2008 Democratic Primary:posted by: Political Pyro
April 29, 2008 at 3:23 am
When Al Gore lost the presidency to George W. Bush nearly eight years ago, Democrats all across the country were outraged that their candidate was defeated despite winning the popular vote by over a half-million votes.
Today, when media darling Barack Obama looks like he will repeat the Bush role (more delegates, less votes), the uproar is nowhere to be found. Everyone is focused on the delegates. Nevermind that neither candidate will score enough delegates to secure the nomination. Nevermind that each candidate will require the assistance of the superdelegates to push him or her over the top. Nevermind the popular vote entirely… It’s all about the delegates.
Why is the MSM suddenly disregarding the popular vote when it has been only eight years since Gore "outrageously" lost the election by having fewer delegates?
Here’s why: Once the final votes are counted, Hillary Clinton will have the popular vote by perhaps 100,000 (assuming she wins Indiana by 5%, loses North Carolina by no more than 10%, cleans Obama’s clock in Kentucky and West Virginia by 25+% each, and finishes up with a landslide in Puerto Rico).
The first problem here for the MSM is the most obvious one: Hillary Clinton is not Barack Obama.
The second problem is this: Senator Clinton’s victory only exists if the popular vote numbers include Michigan, Florida, and Puerto Rico. Listen in the next few weeks as the mainstream media totally disregard the democratic process of counting every vote simply because the total will not propel their candidate of choice to the victory column.
Among the talking points the MSM will use to justify their position: Michigan and Florida don’t count, and Puerto Ricans aren’t even qualified to vote in the general election.
In the first talking point, "Michigan and Florida", the argument we will hear ad nauseum is that both states broke party rules and moved their primaries up to an unacceptable time slot. It is in this argument we are expected to believe (but only when Obama benefits from such a decision) that DNC rules trump democracy. However, when Puerto Rico is in the national headlines, the argument will be reversed. The new argument will be: "They don’t even count in the general election, why should they count now?". When Puerto Rico comes into play, the rules of the DNC will suddenly be tossed out the window.
The MSM is already guilty of suppressing important information (Wright, Rezko, Ayers, etc.) from the American people. Had the majority of Americans known of such scandals, there is no doubt Senator Obama would have already been defeated by Senator Clinton. But with the impeccable timing of the Rev. Wright story brought out after Texas and Ohio, the media has achieved their objective of propelling Obama to front-runner status.
Such suppression of vital information to the American people by the MSM should be considered nothing less than treasonous.
In the never-ending battle of rules vs. votes, the MSM is proving yet again that they are willing to do anything, say anything to get their man into the White House… truth and democracy be damned.




Article 2 section 1 of the Constitution was written giving the “Electors” the sole responsibility to vote for the President. If I’m reading it correctly; if it weren’t for the 12 Amendment “we the people” wouldn’t get to vote at all for the president. The 12th Amendment was ratified in 1804 and was probably set up in the way that would give the majority of the country at least some voice. Here is a good link for The Constitution. http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
If you Google “election 2000 county map” under “Images” in Google, you will see how the major cities were blue (Gore) but the rest of the country was red (Bush) and it was very similar in the 2004 race. In some ways the Dems are lucky in how there system is set up. If something comes out that makes the candidate with the most votes and/or delegates “unelectable” the “super delegates” could still “rescue” the Democrat Party. It would be interesting to see how the cities vs. rest of the rest of the country voted in both parties during the primary season. They would have to do separate maps for the 2 Parties and various colors for the various candidates. Unfortunately, I wouldn’t have the slightest idea how to do anything like that.
Comment by Granny T — April 29, 2008 @ 1:59 pm