What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
527 Comments
- Bowie, on 04/25/2008, -14/+252Oops.. Math bug. She would have to win by 69% vs. 31%. Even still, absolutely impossible.
(..hey, at least I didn't "misspeak"..lol..) - jbdobd, on 04/25/2008, -8/+211Hillary's numbers are no more honest than her words:
POPULAR VOTE numbers...
- Without MI/FL: Obama: 14,447,566 Clinton: 13,965,192
- With FL, but NOT MI: Obama: 15,016,607 Clinton: 14,822,400
- With MI/FL, including "uncommitted" for Obama: Obama: 15,254,369 Clinton: 15,150,551
- With MI/FL, giving Obama 0 in MI and Clinton 328,000-plus (the only metric which gives her a lead): Clinton: 15,150,551 Obama: 15,016,607 - Bowie, on 04/25/2008, -55/+228In order to win the nomination, this woman would need to win by a 38% margain in every remaining primary... That means the turnout would have to be 88% Clinton vs 12% Obama, in every single contest. Why the HELL is she continuing this?
- JlmAWP, on 04/25/2008, -4/+170I just cannot get passed the fact that she (and the media) are actually counting the popular vote of a state where Obama WAS NOT ON THE BALLOT. If a grilled cheese sandwich had been on the ballot, it would have gotten more votes than him, since, you know, he WAS NOT ON THE BALLOT. I wish my imagination was that creative.
I'm hoping that somebody, some extra-special person in the MSM will see those caps and actually absorb them. Then, they could...I don't know....repeat it on the air. I think....yeah, that would be called "reporting." Not sure though, haven't seen much of it lately to compare. - mikestone1783, on 04/25/2008, -6/+144She is running for president where trust and respectability are important. This stunt shows she has neither.
- Gabberwok, on 04/25/2008, -5/+134Um, wouldn't that be a 76% margin? You're not supposed to double it. It's 50 ± 19%, not 50 ± 38%. A 38% margin would be 69% to 31% - still ridiculous, but nowhere near what you said.
- Bigzz, on 04/25/2008, -5/+104I thought that you couldn't serve as President if you were clinically insane?
- Binarydemon, on 04/25/2008, -4/+76Ask Al Gore how useful the popular vote is...
- tcbishop12, on 04/25/2008, -2/+67Narcissism and selfish ambition. The only big ideas behind mad Hillary's campaign today is a thirst for power that all the Gatorade in Texas and Florida can't quench.
- BinaryDelt, on 04/25/2008, -3/+632012. Set Obama up for failure in '08, run in 2012. She only cares about being President, not the party or the country.
- Bilabrin, on 04/25/2008, -2/+54It might take a village to raise a child but it only takes one selfish shrew to ruin our chance to put a democrat in the White House in 2009.
- AndrewDB, on 04/25/2008, -6/+51Pathological liars, or "mythomaniacs," may be suffering from histrionic personality disorder or narcissistic personality disorder. The following comments basically reflect a pathological liar who has the characteristics of histrionic personality disorder.
Some characteristics:
1. Exaggerates things that are ridiculous.
2. One-upping. Whatever you do, this person can do it better. You will never top them in their own mind, because they have a concerted need to be better than everyone else. This also applies to being right. If you try to confront an individual like this, no matter how lovingly and well-intentioned you might be - this will probably not be effective. It's threatening their fantasy of themselves, so they would rather argue with you and bring out the sharp knives than admit that there's anything wrong with them.
3. They "construct" a reality around themselves. They don't value the truth, especially if they don't see it as hurting anyone. If you call them on a lie and they are backed into a corner, they will act very defensively and say ugly things (most likely but depends on personality), but they may eventually start to act like, "Well, what's the difference? You're making a big deal out of nothing!" (again, to refocus the conversation to your wrongdoing instead of theirs).
4. Because these people don't value honesty, a lot of times they will not value loyalty. So watch what you tell them. They will not only tell others, but they will embellish to make you look worse. Their loyalty is fleeting, and because they are insecure people, they will find solace in confiding to whomever is in their favor at the moment.
5. They may be somewhat of a hypochondriac. This can come in especially useful when caught in a lie, for example, they can claim that they have been sick, or that there's some mysteriously "illness" that has them all stressed out. It's another excuse tool for their behavior.
6. Obviously, they will contradict what they say. This will become very clear over time. They usually aren't smart enough to keep track of so many lies (who would be?).
* They lie about even the smallest things. For example, saying "I brushed my teeth today," when they didn't.
* They add exaggerations to every sentence.
* They change their story all the time.
* They act very defensively when you question their statements.
* They believe what they say is true, when everyone else knows it isn't.
Here's an alternate "checklist":
* Lies when it is very easy to tell the truth.
* Lies to get sympathy, to look beter, to save their butt, etc.
* Fools people at first but once they get to know him, no one believes anything they ever say.
* May have a personality disorder.
* Extremely manipulative.
* Has been caught in lies repeatedly.
* Never fesses up to the lies.
* Is a legend in their own mind.
----
Gee, does this sound like anyone we know? - apec766, on 04/25/2008, -0/+40You DO realize that the Democratic party flat out stated that Michigan and Florida primaries would not count... right?
- smacksaw, on 04/25/2008, -3/+39This should not be a surprise. She is going to say anything she wants. She already knows no one trusts or believes her. Her words are for the people who don't care about the facts or truth, to keep them interested in her for purely illogical reasons.
It's going to get worse. She is going to say and do even more outrageous things as this goes on. That is why Dean is begging the superdelegates to weigh in now. She is already threatening and blackmailing people behind the scenes. These threats will come to fruition if she has a chance to let them unfold. If it ends now, she can't play her final trump cards.
You can't imagine the sort of pressure her backers have on her and the promises she made to get their support and money. She's all-in and going for broke. - pojut, on 04/25/2008, -0/+33Actually, he removed himself from the ballot because BOTH of them agreed not to campaign there because they KNEW that the delegates/votes wouldn't count. He did it to show his acceptance of the DNC's ruling. Clinton agreed to the rulings, yet still campaigned in Florida and kept her name on both ballots.
No political agenda behind it, no closed-door agreement, nothing. All out in the open, fully disclosed and public. Florida and Michigan have no one to blame but their own state leaders. They knew the rules. They agreed to follow the rules. They broke the rules. Plain and simple. - Enron1985, on 04/25/2008, -3/+34Ummm, isn't having a "***** alert" in regards to politics a bit of a lost cause?
- wacki, on 04/25/2008, -0/+31Dugg for the grilled cheese sandwich
- Gabberwok, on 04/25/2008, -5/+34However, functionally retarded is perfectly acceptable (apparently).
- aliengoods, on 04/25/2008, -2/+31And that's without adjusting for the number of people caucusing for Obama. Remember, the caucus count is far less than the raw number of people who caucused for him.
- eliot2000, on 04/25/2008, -5/+31Why is she continuing? The HRC campaign is deep in the red. If the campaign were to close up shop now, they still owe money, including $5Million to HRC herself. Instead of bowing out gracefully, they're scrabbling furiously to project the illusion that she is still a legitimate candidate, and the campaign in turning around- shouting about how everyone has been donating like crazy, and asking for more. It's not about winning anymore- it's about paying the check.
- ChromaticDragon, on 04/25/2008, -0/+25He "took himself off" largely because of their mutual agreement not to campaign in Michigan and Florida.
You should reflect on the fact that for this to backfire on Obama would require all parties to acquiese to pressure to flout the DNC rulings on the sheninagins of Michigan and Florida. Furthermore, as others have already shown, you'd have to give ZERO votes from Michigan to Obama to conclude Clinton is truly in the lead of the popular vote.
But all this ignores how messed up the voting in Florida and Michigan was. Nobody should take those contests seriously. The impact on turnout, voting, etc., was hugely affected by the realization it didn't matter.
Stop and think. Do we want someone in the White House who willfully schemes around and generally ignores rules and laws? Or someone who abides by and executes the laws?
People in Michigan and Florida have every right to be angry, but not at Obama. The DNC maybe. Their state legislators, absolutely. But not the candidates.
Where this will "backfire" on Obama, unfortunately, is that this mess all but guarantees his loss of Florida in the general election. - Observer001, on 04/25/2008, -2/+26I respect your willingness to admit fault. Enjoy another digg!
- SickMonkey, on 04/25/2008, -4/+28Clinton is full of *****. How she has the audacity to first formally accept the DNC rules on FL and MI and then completely flip after the fact is beyond me.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=8wX99qUo3Ow - smacksaw, on 04/25/2008, -0/+23She has to let it run it's course or she will be rendered impotent. She's not just fighting for the presidency, she's fighting for her Senate seat and her husband's legacy. This is a referendum on her at this point. She is vulnerable. The party could easily push competitors for her seat in the Senate, people who are/would be loyal to Obama or the DNC. She has flown in the face of the party leadership. Right now she is negotiating her security by playing tough.
This has nothing to do with the election anymore and everything to do with what her role is, post-primaries. By backing off, she is trying to guarantee her spot as a power broker in the Senate...or even a spot there in the future. She has really screwed herself. - Bowie, on 04/25/2008, -2/+25Ding ding ding..!
Thank you. :) - ScienceDoc, on 04/25/2008, -4/+26Maniacal! Can someone put her in a padded room and tell her she lost?
- iheartboobs, on 04/25/2008, -3/+24I'd vote for McCain over Hillary. I vote for what's best for my country not for the candidate with the closest political beliefs. Her truth bending politics would be just as bad for this country as George W's.
- Gabberwok, on 04/25/2008, -1/+21It's alright - after North Carolina & Indiana, there's a good chance she'll need >100% of the remaining vote to get the pledged delegate lead. O:-)
- smurfz, on 04/25/2008, -3/+23bitch is nuts
- Cattywampus, on 04/25/2008, -0/+20(..hey, at least I didn't "misspeak"..lol..)
Maybe you just temporarily misremembered. ;-) - smacksaw, on 04/25/2008, -1/+20That's 5 days. Her campaign is $2mil per day just to run and that does not include her debts nor people still waiting to be paid.
- MaximusD, on 04/25/2008, -0/+18Andrew Jackson fought people to the death with pistols on the White House lawn. And carried out genocide. We've definitely had some crazy leaders in our past.
- yunus, on 04/25/2008, -6/+24"being statistically impossible for her to win"
Thats just a false statement. It is NOT impossible for her to win. Yes the sun and moon need to line up properly and she has to get a ridiculous percent of the votes in the remaining states but its NOT statistically impossible. If your going to post an article about how someone is skewing the facts to their side, then at least be accurate in what you say. - Bowie, on 04/25/2008, -3/+21I'm just astounded sometimes.. After 7 and a half years of this same *****, it's like everyones nostrils have gotten used to the smell..Well, mine haven't.
It is NOT too much to ask that our ***** elected officials have at least some semblance of dignity, and refuse to put personal ambition ahead of the truth. The problem is, the outflow rate of ***** so high that the "Hey, wait a minute.. that's *****!" just goes completely overwhelmed, drowned out, reduced to meaningless background noise. The common sense of individuals gets lumped together with sour grapes, fanaticism, partisanship and "the usual criticism of any elected official".
Inert and voiceless is precisely what they want you to be. As I see it, you have an obligation as an American to call ***** when you see it. At least we still have the right to do that much. - dkitch, on 04/25/2008, -5/+22But...but...look, I've got a picture of him in traditional Islamic clothes, guys!!! He can't win!!! He's not American!!!
*rolls eyes*
Anyone who runs as a party's candidate, but is willing to try to win at the expense of their party, doesn't deserve to run. End of story - smacksaw, on 04/25/2008, -0/+16I knew after I typed that someone was going to say that, LOL!
With her debts, I meant the money she personally loaned the campaign and the people waiting to be paid are her creditors.
My bad. - kipmartin, on 04/25/2008, -1/+17you really should read up on what transpired in MI and FL. your understanding of the situation is lacking and kind of goes a long way towards proving you are not the brightest bulb on the tree.
both Hillary and Obama signed and agreed to NOT count either state BEFORE the primaries. both states wanted their 15 minutes of fame by moving their primaries up. the DNC said 'No!', and both Hillary and Obama were on board with that decision. now, Hillary has decided to count those votes. they are not her votes, they never will be--the DNC and courts have said the votes wont be counted. end of story. yet Hillary is using those states' numbers and the MSM is, for some reason, being particularly retard and going along with it. i believe they want a protracted and suspense-filled convention to keep their Nielsens and other ratings up, so they are going with it. or maybe its more insidious than that. i dont really know. all i DO know is that the votes wont be counted because both Obama and Hillary signed off on the wishes of the DNC, and now Hillary is duplicitly pumping her numbers up with a fabrication.
Hillary wants a 'do over'. there are no 'do overs' in elections unless gross malfeasance, misfeasance, or nonfeasance can be proved.
shes sunk. and sorry youre stupid, pal. must suck being a moron. - Spektr4, on 04/25/2008, -2/+18No one said it's a landslide. Who have you been talking to? What is true, however, is that she can't catch up in the delegate count. That is what people have been saying. "Landslide" is YOUR word.
- inactive, on 04/25/2008, -3/+17I guess the whole "I'm the underdog!!" angle didn't take as people aren't really sympathetic to a blonde, rich, white, former first lady.
However, the "HE'S the underdog" act might actually work against her, just a hunch. - porkdanish, on 04/25/2008, -1/+15You're
- NJank, on 04/25/2008, -1/+15please no, please no, please no...
- bangerznmash, on 04/25/2008, -0/+14I liked that you tried to spell campaign like champagne. But she doesn't have the right to continue when she can't provide her supporters with health insurance, she can't mathematically win, and she's ruining the chance of a fellow party member winning in the general. Contrary to your dumbass belief, it's not about the candidate it's about the voters.
- edrift101, on 04/25/2008, -0/+13I have this feeling that she's been promising favors for campaign contributions... If she drops out - a lot of companies might be looking for their money back or bigger favors in the future.
- UltraMegaFilms, on 04/25/2008, -1/+14Calm down. There's no landslide, but he's winning for sure. That's why we are looking at the numbers.
- kipmartin, on 04/25/2008, -2/+15he took his name off because the primary meant nothing. and the DNC has made its ruling.
- rahamm, on 04/25/2008, -3/+16That isn't even true she does however need to win 60-40% in most of the remaining primaries and the same for the remaining super delgates
You do the math it is fun
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/29/delegate.co ... - airwalkery2k, on 04/25/2008, -2/+15Now, I wonder if they count the caucus state delegates as "votes" in the popular vote. Here in Nebraska, they only reported the state delegates to news agencies. Obama won by 68%, but it only looked like 26,000 people voted for him. But where I was, they said about every 12 people caucusing in the room made up one of those delegates.
This could make a big difference considering how Obama has done well in caucus states. - insomniac8400, on 04/25/2008, -3/+15Popular vote is irrelevant. It weights the vote in republican and democratic areas equally. Which is pointless. The purpose of delegates is so areas historically democratic count more than republican loving areas. This is very important because you do not want republicans picking the democratic candidate. And that is exactly what trying to use the popular vote does. It is allowing republicans to pick the democratic candidate. It is so annoying that the media continues to pretend the popular vote matters.
- pyrotix, on 04/25/2008, -3/+15sniper fire
-
Show 51 - 100 of 539 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is