Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: xzins
Obama was wrong to blacklist two of the nation’s largest states

You are aware that Obama had nothing to do with taking away FL and MI delegates? It was the DNC with the agreement of the Clintons and the other candidates. Further, your argument that he would have lost in FL and MI is pure supposition. Hillary had a teacher's union encouraging people to vote no on a ballot initiative and to vote for Hillary. Hillary supporters DID campaign in FL, Obama's didn't. Hillary may have won anyway, but she would have probably had a smaller margin. MI has a large black population and the largest Muslim population in America. Barack could well have beaten Hillary there.

20 posted on 05/01/2008 6:55:29 AM PDT by Soliton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]


To: Soliton; ClearCase_guy; Jay Howard Smith

Actually, I think Hillary did visit Florida, but that is a moot point. The campaigns were national and all over the media.

The Dem Voters went to the polling booths those primary days, and they had names on ballots. They voted for the name they wanted. Those are votes cast, and they count in terms of total votes cast for a particular candidate.

Obama was wrong to write off real people in real states.

From Fox News:

Hillary Wins Uncontested Michigan Primary
by Aaron Bruns
No surprise here; Sen Clinton was the only top-tier Democrat on the ballot in Michigan today, and should end up with about 60% of the vote. “Uncommitted” is currently sitting at about 35% — driven up, says the Clinton campaign, due to a radio campaign by Obama backers to get supporters to go to the polls, even though he’s not officially running there.

Why go to any effort to get more “uncommitted” votes? With Clinton nearly guaranteed to win the state, the best her opponents could hope for was an embarrassingly small margin of victory that the press might see as a defeat. Either way, the Obama campaign says MI doesn’t matter — and accused her of ignoring the spirit, if not the letter, of a campaign pledge not to compete in states like Michigan and Florida that moved their primaries into January.

The Clinton campaign shot back that Obama shouldn’t be belittling the voices of voters in Michigan and Florida. Check out the full Clinton campaign response after the jump.

To: Interested Parties

FR: The Clinton Campaign

RE: Michigan and Florida Presidential Primaries

The Obama campaign today circulated a memo regarding today’s Michigan primary and the January 29 Florida primary. This memo was concerning on several levels.

Let us be very clear. Senator Clinton signed a pledge that she would not campaign in any state that violates the DNC approved calendar. Therefore, we did not campaign in Michigan, nor will we campaign in Florida in violation of the pledge. We have two small scheduled fundraisers in South Florida on January 27, as explicitly permitted by the pledge, but we will not hold any open public campaign events. The Obama campaign has also held numerous fundraisers in Florida since signing the pledge. Contrary to the Obama campaign’s memo, there are no events at large venues, nor have we organized in the state. We intend to do so as our party’s nominee in the general election, but will honor our pledge not to campaign there in violation of the pledge.

Let us be clear about something else, however. While Senator Clinton will honor her commitment not to campaign in Florida in violation of the pledge, she also intends to honor her pledge to hear the voices of all Americans. The people of Michigan and Florida have just as much of a right to have their voices heard as anyone else. It is disappointing to hear a major Democratic presidential candidate tell the voters of ANY state that their voices aren’t important.

Make no mistake — the Obama campaign had no problems when its supporters and allies in Michigan ran radio ads and other campaign activities urging people to vote for “uncommitted” as a way to register their support for Senator Obama — and to give him a chance to compete for those delegates at the national convention (http://facts.hillaryhub.com/archive/?id=5218). Now, with polls in recent days showing that effort and their candidate running far behind in both states, the Obama campaign has shifted tactics to say that those who cast a vote in either state don’t matter. We couldn’t disagree more.

Senator Clinton intends to be President for all fifty states. And while she will honor the pledge she signed and not campaign in either state, she intends to continue to give every American a voice during this election and when she gets to the White House.


24 posted on 05/01/2008 7:02:33 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain -- Those denying the War was Necessary Do NOT Support the Troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson