So when did the popular vote ever matter in the Primary season?

[LynneSin]

I mean, I can't even find a link on MSNBC or CNN that shows the popular vote count. Plus I'm assuming Hillary is including states where she broke her promise and added her name to the primary - how can you count Michigan when Obama kept his promise and Michiganers couldn't vote for him.

Did I miss the memo?

[BuyingThyme]

1. When Hillary became a big fat loser.

[PoliticalAmazon]

17. Thank you. n/t

[TexasObserver]

2. If you count the states that don't count, and don't count 15 of the states that do count ...

... and you count the territory that doesn't count, and you squint your eyes, you can see that she won the popular vote for that group of states and territorities.

[helderheid]

4. That's only true every other Thursday n/t

[TexasObserver]

10. Correct. And, you have to look through a prism.

[kid a]

3. hi lynnesin - I'm having trouble finding precedent too!

:hi:

[FlaGranny]

5. Ha! Popular vote

never counted for anything in any National election, even though most times the popular vote winner DOES get the win. Most Americans would love a direct democracy, and most Americans I bet don't even know we don't have one.

[BlooInBloo]

6. She wins that nonexistent metric, if you don't count 15 states....

http://www.americablog.com/2008/06/since-folks-have-been-asking-here-is.html

"
Hillary is still putting out the lie that she has more votes than Obama nationwide. She has achieved this magical "feat" by not counting votes in the following 15 or so states:

Alaska
Colorado
Hawaii
Idaho
Iowa
Kansas
Maine
Minnesota
Nebraska
Nevada
North Dakota
Texas (Caucus only)
Washington
Wyoming

ANY popular votes for Obama in Michigan

So much for every vote counting. So, yes Virginia, if you pretend America is a country made up of 35 states instead of 50 states, then Hillary wins! But I have on better. If you pretend that America is a country of just one state, Michigan, and pretend that no one in that state would have ever voted for Obama anyway, then Hillary actually got EVERY vote in America!!!!"


When Clinton supporters squawk "count every vote", they're just lying to you.

[LynneSin]

7. So why do we not count those 15 states and um, some of them are pretty big states

Oh those are the caucus states right?

Sorry I was never good with this new math.

[BlooInBloo]

8. Because Clinton tells us not to.

[book_worm]

9. Even her popular vote numbers are rigged. First there was no Obama on ballot in MI

and FL was not competitive. Secondly, they under estimate Obama's caucus victories. So it really doesn't matter and the SD are smart enough to see thru her arguments.

[SeaLyons]

11. Obama took his name off the ballot...he didn't have to do that...

he did it because he knew he couldn't win Michigan. Further, there was a big push in Mich for voters to vote "uncommitted" for Obama.

Don't say Hillary broke a promise. She did nothing of the kind. She didn't add her name. That's a lie.

[helderheid]

12. heh

:rofl:

[LeFleur1]

16. The Obama Supporters Lie All the Time

And I'm sick of it. The names they have called Hillary, the way they have treated one of the best President we had in this country is appalling. Bill Clinton was under considerable pressure and had a Republican majority his last four years and he was still able to do a better job than most presidents. Then these liars and twisters have the audacity to question the loyalty, to the party, of others.
Why would Democrats act with such venom against another Democrat whose voting record is nearly the same as the person they are supporting...except for votes when he wasn't yet a US Senator, and except for the Cheney energy bill.
Hillary Clinton is a Liberal. She is an honest person. She has done more good than most of the people posting on this forum will ever do. And that includes her work for minorities and women in this country.
If you can't tell the truth about her just shut the hell up. You act like right wing loonies.

By the way, I'm beginning to receive emails from some of my husband's loony relatives about the Obamas, Michelle in particular. This is the kind of manure you are going to have to deal with if Obama is our nominee. I suggest you clear your heads of the venom you've been spouting about fellow Democrats and find a way to defend the Obamas against the onslaught that is coming.

[helderheid]

24. Your concern is noted.

[onenote]

29. and you don't think that there will be "manure" tossed at HRC if she got the nomination?

Please.

[underpants]

14. So in your world they all cowered to Hillary's AWESOME power and took their names off the ballots?

Everyone? Richardson Edwards Kucinich Obama Gravel...all of them?

get a clue

[mcctatas]

15. Even if what you assert is true (which I don't necessarily stipulate)

the question remains, since when did the popular vote count in a primary? Furthermore, if Hillary is all about counting votes, how can she turn around and ignore caucus states? Those goal posts must be getting worn down from being dragged all the time :eyes:

[mrreowwr_kittty]

18. Well then Obama should get those "uncommitted" votes, shouldn't he?

It's funny how Clinton thinks she should get all the votes in MI counted for her and none for Obama, while insisting that the "uncommitted" vote was an Obama strategy.

[BobbyVan]

20. Is his name "Barack Hussein Uncommitted Obama"?

If not, then he shouldn't.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

22. Can't have it both ways.

40% voters in the Primary that day did NOT want Clinton. Why do you want to disenfranchise them?

[BobbyVan]

26. How do you know they wouldn't have voted for Edwards?

[LynneSin]

23. In that case when did the United States end up with just 35 states?

because it seems that Hillary wants to overlook 15 of them that, if counted, would pretty much kill her idea that she has the popular vote.

[onenote]

30. can you explain what the "popular vote" total is supposed to show?

Seriously. What is it a measure of?

[BobbyVan]

32. The will of the people

[onenote]

35. Here is a discussion of the "will of the people"

Let's imagine a discussion about the popular vote with, let's say, John Conyers, SD from Michigan:

You: Mr. Conyers, you should support Hillary because she won the "popular" vote during the primary campaign.

Conyers: Really? How were the votes from my state, Michigan, tabulated in this "popular vote" calculation.

You: Well, we gave HRC the votes she received in your state's primary.

Conyers: And Obama?

You: We gave him nothing.

Conyers: So you think it reflects the "will of the people" of Michigan to assume that there is no popular suppoort of Obama in our state whatsoever?

You: Yes.

Conyers: And what about caucus states -- how was the will of the people in those states calculated.

You: Well, that was hard,so we basically ignored them.

Conyers: So you count votes from Puerto Rico, which doesn't get a say in the GE, but my support, and the support of hundreds of thousands of other Michigan citizens, and the support of thousands of voters in caucus states that Obama won should be discounted or treated as a nullity and the result somehow deemed to be reflective of the "will of the people"?

You: Yes

Conyers: Get the fuck out of my office, you moron.

[LynneSin]

21. You think Hillary would give a fuck about Michigan if she were clearly ahead in the votes?

Because it sounds like she doesn't give a fuck about 15 states in order to get her 'I'm winning the popular vote' theory.

Which is it because my head is spinning from all this spinning. If we are to count ALL of the states then we need to count all 50 states.

[Imagevision]

13. It appears that many DUer's think think the popular vote matters

[BobbyVan]

19. There is a moral case to be made that the candidate who receives the most votes should win

[Imagevision]

25. who receives the most votes should win? too bad it doesn't work that way, ask Gore...

[BobbyVan]

28. So you're siding with Bush then, huh?

[onenote]

33. only if its based on a fair assessment -- and this "popular vote" calculation is not

Let me ask you: if all 50 states had primaries and Candidate A defeted candidate B by 1000 votes in each of those campaigns, but Candidate B won Puerto Rico by 75,000, would Candidate B have a "moral case" that he/she should be the nominee?

[BobbyVan]

34. In the extreme case you suggest, perhaps not, but let's stick to the facts of Clinton v. Obama

[onenote]

36. the facts of Clinton v. Obama include the following:

To reach the conclusion that the popular vote reflects the will of the people you have to:

Assume that there is zero popular support for Obama in the state of Michigan
Assume that the support for Obama in the caucus states that do not report popular vote totals should be disregarded in assessing the "will of the people".

Tell me again where the "moral case" is in this approach?

[housewolf]

27. Never.... never did, doesn't now

and it's a very sad thing that a sitting senator, respected candidate for the presidency, is running about the country hepping up voters using that as a political slogan, mis-leading supporters and perpetrating a myth. She really ought to be ashamed of herself.

[WA98070]

31. I'm an Obama supporter (now) but I believe he started bragging about it when he had it...

I still don't think it matters but unfortunately he rang that bell first.