"Ask anybody who is supporting my opponent to please tell you how he gets to the 270 electoral votes that we must have to win," she said. "Every independent analysis that I have seen, some of them done by no friends of Democrats as well as objective news channels, show that I defeat John McCain in key states like Florida, like Ohio, and my opponent does not. Show that I have won states totaling 300 electoral votes. My opponent has won states totaling about 217 electoral votes."

That's some real false numbers wrapped around frighteningly twisted logic there, Lou.

Here's a primer for you, subby:

Step 1: Lawyers make the rules, but they themselves don't have to follow them.
Step 2: They can then make more money by writing new ones to replace the old ones that they never had to follow to begin with.
Step 3: Repeat Step 1.

hillary's campaign has begun to remind me of this

Smells like the Global Cooling->Global Warming->Global Climate change crowd.

Just keep moving the goalposts. Nobody will notice.

By her logic, she's already won the 2008 and 2012 elections, repealed the 22nd Amendment and is getting ready to run in 2016.

/also, in before "B-b-b-b-b-b-but Clinton!"
//and "RON PAUL!!1!"

Despite her apparent dig against superdelegates, Clinton and her campaign have routinely argued that those party elites should be able to exercise their independent judgment in choosing a nominee, regardless of vote totals or pledged delegate counts.



Ok, so here's what I can figure out so far:

1. The rules don't apply to Hillary. FL and MI broke the rules, but Hillary pulled a fast one, broke her agreement and campaigned in those states anyway. So because she broke the rules, violated her agreement and those states broke THEIR rules to help her...then those states should count. But GOD help Obama if he breaks a rule, because that would be wrong.

2. Democracy is great. Unless the superdelegates all go vote for Obama. Then obviously democracy isn't great and those people should be shot.

3. Hillary is the Chosen One. Only she can defeat McCain. Never mind the fact that she can't even win a primary race that she swore was already in the bag last year or that every poll done by every organization in the country shows her losing to McCain, she still says she's the Chosen One and will win.

4. Money matters. Give her camapign money so that she can win. But pay no attention to the fact that she's $20 million in debt, Obama and McCain have more money than they know what to do with and that no candidate that's had to fund a campaign with their own $$$ has ever won the nomination - she's still 'the winner' and money doesn't matter. So send in those donations right quick! Or something. it's complicated. Just write the damn check already, ok?

5. Hillary is staying in the race because she could get lucky and someone might shoot Obama for her. But she didn't actually say that, so don't actually go out and shoot Obama. But it sure would be nice if it DID happen. Just don't expect her to grant you a pardon afterward tho, 'cause that's not what she wanted to have happen.

Weaver95: Ok, so here's what I can figure out so far:

Looks about right to me. I especially like the last one.

I think I'm beginning to see a pattern in what Hillary has been saying.

If she is losing the popular vote she thinks super-delegates should vote for her because she's the best candidate. But if she is winning the popular vote she thinks the super-delegates should cast their votes with the popular vote winner.

If she loses a state like Georgia she declares that state "unimportant". But if she wins a state like West Virgina she declares that state as critical to winning the general election.

If her opponent makes a misstatement which can be twisted into something negative, she is appalled and angry and wants to make sure the MSM covers it. But if she makes a misstatement it's only because she was tired or because she had something else on her mind and it was just an innocent mistake.

It's almost like she just wants to win and will say or do anything to make that happen. Is anyone else seeing this pattern in her behavior?

CravenMorehead: It's almost like she just wants to win and will say or do anything to make that happen. Is anyone else seeing this pattern in her behavior?



my god you're right

There are no laws governing the nomination of a candidate. the rules are made by the leaders of the party.

Hillary will whine, threaten and cajole her way into the Democrat Party nomination. The black voters (historically democratic) will stay home out of anger and frustration and McCain will win in a landslide.

Thanks, biatch!

real shaman: Hillary will whine, threaten and cajole her way into the Democrat Party nomination.

yeah... no.

real shaman: Hillary will whine, threaten and cajole her way into the Democrat Party nomination obscurity.

FTFY

real shaman: The black voters (historically democratic)

Which is totally weird since the Democratic party has done nothing but shiat on these folk for two hundred years.

You want to know how to guarantee that a person fails at life? Give them a hand-out every time they fail at life.

Roman Fyseek: real shaman: The black voters (historically democratic)

Which is totally weird since the Democratic party has done nothing but shiat on these folk for two hundred years.

You want to know how to guarantee that a person fails at life? Give them a hand-out every time they fail at life.

i didn't know that championing the civil rights movement was the democrats shiatting on them. that's... um... an interesting point of view.

burndtdan: i didn't know that championing the civil rights movement was the democrats shiatting on them. that's... um... an interesting point of view.

Most of the KKK voted democrat at the time. But you knew that.

burndtdan: didn't know that championing the civil rights movement was the democrats shiatting on them. that's... um... an interesting point of view.

Here ya go

Roman Fyseek:
Which is totally weird since the Democratic party has done nothing but shiat on these folk for two hundred years.

You want to know how to guarantee that a person fails at life? Give them a hand-out every time they fail at life.



I wish this guy had listened to your advice.

Wasn't she for the superdelegates not too long ago?

Oh wait, that was when she thought that they'd hand the thing over to her...

hubiestubert: Wasn't she for the superdelegates not too long ago?

Oh wait, that was when she thought that they'd hand the thing over to her...

it's really very simple - if it works FOR Hillary, she wants more of it. If it works against Hillary....well, politics is a dangerous bidness. A fellow could get hurt if they crossed Don Hillary.

Roman Fyseek: Here ya go

That site is a fkn joke. You present as "evidence" of something?

Good lord...too...much...stupidity...head...hurts...

burndtdan: hillary's campaign has begun to remind me of this

That's great. Bravo!

burndtdan: i didn't know that championing the civil rights movement was the democrats shiatting on them. that's... um... an interesting point of view.

Democrats = sugar and spice and everything nice.

Republicans = snaps and snails and puppydog tails.

... an interesting point of view.

By her logic, the Chargers will win the Super Bowl since they scored a late-game field goal against the Patriots in the AFC championship game.

Newsweek has a bunch of good articles for you Obamaniacs. Good reads.

Bill and Hillary Clinton were the undisputed masters of the Democratic Party from 1992 to 2006, and arguably till Iowa this year. Any complaints they wished to make should have been filed in this window. They could have declared that only persons with the last name Clinton could win a nomination and the party would have accepted it.

In other words... don't hate the playa!

You know what Bill/Hillary remind me of? Willie Lowman in Death of a Salesman. They relied heavily on their name recognition and friends, but in the game of politics and sales, its all about 'What have you done for me lately?'

Wonder if they'll kill themselves in the end...


/hopefully not, but Hillary needs to GTFO.

I was just going to post in the RFK thread how much she sounds like a little kid making excuses. Really bad, unbelievable excuses.

Before this campaign, I admired the Clintons.

CravenMorehead: It's almost like she just wants to win and will say or do anything to make that happen. Is anyone else seeing this pattern in her behavior?



Perhaps you're onto to comething here.

Don't hate the master race, hate the game.

Lionel Mandrake: Good lord...too...much...stupidity...head...hurts...

Now, that's a rebuttal from the left if I ever heard one. "No! That's Incorrect! I don't like it at bit!"

Oh, and the ONLY people saying Obama can't win right now are Hillary Clinton and Karl Rove.

He's got Kerry's map covered, minus possibly New Hampshire. He's well ahead in head to heads in Penn, Michigan, and New Jersey.

He's also ahead in Iowa, Colorado, and New Mexico. That's enough right there. The truly impressive states he's not far behind in (Texas, Alaska, North Dakota, Nevada) are impressive.

He's also running near-even in Ohio. Not as good as Clinton, but pretty good.

The one state she has a chance of winning that Obama can't is Florida. Meh.

She is also, by polls, tipped to lose Wisconsin, Michigan, and Oregon from Kerry's map.

Perhaps you're onto to something here.

Sorry, fatigue. Too many 3am phone calls.

Sgt Otter: I wish this guy had listened to your advice.

Me, too. They might be republican but, they damned sure aren't conservative.

I've noticed that people who tend to call it the "Democrat party" typically have a fair bit of bias. Is that some kind of neocon secret code?

Lawnchair: Oh, and the ONLY people saying Obama can't win right now are Hillary Clinton and Karl Rove.

HAHAHAHAHHAHA! No. I started this campaign saying that Obama would be your next president. I would have been correct if Hillary and Obama hadn't decided to destroy themselves by attacking one-another. I hadn't counted on them beating themselves. Color me unsurprised, though. It's not like the left has ever done what's right for the big picture. They only think about the little picture and, in the little picture, Hillary and Obama campaign until there's a clear winner. Of course, in the big picture, they both run against McCain, Half, quarter, quarter.

You guys are Winnars!

TellarHK: I've noticed that people who tend to call it the "Democrat party" typically have a fair bit of bias. Is that some kind of neocon secret code?

Nah, people have been using that phrase since the 1950s.

TellarHK: I've noticed that people who tend to call it the "Democrat party" typically have a fair bit of bias. Is that some kind of neocon secret code?

threadjack: Are you the same tellarHK from wasteland?

RobbieFal: TellarHK: I've noticed that people who tend to call it the "Democrat party" typically have a fair bit of bias. Is that some kind of neocon secret code?

Nah, people have been using that phrase since the 1950s.

Okay, I've only noticed it these last couple of election cycles. I guess some people just can't say "Democratic Party" even if they have around 60 years to try and learn it.

/old dogs no tricks
//probably not yellow dogs

God damnit. Shut the fark up, you stupid coont. You don't give a goddamn about people's votes or about this country; you only care about yourself and how much power you can have.

Roman Fyseek: threadjack: Are you the same tellarHK from wasteland?

Yup.

Democratic implies that everybody has a vote. Florida and Michigan cheated by voting first. Therefore, Florida and Michigan, being outed as cheaters, don't have a vote. *That* makes it the Democrat party. You guys aren't Democratic; you're liberal. Really, you guys should just call yourselves the party of 'can't agree on ANYTHING except our hatred for the Republicans'

TellarHK: Yup.

Jeff...

/how you doing!?!

When stuff doesn't go her way she wants to change it. I voted for them not to seat delegates from Florida and Michigan......I think we should seat Florida and Michigan. The system is good because I think I will win by a landslide come 2008......I am losing come June 2008, we need to change things to fit the popular vote. I think war in Iraq is needed......I am against this illegal war (that I voted for)

I think this is enough proof that she doesn't need to be making decisions for the entire country. Because every decision she makes is based on the agenda of Hillary and not the agenda of the American people. She doesn't have the foresight to see the unintended consequence. That is a person I want in office, a person who see the unintended consequence of their choices before they make them. Haven't had that for a long time and she proves to continue the idiocy.

RobbieFal: TellarHK: I've noticed that people who tend to call it the "Democrat party" typically have a fair bit of bias. Is that some kind of neocon secret code?

Nah, people have been using that phrase since the 1950s.

Well I'm going to start using the phrase "Republic Party" until everyone else starts saying it. You can't have it both ways. It's either bad grammar for both parties or neither party.

Roman Fyseek: TellarHK: Yup.

Jeff...

/how you doing!?!

Long, long time, man. I'm just heading out for some lunch in a moment, will have to look you up and try not to get in political flamewars with you. I'm emailable at my username @ hotmail or gmail.

/grew up a gun-totin' liberal

I agree that Super Delegates need to go. But that wouldn't change anything, popular vote is still irrelevant and Obama would still have more pledged delegates.

Obama looks good in Ohio ^{(^)}

TellarHK: I've noticed that people who tend to call it the "Democrat party" typically have a fair bit of bias. Is that some kind of neocon secret code?

Fascinating how senstitive Democrats are to that. Its really quite simple. People in the Democratic party are called 'Democrats'. Singular: "Democrat". People are just being lazy when they call it the "Democrat party", i.e. 'the party of Democrats'.

Members of the Republican party are called Republicans. If there were some shorter proper form of Republican, people would use that in reference to the party. Lets say for the sake of arguement it was called the "Republicanite Party", and members of the Republicanite Party were called "Republicans". Then people would still commonly call it the "Republican Party", dropping the -ite. Somehow I doubt the Republicans would be nearly as thin skinned nor attribute the short form to some conspiracy.

fails to represent the true will of American voters.

The nominee is supposed to represent the Democrat party primary voters, not American voters as a whole.

TellarHK: try not to get in political flamewars with you.

No, please, be my guest. I'm frequently wrong.