Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I Will NOT Vote For Hillary If She's Nominated.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Popol Vuh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 05:29 AM
Original message
I Will NOT Vote For Hillary If She's Nominated.
If she is nominated by delegates ignoring the will of the people. I Will Not Support Her in any way. I will view her as hostile against democracy and she'll become completely invisible to me. The same holds true for any candidate. If people's votes are ignored, I will totally ignore that candidate.

I'll write in a vote for Porky Pig if it boils down to this.


:rant:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
cleveramerican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 05:34 AM
Response to Original message
1. what if she wins?
what if she runs the table from this point on?
Comes to within a whisker and superdelagates put her over the top.
All completely above board and within the rules?

what I'm getting at is.... is it personal?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 05:43 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. If Hillary "...runs the table..." then we would know the fix is in and
the war would go on anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Popol Vuh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 05:47 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. I am pretty sure
I made both my point and its reason clear. There's no need for you to add what I didn't express.

Thank you..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cleveramerican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 05:58 AM
Response to Reply #8
15. if she steals the nomination by subterfuge, I'd be with you.
She won't.
It'll never happen.
so you have nothing to worry about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Popol Vuh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:09 AM
Response to Reply #15
20. What about this?
A delegate supporting Hillary even though her constituents voted Obama 90% vs Hillary 10%?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=112424&mesg_id=112424
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:16 AM
Response to Reply #20
26. That's stealing?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northzax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:25 AM
Response to Reply #20
78. what's this?
Deval Patrick, John Kerry, Teddy Kennedy all support Obama? but their constituents clearly voted for Hillary!

where's the percentage line for support that can't be overridden? or can people choose freely, as long as they choose Obama?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shae Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 09:32 AM
Response to Reply #20
98. Nothing illegal about it, but
Edited on Tue Apr-01-08 09:34 AM by Shae
90% is astounding. I always liked SJL but from what she says in the video, she apparently feels more loyalty to HRC than she does her constituents.
I think it's time for her constituents to think about sending her ass packing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
40ozDonkey Donating Member (730 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 05:47 AM
Response to Reply #1
9. Popol will vote for her if she wins cleanly. Everybody loves a miracle.
The specific caveat is - "against the will of the people" - meaning she lost by every measure but still somehow won at the convention.

It won't happen. She's not that crazy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Popol Vuh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 05:50 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. Thank you 40ozDonkey
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guava Jelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 05:39 AM
Response to Original message
2. We will all come around in the end
That is unless we are all OK with Pres.100 more years in Iraq McCain
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salbi Donating Member (195 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 07:48 AM
Response to Reply #2
59. I'm with you, I don't like Hillary, but i HATE the idea of McCain
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cascadiance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #2
131. The problem is many of us might bite our tongue and vote for her, but indys WON'T!
Edited on Tue Apr-01-08 11:59 AM by calipendence
where they might otherwise vote for either her and Obama IF they'd won a democratic majority of their party.

If I'm an independent (I'm not), and don't have as much vested interests in the other agenda of the Democrats, but am wanting to see democratic rule restored in this country, which it has been really ripped out by the current president, I want to see the opposition party be a party of its words if they want me to vote for them and have the integrity from the ground up to reward those who receive the vote of the people the office, not those power mongers manipulating the process.

The bottom line is, if the super delegates try to "overturn" the pledge delegate vote, then even though the Democrats themselves might bite their tongue and vote for Hillary, they are handing McCain a big bone to keep the independents away from voting for her, and therefore the super delegates would in effect be handing the presidency to McCain in the interest of their brand of POWER POLITICS!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arkansas Granny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 05:45 AM
Response to Original message
4. It is certainly your right to do so, but if many people feel as you do it would
almost guarantee a McCain victory. I hope you rethink your statement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Popol Vuh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 05:53 AM
Response to Reply #4
13. I am fully aware of that possibility
Edited on Tue Apr-01-08 05:54 AM by Popol Vuh
and it would be something I certainly wouldn't want to see. But nevertheless I will not vote for someone who was selected instead of elected. I will not betray democracy.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arkansas Granny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:12 AM
Response to Reply #13
25. Around here, we call that cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thepricebreaker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:24 AM
Response to Reply #25
32. In the non GDP world.. we call that CHOICE...
Edited on Tue Apr-01-08 06:24 AM by Thepricebreaker
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
musicblind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:00 AM
Response to Reply #32
61. No, no
I think most rational people would say that it is more like cutting off your nose to spite your face. My mother, who has never been on DU, compares it to the stupid kids she used to teach. They'd get all pissed if they didn't get a grade they wanted, etc. They'd be all like "I'll show you... I wont do ANY of my work." It did them no good, they failed, and guess what? The teacher doesn't give two shits. It hurt THEM more than anyone else and they proved nothing. In fact the teachers would laugh at them behind their backs. Not voting for Clinton in the primary wont make a huge difference. I firmly believe that very very very few democrats will actually do this. People are always "divided" in the primaries and swearing they'll do this, or they'll do that. If Obama wins, the Clinton people will probably vote for him, if Clinton wins the Obama people will probably vote for her. The percent of Dem's who don't vote for her because their candidate didn't win MIGHT cost her the presidency (It might not), but it will NOT be a big enough number to make a noticed statement. It will go by as the squeek of a rodent under the car tires of America. So by not voting he would have minimal effect, he would recieve nothing except his own "self satisfaction" which is 100% worthless when you are dieing from blood loss while the EMT's rush you to the emergency room in order to patch that HUGE GAPPING hole where your nose used to be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Celebration Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #61
127. here is the problem with that
Suppose we think Hillary would be a really bad president. Supposed we think McCain would be a really bad president, and probably worse than Hillary.

I still don't want to be rolling my eyes for four years at someone who is our president who I feel is a liar (possibly pathological) and know that I voted for her. That is too much cognitive dissonance for me to handle.

So, it is a touch choice. I would probably vote for her if she won the nomination cleanly. If she wins it dirty, by subtly cozying up to racists, for instance, then sorry, she loses my vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabbat hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 07:05 AM
Response to Reply #13
51. I have one reason why you should
vote for the democratic party candidate no matter what.

SCOTUS. Whomever is our next president will fill most likely at least 2 vacancies. Do you want that in the hands of McCain?

Or would you want it in the hands of a democratic president?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Popol Vuh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 07:29 AM
Response to Reply #51
55. Hey I agree
All the more reason why any candidate who doesn't get the will of the people should take those issues to heart and step down. If they don't, they're the ones responsible.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabbat hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:14 AM
Response to Reply #55
69. so if you sit out
because HRC gets the nod, and she loses by one vote, will you blame yourself when we get an even more conservative SCOTUS?

We cannot allow this to happen, no matter what.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CTD Donating Member (732 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #69
116. Hillary already cost us that by sabotaging Kerry in 2004.
Hillary doesn't give two shits about the nation or her party. It's all about HER.

I too will never vote for her. Period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thepricebreaker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 05:45 AM
Response to Original message
5. I will leave the president spot blank... and no " I WILL NOT COME AROUND"....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 05:47 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Thepricebreaker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:12 AM
Response to Reply #7
24. yes.. because trolls donate DU..... thats it.. you got me...
Edited on Tue Apr-01-08 06:13 AM by Thepricebreaker
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
musicblind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:02 AM
Response to Reply #5
62. That's what they all say...
but even if you don't come around... like I said... a worthless jesture. Merely the squeak of a rodent under the car tires of America. I am a very nice and tolerant person, especially compared to most on this board, but I do not tolerate people who betray their own country for personal satisfaction or vengence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sam sarrha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 05:46 AM
Response to Original message
6. get over yourself, go back to the FreeRepublic.. where you belong
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Popol Vuh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 05:58 AM
Response to Reply #6
16. "FreeRepublic"?
Really?

How ironic of you to say that. Who has more in common with the Freepers? People who support "selected" politicians? Or people who support democratically elected politicians?

I think you need to reevaluate your statement.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sam sarrha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:07 AM
Response to Reply #16
19. OK.. what are you doing here if you dont vote against McCain.. that is issue, not your Tantrum
if you dont intend to do all you can to keep the Nazi Fascists out of the White House.. you support them

you are leading others astray for your Self righteous indulgence

if you cant support the Democratic nominee who ever it is, go jerk off your ego at the Free Republic. shut the fuck up and get out. how can McCain be better than any Democrat?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Popol Vuh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:22 AM
Response to Reply #19
31. I don't have to vote
for a candidate who didn't get the will of the people to prove I am against Nazi Fascists. Your logic is just as anti-democracy as the Nazi Fascists you're citing.

If you wish to tell Democracy fuck you, go ahead. I won't be a part of it if it plays out that way.

And nice little keyboard commando tantrum you posted there at the end. LOL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sam sarrha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:35 AM
Response to Reply #31
36. good choice avatar of a Psychopathic mass murder of peasants also self rightious . shows your
ignorance
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Popol Vuh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:46 AM
Response to Reply #36
43. sniff, sniff
nibble, nibble. Not very good bait.. Better luck next time.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grassfed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #19
114. No difference between McCain and the sad Mrs C
She's a lying neocon. She will nuke Iran. Better not to vote.

Clinton
NO on Amendment No. 4882 that would have banned the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas.
YES on Bankruptcy bill (S.256) which stripped protections for people in debt.
YES on Kyle/Lieberman bill that sets the stage for the US to take military action against Iran.
YES on the Iraq War Resolution.
McCain refused to sign the AFC Anti-Torture Pledge

McCain
NO on Amendment No. 4882 that would have banned the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas.
YES on Bankruptcy bill (S.256) which stripped protections for people in debt.
YES on Kyle/Lieberman bill that sets the stage for the US to take military action against Iran.
YES on the Iraq War Resolution.
McCain refused to sign the AFC Anti-Torture Pledge




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cascadiance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #114
121. On 1996 Telecomm Act (aka media consolidation act)
Edited on Tue Apr-01-08 11:27 AM by calipendence
Clinton camp:
Signed it into law (this is where Hillary needs to take the good along with the bad if she's going to claim "experience" from her husband's reign)

McCain:
Voted AGAINST it (along with Wellstone, Feingold, Simon, and Leahy)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crankychatter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 05:59 AM
Response to Reply #6
18. OP was clear they would vote for the nominee if that person wins fairly
Edited on Tue Apr-01-08 06:01 AM by crankychatter
The other stuff is questionable but YOU didn't read it, or your comprehension is small.

You can get in trouble around here calling someone a "freeper" or "troll"

You didn't read THEM

are you this nasty to your family members?

Do you talk to strangers this way?... no?

well that's because there are consequences in the 3D world

The relative anonymity of the internet is an irresistable draw to sociopaths and abusers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sam sarrha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:11 AM
Response to Reply #18
21. it is hate baiting.... we are sick of it..
Edited on Tue Apr-01-08 06:13 AM by sam sarrha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Popol Vuh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:26 AM
Response to Reply #18
34. Thank you crankychatter
I guess they didn't see the part where I mentioned if Obama won this way I'd ignore him too. I guess I touched a never from an inconvenient truth they don't wish to acknowledge.

Anyway, thanks again crankychatter...


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
musicblind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:09 AM
Response to Reply #18
65. I would tell a stranger, or family member what I have posted in this thread in a heart beat
I am VERY outspoken. If you don't believe me check out my myspace www.myspace.com/davidbryantthemusicblind

I am a political song writer. My music is VERY in your face about my beliefs.

However, for the most part I am nice, even on these boards. I still call it like I see it. I am also not a hypocrite as I will vote for whoever wins and is most viable against the conservative opposition. Be that person Obama, Clinton, Al Gore, or Doink The Clown.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thepricebreaker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:18 AM
Response to Reply #6
28. ahhhhh.. freedom of choice lives free with some here I see...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:41 AM
Response to Reply #28
40. the board rules are quite clear.
You can choose to be here and support Democratic candidates or you can choose to leave or you can get your butt tossed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Perry Logan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 05:49 AM
Response to Original message
10. For more lucid readers, here's Hillary's record. Really quite excellent.
Edited on Tue Apr-01-08 05:50 AM by Perry Logan
Please highlight all the corporate-shill, evil neocon, destroying-the-Party stuff:


Senator Clinton supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the The Humane Society of the United States 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the National Trust for Historic Preservation 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People 95 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the National Education Association 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the American Wilderness Coalition 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the League of Conservation Voters 95 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Children's Defense Fund 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the American Association of University Women 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the National Organization for Women 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group 91 percent in 2006.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group 100 percent in 2005

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence 100 percent from 1988-2003 (Senate) or 1991-2003 (House).

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the American Public Health Association 80 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Service Employees International Union 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 93 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 93 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the United Electrical Radio and Machine Workers 84 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Worker 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees 88 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the American Federation of Government Employees 83 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the National Committee for an Effective Congress 95 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Americans for Democratic Action 100 percent in 2005.

According to the National Journal - Composite Liberal Score's calculations, in 2005, Senator Clinton voted more liberal on economic, defense and foreign policy issues than 80 percent of the Senators.

According to the National Journal - Liberal on Social Policy's calculations, in 2005, Senator Clinton voted more liberal on social policy issues than 83 percent of the Senators.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Alliance for Retired Americans 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Disabled American Veterans 92 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Bread for the World 100 percent in 2003-2004.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the The Partnership for the Homeless 100 percent in 2003-2004.
http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=WNY99268

She was promoting universal coverage before it was cool. Furthermore she helped to create the SCHIP program. And most importantly she was dead on in the debate the other week where she said political will was the most important thing needed to push health care reform through and we know without a doubt she has that.

She has fougt unrelentingly for a woman's right to choose as well as women's rights both domestically and abroad

Create a Strategic Energy Fund - Hillary has proposed a Strategic Energy Fund that would inject $50 billion into research, development and deployment of renewable energy, energy efficiency, clean coal technology, ethanol and other homegrown biofuels. Hillary's proposal would give oil companies a choice: invest in renewable energy or pay into the fund. Hillary's proposal would also eliminate oil company tax breaks and make sure that oil companies pay their fair share for drilling on public lands. Instead of sending billions of dollars to the Middle East for their oil, Hillary's proposal will create a new clean energy industry in America and create tens of thousands of jobs here.

Champion a Market-Based "Cap and Trade" Approach - Hillary supports a market-based, cap and trade approach to reducing carbon emissions and fight global warming. This approach was used successfully to limit sulfur dioxide and reduce levels of acid rain in the 1990s. By capping the amount of emissions in the environment and allowing corporations to buy and sell permits, this approach offers corporations a flexible, cost-efficient method to do their share to reduce emissions and combat global warming. The program will reduce emissions, drive the development of clean technologies, and create a market for projects that store carbon dioxide.

20% Renewable Electricity Standard by 2020 - Hillary believes we need to shift our reliance on high carbon electricity sources to low-carbon electricity sources by investing in renewable energy sources, such as solar and wind. As President, she'll work to require power companies to obtain 20 percent of their energy from renewable sources by 2020.

Make Federal Buildings Carbon Neutral - Hillary believes that the federal government should lead the way in reducing carbon emissions from buildings. Buildings account for 40 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, and the federal government owns or leases more than 500,000. Hillary would require all federal buildings to steadily increase the use of green design principles, energy efficient technologies, and to generate energy on-site from solar and other renewable sources. By 2030, all new federal buildings and major renovations would be carbon neutral, helping to fight global warming and cutting the $5.6 billion that the federal government spends each year on heating, cooling and lighting.

Protecting Against Exposure to Toxic Chemicals - Hillary wants to make the products we use safer, especially for children. There are tens of thousands of chemicals used in the U.S. and hundreds of new chemicals introduced each year, but little health testing is conducted for many of them. Hillary would require chemical companies to prove that new chemicals are safe before they are put on the market, and would set more stringent exposure standards for kids. She would also create a "priority list" of existing chemicals and require testing to make sure they are safe. To improve our understanding of the links between chemicals and diseases like cancer, Hillary would create an "environmental health tracking network" that ties together information about pollution and chronic diseases.

Hillary's Record

In the White House, Hillary led efforts to make adoption easier, to expand early learning and child care, to increase funding for breast cancer research, and to help veterans suffering from Gulf War syndrome who had too often been ignored in the past. She helped launch a national campaign to prevent teen pregnancy and helped create the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997, which moved children from foster care to adoption more quickly and the number of children who have moved out of foster care into adoption has increased dramatically.

She was instrumental in designing and championing the State Children's Health Insurance Program, which has provided millions of children with health insurance. She battled the big drug companies to force them to test their drugs for children and to make sure all kids get the immunizations they need through the Vaccines for Children Program. Immunization rates dramatically improved after the program launched.

Hillary has been a leading member of the Environment and Public Works Committee since she was elected to the Senate. Today, she chairs the Superfund and Environmental Health Subcommittee and in that capacity has promoted legislation to evaluate and protect against the impact of environmental pollutants on people's health and clean up toxic waste.

Global warming and Clean Air
Spoken out forcefully about the need to tackle global warming in hearings, speeches, rallies and on the Senate floor and co-sponsored "cap and trade" legislation.
Worked to reduce air pollution that causes asthma and other respiratory diseases by writing and helping to pass new laws to clean up exhaust from school buses, and other diesel-powered equipment.
Supported legislation to reduce pollution from power plants, including harmful emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, mercury, and carbon dioxide - emissions that contribute to poor air quality, smog, acid rain, global warming, and mercury contamination of fish.
Aggressively fought the Bush Administration's ill-advised attempts to weaken clean air laws.

Improving Water Quality and Protecting Drinking Water
Helped to overturn the Bush Administration's attempt to allow more arsenic in drinking water.
Cosponsored legislation to protect lakes, rivers and coastal waters by fighting the spread of destructive invasive species, such as the zebra mussel.
Helped ot pass new clean water laws, including measures to protect New York City's water supplies and clean up Long Island Sound.

Protecting Public Lands
Fought oil company efforts to pen the Artic Wildlife Refuge in Alask and Pacific and Atlantic coastal waters to drilling.
Cosponsored the Roadless Area Conservation Act, which prohibits road construction and logging in unspoiled, roadless areas of the National Forest System, and voted for additional funding and manpower to combat forest fires in the west.

Reducing Dangerous Chemicals and Cleaning Up Hazardous Waste
Supported legislation to restore the "polluter pays" principle by reinstating a chemical company fee to fund cleanups of highly contaminated "Superfund" waste sites.
Cosponsored the "kids-Safe Chemical Act," which requires chemical companies to provide health and safety before putting new chemicals in consumer products.
Proposed legislation to create an environmental health tracking network to enable us to better understand the impact of environmental hazards on human health and well-being.

Tackling the Toxic Legacy of 9/11
Pushed for health care benefits for first responders, residents and others whose health has been impacted from breathing the toxic dust and smoke in New York City after 9/11.
http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/8/20/134810/677

Hillary Clinton co-founded the Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families, a state-level alliance with the Children's Defense Fund, in 1977. In late 1977, President Jimmy Carter (for whom she had done 1976 campaign coordination work in Indiana) appointed her to the board of directors of the Legal Services Corporation, and she served in that capacity from 1978 through the end of 1981. For much of that time she served as the chair of that board, the first woman to do so. During her time as chair, funding for the Corporation was expanded from $90 million to $300 million, and she successfully battled against President Ronald Reagan's initial attempts to reduce the funding and change the nature of the organization.

Following the November 1978 election of her husband as Governor of Arkansas, Clinton became First Lady of Arkansas in January 1979, her title for a total of twelve years. Bill appointed her chair of the Rural Health Advisory Committee the same year, where she successfully obtained federal funds to expand medical facilities in Arkansas' poorest areas without affecting doctors' fees.

Hillary Clinton chaired the Arkansas Educational Standards Committee from 1982 to 1992, where she sought to bring about reform in the state's court-sanctioned public education system. One of the most important initiatives of the entire Clinton governorship, she fought a prolonged but ultimately successful battle against the Arkansas Education Association to put mandatory teacher testing as well as state standards for curriculum and classroom size in place. She introduced Arkansas' Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youth in 1985, a program that helps parents work with their children in preschool preparedness and literacy.

And a bit of stuff from the White House :

The First Lady worked to investigate reports of an illness that affected veterans of the Gulf War, which became known as the Gulf War syndrome. Together with Attorney General Janet Reno, Clinton helped create the Office on Violence Against Women at the Department of Justice. In 1997, she initiated and shepherded the Adoption and Safe Families Act, which she regarded as her greatest accomplishment as First Lady.

Along with Senator Ted Kennedy, she was the major force behind the State Children's Health Insurance Program in 1997, a federal effort that provided state support for children whose parents were unable to provide them with health coverage.<124> She promoted nationwide immunization against childhood illnesses and encouraged older women to seek a mammogram to detect breast cancer, with coverage provided by Medicare.<125> She successfully sought to increase research funding for prostate cancer and childhood asthma at the National Institutes of Health.<43> The First Lady worked to investigate reports of an illness that affected veterans of the Gulf War, which became known as the Gulf War syndrome.<43> Together with Attorney General Janet Reno, Clinton helped create the Office on Violence Against Women at the Department of Justice.<43> In 1997, she initiated and shepherded the Adoption and Safe Families Act, which she regarded as her greatest accomplishment as First Lady.<43> As First Lady, Clinton hosted numerous White House Conferences, including ones on Child Care (1997),<126> Early Childhood Development and Learning (1997),<127> and Children and Adolescents (2000),<128> and the first-ever White House Conferences on Teenagers (2000)<129> and Philanthropy (1999).<130>

Hillary Clinton traveled to over eighty countries during this time,<131> breaking the mark for most-travelled First Lady held by Pat Nixon.<132> In a September 1995 speech before the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, Clinton argued very forcefully against practices that abused women around the world and in China itself.<133> She was one of the most prominent international figures at the time to speak out against the treatment of Afghan women by the Islamist fundamentalist Taliban that had seized control of Afghanistan.<134><135> She helped create Vital Voices, an international initiative sponsored by the United States to promote the participation of women in the political processes of their countries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton

More:
http://clinton.senate.gov/issues/nationalsecurity/israel/index.cfm
http://clinton.senate.gov/issues/nationalsecurity/darfur

The following are polls from progressive groups, rating Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, on how often they vote for progressive issues. For each group, http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/011142.php

Clinton Vs. Barack Obama (progressivepunch)
Overall Progressive Score: 92% 90%
Aid to Less Advantaged People at Home and Abroad: 98% 97%
Corporate Subsidies 100% N/A
Education, Humanities and the Arts 88% 100%
Environment 92% 100%
Fair Taxation 97% 100%
Family Planning 88% 80%
Government Checks on Corporate Power 95% 97%
Healthcare 98% 94%
Housing 100% 100%
Human Rights & Civil Liberties 82% 77%
Justice for All: Civil and Criminal 94% 91%
Labor Rights 91% 91%
Making Government Work for Everyone, Not Just the Rich or Powerful 94% 90%
War and Peace 80% 86%
easures to protect New York City's water supplies and clean up Long Island Sound.

HILLARY'S EXPERIENCE ON THE WORLD STAGE:

Her historic speech at the UN Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995 not only galvanized women around the world, it helped spawn a movement that led to advances politically, legally, economically, and socially for women in many countries over the next decade. Among other initiatives, she spearheaded the Clinton Administration's efforts to combat the global crisis of human trafficking. She persuaded the First Ladies of the Americas to use their collective power to eradicate measles and improve girls' education throughout the western Hemisphere. And she is widely credited with helping women in Kuwait finally win the right to vote.

As First Lady and now as a two-term senator who represents the most ethnically diverse state in the nation and who sits on the Armed Services Committee, Hillary Clinton has become a fixture on international issues over the past 15 years. She has traveled to more than 80 countries, going from barrios to rural villages to meetings with heads of state. She has consulted with dozens of world leaders - Nelson Mandela, King Abdullah, Tony Blair among them -- on matters as diverse as America and NATO's roles in Kosovo, eradicating poverty in the Third World, and the plight of women living under the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Today, she is one of the most influential voices in the world on human rights, democracy, and the promotion of a "new internationalism" in foreign affairs that calls for a balanced use of military force, diplomacy, and social development to strengthen American interests and security globally.

While American First Ladies historically have made great (and often overlooked) contributions to our nation, Hillary Clinton's wide-ranging experience on international issues as First Lady is unprecedented. Indeed, she is the only First Lady to have delivered foreign policy addresses at major gatherings of the United Nations, the World Bank, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the World Economic Forum.

Hillary Clinton has been fighting for the rights of children for special needs for decades. In her first job out of law school working for the Children's Defense Fund, she conducted research that led to Congress passing the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, the landmark bill mandating that all children with disabilities be educated in the public school system. later, she helped improve the education of children with special needs by working to reauthorize the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act. In 2005, she sponsored an amendment to increase funding for the act by $4 billion dollars. She also cosponsored the Personal Excellence for Children with Disabilities Act, a bill that promised to help schools recruit and retain new special education teachers, and better prepare general education teachers and staff to work with children with special needs.

Most recently, she has called for greatly expanded funding to the National Institute for Health to investigate treatments for children with disabilities. And she has put forth a comprehensive and detailed plan to help children and families affected by autism, with numerous elements that correspond very closely to what families in the autism community have been demanding for years.

some points on her legal career:

1969 Truehaft, Walker and Bernstein in Oakland, one of the most liberal law firms in the country. They defended the Panthers.
1970 Yale University - city legal services, provided free legal advice for the poor.
1971 Staff attorney, Children's Defense Fund in Cambridge, Massachusetts
1971 Carnegie Council on Children, legal consultant.
1974 Impeachment Inquiry staff in Washington, D.C., advising the House Committee on the Judiciary during the Watergate scandal.
1974 University of Arkansas, Fayetteville School of Law - One of only two female faculty members.
1976 Worked pro bono on child advocacy.
1978 Jimmy Carter appoints Clinton to the board of the Legal Services Corporation.


Education

Wellesley College where she majored in political science.
Yale Law School, where she served on the Board of Editors of the Yale Review of Law and Social Action.

Political Activist Experience

Pragmatic Liberal

Always fascinated by radicalism, she wrote her senior thesis on a great radical organizer of poor people, Saul Alinsky of Chicago. Though when she was offered a job by Alinsky, after she wrote about him, and she turned him down--because she didn't think he was effective enough. She said to her boyfriend at that timebe in politics you have to win. And it didn't look to her like Alinsky was winning enough of his battles. She came to question his methodology and concluded in her thesis that larger government programs and funding were needed, not just community action at the grass roots.

She was the commencement speaker at Wellesley in 1969, chosen by her fellow students--there had never been a student commencement speaker there before. The scheduled speaker was Sen. Edward Brooke of Massachusetts, who Hillary had campaigned for, a Republican, the first black to be a member of the U.S. Senate in a hundred years. In his remarks he was patronizing, Hillary thought. He seemed to defend the Nixon administration's conduct of the war, and didn't mention the wrenching events of 68. When he finished, Hillary got up and extemporaneously excoriated him. As a result of that speech, she was featured in Life magazine as exemplary of this new generation of student leaders. They ran a picture of her in pedal pushers and her Coke-bottle glasses. That article made her well known in the student movement in the U.S.

She monitored the Black Panther trial in New Haven. She monitored the trial to see if there were any abuses of the rights of the Panthers on trial, and helped schedule the monitors. Her reports were turned over to the ACLU.

1971 Senator Walter Mondale's subcommittee on migrant workers, researching migrant problems in housing, sanitation, health and education.

Political Campaign Experience

1964 In high school, volunteered for Republican candidate Barry Goldwater.
1968 New Hampshire, Eugene McCarthy primary challenge to LBJ.
1972 Campaigned in the western states for 1972 Democratic presidential candidate George McGovern
1976 Jimmy Carter Presidential race, served as an Indiana campaign coordinator.

The Clinton Campaigns (Bill Clinton has stated Hillary played pivotal roles in his campaigns)

1974 Bill Clinton's Congressional race (L)
1976 Bill Clinton's Attorney General race (W)
1978 Bill Clinton's Governor's Race (W)
1980 Bill Clinton's Governor's Race (L)
1982 Bill Clinton's Governor's Race (W)
1992 Bill Clinton's Presidential Race (W)
1996 Bill Clinton's Presidential Race (W)
2000 Hillary Clinton's Senate Campaign (W)
2006 Hillary Clinton's Senate Campaign (W)

Legal Experience

1969 Truehaft, Walker and Bernstein in Oakland, one of the most liberal law firms in the country. They defended the Panthers.
1970 Yale University - city legal services, provided free legal advice for the poor.
1971 Staff attorney, Children's Defense Fund in Cambridge, Massachusetts
1971 Carnegie Council on Children, legal consultant.
1974 Impeachment Inquiry staff in Washington, D.C., advising the House Committee on the Judiciary during the Watergate scandal.
1974 University of Arkansas, Fayetteville School of Law - One of only two female faculty members.
1976 Rose Law Firm. In 1979, she became the first woman to be made a full partner.
1976 Worked pro bono on child advocacy.
1978 Jimmy Carter appoints Clinton to the board of the Legal Services Corporation.

She was twice named by the National Law Journal as one of the 100 most influential lawyers in America, in 1988 and in 1991.

First Lady of Arkansas

1979 Chaired the Rural Health Advisory Committee
1979 Introduced the Arkansas' Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youth, a program that helps parents work with their children in preschool preparedness and literacy.
1982 - 1992 Chaired the Arkansas Educational Standards Committee

She was named Arkansas Woman of the Year in 1983 and Arkansas Mother of the Year in 1984.

Clinton had co-founded the Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families in 1977.

Served on the boards of the Arkansas Children's Hospital Legal Services (1988-1992)and the Children's Defense Fund (as chair, 1986-1992)

Corporate board of directors of TCBY (1985-1992),Wal-Mart Stores (1986-1992), and Lafarge (1990-1992)

First Lady of the United States of America

"She's very smart ... people rightly give her credit for having been a participant in the Clinton administration and for doing some heavy lifting on issues." Barack Obama, speaking of Hillary Clinton's White House experience and contradicting Obama supporters - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart 8/22/07



When asked about his wife's role in his administration in August of 2000, President Bill Clinton said "She basically had an unprecedented level of activity in her present position over the last eight years.''

1993 First to bring a serious universal healthcare plan to be considered by the US Congress
1997 Helped develop the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997

The First Lady led the effor on the Foster Care Independence bill, to help older, unadopted children transition to adulthood. She also hosted numerous White House conferences that related to children's health, including early childhood development (1997) and school violence (1999). She lent her support to programs ranging from "Prescription for Reading," in which pediatricians provided free books for new mothers to read to their infants as their brains were rapidly developing, to nationwide immunization against childhood illnesses. She also supported an annual drive to encourage older women to seek a mammography to prevent breast cancer, coverage of the cost being provided by Medicare.

Hillary Clinton was the only First Lady to keep an office in the West Wing among those of the president's senior staff. While her familiarity with the intricate political issues and decisions faced by the President, she openly discussed his work with him, yet stated that ultimately she was but one of several individuals he consulted before making a decision. They were known to disagree. Regarding his 1993 passage of welfare reform, the First Lady had reservations about federally supported childcare and Medicaid. When issues that she was working on were under discussion at the morning senior staff meetings, the First Lady often attended. Aides kept her informed of all pending legislation and oftentimes sought her reaction to issues as a way of gauging the President's potential response. Weighing in on his Cabinet appointments and knowing many of the individuals he named, she had working relationships with many of them.

She persuaded Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin to convene a meeting of corporate CEOs for their advice on how companies could be persuaded to adopt better child care measures for working families.

With Attorney General Janet Reno, the First Lady helped to create the Department of Justice's Violence Against Women office. One of her closest Cabinet allies was Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. Following her international trips, Hillary Clinton wrote a report of her observations for Albright. A primary effort they shared was globally advocating gender equity in economics, employment, health care and education.

During her trips to Africa (1997), Asia (1995), South America (1995, 1997) and the Central European former Soviet satellite nations (1997, 1998), Hillary Clinton emphasized "a civil society," of human rights as a road to democracy and capitalism.

The First Lady was also one of the few international figures at the time who spoke out against the treatment of Afghani women by Islamist fundamentalist Taliban that had seized control of Afghanistan.

One of the programs she helped create was Vital Voices, a U.S.-sponsored initiative to promote the participation of international women in their nation's political process. One result of the group's meetings, in Northern Ireland, was drawing together women leaders of various political factions that supported the Good Friday peace agreement that brought peace to that nation long at civil war.

Hillary Clinton was also an active supporter of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), often awarding its micro-loans to small enterprises begun by women in developing nations that aided the economic growth in their impoverished communities. Certainly one of her more important speeches as First Lady addressing the need for equal rights for women was international in scope and created controversy in the nation where it was made: the September 1995 United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, China.

Senator From New York

After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Hillary worked with her colleagues to secure the funds New York needed to recover and rebuild. She fought to provide compensation to the families of the victims, grants for hard-hit small businesses, and health care for front line workers at Ground Zero.

She is the first New Yorker ever to serve on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

She has introduced legislation to tie Congressional salary increases to an increase in the minimum wage.

She helped pass legislation that encouraged investment to create jobs in struggling communities through the Renewal Communities program.

She has championed legislation to bring broadband Internet access to rural America.

She worked to strengthen the Children's Health Insurance Program, which increased coverage for children in low income and working families.

She authored legislation that has been enacted to improve quality and lower the cost of prescription drugs and to protect our food supply from bioterrorism.

She sponsored legislation to increase America's commitment to fighting the global HIV/AIDS crisis.

She's working for expanded use of information technology in the health care system to decrease administrative costs, lower premiums, and reduce medical errors.

She's worked to ensure the safety of prescription drugs for children, with legislation now included in the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act, and her legislation to help schools address environmental hazards. She has also proposed expanding access to child care.

She has passed legislation that will bring more qualified teachers into classrooms and more outstanding principals to lead our schools.

Hillary is one of the original cosponsors of the Prevention First Act to increase access to family planning. Her fight with the Bush Administration ensured that Plan B, an emergency contraceptive, will be available to millions of American women and will reduce the need for abortions.

She introduced the Count Every Vote Act of 2005 to ensure better protection of votes and to ensure that every vote is counted.

Senate Armed Services Committee

Subcommittees:

* Airland
* Emerging Threats and Capabilities
* Readiness and Management Support

Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works

Subcommittees:

* Subcommittee on Superfund and Environmental Health (Chair)
* Subcommittee Clean Air and Nuclear Safety
* Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure

Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor & Pensions

Subcommittees:

* Children and Families
* Employment & Workplace Safety
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UALRBSofL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 07:03 AM
Original message
Perry very thorough resume on Clinton
Thanks for posting
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cboy4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #10
72. I believe Bill Richardson's resume is almost as long,
thanks entirely to the Clintons.

You know, the people he turned his back on.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beacool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #10
111. Why bother with the facts?
To too many people on this so called "Democratic" board she's worthless. They not only post the nastiest things about her, they lift them directly from RW sites like the Freepers.

Pathetic......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grassfed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #10
118. YES on Iraq War Resolution invalidates her record
She then voted for the Kyle Lieberman Bill giving a known killer the green light for an illegal NUCLEAR war against the people of Iran. She has forfeited her right to a role in the Democratic Party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shaniqua6392 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 05:51 AM
Response to Original message
12. Then you must not be a true Democrat.
If she wins the nomination fairly, you still will not vote for her? I will vote for Porky Pig as long as a Dem gets in the Oval Office! I don't care which one gets the nomination. I will vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thepricebreaker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:19 AM
Response to Reply #12
29. Clinton + Fair = does not compute...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cascadiance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #12
122. The only way she can win the nomination "fairly" is if she goes back in time to change "variables"..
Edited on Tue Apr-01-08 11:32 AM by calipendence
... that really make it almost statistically impossible at this point, unless the Obama campaign implodes...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Stranger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #12
125. Who's to say Porky Pig isn't a Democrat?
If you vote for anyone who gets the nomination, you may as well go join the G.O.P.

They are into fixed elections.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasProgresive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 05:55 AM
Response to Original message
14. Good bye
If you won't vote for the Democratic nominee then you don't belong on DU- On ignore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thepricebreaker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:17 AM
Response to Reply #14
27. OMG.. you HAVE to be kidding.. I guess we have no CHOICE here?
Did this person say they were voting for McCain? NO...

Im going to vote for no one.. if Hillary is nominated.. so put me on ignore too..

come november your ignore list will be LONG



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greguganus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 07:03 AM
Response to Reply #27
50. I will also vote for no one for prez if she steals it. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemVet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:27 AM
Response to Reply #50
82. There is no such thing as "stealing" the nomination.
Explain to me what "stealing" the nomination is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pawel K Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #82
123. No such thing as stealing the nomination?
Cheating isn't stealing the nomination?

If you signed a pledge that you will not care about Florida and Michigan because they broke the rules, then 4 months later after all the candidates ignored those states because of your pledge you suddenly have a change of heart because you are losing you are a cheater.

If you go around trying to convert another candidates pledged deligates to vote for you instead you are a cheater.

Cheating in an election is the same as stealing it, simple as that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemVet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #123
137. So Obama is a cheater?
His campaign "converted" pledged Delegates in Iowa.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pawel K Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #137
140. Link?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
musicblind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:22 AM
Response to Reply #27
75. I don't think that list will be TOO long on the very unlikely chance she wins this.
Most people will have enough common sense to realize how elections ACTUALLY work, not how they "want" them to work. It would be awful if she won this unfairly, but it would be WORSE if McCain was president. Life is not black and white, life is gray! You have to make poor decisions to get the outcome you want. It's call "economic logic". See my above posts for more information. You have to give up something you value in order to get anything you want. Your "self pride" and "moral standing" will be worthless you are dieing from blood lose and being rushed to the hospital with a gaping wound pouring from your face because you decided to cut off your own nose. Maybe I am too cynical. If she wins against the will of the people then it will be a choice between "bad" and "really really bad". I'd rather take a punch to the face than a bullet to the head. The punch will hurt, but you'll still be alive to fight another day. The bullet will prove nothing (and be assured that not voting will prove NOTHING, will be a WORTHLESS gesture, and will be laughed at by the vast majority). The only person who will suffer from the bullet is you. You wouldn't even be alive anymore to pay the person back for what they did. So it's your choice. Punch to the face, where you get to live to fight another day and get a decent person in the White House at some future date, or a bullet to the brain. In that case we would probably not have a decent chance to get a Dem in the White House again for decades. If you make this choice then what McCain does in the White House will not be McCain's fault, it will not be Hillary's fault, it will be YOUR FAULT for giving him the job, because no one can force you to make your own bad choices. You DECIDE to make those bad choices and are therefore responsible for the outcome.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Popol Vuh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:35 AM
Response to Reply #14
37. Thank you
Cya later too. But I won't "On ignore" you.

:hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 05:59 AM
Response to Original message
17. Why is it okay for Obama to draw superdelegates from inside HRC territory --
Edited on Tue Apr-01-08 06:00 AM by pnwmom
like Ted Kennedy -- but not okay for her to draw superdelegates from areas whose constituents voted for Obama?

It seems to me that his supporters are trying to have it both ways. They act as if it's okay for him, but evil for her, to accept the votes of superdelegates whose constituents voted for the opposing candidate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
totodeinhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 07:01 AM
Response to Reply #17
48. If all supers supported the candidate who won their state then Obama...
would be the one who actually gains.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 07:13 AM
Response to Reply #48
54. bzzzt. Wrong
If all SDs supported there states, Obama would still be ahead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
totodeinhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 04:49 PM
Response to Reply #54
145. Ok, I'll stand corrected on that. I was...
just repeating what another poster said in another thread. But this topic is complicated. Take the case of congressmen or women who are super delegates. In some cases the candidate who won the state they are in is not the same candidate who won their district. So what are they going to do? Should they vote for who won the state or for who won the district? The same problems apply to other local officials who are super delegates who represent smaller jurisdictions such as counties or cites. What are they supposed to do?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 07:12 AM
Response to Reply #17
52. It's not OK with hillbots. Even before she won MA
them mass savaging of Kennedy, Kerry and even Caroline was disgusting. I just love how you're fine with that. Hypocrisy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemVet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:25 AM
Response to Reply #52
76. I'm fine with that. That's politics.
Kerry and Kennedy keep babbling about how SD's should vote along the lines "of the people."

Which people?

The National Popular Vote? The outcome of their state? Which?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northzax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:37 AM
Response to Reply #76
83. Kerry, Teddy and Caroline are grown ups
they know full well what the rules are, and if they put themselves on a public stage, they are fair game. Odd that Teddy and John would be so adamant about knowing how to run for President, right? Isn't Teddy the guy who took Carter to the convention in 80? worth noting that they are 0-2.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cascadiance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #76
126. If they all do one or the other, then Obama still wins...
Edited on Tue Apr-01-08 11:42 AM by calipendence
Provided that if you are saying the national pledged delegates (which is as much a will of the people's measure as you are going to get) is a measure of the "national popular vote".

If they vote counter to the will of their state delegate count AND counter to the national delegate count, THEN they are going against the democratic will of the people by any measure and if enough do this, that is when the super delegates "override" the will of the people.

The problem is that the super delegate system is anti-democratic. The super delegates themselves should realize this. They might vote one way in their state's elections as a "citizen voter", but they should vote with the majority of their state or the national majority if they don't want to take away from democracy...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemVet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:11 AM
Response to Original message
22. Somewhere out there...
...a village is missing its idiot.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MaineDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:11 AM
Response to Original message
23. Sad
I'm glad DU is not representative of the electorate.

Most people do not think the way the original poster does.

Thank you for a third Bush term with McCain. I certainly appreciate your concern.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thepricebreaker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:20 AM
Response to Reply #23
30. 20%+ of democrats say they will vote for McCain if Hillary is nominated.. DEMOCRATS..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Popol Vuh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:42 AM
Response to Reply #23
41. Don't think me
If a candidate is selected against the will of the people. Thank that candidate.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:25 AM
Response to Original message
33. Stomp feet. Cut off nose to spite face
Anything else that we have missed?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftofcool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:34 AM
Response to Original message
35. Good! Vote for McCain then!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:36 AM
Response to Original message
38. If she is picked by the DNC then that is who I vote for, if
it is Obama then that is who I will vote for... Anyone other choice is not acceptable within the Democratic Party....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:39 AM
Response to Original message
39. Then you do not belong here.
Clinton is fighting as hard as she can to win. That fight is frequently unpleasant, such is life. Either of our candidates would be a vast improvement over McSame and another four years of the current policies. The contest comes down to super delegates. They are not popularly elected and are free to vote for whomever they choose. Those are the rules. It is unlikely that Clinton will win, but she could. If she does I will wrap my head around that reality and do my best to make sure she wins in November, and so should you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:43 AM
Response to Original message
42. Then you don't give a fuck about the SCOTUS, the environment
the deaths of Iraqis and U.S. troops. You don't give a shit about healthcare coverage or torture or habeas corpus restoration. People who won't vote for the dem nominee this year of all years, make me :puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Popol Vuh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:58 AM
Response to Reply #42
45. I love how
so many people make such narrow minded assumptions based on my position that the will of the people is paramount and I will not go against that principle.

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 07:01 AM
Response to Reply #45
49. You can't disguise petulance no matter how you try
both Obama and Clinton have received millions of votes. If the SDs go with Clinton, it'll be because Obama's candidacy implodes over the remaining weeks. That's the only scenario I can see in which she gets the SD votes, and in that case, it'll be understandable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
musicblind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:27 AM
Response to Reply #49
79. I agree, I can't see any other way she would get the super delegates
at this point in time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UALRBSofL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:53 AM
Response to Original message
44. Popol Vuh I have a suggestion for you
Why don't you vote for Gravel if it's Clinton as the nominee? That's what Clinton supporters are going to do if it's Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polmaven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #44
132. I must TOTALLY disagree with you
I have been supporting Senator Clinton since - well - forever. If Senator Obama is the party's nominee, I will change my lawn sign and my car stickers and will support Senator Obama. I believe most of us on this Board agree, Obama and Clinton supporters all, that this election is far too important for petulant tantrums and hate filled screeds.

The nomination will choose a nominee, and Chairman Dean and others will be sure that it is done by the rules. The nominee will be who the nominee will be. No "stealing" will be done.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquarius dawning Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 06:58 AM
Response to Original message
46. As a Hillary supporter, am I supposed to care?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Popol Vuh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 07:00 AM
Response to Reply #46
47. Did I ask you too?
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Apollo11 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 07:12 AM
Response to Original message
53. Is this an April Fool joke?
Porky Pig for President? :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Irishman26 Donating Member (25 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 07:34 AM
Response to Original message
56. I'm an Obama supporter and I will be quite...
disappointed if he loses the nomination. At the same time, I'll also begin my small efforts to help Hillary win the GE. They're both democrats. Some of you have really gone off the deep end here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JayFredMuggs Donating Member (881 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:14 AM
Response to Reply #56
70. I agree
For any Dem to abandon their party in the face of defeat in the primary and convention process, I don't think I could ever do that!
The stakes of McSame and 100 years of war, the environment, the economy, the Supreme Court, all make me wonder if those who abandon their party so easily are really Democrats at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yotun Donating Member (346 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 07:39 AM
Response to Original message
57. NO true Democrat will vote for Hillary Clinton if...
She wins the nomination by overturning the pledged delegate count.

Lets make this clear. Supposedly in this forum you must support the democratic nominee? Let me spell this out for you. The nominee is the person the people of the party have voted for. The Democratic party is NOT 800 odd super political elte. It is the millions of people who have voted in the contest, and decided in their majority who the nominee should be. IF the nominee, whether it is Hillary or Obama, got the position by overturning the pledged delegate count, then they are NOT the nominee of the democratic party!

It is not about the SCOTUS or McCain. How are your arguments ANY different than George Bush fearmongering, give me your freedoms, leave your values behind, or the evil terrorists will come and get you? We are supposed to leave behind our values of democracy and equality of vote because a party elite scares us about what may happen if the evil McCain gets in the office?

If you let politicians overturn the will of the voters, and then scare you into accepting it and voting for them anyway, say byebye to democracy. Its not about what happens now, its about the precedents you set for the future. Next election it will be another excuse to overturn the majority candidate, and they will tell you, 'Its no big deal, its the same as what happened in 2008'.

For all his faults McCain won his party's nomination in a fair democratic process. If the democratic party elite decides to overturn the will of the voters, and selects the candidate WHO DOES NOT REPRESENT THE WISHES OF THE PARTY AS TO WHO BEST REPRESENTS THEM, then not only must you not vote for that candidate, you must work so that McCain wins in a landslide, so that a strong statement is made for politicians in the future- attempt to subvert democracy, and you have no future.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:14 AM
Response to Reply #57
68. Yes, it is about the SCOTUS. Yes, it is about John McCain.
The 2000 election really should have underlined that for you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yotun Donating Member (346 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:21 AM
Response to Reply #68
74. The election undermined to me that if you allow politicians to go against fundamental values...
then you are screwed a thousand times over. Try your Bush-like fearmongering to make me believe in monarchy and not democracy on somebody else.

If the majority votes against my wishes, I will accept the candidate the majority votes for because thats the nature of democracy.

And you know what, if the majority votes for McCain over Obama, and wants a conservative SCOTUS, I will also accept that, even if I don't like it, because that's the nature of democracy, and I don't place MY wishes over the wishes of society, because I realise my vote is not more important than of any other person.


IF YOU don't value democracy, and YOU believe in 'elites', and 'selected' candidates rather than elected ones, and that the minority elite should dictate its will on the majority, then thats your problem, but you have no fucking right spoiling the name 'democrat' by calling yourself that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 07:41 AM
Response to Original message
58. A vote for Porky Pig is a vote for John McCain.
And as such, you shouldn't be slinging it around here at DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yotun Donating Member (346 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 07:49 AM
Response to Reply #58
60. D in DU means demoratic
That means voting for the candidate chosen in a democratic process. Last I checked the Democratic party was not a dictatorial elite of 800 who can overturn the democratically elected candidate of the pattern.

Face it, the candidate of THE PARTY, is Barack Obama. Hillary can only hope to be the candidate of a political elite that overturns the will of the voters. NOT the Democratic party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #60
67. I am an Obama supporter.
Thanks to me and many others, Barack Obama won more delegates in Texas than Clinton.

How did this happen when Hillary got more votes in the primary section of the process? The rules.

We are a nation of laws. We are a party of rules. The time to change the rules is when the rules are being examined, not after the fact when people don't like the results.

The party rules give superdelegates the ability to vote as they wish. Whoever they select to be the nominee in this very close race will be the Democratic nominee, and I will support that person with my vote in November.

This is because John McCain will never take the country in a direction I would agree with, and both Hillary and Barack would. Hillary less so than Barack, in my opinion, but Hillary is better than John McCain ever would be.

That said, the supes would be foolish to go against the clear winner of elected delegates. I really doubt that they will.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:27 AM
Response to Reply #60
81. Welcome to DU
I agree with you and I suspect many of the super delegates do as well:

Here's what Senator Kerry said back on February 10 when it was less certain that Obama would lead:

"“My personal opinion is it would be a mistake and disastrous either way for the superdelegates — insiders, establishment politicians — to come along and overturn the expressed view of those pledged delegates,” Mr. Kerry said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/10/us/politics/10superdelegates.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2&hp&oref=slogin

Now, Kerry was one of the first Senators (other than Durbin) to endorse Obama, but his statement includes "either way" for a reason - it is a matter of principle.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LoZoccolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:47 AM
Response to Reply #60
85. Bull fucking shit, read the fucking rules. n/t
Edited on Tue Apr-01-08 08:48 AM by LoZoccolo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yotun Donating Member (346 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 09:03 AM
Response to Reply #85
89. If the rules say I must support the party elite no matter what...
...then I'll gladly leave as soon as Hillary is nominated by overturning the will of the voters while the rest of you bend down to be raped by your new monarchs as you hand in what's left of your dignity- and may you live happily ever after in your forum where everybody who is against tyranny and Bush-like 'blind loyalty or else' has no place in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LoZoccolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #89
112. You should leave now if you don't want to follow the rules. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yotun Donating Member (346 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #112
115. Report me for banning then and lets get this over with
IF its against the rules to support the candidate of the party and not the candidate of a political elite that goes against the will of the party majority.
IF its against the rules not to accept what the party elite tells me no matter what.
IF its against the rules to condemn the democratic party when it betrays democracy.

then ban me, for I have no intention of wasting a minute of my life with people as morally bankrupt as to support such rules.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LoZoccolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #115
129. And you should not go around misconstruing what the rules say. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yotun Donating Member (346 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #129
136. Something about a pot and a kettle...
YOU are the one accusing me of being against the rules, not me. Since you are now saying that what I'm doing isn't actually against the rules, because you disagree with my pointing out the implications of what the rules would be saying were I to be actually going against them, you prove you were just spewing shit to try to scare me with 'the rules' when you didn't like what you were hearing?

Care to tell me what you meant by my 'reading the rules'?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LoZoccolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #136
141. "Since you are now saying that what I'm doing isn't actually against the rules"
Huh?

I didn't read the rest. Explain that to me first and I might.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MethuenProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:03 AM
Response to Original message
63. You know that neither candidate can win without the Super Delegates, don't you?
Or isn't that a topic on the Cartoon Network?
"I'll write in a vote for Porky Pig if it boils down to this."~Popol Vuh
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yotun Donating Member (346 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:15 AM
Response to Reply #63
71. If the rules of the party don't specifically state that the candidate is the one won democratically.
that doesn't mean that we are supposed to support them when they exploit them for non-democratic reasons.

Yes the rules say that a candidate must reach a certain number of delegates to win.

The values of Democracy and Equality of vote do not say that. They say that the person who win the majority of the pledged delegates should be the nominee.

The rules of the party also do not say that the super-delegates MUST act contrary to democracy. So the rules of the party give the super-delegates a choice:
1) They can honour the values of democracy and equality, and vote for the majority candidate
2) They can use the 'rules' to go against those values.


So the 'rules' certainly say what they say, but if the super-delegates choose option 2, I say fuck you to them and to their nominee. The party is NOT an 800 political elite, it is the people who vote for it, and that people have made their democratic decision. Time to see what values the elite holds now.

And BTW, no amount of Bush-like fear mongering, 'hand in your freedoms and values or else' is going to change my mind. A thousand times better to have a president who was democratically selected from his party, than one who has gone against the very fundamental values of democracy.

And for all you idiots who say that if you don't vote for Hillary you are voting against the party, and that we should be ashamed and shouldn't be in this forum... BLIND loyalty is nothing to be proud of, and you are no better than Bush neo-conservatives who call people traitors because they don't support everything the government and the country does and won't hand over their freedoms due to Bush's fearmongering.

Time to see where YOUR values lie. Do you value your queen more than democracy? For this is what it all boils down to. A leader selected and not elected, and against the majority will of the voters is an example of monarchy, not democracy, and suited for queens and not presidents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
musicblind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:47 AM
Response to Reply #71
84. I do not consider Hillary a Queen and this has nothing to do with her.
Democracy is a lie. It is a farce. That is the cold hard reality. Sad, but true. I wrote a song with one of the closing lines being:

"Democracy's a lie/because nothing's ever REALLY free"

And the truth is, the Supers are there for the REASON of over turning popular opinion if they don't agree. Before we had it this way, the nominees were always picked in back rooms and America had ZERO say over who the nominee was.

In a real democracy we'd have more than two options that were viable, ANYONE could become president that wanted to (not just the rich), we would be voting on every law, and every judicial decision. However, that isn't what we have. We have "representative democracy" and that isn't even 100 percent accurate.

Values are meaningless if your well being is threatened. This isn't about values, throw them out the window. This isn't about morals, because life is not black and white. Life is gray, America is not REALLY free, (I mean look me in the eye and tell me the British are all prisoners in their own country????). I love this country, and I do think we are close to being "better than the rest" but that does not mean that we are "as good as it gets" and we probably never will be because the system is stacked against us.

We have to bunker down, and do the best we can with what we have. You can a choose to make what we have worse (allow McCain to win which will lead to decades of republican rule) or make what we have better in the long run (Allowing a less conservative person to win and hope that a better person would have a chance to take over office after they leave).

Do I like it? NO, it makes me want to vomit, it makes me so angry I see spots! I wish it was fixed and changed, and don't think I am not saying you should NOT fight for change. You should! We should all fight for change, but sometimes you have to take a step backwards to take two steps forward.

Hopefully NONE of this will have to take place, pray every night that it does not. I pray it does not. I would not want a candidate running for the GE that came about against the will of the people. However, it would not surprise me in this country, and I would do what I had to do to save this country for my children's children. It is the idea of "economic logic" you HAVE to give up something you want in order to get something you want. Because don't get me wrong, I LOVE my country and I am therefore willing to sacrifice to make it better. I'll do what I have to do in the situation we got ourselves in, and work harder to make sure we are not in that situation next time.

And yes, this is fear mongering, because people SHOULD be afraid, and if they are not then they either don't fully understand, or worse, they don't care.

It is about the big picture.


"Try and keep your eye on the big picture/picture keeps getting bigger" -- Ani Difranco
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yotun Donating Member (346 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:59 AM
Response to Reply #84
87. Bullshit...
Sorry, but that's all bullshit.

It all boils down to this. Yes American democracy is not perfect.

You type:
"We have to bunker down, and do the best we can with what we have. You can a choose to make what we have worse (allow McCain to win which will lead to decades of republican rule) or make what we have better in the long run (Allowing a less conservative person to win and hope that a better person would have a chance to take over office after they leave)."

Who is this "We" you talk of? In the end of the day it all comes down to this. A choice must be made. Do we go with the choice of the majority, or do we go with the choice of the minority elite.

None of the rest of the pessimistic philosophical garbage about how we must go against the will of the majority (because obviously YOUR view of the world is more correct than that of everybody else) matters. Everything you've just typed is the view of ONE person. If the majority disagrees, you shut up. If the majority votes for another candidate you shut up, and don't override their decision based on philosophical mumblings, designed to do nothing more than excuse the tyranny of the elite over the will of the people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
musicblind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #87
92. Nothing in this post makes any sense or counters the information that I put in front of you.
We get it, you are willing to screw your own country over, eliminate any chance we have of fixing these problems when we could have exchanged ZERO chance (McCain will NOT fix things) for a small chance (Hillary might actually lead to SOMEONE who will fix things). You would rather do this and do what is not best for the country, because it is what makes you feel the best morally.

This is obviously a personal issue that you have against a particular candidate rather than a moral issue, as you are making a personal and emotional decision rather than a rational decision. Rationally you should strive for the choice that leads you closest to what you want to achieve in the long run and not the short term.

But, just as people who crazed with religion, you cannot reach people who are making emotional decisions with rational information. They will merely call your information "bullshit" without taking time to look at it, digest it, and understand it. Every time you say "that's garbage" "that's bullshit" you just prove my point even further...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yotun Donating Member (346 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 09:24 AM
Response to Reply #92
95. Democracy is greater than MY values...
Edited on Tue Apr-01-08 09:37 AM by Yotun
If you feel that YOUR values are greater than that of a democratic majority, and that you have the right to screw everybody up and THEIR decision, in order for a minority candidate to DiCTATE what is best for the country, just because you agree with that candidate, then I suggest you take out the crown and proclaim your candidate king/queen of the US.

ETA: Just to make things clearer- As an example

I may personally believe that MY views are superior to those of fundie religious wackos. But if those crazies are more than people who hold my views, and I cannot convince them otherwise, I will accept as my president the person who they elect- (as long his actions don't infringer on my rights, because a majority has the right to do as it pleases as long as it does not affect the rights of the minorty).

i will NOT force MY candidate and my views for the course of this country over the nation if the majority vote otherwise.

How difficult is this to understand as the ONLY acceptable solution. You CANNOT overturn the will of the majority, and 'dictate' who your nominee or president will be when you are the minority, even an elite one. Those who dictate their choices are dictators, and have no place in a democracy.

This is greater that SCOTUS, it is greater than Bush. A very dangerous misstep was already made in 2000. If you allow the will of the majority to be overturned now, because of electability, and the fearmongering of politicians, then you give a precedent both to yourself and to future generations, that doing so in the future is acceptable.

Have you any idea how many dictators are held into power, and keep their people in check, because to do otherwise would put the people 'who are against the best interests of the nation' in power? This isn't a far away, alien danger. So much is dictated to people in the US already, and so much spun and twisted- this is one area where you simply CANNOT budge from one inch.

If Hillary Clinton wins the nomination by overturning the will of the voters, I WILL NOT VOTE FOR HER. FULLSTOP!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
musicblind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #95
100. Again you prove my point...
the mere fact that, after reading all of my posts about how I feel regarding this, you would claim that my personal opinions on Hillary have anything to do with my choice. I think Obama will make an excellent choice, and have stated in the past on DU that I have respect for McCain. (I just don't want him running the country) The point is, that Hillary would not win the GE as a minority candidate. You know this. If she were in the GE she would HAVE to win by popular vote. Therefore, if she won, she would be the most wanted of the two candidates running. If you do not vote for her than you have supported John McCain. That is a reality. IF you are okay with all of the murders, the danger to the country, the threat to your children's rights that will take place under McCain then YES you should vote for him. If you are not okay with that then you need to do what is best for your country and try and stop him by voting for the closest viable liberal candidate regardless of who they are.

Elections are NOT about candidates, candidates are merely figure heads. It would be like refusing support the Carolina Panthers because you don't like wild animals. Elections are about bringing either conservative or liberal ideas to the current political table. If you think that conservative ideas are better than liberal ideas then YES you should contribute (by either voting for the conservative ideas or not voting for the liberal ideas). If you think that the liberal ideas are better than the conservative ideas then YES you should contribute (by either voting for the liberal ideas or not voting for the liberal ideas)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yotun Donating Member (346 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #100
102. I WILL VOTE FOR HER IF SHE IS THE MAJORITY CANDIDATE
I will not vote for her if she wins by overturning the will of the voters.

If by some miracle she is handed the nomination even after losing the majority, will you vote for her? You say elections are about bringing ideas to the table. Will you support bringing your ideas to the table as more important than supporting what the majority wants to bring to the table? Will you support an action of overturning the will of people, so that YOUR ideals are brought forward? Do you value YOUR ideals so much that you are willing to excuse the overturning of democracy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
musicblind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #102
105. First, I have already explained how I feel about democracy.
Second, two wrongs do not make a right. Third, Obama and Clinton are nearly identical. Fourth, you act as if this is the GE and she will win the presidency with minority opinion. SHE WILL NOT it is not possible. Did you not read my post above? She HAS to have a majority in the GE. There are no superdelegates. I would not support a candidate that did not have the majority in the GE? No one HAS to vote for her in the GE. She will be an OPTION at that point in a system that was created the way it was to allow a private party and NOT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE to put forward the person they most want to run and represent THEIR private party. Obama could certainly try and run as a third party candidate for that matter. It would be a dumb idea unless we could get a viable fourth party candidate for the conservative side of the ticket to even things out, but who knows what could happen. The GE is the actually election. The Primary is not. The bottom line is that you are willing to throw your own ideals out of the window for the better of your ego. I am willing to sacrifice my moral standing for the better of the country. I have already made that clear.

The GE is the only popular opinion election to start with. If McCain DOES win the GE then he will have won fair and square, if the dem nominee wins then they will have won fair and square. However, the way the democratic, republican, green, libertarian, "insert name here" party chooses who they want to run for president is NOT a general election. It is a party choice. If someone doesn't like that parties choice and they can find the money they should run. It is a shame we only have two parties with enough money and power so we have fewer choices. It is also a shame it takes so much money to run.

If you really value democracy, and are rational enough to see what republicans have done to it then you will have to make a choice at that point. Vote for the dem nominee and punch democracy in the face, or sit at home and shoot democracy in the head with a silver bullet. There is no "neutral option" you have to choose one, punch, or shoot.

According to you the Green Party was against democracy by selecting their candidates without a primary process.


Finally, Ideals and Ideas are two different things. I was careful not to mix them in my above post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yotun Donating Member (346 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #105
107. She cannot win the GE if she isn't the nominee. And she can't be the nominee unless you subvert
democracy. If you give her a majority vote, you are telling politicians they can subvert democracy and you will still vote for them. How difficult is that to understand?

She can ONLY be an option for the American people to consider, IF they first go against the will of the people.

And the Green party decided as a private entity that it would make a private decision on who their candidate should be. The democratic party could have done the same and it would be fine with me. THEY decided they would use a primary system to decide the candidate. How they treat the results of that will tell a lot about how much they value democracy.

Again, she can only win democratically in the GE, if she is the nominee by winning non-democratically in the primary.

You value what Clinton will bring to the table more than McCains offers. You state they are similar to what Obama will.
But it is Obama who has been selected by the people.

Do you value what Clinton will bring by winning the presidency, do you value YOUR values, more than the value of democracy, which was subverted in order for Clinton to even be at the stage to be capable of being voted for in the GE?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taxmyth Donating Member (990 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #107
135. Since when is this a Democracy?
The so called Super Delegates are charged with voting for the person most likely to win the General Election as a Democratic candidate in November. That may or may not be the candidate with the most pledged delegates. Electoral College votes are what matters and not the number of general public votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yotun Donating Member (346 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #135
138. They are NOT charged with voting for the one most likely to win.
The only rule is that they vote however they want. They can CHOOSE to vote for the wishes of the pledged delegates, and they can CHOOSE to vote for who they feel is better, but the rules don't say anything about that.

Since you obviously HAVEN'T read what I've posted because I've tackled this argument before. Its certainly a private election, and the rules don't specify that they must go according to what the pledged delegates say. However they have a CHOICE as to whether they will base their decision in democratic principles, and go with the will of the people of the party, even if they disagree with it, and they have a CHOICE not to do so. Since they HAVE decided to run a democratic primary, that CHOICE, done within the rules yes, will tell us what values the elite of the democratic party holds, and OUR choice as to whether we accept it or not, will tell THEM, how much we value whether our opinion means shit to them or not.

If you do NOT want your leaders to be guided by the values of democracy and equality, but want them to be guided by the values of their own personal worldviews disregarding the democratic will of the voters, its your choice, but do not call yourself a 'democrat'.

But this is all meaningless. You do not care about democracy and you do not care about whether the party follows democratic ideals or not. You merely care about finding a way , however remote, to get your loser candidate the nomination, because you know she sure as hell won't get there by democratic means, and YOU ARE SIMPLY TRYING TO FIND ANY WAY TO RATIONALIZE THIS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
musicblind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #107
142. No that is not what the democratic party decided
They DID NOT decide that they were going hold a primary and let the people decide who the nominee was. They put the Superdelegates in place for a reason. The history behind the superdelegates were due to the heavy losses the democrat party experienced after going with "the will of the people". The Party got together and decided that they needed to do something because this was not what was best for their party. They didn't want to take away the entire voice the people had in the process... so they made super delegates. They would let the people explain who they wanted, and then using that information the superdelegates would THEN decide what was best for the party as a whole. That way they wouldn't end up with bum candidates again. They have absolutely NO obligation to do anything because they are a private entity. They could do it in a back room without our input, or they can do it solely on our input (that didn't work) or they could compromise and do it partially on our input and partially on what the party feels it should do. Private entities are not a democracy. My mom would use that one in her class room too. Kids would say "we should vote" on a new rule, or suggestion, or where to take a field trip. My mother would explain to them that her classroom was not a democracy. All of this was explained BEFORE the nominating process was started. EVERYONE in the party has understood that there are superdelegates for a reason. If the delegates HAD to go with the will of the people what would be the purpose of having them? They were put in place for a reason, do research. This isn't an "accident".

She will have gotten the nomination for that party, not the presidency. If a company decided to hold a vote in their company on who should be CEO. and it came down to two people, and was fairly close.... and the BOARD of that company decided they'd like one person over the other. That company has done nothing wrong because they are a PRIVATE company.

Now I have explained everything to you, in many many posts. I have dumbed it down. I have used elaborate examples. You have decided to ignore the information I have provided because wish to believe what you want to believe.

So, first, get into your head, democracy would NOT be subverted if she were to be the democratic nominee. It would not be advisable, and would not be my preference if this were to happen that way. I would be upset and angry over it. Would the democratic party have done something wrong? or subverted democracy? NO! Because there is no democracy in a private entity that can choose what they wish to do. They are running an entity, much like a company. They are not running a government. They are not a government agency.

Now I have gone at length with long posts, giving detailed explanations. Your posts have been a bit shorter as well as rather short sited. You can disagree with the democratic parties decision... if they went that way. I would disagree as well. But you cannot claim that they had any moral obligation to do otherwise.

You also have failed to counter any of explanations of how voting for a conservative leader is a much more likely to damage democracy than the a private entity deciding they want to endorse a particular person for president who only got 46 or 47 percent of the national vote in a primary that they weren't even obligated to allow, and said before hand that they may over turn the results.

I have nothing more to say about this, so I would ask you to end the conversation now. We are going to have to agree to disagree, because you either A.) aren't fully reading my posts or B.) aren't fully comprehending them. I have a lot of work left to do today.

I'm sure we'll meet up on this board again.

Sorry if there are mistakes in the posts I typed this in a huge hurry.

--David
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:08 AM
Response to Original message
64. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Lou Queb Donating Member (115 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:10 AM
Response to Original message
66. Im new here and just a foreign observer who's not fully informed about US politics...
Im new here and just a foreign observer who's not fully informed about US politics...but as it seems unlikely that she'll go against the will of the primary voters, this contest is about choosing nominees for political parties afterall and so it isn't the actual general election where the popular votes matters more in a way. Excuse me if I may seem ignorant but it's just my humble take...just wanted to break the ice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yotun Donating Member (346 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:25 AM
Response to Reply #66
77. Hillary can only win by going against the will of the primary voters...
There is no way she can mathematically win otherwise.

Yes its not a national election, and its the decision of a private party, but ever since that party has carried out primaries, then the people of that party are capable of viewing how the party treats the results of those primaries. Does it treat them according to the values of democracy and equality, or does it treat them in a mindframe of elites and second-rate citizens?

And will we support the party whatever mindframe it displays? I know I won't. And I know no 'democrat' will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
musicblind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #66
86. You are correct
Edited on Tue Apr-01-08 09:00 AM by musicblind
and for the vast majority of this country's history the nominees from these parties were selected in smoke filled backrooms. THEN all the nominees were presented to us for the General Election. We are lucky to now have a way to let these private parties know how we feel about various candidates, but the reason the Super Delegates are in place is to keep another George McGovern from happening... so that the nominee represents the best interest of the party. What would help is if we had viable third and fourth party candidates. That will never happen it seems :( so here is what we have instead ...

I will be voting for whoever wins the primary.


The people telling you that she cannot win because of the math is are lying. She COULD win the most pledged delegates, it is just highly highly highly unlikely at this point. If she doesn't, she could win the popular vote, which is highly, highly unlikely. If that doesn't happen Obama could crash in the polls, national opinion change towards her, and the super delegates go with that flow, which is highly unlikely. IF none of that happens, the Supers could randomly over turn public opinion, which is within the rules that everyone agreed to at the start of this thing, but that is really, really, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious unlikely!

Most people on here dislike Hillary for personal reasons. Bill Maher (an American political commentator who is actually supporting Obama) said on his show recently "If you HATE Hillary that says nothing about Hillary. That says something about YOU."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yotun Donating Member (346 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 09:08 AM
Response to Reply #86
90. But
1-She COULD win the most pledged delegates, it is just highly highly highly unlikely at this point.
2-If she doesn't, she could win the popular vote, which is highly, highly unlikely.
3-If that doesn't happen Obama could crash in the polls, national opinion change towards her, and the super delegates go with that flow, which is highly unlikely.
4-IF none of that happens, the Supers could randomly over turn public opinion, which is within the rules that everyone agreed to at the start of this thing, but that is really, really, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious unlikely!

1- Fine if she does
2- According to the pledged delegate and popular vote gaps, would be fine if she did
3- Fine if they do

4- NOT fine.

Most candidates were chosen in smoke-filled backrooms yes. Fine. If they decided to do so today, again fine. But ever since they have decided to have primaries, then the people can observe what values are held by the party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
musicblind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #90
94. They haven't been holding open primaries for very long in the course of this country
sadly. I would say it should have been in the constitution, but you can't force a private entity to do anything, admit anyone, let people vote etc.

I appreciate your passion, and your goals. I just think your method of achieving your goals are misguided.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 09:32 AM
Response to Reply #66
97. Welcome to DU
It's always nice to have some international perspective.

Hillary's hopes for nomination depend on two things:
1) a respectable showing in popular votes - within a half percent or so of Obama
2) a significant misstep by Obama which cause the superdelegates to support her.

I don't like our nomination process. It sucks. Nevertheless, it's what we have.

Take the "I'll never vote for Hillary in a million-gajillion years" with a grain of salt. For many, it's their first election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #66
99. "Howdy stranger, what brings you to these parts?”
obscure western quote...where ya from?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lou Queb Donating Member (115 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #99
104. Canada
I am indeed canadian.:)

Hello, yes thanks to tou all for welcoming me, didn't expect that. Thanks for the clarifications also, I have a lot to catch up with american politics so feel free to give me tips whenever tou want.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redsoxrudy Donating Member (131 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:20 AM
Response to Original message
73. Lets all grow up here
I don't believe the SD's will throw this thing to HRC, but if it happens lets not get carried away. It sounds like the whiny-ass 28% of HRC voters who say they won't vote for BO. If she does pull off a coup by SD, make no mistake I will be PISSED and I have muttered to myself that I won't vote for her after some of the stupid crap she has pulled. I have 2 big reasons I will vote for her in the GE.
1. Supreme Court-I think of my 5 year old girl & 1 year old son and think of the litany of rights that will be taken from them.
2. Iraq/Iran/???- I then think of my 17 year old brother and the fact that when McCain takes office he will be old enough to be drafted. (I am too old and broken down for them to take me.) One side will probably mad about who the nominee is but when Nov. rolls around everybody needs to grow up and vote for our side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yotun Donating Member (346 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 08:27 AM
Response to Reply #73
80. And do you ever think of what you are telling to future politicians?
that people will go along and vote even when you subvert democracy? That people are willing to let go of their values as long as you find something to scare them with? have we learned nothing after 7 years of Bush?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
musicblind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 09:09 AM
Response to Reply #80
91. Yeah... about that... see my post above regarding the rodent and the car.
You will prove no point at all. The best you can hope for is to continue to move the country towards a liberal agenda. In doing so you can have better hope of working with the system to find changes to the problems we have today. Otherwise, McCain wins, we have decades of republican rule, and we then have ZERO chance of improving the system. We might only have a 10% chance of improving the system if Hillary wins, but 10 is better than ZERO. Therefore, you cannot say that you are doing this to change the system. Since you KNOW that it is counter productive to changing the system. The only reason to do this, knowing it is counter productive to the system, is to do so for ego purposes. To "make yourself feel better" for "self pride" which, as I've said before in this thread, is worthless if you are bleeding to death on a stretcher in an ambulance with a huge gaping hole in your face... because you decided to cut off your own nose. Not good much pride, self esteem does when you are the person responsible for the deaths of those that happen under McCain. Because it will not just be McCain's fault, or Hillary's fault, it will be your fault because no one forces you to make your own bad decisions. You chose "more deaths of innocent lives" over "low self esteem".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yotun Donating Member (346 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #91
93. But McCain was atleast elected through a democratic process...
In a democracy you accept the results of democratic elections no matter what.

If the majority of the voters DOESN'T want to move the country to a liberal agenda, DOESN'T want to change the system, DOESN'T want to change SCOTUS, what can I do? I will fight to change the attitudes of people, but I accept what the democratic majority wants to do, and do not place myself as an all-knowing monarch who dictates his will above the rest, even if I do not like the results I get now.

Electing Hillary is much more dangerous than electing McCain, because its not about ME being screwed by having a an elected majority candidate with different ideas than me in the minority. Its about making a precedent of EVERYBODY being screwed by electing a MINORITY candidate that has different ideas than the MAJORITY, who really wanted somebody else- but has given its consent to a minority elite to select anybody they wish.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #73
101. grow up? nah i refuse to grow old
nah i refuse to grow old and set in my ways.....:yoiks: :woohoo: :yoiks:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
npincus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 09:01 AM
Response to Original message
88. Yes, you will.
Edited on Tue Apr-01-08 09:01 AM by npincus
How does "President McCain" grab you? YOu think some nutty old fart who imagines al Qaeda teaming up with Iran is better than ANY Democrat?

I will hold my nose and vote for HRC if it comes down to that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 09:25 AM
Response to Original message
96. that`s the ticket! vote for big johnnie!
yup he`s the ticket for all those dummies who say they won`t vote for obama or hillary....

kind` makes ya say--"what the fuck!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
baldguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
103. President McCain
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
musicblind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #103
106. I wonder what possessed McCain to make that face while a camera was on him?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kmsarvis Donating Member (312 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #106
133. THE MSM SHOULD .........
CIRCULATE THAT PHOTO THE SAME WAY THEY CIRCULATED THAT FOOTAGE OF HOWARD DEAN 2004.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beacool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 10:08 AM
Response to Original message
108. That's alright, it's your prerogative.
I have no intention of voting for Obama if he's the nominee. Everybody should vote their conscience and not along party lines.

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oleladylib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
109. here's 4 aspirin and a beer. oink, oink
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 10:12 AM
Response to Original message
110. WTF are you doing in DEMOCRATIC Undergound?
Fuck off and go back to your freeperworld.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knixphan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 11:08 AM
Response to Original message
113. Evolution cannot be stopped.

Hillary will not run the tables.

We will keep donating, and the many will overcome the few.

Power to the people!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lone_Star_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 11:21 AM
Response to Original message
117. I'd prefer Porky Pig over McCain too
From what I've been hearing quite a few of the local Republicans might even get behind that idea.

I'm hoping this is your idea of an April Fools Day joke. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Butch350 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 11:24 AM
Response to Original message
119. Me Too...
I totally agree with your scenario. And I will follow the same trend as you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
backscatter712 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 11:26 AM
Response to Original message
120. I will vote for the winner of the greatest number of pledged delegates.
And that winner will be Barack Obama, unless something utterly unlikely and catastrophic happens.

If the superdelegates steal the nomination and give it to Hillary, I'll still vote for Obama.

Point is, I'll be voting for Obama, whether his name is on the ballot or if I have to write it in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sunnystarr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
124. Actually a write in for Barack Obama sounds better to me than Porky Pig lol (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
128. Fuck all those who don't vote for the eventual Democratic nominee, whomever he/she may be,
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JustABozoOnThisBus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
130. What? Vote for Ralph Nader, Ron Paul, or stay home?
Or do you vote for McCain?

:wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemBones DemBones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 12:23 PM
Response to Original message
134. Fine. My husband and I won't vote for Obama, and

neither will our kids. He's a liar and lacks experience and judgement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mudoria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 12:40 PM
Response to Original message
139. I'll vote for whoever the nominee of the Democratic
Party is come November.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Butch350 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
143. This is a Democracy Right!
I'll vote any damn way I well please. ONE MAN ONE VOTE!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 12:55 PM
Response to Original message
144. Hillary supporters could say that about Michigan and Florida
they could take the fundamentalist pose about THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE and declare Obama illegitimate. But it would be phony and dumb.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kwenu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 04:50 PM
Response to Original message
146. You should always support the Democratic nominee but in this case you'll be lucky.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-02-08 12:29 AM
Response to Original message
147. SCOTUS!! SCOTUS!! SCOTUS!! SCOTUS!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-02-08 12:33 AM
Response to Reply #147
148. SCOTUS!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Apr 20th 2024, 03:45 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC