Originally posted by jamie83
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![...]
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
Did you not watch it? The Michigan representative explained the reason for this. Also, the Michigan representative said that both Clinton and Obama
camps agreed with the Michigan's Democratic Party resolution
Originally posted by jetxnet
Wow this thread is absolutely lacking in any understanding of what went on at the convention! ...
Cyberian, just when I think there is hope for you, you come out with something like that post.
The DNC just gave Obama those delegates. He did not earn them. The DNC put Hillary away today and with much blatent hypocrisy to boot.
Thank you for proving Cyberian's point. I see you really
have no idea what you're talking about.
I, like Cyberian, watched basically the whole thing on CSPAN, so I can say that I apparently know more about this than you have shown so far.
Anyway, there are rules and those states broke the rules. While there could be legitimate reasons for not liking particular rules, they still must be
followed and Clinton and her advisers were certainly aware of them.
But, as DontTreadOnMe pointed out
Hillary pledged not to campaign and those
states and was in agreement with the punishment... before she won those states.
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.
Originally the Committee punished Michigan and Florida in 100%, meaning they would have no voting power. The Michigan and Florida (in particular)
representatives presenting their cases, effectively showed that the Committee had no right to punish them by 100% and that the maximum penalty could
only be of 50%.
That's why their delegates get half a vote. That number isn't made it, it's in the rules
Now, If you had actually seen the process you would have seen Obama's representatives supporting the appeals of Florida and Michigan
not only they believed the original punishment had no basis, but also because the people shouldn't be punished for this mess.
Obama and his people could've simply said "rules are rules and they must be followed" and everything would stay the same, as I have no doubt
Clinton would have done if she was in front.
The result, the delegates and votes allocated were fair and represent the percentage that each candidate earn, taking into consideration the 50%
If this effectively kills Hillary's hopes at being the nominee.. tough luck!
Now don't blame Obama and his people for this, as they simply followed the rules and even pressured the Committee to back up on their original
punishment against their own (personal) interests.
Don't also forget that there were 48 other states who would have liked to have changed their primaries and caucuses to an earlier date but didn't,
and followed the rules.
For everyone who watched the whole thing, I think it was pretty clear that this result was fair.
[edit on 1-6-2008 by danx]