To: COUNTrecount
Considering how much Maalox the “super delegates” are going to be chugging down....I do wish I'd had the foresight to buy stock in this pharmaceutical (!) company!
To: COUNTrecount
If the NYT can only find a way to keep Florida and Michigan from voting in November their thesis is sound.
Again, Facts get in the way of NYT wishes.
3 posted on
05/19/2008 4:47:27 PM PDT by
plangent
To: COUNTrecount
“Always there must be two [Democrat front runners] ... no more, no less”
5 posted on
05/19/2008 4:50:36 PM PDT by
ROTB
(Our Constitution [is] for a [Christian] people. It is wholly inadequate [for] any other. -John Adams)
To: COUNTrecount
Hillery! grasping at straws.
However Oboma has much to learn.
Yet Mr. Obama does not plan to declare outright victory, his advisers say, because he does not want to appear to be pushing Mrs. Clinton out of the race.
6 posted on
05/19/2008 4:52:02 PM PDT by
tet68
( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
To: COUNTrecount
Uh, you do realize that the ONLY way that you can get a Klintoon popular vote lead is to give Hitlery ALL the votes from Michigan while giving Obama ZERO, plus ignoring the votes of IA, NV, ME, and WA.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html
To: COUNTrecount
Obama was not even on the Michigan ballot, but Hillary was. Therefore, of course Hillary got more ‘popular votes’ in Michigan than Obama. Obama got ZERO!
9 posted on
05/19/2008 5:20:24 PM PDT by
Yo-Yo
(USAF, TAC, 12th AF, 366 TFW, 366 MG, 366 CRS, Mtn Home AFB, 1978-81)
To: COUNTrecount
How, exactly, can they justify including Michigan in her totals when she was the only one on the ballot and 45% of the people chose “None of the above”. I bet at least 20% of those who did vote for her only did it because they felt an uncommitted vote was pointless.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson