HuskyCaucasian Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 A deal has been reached. More to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ May 8, 2008 -> 11:13 AM) A deal has been reached. More to come. Oh my word... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 I assume no deal will be made by the Obama team unless it doesn't really hurt him in the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 8, 2008 Author Share Posted May 8, 2008 Apparently it is 69-59 for Clinton. This via MSNBC, not links I have seen yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ May 8, 2008 -> 05:14 PM) Apparently it is 69-59 for Clinton. This via MSNBC, not links I have seen yet. How does that impact things for Obama? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ May 8, 2008 -> 11:14 AM) Apparently it is 69-59 for Clinton. This via MSNBC, not links I have seen yet. So it changes nothing really. This is quite the joke regardless. Ten whopping delegates Hillary. Go home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 8, 2008 Author Share Posted May 8, 2008 QUOTE (Steve9347 @ May 8, 2008 -> 10:15 AM) So it changes nothing really. This is quite the joke regardless. Ten whopping delegates Hillary. Go home. I think this is part of the "peace making" between Clinton and Obama so she will drop out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 Any "deal" that seats delegates at anything other than 50-50 from Michigan is a slap to the face of Democratic voters in the other 49 states. What a joke. Clinton was the only one on the f***ing ballot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ May 8, 2008 -> 10:18 AM) Any "deal" that seats delegates at anything other than 50-50 from Michigan is a slap to the face of Democratic voters in the other 49 states. What a joke. Clinton was the only one on the f***ing ballot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heads22 Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 Or, you know, they could just not seat them as Michigan broke the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 Clinton did get 55% of the vote, so I can understand getting a small bonus for that. A 10 delegate boost would be fine, I still think that the total number of delegates should be halved, however, and Michigan superdelegates should not be seated. I can understand not punishing the at large state party for the sins of the party bosses... but giving those party bosses who broke the rules their votes back at the convention seems wrong to me IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ May 8, 2008 -> 11:21 AM) Clinton did get 55% of the vote And Obama wasn't on the ticket. I don't see the fairness that she should get an advantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 So if it is 69-59, how does that impact the delegate race? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 I'm just not happy with changing the rules in mid stream. I am also not happy with delegates not having their voices heard. So there was no win anywhere that I saw. Those that followed Michigan closer please chime in but, it seems like Michigan would have been a Clinton state and in a straight up, "normal" primary, it would be fair to say at that point in the campaign she would have won. I know that you could not point to anything to "prove" that statement, JMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 8, 2008 Author Share Posted May 8, 2008 I am hoping I didnt over state this as fact. I cant find any other info on this and MSNBC has moved on to other stories. I hope it wasnt a "speculation" report and I missed the part where they said that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 My feelings are that the Dems are trying to get Obama to the required amount of delegates prior to the convention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 But if you count the Michigan delegates, the number to reach the nomination just went up from 2,025 to ????. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 Exactly. The amazing thing is, this actually hurts Hillary. Because his margin ahead of her is so big compared to the amount of delegates left, all this does is move it closer to completion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 QUOTE (Texsox @ May 8, 2008 -> 09:28 AM) I'm just not happy with changing the rules in mid stream. I am also not happy with delegates not having their voices heard. So there was no win anywhere that I saw. Those that followed Michigan closer please chime in but, it seems like Michigan would have been a Clinton state and in a straight up, "normal" primary, it would be fair to say at that point in the campaign she would have won. I know that you could not point to anything to "prove" that statement, JMO Here's the one big issue and big reason for allowing them in...November. If you're going to put a middle finger to Michigan and Florida in the spring, then why shouldn't they do the same to your party in the fall? That's 95% of the motivation for getting something done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 8, 2008 Author Share Posted May 8, 2008 QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 8, 2008 -> 10:33 AM) But if you count the Michigan delegates, the number to reach the nomination just went up from 2,025 to ????. with MI it is 2088 with FL it is 2180.5 if my numbers are right That doesn't factor in Superdelegates from those states that I THINK dont count currently Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 8, 2008 -> 10:33 AM) But if you count the Michigan delegates, the number to reach the nomination just went up from 2,025 to ????. Huh, well was it even possible to reach the delegate number? How was that numebr set? I know Edwards got some delegates but he get that many? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 8, 2008 Author Share Posted May 8, 2008 I think this may be a non-story. MSNBC isnt talking about it anymore and I would think this would be a MUCH bigger story if it were true. Nothing on Huffington Post, TalkingPointsMemo, or Politco. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 When I was watching the news this morning it sounded like they said they were working on a possible deal similar to what you said. They didn't actually say a deal was reached though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted May 8, 2008 Author Share Posted May 8, 2008 (edited) More info on MSNBC right now. This is a PROPOSED deal by the democratic party of Michigan. Nothing official from either campaign, but their seems to be good support from BOTH sides for this deal. The person from Michigan being interviewed seemed VERY optimistic this would happen soon. Edited May 8, 2008 by Athomeboy_2000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 This is different from the original position that Obama opposed isn't it? In Florida, I can't see anything short of a revote solving that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts