For everyone whining about counting every state's votes, how do you explain her plan to win by 2/5?

[jenmito]

Remember how, during an interview, after losing Iowa, she said she planned on taking it "all the way" to Feb. 5th (Super Tuesday)? How many states would THAT have left behind?! Think about that before thinking she REALLY cares about every state counting!

Oh-ALSO explain how she claims to have the popular vote if you include "every state that voted" when she doesn't include ANY caucus states!

[DemsUnited]

1. No kidding. In VA, we're used to having absolutely no say in the

primary process and just sucking up whatever candidate comes out of Super Tuesday.

So no, our hearts are not bleeding for Florida & Michigan who knowingly broke the rules and are now crying that they are "disenfranchised".

Half the states in the country have always been "disenfranchised" during the primaries and we never whined about it.

[jenmito]

Exactly. Whoever believes what she says NOW either has amnesia or is in denial.

[sandnsea]

2. Or how she's going to have the vote nullified

and have the supers hand it to her in the end anyway.

[jenmito]

4. Yeah. If you saw The Daily Show the other night, he showed Hillary starting out by saying

the voters should decide to saying the SDs should decide.

[dchill]

58. However it is decided, however the rules are rewritten...

however many votes/delegates "don't count", as long as she's the "winner", that's the way it should be. The rules must be in a constant state of flux so that they can be applied to favor the "inevitable" winner!

You're obviously not reading the right threads around here!

"Kool-Aid, Kool-Aid, tastes great, wish we had some, can't wait!"

[tekisui]

3. Or how the "Big Blue States" matter more. The Democrats that happen

to live in Red sates or Small states are inferior to the Dems in NY, NJ, CA, etc.

Bullshit. The Dems in the Red States are the ones who can swing and win an election. She has such a defeatist argument. She basically admits her inability to alter the map from what Gore did.

Let's turn MORE states BLUE!!!

[jenmito]

5. Yup. As if OBAMA wouldn't win those states and MORE.

:hi:

[sandnsea]

8. Big Blue States like WA, IL, MN,

He's won some big blue states too. Washington is about the same size as Mass.

[jenmito]

14. And soon-to-be-won-by-Obama North Carolina, which suddenly won't count since Black people don't

count to the Clintons, either (anymore).

[XemaSab]

22. I live in California

and I was ANGERED AND APPALLED that she would take that attitude.

This is the EXACT attitude that kept Strom Thurmond in power for decades. No, really. I talked to a bunch of democrats from South Carolina a couple years ago and they said they hated him, but voted for him anyway because he brought goodies home to South Carolina. This is why the founding fathers decided to have two senators per state. This is why we have the electoral college.

I grew up in the Bay Area, and much as I would like to see a lot of the country turn more liberal, there's a neo-colonial attitude implicit in her argument that says that Bay Area, LA, and New York City values are the "right" values and should be imposed on the rest of the country. Having also lived in the hinterlands of California, even IN California there's a lot of resentment towards LA and the Bay Area for their sense of entitlement and absolute domination of California politics.

But for Hillary to have that attitude ESPECIALLY as the former first lady of ARKANSAS is just not cool.

[knixphan]

72. hellz yeah!

[Spazito]

6. That has been on outstanding question on my mind....

The whole focus of the Clinton campaign from the beginning was to end it all by winning Super Tuesday, they went so far as to empty their prodigious bank account in their attempt to do exactly that. If they had succeeded, would they have insisted the primaries following should continue until the voters in all the rest of the states had their opportunity to vote? I suspect not.

[jenmito]

7. I suspect you're right...

I wonder how many Hillary supporters suspect the same thing or if they'll just avoid this thread.

[Qutzupalotl]

11. You've noticed that, too.

That some Clingon supporters show up ONLY on threads with HRC-favorable titles. They start fights there to keep the threads kicked.

But give them a headline critical of HRC and they scurry away.

There is a propaganda war going on right here at DU, on the "Greatest" page.

[jenmito]

12. Yup...

Sad that they can't defend their candidate.

[SoCalDem]

21. She would have gone on vacation and let her staff tell her the totals later

She would have never given any of them a second thought.

[redqueen]

9. Hahahahaha

*sigh*

[smiley_glad_hands]

10. How about her promoting the "only big states count" meme? eom

[jenmito]

15. Yeah-and she includes TEXAS-like she has a chance of winning there (AND she lost TX anyway

according to the delegate count)!

[PoliticalAmazon]

13. That was before she had to count on vote fraud to win. Need more states...

...to carry it out without it being too obvious.

[jenmito]

16. She's truly turning into a Repub.!

[thoughtcrime1984]

17. She is as disingenuous as they come. She would not be "fighting" for

FL and MI if there was nothing for her to gain from it. Same is true of going until June 3. If Obama was behind, he would have been forced out by now, other states be damned. Some hero.

[jenmito]

19. Exactly. And I find it telling that not one Hillary supporter has come here to defend her.

I thought they "have her back"!

[SoCalDem]

18. BINGO.. She didn't give a RAT'S ASS about the "other" states until she lost 11 in a row

and her MI FL scheme blew up in her face..

Her "plan" was to nail down about 1/3 to 1/2 of the delegates by 2/3, and then the SDs would have lined up behind her..

She also expected the other candidates to bail out after NH, and she would be the Queen Bee..

Instead she ended up being AUNT Bee..with a nasty attitude :)

disclaimer: apologies to THE Aunt Bee who was a real sweetheart:)

[jenmito]

20. Yup. She had no plan "Bee."

:D

[jenmito]

23. kick for ANY Hillary supporter to address this question

[BootinUp]

24. Are you saying that if Obama had been the favorite he wouldn't have

loved for momentum to end it on 2/5?

This thread is another of those "I am going to play dumb and ask people to explain the world to me posts".

[jenmito]

25. You're not answering the question. Hillary's the ONLY one who changed her "opinion" about voters'

votes counting, blaming it on everyone ELSE as if there's no record of her previous statements! And I see you can't defend her.

[tabasco]

49. Obama didn't say "it'll be over February 5th." That was Hillary.

She didn't give a damn about the states that came after that.

December 30, 2007: H. Clinton: It'll be over February 5th."

http://baltimorechronicle.com/2008/010308Burns.shtml

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WsPmZ1zDeA

[jenmito]

26. kicking AGAIN to get at least ONE Hillary supporter to defend her change of "heart"

[ScarletSniper]

27. Hilda speaks out of both sides of her mouth..and her fans just accept it.

[jenmito]

28. Apparently so. I've been kicking this thread for 2 days now and not ONE person has been able to

justify this.

[ScarletSniper]

29. They can't touch it....and can't counter it with the normal Bs..best to ignore it..lol

[jenmito]

31. That's obvious. But I'll keep trying.

[ScarletSniper]

33. kick..still waiting for hillary supporters to respond...

[jenmito]

34. Thank you. n/t

[Major Hogwash]

30. Because in HillaryWorld Groundhog Day is on the 5th of February!

And now we get to relive the same fuckin' day over and over and over and over and over.

LoL

[jenmito]

32. ...

:rofl:

[jenmito]

35. kickin' AGAIN.

[jenmito]

36. Kicking for DAY THREE-WAITING FOR A HILLARY SUPPORTER TO DEFEND THIS.

[azmouse]

37. The silence from them is deafening, isn't it?

[jenmito]

40. Yes. I've never seen a thread go three days with no Hillary supporter at least TRY to defend

Hillary. :shrug:

[Forkboy]

38. You won't get an answer. They didn't give a shit about the votes until they needed them.

[jenmito]

41. I know. But I'll keep on trying.

:hi:

[donheld]

39. Fascinating question

She never cared about any state after that.

[jenmito]

42. Thanks, donheld. I'm still waiting for even ONE Hillary supporter to TRY to answer it.

:hi:

[jenmito]

43. trying once again

[jenmito]

44. ...and again

[Cha]

45. Oh, you mean ol' Double Standard hilary...

Who will say anything but change nothing.

[jenmito]

46. Yup. Perfect pic!

:hi:

[SaveAmerica]

47. Hmmm, very interesting, you have a point...

[jenmito]

48. Thanks. Maybe that's why not ONE Hillary supporter has been able to address the OP!

[jackson_dem]

50. That makes no sense

The plan for front-runners was always to knock out the field by Super Tuesday. The conventional wisdom was it would be over then. Indeed on the rethug side this is exactly what happened. No one volunteers to have more primaries. If Obama could close the deal he would have loved to end this two months ago. She is making an argument to push back against Obamites who want to declare Obama the victor in the after three quarters of the game have been played. The game is close and she has been winning since Obama began to be vetted. Did the Giants quit the Super Bowl because they were losing after three quarters?

[Awsi Dooger]

51. One of the most inane arguments ever

For one thing, Hillary's notable quote wasn't after losing Iowa, as indicated by the OP. It was late December on Meet the Press, saying (paraphrased), "It really isn't a long haul. It will be over by February 5th."

It's no different than a confident athlete who says it will be over at the half way mark, or something along those lines. He might be wrong but that's part of the offense, a demoralizing intention.

[jenmito]

53. Your "logic" makes no sense. You contradicted yourself. First you "admit" Hillary planned on

wrapping it up on Feb. 5th and THEN you go on to blame "Obamites" for wanting to "wrap it up." Obama never contradicted himself. He planned to run in every state, unlike Hillary. SHE planned on running in only a certain number of states, not caring about "all voters" voting-she didn't care about the "Super Bowl" ending in the FIRST quarter, let alone THIRD. Don't you see the phoniness in her NOW claiming she wants every state to vote when she only started feeling that way when she failed to wrap it up in the "first quarter"??? :eyes:

[boppers]

52. She wanted all the votes counted.... after she won a blowout on the 5th.

She truly thought this was in the bag for her. Her aides were either too ignorant, or too terrified, of warning her otherwise.

[jenmito]

54. Exactly.

:hi:

[backscatter712]

55. I can explain her plan (or at least the results of her plan) just fine.

[jenmito]

56. Thanks...

that says it all. :hi:

[Writer]

57. My explanation for 2/5: Edwards dropped out. n/t

[jenmito]

59. How does that explain her claim that she NOW makes that she wants EVERY state to vote???

[Writer]

60. Because she wants every state to vote?

:shrug:

[jenmito]

61. Um, did you not understand the question in my OP? It wasn't "Why didn't she 'wrap it up' Feb. 5th".

It was why didn't she want every state months ago when she planned on wrapping it up Feb. 5th?

[Writer]

62. Because she likes it when everyone votes in close elections?

And she enjoys Doritos?

[jenmito]

63. I see you don't have a real answer.

:rofl:

[Writer]

64. No, actually I'd prefer to sit here, sip my beer, and watch you roll on the ground.

Es'cuse me while I relax. :beer:

[jenmito]

65. Here ya go...

Enjoy! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Writer]

66. Ahhhhh! Entertainment. n/t

[Romulox]

67. The OP doesn't really make sense

The argument is that whichever candidate remaining in the race who has the support of the most Democratic voters should be the nominee. If either candidate had won the nomination by Feb. 5, it would've been because they had established this very fact mathematically.

[jenmito]

68. It makes PERFECT sense. Only Hillary and co. bragged that she'd "wrap it up" on Super Tuesday. NOW

she claims she wants EVERY state to vote and for every vote to count. She doesn't REALLY want every state to vote. She wants every state to vote for HER. And she doesn't want every vote to count. She wants every vote for HER to count. When she claims she's ahead in the popular vote if you count "every state that voted," why doesn't she include any caucus state???

[Texas Hill Country]

69. she doesnt have to win the pledged delegates, just show that she is the stronger candidate.

[jenmito]

70. She shows she's the stronger candidate by having the most delegates. But you didn't answer my

questions.

[Avalux]

71. Stronger how? Because she's willing to act like a GOPer and lie her ass off?

That's the only 'strength' she has, if you can call it that. I have had ENOUGH of the lies and the media manipulation from Hillary's campaign; the statement by Wolfson this morning was insane.

I can't wait to see her cry in defeat.