dialog with Clinton supporter on FL/MI - a dramatization

[CTLawGuy]

Clinton Supporter (CS): Hillary is leading in the popular vote, so she should win.

Me: The popular vote doesn't decide the nomination, delegates do, and Obama is leading by almost 200.

CS: yeah, well the popular vote just proves how undemocratic this process is.

Me: besides, even if you ignore 4 caucus states, discount the Texas Caucus, and include FL and MI, Obama still wins, barely.

CS: No, you can't give him the "uncommitted" vote. THAT shows that Clinton wins.

Me: So you give Obama ZERO votes in MI, how is that even close to fair?

CS: Well he took his name off the ballot, it's his fault. He didn't have to do that.

Me: So let me get this straight... if FL and MI blatantly break the rules, we should let it slide because we don't want to punish the voters who wanted merely to express their preference, but if Obama takes his name off the ballot of an illegitimate primary, the people who wanted to vote for him are SOL, and should not be counted at all??????

How can you agrue with a straight face that you should count MI and FL because the illegitimacy of the primaries are not their fault, but at the same time, and in the same breath, not count the preference of people, in ANY way, who wanted to vote for Obama, but could not, also because of no fault of their own?

So punishing the voters is ok if it's Obama's fault, but not if it is the fault of Hillary supporting state party leaders?

CS: Well.. uh... Um... SEXIST!!!!!!

(scampers away)

[patrice]

1. Apparently there are some voters who know nothing at all about HC except that she is a female.

The appropriate thing to do when you get cornered like that is to start talking policies that are so great and good for the People that they justify the proposed trashing of the caucus states. I wonder why that CS didn't do that.

[CTLawGuy]

2. morning kick

NT