602 replies to this topic

[Bellamy]

Nmj, on Aug 26 2008, 06:23 AM, said:

On The SIDENOTE: The Democratic Convention starts Tonight and I was watching CNN to see their broadcast of the Convention.  It is being held in Denver Colorado, at the Pepsi Center and on the bottom of the Screen on CNN they are putting fun facts and One is that " The Pepsi Center first opened in 1999 to a CELINE DION concert"

  They should play "You And I" there.  

[Annalicious]

Obama's getting the nomination. Get over it. I was a Hillary supporter earlier in the game but it would be a disaster for the party for the delegates to flip flop back to Hillary now. McCain has had the advantage of being the party's nominee for quite a while now and could focus just on campaigning for the GOP. Too many Americans can't get chads right, you think having confusion over who the nominee is would actually be a good thing? And have you actually read any of Obama's policy plans? He has some great actionable ideas and he says HOW he plans to accomplish those things. Also, I think the US economy would definitely benefit as Obama has the support of Edwards' former economic advisor who is happy being as rich as he is and is not out to screw the little guy. I've had lunch with him twice, trust me he's a brilliant guy. You don't hear about these people on the news because they're not controversial but I think Obama's got a great team behind the scenes and it's about time this country had a change for the better.

[Love,]

Alex_Incognito, on Aug 24 2008, 12:43 PM, said:

You don't have to know anything about the military to know that going to Iraq was the wrong choice.  You don't have to know anything about the military to know what many people lost lives for no cause whatsoever. You don't have to know anything about the military to know that George Bush Jr screwed the US economy (why don't you ever talk about that?) and that McCain will be the next coming of hell.

I agree.

[LVCeline]

The convention is a bit of a strange concept to me.  They have days worth of motivational speakers all saying how we need a Democrat in office and how Obama should be the next president, but they are all voting for him anyway!  They should be trying to convince the people that don't want to vote for Obama, not the ones who are supporting him.  

Anyway, I think his choice of Biden was extremely smart.  Biden will be the "age and experience" that they Republicans claim Obama doesn't have.  Biden seems like a good guy and has been in Washington for years and years and has a lot of foreign relations experience.  Now I can't wait to see who Mcain picks!

[Bralo20]

@ Jen

Found a mail from CNN in my mailbox this morning:

"CNN Breaking News" said:

-- Sen. Hillary Clinton tells convention delegates: "Barack Obama is my candidate. And he must be our president."

[LittleBrooks]

http://www.lynettelo...om/CAUCUSFRAUD/

http://www.lynettelo...aud/statistics/
Peniel Cronin "Primary versus Caucus" Final Report -2008

39 Primaries (State Run, State Financed)
34,829,191 Votes Cast 97%

17,657,517 Certified Votes - 50.7% Hillary Clinton - 1464 Pledged Delegates
17,171,674 Certified Votes - 49.3% Barack Obama - 1429 Pledged Delegates
Hillary Clinton: + 485,843 Certified Votes - 1.4% and 35 Delegates

The Pledged Delegate count is after the Democratic party "ajusted" the Pledged Delegates in Michigan and Florida, stripping Hillary Clinton of 66% of her Pledged Delegates won in Michigan and Florida
--If Florida and Michigan would have Voted "normal", How many more Certified Votes and Pledged Delegates would Hillary Clinton have won?


13 Caucuses (Party Run, Party Financed)
1,057,136 Votes Cast 2.9% --53% of these Votes (558,030) were an estimate
378,684 Estimated Votes - 36% Hillary Clinton - 171 Delegates
678,452 Estimated Votes - 64% Barack Obama - 323 Delegates
Barack Obama + 299,768 Estimated Votes +206 Pledged Delegates

ELECTORAL VOTES:
311 - Hillary Clinton
227 Barack Obama
270 Electoral Votes are needed to win in the November General Election
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Example 1: On February 9, Washington held its statewide caucus and an estimated 245,000 caucus-goers, 5.3% of
eligible voters chose Obama over Clinton by 67.5% to 31.2%, a whopping 36-point margin. Ten days later, WA held a
primary attended by 691,381 [15% of eligible voters, ie, almost 3 times the caucus turnout] and Obama won by 51.2% to
45.7%. [Citizens of WA voted-in a State-run Primary. However, the Party-run caucus results are still the legal results.]
Washington allocated its 78 pledged delegates at a ratio of 2:1 [67% to 33%] and Obama got 52 versus Clinton's 26. He
gained 26 delegates. If the pledged delegates had been allocated according to the primary results, Obama would have
won roughly 41 delegates compared to Clinton's 37. He would have gained only 4 delegates. Bottom line: The caucus vs.
primary election benefited Obama by a net 22 delegates , 18.3% of the 120 pledged delegates that separated the two.
--from  -    http://www.lynettelo...om/CAUCUSFRAUD/   - On February 9, 2008, the Washington State Caucus took place. Obama won this caucus 68% to 31%, a 37 point victory.  Just ten days later, on February 19, 2008, Washington State had a primary election.  This non-binding primary was affectionately called the beauty contest since no delegates were awarded. Obama got 354,112 votes and Hillary got 315,744 votes in the primary. Obama won this contest by a six point margin, 52% to 46%. How did the same pool of voters give the same two candidates such disparate results? How can two contests exactly ten days apart with the same candidates differ by thirty points? Obviously, the reliability of the elections in Washington State has to be questioned. Should one trust the caucus where there were thousands of participants and where participants were required to state their preferences in a public venue or should we trust the primary results where almost 700,000 voters participated in the privacy of a voting booth?

Example 2: Texas held a primary & caucus on March 4 and once again widely different results were recorded. Over 2.8
million Texans voted in the primary and gave Clinton a 100,000 vote margin over Obama, a 52% to 48% win. However,
just hours later, the Texas caucus registered an Obama win over Clinton of 56% to 44% [with 41% of the precincts
reporting, total caucus participation has not been released]. Allocation of the 126 primary pledged delegates were Clinton
65 and Obama 61. Allocation of the 67 caucus pledged delegates were Obama 38 and Clinton 29. Bottom line: Obama
actually won 5 more pledged delegates than Clinton in Texas. If all 193 pledged delegates were allocated based on the
2.8 million votes cast, Clinton would have received 100 versus 93 for Obama.
--from   http://www.lynettelo...om/CAUCUSFRAUD/  --On March 4, 2008, Texas held its Democratic Primary, affectionately called the Texas-Two Step.  Polls were open from 7 am to 7 pm and then after the polls closed, persons who voted in primary could participate in a caucus. According to CNN a total of 2,867,454 votes were cast in the Democratic Primary with 1,458,814 (51%) votes cast for Senator Hillary Clinton and 1,358,785 (47%) votes cast for Senator Barack Obama, and a smattering of votes (49,855) for John Edwards, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, and Chris Dodd combined. A total of 8,247 precinct conventions, commonly called caucuses, took place throughout the 254 counties in Texas, most of which were held at each precinct's Primary polling place. If 100 people attended each of these “caucuses” than at least 800,000 people attended caucuses. The Dallas Morning News reported a projected turnout of 1.1 million.  Overwhelmed by the participation, Texas stopped counting the results at only 41% of precincts counted. As a result of the Texas caucus, Obama was awarded 56% of precinct delegates and Clinton was awarded 44% of the precinct delegates. Since people who voted in the caucuses were required to have voted in their precinct, the voters in the caucus were statistically a subset of the voters in primary, but the results were statistically different.  A more sophisticated analysis is required.

Example 3: On February 9, Nebraska held a caucus and only 3.04% of the 1.3 million eligible voters participated. Those
38,571 caucus-goers chose Obama over Clinton 68% to 32% and he won 16 of the 24 pledged delegates. In stark
contrast, on May 13th, Nebraska held a primary where nearly 94,000 voters [7.5% of eligible voters] chose Obama by
49.4% to 46.6%, only 2.8% instead of the 36% vote-spread recorded in the caucus. If delegates were allocated on the
results of the primary instead of the caucus, Obama and Clinton would have received 12 pledged delegates each. Bottom
line: Obama’s 13,700 vote victory in the red-state Nebraska caucus netted him 8 pledged delegates. Compare that to
Clinton's 204,000 vote victory in the battleground state of Ohio which netted her only 9 pledged delegates.
--from  -- http://www.lynettelo...om/CAUCUSFRAUD/  -- Nebraska is one of the few states that had both a primary and a caucus. Obama won the caucus by 35 points but won the non-binding primary by only two points. Which of these results truly represents the will of the voters of Nebraska? In the caucus, Obama got 26,126 votes. In the primary, he got 46,279 votes. Obama got almost twice as many votes in the primary as the caucus, but Hillary who earned 12,445 votes in the caucus and 43,614 votes in the primary earned three and a half times as many votes in the primary as in the caucus. Again, why such divergent results?

Example 4: On February 5, Idaho held a caucus attended by just 2% of its 1,029,000 eligible voters, only 20,535 people
caucused. Once again, Obama prevailed with a 79% to 17% landslide victory over Clinton. He was awarded 15 of the 18
pledged delegates. On May 27th in the statewide primary, 42,900 Idaho voters (twice the caucus turnout) chose Obama
over Clinton by a much narrower 56% to 38%. Obama's vote margin dropped from a 62% spread to just 18%. If the
delegates had been allocated on primary results, he would have received 11 pledged versus 7 for Clinton. Bottom line:
Obama's 13,200 vote caucus win in Idaho (which has not voted Democratic since 1964) netted him 12 pledged delegates
the same number won by Clinton in a 214,100 vote victory in the state of Pennsylvania.
-- IDAHO ELECTION RESULTS
Democrats | Polls | County Results
Candidate Votes - % of votes - Delegates won
Obama - 16,880 - 80% - 15
Clinton - 3,655 - 17% - 3
Uncommitted - 552 - 3%
Edwards - 137 - 1% - 0
100% of precincts reporting

Tuesday 27 May 2008: Idaho Democratic non-binding Primary.
Today's primary has no effect on delegate allocation.

Primary results (as of 9:15A MDT 28 May 2008)

Barack Obama - 23,988 - 56%
Hillary Clinton - 16,119 - 38%
None of the names shown - 2,041 - 5%
Keith Russell Judd - 734 - 2%

Edited by LittleBrooks, 27 August 2008 - 02:14 AM.

[Alex_Incognito]

Bralo20, on Aug 27 2008, 02:17 AM, said:

@ Jen

Found a mail from CNN in my mailbox this morning:

"CNN Breaking News" said:

-- Sen. Hillary Clinton tells convention delegates: "Barack Obama is my candidate. And he must be our president."

It couldn't be any more clear.

[zoea2812]

I think barack Obama would make an excellent president

[PrincesseJen]

This delegate speaks for so many.



And again Hillary HAS to say those things and of course the media is going to eat it up. However Bill certainly was sending a different message.

Quote

"Suppose you're a voter, and you've got candidate X and candidate Y. Candidate X agrees with you on everything, but you don't think that candidate can deliver on anything at all. Candidate Y you agree with on about half the issues, but he can deliver. Which candidate are you going to vote for?"

http://thehill.com/c...2008-08-26.html

Quote

"But underneath that and in the background, there is also a different story, which we don't want to unearth much on the convention floor because it's not really what we're trying to do but which you should be mindful of," Clinton said. The real issue, he said, is whether democracies around the world can deliver on critical challenges when the dust settles after elections"

http://news.yahoo.co...vn_bill_clinton


The whole convention is a sham. It's like one big fraudulent caucus. There trying to make the Clinton delegates cast their votes from their hotel rooms while they have Obama people outside their doors with clipboards. They're intimdating delegates who don't want to vote for Obama. There are other amazing delegates that are trying to get a petition signed so they can get the legitiamte roll call they were PROMISED.  http://www.politico....0808/12885.html

I have given so many links here that explains this whole thing was fixed and yet people are amazed we won't support him. If we vote for Obama that's like saying, we'll you trashed Hillary, her husband and us, you cheated, wasted tax payer money for primaries that didn't mean anything because you stole and manipulated our votes but you know what that's fine and I'll still vote for you anyway. I'll fall in line like a good little soldier and let you keep walking all over me for the sake of "unity" under the holy name of Obama. The Democratic party has thrown Democracy under the bus with 18 million Clinton supporters.  We are not going to reward this behavor by voting for the one they selected. They can keep their unity but they can't have my vote.

BTW the headline I'm reading today is:

"Many Clinton Supporters Say Speech Didn't Heal Divisions" (WASHINGTON POST)

http://www.washingto...2603921_pf.html

Edited by PrincesseJen, 27 August 2008 - 10:59 AM.

[Bralo20]

zoea2812, on Aug 27 2008, 05:42 PM, said:

I think barack Obama would make an excellent president

If he wins the elections in november (which I certainly hope for) I'm certain he will be an excellent president and the foreign nations will welcome him very warm.

All the nations are supporting Barack in his race to the white house.

Several things have to change in the US and Barack is the best person to make the changes happen...  

Unfortunately I can't vote but otherwise I would give him my vote!

[PrincesseJen]

Apparently Obama will be giving his speech with the backdrop of a Greek Temple. Isn't this a bit much?

http://abcnews.go.co...tory?id=5660266




Anyone who thinks Obama would be a good president is kidding themselves. In a matter of weeks he went against his word on public financing, NAFTA and FISA. What do you think he'll do in the white house?

[Alex_Incognito]

Well, rest of the world----you can see that the US is divided.  
Trust me, there are some smart ones out there that take educated interest and want the best for the world.

[Love,]

PrincesseJen, on Aug 27 2008, 11:53 AM, said:

Apparently Obama will be giving his speech with the backdrop of a Greek Temple. Isn't this a bit much?

There's nothing wrong with it.

In fact, I think it's beautiful, and very fitting.

The Greeks believe in democracy, philosophy, knowledge, and understanding.

AND in fact, the Greeks created the very first democracy on planet Earth.

Edited by Love,, 27 August 2008 - 04:37 PM.

[PrincesseJen]

Love,, on Aug 27 2008, 06:33 PM, said:

PrincesseJen, on Aug 27 2008, 11:53 AM, said:

Apparently Obama will be giving his speech with the backdrop of a Greek Temple. Isn't this a bit much?

There's nothing wrong with it.

In fact, I think it's beautiful, and very fitting.

The Greeks believe in democracy, philosophy, knowledge, and understanding.

AND in fact, the Greeks created the very first democracy on planet Earth.

It's not beautiful, it's his ego.



AND AMERICA HAS JUST BECOME NAZI GERMANY. A COMPLETE AND UTTER SHAM OF A ROLL CALL VOTE WHERE THE WILL OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WAS SURPRESSED. THE DELEGATES GIVEN IN NO WAY REFLECTED THE VOTES. REMEMBER THIS DAY. IT'S THE DAY DEMOCRACY DIED. AND THAT SHAME ROLL CALL THAT WAS PLAY FOR THE CAMERAS ONLY IS THE LAST STRAW FOR MILLIONS OF DEMOCRATS. THEY WERE WARNED!

Edited by PrincesseJen, 27 August 2008 - 05:00 PM.

[PrincesseJen]

This blog states it all.

http://heidilipotpou...-to-see-is.html

"What We Are Watching Today More Closely Resembles Iranian Parliamentary Elections than U.S. Federal Elections." (Heidi Li's Potpourri)

Quote

Warning: what you are about to see is not a real vote


Denver, Democratic National Convention, August 24 - 3:30 Mountain Time

In the previous post on this site, I discussed the private delegate sessions held during the day before today's Convention officially convened. Apparently, the delegates were required to sign ballot sheets in those sessions, and it seems that it is these ballot sheets that will be tallied in the next couple of hours during the official "roll call vote". In my previous post, I noted all the ways delegates themselves could, in principle, object to what happens on the floor, including basing an objection into being forced to participate in these private meetings under duress.

But I doubt that will happen - not for lack of delegates who would want to do so - but because such tremendous acts of political courage in the face of oppression are exceedingly hard to muster.

If delegates do muster the will to fight today on the Convention Floor for a democratic Democratic party, they will, I have no doubt be quashed by Speaker Pelosi who long ago gave up on democratic procedures and principles or even showing enough integrity to have her Party abide by its own Rules.

Regardless of what people see on their televisions over the next hour or so, do not be fooled. No ritual that is preceded by private balloting can be understand to be a genuine or authentic vote. When Americans go to vote in the general election, for example, they will not be rounded up beforehand and asked to sign documents stating how they will vote before hand. If we were, the documents would not count as votes anyway. That is because, messy and imperfect as federal elections can be, the one thing the government does is at least try to do is to make the elections that occur on Election Day be genuine decision making making mechanisms, a chance for those eligible to vote to cast ballots according to a previously established procedure to use that procedure to decide the question at hand.

Quite the opposite has occurred at the Democratic Party convention this year. Every effort has been made to ensure that today's televised proceedings NOT be the actual mechanism to decide the Democratic Party's nominee, to turn what could and should have been a vote into a "vote".
What we are watching today more closely resembles closely Iranian parliamentary elections than U.S. federal elections.

A "vote" is not a vote. It is a sham, a fake, a show.

[KimboCosmo]

Alex_Incognito, on Aug 27 2008, 04:53 PM, said:

Well, rest of the world----you can see that the US is divided.  
Trust me, there are some smart ones out there that take educated interest and want the best for the world.

And I, personally, would LOVE to and probably will one day, move out of my own country  

[stevethefan]

You have to watch out about this "charisma" thing. Personally I really don't like either candidates that much and yes, Mr. Obama definitely has a lot of charisma, especially when you compare him to McCain, but having charisma does not necessarily mean you are going to be a great leader or president. Personally I rather have a boring president that will actually get things done or accomplish great things than just someone with a lot of charisma.

[Bralo20]

It seems it's final now...

Breaking News by CNN (From 9 hours ago):  Barack Obama wins Democratic Party's presidential nomination after Hillary Clinton's motion on the convention floor.

[PrincesseJen]

Again the whole thing was a sham. They never wanted to give Hillary the roll call she deserved. The simply handed Obama delegates he didn't earn. Anyone delegate that switched from Hillary to Obama spitted in voters faces yesterday. I was like saying, hey you didn't vote for him but we're just give it all to him anyway. The first surprising thing was Arkansas. Bill Gwatney, the former head of the Demcoratic party in that state that was killed earlier this month, signed a document the day before he was shot that would have giving Hillary ALL of Arkansas's delegates at the convention. That's what was SUPPOSE to happen. Yet I sat there watching his poor wife (who looked nervous by the way) give all of Arkansas's delegates to Obama. If she wanted to honor her husbands memory she would have done what he wanted. Something tells me she had no choice. The whole thing was to make Obama look good. The purposely used Obama delegates/supporter to read the roll calls and made sure there were more Obama supporters in the crowd. They have now pissed off millions of voters. We ELECT Presidents we don't SELECT Emperors.

The quote of the morning:

Quote

"The PUMAs can't deny Obama the nomination," says longtime Democratic strategist Mary Anne Marsh, "but they can cost him the election."

http://www.hillarycl...ead.php?t=25857


DAMN STRAIGHT!!!!

Edited by PrincesseJen, 28 August 2008 - 04:29 AM.

[Annalicious]

Look, I wanted Hillary to win too, but she did not get enough delegates so c'est la vie. A lot of the superdelegates who originally pledged to support her because of old Clinton alliances switched sides after seeing the way their districts. The convention is not supposed to be a vote based on what individual delegates feel like doing but rather a vote based on what their constituencies have chosen so there is nothing to think about. Obama ran a better campaign and won. Good for him. I hope he can make up ground in the swing states that Hillary did better in. Now it's time to make sure we don't end up with 4 more years of the same old Bush policies that clearly don't work. Hillary's obviously moving on and so should you, whining about it isn't going to get her elected and electing McCain isn't going to get you anything similar to what you liked about Hillary.

[Nmj]

Jen Get OVER it Jen trying answering some of my questions for once dont dodge these please

1. Do You Think George W. Bush is a good President?

2. Do You  think that we are better off now rather than 8 years ago?

3. Do You think that McCain will change our country for the better?

4. Why Is Obama a bad choice for Americans when he is the only candidate to help us have faith again after 8 Years of Crap.

________
I Feel Your Sorrow for Hillary Clinton I Bet you dont Know she was my first choice ( I Loved Her So Much ) and Still think in 8 years from now she will run after Obama fixes our nation and No Doubt she will make a GREAT
President!  But Jen I Presume your are a demacrate so you need to swallow your pride and vote for the candiate most like Hillary and that is Obama not McCain
" No Way, No How NO MCCAIN" -  Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton
-Nmj

Edited by Nmj, 28 August 2008 - 04:33 PM.

[Alex_Incognito]

Get ready for a reply that it's all a crock.  She'll post some lame article written by a nobody (that's too long) and talk about how she longs for Hillary.  Same crap, new day.

[Nmj]

BREAKING NEWS: Sarah Palin is McCains VP First Women on Republican Ticket ever

That shows you how desperate McCain is to win this election he thinks he is going after the women Democrates that supported Hillary Clinton, with the exeption of Jen The Puma I think are Ladies of the USA are smart enough to see threw this Business Move..Thats the same disfunctional crap that we have now..

Bottom Line:
McCain is saying she is qualified to be president should something happen to McCain which it might since he is a 73 year old man who is in remisson for Skin cancer and is not extremely healthy she has Little expericence
She is governer of Alaska and is younger (46) Then Obama and is less qualified to be President ...McCain is so Ingornant and The Hillary Clinton supporters are not stupid they know she is not Hillary ....her views on guns rights, War, Gay-Lesbian marriage, and Abortion just to name a few are complete oppisite hillary stands on these policies.


"We need our country back its time for Barack Obama" - President Bill Clinton

[Alex_Incognito]

This is UNBELIEVABLE!!!!

[Nmj]

Whats unbelieveable ? Total Business Move

[A New Day Has Come]

Yeah I say that on the news yesterday I mean the woman is young enough to be his daughter I mean she has no experinace and being VP is a big job to have I mean at least Obamas VP candadate is more experance in that case. I think Mc Cain choose a woman just to bug Hilliray Clinton I think he just lost becoming the Presedent of the United States.    

[Nmj]

its a load of bull

[Macaronie]

Y'all should vote for me for president!!!!

[Céline's Blues]

[PrincesseJen]

Nmj, on Aug 28 2008, 06:33 PM, said:

Jen Get OVER it Jen trying answering some of my questions for once dont dodge these please

1. Do You Think George W. Bush is a good President?

2. Do You think that we are better off now rather than 8 years ago?

3. Do You think that McCain will change our country for the better?

4. Why Is Obama a bad choice for Americans when he is the only candidate to help us have faith again after 8 Years of Crap.

________
I Feel Your Sorrow for Hillary Clinton I Bet you dont Know she was my first choice ( I Loved Her So Much ) and Still think in 8 years from now she will run after Obama fixes our nation and No Doubt she will make a GREAT
President! But Jen I Presume your are a demacrate so you need to swallow your pride and vote for the candiate most like Hillary and that is Obama not McCain
" No Way, No How NO MCCAIN" - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton
-Nmj

Apparently, you still don't understand. This is no longer about Hillary. It hasn't been for a long time. They is about upholding Democratic principals which the Democrats themselves have spit on. We will not condone CHEATING by giving Obama our votes. Us Clinton supporters GOT OVER IT along time ago. That's why we're not gonna be good soldiers and vote for someone we don't believe in.  Considering his campaign strategy was to steal votes, I shutter at what he'll do as president. Also I STILL don't believe that Hillary feels he will be a good president. She is still doing what she has to. Her campaign knew about the voter fraud. She had 3 urgent presses release about them during the primaries that the press magically didn't pick up.  You can see copies of the releases here: http://wewillnotbesi...ument.htm#press  And LOL @  all you upset about the Palin pick. Many Clinton supporters lobbied for her. The Democrats really showed their true colors attacking her like savage wolves. They're scared. The pick was genius. She has more accomplishments then Obama does and he is on top of the ticket.

Edited by PrincesseJen, 04 September 2008 - 10:35 AM.