• on a comment on Bambi No More over 5 years ago

    Thank you. And thanks for your diary up right now. Well needed.

  • comment on a post Bambi No More over 5 years ago

    For a sane foreign policy.

  • comment on a post Hillary is NOT Conceding: Official Statement over 5 years ago

    wouldn't it also supress voter turnout among Obama supporters? And do you have any evidence whatsoever for Obama being behind this?

  • on a comment on The Sun Rises, the World Turns, over 5 years ago

    I get so caught up in the anger at the stupidity of it all that I forget that part.

    I didn't really think about it in terms of how these idiotic attacks haven't been working.

    Thank you for reminding me of that.

    by the way, I, too, enjoyed your texas diary. Thank you for doing that research. It needed to be done.

  • on a comment on Thank You, Senator Clinton over 5 years ago

    No brownie points... I'd settle for a tip :)

  • on a comment on The Sun Rises, the World Turns, over 5 years ago

    yeah a good conservative is hard to find these days...

    also, I'm going to steal hacktackular.

  • comment on a post The Sun Rises, the World Turns, over 5 years ago

    For elite tips.

  • on a comment on Thank You, Senator Clinton over 5 years ago

    okay, one vote as cast = one vote as counted.

    They don't cast votes in caucuses, so those are out, and are you including the FL & MI?

    already, this metric has lost a good deal of its power.

  • on a comment on Thank You, Senator Clinton over 5 years ago

    as for the principle/practice distinction. It results in an ambivilence over Sen. Clinton's candidacy, not some firm dislike for it. The point of the distinction is to highlight that it is one thing (or one main thing) that I believe is detrimental in all of this: Senator Clinton's use of the popular vote metric, which serves no real purpose except to cause division. It doesn't give her a better shot at the nomination, it just results in divisivness.

    Were it not for that, I'd be the first to say "on to Denver!"

  • on a comment on Thank You, Senator Clinton over 5 years ago

    well, I'm assuming it has something to do with the fact that this election is a heck of a lot closer, but, honestly, I'm not sure I get it.

    Not to mention, I was comparing the two to demonstrate that Sen. Clinton has even more warrent to stay in the election than he did...

    So, still don't see the problem.

  • comment on a post Thank You, Senator Clinton over 5 years ago

    well, I wouldn't call it a litany...

    I only make the claim of one problem. :)

  • on a comment on Thank You, Senator Clinton over 5 years ago

    Well, I'd disagree that it is only the caucus that system that makes it difficult to count. Leaving aside the issue in this election of FL and MI, we still have to contend with the wide and varied ways that govern the different states' primaries. For example, do we count an open primary differently than a closed one?

    I would say that there are more issues than simply the caucus states.

    As has been pointed out elsewhere, in addition to the problem of tabulating the popular votes, we have to contend with the fact that the popular vote in this case isn't the desired goal. If it were, campaigns would be run differently. Obama would have tried to run up his score in IL; Clinton would have done the same in NY and CA.

    But, in response to your question, it isn't a matter of pretending that the popular vote metric does or doesn't exist. I contend that it doesn't--at least not in the clear-cut way it's being used by Sen. Clinton and her supporters. Simply put, there are about a dozen ways--all with logical support--that one could calculate it, and Sen. Clinton only wins in a few of those. So, by denying its existence (in the form referred to by Sen. Clinton), I believe that I am doing something useful: calling a flawed, problematic, and specious metric what it is.

  • on a comment on Thank You, Senator Clinton over 5 years ago

    My problem with the popular vote metric is that I don't understand what it's trying to achieve.

    The reason we shouldn't use it is that our primary system is set up in such a way that makes calculating it near-impossible (to do fairly, that is).

    That said, yes, I suppose it does rhetorically weaken Obama's candidacy, but it doesn't seem to do much else.

    I suppose I am pretending it away, inasmuch as I--correctly, I think--note that it does not do anything useful for the party or the actual results of the nomination,.

  • on a comment on Thank You, Senator Clinton over 5 years ago

    what's the problem...

  • comment on a post Thank You, Senator Clinton over 5 years ago

    Flame away. You can flame all day, if you want to.

Diaries

Advertise Blogads