Cokie Roberts And Steven V. Roberts: Why the Democrats could lose


loyal democrat
loyal democrat's picture

Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1
Voting for someone merely for the color of his skin is not good enough, THAT i s racist. The Democratic Party has turned its back on millions of their most loyal voters and there will be a price to pay, come November. How very sad, this could have been a huge victory for the Dem. Party but instead the delegates will try to push this idea of the first African American, down our throats and it won't happen. The people are screaming to listen and choose the candidate that will win for them but oh well, by the time they finally pull their heads out, it will be too late.
Average: 5 (2 votes)
bettycoar
bettycoar's picture

Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1
Please do not give up on Hillary and the democratic way, we do not have 48 states we have 50 and if Fla. & Mich are not counted the DNC can forget about my vote if Hillary does not get on the ballot. Please everyone stand up and be counted.
BusstaBrown
BusstaBrown's picture

Joined: May 2008
Posts: 4
Don't attempt to game the game. MI and FL will have their delegates counted, but not in an unfair manner since they didn't play by the established rules. So enough of the 48 states propaganda already. And if by some remote chance that MI and FL aren't seated, you get to substitute Guam and Puerto Rico. 48 + 2 = 50. http://www.leadershipcultivation.com
tampagurl
tampagurl's picture

Joined: May 2008
Posts: 3
BustaBrown, it is Un-American and undemocratic to not want our votes to count! You obviously don't live in Florida or Michigan or I think you would feel differently. The good people of Florida and Michigan didn't break the rules. The party needs to find another way to punish the true rule breakers...not the voters! Lets not forget counting the hanging, dangling, pregnant, chads, eight years ago; Several times if I remember right. At that time the Dems wanted every vote to count. I find it disingenuous of the party to now want to to strip Florida and Michigan of our right to vote and be heard!! What's everyone afraid of? Let the people be heard or this party will go down in history shamefully.
BusstaBrown
BusstaBrown's picture

Joined: May 2008
Posts: 4
Tampagurl, its purely propaganda to say anyone doesn't want your votes to count...much like the propaganda James Baker spewed in FL in 2000 as in "we counted them, then we counted them again". There was a process in place and the lawmakers (the elected representatives of the good people) in the states of Florida and Michigan chose to not follow the rules. Also, the penalty was in place before the rules were broken. Therefore the consequences of breaking the rules were crystal clear. Now the delegates of FL and MI will be seated, but in a manner that will be fair to both Clinton and Obama. http://www.leadershipcultivation.com
tampagurl
tampagurl's picture

Joined: May 2008
Posts: 3
BustaBrown, We will be heard...One way or another. If not now, then in the general election! Since when did speaking the truth become propaganda? I'll ask you again; What are you afraid of? Could it be that Obama doesn't really have the popular vote?
Wondrouswoman
Wondrouswoman's picture

Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1
"But at this time, in this party, being black is an enormous asset. Given America's long, torturous path toward racial justice, many Democrats simply cannot imagine denying the nomination to the first serious African-American candidate for president. From a moral perspective, that's a noble judgment. From a political perspective, it could cost Democrats the White House. " Yes, Cokie and Steven, the Obama campaign is historic. And the nomination of an African-American for president would be historic. So, in my opinion, would be the nomination of a woman. Furthermore, depriving a woman of her chance by bullying her from the race in spite of her very strong showing in the primary in spite of being vastly outspent would be historic inasmuch as no other presidential candidate in the history of the Democratic Party has been so treated. It would set a precedent for short circuiting democracy that I see as dangerous to the future of the people's right to decide who will rule. What's more, it would send a powerful message to 51% of the population that has, until now, only dreamed of a chance at the White House, and thereby, do real damage to Democratic hopes for the future. I am for democracy. Yes, it is time consuming and sometimes inconvenient. However, I see our discomfort and even frustration about the back and forth of a campaign and waiting until all voters have their say, etc. as a small price to pay for "rule by the people." In my opinion, the people of America have been robbed of their right to select their president by majority vote over the last eight years in one and probably two national elections. Now, a majority of Democrats may be robbed by their own party of their say in a real choice (as far as the popular vote goes) on the nominee. Is that progress? I expect the DNC, the Rules and Bylaws Committee, and the Party as a whole to make a selection of a candidate based on the demonstrated ability of that candidate to win the election in November. Otherwise, I'm an Independent in search of a new party. The price of my vote is respect for my gender and for my intelligence.
BusstaBrown
BusstaBrown's picture

Joined: May 2008
Posts: 4
"I expect the DNC, the Rules and Bylaws Committee, and the Party as a whole to make a selection of a candidate based on the demonstrated ability of that candidate to win the election in November." I've got a better solution. How about awarding the nomination to the candidate that secures the greatest number of delegates and has the lead after the established Democratic nomination is over. The award would be granted regardless of race, gender, religion or who is best at Sudoku. Your candidate doesn't get to claim the nomination because of some add-on entitlement clause http://www.leadershipcultivation.com
Sherry
Sherry's picture

Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1
I believe the DNC have made some incredible mistakes throughout this nomination process, first by punishing MI and FL so harshly and then by presenting us with an unknown and unvetted flawed candidate such as Obama. Had it not been for his associations and his extremist liberal views I might have been inclined to vote for him. I do believe that that he is full of hate and racism fueled by his 20 years with Rev Wright. I especially cannot understand how he could let his children be exposed to this. I have read alot about his Chicago ties and think they are dispicable. For the first time in my adult life I will most likely be voting for a republican if Clinton is not the nominee. My voter's registration card will be going from Dem to Independent in the future and I have made no donations to the DNC. I believe our Dem system needs alot of fixing considering we have only ourselves to blame for all the idiotic mistakes that have been made over the last 9 years.
BusstaBrown
BusstaBrown's picture

Joined: May 2008
Posts: 4
The rules are the rules. Just rules are established before the game begins and the participants do not get to change them after the game starts in order to enhance their position once they get behind. Obama has proven that he is the better candidate. The most obvious proof of that is that after Hillary has used a multitude of gimmicks, Obama still has the lead. What more proof do you need. And about that race thing, African Americans have voted with great enthusiasm for many white candidates, now all of a sudden African Americans are only voting for Obama because he happens to be a Black candidate? How self-serving! It provides such a rational excuse for not voting for the Black guy. How hypocritical can it get. Incidentally Obama happens to be half White. If some White people have such a problem voting for the Black guy, then vote for the White guy. Bussta Brown http://www.leadershipcultivation.com
tampagurl
tampagurl's picture

Joined: May 2008
Posts: 3
BustaBrown stop trying to spin what people have said here. No one said or implied that they wouldn't vote for Obama because he is black. They said, "the nomination of an African-American for president would be historic, however, voting for someone merely for the color of his skin is not good enough, THAT i s racist". Most of us believe that Hillary is the stronger candidate based on the issues. Obama frightens us...not because he is black but because he has not been vetted. He won't wear a flag pin, he WEARS a flag pin, Rev. Wright is his mentor, he's NOT his mentor, Iran is not a threat, Iran IS a threat, He didn't want to make a controversial vote, so he voted 100 times present. Get my point? Furthermore, none of that represents change, it's the same old status quo and if Hillary is not our nominee and our choice is between Obama and the "WHITE GUY" as you call him...We choose the devil we know.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate the change.