Obama supporters don't care about Fair Reflection, but real democrats, do.
Showing posts with label caucus cheating. Show all posts
Showing posts with label caucus cheating. Show all posts
Saturday, June 21, 2008
Why We Protest the Hillary Clinton Delegate Count.
Is this Fair Reflection? Does the Democratic Party believe in Fair Reflection? The question can't be answered, if it is never asked by the media.
Obama supporters don't care about Fair Reflection, but real democrats, do.
Obama supporters don't care about Fair Reflection, but real democrats, do.
Friday, June 6, 2008
"Fair Reflection" How the Democratic Process Ignored Fair Reflection.
The visual just below illustrates the OPPOSITE of the concept of "Fair Reflection". When voters have all day to vote, and vote in the privacy of a voting booth, the vote totals from that particular state more accurately reflect the will of the popular vote in that state.
When Voters didn't have all day to vote, could only vote in restricted locations and within a restricted time period, and had to vote in public rather than the privacy of a voting booth, Barack Obama did so well the numbers didn't accurately match up with the actual popular vote of that state for each candidate. This can be called "Fair Reflection, Denied".
Above is the ridiculous margin of victory for Barack Obama in the Idaho Caucus that had nothing to do with reality, but much to do with back room deals, the very thing Barack Obama claims to want to "change". Barack Obama succeeded by playing the very style of Old School politicking that Barack Obama claims he would "change". Below is the Result of the Idaho Primary, notice how much closer the final results are?
The Primary vote reveals a much closer 56%-37% margin of victory, Barack Obama's ridiculously unrepresentative win from the caucus vote was a 70%-17% margin of victory. Hillary enjoyed a 440% increase in her vote total in the primary vote, Barack Obama had a 140% increase in his primary vote total. The Primary Vote swing is 43% in Hillary's favor.
Up Above is the Nebraska Primary and Caucus Results. After losing in the Nebraska Caucus by a 68% to 32% margin of victory, Hillary Clinton once again closed the gap losing by only two percentage points, 49% to 47% in the Nebraska Primary. The Nebraska primary vote represents a 38% shift in the popularity of both candidates towards Hillary Clinton.
The Washington Primary offers almost an identical shift in numbers as the Nebraska primary. Hillary Clinton once again closed the gap from an unrealistic 68%-31% margin of victory in the Washington Caucus to 51% to 46% in the Washington Primary. The shift in popularity is 32% towards Hillary Clinton. (I recall these numbers used to be 50%-47%, but we'll go with the 51%-46%).
Yes, I believe in Fair Reflection, unfortunately other than a few intellectuals on Hillary Clinton's side, such as Harold Ickies, the phrase Fair Reflection is meaningless to the democratic party higher ups.
When Voters didn't have all day to vote, could only vote in restricted locations and within a restricted time period, and had to vote in public rather than the privacy of a voting booth, Barack Obama did so well the numbers didn't accurately match up with the actual popular vote of that state for each candidate. This can be called "Fair Reflection, Denied".
Above is the ridiculous margin of victory for Barack Obama in the Idaho Caucus that had nothing to do with reality, but much to do with back room deals, the very thing Barack Obama claims to want to "change". Barack Obama succeeded by playing the very style of Old School politicking that Barack Obama claims he would "change". Below is the Result of the Idaho Primary, notice how much closer the final results are?
The Primary vote reveals a much closer 56%-37% margin of victory, Barack Obama's ridiculously unrepresentative win from the caucus vote was a 70%-17% margin of victory. Hillary enjoyed a 440% increase in her vote total in the primary vote, Barack Obama had a 140% increase in his primary vote total. The Primary Vote swing is 43% in Hillary's favor.
Up Above is the Nebraska Primary and Caucus Results. After losing in the Nebraska Caucus by a 68% to 32% margin of victory, Hillary Clinton once again closed the gap losing by only two percentage points, 49% to 47% in the Nebraska Primary. The Nebraska primary vote represents a 38% shift in the popularity of both candidates towards Hillary Clinton.
The Washington Primary offers almost an identical shift in numbers as the Nebraska primary. Hillary Clinton once again closed the gap from an unrealistic 68%-31% margin of victory in the Washington Caucus to 51% to 46% in the Washington Primary. The shift in popularity is 32% towards Hillary Clinton. (I recall these numbers used to be 50%-47%, but we'll go with the 51%-46%).
Yes, I believe in Fair Reflection, unfortunately other than a few intellectuals on Hillary Clinton's side, such as Harold Ickies, the phrase Fair Reflection is meaningless to the democratic party higher ups.
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Democrats to Cover up Caucus Cheating by Forcing Hillary Clinton out of the Race as Soon as Possible.
Fair Warning to all democratic officials, if you support Hillary Clinton's cessation of her campaign to help cover up the caucus cheating that went on, you could be indicted later on for aiding and abetting criminal activity.
Monday, June 2, 2008
Barack Obama's Error In Judgement Swept Under the Rug During Florida Michigan Discussions.
Never before has a democratic candidate received assistance in the acquisition of delegates in the manner in which Barack Obama received them this past weekend. Barack Obama was given Michigan delegates even though his name was not even on the Michigan ballot!
Several years ago Barack Obama challenged the petition names of those running against him for senate. Barack was able to get the top three competitors removed from the ballot by disqualifying their supporters signatures. I don't really think that is that controversial actually. It seems like Obama was able to ridicule old school style of politicking by being a bit slick. It was Barack's way of saying "I'm educated and above you now, I know your tricks, and I'll one up you".
In Michigan, Barack Obama took his name off of the Michigan ballot. Almost the entire media seems to accept this as being some kind of normal procedure. But in retrospect, it really makes very little sense. Isn't something better than nothing?
It turns out that Barack had just made another "slick" move. When Barack took his name off of the Michigan ballot, he did so as a way to endear himself to Iowa voters. It was Barack's way of telling Iowa that nobody better ever try and move their primary date up, Iowa is King! Knowing that by taking his name off of the Michigan ballot, Barack Obama would not only win the Iowa vote, but once again he could trick his own party members into the notion that, "How could the votes in Michigan count, I wasn't even on the ballot".
Dig a little further and we see that Richardson and Edwards took their names off of the Michigan ballots as well, how about that! Edwards and Richardson were in cahoots with Barack and articles have been written about how these three shared caucus voters. Edwards, Richardson, and Obama agreed to help prop each other in the caucus states votes by sharing their excess caucus voters! The top four finishers are eligible for government funding, so it ended up being a sleazy deal that helped them all out.
Is this the kind of change Barack Obama is bringing to the democratic party? Back room deals and shenanigans in which the media always presents the sleazy backroom deals in the best light possible? Barack Obama takes his name off of the ballot in Michigan to gain favor with Iowa voters, then turns around and looks like a victim because his name was off of the ballot in Michigan. As if that wasn't enough, the DNC turn actually took 4 delegates away from Hillary Clinton in the process! But not to be outdone, the DNC also gave Barack a whole slew of MIchigan delegates THAT WERE NOT HIS!
Wow, I'm almost impressed. NOT!
Several years ago Barack Obama challenged the petition names of those running against him for senate. Barack was able to get the top three competitors removed from the ballot by disqualifying their supporters signatures. I don't really think that is that controversial actually. It seems like Obama was able to ridicule old school style of politicking by being a bit slick. It was Barack's way of saying "I'm educated and above you now, I know your tricks, and I'll one up you".
In Michigan, Barack Obama took his name off of the Michigan ballot. Almost the entire media seems to accept this as being some kind of normal procedure. But in retrospect, it really makes very little sense. Isn't something better than nothing?
It turns out that Barack had just made another "slick" move. When Barack took his name off of the Michigan ballot, he did so as a way to endear himself to Iowa voters. It was Barack's way of telling Iowa that nobody better ever try and move their primary date up, Iowa is King! Knowing that by taking his name off of the Michigan ballot, Barack Obama would not only win the Iowa vote, but once again he could trick his own party members into the notion that, "How could the votes in Michigan count, I wasn't even on the ballot".
Dig a little further and we see that Richardson and Edwards took their names off of the Michigan ballots as well, how about that! Edwards and Richardson were in cahoots with Barack and articles have been written about how these three shared caucus voters. Edwards, Richardson, and Obama agreed to help prop each other in the caucus states votes by sharing their excess caucus voters! The top four finishers are eligible for government funding, so it ended up being a sleazy deal that helped them all out.
Is this the kind of change Barack Obama is bringing to the democratic party? Back room deals and shenanigans in which the media always presents the sleazy backroom deals in the best light possible? Barack Obama takes his name off of the ballot in Michigan to gain favor with Iowa voters, then turns around and looks like a victim because his name was off of the ballot in Michigan. As if that wasn't enough, the DNC turn actually took 4 delegates away from Hillary Clinton in the process! But not to be outdone, the DNC also gave Barack a whole slew of MIchigan delegates THAT WERE NOT HIS!
Wow, I'm almost impressed. NOT!
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Associated Press Makes Controversial Statement About Florida & MIchigan Against Hillary Clinton.
The AP quote "Obama is willing to give her the lion's share of those delegates but is stopping short of her demand to fully recognize the two renegade states." is just the latest in a long series of misrepresentations of the truth by the media. How do they live with themselves?Obama is willing to give Hillary Clinton the lion's share of those delegate votes? It must be tough be a lion these days. Or, did the AP mean, Obama was willing to give Hillary Clinton the lying share of the delegate votes that Barack Obama stole in the Caucus States?
This is the kind of one sided news coverage that has afflicted the democratic race in general.
So when does Barack Obama look into the camera, wag his finger at us, and say "I did not cheat with those caucus state votes".
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Operation Stall, Barack Obama's Diabolical Plot for Michigan and Florida.
Barack Obama is stalling in Florida and Michigan and will only allow those votes to count IF AND ONLY IF those votes put Barack Obama over the new delegate majority threshold that has yet to be established.
Unbelieveable. This is just like when the Iran hostages of 1979 were released on the day Ronald Reagan was sworn in.
What Barack Obama is doing is Operation Stall - the slimiest of all tactics because if Operation Stall is successful it will be used as a huge photo and video opportunity with a beaming Barack Obama in the foreground, and thousands of Floridians in the background chanting his name as Barack Obama.
By not having counted the votes in either Michigan and Florida up until now Barack Obama has maintained an artificially bigger delegate lead than he really has, and Barack Obama has used this extra delegate lead over the past several months to convince other delegates to join him.
This is called the Cascading Delegate Effect. Once Florida and Michigan delegate victories were denied to Hillary Clinton, and then Barack Obama cheated in the Caucus States, Barack was able to convince other delegates, with a toxic amount of help from the media, to side with him to help to help maintain the public impression that Barack Obama was well ahead of Hillary Clinton, when he was not, he was actually losing.
There is no real foundation for Barack Obama's lead other than first denying the votes of Michigan and Florida, and then cheating in the caucus states to build a false lead, a lead that does not actually stand up to any real measure of reality when one factors in what it has taken to give Barack Obama his faux lead.
Unbelieveable. This is just like when the Iran hostages of 1979 were released on the day Ronald Reagan was sworn in.
What Barack Obama is doing is Operation Stall - the slimiest of all tactics because if Operation Stall is successful it will be used as a huge photo and video opportunity with a beaming Barack Obama in the foreground, and thousands of Floridians in the background chanting his name as Barack Obama.
By not having counted the votes in either Michigan and Florida up until now Barack Obama has maintained an artificially bigger delegate lead than he really has, and Barack Obama has used this extra delegate lead over the past several months to convince other delegates to join him.
This is called the Cascading Delegate Effect. Once Florida and Michigan delegate victories were denied to Hillary Clinton, and then Barack Obama cheated in the Caucus States, Barack was able to convince other delegates, with a toxic amount of help from the media, to side with him to help to help maintain the public impression that Barack Obama was well ahead of Hillary Clinton, when he was not, he was actually losing.
There is no real foundation for Barack Obama's lead other than first denying the votes of Michigan and Florida, and then cheating in the caucus states to build a false lead, a lead that does not actually stand up to any real measure of reality when one factors in what it has taken to give Barack Obama his faux lead.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
