In case some of you haven't seen this morning's World:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i9ccQcGdTkNXqPvmivScbprXckFgD907J5TG4
In a state where the popular vote carried HC, doesn't it seem contrary that the Gov. would commit his convention vote to the other?
Here is what I wrote in another thread...
"...Governor Henry just announced he was for Obama. Oklahoma was carried by Hillary 55% to 31%. An Oklahoma superdelegate and elected official should not ignore such a mandate from his constituents."
and here is what I responded with in that thread:
Don't you need super delegates to defect en mass for Hillary to win? Will you be upset if and when they break for Obama because he has more votes in their districts and/or carried their state?
You either need Hillary by +71% in all remaining states, or super delegates to do what Henry did and vote for who they think is the best.
idiot endorsing an idiot .... i guess it makes sense
quote:
Originally posted by Cubs
idiot endorsing an idiot .... i guess it makes sense
"It takes one to know one."
"I know you are but what am I."
"If you love him so much, why don't you marry him."
"Liar, liar, pants on fire."Thanks for reminding me how much I dislike the religious right, Rev. Cubs... [}:)]
quote:
Originally posted by USRufnex
quote:
Originally posted by Cubs
idiot endorsing an idiot .... i guess it makes sense
"It takes one to know one."
"I know you are but what am I."
"If you love him so much, why don't you marry him."
"Liar, liar, pants on fire."
Thanks for reminding me how much I dislike the religious right, Rev. Cubs... [}:)]
And to top it off, you're a White Sox fan aren't you Ruf?