Did Obama Speech Backfire?

0 Kudo

Author	Comment
AUPastor	Did Obama Speech Backfire?	Lead	[-]
5th Year Senior Tiger Posts: 561 (03/19/08 08:30:42) Senior Tiger Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Tags : None After stating yesterday that I thought Obama had nailed Billary's political coffin shut with his speech, I am seeing polls (Yahoo News) that are indicating right the opposite. It now looks like the super delegates polled are starting to consider a denial of the popular vote and could possibly give the nomination to Billary. Two things here; 1. Shows how much I know about politics (which is why I NEVER discuss it with my congregation, neither corporately or privately), and 2. Plainstruth was obviously on to something when he voiced the possibility of a democratic party meltdown in a prior thread. Can you imagine the racial divide among the democratic party, and the nation for that matter, if Clinton is given the nomination with Obama winning the popular vote? Which by the way, is a very, very possible scenario. Sorry, I just realized this same discussion was still going on in another thread. Mods feel free to yank this one! Pastor Last Edited By: AUPastor 03/19/08 08:43:35. Edited 1 time.
TigerLily		#1	[-]
SUPREME TIGER Posts: 1206 (03/19/08 08:48:42) Palomino Tiger Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	After all the bitching they did after the GWB/Gore election was decided, it would be quite ironic if the Dems gave the nomination to Billary if Obama is the popular vote winner. "Regardless of what you hear and read, we will have a football team next year. We've won six and we're working on seven." Coach Tommy Tuberville
gshabo		#2	[-]
Knuckle Draggin\' Soldier Posts: 922 (03/19/08 09:19:02) Sophomore Tiger Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	After all the bitching they did after the GWB/Gore election was decided, it would be quite ironic if the Dems gave the nomination to Billary if Obama is the popular vote winner. And by bitching, you mean pointing out the fact that Bush stole the election right?
Vanlarri		#3	[-]
Senior Tiger Posts: 395 (03/19/08 09:21:22) Redshirt Freshman Tiger Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I know he threw his grandmother under the bus..
AUPastor		#4	[-]
5th Year Senior Tiger Posts: 561 (03/19/08 09:49:30) Senior Tiger Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I don't know about the bitching or Bush stealing the election. I just think our whole political system is flawed when a president is elected by electoral votes as opposed to the majority, and a presidential party nominee is so named by super delegates as opposed to the majority. I don't think this has anything to do with party, I think it just proves we have a flawed political system of electing our presidents and president nominees. I'm not smart enough to fix it, just smart enough to recognize it needs fixing.
Plainsman		#5	[-]
5th Year Senior Tiger Posts: 583 (03/19/08 09:55:01) 5th Year Senior Tiger Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Regardless of what goes on between the Obama-Clinton camps, their people would support the nominee rather than vote for a Repub.
gshabo		#6	[-]
Knuckle Draggin\' Soldier Posts: 922 (03/19/08 10:09:51) Sophomore Tiger Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Yes but as always, the independent vote will determine the election. I imagine that Pennsylvania will keep Hillary in for awhile, but the party will solidfy and begin courting the independent eventually. As good as McCain is at attracting the independent vote, Bush is as bad for the Republicans for running that vote towards the Dems.
Jonny		#7	[-]
Tiger Alumnus Posts: 789 (03/19/08 10:21:54) Tiger Alumnus Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	AUPastor wrote: I just think our whole political system is flawed when a president is elected by electoral votes as opposed to the majority, and a presidential party nominee is so named by super delegates as opposed to the majority. I don't think this has anything to do with party, I think it just proves we have a flawed political system of electing our presidents and president nominees. I'm not smart enough to fix it, just smart enough to recognize it needs fixing. I find it interesting that we have this feeling today. 200 years ago they came up with the electorial college system because people viewed the states as being more sovereign. I think our distaste with the electorial college now shows how much our notions of state sovereignty have declined. Bama: 4-20 against UT, LSU, & AU this decade.
TigerLily		#8	[-]
SUPREME TIGER Posts: 1206 (03/19/08 10:59:57) Palomino Tiger Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	gshabo wrote: After all the bitching they did after the GWB/Gore election was decided, it would be quite ironic if the Dems gave the nomination to Billary if Obama is the popular vote winner. And by bitching, you mean pointing out the fact that Bush stole the election right? As always, I guess that depends on which side of the aisle you're sitting. "Regardless of what you hear and read, we will have a football team next year. We've won six and we're working on seven." Coach Tommy Tuberville
AUPastor		#9	[-]
5th Year Senior Tiger Posts: 561 (03/19/08 11:05:06) Senior Tiger Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Jonny, I'm sure in the proper context of the 1804 establishment of the electoral college there was some discussion of state sovereignty, but I've always thought the electoral college was established more because there were no defined political parties at the time and no system in place to choose and limit the number of candidates. On top of this, because communication and travel was so limited, the electoral college allowed the split of votes between candidates who were popular regionally, but were perhaps unheard of throughout the rest of the country. And those votes were split according to the population of the states making up the respective regions. With defined political parties and communication and travel as advanced as it is, it is my humble opinion that the electoral college needs to be revamped. But, for every person who believes this, there is at least one or more who are against popular vote as well.
PalmettoTiger		#10	[-]
TIGER OVERLORD Posts: 5352 (03/19/08 11:09:17) SUPREME TIGER Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	The superdelegte systemof the Democrat party was put into place specifically to act as a counter to that party's primary/caucus system. They, the superdelegates, are not obligate to vote for whomever won that state - whether it is a winner take all arrangement or not. Funny that the whole "Bush stile Florida" thing is still hanging around even now after all that was written. The SCOTUS had two rulings, the first one being the most important when they told the SOFL "You gotta be kidding" by a 7-2 vote - even the more liberal judges weren't buying the argument. Heck, even the SCOFL said, in essence, "Ok, yeah, you got us" afterwards. Telling FL they had to follow their rules apparently is theft now. This despite the fact that after all the recounts left Bush with the win. The kool-aid is strong. Yes, the Electoral College is part of our Federal system and is a good thing lest even mroe power be concentrated in DC. They got enugh when senators went to the popular vote. PT

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

Did Obama Speech Backfire?

Did Obama Speech Backfire?

Quick Reply