes. Typical Destructive Narcissistic Pattern (DNP)!
michaelrobert1974 3 years ago 6
You're wrong, Hillary believes Obama is a fatally flawed candidate that can't win in November (I agree). She believes she CAN win the White House for the Democrats and is pulling out all stops to try to make that happen. She doesn't want a third Bush term, she wants to end the Iraq war. If Obama loses, she won't look selfish or demented, she will look like the hero who tried to save her country and party. Just because you've bought into the B.S. fed to you, doesn't make you correct.
R0SEBUD789 3 years ago
But she can not beat a "Fatally flawed" candidate,who is she gonna be able to beat then?
beteck123 3 years ago
Jeez Hillary is just delusional now, she really needs to get off her high horse and face reality that it is nearly impossible for her to win the nomination in terms of delegates
Otacrack 3 years ago 4
Why doesn't anybody just admit that Obama can't win without superdelegates? It's the same exact arguement.
johnedwards1968 3 years ago
Not really. Who in their right mind would give the nomination to a person who had the lower total pledge delegate count. You try to equate the two arguments but one candidate has a better argument than the other.
Bucksin07 3 years ago 2
The woman is living in an alternate universe. She should be on a soap opera.
Fisue928 3 years ago 3
LOL she does have soap opera appeal. I guess that's her target audience at this point: soap opera junkies.
vertigate 3 years ago 2
Yeah, she wins one state and she's like OMG I'm better than he is! She's ridiculous.
rainsan 3 years ago 5
You have a good point Cenk. Although I think you support the idea of these TINY states having a huge impact, the idea that Iowa and New Hampshire make any difference is preposterous, and they should have been ignored before this race even started.
johnedwards1968 3 years ago
im from iowa, and from my p.o.v. i believe we choosed the best candidate
Lancedawg84 3 years ago 2
I respect you making the choice you believe is right. But the idea that these little states have such a big impact is hugely UNdemocratic. I'm not a big Hillary supporter, and I don't think she's a particularly good candidate. But to pretend that Iowa should have more impact than California borders on clownish.
johnedwards1968 3 years ago
No one ever said that Iowa should have more impact than California. That's a complete strawman argument. Iowa needs to be included in the popular vote according to the number of people who voted in that state. HRC is excluding them and in the caucus tallies, that's also not the case. See argument below.
vertigate 3 years ago
Caucus tallies show caucus delegate votes not individual votes, bla bla, see below.
vertigate 3 years ago
Each candidate is running for the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES of America. Not the bigger states of America. Its Undemocratic to minimize, discount, disregard states simply based on size. You are raising a false argument/ a clownish argument by your own definition. No one stated Iowa has more an impact than California. Hillary's argument is that smalls states don't matter which is MORONIC and from her very mouth and thats not made up.
Bucksin07 3 years ago
John Edwards, what he's saying is that the way the caucuses are counted, they're represented underproportionately in the popular vote, because the caucuses don't show individual votes but caucus delegate votes.
tinyurl . com / 6yhm7b
The total lead of Obama in the overall ballots cast is over 1.1 million including PA, but the popular vote doesn't show that, because of these caucus delegates. Check the link!
vertigate 3 years ago
E.g. Iowa reported 940 votes for Obama and 737 for Clinton. That's not cause there were only 1,600 people voting for them in the whole of Iowa, but because these are caucus delegate votes, representing anywhere from 5 to 100 individual votes each. If you apply the minimum factor of 5 to caucuses Obama's lead in the popular vote is over 1.1 mill including PA. Including FL his lead is STILL over 900,000. That's the minimum.
tinyurl . com / 6yhm7b
Check the link!
vertigate 3 years ago
Calif reported over 4mill votes for Obama and Clinton (compared to Iowas 1,600). Iowa may be smaller than Calif, but not 3,000 times smaller. In fact they're only 18 times smaller. That's why the popular vote count disenfranchises Iowa voters, because they're not counted individually.
vertigate 3 years ago
That's fair enough, and I'm not saying he isn't in the lead. But this caucus nonsense has to go.
johnedwards1968 3 years ago
What caucus nonsense? HRC wants to EXCLUDE the caucuses from the popular vote count, but still use the popular vote for her argument. That's the only nonsense I can see. You completely miss the point. No one said Iowa had a bigger impact than California, but that Iowa needs to be included and be included proportionately according to the actual individuals who voted in that state. HRC distortions are ridiculous.
vertigate 3 years ago
A lot of tiny states don't matter. It's just that some small states that are competitive between the Dems and the GOP are crucial. Nobody cares about Utah for instance in a general election. If anything it's the winner takes system that is the culprit. But I don't think America is ready for a change in that. It basically will mean the end of the two party system and a lot of fragmentation and coalition rule and debate.
tubebunny7 3 years ago
I think that some of the states, have extremely strange rules too. For instance, Hillary Clinton clearly won the popular vote in a Texas primary, and still ended up getting less delegates. The entire caucus system is a crock, and I would go as far to say UNDEMOCRATIC. Don't get me wrong, I think Obama would probably win anyway, but this process is horrendous.
johnedwards1968 3 years ago
Perhaps but the Democratic Party there probably wants to reward the candidate and voters that are more dedicated to the state, not neccesary the one that gets more votes. It's likely they will be more motivated to vote in November will come and contest the state.
In small states caucuses are plausible because of the cost of primaries. If nobody cares about the state's outcome outside of the primaries well why spend a ton of money? A lot of states and voters are pretty much ignored currently.
tubebunny7 3 years ago
First!!!
Silverlin212 3 years ago