Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register

Breakdown.

“Frustrated supporters of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton are planning multiple rallies at the Democratic convention in Denver, coupled with television and print advertisements. The disenchanted Democrats want to express their disappointment with the party’s presidential primary process.” [The Hill]

By:           Andrew Belonksy
On:           Aug 11, 2008
Tagged: , , ,
  • 8 Comments
    • erik11
      erik11

      Thats it…leave the Republicans something to point at and say “they have no cohesion”

      Dumb.

      Aug 11, 2008 at 11:08 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • emb
      emb

      They really need to stop complaining about the “process” being to blame for their candidate’s defeat. Hillary didn’t get enough votes to win the nomination because she didn’t convince as many people to vote for her as Obama did. I believe he convinced somewhere north of 18 million, if I recall correctly…

      Please people, quit the temper tantrum and grow up. (I am now prepared to be thoroughly flamed by grumpy hillaryites who don’t understand that “democracy” is not defined as “hillary gets whatever she wants.”)

      Aug 11, 2008 at 11:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alan down in Florida
      Alan down in Florida

      Yes Obama got more votes – winning all sorts of traditionally red states all of which current polling show will be carried by McCain in Novemeber. In the key swing states, all of which were carried by Hillary in the primaries, Obama is struggling and losing ground.

      Sounds an awful lot like buyer’s remorse to me.

      Aug 11, 2008 at 12:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan
      Ryan

      Yes. How dare Obama win in “red states”? Everybody knows that Democrats and independents in “red states” don’t matter. Or maybe, just maybe, the “red state” meme is a pile of crap. Maybe, it’s more nuanced than that and the TWO state strategy that Dems have been employing for the past two presidential elections (you know, the ones the Republicans won) doesn’t work. This map suggests that to be true:
      http://www.purplestates.org/

      Furthermore, anyone who agrees with the argument that Hillary was somehow “cheated” by the very primary rules that she knew *going in* to the election would be an awful person to play Monopoly with… “Wait a minute, you mean the person with the most money, property and hotels wins? That’s not fair! I thought the object was to be the person with the SECOND-most money, property, and hotels.” Person then turns over the playing board and throws a fit.

      Suffice it to say – and it’s been said on this site before – that if Hillary had won the nomination, there would be no expression of “disappointment with the party’s presidential primary process.” Nope, the process would have been just fine, thank you very much.

      Aug 11, 2008 at 2:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • L
      L

      Get the water cannons ready.

      Aug 11, 2008 at 3:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Adam
      Adam

      What exactly is their complaint? That Idaho matters, too? These people need to remember that she was the *establishment* candidate. The establishment they’re protesting is the same one that declared her inevitable in late 2006.

      Aug 11, 2008 at 3:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • emb
      emb

      Thing is, Alan, the “red state/blue state” thing doesn’t fly in primaries: it’s all (and mostly only) Democrats voting, and then only Democrats who vote in primaries. So a victory in Alabama or Pennsylvania doesn’t mean hooey with regard to the general election, when a bunch more people come out to vote. Hillary’s swing-state wins just mean that primary-voting Democrats in those states voted for her; Obama’s red-state wins just mean that primary-voting Democrats in those states voted for him. No less, no more. They’re equally valuable, because they equally contribute to the selection of a party nominee, and that’s all they do. They do not predict November’s voting pattern.

      Aug 11, 2008 at 7:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • seitan-on-a-stick
      seitan-on-a-stick

      An Unscientific Presidential POLL (kinda like Fox)

      [ ] McCain is this year’s Bob Dole

      [ ] Obama is the “Black” John Kerry

      [ ] McCain will pick Condi as Veep for Checkmate

      [ ] Obama will be a Bill Clinton two-termer

      [ ] McCain will be like Papa Bush’s third term of Reagan

      [ ] Obama will be ousted by Big Oil in one term

      [ ] Bush will declare Martial Law to stay in Office

      [ ] Obama will have an Affair in Office

      [ ] Bill Clinton will hit on Michelle Obama

      [ ] Hillary will run for President in 2012

      [ ] McCain will Die in Office

      [ ] Al Gore will return to complete his 2000 elected term as a result of civil unrest

      [ ] Paris Hilton’s Thong will Run Up her Ass

      Multiple answers allowed (and encouraged!)

      Aug 11, 2008 at 7:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • QUEERTY DAILY

     


    POPULAR ON QUEERTY


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.