How can the party who was pissed that al gore won the popular vote but lost the election

[ourbluenation]

not insist that it's nominee must win the popular vote in the primary?

[gcomeau]

1. Caucuses.

The GE doesn't have them. They skew things when only looking at the popular vote in the primaries. If you want to go by popular vote you need every state to stop doing caucuses first.

[sniffa]

20. But the Caucuses are killing us

It's not fair.

[Boz]

28. Because there is no such thing as a Popular Vote in the primary.....

There is only an estimated exit poll that is reported.

[Debi]

41. Why do you not have a post count?? It's freaking me out!!

:hi:

[MrTriumph]

2. the issue was not that Gore carried the national popular vote

the issue was not that Gore carried the national popular vote. He did. The issue was that he carried the popular vote in Florida, but was denied the votes (and most importantly the electors) by a less than perfect election system there.

[SunsetDreams]

3. Thank you for the voice of reason. nt

[ourbluenation]

8. I know what the issue was. I was speaking more in a big idea way.

I don't think the elected person in the ge, or our party's nominee, should be the one who didn't get the popular vote. There's something very against the will of the people in it, and that usually doesn't end well.

[Warren Stupidity]

22. Fine but when your premise is false it is hard to take your post seriously.

[knixphan]

38. bingo

[KittyWampus]

4. there is no such thing as a popular vote in a primary season including caucuses. Some DU'ers

are so stupid it's mind numbing.

[ourbluenation]

11. Murtha: Clinton Cannot Win Nomination Without Popular Vote

Hillary Clinton simply cannot be the Democratic nominee if she doesn't win the popular vote, Pennsylvania congressman and Clinton-backer John Murtha said Wednesday.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/03/murtha-clinton-cannot-win_n_94874.html

[elocs]

12. Damn! Some members of Congress are so stupid it is mind numbing. n/t

[BzaDem]

18. The people who post crap like that are so stupid it's mind numbing.

You just don't like the fact that caucuses have lower turnout. ***Too bad.*** That doesn't change the fact that the popular vote exists, and can be calculated by simple addition. Luckily, people who post that will continue to waste time posting it over and over while superdelegates will be deciding who to vote for based upon the popular vote that "doens't exist."

[ourbluenation]

23. Oh and FU on the stupid comment. That was uncalled for. I was not speaking literally

because I understand the process, I was speaking in a figurative way. The nominee should be the one the people want.

[Debi]

5. Because day is night in Hillaryland

:crazy:

[OzarkDem]

6. They're not focusing on the GE

The apparently don't care if Obama wins the nom but loses to McCain. I'm not sure what that's about.

[Debi]

7. Are you using that crystal ball for anything other than general election predictions

I'd like to know if now is a good time to refinance my home mortgage.

[OzarkDem]

10. Clinton's polling ahead of McCain in key swing states FL, PA and OH

(Obama is losing to him)

New York Sen. Hillary Clinton holds a 50 - 41 percent lead over Illinois Sen. Barack Obama among likely Pennsylvania Democratic primary voters and runs better against Arizona Sen. John McCain, the likely Republican nominee in Pennsylvania, Florida and Ohio, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.


This compares to a 53 - 41 percent lead in a March 18 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University. In general election match ups of the three largest and most important swing states in the Electoral College, the survey finds.

Florida: Clinton 44 percent - McCain 42 percent; McCain beats Obama 46 - 37 percent;
Ohio: Clinton beats McCain 48 - 39 percent; Obama gets 43 percent to McCain's 42 percent;
Pennsylvania: Clinton tops McCain 48 - 40 percent; Obama leads McCain 43 - 39 percent.



http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1284.xml?ReleaseID=1164&What=&strArea=;&strTime=120

[VolcanoJen]

25. The superdelegates should totally base their decisions on April polling.

Makes absolutely no sense, unless you support a candidate with virtually no chance at the nomination.

Hey Ozark, who's going to win the Kentucky Derby this year?

[OzarkDem]

29. It works the other way

You nominate the candidate who can win the GE. Keep your eyes on the prize.

[VolcanoJen]

31. Why won't you answer my question!??!

So really, who do you like in the Derby? Colonel John, or Yankee Bravo?

[EffieBlack]

34. So what?

Such polls are meaningless seven months before an election.

If polls are going to decide who are nominee will be, why bother to have primaries at all? Let's just have the DNC commission Gallup to conduct a poll and our nominee will be the one who polls the highest.

Of course, they'll have to decide when the poll should be done - before or after a candidate actually campaigns in a given state. If we went with the polls from last fall, Clinton would have won in a landslide. Now, she's losing.

Hey - that might be the same situation with the general election! A candidate who is polling lower than another candidate right now, might actually poll HIGHER later on in the year after they do a little campaigning.

Ya think?

[VolcanoJen]

24. I'd like to know if I should take the over/under in Memphis vs UCLA.

Since we're crystal-gazing and all. :-)

[Debi]

40. C'mon now, we can't be using crystal balls for nefarious purposes

only for the public good. :rofl:

[azmouse]

9. Neither Obama nor Hillary would lose to McSame.

[OzarkDem]

14. Better check the polls

Obama is doing poorly against McCain. Why do you think he's suddenly trying to sound like McCain on Iraq?

[azmouse]

15. And I've seen plenty of polls in which both Dems lead McSame.

Please don't be blinded by Obama hatred to the truth. He can and will win against McSame in Nov.

[OzarkDem]

16. I don't believe in fairy tales

I'm fact based when it comes to electoral politics.

[VolcanoJen]

26. Polls aren't facts. Votes are facts.

Why is this such a difficult concept?

[RC]

33. Obama is doing poorly against McCain because

Hillary is McCain lite. They could be each others running mates. Obama isn't far enough to the right to appeal to the Hillary/McCain people, so he does poorly there.
As long as Hillary is in the race, that will tilt the picture. The true picture will emerge after Hillary is gone.

[wileedog]

42. McCain has also gotten a free pass from the media

whle they have been completely focused on the current Dem Dogfight.

Once this process is over gaffes like his Shia/Sunni mistakes are going to get a whole lot more play. And there are plenty more of those to come.

[elocs]

13. This might be different if one candidate had the popular vote and the other the delegate lead.

In this case though, Obama has both. For some, reality sucks. Ahhh, if only they could be in another dimension, but I fear that some of their minds are already there.

[BzaDem]

21. He has both right now. He might continue to have both later, but millions of people are left.

[elocs]

27. Yes, and things have been trending so well for somebody lately.

I can certainly see how there might be a big change in the opposite direction and the Obama campaign totally collapsing, although I won't start holding my breath anytime soon.

[sandnsea]

17. That isn't why people were pissed

They were pissed because the Supreme Court stopped the recount.

The DNC sanctions the elections in each state. It is too late to change the process.

[Warren Stupidity]

19. I believe the pissed off ness was about stealing the election outright

The fact that we have a bizarre election system that is massively prone to manipulation and corruption and highly undemocratic was a bit of a sideshow around the outskirts of a more simple case of having the election stolen.

[grantcart]

30. Its very easy it was about the delegates that is what everyone said from the begining

if it was going to be about the popular vote then Obama would not have squandered his resources in Idaho and Kansas but would have spent the whole time on the East Coast and California running up the popular vote. You can't start the campaign with one set of rules for winning and then change it.

[sandnsea]

36. I just hate people who try stuff like that

and who wouldn't.

[johnnydrama]

32. they may have been pissed

But they understand the system that we vote under. They may not like it, they may want to change it, but I don't think anybody was claiming that since Gore won the popular vote, he should ave been President (forgetting about the FL problems)

It's only desperation that makes one cry about the system they're playing under, and agreed to play under.

[stillcool]

35. rules?..

[Beregond2]

37. Primaries

As I keep pointing out, primaries are not elections. They are private functions of the parties, whereby nominees are chosen. If they wanted to choose them by having potato sack races, they would be perfectly within their rights to do so. This is why open primaries are so crazy. It's like letting Baptists vote for the next Pope.

Personally, I'm not sold on the idea of primaries at all. Caucases tend to be dominated by those members of the Party who are the most committed and involved to choose the nominee. I can't see anything wrong with that.

[Debi]

43. Considering who the Pope is - I think Baptists voting would have been a good idea

:hi: Remember that Iowa held an open caucus.

[knixphan]

39. let's re-poll after Hillary is out.

See how Barack polls against McCain then.

[MadBadger]

44. Because the current popular vote does not count several states that had caucuses.

[lumberjack_jeff]

45. A better question is how the members of that party can tolerate caucuses. n/t

[MadBadger]

46. Also, the difference between the GE and the Primary is that we dont do winner take all primaries.

They are proportionally selected in order to represent the will of the people.