Anti-abortion activist might keep Obama from unanimous re-nomination
Source: The Hill
Randall Terry, the controversial anti-abortion activist, won 18 percent of the vote in Oklahomas Democratic primary on Tuesday night, making him eligible for at least one of the states delegates.
President Obama had been the unanimous victor in every Democratic primary contest leading up to Tuesday.
Obama won Oklahoma with 57 percent, but Terrys more than 20,000 votes was good enough to carry 12 counties in the deeply red state.
Obama secured 39 of the states 50 delegates on Tuesday, but Terry qualified for up to six. Another five remain uncommitted and will likely go to Obama.
Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/214635-anti-abortion-activist-may-keep-obama-from-unanimous-re-nomination
Back in 2000 Lyndon LaRouche won some delegates in Arkansas, but the DNC denied them, citing the fact that he was ineligible to vote.
sinkingfeeling
(51,471 posts)Freddie Stubbs
(29,853 posts)bluedigger
(17,087 posts)What's so important about unanimity, anyways?
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)BO need to move further right. What is he supposed to do hire Rush LimpBalls as a spokesman?
Freddie Stubbs
(29,853 posts)unfortunately what I've seen on the Internet from disgruntled liberals is disinterest (ie working on Occupy - may or may not show up to vote), or switching to Paul because of his anti-war, pro-pot stance (ie have gone off the deep end).
If there is any challenge I'd much rather see it come from further left but that doesn't seem to be happening.
LoZoccolo
(29,393 posts)The Gallup polls find that liberal Democrats support Obama more than moderate or conservative Democrats.
Here's the link:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Job-Approval-Center.aspx
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)improvement. Your poll does not show that BO is progressive enough.
Self identified Liberals may be anyone to the left (or right) of Genghis Kahn.
emulatorloo
(44,175 posts)You are well within your rights to do so, and you have reasons for your positions.
But do not confuse a minority position with a majority position, just because you believe it or you hear other people echo your views on from a highly rarified self-selected sample. Like members of Democratic Underground.
ON EDIT: That does not mean that the 85% approve of every single thing Obama has done. However they are unwilling to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
ON EDIT: Somewhere I have heard that only 20% identify themselves as Liberals. (I may be a little off on this number) So think about what that means when we talk 15% of Liberal Democrats who disapprove of Obama.
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)I have problems with some of his positions, and I have reasons for my problems with his positions.
I am not "willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater".
I am advocating for BO to change his direction in those areas where I believe he is headed in the wrong direction.
I am within my right to state that I do not believe that he has done enough to earn my vote.
That does not imply that I am willing to vote for the idiots on the other side of the race.
Why do you assume I my position is that of the minority?
I do not believe that you position of unconditional support is the Majority opinion just because you believe it or you hear other people echo your views on a highly rarified self-selected sample like members of Democratic Underground.
emulatorloo
(44,175 posts)Vicardog: "I do not believe that your position of unconditional support is the Majority opinion just because you believe it or you"
LOL, What a ridiculous thing to say. That kind of hyperbole makes you look silly.
Vicardog: "I am within my right to state that I do not believe that he has done enough to earn my vote."
Reread my post.
What part of my statement that "You are well within your rights to do so, and you have reasons for your positions" contradicts your "I am within my right to state that I do not believe that he has done enough to earn my vote."
Think before you put words into my mouth.
"Why do you assume I my position is that of the minority?" Because that is what the polling shows, and not just gallup polling. The majority of liberal democrats never wanted a primary challenge.
Chan790
(20,176 posts)Liberal Dems are also smarter...smart enough to lie when asked because Rush, Beck and Hannity would have a field day with the story if there was even a hint of liberal-flight from the "socialist" President.
But mark my words, there will be a liberal at the top of the 2016 ticket or else there will be a 2016 Republican Presidential election winner.
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)Obama was the moderate transition candidate.
Warren will be the populist candidate.
emulatorloo
(44,175 posts)You may not want that, but your views don't represent the views of the left and liberal Democrats.
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)of the left? Please.
Surely you jest. Please enlighten me. What does the "Left" really want?
emulatorloo
(44,175 posts)They don't think in black and white and have a more complex view of the political sphere, which includes context.
Think Rachel Maddow.
ON EDIT: I do apologize for the above "You may not want that" re defeating Romtorum. That was snarky and hyperbolic and I should not have said it.
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)view is irrelevant.
Where is the complexity is asserting opinions I have never expressed?
Where is the complexity in taking that I think in "black and white" for daring to say that I believe BO should move a lot further to the left, when you seem to allow NO criticism of him or his policies?
Project much?
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)people are registered as Democrat who really aren't. This is left over from the days when local and state government was all Democratic. The first time we had a Republican majority in the State House and Senate was within the last two years.
Even my very, very right wing father in law kept his registration as a Democrat.
This is slowly changing.
999,943 - Democratic
849,332 - Republican
240,855 - Independent
as of Jan 2011
---
look at this and notice in many counties it is two to one for Dems. http://www.ok.gov/elections/documents/reg_0111.pdf
-----------------
People who voted for Terry are not REAL Democrats. They are fake Dems
sybylla
(8,526 posts)I'm great friends with a Northern Dem who was a Florida Republican in the 60's because that was the party of liberals in the south.
kag
(4,079 posts)I don't understand how he hasn't been arrested and convicted of inciting violence, and promoting the murder of doctors who treat pregnant women.
Lionessa
(3,894 posts)That said I don't think this will be the least of an issue for Obama.
peace frog
(5,609 posts)Obama has nothing to fear from Randall Terry.
dmr
(28,349 posts)It irritates the hell out of me. Everyone I know on the Left is pro-life.
On the Left we trust & respect women. We are pro-life & pro-choice.
On the Right they distrust & disrespect women. They are anti-women.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)out of the party.
StarsInHerHair
(2,125 posts)saying anti-choice makes it seem like an inconvenience, at least that's the way they've twisted the meaning over 20 years
bigworld
(1,807 posts)It's a little sloppy sometimes, but I'd rather have a Randall Terry on the ballot than have it any other way.
Iggo
(47,564 posts)asjr
(10,479 posts)voters now than ever before and it is because of people like Terry who want to tell the rest of the world how to live and vote. I wish his branch would become its own party so we would know exactly who and how many of them there are.
thelordofhell
(4,569 posts)Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)Vermine Supreme is my favorite Presidential candidate this year. Of course I would never actually want to see him as President as that would be a bit too crazy, but watching him run for office is pure entertainment. If you take the guy literally you will think he is crazy, but if you view him as a satirist then you can see that he is actually quite brilliant.
a simple pattern
(608 posts)His name makes me want TacoBell!
baldguy
(36,649 posts)And any Democrat voting for him should be exposed.
sakabatou
(42,170 posts)Enlighten me.
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)If one of the many procedures performed by the doctor happens to be abortion.
He stops just shy of telling people to kill. But his implication is overtly obvious. And at least one dedicated follower did kill someone he got off Randall's list.
sakabatou
(42,170 posts)baldguy
(36,649 posts)That's the very definition of terrorism.
LeftishBrit
(41,209 posts)He said that Dr Tiller, murdered by an anti-abortion extremist, 'reaped what he sowed'.
barbtries
(28,810 posts)well at the end of the day it's a non issue. thankfully
The Magistrate
(95,252 posts)Hopefully the twist in the rules by which it is done will show some elegance....
"Rover was killed by a Pontiac, and it was done with such grace and artistry witnesses awarded the driver both ears and the tail."
Lucky Luciano
(11,258 posts)...among such spectacular stupidity.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)party and stop undercutting us? It's not like they're worth a bucket of warm spit to us in Congress.
dflprincess
(28,082 posts)or see to it that they're not on the floor when the vote is done.
David__77
(23,484 posts)Lyndon LaRouche won several delegates in 1996 in Arkansas running as a Democrat against Clinton. Now, as then, the DNC would simply declare the challenger not to be a "bona fide Democrat." It is entirely legal.