Letters to the Editor
-
@ blondeone: Your Answers
If she can *only* win via Superdelegates, by overriding the will of the people, do you support that? If so, why do you support it?
First of all, this question is such a convoluted series of fallacies (begging the question, complex question, equivocation), I'm not sure where to start. But I'll try, breaking this into some reasonable answers:
1] She can only win with superdelegates at this point. But, here's the thing: Obama can only win with superdelegates, too at this point.
2] She can win with the popular vote, which is much more democratic, imo, than delegates (particulary in caucus "victories", which are notoriously undemocratic). If you look at the popular vote total thus far (minus caucus states), there are only about 200,000 votes separating them.
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/2008-primary-election-totals-version-1.jpg
3] There is no written rule about how the superdelegates vote, so you're assuming here that they "override" the will of the people by exercising their judgment/vote. A current CBS poll seems to suggest that voters believe superdelegates should select the candidate who can win (30%) or they should be free to support whichever candidate (21%). Only 46% of those surveyed believe superdelegates should support the candidate with the most delegates.
http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/politics/main250.shtml
4] I support the candidate who has the experience and the "edge", as Clinton does. I think she has a better chance to win the GE. She actually fares better in a GE matchup with McCain -- especially in critical states -- than does Obama, according to polling data.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/latestpolls/index.html
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
-
inherent tax
Report dated Associated Press November 21
15.4% is an embarrassed poorest segment of the population in the New York citizens with the food cost.
It is forecast that the number increases by further 11% by the end of 2006.
Food stamp coupon (food supply system for the low income earner) recipient says that it will rise to about 1.1 million people among 8.1 million New York City residents.
((New York City Coalition Against Hunger) Depend on the investigation that' announced. )
Super-difference society and economic quarantine policy
When did the super-difference age of such the United States start?Corporate CEO and general worker's income differences were 36 times 1976 year. It increases by a factor of 131 in fiscal year 1993, and corporate CEO and general worker's income differences increase by a factor of 431 in fiscal year 2004 when the armaments industry got excited over the Iraq war special procurements. The well-to-do population of the high rank 10% has 70% of domestic assets in the United States when seeing with the property base. Concentrated level of the wealth of the United States is terrific because it says like 61% in France, 56% in Britain, 44% in Germany, and 39% in Japan.
Will an enormous property be a result of the effort?Oh dear, it is not so. 42% of the property person who Rancined it to Forbes 400 merely succeeded parents' properties as well as George Bush. They are not making an effort except insisting on the abolition of the inheritance tax. As the child who grew up in a rich home is 22 times higher than the child of the probability becoming the super-rich of the top five % who grew up in the families living in poverty, and when the child who was born in the home of the subordinate position 25% is a black, the probability of staying as it is in the poorest segment of the population is twices as more as the white according to the research of the U.S. think tank in the United States.
The probability (social liquidity) that can become a well-to-do population from the poorest segment of the population is seen.
Denmark, Nolwei, Finland, Canada, Sweden, Germany, and France are given than the United States at the chance. ("American dream" is achieved easily. )This turns out in the investigation.
The United States says that few countries of the chance are only Britain in advanced nations. )(because of fulfilling wish for people who aimed at the New World from Britannia barely
-
Barack Obama in 2016!
Barack Obama should have addressed the opinions of his spiritual mentor and close confidant long ago....perhaps he
needed to lock his delegates in before hand? While much of
what Reverand Wright has to say is probably true, Senator
Obama seems just a little disingenuous in claiming no knowledge of Wright's inflamatory sermons. This is his
"I didn't have sex with" moment. Whatever! I refuse to hop on the band wagon or drink the Kool-aid. At least I know Hillary
is vetted,road tested and can handle the job. Senator Obama might very well develop the chutzpah and gravitas to be POTOUS,eventually. What I dread is another four years of a president everyone wants to have a beer with. Enough already!
-
@manos Omar
Does this mean that my dog is exonerated?
There is still guilt by association.
-
Believing vs Reality
So am I saying that if your evaluation of the "as far as I know" riff does not take this sentence into account constitutes dishonesty?
Absolutely. I prefer to respect the English language.
Oh, but I am taking that sentence into account. She doesn't believe the rumours, smears (etc) are true; as far as she knows. I don't believe the rumours or smears either; as far as I know. I'm content with her statement of belief. She's acknowledging that her belief is not absolute, it's not a fact, it's only as far as she knows. Subsequent facts could alter her belief. Where's the dishonesty in seeing the obvious?
If I bark like a dog, I know that I have barked like a dog. If I tell someone that I barked like a dog, but they didn't hear it, then they could say, Fester barked like a dog, as far as I know; subject to the videotapes.
You can respect the words, but I would also suggest fluency as well.
-
Minus the causes votes?
She can win with the popular vote, which is much more democratic, imo, than delegates (particulary in caucus "victories", which are notoriously undemocratic). If you look at the popular vote total thus far (minus caucus states), there are only about 200,000 votes separating them.
If the DNC counts the caucus votes, why are you subtracting them? That's not reality based.
After making a lot of noise about what's happened to FL & MI you want to dismiss votes in places like Iowa and Washington? You should know that the Hillary camp is not winning any friends in Caucus states by denigrating their process, especially Iowa, where they seem to love it. In fact that bad attitude looks like it cost Hillary delegates when the state conference came up a few weeks back in Iowa.
So Obama is anywhere to 710,000-821,000 votes ahead in the popular vote.