Florida - Michigan Delegates

Discussion in 'Debate Corner' started by Vex123, May 31, 2008.

?

How should the delegates be split?

Poll closed Jun 1, 2008.
  1. 50/50

    3 vote(s)
    75.0%
  2. More for Clinton, Less for Obama

    1 vote(s)
    25.0%
  3. More for Obama, Less for Clinton

    2 vote(s)
    50.0%
  4. What?

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
Multiple votes are allowed.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Vex123 Traverse Town Homebody

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2006
    Location:
    42
    25
    193
    I just wanted to start a thread to debate the FL/MI delegate issue before it's decided. This is just a one-day thing. This thread is only for intelligent discussion, no flaming or fighting, just intelligent debate. Try not to do anything to anger anyone with a different opinion.
     
  2. Inasuma "pumpkin"

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Location:
    Indigo Plateau
    276
    Meh, Obama is the best out of either candidates.

    I don't even like him that much but he's better, comparatively.
     
  3. Vex123 Traverse Town Homebody

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2006
    Location:
    42
    25
    193
    To tell the truth, I am an Obamaniac. I (obviously) think it should be split 50/50. I've been watching CNN and there was a lady saying that it would be cruel to say that someone who went into a polling booth's vote didn't matter, and in my opinion, it absolutely doesn't, as the whole voting was against DNC rules in the first place. In my opinion, it's kind of like saying a team won in basketball even though they traveled the whole game. (Traveling in basketball is walking with the ball without dribbling for more then 3 steps.) Yes, my response may seem biased, but that is what I believe.
     
  4. Repliku Chaser

    353
    I'm rather sick of Clinton and her fighting. She now after several months complains about votes in Florida and Michigan not counting but there are some serious flaws she is not heeding. Sorry if I offend people but I guess I need a good vent because this whole thing is ticking me off.

    1. She compared the votes not counting to other regions such as in Zimbabwe with Mugabe where he rigged the election and also set himself up as President and even though he has abused great policies, he's a dictator. She pointed out that he was really the only one on the ticket etc. Well, in Michigan she was the only one on the ticket. Mugabe's presidency was for the ACTUAL President elect. Not a party elect, which is not a government procedure.

    2. She makes it sound like the Democratic nominations is the actual Presidential election. The Democratic party elections are NOT owned by the government but a private affiliation: In technicality a corporation which had rules set up ahead of time. They set the rules and can do as they please and Michigan and Florida decided to disobey party rules and KNEW it ahead of time. It is not the Presidential election itself. It is the party election and therefore she has no right to complain.

    3. Hillary was fine with the Florida and Michigan primaries being withheld because at the time she was ahead. She and Obama and Edwards too at the time all signed papers decreeing that they understood to not campaign in those two spots. Obama withheld his name from the Primaries in Michigan so his name was not even on the ballot because he followed the Democratic Party orders. Clinton did NOT pull her name and was the only one on the Democratic Ticket there. So Obama has -no- votes in Michigan for following the rules. Why should Hillary have this counted? This is what she is championing. Imbalanced politics. By doing this, she herself can be compared to Mugabe if people wanted to because she was the only one on the ticket.

    4. I have read countless blogs on the elections from people from Florida and Michigan and they are outraged because many did NOT go and vote because they were told the election would not count because it was done ahead of time. Therefore, her championing 'voters' in Florida and Michigan is just in the end championing herself but she's making it look good like she's defending the voters.

    Hillary wants all votes as they stand to count and is not trying to negotiate. Obama already agreed that he would allow Hillary to have more of the delegates but that they should be split in Michigan since people did not even get to vote for anyone BUT Hillary there because she disobeyed the rules. She signed the papers in agreement as did the other Democratic Party candidates. She had no problem with it back when she was ahead of Obama. She keeps saying she has more of the popular vote IF Florida and Michigan count but the facts are against her that she still would not have the lead, and also again, Michigan did not even get to vote fairly.

    I think in the end the only fair thing to do is what the Democratic Party suggested which was split the votes to Clinton's favor with some extra delegates and let it be, which Obama did agree to, OR to have a re-vote. Clinton should get no more than 10 more Delegates in each place because she was wrong to do this in the first place and sign the paper if she disagreed so strongly. Primaries are private Democratic party nominations and she needs to seriously stop this act that voters are being screwed over. In no way does she deserve the 'total' votes in either place because Florida voters themselves are saying that some did not vote because they KNEW it was not going to count. Michigan is its own story where she is the only one with a name on the ballot. So we can see how skewed that is.

    Lastly, some Floridians, encouraged by Clinton decided to try to sue the wrong people in Florida. They should be suing the actual people who jumped the Primaries time slot instead of the Dem Party itself which the court threw out. Those people who jumped the gun ought to be tossed out on their ears. I am seriously wondering why Florida is so screwed up when it comes to voting for anything lately but if they want to sue someone, get the targets right. In the end, Clinton is really getting annoying and holding up processes and some of it is caused by her own failures. If I wanted to seriously believe in a conspiracy about now, I'd say that Clinton did this Michigan deal of keeping her name in while Obama pulled his out following the Dem Party rules so that if she was losing in the future she could bring this up at a later time and act like she is championing voters. It's all about her. She clearly did not care back when she was ahead and signed the papers in agreement. I just am confused why the Dem Party just doesn't enforce the decision and get it done and refuse Clinton the right to have ALL of her delegates. She tries to act like she is the victim and also championing voters but the reality is this should not even be a debate at all. She's simply desperate because things didn't turn out her way.

    To add one thing: Apparently the Dem Party did go with half counted votes of all delegates in Florida and Michigan. Because Michigan had 55% for Clinton and 44% of the vote was 'noncommitted' implying that the voters did not like the candidate, the votes were halved and she earned 10 more delegates than Obama there. In the end, Clinton earned 87 more delegates and Obama won 63 more votes. Clinton still seems to think this is unfair but others in the party are moving on and hopefully she will just shut up now.
     
  5. EvilMan_89 Code Master

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2006
    Gender:
    Male
    203
    i do not know. whichever is the most fairest and accurate way. i say recount the ballots?
     
  6. Cin Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp Derp

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Location:
    :uoıʇɐɔo1
    241
    ...do you have any idea what's going on? XD
     
  7. Repliku Chaser

    353
    The point is the recount isn't what's the problem. The votes were done and Florida and Michigan jumped the gun. Florida votes were tabulated but people did not get to vote because they were told their votes wouldn't count. But really, it seems they are S.O.L.

    The real debate comes with Michigan, who 55% of voters voted for Hillary and another 44% voted for Democrat but -not- Hillary. Her name was the only one on the ballot so if her name would have been removed like everyone else's Michigan couldn't have jumped the gun and she boned over people actually. All of the other democrats did what they were supposed to.

    So in the end, the votes were -fine- if you consider the fact that a lot of people didn't -get- to vote because Michigan and Florida jumped the gun. The problem is that Hillary thinks that she is only entitled to her stuff she did in Michigan but Obama isn't because no other name was on the ballot. They gave the 44% to Obama because otherwise no one thought it fair to give Hillary her 55% then. There's no 'miscount'. It's more that Hillary feels she's entitled to all votes and Obama none in Michigan and it's obvious if nearly half a state votes democrat but not for Hillary that the other candidates were possibilities. If any other dems were still in the race besides Obama, I'm sure that 44% would have been split amongst them but he is the only one left.

    She's just being Hillary now and persisting on something dumb. In the end, it gave her more votes so she should stop her griping. She signed a paper early on that was by the Democratic Party to not try to have these votes counted.
     
  8. EvilMan_89 Code Master

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2006
    Gender:
    Male
    203
    somewhat, but not the full thing
    that's dumb, i don't understand who would agree with that, that was a stupid thing to think of her i mean, if the votes GOT counted correctly then i really dont' understand what the problem is. the thing in Michigan seems fair to me.
     
  9. Repliku Chaser

    353
    It's fair to me too and nearly anyone with a logical mind. She just doesn't want Obama having the 44% delegates but the Democratic Party gave them to him any way, because his name wasn't on the ballot. That is her stance and her lawyer's stance on it. I'm glad the Dem Party fixed it and Hillary is just ...I have no idea what she is even doing anymore. She's just not making any rational sense at this point.
     
  10. EvilMan_89 Code Master

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2006
    Gender:
    Male
    203
    i think she's just getting very desperate is the case. but somehow, the gap between her and obama closed by alot, wonder how that happened.
     
  11. Repliku Chaser

    353
    She ended up with more votes from Michigan and Florida than he did. I don't think though she's going to catch him at this point, despite her persistence. She may win a couple more states but so will Obama so I think unless the super delegates swing her way in vast numbers, he has it clinched. She keeps going on about popular vote but she doesn't have that unless you say all of the 44% in Michigan ..the total, were not voting for Obama which would be utterly insane to say.

    From the CNN site, the way the polls stand now is this:
    The last states only have 31 delegates so in the end, even if Obama won, he'd not have enough so either way, the Superdelegates are the ones who have to secure the final vote now. It's all up to them. I will say though, this has been an interesting election and I do wonder if whoever gets it will put the other person on as VP. Either way, history is kind of made.
     
  12. EvilMan_89 Code Master

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2006
    Gender:
    Male
    203
    oh do you know that Barrack Obama won the Democratic race? also, HIllary Clinton said she wants to be vice president. what do you think of having Obama and Clinton together?
     
  13. Repliku Chaser

    353
    In a way I think it would be good if Clinton and Obama went on the same ticket...but in another way I think she'd serve better as another position in his staff as one of the major Secretaries. Vice President does so much only and she'd actually be able to influence more on a better staff position and also it would be realized if he did tell her that and bring the party together more. Either way, whether VP or as some other more useful staff member, I do think she should be there for it. However, there's been no announcement yet that he's won so I am waiting for it. He's just darn close to clinching it and we find out tonight or tomorrow how he did. If he wins though I think it would be smart to offer Hillary some position in his staff whether VP or something where she can be more useful.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.