On Jun 9, 2008, at 3:13 PM, MB Software Solutions General Account wrote:
>> There is a large, vocal movement by disgruntled Clinton supporters
>> to
>> undermine the Obama candidacy. Something had to have been done in
>> some
>> sort of official capacity to result in such an unprecedented revolt.
>
> Really? I don't think so. Those folks were very passionate about
> Hillary. To have a mutiny against Obama wouldn't be hard to imagine,
> given the way it went down in the end with such a close race and the
> controversy with Florida/Michigan, popular vote vs. delegate vote,
> media
> bias, race card playing, etc. I think those folks would have done
> this
> without any kind of official doctrine from the HQ of Hillary's camp.
I think that that explanation is very insulting. It smacks of a sense
of entitlement, as if Clinton were somehow "owed" victory, and that
Obama's biggest affront was winning.
And there was no controversy over FL/MI until Clinton herself raised
it, reversing her previously stated position on how to deal with those
delegates. When she was the front-runner, she said that the rules set
up ahead of time had to be followed; when she was trailing, she
changed her statements because that was her only chance to catch up to
Obama. You can't be bitter about a controversy that your own candidate
created.
-- Ed Leafe
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
