cranberry said:
dooley_womack1 said:
The Democrats should hope that's the case. All the same, does anyone else feel odd that the Dem nomination will be decided without two large blocs of delegates being seated? To me, it's the same as having a presidential election without counting Florida's and Michigan's electoral votes. Yeah, I know the states bucked the party's wishes, but just sayin'
It makes me sick to think Democrats in Michigan and Florida won't be represented in a primary year that, due to the war and the economy, takes on tremendous significance. State party leaders let their constituents down badly and should pay a heavy price but somehow people in these states should be allowed their vote.
As I posted on the other thread.......
If you add Michigan and Florida -- regardless of how you feel about it -- HILLARY IS STILL BEHIND IN THE POPULAR VOTE BY ABOUT 200,000 votes, which given the fact that they will likely split the last six primaries means he can't be caught.
And if you give her 60 percent of the delegates from those two states and 40 percent to him -- a ridiculuosly high number but play along -- she is still behind in the delegate count by roughly 100 -- an insurmountable deficit to overcome.
This whole Florida/Michigan argument is ridiculous because even with those two states added in and generously in her favor -- SHE.STILL.CAN'T. WIN.
The argument by her supporters is the equivalent of Houston Oilers fans whining about Mike Renfro's apparent touchdown catch against the Steelers in the 1980 AFC championship game being overturned and called incomplete -- you want that damn touchdown to count? I say, take it -- you still lose 27-20 so now you can go back to where you came from and STFU..........