I was saying that if the contest were not decided by the end of the primary season (which it has been, now), then it (the continuing contest) would run the risk of driving away swing voters in the general election.
Oh, OK, thanks.
Where does "hindsight" fit in, though, since the contest has indeed been decided?
I found Cyclo's response to be disingenuous, at best. I stated my thoughts on what might have happened had the contest continued, Cyclo asked for a followup, I gave the followup, then Cyclo says, in effect, "well doesn't matter 'cause she lost."
Well, yeah, that was the whole point of the thread, right? Why ask for a followup when he's just gonna thumb his nose at me?
Rude.
Hmm, OK. I think that exchange was probably a bit confusing and maybe not everyone was being understood in the way they intended... but clear now, thanks.
Mmm, I mis-read your post, as a suggestion as to what was going to happen; instead of how you meant it, a warning about what could have happened, sorry.
Cycloptichorn
Questions for the Democrats here:
1. Aren't all delegates free to change their minds until it comes to the actual vote in the convention in Denver?
2. And if that's affirmative, do they have to agree in each state delegation, or are they counted as individuals?
3. Who will be chairing that convention? Do the rules provide for a roll-call if decided by the chair, or do the delegates have to vote in order to have one?
Thanks.
