Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

DNC Rules Committee Selects Obama as Nominee

page: 1
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 06:23 PM
link   
Wow... this is going to get ugly.

Not only did the DNC give Obama 55 delegates from Michigan even though he got ZERO votes in Michigan because he wasn't on the ballot, they took 4 delegates AWAY from Clinton!

Harold Ickes was incredulous and said that the 30 members of the committee just hijacked the democratic process from the 600,000 who voted in Michigan.

How can they rationalize just GIVING Obama delegates when he didn't get any votes???? How can they penalize Clinton and TAKE AWAY 4 delegates based on what????

This is outrageous from a legal standpoint no matter whose side you are on. I have no idea how this would ever possibly hold up if Clinton filed a law suit.

What this means in reality is that Obama is now the unofficial nominee. Unofficial because Clinton isn't going to accept this....




posted on May, 31 2008 @ 06:24 PM
link   
Half a delegate? What the hell is that? That's like your wife has a baby and when it comes out they cut it in half and say "well at least here's a compromise!!"

I'm afraid I just witnessed the most disgraceful thing in the history of the United States of America democracy.

Who ever is head of the Florida and Michigan Democratic Parties should be jailed for life for moving their primaries up.

That botched everything!

And like morons, the DNC waited until now to do anything about it!



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 06:46 PM
link   
The Democrats just lost the general election.




posted on May, 31 2008 @ 07:58 PM
link   
Hamas will be pleased.

Are we the only "democracy" without Democracy?

And this is the Democracy that Bush is trying to spread in Iraq.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 08:01 PM
link   
MAN! too bad Johnny Cochran is dead! Mrs. Clinton could sure use him about now because you can bet your life she is suing!



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 08:17 PM
link   
reply to post by jamie83
 


The bigger issue here is the blatant hypocrisy being displayed by the Democratic party.

'Count every vote! You're vote matters! No voter disenfranchisement! '

My butt. How many times have we heard that crap from the Dems the last 8 years? But I guess its OK to only count each vote as 1/2 a vote if your a Democrat. Its OK to give Barry the nomination when Hillary leads in vote totals if ALL votes are counted.

Its not disenfranchisement. Nooooooo sir! The DNC is looking out for the average American!

This would be funny if it wasn't for the fact that the Dem voters in Michigan and Florida are getting screwed, and by extension, so are ALL the Dem primary voters across the nation.

And in the mother of all ironies, yes, Florida is involved. Wonder how this bullcrap will play down there this fall?



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 08:20 PM
link   
Funny too, if it were the other way around and Hillary got the 55 delegates and Obama had 4 taken away, there would be a huge uprising among Black people and their lame religious leaders like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. It would be a HUGE deal.

The DNC should not get away with such BS.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by ufo reality
 


The movement of the primary dates is, IMO, a case of the party making a mountain out of a molehill. Fine the state party. Remove the state party officials who made that choice. But whatever you do, DO NOT TAKE IT OUT ON THE VOTERS!

Not surprisingly, the collection of imbeciles that is the DNC did the worst thing humanly possible.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by jetxnet
Funny too, if it were the other way around and Hillary got the 55 delegates and Obama had 4 taken away, there would be a huge uprising among Black people and their lame religious leaders like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. It would be a HUGE deal.

The DNC should not get away with such BS.


You're right. If this was the other way around Jackson and Sharpton would be organizing riots tonight. It would be so obviously a race issue.

This is really sick, especially since it was New Hampshire that broke the rules, and yet New Hampshire was rewarded by being given and exemption. No wonder Clinton has come across pissed off at times. She probably saw the writing on the wall since last December.

If I were here I'd run as an independent just to throw Obama under the bus. She'd probably be happier with McCain as POTUS anyway.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 08:29 PM
link   
No doubt. I just can't figure out how Obama has so much support from his own party and the media.

The Democratic Nominee was literally engineered in his favor. There must be something the general public doesn't know in that most of the Democrats in Congress and the media wanting him to be President.

Based on Obama's character, it can't be good. It is either hollow promises with regard to money and war.



[edit on 31-5-2008 by jetxnet]



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 08:31 PM
link   
Wait! What? The title to the thread mislead me into believing that Obama is already the [unofficial] nominee for the Democratic Party. (My bad!) Anyway, I thought we should wait until at least June 1 or even June 3 primaries to view the results for both Democratic candidates. I've watched (off and on) the entire DNC meeting via CSPAN and didn't like how they took away four delegates from Hillary. Overall, I don't know how a few could represent the 'will of the people' and disenfranchise some of the voters. I smell something fishy with the whole election, period.




posted on May, 31 2008 @ 08:34 PM
link   
But, the candidates, including Hillary, pledged to NOT campaign in Florida and MIchigan. What about that?
Seems like the state parties in both states should be ashamed. How were these primaries allowed to happen, what were they thinking?


www.democraticunderground.com...

Or was it planned all along for drama?
When Michigan and Florida moved their primaries ahead of the dates set by the Democratic National Committee, New York Sen. Hillary Clinton supported the party's decision to strip those states of their delegates.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by pikypiky
Wait! What? The title to the thread mislead me into believing that Obama is already the [unofficial] nominee for the Democratic Party.


Because of how the delegates are proportionally distributed, the three remaining primaries are certain to give Obama the 60+ delegates he needs to have the majority needed for the nomination.

By allocating the delegates in the way in which they did, the DNC Rules Committee essentially gave Obama the nomination. Obama reaped the rewards of removing his name from the ballot in Michigan by gaining favor in Iowa and New Hampshire by doing so. He then reaped the benefit of being handed 55 delegates from Michigan, a state in which he received ZERO votes.

It doesn't matter that his name wasn't on the ballot. We're talking about a legal process here. "Uncommitted" is a legal designation for a delegate. There is NO legal basis to transfer uncommitted delegates to Obama, nor is there any basis to take 73 delegates won by Clinton, and take away four. In fact, the four that were taken away were given to Obama, so it's an 8 delegate swing.

Let's put this in perspective. Clinton picked up 9 delegates in her much ballyhooed win in Ohio. Obama gained 8 by a show of hands of 18 members of the DNC rules committee today.

Not only is this screwing the voters of Michigan and Florida, it's also terribly unfair to the voters in EVERY state, such as Pennsylvania, who did follow the rules and allocated the delegates legally. Obama's allotment of delegates from Michigan was just handed to him because he's Obama.

This is really making a mockery of the entire process.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 08:55 PM
link   
I so want all of this to go to the convention, man a real political floor fight right before our eyes, beautiful!

It is a wonderful thing for these politician to show the people of the USA just what they are.

The other un-wonderful thing is that the people of the USA will forget it in a few days.

Roper



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 09:06 PM
link   
Did anyone expect anything different? Hillary whole heartedly agreed with those states being punished before it affected her personally. Now her and her groupies want to change the rules midstream? The DNC, what a collection of lying deceiving human excrement. They can't even live by the rules they wrote themselves. Why people back them, boggles the mind.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 09:29 PM
link   
This has all the makings of a repeat of a mess like the 1968 Democratic National Convention but I suspect it will be worse.

We could seriously be looking at the implosion of the Democratic Party.

Both parties are in a huge mess. McCain is just not a very strong candidate. He has alienated the core conservative base and is distancing himself from the industrialists aligned with Bush and Cheney.

If Ron Paul and Hillary Clinton had enough foresight they would take advantage of the situation and depart their parties.

Not together of course, but on opposite ends of the political spectrum.

Ron Paul still has a chance to make an impact with the support of those who are constitutionalists.

An Independent Clinton on the other hand really has a chance to win the Electoral Vote, provided that the DNC doesn't control the Electoral College too.


It would be nice to see an end to the Two Party System and have a new era of multiple parties emerge.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 09:38 PM
link   
reply to post by MikeboydUS
 


It wouldn't surprise me if Hillary takes the independent route now. I never could see her playing second fiddle as VP to Obama, but especially not now.

No, I think she's probably going to take the low road and set her sights on 2012. Obviously, that would be incredibly difficult should Obama win this fall, so the best course of action is to divide the base and throw the election to McCain. To that end, she can either run as a third party candidate (and I've seen polling that indicates at least half of her supporters want her to), or she can try to drag this particular battle into the courts, which will do nothing but fracture the party. In both cases, Obama loses and she gets another shot in 2012.

And so concludes my Hillary conspiracy of the day.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 09:53 PM
link   
Ron Paul has previously stated he wouldn't run independent. (He also mentioned he wouldn't take the VP position.)

Clinton, has previously mentioned that a joint ticket (her and Obama) was a good possibility and that this party race was just to determine who was in the driver's seat.

Evenso, I wouldn't want to ride in a bus if the driver was Obama.

So, since Bush got rid of the constitution ( swans.com... ) and labeled it a [*SNIP*] ( www.capitolhillblue.com... ) ... we should go on a nationwide hungerstrike for election reform.

edit stray word

[edit on 31-5-2008 by Trexter Ziam]



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by vor78


It wouldn't surprise me if Hillary takes the independent route now. I never could see her playing second fiddle as VP to Obama, but especially not now.


I think Clinton could WIN as a third party candidate. To being with, if the delegates were awarded in the primary in a winner takes all allocation, Clinton would have won the nomination months ago.

She would have a good chance of winning in California and NY in a 3-way race. Oddly enough, if she ran as a 3rd party she would be taking votes away from McCain because I know there's a huge portion of Hillary supporters who are planning on voting for McCain over Obama.

I would love to see a three way race.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 10:04 PM
link   
This fracture in the party can't be fixed and things will get ugly soon.

I'm thinking she should split from the party and run as an independent. That or start a new campaign called "WRITE HER IN"!!





new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join