Clinton Desperate to Count Votes, Compares Fla. Primary to Zimbabwe
(CBS)
SUNRISE, FLA. -- Desperate to get attention for her cause to seat Florida and Michigan delegates, Hillary Clinton compared the plight of Zimbabweans in their recent fraudulent election to the uncounted votes of Michigan and Florida voters saying it is wrong when “people go through the motions of an election only to have them discarded and disregarded.”
“We’re seeing that right now in Zimbabwe," Clinton explained. "Tragically, an election was held, the president lost, they refused to abide by the will of the people,” Clinton told the crowd of senior citizens at a retirement community in south Florida.
“So we can never take for granted our precious right to vote. It is the single most important, privilege and right any of us have, because in that ballot box we are all equal. You’re equal to a billionaire. You’re equal to the president, every single one of us.”
In just one day, Clinton has used a variety of arguments to convince her party to seat Florida and Michigan delegates, going as far as comparing the struggles of the voters in Florida and Michigan to those of abolitionists, suffragists, to the plight of Zimbabweans. Clinton even warned that if a resolution is not reached, Democrats in these two states would feel abandoned and likely jump ship to Republican John McCain.
“I think people across Florida and Michigan are thinking to themselves, ‘Well if the Democrats don’t want my vote, maybe John McCain and the Republicans do?’ We can’t let that happen,” she told the small crowd .
Clinton pointed out that unlike the Republicans, the Democrats have not been able to solve the Florida issue in a timely fashion saying, “We have allowed ours to go on.”
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 129 CommentsJMHO.
It is a global shame to Americans.
For those who forget about people''s right of MI and FL and keep on attacking Hillary, shame to you because you are so misleading that you forget the civil rights of person!
We should stand by those who are fighting for the poeple''s rights no matter who they are.
You must have lost your mind that while millions of voters are screwed and yet you only see Hillary and not the people.
SHAME!
do we want someone in the white house that will throw a ***-fit
- like this ?
it is no longer a contest
it hasn''t been one for some time
it''s someone not getting their way
&
the Aftermath
she doesn''t give a *** about
Now the fanatics want to go to show biz and promote a star to the top post of the country.
Give me a break! It is not amusing but humiliating to the country.
Afghanistan gaffe, 57 states, Bitterness of people as reasons to go to church, Staying in the church for 20 years who preach hateful and racist messages while the country are taking strides in coalition.
''Out of touch'' in a grand scale. I am surprised people of bragging quality can be allowed to go so far. There is no party to speak for the poor, the working class.
Edwards, the backstabber of the candidate receiving the votes of the poor and the working class.
BO the one who gets most of the votes of the affluent. Edwards endorse BO; he is such a hypocrite.
The biggest lie from BO is about his mum using food stamp. The media did not even cover it fairly.
1.This is a private political primary-THUS, cannot be compared to popular suffrage fraud, in 2000, and recent Zimbabwee election)
2.YOU were largely responsible for the alleged "DISENFRANCHISEMENT" of
Floridians
3.You degrade Women''s fight for suffrage by comparing a primary vote deprivation to electoral votes
4.You are DESTROYING the party by your RACE-BAITING, GENDER-SPLITTING, DIVISIVE tactics
5.You are leading this country to a dangerous level of racial tension, that may imperil your own physical safety and this country''s stability.
I live in Michigan & I knew full-well that the elected officials screwed up here - they should pay with their jobs, but the votes shouldn''t be counted. There is no "fair" way to do it at this point in time. A revote may be the closest thing to fair - but too much has happened and we''ve lost candidates that were in the race when the voting should have taken place. Plus - Obama wasn''t even on the ticket here.
If they want to be fair - get rid of the officials that screwed things up for us. If she wants our votes to count - she can finance a revote in the two states or agree to split things 50/50.
Because BO and his campaign suggest to split delegates evenly.
Does democracy means anything to BO & company.
Does "for the people, of the people, and by the people" mean anything to the BO fanatics.
They would rather stay on personal attack and character assassination; those trickes used in Bush''s play book.
BARACK OBAMA WATCH YOUR BACK.
And worse than being absurd, she''s being actively destructive by going out of the way to effectively tell the people of Florida and Michigan that if she doesn''t get the nomination that the Democratic party has rejected them, and they ought to vote for McCain.
Of course, what''s really happened is that she had every advantage in the contest and now that she''s lost the contest by running an arrogant, misguided and badly executed campaign, she''s grasping at the only chance that she''s got to possibly win, no matter how unlikely, and no matter how destructive it is to the Democratic party.
If she''s smart, she''ll shift gears after the last primary, and campaign actively for Obama in order to try to undo the damage that she''s done, and then focus on being a great Senator.
And worse than being absurd, she''s being actively destructive by going out of the way to effectively tell the people of Florida and Michigan that if she doesn''t get the nomination that the Democratic party has rejected them, and they ought to vote for McCain.
Of course, what''s really happened is that she had every advantage in the contest and now that she''s lost the contest by running an arrogant, misguided and badly executed campaign, she''s grasping at the only chance that she''s got to possibly win, no matter how unlikely, and no matter how destructive it is to the Democratic party.
If she''s smart, she''ll shift gears after the last primary, and campaign actively for Obama in order to try to undo the damage that she''s done, and then focus on being a great Senator.
There was a precedent case of New Hampshire.
The worst thing about a rule is double standard.
Apply the rule to New Hampshire to MI and FL, we shall all rest in peace.
If there is someone stands for justice. It is fine with me. The point is let people''s voices be heard and count people''s votes fairly.
The fundamentals of democracy is at stake and many fanatics are just drilling on personal attacks. Educated, you are not.
Do we really want this kind of person as President of the United States? Ambition is one thing, but this sort of behavior is unseemly and unattractive in a Presidential candidate.
IT''S
NOT
HAPPENEING!!!!!!!
Stay on the civil right of the people in FL and MI. This is a bigger issue than Hillary. If Hillary is speaking out for the people, it is fine and backstabbing her to sidestep the issue is wrong.
It''s people''s rights which is above everything and anyone. BO took down efforts for revote and he showed us that he is against the people and go hunting for delegates only.
We want the one who speak out for the people; not the one who screw the people. Stay on the big issue please!
Come on, even for her that''s one ignorant remark.
Perhaps Senator Clinton''s attention to this problem will also encourage the DNC to consider revising their primary election process to prevent this kind of thing from happening in other states in the future.
1. Did Hillary know ahead of time that Florida and Michigan were going to lose their delegates? If so, then why did she wait until now to "advocate" for the disenfranchised?
2. Is it unfair to suggest that these elections were popularity polls, not true political, democratic competitions?
3. Doesn''t Hillary know that in Florida, the millions that came out to vote were not driven by her campaign, but by EXTREMELY important ballot initiatives that were on the ballot and drove up the number of voters?
4. At what point did Hillary decide that it would be the popular vote, and not the delegate count that would decide the nomination? Was she not aware of the agreed upon rules of the Democratic Party? Why not "advocate" earlier?Is there a pattern here? Yes. This has nothing to do with the disenfranchised. You are just pawns. The real truth is that Hillary will win by any means necessary...even if it means changing the rules and misleading the public regarding her motives. What a LOW view of the electorate.
1. Did Hillary know ahead of time that Florida and Michigan were going to lose their delegates? If so, then why did she wait until now to "advocate" for the disenfranchised?
2. Is it unfair to suggest that these elections were popularity polls, not true political, democratic competitions?
3. Doesn''t Hillary know that in Florida, the millions that came out to vote were not driven by her campaign, but by EXTREMELY important ballot initiatives that were on the ballot and drove up the number of voters?
4. At what point did Hillary decide that it would be the popular vote, and not the delegate count that would decide the nomination? Was she not aware of the agreed upon rules of the Democratic Party? Why not "advocate" earlier?Is there a pattern here? Yes. This has nothing to do with the disenfranchised. You are just pawns. The real truth is that Hillary will win by any means necessary...even if it means changing the rules and misleading the public regarding her motives. What a LOW view of the electorate.
1. Did Hillary know ahead of time that Florida and Michigan were going to lose their delegates? If so, then why did she wait until now to "advocate" for the disenfranchised?
2. Is it unfair to suggest that these elections were popularity polls, not true political, democratic competitions?
3. Doesn''t Hillary know that in Florida, the millions that came out to vote were not driven by her campaign, but by EXTREMELY important ballot initiatives that were on the ballot and drove up the number of voters?
4. At what point did Hillary decide that it would be the popular vote, and not the delegate count that would decide the nomination? Was she not aware of the agreed upon rules of the Democratic Party? Why not "advocate" earlier?Is there a pattern here? Yes. This has nothing to do with the disenfranchised. You are just pawns. The real truth is that Hillary will win by any means necessary...even if it means changing the rules and misleading the public regarding her motives. What a LOW view of the electorate.
Posted by Anette_Ohio at 08:08 PM : May 21, 2008
_________________
There is no reasonable explanation for the women.
Posted by Anette_Ohio at 08:08 PM : May 21, 2008
_____________
There is no reasonable explanation for Hillary is what I mean.
Posted by Anette_Ohio at 08:08 PM : May 21, 2008
_____________
There is no reasonable explanation for Hillary is what I mean.
You can tell because Obama has been in power in Fla for decades years and his government thugs are rounding up CLinton supporters and beating and torturing them.
[sarcasm off]
Talk about grasping at straws.
Pretty soon you''ll catch her tearing up Obama''s signs off of peoples lawns.
Democracy is at stake when people''s rights of vote for nomination are denied. No issue is bigger than that.
The fact is that BO suggested to split the delegates evenly and it is wrong and is a violation to the basic principle of democracy.
We should stay on the main issue that the rule that applies to New Hampshire are not the same in MI and FL and millions voters there are victimized for party politics and we should root for them for justice.
Keep the personal assault to yourself. We want justice and democracy.
1)Caucus turns win of primary (1 person 1 vote) into loss (e.g. Texas)
TEXAS PRIMARY
Candidate Votes Vote% P.Deleg
Clinton 1,459,814 51% 65
Obama 1,358,785 47% 61
4 points win of Clinton
A gain of 4 pledged delegates to Clinton
TEXAS CAUCAS
Candidate Votes Vote% P.Deleg
Obama 23,918 56% 38
Clinton 18,620 44% 29
12 points loss of Clinton
A loss of 9 pledged delegates to Obama
2) caucus blows up winning margin of primary unproportionally ( 6 times)
WASHINGTON PRIMARY
Candidate Votes Vote% P.Deleg
Obama 339,166 51%
Clinton 303,151 46%
6 points win of Obama
WASHINGTON CAUCAS
Candidate Votes Vote% P.Deleg
Obama 21,629 68% 59
Clinton 9,992 31% 31
37 points win of Obama
3) caucus biases against working class, the elders, the hands-to-mouth and favour colledge kids and the affluent with ample spare time.
4) votes per delegate
Alaska
Candidate Votes Vote% P.Deleg
Obama 6,674 75% 9
Clinton 2,194 25% 4
A win of 4,480 votes
A win of 5 pledged delegates
West Virginia
Candidate Votes Vote% P.Deleg
Clinton 239,298 67% 20
Obama 91,747 26% 8
A win of 147551 votes
A win of 12 pledged delegates
The votes per delegate does not add up right.
People grow up mature and be better.
Injustice exists and lingers.
1. Michigan and Florida broke the rules. Rules that Clinton had agreed to.
2. She signed of on NOT counting the votes in both states.
3. Now that she needs the votes she is demanding that the rules be changed.
4. Obama''s name was NOT on the ballot in Michigan giving Clinton ALL the votes.
5. She gave her word and now wants to go back on it. Haven''t we had enough of this kind of politics?
The only just way to reseat the delegates is to redo the process, and do a revote. As it stands, Barak Obama abided by the rules of the committee, Clinton did not. Both of them agreed to those rules.
To reward the party officials in those two states by counting the states as is, esp. given the issue in MI., is foolish, at best.
You want to complain about democracy being in peril? Democracy in peril would be if these two states were seated, as is, despite bucking the will of the majority. They knew the cost of pushing their primaries up. They chose that action.
They should not be rewarded, with an as is seating of their delegates.
SORE LOSER.
plain, simple and increasingly pathetic (and to think I voted this person into a senate seat...fool me once...)
That is something I''ll be very interested in seeing in future elections of hers-- how much has her thinly-veiled racism, divisive politics, and blatant dishonesty injured her as a politician?
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 129 Comments