While this shlep is busy crying conspiracy, I've done it a little work with CNN's delegate counter. Its true though, Hillary Clinton could actually reach the required amount of delegates, all she must do is achieve a few simple things.
100% - 0 victory over Sen. Obama in Puerto Rico, Montana and South Dakota. Also(assuming all pledged superdelegates vote according to their current standing) receive 79% of the remaining 203 superdelegates. Yeah I smell cover up to, STFU Bill.
Now there is the discussion over delegate rich Florida and Michigan. Word is that if the delegates from those states get seated May 31st, it will only be half of them and they will be divided between the 2 senators with Clinton receiving the favored percentage. She will only make up a small amount of ground on Senator Obama who will surpass the 2,026 delegates needed with the delegates awarded to him. Either way, Clinton can't win and there is no conspiracy.
Originally posted by zakkwylderAh grasshopper you have much to learn! the conspiracy is in the absence of their being one how to construct the appearance of a straightforward win is but the whim of a liberal media affirmative action leg up.
While this shlep is busy crying conspiracy, I've done it a little work with CNN's delegate counter. Its true though, Hillary Clinton could actually reach the required amount of delegates, all she must do is achieve a few simple things.
100% - 0 victory over Sen. Obama in Puerto Rico, Montana and South Dakota. Also(assuming all pledged superdelegates vo ...[text shortened]... with the delegates awarded to him. Either way, Clinton can't win and there is no conspiracy.
Or even more incredibly, the Clinton's are in the race to ensure that Barack wins. The conspiracy in this scenario is that by attempting to brand his steady winning form through the primaries as being somehow a less than stellar performance, the Clinton's help bolster his support mainly due to the residual contempt felt towards them by the public at large. Sort of any enemy of mine enemy must be my friend conspiracy.
Just another spy vs spy scenario brought to you by MAD inc
Originally posted by zakkwylderRetarded? I reckon Clinton (like him or loathe him.) was the smartest, brightest, most intellectually gifted president you've had since Carter (like him or loathe him.) Not talking about policy here.
While this shlep is busy crying conspiracy, I've done it a little work with CNN's delegate counter. Its true though, Hillary Clinton could actually reach the required amount of delegates, all she must do is achieve a few simple things.
100% - 0 victory over Sen. Obama in Puerto Rico, Montana and South Dakota. Also(assuming all pledged superdelegates vo ...[text shortened]... with the delegates awarded to him. Either way, Clinton can't win and there is no conspiracy.
Originally posted by kmax87Though lacking in evidence, quite probable considering politicians these days. Not a bad scenario.
Or even more incredibly, the Clinton's are in the race to ensure that Barack wins. The conspiracy in this scenario is that by attempting to brand his steady winning form through the primaries as being somehow a less than stellar performance, the Clinton's help bolster his support mainly due to the residual contempt felt towards them by the public at large. Sort of any enemy of mine enemy must be my friend conspiracy.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungAbout the only people he was good to. Need I mention NAFTA? Good game on putting the big screw on America and yet they loved him for it. Now they want to put his wife in office(who was really the one behind all the "good" of the clinton administration).
He was good to our debtors, showing that some of us have the honor to pay our bills.
Originally posted by zakkwylderWhat's your complaint about NAFTA?
About the only people he was good to. Need I mention NAFTA? Good game on putting the big screw on America and yet they loved him for it. Now they want to put his wife in office(who was really the one behind all the "good" of the clinton administration).
Originally posted by FMFFunnily enough, I think Carter probably is the most respected US politician still roaming the earth.
Retarded? I reckon Clinton (like him or loathe him.) was the smartest, brightest, most intellectually gifted president you've had since Carter (like him or loathe him.) Not talking about policy here.
Originally posted by zakkwylderI didn't like him either. And you concede that he may well have been intellectually gifted. So why did you refer to him as "retarded" in the Thread title? It seems rather gratuitously offensive and juvenile. Do you know what the word "retarded" means?
Bill Clinton was arguably one of the biggest do nothing presidents of the 20th century. That speaks much louder to me than how intellectually gifted he might have been.
Originally posted by FMFI have no aspirations to argue about Bill Clinton's intellectual capacity. The fact remains, hes acting a damn fool by crying cover up and consipracy when I've demonstrated myself Hillary Clinton has zero chance. The results she needs could only happen in a fixed environment.
I didn't like him either. And you concede that he may well have been intellectually gifted. So why did you refer to him as "retarded" in the Thread title? It seems rather gratuitously offensive and juvenile. Do you know what the word "retarded" means?
Originally posted by zakkwylderI am not sure that your are correct. I think that his actions actually hurt the country.
Bill Clinton was arguably one of the biggest do nothing presidents of the 20th century. That speaks much louder to me than how intellectually gifted he [b]might have been.[/b]
He helped bring about all those flash-in-the-pan "dot-com" companies. What a waste of money that was.
He desimated the CIA by having them remove most human intel agents, relying on technology instead. That set us years back.
He had several chances to take out Osama bin Laden, but didn't.
Oh, why did he attack Somalia??