Reactions to story from Daily Kos: State of the Nation

• 

  Where We Agree With Daily Kos

  http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/5/21/164044/464
  109 days ago in TalkLeft: The Politics Of Crime · Authority: 1,853

  Where We Agree With Daily Kos By Big Tent Democrat, Section Media Posted on Wed May 21, 2008 at 03:40:44 PM EST Tags: (all tags) Share This: First and foremost, we agree that we must all come together and wholeheartedly support and work hard for the
• 

  Where We Agree With Daily Kos

  http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/5/21/164044/464
  109 days ago in FDL Book Salon: Snitch with Author Ethan Brown - TalkLeft: The Politics Of Crime · Authority: 1,475

  First and foremost, we agree that we must all come together and wholeheartedly support and work hard for the Democratic nominee for President as well as all the Democratic candidates for elective office. Second, we agree with this statement: It's clear
• 

  Puerto Rico's impact on Democrats, Top Chef.

  http://thelifevicarious.typepad.com/the_life_vicarious/2008/...
  94 days ago in THE LIFE VICARIOUS · Authority: 21

  Hillary Clinton, despite low voter turn-out still won Puerto Rico. She was hoping for a bigger turn-out so she could give more gravitas to her argument she had the lion's share of the overall popular vote but Puerto Ricans - who control 63 delegates, more than 27 states - only provided a 16% turn-out because they have no representation in US government and they have no vote in the general election. There's no motivation. But as the primaries came to a close and every delegate counted, Puerto Rico, despite its opposition to statehood, almost played a key role in determining the Democratic nominee for President of the United States.Last night we watched the first part of the Top Chef: Chicago season finale. And as we're more than certain Puerto Rico is no part of Illinois we wonder why end a show, that's really only given lip service to Chicago at best this past season, as far as possible from the title city? If anything people in Chicago take their food very seriously, so why leave them as disenfranchised about the winner of their city's contest as Puerto Ricans are disenfranchised in the general election?
• 

  Puerto Rico's impact on Democrats, Top Chef.

  http://thelifevicarious.typepad.com/the_life_vicarious/2008/...
  94 days ago in http://thelifevicarious.typepad.com · Authority: 36

  Hillary Clinton, despite low voter turn-out still won Puerto Rico. She was hoping for a bigger turn-out so she could give more gravitas to her argument she had the lion's share of the overall popular vote but Puerto Ricans - who control 63 delegates, more than 27 states - only provided a 16% turn-out because they have no representation in US government and they have no vote in the general election. Still, as the primaries came to a close and every delegate counted, Puerto Rico, despite its opposition to statehood, almost played a key role in determining the Democratic nominee for President of the United States. Last night we watched the first part of the Top Chef: Chicago finale. And we're more than certain Puerto Rico is no part of Illinois. So why end a show, that's really only given lip service to Chicago at best this past season, as far as possible from the title city? If anything people in Illinois should be just as disenfranchised as those in Florida and Michigan for having no control over the Chicago winner.
• 

  A guest post

  http://gort42.blogspot.com/2008/06/guest-post.html
  96 days ago in Gort42 · Authority: 31

  I've been taking a bit of a break the last few days so a reader picks up the slack. Hey G-man, If you revisit the Presidential race, and Steve Corbett's histrionics, here's my e-mail to Corbett, which you can do with whatever you wish: Corbett- I don't know why you've decided that in order to support Sen. Clinton, you feel it's necessary to denigrate people who voted for Sen. Obama. Let me tell you something. I'm not anything like a"party boss" trying "push someone through." Neither am I a pawn, dutifully doing whatever those aformentioned"party bosses" tell me. Nor do I conform to your latest caricature, as someone who's mentality will only allow them to support someone who can be successfully intimidated and told what to do. I am a voter. I am a member of the Democratic Party for more than 20 years. I am someone who gives careful consideration to my vote. Every time, for every office in every election. More recently, I'm the father of a 10-month old son,who makes all important decisions with the face of my son firmly planted in my mind, and his future as my one overriding concern. In particular, when I make a decision about something as important as my vote for the next President of the United States, I do so upon serious reflection on what kind of world and what kind of America I want my son to grow up in. And it was with my son's image, as he is now, and all the potential that he has to be in future, that I cast my vote for Barack Obama in the Pennsylvania Democratic Primary. I was not pushing anyone aside. I was not doing what I was told. I was voting for my son's future. So you can dismiss that, and diminish it, and run it down all you want. And you can deny that's what you're doing, if you like. But the truth is clear. I pledged long ago, as an Obama supporter, to shift that support to Hillary Clinton if she won the nomination. I would accept the result of the process,even if it wasn't the one I'd been hoping for.But go ahead, please, keep insulting me and my vote and my motivations and my sincerity. You may convince me yet that the best course of action is to insist that it's my candidate or nobody. Peace. Vic I listened to Corbett for about 4 minutes yesterday hoping he would be covering a local topic but when it was just the same old whoring for Hillary BS I switched back to ESPN radio for the rest of my commute. Last week he had a couple of great shows covering reassessment and our esteemed Luzerne County jurists that I enjoyed and hope he gets back to local issues. NEPAConseravtive was also listening and had some fun with photoshop: Hillary won Puerto Rico Sunday in a big way with a whopping 16% turnout. Yawn. The island doesn't even have Republican or Democratic party's. Kos asks why does Puerto Rico have more delegates than 27 states. Tomorrow South Dakota and Montana will chose fewer delegates than Puerto Rico but they have electoral votes and Obama is expected to win both. . From KP: the Uncommitted Delegates will have to make a choice this week. . Holdouts ready to choose . It looks like that by the end of the week Barry will have enough delegates to claim the nomination and I think the General Election won't even be close. The election will be a referendum on Bush and the Republican mismanagement of the last 7 years. If this is not done this week and Hillary wants to go on to the convention a West Wing writer offers a possible scenario: . Four Days in Denver
• 

  Puerto Rico Turnout - Political Opinion

  http://www.netnewspublisher.com/puerto-rico-turnout-politica...
  97 days ago in Net News Publisher for World News, Headlines, Breaking News · Authority: 165

  16 percent.That was turnout? 16 percent. For some bizarre reason, Puerto Rico has more delegates than 27 U.S. states. For a territory that has zero electoral votes in November to have a greater say than over half of the states in the United States isn’t just bizarre on the merits, but it’s also an insult to those 27 states. I’m all for Puerto Rican statehood, and hope to see it happen if the people of Puerto Rico so want it. I love my boricua brothers and sisters so much I actually married one. But until they are a U.S. state, I hope that their influence in the primaries is drastically reduced in the future. If nothing else, it would spare candidates from spending time and money in a state that has no bearing in November. Not to mention that Puerto Ricans, given the option of having a say in an election they are ultimately barred from participating in (unless they move to the mainland), had better things to do than vote. Not surprising, perhaps, given that there isn’t even a Democratic Party in the island. So let’s end this half-way status for Puerto Rico, and let’s make sure that the people living in the United States have the greatest say in who our nominee is going to be. Source Daily Kos Net News Publisher Similar Posts:T-Mobile USA Breaks 30 Million Customer Milestone Clinton, Obama Campaign in Puerto Rico Clinton Comfortably Wins Puerto Rico Primary
• 

  Puerto Rico turnout

  http://americannonsense.com/?p=9720
  97 days ago in AMERICAN NONSENSE · Authority: 62

  16 percent. That was turnout. 16 percent. For some bizarre reason, Puerto Rico has more delegates than 27 U.S. states. For a territory that has zero electoral votes in November to have a greater say than over half of the states in the United States isn’t just bizarre on the merits, but it’s also an insult to those 27 states. I’m all for Puerto Rican statehood, and hope to see it happen if the people of Puerto Rico so want it. I love my boricua brothers and sisters so much I actually married one. But until they are a U.S. state, I hope that their influence in the primaries is drastically reduced in the future. If nothing else, it would spare candidates from spending time and money in a state that has no bearing in November. Not to mention that Puerto Ricans, given the option of having a say in an election they are ultimately barred from participating in (unless they move to the mainland), had better things to do than vote. Not surprising, perhaps, given that there isn’t even a Democratic Party in the island. So let’s end this half-way status for Puerto Rico, and let’s make sure that the people living in the United States have the greatest say in who our nominee is going to be. Update: Ha ha ha. Look at what crazy Lanny Davis said before the Puerto Rico primary: Sen. Clinton has already won the most votes, but there is controversy over including the over 300,000 votes from Michigan, since Sen. Obama was not on the ballot (by his own choice). But if Sen. Clinton wins a substantial victory in Puerto Rico tomorrow – with an expected record turnout exceeding two million voters – she could well end up with more popular votes than Sen. Obama, even if Michigan’s primary votes are excluded. Only the deluded in the Clinton camp thought that turnout in Puerto Rico would exceed two million voters. Not only is island turnout low when matters of the island’s status are not on the ballot, but the election was for a Sunday. Still, 16 percent? That added up to 387,299 total votes. In the 1980 primary between Carter and Kennedy, 800,000 turned out. So not only was Lanny Davis living in la-la land on turnout, but the people of Puerto Rico were far less concerned about his beloved Hillary than they were about the candidates in 1980. Ultimately, bottom line, Obama wins the popular vote when including the caucus states (which should be obviously done), and either excluding Michigan or giving its uncommitted votes to Obama. (The proper count, as agreed to by the Michigan Democratic Party itself, was the exclude the results as unrepresentative of anything.)
• 

  Exercising futility

  http://gregprinceblog.wordpress.com/2008/06/02/exercising-fu...
  97 days ago in Greg Prince's Blog · Authority: 10

  Exercising futility Posted by Greg on June 2, 2008 Kos points out that only 16% of voters turned out in the Puerto Rico primary, then asks a question that has been stated more than once: For some bizarre reason, Puerto Rico has more delegates than 27 U.S. states. For a territory that has zero electoral votes in November to have a greater say than over half of the states in the United States isn’t just bizarre on the merits, but it’s also an insult to those 27 states. I’m all for Puerto Rican statehood, and hope to see it happen if the people of Puerto Rico so want it. I love my boricua brothers and sisters so much I actually married one. But until they are a U.S. state, I hope that their influence in the primaries is drastically reduced in the future. If nothing else, it would spare candidates from spending time and money in a state that has no bearing in November. Posted in Election 2008
• 

  Puerto Rico turnout

  http://www.bloggersforchange.com/?p=2823
  97 days ago in Bloggers For Change · Authority: 8

  Puerto Rico turnout 02 June 2008 16 percent. That was turnout. 16 percent. For some bizarre reason, Puerto Rico has more delegates than 27 U.S. states. For a territory that has zero electoral votes in November to have a greater say than over half of the states in the United States isn't just bizarre on the merits, but it's also an insult to those 27 states. I'm all for Puerto Rican statehood, and hope to see it happen if the people of Puerto Rico so want it. I love my boricua brothers and sisters so much I actually married one. But until they are a U.S. state, I hope that their influence in the primaries is drastically reduced in the future. If nothing else, it would spare candidates from spending time and money in a state that has no bearing in November. Not to mention that Puerto Ricans, given the option of having a say in an election they are ultimately barred from participating in (unless they move to the mainland), had better things to do than vote. Not surprising, perhaps, given that there isn't even a Democratic Party in the island. So let's end this half-way status for Puerto Rico, and let's make sure that the people living in the United States have the greatest say in who our nominee is going to be. Update: Ha ha ha. Look at what crazy Lanny Davis said before the Puerto Rico primary: Sen. Clinton has already won the most votes, but there is controversy over including the over 300,000 votes from Michigan, since Sen. Obama was not on the ballot (by his own choice). But if Sen. Clinton wins a substantial victory in Puerto Rico tomorrow – with an expected record turnout exceeding two million voters – she could well end up with more popular votes than Sen. Obama, even if Michigan's primary votes are excluded. Only the deluded in the Clinton camp thought that turnout in Puerto Rico would exceed two million voters. Not only is island turnout low when matters of the island's status are not on the ballot, but the election was for a Sunday. Still, 16 percent? That added up to 387,299 total votes. In the 1980 primary between Carter and Kennedy, 800,000 turned out. So not only was Lanny Davis living in la-la land on turnout, but the people of Puerto Rico were far less concerned about his beloved Hillary than they were about the candidates in 1980. Ultimately, bottom line, Obama wins the popular vote when including the caucus states (which should be obviously done), and either excluding Michigan or giving its uncommitted votes to Obama. (The proper count, as agreed to by the Michigan Democratic Party itself, was the exclude the results as unrepresentative of anything.)
• 

  Nuttier Than I Thought

  http://www.misspiggylunchbox.com/archives/2084
  101 days ago in Miss Piggy Lunchbox · Authority: 1

  I’m not the only one who thinks the number of Puerto Rico’s delegates is crazy. Thankfully, other people even dig a bit deeper in their research. I’ll borrow some here from kos. That’s 27 states that have fewer delegates than Puerto Rico does, even though Puerto Rico is not a state. Even if apportioned by population, Kentucky, South Carolina, and Alabama are larger than Puerto Rico. As Cliff Clavin would say, “Seriously, folks. What’s up with that?”

Advertise on Technorati

Advertise on Technorati