Obama's arrogance -- has yet to win a single dem closed primary

[MagsDem]

Obama spent his concession speech tonight acting as if he was already the nominee of our party, and telling us how he was going to beat John McCain. His arrogance is sickening to me. Fact is he hasn't won a single primary that is closed to democrats only. They are almost even up now on the popular vote totals, and he has a slight lead in the pledged delegate camp, but the fact is....

HE HAS NOT WON A SINGLE CLOSED DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY!

Democrats, you are letting independents and rethugs who will not support him in the GE choose our party's nominee. And in his arrogance, he is assuming he already has won it. HRC showed tonight that this is not nearly over.

I hope the supers pay close attention to the fact that she is more experienced, she is preferred by more actual democrats, and that she has won all the states that are critical to take in the GE to win against McCain.

[ingac70]

1. That is a filthy lie....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_election

I think you need to check your facts.

[Hepburn]

5. Psssssssst.......

....your talking to a CLINTON SUPPORTER. Facts mean NOTHING to them.

[ingac70]

10. Oh yeah, Maryland and Conn. don't matter

CLOSED primaries.

[Hepburn]

34. Oh, sorry....my bad!

I forgot the Clintonista rule: If Hillary wins, the state matters; if Obama wins, the state does not matter.

:hi:

[ingac70]

38. MagsDem should be ashamed...

I hope this was monumental ignorance and NOT intentional deception.

:hi: Back at ya!

[scheming daemons]

41. If you've read MagsDem the past two months, you know that she/he HAS NO SHAME...

...and EVERYTHING she/he does is intentional deception.

[Hepburn]

43. IMO....

...scary whichever one it is. Says a great deal about the caliber of those who support Clinton....either dishonest or monumentally uninformed. Neither is good, IMO.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

74. how many votes for Obama in those 2 states in compairison with the population the big states?

[ContinentalOp]

14. Not just any Clinton supporter either.

Logic doesn't seem to be a strong point for many of them. They sure do excel at mud slinging and name calling though!

[MagsDem]

21. Which dem closed primary has he won?

[scheming daemons]

25. Maryland, Connecticut, Utah, and DC.... but don't let facts sway you...

...

[nomorewhopper]

36. and delaware

learn to research before you spew your hate

[ingac70]

26. Conn., Maryland.....

Are you paid to post here by Hillary or what?

[NOLALady]

30. Louisiana is closed.

He won Louisiana.

[Hepburn]

37. Where in the hell have you been that you have to ask...

... and ask that question AFTER you post an untrue thread title.

[quiller4]

44. Washington is another closed primary Obama won

Granted the margin was slimmer in our state's primary (which is only a beauty contest the delegates derrive only from caucuses)than it was in Washington's caucus but Obama was the victor in both.

[Window]

75. You should know before you post stupid shit.

[snooper2]

83. Your a bright one all right...

You should check your facts before you post something and make yourself look stupid...

Oh, it's MagsDem, nevermind.... :rofl:

[theHandpuppet]

2. Good point, MagsDem

I believe PA is also a closed primary, is it not?

[ingac70]

33. Since when is a blatant lie a "good point"? n/t

[CalGator]

68. you're talking to Hillaryland here

Don't confuse them with facts.

[DUyellow]

78. wow, you think that is a good point?

[anonymous171]

3. You are aware that Indies and Repugs can vote for dems in the GE right?

[ContinentalOp]

19. Sure, they can vote.

But of course those votes don't count. :eyes:

We need to look for the candidate who wins the big blue states that always go Democratic. That's a surefire way to win the GE. :crazy:

[MadBadger]

4. Maryland

[thesubstanceofdreams]

6. Alterted the OP because it's a blatant lie n/t

[ingac70]

18. same here. n/t

[emilyg]

7. k/r

[MadBadger]

16. Come on now, why did you K&R this?

[nomorewhopper]

28. probably to make the OP look like a fool...

but i don't know. possibly he k&r because he was a clinton supporter, and found this argument to be very appealing

[MadBadger]

32. emilyg is a HRC supporter.

[scheming daemons]

17. You want to K/R an OP that is a blatant, PROVABLE lie???

...lol... ok.

[Barack_America]

8. Delaware.

[scheming daemons]

9. Connecticut, Maryland, Utah..... but keep lying, Mags......

..

:eyes:

[gravity]

12. Those don't count

[Barack_America]

11. Connecticut.

[Barack_America]

13. District of Columbia.

[scheming daemons]

15. "HE HAS NOT WON A SINGLE CLOSED DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY!" - MagsDem should be alerted for lying.....

....

[woolldog]

20. What about Washington state?

He won both the caucus and the primary.

[scheming daemons]

22. Wow... 7 people rec'd a thread that is a blatant lie.

[ingac70]

31. Perhaps...

people wanted to keep it kicked for everyone to see what a vile liar the OP is.

It wasn't me though!

[Barack_America]

23. FYI, neither OH, TX or RI are closed.

OH and TX are open. RI allows unaffiliated voters to participate in the primary of their choice. As does New Jersey, another one of Clinton's so-called "closed primary" wins.

[nomorewhopper]

24. more lies from the clinton side

kicking

[Corkey Mineola]

53. funny I thought we were all on the same side

the Democratic Party, which happens to be selecting between two very qualified and attractive candidates.
Don't give in to smearing another group of people because you disagree with them.

Let's keep our eye on the prize: Democrat in the White House in 2009!

[ingac70]

55. I don't side with liars.

My mother repeated this shit two weeks ago. Apparently it is a Hillary talking point.

[amborin]

27. his speech repulsed me

if Obama does somehow win the nomination, i will vote for him

but seriously, where does this praise for his "words" come from?

i can't stand to hear him speak

he is BORING, he drags out his words in a very affected way, doesn't ever say much, just wastes time dragging out the vowel sounds

gad, if i had to listen to that droning on for four years, i might move to Canada

[SammyWinstonJack]

89. ...

:thumbsup:

[scheming daemons]

29. Change your OP, Mags.... even a blatant partisan like you shouldn't outright lie in an OP....

....

But I don't expect you to fix it..... doesn't serve your narrative.

[Beacool]

35. Yep, that's precisely the problem.

He hasn't won in big numbers among registered Democrats. That's probably why in my state of NJ a poll shows that 25% of Hillary supporters will vote for McCain if Obama is the nominee.

[anonymous171]

39. Again, repugs and indies can vote dem in the GE.

And more Obama supporters will vote for McCain or not vote at all if Clinton is the nom.

[ingac70]

42. The OP is a LIE...

Obama has won several closed primaries.

[in_cog_ni_to]

40. Illinois is a closed Primary. He won here...his home state. n/t

[murielm99]

50. It is NOT.

Anyone can go in to a primary and ask for the ballot of their choice. I always ask for a Democratic ballot, but I can ask for a republican ballot any time I choose.

I DO NOT have to register as a Democrat ahead of time to vote as a Democrat, or a register as a republican ahead of time to vote as a republican.

He won his home state! Wow!!!

[in_cog_ni_to]

60. YES IT IS. I live here. I know what I'm talking about. Here's an explanation:

Friday, January 11, 2008

Illinois’ Closed Primary
Each primary election I get numerous phone calls from voters who are disturbed by the Illinois requirement that you declare your party affiliation at the polling place on election day in order to be able to participate in the party primaries. I’ll try here to give some explanation for why this is done.

Before examining the closed primary system, it is good to identify the terms, which often confuse people. A closed primary is one that is closed to people who are not members of the party. In Illinois, you become a member of the party on election day by OPENLY declaring your membership in the party that day. An open primary is one where you don’t have to declare your affiliation.

The closed primary is set up to prevent what is called party raiding. That is the practice of members of one party crossing over and influencing the primary of the opposite party. Those “raiders” could either vote for a candidate who holds views very similar to their own party or, more cynically, for a candidate that they believe would be easiest to beat.

In years where the nomination is far from certain (like 2008) this is not a major issue. But in years where one party’s nominee is certain (for example the Republicans in 2004) it could be an issue.

The Republican and Democratic Party Delegate selection rules each recognize this concern and thus require that a person’s party affiliation be publicly declared.

The Republican Party rules state: (page 8)
(2) Only persons eligible to vote who are deemed as a matter of public record to be Republicans pursuant to state law or, if voters are not enrolled by party, by Republican party rules of a state, shall participate in any primary election held for the purpose of electing delegates or alternate delegates to the national convention or in any Republican caucus, mass meeting, or mass convention held for the purpose of selecting delegates to the county, district, or state conventions, and only such legal and qualified voters shall be elected as delegates to county, district, and state conventions;

The Democratic Party rules state:
1. Democratic voters shall be those persons who publicly declare their Party preference and have that preference publicly recorded.

So while the Illinois legislature could alter the law to make Illinois an open primary state, it is likely that neither party would recognize the results of that election.

The “closedness” of primaries across the country varies. In Illinois, there is no declaration of party at the time of voter registration. Instead, you publicly declare your affiliation on the day you vote in the primary election, regardless of how you have voted in the past. In fact, you could even declare for one party, get in the polling booth, change your mind after you see the ballot, return the ballot to the judges, and get a new ballot of another party!

Illinois law changed this past year to become more forgiving of party switching. In previous elections, if you had signed a petition for a candidate of one political party for a primary election, you were unable to vote in the same primary election for a different political party. Now you can vote in any primary, regardless of what petitions you may have signed in the past.

Compare that to the State of Florida. There you have to register your party affiliation with the County Election Office at least four weeks prior to the primary. So for Florida voters, that would need to have been done prior to the first votes being cast in Iowa.

Because so many voters in Champaign County, and throughout the state, routinely switch their party affiliation from one primary to another, no one should skip voting because they feel that they are being “labeled” when they declare their affiliation on February 5.

This presidential primary season has been the most exciting in my lifetime. I expect record turnout, even with the closed primary rule.

http://champcountyclerk.blogspot.com/2008/01/illinois-closed-primary.html

[murielm99]

70. I will check with our county clerk.

But as far as I am concerned, this is not a closed primary system.

A closed primary is one where a person has to register by party before the primary. They may register as independents in some states.

In Illinois, no one has to declare a party at the time they register to vote. I can take any ballot I wish in the primary merely by asking the election judge. In a closed primary, I would not be able to do that.

I am well aware of the change in the law regarding petitions. There was a great deal of challenging of petitions prior to this change. That was part of the reason for the change. The other part of the reason was to preserve the freedom of voters to request whatever ballot they choose in the primary.

I do not accept the Champaign County Clerk as the final authority for the definition. I think the comparison to Florida is ludicrous. I did search the Illinois State Board of Elections website, but found no answer.

I still don't understand why you think it is a big deal that Obama won his home state. It would be a big deal if he had not won his home state.

When I look at the voting records for my county, I look at who voted by precinct. I can see which party they voted for in the most recent primary. I see some people who switch back and forth, often because they want to vote for specific candidates in local races. I have to know my precinct and my county in order to find the Democrats. Some people never vote in primaries because they do not want their neighbors to know their affiliation. They may have a business in a very republican area, and do not want to declare as a Democrat. Others simply think it is no one
else's business.

Do you really think that people in Illinois don't cross party lines to do "party raiding?" It is very common for people here to cross party lines, especially during a Presidential year, to vote for the candidate they think is the weakest. And in my county, at our last meeting, one of our regular attendees told us that she had taken a republican ballot in the primary in order to vote for the challenger for circuit clerk. This person always votes for Democrats in the GE. Because she took a republican ballot in the primary, she cannot be a voting member of our county Democrats, a precinct committeeman, or board member. But that is because of our local bylaws, which we are free to adapt as we wish, as long as they conform to the state party's guidelines.

As I said above, I will do my own checking on this. I will call the state board of elections if I am not satisfied with our county clerk's answer.

[PurityOfEssence]

45. But...but...he just won a state with one sixty-fifth of the population of California...

Hey, if there were another hundred and fifty thousand Vermonters, they would match the population of San Francisco, California's fourth-largest city...

San Jose's one and a half times the size of Vermont.

Los Angeles County has about 16 times the number of people in Vermont.

[ingac70]

49. Los Angeles ...where 100,000 votes went uncounted?

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Up_to_100K_Los_Angeles_voters_0211.html

[WVRevy]

79. So, by your reasoning, no state should count...

...unless it is at least as big as California?

Do you honestly think California is going RED in the fall?

A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

[Obamanaut]

46. But on the other hand, was it arrogance that led Sen Clinton

to suggest it would be over by Feb 5th? Here it is, Mar 5, and it not only isn't, the lady is struggling on the come-back trail.


http://baltimorechronicle.com/2008/010308Burns.shtml

“…so I'm in it for the long run. It's not a very long run. It'll be over by February 5th.”

[Tom Rinaldo]

47. You overstated the case

But from everything I have seen Hillary is winning the Democratic vote this year.

[scheming daemons]

48. Will MagsDem show character and admit the OP was a blatant lie? Not likely...

...

[ingac70]

51. She's probably a Rush Limbaugh dittohead. n/t

[Emit]

52. You're losing face, MagsDem

Time to edit your post or ask for it to be locked. This one is going to haunt you big time, me thinks.

[last_texas_dem]

54. Is there any evidence for this?

I mean, the claim that 'pugs are crossing over and voting for Obama for the purpose of having the Democrats run the candidate they think will be easier to beat? Perhaps they are voting for him just because they are trying to prevent a potential Clinton presidency.

[Medusa]

56. It takes more than just Democrats to win a GE

and she can't break above the 45% percentile with anyone BUT Democrats. We lose in November if she's the nominee but if you're happy with losing in November, hey, "congratulations".

[last_texas_dem]

59. I agree

The ironic thing to me is that so much of Bill Clinton's success was based on "triangulation" and appealing to Repugs and Independents, but to hear some of the Clinton supporters on here talk, the fact that Obama receives support from non-Democrats is apparently an indication that he is some sort of Repug plant. The Democrats have had fairly recent elections (think 1972, 1984) in which our candidates won little more than the Democratic base; that is no ticket to winning the presidency.

[Alizaryn]

57. Clinton's arrogance -- has yet to explain how she can

gather enough delegates to reach Obama's numbers and begin to justify her holding McCain up as being more worthy then a fellow Democrat.
She has not bothered to explain why dragging our party and chances of winning the presidency through the slime for the next few months while McCain gets stronger and stronger is the right thing to do. You can have her ego and all the old garbage that comes with it.

[mmonk]

58. And your arrogance has yet to show any class to your fellow dems.

[bhikkhu]

61. Confidence to one is arrogance to another

I see self confidence, and consider it the virtue of someone who knows himself.

Another might see arrogance, and consider it the presumption of one who imagines he can rise above his birth.

[LadyVT]

62. yep, I'm sure they are well aware of this fact

[ingac70]

65. What fact?

That MagsDem is a filthy liar?

[last_texas_dem]

63. Oh yeah, and while we're making irrelevant "points"

Look at all those Repug counties in TX that voted for Clinton over Obama: (Scroll down about three-fourths of the way down the page)

http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#TX

Shouldn't we be ignoring their value since they aren't going to vote for the Democrat in the general? For that matter, isn't Clinton's statewide victory in TX irrelevant since there's no way TX is going to vote for the Democrat in the general anyway? Wasn't that what many of the Clinton supporters were saying in order to brush aside Obama's "red"-state primary and caucus victories?

[PseudoIntellect]

64. Yeah, that's pretty funny.

Apparently, all those red state wins for Obama don't matter. But the 3-4 point win for Clinton means everything in terms of her staying in, even if she doesn't get as many delegates due to the caucus.

[Joz]

66. Why would republicans not support him?

You sound like you don't know any. Most people registered with a party are not zealots or on message boards like this. I know registered republicans who voted for Kerry in 04. Just on NPR this morning some self declared republican guy called in saying that he'll vote for McCain, but if Obama is the nominee he'll vote for him, because he believes him when he talks, he thinks he's sincere, honest, and thinks he has great character, and that he has 6 friends who are in the same boat as him. The host then specifically checked with him that he's willing to overlook party positions and vote for Obama just based on the fact that he likes him and thinks he has great character, to which the republican confirmed yes.

And I don't hear the same type of thing from registered republicans for Clinton. The general election is when the general populace will start paying attention and get inspired or not. And if you think the best way to move forward for our country is to have polarizing, partisan candidates, then I see no point in discussing this with you.

[Barack_America]

67. Funny that 13 people recommended a thread without a lick of truth in it.

But I guess that pretty much sums up DU-GDP these days.

It doesn't matter if it's true, only that it is damaging to your "opponent". Where the "opponent" of choice these days are fellow Dems rather than Republicans.

[rodeodance]

81. Yeah--like those sev. dozen threads about a supposed doctored photo?--what a hate-fest!

[Thurston Howell III]

69. Does arrogance equal uppity?

Race card again.

[JoFerret]

71. So many ungracious losers

Looks like op made a mistake. Big deal

[ingac70]

72. That wasn't a mistake, that was an intentional lie.n/t.

[southern_dem]

73. The only arrogance I see

is that you seem to be a sore winner. Please recheck the facts.

[democrattotheend]

76. Many independents will support him

If not, we won't win...no Democrat could win without independent support. Self-identified Dems only make up at most 40% of the electorate.

And he has won Delaware, Connecticut, Maryland, Louisiana, and DC, all of which were closed primaries.

[yourguide]

77. Ah and of course

the lie poster has disappeared.

[Medusa]

80. Last time I checked, the General Election

isn't a closed event either. Apparently in the Clintonista belief system, indies aren't allowed to vote for a Dem candidate and Republicans can't cross over (unless, on the advice of Rush Limbaugh, they vote for Hillary). And only Democratic votes of course are needed to win the GE and become president.

WTF are you people inhaling, smoking, drinking or otherwise ingesting that you come up with this crap? :eyes:

[rndmprsn]

82. looks like the OP abandoned this thread when they were showed to be a LIAR for CLINTON

so sad...BLIND FAITH IN CLINTON SYNDROME claims another sucker

[npincus]

84. Obama has wiped the floor w/HRC in CAUCUSES

AND he's beating her (so far) in TX caucuses. You can argue that people who bother to go to caususes are true believers in their candidate. In that case, the core Hillary supposrters are not in that majority.

[mohc]

85. Clinton has won fewer closed primaries than Obama has

There have been 9 closed primaries so far.

Clinton has won AZ, NM, NY, and OK

Obama has won CT, DC, DE, LA, and MD

5-4 in number, and the only reason Clinton is leading the vote in those states collectively is because of her home state of NY. Please try and do a little research next time.

[kentuck]

86. There's different ways to interpret that...

Maybe he's bringing in new voters and Independent voters that had never voted before?

[mmonk]

87. Wait for North Carolina and see how "humble" Hillary does.

[angie_love]

88. LOL you got caught for being a liar. LOL

[ProSense]

90. Closed: Obama has won 9, Hillary 4

Obama

Maryland
District of Columbia
Maine
Louisiana
Colorado
Connecticut
Kansas
Delaware
Alaska


Hillary

New York
Arizona
Oklahoma
New Mexico

[mohc]

91. If you count caucuses

You're gonna have to let them count the Virgin Islands.

[RoadRage]

92. Ahh.. and it's Obama's fault that all of the states he's won

have had caucuses.. why hadn't I thought of that? Its OBAMA'S FAULT HE'S WINNING!