Is he out of touch or is it me? [Archive]

View Full Version : Is he out of touch or is it me?

cp#

01-27-2008, 11:14 PM

I'm talking about Rudy Giuliani. He looks bad enough as it is, sitting in last place out of the "top candidates" the media has chosen. The New York Firefighters do not support him. His closest advisers are pushing for an attack on Iran.

Then there is this, which I just saw:
dhli-ZI_8es

Tamper proof?

LOL.

Follow the rules :)

boratika

01-27-2008, 11:25 PM

I'm surprised he didn't fit 9/11 in there somewhere. Maybe it's either side of this clip.

IrishWhiskey

01-27-2008, 11:35 PM

His latest ad cracked me up: "When History and the World wavered, Giuliani never did".

Really.... Can anyone figure out what this refers to? Because if its 9/11, I'm pretty sure he didn't do anything remarkable, except piss off a lot of firefighters.

Also there's this. (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/22/us/politics/22giuliani.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&hp&oref=slogin)
In August 1997, James Schillaci, a rough-hewn chauffeur from the Bronx, dialed Mayor Giuliani’s radio program on WABC-AM to complain about a red-light sting run by the police near the Bronx Zoo. When the call yielded no results, Mr. Schillaci turned to The Daily News, which then ran a photo of the red light and this front page headline: “GOTCHA!”

That morning, police officers appeared on Mr. Schillaci’s doorstep. What are you going to do, Mr. Schillaci asked, arrest me? He was joking, but the officers were not.

They slapped on handcuffs and took him to court on a 13-year-old traffic warrant. A judge threw out the charge. A police spokeswoman later read Mr. Schillaci’s decades-old criminal rap sheet to a reporter for The Daily News, a move of questionable legality because the state restricts how such information is released. She said, falsely, that he had been convicted of sodomy.

Then Mr. Giuliani took up the cudgel.

“Mr. Schillaci was posing as an altruistic whistle-blower,” the mayor told reporters at the time. “Maybe he’s dishonest enough to lie about police officers.”

Mr. Schillaci suffered an emotional breakdown, was briefly hospitalized and later received a $290,000 legal settlement from the city. “It really damaged me,” said Mr. Schillaci, now 60, massaging his face with thick hands. “I thought I was doing something good for once, my civic duty and all. Then he steps on me.”
Oh well. As much as his endless "9/11" tourettes is fun to make fun of, his campaign stands a snowballs chance in hell, as (quite literally) the more time he spends campaigning in a state, the more his approval rating drops. He's even losing in his home state of New York to McCain.

Deadend

01-27-2008, 11:46 PM

Guilliani seems to be in favor of having the government regulate everything using a ID number. Which will make ID theft so easy. Unless you need to scan the card to use it for anything, and he puts a scanner into everyones computer/car/place of employment and makes the coding so good it can't be hacked.

Then your card gets stolen and your FUCKED until you get a new one.

Beelzebud

01-28-2008, 12:15 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPOAKXBi9Pw

tehhu1k

01-28-2008, 02:09 AM

that's some scary 1984 shit he's talkin there!
Can't get online unless you're a 'citizen' eh? Every thing you do, including where you go will be tracked and recorded. Oh yeah, I really want him to be my leader, that's for sure!

snubber

01-28-2008, 02:29 AM

Is he out of touch or is it me?

It's not you. Sooooooo glad he won't win. Bye, Rudy!

Trickyicky

01-28-2008, 02:38 AM

Do you ever wonder about the mental stability of these guys that are so self-involved and idealistic that they think tagging everybody like animals is a good idea?

Ancalagon

01-28-2008, 03:01 AM

Heretic Machine

01-28-2008, 03:37 AM

Beelzebud

01-28-2008, 11:32 AM

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9195886113226551544&q=giuliani+freedom+is+authority&total=6&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

baggle

01-28-2008, 11:43 AM

I'm still just trying to figure out what post Rudy is really running for. He must know that he doesn't stand a chance, so what post does he want to be awarded in the victor's administration? Does he really think he could be VP? Or is he going for something else?

Magnanimous Gnome

01-28-2008, 04:31 PM

I'm really glad that Rudy stands no chance of winning.

I was with him on many of the social issues, but the way he backed down on all of his "liberal" positions really bothers me. Then there's the whole 9/11 BS...yeah.

torrefaction

01-28-2008, 04:34 PM

IT'S JUST EASIER THAN DEALING WITH THE PAIN!

Runaway train, never coming back...

Oxonian

01-28-2008, 05:38 PM

IT'S JUST EASIER THAN DEALING WITH THE PAIN!

Runaway train, never coming back...
Shameful confession: I paid money for that album.
I'm still just trying to figure out what post Rudy is really running for. He must know that he doesn't stand a chance, so what post does he want to be awarded in the victor's administration? Does he really think he could be VP? Or is he going for something else?
He had something like $12 million cash on hand a few months ago and, until fairly recently, was considered a shoo-in for the nomination. His whole strategy was to win the winner-take-all big states, and while he's been campaigning for a year, he's only started to look really shaky in New York and Florida in the past few weeks. It's looking like he probably won't be the nominee, but why wouldn't he stay in the race for a little while longer to see if the polls are wrong? It's not like he has a really pressing engagement anywhere.

If he is angling for a position, I doubt it would be VP. He's too irritating to too many people for that. More likely he would be AG or DHS or FBI Director. Actually, that wouldn't be such a terrible idea; he was, I believe, a decent Associate AG and U.S. Attorney. Certainly his habit of frog-marching white-collar crooks past the cameras in handcuffs would play well in the post-Enron environment.

baggle

01-28-2008, 08:21 PM

He had something like $12 million cash on hand a few months ago and, until fairly recently, was considered a shoo-in for the nomination. His whole strategy was to win the winner-take-all big states, and while he's been campaigning for a year, he's only started to look really shaky in New York and Florida in the past few weeks. It's looking like he probably won't be the nominee, but why wouldn't he stay in the race for a little while longer to see if the polls are wrong? It's not like he has a really pressing engagement anywhere.

If he is angling for a position, I doubt it would be VP. He's too irritating to too many people for that. More likely he would be AG or DHS or FBI Director. Actually, that wouldn't be such a terrible idea; he was, I believe, a decent Associate AG and U.S. Attorney. Certainly his habit of frog-marching white-collar crooks past the cameras in handcuffs would play well in the post-Enron environment.

All good points. There is speculation that Edwards might be running for AG in Obama's administration as well.

Today on NPR they were discussing Giuliani in Florida and made the point that there are quite a lot of New York expats in the state, which I hadn't really considered previously. They were interviewing people at a Giuliani rally and it was surprising to hear all of the New York accents. What was really surprising though was hearing Giuliani's speeches. They really sounded like he wasn't even trying. At all.

IrishWhiskey

01-28-2008, 09:33 PM

He had something like $12 million cash on hand a few months ago and, until fairly recently, was considered a shoo-in for the nomination. His whole strategy was to win the winner-take-all big states, and while he's been campaigning for a year, he's only started to look really shaky in New York and Florida in the past few weeks. It's looking like he probably won't be the nominee, but why wouldn't he stay in the race for a little while longer to see if the polls are wrong? It's not like he has a really pressing engagement anywhere.Fairly recently? Not since the start of the primaries at least. In fact you would have to go back to...

....Actually he was never considered a shoo-in by anyone except Giuliani. A pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro-immigration New Yorker with a history of dressing in drag winning the GOP nomination? Yeah right. And he's been looking shaky in Florida and New York for some time. He's was the leading candidate in New York until recently, sure. But when you were the mayor of the city for a decade, and intrinsically linked to the city, the fact he wasn't leading by 40 points showed from early on how weak his position was there.

cp#

01-29-2008, 12:22 AM

There aren't that many fucking New Yorkers from here. He won't win it.

KingGorilla

01-29-2008, 12:27 AM

There aren't that many fucking New Yorkers from here. He won't win it.

There aren't many New Yorkers in FLORIDA? Are you serious? In New York they call Palm Beach the 6th Borough.

MegaChops

01-29-2008, 11:21 AM

9/11.....9.....11

torrefaction

01-29-2008, 11:21 AM

NEVER COMING BACK.

Wrong way on a one way track.

CoachCrazyMcScot

01-29-2008, 11:27 AM

He stumped through Florida for the last 60 days because he had no chance in any of the states before this primary. Then the governor of Florida Charlie Crist, after having been wined and dined by Rudy since October last year, turned around and gave his blessing to McCain.

Out of 4 Republican candidates in FL, he will be at best 3rd. Then he can fade away....

cppcrusader

01-29-2008, 11:38 AM

bKangy

01-29-2008, 11:42 AM

Rudy's fucked and I can't wait to hear his concession speech. I might stay up to watch it actually.

"Yeah, my politics are ridiculously against the American dream and I'm running with a questionable track record that the Dems will open up if I win. Vote for me because of 9/11!"

Deadend

01-29-2008, 11:42 AM

There aren't many New Yorkers in FLORIDA? Are you serious? In New York they call Palm Beach the 6th Borough.

I thought Palm Beach was where everyones grandparents live?

CoachCrazyMcScot

01-29-2008, 11:44 AM

I thought Palm Beach was where everyones grandparents live?

My grandparents died in NY and I buried them in Palm Beach...

I thought those were the rules. :p

IrishWhiskey

01-29-2008, 07:48 PM

And its all over for Giuliani

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#FL

75% percent of precincts reporting
McCain (36%)
Romney (31%)
Guiliani (15%)
Huckabee (14%)
Paul (3%)
Thompson (1%)

McCain beats Romney, and Giuliani manages to eek out a close third over Huckabee, but given that this is the one state he's focused all his efforts in and he isn't leading anywhere else at all, his campaign is done. By getting 15% he has managed to gain a single delegate in the entire primary, finishing well below Ron Paul in votes and delegates.

He has said that he will be making an announcement "about the future" tomorrow, and everyone expects him to drop out and endorse McCain.

Oh, and Hillary won the Democratic primary, but only because Obama and Edwards refused to campaign there. You see Michigan and Florida were stripped of their delegates after they moved up their primaries in violation of Democratic party rules. Its basically like line-cutting, and if everyone starts doing it, the whole system breaks down. As such the three candidates agreed not to campaign in those states, or try to get those delegates into the convention. However Hillary lied and broke that promise, and in now trying to get them reinstated. Doing so would be a big boost for her, as she was completely uncontested. However that were to put her over the top, it would be essentially cheating and lying her way into the nomination, and would tear apart the party.

baggle

01-29-2008, 09:53 PM

derjester

01-29-2008, 10:17 PM

Everytime I see him interviewed without his glasses he seemed to do "crazy eyes" as he answers questions.
I'm glad he's done for. The less he has to do with national gov't the better I'll sleep at night.

Heretic Machine

01-29-2008, 10:35 PM

A little off topic here, but the media is a fucking joke. This morning the reporters on CNN were basically laughing about how much of a joke Clinton's little stunt in Florida was, and how it was basically just a play to get the media to promote her with a false-win. But of course, I was just watching Larry King for all of five minutes, and that is all it took for him to ask one of his guests, "So, what do you think now, Clinton and McCain?"

Seriously, it's a fucking joke.

Oxonian

01-29-2008, 10:44 PM

Yeah, geeze, can you imagine if those Florida delegates got reinstated for Hillary? I didn't even know there was talk of such a thing. It'd be the 2000 election all over again. People are just barely getting over bringing up the 2000 election all the time, and I'd hate to hear the same kind of bitching all over again for another 8 years if Hillary beats Obama in the primary due to Florida delegates that weren't supposed to count.
It's obviously contentious, but I'm not sure the pro-democracy point cuts entirely against Clinton. After all, if the DNC has its way, the entire states of Florida and Michigan will literally be disenfranchised. That dwarfs even the most heated accusations of 2000. And what sin did these millions of disenfranchised commit? They lived in states whose legislatures moved their primaries to January. I understand the argument why the DNC wants to be able to enforce a primary schedule, and how Clinton arguably "broke the rules" by campaigning. But is telling millions of people they don't get a say an effective way of punishing the Florida and Michigan legislatures, or Clinton herself? And even if it is, is that the pro-democracy position?

I mean, heck. If it's OK to punish Floridians because their state legislature irritated the DNC, why stop at the primary? Let's go ahead and strip Florida its Electoral College votes and Congressional delegation for a few years. We did it after the Civil War, and it worked: Florida hasn't seceded and fought a bloody war to preserve slavery since.

51|RandoM

01-29-2008, 10:46 PM

He is done. Third place in Florida means he doesn't have a chance to win anywhere.

Heretic Machine

01-29-2008, 10:48 PM

It's obviously contentious, but I'm not sure the pro-democracy point cuts entirely against Clinton. After all, if the DNC has its way, the entire states of Florida and Michigan will literally be disenfranchised. That dwarfs even the most heated accusations of 2000. And what sin did these millions of disenfranchised commit? They lived in states whose legislatures moved their primaries to January. I understand the argument why the DNC wants to be able to enforce a primary schedule, and how Clinton arguably "broke the rules" by campaigning. But is telling millions of people they don't get a say an effective way of punishing the Florida and Michigan legislatures, or Clinton herself? And even if it is, is that the pro-democracy position?

I mean, heck. If it's OK to punish Floridians because their state legislature irritated the DNC, why stop at the primary? Let's go ahead and strip Florida its Electoral College votes and Congressional delegation for a few years. We did it after the Civil War, and it worked: Florida hasn't seceded and fought a bloody war to preserve slavery since.

It isn't the DNC's fault, and if the people of Florida and Michigan have a problem with losing their votes, they should go to the people responsible and ask them why it was so important to move their primaries forward? In any case, this isn't the kind of thing that should be reversed in the middle of a primary. If they start doing that, they might as well just start cutting out states that vote for the wrong candidate. Imagine if Paul had won a state, and the Republicans just decided that they didn't want him to get the delegates after the fact. How would that sit with people?

IrishWhiskey

01-29-2008, 10:55 PM

But is telling millions of people they don't get a say an effective way of punishing the Florida and Michigan legislatures, or Clinton herself? And even if it is, is that the pro-democracy position?

I mean, heck. If it's OK to punish Floridians because their state legislature irritated the DNC, why stop at the primary? Let's go ahead and strip Florida its Electoral College votes and Congressional delegation for a few years. We did it after the Civil War, and it worked: Florida hasn't seceded and fought a bloody war to preserve slavery since.Because those things are very different. The primaries and caucus aren't democratic period. There are tons of states that disenfranchise people from voting, or can ban voters on a whim, or in some cases force them to sign loyalty oaths if they want to vote. Primaries aren't part of our government's legal system, but a kooky "whatever the hell we want to do" exercise by private groups. I mean when you learn about how it actually works, the entire country is disinfranchised as what really counts are the superdelegates, which aren't obligated to vote as the people did (neither technically do delegates, but thats another matter). If it was about enfranchisement, we wouldn't have allow a couple of states to weed out most of the candidates.

Even at the end, if all the delegates do what they are supposed to and everything is counted, its common in contentious races where there is no clear winner at the convention, for delegates to trade votes for favors, in order to decide a winner. In other words party insiders buy and sell the people's votes, and all of Michigan's delegates could end up going to Obama. And even when that doesn't happen, when there is eventually a clear winner, state delegates will vote for that person regardless of what the people of their state voted, in a show of support.

People in Florida and Michigan will get a chance to vote and participate in the general election as they have the right to (well okay, maybe not some people in Florida). But voting in the primary not only isn't guarenteed, but isn't really democratic anyway.

What'll happen is that if Clinton is an obvious nominee before the convention, they'll reinstate Michigan and Florida's votes. If not, they'll block them, and if Hillary keeps pushing, it will probably turn people (including Edwards' delegates) against her. So they have about as much say as they usually do.

Also, my favorite quote from Rudy's speech: "The party of Lincoln and Reagan and Bush…"

IrishWhiskey

01-29-2008, 11:24 PM

Most interesting statistic from the exit polls: Voters who think abortion should be legal were 43% of the electorate in the Republican primary. 45% of them voted for McCain, 26% for Romney, 19% for Giuliani, and only 5% for Huckabee.

But those voters who think abortion should be illegal split their vote much more evenly: 35% for Romney, 29% for McCain, 21% for Huckabee and 10% for Giuliani.Similar numbers hold for Church attendance, approval of Bush, and other measures of the conservative base. Moderate Republicans and those not approving of Bush are throwing big support behind McCain. The base is split, between Romney, McCain and Huckabee. If Huckabee drops out, Romney is likely to pick up those votes. As it stands now, it will be Bush-hating moderate Republicans deciding the nominee. But the battle amongst candidates will likely be for the swing-vote base.

Oxonian

01-30-2008, 12:20 AM

It isn't the DNC's fault, and if the people of Florida and Michigan have a problem with losing their votes, they should go to the people responsible and ask them why it was so important to move their primaries forward?
It's not solely the DNC's fault, but the DNC had discretion about what sort of penalty to impose, didn't it? The RNC only docked Florida half its delegates. I'm not convinced the DNC was forced to dock Florida any delegates (someone with a better familiarity with internal DNC rules can check me on this; I may well be dead wrong). It could have let the infraction slide (is it really so terrible that Florida moved up the date of its primary?), or there's a host of other penalties it might have imposed: no funding for Florida Congressional races, a campaign of petty vandalism in downtown Miami, etc. Heck, I would have been happiest if Howard Dean had personally gone down to Florida and personally beaten the shit out of the Florida Legislature Preston-Brooks style. Given that the ultimate purpose of the sanction -- to prevent Florida from moving its date up -- obviously failed, it's hard to see what purpose docking the delegates will serve.

I agree the people of Florida and Michigan should go to their legislatures and say, "W. T. F. ?" But we're talking state legislators here. You have to proceed from the assumption that they are all on Stalin's payroll, because trying to understand how patriotic Americans could so routinely and thoroughly fuck things up with such little power and less prestige will drive you insane unless you assume the KGB is feeding them detailed instructions. If we're going to dock states their primary delegates simply because the state has some moronic legislators, we're in for a very short primary season.

Because those things are very different. The primaries and caucus aren't democratic period.
Well, OK, although if you say the primaries are inherently undemocratic, I don't see why it's so damning that Clinton wants to do something "undemocratic" too. It reminds me of that great scene in Dr. Strangelove: "Gentlemen! You can't fight in here! This is the War Room!"

I think you gave a generally fair description of the fucked-up nature of primaries (I could quibble about minor points, but... that's a pretty good explanation right there of why I won't). But if the primaries are so fucked up, will seating the Florida delegates really hurt all that much? It will be like playing "The Game of Life" with a bunch of drunk guys, each of which uses a matchbox car crammed with a dozen pink plastic pins which he claims denotes his "white slave harem." What-fucking-ever, man, just spin the wheel and choose whether you go to college or not. What's that, Barack? What did you want me to check out? Oh, I see, you're rubbing your pink and blue plastic pins together to simulate the least interesting pornographic scene ever recorded. Yes, I am both impressed with your directorial acumen and aroused by the sexually-charged image and your high-pitched moans. You are a modern-day Frank Capra. What's that? :rolleyes: Yes, you are also JFK. The spitting image, in fact.

Can I help you, Senator Clinton? A shot of Jaeger? No, thank you. I want my head clear for when I get to decide to purchase health insurance. Oh, I wouldn't need health insurance under your plan to provide free affordable insurance for all Americans? Well, that sound gre... I see you threw up on my shoes. No, do not try to tell me you did not throw up on my shoes, I am looking at the vomitus right now, it is deposited on my shoes, and you're still hunched over and dry heaving. Ah, your upper GI tract has joined the vast right-wing conspiracy and is engaging in reverse peristalsis in direct violation of the Constitution. I don't have my copy of the Constitution on me, so I'll have to take your word for it. Is throwing up on me part of your health program or separate? Is there a free universal drycleaning entitlement in your plan?

Oh, John! Sorry, forgot you were still here. You're "in it to win it," huh? Well, good for you. Listen, can you do me a quick favor? Hill threw up on my shoes and I want you to get them cleaned. No, not at the mill. No, not the myeeall. The dry cleaners. Look, just walk down the corner until you see a pregnant Korean woman screaming at you; that's her. Very nice lady. What's that? $30 to clean my shoes? Yes, it does sound like corporate greed, John. No, John, please don't challenge my tiny pregnant Korean dry cleaner to a fight. For one thing, my money will be on the tiny pregnant Korean lady. Did you see the size of her forearms? That's what corporate greed will get you, John: a Bowflex. A clever boy like you might want to consider getting a nice job one day, too. No, John, I don't think it's a good idea to sneak up behind the Korean lady and kick her in the crotch. For one thing, I don't think that quite as effective on women as you seem to believe. And anyway, that woman has access to industrial quantities of flammable chemicals. I'll like to stay on her good side.

IrishWhiskey

01-30-2008, 12:53 AM

Well, OK, although if you say the primaries are inherently undemocratic, I don't see why it's so damning that Clinton wants to do something "undemocratic" too. It reminds me of that great scene in Dr. Strangelove: "Gentlemen! You can't fight in here! This is the War Room!"...Um.... I'll address the sane part. The rest should perhaps be brought up with a therapist.

To put it simply, all three candidates promised to respect the DNC's ruling and not campaign. There would be an advantage in doing so (whoever wins gets good media coverage like Clinton is now), but if any one backed out, then the others would as well, and it would turn into an expensive (if mostly pointless) battle. Obama and Edwards not only kept their promises, but stuck by it even when it was clear Hillary wouldn't. Hillary meanwhile lied, and took a path that could benefit her at the expense of a fractured and weakened Democratic party. Given that one of her primary criticisms right now is that the other two are committed to ideals while she is power-hungry, this doesn't exactly help dispel the negative imagery.

As for what you said to Heretic, the DNC had to punish the two states enough to counter balance the media attention and influence on the race. Anything short of stripping all delegates (and even still, many news outlets report as if they were a big win for Hilary) would likely have just encouraged all the other states to defy them as well. Which would just result in every state leapfrogging the other earlier and earlier, until it all became a farce. The plan was from the beginning to restore their candidates at the convention, as a candidate not reaching the required number well beforehand is pretty rare. But with Obama and Hillary neck-and-neck, and Edwards keeping either from securing it, this could come down to the wire. Which makes Hillary's move reckless and the DNC's decision more important than usual.

Oxonian

01-30-2008, 01:16 AM

Given that one of her primary criticisms right now is that the other two are committed to ideals while she is power-hungry, this doesn't exactly help dispel the negative imagery.
Fair enough. But if I were Hillary Clinton, I woul say this:
"Yes, I campaigned in Florida even when the DNC told me not to. I admit I did it because I want to win this election, and I thought I could do that by persuading people to vote for me. Isn't that what elections are all about?

"Ah, but Obama and Edwards whine that I had an unfair advantage because they didn't campaign here. Why didn't they campaign here? Is it because they love obeying the DNC more than they love speaking to and listening to Floridians' concerns? Or did they realize I was probably going to win Florida anyway, so they seized upon an excuse that would make my victory look as insignificant as possible.

"What was so bad about moving the primaries up? If the people of Florida want to hold their 2008 primary in 1992, that strikes me as bizarre and strange, but let them do as they wish.

"Also, Iowa and New Hampshire aggressively moved their schedules up repeatedly to maintain their first-in-the-nation status, which they have unilaterally decided are theirs by right. The DNC hasn't penalized those two states. Why penalize Florida?

"Heck, such a severe sanction is always a bad idea because you can't punish for further misbehavior. Once Florida knew it would lose all its delegates by moving the election to the 29th, why stop there? Why not go ahead and move its primary to August 2006 just to fuck with the DNC?

"So Obama and Edwards tell you they want change in Washington. But the first time the DNC tells them no, they submit without the slightest public complaint. But I'm the one who bucked the establishment's rules and tried to give Floridians a voice (albeit imperfect) in the Democratic nomination for president. Plus ça change."

IrishWhiskey

01-30-2008, 01:23 AM

Fair enough. But if I were Hillary Clinton, I woul say this:
"So Obama and Edwards tell you they want change in Washington. But the first time the DNC tells them no, they submit without the slightest public complaint. But I'm the one who bucked the establishment's rules and tried to give Floridians a voice (albeit imperfect) in the Democratic nomination for president."In which case Mrs Clinton, why the hell did you vote for it as a top member of the DNC, and give your word not to campaign there? And don't you think its a little suspicious that you agreed they shouldn't count up until Obama started leading and it looked like you might need them?

Every state wants to move up. But every state also knows that if there is no order in the system, they'll end up screwed like everybody else. And having the primary be decided by this would be bad for the party, possibly as bad as the Humphrey nomination after RFK was assassinated, leading to massive riots in Chicago.

Heretic Machine

01-30-2008, 06:01 AM

It's not solely the DNC's fault, but the DNC had discretion about what sort of penalty to impose, didn't it? The RNC only docked Florida half its delegates. I'm not convinced the DNC was forced to dock Florida any delegates (someone with a better familiarity with internal DNC rules can check me on this; I may well be dead wrong). It could have let the infraction slide (is it really so terrible that Florida moved up the date of its primary?), or there's a host of other penalties it might have imposed: no funding for Florida Congressional races, a campaign of petty vandalism in downtown Miami, etc. Heck, I would have been happiest if Howard Dean had personally gone down to Florida and personally beaten the shit out of the Florida Legislature Preston-Brooks style. Given that the ultimate purpose of the sanction -- to prevent Florida from moving its date up -- obviously failed, it's hard to see what purpose docking the delegates will serve.

I agree the people of Florida and Michigan should go to their legislatures and say, "W. T. F. ?" But we're talking state legislators here. You have to proceed from the assumption that they are all on Stalin's payroll, because trying to understand how patriotic Americans could so routinely and thoroughly fuck things up with such little power and less prestige will drive you insane unless you assume the KGB is feeding them detailed instructions. If we're going to dock states their primary delegates simply because the state has some moronic legislators, we're in for a very short primary season.

Well, they were given plenty of warning. It isn't as if they were told, "Hey, you weren't supposed to set your primary that early, we're taking your delegates." They were warned, given a date to change it by, and they didn't; I have virtually no idea why (can someone explain this to me?) The original threat of stripping them of all of their delegates was meant to force them to follow the rules, but while it is true that this failed it would not be useful in the future if the DNC were to fold after-the-fact. Basically, if Florida loses all of it's delegates this time, other states (as well as Florida) are less likely to pull such stunts in the future, knowing that the DNC is serious about the enforcement of it's policies. If the DNC reinstates their delegates, then their policies are meaningless and will be ignored at a legislature's convenience.

Oxonian

01-30-2008, 08:59 AM

Well, they were given plenty of warning.
So an unjust punishment is just so long as the victim had plenty of warning?

Basically, if Florida loses all of it's delegates this time, other states (as well as Florida) are less likely to pull such stunts in the future, knowing that the DNC is serious about the enforcement of it's policies. If the DNC reinstates their delegates, then their policies are meaningless and will be ignored at a legislature's convenience.
I understand that. But we're still talking about punishing the people of Florida -- who did nothing wrong, and many of whom opposed moving the primary schedule up -- for the sins of Florida's legislature. Hurting the innocent to punish the guilty is the sort of thing I thought only Republicans did.

torrefaction

01-30-2008, 09:08 AM

It's because the Democrats hate Cubans!

HAH! That was fun.

Deadend

01-30-2008, 09:13 AM

I live in MI, I was not able to vote for Obama, I don't see why Clinton should count. Besides, the whole point of this stuff is a way to figure out who the best candidate is for winning the presidency.

They could just pick a random person as candidate, and that person would get 45% of the vote. I am annoyed with people in my states decision to make it so I can't pick the candidate for the DNC.

Anyways, it's going to be McCain for the RNC, and he probably won't win. He is so goddamn old, put him in a debate against Obama this fall and it will be over. Of course, it may be Clinton, who probably would make a terrible president with her wrath and inability to get over the past.

IrishWhiskey

01-30-2008, 10:29 AM

It's because the Democrats hate Cubans!

HAH! That was fun.No, no. Its because the evil Hollywood Jews who control the Democratic Party hate Cubans.

baggle

01-30-2008, 10:46 AM

I guess McCain does seem old, but what a spry old fart. I've really got no worries about his longevity, either. The man is 71 years old and campaigning with his mother, who is 95 years old, for cryin' out loud. It might just be (read: it is) a stunt to convince suckers like me that he still has a lot left in him, but it's a damn good stunt, 'cause that old lady looks like she could kick some fuckin' ass.

Also, I'm not sure you should write McCain off so easily, Deadend. Mayyybe Obama will work him in the debates this fall, if they both make it through (and god I hope they both do), but as of now McCain is polling 6-8 points ahead of Obama/Clinton in 'what-if' polls. Polls like that may not mean a whole lot, but they do mean that this race is going to be mighty competitive.

cp#

01-30-2008, 08:45 PM

Fuck McCain. He does not seem Presidential to me, nor is he likable.

This made me laugh
a9Dd-yg2A4E

Fou... 100 more years!!

Heretic Machine

01-30-2008, 09:06 PM

My problem with McCain is that I've heard him say, outright, that fighting terrorism is more important than fixing our economy. To me, that is a totally unacceptable viewpoint, and would be disastrous for this country. I'm talking like a, "Abandon the ship while you still can" sort of disaster.