Hillary is five votes from the nomination

[SlipperySlope]

In my previous post, I presented a flawless mathematical analysis of why Hillary only needs 5.9% to secure the party nomination. (See http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6045204)

In reality she is much much closer than that. She is only five votes away from having the whole primary locked up.

As we all know, the campaign to date has been marked with numerous voting irregularities. Even worse is the wholesale disenfranchisement of Florida and Michigan. One obvious resolution to these problems would be to seek redress from the courts.

But why stop there?

Hillary can, indeed must, argue directly to the Supreme Court to GIVE her the Democratic Nomination. And again, as we all know, it takes a mere five votes of that court to award an election to any person.

Obama should just concede now. The longer he goes on, the more damage he does to the party. If this can be ended before it gets much worse, I'm certain Hillary can find a nice ambassadorship for him somewhere.

[ellacott]

1. So Hillary would take this to the Supreme Court?

The logic

Amazing...

[Labors of Hercules]

47. Did you see a sarcasm smiley?

cuz I sure was looking hard for one... damn. :wtf:

[Andy823]

2. If this isn't sarcasm,

Then you are in need of some serious help! Mental health help that is!

[dolo amber]

3. ...

[NatBurner]

4. totally bizarre

lol @ "flawless mathematical analysis"

[UrbScotty]

5. Snark, I assume?

You might want to add the sarcasm smiley just to be safe.

[SlipperySlope]

10. Where's the fun in that?

I thought everyone would recognize the sarcasm in my other thread as well...

[JRicks_GA]

34. You reeled in a few in the other thread, too. My advice is...

You're going to need a bigger boat. The best sarcasm is done without the :sarcasm: tag. Fortunately for me, my sarcasm detector still works.

[billyoc]

35. Drive on, chief!

Sarcasm tags are for idiots.

[Heather MC]

42. I do think it's funny, but since the supreme court actually did overturn the vote of the people

Once, it's not as funny as we want it to be.
but I did laugh a little

[Drunken Irishman]

6. I get your sarcasm, shocked others do not. :)

[dhill926]

13. yeah, no shit....

what's up with folks. Tough day I know, but sheesh...

[beezlebum]

16. on the days like today when there is a flood of wacky trollishness

it's kinda difficult to discern/keep up.

[Jackpine Radical]

7. By golly, hadn't thought of that!

Hey, it works for me. Now I totally get it about why she has been staying in.

[scheming daemons]

8. Supreme Court has already ruled in the past that political parties can

select their nominees in any fashion they choose..... Primaries aren't covered by the constitution.

The Democratic Party is the sole arbiter of how the process will play out.


The constitution only covers general elections.


Political parties have no responsibility to verify that voters aren't "disenfranchised". If so, superdelegates couldn't exist in the first place.

[stillcool]

14. I remember when they said in 2000

that the Supreme Court would not get involved.

[scheming daemons]

17. Yes.... but they at least had a jurisdiction to get involved..... for this, they don't....

....and won't.

....and the precedent has already been set.

[stillcool]

25. I hope so...

I am very leery of the Court System these days.

[KSinTX]

26. Florida has already tried and got shot down

It's a private political party and its process is its own.

[billybob537]

9. And she's slippery enough to try it.

[madmunchie]

11. I know that this is all sarcasm, but really why would you want to fan the fires?

There are some idiots out there that would really consider this a viable option with viable reasoning.

[beezlebum]

12. .

[Swamp Rat]

15. LOL!

:D

[shraby]

18. You've earned an ignore for me.

The Supremes have nothing to do with a party nominating it's presidential candidate..it also is not supposed to have anything to do with the election of the president but that's a whole nuther basket of eggs that needs broken open and examined very closely like the Supremes bank accounts from before the 2000 election.

[Sundoggy]

23. Hey Sparky!

It's a JOKE. Get it?

Go breathe deeply for a while.

[KSinTX]

29. Breathe. Breathe. Inhale the humor nt

[JRicks_GA]

19. A+++ sarcasm. I'm intrigued by your viewpoints and...

would like to subscribe to your newsletter. :)

[Spooky_D]

20. Good Lord, Don't Give Anyone Any Ideas...LOL n/t

[Sundoggy]

21. World class snark! n/t

[w13rd0]

22. I feel like I've been...

...Rick Rolled.

Now I just need someone to tell me what that means.

[gabby garcia]

24. why i oughta...

:spank:

[K Gardner]

27. Unfortunately, you may have to include the "sarcasm" tag, otherwise the minions will ASSume

you've been on the latest Conference Call and are disseminating new Talking Points.

Oy vey. :hi:

[Occam Bandage]

28. I've been had!

Congratulations on your successful troll. You got me, and you got me good.
:thumbsup:

[Vinca]

30. I'm sure the Supreme Court would find it supremely amusing

that Hillary signed the agreement that disenfranchised the voters she would be there arguing for. By the way, why did she do that,exactly? I keep asking her supporters how disenfranchising voters then was okay, but now that she needs those same voters it isn't.

[Exilednight]

31. That's funny, now read this ..........

Fast forward: The date is June 3, 2008. All primaries are over, pledged delegates are tallied, and enough super delegates have spoken to give Senator Obama the magic number of 2025 along with the title of presumptive nominee.

Wait - Hold ON!!

Is that Senator Clinton taking the stage to give a speech? Will she concede the nomination and begin healing wounds? Will the great divide in the Democratic party finally begin to close?

Let’s listen and hear what has she has to say.

The rest is here. http://notesunderground.wordpress.com/2008/05/19/predicting-the-future-for-hillary/

Looks like she already won.

[SlipperySlope]

40. And after that...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5869147&mesg_id=5869147

[cali]

32. She's done. And believe me, she won't go to the SC. She doesn't

have a freakin' case and no way would they grant cert.

Hill is toast. \

You are living in a hillworld delusion of gigantic proportions.

[rucky]

33. You have a very dry sense of humor.

[NeedleCast]

36. I Bow to Your Superior Sarcasim

And award you one NeedleCast point.

[high density]

37. Yeah, Obama should quit while he's ahead

:eyes: :crazy:

[zulchzulu]

38. Go ahead, Hillary Clinton. Just try it...

If you want 95% unlikeability in polls, go for it. I will work my ASS OFF to derail the Clintons' chance of ever getting in the White House if she dares try to pull this nonsense.

:puke:

[kwenu]

39. I'm sure Scalia would salivate at the thought of slapping Hillary around in open court.

[papapi]

41. utter nonsense

[musicblind]

43. How could anyone not realize this is sarcasm?

I haven't heard a single Hillary poster suggest anything like this for starters. Please my friends, if a post seems odd, read it a second time and you may see that it is merely sarcasm. Though I understand from the amount of hyperbole thrown around this board in rhetoric these days.

[SlipperySlope]

44. I that the ambassadorship was a dead giveaway

N/T

[KaptBunnyPants]

48. "I haven't heard a single Hillary poster suggest anything like this."

The night is young.

[phrigndumass]

45. That would make yet another thing that HRC and Dubya would have in common

So many parallels between the two, so little time.

:yoiks:

[barack the house]

46. Even Bush accepts he is the nominee with his stealth attack.

[Renew Deal]

49. The court didn't get involved in the Nevada caucus BS.

Because parties can select nominee's anyway they want.