Hillary may try to steal this election

[nvme]

Just caught this one off huffington post:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/04/clinton-camp-considering_n_100051.html


This is contrary to any democratic ideal I have ever come to believe.
I am amazed how thoroughly ruthless Camp Clinton has become. They are going to do a full court press of the Rules and Bylaws committee to force the seating of Florida and Michigan with out regard toward the other 48 states who actually followed party rules. " Iowa you don't count you don't count Nevada" or any other state in the union who followed DNC guides and set their primaries according to the DNC direction. This is truly of mockery of all Democratic Party Members.

Camp Clinton may seek to totally circumvent states rights. We Floridians were bamboozled by our legislatures. We Floridian will deal with them come re-election time. I never saw the Clinton's raise so much as a peep over hanging chads in 2000. Now after the possibility of the election not turning in the favor of Clinton, the rights of voters matter. The outrage was not there in December 2007 when the DNC announced Florida and Michigan would not be sat.

This will destroy the party. We cannot have another stolen election. Whether it be a Primary or GE. The Slash and burn attempts will alienate not only Black but youth and crossover independents. After so many have registered and worked to engage Americans once again in the process we can not withstand even the slightest hint of taint to our process. We must have confidence in the process of elections. That is the only way we will win in November. We will be too divided to attract anyone. This will drive away the independents in droves
Republicans act this way not Democratic Candidates . The whole line about this is what we expect from the re pubs in the GE is just another Rovian fear tactic. It is a bullshit line that justifies wretched behavior of one candidate toward the another. This is a line no Democratic contender should cross.

[davidinalameda]

1. may?

LOL

she's doing her best right now!

[krispos42]

2. Once again proving her Republican tendencies

No surprise, I guess. She's fighting Obama harder than she ever fought the BushCo and the Repubs, isn't she?

[2rth2pwr]

3. Using the rules that are in place to get things to go your way is stealing?

[dorktv]

5. Yep.

[caledesi]

33. I agree! NT

[burythehatchet]

41. Phenomenal, isn't it? They can't see their own nonsense.

[DemVet]

48. Nope.

[Leftist Agitator]

11. Yeah, and an election with one candidate on the slate is fair, right?

Oh, you wacky Hillarites!

[DemVet]

49. Obama was the...

...one who took his name off the ballot. It's his own damned fault.

[Kittycat]

53. A judge ruled that contest void.

[DemVet]

54. Judges...

...have little say over a NATIONAL contest.

[prolesunited]

72. Because the party leaders

told him to.

[99th_Monkey]

12. "The rules that are in place" = FL and MI are NOT seated period.

[tritsofme]

18. The rules in place cut the delegates' voting right in half.

The DNC took the extra step of stripping them completely.

This can be reviewed and appealed by going through the proper procedures, as we are now.

[99th_Monkey]

26. Hillary agreed early-on to follow the DNC rules, did she not?

[tritsofme]

27. Yes and the plain vanilla reading of rules state that the voting rights of violators be cut in half.

Plus any additional step deemed necessary, this decision to take an extra step and strip them completely is being appealed.

This is playing by the rules.

[The Doctor.]

28. And she agreed to that.

So is she a liar or an opportunist?

[Leftist Agitator]

65. "So is she a liar or an opportunist?"

A little from column A, a little from column B!

[WeDidIt]

46. She agreed to the stripping of delegates

The rules were set. The DNC even requested that candidates remove their names from the Michigan ballot, which was a request that Obama complied with.

The election in Florida was inherently unfair as Obama was not afforded the possibility to campaign.

So what you suggest is to alter the rules after the fact to the benefit of one candidate over another.

This is stealing the election because Barack Obama will exceed 2024.5 delegates prior to the eharing. Obama will have won under the rules all the candidates were expected to play by and the R&BC will strip him of that win

[stillcool]

55. Isn't it funny about those rules?

Florida Dems defy Dean on primary date
By Sam Youngman
Posted: 06/12/07 07:58 PM
Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), is trapped in a high-stakes game of chicken with party leaders in Florida.
They warned him yesterday not to “disenfranchise” state voters and risk being blamed for a debacle on the scale of the 2000 recount.

The warning comes amid alarm over a decision Sunday by state Democratic leaders to embrace Jan. 29 as the primary date. They are defying DNC headquarters and daring it to follow through on its threat to disqualify electors selected in the primary and punish candidates who campaign there.

But the DNC is not backing down. The committee bought time with a statement late yesterday saying, “The DNC will enforce the rules as passed by its 447 members in Aug. 2006. Until the Florida State Democratic Party formally submits its plan and we’ve had the opportunity to review that submission, we will not speculate further.”

Dean does not, in any case, have the power to waive party rules, a DNC spokeswoman said. The entire committee would have to vote again to do that.
------------------
Carol Fowler, chairwoman of the South Carolina Democratic Party, said she won’t move that state’s primary, scheduled for Feb. 2, unless the national committee allows her. “I’m going to do what the DNC tells me to,” Fowler said. “I’m not willing to violate the rules. The penalties are too stiff.”


http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/florida-dems-defy-dean-on-primary-date-2007-06-12.html

Posted: August 27, 2007, 6:05 PM ET
DNC Moves to Stop Primary Frontloading
The Democratic National Committee moved over the weekend to penalize Florida for moving up its primary date to Jan. 29 -- a violation of DNC rules that prohibit states from holding nominating polls before Feb. 5. The committee said the Sunshine State would be stripped of its delegation at the party's National Convention in 2008 if the state does not reschedule its primary in the next 30 days.

As the nation's fourth-most-populous state, Florida has 210 delegates and has played a major role in recent presidential elections. Florida's decision to advance its primary follows the increasing trend of states pushing up their contests in order to gain relevance in the election.
"Rules are rules. California abided by them, and Florida should, as well. To ignore them would open the door to chaos," said Garry Shays, a DNC member from California. California -- with its 441 delegates -- moved its primary to Feb. 5, along with more than a dozen other states.
-----------------------------------------

The DNC gave Florida the option of holding a Jan. 29 contest but with nonbinding results, and the delegates would be awarded at a later official date.

Florida Democratic Committee Chairwoman Karen Thurman said this option would be expensive -- as much as $8 million -- and potentially undoable. Another option would be to challenge the ruling in court.

"We do represent, standing here, a lot of Democrats in the state of Florida -- over 4 million," Thurman said, according to the New York Times. "This is emotional for Florida. And it should be."
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/politics/july-dec07/florida_08-27.html

Lawmakers in US state Michigan approve moving presidential primary to January despite rules
The Associated Press
Published: August 30, 2007

LANSING, Michigan: Michigan lawmakers have approved moving the state's U.S. presidential nomination contests to January, three weeks earlier than party rules allow, as states continue to challenge the traditional primary election calendar to gain influence in the race.

Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm is expected to sign the bill passed Thursday that would move the contest to Jan. 15, but approval of the switch is far from certain. A disagreement among state Democratic leaders over whether to hold a traditional ballot vote or a more restricted caucus is complicating final action.

If the date moves up, Michigan Democrats risk losing all their national convention delegates, while Republicans risk losing half.
------------------------------------
"We understand that we're violating the rules, but it wasn't by choice," Michigan Republican Chairman Saul Anuzis said, noting that state Democrats first proposed moving the date to Jan. 15.
"We're going to ask for forgiveness and we think ... we will get forgiveness."
----------------------------------
Florida Democrats decided to move their state's primary to Jan. 29. The national party has said it will strip Florida of its presidential convention delegates unless it decides within the next few weeks to move the vote to a later date.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/08/31/america/NA-POL-US-Primary-Scramble.php?WT.mc_id=rssap_america

Published: Monday, September 24, 2007
Florida defies Dems, moves up primary
Associated Press
PEMBROKE PINES, Fla. — The Florida Democratic Party is sticking to its primary date — and it printed bumper stickers to prove it.
State party leaders formally announced Sunday their plans to move ahead with a Jan. 29 primary, despite the national leadership's threatened sanctions.
The Democratic National Committee has said it will strip the Sunshine State of its 210 nominating convention delegates if it doesn't abide by the party-set calendar, which forbids most states from holding primary contests before Feb. 5. The exceptions are Iowa on Jan. 14, Nevada on Jan. 19, New Hampshire on Jan. 22 and South Carolina on Jan. 29.
http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20070924/NEWS02/709240045/-1/

Democrats vow to skip defiant states
Six candidates agree not to campaign in those that break with the party's calendar. Florida and Michigan, this includes you.
By Mark Z. Barabak, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
September 2, 2007
The muddled 2008 presidential nomination calendar gained some clarity Saturday -- at least on the Democratic side -- as the party's major candidates agreed not to campaign in any state that defies party rules by voting earlier than allowed.

Their collective action was a blow to Florida and Michigan, two states likely to be important in the general election, which sought to enhance their clout in the nominating process as well.
Front-runner Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York followed Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois and former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina in pledging to abide by the calendar set by the
Democratic National Committee last summer. The rules allow four states -- Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina -- to vote in January.
The four "need to be first because in these states ideas count, not just money," Edwards said in a written statement. "This tried-and-true nominating system is the only way for voters to judge the field based on the quality of the candidate, not the depth of their war chest."

Hours later, after Obama took the pledge, Clinton's campaign chief issued a statement citing the four states' "unique and special role in the nominating process" and said that the New York senator, too, would "adhere to the DNC-approved calendar."

Three candidates running farther back in the pack -- New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and Sens. Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut and Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware -- said Friday they would honor the pledge, shortly after the challenge was issued in a letter co-signed by Democratic leaders in the four early states.
--
Florida, the state that proved pivotal in the 2000 presidential election, is again a source of much upheaval. Ignoring the rule that put January off-limits, legislators moved the state's primary up to Jan. 29, pushing Florida past California and other big states voting Feb. 5.Leaders of the national party responded last month by giving Florida 30 days to reconsider, or have its delegates barred from the August convention in Denver.

"The party had to send a strong message to Florida and the other states," said Donna Brazile, a veteran campaign strategist and member of the Democratic National Committee, the party's governing body. "We have a system that is totally out of control."

Despite that warning, Michigan lawmakers moved last week to jump the queue, voting to advance the state's primary to Jan. 15.

Michigan defies parties, moves up primary date
JAN. 15 DECISION COULD SET OFF STAMPEDE OF STATES
By Stephen Ohlemacher
Associated Press
Article Launched: 09/05/2007 01:34:57 AM PDT

WASHINGTON - Michigan officially crashed the early primary party Tuesday, setting up showdowns with both political parties and likely pushing the presidential nomination calendar closer to 2007.

Gov. Jennifer Granholm signed a bill moving both of Michigan's presidential primaries to Jan. 15. Michigan's move threatens to set off a chain reaction that could force Iowa and New Hampshire to reschedule their contests even earlier than anticipated, perhaps in the first week in January 2008 or even December 2007.
-------------------------------------------
The national parties have tried to impose discipline on the rogue states. On the Republican side, states that schedule contests before Feb. 5 risk losing half their delegates to next summer's convention, though some are banking that whoever wins the GOP nomination will eventually restore the delegates.
Democrats have experienced similar problems, but party officials hoped they had stopped the mad dash to move up by threatening to strip Florida of all its convention delegates for scheduling a primary Jan. 29 and by persuading the major Democratic candidates to campaign only in the party-approved early states.

The decision by the major Democratic candidates to campaign only in approved early states renders voting in the rogue states essentially non-binding beauty contests.
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_6804685?source=rss

Kucinich Files Affidavit To Remove Name From Michigan's Primary Shortly Before Deadline

October 10, 2007 8:19 a.m. EST
Ayinde O. Chase - AHN Staff
http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7008781843
Dover, NH (AHN) - The Kucinich for President campaign Tuesday afternoon officially requested that Kucinich's name be withdrawn from the Michigan Democratic primary ballot. The affidavit came by way of to the Michigan Secretary of State's office.The Ohio Congressman and Democratic Presidential candidates
National Campaign manager Mike Klein said in the statement, "We signed a public pledge recently, promising to stand with New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina, and the DNC-approved 'early window', and the action we are taking today protects New Hampshire's first-in-the-nation primary status, and Nevada's early caucus."
The statement continued: "We support the grassroots nature of the New Hampshire, small-state primary, and we support the diversity efforts that Chairman Dean and the DNC instituted last year, when they added Nevada and South Carolina to the window in January 2008. We are obviously committed to New Hampshire's
historic role." Klein who actually recently moved to Dover said, "We will continue to adhere to the DNC-approved primary schedule."

Governor Granholm and other Michigan Democratic leaders have openly criticized the decision by several presidential candidates to keep their names off the state primary ballot. The Michigan lawmakers are taken back by Barack Obama, Joe Biden, John Edwards and Bill Richardson's decision to withdraw their names from the January 15th ballot.

The only ones who remain on Michigan's primary ballot are Hillary Clinton, Mike Gravel and Chris Todd.

December 1, 2007, 11:42 am
Democrats Strip Michigan of Delegates
By The New York Times

In a widely expected move, the Democratic National Committee voted this morning to strip Michigan of all its 156 delegates to the national nominating convention next year. The state is the party’s rules by holding its primary on Jan. 15. Only Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada are allowed to hold contests prior to Feb. 5.
The party imposed a similar penalty on Florida in August for scheduling a Jan. 29 primary.
The Democratic candidates have already pledged not to campaign in the state, and Senators Barack Obama and Joseph R. Biden Jr., as well as John Edwards and Gov. Bill Richardson, asked to have their names removed from the state ballot.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/01/democrats-strip-michigan-delegates/

Editorial: Follow DNC rules on seating delegates
February 25, 2008
By Editorial Board

On September 1, the campaigns of Clinton and Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.) issued press releases stating that they had signed pledges affirming the DNC’s decision to approve certain representative states and sanction others for moving their nominating contests earlier. But now that the race is close, Clinton — whose top advisor Harold Ickes voted as a member of the DNC to strip Florida and Michigan of their delegates — is pushing for the delegates to be seated.
Her argument is that not doing so disenfranchises the 1.7 million Florida Democrats who voted and that her pledge promised only that she wouldn’t campaign in the states, not that she wouldn’t try to seat the delegates. However, the results of the contests in Florida and Michigan are not necessarily representative of the voters’ preferences in those states. Given that most of the candidates removed their names from the
Michigan ballot, and that many voters stayed home from the vote in Florida with the understanding that their contest would not affect the final delegate count, the delegate totals that the candidates accumulated in these states may not accurately reflect the will of the voters. Had there been no restrictions in Michigan and Florida, the turnout, and thus the results, may have been different.

The Four State Pledge all candidates signed on Aug. 28 stated, “Whereas, the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee will strip states of 100% of their delegates and super delegates to the DNC National Convention if they violate the nomination calendar...

Therefore, I ____________, Democratic Candidate for President, in honor and in accordance with DNC rules ...pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any election contest occurring in any state not already authorized by the DNC to take place in the DNC approved pre-window.” When the candidates pledged to campaign only in approved states, they were also agreeing to the terms listed above, which explicitly mentioned stripping noncompliant states of their entire delegation.


House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) recently said that the Florida and Michigan delegates should not be seated if they would decide the nomination. Other compromise proposals include holding new nominating contests in these states, but such contests would be expensive and cumbersome. The irony is that had Florida and Michigan not moved up their primaries, they would have voted in February and March, when they would have been even more important than in earlier months in determining the Democratic nominee — and would not have created an enormous controversy that has the potential to divide the party.
http://daily.stanford.edu/article/2008/2/25/editorialFollowDncRulesOnSeatingDelegates

[guruoo]

37. Did she agree to never seek to have these "rules" changed?

[DMorgan]

42. UM Did she seek to have the rules changed BEFORE she was

losing?

[Hepburn]

43. Yes, by agreeing to them to begin with.

Duh.......:eyes:

[guruoo]

70. Have you ever seen an actual copy of this "signed" agreement?

[WeDidIt]

44. The stripping was within the rules.

And they were warned before they went down their scofflaw way that their delegates would be stripped.

[DemVet]

50. They will be seated. It shall be done.

[dorktv]

4. Um I am a young voter who has serious issues with Senator Obama.

And even she did get the two states seated, there is no guarantee they will support her...after all they are free to break to anyone else.

[NotThisTime]

8. She didn't get them seated, Howard Dean has suggested seating them

And I'm sure that Obama will fairly seat the delegates. Popular vote will not count, and that is what she needs....

[dorktv]

15. I think they should have only half the delegation seated anyway.

They DID break the rules but at the same time it is not fair to many of the people who had nothing to do with the reason the primaries were moved up. So half is a punishment that respects those who voted.

[kwenu]

6. This is not going to happen. They know full well Obama would be in court in a Chicago second.

And a judge would be slapping the DNC with an injunction faster than they could say, "I'm sorry."

[tritsofme]

19. On what grounds?

Such a suit would be dismissed just as quickly as pro-Hillary suits that sought to force the seating of delegates.

[kwenu]

66. On the grounds that it violates a PRIOR AGREEMENT of the parties.

The parties being the candidates. The damage is clear. The rights of one of the parties to the AGREEMENT would be substantially prejudiced and harmed. Parties are supposed to be able to rely upon their contracts otherwise there is no point in having a contract or contract law.

In short, IT'S A SLAM DUNK FOR OBAMA!!!!

Believe it!!!

[guruoo]

71. Have you ever seen a copy of the actual agreement?

I haven't. Keep asking, but so far no one has been
able to produce a copy.

[nvme]

22. An injunction was tried once already In My home State of FL

It was slapped down because the party elections are not governed by the judiciary. It was an internal matter. We knew FL was a beauty contest going in.

[kwenu]

67. Failure to follow an AGREEMENT is not a political issue. Therefore, the courts would

have jurisdiction as it is a contract matter and an injunction almost certainly would be issued to stop any action that violates that prior agreement.

[BattyDem]

7. It amazes me that no one is thinking about the BACKLASH

They want two states that broke the rules to be the deciding factor ... and they don't think anyone will mind? People are going to be pissed off! It's going to be the 2000 election all over again, only this time, it will be the Democratic party screwing over the Democratic voters. It won't be pretty. :-(

[RaleighNCDUer]

20. Not to mention, what will happen in '12 with this as a precedent?

We're going to see primaries in October.

It is even more astounding that they pulled this crap the year that the early primaries were actually expanded beyone IA and NH.

The DLC had to pull their power play against Dean. It's not even really about Hillary - it's all about the DLC vs DNC and Dr Dean.

[dmr]

21. I agree with you and I'm in Michigan

One thing that article did not mention about the Michigan vote - NOT EVERYONE VOTED!

Michigan had a low turn-out.

Many here thought it was a waste of time to vote in an illegitimate election. Because of that many people didn't go to the polls because they were pissed off that voter names, addresses and how they voted were given to the 2 political parties to use. Why give them info, especially when your candidate was not even on the ballot?

But the point is, NOT EVERYONE VOTED! People who would have gone to the polls stayed home because it was not a legitimate ballot.

Personally, I'd like to see the Michigan (DLC) Democratic leaders pay back this financially strapped state for an election that they knew full well was in direct violation of rules and bylaws they helped create. It angers me when I hear or read how Hillary 'won' Michigan. She won nothing.

If the DLC wants to run things their way, then they ought to start their own political party and leave the DNC to those who prefer to honestly abide by the rules, and not triangulate. How can we trust anyone to rule this land honorably if they cannot follow simple rules they helped create?

[nvme]

24. I remember there was a place where only one candidate was on the ballot

We called it the USSR. It fell if memory serves me. Is Michigan is a weak claim at best. Only one candidate. Obama pulled his name to support the DNC pledge. He could not pull his name from Florida because by law the name remains on the official ballot. In 2006 congressman Foley's name was on the ballot (you remember the guy who had inappropriate Text messages to a congression page who was a child)and the election board said his name will remain.

[Rageneau]

9. You are confusing stealing something with striving gamely for it.

[99th_Monkey]

13. I'm thinking you must have meant "gamey".

[Leftist Agitator]

10. "May?"

:rofl:

[Triana]

14. Yep...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5818998&mesg_id=5818998

[Zachstar]

16. She will not try the nuke option.

For like a nuke it will "Obiliterate" any support she has left which quickly leads to a blowout McCain win come November.

She wont do this and if she tries she will be the laughing stock of the party.

[FlyingSquirrel]

17. This can be prevented by the Superdelegates.

If Obama takes 47% of the remaining pledged delegates he'll have 1,928 total including the 248 supers he currently has.

He'll only need 35% of the remaining superdelegates to reach 2025. But if he gets 62% of them, he'll have 2100 and at that point there would be no way that a reasonable accounting of MI and FL could possibly give Hillary the necessary 2208 (the number she'd need if MI and FL were counted). Obama would get 67 from FL. If you gave him only 41 of the 55 uncommitted delegates from MI, that would be 2208.

It's really up to the superdelegates to prevent this situation from happening and basically destroying the Democratic party.

And I think they recognize that.

[jackson_dem]

23. Clinton is "stealing" something Obama never had by trying to get FL and MI counted?

Ironic. 8 years ago we had exactly the opposite position on the need to count Florida's votes...

[nvme]

25. Ironic indeed

Especially when Hillary signed her pledge and acknowledged both states do not count.

[judasdisney]

29. Ironic that a Hillary supporter acknowledges "Obama never had"

and so apparently DISENFRANCHISING Obama's voters in MI and FL isn't troubling because apparently that's not a Hillary supporter's concern. DISENFRANCHISING is OK as long as it's her voters who get counted -- screw anyone else. And break the agreed-upon rules whereever it suits you -- sounds like Bush to me.

[jackson_dem]

31. He never had the nomination. How can the nomination be "stolen" if he never had it?

Obama's votes in FL should count, as should Edwards, who would get 14 delegates from FL, and all of "uncommitted" should be allocate to Obama for Michigan.

[AllentownJake]

38. Obama was never on the Ballot

You may convince me on Florida...if Michigan is seated as is...I'm out of here.

Rome can burn.

[guruoo]

35. Could you please show us a copy of this 'signed pledge'?

[nvme]

56. here a few links

Pledges:
http://www.fladems.com/page/-/documents/THREE_pledge_versions.pdf


NYtimes article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/02/us/politics/02dems.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

I won't split hairs because i haven't been able to find the actual signature. Given this was a widely reported issue. Both candidates have made statements regarding FL and MI prior to the actual primaries I will stand by the statement that both Senators Clinton and Obama did sign.

[VotesForWomen]

30. O-nuts are a hoot, aren't they? nt

[WeDidIt]

47. Obama will exceed 2024.5 delegates BEFORE May 31

IF the R&BC seat the FL and MI delegates after he has already won, I consider that stealing.

[stevietheman]

60. Clinton has already stated that FL and MI don't count.

Why do you support her flip-flop?

[Yossariant]

32. "steal" the election? Wow! Obama really has a sense of entitlement.

What a moran.

[Stevepol]

34. Why is it that Hillary will steal the election? If the election is stolen,

it will be done by insiders at the voting machiune companies or lone wolves who are acting on their own. If it happens (or has already happened), Hillary wouldn't need to know about it. I fact, I'd suspect she wouldn't have the foggiest that it's even possible to steal an election. These politicians and the people who follow politics are so excited about any seeming "race" that they spend their time theorizing about the pre-election polling when this polling is probably totally irrelevant. The machines are "trivially easy" (Steve Freeman's words) to hack or patch or maliciously program or whatnot and are probably manufactured with a slight Repub tilt built in, if the NJ Sequoia machine is any indication, but to really steal an election it's necessary to have somebody, some technician probably, responding to some issue with the machines, who's able to insert a prepared program into the machine (the central tabuulator most likely) or machines in general if they're connected and this is possible.

It's not possible anymore to have even the slightest confidence in the results of any election anywhere in the country. It could be that some insider will decide for some reason or other to steal the election for Obama. It could be it's already been done. The general election in 04 I'm sure was bought and paid for long before the election.

We have no way to know. As I understand it, in PA, 85% of the machines don't even have paper for a recount. But even if they have the paper, as we do here where I'm writing this, there are never any audits, so what difference does the paper make?

[Perry Logan]

36. Is there some irresistible urge to say silly things about the Clintons?

[TexasObserver]

39. There's no doubt that Hillary has been trying to steal it since Iowa.

She and her campaign have tried to steal votes and suppress the vote in many states.

She's the living embodiment of the Rove playbook.

[Vinca]

40. Guess the Green Party needs to print up some new membership cards. nt

[MyNameGoesHere]

45. So she may steal the election by forcing votes to be counted. Holy fucking insanity.

Used to come here and see people actually wanting votes to be counted. Oh wait i see i have actually been redirected to freerepublic.com oh no that isn't it either.

[nvme]

58. Forcing votes to be counted

The argument camp clinton put forward, the Obama campaign made the choice to pull its name from the MI ballot must then be applied with respect to the DNC Pledge. Clinton made the choice to sign acknowledging no campaigning No delegates for both MI and FL. By their own standard Clinton must stand by her own pledge. The votes dont count.

[DemVet]

51. There is no such thing as stealing an election.

This implies Obama already has the Nomination sewed up.

He does not.

[totodeinhere]

61. No such thing as stealing an election?

There is no such thing as stealing an election.

Are you maintaining that Bush and the Rethugs did not steal the election in 2000?

[nvme]

64. Granted. Obama does not have 2024 delegates.

Clinton does not have it either. The likelyhood of Clinton recieving 2024 is extremely remote at best. The only way she can surpass Obama is by forcing the Democratic party to reward Florida and Michigan for trying to usurp Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina as lead off states for the primary election. There were also 44 other states who did actually did respect the party rules. Clinton did not pressure anyone to make changes in those states. It is underhanded to make the claim that Michigan with only clinton's name on the ballot should count.

[rodeodance]

52. Obama is stealing the election by having his lawyers actively oppose

seating the FL and MI delegations.


And the DNC is helping him

[stevietheman]

62. Nonsense. n/t

n/t

[totodeinhere]

63. How can upholding rules that Clinton agreed to in the first place be stealing?

[goclark]

57. May? LOL

She is making Rove look like child's play.

HCBC is the dirty dealer of American politics.

[NJmaverick]

59. She has copied every other george bush move, why not that one

[TragedyandHope]

68. Don't stand idly by while America is quietly shuffled off into the night

:kick:

[nvme]

69. It our party not hers

The Clinton camp is not showing any concern for the other states who follow the rules. The sense of fair play is no longer. This campaign has become about one person Hillary Clinton. But what about us? Havent we had enough of disconnect over the last 8 years. Is it ok to manipulate and overturn rules as you go? I did not agree with the DNC's Punishment but in the same token I dislike the Florida legislature attempting to dictate to our national party. when i saw that Florida legislature voted 115-1 in support of moving the date, I understood that they would be willing to risk the penalties that such a move would bring.