Hillary bows to Party Pressure.

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jun/08/clinton-suspends-bid-endorses-obama/

Well although she has more primary votes than Obama, Hillary Clinton has bowed to pressure from Party officials and the elitist so-called mainstream media who support Obama.

Thereby practically ensuring the election of John McCain as the next President.

The silver lining inside the cloud is that we could do a lot worse than McCain.

As a wise man used to say, "Son if you want to be stupid you better be tough."

Ummm Sherm, I don't know what Sirus left was reporting out there but Obama had over half the delegates. He won.

Well duh.

Please read the bold print.

I clearly said primary votes.

Obama had the support of the so-called Super Delegates, without whom he did not have enough delegates to win the nomination.

But that was not the topic.

The topic was a debate on whether Hillary's voters will now flock to Obama.

(You apparently agree with me that they will not, based on your apparent vote.)

The title to the thread is Hillary bowing to party pressure. She didn't bow to anything, she was defeated. Plain and simple. Why can't you understand that Sherm?

And no, she didn't have more vpotes. You're giving her Michigan, where Obabma kept his word and withdrew his name from the ballot and Florida, where he didn't campaign. Hillary gave up on those lies yesterday Sherm. When are you?

Well Aaron would you care to address my question whether Hillary's supporters will now flock to Obama?

I predict it will be a big Democrat year and they will win veto proof majorities in both houses.

But will hedge their votes and elect McCain President.

(I see no need to even argue that the Party bosses and the so-called enlightened mainstream media forced her out when the majority of Dems wanted her to stay in until the Convention)

Look out, Sherm's in full-spin mode again!

I think Obama will defeat McCain, and that the Democrats will expand their majority in Congress, but not by enough to be veto-proof (of course, since Obama will win, Congress won't need to override many vetoes). I think most Hillary voters will support Obama, but not in places like West Virginia.

The big question is, will you shift your support, Sherm? Take all the time you need.

"The big question is, will you shift your support, Sherm? Take all the time you need."

Well that one is easy Randall.

I cannot shift my support from Hillary to Obama.

Since she was not my candidate.


You guys seem to think she was my candidate because I object to the way she has been treated by the "enlightened ones" in the Democrat Party.

And no I am not dodging the other part of the question.

I have been known to change my mind, and it is quite a while till election.

As of today I would not vote for Obama.

If not for his loose cannon foreign interventionism I would vote for McCain.

So as of right now I would not vote for him either.

I guess my vote as of right now depends on who else gets on the ballot.

I'd like to know how it is that anybody could claim Hillary one the most of anything. To arrive at that conclusion you have to:

Include Florida and Michigan and give Obama no votes

Exclude all the voters who showed up to caucus

Include Puerto Rico........Puerto Ricans can't vote for president

If Obama is smart (and I think he's very, very intelligent) he's not going to offer Hillary Clinton anything.....not the VP slot, not a Cabinet position.....nada. If he does, he's going to have to deal with not just that shrill viper, but that out of control thing she calls a husband.

Well Stephanie it is not rocket science.

Just include people who actually cast individual votes in Primaries.

A caucus is not a popular vote.

It is a method of selecting delegates to the Convention.

It is a legitimate way of doing it, but it is not a popular vote.

Why should people who voted "uncommitted" be given to Obama in Michigan?

My guess is that probably more of them were for Edwards than Obama.

Insofar as Florida is concerned all the candidates were on the ballot and it was a record turnout so why not count them?

And Puerto Ricans are allowed to participate in the Dem primary.

So I think she had a case to claim she received the most popular votes.

(Not that it mattered to the elitists)

So people who participated in caucuses shouldn't be counted, but Puerto Ricans should.......because why?

Obama didn't campaign in Florida, and he wasn't on the ballot in Michigan.....she is manipulating the numbers to arrive at a figure that benefits her.

You don't like the caucus system. I understand that. However, it isn't up to West Virginians how they do things in other states. I actually like the idea of a caucus. It certainly has its drawbacks, but it has it's upsides too.

So Hillary wants to count every voter, so long as they vote comes out with her on top. Why aren't I surprised?

Well Steph no one contends that caucuses are not legitimate methods of selecting delegates.

If you had read my post you would have seen that.

However. it is legitimate to point out that a candidate won the most popular votes in an attempt to get the uncommitted super delegates to go with the candidate who got the most popular vote instead of the one who got the most caucus delegates.

And ironically when the elitists thought Obama would win the popular vote and Hillary would get more delegates they were screaming that would be "stealing the election" and "overturning the will of the people", etc.

Sherm,

The top vote getter in a caucus wins the delegates too. I don't understand why this doesn't count. I realize the supporters of candidates eliminated can select a new candidate for the next round, but in order to be top dog at the end, you couldn't have been at the bottom in the beginning.

What would have happened if all the superdelegates were apportioned in the same manner as the delegates won through the primaries and the caucuses. Or what if they were eliminated entirely? It seems to me under those circumstances Obama still would have won more delegates than Hillary.

Clinton and those who support her were just attempting to spin the numbers in her favor. I'm just sick to death of hearing about her. I still favor her packing up her things and putting a choke chain on her husband and returning to Arkansas.

shermangeneral wrote:Well Aaron would you care to address my question whether Hillary's supporters will now flock to Obama?

Yes, like sheep following the herd, including the women. It's all you guys know Sherm.

She will retire to the Senate and become the next Ted Kennedy, the self appointed champion of the liberal cause where she will remain for the next 20 plus years.