It seems obvious to all that Obama will get the Democratic nomination. Despite the fact that more honest upstanding American Democrats voted for Hillary, the superdelegates, in the ultimate example of affirmative action, are poised to hand the election to Obama, the loser of the popular vote. And yes, he is the loser of the popular vote, the citizens of FL and MI count in an ethical sense, despite the machinations of the DNC. Reminds me of pre-civil-war America when blacks were counted as 3/5 of a person.

Anyone who remembers the 2000 Bush/Gore debacle, where Gore got more popular votes, yet had the election stolen by powerful and biased persons in positions of power, knows that there is something deeply wrong and rotten about a system that allows officials with an agenda to defy the will of the voters and "elect" someone who actually lost the election.

Yet, blind in their lust and fervor, Obama supporters are eager, anxious to see the system corrupted again, just so long as it favors them.

If the shoe was on the other foot, if Obama was in the lead in the popular vote yet the superdelegates handed the election to Clinton, the outcry would be deafening. But for some reason (perhaps because it's still fashionable to hate women, or white women, or because political correctness forbids criticism of blacks and promotes undeserved positions for them through affirmative action) the mainstream media takes little or no notice of this blatantly unfair situation.

Make no mistake, though, Hillary's supporters have and will continue to take notice of this harsh injustice. Don't expect them to be casting Obama votes in the general election. For Obama, it's going to be undeserved victory in June, well-earned defeat in November.

Lots of Obama people have to be eating their words right now. How many times I read where who ever gets the most votes should get the nomination or get the votes from the SD. I wish I kept track it would be interesting.

But the truth is that who ever gets the most delegates wins. Plain and simple and that is how it is in NOV so all this talk about who is most popular only makes sense on a state by state basis. You can win the popular vote and lose. That is the way it goes.

Obama did not really steal a thing although I think her really blew it at Saturday's DNC meeting. He had nothing to lose so he could have taken the high road but instead looked like a jerk. I am not so sure Hillary took the right path either but she had something to lose. As it turned out she is done. Had she gotten exactly what she wanted I think she was done anyway. She would be closer to getting the nomination but I think that her chance of getting the nomination still was incredibly small. Obama could have won over some of Hillary voters and his followers are going nowhere. He has changed positions on things several time and they could care less.

I think the argument of most votes was the battle cry and now it is laughed at. There are many others and they could care less. They are hanging their hat on change, hope and something different and they do not need or want any information on what that means.

Oh and I am getting tired of what is the common refrain now. That I am a racist as is any other Democrat that wont vote for Obama. Hey Obama is half white too and his whole upbringing was by the white side of the family. He doesn't know he is black but he is willing to exploit it.

I have had many friends that were black and you know what I like them because of them. I could care less what color they were and I raised my kids the same way. As a result I have three wonderful grandkids that are multicultural. So cut the racist crap. It is getting old.

I didn't vote for Bush because I thought he was an idiot. If he was white or black he still would have been an idiot. I think Obama is playing an intellectual game. Preparing the perfect argument to win. Let reality be damed just like any attorney when they argue their case.

So I think he is full of it. I could care less what color he is. If I have any bit of racisms in me it is of a different type than you may think. When I see a proud, educated, well spoken older black man or woman I am even more impressed than what I would be had he or she been white. I have to believe that in most cases they had to overcome so many hurdles to get to that point.

I really do not think that Obama fits into the mold of oppressed black man able to overcome. Went to a prep school then the best colleges and earns over a million a year. Certainly a better life than I had and I do not feel oppressed by the white man. Also I honestly do not think that the level of racism in Hawaii is anywhere near what one might see in the deep south or other areas of this country where KKK is very active.

So I think that he will not be good for this country. He did not steal anything and if anything was unfairly handed to him it was the media who did it and not anything he did other than to present a person who presents a great story line. He has achieved much in the campaign and a lot of his success is his own doing and I will give him credit for that. However, I just am not buying what he is trying to sell.

Regarding the popular votes, I was stuck by the differences in sentiments in the media in this case and in the case of Bush/Gore. When Gore got more popular votes than Bush, yet lost the election, many people seemed dismayed by that. In this case, not so much.

The Raven

I wouldn't go so far as saying most supporters of Hillary Clinton are/were more honest or outstanding. It has nothing to do with Hillary being a woman, or white woman as you put it - it's that people did not like the person Hillary was or who she had become.

When Gore got more popular votes than Bush, yet lost the election, many people seemed dismayed by that. In this case, not so much.

Maybe because Hillary didn't get more popular votes? Unless you count both Florida and Michigan and don't count caucus states.

Popular votes? Give me a break. Clinton did not get more of the popular vote! Do voters in caucus states not count? I am amazed how so many people will buy into a claim just because it is repeated! That is all that Clinton had left to claim, and she had to "revise" caucus states, Michigan, and Florida to get there. So please, you may be buying that popular vote thing, but it is bogus and everyone knows it...including the super delegates.

I agree with you about Obama being the affirmative action candidate, but everything else you said is hogwash.

Sigh. . . . never let facts get in the way of a long rant.

The democratic party elects its nominee based on delegates not popular vote.

Hillary supporters are selective in counting the votes in their popular vote argument (which again is irrelevant since Dems count delegates not popuar vote). They include Michigan, where Obama's name was not on the ballot and FL where he did not campaign. And they exclude caucus states.

Superdelegates are free to assign their delegate vote to whomever they wish. Many superdelegates are rushing to Obama now at the eleventh hour because the race is over, not because of some special preference or undeserved bonus they are giving to Obama. The suggestion that superdelegates are moving to Obama now because of affirmative action, is petty, ignorant of reality, and a scurrilous attack..

C'mon people. Read. Learn the facts.

The spittle is clouding your vision and, perhaps your glasses.

If there is an Affirmative Action candidate, it is HILLARY CLINTON. A white woman with limited experience whose ,ost distinguishing characteristic is the name recognition that comes from being married to the "Leader of the Free World". When the time came for her to act like a woman with draft age children, a maderate forward thinking independent thinker, she acted instead like a politician who wanted to chest bump with the Boyz and voted with Bush to lynch Saddam so that "We" could feel good about ourselves again. That in and of itself disqualifies her as fit to lead this nation into the future.

You're not just a sore loser, but a person with race too much on your mind. Affirmative action is the Governments acknowledgement that public sector hiring and education have long been clubs for which entrance was based more on interpersonal relationships, who you know than what you know. Before Affirmative action people hired for jobs were somewhere between the Best and the Worst qualified. Nobody complained when they were all white John McCain was near the bottom of his class was it Affirmative Action that got him where he is?. The mythology of unqualified minority hires is based on some white peoples refusal to admit white privilege. Refusal to admit inequality. It has nothing to do with this election.

The rules are the rules. You want to count MI/FL. I wonder why Puerto Rico counts when they don't vote in the GE. But I don't make the rules and if I did, I wouldn't change in the middle of the game. So go on spewing all that Bile Clintonite. Just remember in November when you cast that vote for Hanoi John that he will pick at least three supreme court justices and Roe V Wade will be dead, he will Bankrupt your children with war debt and Clinton will be a Pariah for sabotaging the party this fall. She won't make it past Iowa in 2012. But hey. You will have put a black man back in his place and that's all you seem to care about.

Before affirmative action, everything in this country operated at peak efficiency,for the most part. 911, never would've happened. No way, a bunch of spear-throwers would've been able to come into this country and do what they did to us.

Does that mean George Bush is an Affirmative Action President? Or is he secretly Black? Dude, you lost me at Duh!

TheRaven:

It seems obvious to all that Obama will get the Democratic nomination. Despite the fact that more honest upstanding American Democrats voted for Hillary, the superdelegates, in the ultimate example of affirmative action, are poised to hand the election to Obama, the loser of the popular vote. And yes, he is the loser of the popular vote, the citizens of FL and MI count in an ethical sense, despite the machinations of the DNC. Reminds me of pre-civil-war America when blacks were counted as 3/5 of a person.

Anyone who remembers the 2000 Bush/Gore debacle, where Gore got more popular votes, yet had the election stolen by powerful and biased persons in positions of power, knows that there is something deeply wrong and rotten about a system that allows officials with an agenda to defy the will of the voters and "elect" someone who actually lost the election.

Yet, blind in their lust and fervor, Obama supporters are eager, anxious to see the system corrupted again, just so long as it favors them.

If the shoe was on the other foot, if Obama was in the lead in the popular vote yet the superdelegates handed the election to Clinton, the outcry would be deafening. But for some reason (perhaps because it's still fashionable to hate women, or white women, or because political correctness forbids criticism of blacks and promotes undeserved positions for them through affirmative action) the mainstream media takes little or no notice of this blatantly unfair situation.

Make no mistake, though, Hillary's supporters have and will continue to take notice of this harsh injustice. Don't expect them to be casting Obama votes in the general election. For Obama, it's going to be undeserved victory in June, well-earned defeat in November.

Really well put OP, The Raven. The DNC really screwed all of us...even BO. He damn well better be the "One" his supporters think he is if he's gonna unite this lot!

No, It means after 40 years of affirmative action, we have a lot of people in this country doing jobs that they are not capable of doing. Comprende?

The endless whimpering from you goofballs on the fringe is endlessly entertaining.

Obama won.

Choke on it.

Ah mrliberal,

O.k. your contention is that:

"Before affirmative action, everything in this country operated at peak efficiency,for the most part. 911, never would've happened."

Affirmative action was established by John F. Kennedy in 1961 through Executive Order 10925. Of course it later developed through subsequent Executive Orders by LBJ and Nixon as well as through case law.

<link>

So, you argue that the county operated at peak efficiency prior to affirmative action (1961) and that 911 never would've happened, presumably, if affirmative action beneficiaries like minorities and women were not employed in sensitive positions.

Do I have that right so far?

O.k. so here are some examples of mrliberal's so-called peak efficiency of the United States prior to affirmative action:

Soviet Union launched first maned space craft

McCarthy Hearings

Korean War

Attack on Pearl Harbor

The Great Depression

Jim Crow Laws

Slavery

Reconstruction

Salem Witch Trials

Disenfranchisment of women voters

Child labor

Indian Wars <link>

I think, mrliberal, you may want to reconsider your position.