To me it is just so obvious who the Republicans want to run against and it is obvious that some of the Clinton supporters would rather lose the election than allow Obama to be the nominee.

The republicans will do whatever it takes to get Clinton as the nominee. I sense it will happen too. 8 more years of Bush like behavior is coming again. God help America we are screwed. Maybe we can get 10 dollar a gallon of gas

Yeah, this whole mess is the Republicans fault. Your failure to mention Howard Dean and the DNC is laughable.

Gotta admit WISGOD, sometimes you are right and this is unfortunately one of those times.

Howard Dean and the DNC are responsible for this mess and risk losing in November because of the animosity between the Clinton and Obama camps which threatens to divide the party.

This is what I wrote in the Dean/Do-over thread:


As much as I want the delegates to sit at the convention, I would prefer that they don't sit than to have a do-over.

My thinking on having the delegates sit is that it would encourage statse in the 2012 electoral cycle and beyond to break the rules and thus challenge IA and NH place in the system. Having a do over do will mean we will continue to have the same system forever. Not having the eelegates will create such controversy on the other hand that it just might force a chance in the primary system.

I would especially oppose it taxpayers have to pay for the do-over. Paying for the Jan 15 primary is one thing, but paying for a do-over is unaceptable. I agree with governor Granholm on this.

Posted by member2586 at 2008-03-06 08:16 AM |

Wouldn't it be funny if by some strange twist Obama ended up winning MI an FL in the do-over, or at least if they ended up splitting the delegatse evenly?

LOL! Poetic justice, how ironic for the Clintons.

Out of all the options, the one I like the most is sitting a delegation of half Clinton half Obama delegates.

Danni,


Recently, I've often felt quite sorry for myself as I've watched with horror what the Republican party has become; particularly in regard to fiscal irresponsibility.

Just as I thought things couldn't be any worse, your party seems hell-bent on a path of self-destruction. Given the Bush administration and the Republican congress through 2006, there is no way in hell the Democrats shouldn't take the WH in '08. However, it's beginning to look as if they may not do so. Granted, we are a long way off and anything can happen. Nevertheless, the Republican party is coalescing around McCain - the base doing so kicking and screaming, but doing so nonetheless. This coming-together vs. the on-going split among Democrats is turning what should be a slaughter into a real contest.

I genuinely feel for you and other Democrats. After the last 7 years, you guys deserve a victory. However, there's no longer any kind of guaruntee that you'll achieve it.

Wouldn't it be funny if by some strange twist Obama ended up winning MI an FL in the do-over, or at least if they ended up splitting the delegatse evenly?

* * * *

It's possible. It's also possible that Florida and Michigan voters see one candidate who wanted to recognize their vote, and another who wanted to observe national party rules, and disenfranchise them.

Ironic, eh? The campaign of an African American using party rules to throw out the votes of millions of Americans in two of our five largest states?

Funny, really.

No, the irony is that both Hillary and Obama agree on point: neither candidate really wants Michigan and Florida to revote. Hillary, because she's already won them, and why take chances? Obama, because he would probably lose in round 2, and why take chances?

The problem wouldn't even exist if Howard Dean and the DNC hadn't over reacted to Florida's and Michigan's decisision to change their primary dates which really ought to be their decision. Why certain states should automatically go first is a rule that I have always questioned.

True. Florida and Michigan--along with 46 other states--have a right to wonder why Iowa and New Hampshire have such a disproportionate say in who becomes our next president.

RiR,

What is ironic in this whole thing is that if Michigan and Florida had waited their pre-determined turn, they would have had far more influence in this election than had they tried to jump to the front as they did.

Florida's Governor - Republican.
Florida's Legislature - Republican.

This wasn't the Florida Democratic Party's decision. They had nothing to do with this at all. The State Republicans set the date in direct violation of the National DNC and RNC rules.

Ah. In comes Yav, to play the victim card. Never mind that the Florida Dems don't really see things quite the same way you do. They're always victims of those rascally Republicans.

Okay. Your party is full of them--victims, I mean. Maybe the Dems at the national level can fix the problem.

By the way--who runs the governor's mansion and the legislature in Michigan? Those damned Republicans again, I'll bet. The slimy bastards.

RiR,

What is ironic in this whole thing is that if Michigan and Florida had waited their pre-determined turn, they would have had far more influence in this election than had they tried to jump to the front as they did.

Posted by JeffJ
* * * *

Maybe. Maybe not. Their point is, why should anything be pre-determined? If Florida and Michigan want to move up, why is it anyone else's business? If you want to earn the Floridians' votes, you need to come when Floridians tell you to. Not the other way around.

YAV unfortunately a Democrat first proposed the change of date, after the Democrats realized that it would cause a problem they tried to change it to Super Tuesday but by then the Republicans also realized the problem it would create for the Dems and wouldn't let them. But it was a Democrat who started the whole mess.

RIR just admit you want Hillary to be the nomination. You know that if you get McCain in you can keep stockpiling your loot and avoid paying taxes much like you do now.

No, not playing the victim card, you moron. I'm stating what happened in Florida and who the players were. In case you missed it, I said "direct violation of the National DNC and RNC rules."

It was a boneheaded move. I know the DNC (I can't speak for the RNC) petitioned, repeatedly, the GOP Legislature in Florida to bring the date in alignment with the DNC's rules. Each time it was rebuffed by both the GOP Legislature and Crist. In fact, proposals by the Democrats in the State Legislature were killed and vetoed.

There is no call to redo the Florida primary for Republicans - you have your candidate. What is being attempted in Florida is transparent. It is not being done to help the Democrats. It's political grandstanding. Calls for redoing it, without the money to do it.

Anyone from Michigan that was involved may speak to Michigan's own motivation. On that I have no knowledge.

Bullshit.

No, the GOP State Legislatures would have forced the State Democratic Party to hold a SEPARATE primary on a later date, a date different than that when constitutional amendments, local offices, etc. were being voted. The NYT article when read in the context of what was going on makes sense. The struggle the State Democratic Party was coming to terms with was whether to buck the funded slated election or to have no Primary or to try and get a second primary in line with the DNC rules.

"Calls for redoing it, without the money to do it."

I have read somewhere that a redo of the vote would cost around four million, why not ask the Obama campaign to chip in two million and the Clinton campaign to chip in two million. It's a democratic party problem so I don't really see why the state should have to pay for it.

I listend to State Senator Geller on the radio discuss the situation and YAV describes it exactly as did Geller.

Yav, the Flordia House voted 118-0 on the legislation to move the date up.

What about MI?

Yav, the Flordia House voted 118-0 on the legislation to move the date up.


Republicans fault!


*Sorry Yav, couldn't resist*

There is no call to redo the Florida primary for Republicans - you have your candidate. What is being attempted in Florida is transparent. It is not being done to help the Democrats. It's political grandstanding. Calls for redoing it, without the money to do it.
* * * *

Political grandstanding by whom? Obama? Hillary? The Republicans?

I'd keep your little conspiracy theories to yourself--now that we evil Republicans know how easy it is to throw a big wrench into the Democratic Party plans . . .

Answer the question: can the states themselves decide when to hold their primary elections? Yes or no? Here in Alabama, we moved ours up one week to accommodate Mardi Gras. Should we have gone with a cup in our hand to the DNC to ask their permission?

"Yav, the Flordia House voted 118-0 on the legislation to move the date up."

The date change was attached to a bill to create a paper trail in Florida elections so no one would vote against it. However, I do not blame the Republicans for the situation and really STeve Geller didn't either. We do recognize that it was a stupid idea from the get go.

Fair question, Pirate.


I do remember some scuttlebutt surrounding the move, however my recollection was that the move was voluntary - Michigan seemed willing to test the enforcement of the rules in order to gain what they felt was an influential advantage.

Par for the course for the government in this state at almost all levels - stupid, arrrogant and self-destructive.

There is no call to redo the Florida primary for Republicans - you have your candidate. What is being attempted in Florida is transparent. It is not being done to help the Democrats. It's political grandstanding. Calls for redoing it, without the money to do it.
****

What about MI? Dem Gov there.

"Par for the course for the government in this state at almost all levels - stupid, arrrogant and self-destructive."

Jeff, sorry but Florida is NUMERO UNO in that category.

Jeff, sorry but Florida is NUMERO UNO in that category.


Them's fightin' words, Danni!

I challenge my beer-gut to your mullet any day of the week!

I challenge my Kilpatrick to your Jeb any day of the year!


You ain't got nuthin' on Meeeechigan, girlfriend!

Being a person from PA I would have to agree with JeffJ.

Michigan is much more f-ed up than Florida. Florida definetly seems to have some wierdos but for the most part the economy seems much better than MI.

Not even mentioning better weather and college football!

Not even mentioning better weather and college football!


I agree with most of your comments except for the last.

Florida faced Michigan in a Bowl game following the 2002 and 2007 seasons. Care to guess which team won?

Wow - go do some work, come back and the thread's gone crazy!

Thanks Danni on answering what was going on with the final bill that was voted on. Wisgod misses everything that happened up to that point. Understandable if you weren't living through it. Not to mention how hard the Democrats had been fighting the Jeb "paperless" bullshit. The Dems were outmanuevered and finally had to chose: risk the wrath of the DNC versus losing out on a host of other issues that were critical.

JeffJ - yah, you smartass!! (thanks for the grins this morning)

Back to work for a bit.

Hope everyone's having a good day out there in DR land.

So now I have to accept second rate status even in a competition for most fucked up state. That is par for the course.

Danni gets an FF!


What's truly sad is that your comment is so true - as a Michagander that is very saddening.

So now I have to accept second rate status even in a competition for most fucked up state. That is par for the course.

Posted by danni

Enjoy it while you can.

Sincerely, Wisconsin

As always, Florida wants to make its own rules.

No income tax in Florida right? Sounds pretty good to me!

So? Nevada held their primaries on time.

After the last 7 years, you guys deserve a victory.
Posted by JeffJ at 2008-03-06 08:55 AM


You better check your head out JJ...you may be missing a few screws....something probably fell out.

Howard Dean screwed this thing up. He decide to punish the people of these states instead of the party leaders so we (Democrats) are screwed by our own hand. I understand Howard's point about the rules but the people of Fl, and Mich had no say in this and they are the ones who paid the price. Hillary and Obama both had a chance to stick up for these voters back when the decision was being made and both of them went along with party so they need to be quite. The people of these states have every right to register their complaints but the DNC should find a way to make sure the tax payers dont have to foot the bill for any re-vote that takes place (they should not use the votes that where already cast)

STUART the chances that taxpayers will be stuck with the bill are slim to none. Republican controlled legislature, Republican governor....both giggling at the plight of us Democrats.

yea its a tough spot for us. I feel sorry for the voters of both of those states

"I support a re-vote, which is entirely possible under the rules, and is entirely consistent. What is wrong with that?"

They Broke The Rules !!

They Were Advised 18 Months Prior Not To Change Their Primary Date.

They Wanted To Change The Dates So They Would Have A Greater Impact On The Election.

We Are A Country Of Rules And Laws, The Were Advised That If They Continued On To Have An Earlier Date They Would Not Have Their Delegates Counted.

The Nominees All Agreed Not To Campaign In The 2 States.

(Obama Was Not Even On The Michigan Ballot)

They Held The Primary Earlier Being Fully Aware Of The Consequences !!

Sorry Fuck Them They Broke The Rules After 8 Years Of Bush Doing It Why Should It Be Stood For Now ?

Oh They Are Sounding Off Because It Will Benefit Clinton That Is Why The GOP Governor Is More than Happy To Help His Buddy Out And Michigan's Hillary Supporters !!

-Sarge

That's great Sarge but unfortunately whoever is the nominee will be facing the voters of both of these two states in November....so go ahead...make John McCain's day....punish the voters for the mistakes of the party big shots. See what that gets you.
I can tell you one thing, when I heard about this fiasco several months ago I vowed that I would not contribute a dime to any campaign....I have kept that promise and I was already making small contributions up til that point. I am not alone.

Divide the seats 50-50 in both states and get it over.

Anyone on this blog for Mich or Fl. what do you think ???????

"That's great Sarge but unfortunately whoever is the nominee will be facing the voters of both of these two states in November"

The GOP paid the price and the Delegates were cut in half. The powers that be screwed this up and Rules are Rules, that is like saying:

"They Gave Me A Speeding Ticket And I'll Show Them I'm Going To Stop Driving"

They were warned Danni sorry but they need to vote out there Leadership or Had a Special Election in that 18 Month period of time to do the right thing or get Impeached !!

-Sarge

"Divide the seats 50-50 in both states and get it over."

Be fine with me but Hilary Clinton would never agreee to that.

I live in MI... *and* in the light of full disclosure, I vote republican.

They can have a re-vote, but this is the DNC's mess so they should pay for it. And, what are they going to do about the pepole in the service or who are overseas (absentee balots).

If no re-vote, then pick a point in time and split the delegates in the same proportion as the popular vote in all the priviour primaries.

I don't think splitting it 50-50 would be fair.

It's the states fault for bucking the rules. You break the rules you pay for it. At least that is what we are taught is the proper thing to do.

Unless you are a Clinton and then the rules should change again because it may favor you.

If elections are about the voice of the people, then the voice of the people should be heard. Lots of people went to the trouble of voting in Florida and to tell them their vote doesn't count can be seen as nothing less than an insult to democracy.

In fairness, the Michigan Primary should be a do over, and the ego-maniacs who decided to move up the voting date should be penalized--not the voters of Michigan.

Obama will be President, and I think he'll be one of the best ever. However I don't think he's tough enough to weather the storm of 8 years of republican attacks and be as effective as he'll be 8 years from now. Hillary is as tough and abrasive as they come and with Bill, Obama, and others leading, I think she has the best chance of being the most effective in getting things done in the hate storm to follow the election. In 8 years, the ground work will be laid and Obama can lead more effectively for the next 8.

The only people who will vote for McCain are people who want four more years of Bush policy. If you would vote for McCain over Clinton, you are truly an idiot.

It's the states fault for bucking the rules. You break the rules you pay for it. At least that is what we are taught is the proper thing to do.

Unless you are a Clinton and then the rules should change again because it may favor you.

Posted by bigjohn_1972 at 2008-03-06 03:25 PM


All rights come from the State--even the right to vote.

I think FL and MI are just out of luck. And if I was a voter, I would make sure the state reps would be out of a job as well.

The state reps knew the consequences but they voted for it anyway. They took a gamble and lost. Now they want their money back.

If elections are about the voice of the people, then the voice of the people should be heard. Lots of people went to the trouble of voting in Florida and to tell them their vote doesn't count can be seen as nothing less than an insult to democracy.

----

In the Dem primary, the elections are not about the voice of the people. Hence, the SD's who can override the people.

It's the states fault for bucking the rules. You break the rules you pay for it.


I agree with that but the voters did not make this choice the party and state leaders did. They are the ones who screwed this up not the people of these states. In Clinton's case Mi could easily go for Obama. I don't care about either candidate they had a chance to stick up for the voters back when the decision was made and they went along with it. To me it just seems like B.S. that the people of the states pay the price for a decision they dint make.

"Divide the seats 50-50 in both states and get it over."

Be fine with me but Hilary Clinton would never agreee to that.

Posted by danni

Not only split the delegates but add 313 (FL+MI) to the 2025. Net affect FL/MI get to seat their precious delegates and net sum change to either campaign is zero. If Billery doesn't like it tough shit. One more thing if Obama had the lead in FL/MI this wouldn't be a problem. Barak is above this sort of whiny bullshit. This is what experience gets you: master whiner.

"The state reps knew the consequences but they voted for it anyway."

Since it was attached to the paper trail bill they would have had to have voted against the paper trail in order to oppose changing the date. They were between a rock and a hard place.

The date change was proposed by a Dem. If you bring up the idea, then you are at least partially responsible for it.

And that's just FL.

They were between a rock and a hard place.

Posted by danni at 2008-03-06 03:40 PM |


They didn't have to vote at all. They could have abstained from voting. If enough had abstained from voting on the bill as it was written, they would have to write another bill.

Billyray makes a good point. Whos's really bitching the loudest about this? The voters or Hillary?

To me it is just so obvious who the Republicans want to run against

The republicans will do whatever it takes to get Clinton as the nominee.

I know that the Republicans get blamed on every evil in the world all the way from Katrina to worms in their dogs' stools. But now they are getting blamed for rules the DNC makes and is forcing? Incredible.

Y'all really do need to get a handle on your irrational hatred of the right. It ain't healthy.

BuffaloBob I hadn't considered that option or the option of a fillibuster. I don't really know the rules for the State Senate actually but for whatever reason it was approved. Now we're stuck with a mess in two big states. Seems to me though Florida is the bigger of the two messes because Hilary can claim..."all the candidates were on the ballot" although there was no campaigning allowed and lots of voters stayed home because they were told their vote wouldn't count.
I actually think there is something in the water down here that makes everyone crazy.

"lots of voters stayed home because they were told their vote wouldn't count."

Did they? I thought Florida had a record turnout? How do you figure "lots" stayed home? The numbers dont point to that. Conjecture maybe but has there been any polling done to add credence to that claim?

"Conjecture maybe but has there been any polling done to add credence to that claim?"

I know lots of people who stayed home....including me.

Danni - It makes perfect sense I agree. I just didnt know if anyone had any numbers to back up the claim, like a phone poll or something. The record turnout does hurt that argument.

Really the only fair thing is to have a re-vote, but even that is fishy. Dem Nat Party really screwed this up.

I'm listening right now to Randi Rhodes who is talking to Congressman Wexler from Florida. He says they ought to conduct a meeting between Obama/Clinton/DNC/Florida Dem Committee and tell them....figure out a solution where everyone can be happy. He says they are already having meetings between the FL and MI Committees.
I have a feeling that the big wrench in the works will end up being Hilary Clinton because she is behind and this is really her only hope plus the she did win both states though only her name was on the ballot in MI.

When I heard Hillary include MI and FL in her list of victories, I couldn't believe my ears. I vowed not to vote for her in November when I heard that. Friends have been trying to convince me I must. Must I? I will, but only if there is a revote and she wins fair and square. To claim them as victories now, shows a decided lack of integrity on Hillary's part.

She won Florida in an election that didn't matter. If Hillary gets MI and FL votes without any type of re-vote, THAT'S stealing the election.

What's really a bummer here is that it was the Florida Republican legislature and Republican Governor that set the election date despite Democrat opposition

Dean (and his group), who hate the Clintons, nevertheless contrived to deprive some 1,700,000 Florida Democrats of their vote based on political considerations as he thought the Floridians would support Ms Hillary.

In Florida all of the candidates names remained on the ballot. That some chose not to campaign in Florida was their election.

This entire scenario was a Dean ploy to deprive Ms Hillary of delegate votes. I suspect that the backlash from such exclusion of Florida Democrats from participating in the selection of a candidate, will result in the Republican candidate carrying Florida in the general election, especially if Obama, who dissed them by not seeking their votes, is chosen as nominee. There might just be a mite of resentment.

Seems to me though Florida is the bigger of the two messes because Hilary can claim..."all the candidates were on the ballot" although there was no campaigning allowed and lots of voters stayed home because they were told their vote wouldn't count.
I actually think there is something in the water down here that makes everyone crazy.


Posted by danni at 2008-03-06 03:54 PM | Reply | Flag


People in Florida are still connected to the outside world. If they only base their votes on campaign speeches and TV ads there is a serious problem. People stayed home because--whatever--too bad--it happens every election. People went to the polls--people voted. Hillary and Obama each had a level playing field. Hillary won.

Unless you side with the Establishment and say peoples votes only count when you say they do.

If you say these votes don't count, it should be mandatory that there be an election where their votes do count. Other than that, those votes should count.

I agree that that Florida should have another vote. And they should pay for it, not the DNC.

I am not sure why Obama is so against a re-vote. In the early states alot of Hillary's votes came from early voting, while she still had the big name recognition and Obama wasn't even on the horizon. If Florida and Michigan re-votes then the early voters will be gone. If anyone paid any attention the entire Clinton campaign was based upon getting people to vote early, VERY early, while she was still the presumptive nominee and no-one else had a chance. IMHO a revote in FL and MI would not come out the way Hillary wants it to.

IMHO a revote in FL and MI would not come out the way Hillary wants it to.

Posted by Litlebritdifrnt at 2008-03-06 07:35 PM

There's only one way to know for sure.

They really needed a revote in 2000. I'd have kicked in a buck if everyone else would, to pay for it.

Gee, the Republican Governor of Florida wants the previous primary (that no one campaigned in) to count as that will help McCain. The GOP is drooling at the possibility of running against Hillary, who would most likely lose to McCain because of independents, and who would drag the entire DEM Senate and House tickets down across the country.

They really needed a revote in 2000. I'd have kicked in a buck if everyone else would, to pay for it.

Talk about living in the past . . .

It'd take more than a buck from everyone to resurrect the people who have died since 2000.

And if the results came out differently, what would you do? Have your aliens with their advanced technology (between shifts at the lunar helium mines, of course) spin around the globe at superluminal speeds ala superman and make time go back to 2001 and put Gore in the White House?

Put in two bucks, Buffalo, because you surely aren't going to get mine.

"If you say these votes don't count, it should be mandatory that there be an election where their votes do count. Other than that, those votes should count."

I 100% Dis-Agree

I For One Would Not Take Of From Work To Cast A Vote That Would Mean Nothing. So Not Everyone No Matter How High The Vote Count Was Voted Period !

When You Campaign In A State You Focus On That States Specific Issues Which If You Were Not Allowed to Do Then It Is WRONG.

Ohio And NAFTA Is A Perfect Example, So No These Votes Are No Way Valid.

They Should Not Be Allowed Because The Reason They Wanted To Break The Rules Is They Wanted Recognition As Being The First States To Have Primaries.

Like I Stated No One Likes It When Someone Cuts In Line At The Movies, Disney World, Or The Supermarket, When You Have Patiently Waited Your Turn.

These 2 States Were Warned To Follow The Rules "18 Months Prior" So They Have No Excuse Period !

If There Leadership Screwed They Had More Than Enough Time To Impeach The State Legislators.

Rules Are Rules Sorry.

-Sarge

Put the blame for this fiasco where it belongs, on Howard Dean and the DNC.

Under Republican control, Florida set an early voting date. Dean for his own reasons decided to use this opportunityf to disenfranchise Florida voters. The Florida Democrats were confronted by a fait accompli beyond their ability to change.

Dean then deliberately decided to deprive the Florida Democrats of their right to participate. He did it with the agreement of the DNC. Has anyone asked him "Why?" Yes, why Mr. Dean did you act to deprive Florida Democrats of their vote? This early voting date was something beyond their control, and you decided to deprive them of the vote because of it. Why?

The Democrats are undone by their own devices, hoist on their own petard.

Is this poetic justice, or what?

Sarge

The voters broke no rules. Their votes should count.

Not only are we going to New Hampshire, Tom Harkin, we're going to South Carolina and Oklahoma and Arizona and North Dakota and New Mexico, and we're going to California and Texas and New York ... And we're going to South Dakota and Oregon and Washington and Michigan, and Flor.... (er -- sorry, excuse me)

The voters broke no rules. Their votes should count.

Yeah, bob, but they weren't given the right to have their votes count. Remember your "rights" rant you trot out every so often?

Johnson

We both know this whole thing with FL and MI will end up in the courts. The arrogance of both parties' leaders -- the self-styled party "elite" --evidentally knows no bounds, does it?

Sarge

The voters broke no rules. Their votes should count.

The State Representatives Broke The Rules !!

They Voted Them In And They Are The Voters Voice And They Made The Wrong Call !!

They Should Not Count The Rules Were Set Up And They Broke Them.

Read This Arrogance:

"But in both parties, there's a belief that whatever penalties are meted out will be voided when the conventions gather next summer. The hope is that party leaders will want unity, not division, going into the general election."

-Sarge

Michigan Makes Primary Move Official
The calendar chaos continued today, with Michigan's governor, Jennifer Granholm, signing the legislation to officially move her state's primary to Jan. 15.

"In a statement, Granholm said the early primary will "lead to greater emphasis on issues that matter to all Americans." It will also no doubt bring a greater emphasis on Michigan, which is exactly what she wanted."

Oh Michigan "Is Special" And They Deserve To Break The Rule And Cut In Line !

"Michigan's Issues Are Greater" Than Any Other States Issues, Right !

So Come On Let There Primary Count Triple For Delegates !

-Sarge

Easy for you guys to say that Florida should be forced to revote. How about the absentee ballots? Are you going to try to disenfranchise American servicemen again? How about all the other issues that were up during the primary, not to mention other candidates on the primary ballot, but who lost? Do they all get a second shot? Or are you proposing spending millions of dollars just to get Hillary and Obama out of their little mess, and the votes for every other office and issue stands as originally cast?

The DNC was wrong to say that states can't set their own primary schedule. For that matter, so was the RNC. I've always resented the influence that New Hampshire and Iowa have on the races.

RIR try not to be so obvious. you just want to run against Hill. Obamas name wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan.

How did you become so dishonest?

I'm a rightwing Fascist, obviously. All of us are a bunch of liars. That's how we manage to go through life, just lying to everyone, stealing our money, looting the treasury, destroying the climate, and all the other things you retards actually believe we spend our days doing.

No, Obama has been a stooge for the Democratic National Committee. And Hillary is just as bad, because she agreed not to campaign in those states and then--upon winning them--demanded they be counted.

Hillary Clinton is the most contemptible, horrible figure in American public life. I am one conservative who gives Bill Clinton a pass for everything he did--were I to come home to such a miserable, despicable person every day and every night, I would likely have done some of the same things Bill did. Not with married women, though--and not Monica either. But there but the grace of God go I. Right? Hillary Clinton is an opportunistic whore of the first degree and, if several reports are true, a lesbian besides--so who am I to blame anyone for deciding that a marital relationship with HRC leaves too much to be desired?

No, I actually find your conundrum amusing, and feel it makes for great television. I find it similarly amusing that you Dems have painted yourselves into a nasty corner, having to choose between the horrible, disgusting Hillary, and the biggest question mark in two generations--the Form-Over-Function Obama. And to top it off, you've managed to piss off Democrats in the third and fifth largest states. Too funny.

Hillary Clinton is the most contemptible, horrible figure in American public life

Strewth!

And Karl Rove made her that way.

Just ask Americanunity.

(P.S.---I early-voted for her in the primary down here)

Hillary Clinton is the most contemptible, horrible figure in American public life... such a miserable, despicable person...Hillary Clinton is an opportunistic whore of the first degree...the horrible, disgusting Hillary...

Posted by rightisright


Just to clarify, are you saying you don't like her?

She has her days.

Hillary Clinton is the most contemptible, horrible figure in American public life... such a miserable, despicable person...Hillary Clinton is an opportunistic whore of the first degree...

And still miles better that Bush.

Gawd we're in trouble.

You can't agree with my statement, and then say she's "miles better that (sic) Bush." Because Bush is in American public life, see.

And you're wrong anyhow. She's worse than anyone.

PINCHE

Let's see where I said anything about Karl Rove 'making Hillary that way'.

Karl Rove is the biggest prick/liar/asshole to hit the political scene ... ever.

Wasn't hard to guess you'd be proud that he's one of your own.

" She's worse than anyone."

She couldn't possibly be any worse than George Bush. Seriously, RIR, have you ever seen worse governance than this current crop of idiots? Justice Department officials who can't tell the truth, DHS heads who DKS, and the VP's COS convicted of four felonies protecting the guys who commuted his sentence.

Of course, the Dem leadership is no better. Pelosi & Reid are jagoffs, unable to function under the simplest understanding of how government works. Every time I see either one of them I think three hundred million people, and this is the best we can do?

First time since 1945 that Americans own less than 50% equity in their homes. That Bush, what a president. Be proud Republicans.

Danni,

Bush didn't have that much of a direct effect on home equity. However, the free trade agreements that have been enacted by both sides of the aisle have allowed wages to stagnate in the US to the point where in order to maintain a standard of living the consumer had to tap the credit markets and spend the equity their homes had accumulated.

The arguement that free trade will raise the standard of living for the nations of the world was and still is a lie heaped on the American public. Sure the standard of living will rise is third world nations, but the standard of living in economically developed nations will decrease as manufacturing and good paying jobs are shifted to overseas low wage nations.

As long as credit can be used to maintain the same or marginally better standard of living all will be touted as working. However when the credit that has been used to keep the economy growing dries up then the real problems become apparent.

Throw in an inflation rate much much higher than the government lies are and the problem is exacerbated. But of course debt load doesn't matter now does it? Only when you cannot pay it.

Think foreclosure rates don't matter? It does if you want to refi your mortgage next door to a foreclosure and you find your equity artifically depressed. It also matters when property tax bills on foreclosed properties go unpaid.

"I'm a rightwing Fascist, obviously. All of us are a bunch of liars. That's how we manage to go through life, just lying to everyone, stealing our money, looting the treasury, destroying the climate, and all the other things you retards actually believe we spend our days doing."

Step Back And Ask What Reagan Did?

Is America Better Now Or Worse Since The GOP Has Been In Charge?

1. Unemployment Rate Up

2. Housing Market Fucked

3. Gas Prices Up

4. Cost Of Living Up

5. Deficit Out Of The World

6. Owe China 1 Billion Dollars A Day

7. No Osama Bin Laden

8. Military Overstretched

9. Highest Bankruptcy In History

10. Highest Foreclosure Rate Since The Depression


Sorry But The GOP Has Fucked America

-Sarge

The housing bubble is no more Bush's fault than the tech bubble was Clinton's.

"The housing bubble is no more Bush's fault than the tech bubble was Clinton's."

Absolute baloney. Greenspan held interest rates extremely low and was quoted many times saying he did so specifically to make the Bush tax cuts appear to be stimulating the economy. He felt that a surplus was "dangerous" for the economy and wanted government to increase the deficit....which it did under Bush. So indirectly, Bush is responsible for the bubble which resulted from Greenspan's keeping the interest rates so low. I was screaming this right here five years ago. It was obvious then, it is undeniable now....even by the Bush apologists.

Correction:

5 years ago???

More like 3 years ago.

Rather than blame the national parties, shouldn't equal or greater blame lie with the states' party power structure for unilaterally making the decision to change? The parties reacted to states' decisions... and the Obama/Clinton teams sided with the national party.

That's a huge stretch. The bubble was created by more than just low interest rates.

"The bubble was created by more than just low interest rates."

Baloney. Low interest rates allowed low monthly payments on homes that could never have been purchased with higher interest rates. The bubble was diretly connected to interest rates and burst when rates rose. The blame for the housing bubble lied directly at the feet of Greenspan who was trying to make Bush's tax policies appear sensible.

From the wiki link.

Several economists have argued that the stock market crash, especially in the dot-com and technology sectors, in 2000 and the subsequent 70% (or so) drop of the NASDAQ composite index resulted in many people taking their money out of the stock market and purchasing real estate, which many believed to be a more reliable investment.[11][12][117] Yale economist Robert Shiller argued further that "irrational exuberance" was displaced from the fallen stock market to housing: "Once stocks fell, real estate became the primary outlet for the speculative frenzy that the stock market had unleashed."

Er...Pirate.....ok so the investor buys the house on spec, maybe fixes it us some and then sells it for a big profit....and how did fairly average people buy these homes at these inflated prices......extremely low interest rates. You just proved my point, it all came down to interest rates. THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO BUBBLE WITHOUT EXTREMELY LOW INTEREST RATES. Spin it any way you want but really it comes down to "why????" Why do you want to deflect the blame for the bubble???

PIRATE answer me this....if it wasn't interest rates then why did it burst when the rates went up????

Why pay for the inflated price to begin with? Would you really pay $100,000 more for a condo that just purchased 1 hour ago and had no changes made to it?

I'm not saying interest rates didn't contribute to the problem, I'm saying they were not the sole contribution.

Why did some markets increase like crazy but others did not?

I'm saying the bubble was created by a combo of things with interest rates being one of them.

The decreased interest rates were not due to Bush's tax cuts but because there was a recession caused the tech bubble burst. The air from the tech bubble was just transfered to the housing bubble, so to speak.

Say whatever you want Pirate but the bubble occurred because people could buy houses for far higher prices due to the low payments which low interest rates provided. Sure the rates were initially brought low to combat recession but they were held low to justify the tax cuts, Greenspan himself made comments to that effect. Apparently you have an alterior motive for attempting to rewrite history. The fact of the matter is, there could not have been a real estate bubble without the low interest rates and many people, INCLUDING MYSELF RIGHT HERE ON DRUDGE, said that it was unsustainable at the time, that it was to mask the fact that we never really recovered from the recession and was done simply to provide income to people who were not getting it from wages. It worked, people actually believed the economy was healthy when, in fact, we were still trying to recover from the recession. Jobs creation was far too low, wages were far too stagnant. We see the effects today with the average person in ?America far less well off financially than they were when Bush took office. First time since 1945 that Americans own less than 50% equity in their homes.
65,000 jobs LOST just in the past month.

I agree with that paragraph PIRATE but still, I'm sorry, all of those things....herd psychology, expectation of price increases, promiscuous lenders, 0% down on loans three or four times their incomes.....all based on low interest rates. Lenders didn't worry because "appreciation" insured their risked capital, buyers didn't worry because "appreciation" gave them security even with 0% down.....the thing was though "appreciation" could only occur if buyers could afford the payments for the higher prices....when interest rates rise just one percent payments rise dramatically, with a 3-4 % increase home values had to fall in order for buyers payments to be within a realistic range. Payment amount, not purchase price determines most buyers decision to buy or not to buy. Low interest rates allow low payments even on inflated home prices.

Low interest rates are a powerful engine. I just think a good chunk of people acted like a teenager behind the wheel of a sports cars.

You have to remember, Bush didn't cause people to accept offers that were ridiculously high. If somebody were to offer you 15-20% more for your house than you think it's worth or what you paid for it a year or two ago, are you going to turn them down?

"We tried to get mortgage rates up. We failed. The reason we failed is global forces are overwhelming"

Why couldn't the Fed have just raised interest rates??? As was done later????

Sounds to me that he is trying to deflect blame, understandable.

As he should since the blame lies with Bush, right?

:o)

So Florida and Michigan want to do a bad act by breaking rules and then start name calling when they don't get their way. Such liberals! Anyone see the connection with illegal immigration? Break the rules and then call the other side bad names. Reason number 6,347 while a Democrat should not be president.

"Anyone see the connection with illegal immigration?"

ER...perhaps you have been sleeping for the past seven years but a REpublican has been president and F.Y.I. it is his job to defend the border....but he thought that the immigrants "only do jobs that Americans won't do." So, as you can see, it is RIDICULOUS to be ranting against Democrats in relation to this issue.

Such liberals! Anyone see the connection with illegal immigration? Break the rules and then call the other side bad names. Reason number 6,347 while a Democrat should not be president.
The GOVERNOR is a Republican and he wants all the republican delegates seated also, not the half the the RNC wants to seat. UTASTAFF you are a moron. Learn to read.

No do overs for either party.